Ok...? We went from user input relationship to conditional dialogues?
Conditional branches are a common feature of events in RPGM. All dialogue which pops up in-game (As opposed to in cutscenes, though this can sometimes also apply to cutscenes, depending on how they're programmed.) in RPGM is an event. Although I haven't attempted to decompile the game data for
Lisa, nor am I going to do so, I think it's a pretty safe bet that PaleGrass is already using conditional branches for some of the events in the game. Suggesting that this is a viable solution for incest on/off in the game is an easy progression.
What you are describing is essentially writing different scripts and is much more extensive than the user input relationship. You want if/else statements every time to check if sharon_relationship = mom | mother | mommy | aunt, etc.? Or do you want to switch an incest flag on if you entered something specific? That is obviously writing different "scripts" for the incest and non-incest.
No, I'm not talking about writing different scripts. This game isn't being developed in Ren'Py. It's being developed in RPGM. The game already uses variables, and all of the in-game dialogue is already being done in events (the only way to do in-game dialogue in RPGM). All I'm talking about is using conditional branches in the dialogue events which check variables which are set based on user input. The dialogue between Lisa and Sharon already checks variables based on user input, so adding conditional branches is not that much work.
I didn't look under the hood because well, I don't know how to for RPGM, but I always check the script file on renpy. Not sure why you assumed I had no idea on how this works.
I concluded that you didn't know how it works because it seemed obvious from your statements that you don't know about how this can be done in RPGM without too much extra work. And, as it turns out, I was correct. You just admitted that you aren't familiar enough with RPGM to check the programming.
And that isn't an attack on you, since you seem to be getting very defensive. I'm not interested in having a pissing contest with you. I'm talking about the subject under discussion, not about you. When I say that it seems to me that you don't know about this kind of eventing in RPGM, that's merely an honest assessment, based on the comments you've made about the user input defined relationship system. If you've never worked in RPGM before, there would be no reason why you should know about it.
Why is this relevant? Having code that supports incest is also against patreon policy, in case you didn't know.
I do know. I'm very well up on Patreon's censorship, and have spoken out against it often and loudly, both here on this forum and elsewhere. However, it isn't relevant in this case, because a user input defined relationship system sidesteps Patreon's censorship (at least for now), and the Ren'Py version of this game is not being developed by PaleGrass, so his Patreon support is not vulnerable because of how they code it in Ren'Py.
You seem to have poor reading comprehension, so I will just leave things here. Not like I want to convince a random dude on F95zone.
No one in this thread, including you, thinks that I have poor reading comprehension. This is just an attempt by you to make this personal and put me off balance. But I'm not interested in having a pissing contest on the internet. I'm discussing the subject of the user input defined relationship system, and why I think it doesn't need to be removed or replaced, and why I think that the developer should not waste time on a major rewrite.
As Lecher pointed out RPGMaker supports dialogue branches for different variables. Since the incest is mostly limited to Sharon, PaleGrass doesn't need to write two different sets of dialogues. However, minor adjustments will be needed. He even could distribute future content with her as a patch file on Lewdpachter same as we are used to for RenPy games.
Anyway, the question is, if PaleGrass is able to do it and willing to go through all the dialogues and make the necessary adjustments to support dynamic dialogues, which would fix inconsistencies.
I suspect that, if Sharon is set to "Mom" or "Aunt", then Paul will likely be set to "cousin" by a lot of people, which would qualify as incest in a lot of legal jurisdictions. And perhaps Touma will eventually have some sexual interactions with Lisa? But currently, even if you count Paul, we're still looking at a relatively small number of instances. The amount of reworking should be pretty slight, I would think. And there wouldn't be much extra work going forward, either.
But I honestly don't see that any major changes are needed, one way or the other. I've only seen a handful of complaints about wrong relationship designations in dialogue, and I can't think of anyone other than desmosome who has suggested that the system should be reworked. If it's something which is bothering a lot of people, or if it's important to PaleGrass to fix it, then I don't think it would be that much trouble. I just don't see why it should take time or attention away from continuing to advance the story.
