Here here! To the victor goes the spoils. Defeat means humiliation, violation, corruption and...Probably a few other things that engage the neurons. Even knockdowns, staggers and vulnerability phases fill a similar role, but they're not nearly as "decisive" as sex-on-loss.
This, exactly this. Sex-on-loss is just one of many possible defeat outcomes, and has little to no bearing on the scope of content outside defeats.
Someone who wants that type of content in the game without making it part of the base game or officially connected with the game or developer, I bet.
Just making usure if i comprehended your concerns correctly, but all this pile of text and screens can be much simply summarized with you just feeling upset over the devs refusing to contemplate the insertion of m/f content with the guards, right? (Which totally isn't the kind of overused and oversaturated content to the point that it feel as much stale, if not even more than the box of cookies that my grandma keeps stored from 2 centuries at least in her food thingy btw.)see, it might be though.
it's a very pretty project with silly caked up mouse lady.
big husky overpowering guards exist as a foil currently, yet the dev has gone on record in this board roughly saying:
"we don't see the guards as something you'd have sex with"
View attachment 5255804
???
it is a pretty project, but maybe it will just remain a pretty wandering sim.
where you play as a cute caked up mouse.
stumbling and tripping all over yourself while lesbians belittle your efforts and the only intercourse you will be granted is strap-on business and silly futa shenanigans.
View attachment 5255806
just saying.
it does have potential to allow for many, many kinks.
that can be limited by the devs willingness, too.
View attachment 5255809
something a supporter should be aware of.
"sex-on-loss" doesn't have to equal: a non-consensual game over state.
mouse is already animated in a very playful and quirky way, she could just as easily look as goofy and playful with a fella's cock in her mouth.
I'm supportive of whatever direction the devs choose to take (just hoping for Ratalie to take a lotta dicks
) but I was a little confused by the logic of 'sex on loss is considered non-con' as if it's by definition or something.
This is to meet Patreon restrictions I assume? Only way it makes sense why they would say/do this. Kind of kills the mood for me, though. The entire premise of the game hinges on the tension of potentially getting caught and fucked. Otherwise the game will just be a 'wander around looking for the event triggers' simulator where the gameplay has no connection to the porn. Atleast there is the possibility of getting unwillingly put into bondage if you are caught, which apparently does not count as non-consensual sexual content because...? I'll keep an eye on the game to see what they do with it in the future.
Personally I would say it's dub-con at best, since the premise is still that she is captured when she makes that decision.
Take this with a pinch of salt, but I think it was at least implied the devs will make a mods for this themselves, maybe under different name, so it's not part of the game and tied to them directly. But I might be confusing it with another game and dev, not sure.
We were thinking about it before, but it seemed like a lot of platforms are very vague when it comes to deciding what is non-con. So we are playing it safe on this front.I'm supportive of whatever direction the devs choose to take (just hoping for Ratalie to take a lotta dicks
Someone would have to make a mod for it if you wanna see this sort of content in the game.
We were thinking about it before, but it seemed like a lot of platforms are very vague when it comes to deciding what is non-con. So we are playing it safe on this front.
I'm not very versed in this topic and I'm not sure what is construed as "non-con". But wouldn't an idea like the protagonist accepting everything that happens beforehand negate the "non-con" issue?
For example let's say that a protagonist agrees to participate in a game or in a mission where it is specified beforehand that certain mistakes or shortcomings can have "bad" outcomes such as being tied up, humiliated, spanked, fucked, etc. Doesn't that mean that consent was given, even if the situations aren't exactly "liked" by the protagonist. I mean when u get a loan from a bank they tell u the conditions beforehand, but you still hate paying the rates..
Theoretically it could fly that way, if you framed it properly within the game, but you would still run the risk of one platform or another interpreting it differently and as a violation of their policy.I'm not very versed in this topic and I'm not sure what is construed as "non-con". But wouldn't an idea like the protagonist accepting everything that happens beforehand negate the "non-con" issue?
For example let's say that a protagonist agrees to participate in a game or in a mission where it is specified beforehand that certain mistakes or shortcomings can have "bad" outcomes such as being tied up, humiliated, spanked, fucked, etc. Doesn't that mean that consent was given, even if the situations aren't exactly "liked" by the protagonist. I mean when u get a loan from a bank they tell u the conditions beforehand, but you still hate paying the rates..
