Seeing as AVNs are in essence and always have been romance simulators, for the vast majority of players getting the girl and riding off into the sunset is the goal, thats why they play multiple routes, so of course they have strong feeling about them being portrayed a certain way, even if its before getting them.
A LI/Romanceable character(Main, secondary, tertiary, one-off is irrelevant) is anyone that at any point can have a sexual and/or romantic relationship with the player controlled character.
Telling a player that you cannot realistically show a married woman, a mom, a wife in a game without showing her get fucked is incredibly insulting to players intelligence and communicates quite a bit about your capacity as a writer.
The big college game on this site has hookers that we never see 'hooking' and only tangentially hear talk about, yet we still believe they are hookers, we don't need to catch them in the act and see their three camera angle fully animated sex tapes.
Seeing a mom with a kid, we do not need to see how that kid was conceived to believe she is a mother.
'I like doing it on top', its enough to tell you she is not a virgin, you don't need detailed descriptions of her hookups, or entire rendered and animated scenes to communicate the same message,
UNLESS you are making a game designed to target that
sort of audience, but then why not be transparent about it? Why the mental gymnastics?
It blows my mind that devs instead of being in the market of how I can make my romance options as desirable as possible so the players cannot wait to get their scenes and play their routes, instead they seem to be in the market of 'What I can get away with before I get my game tagged'? What is this, 2019 still?
Side note: semantics debates are as dumb as always have been, if a scene is designed to cause the same type of player jealous and at the same time designed to appeal to the other diametrically opposed type of player, doesn't really matter if you call it NTR, voyeurism, the Easter Bunny, it has the same narrative purpose and will naturally get the same type of reactions.
You can convince someone that claims to hate apples that he doesn't know what he is talking about and what he hates are actually pears, but you won't make him now be ok eating the pears, its a very simple concept to understand, so I have to believe that people that keep going on semantics and definitions debates are just disingenuous that don't even try to pretend they see what the complainer is actually complaining about.
Narrative purpose of a scene and its unnecessary existence is the only thing that matters, especially in a, alleged, harem game.
