At this point, I'm mostly convinced you're just joking, but for the sake of making sure no one gets confused, I'll respond anyway. Also, I don't know why you are making comments about my sense of morality when I specifically said it's not an issue of morality, but whatever.
There are elements of humor in my posts (or attempts), but the underlying points stand as true.
---
My point was that most people saying Drew is the "villain" are probably not making a moral judgement; they are talking about the game's structure.
Point #1
"Villain" is a definitely a moral designation, it is integral to it's meaning, perhaps I'm being unfair to those who have a poorer understanding of the English language, perhaps if they knew better they would have used words like "Antagonist" or "Rival" or "Competition".
---
I just don't want anyone who might be new around here getting confused about the game's design. Within the game, Drew is an agent working against the interests of the player.
Point #2
Drew is an unknown at this point, all you have is Hunters word about her purpose being here. If I were Hunter and I had 2 enemies in the house, I'd tell each of them that the other was my friend, to stop them joining forces, but that's just me, who knows if Hunter thought of that. And who knows what Drews agenda is, I certainly don't, I'll find out as the story develops.
Point #3
(Wanting to fuck the same women you do does not make her evil)
---
If you want to have a moral/philosophical debate about things, that's fine,
I'm not the one who brought moral designations into this, speak to those who love the "villain" label.
---
but it doesn't change the game's design or the MC/player perspective. Yes, there's plenty of good argument to make the case that Ralph Macchio is the "villain" in Karate Kid, and we all got a great new streaming show out of that premise. I'm sure you could do the same with a lot of AVN's, this one included, but from a morally neutral literary perspective and game design perspective, Sterling is the protagonist and Drew is an antagonist.
That Karate Kid reference went over my head, I have no idea where you were going with that. I suspect the villain of the original Movie has had a spinoff and he is now the "protagonist", (or "hero" to people who don't know what the word "hero" means)
I'm glad someone knows the words Protagonist/Antagonist,
Protagonists aren't necessarily heroes, Antagonist aren't necessarily Villains. See point #1
---
As far as philosophy goes, Drew seems to take just as much pleasure from the thought of hurting Sterling as from having sex. Taking pleasure in someone else's pain is always a morally dark action,
Maybe, such absolutes are always dangerous in philosophy.
Not sure I know where you you are getting that from, I must have missed the part where that came up.
Wanting Sterling to be in pain is justified, He is a little bitch who knowingly takes advantage of drugged women while laying claim to the moral high ground, I want him in pain, does that make me a villain?
PS this isn't about noncon content I have several noncon fantasies, it's hypocrites I don't like, if you are going to be the good guy then be the good guy, In real life I'd get those women a hospital even if I had to abduct them (that's what good guys do BTW when they think someone has been roofied). I would remove Hunter even if I had to slit his throat at the breakfast table, he would NOT have the opportunity to achieve his goals once I became aware of them (police would probably be my first option though).
---
even if the other party is a villain. A lot of heroes that kill villains feel remorse and wish there had been another way to end things. If the "hero" kills a drug dealer and then orgasms from the sight of bloodspray and laughs as they watch the light go out of their eyes... that's not good.
Nothing in my Post was trying to promote any kind of moral content,
I was arguing against superficial assumptions nothing more.