Some people's mind frame totally baffle me!
A shitty one-star review because of "transphobia"?
Did we even play the same game?
The mental issue mentioned in the game is a serious documented illness that has to do with limb rejection by the ill people themselves and has nothing to do with sexual organs specifically or anything sexual oriented. The game establishes no such comparison.
That was a shitty review curseofthesky. Totally undeserved as this is one of the most serious, high quality and well conducted projects here on F95.
curseofthesky, try doing some research before you throw accusations...
You must be registered to see the links
And giving a one-star review even though you praised the quality of the game is a shitty thing to do simply because the themes of it don't align with your worldview and beliefs.
Reviews are subjective and matter less than people think. curseofthesky is entitled to their opinion, no need to complain with them about it.
Nevertheless, I do think the accusations of me being a transphobic are unfair.
For reference, their critique is:
and then the transphobia started, i know finding transphobia in these games aren't uncommon but maybe i expected too much from this game. it goes as far as implying trans people as 'mentally ill' and comparing them to seriously ill people who remove their limbs because of whatever reason. i was seriously disgusted at it. so if you're sensitive towards that kind of stuff. i suggest not to play this.
'Of course I am not a different person now, but I might well be,' says Wright. 'I have happiness and contentment and life is so much more settled, so much easier.'
Note how the patient says they're much happier after the surgery.
And the game/me is accused of being transphobic because of these lines of dialogue:
b "Could it be a paraphilia?"
mc "Who knows... it might be that the reason is different from person to person."
mc "For instance, it's not *that* rare for people to be attracted to the physically disabled or amputees."
mc "I think it's rarer for a person to want to be disabled just for sexual gratification, though."
mc "In the cases you mentioned, I think it likely had more to do with an identity disorder than anything sexual."
mc "I think it's similar to transgender identification where a person feels like they were born in the wrong body."
mc "Except that, instead of feeling like they have the wrong gender, they feel like they have the wrong number of legs or whatever."
mc "Maybe we should just start seeing these surgeries as cosmetic."
mc "We are at a point where we are not considering transgenderism as a mental disorder anymore."
mc "Maybe we should do the same for all body identity disorders."
mc "Is there such a big difference between someone wanting to amputate their perfectly healthy hand or their perfectly healthy breasts?"
Basically... bringing awareness to body identity disorders in general and saying that none should be considered a mental disorder anymore the same way transgenderism isn’t... makes me a transphobe?
Giving an option for the player to say that we should stop calling any of these people "mentally ill" and just let them be happy the way they want... makes me a transphobe? I’m almost thinking there is a misunderstanding here somewhere.
curseofthesky, if you could further explain why you consider such statements transphobic, I'd be grateful.
curseofthesky, try doing some research before you throw accusations...
You must be registered to see the links
And giving a one-star review even though you praised the quality of the game is a shitty thing to do simply because the themes of it don't align with your worldview and beliefs.
Yeah, totally ridiculous. Reported that rating. Nonsensical ratings like that shouldn't stand. Seems the person doing that review is struggling with some personal mental issues themself and projected his/her/its issues on the game.
Yeah, totally ridiculous. Reported that rating. Nonsensical ratings like that shouldn't stand. Seems the person doing that review is struggling with some personal mental issues themself and projected his/her/its issues on the game.
I wouldn't jump to conclusions before that person explains themself, but it does seem it was written based on emotions and less so on common sense. Especially considering this was mentioned only in one scene throughout the whole game in a respectful way focusing on a completely different issue... accusing someone of being transphobic and trashing their work because of that shouldn't be acceptable.
I don't agree with downgrading a review of a quite long game because of a couple sentences of dialog, especially when it can be read different ways, and is somewhat unclear what the dev is trying to get across with this scene, but I can sort of see curseofthesky's point. I didn't pay that much attention to this plot point when I played through the game, so I missed the significance of this dialog, relating trans surgery with getting one's leg amputated for sexual reasons.
Perhaps there is a way to read it where the dev is trying to make a point, ham-handedly, about how paraphilias should not be considered mental illnesses, no matter how unusual they are. But no matter what the dev is trying to get across, I can completely understand why many would find it in poor taste comparing someone wanting their leg removed for a sexual fetish, which I think nearly every doctor would believe is a serious mental problem and would refuse to perform the surgery, and a trans person wanting gender reassignment surgery, which has been widely accepted since the 1980s as a standard form of treatment in the medical field.
However, ultimately, I would give the dev the benefit of the doubt.
I think Nothing is Forever is a very good game, with a unique and compelling game style, and though I didn't notice this little aside when playing, i recommend the dev try to reword his dialog choice in this scene for future revisions, to make his point more clear. Or just leave it out, since this is a touchy issue for many, for good reason, as their rights to personal autonomy are being taken away in many states and countries, as we speak.
I don't agree with downgrading a review of a quite long game because of a couple sentences of dialog, especially when it can be read different ways, and is somewhat unclear what the dev is trying to get across with this scene, but I can sort of see curseofthesky's point. I didn't pay that much attention to this plot point when I played through the game, so I missed the significance of this dialog, relating trans surgery with getting one's leg amputated for sexual reasons.
Perhaps there is a way to read it where the dev is trying to make a point, ham-handedly, about how paraphilias should not be considered mental illnesses, no matter how unusual they are. But no matter what the dev is trying to get across, I can completely understand why many would find it in poor taste comparing someone wanting their leg removed for a sexual fetish, which I think nearly every doctor would believe is a serious mental problem and would refuse to perform the surgery, and a trans person wanting gender reassignment surgery, which has been widely accepted since the 1980s as a standard form of treatment in the medical field.
However, ultimately, I would give the dev the benefit of the doubt.
I think Nothing is Forever is a very good game, with a unique and compelling game style, and though I didn't notice this little aside when playing, i recommend the dev try to reword his dialog choice in this scene for future revisions, to make his point more clear. Or just leave it out, since this is a touchy issue for many, for good reason, as their rights to personal autonomy are being taken away in many states and countries, as we speak.
Yeah, I remember cringing a bit as I read through those lines as well, for the reasons Smarmint outline above. I fully accept that the dev wrote that dialogue with the best intentions and I think I can see how it is supposed to come across, but I found the comparison unfortunate and poorly chosen. Not enough to make me throw away the game or anything, but unfortunate.
I can sort of see curseofthesky's point. I didn't pay that much attention to this plot point when I played through the game, so I missed the significance of this dialog, relating trans surgery with getting one's leg amputated for sexual reasons.
[...] But no matter what the dev is trying to get across, I can completely understand why many would find comparing someone wanting their leg removed for a sexual fetish, which I think nearly every doctor would believe is a serious mental problem and would refuse to perform the surgery, and a trans person wanting gender reassignment surgery, which has been widely accepted since the 1980s as a standard form of treatment in the medical field.
It's well possible that what was written could come across in a different way than what I meant, but I still don’t see it.
Especially when it is explicitly said that neither of those things are a paraphilia, and that transgender identification is not considered a mental illness anymore.
Is it not written in the game exactly the opposite of what you say it is? (I know that you are just playing the devil’s advocate here, but aren’t you also misinterpreting the text, or am I missing something here?)
bri "I wonder what causes such desires."
bri "Could it be a paraphilia?"
mc "Who knows... it might be that the reason is different from person to person."
mc "For instance, it's not *that* rare for people to be attracted to the physically disabled or amputees."
mc "I think it's rarer for a person to want to be disabled just for sexual gratification, though."
mc "In the cases you mentioned, I think it likely had more to do with an identity disorder than anything sexual."
mc "I think it's similar to transgender identification where a person feels like they were born in the wrong body."
mc "Except that, instead of feeling like they have the wrong gender, they feel like they have the wrong number of legs or whatever."
[...]
mc "We are at a point where we are not considering transgenderism as a mental disorder anymore."
mc "Maybe we should do the same for all body identity disorders."
The mc says (These are literal quotes):
1) it's rarer for a person to want to be disabled just for sexual gratification
2) it likely had more to do with an identity disorder than anything sexual
3) it's similar to transgender identification where a person feels like they were born in the wrong body
4) instead of feeling like they have the wrong gender, they feel like they have the wrong number of legs
5) we are not considering transgenderism as a mental disorder anymore
6) Maybe we should do the same for all body identity disorders
However, that is in one of the options. There is an optiton to say something else:
mc "Nevertheless, it still feels wrong to chop off people's healthy limb due to these identity issues."
mc "I know we are at a point where we are not considering transgenderism as a mental disorder anymore, but expanding this to all body identity disorders might be excessive."
bri "On the other hand, if the patient thinks they'll be happier that way, who are we to tell them otherwise?"
mc "I don't know... people are prone to self-destructive behaviour in all different kinds of ways."
mc "Often the individual will change over time or with treatment."
mc "I'm not sure that not considering this [wanting to be amputated] a mental disorder is the way to go."
In this route, the MC says:
1) it's rarer for a person to want to be disabled just for sexual gratification
2) it likely had more to do with an identity disorder than anything sexual
3) it's similar to transgender identification where a person feels like they were born in the wrong body
4) instead of feeling like they have the wrong gender, they feel like they have the wrong number of legs
5) we are not considering transgenderism as a mental disorder anymore
6) but expanding this to all body identity disorders might be excessive
7) I'm not sure that not considering this [wanting to be amputated] a mental disorder is the way to go.
Which one of any of those statements is so offensive?
Is it because it is comparing gender dysphoria with other body identity disorders? For example in
You must be registered to see the links
helps defining good guidelines to differentiate between gender dysphoria and other disorders for diagnostic purposes. At some point:
The unique exclusion criteria for Gender Dysphoria might be: 1st) in Body Identity Integrity Disorder desires of amputations are related to arms and legs, not to genitals or breasts.
mc "Maybe we should do the same for all body identity disorders."
mc "Is there such a big difference between someone wanting to amputate their perfectly healthy hand or their perfectly healthy breasts?"
Is the fact that I gave the MC the option to make a comparsion that the doctors already do to diferenciate between the two diagnostics that's so offensive?
Note that the player can still choose the other option that says...
we are not considering transgenderism as a mental disorder anymore
[but] I'm not sure that not considering this [wanting to be amputated] a mental disorder is the way to go.
Is it because offended people are considering this
You must be registered to see the links
of a person that got much happier after getting his limp removed an aberration?(it had nothing to do with any paraphilia btw) And then get offended because there is an option to say that maybe we can let those people do what they want with their own body, the same we already do with transgenders?
Is this a transphobic comment?
Of course anyone has the right to feel offended for whatever they deem offensive, but I don’t see what is so offensive (or cringe) here to the point that curseofthesky felt the need to say they felt disgusted.
And the two quotes above also do not seem to be particularly elucidative to me. But I might still be missing something here, not sure. Either way, it was not meant to come as transphobe or to offend anyone.
I think these are kind of interesting discussions to have, what should be consider a mental illness or not, how we should treat them, and if we should allow surgery or not. But, then again, this is not really the place for any of this discussions, so, let's just move on.
So I'm a good chunk of the way into chapter 2 at this point (really enjoying the game too and am having a cracking time with it) but had one small element of uncertainty.
During the sections where the MC checks his phone on "Twitter" and has the option of liking posts or photos, does this actually ever have any effect on choices? It feels odd to include it if it has no effect whatsoever, but also seems way too inconsequential to actually make any difference.
So I'm a good chunk of the way into chapter 2 at this point (really enjoying the game too and am having a cracking time with it) but had one small element of uncertainty.
During the sections where the MC checks his phone on "Twitter" and has the option of liking posts or photos, does this actually ever have any effect on choices? It feels odd to include it if it has no effect whatsoever, but also seems way too inconsequential to actually make any difference.
I believe is just there for immersion, after all is a social media, it would be weird to not have the option to like other people's photos... don't think too much about it
I kinda feel like that information would spoil the fun...
Also keep in mind that the the dev has clearly stated that (so far at least) there is no way to "close off" a girls route based on choices about other girls. It is possible to close a girl's route directly by declining chances to interact enough times - i.e. if you never agree to accompany Lea on her adventures you don't get any of her content.
It is certainly not a game where you need an esoteric walkthrough to get to a specific character's content.
And remember, as with most story based games like this, the dev is unlikely to spend a lot of time writing widely divergent paths. The nuance of the story or minor scene differences might arise (e.g. dominant vs submissive scene with Emma) but you won't be gated out of whole subsections of content.
So make the choices you feel are right for the character traits of the MC you are role-playing, and sit back and enjoy.
Don't worry. MrSilverLust has been nothing but honest, and available when justified. He mentioned fresh news about the update around late May or June and, considering the complexity of the update in progress and how he likes to think about interactions and ramifications, I wouldn't be surprised it turns out a bit later. He also does everything in an old computer, so...
Just played this. Great story. And awesome chess commentary as well, hope we get more of that!
A question about the future of the game. I'm not after spoilers to the story, more in general what to expect. How much negative consequences to our actions can we expect depending on our choices? I'm thinking things like actually getting caught having sex in public. And some of the kinks in the game can have pretty severe consequences if you aren't careful (bondage gone wrong, humiliation gone too far leaving mental scars, MC screwing up some other way and so on). Then we also have pursuing Jen would likely lose him his psychology license, or at the very least giving Kim further blackmail material.
Don't worry. MrSilverLust has been nothing but honest, and available when justified. He mentioned fresh news about the update around late May or June and, considering the complexity of the update in progress and how he likes to think about interactions and ramifications, I wouldn't be surprised it turns out a bit later. He also does everything in an old computer, so...
What made you think I was expressing concern? I just asked a straightforward question; if anyone had any non- patreon communication regarding the update to share?
The vague pushback of "late May, early June release" was communicated publicly on patreon at the end of March, I have no reason to ask about public posts, thank you.
