• Valve pulls Hatred from Greenlight due to disagreeing with the subject matter of the game.
    576 replies, posted
It's disappointing that the press has a bigger influence than the consumer in gaming.
[QUOTE=Intoxicated Spy;46720184]Defcon, but still I see why they pulled this. I might not agree, but, by the end of the day, Valve is a business, and they need to not have bad PR.[/QUOTE] i think defcon is the only game which you actively go after the civilian population and kill them. fuck it even measures in megadeaths [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megadeath[/url]
[QUOTE=SexualShark;46720214]i think defcon is the only game which you actively go after the civilian population and kill them. fuck it even measures in megadeaths [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megadeath[/url][/QUOTE] Plague Inc?
[QUOTE=Code3Response;46720157]Please name several games on steam in which their sole purpose is to simulate mass killing[/QUOTE] Why is GTA fine but this isn't? Why is Manhunt fine but this isn't? Why is Postal fine but this isn't? If we are going to complain about the execution moves, why is Sleeping Dogs fine but this isn't? Hell, Modern Warfare 2 literally has a level simulating a mass killing.
[QUOTE=Mio Akiyama;46720229]Plague Inc?[/QUOTE] If we're going there, the "zombies" in Left 4 Dead are technically still alive. They're just infected with a virus. So Valve advocates the control of pandemics through wholesale slaughter. That's a joke.
Its an interesting one for me; the game looks bad, I think the people making it are bad, and I think the point it has thus far established itself as trying to present is bad, but I also don't think these things are reason to try and stop it from existing. At the same time, this is a matter of a game which has thus far only demonstrated itself as glorifying mass murder, especially those like the Breivik killings, and anything Valve sells can be considered a representation of them. So while they're fine with people saying "You allow shitty games, violence, misogyny, blah blah." they don't want to be seen as party to mass killings, especially ones of a politically charged nature. This is not a case of censorship, as stores are free to distribute products at will as they have to actually supply them to the consumers. And in games like GTA or Postal 2 or the like, their actions exist within different context from what Hatred is providing at this point. Summary: Hatred, bad game, should be allowed to exist regardless. Valve, not censoring, just not obligated to sell games that misrepresent them. Censorship, not occurring. "SJW" bullshit, not occuring.
I wouldn't mind Hatred being removed, if Valve had some kind of consistent policy on this kind of shit. But they don't, they're an inconsistent, uncommunicative shit company that lets people sell scamware, and who I'm sure have a whole banner page ready to go for the release of GTAV next month. This is just Valve bowing to the cause celebre of the month.
[QUOTE=Code3Response;46720157]Please name several games on steam in which their sole purpose is to simulate mass killing[/QUOTE] Literally every shooter? They have the objective of "mass killing" as in killing as much people on screen as possible to fulfill an objective or achieve a high score. This is like that Medal of Honor bullshit a few years ago, where they had to change to Taliban name to "Op-Force". It's just pixels on a screen, it shouldn't matter what the people look or sound like. People are also acting like you're just killing unarmed people in this game, when its obvious you need to fight the police, potentially SWAT or Army aswell depending on your kill count.
in mobas you farm minions and then fight the other team in this you farm civilians and then fight the police ban dota
[QUOTE=Memobot;46720112]I'm still not a fan of banning anything though.[/QUOTE] True that. The only time something should be banned is if someone (or something, if animals are involved) was genuinely harmed in the process, and even then it's a "should", not a "abso-fucking-lutely MUST", depending on what it is. It is not the content that corrupts, but the mind that interprets it with differing degrees of judgement and logic, which ends up "corrupting" itself. Not everyone was made equal, but that doesn't mean that we should ruin something for everyone because someone took it too seriously. It's a lesson that should be on every blackboard, something that all folks young and old should know. I'm not a fan of killing things that can't fight back, but that doesn't mean I don't want this game to exist, and it also doesn't mean I want it to exist. In truth, I don't care about the game in itself since it's not my cup of tea, but what I do care about is the freedom of expression. Even if it's a reaction to games as art (among other things), it is still art, and if we enable the censoring of art when nothing was harmed in its creation, we've taken a massive step backwards. So all in all I disagree with Valve's decision to pull it from Greenlight, but I don't have much interest in it otherwise.
[QUOTE=Thlis;46720233]Why is GTA fine but this isn't? Why is Manhunt fine but this isn't? Why is Postal fine but this isn't? If we are going to complain about the execution moves, why is Sleeping Dogs fine but this isn't?[/QUOTE] Whats the storyline of those games (besides Postal, which is satire)? Because it appears the storyline for Hatred is to kill as many innocent people as possible via mass shooting. Thats not good PR for Valve and frankly, its a smart move. The last thing the media needs to get a hold of is a story about a game which your sole purpose is to mass kill people. All the other shit games on Greenlight are on there because they're shit games. Hatred probably would push some people ("trigger") over the edge and follow through with their shooting plans. Valve has the last say in everything regardless if we agree with it or not. This is their decision.
[QUOTE=Thlis;46720092]I am going to be frank, this is really dumb. It is a bunch of fictional pixels and trying to claim that there is some difference between what can be done in this game and GTA or Saints row is pointless. This is a lot like the complaints against Watch dogs because you can target minorities. I mean if we are really going down this road should we ban Civ because it glorifies nuclear warfare?[/QUOTE] No, I agree with you. It's the same argument we've seen before.
So have Valve actually mentioned an actual reason for why they've removed it? Without one it's kind of a speculative drama free-for-all spawn. "Based on what we've see on Greenlight" doesn't mean they disagree with the subject matter.
Valve's PR probably just wants to avoid the label of "Valve, publisher of civilian mass-murder simulator 'Hatred'..." when shit inevitably hits the fan in main-stream media.
[QUOTE=Code3Response;46720274]Whats the storyline of those games (besides Postal, which is satire)? Because it appears the storyline for Hatred is to kill as many innocent people as possible via mass shooting. Thats not good PR for Valve and frankly, its a smart move. The last thing the media needs to get a hold of is a story about a game which your sole purpose is to mass kill people. All the other shit games on Greenlight are on there because they're shit games. Hatred probably would push some people ("trigger") over the edge and follow through with their shooting plans. Valve has the last say in everything regardless if we agree with it or not. This is their decision.[/QUOTE] For the third time. Postal is not satire. Postal 2 is satire. Postal is a game about a guy with a seriously fucked up mind going on killing sprees to satiate the voices in his own head.
[QUOTE=milkandcooki;46719962]HATRED now on ORIGIN[/QUOTE] haha [QUOTE=milkandcooki;46719965]no wait i came up with a better joke [I]FIND OUT THE... ORIGIN of HATRED .... THIS SPRING.[/I][/QUOTE] ew
If we can convince Valve to put Hatred on Steam, maybe we can also get JFK Reloaded on there too!
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;46720239]Its an interesting one for me; the game looks bad, I think the people making it are bad, and I think the point it has thus far established itself as trying to present is bad, but I also don't think these things are reason to try and stop it from existing. At the same time, this is a matter of a game which has t[B]hus far only demonstrated itself as glorifying mass murder, especially those like the Breivik killings[/B], and anything Valve sells can be considered a representation of them. So while they're fine with people saying "You allow shitty games, violence, misogyny, blah blah." they don't want to be seen as party to mass killings, especially ones of a politically charged nature. This is not a case of censorship, as stores are free to distribute products at will as they have to actually supply them to the consumers. And in games like GTA or Postal 2 or the like, their actions exist within different context from what Hatred is providing at this point. Summary: Hatred, bad game, should be allowed to exist regardless. Valve, not censoring, just not obligated to sell games that misrepresent them. Censorship, not occurring. "SJW" bullshit, not occuring.[/QUOTE] dumb fuck Breivik was about pushing a political agenda Hatred is about senseless killing for amusement this has been a waste of my fingers [highlight](User was banned for this post ("flaming" - Orkel))[/highlight]
While I don't view Hatred as a game that has really any reason for existing and that we could probably do without, the tone or message of the game shouldn't really matter in my opinion when there are other much more relevant criteria for Valve to judge and reject games by. Such as being generally shit.
[QUOTE=Code3Response;46720274]Whats the storyline of those games (besides Postal, which is satire)? Because it appears the storyline for Hatred is to kill as many innocent people as possible via mass shooting.[/QUOTE] In Manhunt you are a paranoid schizophrenic who kills cops. How many people play GTAV and stick directly to the story and act only within reason accordingly? As stated earlier Postal 1 was not satire. Do games have to follow a set of morals? What about Payday/2? [QUOTE=Code3Response;46720274] All the other shit games on Greenlight are on there because they're shit games. Hatred probably would push some people ("trigger") over the edge and follow through with their shooting plans. Valve has the last say in everything regardless if we agree with it or not. This is their decision.[/QUOTE] How would that differ from GTA or any other shooting game? Are you saying that violence in videogames increases violence in real life?
Ok, now I'm convinced that the only reason they don't put Hatred on Steam is for avoiding the shit-storm of media that would have inevitably come. And I agree with their choice. I would NOT want to be involved with dealing with that either.
Valve being the greatest light bulb once again, I don't defend Hatred in anyway, but the game is well done and should be on steam no matter the controversy.
What happened to 'voting with your wallet' anyway? Why does Valve have to give in to a bunch of political correct types who aren't going to buy the bloody game anyway?
Can they sue for discriminating against different beliefs or something like that
Wait, didn't Running With Scissors announce an HD reimagining of the original Postal? This is going to get delicious. EDIT: Yep. On Unreal Engine 4, no less.
[QUOTE=pessimistic;46720339]Can they sue for discriminating against different beliefs or something like that[/QUOTE]That would mean they would first have to establish a set of beliefs that the game is representing. Basically, Hatred would have to become a work of a specific culture.
[QUOTE=SexualShark;46720214]i think defcon is the only game which you actively go after the civilian population and kill them. fuck it even measures in megadeaths [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megadeath[/url][/QUOTE] ya but thats much different, its a thermonuclear war simulator, and when you nuke a city it just flashes with a number, its graphics are very minimalistic, tronish and... going after cities is not how you play defcon anyways, your goal is to stop the enemy's missiles and destroy their stockpile first, going after cities is a quick way to rack up points but not win
[QUOTE=jackteam54;46720144]Are you crazy? Who would ever want that game, especially enough to save up for it.[/QUOTE] I wanted to Ride to Hell because my friends told me it was hilarious. Dopefish's video seems to confirm my ambitions: [url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n6ndmgaXH-I[/url] In the end, a good game is one that entertains me (developer's intentions or not, I don't care) which is why Ride to Hell is a good game for me. Back on track it's understandable that Valve removed Hatred. It sucks for me, but good for them since they have to worry about PR being a company and whatnot. It's just a video game I think I'll live, but it seems that a little Streisand effect is occurring since Valve is now getting some bad PR for removing this game, but this reaction probably doesn't even compare to what would happen if they did the opposite.
[QUOTE=Sableye;46720352]ya but thats much different, its a thermonuclear war simulator[/QUOTE] you cant get more mass killer than wiping out the species
[QUOTE=Mio Akiyama;46720229]Plague Inc?[/QUOTE] Plague Inc is a strategic simulation game. This game lacks and backstory and is literally just killing for the sake of killing. Not saying it should have been removed, just saying it looks shit.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.