VN Ren'Py ToxiCity [v0.11.0] [ILSProductions]

danb35 · Oct 20, 2025

These sound like awfully narrow definitions. Merriam-webster.com defines dystopia as:

an imagined world or society in which people lead wretched,
You must be registered to see the links
, fearful lives

...and that's the world our characters presently inhabit, isn't it? Their lives are perhaps somewhat less wretched than those of whoever else is around (at least they're getting laid), but they're certainly fearful, and MC at least is becoming dehumanized, by his own account. They have hope (well-founded or otherwise) of escaping that environment (I expect that will be right at the end), but that's where they are now, and for the foreseeable future. I think it fits.

The game's called TOXICity, after all. That would be a bit of a misnomer if they spent much time in a non-toxic environment. So I expect they'll reach safety, in whatever form that takes, and that will be the end, more or less.

So for the tag of "dystopian setting," logically speaking, it wouldn't have to mean that the whole world's irredeemably gone to shit, just that the setting the characters inhabit for the bulk of the story is accurately described that way. If there's an "official" definition for purposes of this site, I'd of course defer to that, but otherwise I'd consider it an appropriate tag. For that matter, I'd consider it appropriate if we made it to safety in 0.12, and the game went on for another dozen updates with some new conflict presenting itself (i.e., the dystopia is gone, but now there's something else going on), because a large part of the game was still in that setting.

Lynava · Oct 20, 2025

e6mill · Oct 20, 2025

danb35 said:
...and that's the world our characters presently inhabit, isn't it?

Not really? Dystopia is more a strong, over-controlling society rather than the collapse into anarchy we've seen so far. This is more Road Warrior than 1984. It could yet become dystopian, but IMO it isn't yet.

Anteron · Oct 20, 2025

Shouldn't need to even be a catclysmic event. There are and have been plenty of countries that could be considered dystopian (think N Korea, Nazi Germany, USSR under Stalin, etc...)

danb35 · Oct 20, 2025

Lynava said:
when a game is set in an undesirable, violent, or decaying world

I think there's room to argue that "world" could mean considerably less than the entire world, but I'll grant it seems to envision something rather more than what the characters currently understand to be the affected area.

e6mill said:
Dystopia is more a strong, over-controlling society

Is it? That isn't how the dictionary defines it. I quoted Merriam-Webster above; dictionary.com defines it as:

a society characterized by human misery, as squalor, oppression, disease, and overcrowding

"Oppression" is used here only as one example among many, not as definitional of "dystopia;" what defines it is that it's characterized by human misery.

Even my dead-tree Random House Webster's College Dictionary (1995) doesn't include authoritarianism in its definition:

an imaginary society in which social or technological trends have culminated in a greatly diminished quality of life or degradation of values.

Either of the other two definitions fit the characters' situation in TOXICity better than this one, but none of them particularly envisions an authoritarian regime as a defining characteristic.

Meiri · Oct 20, 2025

danb35 said:
I think there's room to argue that "world" could mean considerably less than the entire world, but I'll grant it seems to envision something rather more than what the characters currently understand to be the affected area.

Is it? That isn't how the dictionary defines it. I quoted Merriam-Webster above; dictionary.com defines it as:

"Oppression" is used here only as one example among many, not as definitional of "dystopia;" what defines it is that it's characterized by human misery.

Even my dead-tree Random House Webster's College Dictionary (1995) doesn't include authoritarianism in its definition:

Either of the other two definitions fit the characters' situation in TOXICity better than this one, but none of them particularly envisions an authoritarian regime as a defining characteristic.

There isn't any focus on any societal changes after this situation nor seems to be the general focus in this game, I could see it if we meet other survivors and factions started to form and we saw how people are living and adapting to this new situation, there are other games here that do that.

In here the main focus is on the group trying to survive and escape, I think adding the dystopian tag here would be misleading for the majority.

Walter Victor · Oct 20, 2025

danb35 said:
a society characterized by human misery, as squalor, oppression, disease, and overcrowding

an imaginary society in which social or technological trends have culminated in a greatly diminished quality of life or degradation of values

Either of the other two definitions fit the characters' situation in TOXICity better than this one, but none of them particularly envisions an authoritarian regime as a defining characteristic.

I don't believe either of those definitions fits this game at all.

In the first definition, you might make some kind of case for human misery and squalor, but there is no oppression or disease [we don't know what it is] and certainly no overcrowding.

I don't see the second definition fitting either. There are no 'trends' here. A significant event has occurred which has caused a localized diminishment of quality of life, but only a few disconnected instances (that we know of) of degradation of values.

I would compare what has happened in the game to a tsunami strike where a group of people become disconnected from the outside world for a while. I would never consider the aftermath of that to be 'dystopian'.

I might compare this game to the movie, The Mist. As terrifying as that was, it was not dystopian.

If we find out that there is no outside world to flee to, then it would become dystopian.

Dan444 · Oct 20, 2025

Hero?

TheOriginalSchizo · Oct 20, 2025

Dan444 said:
Hero?

bro the public release is tomorrow

Dan444 · Oct 20, 2025

I know - just impatient and got the time now. Worth a try, I guess

danb35 · Oct 20, 2025

Walter Victor said:
I don't believe either of those definitions fits this game at all.

I agree that the second doesn't, and said as much in my post that you quoted (I included it only to point out that, like the other two I had quoted, like the site rules, and contrary to e6mill and Anteron, there's no reference to authoritarianism). But the first of those you quote (which is the second of the ones I quote, the first being in an earlier post) fits quite well--it's a society (allowing for quibbles in the use of that word) characterized by human misery. Squalor, oppression, disease, and overcrowding are examples of the types of circumstances that could cause the human misery that's characteristic of a dystopia. We certainly have human misery, arguably have squalor, and we have something that acts an awful lot like a disease, whatever its true cause may ultimately be shown to be. If we grant the use of "society" (on which, more below), it clearly fits this definition.

The first definition I quoted was from merriam-webster.com:

an imagined world or society in which people lead wretched,
You must be registered to see the links
, fearful lives

Are our characters leading fearful lives? Indisputably. Dehumanized? MC says as much. Wretched? At least they're getting laid, but I still think "wretched" is an accurate description. And if we look beyond our four major characters (I don't have 0.11 yet), what about the BOs? Are they leading wretched lives? Dehumanized? Obviously yes to both. Fearful? Well, that's hard to say; we don't know whether they retain the mental capacity to be fearful--which points back to "dehumanized."

Also note that this definition, and the one from my dead-tree dictionary, are limited to an "imagined" world or society, so any real-world situations are automatically excluded. And none of the three dictionary definitions I've quoted, nor the "official" definition for this site, make any reference to authoritarianism--this paragraph addresses objections made by others, not by you.

The question really comes down to the meaning of "society" or "world." I believe both words can properly be applied to "the environment inhabited by the characters, from which they can't readily escape," even if that environment is limited in time or space. If I'm a prisoner, for example, it's entirely appropriate (IMO) to speak of prison as my world, even though it's only a very small part of the world and I may some day be released. You clearly feel those words should be limited to something on a much larger scale. Fair enough--I don't agree, but I see the point, and (more to the point) see that the operative definition for this site is more in line with your view than mine.

Walter Victor · Oct 20, 2025

danb35 said:
I agree that the second doesn't, and said as much in my post that you quoted (I included it only to point out that, like the other two I had quoted, like the site rules, and contrary to e6mill and Anteron, there's no reference to authoritarianism). But the first of those you quote (which is the second of the ones I quote, the first being in an earlier post) fits quite well--it's a society (allowing for quibbles in the use of that word) characterized by human misery. Squalor, oppression, disease, and overcrowding are examples of the types of circumstances that could cause the human misery that's characteristic of a dystopia. We certainly have human misery, arguably have squalor, and we have something that acts an awful lot like a disease, whatever its true cause may ultimately be shown to be. If we grant the use of "society" (on which, more below), it clearly fits this definition.

The first definition I quoted was from merriam-webster.com:

Are our characters leading fearful lives? Indisputably. Dehumanized? MC says as much. Wretched? At least they're getting laid, but I still think "wretched" is an accurate description. And if we look beyond our four major characters (I don't have 0.11 yet), what about the BOs? Are they leading wretched lives? Dehumanized? Obviously yes to both. Fearful? Well, that's hard to say; we don't know whether they retain the mental capacity to be fearful--which points back to "dehumanized."

Also note that this definition, and the one from my dead-tree dictionary, are limited to an "imagined" world or society, so any real-world situations are automatically excluded. And none of the three dictionary definitions I've quoted, nor the "official" definition for this site, make any reference to authoritarianism--this paragraph addresses objections made by others, not by you.

The question really comes down to the meaning of "society" or "world." I believe both words can properly be applied to "the environment inhabited by the characters, from which they can't readily escape," even if that environment is limited in time or space. If I'm a prisoner, for example, it's entirely appropriate (IMO) to speak of prison as my world, even though it's only a very small part of the world and I may some day be released. You clearly feel those words should be limited to something on a much larger scale. Fair enough--I don't agree, but I see the point, and (more to the point) see that the operative definition for this site is more in line with your view than mine.

There are thousands (if not millions) of people in prisons around the world. As bad as those situations might be, in no way would I consider them 'dystopian'. If that were the case, every game about prisoners would need to be labeled dystopian. Of course a prisoner in a Gulag, could be considered in a dystopian situation. But, is that really what you were suggesting? It still doesn't describe this game. They are not in a Gulag, and they aren't being held prisoner.

Using your logic, I could get a papercut, and if no one is around to help me and I can't find the bandages, I would be in a dystopian situation. MY GOD, THERE'S BLOOD EVERYWHERE! THERE'S NO ESCAPE!

Let's take it further: I could slice an artery and die, if there's no one around to staunch the blood flow. Bad for me, but still not dystopian.

I will repeat what I wrote earlier.

I liken their situation to the survivors of a tsunami, which has rendered those people cut off from the outside world for an indeterminate period of time. They could be threatened by all sorts of situations: death, madness, injuries, disease, starvation, thirst, dangerous beasts, harmful groups or individuals. Nevertheless, I would never consider that situation 'dystopian'. I just don't.

And, as I also wrote before, this game is more like The Mist [I should include the book as well as the movie]. That wasn't dystopian either. The outside world was there to rescue them, if they only held on a little longer.

EvolutionKills · Oct 21, 2025

Walter Victor said:
I liken their situation to the survivors of a tsunami, which has rendered those people cut off from the outside world for an indeterminate period of time. They could be threatened by all sorts of situations: death, madness, injuries, disease, starvation, thirst, dangerous beasts, harmful groups or individuals. Nevertheless, I would never consider that situation 'dystopian'. I just don't.

And, as I also wrote before, this game is more like The Mist [I should include the book as well as the movie]. That wasn't dystopian either. The outside world was there to rescue them, if they only held on a little longer.

Agreed, and here's another fun example: Cast Away.

Tom Hanks being stranded on a deserted island and falling into loneliness and despair so bad that be befriends a volleyball and hallucinates conversations with it. That might fit some definitions of 'dystopia' if you pull really hard at the edges of it. But let's be real, nobody thinks of Cast Away as a dystopian story or setting.

It's like those old internet arguments over what is the Best Christmas Movie of All Time™, and there's always some edge case who answers with Die Hard, thinking that just because it takes place during Christmas that it counts. Is the movie Christmas themed? Does the story revolve around the holiday or the themes of the holiday? Is Christmas even integral to the plot? No. You could have used literally any excuse to bring McClane to Nakatomi Plaza, it being Christmas (as opposed to any other holiday or event) is pretty incidental. So it's a Christmas movie if your only definition of such is that it takes place during the holiday, but most people when asked aren't going to put Die Hard into the same thought and breath as Frosty the Snowman, Miracle on 34th Street, or It's A Wonderful Life.

Lynava · Oct 21, 2025

EvolutionKills said:
It's like those old internet arguments over what is the Best Christmas Movie of All Time™, and there's always some edge case who answers with Die Hard

The first thing that came to my mind was Home Alone.

rudy007 · Oct 21, 2025