It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussionHatred on GOG ?(525 posts)solved(525 posts)solved
(525 posts)solved
Pages:
1
5
10
15
16
17
18
19
20
25
30
35
This is my favourite topic
Posted May 26, 2015
avatar
RWarehall: From the sounds of it ... Get your facts straight
avatar
Fenixp: From the sounds of it != facts. Do you have any sources on that?
http://www.vg247.com/2014/12/17/gabe-newell-apologises-for-pulling-hatred-from-steam-greenlight/
Here's an article about Gabe putting it back in Greenlight.
It's pretty well established that it was originally pulled because of too many complaints about it. About the developers being Nazis (which isn't true), about it promoting genocide, about it promoting hatred specifically toward minorities, etc.
It doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out which sorts of people were the vast majority of the ones filing those complaints...
Posted May 26, 2015
low rated
Interesting how what's "pretty well established" isn't even in the linked article.

Here's the article that explains why the game was pulled.
http://www.vg247.com/2014/12/16/valve-removes-hatred-from-steam-greenlight-developer-responds/

Interesting how what's "pretty well established" isn't in there as well, and in fact contradicts what Valve employees said about the matter.

BUT BUT BUT THE SJW THE SJW THE SJW AND HIS FLAMETHROWER OF COMPASSION
Post edited May 26, 2015 by Vainamoinen
Posted May 26, 2015
avatar
StorkV88: Steam has a lot of flaws but at least they hold their ground and don't moral police.
Err, no, they made a decision (No hatred), then gave up to popular pressure and reverted their own judgement. They folded like a wet paper bag. That's pretty much the OPPOSITE of "holding their ground".

EDIT : Damn, ninja'ed by SirPrimalform
Post edited May 26, 2015 by Kardwill
Posted May 26, 2015
avatar
Fenixp: More specifically: "Even though gamers widely expected this to happen." All I've ever seen was 3000 votes on wishlist, and it's not exactly obscure knowledge that GOG refuses a lot of indie games sent their way. This is the kind of play of words which shifts blame on GOG for doing what GOG does quite often, and painting devs as some innocent victims, even tho they're anything but. (it's been devs who have, on purpose, started spreading negative press about the game in the first place.)
The expectations of gamers (voiced on forums and discussion boards) as to what would happen have nothing to do with the votes to bring the game here. There was no play of word. Which part of their message was factually incorrect?
Posted May 26, 2015
I think GOG needs to address and elaborate on "we can't", and soon. Whenever GOG rejected to sell a remotely anticipated or popular game there's been an out-pour of comments and threads with multiple pages complaining and arguing about the decision. The Cat Lady kind of kicked the trend off, if memory serves, and we've seen threads for many others. I don't think Hatred's devs have said or done anything differently than those other devs who's games were rejected by GOG before them. The difference between Hatred and all those games put together is a couple of thousand votes on the wishlist, the difference between Hatred and all those games is only Hatred caused enough "butthurt" to get its own wishlist entry to not release the game. So, if the "butthurt" in the forum is bad now, I think it will likely only get worse the longer GOG acts coy.
Posted May 26, 2015
avatar
Primo_Victoria: Oh boy, what did they say? I don't have Facebook.
avatar
StorkV88: They just said that it won't be on GoG and now people are going full retard defending GoG.
I am actually disappointed in GoG.
yeah becuase it's the people who are defending GOG that are the only ones going full retarded. Please..typical internet bullshit, oh the people who agree with my position are always fine no matter how stupid they get..
Posted May 26, 2015
low rated
avatar
Vainamoinen: Interesting how what's "well established" isn't even in the linked article.

Here's the article that explains why the game was pulled.
http://www.vg247.com/2014/12/16/valve-removes-hatred-from-steam-greenlight-developer-responds/

Interesting how what's "well established" isn't in there as well.
Vain, you are an idiot. You know full; well that people were complaining to Steam calling the developers neo-Nazis. That it was a public outcry which got it removed from Greenlight in the first place. People claiming "proof" the developers were Nazis included one of the T-shirts of a band one of the developers were wearing and a "Like" on Facebook of a Polish Resistance League or some such. These SJW-types stormed Steam and called the game racist. Hence why it was pulled in a single day.

Just because that wasn't mentioned in the article you linked, doesn't make it untrue. Logic is not your strong suit...

And for the record, Steam allowed the game on Greenlight. They returned to their original decision to allow it.
All you people claiming Steam didn't stick to their guns in removing it seem to forget Steam wanted to sell it in the first place...
Post edited May 26, 2015 by RWarehall
Posted May 26, 2015
avatar
Primo_Victoria: The expectations of gamers (voiced on forums and discussion boards) as to what would happen have nothing to do with the votes to bring the game here. There was no play of word. Which part of their message was factually incorrect?
a) Players posting on forums and discussion boards are minority. "widely expected" suggests majority.
b) Quote is worded in such a way which suggests that Hatred devs just want the best for their players and are being victimized by GOG, which would not be okay even for a game which didn't get a massive amount of negative press release and of which quality we have absolutely no clue. Alas, Hatred devs first made sure to raise a massive amount of controversy and yet are now playing victims in all this.

avatar
RWarehall: Just because that wasn't mentioned in the article you linked, doesn't make it untrue. Logic is not your strong suit...
Even logic aren't facts. While I can see where your argument is coming from, whoever from Valve pulled the game from Greenlight might have had precisely the same reasoning as GOG has right now.
Post edited May 26, 2015 by Fenixp
Posted May 26, 2015
avatar
tfishell: Here's the response I got from the devs (I tried to clean up a little of the broken English), though it's nothing new:

"Hi, [the reason for no GOG release] was already told officially. [GOG] said that the game is good, but they "can't". That is the whole story. You can only imagine the reasons."
sorry but to me this whole thing stinks like a carefully planned cheap marketing and attempt to air dirty laundry in public.

companies don't posts a press releases about where their products arent available for nothing. this is all a calculated stunt that you all are part of, helping developers of this game get free publicity by making a fuss out of it.

so rather than operate on assumptions, let us ask them to show the entire email they got from gog and make it public. they claim to have said what it contains, so they should have no issues showing the actual thing.
Posted May 26, 2015
What I find the most crazy in this thread is there is people upset by GOG not getting the game, when most likely nobody would have cared or probably even knew what this game was had it not been for the controversy surrounding it... just sayin.
Posted May 26, 2015
low rated
avatar
RWarehall: Vain, you are an idiot.
You ended the discussion.
Posted May 26, 2015
avatar
d2t pretty much nailed it. All devs have to do now is just to pose as victims and let internet sort it out for them.
Posted May 26, 2015
avatar
Fenixp: Even logic aren't facts. While I can see where your argument is coming from, whoever from Valve pulled the game from Greenlight might have had precisely the same reasoning as GOG has right now.
But you provide no facts either...

I've followed this controversy, I'm sure the quotes are out there.

Rough timeline:
Hatred was proposed...
People got outraged...
Hatred submitted and was accepted to Greenlight...
Despite a lot of Yes votes for Greenlight, Steam pulled the game amidst complaints the developers were neo-Nazis, a claim which has not been proven.
A couple days later, Gabe Newell stepped in and put it back up.
With the most votes of any game on Greenlight, it passed that stage...and so on...

Its silly to claim Steam "never wanted to sell the game" since they allowed it up on Greenlight to begin with.
No way can we slice it as Steam "sticking to their guns" since they didn't stick to anything for either side, by both accepting it then removing it and accepting it again.

There was pressure from SJW busy bodies later followed by gamer pressure who didn't like the busy-body censorship police. It can be argued they caved twice even!
Posted May 26, 2015
avatar
With any game that gets a lot of press coverage and gets people psyched you can say "oh, if the game didn't xxx or hadn't yyy nobody would even care about it". So slaughtering unarmed civilians in a ridiculously dark presentation is the game's USP, like that's any different than GTA being all about committing all sorts of crimes or Mortal Kombat being all about ridiculously cruel and original executions. Either way they clearly found a gap in the market and the public's interest is as legitimate as in any other case.
Posted May 26, 2015
avatar
gamesfreak64: i saw some screens.... some guys on the floor i a puddle of gore looked like law enforcers?

hacking and slaying ingames is okay, but hacking the good people will send out wrong messages.
why would a gamer whack a law enforcer?

i have lots of dvd movies and some games with gore and guts :D
but its always the good guy that wins, cause if they dont i will return the dvd :D

i like good endings: all bad guys dead and if possible with a minimum of law enforcers loss.

whacking a bad corrupted cop is okay, killing good lawenforcers is bad.
avatar
Buenro-games: So games should not be done from the bad guys' perspective? That is ridiculous.

What next, banning books like American Psycho since it's done from a psychopath's perspective and he "wins" in the end?

Or maybe it's ok in literature but games it's bad?

Well?
??? well look at the current state of the world compare that to the 70s
i been around sinds 70s and a lot changed, each era had its downs and wars, but...

2014-2015 is the biggest mess i have ever seen compared to 70-90s
it will only get worse...

somehow i am glad i am from the 60s, this way i be gone in 20 years maybe 25 years
cause the world is changing a lot, but not for the better.
Thats my 50 cents on it and my last reply regarding this game that seem to escalated a bit in topics.
In the past you could leave a fart in public , try this nowadays and you might end up in a locker, or a lawsuit and then in a locker :D

Tolerance is the keyword: nowadays people are less tolerant towards another, and thats the cause of all this mischief, thats going on in the world.
Pages:
1
5
10
15
16
17
18
19
20
25
30
35
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussionHatred on GOG ?(525 posts)solved(525 posts)solved
(525 posts)solved