Wait, didn't that come into play due to numerous lawsuits like one here in Australia that told them it's illegal to distribute in Australia without such a policy? The fact they were centered in America was thrown out and they were told they MUST offer a refund policy? I doubt EA had anything to do with it.
As a defining factor I doubt it, a contributing factor perhaps. The current Steam policy doesn't meet the criteria set out by the ACCC. The EU system was by passed by some check box and the US was a coin toss depending on what state you were in. I suspect a few factors played a part
1). Origin suddenly not being shit and starting to gain traction, i.e becoming a potential competitor and showing it's customers that their was a better policy to dealing with refund and customer issues.
2). More people seeing a better alternative and wondering why Steam didn't offer even basic levels of customer service let alone refunds. Educating themselves on the legality of Steam's refund policy and giving more traction to genuine legal consumer concerns regarding Steam's refund policy
3). Steam Greenlight, their was no way Valve could get away with washing it's hands of all responsibility for the dumpster fire of hobo shit Greenlight was / has becoming / become. Taking a hands off approach to QC while offering no refund and next to no support was only going to add fire to the whole thing. Thinking on it I would even go as far as saying that Greenlight may be the primary reason for the intro of refunds. It was the easiest solution in trying to restore confidence in Steam and the Greenlight service, cause fuck the other option would have meant Valve actually QCing the shit they sell on their store front.