itch.io

I've not really been "coming back again and again", it's generally those that are replying to me that bring me back into "exploring" the comments here for more things to argue about.

Believe me, I was previously more than happy to engage and argue with you pro-AI loons for a while, but y'all haven't been providing many reasons to engage lately, so I've largely ceased arguing like how I used to. Don't get me wrong, if you guys do want me to keep spamming this comment section, then feel free to continue replying to me - I don't mind returning to beat that ol' horse carcass. She can always get a little bit deader. ;)

Anyway, on the bright side, you can believe whatever you want regardless of what I say - I am enough of a just god to permit you at least that little kindness.

I'll do whatever I like exactly as I like because what you think of my actions isn't relevant to me, I never said anything about "winning" arguments, and I say that the age of the post does matter and you're just being annoying and contrarian for the sake of it.

I've seen better trolls and/or I've encountered significantly more interesting idiots than you. You're just boring. Go find someone else to bore.

Seems to me that the creator is mentally super-glued to the concept of AI in every form and capacity.

I wouldn't suggest holding your breath.

Dog I genuinely hope that I have been living rent-free in your head for these past couple months 'cause I have not thought ONCE about you clowns outside of these comments.

Incredible. Truly astounding. You really are a shining example of AI bros everywhere; mental illness at it's finest. Congratulations. 

Brother, the comment you are responding to is over TWO MONTHS OLD. God damn, you guys just HAVE to argue with people regardless of how old a post is, huh?

AI "art" is not art, period. Humans make art, not machines imitating humans. Plus I myself am an artist, but I don't believe I've yet mentioned that because none of you really care about who's arguing what, you just wanna express the sentiment of "AI IS GOOD DUDE".

Also yes, I will be dismissive and disrespectful to stupid people with stupid positions that don't actually care about said positions. That is what y'all deserve - being disrespected and dismissed.

Why should I bother finding another hill when this one is perfectly comfortable? You idiots can't argue for shit as evidenced by the literal months of you losers attempting and failing to do so. Maybe take your own advice - or don't, either way, 'cause again, it's not like you clowns really believe in anything other than jerking off. Go ask Grok to undress someone underage or whatever it is you lunatic-freaks do.

Edit: That last statement might suggest that I'd prefer people ask their demon-robot to undress kids rather than annoy me, but the opposite is true - I just wasn't thinking of how that could be read, so that's my bad. What I meant was that all AI users are, at best, supporting a machine that creates CSAM and that the poster I was responding to should stop replying, I just kinda ended up jumbling the two general ideas together, but it's also not like the people reading this either care or are capable of reading well enough to decypher the potential meaning of the statement in question, so whatever, read into it however you like.

If you'd read through any of my comments to a meaningful degree, you'd see how I consistently claim "I don't care what you think" - so then, why would I give a shit about the little updoots if that's true? More often than not, I'm getting 1 downvote for every upvote, so the idea for that statement to be true is null and void. Who's comments are you reading, my guy?

No, instead of caring about what any of you morons think, I used to argue in this thread because I actually enjoyed arguing, and while I still do enjoy getting to insult you total losers, I can also be doing other, more interesting things, so I've kinda just moved on. You are the one who responded to me to bring me back to doing it, but I'm still having a good time watching idiots like you grasp at straws while I get to tell you and yours how stupid you all are, because I like doing it.

Anyway, all of what you've said thus far just goes back to the pot calling the kettle black. Go whine about those who speak against your AI god somewhere else.

That's one way to call the kettle black, bud, but I'm not taking the bait, because I really don't actually care what you think and trying to give you any kind of explanation as to why I'm arguing what I'm arguing is entirely pointless even if I did care.

All you clowns can do is whine and cry about how "you won't change your mind! You're an arrogant narcisist! Boo-hoo! You won't change your mind despite my crying about technology that steals other peoples' art and wastes resources!"

Again, go clean Sam Altman's boots with your tongue somewhere else.

It's just AI trash, don't bother engaging with these people.

You idiots definitely aren't capable of holding your attention for longer than a couple seconds on any one topic letalone the multiple paragraphs I've been writing up, so I'm not even going to bother making cohesive arguments. I presume you at most probably just threw everything I've been writing into a chat-bot to summarize what I've been saying anyway.

Go clean Sam Altman's boots with your tongue somewhere else.

Mod =/= multiplayer

I always have to wonder if people like you realize that you're just acting like a troll. And what does arguing get you, exactly? You could be enjoying something, but you're just being annoying for the sake of it. Go find a hobby, man.

What do you mean? It's not on Steam, it's on Itch - and it's free. There's no price tag yet.

If you're saying you can link the application to Steam, that's something everyone is aware of - the creators getting money for the final release is the part that we're talking about.

Yeah, same. With how this has remained consistently at the top of the "Top sellers" list here on Itch, I imagine that there will be a plentiful amount of finances that will be rolling in for the team that developed this.

Hopefully it'll also be more than enough to support MDN and his team beyond their next project, whatever that might be.

I'm also really hoping that developing this isn't a crunch hell to any extent. It always makes me pause whenever I see long posts about people complaining about crunch time and I have to wonder how much crunch was a factor in the games I enjoy. 

Based dev

Theoretically, but I have trouble sticking to any consistent bedtime.

It'd be great if ambient mode specifically did not include ANY kind of meta-paranoia events, especially when it comes to Krampus. I am playing the ambient mode specifically so that I can just focus on getting signals and money, and having this dude popping up is quite frustrating for not being able to sleep. I theoretically might not mind him (or at least not hate him) in the base game, as it could be a good way to throw players off for a while and force them to adjust by getting the ingredients for the Brew, but him being a forced entity in ambient mode as he is just kinda irritates me. I also imagine that people playing ambient might also not want to be scared, as that's why I originally started playing ambient mode, so having no meta-paranoia events would be wise from how I see it.

I'd suggest at least adding either a "Krampus mode" to the ambient settings so that players can turn him on/off as they like, and preferably keep him off by default if this idea is applied to the ambient mode. I think he kinda needs work anyway - there's really no warning nor clear indication that you can even make something to get him to fuck off, so that might be a good addition as well - but again, this is something that I could theoretically see being a good idea in the story mode.

Edit: I just discovered that he can get on the roof, so I'll be waiting to play more until there's some kind of change with him. I don't have the money to get everything for the Brew, and even if I did, I don't want to run around the base like it's Scooby-Doo.

There's also plenty of games that have such content and are less detrimental to the environment, the internet, and humanity at large.

You can also put a rope around your neck while you're jerking off, and apparently that's something so enticing to some people that they've (at best) permanently harmed themselves by doing it. Probably best that you don't do anything like that, but unfortunately fixing stupidity with words is (again, at best) unlikely.

I find it laughable that you say I'm posting a wall of internet expert - and while I don't disagree that I'm posting walls of shit to read (my other post on this comment would obviously fall under that categorization to some degree), you are the one who originally responded to me with your comment telling me about how human beings "can't recreate what LLMs do" as if that was the point of the discussion, rather than it being that human beings can do as good as LLMs, and not in some absolute scientific "what qualities of X, Y, and Z are there in this piece of work". You are the one claiming to be a programmer who knows all sorts of stuff about this and that when it comes to art, but I'm the one who is apparently trying to be the "expert". In what regard and where have I made this claim? I don't recall saying anything like that, but I do recall repeating what others have said things that to me, make sense. I'm not an expert on any topic - but apparently you are.

Anyway, back to what you were saying with that post - I've tried looking up what LUT means - but it doesn't make any sense to me, so I’m also not going to bother trying to learn about something if the other person I’m talking to acts like they’re hot shit when they're clearly not. Thing is that if you're not willing to try to teach others that "aren't your audience", then where does "your audience" start and end? Does someone become "your audience" if they listen to you unconditionally without any kind of question or pushback when they want clarification or explanation? Because that sounds more like you'd just want a doormat to talk at, rather than someone who would be interested in engaging with what you're saying.

But you know what, you're right - I'm not your audience, because you came into this thread all high and mighty about how "what LLMs do can't be recreated by human beings" and got butthurt when I called your word-sewage incomprehensible. As a teacher, generally you need to be able to not only give explanations for stuff that people don't understand, but also talk to the other person as an equal so they don’t feel disrespected, and you kicked off this entire discussion by speaking as though you're the authority on everything that you're talking about, rather than trying to inform me about what I'm wrong about. Again, the "respect" part is the big thing here - or, at least for this discussion. 

I don't necessarily have a problem with being told that I'm wrong for one reason or another, but how you do it is the important part, and you've been doing it pretty poorly, so why should I bother learning anything from someone like you? I'm better off getting it from a book or anywhere else that isn't so up-its-own-ass. Even based on my original post, you expected that type of person to learn from you? What kind of delusional fantasy-land are you living in? Obviously if you talk shit to someone who acts like I do, they're not exactly gonna want to listen to you, ya fuckin' ding-dong. What did you think this is? We’re in the comment section of a porn game. On the internet. This all seems like it just comes down to you not understanding what the tone is of the current discussion - it just goes to show that you didn’t either think or care to employ any kind of social comprehension.

But don't worry - I'm gonna keep posting like I have been, because your posts come off as though you're insecure and need to make up for it through talking down to me (or trying to, at least). Sadly for you, I'm also not just gonna let you spew your insecure garbage at me without telling you what it is - obviously. I really don't know what you expected out of this entire exchange. Again, comments of a porn game. There’s not usually a lot of knowledge that’s being exchanged under these sorts of circumstances in my experience, but you keep your weird expectations.

Ok, so, at the moment, there's two points I actually care to respond to in that post:

First, I've been all-inclusive when I refer to art - not just any kind of artistic creation, I've been using "art" as a catch-all term for literature, music, movies, paintings on walls that were found in caves, all of it. This entire time, YOU have been the one with the stick up your ass about me "clearly not being an artist", yet you have the utter audacity to suggest that YOU weren't the one to draw a line in the sand when it comes to "being an artist"? Holy fucking shit, Batman, that certainly sounds like cognitive dissonance to me - or at least it's some kind of walk-back of what you said before. I've also been using it pretty clearly - you just don't know what any of it means, but that's something for the next point.

Second, I specified DOOM 2016 because I didn't play Eternal, so any of the information or lore that comes from the sequel is not something I am cognizant of, and it's something I am entirely ignorant of. Regardless, sci-fi AI is not the same thing as real-world LLMs, like at all, so I'm kinda confused on why you're even bothering to bring it up when you don't even know the difference between machine-learning "AI" and "AI" that's just repetitive tasks done by a computer, stop trying to muddy the waters to defend a point that you apparently don't even have? I'm confused, are you bringing up the fictional character of VEGA as an AI to try and twist my point into being actually incorrect? My guy, you don't know what you're talking about, stop confusing yourself, it's not real. I don't recall the lore regarding VEGA's existence, but generally in fiction, AI is depicted as being as intelligent as human beings - if not more so, so it theoretically could make sense to install it as a kind of guidance for humans. Not to mention that there's plenty of hypotheticals that I could come up with that could justify the use of a super-human fictional AI, so unless you're going to legitimately argue to me how this video game is actually real (or something as equally psychotic), I don't know why you're trying to get me with the idea of a non-existent character being included in it. Because it's fiction. There's lots of shit in fiction that people do with a story that I also disagree with on some level - but I'm not just going to outright disregard an entire piece of media just because it includes something that has a passingly vague resemblance to a real-world thing that I wasn't even aware of because it didn't hit the cultural consciousness at the time it released. Do you think I enjoy and reference Postal and Postal 2 because of their "moral outlook"? What about the Portal games with GLaDoS? Or Silent Hill 2 with James Sunderland? Please, god, tell me that I misinterpreted what you meant, because that is an incredible fucking statement. After thinking this through, I think I should spend even more time dogging on you for making that post, just by thinking through those two points. I cannot imagine someone so far up their own ass could be so fucking insane, but good lord. You AI-cultists really know how to pick your battles, but god damn you're apparently not defending AI after all this? Really? No, I think you're so full of crap with that suggestion that it's spilling out of your ears, your rationale for everything (especially with this post) is beyond twisted and it's really laughable.

You know what, okay, once again I have to capitulate the point that I'm probably a bit Reddit, but with how ass your reasoning seems to be from where I'm sitting currently, I have to admit that by using it for so long, I imagine that you would be pretty damn good at identifying it, so there you go. Have a fuckin' field day with that one, cause this post made me laaaaaugh, holy fuck. I am cackling like a goddamn WITCH right now - now it's funny, now I'm really fuckin' interested in this. And that comment you just made is part of the reason why I unblocked and responded to you - because it certainly seemed like it'd be funny to respond to you, and you know what, I apparently have some really good intuition. But yeah, sure, I'm Reddit, according to you. I'll be fine with taking that one to the grave, 'cause jesus-H-christ-on-a-bike, the Reddit moderator atomic blast of rot you are giving off really puts my pithy little farts into perspective. Good job. Keep up the good work, you earned all of my Reddit updoots today, m'lady.

Sometimes games won't allow you to download through the app, so if that happens, assume that you have to download it via the Itch.io website instead.

Ok so this is exactly the thing I was talking about - you don't actually care about art whatsoever, but I also directly addressed the things you're saying here in one of my other posts that I've made. But apparently if something is too long you just won't read it, according to your other comment, so I'll try to make this short and sweet as possible for your goldfish atttention span to keep up with.

I'd suggest going back and reading all of my posts, but with the amount of effort that requires out of you, it might actually just end up directly killing you, so I'm unsure if I'd actually suggest that.

My reasons for not liking AI are actually complicated, so I suppose if you're too incapable of reading something that's "too long", you might need to just go back to preschool for another decade or two.

If you're going to skip through an argument, generally you should pick and choose wisely, as my "whining" actually included points against what you were saying, (and then some) but you wouldn't know that outside of what little you've been able to absorb, but don't blame yourself. I imagine AI is what actually raised you instead of human beings.

So what you're saying is that there's not actually any point to responding to all of your arguments because you care too little to actually engage with them. About right, that mentality is exactly why things are the way they are and AI datacenters are currently running through the planet's limited water and other various resources, but I notice you haven't taken the time to respond to that or any of the other arguments I've taken the time to apply, just the bit about you not liking AI artwork.

God, you're inept. Learn to read and think a little critically more than what you're currently doing. I promise it's not hard, you just need to use the tiny, underworked piece of meat in your very thick skull for a smidge longer than what you usually might. Hell, it might even do you some good.

Note how I'm trying to keep this relatively short, and that's for your sake - your attention span is something that also probably needs to be worked on.

I'll actually read through and fully respond to your post when I have more time, but I fully expect you to be repeating the same. Exact. Drivel. That all you AI-cultists use to justify relying on your machine-god - "dude it saves money using this society-corrupting machine that also turns our planet into trash, that's all that's important, just serve the great machine of industry, dude, all else is unimportant, dude, just sell your soul to the machine for it's all-powerful slop, dude, nothing else matters except making money because we're just simple little cogs in a machine, dude" because that's all you AI-cultists are - slaves to a hypothetical "machine of progress" rather than valuing art and knowledge for it's own sake, or even doing anything with yourselves outside of stealing from other people because you're too lazy and uninterested in participating in said mediums of creativity and expression.

But please, keep on responding to me with the exact same points I've seen a thousand times over, at least this is keeping you from using your machine-god for a little bit longer. Hell, go ahead and toss my points into ChatGPT if you're so uninterested in actually having a discussion in the first place, but just know I'll be the first to end this whole thing because you can't hold it without getting bored despite initiating it in the first place - it'll just go to show that you're not capable of finishing what you started, alongside revealing how little you care about your points.

Well, I can certainly say that you sound like a lunatic, so you've at least got that going for you. You know that human beings are the one that are making the art, right? Not just some unthinking, unfeeling machine? But oh, I guess if they "can't do it better" they shouldn't exist? Is that what you're suggesting with that post? Because it sounds to me like that's what you're suggesting. Please, elaborate on what you mean by "it's natural selection at that point", because I'm sure you've got such a morally complex justification for what you wrote.

What a incredibly childish take. That's a mindset I'd expect from a supervillain in a kid's TV show. You know there's plentiful amounts of media with characters with that exact line of thinking, right? And they always either end up having different mindsets or ending up dying in some violent fashion, usually the former if it's a kid's show, and typically the latter if it's being more honest with how true things are to reality. In the real world, unfortunately, people tend to end up taking themselves out in the second option when insisting on keeping those series of ideas in their heads, so for your own sake, I'd advise changing your argument to prioritize a more caring and human-centric view. 

Or don't, as I guess that'd just be "natural selection" from your current point of view. You need to get help from a suicide hotline or talk to a therapist before doing anything rash, christ.

Edit: Call the 988 Lifeline if you're in the US, or type in "suicide hotline" in your search browser for one that's more applicable to you.

Okay, let me break it all down for you, then. How you're so insistent on not actually explaining anything is beyond me, but I guess I have to be the one to spell things out for you because you're more interested in coming off as correct “as an artist” rather than actually responding and supplying information to reveal to me how I might be wrong, but I guess that's the state of the internet now - here's something for you to ponder on that I’ll get to later in this post; it benefits both you and the other party you're talking to to explain what you mean when you say something.

Anyway, I'm more than willing to admit that I don't know anything about being an artist in the textbook definition sense, but that doesn't detract from the fact that making art is something that an actual human being can do because it's something that human beings have been doing since the internet existed.

And since I'm, apparently to you, clearly not an artist (in whatever insane definition you have stuck in the corner of your mind), you need to talk like an actual person and not just say things that don't mean anything to others. That’s kind of the point of communication - to deliver information to others. Mentioning “LUT” and your use of "uncanny valley" both mean nothing to me, so again, the points that you made previously are irrelevant because I don't know what it means, and I have very obviously written it off because of that. (This is what I mean when I say things like "word salad" or "word garbage" when I’ve responded to you. This is something that goes back to the phrase "address the points that I am making". It's only apparent to me now that you're arguing from your position of knowledge rather than discussing the concepts I am trying to get at.) You need to treat your audience as though they don't have the same experience as you do, because I don't, and I’d be more than willing to bet a large sum of money that most people also do not have your specific experiences. Talking down to other people when you're "not defending AI" sounds functionally identical as if you're defending AI, hence why I was saying that you are. 

Furthermore, what kind of "AI" are you talking about, here? Are you talking about the use of LLMs and are you using "AI" as the catch-all term as I have been (because that's how almost everyone else uses it based on all of the discussions that I've seen online), or have you been using it in reference to computers participating in repetitive actions? Because if you're using it in the latter manner, you're using it in a way that NOBODY ELSE ONLINE DOES - least of all, me. But for the sake of clarity and because apparently you need me to spell things out as explicitly as possible for you, I'll refer to LLMs as LLMs from here-on-out rather than the catch-all term of "AI" because you're apparently more interested in showing off your knowledge about your field (or using it in the "technically correct" term) rather than socializing with other human beings, online or off.

The fundamental argument I have against the use of LLMs is a concept that I originally learned about from DOOM (2016), and the idea is that while the scientists in said game might have been able to get some useful stuff out of using the technology they developed from studying Hell, but it still made the rest of the world terrible. The idea is that the scientists that made the enemies in the game were fundamentally still using evil technology, and even if it's "for the greater good", it's still degrading the rest of the world.

And I don't use Twitter, actually, because that website is straight-up ass in more ways than one. Matter of fact, I hardly use social media more than I need to because of people like you that get stuck up on textbook definitions (or whatever you think you’re spouting) rather than socialize and act like rational people.

When you go into any kind of situation where you have to communicate with other living beings, it's more expedient to refer to things as they are by the other people in the room, or, it’s wise to at the very least ask what other people mean when they use words that can be misinterpreted. I'm spelling this out for you explicitly because this has been an insane conversation, and frankly, you need to talk to other human beings more often. This kind of stuff is socialization 101. I learned this in both middle and high-school, and that's because I was so socially inept that I didn't learn it earlier, so it makes me think you're even more socially incompetent than I was as both a child and an edgy teenager.

But damn, you sure showed off how much of a technically correct artist you are, so congrats. There’s a win for you. You got me on that point.

Edit: Apparently you're so avid for posting that it seems to me like you should have already known a good portion of the things that I've mentioned, but all of this just goes back to the idea that people like you are more interested in coming off as correct and being the one to "win an argument" rather than actually have the argument so that both sides can benefit, and that's coming from a guy that is solely interested in arguing with other people on this account, so you very clearly need to log off and touch some grass. Surprisingly, you're somehow even more terminally online than I am, and I mean that in the most derogatory sense possible to all parties involved. 

You won all of the internets, so please, go back to Reddit, kind stranger.

Because it's stealing work from actual artists to make things that are almost equivalent or worse, and that LLMs are turning everything online into an absolute cesspit.

Not to mention the climate effects of the data centers they are built on.

What's more puzzling is why people insist on using and supporting it, but I guess you can't really argue with irrationality. (Even though I enjoy trying.)

Bud, if you're gonna insist on acting like a troll, at least actually try when you're posting straight slop like this.

The reason I didn't engage with any of your arguments is, as I said, is that it's nonsense. None of it logically follows the stuff I mentioned, you're just spouting word salad and acting like you know the first thing about anything. This is part of the reason I'm blocking you, the other being that you're either a troll or legitimately too unintelligent to be able to argue in a coherent fashion. I also imagine this is for your benefit as well in the long run.

It also doesn't matter whether or not you're "an artist", as you're defending AI art by continuing to argue with me. (Your previous comment literally said, verbatim, "No, human artist can't do this," seeming to me to indicate that you take the side of AI.) 

Please just stop drinking leaded or irradiated water or whatever it is that you're putting into your body, I beg of you. There are sources of water around you that aren't going to actively destroy your cognitive functions, I can almost guarantee it.

I'm gonna be honest, your comment is so completely incomprehensible that I'm not even going to bother trying to write out an actual response. It's a Gordian knot of sheer nonsense and I'm not putting any more time into this reply.

Untangle the meat between your ears, please.

As the Jackal in Far Cry 2 put it, "I'm talking facts, you're talking theory," but I'm the one talking theory and you're talking facts. Same idea, different execution.

I am quite the chatterbox, so something that long is nothing new from me. It also goes to show that I care enough to put my time and effort into it. (Though, I've also spent a lot of my time arguing with people on this platform, so don't take it as too much of a compliment - I mainly just like to call 'em as I see 'em.)

But don't let my criticisms weigh on you too much - again, just remember to do your best. I know that not everyone has an excess of time like me, so doing what you can where you can is important to take note of and admirable in and of itself. You've spent your time making a game that, while it has it's issues, is a piece of entertainment that can be and is currently being enjoyed by lots of people. Meanwhile, I've spent my time arguing with idiots and writing things that few will ever engage with.

That'll happen.

Dude, you can fuck??? A donut???

That's kinda the catch-22 with porn games - how should a developer focus on the "porn" part? How much of the story? Gameplay? What about the other aspects?

It's an unfortunate juxtaposition, but it'll remain for as long as the "porn" remains in the "game".

It's porn logic, I wouldn't suggest questioning it.

Cute

Not bad, but there's a number of weird quirks present here that are typical in games by newer devs (which I am assuming you are). 

I don't actually have much knowledge in making games specifically, but this isn't a bad start from what little I do know about the field. There's mostly just some small user interface/user experience things to work out. One good idea would be to add an "apply" button somewhere in the settings, as just having none always makes me unsure if the game is registering my inputs. (Matter of fact, I've had some games actually do this - by that I mean that it doesn't save some of my settings when I exit the settings menu, and it can be confusing to try to get it all back to where it was.) I don't quite know how to describe it, but some of the feedback in the "controls" section felt a little weird. I guess that it's partially because it doesn't display what key does what - usually games will put the key directly beside whatever it does, rather than just making it a "click button to set as" and no display of the key. The settings are arguably the most important part before introducing a player to your game, so it shouldn't really "stand out" when it comes to how it functions. I'd advise looking to other games with how they implement setting menus, and considering both why and how they're doing what they're doing. This is just general advice, but it's stuff that I think would really improve the quality.

Anyway, as for the first thing to point out, I'd suggest making the filter on the player's eyes limited to just the outer edges of the screen - as it currently is, it just looks like my screen is really messy and it's a little disorienting. It's not a bad thing for the effect, as I think it's actually pretty neat, I'd just suggest pulling it back so that it only covers about 20-30% of the screen, rather than 100%.

Second, I'd suggest slowing everything down when it comes to gameplay. After hitting play, I was instantly thrown in to a character speaking and it was a little jarring, as other games like this tend to lock the player in-place so that the player can focus on the character that's speaking and introducing the game, rather than worrying about the time limit. With this suggestion, I'd advise you to think of it from the player's perspective. Give the player some time to understand the world, even if it's for a couple seconds. Having a little well-placed breathing time is everything when it comes to games when they get really stressful.

Overall, this is a really good start. The models are extremely detailed, and I more or less understand everything that's going on. Good stuff, keep doing your best.

You need to write at a reasonable size.

Uh, I don't actually know that part. I haven't tried it.

I would assume that you might sign up for a developer's account or something, perhaps, but the process is beyond me.

If you're asking me literally how, you can just look up the site. It's just GOG dot com.

Oh yeah, if you go to the website there's a "submit your game" button all the way at the bottom of the site.

I'd suggest looking into putting your games on GOG. I don't know anything about the developer's side of things, but from the user's side, I really enjoy the platform and they always go on about having DRM-free games, so I can actually own the things I buy and not just a "license".

With both Itch.io and Steam doing their whole "no NSFW content" a bit ago, I would argue that it would be wisest for everyone to put their games and entertainment on other platforms for a different variety of reasons, but it's your call if not.

I'll be sure to buy it on there if you do end up getting it on there. 

Anyway, I'm always happy to see more NSFW games around. Good work.