40
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 25 Nov 2025
40 points (66.1% liked)
Games
22247 readers
266 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I came in to read what caused Valve's fall from grace, but nope, still the good guy.
I have to disagree to be honest. Not because I think that they should allow a naked guy with a young girl(gross), but because in the time that it took for steam to review the game and give a verdict, they had already changed it on their own to be a different model.
For them to refuse re-submission of the game is pretty dumb, considering that the offending content(if that is what it was) had already been fixed in the release build and steam was operating under old information.
If they haden't already changed it for the release candidate I would be fully on board, but clearly they saw wrong in it as well which was why they had changed it prior to steams decision.
Steam forced an early release build of the game way earlier than they normally asked for, which meant it was exactly that, a pre-release build, meaning it had not gone through the proper channels for vetting or checking to make sure that what they wanted to publish was a final product. Then when requested for a review of the actual final build, steam refused. This combined with the fact that the only storefront that blocked the release was steam, I definitely think steam is the bad guy here.
BEING SAID, this might not be the reason anyway, reading the struggles of this games development process, steam had already posted concern about the live action portions of the game, so I'm expecting it might have been a combination of the nudity aspect of the game (even if not intended to arouse) and the live action portions. I assume steam was already looking for a reason to block this release, and when they were given one they just went with it.
That's the one of the very few things in the devs' favor imo, that Valve took too long to let them know. It's impossible to say if it took that long review because of csam reasons or normal reasons, or if they just sat with the notice for a while, doing nothing, though.
It's also far from the first time Steam's content review process has stirred up controversy--even before Collective Shout--which is ultimately the reason why this is getting so much run in games media right now. At some point Steam has to get their shit together, start hiring people, and revamp their scattershot content review system before they get on the wrong side of an incident by either letting something through that stirs up a shitstorm and Congress gets involved, or pissing off the wrong publisher and having the ESA come down on them.
That said, I don't think this particular game is the horse to back for this effort, so to speak.
Firmly agree, I think their primary issue is it's hard to find a game that they refuse that would be a decent game to back that type of cause. This is just due to the nature of the games that get rejected on Steam. They're the controversial leaning style games.
This one in particular for sure isn't a good choice, because of the underage controversy but, all of these style games are also going to have a pretty vocal and not so small group against this type of effort.
this is what they are afraid of https://assetsio.gnwcdn.com/HORSES_Screenshot_1.jpg ?
I believe so, except in review build it was a minor who was riding it, and we don't know what else was there in the "interactive dialogue sequence"
That's what they changed it to, after the damage was done.
They first submitted a build with a child riding the naked horse-man, which is probably what flagged it for good.