Steam says NO to censorship. Gamers are happy. Journalists are not

Jim crying his flabby face out making as controversial title as possible.

Sad.

Not disputing Steam's less than stellar track record of quality control. But that control should be based on quality, as in the functionality of a game. Not control of content based on subjective tastes. Would you want Steam to be like Nintendo during the early years of their 16bit cycle, when they censored the blood from Mortal Kombat?

I'm just catching up to this development, and I can be counted in the camp applauding Valve for this decision. Let it be an open and free market where the consumers vote with their wallet. And hearing about the Twitter outcry... not gonna deny I am reveling in it, to see their breakdowns in realizing they don't wield the power they do in other mediums. The very same policy that allows games they don't like also allows publishers to release games with their tastes. They just can't stand the fact that they can't push their message unchallenged by any other (or opposing) viewpoints. It's their loss of entitlement that has them so shaken, and to that.... I get great satisfaction in seeing spoiled brats not get their way.

I understand why people would wanna censor games, but it's not something I agree with, just slap a warning label on it and call it a day.

And the back-tracking begins...

Valve removes AIDS Simulator, other controversial games from Steam Store

@zmanbarzel: was there really an AIDS simulator???

I can't believe there was suicide and aids simulators.

Disgusting, people should know these are not matters to mock with.

Exactly! Like what's been with with movies, music, comics, and.... and.... oh yeahhhhh, with GAMES... for years.

Sticks and stones man.

I don't think Pedro or most of us (ReCloud is not a person let's be honest) in the thread who are dissatisfied with this announcement are upset because they're allowing certain subject material. Hell, I'm all for porn games being on Steam, I love smut, and idgaf who knows it. The problem is that, with their QA as embarrassingly lax as it is, and only the vaguest hint that they will try harder in the future, all I get out of this is that the flood gates for even more muck are now well and truly open. Which means more good games are getting buried and losing sales to shit games, and I can't browse and find the good games I want that don't make storefront.

To give just one of my personal examples (and possibly the biggest example of why I am so salty about Steam's Store), I bought To The Moon and it's minisode tie in, A Bird Story, because I loved TTM as outside platform release, and wanted to support my lord and savior cool guy Ken Gao. Thing is, it took an eternity for the next game just because it's a one man team with irl stuff happening. It faded from my mind for quite a while. So did Steam recommend me the new game when it got released, front and center? Hell na! It got buried under a fountain of completely mediocre RPGs because I have logged a billion hours of Dark Souls 1-3. Two Worlds is on my recommended right now. I legitimately am curious who wants to play Two Worlds in 2017-18. That's not even getting started on the early-access-for-eternity games, the asset flips, or the busted stuff that shows up in the indie tabs and the upcoming tabs.

I would never have known Finding Paradise was finished, had I not accidentally stumbled upon a rock paper shotgun article talking about it. I can't say if it was ever on the front page or not. If it was it couldn't have been on new and hot for more than a day. Either way, Steam had essentially buried a game that I was at least passively anticipating. A game that I of course bought, and of course, I loved the shit out of it.

Or, if you want to use a less personal example, currently Valve's 'Upcoming' tab is putting Boobs Saga up in front of Jurassic World, even though the aptly acronymed BS is simply listed as TBD release date, and JW releases Tuesday. They would rather you see Boobs Saga first, before a movie tie-in from a dev team with critical acclaim. I say again, instead of attempting to give front and center of prerelease real estate to the guys behind Planet Coaster (or any decent games and devs for that matter), it's several pages in, where it comfortably shares it's release date with 24 other games, best among which are such amazing titles as Cursed Caves, Dances With Memes, and LGBT Battlegrounds, a set that I will let you feel free to judge the quality of for yourself. And I know it's supposed to be sorted by release day, but that's clearly not the case.

Funny thing too is there's a game that day that looks kind of interesting, called Lust for Darkness. No idea what it's about, but it has some pretty good and weird art, kind of like sexy Amnesia. I might see how it turns out... Something I absolutely would never have said were I searching under normal parameters, because why would I sift through hundreds of games hoping one cool looking one shows up, save for making this futile point on a message board?

So yes, I really don't think It's absurd for people to be saying that Valve should be solving these issues before the store becomes even more all-inclusive. Already it's the wild west of store algorithms with not a single person watching out, which is bad for every developer trying to make good, quality games with earnest skill and effort put in, and bad for gamers trying to find said games.

To be sure though, I'm not sure this conversation will mean much. Steam just dumped AIDS Sim for being too controversial, so it's hard to say if there's actually any weight to their proclamation at this time.

Journalists aren't gamers, so who cares.

They said they would remove troll games. Jim Sterling bringing up a troll game, saying "oh look a troll game", was a non-sequitur.

honestly regarding the AIDS simulator I dont see how it would cause any harm to society anymore than COD does.

one has to be careful about injecting their view on good taste going against it is dangerous to society, because if we can, then I have a few things to say about murder simulators

Agreed. I checked today and saw at least 6 hit-pieces and 1 typical hyperbole video from Sterling.

They seem to be under the impression they are the voice for all gamers, or that they, not Valve should dictate their own store.

its fear of change that one can control

that is the source

@uninspiredcup: The coverage from the press hasn't been good at all to be honest.

Well nice to see Valve remove the absolute garbage that was AIDS Simulator so there’s that at least.

I dont agree with that move.

I dont understand the full context of the game but I dont see any more of a problem with 'aids simulator' as I would 'murder simulator' which is common place.

so maybe I need to look at the game in quesiton

@tryit: I don't think it had to do with the content of Aids Simulator but rather the trollish nature as Cup pointed out.

The game's description even read that it was a bad game that used flipped assets. That's why it was taken down, not because of the aids part.

I doubt that, asset flips are a good thing

that is why the asset store exists in the first place

OMG I GOT RECOMMENDED GAMEZ I DUN LIKE.

TIME TO CENSOR.

Aren't you 2 the over exaggerating drama queens..

@tryit: Of course there are plenty of assets available that are completely fine to use but others that aren't, and it wouldn't be the first time Steam has taken action on such games.

Source

It could be for other reasons too, but I don't necessarily believe it had to do with the topical content. I think it was under their policy that it was a 'trollish' game.

it wasnt because of asset flipping,

read the articles again and think on it a bit, meditate even.

maybe read the articles twice if you have to, i am sure you can figure it out

@tryit: https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2018-06-08-valve-removes-aids-simulator-other-controversial-games-from-steam-store

One of the games removed among the pack was called 'asset flip simulator'. Whether or not it was the admitted use of flipped assets in Aids Simulator that had it removed, it fell into the 'straight up trolling' bracket. The game's description flat out admits that the game is trash.

it was not removed because if was an asset flip.

you are smarter than that, read the article again please, slowly, think on it. be honest with yourself.

try again.

in fact, asset flipper games was not removed because it was an asset flip, think its very clear, the hint is in what they said.

'designed to do nothing but generate outrage and cause conflict through its existence,'

its not becvause it has asset flips, its because the title and theme was designed to tick certian people off

@tryit: It was deleted, along with all the other developers games because he is a troll who admittedly releases asset flip games which is against Steam's policy. :P

As per Asset Flip Simulator's game description

"From the esteemed asset flippers and shovelware pumpers that brought you gems such as ISIS & Suicide Simulator, comes another zero effort cash grab aimed at the fat wallets of edgelords and memesters. Do you enjoy wasting your time and money on the Internet? Look no further!"

The developers are trolls. The games were removed under Steam's new policy which states it would crack down on trolls. That's how I see it.

"'designed to do nothing but generate outrage and cause conflict through its existence,"

That quote is relating to Active Shooter. Not Aids Simulator. You also did not provide the full quote:

"We rejected Active Shooter because it was a troll, designed to do nothing but generate outrage and cause conflict through its existence," Lombardi said. "In addition, the developer had been involved in numerous misrepresentations, copyright violations, and customer abuses. There are no second chances for Active Shooter, or its developers. And to be explicit, while the developer behind it was also a troll, we'd reject Active Shooter if it had been submitted by any other developer."

The developer of Active Shooter was a toxic troll.

incorrect,

it was removed because:

'designed to do nothing but generate outrage and cause conflict through its existence,'

not specifically because it has asset flips.

read it yet again, closely and slowly. they are wanting to remove games in which the content of the games are specifically designed to aggitate people.

so its not removed because it has asset flips, its removed because an entire theme in your face 'this is a asset flip game' was clearly designed to troll.

the article is clear, you are smart enough to understand it, why you are trying to make it into something else I dont know

@tryit: Again, that's Active Shooter, not Asset Flip Simulator or Aids Simulator.

Was this game designed to cause outrage?

https://youtu.be/17Zh6HkAfLQ

Again, Steam take down asset flips:

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2017-09-27-valve-removes-173-asset-flipping-games-from-steam

https://www.tweaktown.com/news/59291/valve-remove-173-games-steam-due-asset-flipping/index.html

"The Steam platform is open, but we do ask developers to respect our customers and our policies. Spamming cloned games or manipulating our store tools isn't something we will tolerate. Our priority is helping players find games they will enjoy playing."

Now, I don't know whether they specifically took it down for having asset flips in this case, but it's obvious they took these games down for trolling which blatantly advertise their use of asset flipping. And too right. Steam should be cracking down on low-effort stuff like this.

the game called 'Asset Flipper' was removed not becuase it contained assets but because the subject matter in question was designed to be trollish.

you need to read the article again.

'blatantly using assets' IS A GOOD THING assets are DESIGNED to be flipped, that is the whole $%^&* point!

If I make a game with green characters and then you make a game that is EXACTLY the same but with blue characters that is 1. pretty much every AAA FPS around but more importantly 2. not harmful to ANYONE. I as a consumer know what I am buying, my game experience is not hurt becuase its a flip

@tryit: I know. That's what I outlined in my opening comment about the game. :P My first post read:

"I don't think it had to do with the content of Aids Simulator but rather the trollish nature as Cup pointed out."

Asset flips are not a good thing. Using assets that people offer for purchase is totally fine. I have done it myself. That's why they exist. The asset store offers the chance for developers to create a game without the artistic talent to make the game handsome. Credit is given to the asset creator and it's all good. That's not what an asset flip is though.

An asset flip is a game comprised exclusively of pre-made assets with no developer input from the charlatan developer. Essentially they're mashing all the assets into a Unity scene and selling it on without creating an actual game around it. I am not against using pre-made assets but I am against developers who don't create a game around the assets and effectively sell them on without any effort on their part to create an actual game.

http://crappy-games.wikia.com/wiki/Asset_Flipping

You don't know what asset flipping is.

AIDS simulator was not removed because it was an assit flip.

it was removed because of its content, the article is really extremely clear about the bucket of games that where removed and AIDS simulator itself. there is no room to be confused.

again please read this carefully

f I make a game with green characters and then you make a game that is EXACTLY the same but with blue characters (and literally 100% of the assets come from the asset store) that is 1. pretty much every AAA FPS around but more importantly 2. not harmful to ANYONE. I as a consumer know what I am buying, my game experience is not hurt becuase its a flip

that is what the asset store is designed for, that is the whole point!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

@tryit: And there is nothing wrong with that but it's not an asset flip.

An asset flip is a game comprised of standard assets without any input from the actual developer in creating something original using those assets. I'll point you again to the article above.

Let me give you an example, and this is basically what Asset Flip Simulator is:

The developer downloaded the Unity package that comes with 'Standard assets'. In the standard asset pack, there is a first person character controller script. He downloaded that file and then uploaded it for money without doing anything with it. He did not program anything himself, he did not actually do any work or create his own game. That's an asset flip and it's frowned upon vocally by Steam and the Steam community.

Just to clarify; using assets from the Unity, Unreal or Steam asset store is totally fine. There's nothing wrong with using assets as a contribution to a developer's work but when the developer puts no work into the game, it becomes an asset flip. You need to understand the distinction here. Nobody sees anything wrong with using the asset store but using the asset store does not make your game an asset flip.

so creating a game that is 100% made from assets from another store or game, in which everything you see and everything you do is EXACTLY the same, except for the color of one character.

is not an asset flip in your mind?

@tryit: If none of the code or work or the bare minimum of code comes from the developer, yes. Google 'What is an asset flip?' Here is the top result which explains it very well.

"Asset Flipping" is a term that refers to the practice of building a game almost entirely out of pre-made assets with little original work. They are more commonly found on Steam being sold for cheap prices. Valve Corporation refers to asset flips as "Fake Games".

The problem isn't the use of the assets. Using assets is fine, especially for developers who haven't skills in 3D modelling or animation but do have the ability to program and create a game. The difference is that asset flippers aren't creating games, they are comprising assets and dumping them in a Unity scene then selling it on without actually developing a game themselves using those assets. You can understand then why Steam would want to get rid of those games. It makes games that use assets for a genuinely good purpose look bad when really they are totally acceptable to use so long as you make your own game around them.

so you didnt read what I said two times let me try again:

If I make a game with green characters and then you make a game that is EXACTLY the same but with blue characters (and literally 100% of the assets come from the asset store) that is 1. pretty much every AAA FPS around but more importantly 2. not harmful to ANYONE. I as a consumer know what I am buying, my game experience is not hurt becuase its a flip

you just told me 'but that is not an asset flip'

but again, none of those games were removed because they were asset flips, they were removed for the reason Valve clearly stated, because the content of the game itself was specifically designed to tick people off.

@tryit: AAA developers don't get their assets from an asset store. :P

They have their own team of artists who create the 3D models for their games. These may be based on real-world objects but all the art 100% comes from the team developing the game. It's totally totally different.

Of course it is harmful. It dampens the image of utilizing assets when they are linked to lazy, underdeveloped games. It will hurt the artist as well as developers who utilize assets for legitimate use.

let me try this a fourth time

If I make a game with green characters and then you make a game that is EXACTLY the same but with blue characters (and literally 100% of the assets come from the asset store) that is 1. pretty much every AAA FPS around but more importantly 2. not harmful to ANYONE. I as a consumer know what I am buying, my game experience is not hurt because its a flip

focus on the point, not the side points. its hard enough as it is.

and know its not harmful to the consumer. I know what the game is, I want to play that game, my enjoyement of the game is not affected by the fact that 100% of the assets come from a store instead of only 80%. I am playing a video game not a Business Justice Simulator

@tryit: It isn't harmful to the customer if they know what they are purchasing. It's totally fine, but it's harmful to Steam as a platform as well as the integrity of the asset store. So the idea that it's not harmful to anyone is untrue as far as I am concerned. The customer isn't everyone involved in the issue of asset flipping. People do not like asset flipping. It shouldn't have to be explained why lazy game development is a bad thing.

Changing the color of the character isn't enough. It takes 0 effort. Tools like Unity give you color sliders to change the color of any object in a scene, even pre-made assets. Additionally free tools like GIMP do the same. It's not enough personal work to qualify.

could not remotely disagree more.

If the consumer knows what he is getting, enjoys the game. then that is good for Steam.

The assets are designed to be reused, there isnt some moral justice ruler that says 'developer must put in at least 10-15% of their own code in order for it not to be offensive.

that is absurd.

but MORE IMPORTANTLY you should not be bothered with concerning yourself with how best to improve Steams image, that is not what this subject is even about.

People who hate steam now will always hate Steam. Steam is not for them, they are for playing Call of Duty, I am not for playing Call of Duty so I stay away from those ecosystems. I do not try to make the AAA market into My Summer Car which by the way is a friggin awesome game

so just dont use Steam

@tryit: Except unfortunately that isn't the general consensus on these projects.

The general consensus is that Unity sucks and standard assets are bad, and asset flipping is totally at fault for building those reputations. It's very difficult as a Unity developer to try and temper the slog of uninformed opinions about the engine relating to laziness and low quality games that are associated with it thanks to lazy asset flipping developers. Of course it bothers me personally. Not because of Steam but because as a Unity developer, there's a cloud over the engine and the use of assets that stem from poorly made games by lazy developers that Unity devs get lumped into.

I appreciate that you're willfully naive about the practice of asset flipping but it does damage. It has done damage. There are many game devs who are rightfully irritated by asset flipping. I understand you might not have any vision on this community, but you're wrong in believing that people are not affected by this. They are.

and that illustrates how you dont understand.

Games should not be create only for 'the general consensus' we are not homogizing creatitity

different things for different people, I love the idea of the Unity asset store, I think its a good thing, I have played games that use items from the unity store and I am glad that they do.

I am not intrested in what the 'consensus' people think becasue I know they are wrong.

So they should just stay away from Steam and let me play my Kerbal Space Program and My Summer Car in peace and they can go around on Origin and complain about how bad Unity is of which I think Unity and the games created by it are FANTASTIC

everyone does not have to have the same tastes as you in order to not be banned

@tryit: That reply 100% missed my point and the points I am trying to make. :P

First of all... It's not your fault.

Second there are so many things wrong with this. For starters, AAA developers are building games nearly entirely using their own assets. It doesn't matter if games X and Y are both modern military, the company artists and designers are making a vast majority of their games with their own content, which means they are not asset flipping. Justice League and Avengers are not asset flips just because they're both movies about a motley team of modern superheroes.

Third, the idea that "this is not harmful to anyone" Is blatantly false. Asset flips drown legitimate content under a sea of extremely low quality sham games. This is majorly harmful to developers and has been stated as such by many indie devs (those same guys you claim to love and cherish) as a reason why indie on Steam is losing ground. They lose sales from this, which means less revenue and less potential to continue making games. But it's also harmful on our end. Specifically to non-informed consumers, such as children, people who will buy the game for their online streams or just to be edgy, and parents who don't know or care, and will just buy what they think their kids want.

Please be reasonable. Asset flipping is not making a somewhat similar game to another game, it's using 90-100% store bought and free assets, putting in virtually no time or effort or cash, and putting them on the store page to make the laziest bit of money possible. If you fart out 2-3 custom labels or pictures, that doesn't suddenly free you from the moniker, when the rest is still free/store assets.

Keep in mind too, the fee for direct is only $100, so if you sell your game for 5-10 dollars, and you spent literally no money or time copy/pasting a Unity template and saying it's your game, you only need 20ish people to buy it to break even. Which isn't hard when there are contrarians and ignorant shoppers on Steam to exploit, and you only need .0000001% of a 100,000,000 person userbase to make a purchase. It's a wildly sleezy method of making a small and extremely lazy profit, but a profit nonetheless.

I LIKE the Unity Store

I LIKE Unity

I LIKE the games created from Unity

I ENCOURAGE developers to use assets from the Unity asset store

What the majority thinks is not what everyone should get just because the majority doesnt like what the minority likes

that right there pisses me off so much.

I dont care if the asset they are reusing comes from an asset store created by someone else or from their own shop.

neither of those points has diddly dick to do with if I can enjoy the game or not, its so friggin absurd.

If you dont like the fact that the resused assets are coming from a store, instead of a developers own library then just dont buy the game. but dont restrict ME from buying the game.

I dont have a problem with you thinking the games i like are terrible, I have a problem with you thinking that the games i like should be BANNED

sometimes I feel like I am the only gamer who cares about actual game play, not how the sausage is made. a copy is a copy, i dont give a F if the copy came from a store or a library

I am 100% on board with what you are saying. Ori and the Blind Forest, Cities Skyline, Kerbal; it's all great.

But sadly it's not up to us and the practice of using assets and the Unity engine has been soiled by these asset flippers. As a developer, I have seen this first-hand. Browsing the comment section of some of Jim Sterling's videos exemplifies this. Comments like.

"Made with Unity so you know it's bad."

Jim Sterling has perhaps unintentionally dragged the reputation of using assets and Unity through the mud by only focusing on all the terrible games that use these resources.

You might not care, and that's fine. you can be blissfully ignorant and it won't affect you but it does affect the many Unity developers trying to make a living, who use standard assets but put legitimately good work in to make a quality game only to be lumped in with all the terrible, lazy, asset-flipping developers out there. The world is larger than you or I. Pretending like people are not harmed by asset flipping is wrong, dude. As a Unity developer, I have seen it myself.

It's not your fault.

What you said and what you linked to have essentially nothing in common. It's doesn't change that you are wrong about AAA games being asset flips. And nowhere did I even say you can't enjoy these shit baseline-unity-template "games" if you really want to. But they are harmful, as mentioned by independent developers. Whether you like it or not I am right.

for the third time

completely and totally absolutely could not remotely disagree with you more.

which is why you simply need to not BANN the game I want to play and just instead shop elsewhere

I am a strong supporter of Unity AND the Unity Asset store, I think its one of the best things that has happened to gaming in a long time, so please, just dont use it, dont try and shut it down because you dont like what I do.

whatever bro I could care less about strawman obsession of words.

a copy is a copy, i dont care where the copy came from

@tryit: Well you're wrong man and you're not part of the game dev community. I've seen these discussions take place.

https://www.reddit.com/r/gamedev/comments/4wwbzm/how_bad_is_an_assetflip/

http://angryjoeshow.com/ajsa/forums/topic/31444-why-does-unity-get-such-a-bad-rep/

These games that are openly lazy, useless pieces of work are, in themselves trolling.

dude if Unity was bad and the Unity store worse it would not exist.

its really simple, there are a lot of things about the gaming industry I think are horrid, but I dont advocate that they should be BANNED. if people like it, that is there business, I think they are strange and missing out on good quality game play and I encourage them to change but I am not going to BANN them from doing what they want.

Unity store is awesome and Unity is even more awesome then the store, it is in my view the best game engine out there

and frankly I dont care if 90% of the entire industry disagrees with me, I suggest they just stay away instead of trying extra hard to force me to not be able to play what I want to play