The "No Refund" Fallacy

Slapshot1188 · July 2018

All I ever hear from fans is that these Crowdfunded games (almost all years late) could not possibly offer refunds because it would cripple the game. It was repeated so often that I even bought into it. But now we have ACTUAL numbers from a developer of a Crowdfunded game that refutes that.

Camelot Unchained has offered refunds since they started. Yes, they are massively late. And no, this does not excuse that... but the fact that I can simply ask for, and receive my money back has made all the difference to me in how I treat their delays. A day or two ago, Mark Jacobs posted that their refund rate is a measly 3.8%. That is simply amazing when you consider that they do not even challenge you. If you request a refund they grant it.

“Our refund percentage is at 3.8% of total pledges. That’s a really small number, especially after 5 years. You know that we are still paying refunds and still have a no questions asked policy. We’re slow, but we always pay off and don’t make people jump through hoops. The last two months we’ve seen a more than doubling of number of new pledges. In June, we’ve received almost 4x the number of donations in January.”

I hope more of these developers take note and follow suit. It's only fair, especially if you are YEARS late in delivery. Have the confidence in your product to be able to stand behind it.

BeansnBread · July 2018

I think the games that have a vast amount of whales supporting them with $20k+ are more afraid of refunds than a game like Camelot Unchained. The scale is different for the game that shall not be named.

But yeah, it's pretty disgusting that the game that shall not be named is not giving refunds as of January.

Kyleran · July 2018

Marc and CU are the.poster child for how refund policies should be handled.

Should be noted CUs crowdfunding total is but a fraction of the funding with outside investors and even Marc himself making up well over 3/4 ths of money raised to build the gsme.

Most other indie efforts don't have nearly the same ratio of private funds vs those raised via crowd funding, hence they may not be in a solid position to offer endless refunds.

Slapshot1188 · July 2018

Kyleran said:

Marc and CU are the.poster child for how refund policies should be handled.

Should be noted CUs crowdfunding total is but a fraction of the funding with outside investors and even Marc himself making up well over 3/4 ths of money raised to build the gsme.

Most other indie efforts don't have nearly the same ratio of private funds vs those raised via crowd funding, hence they may not be in a solid position to offer endless refunds.

True, but that 3.8% figure is from the pledges and not accounting for Mark's money. (also remember the refunds were in place from day 1... well before they got the external funding)

If you can't survive a 3.8% refund you are doing something wrong, plus having a refund will likely result in better reception and increased sales as people are less hesitant.

If you have a high number of refunds... you are doing something wrong... and refusing refunds is just a band-aid over an infected wound which eventually will turn fatal.

BeansnBread · July 2018

Slapshot1188 said:

If you have a high number of refunds... you are doing something wrong... and refusing refunds is just a band-aid over an infected wound which eventually will turn fatal.

A bit dramatic. I'm willing to bet that SC will continue to not offer refunds and will continue to get massive amounts of funding. It's sad that they aren't being held accountable for their poor practices, but we live in a new time.

MadFrenchie · July 2018

BeansnBread said:

I think the games that have a vast amount of whales supporting them with $20k+ are more afraid of refunds than a game like Camelot Unchained. The scale is different for the game that shall not be named.

But yeah, it's pretty disgusting that the game that shall not be named is not giving refunds as of January.

But, it's pretty much a donation! That's why these folk give it freely without being given huge amounts of in-game items or perks in return... Oh wait.

cheyane · July 2018

I have so much respect for Mark Jacobs and his policies that even though I am not by any stretch of imagination a PvP player I will buy his game and play it.

TatsuyaHiroki · July 2018

BeansnBread said:

I think the games that have a vast amount of whales supporting them with $20k+ are more afraid of refunds than a game like Camelot Unchained. The scale is different for the game that shall not be named.

But yeah, it's pretty disgusting that the game that shall not be named is not giving refunds as of January.

lemme guess: you are talking about Star Citizen, right?

Wellspring · July 2018

At a minimum game companies need to be upfront about their refund policy from the very start. Then players can decide for themselves how much they want to "donate".

I didn't back the Star Citizen KS, so the game that stands out in my mind is Chronicle of Elyria. CoE concluded their KS with a bunch of promises and no mention of a no-refund policy, or that they considered KS packages to be charitable donations (wtf). Only several months later did they rewrite their TOS to include a no refund policy, when they launched their own website store.

A year and a half later, when the game was supposed to launch soon, they announced they weren't anywhere near hitting their KS timeline. That's when I reached out for a refund of my KS package (which was paid for prior to any announced no-refund policy), but was told I had basically given my money to charity. They didn't even answer my email response back. And being over a year after my card was charged, it was much too late for my bank to do a chargeback or get a refund through KS.

Ultimately, I was able to resell my KS pledge to another player (at a slight loss) and be done with the whole thing.

I learned my lesson though about blindly trusting KS developers.

btdt · July 2018

Kickstarters are just another clever early access scheme. If the game actually does come together, they will sell it to a publisher for a mint and you will have nothing because the publisher doesn't have to give you access to their game for free. Contractually, you have zero ground to stand on.

If the game never comes together, you will have spent probably triple the amount of a finished retail game just to play what amounts to tech demos. The developer will have spent as little of his own money in this endeavor as possible.

The only one spending money foolishly here is the person investing in the kickstarter. If you get a refund, it's not because they are legally obligated to do so. Any second rate lawyer could prove that you don't rate a refund, so if you do get a refund, consider yourself exceptionally lucky.

Think of a kickstarter like a retirement account.... you put money into it and forget about it for about 30 years and hope that when you do retire, it didn't get eaten by the stock market. If it did, you have no recourse. If it didn't, you get your retirement. You have to wait for your game to mature like your retirement account... so you're looking at playing the game well off in the future, but buying into the concept years earlier. Do you even know what kind of games you will be interested in come 2025? That's a pretty big gamble on your part. One that you gladly took when you pledged.

jimmywolf · July 2018

i care less about refunds and more about accountability, KS get their money day 1 anything that happens after that they care little to none.

that why scams, delays an anything else that happens their very slow to act if at all. they should be forced to wait like us and not get a dime if it failed. wonder how quick they be to make sure their would be no scams or endless delays after that...

Scot · July 2018

The best way to always make sure you can get a refund is to not put anything into the game before launch. I have never had any problems with refunds funnily enough.

Kyleran · July 2018

MadFrenchie said:

BeansnBread said:

I think the games that have a vast amount of whales supporting them with $20k+ are more afraid of refunds than a game like Camelot Unchained. The scale is different for the game that shall not be named.

But yeah, it's pretty disgusting that the game that shall not be named is not giving refunds as of January.

But, it's pretty much a donation! That's why these folk give it freely without being given huge amounts of in-game items or perks in return... Oh wait.

True story. When I contributed to CUs Kickstarter oh so many years ago (5 plus) I actually did consider it a donation.

Even though Marc offers refunds as I told him a few years back, regardless how it all turns out, he can keep the money.

Now, it was only about $180 bucks or something, but at the time I was following a principal adapted from playing EVE.(or lending money to people)

Never pledge more money in a Kickstarter than you are able and / or willing to lose.

Seeing how things turned out so far (which was not at all unexpected) I never contributed to a crowd funding campaign again.

I have bought into a couple of EAs at a minimum level once they had playable games. (Albion online and 7 days to die)

VestigeGamer · July 2018

This is a nice example, yet I wonder how many like it must occur before you can truthfully say "fallacy." From what I've heard and seen, there is still about a 5:1 "no refund" practice. I wish more kickstarters adopted Mark's practice.

Slapshot1188 · July 2018

Lots of valid points but I want to stay on the idea that it is a fallacy to state that crowdfunded companies cannot offer refunds and stay in business. Jacobs is proving that to be untrue.

3.8% refunds

That is a real number. For a game in development for 5 years. (and very... very... very late)

I wonder how many people bought in BECAUSE of the refund policy? Knowing that they could just get their money back if they wanted? I'd bet that is a lot more than 3.8%...

So the refund policy is IMHO a net positive financially and certainly a massive positive for reputation and word of mouth.

Ungood · July 2018

Crowed Fund projects like Kickstarter have all kinds of statements that they do not offer refunds, Paypal will not do a refund from a Crowed funded project, and there are other things along these lines for both creditors and the like. But the thing here is that they make the consumer aware of this.

A big thing about that many miss is that a crowed funded project is not a guarantee of success even if they reach their funding goal, some idea just don't get off the ground or the person trying to do it didn't factor in a lot of little things that became big things and the whole project implodes.

This is a risk of Crowedfunding. think about it, if they had a guarantee that they could 100% legit pull this off, on time, exactly as they said, they would have been able to get a bank or other kind of backer, with no problems. In fact, if they could put out the promise that some gamers have come to demand, they never would have gone the route of Crowed Fund to start with.

That is the whole thing with Crowed Funded projects, it is a risk, a risk that was too high for the people that typically invest in and back to projects to take.

Nwo, If CU offers refunds good for them. That is something they have chosen to do. This in no way obligates anyone else to do the same.

Kickstarter makes it clear they do not promise the completion of any project, and that as long as the creator tries in good faith to complete the project that meets their obligations for no-refunds or returns.

Slapshot1188 · July 2018

Ungood said:

Crowed Fund projects like Kickstarter have all kinds of statements that they do not offer refunds, Paypal will not do a refund from a Crowed funded project, and there are other things along these lines for both creditors and the like. But the thing here is that they make the consumer aware of this.

A big thing about that many miss is that a crowed funded project is not a guarantee of success even if they reach their funding goal, some idea just don't get off the ground or the person trying to do it didn't factor in a lot of little things that became big things and the whole project implodes.

This is a risk of Crowedfunding. think about it, if they had a guarantee that they could 100% legit pull this off, on time, exactly as they said, they would have been able to get a bank or other kind of backer, with no problems. In fact, if they could put out the promise that some gamers have come to demand, they never would have gone the route of Crowed Fund to start with.

That is the whole thing with Crowed Funded projects, it is a risk, a risk that was too high for the people that typically invest in and back to projects to take.

Nwo, If CU offers refunds good for them. That is something they have chosen to do. This in no way obligates anyone else to do the same.

Kickstarter makes it clear they do not promise the completion of any project, and that as long as the creator tries in good faith to complete the project that meets their obligations for no-refunds or returns.

Nice answer to the wrong question.

The fallacy (as mentioned a few times) is that Crowdfunded games cannot offer refunds or they would be out of business.

Jacobs proves that is NOT true. It can be done. And it can be done for the benefit of both the company and the consumer.

MadFrenchie · July 2018

Ungood said:

Crowed Fund projects like Kickstarter have all kinds of statements that they do not offer refunds, Paypal will not do a refund from a Crowed funded project, and there are other things along these lines for both creditors and the like. But the thing here is that they make the consumer aware of this.

A big thing about that many miss is that a crowed funded project is not a guarantee of success even if they reach their funding goal, some idea just don't get off the ground or the person trying to do it didn't factor in a lot of little things that became big things and the whole project implodes.

This is a risk of Crowedfunding. think about it, if they had a guarantee that they could 100% legit pull this off, on time, exactly as they said, they would have been able to get a bank or other kind of backer, with no problems. In fact, if they could put out the promise that some gamers have come to demand, they never would have gone the route of Crowed Fund to start with.

That is the whole thing with Crowed Funded projects, it is a risk, a risk that was too high for the people that typically invest in and back to projects to take.

Nwo, If CU offers refunds good for them. That is something they have chosen to do. This in no way obligates anyone else to do the same.

Kickstarter makes it clear they do not promise the completion of any project, and that as long as the creator tries in good faith to complete the project that meets their obligations for no-refunds or returns.

Yes: crowdfunding is largely convincing folks uneducated and inexperienced about the risks of said project to fund it anyways, because those with the experience and education to better gauge the risks involved wouldn't touch it.

It makes a convincing case against the wisdom of the crowd.

Ungood · July 2018

Now, lets set something out here.

If the company really, legitimately, needed the money from a crowed fund, they simply can't afford to give it back, if their need was real, then they have already invested that money into the project and don't have it in a liquid state to return. That money should have gone to programs, needed supplies, hiring talent, etc.

If they really needed it, then they really can't afford to give refunds, as such if they can just give out refunds then they didn't honestly need the money to start with, or obtained some other, better, source of backing.

In the case of CU, I would wager that since he started with a full return policy, Mike had enough personal assets that he didn't really need the crowed funded money, he just went that route to play with that platform.

Slapshot1188 · July 2018

Ungood said:

Now, lets set something out here.

If the company really, legitimately, needed the money from a crowed fund, they simply can't afford to give it back, if their need was real, then they have already invested that money into the project and don't have it in a liquid state to return. That money should have gone to programs, needed supplies, hiring talent, etc.

If they really needed it, then they really can't afford to give refunds, as such if they can just give out refunds then they didn't honestly need the money to start with, or obtained some other, better, source of backing.

In the case of CU, I would wager that since he started with a full return policy, Mike had enough personal assets that he didn't really need the crowed funded money, he just went that route to play with that platform.

Who the fuck is Mike?

I honestly think half your posts are just to try and say the opposite of whatever I post but without actually researching the topic.

3.8%

THAT is the number that matters. Not some strawman about having spent all the money. Not some strawman about not having to legally give refunds.

3.8% is the ACTUAL percent of refunds for a game that is very very late and stretches 5 years.

Wizardry · July 2018

I commend them on their policy ,they don'tr have to offer refunds.
However that one aspect of kindness,goodwill won't get me into this game,it will simply "my opinion of course"not be nearly good enough.
I have seen enough of most of these incoming games to give them a vague score,by vague meaning nothing is concrete or set in stone until a game is actually delivered.
First of all,i don't hand out scores like fanbois or websites that partner with these developers ALL of those scores are rubbish,garbage,100% meaningless because they carry an agenda.

So my opinion on this game to come? a 4/10 at best.As i stated a vague score,the game is not out,that score can change ,it might be a 6-7 it might be worse ,a 2 or 3,time will tell.However there is VERY little i have not seen and understand,i can get a pretty good darn feeling for a game before it is released.

First of all crowd funding is imo an auto fail,you cannot properly design a game that way,it will NEVER be the best version of itself.

There is also something to read into that 3.8%.

Could simply be that MOST people wiling to pay into these CF games can see how little chance this game has and never figured on giving any money to it.The few funders could simply be stout fanbois,willing to "take a chance"on ANY notion because of an old game DAOC title bantered around to stir up interest in this one.

Octagon7711 · July 2018

A no refund policy is often a Jedi mind trick for the weak minded as a lot of consumer protection laws make it illegal to refuse refund requests. Some countries even see perma-bans as a denial of service which is entitled to a refund, I've heard.

Kyleran · July 2018

Slapshot1188 said:

Ungood said:

Now, lets set something out here.

If the company really, legitimately, needed the money from a crowed fund, they simply can't afford to give it back, if their need was real, then they have already invested that money into the project and don't have it in a liquid state to return. That money should have gone to programs, needed supplies, hiring talent, etc.

If they really needed it, then they really can't afford to give refunds, as such if they can just give out refunds then they didn't honestly need the money to start with, or obtained some other, better, source of backing.

In the case of CU, I would wager that since he started with a full return policy, Mike had enough personal assets that he didn't really need the crowed funded money, he just went that route to play with that platform.

Who the fuck is Mike?

I honestly think half your posts are just to try and say the opposite of whatever I post but without actually researching the topic.

3.8%

THAT is the number that matters. Not some strawman about having spent all the money. Not some strawman about not having to legally give refunds.

3.8% is the ACTUAL percent of refunds for a game that is very very late and stretches 5 years.

Off the meds today Slap? (I'm sure he meant Mark)

3.8% is one data point. Is it representative or typical of all Kickstarters?

What if something happened to spike the rate?

There are multiple factors which come into consideration and what works for CU may not work for COE.

You are trying to build an argument that "everyone" says refunds are never possible when I don't really see anyone here saying such.

Sometimes they are, perhaps sometimes they aren't. One size doesn't fit all.

SpottyGekko · July 2018

Slapshot1188 said:

...

3.8%

THAT is the number that matters. Not some strawman about having spent all the money. Not some strawman about not having to legally give refunds.

3.8% is the ACTUAL percent of refunds for a game that is very very late and stretches 5 years.

I think you've lost the plot, lol

Are you seriously going to claim that CU is representative of the "average KS MMO" project and that therefore all other KS projects should offer the same refund policy ?

The only way a KS project can offer refunds is if they keep a % of the funds raised in a reserve account for the entire duration of the project. And then they better hope that their refund reserve lasts.

Of course, the refund policy of any crowdfunded project is an illusion. It only holds up as long as refund requests are very low. A well-managed KS project should have almost no money in the bank when launch day arrives, because that shows their fundraising matched their needs closely.

Slapshot1188 · July 2018

The point is that if done correctly... even with massive delays... you can have a very low refund rate. It can actually be a POSITIVE.

And Spotty- I disagree. A proper Crowdfunded game should really have enough in the bank at launch to carry them for many months. Remember, the common model is to pre-sell massive amounts of perks to the core playerbase. They sell accounts, subs, items... So at launch all that revenue is already in the coffers. Needs do not equal launch day but equal launch day + months.

Planning to have a big bang at launch is not the most solid plan IMHO.

Kyleran · July 2018

Slapshot1188 said:

The point is that if done correctly... even with massive delays... you can have a very low refund rate. It can actually be a POSITIVE.

And Spotty- I disagree. A proper Crowdfunded game should really have enough in the bank at launch to carry them for many months. Remember, the common model is to pre-sell massive amounts of perks to the core playerbase. They sell accounts, subs, items... So at launch all that revenue is already in the coffers. Needs do not equal launch day but equal launch day + months.

Planning to have a big bang at launch is not the most solid plan IMHO.

If you had said 5 years ago that indie game devs could collect massive pledge amounts and then grossly overshoot the promise date by more than double and not suffer from a high refund rate few would have believed it.

But CU and SC are two games still without a firm delivery date despite being 3 to 5 years overdue, (and very likely not delivering for 2-3 more years) yet people are increasing their pledges or buying in for the first time, yet another phenomenon no one could have forseen.

The desperation levels of gamers for something new, different and fun is the common denominator for both and I suspect will fail to meet the overly lofty expectations most have.

Still true, the "best" game is the one in a player's imagination, generally unravels when the reality of the delivered product sets in.

Even "Saint" Mark plans to stop refunds once he starts letting more of the general public start giving it a go, as he well understands this principal.

Howdy, Stranger!

The "No Refund" Fallacy

Comments

Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey

Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

The "No Refund" Fallacy

Comments

Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey

Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV