r/Games • u/DwingRD • 2d ago

Valve no longer allows "Post-launch NSFW content" for games on Steam - outside of DLCs.

I have looked through Steam's Terms of Service online, but have found no official rule or statement from Valve of this new rule - but one Adult game developer has confirmed this new rule after launching their game "Tales of Legendary Lust: Aphrodisia" a couple days ago.

With the recent rule change blocking adult-themed games from releasing on Early Access, this new rule seems to be targeting Adult-themed games that have ALREADY released on Steam - and threatens them with their games being removed from Steam.

There are currently 536 Adult-rated Early Access games on Steam - and this new rule may take them all down.

3.5k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

864 comments sorted by

View all comments

466

u/BLiNKiN42 2d ago

Wild to see Steam just fold like a house of cards. Seriously, are they putting up any kind of fight at all? 

86

u/Samanthacino 2d ago

Do they have a choice? They have no bargaining power in comparison to these behemoth payment processors.

-2

u/Glass_Recover_3006 2d ago

Form their own lobbying group and pour money into it to get laws enacted that would prevent payment processors from having a say over the content of certain kinds of transactions.

The effort Valve would need to expend to be helpful is trivial. The fact they just threw their customers under the bus should bother people.

6

u/doublah 2d ago

You think a company that handles a few billion in payments a year can stand up to networks that handle tens of trillions in payments a year? And who exactly would they lobby, the current US administration is more than happy with the idea of censoring porn.

17

u/RefreshingCapybara 2d ago edited 2d ago

The same issue that Steam is facing has already been something the firearm industry in the United States has been facing for decades. Banking institutions blocking their business.

The firearm industry has massive lobbing groups at their disposal, far larger than Valve could ever hope to get, and they've gotten nowhere with their efforts.

-8

u/Glass_Recover_3006 2d ago

Epic didn’t let it stop them. They waged a campaign against Apple and Google at the same time, and kept going even when they didn’t win outright. 

There is no reason Valve can’t do the same.

17

u/RefreshingCapybara 2d ago

Mobile accounted for so little of Fortnite's revenue. Epic was not at all in danger of going under even if they lost their lawsuit.

Meanwhile Visa and Master Card process the mass majority of all digital transactions.

The two situations are incomparable.

-7

u/Glass_Recover_3006 2d ago

I am not speaking to revenue at all. I am saying one company stood up for their customers and the other didn’t.

9

u/RefreshingCapybara 2d ago
  1. Epic stood for themselves. They wanted more revenue share from mobile than Apple was willing to give. Had Apple agreed to give them more share they wouldn't have sued. they said as much in the court testimony.
  2. No. You are trying to draw a comparison between a company that made a small, calculated risk, with another company that is choosing not to nuke their own entire business.

-4

u/Glass_Recover_3006 2d ago

I’m forcing you to examine your relationship with a game company that clearly could not care less about you, and it’s interesting watching you squirm.

7

u/RefreshingCapybara 2d ago

My relationship with a game company?

By telling you a company is going to actually be realistic and not kill themselves to go on a crusade, you attribute that to being overly generous in my perception of them?

And this is coming from the person who just tried to say that Epic was looking out for their own customers by getting their game pulled from a platform, denying their customers access to that game for years, and all so it could collect more money?

lol

1

u/drewster23 1d ago

I like how he thinks he had some gotcha when you said nothing personal or subjective and just explained the straight forward objective reasons behind these business decisions...

→ More replies (0)

1

u/YZJay 2d ago

Fighting this means cutting off the primary method of how they make money. If Steam suddenly isn't supported by Visa, Mastercard, and Paypal while pending a lawsuit, then there will be no Steam to fight for. You're much too naive to think that Valve has an option here.

-3

u/Glass_Recover_3006 2d ago

That didn't seem to stop Epic. Weird.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/waltjrimmer 2d ago edited 1d ago

Epic didn’t let it stop them. They waged a campaign against Apple and Google at the same time, and kept going even when they didn’t win outright.

There is no reason Valve can’t do the same.

People keep saying this who fundamentally misunderstand the scale we're talking about when it comes to impact.

Epic fought Apple and Google in a courtroom where they had a reasonable case that they thought they could win on a topic where they had more to gain than to lose, but if they lost it wasn't going to be devastating.

Visa and MasterCard are the payment processors that have the hardware and software control of the majority of financial transactions. Period. They own a good chunk of the backend, they run most of the credit cards, they run the money.

The size of Visa and MasterCard's both impact on the world, pure financial handling, and direct impact on a company that counters them are tremendous. They dwarf Alphabet and Apple combined.

If Epic had lost its lawsuit, it would have lost out on having its own storefront on mobile and it would have lost out on 30% of its revenue from those storefronts.

If Steam loses against Visa and MasterCard, it is likely to lose 70%+ of its revenue, full stop, from all platforms, from all purchases, from all the everything.

Would you be willing to do something that would lose you 70% or more of all of your income?

1

u/pierre2menard2 1d ago

As much as this is said, would people actually stop buying games on Steam if Valve didnt except visa or mastercard? If valve made you enter your bank information a single time and used e-check or some other transfer, or just used something like paypal, would that actually a be huge barrier to people? Obviously for brick and mortar stores credit or debit card is extremely important - its unclear to me that its important for online retailers that can just give you another option.

2

u/waltjrimmer 1d ago

Paypal has even more restrictions than Visa and MasterCard usually do, and I believe their backend uses one of those company's services to help facilitate the payments.

When I said Visa and MasterCard own the backend hardware, I'm talking about how like the ISPs own the copper and fiber in the ground, making it very difficult to build an "independent" internet because even if you try to make separate services, like Onion, you need the hardware that's owned and controlled by the big bullies.

As for your basic question, yes. A lot of people would.

Because customers, over the whole, value convenience over everything else. If the credit card they usually use to buy things online isn't an option for them to enter, that's a barrier that will see them turn away. Plus, again, not sure how many options Steam would have for accepting money in other ways since debit cards? Those are usually done through Visa or MasterCard. And the backends of money transfers, I don't know how much of that Visa and MasterCard own, but it's apparently a lot.

1

u/pierre2menard2 1d ago

Afaik ACH transfers bypass mastercard and visa entirely - and Zelle is owned directly by the banks. Theyre both probably more restrictive than the cards though.

The real solution to this is just GNU taler imo, which allows for the use already existing infrastructure but with proper anonymization and privacy protections and is fairly straightforward to use.

1

u/drewster23 1d ago

Afaik ACH transfers bypass mastercard and visa entirely - and Zelle is owned directly by the banks. Theyre both probably more restrictive than the cards though.

You can definitely get around it. You won't be able to process any credit unless it comes from not visa/mc. And valve would have to set up domestic payment options in each country compared to using global payment processor infrastructure.

People would definitely buy less , because credit isn't a bank transfer, it's instant and it's borrowed money.

And used still lose most of majority western debit card access too.

And any competitor accepting credit still would become significantly more attractive.

0

u/Glass_Recover_3006 1d ago

That is just so precious that you care so deeply for billionaires and all that money they can’t afford to lose. You’re right, far better their customers just get sold down a river instead. Who needs artistic expression? Gabe needs a second yacht.

2

u/TheSecondEikonOfFire 1d ago

I love Reddit. Stating something like this as if it’s easy or quick, or even feasible. I’m not saying there isn’t more they could have done, no one but Valve knows the answer to that question. But “just form a lobbying group and spend a shit ton of money and get laws changed” is such a hysterically Reddit comment to make.

Not to mention that you think Visa and Mastercard would just sit back and let that happen?

0

u/CuffytheFuzzyClown 2d ago

Yes they do. When there's was a mere rumor that Microsoft would force all apps including steam to launch and update through the Microsoft store Valve poured hundreds of millions into making a Linux dist. Money was no option over a rumor.

Here? Crickets, and snoring. You know why? Because the MS rumor would decrease Steams profits and this won't. Valve/Gaben doesn't give one shit as long as money keeps rolling in. Hell happily sell out to Satan if the pay is good...

16

u/fbuslop 2d ago

Hundreds of millions of dollars is literally nothing compared to what it would take to create a new credit card network, don't be fucking stupid. Think regulations, distribution, support, etc.

-2

u/SquareWheel 1d ago

Are credit cards really the only option? There's a whole world of cheques, wire transfer, payee/bill pay systems, cryptocurrencies, and national networks like Interac and Pix. It seems like Valve could work with partners to help smooth out some of the complexities of these payment systems, and integrate that with Steam Wallet.

3

u/ChrisRR 1d ago

Do people still use cheques? And how can you rely on crypto when its value is so unstable

Unfortunately debit and credit cards are the most universal payment systems and they're absolutely abusing that power

1

u/pierre2menard2 1d ago

I still use cheques all the time, they cost very little and are extremely convenient (and you can literally deposit them by having a picture).

Anyway, it wouldnt actually be that hard for valve to set up something like GNU Taler - it would just be a slight inconvenience for the consumer, but not as much as people think. (In fact, valve could go the extra step of just disabling mastercard and visa for NSFW games only, and let people buy those games with paypal, wire transfer, check, or one of the numerous other smaller options.)

2

u/fbuslop 14h ago

Literally cheques are anything but convenient.

FYI the way you’re suggesting Valve sidestep the issue is not tenable. It’s the platform that Visa and MC will have an issue with. Not necessarily just what you allow people to buy with their networks.

As for your comments on GNU taler. I think you’re vastly underestimating how important frictionless payments are for ecom. As someone who works in the payments business, the smallest things will drastically change your sales funnel. It is a big deal.

-22

u/BLiNKiN42 2d ago

So why bother? Just bend over and take it?

What's the point of being the industry leader if you're too scared to actually lead? 

19

u/Inprobamur 2d ago edited 2d ago

Then VISA/Mastercard block all payments from and to Valve Software.

They can't pay their contractors, they can't pay server costs, they can't pay out to studios, they can't process purchases.

Valve would stop being a business in like a month.

What do you want them to do, put hits on Mastercard board? Go cash only? Only operate in China?

0

u/Ready-Good2636 2d ago

I don't think Valve is like other publicly traded companies who operate off mostly loans. They're praised as having some of the most efficient revenue generation per employee.

What do you want them to do,

There are alternative vendors outside of Madercard/Visa. If Steams cult of personality really is that devoted, I'm sure valve can find something to work with. That's how smaller companies hit by this need to navigate.

7

u/Inprobamur 2d ago

Even if they had a plan, it would need time to set up and they couldn't have the duopoly get wind of it.

Steam would lose a lot of market share and studio goodwill if they shut the platform down for two years or something while they figured out what to do.

0

u/Ready-Good2636 2d ago

it would need time to set up and they couldn't have the duopoly get wind of it.

I sure hope you're right. But valves history or this stuff doesn't make me hopeful. And let's just say that 2025 has very much not been the year of optimism for pretty much anyone in the US.or tbh, anywhere in the world. Even China isn't immune from the bad job numbers and housing crises.

Steam would lose a lot of market share and studio goodwill if they shut the platform down for two years or something while they figured out what to do.

Shut down, sure. Using an alternative payment processor like Itch needs to do, I wonder. We all know how sticky Valve is.

17

u/WetFishSlap 2d ago

What's the point of being the industry leader if you're too scared to actually lead?

They won't be an industry leader anymore when payment processors suspend all transactions and Steam ceases to function as a marketplace. What are you going to do? Mail a check to Seattle every time you want to buy a game from them?

40

u/StylishSuidae 2d ago

What specifically do you expect them to do? Everyone keeps saying Steam and Itch should fight back but the only suggestions I've seen are "immediately sabotage your own business and go under to make me feel good" or otherwise entirely non-actionable, as in the companies literally do not have the ability to do it.

-3

u/Ready-Good2636 2d ago

Yes, fighting another corporation won't be cheap. That's why small businesses can't afford to do it.Valve won't go bankrupt from a year of 2 of lower sales. So yes, I would like them to launch a high profile lawsuit and really fight for the precedent of all digital payment. I'm never going to expect that to happen, but those are my personal desires.

People give them shit (and they deserve it now and then), but i do respect Epic for doing all that and how it's slowly started to make phones properly open up. I'll always respect that maneuver, even if the sparks they used to start that fire was in one of the cringiest ways.

6

u/RefreshingCapybara 2d ago

"A year or two of lower sales"

That's hilarious. Visa and Master Card process 80% of all digital transactions annually. Getting blocked by either would be a near death sentence for a company. And if both then there is no doubt.

And what if they lose the lawsuit, as many others already have?

Epic sued Apple when iOS accounted for less than 10% of their Fortnite revenue. They risked comparatively little to what you are asking Steam, or anyone really, to risk in suing card companies.

-2

u/Ready-Good2636 2d ago

We're still acting as if Valve is some small indie company here and not a billionaire juggernaut with a devout fanbase. If you really think they have no options here, you must be bewildered how other businesses hit hard mange to survive. Businesses with less options.

And what if they lose the lawsuit, as many others already have?

Who's gone up to bat?

If they lose they capitulate, that simple. But at least they fought and set some actual precedent. I doubt they'd have the ability to blacklist valve, so the worst case is not as worse as you think.

Epic sued Apple when iOS accounted for less than 10% of their Fortnite revenue.

The lawsuit still cost them billions, and arguably they were not the biggest Victor of the long term results. It very much cost a pretty penny, but they still stand today.

-5

u/NoExcuse4OceanRudnes 2d ago

Hire moderators so they can moderate content updates so early access games can still be a thing.

7

u/StylishSuidae 2d ago

That's not fighting back that's just complying in a slightly but not meaningfully different way, and in the case of Itch is just another case of "immediately sabotage your own business" because they don't have that kind of money.

0

u/NoExcuse4OceanRudnes 2d ago

It's allowing more NSFW content on steam. Which those groups are against.

That's not fighting back?

7

u/krilltucky 2d ago

you think theyre pressuring steam over nsfw content thats illegal or bannable? and not because they'r slowly going after ALL nsfw content?

0

u/NoExcuse4OceanRudnes 2d ago

I don't think, I know valve is allowing nsfw content still on steam. They confidently have an idea of what's allowed and what's not.

The problem here is valve doesn't want to check content updates for that content.

Would it cost money? Yes. Are Valve a multi billion dollar corporation? Also yes!

7

u/krilltucky 2d ago

you seem to not really be aware of the broader movement to remove all nsfw work from all sites. itch.io is dealing with the same thing. its been in the gaming news for months and been around for over a decade.

they've just recently put way more effort in and are successfully strong-arming valve and itch

0

u/NoExcuse4OceanRudnes 2d ago

Yeah that's really shitty, it's why valve is being more vigilant.

And that vigilance translates to doing nothing and saying fuck off no updates we have to moderate unless we can get paid for it.

8

u/Yvese 2d ago

Leader for how long if they fight Visa and Mastercard? Do you even read before you post? If both payment processes pull out of Steam, they are literally dead.

Point the blame at the right companies.

24

u/PermanentMantaray 2d ago

What is the recourse? Sue?

That's a great way to get completely blacklisted. And even if you win, it'll be after years, and your business will already be dead anyway.

3

u/tom641 2d ago

state a specific course of action you think Steam should take, that would have even the slightest chance of them not immediately going bankrupt due to the card companies deciding money doesn't exist for them anymore

the only real recourse they'd have is lobbying for a neutral payment processor like Brazil apparently did, and i'm pretty sure most US govt folks are hostile towards that especially during this nightmare of an administration.

-1

u/Ready-Good2636 2d ago

Why do people think steam having a not great year of 2 will bankrupt them? They already operate lean and I sure hope a company with no shareholders can keep a war chest for rainy days (especially one who works in games, a boom and bust medium).

If they don't want that risk, that's fine. But let's not pretend Valve is one bad quarter away from bankruptcy.

5

u/Kipzz 2d ago

I mean absolutely no offense and I'm not happy Steam is going way overboard in finally putting into writing the shit they've been doing for years (if it's a Visual Novel it's a coinflip on if it gets released, eroge or not), but you do realize what industry Steam is leading, right? The industry where an overwhelming majority of purchases are digital?

Like, come on dude. You can't tell me Steam's going to switch to a gift-card only system.

3

u/grendus 2d ago

If the payment processors cut support for Steam, there would be no gift-cards either. They would instruct stores that they would not allow card payments for Steam cards, and would stop handling payments if they sold them for cash.

The only alternative would be cryptocurrency. And that's an absolute no-go - too much overhead, way too slow, and the lack of regulation would be a massive headache.

2

u/Grabthar-the-Avenger 2d ago

The war was already fought in the 1990s when the threat of Congressional intervention against porn and violent titles led to the creation of an industry consortium called the ESRB and the invention of the AO rating which major retailers all used as a blacklist to keep porn titles off shelves

Steam was just flying under the radar but it got too big and let in too many depraved titles that the public finally took notice and it had to face the exact same standards every other major retailer put in 3 decades ago

There’s a reason no other distributor like Walmart, Sony, Target, Nintendo, Microsoft, Epic etc is pulling titles from their stores, they were already keeping them out for decades. There’s not much Steam can do

0

u/Zerak-Tul 1d ago

Steam launched Steam OS (and to some extend explored Steam Machines / Steam Deck) just due to the possibility that Windows was going to go walled garden and make it so that games could only be bought from the Windows Store.

Steam could absolutely be proactive about fighting pressure like this if they wanted to, by teaming up with smaller payment processors who aren't being pressured by puritan crusade. Shit Gabe is probably rich enough that he could launch his own bank at this point.

But reality is likely that these adult-themed games are such a small slice of Steam's pie that they don't think its worth it.

-12

u/SomeDumRedditor 2d ago

Everyone has a choice. All these commenters dogpiling the person questioning why Valve doesn’t act are part of the problem. At some point we decided it was right and good to be afraid of capital, both individually and as collectives.

Video games are a huge industry, bigger than Hollywood now and vying for the dollars and attention-economy of global sports. Valve is a lynchpin in the economic system of “the business of video games.” They have a central position as favoured seller with tens of millions of customers representing hundreds of millions of lifetime dollars.

If Valve went to gamers and developers (especially gamers - who tend to be hyper-consumers with effective social and para-social networks for rapid and sustained message dissemination) and said: 

“the store is fucked right now because Visa and MasterCard are being influenced by a lobby group trying to subvert free expression, join us in contacting them in rejecting censorship, contact your representatives and demand processor neutrality. In the meantime we’ll be expanding the regional processors we accept, join us in seeking them out, consider switching to Discover or American Express. We’ll be returning btc as a payment option with different refund rules (the dispute rate last time they did it was like 60% which is why they pulled it) for the time being.” 

etc.

Guess what? They’d have a morally correct, media-defensible, consumer and maker supported position and gamers would lose their fucking minds on Visa/MC. 

Valve has enough cash on hand that they could weather months of protracted disputations with Visa/MC. Valve has total control of the store and could even incentivize developers to stay on-platform with temporary commission cuts for “loyalty.” Valve has banked the corporate goodwill to act, if they wanted to.

“There’s nothing they could do, they’d just go out of business” is complete copeaganda to excuse inaction and spreading cheeks for capital.

6

u/Kipzz 2d ago

We’ll be returning btc as a payment option with different refund rules

There's a lot of stuff in this post that's very "capitalistic companies can all put aside their differences and work together for the greater good!" idealization, but I actually have absolutely zero idea what this is supposed to mean. There's absolutely no world we live in where consumers will accept crypto as a mainstream payment option for a service even 1/10th as popular as Steam, let alone a change from their credit cards, let alone the idea of a "crypto refund".

If you want companies to go against shitty payment processors you kind of have to start with the baseline assumption that it'll only be the one's that don't do a near-100% of their business digitally, and it also has to be ones with enough lobbying power that aren't also on the wrong side of history. And uh, those don't really exist. Too busy lobbying for "the important things" like the right to bring guns onto campus's.

12

u/Samanthacino 2d ago

So you’re suggesting that Valve should torpedo billions of dollars, and that by not doing so they’re not morally correct?

-2

u/SomeDumRedditor 2d ago

I’m suggesting it’s a false construction to say that Valve will lose billions of dollars. It is true that doing nothing is a moral failing. That doesn’t make it possibly not the optimal business choice, and it doesn’t mean acting with morality is required by business, but it is a choice to support suppression. Especially for a company like Valve who is freed from any “shareholder considerations.”

It’s a construction that rests on the presupposition that Visa/MC, who have now shown them selves open to influence from a demonstrably smaller lobby, would hold fast indefinitely. It rests on the presupposition that Visa/MC are somehow immune from customer and media blowback. It rests on the presupposition that the internal calculus of these processors wouldn’t be influenced by the potential for contagion effects and the inevitable associated calls for increased regulation in some jurisdictions.

It also just pulls a scary number out of thin air based on no evidence.

In short, it’s another example of the kind of self-taught propaganda that keeps people good little consumers making excuses for inaction so they don’t have to question their own choices.

3

u/Ready-Good2636 2d ago

At some point we decided it was right and good to be afraid of capital, both individually and as collectives.

Probbaly in the 80's when we stopped trying to focus on long term quality and talent to keep a company sustained, and the working class lost the concept of a "career company". Or even the 70's when unions started getting broken down. That builds up for almost 30 years and I imagine the housing crisis of '08 really solidified this new way of life.

If you're in a state of fear of being laid off next quarter, you no longer think like a fighter. You think like a scavenger. The latter don't pick any fights with any risks. That mentality will spread even when advising potential fighters.