My reading comprehension skill is fine. I understand everything you said. The reason I didn't give you a reply that satisfied you is because what you said doesn't justify anything. This thread is about what is right and what is wrong. Not about the rights of Valve or capitalism etc. Your post was pointless and annoying. Like I really don't know that we live in a capitalistic society? Like I really don't know Valve's rights? Are you trolling me? I know we live in a capitalistic society. I know it's all about the money. And if you don't think a private company can take part in censorship, you are very delusional.

Oh, I can understand that then. I don't think the controversy is raised by the game's content per se, after all, you are just shooting pixels at other pixels and those pixels then produce more pixels. I think it's all about people slowly starting to accept videogames as an art form (or something along those lines anyway), and associating underlying messages with the art. When you've got a war game where there's an option to sacrifice civilians, the game's message is not 'massacring civilians is good' - it's much more complex than that, just as the game is. However, when the entire game revolves around murdering unarmed civilians, when it's the main point of the game, well... That's what people are then going to read into it. I'm not saying I know what the game's message is or that it even carries one, neither do I say I agree with surpressing such message - just that I sort of understand the thought process behind why this is controversial and those other games aren't.

This thread isn't about ethics or the question if the development of a game like Hatred is morally right or wrong. It's about "Steam pulls Hatred from Greenlight" (it's the title of this thread). And for Steam/GOG/Desura or any other digital distributor it might be the right thing to not sell this game, because it might harm them in a serious way.

The reason that you think my reply is pointless and annoying for you, is probably the fact that you know that I am right.

And I don't even care for the game. For me it doesn't matter if they develop it or not (even if I think that it's amarketing stunt). I just can't people who always cry "censorship" if people or companies do something they disagree with.

Oh believe me, this is all about Valve.

These jokers barely lift a finger to sort the broken garbage with stolen assets flooding their store, and now they burst through my front door five hours late for dinner smelling of piss and shouting ‘ish okay! I got your back!’

I doubt the gamers who berated Target will be anywhere to be found on this one either.

Well for me, this thread is about what is right and what is wrong. The reason I said your reply is pointless and annoying is because, like I said, I'm here to talk about what is right and what is wrong. And you are just pointing out to me what everyone already knows. Yes, it's all about the money. Yes, we live in a capitalist world. Yes, Valve has the right to do this and that. So yeah, most of what you said is right(true). I do not deny those facts. But you are wrong about one thing, Mr. Cookie Monster. You said what Steam is doing is business and not censorship but you are wrong for saying that. Because what they are doing is business AND censorship.

That is pretty much what it is though. Anything more than that, and you are just thinking way too much over something which is and should be pretty simple.


I guess at the end of the day - Steam *is* a business first and foremost.It shouldnt be trying to be the moral or ethical judge on what people should or should not play (or have access to the said type of games). Bottom line - does it sell or not?. Make money. People are adults.If some dickheads are going to be saying stupid things like has been mentioned much earlier - then thats their own immaturity and shouldnt be automatically assumed the devs feel in same way shape or form (its overblown imho).
Having said that, the game could be a piece of crap for all we know - but people may end up buying it for curiosity sake LOL.

Let's agree that we have different definitions of censorship then. For me it always involves governmental institutions or groups and companies that have the power to influence the broad publicity (like churches and mass media).

For me single company that refuses to sell a product doesn't make it censorship. Like me not selling drugs doesn't mean I censor drug use.

There are many levels of censorship. From a small Christian store that only sells Christian content to a government, executing anyone caught with BANNED content. If one single company takes part in censorship then it won't make a difference but they are still taking part in what I consider evil. If one person murders an innocent person, then the world will move on as if nothing happened but one person did commit an evil act. And Valve is not like other single companies. Valve with Steam, has an insane amount of power over the world of gaming. Valve's power to censor is almost close to the power of state censorship... Imagine 15 years from now, someone wants to buy Hatred? Where will they be able to go to buy the game? By then, the dev's website will probably be gone. Steam won't sell it. Origin will never sell it. GOG might not sell it. Desura? I doubt it. Amazon.com or Ebay or $100? And if you can't afford to spend $100 on a game? All the brick and mortar video game stores sell console games. So then what? Then you are fucked. No Hatred for you. Not as effective as state censorship but still...effective.

Hatred brought out the hatred from people who find the game disgusting and now they are letting their hate turn them to the dark side of censorship.

There are many games from 15 years ago that I can't buy anywhere or just for an obscene amount of money. And yet it has to do nothing with censorship.

And who knows, maybe Steam, GOG and Desura don't even exist anymore in 15 years and the developers of Hatred have a well running store themselves (made with all the money they earned from people buying Hatred directly from them).
It's quite pointless to make such kind of predictions, nobody knows how digital distribution will develop.

And yet they propably own the Postal series. Ironic isn't it?

I was just showing you how effective Steam can be when it comes to controlling what games are available and what games are not... And that is not pointless.

I still hope that it's going to be a good game and if that will be indeed the case, that GOG is going to take it in. And I'm saying that as someone who was instantly thrown off by its content and the attitude the developers showed.

I'm guessing the game will be good because if the devs make it a good game, it will be like an additional middle finger to all those who are against the game. Because many people who oppose the game are hoping the game sucks and are saying it's going to suck. It's also their first game so if the game is shit, then they don't really have much of a future. They will just be known as people who caused a shit storm and nothing else. Instead of pioneers paving the way to a new future for the world of gaming with Hatred 2 and Hatred 3... Instead of being the new Polish 3D Realms.