you are forgetting though that a 5$ USD game isn’t going to magically becomes < 5$ USD though. if its using the same framework even if the game is only worth 2$ native, its still 5$ USD and therefore would be the same. Regional pricing doesn’t matter in the scenario.
you are forgetting though that a 5$ USD game isn’t going to magically becomes < 5$ USD though.
I am not, and that was not the point. The point is if you’re paying $5, and someone in a non-USD region is paying $5, they’re taking a bigger risk than you if the game ends up sucking because $5 is worth more in their region.
Lowering the refund period for everyone without regional pricing means people in underprivileged regions are taking on more risk than you are; ergo, you’re punishing them for being underprivileged, and making a bad situation worse.
you are misunderstanding. I’m saying pick a region for the guideline, if its $5 on that region the game has that refund period. Then apply regional pricing. There’s zero reason to apply a framework for every region that’s more work then needed. the lower regional price would have the same refund period as the standard pricing as its following the same framework. The fact its lower price does not matter, as regions do not matter.
Then the only time it would need to be region based, is if they sold a region specific SKU such as some Japanese or Australian releases instead of having to go in and select refund periods for every period in every region. That’s way more work than is needed.
I don’t think I am. The issue is not that your system won’t work with regional pricing, it’s that it will not work without it.
I’m saying pick a region for the guideline, if its $5 on that region the game has that refund period. Then apply regional pricing.
Yeah, that’s the issue. Some games do not opt into regional pricing, so the price never gets lowered, which means they will be paying $5 and have, for example, only 1 hour to refund the game, just like someone in the US. Their having to pay $5 is already an issue, and now they have even less time to refund it if it sucks.
There’s zero reason to apply a framework for every region that’s more work then needed.
I never adovacted for this. You can tie the refund period to money paid, no problem. You do not need a different refund period framework for every region, and I don’t understand why you think I’m pushing for this to begin with. It’s fine as long as you enforce regional pricing for everyone, which’s not something Steam will do.
At this point, I’m not sure where our disconnect is so I’m not really sure how else to clarify, im not sure how you read what I sent and somehow got that it has any attachment to regional pricing. The framework I’m talking about would not require regional pricing at all because the only price it cares about is what the price is in the chosen region.
The system I’m advocating would work with or without regional pricing because the region’s price doesn’t matter.
As an example, say their chosen region is the US and they decide that $5 means it’s a 30 minute return.
But then they have another region that is two dollars.
It doesn’t matter that it’s $2 in that region because the region that is used for the metric is $5.
So the $2 game that is regional pricing would have the return policy of the $5 game because the region that they use for the calculations has it at $5. As a further example, the inverse would be true as well. If it was $10 in the associated region, since the framework region is $5, the $10 game would have the $5 policy
I’m not sure why it needs to be so complicated to have specific return policies for every single region. At the end of the day the value in the framework region is isolated from the framework and no changes to its price would change its return policy as it doesn’t matter
ah sorry, yea I reread it when I got on my pc and I can see where I misunderstood your position,
as for where I got the concept from:
This would only work if the game participates in regional pricing, otherwise you’re fucking over most people who don’t deal in USD. $15 to you is not just $15 to everyone else.
and then
I don’t think I am. The issue is not that your system won’t work with regional pricing, it’s that it will not work without it.
since my post was about having it be based off a policy on pricing based off the current price, I took that as a message stating that it requires regional pricing to work. So I jumped the gun a little and thought you meant that you were advocating that for it to work, they would need regional pricing on everything as such would require regional based refunds for those areas, but I can see where I got overzealous on that so I apologize.
My opinion is still the same on it though, I think it would be better to implement that system than to not, even if the dev doesn’t participate in regional pricing at all, worst case scenario is it’s a static price with a static return based off the only price available and the buyer would know that going into it. I could see how it could negativly impact the buyer like you said but, if the seller is already not participating with regional pricing, there isn’t much else that can be done to fix that. Maybe keep the current system if the game is is bought in a region and not with regional pricing? but I don’t think that would really work either as it could just enable the abuse in those regions still. It can definitely work without regional pricing but, preferably if the dev wants to have sales, they really should enable it.
Also as an addition because I didn’t mention it, I used USD as an example because it’s what is generally used for an example, obviously said framework could be any region as long as it’s consistant across every game so it’s not confusing. Honestly steam could likely even supply a exchange tool to auto do the exchange across all denominations. They do that already for payouts/purchases
you are forgetting though that a 5$ USD game isn’t going to magically becomes < 5$ USD though. if its using the same framework even if the game is only worth 2$ native, its still 5$ USD and therefore would be the same. Regional pricing doesn’t matter in the scenario.
I am not, and that was not the point. The point is if you’re paying $5, and someone in a non-USD region is paying $5, they’re taking a bigger risk than you if the game ends up sucking because $5 is worth more in their region.
Lowering the refund period for everyone without regional pricing means people in underprivileged regions are taking on more risk than you are; ergo, you’re punishing them for being underprivileged, and making a bad situation worse.
you are misunderstanding.I’m saying pick a region for the guideline, if its $5 on that region the game has that refund period. Then apply regional pricing. There’s zero reason to apply a framework for every region that’s more work then needed. the lower regional price would have the same refund period as the standard pricing as its following the same framework. The fact its lower price does not matter, as regions do not matter.Then the only time it would need to be region based, is if they sold a region specific SKU such as some Japanese or Australian releases instead of having to go in and select refund periods for every period in every region. That’s way more work than is needed.
edit: i misread a core part of this chain, oops
I don’t think I am. The issue is not that your system won’t work with regional pricing, it’s that it will not work without it.
Yeah, that’s the issue. Some games do not opt into regional pricing, so the price never gets lowered, which means they will be paying $5 and have, for example, only 1 hour to refund the game, just like someone in the US. Their having to pay $5 is already an issue, and now they have even less time to refund it if it sucks.
I never adovacted for this. You can tie the refund period to money paid, no problem. You do not need a different refund period framework for every region, and I don’t understand why you think I’m pushing for this to begin with. It’s fine as long as you enforce regional pricing for everyone, which’s not something Steam will do.
At this point, I’m not sure where our disconnect is so I’m not really sure how else to clarify, im not sure how you read what I sent and somehow got that it has any attachment to regional pricing. The framework I’m talking about would not require regional pricing at all because the only price it cares about is what the price is in the chosen region.
The system I’m advocating would work with or without regional pricing because the region’s price doesn’t matter.
As an example, say their chosen region is the US and they decide that $5 means it’s a 30 minute return.
But then they have another region that is two dollars.
It doesn’t matter that it’s $2 in that region because the region that is used for the metric is $5.
So the $2 game that is regional pricing would have the return policy of the $5 game because the region that they use for the calculations has it at $5. As a further example, the inverse would be true as well. If it was $10 in the associated region, since the framework region is $5, the $10 game would have the $5 policy
I’m not sure why it needs to be so complicated to have specific return policies for every single region. At the end of the day the value in the framework region is isolated from the framework and no changes to its price would change its return policy as it doesn’t matter
I am not advocating for this. I do not understand why you think I’m advocating for this when I never brought it up.
Please re-read my last comment.
ah sorry, yea I reread it when I got on my pc and I can see where I misunderstood your position,
as for where I got the concept from:
and then
since my post was about having it be based off a policy on pricing based off the current price, I took that as a message stating that it requires regional pricing to work. So I jumped the gun a little and thought you meant that you were advocating that for it to work, they would need regional pricing on everything as such would require regional based refunds for those areas, but I can see where I got overzealous on that so I apologize.
My opinion is still the same on it though, I think it would be better to implement that system than to not, even if the dev doesn’t participate in regional pricing at all, worst case scenario is it’s a static price with a static return based off the only price available and the buyer would know that going into it. I could see how it could negativly impact the buyer like you said but, if the seller is already not participating with regional pricing, there isn’t much else that can be done to fix that. Maybe keep the current system if the game is is bought in a region and not with regional pricing? but I don’t think that would really work either as it could just enable the abuse in those regions still. It can definitely work without regional pricing but, preferably if the dev wants to have sales, they really should enable it.
Also as an addition because I didn’t mention it, I used USD as an example because it’s what is generally used for an example, obviously said framework could be any region as long as it’s consistant across every game so it’s not confusing. Honestly steam could likely even supply a exchange tool to auto do the exchange across all denominations. They do that already for payouts/purchases