Steam is not offering refunds for all From Dust Purchases

#1 Posted by SeaFoamPurple (4 posts) -

http://i.imgur.com/lVIGD.png   
As see on reddit, many people not getting a refund for From Dust

#2 Posted by The_Laughing_Man (13629 posts) -
@SeaFoamPurple said:
http://i.imgur.com/lVIGD.png   As see on reddit, many people not getting a refund for From Dust
Why not give us more info? Like why they would want a refund? This right now is spam dude. You need to give a bit more info. 
#3 Posted by Afroman269 (7387 posts) -

Why would people want a refund? Wait, what?

#4 Posted by TehFlan (1928 posts) -

Is there something about the DRM that stops you from playing the game? I assume since you downloaded it you've got an internet connection.

#5 Edited by Ramboknife (114 posts) -

Because the game is locked at 30 FPS. there are no graphics options so the game doesn't look great, and the mouse controls are a bit messed up. Also, some people are saying stuff about the DRM not being what they were told. 

#6 Edited by SoldierG654342 (1821 posts) -
@TehFlan said:

Is there something about the DRM that stops you from playing the game? I assume since you downloaded it you've got an internet connection.

Ubisoft said there would be no DMR and there was. Not that I disagree with your point. 
#7 Posted by UnrealDP (1221 posts) -

@Ramboknife:

Man, is that it? It seems like steam wouldn't need to give a refund for things like that, but i'm not even sure why these things would warrent a refund in the first place.

#8 Posted by CornBREDX (6044 posts) -

Been a lot of hub bub over this. Wish I knew what all happened but what little has been shared (here) it sounds like the From Dust port was shoddy and there was something fishy with the DRM.

Ubisoft, consistently being mean to their customers. Can't say I am surprised.

#9 Edited by FadedOasis (61 posts) -

@TehFlan: Ubisoft announced that there would be a ONE-TIME activation, and then you'd never have to be online to play it again. Switching it out for the you-must-always-be-online DRM totally screws everyone whose internet connection isn't stable, everyone who likes to play games on a laptop while traveling, and absolutely everyone if Ubisoft's servers were to go down, which, if you recall, happened for a good two weeks after Arkham Asylum was released on the PC. Everybody was unable to play that game for two full weeks.

#10 Posted by Doctorchimp (4055 posts) -

It's kind of shitty people are blaming Steam.
 
They should take it out on Ubisoft and subsequently stop believing them when it comes to PC stuff.

#11 Posted by CrazyBagMan (859 posts) -

Somehow I'm not shocked ubisoft would pull this crap. Held off on buying on xbla to play on PC, now I won't even do that.

#12 Posted by RE_Player1 (7526 posts) -

1st post...

#13 Posted by SeriouslyNow (8534 posts) -

Guys, read the linked pic:-

He's upset that Ubisoft lied about the game being Ubi DRM free when it actually isn't.

#14 Posted by Vitor (2832 posts) -

@SeriouslyNow said:

Guys, read the linked pic:-

He's upset that Ubisoft lied about the game being Ubi DRM free when it actually isn't.

Problem is, Steam's terms of use does not cover 3rd party DRM. Also, pretty sure the game page had a warning about Ubisoft DRM despite their claims to the contrary.

#15 Posted by SeriouslyNow (8534 posts) -

@Vitor: I understand that but if they make claims to the contrary and don't live up to them that still counts as false advertising. The issue rests with Ubi rather than Steam though.

#16 Posted by Vitor (2832 posts) -

@SeriouslyNow: Oh I agree that it's totally messed up - apparently if you circumvent ubi customer support and actually either email someone in marketing or sales directly/pick up a phone, they have refunded a few copies that way.

Personally, I find the PC version totally playable and have dealt with much worse PC ports before so am not too bothered. Just feels like I'm playing a higher res version of the 360 game which is enough. At least performance is good, even at the capped FPS. Wish I could turn off the LOD stuff - disappearing trees and shadows really bother me, especially considering I have no performance issues when zoomed out.

#17 Posted by roc_553 (210 posts) -

@FadedOasis: Ubisoft didn't publish Arkham Asylum, Eidos / WBIE did.

#18 Posted by wolf_blitzer85 (5293 posts) -

Man after reading some articles about it, it sounds like the PC version is a mess. Ubisoft promised a one time online activation, but then changed it to always on.

The performance is terrible even on high end systems. Also it's locked at 30fps. The mouse controls are pretty much the same as the console version, as in you have no pointer, just that snaky thing that's locked on the ground making for some weird feeling control.

I'm sad this ended up being broken to all hell. It looks like such a cool game and I was hoping for some solid mouse control.

#19 Posted by niamahai (1394 posts) -

i can't wait to see Ubisoft stop making PC version of their products.

#20 Posted by Vitor (2832 posts) -

@wolf_blitzer85: i have had zero performance issues and the only ones I've read about are only lamenting the capped 30FPS. I have a medium specced rig so if I can run it at 1900x1080 with no problem, I'd be shocked if others were having issues.

#21 Edited by roc_553 (210 posts) -

@niamahai said:

i can't wait to see Ubisoft stop making PC version of their products.

As someone who only owns a gaming PC, and would rather have a bad port of a good game than no game at all, I can't wait to see you say something stupid.

Oh wait, I just did.

Furthermore, the DRM is listed both on Steam and Ubisoft's website, and the lack of different mouse controls and video options means it's the same product that was released on XBLA and PSN. I love PC gaming, but the sense of entitlement from this community is horrendous. Why should we expect developers to make changes exclusively for us when we will just end up stealing their game?

#22 Posted by atomic_dumpling (2483 posts) -
@roc_553 said:

@niamahai said:

i can't wait to see Ubisoft stop making PC version of their products.

As someone who only owns a gaming PC, and would rather have a bad port of a good game than no game at all

Even as PC gamers we should have our pride, don't you think? 
 
@roc_553
said:

Why should we expect developers to make changes exclusively for us when we will just end up stealing their game?

*sigh*
#23 Edited by wolf_blitzer85 (5293 posts) -

@Vitor said:

@wolf_blitzer85: i have had zero performance issues and the only ones I've read about are only lamenting the capped 30FPS. I have a medium specced rig so if I can run it at 1900x1080 with no problem, I'd be shocked if others were having issues.

Okay so one article I read might have mistaken a frame cap for poor performance. How does the mouse movement feel? Are the graphics settings substantial, or is it pretty much boiled down to picking a resolution and maybe some v-sync?

#24 Posted by Vitor (2832 posts) -

@wolf_blitzer85 said:

@Vitor said:

@wolf_blitzer85: i have had zero performance issues and the only ones I've read about are only lamenting the capped 30FPS. I have a medium specced rig so if I can run it at 1900x1080 with no problem, I'd be shocked if others were having issues.

Okay so one article I read might have mistaken poor performance for a frame cap. How does the mouse movement feel? Are the graphics settings substantial, or is it pretty much boiled down to picking a resolution and maybe some v-sync?

V-sync? We should be so damned lucky. Need to disable that via the GPU control centre if needed. Resolution is the ONLY graphical setting.

The mouse is weird. It's playable and not awful, but the first time you try to move the camera and mouse around, you will be shocked by how totally unintuitive it seems initially. Not what you expect at all. I just plugged in a 360 pad and am having a good time with that. Hopefully they'll patch the controls though - it's serviceable but not ideal and I seem to have the same amount of precision with the controller.

#25 Posted by roc_553 (210 posts) -

@atomic_dumpling said:

@roc_553 said:

Why should we expect developers to make changes exclusively for us when we will just end up stealing their game?

*sigh*

Okay, maybe piracy isn't the issue, but money still is. If I'm Ubisoft, what possible reason could I have to spend more money adding features to a game that will sell less copies than on consoles. I mean, this isn't Call of Duty we're talking about here. This already isn't a game that will rocket to the top of the sales charts. To expect anything more than the same experience on XBLA is ridiculous, and if that's what people wanted, they should have been more judicious with their money. Everybody knows Steam doesn't give refunds.

#26 Posted by scarace360 (4828 posts) -

Why would you even try with DRM people are gonna pirate your game anyways. Might as well treat the people who buy it like kings.

#27 Posted by niamahai (1394 posts) -

@scarace360 said:

Why would you even try with DRM people are gonna pirate your game anyways. Might as well treat the people who buy it like kings.

that Uplay thingy isn't exactly THAT intrusive to be honest. its not like AC2's server-side games saves.

and theoretically how do you treat your PC customers like king?

actually putting out a PC version for a game (which probably failed all of Ubi's internal contribution analyst for PC release) is not good enough? should Ubi come over and give us blowjobs?

#28 Posted by scarace360 (4828 posts) -
@niamahai said:

@scarace360 said:

Why would you even try with DRM people are gonna pirate your game anyways. Might as well treat the people who buy it like kings.

that Uplay thingy isn't exactly THAT intrusive to be honest. its not like AC2's server-side games saves.

and theoretically how do you treat your PC customers like king?

actually putting out a PC version for a game (which probably failed all of Ubi's internal contribution analyst for PC release) is not good enough? should Ubi come over and give us blowjobs?

Well give us Mod tools dont put DRM let us run are own servers. Treat us well and we will buy your product. Unless the game is shit.
#29 Posted by SeriouslyNow (8534 posts) -

@niamahai said:

@scarace360 said:

Why would you even try with DRM people are gonna pirate your game anyways. Might as well treat the people who buy it like kings.

that Uplay thingy isn't exactly THAT intrusive to be honest. its not like AC2's server-side games saves.

and theoretically how do you treat your PC customers like king?

actually putting out a PC version for a game (which probably failed all of Ubi's internal contribution analyst for PC release) is not good enough? should Ubi come over and give us blowjobs?

This idea that a game like From Dust falls into the same marketing analysis pool as Assassin's Creed is ridiculous. From Dust is $15 throwaway title being used by Ubi, in this case, to bait and switch people into their Uplay service on PC, a service which has already had a lot of bad press on PC.

#30 Posted by niamahai (1394 posts) -

@scarace360 said:

@niamahai said:

@scarace360 said:

Why would you even try with DRM people are gonna pirate your game anyways. Might as well treat the people who buy it like kings.

that Uplay thingy isn't exactly THAT intrusive to be honest. its not like AC2's server-side games saves.

and theoretically how do you treat your PC customers like king?

actually putting out a PC version for a game (which probably failed all of Ubi's internal contribution analyst for PC release) is not good enough? should Ubi come over and give us blowjobs?

Well give us Mod tools dont put DRM let us run are own servers. Treat us well and we will buy your product. Unless the game is shit.

creating consumer friendly mod tools isn't exactly financial viable for a $15 product

#31 Posted by scarace360 (4828 posts) -
@niamahai said:

@scarace360 said:

@niamahai said:

@scarace360 said:

Why would you even try with DRM people are gonna pirate your game anyways. Might as well treat the people who buy it like kings.

that Uplay thingy isn't exactly THAT intrusive to be honest. its not like AC2's server-side games saves.

and theoretically how do you treat your PC customers like king?

actually putting out a PC version for a game (which probably failed all of Ubi's internal contribution analyst for PC release) is not good enough? should Ubi come over and give us blowjobs?

Well give us Mod tools dont put DRM let us run are own servers. Treat us well and we will buy your product. Unless the game is shit.

creating consumer friendly mod tools isn't exactly financial viable for a $15 product

Im not saying for that game im just saying for pc games in general. Also if they put out a demo maybe people could try it before they buy it cause i know alot of people who torrent a game to see how it runs on there system and to try it out before dropping money on it.
#32 Posted by Yanngc33 (4461 posts) -
@Ramboknife
Because the game is locked at 30 FPS. there are no graphics options so the game doesn't look great, and the mouse controls are a bit messed up. Also, some people are saying stuff about the DRM not being what they were told. 
Steam can't refund you because of the quality of a game. If that were the case, everybody would've gotten their DNF money back
#33 Posted by endaround (2147 posts) -

Keep in mind part of the EULA is that if you don't agree to it you can take it back to the retailer for a refund.  That retailer is Steam.

#34 Posted by ervonymous (1297 posts) -

When did they say it wouldn't use the DRM? I remember reading about it a while back... or perhaps I just took it for granted after the Driver DRM announcement.

#35 Edited by Dread612 (167 posts) -
@ervonymous: RPS did a write up of the issues. (http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/08/18/from-dust-does-need-online-badly-ported/
 
The problem is that UBIsoft stated that it will only require a one time activation (Proof: http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/images/11/aug/ubiforum.jpg
Then they changed it to, require to login every time you start the game, but then you can go offline (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/9751064939/m/2901034249
 
So the problem is they didn't tell  their customers the truth. Regardless of how badly the game was ported, customers have a right to know what is required  so they can make a decision to buy the game or not. 
 
For example, in my personal case, I don't mind if a game requires a one time activation. However, I don't want to support a game or its publisher if it requires either persistent or "login every launch". This is my right as a customer, I don't have to buy their products if I don't agree with them (some of the people on these forums fail to understand this).  But I need to be told the truth about the DRM before I can make that decision.
#36 Posted by ervonymous (1297 posts) -

@Dread612: Wow, what a dick move. Ubisoft coupled with Steam's refund policy and other shenanigans are a recipe for carnage.

#37 Posted by Kung_Fu_Viking (717 posts) -

Why is the game being locked at 30FPS an problem?

#38 Posted by Scrawnto (2467 posts) -

@endaround: But Steam also requires you to agree to their terms any time you make a purchase, wherein they state they will not give you a refund after the release date has passed.

#39 Posted by Dread612 (167 posts) -
@Kung_Fu_Viking
 
First lets understand that 30FPS is a ceiling, on both PC and consoles. So the FPS can only max out at 30, but can be anywhere between 1-30 depending on whats being displayed. This was probably done to prevent tearing. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Screen_tearing)
 
So basically, its an artificial lock, a remnant of the console version. There is no reason for it on PC other then devs were lazy and didn't want to update their code to take advantage the additional power of the PC. Whats the point of having all the additional computational power if can't use it just because they put an artificial lock? If my PC can run this game at 60FPS or higher then it should be able to.
#40 Posted by MeierTheRed (4941 posts) -

Ubisoft will never learn.

#41 Posted by coryrx8 (174 posts) -
@Doctorchimp said:
It's kind of shitty people are blaming Steam.  They should take it out on Ubisoft and subsequently stop believing them when it comes to PC stuff.
I disagree. Any decent retailer will give people refunds when the product they deliver isn't the same as the product advertised, regardless of whether the ad came from the retailer or the manufacturer. The same standard should apply to digital downloads, and Steam doesn't meet that standard. Never mind that any EULA says that if you don't agree to it that you should take the game back for a refund, which Valve will happily deny you.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.