Is Epic's 'Love' a Spell Gone Wrong? The Horses Dev Unpacks a Digital Ghosting
AI Gaming News Author · Eurogamer ·
Santa Ragione, the indie studio behind *Horses*, has fiercely disputed Epic Games Store's executive claims of 'loving' them, revealing they were 'ghosted' and denied proper appeal after their game was banned just before launch. This digital dust-up highlights the opaque nature of platform content moderation and the precarious position of indie developers in the face of corporate power.
Right then, gather 'round, folks, because I've been tinkering with this story all morning, and bloody hell, it’s wilder than a rogue teleportation spell. You know that feeling when a massive corporation drops a line like, 'Oh, we absolutely *love* that studio!'? Yeah, well, Santa Ragione, the indie wizards behind the controversial horror game *Horses*, just gave Epic Games Store's VP Steve Allison a good-natured, yet firm, 'Nah, mate. Not quite.'
It’s a bit of a digital drama playing out, isn't it? A classic tale of 'he said, they said,' but with more policy documents and less dragon fire. Basically, Allison went on record in an interview, casually dropping that Epic 'loves' Santa Ragione, which sounds awfully chummy. But Santa Ragione, bless 'em, weren't having any of it. They clapped back online, stating in no uncertain terms that Epic had 'made provably incorrect statements about the game’s content' and had, rather unceremoniously, 'effectively ghosted us.' Ouch. That's like trying to summon a powerful entity for help, only for it to send your calls straight to voicemail for months. From what I’m observing, this isn’t just a spat; it’s a peek behind the curtain of platform power and developer vulnerability.
Now, for those who haven't been keeping up with the whispers in the digital ether, *Horses* has had a bit of a rough trot, so to speak. Ahead of its planned launch, it faced rejection from Steam, then, just before it was meant to gallop onto the Epic storefront, it got booted there too. Talk about a double whammy! This left Santa Ragione in a precarious position, with founder Pietro Righi Riva even telling Eurogamer at the time that the studio's very existence was on the line if the game didn't sell well. You've gotta admire the sheer grit of an indie studio pushing on through that kind of chaos, fair dinkum.
Epic's initial email, sent a mere 24 hours before *Horses*' release, cited violations of its Content Guidelines, specifically around 'inappropriate content' and 'hateful or abusive content.' They mentioned guidelines prohibiting content that 'promotes abuse and animal abuse' and 'contains explicit or frequent depictions of sexual behaviour or [that is] not appropriately labeled, rated, or age-gated.' To back this up, Epic claimed they'd filled out an IARC Questionnaire based on their review, which apparently spat out an Adults Only (AO) rating – a category they don't distribute. Convenient, eh? It makes you wonder about the precise nature of these internal assessments and how consistently they're applied across the board. It's almost like a magic spell with opaque ingredients; you know the result, but the formula is a secret.
Here’s where it gets interesting, mate. Santa Ragione isn't just grumbling; they're questioning the very fabric of Epic's claims. They stated that Epic 'refused to provide details supporting their claims, and has not shared their claimed AO IARC certificate, which normally includes a link for the developer to appeal.' This is a crucial bit of information, isn't it? Without that certificate and the supporting details, how's a developer supposed to understand, let alone appeal, the decision? It feels like being told your spell failed, but the wizarding academy won't tell you *why*.
Santa Ragione also pointed to existing evidence that contradicts Epic's AO rating: 'The fact that the game does not deserve an AO rating is apparent from the widely available full walkthroughs on YouTube and Twitch, as well as from its distribution on the Humble Store.' Now, that's a clever observation. If a game is openly viewable in full on major streaming platforms and sold on another reputable storefront without such an extreme rating, it does put Epic's internal assessment under a pretty harsh spotlight. It makes you wonder if there’s a bit of a disconnect between internal reviews and external reality, doesn't it?
To add another layer to this digital onion, Epic later provided a statement to Eurogamer via their senior communications manager, Brian Sharon. He elaborated, saying their team 'played the game and found it violated the Epic Games Store’s Content Guidelines.' He then mentioned a 'secondary check' where they filled out the ratings questionnaire themselves, leading to the AO rating. Sharon clarified that because this wasn't an 'official submission,' they didn't have a certificate to share. They did, however, claim to 'give the developers context around the policies they violated.' So, a bit more detail, but still no concrete, shareable proof or easy appeal process for the developers. It's a classic corporate move, offering just enough information to seem transparent, but not enough to actually resolve the core dispute or offer recourse.
What this whole saga really highlights, beyond the specifics of *Horses*, is the immense power wielded by storefronts like Epic and Steam. They act as gatekeepers, and while moderation is absolutely necessary, the process needs to be as transparent and consistent as possible. For indie studios, especially, a last-minute ban can be catastrophic, jeopardising months, if not years, of work and significant financial investment. The 'human story behind the corporate announcement' here is a studio fighting for its very existence against the arbitrary-seeming decisions of a giant.
On a cautiously optimistic note, despite all the distribution woes, Santa Ragione *did* manage to generate enough revenue to repay the loans taken out for development and even pay royalties to *Horses*' creator, Andrea Lucco Borlera. That, my friends, is a testament to perseverance and, perhaps, the power of player curiosity, even when platforms make things difficult. It shows that sometimes, even when the big players try to put up barriers, genuinely interesting (and yes, sometimes controversial) art can find its audience.
So, what's the takeaway from this digital dust-up? It's a reminder to question corporate pronouncements, to look for the 'why' behind the 'what,' and to always stand with the little guys trying to innovate in a landscape often dominated by giants. And for the platforms? Maybe a bit more transparency and a bit less 'ghosting' would go a long way. After all, genuine love isn't just about saying the words; it's about the actions that back them up. Otherwise, it just feels like a spell gone wrong, doesn't it?
Tags: Indie Games, Gaming Industry, Content Moderation, Game Development, Epic Games Store
Original article: Eurogamer