VN Ren'Py Our Red String [Ch.13.3.4] [Eva Kiss]

[soprano31]

Hey, fellas! Can someone provide a Mega link of the new version?

Thanx in advance!

 

[spiderpity]

what if Seymour is actually Lena's father?

 

[Gicoo]

what if Seymour is actually Lena's father?

Could be, mainly debunked by patreons/steams strict guidelines against incest.
Still, Seymours past lover, Lenas unknown father, Ians parents being unfaithful (or something like that) leave a couple of possibilities open.
If Emmas remark about being adopted wasn't a throw away line, she could also be a candidate.

 

[BigAlzBub]

what if Seymour is actually Lena's father?

While the author has done incest content before, that was in a time when Patreon weren't going on a rampage against anyone who dares make this sort of content.

 

[Xupuzulla]

what if Seymour is actually Lena's father?

I dont think hes the father but i can see Lena mom being Seymour first and only love....

 

[Erectosaurus]

Going to laugh if Ian gets content with Louise while still never getting any Ivy content. Feels like Eva has a specific grudge against this pairing for whatever reason

 

[Gicoo]

Going to laugh if Ian gets content with Louise while still never getting any Ivy content. Feels like Eva has a specific grudge against this pairing for whatever reason

Ian could already fuck Louise, so that ship has been sailed. Ivy's, meanwhile, hasn't even left the port.

 

[Roderick2]

Ian could already fuck Louise, so that ship has been sailed. Ivy's, meanwhile, hasn't even left the port.

Better than that, he got a threesome with her and Lena.

BTW, nothing new in the "final version"... Or did I miss sometinhg?

 

[Turret]

The update was a huge letdown and didn't meet many (I assume) if not most players expectations.

Seymour was introduced as a mysterious, enigmatic, sinister man, whose "love" towards Lena is extremely dubious. He presents the corruption part of the game perfectly, in contrast to some other love interests that are vanilla, happy and safe. This was spelt out by Eva multiple times. Seymour is the main antagonist, he is not good. Every conversation was a dance with the unknown of why he would approach Lena and how he would do it.
The other main antagonist is Axel. Eva also went out of their way to delete an early sympathetic side of him and made him even more ruthless and despicable to emphasize the corruption. If Axel embodies the physical corruption, an animalistic predator who physically drags Lena around like a doll, then Seymour is the mental corruptor, someone who manipulates and poisons Lenas mind so much that she falls further and further in depravity on her own, until she makes a move on him because he lets her think its her idea.

And instead we get Seymour awkwardly making a move on her and simply retreating like the simp he is. Unless that is a ploy to make him seem feeble (which I doubt), he and Eva had utterly lost droped the ball with the latest release. The inclusion of Arthur may seem harmless and if its just a cameo it may be, but it was an immediate warning label to me that he is there to make Seymour look milder, meek and "good", to fill in the actual corruption regards prositution that was deemed first in that pointless poll.

So yeah, I want evil Seymour, most of all I want him to be in control. Not the toothless cuck I worry about giving a heart attack whenever I let Lena allow him to fuck him.

Hi!

You might remember that some players, like e.g. Doom and myself, from early on voiced our opinion that Seymour is NOT the evil bastard a majority of players seemed to think.There were several, sometimes blatant, hints into the direction that Seymour is a hard, calculating business man, but there is more to him outside his business self.

I think a majority of players misread the antagonist label. The business part of Seymour is one who knows how the system functions and is good at playing the big game. Seymour does not care if some businesses go down if it advances his and his friends agendas, in so far he is the antagonist of parts of Baluart, but that does not make him evil like e.g. Artur is. Seymour is simply good at being a business man. Some people might not like it, but to make an omlett you need to break some eggs. While the economy is not quite the zero sum game a lot of people believe, there is more to it than simple theory says, it was, is and will be a tank of sharks. That is one side.

If you play a Lena who has really good relations with Seymour you can learn quite a bit about him. Some things the players who could not wait to antagonise him never saw it seems. How this update played out, with Seymour NOT an evil bastard, was something that surprised me not really. Seymour can be a puppet player when it comes to business, but he is less so in private with people he likes. He can be altruistic if he wants to be or is reminded to by people close to him.

Besides, one of the biggest hints for such a"turn of events" as the new update was is actually the person Seymour was based on.

 

[SearingFive]

“I want to be the architect of your orgasm”. Man, shut the hell up Seymour! Can't pump harder, so he then proceeds to masks his inadequacy with these lines. Future cuck in the making. I'll jump out of the window if Robert is the one who cucks Seymour.

 

[Gicoo]

He quotes Nietsche, in particular interpreting the ubermensch or child as "master" so that it describes it himself, his gloating animation is labeled "evil" in code and that label fits, he blackmails Lena into a fancyier form of prostitution, ordering her to insert sextoys into her, all under the label of artistic expression. Utter disregard to the common folk, classist and elitist. He is too educated to argue with ignorance, he knows what he does makes the mayority suffer and very few benefit. Compare him, Agnes, the mayor candidate and Arthur VS Perrys dad, homeless guy, Emma, Ed and Molly. Hmm, I wonder who the wholesome, friendly, morally upstanding people with integrity are in these two groups.

He is morally bad, the current portrayal of a misunderstood well meaning extremist isn't consistent with his previous introduction and buildup.

While ORS very likely won't lead to rape and murder as GGGB could, Seymour and Axel were the closest you have to engaging with vile, corrupt scum, without them directly being rapists (Axels scenes are forceful and dominant, but sort of consential in porn logic as in Lena could back out and just decides not to).

 

[fatpussy123]

Hi!

You might remember that some players, like e.g. Doom and myself, from early on voiced our opinion that Seymour is NOT the evil bastard a majority of players seemed to think.There were several, sometimes blatant, hints into the direction that Seymour is a hard, calculating business man, but there is more to him outside his business self.

I think a majority of players misread the antagonist label. The business part of Seymour is one who knows how the system functions and is good at playing the big game. Seymour does not care if some businesses go down if it advances his and his friends agendas, in so far he is the antagonist of parts of Baluart, but that does not make him evil like e.g. Artur is. Seymour is simply good at being a business man. Some people might not like it, but to make an omlett you need to break some eggs. While the economy is not quite the zero sum game a lot of people believe, there is more to it than simple theory says, it was, is and will be a tank of sharks. That is one side.

If you play a Lena who has really good relations with Seymour you can learn quite a bit about him. Some things the players who could not wait to antagonise him never saw it seems. How this update played out, with Seymour NOT an evil bastard, was something that surprised me not really. Seymour can be a puppet player when it comes to business, but he is less so in private with people he likes. He can be altruistic if he wants to be or is reminded to by people close to him.

Besides, one of the biggest hints for such a"turn of events" as the new update was is actually the person Seymour was based on.

It's very easy being nice to the people who are nice to you. The marker for goodness isn't in how you treat those close to you, but how you treat people who you don't directly stand to gain from treating them nicely. As an example holding doors open for a date is nice gesture, but doesn't actually reveal your character because you could be doing so as a way to get in good standing. On the other hand, holding the door open for strangers who you have nothing to gain from probably reveals more about your character.

All that to say that of course Seymour is nice to Lena if she is nice to him. That doesn't change that he is a blackmailer. He directly blacklists Lena from her main source of income in order to get her to work for him and satisfy his fetishes. On the paths where Lena is into him he still blacklists her before proposing his contract to her. If Lena tries to refuse the blackmail is brought up. Also, saying that these practices are industry standard is not actually a refutation of the claim that he is immoral. It just means that the industry standard is to be immoral.

Nothing from this Seymour update has changed any of the facts or contradicted this understanding of Seymour. The only thing we learned that besides being a horrible person, he also is inept.

 

[ffive]

How this update played out, with Seymour NOT an evil bastard, was something that surprised me not really. Seymour can be a puppet player when it comes to business, but he is less so in private with people he likes. He can be altruistic if he wants to be or is reminded to by people close to him.

The idea that Seymour might be actually completely innocent and nice older guy kind of doesn't quite align with how Lena is on more than one occasion rewarded Smarts points if she opts to avoid getting closely involved with him. I mean, if Lena having a relationship with him is supposed to be perfectly normal romance route, why is it a smart thing for Lena to avoid it?

 

[Turret]

He quotes Nietsche, in particular interpreting the ubermensch or child as "master" so that it describes it himself, his gloating animation is labeled "evil" in code and that label fits, he blackmails Lena into a fancyier form of prostitution, ordering her to insert sextoys into her, all under the label of artistic expression. Utter disregard to the common folk, classist and elitist. He is too educated to argue with ignorance, he knows what he does makes the mayority suffer and very few benefit. Compare him, Agnes, the mayor candidate and Arthur VS Perrys dad, homeless guy, Emma, Ed and Molly. Hmm, I wonder who the wholesome, friendly, morally upstanding people with integrity are in these two groups.

He is morally bad, the current portrayal of a misunderstood well meaning extremist isn't consistent with his previous introduction and buildup.

While ORS very likely won't lead to rape and murder as GGGB could, Seymour and Axel were the closest you have to engaging with vile, corrupt scum, without them directly being rapists (Axels scenes are forceful and dominant, but sort of consential in porn logic as in Lena could back out and just decides not to).

Being able to quote Nietzsche makes you evil? Oh my God, now I know I am evil! Joking aside, while Nitzsche has some big blunders in his philosophy, there are parts where he nailed it, no matter what the Naysayers (many who never read anything written by him) blabb.
But philosophy aside, most of what you describe here happens if you antagonise Seymour from the get go, it simply does not happen if Lena and Seymour have a good relationship. In addition, if Lena is close with Seymour and Emma, Lena can sponsor a talk between Seymour and Emma (in some future update).
As for the morally upstanding people comparison, it might be cynical, but I would take a competent as... mayor, who get´s at least some things done over the morally upstanding, but incompetent mayor Perry´s Dad is, whose failure hurts the whole city, any day.
Seymour is morally really bad only on the antagonise him from the start paths. His current portrayal is consistent with the Seymour on the Lena and Seymour have a good relationship paths.

It's very easy being nice to the people who are nice to you. The marker for goodness isn't in how you treat those close to you, but how you treat people who you don't directly stand to gain from treating them nicely. As an example holding doors open for a date is nice gesture, but doesn't actually reveal your character because you could be doing so as a way to get in good standing. On the other hand holding the door open for strangers who you have nothing to gain from probably reveals more about your character.
All that to say that of course Seymour is nice to Lena if she is nice to him. That doesn't change that he is a blackmailer. He directly blacklists Lena from her main source of income in order to get her to work for him and satisfy his fetishes. On the paths where Lena is into him he still blacklists her before proposing his contract to her. If Lena tries to refuse the blackmail is brought up. Also, saying that these practices are industry standard is not actually a refutation of the claim that he is immoral. It just means that the industry standard is to be immoral.
Nothing from this Seymour update has changed any of the facts or contradicted this understanding of Seymour. The only thing we learned that besides being a horrible person, he also is inept.

You are argueing with meta knowledge here, since we can see Seymour (or other characters) at their worst if we play enough paths. But that is futile here since the various paths represent different universes. On the paths were Lena and Seymour have a good relationship, Seymour is not a blackmailer. Unless it was reworked during an update, if Lena and Seymour are close, he proposes his exclusive contract before(!) doing any blacklisting.

Besides, I never said Seymour is fully good or so, as your argumentation assumes. I argue that the Seymour on the paths where Lena and him have a good relationship is not an evil bastard. He is still im- or amoral in his choices, but he has growth potential and is nicer than many think. As I said, play some path variants where you can learn more about him.

The idea that Seymour might be actually completely innocent and nice older guy kind of doesn't quite align with how Lena is on more than one occasion rewarded Smarts points if she opts to avoid getting closely involved with him. I mean, if Lena having a relationship with him is supposed to be perfectly normal romance route, why is it a smart thing for Lena to avoid it?

As I wrote above, I do not say Seymour is a pidgeon feeding do-gooder. He is a shrewd business man, who is also im- or amoral with many of his choices. He is not really good, he resides in a morally grey area. Seymour as depicted in the game and the new update in special has the potential to get "better" (e.g. Lena can sponsor talks between him and emma, he is a lot more inclined to do the right thing if Lena and he have a good relationship and Lena nudges him to) Unlike Artur, Seymour has not gone beyond the moral event horizon so far and still has potential to become a better person, esp. if people close to him give hints or initiate stuff.
Nevertheless Seymour is, as said, mostly im- or amoral in his choices. Going by his favourtie philosopher I would say amoral. and this is a part of him for good. Even if Lena and friends can nudge Seymour to become a better person, part of him will stay amoral. And a Lena in a close relationship with him will undoubtedly be influenced by this towards a morally more grey stance. The couple smart points Lena can get is for seeing this and if she wants to stay a "pure" do-gooder.

 

[Gicoo]

Being able to quote Nietzsche makes you evil?

Read the entire sentence. Quoting Nietzsche one its own isn't evil, interpreting his work in a certain way is. Just how Nazis interpreted the ubermensch as the ideal german man who had the justification to stand above everyone else.

most of what you describe here happens if you antagonise Seymour from the get go, it simply does not happen if Lena and Seymour have a good relationship

Seymour doesn't blackmail Lena when she likes him, but he does if she refuses him.

You rhetoric that Seymour is technically good if Lena and Ian don't oppose him because they themselves chose to be opportunistic, career-and money driven in specific playthroughs, doesn't hold up. Its just an absence of evil in Lenas and Ians limited perspective.

He is not really good, he resides in a morally grey area.

He is a flat out criminal and just too rich and clever to get caught.


Sure, Seymour can do good things, like paying for Lena's mother hospital. His overall intent is to make others indebted to himto worship him.

There is no indication that Seymour would change and become good or redeemed. This was initially suggested with Axel, but droped to make him consistent with his character, his role and progression throughout the story as the clear antagonist. The same was with Seymour until he uncharacteristically and narratively inconsistenly mellowed down in the latest update.

 

[Turret]

Read the entire sentence. Quoting Nietzsche one its own isn't evil, interpreting his work in a certain way is. Just how Nazis interpreted the ubermensch as the ideal german man who had the justification to stand above everyone else.

If you read the entire part, you see that I was joking, even added the smileys

Seymour doesn't blackmail Lena when she likes him, but he does if she refuses him.

As I wrote in an earlier post, the paths in the game are differents universes. You cannot argue with this, since if the Multiverse theory holds water somewhere out there are universes where everybody has both great and evil versions of oneself hopping around. So on the paths where Lena and Seymour are close, he is a nicer guy than in others. Remark that I do not say good.

You rhetoric that Seymour is technically good if Lena and Ian don't oppose him because they themselves chose to be opportunistic, career-and money driven in specific playthroughs, doesn't hold up. Its just an absence of evil in Lenas and Ians limited perspective.

As I mentioned before, I never said that Seymour is good. I argue that he is NOT the evil bastard you and some others like to see him, but an amoral businessman/grey hat, who has the potential to personal growth, if he has the right persons around him. (e.g. Lena can bring Seymour and Emma together for talks and I estimate that for Ian a similar option arises in a future update)

 

[fatpussy123]

If you read the entire part, you see that I was joking, even added the smileys

As I wrote in an earlier post, the paths in the game are differents universes. You cannot argue with this, since if the Multiverse theory holds water somewhere out there are universes where everybody has both great and evil versions of oneself hopping around. So on the paths where Lena and Seymour are close, he is a nicer guy than in others. Remark that I do not say good.

The multiverse in ORS is used sparingly to explain different preferred background for characters. Namely Lena's background and Jess' good and bad variants.

The actual events of the story follow cause and effect and a lot of them are universal, ie Perry setting up a beach event in all universes leading to Ian and Lena going there.

Similarly Lena losing all her jobs is also a universal event, a canon event if you will. The timing of this event and the unlikelihood of her losing all opportunities in one day are obviously because Seymour blacklists her. No other explanation is satisfactory and this is even confirmed with the contract meeting.

To claim otherwise you need to provide evidence that there is an intended good guy alternate timeline version of Seymour. And saying that other characters have variants isn't evidence, unlike the other side that can point to evidence showing Seymour clearly is intended to be a bad person. Based on him being blackmailer in all routes where Lena doesn't kiss his ass, him being referred to as evil in the files, and EK calling him the big bad on a patreon post.

 

[Turret]

And saying that other characters have variants isn't evidence, unlike the other side that can point to evidence showing Seymour clearly is intended to be a bad person. Based on him being blackmailer in all routes where Lena doesn't kiss his ass, him being referred to as evil in the files, and EK calling him the big bad on a patreon post.

What evidence do you bring to the table, hm? You are weighting with two scales, since ALL characters have different versions of themselves hopping around in the game. Nice and not so nice ones. The number is unimportant as long as there is variance. Just as an example, if Lena and Seymour are on really good terms, he might not be a big do-gooder, but Seymour is clearly a nicer person here, e.g. helping with the high health costs and you see it in the new update that it was not done with hidden thoughts.
It is also very evident by your word choice that you have a set opinion, why should I bother? But as a quick answer, there are route variants where Seymour is a rather nice guy and Lena does not "kiss his ass", quite the contrary as we can see in the update! The "evil" in the files tags a pic "evil grin". Oh my goodness, everybody can do an evil grin. And EK calling him the big bad is clearly meant for the paths where you antagonise him early on and join the rabble without cause so you can feel morally superior when you shave in the morning.
The paths where Lena, Seymour, Ian and Co are on good terms and the new update underpins this, can also lead to good results but morally far more grey than anything else.

 

[Geralt From Rivia]

Famous rapper Sean Combs, known by nickname P. Diddy, spoke out in support of Seymour Ward.
"A wonderful man, investor, businessman and philanthropist. I don't know why people spread lies and rumors about him, they just want to look morally superior.
We have a great relationship and he was often my guest at my parties, and his trips to Little Saint James island were purely for business. He is a law-abiding citizen, and 1000 bottles of baby oil were simply a gift to show our long friendship," - Diddy said.

 

[fatpussy123]

What evidence do you bring to the table, hm?

The evidence is that Seymour blacklists Lena in ALL playthroughs. The evidence is also authors intent:

Saying there are variants of other character therefore it is evidence that he has a good counter part present in the game does not logically follow. You have to prove that a good variant is present as an option. Evidence is needed to support the claim, maybe a variable in the files like holly_slut or jess_bad labelled seymour_good or something. As it stands Seymour blacklists Lena in every path and if the sly tactics don't work he resorts to blackmail therefore no amount nice pleasantries in Rome will make him some misunderstood nice guy. He is a manipulator through and through with no evidence of a good variant in the game. Just because someone acts nice around some they manipulated does not change the fact that they manipulated them, in this case through blacklisting and finacial pressure.