Give Us The Ability to Mute/Blacklist Developers/Publishers From Our Account

[Iskandar]

So with the increase of anti consumer ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ that is happening, there needs to be a pretty definite way to get rid of certain games off your feed. Be it activision and being activision, some of the more scummy epic game store sell outs who outright insult their fans in the indie space, to companies who anti consumer drop out of geoforce now despite it just being streaming pc hardware and you still need to own the games on steam and stuff, etc.

I want to not only have these people removed from my view, but also I want the ability for their to be consequences that are direct when studios/publishers do this, not saying ban them from steam or something, but if a large portion of people blacklist/mute a publisher for the choice they made with a game that is particularly scummy/anti-consumer, it'd also push devs to be less scummy because they'd be losing out objectively on future sales.

Plus it's just I don't want them on my feed, screw anti-consumer gaming companies.

[Ettanin]

And Steam will lose games to sell and lose revenue. Not going to happen.

[Crazy Tiger]

Originally posted by davidb2951:

but if a large portion of people blacklist/mute a publisher for the choice they made with a game that is particularly scummy/anti-consumer, it'd also push devs to be less scummy because they'd be losing out objectively on future sales.

No, that has no bearing at all. The only numbers that matter are the numbers regarding sales/revenue/profit/ etc. Ergo, vote with your wallet.

Besides, that "large" portion might not actually be as alrge as people usually think. Gamers aren't a homogeneous group and often enough people don't follow up on their word.

Valve won't put consequences to it, as it would also be something that could be abused by people with an (unfair) axe to grind. There are reasons why they cut out off-topic review bombs from review ratings.

[Iskandar]

Originally posted by Ettanin:

And Steam will lose games to sell and lose revenue. Not going to happen.

Originally posted by Crazy Tiger:

Originally posted by davidb2951:

but if a large portion of people blacklist/mute a publisher for the choice they made with a game that is particularly scummy/anti-consumer, it'd also push devs to be less scummy because they'd be losing out objectively on future sales.

No, that has no bearing at all. The only numbers that matter are the numbers regarding sales/revenue/profit/ etc. Ergo, vote with your wallet.

Besides, that "large" portion might not actually be as alrge as people usually think. Gamers aren't a homogeneous group and often enough people don't follow up on their word.

Valve won't put consequences to it, as it would also be something that could be abused by people with an (unfair) axe to grind. There are reasons why they cut out off-topic review bombs from review ratings.

Did you guys even read the op? I said that you'd as an individual wouldn't be able to hide certain publishers/developers from your specific feed so you can not have to worry about it. You can do this for individual games, but what if we wanted to avoid a certain publisher/developer? We should be able to do that as well.

[Crazy Tiger]

You mean this?
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1972247912

Sorry, I mostly read the OP as wanting to add unreasonable consequences to it, so I expected you to know this.

[Iskandar]

Originally posted by Crazy Tiger:

You mean this?
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1972247912

Sorry, I mostly read the OP as wanting to add unreasonable consequences to it, so I expected you to know this.

Cool, that's irrelevant if they don't have a page but a simple "these are the games" like the ooblets dev, and only bigger publishers.

[76561198407601200]

Fortunately my mouse wheel works, so i can scroll by any games I don't wish to purchase. I have no need to have someone else hold my hand for me to accomplish that, although others do it seems.

[Tito Shivan]

Originally posted by davidb2951:

but if a large portion of people blacklist/mute a publisher for the choice they made with a game that is particularly scummy/anti-consumer, it'd also push devs to be less scummy because they'd be losing out objectively on future sales.

Trolls would have a field day with this one.

[Iskandar]

Literally banning studios from your own profile being able to see it sounds like a basic feature that should exist.

[Iskandar]

Originally posted by davidb11:

Originally posted by davidb2951:

Literally banning studios from your own profile being able to see it sounds like a basic feature that should exist.

THis literally is open to abuse the likes of which you have never seen before.
You're asking for the sun, the moon, and the stars here.

I suggest you try closer to Earth first.

Can you not read? How many times do I have to explain this:

"I don't like this dev, I will block them so that I can't see their page or games"

Abuse how? You considering not wanting to see activision games on your own profile abusive? Good, then abuse is a positive thing.

[Iskandar]

Originally posted by davidb11:

You can't block games on your profile. AT all.
LEt alone game companies.

You're using incorrect terms here and that's throwing me off.

You can only block seeing them on the store itself.
That being said, it still can be abused to be able to block too many things.

That's like saying blocking people on facebook can be abused, that's not how that works. You should objectively have the ability to go "I don't like this publisher, so I'm going to remove seeing them", you can for bigger publishers already, but you should be able to do that for indie devs and stuff as well.

[Iskandar]

Originally posted by davidb11:

Except Blocking people on facebook can be abused.... Same with Twitter. Twitter literally changed how the blocking feature worked to make it less silly.
So that argument is paradoxical.

Look, I'm not trying to start the 3rd Crusade. You're not Saladin, and I'm not King Richard the Lionhearted.

So, calm down here.

All I know, is that yes, blocking publishers can be helpful, but the feature, like anything, can be abused.

No it can't? Unless you think "stopping someone from talking to you" is against some sort of right, at which point: you need to leave those poor girls alone homie. Like you shouldn't have to forced to talk to people you don't want to, you shouldn't have to see studios you don't want to, it's literally YOUR account.

[Tito Shivan]

Originally posted by davidb11:

If you can't see how blocking people can be abused, you literally know nothing, Jon Snow. That's not even trying to be a meme. It's just the cold hard truth of the matter.

Can't recall which game it was, but it had this block function where if you blocked a user he could no longer join your games via matchmaking...
In theory a good feature, so people could avoid toxic players and have a better gaming experience...

Long story short people thought it'd be fun to block streamers instead and those streamers ended having actual issues to even play the game, as finding a game without anyone who didn't block them 'for the lulz' took a lot of time.

TL-DR: There's two sides of every coin and features can also be abused.

[Iskandar]

Originally posted by davidb11:

If you can't see how blocking people can be abused, you literally know nothing, Jon Snow. That's not even trying to be a meme. It's just the cold hard truth of the matter. It's actually easy to abuse blocking someone. Don't like what they say one time, block them. Eventually, no one but echochambers remain.

The fact that you are insulting me and being very childish, literally accusing me of stalking people, proves you cannot be taken seriously.

I'm through here. You have burnt up your credibility.
And I want you to change your name so people don't somehow confuse the two of us.
Because your actions here are not what I want anyone to associate me with.

You by your very actions has caused a fruit of the poisonous tree. Literally no one will take you seriously now because I've been nice and calm this entire time, and you have done nothing but be rude.

ALso, your insult falls almost under the category of libel.
Stalking is a crime. Accusing someone of a crime that you know they did not do falls under libel laws.

And how does that effect anything? That's their choice who they spend time with, I mean damn, they can go to a pm if they want and cyber for all I care, it's their lives.

Blocking hurts no one but people upset that they are upset that a girl didn't want to talk to them.

Nah, you can change your name since it's literally your problem.

Honestly you've just been complaining about a non issue, saying blocking is an issue because "the person will only be with people they like", which feels like a positive thing, and the literal reason for blocking.

[Iskandar]

Originally posted by Tito Shivan:

Originally posted by davidb11:

If you can't see how blocking people can be abused, you literally know nothing, Jon Snow. That's not even trying to be a meme. It's just the cold hard truth of the matter.

Can't recall which game it was, but it had this block function where if you blocked a user he could no longer join your games via matchmaking...
In theory a good feature, so people could avoid toxic players and have a better gaming experience...

Long story short people thought it'd be fun to block streamers instead and those streamers ended having actual issues to even play the game, as finding a game without anyone who didn't block them 'for the lulz' took a lot of time.

TL-DR: There's two sides of every coin and features can also be abused.

And how would that effect me wanting to block a developer/publisher so I can't see their games on the steam store exactly? Also you literally could just have it so you can play with people who are blocked but blacking out their name and voice chat with them.

[Iskandar]

Originally posted by davidb11:

OKay. It's very obvious you are just messing with me. THere is no justifiable reason to continue to insult people in general with your weird Stalking fetish.
Please don't do that here.

Also, "
Honestly you've just been complaining about a non issue, saying blocking is an issue because "the person will only be with people they like", which feels like a positive thing, and the literal reason for blocking."

If you can't see why blocking everyone but like minded individuals is not a GOOD THING, then please, just read 1984. That's the literal beginning stages of Big Brother by getting rid of WRONGTHINK. Anything that you personally hate.
Capital letters used for a valid reason.

What even is your argument? Do you favor someone's spiritual enlightenment to grow as a person as somehow more important than someone's ability to get rid of someone harassing or stalking them? Honestly there is nothing wrong with removing people you don't want to talk to, your argument is literally "think of their mental growth", which is kind of a moot point.

Sorry you have to use that sort of argument when I'm trying to remove anti-consumer scummy companies from my store feed.