• 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.

Verses with high sexual content (STAFF ONLY)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Visual novels often have 18+ versions which has sex scenes, and all age versions without any sex scenes, sometimes have like 15+ or 17+ versions as well which only has nudity and not really sex.

That's why i am wondering where the line is, sex scenes, or nudity, and if it's at sex scenes does it depend on if it's explicit or not, and if so does it also depend on the frequency of said scenes.

Obviously if the entire game revolves around sex and it's in your face about it that would obviously be considered ****, if it's like what i said about What a Beautiful Series, then it's obviously not **** since not only are the sex scenes infrequent, it's not even explicit since all you see in them are boobs.
 
You could simply stop like I've politely asked you to and let someone answer my question and be done with this issue yet you continue to insist on arguing with me

Also huniepop revolves entirely around sex and nothing else yet it's somehow fine
 
Andytrenom said:
I'm against the disclaimer. From what I understand, there are two reasons to use it,
1. We are obligated to do so: Which isn't true, since like others have stated, making sure users below 18 don't look up inappropriate material off site isn't our responsibility, it's the guardians

2. We want to avoid it for moral reasons: In this case we would just be using a very unreliable method of keeping kids away from material they shouldn't. People don't care about a few words in a box, if they feel like searching something they will do it anyway and we will have barely done anything to stop them

I just don't think there's really a reason for this disclaimer to be applied or that it would solve any problems if it exists. That's my position here
Click to expand...
Getting this back on track, this is my opinion on banners and categories and disclaimers.
 
I think that any material that covers mature subject matter whether it be Gore or Nudity should have a disclaimer. That way we can take no blame at all if they find out.
 
Matthew Schroeder said:
Can you not turn this into a mess once again? Just let the thread continue apace, don't keep pushing for that.
Click to expand...
How about you sto trying to silence me and just let someone answer the damn question
 
If a child aged 9 finds pornography on the internet after two google clicks, the fault lies not on Google or the **** Websites themselves, the fault lies in the child's parents.

Taking responsability for the children of others is an absurd conceit and we do not need to act like we are responsible for whatever a child may or may not see.

We already have a brief warning in our front page, and at most we are also considering adding a specific warning rating on some verse pages. That's all that needs to be done, nothing else. How many more layers of "protection" must we addorn ourselves on? There's nothing to protect ourselves from.
 
Matthew Schroeder said:
Getting this back on track, this is my opinion on banners and categories and disclaimers.
Click to expand...
Non of that really answers any of the arguments in favor of havig a category, though, as these arguments were neither about obligation nor morals.

As said, we would have a category like this if it were literally anything else, so why would we deliberately prohibit having this category?

It's just uneccesarily making it hard to keep track and regulate things, as well as making things difficult if there should be any changes in the future.

And for absolutely no return.
 
I am not against category. If the profiles will be delted in the future even the verse category makes the mass deletion possible, in any case. Hence, this reason is why I am not against the category and having category like @DontTalkDT and @Wokistan's points alluded will make it easier to keep track and regulate things, as well as making things easier if there should be any changes in the future.
 
I am not against the category, but idk where we draw the line for what counts as an "Adult Sexual Verse" or something like that.

Obviously if the verse revolves around sex, it would count, but other than that idk.
 
My stance is to base it on how much sexual content there is as a % of the whole. The verse having an option to remove it doesn't matter.

"The **** can be removed from the story without issues" isn't really a helpful guideline when removing the **** removes 99% of the content.
 
I agree with DontTalk about that adding a category to verses with pornographic content would be a good precaution, in case we need to quickly find them later.

On the other hand, I also agree with AKM and Ryukama (and Promestein?) about that if we have a poorly defined line for what is or isn't acceptable, people will likely recurrently step over it, and we will get a lot of these types of discussions in the future, due to additions of inappropriate content.

As such, it might be better to not allow any "**** with a plot" whatsoever, to save ourselves a lot of unnecessary recurrent work. It isn't like "Monster Girl Quest" and "Huniepop" are particularly important for the wiki to start with.
 
Yeah, the category should not be something like ****/Hental, as such things would give a bad impression that those are allowed. If there's going to be a category, it would just be something like "Mature Subject Matter". But I'm leaning towards agreeing with Promestein and Matt that we shouldn't have a category. But just a warning similar to Matt's suggestion.
 
DarkDragonMedeus said:
Yeah, the category should not be something like ****/Hental, as such things would give a bad impression that those are allowed. If there's going to be a category, it would just be something like "Mature Subject Matter". But I'm leaning towards agreeing with Promestein and Matt that we shouldn't have a category. But just a warning similar to Matt's suggestion.
Click to expand...
Yeah.

No need to get overly paranoid and go about deleting stuff to save face. We already had this conversation about a dozen times already.
 
If people really want to go with the warning thing, then I don't see why a clean CoC page won't be allowed if it has a warning. It isn't our fault if a 13 year old sees the page and plays the game, it is the internet's and their parents', right?
 
Like I said before, I fear this thread is in the midsts of severely losing its rails and that people are polarizing their opinions and making them more extreme as a result, as opposed to the mostly calm and collected beginning of the thread.

Ultimately, I think neither a category nor warnings are necessary, and both are just a product of an overzealous, overtly-fearful staff that is worrying over nothing, in my honest opinion.

I am fine with adding a warning to certain verses if we absolutely feel the need to do something that only amounts to a pat on the back, though we already have a brief warning on the Site's Front Page. And really, no need to be so paranoid about anything sexual. The prudess in display is a little too much.

However, I am absolutely against the perceived necessity of a Category, specially since the only way people are pushing for it is that they are expecting that there will be the need to delete lal these verses in the future, both of which are terrible solutions. One is making decisions based solely on irrational fear, and the second is just taking extreme unillateral solutions to get rid of a perceived problem.

Allowing "literally anything" is a big no and I think everyone who's reasonable in this thread has agreed to this. However, making this an issue of "Think of the children!" and act like complete prudes, basically acting like any series which contains explicit sexual material intended to be pleasing in any sense of the word should be permanently banned when really we are okay with things that are objectively far worse morally, but to which we don't bat the slightest eye because it has no nipples and genitals.

Please spare me this double standard. What makes sex so much worse than mass murder, or torture, or suicide? Why is a verse that has a lot of sex worse than a series with gallons of bloods and guts? What is it that differs Eyes Wide Shut from American Psycho? Or, why is something like Hatred, a game about an edgelord mass murderer shooting civilians at will okay, but Huniepop, a completely harmless game about playing candy crush to score at dates, not okay?
 
It doesn't matter if a **** game has more story or less, at the end of the day both are the same content. I am legit surprised to see people pushing for making pages for **** games and with logic that is "this **** game has more story content and less **** than this other game so we can make a clean page for the first one but not the second one". Double standards.

At this point you're basically saying that **** games/series are allowed as long as they even have any story worth making profiles for, except the cases where it's nothing but ****. And every **** game is "**** with a plot", not "plot with ****". That's why they are called "****" games.
 
If it's an Action or Adventure game first and foremost and Mature Content is a side line, it's fine. If it's a **** game before anything else, it's not okay.
 
There's no double standards going on, AKM. MGQ and CoC are very different materials and Huniepop hardly qualifies as ****.

And calling Monster Girl Quest just **** and acting like it has nothing of value / legitimacy is showing a lot of preconceived notions while also ignoring basically this entire thread.
 
Saikou The Lewd King said:
As I've said:
CoC: Excuse for ****. There is plot yes, but it's usually just a way to introduce new scenes or stuff related to said scene.

MGQ: Features large amount of story and yes, many h-scenes, but they are rare enough compared to the verse's actual story and lore.

The line for me is the duality between mainly story with **** vs **** with story in-between, and CoC fits definitively in the former.
Click to expand...
Literally this issue was solved in this thread's 8th post. That it's even being discussed yet rather than a more general topic is beyond me.

And I'll say again: If Hybrid x Heart can get an All-Ages Fandom Wiki, there's no reason for us to act like borderline evangelicals around this wiki.
 
Well, I agree about that depictions of gruesome torture and murder is far more objective morally than drawn sex between consenting adults.

I didn't get much feedback to my old story (that I finished over 11 years ago at this point), but despite that it was psychologically disturbing to the point of almost making "A Game of Thrones" look like "My Little Pony", and essentially consisted of everything in the world that made me feel sickened at the time, what I recall that people reacted most to was a brief sex scene that took up around 2% of the narrative.
 
@Antvasima

This is exactly what I mean. To quote George R.R. Martin himself:

I can describe an axe entering a human skull in great explicit detail and no one will blink twice at it. I provide a similar description, just as detailed, of a penis entering a ******, and I get letters about it and people swearing off. To my mind this is kind of frustrating, it's madness.
I also sincerely hope we're not going to suddenly start pretending to be some sort of exemplar moral guardians now, because seriously we're anything but.

It's hypocrisy of the highest level to suddenly act like certain content is objectionable because children might see it, and then act like its OUR problem and pretend to be virtuous because of it. We have absolutely [Censored] All to do with what other people's children end up finding on the internet. It is not our concern and I want none of this on the wiki.
 
"MGQ and CoC are very different materials"

Aren't they both classified as **** games first and foremost. And now I can't call a **** game ****? Again, it DOES NOT MATTER if one **** game has more story content, it's still classified as **** GAME for a reason.

Anyway, according to you Matt, where would you draw the line? Not something subjective as "this is **** with plot and this is **** with more plot so the latter is allowed". I want a clear well-defined line.
 
I think that the reason for the inconsistent public perception is that fictional depictions of torture and murder are generally done in a manner that aspires to horrify others (and if we sugar-coat reality too much, people in general will become unable to remotely deal with it), whereas sex is usually inserted for personal arousal purposes.
 
@AKM

Corruption of Champions is built entirely around sex. The mechanics are built around sex. 90% of the game consists of sex. Almost all interactions with enemies and NPCs end up in sex. All of the lore that exists in the world is there purely as a backdrop for sex. It takes legitimate effort to find story in the game because it's literally scattered between thousands of sex scenes.

Monster Girl Quest has a ton of sex scenes, but outside of about 6 unskippable events that occur over the course of three games and over 50 hours of gameplay and story, all of them are optional, skippable, and non-canonical.

With the sequel trilogy, Monster Girl Quest: Paradox, sex became even more secondary. Now the game isn't just a visual novel with RPG Fighting, but an actual honest-to-god RPG with exploration, party manageament, leveling up, equipment, etc. And in this case, all sex scenes are optional.

Do you see the very clear difference?
 
Antvasima said:
I think that the reason for the inconsistent public perception is that fictional depictions of torture and murder are generally done in a manner that aspires to horrify others (and if we sugar-coat reality too much, people in general will become unable to remotely deal with it), whereas sex is usually inserted for personal arousal purposes.
Click to expand...
Doesn't it say something deeply disturbing about our society and culture that we are more accepting of content meant to horrify, disturb or disgust us, than we are about content meant to incite arousal and happiness in us?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Lloydblitzed
  • Locked
Discussion Rules lil Revision
Replies
39
Views
2K
Antvasima
Antvasima
DarkGrath
Proposal for Site/Forum Image Standards Revision
3 4 5
Replies
175
Views
9K
CloverDragon03
CloverDragon03
  • Locked
Clarification Of Sentence Phrasings And Addition Of Expected Punishments For Each Type Of Rule Breach For All Rules Pages
Replies
21
Views
2K
Mahek_The_Assassin_Silent_Killer
Antvasima
  • Locked
Fan art for characters with no official appearance
Replies
38
Views
4K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Agnaa
  • Locked
Proposal for Off-Site Links Revision
Replies
11
Views
3K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Back
Top