Corruption in gaming journalism discussion and update thread. - General

[QUOTE=TheJoey;46730768][url]http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=356532461[/url] it's back! hatred put back onto greenlight. still no word of valve being strong-armed by journos or anything like that.[/QUOTE] Oh god, the comments on that could fuel ammunition that "gamers only want death to SJW's" so hard.

[QUOTE=Wootman;46730756]That's an awful board, why hasn't it been erased yet? I don't care how much 8chan supports GG that shit should be nuked off the site.[/QUOTE] anything that doesn't break us law stays on the site. hotwheels says anything that does break the law gets wiped immediately. welcome to free speech. you gotta accept the bad that comes with the good otherwise whats the point of "free" speech.

[QUOTE=TheJoey;46730768][url]http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=356532461[/url] it's back! hatred put back onto greenlight. still no word of valve being strong-armed by journos or anything like that.[/QUOTE] A victory against censorship!

[QUOTE=Wootman;46730756]That's an awful board, why hasn't it been erased yet? I don't care how much 8chan supports GG that shit should be nuked off the site.[/QUOTE] Hotwheels has said that despite him personally being repulsed by the board he will not take it down as it does not violate any US laws. That's his stance on every board on 8chan, and at the very least its nice to see he stands by his principles.

[URL]http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2014/12/16/what-gamergate-is-actually-about/[/URL] I think Kain makes several good points in this article. There's a huge gap between gaming journalism and gamers to the point where the journalists are hostile to their own readership and unwilling to accept any sort of criticsm from them. GG happened because of the gamer side finally getting pissed enough to actively go on the offensive against the media. Even before GG happened, I felt that the press was distant enough to gamers that it actually felt alien instead of simply being another part of gaming. However, I do think that Kain was a little too generous to the press in regards to their criticism. I feel that a lot of social criticism against games is awful junk from people that, like your average college kids, think they've got the entire (American) social system cracked because they know what the word "priviledge" means, from Jason Schrieber's bizzare attempt at linking Dragon Crown's character design to pedophiles to Jonathan McIntosh acting like the stereotpyical know-it-all that doesn't really know what he's doing, despite his insistence otherwise.

[QUOTE=ForgottenKane;46731054]A victory against censorship![/QUOTE] A store refusing to carry a product is not censorship.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;46731285]A store refusing to carry a product is not censorship.[/QUOTE] It is when they arbitrarily refuse to carry it without given proper cause. The excuse they gave at the time was 'it violates our community guidelines' and we all know that's a load of horseshit and it's removal was based solely on the tastes of the one responsible.

[QUOTE=ForgottenKane;46731337]It is when they arbitrarily refuse to carry it without given proper cause. The excuse they gave at the time was 'it violates our community guidelines' and we all know that's a load of horseshit and it's removal was based solely on the tastes of the one responsible.[/QUOTE] Censorship refers to the suppression of free speech. Valve in no way suppressed the creative rights of the Hatred team by refusing to distribute the game through on their digital market. [editline]16th December 2014[/editline] "Proper cause" can but whatever reason a vendor deems fit. You can find the many posts I made disagreeing with Steam's decision but it isn't censorship.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;46731367]Censorship refers to the suppression of free speech. Valve in no way suppressed the creative rights of the Hatred team by refusing to distribute the game through on their digital market. [editline]16th December 2014[/editline] [B]"Proper cause" can but whatever reason a vendor deems fit. [/B]You can find the many posts I made disagreeing with Steam's decision but it isn't censorship.[/QUOTE] No. Proper Cause is behaving within the terms set out in the Terms of Service, that is the contract which the company makes with users and customers. When the Company contravenes the contract on what is substantially a whim to restrict access to material by customers, that is censorship.

[QUOTE=Crazy Ivan;46731434]No. Proper Cause is behaving within the terms set out in the Terms of Service, that is the contract which the company makes with users and customers.[/QUOTE] Cite the section of the Terms of Service that requires Valve to allow every Greenlight submission. [QUOTE=Crazy Ivan;46731434]When the Company contravenes the contract on what is substantially a whim to restrict access to material by customers, that is censorship.[/QUOTE] No it isn't because the Hatred team can still express their creativity. They can go to any number of digital vendors or sell the game themselves.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;46731454]Cite the section of the Terms of Service that requires Valve to allow every Greenlight submission. No it isn't because the Hatred team can still express their creativity. They can go to any number of digital vendors or sell the game themselves.[/QUOTE] It was removed on the grounds that the material was "offensive." That was the only grounds. The ToS does not have Right-Of-Refusal, outright. If you want to make the argument that Hatred is or was "offensive" enough to breach ToS then you are indicting a lot of material on Steam. It is blatantly inconsistent to remove Hatred and not remove items like Postal, Manhunt or GTA. A lot of people have spelled out this argument before me, and I won't lay tongue rubber on this one anymore. Watch Totalbiscuit's latest content patch if you want to grasp the full reasoning and explanation of the argument.

[QUOTE]You understand and agree that Valve is not obligated to use, distribute, or continue to distribute copies of any Workshop Contribution and reserves the right, but not the obligation, to restrict or remove Workshop Contributions for any reason.[/QUOTE]

well good thing it's a greenlight game and not a workshop contribution

Valve be atleast consistent with your hasty doings you chumps

[QUOTE=Raidyr;46731487] Workshop Stuff [/QUOTE] I'm sorry, this is about [I]Greenlight[/I] not [I]Workshop.[/I] If you want to cite letter and law, take this from the first step of the Greenlight submission process: [quote] Before posting your game or software Before you post your game or software to Steam Greenlight, you must agree to the following: You own the rights to sell the game or software you are posting, or you have specific authorization to represent the developer You agree to the terms and conditions of the Steam Subscriber Agreement Additionally, you agree not to post any item to Greenlight that contains the following: Someone else's game or software, unless you have specific authorization to do so Porn, inappropriate or offensive content, warez, or leaked content Cheating, hacking, or game exploits Threats of violence or harassment, even as a joke Games or software using copyrighted material such as assets or intellectual property without permission from the owner Soliciting, begging, auctioning, selling, advertising, referrals, racism, or discrimination [/quote] Hmmm, no Right-Of-Refusal there. How about here, on the more broadly general about page? [quote] [B]Are there any restrictions on what can be posted?[/B] Your game must not contain offensive material or violate copyright or intellectual property rights. [/quote] Hmmm, that's not quite right. Reading... Reading... [quote] What if my game never gets accepted? Currently your game will remain on Steam Greenlight unless you decide to take it down. [/quote] Huh, how about that. The item will remain [I]indefinitely[/I] unless the developer decides to take it down. Valve could just refuse to Greenlight it altogether then! There's your right-of-refusal I suppose! Though it wouldn't look good for a community driven project to ignore a highly rated item. Weird how that works out, huh.

[QUOTE=Crazy Ivan;46731469]It was removed on the grounds that the material was "offensive." That was the only grounds. The ToS does not have Right-Of-Refusal, outright. If you want to make the argument that Hatred is or was "offensive" enough to breach ToS then you are indicting a lot of material on Steam. It is blatantly inconsistent to remove Hatred and not remove items like Postal, Manhunt or GTA. A lot of people have spelled out this argument before me, and I won't lay tongue rubber on this one anymore.[/QUOTE] Is it inconsistent? Yes. Do I disagree with Valve decision? Yes. Does Valve have a communicaton problem? Yes. Was it censorship? No. [QUOTE=Crazy Ivan;46731469]Watch Totalbiscuit's latest content patch if you want to grasp the full reasoning and explanation of the argument.[/QUOTE] I've seen it. No mention of censorship whatsoever. He actually seems to have no problem with games being booted off Greenlight as long as it's consistent. [QUOTE=Wii60;46731493]well good thing it's a greenlight game and not a workshop contribution[/QUOTE] It's the closest thing related to Greenlight in the subscriber agreement. Additionally the Greenlight submission page itself says that you cannot have "inappropriate or offensive content". Such language is subjective and has always been at the discretion of the vendor. Again, it's certainly inconsistent to sell Postal 2 and Manhunt then (seemingly) boot Hatred off Greenlight, but the Hatred team wasn't censored in any way.

[QUOTE=ForgottenKane;46731337]It is when they arbitrarily refuse to carry it without given proper cause. The excuse they gave at the time was 'it violates our community guidelines' and we all know that's a load of horseshit and it's removal was based solely on the tastes of the one responsible.[/QUOTE]No its not, not even remotely. Stores have the right to not stock items. This is exactly what I was saying about you all just completely throwing so much that GamerGate espouses out the window. Studios shouldn't be pressured in to doing something they don't want to do. Unless that something involves publishing a game SJWs don't like, then they should be brow beaten until they do exactly what they're told, no matter what.

It's obviously an issue of image before anything else, it's a shitty thing to do but it's their store. The real question is why they'd pull such a kneejerk, streisand-effect inducing reaction when they could just leave it in greenlit limbo like so many other games, or game their own system so the Hatred devs could only see a certain amount of votes and think they just didn't get enough votes to be greenlit.

[QUOTE=latin_geek;46731639]It's obviously an issue of image before anything else, it's a shitty thing to do but it's their store. The real question is why they'd pull such a kneejerk, streisand-effect inducing reaction when they could just leave it in greenlit limbo like so many other games, or game their own system so the Hatred devs could only see a certain amount of votes and think they just didn't get enough votes to be greenlit.[/QUOTE] Because they'd be taking responsibility for it and ultimately endorsing its message. I've said it before, Hatred is a wildly different beast from Postal or Modern Warfare 2 or anything like that.

[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;46731670]Because they'd be taking responsibility for it and [B]ultimately endorsing its message.[/B] I've said it before, Hatred is a wildly different beast from Postal or Modern Warfare 2 or anything like that.[/QUOTE] No they wouldn't. Having something up on greenlight is very different from actually having it in-store and distributing it. This is the entire issue with extremist, reactionary people, and the breakneck pace of news on the internet. It's absurdly easy to tweet some context-less garbage comparable to clickbait and make people take sides. "Valve endorses neo-nazi murder simulator!" (except they don't sell it) "Videogame bloggers have a secret mailing list!" (a fairly common, not malicious thing) "Patreon supports pedophile website!" (a discussion board with maybe two pages' worth of legal content and admittedly gross discussion, on a chan running on donations)

[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;46731670]Because they'd be taking responsibility for it and ultimately endorsing its message. I've said it before, Hatred is a wildly different beast from Postal or Modern Warfare 2 or anything like that.[/QUOTE] lol have you even played postal 1 it's a fucking murder-simulator on even worse levels arguably [editline]16th December 2014[/editline] Christ, Man-Hunt is on Steam too isn't it?

[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;46731670]Because they'd be taking responsibility for it and ultimately endorsing its message. I've said it before, Hatred is a wildly different beast from Postal or Modern Warfare 2 or anything like that.[/QUOTE] Taking responsibility? Yes. A store takes reprehensibility for it's product. Endorsing the message? That's a little less clear in Hatred's case.

[QUOTE=latin_geek;46731700]No they wouldn't. Having something up on greenlight is very different from actually having it in-store and distributing it.[/QUOTE]Its on their service, and up for release through their store front by them. [QUOTE]This is the entire issue with extremist, reactionary people,[/QUOTE]You mean the people who complained about it being removed from Steam because they had no genuine clue what they were talking about and went full retard over it? Because seriously, that is exactly what everyone did because they didn't like that a studio did something they couldn't understand.

[QUOTE=ForgottenKane;46731054]A victory against censorship![/QUOTE] How was it ever censorship? PS I find it hilarious how when those darn SJWs "pressure" Valve to take Hatred off of Greenlight, GG is outraged. But when GG and others pressure Valve to put it back up, there is nothing wrong there.

[QUOTE=ForgottenKane;46731711]lol have you even played postal 1 it's a fucking murder-simulator on even worse levels arguably [editline]16th December 2014[/editline] Christ, Man-Hunt is on Steam too isn't it?[/QUOTE]As I said, wildly different beasts. Postal isn't just a murder simulator, but more importantly it prefaces everything with clear context that you are legitimately, completely insane when doing this. Manhunt isn't even remotely the same as the game is about an entire city filled with people who are legitimately worse than you, your character being forced to do these things. People keep forgetting the context is what matters, no just the violent content. Since it was initially announced Hatred has made it clear it only exists as glorification of these actions, without any framework. That is the issue, that is the thing that differentiates Hatred from others with gratuitous violence is that ultimately none of them actually sell themselves on these things being a good thing or worthwhile. Except Hatred. And that is where the contention lies.

[QUOTE=xxncxx;46731742]How was it ever censorship? PS I find it hilarious how when those darn SJWs "pressure" Valve to take Hatred off of Greenlight, GG is outraged. But when GG and others pressure Valve to put it back up, there is nothing wrong there.[/QUOTE] Since we don't know what actually happened I'm going to go out on a limb and say it had nothing to do with "SJW"s. My theory is someone high up at Valve didn't like the look of the game either personally or for what it might mean in terms of press and dumped it. This person was later vetoed when people around the office went to Twitter and Reddit and saw the shitstorm growing. So it was silently re-upped.

[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;46731725]Its on their service, and up for release through their store front by them. You mean the people who complained about it being removed from Steam because they had no genuine clue what they were talking about and went full retard over it? Because seriously, that is exactly what everyone did because they didn't like that a studio did something they couldn't understand.[/QUOTE] I really don't think it takes a genius to get the basic idea behind Hatred, the Citizen Kane of edgy videogames

[QUOTE=Raidyr;46731716]Taking responsibility? Yes. A store takes reprehensibility for it's product. Endorsing the message? That's a little less clear in Hatred's case.[/QUOTE]The problem is that ultimately Valve does have to approve of it when it gets added and has to publish it. Hatred wears its purpose on its sleeve, and when a product so clearly pushes a message like Hatred's stores will not want that on their heads.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;46731780]Since we don't know what actually happened I'm going to go out on a limb and say it had nothing to do with "SJW"s. My theory is someone high up at Valve didn't like the look of the game either personally or for what it might mean in terms of press and dumped it. This person was later vetoed when people around the office went to Twitter and Reddit and saw the shitstorm growing. So it was silently re-upped.[/QUOTE] I said "darn SJWs" in jest, since SJWs are GG's favorite boogeyman to blame in situations like these.

[QUOTE=Wootman;46730756]That's an awful board, why hasn't it been erased yet? I don't care how much 8chan supports GG that shit should be nuked off the site.[/QUOTE] 8chan's only global rule is to keep it legal. If you don't like it, just don't go there, there's plenty of sites that do censor stuff like that because of people's sensibilities. Personally i think it's cool we have at least one big site where anything that won't (directly, anyways) incite the wrath of law enforcement goes. [editline]17th December 2014[/editline] Its kinda hard to keep track of all the goalpost moving in this page's discussion so i won't quote anyone in particular. Suffice it to say, semantically valve's removal of hatred with a double standard basis was censorship, by dictionary definition. If you want to argue that it's not "important censorship", and that there is some difference in importance between government and private censored works, that's another story. And you'd be right, there is "a difference", and to what degree effect and importance that difference is is a different topic worthy of discussion. It's just really silly to see people try to change definitions of words because they don't like the impact of the connotations the word has on their argument. I realize language is shit but we have to communicate using a standard set of definitions so get with the program.