> if the request is made within fourteen days of purchase, and the title has been played for less than two hours
Purpose of games, is entertainment.
2 hours should be enough for you to decide if the game was worth it or not.
Let's say the average game gives you 40 hours of entertainment. (Bit arbitrary, granted.)
2 hours would be 5% of it's total lifespan.
Sounds reasonable?
Not under the Australian consumer law. We’re (rightly) quite proud of the level of protection it affords consumers.
This seems to be straying off-topic. The question isn't whether it was worth the price paid. The question is does it violate consumer protection laws vis-a-vis does it do what they said it would.
Sounds reasonable?
It does not. Applying a uniform hard limit to the full range of all possible games seems unreasonable. Practical, but not reasonable.
You might have enjoyed the game, but due to its broken nature, you are still entitled to a refund under Australian Consumer Rights.
"it has a problem that would have stopped someone from buying it if they’d known about it" is considered a "major" problem with the product.