VN Ren'Py Eternum [v0.8.5 Public] [Caribdis]

[theblasbla]

Spoiler: I don't know if I agree with anything you've written there, except that people have different preferences.

You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.

Lets assume that the child NPC really is an actual person turned into an NPC... where exactly is the interesting moral dilemma there? If it really is a child then of course causing it harm would be wrong. The best defense you could give the other player is that he's ignorant of the possibility of the NPC being an actual person. This is reflected in how the two options are "Kill the bad guy(good option)" and "Accept the bribe from the bad guy(bad option)". It's very cut and dry what the intent is.

The Dev put actual, reasonable, real world arguments in favor for of taboo erotic fiction in a scenario where it can't be anything but wrong. It's the equivalent of having enemies spout capitalist rhetoric as they loot a village or having the asshole character in a romance VN be a Men's Rights Activist.

That's not an attempt at having an interesting moral dilemma, that's just virtue signaling. If you really want an interesting moral dilemma, have a player character corner a young bandit NPC. The player needs to kill the bandit for a quest and is about to execute it, does MC intervene or does he let it happen? If the MC intervenes, the NPC kills the other player before running away. If the NPC dies it will respawn after a while, and the other player will be able to log in after 24 hours at Level 1 if he dies. No lasting consequences except their suffering, but whose suffering does the MC prioritize? Fuck, Marry, Kill... and no saying "Fuck" twice.

Spoiler: Also again, it's hard to argue against the "not real" excuse when the child looks like a real-life equivalent of a kid in their universe.

You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.

What the child NPC looks like or how real it feels doesn't matter if it's not actually real, and to the other player, that's what he thought it was: Not Real. That's all the defense that's needed really because no reasonable person would think that NPCs would be actual people.

 

[Ungawa]

I don't know what everyone is losing their fucking minds about but I just played the whole game through from the beginning just to extend the experience and it's STILL NOT LONG ENOUGH!

Well, it needs to be

You must be registered to see the links

 

[Geralt From Rivia]

DOUBLE NOVA ACROSS THE SKY ROOM!
What does it mean!?

You not played 0.5? Don't want to spoil things.

 

[Dorfnutter]

What the child NPC looks like or how real it feels doesn't matter if it's not actually real, and to the other player, that's what he thought it was: Not Real. That's all the defense that's needed really because no reasonable person would think that NPCs would be actual people.

Except we as players know (and Orion to an extent because his supernatural senses could sense it even though he may have some doubts about it) based from what has been presented so far that it's likely a kid. If you have the burden of knowing that knowledge (or at the very least, you know there's a significant chance that that's the case), would you not feel revulsion for what the pedophile was doing - despite him not knowing?

Also, ignorance on the matter can't really be used as a defense when we (being the players and to some extent Orion) know that there is harm being done to someone. "Oh I didn't know this person was a victim of human trafficking, I thought she was a bonafide prostitute who's doing her job with her consent." That's basically what the "ignorance" argument sounds like to me, given what we know so far in the story.

 

[Helzing]

Thank you, you made a really nice game.

 

[sampow]

Lets assume that the child NPC really is an actual person turned into an NPC... where exactly is the interesting moral dilemma there? If it really is a child then of course causing it harm would be wrong. The best defense you could give the other player is that he's ignorant of the possibility of the NPC being an actual person. This is reflected in how the two options are "Kill the bad guy(good option)" and "Accept the bribe from the bad guy(bad option)". It's very cut and dry what the intent is.

The Dev put actual, reasonable, real world arguments in favor for of taboo erotic fiction in a scenario where it can't be anything but wrong. It's the equivalent of having enemies spout capitalist rhetoric as they loot a village or having the asshole character in a romance VN be a Men's Rights Activist.

That's not an attempt at having an interesting moral dilemma, that's just virtue signaling. If you really want an interesting moral dilemma, have a player character corner a young bandit NPC. The player needs to kill the bandit for a quest and is about to execute it, does MC intervene or does he let it happen? If the MC intervenes, the NPC kills the other player before running away. If the NPC dies it will respawn after a while, and the other player will be able to log in after 24 hours at Level 1 if he dies. No lasting consequences except their suffering, but whose suffering does the MC prioritize? Fuck, Marry, Kill... and no saying "Fuck" twice.

Your moral dilemma example seems kinda lame to me. NPC dies or Player dies? Where's the dilemma? Players killing NPC's (in a quest scenario) would be entirely expected. Intervening because you want to save the NPC seems rather nonsensical.

It's not that the NPC kid is an actual person, it's that they might have been a real kid in the past. The understanding is that some NPC characters were real people. So what are these characters now? Imprints of their data from when they were alive? Do they have "souls"? And also, do you care for the feelings of an AI that appears to be self aware?

You can't just say, "lets assume this..." and then say "where exactly is the interesting moral dilemma there". I'm not assuming anything, I'm placing a whole lot of possibilities on the table and then saying, it's a dilemma. The dilemma is in the fact that we don't know.

And I still don't get your virtue signalling accusation. What exactly is the dev signalling? That he doesn't like child abuse? That he thinks child abuse, even in a fantasy-no-real-victim scenario, is still reprehensible? It's unfair to the perpetrator that he doesn't know that the kid is anything more than lines of code, but it's clear that the mc and Alex both treat him like a real kid. And the kid's reaction, confused, and frightened, does nothing to convince them otherwise.

So yeah, what exactly is this virtue signalling you're going on about? Is every choice that the mc makes throughout the game virtue signalling? Is every choice that leads to one of the LI's approval virtue signalling? I mean why draw the line at this one incident? Why is shooting a paedophile in the head before he abuses an NPC kid virtue signalling? Does that mean:

• Is it virtue signalling that the player can buy x-ray glasses only to have them breakdown on their first use?
• Is it virtue signalling that Benjamin's head was blown off, and he died in real life, as he was perpetrating a rape?
• Is it virtue signalling that the mc acts all nervous when he runs into Annie just after fucking Eva's brains out, and that he is nervous again when Eva meets up with the gang at Blackridge?
• Is it virtue signalling every time the mc highly regards another character's actions (like when Nancy consoles Thanatos' mom)?
• Is it virtue signalling when Nancy decks the misogynist emperor and becomes the empress?
• Is it virtue signalling that raping Dalia leads to the relationship ending?

The scene actually played out mostly like it might in a VR game in our world:

• Paedophile finds out how to control NPC child and intends to abuse it
• Other players discover him and think he's a sicko,
• He argues that it's not real, it's just a fantasy
• Players shoot him in the head (that's not real either)
• The end
• PS: Alex points ++

 

[theblasbla]

Spoiler: Except we as players know

You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.

What are you even on about? Human trafficking is rampant in the sex industry, actual human souls being trapped as NPCs in a video game is NOT. Like, say you killed a bandit in the last game you played... but, SURPRISE, there was actually the soul of an actual human being in that bandit, and you just erased that soul from existence. Should you then branded as a murderer? No. Because no reasonable person would assume that there's actual people trapped in a video game. Same goes for the player raping the NPC, he has no reason to believe that his actions would cause harm to an actual person, so he is much less culpable, arguably even innocent.

 

[theblasbla]

Spoiler: Your moral dilemma example seems kinda lame to me.

You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.

I had agreed to argue based on the assumption of the child NPC being an actual child since that seemed to be the consensus here, and so would be an appropriate context for an argument. That's how moral dilemmas work, you establish a scenario with set parameters and evaluate decisions based on that scenario.

The actual in-game events clearly present the other player in the wrong, no questions asked. It isn't a moral dilemma. There's a MYSTERY about which NPCs are actually people, of souls, and servers, but the MCs action of shooting the other player is unequivocally presented as being right. There is no moral dilemma.

All those other examples you gave aren't examples of the Dev bringing real world arguments into the game, which is why they aren't virtue signaling, as opposed to the scenario we were discussing which very clearly references common arguments about this subject matter and then putting those arguments in a scenario where they're unequivocally shown as being in the wrong.

 

[sampow]

I had agreed to argue based on the assumption of the child NPC being an actual child since that seemed to be the consensus here, and so would be an appropriate context for an argument. That's how moral dilemmas work, you establish a scenario with set parameters and evaluate decisions based on that scenario.

The actual in-game events clearly present the other player in the wrong, no questions asked. It isn't a moral dilemma. There's a MYSTERY about which NPCs are actually people, of souls, and servers, but the MCs action of shooting the other player is unequivocally presented as being right. There is no moral dilemma.

All those other examples you gave aren't examples of the Dev bringing real world arguments into the game, which is why they aren't virtue signaling, as opposed to the scenario we were discussing which very clearly references common arguments about this subject matter and then putting those arguments in a scenario where they're unequivocally shown as being in the wrong.

I don't know where you're getting your definition of virtue signalling from, but it's not about corralling opposing views to your own into a losing argument to prove you're right (which is what you're saying the dev has done here).

Virtue signalling is purely putting on the public record your moral standing on an issue to convey your own good character.

Giving the player an option to shoot a paedophile in the head (regardless of the paedophile's opinion) isn't virtue signalling.

Posting on twitter (X... ) that you're not buying a copy of Hogwarts because you want to stand in solidarity to with your LGBT friends is a correct example.

I could be wrong, but I just get the impression that you think that perpetrating child abuse in a fantasy environment where there are no victims, should not be considered a bad thing, and you don't like that the dev portrayed it as bad, and rewarded the player for shooting the pedo in the head?

 

[theblasbla]

I don't know where you're getting your definition of virtue signalling from, but it's not about corralling opposing views to your own into a losing argument to prove you're right (which is what you're saying the dev has done here).

Virtue signalling is purely putting on the public record your moral standing on an issue to convey your own good character.

Giving the player an option to shoot a paedophile in the head (regardless of the paedophile's opinion) isn't virtue signalling.

Posting on twitter (X... ) that you're not buying a copy of Hogwarts because you want to stand in solidarity to with your LGBT friends is a correct example.

I could be wrong, but I just get the impression that you think that perpetrating child abuse in a fantasy environment where there are no victims, should not be considered a bad thing, and you don't like that the dev portrayed it as bad, and rewarded the player for shooting the pedo in the head?

I would say that showing the other side of a moral or political argument as being the "bad guys" in a piece of media that you create, which in this instance is done via "corralling opposing views to your own into a losing argument to prove you're right", is a TYPE of virtue signaling. It's akin to making the enemies in your game wear MAGA hats.

If the Dev just didn't add in the valid real world arguments, and left everything else in the scenario the same, then I wouldn't have had any problem with it.

 

[someyoungguy]

It's honestly baffling to see someone stan so hard for a paedophile NPC.

The specific position of "it was wrong to shoot his video game avatar because he didn't know the kid he was trying to abuse might be real" just seems surreal.

 

[theblasbla]

No, that's not the same. A MAGA-affiliated person who is part of the organization due to perceived grievances and anger to the "establishment" and "the social justice-addled society" is not the same as a literal pedophile fulfilling his sexual fantasies in a virtual environment where people can find out what he's doing. You cannot make a "see this from their perspective" argument to this. One is motivated by a possible number of factors while the other is thinking with his loins, full stop. Even convicted felons are repulsed by the latter (so much so that they kill "kiddy diddlers" when they get outed in prison).

And no, Cari is not "virtue signaling." Like sampow said, being provided a choice on the matter - even if one choice basically nets you LI points because said LI has her own moral compass - disqualifies it as "virtue signaling." "Virtue signaling" would be us completely having no choice on the matter at all...or worse, having Orion soapbox for a good few minutes on how morally repugnant the pedophile's actions are and how it's his god-given right to take out scum like him. If anything, the scene is basically just Orion doing right by what his supernatural senses are telling him to do (and what he's destined to become) as well as provide additional lore information as to how the boxes work. That's pretty much it.

Except one choice is clearly being shown as the moral one. If you choose to take the bribe its presented as the MC doing something bad but pragmatic. Him and Alex also DO soapbox about what a terrible person the other player is, regardless of which choice you make. Then IIRC it gets brought up again later just so they can reiterate how horrible the other player is.

Also, no additional information on the boxes was given.

 

[kingadam696]

Spoiler: Scene OST Names

You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.

(PSA: Please don't go to the artist's YT pages of said songs and tell them that you heard this from Eternum as the owners of royalty-free music sites and some artists who don't want their work associated to adult content have been cracking down on AVN devs using said songs (they already gave grief to Ocean - the dev of "Summer's Gone" - and DriftyGames - the dev of "Leap of Faith" - which led them to remove music from their own games). So if you don't want Cari to pull songs out of this VN because some litigious license holder discovered that said song is being used in an AVN, just enjoy the music and as much as possible don't post/leave any sort of comment on YT)

Holy shit, you're a legend. Same for the people who linked the youtube playlist, but thanks specifically for pointing out which are those songs.

 

[Dorfnutter]

Except one choice is clearly being shown as the moral one. If you choose to take the bribe its presented as the MC doing something bad but pragmatic. Him and Alex also DO soapbox about what a terrible person the other player is, regardless of which choice you make. Then IIRC it gets brought up again later just so they can reiterate how horrible the other player is.

Also, no additional information on the boxes was given.

Talking about how they feel sick about the encounter isn't soapboxing. Orion waxing poetic or monologuing when it's obvious that he's talking to the player is (which he hasn't done during the event).

Spoiler: Also, there IS some info about it (albeit in a "blink and you'll miss it" line).

You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.

 

[Takkatakka]

Except one choice is clearly being shown as the moral one.

Because it is.

 

[Envy*]

I've just got to the end of this version and I already want to see the sequel... frustrating to have to wait, but if it allows me to have a game with a scenario of this quality, I'll wait.

 

[Ellyx]

Except one choice is clearly being shown as the moral one. If you choose to take the bribe its presented as the MC doing something bad but pragmatic. Him and Alex also DO soapbox about what a terrible person the other player is, regardless of which choice you make. Then IIRC it gets brought up again later just so they can reiterate how horrible the other player is.

Also, no additional information on the boxes was given.

As many comments stated before, yes one choice is despicted as bad and it is normal, you (and when I say you it means Orion and you the player) know that this kid is not originally an NPC and was human before so I don't know how someone can feel bad about the fate of the pedophile and choose to accept the bribe.

 

[Takkatakka]

As many comments stated before, yes one choice is despicted as bad and it is normal, you (and when I say you it means Orion and you the player) know that this kid is not originally an NPC and was human before so I don't know how someone can feel bad about the fate of the pedophile and choose to accept the bribe.

It's not even his "fate" it is just his character in a game for him. So he is effectively losing nothing...

 

[ShadowLordV1]

The fuck is happening here the last 2 days.

 

[huangff96]

Does anyone know which game these pics come from?