PDA

View Full Version : Steam, Gaming Industry - "Violence OK, Sex not OK"



Dexter
06-09-2012, 05:49 PM
So, especially after the entire "Sexism" debate, that often boils down to people saying that the depiction of any sorts of cleaveage is bad and reminds me a lot of past US shenanigans (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wm1jCzIAJ5w) and media outrage (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKzF173GqTU) regarding the topic.
Comes Valve apparently denying a relatively tame-looking "dating sim" on the basis of containing content of sexual nature titled "Seduce Me", there's a long article over here: http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2012-09-05-no-sex-please-were-gamers


When Valve announced Steam Greenlight it seemed like another progressive move from one of the boldest companies in the industry. Steam's popularity had reached a point where, for the vast majority of independent PC developers, it was the only distribution platform with a large enough audience to offer a realistic chance of success. With the number of submissions growing all the time, Valve turned to the crowd: the community buys the products, so the community should be allowed to decide which products make the cut.

For No Reply Games, however, the reality of Greenlight has been somewhat different from its promise. Founded by two former employees of Guerrilla Games, Miriam Bellard and Andrejs Skuja, No Reply Games focused on perhaps the least developed part of the global market: interactive erotica. There were Japanese Hentai games, there were Flash games with rock-bottom production values, but there was nothing to compare to erotic literature, photography or film. No Reply's first project, Seduce Me, would effectively combine all three.

"We always intended to at least approach Steam with this," says Bellard, a softly spoken native of New Zealand, who has been living in Amsterdam since getting a job with Guerrilla. "I think we'd managed to convince ourselves that there was a reasonable chance that they'd take it, and the game was close enough to being finished when Greenlight came around, so we thought we'd get in at the start and see what the community said."

The community's response was polarised. Bellard observed a relatively even split between those calling for Seduce Me to be down-voted and threatening to complain, and those who, for various reasons, believed that content of this sort should be allowed a place on PC gaming's most pervasive distribution platform. Ultimately, the community didn't make the final decision; within an hour, No Reply received an e-mail from Valve stating that Seduce Me had violated Greenlight's terms of service and had been removed from the process.

"It was just a very generic e-mail saying we'd violated and the game was being taken down. It struck us as them not wanting to deal with it, not wanting to engage," says Bellard. "We were actually really shocked when it went down, because we thought that it would at least be allowed on Greenlight to be discussed. We wouldn't have minded taking down some of the images if they were considered too racy for the forum, but there was no communication - nothing.

"Before Greenlight happened, when indie developers didn't get [a game] onto Steam there was usually very little discussion about why not. People would sometimes not receive responses to their e-mails. Based on that behaviour, I can't see them doing any different here.
"I've heard figures from other indie developers, and proportionally Steam accounts for as much as 90 to 95 per cent of their sales. Getting on Steam for an indie developer is the difference between surviving financially or not."

For Bellard, Valve's intervention undermines the Greenlight concept. There is a good chance that Seduce Me wouldn't have received enough votes to pass muster, but the balance between the community's approval and disapproval was not the deciding factor. The Greenlight website lists two restrictions on acceptable content: "Your game must not contain offensive material or violate copyright or intellectual property rights." Seduce Me was evidently cast out for violation of the former, causing offence, but this description is far too vague to be useful to any developer wishing to push the envelope in terms of content.

If it can be said that greater diversity in gaming is important for the future of the medium, and it can be said that what offends one person won't necessarily offend another, then Valve's decision to remove the game is effectively a political act. How many people need to be offended for a game to be removed? Should the moral compass of certain individuals dictate what content is offered to those with a different view? For Bellard, the side of the argument that Valve chose to take will only convince other developers to err on the side of caution, and create content that won't transgress a frankly vast possible spectrum of opinion.

Of course, these strictures on what is deemed fit for sale aren't difficult to find in the games industry. Apple's guidelines for iOS submissions have attracted criticism for prohibiting a wide range of themes and subject matter, from sex and sexuality to depictions of animal faeces, but Bellard associates Valve with a different set of values.

"I understand it more on iOS, because Apple has this air of, 'we're here to protect you, everything just works and it's a nice, safe place to be'," she says. "That's Apple's whole ethos: I don't like it, but I understand it. I don't understand Valve's, because it's supposed to be part of the PC, Linux ethos. I'd always seen them as being on the side of the underdog, on the side of free speech."

When considering this issue, it's important to remember Steam's global reach. Valve sells games to a range of different countries, each with its own standards when it comes to sex and violence: Germany, for example, is more tolerant of sex than violence in cinema, television, gaming and other forms of entertainment; in America that bias is reversed. On the face of it, there's no practical reason why these varying standards should lead to games with sexual content being excluded - it certainly doesn't when it comes to violence - but Valve's decision to remove Seduce Me could simply be an example of playing it safe in a global marketplace.

"I personally don't think Valve needs [to play it safe]," Bellard responds. "I think Valve is in a position where they could push this if they wanted to. Sure, they might lose a very small amount of their audience, but they would gain others... Why they've chosen not to is possibly that they're part of that American culture, and they view this issue with that American point-of-view."

To a large extent, the righteousness of Bellard's position is besides the point: Steam is Valve's platform, just as iOS is Apple's, and it's entitled to make decisions about the propriety of different subject matter, even if that basically places that content in a commercial and creative ghetto. Frankly, the deeply conservative response of the Greenlight community is even more provocative.

Bellard and Skuja aren't pornographers; they are independent game developers attempting to fill a gap in the market that has existed since the dawn of the industry. On one level it's just good business sense, and yet Seduce Me, which is scarcely more hardcore than 50 Shades of Grey or The Joy of Sex, provoked vitriolic opposition. The complaints went beyond simple disapproval, or the refusal to purchase a product that isn't to your taste. Many comments were nothing less than blanket condemnations of all sexual content, and Bellard believes this is indicative of the way even the most engaged gamers view their hobby.

"The people we've spoken to [about the game] here in Amsetrdam, we just never hit that intensity of disagreement. Many of them felt that it wasn't for them, but there wasn't that sense of outrage that we saw from the Greenlight forum," she says.
"There's still that historical view of games being for children, and even though the average gamer is now 30 yeas old it's still the gut reaction. With books, you have children's books, teen fiction, adult books of all genres. But we tend to view games as one solid category. I think things like this can just be about habit; it's just what we're used to."

This is an important point. Despite the ubiquity of extreme violence - a talking point following this year's E3 press conferences - the games industry has a somewhat hysterical track record when it comes to sex. The most famous example is the Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas mod, Hot Coffee: a mini-game depicting consensual sex between adults that somehow managed to be more controversial than the killing sprees allowed by the game's mechanics.

With this in mind, it's pertinent to consider how violent a game would have to be to raise a similar level of ire from the Greenlight community, and which side Valve might take in that situation. Similarly, would a product as explicit as Seduce Me have been greeted by the same condemnation if it were on a Greenlight-esque service for film or literature? In a world where Netflix can host Disney fare and art films with scenes of penetrative sex without complaint, it's certainly hard to imagine.
For Bellard, this is just another teething problem for an industry that is perhaps less mature than those who work within it would believe. The acceptance of sexual imagery and themes has been the source of enormous struggle for every entertainment form, but it was also a vital aspect of their evolution and cultural acceptance. For now, though, there is little encouragement from either the industry or the audience for developers to demolish those taboos.

"That there's no content like this is exacerbated by the fact that there's nowhere for it to be sold.," Bellard says. "Once content starts to appear places will be found for it to live, which will encourage other people to make that kind of content.

"The indie scene is quite young, and I see where we are with games as like where the film industry was in its early years, when it was dominated by the really big studios, before developments in technology allowed people to break away from their control. That's where games are at the moment. We've finally got products like Unity, which allow you to make a game for a lot less money, and allow you to break away from the control of the big companies. And big companies are always more conservative."

Here are also some screens of user comments, also from the article:
http://images.eurogamer.net/2012/articles//a/1/5/1/1/5/6/3/Seduce_Me_Greenlight_comments01.jpg.jpg
http://images.eurogamer.net/2012/articles//a/1/5/1/1/5/6/3/Seduce_Me_Greenlight_comments02.jpg.jpg
http://images.eurogamer.net/2012/articles//a/1/5/1/1/5/6/3/Seduce_Me_Greenlight_comments04.jpg.jpg
http://images.eurogamer.net/2012/articles//a/1/5/1/1/5/6/3/Seduce_Me_Greenlight_comments09.jpg.jpg
(http://images.eurogamer.net/2012/articles//a/1/5/1/1/5/6/3/Seduce_Me_Greenlight_comments09.jpg.jpg)
There's also a trailer:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVnagNeKQjc

This is especially jarring, since they've apparently allowed Postal 2, it was once deleted in the belief it was a fake, but long since reinstated: http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=93000640

Malawi Frontier Guard
06-09-2012, 05:58 PM
It's a porn game, it doesn't need to be on Steam anyway.

It just needs a marketing move like this to get attention.

Lukasz
06-09-2012, 06:03 PM
It's a porn game, it doesn't need to be on Steam anyway.

It just needs a marketing move like this to get attention.

why not?



it reminds me of an outcry on RPS about boobs in witcher 2.

Games were you cut people heads off, where you torture innocent people... it is okay. but ah. someting which is done by billions of people... now that's wrong.

NathanH
06-09-2012, 06:08 PM
Sensible business decision probably. I don't really want porn games popping up in the store and I imagine there are plenty of people who feel the same. Don't have anything against the genre; hell, I try most genres at least once so I'll probably even play one some time, but it's the sort of thing I'd want to go and look for rather than have it come to me.

Steam is a private store and so it's free to have whatever policies it thinks are best for it, provided no laws are broken.

One thing I would hope is that, if this were to happen now the $100 charge is around, the money would be refunded. That would only be fair.

Tei
06-09-2012, 06:10 PM
I have no problem with this.

Steam is free to sell whatever want. And if don't want to sell porn games, because are a USA company with USA morals, is ok.

This don't mean you can't buy the game, you can buy it... elsewhere.

I have a problem when you can't install a porn app in iPhone, because there the itunes store is a monopoly. If iTunes remove a app, because contains porn, or worse, because Apple itself plan to sell a similar app, then I get angry. Because theres nowhere else to buy that app.

caljohnston
06-09-2012, 06:19 PM
Steam is free to sell whatever want.

Yeah and? Nobody's saying that they're not allowed to remove it, we're questioning their choice to do so.

Basically, they sell Postal 2 where you walk around pissing on people until they puke, and that's okay because video games are just harmless fun and in no way influence people as RPS will tell you, but add sex to a game and it's suddenly a mortal offence? Why? How?

Tei
06-09-2012, 06:31 PM
Yeah and? Nobody's saying that they're not allowed to remove it, we're questioning their choice to do so.

Basically, they sell Postal 2 where you walk around pissing on people until they puke, and that's okay because video games are just harmless fun and in no way influence people as RPS will tell you, but add sex to a game and it's suddenly a mortal offence? Why? How?

Because thats how morals are in USA. And are like that, because is a country with a religious history. Most (all?) countries have a strong religious influence, and religion is against sex, because religion want to control who have childrens, and who don't have childrens. Since religions want that power, everyone having childrens outside the monopoly is not "following the program", so brainwash the brain of the stupid average people to think thats bad. And have done so since 100.000 years ago. So basically anywhere you go in this planet, you will see that attitude permeating all the culture, from top to bottom. It may take another 100.000 years for people to start thinking "Sex? thats a good thing, IMHO", but just now, is *not* how people think, just now is the... THE tabbo.

and thats why. And you know all of this, so you are asking something you already know.

You want it to change, I want it to change, but our generation and the next generation and the next of the next will not see it change. Its going to take more than one milenia to fix the damage that religion has done in the human culture.

db1331
06-09-2012, 06:34 PM
What is the point of this shit? Why would you "play" a porn "game", when you could just, you know, watch porn? This kind of crap seriously makes me feel sorry for anyone who would play it. It's almost as embarrassing as that service where you can pay to have a "Gamer Gurlll" play CoD with you on Xbox.

gundato
06-09-2012, 06:42 PM
The purpose of global media is that you need to target the lowest common denominator.

Americans get a bit prudish at sex. Its just how we were raised.
Muslims don't like seeing Allah or Mohammed mocked.
Germans have a thing about Nazis.
The British generally don't like having the IRA and The Troubles brought up in the stuff they use to relax
The Irish generally don't like having the IRA and The Troubles brought up in the stuff they use to relax

So you target that. You try to avoid having games that consist of Mohammed having sex with a Nazi while setting off car bombs in Northern Ireland (... I want that game! :p). You can push the envelope a bit (The boobs and sexual themes in "mature" and mature games, portraying the Axis and letting you shoot Hitler, etc), but you don't want to alienate the other markets. I am sorry if the entire world does not have your moral standpoints.

A good example would be this past E3. One of the general responses was "Wow... that was really violent. Probably too violent and gory". Many Americans are probably not as affected because they watch SAW like jackasses, but many Europeans definitely felt uncomfortable. And time will tell how that impacts sales (I know I generally avoid games like that).

So, to summarize: I am sorry that not everybody has your morals. Suck it up and deal with it. if you want games that alienate a demographic, go check out a non-mainstream digital distribution platform. Lots of Japanese games have very sexual components :p

Kaira-
06-09-2012, 06:42 PM
What is the point of this shit? Why would you "play" a porn "game", when you could just, you know, watch porn?

Likewise, why would anyone play Manhunt/Postal 2/Manshoot: The Shootiest instead of just watching Cannibal Holocaust/Commando/<some other action flick here>? Why? Because interaction​.

Tei
06-09-2012, 06:47 PM
Anatomically correct dolls for childrens.

http://i53.tinypic.com/35b6yko.jpg

(Is safe for work).

Tritagonist
06-09-2012, 06:49 PM
Because thats how morals are in USA.
Publicly, perhaps. Meanwhile, the USA has a gigantic porn industry that rivals Hollywood in yearly revenue (http://www.cracked.com/article_17300_6-ways-that-porn-runs-world.html), and its citizens hosts close to 90% of all pornographic websites (http://internet-filter-review.toptenreviews.com/internet-pornography-statistics.html#anchor2) worldwide (to be fair, this probably has something to do with its First Amendment free speech law as well).

As to why the whole 'sex is bad, violence is awesome' is still around I can't say.

SirKicksalot
06-09-2012, 06:50 PM
What is the point of this shit? Why would you "play" a porn "game", when you could just, you know, watch porn? This kind of crap seriously makes me feel sorry for anyone who would play it. It's almost as embarrassing as that service where you can pay to have a "Gamer Gurlll" play CoD with you on Xbox.

Not all sexual content is intended to be wanking material.

A couple of years ago Valve forced Kim Swift out of a GDC design challenge - My first time: Sex and autobiography.
I guess they just don't want to deal with any potential media shitstorm. That's a shame.




A good example would be this past E3. One of the general responses was "Wow... that was really violent. Probably too violent and gory". Many Americans are probably not as affected because they watch SAW like jackasses, but many Europeans definitely felt uncomfortable.

>people clap at the end of TLOU demo because it was a great presentation
>journalists ("journalists"?) manufacture controversy by claiming people clapped because a dude was shot in the face

caljohnston
06-09-2012, 07:02 PM
Because thats how morals are in USA.

That's debatable. The US is the #1 producer of porn, and huge US sites like reddit have tons of (user-generated!) porn. Neither of these are controversial in the US. There are no movements to shut down the US porn industry, and parents don't whisper reddit's URL lest the children hear it, even though porn there is often just a few clicks away.

Somehow sex, or even nudity, is something game publishers and developers just aren't touching. Fuck, ten years ago I expected that by now there would be a thriving industry in interactive porn. The tech is more or less there, but it's not happening. Kind of disappointing, really, if I may be honest.

Nalano
06-09-2012, 07:06 PM
I'm sorry, are we having a "wtf US morals" debate here?

I learned it from you, dad. I learned it from you​.


Neither of these are controversial in the US. There are no movements to shut down the US porn industry

Dude, yes they are. Yes there have been. Many, many of them. Pretty much nonstop since cameras were invented.

gundato
06-09-2012, 07:06 PM
>people clap at the end of TLOU demo because it was a great presentation
>journalists ("journalists"?) manufacture controversy by claiming people clapped because a dude was shot in the face
I'm not even really talking about that, I am mostly just saying: Most of the clips that were shown were VERY gory and violent. I know it made me a bit queasy, and I wasn't the only one.

When stuff gets too far outside of comfort zones, it discourages sales. Simple as that.

Kadayi
06-09-2012, 07:27 PM
Having watched the video I can see why it wasn't allowed and personally I don't have a problem with it not being in the store. I could see a dating game being on steam no problem if it was tasteful, but albeit things are pixelled out that's kind of explicit material tbh, and looks to be a lot about objectification.

Frenetic Pony
06-09-2012, 09:20 PM
This all just part of the American plan to train a global culture to deal with overpopulation. When everyone starts starving to death because the population is twelve billion and rising fast we'll all have no problem just quitting sex and murdering everyone who doesn't. It's really quite brilliant.

pakoito
06-09-2012, 09:23 PM
"Sex not OK" <- booth babes.

Tei
06-09-2012, 09:44 PM
Having watched the video I can see why it wasn't allowed and personally I don't have a problem with it not being in the store. I could see a dating game being on steam no problem if it was tasteful, but albeit things are pixelled out that's kind of explicit material tbh, and looks to be a lot about objectification.

I like what I see in the video, the game seems to have a quality to it, good taste, elegant and the minigames can be fun, perhaps. You can do much worse, like these "train your horse" games. Is just that is a sexual game, and that is not the Steam thing.

Nalano
06-09-2012, 09:44 PM
This all just part of the American plan to train a global culture to deal with overpopulation. When everyone starts starving to death because the population is twelve billion and rising fast we'll all have no problem just quitting sex and murdering everyone who doesn't. It's really quite brilliant.

Too bad we still eat excessively and drive everywhere. We are determined to be unsustainable in as many ways as possible!

lasikbear
06-09-2012, 09:52 PM
Too bad we still eat excessively and drive everywhere. We are determined to be unsustainable in as many ways as possible!

But obesity and obesity related diseases are the number one killer in America! Also cars are up there too! Its all part of the plan!

Nalano
06-09-2012, 09:54 PM
But obesity and obesity related diseases are the number one killer in America! Also cars are up there too! Its all part of the plan!

Hey, maybe this is why the US is anti-sex: Ever try to get under all that blubber in the back seat?

lasikbear
06-09-2012, 10:03 PM
Hey, maybe this is why the US is anti-sex: Ever try to get under all that blubber in the back seat?

And thus the SUV was created, and it was good. For sex.

NathanH
06-09-2012, 10:22 PM
I think this thread needs to be removed now, for outraging public decency.

Bleekill
06-09-2012, 11:48 PM
The game obviously needs more violence with it's sex

archonsod
07-09-2012, 01:07 AM
Not all sexual content is intended to be wanking material.

A couple of years ago Valve forced Kim Swift out of a GDC design challenge - My first time: Sex and autobiography.
I guess they just don't want to deal with any potential media shitstorm. That's a shame.


They still carry The Void. I'd take the dev's claims with a pinch of salt tbh, not only do they freely admit it's an assumption, but they're hardly likely to admit to any dodgy dealings which could have broken any of the myriad conditions Steam imposes.

elfbarf
07-09-2012, 01:19 AM
I don't understand what the fuss is about. Having your game on Steam isn't a right and never has been. Porn/hentai games are rarely sold on any major distribution websites (unless said websites are created specifically for that kind of thing); it's not like it's only an issue with Valve/the US.

Koobazaur
07-09-2012, 01:51 AM
Eeeh I can understand Valve's decision. Even if they themselves dont have a problem, I can see the parental outcry of "WHAT MY TIMMY CAN BUY THESE HORRIBLY FILTHY GAMES ONLINE?" They want to keep their service open to as many as possible (13yo+) so banning too risque games not to damage their reputation is, sadly, a sound business decision.

I know steam already confirms birthdates for some r-rated games, so it would be cool if there could be a whole "adult only" area of more risque games. But as I said, as long as majority of American audience keep freaking out at the slightest nip-slip, it wont happen :/

soldant
07-09-2012, 02:08 AM
I don't understand what the fuss is about. Having your game on Steam isn't a right and never has been.
Exactly. This is why we have downvotes, this is why Valve must play gatekeeper, this is why the entire "It's only $100 for a shot at getting on Steam" arguments are pointless. Steam's never been a right. It's not the only digital store, despite how many people have been fighting for Steam to own the market.

If Valve or the community decide Game X isn't good enough/shouldn't be allowed, tough shit.

caljohnston
07-09-2012, 06:17 AM
No one said that getting your game on steam was a right, you functional illiterates. We're questioning their choice to remove it and the wider implications of it.

soldant
07-09-2012, 06:33 AM
No one said that getting your game on steam was a right, you functional illiterates. We're questioning their choice to remove it and the wider implications of it.
The question is whether it should be removed because of its content. People are acting like it has a right to be there because it's a game, albeit one that deals with sex and little else. And the entire argument can be ended with "Valve's store, Valve's rules" and if you don't like it, too bad.

Nalano
07-09-2012, 06:34 AM
No one said that getting your game on steam was a right, you functional illiterates. We're questioning their choice to remove it and the wider implications of it.

Americans are prudes.

It's what happens when you allow a bunch of religious extremists from an already prudish nation found a society where the only nearby cultural influencers are thought of more as target practice than people.

r3dknight
07-09-2012, 06:39 AM
As for the complaints on why Steam doesn't allow it in the store - tough luck, those complaints are invalid. Attack it from any angle you want, but as someone said, 'Steam's Store, Gaben's Rules.'

But hey, they got their exposure already. For nothing.
Just submit into Greenlight and people are suddenly talking about Seduce Me . A game that no one knew existed a few weeks ago.

Looks like it's a good deal of free awareness isn't it?
Time to send Gaben that Wagyu beef sandwich.

RakeShark
07-09-2012, 07:25 AM
No one said that getting your game on steam was a right, you functional illiterates. We're questioning their choice to remove it and the wider implications of it.

It's hard to separate the "freedom/right" from the "moral implications" in US culture in casual discussion. We're working on it, but we have a long way to go. Besides, one tends to influence the other. But I'll try to address the choice and implications specifically. However, this event is nothing new, and is just another symptom of our behavior, not anything radical.

I believe the argument can be boiled down to the phrase "Not in my backyard." Moreso than fanatical religious beliefs, the greatest American passion is to ensure anything we don't like isn't around us. We may tolerate the idea, or even completely support it, but the thought of something potentially (realistically or not) disruptive and objectionable invading our comfort zone riles us up into rejecting it fanatically.

A prison is a necessary part of the judicial system, but I don't want it in my backyard.
A nuclear power plant is a cleaner alternative to fossil fuel power with less environmental impact, but I don't want it in my backyard.
Indians are somewhat kind folk who helped us survive our first winter in the new world, but I don't want them in my backyard.
Porn is a wonderful thing, but I don't want that in my backyard.

Steam is just another backyard, where I enjoy my variable quality of goods unmolested by things I find objectionable. Sure, I have a slight case of PTSD from my time in the Army, which means I find MANSHOOTS disturbing on a level few can understand, but I don't begrudge others from enjoying that power fantasy. Plus, I don't have to buy these games. Therefore MANSHOOTS and I can live in coexistence, but not in harmony. I am, however, a very small minority when it comes to tolerance of this kind.

Everyone else would have seen this as a communistic perversion and assault of family values, betraying customers' trust in Steam's ability of filtering unwanted content away from us and our backyards, because as Americans they have a god-given duty to do that.

That last sentence is not a joke. That is what more than half of Americans believe.

This is why underground entertainment exists as well. Strip club advertisements on the radio start at 10 pm, sooner depending if there's a military base close by. USA Network's old dirty girl phone chat commercials started at about 11 pm. Skinemax started at (I think) midnight. Hell, early porn sites not names Hustler or Playboy had to advertise in tiny blocks in the back of Rolling Stone. Why? Because either the kids are asleep, or they don't care about classified ads. Perversion indulgement has its own healthy avenues.

However, they are out of sight, out of mind, and not in my backyard. Steam rejecting "Seduce Me" is just a reflection of its customer base and company.

Sorry if this explanation seems bizarre, outrageous, or idiotically unfathomable. It is however as honest as can be without pretension.

r3dknight
07-09-2012, 07:59 AM
Everyone else would have seen this as a communistic perversion and assault of family values, betraying customers' trust in Steam's ability of filtering unwanted content away from us and our backyards, because as Americans they have a god-given duty to do that.

"May the Father of Understanding Guide Us"

Mohorovicic
07-09-2012, 08:25 AM
"Sex not OK" <- booth babes.

Quotin' this.

deano2099
07-09-2012, 05:43 PM
As for the complaints on why Steam doesn't allow it in the store - tough luck, those complaints are invalid. Attack it from any angle you want, but as someone said, 'Steam's Store, Gaben's Rules.'


The question is whether it should be removed because of its content. People are acting like it has a right to be there because it's a game

I'd love to see where people are acting like that on this thread? I won't say you're illiterate but you are imagining things, go back and read the thread and quote me someone saying that. You guys seem to constantly get confused over what companies have a right to do and what people think they should do. Sometimes the wider topic is more interesting. Most of the time actually. Your constant efforts to shut down debate by always going back to what the current rule of law is are frankly really tiresome. "The law says women can't vote. End of discussion".

No-one is saying any game should have a right to be on Steam, they are simply questioning what the 'rules' are why they exist in one form or another.

To put it another way "Gaben" also has the right to close down your Steam accounts tomorrow because he feels like it. If that happened, would you go "oh well, he has the right to do that so can't argue" or would you ask why that happened and see what other people thought about it?

Tei
07-09-2012, 06:08 PM
Another way to see this, is that this is the way we have a better SNR. Having sex in Steam could potentially produce a lot of noise by morons.

Nalano
07-09-2012, 06:18 PM
"The law says women can't vote. End of discussion".

If you're going to insinuate that people are illiterate, then you might want to distinguish between a private company and a public representative body.

Indeed, free speech is why we have as much pornography as we do, despite being prudes.

Hypernetic
07-09-2012, 06:22 PM
This game probably sucked horribly anyway.

BjolkeDeBjeer
07-09-2012, 06:25 PM
Having sex in Steam could potentially produce a lot of noise by morons.

Not to mention all the puns involving 'steamy'.

deano2099
07-09-2012, 07:57 PM
If you're going to insinuate that people are illiterate, then you might want to distinguish between a private company and a public representative body.

"The law says companies can't sell alcohol" then.

Basically we're having a debate about the legalisation of drugs and people are turning up going "durr, don't be stupid, drugs are illegal, what's to discuss?"

It's happening more and more on these forums of late, and while it's nice to have someone in the discussion to give the straightforward facts of the current situation, it tends to get repeated over and over in response to everyone elses discussions in an attempt to close down debate. I find that whole attitude kinda repulsive to frank and don't really understand why those people frequent discussion boards. It's just weird.

I mean seriously, no-one here thinks every game ever made has a unassailable right to be sold on Steam, that would be silly, I don't know what's gained from pointing it out.

Nalano
07-09-2012, 08:12 PM
"The law says companies can't sell alcohol" then.

It's not illegal to sell H-games.

Valve, however, does not want to be a publisher of H-games.

Why do you keep bringing legality into it?

deano2099
07-09-2012, 08:18 PM
Why do you keep bringing legality into it?

Because the argument I was responding to was "Valve have no legal obligation to put any game on Steam"

Nalano
07-09-2012, 08:20 PM
So, to summarize: I am sorry that not everybody has your morals. Suck it up and deal with it. if you want games that alienate a demographic, go check out a non-mainstream digital distribution platform. Lots of Japanese games have very sexual components :p

http://www.tofugu.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/japan-no-further-description-required-500x400.jpg


Because the argument I was responding to was "Valve have no legal obligation to put any game on Steam"

Because American companies tend to do either pornography or not-pornography, not both.

soldant
08-09-2012, 02:59 AM
Your constant efforts to shut down debate by always going back to what the current rule of law is are frankly really tiresome. "The law says women can't vote. End of discussion".
I wasn't aware that Valve made laws? Oh right, they're not the state. They don't.

Valve are an independent third party who can make up whatever rules they like. If you don't like it, don't use Steam. While I may not agree with all of the things Valve set out in their policies, I at least recognise that it's entirely up to Valve to set their policies as they see fit. Protest all you like, but that's the bottom line - Valve can reject any game at will, and they don't even really have to give a reason if they don't want to. That's the bottom line that actually matters.

Regarding attitudes of 'people' - I was commenting about people in general, not specifically this thread, and in a broader way about things like Greenlight where apparently everything should be accepted because they're games and Steam sells games. I'm commenting about people's general attitude towards Steam. It's not a free utopia of gaming where anything goes, and it never has been. It's as much a walled garden as the next store, it's just that it's managed by Valve who are to PC gamers as Apple are to Apple users.


To put it another way "Gaben" also has the right to close down your Steam accounts tomorrow because he feels like it. If that happened, would you go "oh well, he has the right to do that so can't argue" or would you ask why that happened and see what other people thought about it?
GabeN would need a good reason to deny us access to a service we'd paid for. As far as I'm aware he can't terminate our accounts without providing an actual reason, namely demonstrating some kind of infringement against the policies. Should Valve retroactively change the Steam agreement to add in a random/arbitrary closure clause, we'd all have good reason to argue.

But that's not the same as Valve rejecting a game because they don't believe it belongs on Steam, nor Valve implementing a rule that you can't trade games outside of your region, nor a rule that your user name can't be offensive or racist. We signed up with an understanding that we'd have access to our games so long as we play by the rules. Attempting to change those rules would have major consequences for the service given what we agreed to previously. A game being rejected or a ban being applied for abusive behaviour, on the other hand, is entirely different. The two aren't even somewhat similar except by the very broad association of "Valve said/did something."

caljohnston
08-09-2012, 07:07 AM
Valve are an independent third party who can make up whatever rules they like. If you don't like it, don't use Steam. While I may not agree with all of the things Valve set out in their policies, I at least recognise that it's entirely up to Valve to set their policies as they see fit. Protest all you like, but that's the bottom line - Valve can reject any game at will, and they don't even really have to give a reason if they don't want to. That's the bottom line that actually matters.
How many times do we have to point out that this is a strawman argument? No one here has claimed that Valve isn't allowed to reject games, we are simply discussing their choice to do so.

Again, no one here is saying that they've done something illegal, or that they've broken some explicit or implicit agreement, so please stop your attempts to obfuscate the discussion.

squirrel
08-09-2012, 08:31 AM
Sometimes we just need to play fair. While we are criticizing a publisher / distributor / store for censoring their distributed products, we need to realize that it is the publisher / distributor / store who is bearing the risk of endorsing a piece of work to be distributed through their channel. We bear no risk at all, we are just there to give or take.

Can you imagine those parents may immediately stop paying their kids for buying from Steam if they saw something like that?

Just for that trailer, Seduce Me is straight out a porn game. I doubt there is any point to argue against it.

soldant
08-09-2012, 09:50 AM
How many times do we have to point out that this is a strawman argument?
How many times can you fail to read my post?

Mohorovicic
08-09-2012, 10:03 AM
Does Wallmart have a porn section?

Namdrol
08-09-2012, 12:13 PM
How many times do we have to point out that this is a strawman argument? No one here has claimed that Valve isn't allowed to reject games, we are simply discussing their choice to do so.

Again, no one here is saying that they've done something illegal, or that they've broken some explicit or implicit agreement, so please stop your attempts to obfuscate the discussion.

+1.

It's common everywhere though. Dissent or criticism of private companies, organizations, publications, heck even forums is usually met with "it's private property, they can do whatever the they want." Which is, of course, crap as the Stardock thing goes to show ("I own the company so show me your tits or get another job.")

Private companies are open to criticism, full stop. They are part of the broader world and therefore have responsibilities towards that world, whether legal or moral.

Now, Steam having/not-having porn games is pretty inconsequential to everyone except the people who make the game. To them, it is about their livelihood, and therefore pretty damn important. So, yes it is a valid topic for discussion.

I put this topic in the same category as the following: Amazon removing books from its site that Amazon corporate policy didn't agree with. Google deciding to start hiding certain types of search results. Is it substantially different when a corporation decides what information to present to people as opposed to say the Communist Party of China? And saying, "Google's private fuck off" doesn't wash.

Hypernetic
08-09-2012, 12:29 PM
It's simple really. Valve would lose more customers than it would gain by adding this kind of stuff to Steam. If they allow this game it sets a precedent for more "porn" type games in the future.

Do I personally care one way or the other? No, but a lot of people do. Hell, just look at some of the topics that have been on THIS forum lately to see how easily offended people are by things that aren't as culturally taboo as porn.

soldant
08-09-2012, 12:54 PM
It's common everywhere though. Dissent or criticism of private companies, organizations, publications, heck even forums is usually met with "it's private property, they can do whatever the they want." Which is, of course, crap as the Stardock thing goes to show ("I own the company so show me your tits or get another job.")

Private companies are open to criticism, full stop. They are part of the broader world and therefore have responsibilities towards that world, whether legal or moral.
Since when is "We don't want to sell your game" related to a responsibility? Valve have no responsibility to sell every product that turns up. This is in no way even remotely related to "Tits or you're fired."

Hypernetic
08-09-2012, 12:55 PM
Since when is "We don't want to sell your game" related to a responsibility? Valve have no responsibility to sell every product that turns up. This is in no way even remotely related to "Tits or you're fired."

LOL! I must have missed that part... that's pretty funny.

NathanH
08-09-2012, 01:30 PM
Since when is "We don't want to sell your game" related to a responsibility? Valve have no responsibility to sell every product that turns up.

Look, it's very simple. Your argument is as follows: They can legally follow whatever legal policy they like with regards to what games they want to sell, and this is a legal policy. The argument is flawless, except for the fact that it doesn't interact at all with discussion about whether their policy should be as it is. So when people are discussing whether their policy should be as it is, you should stop quoting them and writing something orthogonal to that discussion. Got it?

deano2099
08-09-2012, 02:25 PM
It's simple really. Valve would lose more customers than it would gain by adding this kind of stuff to Steam. If they allow this game it sets a precedent for more "porn" type games in the future.

It's interesting though because of the level of lock-in - I doubt many people with more than a couple of games on Steam would stop using it because it started selling porn games.

I also think it could be managed well by putting it behind a locked separate area - obviously I don't think it should come up in the big adverts when you load the front page!

I do think Steam could be an interesting agent for change here, though it's really not worth it for them - the porn game industry, especially in the west, is tiny. Compared to both the games industry and the porn industry. Now if someone made a Steam-like platform for video porn... they'd be bloody rich.

deano2099
08-09-2012, 02:26 PM
Valve can reject any game at will, and they don't even really have to give a reason if they don't want to.

That's totally true. Do you think they should reject this game though?

soldant
08-09-2012, 03:10 PM
Look, it's very simple. Your argument is as follows: They can legally follow whatever legal policy they like with regards to what games they want to sell, and this is a legal policy.
Oh I love it when people try to say "Your argument is this" as if they know what I'm thinking. No, I'm not talking law. I'm talking morals too. Morally they should be free to reject any game that they don't want to sell, and morally they should be allowed to impose their own moral standards on titles that pass through their store. Morally, they have no responsibility to sell every title that passes them. That might be a bad business decision, or it might not, but they'll bear the cost of that (and there's pretty much no cost to bear here).

The fact that their decision affects the availability of the game to their customers isn't an issue for me, because they're a store, and they're not the only store. They're not a government, and it's not a reprehensible action like "tits or you're fired" as some people have suggested, so it's perfectly fine for them to reject it from a moral perspective. The game can still be sold anywhere else. I don't see any moral problem with them not selling it. A lot of other people don't too. Other people don't like Valve applying moral standards to reject games, but as I say, it's Valve's choice and if they don't like it, there are other alternatives to get games like this.

Law isn't factoring in here. Nice try with attempting to impose your interpretation of my argument as the only correct one, and then trying to tell me that my own intentions are incorrect.


That's totally true. Do you think they should reject this game though?
If they don't want to sell it, sure. Personally I don't care either way, but I totally respect Valve's decision not to sell it. They're just a store, there are other online stores, this game isn't doomed because Valve said no.

Drake Sigar
08-09-2012, 03:42 PM
I find it mildly amusing that Seduce Me has been plastered all over news sites these last few days and has perhaps received far more exposure than it would ever have had from being accepted on Steam.

Rauten
08-09-2012, 03:46 PM
I find it mildly amusing that Seduce Me has been plastered all over news sites these last few days and has perhaps received far more exposure than it would ever have had from being accepted on Steam.

Which could very well have been their goal the whole time. I didn't even know about their existence until people started going in an uproar over this.
It's VALVe's store, if there's something they don't want to sell, they're free to refuse to do so.

Hypernetic
08-09-2012, 04:46 PM
It's interesting though because of the level of lock-in - I doubt many people with more than a couple of games on Steam would stop using it because it started selling porn games.

I also think it could be managed well by putting it behind a locked separate area - obviously I don't think it should come up in the big adverts when you load the front page!

I do think Steam could be an interesting agent for change here, though it's really not worth it for them - the porn game industry, especially in the west, is tiny. Compared to both the games industry and the porn industry. Now if someone made a Steam-like platform for video porn... they'd be bloody rich.

You seriously underestimate the power of offended people.

Nalano
08-09-2012, 05:00 PM
Look, it's very simple. Your argument is as follows: They can legally follow whatever legal policy they like with regards to what games they want to sell, and this is a legal policy. The argument is flawless, except for the fact that it doesn't interact at all with discussion about whether their policy should be as it is. So when people are discussing whether their policy should be as it is, you should stop quoting them and writing something orthogonal to that discussion. Got it?

THIS IS NOT A LEGAL POLICY.

For fuck's sake!

b0rsuk
08-09-2012, 06:27 PM
"Violence is OK, Sex is not OK" is a problem specific to the USA. Don't try to paint it as a gaming problem. People live outside USA.

Hypernetic
08-09-2012, 06:50 PM
"Violence is OK, Sex is not OK" is a problem specific to the USA. Don't try to paint it as a gaming problem. People live outside USA.

Surprise! Valve is US company and the North American market is probably their largest market! Who knew?!

biz
08-09-2012, 08:02 PM
violence in media is completely detached from the real world so nobody cares. through training and law enforcement, people are mostly responsible about violence.

sex isn't the same. its portrayal in media has an enormous effect on real life. lots of people are irresponsible about sex.

in games/media things like pregnancy/parenting/STDs simply do not exist.

Hypernetic
08-09-2012, 08:07 PM
violence in media is completely detached from the real world so nobody cares. through training and law enforcement, people are mostly responsible about violence.

sex isn't the same. its portrayal in media has an enormous effect on real life. lots of people are irresponsible about sex.

in games/media things like pregnancy/parenting/STDs simply do not exist.

So we should make a game about a 15 year old who has 12 kids and AIDS? I'm down.

NoodleFighter
08-09-2012, 09:26 PM
Remember children, looking at natural body parts is wrong but seeing people get murdered or horrible disfigured is ok !

Hypernetic
08-09-2012, 09:41 PM
Remember children, looking at natural body parts is wrong but seeing people get murdered or horrible disfigured is ok !

You and I might think it's stupid, but the "moral majority" think it isn't. It's just smart business sense on Valve's part.

Nalano
09-09-2012, 12:22 AM
"Violence is OK, Sex is not OK" is a problem specific to the USA. Don't try to paint it as a gaming problem. People live outside USA.

People who live outside USA sure do watch a lot of violent, sexless American media.

Drake Sigar
09-09-2012, 12:35 AM
People who live outside USA sure do watch a lot of violent, sexless American media.

We don't have much of a choice, your media is plastered everywhere, and I'm not going back to four channels. I've even started pronouncing some words in Americaspeak. Is this how you take over?

Hypernetic
09-09-2012, 12:38 AM
We don't have much of a choice, your media is plastered everywhere, and I'm not going back to four channels. I've even started pronouncing some words in Americaspeak. Is this how you take over?

What words? I am curious.

Also, the answer to your question is yes.

Sketch
09-09-2012, 12:44 AM
"Violence is OK, Sex is not OK" is a problem specific to the USA. Don't try to paint it as a gaming problem. People live outside USA.

Er eh? It's definitely so in the UK too.

Hypernetic
09-09-2012, 12:47 AM
I am the Mayor of Sherptown.

Nalano
09-09-2012, 12:47 AM
Er eh? It's definitely so in the UK too.

As I said in my first post on this thread: We learned it from somewhere.

soldant
09-09-2012, 12:49 AM
As I said in my first post on this thread: We learned it from somewhere.
The church?

Nalano
09-09-2012, 12:50 AM
The church?

The English!

RakeShark
09-09-2012, 01:33 AM
I certainly wasn't the water over here, the natives were fine before we came.

soldant
09-09-2012, 01:42 AM
I certainly wasn't the water over here
Then who was water?

(Sorry, I can't help myself sometimes)

Derps
09-09-2012, 02:11 AM
I certainly wasn't the water over here, the natives were fine before we came.

How do I shot water?

Hypernetic
09-09-2012, 02:47 AM
Then who was water?

(Sorry, I can't help myself sometimes)

I am the water, all of it.

Drake Sigar
09-09-2012, 02:39 PM
What words? I am curious.

Also, the answer to your question is yes.

If this ends with you asking me to kill the prime minister of Malaysia, count me out.

I say mom when I should say mum. And instead of ga-ridge I say ga-rah-je.

deano2099
09-09-2012, 02:44 PM
Er eh? It's definitely so in the UK too.

Hardly to the same extent. We have tits in the national newspapers, porno mags on the top shelf of the newsagents and porno channels on digital TV boxes (even if they're limited to previews and asking you to buy a sub).

Selling porn in the same place other stuff is sold has never been a UK problem.

NathanH
09-09-2012, 02:46 PM
I say mom when I should say mum. And instead of ga-ridge I say ga-rah-je.

You should say instead mam, like civilized human beings and Geordies.

Nalano
09-09-2012, 02:51 PM
And instead of ga-ridge I say ga-rah-je.

I find this funny, considering you're far closer to France than we are.


Hardly to the same extent. We have tits in the national newspapers, porno mags on the top shelf of the newsagents and porno channels on digital TV boxes (even if they're limited to previews and asking you to buy a sub).

Aside from tits in the dailies, we have all of those too. And we have tits in the free weeklies. Ahh, the Village Voice...

Also, of all the infinite varieties of porn, British is not a particularly popular subset. :P

Sketch
09-09-2012, 03:48 PM
Hardly to the same extent. We have tits in the national newspapers, porno mags on the top shelf of the newsagents and porno channels on digital TV boxes (even if they're limited to previews and asking you to buy a sub).

Selling porn in the same place other stuff is sold has never been a UK problem.

I mean in gaming, although I guess violence isn't exactly accepting yet, at least not by the Daily Mail. But then who cares about them.

tossrStu
09-09-2012, 11:06 PM
If this ends with you asking me to kill the prime minister of Malaysia, count me out.

I say mom when I should say mum. And instead of ga-ridge I say ga-rah-je.

To be fair, brummies say "mom" as well. You should have your citizenship revoked for "ga-rar-je" though.

Also, this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnGPgCVJUsI) is relevant.

slyscorpion
09-09-2012, 11:13 PM
Concerning this whole Seduce Me fiasco, I have just one thing to say:

I get enough sex in real life but no violence and I would rather have violent games made available. Besides, every sex game that I saw just can't compare to the real thing.

r3dknight
10-09-2012, 02:31 AM
I doubt you'd want to experience real futanari.

gwathdring
10-09-2012, 02:52 AM
Concerning this whole Seduce Me fiasco, I have just one thing to say:

I get enough sex in real life but no violence and I would rather have violent games made available. Besides, every sex game that I saw just can't compare to the real thing.

Though there is a significant distinction between games wot have sex and nudity in them and games wot try to immerse you in a virtual sexual experience.

Just so, there is a significant difference between games that have violence and gore in them, and games that try to immerse you in a vicariously violent virtual experience.

Even ignoring this distinction, just as there are socially acceptable violent activities, there are sexual activities that are either not acceptable or not accessible in a given individual's experience. Depending on what you want out of the game (the answer need not always be vicarious experience for either sexual or violent games, nor titillation/masturbatory material for sexual games specifically), there are plenty of reasons for people to seek sexual media despite being in perfectly healthy and happy sexual relationships. I know plenty of people who play soccer but also enjoy playing the Fifa games. It's not necessarily about directly substituting vicarious experiences for real ones. It's about experiencing entertaining media--be it sexual, violent, or whatever.

That there is a tendency for the industry to disproportionately condemn, reject, demean or avoid sexual material is a shame. For my part, I'm mostly worried about the second to last one. From the trailer, I'm not especially convinced this is a game I'm inclined to fight for on those grounds.

r3dknight
10-09-2012, 03:04 AM
They should submit Katawa Shoujo in there. Just saying.

Rauten
10-09-2012, 04:30 AM
They should submit Katawa Shoujo in there. Just saying.

I thought it actually does have sex scenes? If that's the case, it'd be a waste of time, it would be insta-removed.

Kevin
10-09-2012, 05:46 AM
This issue sort of reminds of a few choice quotes by Alan Moore:

"Most of the people who get sent to die in wars are young men who've got a lot of energy and would probably rather, in a better world, be putting that energy into copulation rather than going over there and blowing some other young man's guts out."

"Sexually progressive cultures gave us mathematics, literature, philosophy, civilization and the rest, while sexually restrictive cultures gave us the Dark Ages and the Holocaust. Not that I’m trying to load my argument, of course."

So far as American censorship goes, these types of games are no more easier to find on a service like Steam (so long as it isn't explitictly advertised) as it is to Google things like "My Pipes Need Cleaning," "Put it Where it Doesn't Belong," and "Men Alone II: The KY Connection".

soldant
10-09-2012, 08:26 AM
"Sexually progressive cultures gave us mathematics, literature, philosophy, civilization and the rest, while sexually restrictive cultures gave us the Dark Ages and the Holocaust. Not that I’m trying to load my argument, of course."
What a load of crap.

Hypernetic
10-09-2012, 08:34 AM
Well sexually restrictive cultures do tend to be pretty tied into various religions which do in turn block progress with their petty morals and other such bullshit (see things like stem cell research).

r3dknight
10-09-2012, 08:37 AM
sex is the religion of peace.
fuck those who insult sex.

soldant
10-09-2012, 08:46 AM
Well sexually restrictive cultures do tend to be pretty tied into various religions which do in turn block progress with their petty morals and other such bullshit (see things like stem cell research).
That may be true, and again I'm not arguing that the various churches don't put up opposition to scientific progress, but the idea that the 'sexually progressive' cultures were all places of science and learning and art without pointless wars or violence is a load of nonsense, just the same as the idea that the "dark ages" were times of science practices in dark dungeons is nonsense too.

I still can't believe how many people believe that all the Christian scholars all thought the earth was flat. I'm as much of a critic of religion as the next man, but let's at least get our facts straight!

Kevin
10-09-2012, 08:50 AM
You can make an argument that sex and violence are two faces of the exact same coin. Take for instance France: The old joke goes that the French make the best lovers, and the stereotype is that they are the most promiscuous. At the same time, given their history they are probably the most violent and war-like country in all of Europe (and for all of you Limeys who say they're a bunch of surrender monkeys, it's worth pointing out which country is the only one in Western Europe to operate a full-sized aircraft carrier that launches a full-on 4.5th generation fighter, and which one has a navy that's been plagued with budget cuts and only has a few puny VTOL carriers that launches Harriers that the Rafale can eat for breakfast).

Nalano
10-09-2012, 03:01 PM
You can make an argument that sex and violence are two faces of the exact same coin. Take for instance France: The old joke goes that the French make the best lovers, and the stereotype is that they are the most promiscuous. At the same time, given their history they are probably the most violent and war-like country in all of Europe (and for all of you Limeys who say they're a bunch of surrender monkeys, it's worth pointing out which country is the only one in Western Europe to operate a full-sized aircraft carrier that launches a full-on 4.5th generation fighter, and which one has a navy that's been plagued with budget cuts and only has a few puny VTOL carriers that launches Harriers that the Rafale can eat for breakfast).

Wait... what?​

gwathdring
10-09-2012, 07:53 PM
So ...

1) Sexual stereotypes about France are true.

2) France is the most war-like country in Europe.

3) Disregard martial stereotypes of France. Stereotypes are silly.

4) Something about aircraft carriers.

5) Sex and violence are two sides of the same coin.

...

Mohorovicic
11-09-2012, 06:33 AM
"Sex and violence have always been linked, and if you don't believe me let your eight year old daughter stay at my uncle Reggie's house"

bonkers
11-09-2012, 09:05 AM
So the Chinese only have half of an aircraft carrier and have been pretty war like in the past.
That means... they are pretty decent in bed?

I'm afraid I did not get that argument...

soldant
11-09-2012, 10:21 AM
So the Chinese only have half of an aircraft carrier and have been pretty war like in the past.
That means... they are pretty decent in bed?

I'm afraid I did not get that argument...
No, it's like a metaphor. You wouldn't understand, we're on some high level hipster stuff here. It's so far from mainstream that not even I understand it. It's so exclusive, not even the band can get in.

NathanH
11-09-2012, 10:24 AM
Unfortunately I can't connect emotionally to the experience of this thread. I'm too culturally stunted and anti-intellectual to become immersed in it.

I can talk about French stereotypes though. The best thing about living in Belgium was watching soccer with French commentary. They were so stereotypically French it was amazing. Every time something vaguely exciting or surprising happened it was OOH LA LA for about five minutes. I didn't think anyone actually said that. Top entertainment.

Mohorovicic
11-09-2012, 10:33 AM
You gotta watch some Brood War proleagues then, with original commentary.

ARBITORUUUUUUUU

Cooper
11-09-2012, 04:24 PM
"Violence OK, sex not OK" is basically a summary of the US's cultural attitude to media & free speech in toto.

deano2099
11-09-2012, 06:18 PM
And yet somehow sex and violence together is considered worse than either alone...

Koobazaur
11-09-2012, 08:34 PM
"Violence OK, sex not OK" is basically a summary of the US's cultural attitude to media & free speech in toto.

Yep. But those topics have always been weird in many cultures. I did a study abroad in Japan and it was interesting to see the dichotomy on that. On one hand, they never talked about it, girls were super shy, and you wouldn't hear about it on TV either. But then, you can walk into any corner 7-11 and star browsing the porn mags without anyone stopping you. And we all know that Japanese porn is some of the weirdest and kinkiest out there.

SirDavies
12-09-2012, 02:17 AM
Valve is a private company, they can do whatever they want. They can choose not to offer a game on their system if they feel like doing so.

I think that's clear for all of us. I don't think it's something worth discussing. What I think is worth this discussing is whether the decision to ban a game from a distribution platform based solely on the fact that it includes sexual content is a policy we agree with or not.

There's a lot of crappy games on Steam. Games that don't work properly, are badly designed or just lazy ports are something you see every day. There're also a lot of violent games on Steam, and when I say a lot I mean A LOT. Pixel violence is something we gamers are used to, we have even grown fond of it. If there's something the last E3 taught us is that the industry believes gore=cool, and more gore = cooler. What boggles my mind is when gamers, amused by all the various gory ways of killing enemies the upcoming AAA titles present them with, are able to criticize a game for including explicit sexual content or, even worse, think that the indistinct ban of these type of games is entirely justified. We are talking about two acts here. Killing and sex. One of them is in 98% of all videogames out there, but in the real world is the most reprehensible act we can conceive, while the other is done by 98% of the people on earth but is systematically banned from all major videogame distribution platforms. One is usually an act of cruelty and disdain and the other is usually an act of love and passion. Why are we trying to ban something that is good, pleasurable and ultimately the source of our own existence while applauding the representation of something we despise? It doesn't come down to whether the game is good or not, or if it is any fun. If that were the case, Seduce Me would still be on Steam Greenlight, up for the users to judge. But it isn't. Valve can't even conceive the possibility of letting it's community make that choice. Explicit sex is banned, explicit violence is celebrated. How much time will it take for this industry to grow up as a whole, stop using violence as it main gimmick and explore other areas of human existence? I don't know, but with policies like this one, it feels like it's gonna be a whole lot of time.