An indie developer says Steam's refund policy cost his well-reviewed game 55,000 refunds

[Alfonso Maruccia]

Duration Matters: Young German developer Mateo created Paddle Paddle Paddle all by himself, promising a challenging, coordination-heavy experience for solo and multiplayer fans alike. But the game proved to be easy prey for speedrunners, many of whom asked Steam for a refund shortly after completing its single level.

Despite earning a 90% "very positive" rating on Steam, Paddle Paddle Paddle (PPP) has been hit with an unusually high 21% refund rate. Mateo says his game has collected more than 55,000 refunds, and he's now pointing to Valve's famously lenient refund policy as the culprit. It doesn't help that PPP is, by design, a fairly short game.

Under Steam's official refund policy, players can get their money back "no questions asked" within two weeks of purchase, provided they've played less than two hours. Mateo said on X that dozens of reviews openly admit the game was finished in under two hours before the reviewer requested a refund.

– Zoroarts 🦈 Paddle Paddle Paddle OUT NOW (@Zoroarts) July 5, 2026

Later in the thread, Mateo explained that he'd designed PPP around a "medium" playtime of 3.5 hours. Add in the roughly 40-minute demo, and the full experience runs close to four hours of total gameplay. Many players finished the game in just a few hours, but speedrunners moved even faster – and requested refunds en masse. One commenter mocked Mateo, telling him to simply make a game that lasts more than two hours.

Paddle Paddle Paddle contains a single, giant level where a couple of weirdly-looking characters need to coordinate their paddling action to survive lava pits, massive jumps, and more. The game is designed to test the player's coordination, and can be played both solo or in different multiplayer modes. Mateo said he got the idea for the game in the shower, where "all great ideas are born."

The game starts at $3 and is on sale for 40% off right now. Some have speculated the refund surge could be a deliberate effort to hurt the game's commercial viability, though it comes nearly a year after PPP's original release. For an indie developer, facing this volume of refunds is likely a tough pill to swallow, though it's worth noting there's no third-party data to confirm Mateo's numbers.

In any case, Mateo says he may have found a workable fix for short games caught in this refund trap: displaying "expected" playtime directly on a game's Steam page. That way, players would go in with clear expectations and a short runtime alone would no longer count as valid grounds for a refund. At least, that's the theory.

Permalink to story:

An indie developer says Steam's refund policy cost his well-reviewed game 55,000 refunds

 

[yRaz]

They need to adment their EULA with an asterisk saying something like if you beat the game in under 2 hours you can't claim a refund. I've seen speed runners beat 100 hour games in under 20 minutes.

I saw more people abuse Steam's EULA in this case than I've really seen steam abuse their own EULA. At the very least, they need to add something to their own EULA saying that they cant protect all developers from user abuse of the EULA. This is a sentiment that's been built up over decades of fraud from developers and publishers. These devs and, technically, the users have done nothing wrong at this point. The problem is with the technicalities. Close the loophole and don't let it happen again.

 

[jellowiggler]

Devs should make their game over 2 hours.

We all know the terms. Players and devs.

I’m not trying to be insensitive, but if there is a game that is locked to a narrative less than 2 hours and people seem to like it, extend it to be longer. Why should Valve change their policy?

 

[VitalyT]

Mateo said he got the idea for the game in the shower, where "all great ideas are born."

I'd say he is weird, but then again he is German.

 

[yRaz]

Devs should make their game over 2 hours.

We all know the terms. Players and devs.

I’m not trying to be insensitive, but if there is a game that is locked to a narrative less than 2 hours and people seem to like it, extend it to be longer. Why should Valve change their policy?

For the same reason that you buy a movie less than 2 hours. The important question that no one is asking is did they find value in the entertainment they received from the money they spent? It sounds like people did. If this was a AAA game instead of an indie game, people would be rallying behind the users. And they did make a bunch of money off the game even after the refunds. This is why I think the solution is to close the loophole and move on. EULAs, HR departments, contracts. They are meant to protect both consumer and business. For decades, it has been mostly to serve businesses which is why I think it is why so many people are able to justify. If Sony hadn't had such a performance lately, I doubt this would have ever happened. the fact of the matter is that it did happen. Write the EULA to serve both parties equally so it can be abused by neither.

 

[Theinsanegamer]

For the same reason that you buy a movie less than 2 hours. The important question that no one is asking is did they find value in the entertainment they received from the money they spent? It sounds like people did. If this was a AAA game instead of an indie game, people would be rallying behind the users. And they did make a bunch of money off the game even after the refunds. This is why I think the solution is to close the loophole and move on. EULAs, HR departments, contracts. They are meant to protect both consumer and business. For decades, it has been mostly to serve businesses which is why I think it is why so many people are able to justify. If Sony hadn't had such a performance lately, I doubt this would have ever happened. the fact of the matter is that it did happen. Write the EULA to serve both parties equally so it can be abused by neither.

What? How is a movie ticket comparable? Movie theaters don't have time based refunds.

 

[Kirby1]

Valve doesn't need to change a thing. If someone can't beat a game in less than 2 hours on their first try, that's an issue with the game. I've played countless demos well longer than that. It's not like a dev would be blindsides by this. Put more content in your game.

Dude is Lucky to be getting all this free press for pissing and moaning.

 

[yRaz]

What? How is a movie ticket comparable? Movie theaters don't have time based refunds.

I thought you'd be the last person I'd have to spell this out to, but I will. Games were mostly assumed to be 20-30 hour experiences with multiplayer extending that. That got shorter over time as multiplayer became more profitable. But I think that we are in an era where it is assumed that you should get at least 15 hours out of a single player game for $60US. That said, this was not a single player game and I think that if people are willing to give up 2 hours of their time for $20 for quality entertainment that should apply to all entertainment. So what did the game cost? And most people got far more than 2 hours of entertainment out of it.

 

[BlackyNoir]

That's BS.

First, that's a rage bait game. If you make your customers rage fast, some are going to refund fast.

Second, GOG has a 30 days refund policy. And nobody lost money over that (despite devs shrieking their lungs everywhere about it when it was announced).

 

[Burty117]

What?

I thought you'd be the last person I'd have to spell this out to...

Honestly, I quite like watching you two not understand each other frequently, at times you almost seem like brothers that refuse to see eye-to-eye.

 

[dangh]

There should be achievement for finishing main quest or story or trip. If you get there, no refund possible.
Sure, you can return your steak after having a bite. But if you cleaned a plate it's too late.

 

[winjer]

The 2 hour refund policy on Steam is one of it's most important features to protect consumers.
In an age when there are so many games being released unfinished, or with technical problems, or outright scams, the refund policy becomes extremely important for consumers.

It sucks for this particular dev that people are using the refund policy in a bad way. But that is not a reason to force Steam to abandon such an important for consumer protection.

 

[Burty117]

There should be achievement for finishing main quest or story or trip. If you get there, no refund possible.
Sure, you can return your steak after having a bite. But if you cleaned a plate it's too late.

This, is a great idea, the only problem would be games that are just AI slop scam crap, they probably would trigger the "game completed" achievement 1 second in to stop you from refunding it.

Edit: Although, when customers report to Valve that it's a scam, an employee takes a look at the game and indeed, it's triggering straight away, they can probably waver the no refund policy.

 

[Kirby1]

I thought you'd be the last person I'd have to spell this out to, but I will. Games were mostly assumed to be 20-30 hour experiences with multiplayer extending that. That got shorter over time as multiplayer became more profitable. But I think that we are in an era where it is assumed that you should get at least 15 hours out of a single player game for $60US. That said, this was not a single player game and I think that if people are willing to give up 2 hours of their time for $20 for quality entertainment that should apply to all entertainment. So what did the game cost? And most people got far more than 2 hours of entertainment out of it.

You literally don't have to spell anything out to anyone ever. Your opinions are simple and basic, despite you fluffing them into paragraphs and acting like a narcissist, and arguing endlessly.

Perhaps you should try being less basic.

Valve is a private company that set their own rules. Don't like it, don't sell a rage game with a hour of content on Steam. If anything, this is just the floor where crap gets filtered out.

 

[Deezy]

Dang. Who needs a $3 refund if you completed the game? Tighta$$es, I guess.

 

[yRaz]

You literally don't have to spell anything out to anyone ever. Your opinions are simple and basic, despite you fluffing them into paragraphs and acting like a narcissist, and arguing endlessly.

Perhaps you should try being less basic.

Valve is a private company that set their own rules. Don't like it, don't sell a rage game with a hour of content on Steam. If anything, this is just the floor where crap gets filtered out.

Rage game? It's rated as overwhelmingly positive.

 

[Neatfeatguy]

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. Hopefully the developer learns his lesson here.

 

[m4a4]

This, is a great idea, the only problem would be games that are just AI slop scam crap, they probably would trigger the "game completed" achievement 1 second in to stop you from refunding it.

Edit: Although, when customers report to Valve that it's a scam, an employee takes a look at the game and indeed, it's triggering straight away, they can probably waver the no refund policy.

Yeah, it would need guardrails to help avoid abuse (maybe the dev can mark it as a "short game" and then it caps the max price among other things to disincentivize lying?).

And then AI slop would have bad reviews regardless, so that should at least help people avoid it.

 

[Kirby1]

Rage game? It's rated as overwhelmingly positive.

So you don't even know what a rage game is.

Piss off.

 

[cfenton]

I don't see the problem here. The developer knew about the policy and made a short game anyway. I don't really know why someone would bother with a refund for a $3 game, but clearly they didn't think the game was worth that much.

 

[gingerbill]

I am sure at least some of those who refunded wouldn't have bought the game if that was not an option. Probably a significant amount. It's very similar too counting every illegal download as a lost sale.

I wouldn't want to change the refund policy just because that happens and if he was making a fuss about it I would say tough **** the world isn't designed around you.

Couldn't a simple solution be to clearly mark games with short playtimes and maybe they could have a shorter refund time ? No system is perfect and never will be and the current system is a good one.

 

[Loadedaxe]

There should be achievement for finishing main quest or story or trip. If you get there, no refund possible.
Sure, you can return your steak after having a bite. But if you cleaned a plate it's too late.

This is probably the best answer so far.

And for the people saying “he should just suck it up” or “make the game longer”...come on. That is lazy thinking.

Not every game needs to be padded out with filler just to survive a refund policy. A short game is not automatically a bad game. Some games are designed to be quick, focused experiences, and that should be perfectly valid.

Telling an indie developer to make the game longer just to avoid refund abuse is basically saying, “Add unnecessary fluff so people feel less guilty paying for it.” That is not good design. That is bloat.

The issue is not that the game is short. The issue is that the refund system treats a short indie game the same way it treats a massive RPG. Those are not the same product, and pretending they are is where the problem starts.

 

[Loadedaxe]

You literally don't have to spell anything out to anyone ever. Your opinions are simple and basic, despite you fluffing them into paragraphs and acting like a narcissist, and arguing endlessly.

Perhaps you should try being less basic.

Valve is a private company that set their own rules. Don't like it, don't sell a rage game with a hour of content on Steam. If anything, this is just the floor where crap gets filtered out.

That was a lot of words just to say you’re upset he made a point you didn’t like.

Calling someone “basic” while offering nothing but insults is not the intellectual uppercut you think it is. It’s just noise with a thesaurus allergy.

You don’t have to agree with him. That’s fine. But if your entire counterargument is “you write too much and I don’t like your tone,” then congratulations...you didn’t refute anything. You just announced that paragraphs are where your stamina taps out.

So by all means, keep swinging, try aiming at the argument next time instead of shadowboxing with your feelings.

 

[Kirby1]

That was a lot of words just to say you’re upset he made a point you didn’t like.

Calling someone “basic” while offering nothing but insults is not the intellectual uppercut you think it is. It’s just noise with a thesaurus allergy.

You don’t have to agree with him. That’s fine. But if your entire counterargument is “you write too much and I don’t like your tone,” then congratulations...you didn’t refute anything. You just announced that paragraphs are where your stamina taps out.

So by all means, keep swinging, try aiming at the argument next time instead of shadowboxing with your feelings.

I don't care what his opinion is, it's the way he talks. "I didn't think I'd have to spell this out" blah blah kind of thing, like he thinks his opinion is gospel.

You're dumb for defending him.

 

[Taroo]

The problem lies in the people who actually bought the game, played it the fastest they could, and then asked for a refund on purpose. It's really dishonest and bad for the developer.