• cosmo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    edit-2
    11 hours ago

    It isn’t about the actual games being targeted. It’s everything about the implications of having a private company dictate what legal content I can buy with my own money. If they cave to lobby groups once, they will do it again. Next time it might be something you care about instead.

    Also games made for adults are targeted at adults, not “young people”. You can’t even really see these games on steam unless you are an adult and explicitly turn on visibility of porn games. The average gamer is well up in their thirties at this point as well.

    • Vroomfondel@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Alright, I understand your point. But I only partially agree with it. Hear me out: You want a free marketplace to buy whatever you wish, without any dictations? - But any market or shops you can think of has some regulations and dependencies, right? The one who offers the platform dictates what and how it is traded, as far as it has been. And even more if banks or transaction processors are involved, who also have a say. Not ideal, I agree, but the norm. How do you want to technically solve this? By their own transaction service, like some suggest here? Not sure if that helps, because you might create a new monopoly.

      And at the same time, we discuss this here, people demand transparency and environmently responsability for all the delivery chains. Like for clothing or food. - Is that not what happens here? The banks as part of the service chain are pushing Valve to implement stricter rulings about critical content. For me, that looks like what people would ask for. Correct me, if I am wrong.

      • cosmo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 hours ago

        It’s dictated by the law in my country. It’s either legal or it isn’t. The laws are decided through democracy and debated before implementation or changes. VISA doesn’t need to meddle. I have to follow the law, and so do they. We don’t need arbitrary whims on top of that.

        Your last paragraph is a false comparison. There’s nothing transparent about what content is currently on the card companies hatelist and what they deem ok. Several LGBTQ related games got hit as well. The transparency in regards to food and clothing is about letting me take informed choices about the products I buy. Cards companies are still letting me buy clothes made by factory slaves and sold via Temu. They don’t care. I have to take that moral standpoint to buy more ethical clothing if I find that the morally correct thing to do. If I want cheap clothing made by slaves I can, with the blessing of my Mastercard. It’s certainly legal.

        I’d rather buy a porn game made by someone who cared enough about it to make it as a passion project, than a AAA title made with the blood and tears of exploited, underpaid developers to fill the pouches of some overpaid ceo. If ethics is something to value, at least.

      • kieron115@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        6 hours ago

        I think people are mostly upset about some bank telling them how they are allowed to spend their money (by restricting what is available for sale). What if those big banks decide that, say, R-rated movies are too much of a liability for them and demand retailers stop carrying them? I’m not sure what an alternative would be, but allowing a bank to decide what you can spend your money on is a bad precedent given that everyone is basically required to have a bank account these days.