Smaller Devs Abused By Steam's "No Questions Asked" Refund Policy

[Infernal Lawyer]

The hell is this garbage?
You equate this to paid mods because some shitty IOS port gets refunded a lot and someone whines that they need to "reintroduce DRM" because people can't pirate that stuff anyway if they wanted to [https://www.gog.com/support/website_help/money_back_guarantee]?
The fuck does this even have to do with steam, who cares if a game that is tethered to steam anyway has (additional?)
DRM? Steam IS DRM.
You can't "refund and then keep playing" unless you do stuff that would enable you to keep playing regardless of DRM.
And how nonsensical is it anyway to boast to never use DRM and then have your games on steam only?

So devs now need to make worthwhile games and if it's less than 2 hours long, it better have replay value?
Games need to be, like, good now or people return them a lot?
Boo fucking hoo, cry me a river.

Actually, lots of games on Steam can be run by the .exe file, regardless of whether Steam is on. There's a list of them somewhere, and it's pretty huge.

Don't get me wrong though, I don't think this justifies the claim, particularly since most people (including yourself :3) don't know about this to exploit it. That and, yeah, DRM isn't exactly infallible.

 

[lacktheknack]

As usual, a lovely-in-concept system being ruined by assholes.

This is why we should not have nice things. (Yes, "should not".)

EDIT: To those commenting that people would not have bought the game anyways if not for the policy, I straight up do NOT believe you. At all. Before the policy change, sales were at an amount. After the policy change, they were at a disturbingly lower amount. The end. Explain.

And if you're going to tell me that people AREN'T abusing the system but are merely returning it because they didn't like the game and not because they're the worst breed of cheapskate, I simply don't believe you either. You're fooling no one, people on the whole are bastard-coated bastards with bastard filling and I know this and you know this and your grandmother's dog knows this and we all know that people are not honoring the honor system. Don't pretend otherwise.

 

[Carzinex]

8) Most importantly, it is every consumer's right to request a refund on purchased goods, especially if the product was falsely advertised. The gaming industry is not special. There is nothing about it that inherently makes it exempt from allowing the right for a refund.

This.

Im sorry but im from the UK and have always found it dodgy that steam hasnt offered refunds on games. Its the law here, conumers have rights. I don't know how it works in the US but I pity you if you are that brainwashed by corporate culture that you support companys rights over consumers.

And just to add, i agree with everyone who points out, if I can complete your game in under 2 hours and am left with no interest in playing it ever again, then its a bad game, try harder next time.

eg, stanley parable, completed in 15 mins? played it many times for a quick chuckle.

 

[Xyebane]

Before it was developers abusing customers and now customers have the power to abuse developers. There are always going to be some jerks who abuse the system but for a healthy industry i think it is better for the customers. This buy/play/refund scam will probably calm down when the fury of people who will abuse it have finished doing the rounds and is similar to the spillage you would otherwise see as just plain piracy, only now you get fancy graphs to track it well.

 

[Strazdas]

Oh, a shitty mobile minigame (as in literally i saw this thing as a minigame for a FREE mobile game) is getting refunds. oh the horrors! A game like this belongs on newgrounds, not steam.

The key factor in Qwiboo's story is the length of it's game.

No. The key factor in the story is the game being shit. It was so shit 72% of people wanted their 2 dollars back. To be honest im amazed the remaining 28% didnt bother.

"Bloody hell steam refund rate has gone from 0.09% to 17%. Methinks people are taking the piss. Here comes DRM again sadly..." Harris lamented.

You mean when a service allows people to refund bad games, refunds for bad games increases. truly hell for hack developers. Oh and congratulations on turning your costumers into pirates. I usually buy games that are against DRM to support the principle, i know people who do the opposite, pirate DRM games on principle.

Should the value of a game be decided by it's length, though?
Padding a game doesn't magically make it better.

In part, yes. I would never pay 60 dollars for a game that would offer less than 2 hours of experience, no matter even if it was the best game in the universe. the fun time per dollar ratio is simply unacceptable.

It sucks for people who genuinely care about making games.

No. these kind of people make games that wont get massive refunds because odds are they wont be absolute garbage cashin games.

Perhaps a developer has a small interactive story they want to tell

They should have written a book, then.

Setting the two hour limit for all games was stupid.

Yes, it should be much higher. For example Origin has 24 hours and GoG has 30 days.

You people in the comments make me sick, to half of you your answer is "Well just make a better game!" sorry not all indie devs can make triple A games, and for 2 dollars, WHAT DID YOU EXPECT?

Make a better game or stop trying to sell garbage. If you want my money you make a good game or your not getting my money. if you try to trick me, refund is there to fix that. for 2 dollars i expected something more than something that isnt even a full free mobile game. when you try to sell something that wouldnt even get downloads for free no wonder you get refunds.

EDIT: To those commenting that people would not have bought the game anyways if not for the policy, I straight up do NOT believe you. At all. Before the policy change, sales were at an amount. After the policy change, they were at a disturbingly lower amount. The end. Explain.

And if you're going to tell me that people AREN'T abusing the system but are merely returning it because they didn't like the game and not because they're the worst breed of cheapskate, I simply don't believe you either. You're fooling no one, people on the whole are bastard-coated bastards with bastard filling and I know this and you know this and your grandmother's dog knows this and we all know that people are not honoring the honor system. Don't pretend otherwise.

I guess the good thing is that it does not matter what you believe, only what is correct. The sales were already explained. The game had a 50% off sale end at the same time the chart shows decrease in sales. more units sold during a sale, less after it. makes sense, no? Not that its the kind of game worth paying a single cent to begin with.

I dont know if people are abusing the system. what i know that both cases presented in OP are not evidence of abuse. I know that both GoG and Origin claims that people arent abusing theirs.

 

[Fulbert]

You people in the comments make me sick, to half of you your answer is "Well just make a better game!" sorry not all indie devs can make triple A games, and for 2 dollars, WHAT DID YOU EXPECT?

Steam never needed a refund policy like this, they need smarter customers, and don't try and tell me that you couldn't get a refund because the game doesn't work on your computer, they were already doing that.

I tried getting a refund for a game that was falsely advertised to me once. I submitted a ticket to the support and had to wait for around two weeks before I gave up and cancelled it. I was completely and utterly ignored.

I am now stuck with a game I'm not happy with because the publisher didn't care to disclose their use of the 3rd party DRM scheme (they only did it three days after the game was released and customers kicked up a fuss about in in the forums - those preordered like me were screwed) and because Steam support never found a minute to even read my ticket.

Mind you, even if I did get refunded, that would be my one and only chance to. The next hack of a developer who suceeded in tricking me into buying their bollocks game I'd have no defence against.

What glorious times those were. And Steam just had to go and screw everything up with this new consumer-friendly policy of theirs.

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

Good. They'll think twice before releasing a shitty product.

 

[SeventhSigil]

Out of curiosity, if you were to buy a game, and then refund it, does the system prevent you from just buying it again and refunding it again?

Asking because I'm just about to head to bed, so if anyone knows for certain, appreciate an answer. But if there's nothing to prevent someone from buying and refunding a title multiple times, I think there should be. Maybe a limit of one refund per game per account. So if you buy it a second time, you're stuck with it. Because honestly, if you're foolish enough to buy the same game a second time, then you probably deserve to be out a few bucks. (although if people are antsy about that, maybe slap a notification on when you try to rebuy it that you bought it before.)

In any case, such implementation would reduce the extent of glorified rentals, as someone wouldn't be able to rebuy a title for ANOTHER span of time, play it, and refund it, rinsing and repeating. If it isn't worth the price, then you frankly have no reason to play it again, and so shouldn't bother buying it again.

(again, this is assuming such a system is not already in place. If it is, then at least that's something Valve did right.)

 

[Vigormortis]

Jesus Christ, Escapist....

It's "news"[footnote]And I use that word VERY loosely here.[/footnote] stories like this that make me give serious consideration in cutting this site from my list of news aggregate sites.

If this is the quality of investigative journalism we can expect now, well...

I'm out.

snip

Mostly agreed on all points but these two:

They should have written a book, then.

I don't think a dev wanting to make a one to three hour long, purely narrative-driven game is an invalid venture. I think such games have every right to exist along side any other video game.

Yes, it should be much higher. For example Origin has 24 hours and GoG has 30 days.

I'm not entirely sold on the time being longer. I'm not saying the limit shouldn't be longer, I'm just not convinced it has to be.

 

[Fulbert]

Out of curiosity, if you were to buy a game, and then refund it, does the system prevent you from just buying it again and refunding it again?

Asking because I'm just about to head to bed, so if anyone knows for certain, appreciate an answer. But if there's nothing to prevent someone from buying and refunding a title multiple times, I think there should be. Maybe a limit of one refund per game per account. So if you buy it a second time, you're stuck with it. Because honestly, if you're foolish enough to buy the same game a second time, then you probably deserve to be out a few bucks. (although if people are antsy about that, maybe slap a notification on when you try to rebuy it that you bought it before.)

In any case, such implementation would reduce the extent of glorified rentals, as someone wouldn't be able to rebuy a title for ANOTHER span of time, play it, and refund it, rinsing and repeating. If it isn't worth the price, then you frankly have no reason to play it again, and so shouldn't bother buying it again.

(again, this is assuming such a system is not already in place. If it is, then at least that's something Valve did right.)

The release did say they'd be monitoring the refunds to prevent people from abusing the system. It didn't say how exactly they'd be doing that - I presume, not to give potential abusers any ideas on how to game the system better.

But the release did say buing the game right before a sale, then refunding it and buing it again for a lower price will NOT be seen as abusing the system. So there's that.

 

[StorkV]

Smaller indie devs should make good games.... or make demos.

 

[The Youth Counselor]

Do we really have to jump automatically from "New policy has kinks that need working out just like ALL newly implemented policies do" to "Is Valve completely out of touch?"

Yeah, it might need fine tuning. I'd be surprised if it didn't. Why is anyone else?

If a game can be finished in under 2 hours and doesn't have enough replayability or post-game content to make people want to keep playing, it's not worth even a single dollar. If people can now get refunds for these games, then I see it as the system working.

heres the sure-fire way to solve this problem:

Stop making shitty Indie games.

WOW.Mp4

If you game is under 2 hours long that shit had better be free because if you are going to put in the minimal amount of work into your game, then I'm going to pay the minimal price I feel your game is worth (namely, jack shit). Also I'm gonna love how those Indies are gonna put in DRM in their games, because DRM is completely flawless and it isn't like there are groups of people out there than can crack your DRM within a few days of your game being released.

On that note also, people have already said how much easier it is to outright pirate games instead of going through the refund process, if they have seen a massive uptick in refunds, then they probably have a 90-99% piracy rate for their games.

Possibly out of pitty for how bad their games are to begin with.

And do we really have to go through the "length is not a sure indicator of quality" speech again? I'm not saying it shouldn't factor into cost at all, and for less then two hours you'd really have to have one hell of a fried gold masterpiece to charge anything more then probably $5 at the very most. But are we really going with a game under two hours automatically has minimal work put into it?

A couple years back I picked up this tiny experimental thing called Dinner Date. You play as a man's subconscious as he slowly realizes he's been stood up for a date, through an array of little internal monologues and small actions. It was a fun little idea and I liked the execution well enough, and while it wouldn't make any personal top 10 lists I was happy to give it the two or three bucks or whatever I paid for it at the time. It only lasted about half an hour, and almost certainly would have started to overstay it's welcome if it had lasted any longer.

I hate to resort to such a tired cliche in it's defense, but what exactly is two or three dollars worth? A soda? A couple of minutes with a candy bar? Not a little glimpse into some small story or odd little mechanic or whatever? We're willing to pay almost ten dollars, sometimes more depending on the showing, to go see a movie for two hours, but a game tries to tell itself with the same pacing and suddenly it's automatically only putting the bare minimum of work in?

Now this doesn't mean that it can't also be a bad game. Bad games happen. A lot of people didn't like Dinner Date and I can certainly understand some, though not all, of the complaints. At the least it's not for everyone. But more often then not games are bad because of how they /use/ their length, not what they're length is. Games aren't shit because of what they are, they're shit because of /how/ they are what they are. That's what execution means.

For games under two hours that actually are by whatever measure 'good', I can see this being a real concern. I don't know that I have a good solution that doesn't also present it's own logistical problems. But it's definitely worth investigating, because why wouldn't it be?

^This! Why does this need to be brought up with every other thread? I feel like there should be a memo or FAQ because we come to the same conclusions. Most new AAA releases retail for $50+ to $60 USD plus taxes and aim for 8 hours of game length. 2 hours isn't even worth one dollar? Few games are worth more than $16 then.

Another aspect that can be screwed easily through abuse of this system are episodic games. They are usually 1 to 2 hours each and sold with that knowledge. How can developers like Telltale pay the bills if people in flux start buying their games, complete one episode, get a full refund, and buy again to play the next episode?

 

[RicoADF]

You people in the comments make me sick, to half of you your answer is "Well just make a better game!" sorry not all indie devs can make triple A games, and for 2 dollars, WHAT DID YOU EXPECT?

Steam never needed a refund policy like this, they need smarter customers, and don't try and tell me that you couldn't get a refund because the game doesn't work on your computer, they were already doing that.

The right to a refund on a faulty or misleading product is a consumer right which in most countries is protected by law, frankly it's rediculas that Steam has gone this long without it and I suspect the fact that Europe, Australia etc have all had their consumer protection departments investigating and warning Valve has a big reason for this. Any dev that says the crap reported here doesn't deserve to survive, to have such hostility to consumers that they consider us having the right to a refund if their product doesn't work or was falsely advertised is disgraceful and I know who NOT to purchase from in future.

 

[Fasckira]

Its a shame that the 2 weeks bit is in there, I have a ton of games in my Steam library that have like 10-15 mins play time then I never went near again.

 

[SecondPrize]

Its a shame that the 2 weeks bit is in there, I have a ton of games in my Steam library that have like 10-15 mins play time then I never went near again.

I've seen threads other places where people are listing games purchased up to six months ago. I imagine it's because this may as well be an entirely new thing, not something that replaces a workable but incomplete option you had half a year ago. I am cautious in my purchases so I don't know exactly how to request a refund now on steam but try it with some of those games, it may work.

 

[Fulbert]

Smaller Devs Abused By Steam

Damn you do post a lot of one sided click bait drivel. is this kotarku or the escapist?

I got warned by the forums mods for a question like this once. You're walking on thin ice, mister!

 

[zumbledum]

Smaller Devs Abused By Steam

Damn you do post a lot of one sided click bait drivel. is this kotarku or the escapist?

I got warned by the forums mods for a question like this once. You're walking on thin ice, mister!

well as i would be so hurt to loose access to the high minded and reasoned debate prevalent on these forums these days i shall edit my post, even though my question although hostile was honest and i think raised a fair point.

 

[Alleged_Alec]

So are we really saying that the feels of those small indie devs trump consumer's rights? Because that sounds like a strange thing to say. Because seriously: yeah, there are probably a few people who will abuse this system. However, I won't believe, unless I see proper data on it, that a large part of these returns are done by such people.

 

[Bat Vader]

They should have written a book, then.

I have never understood that answer. That's like telling people who play video games for their stories that they should read a book instead. It always sounds like the person feels they have some type of made up authority to tell others what or what not to do.

So are we really saying that the feels of those small indie devs trump consumer's rights? Because that sounds like a strange thing to say. Because seriously: yeah, there are probably a few people who will abuse this system. However, I won't believe, unless I see proper data on it, that a large part of these returns are done by such people.

I think we can all agree that if people do abuse it that those people are complete scum.

 

[alj]

How about you make a game people want to keep ? And not come crying because they wanted to return your crappy game.