The alternative is that MC/Visa stop doing business with Valve, and thusly shut out large part of the userbase. Cause a much larger part of the userbase uses those two than people think. Heck, many people seem to be unaware that they use them.

Originally posted by Crazy Tiger:

The alternative is that MC/Visa stop doing business with Valve, and thusly shut out large part of the userbase. Cause a much larger part of the userbase uses those two than people think. Heck, many people seem to be unaware that they use them.

We're still unaware Valve/Steam uses them as a direct gateway or not, as they have not publicly disclosed such information. For all any of us know, whoever contacted them, may have been contacted themselves (by their own agents).

The other alternative would be clear and concise updates to the ToS, detailing changes. Not a blanket statement as "may". When you have external business with a third parties, the onus to follow it's rules shouldn't be vaguely placed upon its customers, like this.

Do YOU have any idea what MAY violate these companies policies, or who these companies are? Because even column writers who originally broke this news, can only speculate.

It doesn't matter whether Valve uses them. What matters is that MC/Visa won't process any transactions relating to Steam unless Valve removes those games.

It'd adult only games. It seems to be mostly games where consent of the characters is questionable at best. But I haven't checked all games hit.

I mean, I don't agree on the removal of games. But Valve, and Itch as well, is just a middleman in this who are just looking to take the best course for their business.
Some people may want them to be our activists, but they're not. Their primary business is to sell games, I can't fault them for prioritising the majority in that.

I don't think you understand the point of my post. idc if Valve wants to include it in their ToS, or at least clarify, but the ToS we're agreeing to right now, literally has no way for us to know what content these mysterious third parties, may or may not allow on the platform. It's literally THAT vague. Not looking for them to be an activist or even change their mind (It'd be nice, it's my opinion they should stand up for themselves and keep their word. But that's not the point of me making this post). I'm asking them to clarify the rules, and not let it stand on this large an ambiguity.

They delisted a number of games that didn't include non-consensual acts, or incest. Some just happened to have a title with "sisters" in it, and NSFW tags. For a lot of these devs, English isn't their first language, or don't they speak English at all. I can't imagine them now having to try and explain what their game is about, in an appeal form.

I'd say Steam likely only hit maybe 10 titles that were false positives? But still, no one knows for sure what rule they violated. (It's been inferred via Collective Shout's letter, not Steam). In a year's time, it's not going to be written anywhere, or save some other upcoming dev from making the same mistake.

If you're curious what got delisted: https://steamdb.info/history/events/?before=65026782
You'll have to scroll to the bottom to click the last date, for the next page, going back over the last 8 days (Steam's been doing them in chunks based on topics) They'll be bunches, and pretty evident by the titles.

Every corner store, supermarket, book retailer, movie theatre, concert hall and shopping mall is a middle man. But they do their best to make it clear what isn't allowed, before accepting merchandise for sale, or booking events. Their agreements with merchandisers don't include vague terms like: "or anything that our payment processor may not agree with".

Originally posted by JustJinxed:

I don't think you understand the point of my post. idc if Valve wants to include it in their ToS, or at least clarify, but the ToS we're agreeing to right now, literally has no way for us to know what content these mysterious third parties, may or may not allow on the platform. It's literally THAT vague. Not looking for them to be an activist or even change their mind (It'd be nice, it's my opinion they should stand up for themselves and keep their word. But that's not the point of me making this post). I'm asking them to clarify the rules, and not let it stand on this large an ambiguity.

It's not clarified further because they want everyone to know why the decision was made. They could have simply copied over the content that the payment processors don't want to be associated with and called it a day. The content restrictions are the same for all of them. But writing it this way deflects the blame towards the payment processors.

Originally posted by JustJinxed:

They delisted a number of games that didn't include non-consensual acts, or incest. Some just happened to have a title with "sisters" in it, and NSFW tags. For a lot of these devs, English isn't their first language, or don't they speak English at all. I can't imagine them now having to try and explain what their game is about, in an appeal form.

It doesn't seem like you actually looked at the list of games that were removed. They were definitely incest and rape related. Some titles that are still on the site removed much of that material from their games to stay on the platform.

Originally posted by rawWwRrr:

It's not clarified further because they want everyone to know why the decision was made. They could have simply copied over the content that the payment processors don't want to be associated with and called it a day. The content restrictions are the same for all of them. But writing it this way deflects the blame towards the payment processors.

Welp, Visa just came back and said "not us". Why would a why be inserted into a ToS? We're talking about terms us publishers have to agree to, not some article explaining why they pulled the games. I think it would wise if they did copy over what it is the PP's want, and call it a day. At least then we'd have some clear understanding. No it's the same for all of them, because plenty of them payment process for x-rated websites, and graphic novels that include this same questionable content (in all cases, fictionalized).

Originally posted by rawWwRrr:

It doesn't seem like you actually looked at the list of games that were removed. They were definitely incest and rape related. Some titles that are still on the site removed much of that material from their games to stay on the platform.

Ok, that's just a straight up lie. 1) Yes I did review the list. 2) No, not every one was about incest or rape (and I won't be going into details, as I don't need the ban) 3) You can tell when a game makes an update via steamdb, so that a load of bullocks.

I don't know what you hoped to gain, when the information is literally linked to, mate. But I'm not going to play that game.

Good day, not quite sure where to go with a concept. But perhaps steam can start their own credit card system?

I'd be onboard with that like ugly on an ape.

Just an idea.