I don’t see how this would be too much of an issue. If it’s that way in one region, then it would be unilateral all across all regions. Price wouldn’t really matter at that point as long as you’re using the same guideline
I don’t see how this would be too much of an issue.
So not only are people paying more than you’re paying because the value of the dollar is higher in their country, the money they’re paying is now at a higher risk because they have a smaller refund window.
You would be essentially taking an existing issue and making it worse.
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 $5 policy
I’m not sure why it needs to be so complicated to have specific return policies for every single region. At the end of the day the value in the framework region is isolated from the framework and no changes to its price would change its return policy as it doesn’t matter
I don’t see how this would be too much of an issue. If it’s that way in one region, then it would be unilateral all across all regions. Price wouldn’t really matter at that point as long as you’re using the same guideline
So not only are people paying more than you’re paying because the value of the dollar is higher in their country, the money they’re paying is now at a higher risk because they have a smaller refund window.
You would be essentially taking an existing issue and making it worse.
you are forgetting though that a 5$ 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.
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.