"I liked the game enough to beat it in under two hours."
and
"The game was so short i beat it in under two hours."
I think that's the wrong question. It's more, "Do I feel like this game was worth the money I spent on it?" If it is, the length doesn't matter. It's a personal value judgement.
The refund window only goes back 6 months. It could be shorter I guess, but then this is the first time they've offered it.
I guess I don't understand the wisdom behind offering an extended refund window at all. A refund policy is a good thing but just make it apply moving forward and don't burden developers with backdated lost revenue.
Example- A small developer sells 500 units a month at $10. The refund policy is put into effect and there is a 5% refund rate backdated 6 months. Without warning the developer is burdened with a month with $1500/30% less income. That is someones mortgage payment. They could have at least spread the damage out over another 6 month window to soften the blow.
I think that's the wrong question. It's more, "Do I feel like this game was worth the money I spent on it?" If it is, the length doesn't matter. It's a personal value judgement.
Yeah that's probably a more accurate question, do i feel it was worth the money even though it was so short?
I guess I don't understand the wisdom behind offering an extended refund window at all. A refund policy is a good thing but just make it apply moving forward and don't burden developers with backdated lost revenue.
Example- A small developer sells 500 units a month at $10. The refund policy is put into effect and there is a 5% refund rate backdated 6 months. Without warning the developer is burdened with a month with $1500/30% less income. That is someones mortgage payment. They could have at least spread the damage out over another 6 month window to soften the blow.
they cant ask for a refund after 14 days, so this example doesnt really work
I support this a 110%. I am really proud that refunds finally got implemented. Not sure how Valve is seeing 2 hours window very viable though for playtime after purchase. This should've been set to a 72 hour period from ones purchase. If not that, then simply make any game refundable, or trade able like consoles for an infinite time period.
Strongly I see this inducing a level of higher integrity and accountability to shady developers who aren't producing anything but quality crap.
Not sure how Valve is seeing 2 hours window very viable though for playtime after purchase. This should've been set to a 72 hour period from ones purchase. If not that, then simply make any game refundable, or trade able like consoles for an infinite time period.
You can't do that tho. If I pick up 5 games during a sale, I won't even get to look at 4 of them before the 72 hours would be up.
What caused this shift in behaviour? Is this so long arched plan from valve or was it brought to life on the coattails of the Paid for Dlc disaster?
Would like to know the original motivation for the flip on policy. I've only ever needed one game refunded and it was Dust, the single player god game that they tacked always online DRM too, despite claims of drm freedom. They were tight fisted about it, claiming i had to go to Ubisoft and get a refund through them. Blah blah blah, i got a begrudged refund, with the not so subtle threat of a vac ban if it occurred again.
What caused this shift in behaviour? Is this so long arched plan from valve or was it brought to life on the coattails of the Paid for Dlc disaster?
Would like to know the original motivation for the flip on policy. I've only ever needed one game refunded and it was Dust, the single player god game that they tacked always online DRM too, despite claims of drm freedom. They were tight fisted about it, claiming i had to go to Ubisoft and get a refund through them. Blah blah blah, i got a begrudged refund, with the not so subtle threat of a vac ban if it occurred again.
So why the sudden(?) change?
As far as I'm aware this has nothing to do with goodwill and more with European Union's law that mandates that all items bought online must be refundable for 14 days from the date of purchase.
The fact that the EU has the power to shut Valve down inside Europe lol.
Well, that was kind of a rhetorical question I'm wondering if them making people waive their rights somehow put them on the map of whoever is in charge of dealing with that stuff. After all Sony's refund policy isn't that great either and it disallows any refunds of digital purchases (apart from some subscriptions).
Naa, it makes perfect sense to apply it retroactively. Here's an example, a couple months ago, my wife bought Fallout 3 (the 2008 one). It would not run *at all* on her Win 8 machine. After looking at various sites, this was a known issue, essentially Bethesda was selling a game they knew would not run on a current windows operating system. Wanted to return it, but couldn't. It was only $10 but so not a big deal, but still really annoying.
Is there a limit on how many returns you can do? Haven't read anything about that, but seems kind of common sense. If you're returning 5 games a month, etc.
Is there a limit on how many returns you can do? Haven't read anything about that, but seems kind of common sense. If you're returning 5 games a month, etc.
Yeah there is but they haven't made it public, but said they will take away the refund option from people who are abusing it.
I feel like if they were any more transparent as to what factors into them identifying abuse then it would just make it that much easier for people to abuse it. People would know somewhat exactly what they are looking for and take more strategic precautions to avoid getting caught and end up making "better abusers" by releasing that kind of info.
Replies
I think that's the wrong question. It's more, "Do I feel like this game was worth the money I spent on it?" If it is, the length doesn't matter. It's a personal value judgement.
I guess I don't understand the wisdom behind offering an extended refund window at all. A refund policy is a good thing but just make it apply moving forward and don't burden developers with backdated lost revenue.
Example- A small developer sells 500 units a month at $10. The refund policy is put into effect and there is a 5% refund rate backdated 6 months. Without warning the developer is burdened with a month with $1500/30% less income. That is someones mortgage payment. They could have at least spread the damage out over another 6 month window to soften the blow.
Yeah that's probably a more accurate question, do i feel it was worth the money even though it was so short?
they cant ask for a refund after 14 days, so this example doesnt really work
The problem is that they can right now as valve is allowing for 6 month old purchases to be refunded. Only new purchases are on the 14 day window.
Strongly I see this inducing a level of higher integrity and accountability to shady developers who aren't producing anything but quality crap.
What caused this shift in behaviour? Is this so long arched plan from valve or was it brought to life on the coattails of the Paid for Dlc disaster?
Would like to know the original motivation for the flip on policy. I've only ever needed one game refunded and it was Dust, the single player god game that they tacked always online DRM too, despite claims of drm freedom. They were tight fisted about it, claiming i had to go to Ubisoft and get a refund through them. Blah blah blah, i got a begrudged refund, with the not so subtle threat of a vac ban if it occurred again.
So why the sudden(?) change?
As far as I'm aware this has nothing to do with goodwill and more with European Union's law that mandates that all items bought online must be refundable for 14 days from the date of purchase.
What is weird, is that just a couple of months ago, Valve specifically went against that law:
http://www.gamespot.com/articles/valve-restricts-14-day-eu-refund-law/1100-6425990/
Makes we wonder what made them do such a 180 in such a short time.
The fact that the EU has the power to shut Valve down inside Europe lol.
Well, that was kind of a rhetorical question
Naa, it makes perfect sense to apply it retroactively. Here's an example, a couple months ago, my wife bought Fallout 3 (the 2008 one). It would not run *at all* on her Win 8 machine. After looking at various sites, this was a known issue, essentially Bethesda was selling a game they knew would not run on a current windows operating system. Wanted to return it, but couldn't. It was only $10 but so not a big deal, but still really annoying.
www.addisonslawyers.com.au/knowledge/ACCC_Steamed_Up_over_Refund_Policies_and_Consumer_Guarantees702.aspx
Yeah there is but they haven't made it public, but said they will take away the refund option from people who are abusing it.
https://twitter.com/Steam_Spy/status/609481363146862593