First off, thank you for taking the time to reply to me and I also appreciate your civility. I also apologize for the length of my responses but I prefer to be thorough so that it is clear that I'm reading what is being written and, more importantly, show I understood what was written... and if I didn't, it should be easier for someone to address where they feel they were misunderstood by me. That said...
Porn is not an equal term than adult and vice versa. And adult films and movies are not per se porn movie/games.
Except they clearly are since that it primarily what you will get for search results in any search engine. So yes, whether you like it or not
ONE of the accepted definition of the word “adult”, especially when paired with words like “film”, “actress”, “film star”, and or “game”… is “porn”. This is so true that even Hopes used it in that way on their patreon.
In fact, the word “adult” is often used as a way to say “porn” without saying “porn” so this isn’t just one of the accepted definitions, this is the definition most people use in that context. If you say to someone “I’m going to look up some adult games to play or look for some adult movies to watch while I’m quarantined”, most people, by far, will assume the speaker means porn.
And if that isn’t you and was never you, kudos, but to pretend the above isn’t true is so disingenuous.
They can and on different platfrom the ration is different. As example game for video game console, they have ratings that goes up to "adult", but you most never see a pornographic content in it and if, they usually comes a patch to keep their universe happy...
Since I’m not saying that the definition can’t mean other things, this is irrelevant. One of the accepted definitions of the word “cool” is a synonym for “good”.
Replying to that statement with something akin to “Cool can mean something that is good, but sometimes it doesn’t”, doesn’t make any sense. Responding this way and or pointing that out when someone is explaining to you that regardless of how you personally use or don’t use the word “cool” it makes sense that others use it differently because etc, also doesn’t make sense.
Or more importantly, it doesn’t invalidate anything I’ve stated and doesn’t show a lack of merit in my statements.
Two things come to my mind: "standard business conditions" and Lemmings. I don't think that many of us read the standard business conditions on a shopping website, but they there and you can't argument about them. Same goes for the normal laws.
Actually, you can argue about them. In fact, there have been judges, lawyers, and other legal experts that have argued for decades that a EULA wasn’t enforceable because it was unreasonable to expect people to read the agreement. In fact, sometimes a contract is held as unenforceable if it is deemed to not use language that is clear enough to be understood.
This isn’t to say that no one holds opposing beliefs on this matter, just pointing out that your argument, that those agreements can’t be argued, is factually incorrect.
Are we? Perhaps, but I think, you think we are. I usually find it quiet interesting how many user know all this. I for myself often think I know something and believe that this is so, but then again, I'm also quiet sure I'm not normal
Yes, Hopes has been overly defensive at times and others over protective of them. As a result, we’re suddenly confused by people being confused about what this game is about. Suddenly, we’re arguing that a term, that for over a decade has been used in place of another word is suddenly not ever
(or in fact, mostly) synonymous with that word it is often used interchangeably with. Those are markers for over protective/defensive.
The game titles would be very long otherwise and not only this game.
This argument is irrelevant to anything that I’ve said and has no merit.
It’s irrelevant because it doesn’t change the fact that Hopes’ analogy was incorrect due to the fact that he said it was on the sign and it isn’t on the sign.
Your argument here has no merit because the length of the name is entirely irrelevant to whether or not one CAN add that to the title… well that, and “long” is entirely subjective. There are plenty of arguably “long titles” here on this site, so…
We have a tag system so we use it.
Does this tag system prevent people from putting information in the first post? I see people repeating the tag system but never addressing my points regarding the tag system:
1.) We also have a forum posting system, we could use that too in this case. To my knowledge, putting information on one part of this place doesn’t stop one from being able to put it somewhere else.
2.) The tags here do not in anyway mean a game isn’t pornographic. In fact, these exact same tags could be used on a game that is pornographic in nature.
3.) The title and the first post, are where most people are going to look more than anywhere else… by far. We know this. This is fact. So let me put it this way…
If the only thing Hopes did was put it in the title like:
The DeLuca Family [v0.06.1] [not porn] [HopesGaming]
It would likely have had more of an impact than all the reviews, tags, and comments combined. In fact, while I am not saying that this is the case, one could argue the reason to leave that information out at the start was intentional so people would try the game anyway and fall in love with it because it is a fact that many people wouldn’t have bothered downloading the game in the first place if they saw upfront this wasn’t porn.
If it was in the title and or the first post, everyone saying it’s someone else’s fault if they’re misled here would be 100% correct… but the information being in places that most people won’t look makes that false.
My though if people would rzead more, think more and often look more, most time look on the same page of the thread before their beginn typing their post, then we would have much smaller threads here.
This argument basically amounts to, “If people would behave less like how majority of people behave most of the time, none of this would happen” and this is an absurd argument to make. People are going to be people. Every single business and entity is aware of this and they plan for it, sometimes taking advantage of this/these fact
(s). It isn’t a coincidence that drug ads say rapidly and at the end of commercials what their side effects are or that certain details that might be considered negative are often written in the fine print.
It’s like, technically they aren’t doing anything wrong by using these methods… but people aren’t wrong for not knowing things that aren’t laid right before them in the places they are far more likely to look/listen.
I think this would include you also. Otherwise I don't believe you would write your own post in response to ours.
And you would obviously be wrong because me responding is not the same as me “stomping” nor is it me “attacking” anyone. Me pointing out that certain things are factually wrong also do not fall into this category. However, saying you detest people, blaming them for things, implying their dumb and or crazy for being misled, and or calling them things like “entitled brats”, or referring to them as a negative type of breed of people… those things are very much actual examples of those negative things mentioned by Hopes.
This is also a marker for being overly defensive by the way; seeing something as an attack or something else negative, when it isn’t. I’m expressing facts and also providing dissenting opinion. Responses like yours here make it seem like that kind of thing isn’t allowed here unless its confined to your standards/beliefs.
If
HopesGaming finished the game without any porn in it, I will invite you to a drink at my cost - drinks, not the voyage to obtain it.
I don’t care if Hopes puts any porn in this game or not. It’s their game. They should do whatever it is they want… but as I keep pointing out, it is wrong to say these two things:
1.) It’s a person’s fault for expecting porn in this game, right now… it’s also not wrong for Hopes to have no porn in the game.
2.) It is incorrect to say that Hopes did everything they could to avoid confusion. They clearly didn’t and none of your arguments, not even theirs, goes against that fact. In fact, regardless as to the reason, Hopes has made it clear they intentionally won’t try to make it clearer. I assume to stick to their guns at this point?
At this point, the ONLY thing you’re all arguing against when you’re arguing against me is simply adding in the first post what this game is and what they intend for it to be and that makes no sense given it wouldn’t change anything else other than probably reducing the number of people that get frustrated when they discover there’s no porn in this game.
We would still have the tags, comments, reviews, etc… but why not also add one or two sentences to the first post? Why are you all so angry and adamant about such a move? What is the rational there?
No its on him and for me he has done it. T
So even though it would likely make it clearer for even more people
(since not everyone is like you) they just shouldn’t do it because at least c3p0 is taken care of?
Okay, I was being cheeky there but my point is, there are obviously a significant number of people who were confused. Even some of the people that gave this game 5 stars, say things in the review that make it clear to me that they were initially
(sometimes still seem to be) confused.
If it takes practically no effort to make things clearer for even more people, why not do it?
Also why should it be in the title? A title is a title, nothing more, nothing less. Although the title usually refer to it's content often this link is only clear after we have involed us with the content.
You answered your own question because it often refers to the content. It’s not a question of why should it be… as much as, why not?
There’s nothing about a title that makes it to where it is wrong to include that info there… just like it isn’t wrong not to include that information there… but would it have helped in this case? Oh, absolutely. As I pointed out before, I know there were people that skimmed the first post after clicking on the title, played the game for hours, found no real pornography… came back to the thread, checked out the first post, saw nothing indicating this wasn’t meant to be a pornographic game… AND THEN posted.
Simple: proof it. I'm very logical person and I can also admit if I was wrong. But as a logical person I want a hard scientific proof first.
You’re not being logical here. In fact, there was nothing logical about this statement/request either. You can’t prove everything. It’s an unreasonable request to ask me to prove my theory, but it also doesn’t mean I’m wrong.
But you need proof that most people don’t look past the first post? Truth be told, when people read at all, they’ll likely not go past the first 2 paragraphs or so of the first post.
Do you need proof that most people don’t look at comments or reviews?
Are you trying to say that you don’t believe that more people look at the first post than they do tags, reviews, and or comments?
Are you trying to say that no one did as I described?
If you are saying any of the above, you aren’t being logical. The closest to being logical you could come while disagreeing with what I’ve said there is to say you just don’t know, but even that comes dangerously close to being illogical as it ignores principles that people /businesses capitalize on and have been saying practically forever.
