Support NeoGAF

[Agkel]

I apologize to TruthJunky and the poster that referenced him. I got confused thinking he had downloaded the game. As I stated before though, in his particular case where he has not downloaded anything, if he decided to ask for one, he should get a refund. Chuckle would be able to verify the unused key, rescind access and return the money. The rest i still stand by and the person mentioned in the OP is notentitled to any refund and he/shed had the chance toask for one.

 

[tranciful]

I feel like some people here don't think a consumer should ever be able to get burned. Unrelated to gaming, I've bought tons of stuff that I later regretted. It forces me to be smart and do my research ahead of time. I pay attention to return policies and consider the risk that the product will be a dud. I learn from my mistakes. That's just how the world works. Sometimes businesses have generous return policies and sometimes they don't. I can understand if an indie dev can't afford to provide a super nice return policy -- these aren't megacorps making crazy money. Some of you seem incredibly entitled. How do you function in the real world?

 

[sneaky77]

I won't be sharing that information but I will say that my company provides a full warranty (longer than industry standard, btw) and allows for refunds based on the product not working for specific situations. But, if a customer who ordered one of our products called me 2 years after ordering it and said that they didn't use it and would like to return it for their money back I would not be able to provide them with a refund.

But the guy in the OP has not yet received what he pre-ordered.

 

[Jhriad]

Good for you, but early access doesn't work that way as your Beta Key transforms into the full release Key, and should you be unhappy with the early access game, or even should the game be canceled before full release, Valve doesn't do refunds.
It can lead to stupid situations but it's like that.

Since his 'preorder' was from before early access I don't really see how turning his beta key into an early access grants the developer protection from giving out refunds for failing to deliver the game anywhere close to the release window. Excusing it by saying, "That's the way it works" doesn't make it a less shitty situation for the consumer.

 

[2San]

Agreed. If a game is in your hands and has been released, it cannot be by definition, a pre-order.

Glad we agree.

In this case, a game was purchased including a "pre-order" for the final build. This person is asking for a refund of not what was paid for, but something included in what was paid for, which is obviously not acceptable.

It is acceptable. Bigger publishers have sold beta access as pre-order bonus plenty of times and you could still cancel. Cuddlefish are suddenly trying to change what a pre-order actually entails.

It's akin to buying a season pass for a game, playing the first DLC, then asking for a refund for the pass. You don't get you have your cake and eat it.

No, because that's buying a season pass and not pre-ordering a game.

 

[Aim_Ed]

I put in lots of hours in this game and was ultimately underwhelmed. I don't even think there's enough content to justify calling it fully playable. Last I checked was December though, and I quit checking because of the slow rate of content.

 

[marrec]

But the guy in the OP has not yet received what he pre-ordered.

Actually, the guy in the OP consumed the code and played it for 20 hours. His asking for a refund is hilariously entitled.

TruthJunky's request is much more nuanced and understandable. I would not fault Chucklefish for providing him with a refund however I do not think he's entitled to one either.

 

[no angel]

....But, if a customer who ordered one of our products called me 2 years after ordering it and said that they didn't use it and would like to return it for their money back I would not be able to provide them with a refund.

Which would be fine if this chap had been able to play the Product he preordered. As it hadn't been released yet this is kind of difficult.

 

[BibiMaghoo]

But the guy in the OP has not yet received what he pre-ordered.

He has, he has received and played the game he paid for, that came with a pre-order for the final build. Otherwise, that suggests that an early build of the game was actually free, which is not true at all.

It cannot be both ways. If they paid for the early build, then they did not pay for the pre-order. Some early access titles specifically state that the final version is free upon release to early buyers, in which case it is abundantly clear you are paying for the build you play.

No, because that's buying a season pass and not pre-ordering a game.

You are ordering something unreleased by buying a season pass when it comes out. That is identical to a pre-order.

 

[marrec]

Which would be fine if this chap had been able to play the Product he preordered. As it hadn't been released yet this is kind of difficult.

It was released in an Early Access state.

 

[no angel]

It was released in an Early Access state.

Which he didn't preorder. He preordered the final release.

 

[scytheavatar]

Actually, the guy in the OP consumed the code and played it for 20 hours. His asking for a refund is hilariously entitled.

TruthJunky's request is much more nuanced and understandable. I would not fault Chucklefish for providing him with a refund however I do not think he's entitled to one either.

He consumed the early access which defo isn't what he preordered.

 

[Stumpokapow]

But the guy in the OP has not yet received what he pre-ordered.

So, let this be a note to future developers: If you allow a pre-order with lengthy and ongoing beta access, make sure you clarify what percentage of the pre-order is satisfied by having access to the beta, because otherwise people will assume the answer is 0% since the version number doesn't read 1.0.

 

[flux1]

Seeing how long the game has been up and its current state has put me off giving money for games anymore unless they are done.

I pre-ordered it initially when the promise was for a 2013 release date. Well I played other stuff until recently and decided to finally try the game. Its been fun, but there are still issues like performance that need to be addressed. After hearing about another delay now I'm just going to assume I got what I got, it probably won't be finished, and enjoy it as is. Then not pre-order anything else unless its something with a concrete release date that warrants it like a limited run physical edition of a game.

 

[Enco]

They don't owe anyone a refund. Game isn't broken. Not liking a game is not reason enough.

This.

I think a lot of devs abuse early access but you have no right to ask for a refund in this case.

In no other industry can you buy something, use it for months and then decide you don't like it.

Straight up bullshit.

You knew the risks getting in so have no right to ask for your money back.

 

[Seanspeed]

"Couldn't deliver?" That's a big logical leap. It's completely understandable that release dates shift, for all the right reasons, when you're getting so much community feedback.

I assume that at the time, the planned features would have been doable within their timeframe. But as they open it up to the community, they will inevitably get a ton of user feedback and feature requests. They probably added a ton of stuff that wasn't planned when they announced that date, but was stuff the community requested. There were probably bugs and problems the community discovered that they had to spend time fixing. Sure, all these things push back the release date of a 'finished' version, but these things also make it a better game.

Should they have instead ignored all the community feedback and stuck with their original featurelist in order to release on time? I think that would be dumb -- the game would be worse and the only thing that'd help is to avoid bullshit like this where people get hung up over words instead of thinking about the actual game.

If the game is being pushed from 2013 to 2015, I think its pretty safe to assume they 'couldn't deliver' on their original promise. And yes, it was a promise. They said straight up that it would definitely release in 2013. There was no vague statement that I'm interpreting wrong or anything.

I'm not arguing that pushing it back isn't what's best for the game. But somebody who pre-ordered it in April of 2013 with the expectation that it would be released in 2013 certainly has a right to be upset with the way things have gone since then. A refund is not unreasonable to ask for.

You called yourself one. I gave you a data point that may support your self supposition.

I did not call myself an idiot. :/

I asked if you thought I was one. You said yes, I might be. You would also have to include many other people here in this very thread as 'idiots' as well.

Very few people would have known this game would be pushed back all the way to 2015 originally. Maybe you did, but that doesn't make everybody else idiots.

 

[Supernorn]

I've been pretty disappointed with the development of this game, and am really annoyed that the developer is working on other games rather than prioritizing finishing up this early access game..

Please don't say things like this, as it's simply not true. Every Starbound team member has worked on Starbound, and Starbound alone. No resources have been moved away from the game, If anything, we've hired more people to work on it.

 

[no angel]

So, let this be a note to future developers: If you allow a pre-order with lengthy and ongoing beta access, make sure you clarify what percentage of the pre-order is satisfied by having access to the beta, because otherwise people will assume the answer is 0% since the version number doesn't read 1.0.

I don't even think this is that complicated, this all boils down to the specifics of the language used for the guy's original preorder.
As much as I don't like the idea paying for early access it's pretty clear what you're spending your money on.

 

[Morokh]

The window to get a refund from a pre-order is as long as the full product as detailed by the pre-order has not been released, is not some arbitrary concept of time as the developer wishes to be.

He preordered, he got his beta access as promised by the preorder, full game is delayed until 2015, guy wants a refund, which he should be entitled to. It really is that simple.. all the other word and semantics and weird non sensical theories people are saying about hrs played in a beta that he got with his preorder as stated, do not matter..

I preorder something.. I can ask for a refund until the full product is out as it was detailed on my preorder terms.. his terms have not been completed, he is entitled to a refund. This is not some hard mathematical concept here. Some of the answers in this thread are mindblowing..

Your point is completely valid, but his Beta acess transformed in a Steam Early Access Beta Key which goes by Valve rules that don't seem to allow that.
(do a bit of google searching on Valve policies on refunds and early access refunds, it's not all butterfly and roses ...)

I'm the lead developer of Starbound.
So I wanted to clear some things up. Before we released anything on steam we were offering people that had bought the game before any kind of release no questions asked refunds. That's because there was nothing to play yet and we had more control over actually refunding people.

It's certainly not ideal for those who think they have been wronged, but the change was not made without prior notice.

 

[sneaky77]

He has, he has received and played the game he paid for, that came with a pre-order for the final build. Otherwise, that suggests that an early build of the game was actually free, which is not true at all.
.

In the terms described in the OP, the preorder was for the full game with free access to a beta.

The full game is not out yet..

Your point is completely valid, but his Beta acess transformed in a Steam Early Access Beta Key which goes by Valve rules that don't seem to allow that.

The developer does not get to change the terms that were made when his preorder was made, but it can change the terms for future preorders.

 

[2San]

You are ordering something unreleased by buying a season pass when it comes out. That is identical to a pre-order.

I think definition matters. Calling something a "pre-order" has certain connotations and expectations associated with it.

 

[Enco]

I don't even think this is that complicated, this all boils down to the specifics of the language used for the guy's original preorder.
As much as I don't like the idea paying for early access it's pretty clear what you're spending your money on.

Yup.

If you buy into early access you should be fully ready to accept that you won't get the promised game. You're insane if you pay money and start to throw a fit when something doesn't end up being what you want. Not happy with the terms? Don't buy based on a promise.

This case isn't as clear cut due to the wording used but I can't remember exactly what they said with the pre order.

 

[marrec]

Lets say I'm developing a new product. I allow people to pre-order the product and give them a time frame for release. All through the pre-order period people are able to cancel their orders and receive a full refund. Then, based on the length of time to put this product out, I decided to give it to customers in a working but not fully featured state. I contact every one of my customers and let them know that I'm giving them the product, it's not complete mind, but it's theirs and they can use it as they see fit. Also I'm allowing them to request refunds based on this new direction. Then, one year after I take this new direction, someone calls me up demanding a refund because they received my Early Access product a year ago but decided not to use it.

Again, it's nuanced, but I don't think the person asking for a refund so long after the time of the Early Access release is necessarily entitled to that refund.

This is, of course, in reference to TruthJunky. The guy in the OP deserves nothing. Early Access is inherently anti-consumer, people should be wary at any point in that process of giving anyone money.

 

[tranciful]

If the game is being pushed from 2013 to 2015, I think its pretty safe to assume they 'couldn't deliver' on their original promise. And yes, it was a promise. They said straight up that it would definitely release in 2013. There was no vague statement that I'm interpreting wrong or anything.

I'm not arguing that pushing it back isn't what's best for the game. But somebody who pre-ordered it in April of 2013 with the expectation that it would be released in 2013 certainly has a right to be upset with the way things have gone since then. A refund is not unreasonable to ask for.

Haven't people been playing the game since 2013? Sounds like they still do nightly builds, too.

This whole "if it doesn't say 1.0 it doesn't count" thing is insane. That kind of attitude will only serve to accomplish two things:

1. developers will slap the '1.0' label earlier than they'd like just to satisfy the people that get hung up on things like this
2. developers will needlessly prioritize original plans and schedule at the detriment of the game itself instead of responding to community feedback and really benefiting the game

Developers should be careful about their wording, but gamers need to stop being so unreasonable.

 

[Walshicus]

I've spent far more on far less. Starbound is already a game worth playing.

I don't have much sympathy for the refund asked.

 

[Starviper]

Please don't say things like this, as it's simply not true. Every Starbound team member has worked on Starbound, and Starbound alone. No resources have been moved away from the game, If anything, we've hired more people to work on it.

Fair enough, I guess I was unaware/misinformed -- in my eyes, it seems like development has slowed to some degree so I assumed that more resources were being put towards developing other games at this point. Glad to hear that you are putting more time into it, as I was really looking forward to the quest systems and other various systems that would give the game some real meaning, rather than just finding enough of something to get better gear to beat the next boss and that's that.

 

[no angel]

Yup.

If you buy into early access you should be fully ready to accept that you won't get the promised game. You're insane if you pay money and start to throw a fit when something doesn't end up being what you want. Not happy with the terms? Don't buy based on a promise.

This case isn't as clear cut due to the wording used but I can't remember exactly what they said with the pre order.

Right. So in this case it was the developer's poor item description that caused this issue therefore the guy should get a refund

I'm still sickened by how many people will come out to bat for a company over an individual here.

 

[tranciful]

I'm still sickened by how many people will come out to bat for a company over an individual here.

It's an indie dev. They're more or less a small group of individuals. This isn't Bobby VS Viacom

 

[woolley]

I don't see the need to give him a refund. Although I regret purchasing Starbound I wouldn't say I deserve a refund.

I don't really understand what's taking them so long with the game though. It's been like 8 months since the beta has been released and still no major updates for it. You'd think they'd have something significant to show for all that time.

 

[no angel]

It's an indie dev. They're more or less a small group of individuals. This isn't Bobby VS Viacom

I don't really see how the importance of consumer rights fluctuates in relation to the size of the company abusing them.

 

[ElFly]

So, let this be a note to future developers: If you allow a pre-order with lengthy and ongoing beta access, make sure you clarify what percentage of the pre-order is satisfied by having access to the beta, because otherwise people will assume the answer is 0% since the version number doesn't read 1.0.

If the dev themselves recognizes the game is not complete, then there is no point to being snarky about version numbers.

People paid for a preorder.

Game is not out in a reasonable timeframe of when it was said to be out.

People should get a refund.

End of story

 

[BibiMaghoo]

In the terms described in the OP, the preorder was for the full game with free access to a beta.

The full game is not out yet..

The developer does not get to change the terms that were made when his preorder was made, but it can change the terms for future preorders.

By those terms then, yes, I retract. If it was explicitly stated that the beta was free, and not the game upon release, then it seems fair to ask for a refund for just playing a beta, had he done so in a reasonable time frame.

I think definition matters. Calling something a "pre-order" has certain connotations and expectations associated with it.

What is a pre-order? It is the pre-purchase of a product as yet unreleased. This term is applicable to any unreleased product that allows orders to be taken, from a new book or game, to the latest brew machine with milk frother.

A season pass is exactly this unless purchased after the content is released. If purchased before, your purchase is a pre-order for that content.

Could you describe for me the connotations and expectations that apply to a pre-order, but not a season pass? Does the right to cancel after playing apply to either?

 

[Seanspeed]

Haven't people been playing the game since 2013? Sounds like they still do nightly builds, too.

This whole "if it doesn't say 1.0 it doesn't count" thing is insane.

December 2013 is when Early Access was started and when people started playing. So yes, at the very tail end of 2013, people finally got the chance to get their hands on it. But the point is, you had to cancel your pre-order before playing it. So you'd have to judge how long you think the game would take just by looking at it. That's pretty damn difficult even for experienced developers, I imagine.

So people who pre-ordered in 2013 with the expectation that they'd get the full release that same year instead got access to an Early Access game that was still over a year away from completion(which was unknown to people at the time). I bet most people thought they'd be waiting a few more months or something, not an extra year. So that's indeed a hard pill to swallow.

And no, the 1.0 thing isn't insane. Just because its playable doesn't mean it isn't a WIP game. If the devs aren't happy with the state of the game to release it as 1.0, then the why should the customers? I'd really like to hear you answer that question.

I'm hardly 'unreasonable' when it comes to this stuff. I'm not your typical 'get outraged at any little hint of anti-consumerism' sort of gamer. This just strikes me as a very valid complaint.

 

[Morokh]

Fair enough, I guess I was unaware/misinformed -- in my eyes, it seems like development has slowed to some degree so I assumed that more resources were being put towards developing other games at this point. Glad to hear that you are putting more time into it, as I was really looking forward to the quest systems and other various systems that would give the game some real meaning, rather than just finding enough of something to get better gear to beat the next boss and that's that.

Development slowed a bit for a time this year during the time they moved in new offices as far as I'm aware of.

It has resumed at a steady pace since and you can test things every day with new builds if you subscribe to Nightly builds on Steam.

 

[mclem]

I think a key bit of information is required here: What, of the featureset promised when this purchase option was available, is not currently in the game? And conversely, what features that were *not* envisioned at the time of the original purchase are in the current game?

 

[tranciful]

I don't really see how the importance of consumer rights fluctuates in relation to the size of the company abusing them.

Big companies can generally afford it. It's different for mom and pop shops.

 

[no angel]

Big companies can generally afford it. It's different for mom and pop shops.

Lol that makes it ok then!

 

[Enco]

Right. So in this case it was the developer's poor item description that caused this issue therefore the guy should get a refund

I'm still sickened by how many people will come out to bat for a company over an individual here.

Oh man don't even put me in that group.

I'm ALL for supporting consumers and so 90% of the time. However, sometimes the consumer is wrong.

Like I said, I can't exactly remember how Chuckle worded the pre-order so I can't say for sure.

Either way, if the person had ordered the game from a store other than Chuckle's then Chuckle have nothing to do with it.

If you ordered from Humble, go to Humble.

 

[zhorkat]

Lets say I'm developing a new product. I allow people to pre-order the product and give them a time frame for release. All through the pre-order period people are able to cancel their orders and receive a full refund. Then, based on the length of time to put this product out, I decided to give it to customers in a working but not fully featured state. I contact every one of my customers and let them know that I'm giving them the product, it's not complete mind, but it's theirs and they can use it as they see fit. Also I'm allowing them to request refunds based on this new direction. Then, one year after I take this new direction, someone calls me up demanding a refund because they received my Early Access product a year ago but decided not to use it.

Again, it's nuanced, but I don't think the person asking for a refund so long after the time of the Early Access release is necessarily entitled to that refund.

This is, of course, in reference to TruthJunky. The guy in the OP deserves nothing. Early Access is inherently anti-consumer, people should be wary at any point in that process of giving anyone money.

But what if the plan was always to release an incomplete version of the product in addition to the complete version and the wording of the preorder to this day explicitly distinguishes the incomplete version from the complete version and people can still preorder the product today and all you really did was delay your product's release and finalize the method in which the incomplete product would be distributed?

 

[no angel]

Oh man don't even put me in that group.

I'm ALL for supporting consumers and so 90% of the time. However, sometimes the consumer is wrong.

Like I said, I can't exactly remember how Chuckle worded the pre-order so I can't say for sure.

Either way, if the person had ordered the game from a store other than Chuckle's then Chuckle have nothing to do with it.

If you ordered from Humble, go to Humble.

Here you go, posted on the front page.
https://web.archive.org/web/20130520042625/http://www.playstarbound.com/store

Wording's clear, and bought from the devs as far as I can tell.
I can't really see where the consumer is wrong here.

 

[tranciful]

And no, the 1.0 thing isn't insane. Just because its playable doesn't mean it isn't a WIP game. If the devs aren't happy with the state of the game to release it as 1.0, then the why should the customers? I'd really like to hear you answer that question.

I've already addressed this.

"Couldn't deliver?" That's a big logical leap. It's completely understandable that release dates shift, for all the right reasons, when you're getting so much community feedback.

I assume that at the time, the planned features would have been doable within their timeframe. But as they open it up to the community, they will inevitably get a ton of user feedback and feature requests. They probably added a ton of stuff that wasn't planned when they announced that date, but was stuff the community requested. There were probably bugs and problems the community discovered that they had to spend time fixing. Sure, all these things push back the release date of a 'finished' version, but these things also make it a better game.

Should they have instead ignored all the community feedback and stuck with their original featurelist in order to release on time? I think that would be dumb -- the game would be worse and the only thing that'd help is to avoid bullshit like this where people get hung up over words instead of thinking about the actual game.

You've essentially got two options.

1. Release game earlier by ignoring community feedback
2. Improve game based on community feedback, naturally taking longer to 'finish'

You can't have it both ways. #2 sounds better to me, but you're demanding #1.

 

[ElFly]

Again, it's nuanced, but I don't think the person asking for a refund so long after the time of the Early Access release is necessarily entitled to that refund.

Let's say the worst happens. Starbound is cancelled.

Does that mean the preorder guy got his preorder fulfilled by getting a game that everyone agrees is incomplete?

 

[2San]

What is a pre-order? It is the pre-purchase of a product as yet unreleased. This term is applicable to any unreleased product that allows orders to be taken, from a new book or game, to the latest brew machine with milk frother.

A season pass is exactly this unless purchased after the content is released. If purchased before, your purchase is a pre-order for that content.

Could you describe for me the connotations and expectations that apply to a pre-order, but not a season pass? Does the right to cancel after playing apply to either?

Consumers do not have the expectation that they can cancel a season pass mid way, as this was never possible. Unlike when they pre-order a game, where you could always cancel before the release of the product.

 

[tranciful]

Let's say the worst happens. Starbound is cancelled.

Does that mean the preorder guy got his preorder fulfilled by getting a game that everyone agrees is incomplete?

Depends. Is that 'incomplete' game better than their originally planned 'complete' game due to changes made by community feedback?

"b0.6" vs "1.0" doesn't matter. It's the game that matters.

Consumers do not have the expectation that they can cancel a season pass mid way, as this was never possible. Unlike when they pre-order a game, where you could always cancel before the release of the product.

The definition of pre-order has changed.

 

[marrec]

Let's say the worst happens. Starbound is cancelled.

Does that mean the preorder guy got his preorder fulfilled by getting a game that everyone agrees is incomplete?

Unfortunately for consumers sometimes they give money to people who deliver an inferior product. Yes, he had his pre-order fulfilled when he cashed in his Early Access code. TruthJunky had his pre-order fulfilled when he received his Early Access code and made no attempt to contact Chucklefish for a refund.

The developer is not under an obligation to give refunds based on consumers who do not wish to get refunds within the pre-order window. That window closed when they received a product. If TruthJunky wished to not get the product he should have acted at the appropriate time, not months or years afterwards. It's unfortunate but sometimes it's the consumers fault when they waste money.

The What-If Machine is totally tapped out:

 

[Enco]

Here you go, posted on the front page.
https://web.archive.org/web/20130520042625/http://www.playstarbound.com/store

Wording's clear, and bought from the devs as far as I can tell.
I can't really see where the consumer is wrong here.

Doesn't seem very clear. I don't see any promises.

An estimated release of 2013 (lol) seems about it. The stretch goals are a complete joke though. Pretty sure none of them have been met.

Q. How come you're doing this Kickstarter style?
A. We're financing the game out of our own pocket and a couple of our team members have had to take on second jobs. We're hoping the preorder will allow them to work full time on Starbound and get the game to you quicker!

So they're admitting it's kickstarter 'style'.

They could have done a better job but apart from the stretch goals I don't see anything unfulfilled that was guaranteed.

 

[Lactose_Intolerant]

The definition of pre-order has changed.

No it hasn't

 

[sneaky77]

The definition of pre-order has changed.

No, it has not.

 

[Morokh]

I think a key bit of information is required here: What, of the featureset promised when this purchase option was available, is not currently in the game? And conversely, what features that were *not* envisioned at the time of the original purchase are in the current game?

Game was missing some key features including some of the ones promised during the crowdfunding/pre-order campain.
Some of them, like gear progression, and bosses are in, but as placeholders in a very simplistic way.

On the other hand many things of smaller note have been incorporated based on player feedback and mods that already have been created.

And that was as of January of this year where I played it for the last time can't really speak for further than that. as I just took a look on the blog posts since then.

Doesn't seem very clear. I don't see any promises.

An estimated release of 2013 (lol) seems about it. The stretch goals are a complete joke though. Pretty sure none of them have been met.

All have been met

 

[ElFly]

Depends. Is that 'incomplete' game better than their originally planned 'complete' game due to changes made by community feedback?

Given that the developer recognizes the game is incomplete, and that have missed their advertised launch date by several months, that is up to the consumer to decide.

Obviously in this case, preorder guy is already saying "no" and so the answer is that no, the preorder has not been fulfilled