Jubs!

Member
Game Developer
Mar 29, 2018
154
422
260
I'm guessing that you are playing an old version of he game, as those "errors" have already been reported and fixed.

Do not overthink the whole "step-family" dynamic. Some AVNs have "step-families" some have "landladies and tenants/roommates", this is because incest is illegal and hosting sites tend to ban games that contain incest, so devs create spurious relationships to avoid such bans.
I think you are the first person that I have seen taking the whole "step-family" nonsense seriously.
Actual incest is illegal, but depictions of it in media are not, hence why Game of Thrones (and many other movies and TV shows) are able to depict it so graphically. The fuss about it now is because of payment processors being puritanical dicks who have decided to control societies morals.

I was reading a book by a female psychiatrist on women's health recently. My wife told me to read it as she has PMDD (an extreme form of PMS), it was genuinely fascinating and taught me a lot about women. Also about men and my own health - much of it was transferrable. It was about hormones and how modern life screws with them and what that does to us. I thought it was interesting that in a bit about sexual desire she noted; the incest fantasy was very common with her clients. If her female client talked to her about experiencing sexual dysfunction due to waning desire, she would talk to them about what turns them on and often it would come up. She encouraged them to explore it via roleplay etc. The way she talked about it was very matter of fact, this is kinda normal in the same way that it is kinda 'normal' for people to like BDSM. This is the incest fantasy, about other people committing incest, not actual incest, which is something very different. Society imprisons itself through pretending that most people don't have some sort of unusual desires somewhere. The prevalence of these fetishes deemed "abhorrent" to society should be enough to say this isn't actually that weird, and if you just stopped being all weird about the fact that people enjoy fantasizing about these things, then we'd all get on a lot better. For 99.9% of people, their fetishes are just fantasies and they don't harm anyone.
 

Jubs!

Member
Game Developer
Mar 29, 2018
154
422
260
A few continuity glitches I've spotted as I'm playing.

#1 - Prologue: Lilly and MC in the kitchen, she generates a green fireball in her hand. Dialog says "blue". Easy enough to swap out that "blue" for "green". View attachment 5517126

#2 - Isabella's first scene with MC. Dialog says "...grinding against you through your clothes." MC was already naked. She stripped his pants off when she gave him the blowjob. View attachment 5517127

#3 - Sarah Sinclair: her dossier says she married Carl "Barker" when she was 18, and Lilly Barker was born a year later. Everyone else in the family is named SINCLAIR, and their dossiers state that the father is Carl Sinclair. View attachment 5517382 Could Sarah have married 2 men with the given name "Carl", with two different surnames? Yes, it's possible (my wife's late first husband was Jeff, my given name is Geoff, pronounced the same) but it would be unusual to say the least. But nothing in the existing lore indicates that happened.

#4 - Not to put to fine a point on it, but the step-family relationship does not apply to any of the siblings. The "step-" designation is for blended family members, people who are family by MARRIAGE, not blood. Example:

Father has child(ren), becomes single. Mother has child(ren), becomes single. Father meets Mother and they marry. The pre-existing children are now step-siblings because their parents are married. Father becomes stepdad to Mother's child(ren) and Mother becomes stepmom to Father's child(ren).

The existing story lore and the birth order of the children precludes that. Nothing in any of the family dossiers indicate that Sarah (or Carl) had a second marriage. So NO ONE in the family is a step-anything. If Carl supplied half of the DNA and Sarah provided the other half, the kids are all full siblings. MC dossier states he was "raised by" Carl and Sarah. SO, if neither parent provided the DNA for the MC, the options are:

A. - The Sinclairs are the MC's FOSTER family, "foster mother"/"foster siblings" would be the correct relationship.
B. - The Sinclairs ADOPTED the MC, making the family relationship "adoptive mother"/"adoptive siblings".
C. - If Carl provided half of the MC's DNA but Sarah did not (making him a literal bastard), we could possibly argue that Sarah is in fact a "step-mom" but the other children would be "half-siblings" not step-siblings.
Thanks for the feedback.

What version are you running currently? 0.36 is the latest public version.

The green fire thing has been fixed for 0.4 which is just out in early access so you probably don't have that one.
You are right about the Isabella scene, so I've corrected that for the next update.
I though the dossier stuff about carl had been fixed in the 0.36 update. It is correct on my version so maybe I fixed that as a first thing in 0.4, but I'm pretty sure 0.36 is where all the new updated and corrected dossiers went in. I flip-flopped on his name and the family name(Carl and Carter, Barker and Sinclair) and didn't realise I had left both in. It's Carter Sinclair.
The canon route is the one most people will play and so the game was designed around that, the other routes were added in as an afterthought and I'll admit, whilst I try to make as much as possible match the variables most put in for the relationships, it's not an easy thing to get right.

Adopted makes the most sense, so you are right "step" isn't the right way to define it. However, adopted doesn't have a phrase in common usage. People know what you mean when you say "adoptive sister", but unless there is something very officious or very wrong with the family dynamic, noone would refer to their sibling as "my adopted sister". They would say "my sister". The use of "Step" by default was really intended to ensure that if a patreon mod ever decided to poke around in the game during its early phases, they could not mistake what was happening because everyone was referring to each other as "brother", "sister" etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Evil_Geoff

Evil_Geoff

Newbie
Apr 13, 2025
18
19
3
Do not overthink the whole "step-family" dynamic.
... I think you are the first person that i have seen taking the whole "step-family" nonsense seriously.
That would not surprise me in the least. ;)

I live my life somewhere along the Autism spectrum, in the area commonly referred to as "Asperger's Syndrome". So, yeah, I overthink the hell outta stuff, then over-explain or "over share". Think about Sheldon from The Big Bang Theory, and you'll have a pretty fair image of how I look at, and interact with, the world.

And I'mma shut up now. :LOL:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jubs!

BigAlzBub

Active Member
Jul 20, 2020
519
478
228
The fuss about it now is because of payment processors being puritanical dicks who have decided to control societies morals
While the Payment processors did the actual deed, they were pressured into it by an Austrailian group called Collective Shout, which effectively lobbied them. It is hard to say whether the payment processors could have just ignored them, as the Ozzie government has shown itself to be quite keen on taking on big business like with the News Media Bargaining Code where social media companies were brough to heel and forced to pay news services for just displaying their content. I don't want to get into an argument about whether they should or not, so please don't at me over it, I'm just pointing out that they did this, and had the payment processors ignored Collective Shout they might have been next to feel the wrath of the Ozzies. Not to mention the fact that groups like Collective Shout often have extensive links with other such groups (often also backed by American Evangelical groups like the Herritage Foundation).

TLDR: The payment processors did the thing, but they probably wouldn't unless forced.
 

Jubs!

Member
Game Developer
Mar 29, 2018
154
422
260
While the Payment processors did the actual deed, they were pressured into it by an Austrailian group called Collective Shout, which effectively lobbied them. It is hard to say whether the payment processors could have just ignored them, as the Ozzie government has shown itself to be quite keen on taking on big business like with the News Media Bargaining Code where social media companies were brough to heel and forced to pay news services for just displaying their content. I don't want to get into an argument about whether they should or not, so please don't at me over it, I'm just pointing out that they did this, and had the payment processors ignored Collective Shout they might have been next to feel the wrath of the Ozzies. Not to mention the fact that groups like Collective Shout often have extensive links with other such groups (often also backed by American Evangelical groups like the Herritage Foundation).

TLDR: The payment processors did the thing, but they probably wouldn't unless forced.
Collective Shout were the catalyst, but MasterCard were already going down that route. Something to do with the Mormon Church holding a $900,000,000 holding in the company and pressure from them to not support anything they don't like.

Even if that wasn't the reason, the big institutionals like BlackRock insist on arbitrary EDI and ethics standards for any investment they make, the big companies chase these. So collective shout may have pushed them over the edge, but the 'ethical' investment standards of the big funds brought them to the precipice. It was why Steam ignored it all for so long, no shareholders to worry about.
 

Jubs!

Member
Game Developer
Mar 29, 2018
154
422
260
Anyway, Merry Christmas everyone and thanks for your interest and support over the last 5 months! These are a teaser of some bonus content images I'm working on for patreon. I get pretty much all my feedback and interaction with my 'customers' here, so here is a little thank you :) 00349-3440095145.png
01356-2086045528.png
00740-2197778205.png
 
4.10 star(s) 15 Votes