[Discussion] Design/Writing Question about Victory Speed

[Saki_Sliz]

XD No worries, you seem to be one of the few that have rivaled me in terms of puking out a wall of text, one of my bad habits. I welcome your wall of text!

You said you were more of a reader than me, and I could definitely get a sense of that from your first reply, but your second reply certainly solidified that feeling. It seems we come from two different backgrounds. You're more of a reader and as a result you tend to have more of an affinity towards games that by some means provide an enjoyable experience through what I would call, character interactions. I think I mentally explored the idea at one time, asking myself what makes some stories or shows more enjoyable. I was asking myself because I was wondering what made some shows memorable, even leading people to writing fan fiction. Looking over most shows, games, stories, fan fictions, and even adult games, the thing that seems critical to making a story (or the context at minimum) enjoyable, and let me know what you think, is the interactions between characters. Not physical interactions, but mental interactions. How does one character feel about another, what do they think about the main character, and a very important aspect is what issues are there, be it a mission, a mystery, a misunderstanding, friction between characters, etc. One could write an epic, but if the story only has one character, with no other characters to react to the main characters and the events of the story, it's almost as if no story happened at all.

I on the other hand come from a more technical upbringing. I was a SFW game maker and coder for years before I found the NSFW community. A triple A game, or AAA game, such as Skyrim, Fallout 4, Just Cause 4, etc. usually refers the budget and expected quality that these games would have. AAA doesn't mean anything, it is just a grading system to rank games, but in the indie community, we point out the difference between AAA games using an acronym. You are AAA if your game has all three A's, Art (or more accurately Aesthetics), Story Ark, ... crap I forgot the third. Basically it took a lot of work to make a big game, even with a team, sacrifices were made, where we had to focus on something more niche rather than do something more cinematic and traditional. And with SFW indie games story can be omitted depending on the design of the game. There are quite a few NSFW games on newgrounds which are more game than adult content, and in some cases I think it works. But I think that may just be because I am more a gamer rather than a reader as you are, so I may have more of a bias towards games that act like games rather than visual novels.

And so, like I said above, see it as ,"how much story/dialog is mandatory", more that the, "how much story/dialog can I sacrifice", that was in your mind at start.

One thing I am trying to avoid is making it sound like the scale has some sort of assumption, like the assumption that more story is better than less. But I think both phrases sound a bit biased. I am thinking now, instead of a one dimensional scale, a 2D graph with two scales may be better at explaining things, at the cost of more complexity to the conversation.

on one side of the graph is the story investment, and on the other side is game investment. a weak game could have neither, a AAA game could have both, and a curved line could be used to show how much can be done given so many man hours. As you point out with your example of brothel manager with a story, a game can have both a focus on story and game mechanics, so long as things are dynamic. Perhaps another word for dynamic could be, evolving, progression, something new around the corner.

Thanks for the clarification about quality. I wasn't referring to art, but rather the over all experience being good, a good game is good, derp. Coherence is a good term.

With your example about adding the story to the brothel game idea, I couldn't help but think of where I did something similar, where I saw a simple idea, and suddenly my creative mind had a field day. I guess sometimes people really do like a good story to bring the mundane to life.

You make a good point about letting the game do some of the work out of the story, such as using different lines in your example to exaggerate the focus on each statement as you pointed out, or my favorite, use images of characters like in visual novels to some what animate them, to represent their mood and behavior as they talk. are they blushing, mad, etc.

I wanted to make a simple tech demo with a captured girl and one scene, but because I couldn't keep the dialog simple enough, I practically had to map out ever form of indirect communication for a simple test. It is kind of the reason I started this post was to explore some thought and to see what I could try next.

I think it's a question of practice... Well, at least I hope, since I plane to make my own game one day

Well considering all the points you make, I can definatly tell it is something you have an interest thinking about and studying, I'm in the same boat more or less, but perhaps almost falling overboard.

Not necessarily what I prefer, but undeniably the better approach for an adult game.

Agreed and agreed. Writing exaggerated characters is not necessarily a good thing, and every anime that tries it isn't usually the best or even that good, but adult games do seem to be able to benefit from exaggerated character writing more so than any other medium since often character personalities can be the focus of the player (does the nice guy win the shy girl, can you melt the goth girl's icy heart? etc.), and then that loops back to the importance of character interaction, and then that leads back to why story tends to be a very important aspect to many adult games.

In the future I may try out your suggestion of writing and removing, thanks for sharing!

 

[anne O'nymous]

[Sorry, shit happen sometimes, the answer was initially validated by a keyboard shortcut before I had finished it]

One could write an epic, but if the story only has one character, with no other characters to react to the main characters and the events of the story, it's almost as if no story happened at all.

I totally agree and have the perfect example for this, 2001 a Space Odyssey. Yes, Arthur C. Clarke is a great writer, and yes, Stanley Kubrick is a good director. But what make the story great is the fact that HAL isn't just an IA, but an interactive one. There's more tension and more narrative power in a dialog between HAL and the astronauts, that it can have if the said astronauts were talking together, commenting what they see on a screen.
It's the difference between, "I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that" (talking about the whole scene), and something that could have been :

- What happen, Dave, open the door !
- I can't, there's something preventing it.
- Try again !
- I already did it many times. You'll think I'm crazy, but it looks like HAL know that we want to disconnect it and refuse to let you in to prevent this.
- You're right, I think you're crazy. [NdA:what can he answer except that ?]

With this "not interactive IA" version, we can only have Dave guess regarding the situation. But alright, the door can't be opened, why should it be because HAL don't want to die ? Why can't it be just some whim of the IA, a bug in the code, or some piece of the computer that broke ? And, on top of that, why can't they get rid of this stubborn assembly of code lines ?
This while with the real version, we hear HAL and, like you said yourself, it permit to know how it/he feel about the astronauts.
The emotional impact isn't the same and, we humans, are led by our emotions ; we like a great story, but we love an amazing one. Provide us with these emotions, and you can touch us, hook us. Deprive us of them, and we just past X time doing something that wasn't totally boring, perhaps funny, but well if we find better next time, we will choose that.

There are quite a few NSFW games on newgrounds which are more game than adult content, and in some cases I think it works. But I think that may just be because I am more a gamer rather than a reader as you are, so I may have more of a bias towards games that act like games rather than visual novels.

I stop you here (then will effectively answer the point). I'm a reader and a gamer No more a hardcore one because I'm near to my fifties, and so lost part of my eyesight and reflexes, but I have more that thirty years, in both reading and gaming, behind me.
This said, I think that the games you talk about, if I understand correctly, succeed because they followed some kind of reverse process. The dev took a regular game, made it, then found a way to insert adult content in it. It's the case by example of games like the Deep Space Waifu series ; classical shoot 'em all but in an adult context. Which fallback again on the "entertainment inside entertainment" I talked about previously. I want to play a shoot 'em all, why not this one, it will add the enjoyment of the adult content in top of the enjoyment of the game itself.

I am thinking now, instead of a one dimensional scale, a 2D graph with two scales may be better at explaining things, at the cost of more complexity to the conversation.

on one side of the graph is the story investment, and on the other side is game investment.

I see it more as a two axis approach. Something like, "amount of immersion and/or investment expected from the player", versus, "amount of interaction (between the characters) needed from the player". The more interactions you have, the less you need dialog/story ; but the more immersion you want, the more you need to have both.
A "fuck the girl" flash game have technically a lot of interactions triggered by the player ; he need to click for every thrust. But in the same time it don't need a real story, nor dialog lines, unless you want the player to really invest himself into the game. At the opposite of the scale, you have pure Visual novels. They have no interactions triggered by the player, but want to achieve a total immersion. So, they need a strong story and many dialog lines.
Then, in the middle of this you have the "choose your own adventure" games. There's a large amount of interactions, but they aren't triggered by the player just because he need to ; generally the player have another motive. By example, among the three girls in the room, he'll interact with the one he prefer. So, in a way, the player not only choose his adventure, he also partly wrote his story. Here, you need to provide enough story to describe fill the background and maintain it, and enough dialog to express the evolution of the character's stories. But not too much of both, because you also need to let some place for the player to add his own story on top of this.
In terms of AAA games, it's also the difference between Mario Kart and Call of Duty, with Fallout in the middle.

As you point out with your example of brothel manager with a story, a game can have both a focus on story and game mechanics, so long as things are dynamic. Perhaps another word for dynamic could be, evolving, progression, something new around the corner.|/quote]

Or, like I said at first, "living". The player should feel that the game isn't just lines of code, but something living ; so like you said, something that, according to what the player do, evolve, progress and offer novelty around the corner.

You make a good point about letting the game do some of the work out of the story, such as using different lines in your example to exaggerate the focus on each statement as you pointed out, or my favorite, use images of characters like in visual novels to some what animate them, to represent their mood and behavior as they talk. are they blushing, mad, etc.

Both are complementary. It's a game, it have a visual part and a textual one. If the dev totally forget one, haven't he also forgot one dimension of his game ?
The fact to have both can even come handy in case there's more than one character on the scene. The text provide the information related to the character speaking, while the CG provide the information related to the other(s).

mc "Mom, when we arrive, can you help me raise the tent ?"
[The sister smile in the back, because of the sexual innuendo in your question.]
mom "You have two hands, use them for this !"
mc "But mom..."
mom "No 'but'. It's not another hand that will change something."
mc "It would make it easier for me."
[The sister have a hard time not laughing]
mom "And why should it be mine ? Ask your sister."
sis "Wait, what ? No ! I categorically refuse to do this."
[The mother look at her daughter with perplexity, why is she suddenly reacting like that ?]

Well considering all the points you make, I can definatly tell it is something you have an interest thinking about and studying, I'm in the same boat more or less, but perhaps almost falling overboard.

For now I'm more looking at the boat from shore.
This said, falling overboard isn't by itself a problem, as long as you can go back in board after this. It's even more the opposite, you'll learn what you shouldn't do. After all, there's more to learn from our failure, than from our success.

In the future I may try out your suggestion of writing and removing, thanks for sharing!

Your welcome.

 

[Saki_Sliz]

I haven't played the deep space waifu series, but you make it sound like a decent shoot em up game with adult content. I think of

You must be registered to see the links

to be quite similar, a shoot em up game with adult content. I find it is much more fun with a gaming mouse set to rapid click at 1000 hz. A surprising amount of art content and variations, far too much for any one person to do alone. I agree with you,

[These kinds of ]games ... succeed because they followed some kind of reverse process. The dev took a regular game, made it, then found a way to insert adult content in it. ... Which fallback again on the "entertainment inside entertainment"

And that not all games need to rely on this, some games can be more tailored made for adult content, and I think previously you were trying to point out, that for most of these adult content focused games, story can go along ways to making them more than just fap content. So not every game has to follow the same core design philosophy.

You talk about making the game seem like it is something living, dynamic. What do you think of when you think of a living game? The reason I ask is because I think of two things. The first thing I thought of when you gave that example with the brothel management game with a bit of story and when you first used the word dynamic was I imagined a story line filled with characters with different energy levels and energy types, from the cheerleader like girl, to the goth, and the story line continues to evolve and progress at a sensible rate. But when you use the word living, I think of something else, where the player makes choices and the game responds accordingly to those choices.

There can be three ways a game can respond to user choices, at least I think so far. The first would be branching paths, where eventually your choices or a collection of actions are used to make the story follow a particular arc, such as choosing being a hero or a villain. these kind of mechanics are used in CYOA and visual Novels, but as you point out, there can be variation with this sub category. Many games use this as the main tool for having multiple different endings and it is one way to add agency to player's actions. The second thing is to make player choice a core aspect of the game, such as with management games, character load outs in rpg's, tactical games, where player choice is not about the story per say, but just how the game is played and brought to life, like a tabletop game, again giving player a sense of agency. The second case usually focus on specific types of games, such as tactical games like Civilization 6, winning by world domination, or being the first to advance from the stone age to the point of having a rocket go to the moon. This may be less applicable to adult games and may rely on the concept of entertainment inside entertainment. The third way a game can respond to choices, and still give a sense of agency (importance or significance in your choices) and I think is more applicable to adult content is to give immediate feed back.

Typically for feed back, it would be like an rpg, when characters answer differently depending on how you talk to them. For the last case, feed back doesn't also need to be connected to a branching mechanism that impacts how the game changes or how the character changes. In fact feed back doesn't have to do anything but give an interesting response. The issue with feedback alone is often players don't like feeling that their choices have no significance, no agency. I think feed back is good, as it can come in the form of dialog where a character can express themself. This goes back to character interactions and knowing what is going through their minds. you do something nice, and they appreciate it. you do something dirty and they are a bit embarrassed or teased. Etc. do feed back right and even though it may not impact the game, it can still be a rewarding experience for players.

At least that is what I think. When you mention making a game dynamic, I think interesting writing of character, plot points, and events, but when you say living, I think of these three things instead. The reason I think of these three things is because of how some games are made, either branching behavior, intricate game mechanics which constantly monitor you and allow for the game to be played in a variety of ways (such as having to level up or make money in some games to help pace the story's progression, like

You must be registered to see the links

does), or the third being no actually significant impact (other than the illusion of agency/choice). The important reason I bring this up is to focus on the idea of player choice and control.

From what I have found, the more you make a game's behavior dependent on player choice, the exponentially more work goes into making the game, and the pay off isn't exactly equivalent, it isn't even linear. There is always a point of diminishing returns on investment. If someone is passionate about an idea, this doesn't matter, the game itself is the goal. Even if someone is just making a game to make money, having anything is good enough.

I don't know about you, but I don't plan on making a master piece, that takes to much time and is quite depressing to know that there is always more you can do, I have worked on enough master piece projects as it is, and I free time is diminishing as the years progress. I also don't just want to make something, anything, and then keep making new games along the way, trying to learn and improve as time goes on.

I am not really that interested in making adult games, what I am more interested is figuring out what makes something good, better, or effective, and then I want to exerciser what I preach. As a result, what has happened is my current thinking is, I can do art, I can code, I can create just about anything needing technical skill, but those two things are the slow and hard parts. Writing and deciding how the game should go and play are the quicker easier parts to work on, but poor choices can lead to a lot of work for not necessarily a lot of pay back. Everybody wants different things, and I find I don't want to create great games, but lots of smaller focused fun games and stories.

Perhaps a talking point for another time, but more focused (or niche) games seem to have very high reception rates if only really found by those looking for said niche. Where as games that try to check off too many boxes have the issue where content tries to compete with other content in the same game, and sometime players find the niche content to be rather diluted; but bigger games do get the advantage of being more marketable to more people.

One could say I am asking for everything, both quality in the game i want to make, and quantity by making more games with ease. One could say I am looking for a sort of perfect game or formula, and maybe I am. I just know I want to get the most bang for my buck, the most fun and success out of my limited time, so exploring topics like this can act as a sort of magnification to hone in one's abilities.

Getting back to why I am focusing on the wording "living" to describe a game vs dynamic is, I feel dynamic can describe the experience and can be expressed through writing. Living, on the other hand, can describe how the game feels overall, and this can often be created by making the game react to the player. The issue with making the game reactive (be it being able to change clothes, having money, play a role, choose a storyline, etc.) is much more work, not as much pay off (but that varies), and doing so can exclude players from some content. I myself do not replay longer story based game to explore more content just because of my short attention span. However, a feed back system seems to be the holy grail solution. In some cases talking to a character and making the wrong choices can have some impact on the game, but if it is nothing too significant (such as just waiting till the next day to try again) and it offers an insight to how you or the character feel about something (like a student who secretly has a crush on their professor suddenly getting excited to hear the professor needs them even if you are just lying to the student to get them to go away), then even if any answer was good enough, it still makes the experience rewarding because simple by the interesting character interaction. Since that takes only a bit of writing and extra art, doing this I find is a very efficient choice to make in term of time and energy to implement, and will be something I want to focus on in the future for my game or games. But there are cases where without significant writing players do get the feeling of choices not mattering.

That may have been a bit of a bird walk.

After all, there's more to learn from our failure, than from our success.

Most certainly. For professional game devs, if you want to make sure your game is a success, we have a phrase.

You must be registered to see the links

. Don't assume to start with the perfect idea, continually test and break your game along the way, see what the issues are, fix, and keep repeating (but realize that different players want and like different things). Halo was originally going to be a real time strategy game if you can believe it, like starcraft. While these are wise words, I again think it comes back to the idea that not every game can follow the same rules, even the fail faster rule. The issue with fail faster is it an attempt to perfect a game, which becomes an issue of spending more time on a game, and only really needed if you want to maximize the amount of money/success one is going to make. It doesn't really apply when you want to make something very specific, because sometimes focusing on an idea or a key point is the innovation that is needed to bring something new to the market rather then results from play testers. In my case, I want to make simple games just so that I hardly ever have to go back to them or fine tune them before release. In the adult gaming community, a good alternative I have seen to fail faster is the game comes out, a version 1, and eventually a version 2 is made with fixes and additional content, or another game of a similar make is made that narrows in on what players wanted. While both fail faster and the alternative of this support the argument of "just make something first, anything is good enough" case, I still want to test how far I can lean out of the boat before falling out, to see how far I can reduce and clarify to do's and not to do's till I can make games as easy as I can make robots, circuits, code, and do art; with the end goal being to make games for fun on the side of everything else I do.

While I want to focus on smaller projects, I am sure there will always be demand for greater and larger projects, but from what I can tell, there are already plenty of people looking to fill those shoes, so for now I will continue to look into perfecting smaller niche games.

 

[anne O'nymous]

You talk about making the game seem like it is something living, dynamic. What do you think of when you think of a living game?

Honestly I'm not sure that I can really define "living".
You know, like when you look at the picture of a room in a magazine and thought that surely nobody live in here. Why do you think this ? If you look with more attention, you see that the magazines are all perfectly ordered on the table, that the curtains are too perfectly straight, same for the blanket. It's little things that, when you addition them, lead to a staged photography deprived of life. And you felt it immediately, without being really able to describe your feeling other way than with "it lack of life".

But for a game, I'll say that it's based on two main things.
Firstly the game pace. Whatever how far you are in too many games, you always have one thing to do, and this thing always have the same importance.
Think of this like if you were playing one The Elder Scroll game. You're here, peacefully following the main quest. All you have to do is going to this location, that you reach easily. Then, you now need to go to this one and... what the fuck ? Why are all these locations appearing on the map ? Hey, slow down man, I can't visit them all at once.
One second before you had almost nothing to do, then you have too much. And it will finally fallback to "almost nothing", to perhaps raise to "oops, don't add more please, it's just enough now". The line measuring "what to do"/"what happen" isn't a straight one, it goes up and down. And same for the importance. Some of those new locations are important, they'll help you finish a quest or trigger a new one. Some other are just fillers to help you earn better equipment, more money and/or level up.
The pace isn't regular. Sometimes you wonder what you can do, and sometimes you wonder if you'll really be able to do everything. The difficulty being to not overdo it. The player shouldn't be bored because he have absolutely nothing to do. Like he shouldn't be drown because there's way too many things to do.

Secondly, the characters. Too often they seem to be puppets. Well, they are since it's a game, but they shouldn't feel like it.
Why do they have to always have the same amount of reaction whatever you do ? You're nice, boom, three lines of text and a counter that increase. You're a jerk, boom, three lines of text and a counter that increase. Why a character can't go full tantrum, giving it hard to you for a full hour ? Or at the opposite be over happy because you gave it a gift ?
And why should it be always this ? Why not a, "Yeah, it's a good gift. Excuse-me, I had a really bad day, I'll probably be more happy next time you'll offer me one", or a, "You know what ? I'm exhausted today. So, for once I'll not even be mad at you for your stupidity".
It's not just a question of randomization of their reaction. It's that the characters aren't waiting for your next interaction with them ; they are supposed to have a life on their own after all. And this should be reflected in the way they act and react. That they follow a regular schedule is due to the fact it's a game ; if they always are "here" at "this time", it help the player. But that they always perform the exact same action in the exact same way... Are porn game's universes only populated by OCD peoples ?
Like they have a life, we should see its effect on them.

The important reason I bring this up is to focus on the idea of player choice and control.

I some way, I think that the player should come last when you think of your game. It's the most important part of it, but you can't write something good if you already wonder what the player will do.
The most difficult thing is to keep your story coherent, same for the character personalities. So, if you write them first, without caring yet about the player, you'll have this coherence. Then you decide how much liberty you'll give to the player, and write variation of the story and the different possible personality evolution.
This way, when you finally write the game, and so think about what the player can or not do, you already know what you'll have to give him.

From what I have found, the more you make a game's behavior dependent on player choice, the exponentially more work goes into making the game, [...]

Yes. That why I said above that you must think of the player last. Having your story and its variations already wrote will help you limit the growth of the works. You can't go outside of what you wrote, so you have one border here, one border there, and your game stay between them. Everything that lead it to cross a border must be corrected to not do it.
By example, the player is too kind too often ? Sorry guy, it will not speed up the pace of the story, you'll still have to wait a little. And at the opposite, the player is too much of a jerk ? Well, look, she's pissed off now, you'll have to appease her mood if you want to progress again with her.

I don't know about you, but I don't plan on making a master piece, that takes to much time and is quite depressing to know that there is always more you can do, I have worked on enough master piece projects as it is, and I free time is diminishing as the years progress. I also don't just want to make something, anything, and then keep making new games along the way, trying to learn and improve as time goes on.

Well, to be honest I feel like I must make a master piece. I expressed too often my thoughts about what make a game good, and too many people seemed to agree. Add to this the number of people I helped with Ren'py, and... can I really make just "yet another average game" ?
But, to be more than honest, I'm old enough to know that theory and practice are two different things. Some are better with one, other better with the other, and few are effectively good with both. So, I'll do my best, hopping to be at least average with practice, and see what happen.

Perhaps a talking point for another time, but more focused (or niche) games seem to have very high reception rates if only really found by those looking for said niche. Where as games that try to check off too many boxes have the issue where content tries to compete with other content in the same game, and sometime players find the niche content to be rather diluted; but bigger games do get the advantage of being more marketable to more people.

My thoughts on this are simple : You can't please everyone, and if I do it, it's not for the money. So I'll do my game like I want, the way I want, including what I want. If you like it, well I'll be glad. If you dislike it, well, it's your right, but don't expect me to care.

Getting back to why I am focusing on the wording "living" to describe a game vs dynamic is, I feel dynamic can describe the experience and can be expressed through writing. Living, on the other hand, can describe how the game feels overall, and this can often be created by making the game react to the player.

Said otherwise, "dynamic" describe the technical part (writing as well as coding and design), while "living" is more on the side of the player's feeling.

The issue with making the game reactive (be it being able to change clothes, having money, play a role, choose a storyline, etc.) is much more work, not as much pay off (but that varies), and doing so can exclude players from some content. I myself do not replay longer story based game to explore more content just because of my short attention span.

I agree for the amount of work, but it's not necessarily something that don't pay off.
Let the player choose what he want to wear, change what the girls wear (my god, how many of them only have on set of clothes !). Make the player have to work extra hours to be able to buy new clothes, for him or the girls. Make him face the choice, what will he wear today, what will he offer her first ; possibly make him decide what he prefer that she will wear more often.
But just do this. I mean, it will change what the player see, but have no impact on the story. It's just for the player feeling. If he want, he can offer her a new swimsuit, very sexy or very slutty. But if he don't do it, she already own one, that she'll wear if needed. And if he do it, it will no make more guys trying to hit on her.
In the end, not necessarily more dynamic, but more living, and so it can possibly pay back. But, yes, way way way more works.

Most certainly. For professional game devs, if you want to make sure your game is a success, we have a phrase.

You must be registered to see the links

.

Try, and your own "final fantasy" can be as much a success.

While both fail faster and the alternative of this support the argument of "just make something first, anything is good enough"

Anyway, you'll never know if it's good or not if you are the only one playing it. And if it's not good, you'll never improve if you only have your own feedback. So, yes, make something, release it, and take not of what people say.

 

[Saki_Sliz]

Having your story and its variations already wrote will help you limit the growth of the works.

Limit, that is the keyword! Ah, it feels like you threw a bucket of cold water on me! XD Yes, limits are very important! How could I have forgotten something so fundamental! I feel like such an egg head. I remember at some point I took note of how important it was to have limits, of how important it was to start something just to make an outline and limit yourself. It works for everything, circuit design, programming, document design. I think I first noticed the power of this technique when I was studying art and it was hard to figure out what I wanted to do, but by keeping in mind that limits could be used as guidelines was the key I needed at the time to finally start being able to complete some art. It is kind of the background reasoning for why I started to focus on simpler projects, but I had been focusing on simpler projects for so long I had forgotten why I originally set my self down such a path. At the time I was trying to limit myself away from making a masterpiece because such games are known to push their limits at times. Thanks to you I am starting to once again understand things I had forgotten!

Well, to be honest I feel like I must make a master piece. I expressed too often my thoughts about what make a game good, and too many people seemed to agree.

In that case, I must reflect much of the advice you and others have given me, and repeat them to you. If you are going to make a master piece, the focus should be focused on you, and what you want the game to do. But try everything in your power to not make the game about the players, or to say it another way, don't try to make a game to prove a point or to impress others. It is as you say...

My thoughts on this are simple : You can't please everyone, and if I do it, it's not for the money. So I'll do my game like I want, the way I want, including what I want. If you like it, well I'll be glad. If you dislike it, well, it's your right, but don't expect me to care.

Easier said then done, humans are a naturally social creatures, everything circles back to wanting to hear a positive second opinion. And if you are a fan of the idea that humans evolved, you could then come to understand that focusing on the negatives is human nature, as part of an old survival mechanism used to avoid danger and hazardous situation. Not to mention the more you do something, such as write or make games, the better you get at doing that particular thing in a particular way, then more you want to challenge yourself, the more you crave perfection, and then the more critical of yourself you become because you start to have higher expectations for yourself because you know your different, you know you have some particular skill or insight that gives you the edge, something to differentiate the difference between the good from the bad. Next thing you know, you start trying to prove it to yourself, but the only way to prove to yourself, is to get recognition from others. It's a horrible trap to get into... but in this society it just might help pay the bills

Or at least that has happened to me a few times, it is kind of why I bounce between hobbies, from electronics, coding, art, game making, and now trying to get better at writing. Basically, what I am saying is that many people who get started in making games, from what I have witnessed over the past few years as the SFW solo game dev community has grown is that most people who make their first game do so because they are finally inspired enough to risk doing something new (Such as neither of us have made a nsfw game yet), but unfortunately for most of them, it is because they finally had some grand idea, the perfect idea, a master piece, which is what they want to bring to life. And typically that master piece never sees the light of day because the lack the skills, the endurance, have a new great idea, or come to realize that the amount of work to bring their idea to life at the quality they want even if they had the skills they wanted, would still take more time than they think they would be willing to commit. That is actually one of the reasons I started this thread, was to explore the scale as a tool to guide devs and writers, with hopefully not the intent to limit them, but for them to understand what to expect to happen if they want to make a game a certain way, and what other options there are to explore.

Why do they have to always have the same amount of reaction whatever you do ? You're nice, boom, three lines of text and a counter that increase. You're a jerk, boom, three lines of text and a counter that increase. Why a character can't go full tantrum, giving it hard to you for a full hour ? Or at the opposite be over happy because you gave it a gift ?

I mentioned before I have been trying to focus myself to make a simpler game, or simplify my writing. I would like to be able to do something like just 3 lines. What you showed is something like a 2 on the scale, maybe a 2.5. However, I tend to write characters with more... their answers always have a hidden motive, a personality, a person who has their own secrets. I do so since sometimes some of the fun is eventually that persons secrets coming out to embarrass them, and it is a habit I am trying to break. I have no problem making more elaborate responses. But as I may have alluded to, perhaps one of the reasons I have a hard time simplifying my writing is because I expect more from myself, simply because I have an undeserved ego. So perhaps I am looking for excuses, looking to justify a reason to compromise on my writing in a way that makes it some how even better, and in tern easier for me to make games with.

It may be I will have to follow your advice more to the letter than I thought I would at first. Writing first, ignore players for now. Rewrite again, cleaning things up since I know what leads to what. Write down all the alternatives, how each character can express them self uniquely, personalities, quarks, etc. Rewrite again in the form of a game, but use what I have write as both my boundries and a guide, Then explore what players can do. Try working on the game, the art, remove any extra stuff text that the game could communicate either through art, clues in the story, or how the text is delivered, be it font, spacing, etc. (At one time I was exploring custom fonts and font animation to add more life to text and how it is delivered, bubbly text with color and pops in = nice with energy, sharp text that slams in and white, grey, and cool blue tones = cold and angry). And then try for a first release.

Said otherwise, "dynamic" describe the technical part (writing as well as coding and design), while "living" is more on the side of the player's feeling.

You are much better with words than I. A but better clarification and definition.

Let the player choose what he want to wear, change what the girls wear (my god, how many of them only have on set of clothes !).

XD, so true, and now that you bring it up, that may be a great starting point for a game idea. With my best narrator's voice,
A world where clothes are limited...
or as my brother in law once said,
[Insert name of state here, eg. Wyoming], where men are men, women are men, and sheep are scared!
wait what?
I am just fooling around, I always look for an excuse to say that line. But being serious again, I do think that may be an interesting idea for an adult game, or focus point. In fact, if in the future I want to continue working on smaller game projects, rather than going out looking for ideas half form by the community, I could have it where each game is just based on one simple idea.

Anyways, some time tonight I will start thinking of ideas around a game where character starts out with one set of clothes, players can give them more, and something about a story. I will try out your idea of forming the story first and going out from there. It's been great talking with you!

 

[anne O'nymous]

Yes, limits are very important! How could I have forgotten something so fundamental! I feel like such an egg head.

No need to feel like this. "Limits" and "creation" are two words that don't feel like they can be used together in another way that "limits your creation". When you write the story, or the characters, you need to let your imagination get totally free, that's implied by "creation". So, it happen, often, than you forgot to put back the limits when you aren't anymore writing the story, but the game itself.

[...] or to say it another way, don't try to make a game to prove a point or to impress others. It is as you say...

More than impressing the others, I feel that I must do a master piece to not deceive them.
Basically speaking, I didn't even have something releasable and I already feel the "it's a game make by this guy who said so interesting things about how a game should be", and others, "it's a game made by this guy who solved my problem with Ren'py". And all ends in the same way, "I'll play it, it should be a really good and interesting game".
For the coding part, I know that it will be true, but for everything else I'm far to be this sure. But well, like I already said, the only way to be sure is to release something, so I'll do it, one day. I must first apply what I say, and limit myself to a single game instead of already thinking about four or five ones.

Next thing you know, you start trying to prove it to yourself, but the only way to prove to yourself, is to get recognition from others. It's a horrible trap to get into... but in this society it just might help pay the bills

I will not say that I totally don't care. Having good feedback is always a nice feeling, while having bad one can sometimes hit you really hard.
But, all in all, I'm a 47 years old father of two, there were a time where an ego search returned thousands of answers. This will, even if I'm not really knew for my works outside the people effectively working with me, what I make is appreciated. So, I feel like I don't have anything to prove, I already did it, and did it good enough for a whole life. If I succeed, I'll probably feel it like a free bonus.
This said, it's really easy to say this when there's no negative feedback... It can be something different when the time will come. Yet, it's probably the best way to see things. Making games is part of your life, but you'll never be effectively famous for making adult games. It's not you who'll be know, but your alias. So, don't see this as a way to achieve something in life, because the day you'll die, nobody will go and say, "I'll miss him. He was so good at what he was doing that I can't count the number of hours I past faping on his games."
And this have a positive side effect. Once you don't see this as a life achievement, but just the achievement of a personal pleasure, negativity have less power over you. There isn't many grannies coming back from the club, crying because someone said that their last embroidered doily is a piece of shit. They had a good time creating it, that what matter the more for them ; more that what this bitch who can't even keep a husband more that two years, can think about it.
The example can seem funny, but it have more depth that it seem. Being able to still be loved by your husband so many decades after your wedding, is way more an achievement than being able to always create the perfect embroidered doily. And the same apply for any hobby.

I would like to be able to do something like just 3 lines.

There's two kind of masters. Those like Leonardo DaVinci, who are born with it, and those like Bruce Lee, who worked hard, day after day, to become one. So, if you aren't born with it, you can still become one if you really want it.
At least, the more you'll practice and bring back in question your own works, the more you'll approach it. The real failure isn't to not succeed, but to try again in the same way.

What you showed is something like a 2 on the scale, maybe a 2.5. However, I tend to write characters with more... their answers always have a hidden motive, a personality, a person who has their own secrets. I do so since sometimes some of the fun is eventually that persons secrets coming out to embarrass them, and it is a habit I am trying to break. I have no problem making more elaborate responses.

I think you're confusing "elaborated responses" and "deep responses". The game isn't something instantaneous, the answer can be gave piece by piece.
In the last update of

You must be registered to see the links

, there's a scene at the pool. A drunk girl express the big secret of her family, her deep loneliness and her trust for the MC in two sentences only ; perhaps three, don't remember exactly, but not more than that.
At the moment the player read this, he can perhaps have some clue, but that's all. Then, few times later, the big truth is put in bright light. And that's when the loneliness and trust parts kick in.

Deep responses don't necessarily need to be elaborated nor long. They only need to have a meaning. They don't even effectively need words. Make a girl bit her lips when the MC say, "wow, look at this picture. The girl in it is so hot", and the player must be blind to not understand that she's thinking of the said model in a sexual way ; and so that she's at least bi-curious. You don't need a dialog line like, "Yes, she's hot. I was never really attracted by girls before, but this one make me all wet", the lips biting is enough.
You want to express the fact that the mother have fall in lust for her son ? Make her talk with a friend :
friend "You're son really grown up since the last time I saw him. He became such a handsome man now."
friend "[something that don't really mater]"
friend "[another thing that don't really mater]"
friend "What do you think about this ?"
mother "What ? Sorry, I was lost in my thoughts. You said ?"
You don't need the usual :
friend "if he was my son, I would have already let him fuck me."
mother "what ? Are you crazy ?"
friend "don't say that you never thought about this."
mother "what ? No !"
friend "don't lie to me, I know you since kindergarten. I know when you're attracted by a guy."
mother "Well... perhaps..."
friend "Please girl, you know that it's not 'perhaps'. Look at you, I don't need to see your panties to know how wet you are."

Writing first, [...]

Can't say that it's the way, but it's the one I'll try to follow.

It's been great talking with you!

Same here.