Redemption for Jessika (En, Sp, Fr, It, Ge)

[DorianGRey]

This post and this game is really the reason i made this account although i have been lurking around more than 3 years reading posts in this forum and playing games suggested here...
I am here mostly to defend the creators of this game because i have seen many posts criticizing both Tlaero and Mortze about their choices mostly. I hope i wont tire you too much but i think some posts are not just simple and constructive criticism but they become discouraging for the creators of this game... so let's start.
In my humble opinion, mortze has done his best work in his games so far. The facial expressions and the lighting used in his animations are by far the best i have seen in this game genre... he have received much criticism for Jessika not being that pretty and such. But all i really want to ask you is, have you seen a drunk woman in the verge of alcoholism and melancholy inside a shady bar. looking sparking and radiant? i think not... (well unless you are drunk too, so you may have ). Jessika is getting more and more beautiful later on in the game which is i think was the goal of the artist to follow the story line and show the changes that marc have done to her life.
In addition mortze left me with open mouth with his animations scenes, especially in the strip scene which is one of my favorites in the game...
About tlaero. I think is one of the best authors in these kind of games out there and i think she have brought these games to a new level with these series, since the story is not the cliche themed stories, like guy cheats wife with someone, boy meets girl and make a relationship and such, which after playing that kind of games in the past years, i really find them uninteresting and boring... Well, since tlaero stated that this game is less interactive before she release it, since she want to tell a story to connect the events in the series, i can't really understand why people are keep complaining about this matter... I agree that some options in the conversation between marc and jessika were a bit too much for my taste, like you are too beautiful for me and i don't deserve you, but haven't we all said stupid things in dates? especially when we thought the girl was sitting at the opposite side of the table was out of our league... Furthermore, if two gorgeous women made love in front of you why on earth would you want to leave? Just bear it because it would be a lifetime experience even if you don't participate in it... And even if you don't like it in your real life, just click through it, it's just a game anyway...
Anyway as a keen admirer of Tlaero writing skills and of her games, I will say only one thing to her and I hope she continues making glorious games like this for us to enjoy freely:
“There is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about.”

[tlaero]

Welcome to the forum, Dorian. Very cool avatar picture!

I guess one woman's sweetheart is another man's weakling, but that's okay. I'm getting some useful feedback here.

What I'm taking away from all this is that people want the option to make more choices in the games, even when those choices ultimately lead to failure. For instance, it would have been pretty easy for me to give the options to have Marc refuse to go to Sylvia's, walk out when he saw that Sarah was baiting him, and walk out when Sarah and Sylvia started going at it. I already had those paths from when he was too Lewd, so giving those options would have probably meant 3 or 4 more pages. In the end, they would have all lead to failure, because you wouldn't have gotten on Sarah's good side, so she wouldn't have invited you to sleep on the couch. So you wouldn't have enough good nor lewd points to get through the game. But you would have the option of being more manly, even if it meant failure. Similarly, I could have pretty easily had Marc refuse to sleep on the couch. I could have had him say that a walk sounded boring and leave. I could have had him decide not to go over to Jess's the next day because he didn't want to seem desperate. And I could have had him ignore her and chase after Charles rather than check out the car. All would have lead to failure (the last ending in Jess dying in the bomb blast), but all would have given people options. And, in a game, options are good.

I've generally been against one choice dead ends, but I hear the feedback that people want these things.

I'll reflect on this for the next game.

Tlaero

[Mortze]

What I'm taking away from all this is that people want the option to make more choices in the games, even when those choices ultimately lead to failure. For instance, it would have been pretty easy for me to give the options to have Marc refuse to go to Sylvia's, walk out when he saw that Sarah was baiting him, and walk out when Sarah and Sylvia started going at it. I already had those paths from when he was too Lewd, so giving those options would have probably meant 3 or 4 more pages. In the end, they would have all lead to failure, because you wouldn't have gotten on Sarah's good side, so she wouldn't have invited you to sleep on the couch. So you wouldn't have enough good nor lewd points to get through the game. But you would have the option of being more manly, even if it meant failure. Similarly, I could have pretty easily had Marc refuse to sleep on the couch. I could have had him say that a walk sounded boring and leave. I could have had him decide not to go over to Jess's the next day because he didn't want to seem desperate. And I could have had him ignore her and chase after Charles rather than check out the car. All would have lead to failure (the last ending in Jess dying in the bomb blast), but all would have given people options. And, in a game, options are good.

Making Marc refuse the sex with Jessika because, as his super idol, he'd probably soil her with his unwortiness.
Come on people, the point in sex games is to have the sex. Don't make us put a "Skip" button in every sex scene. Sure, that would give the player a choice. But what's the point in playing a sex game then?

I must confess that at first I was a little hesitant about the lesbian sex scene. It seemed to me that SeraB was a little too quick to jump on conclusions saying that Mark is a pig by only looking at her overly exposed cleavage. I defended my case bravely before Tlaero, saying that SeraB's move was totally unfair. No man could be punished for looking at a beautifull cleavage. I'd rather die if I couldn't.
But Tlaero told me that this scene is totally about that. About setting a character's identity. Sure, SeraB isn't particulary fair. She isn't particulary nice at some point. But she's doing that for one sole reason. Because of reasons, she has become overly protective of those she loves; Jessika and Silvia. Other people are menaces to her, and to her loved ones. Marc was a menace. He had to be tested. The hard way. The player had to be tested. The hard way too.
Instead of looking through Marc's eyes I began looking through Sarah's. And it made sense for me.
Yes, the character is totally submissive there, for 2 reasons:
1/ he is polite;
2/ he is having the view of his life.
Personally, if that happened to me I don't know if I'd stay and enjoy or feel totally out of place and leave, excusing myself. I don't know. What I know is that, plotwise, Marc had to stay. For Sarah to get a good impression of him, and to invite him to stay over to meet Jessika in the mourning. Later in the game Jessika put up a show for Sarah in return, and much later there is the bonus scene. All tied to that moment when Marc decided not to leave.

These games are essentially the story we, creators, want to tell. Not the story the players want to play. This isn't an open sandbox world. The interaction is limited by the options the creators find essential to keep the story flow.
Even the most expensive videogames made, RPGs style have some kind of linearity to it. You may take some choices to diverge a little but in the end you'll end up doing what the story sets as major plot points.
These games are far from being comparable to those video-games giants. So, the playability is, likewise, more modest.
But in the end the same principles apply.

What if Han Solo decided that paying the debt to Jabba was way more vital to his survival than go risk his life, Chewiee's, and the Falcon's integrity, joining the Yavin battle? He would have good, understandable reasons to not come back. We'd relate to that. The civil war was not his war. He had a debt to pay. He helped enough, and he wasn't a soldier (not anymore). But we would not have had much of a Saga, if Vadder blew Luke's X-Wing, undisturbed by Han's return.
Some choices gotta be restricted for storytelling sake. The important thing is that this restriction has to make sense.

[Dolphin-BR]

... it would have been pretty easy for me to give the options to have Marc refuse to go to Sylvia's,...
... Similarly, I could have pretty easily had Marc refuse to sleep on the couch...

Giving him also options to take the initiative, propose something instead of just saying 'yes' or 'no' to the female characters' ideas would make him look less weak and more manly too.

These games are essentially the story we, creators, want to tell. Not the story the players want to play.

I agree 100% with you here. I said it once and I'll say it again, I believe authors should make the game they want, if other like it as well, great!
But players should be able to say what they liked and disliked about the game. Meaning no offense, just personal opinion and taste.

[JFR]

... I've generally been against one choice dead ends, but I hear the feedback that people want these things.

I'll reflect on this for the next game. ...

Please don't reflect too hard or feel you have to change the style of your games. You're hearing that feedback from a few people.

I'd bet the very vast majority of us love your games and the stories you tell. I know I do. The problem with putting in too many branches and dead-ends is that it slows gameplay to the point it isn't enjoyable. I, for one, like to be able to just play the game and not pull out the yellow pad to start mapping every alternative. Those things have their place I suppose but there is something to be said for just enjoying a good story and interacting with it. I fear that in attempting to change things too much to accommodate the "minority opinion" might interfere with that nice game flow you have achieved in DWE and RFJ. I'm looking forward to the next chapter.

[jk103]

These games are essentially the story we, creators, want to tell. Not the story the players want to play. This isn't an open sandbox world. The interaction is limited by the options the creators find essential to keep the story flow.
Even the most expensive videogames made, RPGs style have some kind of linearity to it. You may take some choices to diverge a little but in the end you'll end up doing what the story sets as major plot points.
These games are far from being comparable to those video-games giants. So, the playability is, likewise, more modest.
But in the end the same principles apply.

What if Han Solo decided that paying the debt to Jabba was way more vital to his survival than go risk his life, Chewiee's, and the Falcon's integrity, joining the Yavin battle? He would have good, understandable reasons to not come back. We'd relate to that. The civil war was not his war. He had a debt to pay. He helped enough, and he wasn't a soldier (not anymore). But we would not have had much of a Saga, if Vadder blew Luke's X-Wing, undisturbed by Han's return.
Some choices gotta be restricted for storytelling sake. The important thing is that this restriction has to make sense.

The player, and the freedoms the developer chooses to give or withhold to the player, is what makes a game a game. An RPG typically tells a linear story, but it gives the player the freedom to explore the world, develop his stats, choose his party or whatever. The player might not have control over the story, but the choices he makes still give him a sense of agency, and that keeps him engaged in the story and its characters. This concept is pretty much the foundation of all gameplay design.

Tlaero's games are more or less straightforward, linear stories, and that's great. But even so I think it's important to find SOME way to convince the player he's in the driver's seat from time to time, to make the player feel like he's a part of the game and not just watching it. The old Japanese dating sims did it by giving the player a choice between multiple romantic interests, some of the newer poser-era dating games do it by letting the player choose where the date happens and what happens on the date. If Tlaero isn't going that route than I think it's worth brainstorming other ways to give the player a sense of agency. It's not necessarily about letting the player reach dead ends or say no to sex scenes or anything like that - those came up because people felt especially powerless in a specific scene in RfJ, and slapping a yes/no option before every scene may or may not be relevant to the next game.

[SpikeTheGoat]

... I've generally been against one choice dead ends, but I hear the feedback that people want these things.

I'll reflect on this for the next game. ...

Please don't reflect too hard or feel you have to change the style of your games. You're hearing that feedback from a few people.

I'd bet the very vast majority of us love your games and the stories you tell. I know I do. The problem with putting in too many branches and dead-ends is that it slows gameplay to the point it isn't enjoyable. I, for one, like to be able to just play the game and not pull out the yellow pad to start mapping every alternative. Those things have their place I suppose but there is something to be said for just enjoying a good story and interacting with it. I fear that in attempting to change things too much to accommodate the "minority opinion" might interfere with that nice game flow you have achieved in DWE and RFJ. I'm looking forward to the next chapter.

I'd have to agree with this point. We all have our opinions, and that is fine - as is discussing them openly, in my view. But you should take all the flak you get with a grain of salt and use it only as a way to reflect on yourself and your ideas, not to please the peanut gallery. If you look at what they say and think, 'Hmm, they are right. Maybe I could have threw in an option for Marc to touch himself during the lesbian scene. After all, he wouldn't be touching them and how could the girlfriend object when she herself was pressuring her significant other into the act?' I see that as a sensible approach. Saying 'Well, let's remove tons of sex, add a lot of pointless game-over paths that just angers people who didn't save lately and possibly take a long time to reach, and avoid telling a story I don't want?' -- well that is obviously way too far towards the other side.

It is your game. It is a porn game, which, despite its very minor touches with reality, some people are tending to forget. I mean, the situation would be awkward as hell in real life and I might accuse the girlfriend of being a terrible person for putting her lover in such a position she doesn't want to be in on first meeting some guy from her work - not to mention doing everything in her power to show how much of a 'man' the guy is (like having a full bar and inviting over an alcoholic). But this isn't real life. It is a zany, off-the-wall porno game that happens to have a story tied to it vs. find the item and fuck. Which I can respect, but there is nothing wrong with it being crazy and things happening that don't equate to reality.

Again, just not liking the character is fine. I didn't love him myself - not due to his passive, polite nature, but his idolization of someone to the extreme. But I don't feel he was 'wrongly' though up and created. The same way I may not like some music but think it has just as much merit as any other. I also enjoy branching paths and loads of choices, but also realize these things take tons of extra time and aren't always required when the author wants to tell a particular story - it is just a different kind of game, and that is fine. And as long as people aren't being viscous or rude, I don't see a reason not to critically tear apart anything, if that is their thing.

So my thoughts - which really mean nothing in the long run - is just to take and learn from what people say, as every author/artist/whatever can always have room to grow, but don't alienate who you are to create games that you spend your free time on that people enjoy for the cost of $0. Once you get shareholders, office costs, and all that jazz, then you can sweat the small stuff =)

[tlaero]

Giving him also options to take the initiative, propose something instead of just saying 'yes' or 'no' to the female characters' ideas would make him look less weak and more manly too.

If you're saying to make it so that it's Marc, instead of Jess, who suggests the walk or going to see PowerGirl, that's fine. If it's that Jess wants to go for a walk or see PowerGirl and Marc says, "No, let's do this instead," and we need to make both scenes, then it's incredibly expensive. Between writing, posing, rendering, coding, and testing, one of these scenes takes over a week to produce. Doing multiple scenes for every date would double the length of the game, as well as double the amount of time it takes to produce. Alternately, it would cut the story in half. I don't think people would be served by either.

Tlaero

[jk103]

Giving him also options to take the initiative, propose something instead of just saying 'yes' or 'no' to the female characters' ideas would make him look less weak and more manly too.

If you're saying to make it so that it's Marc, instead of Jess, who suggests the walk or going to see PowerGirl, that's fine. If it's that Jess wants to go for a walk or see PowerGirl and Marc says, "No, let's do this instead," and we need to make both scenes, then it's incredibly expensive. Between writing, posing, rendering, coding, and testing, one of these scenes takes over a week to produce. Doing multiple scenes for every date would double the length of the game, as well as double the amount of time it takes to produce. Alternately, it would cut the story in half. I don't think people would be served by either.

Tlaero

There's no simple answer, I don't think. Your style of game is probably closer to a Visual Novel than anything else, and there's a reason why those games use static portraits for the majority of their imagery. If it helps I doubt you'd need to double up on every single scene. Instead, from the very start of development, decide what the player's role is going to be and pick a handful of key moments to let him speak up. Pick your spots and design the game around them.

[tlaero]

If anyone is interested in the poster that paid for the juice machine in RfJ, I just sent it to our "Partner" level ($10) patrons. If you're not a patron yet, but want to become one, I'll send out the poster again next month when I send out the short story I mentioned in the Dreaming with Elsa topic.

Tlaero

[Siske]

Hey there Tlaero and Mortze

One of the reasons I registered is to thank you both for a great game.
Loved the graphics, the whole story and really enjoyed the last bonus scene when you complete the 10 achievements. Definitely one of the best I've ever seen/played.

Keep up the good work, both of you!


P.S. Looking forward to Pandora p2!

[ares]

I guess one woman's sweetheart is another man's weakling, but that's okay. I'm getting some useful feedback here.

What I'm taking away from all this is that people want the option to make more choices in the games, even when those choices ultimately lead to failure. For instance, it would have been pretty easy for me to give the options to have Marc refuse to go to Sylvia's, walk out when he saw that Sarah was baiting him, and walk out when Sarah and Sylvia started going at it...

It seems to me that it just may not come easy to you to create male characters that are believable, at least to me. I frankly don't understand much of what you are saying in this message . It looks as if sometimes, men appear to you as some sort of foreign creature that acts in a whole different way than women, at times utterly incomprehensible.

So let me ask you a question. Say that you are a woman and there is this couple that you know that you find very hot - the gender composition of the couple is irrelevant, it can be FF, MF, MM, whatever. In any case, said couple invites you to their place, they start making out and inform you that they are cool with you staying as long as you don't try to touch them. What would YOU do in such situation? Does it correspond to the behavior the PC has in your game? Do you really stay there completely passive and not even masturbating while the couple you have the hots for go at it?

The last problem the scene has is that there is no possibility for Marc to walk out. Is that what you conclude from all this conversation? Speaking for myself, I want you to tell me the story you want to tell me. If in the story you want to tell me Marc doesn't walk out of the room, I couldn't care less about whether you put that possibility there so that some people can properly lose the game at every possible stage. The real problem with the scene is that there is no option for Marc to do what most people, whether men or women, would do when faced with such situation. Which I believe is some variation of, 'Ok, there is the don't touch rule which sucks, but let's see how I can get the most of this experience without touching them.'

I already had those paths from when he was too Lewd, so giving those options would have probably meant 3 or 4 more pages. In the end, they would have all lead to failure, because you wouldn't have gotten on Sarah's good side, so she wouldn't have invited you to sleep on the couch. So you wouldn't have enough good nor lewd points to get through the game. But you would have the option of being more manly, even if it meant failure.

Manly? And what is that exactly? Is having some initiative for something, manly? Should we assume then that not having initiative is 'womanly'? Because it can't be both right?

Let me quote here George R. Martin. Given that you guys are trying to tell stories, maybe there is something to learn from people that evidently know how to tell one. I think it's more or less universally agreed that the female characters of ASoIaF are very well done, even though GRM appears to be a dude. Answering a question on how does he writes characters that seem so believable, here is what GRM had to say:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens ... inist.html

'Yes, you're right I've never been an eight year old girl, but I've also never been an exiled princess, or a dwarf or bastard. What I have been is human. I just write human characters.'

I think this is spot on. He manages to write the Aryas, Cerseis and Daenerys simply by not making gender a factor that distinguishes the motivations of people. Men in Game of Thrones desire power. So do women. Some men are honourable, some are despicable. And so is the case for women. And at the end, everyone is flawed as we all humans are.

The women in your stories seem to have something of you. Ask yourself, is there something of you in your men? Would you in place of that guy do and say what he does and says? Would you be constantly passive without some initiative or ideas? If one is to judge by your women, one is led to think that you probably wouldn't.

Similarly, I could have pretty easily had Marc refuse to sleep on the couch. I could have had him say that a walk sounded boring and leave.

Is that what a normal person would do? Seriously, if you were Marc, in a situation in which a person you are attracted to proposes to take a walk, would you refuse say 'oh, this is so boring' and leave instead? That's not manly, that's idiotic! Why should the considered options be illogical? Let's say that this person you are attracted to proposes a walk and you do think a walk is boring. How about proposing going to the movies, or to a theater or I don't know, karting! What a normal person would do in such a situation is to make a counterproposal that he/she prefers instead of just walking and that he/she thinks the other person would enjoy as well.

I could have had him decide not to go over to Jess's the next day because he didn't want to seem desperate.

Again, what is he, 16? Do you think "middle aged people" as he is described in game act like 'I will not go today because that would make me look desperate'? Everything is much simpler. You are attracted to this woman, you let her know. The next day, if you feel like it, you send her a message 'I'm doing such and such, would you like to come?' or she sends a similar message, or none of you sends anything. I would say that adult people understand in general that after one meeting, people are not so invested in each other that they can't afford a rejection. Going over Jessica's is not the issue, what makes him look desperate in game is his repeatedly implying that she is out of his league. Have you ever told a guy that you are out of his league? And the good thing is that changing this aspect does not involve introducing a big bunch of dead ends.

[Siske]

I guess one woman's sweetheart is another man's weakling, but that's okay. I'm getting some useful feedback here.

What I'm taking away from all this is that people want the option to make more choices in the games, even when those choices ultimately lead to failure. For instance, it would have been pretty easy for me to give the options to have Marc refuse to go to Sylvia's, walk out when he saw that Sarah was baiting him, and walk out when Sarah and Sylvia started going at it...

It seems to me that it just may not come easy to you to create male characters that are believable, at least to me. I frankly don't understand much of what you are saying in this message . It looks as if sometimes, men appear to you as some sort of foreign creature that acts in a whole different way than women, at times utterly incomprehensible.

So let me ask you a question. Say that you are a woman and there is this couple that you know that you find very hot - the gender composition of the couple is irrelevant, it can be FF, MF, MM, whatever. In any case, said couple invites you to their place, they start making out and inform you that they are cool with you staying as long as you don't try to touch them. What would YOU do in such situation? Does it correspond to the behavior the PC has in your game? Do you really stay there completely passive and not even masturbating while the couple you have the hots for go at it?

The last problem the scene has is that there is no possibility for Marc to walk out. Is that what you conclude from all this conversation? Speaking for myself, I want you to tell me the story you want to tell me. If in the story you want to tell me Marc doesn't walk out of the room, I couldn't care less about whether you put that possibility there so that some people can properly lose the game. The real problem with the scene is that Marc doesn't do what most people, whether men or women would do when faced with such situation. Which I believe is some variation of, 'Ok, there is the don't touch rule which sucks, but let's see how I can get the most of this experience without touching them.'

I already had those paths from when he was too Lewd, so giving those options would have probably meant 3 or 4 more pages. In the end, they would have all lead to failure, because you wouldn't have gotten on Sarah's good side, so she wouldn't have invited you to sleep on the couch. So you wouldn't have enough good nor lewd points to get through the game. But you would have the option of being more manly, even if it meant failure.

Manly? And what is that exactly? Is having some initiative for something, manly? Should we assume then that not having initiative is 'womanly'? Because it can't be both right?

Let me quote here George R. Martin. Given that you guys are trying to tell stories, maybe there is something to learn from people that evidently know how to tell one. I think it's more or less universally agreed that the female characters of ASoIaF are very well done, even though GRM appears to be a dude. Answering a question on how does he writes characters that seem so believable, here is what GRM had to say:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens ... inist.html

'Yes, you're right I've never been an eight year old girl, but I've also never been an exiled princess, or a dwarf or bastard. What I have been is human. I just write human characters.'

I think this is spot on. He manages to write the Aryas, Cerseis and Daenerys simply by not making gender a factor that distinguishes the motivations of people. Men in Game of Thrones desire power. So do women. Some men are honourable, some are despicable. And so is the case for women. And at the end, everyone is flawed as we all humans are.

The women in your stories seem to have something of you. Ask yourself, is there something of you in your men? Would you in place of that guy do and say what he does and says? Would you be constantly passive without some initiative or ideas? If one is to judge for your women, one is led to think that you probably wouldn't.

Why so defensive/aggressive(yes, its possible to be both at the same time)? Seems like you have a personal issue with the game or something, atleast with the way you are writing about it. Your "feedback" doesn't seem like a feedback anymore, looks just like a frustration of kind.

Main character is a bit pulled around through the game, but nothing special. He is very believable...he IS a huge fan of HER, wants to HELP HER, and deeply cares for her. While she is in a very vulnerable place he would listen and help her in any way...being pulled to sex etc just makes it a bonus. Later in relationship it doesnt have to be that way anymore, but thats not the point.
How can you "try" to understand a character made by someone else if not open minded?

And dont quote GRRM...I love his books, but he has nothing to do with other peoples work/characters.

There are alot of different people in the world and everyone imagines/lives things differently, why do you assume he would have to be made the way you like it? This game wasn't made specially for YOU.

The part when called to look at them having sex, you could "join" and get rejected or look, create a good mental image for yourself, help a friend too The 2nd option would work for me if a good friend asked me to...why not? People are different and care or dont for different things. As to the "3rd" part of leaving and refusing to watch them...it would end the game...and if you want to do that so early in this game, it means its just not made for you...So "this game just aint for me" would do fine...

Hope there is no hard feelings

[ares]

Why so defensive/aggressive(yes, its possible to be both at the same time)? Seems like you have a personal issue with the game or something, atleast with the way you are writing about it. Your "feedback" doesn't seem like a feedback anymore, looks just like a frustration of kind.

I disagree. But it's enough time already spent providing feedback to this game to also discuss 'meta' aspects such as whether my feedback is true feedback or not.

My message above is full of smileys, which are intended to convey that my purpose is constructive criticism. But you are free to your opinion.

And dont quote GRRM...I love his books, but he has nothing to do with other peoples work/characters.

I should probably reserve the right to quote people as I please but ok, I won't quote GRM if you insist.

There are alot of different people in the world and why do you assume he would have to be made the way you like it? This game wasn't made specially for YOU.

Nor are M. Night Shyamalan movies made specially for all those reviewers that obliterate them. In several instances of my message, I use phrases such as 'I think', 'I believe', 'Speaking for myself' and so on. The purposes of my repeated use of such phrases is to make it clear that I am stating my opinion. You are free to have your own and state it here in this forum. And most likely, truth lies somewhere in between the two.

[Siske]

Why so defensive/aggressive(yes, its possible to be both at the same time)? Seems like you have a personal issue with the game or something, atleast with the way you are writing about it. Your "feedback" doesn't seem like a feedback anymore, looks just like a frustration of kind.

I disagree. But it's enough time already spent providing feedback to this game to also discuss 'meta' aspects such as whether my feedback is true feedback or not.

My message above is full of smileys, which are intended to convey that my purpose is constructive criticism. But you are free to your opinion.

And dont quote GRRM...I love his books, but he has nothing to do with other peoples work/characters.

I should probably reserve the right to quote people as I please but ok, I won't quote GRM if you insist.

There are alot of different people in the world and why do you assume he would have to be made the way you like it? This game wasn't made specially for YOU.

Nor are M. Night Shyamalan movies made specially for all those reviewers that obliterate them. In several instances of my message, I use phrases such as 'I think', 'I believe', 'Speaking for myself' and so on. The purposes of my repeated use of such phrases is to make it clear that I am stating my opinion. You are free to have your own and state it here in this forum. And most likely, truth lies somewhere in between the two.

Some things I wrote might have come up different than I wanted. I'm not a perfect english speaker, so sometimes is happens
I didnt mean you cant quote him, its just that people view things differently, specially fictional characters and sex. So quoting a 3rd party (however good or bad he/she is at writing) doesnt really change much.

I definitely agree with your last sentence. Somewhere in between should be just fine.
Yea, we are free to have our own opinion here, which is great. Just seemed like you were pushing your opinion on others, that's a point I was meaning to give, but my stupid brain failed. Wish you a good day m8