Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 10

Author Topic: Sex  (Read 33941 times)

Putnam

  • Bay Watcher
  • DAT WIZARD
    • View Profile
Re: Sex
« Reply #75 on: July 03, 2016, 05:57:28 pm »

Considering that my post there is the first time anyone acknowledged it at all, it seems remarkably ineffective.

Besides that, that's not even remotely a good goal to have.

Random_Dragon

  • Bay Watcher
  • Psycho Bored Dragon
    • View Profile
Re: Sex
« Reply #76 on: July 03, 2016, 06:04:47 pm »

Well, it's worth a shot. :V
Logged
On DF Wiki · On DFFD

"Hey idiots, someone hacked my account to call you all idiots! Wasn't me you idiots!" seems to stretch credulity a bit.

Putnam

  • Bay Watcher
  • DAT WIZARD
    • View Profile
Re: Sex
« Reply #77 on: July 03, 2016, 06:05:25 pm »

No, the argument's perfectly on topic and you're trying to derail that. It's not worth a shot.

SixOfSpades

  • Bay Watcher
  • likes flesh balls for their calming roundness
    • View Profile
Re: Sex
« Reply #78 on: July 03, 2016, 06:51:44 pm »

Rape . . . we must understand it exists in this real-life world with a air of maturity, but it probably wont have a place in the world of DF as hard as you may try in the same way.
I disagree with this so much, I hate the way day people take the opinion that being maturer is to not depict offensive material at all, it's PC gone over board.
Happily, we know that no one will ever accuse Dwarf Fortress as being PC gone wild.

Quote
I don't believe anyone here is actually advocating rape
I am advocating it, partially because I love playing devil's advocate
There are two reasons to play devil's advocate--the first is to expose weaknesses in the opposing side's arguments, so that the opposition can move to correct them. By arguing for rape being made part of DF, you are helping to strengthen the arguments against it.
And the other reason to play devil's advocate is because you actually want rape in the game.

Quote
given that we now know there will be a setting to turn off violence then there is no good reason imho for the other extreme to not include horrific things like rape
You can't have a fantasy/adventure game, or a real-time strategy game, without opponents. You can't have opponents (in these kinds of games) without combat. And because realism is a core ethos of DF, with that combat comes violence. Messy, sometimes brutal violence, because the computer doesn't (yet) make value judgements, or decide that a clean kill is more moral than an agonizingly slow dismemberment. Combat is a necessity, and the violence is simply a byproduct of that necessity. But rape? Sex would only be a realistic bonus--the game's done just fine without it, so far--and rape would not naturally occur as its byproduct, you would have to make the conscious decision to deliberately code it in. That, right there, is a reason NOT to include horrific things like rape . . . and what reasons do you offer as to why it SHOULD be included?

Quote
. . . use DF's awesome psychological system to depict the fallout and suffering of the victim, have them crying and shivering on the ground saying "pl. please no more."
Dude. That sounds like you're getting off on this. Maybe you should talk to a professional. Really.

Quote
. . . basically try and invoke empathy from the player whom does engage in rape.
If a player indulges in rape, it's basically too late for empathy. Personally, I could tolerate rape in the game, AS LONG AS it was not possible for the player to rape, ever, OR to make a fortress dwarf more likely to commit rape. I'm okay with historical rapes being documented in Legends mode. I'm okay with invaders coming in and mixing a little raping in with their burning & pillaging. I'm okay with rape being an accepted practice in goblin societies. But because of today's culture of rape apologists, willing to downplay real attacks as "twenty minutes of action" and the like, I absolutely will not accept any attempt to portray sexual assault as something that is "okay" for the player to do, or even "allowed".

Yes, the game allows killing, which is very arguably worse than rape. We watch dwarves, even infant dwarves, die horrible deaths. We can even deliberately engineer elaborate deathtraps that consume every living being in the fort. So why do I fight against rape? Because, in the real world, no one is claiming that killing your fellow citizens is an okay thing to do. If you are observed giggling at the sight of someone falling into a wood chipper, you get sent off for mental evaluation. And when's the last time you heard about someone trying to fill a building with magma? But rape is different; in the real world, rape is common, rape is still viewed as being "reasonable", and rape is still largely accepted. Somebody collapsing a mountain onto a city is not a thing that can happen--it is not a threat, so it doesn't matter if we encourage it. But rape IS a thing that happens--it IS a threat, so it DOES matter. That's why rape is a special case.

Quote
True, some modders will just script themselves a rape scene in every village . . . so if that can't be prevented, maybe implementing Adventure-mode sex would have to be abandoned.
No, just no, I've always hated this type of reasoning.
Really, always? Wow . . . that's quite the compelling argument. Well, I certainly can't beat that line of argument, I guess I'll have to concede. I take back everything I said, you've convinced me.

Quote
Part of the reason I want Toady too handle the subject officially is because as it stands Meatgod is the only depiction of rape DF has and its very easy for anyone to mod in and given that its very likely that we will get some level of sexual activity based on old DF talks and Dev goals it will only become easier to mod but if rape is not handled in any official capacity then there is never any actually recognition of the horror that is rape so I think its better to add it make it legal and simulate the trauma but not the act itself then maybe the game can invoke the same response Meatgod creator had after he'd finish where he relied what he'd done went WTF and deleted the save.
Was that a sentence? The characters ,`.;':" aren't just for grass, you know.
But there is a very useful element in there: implementing the psychological trauma of rape, but not the rape itself. Coding only the negative aspects sounds like an idea worth exploring . . . but then again, there are some rapists for whom the trauma IS the goal. Rape commonly isn't about sex--it's about control, or punishment, or sadism.

I'm not worried about Meatgod turning into some kind of "rape ambassador" for the game. DF will always be known as the game with the drunken, retarded psychos, and the hideous ASCII, and the flux stone, and the impenetrable menus, and the traction benches, and the terrifying carp. Not as the game in which some modder deliberately warped the game's content while it was still in alpha.

Quote
I don't think it [rape] is required but I do think its a natural extension of including both sex and a violence/horror setting and no its not necessary for grand stories but many stories have rape as plot points and that doe not lessen the story and it can add to a story of revenge quite well, help show the depths of depravity of a villain and show just how evil an evil entity (civ) is.
Like I said: Legends mode, invaders, and goblins. That's all you need.
Logged
Dwarf Fortress -- kind of like Minecraft, but for people who hate themselves.

therahedwig

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
    • wolthera.info
Re: Sex
« Reply #79 on: July 04, 2016, 06:42:43 am »

uhm...

Quote from: Toady One
Quote from: Whatsifsowhatsit

What would "bleak and horrifying" entail? Would this include some of the things that have traditionally been avoided in Dwarf Fortress for various reasons, such as sex and (lack of) consent and whatnot? (There were, I think, some other similar things that I don't remember off the top of my head.)

Oh, and at the other side of the spectrum, is "No death [...]" to be taken literally? Will there be no death at all in this setting (and what would that mean for the demographics and such of the worlds)? Or just no death due to fights and wars and the like?

Nah, we weren't thinking of going that way.

Yeah, no death at all.  Use of the attack button in adventure mode removed, etc.  We were thinking of intermediate setting(s) where wars and attacks against intelligent critters would be off, but e.g. hunting and butchery would be permitted, so you could still do the ranch-fort thing without worrying about wars or extortion or whatever.

Source


I think this should indicate neither will be in for a while. Not that it's gonna stop you discussing it, but.
Logged
Stonesense Grim Dark 0.2 Alternate detailed and darker tiles for stonesense. Now with all ores!

Ribs

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Sex
« Reply #80 on: July 04, 2016, 07:14:30 am »

well, to elaborate on my last post, since I usually try to avoid the topic:

this fanbase is almost entirely made up of complete edgelords

That's most fanbases to be honest. The DF fanbase manages to be less edgy than My Little Pony's. That's certainly saying something about fanbases in general, although I'm not entirely sure what...

A more honest response would be that, given the current political climate we live in, there's very little interest for any developer to support this kind of sexual interactivity in their games (especially rape, but even a tamer approach) unless that's their gimmick in the first place. I don't think Toady and Threetoe are prudes, just that it wouldn't be rewarding enough and the risks wouldn't be worth it.

We also currently do have "rape" in the game. Night creatures kidnapping people and making them their brides is pretty much that. No need to get into detail, though.
Logged

vjmdhzgr

  • Bay Watcher
  • Hehehe
    • View Profile
Re: Sex
« Reply #81 on: July 04, 2016, 04:43:26 pm »

As I stated 4 posts ago, a reasonable implementation seems perfectly doable: In Fortress mode, treat sex with the same level of detail as eating. Even the most prurient of players will never get anything more descriptive than "He enjoyed sexy times with the wife lately." In Adventure mode, make sex depend upon the sexual arousal of both subjects, and make arousal only achievable through conversation, not combat. True, some modders will just script themselves a rape scene in every village . . . so if that can't be prevented, maybe implementing Adventure-mode sex would have to be abandoned.
As much as I'm mostly against the implementation of most suggestions in this thread, I feel you're extremely overestimating the power of modding. The only suggestion in this thread that modders might be able to change into something worse was when somebody said rape would be highly illegal in dwarven civilization. That could be changed by modding to be required rather than punishable, though it's important to note, that the full implications of an ethic counting as required are not currently implemented, so it wouldn't mean dwarves just rape every chance they get even if it was modded to be as such, but the punishment could be removed. Aside from that though, unless Toady suddenly decides to massively expand what modding is capable of doing, no modders will "just script themselves a rape scene in every village" that just sounds like nonsense as far as Dwarf Fortress modding is concerned.

I also find it strange that some people have acted as if adventurers having sex during combat is inevitable. It's not. It'd be very simple to just have some message pop up or whatever when you try to select the option "You do not feel safe enough to have sex." Just like it says when attempting to enter the travel screen while in combat. That'd also fit in well if the game just cuts to the travel screen when it actually happens, which I think is probably the best way to handle that.

I think a reasonable, and unabusable implementation of sex is rather easy, though I'd prefer it just not really be bothered with until Toady decides to start expanding adventurer mode a lot with the planned adding in romance stuff, land ownership, playing as children of your adventurer, all those things where it would actually fit in and serve a purpose.
Logged
Its a feature. Impregnating booze is a planned tech tree for dwarves and this is a sneak peek at it.
Unless you're past reproductive age. Then you're pretty much an extension of your kids' genitalia

Putnam

  • Bay Watcher
  • DAT WIZARD
    • View Profile
Re: Sex
« Reply #82 on: July 04, 2016, 04:47:33 pm »

Yeah, there is nothing that can reasonably be called scripting in DF modding.

callisto8413

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Sex
« Reply #83 on: July 07, 2016, 12:47:36 pm »

They already have sex - they have offspring - so there is sex.  I don't have to see it to know it is happening.  So, no.  No, no, no, no.  And if you need to know why I am saying know just re-read the thread.  NO.  No, no, no.
Logged
The most EVIL creature in Dwarf Fortress!

Random_Dragon

  • Bay Watcher
  • Psycho Bored Dragon
    • View Profile
Re: Sex
« Reply #84 on: July 07, 2016, 02:45:02 pm »

Basically...yeah. If you want rape, mod in dongs and do it yourself. I'd say adventure mode needs the ability to form relationships first, whether that be real romance or what would, if this idea was developed, lead to a one-night stand.

Either way, and the framework needed for NPCs to form attatchments in adventure mode, THEN we can have people shitpost about how they want DF to become an H-game, until I get tired of all the idiocy and start trying to derail the thread again.
Logged
On DF Wiki · On DFFD

"Hey idiots, someone hacked my account to call you all idiots! Wasn't me you idiots!" seems to stretch credulity a bit.

Egan_BW

  • Bay Watcher
  • The questioner does not.
    • View Profile
Re: Sex
« Reply #85 on: July 08, 2016, 02:21:38 am »

I'd like to point out that it's not exactly the place of the suggestion forum to debate whether a feature should be implemented or not; that is ultimately up to the Tarn brothers.
With that in mind, I have an actual suggestion, in the case that Toady ever actually reads past that massive argument, and provided that he (and Threetoe, of course) sees fit to implement more detailed romance in adventure mode.

Ahem.

When one creature propositions another, depending on its personality, it should have a chance of saying a horrible pick-up line, LCS style. This should, in turn greatly increase the chances of rejection.
Logged

FantasticDorf

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Sex
« Reply #86 on: July 08, 2016, 05:26:18 am »

I hear commiting a routine of serenading your beloved with a Troll love song is all the rage.

*Oddly haunting collection of low-pitched screeches, not unlike moo's, the lower and broader a troll's singing voice, the larger and healthier the male prospectively, trolls take to wind instruments very well in this respect*

So is wearing a steel helmet, when your beloved tries to throw a anvil at your head to cease your noise. But with the new neck jerks, youll die from the force anyway.

It was inevitable.
Logged

Maltavius

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Sex
« Reply #87 on: July 10, 2016, 04:00:48 am »

The only constructive post in this thread was made by GoblinCookie.

Personally I'd prefer if dwarves actually had a need for sleeping together and co-decided to do so. Only then would "spores" be planted, there need not be anything in any logs about copulation, only the need to sleep besides ones spouse/lover to be fulfilled which would bring joy.
Of course, having a spouse and being caught with a lover could tantrum spiral for fun.

Also, dwarves about to go into "labor" should be admitted into a hospital zone or at least in a bed, failing that a table, failing that a meeting room, failing that anywhere.
Not like it is now where "axdwarf hits the goblin" "cancels hitting: seeking infant".

Just leave sex in adventure-form out of the game!
Logged

Pseudopuppet

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Sex
« Reply #88 on: July 10, 2016, 06:03:32 pm »

This is a game where you can take someone and break each of his fingers one-by-one, tear off his limbs, beat him to death with his own eyeballs, and yet the idea of sex is off-limits.

Not that I really care that much, obviously Toady wouldn't even consider adding this (this thread is probably better off being locked anyway), but I just find it curious how mass, incredibly gory violence to the point of people's skin rotting off is okay but sex is not.

EDIT: I reworded my original post because it might have sent very wrong signals.
« Last Edit: July 10, 2016, 06:20:04 pm by Pseudopuppet »
Logged

Random_Dragon

  • Bay Watcher
  • Psycho Bored Dragon
    • View Profile
Re: Sex
« Reply #89 on: July 10, 2016, 06:04:33 pm »

*grabs the popcorn*
Logged
On DF Wiki · On DFFD

"Hey idiots, someone hacked my account to call you all idiots! Wasn't me you idiots!" seems to stretch credulity a bit.
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 10