I know this is more of a serious thing, but I was thinking that I kinda hope these payment processors try to ban some big European company over some puritanical bullshit and then Europe responds with threatening a complete ban on them to put them in line. Ain’t no way any payment processor would ever risk being banned in one of the largest markets in the world.
There are a few smaller EU payment processors. I’d love to see them move into the space Visa/Mc leave behind here but I’m not sure they are “big” enough for it.
Still, it further highlights just how much power over law payment processors have - a worrying thought that the morality of a company (influenced by problem life nuts) dictates international law.
Edit - autocorrect turned pro life into problem life. I am ok with this.
First they came for the incest/rape games, which most people somewhat agree with (although the principle is still wrong) Next up is all nsfw games. After that, it’ll be mainstream and indie games altogether. This never stops with just one “victory” for these groups.
Everyone should read the open letter that’s linked in the itch statement, to have a fully informed opinion.
There definitely is a line. Everyone can choose were they draw it. You don’t have to draw it in a way where you end up defending things that are kinda messed up.
There is definitely a hill worth fighting on in that area. I don’t think it’s this exact one.
I am specifically saying this, because my democratic country has laws that would also cover these things the letter mentions and would also deem them wrong. The people normally charged with upholding that law, are just dumb, “not from the internet” and overworked with other stuff.
Please check what laws your country has around the topic of glorification of crime and violence.
We also don’t know what the payment processors told itch and steam.
Itch and steam are doing what they are doing as a blanket move, to create a situation where they can stay in business for now and deal with the problem at all.
My bet would be that they “allowed nsfw stuff”, turned a blind eye, and now suddenly noticed they actually have a really big legal problem, with actual laws and the fact that it was an NGO and not an official legal institution that started this, was dumb luck and now they mostly need time and cover their own arse.
And I fully support the opinion that it shouldn’t be the payment processors forcing these sorts of things. But reality is messy and if this was the path of least resistance to get something done, such is life.
If GTA V is allowed, I’m pretty certain most of what we’ve seen from NSFW games is as well. Regardless, a payment company should not be acting as judge for such things, just as media companies should not act as judge on copyright infringement on YouTube.
I feel like there is nuance that is really getting lost on some people and that is the way that people engage with these games. Let me try to explain: I like playing NSFW games - even with tags like Rape, Corruption or the occasional Incest. Without trying to go into too much detail, it’s simply erotic to me in the correct context.
Now, do I know that these topics are incredibly taboo and/or offensive in real life? Yes, of course. I keep these things private and never put them out in real life. I would rather noone knows about what I do privately in my own time at my own PC. The way I see it, I simply paid an artist to draw something erotic and write a good story and/or program some gameplay attached to it. And once I stop engaging with the videogame, I also do not have any desire to recreate anything in real life. The same way that I don’t go around killing people after playing GTA, I also don’t go around assaulting women because I played a videogame where these things happen.
And that’s exactly what worries me - the people pushing this narrative, genuinely think I would want to start reenacting something I’ve seen in a videogame happen. That is complete nonsense.
The idea that what you see online has an effect on what you do offline, is not that far fetched is it? I mean, I don't know if it's true and I guess you could argue it could work in both directions too. Do people blow off steam online so they don't have to enact their darkest fantasties IRL. Or does the online material encourage or normalize these things? It could also be so that this works different for different people. It let's one person blow of steam, while it pushes someone else over the edge to do something horrendous. And if that is the case, is it fair to take it away from those who are not negatively influenced by it, to prevent those in whom it inspires bad actions from seeing it. I guess we'd need research on the matter, I don't know if it exist or how reliable it is. But I don't think it's a nonsensical question to ask what the effects are.
Jesus Christ we can’t be back to this old chestnut.
We cannot, and do not, standardize society’s guard rails around the most extreme edge cases.
Leave it back with Jack Thompson in the late 90s-early 00s where it belongs. The horse has already been jellied by repeated blunt force trauma more than a decade ago. You’re just punching a horse shaped divot into the dirt at this point.
The question is if it's edge cases. People suffer sexual trauma in very large numbers and working in psychiatry has taught me how incredibly harmful it can be. If this kind of material could help prevent sexual trauma, we should definitely allow it. If research shows that it makes problems far worse, we should consider limiting access to it. I am not saying either is the case, I am saying I don't understand what is wrong with the question itself.
This restated question is not the problem directly.
The problem is the entire discussion/concept of “exposure to a dangerous idea in a pretend context maybe might maybe make someone more likely to emulate it in reality” when there has been little to no evidence found supporting that concept. Additionally the non-proportional amount of concern given to videogames in relationship to this concept as compared to literally any other form of media.
If there was even one iota of connection between “exposure to horrible things in media” (or even “pretending to do horrible things in a pretend context”) and “doing horrible things in real life”, the world would already look considerably different than it does. Militaries would be using these games as “exposure therapy” for soldiers. We’d be seeing crime rates of all sorts shifting in accordance with the media industries. There would already be measurable impacts after the decades of these things existing.
And more so than any of that: This discussion has literally been happening for longer than any of us here have been alive. I’m tired of having it.
Please stop letting the vague idea of “but it might help” override the logic of “but there’s no evidence to support that except a vague gut feeling”.
The same way that I don’t go around killing people after playing GTA, I also don’t go around assaulting women because I played a videogame where these things happen.
Right. That’s fair and I’ll believe it.
Do you generally think there is any limit at all, in any type of media that crosses lines and shouldn’t exist? Think “liveleak” stuff from when that was around.
Or do you consider this game topic just not crossing that line?
My line is: any kind of fictional content is ok. If nobodies hurt, then there is no crime. And in practice being maniac in games doesn’t translate to being maniac irl. There might be some exceptions of crazy people being inspired by games to do crimes, but they should be dealt with on case-by-case basis using just regular law and law enforcement.
Moral judgement or suppression of fiction/artistic expression is deeply and profoundly unethical. How you or I or anyone else feels about something that isn’t “real” is inconsequential. If you allow any line to be crossed in this, then every line can and will be crossed.
I’m pretty sure I can find fictional things immoral? Why would it be unethical to have an opinion on fictional things?
Factually, all the lines that you allow to be crossed are crossed and all lines that are collectively defended are usually not crossed. That’s culture. It’s arbitrary and not absolute.
There are specific games in steam’s case I’m very ok with getting removed, but at the same time its very fucked up that we’re in a situation where the world is beholden to payment processors. Ideally this would be a case where they go directly to Valve and say “hey we think you should take a look at your content policy and at these specific games” and Valve makes the call from there on where they want to draw the line.
The main stuff I saw removed was related to incest and rape, not in a “it contains it” way. Somehow Corruption of Champions 2 escaped the ban hammer which makes me think those games probably took things pretty far, or were basically built to simulate assaulting people.
For reference, CoC2 is uh… Well when you lose in combat the enemy fucks you, and vice versa. It’s like a lot of fetish stuff too. So not that I know exactly what’s in the games, but I feel like you have to really be trying to outdo CoC2.
Edit: I’m not criticizing CoC2 btw, it’s fine. Its… I don’t wanna say tasteful but non con is like one of 90 things you can or cannot opt into. Idk how to put it. It’s an actual game that happens to have non con content I guess is what I mean.
In childhood and teenage years I played a lot of games like Carmageddon, Postal, Grand Theft Auto. In first two games slaughtering innocent people en masse is part of gameplay loop. Yet I somehow didn’t grow up to be maniac, and mostly didn’t even hurt anyone physically in my whole life. It’s games, fiction, you’re not supposed to take any of that seriously or to project it onto your real life.
I’m aware, I promise you that, I’m not saying games make you violent or awful. That argument has been annoying me to hell and back my whole life. To be honest I’ve not heard the argument for video games made for porn games before, but yeah, fair. So yeah. I don’t like those specific rape/incest games, they’re kinda yuck to me, but you do you.
Out of curiosity do you think there should be a line? Where would it be? Maybe like only explicitly illegal content is ever removed? (I wanna say thats how ao3 works) Or is steam having final say your preference? What if steam decided to make changes on its own?
If I had my way, I’d just have filters and tags, and let steam manage their storefront. I might disagree on how they do it, but that’s up to them(or it should be). It just feels weird and loopholey that a payment processor is making this sort of overarching decision.
Out of curiosity do you think there should be a line? Where would it be? Maybe like only explicitly illegal content is ever removed?
For me the line would be fictional-vs-non-fictional. So if a game contains photos or videos of actual people being hurt or abused IRL, that is illegal. But anything fictional is fine. For shocking/kinky stuff, there might be some special tags, and tag-based extra warnings like “this game contains scenes of …, do you want to open the page?”. So when you find and open any game with certain tag you get a warning corresponding to this tag. After confirmation it might remember your consent and enable some flags in the options to not bother you next time. But you can go into the options any moment and hide it all again if you decide you don’t want to see this kind of stuff in future. Also, before you enable/consent to this content, it probably shouldn’t be randomly recommended to you.
So I think that’s all pretty fair, of course including the fact that it should all be legal too.
Does the paradox of tolerance concern you at all? The idea that if you let shitty people have a say they’ll eventually use the bit of tolerance you give them as a tool to take away tolerance of others.
Basically, in theory if you let the nazis have a political party they might win and ban all the other parties, so to keep it fair arguably you should ban them first.
Now applying that to games that are pretty obviously hate games, like the ones the other commenter mentioned, the raping women into obedience game, or a game where you kill a bunch of gay people, the implication is that those games should be banned.
I kinda just wanted your thoughts on the concept. Like for example a game where you play as a school shooter. All good?
Sorry if this is a little philosophical, I just honestly wonder where the line should be for the least amount of harm.
Does the paradox of tolerance concern you at all? The idea that if you let shitty people have a say they’ll eventually use the bit of tolerance you give them as a tool to take away tolerance of others.
Basically, in theory if you let the nazis have a political party they might win and ban all the other parties, so to keep it fair arguably you should ban them first.
I personally feel the correct way to deal with this in current society is to counter propaganda takes instead of trying to silence them. But even better would be to move away from nation-states altogether to more decentralized forms of societies. Compared to even 100 years ago, nowadays we have a lot of technology that makes off-the-grid living much more accessible: efficient solars, modular building, biotoilets, 3d printing, starlinks, etc. The biggest thing that still requires a lot of infrastructure and governing is healthcare imo.
Now applying that to games that are pretty obviously hate games, like the ones the other commenter mentioned, the raping women into obedience game, or a game where you kill a bunch of gay people, the implication is that those games should be banned.
I kinda just wanted your thoughts on the concept. Like for example a game where you play as a school shooter. All good?
Those are not necessarily hate games, but they can be. Rape can be a crime and it can be a kink. And it’s a very popular kink among women themselves. There are whole genres of consensual noncon porn, where people roleplay rape for fun. Big part of BDSM is also all about enjoying those twisted power dynamics. Yet something like this can definitely be a hate game as well done by someone having strong feeling of hatred towards certain groups of people: be it women, gay, trans, black, etc. I’m not sure I’ve ever played actual games like that, and I also would expect them to be low-quality slop, but either way, if you think someone’s trying to push some hateful propaganda through the game, you’re free to call them out, leave negative review, write a post or record a video criticizing it.
I gotcha, I get it being a kink, and you have a fair point in that public feedback helps call out the sort of things that aren’t made in good faith. I think I still like the idea of obvious hate games being taken down, but its always going to be somewhat subjective, so its hard to enforce that kind of thing without screwing over games that don’t deserve it.
Definitely not something payment processors should be in charge of lmao
mention of sexual assaultnot OP, but for example the first game collective shout went after a few months ago (“no mercy”) was explicitly a game about raping women to make them obedient. this is bad not because its NSFW, it’s bad because it’s rape apologia, and a misogynistic hate game. to me, it’s not much different than “chad vs the gay nazis”, another hate game (with a pretty self-explanatory name) that was released around the same time and was also quickly delisted. I wouldn’t be surprised if other games that just got delisted were as bad as no mercy. but also, the blanket banning of anything NSFW (or even just kinky) sets a terrible precedent.
What kills me is in most cases you have to pay for the game, then you have to download the game, then install it and finally play it. It’s not.like the game is going to one day pop into your computer and then force you to play it.
Bottom line. If the game bothers ornoffends you just move on.
It’s going to come down to anything with even a whisper of LGBTQ+/minority/disability/etc representation, just like with books.
They start with the “egregious” content (not that it’s necessarily right to remove that either), then narrow it down until it shapes up into hegemonic conformity and systemic oppression via media (there’s a term for it, kind of like stochastic violence but not quite that I can’t remember atm).
it doesn’t even stop there - it will be used to punish people who do not exactly like it’s expected, with the mere accusation of playing/reading/watching/thinking something “unchristian” as reason.
BDSM games have been targeted as well for “sexual violence”. Only straight, vanilla PiV missionary for the express purposes of having children within the confines of marriage where nobody is enjoying it porn will be left.
And it won't happen because companies won't allow them to ban a trillion dollar industry, you knob. Banning adult games isn't remotely comparable. Most video games rely on violence and it's too big of an industry to fail, adult games have a tiny following and were an easy target.
They banned adult games?! That means they'll ban all violent media! They'll eventually come for all media, they'll come for our computers, they'll trap us in cages! It's a slippery slope!
Steam and Itch are both victims in this matter, their hands are tied. If the payment processors simply refuse to process any payments unless they comply, there’s no point in trying to put pressure on them. I’m pretty sure they were happy to take people’s money for these games and still would be, if they could so while saving face.
I don’t even understand how they give a shit. Seems like the perfect place for shareholders to want them to make as much money as possible, it’s a limited market.
the payment processors didn’t randomly wake up this week and decide to ban NSFW video games on a power trip.
they are being financially pressured in some way to threaten game platforms that they’ll remove their services completely. the implication of that is they’re worried about losing even more money than they make from payments on game platforms.
from the payment processors perspective, they’re thinking, “okay this is not a hill we want to die on and it’s a small percentage of our business anyway.”
It’s not just happening recently with Steam and Itch.io, it’s been happening for a while.
Some smutty art creators on Patreon have been chased off that platform because of payment processors telling patreon they’d pull the plug if Patreon kept that type of art on the platform. Those same artists have then reported being unable to set up, for instance, Stripe for their paywalls.
Porn stars have complained about being unable to set up accounts with payment processors.
Same with ad companies that are deathly afraid of being seen next to NSFW images, so for instance Imgur has cracked down on them.
Payment processors should not get to police what kind of legal transactions people use their services for. No matter how much you dislike the particular product. And especially since they have an effective monopoly. If we let them go through with this, it would open the gateway for them to enact the kind of control over our consumption that should be exclusive to elected officials.
While i agree the notion its not that black and white.
Payment processors are companies. Where you would draw the line when company can and cant decite how they want to manage their product? In the end its their decition.
We already do it for utilities. A financial company should not be deciding what its users are allowed to spend their own money on except within the confines of law.
This has been happening forever in the adult video space. Certain kinks are verboten and disallowed by payment processors, which leads to a kind of underground gray market where you have to use certain euphemisms to avoid getting flagged.
Tbf it should be banned for being ridiculous but not from a morality standpoint from the payment processors, just bc it’s cringe and has nothing to do with that social media format. That being said, Twitter is getting worse and worse
Hell, if extwitter gets banned, it’d be hilarious because then there would probably be laws changed to ensure only the government can select what gets banned. Though, not so hilarious in the current state of the world.
Steam has no power. They are beholden to a very particular monopoly that can get away with anything it wants and is currently being manipulated by unethical evangelical fascists.
The amount of money Valve rakes in with Steam is insane. If itch had even 0.1% of that it would be a much bigger website. Itch had to limit dynamic filtering (like searching for Arcade + Fantasy) to just a few preset tags because of the server load. I wouldn’t be surprised if the number compared to Steam is less than 0.01%. People who want DRM free games generally go to GOG. Hell a lot of DRM free indie/AAA/retro games don’t even get listed on itch, so they get only the tiniest portion of the pie.
That’s why they’re first going after such cases. In Hungary we named this tactic the “goose liver method”. Goose liver is often created by overfeeding geese, which is abuse. A lot of smaller political party, instead of regulating farming, decided to campaign on banning goose liver entirely, while bashing the food item as a “luxury only the rich can afford”.
This is a very reputable charity organisation. Serhiy Prytula is a well known comedian in Ukraine who has been working on charity work since the full scale invasion.
If you have more than $8 to spare there is also “Come back alive”:
I did love tunic, fantastic game, easily worth that price on its own.
I’ve never played cook serve delicious, but it’s been on my radar. I’ll have to give this a shot. Heh, there are some tabletop games and rulesets on this list, could be some hidden gems in there. Honestly, this is a big enough bundle to be worth just buying on principle, and sorting it out later. So what if I don’t end up playing 400 of these titles, if I end up liking 10, that’s a fabulous deal, and all for charity!
It looks like there are a few games I was slightly interested in trying at some point, but not enough to buy them, but having so many together as a single purchase, I couldn’t resist. I even paid the default price of $20 instead of $10.
The point of this is obviously the charity, but I’m not gonna lie, after a quick look at the included games, if Tunic wasn’t in this bundle I would feel ripped off paying $10 for it.
I don’t see any of those other games combined being worth $10 to me. Multiple visual novels / story games, puzzle games, and many games that look like a generic Kemco published RPG Maker game but with a pastel color palette this time. Again, I get that the point of this is charity, but Tunic is literally the only game that I would say brings value to this bundle. If someone already owns Tunic and is considering this, I would say to just directly donate the money.
Besides Tunic, there are still several good to great games in the first dozen (and no doubt a bunch more if you’re willing to dig into the smaller indies):
Cook, Serve, Delicious - Overwhelmingly Positive (95% of 3,631) all time
Hoa - Very Positive (89% of 2,098) all time
Tangle Tower - Overwhelmingly Positive (95% of 4,760) all time
Octodad: Dadliest Catch - Very Positive (93% of 8,480) all time
Whispering Willows - Very Positive (81% of 1,166) all time
Hidden Folks - Overwhelmingly Positive (97% of 7,333) all time
Eldritch - Very Positive (88% of 1,673) all time
They Bleed Pixels - Very Positive (84% of 2,014) all time
Yeah, I prefer the gameplay in 1 because it's more fun and fast-paced to me. You can disagree if you want, doesn't affect my enjoyment at all. I'm confused why I got downvoted for my opinion.
I didn’t downvote you! I only downvote trolls. Anyway, that’s fair, since the lack of prep forces players to be quick on the trigger, so to speak. I guess I seek a bit more “realism” in a sense, since actual restaurants always prep. I wonder if 3 might strike a decent medium…
You don't have to support every bundle if you don't like the games. Trashing the bundles you don't like is just sorta lame. It also covertly mocks the people who are interested in buying it.
Inb4 a comment about how most of these aren't digital games so this bundle is useless.
If someone already owns Tunic and is considering this, I would say to just directly donate the money.
Or just like… Donate through the bundle and consider trying out some minor projects created by people who are trying to make something cool? Why turn down access to these games out of some form of perceived superiority? This notion that since you’ve never heard of these other titles they can’t possible offer anything of value to you is kind of a spit in the face of struggling artists of all types.
I actually disliked Tunic, just saying. I got more enjoyment out of Cosmic Express and Delver (and I didn’t even like the final fight in Delver). Whatever floats your boat…
Same. I gave Tunic a fair shot until I had to use a guide to get further due to the devs cheaply hiding a teleport gate in the map. Plus the spirit gauntlet was its own bit of bs
Yes, it was the cheap camera tricks obscuring parts of the map that you could go to that did it for me. It was, like, basically making you check for every possible secret despite the limited abilities of no camera control nor destructible terrain… I get that there was an era of games with this mindset (sorta like some Metroid-&-other games, I suppose), but I just don’t have time for that any more.
This may sound odd to some, but my stance towards quality games is: punish fairly. Life is hard enough as it is so I don’t need a game also going, “Haha, well, screw you here, too.” Thanks for coming to my TED talk.
To each their own. I have no idea what Tunic is, I got it for
charity
Cook Serve Delicious
Blobun
Octodad
The fact you say it has lots of VNs and puzzle games suggests there is more in the bundle I’ll like if I just explore more as those genres are to my taste.
I bought it because my son has been asking for Skatebird, but we also enjoyed an hour playing Ripped Pants at Work together and I’ll give Delver a go later tonight.
Thats the thing with bundles, different titles will appeal to different people.
Yes, you install them through desktop mode then load them into steam as a non steam game. Then they’ll show up in game mode. There’s also a decky plugin that easily lets you add artwork for the steam entry
For some reason they don’t mention in the description that most or all of these games are not videogames, they are tabletop role playing game manuals. (The digital downloads are .pdf files)
Nothing wrong with that of course, but it certainly seems like an important detail.
In the collection description I guess it doesn’t, but if you click on any of the games included it’s clear that they’re tabletop role playing games (some even have it in the title icon). I can edit the post to include that if people think it’s misleading, though
itch.io
Gorące