I don't agree. Sterling's already done nearly everything with Ophelia. I can't see them stretching it out even more.
Ren'Py Power Vacuum [Ch. 12 Official] [What? Why? Games]
- Thread starter 7767
- Start date
-
- Tags
- 3dcg ahegao anal sex animated big ass big tits corruption creampie exhibitionism female domination futa/trans groping group sex harem humiliation humor interracial kinetic novel lesbian male protagonist masturbation milf mobile game netorare oral sex point & click sandbox teasing vaginal sex virgin
- Mar 25, 2019
- 3,638
- 5,055
- May 24, 2019
- 1,166
- 2,449
Phrasing!
I think you're right though. There's been a steady progression with Ophelia and I think we know what the next step is.
- Feb 15, 2018
- 374
- 361
What if 8 In all the scenes, it would be better if someone fucked Ophelia, and not vice versa....Some kind of nonsense
If that's the case, it better be one HELL of scene, like half chapter only for fucking her!
im really confused. the updated got flooded with comments so im not sure if its the volume8 added for add-ons or an aditional chapter was added to the main game. can someone tell me whats new with the game?
You're excused, but like I've already said, literally all of that could be achieved in any number of different ways. You could replace Hunter with even a non-character and have the same outcomes, if you really wanted to.
Whether it would be the same game is a sort of ship of theseus problem, and it's also largely irrelevant. My argument hinges on that it would be a better game, which should be more important than whether it's the same game or not.
And because the story could be constructed to have the same effects but without including specifically Hunter, the only reason to include Hunter, or defend his inclusion, is if you want specifically Hunter to be there. If the character of Hunter himself and his appearances, NOT his impact on the story, but solely the character itself, is in any way a net negative on the experience of playing the game then there's no reason not to argue for his removal.
When writing a story, every single tiniest piece is fundamentally interchangeable. Specifically because its fiction. Fiction gets to be literally whatever it wants. So why make do, or settle for, a piece that is less than good, less than enjoyable?
- Aug 30, 2017
- 4,573
- 8,799
No it wouldn't. You want to get rid of a character because you hate the character. Not because it takes away from the story, but because you don't want to see him again. Saying the story would be would be better without him is just what you think and subjective. There are almost 300 reviews for this game all mostly positive. It's just you and a minority who don't like this game.
No, you wouldn't, because Hunter is the driving force behind the story. Everything the MC does is in reaction to Hunter's actions. If you take out Hunter, you won't have the same story. You can't get the same events, because in order to have them without Hunter, you have to change the characters, which means you'd have a different story.
People like this story because it's not your run of the mill story. It's not an MC doing dubious and underhanded things to get what he wants, but an MC trying to stop a character from doing dubious and underhanded things. If you take out the villain, you end up with an MC who's the villain, like in so many stories.
- May 24, 2019
- 1,166
- 2,449
I still argue there's no objective measure for what would make this a "better" game. Removing one element or adding another; each change can have proponents and detractors. And honestly it's a slippery slope... what if someone can't stand Catherine? Should she be removed also? Should WWG have to create a multitude of branching routes so that every player can have a customized experience? Maybe that would be a better game, or maybe it would be an impossible-to-manage mess.
Perhaps you're right about one thing, that on some level people do want to see Hunter. This could be for various reasons: they could just have a twisted sense of humor, or they could be ugly old men themselves that appreciate the representation. Also there's a type of humiliation fetish where men enjoy seeing beautiful women get plowed by ugly bastards, but the thing is it's about degrading the women and enjoying their humiliation. If that sounds fucked up and misogynist, well that's because it is, but I try not to judge people's kinks, particularly in a fictional setting where no one gets hurt.
Lastly, on reducing a story to its constituent parts: some pieces are more important than others when given context by the rest of the story. Sure, they can be changed, just like a house can be lifted to pour a new foundation; the point is it's not so easy. Hunter isn't just a MacGuffin that gets the story going, he's an integral part.
P.S. I'm trying to debate in good faith and I've actually enjoyed our exchanges to some degree. Even if neither of us influence the other's opinion, it's nice to have an intellectual debate to keep the brain sharp.
Again, you're confused. I like this game and I've repeatedly stated as much. I wouldn't be here offering sincere critique if I didn't. And yes, my critique is my subjective opinion, that's what that means. I'm not on here speaking anyone else's subjective opinion. Speaking my opinion is one of the purposes of this forum, as we've already been over. And it doesn't take a lot of insight to understand that having an overall favorable opinion of the game doesn't mean that you agree with every last thing in it. In fact, people who uncritically accepts every little thing in media that they enjoy are weirdly undiscerning to me. There's no good reason to be that way.
Yes, and you can make literally anything the driving force behind the story. It's an unusual example that people who aren't that into storytelling might not get, but a villain doesn't need to be a character. Circumstances can be a villain. The milieu or the setting could be the villain.
You can fill the storytelling role of Hunter with basically anything. Because in storytelling, anything goes. So the only reason to argue for specifically Hunter is if you want specifically Hunter. The only reason to argue for a burnt up turd to appear in the story is if you actively want a burnt up turd to appear. Because as the storyteller you get make that villain role be anything you want, including something that's not a character.
Again, you're confused. I like this game and I've repeatedly stated as much. I wouldn't be here offering sincere critique if I didn't. And yes, my critique is my subjective opinion, that's what that means. I'm not on here speaking anyone else's subjective opinion. Speaking my opinion is one of the purposes of this forum, as we've already been over. And it doesn't take a lot of insight to understand that having an overall favorable opinion of the game doesn't mean that you agree with every last thing in it. In fact, people who uncritically accepts every little thing in media that they enjoy are weirdly undiscerning to me. There's no good reason to be that way.
Yes, and you can make literally anything the driving force behind the story. It's an unusual example that people who aren't that into storytelling might not get, but a villain doesn't need to be a character. Circumstances can be a villain. The milieu or the setting could be the villain.
You can fill the storytelling role of Hunter with basically anything. Because in storytelling, anything goes. So the only reason to argue for specifically Hunter is if you want specifically Hunter. The only reason to argue for a burnt up turd to appear in the story is if you actively want a burnt up turd to appear. Because as the storyteller you get make that villain role be anything you want, including something that's not a character.
No, I agree there is no objective measure for what would make this game better. Even in the most studied and well understood applications of art, we can only be objective in the most niche ways. I'm only offering my opinion and have never really proclaimed to have done anything else from the start. It's an attempt at constructive critique and a suggestion on how the game could be improved as I see it, not how anyone else necessarily sees it, because I cannot and do not pretend to speak for others.
As for it being a slippery slope, I disagree, I think Hunter stands well enough alone as a unique character in the story. Not liking Catherine is one thing but she's not that dissimilar from other characters in the game, and from the beginning this wasn't about Hunter simply being unlikeable but entirely disrupting my ability to enjoy the game.
And I get everything that you're saying about kinks, but what I've been arguing for is to keep all that in the NTR path. I'm willing to suggest that well over 90% of players who choose the NTR-free path does not enjoy being humiliated. That's kind of the whole aversion against NTR to begin with. So Hunter absolutely fills an important role in the story, IF you're on the NTR path. If the player already has chosen to not want to see any NTR, he's exclusively a detriment to the game, IMO.
Changing Hunter entirely to anything else is absolutely more difficult in an established story, and my argument for that he COULD have been anything is more of a theoretical one and in practice I wouldn't argue for doing anything than deleting almost every scene where he's in and replacing it with basically the same scene but he's absent. If you wanted to you could represent pretty much all of his machinations that are story-essential without him even being in the scene and many other of his scenes are just superfluous and could be deleted entirely. For the NTR-free route, that is.
Oh, now you're just talking out of your ass. Yes, you are correct, but in this particular case, it would change the story. As I said, everything is in reaction to Hunter's actions. Everything happens because of him. Take him out and there's nothing that will happen.
But sure, give me one example of something that Hunter did but altered in your way, without changing the other characters.
The villain could for example be some shadowy organization that only reveals themselves to the MC. We wouldn't even ever have to see a character from them but they're the one responsible for all the hormones and chemicals that changes appearances and behavior, pays for the house and everything but only given that the MC acts the way they want, with the threat of replacing him and maybe other threats if he acts out of line. Every single one of the plot-necessary actions that Hunter makes could be explained this way, and this is just the first example that sprang to mind in a few seconds.
That has got to be the dumbest thing I ever heard. What would even be their motivation to do this? And having a hidden shadow organization just obfuscates the threat. At least with Hunter clearly in the picture, the threat is real.
To use the example of Big Brother, Eric was also supposed to be the NTR threat, but because he was so inactive, he became a non-issue. Hunter, on the other hand, is pro-active, so the threat is more real. In Big Brother, it was the MC who drove the story forward, but he was a little shit (his actions would make Hunter proud). Because Hunter is the villain who drives the story, the MC is the good guy.
Yeah, obviously. Keep thinking for some more examples, because this one is shit.
That's just your opinion. IMO, Hunter is a weak storytelling piece because there's literally no reason to keep him around anymore. The MC has already, pretty early, shown the ability to make large amounts of money with minimal effort, so the "excuse" that Hunter is being kept around because he's paying for the house is particularly nonsensical. Not to mention the family could just move. His entire existence and tolerance by the rest of the family is based on flimsy grounds at best, I'm not going to insult you by pretending that you think it's convincing storytelling that Hunter could get some hair, put on the MCs clothes and there would be ANY situation where Brenna or Catherine could mistake him for the MC. No one thinks that's reasonable. It's silly in the extreme.
On the other hand, a shadowy organization is a MUCH more real threat because if they have the ability to get chemicals into you and your family's food without anyone noticing, how can you ever hope to escape them? Hunter should have been shot in the head and thrown in a ditch a few episodes ago for the story to remotely be believable, but how would you ever begin to do something like that against an organization you haven't even seen? So yeah, a shadowy organization would be a much more credible threat without overtly and physically drooling over the girls. And this would still leave the organization the villains and the MC as the good guy.
- Nov 19, 2017
- 312
- 425
I think the issue here is the fundamentally opposed views people might have of this game.
Like... A Narrative Vs Power Fantasy scenario so to speak.
If we read Power Vacuum as a Power Fantasy, then of course people think Hunter is unnecessary to the porn. They want quick, easy sex scenes that do no challenge this fantasy (hence the overwhelming hatred for the new what if from some people here), and an unchallenged protagonist whose main issues can be easily solved by doing some repetitive tasks.
That's not how this story works. From a Narrative and a Metatextual Prospective, this is not one of those games. Hell, this is hardly even a game at this point, there is no actual gameplay, no actual control over the Main Character, no branching paths or needs to keep in check or relationship meters.
This is a very specific story with a very specific message I feel, one people are contesting without even thinking about it.
People are angry over Hunter, but isn't Hunter but a reflection of every house game protagonist ever? A natural conclusion of that arc? All that charm and youth you could have used to identify with him had he been the protagonist is long gone, and only the ugly truth remains, a withered husk committing crimes so be could sexually assault his family with impunity.
He is the perfect villain of this story. A Story that, ultimately, is but a commentary on the genre It's spoofing.
The genre is Voyeuristic, so there are cameras all over the house and then some, because you, the watcher, are living vicariously through Sterling your fantasy, much like Hunter was at first, much like Kevin is when he stole all those women's videos, much like Lucia projected herself into Sterling during her own "house" game.
You are not controlling a character, you're just along for the ride, and you've being told a story about his exploits. The fat has just been trimmed, no repetitive chores or bullshit to do, just sex, eased by chemicals and drugs caused by the villain, a villain that is necessary to get the story running, and to give it stakes.
I'm not Gona say that Power Vacuum is the Citizen Kane of House Games of course, but it sure as shit can be its Starship Troopers... Wait no shit that Space Corps XXX, OK scratch that this is the Roger Rabbit of house games then.
A comedy which, if taken at face value, it's just that, a comedy, but on a deeper reading contains far bigger themes and character arcs than you imagined, much like Roger Rabbit was in turn a movie about how a corrupt bureaucracy and the Automobile Industry destroyed the American Public Transit and Railway System and razed down minority ghettos to build giant highways for profit.
(No really that's what Roger Rabbit is about if you remove the cartoon filter, just check the villain's final monologue).
And much like Roger Rabbit, this game, this story too is but a critique of actual tropes and trends within the genre as a whole and not just that, a coming of age story about children trying not to be like their parents, about the Trauma that comports, about power dynamics and, of course, about the extremely Voyeuristic and Manufactured nature of the genre.
And also about fucking of course, this is still a porn game.
Like... A Narrative Vs Power Fantasy scenario so to speak.
If we read Power Vacuum as a Power Fantasy, then of course people think Hunter is unnecessary to the porn. They want quick, easy sex scenes that do no challenge this fantasy (hence the overwhelming hatred for the new what if from some people here), and an unchallenged protagonist whose main issues can be easily solved by doing some repetitive tasks.
That's not how this story works. From a Narrative and a Metatextual Prospective, this is not one of those games. Hell, this is hardly even a game at this point, there is no actual gameplay, no actual control over the Main Character, no branching paths or needs to keep in check or relationship meters.
This is a very specific story with a very specific message I feel, one people are contesting without even thinking about it.
People are angry over Hunter, but isn't Hunter but a reflection of every house game protagonist ever? A natural conclusion of that arc? All that charm and youth you could have used to identify with him had he been the protagonist is long gone, and only the ugly truth remains, a withered husk committing crimes so be could sexually assault his family with impunity.
He is the perfect villain of this story. A Story that, ultimately, is but a commentary on the genre It's spoofing.
The genre is Voyeuristic, so there are cameras all over the house and then some, because you, the watcher, are living vicariously through Sterling your fantasy, much like Hunter was at first, much like Kevin is when he stole all those women's videos, much like Lucia projected herself into Sterling during her own "house" game.
You are not controlling a character, you're just along for the ride, and you've being told a story about his exploits. The fat has just been trimmed, no repetitive chores or bullshit to do, just sex, eased by chemicals and drugs caused by the villain, a villain that is necessary to get the story running, and to give it stakes.
I'm not Gona say that Power Vacuum is the Citizen Kane of House Games of course, but it sure as shit can be its Starship Troopers... Wait no shit that Space Corps XXX, OK scratch that this is the Roger Rabbit of house games then.
A comedy which, if taken at face value, it's just that, a comedy, but on a deeper reading contains far bigger themes and character arcs than you imagined, much like Roger Rabbit was in turn a movie about how a corrupt bureaucracy and the Automobile Industry destroyed the American Public Transit and Railway System and razed down minority ghettos to build giant highways for profit.
(No really that's what Roger Rabbit is about if you remove the cartoon filter, just check the villain's final monologue).
And much like Roger Rabbit, this game, this story too is but a critique of actual tropes and trends within the genre as a whole and not just that, a coming of age story about children trying not to be like their parents, about the Trauma that comports, about power dynamics and, of course, about the extremely Voyeuristic and Manufactured nature of the genre.
And also about fucking of course, this is still a porn game.