That's kinda the whole point of putting both of these in Harvest Valley, I thought?
Your gripes with CoC II
- Thread starter Narmlet
- Start date
- Status
That's kinda the whole point of putting both of these in Harvest Valley, I thought?
If they were in different areas we could assume that that each is isolated enough and primitive enough that their civilizations wouldn't come into conflict but when they're both in the same area it's less believable that they haven't been trying to drive each other out up till now. By putting them in the same place a backstory is now necessary to explain their co-existence.
That's not a bad move per se but the more of those types of decisions we see the more complicated the setting has to become to attain a basic level of coherency - and even if the exposition is there it still gets a bit hokey if dozens of civilizations are within walking distance of each other.
That's not a bad move per se but the more of those types of decisions we see the more complicated the setting has to become to attain a basic level of coherency - and even if the exposition is there it still gets a bit hokey if dozens of civilizations are within walking distance of each other.
Magicocks. They're not implemented yet but they're intended to be something you can obtain from Evergreen and will fulfill the 'has a penis' condition needed to advance Kiyoko's plot while still allowing your Champion to be fully female.
Ohh! I really hope we can have some nice non-human models, I'd love a leothran one!
I don't think we have any sense for how standard the practice was, but pubic depilation is much, much older than the game's Earth-historical equivalent.
Amen!
Now... I don't know if things have changed in that aspect, but body hair has always been left deliberately vague in Fengames. I know, CoC 2 isn't much of a "Fen" game, but you know what I mean
I keep writing it and getting cock blocked (heh) in my bust art. All the orc girls I wrote have bush but the only one whose bust shows it is Infrith. In her one scene. RIP.
Not nearly enough slow-burn bad ends. Evelyn and Arona both tease you with the possibility, but never go beyond that. Arona technically has one, but it's more the aggressive immediate sort for refusing her. Kassyra is an excellent Dom in the dream sequences. I guess when I say bad-end I really mean in-game consequences for letting certain personality types get their hooks so deep into you. There are always a lot of characters in these games that have no-strings-attached sex with the PC. Waifus are a dime a dozen. I guess that's good, I mean, it's a collection of people with different preferences writing this stuff right? My preference is just consequences for going too far with certain personalities. Even if the game didn't end and the PC was forced to play the entire game in a pony-suit or some ridiculous type of thing.
Consequences..
Consequences..
I don't really engage with Evelyn much, because, well, she's not really my thing, but would it make sense for her to have a bad end for the player? Like, in TiTS, it makes sense for some characters to be willing to put Steele in slowly building bad-end. But in CoC2, we may not be, like, a solo god like Steele is, but also, Steele's quest is incredibly personal. The Champion (or whatever our PC is referred to aside from their name) is fighting largely for the sake of the world. In Hawkethorne, the Champion is likely at least somewhat known for their quest, so Evelyn wouldn't truly have motivation to bad-end them. And even then, the Champion would not have any motivation to accept a bad-end.
Evelyn is a resident of the world that our pc is trying to save. They may have fun, but, hanging around in the tavern, she likely would know what we're trying to do. Even if she doesn't, Garth owns the Tavern she fucks you in. Garth knows that you're trying to save the world, he's pretty much sponsoring you to do so. If Evelyn tried to keep you there, permanently, before you actually got done saving the world, Garth would likely explain to her that she should not, and if she's somehow that stupid and stubborn that she insists (I'm fairly certain she is neither that stupid, nor that stubborn), then he would, at the least, kick her, you, and the entire group of party members out. And the party members are all invested in this quest too, especially Cait, so they'd likely not allow you to stay either, until you defeat Kassyra. All in all, in regards to Evelyn, this sort of "consequence?" Not something that could possibly occur.
I could definitely see a good end from her along the lines of what we get from Xotchi in TiTS! Also, I haven't done any of the corruption route yet, but I can definitely see her giving the champion a bad end there. Plus, bad ends are often just extracanonical and don't always jive with the lore of the game in the first place: sometimes they're just for titillation!
Well, what route you take with Arona definitely impacts the way she'll treat you! I'm not entirely sure it'll impact the entire game, but there are definitely game-impacting consequences for the choices you make with a lot of characters, including with her. They're just not all implemented, yet.
I've thought about it but Evelyn has her own reasons for not bad ending the PC that will become apparent later. If we ever get around to this specific bit of TF content, she'll probably get a bad end there, too. For now, she's just not really that kind of domme.
Obviously Wsan is more qualified to answer that than I am, but I don't feel like it would fit Evelyn (so far, maybe if we get the chance to corrupt her later on). Not every domme takes advantage of you for personal gain without any concern of how you feel. And Evelyn, more than any other, shows that despite being a domme (and a great one) she still cares about you, so it wouldn't make sense for her to drive you through a bad end.
Last edited:
Only long running bad end I could see is something with Evergreen maybe
Tldr, I didn't say anything about Evelyn specifically needing a bad end or even mention her personality, but even if I did, your reasoning for why she wouldn't/shouldn't have one doesn't hold up considering the convention of these games.
Now for the too long part.
The point of my comment was wildly misunderstood based on these responses. I am not arguing about the particulars of any one character's personality or advocating exclusively for bad ends. I even make it clear that I mean consequences in general. She might not bad end the PC, but she's not above making them adventure with a maid outfit given her actual content. And considering her openly stated thoughts about keeping the PC on a leash, she's pretty ripe for a "Good End" where the PC is entirely complicit in the situation. I didn't realize I had to be that specific to avoid this kind of thing. @Tide Hunter, you even quote me in my entirety where I say,
"I guess when I say bad-end I really mean in-game consequences for letting certain personality types get their hooks so deep into you".
And in that quote Evelyn is mentioned all of once as a tease for the possibility for a game ending. I don't say that she specifically needs one or that her personality demands it. In fact, I'm intentionally restrained in my comment because this is a game for many personalities and many tastes. I respect that. I'm not sure you've misunderstood me so badly on purpose, but since you opened the door, I'll lean in.
Whether she's good or bad or "loves" the PC doesn't have anything to do with bad/good ends in the history of these games. In some of the games on this site, some of the ends include the PC finishing their quest and then going back to dom characters to live out the rest of their lives. Some of them include the PC using the resources their dom gives them to finish the quest. The PC is in a mutually enriching relationship with characters like Akane and Luca when ther ending is triggered. None of these things are exclusive. In one of the most extreme bad ends, PC Steele is turned into a sentient pet whose owner then takes the PC to finish the quest for their own purposes. There are some "bad ends" like this that are written but not implemented because the game doesn't have an ending for the PC to willingly go back to these characters yet. Game endings and quest completion are separate concerns by the established convention of these games. So saying that a character wouldn't bad end the PC because it would prevent quest completion is off the mark, and saying that love or care for the PC prevents an end scenario is also off the mark according to the games themselves.
Now if Savin or Wsan and the creative team intentionally want Coc2 to have a different standard, that's for them to decide, and that's fine. But basing your reasoning off of the history of the games themselves doesn't cut it.
And whether or not the PC is trying to save the world, or whether or not the quests is personal or impersonal doesn't make a difference, and hasn't in other Fen/Sav games. Selfish or doming personalities aren't going to give the PC an "Are you saving the world" questionnaire before deciding they want to keep her/him for themselves. If we're taking this that far, then Lane in TiTs stands a chance of getting the planet he's on blown up by space pirates because getting his/her rocks off with the help of hypnosis is more pressing than said space pirates less than 12 tiles away from him. Any character that willingly sells the PC bad-end prompting transformatives on at-risk planets too. Or how about the Nyrea/Bothriac on myrellion who don't ask Steele whether he/she can advocate on their behalf among uplifted species before trying to keep him/her as a glorified egg incubator. Lund is definitely on the hook for possibly bad-ending a character who's central to keeping his home free from invaders and saving the daughter of his leader and the future of the hold. Maybe you respond with "But these characters don't know what the PC is trying to do for them", and my answer would be "Winner winner, chicken dinner". Every NPC doesn't know everything about the PC, including their world saving ambitions.
And lastly, I'm not sure you noticed but the creator himself didn't say that bad ends were never a consideration for her or that she was personally incapable of it. He says He has considered it, she has reasons for not doing it, and they still aren't completely off the table. Meaning what either I or you think about her personality or the personality of any of these characters, doesn't mean much of anything. It also means that your insistence that it would never be even a possibility for her because of your reading of her personality is wrong. Because the author himself considered it (Please don't kill me Wsan, I only invoked your name in internet self-defense).
And I'm not trying to be an asshole. But having my words taken so far out of context and then having that followed by a chorus of congratulatory back-patting because of that misunderstanding puts the bitch-bug in me.
Thanks for replying Wsan, but I think most of what I wrote was misunderstood. She was only listed in the original phrase as one of the few characters who teased the possibility for a good/bad end sort of consequence in a game lacking a lot of them at the moment. I think any consequence she imposes on the player would be hot, including a bad end, but my original comment did not mean to ask for one from her specifically. Her inclusion in the comment was a one mention note in a thread about gripes with the game as it is so far. You guys are working hard and doing a pretty good job.
Last edited:
The main thing about permanent consequences are twofold: firstly, they need to be accounted for in every single piece of writing that the player character engages in. Even something as simple as being forced to wear a maid outfit has enormous consequences: you effectively lose the versatility of at least one equipment slot. Every scene which involves the PC's clothes suddenly has to account for that, since they're not allowed to change clothes any more. Some writing avenues will be closed off to other writers that they might have wanted to pursue otherwise. It's an ugly morass to wade through, which is why permanent game consequences are few and far between: so far we only have one true permanent consequence, and that had to be discussed over more than two years for people to account for it and run around it.
Secondly, they discourage exploration of content, and we don't want players to feel punished for interacting with the NPCs in the game. We don't want the players to have to look up the wiki at every step to know what's going to lead you in to a bad end, and what's not. CoC1 had numerous such points where you could just fuck your character over completely without any signposting whatsoever, and although that might be some peoples' fetish, it's not the fetish of many more people. Signposting can help to an extent, but it's not foolproof. For example, addiction mechanics will be making a comeback eventually, but you won't get something on the lines of Marble's milk where if you didn't drink you would just straight-up die. Nor, for that matter, are the planned addictions going to be permanent.
Secondly, they discourage exploration of content, and we don't want players to feel punished for interacting with the NPCs in the game. We don't want the players to have to look up the wiki at every step to know what's going to lead you in to a bad end, and what's not. CoC1 had numerous such points where you could just fuck your character over completely without any signposting whatsoever, and although that might be some peoples' fetish, it's not the fetish of many more people. Signposting can help to an extent, but it's not foolproof. For example, addiction mechanics will be making a comeback eventually, but you won't get something on the lines of Marble's milk where if you didn't drink you would just straight-up die. Nor, for that matter, are the planned addictions going to be permanent.
z
And that there is perfectly fine. I can easily get behind reasonable concerns from one of the creators themselves. Though losing the versatility of an equipment slot is what I have in mind when I say consequences. The PC pays a cost for letting certain things go too far. And I didn't say that the PC cannot remove the clothing. The in-game reasoning or limitations don't have to be such rigid set-in-stone things that would make writing impossible, and the maid thing is an example of a consequence, not the only thing I could mean when I mention consequences. It's as simple as losing the option to resist in encounters like the Bothriac, or being unable to get loads of energy back because of withdrawal. But the very nature of CYOA games in this vein with so many contributors is that some writing avenues are closed off, and certain decisions made by the player will cut off decisions for them in game. For example, Cait is presented as a friendly overall wholesome catgirl companion. No potential author of the game is going to write her as a domineering shark woman because previously made decisions lock her out of that avenue. The same could be said for every decision made about a character's gender, preferences etc. There are decisions made at every point that determines writing possibilities, so that does not strike me as the greatest reasoning for avoiding content.
So that someone doesn't accuse me of eating babies or something else not remotely related to what I mean, let me say this: I'm not saying that authors should be forced to put in bad ends, or consequences, or that the creative team should have to put content in that nobody wants. If Savin made the executive decision today that CoC would be bad-end free and it would just be Waifu simulator because they are either technically cumbersome or just not something he likes, that's his and the creative team's decision to make and I'd have to respect it.
I'm saying that In a thread about gripes with the game, these are my gripes, Good/Bad ends are independent of quest completion, Every creative decision by the very act of decision making determines future writing avenues for authors and by definition closes off avenues of writing-and because of that it's not a good reason for avoiding content, the availability of save slots at any time in abundance promotes exploration and finally, nothing that I mention liking needs to be in the game because I am not a creator and this is a game for everybody with many different tastes. I am also an adult that understands I don't control other people's tastes or the direction of this game. I am fine with that and am expressing my opinions in the appropriate thread.
One of the best things about discovering Coc 1 way back when was finding the number of ways you could get yourself in trouble, and having saves so ready to hand promotes plenty of exploration. This game isn't full of un-skippable cutscenes, and last i checked, you haven't pulled a Konami and started charging for save slots. Being unhappy with an interaction when loading a save takes less than 3 seconds is a self-imposed limitation of players, not of the game design. If the games have changed since then and people aren't looking for that specific content, that's fine though. Not a single thing is wrong with that. It just means finding different content producers for certain types of content. No one should expect otherwise. Thank you for taking the time to chime in.
And that there is perfectly fine. I can easily get behind reasonable concerns from one of the creators themselves. Though losing the versatility of an equipment slot is what I have in mind when I say consequences. The PC pays a cost for letting certain things go too far. And I didn't say that the PC cannot remove the clothing. The in-game reasoning or limitations don't have to be such rigid set-in-stone things that would make writing impossible, and the maid thing is an example of a consequence, not the only thing I could mean when I mention consequences. It's as simple as losing the option to resist in encounters like the Bothriac, or being unable to get loads of energy back because of withdrawal. But the very nature of CYOA games in this vein with so many contributors is that some writing avenues are closed off, and certain decisions made by the player will cut off decisions for them in game. For example, Cait is presented as a friendly overall wholesome catgirl companion. No potential author of the game is going to write her as a domineering shark woman because previously made decisions lock her out of that avenue. The same could be said for every decision made about a character's gender, preferences etc. There are decisions made at every point that determines writing possibilities, so that does not strike me as the greatest reasoning for avoiding content.
So that someone doesn't accuse me of eating babies or something else not remotely related to what I mean, let me say this: I'm not saying that authors should be forced to put in bad ends, or consequences, or that the creative team should have to put content in that nobody wants. If Savin made the executive decision today that CoC would be bad-end free and it would just be Waifu simulator because they are either technically cumbersome or just not something he likes, that's his and the creative team's decision to make and I'd have to respect it.
I'm saying that In a thread about gripes with the game, these are my gripes, Good/Bad ends are independent of quest completion, Every creative decision by the very act of decision making determines future writing avenues for authors and by definition closes off avenues of writing-and because of that it's not a good reason for avoiding content, the availability of save slots at any time in abundance promotes exploration and finally, nothing that I mention liking needs to be in the game because I am not a creator and this is a game for everybody with many different tastes. I am also an adult that understands I don't control other people's tastes or the direction of this game. I am fine with that and am expressing my opinions in the appropriate thread.
One of the best things about discovering Coc 1 way back when was finding the number of ways you could get yourself in trouble, and having saves so ready to hand promotes plenty of exploration. This game isn't full of un-skippable cutscenes, and last i checked, you haven't pulled a Konami and started charging for save slots. Being unhappy with an interaction when loading a save takes less than 3 seconds is a self-imposed limitation of players, not of the game design. If the games have changed since then and people aren't looking for that specific content, that's fine though. Not a single thing is wrong with that. It just means finding different content producers for certain types of content. No one should expect otherwise. Thank you for taking the time to chime in.
Last edited:
Hm... if winterstem had some addiction mechanics attached... personally, I'd like that. Reduction in efficacy/gradual dependency with overuse, and withdrawal would cause a temporary corruption spike, due to irritability and increased sensitivity to your surroundings.
FWIW, I knew what you meant when you said bad end. Regardless, my point wrt Evelyn stands. Don't be disheartened about her specifically, though; she'll likely have one in a separate TFed iteration of herself. Unfortunately I can't really reveal anything about the reason(s) involved without spoiling my work, so you'll have to wait. The short version is that she has a greater purpose in mind for herself than just slumming the rest of her life in Garth's inn with you on a leash.
Time to blab: some of the very first things I wrote for TiTS when I started writing were bad ends because I love them so much. I actually just wrote a heavily branching bad end with player choice included in the WC, and then a second less-complicated one also in the WC. Personally, I love including bad ends and I do love consequences (Ceraph's bad end, while the actual ending wasn't that hot to me, was great just for the journey imo -- as well as things like minotaur addiction). When I started writing, I think taurs and bad ends were the two things at the very top of my priority list. My very first complaint to Fen was that the venus pitchers didn't have a bad end, so I get you, I really do. I'm also a huge fan of slow-burn bad endings myself; I really loved Kelt's bad ending (especially for centaurs) for instance, and I wrote the Nyrean Alpha bad ending where you continually crawl back to her to get filled with eggs. That kind of thing takes time for the player to get the full experience, and having them guide themselves to their own eventual loss of agency is very powerful.
Relatively speaking, my favourite kind of bad end is the type where you bring yourself back to an arrogant, grinning dominant that has you figured out better than you do yourself until your understanding gradually comes to align with theirs. A short, sudden end can be great too, though. Anyway, I hate to keep saying this, but wait for the corruption of the land to actually start happening. Then we have all sorts of excuses for bad ends.
Drug/Substance use like Winterstem is taken rather lightly in this game tbh. Not exactly comfortable with the idea of removing that. Too real by that point.
Infrith is a character i wish had mor content just because of her bush lol. happily waiting for these hairy orc charatcers you are writing
She's very well written, and the unlikelihood of her staying in one small room in Garth's inn is clear because of that writing. I look forward to most of your content, but I'll have to put a pin in this one in particular and watch the devblog.
It's almost eerie. We have almost the exact same taste when it comes to that sort of thing. We couldn't be on any closer page on Ceraph's end for example unless we were literally reading the same book. The whole point is that the PC gets in so far over his/her head by their own lust that they're too far gone by the time things are clear.
And just with the consequences thing, exactly what I mean is already in the game. In the beginning a masculine character going too far with Kassyra results in them growing tits and becoming androgynous. It's that simple. Interaction with the world. Significant change as a result of that interaction. Persistent result means further interactions are changed ,like titfucking becoming an option, and the player continuing as a female.
Final disclaimer, my comments in this thread are not to intentionally push anything in any given direction or say the game would be somehow objectively better with these changes. Since kinks are so insanely subjective, that would be impossible. It's just to answer the question of the post and specify where I've been too imprecise.
- Status