Getting a refund for game purchased through Steam?

[MStele]

I just don't understand why you think that if it works for you then it must be a-okay. There are thousands of people having the OP's problem, which points to an issue with the game itself.

According to official sources, this game sold over 300,000 units in the first month and over 2 million as of Dec 09 according to take-two. Even if 10,000 people were having critical problems with the game (an unrealistically high number), your only looking at 0.5 percent. But lets assume those numbers are fudged horribly and maybe they only sold half that, the amount of people with critical problems (crashes, driver issues, etc) would still amount to only 1 percent. I would like to say that more than 10,000 had problems, but there are absolutely no sources, official or unofficial, that can qualify those numbers. Hell, even if your scoured the forums and counted every post that had a problem, you could maybe quantify 500-1000 or maybe 2000 if your really good and spend the whole weekend searching, but any more than that is unrealistic.

I think the game prob has some issues, all games do, but I am hard pressed to believe that the game has problems of this magntitude. It just doesn't fit the data. The game in general has been well recieved and for the vast majority of people runs well (which includes the Steam download). I feel bad for the OP but theres likely something else going.

 

[CoinOperatedBoy]

According to official sources, this game sold over 300,000 units in the first month and over 2 million as of Dec 09 according to take-two. Even if 10,000 people were having critical problems with the game (an unrealistically high number), your only looking at 0.5 percent. But lets assume those numbers are fudged horribly and maybe they only sold half that, the amount of people with critical problems (crashes, driver issues, etc) would still amount to only 1 percent. I would like to say that more than 10,000 had problems, but there are absolutely no sources, official or unofficial, that can qualify those numbers. Hell, even if your scoured the forums and counted every post that had a problem, you could maybe quantify 500-1000 or maybe 2000 if your really good and spend the whole weekend searching, but any more than that is unrealistic.

I think the game prob has some issues, all games do, but I am hard pressed to believe that the game has problems of this magntitude. It just doesn't fit the data. The game in general has been well recieved and for the vast majority of people runs well (which includes the Steam download). I feel bad for the OP but theres likely something else going.

Again, even if only a marginal number of people are impacted, that doesn't mean the game is not defective. The numbers don't matter. It may just mean it's not cost-effective for them to fix the defect. On the other hand, it's obviously possible that the OP and some of the others experiencing issues may have a problem on their end.

 

[GuitarDaddy]

How do you know your overclocked CPU isn't generating errors? How long did you run Prime?

OK, enough about overclocking, I'm fully aware of the potential downfalls and possible instabilities. Not that it matters but I ran prime for 72hrs at 3.8 during my original testing and the machine has run for over a year at 3.5 and been incredibly stressed (6hrs of solid gaming at a stretch and more)THIS IS NOT THE PROBLEM. I deleted the game and redownloaded and installed all at stock speeds and the problem still exists.

I appreciate all the help and ideas, so far I have tried everything mentioned short of reformatting and reinstalling windows or deleting steam and re downloading all the games.
I might undertake those drastic steps if anything else pointed to a faulty windows install or steam install, but it doesn't. Just not willing to put in the time and effort to try those steps when it most likely won't change anything.

And to the poster that recommended I try different video driver, I can't as the GPU (5770) is pretty new and there is only one set of drivers available for it. I'm starting to think my newish GPU may be the problem. I'm also wondering about the physx situation with ATI cards, I've seen several nvidia card users fix this problem by updating their physx drivers, but AFIK ATI doesn't have physx drivers? When I updated the machine to the new GPU I uninstalled all the nvidia drivers including physx, could their be something left of that old driver thats causing the problem? Should i install the updated nvidia physx driver even though I have an ATI card?

 

[CoinOperatedBoy]

And to the poster that recommended I try different video driver, I can't as the GPU (5770) is pretty new and there is only one set of drivers available for it. I'm starting to think my newish GPU may be the problem. I'm also wondering about the physx situation with ATI cards, I've seen several nvidia card users fix this problem by updating their physx drivers, but AFIK ATI doesn't have physx drivers? When I updated the machine to the new GPU I uninstalled all the nvidia drivers including physx, could their be something left of that old driver thats causing the problem? Should i install the updated nvidia physx driver even though I have an ATI card?

I didn't think ATI had hardware support for PhysX (yet?). If the game is using PhysX resources, it's running on the CPU. You might want to check your settings file to make sure PhysX hardware support is disabled. Oh, but I did see a lot of people say you need PhysX installed to run Borderlands, even if you have an ATI card. Not sure. I think Steam installs it by default with the game.

Also saw this:

You have to turn off Catalyst A.I. for some reason it messes with Borderlands badly.

In Catalyst Control Center, Hit 3D on the left hand side then Catalyst A.I, click Disable Catalyst A.I and run the game. All fixed.

http://www.overclock.net/graphics-c...ds-having-trouble-ati-5770-a.html#post8031306

 

[ScorcherDarkly]

According to official sources, this game sold over 300,000 units in the first month and over 2 million as of Dec 09 according to take-two. Even if 10,000 people were having critical problems with the game (an unrealistically high number), your only looking at 0.5 percent. But lets assume those numbers are fudged horribly and maybe they only sold half that, the amount of people with critical problems (crashes, driver issues, etc) would still amount to only 1 percent. I would like to say that more than 10,000 had problems, but there are absolutely no sources, official or unofficial, that can qualify those numbers. Hell, even if your scoured the forums and counted every post that had a problem, you could maybe quantify 500-1000 or maybe 2000 if your really good and spend the whole weekend searching, but any more than that is unrealistic.

I think the game prob has some issues, all games do, but I am hard pressed to believe that the game has problems of this magntitude. It just doesn't fit the data. The game in general has been well recieved and for the vast majority of people runs well (which includes the Steam download). I feel bad for the OP but theres likely something else going.

Whenever you hear about product recalls, how many consumers have actually been affected by the problem for which the product is being recalled? Last year whenever they had the baby crib recall, less than 20 kids had been hurt, yet they recalled millions of cribs. There was the E. coli scare in packaged salad that made a handful of people sick, yet they recalled millions of pounds of food. Obviously these issues are more serious than a video game that won't boot, but it illustrates the point that it takes a very small percentage of bad product in order to label the entire line defective. Compared to the examples I gave, 0.5% of all customers is a HUGE number.

It could be that the game doesn't run on a specific combination of hardware, or is interfered with by a specific combination of software. There's no way to test all possible combinations before the game launches. The fact that thousands of people are reporting the same issue says to me that there is something wrong with the game itself. Dismissing the problem as 10,000 broken computers or 10,000 stupid users is fairly ridiculous.

 

[Magusigne]

Whenever you hear about product recalls, how many consumers have actually been affected by the problem for which the product is being recalled? Last year whenever they had the baby crib recall, less than 20 kids had been hurt, yet they recalled millions of cribs. There was the E. coli scare in packaged salad that made a handful of people sick, yet they recalled millions of pounds of food. Obviously these issues are more serious than a video game that won't boot, but it illustrates the point that it takes a very small percentage of bad product in order to label the entire line defective. Compared to the examples I gave, 0.5% of all customers is a HUGE number.

It could be that the game doesn't run on a specific combination of hardware, or is interfered with by a specific combination of software. There's no way to test all possible combinations before the game launches. The fact that thousands of people are reporting the same issue says to me that there is something wrong with the game itself. Dismissing the problem as 10,000 broken computers or 10,000 stupid users is fairly ridiculous.

Game not running properly /= Babies getting strangled or people getting sick

 

[CPA]

It depends. If Steam has a legit claim on the money and he gets the cc company to refuse payment, its equivalent to bouncing a check. Since this is percieved as an attempt to defraud, it violates EULA and yes could mean a ban. There are legal routes to take to get the ban removed, but you would have to prove that Steam knowingly sold junk software.

The problem I have with this is that the other games should have no bearing on the disputed charge issue.

 

[MStele]

Whenever you hear about product recalls, how many consumers have actually been affected by the problem for which the product is being recalled? Last year whenever they had the baby crib recall, less than 20 kids had been hurt, yet they recalled millions of cribs. There was the E. coli scare in packaged salad that made a handful of people sick, yet they recalled millions of pounds of food. Obviously these issues are more serious than a video game that won't boot, but it illustrates the point that it takes a very small percentage of bad product in order to label the entire line defective. Compared to the examples I gave, 0.5% of all customers is a HUGE number.

It could be that the game doesn't run on a specific combination of hardware, or is interfered with by a specific combination of software. There's no way to test all possible combinations before the game launches. The fact that thousands of people are reporting the same issue says to me that there is something wrong with the game itself. Dismissing the problem as 10,000 broken computers or 10,000 stupid users is fairly ridiculous.

You make a good point. I do want to point out a couple things.

First, the 10k number I chose was completely arbitrary. Since many people who have problems will likely never report them, I had to try a pick a number that was in excess of the amount of people who would likely have critical failures (crashs, inability to play game, etc). The actual number is probably much lower than that. Note that this doesn't account for smaller bugs that might come in the form bad AI, graphics anomalies, irratic framerates etc. Anyone who has ever made a hobby out of buying software knows that bugs are a way of life and we accept that at purchase. We also know that, except for special circumstances, there are no return policies. It is buyer beware as a gamer.

Second, buggy games don't kill people. I'm totally with you in regards to the other products you mentioned. If it was a safety concern, a 0.5% chance that your kid might have a permenant accident is unacceptible. However, we aren't talking about kids health. We're talking about video games, and they shouldn't be directly compared like that.

We've all been there when buggy games have come around. I was one of the poor souls who forked out cash for Ultima IX...and King's Quest MoE. Those were buggy. Borderlands has problems, I'll give you that, but to elevate it to recall status because 0.5-1.0% of people have problems? Nah.

My guess is that most of the heartache is related to graphics drivers. ATI is trying to roll out a new line and Nvidia has been sucking hard lately in regards to drivers. I think in the next few months when they have gotten their act together most of the worst Borderlands' issues will be resolved. The game is really popular, so it would be a bad move to leave even 0.5% percent in the dark.

 

[igloo15]

You make a good point. I do want to point out a couple things.

First, the 10k number I chose was completely arbitrary. Since many people who have problems will likely never report them, I had to try a pick a number that was in excess of the amount of people who would likely have critical failures (crashs, inability to play game, etc). The actual number is probably much lower than that. Note that this doesn't account for smaller bugs that might come in the form bad AI, graphics anomalies, irratic framerates etc. Anyone who has ever made a hobby out of buying software knows that bugs are a way of life and we accept that at purchase. We also know that, except for special circumstances, there are no return policies. It is buyer beware as a gamer.

Second, buggy games don't kill people. I'm totally with you in regards to the other products you mentioned. If it was a safety concern, a 0.5% chance that your kid might have a permenant accident is unacceptible. However, we aren't talking about kids health. We're talking about video games, and they shouldn't be directly compared like that.

We've all been there when buggy games have come around. I was one of the poor souls who forked out cash for Ultima IX...and King's Quest MoE. Those were buggy. Borderlands has problems, I'll give you that, but to elevate it to recall status because 0.5-1.0% of people have problems? Nah.

My guess is that most of the heartache is related to graphics drivers. ATI is trying to roll out a new line and Nvidia has been sucking hard lately in regards to drivers. I think in the next few months when they have gotten their act together most of the worst Borderlands' issues will be resolved. The game is really popular, so it would be a bad move to leave even 0.5% percent in the dark.

He doesn't make a good point at all besides that I agree. The analogy of Recalls when one person or a couple have a bad result from a product is not even close to accurate.

A product like a crib or car is a solid product which is made a certian way and if it failed in the way it was made then it should be recalled. There is no differences in the environment in which it is used the issue of recall is in the actual product.

Lets look at software, software is a volitaile fluid product that expands and contracts hugely depending on the environment it is used in. Success in software is in the product working for the majority that is the only possibility. As I was told in College a perfect software project is an oxymoron there is no such thing. If the software worked for only 50% of users using it only than would I be certain of software error. I wouldn't even think about software error if less than 25% of users were having a problem. Now obviously thats no acceptable range so I sure fixes would be found and that most companies want a range below 15% of users with issues.

For most games this is less than 100,000 users with problems. So 10,000 people how ever arbitrary is such a small number that I actually commend Borderlands on their excellent QA. Of course to the person having the problems these type of typical facts never matter.

 

[CrackRabbit]

Should i install the updated nvidia physx driver even though I have an ATI card?

It couldn't hurt to have the newest PhysX runtime installed.
Even without GPU acceleration if the game uses it for its physics then you would need the runtime.
Here is a link to the newest one.
http://www.nvidia.com/object/physx_9.09.1112.html

 

[coloumb]

OK, enough about overclocking, I'm fully aware of the potential downfalls and possible instabilities. Not that it matters but I ran prime for 72hrs at 3.8 during my original testing and the machine has run for over a year at 3.5 and been incredibly stressed (6hrs of solid gaming at a stretch and more)THIS IS NOT THE PROBLEM. I deleted the game and redownloaded and installed all at stock speeds and the problem still exists.

I appreciate all the help and ideas, so far I have tried everything mentioned short of reformatting and reinstalling windows or deleting steam and re downloading all the games.
I might undertake those drastic steps if anything else pointed to a faulty windows install or steam install, but it doesn't. Just not willing to put in the time and effort to try those steps when it most likely won't change anything.

And to the poster that recommended I try different video driver, I can't as the GPU (5770) is pretty new and there is only one set of drivers available for it. I'm starting to think my newish GPU may be the problem. I'm also wondering about the physx situation with ATI cards, I've seen several nvidia card users fix this problem by updating their physx drivers, but AFIK ATI doesn't have physx drivers? When I updated the machine to the new GPU I uninstalled all the nvidia drivers including physx, could their be something left of that old driver thats causing the problem? Should i install the updated nvidia physx driver even though I have an ATI card?

This is something you probably don't want to hear... but perhaps the OC'ng [which I'm going to assume since the problem happens on both computers - you're OC'ng both?] has slightly modified the hardware components of your systems [CPU, Memory, motherboard, etc] - and the game code is a bit sensitive to this. Switching back to default settings won't fix it - and I doubt a new OS will help either. I've encountered similar issues where PRIME would pass without any issues, nearly every game on the planet would work fine, but one or a few games just refused to work properly on *my* computer [the game would work fine on a computer that wasn't OC'd].

I'd say yes about the drivers - boot into safe mode and remove all video drivers. Find a program that cleans off old drivers - I think ATI and nVidia have programs to clean old drivers - should be 3rd party programs to do this as well. Install drivers which were included with the video card - then try the game.

You mention perhaps it's the video card? Well... if you can afford it, go buy a last-gen ATI card from a store that accepts returns. Try out the new card and see if the game works. If it does - then you have your answer. If it doesn't, then it's something else.

If you know someone who has a computer/laptop capable of running Borderlands - try testing it on their computer. If it works - then it's your computer - not the game.

And thus this is why digital distribution of pc games is bad for the consumer - if this game was a retail version [and wasn't locked into STEAM], you could at least resell it on ebay.

 

[coloumb]

From what you describe, your issue has nothing to do with Steam and would also affect the game if you bought a retail boxed copy. It just might be easier to return the retail version.

I purchased the game during the holiday STEAM sale. I purchased it assuming it would work under Windows 7. However, further research indicates it does not and is not supported by the 3rd party vendor. STEAM loves to use that scapegoat whenever a problem happens with a game not produced by Valve. And SECTION 4 of the user agreement clearly states "NO REFUNDS".

I guess it's ultimately my fault for making the assumption a recently released game would run under Windows 7 and ignoring the "Supported OS" section of the requirements. What irks me is they mention nothing about Windows 7 being an issue with this game...

As for the problem the OP is having - if this game had a legitimate demo - then this wouldn't be an issue

Had to edit - this was replying about Saints Row 2 - not Borderlands

 

[Purple44]

There people with the new ATI 5000 series video card that are having troubles getting DIRT 2 to start, even using the new 9.11 and 9.12 updated drivers.

If you got another video card you can use for a test to see if Borderlands will run with different video card, might give that a try.

 

[CoinOperatedBoy]

Nobody suggested Borderlands should be recalled or that a bug in a game is equivalent to babies getting killed. You people are ridiculous. ScorcherDarkly was clearly just trying to illustrate that even a defect that impacts less than 1% of users of certain products is considered significant. It's stupid to dismiss an issue just because the numbers of impacted customers don't meet your arbitrary invisible standards.

So much noise in this thread. Sorry, OP. Hope your issue gets sorted out.

 

[badnewcastle]

I only briefly ran through this thread but have you checked out your sound card/drivers??? I've seen weird errors due to sound drivers.

 

[paperfist]

It depends. If Steam has a legit claim on the money and he gets the cc company to refuse payment, its equivalent to bouncing a check. Since this is percieved as an attempt to defraud, it violates EULA and yes could mean a ban. There are legal routes to take to get the ban removed, but you would have to prove that Steam knowingly sold junk software.

Yeah but you guys are saying Steam will lock out your whole account, not just the single game you bought and couldn't get to work despite going the tech support route.

I don't see how it could be legal for them to shut down your whole account (say you have $700 in Steam games) over one denied payment. Steam I would assume has the ability to remove that single game you disputed from your account so that if it wasn't a legit claim you wouldn't have access to it any longer.

 

[MStele]

Nobody suggested Borderlands should be recalled or that a bug in a game is equivalent to babies getting killed. You people are ridiculous. ScorcherDarkly was clearly just trying to illustrate that even a defect that impacts less than 1% of users of certain products is considered significant. It's stupid to dismiss an issue just because the numbers of impacted customers don't meet your arbitrary invisible standards.

So much noise in this thread. Sorry, OP. Hope your issue gets sorted out.

"Obviously these issues are more serious than a video game that won't boot, but it illustrates the point that it takes a very small percentage of bad product in order to label the entire line defective. Compared to the examples I gave, 0.5% of all customers is a HUGE number."

He specifically asserts that a 0.5% failure rate is enough to declare Borderlands a defective product, even if there is no health risk associated with it. That is what people were responding to. No one thought he literally meant that Borderlands was hazardous to kids

 

[CoinOperatedBoy]

"Obviously these issues are more serious than a video game that won't boot, but it illustrates the point that it takes a very small percentage of bad product in order to label the entire line defective. Compared to the examples I gave, 0.5% of all customers is a HUGE number."

He specifically asserts that a 0.5% failure rate is enough to declare Borderlands a defective product, even if there is no health risk associated with it. That is what people were responding to. No one thought he literally meant that Borderlands was hazardous to kids

A single person experiencing a failure is enough to declare it defective.

 

[Jschmuck2]

I purchased the game during the holiday STEAM sale. I purchased it assuming it would work under Windows 7. However, further research indicates it does not and is not supported by the 3rd party vendor. STEAM loves to use that scapegoat whenever a problem happens with a game not produced by Valve. And SECTION 4 of the user agreement clearly states "NO REFUNDS".

I guess it's ultimately my fault for making the assumption a recently released game would run under Windows 7 and ignoring the "Supported OS" section of the requirements. What irks me is they mention nothing about Windows 7 being an issue with this game...

As for the problem the OP is having - if this game had a legitimate demo - then this wouldn't be an issue

Borderlands has worked fine with Windows 7 for me and many others since launch.

 

[MStele]

Yeah but you guys are saying Steam will lock out your whole account, not just the single game you bought and couldn't get to work despite going the tech support route.

I don't see how it could be legal for them to shut down your whole account (say you have $700 in Steam games) over one denied payment. Steam I would assume has the ability to remove that single game you disputed from your account so that if it wasn't a legit claim you wouldn't have access to it any longer.

No. We are not saying they will lock you out, only that they could lock you out and be within their legal rights to do it. It's not in their best interest to lock you out completely. After all, they are out ot make money.

 

[MStele]

A single person experiencing a failure is enough to declare it defective.

If you make 1000 baseball bats and each swings at the ball once and one of them fails, then that bat is 100 percent defective. However, if you take one bat and hit 999 homeruns and then it breaks on number 1000, I wouldn't say its defective, because we don't know how many hits it was designed to take. It could just be at the end of its service life and the break could have been predicted. Now, i'm I don't know or care how many hits a baseball is supposed to withstand before weakening, so please don't go there. Bats are physical things..they break eventually regardless of how good they are. Thats where your logic sits.

Software doesn't "break". It either works or it doesn't given an environment to operate in. Defective software would be defective in every installed environment. Obviously the software is not badly written, because the vast majority of people are running it fine. Since the amount of people having serious problems is statistically small, logically the problem is somewhere else, or an unforseen interaction between the software and the environment it operates in. Either way, the software itself is operating as designed, therefore not defective.

 

[CoinOperatedBoy]

If you make 1000 baseball bats and each swings at the ball once and one of them fails, then that bat is 100 percent defective. However, if you take one bat and hit 999 homeruns and then it breaks on number 1000, I wouldn't say its defective, because we don't know how many hits it was designed to take. It could just be at the end of its service life and the break could have been predicted. Now, i'm I don't know or care how many hits a baseball is supposed to withstand before weakening, so please don't go there. Bats are physical things..they break eventually regardless of how good they are. Thats where your logic sits.

Software doesn't "break". It either works or it doesn't given an environment to operate in. Defective software would be defective in every installed environment. Obviously the software is not badly written, because the vast majority of people are running it fine. Since the amount of people having serious problems is statistically small, logically the problem is somewhere else, or an unforseen interaction between the software and the environment it operates in. Either way, the software itself is operating as designed, therefore not defective.

Are you serious right now? Your bat analogy is laughable. You have not described my position at all.

If there is a bug in software, that software is by definition defective, even if no user ever encounters it. In other words, not every defect impacts every user -- hardware, system software, and usage can all differ, and thus so can the likelihood of exposing said defect. I would think this would be completely obvious and not even worth arguing about. Are you really trying to say that if a bug only affects a few people, it's not a bug at all? That makes no sense. "Either way, the software itself is operating as designed, therefore not defective." You have no grounds to make this claim.

Do you know what defective means? Hint: It is not the same as "badly written" or "eligible for recall". I made no such suggestion.

I do agree that the smaller the customer impact, the higher the likelihood that the software is not the culprit, but that in no way excludes the possibility. And the fact is, the OP is one of thousands of people getting general protection faults when trying to play Borderlands, whether or not that is statistically significant in terms of total sales. Something is causing it, and it doesn't help the OP in any way to state definitively (with literally no evidence) that it's not a problem with the game itself. We just don't know.

 

[igloo15]

Unfortunately I disagree if one person out of ten has a problem with software. Then its the users problem not the software end of story. The reason is simple because software will always 100% of the time have defects. To expose these defects you must have a certain type of environment. Since the environment is caused by the user then its a user problem. They should change their environment in order for it to work.

The difference is that not all bats have defects some do some don't. But all software has defects no matter how long in development or how well the QA team is.

So the only way to claim a piece of software is fundamentally flawed is if it works for no one. You have your ideas backwards its not that only one person needs to claim an error for software to be bad. It is that only one person needs to claim software to work for it to be good. That is the only fact that is true in software.

If one person claims that it works for them and everyone gets the same environment as that person than it works for all of them. This is also way consoles are favored by developers.

 

[CoinOperatedBoy]

Unfortunately I disagree if one person out of ten has a problem with software. Then its the users problem not the software end of story. The reason is simple because software will always 100% of the time have defects. To expose these defects you must have a certain type of environment. Since the environment is caused by the user then its a user problem. They should change their environment in order for it to work.

The difference is that not all bats have defects some do some don't. But all software has defects no matter how long in development or how well the QA team is.

So the only way to claim a piece of software is fundamentally flawed is if it works for no one. You have your ideas backwards its not that only one person needs to claim an error for software to be bad. It is that only one person needs to claim software to work for it to be good. That is the only fact that true.

If one person claims that it works for them and everyone gets the same environment as that person than it works for all of them.

This thread is one big lolfest.

 

[Northern Lawn]

I wouldn't do much to piss off steam. They can easily ban your account or block access, which would cost you much more than $50.

I'd suggest updating drivers, directx, etc. If that doesn't work, uninstall steam and re-download everything. If that fails, try and reformat and reinstall windows.

Sounds like the makings of a class action lawsuit.