Gabe Newell intervenes on removing Hatred from Steam Greenlight, sends a personal message to the team and brings back the game to the public voting. The game ends up on #1 within only 7 hours after being restored
... and great that Gabe himself has stepped up and rectified this mistake. :) While personally I'm skeptical about the game, I don't believe in censorship, and just like there are movies and books widely available which deal with very disturbing gruesome issues and content, the same should be true for video games. There should be a wide variety of genres available for all ages, for all interests, etc etc.
Not really cencorship more choice.
I watched the trailer and it is obscenely violent, more violent than any game I've played before and the sheer malice did make me feel very uncomfortable. However my playing preferences shouldn't be imposed on everybody else so it is a great thing for freedom that the game is back on Steam and available to any adult who wants it. The trailer is well made and now I kinda want to play it!
I started corresponding with Jarosław Zieliński back in October when the game came under such intense fire. I and friends did so as a show of support for them not to cave into the puritanical tropes and SJW imbeciles. They have persisted. There is now a flood of emails into their office to the point they are autoresponding with a FAQ: FAQ: Q: Relase date? A: We don't know exactly - but it shall be as written at the end of our trailer - April - June, 2015 Q: Steam? Gog? A: Steam Greenlight in progress! Q: PS4? XboX One? A: We would love to, but we're to small team to develop a consoles version. If the game will sell nice on PC, we will have the money to work for PS4/XO versions. Q: Any preview version for youtubers/press? A: No, we're working on the title only for several months and it's far from being suitable to be shown as preview version. Q: Boxed version? A: If there will be a publisher with balls big enough to release it. :) Q: Price? A: Half price. Q: Alpha/beta testing? A: Nope, sorry. Only internal testing. Q: Multiplayer/coop? A: Not now, we're to small team. Maybe as some sort of free DLC or something in the future. Q: Where's the line? A: No killing children or animals. Q: Mod support? A: We don't know. But we really want it. Q: Pre-order? A: When the second trailer will be launched - January! :) Q: Racism? A: Quote from Postal Dude: "Please, don't think I'm a biggot. I kill races equally". The same goes for Hatred. :) I wish you all a very nice day.
Well... good news for my new games "Negro Slave Whipping Simulator 9001" And my other game "Hitler has a bad day" Where you just go around torching Jewish people with a flame thrower for points. Ah yes, today was a victory for humanity! Seriously, I am all for freedom to create, if someone wants to make offensive games fine, but Steam has every right to not sell them on there service. And personally I feel like this was a mistake, i'm disappointed with Gabe,
The removal would have been a form of censorship. Censorship is a slippery slope and such removal could be a dangerous precedent. Though I won't be buying this game, I do commend Gabes decision to restore the game to green light.
@Morgan "I and friends did so as a show of support for them not to cave into the puritanical tropes and SJW imbeciles." The backlash against Hatred, at least from what I've seen, doesn't really have anything to do with social justice. Let's not just throw complaints we dismiss about a game into the broad category of "social justice." Here's my take on Hatred. I don't like it. I think it's glorifying an ideologically connected series of crimes, collectively referred to as "mass shootings," in which the murderers seek this type of immortalization, at the expense of a gaming community that is primed to defend them. This is not GTA or MK. While featuring over-the-top violence, those games are creative. Their violent scenarios defy reality. Equating games of that ilk to Hatred is like comparing the NBA 2K series to NBA Jam. Hatred is a simulator that replicates the experience of the mass shooter. At best it steps on the victims of these shootings to make a buck at the expense of the gaming community that will have to deal with the inevitable blow-back, and at worse it provides it guarantees people who commit these acts the immortalization that they are looking for.
The reason you did not see the puritanical outrage or the SJW angle is you did not look beyond your own protests. Even now over at the Greenlight section there are several of those very remarks posted. It happened and is happening still. Whether or not something is creative is a personal judgement, not a matter of "There are 4 different cars in the game." What you are experiencing is personal dislike rather than a judgement which you can qualify on a set scale. Seriously, do you not think what you have seen in this game defies reality? You need to relook the trailer. Or become more familiar with reality. What is at stake here is simple freedom. I really love to poke holes in individuals that want to judge the title based on degrees of acceptablitity. "Oh the murders I commit in game X are acceptable but not here because game X has a story." What a frigging joke. These calls are always of a personal nature. It is laughable that such persons feel that their individual take on violence should suddenly be counted as the line in the sand. it is particularly laughable when what they find acceptable crosses the line designated by someone else. They always wind up issuing a set of standards that are in the end wholly unqualifiable and instead are little more than whims based on personal judgements.
@Morgan "The reason you did not see the puritanical outrage or the SJW angle is you did not look beyond your own protests" Or I did not go searching it out. Am I denying your "several comments?" No. What I'm saying is that social justice causes aren't what's gotten the game this big of a backlash. "Whether or not something is creative is a personal judgement, not a matter of 'There are 4 different cars in the game.'" Which means what? We make subjective observations all the time. That doesn't disqualify their validity. I presented an argument—An argument that has been made in defense of video games many times, before Hatred came along and made people have to pivot: The Mortal Kombats and GTAs, while violent, are absurd scenarios that aren't really grounded in reality. Hatred wouldn't have a tenth of the publicity it has if not serving as a simulator to imitate the mass shooting experience. All you really presented was that such is my opinion. Well, duh. When did I say it wasn't? It's not an opinion I just pull from my rear, though, so if you want to counter it, come with something stronger than stating the obvious, that it's subjective. "What is at stake here is simple freedom. I really love to poke holes in individuals that want to judge the title based on degrees of acceptablitity." And I really love to poke holes in the arguments of individuals who fail to understand freedom and exacerbate that failure by comically choosing Hatred, of all the issues in the world, as the cause they need to champion in the name of "freedom." "It is laughable that such persons feel that their individual take on violence should suddenly be counted as the line in the sand. it is particularly laughable when what they find acceptable crosses the line designated by someone else." Where did I say anything about the game being too violent? My problem isn't with the level of violence. MK and GTA have it beat there. My problem is with the context in which they depict that violence. Hatred is a love letter to the mass shooters whose names I'm not even going to type and is clearly using that to hype itself.
@Ashlen Indeed they do, but it would be highly worrying when a firm with monopolistic power like Valve takes moral-political stances. These days, if you're not on Steam or Origin, you pretty much don't exist. Freedom of speech implies that you can say what you want without it ruining your life. Either Valve allow this sort of thing, or we start thinking about how to reduce their market power.
@LeCreuset So essentially you are saying that the narrative is where your issues stem from. Right? GTA doesn't have a narrative for mass murder but anyone that plays that game goes into free mode and essentially wreaks havoc on society anyway. Its a sandbox of violence and a open letter to whomever wants to. You can't tell me that you have not gone wild on the streets of San Andreas at least once. Most everyone does that in the game at some point and how many iterations or copy cats of GTA are there? I believe life is much more violent than the sheltered life most of us are fortunate enough to live. Way before movies or games were "violent". I don't think this game is for children necessarily but I grew up on horror and games like postal and I don't have any tendencies to go out and mimic them. People who do these kinds of acts have issues that stem from deeper issues than video games, violence in books or movies. Human nature can be very dark and unyielding than these books, movies and games. After all these ideas stem from somewhere to even be made. It doesn't mean we will live the out. Whether I like this game or not I don't think we should be censoring it. If we do that then we will have to censor numerous books, movies and media. Till its all gone. Life violent and unrelenting sometimes and it always has been. Far before entertainment and media stepped in to show the masses. With that said if I had children I wouldn't be letting my kids play this for obvious reasons but I will probably play it just to see what its all about.
No one said you had to search it out. If you read any series of remarks, those I mention above have surfaced among the very earliest complaints. You are not required to look but you also can't live under a rock and then complain about the lack of sunlight. If you actually read any of the complaints, they are the same sort of tripe that buoys ridiculous SJW causes. Yes some remarks are born out of disgust - much of it hypocritical in nature. "Murder in this game over here is fine but not what I saw in that trailer!" Those remarks aside, the SJW monkeys are there. When I see an animal that looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck I call that animal a duck. I do not need nor require someone else to hand a sign around a cause to recognize SJW actions. You were saying that GTA had violence, murdering among that, which is creative. By your own indication your personally assessed creativity is part of what allows the violence to be permissible. You also assume (break that word down) that Hatred has no creativity. This assumption comes from your knowing absolutely nothing about the title. By sheer deduction, such violence and mass shootings are fine by your account as long as there is creativity. Do you not recognize the ridiculous hairs you are attempting to split. Why is your opinion correct when there are plenty of people that will tell you that you are wrong becuase in THEIR OPINION GTA is too violent. Now whose opinion should be the guidelines of freedom by which the gaming industry must abide? Neither actually. You are using your personal opinion to judge if something is creative and thus allowable. You fail to see the slope I already pointed out where others say that there is no creativity in GTA and thus should be banned. You are exactly right. Whether something is creative is subjective and therefore that is the last standard, personal subjection, that should be applied to determine if freedom should be allowed. In this case to determine if a game should be allowed. You are allowing your personal opinion to overrule basic freedom. You say at the end your problem is context. Still this, context, is a personal and subjective judgement and individual standard and as such is the absolute worst yardstick of permissibility one could apply to freedom.
I'm the first one to protest about censorship but this isn't it. I'm disappointed that Gabe has done a back flip on this one. Games like this only serve as ammo for the radicals that want to bring gaming down as a whole. It makes it easier for those that want to place much greater restrictions on games and what content they can have. Just like RapePlay, it wasn't even really a game but did more damage to gaming through fear mongering and crap legislation that follows it than anything else ever has. I love quality games. I love gaming. Hatred isn't a game and no comparisons can be drawn to any other game, not GTA, not even Manhunt. This takes me back to my first point. Games don't need Steam to survive or even to sell. There are plenty of games that make a fortune using just their own website and launcher. I feel Steam has lowered its self down significantly with this. Gabe has allowed the sale of a politically motivated, racist, all most Noe-Nazi, hate crime simulator. It's just not good. It should be sold of it's own back if it has any merit at all, not off the press generated by the news stories. Gabe, buddy, I've been with you since before 1.0 and HL2. Please just man up and get rid of this filth, it's your service.
I see his been taking tips from David Jaffe.
I have no intention of buying or ever even playing this game but the attitude people have of "I dont like this so it shouldn't exist" makes me sick. Censoring products becauae you disagree with the content or the people making it is unacceptable unless that product causes harm and a game causes no harm. All these morons have done is give this game massive amounts of free press and obviously the plan has backfired as people like me with no interest in the game are fighting for its right to exist and up voting it on steam. Let the market decide if this game is a success not political opinion. Changes are were it not for all the manufacturered outrage this game would have vanished into the night the day it was unveiled. Instead its become the most talked about game for the last 2 months.
Agreed I'm not a huge fan of the premise or the trailer but I believe that video games fall into free speech
I have mixed feelings about this game because you know that politics and News media are going to come after this game, AND probably Steam for allowing this game to go through. I'm all for violent games and stuff, but I think this might be a little too extreme for me personally. My concern is, some idiot mother or father will buy this game for their 10 year old kid and is really going to screw them up.
"Hey there little Jimmy. What game would you like me to buy you on Steam today?" - Parent "I want Hatred" - Little Jimmy "Alrighty then kiddo. Hatred sounds like a wholesome family game. Have fun!" - Parent "Yeaaaa!" - Little Jimmy "What else can I get for you Little Jimmy?" - Parent "I want Burnout 3 Takedown!" - Little Jimmy "Oh no no no. Little Jimmy, that game glorifies car crashes and people lose their lives from reckless driving everyday. I can't have you playing crashing simulators. It would disrespect all of those who died in car crashes." - Parent "OOOkaaay..." - Little Jimmy
* I think the concept of the game is disgusting and in NO WAY appealing at all. I will never buy this game. However, I'm glad it gets to be made for those of you who do want to play it. * We can't let the "no fun police" go around and decide who gets to play what types of games. You do this to Hatred, and the next thing you know the new Pokemon games is getting banned for animal cruelty. I commend them for seeing the difference, and making the correct decision.
No censorship? What if there was some kind of child molestation simulator out there? Should that be on Steam?
No, violence is acceptable in our culture (we openly celebrate it). Child molestation, violence against childern, rape etc. are not socially acceptable... how can you even seriously try to equate the two?
Not a game I myself would ever play, but I'm glad that Valve is taking the high road and choosing to let the consumer make that choice.
Yeah, it gets tougher and tougher to make these decisions b/c what was taboo 30 yrs ago is completely acceptable today. The family breakdown has seen children grow up much faster, able to get their hands on adult content much easier. As parenting has become more suspect, states and government have moved in to pick up the slack, which imho should never be the answer. So, yeah, normally I am never against censorship, and I would also never buy this game or allow my children to play it. And while I don't believe anyone should have de facto power in deciding what is too bad etc., I must say that I do feel more than a bit worried that those who would normally be protected from adult content years ago, just aren't anymore. And the effects could be quite devaststaing.
That is awesome of Gabe... but he shouldn't have apologised on behalf of the idiots who pulled the game down... they should've.
Great owners/managers will apologize for the mistakes of their employees.
Agreed, good employers don't throw employees under the bus.
Good for you Gabe, it's up to me what I want play/buy, it's my money and time i'm using, if you don't like the game or the subject matter stfu and ignore it, I don't hate on people who like crap like The Hunger Games or Celine Dion, I probably would go on a killing rampage if I was exposed to rubbish like that
"if you don't like the game or the subject matter stfu and ignore it" So we aren't allowed to discuss/critique it?
Not if you already have done, there's PLENTY of things I don't like in this messed up world, I don't go on and on and on like a scratched record on how I don't like whatever it is I don't like, I just accept it I don't like gay porn movies, but I wouldn't ever dream of trying to stop someone who does, it's within their right to do what they want Edit: I'll add that I doubt my laptop would even run this game so i'll probably never play it
Of course you are. Just don't demand for it to be banned and censored. You can call it sick, twisted, immature, demented, cheap, whatever. And that's OK. No problem. However, nobody should be demanding for it to be banned or censored, meaning other people aren't allowed to make that judgement and decision for themselves. I'm 38 years old. I certainly have my doubts about this game, and most likely, I'll never even buy it. But that will be MY choice, and it shouldn't be decided for me by someone else who pretends to do so from some sort of 'moral high ground'.
"Not if you already have done, there's PLENTY of things I don't like in this messed up world, I don't go on and on and on like a scratched record on how I don't like whatever it is I don't like, I just accept it " Well just because you accept it doesn't mean everyone should accept all kinds of nonsense. Oh look, there's genocide happening in Nazi Germany. Nah, just shut up about it. I don't like it, but whatever, accept it... I made a video asking for the video to be banned: https://www.youtube.com/wat... I take it back now. I don't think it should be banned because of the dangers regarding the precedent that it could create. In a way now, I hope Hatred does get published so that we have something to fall back on when someone makes a game with a controversial narrative.
So should I make a video whining on and on about how I hate religion and how it should be banned? it's a set of belief systems that are responsible for more deaths than anything combined in the history of human race? Nooooope, I just get on with it for the sake of the few believers that use their religion in a positive insightful way, I don't hate on everyone because a minority want to see the world burn
its kind of hard to ignore something when its front and centre with all the other news about games. its also something hard to ignore if your a steam member and other people on your friends list is playing it and it shows up. i personally dont care either way. this game doesnt bother me in the slightest. what does bother me is how something gets exposed for all the wrong reasons. the game is number one now. why? why are people drawn to controversy so much. this game could be complete garbage yet people want to check it out now. that to me is a sham and ignorance to all the other games on steam that are better that get ignored because they are not drowned in controversy. the game might be great and if it is then i take back what i say but if its a bad game and sells good what does that tell us about gamers?
@Hellsvanacy "So should I make a video whining on and on about how I hate religion and how it should be banned?" If you felt strongly enough and wanted to raise awareness for your case then yeah, you could make a video about it/discuss it. If you felt that religion is a problem, why on Earth would you stay silent and let the status quo continue? Your paralysis doesn't actually help your 'cause' at all. "I don't hate on everyone because a minority want to see the world burn" What exactly are you on about now? We're talking about the right to critique/criticise. According to you, everyone should just shut up and not be allowed to talk about it. Don't you see the hypocrisy in what you're saying? You're promoting expression on the one hand and purging it on the other? Its just a really weird stance you're adopting.
Definitely don't have to accept anything like this Ever! Now I will say people should be free to make there own choices on what they want to purchases.
@Septic: I'm sorry but you're talking about allowing highly subjective emotions dictate objective reality. You not liking something doesn't give you the right to call for it being banned. You have the right to say you don't like it, that you won't support it, but you DON'T have the right to say that people should be trying to ban it. And it's nothing like accepting genocide because that's ACTUAL HARM. A game isn't harmful to anyone or anything, and if you don't like it then you can exercise your right to say "I don't like this" and not buy it. That's the extent of your rights. Your logic means that the women that got GTAV pulled from Target and K-Mart in Australia were right.
@Dragon I know. Which is precisely why Im going back on what I said before about the game being banned (like I stated above).
Valve should not have went back on it's decision, because all it did was give this game unnecessary attention and success. Which is something this dev was going for anyways. You really think these guys who made this game wanted to pass along a message or some kind of social commentary? No, they wanted to get a lot of attention by creating the most offensive and violent video game they could think of. This developer and it's employees can now reap the benefits of an ill found success off of people being curious about the game through controversy only. Gabe and Valve played right into these guys hands and the next step for these guys who made this game is to now put this game on their resumes and go to a bigger company and demand a higher salary because they are now super stars with a number 1 game under their belt.
@Gangsta_Red You get it. I get it. Unfortunately, many other gamers want to turn this into an issue of free speech and rights. Depending on the country, you have freedom of speech. That does not mean you are guaranteed a platform for that speech. In this very thread we have people claiming someone doesn't have the right to say the game should be banned. According to what law? There's a distinction between what someone thinks is right and what rights someone has. It's frustrating that these things even need to be clarified. Like you said, it's all about these guys getting themselves over and leaving the wider gaming community to take the hit for them.
Just like it's your choice what to play/buy. Valve also has the choice to decide what they want to sell in their store.
Thank you. Do people think Nintendo, Sony, and MS let anything on their systems, so long as it has a publisher?
Dude. Hunger Games is a good series. You should try it.
I watched 25 minutes of one of them with my partner, it was all I could tolerate, my missis loves the books/films etc, she practically forced me to try and watch it, I just couldn't Yeah, not my thing buddy
Meh, it's subjective. Perhaps he's more of a Neuromancer cyberpunk fan.
The topic of the game aside, I think it's quite amusing how the people being outraged by this game are the ones to thank for the growing popularity of that title.
That's how things usually work. It seems like negativity brings more attention to things then positivity.
They just gave the game a nice serving of free publicity.
I wonder how long it will take for certain unprofessional and bigoted publications to point at this as an example of misogyny in gamergate? After so many entities in the gaming industry have kept kowtowing to these SJWs it's such a breath of fresh air to see Gabe take a stand and say 'no'.
gamergate has been sending emails and campaigning for this game to come return to Steam, so it's no surprise it ended up being number 1 on Steam in such a period of time. Totalbiscuit raised to #1 spot in the curators list too when he endorsed gamergate and then people say that gamergate it's just a "small" group of of people. And not to mention the over the $100,000 for charities and the million dollar Gawker lost.
just need this game on psn now :)
Sony and Microsoft don't have the balls to release this game on their store front. Valve is a private company so it can do whatever it pleases and not have to pander to any shareholders.
I guarantee we'll see it on a console.
Not having to grovel to shareholders must be priceless...
Our GabeN, hallowed be thy name!
Honestly after seeing ethnic cleansing, I didn't think any game could shock me more but there is something really disturbing about Hatred imho. Should it be banned? Debatable but it's good to see Steam/Valve stand up for creative freedom regardless.
Do you mean like ethnic cleansing, the game? Does that exist? If so, I'd like to see how the developers handled it.
I know I'm in the minority, but I think it's interesting that Valve (Gabe) gets damned if he pulls the game, but praised if he keeps it. Everyone screams "it's my choice to play...", what about his choice to promote/distribute or not?
This is the problem with Greenlight. It's meant to be a service which allows the community to dictate what they want on Steam, Valve for the most part has been completely hands off. There's somewhat of a falsity with Greenlight if despite a game has broken no rules and has the community's majority praise is pulled for little to no reason given. Of course the community is gonna react in uproar.
i think we have hatred to thanks for having region all games region locked. I f'ing hate hatred now, if that is the case.
I wondered the same but apparently that was to combat the terrible exchange rate in certain territories. Russia in particular. Cant have a marketplace where people can buy copies from a country where things cost a fraction of the price and use them in countries with a more stable currency, i think is the logic. I do think the Hatred/region locking thing is going to come in very handy for valve though as there are definitely countries where it's going to be illegal.
Good guy Gabe.
A good lider takes responsability, he doesn't whashes his hands and blame his emplyees.
Hypocrisy really because I can think of a few things that Gabe would censor... Actually - that should be the new goal.
Games are a form of artwork and art shouldn't be censored. Go to the Louvre and lay your eyes upon the weird-ass sh%* in there. Devils and Angels doing weird thing to each other ETC
I like that someone in the industry is able to take a step back look at what they stand for & say it might not be for my taste but we did wrong we apologise. It takes some bolloxs to do that these days. They will take some stick for it obviously but how can they be wrong by sticking to the policy they created in the first place for the ability of true customer choice. If you care for the game or not, Gabe did good for customers & that approach is extremely lacking in this industry!
I understand why people would be happy that Gabe did this, but people still need to get one thing strait: This Was Not A Case of Censorship! If some company makes something that is widely offensive (a large group of people have an issue with it) and a separate private company decides not to be involved with it, that is choice. It is an action and a reaction. Censorship would have been if the ESA, ESRB, or Government came in and said you cannot make or release this game, not even privately. Freedom of expression means if I want to make a game about a mass murderer, sociopaths, or the KKK I am free to do so. It does not require that other companies accept, help, or carry my game. Anyway... /rantoff :P I am glad Gabe brought the game back for those who want it, I sincerely hope they enjoy the game. Personally I won't be touching it with a 10 foot pole.
So censorship can only be carried out by da man? And if a private company chooses not to support something, and restrict, that is their freedom as well? I suppose Gabe choose to cater to his clients by not restricting their wants although it was his freedom to do so. Steam is so dominant it's like Google or walmart, and have a leadership role in making choices that are fair to such a large population.
Trau, Good point, I suppose you are right in a way. This is a case of someone at Steam making a moral judgment. Which would.mean Steam is censoring their service, not censoring the game itself, since that still exists. My post was mostly directed to people who were citing freedom of expression when Valve took the game down. I was trying to illustrate that freedom of expression allows you to make something. It doesn't require that people accept it. :)