Several developers have already made this observation to me, it's complicated when their games have a life span of less than 2 hours. Steam must find a solution for them.
I don't know if it's the best solution but the first idea that comes to my mind would be to limit the number of refunds per period.
Comment has been collapsed.
For an account or for the game itself? Like not take refunds for the game if it surpasses a certain number?
I don't refund anything I buy and I don't promote it, mistakes I buy are mistakes, but I can see why this is happening with this game. While I can see some effort put into it, it's $9 for a 2 hour walking simulator. Yes sure, the answer is, well if you don't like it don't buy it. At the same time, I don't feel like enough work has been put into this to be called a full fledged game so whoever gives this a shot, will probably be let down getting it even at the $7 mark and just refund it, as some other reviews mention. If you look at recent reviews they're all about supporting the dev. I don't disagree because I do like supporting the little man, but it doesn't mean the game is great. Walking simulators are weak and simple, and it would help if at least they were longer and more involved. Just my opinion of course.
I mean you could spend $7 on this right now, or you could've used less than that(about $5) recently on battlefield 1 revolution, ac creed unity and others, bro force $3, curse of monkey island and escape from monkey island $4. For like $10 you could've gotten Mass effect andromeda and dragon age inquisition together, or fallout 4, wolfenstein ii and colossus. For $15, phasmophobia, for $21 doom eternal deluxe, for $14 standard edition. I don't know, maybe I'm crazy for thinking this way, but I think this specific game is just mispriced. Developer has every right to set whatever price they want for their game. I just wouldn't say their $7 game is 33% of the experience I'm going to get out of doom eternal. But we're going to see, I haven't played doom eternal yet.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm talking about limiting refunds for accounts.
To be honest, I haven't even looked at that developer's games specifically so I don't speak for him specifically.
I understand him, there are bad games, maybe his are, there are developers who abuse with nice trailer and nothing behind or with a completely bugged game... but we don't come across them every day... so by adding a minimum delay between two refunds, maybe it will limit the abuse... maybe..
Comment has been collapsed.
Maybe that could be an idea, but as pointed out earlier here in the comments, the refund policy is not Valves own, it is legal requirements placed on Valve. They might not have too much leeway to adjust how the return policies work in such ways, as they don't make the laws that govern what a company may or may not do.
Comment has been collapsed.
This is just a guess, but I assume that valve does something against any account that refunds a big portion of the total games they own. I would find it a little broken in design if by law it was alright to buy 100 games and refund 100 of them after playing each for just less than 2 hours. I'm probably wrong tho, and this actually happens, because I know this would make some people even around here very happy.
Comment has been collapsed.
Laws often are that square, not always, but often.
Look at it from the other point of view; A person buys a 100 products, and have issues with all. Real issues, not made up bullshit/fraudulent behavior, but real life issues with them all. This person also has a legal system designed to protect and help consumers from unhelpful corporations when such issues arise. Telling this person that you can only pursue a part of these issues because there's too many of them isn't fair, and would most likely again be the base of public outcry on forums such as this one.
The problem is when these laws are used in a fraudulent way, to ensure the consumer gets the product (whatever it might be) for a while and then returns it on some made up issue that isn't real. And I guess that happens a lot, and I would also wager (without knowing any facts) there are cases such as those where corporations take people to court over such abuse.
Then again, the way Valve has built the option for returns, without any real burden of proof on the consumers part is most likely a conscious choice. I guess the increase in staff and underlying structures would cost much more than lost revenue caused by a few people that play games for less than 2 hrs and then return them. And again, designing a totally different system for short games only - which I guess would cost a lot in legal fees trying to convince legal agencies to allow them those changes - will cost a lot more than losing a few developers that make very short games only. Especially as I suspect most such short games are simple cash grabs, asset flips, or simply people learning to code calling themselves indie developers, when they are not yet really anywhere near that position yet - not really ''games'' at all.
But to be fair, I am no expert on any of these subject, may very easily have made a wrongful assumption or two, or just plain being stupid. My sources are all ''Bro, trust me''.... ;-)
Comment has been collapsed.
Maybe a short game tag that changes the refund time to an hour may work.
Comment has been collapsed.
Doesn't stop developers from abusing the system, like the shitty companies that make asset flip games, even IF the game has a lot of content they will mark the game as short and have the refund time reduced which would be bad for the consumers.
Comment has been collapsed.
How about if Valve tag it? Developer can apply the game to Valve to be reviewed and gain "Short Game" tag. And if they apply asset flip games they can decline them all together as well, one stone 2 birds.
Comment has been collapsed.
That means there would have to be people who check the games. >>> That would result in developers receiving less money or the prices would be higher.
Steam games don't have to be in English, so there would have to be even more people to check the games for every language. >>> Costs even more money.
Some games can be short or long depending on how you play (or for example, there could be some puzzle/something that the checking employee couldn't solve/pass). >>> Multiple people would have to check each game. >>> Costs even more.
I think that this would create more problems than it would solve...
Comment has been collapsed.
That would result in developers receiving less money or the prices would be higher.
I don't think so. Steam will hire the people for that, and they will only check if devs apply for the tag. There aren't tons of games that lasts less than 2 hours anyway. (They can even charge a small amount of money for the tag, so only serious people would do it)
Steam games don't have to be in English, so there would have to be even more people to check the games for every language.
You are probably right for Asian languages, but otherwise most games have Eng language.
Some games can be short or long depending on how you play
You are kinda right, but I don't think it is a huge difference if a game lasts 2 hours or 2.5 hours. But overall this is the most valid point you make, and it can create problems for sure.
I honestly think it is possible, and it wouldn't hurt Valve financially. But I doubt they will bother with something like that. To be honest it makes sense as well considering how many games are facing this problem. I am assuming not much.
Comment has been collapsed.
Developer can apply the game to Valve to be reviewed
If this ever happened, we wouldn't have the tsunami of "fake games" a few years ago. Valve does fuckall about reviewing games, not even to the point of "does it have an exe?, they won't review game length ever.
Comment has been collapsed.
yeah.. but who at valve will check the game lifespan?
Comment has been collapsed.
I never refunded anything on steam yet, i doubt ill ever do because i not using the function to demo games and i can see just from the store page if i want to play that game or not.
However, this feels like a PR advertisement to boost the sales. If you refund a game then on the review you can see "product refunded", scrolled through all reviews and seen that tag only on 4 reviews, from the 333.
If i would release a game shorter than 120mins, then it would have an achievement to play the game for 121+ mins.
Comment has been collapsed.
PS I read Steams refund policy, if you buy a game and then within the two week refund period the game goes on sale you are allowed to ask for a refund to then rather buy the game on sale :) so keep that in mind.
Comment has been collapsed.
usually not purchasing full priced games, there is always something interesting on sale OR brand new games wont have sale within 14days after the launch.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes, such a achievement would help i would set it a bit higher as 121 min..
Comment has been collapsed.
I've refunded games twice because they didn't work on my PC. The requirement info is not always enough to know if it will work, and in the case of some games with multiplayer, you don't have the luxury to wait because then the community has moved on
Comment has been collapsed.
Luckily, that never happened to me, broken/not running game pretty valid reason for refund. I usually dont play MP games but i use augmented steam expansion on chrome so when i check store page on steam i can see the actual player amount who currently playing the game, useful when looking for MP game.
Comment has been collapsed.
Hm, I noticed the game doesn't have steam cards, that might have been an incentive to make that the people keep the games, they would need to idle it past 2 hours to get all the card drops and then stand a chance to get card packs after getting all their drops.
Steam cards sound like a stupid fix to the problem but it would definitely have resulted in a lot more people not refunding the game.
Comment has been collapsed.
well, if you never refunded anything dont need to wait for the 2h, i get the frist card already at the 10mins mark usually:-)
Comment has been collapsed.
It depends on the dev's setting choices. The shortest time frame to gather all cards is 1.5h afaik, but devs have the option to ramp it up a lot. Either by simply adding more cards or by a much longer required playtime per card drop.
Comment has been collapsed.
New games can't get steam cards until they cross a certain threshold, when Valve approves the cards. No one knows that this is. You'll notice also achievements on new games can't be featured in profile nor do they count in stats... until the game leaves "Steam is learning about this game" category (10 reviews, and some more things).
Comment has been collapsed.
This game seems to be approved 9 days after release. (30th Jul 2021). They could've added cards.
That said I find hard to believe that cards would effect refunds.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah I just looked myself through all the reviews in English and found only 1 negative with a "refund" orange mark. There might be more in other languages but that doesn't look like a storm of any kind.
Comment has been collapsed.
There is 4 in total. of about 290.
Doesn't scream very huge to me, only one was positive while dev claimed "huge number" after positive reviews. (or maybe he meant overall rating)
Comment has been collapsed.
I think it should be mentioned that not everyone that plays a game will review it. So it's not like it's 1 review = 1 refund. There could be thousands, we just wouldn't know. That would also mean the dev sold more but again, I'm assuming numbers. I also don't see why people who would abuse a refund policy would also leave reviews, they probably know that it would show returned on their reviews after they did it, so they just wouldn't review. I think there's a lot of reasons to not review if you're gonna return, except if you really had a bad experience. Hence why I always think devs should look at negative reviews, because if someone actually took the time to write a negative review, it means something must've been really bad with the game.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, they are of course not the same.
Also in negative reviews process Steam asks you to consider contacting support for help or refund first, so that would push game towards positive ratings even if it's bad.
Comment has been collapsed.
Exactly I agree with you, this game is also rated very well as you suggest, since I think it's interesting as a few others mention here, it seems to be a very lackluster game for what it costs.
Comment has been collapsed.
I never refunded anything and I never heard of this developer but after some googling this is my take on things. I must also point out that I don't like horror games where you can't defend yourself or fight in any way to kill or at least slow down the enemies. I also see some of their games were on my ignore list before this post and now all of them are on my ignored list.
-
Steam Refund policy is not a secret and it is well know to everyone how it works and that anything under 2h playtime can be refunded and will be accepted by an autobot.
-
Game looks like it is made from assets and it happens to be like other 3 different games they created with the same walking simulator with basic jump-scares each lasting 0.5-1 hour. Despite that they also have an announcement for the 5th game just the same as other 4. It can point out that the developer is running out of idea and use the same tools all the time to create the same game under different name with changed graphics to make them not look similar.
-
Believing that there is a system that exists and can be exploited but there will be no people to exploit it is strange.
-
Crying over the internet how Steam is bad because people can use refund system that you knew exists since you created the 1st game and still creating the same short game after game looks strange.
-
The sales even without the refunds looks bad in numbers I think and the number of people that reviewed the games during 2-3 years is not great.
-
A simple trading cards would make more people buy their games from the start and play it for more than 2 hours. But to create good cards you need a graphic designer...
-
After the announcement people were just buying their games to leave a possessive review even without playing them. It looks strange almost like pay reviews.
For me it looks less like an "indie developer" problem and more like asset flips and Digital Homicide problem.
And I think the whole point of that outcry was just to make people buy their games and leave positive feedback and in that they succeeded.
Comment has been collapsed.
A simple trading cards would make more people buy their games from the start and play it for more than 2 hours. But to create good cards you need a graphic designer...
Was abused now Steam "is learning" about a game meaning a dev can add trading cards only if a certain threshold number of license holders is passed.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well that would mean they maybe didn't have cards on any of the 4 games because they sold poorly?
Comment has been collapsed.
They can add cards upfront and you will see the tag then, even if Steam is still learning about the game. If you can't see the tag, they didn't add cards.
Comment has been collapsed.
No, those tags can be freely set by the dev, whether the cards exist or not doesn't matter.
That's why you also see games with achievements missing the achievement tag.
Both of these should be automatic and immutable, but they aren't.
(Besides there are exception games that actually have cards despite being profile limited)
Comment has been collapsed.
Means nothing for people who are not achievement hunters, and even achievement hunters can just ignore it if they wish so. When you refund/remove a game from your library, the stats are nulled, it does not count into the % completion, so they can left it unfinished and just refund it.
edit: achievement for finishing the game would make more sense - game completed, no refunds.
BUT: each game would need to be tested if the achievement really triggers at the end, and not sooner.
Also: SAM exists and it can unlock and LOCK achievements, rendering this solution totally useless for now.
Comment has been collapsed.
Twitter account: https://twitter.com/EmikaGames
There's been more tweets by dev following their initial announcement...
Comment has been collapsed.
I like how the developers are basically saying it's a Valve problem for having the refund policy in the first place, when given a choice they wouldn't have one at all. But because of consumer protection laws they were forced to. So Valve is stuck, they are forced to provide the means for consumers to refund a product they are not happy with or face big fines from governments, and it's not really their fault that a game can be completed in two hours or less. Basically anything they do is going to be abused in some way, either by publishers or consumers.And honestly, a lot of the 'added value' incentives that might encourage people to keep a game beyond the 2 hour mark were abused into the ground by developers mostly and Valve had to intervene. So it's sad that some games might be targeted like this, but I'd say the first solution would be for the developers to just pad the game a little, or add some form of replayability, rather than making what is essentially an interactive movie that can be experienced in less than 2 hours.
In the case of this Dev, maybe they should look at putting all their stories together into an anthology game, that encompasses each game as a 'chapter' and then the length would be longer.
Comment has been collapsed.
I like how the developers are basically saying it's a Valve problem for having the refund policy in the first place, when given a choice they wouldn't have one at all.
Not all developers. There's many of "us" (I don't see myself as a deveoper for real, but I do work on my 2nd game so...) who like having refunds handled in a quick and easy manner. I'll c/p what I already said on reddit:
As a "small time game author of sorts" I prefer to have it, because if someone doesn't like my game and they see it immediately after a few minutes, even if those few minutes are later that week/next week, they can get their money back in an easy and clean manner. If not for refunds, you'd have an unhappy customer instead who might hate not just the game they got, but you as an author, Steam,... Why fuel the hate, just let them refund it and go in peace.
Comment has been collapsed.
Oh yeah I meant these particular developers. If I ever finished my game I think my attitude would be similar to your own, which is to say, rather let them leave. As someone who is also a consumer, I also appreciate the refund policy as there have been a couple of times where I've bought a game and found it was completely not what I expected, so it wouldn't seem right to begrudge others that same privilege.
And side note, if you've completed and published an original game, then you are definitely a real developer in my book.
Comment has been collapsed.
I will say unpopular opinion now..I never played this game, but judging from the way screenshot looks, and fomr how much this game costs, I would say that I hope this developer will never do games again. This game looks okay for a free game though. Maybe they should have tried with itch.io first?
Comment has been collapsed.
One of the official reasons for steam refund request is very clear: "It's not fun". As long as this exact wording exists, I don't see a reason for this or any similar discussions. Just make up your mind AS A CONSUMER - is it made for your benefits or not?!
Comment has been collapsed.
Yea but then other "sh!t" devs will pad their crapfest of a game to 2 hours 15 mins to beat to get around it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Sometimes you don't know that and might think it's shitty start at first and it may develop in the middle/end.
I found 1/2 games really shitty and hoped I/the game would become better but nope. A few other games wen the opposite. Started bad/low and I get the feeling/development of it and it became great.
Comment has been collapsed.
could it be that the game simply did not sell well, as it looks like any other game you would get from indiegala? This sounds like an excuse to get some sympathy points, when steam was in fact the only point of acess to many new developers.lets be real if it werent for steam you wouldnt even be seeing their game anywhere else. chances are it wouldnt be approved on consoles, or even other pc stores like GOG or EPIC
Comment has been collapsed.
Looking at the dev's other games, I'm inclined to think the same. There's already loads of short walking simulator on Steam... I may be too cynical, but this looks more like a publicity stunt than anything else, a somewhat desperate attempt to get attention. They made a fuss to create a buzz. And it's working, people are buying their games. Or at least, that Summer of Whatever one.
Comment has been collapsed.
People can PLAY:
FREE wonderful Videogames as SKY sons of Light,Warframe,Spacelords etc..
Hundreds of FREE Videogames given by Epic Games Store every week
Hundreds of FREE Videogames given in Steam Weekend\GOG\HB\Giveaways
People can do microsoft rewards earn 10€ wait that a resident evil\horror game its' at 9,99€ deal and get it for free.. this is your new horror gam e and you can forget about who remove his horror game on steam...
And Use Xbox Game Pass\Ubisoft+\AmazonLuna\Xbox Rewards\PSNow $1€ Deals Monthly or Rewards
Buy other Billions of Videogames in STEAM play them and be happy
So i Doubt that if 1 Game miss in the Steam Store someone will care about it
in the Past for a little time some Rockstar\EA games has been removed from the steam store but people not give a fuck about it and just play other games so... ¯_(ツ)/¯
if you want someone feel happy to play your game and give money to you , so you must to make it in a way that who play it is feel happy to pay you for the content you give,if people ask refund is mean your game is not good and not make them happy to play it or not feel him is worth it so they have all the rights to ask a refund , not only in 2 hours same steam allow but also after 14 days by start a lawsuit to steam\valve if necessary maybe one day one judge allow someone be refunded after 14 days also if valve rules say 2 hours ¯_(ツ)/¯.
Even if refund is limited to 1 Second people can find a way to download the game,apply via software a "Stazi\Freeze" time (this can be done without use hack\cracks or piracy just by use software for freeze the status of the os or virtualize it) and play\finish the game until the finish,then decide if buy it for support the devs\publisher or NOT buy it,then disable the freezed timed and ask the 1 second refund.. so is not this the way to fix the problem,the problem must be fixed by release a product that people will feel happy to pay for.
Top of all this:
People can also WATCH on youtube other players play the game full gameplay videos and then decide if buy the game or not
People can ask to someone that buy already the game to allow him to do remote desktop for play the game via remote\stream (teamviewer etc.) and then decide to buy the game or not
People can ask to other people to borrow them their account (xbox,playstation,pc) and use that for play the game and decide if buy it or not...
So is not by limit the refunds that you fix the problem about your game don't make money because people is not happy about it and not like it enough to feel happy\proud to pay your work\content.
i Buy Dreambreak,i finish it in 54 Minutes,the game is very low quality and very short,but i don't ask a refund for it¯_(ツ)_/¯
Then maybe i buy another very famous game maybe 100% good quality 100 times better than dreambreak
but i ask refund only because me is disappoint about the lies of the publisher about how manage it dlcs\season pass\sell the game exclusive for another platform, or future contents to pay or because remove some dlcs from the store and make it be exclusive to another etc...
is up to me,my money my decision .
it's so the disappointment,the bad feel of the product that make people ask refund,
and this can't be fixed with rules\times limiters etc.
Must be fixed by release a product that people like and so is happy to pay and play.
Another perfect example of how people can't be forced to play\like\buy your game is the latest FIFA , by use the fake marketing excuse that "Old PC is not good enought to play FIFA" the publisher make the NEXTGEN version of it be an exclusive of Consoles and release on PC only the limited\lower version without some "nextgen" animations\features,in this way they try to force people to buy a console and then buy the game at selled at $99€ in the console store.
What will happen then it's that people Poor that can't afford to buy the console + the game can just not give a fuck about it and play the FREE "Lite" version of the OLD or NEW Efootbal\Pes ,That BTW has awesome Physic\Graphic\Animations , different gameplay moments\goals and updated teams too or Editor for edit it so... it's not that much bad\alternative too ...
So people can just not care about fifa,play efootbal and be happy and even if\when one day Efootball\Pes stop exist can go in road play real socceer that is better too , so it is not matter how much important\big it's a company if people is not happy about you will not buy your product , maybe apple or playstation has the best games,but if people feel unhappy with them about their lies or expensive prices maybe then just buy android devices or an xbox one s with xboxgamepass or a steamdeck with 1500 games and can not care about it...
people can find alternative happyness,1 game\console\store is not the ALL only happiness in gaming¯_(ツ)_/¯
Comment has been collapsed.
Give the players reason to play beyond 2 hours. That's not much.
Comment has been collapsed.
Eh, looks like the guy isn't liking some of the attention he's getting...
Stop arguing!
I did not ask people to help me with money, I did not encourage people to make any donations! I just described my problem! I wrote that I was going on a long vacation. The fact that you are building your guesses about my advertising here, you are wrong! Can you express your opinions? And I can express my displeasure and opinion! Therefore, I repeat, I do not encourage anyone to buy and donate! It annoys me that people allow themselves a lot, and I can't even just tweet my problem!So keep your arguments that I am cheating or advertising to yourself! I didn't ask anyone to do this! People support me themselves, so I can't understand your anger!
I have nothing against refunds for half of the game, for technical problems. But according to the comments that they write to me when returning, it says "I return it because the game is short", "Using the company's policy, I return the game" and so on. At the same time, the game is completed. This is starting to infuriate, since this applies to all my projects. I don't make the games longer, as it will annoy the players! If you don't like this genre of games and you don't like short games. Please!!! Pass by!
Comment has been collapsed.
Let's just say that he is not handling the whole thing in a very professional manner... At best, people will roll their eyes and at worst, they'll see a crybaby.
I'm certain that some people will refund short games after completing them, but I'm not sure if there really was abuse of the refund system in this case. That being said, by admittedly only releasing games that can be completed under the 2-hour mark, he is putting himself in a situation where abuse might happen. I would dare to say that he his partly at fault? I mean, Steam's refund policy was implemented before he started putting out games and Summer of Whatever isn't even his first title... if people were "massively" refunding this one, you'd think this was the case for his other games too, so why would he keep pumping out short walking sims instead of trying to fix the issue? I don't get it. But anyway... now this his story is making the news, he will possibly get a nice lump of sympathy money and will be able to keep releasing the same kind of generic walking simulators.
Comment has been collapsed.
Its hardly being a crybaby to be frustrated by sudden attention. Its easy to scrutinise the reply on its own, but when you consider the sheer scale of attention and replies they're getting (and many of which will be projecting various degrees of very uncharitable or presumptive values) then I think replying in exasperation like this seems natural.
Strict professionalism is an ideal, but not a necessity. Sure it might not be a good look, but people have limits. Its often why devs have a devoted PR team (or individual) to handle this stuff without the emotional charge of being direclty involved with the work that is criticised. Only in this case, they decided to back out due to a legal requirement / policy that was getting abused. Honestly with how relaxed the standards are for participation in the official forums I don't really blame them for growing frustrated.
Plus the language barrier is bound to have exacerbated things, losing the finer tone in translation.
Comment has been collapsed.
this is why steam games now drop cards after 2 hours.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's more complicated than that. If you refunded Valve can and will flag your account to drop trading cards only after two hours minimum play time.
I've never refunded a game from Steam so my cards drop in the first minutes/hour of playing normally. But there are games where card drops are poorly implemented or deliberately done so to boost play time stats(who knows?) that take hours of playing/idling to get the drops.
Comment has been collapsed.
Devs choose card drop time from 10min - 2hr per card. Which mean drop times can vary a lot between games.
Comment has been collapsed.
I dont want to sound like a scumbag, but maybe make games longer than two hours, or with good replayability, or games that are so good that people wont want to refund.
For example I love playing shmups, lile Ikaruga or Deathsmiles, and those games are ultra short, less than an hour, yet I dont refund because I actually like them and I feel like playing then over and over, even now and then through the years.
Comment has been collapsed.
When all this started, there was 384 reviews on Summer of '58, out of those there was 4 reviews tagged with "Product refunded". Out of those 4, 3 had enough game time to have played through the game.
Granted, this is only the people who has posted reviews... but still, that's one 1% if we're being generous. I seriously doubt that this is an as big a deal as the developer is making it out to be. Same as with any refund system, most people simply won't use it. In fact it drives sales since people buy things thinking they could refund it, but most just don't.
Comment has been collapsed.
In my opinion Valve should forbid guaranteed refunding of games with under 2h if game has demo. This should allow most people to judge if game is worth their money and wouldn't require Valve to hire people to tag the games if they are short , but as with all things someone would still find a way to abuse it.
Comment has been collapsed.
I feel many comments here are misguided.
There is no inherent problem with games shorter than two hours, if it's a well-designed game, that is short for a reason.
There is problem with games that are short but somehow only attracts people who tend to refund it after finishing it, without a good amount of "proper" players.
IMO it's either aimed at a wrong audience, or it is bad enough that only interesting for an audience who feel like this behavior is okay.
(Also chance for dev making buzz for a jumpscare streamerbait of a game, or just complained randomly on twitter about a some refunds and it got blown up as an "industry problem".)
Comment has been collapsed.
"While Steam has many policies that help indie developers grow, and even runs its Games Festival to give exposure to thousands of games from small studios, some of its policies can also land them out of business. Such is the case with Emika Games, a small independent developer that has just announced its indefinite retirement from video game development following the abuse of Valve’s platform refund policy:
The horror game Summer of ’58 was released on July 21 and received very positive reviews from players. However, Emika Games disclosed that the game did not generate any profit due to its players abusing the Steam Refund Policies.
Summer of ’58 is a game whose story can be completed in less than two hours, the maximum time Steam can play before refunding a game. For this reason, players can buy the title, play it in full, and then request a refund of their money, even after leaving positive reviews on Steam, which was done by a large number of users. For this reason, the developer announced that it will withdraw from video game development, since it does not have the necessary funds to finance its next project “From Day to Day”.
This announcement has had a great impact on the networks and has led many players to buy the game and leave positive reviews as a show of support for Emika Games."
https://today.in-24.com/technology/305347.html
https://twitter.com/EmikaGames
Comment has been collapsed.