Hacker News Reader

Comment by jsheard | Hacker News Reader

> and give refunds so they get a free pass.

They only begrudgingly conceded refunds in 2015 after the no-refunds policy they had maintained for 12 years was found to be illegal in Australia.

View on HN

Whatever the reason for their policy, it provides a nice sense of safety to Linux gamers. They can buy the game without worrying about compatibility; if the game doesn't run then its two clicks for an automated refund.

They made the new refund policy worldwide, which they absolutely did not have to.

Sure, but I imagine they saw the dominoes falling and realized that the optics of going down kicking and screaming in endless battles against basic consumer rights would be exceptionally bad. If they hadn't fully conceded then the EU would have been up their ass too before long.

> kicking and screaming in endless battles against basic consumer rights

“Apple has entered the chat.”

There are so many examples of other companies doing exactly that.

Also, competing stores like EA's Origin had a pretty friendly refund policy before Valve did, helping to put some pressure on Valve.

I seem to recall Origin initially reserving the right to revoke your license to play games you purchased after a few years of inactivity.

Classic EA.

"Oh, you haven't played this game in a while. You should pay us again if you wanna play it again. Give you a sense of pride and accomplishment!"

(reference for those who haven't seen it https://www.reddit.com/r/StarWarsBattlefront/comments/7cff0b... )

AFAIK Steam has this too. The Subscriber Agreement clearly states that you're not guaranteed continued, free access to Steam. If they decided they wanted to charge you to access games you already bought, they could.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com