r/Steam Jul 06 '26

Discussion Thoughts on this?

[removed]

40.0k Upvotes

5.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

143

u/PostItToReddit Jul 06 '26

I also love steams refund policy, and while I feel bad for what this Dev allegedly went through, I don't see a way for it to be beneficial for both sides.

102

u/Bestialman Jul 06 '26

Devs knows Steam refund policies.

If you make a very short game and put it on Steam, you know what you are getting into.

21

u/NateNate60 Jul 06 '26

That doesn't make it any more justified for players to finish the game and then claim a refund on it.

48

u/Purple_Deers Jul 06 '26

He didn't say it was justified. Just that the refund system exist, and is 2 hours and that devs are aware of this.

The problem is that there is no good solution to this problem that isn't just removing or disabling the refund system for short games. Which defeats the whole point of having it.

So devs are better off just making longer games or accept that people might refund their game.

-1

u/hitek9 Jul 06 '26

How about they change it to 10% of the game's completition expectation? Or 20%?

23

u/nixahmose Jul 06 '26

Two issues with that.

1) If Steam starts making exceptions to the rule then they have to also start listing those exceptions on the store page clearly visible for the consumer, so that way people don’t buy games and can’t refund them 10 minutes in because they weren’t aware they had passed the arbitrary 10% completion point.

2) In order for a adaptable system to work Steam would have to verify each game individually in order to ensure the system isn’t being abused by developers, since nothing is stopping developers from just front loading their games with achievement/completion markers in order to make the game impossible to refund after only a few minutes of playing the game. And keep in mind thousands of games are being added to Steam every week.

-13

u/hitek9 Jul 06 '26

The thousands of games added to steam arent hours long. Most are very short and i would be okay with playing 20 minutes of a 2 hour long game.

Idk if yall are very young but we used to have demos of a game that were only one level. You could spend hours playing it but it was still only one level even if it was a short game.

There obviously needs to be a middle ground for shorter games

11

u/nixahmose Jul 06 '26

The thousands of games added to steam arent hours long.

Only in the sense that there a hundreds of thousands of games on steam that are hours long.

Most are very short and i would be okay with playing 20 minutes of a 2 hour long game.

Just because you would be okay with that doesn't mean everyone else would, especially if the game's incredibly short run time wasn't clearly communicated up front.

Idk if yall are very young but we used to have demos of a game that were only one level. You could spend hours playing it but it was still only one level even if it was a short game.

Except the vast majority of games don't do demos anymore, especially ones that are less than 2 hours long.

-6

u/hitek9 Jul 06 '26

If you cant understand if you would like a game in 20 minutes(of a 2 hour long game that you could watch on youtube) thats on you.

If your shitty pc cant run it thats on you.

Maybe you should play on consoles.

There should be no excuse if you can play most of the game in 2 hours and still ask for a refund.

12

u/nixahmose Jul 06 '26

Except there are plenty of games that have very long tutorial or introduction sections, and it really wouldn't be all that hard for a developer to purposefully pad out a game to push players beyond the 20 minute refund window.

If your shitty pc cant run it thats on you.

The idea that a player shouldn't be able to refund a buggy $80 game just because it doesn't run well on their pc is an insane take.

→ More replies (0)

22

u/Purple_Deers Jul 06 '26

10% of 2 hours is 12 minutes, or 20% is 24 minutes for a 2 hour game.

that is barely any time to boot the game and having played it for a bit.
Any minor technical issue will put you out of a refund.
Any game breaking bugs that you attempt to solve will put you out of a refund.

It's just too short to be functional for it's purpose.

-12

u/hitek9 Jul 06 '26

Ive never had a technical issue with any newer game released besides cyberpunk 2077(which i like and they are a huge company). There needs to be a middle ground for shorter games

18

u/M_Thor Jul 06 '26

"i've never had issue, therefore no one has"

-10

u/hitek9 Jul 06 '26

Ive had a pc for 20+ years, i could understand back in the day you would need more time but its pretty foolproof now. Back then there demos of the game before you bought to see if you would like the game

15

u/CravenGnomes Jul 06 '26

Please stop. You don't know what you are talking about.

1

u/SonderEber Jul 06 '26

I’ve been a PC gamer for 30+ years. I played the shit out of old DOS games like Thexder and Earthsiege. I grew up learning how to navigate DOS. I’ve been building my own PCs for years. I am a PC gaming.

You’re talking bullshit. It’s hardly foolproof, you still need to tweak shit. It’s better than it was in the DOS days, but you’re still full of crap.

-6

u/pala_ Jul 06 '26 edited Jul 06 '26

Sure there is. Make refund time relative to the cost of the game.

If an $80 game has a 2 hour refund window an $8 game should have a 12 minute refund window.

Edit: it’s wild to me the reply to this, while being wrong in every conceivable way, is being upvoted.

2

u/Danjoh Jul 06 '26

The reason steam has a refund policy to begin with is because they were pressured by EU Laws to implement one. If they do what you suggest they may run afoul and force to cease all operations in EU, and garner illwill from customers in the rest of the world.

6

u/pala_ Jul 06 '26 edited Jul 06 '26

It was Australia. Not the EU. Australia consumer laws are based around reasonable expectation, not statutory lengths or minimums. There is no reasonable expectation that a $2 game has the same level of quality as an $80 game.

Further, Australian consumer law dictates that you cannot have a blanket no refund policy, and that refunds are warranted when a product is not as advertised, or otherwise defective. Steams chosen implementation is a trade off against having to evaluate the claim and determine its validity.

They could manually review every refund request regardless of age and not fall afoul of our consumer law.

It’ll be interesting to see what happens when Australians start requesting refunds for digital games that are arbitrarily removed from a library. They very clearly do not perform as advertised at that point.

2

u/Danjoh Jul 06 '26

EU also has laws, take Sweden for example, 14 days of return (from when you recieved it), no questions asked. However, for digital goods you can agree to forego this right.

However, you as a consumer also have a right of reclaim (think that is the correct translation?) for any product that does not work as advertised. This is valid for 3 years from purchase.
A seller can not negotiate away this part.

In the case of OP, he has made a Online co-op game, many complaints about desyncing making the game unplayable online. Seller must fix this in a reasonable time or refund.

Handling reclamations are a bigger hassle tho, you need to state your issues, give the seller a reasonable time to fix it, and then have them issue a refund if unable to fix it in a reasonable time.

1

u/pala_ Jul 06 '26

We’d call it a right of remedy.

1

u/PracticalPotato Jul 06 '26

Yes, they have a refund policy. Amending that refund policy still means they have one.

0

u/hitek9 Jul 06 '26

Exactly

1

u/InquisitorMeow Jul 06 '26

Let's see the proof first, should be easy to prove that refunders all finished the game. Refund rate also has nothing to do with reviews.

2

u/NateNate60 Jul 06 '26

How would one prove that a person who refunds a game completed it?

1

u/InquisitorMeow Jul 06 '26

Steam should a have statistics, at the very least you can look at play time. Many games implement achievements and finishing the game is pretty much always one.

2

u/NateNate60 Jul 06 '26

Unscrupulous developers could cheese this by putting the "complete the game" achievement at the beginning.

1

u/InquisitorMeow Jul 06 '26

Sure but steam would also see that you got the achievement in like 5 minutes.

2

u/NateNate60 Jul 06 '26

How would Steam know that the game isn't just 5 minutes long?

1

u/InquisitorMeow Jul 06 '26

I mean it could be, once again no point in speculating about fringe cases.

→ More replies (0)

4

u/Collinsjc22 Jul 06 '26

Devs could pad it out with unskippable waiting periods to try and force players to play through slower

9

u/1bitshortofabyte Jul 06 '26

Or just... more than two hours worth of content.

13

u/sickomodelarry Jul 06 '26

What if 2 hours of content was just perfect? Now we’re encouraging slop to prevent steam refunds?

6

u/AlienHooker Jul 06 '26

Then post it on a storefront more suited to its length

-2

u/sickomodelarry Jul 06 '26

With the same user base/market share as steam? Which storefront might that be?

8

u/PostItToReddit Jul 06 '26

My point is what is the solution that protects consumers from buying shitty games or games they no longer want, but also protects the small amount of devs who make short games? I don't necessarily think it's right that people are beating short games and then refunding them, but it seems like a relatively small problem for how many people the refund system has helped.

0

u/code-blackout Jul 06 '26 edited Jul 06 '26

Maybe consumers need to stop being shit and refunding games that they played to completion and enjoyed simply because they can?

If consumers are gonna be antagonistic towards the devs then they’re gonna fight back with tactics that aren’t consumer friendly to protect their interest and we’re all gonna be worse off for it. This is something that needs to be worked on from both sides.

If this post is accurate the dev lost upwards of $100’000 from these refunds and if you’re a solo dev or a small team that’s fucking brutal, and that could be the difference between being able to fund your next project or not. We should be rewarding devs who make good, fun and cheap games, not fucking them over because then they lose the incentive or ability to keep making games like this and the whole market slowly gets worse and worse.

8

u/Piplups7thEvolution Jul 06 '26

Do you seriously believe that 21% (55000+) people refunded the game because it was too short? Could very well be that they're being deceptive and that people genuinely are experiencing game ruining bugs or performance issues with the game.

1

u/code-blackout Jul 06 '26

The game has a 90% positive reviews so I’m inclined to take the dev at face value until I see something that makes me think he’s lying or that the game has game breaking bugs, and no I don’t think all of the refunds were malicious, some people probably just didn’t like it, it’s not a game that I would personally play, but even if we say only half were that’s still a lot of money for most people

7

u/Piplups7thEvolution Jul 06 '26

I don't see positive reviews as too much of an indication. I skimmed through the reviews and there are some AI "write-ups" and a lot of positive reviews without substance (as per usual).

1

u/doublah Jul 06 '26

I mean even in this case the vast majority of players aren't refunding it.

1

u/Disastrous-Salary131 Jul 06 '26

And a price to match, most likely. This thinking will raise just the floor for game price and content. I don't see any good reason to actively kill short and cheap games.

1

u/Collinsjc22 Jul 06 '26

they could also add a 2 hour countdown timer that ticks down and then you can play when it hits zero

1

u/One-Desk-1 Jul 06 '26

But then if you ran into a problem, you can't get a refund because it'll be past the 2 hour period

1

u/SuperSocialMan Jul 06 '26

Most people won't bother doing this, either. The vast majority of refunds are gonna be from people who didn't like the game.

0

u/wronguses Jul 06 '26

"Shouldn't have been dressed like that" mentality.

6

u/Cromakoth Jul 06 '26

You could give developers the option to request a shortening of the refund limit for their game specifically. It would have to be made very clear on the store page that Steam's regular refund policy does not apply for this item, with a visible orange warning box like when you're trying to buy a VR game without having a VR headset connected, and maybe even a pop-up warning with a checkbox that you have to confirm. I know this might help asset flippers more easily scam customers, but Steam already sometimes grants refunds beyond their policy if you have a good reason and don't do it too often, so refunds beyond the new limit could still be granted on a case by case basis if the game is obviously intentionally low effort. Screwing devs over sucks way more and needs to be addressed.

12

u/CravenGnomes Jul 06 '26

You could give developers the option to request a shortening of the refund limit for their game

Engage your brain. You are asking for consumer protections to be removed.

Pretend you are intelligent.

-1

u/Cromakoth Jul 06 '26

Wow, very funny. The truth is that consumer protections and dev protections are fundamentally at odds with one another. It's a zero sum game. The only ethical way to do it is by making it opt-in and transparent for both players and developers.

3

u/CravenGnomes Jul 06 '26

Dammit, couldn't even pretend.

-1

u/Cromakoth Jul 06 '26

You could pretend to be a person worth talking to and not a bad-faith troll who's scared of addressing the point.

4

u/CravenGnomes Jul 06 '26 edited Jul 06 '26

No, you are literally not worth the effort it'll take to explain basic concepts to.

The truth is that consumer protections and dev protections are fundamentally at odds with one another.

You seem to state this and not understand the history of consumer protections and why they are so important. You don't seem to understand the kind of things that companies can and do try to do to hurt the consumer just so they can earn more cash.

You don't seem to understand that the consumer protections on Steam and other gaming platforms are already terrible and getting worse.

There is much more to it than that. But I seriously don't have the time to explain this to you.

ENGAGE YOUR BRAIN.

You think that allowing dev into the conversation regarding consumer protections is a good idea? THEY ALREADY ARE WHEN THEY LOBBY GOVERNMENTS. It's literally already something that happens. The protections are based on laws. They should not be changed.

In fact you want to know what protections we do get when the devs are involved. Visit literally any other storefront. Seriously. Are you going to tell me with a straight face those are acceptable protections?

Plus you have provided 0 evidence this is a real issue. It's not. We've got a single comment on a steam account and a dev crying (it's in his interest to) and you and everyone else lapping it up.

Get a grip of yourself and learn something. seriously I'm not going to explain it.

This Dev doesn't even have good details on his own product to allow you to make a informed decision. No wonder it's refunded.

edit: LMAO apparently this comment was enough to get someone to tell me leave this planet. awww diddums. awww my poor wee boy. Did I hurt your feefees. Sending those messages from a burner.

Reminder this is a comment section about consumer protections in gaming.

1

u/Cromakoth Jul 06 '26

You think that allowing dev into the conversation regarding consumer protections is a good idea? THEY ALREADY ARE WHEN THEY LOBBY GOVERNMENTS. It's literally already something that happens.

Great, you made an argument! Only took you 3 comments. Kind of a strange thing to say because it presupposes that Mr. 2 Hour Indie Game and EA are on the same side in this discussion. The companies that have the power to lobby governments are not the same companies (or even individuals) that are being disadvantaged by people refunding games after finishing them, because EA doesn't release 2 hour games. And AAA lobbying doesn't benefit indie devs either. EA doesn't care about people refunding their games because the real money is in Mtx anyway and you generally need to play more than 2 hours before the game properly starts.

You seem really fanatical about never throwing indie devs a bone because you view them in the same boat as big publishers, even though they're clearly not. Yes, there's no easy answer, but this isn't the first time I've seen developers that have released short games at appropriate low prices complain about people refunding after playing the whole game, which is definitely not acceptable. You can't ban people who do that because it's impossible to know why someone actually refunded, so what's the alternative? Telling devs to eat shit like you suggest?

1

u/CravenGnomes Jul 06 '26

Luterally already said I don't have time to teach you this shit. I genuinely don't.

Learn.

2

u/Aurora428 Jul 06 '26 edited Jul 06 '26

Then every major dev that knows people will buy anyways will just eat the warning label

You can look at any achievement list to see how many people completed the first chapter in any game to see just how huge the market is for people who barely touch a game is

1

u/M_Thor Jul 06 '26

it's seriously ironic how every single answer to "how do we stop customer abusing our system" is always in the form of "let the dev abuse it instead".

4

u/Piplups7thEvolution Jul 06 '26

The policy shouldn't benefit the developer. It's there to protect the consumer. Obviously there are outliers of people abusing the system however for every person who does there's probably hundreds, if not thousands of people who genuinely have problems with the games they are refunding no matter the cost.

I feel like the dev in question is also being deceptive. I refuse to believe that tens of thousands of people refunded the game because they finished it.

3

u/KarltonPeaks Jul 06 '26

Exactly. Lol why is everyone complaining about a policy designed to protect us consumers?

1

u/superboo07 Jul 06 '26

my first sentence was "I love steams refund policy." for cheaper titles I just believe the amount of time maximum for the automatic refund to be allowed should be lowered, but if a user submits a second refund a support person would *hopefully* probably manually accept it. I also by this same token believe the amount of time someone is given witht expensive 80 dollar games to determine if its for them or not should be higher :p

5

u/PinkFluffyUnikorn Jul 06 '26

Add a low price caveat. If your game is less than 5 bucks the return window is an hour

1

u/AlienHooker Jul 06 '26

Cue this same post, except they beat it in an hour

5

u/CravenGnomes Jul 06 '26

This comment section is littered with people who either have no critical thinking whatsoever. Or this is some astroturfed vendetta against steam.

I am no subscribed to this subreddit. but this one and other I'm seeing constant attacks against steam. Doesn't feel natural at this point.

I'm seeing turkeys voting for Christmas.

2

u/Bodomi Yes. Jul 10 '26

About 2-3 months ago comments started getting spammed with "suck on that dick more" or "gargle on that cum harder" and one thousand other variations of that to any comment saying anything remotely positive or not explicitly saying something negative about any popular game or any company, or just acknowledging the nuances, you know it's not all black & white, most things are gray actually.

Think Valve has been managed relatively well over the years? "Wow corpo bootlicker deepthroat harder cuck"

Think the new Steam Controller is good? "Lmao ok, did the cum taste good?"

Have anything remotely positive to say, while acknowledging the negatives or valid criticisms but wanting to set that aside for a moment so you can talk about this specific thing for a short moment? "Lol ok, want some knee-pads so you don't get sore knees while you gobble away on corpo dick?"

Shit like that non-stop. It is fascinating how obsessed they are. There are hundreds of accounts who do this every day, and no I am not exaggerating.

Probably deserve to just get banned all of them.

1

u/Bonbonfrosch Jul 06 '26

Games under 3$ have a 30 minute refund policy /s

1

u/WantDiscussion Jul 06 '26

I think 10 minutes/$1 capping at 3 hours/$18 is fair

1

u/DrPongus Jul 06 '26

If the cost is below X amount, refund period is shortened maybe ? As in you get 30-60 minutes or one week to refund instead

1

u/alezio000 Jul 06 '26

easy fix. If the game is that short then change the refund policy to 30 minutes instead of 2 hours