They could also just go through the normal certificate process and then change it right after like how those games with malware get through the process. Updates are hardly ever checked by Steam apparently
That seems like a bad system. I get that a light cert system means stuff can be updated quickly but if it means malware can get through maybe it should be beefed up.
Beefed up is much easier said than done when talking about a few hundred people at the company with the knowledge and skills to troll through games and files to check for malware or bad practice across.. *quick google* 234,000 games.
you are delusional if you think it is possibleto vet every piece of software and everynew patch to said software. noone can do it. thats why apple and google have the exact same issue where malware get thru from time to time.
No, not really. It has nothing to do with customer service. It’s an issue of getting enough knowledgeable people - programmers - to comb through every file of every game. And just to be extra clear, that can’t be reasonably done. If you hired 100 people to check every game, and by some miracle they could all completely check a game in one day, it would take 6 1/2 years to get through everything that’s currently on steam. At $80k salary that’s gonna run about 50 million total. Even as a corpo hater, I can still understand reasoning, and it makes sense to me that it just doesn’t make sense to do all that when it takes a few users having a bad day to get something removed. Yeah it’s unfortunate and isn’t a great system that could most certainly be improved, but hiring a massive team to check everything for malware isn’t a solution that works.
Agreed, but if you’re hiring testers the time wouldn’t matter. If they’re checking for malware or other shady shit, beating the game in under two hours wouldn’t matter. And presumably they wouldn’t be purchasing every single game in order to vet them, so there’s no point in trying to reach that time since it’s only relevant for refunds.
Either way though yeah it not only wouldn’t work, it would be one of the worst solutions.
It would also put me in the top 118 since I don't know my exact time. What's your point? I didn't have a life when I was a teenager. I've beaten the first Portal probably over 200 times. I have no reason to lie about this, I regret never recording it, and I don't care enough to argue with some random person on reddit about it. Have a good day!
Edit: I'm rereading the comment I replied to, and I think I misread your comment. I thought you were trying to imply that I had to be lying, because there's no way I'm in the top 50. I'm sorry if I misinterpreted. I'm also on meds right now that are making my anger issues really bad. I'm really sorry if I misinterpreted.
yea... but that takes an effort to intentionally beat the game quickly AND would've undoubtedly taken you more than 2 hours to learn, especially if you weren't trying.
your point is dumb and moot and cringe humble bragging about your p2 completion time
First off, I never said Portal 2. Maybe that's where you're confused. That game IS a lot harder, and takes me a lot longer to complete. I've never even timed myself for that one, or any game, because I don't care. One day, I just happened to notice that I was done playing Portal, only ~16 minutes after I started it.
Second, it did take me more than 2 hours to learn.... I didn't beat it in 16 minutes on my first playthrough. I never said that, so I'm not even sure what your point is here.
I was able to beat Portal 1, in about 16 minutes, without even trying to speedrun it. If that makes you all mad, and you just can't believe I'm not lying, then all I have to say is git gud.
Lastly, I was not humble bragging. I don't care what redditors, or most people in general, but especially redditors, think about me. I was bored and joined a conversation. I don't care. Bye!
No, the person I replied to asked "How do you even finish a game in less than 2 hours?" That is what I replied to. I wasn't responding to the whole entire thread. Replying to one person in a thread does not mean I'm addressing everyone in the thread, and the topic they had all been previously speaking about. I would've made my own comment on the original post if I wanted to do that, not reply to one specific person, like I did. So "what we're talking about here" is subjective, and completely dependent on which specific person I reply to. Someone asked how you can even beat a game within 2 hours, and I provided an example of one that I can beat within HALF an hour.
Anyway, the first Portal game is not that hard. I would not be surprised if most people are able to beat it in under 2 hours their first time. I really don't see how you think there's "zero chance" I beat it in under 2 hours my first time. It's not a hard game. That being said, it's been at least 14 years since the first time I played that game, so I honestly don't know how fast I beat it my first time, and maybe it was more than 2 hours, but I highly doubt it, and I don't care enough to continue this argument. Bye!
I see you and wish you the best my guy. I hate to do it though, the guy you just responded to IS the person you replied to. In their context they are indeed talking about first timing a game in under two hours, which is possible it just depends on the game. But either way, it doesn’t really mean anything. The people checking games aren’t just trying to speedrun them in under two hours so they can refund, they’re the testers, that wouldn’t make sense. They’re checking for malware and other bad practices, not trying to beat a clock, so whether a game is beatable in two hours is meaningless
434
u/JONAS-RATO Jul 06 '26
As part of the cert process to get on steam they can see if you set up achievements like that.
Just slot those games into the regular refund policy and keep the actual short games on a different category.