Hatred is back on Steam Greenlight, Gabe Newell apologies.

[ShadowCaptain]

So then why did he do it in the first place?

 

I don't buy the "I didn't know anything about it" statement at all. Sounds like utter damage control.

 

He personally didn't, I don't think he literally oversees EVERY single game that goes in and out of steam there are over 300 employees there

 

At work I manage a fleet of 200 cars, and only I do this job, doesn't mean the manager wont step in if I do something wrong

[Mooshi]

I loathe this game. No hate, loathe. I will never think of it as more than a 3edgy5me homicide simulator made by a dev who has no redeeming qualities beyond wanting to release something for shock value and only shock value. I will continue to cringe when others compare to other games as some sort of justification even though the games cited has killing innocents as an optional thing and not the focus of the game. As a gamer, it disappointed me how anyone sensible could want this game while also crying whenever the media puts another hit piece on the sub culture. That level of hypocrisy is a good way to lose my respect. To me, it looks like these gamers are throwing petrol onto the fire by encouraging more future drama over video games. "Video games make you blah blah blah" gets old.

 

And I wouldn't ever vote "no". That's the thing. I'd rather abstain than voting no on Hatred because it's not my job and shouldn't be anyone else's job to police someone's work. Will never play such a tasteless game, especially one that you damn well know will cause media to flip its shit. That doesn't mean someone else wouldn't. This is how the free market works. One can be against something without making a fool of themselves. Games are games and real research, not junk cited by the hysterical media, has shown games decrease violence as a stress reliever. Those who voted "yes" should be fully aware of what will come in regards to media and must be held responsible for their actions. You're not allowed to complain about bias media if Jack Thompson 2.0 appears. You knew what you were getting into. Freedom of speech and all that are sacred and should be protected, not abused. This is my view on this controversy. I don't like Hatred, but it also wasn't a game for me. On the grounds of being a game alone, if an HTML browser "game"  about depression can squeak by greenlight, so should a game that actually has interest. You're free to vote on stuff on this just as I'm free to criticize. This is how free speech works.

[Fate]

Can you please stop using Center alignment I can't read anything you type up.

Yea for some reason it's very difficult to read when everything is centered. @XTankSlayerX

[skywake]

On the one hand I don't really like it when anything is "banned" and the whole argument about people being influenced by it is a load of crap. On the other hand this game is pretty revolting and surely there's a line somewhere. Would people be happy with a game that made the KKK, Nazis or Al-Qaeda the heroes? Even if it was more tasteless than it was parody or serious literature? I get that those are extreme examples, this game is nowhere near that, but there is definitely a line. So I get both sides of the argument.

 

Personally I'd never want to play a game like that anyway. When I play a game I like to have at least a bit of an understanding of what motivates the main protagonist, that's a big deal. With this? Fuck that. Also after the crap that went down in Sydney this week, presenting that topic in this way? I don't want to play a game where that dude is the hero and I don't really like the idea of someone profiting from a game that does that. I'm not going to jump up and down and ask for the game to be banned but I wouldn't be at all upset if it was banned. 

[XTankSlayerX]

Updated OP with your "lord and savior, GabeN's" apology.

[Snickerzz]

Updated OP with your "lord and savior, GabeN's" apology.

thats how you be a good CEO

[LAwLz]

I loathe this game. No hate, loathe. I will never think of it as more than a 3edgy5me homicide simulator made by a dev who has no redeeming qualities beyond wanting to release something for shock value and only shock value. I will continue to cringe when others compare to other games as some sort of justification even though the games cited has killing innocents as an optional thing and not the focus of the game. As a gamer, it disappointed me how anyone sensible could want this game while also crying whenever the media puts another hit piece on the sub culture. That level of hypocrisy is a good way to lose my respect. To me, it looks like these gamers are throwing petrol onto the fire by encouraging more future drama over video games. "Video games make you blah blah blah" gets old.

 

And I wouldn't ever vote "no". That's the thing. I'd rather abstain than voting no on Hatred because it's not my job and shouldn't be anyone else's job to police someone's work. Will never play such a tasteless game, especially one that you damn well know will cause media to flip its shit. That doesn't mean someone else wouldn't. This is how the free market works. One can be against something without making a fool of themselves. Games are games and real research, not junk cited by the hysterical media, has shown games decrease violence as a stress reliever. Those who voted "yes" should be fully aware of what will come in regards to media and must be held responsible for their actions. You're not allowed to complain about bias media if Jack Thompson 2.0 appears. You knew what you were getting into. Freedom of speech and all that are sacred and should be protected, not abused. This is my view on this controversy. I don't like Hatred, but it also wasn't a game for me. On the grounds of being a game alone, if an HTML browser "game"  about depression can squeak by greenlight, so should a game that actually has interest. You're free to vote on stuff on this just as I'm free to criticize. This is how free speech works.

I don't get your post.

 

First you say only no sensible person would want this game and also be mad at the media publishing unscientific garbage which can cause games like these to disappear. How is that hypocrisy?

The drama is not created by the people who want this game, the drama is created because people who don't like this kind of game is trying to get it removed from the market. People looked at this game on Steam, said "that looks interesting, I want to buy this" and then a bunch of other people who didn't want to play this game thought "we don't want anyone else to play this either". Who is the one to blame for the drama? I blame the ones trying to enforce their world views on everyone else.

 

Why are you blaming the users who voted yes to the game for the unscientific garbage the media publishes about the game? You are essentially saying that we should let the Jack Thompsons of the world win. That we shouldn't acknowledge games they dislike because if we approve of them then they get more fuel. Or am I misinterpreting your post?

[RH00D]

 

 

The limit exists, but it's different for different people. That's why you can find Final Destination and Frozen on shelves in the same shop, so you can decide which is for you. And if these "but what about the children" parents are worried that such games will fall into their kids' hands, it's about time to familiarize yourself with what sort of sh*t they are accessing through the web.

 

 

I was thinking of starting a thread asking what everyone's limits are before they would prefer to see a game banned.  But it would probably end up like all the religious and gun debate threads.

 

I've played a few "games" where that happens (Only rape in the sense that they can't legally consent, not the violent way, even I tend to stay away from those kinds) ("game" is in quotes because it's visual novels, which are more like picture books).

I don't really see why that would be banned either, not even the violent rape kind.

Fiction = fiction.

Fiction != reality.

 

As long as it's clear that it's fiction I don't really see any reason why we should ban/censor any theme, no matter how horrible it is. I totally understand that different people have different morals but you should only express them by voting with your wallet, not by getting things you dislike banned. Wanting everyone to adhere to your personal morals shows a clear lack of respect for other peoples' morals. If you don't like it then fine, don't buy it. If people agree with you then the thing will be a commercial failure. I don't think it's okay to ban something just because you find it distasteful.

 

Edit: I guess you could sum it up as "I don't think anyone's personal opinion should be able to govern what other people are allowed to do".

 

I'm just curious to know what the reaction would be to Holocaust Simulator, where you starve Jews for weeks then load them up into ovens and cook them alive. Alternatively, you could use other more faster methods such as the gas chambers.

[LAwLz]

I'm just curious to know what the reaction would be to Holocaust Simulator, where you starve Jews for weeks then load them up into ovens and cook them alive. Alternatively, you could use other more faster methods such as the gas chambers.

I would be totally okay with such a game being released. To be perfectly honest, I googled it and found this on uncyclopedia:

The player begins with nigger tits + alcoholic beverages in an empty plot of land, levelled and ready for development. In the early stages of the game, the player will build his camp, adding huts, arranging for political opponents, enemy aliens, specific ethnic or religious groups to be transported in, and the construction of (initially experimental) gas chambers. As with most games of this genre the early development is the most important stage, as the structure of the camp is crucial to its survival. Controversially, players are encouraged to cram as many people into huts, to heighten profit (refered to in-game as 'death toll').

 

Eventually, as the camp develops, more options become available. For example, the player must then negotiate contracts with various loyal companies, such as gas providers, freight rail and allied computer companies (Apple is available). The object of this game is to build an organised and brutal camp, allowing your Commandant promotion whilst gaining the love and appreciation of the Master Race.

 

Although primarily a strategy game, the game contains a few action-oriented "mission sequences". Verlassen Verboten! is a first-person shooter in which the player must prevent camp residents from climbing the fence or tunneling. In Trash Day, the player must keep the disposal units running under an increasingly heavy stream of biological waste.

 

I really like Tycoon games and that sounds like it could be a decent one.

Obviously you could implement all the same game mechanics around a more pleasant subject but I wouldn't hold the WW2 theme against it if it still managed to be a fun game.

 

I am sure people would be furious about it though.

[Ryukrieger]

I'm just curious to know what the reaction would be to Holocaust Simulator, where you starve Jews for weeks then load them up into ovens and cook them alive. Alternatively, you could use other more faster methods such as the gas chambers.

I'd say that going too far would be... actually, not really, when it comes to fictions, I'm fine with anything existing, however, it doesn't mean I'll throw my money at anything.

I think it's about letting the creators know via how well they do based on people's interest instead of letting them have the excuse of "It's because I was banned by <insert name>, the small amount of players clearly supported this".

For example, if people make a game where they're depicting my country or my race as evil and should be eradicated, sure, I have no problem with it existing, it's a fictional setting set in a fiction world, if I find it not to my taste, I won't support it, but I won't take away anyone's choice to. I've played games where the enemy is my country (Note, I'm not originally from Aus), and I don't feel offended, even on parts where my people are depicted as outright evil, I don't start thinking "Damn, my countrymen are all arses, I want to kill them", either. Normal business as always, really.

In short, leave it up to the people in the targeted demographic (Yes, targeted demographic, underage get mature-rated games don't count, that's the parents' faults), take no choices away from it, if the majority doesn't like it, the creators will try something else or try to do better (depending on the content), that's all.

On another aspect, I do understand that there are people who can't separate reality and fiction, but how many, really? Is it most of us? Or is it just some of us? I'm not sure, but I'm sure that the negative usually drown out the positive parts, but in my entire life, I'm sure that most 18+ years old people I know know the different between fiction and reality.

In summary, my opinion is the same as most people "Let the people choose their own paths, don't choose for them".

[LePawel]

I'm just curious to know what the reaction would be to Holocaust Simulator, where you starve Jews for weeks then load them up into ovens and cook them alive. Alternatively, you could use other more faster methods such as the gas chambers.

Honestly, it would be broadly hated but people who enjoy games like SimCity or Banished would probably look it up from mechanics point of view, which would probably reflect a Baking simulator with different baking methods where you have to grow your ingredients (yes, really, think about it).

I would definitely check it out because I'm Polish, and I can assure you that just like you just pointed out, it would be just the Jews as victims/burned, which is one unacceptable bullshit I just can't walk by when it comes to the widely spread WWII history.

Lastly, I see no connection between a war crime on multi-million scale during world's largest conflict and a killing rampage you can already do in different games, but none focus strictly around it. As long as Hatred is executed well or has fairly open engine access it's definitely a game worth checking precisely because it's different. Not everyone can take their kids to Iraq to show reality of war and killing, this may be the next best thing, who knows.

[Mooshi]

-snip-

 

Gamers are constantly on the defensive trying to defend their hobby. We both know this. My point was only someone completely naive will fail to notice that a game like this will only lead to more judgement of gamers. Especially by those who are hardcore wanting this game just to piss off others. If it wasn't bad enough to hear "Video games cause violence" now gamers are going to be viewed as even more anti social psychopaths and thus begins another episode of mass hysteria and public perception. I thought as gamers were sick of this by now.

 

The point is that this game has a right to exist, but gamers who voted yes should be prepared for the inevitable backlash. Hatred makes GTA look like Super Mario Bros.

[StingBull]

So then why did he do it in the first place?

I don't buy the "I didn't know anything about it" statement at all. Sounds like utter damage control.

A CEO or a managing director doesn't have to know everything that goes around in his company. If anything and everything was to be reported to the guy at the top A. he would never be able leave work for even 5 seconds B. he would be the bottleneck of the company and nothing would get done.

[Doobeedoo]

*smile* Makes me happy.

[ImBleu]

 

 

“DAFUQ it’s about 3am in Poland I’m in bed I have no idea what’s going on, will investigate it,” one staffer said on the Destructive Creations forum"

“You won’t believe but I know nothing. They didn’t text me about it. Maybe they sent something only to our CEO, I’ll know tomorrow,” he added.

 

 

 

God these people are so professional it burns.

[Victorious Secret]

I am perplexed by how the public at large thinks. 

 

How can 'Hatred' cross the line when it follows in the footsteps of games far, far worse? Seriously. Where do we stop with the political correctness nonsense? 

[Thony]

Now I'm wondering if ppl gonna stream it on twitch.

[Misanthrope]

Gamers are constantly on the defensive trying to defend their hobby. We both know this. My point was only someone completely naive will fail to notice that a game like this will only lead to more judgement of gamers. Especially by those who are hardcore wanting this game just to piss off others. If it wasn't bad enough to hear "Video games cause violence" now gamers are going to be viewed as even more anti social psychopaths and thus begins another episode of mass hysteria and public perception. I thought as gamers were sick of this by now.

 

The point is that this game has a right to exist, but gamers who voted yes should be prepared for the inevitable backlash. Hatred makes GTA look like Super Mario Bros.

 

Still that's like telling a gay person "Well I am ok with you being gay but if you're flamboyant you are responsible for bigots protesting your basic human rights because you should have gone to hid on a corner and tried not to be noticed"

 

That is complete and absolute nonsense: There's 0 scientific evidence of any kind of adverse effect on a person that plays a violent videogame, no matter how tasteful or distasteful the title is. You're advocating mixing moral values with facts which is a big no no, sorry to say but that is dead wrong.

[Mooshi]

Still that's like telling a gay person "Well I am ok with you being gay but if you're flamboyant you are responsible for bigots protesting your basic human rights because you should have gone to hid on a corner and tried not to be noticed"

 

That is complete and absolute nonsense: There's 0 scientific evidence of any kind of adverse effect on a person that plays a violent videogame, no matter how tasteful or distasteful the title is. You're advocating mixing moral values with facts which is a big no no, sorry to say but that is dead wrong.

 

Where did I even imply there is a link between video game actions in real life? The only reference I gave in regards to any links is that it actually reduces real life violence since the game is an outlet to channel frustrations. As for the gay thing, that's a strawman argument. If an individual is acting suspect in public, that's on them. It's no different than a hetero couple holding hands in public vs openly slobbering on each other. That wouldn't get a free pass, either. While it is their right to do so, they also can't be shocked when people gawk.

 

Literally the only points negative where that it's edge the game and that it will only invite even more scrutiny towards the gaming community. Have you read the comments of pro Hatred around the internet? It reads of entitled children looking to support out of spite. That kind of immaturity is exactly why I feel negative towards this as a whole, but I'm not going to try to convince others of anything since that's not my problem.

 

tl;dr opinions

[Misanthrope]

Where did I even imply there is a link between video game actions in real life? The only reference I gave in regards to any links is that it actually reduces real life violence since the game is an outlet to channel frustrations. As for the gay thing, that's a strawman argument. If an individual is acting suspect in public, that's on them. It's no different than a hetero couple holding hands in public vs openly slobbering on each other. That wouldn't get a free pass, either. While it is their right to do so, they also can't be shocked when people gawk.

 

Literally the only points negative where that it's edge the game and that it will only invite even more scrutiny towards the gaming community. Have you read the comments of pro Hatred around the internet? It reads of entitled children looking to support out of spite. That kind of immaturity is exactly why I feel negative towards this as a whole, but I'm not going to try to convince others of anything since that's not my problem.

 

tl;dr opinions

It's not a strawman argument, both my analogy and your argument are clear cases of Victim blaming: Oh you're asking for it. Yes you actually done nothing wrong since there's no consequences at all for exercising your freedom of choice but since you do it openly or you're a bit too obnoxious about it, then I guess YOU have to deal with people who want to take away your rights and it's your damn fault, even if you did nothing wrong.

[Mooshi]

It's not a strawman argument, both my analogy and your argument are clear cases of Victim blaming: Oh you're asking for it. Yes you actually done nothing wrong since there's no consequences at all for exercising your freedom of choice but since you do it openly or you're a bit too obnoxious about it, then I guess YOU have to deal with people who want to take away your rights and it's your damn fault, even if you did nothing wrong.

 

It's not really victim blaming and more of a reality check. We know SJWs go apeshit over this kind of stuff. In the end though, I'm one person out of billions, my opinions have no impact of what goes down in regards to that game. I don't like it, but I also won't protest it or randomly go off on anyone of my friends if I see them playing it on Steam in the future. It's more or less of "Be prepared for the incoming shitstorm" really. The game isn't even being sold and the controversy and snarky comments from both sides already hurt my brain. I will say though. The people who are actively protesting, they are ironically going to make the game even more popular. On a side note, I've already left GamerGate due to getting tired of my Twitter flooded with the same stuff I already knew on a daily basis. I'm not going to join another gaming crusade if gamers come under fire because of that game. Staying out entirely.

 

We don't always agree on subjects, but we do on some and you're one of the members here I respect. i'm not on your ignore list so I assume I don't annoy you that much.

[Real_PhillBert]

I'm still not really sure how I feel about this game, but I am glad that Valve is not taking it upon themselves to decide what is ok and what is not. Good job Valve.

[Misanthrope]

It's not really victim blaming and more of a reality check. We know SJWs go apeshit over this kind of stuff. In the end though, I'm one person out of billions, my opinions have no impact of what goes down in regards to that game. I don't like it, but I also won't protest it or randomly go off on anyone of my friends if I see them playing it on Steam in the future. It's more or less of "Be prepared for the incoming shitstorm" really. The game isn't even being sold and the controversy and snarky comments from both sides already hurt my brain. I will say though. The people who are actively protesting, they are ironically going to make the game even more popular. On a side note, I've already left GamerGate due to getting tired of my Twitter flooded with the same stuff I already knew on a daily basis. I'm not going to join another gaming crusade if gamers come under fire because of that game. Staying out entirely.

 

We don't always agree on subjects, but we do on some and you're one of the members here I respect. i'm not on your ignore list so I assume I don't annoy you that much.

If you stop acting on what you believe because of said reality check, you are basically conceding that SJW types and bigots are right. Yes I know it will be a shitstorm but that should strengthen your resolve to support freedom of speech, if you don't personally want to be involved on that ok then. But don't advocate or suggest that people should be weary and doubt defending their rights that is detrimental and could be construed as an implied support of censorship cause the end result is the same: suppressing someone's rights.

[Mooshi]

If you stop acting on what you believe because of said reality check, you are basically conceding that SJW types and bigots are right. Yes I know it will be a shitstorm but that should strengthen your resolve to support freedom of speech, if you don't personally want to be involved on that ok then. But don't advocate or suggest that people should be weary and doubt defending their rights that is detrimental and could be construed as an implied support of censorship cause the end result is the same: suppressing someone's rights.

 

I suppose you're right. I'll never lend my support to this, but if I continue to speak against it, I'll turn into another mouth breathing opinion piece and a part of me will turn SJW..that would be scary. I'm going to abstain from this, it's better to keep your cool than to vote for something you don't like or vote no to prevent others from enjoying something. We cool?

[Misanthrope]

I suppose you're right. I'll never lend my support to this, but if I continue to speak against it, I'll turn into another mouth breathing opinion piece and a part of me will turn SJW..that would be scary. I'm going to abstain from this, it's better to keep your cool than to vote for something you don't like or vote no to prevent others from enjoying something. We cool?

Yep, carry on