Hatred is back on Steam Greenlight, Gabe Newell apologies.

[Lewellyn]

Nah, I'm just in hysterics at this point. Three people basically screaming censorship over one shop for a period of like two days deciding that it didn't want to sell a game that tbh looked shit anyway. Cry me a god-damned river.

 

 Maybe I'll ignore what everybody actually said and go lobotomize myself like you did, sounds like a great plan!

[othertomperson]

 Maybe I'll ignore what everybody actually said and go lobotomize myself like you did, sounds like a great plan!

 

Make sure you do it CONSISTENTLY. Apparently you have some kind of obligation to do that and someone might get upset if you do it ARBITRARILY.

[Lewellyn]

Make sure you do it CONSISTENTLY. Apparently you have some kind of obligation to do that and someone might get upset if you do it ARBITRARILY.

 

You think you're being funny, but it's actually quite sad. Not one person in this thread ever said "Valve has a legal obligation to sell every game we want sold," despite what you keep yelling and screaming.

 

Maybe if you weren't such a moron you would understand what is explicit and implicit about each argument that was presented to you, but you were given developmental limits that have stunted your social cognitive abilities.

[PopReference]

Make sure you do it CONSISTENTLY. Apparently you have some kind of obligation to do that and someone might get upset if you do it ARBITRARILY.

Arbitrary lobotomy sounds like a name for a Death Metal band, you know, the type that people would blame for a teen angst and miscreant behavior. <- just enough on topic

[othertomperson]

You think you're being funny, but it's actually quite sad. Not one person in this thread ever said "Valve has a legal obligation to sell every game we want sold," despite what you keep yelling and screaming.

 

Maybe if you weren't such a moron you would understand what is explicit and implicit about each argument that was presented to you, but you were given developmental limits that have stunted your social cognitive abilities.

 

Nah you've spent about two pages outlining exactly what Valve should do and to the extent their decisions are censorship as if, hilariously, you have some kind of say on the matter. Bless.

[Shadowcat]

Unless the devs are mowing people down in the streets then no line has been crossed. Its a video game if you take everything so seriously you'll have issues going forward in life. Valve either needs to curate their shit or let the community do it. The community chose for the game to be on steam end of story.

[Lewellyn]

Nah you've spent about two pages outlining exactly what Valve should do and to the extent their decisions are censorship as if, hilariously, you have some kind of say on the matter. Bless.

 

LOL! No, I did not. Go and quote the posts, you won't be able to. Not one person in this thread ever sai-- nevermind, if you want the explanation as to why you are retarded just go and actually read what people posted instead of asserting your misguided prejudice. The way you have put words in other peoples' mouths is quite disgusting, in fact that sort of stupid dishonesty offends me so much it probably should be banned from the forum.

[mr moose]

 

 

 

HERP DERP

 

 

 

A highly intelligent and very well thought out rebuttal

 

Maybe if you actually read what people are saying rather than argue points that are not in contention you might have had a better discussion.

 

Your arguments have gone from a lack of understanding and completely wrong to petty insults and unintelligent misrepresentation of others.  There would not be two pages of discussion on censorship and consistency if you understood what they mean in the context of this discussion.

[Guest]

Good, it should be allowed even though it's disturbing imo, but it SHOULD be allowed.

[mr moose]

Edit:Meh noone will read this.

TLDR: valve fun fucked up, hatred/devs done nothing wrong,community wins.

 

I read it, it sounded fine to me. it made sense and added to the discussion.  why remove it?

[Shadowcat]

I read it, it sounded fine to me. it made sense and added to the discussion. why remove it?

honestly idk I'm incredibly indecisive when it comes to what I want to say/post I re edited it again already.

[SpaceCore]

The interesting thing here, after reading the replies, is that it seems many of you can't separate you're abhorrence for censorship and desire for freedom of expression from the concept of inappropriate. We all agree there should be no such thing as censorship (this is a civil right), however the simple question is, is there a point that is too far?  What would it look like? what would it take to get you to a personal dichotomy where your convictions between freedom and moral/ethical appropriateness oppose each other?

 

Keep in mind it is not hypocrisy, as hypocrisy is an ignorant/arrogant issue, this is a conflict of belief systems with no real solution.

what are the circumstances that make the game Hatred inappropriate?

[Beskamir]

Personally I don't like this game but I will respect it's right to exist. If people want to play it then that's their choice and I do not have the right to stop them.

[skywake]

what are the circumstances that make the game Hatred inappropriate?

 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-12-15/sydney-siege-photographs-of-hostage-situation/5969010

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-12-18/journalist-describes-horror-movie-scene-in-peshawar-school/5975808

[Shadowcat]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-12-15/sydney-siege-photographs-of-hostage-situation/5969010

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-12-18/journalist-describes-horror-movie-scene-in-peshawar-school/5975808

I see no issues here, care to explain why these tragedy's should affect the works of people whom are not connected to them? Shit happens life goes on. Can't revolve your life (development cycle) around shit other people do.

[Briggsy]

after seeing this, Hatred almost seems tame in comparison. (this is not a real game, just a weird/insane protest)

 

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=357693142

[mr moose]

what are the circumstances that make the game Hatred inappropriate?

 

You'd have to ask people who think it's inappropriate or has content that is.   There are a few that have posted already.

[skywake]

I see no issues here, care to explain why these tragedy's should affect the works of people whom are not connected to them? Shit happens life goes on. Can't revolve your life (development cycle) around shit other people do.

It's really not that complicated. I don't necessarily agree with the game being pulled but it's not hard to understand why people would. You have really terrible stuff like the events in Sydney and Pakistan this week and every other month and there's a society wide disgust towards that. Then there's a game like this that's celebrating that sort of behaviour with no clear reason why other than to cause controversy. It's not about worrying that somehow the game would result in such events, but the tone and perspective of it is arguably inappropriate.

 

Either way I'm not going to chuck a tantrum. If the game is available then I'm not going to buy it anyway, if the game is banned I'm not going to lose any sleep over it. IMO there is a line and while this this game maybe hasn't crossed it it's definitely right ontop of it.

[BurgerBum]

penis. 

that is all i have to say about this.

[Ryukrieger]

It's really not that complicated. I don't necessarily agree with the game being pulled but it's not hard to understand why people would. You have really terrible stuff like the events in Sydney and Pakistan this week and every other month and there's a society wide disgust towards that. Then there's a game like this that's celebrating that sort of behaviour with no clear reason why other than to cause controversy. It's not about worrying that somehow the game would result in such events, but the tone and perspective of it is arguably inappropriate.

 

Either way I'm not going to chuck a tantrum. If the game is available then I'm not going to buy it anyway, if the game is banned I'm not going to lose any sleep over it. IMO there is a line and while this this game maybe hasn't crossed it it's definitely right ontop of it.

This is the altitude I prefer people to have, as in... "Their own opinions", else imagine this, if someone tells you "You must like this game, you don't get to choose", it is basically the same situation. The individual reaction from everyone will be what the creators use to decide what to do next.

I've said something a few pages ago, which I doubt later replies read, I have no problems with games using a setting I personally can relate to.... and pose to my people as evil, been there, played that, I feel indifferent, so on a personal level (and personal opinion), I am fine with such games, I believe different people exist and I belong to the group that isn't sensitive if fictions touch a touchy subject in real life. 

 

Although, of course, we have to agree here, people who don't like a piece of fiction (in this case, Hatred), will not support it and it's their own choice, it's no one's loss or gain, the two sides will exist, and the two sides are not wrong.

Although of course I'll have massive problems with adults buying this game for anyone who can't distinguish between fictions and reality (generally, children and mentally challenged, but case-by-case basis is probably more appropriate, I believe), , because that's irresponsible, a completely different topic.

[SpaceCore]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-12-15/sydney-siege-photographs-of-hostage-situation/5969010

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-12-18/journalist-describes-horror-movie-scene-in-peshawar-school/5975808

This is very subjective now. Do those links represent why you think the game Hatred is inappropriate?

If so, in the last 10 years*, it has been inappropriate to release any game in where killing innocent bystanders is necessary to progress.

following this logic we should remove all games that fit that description. That's a lot of games.

 

 

*I'm being generous with 10 years. Atrocities like the ones in the links have been happening for more than 10 years.

 

edit:

I see from your other comments that you, personally, find this abhorrent. I get it, I don't think it is in good taste either.

However, there is a quote by Voltaire I like: "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"

He also added "What a fuss about an omelette!" in this case, the omelette is the game Hatred.

In the end, these are imaginary people we are talking about.

[skywake]

This is very subjective now. Do those links represent why you think the game Hatred is inappropriate?

If so, in the last 10 years*, it has been inappropriate to release any game in where killing innocent bystanders is necessary to progress.

following this logic we should remove all games that fit that description. That's a lot of games.

I think there's a clear difference between a game where there's violence and/or innocent people dying and a game where that's the primary and only goal. In most games it's a kill or be killed sort of thing or and even when it's not you're going in there with a specific goal other than just killing all the dudes. Usually your opponents are armed. Even in games like GTA which some people do think goes to far you're playing as a loser or someone who is clearly mentally disturbed. Also in GTA when you do systematically gun down innocent people it's usually not part of a mission and you're always swarmed by cops. The game trailer for this makes it clear that that's not the case, you're literally going out to commit genocide and by the looks of it your character is almost god-like. Very different.

 

Also I do think that when "art" does deal with tragedy there is a point where it becomes inappropriate. The closer to such a tragedy it is the less appropriate it seems. Last week I read about this game and was largely indifferent about it and to an extent I still am. But after what I saw live, all day in my own country this week? I now lean more towards the "maybe it's a bit too much" side of the debate.

 

edit:

As a side note, some of my favourite games of the last couple of years (Bioshock Infinite, Tomb Raider) have made a point of questioning violent acts. A fact that makes a game that goes well and truly in the other direction even less appealing IMO.

Edited December 18, 2014 by skywake

[Fuzz3k]

To be quite frank, it shouldn't have been taken off steam to begin with.

 

We already have 2 ultraviolent games, Manhunt and Postal/Postal 2. You could put Hotline Miami under the ultraviolent genre in a sense.

 

Good job GabeN, I applaud you.

[SpaceCore]

I think there's a clear difference between a game where there's violence and/or innocent people dying and a game where that's the primary and only goal. In most games it's a kill or be killed sort of thing or and even when it's not you're going in there with a specific goal other than just killing all the dudes. Usually your opponents are armed. Even in games like GTA which some people do think goes to far you're playing as a loser or someone who is clearly mentally disturbed. Also in GTA when you do systematically gun down innocent people it's usually not part of a mission and you're always swarmed by cops. The game trailer for this makes it clear that that's not the case, you're literally going out to commit genocide and by the looks of it your character is almost god-like. Very different.

 

Also I do think that when "art" does deal with tragedy there is a point where it becomes inappropriate. The closer to such a tragedy it is the less appropriate it seems. Last week I read about this game and was largely indifferent about it and to an extent I still am. But after what I saw live, all day in my own country this week? I now lean more towards the "maybe it's a bit too much" side of the debate.

 

edit:

As a side note, some of my favourite games of the last couple of years (Bioshock Infinite, Tomb Raider) have made a point of questioning violent acts. A fact that makes a game that goes well and truly in the other direction even less appealing IMO.

and that is what it really boils down to. Your opinion. Inapproriate is very subjective. One mans trash is another's treasure.

The only way to deal with that is to let everything and anything come to fruition. Let the people decide what they want to consume/experience.

no one is forcing anyone to experience the game.

don't tell me your next argument is "it's for the children"

 

and lobbying to have it removed from the face of the planet because you don't like it is extreme.

[OlekKing]

I think there's a clear difference between a game where there's violence and/or innocent people dying and a game where that's the primary and only goal. In most games it's a kill or be killed sort of thing or and even when it's not you're going in there with a specific goal other than just killing all the dudes. Usually your opponents are armed. Even in games like GTA which some people do think goes to far you're playing as a loser or someone who is clearly mentally disturbed. Also in GTA when you do systematically gun down innocent people it's usually not part of a mission and you're always swarmed by cops. The game trailer for this makes it clear that that's not the case, you're literally going out to commit genocide and by the looks of it your character is almost god-like. Very different.

 

Also I do think that when "art" does deal with tragedy there is a point where it becomes inappropriate. The closer to such a tragedy it is the less appropriate it seems. Last week I read about this game and was largely indifferent about it and to an extent I still am. But after what I saw live, all day in my own country this week? I now lean more towards the "maybe it's a bit too much" side of the debate.

 

edit:

As a side note, some of my favourite games of the last couple of years (Bioshock Infinite, Tomb Raider) have made a point of questioning violent acts. A fact that makes a game that goes well and truly in the other direction even less appealing IMO.

It doesn't matter.

The only line that exists is taking action in real life or directly inciting real life action.

You don't have to like it but please don't be telling us how it's "different", it's no different than mowing down people in Call of Duty or any other shooter.

You're just shooting a different arrangement of pixels and polygons made to look like regular civilians.

 

The game has nothing to do with real shootings that happened, if it was actually portraying a real event and put representations of real victims in the game then you have a reason to be disturbed.

 

Shooting people in hatred is no more shocking than shooting any other kind of people in any other shooter game.