Oh, FFS!
You don't have permission to view the spoiler content.
Log in or register now.
- Thread starter Eva Kiss
- Start date
-
- Tags
- 2dcg anal sex bdsm big ass big tits cheating corruption creampie dating sim exhibitionism female domination female protagonist group sex handjob harem interracial lesbian male domination male protagonist masturbation milf mobile game multiple protagonist netorare oral sex point & click romance sex toys stripping swinging teasing titfuck turn based combat vaginal sex
BlandChili
Engaged Member
- Dec 15, 2020
- 2,404
- 5,522
Other way around.What was wrong with that scene? Were people getting offended that some characters did not like trans porn? -_-
The scene felt natural to me, people openly discussing their kinks, what turns them on and what doesn't, nobody's trying to make any sort of political statement, which is fucking refreshing nowaydays. In contrast, red lolly manages to cringe me every now and then with stuff in her game like: "It's 21 century - being naked is empowering for women! This nude model gets naked every day for the sake of all women in the world!", "Damn, coprofilia is really not my cup of tea. I mean, no offence to anyone to likes that sort of thing, we all have our kinks I just meant that I, personally, would not enjoy getting shit involed in my sexual life but if you do that's totally fine I did not mean to offend you, still if I did I'm very sorry"
The criticism wasn't towards transgender or their presence in porn, there was a complaint that some users felt that Ian didn't have an option to really speak up on transgender behalf, something along the lines of "they are people, not a porn trope," something similar to what Cindy expresses if she's present. Some people felt that Wade's language, calling transgender "dick girls" specifically was oppressive and needed a choice for the player to more concretely speak out against.
Nah, from what I recall the issue was more that Wade was being too much of a prick and leaning towards some offensive stuff (repeatedly referring to trans-women as "dudes with tits") and there wasn't really much of an option to tell him to cut it out, most the player could do was say that Perry can jerk off to whatever he likes, which is not really the same as telling Wade to stop talking shit about transgender people.What was wrong with that scene? Were people getting offended that some characters did not like trans porn? -_-
The scene felt natural to me, people openly discussing their kinks, what turns them on and what doesn't, nobody's trying to make any sort of political statement, which is fucking refreshing nowaydays. In contrast, red lolly manages to cringe me every now and then with stuff in her game like: "It's 21 century - being naked is empowering for women! This nude model gets naked every day for the sake of all women in the world!", "Damn, coprofilia is really not my cup of tea. I mean, no offence to anyone to likes that sort of thing, we all have our kinks I just meant that I, personally, would not enjoy getting shit involed in my sexual life but if you do that's totally fine I did not mean to offend you, still if I did I'm very sorry"
The only person that takes any issue with what Wade is saying is Perry, but then he gets imediatelly jumped on by Alison and Cindy because they were doing some pearl-clutching about porn being inherently disrespectful because of the fantasies they portray (evident hipocrisy considering the things the two of them can be doing at this point in the story), and then Emma goes on a tangent about sexual "weirdness" being a good thing and that it makes life much more interesting, which can be a fine message in itself, but speaks more about the group not being mean to Perry about his sexual kinks than about the issue of treating transgender people as freaks, since the later is more of an "identity thing" than a "sex thing".
And WHY does Ian have to speak on on BEHALF of them? Why is Ian NOT allowed to speak AGAINST them?
Do you see where YOU are the problem here? You are dictating that writers have only a "limited option" on a creative level. YOU are the one dictating that a writer HAS TO include content that the writer may not be 100% comfortable with. YOU are narrowing the path that the writer might not WANT to be narrowed at all. YOU are demanding that characters interact in ONE way, and ONE way only. YOU are demanding that they HAVE TO BE SUPPORTED when "not supporting them" can result in the creating of conflict with certain characters later on down the road.
Sorry, but EVA is the creator. SHE is the only voice that is allowed to DICTATE CONTENT.
And even though I have enjoyed what Eva has created overall, there is content that I'm not 100% happy with. But I don't make DEMANDS that Eva alter what she is doing. Nor do I support ANYONE on ANY topic who makes demands on ANY writer.
You may suggest, you may ask if it is a possibility to explore. But once you start to DEMAND that the writer addresses content TO YOUR satisfaction, then just shut up and leave.
Eva should be given the freedom AND the encouragement to continue making content SHE is comfortable with, WHEN she is comfortable with using it and in the manner SHE SEES FIT!
Don't like it, write your own god-damn game and do it YOUR way. Ironically, if you do and I enjoy it. I will be 100% behind you doing YOUR story YOUR way and telling those who make demands OF YOU, to shut up and leave.
Brickman
Member
- May 26, 2017
- 444
- 3,504
Oh fuck not this again, please let's not feed the offended trolls that want to push their sociopolitical views in every piece of content that doesn't explicitly agree or portray their moral world view. To each their own, if you don't like the game's personality you're free to look for what pleases you in other creators, but accusing someone of harmful and active discrimination, hate or phobia against certain identities is just childish, egotistical and harmful. ORS is not a piece of political propaganda, it's a piece of art and culture and I think it's rather progressive in it's scope, if anything, certainly not racist or "transphobic".
So can we talk about what's actually in the game? I wonder what stats will the other character cards have. My guess is this:
High Wits: Holly, Seymour and maybe Alison
High Charisma: Axel, Cindy and Jeremy
High Athletics: Axel, Jeremy and Axel
High Lust: Ivy and Mike
So can we talk about what's actually in the game? I wonder what stats will the other character cards have. My guess is this:
High Wits: Holly, Seymour and maybe Alison
High Charisma: Axel, Cindy and Jeremy
High Athletics: Axel, Jeremy and Axel
High Lust: Ivy and Mike
jduk
Member
- Nov 25, 2019
- 363
- 965
Not this bs talk guys ... Please lets just appreciate Eva's work and fap to it... If anyone is offended by it's content, he can always stop playing the game etc... I am sick and tired of everything being pc... If you want to create a story or a game just make it pc as possible, your choice. Eva and all the creators can do whatever they want, they have the right to free thought and creation. Also Eva is pc enough as far as i can say... The only "racist" thing she does is "bbc stuff" but a lot of people are into that and I don't have a problem with it. She can do whatever she wants, a sex game doesn't have to be morally and politically correct. Sex isn't politically correct in itself. That's how's life out there.
Btw how those new stats (charisma,lust etc) are going to influence the game so far?
It was all starting with 0 before, am i right?
Btw how those new stats (charisma,lust etc) are going to influence the game so far?
It was all starting with 0 before, am i right?
jduk
Member
- Nov 25, 2019
- 363
- 965
I think Jeremy would have very high athletics and lust, I don't know about charisma...
Alison and Holly high wit, i agree.
Ivy full lust and high athletics.
Stan high wits and lust but shit in the others...
Perry shit all around... Maybe average wits and lust if Eva is being generous to him ...
Charisma is high for Cindy i guess and maybe Mike too. I don't know about Wade... Maybe above average wits and athletics? Or everything low like Perry...
BlandChili
Engaged Member
- Dec 15, 2020
- 2,404
- 5,522
Uh, why not? I see no reason not to give the player such a choice.
Why in the world are you singling me out for? What I told you was an aproximation of many opinions not my own. Take a moment to consider what you're writing.
I'll echo my former point that I see no issue with having the choice for such a response. The word "choice" indicating that it'd be optional. If you're fine with Wade using transphobic language you'd be free to ignore it. Besides, there is no issue here, with her conduct about the new clothing options for Ian it's pretty clear that she's open to criticism generally.
Uh, sure. Two things, 1. I am not dictating anything. 2. Eva is an online creator if she ignored her userbase her product would fail.
Neither do I.
I don't understand the outrage you are commenting with. I have never made any demands, so get off your high horse.
gymnopedies
Member
- Dec 28, 2019
- 374
- 500
nobody notice that our favorites characters have electric last names???
You must be registered to see the links
ORS character cards
One day I was thinking about the defining traits of ORS characters: which stat does represent their personality the best? How do they compare between them? What attribute do they value the most and to which do they react more favorably?
In short, I decided to give them some numbers to better define them, and just for fun. It seemed a cool idea to make a presentation in the style of a trading card game. Mind you, these numbers don't share the utility value with the in-game stats, it's just a way to rank the characters from 1 to 10 in a fun, visually compelling way. I also decided to give each character a zodiac sign that would kinda match their personalities (I don't really believe in that kind of stuff, but it was fun matching archetypes).
So, to begin with, I give you Base Ian and Base Lena. If you're curious, he's a Libra and Lena is Aquarius. Do you think it suits them? Can you guess other character's zodiac sign? I'll start posting their cards during the following weeks, as I continue to develop Chapter 9.
Uh, why not? I see no reason not to give the player such a choice.
Why in the world are you singling me out for? What I told you was an aproximation of many opinions not my own. Take a moment to consider what you're writing.
...
I'll echo my former point that I see no issue with having the choice for such a response. The word "choice" indicating that it'd be optional. If you're fine with Wade using transphobic language you'd be free to ignore it.
...
Uh, sure. Two things, 1. I am not dictating anything. 2. Eva is an online creator if she ignored her userbase her product would fail.
...
I don't understand the outrage you are commenting with. I have never made any demands, so get off your high horse.
Both statements that I had underlined and made bold are direct DEMANDS on a writer to create limited content and interaction for a character's option. BOTH statements singled out speaking on BEHALF of a topic. BOTH statements single out ONE way, and ONE way only, for the writer to handle a topic overall.
THAT is why I aimed my displeasure at you directly. Although, in fairness, the use of the word 'you' should be thought of more as a 'generic you use' and not 'specific you use' for a lot of what I say online. So, while it was aimed at you to make my point, I opted to emphasize the word for 'generic use' to aim at other at the same time. More of a "directed statement" that is able to be used as a "generic statement" as well.
Now, as far as your 2 pts? Uh, you are aware that they are completely countering each other, right? I mean, the first one is basically saying "I'm not telling you what to do, but X-Y-Z" followed immediately by point 2 which is basically saying "Well, since you didn't do X-Y-Z like I told you to, no wonder it failed."
Again, it is how you (generic) come across supporting content in general. Asking if it is possible, suggesting adding it when/where it fits the best, asking the writer how they feel in regards to comfort level and determining where the line is drawn for creative/player enjoyment? This style of approach is highly encouraged and can enhance a project in numerous ways.
But if you (again, generic) start to say content HAS to be added, especially for "these characters" while dismissing other characters, AND include (the often annoying as hell) 'suggestion' of how that content should be played out or how it should be handled? Well, that is when it is best for everyone involved to move on and create a new project instead.
Look, here's the thing. I have seen how this plays out as a creator first hand. Working on prior games, I've had interactions with players/fans who start to push more and more for content that they want, rather than the content you want to write in your own game. THE BEST example of this is making a game with a female lead character, and being instantly flooded with demands for lesbian/futa type content. Or even full Trans content and not Futa. The thing is, on a creative level, that type of content can really throw the writer off. Comfort level, how to work it into a scene with one character working better than another ... which often ticks off the fans who have suggested it to begin with because it isn't the "right character" to use. Even having to throw out entire game design elements or story-arcs JUST to make it work in SOME form or another, only to have fans turn right around and stab you in the back for saying it wasn't "enough" for them to enjoy.
I've seen this with fetishes as well. BDSM that doesn't go far enough. "Scat content" being demanded be added to a game, when as a writer that exact same content turns me OFF, which makes it impossible to write a convincing 'sexy scene' while being 'revolted' creatively. BBC requested with zero Black people involved, and now a need to create a completely new character AND figure out what role they play that isn't going to get me accused of being a racists because of some offensive content that I never even intended, or saw, while creating them. (Such as making him the captain of the basketball team suddenly making me a racist because he is ON a basketball team at all, despite CLEARLY pointing out that he is the captain and has plans on getting a scholarship to go to collage.) NTR/Bukkake content where I have to now create a "storm" of location, people involved, why it happens at THIS specific time in the story, just how does it play out for the player overall, IS there a path out of it, and if there is a path out of it does that mean players are going to be pissed off at me for doing so, HOW does it end, what is the aftermath of the event in general, DO any side-characters get involved and if so how/why and what fallout results of that, does it block off other paths with other characters? See what I mean?
Gay, Lesbian, Trans, Futa, Shota, NTR, Cuck, BBC, BDSM and various other "choices" should come from the creator and the creator ONLY. Should only be done to the extent of the creator's comfort level. And should only come from the creator who knows how to use that content in their project to advance the project overall, not take a detour "just for this content option".
Once it starts coming from outside sources, it makes it difficult for the creator to work into what they have planned, or what they have already got into the game. Which is why suddenly "demanding it" from a fan that wants it done "just like this" or with "these specific characters"? Well, then the only thing to do creatively is to simply tell that fan to do their own thing.
And all of this becomes extremely difficult, if not flat out IMPOSSIBLE, if the writer has to take into account someone else's political/social point of view. So pointing out that characters of this race can ONLY be written in this way, that sexual preference has to be somehow "encouraged" over other choices, or physical traits/attributes have to be "accepted" while "not disliked" by anyone for any reason.... Well, it tosses out so many "roadblocks" creatively, that the creator actually reaches a point of not BEING ABLE to create at all.
And that is where my own personal anger came from. Having experienced it first hand, I know what it does to the creator. I know that it evolves into a situation of NOT being able to please the same people you are TRYING to please. I know that once they see you cave and start to write for ONE piece of content that wasn't originally included, then they will want you to start adding in THEIR piece of content as well. Even if their content is completely AGAINST the sort of set-up and relationships that you have been building since Day 1. I know how a simple suggestion that you are considering, or may have hinted at because you haven't quite reached HOW you will work it in, but want to establish the ground work.... suddenly turns into a FLOOD of outsiders wanting it to be this way, or that way, or this other way, or just like this but with a twist.
Like I said. It becomes impossible to do on a creative level. It tends to destroy creative production. It bogs down into constant re-working the same content over and over trying to reach that 'right amount' that will please people AND allow you to move forward as a creator.
And that is why, when someone stats to demand that writes handle a topic in "this way only", I get ticked off. Because I know what it does to the person creating the game. It demoralizes them. It turns them into cowards, afraid that the slightest mistake will be blown out of proportion. The amount of HATRED that gets dumped on them for taking the wrong side of an issue for creative purposes, even if it isn't the side they support personally. And it gets to the point of the creator basically asking "why bother" and just flat out stop trying to BE creative, resulting in repetitive content, characters and story lines.
So, in short. Yeah, your post combined with earlier posts just reached my limits and I "barked".
i bet you play games on game journalist mode.
BlandChili
Engaged Member
- Dec 15, 2020
- 2,404
- 5,522
Sorry, I don't feel like reading all that right now.
From what I glimpsed at the beginning though I'll just reiterate that I made no demands. Telling you what some people felt would have been a nice option to include is not a demand.
RC-1138 Boss
Message Maven
- Apr 26, 2017
- 13,721
- 20,917
Goes on a nonsense rant then make a wall of text to explain said rant...
Use as much honey as you want. But when you include 2 different lines of handling a situation in ONE direction only? Then, YES! You are making a demand. You aren't presenting an "option", not even a "choice". You are presenting DICTATED CONTENT!
And doing it while not even bothering to ask if the writer feels the same way about the subject as you do? Well, then you are basically telling the write EXACTLY WHAT TO WRITE FOR YOU!
Again, if it was presented in the following, we wouldn't be having this issue:
Could it be possible to provide Ian with some kind of response in this situation? One where he is offended, while keeping another option available to support his friend in order to keep relationship points available? Or indicate some relationship impact of Ian simply hearing that kind of statement in general?
See? Not only does it ask without demanding only one option, but does so with providing assistance to Eva on how to guide the scene using the "game stats" as pro/con interaction with a character. And it leaves open a very simple method for Eva to express Ian being upset with hearing it and not having to re-write the entire scene by a simple +/- relationship change.
No accusations, not a single "request" of handling it in one way, not even a hint as to what MY own personal views are other than the use of "that kind of statement", which implies that I did not like it without assuming that Eva was trying to be 'offensive' or pushing Eva's own views onto me.
It is HOW you do it that makes the difference. And doing it in a way that comes across as making 'demands' (even if that isn't your intention to begin with) turns it into a negative interaction. Leaving it open-ended for creative talents WHILE pointing out that the interaction itself SHOULD be viewed as a "relationship moment between characters" but wasn't can draw Eva's attention to that moment and BUILD on it, use it as a wedge, or simply ding it with a +/- and STILL indicate Ian's feelings about the matter without a full re-write or re-working the scene completely.
Sometimes, yes/no isn't enough.Goes on a nonsense rant then make a wall of text to explain said rant...
Tallyhoe
Member
- Feb 21, 2019
- 205
- 710
Shouldn’t Eva be free to write a ‘character’ as she sees fit? All of ORS cast are a lot more grounded compared to GGGB like she wants it to be. They, to some degree, don’t fit to too many stereotypes and they all have some flaws.
Lena and Ian are not blank slates, never have been. They both have certain characteristics and perspectives to the world based on their characters’ experiences. You can only choose or influence them to go certain ways based on your liking. I know options are good and of course you’d want every option possible but at some point you can’t add everything. These people she writes may be skeptical or bias for/against something based on their character. Why does everything has to be either sexist or racist?
Lena and Ian are not blank slates, never have been. They both have certain characteristics and perspectives to the world based on their characters’ experiences. You can only choose or influence them to go certain ways based on your liking. I know options are good and of course you’d want every option possible but at some point you can’t add everything. These people she writes may be skeptical or bias for/against something based on their character. Why does everything has to be either sexist or racist?
BlandChili
Engaged Member
- Dec 15, 2020
- 2,404
- 5,522
I was not presenting dictated content.
BlandChili
Engaged Member
- Dec 15, 2020
- 2,404
- 5,522
Of course, I think Eva is smart if she listens to feedback, like she has done, but ultimately she's n charge.
I think it depends somewhat on what she's selling actually.
A part of the pitch of ORS is "your choices matter" so I don't think it's undue criticism that people point out if they feel like they are only allowed to express a narrow perspective. In the above discussed example Ian has no history, good or bad, in relation to transgender people that we know of so there isn't really a reason to limit his response options in that specific instance.
That is not to say that Eva has to do anything, but I also don't think people should be called demanding because they feel limited in some situations. It's all part of the creative process that you can't satisfy everyone and Eva herself has to consider what feedback to consider when implementing changes, if and when she chooses to implement any,
Deleted member 3064965
Member
- Nov 15, 2020
- 418
- 1,882
No, those are not demands. It's not even close to being demands. It's a summary of how several members on the forum perceived a specific scene and its dialogue. Some agreed, some disagreed, and it was discussed in a mostly civil and polite way, which is more than I can say of your completely out of the blue rants.
And that's what people do on a forum like this, you know? We discuss the content of the game – what we like, what we miss or like less, and what we hope or expect to see in the coming updates. Also, this forum and thread don't even have any connection to the creator. Sometimes people are discussing how a scene or a storyline specifically could have been adjusted to work better, but no-one expects Eva Kiss to log onto a pirate forum and change her game because of the members' impression of the different parts of the game. People discuss it because they're interested in storytelling and what makes a scene work or not.
Also, in a lot of the cases where a specific part of the game have gotten a less enthusiastic reception, the members of her Discord channel have given more or less the same arguments. But it's still not demands, it's feedback. Which is something everyone who write stories need in some way. Sometimes Eva considers the feedback and agrees, and then makes adjustments to the game, as was the case with Ian's new outfits a few weeks ago. And sometimes she doesn't agree, as was seemingly the case with this specific dialogue about trans people. So she didn't change it, and then people accepted it, because it's her game and she can choose to follow the feedback's suggestions or not.
Last edited:
Ok, you can all the ice cream you want. But you have to pick between one scoop of vanilla or one scoop of vanilla.
Is that a "choice"? Do you really have an "option"? Is there any other way to think about this other than YOU (generally) are telling me to have one scoop of vanilla and NOTHING ELSE?
HOW is that not "demanding" someone to reach the outcome that has been DICTATED TO them in regards to having ANY ice cream at all?
Again, when a comment is made and TWO different lines of that comment appear to determine the 'approved outcome' within the same paragraph. Then YES, that is a DEMAND being made.