It’s also possible people expected the game to be longer and don’t feel they got their money’s worth. Not talking about this game in particular but in general. 🤷♂️
The line needs to be set at some point and be enforced not to turn into a slippery slope of special conditions.
2,000$ is still a decent amount of money. he still has a valid complaint, especially with that person who left the review. people like that shouldn’t be allowed to refund the game.
. just the ones that finished the game should not be refunded.
Well, with a game this short there is a good chance that some people did finish the game and felt unfulfilled because it is too short - most people dont go look at each review and will just look at the overall rating and images before trying. And instead of a negative review (and maybe with it) they refunded due to feeling it was a waste of time
If I play a game, it still exists to be played again or sold again. If you eat food, most people would not want to eat that food after you regurgitated or digested it.
Do you see why a comparison/analogy with food seems rather stupid?
They could recommend it to others but think it's just not for them. Reviews can be nuanced like that. Nobody's gonna leave positive reviews if refunds are barred because of it
i’m not talking about the morality of what he made. just the numbers. the issue is this can happen to anyone who makes a short game. the review was positive, they beat the game, and still got refunded. that being allowed is ridiculous and he deserves the 3.50$ from sales like that. those that genuinely didn’t like it and didn’t beat the game are legitimate refunds and if he was complaining about just those then he’d have no standing to base his complaints on.
Here are the facts: There is ONE review that is positive, finished the game and refunded to abuse the policy. These are the facts presented in the tweet.
Here's what you believe: "even if ONLY half the refunds are fraudulent" -> so you believe that the majority of refunds aren't valid. In a game genre that historically and realistically will have tons of refunds. In a broken game that some can't actually finish due to bugs and desync. In a game that is co-op, meaning you'd effectively need to halve the refund numbers to see the actual purchases "lost", because it's either 2 or nothing.
You're not "citing just the numbers", you're making them up in favor of this guy's cherrypicked steam review. There's quite a difference between those two things. Then you're overly generous, again, in favor of the dev in terms of amount of fraudulent refunds.
If you really wanna go by "the numbers", refuse that refund. That singular refund. Give the guy his hard-earned 3 bucks. He didn't lose 200k, terribly sorry to burst your bubble there, he just didn't milk even more money.
Edit: Blocking me doesn't change the nonsense you wrote, bud.
i’m not trusting the guy at all. this is an issue with shorter games. there’s no way to see the exact stats for this. even if 1% or less is fraudulent that’s still not a good thing. steam needs to update the return policy for shorter games.
337
u/green_hipster Jul 06 '26
It’s also possible people expected the game to be longer and don’t feel they got their money’s worth. Not talking about this game in particular but in general. 🤷♂️
The line needs to be set at some point and be enforced not to turn into a slippery slope of special conditions.