I agree with the Sony dude. You don't get a refund after watching an awful movie, and you should not be entitled to a refund after playing 10 hours let alone 50 hours. Unless the game is obviously broken or doesn't deliver advertised features (that would be a fraud anyway) you should suck it up and move on.
It's a bit icky getting a refund after playing 50 hours or more, sure. But Sony complaining about it is way worse imho. Especially given that they *are* giving players refunds. Don't like it, don't give refunds. Not that people can do much about, right? ...
I'll wait to the day's end when the moon is high And then I'll rise with the tide with a lust for life, I'll Amass an army, and we'll harness a horde And then we'll limp across the land until we stand at the shore
Cut and dry, these people demanding refunds are the only ones guilty in the eyes of the law of theft of service. They never intended to buy the product, they simply wanted to play the game for free. Their credit rating will take the hit.
Pardon any spelling errors
Konfess your cyns and some maybe forgiven Boy: Why can't I talk to Him? Mom: We don't talk to Priests. As if it could exist, without being payed for. F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing. Even telemarketers wouldn't think that. It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
Edit: Flames aside, steam counts log in time if you're sitting there at the launcher screen afk.
On that note, I don't think it counts your Hours Played at all if you play in offline mode. Iirc, it shows the hours played during your offline session, but if you shut down steam without logging in afterwards, it just wipes them out. I haven't thoroughly tested that, but personal anecdotal evidence suggests that's how it works.
So, the question: does Steam take those into account the hours played that you don't see in your Library listing?
I agree with the Sony dude. You don't get a refund after watching an awful movie, and you should not be entitled to a refund after playing 10 hours let alone 50 hours. Unless the game is obviously broken or doesn't deliver advertised features (that would be a fraud anyway) you should suck it up and move on.
Well there's no shortage of videos showing multiple crashes (both PS4 and PC) on Youtube, apparently the game is, or at least was, pretty broken. There's also no shortage of videos of Murray outright saying things would be in the game that clearly aren't, so there's that. And last I heard they were still using videos that showed features clearly not in the game to advertise it on both Steam and PSN, not really the best idea under the circumstances.
Those rather severe issues aside, the movie analogy fails because the whole thing is more akin to paying for a ticket to see a superhero movie and being shown a romcom instead.
Anyway, a question for those saying 50 hours is too much -- where is the cut-off?
Personally I don't know where I'd set it, other than that it'd vary quite a bit by game. For a, say, Deus Ex game? Yeah, I'd say fifty hours is too much. For something like Elite or NMS? Not sure it's so cut-and-dried, especially in the case of NMS, where supposedly so much was obfuscated with claims that all sorts of things were "out there to be discovered", not to mention the crashes.
So where is the cut-off between "You didn't give it a chance", which inevitably gets tossed at anyone who doesn't play a game at least fifty hours before expressing an opinion, and "You must have been having fun so you got your money's worth"?
Because honestly the lines that get drawn too often seem bloody convenient for whatever argument one wants to make at the time.
Comments
You don't get a refund after watching an awful movie, and you should not be entitled to a refund after playing 10 hours let alone 50 hours.
Unless the game is obviously broken or doesn't deliver advertised features (that would be a fraud anyway) you should suck it up and move on.
I'll wait to the day's end when the moon is high
And then I'll rise with the tide with a lust for life, I'll
Amass an army, and we'll harness a horde
And then we'll limp across the land until we stand at the shore
Boy: Why can't I talk to Him?
Mom: We don't talk to Priests.
As if it could exist, without being payed for.
F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing.
Even telemarketers wouldn't think that.
It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
I haven't thoroughly tested that, but personal anecdotal evidence suggests that's how it works.
So, the question: does Steam take those into account the hours played that you don't see in your Library listing?
Those rather severe issues aside, the movie analogy fails because the whole thing is more akin to paying for a ticket to see a superhero movie and being shown a romcom instead.
Anyway, a question for those saying 50 hours is too much -- where is the cut-off?
Personally I don't know where I'd set it, other than that it'd vary quite a bit by game. For a, say, Deus Ex game? Yeah, I'd say fifty hours is too much. For something like Elite or NMS? Not sure it's so cut-and-dried, especially in the case of NMS, where supposedly so much was obfuscated with claims that all sorts of things were "out there to be discovered", not to mention the crashes.
So where is the cut-off between "You didn't give it a chance", which inevitably gets tossed at anyone who doesn't play a game at least fifty hours before expressing an opinion, and "You must have been having fun so you got your money's worth"?
Because honestly the lines that get drawn too often seem bloody convenient for whatever argument one wants to make at the time.