• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

MattWilsonCSS

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
1,349
And you don't think Evangelicals couldn't create a campaign that says "Ban homosexual games"? Or "Ban games with pre-marital sex"? Or "Ban games that promote abortion"? Really?
Okay, let me expand my sentiment. Fuck them and fuck their money too. I do not care what they find offensive because they ally with fascists and they are fucking evil.

The idea of equivocating people who believe non-cis people exist and have a right to live their life, and people who believe non-cis people shouldn't exist, is buckwild
 

Raein

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
980
Newell has always been a hardcore libertarian and his policies have always reflected that. I don't think the laissez-faire approach is a bad one given that moderation always invites bias. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes, and all that.
 

Pixieking

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,956
Okay, let me expand my sentiment. Fuck them and fuck their money too. I do not care what they find offensive because they ally with fascists and they are fucking evil.

The idea of equivocating people who believe non-cis people exist and have a right to live their life, and people who believe non-cis people shouldn't exist, is buckwild

Equivocating is not exactly what this was about, though:

- You are seemingly unaware that there are groups of people that consider promoting homosexuality to be morally offensive.
- You further seem to believe that demanding curation will only hurt the titles that you disapprove of, but not the titles that others disapprove of.

"Good-Guy Valve" is a meme, but it's also an assumption of their stance up to now - that they would obviously allow socially liberal titles to be on the store, whilst just as obviously disallowing hateful content. Yet their blog-post explicitly says that there's been internal strife, which shows that the "Good-Guy Valve" stance was not obvious to them, and that there was some subjectivity in the application of content guidelines:
In addition, Valve is not a small company - we're not a homogeneous group. The online debates around these topics play out inside Valve as well. We don't all agree on what deserves to be on the Store. So when we say there's no way to avoid making a bunch of people mad when making decisions in this space, we're including our own employees, their families and their communities in that.

Late edit to explicitly say:

Everyone's assumed every single Valve member of staff who vets Steam games is pro-LGBTQ, pro-sex, pro-consent, pro-abortion, pro-tits (anime or not) - the Western Liberal ideal, essentially. What if they're not? What if some people are fine with LGBTQ, but against abortion? What if they're pro-sex work, but not pro-porn? Anime tits were bad a few weeks ago, but The Witcher's tits were fine - why was that, hmmm?
 
Last edited:

SirFritz

Member
Jan 22, 2018
2,084
Valve don't even keep the $100 steam direct fee, it's paid back after you accumulate $1000 in sales.
 

Madjoki

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,231
Valve don't even keep the $100 steam direct fee, it's paid back after you accumulate $1000 in sales.

But do these "games" earn $1000 from copies sold on Steam?
I have my doubts, they usually launch at $1 with max 40% launch discount, they aren't making much profits.

These games get sold for a couple of cents per key for bundle sites etc. and those don't count.
Sure they can make $100 back, but I doubt they make it ten times back, so Valve gets to keep $100 fee.
 

City 17

Member
Oct 25, 2017
913
But do these "games" earn $1000 from copies sold on Steam?
I have my doubts, they usually launch at $1 with max 40% launch discount, they aren't making much profits.

These games get sold for a couple of cents per key for bundle sites etc. and those don't count.
Sure they can make $100 back, but I doubt they make it ten times back, so Valve gets to keep $100 fee.
They might get to keep that, but it's really not much, let's say 10k games in a year don't reach that point, it'd be only 1M$ for the year, less than what Valve gets from DOTA2 each day, and that's not considering the costs (bandwidth etc.) for the said 10k games.
 

khamakazee

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
3,937
This move may end up hurting Valve in the end because some people will stop supporting Steam even though they can ignore the titles they find offensive. You're damned if you do, damned if you don't. On one hand I respect them for not policing everything but on the other you still have to have some control of the content otherwise it can easily get out of hand.
 

Nitpicker_Red

Member
Nov 3, 2017
1,282
You mean the 30% that every store keeps? What does it have to do with the initial fee that gets refunded at that point?
As much as the original comment
Valve don't even keep the $100 steam direct fee, it's paid back after you accumulate $1000 in sales.
has to do with the decision discussed in the thread. Just about highlighting the money flow involved in the process, to show that there is no loss made or "free service" provided.
 

Deleted member 5167

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
3,114
jfc the steam direct fee is only there because the fucking 'omg moar curation' idiots made such a huge goddamn deal about greenlight, which was a flat one off fee

"Fuck you valve, its too eays to put games on the store without consequence"
*adds per game fee*
"Fuck you valve making money off every game submitted"
 

City 17

Member
Oct 25, 2017
913
As much as the original comment

has to do with the decision discussed in the thread. Just about highlighting the money flow involved in the process, to show that there is no loss made or "free service" provided.
That's quite the reach.

The poster that you quoted said they don't keep the initial fee if the game reaches 1000$, which is right, nothing about free service, the standard 30% for almost every store is quite irrelevant to the discussion, actually now that you mentioned it, the devs can circumvent that by generating free keys and selling them on other stores, of which Valve would get no cut, but has to still offer the same service for those sales as well. We don't have this on other stores.
 

Deleted member 9237

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 26, 2017
1,789
Let's have some fun, a little further down the results.


LGBT BATTLEGROUNDS

header.jpg


https://store.steampowered.com/app/874100/LGBT_BATTLEGROUNDS/



It must be so hard for Valve to curate something so blatant. They'll have no problem accepting another $100 self-publishing fee tho. Easy cash after all. No effort when you accept every little thing.
It's a zero-effort reaction bait game. This game, and it being on Steam or not, is probably not going to matter to anyone, anywhere. It's the equivalent of some dumbass standing around holding a stupid sign.

Personally, I'll complain about this moderation policy when it is shown to be a problem. I mean, there are issues to discuss, but I don't think shit like this gets to the core of it.
 

Madjoki

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,231
Of which they keep $300 right?

$1000 is after Valve's cut, but that doesn't really matter in this case.

They might get to keep that, but it's really not much, let's say 10k games in a year don't reach that point, it'd be only 1M$ for the year, less than what Valve gets from DOTA2 each day, and that's not considering the costs (bandwidth etc.) for the said 10k games.

For Valve it's nothing, but it huge chunk of profits of these games, which is Valve how tries to fight these games, ie. disabling trading cards, $0.49 minimum price, preventing coupons for cheap games (which was a way to bypass $0.49 min price rule), limiting amount of keys.
 

City 17

Member
Oct 25, 2017
913
For Valve it's nothing, but it huge chunk of profits of these games, which is Valve how tries to fight these games, ie. disabling trading cards, $0.49 minimum price, preventing coupons for cheap games (which was a way to bypass $0.49 min price rule), limiting amount of keys.
If you don't expect your 5$ game to sell ~200 copies in its lifetime, you might as well not bother, or 100$ shouldn't really matter to you... that's what, a few meals?
 

petran79

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
3,025
Greece
I apologize to the mods and any members I may have infuriated. My English for such discussions got rusty.

This is the sort of argument that in my opinion completely validates Valve's stance on the matter of curation and content control. If people are already arguing with a straight face that strategy games are promoting the alt right, how far are we from a situation in which Valve is forced to remove Hearts of Iron because you can play as Germany in WW2?

Promoting is not the issue here, it is that there exist a considerable alt-right playerbase in those games. I also sent an email to the mods explaining that my post was about players who are both alt-right AND play strategy games. This is different than alt-right playing GTA, FPS or other games or spraying anti-gay messages in Splatoon Plaza.My humblest apologies fellow compatriot!


You mean you're as ignorant as that poster is and just want to agree with them.
There's no such thing as "France" as a country that has "always existed".
Most countries in the world are an amalgam of nation states that unfied.

You're talking absolute fucking drivel, and you're citing some fucking forum thread on some other fucking forum as the authoritative basis for your claims.

e:
This is seriously about as 'bad faith' as it gets. Its like linking to kotakuinaction to 'prove' the gaming media re run by a cartel of essjaydubyas.
Absolutely fucking infuriating

The site of that forum is often cited and discussed here and it also mentions various social issues regarding video games. I do not see any problem mentioning posts from its forum. On that thread there were not any reactions of that caliber like here. This was a mistaken assumption on my behalf.
If anime games, fps games and countless other games are analyzed here in how they connect to the alt-right (among other things ), I do not see why strategy games should be the exception.
I understand and justify your reaction, but my aim was not to stir things up or insult people personally, just to leave food for thought.


Ah yes, I forgot alt-right people were some exceptionnaly smart people with deep political knowledge. It requires a terrifically high IQ to have racists thoughts. That's some fucking huge reaching here.
The bolded reads like an elaborate troll. Really. Like someone who had to justify their Phd in Psychology. :"")
Also, this is also pertinent to your "Total war devs changed 3 Kingdoms to please the alt-right" because clearly the white nationalists fantasize about ancient China. :""""")


Plenty of racists have high IQ and are in esteemed positions of power, intellectuals and media world wide. They do not even need to belong to the alt-right political spectrum. This is far more dangerous. Racism and capitalism can be even connected to "Western Europe and America are better than Rest of the World".
Also I did not say "changed", it was just a concern because many players there are alt-right. There are countless discussions about FPS and white protagonists for that matter.
I apologise again.
It was just about some players and how they could influence things, not game developers or the genre. Vast majority of the strategy game community condemn such actions.
 

meanspartan

Member
Oct 27, 2017
54
San Diego
I'm all for this, let the market speak on its own as much as possible.

It's a mistake for companies to open the pandora's box of deciding what is and isn't ok IMO. While some shit is obviously morally repugnant, if you take it down but don't take other (more gray area) stuff down, it comes across as saying the latter is acceptable.

Better to just allow everything except content that is actually illegal, and let people decide what they do and don't want.
 

Deleted member 5167

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
3,114
The site of that forum is often cited and discussed here and it also mentions various social issues regarding video games. I do not see any problem mentioning posts from its forum.

I mean, you just missed discussing the entirety of the E3 conferences as a result of copping a ban for this, so I really don't know why you would come back and relitigate it again, but let me explain this to you.

IGN is a well known videogame site, whose news stories and articles can be used for the basis of discussion on this site.
IGN also has a forum.

What you did is the equivalent of taking a forum poster on IGN saying "My uncle says MS are about to buy From Software" and creating a topic saying "IGN: MS are buying From Software".

You.... you see the difference, yes?
 

petran79

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
3,025
Greece
I mean, you just missed discussing the entirety of the E3 conferences as a result of copping a ban for this, so I really don't know why you would come back and relitigate it again, but let me explain this to you.

IGN is a well known videogame site, whose news stories and articles can be used for the basis of discussion on this site.
IGN also has a forum.

What you did is the equivalent of taking a forum poster on IGN saying "My uncle says MS are about to buy From Software" and creating a topic saying "IGN: MS are buying From Software".

You.... you see the difference, yes?

I've seen here too plenty of buying threads with a lot of humour!

Regarding E3, I'll read the summaries later. Discussions would require spending the whole day, which I avoid on non-weekends. Had we discussed Monday- Friday I'd avoided the ban. One reason I was surprised to see Yakuza on Steam pop up suddenly and at half price compared to PS4

Havent bothered with IGN for years tbh,especially the way the are now.
I used forum opinion is just as an indication. We are a forum here too after all, a dying breed of communication, with less tight discussion rules compared to a news site, where even first messages get filtered, rejected or are downvoted. Better title I'd come up with would be "what would you think were From to be bought by MS (shudders) and what is your analysis?"