If this is really just 4th instance this year, then it would be significantly cheaper to just reimburse the ~120k then to do what you are suggesting. Besides, a third party provider will hardly deliver a cutting edge scan for games.
Most importantly, whether they pay their own employees or a third party provider, the result is the same. Either prices go up or cost cutting happens elsewhere.
And I don’t get the mindset of large company should do things for free. Valve is using the 30% to distribute games, provide backups for saves, run steam workshop, make games playable on Linux, creating the steam framework for games, and more. And of course keeps some of it as profit. Being a large company does not give you infinite resources. If they invest massive effort into some behavior analysis stuff, either they increase prices or cut something else they are doing.
Well, I just disagree with you. IMO, they are a game distribution company, not a security company. I don’t see this as their job and I am not willing to pay more for games to have some far from perfect behavior scanning.
PS: That is not to say Steam should do nothing, just not behavior analysis, which is an unnecessarily difficult and expensive measure to implement and operate.
There are so many ways to bypass what you describe, in addition to it not working for games with kernel anti-cheat etc.
The real issue is all desktop OSes deciding everything should be allowed to access everything. Why is a game able to access your crypto wallet by default, without any permission required? Why can a fake pdf access browser cookies? This has been solved on phones for years.
Sure, it’s not a high quality study. But there is only so much effort countering this baseless fear mongering deserves. This study may already be more effort than it deserves.
The fear mongering doesn’t end. Violent movies cause violent behavior. No they don’t. Violent games cause violent behavior. No they don’t, actually research show gamers are less aggressive. Now it’s sexualized games that cause harm. And every time, they don’t even really care about the research anyway.
In my experience, most first year undergraduate courses for STEM related degrees more or less match the demographics of the university itself.
I don’t know anything about other STEM fields or other countries, but where I live, most sw engineering courses don’t have above 5%. (And I guess even fewer men in the medicine field. Some fields just seem to attract specific genders, idk why.)
But yeah, dismiss reality I have seen with my own eyes as “The dog whistles! The dog whistles!” And then act surprised when no one outside your echo chamber takes you seriously.
Sure, make it my fault for disagreeing that following fundamental principles of good game design is somehow a cop out. Whatever makes you sleep better.
What is “in it” for the non-queer gamers…
And you proceed to describe what would benefit queer people, if they managed to keep non-queer gamers on their side or at least neutral. Which just proves my point.
People want to feel all nice and accepting and open minded but they never want it to actually inconvenience them.
Some people don’t want to be inconvenienced at all, most people don’t want to be inconvenienced for no good reason. There is a big difference.
It’s worthless to conceed ground over and over again to people who always wanted us to disappear. It doesn’t work.
Yes, what you are doing now seems to be working great. Best of luck with that.
Yes, deflect the question, misrepresent the issue, and blame everyone around. Just avoid any introspection.
There is no “worth it” here for the non-queer gamers in the first place. It costs them (seemingly) nothing to throw queers under the proverbial bus and oppose any inclusivity. The only thing stopping people is sympathy and goodwill. Being a decent human being. Which tends to go out of the window quickly, when you actively try to destroy what those people care about. People don’t have sympathy for people that “picked a fight” with them first. They just “fight” back.
And before you pretend games are insignificant and people shouldn’t do this “just because of games”, remember you picked this “fight” because of representation in games as well. Can’t have it both ways. Games either don’t matter (in which case what are we arguing about) or they do.
Gamers care about games. They have always pushed back hard against people messing with their games, whether it is “concerned parents” (religious conservatives), queers, or payment processors. If you believe that it is just homophobia, you are deluding yourself.
So I ask you again, is it really worth it to push things like SBI, that produce objectively bad games for everyone, knowing it will destroy sympathy and goodwill you have with gamers?
You don’t have to answer here, just think about it. Because you can’t expect understanding and sympathy from others if you are not trying to understand and sympathise with them as well.
People will take your words as tacit endorsement that queer people “had this coming” because a bunch of businesses responded to a body of queer theory and made some fucking games.
That is exactly why your stance is pissing me off so much. People like you, who don’t care how their ideas impact other people as long as they are inclusive, are pushing massive amounts of people towards the conservative side of the argument. I don’t think that makes those people conservative, for some reason you do. Regardless, we both agree it hurts queer people.
So was it worth it? A bunch of poorly written queer characters in games and movies in exchange for pissing off a portion of otherwise tolerant population and pushing it towards conservatism?
There’s no “actual homophobes” vs " not homophobic but still unhappy that queer people and ‘forced inclusion’ are in a game people"
That’s the same kind of argument as saying criticizing Israeli genocide is antisemitism. There are objectively bad things done in the name of inclusion. Criticizing them is not homophobic. If you are going to pretend they are, that you are somehow above criticism just because your stated goal is noble, don’t be surprised when people turn against you.
and want your games to not make you feel uncomfortable.
You are missing the point entirely. Playing as a homosexual character did not make me feel uncomfortable, even though I understand if it did for some people. Even so, not every game is for everyone. It is fine to have games focused at different audiences.
But when you hand over writing your game characters and story to groups like SBI, whose only qualification is “inclusive writing”, than it destroys games for everyone and you get entirely justified backlash from gamers.
Same if you take an established franchise and change the target audience.
Unfortunately, just like you don’t make distinction between the actual homophobes and people who just want good writing and game design, a lot of gamers once pissed of don’t distinguish between good inclusion and forced, badly executed one. And than you get the polarized BS of today.
No. Not wanting to have your car stolen by a gay person does not make you a homophobe. It just makes you a normal person that doesn’t want to be stolen from. Equally, wanting a game to be entertainment, not political messaging does not make you conservative.
Most people had no issue with diverse characters that are part of a game, see Life is Strange. They do when you turn a game into political PSA at the expense of the rest of the game, see Valeguard.