Unreal Engine Completed Last Hope [v1.0174] [Poolside Games]
- Thread starter N7
- Start date
- Jan 23, 2018
- 53
- 28
Select censorship off in advanced settings in setting menu... dark means OFF / bright blue means mosaic on...
Default is OFF so button/Key/mouse bashing likely turn it on...
Everything is already at Max. There's nothing more i can do to unlock.
And i can't find these scenes. I see them Green on the Calendar but when i go to activate them it's just the same old scenes. Nothing new.
- Apr 28, 2021
- 883
- 1,134
R-Life
Wildlife
Skyrim + Mods (check loverlabs)
Monolith bay
Breeders of the Nephelym
Bonetown
Lots of Illusion games (Ai shoujo, Koikatsu, Sexy Beach)
Seed of the dead Sweet Home
Together BnB
Check my favorites: No free roam, but 3D:
Virt-a-mate
Some modeling agency
COM3D2
Know what would be a fun idea? If the status report thing was used as an excuse to record private porn vids.
- Jan 23, 2018
- 53
- 28
1 Grinding
2 yoga sex
only triggered by event menu... ask when shes not active in an event.
Any way to have the nude mode updated for the 19.2 ? Those scenes without clothes could be even better imo ! Ty !
- Jul 4, 2021
- 81
- 35
Choose last option 'can't decide' till you get 'touch the boobs'
ABSOLUTELY GIGANTIC WALL OF TEXT
OH FUCK I'M POOOOOOOOOSTIIIIIIING
TL;DR - Dumb reviews bother me. I don't mind criticism as long as you explain it and try to stay objective in your final verdict. The site needs a better interface for sorting and recommending reviews, because right now visitors will just see the most recent reviews and have to scroll into past reviews to hopefully find a balanced take.
//////
A cursory glance of the site rules doesn't prohibit discussion of reviews, so I'll bite.
I have been disgruntled with poor reviews on many other games, usually for a few reasons:
1. The reviewer obviously did not play the game.
2. The reviewer is hypercritical of specific aspects of the game.
3. The reviewer provides no reason, or very stupid reasons for disliking the game.
Examples:
"I hate Saving Private Ryan because Tom Hanks is a shitty, ugly actor. Why would you want to watch this movie? I watched like five minutes before I wanted to puke at his stupid hillbilly-ass-looking face and left."
"I hate Saving Private Ryan because one of the Germans' gun was actually just an old British 1901 Winfucklerbum .303 rifle, which completely ruined the historical accuracy appeal of the film."
"I hate Saving Private Ryan because I didn't understand what was going on, like, at any point in the film. Too noisy!"
Obviously, negative reviews are not the sole problem. There are plenty of occasions where people leave a 5/5 star review on an objectively low-quality game because they really, really liked one scene or fetish the creator included. However, negative reviews are in my opinion more common and more egregious. This is compounded by the fact that this site does not have any system to sort and discuss reviews, meaning that all reviews are treated equally and are only weighted by how recent they are. A well written and comprehensive review of a game is just as likely to be seen first as someone saying, "Game bad, developer sucks, I hate this."
I am guilty of these sometimes - particularly with the second point. I think it is fair to lower a rating based off of one factor, so long as the reviewer keeps in mind the rest of the experience. I can respect the effort a developer put into art and UI design even if I can't stand the story. I can love a story but factor a truly abysmal user experience into my rating.
With this all out of the way, let's take a look at a recent review by... Anon. There really isn't a point to keeping the reviewer anonymous, but whatever.
1. Anon thinks the game lacks a meaningful amount of content.
2. Anon dislikes the grind, particularly referring to the first few days of the game where you have to masturbate to fill the first tank.
3. Anon dislikes the characterization of the women on the ship because they "ignore" the MC and treat them like "someone not worthy to be spoken to."
4. Anon either dislikes the wine bottle minigame or experienced a bug with it.
5. Anon believes the dev did not playtest the game.
6. Anon thinks the game lacks a meaningful amount or quality of dialogue.
1. Anon thinks the game lacks a meaningful amount of content. I disagree. Despite being a fully 3D, animated game, there are many soft and hardcore porn scenes for each of the girls. There are "nightcrawling" scenes, consensual softcore scenes, exhibitionist and group scenes, reoccuring branching scenes, and the hidden dream scenes. My first run of the game lasted hours and ended prematurely due to a bug that set me a few in-game days back. Claiming that the game has "no content" is objectively false. Claiming the game lacks "sufficient" content to not receive demerits places the bar so high that few games on the site would meet the requirement.
2. Anon dislikes the grind, particularly referring to the first few days of the game where you have to masturbate to fill the first tank. Because I'm autistic, I went and tested the game (v18.2) and clocked that entire introduction at twelve minutes long. I could've done it faster. Twelve minutes to reach the first "H-scene" where Kat gives you the handjob in the medbay. You do not need to masturbate again for the rest of the playthrough, as her nightly handjob is available afterwards.
I actually agree that the game is a little grindy, though certainly on the lighter end of the spectrum. I've played Hentai High School and Girls Life; I think I know grind. The lack of a "hold to skip" button seen in most Ren'Py games is a sore spot. The asteroid minigame quickly became tiresome as well. The game could use some better communication about requirements for certain scenes, although my frustrations there were almost exclusively focused on Natasha's working scene and her yoga scene. I am glad that there is an option to skip the minigames used in certain scenes, like Adrianna's bath scene.
3. Anon dislikes the characterization of the women on the ship because they "ignore" the MC and treat them like "someone not worthy to be spoken to." This is almost objectively false. Natasha and Adrianna are kind from the start of the story. Nobody ignores the MC. Katherine, whose first interaction with the MC is him ogling her naked body, is the only character who shows any negativity towards the MC, but even she expresses genuine concern for his well-being within the first twelve minutes of the game. Her personality is that of a stereotypical "annoyed sister," or "tsundere," and her hostility is usually provoked by making sexual requests or compliments before her "Love Level" is high enough. This completely flips past the first hour or two of the game, where she becomes far more flirtatious, caring, and playful towards the MC... but then, Anon didn't actually play the game.
The second part of Anon's complaint is a little more subjective, but no less wrong: the MC is their only hope of getting out of the situation alive, so why do they treat him poorly? Well, they don't, but there is some understandable awkwardness about the topic early on. One could make the argument that they should be much more eager and respectful towards the MC, but honestly, the crew is already unreasonably quick to jump on the MC's dick. They also are in no immediate mortal danger, they have food and recreation available, and the MC filling the tank is an eventuality. The MC demanding their sexual services or respect or whatever wouldn't make sense and would drastically change the tone of what is fundamentally a game playing with incest taboo.
4. Anon either dislikes the wine bottle minigame or experienced a bug with it. I also was frustrated with the wine bottle when I first played. I still don't know exactly what triggers it, but talking to Natasha about the wine bottle, asking her again, talking to Adrianna about wine, and waiting for a full day was sufficient to get the wine bottle to appear on my test playthrough (again, version 18.2). My guess is that you really only need to talk to Natasha and Adrianna both to get the wine to spawn. I would recommend that this be changed to simply asking Natasha about it, since offering Adrianna wine that you don't have in order to spawn it is anything but intuitive.
The wine itself is easy to find. For the true dullards out there, making it shine or sparkle might help, but IMO the most important change is making the process to spawn it simpler.
5. Anon believes the dev did not playtest the game. Now, I can't prove that the dev has or has not playtested the game beyond all doubt. However, if the dev had managed to put this all together without ever playtesting the game, then they would be one of, if not the single most talented programmer to grace this green earth. Of course they playtested the game. The game functions exceptionally well. I experienced one minor graphical glitch and one crash after hours of playing the game, which, as mentioned before, is fully 3D with, essentially, dozens of scripted cutscenes. Todd Howard wouldn't dream to dare to claim such stability.
On the subject of my crash, I tried skipping through the scene with Natasha in the gym. I mentioned this to the dev, who acknowledged it, and I see a patch has been included in the latest version.
6. Anon thinks the game lacks a meaningful amount or quality of dialogue. I agree, up to a point. There are absolutely better written stories on the site. I do not remember Last Hope for its suspenseful plot and deep conversations and character arcs. I remember Last Hope for Adrianna's big tits popping out of her bra when she jumps in the tub. I remember enjoying the stereotypical "clueless MILF mom," "mischievous cougar aunt," and "horny insecure sister." Last Hope hits the bare minimum for an acceptable story, which is that none of the characters are insufferable and the plot is mostly coherent. Many games, even popular games on the site do not meet this standard.
So I agree that the quality of the story and dialogue are nothing stand-out, but "no dialogue" is just not true. There is a story, even if it's very predictable. Unless the dev pulls some magic out of their ass before the final release, my review will criticize the game for its mediocre plot. You know what that translates to? 3/5. Average for the genre. Not 1/5. 1/5 is "The worst in the genre."
Anon's review reads like somebody that got frustrated because they didn't try other dialogue options to find any sex scenes. They either could not or would not figure out how to get the wine, a task I was able to accomplish in my own playthrough after a single search on the thread. If they had said, "The game is very opaque on how to accomplish certain tasks or make progress early in the game," then that would have been a perfectly reasonable criticism. Rating the game 1/5 because "no content" tells me you shouldn't have left a review. Rating the game 1/5 because "character bad" when you have not played more than twelve minutes of content tells me you shouldn't have left a review. Spewing hate at the dev because you could not bother to ask about the only hiccup people regularly have in the game tells me you shouldn't have left a review.
Unfortunately, any kind of vetting process on reviews is difficult to say the least. It runs the risk of "verified" reviewers or critics skewing the perception of stuff because they can't stay objective - purposefully or not! Provided nobody is a dumbass, a completely open forum is ideal, but Anon's review here is Proof Numero Uno that we can't have anything nice. I haven't thought of a great solution to the problem, but I think some inspiration can be taken from Steam for a decent one: the helpful/funny system. I already mentioned my issue with the current review page, but to reiterate - there is no way to sort or promote reviews. Shit reviews are just as impactful and more importantly visible as good reviews to the casual visitor. The "helpful" and "funny" split allows people to easily "like" a review as well as specifically endorse or recommend the review. For what it's worth, Steam also has a sidebar that shows the most recent reviews for games, regardless of community interactions with the review.
I don't know anything about F95 site culture or the process for recommending or discussing changes. There wasn't a particular reason why I chose this review either, so I will probably not engage too much on this, but I felt that I should comment about it at some point, so here we are...
Two-thousand fucking words later.
EDIT: The review I discuss in this post was very old - I somehow ended up on the last page of reviews without realizing it and believed it was the most recent review. Probably user error, but my pride demands it was definitely the computer's fault. None of my high level criticisms or conclusions are affected by this - other then perhaps an even greater need for a clearer UI!
OH FUCK I'M POOOOOOOOOSTIIIIIIING
TL;DR - Dumb reviews bother me. I don't mind criticism as long as you explain it and try to stay objective in your final verdict. The site needs a better interface for sorting and recommending reviews, because right now visitors will just see the most recent reviews and have to scroll into past reviews to hopefully find a balanced take.
//////
A cursory glance of the site rules doesn't prohibit discussion of reviews, so I'll bite.
I have been disgruntled with poor reviews on many other games, usually for a few reasons:
1. The reviewer obviously did not play the game.
2. The reviewer is hypercritical of specific aspects of the game.
3. The reviewer provides no reason, or very stupid reasons for disliking the game.
Examples:
"I hate Saving Private Ryan because Tom Hanks is a shitty, ugly actor. Why would you want to watch this movie? I watched like five minutes before I wanted to puke at his stupid hillbilly-ass-looking face and left."
"I hate Saving Private Ryan because one of the Germans' gun was actually just an old British 1901 Winfucklerbum .303 rifle, which completely ruined the historical accuracy appeal of the film."
"I hate Saving Private Ryan because I didn't understand what was going on, like, at any point in the film. Too noisy!"
Obviously, negative reviews are not the sole problem. There are plenty of occasions where people leave a 5/5 star review on an objectively low-quality game because they really, really liked one scene or fetish the creator included. However, negative reviews are in my opinion more common and more egregious. This is compounded by the fact that this site does not have any system to sort and discuss reviews, meaning that all reviews are treated equally and are only weighted by how recent they are. A well written and comprehensive review of a game is just as likely to be seen first as someone saying, "Game bad, developer sucks, I hate this."
I am guilty of these sometimes - particularly with the second point. I think it is fair to lower a rating based off of one factor, so long as the reviewer keeps in mind the rest of the experience. I can respect the effort a developer put into art and UI design even if I can't stand the story. I can love a story but factor a truly abysmal user experience into my rating.
With this all out of the way, let's take a look at a recent review by... Anon. There really isn't a point to keeping the reviewer anonymous, but whatever.
Let's distill this to the actual points and then address them one by one.
1. Anon thinks the game lacks a meaningful amount of content.
2. Anon dislikes the grind, particularly referring to the first few days of the game where you have to masturbate to fill the first tank.
3. Anon dislikes the characterization of the women on the ship because they "ignore" the MC and treat them like "someone not worthy to be spoken to."
4. Anon either dislikes the wine bottle minigame or experienced a bug with it.
5. Anon believes the dev did not playtest the game.
6. Anon thinks the game lacks a meaningful amount or quality of dialogue.
1. Anon thinks the game lacks a meaningful amount of content. I disagree. Despite being a fully 3D, animated game, there are many soft and hardcore porn scenes for each of the girls. There are "nightcrawling" scenes, consensual softcore scenes, exhibitionist and group scenes, reoccuring branching scenes, and the hidden dream scenes. My first run of the game lasted hours and ended prematurely due to a bug that set me a few in-game days back. Claiming that the game has "no content" is objectively false. Claiming the game lacks "sufficient" content to not receive demerits places the bar so high that few games on the site would meet the requirement.
2. Anon dislikes the grind, particularly referring to the first few days of the game where you have to masturbate to fill the first tank. Because I'm autistic, I went and tested the game (v18.2) and clocked that entire introduction at twelve minutes long. I could've done it faster. Twelve minutes to reach the first "H-scene" where Kat gives you the handjob in the medbay. You do not need to masturbate again for the rest of the playthrough, as her nightly handjob is available afterwards.
I actually agree that the game is a little grindy, though certainly on the lighter end of the spectrum. I've played Hentai High School and Girls Life; I think I know grind. The lack of a "hold to skip" button seen in most Ren'Py games is a sore spot. The asteroid minigame quickly became tiresome as well. The game could use some better communication about requirements for certain scenes, although my frustrations there were almost exclusively focused on Natasha's working scene and her yoga scene. I am glad that there is an option to skip the minigames used in certain scenes, like Adrianna's bath scene.
3. Anon dislikes the characterization of the women on the ship because they "ignore" the MC and treat them like "someone not worthy to be spoken to." This is almost objectively false. Natasha and Adrianna are kind from the start of the story. Nobody ignores the MC. Katherine, whose first interaction with the MC is him ogling her naked body, is the only character who shows any negativity towards the MC, but even she expresses genuine concern for his well-being within the first twelve minutes of the game. Her personality is that of a stereotypical "annoyed sister," or "tsundere," and her hostility is usually provoked by making sexual requests or compliments before her "Love Level" is high enough. This completely flips past the first hour or two of the game, where she becomes far more flirtatious, caring, and playful towards the MC... but then, Anon didn't actually play the game.
The second part of Anon's complaint is a little more subjective, but no less wrong: the MC is their only hope of getting out of the situation alive, so why do they treat him poorly? Well, they don't, but there is some understandable awkwardness about the topic early on. One could make the argument that they should be much more eager and respectful towards the MC, but honestly, the crew is already unreasonably quick to jump on the MC's dick. They also are in no immediate mortal danger, they have food and recreation available, and the MC filling the tank is an eventuality. The MC demanding their sexual services or respect or whatever wouldn't make sense and would drastically change the tone of what is fundamentally a game playing with incest taboo.
4. Anon either dislikes the wine bottle minigame or experienced a bug with it. I also was frustrated with the wine bottle when I first played. I still don't know exactly what triggers it, but talking to Natasha about the wine bottle, asking her again, talking to Adrianna about wine, and waiting for a full day was sufficient to get the wine bottle to appear on my test playthrough (again, version 18.2). My guess is that you really only need to talk to Natasha and Adrianna both to get the wine to spawn. I would recommend that this be changed to simply asking Natasha about it, since offering Adrianna wine that you don't have in order to spawn it is anything but intuitive.
The wine itself is easy to find. For the true dullards out there, making it shine or sparkle might help, but IMO the most important change is making the process to spawn it simpler.
5. Anon believes the dev did not playtest the game. Now, I can't prove that the dev has or has not playtested the game beyond all doubt. However, if the dev had managed to put this all together without ever playtesting the game, then they would be one of, if not the single most talented programmer to grace this green earth. Of course they playtested the game. The game functions exceptionally well. I experienced one minor graphical glitch and one crash after hours of playing the game, which, as mentioned before, is fully 3D with, essentially, dozens of scripted cutscenes. Todd Howard wouldn't dream to dare to claim such stability.
On the subject of my crash, I tried skipping through the scene with Natasha in the gym. I mentioned this to the dev, who acknowledged it, and I see a patch has been included in the latest version.
6. Anon thinks the game lacks a meaningful amount or quality of dialogue. I agree, up to a point. There are absolutely better written stories on the site. I do not remember Last Hope for its suspenseful plot and deep conversations and character arcs. I remember Last Hope for Adrianna's big tits popping out of her bra when she jumps in the tub. I remember enjoying the stereotypical "clueless MILF mom," "mischievous cougar aunt," and "horny insecure sister." Last Hope hits the bare minimum for an acceptable story, which is that none of the characters are insufferable and the plot is mostly coherent. Many games, even popular games on the site do not meet this standard.
So I agree that the quality of the story and dialogue are nothing stand-out, but "no dialogue" is just not true. There is a story, even if it's very predictable. Unless the dev pulls some magic out of their ass before the final release, my review will criticize the game for its mediocre plot. You know what that translates to? 3/5. Average for the genre. Not 1/5. 1/5 is "The worst in the genre."
Anon's review reads like somebody that got frustrated because they didn't try other dialogue options to find any sex scenes. They either could not or would not figure out how to get the wine, a task I was able to accomplish in my own playthrough after a single search on the thread. If they had said, "The game is very opaque on how to accomplish certain tasks or make progress early in the game," then that would have been a perfectly reasonable criticism. Rating the game 1/5 because "no content" tells me you shouldn't have left a review. Rating the game 1/5 because "character bad" when you have not played more than twelve minutes of content tells me you shouldn't have left a review. Spewing hate at the dev because you could not bother to ask about the only hiccup people regularly have in the game tells me you shouldn't have left a review.
Unfortunately, any kind of vetting process on reviews is difficult to say the least. It runs the risk of "verified" reviewers or critics skewing the perception of stuff because they can't stay objective - purposefully or not! Provided nobody is a dumbass, a completely open forum is ideal, but Anon's review here is Proof Numero Uno that we can't have anything nice. I haven't thought of a great solution to the problem, but I think some inspiration can be taken from Steam for a decent one: the helpful/funny system. I already mentioned my issue with the current review page, but to reiterate - there is no way to sort or promote reviews. Shit reviews are just as impactful and more importantly visible as good reviews to the casual visitor. The "helpful" and "funny" split allows people to easily "like" a review as well as specifically endorse or recommend the review. For what it's worth, Steam also has a sidebar that shows the most recent reviews for games, regardless of community interactions with the review.
I don't know anything about F95 site culture or the process for recommending or discussing changes. There wasn't a particular reason why I chose this review either, so I will probably not engage too much on this, but I felt that I should comment about it at some point, so here we are...
Two-thousand fucking words later.
EDIT: The review I discuss in this post was very old - I somehow ended up on the last page of reviews without realizing it and believed it was the most recent review. Probably user error, but my pride demands it was definitely the computer's fault. None of my high level criticisms or conclusions are affected by this - other then perhaps an even greater need for a clearer UI!
Last edited:
I looked through the reviews and I know which one you're talking about. That review is from 3 years ago, though, back when the game really did not have any content. All of the things you mentioned were not in the game back then.
I agree with you that the review is silly and at this point it should be changed, updated, removed whatever. When I reported it, however, the mods just dismissed it without even giving a reason as to why.
The idiot is me. I stand by my conclusions. But that review is in fact very old. I got a notification that somebody had made a review, clicked on the notification, and was brought to the last page of the reviews. I thought that was the most recent one. Pays to pay attention. I'll update my post.
It does touch on another topic though - old reviews, positive or negative, may not reflect the current quality of the game. Steam also separates the overall and recent review scores to address this problem.
Yes, it's a bit wonky how it works. If you click on the notification, it brings you to the first reviews made for that game, not the latest ones. It's been like this for a while, idk why. I encourage you to report the review anyway as it's outdated and no longer reflects the state of the game. Usually the moderators remove dumb or outdated reviews, I don't know why they rejected my report in this case.
