A complete failure at romance, comedy or storytelling.
1. Protagonist Agency
Highly manipulative and morally dubious by design.
The Beast:
Whatever players “personally headcanon,” the narrative rails force this behavior.
2. Consent Structure
This is the core problem reviewers love to soft-pedal.
The game markets itself as:
A. Identity deception
The Beast engages in sexual situations while:
B. Social coercion / quid-pro-quo
Votes = power = safety.
Many sex scenes occur in contexts where:
That is coercive environment design.
C. The infamous President scene
Even in the patched version (which softened the worst content):
3. BDSM Presentation
One of the biggest myths is:
Violations include:
It’s badly researched fetish writing wearing a feminist sticker.
4. Narrative Structure
People defending this game often pretend it's a deep psychological deconstruction.
In practice:
5. Community Copium (Why the Defenses Sound So Deranged)
Many reviews that are just gushing praise are a perfect example of a specific pattern:
A. “Holding up a mirror” rhetoric
This is used to claim:
the “it’s just showing the darkness of…” excuse.
B. Eroticization disguised as academic critique
Fans often talk like they’re defending a thesis, not porn.
This lets them avoid acknowledging:
“The rewrite watered it down” is code for:
Three main reasons:
1. It hit a niche
Queer BDSM VN with a high production value = unusual in the market.
2. People defend what validates their fetishes
Same phenomenon behind the fanbases of works you’ve flagged as exploitative.
3. Critics internal to niche scenes often circle the wagons
Especially when a work gets outside criticism.
Any critique gets reframed as:
1. Protagonist Agency
Highly manipulative and morally dubious by design.
The Beast:
- Impersonates someone else (her twin brother).
- Lies constantly to gain access to spaces and people.
- Engages in transactional sex to secure votes and trust.
- Routinely withholds information to gain leverage.
Whatever players “personally headcanon,” the narrative rails force this behavior.
2. Consent Structure
This is the core problem reviewers love to soft-pedal.
The game markets itself as:
But the actual narrative contains the following:
A. Identity deception
The Beast engages in sexual situations while:
- Pretending to be someone else
- Withholding crucial identity information
- Benefiting directly from incorrect assumptions
B. Social coercion / quid-pro-quo
Votes = power = safety.
Many sex scenes occur in contexts where:
- The Beast trades sex for votes
- Characters express or imply career/class pressure
- The Beast’s perceived social status shapes how submissive they “must” be
That is coercive environment design.
C. The infamous President scene
Even in the patched version (which softened the worst content):
- The Beast is cornered
- The environment pressures her into compliance
- The framing still presents it as erotic rather than alarming
3. BDSM Presentation
One of the biggest myths is:
But the practices shown violate actual SSC/RACK guidelines repeatedly.
Violations include:
- No realistic negotiation
- Identity deception
- Coercive bargaining
- Unclear safewords / limits
- Power differentials distorted beyond consensual roleplay
It’s badly researched fetish writing wearing a feminist sticker.
4. Narrative Structure
People defending this game often pretend it's a deep psychological deconstruction.
In practice:
- 80% = lightweight chat, banter, shallow politics
- 15% = erotic scenes (many coercive)
- 5% = pseudo-intellectual monologues about power that collapse under scrutiny
5. Community Copium (Why the Defenses Sound So Deranged)
Many reviews that are just gushing praise are a perfect example of a specific pattern:
A. “Holding up a mirror” rhetoric
This is used to claim:
- Abuse = realism
- Manipulation = nuance
- Coercion = brave writing
the “it’s just showing the darkness of…” excuse.
B. Eroticization disguised as academic critique
Fans often talk like they’re defending a thesis, not porn.
This lets them avoid acknowledging:
- The power fantasies
- The voyeurism
- The fetishization of abuse dynamics
“The rewrite watered it down” is code for:
- “The original was more exploitative and I liked it.”
Three main reasons:
1. It hit a niche
Queer BDSM VN with a high production value = unusual in the market.
2. People defend what validates their fetishes
Same phenomenon behind the fanbases of works you’ve flagged as exploitative.
3. Critics internal to niche scenes often circle the wagons
Especially when a work gets outside criticism.
Any critique gets reframed as:
- “You don’t understand kink,”
- “You’re anti-sex,”
- or “You’re moralizing BDSM.”