e6mill
Forum Fanatic
- Aug 4, 2022
- 4,650
- 9,379
- 628
- Thread starter HanakoXVN
- Start date
- Jul 12, 2020
- 14,400
- 35,671
- 997
damnedfrog
Engaged Member
- Nov 11, 2020
- 2,265
- 4,749
- 378
OK, my bad English skill strike again...
But still, I find my misinterpretation funny
damnedfrog
Engaged Member
- Nov 11, 2020
- 2,265
- 4,749
- 378
idkWHYimHERE52
Newbie
- Jun 29, 2024
- 53
- 101
- 47
Love Faith, hopefully she won't be sidelined like Janice was in AR1, but with Faith's scene being grouped up with Carly, it doesn't give me much hope.
Edit: I read the full threads, really hoping Faith gets upgraded to a main girl, or if not that, is at least part of the harem even outside of Sorority, she's too good to be shelved into only one route, not to mention we missed Janice, most games don't really have a good main li who is black, even if they are there they're side girls, such as Camilla from BaD and Kim from UoP.
Edit: I read the full threads, really hoping Faith gets upgraded to a main girl, or if not that, is at least part of the harem even outside of Sorority, she's too good to be shelved into only one route, not to mention we missed Janice, most games don't really have a good main li who is black, even if they are there they're side girls, such as Camilla from BaD and Kim from UoP.
Last edited:
Mmushy
Active Member
- May 5, 2020
- 876
- 1,172
- 317
Just discovered this.
Another fun game just like the first one.
Like mother like daughter in the mannerisms .
Subscribed
Another fun game just like the first one.
Like mother like daughter in the mannerisms .
Subscribed
Buletti
Engaged Member
- Nov 7, 2023
- 2,124
- 3,672
- 349
A confused Dev ponders: Harem expansion?
10 minutes ago
This is going to be a weird one and I'm putting this out as Free Access to get everyone's thoughts on the matter. Bear with me, this might get rambly.
Also no images 'cause I'm writing this while in bed.
One things that has surprised me over the past few months has been the "popularity" of the side-girls, Tori and Faith (and Carly to a lesser extent). Their function was a way to get some lewd scenes in the early chapters while waiting for the main girls relationships to cook and they would fade a bit in the background as the story progresses and more main girls become available for lewds.
I don't think this is good AVN design. I believe I used side-girls correctly in AR1, where it was obvious that they were such (Kim, Sandy, the other receptionist) and when it wasn't obvious (Janice) it left a bad taste is some people's mouth, and rightfully so.
So I shifted to the idea to have Tori and Faith/Carly be sort-of main girls, but tied to specific story paths (Dorm and Sorority respectively) and to come up with another girl to put in that place for the Apartment path.
Even though I said in the beginning that I wouldn't do path-exclusive main girls this time around, I was rationalising it in my head like "they aren't REALLY main girls, it's still fine!" and so I wrote chapter 3 with this concept in mind. So Tori has a lewd scene if you are in the Dorm path, Faith/Carly have one if you are in the Sorority path and the Apartment path doesn't need one 'cause it's got Miho.
But... is it fun?
Is it actually an harem game if some girls suddenly become "unavailable"?
Is it okay to get people invested in some girls and then just start ignoring them, especially after letting the MC get sexually involved with them multiple times?
This thought has kinda been eating at me these past couple of weeks. Sure, there's the "Cheat" option, but is that just an excuse?
Like, I personally don't have problems when games tie love interests to specific paths, if it makes sense, but I'm not the one playing this game.
Then tonight, while showering, I got an idea, a writing solution to "get" all the lewd scenes regardless of the path (at least for this chapter).
Ecstatic, I ran out of the bathroom and wrote it down... but then another thought crept up.
Don't actions have consequences?
Would the game lose replayability if almost all the lewd scenes are available in one single playthrough?
Why have the split in the first place if one of the main reasons for it (having exclusive scenes with specific girls) gets removed?
I don't know.
So I'm going to leave my ego and my "auteur vision" aside for a moment and ask you all, the people who actually play and support this game, for your input.
Should I stick with my original vision for the game where "the big choice" aka deciding where to live determines which side-girls you have access to or should I give everyone free access to Tori and Faith (and Carly)?
In other words, what it basically boils down to, should I treat those two (three) like main girls?
This is not a decision that needs to be made immediately. Right now I just started Faith/Carly's lewd scene and then I need to do Miho's, so I still got some time before making up my mind and do the necessary re-writes and additional renders (though if I have to do that, I'm 100% splitting the chapter in two parts).
Leave a vote and let me know what you think in the comments. I might not go with the "winner" (this is not a democracy, I AM THE LAW), but I really want to know what you, the players, think about it.
Thank you!
10 minutes ago
This is going to be a weird one and I'm putting this out as Free Access to get everyone's thoughts on the matter. Bear with me, this might get rambly.
Also no images 'cause I'm writing this while in bed.
One things that has surprised me over the past few months has been the "popularity" of the side-girls, Tori and Faith (and Carly to a lesser extent). Their function was a way to get some lewd scenes in the early chapters while waiting for the main girls relationships to cook and they would fade a bit in the background as the story progresses and more main girls become available for lewds.
I don't think this is good AVN design. I believe I used side-girls correctly in AR1, where it was obvious that they were such (Kim, Sandy, the other receptionist) and when it wasn't obvious (Janice) it left a bad taste is some people's mouth, and rightfully so.
So I shifted to the idea to have Tori and Faith/Carly be sort-of main girls, but tied to specific story paths (Dorm and Sorority respectively) and to come up with another girl to put in that place for the Apartment path.
Even though I said in the beginning that I wouldn't do path-exclusive main girls this time around, I was rationalising it in my head like "they aren't REALLY main girls, it's still fine!" and so I wrote chapter 3 with this concept in mind. So Tori has a lewd scene if you are in the Dorm path, Faith/Carly have one if you are in the Sorority path and the Apartment path doesn't need one 'cause it's got Miho.
But... is it fun?
Is it actually an harem game if some girls suddenly become "unavailable"?
Is it okay to get people invested in some girls and then just start ignoring them, especially after letting the MC get sexually involved with them multiple times?
This thought has kinda been eating at me these past couple of weeks. Sure, there's the "Cheat" option, but is that just an excuse?
Like, I personally don't have problems when games tie love interests to specific paths, if it makes sense, but I'm not the one playing this game.
Then tonight, while showering, I got an idea, a writing solution to "get" all the lewd scenes regardless of the path (at least for this chapter).
Ecstatic, I ran out of the bathroom and wrote it down... but then another thought crept up.
Don't actions have consequences?
Would the game lose replayability if almost all the lewd scenes are available in one single playthrough?
Why have the split in the first place if one of the main reasons for it (having exclusive scenes with specific girls) gets removed?
I don't know.
So I'm going to leave my ego and my "auteur vision" aside for a moment and ask you all, the people who actually play and support this game, for your input.
Should I stick with my original vision for the game where "the big choice" aka deciding where to live determines which side-girls you have access to or should I give everyone free access to Tori and Faith (and Carly)?
In other words, what it basically boils down to, should I treat those two (three) like main girls?
This is not a decision that needs to be made immediately. Right now I just started Faith/Carly's lewd scene and then I need to do Miho's, so I still got some time before making up my mind and do the necessary re-writes and additional renders (though if I have to do that, I'm 100% splitting the chapter in two parts).
Leave a vote and let me know what you think in the comments. I might not go with the "winner" (this is not a democracy, I AM THE LAW), but I really want to know what you, the players, think about it.
Thank you!
You must be registered to see the links
Avaron1974
Resident Lesbian
- Aug 22, 2018
- 28,171
- 97,262
- 1,021
I did vote to have side girls tied to living choice.
I find getting everything a bit dull and I like choice to have meaning and consequences.
I find getting everything a bit dull and I like choice to have meaning and consequences.
idkWHYimHERE52
Newbie
- Jun 29, 2024
- 53
- 101
- 47
Avaron1974
Resident Lesbian
- Aug 22, 2018
- 28,171
- 97,262
- 1,021
idkWHYimHERE52
Newbie
- Jun 29, 2024
- 53
- 101
- 47
It's better than being totally exclusive while also having some consequences to the choices.
I'm going to go with this, too. Leaving aside the issue that at least the apartment path goes from 0 to 10000, (waaaay bigger than 0-100
) in one shot for a moment, this is supposed to be at a college where you're definitely going to be seeing folks multiple times at classes, in the dining halls, at parties, etc, regardless of where you're living. Would definitely prefer the "see them less, but still see them" kind of thing as, what seems to me to be the most "logical," (I know, it's a pron game - nothing's logical ) especially vs the alternative of never seeing them again. If anything, that should open up some interesting future opportunities to either deepen or lessen those relationships with folks you're not living with, (and maybe those you are since the apartment thing starts with huge stalker vibes, which may make re-evaluation of those living choices valuable).