All NSFW games on Itch are now hidden by default.

[Count Morado]

The biggest problem for me is itch getting rid of it all without warning. Bending the fucking knee to fuck over the people who were still using the site for that purpose. And just because it's against ToS doesn't mean they have to complete dicks about it. A simple "we're enforcing our rules now" would go miles better than the shitshow currently happening.
This shit will just spiral. People bitching against us and siding with this brain-dead decision are gonna be embarrassed when we can't say "peepee" without getting fucking arrested.

If a developer has a game that violates the decade-long+ TOS, then it's either because the developer knew the rules and thought they could get away with it, or the developer didn't bother to read the rules and were an idiot not to make sure they were in compliance. Either way, why should the developer get the benefit of the doubt?

I don't necessarily agree with what's banned or not ... but I am not going to play the victim card when it has been discussed time and again for months and years among the adult gaming development and fan community about what sites allow or not - and what sites adamantly enforce their rules and what sites don't have the resources or time to enforce, or simply are trying to get away with something, themselves.

 

[laundrymachine]

Why are you mouth breathers racebaiting and not talking about porn game bans?? Start a blog.

 

[gingisep]

Currently, from my location (EU) I can browse more or less 7045 games in the "nsfw" category, and confirmed a few titles has been suspended with a notice about "TOS violation".

The rape tag theory seems to hold, at least by simple observation:

You must be registered to see the links

this bundle offered the three games of Lovecraft Locker, but only the "Tentacle Hell" had rape in their tags, and it's now suspended.


My hypothesis right now is that itch.io is rebuilding the interested indexes from scratch, filtering out games that might cause issues and expecting the creators to appeal for a second review.

 

[Fanorase]

If a developer has a game that violates the decade-long+ TOS, then it's either because the developer knew the rules and thought they could get away with it, or the developer didn't bother to read the rules and were an idiot not to make sure they were in compliance. Either way, why should the developer get the benefit of the doubt?

They've let devs get away with it for as you say a decade-long+, either through, as you say, lack of resources or time, so I'd figure it'd be common courtesy to send an ALL CALL that they're actually enforcing it. Pulling the rug is an insanely shitty look, and who knows how they'll react in the future to literally anything else.

 

[Count Morado]

Currently, from my location (EU) I can browse more or less 7045 games in the "nsfw" category

That's 22 more than there were 2.5 hours ago.

You must be registered to see the links

They've let devs get away with it for as you say a decade-long+, either through, as you say, lack of resources or time, so I'd figure it'd be common courtesy to send an ALL CALL that they're actually enforcing it. Pulling the rug is an insanely shitty look, and who knows how they'll react in the future to literally anything else.

Again --- the developers who KNEW and were trying to get away with it --- why do they deserve common courtesy? They obviously didn't give a shit about the rules to begin with and over the weeks, months, years they were on the site. They were not giving the common courtesy you are now calling for.

If they didn't read the rules - why do they deserve common courtesy? Again, they didn't bother to take the time to learn what was allowed and what wasn't in the first place. They obviously didn't give a shit about the rules to begin with and over the weeks, months, years they were on the site. Why should anyone give them common courtesy in return for nothing?

And, again, these rules have been conversations FOR YEARS ... for YEARS ... and lots of people, A LOT OF PEOPLE, who has paid attention in the adult gaming community knew they were on borrowed time by breaking the rules and trying to fly under the radar. The conversations have been there. The "advice" has been there... and yet developers didn't decide to either leave the sites with the rules or look to revise their content so that they wouldn't be facing bans.

No, there are no fucks given.

And yes, I do blame Itch and Steam for not being proactive and making sure they were following their own rules and their own agreements with the payment processors. But they didn't get a common courtesy either .... because, AGAIN, they were either trying to get away with something or feigning non-awareness or some other excuse.

 

[prpa]

And yes, I do blame Itch and Steam for not being proactive and making sure they were following their own rules and their own agreements with the payment processors. But they didn't get a common courtesy either .... because, AGAIN, they were either trying to get away with something or feigning non-awareness or some other excuse.

As far as I know, Steam didn't have rules like that to begin with, so once again, we're dealing with payment processors enforcing their own arbitrary rules on independent businesses.

And yeah, I get it, they're private companies and can do what they want, etc., etc.

 

[Fanorase]

As far as I know, Steam didn't have rules like that to begin with, so once again, we're dealing with payment processors enforcing their own arbitrary rules on independent businesses.

And yeah, I get it, they're private companies and can do what they want, etc., etc.

I'm gonna pretty much ignore him now, I know what kind he is and I'm not a fan

 

[lewdryuuwu]

As far as I know, Steam didn’t have rules like that to begin with—so once again, we’re dealing with payment processors enforcing their own arbitrary rules on independent businesses.

And yeah, I get it, they're private companies and can do what they want, etc., etc.

i know for a while nsfw games wasnt much on steam and it kinda blew up. wich im glad they ended up opening to them.

 

[Specific360]

If anyone is wondering just how big the impact actually was, about 75% of adult games were delisted with no warning whatsoever

 

[Count Morado]

But as far as I know, Steam didn't have rules like that to begin with, so once again, we're back to payment processors enforcing their own arbitrary rules on independent businesses.

They didn't state in their rules about developers having to abide by payment processors' rules - correct.

This is one of the reasons why I do blame Steam. Because in order to have agreements with those payment processers, Steam has to agree to the rules that say that payment processors will not allow money transfers for certain content. Steam knew - and because either their original work wasn't with adult games or because they overlooked making sure they put it in their rules or they tried to get away with it for as long as they could (sound familiar) --- they didn't make sure to clarify it with developers.

And "enforcing their own arbitrary rules on independent businesses" is what businesses do in .... business. If you went into a consignment shop and said "Hey, I want to sell my dad's old porno mags" and they say "We sell allow sellers to offer a lot of stuff here, but not porno mags" and you get angry with them... you're the dick, not them. It's THEIR COMPANY, NOT YOURS. As such THEY decide what THEY want to do business in. NOT YOU. If you want to do business with them, you have to follow their rules. Straight-forward concept.

If they said "Sure, you can sell them, but only Playboys and Penthouses - not Hustler, Cheri, Chic, High Society, etc --- only Playboys and Penthouses" --- same concepts apply.

View attachment 5072676
If anyone is wondering just how big the impact actually was, about 75% of adult games were delisted with no warning whatsoever

Your 7,008 number is old... it's now 7,049 and growing. It's gone up about 26 in 3 hours. It's going to take time, but as games pass review, they will be readded to the list. It's too early to tell the full ramifications.

 

[flamewho]

They didn't state in their rules about developers having to abide by payment processors' rules - correct.

This is one of the reasons why I do blame Steam. Because in order to have agreements with those payment processers, Steam has to agree to the rules that say that payment processors will not allow money transfers for certain content. Steam knew - and because either their original work wasn't with adult games or because they overlooked making sure they put it in their rules or they tried to get away with it for as long as they could (sound familiar) --- they didn't make sure to clarify it with developers.

And "enforcing their own arbitrary rules on independent businesses" is what businesses do in .... business. If you went into a consignment shop and said "Hey, I want to sell my dad's old porno mags" and they say "We sell allow sellers to offer a lot of stuff here, but not porno mags" and you get angry with them... you're the dick, not them. It's THEIR COMPANY, NOT YOURS. As such THEY decide what THEY want to do business in. NOT YOU. If you want to do business with them, you have to follow their rules. Straight-forward concept.

If they said "Sure, you can sell them, but only Playboys and Penthouses - not Hustler, Cheri, Chic, High Society, etc --- only Playboys and Penthouses" --- same concepts apply.

We get it so you can stop yapping now.

 

[Count Morado]

We get it so you can stop yapping now.

Obviously people don't because they keep putting out the same misinformation.

Have a great day.

 

[MGGEDev]

This could kill itch as a site. They've managed to mobilize the LGBT thanks to their incompetent handling of it.

Wont end well for them.

The bootlickers, knee benders, payment processors and activists can all collectively (lol) get screwed.

 

[ThibsArt]

I'm sitting here putting the final touches on the prologue of my game and this week has just been a rough one...

 

[MGGEDev]

 

[prpa]

They didn't state in their rules about developers having to abide by payment processors' rules - correct.

Yeah, Steam didn't have rules like that until recently.

This is one of the reasons why I do blame Steam. Because in order to have agreements with those payment processers, Steam has to agree to the rules that say that payment processors will not allow money transfers for certain content. Steam knew - and because either their original work wasn't with adult games or because they overlooked making sure they put it in their rules or they tried to get away with it for as long as they could (sound familiar) --- they didn't make sure to clarify it with developers.

And "enforcing their own arbitrary rules on independent businesses" is what businesses do in .... business. If you went into a consignment shop and said "Hey, I want to sell my dad's old porno mags" and they say "We sell allow sellers to offer a lot of stuff here, but not porno mags" and you get angry with them... you're the dick, not them. It's THEIR COMPANY, NOT YOURS. As such THEY decide what THEY want to do business in. NOT YOU. If you want to do business with them, you have to follow their rules. Straight-forward concept.

I've always disliked this analogy, payment processors aren't actually selling or buying anything. They're not the creators, they're not the consumers, they're just middlemen, moving money from one party to another. Their job is to process transactions, not to act as moral gatekeepers or unofficial regulators of legal business.

If something is legal to buy and sell, then a payment processor stepping in and saying, "We don't approve of this content, so you can't get paid for it", is an abuse of power. They're not law enforcement, they're not legislators. Yet somehow, they've positioned themselves to exert massive control over entire industries, from adult games to books to art and beyond, simply because they can cut off access to payment infrastructure.

They're interfering in legal commerce between willing adults. The issue is that financial institutions shouldn't be dictating what kinds of speech or expression are permissible, especially based on vague notions of "brand safety". Payment processors, by nature, are supposed to be neutral facilitators.

But we've already had this argument in the other thread, so I'll just say this: I blame the governments of the U.S. and the EU for not trying/failing to break up the Visa–Mastercard duopoly.

 

[laundrymachine]

You must be registered to see the links

Their official statement. Not sounding too good. They are pretty much capitulating to payment processors but only time will tell how much will actually get put back.

 

[Casperer007]

And "enforcing their own arbitrary rules on independent businesses" is what businesses do in .... business. If you went into a consignment shop and said "Hey, I want to sell my dad's old porno mags" and they say "We sell allow sellers to offer a lot of stuff here, but not porno mags" and you get angry with them... you're the dick, not them. It's THEIR COMPANY, NOT YOURS. As such THEY decide what THEY want to do business in. NOT YOU. If you want to do business with them, you have to follow their rules. Straight-forward concept.

If they said "Sure, you can sell them, but only Playboys and Penthouses - not Hustler, Cheri, Chic, High Society, etc --- only Playboys and Penthouses" --- same concepts apply.

Labelling something as "what businesses do" only serves to provide an excuse. Just because something is the norm doesn't make it moral, ethical, or right. Just because a business has it's big fancy business licenses doesn't make everything they do right. Just because a business has a "right" to do something doesn't even mean that they should have a right to do that in the first place either. I don't give a flying yeehaw if it's THEIR business, if they are big enough to materially affect the lives of people worldwide then perhaps it shouldn't be their "right."

Moreover, conflating an alliance of the world's largest payment processors with a little mom and pop consignment shop not wanting to sell porno mags is disingenuous at best.

 

[MGGEDev]

You must be registered to see the links

Their official statement. Not sounding too good. They are pretty much capitulating to payment processors but only time will tell how much will actually get put back.

The fact they are refusing to pay out money that has already been earned is disgusting. Especially when this was so sudden.

Basically stealing money from those devs to cover the losses they are going to make from bending the knee.

 

[Count Morado]

I've always disliked this analogy, payment processors aren't actually selling or buying anything.

They are.

They are selling their services to process payments, and as such they have the ability to deny service if they choose to.

They're interfering in legal commerce between willing adults.

No, they aren't.

I blame the governments of the U.S. and the EU for not trying/failing to break up the Visa–Mastercard duopoly.

That's valid. But it wouldn't change what is happening now.

Not with the political climate that is in play right now.
Not with the courts in play right now.

The conservatives in office won't fight for porn producers --- ESPECIALLY when rape and incest content is involved.
The liberals in office won't fight for this -- because the conservatives would label them pedophiles and smut peddlers and putting our children in danger.

Petitions won't do shit.
Writing to companies won't do shit.
Contacting elected officials wont' do shit.

Not any time soon.
Not in this political environment.

Eventually, if the pendulum swings another way and there is the "perfect" client to put on the stand -- then the ACLU and other similar free speech groups might fight it.

Labelling something as "what businesses do" only serves to provide an excuse. Just because something is the norm doesn't make it moral, ethical, or right. Just because a business has it's big fancy business licenses doesn't make everything they do right. Just because a business has a "right" to do something doesn't even mean that they should have a right to do that in the first place either. I don't give a flying yeehaw if it's THEIR business, if they are big enough to materially affect the lives of people worldwide then perhaps it shouldn't be their "right."

Moreover, conflating an alliance of the world's largest payment processors with a little mom and pop consignment shop not wanting to sell porno mags is disingenuous at best.

Bullshit. It's an apt analog.

It's not about the size of a business. It's about what they have the right do with with their business. Whether it is a multinational corporation or a "mom and pop business."

You are literally being a hypocrite by saying that developers should be able to put into their products what they want because it is theirs .... but Steam can't decide what goes on their site .... and itch can't decide what goes on their site ... and payment processors can't decide what they do with their business.

Again:

Processors have the right to run their business the way they wish within the legal and civil framework allowed them. Therefore, they have the right to say what they will or will not allow if a person/company wishes to use their services.

Processors, in order to exist, must follow the laws, regulations, and rules (de jure and de facto) or they will go out of business.

Platforms have the right to run their business the way they wish within the same framework. Again, they have the right to say what they will or will not allow if a person/company wishes to use their services.

Platforms, in order to exist, must follow the laws, regulations, and rules (de jure and de facto) - including the rules of the processors they wish to use - or they will go out of business.

Developers ALSO have the right to run their business within the legal and civil framework allowed them. As such, like the other two, they have the right to put in whatever content they wish into their game. That said --- again, like the other two ---
Developers, in order to exist, must follow the laws, regulations, and rules (de jure and de facto) - including the rules of the platforms they wish to use - or they will go out of business.