554
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 16 Jul 2025
554 points (100.0% liked)
Games
20644 readers
67 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
On the one hand, oh noz, the incest games. Who will live without the low effort AI goon crap?
On the other hand, why do the payment companies get to dictate what sales are made? It's my fucking money, or my fucking store. It's not the job of the payment processors to determine if I'm buying illegal goods, just that the money goes from me to the store.
It's been like this for a while in the porn industry. In an interview a while back, Bree Mills says she gets more limited by payment processors than the government (though that might be switching).
Ever wonder why every faux-incest video goes out of the way to say everyone is a step family? Step father, step daughter, step mother, step brother, all somehow living in the same house, over 18, and no blood relation? The first amendment protects them from the US government, so that's not why. Credit card companies are why. The old Taboo series was distributed differently back in the day. Can't make that anymore.
This also applies to some of the more extreme BDSM stuff, like blood play or scat. Won't find them on kink.com.
Yeah, processors and web hosts both play a huge role in policing content. The beasiality and lolicon websites haven't been disappearing for the last 15 years because moral awakening. It's been the web hosts shutting down websites because they violate some local law and it interfered with there profits.
Well in germany doing porn that implies incest or csam even if the actors are not related or over 18 can still get you jail time
CSAM sure, but is incest porn really mentioned in the StGB? There's 173 StGB, but that is for the actual act and not pretending.
Well after a bit of research it seems i was wrong with incest porn. Even the act is not punishable as long as it is not vaginal sex
I was surprised to see that you are correct. 173 StGB only mentions "Beischlaf" and that is indeed only vaginal intercourse. You learn something new every day.
The payments can become a legal liability for the processors. I believe there are federal laws that have penalties for anyone who facilitates transactions for certain prohibited goods or services. It's the same reason cannabis shops have such a hard time getting payment and banking services.
The payment processors have very little incentive to take risks here. As others have noted, there isn't much competition pressure.
EDIT: I went to find a source, and found the cannabis analogy isn't right. Seems that Visa and MasterCard really are the primary censors of the porn industry. This archived FT article went in depth. https://archive.ph/zXKuD
It's not even legal risk. It's brand risk.
There's a difference with cannabis shops because that's actually still federally illegal. As such, the required business accounts and tax documents required to use a national payment processor are often not forthcoming. It's a low level regulation that you can't generally tell a federal bank you'd like an account to store the proceeds of a federal crime.
With porn, the legal standards and protections are pretty well established. As long as the company is in possession of the required tax documents and business accounts, there's no legal risk beyond the standard due diligence they need to do for every customer. Visa isn't generally liable if a tire shop is discovered to be breaking a non-financial law. What processors don't want is to have their brand attached to something that they worry could make them look bad.
Not really. In the US, the first amendment protects a lot. Just like with YouTube censorship, capitalism has created a more restrictive regime through financial pressure than the government does. This has affected the porn industry, as well (see another comment in this subthread on that).
They are just testing their power, make you get used to it. Someday they will make pressure for some ideology. Whenever there's a morality argument in place prepare to get fucked.
As a form of protest, we should all start scooping up incest porn games.
Found Jamie Lannister's account.
Why shouldn't the payment processors get a say in the payments they process? Illegal or not, why should they be forced to process payments that facilitate things against their beliefs?
Steam could pursue other payment processing possibilities instead of acquiescing to their demands.
Imagine you can't use visa or mastercard. What other fucking payment card acceptance system are you going to use for payment processing in under 30 seconds?
Because it's none of their business what I buy. If a store is a reputable business that isn't defrauding me, and are a legal entity, then whatever they sell to me or I buy from them should only matter to me and the seller.
So half the market can get nuked once the CEO decides whatever faith du jour they have disallows whatever?
This is one of the few places where I think cryptocurrency could be useful. It ain't much, but there it is.
Incorrect! Bitcoin transactions take 10 FUCKING MINUTES.
There are countless other cryptocurrencies than Bitcoin
And literally not a single one of them is useful for the purpose of quick, efficient, and secure transactions.
Blockchains are slow and inefficient by design, since they need to build consensus. On any sufficiently popular blockchain, transactions are either fast or secure, never both.
The "fix" that the crypto industry has come up with is to re-invent banks, except with even more crime and virtually no regulations. Now you're just entrusting FTX with your coins to enjoy "immediate" transfers, how could that possibly go wrong?
The costs are much worse than the time imo.
Bitcoin has lightning or you could use a chain with faster blocks.
How many fingering minutes is that?
These payment processors are businesses. They provide a service. Like valve does. It seems to me like you're making an argument for valve, but not for these other businesses which only differ in the service they provide.
If your point is "our society is too dependant on a small selection of payment processors and we need better options," that's a separate discussion and one I don't think I'd disagree with.
Yes, Valve and Visa/MasterCard differ massively in their service. Valve operates a store within a specific industry, Visa/MasterCard process payments across our whole society.
It should be clear to anyone that payment providers must be held to a much stricter standard and have certain requirements of neutrality imposed on them. If not then in the best case you risk destroying the "free market" part of free market capitalism, worst case you're weakening democracy by letting unelected, unaccountable people decide what is and what isn't legal.
There's also no choice. Which payment processor and credit card do I choose so that I can buy any legal pornography I want? How do you even get a card that's not.visa or MasterCard for.l general use? I've only ever had one of those
Well I find it a bit ironic to invoke the "free market" while simultaneously asserting they should not be free to choose who they go to market with. Isn't the point of the "free market" that if Visa or Mastercard won't facilitate the needs of the market, someone else will?
Payment processors should be following the most free speech laws there are, because they have de facto monopolies. If they do have a choice though, if they don’t want to support porn, then they could choose not to be a payment processor.
Ideally they should be nationalised, or perhaps internationalised.
Well I think bottom line is that's the rub, the burden to become a payment provider is high... which it should be, but that's because we need pretty damn good regulations on them (as obviously if their security goes to crap, the consiquences are insanely high).
In addition it kind of is a small group by design because, we can't have it as a large group. If we have a nice even spread across 50 payment processors, then either everyone needs 50 credit cards, or every service that needs to be paid needs contracts with 50 payment services.
Amex. Discover. Diners Club. Venmo.
and will they accept me selling incredibly controversial pervert games that disgust even the most perverse?
I don't know. Visa and MasterCard did for 20 years, so maybe. I don't really care either way. I'm not going to judge people who play "Interactive Sex - Daddy Daughter Incest Volume 4" but I'm not going to go to bat for them either. I can think of way better hills to die on.
sure, we're both on the same page, but pointing out non-alternative alternatives isn't exactly a contribution to a discussion.
Because they're a financial institution, not an individual. They don't have beliefs.
Arguing that corporate "beliefs" (image management) and interests take priority over societal order is ridiculous.
We regulate banks and financial institutions all the time. We regulate businesses all the time.
They should suck it up and treat businesses with legal activities and proper tax documents as just another business. Kinda like how we have laws that say that public shipping companies need to generally treat all customers the same. It's why they don't typically ask what's in the box aside from questions related to operational characteristics. Porn doesn't spontaneously ignite and threaten an aircraft, but lithium batteries can.
Good thing I'm not arguing that.
You'll excuse me for thinking this means you think corporate beliefs are more important than the social benefits of neutral financial institutions.
To answer your question again without assuming anything about your opinion: they should be forced to process payments because they don't have beliefs, it's better for society if financial institutions only look at the business relevant portions of a business, and a legal obligation is perfectly sufficient to protect their business interests in reputation management. All the same reasons we don't let shipping companies refuse customers for morality reasons.
Because corporate religions are obviously more important than individual religions and beliefs. It goes against my beliefs to pay overdraft fees. Do you think that shit would hold up? They are constantly changing the rules that you have to follow and enforcing their will on everyone whether they use their service or not.
Religion is vile.
Because it’s not their fucking money! If someone is selling a thing, offers to sell it to me for money, and I give them money, I get the fucking thing! The processors can fuck right off with their Victorian bullshit.
Things of questionable moral value have been available for sale for as long as money has existed. It’s not like this is new. Payment processors got into this business knowing perfectly well that some purchases may not align with their moral values. In fact, they’ve been profiting off it for decades. They don’t get to suddenly clutch their pearls now.
To be clear, I won’t miss the incest games. I just don’t like the precedent this is setting.
Processors don't even deserve the right to even learn what morals even are. They are business entities, and shouldn't have any rights at all, honestly. They're just there to move money and shouldn't get any say at all in what that means. None.
Honestly, (to your last point) fuck anyone who is into that shit in any kind of practical way.(if they wanna goon about it, that's another discussion. But even with adding "step", it's kinda close to that vanta black color on the sunniest day.
But if having erotic software keeps them out of their siblings and parents and kids' beds, then more power to em.
Because they hold an effective monopoly over the payment process.
Because I'm not a right-libertarian who ignores how corporations setup coercive structures all their own in a perversion of free association.
In a world without regulation etc... maybe. Bottom line we've given payment processors power. Bottom line we need to buy things in the digital world, unless crypto can actually be stabilized or designed in a way that doesn't require an unsustainable massive energy waste and polution to use.
There either needs to be a universal good as cash payment processor that anyone can easily use... or we need to force ones that exist to transfer payments without bias.
Because they're functionally a utility. If they want to throw their weight around they should be forced to compete with a public option