this post was submitted on 07 Dec 2025
734 points (95.8% liked)
Greentext
7444 readers
555 users here now
This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.
Be warned:
- Anon is often crazy.
- Anon is often depressed.
- Anon frequently shares thoughts that are immature, offensive, or incomprehensible.
If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Hmmm. Everyone takes Steam refunds for granted now. But until late 2015 they refused to do refunds for any kind of game purchase, even if the game was literally unplayable by buyers - until they were dragged through the courts by the ACCC and fined, with similar legal demands happening from the EU around the same time.
Dunno if I'd call that, "never abused their power to the disadvantage of customers".
https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/australia-fines-valve-over-steam-refunds
That is not true. I know this because I had one case where I did get a refund for a game called "War Z" - I also found an article that explains that the game was pulled by valve and they have indeed offered refunds: https://www.gamedeveloper.com/business/how-not-to-launch-a-video-game-starring-i-the-war-z-i-
On the same site, I also found this article talking about a ubisoft game that was pulled: https://www.gamedeveloper.com/business/report-ubisoft-offering-refunds-on-i-from-dust-i-through-steam
Now, it's debateable if this was a valve or a ubisoft decision - however, knowing ubisoft, I'd say they were pressured by valve to give in lmao.
I've also found this article on polygon that talks about another Early Access Title that was pulled by valve and refunded to buyers because it was shit: https://www.polygon.com/2014/5/6/5686826/earth-year-2066-refund-steam-early-access/
And that's just what I found with a few minutes of research. I'm fairly confident if I search some more, I'll find much more of those cases.
So yes, while the stance back then was "all purchases are final", you were absolutely able to get your money back if the game was truly broken and unplayable. Don't get me wrong, the current rule is significantly better, but claiming that steam hasn't been on customers side back then is just straightup wrong.
And I have an anecdote that counters your anecdote. I've been refused a refund. It was at their discretion. Game crashing withing 10 minutes of playing every time isn't always enough to get them to deign to give you your money back...
So, yes, it IS true. Them occasionally making a PR friendly move and going against their own policy doesn't change that
Their policy was that if a game was activated on your account then you were not entitled to a refund. The fact that they pulled some games from the store due to significant complaints about those individual titles (or at publisher request), and subsequently decided to make an exception to refund that particular game for some people does not disprove that their standard policy was 'you are not entitled to a refund'.
Of course it doesn't disprove that, I never said it was, infact, I stated quite the opposite. However, the fact that they were handing out refunds in cases where games were just outright broken or a scam proves that they have been on the consumer side. Just look at what bethesda did with FO76, where they actually denied refunds for that game when it was obvious it was a shitshow.
Again, I'm not saying that it was a great move from steam to not have a refund window, but claiming they were "abusing their power" when "no refunds" is basically the default for american companies (where refunds are not legally mandated, but each merchant can set his own refund period) is just stupid.