I agree with this wholeheartedly.
But let’s think about this for a second.
A bad actor comes in, wrecks the place, abuses the payment system, and constantly evades punishment. The proposed solution is for the company to:-
- Release free titles to the public
- Remove the conditional guarantee of a refund.
Releasing free titles cost money, time, and manpower for the company. So the company has to put in even more resources to handle the problem at a net loss for the company. Not only that but if you release the free titles improperly you could cause market cannibalization, leading to people that would otherwise buy one of your products to only use the free one. This further leads to a loss of revenue.
Now on top of that, the company then removes the refund policy on all of their products. I get that some consumers are smart and do their research, look into the forum, and test out the free products that are available. But we also have to think about the consumer psychology here. I come to the website. I’m offered a free title (or a few) and all the other titles are non-refundable. My brain as a consumer, who is unfamiliar with your product and lofty claims as a subliminal producer will either consciously or unconsciously think something is off. Why would I buy from your company with no refund policy if the other does? I feel more secure with my wallet there. Maybe you’re scamming me. Or you’re not confident in your product.
Then boom, your rival company got a new customer and continued loyalty because every product their customers purchase is refundable (safety). I am dealt with a double whammy of having to release free titles and revoking the refund policy that increases sales. Now my offer seems inferior to my competitors and I lose more time + effort to solidify myself in the marketplace.
I think we’re skirting around the solution here. Which is figuring out how to handle payments without someone abusing the system. That’s all we need to do. I think we’re jumping the gun here a little bit. Let’s say we solved the problem by just doing that. Then we don’t have to deal with all of these potential downsides in response to one bad actor, who would probably feel ecstatic that they caused the company to shoot themselves in the foot in response. We may potentially have future problems with the change but we’ll cross the bridge when we get there.
That’s my 2 cents on the matter