In some regions boxed PC games cannot be refunded - a player could have burned the contents of a disc, returned it and in effect got a free game. Once a game is downloaded, users of Steam are capable of making a copy of the game and not playing it on the Steam client. This means that even if a user does get a refund, they may potentially have a copy of the game - free game.
There will be conditions on the new rules Steam have set out - A user cannot have 2 hours or more playtime on a game and the purchased game must have been brought within 14 days of requesting a refund. At present I am concerned about the first part of the rule. I know from using Steam that if I turn a game on without using the Steam client, the recorded time on game does not increase. Someone can play a game for this 14 day period for any amount of time, if the developer has not implemented a way to force players to need Steam open to accomplish what they want in-game - A positive way to encourage users to play games on Steam could include Steam Achievements or online multiplayer (but not every game is online, works online or should be online). Another concern I have is that some games can be completed within a 2 hour period. This 2 hour period Steam have effectively made up undermines some games by allowing someone to complete a game in let’s say 1 hour 50 minutes, getting a refund and having a free gaming experience, which they enjoyed - why should these games be penalised for Steam’s arbitrary 2 hour period?
Understanding some fundamentals of consumer law, a purchasers contract is with the products vendor, not the products manufacturer. This to me would mean once a developer has taken commission from Steam, a refunded or non-refunded game will not affect their income whatsoever - I am however unable to get this verified. Steam apparently pays developers at the end of every calendar month the commission they are due, so a purchase and refund within a month may (probably will) equate to a developer receiving no money for the sale.
On the upside, the public announcement of allowing refunds could expand the trust in Steam and provide even more customers - What is there to lose buying a game on Steam if it can be refunded? Users could be happier to buy titles they otherwise would not, if they do not like a game they can get their money back.
I’m really hoping to ascertain varied opinions on the matter of Steam in the community to widen my own knowledge and get a better understanding of whether this is something we developers need to worry ourselves with or not. I’d also like to get some other links. Apart from Steams announcement on their client, when I turned it on this morning and the link I put above, I have not read literature on this.
Games and pre-ordered games have the 14 day and 2 hour grace time period. From my interpretation of the text - if you pre-order a game, wait for release (which is over the 14 days), play it and do not like it, then because the 14 days elapsed you are not entitled to a refund.
Steam mention at the end under “Abuse” that repeat offenders of asking for a refund in order to “get free games” might lose their right to refunds.
Sorry, I should have thought of other regions. I’ll amend the starting post - I don’t want to misinform anybody.
Legitimate reasons to request a refund will include:
• Accidental purchase of a game
• Did not enjoy a game
• PC does not meet hardware requirements
A matter which is raised on the first source I have read is that if someone wants a refund, they may give a game a poor review. This review could be insincere, as the reviewer has an ulterior motive of getting a refund after playing the game. A chain of negative reviews could appear on a game, lessening its chances of making other sales. Personally I don’t see this ever being a huge problem, the majority of users will probably not harshly review something unless they are sincere about it.
I like the new rules as a player. There have been several games for me that have been mega buggy, performance has been bad or were not as good as was hyped.
Then what does it mean for developers? well now your game has to be even better experience at least for the two first hours. It also means you should always integrate Steamworks in a way your game always requires it. The support is better for players too.
I’m pretty sure Steam has analytics of which games are short, who abuse the system and etc.
This is a good first step towards some type of quality control on steam. I think it is a good development.
It might mean that some indie devs make less money because they have to deal with lot’s of refunds. But that’s a good thing, it means your game is not up to par and you need to change things.
The semi scamming we see going on at steam greenlight will surely be driven back with this
If you are going to cheat the system, you can generally find a pirated torrent of a game much easier then you can download the game and deal with steam’s refund process. So I don’t think this is an issue.
It might effect quality a little, as more gamers return poor games to the store. But I doubt it.
The main reason for the change will be continuing to sell games in markets that have consumer laws that force refunds. Most governments are promising tighter controls on ecommerce within their borders, and steam stands to be cut out from a few markets if they don’t comply with local regulations. Sure they have given it appositive PR spin. But there are other games afoot.
Thanks for the feedback so far. I’m not as concerned as I was when Steam notified me this morning of the change. I’m not sure that I feel that a user should be allowed to enjoy the experience, only to then get a full refund and spoil the revenue of Developers. But I guess it will be a small minority that will exploit the hard work of us Devs. As BoredMormon points out, torrents exist and if someone wants to steal a game they will be more likely to take that route.
For starters, a reasonable refund policy is something they should always have had. If you sell stuff you should be willing to support it, and on the odd occasion that means giving a refund.
Secondly, good “quality control” means keeping the quality high from the start, not letting low quality stuff through and then offering refunds later.I sincerely hope that’s not been a part of the considerations behind this.
Thirdly, this could be a good thing in that it might increase customer confidence in making a purchase in the first place. Think it looks alright but aren’t sure? Now you can buy it and find out, rather than teetering on the fence and then perhaps moving on to something else. Then, if the game is good, it might have a better chance of keeping a sale than it might otherwise have had at getting one.
So, if they’re serious about not letting people abuse the system then it could be beneficial.
I think its a good move - consumers absolutely need a way to get a refund. The 2 hour condition just seems so arbitrary, it needs a little more thought to address any casual abuse.
Perhaps linking it to the price (RRP not eternally-on-sale price) of the game, with a few price tiers, would help protect smaller developers while still allowing genuinely unhappy customers to get a refund. A 30min refund window on a $5 game still seems pretty reasonable.
You’d probably need to exclude early access games from this reduction, but that probably isn’t a bad thing. I’m fairly confident that’s the biggest problem area from Valves point of view - there’s an awful lot of oversold-never-to-be-completed shovelware hanging around there.
Seems straightforward and fair. If the user played more than 2 hours or owned it longer than 14 days then he isn’t eligible for an automatic refund. Not really sure what there is to dislike about that, users have a fair window and developers are protected from refund-abuse.
If someone played my game for less than 2 hours and decided to ask for a refund I don’t see why I would have any reason to be opposed to them getting it.
I think this is a great thing for indie developers.
As a gamer, buying any indie title aside from the most covered breakout hits is always so risky. And often I’ve even regretted some of the better reviewed breakout hits like beiseiged in early access.
Being able to just return a game after you look at it for 15 minutes just allows way more ‘adventurous’ purchases. And for just about every developer who might post on these forums, that’s a pretty good thing.
I see this as a bad thing honestly, a games worth shouldnt be valued by how long you play it for, but rather how fun it actually is. I’ve played Nidhogg for in total about an hour and a half, yet its one of my favorite games, I’ve just completed it enough times now and Im bored of it
I do believe players are entitled to a refund, but only if the game is really poorly made, different than what the store pics show, or broken (even if just for certain PC’s).
Like all things it will be good and it will be bad. Wouldn’t surprise me a bit to see headlines appear High Refunds Drive Established Indie Game Developers Away From Steam nor to see Average Steam Game Sales Increase Slightly After Offering Refunds.
I would think the pirate community is aware and now they’ll have a great way to get all of the latest games. Of course, they’d always get em sooner or later anyway.
The refund policy will probably dramatically increase sales, since it will make consumer feel like there is less risk. It will probably be especially true for unknown indie titles, because those are the most affected by lack of consumer confidence. A few trolls will abuse the refund policy, but overall this will be a huge net benefit for everybody.
In theory it might not be abused too much since Valve says they’ll deny refunds to those who are abusing them, but what is to keep people from creating new accounts to get around this? The part that worries me also is the 2 hour limit. It’s very possible to play a game that’s less than 2 hours in length and enjoy it.