Poll: So Steam is not going to censor what games it will sell

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT
 

The reason that its not censorship unless the government is involved, is because we have a capitalist free market in this country. You may have the "right" to buy something... but ANY company has the "right" not to sell what you are looking for. You can't claim that a McDonalds is censoring because you want a Pepsi and they won't sell it to you. When a government entity blocks your access to legally consume something (whatever it it) driving you to have to break the law to obtain that thing... that's censorship. "Censored" music doesn't really even apply, because that's just a company (music label) acquesing to the standards and practices of radio stations and retail sellers. And this is capitalism, both of those companies absolutely have the right to do that.

You can call it censorship if you like, but unless they are breaking the law the people "censoring" what you want are just exercising THEIR rights. I produce a talk radio program, I've had people claim I'm "censoring" them by not putting their call on the air. You can't call it censorship if I have the rights and YOU don't. My company gives me the responsibility of determining what goes on our air. YOU DON'T have ANY rights to speak on the air on MY station. I MAY deem you worthy of having something to say and ALLOW you to speak for a time. AND the law actually says I OWN that audio. Legally OWN what YOU said. I can record it, jumble up the words, play it back on the air any way I want. And I can cut anyone off at any time I want to... for whatever reason I want. I can do it if I don't like what they are saying, if I think they are badmouthing my station or one of our sponsors, or just if I think they have an annoying voice, or if I'm bored... and guess what. That's not censorship. That's me doing my job.

And that's where Steam is at here. They can say they aren't "censoring" what they allow on their service, but what they actually are saying is they can't be bothered and are too cheap to do their own quality control. Its irresponsible business practice and they are practically INVITING the government to come in and dictate what they can and can't sell. THAT'S censorship. THEN you can whine and cry about censorship. And you can thank Steam for it if it happens, they could have prevented it.

DANEgerous:

So I ban your weird German porn and ban it. Yep, I just censored you. I think I should have but none the less I did censor you. It was justified but who cares? It was still censorship.

In that case, censorship becomes utterly unavoidable, and loses its negative connotations entirely.

StatusNil:

Censorship (noun): The suppression or prohibition of any parts of books, films, news, etc. that are considered obscene, politically unacceptable, or a threat to security.

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/censorship

Right! And since the creators have the ability to publish it themselves (or find an alternative publisher), a single storefront refusing to sell it does not constitute suppression in any meaningful way, and nor are the creators being prohibited from selling.

Again we have this debate, and again, people are completely incapable of delineating between censorship and a storefront choosing what to stock.

Oh, and corporations are a government. They are not the State, but they govern a domain, therefore can be considered government. Censorship within that domain is still censorship, even by some people's rigid standards.

I will never understand the relationship of internet commenter critics and Steam.

According to the internet:

Steam is a slippery slope, anti-consumer monster, who has several times come close to complete monopoly of digital distribution, allowing them to be the gatekeepers of what gamers can and can not play.

But also, Steam should curate what goes onto the platform, and keep out the undesirables. Act as a gatekeeper to keep out the trash.

WAIT....

Elijin:
I will never understand the relationship of internet commenter critics and Steam.

According to the internet:

Steam is a slippery slope, anti-consumer monster, who has several times come close to complete monopoly of digital distribution, allowing them to be the gatekeepers of what gamers can and can not play.

But also, Steam should curate what goes onto the platform, and keep out the undesirables. Act as a gatekeeper to keep out the trash.

WAIT....

In my experience in the real world, not having trash and having customers suffer needless bullshit, misinformation of products, and outright theft of IP is called 'best practice' and having a healthy business. If Steam is going to forfeit quality control and ignore outright theft and product misinformation, it better at least emulate then the very best consumer law standards as seen in the world as standard faire.

Say, improving their refund policy and giving customers greater powers to point out where products are simply taking the piss.

The former businesswoman in me is screaming; "Why the fuck are we doing Steam's job for them?"--The consumer in me is screaming; "This is why GoG is a superior platform!"--The gamer in me is simply screaming; "This is why board and tabletop roleplay gaming market will always be best."

Addendum_Forthcoming:

Elijin:
I will never understand the relationship of internet commenter critics and Steam.

According to the internet:

Steam is a slippery slope, anti-consumer monster, who has several times come close to complete monopoly of digital distribution, allowing them to be the gatekeepers of what gamers can and can not play.

But also, Steam should curate what goes onto the platform, and keep out the undesirables. Act as a gatekeeper to keep out the trash.

WAIT....

In my experience in the real world, not having trash and having customers suffer needless bullshit, misinformation of products, and outright theft of IP is called 'best practice' and having a healthy business. If Steam is going to forfeit quality control and ignore outright theft and product misinformation, it better at least emulate then the very best consumer law standards as seen in the world as standard faire.

Say, improving their refund policy, or giving cistomers greater powers to point out where products are simply taking the piss.

To be clear, in most of the non-American world, Steam has to follow very strict and fair consumer protection laws, just like every other retailer.

Elijin:

To be clear, in most of the non-American world, Steam has to follow very strict and fair consumer protection laws, just like every other retailer.

Garbage. As someone not in the American sphere of experience...

Addendum_Forthcoming:

Elijin:

To be clear, in most of the non-American world, Steam has to follow very strict and fair consumer protection laws, just like every other retailer.

Garbage. As someone not in the American sphere of experience...

Lucky I said most, not all. That might have been awkward for me.

Elijin:

Lucky I said most, not all. That might have been awkward for me.

What's awkward is;

A: I said Steam should emulate the very best consumer law practices...
B: Your reply doesn't address my issues at all...

I don't care because it literally does not effect what I do and don't buy. I don't casually browse through the Steam store buying games at random and I actually look into games before I do buy them. This whole thing is a storm in a teacup unless I'm an actual crazy person and everyone else just randomly buys games without looking at them and I'm the exception.

I am so way past caring at this point am more worried about the precious time and synaptic plasticity myself and others have wasted ever entertaining that any of these cries of censorship were anything more than paranoid hysterical slippery slopes with an undercurrent of deep hypocrisy and cherry-picking from such an insignificant part of a crappy subculture it is beyond pointless. These people will see censorship wherever they fucking want whener it is convenient, no different from seeing the Jesus in toast or their sheltered childhood amongst the crumbling tea-leaves of a fetid neglectful cup...it will never fucking end and nothing will lead anywhere but back to the start the next time a new confirmation bias is spotted and the charade can begin again, wasting everybody's time.

Steam doesn't "censor" and is overloaded with shitty cons and fakes by charlatans?...Great! Paves way for a competitor to rise up and prove themselves better.

Steam does "censor" and angers all the angsty boys hurt that they can't access the latest asset flip in their imagined holy crusade against fascist liberals?...Great! Paves the way for a competitor to rise up and prove themselves better at providing shit-quality cons.

Everybody wins either way! But the hysteria will never stop. So fuck that, I'm done with it all. Now if you'll excuse me, being the fascist sjw that I am, I must go and start the daily "censoring" of my nether-regions ready to scamper out and about in the real world without traumatising the local children here and being put in jail. This totalitarian state is a real oppressive bitch like that.

Addendum_Forthcoming:

DANEgerous:
Still Convincing me I am right, again if they are purely asset flips, that is illegal and banned. Sorry If i say I will not sell (X) that is absolutely positively %1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 pure unadulterated CENSORSHIP to THE MAX 200 X1,000 MAXIMUM SUPER HYPER ULTRA!!!

So I ban your weird German porn and ban it. Yep, I just censored you. I think I should have but none the less I did censor you. It was justified but who cares? It was still censorship.

How?

Are you legitimately suggesting store owners have no right to tailor their store environment for targeted audiences and maintain their own standards of shelf space allocation?

Is Prada or Miu Miu stores censoring other designers by not carrying their labels?

What about the store owner's right to tailor their retail experience?

If I open a board games cafe, am I 'censoring' Magic: The Gathering by having a Netrunner and Legend of the Five Rings night? Sounds like you're """censoring""" my wishes to advertise and host routine Netrunner and L5R events and prioritize the seating of those players to me... what about my rights to maintain A:NR and L5R events?

How is restricting what people consume not censorship? I don't even know what to say to that. Yep all of those a censorship, very sensible uses of it but still censorship. Taco Bell rightfully censors Coke as they are the direct competitor to Coke so they should.

DANEgerous:
Taco Bell rightfully censors Coke as they are the direct competitor to Coke so they should.

They aren't. Taco Bell has a lifetime exclusivity contract with Pepsi, which is not the same as being a competitor.

They sort of used to be, back when PepsiCo still owned Taco Bell (as well as KFC and Pizza Hut), but some 20 years ago, its restaurant division spun off into the independent publicly traded Tricon Global Restaurants (now Yum! Brands).

DANEgerous:
How is restricting what people consume not censorship? I don't even know what to say to that. Yep all of those a censorship, very sensible uses of it but still censorship. Taco Bell rightfully censors Coke as they are the direct competitor to Coke so they should.

Because we want words to make sense. We want words to actually mean something, andthe simple fact that if Steam had actual quality control that is not censorship.

To put it plainly, private agency, such as Taco Bell signing a contract with Pepsico, is not censorship. That's stupid. Okay, please outline what you think censorship is, and how it relates to private individuals conducting business and choosing the nature of their affiliation to other private interests?

Addendum_Forthcoming:
The former businesswoman in me is screaming; "Why the fuck are we doing Steam's job for them?"--The consumer in me is screaming; "This is why GoG is a superior platform!"--The gamer in me is simply screaming; "This is why board and tabletop roleplay gaming market will always be best."

To be fair, you have to be around other people to play tabletop, board games and 99.9% of people that play those are assheads.

Not stocking your shop with a product is not a censorship.

There is a discussion to be had about limits of private enterprise, and if those big enough should be treated closer to goverments(yipes!) since they're affecting bigger and bigger portions of human lives... But personally, i'm more miffed when a shop offers me a product with cut content, and no explanation, rather that when it simply doesn't have it in stock.

The censorship discussion is semantic and besides the point. I don't care which games are offensive. GTA, Hatred and lots of other games are, quite deliberately, offensive but they can sell those for all I care. It'd just be nice to be able to browse the steam storefront without having to wade through mountains of utter garbage. It'd be nice to be able to know that when I spend my money on a game on steam it'll be decently functional and have an executable file.

Steam is not worthless now, but one of its functions, being easily able to browse games, has been ruined by Valve's unwillingness to check for quality. That is unfortunate both for me as somebody who would like to find new games, and for the smaller devs who don't have the means to market their games like Ubisoft can. Don't get me wrong, Valve is entitled to do most of this (except maybe selling games that literally do not function) but it is a bad development for consumers and smaller devs.

If keeping AIDS simulator off of Steam is censorship, then frankly I'm failing to see how censoring AIDS simulator is a bad thing. There's so much raw fucking sewage on Steam nowadays that Steam is hurting its own brand and smaller devs who can't be heard over the mess. And I think people can agree that not every last shitty asset flip deserves a right to be seen on Steam.

Or have we reached such a point of hating any forms of restriction that people would be cheering if Ethnic Cleansing got put up on Steam?

erttheking:
If keeping AIDS simulator off of Steam is censorship, then frankly I'm failing to see how censoring AIDS simulator is a bad thing. There's so much raw fucking sewage on Steam nowadays that Steam is hurting its own brand and smaller devs who can't be heard over the mess. And I think people can agree that not every last shitty asset flip deserves a right to be seen on Steam.

Or have we reached such a point of hating any forms of restriction that people would be cheering if Ethnic Cleansing got put up on Steam?

Ehm, just FYI, but one can already do ethnic cleansing in several games..
Games that are also highly revered. I'm quite certain you've heard of several, or even played them yourself.

I was going to say that as long as it's not illegal, but games allow you to do several things that are illegal already.
Like theft, murder, assault, ethnic cleansing, rape (I think), etc etc.

Tastes differ, and yours is as valid as mine, so long as you don't try to take mine away from me and replace it with yours.
Or collude to impose a political agenda on others. Despite calling yourself good. For example.
Games is an escape, an expression, art, entertainment, and so much more.

Vendor-Lazarus:

erttheking:
If keeping AIDS simulator off of Steam is censorship, then frankly I'm failing to see how censoring AIDS simulator is a bad thing. There's so much raw fucking sewage on Steam nowadays that Steam is hurting its own brand and smaller devs who can't be heard over the mess. And I think people can agree that not every last shitty asset flip deserves a right to be seen on Steam.

Or have we reached such a point of hating any forms of restriction that people would be cheering if Ethnic Cleansing got put up on Steam?

Ehm, just FYI, but one can already do ethnic cleansing in several games..
Games that are also highly revered. I'm quite certain you've heard of several, or even played them yourself.

I was going to say that as long as it's not illegal, but games allow you to do several things that are illegal already.
Like theft, murder, assault, ethnic cleansing, rape (I think), etc etc.

Tastes differ, and yours is as valid as mine, so long as you don't try to take mine away from me and replace it with yours.
Or collude to impose a political agenda on others. Despite calling yourself good. For example.
Games is an escape, an expression, art, entertainment, and so much more.

Really. Please point out games where the stated, intended goal was to give the player the ability to perform ethnic cleansing. Because there's a world and a fucking half of difference between a game like GTA, which doesn't actually advocate you to go out and steal cars, and Ethnic Cleansing, which DOES advocate for the killing of non-whites, and I really shouldn't have to explain this to you.

And if being against ethnic fucking cleansing being on steam is a political agenda then A. saying it should be on Steam is just as much a political agenda itself and B. I fail to see how it being a political agenda is a bad thing.

Uh huh, and like art, there's the racist propaganda side that doesn't deserve any respect. Not all games are equally as valid as the other. The Slaughtering Grounds is not equally as valid as the Stanley Parable.

Steam needs goddamn quality control, pure and simple. No one is buying all these shit games, it's ruining any chances for promising developers to get noticed, and it's cluttering up a once respectable store front.

erttheking:

Vendor-Lazarus:

erttheking:
If keeping AIDS simulator off of Steam is censorship, then frankly I'm failing to see how censoring AIDS simulator is a bad thing. There's so much raw fucking sewage on Steam nowadays that Steam is hurting its own brand and smaller devs who can't be heard over the mess. And I think people can agree that not every last shitty asset flip deserves a right to be seen on Steam.

Or have we reached such a point of hating any forms of restriction that people would be cheering if Ethnic Cleansing got put up on Steam?

Ehm, just FYI, but one can already do ethnic cleansing in several games..
Games that are also highly revered. I'm quite certain you've heard of several, or even played them yourself.

I was going to say that as long as it's not illegal, but games allow you to do several things that are illegal already.
Like theft, murder, assault, ethnic cleansing, rape (I think), etc etc.

Tastes differ, and yours is as valid as mine, so long as you don't try to take mine away from me and replace it with yours.
Or collude to impose a political agenda on others. Despite calling yourself good. For example.
Games is an escape, an expression, art, entertainment, and so much more.

Really. Please point out games where the stated, intended goal was to give the player the ability to perform ethnic cleansing. Because there's a world and a fucking half of difference between a game like GTA, which doesn't actually advocate you to go out and steal cars, and Ethnic Cleansing, which DOES advocate for the killing of non-whites, and I really shouldn't have to explain this to you.

And if being against ethnic fucking cleansing being on steam is a political agenda then A. saying it should be on Steam is just as much a political agenda itself and B. I fail to see how it being a political agenda is a bad thing.

Uh huh, and like art, there's the racist propaganda side that doesn't deserve any respect. Not all games are equally as valid as the other. The Slaughtering Grounds is not equally as valid as the Stanley Parable.

Steam needs goddamn quality control, pure and simple. No one is buying all these shit games, it's ruining any chances for promising developers to get noticed, and it's cluttering up a once respectable store front.

The answer is 4X games. So many of them have it built into them, with various bonuses and penalties linked in with their assorted military, political, morale systems. A bunch of those games have at least one race/faction that gets rewarded for some good old ethnic/racial cleansing.

Elijin:
Snip

And how many of them encourage the specific cleansing of a specific human race that actually exists? There's a difference between Stellaris letting you eat aliens and a game encouraging the murder all the Jews.

DANEgerous:

Addendum_Forthcoming:

DANEgerous:
Still Convincing me I am right, again if they are purely asset flips, that is illegal and banned. Sorry If i say I will not sell (X) that is absolutely positively %1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 pure unadulterated CENSORSHIP to THE MAX 200 X1,000 MAXIMUM SUPER HYPER ULTRA!!!

So I ban your weird German porn and ban it. Yep, I just censored you. I think I should have but none the less I did censor you. It was justified but who cares? It was still censorship.

How?

Are you legitimately suggesting store owners have no right to tailor their store environment for targeted audiences and maintain their own standards of shelf space allocation?

Is Prada or Miu Miu stores censoring other designers by not carrying their labels?

What about the store owner's right to tailor their retail experience?

If I open a board games cafe, am I 'censoring' Magic: The Gathering by having a Netrunner and Legend of the Five Rings night? Sounds like you're """censoring""" my wishes to advertise and host routine Netrunner and L5R events and prioritize the seating of those players to me... what about my rights to maintain A:NR and L5R events?

How is restricting what people consume not censorship?

No company (in these examples) is "restricting what people consume." People are still entirely free to consume the product in any of the literally infinite number of ways that is not their storefront.

The default state of any product is not to be provided by a company; a company must go out of its way to begin providing a new product or service. Therefore, not providing any given product/service isn't censorship because there is no restriction or suppression going on. Your frankly delusional view that every store, by default, sells every item in existence then "censors" it's way down to the few products it actually sells is astonishing. Stores by default sell nothing then add items to their inventory.

If I walk past a homeless person on the street asking for change, not giving them money isn't the same as stealing from them. You're trying to conflate the two as equivalent.

tldr: A lack of enabling isn't hindrance, a lack of promotion isn't suppression, and a lack of assistance isn't restriction. An absence of something isn't the same as the presence of it's opposite.

erttheking:

Vendor-Lazarus:

erttheking:
If keeping AIDS simulator off of Steam is censorship, then frankly I'm failing to see how censoring AIDS simulator is a bad thing. There's so much raw fucking sewage on Steam nowadays that Steam is hurting its own brand and smaller devs who can't be heard over the mess. And I think people can agree that not every last shitty asset flip deserves a right to be seen on Steam.

Or have we reached such a point of hating any forms of restriction that people would be cheering if Ethnic Cleansing got put up on Steam?

Ehm, just FYI, but one can already do ethnic cleansing in several games..
Games that are also highly revered. I'm quite certain you've heard of several, or even played them yourself.

I was going to say that as long as it's not illegal, but games allow you to do several things that are illegal already.
Like theft, murder, assault, ethnic cleansing, rape (I think), etc etc.

Tastes differ, and yours is as valid as mine, so long as you don't try to take mine away from me and replace it with yours.
Or collude to impose a political agenda on others. Despite calling yourself good. For example.
Games is an escape, an expression, art, entertainment, and so much more.

Really. Please point out games where the stated, intended goal was to give the player the ability to perform ethnic cleansing. Because there's a world and a fucking half of difference between a game like GTA, which doesn't actually advocate you to go out and steal cars, and Ethnic Cleansing, which DOES advocate for the killing of non-whites, and I really shouldn't have to explain this to you.

And if being against ethnic fucking cleansing being on steam is a political agenda then A. saying it should be on Steam is just as much a political agenda itself and B. I fail to see how it being a political agenda is a bad thing.

Uh huh, and like art, there's the racist propaganda side that doesn't deserve any respect. Not all games are equally as valid as the other. The Slaughtering Grounds is not equally as valid as the Stanley Parable.

Steam needs goddamn quality control, pure and simple. No one is buying all these shit games, it's ruining any chances for promising developers to get noticed, and it's cluttering up a once respectable store front.

Eijin got it in one. I would have listed a bunch of game titles, but the overall genre of most would be 4X games.
Despite your moved goalpost.

Also, ethnic cleansing doesn't mean only against non-whites. Whites are in fact being genocided in South Africa, causing an ethnic cleansing. Most ethnic cleansing have been by non-whites against non-whites. So I don't see why you brought that up.

Steam doesn't need quality control. They do need to become better at sorting and categorizing games however.
Quality control could potentially be used to "disallow" games that goes against a political viewpoint.
Any viewpoint.
Imagine if christans or muslims were in charge of the quality control. Would you be okay with that?

Vendor-Lazarus:
Snip

Yeah, if you think that being able to commit ethnic cleansing in Stellaris is the same as a game that's all about how you should kill non-whites are more or less the same game, you're looking at this with little nuance I find. Stellaris isn't a propaganda game saying that black people should all die.

Hm, your information on non-whites is interesting. Just not sure how it relates to anything.

*Looks at AIDs simulator* It needs quality control. I'm sorry, but just about every major retail store manages to have quality control without managing to ban everything they politically disagree with. It's not hard. And while "every message deserves to be heard" sounds great, when people start defending pro-Nazi rhetoric being sold on Steam's store front for money, carrying an unspoken word of endorsement from Valve, the only thing I can do is shake my head.

Am I ok with theocracies? No, but I'm not advocating for theocracies. Can we calm the fuck down with the hyperbole? Or are you making the comparison that any form of quality control ever is the same as living under theocratic rule?

erttheking:

Vendor-Lazarus:
Snip

Yeah, if you think that being able to commit ethnic cleansing in Stellaris is the same as a game that's all about how you should kill non-whites are more or less the same game, you're looking at this with little nuance I find. Stellaris isn't a propaganda game saying that black people should all die.

Hm, your information on non-whites is interesting. Just not sure how it relates to anything.

*Looks at AIDs simulator* It needs quality control. I'm sorry, but just about every major retail store manages to have quality control without managing to ban everything they politically disagree with. It's not hard. And while "every message deserves to be heard" sounds great, when people start defending pro-Nazi rhetoric being sold on Steam's store front for money, carrying an unspoken word of endorsement from Valve, the only thing I can do is shake my head.

Am I ok with theocracies? No, but I'm not advocating for theocracies. Can we calm the fuck down with the hyperbole? Or are you making the comparison that any form of quality control ever is the same as living under theocratic rule?

You said:

erttheking:

Or have we reached such a point of hating any forms of restriction that people would be cheering if Ethnic Cleansing got put up on Steam?

So I pointed out some games that have that in them already.
You started to move the goalposts after I mentioned this.

You brought up ethnic cleansing speficially as a thing done by whites here:

erttheking:

Really. Please point out games where the stated, intended goal was to give the player the ability to perform ethnic cleansing. Because there's a world and a fucking half of difference between a game like GTA, which doesn't actually advocate you to go out and steal cars, and Ethnic Cleansing, which DOES advocate for the killing of non-whites, and I really shouldn't have to explain this to you.

I countered it.

Physical stores need to carefully select those games that they think will sell the best, because of limited storage space. A digital marketplace has no such restrictions.
Selling a product is not the same as endorsing it. Nor does every commercial supposedly endorse the show it is being aired in between.

Hyperbole...
Me saying that any quality control is a theocracy?
Hyperbole!

Vendor-Lazarus:
Snip

The GAME Ethnic Cleansing. There is a game called Ethnic Cleansing. You control either a Nazi or a Klansman and kill Hispanics, Blacks, and Jews.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_Cleansing_(video_game)

That's what I was talking about. And frankly I'd rather not see this piece of shit on Steam.

Yeah, it kind of does. I mean, it's a pleasant ideal to take a laissez faire attitude towards this kind of stuff, but that didn't work in the past when it came to Steam and Digital Homicide, and it's not really going to work now. If someone wants to sell Nazi propaganda on your storefront and you're ok with it, a lot of people are going to see that as an endorsement, regardless of whether or not that was the intent.

If you're not saying any quality control is theocracy, why did you bring up that "Would you want Christians or Muslims deciding quality control" if comparing quality control to theocracy wasn't your point?

Also, what about games that just flat out don't work? That can't run? The one of two guidelines Valve actually has for quality control (it needs to be able to launch) and it doesn't even enforce it. Or games that are bugged up the ass, or are asset flips, or just flat out stolen?

erttheking:

Vendor-Lazarus:
Snip

The GAME Ethnic Cleansing. There is a game called Ethnic Cleansing. You control either a Nazi or a Klansman and kill Hispanics, Blacks, and Jews.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_Cleansing_(video_game)

That's what I was talking about. And frankly I'd rather not see this piece of shit on Steam.

Yeah, it kind of does. I mean, it's a pleasant ideal to take a laissez faire attitude towards this kind of stuff, but that didn't work in the past when it came to Steam and Digital Homicide, and it's not really going to work now. If someone wants to sell Nazi propaganda on your storefront and you're ok with it, a lot of people are going to see that as an endorsement, regardless of whether or not that was the intent.

If you're not saying any quality control is theocracy, why did you bring up that "Would you want Christians or Muslims deciding quality control" if comparing quality control to theocracy wasn't your point?

Also, what about games that just flat out don't work? That can't run? The one of two guidelines Valve actually has for quality control (it needs to be able to launch) and it doesn't even enforce it. Or games that are bugged up the ass, or are asset flips, or just flat out stolen?

That horrible game would run afoul of the illegal aspect I think. So no worries there.
What makes it horrible is that it does espouse an actual racist viewpoint that is current and rooted in real life.
Still, even if it was allowed on steam, it could be downvoted and argued against within political lines.
Show it for the garbage that it is. Not avoiding it, making it taboo or silencing it.
That only leads to making it seem that much more interesting.

I was showing you that enforcing a certain political viewpoint through quality control could backfire and that only allowing what you want or agree with is a double-standard (when it comes to politics).
The whole sentece I wrote was:

Vendor-Lazarus:

Steam doesn't need quality control. They do need to become better at sorting and categorizing games however.
Quality control could potentially be used to "disallow" games that goes against a political viewpoint.
Any viewpoint.
Imagine if christans or muslims were in charge of the quality control. Would you be okay with that?

Through better categories and sorting, you could avoid certain game tags or find just the ones you want.

I completely agree with you on games that don't work, can't run, severely buggy, asset flips and stolen.
Except for the stolen part, which is illegal, I don't see why the quality control couldn't consist of a tag/label that describes the issue and sell it as is.

Vendor-Lazarus:

erttheking:

Vendor-Lazarus:
Snip

The GAME Ethnic Cleansing. There is a game called Ethnic Cleansing. You control either a Nazi or a Klansman and kill Hispanics, Blacks, and Jews.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_Cleansing_(video_game)

That's what I was talking about. And frankly I'd rather not see this piece of shit on Steam.

Yeah, it kind of does. I mean, it's a pleasant ideal to take a laissez faire attitude towards this kind of stuff, but that didn't work in the past when it came to Steam and Digital Homicide, and it's not really going to work now. If someone wants to sell Nazi propaganda on your storefront and you're ok with it, a lot of people are going to see that as an endorsement, regardless of whether or not that was the intent.

If you're not saying any quality control is theocracy, why did you bring up that "Would you want Christians or Muslims deciding quality control" if comparing quality control to theocracy wasn't your point?

Also, what about games that just flat out don't work? That can't run? The one of two guidelines Valve actually has for quality control (it needs to be able to launch) and it doesn't even enforce it. Or games that are bugged up the ass, or are asset flips, or just flat out stolen?

That horrible game would run afoul of the illegal aspect I think. So no worries there.
What makes it horrible is that it does espouse an actual racist viewpoint that is current and rooted in real life.
Still, even if it was allowed on steam, it could be downvoted and argued against within political lines.
Show it for the garbage that it is. Not avoiding it, making it taboo or silencing it.
That only leads to making it seem that much more interesting.

I was showing you that enforcing a certain political viewpoint through quality control could backfire and that only allowing what you want or agree with is a double-standard (when it comes to politics).
The whole sentece I wrote was:

Vendor-Lazarus:

Steam doesn't need quality control. They do need to become better at sorting and categorizing games however.
Quality control could potentially be used to "disallow" games that goes against a political viewpoint.
Any viewpoint.
Imagine if christans or muslims were in charge of the quality control. Would you be okay with that?

Through better categories and sorting, you could avoid certain game tags or find just the ones you want.

I completely agree with you on games that don't work, can't run, severely buggy, asset flips and stolen.
Except for the stolen part, which is illegal, I don't see why the quality control couldn't consist of a tag/label that describes the issue and sell it as is.

Honest question, how is it illegal? America doesn't have hate speech laws.

And no one sold it back in the day and it didn't blow up. "No such thing as bad publicity" is overblown. The school shooter game got taken form and people just forgot it. The "buy games because lol triggered" crowd has a short attention span

I think we can all agree that there are certain viewpoints that don't deserve attention. Those are the only ones I'm arguing against.

Orgsnize all you want, oversaturating the market is always a bad idea.

If Steam wants to become the reject shop of online game storefronts, well good for them. I will continue not using their storefront unless I know exactly what I'm looking for. There's that much crap that gets release in a week. Perhaps it's time to start migrating over to GoG, though I don't think I'll be ever quite rid of Steam, I have far too many games on in my library.

Time used to be that getting on Steam was a mark of quality. But now even asking Valve to make sure everything they put up works properly, and that 'games' that are not even alpha test quality not be approved for sale is censorship, it would seem. I mean, that is the main argument of Sterling when he asks for curation, though you wouldn't know it with all the cries of 'censorship!' that abound.

Okay so I noted we are all talking past each other, I stand by what I said but I think the problem is, there is no good word for what happened. What is Steam not doing? Censoring? No for reason in this thread. Restricting? No, they restrict content even via age, granted the restriction is broken easily but so is police tape. Prohibit? No, for me that means "sells illegal goods" prohibition is literally banning alcohol. I think there is just no word for what such action. My suggestion angusta (or whatever is Latin for narrow) as that is easily the best fit. Yeah, this thread turned me off this argument but I think this is why in part.

To those still arguing wether Valve has "bent to the hate mob" or "defended free speech", i have an answer.

They have picked the option that takes the least effort.

Yanno why this came about?

A group of people threw a massive hissy fit over some games that were on the platform so Steam, deciding to show they were nice people, decided to take down the obviously horrible and offensive games.

Then a group of other people threw a massive hissy fit over those same games being taken down, so Steam had to backtrack and NOT take them down.

So the first group likely started THEIR hissy fit all over again...

So Steam finally had enough and just said "Fuggit, we've been dealing with this for years. If you guys can't be happy, then figure it out yourselves. If you're offended, OH WELL, us taking it down will just offend someone else. Grow a thick skin and deal with it, we're tired of not being able to win in this conversation, those games don't reflect our values."

And then everyone is throwing a hissy fit over that.

Welcome to the Internet, where no matter WHAT you do, IT'S WRONG.

DANEgerous:
Okay so I noted we are all talking past each other, I stand by what I said but I think the problem is, there is no good word for what happened. What is Steam not doing? Censoring? No for reason in this thread. Restricting? No, they restrict content even via age, granted the restriction is broken easily but so is police tape. Prohibit? No, for me that means "sells illegal goods" prohibition is literally banning alcohol. I think there is just no word for what such action. My suggestion angusta (or whatever is Latin for narrow) as that is easily the best fit. Yeah, this thread turned me off this argument but I think this is why in part.

Quality control?

Chessrook44:

Welcome to the Internet, where no matter WHAT you do, IT'S WRONG.

Well, of course there wasn't any course of action that could please everybody. There never is, because people have mutually incompatible priorities here. If anybody expected otherwise they were fooling themselves.

I think people need to stop using the word "censorship" because I don't think it means what they think it means.

Valve should "censor" *heavy sarcastic air quotes* because it reflects poorly on them if they don't.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 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