Initially， no one paid attention to the removal of adult games from Steam. It was seen as an intermittent glitch on the platform， the disappearance of games they themselves never played， and the laments of a minority of players. Only later did we discover that this major overhaul on Steam concerned everyone. – “Wandering Butter”
In mid-July， many users noticed that certain categories of adult games on Steam were being removed. This in itself wasn’t surprising， as Steam has always had strict control over adult content， and there had been precedents for removing such games before.
However， this time it was more unexpected than usual， as it wasn’t just one or two titles， but a significant number all at once.
This wave of unannounced removals left developers in a state of anxiety. Some games that had not yet been affected began to subtly alter their titles in the final days， attempting to pass unnoticed.
If this were simply Steam tightening its grip on adult content controls， there would be no reason to discuss its relevance to everyone.
Sure enough， an Australian organization named Collective Shout soon emerged， taking responsibility for the issue.
This organization is quite influential， with a documented history of activism. For instance， in 2014， they protested against Grand Theft Auto V， labeling it a video game that “encourages players to brutally kill women for entertainment.” That same year， GTA V was banned from sale by two major Australian retail chains， a move Collective Shout claimed responsibility for. In 2018， Collective Shout launched a petition demanding the Australian ban of Detroit: Become Human， citing themes of “child abuse and violence against women” within the game.
But why would this relatively unknown organization’s complaint cause Steam to capitulate so readily?
The reason lies in their discovery of Steam’s vulnerability: a “bug” that could cripple the platform – applying pressure to payment institutions.
Supporters of the Collective Shout organization sent over a thousand emails to various credit card companies， alleging that these games promoted the normalization of abuse and exploitation， and demanding that these companies sever ties with Steam.
Faced with such grave accusations， these payment institutions found it difficult to resist， especially considering potential implications for their human rights image in the United States.
Under this unseen influence， Steam indeed relented. Not cooperating would have been detrimental， as the precedent of Pornhub’s decline， which began a few years prior， serves as a cautionary tale.
At its peak， Pornhub gained significant mainstream attention， collaborating with mainstream celebrities， selling merchandise， and even employing a dedicated Chinese localization team to optimize titles， which often became as poetic as gamer nicknames in games like CS. However， starting in 2020， credit card companies， the gatekeepers of Pornhub’s payment channels， buckled under pressure and withdrew their services， leading to Pornhub’s rapid decline.
Regardless of a platform’s power， it ultimately needs to generate revenue to survive. When payment channels cease to operate， it effectively destroys the platform’s livelihood， leading to content creators seeking other opportunities and users finding alternative entertainment， causing a general dispersal.
Therefore， it’s unrealistic to expect Steam to resist such pressure; no platform can withstand it. When faced with the withdrawal of payment processing services， any platform would be in a precarious position.
Indeed， some players later discovered that on July 16th， Steam quietly updated its Steamworks documentation. In the “Registration Preparation” section of the introductory guide， a 15th rule was added.
In essence， to publish a game on Steam， developers now not only need platform approval but also must adhere to the dictates of payment providers like Visa and Mastercard.
At this point， it becomes clear why so many are upset. It’s not just about the removal of adult games; it’s about the game platform’s inability to assert control.
Payment institutions have inexplicably gained the power to determine the survival of developers and dictate what players can access， and they are exhibiting bias in their decisions.
It’s not just ordinary people who are disgruntled; even Elon Musk， a prominent figure in online discourse， has weighed in， suggesting the creation of “X Pay，” perhaps to capitalize on the missteps of established payment providers. This move is understandable， especially considering that Grok’s new AI girlfriend， a “blonde twin-tailed” character， also faced criticism from Collective Shout recently.
The reasoning behind Visa and Mastercard’s decision to take action against Steam， despite knowing they were being used as a tool， boils down to their core business principle: risk mitigation. As Michael Jackson famously sang， it’s all about “avoiding trouble.” Associating with adult content in today’s climate is akin to playing with fire; any hint of controversy causes payment providers to become apprehensive and take immediate action to protect themselves from reputational damage.
Furthermore， cracking down on adult content is unlikely to generate negative publicity; in fact， many parents might even express gratitude.
Collective Shout’s strategy is particularly astute. They refrain from directly confronting Steam， as Steam could easily dismiss such a minor organization. Steam could simply maintain that it clearly labels adult content， thereby supporting creative diversity and upholding players’ freedom to browse， purchase， and play.
However， payment institutions cannot afford to be so dismissive. They must diligently avoid being drawn into widespread public outcry and refrain from appearing unruly or unaccountable.
Despite their previous claims of processing all legal transactions， not monitoring merchant content， and being unable to review individual sales， the reality has proven otherwise.
Let’s turn our attention to Japan， where numerous legal adult content platforms exist. These platforms have already faced action from Visa and Mastercard. Since the summer of 2022， payment institutions have been systematically penalizing all services dealing with adult content， with platforms like DLsite， pixiv， and POKEDORA being affected.
For a considerable period， there was no clear explanation for these actions. It wasn’t until the end of last year that the President of Visa’s Japanese subsidiary， Visa Worldwide Japan Co.， addressed the issue in a media briefing， explaining why Visa could not be used on platforms selling legally produced Japanese adult content.
He stated: “Visa has always aimed to facilitate legitimate and lawful consumption as smoothly as possible， but sometimes， ‘to protect the brand，’ we must prohibit certain usage scenarios.”
This indicates that the decision is not about profitability or legality but about safeguarding their brand image.
What further fuels dissatisfaction is that even as these payment institutions involve themselves in content censorship， they lack clear and consistent standards， leaving developers in limbo. This means that whether a game is removed is effectively arbitrary.
Under these circumstances， the game rules are dictated by who has the loudest voice and the strongest public opinion. In this context， Collective Shout clearly emerged as the victor， wielding the power to determine what games players can access.
This situation is particularly concerning， as even prominent LGBTQ+ organizations， often considered top-tier in the Western world， have faced repercussions in this matter. Reports indicated that when Visa and Mastercard targeted Pornhub， it severely impacted the safety and livelihoods of transgender women of color. Similarly， in the case of Steam， Naomi Clark， a game designer and chair of NYU’s Game Center， stated that these actions could pose significant risks to the LGBTQ+ community.
If the standards set by Collective Shout were to be rigorously applied， players might find themselves unable to play games like GTA VI. When the organization lobbied for the removal of GTA V， their stated reason was the ability for players to inflict violence on non-player female characters in various ways. By this logic， Steam might as well shut down， and players would be left with simple games like Minesweeper， Zuma， or Tetris.
Another chilling thought is that a petition with around a thousand signatures was enough to prompt payment institutions to influence a major gaming platform. Payment institutions are not only related to gaming platforms but are deeply integrated into everyone’s daily lives.
“Today we cede five cities， tomorrow we shall cede ten， and then we shall find peace for one night. But when we look around， the Qin soldiers will be upon us again.”
If players back down now， their concession will not be met with gratitude but with further escalation. If payment institutions are influenced today to dictate which games players can access， what’s to stop them from being influenced by another small group tomorrow to decide what people can watch or say?
It seems the “big brother” is watching， but this “big brother” is Uncle Sam， represented by the American flag.
“Enduring it for a moment only makes one angrier， yielding a step further only leads to more loss. Let’s fight back!”
Players have begun to unite and learn from the “barbarians to control the barbarians，” signing petitions to demand that payment institutions cease interfering with legal entertainment activities.
They believe these payment institutions are neglecting real-world transgressions while focusing on legal virtual content， suggesting a fundamental disconnect in their priorities.
Currently， the number of petition signatories has reached approximately 200，000， nearly 200 times the number of signatures collected by Collective Shout.
In addition to petitions， some have attempted to lodge formal complaints via email， but to little avail， receiving only repetitive and vague responses.
While the responses appear lengthy， upon closer inspection， they seem to convey very little substantive information.
Furthermore， articles written by contributors for media outlets like Vice have also been removed. Several authors， unwilling to let the matter rest， have resigned from their positions.
The International Game Developers Association has also voiced its concerns， issuing a statement. However， its practical impact is minimal， limited to urging platforms and payment institutions to enhance transparency and fairness in game review and processing. Whether these calls will be heeded remains uncertain.
Judging by the current trend， players’ voices are likely to be selectively ignored. Within a few days， more significant events will capture public attention， and the hardships of daily life might compel even the most defiant individuals to yield.
The dominant payment institutions will not collapse from a single challenge; their commercial empires remain robust.
However， regardless of the outcome， players and anyone who disapproves of the overreach of payment institutions will remember this struggle.
Should an opportunity arise in the future， such as the successful launch of “X Pay” as proposed by Musk， it is likely that these individuals will cast their vote with their actions.
