clyde

Don't they have the right to allow something on their store that a certain group of its consumers consider a scam or just noise?

I'm in a weird spot because if I don't respond then it will look like I'm ignoring you and if I do it will provide you with more evidence of my manipulative rhetorical tactics. If I just say the above then it'll probably seem like I'm accusing you of something so I'll just go ahead and attempt to clarify my positions on your points: I don't think Sterling is a bad man. I do think that he is using fascist imagery while saying things like "A 15 million dollar lawsuit should never have happened. Multiple copyright strikes against dozens of YouTube channels shouldn't happen. Stalking, threats, invasive behavior, this string of not just unprofessional but recklessly unhinged little animals thinking that they run the show, it should never have gotten so far and so out of hand. For years, I thought the problem was the games, the shitty games flooding Steam. James remind taught me different. Threats to kill me through continued harassment taught me different. Accusations of trademark violation and developers who think their ass-pool(?) users beat Valve's rules taught me different. Shitty games are a symptom, shitty people are the disease and the thought of disinfecting them for good fills me with a near perverse level of pleasure; the work continues." probably helps to encourage the behavior he is supposedly condemning. I linked this article earlier. I'm not suggesting that the developer didn't also harass folks, but I think it is worth considering that this developer has received harassment from the fans of Sterling who again is dressed like and presents himself like a fascist. I'm happy that he is a proponent of social justice, but that doesn't change how I'm seeing this particular campaign and his role in it. I read the Hernandez review. Similar to how I view the Jim Sterling stuff, it seems performative to me. When someone goes in to review a game that has racked up 454 mostly negative reviews in five days and is selling for 24cents for a publication or their YouTube channel, I tend to assume that it is going to be a hit job for laughs. I don't entirely dismiss their observations because of that motive, but I do see it as performative rather than some sort of good-faith desire to enjoy a game. That's fine with me if they want to do comedic hit-jobs, people love that stuff but it is a performance in both cases. I'm okay with this conversation happening, I just think that I'm right and Twig is wrong. I still want to hear y'alls opinions and express mine, but I'm not expecting in to result in us agreeing. I still find value in it. I am open to the possibility of better curation being a net positive for customers and developers of games. I don't think that removing games from the store because of status-quo standards is better curation. I still think that the folks who find these games to play are looking for them. Maybe they want to do a comedic hit-job. Maybe they want to be obstinate about fake-games. The point is that I don't see these games served to uneducated consumers in an exploitative manner. Better curation in my view would be allowing folks to do things like search by publisher, be able to subscribe to the recommendations of others, and be able to filter by user review scores. I think they have done all that, but that is the type of thing that I think leads to better curation. Not removing something from sale on a digital store. I think you are overstating my disdain for Sterling. If there is a particular thing I said you want me to address I can. So my Let's Play is up.

I don't think I'm using strawmen. Valve is getting advice from Jim Sterling on this issue. Jim Sterling did a performance that was based on the the idea that it is ridiculous to have a Digital Homicide game on Steam. So it seems like Valve is considering enforcing the types of standards that Jim Sterling has for games. If we are just talking about the game and not the actions of consumers and the developer in this conflict I know little about, there is no reason for Devil's Share to not be on Steam. It's not fraudulent in any way. I enjoyed it. It's not a swindle. Jim Sterling thought that games like this are unworthy of Steam as a platform. I just made a Let's Play of Devil's Share. I'll probably publish it tonight. Also what about my other examples like Magic Wand or Mountain. You think that Jim Sterling or his fans would have the aesthetic flexibility to see the value of it being on Steam? I don't have that much faith in them.

But historically, attempts to remove some of these games and games like these used the same arguments. I think you are looking at this problem retrospectively and as if the standards of quality are objective. When another game comes out that is in the position to do what Mountain or Five Nights At Freddy's or Gone Home did comes out in the future and defies the expectations gamers have about what is allowed to be sold as a game, I don't want these fake-game hunters to have the ability to protect the public from them. I think that 50 Short games and Magic Wand are particularly good examples. I know that thecatamites was putting Magic Wand up on Greenlight at some point and the sensibility of that game is something that would likely be targeted by the complaints of the game-police. Even if it got through Greenlight because of an established fandom, all those fans would be accused of being sock-puppet accounts because the game-police are so convinced that what they define as a game worthy of being on Steam is the only possible definition.

"no" what?

Of course they will have other venues for distribution, but some examples of games that have artistic value that I imagine would be targeted for removal: -Depression Quest -Magic Wand -50 Short Games -any Twine game -games made with RPG Maker -Visual novels -any game that uses a publicly available 3d model or environment from the Unity asset store. With the exception of the Digital Homicide games, I'm not aware of any that are up for sale, but I'm sure there are some. -Dominique Pamplemousse -Mountain

I played some Pixel Day Gun-Z which is not nearly as interesting as the previous two games. I watched some more Jim Inquistion videos about the beef with Digital Homicide and Unit-Z "asset-flips". I think that those are two different situations that shouldn't be conflated. In one case Sterling claims that the developer started harassing him with frivolous lawsuit threats. He also goes into detail about stuff like creating a honey-pot for people who were critical of the game so that they could be pre-emptively banned before writing bad reviews (I think?). On the flip side of that it looks like there was a pretty significant campaign of writing comments in every possible crevice of the developer's store-fronts to talk shit. I wasn't there, I don't know what's really going on, it seems like more of an issue involving terms of use for developers and consumers on the social portions of the Steam store. With games like Pixel Day Gun-Z (which is still on Steam but took some effort to have it appear on a list of games) the issue seems to be that folks are buying a game-pack called Unit-Z and an bundle of 3d models off of the Unity Asset store, putting them together in the fastest way and then getting the game through Greenlight somehow. I also saw it mentioned that some games are being submitted to Greenlight by people that actually did not make the game. I don't know how they got it, but I guess someone could take a game off of itch.io and put it on Steam Greenlight claiming that it is theirs? The reason I mention these two types of circumstances together is because in both cases the problem seems to be that Greenlight is somehow being gamed. I'm kinda curious about how that is done. Are they using botnets or just giving away free keys for upvotes? I'm not bothered by Pixel Day Gun-Z being on the store. I think it is astoundingly uninteresting and if I had a store this would not be in it, but I don't know. I am concerned that every game that uses a store-bought asset is going to get attacked by these purists and maybe the advantage of having games like Pixel Day Gun-Z on the store is that it establishes one side of the spectrum of expectations. I'd love to see an examination of the game that expresses appreciation for it, I can't do it. Devil's Share is pretty cool though, and Galactic Hitman is not a fun game, but I still see those wet liver-faced aliens with tentacle mustaches shooting at me when I close my eyes and I can remember the exact intonation of "Target Down". So those are good examples of what concerns me about these efforts to get games removed from Steam. I think they are kinda neat (even though my appreciation for them is based on something other than fun-factor) and I expect that they would be lumped in during the purge. I think it's also worth mentioning that Galactic Hitman and Devil's Share may not have come into being if not for the motive to put them on Steam, I'm not sure about that but it is worth considering. I'm curious about how this Explorer's program will go now that I've investigated the situation a little bit. I might record a Let's Play of Devil's Share. I'm a bit nervous about doing so, but we will see.

So I've now beaten Galactic Hitman and another game by Digital Homicide called Devil's Share. Both games are rather short and also extremely punishing in how fast and inevitable damage is (until you realize that crouching makes you impossible to hit). I stopped playing Galactic Hitman after the first two levels. The levels are very similar to each other. Then I played some Devil's Share. Devil's Share is actually kinda awesome. I'm happy that I bought it and played it. I will admit that it would be confusing if I didn't come into this game expecting something normal, but that could be said about other games I've learned to appreciate. I don't really want to spoil Devil's Share for y'all; working through your expectations for how a game that looks like it should play is the fun and interesting part. If I just happened across either of these games on Steam somehow (which again, is impossible now) I would be really confused. I don't think that is reason to campaign against the developer though or for the store to remove the games (I understand that there was more complexity to this case, but I'm just saying based on the quality of the games themselves). Mildly interesting note: the trading cards are still earnable, but not buyable or saleable. Looking forward to trying Pixel Day Gun-Z tommorow or maybe a little bit tonight.

Guess what I just found for the ripe price of 10cents? Not Air Control. https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B01CS3XJB8/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1491773024&sr=8-1&pi=AC_SX236_SY340_FMwebp_QL65&keywords=galactic+hitman&dpPl=1&dpID=61dLsQEl28L&ref=plSrch

Awkward. Hmmm. It looks like there is some nuance to these events. http://www.azcentral.com/story/money/business/2016/09/21/yuma-digital-homicide-video-games-sue-users/90742572/ http://kotaku.com/game-developer-sues-100-anonymous-steam-users-for-18-m-1786721306 It looks like another case of consumer-vigilantes. Now I'm wondering if we are debating ethics in games-storefronts while someone is the victim of online harassment.

I can't buy Air Control or find a way to buy Galactic Hitman (maybe because I'm on my phone?) So it seems that Valve is removing games that the Youtubers freak out about having access to on the Steam store in some cases.

I think they have a right to not include all games submitted, I just don't think they have the responsibility to exclude games that gamers consider fake games. I still don't understand where these low-information consumers are being served these fake games as suggestions to buy. I don't see these dozens of complaints of games being non-refundable, possibly because I'm browsing by phone. I also don't consider use of assets from Unity's asset store a reason to dismiss the worth of a game. As far as why be concerned, Steam as a platform has an impact on what is considered legitmate and/or saleable. I can understand someone thinking that this does not necessitate that they have the responsibility to represent games outside of the status-quo, but Steam's influence is significant enough that the gamer-police can use its policies to damage the medium and the ability of small developers to reach their audience. I can easily think of a few games that this crew would get removed from consideration on the store that have historical been influential and successful financial or culturally. And again, the complaint that these fake games are creating so much noise and cheating customers continue to be unbased.

If the games had viruses then I would agree that there is a problem. Valve's job (as I see it) is to: -keep viruses or phishing methods or whatever off the store -to ensure that I can get refunds for games that are falsely advertised or don't run -keep harassment masked as free-speech games off the store -ensure that I can still download the game once the developer goes belly up. Not to enforce quality-standards of others on me.

Someone found one for me. It's on sale even! Looking forward to play it when I get home. I hope the haters don't get it removed first. http://store.steampowered.com/app/474790/

I still don't understand how this creates a problem for you. Is the problem that you don't want to see non-interactive stuff when you are browsing Greenlight submissions? I mean, what is the section of the store that people are browsing where fake games are creating too much noise? I never see them.

Thank you. I'll check some of these non-horror ones out. Ok. So Action Alien is cheap and looks cool. Would all of you agree that this is one of the fake games that is ruining your Steam experience? I kinda want to make sure that I am buying a fake game because I don't have loads of disposable income.

Since they are all over Steam, I should be able to find them with ease. If you can't give me Air Control, the link me to some others. This seems like a fake problem. Who has been exploited?

I feel like I missed out on all these "asset-flipping" games. How can I play them, they sound pretty interesting in concept. The footage for Air Control looks especially surreal. I don't appreciate gamers telling me what I should and shouldn't have access to on a store they have associated their personal identities with.

He mentions that Valve also invited TotalBiscuit for consultation. TB has made a longer video about it that I haven't watched.

I wad pleased that the short conversation about expectations between Jake and Chris covered a broad spectrum of experiences. I tend to advise against hype, but Jake's point that hype can provide pain-relief is something I need to remember. Having something to look forward to can change things a lot like how listening to music can change things.

This explanation of what empathy-machines actually do is rather useful. http://www.blog.radiator.debacle.us/2017/04/if-you-walk-in-someone-elses-shoes-then.html?m=1

I'd be interested in hearing the impressions on Havarl of someone who enjoyed Havarl.

I had an interesting round of R6 last night. I continue to enjoy this gane a lot. Also, Glaz is so good now.

Here is a stereoscopic 360 screenshot of the bridge. If you have a VR device (including Google Cardboard) then you should be able to see it using that device. I'm constantly surprised by how much bigger everything is when it isn't on a screen. When I'm playing the game, the rooms in the Tempest feel conservative and small, in VR they seem kinda grand. I tagged it as a spoiler to avoid it having to load on my phone everytime I check this page.

I watched 10 minutes of the video. I don't want to watch any more. I'm only saying this because I commented above with the intention of watching it.