Current Events > Devs quit due to gamers "renting, beating, and returning" their games

(+) Yeah! (+)

MedeaLysistrata posted...

People pay more than 9 dollars to see a movie so I dont think there are too few comparisons for this not at least be a both sides issue

Movies aren't games. Pointless to compare different media forms.

---

1 hour long game should be free. Oh well, make a better and longer game.

---

thronedfire2 posted...

idk man if I paid $9 for a game and it was only an hour and a half I'd probably want a refund too

Cheap ass.

---

Crazyman93 posted...

Cheap ass.

I've paid less for games I've played for dozens of hours. It's not being cheap. The price for what you get just appears to be a ripoff.

---

I read the thread about this on /r/games. Some people in that thread said it wasnt very good or overpriced. I havent played the game myself so I cant assess how valid those criticisms are.

chrono625 posted...

I mean the games short. Steam has to just prorate the return window based on average game completion length.

so a game like this should have a 30m-1hr return window.

Valve would never do this. They want the system to be as automated as possible, and also theyd risk pushback from devs if the return window got expanded for longer games as well.

---

MedeaLysistrata posted...

Maybe Steam should have a rent function then -_-

I honestly don't see why they don't. Download the raw files, but you can't use them unless you pay to unlock it for x amount of time.

---

Even if Steam had a rental function this game is still so short you'd experience that vast majority of it before the rental period is over lol

---

TheRadiant posted...

Even if Steam had a rental function this game is still so short you'd experience that vast majority of it before the rental period is over lol

That's fine. It's still better than refunding a full priced game because you beat it in less than 2 hours.

---

what about renting it for like a week for 1/4-1/3rd the price then? and while you're renting it let you pay the remaining amount if you decide to buy the game. that way you still get to test a game before you buy it.

these short indy games they should track your progress as well as the time played. if you beat over half the game in under the 2 hours then you can't get a refund anymore. i'm sure that's much easier in writing than to actually program in.

yusiko posted...

most games give you an achievement for beating the game
just make it so that a game cant be refunded if the player has the completed game achievement
problem solved

Damn came to post this. Seems like a good idea, or the rent option could be good too

---

Aristoph posted...

I've paid less for games I've played for dozens of hours. It's not being cheap. The price for what you get just appears to be a ripoff.

good thing the value of a game is measured solely by how long it takes to beat it

---

TheRadiant posted...

Maybe make a game that can't be fully beaten in less than 2 hours

Make a good game and no one will cause problems

---

I think this could be partially resolved by having the play time allowed scaled to a "time to complete" number submitted by the developer. It could prevent devs from overstating the size of their campaigns if saying "over 100 hours" leads to people beating your game by 80% in 10 and then refunding.

Alternatively this number could be based on data submitted by the community.

---

PC gamers

---

TheRadiant posted...

Maybe make a game that can't be fully beaten in less than 2 hours

This.

---

Unfortunately the reality is that this is squarely on the developer. The developer knew the refund policy, the developer knew the length of the game they made, the developer knew that people can be assholes, the developer knew how much they were going to charge for the game. Despite knowing that all of these factors are working against them, they still decided to release the short game on a platform that allows returns up to a certain length of play (which is a longer length than their game), and for a price that is more than people were willing to pay for such a length of game.

Another unfortunate reality is that nobody is really going to miss this dev. Sucks they couldn't make a better/longer game and keep doing something that they enjoy.

---

Bunch of assholes itt, lol.

---

Perfectinsanity posted...

Unfortunately the reality is that this is squarely on the developer.

it's on the players for abusing the refund feature and on steam for monopolizing the market to such an extent that it's near impossible to sell games elsewhere and then having very anti-small-dev practices


---

kirbymuncher posted...

good thing the value of a game is measured solely by how long it takes to beat it

Doesn't matter, I expect a game to be longer than your average movie.

---

9 dollars for 2 hours of play time is asking for a lot.

dolomedes posted...

also lots of indie games are short like that. they're typically more about narration and art than a traditional game.
this probably happens to a lot of indie devs. gamers are f***ing a******s.

Why make games to appeal to them as your primary audience if they're "assholes"?
---

lmao @ the number of "just make a better game bro" posts in this thread

---

Also lmao @ the number of victim blaming posts ITT.

I guess the moral of the story is most gamers have no integrity, even with such an insignificant amount of money.

---

Tappor posted...

lmao @ the number of "just make a better game bro" posts in this thread

I mean, this is pretty damning:

pogo_rabid posted... Just looked at the steamcharts of a few of the games. Nobody bought the games peroid. Sub 150 peak players for the most popular one, a couple dozen for the others.

https://steamcharts.com/app/1609080



https://steamcharts.com/app/1258590

https://steamcharts.com/app/1504740

---

dolomedes posted...

any of y'all ever been to an arcade?

Those things where we can expect games to be much shorter than average? Hell yeah, I loved Gameworks.

---

Sad_Face posted...

9 dollars for 2 hours of play time is asking for a lot.

honestly I kinda agree with this, I'd definitely be a bit disappointed unless the game experience was just really really good

but what about half that? or a third that? there's a lot of people in this topic acting like you shouldn't be able to charge money at all for games shorter than 2 hours

---

3PiesAndAFork posted...

Shut the fuck up.

Very angry, please look into that.

---

dolomedes posted...

oh i forgot steam doesn't have user reviews on the same page as the 'buy' button. my b.

you guys are right, fuck this one-man dev team for making a game !

Yes, the wailing of someone who won't admit they made a shit comparison.

---

Don't put out a game that can be beat so fast that the return policy allows returns after beating?

---

dolomedes posted...

or is this about how 9 bucks won't last you 2 hours of gameplay at an arcade?

To be fair, many arcade games, while short, are actually very good and have strong replay value. You can easily put 25-50 or more hours into a good arcade game, even if a single playthrough is only 30-60 minutes. This is because they are fun, challenging, exciting, and encourage the player to push their limits for higher scores. This game, however, looks like hot garbage. Nevermind the refund, I'm surprised people even bought it in the first place. It looks like the kind of shit you see in the 95-99% off section on Steam sales.

thronedfire2 posted...

idk man if I paid $9 for a game and it was only an hour and a half I'd probably want a refund too

Meanwhile movies are about $12 for 90 minutes.

---

TheRadiant posted...

Maybe make a game that can't be fully beaten in less than 2 hours

---

Maybe make a game that can't be fully beaten in less than 2 hours

---

might try the game out since i can refund it after i beat it

---

Based on the stuff I've been seeing in this thread, it seems like this developer is a get-rich-quick content-shoveler who's trying to get lucky with the next Five Nights at Freddy's, Among Us, etc., and is salty that his mediocre projects aren't turning enough profit to keep the train rolling.

I'm not saying I could make a better game; I'm not saying game development is easy...but I'm saying that a lot of games that are actually worth the price don't have this issue.

---

$9 is cheaper than a single fucking beer at a sporting event or concert

lol at people siding against the developer here

---

TheGoldenEel posted...

$9 is cheaper than a single fucking beer at a sporting event or concert

$9 isn't a ton of money, granted. Still, if you can fully complete the game in under two hours, maybe it wasn't ready for release. Or maybe it should have been $5.

---

fairest of the next

TheGoldenEel posted...

$9 is cheaper than a single fucking beer at a sporting event or concert

lol at people siding against the developer here

---

fohstick posted...

fairest of the next

TheGoldenEel posted...

$9 is cheaper than a single fucking beer at a sporting event or concert

lol at people siding against the developer here

I mean no one's stopping you from spending your money on overpriced beer at overpriced sporting events and overpriced concerts, but some people actually like value for their money.

dave_is_slick posted...

I mean, this is pretty damning:

pogo_rabid posted... Just looked at the steamcharts of a few of the games. Nobody bought the games peroid. Sub 150 peak players for the most popular one, a couple dozen for the others.

https://steamcharts.com/app/1609080



https://steamcharts.com/app/1258590

https://steamcharts.com/app/1504740

The dev being a liar is inconvenient to the narrative.

---

TheRadiant posted...

Maybe make a game that can't be fully beaten in less than 2 hours

thronedfire2 posted...

idk man if I paid $9 for a game and it was only an hour and a half I'd probably want a refund too

The entitlement is strong.