lets take sharing, how can a harem situation be more acceptable than sharing?
I'm going to preface my answer by saying that I'm fine with sharing being included in the game as an option, and am in no way, shape, or form advocating for its removal.
But A can be more acceptable than B for a variety of reasons, the most basic of which is"some people get off on A but not B". Since that's a large part of the point of the game, they (and, full disclosure, this includes me) are obviously not going to care about things that don't do it for them. If they have reason to believe that it's inclusion will result in less time and/or effort being spent on the things they do like, then of course they're going to be a little miffed. And that's a fair concern; there is only so much time Mr.Dots can schedule to work on DmD; if he spends 25% of that working on content you wil not see, then he effectively only made a 75% sized update from your perspective. It's an inevitable consequence of the allocation of finite resources in a multiple path branching game.
I have more than one playthrough (D only, plus a few MFFs) and should it transpire that the MFF routes will require a sharing route, with another male, then I'll not finish those routes. This would obviously be disappointing, and so I hope that doesn't occur; I doubt it will, since polyamory and sharing are listed as alternative options.
why is it ok that a dude can fuck around or have 2+ girls in the same time, while two guys on a girl its totally wrong?
Personal preference; people have them. Sometimes they make sense to others, sometimes they don't. The important thing is, no-one actually has to justify their personal preferences; they might choose to, and If you're legitimately curious, then I'd be willing to explain from my own perspective, but you not understanding why they have those preferences doesn't make them irrelevant.
theres people that enjoy that fetish, let it be avoidable and thats it. end of discussion. next.
We agree, and I get that the none-too-subtle my-preferences-have-priority-only-do-what-I-want mentality is wearying, and pretty damn entitled, but they're not going to stop. If they had the self-reflection to do so after you put them on the spot, they'd have already had enough self-reflection to not do it in the first place.
You are absolutely correct that person A's preferences shouldn't mean person B doesn't get their stuff (sharing, in this context). Personally, I'm fine with the inclusion of sharing (or bestiality, or whatever other fetish-I-don't-share that people ask for), I just won't see that content myself.
No, selfishness is not a nice property
No one said it was, but it is the most common defining human trait; everyone is selfish, in one regard or another. But "selfish" and "entitled" aren't the same thing, chief.
Again, the concern that I think some people have (not one I share, but I can at least see their logic) is that in order for Group A to get what they want, Group B will not get what they want. In that scenario, why should Group B care that Group A got what they wanted?
There's also some people whose concern is simply that the fetish in question exists; there's no talking to those people, though. Hell, think how many people have that opinion regarding the game existing at all; from most perspectives, we're all deeply, deeply sick fucks for getting off on this. How many people do you know who'd feel that way about this game, and how likely do you think you'd be to chnage their mind? Same deal.
