VN Ren'Py Summer's Gone [S1 Steam + DLC] [Oceanlab]

[BobTheDuck]

It’s worth making a reservation here. Most likely, I myself somehow missed a place where I needed to focus on this. I'm not a fan of Nika, I don't even have the desire to take his side. Along the way of the first season, he does a lot of shit (besides breaking into the house) that does him no credit, while smiling in his eyes (as best he can). At the same time, we must pay tribute, a gray character with trauma from the past, closed, ready to put himself outside the brackets of society, can make the world a better place and it’s difficult to consider him completely bad.

Who else but he can hit you in the head with a tennis ball? Not just because he is a sharp shooter, but because in this situation it is necessary and simple chatter simply will not help.

The plan is crap, no doubt. But it very much synergizes with the age of the characters. And what teenager doesn't like spy stuff?

Going beyond social boundaries is too complex a topic and I’m not sure that I won’t screw it up somewhere. These frameworks themselves are not always fair, nor are the laws, nor are those who “defend” these laws. Again, let's just add details from our heads to test ourselves. Let's say the person who is the target of their plan is a drug lord, against whom the penitentiary system has nothing. And a couple of teenagers simply don’t want him to become part of their family. We won’t specify the risks, that’s not why. The question is: will your/our understanding of the limits of what is permitted change?
For me personally, the very ability to push oneself beyond the boundaries commands respect. What they do and why they do not. Until the screenwriter completes the goal of some other bad features that will balance the scales.
Well, or they won’t be given educational consequences, which will also bring the characters closer together.



Potential. Let's assume that I used the wrong word.
In any case, this is precisely the fact that there is not a single argument in favor of Holgerson until the author completes his biography.
I remember the call. Perhaps this is the nail that will finally break their plan.



Well, I absolutely agree with this. Speaking of spy stuff, how easily it gets into the hands of just anyone, multiple cars owned by teenagers, and the like. I don’t know how rich people live, but this really doesn’t look like a story based on real events. Therefore, I agree to pass through the prism of the real world individual actions, but not the whole story as a whole.

Don't worry, I tend to miss things too, and finding the time to write comprehensively... I'll just hope people can follow if they find the topic interesting these days, typos and all.

I think Nika's past gives him some level of grace, as does Bellas, but if they have to plead mental health as a mitigating circumstance ina trial, it's still criminal. I personally understand how he finds it hard to stay within the lines, simply because all the lines in his world shattered, and he is trying to restore the framework for the first time. Part of it could be pushing himself too hard in an overstimulating experience, and over-engaging after years of mental isolation.

Regarding your example, the disapproval of say a drug lord, the first step would be to find the evidence from legal sources that can be verified. By becoming a criminal, there is no reason to reject another criminal in the family based on distaste of criminality, as you've become a mirror. The sensible way is much easier, costs less, and can be done without any external help. Kick up a good solid argument. If there's no proof that's easy to find and it's just gut instinct, we have to wonder why our gut is telling us someone is reprehensible.

However we do know Stefan is still married. So if he's chasing Amber, he's planning on having a mistress, which does give Bella a good reason for distaste. The word of someone who cheats when they swore oaths/marriage vows is worthless.

Spoiler: Script from scene at Relucia where they are looking at who Stefan is dining with

You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.

Stefan hasn't revealed himself as evil incarnate, but even if he does, the law is clear. Becoming a vigilante is a risk most people sensibly won't take. Normal people assume innocence when they lack proof, even if suspicion makes them cautious.

On the flipside, Stefan has shown that he'll press charges agaisnt someone with no proof, and if he is chasing Amber, he's dishonourable to his wife.

And yes, there is a level by which we have to suspend disbelief. The book club takes place in a regal mansion where milfs arm wrestle over wine? I'd expect a far more seriosu book then, maybe some Umberto Eco?And why arm wrestle when the hired help can just bring up another cart load of wine from the cellar?

so this not harem game?

No, Ocean dislikes harems. There are plans for throuple paths, but Ocean claims they will likely combust if you don't manage your time well between the other two in your throuple - jealousy will cause those paths to fail.

Hmm, what's wrong with this picture?
View attachment 3769351
View attachment 3769336

To be fair, who is responsible for keeping the tags updated now that there is only "deleted member" who really knows? And where's the domination at?

 

[O1duvai]

Don't worry, I tend to miss things too, and finding the time to write comprehensively... I'll just hope people can follow if they find the topic interesting these days, typos and all.

I think Nika's past gives him some level of grace, as does Bellas, but if they have to plead mental health as a mitigating circumstance ina trial, it's still criminal. I personally understand how he finds it hard to stay within the lines, simply because all the lines in his world shattered, and he is trying to restore the framework for the first time. Part of it could be pushing himself too hard in an overstimulating experience, and over-engaging after years of mental isolation.

Regarding your example, the disapproval of say a drug lord, the first step would be to find the evidence from legal sources that can be verified. By becoming a criminal, there is no reason to reject another criminal in the family based on distaste of criminality, as you've become a mirror. The sensible way is much easier, costs less, and can be done without any external help. Kick up a good solid argument. If there's no proof that's easy to find and it's just gut instinct, we have to wonder why our gut is telling us someone is reprehensible.

Principle of proportionality. A painted car is not a drug dealer.
Of course, I don’t like the money part either, it’s about a plan to break up a family and break into a house.
This is the only argument from the category of opinion.

By the way, there is one point about which I forgot. Before the night ride, he says that “he has nothing to lose.” Obviously not taking Nojiko and Cheeto's feelings into account. My thoughts on this matter: if you are sure that a person is a shit and is worth the consequences that will follow any action towards him, then why not. The main thing here is to realize that at this particular moment you are doing something illegal and will pay a fine (I doubt that they will be jailed for graffiti on a car).
And this is what he doesn’t understand. Probably due to the fact that he spent most of his conscious life in a sealed jar.

However we do know Stefan is still married. So if he's chasing Amber, he's planning on having a mistress, which does give Bella a good reason for distaste. The word of someone who cheats when they swore oaths/marriage vows is worthless.

Spoiler: Script from scene at Relucia where they are looking at who Stefan is dining with

You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.

Stefan hasn't revealed himself as evil incarnate, but even if he does, the law is clear. Becoming a vigilante is a risk most people sensibly won't take. Normal people assume innocence when they lack proof, even if suspicion makes them cautious.

On the flipside, Stefan has shown that he'll press charges agaisnt someone with no proof, and if he is chasing Amber, he's dishonourable to his wife.

Well, here the convention is obvious. The main characters of anything are not ordinary and law-abiding to the last comma.

We know for sure about Stefan that he is a lousy husband and a womanizer, whose eyes run in all directions at once. He deserves the dirty trick to the same extent as Nika deserves a visit to the police station and some kind of commensurate fine (as far as we know, they did not inherit and it is hardly possible to prove anything).

Again, my opinion is that such an act with such initial conditions does not make him a canonical criminal. If he had simply robbed the house because he could and that had been the goal in the first place, I would have had no questions or doubts.

 

[ahxjosu]

ok tyy i will skip this to save space of hdd for other game

 

[turbojoe]

ok tyy i will skip this to save space of hdd for other game

Come on man - 11 GB of phantastic girls with several possible relationships and an amazing story isn´t worth for your HDD?

Anyway if you only looking for harem you´re indeed on the wrong side here, you better look at BareWitness (so far you already don´t know).

 

[ahxjosu]

Come on man - 11 GB of phantastic girls with several possible relationships and an amazing story isn´t worth for your HDD?

Anyway if you only looking for harem you´re indeed on the wrong side here, you better look at BareWitness (so far you already don´t know).

i got that game

 

[codex35]

SG previews be like "great game, great music, nice animation, top level renders here is a 1 star"

 

[Ray_D]

WHY gun part removed?

Because you can't shoot someone in a public street and get away with it.

 

[AlexFXR]

Because you can't shoot someone in a public street and get away with it.
View attachment 3770472

Why? MC's action is completely justified from a legal point of view. Before his eyes, some crazy woman hits a girl with her car and then tries to shoot him. Perhaps she wants to kill him and get rid of the witness to avoid punishment. He has every right to self-defense.

 

[BobTheDuck]

Principle of proportionality. A painted car is not a drug dealer.
Of course, I don’t like the money part either, it’s about a plan to break up a family and break into a house.
This is the only argument from the category of opinion.

By the way, there is one point about which I forgot. Before the night ride, he says that “he has nothing to lose.” Obviously not taking Nojiko and Cheeto's feelings into account. My thoughts on this matter: if you are sure that a person is a shit and is worth the consequences that will follow any action towards him, then why not. The main thing here is to realize that at this particular moment you are doing something illegal and will pay a fine (I doubt that they will be jailed for graffiti on a car).
And this is what he doesn’t understand. Probably due to the fact that he spent most of his conscious life in a sealed jar.



Well, here the convention is obvious. The main characters of anything are not ordinary and law-abiding to the last comma.

We know for sure about Stefan that he is a lousy husband and a womanizer, whose eyes run in all directions at once. He deserves the dirty trick to the same extent as Nika deserves a visit to the police station and some kind of commensurate fine (as far as we know, they did not inherit and it is hardly possible to prove anything).

Again, my opinion is that such an act with such initial conditions does not make him a canonical criminal. If he had simply robbed the house because he could and that had been the goal in the first place, I would have had no questions or doubts.

The principle of proportionality doesn't apply to the theft, the theft is quantifiable. All the Holgersons need is for those cameras that Bella claims are inactive to be recording, and Nika is screwed. There is no such thing as proportionality in morality, that is why the saying two wrongs don't make a right is a great guide. Most importantly, criminal acts in society are not mitigated by any criminal activity on the other side. I can't murder a drug dealer, I can't take the law into my own hands and decide what is fitting.

An eye for an eye is not justice; the point of law is not to preserve moral behaviour, it is to preserve social function - the rules exist essentially to keep peace within the container we call society while we're all stuck in it. If I wish to make comparitive morality, I can only do so when my threat/power is greater than society's collective power - I have to have either enough leverage or force to ensure no one can bring consequences, or hope I am small and petty enough to not be worth the effort of punishment.

However, SG's universe has a theme of every action having a consequence (which is something Nika repeats to himself), so comparitive morality is a lie in the games narrative. Nika believes he can be a vigilante (or as you say, simply doesn't care for a variety of plausible reasons). But consider it this way: if there are such intense consequences for winning a basketball game through simple mind games, how would a sliding scale work for theft? I'd imagine execution at least

Getting back to the money thing, in a legal sense, if Nika is caught, no one will care about motives. He took the money, we even know that his motives were purely selfish, and he just wanted it - he took the opportunity. THere is no ay to mitigate his motivations by comparisons to the Holgersons (who we have no evidence of any wrong doing prior to this moment). Nika breaks and enters, destroys property and steals money purely because he hates the guy for dissing his appearance and being associated with people who verbally bullied Mila (despite her calming the situation down and letting it go). So Nika's reasons are not at that moment about the 'plan'. That comes the following day. They are just doing this purely on spite.

Oh and I forgot this quote about Bella's beliefs about Stefan, because my memory of the changes in S1 Full hasn't yet sunk in:

Spoiler: Prior to the plan

You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.

The plan is only formed after Amber receives the invitation the the gala, and Mila is accused by Stefan the day after. Nika exploits Bella's distress to set up revenge - AFTER already stealing money AND vandalising AND breaking and entering - to get revenge for being called a hobo. Oh revenge and fun. He's not even rocking a panic attack, or anything, this is him being completely comfortable being a criminal, and having no sense of proportionality. At this point, Nika's only interaction with Mario is the street scene, and the only info is what Bella says. Nika isn't deciding anything other than his blood is high over a perceived insult. It's so over the top.

Spoiler: The birth of the plan

You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.

This actually marries into his reason for getting into fights - it made him feel alive, as he mentions to Amber in therapy. I think what you say about living in a sealed jar is probably the key to this - Nika has no concept of the consequences, so his actions are free in this moment. Part of the narrative (I think) will show he starts developing awareness of consequences, and that will be part of him becoming a better person (both in mental health and in social standing). So we already see that he questions VIc crossing the road, that wouldn't have happened without him, Mila getting accused wouldn't have happened, Sonya will probably get in trouble for the games when the parents discover there's no professor involved, Nika's basically having a bad influence on everyone in some way, even if he is charming in other ways. Essentially, he is a catalyst in their stories as much as they are a catalyst in his. For example, I think that the Holgersons were waiting for an opportunity to do something to Mila (if we take all the small comments to heart and read between the lines) and Nika just provoked that opportunity:

Spoiler: The Holgerson's thing with Mila

You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.

 

[Adhdclassic]

Some of us have been saying this for years. Both Bella and Nami's routes were butchered way before 5.0 Beta or the S1 final.

I would invite anyone who disagrees to play the pre-reworked version 3.0 of the Bella and MC fight in her room when MC finds out about her sister. It was so much heavier. Much more emotional and poignant.

All Ocean did with the introduction of the reworks was dilute the story. Like adding ice cubes to a glass of the finest whisky in the world.

Thats how I felt with the scene with Mila at the tree spot Nadia told her about. The original scene was more intimate, they were physically close, Steam one when they are talking they are distant the feels was gone. Overall feels like the emotions of the entire story got watered down.

 

[alanrock]

Why? MC's action is completely justified from a legal point of view. Before his eyes, some crazy woman hits a girl with her car and then tries to shoot him. Perhaps she wants to kill him and get rid of the witness to avoid punishment. He has every right to self-defense.

Marla was protecting the girl from the bizarre behavior of the MC, as he behaved like a total lunatic. The whole scene was ridiculous.
What an odd way to start a game whose plot revolves around healing ...

 

[BobTheDuck]

Marla was protecting the girl from the bizarre behavior of the MC, as he behaved like a total lunatic. The whole scene was ridiculous.
What an odd way to start a game whose plot revolves around healing ...

Prior to Ch 3 we had some sort of anti hero noire style VN and made sense in context of a sadist with a tormented past. It was cut once the rework started and the plot direction changed - it was merely one of the last legacies of the original story to be removed.

Having said that, you're responding to someone who thinks legally justified self defense is shooting someone AFTER disarming the threat.

 

[BenMeiffert]

Why? MC's action is completely justified from a legal point of view. Before his eyes, some crazy woman hits a girl with her car and then tries to shoot him. Perhaps she wants to kill him and get rid of the witness to avoid punishment. He has every right to self-defense.

USA is great !

 

[Old Man Al]

Marla was protecting the girl from the bizarre behavior of the MC, as he behaved like a total lunatic. The whole scene was ridiculous.
What an odd way to start a game whose plot revolves around healing ...

This.
Plus if you shoot someone unarmed just because he/she was a threat earlier it would not be covered by self-defense, at least in Germany, and I daresay every european country.
It is only self-defense here as long as yourself and/or you helping someone unable to defend themselves against is attacked. The moment the MC had the gun from Marla in his hands the attack was over.

 

[Don Sucio]

However we do know Stefan is still married. So if he's chasing Amber, he's planning on having a mistress, which does give Bella a good reason for distaste. The word of someone who cheats when they swore oaths/marriage vows is worthless.

To be fair, who is responsible for keeping the tags updated now that there is only "deleted member" who really knows? And where's the domination at?

Question about english terminology, when you say Stefan is planning on having a mistress, is nothing related to femdom stuff right? The only time i see the word "mistress" is in femdom games but i´m not sure that meaning is the same in your setence. I have seen that expression in other games like Yakuza Saga and i always think about femdom stuff but it doesn´t make sense with the situation. Is just for learn and be sure for the next time i see the word

About the tag of domination yeah, i have always thought that those tags are for future content, but i don´t know how works the tag thing. Mods (i suppose) put them knowing the future content or the tags are added when a new content/kink appear in the game?

Having said that, you're responding to someone who thinks legally justified self defense is shooting someone AFTER disarming the threat.

This.
Plus if you shoot someone unarmed just because he/she was a threat earlier it would not be covered by self-defense, at least in Germany, and I daresay every european country.
It is only self-defense here as long as yourself and/or you helping someone unable to defend themselves against is attacked. The moment the MC had the gun from Marla in his hands the attack was over.

I´m sorry guys, but i´m with the other side of this discussion.
If someone enter in my house and i´m a hunter, i will probably take my gun and shoot the intruder even if he is laying in the floor disarmed and reduced.

Both of you are right, of course, and you have the law with you but i think criminals lose their rights when they try to attack other people´s rights. I don´t know if you know Bukele, president of El Salvador in center/south America, i like his model of treatment for criminals.

In my country, Spain, some months ago there was a case very polemic, an old man with 80 years old killed a guy who had a criminal past when he entered to his house with a chainsaw for steal him. The old man was a hunter in his young days so he grabbed his gun and shot the intruder, and when the intruder was in the floor blooding the old mand reloaded his weapon and shot him again, this time in the head (or back, i don´t remember well). The old man was accused of murder and was forced to pay a compensation to the intruder family...

In that case yeah, the laws are for everyone and he comitted a crime too, even if he was only defending himself, his wife and his property but... Seems like criminals have more rights than normal people, and justice seems to fight more againts citizens who drive above the limit speed than punish criminals who rape, murder, make traffic drugs...

 

[Old Man Al]

Well I can only say in Germany this would be homicide and in the best case the shooter would get a suspended prison sentence. I could PM you some articles about such cases, but they are only in German.

 

[Ottoeight]

I´m sorry guys, but i´m with the other side of this discussion.
If someone enter in my house and i´m a hunter, i will probably take my gun and shoot the intruder even if he is laying in the floor disarmed and reduced.

Both of you are right, of course, and you have the law with you but i think criminals lose their rights when they try to attack other people´s rights. I don´t know if you know Bukele, president of El Salvador in center/south America, i like his model of treatment for criminals.

In my country, Spain, some months ago there was a case very polemic, an old man with 80 years old killed a guy who had a criminal past when he entered to his house with a chainsaw for steal him. The old man was a hunter in his young days so he grabbed his gun and shot the intruder, and when the intruder was in the floor blooding the old mand reloaded his weapon and shot him again, this time in the head (or back, i don´t remember well). The old man was accused of murder and was forced to pay a compensation to the intruder family...

In that case yeah, the laws are for everyone and he comitted a crime too, even if he was only defending himself, his wife and his property but... Seems like criminals have more rights than normal people, and justice seems to fight more againts citizens who drive above the limit speed than punish criminals who rape, murder, make traffic drugs...

First, he was NOT defending himself.

Secondly, he killed a man, therefore he is a murderer.

Thirdly, you should NEVER give a 80 years old dude a weapon, because old grandpas geezers are mostly old bonkers.

Fourthly, THIS IS OFF TOPIC

Fifth, basic F95 forum rules tells that YOU MUST NOT talk about flaming sensitive topics (ethics, law, politics and so on), therefore I'm going to report you.

Sixth, I don't give a damn about anyone's political opinions on this forum. I'm NOT here for anyone's rantings.

 

[Don Sucio]

Well I can only say in Germany this would be homicide and in the best case the shooter would get a suspended prison sentence. I could PM you some articles about such cases, but they are only in German.

Don´t worry, in my country too

First, he was NOT defending himself.

Secondly, he killed a man, therefore he is a murderer.

Thirdly, you should NEVER give a 80 years old dude a weapon, because old grandpas geezers are mostly old bonkers.

Fourthly, THIS IS OFF TOPIC

Fifth, basic F95 forum rules tells that YOU MUST NOT talk about flaming sensitive topics (ethics, law, politics and so on), therefore I'm going to report you.

Sixth, I don't give a damn about anyone's political opinions on this forum. I'm NOT here for anyone's rantings.

Okay Batman.

 

[Don Sucio]

First, he was NOT defending himself.

Secondly, he killed a man, therefore he is a murderer.

Thirdly, you should NEVER give a 80 years old dude a weapon, because old grandpas geezers are mostly old bonkers.

Fourthly, THIS IS OFF TOPIC

Fifth, basic F95 forum rules tells that YOU MUST NOT talk about flaming sensitive topics (ethics, law, politics and so on), therefore I'm going to report you.

Sixth, I don't give a damn about anyone's political opinions on this forum. I'm NOT here for anyone's rantings.

By the way, you are going to report me because i´m off topic but you have written your opinion too, and after doing it you have realized that this is off topic and bla bla bla.

Are you going to report yourself too for doing the same or you just are upset because i don´t have the same opinion as you?

 

[PaxHadrian17]

Question about english terminology, when you say Stefan is planning on having a mistress, is nothing related to femdom stuff right? The only time i see the word "mistress" is in femdom games but i´m not sure that meaning is the same in your setence. I have seen that expression in other games like Yakuza Saga and i always think about femdom stuff but it doesn´t make sense with the situation. Is just for learn and be sure for the next time i see the word

About the tag of domination yeah, i have always thought that those tags are for future content, but i don´t know how works the tag thing. Mods (i suppose) put them knowing the future content or the tags are added when a new content/kink appear in the game?



I´m sorry guys, but i´m with the other side of this discussion.
If someone enter in my house and i´m a hunter, i will probably take my gun and shoot the intruder even if he is laying in the floor disarmed and reduced.

Both of you are right, of course, and you have the law with you but i think criminals lose their rights when they try to attack other people´s rights. I don´t know if you know Bukele, president of El Salvador in center/south America, i like his model of treatment for criminals.

In my country, Spain, some months ago there was a case very polemic, an old man with 80 years old killed a guy who had a criminal past when he entered to his house with a chainsaw for steal him. The old man was a hunter in his young days so he grabbed his gun and shot the intruder, and when the intruder was in the floor blooding the old mand reloaded his weapon and shot him again, this time in the head (or back, i don´t remember well). The old man was accused of murder and was forced to pay a compensation to the intruder family...

In that case yeah, the laws are for everyone and he comitted a crime too, even if he was only defending himself, his wife and his property but... Seems like criminals have more rights than normal people, and justice seems to fight more againts citizens who drive above the limit speed than punish criminals who rape, murder, make traffic drugs...

I agree with you about the current efforts to 'protect' criminals from the consequences of their choices.

I think, like a number of the discussions we have on this thread, that we need to remember that SG is an AVN taking place within a society that has law and order but not specifically one RL set of rules from any one country.

It establishes the framework within which this story can be told and enjoyed by people from many countries and does so in a manner that allows for us to recognize in SG - many/all of the things we have seen in the country/countries we have lived/live in:

* Theft from the Holgersons occurs with some kind of future consequences (the who and what TBD)
* Bullies like Melanie Ceril seem to get away with middle school (in the U.S - the equivalent of school for kids of about 12 - 14 years of age) and likely high school (the equivalent of school for kids of about 15 - 18 years of age) attacks on kids about their age.
* Police officers harass specific people, often with impunity (justified/unjustified)
* The disappearance/death of children

These are just a few examples.

My point is the framework is meant to provide basic boundaries for the story but not interfere with the telling of the story.

We need to bring a measure of the 'suspension of disbelief' to enjoy many stories and this is just one.

Ex. I am looking forward to the chance for the MC to romance Amber and get physical with that Very Hot MILF.

This means that, in RL - she would be putting her professional reputation and licenses in jeopardy to have sex and romance with one of her younger patients.

In AVN world - this is fine - we accept that this is part of the story.

I think we need to bring the same kind of acceptance to other 'rough edges' of the Summers Gone story.

Who cares that the drug named by Ocean (when Sasha gives the MC a pill to help stop his panic attack during the book club event) has XYZ effects over time versus ABC effects over time.

We all understood - from the perspective of the story - what was happening (and got to enjoy discussions focused on another detail from the mystery of Sasha).

It is, after all, Not a true-life retelling of certain events with an emphasis on verifiable events only...

Cheers!!