VN Ren'Py Love & Jealousy [Act 3] [Professor Amethyst Games]

[monkeyqueen]

It has a good rating. So I thought why not try it. Not really an Ntr fan but don't mind it either since its just a game.

I stopped it and started it again months later. Playing the game is pure pain. I hate the MC with a burning passion but I still give the game a good rating because of the quality of the writing. He uses literary tools that are more sophisticated than the authors of most AVNs

If you manage to get the game going and end up identifying with the MC let me know so I can file a restraining order

 

[monkeyqueen]

I agree and was just listing it in my Lacey or Evil Lacy Hates the MC theory . like me your so invested in this its taking up way too much time lol ..but we love it so what the hell.

Try another theory. Lacey a) thinks pain leads to mental health b) believes she deserves any pain she receives c) get sexual satisfaction from pain. Her deepest, darkest sexual fantasy is to be choked to death by her husband while he whispers "I love you"

And she does this for multiple reasons - one of the reasons is that she knows that her husband enjoys abusing her. He wants to choke her to death, she wants to be choked to death. Perfect couple for a Romeo and Juliet ending, right? But the MC doesn't want to accept his true desires so she needs to provoke him.

Replay the shark and remora scene - the MC wants to sleep but she forces the conflict. Because she knows he wants to get angry and she wants to feel pain.

 

[funnythings3785]

It's been theorized in discussions on here before this update, that her actions can only be explained by some sub conscious resentment she has for him, that she doesn't really control. And she rationalizes them consciously with flimsy shit like it has to be done, it will make us better, I didn't want it to go this way but brain damage, the usual. Because examining not just the actions themselves, but also the details of how exactly they happened, shows intent that can't be justified.

This update actually tells us she does assign blame on him "for not saving her". Which in her broken mind could mean many things all together, from their current marriage, to college, to all the way back to their childhood. And if it goes that back (most likely), it makes sense why she can only acknowledge it during a mental breakdown, talking out loud in an argument with herself.

My worry is that this will become a crutch to absolve her in the story, that somehow it will turn out that he is really at fault here because he didn't go get her and I would argue that this would have been completely out of character for him to do that as well as counter to the way his relationship had evolved through childhood with her.

He did not force Lacey in their youth, he simply adjusted to fit her needs and her leaving for college (with the claim she would return so they could be together) was him responding to that dynamic. His sending messages, fell in line with his process of checking if she needed him, but her lack of response (more specifically him seeing she read the messages) was also him respecting those boundaries he established all through youth (ie... don't touch here, only here on this day, sit this way, do all the talking, don't talk, presents on this day, not that one... etc...). He was merely doing as he always did, trying to be helpful, but not upsetting her wishes.

 

[DeviantFun]

Replay the shark and remora scene - the MC wants to sleep but she forces the conflict. Because she knows he wants to get angry and she wants to feel pain.

This is not reflected in the material, in that specific scene Lacey is very worried that MC would start caring less and less giving up on them. (It is the literal dialogue).

In fact one of the things that is underlined and repeated often heavily in the dialogues is that Lacey suffers the most when MC ignores her and her antics.

 

[cormac69]

I found another typo that should be corrected. This should be the MC saying this. Not Lacey.

 

[monkeyqueen]

This is not reflected in the material, in that specific scene Lacey is very worried that MC would start caring less and less giving up on them. (It is the literal dialogue).

In fact one of the things that is underlined and repeated often heavily in the dialogues is that Lacey suffers the most when MC ignores her and her antics.

It is supported by the text And I think we are saying something similar - Lacey invites the MC's abuse. She needs to be abused, he needs to abuse someone. Indeed the tragedy of that scene is that Gristle comes to an insight that could cure his jealousy BUT Lacey pulls him back into a co dependent cycle.

Play the scene from the start. If you need me to I will post the text itself but that will take some time.

MC wants to sleep and avoid conflict - Lacey literally tries to push the MC to the ground over to start the conflict and bring out his rage.

Again, if you don't believe me I'll post the text.

 

[CrysusPariah2]

I found another typo that should be corrected. This should be the MC saying this. Not Lacey.

I think Lacey is the one excited about the “fake” argument, not MC?

 

[DeviantFun]

I think Lacey is the one excited about the “fake” argument, not MC?

Correct.

L "To swoop in and be furious with me and drag me away for our big argument."
MC "So we'll do the argument for real?"
L "Well... we don't have to. But I'd really like it if we can incorporate that."

But in the case shown MC should be the one talking.

LP "So, last chance to back out."
LP "The sooner we start, the sooner I can take you home and have an awesome trailer park argument with you." -> This should be MC (also because he is the one that is supposed to drag her home in her emovamp scenario)
LP "(giggle) I'm so glad I married you."
LP "Best decision I've ever made."

MC wants to sleep and avoid conflict - Lacey literally tries to push the MC to the ground over to start the conflict and bring out his rage.

Again, if you don't believe me I'll post the text.

I know the game dialogue almost by memory, not a healthy thing.

You are misinterpreting what is happening in the scene, which is a bit weird to me since the writing is on the wall, considering the words of Anna just before at the park.

A "Go home. Get angry with her."
A "Do whatever it is you do."
A "But don't leave her there suffering."
A "She would rather you yell and scream at her than ignore her."

As I said, and I will for the last time, Lacey suffers and spirals when MC ignores her since it would mean many bad things for her. (we can all guess what those are, yes?)

 

[monkeyqueen]

DeviantFun

Anna isn't a reliable narrator - she's on a mission to destroy the relationship so she can have Gristle. She's also a sociopath.

(pro tip: breaking into houses and secretly recording people is not normal)

Q: Why did Anna delete the audio recording?

A: To make Lacey look as bad as possible when Lacey acted exceptionally well.

And it was a really shitty thing to do because Lacey put Isaac in his place - and that was part of his transformation.


Help me out, I'm not entirely sure what your point is? Do you not believe that Lacey wants to be abused? Do you not believe that Gristle wants to abuse her? Help me understand where we disagree.

 

[Arithil]

I will be honest with you all, there is no point of figuring out what will happen in next chapters, since professor seems to write spontaneously. For all we care in the next episode there could be dinosaurs, i will just wait and see, also try to forget. I personally hope that mc won't have breakdown and instead wake the fuck up and grows some balls, put Lacey in her place but thats wishful thinking. I would compare this to the game Dispatch, 70% of people thought that BB is secretly a villain with how nice she acted and from previous experiences from other games and it turned out that she is just a good and mature person

 

[DeviantFun]

DeviantFun

Anna isn't a reliable narrator - she's on a mission to destroy the relationship so she can have Gristle. She's also a sociopath.

(pro tip: breaking into houses and secretly recording people is not normal)

Q: Why did Anna delete the audio recording?

A: To make Lacey look as bad as possible when Lacey acted exceptionally well.

And it was a really shitty thing to do because Lacey put Isaac in his place - and that was part of his transformation.


Help me out, I'm not entirely sure what your point is? Do you not believe that Lacey wants to be abused? Do you not believe that Gristle wants to abuse her? Help me understand where we disagree.

My point is that you are not reading the novel, and are injecting some weird personal thoughts into it.

case in point:
MC "Just because I'm jealous doesn't give me the right to punish you forever."
L "It's only been a month."
L "You act like you've been punishing me for years."
L "A month of you being hurt and angry is nothing."
L "It's a walk in the park."
L "Maybe if this were only about the past, then maybe I'd feel a little differently."
L "I'd still understand, but I might feel like we should set a time limit for how long you punish me."

But I already broke my personal promise twice now, this is the last one.
(There are other points where Lacey actually punishes and abuses HERSELF, through others too, and it is clear that she does not want to relive that, but I'll let you find them by yourself.)

Your interpretation of Anna is clearly very......ahem....personal.

You don't have to change your mind, you are set in it and are clearly enjoying yourself with your own "interpretations", but please stop trying to push so hard on it.

Edit: I do not want to sound harsh or anything, I think you are bringing some personal stuff in the novel that is not there.
I get it, why do you think I stick heavily to the material and dialogues? To avoid myself going down that path, as some topics in the novel are very personal to me.

I will be honest with you all, there is no point of figuring out what will happen in next chapters, since professor seems to write spontaneously.

This is very true, give me back act 1 social anxiety Kelly and act 2 Lacey

 

[funnythings3785]

I will be honest with you all, there is no point of figuring out what will happen in next chapters, since professor seems to write spontaneously. For all we care in the next episode there could be dinosaurs, i will just wait and see, also try to forget. I personally hope that mc won't have breakdown and instead wake the fuck up and grows some balls, put Lacey in her place but thats wishful thinking. I would compare this to the game Dispatch, 70% of people thought that BB is secretly a villain with how nice she acted and from previous experiences from other games and it turned out that she is just a good and mature person

Yep, which is fine, it is his style. My hope though is that after he is finished, he goes back and shores everything up... and well...

I would absolutely LOVE for him to release a commentary scene by scene on his thoughts, what he was going for, various things, etc... I think it would be just as fascinating to see that once it is done.

 

[monkeyqueen]

My point is that you are not reading the novel, and are injecting some weird thoughts into it.

We're actually making the very same point to one another - I think you are projecting some weird personal thoughts into it. I suspect - but don't know - that you sympathizes with the MC when they are not intended to be a sympathetic character.

(and that is normal for people to disagree on interpretation)

The MC is a monster wearing a nice guy mask. Lacey knows this but loves her shark anyway because she is an abuse victim. And she is specifically a type of abuse victim that turned to self abuse as a defense mechanism. Her desire for punishment is crazy but it's who she is.

How do I know this about Lacey? Two reasons supported by the text - one, Gristle's rules. Take away Lacey's pencil's on Friday or she will stab herself with them over the weekend. Two - the pain she received in college actually healed her. Were it not for Isaac she would have freed herself of the images of her father.

Now - this is indeed personal - but I dated a cutter once. This is the psychology of the cutter:

Achem. Life gives us all sorts of bad feelings that are hard to identify and/or impossible to deal with. Job, traffic, painful memories, relationship drama. Sometimes there's no solution. What if we could actually solve all those problems all at once? What if we could just cut them away? Cutters transform diffuse, amorphous psychological pain into physical pain. Do they like it? Kinda-no. What they like is that they can literally release all that pain by transforming it into just a few cuts. Razor blade goes in and then you only need to deal the physical pain - and they know how to heal or tolerate physical pain. This is what Lacey was doing with the pencils - making psychological pain physical.

(Lacey is also a masochist and a scapegoat - but I'll address that separately because they aren't the same)

Why do I think the MC is a monster? So many reasons! Replay the King's Day scenes - when Gristle is asked to come up with his darkest fantasy he comes up with three rape fantasies. The player MUST choose a rape fantasy for the MC. The player then MUST choose a mind control fantasy that destroys the minds of the harem members. Anna gets to see what only Lacey has seen up until now - there is another side of Gristle that Anna has never seen even (if she accepts it in some way) As Lacey says elsewhere the MC is her Frankenstein monster - but he is a monster.

I will eventually collect lots of quotes to support this theory for you and anyone interested.

And of course the final sex scene of act 1. Lacey and Frankenstein have the best sex they've had since their wedding night. He almost kills her and she almost dies.

As to you quote: ". . . .I'd still understand, but I might feel like we should set a time limit for how long you punish me."

Lacey is telling herself that - one day she will be healthy. I'm rooting for her but that doesn't mean that this sick puppy doesn't crave the pain right now. (again, when I have more time I'll collect more evidence)

You don't have to change your mind, you are set in it and are clearly enjoying yourself with your own "interpretations", but please stop trying to push so hard on it.

For me exchanging theories is the fun of this game. I hate the sex scenes so much. And I do think people are interpreting it wrongly. So I can't promise that any more than you can.

 

[funnythings3785]

I think Lacey is the one excited about the “fake” argument, not MC?

Yep, she used the Anna situation essentially to create another JD for herself. See how she could excuse her actions off of making him jealous because she was "jealous and scared" herself? Oh poor thing, she suffered... but quick MC, get jealous, save her and rush up to the hotel room so you can word vomit at her and then fuck her silly!

I bet her "silence" during the whole thing in the bar was her simply getting very aroused and salivating in the moment. "I was shocked... totally shocked I tell you... *cough*.. umm... "ooohhhh... shocked... yeah... that's it... right there..." /sigh

 

[Lady Lydia]

Yep, which is fine, it is his style. My hope though is that after he is finished, he goes back and shores everything up... and well...

I would absolutely LOVE for him to release a commentary scene by scene on his thoughts, what he was going for, various things, etc... I think it would be just as fascinating to see that once it is done.

I really don't think it would even be possible for the Prof to be able to comment on their state of mind while doing the various scenes, the radical shifts in between Acts imply the Prof doesn't really keep track of those things, if they actually were able to keep track they'd be able to realize they deviated their characters & narrative from an Act to another, since they can't its obvious when they are done with an Act any thought they had on it just fade away, they only retain some stuff, the big narrative lines, and everything else is mostly gone except some vague impressions.

 

[funnythings3785]

I really don't think it would even be possible for the Prof to be able to comment on their state of mind while doing the various scenes, the radical shifts in between Acts imply the Prof doesn't really keep track of those things, if they actually were able to keep track they'd be able to realize they deviated their characters & narrative from an Act to another, since they can't its obvious when they are done with an Act any thought they had on it just fade away, they only retain some stuff, the big narrative lines, and everything else is mostly gone except some vague impressions.

Well, I did say that I would like for him to go back and "shore up" the story first... but consider this...

Even if he didn't, him explaining each scene might give some insight on his thinking of things. They may be disconnected from scene to scene, but the point is not so much as him sharing the technical aspects of his story, but more so him giving insight on what he was trying to convey in a given scene, even if it doesn't "fit" the story, it would still be interesting, heck... as I said it might explain WHY some scenes progress the way they do in terms of their drastic changes.

 

[AL.d]

My worry is that this will become a crutch to absolve her in the story, that somehow it will turn out that he is really at fault here because he didn't go get her and I would argue that this would have been completely out of character for him to do that as well as counter to the way his relationship had evolved through childhood with her.

He did not force Lacey in their youth, he simply adjusted to fit her needs and her leaving for college (with the claim she would return so they could be together) was him responding to that dynamic. His sending messages, fell in line with his process of checking if she needed him, but her lack of response (more specifically him seeing she read the messages) was also him respecting those boundaries he established all through youth (ie... don't touch here, only here on this day, sit this way, do all the talking, don't talk, presents on this day, not that one... etc...). He was merely doing as he always did, trying to be helpful, but not upsetting her wishes.

True, but I don't see how he would go about it. Bad things happen all the time by people who have childhood trauma. It doesn't absolve them. I think he just added that as a piece of the puzzle, because all the excuses and her silly reasoning don't explain shit.

You are right that it's an irrational sentiment. But it is meant to be that. She is a narcissist, they are not exactly known to hold themselves accountable in more than lip service. Also she's the type of narc (vulnerable), who feeds on negative attention. Jealousy, anger, humiliation, all those work as supply for that type, they provoke them for that purpose. It's called reactive abuse. So having some underlying resentment for the dude who is too servile to ever ignore her boundaries, try to control her and stop her antics, checks out. If she tells him to stay outside and not open the door, he won't.

 

[funnythings3785]

True, but I don't see how he would go about it. Bad things happen all the time by people who have childhood trauma. It doesn't absolve them. I think he just added that as a piece of the puzzle, because all the excuses and her silly reasoning don't explain shit.

You are right that it's an irrational sentiment. But it is meant to be that. She is a narcissist, they are not exactly known to hold themselves accountable in more than lip service. Also she's the type of narc (vulnerable), who feeds on negative attention. Jealousy, anger, humiliation, all those work as supply for that type, they provoke them for that purpose. It's called reactive abuse. So having some underlying resentment for the dude who is too servile to ever ignore her boundaries, try to control her and stop her antics, checks out. If she tells him to stay outside and not open the door, he won't.

Nor I, the way the story is going is concerning... but... it is also possible the professor due to his style could pull something out of a rabbits hat so to speak and resolve it (likely much to our dismay).

My biggest issue is him sacrificing the MC, and I don't mean that I have a problem with a demoralized ending for him, rather... I just don't want him to be a scapegoat and doormat to proclaim victory by Lacey or the girls. In that, it would be no different than any other NTR garbage story where the FC gets everything she wants and somehow the story ultimately reasons why it was always the MCs fault.

That would be an insult. I don't care if the MC dies, if crap hits the fan and he is demoralized, but FFS... I won't accept the whole concept of the antagonist getting to play the victim AND the hero, it is a tired trope that has been poisoning various works throughout entertainment media. It makes no sense, it is... in itself completely narciscistic and wreaks of the cancer of "self insert" writing style.

 

[Lady Lydia]

Well, I did say that I would like for him to go back and "shore up" the story first... but consider this...

Even if he didn't, him explaining each scene might give some insight on his thinking of things. They may be disconnected from scene to scene, but the point is not so much as him sharing the technical aspects of his story, but more so him giving insight on what he was trying to convey in a given scene, even if it doesn't "fit" the story, it would still be interesting, heck... as I said it might explain WHY some scenes progress the way they do in terms of their drastic changes.

But that is the point I am saying, I doubt the Prof even can tell us what they meant to convey with various scenes because if they could keep all of that in mind they'd write the story more consistently between the Acts, the fact they can't keep in mind their past characterization and narrative in pretty much any shape or form except likely the most basic skeletal way, is an indication to that.

I wouldn't be shocked to discover they completely change their own perception of their own characterization and narrative between the various Acts so at this point likely any insight the Prof had during the making of Act 1 is long gone, same for Act 2, and Act 3 might be the only one the Prof could give us insight into that would still be viable, but by the time Act 4 will be out any insight on Act 3 will have become obsolete. I know some creative minds work like that, as soon as they are done with a piece of work it fade out of their mind quickly and each Acts in this game amount to a separate piece of work.

As for shoring up the story... that would be a dozy, if by shore it up you mean rewrite just about every Acts to streamline them and likely redo a ton of stuff to make it consistent, I mean I'd love that, but I am not sure the Prof could even achieve that without completely rewriting large swats of the story.

 

[funnythings3785]

But that is the point I am saying, I doubt the Prof even can tell us what they meant to convey with various scenes because if they could keep all of that in mind they'd write the story more consistently between the Acts, the fact they can't keep in mind their past characterization and narrative in pretty much any shape or form except likely the most basic skeletal way, is an indication to that.

I wouldn't be shocked to discover they completely change their own perception of their own characterization and narrative between the various Acts so at this point likely any insight the Prof had during the making of Act 1 is long gone, same for Act 2, and Act 3 might be the only one the Prof could give us insight into that would still be viable, but by the time Act 4 will be out any insight on Act 3 will have become obsolete. I know some creative minds work like that, as soon as they are done with a piece of work it fade out of their mind quickly and each Acts in this game amount to a separate piece of work.

Possible, but I would wager that the professor is capable of reading a scene he wrote and explaining what he was thinking "at that moment" he wrote it. Keep in mind, I am not saying he should have to explain how it flowed between each act or scene (if he couldn't I would understand that because he seems to be an "in the moment writer"), but through his individual evaluations of a scene recount, it "may" (and I stress "may") provide some insight into things over all, even if he doesn't realize it in the micro explanations, a macro evaluation of all commentary at the end of the story might provide its own analysis and even if it doesn't it still gives a perspective of how he wrote the story and "may" explain things over all from that perspective.