[Lorric]

http://www.polygon.com/2014/10/17/6994921/hatred-the-polygon-interview

This interview would indicate to me that they are doing it for the right reasons after all.

From the OP, I thought it was specifically to take a shot at political correctness, but it actually is they are simply creating the game they want to play rather than creating a product specifically to rebel against political correctness.

"Like many of us, I grew up playing all kind of games. More or less violent. And I'm still just a regular guy like millions of other gamers in the world. But what I observe these days are games, that used to be considered a rebellious medium, losing that factor and just trying to fit in the nice and sweet pop-culture.

"So the spark that was present in Doom, Kingpin or Postal was lost somewhere in the process. Those games had no limits. So we've decided to rebel against this overall trend and go back to the roots. Create a game, that we want to play and not the one that will try to please anybody's expectations.

[Mr. Vega]

In today's current PC climate Steam not choosing to carry a game most likely means the game doesn't succeed.

"Most likely"? That's awfully vague.

No it isn't. You ever heard of Total Biscuit? He does videos on PC games on youtube.
He has stated that many developers specifically ask him to not do a video on their game until it is available on Steam.  If it's on another distribution platform like GOG or Humble store first they ask him to wait to talk about their game until its on Steam because Steam sales will account for most of their sales.

Is that anecdotal, sure. But the guy's talking to developers all the time and those same developers are most concerned with having a roof over their head and putting food in their mouth so I trust that the latter has done their research.

Or if you want  here's a 2 and a half hour video of him talking to developers and marketers about Steam curation and the platform as a whole:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzUIIkP5RMA

This graphic from 2011 says that Steam has some 51% market share:
http://www.prlog.org/11520350-digital-distribution-giant-steam-is-losing-market-shares-to-amazon-gamestop-and-microsoft.html

If that's still remotely true, a game potentially losing 50% of its sales is a big thing.  Not that market share directly translates into sales but it is an indicator. 

Uh, AA? Not that it needs to be relevant, but as a personal aside, do some research on TB pretty please. Just trust me.

[AdmiralRalwood]

Is that anecdotal, sure.

So you admit it's completely useless as evidence even while you present it as evidence?

If that's still remotely true, a game potentially losing 50% of its sales is a big thing.  Not that market share directly translates into sales but it is an indicator.

A potential indicator. And "losing 50% of potential sales" != "doesn't succeed".

It's an extremely powerful political tool, and you would absolutely be kicking and screaming if it was being used to attack your political position, so please stop acting like it's not worthy of discussion.

I would absolutely not be kicking and screaming if a game I liked wasn't being sold on Steam, because it's already the case.

But how would you react if developers of a game you like wanted to sell it on Steam, and Steam suddenly refused them, despite very favorable Greenlight response?

"Oh well."

[Grizzly]

From the OP, I thought it was specifically to take a shot at political correctness, but it actually is they are simply creating the game they want to play rather than creating a product specifically to rebel against political correctness.

Actually, the response to the very first question of that interview says otherwise:

Why did you decide to make a graphically intense game about killing innocent people?

The answer is simple really. We wanted to create something contrary to prevailing standards of forcing games to be more polite or nice than they really are or even should be.

[Mr. Vega]

Why doesn't Steam just teachsell the controversy?

[Lorric]

Actually, the response to the very first question of that interview says otherwise:

Why did you decide to make a graphically intense game about killing innocent people?

The answer is simple really. We wanted to create something contrary to prevailing standards of forcing games to be more polite or nice than they really are or even should be.

It's a fair point. Clearly it has played a significant part in the reasoning behind making the game.

The part I quoted about it being the game they want to play is the part that makes me think it's for the right reasons, though I recognise you're not disputing that. But I think at the end of the day they are making the game they want to play, rather than something designed to push as many of the PC brigade's buttons as possible.

[NGTM-1R]

http://www.polygon.com/2014/10/17/6994921/hatred-the-polygon-interview

This interview would indicate to me that they are doing it for the right reasons after all.

From the OP, I thought it was specifically to take a shot at political correctness, but it actually is they are simply creating the game they want to play rather than creating a product specifically to rebel against political correctness.

"Like many of us, I grew up playing all kind of games. More or less violent. And I'm still just a regular guy like millions of other gamers in the world. But what I observe these days are games, that used to be considered a rebellious medium, losing that factor and just trying to fit in the nice and sweet pop-culture.

"So the spark that was present in Doom, Kingpin or Postal was lost somewhere in the process. Those games had no limits. So we've decided to rebel against this overall trend and go back to the roots. Create a game, that we want to play and not the one that will try to please anybody's expectations.

He's still complaining about political correctness in this answer. He doesn't literally say so, but when he starts complaining about "used to be considered a rebellious medium", "just trying to fit in the nice and sweet pop-culture",  "Doom, Kingpin, or Postal", "Those games had no limits." then that forces certain conclusions.

Translated, he's saying "games used to cause controversy (that is, not be politically correct), but now they don't, so I'm going to make the most controversial (least politically correct) game I can to recapture that feeling that I was a rebel for playing games (because I got old and the gaming industry and gamers are in the living room rather than the basement, but I never grew up)".  The literal text is not the whole of what the text says. It never is.

And frankly the fact games don't cause controversy anymore has nothing to do with Doom or Postal being somehow subversive and rebellious and ultraviolent in comparison to modern games. They're both quite tame, honestly, when we look back. It has more to do with the fact that games were new and different and what is different is frightening to people.

The complaints that supposedly spawned this game are either lies to cover for the utter misanthropy of the developers or based on a fundamental misunderstanding that the position of gaming in culture has changed. It's not something done by a minority of youth any more. It's mainstream. It's normal. Violence in gaming has become routine; these old games had far more limits and far less violence than he wants to remember.

[Akalabeth Angel]

Is that anecdotal, sure.

So you admit it's completely useless as evidence even while you present it as evidence?

It's more useful than your opinion buddy.
All you have is questions not information.  Asking questions without a desire to answer them is a waste of everyone's time, as is deliberately asking questions that one hopes or believes cannot be answered.

If you have no desire to actually know the impact on an independent developer not having their game on Steam then there's very little point in actually trying to discuss it. 

A developer like Team Meat had great success on the Xbox 360, becoming one of the best selling indie titles on the platform thanks in part to promotion by Microsoft. But when they talk about sales, their biggest cash cow is not the Xbox 360, it's not the PC, it's Steam specifically. 

Another developer, Blendo (Atom Zombie Smasher) gave a chart showing his PC sales:
http://ca.ign.com/articles/2012/03/07/just-how-important-is-steam-for-indie-devs

96% of his sales were on Steam.

But hey those are just two developers I'm sure it means absolutely nothing and is no evidence at all.  Such is the case in the moving goalposts that is internet discussion.

Uh, AA? Not that it needs to be relevant, but as a personal aside, do some research on TB pretty please. Just trust me.

Why? I watch his videos to get a sense of the game. Don't really need to know more than that.

[Scotty]

Here's a cool censorship test for you guys.

If a guy approaches me and asks to advertise on my billboard, which occupies a very prominent section of a heavily traveled section of major highway, and I refuse on any grounds to display the advertisement, is that censorship?

The answer is no.  Even if I have the only billboard visible from the highway, it is not censorship.

If a guy approaches me, etc, and I decide that his advertisement is abhorrent, tasteless, or any other descriptor and in doing so attempt to convince other proud billboard owners that this guy should not be allowed to display his advertisement, is that censorship?

The answer is yes.

Steam is not trying to get other distributors to shut down this game.  Steam is not doing anything besides saying "No, you may not use my billboard."

It is not censorship.

[Grizzly]

But I think at the end of the day they are making the game they want to play, rather than something designed to push as many of the PC brigade's buttons as possible.

Aside from NGTM-1Rs excellent points, I would note that those two things are not mutually exclusive.

[NGTM-1R]

I mean, I get where this guy is coming from. When I was a kid, Snoop Dogg was this terrifyingly evil monster who'd killed a cop and my mom panicked when she realized I listened to his music. Now, Snoop Dogg is a respected American institution suitable for all ages who appeared leading an army of Gummy Bears in a Katy Perry video and my mom sang along with his verse without a shred of irony.

This guy is the fan of Dre, Snoop, and Tupac who woke up this year, looked around at rap's mainstream, and realized the person most likely to put out music that frightens parents is Nicki Minaj. It's not that violent rap is dead. Ghostface Killa is still out there somewhere. Eminem still talks about abusing women like it ain't no thing. It's that nobody cares about it anymore. He's realized the era of his childhood is over and that things have changed.

However, rather than accept the new normal, remain with the past, or hang out with those who still think like he does, he's attempted to bring the past back to us in the least-intelligent way possible.

[Akalabeth Angel]

FYI Steam put the game back on Greenlight people.
And what's his face apologized to the developer.

It was most-likely censorship. It was a decision made for the "wrong reasons." At least Valve has backbone to own up to it.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/139094-Valve-Removes-Hatred-from-Steam-Greenlight

"Hi, Jaroslaw.

"Yesterday I heard that we were taking Hatred down from Greenlight. Since I wasn't up to speed, I asked around internally to find out why we had done that. It turns out that it wasn't a good decision, and we'll be putting Hatred back up. My apologies to you and your team. Steam is about creating tools for content creators and customers.

"Good luck with your game.

Gabe"

[Luis Dias]

Steam willingly denying this game access to their store due to concerns regarding the violent nature of it is obviously censorship, I hope this particular semantical note is settled. It is also beyond dispute that Steam, given its prominent market share, especially in these alternative games, can basically decide whether the developers make enough money to get the investment back or not by that decision alone.

Regarding whether they should now accept an anti semitic game or not, that can become an interesting topic in itself (there were questionable games regarding the Gaza conflict pulled off from the Apple store, IIRC), but for this topic let us remind ourselves that misanthropism is equal opportunity egalitarian, non racist and non discriminatory. An anti Jew game would be obviously divisive where this is not.

Personally I don't care about the game but I do care that certain groups feel more and more comfortable in deciding for the rest of the society which games should we play or not. Who elected these high moral priests in the first place? Why do these people believe they speak for me? And if they don't who are they to deny me the convenience of being able to buy these games where I want? On whose authority do these people work?

I already long for those days where these people would say they wouldn't "take your games away from you". Golden days.

[Mr. Vega]

FYI Steam put the game back on Greenlight people.
And what's his face apologized to the developer.

It was most-likely censorship. It was a decision made for the "wrong reasons." At least Valve has backbone to own up to it.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/139094-Valve-Removes-Hatred-from-Steam-Greenlight

"Hi, Jaroslaw.

"Yesterday I heard that we were taking Hatred down from Greenlight. Since I wasn't up to speed, I asked around internally to find out why we had done that. It turns out that it wasn't a good decision, and we'll be putting Hatred back up. My apologies to you and your team. Steam is about creating tools for content creators and customers.

"Good luck with your game.

Gabe"

You won't believe who led the charge to get the game back on steam. And who is now requesting AS, ZQ, and Phil Fish be added as targets to shoot.

[Lorric]

But I think at the end of the day they are making the game they want to play, rather than something designed to push as many of the PC brigade's buttons as possible.

Aside from NGTM-1Rs excellent points, I would note that those two things are not mutually exclusive.

I suppose it's open to different interpretations. And sure, you can have both, but I believe even if it is both, that the latter is the secondary objective and the former is the primary objective.

Why did you want to make this thread anyway?

[Mr. Vega]

Steam willingly denying this game access to their store due to concerns regarding the violent nature of it is obviously censorship, I hope this particular semantical note is settled. It is also beyond dispute that Steam, given its prominent market share, especially in these alternative games, can basically decide whether the developers make enough money to get the investment back or not by that decision alone.

Regarding whether they should now accept an anti semitic game or not, that can become an interesting topic in itself (there were questionable games regarding the Gaza conflict pulled off from the Apple store, IIRC), but for this topic let us remind ourselves that misanthropism is equal opportunity egalitarian, non racist and non discriminatory. An anti Jew game would be obviously divisive where this is not.

Personally I don't care about the game but I do care that certain groups feel more and more comfortable in deciding for the rest of the society which games should we play or not. Who elected these high moral priests in the first place? Why do these people believe they speak for me? And if they don't who are they to deny me the convenience of being able to buy these games where I want? On whose authority do these people work?

I already long for those days where these people would say they wouldn't "take your games away from you". Golden days.

Like I said, Steam should sell the controversy.

[Grizzly]

Why did you want to make this thread anyway?

For the same reason I make other threads in the "Discussion" forums. I like opinions.

[Luis Dias]

I believe they already are and the game will profit more from this I'm sure. Regarding the literally who's obsession in being successfully trolled, I gotta say I also appreciated the suggestion of having the entire gamergate people as "victims" of the game, no sarcasm. Why the hell not. Who cares.

[The E]

Steam willingly denying this game access to their store due to concerns regarding the violent nature of it is obviously censorship, I hope this particular semantical note is settled.

No, it's not settled in any way, but it's not a point that can be argued fruitfully on the Internet.

I will say however that the only lesson I am taking from this is that Steam Greenlight is ****ed beyond repair, that Valve is doing a terrible job at communicating, and that the outrage about this is actually kind of hilarious.

It is also beyond dispute that Steam, given its prominent market share, especially in these alternative games, can basically decide whether the developers make enough money to get the investment back or not by that decision alone.

This is debatable as well. The Greenlight numbers showed some interest in this game, there's obviously an audience for this, and given the success the devs had in going viral with their marketing, I'm going to assume that they would have found an audience regardless of distribution method large enough to recoup at least some of the cost.

Personally I don't care about the game but I do care that certain groups feel more and more comfortable in deciding for the rest of the society which games should we play or not. Who elected these high moral priests in the first place? Why do these people believe they speak for me? And if they don't who are they to deny me the convenience of being able to buy these games where I want? On whose authority do these people work?

Do store owners have the right to curate their offerings? Is there a threshold beyond which a product has to be carried, regardless of the wishes of the store owner or other consumers?

I already long for those days where these people would say they wouldn't "take your games away from you". Golden days.

Yes, how dare people have opinions I disagree with. Being mildly inconvenienced is literally the worst.

[The E]

Also, Luis, please do not start with the gamergate bull**** again.