I can understand why they step into it like a rake in the grass, though. They seem to think that being defensive, possessive, and telling the wife not to fuck Donny instead of trusting her judgment is the high confidence decision. Whereas you telling her that you are prepared to let her take it as far as she wants awards confidence points, which she finds attractive. The scoring system of the game inhabits the upside down as far as their worldview is concerned.
1. Confidence.
According to your concept, the agreement “Where you tell her that you are prepared to let her take it as far as she wants” means complete chaos. This means Steph can cut off the heads of kittens and cut out the hearts of babies. When my wife and I go to the mall and I say “buy whatever you want,” we both know that “whatever you want” has its limits. This is what confidense expresses, we both voluntarily respect boundaries. “Whatever you want” will always be surrounded by “red flags,” like a wolf on the hunt. That's why I don't follow my wife around and control every purchase. To quote the Marquis de La Fayette, “Freedom consists in the right to do whatever does not harm anyone.”
What the author presents in the game as confidense looks like a religiously fanatical obsession, blind, unquestioning submission to the MC.
Trust is a two-way relationship. Trust means: “I know that you understand the boundaries that define our relationship. I know that you will not step over them. I know that you will not commit actions that insult or humiliate me.” and the other half of the pair acts the same way. Trust means that the couple voluntarily accepts and follows the accepted boundaries.
We are not all saints and sinless, we make mistakes. The concept of trust means that its participants recognize the right of one of the parties to demand respect for boundaries if the other party has violated them. The offender must admit his guilt. This is not weakness or mistrust, this is a normal relationship in a couple. To paraphrase the Marquis de La Fayette: “Insurrection is at once the most inalienable right and the most sacred duty,” one might say: “The demand not to overstep boundaries is at once the most inalienable right and the most sacred duty.” Otherwise, all relationships will fall apart.
Where is Steph’s trust in the game?
2. NTR.
Quote from BangB420: “So sad to see, plays a NTR game and gets mad when there's NTR.” Do you know better than the author what the game is about? Where in his messages does the author talk about the presence of ntr in the game? Quote from the author: “All sexual acts in the game are consensual. Join him in adventures reserved for swingers." Where is ntr?
The main problem of this game is not whether there is ntr or not ntr. We are all discussing a game that doesn't exist. How NTR lovers and those who don't like NTR see what is not there. The main problem of the game is the author. He denies having ntr, he says “love and happy marriage”. In fact, supporters and opponents of NTR say the same thing: “the author is a lying bastard.”
I'm not against ntr, my complaints are about the author's promise: “Join him in adventures reserved for swingers.” Where is it? For me now AMW, on the HC route, only ntr. Script of NTR's novel:
1. There is a husband/wife couple.
2. There is an antagonist (it could be a wife).
3. The wife is not interested in the opinion of the MC, she does what she wants.
4. The MC is unable to control events around him.
5. The MC carries out all his wife’s orders (passive “yes” or passive “I don’t mind”).
6. If the MC does not agree, it is ignored or “game over”.
7. Agreements with MS are not fulfilled or changed (passive “yes” or passive “I don’t mind”).
8. MC does nothing to change the situation (see 4)
9. The wife is an uncontrollable whore.
10. MC can't throw out his wife.
How is it different from AMW?
In my opinion, the author is trying to cross ntr and love. He thinks that if you write “I love you” 800 times in NTR, it means love. The result is neither two nor one and a half. Based on the author's promise, the claims regarding the presence of ntr are fully justified. The author needs to acknowledge the presence of ntr and make three independent routes: swing, ntr and cuckold. Then all complaints will disappear. If the author had done this at the start, 90% of the messages on the forum would not have appeared.
The only problem is that the author and the players see the game differently. The author was unable to express his vision of the game in an intuitive form. Players don't see what the author sees. The author threatens a future update and is confident that all of us (supporters and opponents of ntr) upon seeing the update will immediately realize and understand how wrong we all were. Does anyone believe it? How can two opposing points of view be simultaneously wrong?
This is my point of view on the current version of the game. Let's wait for Steph's terrible secret, which will put everything in its place.
