• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
  • We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.

    Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.

    Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
  • Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.

Is this verse acceptable? Pt. 2

ImmortalDread said:
There are standards for it, pretty clear. This verse is not eligible. Apologies.
Click to expand...
- Verses with shown or heavily descriptive sexual conduct. Said sexual content is not the main focus of the material and is usually part of a greater overall plot. Such content would be akin to an R-rated movie; restricted to mature audiences, but for wholly artistic endeavors.
Click to expand...
I think rance fits this criteria fine
 
It is level 4 and there is a note about it
Verses classified as level 4, even with the option to display safe-for-work (SFW) content, will still not be allowed and will be treated the same as other level 4 content.
Click to expand...
And the verse is pretty much level 4, pretty much comparable to Monster Girl Quest.

Apologies, but this verse is on blocklist. Oh, btw you can always create a staff thread to ask about it.
 
ImmortalDread said:
It is level 4 and there is a note about it

And the verse is pretty much level 4, pretty much comparable to Monster Girl Quest.

Apologies, but this verse is on blocklist. Oh, btw you can always create a staff thread to ask about it.
Click to expand...
if it was truly level 4, fandom would not permit an alicesoft/rance wiki to be made. yet they did. but yeah, ill do that when i feel like it
 
Dread you literally misrepresented Rance in the first place in your thread. You literally know nothing about the series and Rance is wholely irrelevant to that thread but put it as an example being unintentionally or intentionally dishonest (dunno which one but likely unintentionally due to lack of knowledge about the series).
 
BestMGQScalerEver said:
Dread you literally misrepresented Rance in the first place in your thread. You literally know nothing about the series and Rance is wholely irrelevant to that thread but put it as an example being unintentionally or intentionally dishonest (dunno which one but likely unintentionally due to lack of knowledge about the series).
Click to expand...
Tbh you are right, I only know that is centered around sex and rape and some fetish. Pretty much that, oh ya and the optional display with brings no relevance to the table. Not interested on negotiating with it.
 
ImmortalDread said:
Tbh you are right, I only know that is centered around sex and rape. Pretty much that, oh ya and the optional display with brings no relevance to the table. Not interested on negotiating with it.
Click to expand...
Rance has no "optional display". It's just an eroge which has sexual content but has the story and world building as its main focus. It's not like MGQ where sex is intrinsic to both the combat and story.
 
BestMGQScalerEver said:
Hate to somewhat hurt my case here but the better way to put it is "not necessary for the story" or "it can do without". Yea a lot of the stuff is optional but not all of it. The main point for addition is that the verse's nature is not pornographic as it can do without said content and that the story and gameplay is far more relevant than the sexual content as well as being an eroge which is a story based game that has sex in it rather than a nukige which is what MGQ is. Having sex is not an inherent disqualifier though and Celestial also agrees with that as well.
Click to expand...
Were this not your argument? "that stuff is optional"
 
Marshadow29 said:
but that's clearly wrong
Click to expand...
Fr, it is innocent plot and we all misjudging it, mhm. Anyway, there is no good grounds for discussing it here. If you feel you can convince staff members with it, be my guest. I am not interested on adding disgusting verses that support rape.
 
What is your point? It was the main argument that sex stuff was optional, now you changed it, it won't even make it better, but worse.
 
"What is your point?"
"You again misrepresent what I originally said."

I don't think this is going anywhere.
 
I mean, the staff thread already created as I suggested. No point in arguing, but all I want to say, even if you are now telling me there is no optional display on those stuff, you are not making your position greater to convince me, instead I will have a counter-argument that the verse indeed does not have optional display, and it will be more complicated.
 
ImmortalDread said:
I mean, the staff thread already created as I suggested. No point in arguing, but all I want to say, even if you are now telling me there is no optional display on those stuff, you are not making your position greater to convince me, instead I will have a counter-argument that the verse indeed does not have optional display, and it will be more complicated.
Click to expand...
Optional display doesn't matter if it exists or not according to your own words though. This means ultimately nothing if the primary focus of the verse isn't sex and the presence of sex is not an automatic grounds for rejection.
 
It actually matters, it was a strong argument that people won't need to witness those stuff while surfing the profiles or trying the game. It was perhaps the best argument in this thread till now.

And now that this concept does not even exist in the game, it make it harder to be accepted.
if the primary focus of the verse isn't sex and the presence of sex is not an automatic grounds for rejection.
Click to expand...
Rejecting a verse full of rape and sex is for me at least a legitimate reason to reject it. Perhaps, not everyone has the same point of view.

You can ask for permission for staff thread to argue allowing those stuffs. I don't mind it. I will just wish you all hope for having this type of discourse.
 
ImmortalDread said:
It actually matters, it was a strong argument that people won't need to witness those stuff while surfing the profiles or trying the game. It was perhaps the best argument in this thread till now.

And now that this concept does not even exist in the game, it make it harder to be accepted.
Click to expand...
Verses like The Boys, Game of Thrones, Original Tsukihime (which we indexed way before the remake), Redo of Healer, JK Haru, Devilman Crybaby and many many more exist (no setting to turn off explicit content). I'm not concerned at all. All that matters is if the verse's primary focus is sex or not (which it isn't)

All that needs to be done for the verse is a content warning on how it comes from a verse with content some might find disturbing such as here or here

Rance can also be perfectly indexed without any adult content since it's not MGQ and the combat is actual combat.

ImmortalDread said:
Rejecting a verse full of rape and sex is for me at least a legitimate reason to reject it. Perhaps, not everyone has the same point of view.

You can ask for permission for staff thread to argue allowing those stuffs. I don't mind it. I will just wish you all hope for having this type of discourse.
Click to expand...
Having morally disgusting content is not grounds for rejection when you look at it from an objective point of view and the verses we currently allow.
 
Your instances are really bad. Game of Thrones has many sex scenes, but in nowhere (and ask anyone) their plot is even focused on this part at all.
Redo of healer is actually level 3 according to international opinion, but hey? I won't even be opposed to removing it. Be my guest, lol.
And I don't know about others, since I am not addicted and neither interested in indexing this type of genre. My condolences.

I don't think content warning will suffice, I still find it disturbing to index rape games, sorry.
BestMGQScalerEver said:
Having morally disgusting content is not grounds for rejection when you look at it from an objective point of view and the verses we currently allow.
Click to expand...
Let's agree to disagree. I think it is reasonable. Also, don't please use “objectivity” in this discussion, because if it was, you won't have created this thread to discuss the obvious, you would have created the profiles outright.
 
"And I don't know about others, since I am not addicted and neither interested in indexing this type of genre. My condolences."

It's a type of genre?
 
BestMGQScalerEver said:
Dread you literally misrepresented Rance in the first place in your thread. You literally know nothing about the series and Rance is wholely irrelevant to that thread but put it as an example being unintentionally or intentionally dishonest (dunno which one but likely unintentionally due to lack of knowledge about the series).
Click to expand...
Come again,

who was being dishonest?

580919829180186665.webp
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Psychomaster35
Is this verse allowed? (Nezumiman)
Replies
1
Views
609
BestMGQScalerEver
BestMGQScalerEver
BestMGQScalerEver
Is this verse acceptable?
Replies
38
Views
4K
Rikimarox2
Rikimarox2
H3110l12345I20
(SOLVED)Should a popular gacha life original work be allowed? PT 1
Replies
29
Views
2K
H3110l12345I20
H3110l12345I20
Deadguy999
Can I do this verse (Kinda memetic)
Replies
7
Views
517
Deadguy999
Deadguy999
091Franky
  • Locked
Does Devon Ke Dev Mahadev Fit Here?
Replies
18
Views
967
Antvasima
Antvasima
Back
Top