this post was submitted on 01 Aug 2025
367 points (97.9% liked)

Games

41137 readers
1942 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Rules

1. Submissions have to be related to games

Video games, tabletop, or otherwise. Posts not related to games will be deleted.

This community is focused on games, of all kinds. Any news item or discussion should be related to gaming in some way.

2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

No bigotry, hardline stance. Try not to get too heated when entering into a discussion or debate.

We are here to talk and discuss about one of our passions, not fight or be exposed to hate. Posts or responses that are hateful will be deleted to keep the atmosphere good. If repeatedly violated, not only will the comment be deleted but a ban will be handed out as well. We judge each case individually.

3. No excessive self-promotion

Try to keep it to 10% self-promotion / 90% other stuff in your post history.

This is to prevent people from posting for the sole purpose of promoting their own website or social media account.

4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

This community is mostly for discussion and news. Remember to search for the thing you're submitting before posting to see if it's already been posted.

We want to keep the quality of posts high. Therefore, memes, funny videos, low-effort posts and reposts are not allowed. We prohibit giveaways because we cannot be sure that the person holding the giveaway will actually do what they promise.

5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

Make sure to mark your stuff or it may be removed.

No one wants to be spoiled. Therefore, always mark spoilers. Similarly mark NSFW, in case anyone is browsing in a public space or at work.

6. No linking to piracy

Don't share it here, there are other places to find it. Discussion of piracy is fine.

We don't want us moderators or the admins of lemmy.world to get in trouble for linking to piracy. Therefore, any link to piracy will be removed. Discussion of it is of course allowed.

Authorized Regular Threads

Related communities

PM a mod to add your own

Video games

Generic

Help and suggestions

By platform

By type

By games

Language specific

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 9 points 4 hours ago

That's not a statement. It's just a lame excuse and attempt to escape the blame for their behavior.

[–] VitoRobles@lemmy.today 15 points 7 hours ago

There's been two decades worth of lawsuits because PayPal has a history of withholding revenue and blocking stores from small e-commerce stores.

I'm talking about e-commerce sites selling a board game, making $40k in sales through paypal, and PayPal refuses to give them money.

PayPal's stance has been, "Fuck you sue us."

I'm not saying this because I think Peter Thiel, who was one of the creators of Paypal, is a fucking evil villain.

[–] backgroundcow@lemmy.world 57 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago) (1 children)

MasterCard's and Valve's statements seems to point at Stripe and PayPal as the ones who folded to the pressure. These payment processors then cited MasterCard's rules to back up their change in policy.

MasterCard now clarifying that the payment processors are over-interpreting the rules and anything legal is ok seems a very good thing here. Valve should be able to go back to Stripe and PayPal with this and say: "Hey, you've misunderstood the rules you are quoting; MasterCard themselves say anything legal is ok, and that is the exact policy we've been using!"

[–] Etterra@discuss.online 19 points 15 hours ago

I love how they form a consortium that stays in lockstep to maintain their oppressive control over everyone else.

[–] BlameTheAntifa@lemmy.world 58 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago) (3 children)

So Valve says the processors - such as Stripe and PayPal - pressed the issue based on pressure from MasterCard (and possibly Visa). MasterCard says they had nothing to do with it. Itch says that Stripe was directly responsible in their case with a blanket ban on anything generally sexy, but that Stripe blamed their banking partners.

So Stripe, at least, is directly responsible but insists they are under outside pressure. This means the pressure is coming from one or more actual banks. Since we don’t have names, we have to do some research to find out who Stripe works with. The possibilities I was able to dig up on a quick search include:

  • Citigroup
  • Wells Fargo
  • Barclays
  • Goldman Sachs
  • Evolve Bank & Trust

It seems clear that this has nothing to do with legality in any jurisdiction and that some powerful financial institution is forcing their twisted, puritanical morality on anyone they can at the behest of like-minded authoritarian terrorists. One or more of the above institutions are most likely at fault.

[–] SCmSTR@lemmy.blahaj.zone 14 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago)

Shittygroup

Hellsfargo

Nutglaze

Oldball sacks

Devolve bank mistrust

This is all still project 2025

Donald Trump is on the Epstein list and is a child rapist

[–] tonytins@pawb.social 18 points 19 hours ago

I have a hunch this goes one step higher than the private banks.

[–] Capricorn_Geriatric@lemmy.world 5 points 14 hours ago

Sure. Let them whatabout. But to us, consumers, it shouldn't matter.

We know the stores aren't responsible, so we shouldn't attack them.

The processors are. For Visa and MasterCard it's pretty obvious. Itch, as you said, puts direct blame on Stripe, and I think we can trust that.

As much as processors need banks, banks also need processors. It's a sort of symbiosis. Damage to one actually trickles onto the other. So pressing onto processors isn't a mistake. It'd be foolish at best and malicious at worst to suggest that.

Now that we have leverage as users and consumers, having started a push which made way and caused a response (first the prepared phone statement and now a press release), the absolute wrong thing to do is bacl down and say "sorry, we were wrong, it was B after all and not you, A".

And look at it this way: There's less payment processors and they're smaller than banks. If you suddenly turn to banks, you won't accomplish anything because to them, a few consumers who aren't their customers doesn't cause them even an itch. But if payment processors come to them it might.

[–] Nibodhika@lemmy.world 34 points 17 hours ago (2 children)

If this is true then I honestly hope Steam and Itch go "ok, then, PayPal and Stripe are banned from the store as payment forms until we can figure out a way of limiting content you can pay with them". Honestly I don't think enough people use either of those payments forms, and even if they do currently they almost assuredly have a card they can use instead, and are more likely to switch payment methods than to stop buying games.

[–] zqps@sh.itjust.works 6 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Unfortunately they are indeed big players, Stripe where people use credit cards and PayPal everywhere else. Both horrible companies that we'd be a lot better off if replaced with privacy-respecting alternatives.

[–] razzazzika@lemmy.zip 4 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

I mainly use PayPal as a necessary evil so I don't have to pull out my wallet and put the card info in every time I want to buy a game. I dunno maybe I SHOULD go back to that because then only the games that are worth the effort of getting up off the couch are the ones I'd buy.

[–] chilicheeselies@lemmy.world 3 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

You can just save your card info in steam. No need for paypal for that.

Honeslty i am not sure what paypal is even for anymore

[–] yermaw@sh.itjust.works 2 points 5 hours ago

Ive literally never used PayPal. I didnt trust it in the early days, and by the time online shopping was normal there were far easier alternatives.

[–] Arcane2077@sh.itjust.works 32 points 17 hours ago (2 children)

IIRC Stripe is the main payment processor. If you’re paying with a visa or mastercard online, it’s usually via stripe. Hence, the immediate censorship.

Paypal can go fuck itself and die

[–] zqps@sh.itjust.works 4 points 8 hours ago

Stripe can also go fuck itself and die, thanks

[–] Nibodhika@lemmy.world 6 points 16 hours ago

Ah, if that's the case then MC statement is kind of pointless, so it's not them putting the pressure, but you still have to go through the people putting the pressure to get to them. I thought that if you put your card number on steam it had some more direct form of charging than going through stripe.

[–] RBWells@lemmy.world 45 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

By that standard, I ought not be able to use the card to buy booze (might give it to a minor or use for a Molotov Cocktail) a gun (obviously could use for crime) , and probably a million other things they let people buy with cards.

[–] noobdoomguy8658@feddit.org 2 points 13 hours ago

Well, you see, guns and booze are adult things (with tons of lobbying and taxes and corporate interest), while games are for kids and stupid and non-Christian. Simple!

[–] darcmage@lemmy.dbzer0.com 262 points 1 day ago (6 children)

MC: It's not us.

Steam & Itch: It's the payment processors.

Gee, I wonder who people are going to believe.

[–] MolochAlter@lemmy.world 4 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

MC and Visa are not technically payment processors, that would be stuff like stripe or ayden.

The problem is that cc companies have rules that put the onus of ensuring nothing illegal is purchased with their issued cards on the ones actually meditating the transaction, so it becomes a chilling effect because the intermediaries don't want to risk burning a bridge with the largest cc networks in the world, and overcorrect as a result.

[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 3 points 15 hours ago

cc companies

best to say card networks, as cc companies both include a lot of other things (like issuers), and doesn’t include some things (like debit cards, which still use the card networks)

[–] buddascrayon@lemmy.world 8 points 21 hours ago

It's been pretty widely reported that it's PayPal and Stripe(mostly Stripe) that have been the ones that were requiring them to remove the NSFW material.

[–] Katana314@lemmy.world 42 points 1 day ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (11 children)

Thing is…I think both claims are correct.

Mastercard and Visa are not the only middle-men; the only “payment processors” involved in making sales.

Next time you check out at a cafe, look at the branding of the tablet/software the cashier is using. Chances are, it wasn’t developed by the cafe owners, or by MC/Visa. That’s a payment processor. There’s some big ones out there that can be hard to avoid.

EDIT: While finding exact point of blame remains difficult, a recent statement from Valve suggests I may be wrong about the card companies being innocent, at least with Mastercard. It’s a long chain and it seems each link wants to forward blame.

[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 33 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Practically no one in the world who accepts payments for their online business directly integrates with visa or Mastercard. It's all 3rd party companies who integrate (because it's fucking hard and tedious) and then resell it in a nice easy package.

In almost all cases, any talk about payment processors, is them, not visa/Mastercard.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] commander@lemmy.world 18 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

I remember seeing a graphic that was about every layer of companies that are interacted with when you use a credit card. Must have been at least like 6 layers of companies each taking a fee from a company that took fees higher up the chain closer to the consumer. Similar when I read an explanation of, when you buy a stock through a company like Fidelity where is the stock actually held and that was layers of public/private companies/corporations

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[–] vodka@feddit.org 31 points 1 day ago (2 children)

From what I understand it wasn't actually mastercard and visa?

Itch statements made it very clear the issue was PayPal and Stripe.

Steam even disabled PayPal payments for a while, a couple days before the purge. While direct card payments with Visa/Mastercard still worked fine.

[–] eRac@lemmings.world 13 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

Valve also clarified today that it was the processors, not the card management companies, that they talked to. The processors were pointing at MasterCard's rules, but refusing to provide Valve with someone at MasterCard to talk to.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 1 points 15 hours ago

There are other stakeholders, like regulators and shareholders.

[–] paraphrand@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

Well, everyone discussing this seems to have been confused about it. Is it fucking PayPal and Stripe or fucking Mastercard and Visa?

[–] darcmage@lemmy.dbzer0.com 15 points 23 hours ago

We'll probably never get the whole story. Itch's update from yesterday points the finger at stripe, others could still be involved.

[–] satansbartender@lemmy.world 3 points 18 hours ago

It almost certainly wasnt the card brands forcing the issue. They outsource that stuff to payment processors and other middle men because it's cheaper and gives them some legal shielding if someone buys something illegal with their cards

[–] slazer2au@lemmy.world 136 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Instead of linking the actual statement, we have a 3 and a half paragraph "article". Here is the actual statement from MC

https://www.mastercard.com/us/en/news-and-trends/press/2025/august/clarifying-recent-headlines-on-gaming-content.html

Mastercard has not evaluated any game or required restrictions of any activity on game creator sites and platforms, contrary to media reports and allegations.

Our payment network follows standards based on the rule of law. Put simply, we allow all lawful purchases on our network. At the same time, we require merchants to have appropriate controls to ensure Mastercard cards cannot be used for unlawful purchases, including illegal adult content.

[–] TheBat@lemmy.world 38 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You forgot to add this:

Media contact

Seth Eisen

seth.eisen@mastercard.com

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] bouh@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

In fact this statement states that they ask their clients to litteraly do the job of justice. That's quite scary.

Ensuring a card cannot be used to buy illegal content.

That means they can shut you down if they think you didn't do enough, which is literally their whim.

[–] chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Or if there is any possible ambiguity in the law. I'm thinking it's possible this has something to do with the recent weakening of constitutional protections for adult content in the US, where censorship by states of somewhat arbitrarily "obscene" content can be deemed illegal. The quote in the article by Valve seems to reference the concept of offensiveness in Mastercard's policies:

Payment processors rejected this, and specifically cited Mastercard’s Rule 5.12.7 and risk to the Mastercard brand. See https://www.mastercard.us/content/dam/public/mastercardcom/na/global-site/documents/mastercard-rules.pdf.

the rule including the text:

  1. The sale of a product or service, including an image, which is patently offensive and lacks serious artistic value (such as, by way of example and not limitation, images of nonconsensual sexual behavior, sexual exploitation of a minor, nonconsensual mutilation of a person or body part, and bestiality), or any other material that the Corporation deems unacceptable to sell in connection with a Mark.

So what I'm reading between the lines here is, there is now doubt among the lawyers of credit card companies or the lawyers of their middlemen that these games are for sure legal, and not in violation of obscenity laws that rely on hazy standards of offensiveness.

[–] Capricorn_Geriatric@lemmy.world 1 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

It never was about the laws. If it were, Mastercard wouldn't have been doing it for quite some time now.

It's truly idiotic. They backed down to 200 phone calls from CS. They probably cited that rule, saying doing what they do (processing payments) will damage their brand.

Lo and behold, once they stopped processing transactions their brand got damaged. And due to the ego damage already associated, they won't back down and backtrack not that they actually have a problem on their hands. What with their brand being seen as discriminatory, weak to undue influence and excersizing undue power against their own clients. Very "good brand" of you, Mastercard.

If Mastercard wants to display Christo-fascist family friendlyness they can slap a cross onto their logo and change the font to Comic sans.

[–] chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago)

The precedent setting supreme court ruling I'm thinking of is very recent, and there are other recent significant changes to law that could also be relevant. My guess is that the phone calls didn't make the difference on their own, but rather prompted internal conversations about legal liability given the new landscape and how they should be handling it to best avoid potential damages.

Yes, the statement is in the article, which gives background context.

[–] SynonymousStoat@lemmy.world 15 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I do kind of wonder of any of these game devs could go after these payment processing companies for loss of income? I'm not a lawyer, but I'd definitely be looking into it if I was a Dev that has been effected by this.

[–] VitoRobles@lemmy.today 2 points 7 hours ago

Loss of income is really difficult to sue for. Especially if you're an indie company in another country, trying to sue an international company. You either sue locally, or open up a office in their nation.

And your case has to be rock solid.

Like tech companies still lose cases around loss of income, even when it's obvious to the average person that the major company is going out of their way to stamp out competition.

[–] Newsteinleo@midwest.social 5 points 21 hours ago (2 children)

Likely not, the devs don't have an agreement of any kind with the processor.

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 8 points 21 hours ago

Valve, on the other hand, should be sueing if the Mastercard statement proves false and it was in fact their policies forcing the Steam and Itch io takedowns.

[–] GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 4 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

correct. so they could sue itch, which does have an agreement with them. and itch can sue the processors.

[–] SynonymousStoat@lemmy.world 2 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah, I figured it would probably be something more like that order of operations. But I'm also sure there is probably a clause in the agreement between dev and store that says they can pull your game for any reason without notice, so there's probably nothing that can be done.

[–] GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago

correct, but it could be argued the clause is too broad and doesn't fit into the current circumstances considering it wasn't a choice itch made, but a choice their payment processor forced them to make.

that in itself could be a bridge that leads to a direct confrontation between developers and mastercard.

load more comments
view more: next ›