What games do you want to ban?
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Valve Removes Active Shooter
- Thread starter FrgMstr
- Start date
-
- Tags
- active shooter steam valve
What games do you want to ban?
Probably not many... this one seems like an easy one though. Child porn games seem easy if there are any. I don’t think it’s too difficult to make that decision. At the end of the day, I’m not for ‘banning’ them to be honest but I would be okay with it. I am for businesses making the right judgement and pulling these type of games though.
I don't want to ban any. If I don't like a game I don't buy it. Open the door to banning one, you'll never stop.
Not if common sense prevails and we don’t listen to the stupidly loud minority that screams about it.
sfsuphysics
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2007
- Messages
- 16,007
Don't put any restrictions on games, then you open the door to shovelware garbage that dilutes what is out there, hey look Steam sale... with 8424 games, I hope you know how to navigate though the messes of masses.
Person triggered willing to stick their head in the sand for their ideology is evident. Plus snowflake and safe place really isn't an insult anymore (tired like others have said - the "that's gay" of the 90s). It really just shows the character of the person posting. So assuming you have children, which I hope you don't defending this game, you would be ok if someone simulated a smut film with your daughter? And just don't buy it would be your response? That's the most tired and lazy response to real issues that "attack" "freedom of expression" - note the air quotes. Like I said above smh. I'm sorry that I have morals and respect my fellow men more than silly pissing matches about media.
Edit: I just read your responses. Makes much more sense to your sensitivity to mine. Terrified of societal norms - banning games that promote rape or child murder cause of the "slippery slope." See above. smh. If you weren't so paranoid you would realize that the people you are so scared of only want to ban the most extremist insanely stupid shit and you'll still get your murder simulators. Honestly man - I think for a lot of the people using safe place and snowflake there needs to be a bit of self reflection to really think of who they are talking about.
Last edited:
Even if it was about the product rather than the developer.
I refuse to resell your product because it reflects poorly on my business. The end.
I refuse to sell lots of drinks in my bar because they're shit or it isn't the vibe we're going for. Doesn't mean distributors can sue me. I'm only beholden to the law and my shareholders. It's not a speech issue and I'm not negating my fiduciary duty (to myself)
I refuse to resell your product because it reflects poorly on my business. The end.
I refuse to sell lots of drinks in my bar because they're shit or it isn't the vibe we're going for. Doesn't mean distributors can sue me. I'm only beholden to the law and my shareholders. It's not a speech issue and I'm not negating my fiduciary duty (to myself)
M76
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2012
- Messages
- 14,059
I don't know why everyone comes with this protected class excuse. It has nothing to do with class. It is the right to equal service. Just because someone is not part of a "protected class" you can't refuse them service if they're not violating any terms.
And I'm not saying that valve is in the wrong for banning them is this case becase of their other violations of the terms. But bringing the game's content into the mix is muddy water that paves the way to open censorship. OK now they violated other terms and they were already banned for that before. But what if next time some game comes around that will be removed solely based on not agreeing with its contents? Who decides what is acceptable and what is not?
You have the laziest and most tired argument of all time "Its for the kids".
You can have your morals, just don't impose them on me.
I never said Valve had to carry anything, they don't. I'm arguing with the dumbasses that want to ban games because THEY are offended by them.
M76
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2012
- Messages
- 14,059
You're too lenient.
Normal people don't have to proclaim at every turn how morally reprehesible they find mass shootings. Because that should be the default position. I've found that public grandstanding about morally reprehensible acts is usually employed to conceal a wish to perform the very act that is being condemned. How do you think banning a videogame or movie or book depicting mass shootings will help in solving the actual problem?
Last edited:
oROEchimaru
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2004
- Messages
- 4,662
meanwhile they are upset about boobs on valve/steam games. valve is nuts
sfsuphysics
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2007
- Messages
- 16,007
I dunno, while said dumbass might have gotten this game's attention on Valve's radar... although lets be fair, stories of did go viral so I'm sure Valve knew of the bad press it did/probably would have. Then it becomes a matter of a game with bad press not being one they want, not because members of "The Children's Television Council" (or video game equivalent) raised a stink.
There's a lot of idiocy in this thread, but this is one of the dumbest statements yet. Your findings are that these people are usually "concealing a wish" to commit the heinous acts they're decrying? Really? I'm sure you've got some serious data on that one!
I think you have that backwards. Freedom of speech can lead to offensive speech but the Freedom always had primacy. If speech doesn't offend someone somewhere, it doesn't need protection. For example civil right's protests in many areas would have been shutdown (many were until the right was enforced) Qualifiers on content destroys the whole point.
yourgrandma
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2011
- Messages
- 1,393
Valve letting the steam store look more like a smut shop then a digital game store has reflected on them worse then anything else. Removing or censoring games that shouldn't have been there in the first place is the worst PR move you can take honestly, but it's thier fault for letting it get this bad.
Guarana [BAWLS]
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2001
- Messages
- 1,951
Actually a reason doesn't have to be 'good'. It just can't be illegal.
I don't know what to say. I'm a firearms owner. Support responsible gun rights (I'm not scared of my AR). Care about my communities. You will defend your ideology without ever taking a look at why people have a problem with, for example, a video game (which is made by a troll) that depicts mass murder in a children's school. I just have to assume you don't have families, have become completely desensitized to what this violence represents and now will fight tooth and nail for what you believe your rights are. And you have that right. But don't try to attack my as a psychopath because you are showing psychopathic behavior with that comment.
Sorry man, I get into with a number of guys/gals on [H] but for what are what usually seem like things (TO ME) that common sense and human dignity would tell you not to defend.
M76
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2012
- Messages
- 14,059
Just look at the number of feminists exposed as repressed sexual predators. It's always the guy who makes the biggest spectacle about the fart in the office elevator who actually farted.
This is hardly a new idea, and I'm hardly the first who noticed the pattern.
Guess that makes Shakespeare an idiot.
^FTFY
M76
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2012
- Messages
- 14,059
What great arguments you have. The irony is so thick that I need a machete to cut trough it. I make a comment about grandstanding, and you try to use grandstanding in response. Good job.
I know. That's the point.
I need to quit reading back. Protected class is due to historic discrimination. And if you were a manager EVER in your life you would know why people quote protected class. It's abused, but it's always a consideration. Again yikes man, maybe pull it back a little with the extremism.
No you don't like that someone disagrees with you and the "yikes" was that you don't have an argument you can back. People are asking for factual information to back your "argument", this is not grandstanding. You just attack with criticism. Many people would consider what you are posting a derogatory statement towards woman. We could discuss that, but we are diverting far from the original discussion of an extremely offensive violent video game being pulled from Steam so maybe head back down that tunnel?
M76
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2012
- Messages
- 14,059
So you think rape cases and sexual harassment cases brought against vocal feminists is not relevant enough? Sorry, but I Don't think there is a study with a red knot on it that says exactly "75% of mass shooters previously openly condemned mass shootings" Since so few people actually commit mass shootings it won't be a reliable statistic anyway. Statistics are not the be and end of all things, they're just a tool, that you employ.
Of course not all, who grandstand is a potential shooter. He who shouts loudest is usually whose house is on fire. That saying didn't came about for no reason.
But tell me what is the purpose of condemning not just the act but the depiction of the act as well?
I'm confident that people who are too fast and too loud in condemning something often have some desires of their own that they fear.
M76
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2012
- Messages
- 14,059
That's the same thing just different wording. I'm sorry I'm not from the US my first language is not english, so I don't know the proper legal terms used in the US. But that is exactly what I meant.
M76
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2012
- Messages
- 14,059
You don't do anything but attack me on a personal level. You can read back as much as you want just please stop posting garbage to defame me. I don't know the historic relevance of the term "protected class" because I never lived in the US. And again you're not responding to the actual argument. Respond to an actual argument and not a technicality or something twisted out of context or quit wasting my time.
M76
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2012
- Messages
- 14,059
Where did I post derogatory statements towards women? I never even mentioned women. I shared my observation, you can disagree with it, but that's no reason for lobbing dozens of ad hominem attacks at me.
I'm sorry that a videogame offends you but, so what? Just because you're offended doesn't mean you're right.
And you just did the exact same thing man. I've been in management for a very long time and protected class is not a directly American concept. In the US, to terminate a person in a protected class who typically has been historically discriminated against, it is much more difficult (you have to create a true paper trail or you will be sued). Anyone not in one of those classes is "at-will", meaning that termination for any reason is legal. The reason that a few have referenced that is stating this game is not protected in any legal manner.
What we are asking is for some sort of provable source (preferably from a neutral source) on the claims you have made. I'm not attacking you, I'm defending the attacks you have made on me... if you can provide any sort of proof other than your personal beliefs to defend the statements you have made I would be more than willing to read, research and vet. But that's not what happens. Denigrating someone doesn't help an argument, I agree, but I'm not making any argument that is factually not back-able by an independent source.
Edit: Oh another edit. You are defending a school shooting simulation and aren't from America and have never lived here? Seems odd since the US has had something crazy like 60x more school shootings then all 1st world countries combined in the last decade or so.
Last edited:
Darunion
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2010
- Messages
- 5,387
My point is I don't think one has to do with the other and that there is no public evidence of your point.
Take this created scenario, Let's say I become a strong advocate to make it okay for children to be depicted naked in video games and that games that let you murder rape beat etc them. What is your opinion of me then?
Inversely if I advocate that it cannot be depicted in games. What is your opinion of me for that?
It sounds, maybe I am mistaken that you would think less of me if I wanted it banned as opposed to it being allowed?
Or if I advocate for either direction does it paint me the same way? In which case that could argue that no one should voice their opinions on any subject?
I do feel that people joining a fight one way or the other for the purpose of just getting popular or followers etc could be suspect for having a background agenda or motive. But I see nothing wrong with people fighting for what they personally believe in whether I agree with it or not.
Indifference and inaction are at the roots of many problems in the world as well.
I do feel that video games do get way too much shit from a lot of people. Movies in my opinion are pretty grotesque and violent as well. But we just slap a rating on it and move on. People trying to get video games more restricted have clearly never heard kids shout "awesome!" when jason kills a camp counselor
It's the simulation aspect of video games. It triggers different areas of the brain than a momentary lapse from reality when watching a movie. Most people associate with the protagonist or villain in a movie but you aren't controlling the behavior.
Movies have also had shifts in what is socially acceptable (think of the rating system from the 80s thru today - there was a time when breasts could be shown in PG yet the violence needed to be "faked"). The same will happen with video games, we just now are much more vocal because of the social avenues the internet has allowed... and remember we are much more allowing of violence and tits these days, censorship was much greater just years ago!
Edit: I typically just go with it until something like this comes up and get fired up that this is becoming acceptable... Don't care about the shit episode of South Park or GTA (loved both and both got everyone fired up for censorship), but simulated mass murder in high-school... should just be socially unacceptable (IN MY OPINION).
M76
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2012
- Messages
- 14,059
I don't know what are you looking for. Source for what? That I don't think valve should refuse to publish games based on their content? It might be legal to refuse the service, I'm not a lawyer I don't know that. But it doesn't mean it's right to refuse it.
Source for your claims that fighting against horrific media means you are leaning towards performing the act yourself (which I know is 100% bullshit) or the most Feminist's are sexual predators. LOVE to see any factual data on either. I know there isn't...
Edit: The right to refuse extremist psychopathic murder simulation is any distribution platforms right. Dude you are a young man. I get it. But this is not acceptable for any media platform. Why do you think any smut is illegal? I honestly don't know why I'm spending time on this anymore, I just am SHOCKED that anyone on the internet is trying to defend this shit. Just like if Kyle is annoyed with my rant he can ban me. But I'm not propagating mass murder.
Last edited:
Darunion
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2010
- Messages
- 5,387
I feel it should always rest in valves hands. If they want to not sell a game under their service, that is fine. It is their business and their money. What I think was in their bad taste was waiting until launch to act on this developer and game (which seems to be a repeat offender for other misc issues with valve).
I assume valve dismisses games and devs all the time, but once in a while it sparks public attention and then it becomes a big deal.
It really is just a moral posturing. Remember how everyone fell apart with the call of duty scene of shooting in the airport, in a game where you shoot people all day long?