90
Steam Age Check Locks Out 65% of Adult Australians [2026] (tech-insider.org)
submitted 3 days ago by to c/australia@aussie.zone
68 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

"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."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 3 days ago (7 children)

It’s gonna be a nasty battle but the truth is the Gov should stand firm, because there is gonna be a wave of other tech that will be testing the line soon. There are non invasive options to prove you are over 18 but tech just wants to continue its unregulated abuses

I like steam however I will never be handing over credentials to a company just to be on a social media or platform. I’d rather stick an old fashioned disc in.

I agree with the other comment, valve knows piracy is a service problem. Unfortunately as with cigarettes the gov is happy to test legal VRS black market routes.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 3 days ago (6 children)

    We're not discussing exploitative porn or handing out guns and drugs here, this is a platform for distributing art.
    I don't want the Australian Government censoring things, or deciding who can and cannot view art and in what circumstances.
    I want them making guidelines about labelling, so that citizens can make informed decisions about what they and their children view.

    Discussing the particular method that Valve should implement this farce is talking past the point as far as I'm concerned.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 3 days ago (4 children)

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

    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).

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 days ago (1 child)

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago*

    Community Hub would fall under social media. Adult rated media/apps/games are covered by different rules and had a different timetable. There is more than one thing happening. Valve did argue that Community Hub wasn't primarily social media but the rules for soc media and adult media are not the same thing. It is all part of a bigger picture but each element is distinct.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 3 days ago

    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?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 3 days ago

    Do you think tech will play fair and self regulate?

    I think Valve would be one of the 'least dirty' players out there. This isn't just gaming, its all media really, this is just one of the first to tackle incoming changes. In terms of the games Guidance and signposting has been in place for a long time. Games are not simply Art open to interpretation, most are harmless, but there's a rating system on them for a reason.

    Another aspect is the extension of gaming culture and what comes with that, there are arguments that boys and young men are more susceptible to their identities being shaped from people in the gaming sphere. Those actors can be unhealthy (mentally). I think the game is seen as the root of the problem...therefore an easy target for regulation.

    I agree the Gov shouldn't have to censor but its still sensitive information shared so they have stepped up. I hate over authoritative compliance, but at this stage no one else is going up against tech and the way they operate to hook young users.

    I also agree that parents play a part but TBH the amount of parents who are equally conditioned just as much a problem.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent