Originally posted by Bli9der:

Steam censoring non adult games.

Why is steam now censoring non adult games as well now. Red Pine Lake does not deserve this kind of treatment. They have been denied a spot on the store for literally no reason. Get your ♥♥♥♥ together steam. Check their post on X/ twitter as to their exact reason for being denied.

https://x.com/AftermathZGame/status/1984027934395417079

Just so people don't have to Google it.

I can't find anything about a game by that name on search engines.

Originally posted by cSg|mc-Hotsauce:

Originally posted by Bli9der:

Steam censoring non adult games.

Why is steam now censoring non adult games as well now. Red Pine Lake does not deserve this kind of treatment. They have been denied a spot on the store for literally no reason. Get your ♥♥♥♥ together steam. Check their post on X/ twitter as to their exact reason for being denied.

https://x.com/AftermathZGame/status/1984027934395417079

Just so people don't have to Google it.

:nkCool:

Ok, so Valve objected to the store art being too raunchy and their response was to throw a tantrum rather than just changing the store art to not have a focal point of someone's butt?

Why not put, for example, the slasher villain in the art for this slasher game?

Originally posted by Ben Lubar:

Originally posted by cSg|mc-Hotsauce:

https://x.com/AftermathZGame/status/1984027934395417079

Just so people don't have to Google it.

Ok, so Valve objected to the store art being too raunchy and their response was to throw a tantrum rather than just changing the store art to not have a focal point of someone's butt?

Why not put, for example, the slasher villain in the art for this slasher game?

Sex sells.

And waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah.

that is quite the a silly reason to reject a games art.

but the developers breakdown does not really help their case.

Valve: "Choose better store picture"
Dev: "No"
Valve: "You don't get Store page then"
Dev: "CENSORSHIP!"

Originally posted by rawWwRrr:

Valve: "Choose better store picture"
Dev: "No"
Valve: "You don't get Store page then"
Dev: "CENSORSHIP!"

Dev: Misleading analogy.
Epic Games: Come here kitty kitty...

Censorship is censorship period. It's not steams game. When you see the picture it is anything but ranchy unless your a nun.

Originally posted by cSg|mc-Hotsauce:

Originally posted by rawWwRrr:

Valve: "Choose better store picture"
Dev: "No"
Valve: "You don't get Store page then"
Dev: "CENSORSHIP!"

Dev: Misleading analogy.
Epic Games: Come here kitty kitty...

:nkDaze:

And it's only one side of story. Who knows exactly what the reasons were.

And the Twitter post is laughable... Like they aren't aware of anywhere else to list their game? They've never heard of EGS?

Whatever....

Originally posted by Bli9der:

Censorship is censorship period. It's not steams game. When you see the picture it is anything but ranchy unless your a nun.

Must be true if that's what the devs says it is. /s

Originally posted by rawWwRrr:

Originally posted by cSg|mc-Hotsauce:

Dev: Misleading analogy.
Epic Games: Come here kitty kitty...

:nkDaze:

And it's only one side of story. Who knows exactly what the reasons were.

And the Twitter post is laughable... Like they aren't aware of anywhere else to list their game? They've never heard of EGS?

Whatever....

Originally posted by Bli9der:

Censorship is censorship period. It's not steams game. When you see the picture it is anything but ranchy unless your a nun.

Must be true if that's what the devs says it is. /s

I've lived long enough to see this type of censorship destroy entire mediums of entertainment. I would prefer to not see steam fall to the annals of history due to censorship. For example Doom is still an active IP today because it chose not to censor when they were called too.

Originally posted by cSg|mc-Hotsauce:

https://x.com/AftermathZGame/status/1984027934395417079

Just so people don't have to Google it.

Originally posted by Ben Lubar:

Ok, so Valve objected to the store art being too raunchy and their response was to throw a tantrum rather than just changing the store art to not have a focal point of someone's butt?

Why not put, for example, the slasher villain in the art for this slasher game?

Originally posted by rawWwRrr:

Valve: "Choose better store picture"
Dev: "No"
Valve: "You don't get Store page then"
Dev: "CENSORSHIP!"

By the graphic alone thought that was another low effort 'visual novel'. The font is good, the rest doesn't really scream "slasher" and "horror".

They have a better choice on their own social media for a store page graphic. Sometimes people pick bad community managers.

Originally posted by Bli9der:

Originally posted by rawWwRrr:

And it's only one side of story. Who knows exactly what the reasons were.

And the Twitter post is laughable... Like they aren't aware of anywhere else to list their game? They've never heard of EGS?

Whatever....


Must be true if that's what the devs says it is. /s

I've lived long enough to see this type of censorship destroy entire mediums of entertainment. I would prefer to not see steam fall to the annals of history due to censorship. For example Doom is still an active IP today because it chose not to censor when they were called too.

Must be censorship because that's what the angry devs said. /s

Originally posted by rawWwRrr:

Originally posted by Bli9der:

I've lived long enough to see this type of censorship destroy entire mediums of entertainment. I would prefer to not see steam fall to the annals of history due to censorship. For example Doom is still an active IP today because it chose not to censor when they were called too.

Must be censorship because that's what the angry devs said. /s

It is actually. Any change outside of the dev's choice would be considered censorship.

Originally posted by Bli9der:

Originally posted by rawWwRrr:

Must be censorship because that's what the angry devs said. /s

It is actually. Any change outside of the dev's choice would be considered censorship.

So would it be considered censorship for Steam to reject a game on their store that a developer has made and filled with malware? It's their choice to fill it with malware, not Steam's.

Originally posted by rawWwRrr:

Must be censorship because that's what the angry devs said. /s

If the other party refuses to tell their side of the story, then that's their loss; no reason to assume they aren't telling the truth.

Originally posted by datCookie:

Originally posted by Bli9der:

It is actually. Any change outside of the dev's choice would be considered censorship.

So would it be considered censorship for Steam to reject a game on their store that a developer has made and filled with malware? It's their choice to fill it with malware, not Steam's.

If Steam wants to say the reason it was rejected was for malware they are free to do so.

To the people who say they don't have to, well there are consequences for not doing so.