“Steam started blocking Australian users from viewing or buying 18+ rated games on September 9, 2026, unless they attach a valid credit card to their account. Valve’s rollout affects hundreds of mature-rated titles, including Cyberpunk 2077 and Doom Eternal, and it doesn’t matter whether the account is brand new or fifteen years old with a library full of paid-for adult games. Without a credit card on file, those store pages, search results, and even home-page recommendations simply disappear.”
The government is not doing those things. Valve is. The purpose of the social media law is to prevent people under 16 from from being able to post online (they’re allowed to read).
Is it a stupid law? Yes.
Should it be the parent’s responsibility to be aware of what their kids are doing/exposed to online? Also, yes.
I don’t know how this has turned into some sort of discussion about the games themselves. It’s the Community Hub where users discuss games that is the issue as far as the government is concerned. Valve has responded by making it about the games. Probably because if they blocked our access to the Community Hubs, most of us wouldn’t notice/care.
All that said: Whether I agree with a law or not, I do believe the government should have the leverage to enforce the law. The other side of the discussion is valid also though. I believe Valve should have the right to say ‘no’ to laws from foreign nations. I don’t know what the consequences should be in that case though. Provide refunds for our purchases and close our accounts? I can’t see that being viable.
Like I said: fascinating to watch this play out.
Age verification for app stores including the Steam store, adult media etc is only slightly related to the under 16 social media restrictions on the interactive side. The social media rules were rushed through in a moral panic but all the other restrictions have been in the works for a long time and there has been a lot of industry discussion.
The reported aim is to bring online 18+ content into line with the physical world where a minor can’t walk into a brothel, adult shop or casino or buy alcohol or tobacco. Obviously quite a lot of us think there is a secondary objective of de-anonymizing Internet use for data collection, both corporate and government.
The scope and ambition of the esafety commisioner is very broad. There are discussions down to the level of operating systems, devices and browsers.
Valve’s justification for an exemption according to that letter I linked above was that Community Hub was an incidental side feature of Steam. Essentially the same argument that got GitHub an exemption. I even agree with them.
An overall age verification strategy for all online content would answer the question though.
I’ve come at the situation in the context of the social media changes, because that’s what Valve cited in their letter.
I absolutely agree about the hub. I see this less of an issue about the game. Its more about the platforms who are choosing to ignore bigger issues. This is then causing issue in our wider communities.
Its like asking are Cars good or bad?