- Dec 25, 2019
- 609
- 1,824
I just realized i don’t see the blonde queen since february, 7 months. I Miss you, come back even Hotter and ready to be fucked harder.
That was… definitely not the point I was trying to make, but I should have seen it coming.That would be so hot... Going back home with Ian's semen still flowing out of her little pussy...
Total used cheating slut
YES! it's been way to long without her, show yourself our qeen in a form of a hot new preview please!I just realized i don’t see the blonde queen since february, 7 months. I Miss you, come back even Hotter and ready to be fucked harder.
Obviously I agree that Stan like all characters should go through some kind of change, and that it should be influenced by the protagonists' choices. But out of the three nerdy/timid/slightly depressed male characters (Stan, Perry, Wade), Stan's the guy I'm having the biggest problem imagining how it would realistically be implemented.As I said, I don't actually expect Eva to put that sort of time into Stan, but I do think it would be nice to have the chance to make him something more then just the deadbeat voyeur or cuckold or whatever - for those of us that might want that. I also wouldn't be against him still retaining some of that shyness, but at least having built enough confidence from that makeover to realize his self-worth, and for others to be able to appreciate what he has. To actually get a girl who doesn't pity him, for example.
I can see how the time-skip/makeover could be compared to Eric, although in truth I hadn't considered that when I thought of the Stan makeover. I'm not really sure what to say on that point other then you're right, but hopefully it won't rule out Stan having a choice for self-improvement altogether. I wouldn't begrudge others wanting to have Stan remain the voyeur or become a cuckold, but if that's all Stan will ever be he wouldn't hold much interest in my play-through, just like Jeremy, which would be a bit of a shame because there is potential.
PS. Post you were referring to was referencing a convo a few pages back about achieving the implausible dream and the skills required to do so.You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.
View attachment 1396643
Stan is your typical nerd. Horrible clothing style aside, dude is so forgettable that not even his creator gives a slight fuck about him. As Lena, are you shamelessly twerking in his face turning him into the ultimate simp, or are you insulting him every time he crawls out of his hole?
View attachment 1396642
Marcel is the classic imposing bouncer. When he's not busy kicking Perry's ass, he likes to flirt with cute and innocent female writers (despite the deepest thing he's ever read is Mickey Mouse). Are you going to let him corrupt Holly, or are you going to let him corrupt Holly?
Doing Eva's work here smh
Yeah Stan might be a cuck and Lena will just let him take a look when she gets fucked by studs like Mike, Axel, Jeremy etc...Only issue is that this kind of change, off-screen and such, would be very close to the change that Ashley's boyfriend Eric can go through in GGGB, Eva's other game. I'm not sure Eva would repeat such a story line.
I think Stan is meant to just be the shy voyeur although perhaps there will be a route for Lena to indulge him, although it's hard to say if any character improvement would take place during such a route. If he does have a dedicated route planned it could also be that of the consensual cuckold where he gets off watching Lena with others.
I thought about leaving him by not paying rent. Then his dad appeared so I kept him for Lena.Perry is a whiny loser... Ian should not help him with Emma and especially with Cherry...
I think the issue is more that, at least with how those cards had their stats arranged, is that both "wits" and "charisma" are kind of overlapping into one big ball of "social intelligence".lot of the previous posts regarding Seymour's stats is a bit over focus on the idea of intelligence. Arguing the flawed view of philosophy and etc. Over looking the basic facts and traits of the character. That is he is politically connected and economically successful; dont get that way without some kind of smarts.
More importantly; the man is a manipulator. Now maybe Eva didnt do it quiet that well, the reception is debatable and subjective, but that is what the point of interactions with him thus far is suppose to convey.
The man is of means and able to use it and can do so directly and indirectly and should not be taken lightly. Least thats my take on the character thus far in the story.
Also, the dialogue over the philiosphy (forgot who exactly) is mainly to convey how that character views things. Right or wrong.
Stan wouldn't say no to banging Louise, the dude is so desperate that it'd be consensual, even if she humiliates him verbally in the process (unless I underestimate his dignity). Stan "hatefucking" Louise can never be consensual i.e. is impossible unless she's drunk, drugged, blindfolded, or otherwise tricked. Louise is disgusted by Stan and isn't even attracted to him. The only consensual sex scenario I can picture between Stan and Louise is the one initiated by Louise for various reasons (guilt + newfound appreciation that ends up in a romantic attraction OR sexual frustration mixed with disgust which makes her develop some sort of kink, etc).So, female on male rape is fine in your book? Or maybe I misunderstand?
There even is an example in-game: IanxMinerva.To reiterate, hatefucking needs to have a mutual desire, even if both participants can't stand each other in terms of personality but are attracted to each other sexually.
Seymour overall is very intelligent and is charismatic to maneuver to achieve and profit. the two dont really overlap; a person dont have to be very educated to charm people or convince them to do things.I think the issue is more that, at least with how those cards had their stats arranged, is that both "wits" and "charisma" are kind of overlapping into one big ball of "social intelligence".
Doesn't make much sense to have two stats to convey the same ability (in this case, social aptitude) so some people are of the opinion that "charisma" should be the stat for characters that can be good manipulators, while "wits" should be a stat for more general intelligence. Issue is that EvaKiss had those cards make Ian's and Lena's friends look like literal cavemen compared to Seymour, Axel, and Ivy, which feels a bit silly when we consider the only things those characters are better at so far is social manipulation (also internally inconsistent since Holly had really high wits but she is as socially naive as they come).
Also if "wits" was to be more general intelligence, I feel that would involve a level of mental wellbeing and introspection, which characters like Seymour, Ivy, and Axel are all lacking with their borderline sociopathic behavior.
Louise is the best example character for this, I'm fine with her having low charisma for the reasons you mentioned, but she's getting a master's degree on literature and she has a "wits" stat of 5, tied with Ivy (who didn't go to college), losing to Mike (???) and Axel. We have seen absolutely nothing to even indicate those characters have "higher than average" intelligence besides their social aptitudes (which should fall under charisma, not wits), and yet they are handily beating characters like Emma, Perry, and Wade, which we have seen nothing from them to indicate "lower than average" intelligence aside from social ineptitude (which again should fall under charisma, not wits).Ian's and Lena friends measurements does not mean they are lesser, its general measure of who these people are and fairly representative on the interactions with them. overall they are generally average people given the point of their lives and dialogue we interact with as the story progress.
Louis is same only not that charming considering how blunt and judgemental, right or wrong.
Again, in matters of social aptitude, it is clear Seymour is much more skilled than Holly, but that is already reflected in his charisma stat, you can't argue it is fine for him to have an absurdly high "wits" because of his manipulation skills and at the same time also argue there isn't an overlap between "wits" and "charisma" in the form of "social intelligence".Seymour overall is very intelligent and is charismatic to maneuver to achieve and profit. the two dont really overlap; a person dont have to be very educated to charm people or convince them to do things.
again manipulator, he is smart and very persuasive to be where he is.
Holly meek and naive personality is fairly fit give her a low charisma. lot of it is based on confidence to argue or sway a person. She is smart, but i but is less likely to convince others or lose her nerve or be shaken in a conversation.
You might have missed some details about Ivy's story, we know already that she was actually ostracized and bullied during high-school, with Lena being pretty much her only friend. She wants to pass an image of a confident and completely self-reliant person, but she has some concerning attitudes here and there that maybe indicate she might be a little obssessed with Lena and that she seems to be a bit ruthless and uncaring about other people's wellbeing if they get on her way.sociopath....read many of those arguments many times and many on cindy. dont think a lot of people clearly understand what a sociopath is or how they operate or defines them.
Not that im an expert either, but in regards of Ivy....way off base.
Basic definition is a person who is antisocial and lacking a conscience. Seymour is perhaps accurate on it given he is self serving and based on revealing connections and etc thus far, man is self serving and will use and exploit and anything and anyone to get what he wants.
Ivy....very free spirit individual i suppose and is driven by her confidence in her own sexuality but highly doubtful on her being a sociopath. Considering her friendship with Lena and , from what i remember, general attitude when or should the reader choose to reveal or setup the dilemma regarding with Jeremy and Louise. Now unless a reveal shows otherwise, she is a person who embraced her sexuality and willing to use it, but its not completely morally bankrupt, unorthodox sure, and does have a....at least unusual stance on caring for her friends or friendship with Lena.
OctoberWhen is the next update?
Are you blind? Louise insists on prancing around half naked in front of Stan, she leaves her door open when she has sex and she is extra loud just to make sure Stan can hear everything. And then the constant taunting. She even dropped her panties in his room (the whole Lola story doesn't make any sense) so she could accuse him. She is basically begging him to take her!Stan "hatefucking" Louise can never be consensual i.e. is impossible unless she's drunk, drugged, blindfolded, or otherwise tricked. Louise is disgusted by Stan and isn't even attracted to him. The only consensual sex scenario I can picture between Stan and Louise is the one initiated by Louise for various reasons