Installer Steam
log på
|
sprog
简体中文 (forenklet kinesisk)
繁體中文 (traditionelt kinesisk)
日本語 (japansk)
한국어 (koreansk)
ไทย (thai)
Български (bulgarsk)
Čeština (tjekkisk)
Deutsch (tysk)
English (engelsk)
Español – España (spansk – Spanien)
Español – Latinoamérica (spansk – Latinamerika)
Ελληνικά (græsk)
Français (fransk)
Italiano (italiensk)
Bahasa indonesia (indonesisk)
Magyar (ungarsk)
Nederlands (hollandsk)
Norsk
Polski (polsk)
Português (portugisisk – Portugal)
Português – Brasil (portugisisk – Brasilien)
Română (rumænsk)
Русский (russisk)
Suomi (finsk)
Svenska (svensk)
Türkçe (tyrkisk)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamesisk)
Українська (ukrainsk)
Rapporter et oversættelsesproblem
Woke ideology is closely tied to censorship due to it having no bearing in logic or reality so it relies heavily on censorship to hide opposing views that prove it completely incorrect. For example woke views on gender can be easily disproven using simple biological facts so it’s necessary to censor these facts wherever said gender ideology is parroted (Reddit, bluesky etc). It’s important to realise that far-left ideology has no interest in “social justice efforts” and is merely a facade for spreading identity politics.
Why did you post a review for a game that you haven't even played? If you wanted to post an opinion, that's what the game hub is for. I couldn't honestly read your "review" because you openly state that it isn't one.
This isn’t about whether woke ideology is right or wrong. Please keep the discussion focused on video game censorship so we can talk about that without going off-topic.
This is peak selfish entitlement.
As for the refund: I didn’t do it to hurt the store or out of “entitlement,” but to express disagreement in the only way a consumer really can—through their wallet. It’s not a perfect system, but it’s one of the few direct tools players have to signal dissatisfaction with a product or the direction it’s taken.
For the record, this was the first time I’ve ever requested a refund on Steam. I don’t take that lightly.
Then the best thing to do would have been to make a thread on their discussion board about this "issue". Posting a negative review on a product you've never played and only have an opinion on is misleading and a misrepresentation of the product.
Reviews don't reach as many people as you think, but it's also not where discussion about a game happens. That's why game hubs with a discussion board exist, so people can discuss the game.
I'd be careful abusing the refund system the way you did, because if you do it too many times, Valve will prevent you from making refund requests in the future.
But that’s not the focus here.
In this case, the goal wasn’t to “gather support,” but to understand why a personal stance was so strongly misread, and to reflect on the reactions it triggered.
If Steam had seen it as a violation of their rules, I imagine the refund would have been denied, or I would have received a warning. Neither happened.
I understand you disagree with my approach, and that’s fine — but accusing me of abuse when I followed the system in good faith feels a bit excessive.
That's not what the review system is for, at all. If you want to have a discussion on a topic, be it here or on the game discussion board, that's where you need to post it. Reviews are intended for players to review gameplay and other aspects of the game after having played it, which you did not do, at all.
Comments on reviews are an echo chamber, because the reviewer can delete any comment they don't like and even turn comments off altogether if they wish.
The reason I'm focusing on this, rather than the overall topic here, is because it shows a level of dishonesty that has me hesitant to believe the topic is genuine.
So I think echo chamber is the wrong term.
Whether the discussion below becomes an echo chamber is at the discretion of the reviewer
That isn't "good faith".
Unfortunately, what I noticed at least is that a number of English natives tend to stay within their own bubble and imagination. These people only take input from their surroundings that either validate their thoughts and feelings directly or indirectly. Being a feeling based observer, looking for the things normally algorithms on platforms like tiktok and youtube feed to them based on their past search results, they glance at either the top or bottom of your post, without actually reading anything written in it, nor entirely understanding the context. I am not sure what it originally said there, but this is in my guess what happened at least.
Whatever they then find in the quick skim of the text is then used in their head to form a fantasy, a narrative, an explanation for why you posted whatever they are imagining you have just posted. Everything that you actually put out didn't matter. The context behind your intentions or your words doesn't matter either. The slippery slope that plays in their minds is all they see, and because of that, you get reactions that make no sense to you, but somehow makes sense to them.
The reactions are often fueled by feelings of being hurt or having hurt whatever they associate with or stand up for. I think of this behavior as 'associated narcissism', because basically they turn themselves into the main character fighting evil; so they make it about themselves, make themselves big, belittle others, things become based on their version of events and arrogantly keep up believing that as the truth, they feel strongly entitled to an apology and strongly feel you should be punished, etc.
The people who are most bothered by this kind of behavior are other English natives- especially the more open-minded people. Yes, even other English natives as such feel feel this insane cultural difference, even when they live in the same country.
I fear that, the reason why these things happen is mostly because people stay in the same information bubble, one most often created by the platforms they stay on (tiktok, youtube, facebook, etc.), and the limited friend circle who basically echo everything, instead of feeding them with new and different perspectives. People who stay in the same bubble feel as if their castle is being attacked when you throw in other ideas about something and have no clue how to deal with this at all. They cannot take critique, they lash out, etc.
It's sad. One consequence is that this avoidance of pain makes them reject people, sometimes even their close friends. They're intolerant of thoughts, ideas even when simply calling them, not even in public. However, these same people are usually more open if you meet them one on one in real life- so they depend a lot on subconscious signals and the tone of your voice to decide your intention.
On the internet you see no face, you hear no voice; people imagine these things and unfortunately, it is very easy for something to sound arrogant in an indirect language culture such as english.
When you use direct language, you may sound like a know-it-all, or a teacher looking down on others to some people, due to them assuming an indirect, high context language culture. So they are not looking at your words, but rather at what kind of a person might say that, and why, and then associate it with themselves + some imagined tone of voice.
This is difficult to deal with when you're from a direct low context language culture. When you try to share information, you might have been too direct about it --- causing people who read it to become upset due to an imagined arrogant tone. It's just an example.
Anyway, yeah- I think some combination of this may have happened basically.