- Feb 26, 2021
- 84
- 75
on the UE4 version of the game there is a quest with Anubis where after the fight with the boss you can choose 3 options for completing the quest, one of which is to eat him. i think that’s why there’s such a tag here
Unreal Engine Carnal Instinct [2024-10-17] [Team Carnal Instinct]
- Thread starter BaasB
- Start date
-
- Tags
- 3d game 3dcg adventure animated big ass big tits character creation combat creampie exhibitionism fantasy female protagonist furry futa/trans futa/trans protagonist gay graphic violence group sex handjob internal view interracial lesbian male protagonist masturbation monster girl multiple protagonist oral sex pregnancy prostitution religion sandbox tentacles transformation vaginal sex voiced
Its naga... also dragon if you make the wrong choice and piss them off (or attack).
Looking at the recent posts above, now I see why there were jokes about vore from players and the devs insisted they would not put actual vore into the game - at least 3 enemies in the game's development eat the player if you make the wrong move. However those were not vore deaths, but rather implied gore followed by implicitly being eaten. Now I see the origins for the history of vore as a topic for this game.
- Dec 16, 2017
- 101
- 32
is there a chance we get something for the U4 version of this game? U5 seems to be a lil bit empty at the moment
- Sep 12, 2021
- 153
- 198
welp here comes the tears of a poor human being
game still one of the best I played though
thanks for the hours of gameplay
peace out
What scares me from a gamedev perspective is that if you do migrate to a newer engine to build up your game better, fans will pine for the old game because it was further along. From a development perspective, it's not only about adding new features but recognizing core features that are broken or built on top bugged and poorly optimized code to the degree that managing it further is a chore.
I've seen multiple games die from updating to a newer engine. I've seen some games live better switching to a new engine but so far only under the circumstance that the old game was so broken it was unlivable. The happiest medium are games that release with somewhat incomplete features on an old engine, and the winning idea past that point is to make game #2. Note that many games that are considered good have a 2nd game, and said sequel is usually the best game. I'm not exactly sure if that holds true past 2 games, hence the meme that Valve can't count past 2.
If I had to guess, it's because game #1 had all the concepts fleshed out but arrived with inferior implementation, and was released on-time and " " " complete " " ", being clean enough to sell but lacking in many things the devs wanted to have, including cut story content. Game 2 comes out supported largely by the cut story content, meshed together to tell the original story but bigger, building not only the old good systems but making good new systems and getting rid of bad issues. Fans seem to love it because it's more game, but better, and the original game got released.
Pathologic is a good example of this among many other examples, because it's so peculiar. Ugly looks, ugly music, golden story, but held back by horrible jank. The "sequel" is largely a remake, but everything's better. It lives up to the original vision better. In these cases game #1 is like an early alpha that gets packaged and sold, and game #2 is the original intended product. Note that the team still struggled a lot with money, to the degree they had to make mobile games just to cover the cost of Pathologic 2.
So why not do a game 3? Story got spent, good ideas got spent, it's all too similar to justify making. Going with a crap story, repeated content, new content that's arguably worse, and perhaps even greed-incentivizing from your management is bound to kill your product. Hence there's no game #3.
In this situation I would say the dev should release first, but that manifests the problems of underwhelmed audience actively avoiding a sequel and big studios seeing its potential and absolutely plagiarizing it to make a better game since they can recognize what's weak and invest effort strategically to beat the original. However releasing is still typically better than starting over during development because it avoids fans ghosting from expecting the project to die before release. Unless you suspect your entire team will abandon further development from being forced to release a weak game, then you drag out development like this.
It's not an easy situation but I just recommend you wait. Lots of choices for games out there. I understand they want to make a game and as the team is holding up now it's likely they'll work on it. Small chance they'll abandon. Timeliness? Late is better than abandoned. Slower dev tends to live longer.
Last edited:
- Sep 12, 2021
- 153
- 198
Tbh, chances are WW3 will be here before the game gets out of pre-alpha stage. Jokes aside, even if they do end up completing their project, I'll probably have forgotten about it. I'm not gonna wait a decade to play a game. So, either they downgrade the scale and work on a less ambitious project (which they had with the UE4 build) or they ACTUALLY use the EA Steam feature for once (that was the point on putting the game on Steam in the first place) and work from there with the Steam playerbase feedback and provide the advertised 3 months builds per year.
At the end of the day, the real problem here is them using Steam as a billboard to get people to their Patreon and since there is this Patreon trend that's been here for a while where you get money by doing bare minimum work, it's really hard to be optimistic.
Really missing those days where devs were more interested in giving something new and fresh and enjoyed working on a game rather than working in the industry to only rack in the money.
Last edited:
- Nov 3, 2022
- 38
- 64
The problem really isn't that they upgraded the engine, it's that UE5 is so vastly different in gameplay. UE4's general gameplay feels a lot like Skyrim, but UE5's more like Dark Souls. It's somewhat sluggish, harder to control your character, and combat feels like it wasn't even tested, because some features don't even seem like they work properly.
Where a game has done engine upgrade right however, is Stardew Valley. At no point does it ever completely change any mechanics, only improve and add new features.
Or if you want an Early Access example, the Project Diva (not-quite-a) fangame: Project Heartbeat. Its most recent update, upgraded the engine to Godot4, and improved the input handling so that the game reads them more accurately. On the surface, it looks no different from the previous version, and that's can actually be a good thing, but some developers don't understand that upgrading doesn't mean that you have to change everything.
Sadly,
You must be registered to see the links
, as says Nintendo. Standards have risen since the greats stay forever, what hasn't been tried is quickly taken for projects, and much of what's new fails due to unexpected problems. Players will unfortunately wait literally decades for certain game releases, as is the case with Elder Scrolls 6 (currently about 13 years), Baldur's Gate 3 (about 20 years), Duke Nukem Forever (over 14 years), Star Citizen (expected to die before its release in 30 years), etc. You have to lower your standards to the point where developers don't feel afraid, meanwhile Triple A studios have lowered their standards exactly so, people buy their overpriced half-assed work because advertising with a big name and flashy media will force it through to be spread by the masses. I can see why they want to try hard. They want to be seen.I had to take a bit longer to think about the patreon problem. Steam regulates developers firmly, and patreon doesn't. That's problematic, I agree. Unfortunately for some projects, "new and fresh" definitely takes a long time.
I'd even call those projects "cursed", the kind of concept that arrives to you in an intense dream one day, haunts your memories for years, and will always be hard to get support for as the details are so different from what people know they would like that you can't even talk about it to most without a strong set of ready concepts to present and probably something playable and attractive to boot.
Your post brings me unexpected nostalgia. Before Skyrim there was Oblivion, Morrowind, and Daggerfall. You can say standards there were lower from a technical view, but Morrowind had the best story and atmosphere, Oblivion had the most fun combat speed, and Daggerfall had the best dungeon exploration. Half-Life 2, its episodes, and Alyx came out but people still play HL1 and its multiplayer mode for its uniquely frantic flow. People still return to those games to this day. They're not the market majority, but checking game dev news recently it seems there's hype for retro-inspired projects like the
You must be registered to see the links
(inspired by HL1),
You must be registered to see the links
(inspired by Hexen / HL1 / Souls),
You must be registered to see the links
(inspired by Daggerfall).As for souls games, Dark Souls broke the media around action games like
You must be registered to see the links
broke theatre for about a century and became a foundational inspiration for techniques in film. I personally don't care for soulsborne as a comparison term because not only does it make consumer talk dumber by skipping specific nuances of the game they're actually talking about, but it makes game development dumber as games like Lies of P really dive into the mentality of this actually being the kind of game people really want, and they make a clone that feels too close to the original comparison item so everyone's passionless about its reception.The rest of your post intrigues me, you seem to have a point about graphical fidelity. For example, Terraria has been around forever and still goes strong. Graphically it's aged poorly but the game itself has flourished even despite competition from ex-staff in Starbound (which died horribly in $#% circumstances).
Your examples are pretty sound. Yes, I'm glad Godot is seeing use instead of Unity and input handling is more important than people give credit for in responsive games.
What worries me from a gamedev perspective is the conscious decision to make the game "better" by changing things that might have worked well enough to draw an audience already. Like an author might change their story ending yet people actually liked how the story ended, to change gameplay is something that will bother people - rightfully - because it had merit. It's like looking back at your work and thinking that the new way was the way it should've been, but the old way was what people enjoyed even if it clashed with your vision.
I personally enjoy the slower and methodical pace of a "souls" game approach, but as I said, I had great fun with Oblivion even with its weak story because the dungeons were fun (better than Skyrim's), and the combat flowed at a speed such that it felt like a boomer-shooter if you spawned a bunch of enemies in an area and everyone had high agility. Yeah, I'm pretty sure paladins in armor aren't supposed to move as fast as Sonic the Hedgehog and swing claymores as fast as kids hyped on breakfast cereal on Christmas morning will swing empty gift wrapping cardboard tubes at each other, but... it felt fun, not gonna lie. It's like that.
So I'm sorry for your loss. I resolved to only sticking with the new game to playtest efficiently what is being worked on without being biased by the old version, but you have a solid point.
I think in times like this the developers would make a new system that's in between the old systems. The developers of MOBAs tend to do this more often. Especially the ones with constant balance issues, for better and worse. In short, system A is fun, system B is less fun to some, and system C blends the good of both. Hopefully balance is good enough that no further patching is needed. Yeah, that's tough to uphold. That's the way to do it though.
Last edited:
- Sep 12, 2021
- 153
- 198
A lot of quoting, sorry about that. Also sorry if it's a bit off topic, some stuff was interesting so bear with me.
All right, I had fun with this little back and forth. I'll stop here to not derail the thread further.
Nintendo isn't really a good example, they've lost they ways for a while now. Plus, with the recent changes they did (see Pokemon GO, Paper Mario, etc...) and seeing them bending the knees to woke stuff, this is not the Nintendo from my childhood anymore.
Most of the new stuff fails because it's bad, plain and simple. Seeing the recent statistics showing that gamers are playing mostly older titles and boycotting new ones is pretty much telling.
And the result was an absolute dogshit game.
Let's be honest here, that thing is a literal scam. There won't be any game ever.
Oh trust me, my standards are already as low as they can get, especially with this DEI bullshit becoming the norm on the AAA scene (and even starting to rot the indie one). That's pretty much why I haven't bought a single AAA title in a decade.
No, people buy because people are stupid. "Must consume !", people being stupid isn't something new.
All right, I had fun with this little back and forth. I'll stop here to not derail the thread further.
I think a lot of is that these types of games (patreon or any game that's funded by subscribers) have a bad track record for getting abandoned or being stuck in a weird development limbo. Now I'm not saying that there isn't people that rag on these games in bad faith, but I believe that a lot people have just been burned in the past or have just seen said people get burned from a distance and echo the sentiment of "this is just never gonna release" or "their milking subscribers" hell this thread itself has had these same conversations of doubt. Do I think these devs are leading people along with the hopes that they'll game eventually? no. But its hard for a lot of people to not be jaded and not immediately get put off when they see the whole engine switch. I think its smart and probably less work in the long run with all the extra stuff that ue5 can do out of the box, its also a red flag for a lot of those who been let down in the past.
I'm sorry for rambling like this for what is a pirate site but I just wanted to put out there that I don't think that a lot of is inherently malicious.
I'm sorry for rambling like this for what is a pirate site but I just wanted to put out there that I don't think that a lot of is inherently malicious.
That's fine, it's what most of us think. Patreon is a way to get things done but it lacks accountability. On the other hand, Steam isn't so great after all since it was recently confirmed that
You must be registered to see the links
. I have seen Epic transfer games from one account to another, but they delete the source account first. GOG seems to be best retailer overall for not having DRM in their games, but I don't recall them having a method to support devs who want to start a game and find early access players.However I must say, it has been mentioned in the forum rules that development talk just derails threads and thus it's not allowed. Such talk mostly adds no content, and it'll go on for pages being periodically interrupted by requests to upload the new game version that so many people were saying wasn't going to come anytime soon, etc.
Sorry, a small on topic
Or, if somebody knows, what is the difference between Steam's 0.3.70 and Patreon's 0.3.721?
Thanks in advance
Last edited:
i know the steam update lags the patreon one so there is a tiny bit of content like centuars that didnt get taken over.