snooggums comments on "This still does not compare to the kind of audience we would have on Steam": Horses lead says ban virality helped sales "but we're not out of the woods," and he fears "self-censorship" with future...

[–] snooggums@piefed.world 47 points 11 months ago (3 children)

Yeah, the people who keep saying the scene wasn't sexual because nudity isn't inherently sexual (true) completely ignore the sexual context when a naked human is ridden while being led around.

The devs are stressing how clear it is that all the characters are adults because they were not all adults in the early builds.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] webadict@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago (1 child)

I see where you are coming from. I also think you are wrong.

While there are sexual connotations behind naked ridership, there is also several other connotations involved that are meant through the scene. I see the scene as meant to demean and dehumanize the human being ridden, a literal replacement for an animal. Nakedness is often used in media to show vulnerability and, especially in this context, power differentials, and since the rider is clothed, viewing this as sexual doesn't feel like a correct interpretation. Using a child as the rider might make sense in some contexts (say, as a metaphor for innocence when enjoying an activity through the suffering of the exploited), but I do kind of agree that the current scene doesn't meaningfully change with aging the character up.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] snooggums@piefed.world 3 points 11 months ago*

The publisher is the one that acts like that scene is the only one that valve might have objected to and acting like it exists in a vacuum. Two years ago valve asked for a build of the game because of something concerning on the game page, and I would bet money 'child rides naked lady' was not on the page. It was clearly a decision based on the game as a whole at the time, not one scene.

Kind of like how Epic changed their mind at the last minute after doing their own age rating verification that had a different result than the one the publisher submitted. Again, not based on one scene but the game as a whole.

Also the developer saying the scene and all the characters makes more sense with adults is obviously bullshit. If the scene did not have the overall sexual context of the game then having a child pick their slave horse is more in line with the themes of the game. The player is described as playing a 'young boy' in some articles and early promotional materials but the publisher stresses he is 20+ just like the 'young woman' who picks the slave horse. Aging them up does significantly change the story. What college kid is sent to a farm to work? That is what you do with teenagers.

I am not saying that the finished product shouldn't exist or anything like that, but that the story focused on one scene out of context is glossing over a larger picture that was being seen as more edgy in earlier builds and is still enough for Epic to back off. I am saying that storefronts being cautious makes sense.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

[–] BlameTheAntifa@lemmy.world -3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

My understanding is that the game is a surrealist-horror social commentary, like something David Lynch would do. I see a lot of people in these comments making some very wild claims and assumptions based on a build the developers were coerced into putting together early in development and which does not actually exist. The developers know they are pushing boundaries and that is the whole point, they even said they would change anything if Valve requested it since the build they were told to send was so early and quickly assembled. Instead, Valve gave no feedback at all and blacklisted them without recourse.

Since Steam is effectively a monopoly - though earned on merits instead of anticompetitiveness - being rejected without recourse or discussion is a death sentence and Valve should not have that power. Generally, I am violently opposed to anyone having the ability to dictate what qualifies as art, but when it’s a company that has captured an entire market crushing an indie developer for being too avante-garde while that company actively distributes basic porn, I must call bullshit. This is an abuse of their monopoly and it needs to be called out and punished.

I don’t have the stomach to play it, but I bought a copy on GOG to support the devs. As a consumer I prefer GOG, but for developers, being blocked from Steam is death. Potentially literal death, since we are discussing peoples livelihoods.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent