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.
Valve Pulls Controversial Game Hatred from Greenlight - Update
- Thread starter roseofbattle
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Another dick move by Valve... I'm so surprised...
Horribly bad and broken games as well as outright scams are okay but I dare you to offend the feeble mind set of? well of whom exactly btw? ? Ah lets go for Americans they got some pretty nice mass shootings, its like a daily live simulator.
I say its conspiracy by the NRA. They pressured Valve into taking actions against the bad publicity of mass shootings.
oh an apple!
Horribly bad and broken games as well as outright scams are okay but I dare you to offend the feeble mind set of? well of whom exactly btw? ? Ah lets go for Americans they got some pretty nice mass shootings, its like a daily live simulator.
I say its conspiracy by the NRA. They pressured Valve into taking actions against the bad publicity of mass shootings.
oh an apple!
That trailer...if I was a religious man I would pray. But since I'm not, eh. Valve doesn't want to be the store front of a sophmoring mass murder game? Oh well.
So like the movie production code. We need to start censoring ourselves.ryukage_sama said:
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.
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.seris said:
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.
For anyone who wants to know more Jim Sterling and Total Biscuit have additional information and views on this subject:
Personally I have no problem with Valve denying this game as it looks to be a monotonous and shallow game existing only to offend or at least to provide "entertainment" on the basest of levels. But I wouldn't personally buy it so I wouldn't be concerned, would I? I also happen to believe that games should not be censored for their content even if it is questionable because just where do you draw the line? See the common comparisons to GTA and Postal.
But one thing is certain: if Valve don't follow this debacle up with a bona fide quality control system for Greenlight then they're just going to appear as hypocrites.
Personally I have no problem with Valve denying this game as it looks to be a monotonous and shallow game existing only to offend or at least to provide "entertainment" on the basest of levels. But I wouldn't personally buy it so I wouldn't be concerned, would I? I also happen to believe that games should not be censored for their content even if it is questionable because just where do you draw the line? See the common comparisons to GTA and Postal.
But one thing is certain: if Valve don't follow this debacle up with a bona fide quality control system for Greenlight then they're just going to appear as hypocrites.
Valve is making themselves out to be massively hypocritical. Postal 1 & Manhunt can be on Steam, but Hatred can't. People under the impression that Postal has always been satirical like Postal 2 have clearly never played the 1st game, which was a straight-up mass-murder simulator. If this is some sort of argument about quality control, then that energy seems to be wasted on a game that isn't even out yet, while legitimate scams have passed through Greenlight and are flooding the market in an unplayable and dysfunctional state.
I don't think I'd like this game. It's attempt at shock and controversy are puerile at best and doesn't look interesting to play at all, but I'll defend its right to exist. If games can be art than they need to be offensive. To illicit an extreme emotional response like this game has is something most artists crave to do. Attempting to defame the developers (through unfounded rumors no less) and to remove access to the game via Steam (the most dominant force of publishing on PC) is doing games a disservice as a medium. Let the market decide whether or not the game will succeed, and don't let it fall victim to moral panic.
I don't think I'd like this game. It's attempt at shock and controversy are puerile at best and doesn't look interesting to play at all, but I'll defend its right to exist. If games can be art than they need to be offensive. To illicit an extreme emotional response like this game has is something most artists crave to do. Attempting to defame the developers (through unfounded rumors no less) and to remove access to the game via Steam (the most dominant force of publishing on PC) is doing games a disservice as a medium. Let the market decide whether or not the game will succeed, and don't let it fall victim to moral panic.
Hatred looks like absolute shit, from both a gameplay and a "story" perspective.
That being said, Valve definitely should make up it's mind about quality control. This removal seems kinda arbitrary and they should have defined written rules if they're going to do stuff like this.
That being said, Valve definitely should make up it's mind about quality control. This removal seems kinda arbitrary and they should have defined written rules if they're going to do stuff like this.
Nobody is forcing others to buy/play this game.
Denying it from stores is asinine since it obviously has enough support to pass the Greenlight checks.
This is just another example of people not keeping away from things that upset them.
Denying it from stores is asinine since it obviously has enough support to pass the Greenlight checks.
This is just another example of people not keeping away from things that upset them.
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 said:
You know what else sets up a slippery slope? Forcing websites to provide content against their will.Gamergeek25 said:
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.
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.
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.
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.Entitled said:
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.
- Apr 1, 2009
- 16,500
- 5,100
- 118
- Gender
- Whatever, just wash your hands.
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.
Actually, they did remove Earth: Year 2066 on a quality issue.webkilla said:
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.
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.Gamergeek25 said:
You are acting scared about potential censorship, while cheerfully demanding to control other people's distribution of information.
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.Entitled said:
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".ShakerSilver said:
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.
Great straw man argument about banning a game. Let us know when a game is actually banned.Gamergeek25 said:
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.