Developer Blames "American Culture" for Greenlight Ban

[blank0000]

I see it in the manner that a movie theater would. Steam promotes and sells games, they are a distributor and they want to make sure what they distribute doesn't paint them in a bad light.

Now, a theater has films involving sex and violence, AS DOES STEAM. However, most theaters do not promote and distribute raw pornography. If they do, they specialize in it. I can see the folks running steam treating there service as such, seeing a game that is designed to be pornographic, and make the decision not to show it. It's not a shut down of creative express, or a reflection of the "Prudish American Standard" it's a company deciding the kind of content it wants to distribute.

 

[Quadocky]

I am actually tossed on this. No idea. On the one hand, I believe that sex and sexuality should be more of an accepted thing, not something for people to go "Ewww!!" at or whatever.

But at the same time I believe there is a time and place for everything.

Given that this game is pretty transparent in its purpose, it doesn't really seem to match the standard of content already set by many other games on steam. Maybe in the future steam will have a 18+ section, but at the same time... it may not. I don't actually expect Valve to ever have 18+ games, it just seems... odd to me.

Well, in the history of video games, the ones that were meant to be pornographic are usually terrible games anyway. So, overall games are better served when sex and sexuality serve as a means to amp up the existing content, not being the focus.

And many, MANY gore/violence based games on Steam are not transparent on their purpose? Killing Floor (even in the name itself, love the game ) is very transparent of how it gets the initial attention. The much loved Team Fortress 2 is essentially a game that proves one e-peen through the total destruction of the opponent. It's not like the game is going, "Oh look, here is a guy completely forcing sexual drive on all these unsuspecting women." It is a game where both parties are interesting in a very physical relationship.

The game is co-created by a woman for crying out loud. This is very good evidence that women like erotic based games as well, but no... Mortal Kombat game okay, down with boobies..... what?

Its not perfect, I understand. There is not much to be done about it.

The USA is full of dichotomies in terms of media. Has been for a long time. And sadly its going to be long time before it could change again.

 

[axlryder]

People are looking at this all wrong. I personally find it offensive that "American Culture" gets blamed on this. It was offering up risque material, and Steam didn't want to take a chance. That is all. Valve has the right to deny any game they wish from their service. End of story. In Steam rejection letters, they are all generic and never give an explanation as to why games are turned down. But make no mistakes about it, it is their prerogative to do it, but don't scapegoat "American Culture".

Edit: Looking over the comments, people are way too influenced by the conjecture of this person. Use your reasoning and you will discover that this is not uncommon for Valve and has nothing to do with "American Culture" as compared to Valve worrying about their image.

That's the point - why is it risque material in the first place? Why would this hurt Valve's image? How is this more risque than games that have you run around lighting people on fire while they scream in agony? It come's back down to American Culture and how it treats sex as worse than killing.

It's not just about being risque. It's sleazy. The concept itself is sleazy, and sex games/film have always been associated with low quality, exploitative business practice, and crappy, scummy people. It's just how it is. Perhaps that too is a product of American culture, but it does generally ring true from my experience (even in countries that aren't American). Valve doesn't want to be associated with that image. It's entirely understandable.

True, it's sleazy. But why is sleazy worse than gruesome? Even in the world of exploitation films, the pornos are looked down upon more than the gorefests. Saw and Hostel are not nearly as condemned as porn; yet you can't really classify either as "wholesome", "thoughtful", or "dignified".

Not just sleazy content in the game, the majority of the sex industry is sleazy. Remember, sex games/films are often associated heavily with very low quality (probably equivalent to bad flash games), exploitative business practices and scummy people (including distributors). Those factors, even independent of one another, are enough to make any non-porn associated supplier think twice about dealing with that sort of content. Note that the Saw films don't attempt to enforce impossible to cancel recurring payments on monthly subscriptions required to view their content. As bad as the films are (especially the later ones), they at least have some semblance of quality in their production. The actors themselves are probably, you know, real actors (not some random person whose getting paid to mumble a few lines and then have sex). There's obviously time and money that went into them. Yes, it's cynical schlock turned out by a corporate entity for the sake of a few bucks, but it still looks good next to most porn. The sleaze itself just makes the game appear to have no real merit aside from featuring some well drawn boobs and only strengthens the connection to the previously mentioned points.

There's also the factor that Valve would probably have to create a special porn section just for the game AND try and figure out where to draw the line in terms of appropriate and inappropriate content for whatever else might go in that section (tentacles okay? How about lolis? Scat? free for all?). The whole thing is a massive headache for valve and certainly not worth messing with their whole site for the sake of one game.

What I'd be interested to see is if Valve would consider putting games similar to katawa shoujo on their service.

 

[caturdaytimes]

If you want to see at what point an immature, childish view of sex enters the story here, it's at the game's conception, not at its prohibition; this looks like something a high school boy thought up with his friends in AV Club. American culture aside, the desire to block this tacky masturbation fantasy disguised as a video game is coming less from a prudish aversion to sex and more from an understandable aversion to dumb, childish shit.

I think it comes down to a form of societal "peer pressure", if you would. It appears that the game tells a story of a male looking to get laid. Nothing new in history. I'm sure some of my male fellows on the forums here has experienced a desire to have sex (like I said, nothing new)..... but, somehow, that is bad. Just think for a minute. Wanting to get laid is wrong. lol Ridiculous, I know, but that is an underlying message within American culture. Now, this message *is not* directed towards females.

Yes, because female sexual empowerment is all the rage in America. What planet are you living on where women are encouraged to have a lot of sex but men aren't?

I should have clarified that my personal thoughts on the matter are that sex should be able to be addressed by videogaming as they already address the worst possible crime a human being can commit, murder.

And they haven't come even close to addressing it in a realistic, wholesome, or otherwise mature way. Couple that with the fact that, as a whole, video game portrayals of sexuality are even more infantile, and you've got a good argument for why we shouldn't be even trying to approach sexuality until we as a community grow up.

The fact that meat-headed, empty violence is a common fixture of video games is an argument AGAINST attempting to deal with sex, not FOR it.

The original intent of my statement, Peruvianskys, is not sex, but a subtle change in the culture of American society. I urge you to re-read my post and respond with a more intelligent response. Thank you.

 

[Iron Lightning]

1) I never said anything about abusive or negative relationships. I'm defending consensual sex in video games here, where both sides are perfectly willing to do it. What do you think I'm defending here?

And what I'm saying is that the relationships portrayed in the game in question, as well as in the larger video game world, are by and large negative depictions that trade on misogynistic stereotypes and indulge in masturbatory fantasy instead of honest and edifying sexual behavior.

There are more categories for a depiction of sex to fall under than just "great" and "rape." Just because these female cardboard cut-outs that exist solely to get fucked are technically consenting doesn't mean the relationship presented is positive.

As I understand it Seduce Me is like most other dating sims in that the player talks to a person, learns facts about that person, buys the person gifts, gdates the person, and then has sex with the person if all goes well. What's the problem with that? I don't understand

4) Sex in a game having a bigger impact on children than a game that has the player torture people as a government agent or kill cops as a gang member is something I just don't buy. Once again - sex is a natural part of life, gunning down a crowd or shoving a pencil into someone's eye isn't.

Your last point is an important one; you're absolutely right that while insane violence is not something most children will engage in, sex is. This is why it has a bigger impact. A child doesn't take lessons on how to murder correctly from media but they can and do take lessons on how to talk to women or have sex or otherwise interact romantically from media. You can't deny that.

Irrelevant since this isn't a game for children nor is it a game that I most children would be interested in.

5) THIS GAME ISN'T MEANT FOR CHILDREN! Why are we considering how this affects children when this is meant for adults? The only reason kids should be playing any M rated game is because the parent(s) feel that their child can handle it. If the child has trouble separating reality and fantasy, the parent shouldn't let them be playing games like this or even at all. It's the parent's job and reponsibility to decide what's right for their kids, not anyone else's. Yes, I'm saying that kids shouldn't be playing CoD or GTA either without the parent's consent. No, the kid secretly playing this at a friend's house isn't an excuse, since the parent should be well aware of where their kid is going and be in contact with the friend's parents as well. If the parent feels their kid can't be trusted there, they simply shouldn't allow them over there.

The whole child thing is a side issue that I don't really care about. What I'm saying is that this game gives no indication of having any artistic merit or value beyond sleazy jerk fodder. This thread is full of people saying that childish attitudes towards sex are responsible for the ban, and I am arguing that those who took it off Steam were showing quite a bit more maturity when it comes to sex than those who made this shitty game.

Assuming that this game is indeed merit-less rubbish then why should we treat it differently from merit-less rubbish where the only point is to derive pleasure from wanton murder. Violent shit like Killing Floor is perfectly acceptable but sexy shit like Seduce Me isn't. Does that not seem hypocritical to you?

6) Finally, your arguments are still the same exact arguments that people use against violence in video games - just retailored to tackle sex instead. That argument has been destroyed many times by people much more intelligent than either of us. Go find one of the many thousands of threads and articles that address that issue if you're wondering why that argument doesn't work, as they'll explain it way better than I can.

Actually, many studies have shown that young children get a large amount of their information about sex and male/female relationships through television and media. In fact, I doubt that there is a study in existence that denies the huge impact depictions of sexuality in media have on children.

I thought the children thing wasn't the crux of your argument yet you spent the most words on it and you just came back to it. Anything to do with children is irrelevant to this discussion.

P.S. For the satisfaction of my curiosity I would like to see those studies, if you please.

 

[cookyt]

With what little I've seen of the game, it comes across as the sort of cheap thing you'd see on Facebook or a Flash portal. I don't find anything objectionable about the game, but it doesn't look engaging.

As for the violence v. sex thing: most violent games use violence as a cheap and easy way to set up a conflict. When you jump into the game, there's not much of a difficulty curve in figuring what you're supposed to do. Those guys are shooting at you; you shoot back; if you get hit you lose. Lather, rinse and repeat. You could even replace all the violence with, say, simple graphics using circles and triangles, and the game wouldn't really suffer too much for it.

A game like this, however, needs a more subtle approach. If the whole game consists of thinly veiled sexual advances and innuendo where the pay-off is a few racy pictures, then I don't really see much point in it. At best, it comes across as way to make a quick buck off by exploiting the sexual desires of people. I think this is the main difference between a violent game and a sexual one. You won't see a bad game sell well just because it's violent, but the same cannot be said for sexual games.

Games like these can be done right (engaging characters, interesting plot, mechanics that feel integral to the game instead of like tacked on padding), but it's too easy to do it wrong. I guess I won't be seeing where on the spectrum this one falls.

 

[popa_qwerty]

Snip for not being important

In this case, it's nothing BUT that. There isn't even any gameplay, from what I could see. And trying to sell a "game" with nothing but sex in it... well, EVERYWHERE it would have been taken down, I guess. That barely has something to do with Valve but simply with how people react to that topic in general. And I personally would feel offended by such a game.

Tell that to Sony they have lots of "visual novels" on there platforms but at lease they have a decency to keep that crap home so don't say Everywhere in all caps like it is 100% true

 

[Epic Fail 1977]

Wait... this game was made by someone called 'Bellard'? For real!? LMFAO

 

[Sovereignty]

I lol'ed at all the people saying, "How can sex be bad, but violence/murder be good!?"

Seriously, you people make reading these articles worth it.

You view digital murder as bad. Okay. I can see where you come from. Do I agree? No, but I get it.
You don't view digital sex as bad. Hmm. Alright. I can accept that as your opinion. Do I share it with you? Hell no.


To you people because you view digital violence as 'worse' than digital erotica, it suddenly is so wrong that digital erotica is not acceptable. Not because both are bad mind you, but because something worse exists.

You don't take into consideration that what is 'wrong' or 'bad' is all subjective. Even if it wasn't. Even if we all felt exactly the same, you're still crying about the wrong things here.

You don't permit sex in video games just because something worse is used in the medium. That's not a solution, it's a way to make a problem worse. You could complain that violence *shouldn't* be in video games. (I wouldn't, but you could.)

But arguing that because someone kicked a kitten and got away with it... You should somehow be allowed to kick a full grown cat and get away with it... Well that's just wrong.



On a side note, do people actually buy these sorts of games? I imagine the game-play would be horribly dull... I mean, "Buy drink for Stacey." "Ask Stacey if you can come inside."... Just sounds boring =S

 

[Bindal]

Snip for not being important

In this case, it's nothing BUT that. There isn't even any gameplay, from what I could see. And trying to sell a "game" with nothing but sex in it... well, EVERYWHERE it would have been taken down, I guess. That barely has something to do with Valve but simply with how people react to that topic in general. And I personally would feel offended by such a game.

Tell that to Sony they have lots of "visual novels" on there platforms but at lease they have a decency to keep that crap home so don't say Everywhere in all caps like it is 100% true

1. A visual novel itself doesn't have to be bad. Heck, Steam itself got at least one. (Analogue - A Hate Story). But that, in itself, had sort of gameplay. But it does NOT have sex in it.
If those get sold is more depending on the prefered type of game in a region.

2. This game is just a cheap sex-game. Even in Japan and the like, they don't stay open on a shelve in any store next to the current FF.

 

[omega 616]

Just stick it on XBL, with the other 5 million sex games?

The thing that is quite interesting though is: a female is making a game where you play as a male, trying to shag females ....

1) Is she making it males to shag females 'cos she knows women would rather read there porn (apparently)?

2) Is that 'cos she knows sex sells and just wants to make a lot of cash quick.

It's not like this game is or was ever going to be anything decent, mini game collection mixed with a dating sim with comic book graphics, I am pretty sure has been done before. So it must just be a cash grab

 

[RaNDM G]

To anyone arguing that sex and nudity should be accepted in mainstream gaming, you already have Heavy Rain, Witcher 2, and a bunch of other games that depict both in detail. In these games the content is there in context, whether it contributes to a story arc, makes an artistic statement, or is even just played for laughs.

Some games like God of War have scenes that make no contribution to the game, they're just there. But these scenes are so short and so few and far between that once they happen they are promptly ignored.

In Seduce Me, sex is the main selling point. It serves no purpose other than to satisfy the viewer, putting it in a similar category as Japanese eroge. And when was the last time you've seen Hentai listed on Steam?

Steam reserves the right to refuse any game for any reason. No Reply shouldn't be surprised their game was pulled.

 

[idodo35]

oh i saw it on the greenlight before it got banned...
why is this person so suprised?
also who the heck plays these things for money?

 

[Negatempest]

I lol'ed at all the people saying, "How can sex be bad, but violence/murder be good!?"

Seriously, you people make reading these articles worth it.

You view digital murder as bad. Okay. I can see where you come from. Do I agree? No, but I get it.
You don't view digital sex as bad. Hmm. Alright. I can accept that as your opinion. Do I share it with you? Hell no.


To you people because you view digital violence as 'worse' than digital erotica, it suddenly is so wrong that digital erotica is not acceptable. Not because both are bad mind you, but because something worse exists.

You don't take into consideration that what is 'wrong' or 'bad' is all subjective. Even if it wasn't. Even if we all felt exactly the same, you're still crying about the wrong things here.

You don't permit sex in video games just because something worse is used in the medium. That's not a solution, it's a way to make a problem worse. You could complain that violence *shouldn't* be in video games. (I wouldn't, but you could.)

But arguing that because someone kicked a kitten and got away with it... You should somehow be allowed to kick a full grown cat and get away with it... Well that's just wrong.



On a side note, do people actually buy these sorts of games? I imagine the game-play would be horribly dull... I mean, "Buy drink for Stacey." "Ask Stacey if you can come inside."... Just sounds boring =S

So you are comparing consensual sexual intercourse to kicking a full grown cat? We are not talking about a game here where the guy forces a large number of women into sex. This game would of focused on the women who want sex as much as the guy, but the guy would actually have to work for it instead of getting sex easily just because he's the main character. So even though the end game is essentially a sexy image or 2, you cannot get there unless the player actually worked for it. The way people are arguing against this game sounds like Fox vs "Sexbox" again. Where the news team believed how easy it was to get to that point of showing sex in a game, when it wasn't....not even close.

 

[Negatempest]

To anyone arguing that sex and nudity should be accepted in mainstream gaming, you already have Heavy Rain, Witcher 2, and a bunch of other games that depict both in detail. In these games the content is there in context, whether it contributes to a story arc, makes an artistic statement, or is even just played for laughs.

Some games like God of War have scenes that make no contribution to the game, they're just there. But these scenes are so short and so few and far between that once they happen they are promptly ignored.

In Seduce Me, sex is the main selling point. It serves no purpose other than to satisfy the viewer, putting it in a similar category as Japanese eroge. And when was the last time you've seen Hentai listed on Steam?

Steam reserves the right to refuse any game for any reason. No Reply shouldn't be surprised their game was pulled.

Oh hey, Killing Floor (favorite game of mine), you aren't just gore porn disguised as a game right? Have anyone of us actually played a demo of said game to find out whether it is good or not? No. Why? Because the very project that asks the fans/members if said game was any good was pulled before said fans/members could say if the game was good or bad. See how that situation is kind of odd? I would rather have the game pulled because the people that played the game found nothing interesting in it at all, than it being pulled by Steam themselves because it goes against how society sees sex right now.

Heaven forbid a sex game can exist, but a violent one like Killing Floor cannot.

 

[CrazyCapnMorgan]

For the whole sex/violence argument thing this thread revolves around, I ask this:

What is the definition of pornography? I'd really like to know this. Not just people's conception of it, but the legal definition as well. As I said in the other thread related to this one, if you're going by the US definition of it...well then...

Spoiler: Might wanna keep the kids outta hearing distance of this one

Or maybe not, depending on the type of person you are
And how many games fit under that definition? Here's a hint: A goddamned lot.

 

[Easton Dark]

Did the Escapist use an image for this article on the front page with nipples showing?

That's bolder than showing organs flying in every direction, apparently.

 

[Treblaine]

I think it's less a case of "pandering" and more a case of "abject fear" of these over-reacting conservatives who can use sex as an excuse to censor anything.

 

[TheSteeleStrap]

Eh this doesn't seem like something I'd want to play anyway.

 

[peruvianskys]

As I understand it Seduce Me is like most other dating sims in that the player talks to a person, learns facts about that person, buys the person gifts, gdates the person, and then has sex with the person if all goes well. What's the problem with that? I don't understand

I think a video game that presents women as a series of puzzles that must be unlocked to get pussy, where all interaction exists for the sole purpose of having sex, and where women are depicted only in terms of their attractiveness to men has a serious problem with misogyny and androcentric bullshit. If you treated women in real life like you do in these dating sims, you would be a giant asshole. It's one thing to escape into a fantasy that you will never, ever engage in in real life (like blowing up a city) but it's quite another to make a game that exists to allow an outlet for immature and sleazy male instinct.

Irrelevant since this isn't a game for children nor is it a game that I most children would be interested in.

Yes, you're right. The whole child thing is a side-issue that I'm trying to get away from.

Assuming that this game is indeed merit-less rubbish then why should we treat it differently from merit-less rubbish where the only point is to derive pleasure from wanton murder. Violent shit like Killing Floor is perfectly acceptable but sexy shit like Seduce Me isn't. Does that not seem hypocritical to you?

First of all, I don't enjoy mindlessly violent meathead bullshit like Cod or Gears of War or Mad World or whatever, so I'm not being hypocritical. Video games have a shitty relationship with pointless violence, yes, but that doesn't mean that the correct response is "Man, let's get some pointless sex in here too!"

I thought the children thing wasn't the crux of your argument yet you spent the most words on it and you just came back to it. Anything to do with children is irrelevant to this discussion.

Because he made an absurd statement about it that I simply corrected. But yeah, I can find some studies that corroborate my point and I'll post them. Give me a sec.