Can I refund a game that can potentially infect/brick my PC?

[beetles2000]

Is it possible that Steam can give me a game refund based on information of potential damage to my entire computer to the point where it could be bricked?

This is in reference to the Dark Souls III message on Twitter: https://twitter.com/SkeleMann/status/1484802129302798336

Essentially there is a game exploit that can potentially completely ruin my PC based on a MAJOR flaw on DS3's servers that was warned but went unheard by From Software some time ago. Now its gotten to the point where you can potentially expose yourself to getting infected by it if you play with the online servers.

I'm not angry about that issue, but when I hear things like this I get extremely paranoid due to me having an expensive PC that I CANNOT get infected or have anything happen to, so I can't touch this game at this point.

Do I have chance of getting this to happen even after spending 13 hours on it? Because I cannot have my $65 go to waste.

[𝕎𝕠𝕦𝕤𝕖𝕝𝕫]

If this informations are legit, maybe... open a ticket and see what happens.
But I would bet on no because of your playtime.
Besides... you've needed 13 hours to recognize that something is possible shady about the game...

[beetles2000]

Originally posted by Wouselz:

If this informations are legit, maybe... open a ticket and see what happens.
But I would bet on no because of your playtime.
Besides... you've needed 13 hours to recognize that something is possible shady about the game...:iamthink:

The message about the infection was just posted not even a day ago.

[Awaken]

You fall way outside the parameters for a refund at 13 hours. You can always try.

[Mad Scientist]

Unlikely, so "No."
You wait for a patch to be released and stick to Singleplayer.
2 Hours or 2 Weeks, anything else is on the Developer to fix or even authorize refunds beyond offered refund time and inform Steam of such allowance.

If the game itself had malware, that would be another story.
This is also assuming the source has any credibility.

[nullable]

https://steamcommunity.com/app/374320/discussions/0/3194742149941139427/

At any rate you're not eligible for a refund. And an exploit found in a six year old game probably isn't going to trigger automatic refund exceptions.

You'll have to wait for a patch from From Software. And playing the game offline is perfectly reasonable too, even if you don't want to make that compromise.

[Spawn of Totoro]

Going to ask for a refund for Windows or your computer too? There are many unknown exploits out there that could do a lot of different things, from minor to major.

You can also play in off-line mode.

Regardless, it is still subject to the standard refund policy of two hours play time and with in two weeks of purchase. An exploit being found doesn't change that.

[PirateSpongeBob]

1st Since it sounds like you are way past the usage permitted for refund, the answer to getting a refund is no.

2nd An exploit in a piece of software, regardless of it being a game or not, does not equate to destroying your computer. As a person who tinkers with software, hacks, and other mods, exploits usually do not "brick" your computer.

3rd The information provided on twitter has to be verified and validated by the company who made the software. Reading the post, it does not say exactly what exploit or part of the software will "brick" your computer. It is just a verbal allegation/assertion. An assertion/allegation needs hard evidence to be proven.

4th This cycle of alleging a piece of software has an exploit which will damage your computer, is a common tactic for scammers, bot networking, and hackers to make the user be afraid & cause paranoia. The hacker/scammer will have people download a "mod" which that in itself can be a virus, trojan, and/or hack in itself. This is an extremely common tactic.

5th If there is a true exploit, the company who created the game/softward usually will get on top of writing a patch, unless it is abandonware.

So, no you are past the refund time. If there is an exploit, let the developers write a patch. If you are paranoid, play offline/single player.

[JellyPuff]

If someone can just use the invasion or co-op mechanic to run any code on a target's system, that would be the most severe videogame-related exploit, to ever exist.
Hard to say, what this exploit can do exactly. People are a bit fear-mongery, but it does exist.[nvd.nist.gov] But only the modder for the anti-cheat mod for Dark Souls III claims to know about it in detail and also claims to have disclosed it to Bandai-Namco years ago.

The worst, i've seen, in terms of DS3 cheaters so far (outside of abusing the broken ban-system to ban other players or destroy their progress completely) is them triggering text-to-speech on the other player's end.

Originally posted by Spawn of Totoro:

Going to ask for a refund for Windows or your computer too? There are many unknown exploits out there that could do a lot of different things, from minor to major.

WIth digital goods, it poses an interesting problem, though. A computer, or at least the parts inside, are subject to limited-time warranties by law in many countries. This is to prevent people from just selling subpar products, that break down easely to save costs or are designed to do so, so you keep buying new products.

But what if a digital good loses functionality, breaks down completely or even becomes harmful to your system within a reasonable timeframe after purchase? These sort of questions have to be answered and will get regulated eventually.

(edit: typos)

[Satoru]

1) no you're not getting a refund for that
2) Why do people believe every goober on the internet that spouts all sorts of FUD
3) Just say it has an RCE not "OMG IT WILL CAUSE LASTING ISSUES ONYOUR COMPUTER" is just like really buddy this isnt reddit farming likes isnt a thing

[crunchyfrog]

Nope, you are not going to get a refund for the simple reason that the only agreement in place here is the standard refund policy. This does not fall within that regardless of the reason.

The ONLY grounds you may have is if the game were faulty (and that's a MASSIVE task to prove and not applicable here as exploits aren't making the game not run as described). If you are in the EU you could have tried that.

But as this doesn't apply even that you're out of luck on.

So no, this is something you should do the following on:
NOT play the game online for now until a patch hits.

The ONLY possible grounds you could have is if From Software refused to patch this and the exploit did lead to consequences. Then you could sue them. However the cost in doing so would be prohibitive unless some class action suit were done.

In other words, a big fat no.

[RiO]

Originally posted by crunchyfrog:

The ONLY grounds you may have is if the game were faulty (and that's a MASSIVE task to prove and not applicable here as exploits aren't making the game not run as described). If you are in the EU you could have tried that.

Actually, it does apply for EU citizens and they don't have to prove anything. (Inverse burden of proof.)

As of Jan 2022 all member states are required to have activated new laws based on the EU 2019/770 Directive, colloquially the Digital Content Directive.

This directive states that conformity with contract also covers security concerns, such as software bugs that can be used to trigger remote code execution. Presence of a bug of such nature is grounds for a claim of non-conformity.

Moreover, in cases of digital content there is a lasting inverse burden of proof. It is up to the seller, whether that be Valve directly or the publisher with Valve only acting as their agent, to prove that this issue does not exist and the claim is false.
In contrast with physical goods, where the inverse burden of proof expires after a year - used to 6 months under the old Sale of Goods directive superseded by the new 2019/771 one - the period for inverse burden of proof does not expire on digital content. It is lasting.

The period where a seller can be held liable for non-conformity of digital content normally has a minimum of 2 years, where member states are allowed to afford a longer period to consumers - but not less. HOWEVER, for cases of continuous supply the period where a seller can be held liable extends for as long as supply lasts. And the directive in its recitals makes clear that digital distribution platforms for video games that allow on-demand download and installation via a library of purchased titles are to be treated as cases of continuous supply.

Moreover, nearly all parts of this directive including the articles linked to what I described above are grandfathered into existing purchases and cases of continuous supply, as they apply to all forms of supply that continue to occur from 1 Jan 2022 onward. There are only two articles that only affect new purchases concluded on 1 Jan 2022 or later, which are articles 19 and 20. The former relating to the regulation of updates outside of those that are strictly needed for conformity; and the latter being the right of redress for the seller.

(Ironically this puts sellers that offer continuous supply in a tough spot; because they are liable for supply of a purchase prior to Jan 2022, but have no right of redress to recoup losses over them.)


Summarizing:

1. The new directive applies to existing cases of supply of digital content,
   
2. which means security problems with DS3 purchased before Jan 2022 are still covered by the directive as cases of non-conformity;
   
3. where the seller is liable for these cases for as long as supply lasts, i.e. for as long as your Steam account lasts; and
   
4. it's up to the seller to disprove the claim, i.e. to prove that the security problem in question does not exist.

This doesn't mean you're eligible for a refund off the bat.
It means the seller, whether that be Steam or the publisher, is required to fix the problem and thus restore conformity. Only if they refuse to do so, are you allowed to terminate the contract and obtain a full refund of all sums paid, provided the problem is not minor. But in case of a dangerous RCE vulnerability, I wouldn't worry about that part - that's definitely not minor.


For your reference:
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32019L0770

Originally posted by crunchyfrog:

The ONLY possible grounds you could have is if From Software refused to patch this and the exploit did lead to consequences. Then you could sue them. However the cost in doing so would be prohibitive unless some class action suit were done.

In other words, a big fat no.

Yup. It really sucks how limited (and unrealistically expensive) your options are if you reside in the US vis-a-vis the EU.
Sad thing, really.

[Raiser 💤]

Instead of asking here you should write to steam support, since they are the only ones who can give you a real answer.
But as the twitter post points out you should be safe playing the game in offline mode.

[[☭]-Soviet-Triumph-]

spending $65 on a 6 year old game that regularly goes on sale jesus christ

[WhitePhantom]

They're working on it:

https://twitter.com/DarkSoulsGame/status/1485210967009071108

"PvP servers for Dark Souls 3, Dark Souls 2, and Dark Souls: Remastered have been temporarily deactivated to allow the team to investigate recent reports of an issue with online services.
Servers for Dark Souls: PtDE will join them shortly.

We apologize for this inconvenience."

[JVC]

Originally posted by RiO:

As of Jan 2022 all member states are required to have activated new laws based on the EU 2019/770 Directive, colloquially the Digital Content Directive.

Supposed to is a key word here. There are EU directives that never get implemented in some jurisdictions because of national opposition. Noone looking at Italy here.

So it all depends on how stuff is implemented in X's national legislation, and how their ministry of Justice has interpreted that the law is to be understood.

Waving around with international treaties is worth squat. Unless you have a good lawyer and unlimited funds to process a case in a court of law and can get it before the supreme court. Everything else can be ignored in other courts of law.

Take a look at the national legislation. Or accept that some battles aren't worth losing good money on.