It appears they are supernaturals. Found this little gem:
https://www.tumblr.com/blog/view/queenstowndetective-if/700715959932026880
Reading through the tumblr, I gotta say it’s refreshing to have the author flat out state all of the ROs have red flags, rather than trying to pass their crap off as “romantic”.
Ugh. And it seemed so good. Too good to be true -,-
Oh yeah. It makes me feel much better about not liking a character, because I can safely dislike them without anybody getting after me about “just not getting it.”
B has already landed firmly in the “never in a million years” category, for me, and I’m not even slightly ashamed of it.
(Also: 3,700 posts. And here I used to think this thread was going crazy back at a mere 300.)
Yeah, the author even seems surprised people are simping for the ROs so hard because they are all meant to be red flags. The more I skim the asks, the more I think this is meant to be a yandere romance, with a somewhat similar setup to Wayhaven (which isn’t really unique, considering it’s basically a VN without the visuals).
Saw this and it made me laugh:
https://www.tumblr.com/blog/view/queenstowndetective-if/702100127878463488
The MC, from what I can gather, will have much more agency in how to react to the ROs and their multitude of red flags, the Agency they work for (which is actually geared toward keeping supernaturals in check instead of “protecting” them from evil humans), the absentee parent (who was a handler, but won’t be now and will be less emotionally unavailable than before), and pretty much everything.
That said it seems the MC will be pretty set. Very focused on work and competent (age is mid 30s), with experience in their job. They’ll be somewhat off as well, with a choice for a “vice” of alcohol, drugs, unprotected sex, etc. So the MC kinda sounds like a red flag, too. And where I’m at now in the blog, they’re set to be demisexual, requiring everything to be the dreaded slow burn.
If I find more tidbits, I’ll share. This was how I found out Night Market was not for me–digging through the blog. That game hits too many of my “no fucking way” buttons for me to play it.
One of the hugs pluses for the detective game is that you’ll be able to experience domestic life with the ROs in b2 instead of being forced to wait an eternity for it.
Oh I hope I didn’t bork the quote, I’m more tech illiterate than I’d like to admit and on mobile
I was like, half way through an essay worth of writing yesterday before giving up, but I think the big sticking point with weak or ‘doormat’ MCs, is the disconnect in agency between player and character and how hard of a thing that is to actually write well, in addition to the expectations the average IF reader has with regards to character ownership and what they even want out of a story/game.
The closest parallel obviously is actual video games, to almost a T. Which makes sense, interactive mediums and all, but I used to honestly believe that IFs would’ve had enough of a more, and these are heavy air quotes, “traditional” book reader bent to the audience. Instead, honestly, a lot of the IF audience, mostly here but also on tumblr and the million discord groups there are now, aren’t all that different from how the average gamer engages with like, Skyrim, for… better and ill and all that entails.
I’d originally had Mass Effect as my example, because there’s a similar level of… character ownership that players have with their Shepard, but Shepard is enough of their own character, especially in the third game, that it doesn’t quite fit. It’s a messy comparison either way, but I do think a lot of readers approach it more as a power fantasy sandbox, where the ultimate authority is the player, which is much more in line with a Bethesda rpg than anything else. The antithesis is probably something like Disco Elysium, which while very good about player agency, is far more about the world and the setting, about what the detective’s life in this world was
I dunno, I have a lot of capital T Thoughts on player agency and how one engages with a game, how a game and it’s setting and world engage back with the player, but I do know that I’m also an odd duck when it comes to how I like my games and narratives. And that’s like, several essays worth of writing and this is already long and rambling
I’d say there’s a bit of an identity crisis, when it comes to IF as a medium, but I think that’d be doing a disservice to it, limiting it in a way. It’s a medium that can hold all kinds of styles of engagement and a variety of stories. And honestly, not every one is gonna appeal to everybody. I adore the Golden Rose, Max Gladstone’s entries, Heart of the House, while on the flipside, I found Choice of Rebels way too much of a numbers game for me to enjoy. Different strokes for different folks and all that
Funny, I actually used the Mass Effect analogy earlier in this thread, to demonstrate how MCs need some traits that the player isn’t allowed to change and how annoying it can be when people demand options that would basically render their character’s existence pointless. And the complaints about “doormat MCs” are similar in that I often find them unrelatable, to phrase my feelings politely. I don’t need my character to always be the alpha [insert gender here] who never has to listen to anyone, apologize to anyone or be weaker than anyone, and I get a sense that there are some people who do.
“wow nice an IF that seems cool-”
AlL mY rOs ArE rEd FlAgS 
Eeeeeeeeh… enjoy it, people.
Kidding (still not my cup of tea so I’ll pass). I am pretty sure that I’ve read QD before the red flag thing (I think the author made a rewrite, at the same time that the red flag ROS BOOMED on every if tumblr) and was very good.
No worries, you did good. I’m also a mobile poster, so I know the feeling well, believe me.
I have a ton of Thoughts too! It is really, really interesting seeing how conversations have shifted over time - when I was getting into IF in earnest back in 2014-ish, a lot of choice-based games were moving away from blank slate/sandbox type of structures and there was a lot of experimentation about restricting PC actions for artistic reasons or defining PCs more. My IF from that time had pretty defined PCs, and my first one even had something where a player could try to do a particular action (tell someone the truth about something) but the PC couldn’t say it.
For my CoGs I have much more openness and freedom for the PCs but I am always interested in the boundaries of their situation and genre and what assumptions are being made in the game about what a PC can do without using stats. Hence things like not having a violence related stat in Crème de la Crème, or not having an introversion meter for Royal Affairs.
Which isn’t to say get-off-my-lawn in any way 
but there sometimes does need to be some constraints otherwise games won’t ever be finished!
I totally agree, and I think there is an expectation-mismatch sometimes too. An author may be deliberately making a weak MC because they want to explore that, but it may become tricky if players come in expecting a power fantasy.
I think as well there can be not-always-accurate expectations about the degree to which a player will be able to curate their PC’s personality - because it varies such a huge amount between games and approaches - and the degree to which players want to roleplay as themselves. I do sometimes see, and can understand, players being confused about why there is (to take a random example) a personality slider between Shy and Extroverted when the PC seems to speak shyly regardless of where they sit on the scale.
@Omeg Yeah, I like it a lot when my characters go through hardship, haha!
I second this, anytime I see this red flag business I’m already turned off. Seeing from what I read about the Queenstown love interests red flags, I think I’m gonna do a hard pass on this one.
One of the love interests literally reads as “They will never care about you and won’t for a long time”. Then another character likes to be infantilize due to their height. I’m almost nearing my 30s, that isn’t my cup of tea whatsoever.
I will give them kudos for trying to make the detective in this game have more Agency and control.
Are you serious? Assuming that people complain about doormat MCs because of the reason you stated is absurd. I guess you enjoy playing MCs who can’t take two steps without falling down or give UwU big eyes when other characters treat them like shit.
But just because some people don’t like playing MCs who are emotional punching bags for ROs or who are always too weak to do anything without having other characters step in and handle things for them doesn’t mean they want to be the “alpha” or can’t eve be weaker than other characters or ask for help. Asking for the MC to be able to do some things on their own and being treated with respect by the NPCs they’re forced to be around isn’t asking for the MC to be a god and it’s not unreasonable. But if that’s how you view it… 
Yeah, after reading about the ROs, I think I’m steering clear of QD. The MC, while competent, is a bit too set for my tastes and every time I see something is slow burn, it now gives me PTSD (joking, but I do cringe). Most importantly, there’s no M equivalent (or anything close), so no one interesting for me.
I don’t think expecting a character with combat stats to actually be able to protect themselves or not be afraid of their own shadow is expecting a “power fantasy”.
I do think that, if an author is intentionally making the MC/PC incompetent, too weak to do anything themselves, too shy to speak without sputtering and pissing their pants, etc. then they need to state that in the description so players know what they’re going to get.
As far as I’m concerned, the “disconnect” you’re all referencing happens when a game description does not match what is actually written. If players get a stat like shy vs bold, then the author should either abide by them or leave them out. But don’t tell us we can play the way we want, give us the stats for it, then ignore them and write whatever the hell you want. Just tell us up front that we’ll be playing a wide-eyed UwU tween female and leave it at that. In other words, don’t lie.
I believe most of us comprehend there have to be some limitations on MC action/dialog for a game to work. Shepard was a good example for that–Shepard couldn’t just say fuck off to the world and go do his/her own thing or the story couldn’t progress. But we were given options within that, like punching that jerkass reporter in the face because we were fed up with the whole thing. You had the typical BioWare answers of: “I’m a saint”, “Meh”, and “I’m a total dick”. And you could be a dick about it if you wanted your Shepard to go that route. But, often, in IF, your MC is repeatedly forced into situations without the opportunity to have thoughts about it.
And, I think, that’s one of the issues. If you’re playing a romance game where you’re given the option to be bold, where your choices reflect that but the rest of the time the MC is written like a tweener angst machine, then either the author needs to ditch the stats or offer an option or two on occasion (untracked) for the MC to wonder wtf is wrong with them, that they normally don’t behave like this. Just acknowledge it. Likewise, if your character is kickass and can take out a gang of ruffians but your team members treat the MC like an incompetent piece of shit, then let the MC say something about it. Or think something. You don’t have to change the game, but give us something to work with that reflects the character we’re building–that the author has allowed us to build, since they give the stats!–even if it’s just a choice here or there to reflect on the fact that their behavior feels foreign to them.
Otherwise, just lock the damned character down, provide an accurate description, forget the stats, and be honest about the fact that it’s entirely set and the player can’t control anything but which branch they head down.
And just to be clear, this isn’t directed at you, @HarrisPS, I’m just responding to what you said. I think that players make a lot of assumptions about what authors do (and should not), but the same is also true with authors toward players (and should not happen, either).
Agreed, if a game has combat stats players are reasonable to assume that they’ll be used and useful, and be reflected in the game. I feel stats are part of the ways authors can communicate what’s important in their game, and if an author is interested in telling a story about intense vulnerability then perhaps including combat stats doesn’t make a lot of sense (though who knows, there are probably exceptions). I think we are broadly agreeing with each other! (Power fantasy wasn’t quite the right phrase for me to use as it does feel a bit loaded and maybe shallow; I’m not sure I can think of a better one off the top of my head. Prowess? Competence…?)
I agree; I like when there are options for say a cautious MC to do something wild and have some internal thought that “this is crazy, I’m climbing up to get that cat and am running on pure adrenalin, I never do this!!”
I think games can run into problems when they try to have their cake and eat it too with wanting PC personalities to be both restricted to certain traits and allowing players to shift them in ways that go against those restrictions. Then you end up with “why is my Highly Reserved character cracking jokes all over the place?” questions and it feels off.
To wit: Like how players tend to develop certain expectations of what a game is going to be (due partly to the advertisement page of said game) and wind up coming away with frustrations when they learn that they can’t play the game in a particular manner, authors tend to develop certain expectations about what kind of audience they believe is going to be playing their games, and wind up surprised when it turns out that their scope was too narrow.
Without naming names, I’ve come across some authors who were genuinely shocked, if not a little taken aback, by the idea that there existed a player (or players) who didn’t fit their predicted mold of their target audience.
I was said mold-breaker in at least two of those instances, by the way - I typically played my characters to be as negative and hard-headed as I could get away with, and when I reported my results in the WIP(s), the author(s) were left stunned that what I did was even possible.
I didn’t do anything outlandish, I still played the games within the scope that any other player is allowed; I simply honed in on all the negative options to see what would happen. What happened was, since the expectation was that I wouldn’t do that, I ended up pulling off some crazy nonsense that at least one author probably had to go back and troubleshoot as a result.
Another example that wasn’t my fault - again without naming names - was when an author was taken off-guard by everybody wanting a character to be an RO that they were certain everybody would hate, instead. It’s a discussion we’ve had in my thread before, so IYKYK.
I’m gonna lean towards “escapism” on this one. How many of us can throw magical fireballs? How many of us are buddies with a dragon? When was the last time someone came around looking to recruit us to badass, if shady, organizations that nominally work to protect the world from unseen dangers?
A lot of the games and WIPs that have happened recently have trended in this particular direction, and for the average nine-to-five Joe, the idea of being the kind of person who’s cool enough to pull all that off is pretty enticing, after a long day of slogging away at work.
So walking into a game and finding out that you’re actually just another nine-to-five Joe who the infinitely cooler members of cast essentially have to drag around tends to chafe pretty harsh.
Still I find a suffering game once every while to be quite fun😁. Though that tends to not have the mc to be completely incompetent more like put in extremely painful situations both physically and mentally. Also quite different from having every ro (If there is any) hating the mc’s guts
What some people are asking for isn’t an alpha main character or any of what you stated but a main character with agency and a sense of self, those words are so vital to storytelling yet the ones where a-lot of people fumble the bag.
A love interest doing the main character dirty and the main character letting it slide is some grade A nonsense. Or the main character constantly being jerked around with no input from them at all.
Not to bring up the Night Market again but the main character does suffer from this. Especially concerning one character, while I respect, I hate how hopeless and doormat it leaves the main character.
Otome games are infamous for it, heroines are usually there to be stepped on.
I want a main character that isn’t gonna put up with the disrespect and I shouldn’t be shamed for fighting back against people who do exactly that. That isn’t alpha behavior that’s human behavior.
What do you think about MC being weaker (they’re not totally incompetent, tho) than all the other characters - siblings & all ROs, and the reason is because MC is younger.
I’ve never seen anything like this in IFs before and I’m actually curious how it will work (this wip is still in its early stages). On the one hand, I think it’s quite reasonable - if mc was a little baby who was only pampered, while ROs were already training… But if the author intends to keep the MC in the shadow of that for most of the story and not let them kick anyone’s ass (especially some ROs that seem to be competitive assholes types) then I’ll be annoyed.
The character treats me like shit in one scene. There’s no option to defend, only apologizing or ignoring it, continuing to show interest in this RO.
When I write to author asking them to consider some other options, I’m attacked.
How dare you want to be treated with respect…
That’s only a valid excuse up to a certain point. Plenty of younger siblings actually turn out to be way tougher than older ones. Maybe if it was, like, a multiple-year gap in difference, like five or ten years, I could buy that, but even then, once you get far enough in life, it’s more than plausible for you to start to catch up.
It’s just interactive romance there paranormal was only there in name and the suspense was when you’d be a good detective/j
Romantic suspense and paranormal romance are book genres. Romantic suspense = the threat of peril or other shadowy dealings along with romance, which is accurate to TWC given the fights, kidnappings, and such. Paranormal = fantasy elements which certainly exist in TWC (though I am never quite sure what the line between paranormal and urban fantasy are). Regardless of whether one enjoys the games either description fits TWC, or a combination of the two as Aletheia suggests.
Honestly especially for WIPs this can be very valuable for authors. For me, I love when players point out that something feels totally off for their character and I will almost always do something to account for it in some way even if it might be a bit of a head-scratcher. It is reasonable for authors to expect a minimal level of buy-in from players (“you can’t push this character in the river”) but it is less so to expect that everyone will want the same things from the game (“you must feel a certain way about this character or situation” / “not only can you not push the character in the river, you will always be outwardly polite to them” / “surely no one would want to interact with that character so I’ll never give the option”).
It is interactive after all, and ChoiceScript games tend to come with certain expectations of freedom/customisability (unlike a lot of the 2015-era Twines I mentioned a few posts ago).
All of which to say that I like when players challenge my assumptions about what they like or don’t like in my games, even if I may need a hot drink to fortify myself when it’s time to figure out if and how I want to broaden things.
So after reading a while I have two things to say:
It’s ok if an RO does something not favourable to the player. I don’t think anyone is saying it’s bad. I think people are more concerned about the mc reaction. I think it makes the story more real is the right word. Like if you don’t romance an RO they will go and woe or be woed by someone else. I think that’s great. I think in the night market’s case it’s how much people were invested in the romance versus the plot. I’ll be honest I did not care much of the plot as it wasn’t as exciting to me so if I didn’t like any of the ROs I would have dropped it. This has nothing to do with the writing it’s just me by the way. Whereas other stories I could care less about the romance as I really really liked the plot an example is shepherd’s of haven or fallen hero.
The other thing was about player agency and competence. I don’t like characters who are damsel in distress in regular fiction so it’s even more infuriating when I can’t even do my job in the an if. Like in something fernwegh I’m ok with it I’m just some guy but even there I feel so much more useful then I’ll ever feel in wayhaven. Like let the mc be good at something and have that matter in the story. If your mc is a detective have them do detective work and have them find out stuff. It doesn’t have to written as a well mystery but for the love of god please let them detect something. Give the mc moments to shine. To be cool. And have it happen consistently enough that it feels like they did stuff in that story. If an mc is a firefighter have them put out a fucking fire. If they are a doctor have them save someone. If the mc has a profession have that profession matter in the story. Otherwise make them just some Joe and give them a flamethrower. (You do not have to add a flamethrower)
mportant nuance I forgot to add . Some people like to be saved/be the damsel in distress and be saved by the ro. And that’s completely fine.
Some people do not like to be saved. And would like to take reigns and punch a Joe.
At the end of the day it comes down to what the author is trying to achieve and if the readers get that desired effect.
So I think authors should me more clear with what they are trying to achieve with their story and MC. Ya know if an mc has a defined personality have that on the box. If the mc is not gonna be the damsel than have it on the box. If the mc is gonna be a doormat than have it on the box. Try to align the readers expectations with the type of story that the author is writing.
This way the author gets their target demographic and readers know what they are getting into.