Nainstalovat Steam
přihlásit se
|
jazyk
简体中文 (Zjednodušená čínština)
繁體中文 (Tradiční čínština)
日本語 (Japonština)
한국어 (Korejština)
ไทย (Thajština)
български (Bulharština)
Dansk (Dánština)
Deutsch (Němčina)
English (Angličtina)
Español-España (Evropská španělština)
Español-Latinoamérica (Latin. španělština)
Ελληνικά (Řečtina)
Français (Francouzština)
Italiano (Italština)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonéština)
Magyar (Maďarština)
Nederlands (Nizozemština)
Norsk (Norština)
Polski (Polština)
Português (Evropská portugalština)
Português-Brasil (Brazilská portugalština)
Română (Rumunština)
Русский (Ruština)
Suomi (Finština)
Svenska (Švédština)
Türkçe (Turečtina)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamština)
Українська (Ukrajinština)
Nahlásit problém s překladem
Toto téma bylo uzamčeno 
Pravidla a pokyny k diskuzím
Nahlásit tento příspěvek
Though, granted, some video game retailers sell pre-paid cards that just add funds to your Steam wallet using a code, with no credit card involved, and I'm not sure whether they'd sell those cards to a kid. To continue this line of thought, if only to explore a bit of a devil's advocate possibility, it makes you wonder, actually, as that could arguably be a valid concern:
If retailers sell those cards to minors in exchange for cash from the kid's allowance, then disallowing purchases of adult titles using Steam Wallet funds (which is what those pre-paid cards give you) could hypothetically make it harder for kids to obtain adult-oriented titles.
They'd still find ways to do it, of course, and any non-child customers who prefer to shop with Steam Wallet funds and/or pre-paid cards would be inconvenienced, so it would likely annoy more people than it would protect... thus, I really, really wouldn't recommend they actually do this.
Also, predictably, nobody presenting apologia for Valve's confused crackdown on VNs has even mentioned vaguely valid concerns like this. =_=;;
Goes to show how much they, and MiM, actually care about "the children".
Lest we forget
To the latter question, the right and only answer should be,
"Because I can, because it's not illegal, because you don't get to push your idiocy on everybody, and frankly because it's none of your bloody business."
Its not right Valve is inconsistent on how it handles what games is accepts and rejects. Customers and Devs and Publishers have to accept that and decide if they want to support Steam or not.
Plenty of businesses are behaving the same way as Valve, Walmart comes to mind.
Just because Niko helps some drunk italian on a park complaining about his life by killing 456652546 cops/dealers that doesn't make it a Shakespearean storyc classic.
For some reason certain people think their personal taste should dictate which games should go and which should stay, kinda like feelings over law and rationality.
If they only cared about money, if they were just another business, then surely they would have gone public by now, joined the stock market, let a gaggle of wealthy investors hand them heaps of cash in exchange for their freedom and integrity. But they said no to that option, they decided their vision, or ideas, or freedom, or simply ownership of their own IPs and other concepts, was worth more. They were not wrong, if you ask me; I only wish more companies would do the same.
All of which leads me back to -perhaps naively- wanting to believe that Valve as a whole did not endorse these actions, but were either pressured into them, or misrepresented by someone they trusted to handle day-to-day operations while they focus on... well, whatever they're doing.
The lack of official communication is still not a good thing, but I'd like to think we'll get some kind of official statement eventually, and I hope it includes some apologies and perhaps a restoration of Maidens of Michael and/or other already-approved games that were suddenly and rather covertly removed... or at least an investigation into just what happened, and who made those decisions, and on what grounds.
Why would Valve relinquish control of their money cow, or give even a small share of the profits to "investors" that it doesn't really need?
Watch when Steam ends up with real competitors in terms of market share, then it might make sense to go public (or accept a buy-out).
If you genuinely think Steam embodies any kind of pro-consumer stance, you haven't been paying attention for years now.
I see there's a new Sakura game, they don't get threatened either.
On the other hand, having the market share that they do, they still offer free games from time to time, and it's not unheard-of for games to go 75% off, certainly not uncommon for there to be a 50% off deal of just about anything at one time or another. The sale prices have been a little less dramatically low in recent years, it's true, but still kind of a lot better than buying stuff from Origin, uPlay or retailers... the former two might do the free game thing too here and there, but that's kind of just them doing the games industry equivalent of innovation thing... i.e. "catching up to Valve" (or rather, trying to).
Now, are Valve perfect? No. Is Steam perfect? No. Can it be better? Absolutely. Should it be? Yes! Do Valve care as much as they should about that fact? Quite possibly not. But I'd like to keep hoping they'll come around at some point.
Who knows, though, maybe they're farther gone than I realized. Still, benefit of the doubt? Little bit? Maybe?
Well, they did (supposedly) make Winged Cloud (who develop and/or publish the Sakura games) take all the uncensor patch download links off their Patreon page... that could just have been a pre-emptive measure to avoid further persecution, but with so little reliable info to go on, how are they -or we- supposed to know what's what in this mess? O.o;
I used the word supposedly cuz I don’t really know if Valve is communicating with any dev behind the scenes.
Two games that were heavy prejudiced by this situation is Kindred Spirits and Maidens of Michael, one cuz they spent too much time with Steam just to get accepted and the other outright removed (when in fact both games are basically the same level of adultness).
I heard sad stories from those devs, it’s a hard time now with all this censorship, people losing their jobs, others can’t work with their dreams or hobbies. It’s like a nightmare if you are a dev that can’t work on what you like, really sad.
Steam is a "mass market push" store. Given the saturation of entertainment titles, they need to get people interested in constant parting with money rather than actually enjoying their games for a while.
Hell, sometimes the 75% off sale is still above some non-discounted regional pricing.
I hope they do make a statement at some point, as I feel this whole thing being left so ambiguous somewhat tarnishes the name of a company I've come to respect both for their games and their apparent integrity. Already-approved, already-paid-for games should not just suddenly disappear from the Steam store just because they were vulnerable and thus targeted for attack by sleazy, deceptive "moral" groups like MiM, whose methods strongly resemble outright harassment.
I would think Steam should already have some kind of developer protection policy safeguarding against that... and if not, it should. If a game was reviewed and found acceptable for sale, it should not be removed without first being fully re-reviewed. If it was just accepted without any kind of examination, it should still be reviewed for content before any subsequent removal, by a couple of community volunteers working for nothing if need be. It should not be as simple as throwing out some doctored or non-Steam-version screenshots in spite and seeing a game burn. Assumptions do not make a good foundation for justice, and to loop back to the old "companies exist to make money" perspective, justice is a great incentive for commerce.
https://www.pcgamer.com/as-sexual-content-on-steam-is-threatened-developers-look-elsewhere/
thing is this wont be forgoten they poked the wrong user groups.