VN Ren'Py Abandoned The Home [v0.9] [Yihman1]

[Slimeee]

This shit is fun as fuck dude I love that you are writing whatever the fuck you want, its kinda fucked up and also interesting. Im enjoying it, keep it up.

 

[aqvaman]

Wrong Mega link. Goes to "Magical Investigation of Meridiana".

 

[Doublefrost]

Genuinely surprises me that for a game where the perspective of the story and the protagonist straight up says mentally ill at the very beginning... That there's people bitching that it's not entirely well adjusted. Fucking duh. Personally, I find the experience to be rather fascinating. Most of the VNs posted up on this site fail to make me think about what's really going on under the hood while this one does.

 

[Hinatsukino]

Wrong Mega link. It goes to Sorceress something-another.

 

[RedPillBlues]

2) People who get a negative experience are FAR more likely to give a review than people who get a positive experience. The man who finds a rat head in his food is much more likely than the million other customers who enjoyed their meal and did not get affected by the tainted batch to leave a review. It's a bias we as humans often times have. Unfortunately, we remember the negative more than the positive. You got a faithful wife for a decade then one night you walk in on her sucking another guy off. You aren't thinking about those 10 happy years anymore are you?

I agree and disagree, it goes both ways when considering Adult games. You have a lot of games that get 1/5 star reviewed because it had a fetish someone doesn't like for example. While most get deleted if they make it obvious that's the reason they are leaving the review, many do get past it by only making it a small part of the review, even when its obvious that's the main reason they rated it a one star. However you can take a look at threads like Being a Dik and see idiots review it 5 stars just because "gud renders." Though even with these 2 groups of people if you take a look through the pages on the games forum you can see that reviews are still generally pretty varied. If you look at mine as well they are pretty varied. Generally I don't review games unless I feel strongly about them, which Is why if its a game I really like it'll be long and detailed, and if its something I hate it'll be straight to the the point. The "FAR" more likely just doesn't hold up in regards to this site, but I do consider it a problem as well as the empty 5 stars.

Now the problem is how do you fix it? Do you set a more restrict limit to who can review? Maybe limit it to people who have been members for X amount of time and have X amount of posts? Do we have a select number of people only that can review, members who have shown themselves to try to be as unbiased and fair as possible? Or do we just get rid of reviews altogether unless the Dev ops into it like Epic Games? It might be a easy question to answer for yourself, but it becomes harder once you realize just how many users it effects.

In my experience reviews are hit or miss, you have a lot of people that repeat information ad nauseam, and others that are generally unhelpful. However, there's many that are the opposite, and paint a clear picture of the games content and perceived quality.At least for me I have never been convinced to not download a game because of a low rating, however I have been convinced to play a game I normally wouldn't because of high ratings. While there are flaws, as a player I find reviews to be something I would miss dearly if there were gone.

So this all comes to the main question I want to ask, does being a developer of a game that's averagely reviewed play a part in your dislike of reviews?

 

[MacDoobie]

I am real with people. What you just typed out probably sounded really good in your head, and on the surface, it does appear to be an attempt at being insightful and helpful. Rather commendable. Here is the thing though.

You say stop being so aggressive... Want a cold hard truth about this world we live in? Nothing meaningful was ever accomplished by a passive person ever in the history of mankind. I'd rather blow my fucking brains out than be a passive person. No passive man ever gets that promotion, gets that pussy, or accomplishes that goal. If I set my mind to something I aggressively go out and do it. Aggressiveness is a virtue.

The only time that aggression is considered bad in my book is when the individual in question is a criminal. Nobody really likes passive people either I'm afraid. Passive guys are looked at as a "Nice guy". They are the cucks in these stories. They are the door mats of society. They are the beta orbiters that are friends with lots of girls, but get no pussy. They are male feminists. They are the soy boys. They are the NEETS without an education or employment. They are that 500-pound lard ass you see on the motorized scooter in wal mart. They are the welfare rats that live off the fat of the land while others provide for them with their taxes or charity. Passiveness is a sin.

Passive people are "Takers"
Aggressive people are "Makers"

end rant

Dude - not that it really matters to you - but your attitude in this thread has turned me off even trying your game. Talk about egocentric - you are turning off possible patreons with your snarky sophomoric attitude. Grow up. Bye and good luck.

 

[Master of Puppets]

This game is so weird. I have to admit I want to know what happens next though. What will Real Dad and Lura do to Evil Mom? Will they brainwash her into a bimbo in revenge for her brainwashing him? How does she want to use the cute redhead to get revenge? Will she ever get enough of Lura's butt? Can she save Past Dad from Evil Mom? If she does, will she cease to exist? So many questions!

 

[yihman1]

Dude - not that it really matters to you - but your attitude in this thread has turned me off even trying your game. Talk about egocentric - you are turning off possible patreons with your snarky sophomoric attitude. Grow up. Bye and good luck.

1) I haven't set up a Patreon account. Not that I couldn't make money creating a game I'm sure I could make a little pocket change at least, but this is my first go-around at making a game. Also, I don't have to be a slave to Patreon's rules and regulations as unfortunately many creators must. I'm neither at the mercy of the dollar or patreon. I'm unchained.
2) It's better to be around an honest asshole over a lying sweetheart every day. It's good advice to live by. At least you did not call me a sycophant. I don't just give an "attitude" as you say to just anyone. They come in with an attitude they are gonna get one back. Legitimate criticism is more so acceptable and I talk with folks more level headed. Someone comes in like a heckler I tend to humiliate them.

I agree and disagree, it goes both ways when considering Adult games. You have a lot of games that get 1/5 star reviewed because it had a fetish someone doesn't like for example. While most get deleted if they make it obvious that's the reason they are leaving the review, many do get past it by only making it a small part of the review, even when its obvious that's the main reason they rated it a one star. However you can take a look at threads like Being a Dik and see idiots review it 5 stars just because "gud renders." Though even with these 2 groups of people if you take a look through the pages on the games forum you can see that reviews are still generally pretty varied. If you look at mine as well they are pretty varied. Generally I don't review games unless I feel strongly about them, which Is why if its a game I really like it'll be long and detailed, and if its something I hate it'll be straight to the the point. The "FAR" more likely just doesn't hold up in regards to this site, but I do consider it a problem as well as the empty 5 stars.

Now the problem is how do you fix it? Do you set a more restrict limit to who can review? Maybe limit it to people who have been members for X amount of time and have X amount of posts? Do we have a select number of people only that can review, members who have shown themselves to try to be as unbiased and fair as possible? Or do we just get rid of reviews altogether unless the Dev ops into it like Epic Games? It might be a easy question to answer for yourself, but it becomes harder once you realize just how many users it effects.

In my experience reviews are hit or miss, you have a lot of people that repeat information ad nauseam, and others that are generally unhelpful. However, there's many that are the opposite, and paint a clear picture of the games content and perceived quality.At least for me I have never been convinced to not download a game because of a low rating, however I have been convinced to play a game I normally wouldn't because of high ratings. While there are flaws, as a player I find reviews to be something I would miss dearly if there were gone.

So this all comes to the main question I want to ask, does being a developer of a game that's averagely reviewed play a part in your dislike of reviews?

If it were up to me how would I modify the reviewing process to make it more accurate feedback? Now that is a good question. It's not up to me, but if it were here is how the review process would work. It would be more work, but would yield far more accurate reviews... Gonna get all scientific on it... I'm no rocket surgeon but I'll give it a go. It's a crude system and could use better analytics.

1) The creator of the game posts 5 trivia questions (multiple choice or true/false) about the game to be eligible for a full review score. For a review to be valid the person answering the 5 trivia questions must answer as many questions as possible. The more questions you answer correctly the more it is weighted towards your review. Answering 0/5 = 0% review and failed to review. You may not review if you can answer 0/5. 1/5 you get 20% review score and so on. So a games review with 3 reviewers. 1 gets a score of 1 and gives it 1 star, the 2nd gives it 3/5 and scores 2/5 review score, but the 3rd person gives it a 5/5 review and also gets a 5/5 review score that becomes 1/5. That normally would just be a 3/5 review under the current system. Since the 5-star reviewer answered more questions better then it would be weighted more so than the other 2 reviewers and the review would be 4+ stars. Had the 5 star reviewer scored poorly and the other two scored better then the review stars would then be below 3. This will make it so people who know the game better have more say on reviews than those who know the game less. The experts would have more say in the reviews which is good.

2) Once a review is 90 days old it will be rigged to send a notice to the reviewer. The notice will send some sort of message saying "Is this review still accurate? Yes or No". The reviewer then has 14 days to click "Yes" on this notice or it will automatically be deleted. If no is clicked it will be deleted. This automated process will clean up outdated reviews, and reviews from inactive users.

3) Next to the review would read to reviewers overall review history. or "ORH" for short. This is total number of stars given out of total number of stars possible to have given were they all 5-star reviews. So if someone who has given 10 reviews, and has given 50 stars then gives a game 1 star it would mean MORE so than a player who had given given 10 reviews with a total of 20 stars given because they tend to review low. This would make it much more accurate all around.

Even then it would still be an imperfect system, but it would likely work better than how it does so currently.

 

[The Krypt Angel]

I'm all for telling people you don't give a fuck right off the bat but having a strobing screen with no warning like that could be dangerous for people with epilepsy

 

[TearStar]

I'm all for telling people you don't give a fuck right off the bat but having a strobing screen with no warning like that could be dangerous for people with epilepsy

YEAH that would have been appreciated. I never pressed alt f4 that was and now I have a headache.



How in the world was that a good idea???

 

[yihman1]

I guess I can slow that strobing effect down a little in future builds.... and done.
Now it's no longer 1/10 of a second but 3/10 per frame there. (in future builds)

 

[TearStar]

I guess I can slow that strobing effect down a little in future builds.... and done.
Now it's no longer 1/10 of a second but 3/10 per frame there. (in future builds)

OR why don't you just skip it. What's the point of it anyway. If it's going to stay that's the worst idea ever. But... your game I won't interfere.

 

[The Krypt Angel]

I guess I can slow that strobing effect down a little in future builds.... and done.
Now it's no longer 1/10 of a second but 3/10 per frame there. (in future builds)

Just my opinion but I'd just lose the strobing entirely the screen itself gets your point across some annoying flashing doesn't really add much in the way of impact to the message

 

[RedPillBlues]

1) I haven't set up a Patreon account. Not that I couldn't make money creating a game I'm sure I could make a little pocket change at least, but this is my first go-around at making a game. Also, I don't have to be a slave to Patreon's rules and regulations as unfortunately many creators must. I'm neither at the mercy of the dollar or patreon. I'm unchained.
2) It's better to be around an honest asshole over a lying sweetheart every day. It's good advice to live by. At least you did not call me a sycophant. I don't just give an "attitude" as you say to just anyone. They come in with an attitude they are gonna get one back. Legitimate criticism is more so acceptable and I talk with folks more level headed. Someone comes in like a heckler I tend to humiliate them.




If it were up to me how would I modify the reviewing process to make it more accurate feedback? Now that is a good question. It's not up to me, but if it were here is how the review process would work. It would be more work, but would yield far more accurate reviews... Gonna get all scientific on it... I'm no rocket surgeon but I'll give it a go. It's a crude system and could use better analytics.

1) The creator of the game posts 5 trivia questions (multiple choice or true/false) about the game to be eligible for a full review score. For a review to be valid the person answering the 5 trivia questions must answer as many questions as possible. The more questions you answer correctly the more it is weighted towards your review. Answering 0/5 = 0% review and failed to review. You may not review if you can answer 0/5. 1/5 you get 20% review score and so on. So a games review with 3 reviewers. 1 gets a score of 1 and gives it 1 star, the 2nd gives it 3/5 and scores 2/5 review score, but the 3rd person gives it a 5/5 review and also gets a 5/5 review score that becomes 1/5. That normally would just be a 3/5 review under the current system. Since the 5-star reviewer answered more questions better then it would be weighted more so than the other 2 reviewers and the review would be 4+ stars. Had the 5 star reviewer scored poorly and the other two scored better then the review stars would then be below 3. This will make it so people who know the game better have more say on reviews than those who know the game less. The experts would have more say in the reviews which is good.

2) Once a review is 90 days old it will be rigged to send a notice to the reviewer. The notice will send some sort of message saying "Is this review still accurate? Yes or No". The reviewer then has 14 days to click "Yes" on this notice or it will automatically be deleted. If no is clicked it will be deleted. This automated process will clean up outdated reviews, and reviews from inactive users.

3) Next to the review would read to reviewers overall review history. or "ORH" for short. This is total number of stars given out of total number of stars possible to have given were they all 5-star reviews. So if someone who has given 10 reviews, and has given 50 stars then gives a game 1 star it would mean MORE so than a player who had given given 10 reviews with a total of 20 stars given because they tend to review low. This would make it much more accurate all around.

Even then it would still be an imperfect system, but it would likely work better than how it does so currently.

Interesting to say the least, although i'm not too sure how effective that would actually be. We already suffer from a lack of people who leave reviews on more unpopular titles so I think this would hurt that even more. Also I don't think that's possible with existing plugins and would need to be made from scratch. Maybe something along the lines will come with the new website update.

 

[bsjfan69]

That's the spirit. At least you tried to be aggressive there, but you don't know what aggression is because you are a confused passive person by nature trying to be aggressive. That's okay though. Keep trying. One day you too can be aggressive and have a clear mind, and you may understand my words that day.

What I say about aggression is 100% truth. Not only in humans, but in the entire animal kingdom. If there are aliens out there somewhere else in the universe it is true for them too. It's a basic law of nature. Confucious said "Man who stand on hill with mouth open will wait long time for roast duck to drop in." That is the passive man.

Look at professional sports. More aggressive teams are better. More aggressive individuals are better. Even look at chess. The aggressive grandmasters are checkmating everybody always putting that pressure on.

You confuse aggression with rudeness or arrogance or bullying or anger which is understandable. (And I feel your reply was full of) That's not what I'm talking about though. I'm talking about raw aggression by itself, not with these other things that some people foolishly associate with it. It's energy.

It's also good to be polite, and well-spoken, and kind, and happy. You can be both aggressive and all these things at once.

In a competition would you rather go against a passive or aggressive competitor?
In a cooperative effort would you rather be teamed with passive or aggressive teammates?

You say you would not be proud if you made a game of the quality of mine huh? Show me the better game you have made, and I'll be the first person to give you a five-star review. You won't do that though. You will this excuse or that excuse. Because you are passive, and you won't aggressively go out there and make a game. What you will do on the other hand is shit on others who have. Calling others fat don't make you thin buddy.

Quality cringe material. Good job developer man.

 

[yihman1]

New version in the works. So far I have completed the pictures and code on 1.21 jiggawatts path. Just need to fill in some dialouge there, but gonna probably add more to other paths before next release.

 

[PeggyBlackett]

The NOPY link triggered an alert frtom my browser warning of possible malware.

 

[yihman1]

The NOPY link triggered an alert frtom my browser warning of possible malware.

Most likely a false positive. However, I think I heard of some download sites including some sort of bitcoin miners or something into downloads a while back. Some antivirus programs will also trigger a positive on an unknown application or file because it simply doesn't know. I usually use Mega don't have many problems with that.

 

[PeggyBlackett]

Most likely a false positive. However, I think I heard of some download sites including some sort of bitcoin miners or something into downloads a while back. Some antivirus programs will also trigger a positive on an unknown application or file because it simply doesn't know. I usually use Mega don't have many problems with that.

Based o the message it gave me, it looked like some kind of code in jection thing - someone had managed to compromise that NOPY server with data-minersa.

 

[none of yo business]

Thank you for sharing this comment. Your 100% unoriginal insult has been uttered before.




Here you go guys I'll hit you both with 1 meme.

View attachment 439809

Lol, just fix her face, the dialog is kinda funny I guess at some points but please just fix her face, and your image doesn't relate to anything here, this is a fucking porn game essentially and no living person EVER will have a face like that, so it's not that your character is a living person to get offended by such a statement, just shrink the cheeks mate, looks like she's sucking on two jawbreakers from Ed, Edd and Eddy. Take the maids face as a template of what is normal or ANY OF THE OTHER FEMALE characters in there as far as i have seen are normal, the main protagonist for some reason is getting some real bad treatment intentionally what it looks like.