Yet this is exactly what is happening. Games are being released with day zero patches. What happens if you do not have access to the patch though? Simple. You have a broken game.
I don’t know the state of Internet connectivity in Europe, but in my area it is largely dial-up with only a very small number having highspeed. Broadband tiers are almost entirely restricted to cities.
But that just refers to a micropayment scenario. By this argument, even some lod popping in the distance would be grounds for refund.
The fact is while I don’t anticipate it will be much of a revenue loss for indies selling in the UK, I do anticipate that it is needlessly adding to customer service pressure which a small developer really, really doesn’t need.
It requires much clarification on what qualifies as ‘broken’. Broken is pretty perceptual too. For example WoW players will tell you the game mechanics are broken every few weeks.
To quote the legal text directly:
The requirements of “good” goods:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/section/9
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/section/10
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/section/11
In the field of videogames, as you point it out, it’s so vague that it will simply be unapplicable (taken litteraly, all softwares are defective goods as they don’t fit all requirements) unless you have a blatant case of malfunction like the example of the IAP which doesn’t work. If UK ever wanted to enforce this to worldwide selling platforms (which I highly doubt), those platform holders would likely put in place a “one-size-fits-all” type of refund policy like it’s already the case.
Now of course for UK’ers doing business only nationwide that can be a problem…
Any bets on how long till people are trying to acquire refunds for Microsoft Windows? 
I was thinking the same thing. People here of course are thinking of games but geesh there is a lot of software that is in terrible shape as far as being glitchy, crashing, etc.
If there will be laws actually enforcing software quality control… wow… that could be a real barrier to entry again. I’m curious how it will (be amended to) apply to mobile games that are free yet make money by presenting ads to the user. Will they interpret the gamer’s time spent in watching the ad as a form of payment.
I don’t get why early access costs $$$. I’m all for beta testing but it makes more sense if it were free since they’re actually doing you a huge favor. Nobody should pay money for an unfinished product.
With Early Access you know there will be bugs and the game is a WIP, right? I thought EA was kind of like supporting a Kickstarter campaign except with EA you actually get the game to play (in some form anyway) right now. Isn’t that how it works?
This is probably people that binge shop and want refunds. However, there are enough platforms that current SW is untested on that plenty of people do have a legitimate complaint for a refund. That said, every time I’ve ask for a refund in the Apple App Store I’ve gotten it which isn’t often as I don’t shop much there.
The way OSes manage apps are being programmed now with these TSR notifications and memory residency your carefully optimized and tested app will fail on plenty of people’s platforms when the OS runs out of memory, because every app they ever downloaded just had to turn on notifications with which to spam you with; such as the ridiculous new ‘Twitter Moments’ expecting you to look back in fondness as yet another business decides their own product isn’t relevant so maybe we’d better include a international news feed to make their product seem more relevant.
Windows Edge by the way is ridden with bugs and less so, the File Explorer in Windows 10. The File Explorer bug seems to be the same bug around since Windows 7, can’t imagine how they haven’t identified and fixed it by now. The Windows Edge bugs clearly wasn’t tested near enough - it seems to be related to their predictive pre-browsing and pre-fetching. LOL, when it crashes, it crashes quick & clean, none of this let Windows gather more information business.
I don’t mind paying for early access but the cost should be proportional to the current state of the game. Minecraft did an excellent job with this charging $5 for alpha, $10 for beta, and $20 for final release. I wouldn’t be surprised if it drew in a lot of people who were on the edge about buying it too.
You may not mind buying a game before it’s finished if it turns out okay but you hate it when it doesn’t. Preventing the risk of the latter is why games in alpha or beta shouldn’t cost money to play.
Actually, I guess a pre-release sale isn’t that bad and it helps indies who need immediate support throughout the development.
Lol. You guys are funny. There is nothing new in this law. It’s just a rehash of existing consumer protection laws and specifically affirming there applicability to software.
Consumer protection law in civilised* countries requires a refund in three situations
These provisions already applied to software, they were just difficult to enforce, often requiring court action.
Strong consumer protection law benefits everybody. Consumer protection leads to consumer confidence. Consumer confidence leads to more sales. (In fact the most successful retail companies go even further and offer refunds for change of mind, as long as the product is still saleable).
The only people who will suffer is those publishing poor quality games in a attempt to grab cash.
On to the specific concerns:
DRM isn’t really an issue. Any significant piece of software has already been cracked and can already be downloaded via torrent. Buying your product and returning it is the least efficient way to install something for free.
3 days time limit for a refund? Grandma buys a birthday present for her little nipper. It might not get played for a couple of weeks. 30 days is standard everywhere else and perfectly reasonable. This law is designed for average consumers. Not just the hard core gamers.
There will be some attempts at abuse. But no more then every other retail industry deals with. And the rest of retail copes just fine. Frequent a users will be caught and dealt with, and will probably just pirate anyway.
TL;DR - You can’t complain about the flood of rubbish products and be opposed to this laws designed to drive product quality.
*I use the term civilised in the traditional sense of the word. Countries will cultures and practices similar to mine. 
Yeah you’re right. Also on the abuse thing I once knew a fella who would routinely go to Lowe’s and other places buy some equipment, use it pretty hardcore completing a job or two over the weekend then return it on Monday. When I first found out I was shocked and went off on him a bit saying man you are an ass lol But through time I learned that I was the oddball and a lot of people do things like that. And the stores even know it. A lady at Walmart told me it is common for people to buy a big screen tv right before the super bowl then return it a few days after. Guess people just get it for their big party. lol
It is against the games like THPS5 or Arkham Knight. Games with minor bugs (such as occasional texture glitch) shouldn’t be affected if the rest of it is solid.
As for games like Goatsim, well, people actually buy it for the bugs, so I wouldn’t be worried.
Dunno about how it will affect Steam refund policy tho. Will they:
a) Make it so it’s 30 days +2h of gameplay in all regions
b) Make it so it’s 30 days +2h of gameplay UK only
c) Make it so it’s 30 days (without limit on gameplay) in all regions
d) Make it so it’s 30 days (without limit on gameplay) in UK only
And how do AAA studios and other media companies respond to this? They certainly don’t realize that DRM is pointless and give up on it. Instead they double down. I predicted that we would see more DRM, or that the chances of DRM going away would dimension. I didn’t say that it was logical to do so.
Also, the easiest way to get high is to use an illegal drug. That doesn’t stop kids from doing much more dangerous things because those things aren’t illegal. I don’t think the number of scammers will be significant enough to worry about, but I wouldn’t say there wouldn’t be anybody who would cheat the system but wouldn’t break the law to do so.
That triple negative…I can’t even.
I don’t know about everyone else, but Australian consumer law is pretty basic.
You’re entitled to a refund if the product is faulty, doesn’t do what it was advertised to do or isn’t fit for purpose. Pretty much the same as what @Kiwasi said (makes sense since he’s in NZ).
If I bought a desk that was damaged prior to delivery, had massive splits in the wood then I’m entitled to return to the store and demand a refund (true story). The decision is up to me as to whether or not I want a refund or a replacement or to exchange for something else.
If this was a game that I purchased, am not able to play due to extensive bugs then quite simply I’m entitled to a refund. It doesn’t matter if the devs are working to fix it, or if they’ve even already fixed and released a patch but I’m unable to access the patch. The simple matter is the game is faulty/not fit for purpose.
In terms of early access/paid beta games the same thing still applies. If I pay money for something and am not able to use it because it’s buggy as hell (faulty) then I’m entitled to a refund. Doesn’t matter if the devs advise that it’s a work in progress…if it doesn’t work then I can get a refund.
Consumer law is very black and white and it favours the consumer. The onus is on the game developer/manufacturer/retailer to ensure the product is fit for purpose, works as advertised and isn’t faulty. Release a game into early access and you could get burnt by refunds.
Note - this doesn’t apply to incomplete games that work as intended. The dev states quite clearly that the game is in early access and under development so provided that there are no horrendous bugs that make it unplayable then lack of content isn’t grounds for a refund.
I like GOG policy: you have 30 days to demand refund. Just like that. No more conditions. You can actually finish the game in 30 day? It seems not to be a problem.
And yes. I see that British regulations are design for general merchandise: basicly you can demand refund if you didn’t get what you expected. It may mean that Early Acces is still OK: you are warn that the game is probably buggy so you cannot say you didn’t expect that. Matter for lawyers for clarification, I guess.
Is this why Microsoft made Windows 10 free? They knew they’d have to refund everyone no matter when they bug it because it’s always buggy?
Would having a disclaimer before purchase stating that the game is in alpha/beta & so has bugs & is missing features & click if you acknowledge that get the dev around having to refund as the buyer was made aware & accepted those conditions?
Nope, in Australia at least that wouldn’t work. The consumer law is based around protecting the consumer, there is no such thing as “buyer beware”. If a manufacturer/developer sells a product that is dodgy/buggy and its not fit for purpose then the consumer is entitled to a full refund.
Our laws in general are made to protect the public, you can put anything you like in a contract but if it tries to circumvent a law then that contract term or the entire contract is thrown out.
Note: This also applies to things like Kickstarter. If people promise certain content and don’t deliver it in the game they’re opening themselves up for a class action lawsuit.
No. Microsoft is definitely not giving away Windows 10 out of fear of refund laws. Microsoft realized there was more opportunity for making money with the widespread adoption of Windows 10 than there would be by further segmenting the Windows platform into more niches. Microsoft wants to have a Windows app store that lets Microsoft collect a percent of every sale of every app and game on the platform instead of merely selling the operating system.
For Microsoft to successfully establish a Windows app store, Microsoft needed to convince everybody to upgrade from Windows XP, Windows Vista, Windows 7, Windows 8, and Windows 8.1. Microsoft probably estimated that most Windows XP and Windows Vista users needed new computers, so Microsoft did not bother with giving free upgrades for those old versions. But Windows 7, 8, and 8.1 users had modern enough computers to run Windows 10, so Microsoft made the calculated move to give those users the free upgrade. Once everybody is running Windows 10, Microsoft will own one of the most popular app stores. At that point, it will be easy to convince developers to ship software through their app store.
This strategy has work well for everyone else in the operating system game. Microsoft is just a late bloomer.