So what your saying is
You want this to be a game about sex
They’re going to have to add in some level of divergence to account for brain injuries, so why couldn’t this system be extended to generate inborn neurodivergences?
No, which is why I never stated anything of the sort
I’m so confused at what point you are trying to make
1 Like
Why would they add it? What does it add to the gameplay that is oh-so-important to add a litterall simulation of the brain
3 Likes
How would they even do that we can barely do a worms brain on a supercomputer lol
1 Like
What it adds to the gameplay is a reason why the player’s creature dies if its head is stomped into mush
They wouldn’t. They’d add in a check to alter and downgrade their behaviour and abilities when the brain is hurt
Did you know? They dont have to simulate long-term brain injury for this! I know it must be a shocking revelation for you so please sit down and take a moment to take it in.
How? How will the game know that a player dies when they lose their head without the need to consider brain damage?
1 Like
… cause… They lost their head?
2 Likes
I mean if ur a cockroach u don’t die
Hey cockroaches are beings that are made of untold power
Because that’s where the brain will be, the game will probably take in account location of vital organs but qdding brain damage its just useless, since the behaviour tab just affects player species, not the player itself
1 Like
Yeah I feel that adding a whole neurological component would just add a whole different level of complexity that’s not needed on top of something that’s already really complex to begin with anyway
1 Like
So what happens when your creature gets a horn through their brain? Their head is still intact, so they should survive, right?
Or maybe we should measure it by damage to the brain itself, in which case why not use lesser degrees of damage to do something else?
Brain injury would probably be easier to implement than limping: With limping there’s all sorts of factors to consider where brain injury can be simplified to just injury → behaviour/ability goes wrong
Looks like a second thread is being almost killed by @BurgeonBlas . I’ve given them a second official warning to stop derailing discussions so badly.
Let’s try to get back on topic, please. If @BurgeonBlas still continues this behaviour silencing / a ban will happen.
1 Like
They will die, because the horn hit the general area of the vital organ.
Both have a lot of factors which I’m too lazy to point out
What would this add to gameplay? If a player just finds themselves unable to do an action they could before they will think its a bug and even if they realize its because pf the injury, it would just be frustating, if they find a member acting strange they will think its a bug, this doesnt add anything meaningfull to gameplay
1 Like
Like hhyyry said
Please get back to the topic
So to get back on topic, here are the issues we still need to resolve regarding sexual content:
- Is the exchange of pollen or similar forms equally as sexual/inappropriate as a similar-method transfer of gametes?
- If so, at what point should the use of middle-man forms like pollen be considered appropriate to show and have the true mating itself be considered sexual?
- How close to mating must an act be to be considered sexual/inappropriate just as mating itself
- How to form these and other answers into a workable definition
We also must define other problematic topics brought up here such as defecation/excretion and gore
I feel we’ve made some progress with definitions, so I’ll try to propose a definition
First, to answer my issues:
- Pollen exchange is as sexual as gamete exchange, in all cases I can think of. The true mating between pollen-type beings is also sexual if the pollenoids are macroscopic
- If the animal has organs that only have function in mating, then use of these organs in the way they are used for mating is just as sexual as mating, even if it isn’t mating or even like mating
Hence, my definition would be: “Mating or introducing pollenoids through physical contact, or using organs that are only functionally capable of such acts”
Onto the other issues in this thread: Defecation/excretion would be “Removing substances from the body without targeting behaviour”. I can’t find a good way to define gore, though
What are you even talking about? How many movies that happen to be filmed during tree pollen season have you seen that have been entirely censored or not rated suitable for everyone?
This is the complete opposite of what you said above. You just said in your post that you want to form these into workable definitions and then the definitions you give a few seconds later are conflicting.
3 Likes
Sorry for being unclear, what I meant was that whether an act uses pollen-type individuals or true gametes wouldn’t impact how sexual an act is (i.e. trees releasing pollen or releasing gametes would be equally non-sexual, whereas a cloacal kiss would be sexual regardless of whether sperm or pollen is transferred)
3 Likes