Sounds like it's really about that one specific game (Hatred) then and they just wanted to make it sound less political. It doesn't seem very useful as an actual rules clarification considering many PC games aren't actually rated by ESRB, and "adult" games almost never are.
Twitch.tv: Clean your streams of titillating titty titles off our screens
Gameplay broadcaster Twitch has banned users from streaming racy live video from "adult only" games. An update to the Amazon-owned site's rules of conduct states titles with a US rating of "Adults Only" (AO) are no longer permitted for streaming. Games rated "Mature" and cleaned-up ports of AO games are still permitted, so …
COMMENTS
-
-
Friday 29th May 2015 07:29 GMT Bernard M. Orwell
You're almost certainly right, but how do we feel about that? I've been a gamer for....oh...far too many years, and I've always stood on the side of content being free of censorship (If I don't like it, I don't buy it), but is Hatred a step too far?
It's set out to be provocative, and has provoked a reaction...
-
-
Thursday 28th May 2015 22:55 GMT Kaltern
Social Justice Arseholes win again.
Official statement: "Our goal at Twitch is to create a safe, welcoming, inclusive community platform where everyone can feel comfortable and have fun. From time to time, we update our Rules of Conduct (RoC) in pursuit of this goal and to match emerging issues in the video game industry."
It's the last bit that tells us where this has come from. Thanks to GamerGate and the wonderful army of SJW's, adult stuff is becoming off-limits because of feminism/sexism/sex/drugs/anything else they can campaign against.
This is the start of a wonderful start to the voluntary censorship of the net, without politicians having to lift a finger.
-
-
Friday 29th May 2015 22:38 GMT John Brown (no body)
Re: Social Justice Arseholes win again.
"...adult stuff is becoming off-limits because of feminism/sexism/sex/drugs/anything else they can campaign against."
But blood, gore, murder and various gratuitous violence is ok on prime time but the vaguest hint of a nipple is verboten. Fox News even censored some Picasso cubist art which barely resembled nekkid wimmin never mind nipples and lady gardens but the relevant bits were blurred out ;-)
Left-pondians do have some funny ideas on censorship. I wonder if there's a market for table-leg trousers?
-
-
Friday 29th May 2015 00:58 GMT dan1980
Yay progress!
Twitch was a site that grew with and was shaped by its community. One outcome of that was that it was irreverent and sometimes even a little crude. (Sometimes a lot but there will always be jerks - whatever the situation.)
When they were sold to Amazon, the usual rhetoric was spun:
"We chose Amazon because they believe in our community, they share our values and long-term vision, and they want to help us get there faster. We’re keeping most everything the same: our office, our employees, our brand, and most importantly our independence. But with Amazon’s support we’ll have the resources to bring you an even better Twitch."
-- Emmett Shear (Twitch CEO, 25/8/2014)
"Like Twitch, we obsess over customers and like to think differently, and we look forward to learning from them and helping them move even faster to build new services for the gaming community."
-- Jeff Bezos (Amazon CEO)
Glad to see they've kept their 'independence'. And, of course, censoring content that might not be 'family friendly' is certainly 'think[ing] differently' and always makes everything 'better'.
So thanks guys - bang up job of staying true to the uploaders and viewers who helped define and grow the site. Moves like this just scream out how much you 'believe in [your] community'.
-
Friday 29th May 2015 02:16 GMT dan1980
To the specific case, it is clear that this policy update is really just Amazon trying to cover their asses .
There are already age-restricted sections of Twitch so there really is no reason that a game like this cannot be pushed behind this existing barrier. Well, no reason beyond trying to avoid backlash from the 'family first'/'family values' type groups who seem to have an opinion on everything and everyone and are all too eager to berate you when you don't share their views.
And why would a supposedly independent site focussed on gamers be worried about what a bunch of finger-wagging busy-bodies who have nothing at all to do with the gaming "community" think? What are they going to do? Boycott Twitch? I'm sure that an "action alert" from a bunch of 50-60 year old balding white men with bad facial hair is going to hurt viewer numbers.
What could they possibly be worried about? They say they are committed to providing a "safe, welcoming, inclusive community platform where everyone can feel comfortable and have fun". I respect that and so applaud their efforts to prevent minors accessing inappropriate contact. But why can't this content be managed by the same mechanisms? I mean, if the age verification checks are sufficient for the current content that is deemed inappropriate for minors (like GTA V) then what's the big deal? If they aren't then maybe they should look at that.
But, of course, Twitch isn't independent. They are owned by Amazon and so the content uploaded to and viewed on Twitch reflects on the parent company. And, while, Twitch may not have any services that would be impacted by the beards and perms that run these professional wowser groups, Amazon does and they would rather avoid the bad PR.
So, in the end, what does "independence" really count for when your decisions have to take into account the impact on the parent company's image? (Or when those decisions are made for you by them.)