Ren'Py Power Vacuum [Ch. 12 Official] [What? Why? Games]

[MrJay]

EXCUSE ME, Hunter is ESSENTIAL to the plot and the themes of this game, what the fuck do you mean he's NON-ESSENTIAL, dude is literally the fucking engine that gets the story running, he is quintessential to the backstory of the MC's father being abusive, he's needed to implement those mechanics and ploys that other, lesser stories would saddle the MC with thus ruining his good image like this very fucking What If underlined with the Big Brother segment, we need a fucking VILLAIN so the plot can continue so the plot can fucking start so the plot can fucking end, otherwise this is just a bunch of disconnected sequences with no fucking correlation between each other.

You remove Hunter from the equation the MC isn't fucking ANYONE, we need him to spike the food build the air conditioning and act as a negative, encroaching, active figure to spur the passive, positive, respectful MC into action, we don't have that we don't have a fucking story we don't have a fucking Harem and we don't have fucking Porn.

"Remove the grandfather from the game" yeah and let's remove fucking Sauron from the Lord of the Rings too while we're at it let's read a 5000 pages long treaty on Hobbit Husbandry at that point, no stakes, no story, no interactions, nothing, just boring, motionless, trite grey slob you've been seeing A DIME A DOZEN.

I fucking swear, let's destroy the central confict of this story, the nerve of some people.

You're excused, but like I've already said, literally all of that could be achieved in any number of different ways. You could replace Hunter with even a non-character and have the same outcomes, if you really wanted to.

Speaking of false dichotomies, you've repeatedly suggested that everyone who doesn't hate Hunter like you do must love him. Perhaps we're simply not bothered by him?

I hear what you're saying. You don't want to see Hunter because he's so repulsive to you, that's a valid point of view. But then you try to construct a logic-based argument to support your subjective opinion, and this is where I have to disagree. Of course there are an infinite number of alternative ways this game could be made, but then it wouldn't be this game. Whether or not it'd be easy to create, and whether or not it would fundamentally alter the experience, in the end what you're asking for is a different game. It reminds me of the argument that FromSoftware should make an Easy Mode; they could, and some people would appreciate it, but then they're not experiencing what the creator intended.

Whether it would be the same game is a sort of ship of theseus problem, and it's also largely irrelevant. My argument hinges on that it would be a better game, which should be more important than whether it's the same game or not.

And because the story could be constructed to have the same effects but without including specifically Hunter, the only reason to include Hunter, or defend his inclusion, is if you want specifically Hunter to be there. If the character of Hunter himself and his appearances, NOT his impact on the story, but solely the character itself, is in any way a net negative on the experience of playing the game then there's no reason not to argue for his removal.

When writing a story, every single tiniest piece is fundamentally interchangeable. Specifically because its fiction. Fiction gets to be literally whatever it wants. So why make do, or settle for, a piece that is less than good, less than enjoyable?

 

[Tr89]

is it suppose to go white screen every time the MC cums

 

[dartred]

You're excused, but like I've already said, literally all of that could be achieved in any number of different ways. You could replace Hunter with even a non-character and have the same outcomes, if you really wanted to.



Whether it would be the same game is a sort of ship of theseus problem, and it's also largely irrelevant. My argument hinges on that it would be a better game, which should be more important than whether it's the same game or not.

And because the story could be constructed to have the same effects but without including specifically Hunter, the only reason to include Hunter, or defend his inclusion, is if you want specifically Hunter to be there. If the character of Hunter himself and his appearances, NOT his impact on the story, but solely the character itself, is in any way a net negative on the experience of playing the game then there's no reason not to argue for his removal.

When writing a story, every single tiniest piece is fundamentally interchangeable. Specifically because its fiction. Fiction gets to be literally whatever it wants. So why make do, or settle for, a piece that is less than good, less than enjoyable?

No it wouldn't. You want to get rid of a character because you hate the character. Not because it takes away from the story, but because you don't want to see him again. Saying the story would be would be better without him is just what you think and subjective. There are almost 300 reviews for this game all mostly positive. It's just you and a minority who don't like this game.

 

[SuddenReal]

You could replace Hunter with even a non-character and have the same outcomes, if you really wanted to.

No, you wouldn't, because Hunter is the driving force behind the story. Everything the MC does is in reaction to Hunter's actions. If you take out Hunter, you won't have the same story. You can't get the same events, because in order to have them without Hunter, you have to change the characters, which means you'd have a different story.
People like this story because it's not your run of the mill story. It's not an MC doing dubious and underhanded things to get what he wants, but an MC trying to stop a character from doing dubious and underhanded things. If you take out the villain, you end up with an MC who's the villain, like in so many stories.

 

[Fayn Arawn]

Whether it would be the same game is a sort of ship of theseus problem, and it's also largely irrelevant. My argument hinges on that it would be a better game, which should be more important than whether it's the same game or not.

And because the story could be constructed to have the same effects but without including specifically Hunter, the only reason to include Hunter, or defend his inclusion, is if you want specifically Hunter to be there. If the character of Hunter himself and his appearances, NOT his impact on the story, but solely the character itself, is in any way a net negative on the experience of playing the game then there's no reason not to argue for his removal.

When writing a story, every single tiniest piece is fundamentally interchangeable. Specifically because its fiction. Fiction gets to be literally whatever it wants. So why make do, or settle for, a piece that is less than good, less than enjoyable?

I still argue there's no objective measure for what would make this a "better" game. Removing one element or adding another; each change can have proponents and detractors. And honestly it's a slippery slope... what if someone can't stand Catherine? Should she be removed also? Should WWG have to create a multitude of branching routes so that every player can have a customized experience? Maybe that would be a better game, or maybe it would be an impossible-to-manage mess.

Perhaps you're right about one thing, that on some level people do want to see Hunter. This could be for various reasons: they could just have a twisted sense of humor, or they could be ugly old men themselves that appreciate the representation. Also there's a type of humiliation fetish where men enjoy seeing beautiful women get plowed by ugly bastards, but the thing is it's about degrading the women and enjoying their humiliation. If that sounds fucked up and misogynist, well that's because it is, but I try not to judge people's kinks, particularly in a fictional setting where no one gets hurt.

Lastly, on reducing a story to its constituent parts: some pieces are more important than others when given context by the rest of the story. Sure, they can be changed, just like a house can be lifted to pour a new foundation; the point is it's not so easy. Hunter isn't just a MacGuffin that gets the story going, he's an integral part.

P.S. I'm trying to debate in good faith and I've actually enjoyed our exchanges to some degree. Even if neither of us influence the other's opinion, it's nice to have an intellectual debate to keep the brain sharp.

 

[MrJay]

No it wouldn't. You want to get rid of a character because you hate the character. Not because it takes away from the story, but because you don't want to see him again. Saying the story would be would be better without him is just what you think and subjective. There are almost 300 reviews for this game all mostly positive. It's just you and a minority who don't like this game.

Again, you're confused. I like this game and I've repeatedly stated as much. I wouldn't be here offering sincere critique if I didn't. And yes, my critique is my subjective opinion, that's what that means. I'm not on here speaking anyone else's subjective opinion. Speaking my opinion is one of the purposes of this forum, as we've already been over. And it doesn't take a lot of insight to understand that having an overall favorable opinion of the game doesn't mean that you agree with every last thing in it. In fact, people who uncritically accepts every little thing in media that they enjoy are weirdly undiscerning to me. There's no good reason to be that way.

No, you wouldn't, because Hunter is the driving force behind the story. Everything the MC does is in reaction to Hunter's actions. If you take out Hunter, you won't have the same story. You can't get the same events, because in order to have them without Hunter, you have to change the characters, which means you'd have a different story.
People like this story because it's not your run of the mill story. It's not an MC doing dubious and underhanded things to get what he wants, but an MC trying to stop a character from doing dubious and underhanded things. If you take out the villain, you end up with an MC who's the villain, like in so many stories.

Yes, and you can make literally anything the driving force behind the story. It's an unusual example that people who aren't that into storytelling might not get, but a villain doesn't need to be a character. Circumstances can be a villain. The milieu or the setting could be the villain.

You can fill the storytelling role of Hunter with basically anything. Because in storytelling, anything goes. So the only reason to argue for specifically Hunter is if you want specifically Hunter. The only reason to argue for a burnt up turd to appear in the story is if you actively want a burnt up turd to appear. Because as the storyteller you get make that villain role be anything you want, including something that's not a character.

No it wouldn't. You want to get rid of a character because you hate the character. Not because it takes away from the story, but because you don't want to see him again. Saying the story would be would be better without him is just what you think and subjective. There are almost 300 reviews for this game all mostly positive. It's just you and a minority who don't like this game.

Again, you're confused. I like this game and I've repeatedly stated as much. I wouldn't be here offering sincere critique if I didn't. And yes, my critique is my subjective opinion, that's what that means. I'm not on here speaking anyone else's subjective opinion. Speaking my opinion is one of the purposes of this forum, as we've already been over. And it doesn't take a lot of insight to understand that having an overall favorable opinion of the game doesn't mean that you agree with every last thing in it. In fact, people who uncritically accepts every little thing in media that they enjoy are weirdly undiscerning to me. There's no good reason to be that way.

No, you wouldn't, because Hunter is the driving force behind the story. Everything the MC does is in reaction to Hunter's actions. If you take out Hunter, you won't have the same story. You can't get the same events, because in order to have them without Hunter, you have to change the characters, which means you'd have a different story.
People like this story because it's not your run of the mill story. It's not an MC doing dubious and underhanded things to get what he wants, but an MC trying to stop a character from doing dubious and underhanded things. If you take out the villain, you end up with an MC who's the villain, like in so many stories.

Yes, and you can make literally anything the driving force behind the story. It's an unusual example that people who aren't that into storytelling might not get, but a villain doesn't need to be a character. Circumstances can be a villain. The milieu or the setting could be the villain.

You can fill the storytelling role of Hunter with basically anything. Because in storytelling, anything goes. So the only reason to argue for specifically Hunter is if you want specifically Hunter. The only reason to argue for a burnt up turd to appear in the story is if you actively want a burnt up turd to appear. Because as the storyteller you get make that villain role be anything you want, including something that's not a character.

I still argue there's no objective measure for what would make this a "better" game. Removing one element or adding another; each change can have proponents and detractors. And honestly it's a slippery slope... what if someone can't stand Catherine? Should she be removed also? Should WWG have to create a multitude of branching routes so that every player can have a customized experience? Maybe that would be a better game, or maybe it would be an impossible-to-manage mess.

Perhaps you're right about one thing, that on some level people do want to see Hunter. This could be for various reasons: they could just have a twisted sense of humor, or they could be ugly old men themselves that appreciate the representation. Also there's a type of humiliation fetish where men enjoy seeing beautiful women get plowed by ugly bastards, but the thing is it's about degrading the women and enjoying their humiliation. If that sounds fucked up and misogynist, well that's because it is, but I try not to judge people's kinks, particularly in a fictional setting where no one gets hurt.

Lastly, on reducing a story to its constituent parts: some pieces are more important than others when given context by the rest of the story. Sure, they can be changed, just like a house can be lifted to pour a new foundation; the point is it's not so easy. Hunter isn't just a MacGuffin that gets the story going, he's an integral part.

P.S. I'm trying to debate in good faith and I've actually enjoyed our exchanges to some degree. Even if neither of us influence the other's opinion, it's nice to have an intellectual debate to keep the brain sharp.

No, I agree there is no objective measure for what would make this game better. Even in the most studied and well understood applications of art, we can only be objective in the most niche ways. I'm only offering my opinion and have never really proclaimed to have done anything else from the start. It's an attempt at constructive critique and a suggestion on how the game could be improved as I see it, not how anyone else necessarily sees it, because I cannot and do not pretend to speak for others.

As for it being a slippery slope, I disagree, I think Hunter stands well enough alone as a unique character in the story. Not liking Catherine is one thing but she's not that dissimilar from other characters in the game, and from the beginning this wasn't about Hunter simply being unlikeable but entirely disrupting my ability to enjoy the game.

And I get everything that you're saying about kinks, but what I've been arguing for is to keep all that in the NTR path. I'm willing to suggest that well over 90% of players who choose the NTR-free path does not enjoy being humiliated. That's kind of the whole aversion against NTR to begin with. So Hunter absolutely fills an important role in the story, IF you're on the NTR path. If the player already has chosen to not want to see any NTR, he's exclusively a detriment to the game, IMO.

Changing Hunter entirely to anything else is absolutely more difficult in an established story, and my argument for that he COULD have been anything is more of a theoretical one and in practice I wouldn't argue for doing anything than deleting almost every scene where he's in and replacing it with basically the same scene but he's absent. If you wanted to you could represent pretty much all of his machinations that are story-essential without him even being in the scene and many other of his scenes are just superfluous and could be deleted entirely. For the NTR-free route, that is.

 

[SuddenReal]

Yes, and you can make literally anything the driving force behind the story. It's an unusual example that people who aren't that into storytelling might not get, but a villain doesn't need to be a character. Circumstances can be a villain. The milieu or the setting could be the villain.

Oh, now you're just talking out of your ass. Yes, you are correct, but in this particular case, it would change the story. As I said, everything is in reaction to Hunter's actions. Everything happens because of him. Take him out and there's nothing that will happen.
But sure, give me one example of something that Hunter did but altered in your way, without changing the other characters.

 

[MrJay]

Oh, now you're just talking out of your ass. Yes, you are correct, but in this particular case, it would change the story. As I said, everything is in reaction to Hunter's actions. Everything happens because of him. Take him out and there's nothing that will happen.
But sure, give me one example of something that Hunter did but altered in your way, without changing the other characters.

The villain could for example be some shadowy organization that only reveals themselves to the MC. We wouldn't even ever have to see a character from them but they're the one responsible for all the hormones and chemicals that changes appearances and behavior, pays for the house and everything but only given that the MC acts the way they want, with the threat of replacing him and maybe other threats if he acts out of line. Every single one of the plot-necessary actions that Hunter makes could be explained this way, and this is just the first example that sprang to mind in a few seconds.

 

[SuddenReal]

The villain could for example be some shadowy organization that only reveals themselves to the MC.

That has got to be the dumbest thing I ever heard. What would even be their motivation to do this? And having a hidden shadow organization just obfuscates the threat. At least with Hunter clearly in the picture, the threat is real.

To use the example of Big Brother, Eric was also supposed to be the NTR threat, but because he was so inactive, he became a non-issue. Hunter, on the other hand, is pro-active, so the threat is more real. In Big Brother, it was the MC who drove the story forward, but he was a little shit (his actions would make Hunter proud). Because Hunter is the villain who drives the story, the MC is the good guy.

and this is just the first example that sprang to mind in a few seconds.

Yeah, obviously. Keep thinking for some more examples, because this one is shit.

 

[MrJay]

That has got to be the dumbest thing I ever heard. What would even be their motivation to do this? And having a hidden shadow organization just obfuscates the threat. At least with Hunter clearly in the picture, the threat is real.

To use the example of Big Brother, Eric was also supposed to be the NTR threat, but because he was so inactive, he became a non-issue. Hunter, on the other hand, is pro-active, so the threat is more real. In Big Brother, it was the MC who drove the story forward, but he was a little shit (his actions would make Hunter proud). Because Hunter is the villain who drives the story, the MC is the good guy.

Yeah, obviously. Keep thinking for some more examples, because this one is shit.

That's just your opinion. IMO, Hunter is a weak storytelling piece because there's literally no reason to keep him around anymore. The MC has already, pretty early, shown the ability to make large amounts of money with minimal effort, so the "excuse" that Hunter is being kept around because he's paying for the house is particularly nonsensical. Not to mention the family could just move. His entire existence and tolerance by the rest of the family is based on flimsy grounds at best, I'm not going to insult you by pretending that you think it's convincing storytelling that Hunter could get some hair, put on the MCs clothes and there would be ANY situation where Brenna or Catherine could mistake him for the MC. No one thinks that's reasonable. It's silly in the extreme.

On the other hand, a shadowy organization is a MUCH more real threat because if they have the ability to get chemicals into you and your family's food without anyone noticing, how can you ever hope to escape them? Hunter should have been shot in the head and thrown in a ditch a few episodes ago for the story to remotely be believable, but how would you ever begin to do something like that against an organization you haven't even seen? So yeah, a shadowy organization would be a much more credible threat without overtly and physically drooling over the girls. And this would still leave the organization the villains and the MC as the good guy.

 

[FoolishFool0]

I think the issue here is the fundamentally opposed views people might have of this game.

Like... A Narrative Vs Power Fantasy scenario so to speak.

If we read Power Vacuum as a Power Fantasy, then of course people think Hunter is unnecessary to the porn. They want quick, easy sex scenes that do no challenge this fantasy (hence the overwhelming hatred for the new what if from some people here), and an unchallenged protagonist whose main issues can be easily solved by doing some repetitive tasks.

That's not how this story works. From a Narrative and a Metatextual Prospective, this is not one of those games. Hell, this is hardly even a game at this point, there is no actual gameplay, no actual control over the Main Character, no branching paths or needs to keep in check or relationship meters.

This is a very specific story with a very specific message I feel, one people are contesting without even thinking about it.

People are angry over Hunter, but isn't Hunter but a reflection of every house game protagonist ever? A natural conclusion of that arc? All that charm and youth you could have used to identify with him had he been the protagonist is long gone, and only the ugly truth remains, a withered husk committing crimes so be could sexually assault his family with impunity.

He is the perfect villain of this story. A Story that, ultimately, is but a commentary on the genre It's spoofing.

The genre is Voyeuristic, so there are cameras all over the house and then some, because you, the watcher, are living vicariously through Sterling your fantasy, much like Hunter was at first, much like Kevin is when he stole all those women's videos, much like Lucia projected herself into Sterling during her own "house" game.

You are not controlling a character, you're just along for the ride, and you've being told a story about his exploits. The fat has just been trimmed, no repetitive chores or bullshit to do, just sex, eased by chemicals and drugs caused by the villain, a villain that is necessary to get the story running, and to give it stakes.

I'm not Gona say that Power Vacuum is the Citizen Kane of House Games of course, but it sure as shit can be its Starship Troopers... Wait no shit that Space Corps XXX, OK scratch that this is the Roger Rabbit of house games then.

A comedy which, if taken at face value, it's just that, a comedy, but on a deeper reading contains far bigger themes and character arcs than you imagined, much like Roger Rabbit was in turn a movie about how a corrupt bureaucracy and the Automobile Industry destroyed the American Public Transit and Railway System and razed down minority ghettos to build giant highways for profit.

(No really that's what Roger Rabbit is about if you remove the cartoon filter, just check the villain's final monologue).

And much like Roger Rabbit, this game, this story too is but a critique of actual tropes and trends within the genre as a whole and not just that, a coming of age story about children trying not to be like their parents, about the Trauma that comports, about power dynamics and, of course, about the extremely Voyeuristic and Manufactured nature of the genre.

And also about fucking of course, this is still a porn game.

 

[Raner]

Whats the new scenes?

 

[yourmomma]

I will never stopped being amazed at how emotionally attached some people get with these games and their projected control freak issues and insecurities lol.


I hope the dev drops some forced NTR in the main game at this point, because people are going to bitch regardless. So might as well.

 

[OnlyWorthyDevsMakeMoney]

I hope the dev drops some forced NTR in the main game at this point, because people are going to bitch regardless. So might as well.

That would be the biggest mistake ever made, the dev made a point that the NTR will always be non-canonical and "outside" of the main game, that's why he started to make the what-ifs, because the majority of Patrons love NTR, but there are also tons of patrons (even if they are on lower tiers) that will leave immediately if NTR will become a non avoidable thing. So it would backfire in an horrible way.

 

[yourmomma]

That would be the biggest mistake ever made, the dev made a point that the NTR will always be non-canonical and "outside" of the main game, that's why he started to make the what-ifs, because the majority of Patrons love NTR, but there are also tons of patrons (even if they are on lower tiers) that will leave immediately if NTR will become a non avoidable thing. So it would backfire in an horrible way.

I'm just following the lead of everyone complaining about the game. Everything revolves around MY whims and desires. Duh. lol

 

[SuddenReal]

The MC has already, pretty early, shown the ability to make large amounts of money with minimal effort, so the "excuse" that Hunter is being kept around because he's paying for the house is particularly nonsensical. Not to mention the family could just move.

Yes, because if you have enough money to buy a new television, you have enough money to buy a house. No wonder you know so much about story telling, it's because you live in a fantasy world.

On the other hand, a shadowy organization is a MUCH more real threat because if they have the ability to get chemicals into you and your family's food without anyone noticing, how can you ever hope to escape them?

No, because it's a dumb premise. How are they doing this? Hunter succeeds because he LIVES in the house. A shadowy organization has no way to enter unseen, so all of their ploys are "just for the story" and thus a non-issue. There's different ways to advance the plot and "a wizard did it" is a bad way since that's just advancing the plot to advance the plot. Hunter also advances the plot, but that's a reaction to his actual present threat. We can guess and try to anticipate what he does, but an unknown organization with unknown motives, there's nothing we can do against that, so all agency is taken out of our hands. It's obvious you play with the NTR switch off since your suggestion offers no choice. With Hunter, the player is forced to make a choice and based on that choice we either have the good ending or the bad one. With a shadow organization, there's no choice, because what will happen if we make the wrong choice? A bunch of men will suddenly burst in the house and fuck everyone? That will obviously never happen, so there's no choice. And if there's no choice, there's no agency.

 

[MrJay]

Yes, because if you have enough money to buy a new television, you have enough money to buy a house. No wonder you know so much about story telling, it's because you live in a fantasy world.


No, because it's a dumb premise. How are they doing this? Hunter succeeds because he LIVES in the house. A shadowy organization has no way to enter unseen, so all of their ploys are "just for the story" and thus a non-issue. There's different ways to advance the plot and "a wizard did it" is a bad way since that's just advancing the plot to advance the plot. Hunter also advances the plot, but that's a reaction to his actual present threat. We can guess and try to anticipate what he does, but an unknown organization with unknown motives, there's nothing we can do against that, so all agency is taken out of our hands. It's obvious you play with the NTR switch off since your suggestion offers no choice. With Hunter, the player is forced to make a choice and based on that choice we either have the good ending or the bad one. With a shadow organization, there's no choice, because what will happen if we make the wrong choice? A bunch of men will suddenly burst in the house and fuck everyone? That will obviously never happen, so there's no choice. And if there's no choice, there's no agency.

No but if you have enough money to pay a housekeeper $8000 a month just to NOT do something, all from acting in a porn video every two weeks or so, then yeah, you could pretty easily work harder to get the money to pay for the house and everything.

Yeah, I'm playing with NTR off, and that's the entire basis of my argument. If you're playing with NTR on then why are you even arguing with me, when the entire time I've said that I don't want to change a single thing about the game as it is with NTR on? I don't give a single shit how the game is with NTR on, because I will never play it.

 

[OnlyWorthyDevsMakeMoney]

No but if you have enough money to pay a housekeeper $8000 a month just to NOT do something, all from acting in a porn video every two weeks or so, then yeah, you could pretty easily work harder to get the money to pay for the house and everything.

Yeah, I'm playing with NTR off, and that's the entire basis of my argument. If you're playing with NTR on then why are you even arguing with me, when the entire time I've said that I don't want to change a single thing about the game as it is with NTR on? I don't give a single shit how the game is with NTR on, because I will never play it.

The NTR on just demonstrates why Hunter and Drew are so important for the whole plot! If you remove Hunter/Drew from the game, it will become like any other harem incest game. The NTR bad endings (totally non-canon) are the main key to understand why Hunter and Drew are ESSENTIAL to the plot. You can argue forever, but the presence of Hunter and Drew in the game is fundamental to keep all the shit together! And if you read carefully the dialogues, you will notice that now Sterling is planning to give 180.000$ to her mother over 3 years in order to get rid of Hunter (just like you want) in a way that doesn't raise suspicion from Hunter (he thinks that he is the only one capable of giving them money, so he has power over them).
I don'ìt like NTR at all, but I recognize the value of it in this story. Anything else beside Hunter/Drew as "villain", is totally incoherent for the plot as it is.

 

[MrJay]

The NTR on just demonstrates why Hunter and Drew are so important for the whole plot! If you remove Hunter/Drew from the game, it will become like any other harem incest game. The NTR bad endings (totally non-canon) are the main key to understand why Hunter and Drew are ESSENTIAL to the plot. You can argue forever, but the presence of Hunter and Drew in the game is fundamental to keep all the shit together! And if you read carefully the dialogues, you will notice that now Sterling is planning to give 180.000$ to her mother over 3 years in order to get rid of Hunter (just like you want) in a way that doesn't raise suspicion from Hunter (he thinks that he is the only one capable of giving them money, so he has power over them).
I don'ìt like NTR at all, but I recognize the value of it in this story. Anything else beside Hunter/Drew as "villain", is totally incoherent for the plot as it is.

I play with NTR off and the plot is completely coherent, so I will have to disagree. And the idea that it being "like any other harem incest game", first off isn't actually a coherently bad thing because many of those games are great, and secondly, is just wrong because most of those games also manage to have their own entirely unique identities and appealing qualities. Power Vacuum would still be its totally unique thing even if Hunter wasn't present.

And I don't need to argue forever. Maybe they are essential for the plot as it appears in the 'NTR on' version, I simply neither know nor care, but they're just not essential in the 'NTR off' version. And again, I've never once argued for changing anything in the 'NTR on' version, so if that's the version you play and you like it, great, I'm not talking about anything that would affect you.

 

[ScareKing]

I play with NTR off and the plot is completely coherent, so I will have to disagree. And the idea that it being "like any other harem incest game", first off isn't actually a coherently bad thing because many of those games are great, and secondly, is just wrong because most of those games also manage to have their own entirely unique identities and appealing qualities. Power Vacuum would still be its totally unique thing even if Hunter wasn't present.

And I don't need to argue forever. Maybe they are essential for the plot as it appears in the 'NTR on' version, I simply neither know nor care, but they're just not essential in the 'NTR off' version. And again, I've never once argued for changing anything in the 'NTR on' version, so if that's the version you play and you like it, great, I'm not talking about anything that would affect you.

Lets pretende Hunter became a "shadow agency", why they would help Ophelia and family? Why Ophelia would accept some random peoples help? When they start filling weird, why they wouldt move away? Even the whole sex stuff wouldnt make any sense since MC fuck every one because hes trying to stop Hunter, and MC money comes from sex scenes with Breanna, if him just appears with a bunch of cash out of nowhere, Ophelia would ask how he got that, and they live together, Ophelia knows MC dont have a job, and if you play with NTR On, you just see the consequences of MC mistakes but if you are not blind by anger against Hunter, you can see hes essential to the plot with NTR Off.