Valve Pulls Controversial Game Hatred from Greenlight - Update

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT
 

They're pulling it so they don't have to deal with all this kiddie DRAMA. Messed up by letting it through Greenlight, but better now than later.

TotalBiscuit's video on this is just perfect

Steam sells Postal 1 - which is a straight up murder spree simulator.

Postal 2 - the "pee on the dead charred bodies of women" simulator?

Postal 3? Do I even need to say anything here?

They sell GTA games. I'm just gonna say "Gauranga"

In short: They sell all kinds of games that allow you to kill innocent bystanders.

Bloody hell: They sell the Carmagedon games. You get extra points from running over bystanders with your spike-grilled car. You're meant to run people over in this game.

Skyrim - the assassins guild and their questions and assassination missions. Killing for fun and profit!

Or if its because Hatred is just 'politically incorrect' then why are games like Democracy 3 on steam? There you can set up the most horrible police state and suppres every human right you can imagine.

Binding of Isaac? Naked boy running around!? Child pornography!

There are so many potentially offensive games on Steam - this makes absolutely no sense. Valve done goofed - they done goofed hard.

If its a quality issue, then all the games that Jim Sterling makes Squirty Plays of should be taken down immediately.. but they're not.

So Valve - if nothing else - be consistent. If you dont want a certain kind of games or a certain kind of game content on Steam, then be bloody hell honest about it.

Entitled:

Gamergeek25:
So like the movie production code. We need to start censoring ourselves.

Yeah, it's like that, only instead of codified industry-wide censorship enforcement, it's a single company determining it's own profile. In other words, not like that at all.

Gamergeek25:

Banning a game because you dont like it or offended is a slippery slope. Where do we stop. Mario could be banned because it make Italians uncomfortable. Zelda could be banned because pot breaking might promote destruction of property.

You know what else sets up a slippery slope? Forcing websites to provide content against their will.

Should news sites be edited by the government to make sure that no side got "censored" by a lack of representation? If I develop a bloody and sexy Zelda game, should Nintendo be forced to publish it otherwise they are censoring me?

As far as the choice of "banning" a content from your own platform can be called "banning" at all, this is an extremely pro-free-speech type of "banning", that should be encouraged in the whole world.

I was referring to this leading to it. Since certain people who are (I think) against it are desiring the markets to be scraped so we have a democratically elected planning group.

Also notice the reason they banned it? They gave no reasonable answer. No information on what rule this game violates. They have postal and manhunt, but suddenly this game is too much? If they are gonna ban it. They need a reason when they have violent games up already.

Well I sure as hell wasn't going to get it, but I'm not sure it should have been taken down. I mean movies are shot from the perspective of psychos, why can't games be from that perspective also.

webkilla:

Steam sells Postal 1 - which is a straight up murder spree simulator.

Postal 2 - the "pee on the dead charred bodies of women" simulator?

Postal 3? Do I even need to say anything here?

They sell GTA games. I'm just gonna say "Gauranga"

In short: They sell all kinds of games that allow you to kill innocent bystanders.

Bloody hell: They sell the Carmagedon games. You get extra points from running over bystanders with your spike-grilled car. You're meant to run people over in this game.

Skyrim - the assassins guild and their questions and assassination missions. Killing for fun and profit!

Or if its because Hatred is just 'politically incorrect' then why are games like Democracy 3 on steam? There you can set up the most horrible police state and suppres every human right you can imagine.

Binding of Isaac? Naked boy running around!? Child pornography!

There are so many potentially offensive games on Steam - this makes absolutely no sense. Valve done goofed - they done goofed hard.

If its a quality issue, then all the games that Jim Sterling makes Squirty Plays of should be taken down immediately.. but they're not.

Actually, they did remove Earth: Year 2066 on a quality issue.

If anything, Valve has shown perfect consistency in taking down games either for violence or for low quality, only when it created an outrage, but not on command of a random youtube reviewer's word, or on the chance of being "potentially offensive".

That list you posted, is comparable to the list of Squirty Plays games, and Hatred is comparable to Earth: Year 2066.

There is your consistency. It would be hypocritical to expect Valve to keep up a certain game facing backlash, where in other situations they have already demonstrated their willingness to listen to a large enough community.

Gamergeek25:

Also notice the reason they banned it? They gave no reasonable answer. No information on what rule this game violates. They have postal and manhunt, but suddenly this game is too much? If they are gonna ban it. They need a reason when they have violent games up already.

They have chosen to not sell it from their own website. If this could lead to a slippery slope of Nintendo banning it's Mario and Zelda games, then the opposite solution, of demanding that they "need a reason" could just as easily lead to an anti-free-speech system, where privately held websites are obliged to either distribute a certain type of content, or forced to "give reasons" whether they want to or not.

You are acting scared about potential censorship, while cheerfully demanding to control other people's distribution of information.

Entitled:
There is your consistency. It would be hypocritical to expect Valve to keep up a certain game facing backlash, where in other situations they have already demonstrated their willingness to listen to a large enough community.

If the game were facing enough backlash that much of the market was calling for its removal, it wouldn't have seen so much approval on its Steam Greenlight page. The backlash isn't nearly as a game like 2066, and not completely comparable: 2066 was removed for universal outrage over being completely broken and a huge scam with a developer that lashes out at people complaining; Hatred was removed because of a kneejerk reaction from a subset of the market to a murder-spree sim when other such games already exist and the rumors of the developer being an alleged "neo-nazi". The backlash of Hatred is perceived as more severe because a lot more voices in media are being broadcasting disapproval for it, when scams on Greenlight aren't really given much attention at all.

ShakerSilver:

If the game were facing enough backlash that much of the market was calling for its removal, it wouldn't have seen so much approval on its Steam Greenlight page. The backlash isn't nearly as a game like 2066, and not completely comparable: 2066 was removed for universal outrage over being completely broken and a huge scam with a developer that lashes out at people complaining; Hatred was removed because of a kneejerk reaction from a subset of the market to a murder-spree sim when other such games already exist and the rumors of the developer being an alleged "neo-nazi". The backlash of Hatred is perceived as more severe because a lot more voices in media are being broadcasting disapproval for it, when scams on Greenlight aren't really given much attention at all.

How are these statements the demonstration of them not being comparable? You are practically using synonyms to describe their situation: "2066 was removed for universal outrage", but for Hatred, "a lot more voices in media are being broadcasting disapproval for it".

Likewise, with Hatred, "other such games already exist", meanwhile games similar to 2066 "aren't really given much attention at all".

It seems to me like both games were widely criticized, even though they are examples of a problem that Valve otherwise tolerates by default, but in this case, removed them.

Gamergeek25:

ryukage_sama:
Good news. "Hatred" makes us look bad by association and appears neither fun nor fulfilling to play. Steam needs to be more judicious in what they sell, so hopefully they'll be making similarly mindful determinations in the future.

So like the movie production code. We need to start censoring ourselves.

edit: an abridged lesson on Hayes code. It was a group formed to keep movies decent back in the day. Prompted because of all the sexual innuendos in the movies and off screen incidents. Like Some like it hot. It banned anything that was controversial of the time.

Banning a game because you dont like it or offended is a slippery slope. Where do we stop. Mario could be banned because it make Italians uncomfortable. Zelda could be banned because pot breaking might promote destruction of property.

Great straw man argument about banning a game. Let us know when a game is actually banned.

The developers can totally sell their game via their own website if they so choose. Valve has zero obligation to provide them an avenue for sales. We can't compel a company to take part in business they don't want, especially when they don't need the income and the vast majority of their customers won't care or will support their decision.

webkilla:
TotalBiscuit's video on this is just perfect

Steam sells Postal 1 - which is a straight up murder spree simulator.

Postal 2 - the "pee on the dead charred bodies of women" simulator?

Postal 3? Do I even need to say anything here?

They sell GTA games. I'm just gonna say "Gauranga"

In short: They sell all kinds of games that allow you to kill innocent bystanders.

Bloody hell: They sell the Carmagedon games. You get extra points from running over bystanders with your spike-grilled car. You're meant to run people over in this game.

Skyrim - the assassins guild and their questions and assassination missions. Killing for fun and profit!

Or if its because Hatred is just 'politically incorrect' then why are games like Democracy 3 on steam? There you can set up the most horrible police state and suppres every human right you can imagine.

Binding of Isaac? Naked boy running around!? Child pornography!

There are so many potentially offensive games on Steam - this makes absolutely no sense. Valve done goofed - they done goofed hard.

If its a quality issue, then all the games that Jim Sterling makes Squirty Plays of should be taken down immediately.. but they're not.

So Valve - if nothing else - be consistent. If you dont want a certain kind of games or a certain kind of game content on Steam, then be bloody hell honest about it.

Can you tell me which one of them was available in the steam store on the after day after 2 people were killed in a cafe in Sydney by someone full of hate and then 122 school children were murdered in Pakistan. When circumstances change, policy changes.

Entitled:

How are these statements the demonstration of them not being comparable? "2066 was removed for universal outrage", but for Hatred, "a lot more voices in media are being broadcasting disapproval for it".

The numbers don't seem to show a universal outrage or any kind of mixed reception at all in Greenlight.

Quite the contrary. The numbers clearly show a universally positive reaction to the Greenlight. People wanted the game. Even after those articles went up letting the world know that Hatred was up on Greenlight. Even with that exposure, the game still had an overwhelmingly positive stint on Greenlight in the brief time it was up there. This is obviously very different from what 2066 went through.

albino boo:
Can you tell me which one of them was available in the steam store on the after day after 2 people were killed in a cafe in Sydney by someone full of hate and then 122 school children were murdered in Pakistan.

So you admit it has nothing to do with the game itself but because Valve is submitting to moral panic? Better not release any game with killing in it at all, as people are killed everywhere all the time.

When circumstances change, policy changes.

If policies have been changed then most of those game he listed would have been taken down from Steam as well.

Humm, removing a game based on the content seems.. an odd choice. There shouldn't be anything you can't make a movie, book or game from, as long as you're tasteful about it or baring that learn something from it. Art can be designed simply to offend, but that in itself doesn't invalidate the art. I'd like to offer "Paint Your Wagon" as an example, or if you must "Requiem for a Dream".

I don't see that I'd buy Hatred, but that being said I don't think that it should have been banned outright; just kept off the front page. If you go looking for it, you'll find it.

That being said, I would like Valve to make more of an effort in removing more games that deserve it through the fact that it's broken without the developer moving to fix it. Grass Simulator is still on stream even thought it is barebones and non-functional.

albino boo:

Can you tell me which one of them was available in the steam store on the after day after 2 people were killed in a cafe in Sydney by someone full of hate and then 122 school children were murdered in Pakistan. When circumstances change, policy changes.

It is not available yet. It was a green light campaign to get it on steam once released.
And I bet I can in fact dig up some horrible shit that happened around the release of these games merely because the world is one fuck up place where you can easily dig up horrible shit all the time if you just start looking.
Afghanistan and Iraq should cover me for the last 10 years alone when it comes to terrorist attacks...

Yes policies change... why are they still on the store though? - It should be fairly easy to remove games from the store while leaving already purchased license intact and allow for codes obtained otherwise (retailers) to be activated.

Entitled:

webkilla:

Steam sells Postal 1 - which is a straight up murder spree simulator.

Postal 2 - the "pee on the dead charred bodies of women" simulator?

Postal 3? Do I even need to say anything here?

They sell GTA games. I'm just gonna say "Gauranga"

In short: They sell all kinds of games that allow you to kill innocent bystanders.

Bloody hell: They sell the Carmagedon games. You get extra points from running over bystanders with your spike-grilled car. You're meant to run people over in this game.

Skyrim - the assassins guild and their questions and assassination missions. Killing for fun and profit!

Or if its because Hatred is just 'politically incorrect' then why are games like Democracy 3 on steam? There you can set up the most horrible police state and suppres every human right you can imagine.

Binding of Isaac? Naked boy running around!? Child pornography!

There are so many potentially offensive games on Steam - this makes absolutely no sense. Valve done goofed - they done goofed hard.

If its a quality issue, then all the games that Jim Sterling makes Squirty Plays of should be taken down immediately.. but they're not.

Actually, they did remove Earth: Year 2066 on a quality issue.

If anything, Valve has shown perfect consistency in taking down games either for violence or for low quality, only when it created an outrage, but not on command of a random youtube reviewer's word, or on the chance of being "potentially offensive".

That list you posted, is comparable to the list of Squirty Plays games, and Hatred is comparable to Earth: Year 2066.

There is your consistency. It would be hypocritical to expect Valve to keep up a certain game facing backlash, where in other situations they have already demonstrated their willingness to listen to a large enough community.

Yeah, gonna have to disagree with you there on Valve's consistency. Both Postal and GTA - especially GTA - have gotten far more negative publicity and backlash than Hatred, yet both franchises still exist in their entirety on Steam. If a large enough community is all it takes to get Valve to listen, both franchises would be off of Steam already, Greenlight would've been reworked from the ground up, and the infamous issues with Steam allowing hoards of bug-ridden and / or literally unplayable games onto the storefront would've been resolved by now.

Valve has never before removed a game for being too violent or controversial despite hosting numerous games and franchises that put Hatred to shame on these fronts, so the removal of Hatred does indeed come across as inconsistent.

Off Topic: Fuck ads in Captchas. No, I'm not going to type marketing bullshit about a brand of cars I don't give a rat's ass about just to friggin' post in a gaming forum. Quit trying to sell me crap I don't want through an anti-spam system, already! >:(

Entitled:

Gamergeek25:

Also notice the reason they banned it? They gave no reasonable answer. No information on what rule this game violates. They have postal and manhunt, but suddenly this game is too much? If they are gonna ban it. They need a reason when they have violent games up already.

They have chosen to not sell it from their own website. If this could lead to a slippery slope of Nintendo banning it's Mario and Zelda games, then the opposite solution, of demanding that they "need a reason" could just as easily lead to an anti-free-speech system, where privately held websites are obliged to either distribute a certain type of content, or forced to "give reasons" whether they want to or not.

You are acting scared about potential censorship, while cheerfully demanding to control other people's distribution of information.

I agree. It's bizarre how many critics of Valve's decision assume that Valve didn't have a reason doing this and/or insist that as customers they're entitled to a complete briefing of Valve's rationale for the decision. It's certainly up for debate and remains to be seen as to whether this decision will benefit Valve in the long-run, but Valve can and ought to make decisions they feel is in their best interest . . . or what they would choose based on personal preference or conviction.

Steam wants to distance itself from the controversy. I can hardly blame them. It is telling, however, that they'd remove this game but continue to publish some of the shit games that they do. I mean, some of these games Jim plays on Squirty actually have stolen art and sound assets in them. Steam continuing to do business with these kind of developers says more about them then their unwillingness to publish a genocide simulator, imo.

ShakerSilver:

So you admit it has nothing to do with the game itself but because Valve is submitting to moral panic? Better not release any game with killing in it at all, as people are killed everywhere all the time.

If policies have been changed then most of those game he listed would have been taken down from Steam as well.

Ishigami:

It is not available yet. It was a green light campaign to get it on steam once released.
And I bet I can in fact dig up some horrible shit that happened around the release of these games merely because the world is one fuck up place where you can easily dig up horrible shit all the time if you just start looking.
Afghanistan and Iraq should cover me for the last 10 years alone when it comes to terrorist attacks...

Yes policies change... why are they still on the store though? - It should be fairly easy to remove games from the store while leaving already purchased license intact and allow for codes obtained otherwise (retailers) to be activated.

Those are old stories not new ones. When Anders Breivik murdered 77 people in Norway the shops in Norway took WoW off sale. It was the appropriate course at that moment. When 9/11 happened they changed the advertising posters for Spider Man because they featured the world trade centre, again appropriate course at that moment. Postal et al are old stories and the media has long sinced moved on but the killings I mentioned are current and Valve responded to current events.

+1 for "The game is tone-deaf, Valve exists under capitalism and can therefore do whatever the hell it wants."

I have nothing new to add there. However, I do find one aspect of this massively offensive...

The DOOM font they are using for the title. I get that they are trying to evoke the spirit of the franchise because a lot of people associate DOOM with mindless slaughter-fests. I understand. It's still a cheap move. If Hatred gets famous for this malarkey and pops up on newsfeeds everywhere, people, especially newer gamers, are going to subconsciously develop an association between this mean-spirited mass shooting game and the font. Then DOOM 2014 drops and new gamers, not to mention desperate news outlets, are going to have a load of preconceived notions about it, despite the fact that the blood baths in DOOM have context, justification, and the enemies fight back.

Yes, I realize this is a pointless and weakly constructed argument. I just really want to write something, anything, anywhere, about DOOM 2014. Because they aren't giving us any more news. They just aren't. Nothing. Not a reveal date, not a screengrab, no bootleg footage of QuakeCon, NOTHING. Seeing that font pop up in this boring looking asshole simulator just... Hurt. My heart rose and fell.

I'm sorry if you decided to read this post and I wasted your time not posting anything relevant to the story at hand. I just... DOOM, you know? Every aspect of my life has been falling into place after years of hard work or years of patience, but there's still this massive hole in my soul. No matter how much I do to better myself and my position in this world, id still won't release any information about DOOM, and I just feel hollow and cold...

DOOM... I love you... Come back... Hatred looks dumb and I don't care... *begins weeping softly*

albino boo:

webkilla:
TotalBiscuit's video on this is just perfect

Steam sells Postal 1 - which is a straight up murder spree simulator.

Postal 2 - the "pee on the dead charred bodies of women" simulator?

Postal 3? Do I even need to say anything here?

They sell GTA games. I'm just gonna say "Gauranga"

In short: They sell all kinds of games that allow you to kill innocent bystanders.

Bloody hell: They sell the Carmagedon games. You get extra points from running over bystanders with your spike-grilled car. You're meant to run people over in this game.

Skyrim - the assassins guild and their questions and assassination missions. Killing for fun and profit!

Or if its because Hatred is just 'politically incorrect' then why are games like Democracy 3 on steam? There you can set up the most horrible police state and suppres every human right you can imagine.

Binding of Isaac? Naked boy running around!? Child pornography!

There are so many potentially offensive games on Steam - this makes absolutely no sense. Valve done goofed - they done goofed hard.

If its a quality issue, then all the games that Jim Sterling makes Squirty Plays of should be taken down immediately.. but they're not.

So Valve - if nothing else - be consistent. If you dont want a certain kind of games or a certain kind of game content on Steam, then be bloody hell honest about it.

Can you tell me which one of them was available in the steam store on the after day after 2 people were killed in a cafe in Sydney by someone full of hate and then 122 school children were murdered in Pakistan. When circumstances change, policy changes.

All of them but Hatred since Hatred isnt out yet. I guess we have to blame those ones, Skyrim included.

josemlopes:

All of them but Hatred since Hatred isnt out yet. I guess we have to blame those ones, Skyrim included.

I refer you to this post here

albino boo:

ShakerSilver:

So you admit it has nothing to do with the game itself but because Valve is submitting to moral panic? Better not release any game with killing in it at all, as people are killed everywhere all the time.

If policies have been changed then most of those game he listed would have been taken down from Steam as well.

Ishigami:

It is not available yet. It was a green light campaign to get it on steam once released.
And I bet I can in fact dig up some horrible shit that happened around the release of these games merely because the world is one fuck up place where you can easily dig up horrible shit all the time if you just start looking.
Afghanistan and Iraq should cover me for the last 10 years alone when it comes to terrorist attacks...

Yes policies change... why are they still on the store though? - It should be fairly easy to remove games from the store while leaving already purchased license intact and allow for codes obtained otherwise (retailers) to be activated.

Those are old stories not new ones. When Anders Breivik murdered 77 people in Norway the shops in Norway took WoW off sale. It was the appropriate course at that moment. When 9/11 happened they changed the advertising posters for Spider Man because they featured the world trade centre, again appropriate course at that moment. Postal et al are old stories and the media has long sinced moved on but the killings I mentioned are current and Valve responded to current events.

Gamergeek25:

seris:
This isnt censorship of a game like ive heard, its the exact same thing as target chosing to not stock GTAV. Steam is a store and ontop of that, a private company, let them do as they wish. In my opinion valve needs to start pruning greenlight more with games worse than this. we have way too many bad games gettting through greenlight

So why are they selling Manhunt and postal 1 and 2.
censorship:
the institution, system, or practice of censoring
Censor:
a person who examines books, movies, letters, etc., and removes things that are considered to be offensive, immoral, harmful to society, etc.

By labeling the decisions of any and all media stores, online or otherwise, not to sell any given work as censorship, you're neutering the weight the term carries. Valve isn't practicing censorship of Android based games by failing to sell them. Even given that much broader definition of censorship, your given definition fails to mention the removal of a product that would be bad for business.

So instead of being happy that Valve is finally starting to curate their storefront, by removing games before they go on sale, we're going to collectively bitch about censorship and consistency?

Entitled:

Actually, they did remove Earth: Year 2066 on a quality issue.

If anything, Valve has shown perfect consistency in taking down games either for violence or for low quality, only when it created an outrage, but not on command of a random youtube reviewer's word, or on the chance of being "potentially offensive".

That list you posted, is comparable to the list of Squirty Plays games, and Hatred is comparable to Earth: Year 2066.

There is your consistency. It would be hypocritical to expect Valve to keep up a certain game facing backlash, where in other situations they have already demonstrated their willingness to listen to a large enough community.

Precisely. When something on the platform causes enough of a controversy, they (generally speaking) react accordingly.

There have been times when they haven't, and they should still be criticized for those occasions (because they are NOT above criticism), but for the most part they do respond.

I find it fascinating, in this particular instance, that many of the same people who routinely complain that Valve doesn't listen to it's customers are now complaining that Valve keeps capitulating to their customers concerns over perceived "offensive content" on their Storefront.

It's as if last month it was:
"Valve needs to curate their storefront!"
"Valve doesn't listen to their customers!"

And now it's:
"Valve needs to stop censoring their storefront!"
"Valve needs to stop giving in to whims of their customers!"

ryukage_sama:

I agree. It's bizarre how many critics of Valve's decision assume that Valve didn't have a reason doing this and/or insist that as customers they're entitled to a complete briefing of Valve's rationale for the decision. It's certainly up for debate and remains to be seen as to whether this decision will benefit Valve in the long-run, but Valve can and ought to make decisions they feel is in their best interest . . . or what they would choose based on personal preference or conviction.

Precisely number 2.

Valve are free to decide what they do and don't allow on their platform, just as users are free to decide whether or not they wish to do business with Valve.

If the removal of this, let's admit, extraordinarily shitty game bothers someone, then they should do the logical thing and stop doing business with Valve. What they shouldn't do is bitch about "censorship" after spending months demanding Valve curate their storefront.

Vigormortis:

I find it fascinating, in this particular instance, that many of the same people who routinely complain that Valve doesn't listen to it's customers are now complaining that Valve keeps capitulating to their customers concerns over perceived "offensive content" on their Storefront.

It's as if last month it was:
"Valve needs to curate their storefront!"
"Valve doesn't listen to their customers!"

And now it's:
"Valve needs to stop censoring their storefront!"
"Valve needs to stop giving in to whims of their customers!"

Who exactly are they "listening" to here? The only hard proof we have of the game's reception on Steam was it's progress on Greenlight, which was almost universally positive by a wide margin.

I'll quote my own post earlier in the page:

Tohuvabohu:

Quite the contrary. The numbers clearly show a universally positive reaction to the Greenlight. People wanted the game. Even after those articles went up letting the world know that Hatred was up on Greenlight. Even with that exposure, the game still had an overwhelmingly positive stint on Greenlight in the brief time it was up there. This is obviously very different from what 2066 went through.

So where were the people rallying against this game? Because out of 14 thousand total votes, only 1 thousand of them were against the game.

MarsAtlas:
I've no love for the game, from the sounds of it, the game is Postal 2 without anything that actually gave Postal 2 merit. I do find it a tad worrying that Valve is refusing to host it, since they've nearly got a monopoly in regards to digital distribution, and we all know how important Steam is to a game based on indie dev after indie dev after indie dev. I'm not surprised though. Apparently the game is being developed by skinheads, and I certainly wouldn't want to sell something along the likes of Ethnic Cleansing in my place of business, so I can't fault Valve for that either.

To be fair, the devs have ANCESTRAL connections with politically-motivated murderers in Poland's past, but they're not criminals (or skinheads) in and of themselves. Most of the accusations regarding Destructive being staffed by radical right-wingers have been debunked.

Personally, though, I agree with your statement. I'm not seeing how Postal being done in a Twin-Stick fashion with a Grimdark aesthetic and without an ounce of humor would strike anyone as being interesting. Except maybe teenagers who just entered their Subversive phase; or impressionable and unstable sorts with a latent murder-on.

Vigormortis:
I find it fascinating, in this particular instance, that many of the same people who routinely complain that Valve doesn't listen to it's customers are now complaining that Valve keeps capitulating to their customers concerns over perceived "offensive content" on their Storefront.

It's as if last month it was:
"Valve needs to curate their storefront!"
"Valve doesn't listen to their customers!"

And now it's:
"Valve needs to stop censoring their storefront!"
"Valve needs to stop giving in to whims of their customers!"

My concern personally is consistency. If Valve is going to start curating, fine and dandy - but they need to actually state the basis on which the curation will be performed, and whether they will grandfather in games already on steam or go back and clean them up.

Honestly I don't care at all if they grandfather things or not, but it kind of matters going forward when it comes to my purchasing decisions. If Steam is going to start pulling morally questionable or poorly made games, then I need to start seeking another platform to get that on.

People here have watched enough to know the game isn't purely about killing civilians, right? A lot of people here haven't even watched the trailer (that clearly shows police and SWAT shooting back) to know this isn't just a civilian slaughter sim. It's an isometric shooter with a 'lone gunman' theme. A delicate topic sure but if that's a reason a game shouldn't cover it then where is the line? We have games that let you slaughter civilians already, and even games that reward you for it, so I don't see why everyone is getting so wound up about this one.

Tohuvabohu:

Who exactly are they "listening" to here? The only hard proof we have of the game's reception on Steam was it's progress on Greenlight, which was almost universally positive by a wide margin.

So where were the people rallying against this game? Because out of 14 thousand total votes, only 1 thousand of them were against the game.

I didn't say they were actually capitulating to some group making demands for the removal of the game. I was talking about those who are complaining about the removal of the game by claiming Valve is giving in to customer complaints; the same people who routinely assert that Valve never listens to it's customers.

I would ask that you please refrain from accusing me of claiming things I never claimed. Thank you.

EvilRoy:

My concern personally is consistency. If Valve is going to start curating, fine and dandy - but they need to actually state the basis on which the curation will be performed, and whether they will grandfather in games already on steam or go back and clean them up.

To be frank, they don't owe us an explanation as to why it was removed. Technically speaking, they don't even owe the dev an explanation. (though, from the sounds of things, they did explain their reason to the developer)

As well, they've already taken steps to remove games from the platform that received enough user or media backlash. I.E. Air Control, Earth: Year 2066, etc.

So I'm not entirely sure where one can see a lack of consistency.

Honestly I don't care at all if they grandfather things or not, but it kind of matters going forward when it comes to my purchasing decisions. If Steam is going to start pulling morally questionable or poorly made games, then I need to start seeking another platform to get that on.

I agree. And one should seek out other options.

My primary point of contention is with those who are calling this current situation "stifling censorship", even though they've demanded for months that Valve should curate their storefront.

That, to me, is the only hypocrisy in effect in this whole 'debacle'.

Vigormortis:

I didn't say they were actually capitulating to some group making demands for the removal of the game. I was talking about those who are complaining about the removal of the game by claiming Valve is giving in to customer complaints; the same people who routinely assert that Valve never listens to it's customers.

I would ask that you please refrain from accusing me of claiming things I never claimed. Thank you.

Oh alright. My mistake, I misunderstood you.

I suppose some curating is better than no curating, and everyone knows that Greenlight needed a lot of it. But there's a lot about how Valve handled this situation and what they said that really stinks to me.

MarsAtlas:
I've no love for the game, from the sounds of it, the game is Postal 2 without anything that actually gave Postal 2 merit. I do find it a tad worrying that Valve is refusing to host it, since they've nearly got a monopoly in regards to digital distribution, and we all know how important Steam is to a game based on indie dev after indie dev after indie dev. I'm not surprised though. Apparently the game is being developed by skinheads, and I certainly wouldn't want to sell something along the likes of Ethnic Cleansing in my place of business, so I can't fault Valve for that either.

Their polish developers who's families suffered under the gastapo, whatever idiot suggested they were Nazi skinheads was seriously stupid or nasty.

Frankly I think Valve should be required to sell it because it already sells Postal and Manhunt, their being hypercrits.

Polygon, as is their recent MO lately, did a hit piece on the devs, calling them neo-nazis for liking something on facebook that turned out to be from a conservative webpage.

Turns out more than one lost family to the Nazis, being Polish and all... OOPS!

Back when gamers were defending ALL games regardless of content, like Doom and Mortal Kombat, we didn't have our own media at the time attacking developers for making stupid senseless violence.

Vigormortis:
I find it fascinating, in this particular instance, that many of the same people who routinely complain that Valve doesn't listen to it's customers are now complaining that Valve keeps capitulating to their customers concerns over perceived "offensive content" on their Storefront.

It's as if last month it was:
"Valve needs to curate their storefront!"
"Valve doesn't listen to their customers!"

And now it's:
"Valve needs to stop censoring their storefront!"
"Valve needs to stop giving in to whims of their customers!"

Critical Miss guys got you covered there.

I have a feeling that I could post this strip in a way that is relevant at least once a week for the rest of my patronage on this website.

Tohuvabohu:
So where were the people rallying against this game? Because out of 14 thousand total votes, only 1 thousand of them were against the game.

You act like many of the shitty games people are demanding curation for haven't gotten through Greenlight themselves. Its not like Valve owes it to the game to get through Greenlight anyways, nor do they owe anybody their rationale for rejecting the game from its platform. Gabe Newell could ban Fallout New Vegas from Steam tomorrow because he thinks that Fallout 3 is better and he just wanted the ultimate fanboy dig.

Vigormortis:

EvilRoy:

My concern personally is consistency. If Valve is going to start curating, fine and dandy - but they need to actually state the basis on which the curation will be performed, and whether they will grandfather in games already on steam or go back and clean them up.

To be frank, they don't owe us an explanation as to why it was removed. Technically speaking, they don't even owe the dev an explanation. (though, from the sounds of things, they did explain their reason to the developer)

As well, they've already taken steps to remove games from the platform that received enough user or media backlash. I.E. Air Control, Earth: Year 2066, etc.

So I'm not entirely sure where one can see a lack of consistency.

They owe us only as much as our dollar buys, but I am somewhat troubled that the relatively low cost of transparency on minor items like this hasn't been worked in to the pricing already.

The inconsistent behavior I have observed thus far hasn't been especially heinous (broken games/questionable content being allowed so long as complaints don't explode), but I'm concerned about it developing further in future. If they explain their reasoning in a straightforward manner, neither side gets surprised later on. I might be unimpressed by Target Australia, but they were forthright with their reasoning, and I know to expect similar reactions in the future.

Honestly I don't care at all if they grandfather things or not, but it kind of matters going forward when it comes to my purchasing decisions. If Steam is going to start pulling morally questionable or poorly made games, then I need to start seeking another platform to get that on.

I agree. And one should seek out other options.

My primary point of contention is with those who are calling this current situation "stifling censorship", even though they've demanded for months that Valve should curate their storefront.

That, to me, is the only hypocrisy in effect in this whole 'debacle'.

Fair enough, but keep in mind that calling out hypocrisy only makes you feel good. It isn't a counterargument and it never changes minds. Worse in this case, because without a Venn diagram I don't know how much cross membership between those groups exists.

RicoADF:
Frankly I think Valve should be required to sell it because it already sells Postal and Manhunt, their being hypercrits.

While we're at it, lets force Valve to host Ethnic Cleansing and Custer's Revenge. Lets not stop there, lets have them host e-books. Not just any books either, but Jack Thompson's books, and on the front page. Because freedom! Anything less is censorship.

Valve hasn't prevented anyone from buying and playing this game. If you feel deprived of the game because you can't register it through Steam then that is on you.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here