What's new
By:
Filters

RPG Patreon Active RPG Maker [YummyTiger] Aylia's Story


It'll be major in terms of work done. The entire game is in MV and double the resolution. Most of the scripts are converted and we're recreating the custom ones. Bugs are squashed from the December release.

Note: the update I was talking about was a Patreon post, not a release. I'm not bothering with another alpha at this point. It served me no purpose but complaining in December, so might as well just keep working until it is a bigger release.
 
Here's the link to the December release. It was extremely buggy, and was meant to be an alpha. The prologue overall is mostly fine, but anything past that is likely to crash and burn. Your call if you want to play it, or just wait.

You must be registered to see the links


@AngelBoi - The project was never dead, just caught up in an endless cycle of revamping and procrastination. I took a step back and attempted to right the ship about 2 months ago. Time will tell if it'll work. Once my Patreon gets unsuspended, I have a link to a Trello board with everything broken down that needs to be finished. People will be able to follow along, so I never have to give another release date before testing phases.
 
Still a big defender of this project, my Shaolin monk's training was not in vain. :p
 
AngleBoi7 said:
Can't you just post the link here? The "dead" thing was kinda sarcastic, but still, needing to be a patreon to get any update at all...
Click to expand...

Yes, I can, but I won't until I've posted it on Patreon. Seems only fair that they at least get access when everyone else does. Also, literally the only reason I make anything "patron-only" update wise is so I can post provocative or nudity in the post artwork. According to other devs, the picture of Aylia lifting her skirt and her panties saying "YTGaming" is too risque for public posts. Which is downright ridiculous in that you can see worse at nearly any public beach.
 
YummyTiger said:
Yes, I can, but I won't until I've posted it on Patreon. Seems only fair that they at least get access when everyone else does. Also, literally the only reason I make anything "patron-only" update wise is so I can post provocative or nudity in the post artwork. According to other devs, the picture of Aylia lifting her skirt and her panties saying "YTGaming" is too risque for public posts. Which is downright ridiculous in that you can see worse at nearly any public beach.
Click to expand...

It's not ridiculous, really - or at least not if you look at the community guidelines. You appear to have the definition that a bikini is worse than a skirt lift because it exposes more skin. However, bikini wearing at a beach doesn't have any direct sexual connotations (there may be indirect ones, like wanting to look attractive), whereas a skirt lift does (exposing undergarments in that manner is likely to be interpreted as a sexual act of some kind). As Patreon's guidelines aren't just about nudity, but also about what is being depicted, I think they're being consistent here, because the policy is applied to the sexual content rather than the amount of skin shown. I mean, for example, if it was just about nudity then you would be able to put clothed sex pics in the public area that don't have any nudity by means of camera angle in public posts, but that's clearly not what is intended by the policy which states public facing content must be appropriate for all ages!

For nudity and sexual activity, context is key. Perhaps annoyingly, it's not a completely objective thing. If you're going to keep using Patreon, then it'd be best to keep that in mind, lest you be suspended again (an outcome which benefits no-one, obviously).
 
Last edited:
Note sure the community guidelines are nearly clear enough. I'm also more than a bit perturbed that you get suspended without any opportunity to address the issues (in my case, I could have done so in mere minutes instead of being suspended for 5 days now). Finally, they seem to be trying to have their cake and eat it too. You label your page as NSFW, you are taken out of searches, and yet you're supposed to not have anything "risque" publicly viewable. What's the point of labeling something NSFW? I get some restrictions, but I feel that the example I gave is far from egregious.
 
Last edited:
YummyTiger said:
Note sure the community guidelines are nearly clear enough. I'm also more than a bit perturbed that you get suspended without any opportunity to address the issues (in my case, I could have done so in mere minutes instead of being suspended for 5 days now). Finally, they seem to be trying to have their cake and eat it too. You label your page as NSFW, you are taken out of searches, and yet you're supposed to not have anything "risque" publicly viewable. What's the point of labeling something NSFW? I get some restrictions, but I feel that the example I gave is far from egregious.
Click to expand...

Oh, I'm not saying that your example was egregious, although I'd disagree on the community guidelines not being clear - they seem very clear to me. I'd also point out that while you may be taken out of Patreon's searches if you flag yourself as NSFW, you are not taken out of say, Google searches. The thinking with the guidelines appears to be that upon landing on Patreon from anywhere on the Internet, a viewer shouldn't see anything NSFW without clicking through - and that's reasonable, I think, as Patreon doesn't want to be synonymous with adult content and/or there may be terms they need to enforce from their payment processors. The guidelines stating that mature content should only be in Patron only posts also appears to be designed so that they won't be serving adult content to minors as well (because public Patreon pages don't ask for age), which puts Patreon on the right side of the law. Under those circumstances, I can understand why there response is to suspend the account until they are sure any potential legal issues are resolved.

Patreon might not have started this way, but when the company started to get bigger and hired lawyers to minimise legal risks, this was the inevitable result. It might be annoying, but I think it is reasonable and understandable.
 
"We also require that all public content on your page be appropriate for all audiences. Content with mature themes must be marked as a patron-only post. "

That's crystal clear? Those two sentences are basically what you are basing the entire argument on. "Mature themes" is not that clear, and the recommend path by HW and others is to simply remove EVERYTHING that might have any chance of being consider mature. Well, even that is subjective. What I consider "mature" is a far cry from what my mother considers "mature." Who is right?

In terms of someone lifting their dress and showing panties with my logo. That is hardly any different than most advertisements you see capitalizing on "sex sells." Is a car show model "mature?" I can find provocative images damn near anywhere, on plenty of store fronts. Underwear pictures in a store magazine, are those "mature?" You argued the intent/context of the picture makes it "mature," but to me it is entirely subjective.

I do plan on removing all images from public posts, because I don't feel confident in what risks a suspension at this point. Instead, it'll all be reserved for patron-only and any forum posts. I'm just sad it comes to that.
 
Ah, the Beauty of old Quaker sexual sensibilities in western culture, they make so much sense :D

Akabur seems like is going to do similar after his suspension, image he used for release of a game was simply the game title. He does have his own site + HentaiFoundry page with adult content, maybe try something like that for posting anything risqué?
 
Byzantine2014 said:
Ah, the Beauty of old Quaker sexual sensibilities in western culture, they make so much sense :D

Akabur seems like is going to do similar after his suspension, image he used for release of a game was simply the game title. He does have his own site + HentaiFoundry page with adult content, maybe try something like that for posting anything risqué?
Click to expand...

Yeah, migrating previews and the likes to ones own site seems to be a common type of action among devs when faced with the current situation.
 
YummyTiger said:
"We also require that all public content on your page be appropriate for all audiences. Content with mature themes must be marked as a patron-only post. "

That's crystal clear? Those two sentences are basically what you are basing the entire argument on. "Mature themes" is not that clear, and the recommend path by HW and others is to simply remove EVERYTHING that might have any chance of being consider mature. Well, even that is subjective. What I consider "mature" is a far cry from what my mother considers "mature." Who is right?

In terms of someone lifting their dress and showing panties with my logo. That is hardly any different than most advertisements you see capitalizing on "sex sells." Is a car show model "mature?" I can find provocative images damn near anywhere, on plenty of store fronts. Underwear pictures in a store magazine, are those "mature?" You argued the intent/context of the picture makes it "mature," but to me it is entirely subjective.
Click to expand...

Well, that is kind of the point really. It is subjective. But that doesn't mean it's not clear, either. I think I would struggle to find an advert for a non-adult product that involved the model lifting her skirt in a sexually provocative way, even if there was a logo on it. I mean, underwear advertising doesn't work that way at all, does it? And it has to be stated that if a woman was lifting her skirt to show her panties in public, there's a good chance that would count as indecent exposure because it will be construed as a sexual act.

I may be someone who has Asperger's syndrome, and therefore I am intensely rational about things, but I cannot see how you get to the idea that underwear pictures in a store magazine, or sexy marketing are sexually provocative - because they are not intended to encourage you to screw the model or see the model as a sex symbol. Intent matters. And as someone who is creating an adult game, if you post stuff where characters are exposing themselves, that's going to be taken as mature content because the intent will be construed as being "to arouse". This is opposed to women wearing bikinis on the beach, or "sexy sells" marketing, because looking sexy is not the same as intending to arouse someone. It might accomplish that, but that isn't its intent.
 
Whatever.

EDIT: Based on your argument, the iconic Marilyn Monroe picture of her skirt blowing up is too mature for public consumption for the sexual undertones it implies.
 
Last edited:
YummyTiger said:
EDIT: Based on your argument, the iconic Marilyn Monroe picture of her skirt blowing up is too mature for public consumption for the sexual undertones it implies.
Click to expand...

Clearly I'm not making any progress in explaining things, so I'm gonna leave this because I feel that no matter what I say, we'll end up in disagreement. Intent is important, remember, and you have to ask yourself if there is sufficient intent in that film - because you're not talking about a picture, but a scene from the film The Seven Year Itch, which gives you a whole lot more context to consider - to arouse the audience. I would say that in the film as a whole, there isn't that intent. Certainly not a primary intent, at least. Arguably, there isn't that intent in the scene, either, as "The Girl" in the film does not stand on the grate for a sexual reason (it's because she wants to feel the breeze, and doesn't think it through). And yes, Monroe is credited as "The Girl" in the film, which is primarily about the fantasies of an middle-aged man going through a mid-life crisis, and how he ends up not going through with them to remain faithful to his wife.

Incidentally though, reportedly this scene did contribute to Marilyn Monroe's divorce from her husband at the time, Joe Dimaggio, who stormed off the set in a rage because he felt his his wife being an exhibitionist. So for at least one person, this actually was too mature. Or at least the filming of it - which is certainly a different thing to the story told in the film. And it should be noted that Dimaggio's reaction was kinda extreme.

EDIT: On further reflection, the film "The Seven Year Itch" actually does illustrate my point quite well, insofar that it does have an exploration of the difference between the intent of "The Girl" and the interpretation of the protagonist. It might be worth a proper watch.
 
Last edited:
YummyTiger said:
Whatever.

EDIT: Based on your argument, the iconic Marilyn Monroe picture of her skirt blowing up is too mature for public consumption for the sexual undertones it implies.
Click to expand...

Um, yes? Back when it happened, it was considered to be extremely scandalous.
 
Cerneu said:
Um, yes? Back when it happened, it was considered to be extremely scandalous.
Click to expand...

So, we're supposed to go back to 1950s standards? That's a little ridiculous, don't you think?

@habisain - I drew the picture. There was nothing sexual about her intent. It's entirely subjective, and you're right, you can't win this argument. I can't either. That's why it's foolish to base your policy around it. If they say "No nudity." That's fine. There is a clear distinction there. The problem is that their policy is not terribly clear when it is not outright nudity or pornography. It leads to ticky-tack enforcement where some people can have risque pictures and some people can't. That's a problem. Anyways, I get your point, thank you.

Edit: Let me add a caveat. My whole frustration with the rule clarity stems from the suspend first, discuss days/weeks later. If they simply warned you, and gave you a short window to make the changes, then I'd say their current rules are fine. But, with a suspend first mentality, those rules should leave NO room for misunderstanding. Since, it is incumbent upon the creator to fully understand them in order to prevent suspension. I'd also note that we don't even know if the picture in discussion is a problem, Patreon has not gotten back to me yet. I do know two things that were more clear violations (even if I was unaware of that), and those have been removed. So this discussion might be moot on that point, as this picture might be just fine.
 
Last edited:
Ultimately it's going to come down to whether or not you can judge what's acceptable in a given context as to whether or not risque pictures are problematic. The basic problem is always going to be whether or not what you post in context is judged to be mature or not, and the basic issue is that because your intent is to make an adult sex-oriented game (well, technically on Patreon it's to raise funds to make an adult sex-oriented game), everything you post is going to be taken in that context. This is why the comparison to The Seven Year Itch/Beach/Lingerie catalogue is such a non-starter to me; none of those are sex oriented, but your game/Patreon are.

Enforcement is only going to be as ticky-tack as people reporting the page is though, or through Patreon's own enforcement efforts which are random sampling based (because they cannot manually review everything). Anyhow, shutting up on this now.

Reply to edit: Yep, suspend first rules do suck, but as I stated before, Patreon has legal reasons to have that policy with regards to serving content to minors. Ultimately, just as you're trying to look out for your interests, they're looking out for theirs. Would be interesting to know what was the actual problem though... It'd be odd to have had this entire discussion on a moot point.
 
YummyTiger said:
So, we're supposed to go back to 1950s standards? That's a little ridiculous, don't you think?
Click to expand...

I never said that. I merely pointed out that you picked a ridiculous example when you started bringing up publicity stunts from the 1950s and applying them to modern sensibilities.
 
Cerneu said:
I never said that. I merely pointed out that you picked a ridiculous example when you started bringing up publicity stunts from the 1950s and applying them to modern sensibilities.
Click to expand...

No, I brought it up because there is/was literally a statue of that Marilyn Monroe shot in Chicago, her underwear fully exposed (not sure if it's still up). Not to mention, that shot is available for purchase on souvenirs in many gift shops where families frequent. It had nothing to do with when the scene occurred or the context. I'm talking about the image itself, and that image of her skirt up and underwear exposed is readily available for people of all ages to see. Doesn't seem that ridiculous of a comparison to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top