You can do that too. For me, it would fulfill two functions: give a review for a game with my honest opinion, and help make the “anti-woke” lists a double edged sword for the bigots: if you make a public list, it may also be used by the “woke” to support their games.

If any group complaining about something makes it “controversial”, then everything is controversial and the word loses all meaning.

Yeah, woke. Oops.

I’m not suggesting “buy every game on this list” but to use it as a means to discover games. There are probably good games on there which get undue hate from the curator’s followers and are not very well know. The followers do try and review bomb the games, so they don’t bubble up to the top naturally.

That would be unfortunate. When lemmy.world goes down, I think all their content is still available on every instance that federated with it.

Would this kind of thing be possible with peertube? It has “peer” in the name, but is it really resistant to take downs or unforeseen outages? If peertube instance A is hosting a video and I’m on peertube instance B, trying to watch that video, if instance A goes down, will that video be unaccessible?

They do have an “Owners” forum (the default is the Non-Owners for those who don’t own the game). I imagine the non-owners forum is there to provide an opportunity for non-owners to ask genuine questions about the game, but that obviously isn’t happening. Maybe you’re right and they should just make it owners only. I don’t know if it would be visible to others though.

The forums are just full of bigotted trolls who want to see the game fail.

It “controversial” because racists and bigots made it that way. There was no controversy about other heist games, there’s no “controversy” about games with all-white characters. But put in a diverse group of character, that steal back what was stolen and suddenly that’s “controversial”.

Sure, I won’t travel to Gaza and say “wow, so many dead people here” and act surprised, but if I stumble upon a dead body on a playground, you betcha it’s at least a little surprising.

Or it becomes a popular trolling target with a cry of “they can’t take us all down” and it gets worse.

For anybody saying “it’s not a problem, just moderate it yourself”, look at Relooted’s steam forum. There are more than 700 threads there and most of them are really not kind. Tell me how you’re going to moderate that.

Just put yourself in the shoes of game publishers or studios that make a game which goes against the grind and gets attacked like Relooted is being attacked. Would you want to employ somebody just to moderate the forums? Should the onus be on the forum owners or should it be on the forum providers (Valve)? Do you think this has no effect on the types of games being released?

I mean, look at this game Tyrone vs Cops 2. Is this OK? What do you think the forum discussions look like. Are they OK? If it’s only devs that should moderate their forums, that means the KKK could make game about water lillies and then have their forums be the meeting ground for white power discussions. They won’t be offended after-all. That’s OK?

I think the “it’s not free” is related to discord since there is a paid discord. But the sentence is quite confusing.

There are European hosts, but I admit, I’m not a techie. That’s why I pay others to host and manage my stuff.

Luckily, there are alternatives.

I wonder if they’d allow a game called “Muhammed vs IDF” and Muhammed would scream “Allahu Akbar” while killing the soldiers.

It would make Europeans happy that are trying to reduce their US tech consumption.

Are you going to release it on GoG?

Oh boy… I see lots of crunch in the future of those poor devs.

Progressives just follow the general vibes forward without thinking, they are mindless tools who want to go forward at any cost.

Do you realise how ridiculous your statement is once applied to another group? Change is constant. Adapting to it doesn’t mean people are without convictions. Furthermore, you are judging the destination (centric), regardless of the path taken to get there. You can end up a centrist by carefully weighing the teachings, convictions, and information multiple camps provide. Or you can end up a centrist by having no thought and refusing to take a side à la “the only way to win is not to play”.

You are also presenting a false dichotomy: either you have convictions and stick to them no matter what, or you have none and accept whatever argument happens to sway you to one extreme or the other. People are more complicated that “left right”, right-wrong, black-white,… The ability to weigh arguments, be open to comprimise, and thoughtfully consider new ideas isn’t a fault.

Do I have to belong to a group to defend them?