looks like its just a mod drunk on a bit of power rather then Valve itself.
this post was submitted on 11 Dec 2025
375 points (95.8% liked)
Bluesky
1777 readers
388 users here now
People skeeting stuff.
Bluesky Social is a microblogging social platform being developed in conjunction with the decentralized AT Protocol. Previously invite-only, the flagship Beta app went public in February 2024. All are welcome!
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Out of all the things to get mad about this is wild.
I think it's a perfectly valid review. It is stupid and racist, but that's clearly on the reviewer and not the developer.
With any rating system you'll always get someone leaving a negative rating without valid reason. At least with this one, anyone who reads it knows they can ignore it.
I used to work for a company that made blinds that people could order online and would then have to put up themselves and one person left a negative review because they dropped the set of blinds on their head while trying to install it.
The owner was delighted because it was such a stupid 1 star review. Anyone reading it would just laugh at the person leaving the review and wouldn't think negatively of the company.
You people are the modern version of jobless housewives. Some random dev baits for simpathy points and everyone bites, hook line and sinker. As far as we know, those are bots from a guerrilla marketing company and not organic reviews. Don't feed the trolls with attention, it only broadcasts their message!
Any evidence to support your claims?
its not a claim, its asserted as a plausible explanation for facts
I don't like Christians
For clarification... People named Christian, people of Christian belief, or both?
Jesus Fucking Christ christians can be so freaking annoying sometimes
I don't like anyone that wants to make laws based on their favorite fairytale.
Based dev and I wishlistrd that game because it looks fun and I want to support them for the response alone, but I think I kind of agree with that decision, or can at least see where it's coming from. Disliking a game for its political message seems entirely valid to me, if someone made an otherwise amazing game but the message is "hitler was great actually", I'd like to be able to negatively review that. And since it's not review bombing but actual individual idiots, it shouldn't have a big impact wrt to the ratio. If anything I read a review like that and become more interested in the game. Allowing it at least keeps them honest.
Though "it has muslims" as a negative review reason still seems like it should be removed just for being racist (or if i were to give the reviewer way more benefit of the doubt than they deserve, sounding racist. I guess in theory they could just not like religions in games, but let's be real they'd love if it were christians instead).
Its a "valid," review in that it does describe how they dont like the game and why, and hinestpy thats better than 90% of reviews. However, and this is a big however, racists should not get a pass and should be banned and removed for being racist. We should not brook these type of people and especially not give them a platform. It only makes things worse. Stamp the problem out with prejudice.
Problem is that "Hitler" is an individual while "Muslim" is multiple groups of people all with different views.
Also yeah it's usually used as synonym for "brown people."
Where is the text of the actual review? I dont know about you but the only text I can see on that image is the word Muslim, nothing else. Maybe not getting the best quality image or something but it's still really hard to read.
(Edit)Nvmd the quality is better on the bluesky version, dunno what op/lemmy did here.
It's in the Blue Sky message when you click on it.
I felt it was important to provide the whole chain untouched.
Here is the Muslim one
what a fucking chad developer.
💖
I zoomed in and read carefully. Don't bother. He's calling it "woke", implying that his problem is just with Islam specifically.
Yeah i zoomed in, I think the quality got degraded by lemmy either on upload or download
Weird , looks fine on my end.
Must be client side then
Copy the link of the image. You see the bit at the end of the url that says ?format=webp? Change that to ?format=png.
Lemmy often doesn't show images in original quality unless specifically requested to.
Edit: which is fair, because the lossy webp is 51 kb vs 513 for the png. Compressed for longer, it could be a 265 kb lossless jxl though. Once Mozilla and Google finally add support (which is actually happening now!). It could also be a 322 kb lossless avif. All of these aren't max effort, just the effort that takes about 6 seconds on Image Toolbox on my phone
Lossily, avif > webp > mozjpeg > jxl > jpegli for this image, although I think this is just because jxl and jpegli use the same perpetual tuning method which must not favor dark areas. Which might be good for most images but certainly is terrible for this one. It certainly is much better at the bright areas. Mozjpeg vs jxl -> lossless webp (equivalent compressed size)
Note that all of the lossless formats would have been much smaller if the original screenshot in the mastodon post was lossless
It would be interesting to test with other groups of people. For example, when happens if all my review says is "I don't like jews" or "I don't like Americans/Russians/Chinese people".
Wouldn't a more comparable test be "I don't like Christians" or "I don't like vegans"? If they say Jews it's often racist, not about their personal beliefs.
"Muslims" is often used in a racist way to mean brown people, not just refer to a religious group. "Jews" is used in the same way, to refer to an ethnic group as often as a religion.
The two are used by racists in almost the exact same way. "Christians" are mainly white, so racists dont often attack them at all, especailly since a large contingent of the racists are christian.
Is that a US thing? I've never seen that use in Europe (yet?)
The "Chinese" one, I'm seeing it more and more from western reviewers.
So long as you're equal opportunity with your hate it's good to go.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Looks like someone forgot what quotation marks mean.
Who?
he’s pointing out that the quotation is not exact to what the review said, but like it was a twitter post or something, and the quotated meaning was spot on anyways, so he’s being pedantic for no good reason.
the reviewer is part of the ‘media should not comment on politics’ crowd who considers a persons race or nationality, as long as it’s not the same as theirs, to be a political statement in of its self.
so a moral-less class-less racist loser
...being pedantic for no good reason
Nuance has meaning. While I don't agree with the political statement the reviewer was making, it is not the same statement OP was accusing them of (though by implication, the reviewer likely does hate muslims).
This isn't the Oxford comma where genuine misunderstandings are unlikely—using quotes incorrectly is dishonest. It isn't pedantry to look at a quote and take it to be a direct attribution.
Looks like you forgot that prescriptivism belongs in textbooks, you boreish snob
Looks like you forgot that prescriptivism belongs in textbooks, you boreish snob. Also, I pooped my pants.
It isn't just text books where quotes are used. People understand quotation marks to mean they are direct quotes. Using them incorrectly in this manner is dishonest. The person OP is complaining about is clearly a douche, but given the context, Valve is not (quite) as bad as they imply by refusing to remove the review.
Go clean yourself up.
load more comments
(1 replies)
view more: next ›