VN Ren'Py Pale Carnations [Ch. 4 Up 4 Public] [Mutt & Jeff]

[GokutheG]

Wait, Kat has pegged Ian? Damn, i either made wrong choices in the dialogue and didn't get that, or somehow managed to forget it.

Daaamn, now i feel like Edwin is missing out

Why do I feel that during Ian was busy thinking of Edwin.

 

[Simpgor]

Wait, Kat has pegged Ian? Damn, i either made wrong choices in the dialogue and didn't get that, or somehow managed to forget it.

Daaamn, now i feel like Edwin is missing out

I don't recall how far he mentioned it going (off hand mention is all we get iirc) but I'm 99% certain Ian makes reference to Kath doing prostate related stuff?

I think Ciaran8023's point was that there was no indication prior to taking the job that working for Kathleen would subject the MC to the same sort of sadism as the girls. Which is true in a literal sense. But IMHO, that's part of the point of the game: the MC's decision to work at the Club will have consequences, and not all of them will be under our direct control.

Disagree because before the scene where he quit (forced injection) kathleen calls MC to her car JUST to say "hey I know your mommy did porn lol umad?" (Technically give him a usb which she in no way had to hand deliver) which is actual real literal blackmail.....

IMO that clearly shows that she is going to mentally fuck with MC, there is even direct evidence that kathleen is fine using the drug perfume despite Edwin being the only one in the car with her (stare at her tits or not)

Dude was way more respectful than most people who are objectively wrong but that doesn't change the fact that they ignored/skipped a half dozen examples of "femdom" before one snuck up on them

 

[Ciaran8023]

I think Ciaran8023's point was that there was no indication prior to taking the job that working for Kathleen would subject the MC to the same sort of sadism as the girls. Which is true in a literal sense. But IMHO, that's part of the point of the game: the MC's decision to work at the Club will have consequences, and not all of them will be under our direct control.

The game spends a great deal of effort establishing the morally dubious framework for the Club long before we work there - things like the MC ruminating on whether he's truly a good guy or merely lacked the opportunity to do bad, or the opportunity to exploit Rosalind simply because she agreed to it in a general sense. Kathleen drugging the MC is yet another aspect of that: the MC signed up for a dubious job, and it turns out not be what he thought it was. What does that say about the things the Carnations and the various house girls will be subjected to in the future?

To me, Kathleen's highly unethical railroading is a vital part of the story. It's supposed to be beyond the pale precisely to highlight the way a lot of the other things we will have control over are just as dubious. I've said before that working for the Club is a Faustian bargain, and Kathleen's treatment of the MC is an early reminder that someday there will be a bill. I do not blame anyone who wants no part of that sort of thing and abandons the game as a result; I consider this game top notch, but it IS very much an acquired taste.

I do not, however, think Kathleen's abuse of the MC is sub-par writing. Distasteful as it is, I think it's very much the opposite.

You pointed things out rather accurately so I don't really have anything to add.
I do however want to point out that, in case it was lost, it was sub-par from a femdom point of view as a lot of games and people on f95 seem to believe that this is just 'regular' femdom type content. I don't know the dev(s) so I had no indication of what their view of femdom was, which is why I used that terminology as.. well let's be real, dude got sexually assaulted, no real way around that.
It does the job exceedingly well in presenting her as an absolute irredeemable piece of shit however, so yes, in that sense it is well written. As I said, the game has good writing, I took offense to the character and the scene aswell as the potential issue of perpetuating a flawed view on femdom.

That's sad but understandable. The dynamic between the two is actually very interesting. I'll just say that later on she tries to push a certain button and you can make it VERY clear not to do it again. Now I'll just say that later on her focus shifts to breaking the Carnations.

I'll just give you some insight into why I think their dynamic is so interesting. Kat starts to believe that the mc is as fucked up as her and her actions so far are to try and get him to fall. You can indulge her/your darker impulses, stand up to her or even get on her good side without going too far.

Can I suggest you try the game until the first full Carnation event. The writing is well done and it's possible you'll enjoy the game after this initial uncomfortable non femdom scene.

I'll.. give it some thought. I'm generally very laid back when it comes to most things, I can basically play essentially anything that has tags that are usually quite disliked and I'll be fine with it if it's written well, it's just that certain characters and scenes instantly starts thumbing on the principles I have.

I might check it out more later, you do make a convincing argument.

 

[Biscardone]

Sure, but it doesn't change what it was. I'm not one to beat around the bush as arguably it was less femdom and more just outright sexual assault. If people like sexual assault, sure, but to say that it was an accurate representation of femdom would be facetious at best and malicious at worst.

Well, again, noting that scene as something that's a poor representation of femdom isn't exactly an opinion, it genuinely is a poor representation. If you're wanting to get into kinkplay and someone decides to blackmail you and touch you without your consent, that isn't femdom even though a lot of AVN's on here seem to think so (which is also it's own issue entirely). Hell, the only reason why I'm calling it femdom and not sexual assault is because so many people on here have such a skewed understanding of what femdom is.

EDIT: I also like to add that I'm someone who enjoys femdom as a tag, which is also why I react a bit more than most when I see a poor representation of it, especially in a popular game. Why? Because there are a ton of people playing this, and likely quite a lot of them will draw inspiration from it for their own projects, which might just perpetuate this extremely shitty and toxic "femdom must be forced and non-consensual" type shit that quite a few games have gone into over the last 3 - 4 years or so. That isn't a good thing. It's like if games all of the sudden started noting "big tits" as only being hyper-inflated bimbo balloons, sure it's "technically" big tits but I reckon quite a few people who are into big tits would have something against it.

Well, I think we've reached the core issue. You've stretched the definition of "femdom" to unreasonable limits to include any form of abuse, rape included. However, I can assure you nobody here agrees with that definition - first of all the author (TD) himself, as he told you in person - and the scene is not meant to be interpreted as femdom. You don't like the scene? You're not supposed to like the scene. So if you're repulsed by it and don't want to play the game because of it, that's fine. Just, stop judging it with an unfitting metric, or as an attempt to pollute the femdom pool.

Oh, and by the way:

It would take someone with terminal brain damage to not recognize poorly veiled blackmail and a shitty attempt at femdom.

The devs (and mods) deserve better than having to deal with your bullshit. They don't get paid enough to do that.

The devs also deserve not to be called out as writers of "poorly veiled blackmail and a shitty attempt at femdom", when it's clearly not their intent. Or terminally brain damaged, by extension (since they also can't recognize it, apparently).

 

[Ciaran8023]

Well, I think we've reached the core issue. You've stretched the definition of "femdom" to unreasonable limits to include any form of abuse, rape included. However, I can assure you nobody here agrees with that definition - first of all the author (TD) himself, as he told you in person - and the scene is not meant to be interpreted as femdom. You don't like the scene? You're not supposed to like the scene. So if you're repulsed by it and don't want to play the game because of it, that's fine. Just, stop judging it with an unfitting metric, or as an attempt to pollute the femdom pool.

I haven't stretched the definition of femdom, F95 has aswell as a handful of other devs. It's the same shit with the NTR tag, and no one on this green earth can know exactly what type of understanding the dev or devs have of it until you play what they've created. If you see a femdom tag it can be anything from forceful sexual advances, to blackmail, to covert scheming (i.e femdom character toys with another characters freedom and future to get them in line) and a host of other things, most of which do not belong in femdom. Same with NTR, that can be anything from netorare to netori to netorase, and it can take the form of anything from severe humiliation to covert cheating to overtly cheating and psychologically harming etc, again most of which don't really have a place within NTR specifically and technically belongs to other tags (or should atleast).

If a dev creates something that mimics a lot of other poor attempts and understanding of a certain kink, I will call that out. That's just how it is. If it wasn't the devs intent, they would say so, which they have so your post didn't really have a point at all. None of what I posted was problematic because as stated, I had no indication of intention with the scene at all, so your vehement and forceful defensiveness is just essentially going "ha I told you so" because you had information that I didn't.

Oh, and by the way:
The devs also deserve not to be called out as writers of "poorly veiled blackmail and a shitty attempt at femdom", when it's clearly not their intent.

People do deserve to be called out on stuff when there's no disclaimer of their intent. As said, you're posting with information that I do not have nor have had access to unless I fine-comb over 700 pages of responses when I made my post. That in itself is arguing from a fallacious standpoint.
No one is exempt from critique, especially not when it isn't remotely conveyed at first glance as to what the scene is supposed to portray, and no one is confused about what the scene actually was.

 

[Simpgor]

Too bad the Skinner "the children are wrong meme" doesn't apply here; they arent even entertaining the fact that they could be wrong its 99% of readers, and even the damn creator who are wrong. The guy who (thankfully left) that unironically claimed any sort of oral sex was degrading and thus femdom? Now that guy was right and ahead of his time

 

[RoamingZone]

i swear every time I enter a forum nowadays its full of bickering and bullshit, we get it people have their own minds and opinion but you only need one comment to express it. No need to prolong this thing further, let it rest.

 

[Biscardone]

If you see a femdom tag it can be anything from forceful sexual advances, to blackmail, to covert scheming (i.e femdom character toys with another characters freedom and future to get them in line) and a host of other things, most of which do not belong in femdom.

Except, in the case of Pale Carnations, there is a scene which is unequivocally femdom AND consensual (with resident amazon Veronica, in case you're curious). So, the tagging in this case is perfectly fine, and your conundrum is unsolvable: the game deserves to be tagged with femdom, irrespective of your own point of view on the matter.

People do deserve to be called out on stuff when there's no disclaimer of their intent.

And people do deserve to be called out when they are gratuitously rude to the authors because of their own unique sensibilities and their crusader complex.

Anyway, I agree, I've been adding useless fuel to the fire, so I won't comment further. But I think form IS substance, and rudeness deserves a reaction irrespective of the concept it tries to convey.

 

[Ciaran8023]

Except, in the case of Pale Carnations, there is a scene which is unequivocally femdom AND consensual (with resident amazon Veronica, in case you're curious). So, the tagging in this case is perfectly fine, and your conundrum is unsolvable: the game deserves to be tagged with femdom, irrespective of your own point of view on the matter.

I never stated that it shouldn't be tagged as femdom, and you shouldn't try to put words in my mouth. This entire time we've been discussing the scene in question that I reacted to, and the character in question, anything else is you dragging irrelevant things into it by your own volition, make no mistake about this.
Note that every other one of my posts is talking about what people think is femdom and the misconceptions behind that, especially on certain devs sides. (And no, these devs are not among those as they've already cleared up things about that scene.)

And people do deserve to be called out when they are gratuitously rude to the authors because of their own unique sensibilities and their crusader complex.

At no point is it a "crusader complex" to point out a flawed scene that doesn't function that well as either storytelling nor a representative of a kink. None of that is trying to take a moral highground and believe that it's a just cause to argue, but moreso everything to do with avoiding misinformative views of what a subject is or should be, because so many games I've come across take this exact concept and call it femdom, which is why I had to point this flaw out.
If you want another recent example that I looked into which does this exact same thing in a very similar manner would be My Best Deal. Same type of misinformed representation of what femdom is, and as I stated earlier in nearly every one of my posts, when there's no indication of intent then there's all the more reason to call it out.

Anyway, I agree, I've been adding useless fuel to the fire, so I won't comment further. But I think form IS substance, and rudeness deserves a reaction irrespective of the concept it tries to convey.

Rudeness is only experienced through subjective interpretation. Even the greatest of literary works can have instances where something is distinctly poor in how it's conveyed and anyone has a right to call out that it's something shitty, that in itself doesn't take away anything from the writer, nor does it try to infer that the entire product is the same, nor does it try to infer that someone should feel ashamed for liking it. It's a blunt statement on a specific situation and a specific character, that's it, so if you found it rude then it's likely that you either interpreted it as a personal attack on the devs or a personal attack on yourself, neither of which is the intent (which is a bit ironic since we did discuss intent quite a bit).

But yeah, this is just a dead end and will simply go in a circle forever. You do you man, to each their own, I've got no interest in typing out more paragraphs when everything I've been meaning to say or convey has already come across in my posts.

 

[UmbralKnight]

Femdom with V and MC?
softdom yes
harddom no
not at-least when you're in her route

 

[TD1900]

That's what I was thinking, but apparently my post was nothing but a "questionable conclusion" so I was dying to hear his understanding of what happened.

Calling that scene blackmail is what I took as the weird conclusion. Someone doing something they're not 100% onboard with doing because of the want of money ain't it. Even with the magic perfume, to paint Edwin as a victim in that scene at all is questionable.

While the reader can't, Edwin could refuse Kathleen.

There's an important distinction there, and it's why the player character is smack dab in the situation in the first place.

Regardless, splitting hairs is pointless. You don't like what you don't like, and a question of semantics between coomers won't change that.

Sorry you wasted your time, but to answer your original point of even posting, I just don't see the need for a disclaimer. The scenario itself and everything within the prologue should give the player an adequate heads up of what the story is about. I mean the game opens with the main character watching his mom gets gangbanged while navel gazing about being a good boy and, honestly, you're like the first person in four and a half years to raise a need for one.

The game is adequately tagged. Playing something that seems appealing and finding a specific shade of something that turns you off (be it shit writing, poorly executed scenes, or not exactly your fetish) is just the risk of any story.

 

[Ottoeight]

Playing something that seems appealing and finding a specific shade of something that turns you off (be it shit writing, poorly executed scenes, or not exactly your fetish) is just the risk of any story.

Tell me about it. I've just stopped binge-watching an Amazon tv series because I felt I didn't like it after all. Too bad it took me 8 episodes and a half to realise that.

 

[TD1900]

Tell me about it. I've just stopped binge-watching an Amazon tv series because I felt I didn't like it after all. Too bad it took me 8 episodes and a half to realise that.

Yeeeeeeep.

Meanwhile, one of my primary wastes of life hobbies is binging shit Tubi movies on the small chance of feeling that high of finding something unseen that is either "so bad its good" or "wait, this is actually good?!"

Honestly, not a far off comparison with using the latest update tab on here.

 

[Ciaran8023]

Calling that scene blackmail is what I took as the weird conclusion. Someone doing something they're not 100% onboard with doing because of the want of money ain't it. Even with the magic perfume, to paint Edwin as a victim in that scene at all is questionable.

While the reader can't, Edwin could refuse Kathleen.

You say that, but I will argue that it wasn't conveyed in a proper sense within the scene. The entire scene had the MC being indecisive and very uncomfortable, not wanting to have anything to do with the situation. This is atleast what information is given to us through MC's internal narration.
She then tells him that she's going to do something, which he didn't like the sound of, she tells him to whip his cock out, to which he was in disbelief but again the internal narration noted that "how else could I respond, by doing what she asked? Yeah right". If your intent was to outline MC as equally willing to participate in this scene, this feels very counterintuitive because it just isn't what the game is telling us, the player, through the internal monologue and narration.

After that you can try to refuse, the MC simply saying "I don't want to" to which she replies, "You do remember your arrangement with Charles, yes?".
After that he notes "I have to do this if I want to get paid". The player isn't given any choice at that point and the MC, again from what the narration and internal monologue is saying, isn't into it either.

I.. I have to ask at this point, are we looking at the same scene or are you perhaps misremembering it? I am genuinely curious because what you're telling me isn't what I'm looking at right now. I redownloaded everything to double check and it's as I remember it, and last I checked, "I don't want to" isn't a yes. Unless you're Brock Turner.
Again, I am genuinely curious if we're talking about the same scene here, because I'm having difficulties seeing what you're telling me and I do want to find out where that confusion is coming from.

There's an important distinction there, and it's why the player character is smack dab in the situation in the first place.

Regardless, splitting hairs is pointless. You don't like what you don't like, and a question of semantics between coomers won't change that.

Sorry you wasted your time, but to answer your original point of even posting, I just don't see the need for a disclaimer. The scenario itself and everything within the prologue should give the player an adequate heads up of what the story is about. I mean the game opens with the main character watching his mom gets gangbanged while navel gazing about being a good boy and, honestly, you're like the first person in four and a half years to raise a need for one.

The game is adequately tagged. Playing something that seems appealing and finding a specific shade of something that turns you off (be it shit writing, poorly executed scenes, or not exactly your fetish) is just the risk of any story.

I was never talking about tags, only disclaimers, but fair enough if you don't feel the need to, it's not my place to tell you what to do or not to do with your game or how you develop things. As with any critique or questioning, it's up to you to decide what to do with it at all.

What I will say though is that even if we're given an adequate heads up of what the story is about (which I do agree with, the game does set the tone fairly quickly), the information as to where the MC fits into all of that is a lot more sparse, again by design for narrative drive and whatnot, but I just figured I'd point that out as there is a bit of difference between having set the tone of the game and setting the tone of where the MC actually fits into things.

I also didn't waste much time at all, as stated previously, you did put this fairly early into the game which does save a lot of time and potential frustration compared to if this scene were to happen a fair bit into the game.
I kind of enjoy poking and prodding at devs so while I do apologize for likely flooding you with posts, I do enjoy discussing the potential disconnect between someones experience and what was the intended experience (or message) to be conveyed.

 

[ffive]

After that he notes "I have to do this if I want to get paid". The player isn't given any choice at that point and the MC, again from what the narration and internal monologue is saying, isn't into it either.

I'd guess there's no choice for the player because MC, ultimately, decides that he'd rather overcome his distaste for the sake of getting paid. So he's at best persuaded, not blackmailed. It's not like getting that money is crucial matter of life and death for MC and he couldn't afford to say "no".

 

[ename144]

You say that, but I will argue that it wasn't conveyed in a proper sense within the scene. The entire scene had the MC being indecisive and very uncomfortable, not wanting to have anything to do with the situation. This is atleast what information is given to us through MC's internal narration.
She then tells him that she's going to do something, which he didn't like the sound of, she tells him to whip his cock out, to which he was in disbelief but again the internal narration noted that "how else could I respond, by doing what she asked? Yeah right". If your intent was to outline MC as equally willing to participate in this scene, this feels very counterintuitive because it just isn't what the game is telling us, the player, through the internal monologue and narration.

After that you can try to refuse, the MC simply saying "I don't want to" to which she replies, "You do remember your arrangement with Charles, yes?".
After that he notes "I have to do this if I want to get paid". The player isn't given any choice at that point and the MC, again from what the narration and internal monologue is saying, isn't into it either.

The player isn't given the option to refuse because that option would result in the MC quitting the Club before the first chapter - i.e. beyond the scope of the game. Being used as a sexual prop is precisely what he signed up for. The fact that it makes him more uncomfortable than anticipated is, again, a key point of the scene: the Club isn't a fair or reasonable place by design. Trying to make the MC comfortable here with would ultimately be sending exactly the wrong message to the player, because this entire game is going to operate in the grey zone were consent is a murky issue.

Personally, I thought that was already sufficiently established before this scene, but this scene drives the point home. IMHO, if the scene is a deal breaker for you [the player], it's doing its job (or at least one of its jobs) correctly. This is almost certainly not going to be your cup of tea, so better to realize that early on.

 

[Zod666]

Finally came around to finish last update and oh boy, that last scene really brings you back to reality. I was happily ignoring all the signs, implications and blunt statements to the character of people MC is working for. Trading it for 'free pussy' so to say, but with Kathleen bringing in that new patron, going all out on Felicia and Chuck being some psycho bitch breaker. It did leave a bit of a sour aftertaste, hopefully its exaggerated for dramatic purposes and all our carnations get a happy end. Ignorance is bliss after all.

Other than that top notch update as usual. Hopefully next update brings more Kathleen scenes, those are always some of the best.

 

[GokutheG]

You say that, but I will argue that it wasn't conveyed in a proper sense within the scene. The entire scene had the MC being indecisive and very uncomfortable, not wanting to have anything to do with the situation. This is atleast what information is given to us through MC's internal narration.
She then tells him that she's going to do something, which he didn't like the sound of, she tells him to whip his cock out, to which he was in disbelief but again the internal narration noted that "how else could I respond, by doing what she asked? Yeah right". If your intent was to outline MC as equally willing to participate in this scene, this feels very counterintuitive because it just isn't what the game is telling us, the player, through the internal monologue and narration.

After that you can try to refuse, the MC simply saying "I don't want to" to which she replies, "You do remember your arrangement with Charles, yes?".
After that he notes "I have to do this if I want to get paid". The player isn't given any choice at that point and the MC, again from what the narration and internal monologue is saying, isn't into it either.

I.. I have to ask at this point, are we looking at the same scene or are you perhaps misremembering it? I am genuinely curious because what you're telling me isn't what I'm looking at right now. I redownloaded everything to double check and it's as I remember it, and last I checked, "I don't want to" isn't a yes. Unless you're Brock Turner.
Again, I am genuinely curious if we're talking about the same scene here, because I'm having difficulties seeing what you're telling me and I do want to find out where that confusion is coming from.

I was never talking about tags, only disclaimers, but fair enough if you don't feel the need to, it's not my place to tell you what to do or not to do with your game or how you develop things. As with any critique or questioning, it's up to you to decide what to do with it at all.

What I will say though is that even if we're given an adequate heads up of what the story is about (which I do agree with, the game does set the tone fairly quickly), the information as to where the MC fits into all of that is a lot more sparse, again by design for narrative drive and whatnot, but I just figured I'd point that out as there is a bit of difference between having set the tone of the game and setting the tone of where the MC actually fits into things.

I also didn't waste much time at all, as stated previously, you did put this fairly early into the game which does save a lot of time and potential frustration compared to if this scene were to happen a fair bit into the game.
I kind of enjoy poking and prodding at devs so while I do apologize for likely flooding you with posts, I do enjoy discussing the potential disconnect between someones experience and what was the intended experience (or message) to be conveyed.

Think of it this way. He thought he was just in charge to make sure the Carnations are ready for the competition only to find out he's barely a notch up on the totem pole himself and is ok with that.(I know it's really the other way this was just the best saying I could think of).

 

[Ciaran8023]

The player isn't given the option to refuse because that option would result in the MC quitting the Club before the first chapter - i.e. beyond the scope of the game. Being used as a sexual prop is precisely what he signed up for.

I mean, that's what he knows the club is about, but again there's nothing actually noting that HE would also be a sexual prop. I've gone back to check several times, at no point prior to that scene does anyone allude to him being as much as a prop without any rights as the girls.

The fact that it makes him more uncomfortable than anticipated is, again, a key point of the scene: the Club isn't a fair or reasonable place by design. Trying to make the MC comfortable here with would ultimately be sending exactly the wrong message to the player, because this entire game is going to operate in the grey zone were consent is a murky issue.

That's my point though, the MC clearly isn't alright with any of that and does not that he doesn't want to have anything to do with it, but he's forced by Kathleen and the circumstances he's in.
Also, there's no real grey zone from what I saw of the game, it's more like consent doesn't actually exist as a concept within the club or anyone involved with it, full stop. Sure, I haven't played further than that scene, but I'd be honestly VERY surprised if there is ever any form of consent within working at the club given how things were introduced.
But then again I could be wrong, I don't know and I'm not keen on even trying to find out.

Personally, I thought that was already sufficiently established before this scene, but this scene drives the point home. IMHO, if the scene is a deal breaker for you [the player], it's doing its job (or at least one of its jobs) correctly. This is almost certainly not going to be your cup of tea, so better to realize that early on.

I'd argue otherwise. It was established that women were used as props, absolutely, but again no one actually explained to him what his job would entail nor that he would also lack any rights like the girls do. Chuck said nothing, Killian said nothing, August said nothing and Kathleen said nothing aswell when the MC did ask them about it other than "oh you're just a handy man basically" which could mean a LOT of different things in an establishment that isn't legal. Essentially, everyone just yanked him around like a puppet until they were certain that he agreed to work there.

Also yes, I did realize that the game isn't for me early on, I included that in my very first post.

Think of it this way. He thought he was just in charge to make sure the Carnations are ready for the competition only to find out he's barely a notch up on the totem pole himself and is ok with that.(I know it's really the other way this was just the best saying I could think of).

I do understand that, but I don't think that he was that ok with what happened given what the scene outlined through narration and MC's internal monologue.
But yeah, he's on the same notch as the girls, arguably even less so as Kathleen strikes me as the type of antagonist to not be above dragging others into things in order to keep the MC on a tight leash, whether that is accurate or not I can't say as I did stop at that scene entirely, but that's the type of individual she strikes me as, which is also something that doesn't really factor in for the girls as they're already kept on a tight leash by their desperation.

 

[TD1900]

The player isn't given the option to refuse because that option would result in the MC quitting the Club before the first chapter - i.e. beyond the scope of the game. Being used as a sexual prop is precisely what he signed up for. The fact that it makes him more uncomfortable than anticipated is, again, a key point of the scene: the Club isn't a fair or reasonable place by design. Trying to make the MC comfortable here with would ultimately be sending exactly the wrong message to the player, because this entire game is going to operate in the grey zone were consent is a murky issue.

Pretty much, and Edwin never gets the option to outright refuse during his exhibition role either. Sometimes he can pull his punches or try to mitigate the girl's humiliation, but either way, he's right up there with them. It's just the crux of the story and the need to keep him wishy-washy until he doesn't need to be.

From a certain perspective, I have long considered that Edwin's fence-sitting might be a bit ill-conceived from a choice-driven VN perspective. Asking the reader what they would do and where they want to direct Edwin, but being locked into his tacit compliance (to varying degrees) until the climax of the story does produce a disconnect. Most people probably knew if they wanted him to get the fuck out of Dodge or become his best-worst self by the start of week 1, yet you have to watch him painfully trudge along to that conclusion.

Thankfully, people have been open to that ride.

To go back to the particular moment: in my opinion, Edwin's discomfort does not negate his consent over the situation. The horny perfume obviously muddles this somewhat, but it is not like he's robbed of his faculties or ability to leave. Ultimately, he's choosing to be complicit, just like he was when he accepted the offer in the first place. Knowing something is messed up, yet still doing it for an easy ride (not even on the pain of poverty) through medschool is not sympathy inducing. The only thing making it so would be the game being told from his perspective, with the reader right there inside Edwin's head hearing his excuses and anxieties.

That said, this is shit from the prologue. I had an entirely different perspective back then on where the project's focus would rest and almost no character had come into their own voice yet. I might have been aping Marie Mamiya too much there, and if I were to write it now, I'd probably give a bit more begrudging latitude to the player just as I have in later scenes.