After a developer’s criticism, players defend the refund system of Steam. However, there have been suggestions for a solution for years that could make both sides happy.
This is the current conflict: Zoroarts, the solo developer behind the game “Paddle, Paddle, Paddle” is currently making waves with his criticism of Steam’s refund system. He complained on X that players quickly finish his game and then return it within the 2-hour window – even though they actually enjoyed it.
A similar discussion took place in 2021 about the horror game Summer of ’58. The developer, Emika Games, even withdrew from game development for an indefinite period at that time.
The current post is dividing the gaming community. While some are supporting the developer and find the behavior of such players quite poor, others take a much more critical view. After all, Steam’s refund policy is considered very customer-friendly – something that many consider even more important right now. After all, gaming companies remind us repeatedly that we actually own nothing.
Attacking Steam’s refund system now is not sitting well with some people. Some even use drastic words: Such returns are simply the just punishment for having made a short game. The logic goes that if you made a better game, people wouldn’t return it.
Experience or Value-for-Money Winner?
What would be the solution? It’s pretty obvious: Steam could introduce a separate refund system for very short games. There are several options for how exactly this could work:
- The refund window could be dependent on the expected playtime. If it’s under 2 hours, the refund window could shrink to half the expected playtime.
- The refund could be made dependent on progress. If the player has reached a certain point in the game, a refund would no longer be possible. This could be tracked via an achievement. A more complicated option would be a manual check, for example, whether the player has seen the credits.
Generally, there are ways to ensure that Steam’s strong consumer protection could remain intact without small indie developers being left behind.
Of course, it cannot be ruled out that new problems would emerge from this as well. For instance, it would first need to be explained what exactly the expected playtime is, and who determines it. Additionally, faster players could benefit while slower ones might be at a disadvantage.
Can’t developers just make longer games? At least in the eyes of some players, this seems to be the obvious solution. However, this might not be so easy to implement, especially for solo developers or very small indie studios.
After all, game development involves a lot of work, and smaller developers often work on projects in their spare time. Just adding some extra content can quickly become a mammoth task. Especially immersive story-driven games could even suffer if playtime is artificially extended.
In the end, it’s likely to lead to a fundamental discussion: do you measure the “value” of a game by how much playtime you get for your money, or does the experience count – no matter how short it may be?
Now it’s your turn: Do you meticulously calculate how much playtime you get per euro when buying games, or are you more of a team experience person? Discuss with us in the comments!
One developer even saw the problem of short games as a challenge and created a game that challenged players to return it. What this was about can be read here on MeinMMO: Weird game on Steam wants you to refund it – if you can
Your opinion is important to us!
Do you like the article? Then let us know!