GOG has recently enabled customers to return games without reason within 30 days of purchase. There are no restrictions, only in cases of suspicion of misuse, reimbursement should be refused. This regulation, which is generous for customers, was not discussed with developers in advance.
This fact became apparent through a discussion by indie developers on Twitter that euro Gamer noticed. It gives an insight into how large platforms work to change their policies and guidelines. This sparked part of the criticism: developers were not asked about their concerns in advance, solutions for possible problems were sketched, and they were not informed in advance.
Developers (at least most of us) are never consulted when Steam or GOG make fundamental changes to their services. They sell OUR games. They make money from OUR games. Why do we not get a say in how OUR games are sold? https://t.co/wWF4OLEKEV
– Ragnar Tørnquist (@ragso) February 27, 2020
Dispensing with DRM creates gaps
In addition, the developers, in contrast to the profiting end customers, are less enthusiastic about the extended return options than they are. Concerns are once raised on Twitter about possibilities for simple abuse: It is now possible to buy a game, download it and still keep it because GOG does not have a DRM system.
This problem did not exist with the stricter, old regulation, which only provided reimbursement for technical problems that could not be solved, Eurogamer outlines – or at least it was far more difficult to simulate such problems and to use the system. The DRM-free delivery of games is also a reason why the policy is so generous: A compromise solution like Steam is not an option for GOG, because the game can be continued even then, the site concludes. It is therefore a good idea for the platform to create a unique selling point with a regulation that is perceived as generous.
Impact not foreseeable
In a statement to Eurogamer, GOG wrote that any reimbursement request would be checked manually to prevent abuse. The worst, namely mass abuse of the function, does not necessarily have to happen anyway: David Szymanski (Dusk) noted on Twitter that after introducing a return option, he could not see any noteworthy losses even with his very short story games. A lot of players would support the developers of the games they like to play, even if there is a way to cheat, or even if they already have an illegal copy. Another good example of such a view is The Witcher 3. The role-playing game was sold on GOG without copy protection and was, or perhaps because of it, extremely successful.
Surprisingly that didn’t end up being the case. The refund rates for my games have remained pretty low. I think actually The Moon Sliver has a lower refund rate than Dusk, which is kind of insane.
– David Szymanski (@DUSKdev) February 26, 2020
Other developers contacted by the site were more skeptical. Ragnar Tørnquist (Draugen) reported significantly higher return rates on Steam, but did not consider any further effects possible. Still, a studio would have to include reimbursements in the budget. This and the profit margin are small for small developers anyway, which is why the economic situation tends to worsen.
–
