How smart do you like your soon-to-be corrupted girls in games?

[woody554]

I always like it when they kinda see the train coming, are suspicious about your actions, but still end up gradually losing the struggle. usually because they have an inner conflict between what they THINK they're about and what their more basic instincts pull them towards. there should always be that inner struggle between what they'd like to be and what they are, that makes them interesting. and it should never be fully resolved if you want to keep them interesting. the prude should NEVER become a slut, instead she should keep getting into these weird situations where 7 old monks goes bukkake on her. she swears never again, but somehow ends up getting fucked by a horse because reasons. and on some less conscious level she should be seeking it herself, but on the surface level she should always protest and at least pretend she didn't.

it's also less about intelligence and more about blind spots. even a dumb simple girl should see through the attempts to corrupt her, she should be suspicious about your lies and manipulation, but emotionally more likely to believe your further excuses. something like that.

NOT stupid in the way that you tell her to close her eyes and stick your dick in her mouth claiming it's a lollipop, and she never realizes its a dick. more like that she instantly knows it's a dick, goes "eeew, that's your dick', but still grudgingly keeps sucking it because you ask her. then she makes you swear never again, but next day is dumb enough to close her eyes again saying "it's better not be your dick again" and of course gets your dick in her mouth again. - I think that's a good level of dumb. not oblivious to things, but trusting and forgiving because she's just that nice.

 

[woody554]

about the iq nonsense related to writing: to claim a dumb writer can't write smart characters is the same as saying a dumb person can't see anyone looking smarter than him. everyone would look at most as smart as yourself or dumber, no matter how stupid you are.

clearly that's not how the world works, and we're all constantly seeing people looking smarter than us everywhere. so it's not about being required to understand what the smart people understand, it's just an illusion. social convention of showing certain behaviour patterns and status accessories like having a Phd or even just being rich. ever noticed how a rich old man in a suit is listened on societal things regardless of him making his money by selling coffee in paper cups? there is absolutely no reason to expect a billionaire knows something a cleaning lady doesn't, yet we do. getting money doesn't magically infuse knowledge from books into your head. but our kneejerk reaction is to assume it did, because we're all idiots.

in text you really only need to drop a couple of hints here and there and the reader will fill in the rest. don't overdo it, don't hammer it in, or they'll just look like cunts instead.

 

[Diconica]

Hi,

in case you don't remember there was during those times, something called "The Church" and/or "The Inquisition" (not only the Spanish one) - and most people who openly tried to either innovate or put the Scriptures to the test were simply called "heretics" and executed.
They did adapt - you simply know not about it.

Industries? no such thing as industry in Europe before the 18th century.

Cities: again, most European cities had still middle ages style fortifications (and mindsets) late in the 18th century. (Paris still had its fortifications in 1914)

thrive and conquer: well, if they were not born in the Nobility, they add little opportunities to rise above a certain social status. Nobody wanted or allowed them to.

People of Power: well, sadly most of them were stupid. (you know, inbreeding in Nobility/Royalty) or wanted to use your creations only for War or Alchemy (changing Lead into Gold). (ask Leonardo)

the Renaissance: well, it is a vastly different period if you compare what really happened from country to country and it drove most of Europe straight to the "Religion Wars". (over 40 years of jolly good fun and creativity)

to your last point: well, you may have missed the "creation" of all the secret societies (those we know about) like the Freemasons or the Rosicrucians - those were answers to your point - One can only thrive in a fertile (and friendly) environment .
(which most of the time is secret)



hum... isn't that already the case? I'm sure that I did not found any recent game's MC to be a rocket scientist or demonstrating any superior abilities besides the one that is getting his dick hard...
(which is not that hard to achieve... so to speak)

A more general point to demonstrate that idiots people with limited creative abilities cannot write an intelligent character - have you not watched any of the movies that came out of the US Hollywood based film industry for the last 15 years?

So, I would like my soon to be corrupted Girl to be sexy as "insert the most sexiest girl you can think of according to your generation", intelligent and hard working as Madame Curie, and with the sex drive of "insert name of your favorite porn star" *

* as a bonus she will love anal and oral sex.
Cheers

Just one issue I want to point out.

You must be registered to see the links

tends to be held up as the de-facto example of the church going against science. When it true both Copernicus and Magellan were friended by the popes of the time.
The truth is of the 32,000 that died over the 356 years of the inquisition none were in regard to science. All were direct heretics of the faith. You should check out

You must be registered to see the links

Henry Kamen is a Jewish Scholar not a Christian.
You might also check out

You must be registered to see the links

 

[DuniX]

For fucks sake The Church was bankrolling the Renaissance.
You would still be fucking peasants without it.

Cities: again, most European cities had still middle ages style fortifications (and mindsets)

If your argument is that geniuses were everywhere, then why is "mindset" a problem? Cities can still provided services thus opportunities for a genius to make use.

Industries? no such thing as industry in Europe before the 18th century.

The rich had no need for luxuries? Smiths?

or wanted to use your creations only for War or Alchemy (changing Lead into Gold). (ask Leonardo)

So no need for generals and engineers? What geniuses are supposed to be moral saints now?

to your last point: well, you may have missed the "creation" of all the secret societies (those we know about) like the Freemasons or the Rosicrucians - those were answers to your point - One can only thrive in a fertile (and friendly) environment .
(which most of the time is secret)

That's not the dark age, that's after the renaissance and great deal of things have changed in terms of knowledge.

Again my Argument is without Knowledge your vast Intellect is Worthless.

 

[Diconica]

about the iq nonsense related to writing: to claim a dumb writer can't write smart characters is the same as saying a dumb person can't see anyone looking smarter than him. everyone would look at most as smart as yourself or dumber, no matter how stupid you are.

That isn't what was said just what one individual took it as.

People write stories with smarter characters than themselves all the time.
What they don't do is write from the first person perspective if they are a writer who is worth a shit.

It's hard enough for people to see stuff from other people's perspectives in life.
Putting yourself in someone else's shoes is and understanding where they are coming from isn't the easiest thing always to do.
If it was we would have vastly fewer conflicts.

The intelligence factor however doesn't just work one way it works both ways. It is impossible for the very intelligent to see the world the less intelligent see and equally impossible for the less intelligent to see the world the same way a more intelligent person can.

Take the game chess. The vast majority of chess masters are 160+ IQ.
There are exception individuals who show extreme intelligence toward a subject but not many or any others.
They are very similar in the way a savant can have an ability that far exceeds normal yet is retarded in other aspects. The difference those few people tend to still have a 130 or so IQ.

How would you ever represent the thoughts of a person who is thinking 8 moves ahead on all potential moves the opponent might make in a match. Not just that Chess games range in time from normal 90 minutes 40 moves, to 30, rapid games are 15 to 30 minutes, Blitz games are 3 to 5 minutes, and bullet games 1 to 2 minutes. Consider they are making all those calculations in the time to make each move. That's hard enough at 90 minutes / 40 moves you have to manage your time. now think what that is like at 30 or 15 minutes divided by 40 or one of the faster games.

Compared to me they are an Indy car and I'm driving a Pinto. Their brains are going like this all the time. Which is why smart people often suffer more issues like depression and so on. They see all the potentials including all the bad ones.
If you think talking to one of these guys is bad sit in on two of them working on a problem together. The second one is watching the first one and pipes up I see where you are going with this walks over and starts working on the other portion of the problem. You are left sitting between the two of them going WTF are they using telepathy. It feels more awkward when you realize the rest of the people who were supposed to be in on this, left because they felt like a third wheel.

That there is why good writers write about characters like James Bond from the third person not the first.
It's only possible for you to write first person at your own level of intellect. You can't escape your own limitations.

 

[Deleted member 3145675]

Just one issue I want to point out.

You must be registered to see the links

tends to be held up as the de-facto example of the church going against science. When it true both Copernicus and Magellan were friended by the popes of the time.
The truth is of the 32,000 that died over the 356 years of the inquisition none were in regard to science. All were direct heretics of the faith. You should check out

You must be registered to see the links

Henry Kamen is a Jewish Scholar not a Christian.
You might also check out

You must be registered to see the links

Indeed,
even Galileo was simply silenced. (for heresy)
(we could consider that for a scientific mind being silenced is equivalent to death - an academic one)
(I had more of a Giordano Bruno in mind even if he was condemned for "heresy" - he was a scientific mind)

 

[CocoVC]

I just want them smart enough to know they're being corrupted, and they continue to be corrupted because they like it.

 

[Diconica]

Indeed,
even Galileo was simply silenced. (for heresy)
(we could consider that for a scientific mind being silenced is equivalent to death - an academic one)
(I had more of a Giordano Bruno in mind even if he was condemned for "heresy" - he was a scientific mind)

It wasn't so much Galileo was silenced as he was put under house arrest for accosting people he got in a disagreement with.
Let's just say he was enthusiastic about defending his position. Then he got labeled a heretic. Copernicus view of the solar system wasn't considered heretical till 1609 quite a few years after his death in 1543.
I think the issues then is as Pope Benedict the 16th said before retiring that he was surrounded by wolves.
Technically the sun isn't the center of the universe as Copernicus stated. It's the center of the solar system only.
Guess the church was half way right because the earth isn't either. haha

Giordano Bruno wasn't killed for his science views. He was killed over being part of Heretical cult and refusing to repent.
Hermetic as in Greek gods and astrology which isn't science astronomy is.

There was an entire set of rules inquisitors had to go by and if they didn't they got in serious trouble.
To be clear there wasn't anyone killed over science. To be clear the church itself never burned anyone. They turned the people they found guilty over to the civil authorities and they then determined the punishment.

There are a lot of people and groups like that like to paint the catholic church in a bad way. Some of the stuff is true a lot of it is just bunk. Martin Luther accused the church of taking money for indulgences. That was true in some locations. They put a stop to it after that. The inquisition well I guess that depends on how you look at it. Anyone that repented wasn't killed. There wasn't the torture in the Latin states/countries. While the inquisition was 1478–1834. Remember the protestant reformation took place in 1517-1555. What happened in England isn't on the Catholic Church at that point. At that point the king of England is head of their church. Blame his ass for what goes on there. Frankly most the atrocities associated with it are from England.
The inquisition in Spain over that period on executed 3000 to 5000 about 2.7% of the people charged or tried.

BTW sorry got that number wrong above. Should have picked a more reliable source than encyclopedia Britannica. It's the one that claimed 32,000 for the Spanish inquisition. 32,000 is probably more accurate for all of them combined. I'm sure England / Britain would love to put the blame of the deaths in their country on Spain. That said there are worse than them such as the guardian. You can see a number of sites that reference one another. Sad to say wikipedia seems to have the better sources this time. (Now that's a shocker)

 

[DuniX]

How would you ever represent the thoughts of a person who is thinking 8 moves ahead on all potential moves the opponent might make in a match. Not just that Chess games range in time from normal 90 minutes 40 moves, to 30, rapid games are 15 to 30 minutes, Blitz games are 3 to 5 minutes, and bullet games 1 to 2 minutes. Consider they are making all those calculations in the time to make each move. That's hard enough at 90 minutes / 40 moves you have to manage your time. now think what that is like at 30 or 15 minutes divided by 40 or one of the faster games.

By using metaphor? Because it's not really about how accurate the thinking is represented but how dramatic it can be.
Just look at how Anime do it in representing different subjects, like Hikaru no Go.
If your galaxy brain author writes the character's perspective that is ultimately boring and confusing to the audience then he wouldn't be a good author.
Like how Knowledge can simulate Intelligence, even you Big Brain's Perspectives need to be translated into Understanding and Entertainment in the Audience.

So maybe you are right, High IQ people do not understand a normal person's perspective, so they are likely to bore the audience to death. So maybe you should be restricted from writing anything.
Only normal people should write intelligent characters so that they can be understood by each other.
We must seize the means of writing intelligent character from our High IQ Overlords!
For Normal People By Normal People!

even Galileo was simply silenced. (for heresy)
(we could consider that for a scientific mind being silenced is equivalent to death - an academic one)

Galileo was an asshole and a complete political moron.
If he was really "silenced" then why are we still reading about him in history books?
Really the Pope went above and beyond to protect that fool.

 

[Diconica]

By using metaphor? Because it's not really about how accurate the thinking is represented but how dramatic it can be.
Just look at how Anime do it in representing different subjects, like Hikaru no Go.

Hikaru no Go is entirely 3rd person.
That's something I said could be done.

Ive been saying this entire time it is only not possible to do third person.
So were is your example of that?
I am starting to believe you don't know the difference between first person and third person.

To be clear most the characters in Hikaru no Go who are supposed to be smart don't sound that smart they simply sound like someone trying to pretend to be smart.
Hugh Laurie in House does a vastly better job but again 3rd person.
Sherlock Holmes in pretty much every movie is played better. Again 3rd person.
Sherlock Holmes books some are Narrated by supposedly Holmes. The operative word there is Narrated another 3rd person perspective.

Please tell me you haven't been arguing all this fucking time because you don't get the difference between first and third person.

3rd person:
As time comes home he makes sure he is quite in an attempt not to wake his roommate up Mary.

1st person:
"Ok, were did I put my keys. Can't make much noise or I am libel to wake Mary up. I can't handle that right now. She is way to rambunctious ... Owe crap she's already awake."

"So how long have you been waiting for me?"

First person books you should know.
To kill a Mocking Bird is told from Scout's point of view.
Gulliver's Travels was told from Lemuel Gulliver perspective.
Lemuel Gulliver
The great Gatsby

I can do a better job at defending your position than you but it would still be wrong.
Maybe you should spend less time on your quips and more time trying to understand the issue or what is being discussed at hand. Maybe, then you could form a more rational argument or at least present us with examples that fit.

 

[Alea iacta est]

Madness conversations.

Kids... You read two books and pretending to be educated.

Remember the lesson from Socrates.

I know that I don't know...

Stop quoting Galileo or Giordano Bruno, you have no clue. Just discuss porn please

 

[Deleted member 3145675]

Hi,
indeed,

I know that I don't know...

but by knowing that you do not know, you do know... (at least one thing)
Socrates is indeed an interesting fellow, sadly things did not end well for him - maybe not an example to emulate.

Regarding Galileo or Bruno - unless I'm mistaken we did not quote their works but merely pointed out that it got them into troubles.

Regarding ignorance (having no clue) isn't the best way to fight ignorance to discuss and share information?

Lastly, if You know that you don't know: on what ground do you build up your judgement upon our poor supposedly illiterate selves?
Nosce te ipsum

edit: Man, OP asked if people want smart or dumb bitches to mind break in porn games,
(I like both depending on the context)

 

[Asia Argento]

How about this? If the content is amazing and uses the protag properly... Anyone can fit well into a corruption game? The airhead (Yukino), the naive one (Chloe) or the one with brains (Karryn). It just depends on who is writing it up and how well the protag works with the material. All 3 mentioned were perfect fits in their games.

 

[desmosome]

Man, OP asked if people want smart or dumb bitches to mind break in porn games, and y'all are having philosophical discussions spanning 4 pages. Let me remind you guys that this is general discussions and not off-topic. Nobody wants to see you guys flaunting your high IQ brains in roundabout ways.

 

[Diconica]

Madness conversations.

Kids... You read two books and pretending to be educated.

Remember the lesson from Socrates.

I know that I don't know...

Stop quoting Galileo or Giordano Bruno, you have no clue. Just discuss porn please

What have you been reading? Maybe, I missed it but I don't recall anyone quoting them. I know I sure didn't.
I'd prefer Shakespeare when it comes to this topic. "A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool."
or “Don't criticize what you can't understand.” ~ Bob Dylan that would be for Dunix

As for me, I know I'm a fool look at all the time I wasted trying to convince Dunix.
If I was to compare my intellect or knowledge that is out there in potential my brain would be a bb rolling down an 8 lane highway.

 

[Asia Argento]

Man, OP asked if people want smart or dumb bitches to mind break in porn games, and y'all are having philosophical discussions spanning 4 pages. Let me remind you guys that this is general discussions and not off-topic. Nobody wants to see you guys flaunting your high IQ brains in roundabout ways.

Good writing > Female archetypes.

About your point, this is why people get wrist slaps and make post complaining about them------

 

[WindyGust]

Man, OP asked if people want smart or dumb bitches to mind break in porn games, and y'all are having philosophical discussions spanning 4 pages. Let me remind you guys that this is general discussions and not off-topic. Nobody wants to see you guys flaunting your high IQ brains in roundabout ways.

Well i guess you were one of the intelligent ones, that understood the question properly.

 

[Asia Argento]

Well i guess you were one of the intelligent ones, that understood the question.

Are you planning on making a game? Or is this just simple curiosity?

 

[WindyGust]

Are you planning on making a game? Or is this just simple curiosity?

Ehm, im writing something and i am testing to turn this into a VN with DAZ and renpy. Thats correct. First 2 Chapters are done. Currently i am working on the renders.

 

[Asia Argento]

Ehm, im writing something and i am testing to get this into a VN with DAZ and renpy. Thats correct. First 2 Chapters are done. Currently i am working on the renders.

I see--- well I hope my answer helped. Without a symbiotic relationship between the protag and storyboard, I dont think it would matter--- Most people would want the Karryn of Karryn's Prison (Protag that has her shit together and just falls in the heat of the moment due to being placed in a situation. Her option has 69%), not the naive Chloe or Ditzy Yukino who stumble into trouble somehow someway.