vivster said:
impertinence said:
vivster said:
How does praying one thing and doing the opposite not make you a hypocrite?
They have the right to judge how they want so that we can say that their judging is weird and has a double standard. The thing is apparently that they have an exact measure of what is too much backlash and it would be interesting to see how they define it. Because I've seen a lot of backlash against other shit games that Valve continues to support with their platform.
And as Jim wonderfully said, if their argument is that this game doesn't belong on Steam because they don't like it, it means in return they do like all the other broken shit that is on steam and that they're happy to enable scumbags that put broken games on the platform to scam people.
The issue is not with what they did but what they didn't do.
|
Nonsense. If Jim, whomever that might be, has said that since Steam has refused one game because they don't like it that somehow means they like everything they do allow then he doesn't understand how to make a reasonable argument and he should not put his opinions out in the public space unless he wants people to make fun of his mental faculties.
And Valve is not saying one thing and doing another. All they are saying is that they find one particular game too offensive for their platform, and so won't allow it. That doesn't mean that they are obligated to ban everything else that random people like yourself and the rest of the internut peanut gallery think should be measurred to the same standard. The only thing that matters is that Valve, the platform owner, has decided that there is a difference between this game and other games in their eyes and that they don't want to touch this game.
|
I suggest you adjust your tone. I will let it slide this time.
If they're not hypocrites they must have a clear definition of what is too offensive and what is not. What this definition is, nobody knows. Which makes their practice intransparent and as that criticizeable.
Let's just take Hatred out of the picture for a minute and talk about the shit they actually publish. Broken games and other nonsense. You know, the stuff the likes of EA and Ubisoft are permanently criticized for. Is it ok to criticize them for that? Last time I checked this is an offense punishable by being named the worst company of the world.
The reason why this is a big thing now is that people have pleaded for a long time for Valve to take some action and clean up the mess that their storefront has become. Yet they did nothing. And now suddenly they take action, but not for the things that their fans would've wanted but just to ban a random game. Don't you think that left a lot of people disappointed as they apparently care about their image when it comes to offensive violent games but don't give a shit when it comes to games that are offensive not because of their content but because they're a broken product that is actually sold for real money?
That's the real problem here. Hatred as a game isn't even the important part. It's that Steam seemingly acts randomly without listening to any feedback its fans give them. That's a bad thing to do when the current trend is actually companies listening to their customers.
|
You don't know what a hypocrite is. Here is an example for you: Valve says Origin should be shut down because they allow a questionable game on their platform, then proceed to allow the same game on their own platform (try to focus on the principle here, not the concept of a game releasing on Origin and Steam).
The real issue here has nothing to do with Valve and their policies, it has to do with entitled gamers acting like little children thinking they have a right to enforce their own (arbitrary) rules on a private business. Valve allow and disallow whatever they like on their platform for whatever reason. The customers deal with it. That's how it works. Sometimes they deal with it by crying a lot together and Valve changes their mind, as in this case, but that still doesn't change the fact that Valve never were hypocrites in this case, or had any sort of obligation to put their content policies out to a public hearing.
As for the decission to allow the game back on Steam, I suspect the following reasoning: Valve realizes that not allowing this piece of shit game on Steram will generate excactly what the developers hope for, more controversy and more 'edgy' customers who will purchase a turd just becuase others will find it revolting. So, by allowing this game and let it stand on it's own against a mountain of other useless games, it will not be awarded the additional help of being able to say they are "too extreme for steam".
