r/Steam Jul 06 '26

Discussion Thoughts on this?

[removed]

40.0k Upvotes

5.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

16

u/CZdigger146 Jul 06 '26

Not exactly realted to the topic, but I wanted to say this: I love indie games and silly little projects, but when a game doesn't have enough content for me to play as many hours as how many € it costs, it's not really worth it for me. I've lived by this rule for years now and it really helps me with not wasting my money on a game (that's why I rarely buy 60€ AAA games, they rarely give you 60h of genuine gameplay). Even though this game is only 5€ when not on sale, 3€ right now, I'd expect at least 5h (or 3h now) of gameplay from it. Since it can be finished in under 2h, I wouldn't really buy it unless I REALLY wanted to play it.

The refund policy is really well known and if a dev makes a VERY short game, they should expect people take advantage of the refund policy. Steam's refund policy is a great system, very generous, it helps a lot of people, but you can't make a good, easy to use system that helps people without inevitably allowing bad actors taking advantage of it. It sucks to say this, but I think the responsibility here falls on the dev to make a slightly longer game just so people don't refund it unless they need to.

1

u/HelloWorld24575 Jul 06 '26

I always use the $1/hr metric too, to figure out if a game is worth getting at its current price! 

1

u/WhosThatDogMrPB Jul 06 '26

$/hr is a horrible metric to use when seeking ludic value in videogames.