TR Member Perks!

A few days ago, a game on Steam Greenlight was launched and subsequently banned in the course of two hours. Independent developer Randall Herman, the one man coder of company Skaldic Games, posted a small, poorly designed duck-shooter titled Kill the Faggot. The objective is simple, shoot as many gay and transgendered people as possible while avoiding straight people as they run and roller skate across a static screen.

Boasting the quality of a Newgrounds flash game from 2001, KTF is a rather poor attempt at satire and comedy, with thinly veiled jokes at the expense of homosexuals, shouting with full lisps colorful phrases such as “I just dropped the soap” and “Can I put my wiener in your butt?” Dripping with the stereotypes that many in the LGBT community have constantly pushed away from, KTF simply becomes another derived, poor excuse for humor, and for many others, a possible example of homophobic speech.

Sites such as Gaygamer have condemned the title. Writer Greg Rayo stated, “The game was a blunt example of hate speech being used to target queer people, literally by shooting them.” Journalist and Internet celebrity Jim Sterling posted a short video of the game on YouTube, criticizing the title as a poor excuse for satire and Herman and his company for even posting the game.

Sterling succinctly sums up everyone’s reaction towards the end of his video, “I don’t even know how even the most hardcore…of game developers who should be allowed to do what they want could stick up for this one.” A sentiment we all share, as KTF is a terrible, disgusting game, but that is also the point of its creation.

Herman, in a statement he wrote to several companies, has responded to the criticism of his title on Skaldic’s official website: “The reason behind this particular game is because of how tired I am of people being overly sensitive and how easily offended people are by every little thing, especially with LGBT issues,” writes Herman. “I didn’t make this game to attack LGBT people personally, but I made this game just to piss off those people that are way too sensitive, which includes straight people.“ In essence, Herman created this game as a statement on political correctness in the industry, and brings up a valid, if morbid point, regarding the industry by and large.

“I mean come on, its just a crappy made video game made by a no-name developer. Why do you care so much?”

Since the game was taken down on Greenlight, Herman, who did QA testing on titles such as Disney Infinity and Call of Duty: Black Ops, has since reposted it on Skaldic’s website. Herman is also planning on releasing another title in the future named The Shelter: A Survival Story. However, there is no need to give Herman any further, unwanted promotion for his work, as the bigger problem is not the game itself, but the response to it by gaming media.

Writers like Rayo, for example, opined on why the game was posted in the first place stating,“What DOES concern me is how this was allowed to happen…the glaring lack of responsibility on Valve’s part to protect its users from abusive content is shocking and disheartening. Valve should protect its consumers from having to be exposed to this obvious bile.” Sam Machkovech of Ars Technica stated, “Whether or not that fee has been backed by any active filtering or monitoring service, Greenlight still failed to stop a game from launching that clearly violated its terms of service.”

The terms of service in question do mention, “Porn, inappropriate or offensive content, threats of violence or harassment, even as a joke,” to be conditions you agree to not post, which this game clearly violates. However, several games on Steam Greenlight, and Steam in general, also can be categorized as this tangentially. Hatred is perhaps the most obvious example, with its tumultuous relationship on Steam being well documented in the past several months. Other recent titles like Hotline Miami 2 have been criticized for including a “simulated rape” in a staged movie scene in the game, to the point where the sale of the game has been banned in Australia.

Hotline Miami 2 Controversial Scene

The questions presented by Rayo, Machkovech and other journalists are fair, but founded in the wrong context. It should not be a whether or not Valve essentially “dropped the ball” on allowing a game like KTF to be released, but rather it should be a question of dealing with controversial games; namely, should Valve censor content on their service, or should the market censure it for them?

The thorny issue here boils down to a few factors. Many, including some on the staff of Techraptor, have debated the merits and protections of censorship of violent and sensitive subjects in various forms, but it feels that each editorial seems to be missing one thing from the equation, and that is the necessity of controlling content when necessary. It is not a question of agenda or ideology, but rather a common sense notion of what is actually appropriate for your audience, which always leads down the rabbit hole of not only the perception of video games, but its status as “commercial art.”

Herein lies the key, and it is laid at the feet of the “commercial” portion of the creation of video games. Anything can be considered a work of art and have the protections as a work of art, but that doesn’t mean it should be made, sold, or even showed publicly because of its subject matter. Controversial games range from obviously racist such as Ethnic Cleansing, to politically charged titles, such as Under Siege or Super Columbine Massacre. However, what truly regulates the market is not that these titles should be censored, but rather the public has chosen to censure them.

Censuring content, of course, is an “expression of formal disapproval” towards some matter of content. The gaming public at large is savvy enough to disapprove of practices within the gaming industry all the time, which leads to us all actively participating in the censuring of content. This is different from censorship, which is the suppression of objectionable speech, public communication or information.

Which leads us to the opposite of what the likes of Rayo, Sterling and Mackhovech have said, a game like KTF should not have been removed from Steam Greenlight. The terms of service of Steam Greenlight, while clearly violated by the title, are broad enough to allow games such as Hatred to fall into the same category. It is not a stretch to say that Hatred should still be banned for its content of hyper violence and complete, nihilistic amorality, in fact doing so would eliminate the hypocrisy presented by removing KTF.

hatred isometric

An argument can be made that context is key, which is a very valid and rational way to look at controversial games. The community by and large, however, tend to be antagonistic towards those we don’t agree with first. The ability for rational discussions is there, but the path getting there is mired in outrage and debate, bringing us full circle to the heart of the question once more, should games be censored or censured?

In truth, it is a question we may not be equipped at solving any time soon. If we are to deny one game, clearly made to antagonize on purpose for political reasons, while simultaneously championing another title designed for the same purpose, we skirt that slippery slope of becoming hypocritical ourselves. However, should we simply allow any game to be posted, regardless of the amounts of violence, nudity, sex, and racism presented in it to avoid censorship?

It is in cases like this where it may just be best to let the market decide things itself, a stance that Valve has actively taken with Steam in general. Consumers are the arbiters of their own content, and the massive outrage over a game like KTF has shown that we can censure titles that are clearly deplorable. Make no mistake about it, a game like KTF is a bad game, and no one is endorsing it to even play, but do we allow it to exist is another question entirely; one that we need to really ask ourselves.

It is very likely that more and more controversial topics and subject matters, both in good and bad taste, will pop up on Steam Greenlight, online and in general in the public eye of the video game community. The community by and large must not only use their better judgment to censor themselves, but be tolerant enough to allow materials they disagree with to exist. It is a stance that leads to uncomfortable feelings, but perhaps it is the best course of action when it comes to what we all perceive as controversial.

So what are your thoughts on this? Should games be censored or censured? Leave your comments below. 


Robert Grosso

Staff Writer

A game playing, college teaching, erudite-minded scholar who happens to write some articles every so often. Have worked as a journalist, critic, educator and blogger for over five years now, with articles published (as user editorials) on Game Revolution and Giant Bomb as well as a contributor for the websites Angry Bananas and Blistered Thumbs. Now making TechRaptor my home.



  • Mephisto

    While I find the game mildly disturbing, I will never call for it, or any other to be removed. This opens the door to anything deemed ‘sensitive’ to be mobbed off the shelves.
    Suck it up buttercups.

  • JEA

    I say let the market decide. I think in general people didn’t like the game found it untasteful. Now this part of my opinion is here i come from art loving back ground. A lot of art is made to cause dialogue and cause conflict, which is the actual art piece not he physical piece or both.

    I think its important to for this as a society to question thing and discuss it, It brings serious issues up to the front and can help us grow. Case and point i really didn’t see anyone who agree with this game play, The issue like you wrote. Wither it should be censored and if steam had right to take it down was the main discussion. I think that dose show a lot about us. Now was this game made to prove a point yes was it meant to make money no. This guy knew what he was doing and its same mind set i see from a lot of artist. Some make art for money , some make it to prove a point, and sometimes they make art for sake, artistic intellectual philosophy aspect of what is art.

    Last point did steam have the right to take it down yes off course it dose no matter how hypocritical (from my eyes) it has every right. Plus again i don’t think the guy who made game excepted it to be on steam for as long as it did and expected it to get shut down. I don’t think he cared it got taken down like most statements of expression of touchy issues you expect it to be a burn out.

  • Typical

    Who cares, it’s crap anyway. The point is valid though, stop being such bitches and crying about anything that you think might offend the biggest pussy that only lives in your imagination.

  • Once you start down that road, then the question becomes “What else can be pulled for being controversial?” We may as well blacklist Rockstar Games at that point, because people have always raised a stink over GTA’s content. Since. Day. ONE.

    If we start censoring because of what some people consider disgusting, then it won’t matter if people choose to vote with their wallets.

  • Typical

    Let’s just get a list from liberals of what’s ok to make, for instance, put a picture of christ in a jar of piss = art, virgin mary covered in shit = art, a contest to draw mohammed = free speech gone too far. Just post the list of valid targets of criticism, oh great arbiters of taste.

    Or could it be that they only attack targets that seem “safe” like turn the other cheek christians and nerds, rather than the “Bomb the infidel muslims”?

  • JackDandy

    First off, I definitely agree with Mephisto. I believe it should stay on Steam, and that the audience should decide on whether to greenlight it or not.

    The last 8 months have forced me to realize just how complex the entire concept of “hate speech as freespeech” is.
    In any case, I think the best solution for this particular case is for Valve to make their GL rules less vague. People need to know what goes and what doesn’t. “Offensive” is an extremely nebulous term, which can easily be abused.

  • Audie Bakerson

    The important question none of the politically correct busybodies have asked though is how mentally ill men who think they are women got lumped in with “faggots”.

  • Mephisto

    Personally, I would do like Milo did when he was added to Postal, laugh and share. If so many people were not so hypersensitive, the game would have never been made.

  • Apparently KtF was supposed to be a game within a game, sort of like Turkey Puncher in Doom 3. The developer was originally going to slip it into their upcoming Survival Story title.

    Should I feel unqualified to comment on this because I’ve never encountered a video game which offended me? Not once. I don’t assume portraying something means advocating it.

  • moose

    Games like KTF only become offensive in the minds of most people when they target the supposedly “oppressed” groups of people. there is an episode of the simpsons where marge becomes a bodybuilder, and around half way through she initiates sex, and when homer objects she says “I wasn’t asking”, making it clear she intended to rape him in a programme which has a largely under 18 audience.
    So far as I can tell no-one batted an eyelid over that. yet I have seen numerous times where genders were reversed less obvious situations getting backlash. yes I know comparing TV to games isn’t really fair but the point still stands, the people who call for censorship are doing it in ways which create a double standard between the “oppressed” and the “oppressive”.

  • Sculptor

    “It is in cases like this where it may just be best to let the market decide things itself, a stance that Valve has actively taken with Steam in general.”

    Don’t really agree that steam does this.

    If that were the case, dating sims with adult content wouldn’t be censored so damn hard on steam.

    Steam is actually quite participant in controlling what is allowed to appear on their platform.

    They just step aside when the market unanimously asks them to. (eg. Hatred)

  • Typical

    That’s kind of my point. They completely support double standards.

  • JeremyVerdi

    The main difference between Hatred and KTF is that Hatred is an equal
    opportunity destroyer, while KTF specifically targets one minority. Getting pulled off of Steam isn’t the same as “not being allowed to exist”. Steam is a private company, not a public venue, and there are places that KTF could find a home, namely crazy, extremist fringe sites.

  • root

    I’m tired of people misunderstanding art, or rather, what art is worth studying. I’m going to narrow down what qualities an art piece usually has to be considered worthwhile.

    1) Because of the craftsmanship and skill required to create it. Ie The david
    2) Because of the context where it was created. ie: toilet seat in a museum, soup can prints
    3) Because of historical and anthropologic value. ie: cave paintings

    2 is the one most misunderstood by the public because people usually see the piece without the context. If you don’t know why the artist created the piece, it ends up just being a toilet or a jar of piss that isn’t particularly pretty to look at.

    Kill the faggots and Draw muhammad’s only context is “lets try and offend people”, which isn’t particularly valuable artistically, regardless of the religion you chose to pick on.

    But really, who am I kidding, you don’t care if its art or not, you just don’t want them to not insult YOU and do it to someone instead.

  • root

    I’m amazed by the amount of bitter jabs at liberalism here and casual homophobia in these comments. Guess I expected too much from this website.

    I don’t know what to tell you if you don’t find it problematic when an already marginalized group is further attacked on the thinly veiled excuse of “artistic statements”. The matter of the fact is when they insult you on art for being christian or straight nobody cares. You don’t have to fight horrible misconceptions or discrimination due
    to it, nobody sees it as anything but a petty jab.
    When you’re a minority those same pretty jabs are things people actually believe and use to discriminate you.

    But I guess its pretty comfortable as a heterosexual to claim something is being censored unfairly when you never have to worry about being discriminated and attacked for your sexuality.

  • chizwoz

    I’m a big believer of just let the audience decide. I hope enough people will be sensible enough to vote with their wallets and keep games like that out of existence purely by economics.

  • chizwoz

    I’m not in favour of lists at all. But if they were ever to have a list, I would say it should only be to protect immutable characteristics of people’s identities. So race, gender, sexuality, disability etc etc. The reason being that there’s really nothing to be gained by insulting these things when people can’t even change them if they wanted to.
    Religion doesn’t belong to that category at all. Although for some reason it’s convinced millions of people it does. That’s just cultural conditioning. Insulting islam or christianity should be completely fine. They’re free to reply in kind or to leave their religion if they find it indefensible.
    What you’re really seeing in such issues is just strategic manufactured outrage. It’s not genuine at all. It’s entirely designed to just shut you up criticising things they don’t want criticised.

  • Typical

    hey guess what? I’m tired of pretentious assholes pretending they are the final judge of what’s art and what isn’t. I think no games are art, as they’re a commercial product for sale. the same amount of skill and craftsmanship goes into building cabinetry as David, but my kitchen counters aren’t art. Hanging a toilet seat in a museum is as much art as drawing a mustache on a political poster, and the romans used to wipe their ass with a sponge on a stick, so that has anthropological and historic value, but I’m not hanging toilet paper in my study.

  • Typical

    Tough shit, let the pissbabies toughen up. like we’re supposed to. You don’t spend 4 decades parading about how “normal” you are, then cry because you’re specially insulted by what normal people should chin up and take as a matter of course.

  • root

    Sorry, but academic definitions of art aren’t pretentious shit. There is a reason why some pieces are studied and valued and others are left behind as worthless. I’m just pointing out the reasons why.

    But good job misconstruing my argument and attacking your own interpretation, that always works when have nothing to say.

  • root

    Being homosexual is not statistically the norm. We’re not “normal” and we probably never will be, and you know what, that is okay. Normal is not a synonym for good, we just want the same rights as normal people, a thing they did absolutely nothing to deserve.
    You didn’t earn your straight status, it just happened to you. Why should you be treated better than others?

    It sure is easy to call someone a pissbaby when you’ve never been discriminated for something out of your control. You can’t stop being less “gay” or less “black” because it offends someone. There is no “toughening up”.

  • Badmojo7

    Pretty obvious this seemed intentionally made with the soul purpose of forcing steam to remove it. A backlash against hatred getting the OK. Honestly it should have been left on and let the market decide, I doubt anybody would have bought it. I am against censorship, once you go down that path, it will quickly grow to include anything, anybody finds offensive. On top of that we have the oppressed (or sjw’s, whatever you want to call them) that go around intentionally finding things to be offended about. I sure as hell do not want those idiots having any say in what games are ok and not ok.

  • Robert Grosso

    There is a major difference between oppressed and social justice, I would not put the two together like that.

  • Robert Grosso

    Careful with your words dude. I don’t want this discussion to turn into a mud-sling.

  • Robert Grosso

    Is that enough to justify it being removed though? To play devils advocate, yes Hatred may be hitting more demographics, but it’s just as deplorable in it’s presentation and portrayal, even more so due to the hyper violence.

    I admit it’s a bit hyperbolic to say it doesn’t exist, but we also need to face facts, Steam is the mover or shaker of the PC gaming world now. A lot of companies do need it to survive. For Steam to dictate what can and can’t be put up there then becomes a bit muddy.

    That to me is the choice the consumers of video games needs to make. Is it going to be one where censorship is allowed, or do we censure it ourselves? Companies have to be a part of that discussion too, of course.

    Personally, I am all for censorship when it’s necessary. The problem is we tend to think its never necessary because of freedom of expression. In cases like this, it’s a much more gray area that is complex enough to actually talk about.

  • Robert Grosso

    While I agree academic definitions are not useless, I do feel they are fairly narrow in their scope.

    Norman Rockwell, for example, has great art out there, and did it for commercial use. He is really no different than Da Vinci, who worked off the patronage system to produce works like The Last Supper.

    So what separates them? Rockwell made more pieces of art by copying photographs, Da Vinci did less free-hand in a specific style. Does that really tarnish Rockwell over Da Vinci? Does that make his works less artisitc?

    Or go down the realm of games compared to mediums like film and music. Determining what is considered art through academic definitions needs to be changed, or at least recognize that there are pieces of art out there that do not fit that definition while still being artistic. One game example, Shadow of the Colossus comes to mind.

  • Nytezero

    Transgender kill!

  • Lief

    Nobody “earns” their rights, what are you talking about?
    In another post you mention how context matters in making art notable. The creator of KTF clearly stated he released the game to criticize hypersensitive people in the games industry…i.e. he chose a piece to conflict with a particular context. Again, what are you talking about? I presume you realize you’re giving that dev the reaction he was going for, right?

  • Typical

    I never said anyone should have their rights denied, but here’s the thing: I and a lot of others are getting tired of manufactured outrage at any perceived slight turning into national headlines.

    You clearly hold a double standard, that because the pool of people insulted is larger, it makes insults ok.

    Quit using minority status as a shield like a pussy, and grow up. You want to be treated like everyone else, take an insult like you expect everyone else to is my point, perhaps normal wasn’t the right word, but you got my point anyway. You want to be treated the same as everyone else, react the same way as you expect everyone else to. This is the exact kind of double standard that drives lies like the pay gap: If women want to make as much as men statistically, maybe they should stop taking teaching jobs and start taking engineering jobs.

  • Typical

    That was poor wording. I was pointing out double standards in the post. I’m tired of the “you can’t argue my special status because I have special status” bullshit argument. Every subject is fair game, or none is. There are no special people in this life, everyone’s the same.

  • Typical

    My definition of art is very abstract. Is a corporate logo art? Is a collection of sounds randomly generated by a computer to make a tune art? Art is subjective, and anyone claiming that something is or isn’t definitively art is a pretentious ass.

  • Crizzyeyes

    This. I don’t really care what the “academic” definition of art is, and I would be extremely surprised if that didn’t differ from university to university. Typical’s point about the moustache on a political poster is pretty valid, and it seems to me like just as much context applies for KTF. There’s a subtle difference between creating something just to offend and creating something offensive so you can point out how pointless it is to get offended by it (read: the game was intentionally shit). Art is extremely subjective even with a “clearly” defined set of criteria as posted by root, so arguing over the definition is pretty damn pointless, I don’t really care how many liberal arts degrees you have on the issue.

  • Johnathon Tieman

    I certainly prefer the idea of censuring content versus censoring content. I think the place where it gets murky is the involvement of Valve. Given Valve’s position of a private distributor (in this case), I can understand why they don’t want certain content on their platform (either for quality reasons or political/moral ones). I would argue you could liken this to content firewalls put into place by ISPs – are they common carriers, or private entities? Companies like Verizon seem to be pretty obviously the former, but Valve largelys appear to fall into the latter.

    Depending on which side you look at it from, Valve is censuring KtF by not allowing it to reside on their platform. The game can be sold through the company’s website. However, for a vast number of PC gamers, if it isn’t on Steam, it doesn’t exist (and if nothing else, Steam also functions as a security measure, as products on Steam are at least somewhat vetted to not to spyware/virus-laden). So from some viewpoints, not on Steam does equate to censoring the product.

    The biggest issue is the one you highlighted regarding the rather vague guidelines. I haven’t really looked at the Greenlight process (none of my projects are anywhere close to being worthy for that), but if at any point money changes hands, Valve has some legal obligation to the developers (and since time spent promoting the game on Greenlight is one of them, Valve can’t simply make things right by a refund). Even without the financial aspect, it is clearly in Valve’s best interest to have a *very* explicit guideline for game submissions. If Valve really doesn’t want to deal with controversial issues such as those brought up by Hatred then basically repeated by KtF, then it really probably should ban Hatred. Otherwise, Valve should probably issue a statement saying they are refining the guidelines to make it clear why one is allowed and the other isn’t. It seems like this hasn’t been an issue for very long, though – Gabe may still surprise everyone.

  • MusouTensei

    It should have stayed there.

  • Nope Naw

    Honestly, you are not making a good case for gay people at all. For one, you’re playing a dangerous game of making absolute statements about someone else’s life.

    Also, the whole “we’re not normal” thing is victim-think. I’m aware you didn’t start the “normal” thing here, but seriously, you need to rise above it, not mire in it.

  • Nope Naw

    I’m gonna go out on a limb and make an absolute statement. If you’re arguing for censorship, then you’re holding a double standard. Because I bet you that if you want something to be censored (aka “what you don’t like”), you also do not want something else to be censored (aka “what you do like”), and somewhere exists a person that does not agree with you.

    It’s an inherently dishonest position in my book. It’s also a completely counter-productive position to boot.

    “This thing is offensive to me, remove it.” – Now that thing has power over you, and you’re shining a spotlight on it, giving it more exposure (of course this is what the SJW fuckwits wants, but I digress).

  • JeremyVerdi

    >For Steam to dictate what can and can’t be put up there then becomes a bit muddy.

    It’s really not muddy at all: You’re pitting “what you think” against the reality that Steam is still a privately owned company. That other companies “need it to survive” doesn’t change that fact. YouTube won’t host pornography and television companies won’t host flagrantly racist programs due to internal policies. Steam has their own internal policy and interpret it as they see fit, which is their right to do as a private business. This game can and will still exist of course, but it will have to find a place willing to host it.

  • JeremyVerdi

    Also: >I admit it’s a bit hyperbolic to say it doesn’t exist

    It isn’t “a bit” hyperbolic, it’s the meat of the narrative that you’re using to lead the conversation. I’m not you, so I can’t say with any certainty that it was your intention to incite censorship panic, but your comment about being FOR censorship when you believe it is necessary leads me to believe that this article was meant to present a straw man in order to bait out the worst in people to validate your feelings in that regard, and a quick scan of the comments shows that it has. Your primary audience is already rightly annoyed with the frequent cries for censorship by SJW’s who use dis-proven junk science to back up their “claims”, but they now seem unable to tell the difference between legitimate social problems and hysterical drum beating.

    Shame on you for taking advantage of that.

  • Mark Andrew Edwards

    Wow, Jim Stirling. That is a paragon of game criticism, let’s use him as our authority figure…or, you know, not.

    The developer’s problem was that he didn’t use a scimitar and a noose as is actually used to execute homosexuals in the Middle East and Africa. He should have said he’s standing up for religious freedom and in defense of the Prophet. Then there wouldn’t be a peep.

    Look, I have no problem with people condemning this game. I don’t like or approve of COD: MW 2, Hotline Miami, all the GTA games on moral grounds. Valve’s a private company, it can sell what it wants. I’d prefer more sex, less violence in my games, personally. But most of the shock and horror over this game is over the targets: the new privileged class, the strident harpies of the LGBTQAN minority.

    I’ve got to put up with Bill Mahr, you’ve got to put up with this crappy video game. Or else it’s just one theocracy or another in charge.

  • Ben Jeanotte

    While I think it’s bad form to be an antagonistic hateful jerk, I do support anyone’s right to vocalize those traits through media. Yes it’s offensive, but who cares… let them release their hateful game, maybe it will sell some copies, but most people will return their hate and there will be a dialog of some sorts. With censorship, there is little to no dialog, people are robbed of even their opinions because they never even get to really see the work being censored.

    If something is bad, society can view and discuss and learn from such things. We should not treat adult consumers like children that need to be sheltered from bad ideas.

  • Robert Grosso

    I teach for a living. My goal is not to tell you how to think.

    My goal is for you to think for yourself really. I honestly couldn’t care less if you agree or disagree with the point all. The real purpose of this article is to make you think about it.

    And honestly, ive seen a lot worse out there that is click bait, most of it pertaining to the social justice stuff in the first place. I am not stooping that low.

  • BurntToShreds

    The creation of this game was a stupid idea in my opinion.

    So the creator of the game is pissed off at people for being overly sensitive and easily offended, and thought that the best course of action was to make something that both they and other more sensible people would find offensive? Good work on that.

    If you want to do something actually constructive to stop people from being so easily offended, there are many more options than making a crappy game to vent your frustrations. Create a forum where you can discuss these things in a well-moderated (and I mean “well-moderated” as in “keep flame-wars from erupting” rather than “censor one side of the debate”) environment. God knows we need more of that rather than people seeing how much bile they can fit into 140 characters on Twitter.

    Speaking of which, KTF is just a more elaborate version of your average angry Twitter post; hastily made, nothing of worth, and gets thousands of people riled up and pissed off. KTF should be allowed to exist and consumed by people if they so wish, but I don’t blame Steam for giving it the boot after everything that happened with Hatred and their recent missteps and bugs over the last two weeks.

  • Ncrdrg

    Why in the heavens are they complaining about Greenlight not filtering it pre-emptively? It was removed specifically because they noticed it due to feedback. Seems to me it’s the system working. Do you have any idea how many Greenlight games are created? Too many for Steam to keep up with.

    It’s pretty stupid game but like the author said, he’s just one unknown game dev posting a completely childish and irrelevant homophobic game. Give it 2 weeks and pretty much everyone will have forgotten about it.

  • chizwoz

    No-one cares about academic opinions on the subject. You’re confused about the nature of authority. People who’ve bought into all of the various theories and attitudes to art that they were taught in college (and had to accept otherwise they risked getting rejected from the clique) have no authority over the general public whatsoever. Worthwhile art is just whatever people think is worthwhile and happen to enjoy. That’s it.

  • Chino Gambino

    There is only one real justification for removing KtF at least one I can agree on. Does Steam want to become Newgrounds 2.0? Can we rule out indie projects on technical standards and on Greenlight the real intention of developing the product?

    Honestly I’d rather steam be more restrictive of throw away games but maybe I’m wrong. There are plenty of ‘casual’ games I love on the service that maybe ruled out on my reasoning but there has to be a better way of isolating this perhaps ‘arty’ statement shit. Maybe steam should have an ‘Art’ games section catering precisely to pretentious shit and social commentary. An opt in system for the sensitive souls out there.

  • Father Agnostus

    I think the only good reason to remove that game is because it’s shit quality. Sure it’s in poor taste. But I don’t mind that. Such games have their place. Like Newgrounds. Leave them there.

  • GrimFate

    Valve should either offer a “block” button to allow users to hide games that they NEVER want shown to them, or they should create an “offensive” category for games that either they or the community decides could trigger the sensitive, and allow people to “unsubscribe” from ever seeing titles in this category. Then those who wish can shelter themselves from this content and the rest of us can make up our own minds on whether or not something is worth playing, supporting, etc.

    I have no intention of even considering playing KTF and consider the title and concept of it deplorable, but the idea of banning it makes me uncomfortable because the next game which is banned might actually be something I do want to play. (I would support forcing the developer to change the game’s name though.)

    Probably not the best argument in the world, but if we let the landscape of art be ruled by the offendable, we would probably end up with something like 1950’s Hollywood. Sure, they had good movies during that period and before it, but there are a LOT of good movies since that would not have been made if things hadn’t changed. As a fan of dark art, i.e. art of a dark tone that often deals with dark subject matter, I would hate to see that disappear or neutered simply because it wouldn’t appeal to the nice, happy, delicate people that we might let take control of things.