Indie game storeFree gamesFun gamesHorror games
Game developmentAssetsComics


A member registered Mar 18, 2018 · View creator page →

Creator of

Recent community posts

(1 edit)

this is the two of you right now, and a good portion of your website.

"you can't sue us because the TOS says so", *does not* come across like you think it does. are you now saying you are guilty, but hahaha i can't do anything about it? ah ok i see you're all dishonest shitbags then. good to know

(1 edit)


rule 2 is paper-thin, and they're trying to stop people from suing them, by denying this community certain information. 

for a website supposedly so damn confident that they can't be sued, they're putting an awful lot of effort into trying to strangle this law change in the crib.

(1 edit)

small, medium, large, whatever, size won't matter if a legal snow ball occurs

if google and facebook get hit, you've got even less safety then them.

-scenario A

this passes, someone sues google, they win big, it's giant tech news. then, the crosshairs drift a level to the medium level, because if google is valid, then so is everyone else...

-scenario B

" is a small/medium platform" well even if thats true now, it wont be with growth. also, being a little guy doesn't give you license to be a piece of shit, it just means your a low ranking piece of shit

speaking of company size, an open point is that some shady companies may use financial fraud to hide their real size, to skirt under certain rules. for a small/medium company, you guys sure seem to stomp around like you're a big one

what you're doing is the content management equivalent, of saying you don't need to pay XYZ taxes, because you're only in a certain tax bracket, when you actually might not be

(2 edits)


after posting about an important law update in regard to which laws do and do not protect tech companies, my thread was suddenly shunted out of the pile, and leafo asked me to stop talking about this.


"if the same fate gets applied to this second thread, lets be real here, consider that proof something shady may be happening behind the scenes."

>same fate does in fact get, applied IE a red flag certain things are being done behind the scenes, that they want hidden


this post.

if this thread gets locked and shuffled out of the pile, please be aware that leafo and the other mod team members are trying to hide something, and that thing is that their business practices may be illegal

they're trying to lock my threads down and hide this information so you don't see it. they're hiding it because if this law passes, they lose certain legal protections, and you could possibly sue them.

leafo is trying to hide this so you can't drag him into a courtroom one day.

"Senator Hawley Introduces Legislation to Amend Section 230 Immunity for Big Tech Companies"

(3 edits)

after posting about an important law update in regard to which laws do and do not protect tech companies, my thread was suddently shunted out of the pile, and an admin asked me to stop talking about this.

why was i told to stop doing that?

is currently carrying out business practices they don't want people snitching about? obviously hiding things that are illegal, would be highly illegal

a suspicious man, might look at this happening and say they're trying to silence whistleblowers from inside their own community, in order to stop a particular fact from becoming common knowledge.

if the same fate gets applied to this second thread, lets be real here, consider that proof something shady may be happening behind the scenes.

"Please do not post topics like this" AKA "please stop considering the prospect we're doing something literally illegal right now"

(1 edit)

the winds of change always blow, and those that don't keep their ear to the ground get rolled over by it. some days ago, an mod told me "what does the censorship have to do with big tech antitrust?", and the answer is THIS.

not even could escape the hammer of this law getting passed, and unfortunately, maybe it needs to get passed.

>Today U.S. Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) introduced the Ending Support for Internet Censorship Act, a major update to the way big tech companies are treated under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA).

>Sen. Hawley’s legislation removes the immunity big tech companies receive under Section 230 unless they submit to an external audit that proves by clear and convincing evidence that their algorithms and content-removal practices are politically neutral. Sen. Hawley’s legislation does not apply to small and medium-sized tech companies.

>“With Section 230, tech companies get a sweetheart deal that no other industry enjoys: complete exemption from traditional publisher liability in exchange for providing a forum free of political censorship,” said Senator Hawley. “Unfortunately, and unsurprisingly, big tech has failed to hold up its end of the bargain.

>“There’s a growing list of evidence that shows big tech companies making editorial decisions to censor viewpoints they disagree with. Even worse, the entire process is shrouded in secrecy because these companies refuse to make their protocols public. This legislation simply states that if the tech giants want to keep their government-granted immunity, they must bring transparency and accountability to their editorial processes and prove that they don’t discriminate."

TLDR: if this passes, and you're a large tech company, and you can't prove you're politically neutral, you could get sued for banning certain viewpoints you want to censor for XYZ reason.

(3 edits)

so, like last time i should assume free speech and free creative expression is dead on this site?

maybe leave your hatred for groups you disagree with, at the fucking door, when you come into work everyday. you seem overly emotional, emotionally immature, and seem to revel in banning those you hate. you shouldn't have the power of banning things, until you get your shit sorted out

if silencing people is a charge you want to level against the "nazis" you apparently try to hunt down, you're being exactly that right now, and a hypocrite. FFS is it really that hard for you let people be?

as i said, you were so damn intent on explaining why hate speech was bad, that a common user had to do your fucking job for you. do i need to explain why that's a sign you should do better? instead of helping me by giving the info i asked for, you thought it was a far better option to lecture at my face. fuck you in particular for that.

i saw my first impression of you, now i've seen my second, and i don't like you, or your stupid mod conduct. you even existing as you do now, makes me hate this entire website.

(5 edits)

thank you for responding with some actual answers

>We are free to choose who we host and do business with.

okay, does that mean a "marketplace" carries the ruleset of a publisher and not a platform? if asking this question resolves the post, i will happily admit i was answered. whenever a company operates under an unclear legal type, it's hard to judge boundaries without directly asking like this

also if that is the case, would it be rude to suggest that spelling that out clearer to others, might be a workable idea? IE " is a marketplace and operates as a publisher" instead of saying some grey area?

(1 edit)

it's also a different type of legal moniker they seem to conveniently operate under

does a "marketplace" have the rules of a publisher or a platform? this is a fairly critical legal question lawyers would probably advise to not fuck up

publisher rules or platform rules then? which is it? it's a super-simple question to answer

(3 edits)

stop talking. you just said this wasnt your department.

because you've stated this is not your job now, i'll wait until the person whose job it actually is, shows up. the only thing you can possibly add to this conversation now is *nothing*

you are the least professional, least qualified, and most immature mod i've ever seen. the last time we talked, a common user was better at actually finding source links then you (because you were instead wasting time explaining how nazis were bad). that's the truth of what happened, and i don't want to hear your response because you just stated this is no longer your job now.

>I don't need to cite any legal proof. For one thing it's not my department

why am i even fucking talk to you right now then?

get up out of your chair, go to the legal department, get whoevers job it actually is, to comment on this. why are you even commenting here if it's not your department, as you say? you're saying legal claims that if proven false, could bite the website in the ass

also as a parting note,  wikipedia is not a valid research source, and any basic schoolteacher will tell you this

(4 edits)

part 1:

okay, so "No Time To Play" came in and said:

>Belatedly, is neither a publisher nor a platform. It's a marketplace. Think of is as a mall where you can rent space and set up a store where you can sell your wares. Renting out space is a business, and a business is within its rights to throw people out if they're being disruptive or breaking the law on its premises. That doesn't limit anyone's free speech, since there are many other places where one can offer a game for download. And last time I checked, hate speech was illegal in every civilized country, including the US where is based. So yes, admins can delete games at their discretion and still be fully within their rights. Making vague threats over the possibility is only going to make reconciliation less likely.

end quote.

this raises an even larger legal question. can someone please cite the law that enables a marketplace to have the right to trim content at their will?

also, YOU HEARD IT FROM A MODERATOR, ITCH.IO IS NOT A PLATFORM AND NOT A PUBLISHER but they still 100% claim to have the right to remove content. if they've told you at any point it is a platform or publisher, they actually (probably illegally) lied to you

i also refuse to take their word at face value of their claimed legal rights. clearly it would make a few users more comfortable if this sites admin team had valid paperwork.

assuming is a marketplace, what legal law on record gives them the right to delete content at will? i'll only believe a link on an actual US law list relating to types of business and their rights

oh yeah, and once i have that, it'd be nice to see official linked proof it *is* a marketplace

EDIT: for the sake of preventing certain people from lying i've gone and recorded the marketplace response



i'm going to need you cite legal proof on:

A. this site being a "marketplace"


B. that being that, gives you the right to delete content at your discretion.

ALSO, "hate speech" does not exist (it's a shutdown tactic by labeling certain words), and that concept is trumped anyways by the first amendment. free speech is king, and all else is a lie and nobody cares about your feelings.

most civilized countries don't have hate speech laws, that's only the leftist ones (and thank the gods many don't). i realize your role might give you a big ego but you fail at understanding the rest of the world. you appear to be imagining the rest of the world as downtown california. you are very incorrect.

now, could you please so kind as to locate A and B for me to prove your point? you clearly have access to that documentation

(1 edit)


>Valve opted to recant their authoritarian position and opt for a more user-controlled system where users get to filter in and filter out what games appear for them to purchase.

also, you're wrong about this place being a platform. someone with an actual mod tag came in and said here was a "marketplace"

(1 edit)

steam is indeed a publisher but they've declared free speech is okay

this place *might be according to the claims of non-verified users* a platform, and an admin once told me he deleted nazis but refused to define what nazi meant when pressed for a hard definition. if true, and that admin was doing that under the umbrella of "platform", that's actually completely illegal and violates free speech/content law

(3 edits)

leftist political bias has gone unpunished for a long time, and it's half the reason google and FB have the anti-trust guns aimed on them. leftists hate centrists and people on the right, and censor them. this site is leftist but now doing so might be legally dangerous

trump has a website/hotline set up to start reporting left-wing bias (if you're a legal US citizen, look it up if you think has discriminated against you)

don't take my word for it, explain the senate questioning of zucc and dorsey and other figures from the digital MSM.

also, i'm still not seeing a response with the right user flairs. i want to hear from the site admins before i'll believe a word of anything

like, if i posted a game with swastikas in it people here would hate it, but it would be completely legal under US free speech and the title of "platform". so, what happens if i try actually doing that?

if they call themselves a platform and deleted my game for illegal reasons under the "platform" umbrella, could i seriously sue them for doing so? the fact FB and google are on the firing line right now seems to indicate "yes"

(1 edit)

i want to double check legal things because i like having my paperwork in order. as you know, these 2 types of legal entities have different actions they are allowed to do, and some actions they can't do

namely, a publisher has the legal right to trim content. platforms don't, they're public squares. you either explicitly hold the right to trim content that doesnt break the law, or you don't and doing so violates the law.

you'll probably have heard the news that google and facebook currently have anti-trust shotguns aimed on them.

i was wondering what category fits in, seeing as lying about that question might become legally dicey moving forward. even now, lying about it might not be a good idea

if no one from the staff answers this directly, can we drag them into a congressoinal hearing too? i don't know what the CEO here looks like, but hopefully he's not a lizard person as well

stop trying to shut down "hate" and "bigotry". why do you do even need to do that in the first place? what even about your position says so? free speech and truth is king, all else is a lie, and you're practicing some lies

"hate speech" doesn't exist, it's a label used to shut down speech some people don't like. "hate" depends on the viewer and there's always the option to turn off the screen instead (which is why i don't want to come back here)

BY TRYING TO MAKE SURE "HATEFUL CONTENT" DOES NOT GET THROUGH, YOU ARE IMPLICITLY CORRUPTING, DELETING AND CENSORING MYTH, CULTURE AND HISTORY ITSELF. stop doing that. that isn't okay. that isn't right. why should you even deserve to hold the knowledge of mythology, if this is how you treat it? knowledge is valuable, and it was clearly wasted on you.

as they say, "get woke go broke". may the gods of wisdom and knowledge pay back all of your meddling in full, with ignorance and blindness fairly earned.

(1 edit)

the judge in charge here doesn't want "hateful" content, even though they're dealing with mythology, and talking about fucked up things cannot be avoided without heavy censorship in certain places. in other words we're supposed to lie about our source material at times

this creative restriction kills any chances of properly covering mythology. you're asking people to not talk about certain parts of what you just asked them to create, which contradicts itself, to be blunt about it

i asked a simple question about my work, and got called a damned nazi for no reason even though the question was a valid one. that was the rudest shit i've ever seen happen in this job.

FUN FACT: if the myth you cover is germanic/norse, this contest, its judge and its participants think you're a nazi if you ask the wrong questions about your field of study

this gamejam doesn't actually want what it asks for, it doesn't deserve the really accurate depictions, and i'm not wasting my time on this gamejam next year. the most i got out of this was wasting a damned half-month, while heavily confused over whether or not i'd get banned by someone, because one person thought i was "hateful" or some undefined shit like that

even vaguely planning towards what this gamejam would want just stops all progress cold so hard, that it takes organization and time to get up and running again. i refuse to self-censor myself, or to censor the lore i cover to protect the sensibilities of a 2-bit contest that hates what it asks for

i don't intend to enter this contest ever again. 1 year was enough to see it was a waste of my damned time. the written record of mythology doesn't care one bit what you do and do not find hateful. grow thicker skin

somewhere out there in a grave thousands of years old, you're making someones corpse spin, by saying their view on reality isnt okay nowadays, and yet you also want to to use the knowledge those people wrote down. shameful. creative vultures. you say an entire people and culture was worthless now, then plunder their writings regardless, then say you're still moral and ethical people. fuck no, you are not ethical

be more professional then this, or perhaps cover something less volatile in your gamejams if you can't take the heat off the content you're asking for

butthurt communists are the worst

"i hate rich people and their cool stuff, but regardless, i would still like to lead an angry mob stealing said cool stuff, even if after a certain point that'd make me the rich guy i'm currently hating on"

the dev to this game might not be aware that cool stuff requires rich people lol.  if he wants the contents of a grocery store, maybe he ought to earn it and not break in and steal like a dirty commie

why does this page have so many comments deleted?

(1 edit)

thank you for clearing that up then.

"common decency" doesn't exist anymore, dude. its a culture war. i think instead i'll just email support asking for your freedom of speech policies in writing.

i've just had someone imply i'm "lower then a cockroach", that i'm a "punching bag of society", and "rightly deserve every bit of scorn, spew, and spite thrown in their fucking faces."

i'm suddenly worried now that someone from this website will make the decision that i qualify as a "nazi", and that they will doxx me, and punch me for this. antifa is known to do this. this is a real concern.

i'm not okay with that. it feels like anything remotely right-wing can have "nazi" applied to it, to make you and the mod team promptly delete it.

please do get in contact here if you can officially mark out what a nazi is though. until then, i do not have faith in you and this website fairly enforcing rules. i don't even have faith in this website anymore, despite putting in effort over months to build a presence here.

this is what i get for being diplomatic. apparently the answer is "no".

the more replies i see to this thread, the more i get worried that someone from this website will punch me in the face for thinking differently then they do. i had no idea this website was filled so many damn psychopaths.

moving over to someplace else looks better and better the more information i receive here. that's probably not ideal for the website as a whole.
"come to, but if you're X Y or Z you're lower then a cockroach and will be physically assaulted"

important question: what definition of "nazi" are we working under here?

there's a very good chance we're  working on two  separate definitions right now, and things will probably go to shit if we're arguing while completely misunderstanding what the other person thinks the qualifier entails

"Let me further point out that holding specific ideologies is a choice. Skin color, sexual orientation, disabilities, or other things that set people apart... those aren't choices. That's why the latter are always protected, while the former may not be."

if a white person is called a nazi just for their skin color, do they get the same racial protection as a black person?

i'm hoping that argument doesn't happen.

there's a rising portion of game developers from the right wing thats emerged purely because they all got kicked out for wrongthink, and dont like how the industry no longer speaks to them. i'm not gonna be the last person showing up to ask this question. believe you me, you're gonna get some genuine trolls.

i'm making this thread for people on the right to test the waters public-acceptance-wise. like i said, "diplomatic thread", i'm holding back a lot here in the hopes of being the reasonable one.

so far what i've learned is an antifa type can punch me in the face freely, whenever they think i'm a "nazi". i hope you can understand why me and many others would be concerned about this fact.

(2 edits)

i'm being the diplomatic one here, and you just said an entire group of people deserved to be punched in the face.

should i take this to mean that DOES NOT allow right wing politics, but will let left-wing politics punch their opponents in the open?

this news is greatly concerning to me. you need to get help so you're not so violent.

okay, let me see if i'm reading this right.

you cannot:




groups of people, UNLESS they "upset people", in which case, you can freely




them, also they'll get banned despite being the victim under the rules already set out. am i reading this correctly?

given that nazis are white, and you just cited race, shouldnt you be banned just now for calling a racial group, and i quote

"lower than cockroaches.  They are the punching bags of society and rightly deserve every bit of scorn, spew, and spite thrown in their fucking faces."

this statement seems heavily racist against white people.

searching "nazis" brings up only results about punching nazis, which goes beyond demeaning, into implicit violence when put together with the domestic terrorism of antifa, and the general violence-baiting of the left

"without being bullied or harassed." should games about punching nazis be removed for bullying and harrasing nazis?

i saw that the front page a while ago had a pixel RPG game about abortion, where the ending was sort of directly a pro-abortion message. people were arguing about it in the comments.

if the mod team here had any problem with that, it would be deleted or not on the front page. so, my question is, if the left-wing is allowed here, does the right-wing get the same treatment? fair is fair, right?

i ask this because there's been overt tones of the culture war seeping into video game dev work, where if you hold the wrong opinions you get un-personed.

this is an issue where i dont think i'm the only one whose wondered this.

ah fuck it, i'll submit it anyways just to see what happens.

map generation is one of the hardest things to get running. thank you for the post.

neat, the simple versions ive run so far just attracted an object towards the center point with a distance-variabled gravity level

ive tried to do the same thing but my area is mostly norse, not celtic. are there any really good lore sources you've been able to find?

3D gravity is something ive tried hard to work on, but realistic orbiting is something i havent attempted to replicate

can you tell me some sources on the physics math here?