You might want to look up the word 'trope', and how it differs from similar words. Tropes are, when used in media, lazy shortcuts. They let a writer skip a lot of backstory or character building by simply using a well-known and expected stereotype - a trope. That's not always a bad thing, especially if it is a small role character and you want them to have a flavour, but not to slow the plot development by giving them slow exposition. But in any main or significant character, it becomes sheer laziness, and a replacement for much original thought *except* where a writer deliberately breaks the trope - like the hooker with a heart of gold is actually a backstabbing slut who only pretended to have that heart of gold.
Tropes are cheap and nasty. They are the junk food of writing. Naturally in a discussion between chefs, junk foods are going to be talked of dismissively and disparagingly. Same deal when creators and authors talk about tropes, even though we (if professionals) have probably resorted to a little cheap and nasty ourselves at times, just to meet budgets and deadlines.
Much of it, acknowledging our own guilty uses, is a tongue-in-cheek discussion. But there is also the purist, true artist take, which is quite rightly a little more seriously critical.
Since when were tropes inherently lazy? The use of a trope by definition just means the use of a concept/idea that has been done before. That may sound lazy, but truly, it entirely depends on the way someone actually uses it. In what way is having a character who is a hooker with a heart of gold automatically lazy, or lacking in original thought? Sure, its been done before, but that does not make it inherently negative. If the author provides ample backstory, character development, and intelligent thought for that hooker, do you still think its lazy? Naruto falls under the 'chosen one' trope, is his character lazy? At the beginning of the show Walter White falls under the 'regular guy doing bad things for good reasons' trope, was his character lazy? Some of the best characters ever written fall under tropes, that does not make them lazy nor mean the author was taking a shortcut. Professional writers don't scoff at tropes, they scoff at bad uses of them. Tropes aren't lazy, they can just be used lazily.
I think you are still struggling with the fine-definition of the very concept of 'a trope'.
Corrupting a family member is not a trope.
The idea that if a member of your family ever sees you naked in the shower it instantly starts them wanting your dick is a trope, and a bad one, pretty specific to just porn games of a certain type. It is a shallow, lazy way for a developer to avoid having any real or original thought about how a family member might really be corrupted, and thus robs the audience, and the genre as a whole, of more thoughtful and creative narratives.
Do you see the difference? The trope is not in the situation or problem itself, but in the lazy solution of just using what has been used before without thinking of whether it was actually worth copying, or at least, better than any original alternative you could think up.
Actually, incest within porn games
is a trope.
Imagine if there was a porn game where the the mc had a thick ass lonely mama, hot but bratty older sister, naive but loving younger sister, and a party hardy/free spirited aunt, and he wasn't romantically/sexually interested in any of them. They just loved each other as family, and were the best of friends. A mc going after his hot family members has been done so frequently within porn games that it isn't just a trope, but becoming a genre in and of itself. By
definition, all a trope is is a concept/idea done often before. By your logic, are all incest porn games lazy, or cheap/nasty?
Also, for your second example. Imagine if that shower scene happened an hour into the game. The mc is chipping away at a family members inhibitions, slowly corrupting them. The family member is on the fence/in denial, but upon seeing the mcs dick on accident in the shower, they have to face the fact their body is becoming aroused by something they are forcing themselves to be disgusted by. It increases their inner turmoil, and forces them to face it. Is that scene still inherently lazy or shallow? No! It makes perfect sense in context, and was used by the author in an intelligent way!
Tropes are not automatically lazy or cheap dawg. It
entirely depends on how a author uses them.
