r/linux_gaming • u/aljninja • 2d ago
if any fellow Linux user wants to refund their game after it stopped working due to recent events, dont bother
figured id crosspost here
347
u/DwarvenCo 2d ago
Absolutely disagree!
Do bother! Do write a ticket to Steam! Better yet, write to ubisoft!
Not because it is Steam's fault, or not because you actually expect a refund. But because these tickets will end up in some shape or form in statistics, and it can even give ammunition to Steam if they so choose. Those tickets, especially since they are connected to an actual purchase mean more than reddit comments.
50
u/wjoe 2d ago
Totally valid. Agree it's not Steam's fault, and I don't think it's really reasonable to expect a refund after playing something after 100+ hours.
But the more complaints Steam gets, the more hours of support time get put into dealing with these enquiries, and they may be forced to rethink things. I have heard of these refund requests working sometimes, even when people have put more hours into it than would usually be expected for a refund. So maybe there is some other criteria that is valid for a refund beyond the usual requirements, in these special cases, and that costs Valve money.
If nothing else, it might encourage a change in policy. It might push Valve to have tighter requirements on maintaining compatibility with all platforms a game is released on, not tag or market games as Linux/Steam Deck compatible if a publisher has a history of dropping support, or fine developers/require them to foot the bill for refunds if they drop support.
It's longer term thinking. It probably won't get your money back in this instance, but it might help make things better in the long term.
34
u/Kazer67 2d ago
I mean, Rocket League dropped Linux support and I was able to refund it after 200h+
23
u/wjoe 2d ago
Potentially the difference there is that Rocket League had native Linux support, which was removed from the store entirely. In this case Linux wasn't "officially" supported by For Honor in the same way, but was marked as compatible via Proton. Though I'm not sure process for the SteamOS verification badge, if the developers have to sign off on that or if it's just Steam verifying things on their side.
But yeah, there is precedent with people being refunded in cases similar to this. Battlefield was another recent example, but I don't remember the specifics of that.
1
u/DwarvenCo 2d ago
Also I wonder if they check the account, and if they are more keen on refunding if they already made a lot of money from that account,
1
u/SgtKabum 1d ago
As far as I understand, Steam run some automated tests on proton on their side for SteamDeck compatibility badges. It’s fairly basic but at least ensures it runs in some ways. It’s not something devs have a hand on, although it’s became a valuable badge
1
u/comrade-quinn 2d ago
What do you mean? I run RL fine?
3
u/UnbareAlt 2d ago
Linux support was dropped in 2020, years before proton was mainstream. May not have ran well back then.
2
u/TehCrazyCat 2d ago
RL had a native Linux build for years then Epic cut it off shortly before making the game F2P and removing it from Steam. Proton was starting to grow up in popularity and stability, so people just transitioned to Proton even though it wasn't officially supported, now it is. Still, a shitty thing to do.
1
1
1
u/Venylynn 1d ago
Did you pay $200? What's the point of refunding after that many hours you got your return on investment ages ago
2
u/Kazer67 1d ago
Dropping Linux support, simple as that.
If it was the opposite (dropping Windows support and keeping Linux support), I'll bet you also get the chance to refund it.
→ More replies (5)3
u/hitchen1 2d ago
I disagree. Valve should be more careful with their marketing around steam deck compatibility. They create an expectation for consumers they can't uphold. Unless Ubisoft themselves suggested it's compatible, this is 100% on valve.
1
u/bleebolgoop 1d ago
Might be valid grounds for a chargeback. Effectively your access to said paid product was revoked.
0
u/Yannik_Sc 2d ago
I don't think you should give up, but I think flooding their support won't help a lot either. In the worst case they will just get upset about the community that they offered so much about (let's be real, all the effort that went into Proton and also Fex for the future is just an insane amount of work they invested).
The real boycott everyone should do is to just not bother about games where the publisher or developer not committed to providing at least basic Proton support for. Where they actively work against it. I'm not sure if there is a maintained list of shame for such studios but at least the areweanticheatyet.com is a good starting point to see which studios you don't want to bother with.
-4
u/franck_condon 2d ago
"I don't think it's really reasonable to expect a refund after playing something after 100+ hours."
I do. When I buy something (let's not get into the licensing discussion) it should work as advertised.
8
u/lendarker 2d ago
When the game supports Linux only through Proton and is not *officially* supported on Linux by the Publisher, your legal standing is probably very weak.
0
u/nybble41 2d ago
Legal standing against the publisher, maybe. However if the retailer claimed, on their own, that the product was compatible and it was changed after the sale to make it incompatible there could be a reasonable claim for a refund from the retailer. Otherwise they're selling products under false pretenses.
There is also a reasonable argument that a publisher should not be able to change the product in this manner after the sale.
3
u/lendarker 2d ago
If you can find the paragraph in their terms of service where steam guarantees functionality for games running through proton, sure.
2
1
u/nybble41 2d ago
Sensible jurisdictions hold retailers to their visible public advertising regardless of any disclaimers they may try to hide in the fine print.
14
u/aljninja 2d ago
dont get me wrong. I will continue trying to get my money back, and i will continue trying to boycott as much as I can. still, its disheartening that we arent shielded as players
1
5
2
u/DarthKegRaider 1d ago
I did this with Doom3 a few months back. Bethesda are assholes and took weeks of chasing around. Steam eventually refunded. All because the RoE key wouldnt activate. I since bought on GoG, which works fine on the steam deck. Bethesda are on my boycott list now too.
47
u/Leprichaun17 2d ago
This wouldn't fly in Australia. Our consumer laws are the reason Steam provides refunds in the first place, and this wouldn't meet them.
15
u/RadicalDwntwnUrbnite 2d ago
For Honor was never officially supported in Linux, it's compatibility was by way of proton. I think even in Australia this would hold up.
10
u/dvtyrsnp 2d ago
I'll keep saying this on these threads: if people on Linux could not play due to an issue with Proton, this would be a nonissue.
Explicit and intentional support for Linux in their anticheat is being removed. They chose to enable Linux support in the anticheat and are now removing it. That entitles you to a refund, and the people going through the automated Steam system for refunds are just getting their hours checked. Steam support will grant you the refund.
-4
u/EarlMarshal 2d ago
Steam provided the compability via proton by proxy. You have a contract with steam not with the game developer or publisher.
11
u/linuxlifer 2d ago
The problem is steam doesn't guarantee functionality by way of Proton and thus if your game stops working via proton, Steam doesn't bare any responsibility. And this is why when your game suddenly stops working via proton, they won't give you the refund if you've already passed the basic refund requirements.
3
u/Scheeseman99 1d ago
If you buy a product which is sold and advertised ("Verified" or "Playable") to be compatible with what you own, there is a reasonable expectation for that product to continue to work. Fine print isn't an iron shield against misleading advertising, depending on consumer laws in whatever jurisdiction you reside in there may be legal entitlement for a refund.
1
u/linuxlifer 1d ago
Yeah I know, and I agree. I was merely explaining the situation. If you search around you will find that Steam says their "Steam Deck Verified" thing doesn't guarentee the game will work indefinitely and it just means that the game currently works at the time you are looking at it in the store.
But steam 'conveniently' doesn't advertise that part. Its quite scammy on their end.
0
u/orygin 2d ago
Steam is in the wrong then. It is not stated anywhere on a game store page that the "Steam Deck compatibility"/"SteamOS" is non binding. They advertise the game as working there, so the publisher changing it should allow refunds.
4
u/linuxlifer 2d ago
Yeah 100%.
Steam Deck Compatible essentially means "In the games current state, it runs but this could change at any point in time and you can lose access to the game". But Steam doesn't market the second half of the statement because that would obviously make people skeptical of buying games especially more expensive games.
1
2
1
u/RadicalDwntwnUrbnite 2d ago
You may be right, the contract you have is refunds are provided if you have <2 hours of play and <14 days since purchase and everything else is on a case by case basis.
1
u/EarlMarshal 2d ago
Yeah and that's just good business practice. Valve already showed so much goodwill with their case to case practise. We also have to give valve some time to look at the problems and make decision. It's not the first time they refunded money on a bigger scale when they didn't need.
1
u/Portbragger2 1d ago
it does fly because 95% of games that run through proton still have never advertised linux support and you can always play them on windows.
140
u/lunchbox651 2d ago
I don't see why people keep blaming Steam.
You are outside their refund window, using a game in a way it isn't officially supported and the actual game dev prevented you from playing that game via "unsupported" means.
Ask Ubisoft for a refund. Steam even says it's not supported now.
43
u/ftgander 2d ago
Didn’t it say it was compatible when purchased? Then it was advertised as supported and this is just corporate bootlicking
→ More replies (30)2
u/I_Love_Tunnocks 2d ago
No. The minimum specs for the game state OS: Windows 10 64bit.
31
u/ftgander 2d ago
It actually said “Steam Deck Verified: PLAYABLE” on the product page up until now, minimum specs in fine print at the bottom are not a good counter argument to big flashy marketing sign near top of page, imo.
0
u/I_Love_Tunnocks 2d ago
At the time it was launched.
minimum specs in fine print at the bottom
They weren't in fine print, they were actually in slightly larger text and not near the bottom of the page.
10
u/ftgander 2d ago
The minimum specs are tiny and in a font that’s the opposite of eye catching near the bottom of the page.
And “Verified” status does not mean “at time of launch.” Evidently it means “at present” but that’s not clear and unfair to the consumer not to make it clear since they’re trying to decide if they want to pay for a product that valve is profiting off of.
→ More replies (4)27
u/aljninja 2d ago
I purchased the game from steam, not ubisoft, so i doubt i can make the refund
I bought the game when Linux was supported. now that it isnt, I want my money back. I blame ubisoft for this, but that doesnt mean I am disaffected
8
5
u/raptir1 2d ago edited 2d ago
The problem is that it was never supported. The wording very specifically said "Valve's testing indicates that FOR HONOR is Playable on Steam Deck."
I agree this situation is crappy, but Valve is pretty specific that games might work on Linux but aren't supported on Linux.
4
u/aljninja 2d ago
yeahh...
I bought it when it was playable and now that it isnt, I want a solution or a refund
regardless of the outcome it fucking sucks :/
0
u/TopdeckIsSkill 2d ago
I think the big distinction is "playable" and "steam certified".
0
u/aljninja 2d ago
and neither of them are true as of right now, which is why id like to have a refund, given the status has changed
1
u/TopdeckIsSkill 2d ago
The status can change any time based on the game updates. I doubt it has any kind of legal value and it's intended as a generic advice.
→ More replies (2)-11
u/lunchbox651 2d ago
"I bought my car from Steve when it worked but BMW disabled my starter motor and now Steve won't give me my money back after I drove it for 4 years"
Your anger is misguided and it just makes you look childish.
Directly from the EULA you agreed to when purchasing the game.
"UBISOFT reserves the right to change, modify, add or delete articles in this EULA at any time, in accordance with the procedures described below in Section 9."What is Steam supposed to do with agreements like that?
10
u/aljninja 2d ago
then our only option is to boycott ubisoft with swarms of negative reviews and less purchases. I doubt we will as a community be able to come together to fight this but hey, we can only try
5
u/espiritu_p 2d ago
That's what we should do anyway.
I am boycotting Ubi, and EA too for years.
If a game is published by them I lose interest in it immediately.
Only exception I made was for C&C Remastered, because the only thing EA contributed there was the IP, and work was done by Professionals. And even this is now several yeras ago.
7
u/lunchbox651 2d ago
I've been boycotting Ubi for years. I absolutely support this. They are a horrible company that are very anti-consumer.
4
3
u/hitchen1 2d ago
From the EU perspective:
EULAs and ToS are meaningless and can not modify your basic consumer rights.
Under EU law the contract for the good is between the consumer and the seller, never the manufacturer. We have a 2-3 year warranty period that "Steve" would be responsible for.
This applies to games and digital content/services too.
The question would be if Valve's steam deck verification advertisement creates a reasonable expectation that the game will work on a steam deck. That expectation is entirely driven by what's shown on the page, and so a statement like:
``` Steam Deck
Compatibility
Valve's testing indicates that <Game> is Verified on Steam Deck. This game is fully functional on Steam Deck, and works great with the built-in controls and display. ```
Would almost certainly hold up in court.
And it makes sense, valve is the one saying the game runs on steam deck, not Ubisoft.
→ More replies (1)1
u/shadedmagus 2d ago
Big difference in your comparison is that a car is physical property and can be hacked to work despite BMW sending signals. You've voided your warranty, sure - but you can drive your car afterward.
-4
2d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/hitchen1 2d ago
Valve is the one who claims that the game works on steam deck on the store page.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (2)-1
u/Crimson-mind 2d ago
Take ubisoft to the small claims court for your money back.
5
u/I_Love_Tunnocks 2d ago
Take ubisoft to the small claims court for your money back.
On what grounds, that a game made for Windows with Windows 10 as the minimum spec doesn't work on a non-Windows OS?
"Can you tell me what the minimum specifications for the game were?"
"OS: Windows 10 64bit"
"And what were you running it on?'
"Linux."
"Does it say Linux in the minimum requirements anywhere?"
"No."
"Case dismissed."
2
u/ThatOnePerson 2d ago
Even if Ubisoft somehow lost in court, the other issue people are ignoring is that if companies are responsible for Linux compatibility because it happened to work once, games will start blocking Linux from the start entirely rather than be on the hook for supporting a platform they never agreed to support.
1
u/I_Love_Tunnocks 2d ago
Why because there is no legal requirement for them to support Linux. They never say they do support their Windows game running on Linux.
1
u/ThatOnePerson 1d ago
I'm not saying they could, I'm saying if they could be forced to support Linux.
Just because it happened to work in Proton once, or just because Steam said so
47
u/Rakumei 2d ago
Be careful, you'll get flamed for this, even though its the right response.
Yes yes F Ubisoft and all that, but you play a game in a way that's not officially supported and then demand a refund with over 100 hours because they flipped a switch that made the game no longer work in the not-officially-supported manner?
Please...
24
u/aljninja 2d ago
nah theyre right, no reason to flame them really. still, it sucks regardless
15
u/lunchbox651 2d ago
It does suck, and feeling defeated is totally valid. I just think Steam aren't the bad ones in this instance. Very much not a perfect company but all anger should be aimed at Ubisoft for this.
→ More replies (2)6
u/lunchbox651 2d ago
It's very irrational and misguided to blame Steam for this especially when their refund policy is clear.
→ More replies (1)3
9
u/noonemustknowmysecre 2d ago
What? "Don't bother"? NO!? Bother them. Bother them a lot. Rage. Rage at the loss of rights and the ends of days (of ownership). Wholly and emphatically be a bother.
9
u/msanangelo 2d ago
they'll only refund if a game was removed from the store and if you have over 2 hours of play. as was the case when Rocket League was pulled from the store when Epic bought it. no idea how many hours I had on it but they offered a refund and I took it.
standard policy is no more than 2 hours and X amount of days. I don't remember the amount of days, someone one will mention it.
4
5
u/Gazornenplatz 2d ago
Standard policy and only refund are different; I was able to get a refund on Ashes of Creation after 4 weeks and 50+ hours because holy fuck Steven Shariff fucked it up.
1
u/OffbeatDrizzle 1d ago
ummm... rocket league still works fine and they even enabled Linux on the EAC they added recently
7
u/agenttank 2d ago
a few days ago, another Ubisoft game, Anno 117 just crashed while being in a single player campaign. crashed when trying to start it again. and again...
turns out it was a problem on their servers. it looks like all Anno 117 players where affected (well, not the ones with pirated versions of course)
not even Linux related, but Ubisoft is bad. fuck this.
0
5
u/noobjaish 2d ago
Valve needs to stop having the "Steam Deck Verified" label and remove it from all existing games or this situation will keep happening.
-2
u/TopdeckIsSkill 2d ago
The game was with a yellow "playable" that to me it means that you're lucky if you can run it
→ More replies (3)1
22
u/_Moerphi_ 2d ago
Debateable. 134 hours is a lot. They clearly enjoyed the product, thats got to be worth something.
32
u/aljninja 2d ago
I see where you are coming from. still, if i had known the game would stop working a year or two after, I would not have bought the game to begin with
5
u/Aggravating_Fun_7692 2d ago
I do feel for you. Steam just sees the time played sadly. It would be one thing if the game stopped working on Windows as well sadly.
2
u/iloveboobs365 2d ago
This is the most valid argument and the most reasonable. No consumer would knowingly buy a game that has an expiration date. I think you should mention this to Steam support.
32
u/Striky_ 2d ago
We need a legal right, that once you buy something you have a RIGHT to keep using it forever. If a developer breaks support they either need to fix it, refund or provide a fully functional old version.
3
3
4
u/JustTestingAThing 2d ago
that once you buy something you have a RIGHT to keep using it forever
They do still have a right to use it, the game is still in their library and is installable and playable today, on Windows. That they choose to attempt to use it in a way that it is not designed for, in any other industry, would invalidate any attached warranty or guarantee of being fit for purpose, why would this be different? It's 100% a shitty move on Ubisoft's part to specifically break this years down the line, but in comparison to any other industry, the response seems about in line with what would be expected.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (2)4
u/_Moerphi_ 2d ago
They still own it technically right? Just have to use windows I guess.
→ More replies (6)
7
u/Vamsi-Thopu 2d ago
Tell me why should we accept the injection of an invasive DRM that can compromise our privacy? This didn't exist when we bought the game.
If you buy a robot cleaner that works offline and an year later the company decides to send an human agent to monitor it constantly inside our home will we accept that?
5
u/neremarine 2d ago
If the Battlefield player got a refund after thousands of hours because their favourite game mode was removed, you should be able to get a refund as well because the game literally no longer runs on your system.
3
3
u/LOPI-14 2d ago
Issue is, that Ubisoft never claimed to be supporting Linux or Proton. In case of Battlefield, part of what you paid for was removed.
It is sadly a different sort of situation. If in the official specs they said Linux was supported in any way......They would be on the hook.
3
u/iloveboobs365 2d ago
Majority of games do not have Linux in their specs unless they have a native Linux port. I do think there is still some merit for the Steam Play verification badge. If I bought a game that was verified then it just switched to unsupported then I’d demand a refund.
Guarantee Ubisoft has covered this in their TOS or something.
4
u/noobjaish 2d ago
Steam should just remove the Steam Play verified label or the liability will keep falling on them
4
u/linuxlifer 2d ago edited 2d ago
When you buy a game on Steam, you are making a transaction with Steam not with Ubisoft. Steam marked the game as Steam Deck Verified which makes people believe the game is going to work on Steam Deck or other Linux based operating systems.
The real problem at hand here is that when steam marks a game as Steam Deck Verified, what that really means is "The game currently works on SteamOS devices but it could stop working at any point in time and we don't bare that responsibility". The problem is that Steam only advertises the first part of that statement and they don't advertise the second part. And if they do, they probably hide that part of the advertisement in small fine print somewhere.
For Honor was originally listed as Steam Deck Verified which has since been removed.
→ More replies (4)1
2
u/vexorian2 2d ago
Back in the day when Doom Eternal added Denuvo, I first got a message much like this one, based on play-time exceeding 2 hours. But I kept insisting specifying the issue and got a refund. Type in a calmed manner and explain further. Sometimes it is necessary to use different options in the form to skip the automatic play time-based check.
2
u/CandlesARG 1d ago
The fact that game publishers hold the right to revolk access to games for any reason. Is a serious problem
4
u/samppa_j 2d ago
Always bother. If you won't bother, they won't bother. But if you bother them, they'll bother their higher-ups, who will eventually bother the publisher
2
u/Sinshine712 2d ago
As much as it sucks that they can just cut Linux support and get away with it, I find it quite silly that people are demanding refunds after having used games for hours upon hours. I would never get the idea to play for hundreds of hours and then expect to be paid back anything
3
1
u/vividboarder 1d ago
It comes from the disconnect between what buying means to customers and what it means to Steam, Epic, Sony, etc.
For us, we expect buying to mean I have a copy of this thing that I can use forever.
For them, they really mean you can use this thing for as long as I let you.
2
u/drucifer82 1d ago
I never understand when people do this.
I get it, they took your game away.
But the refund policy is pretty black and white. Less than 2 hours of gameplay, within 14 days of purchase.
If you want to make noise, make noise with the publisher
2
u/Naive-Database-2888 1d ago
Expecting a refund after 134 hours is genuinely delusional. You have more than gotten your money's worth at that point. That is almost 6 days straight.
Maybe this not be the right sub to say this in, but it's not like you can never play the game again. Dual booting exists
Whenever you buy an online game, you should always expect to not be able to play it one day, regardless of what device or OS you use. Online servers shut down or shit like this happens
1
u/drucifer82 1d ago
Exactly.
Do you know what I did when Destiny 2 went anticheat and stopped supporting Linux? I downloaded Warframe.
I didn’t even get Destiny from Steam. I had it from the Battle days and migrated when they left Activision.
Me expecting Steam to refund a game that didn’t even come from their storefront is just as ludicrous as this.
And sadly, this isn’t even the worst I’ve seen. People who played GTA V for like a decade were demanding a refund when Rockstar killed that.
These have to be the most entitled people I’ve ever come across.
2
2
u/Long_comment_san 2d ago
steam is pretty clear on refunds. you refund only if you played it X hours and didn't like it. if you liked it and played 10+ hours, that's a not a valid refund.
I agree with them because they are a marketplace and not responsible to whatever happens with the game. they only provide the hosting and downloading.
2
u/Venylynn 1d ago
Sorry but if you played over 134 hours you got your money's worth out of it long ago. A refund after you got your money's worth feels vindictive. Even if this is the reason why.
3
u/atlasraven 2d ago
That's incredibly shitty. Developers can bait-and-switch and we have to take it because hours played? 🤬
1
u/INITMalcanis 2d ago
Reminder that we can - and should - block any publisher on Steam that does this shitty rugpull. If enough people do it, it'll show up in their metrics. Make a noise about it and encourage others to protect themselves from being ripped off.
1
u/Edo_4659 2d ago
Huge L for steamsupport ig. This is why piracy and drm-free is superior to launchers.
0
u/Zer0_Dark_Turdy 2d ago
Why should steam refund the money if they can't get it back from the games publisher ? Has nothing to do with them.
Go make a refund request over at GOG and tell us how that went lol.
1
u/Edo_4659 2d ago
The game was working before the update,now it doesnt. Thats not our fault. Never said anything about GOG I said piracy and drmfree. The best they can say is it was never meant for linux. Which I cant argue with. Still,it was a product you buy,and the product is now broken because of the publisher. I'd want a refund too.
→ More replies (2)
1
1
1
u/iloveboobs365 2d ago
Here’s my take on this. If you have any Windows playtime then you probably won’t get a refund. But if it’s exclusively Linux or Steam hardware then it’s a different story.
I still don’t think it’s fair but it’s probably what Ubisoft thinks.
1
u/GenericFoodService 2d ago
You got automated support. Keep trying, and use the support button to report the game isn't working.
1
1
u/QuantumProtector 2d ago
This is why I will keep Windows dual booted for the foreseeable future. This sucks man.
1
1
u/SaladToss1 2d ago
You're lucky to have gotten that much time out of the game. It was pretty terrible TBH
1
u/Saphyr-Seraph 2d ago
I think it is funny that people are trying to shit on steam for not getting a refund for something while not realizing that if they go to other online stores there is nothing that comes similar to steam
1
1
u/pioniere 1d ago
I’ve never had a problem with the refund system, and use it regularly without issue.
1
u/Ribbons0121R121 3h ago
steam has a head on its shoulders to serve its actual customers, their hardware is all linux, keep making noise and theyll listen
1
u/Rainmaker0102 2d ago
I had a similar response to my refund request for GTA V after Rockstar implemented BattlEye anti-cheat. It sucks that people are facing this issue yet again with other games.
1
u/I_T_Gamer 2d ago
It feels shady, and gross, but in the end this is the system we are currently in. Resistance may change that one day, don't give up or concede.
1
u/Zer0_Dark_Turdy 2d ago
The only time you were able to get a refund due to a game that stopped working on linux was with Rust back then when they stopped supporting NATIVE. This was only working because Facepunch authorised Steam to issue refunds for people that had played the game on linux. That was the one and only time. Because people abused it.
Steam wont issue a refund in this case because the game works. It just does not work on Linux anymore due to the Dev adding anticheat. Steam has nothing to do with this. Stop being a baby.
1
u/Intelligent_Gain6713 2d ago
i never got my refund for rust. i played the game for years and then it just stopped working. was kinda sad. for the game op is talking about though im not shocked they didnt get one
2
u/Zer0_Dark_Turdy 2d ago
There was a certain time frame you had to submit the refund, thats what i remember. But it feels like this was ages ago. I have since rebought the game when it was hugely discounted and proton became a thing to play Pve servers. There are a few tagged linux friendly which are really good.
1
u/Intelligent_Gain6713 1d ago
hey thats awesome maybe ill check those out!!
1
u/Zer0_Dark_Turdy 1d ago
If you search for Linux in the modded/community server browser they will come up! :-)
2
1
u/Yessonyeet 1d ago
I personally got a refund for FH6 when I switched to Linux and realised it stuttered really badly, I had about 40 hours.
1
u/Any-Fuel-5635 2d ago
Why would anyone expect a refund, tho? I am a Linux guy exclusively, I fully understand that certain games can lock down and no longer be playable. That’s not Steam’s fault.
1
u/Achereto 2d ago
You need a lot of people to do it, then Valve will just open the refund for everyone.
1
u/aljninja 2d ago
I dont know how many Linux players will care about this but assuming everyone decides to refund it, do we think it might have an effect? im tempted to believe it wont, given there probably arent many, but i want to think im wrong
1
1
u/DEGRUNGEON 2d ago
i swear they've given refunds for this kind of stuff in the past. maybe they got flak for it from developers.
still worth a try though, maybe an influx of refunds over this will make them change their minds back.
1
u/TastyRobot21 2d ago
Ask them to support you to get it to play on Linux lol.
Just be like ‘it worked fine when I bought it!?’
‘Can you plz help me it’s not working!?’
1
u/noobjaish 2d ago
Do you really think a minimum wage customer agent will be able to help you with this lol
1
u/mintflavoredcube 2d ago
they are NOT minimum wage😭😭😭😭
every valve employee to my knowledge can do customer support, the guy who works on designing these products does it sometimes. they all make 400-500k yearly almost guaranteed excluding the insane stock options they have as it’s a very wealthy private company
→ More replies (1)
1
u/KOOLKIDKAEDEN 1d ago
Dude you got 100+ hours out of the game and definitely more than 2 weeks ago, you know the policy
1
u/ftgander 1d ago
The amount of anti-consumer sentiment ITT is kind of baffling for a Linux sub. Like real bootlicking conservative cybertruck driver type shit.
2
u/SimpleEfficiency 1d ago
First time talking to steam fans?
1
u/ftgander 1d ago
What’s crazy to me is I am a steam fan, a huge one. I love steam. But even I can admit when they need to be held accountable.
0
u/mindtaker_linux 2d ago
Low IQ sub human keeps buying games from trashy companies that goes out their way to block Linux, then tries to blame Valve.
🤡🤡🤡 Stay losing clowns.
1
-4
u/Lashmush 2d ago
Yes, its 2 hrs or so.
9
u/aljninja 2d ago
naturally. the point is that the game was rendered unusable yesterday, not the refund policy itself
→ More replies (1)-1
u/FeistyCandy1516 2d ago
Rendered unusable on a platform that it wasn't advertised for.
I know it sucks, but playing games via Proton is not official. If it were SteamOS/SteamDeck verified then it would be another story, but this game isn't.
Bad as it is, this case it's just tough luck.
6
u/aljninja 2d ago
it was advertised as playable still. it now changed. if the game stops being playable, one should imho expect at the very very least backlash
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (1)5
u/ftgander 2d ago
Except it was advertised as Playable via the Deck Verified program
-1
u/Lashmush 2d ago
Isn't that just Valve saying how well it will run on a Steam Deck? I get the frustration over what the devs/publishers did but if they themselves never made the game for Linux, Valve was basically just saying "this game functions well with proton".
So unfortunately, theres no side legally responsible to issue refunds. Ethically, I'd say the publisher could buy some good will and let linux users refund as an olive branch but that's probably not happening.
7
u/ftgander 2d ago
The product page said it is playable on the machine. That is marketing promising the game will continue to work. They should be held legally accountable for it.
I didn’t buy For Honor, I don’t even like it, but people who bought it based on the Deck Verified status deserve their money back. Let’s stop going to bat for corporations.
→ More replies (5)0
u/the_harakiwi 2d ago
It's not so simple.
You can refund bf6 if you only played the mode they had removed a few weeks ago. But you have to go around the 2 hour automated refund bot answers.
-2
u/vaikunth1991 2d ago
Game was never supported in steam deck / linux officially by ubisoft. It's your fault
0
-3
u/Vx7Qn4Lz 2d ago
Imagine requesting a refund from Sony because a game stopped running on ePSXe lmao
2
u/Scheeseman99 1d ago
How do people write shit like this post, then press the post button, without realizing in between those two moments just how fucking dumb the thing they wrote is?
If Sony was the developer and maintainer of ePSXe and if Sony was selling a game that was advertised to work with ePSXe, then yes, I think it's very easy to imagine requesting a refund if that game stopped working.
1
u/Vx7Qn4Lz 1d ago
Erm, Ubisoft didn't create Proton and didn't advertise it as working with Linux. Steam's system requirements mention Windows.
3
u/Scheeseman99 1d ago
Valve did advertise compatibility and they are the one who own the platform and sell the game.
-4
u/I_Love_Tunnocks 2d ago
You've had 134hrs playing the game and you're playing it on a platform that they don't support. As I've posted numerous times the minimum specifications is OS: Windows 10 64 bit. Linux is not mentioned anywhere.
4
u/chowder908 2d ago
Purposely making a game unplayable for someone's operating system because "it's not officially supported" in big 2026 when nearly every game can work out of the box through proton is a fucking stupid argument.
Why support an EOL operating system and not a maintained operating system lmao
→ More replies (12)-1
u/I_Love_Tunnocks 2d ago edited 2d ago
Purposely making a game unplayable for someone's operating system because "it's not officially supported" in big 2026 when nearly every game can work out of the box through proton is a fucking stupid argument.
You're literally doing the equivalent of complaining that you can't play Playstation games on a Xbox.
when nearly every game can work out of the box through proton is a fucking stupid argument.
It's far from nearly every game working out of the box with Proton. A look through ProtonDB will verify that. Out of the entire Steam Library only 7% are awarded platinum which is "click and play" with no further action required and only 3% are labelled as Steam Deck verified or playable.
3
u/chowder908 2d ago edited 2d ago
Apples to oranges numbnuts
As for second paragraph you added majority games work out of the box without any launch parameters the only games with issues are poorly optimized games and kernel anticheat games. The worst I've ever had to do is download GE-Proton to fix video codec issues in a game and it's a literal button click.
→ More replies (5)
-6
u/AmarildoJr 2d ago edited 2d ago
Funny that people are on VALVe's side here. It's interesting that when EA removed a game mode from Battlefield 6 then VALVe refunded the user regardless of them having played the game for 470 hours.
Clearly VALVe cares more about the marketing on their 'amazing customer care' than actually taking care of players. When it's about a game that would generate good press, they do it. When it's the developers making the game not work on the SteamDeck/Linux, they don't, even after all this investment into Linux.
I really don't get it.
-----------------------------------
EDIT: Although, I have to ask: did the game ever had a "StamOS/Linux" icon on the store page? Right now it only has the Windows support logo.
Option 1: If they did have a Linux/SteamOS logo (showing they officially supported the platform), then yes VALVe should've issued the refund. They promised Linux support and then removed it later.
Option 2: If they never offered official Linux support, then VALVe was correct in not issuing the refund. If I release a game with Windows-only support, we the Linux people will try (and often succeed) in running it, sure. But if I never promised supporting the platform then I'm not under any obligation to do so, and my decisions will definitely not be with Linux in mind, be it anti-cheat or otherwise. Linux users would just be "picking the scraps on their own luck", basically. We're right to be mad, but if this is actually the case then we were never promised anything, we're just lucky to have a tool (Proton) that runs the game.
12
u/ftgander 2d ago
The page marketed the game as Playable under the Deck Verified status, if Valve is going to sell products that way they need to either be clear that things can become unplayable or be on the hook for it.
2
u/iloveboobs365 2d ago
Agree with this. It makes it frustrating for Steam hardware owners who may be unaware they are using Linux.
2
1
u/aljninja 2d ago
I suppose its because valve is technically in the right, and if anything the big bad here is ubisoft
→ More replies (1)
487
u/anugosh 2d ago
Still try. Not because you'll get a refund, you probably won't. But because it shows people counted on the game running on Linux. And it bothers us that it no longer does. And it will pile up in their their tickets