-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Indie developer Emika Games leaves game development after abuse of the steam refund policy leaves them with very little profit.
- Thread starter Musubi
- Start date
I think games can be short and successful as long as there's an incentive to replay them, but yeah, releasing a game that's short is generally very risky in this regard.
That sounds like something that's ripe for abuse.
I do think some tweaking should probably be done for shorter games
they're charging $7 for their latest game, and if i got an hour or two out of it and enjoyed it, i'd say it was well worth the money
hell, I bought Adios for $18, and a playthrough of that is about an hour or two, and it's one of my favorite games of the year
Yeah, sadly, it's not enough to just create a game people enjoy; you have to make sure your customers aren't dirtbags.
That's a fucking shame. It demonstrates a clear need for flexibility *among* developers of shorter games and their refund period.
Last edited:
I just got done watching John Wolfe play this earlier and his video was only about 59 minutes or so. I assumed it was that short due to editing, but I guess it not cutting the time down by that much jives with this; there didn't seem to be a lot in the way of timewasting stuff outside of the normal 'PT lite' shenanigans.
It's always sad in cases like this where people will refund a game they liked just because they can, it really hurts small devs like this. The only thing I could see fixing it would maybe be a setting the dev can toggle that indicates it's a short experience and restricts the refund timeline but also makes that clear on the purchase screen.
It's always sad in cases like this where people will refund a game they liked just because they can, it really hurts small devs like this. The only thing I could see fixing it would maybe be a setting the dev can toggle that indicates it's a short experience and restricts the refund timeline but also makes that clear on the purchase screen.
That toggle seems like it could be easily abusable to limit refunds in your game, though.
Yeah, I think they need to change the system for shorter games. 30 minutes is a good idea, and also one that detects if you've finished the game.
Steam could put a note on the store page that these games have a different system. Even if some developers try to abuse the system, I'm sure Steam reviews will let people know about that.
Steam could put a note on the store page that these games have a different system. Even if some developers try to abuse the system, I'm sure Steam reviews will let people know about that.
This sucks but I'd rather have the ability to get a refund on a game than not at all.
Valve and other stores can't really reduce the time or anything based on the game because how would they do that?
Time limit based on price? How does that affect pricey games on sale?
Based on time the game takes to complete? How would they know? From the devs themselves? Easy to abuse. From howlongtobeat.com or metric within Steam? Would need to be completed by a bunch of people first.
Via achievement unlock? The devs could flag an early achievement with the flag that locks out refunds.
Case by case basis where someone investigates time played and the average time to beat? Refunds would then take a lot longer and need to be overseen manually.
Only thing I can think of that could solve it and not be some magic solution is a straight up "No Refunds" option that Valve or the dev can enable on games, but again, could be exploitable by devs.
Valve and other stores can't really reduce the time or anything based on the game because how would they do that?
Time limit based on price? How does that affect pricey games on sale?
Based on time the game takes to complete? How would they know? From the devs themselves? Easy to abuse. From howlongtobeat.com or metric within Steam? Would need to be completed by a bunch of people first.
Via achievement unlock? The devs could flag an early achievement with the flag that locks out refunds.
Case by case basis where someone investigates time played and the average time to beat? Refunds would then take a lot longer and need to be overseen manually.
Only thing I can think of that could solve it and not be some magic solution is a straight up "No Refunds" option that Valve or the dev can enable on games, but again, could be exploitable by devs.
Steam's refund system is a boon, but absolutely needs reevaluation relative to game experience. It's a hard thing to to gauge, but when there's no oversight you end up with situations like this; a reasonable priced game at a reasonable relative length has people exploiting a basic refund system to have their fund and cash out at the end.
I could understand if maybe, maybe this was like...a $40 indie game that lasted two hours. But that's a completely different conversation of quality relative to value and the subjective end user experience. As it is though this game goes for a meagre AUD $13, currently on sale for AUD $10. It's a movie ticket. Less, depending on where you go. So on paper it seems to me that the entry price and length (~60 minutes) are completely matched.
I could understand if maybe, maybe this was like...a $40 indie game that lasted two hours. But that's a completely different conversation of quality relative to value and the subjective end user experience. As it is though this game goes for a meagre AUD $13, currently on sale for AUD $10. It's a movie ticket. Less, depending on where you go. So on paper it seems to me that the entry price and length (~60 minutes) are completely matched.
Let alone that seven whole dollars is actually worth two hours of entertainment (you're sure not getting that at the cinema), a game that is seen through to the end at two hours is two hours where you saw the complete experience.
I get defending the customer but this specific avenue is exploiting indie devs and hurts the ability to craft a game with a specific time limit like this, as if games are only worthwhile if they last a certain amount of time.
I get defending the customer but this specific avenue is exploiting indie devs and hurts the ability to craft a game with a specific time limit like this, as if games are only worthwhile if they last a certain amount of time.
I'd be curious to see how many refunds they had. Scrolling through his reviews there were only four that I saw that were refunded (with all text reviews listed). Doesn't mean he didn't get tons of non-text review or no review refunds, but I'd want to know more before declaring that the system needs to change.
It strikes me as sensible to step in this specific circumstance, where a game is in and around the two hour mark and thus would necessitate a smaller trial period for the refund. Put that part in a big flashing neon.
Like, if the game is completely over in two hours, and then you're using the refund to get your money back despite seeing it through to the end, you're not doing it because you didn't enjoy yourself, you're exploiting a loophole after getting your fill.
The system doesn't need to change, it just needs a modification in the specific circumstance of games that run under the length of the refund period.
I would make it so devs could choose how long you can play for before a refund is refused; 30 minutes, 1 hour, or the current 2 hours.
Havent heard of this game till now, it looks pretty cool. Just bought it for when I get a steam deck
This sucks but I don't think there is a good solution that doesn't undermine consumers' ability to refund in general. It is not true that this feature generically exploits indie devs. It is true that some individuals are exploiting indie devs.
This is not dissimilar to piracy -- if you have shitty people exploiting from the get go you can't say they were a lost sale, they probably were not going to buy at all without this scheme.
Basically Valve needs to ban or punish people who frequently abuse refunds in some way.
But if you end up in a situation where this is the only game someone ever refunds... Are they really abusing anything?
This is not dissimilar to piracy -- if you have shitty people exploiting from the get go you can't say they were a lost sale, they probably were not going to buy at all without this scheme.
Basically Valve needs to ban or punish people who frequently abuse refunds in some way.
But if you end up in a situation where this is the only game someone ever refunds... Are they really abusing anything?
If there's abuse, Steam reviews would take care of that, and I'm sure people would report it.
I'd say it'd be best if developers chose a different system, and there'd be a note on the store page like "This game's refund window closes after 30 minutes of playing due to it having a shorter length." That, plus Steam reviews, would help people make a conscious decision.
That seems untenable for games that are so long that the core gameplay doesn't even begin in the first hour.
Yep. Two solutions I can think of:
1) If a title is gauged as less than two hours to experience in full, give the developer the option to turn off refunds, and have that clearly flagged to the buyer before checking out.
2) Give developers the option to have either a two hour grace period for refunds, or a marker point (particularly in short games) integrated by the developer (either relative to game time or experience) that flags the necessity for the player to quit if they want a refund. A point of no return, really.
Valve does need to work closer with devs in the instances though. THere's no solution at all and it's not good.
It's sad, but at the same time steam refund policy is great for the mayority of games. It would be cool to see it fixed to work with short experiences.
Also i would love to know what % of people finished the game and then refunded, because that's the core of all the discussion so far and we don't know.
Also i would love to know what % of people finished the game and then refunded, because that's the core of all the discussion so far and we don't know.
This is pathetic. We can never have good things without people just absolutely taking advantage of them and hurting others in the process.
This sucks.
This sucks.
The first one strikes me as a good idea for games that are as low-cost as this one, but I mostly like the latter as a broad solution.
Yeah, I'd love for devs to be able to set the time played in order for a refund to be viable. If your game has a definite end point and you're transparent about that on the Steam Store page for your game, I think it should be fair game to block refunds if someone plays your entire game -- whether they liked it or not.
I'd also be in favour of using incredibly intrusive modal prompts (via Steam Overlay) to inform players that they're about to cross a threshold for refundability in a game.
You could also prompt when closing a game:
"Are you enjoying Game X?
If you are, consider leaving a review. Leaving reviews helps developers and players. Click here to leave a review.
If not, would you like to refund the game? You have DD:HH:MM left of playtime before your right to refund expires. (Playing in offline mode voids your ability to be eligible for a refund.)"
I'd also be in favour of using incredibly intrusive modal prompts (via Steam Overlay) to inform players that they're about to cross a threshold for refundability in a game.
You could also prompt when closing a game:
"Are you enjoying Game X?
If you are, consider leaving a review. Leaving reviews helps developers and players. Click here to leave a review.
If not, would you like to refund the game? You have DD:HH:MM left of playtime before your right to refund expires. (Playing in offline mode voids your ability to be eligible for a refund.)"
I've often almost returned a game in two hours of trying to troubleshoot bad performance, only to finally figure it out at like the 1 hour 45 minute mark. The first two hours of about half of my game purchases are spent trying to figure out why there is constant stutter or other technical issues because so many PC games are released in an awful state that need tons of troubleshooting to fix.
Only getting 30 minutes to do that would suck and I'd definitely end up returning more games because I couldn't figure out the issue in that short window
I have never returned a game because I "didn't like it". Every one of my game returns was because of a technical issue that I couldn't fix before the two hour window ran out.
That's how I feel too. I have no problem with a developer flagging with buyers "Hey, we gauge this game length as less than two hours. It's an upfront purchase with no refund.". And if that sounds like bullshit to the buyer, or they feel it's over priced; don't buy or wait until it's on sale. At least the transparency is there.
AUD $10 is so fucking little. I think that's what stings me both about this. If I buy lunch it'll cost me more than $10. A movie ticket generally costs more. Ten aussie bucks for a one hour video game is completely fair, and I'd feel like a total dick screwing over the dev with a refund.
You'd think so, but some games don't show their warts immediately. Further, some games launch in such a bad state that a player can be fighting just getting the game to run. As long as the executable is running, Steam considers it part of those 2 hours. From personal experience, it took me about that long to determine that a VR game that was giving me motion sickness just wasn't worth trying to see if maybe it could work. That 2 hours feels like a bare minimum for a fair person to make a determination as to whether a game is for them or not. If Valve can't make a flexible system for situations like this (whole game < 3 hours), then we will occasionally see stories like this.
In the end, people need to not fucking suck.
For big AAA games in 30 minutes you are still on the tutorial or messing with specs if you're into that.
Who are these people?
I never even refunded Nier Automata even though the cinematic are completely fucked. Only game I've refunded was Fall Guys and that was partly because I hated it and partly because I knew they didn't need my money.
I never even refunded Nier Automata even though the cinematic are completely fucked. Only game I've refunded was Fall Guys and that was partly because I hated it and partly because I knew they didn't need my money.
That's unfortunate for these devs, but digital refunds are a good thing and we should be wanting them to be adopted on more digital storefronts, not trying to get them more restricted on the few that do have them. The benefits refunds offer to the consumer are worth it even if they come at the expense of smaller devs making very short games.
Had no idea about the dev, but picked up the bundle after hearing about this.
Uh, someone might have to play these spooky games for me.
Uh, someone might have to play these spooky games for me.
This feels like a scenario where we can keep all the benefits and then, in this specific kind of circumstance that only affects these games, modify to accommodate them.
Like it's not "this is being exploited here, FUCK refunds!" It ain't binary.
Maybe when a dev uploads their game to Steam they should have to declare what they think the average completion time is, if they say their product is less than 2hrs then valve kicks in a different refund grace time based on a percentage of what time was declared. I'd think if you play 30% of a game, you know if you want to finish or not.
Halloween is coming up, save um for then and have a spoopfest
you don't understand. I got scared by the first hour of the original silent hill in 2018.
You are using the time appropriately although one could argue unplayable and "I don't like this barely perceptible stutter" are vastly different. Most of the times mods or patches come out to address those types of issues.
I suspect many more than you are NOT using the refund time honestly and getting 2 hours of a game rental in and returning for free. Does Steam limit how many games you can refund? [I have no idea].
I don't disagree, but I feel like if any ability to alter refund policy isn't heavily restricted on the dev side, every company possible will jump on it and find a way to make it as awful for the consumer as possible. Like maybe the ability to do so would be limited to games sold for $10 or under as a start, to automatically disqualify big AAA companies who would only abuse it.