In the early build reviewed by Valve, day six featured a scene in which a man and his young daughter visit the farm. The daughter wants to ride one of the horses, resulting in an interactive dialogue sequence where the girl rides on the shoulders of a naked “horse” while it’s led by the player.
Young girl interacts with naked man and you saw no problem with it…
“The scene is not sexual in any way,”
Maybe not to you but that doesn’t change the content of what you submitted to Valve.
the young character was changed into a twenty-something woman. “Both to avoid the juxtaposition,” it explains, “and more importantly because the dialogue delivered in that scene, which deals with the societal structure in the world of Horses, works much better when delivered by an older character.”
Cool, the review build still featured a young girl riding a naked man and you thought that was a great idea…
I have to disagree to be honest. Not because I think that they should allow a naked guy with a young girl(gross), but because in the time that it took for steam to review the game and give a verdict, they had already changed it on their own to be a different model.
For them to refuse re-submission of the game is pretty dumb, considering that the offending content(if that is what it was) had already been fixed in the release build and steam was operating under old information.
If they haden’t already changed it for the release candidate I would be fully on board, but clearly they saw wrong in it as well which was why they had changed it prior to steams decision.
Steam forced an early release build of the game way earlier than they normally asked for, which meant it was exactly that, a pre-release build, meaning it had not gone through the proper channels for vetting or checking to make sure that what they wanted to publish was a final product. Then when requested for a review of the actual final build, steam refused. This combined with the fact that the only storefront that blocked the release was steam, I definitely think steam is the bad guy here.
BEING SAID, this might not be the reason anyway, reading the struggles of this games development process, steam had already posted concern about the live action portions of the game, so I’m expecting it might have been a combination of the nudity aspect of the game (even if not intended to arouse) and the live action portions. I assume steam was already looking for a reason to block this release, and when they were given one they just went with it.
It’s also far from the first time Steam’s content review process has stirred up controversy–even before Collective Shout–which is ultimately the reason why this is getting so much run in games media right now. At some point Steam has to get their shit together, start hiring people, and revamp their scattershot content review system before they get on the wrong side of an incident by either letting something through that stirs up a shitstorm and Congress gets involved, or pissing off the wrong publisher and having the ESA come down on them.
That said, I don’t think this particular game is the horse to back for this effort, so to speak.
That’s the one of the very few things in the devs’ favor imo, that Valve took too long to let them know. It’s impossible to say if it took that long review because of csam reasons or normal reasons, or if they just sat with the notice for a while, doing nothing, though.
The dude acts clueless and said that someone was probably “having a bad day” and banned it just because fuckem, but this sounds like a more likely reason.
Young girl interacts with naked man and you saw no problem with it…
Maybe not to you but that doesn’t change the content of what you submitted to Valve.
Cool, the review build still featured a young girl riding a naked man and you thought that was a great idea…
I came in to read what caused Valve’s fall from grace, but nope, still the good guy.
I have to disagree to be honest. Not because I think that they should allow a naked guy with a young girl(gross), but because in the time that it took for steam to review the game and give a verdict, they had already changed it on their own to be a different model.
For them to refuse re-submission of the game is pretty dumb, considering that the offending content(if that is what it was) had already been fixed in the release build and steam was operating under old information.
If they haden’t already changed it for the release candidate I would be fully on board, but clearly they saw wrong in it as well which was why they had changed it prior to steams decision.
Steam forced an early release build of the game way earlier than they normally asked for, which meant it was exactly that, a pre-release build, meaning it had not gone through the proper channels for vetting or checking to make sure that what they wanted to publish was a final product. Then when requested for a review of the actual final build, steam refused. This combined with the fact that the only storefront that blocked the release was steam, I definitely think steam is the bad guy here.
BEING SAID, this might not be the reason anyway, reading the struggles of this games development process, steam had already posted concern about the live action portions of the game, so I’m expecting it might have been a combination of the nudity aspect of the game (even if not intended to arouse) and the live action portions. I assume steam was already looking for a reason to block this release, and when they were given one they just went with it.
It’s also far from the first time Steam’s content review process has stirred up controversy–even before Collective Shout–which is ultimately the reason why this is getting so much run in games media right now. At some point Steam has to get their shit together, start hiring people, and revamp their scattershot content review system before they get on the wrong side of an incident by either letting something through that stirs up a shitstorm and Congress gets involved, or pissing off the wrong publisher and having the ESA come down on them.
That said, I don’t think this particular game is the horse to back for this effort, so to speak.
That’s the one of the very few things in the devs’ favor imo, that Valve took too long to let them know. It’s impossible to say if it took that long review because of csam reasons or normal reasons, or if they just sat with the notice for a while, doing nothing, though.
this is what they are afraid of https://assetsio.gnwcdn.com/HORSES_Screenshot_1.jpg ?
I believe so, except in review build it was a minor who was riding it, and we don’t know what else was there in the “interactive dialogue sequence”
That’s what they changed it to, after the damage was done.
They first submitted a build with a child riding the naked horse-man, which is probably what flagged it for good.
The dude acts clueless and said that someone was probably “having a bad day” and banned it just because fuckem, but this sounds like a more likely reason.