Mechanically a good game and it's clearly a passion project from my research and the half-dozen hours I experimented with. But from a social and cultural standpoint, especially in this current landscape, the topics and said execution of said topics is problematic and counter-intuitive. Yes I know you have a disclaimer, but feel it's a cope-out, and I feel attacked and repulsed just by the idea of someone making a game for others also into said troubling interests to play with, cultivating many bad actors no doubt. This just isn't it and I got so many thoughts and emotions I want to put into words but I can't. I wish you well, but I'd urge you to reconsider that expressing things and topics like this, THIS WAY ESPECIALLY, is highly unsettling to non-binary, non-heterosexual identifying people and implore you to do better.
I really don't think that's why you're being downvoted.
If I had to guess about why you're being downvoted so heavily, it's because a lot of LGBTQ+ people love and enjoy the game the way it is, because of the way it is... And they see you as a threat to the content they enjoy.
If Aika starts making the game more acceptable to people like you, a lot of current fans of the game won't enjoy it anymore. This has happened with other games in the past, such as 'Perverted Education', which for a while removed large swathes of content due to censorship rules on Patreon regarding hypnosis.
A lot of people were upset that the player character was no longer coerced against his will to be feminized, hypnotized, and so on, with such scenes instead being replaced with content where the player character blushed and would hesitantly admit that they were into it and ask for the other characters to please do it to him.
When they finally moved all the way over to SubscribeStar and restored the old content, a lot of the community never came back because they were burned out from how the game didn't represent them anymore. I think most of them still don't know that the content has finally been re-added.
Nobody wants that to also happen to TrapQuest, but that is what you are proposing to do: tame the game down, remove the outright rape, dehumanization, etc., and make it an example of a game that evil conservative 'christians' can't point to when screaming about saving the children from the evil pronoun genders.. As if that would actually stop them from doing so anyway.
OK, so you'd hate him changing the name of the game to "Trnasformation Quest" to appeal to more LGTQT+ people? So if I can show you the plethora of people who find subjects related of this game to be offensive, they're still wrong?
"remove the outright rape, dehumanization, etc.," Maybe it's fucked many are resorting to coping in this space to fucked shit like that? Do you have any idea how you sound to the NON-perverted/most LGBTQT community? Stop meat riding Aika.
> OK, so you'd hate him changing the name of the game to "Trnasformation Quest" to appeal to more LGTQT+ people?
Where in this chain of replies was that mentioned?
> Maybe it's fucked many are resorting to coping in this space to fucked shit like that?
Why would it be? It's all fictional.
> Do you have any idea how you sound to the NON-perverted/most LGBTQT community?
I don't think you understand what 'perverted' means.
Something is 'perverted' when it is used outside of how it was designed and meant to be used. The word assumes that there is a correct usage for the thing being perverted.
When discussing sexual perversion, that's used by conservatives to refer to any and all LGBTQ+ definitions, by definition. They believe that sex is designed to allow a man and woman to have children, and any deviation from that is inherently going against 'the way God designed us'.
So, either sexual and gender perversion do not exist and you cannot use weird sexual kinks as a reason to label someone 'perverted', OR everyone in the entire LGBTQ+ community is perverted, yourself included because of your 'misuse of gender' or however they'd word it.
> Stop meat riding Aika.
My boyfriend's name isn't Aika.
"Where in this chain of replies was that mentioned?" Just using that as an example, in case you weren't aware. So what IS your opinion on that, exactly?
"Why would it be? It's all fictional." Art imitates life is all I'm saying, can't blame people, MOST LGBTQT+ people, for having aversion to a game and community like this.
And you're on a kinky porn game- yes, it's 100% perverted. And don't be like that, you know what I mean by perverted: SEXUAL and MORAL perversion. inb4 you say "morality is subjective" you know dang well what I mean.
"My boyfriend's name isn't Aika."
At least you're not a straight cis guy, thankfully.
> So what IS your opinion on that, exactly?
Pretty neutral. Aika and co. can rename the project however they want, it's their project. They can also make whatever offshoots, alternative variations, forks, rewrites, etc. that they want, and call those whatever they want to.
> Art imitates life is all I'm saying, can't blame people, MOST LGBTQT+ people, for having aversion to a game and community like this.
Art can imitate life, but it doesn't have to. To apply that as an absolute is absurd, especially given the amount of art that is literally impossible and completely detached from reality.
And sure, most people should avoid this game. That's why disclaimers are included, to make sure that anyone who wouldn't like it can know ahead of time that they wouldn't like it, and successfully avoid it.
Nobody is advocating for this sort of fictional content to be 'enjoyed by everyone', not even 'enjoyed by everyone in the LGBTQ+ community'. The game isn't for the entire LGBTQ+ community, it's for a subset of it that is into these things.
> And you're on a kinky porn game- yes, it's 100% perverted. And don't be like that, you know what I mean by perverted: SEXUAL and MORAL perversion.
Again, look up the word 'pervert', 'perversion', 'perverting', etc. Here's Google's first definition for each:
- Pervert
- alter (something) from its original course, meaning, or state to a distortion or corruption of what was first intended.
- Perversion
- the alteration of something from its original course, meaning, or state to a distortion or corruption of what was first intended.
- Perverting
- alter (something) from its original course, meaning, or state to a distortion or corruption of what was first intended.
The exceptions to that general definition being the first definition are the following two, and I'll include the second definition for each one for completeness:
- Perverse
- (of a person or their actions) showing a deliberate and obstinate desire to behave in a way that is unreasonable or unacceptable, often in spite of the consequences.
- contrary to the accepted or expected standard or practice.
- Perverted
- (of a person or their actions) characterized by sexual practices or tendencies that are considered abnormal and unacceptable.
- (of a thing) having been corrupted or distorted from its original course, meaning, or state.
It's worth noting that for 'perverse', sexual deviancy isn't mentioned until the fourth definition. All the ones in the first group have variations of the wording for the first definition of 'Perverted' as their second definition, except for 'Perverting', which does not list sexual perversion in any definition, but does list, "lead (someone) away from what is considered right, natural, or acceptable."
So, what's my point? Why do I bring this up?
My point is that you're weakening the entire LGBTQ+ community by calling other parts of the LGBTQ+ community 'perverted'. You're falling into the trap of accepting the premise of the conservatives' worldview: that there is a 'correct usage' for sexuality and gender, and anything outside of that 'correct usage' is bad.
They do this on purpose as part of a 'divide and conquer' strategy. Make sure that some of the LGBTQ+ community sees other parts of the LGBTQ+ community as 'deviants' that 'weaken the cause', create in-fighting, and use that as 'proof' that the LGBTQ+ community is a toxic cesspit of hypocrisy.
I grew up in these circles, and can tell you exactly what they say about us: "They can't even decide what is and isn't perverted because they all just want to justify their own sin, without realizing that all of them are equally sinful."
By giving that idea credibility, you're making their argument look far more convincing.
> inb4 you say "morality is subjective" you know dang well what I mean.
Uh.. Did you not read my reply to you where I detail my entire morality system? For me, morality is concrete and absolute, not relative: if a noun causes an overall increase in nouns, it's morally good; if it causes an overall decrease in nouns, it's morally evil.
It's true that we can never realistically know for sure whether any given noun is good or evil.. But we can make well-educated guesses about what trends a given noun is likely to exhibit.
For example, most people have children. Many people have some amount of artistic creation in their life, even if only as crayon drawings while they're kids. So if someone were to pick a random human on Earth and decide whether or not to erase them from having ever existed, on average doing so would be a morally evil thing. On the other hand, if that same randomly chosen person were instead duplicated, on average that would be morally good. However, turning everyone else on Earth into copies of that one random person would be morally evil, due to the loss of diversity.
These are absurd examples, of course, but they outline the sorts of thought processes that go into it.
It's not exactly traditional 'moral absolutism', because, for example, killing someone can be morally good if that someone was going to kill many many more people (or duplicate themselves across the rest of the planet's population).. But killing someone who isn't about to do anything like that is morally evil. The act itself can be good or evil depending on the circumstances, context, and end results.
At the same time, it's not exactly traditional 'moral relativism' either. It doesn't rely on subjective value or opinions such as, "This is right for me, even if it's not right for you." The only ambiguity is in the question of how you figure out whether more nouns or fewer nouns are the result of a noun existing or not (note: actions and events are forms of nouns as well).
> At least you're not a straight cis guy, thankfully.
Why would you think I'd be a straight cis guy? Straight cis guys would almost certainly not enjoy this game, let alone defend it as heavily as I do.
"Pretty neutral. Aika and co. can rename the project however they want, it's their project. They can also make whatever offshoots, alternative variations, forks, rewrites, etc. that they want, and call those whatever they want to."
Dodged the main point of my question: if you hate censorship so much than I'd assume you'd be against that too technically, right? You can do better than that.
That troll is being downvoted for trolling.
Also for claiming to speak for a group of people. Writing all those comments took more time than playing the game - for research.
But mostly for crapping on the people that play the game for fun.
Transformations and kinks in the game are highly configurable and our researcher seems to have failed to realize that. I only see BS about lgbt.
What about weight gain. Implants. Tattoos, piercings. Generall bimbo sluttery. Air inflation. Tentacles. All the sexual fetisch acts. None of that has any bearing on sexual preference or idenity. No l, g, b or t in all of that.
If you're cis than by all means, lecture onto a transperson like me for giving their clearly not wanted opinion. Completely ignored all my points, including the very original comment I made on here, all because you can't comprehend I have a different opinion of you.
Also, nice deflection with those examples: actually said in another comment how all those didn't factor into the elements I find troublesome in the game. Toxic response as usual.
It being ten years old means there are so many variables to change that the game would be broken by the censorship you want implemented, destroying a decades worth of work. The game engine used is very hard to use in the manner it is used by the developers. Programming is not simple text editing, which you seem to be under the impression by your posts.
No, those are definitely not serious issues. Nobody's dieing from them, nobody's going into poverty from them, and nobody's, and they aren't in any way dangerous. Furthermore, everyone else is just as entitled to their opinion and right to voice those opinions are you are. Additionally, the games community has nothing to do with this, hell I haven't even played the game, the reason your getting downvoted is because your making yourself look stupid, and because believe it or not, nobody agrees with you.
i had a conversation with someone with same writing style on steam.
are you cloned there? or is it one person?
also it looks like he intends to show these conversations to someone else, they are structured in a way to point fingers. am i right? who are you showing this? some governmental censorious prick?
As a non-binary non-heterosexual person myself, you do not speak for me!
I enjoy this game because it is a fantasy happening in private spaces with consenting adults. I don't like some of the things in the game, such as the age-play and race-play, but this game is nowhere near a hate spewing ignorance machine.
If you don't like the content, then speak for only yourself, NOT FOR OTHERS!
Let me ask you this: in a time where nonbinary people at their most vulnerable, their rights trampled over, be actually honest with yourself and tell me if most in the LGBTQ+ space wouldn't find this games themes offensive? The author has practically tried to put in a "disclaimer" to say "OBVIOUSLY EVERYTHING IN THIS GAME SHOULD BE KEPT IN FANTASY," which tells me they feel guilty their game is contributing to homophobia, transphobia, but are too porn-brained to realize it. Tell me how that makes sense, with all due respect.
Fantasy is fantasy, if you can not separate fiction from nonfiction you have serious personal issues. As said before do not like, do not play. Your views have lead to game censorship when unopposed in the past. Collective Shout a key example of a small group of individuals (from Australia) who are considered extremists who have damaged gaming recently.
Oh really, so you're not at all disgusted by the fact that many, MANY bigots and extremists use media like this to justify their views and pass unjust laws? And by the way, if the creator of this game, Aika, has to put such a disclaimer on said game, than it should stand to reason that it's because it's promoting hurtful, toxic ideology and that many people who believe in such, whether they get off on the game or not for hypocritical reasons but I digress, use this as justification and/or clearly CAN'T seperate reality from fiction. If people would just say that this game contributes to toxicity but it gets them hard and it's a shameful, guilty pleasure, than that I could atleast get. But this ain't it. To many on the outside, it makes people like us look like we WANT to be treated like this, like it's just a sexual kink to us and not because of our own identity. One wrong doesn't justify fetishizing our experience, and quite honestly how can YOU not feel shame for sexualing and fetishizing the experiences of people in the LGBTQT+ community? I think my stance is a normal, default stance in that respect.
The disclaimer by Aika is what makes it clear this is a fetish game so people will know it may contain content that is taking place fictionally they may not like so ANYONE that may take offence that continues playing, any and all offence is on the player.
I and others can keep what happens in a fictional setting in the fictional setting, apart from the real world. Your inability to separate what occurs in the game from the real world indicate something in your life is severely wrong. I talked to others about this game, those who had no clue it existed and are conservative, and their reactions to your posts are "That person is getting that worked up over something make believe and that they can just ignore?"
A very good question is this: If you get this worked up over this why are you on this website in the first place? Just leave since just being here disturbs you so much. Stop obsessing about the game and move on with your life. Touch grass, see a movie, go to a park, etc; move on from this.
If I saw some of the stuff in the game in real life I would be disturbed, but note I said in REAL life. What happens in the game is fiction, not real.
I can separate fiction form reality, what you're not getting is that many bigots can't. And I don't get how you can flat out deny any and all accusations that this game promotes hurtful stereotypes via fetishes or that their disclaimer can't be admission of guilt on their own conscience.
Key word: conservative. Bring it up to some progressives and see how well they'll take it. Are you apart of the LGBT+ space or atleast gender nonconforming? Forgot if you said if you were or not, but if not than you need to place yourself our shoes. And sorry to burst your bubble, but if you get turned on from something, a part of you DOES want to see it in real life: I have no faith many people into this, especially the right-wing bigots, WOULDN'T mind seeing a person they never met or interacted with get any of the treatment the MC might have to go through in the game, life ruination, reputation ruination, reenforcing sexist and misogynistic stereotypes, etc. That's just lust, and we should be able to question WHY people lust for certain things, and as I've said, as a progressive or trans friend of yours about this game and you'll get a different reaction.
And I simply left my opinion, polite and respectful opinion, simply not liking the game for obvious reasons and that while I wish they would change things, I don't expect them too and agree to disagree. Than people get hyper defensive because I presume it's their shameful fetish, which is sad, and feel bad for them. Plus, look at the latest comment regarding my post, you can CLEARLY see a bigot who responded. Or am I just being a "snowflake" again?
Bigot: a person who is obstinately or unreasonably attached to a belief, opinion, or faction, especially one who is prejudiced against or antagonistic toward a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group. You are acting antagonistic towards everyone who doesn't seem so share your opinion.
there are far more important things to focus on. dont bother going around fetish spaces policing what folks can or cant enjoy, you're not going to make any kind of "progress". i implore you to spend your energy on stuff that will actually make a difference... speculating on the possible harm a piece of random fetish content could have doesnt exactly fall in that category.
this is genuinely just fetish stuff, and it isnt for everyone, no, but it doesnt mean its immediately harmful. people have fucked up fetishes. you cant stop that. im a bisexual transgender woman, and sure, yeah, i got some fucked up fetishes, but i wouldnt act on any of it if you paid me a million bucks to do so. this is a healthy way of expressing it, 'n honestly, this is a fairly tame!
But you admit it's fucked up and is offensive to the vast majority of LGBTQ+ people like myself? If so than at least we agree on that core point. And the thing is, just because YOU wouldn't act on it, doesn't mean from the outside, cis people or bigots won't get a bad impression from us. Like we're just a fetish. And this is FAR from tame. Ask any trans and/or nonbinary person outside of the fetish space and tell them about this game and the core demographic of said game and I bet you'd get answers you didn't expect.
And god forbid trans people like myself can find safe spaces when the real world is a steaming pile of dogturd for the vast majority of us. No, just because a select few nonbinary or trans people like this game doesn't make it alright or invalidate most others who see this and immediately cringe in disgust.
Going X fictional media is offensive it should not exist is a slippery slope that leads to LGBTQ being removed entirely, it has happened it will happen and it continues to happen. Look at collective shout for example they want to remove all instances of women and children from gaming entirely and the first step was to try to make it so all adult media gets removed which payment processors easily agreed to.
It does not matter what I identify as, though I doubt you will accept that as acceptable.
Payment processors are supposed to be just that: payment processors, not becoming a publisher as well. Not opposing this invasion of Steam means the payment processors will feel comfortable to intrude into other businesses, to decide what can or not be brought. That is censorship.
This quote from Martin Niemoller is very relevant: First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out-because I was not a socialist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out-because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out-because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me-and there was no one left to speak for me.
The payment processors want to control what is or is not brought, not fighting it will lead to catastrophe.
And agreed, I never said they SHOULD have control what is and isn't "acceptable." I'm talking on self-policing and self-reflection, never once have I said that was the way to go.
And actually yes, it DOES matter your identity, because if you're cis than you can't relate to the LGBTQT+ experience and mostly see us as fetish objects, I'd wager. Though bet that 'isn't a big deal' in your opinion.
You may dislike hearing this but your argument is very similar to that of Collective Shout. They argue that porn for straight men should not exist because they believe it's fuelling misogyny and encouraging the objectification of women, and you argue that TQ and presumably other games indulging in fantasies of sex transformation should not exist because you believe they are fuelling transphobia and the objectification of queer folk. We are not going to try and change your opinion or Collective Shout's opinion on any of this, but we think you'll find that within kink communities, yucking others' yums isn't very welcome, and the demographic of people consuming and enjoying such content may not actually be as straightforward as you thought it was, based on projecting your own personal tastes and assuming that everyone within your demographic would feel the same way. Furthermore, no, it's not rough porn creating sexists, it's not violent videogames creating thugs, and it's not TQ creating transphobes. They were already here, they're ironically more prevalent in countries where our content is banned, and in any case, studies have been unable to show a causal link. We're sorry that the world sucks right now, in fact more than sorry, we're angry, too, but we're not sorry that our game makes you feel uncomfortable. This is a sacred space of fetish and fantasy where anything between sane, enthusiastically consenting adults is not only permitted, but revered.
Than why have that disclaimer if you're not worried about the wrong crowd using your games to get their rocks off? And while I appreciate you trying to have solidarity with nonbinary folks like me, I think it's a stretch to say most WOULDN'T have a problem with your themes. Even if the game isn't creating problimatic people and attitudes, it's still beyond insensitive and insulting to the trans experience, mine included. And if you value consent so much, why do you lust after forced stuff? You saying a small part of you doesn't want that? So apologies if I don't buy your "we're sorry you feel that way" and quite frankly, it's a bit insulting. Isn't Aika nonbinary or the like? That's just sick in my opinion, we should all be in this together but your stance, let's be real here, is offputting to most non-cisgendered people, don't sugarcoat it. One last question: when people not in this community see mediums like this, and look at the kinds of people into these kinds of games, don't you think they're going to think that this is all just a sexual fetishes and that trans people are all just weirdos and are "asking to get degraded?" Fuel to the fire as they say? I eagerly await your response, if there is any.
> Than why have that disclaimer if you're not worried about the wrong crowd using your games to get their rocks off?
Disclaimers are so that people who would have the mood ruined by this stuff, don't try to get their rocks off and then encounter something that ruins their mood.
Assuming they aren't underage (or in a mental state where playing this game can be psychologically damaging), if someone can get their rocks off to this game, then they are - by definition - not part of 'the wrong crowd'. If they are in a mental state where playing this game would be damaging to their mental health, then they should have paid attention to the warning.
> Even if the game isn't creating problimatic people and attitudes, it's still beyond insensitive and insulting to the trans experience, mine included.
This is why the disclaimer exists. If you find it insulting, you can simply not look at it.
> And if you value consent so much, why do you lust after forced stuff?
Have you ever encountered a mean person in real life, and really really wanted to just punch them in the face?
Have you ever played an action game where you had a character that could destroy swarms of enemies with magic powers or weapons of some sort?
Would you consider people who do play such games as 'lusting after violence'?
Fantasy is separate from reality. You can fantasize about punching mean morons, and about blasting hoards of demonic aliens with plasma guns, while also thinking that it would be horrible for people to be allowed to assault each other just for being mean (imagine if 'they were mean to me' could be said in court to have charges dropped against you; now imagine what people could do to you if they knew such a thing worked), and also thinking it would be horrible for alien demons to actually invade reality, and that such extreme weapons should not be created because realistically they'd be created to be used against other human people.
In a game, you can always stop playing if something happens you don't consent to. You consented to playing the game, because if you didn't then you would not be playing the game. If someone is holding a gun to your head and forcing you to play the game, that is not the game's fault. That is the fault of the person holding a gun to your head to force you to play it.
> So apologies if I don't buy your "we're sorry you feel that way" and quite frankly, it's a bit insulting.
If you find that insulting, that says a lot more about you than it does about them.
> That's just sick in my opinion, we should all be in this together but your stance, let's be real here, is offputting to most non-cisgendered people, don't sugarcoat it.
Do you know what's sick? Trying to change art you don't like so that bigots who will hate the art no matter how it's changed will hate it slightly less, or have a slightly harder time using it as propaganda against LGBTQ+ people. In reality, they will treat anything with any relation to LGBTQ+ people as something to destroy.
It's sick because it acts like a sickness, a disease, within the community. It spreads a chilling effect, where people become afraid to express themselves freely. It encourages division within the community, and tears us apart from within.
We are all in this together, except for those of us who want to use our differences against us to divide us. Those that want to make us afraid to express our weird kinky selves, and instead feel compelled to look upstanding and non-problematic and thus marketable to a wider audience.
Such behavior does not make us stronger. It makes us weaker. It makes us more prone to being censored and marked as outcast freaks who shouldn't be allowed in the rest of society, because it drives us apart from each other.
We need to embrace our differences, celebrate them even, not try to stamp out anything that mainstream audiences would be uncomfortable with.
> One last question: when people not in this community see mediums like this, and look at the kinds of people into these kinds of games, don't you think they're going to think that this is all just a sexual fetishes and that trans people are all just weirdos and are "asking to get degraded?" Fuel to the fire as they say?
They already think this. They'd think this whether or not this game existed, or any other game like it. Hell, if we go back in time and we make it so that history is mostly the same, but somehow porn itself never existed and thus trans porn never existed, and trans people were exactly as SFW as cis people... Bigots against trans people would still think this about trans and non-binary people.
Sure, many of them will use games like this as 'proof' of their bullshit claims, but these games were never the reason why they believed such things to begin with. They found these games as a result of looking for evidence of their already-formed beliefs. If these games didn't exist, and porn didn't exist, and they had no proof? They would still believe what they do, and they would just find something else to use for 'proof'.
I already gave a more comprehensive example of this in one of my other replies to you.
> I eagerly await your response, if there is any.
They never needed to respond to you to begin with. They have no obligation to explain themselves to you.
In fact, the primary reason why I've responded to you, is that this is a topic that is dearly important to me. I'm actually pissed off at some of the replies you've gotten that claim there are 'more important issues in the world', when censorship of art is one of the most (though definitely not the most) important issues on the planet right now. I'd say it's definitely in the top 100 most horrific evils in modern times.
And you are perpetuating it. You are perpetuating horrific evil, and I happen to have a wide range of arguments against this particular form of evil.
There may be plenty of other commenters replying to you to defend this game, but you are one of the only ones who seems to be tirelessly replying to everyone. That puts them at a major disadvantage, but it also means that you put at least enough thought into your responses that you have to actually consider the arguments being made.
Even if your counter-arguments are often contradicting each other and it's very likely you are arguing in bad faith and have no intention of ever having your mind changed, your willingness to debate raises the chances that you are just severely misguided quite a bit.
So here I am, also willing to debate, despite how evil you appear to be to me.
Firstly, disagree with all your points. Secondly, you're acting like I was rude. Hey, guess what, I wasn't, merely giving my opinion and than people got defensive over it despite "wanting the community to feel inclusive." So no, don't buy it. And quite with YOUR passive-aggressive tone, if you're not trans IMO your opinion is less valid when it comes to these subjects. Do NOT mansplain it to me.
What do you mean by 'disagree with all your points'?
The very first point I bring up is that you misunderstood what the purpose of disclaimers are. The purpose of a disclaimer like that is very well understood and is not something to 'agree' or 'disagree' on, you either understand it or you don't.
If you think the disclaimer is for something else, you'll have to provide an analysis for why I'm wrong about its purpose. As an example template for such an analysis, I shall include one below for why I disagree with your definition.
Firstly, lets look at what the disclaimer can and can't do.
It can tell users what types of content are in the game, before they play the game. This gives users the chance to decide not to play the game, since they now know what sorts of content are in it. In this way, it gives players who play the game informed consent. That's about all it can actually do, though.
What it cannot do is prevent someone from playing the game. It also cannot hide what sort of content is in the game; it is explicitly designed to do the opposite, so that any types of content that someone might want to (or should) avoid are disclosed before they play it.
In short, it's incapable of filtering who plays the game, but it does make it possible for potential players to filter themselves.
So, lets look at the statement you made in your previous post:
> Than why have that disclaimer if you're not worried about the wrong crowd using your games to get their rocks off?
Lets say Shame Games did make the disclaimer because they were worried about the wrong crowd using their games to get their rocks off.
According to the premise of the statement, this group of people ('the wrong crowd') would apparently be able to 'get their rocks off' from the content of the game. If this were not the case, then there would be no worry.
So you are asserting that the purpose of the disclaimer is to prevent 'the wrong crowd' from 'getting their rocks off'. The only way that the game would help 'the wrong crowd' do this, is if 'the wrong crowd' played the game.
But we can already know for a fact that a disclaimer cannot prevent someone from playing the game, so that cannot be the purpose of the disclaimer.
Alternatively, perhaps 'get their rocks off' was a euphemism that actually means 'enjoy themselves' very loosely, and 'the wrong crowd' doesn't refer to players, but instead to people who want to spread hatred and bigotry against the LGBTQ+ community. In such a scenario, this 'wrong crowd' would 'enjoy themselves' by running a successful smear campaign against the LGBTQ+ community, in which they spread their hatred successfully.
While a bit of a stretch, that does seem to align with a few of the other things in your posts, so I figure I may as well address this possibility explicitly.
Under this scenario, your statement would be asserting that the purpose of the disclaimer is to prevent people bigoted against the LGBTQ+ community from using the game as ammunition against the LGBTQ+ community.
However, bigots will do whatever they can to run such smear campaigns, even claim that LGBTQ+ inclusive children's books that are 100% safe for work are literally porn being shown to children by force. That is not a hypothetical absurdist example either, that is something that has literally happened, with no exaggeration.
They will call things porn, even when they are not at all related to porn in any way, shape, or form. They will go to every possible length to label all porn as evil and to be abolished. They would do that with this game without even playing it, just looking at the name alone and labeling it obvious porn intended to brainwash people into becoming predators, even though the only true part of such a statement is that it's obvious porn.
It is not possible for a disclaimer to prevent or even diminish the impact of such bigots and their efforts to smear the entire LGBTQ+ community. And because it's not possible for a disclaimer to do that, it's impossible for that to be the purpose for such a disclaimer.
Now, it's also possible that you have meant some third way to interpret that particular sentence, but I cannot think of any other ways to interpret it. Feel free to respond with a clarification.
"Under this scenario, your statement would be asserting that the purpose of the disclaimer is to prevent people bigoted against the LGBTQ+ community from using the game as ammunition against the LGBTQ+ community.
However, bigots will do whatever they can to run such smear campaigns, even claim that LGBTQ+ inclusive children's books that are 100% safe for work are literally porn being shown to children by force. That is not a hypothetical absurdist example either, that is something that has literally happened, with no exaggeration."
By that logic, than there would be no point to the disclaimers really if it doesn't actually stop bigots from playing the game, only for the creator, Aika, to not have a guilty conscious than.
No, by that logic I prove that you do not know the purpose of the disclaimers. Just because you do not know the purpose does not mean there is no purpose.
In reality, the purpose is to warn people ahead of time what they might encounter in the game, and decide for themselves if they still want to play it.
For example, lets say that someone has actually been raped, and they are into kinky fantasy transformation scenarios as a way to reclaim their trauma for themselves.. But they still have PTSD from the idea of those transformation scenarios being forced on someone against their will. For them, if it's not consented to in-world, it can literally trigger a trauma-induced fight-or-flight panic mode.
The disclaimer is there to warn such people that such content is in the game. They can read the disclaimer, see that something in the game might trigger their PTSD, and decide not to play the game.
Firstly, I never said that. The word 'imagine' appears in my post twice, neither in such a context.
Secondly, I admit that does sound like the overall sort of thing I might have said at some point, so I'd like to emphasize the word 'imagine' for you.
Something can be hot to imagine, but horrifying and nauseating in real life. If you struggle to separate fiction and reality, such as by not being able to compartmentalize fictional sexual interests away from real life sexual interests, then you should not play games like Trap Quest. In fact, that's a sign that you should probably talk to a mental health professional.
My point is that you supposedly hate it but you fetishize it bro, and fine, but I have a hard time believing if that happened IRL and it ticked all the right buttons that you and many others here wouldn't hope at the chance to tame a sissy guy as a sex maid if you could get away with it. Not judging, but just be honest. Have a hard time beliving y'all wouldn't let it slip by IRL if it was hot/your fantasy. Tired of everyone pretending to be compassionate when in reality it's mostly because they're either occupied with other things or because we have laws. Unironically a total sissy argument you have.
Stop projecting, you act like sexual fantasies aren't just people coping with not being able to do it IRL. You sound just like Aika's woketarded disclaimer. Now if I told you to stuff it about your made-up religion you made up while high or some shit I'm the asshole, huh?
That last sentence is melting my heart ♥
It's unironically my religious belief that unusual, unique, and weird fetish art does more to further the purpose of the Universe than a lot of other things. It's hard to say just how much I agree with calling this a sacred space where fetishes and fantasy being enjoyed by consenting adults is revered.
It's very rare to see other people word it in that sort of way. Waayy too rare.
Stalking? I just looked at your comment history, bud. And bullshit, you've literally interjected your religious beliefs in MANY of this comments.
So you're on a autogynephilic fetish game and you're not into it? Why are you even here bro, this is like Mormons knocking on my door to spread the word about Christ.
I don't recall ever mentioning my career choice on this platform, but it's likely I did and simply have forgotten.
I mention religion in two comments, not counting comments where I merely refer to those other comments (such as this comment I'm typing right now).
I never said I'm not into the content of the game. I said what I did to refute the claim that my religion centers around 'Trans chasing'.
If you absolutely must know, I find the idea of myself being a cis guy, but being forced against my will to become a trans girl, to be hot. That's one of my kinks, and is why I like this game.
In real life, I kinda default to considering myself cis, but am pretty neutral on my own gender identity. As such, I adopt the gender identity that whoever I'm interacting with wants me to adopt for the duration of the interaction. Some friends of mine prefer to think of me as a girl, so for them I'm a girl; and others prefer to think of me as a boy, so for them I'm a boy. A select few prefer to think of me as a rubber sex doll, and with them I identify as a rubber sex doll.
It might sound strange for that to be part of my core identity, if it changes depending on who I'm interacting with.. But it is. I have often partaken in sexual roleplays online, and when I do I usually play as the gender/sex that the other person wishes I play as.. And over time I found that I deeply identify with that: of being what they wish me to be.
Anyway, when formulating my religious beliefs, that particular kink for fiction (being forced to become trans against my will) did not in any way influence how I formulated them. However, there are other, more taboo kinks for fiction that did influence how I formulated them. Those more taboo works of fiction aren't really related to the LGBTQ+ spectrum, though of course there is a bit of overlap in their communities.
And those two comments all it took to realize you're a loon, LOL.
"I find the idea of myself being a cis guy, but being forced against my will to become a trans girl, to be hot. That's one of my kinks, and is why I like this game." Don't even care particularly for that subject matter, but love how the stereotype of transwomen transitioning because of a fetish is being proven by a cis guy who, suprise, suprise, is fetishizing.transwomen or whatever they are. So now tell me you're not a chaser?
Also, loathe pronoun shit but what you just said you realize that you could just call yourself "non-binary" even if that's equally stupid? Also, unless you're bacteria you can't change your sex, LMAO. But honestly that's the least interesting thing about you.
"Anyway, when formulating my religious beliefs, that particular kink for fiction (being forced to become trans against my will) did not in any way influence how I formulated them." Press X to doubt.
"However, there are other, more taboo kinks for fiction that did influence how I formulated them. Those more taboo works of fiction aren't really related to the LGBTQ+ spectrum, though of course there is a bit of overlap in their communities." So they're related because of what overlapping implies, got you. May I ask just WHAT taboo and kinky degenerate gooner stuff you're into?
> So now tell me you're not a chaser?
Well, for one I have a boyfriend, so I think it would be pretty rude of me to chase after other people in general. Do I find trans women attractive in general? Sure, the same way that straight women find men attractive in general. I find men, women, trans men, trans women, etc. attractive, in general, but it takes more than sexual attraction for me to pursue someone as a partner. My boyfriend and I share a lot of common interests outside of kinks, and we mutually compliment each other in multiple different ways.
> Also, loathe pronoun shit but what you just said you realize that you could just call yourself "non-binary" even if that's equally stupid?
I prefer to be exact with my usage of language. There is probably some term for exactly what I am that is generally agreed upon by others who are like me, maybe something like 'wikigender' or 'dynagender' or whatever, but even more common terms like 'straight' can mean different things to different people (such as some people thinking a straight trans woman is attracted to men, and others thinking a straight trans women is attracted to women). Overall, I'd rather describe myself more precisely from the start and avoid any confusion.
> So they're related because of what overlapping implies, got you. May I ask just WHAT taboo and kinky degenerate gooner stuff you're into?
Sadly, payment processors get really upset with the content in question, so it would almost certainly be an Itch ToS violation to mention it. However, let me be very clear here: I am strictly on the fiction only side of those communities, and I am actively and vehemently against such things happening in real life. The reason I am in such communities is because they have saved the lives of more than one of my friends, for which I am incredibly grateful.
" 'wikigender' or 'dynagender' " you're a fucking loon man, no wonder people can't take people you seriously. So boyfriend, so you're a gay guy. Don't have to label yourself with this stupid made up gender shit man, it makes you look special, and unironically like a dumb sissy boy.
"Sadly, payment processors get really upset with the content in question, so it would almost certainly be an Itch ToS violation to mention it. However, let me be very clear here: I am strictly on the fiction only side of those communities, and I am actively and vehemently against such things happening in real life. The reason I am in such communities is because they have saved the lives of more than one of my friends, for which I am incredibly grateful."
Oh my goodness, every PDF files excuse. Guess it's not wrong if it's in fiction huh? And ah, gotcha, you're a good lapdog for payment processor censorship.
Honestly I had payment card companys, but one good thing to come out of it is people in the Alphabete Soup communities' projects getting less funding.
I have to strongly disagree with your post, from both a moral and ideological standpoint.
I religiously believe that the purpose of the Universe is to maximize the quantity of nouns; and since nouns include abstract relationships, concepts, raw mathematics, and so on, to maximize quantity of nouns you must also maximize the diversity of nouns.
Thus, as long as a noun causes an overall increase in the number of and diversity of other nouns in the Universe, it is morally good.. And only if a noun causes an overall decrease in the quantity and diversity of other nouns in the Universe can it be considered morally evil.
Anything that limits the uniqueness and differences in nouns, such as the censorship of art, or even just the taming down of language surrounding a topic to help make it appealing to mainstream demographics, is evil. You are suggesting an evil solution to the problem of there being evil people who desire to be evil toward the game's own target demographic.
The truth is, yes! There are people who can point to this game and declare, "Look at this horrible stuff in this horrible game! That's what they want to do in real life and force everyone through!"
And guess what? They can and will do that no matter what changes you make to the game. They don't care if you remove slurs. They don't care if you make it so the player character has to give enthusiastic consent. They don't care if you make it so that trans people are accurately and respectfully represented.
They are evil, and they want to completely eradicate every trace of transgender and homosexual people from existence. They've referred to a completely 100% safe for work children's book about a dog getting lost in a safe for work gay pride parade, and then being found by the end... As porn being forced into children's faces. Yes, they call a children's book porn.
They'll call anything and everything that even remotely relates to LGBTQ+ people 'degenerate porn that must be destroyed'. Why? Because they are evil.
If you censor actual porn that is meant for adults only and has plenty of warnings about its contents, to try to give these evil people less of a leg to stand on, you're going to find that they just don't care, and they'll gladly chop your legs off while thanking you for helping them do their job for them. Why? Because they truly believe they are doing good, and that makes them feel good about themselves for doing evil.
Don't help them censor us. Don't encourage us to censor ourselves for their sake.
Instead, make weirder and more extreme porn art! Weirder and more extreme porn games! Get freaky with it!
So, if hypothetically, I, a trans woman before you jump my throat but presume a cis straight male, wanted to make a game that involves offensive depictions of LGBTQT+ peoples getting raped, dehumanized, treated as sex toys, cultivating a audience around that YOU may fervently loathe, you support that?
Exactly. If you do, you're a degenerate. If you don't, than you're a hypocrite. And what the fuck is with these long rants in the texts to necro comment threads? Just say transphobia and homophobia turns you on and let everyone know what a degenerate you are.
Guess what? If we would've censored THOSE evil people than none of this would be happening. So no, censorship is a GREAT thing, as long as the LGBTQT+ friendly side is in power, because it's obvious cis people are enemies in general to my existence.
> So, if hypothetically, I, a trans woman before you jump my throat but presume a cis straight male, wanted to make a game that involves offensive depictions of LGBTQT+ peoples getting raped, dehumanized, treated as sex toys, cultivating a audience around that YOU may fervently loathe, you support that?
I would defend your right to do that with my dying breath. I think you underestimate just how strongly I feel about censorship of fictional media.
The communities I've surrounded myself with over the past few decades have focused on content far more controversial than this game, often involving content I cannot personally stomach and have to look away from every time it's mentioned.
But I stay in those communities because they are good. They have helped prevent the suicides of several of my friends, and I cherish them for that. No matter how horrific the content appears to be, there is always someone who needs the cathartic release of seeing it realized in some form or another of artistic expression.
> Exactly. If you do, you're a degenerate.
That's certainly an interesting choice of words. Is preventing suicide degenerate? If so, I'm proud to be degenerate. If not, then you need to re-evaluate what you consider 'degenerate' to be.
> And what the fuck is with these long rants in the texts to necro comment threads? Just say transphobia and homophobia turns you on and let everyone know what a degenerate you are.
As I said, I think you underestimate just how strongly I feel about censorship of fictional media. You are attacking something that is at least adjacent to media that has saved lives. Your willingness to continue discussing this long after you initially brought it up (I saw how recently you yourself had posted in other threads about this) tells me you're willing to debate this out, or at least pretend to.
So lets debate this out! Most others won't care enough to try to convince you that you're wrong, and most of the ones who do aren't likely to have the time or willpower to do so for as long as you have been posting about this in here. I'm unemployed, have way too much time on my hands, and have an absurdly high tolerance for bullshit.
I'm willing to explain, and re-explain, and re-explain, in different ways and using different contexts and analogies over and over and over again.
Are you?
> Guess what? If we would've censored THOSE evil people than none of this would be happening.
I'm not against all censorship in general. I'm against censorship of fictional content, or more generally, I'm against the destruction or prevention of existence of any noun that, by existing, would lead to more nouns existing than would have existed if that noun had never existed. Fiction does not have any way of preventing the existence of, nor destroying, other nouns.
The only exception is things like propaganda that comes in the form of fiction that claims to resemble the real world, to convince the reader that the real world is like the fiction that the propaganda depicts.
In that specific scenario, it is 'case by case basis', with a primary focus on scrutinizing the claims made outside of the fictional work about the fictional work being analogous to real life. Such claims are always made outside of the fictional work itself, because within the fictional work's own narrative everything is 'real life'. That is, if a character in a book says, "In real life, this is like that," it is understood that the character refers to the fictional reality they reside in as 'real life'.
Thus, it is still always true that the fiction itself cannot be evil, but it IS true that sometimes people read fiction as analogous to real life, and sometimes the author intentionally encourages that via propaganda. And depending on what the propaganda says, and how the fictional world is meant to map onto the real world, and how that affects people's opinions in ways that either lead to more nouns or fewer nouns overall in the Universe... Determines whether the propagandized statements relating to the fictional world could be considered good or evil.
> So no, censorship is a GREAT thing, as long as the LGBTQT+ friendly side is in power, because it's obvious cis people are enemies in general to my existence.
Most cis people would not care if it weren't for lies spread about the LGBTQ+ community 'grooming children' or other such nonsense. I agree that censorship, when properly applied to propaganda to prevent mass harm against a unique group of people, is ultimately good. I have never said anything counter to that.
But labeling all cis people as an enemy is also a form of evil, because the definition of an enemy is a person or group of people who you want to defeat, and said enemy is likely to take that to mean that you want them eliminated from existence.
Continuing to use rhetoric like that will cause cis people - who are the majority, mind you - to want to attack you more.
This is why I consider certain concepts to be my enemy, not specific people or groups (most of the time; there are exceptions). I don't hate conservative 'christian' people spreading hate against the LGBTQ+ community, but instead I hate the concepts and ideas that lead them to spreading that hate to begin with, as well as the hatred itself that they spread.
As much as your way of speaking pisses me off, "I would defend your right to do that with my dying breath. I think you underestimate just how strongly I feel about censorship of fictional media." that's admirable and respectable.
"The communities I've surrounded myself with over the past few decades have focused on content far more controversial than this game, often involving content I cannot personally stomach and have to look away from every time it's mentioned." May I ask what kinds of communities, out of curiosity?
And apologies for the strong choice of words, you just came at me strong and I felt a strong worded response was necessary.
"Thus, it is still always true that the fiction itself cannot be evil, but it IS true that sometimes people read fiction as analogous to real life, and sometimes the author intentionally encourages that via propaganda." How I interpret this game to be honest, even if I know the creator has the best intentions in mind. Plus, that's HIGHLY subjective, so you can easily make the argument this game is like that.
"But labeling all cis people as an enemy is also a form of evil, because the definition of an enemy is a person or group of people who you want to defeat, and said enemy is likely to take that to mean that you want them eliminated from existence.
Continuing to use rhetoric like that will cause cis people - who are the majority, mind you - to want to attack you more."
Well if the string of laws and attitude from the last year aren't evident enough, I consider cis people as the greatest enemies of the LGBTQT+ community, so yes, I do generally loathe cis people, especially men, and could care less about their problems and if anything hope their situation worsens so they know how they feel.
Out of curiosity, are you a transgendered or cis person?
> May I ask what kinds of communities, out of curiosity?
I have no problems with that, but their mention makes payment processors angry and as a result their mention would probably be an Itch ToS violation. The only thing further I'll say is that I am exclusively in the 'fiction only' side of those communities, and in no way, shape, or form condone such things when they happen in real life. In fact, I actively and vehemently condemn them in real life.
> And apologies for the strong choice of words, you just came at me strong and I felt a strong worded response was necessary.
Yeah, I think I can say the same here. I didn't respond to you saying I was acting like you were rude because, well.. To be fair, I was a bit rude myself. I do think your initial posts in here have seemed rude to me, and several of your responses to me, but to be honest I don't actually have a problem with you being rude to me, so I didn't really care to point it out. To do so would have been hypocritical, because I was rude to you in the same way you were rude to me, and in my mind the most likely cause of that is both of us feeling like the rudeness is justified and warranted.
But even if the rudeness wasn't justified or warranted for either of us, it's still understandable for both of us to think it was, and thus understandable for both of us to be rude as a result.
So yeah, no need to apologize, but apology accepted regardless.
> How I interpret this game to be honest, even if I know the creator has the best intentions in mind. Plus, that's HIGHLY subjective, so you can easily make the argument this game is like that.
That's why I focus on the words and posts made outside of the game, and not the game itself.
As a hypothetical, imagine a game that is designed to simulate the effects of racism, and lets you play as a racist that does various racist things.. To show you the devastating effects of that racism on the NPCs you affect. Like, showing you a report at the end that details how they've lost their job, couldn't afford healthcare causing their wife to die, and so on.
An actual racist might see all that while playing and laugh, being like, "Oh GOOD! HAH his wife died!"
But someone who is racist more subconsciously due to larger societal influences at large might play the game being only subconsciously racist, believing that they're not making any racist decisions... And then be shocked at and disturbed by the report at the end.
This is the sort of thing you see in, for example, Undertale's genocide route.. Where you have the option to kill everyone, and the game gets progressively less fun with towns being empty due to people fleeing from you for their lives.
But imagine in that hypothetical racism simulator, that someone who does not think they are racist but has subconscious racist tendencies, joins the game's community forums to complain about the end report they got in the game.. Saying that they aren't racists, tried to play the game as non-racist as possible, and don't like how the game is seeming to claim that he's racist.
Now, lets say the creator of the game responds directly to them.. But lets split this into two Universes: one where the game's creator intends to point out how subconscious racism can exist, and another where its creator intends to manipulate people into becoming more racist.
In the first, the creator explains what sorts of events in the game result in a report like the one being complained about, and explains that this is still racism, even though the person doesn't believe themselves to be racist. Explains that it's not their fault, it's all learned from their environment and society, but that's why they made the game: to bring awareness to the problem.
In the second Universe, the creator could do a few different things. They might try to convince them that, "Hey, you're not racist, and that's not a racist result! That person got what they deserved for non-racist reasons!" Or they could try to deepen the divide between races by saying something like, "It's satire, man! They claim we're racist for things like that, and just can't accept that we really aren't! I'm just showing how these stupid people think about racism and how it's all bullshit!"
But in the end, the goal of that second Universe's game's creator's replies is overall to either convince the complaining player that it's okay to have these subconscious racist tendencies, or to drive division in people who are against racism into thinking that some of the people they agree with are against them.. Which is a stark contrast to the first Universe's game's creator's replies, which are meant to convince the person that they are subconsciously racist, and this is why that matters.
In both Universes, the content of the game is 100% identical. But the surrounding rhetoric and purpose is vastly different.
Like.. Can you imagine a world where Toby Fox said that the genocide route's purpose is to give players a feeling of dominance and power? The game wouldn't need to change one bit for people to revolt against him for such a thing.
> Well if the string of laws and attitude from the last year aren't evident enough, I consider cis people as the greatest enemies of the LGBTQT+ community, so yes, I do generally loathe cis people, especially men, and could care less about their problems and if anything hope their situation worsens so they know how they feel.
You're falling for the 'Us vs. Them' mentality that malicious people with power want us to have. They know that not every cis person hates the LGBTQ+ community like they do, but they want to increase the percentage of cis people who do hate LGBTQ+ people.
The easiest way to do that is to make LGBTQ+ people think that cis people as a whole hate them, and then make statements targeting cis people (as in, cis people as the target audience of the statements) where they point to LGBTQ+ people hating cis people and use that as evidence that LGBTQ+ people as a whole are lunatics that are against the entire rest of society.
It can be tiring, but whenever I see people on, for example Twitter, talk about trans people as if trans people are delusional and should be removed from society? I try to convince them otherwise in much the same way I try to convince you the same about them: that yes, there are people who claim such things, but that is NOT all, or even the majority, of them.
Though to be fair, when it comes to them, I point to their own posts and tell them that 'their side' already has the power to actually do this, and that means that while trans people lack power and cannot be a legitimate threat to them, they have power and are a legitimate threat to trans people.
> Out of curiosity, are you a transgendered or cis person?
I actually just went over that a bit earlier in a response to someone else in this reply tree. The topic of why I'm into this game came up, so I explained it, and for completeness I contrasted the fantasy scenarios I'm into (relating to this game) to my actual gender identity, and how they differ.
The TL;DR is that I do tend to somewhat default to 'cisgender', but if someone prefers I have a particular gender identity, I will have that gender identity instead.
What I didn't say in that post, is that the bit toward the end (where I mention the rubber sex doll identity) was actually a big influence on my identity. A particular good friend of mine did prefer me to identify as a toy.. And when thinking about it, I realized I actually did identify that way to a large extent. It fit several parts of my real life identity, online identity, and in general how I thought of myself.
So when figuring out how I felt about my own gender identity and how to express it, part of that process was breaking down how I felt about that and the other identities I'd assumed for other people, and figuring out an abstraction that covered all the use cases. And because I do tend to default to just 'cis', it felt fitting to tack that on at the start as the default case.