I think you misunderstood me or I didn’t express myself well enough. What I meant was it context of a game where the MC attempts rape and is shunned or has to face severe consequences vs a story that rewards the MC for murder, that the murder is being made to seem like a more trivial of the actions. Or at least it is to me. There are a couple of CoG games that couldn’t read/play because of the way you are forced into having to kill. See so again, this is based on the mindset of reader too. To me both actions are wrong & I don’t believe that you can quantify how wrong either action is. This is the prime reason I stated and gave examples on how the writer may work around having a rape scene with the writer still being able to villainize the MC.
I just thought that giving 3 good choice and 1 bad then developing how the character wants to go about being bad is better than setting up 6 choices of 3 good and 3 bad options.
And for what it’s worth I agree with you… If the writer wants to stick with a funny light-hearted story then they should probably avoid the topic of rape altogether and find a more “fun” or at least “funny” way to be villainous. For that, I do like your suggestions about pranks and pranking the captain.
The amount of great feedback is incredible!
The number of choices is really not finalised, so there would’ve been more positive and neutral choices, but we didn’t want to develop the scene before we get a chance to hear the opinions of other more experienced people.
I did expect a response like this, And the scene will be changed drastically to adapt to victims or others who may be uncomfortable with the option. The scene will now only consist of a few neutral (like dumping her in her room) and positive (helping her by giving her water, etc.). The worst someone will be able to do is to loot her room while she’s passed out to find out more about her mysterious background.
Read a good chunk of that thread, a lot of salient points. I think what it all comes down to is that we all agree some censorship must take place. Otherwise you literally could have HG titles out there where a a MC molests a child, blows up a place of worship, basically whatever represents the absolute worst of mankind’s actions. The debate then becomes over where the line is and how it is enforced. Ultimately it is moot; CoG is a business and can set whatever limits it likes, and as a writer your choices are to
#Love it
#Lump it
#Pie (just to make sure we have a third option)
With all of us clearly having chosen option 1 by virtue of our continuing presence here.
But debating things one cannot change is a time-honored Internet pasttime so why stop now?
I personally haven’t the slightest interest in throwing rape in there in any story I write, nor really in reading it in any I consume, be it IF or more conventional writing. But I do find it strange for rape to be so taboo compared to outright murder. You cannot convince me that of the many, many HG and CoG titles that were published which deal with taking a life, none of them did so in a trivializing manner. Nor could it be said that a rape scene could not be written in a non-trivializing manner, if handled with the utmost skill and tact; that’s too limiting, and I imagine there are plenty of examples in regular fiction which prove that to be false. We can say that a rape scene could be traumatic for victims of rape if poorly done (or even if not), which is a strong point against including them and something any author wanting to do so needs to seriously consider before making that choice: is it worth the pain this could cause? By contrast, victims of murder tend to not get offended so easily, or at least don’t say much about it. However, those who were violently attacked but survived or family/close friends of a murder victim could still have a similar reaction. So the question comes down to what it will always come down to in the history of any media-producing company in which there is any censorship (which is, ultimately, all media companies worth a fart in a whirlwind): why X and not Y?
The thing is, there are zero situations where rape can be justified but plenty where killing can (to stop the victim killing someone else, for example).
True. But that doesn’t cover 100% of the killings in these titles, not by a longshot.
Then let me rephrase: killing is a grey area whereas rape is black and white
I never thought you or the op were in favor of rape. Just want to make sure that was stated up-front.
Murder is defined and agreed upon in almost every society on the face of this Earth, while rape is different from country to country and even sometimes within jurisdictions within a country. All the valid excuses and permissible situations are agreed upon by all the markets we are selling our game in for murder but not rape.
What this means to you and me as authors is that a passage we write that includes murder will be seen as such in the EU, in the US and in Canada. What we try to convey will be the same - war is a situation where murder is seen as acceptable by all these millions of people.
Rape on the other hand is defined differently. In fact, “date-rape” as @dfabulich says above is defined differently within the US. In some courthouses it is seen as no big deal and done by “everyone” and in some places it is considered as morally wrong as “regular” rape (is there such an evil thing as normalized rape?)
So the scene as written in post one would be taken different depending on was reading the passage. As an author, you can’t logically and with certainty design a choice with the intended consequences and results that you are aiming for because the very definition of “rape” is in question.
Edit: The official CoG stance is: when an author constructs a choice and the choice trivializes the issue at hand. The reason is: The act of doing that does inherently represent the options as comparable.
The ultimate decision maker on this is the CoG staff that is assigned to your project. Like any company, they may decide something trips that line while something similar doesn’t.
Killing people pops up everywhere in entertainment (even in kids movies where the villian usually carks it.) I’ve always thought it was kind of odd. I guess for most people, they know walking up to someone in the bar and killing them is unacceptable in real life. And everyone around you would probably agree. Black and white- obviously wrong. By contrast date rape is a real problem. Some people really don’t seem to get that it’s a line that shouldn’t be crossed. And sometimes it does get trivialised (ie- well she shouldn’t have gotten drunk or worn a short skirt. There have been court cases where what the victim was doing or wearing has been brought into it rather than simply ruling-rape is always wrong.)
If everyone was on board, there wouldn’t be an anti date rape campaign going on around the city near where I live. There’s fliers everywhere with things like silence is not consent, and what someone wears does not justify the excuse “she was asking for it” etc. So it happens out in the real world to people.
Making it seem ok to take advantage of someone “because they’re drunk” actually may have real world implications. I know it’s a fictional story, but unfortunately some don’t seem to have worked this particular line out yet.
(Edit- this actually holds true on both sides. There’s often perceived shame associated with the victim. This does not happen with murder. No one is shamed if they are almost killed in an attempt on their life. Reinforcing that the victim put herself in a position where she was allowing rape to happen and so is partially responsible doesn’t help. This one’s actually close to home. I knew someone who was raped and is no longer with us. No one knew until later and the person who did it got off scott free because there’s no longer a witness. Ultimately reasons like her, is why this sort of material shouldn’t make it into cogs, because there are people in this world that think it’s ok.)
I agree that choices made in a game/book/tv show etc. can have real world implications. However, if wrote properly including a situation much like this could be important to show exactly what is wrong with the idea that rape is okay. Subjects like murder, rape, suicide, racism, hate crimes, etc when handle right provide opportunity to teach the reader/viewer why their actions are wrong. I could be wrong, but I think this was the way the OP intended to write this scene. However, as it was pointed out earlier rape (or for that point any of these topics) would be hard to cover in an appropriate manner in a “lighthearted story.”
Now that being said, I do think to say no never include these topics would be limiting & would be censorship at its worse. So instead I would say if writers are going cover these topics they should do so in a light that frames these acts for the horrific crimes that they are, punish the MC accordingly, & educate the reader to make better choices. Either that or the writer needs to look to writing erotic fiction and publish their works else where. Goodness knows if my popular read list on Kindle is any indication, there has been a boom in that market since that deplorable book 50 Shades of Abuse was made popular.
If this question should be posted elsewhere, forgive me, and I can create a new thread.
What is the most morally objectionable action a MC can choose to take in any published CoG or HG?
Off the top of my head, probably some of the choice of a dragon ones! But they are not morally wrong for a dragon of course.
First thing that came to my mind was either massacring the mining company or how you treat the killed upton at the end in tinstar, but haven’t played choice of the dragon in ages tbh.
I can’t remember one specific action, I just remember having a really hard time reading “It’s Killing Time” because so many choices it seemed like I had to choose between the lesser of the evil choices.
- The Jack the Ripper route in A Study in Steampunk.
- Raising your hand and disappointing Origami when Downfall asked the class if they’re willing to be ruthless.
- Choosing to sacrifice someone for a Necromancy boost in Life of a Wizard. Actually, make that anything that uses Necromancy in that game.
I’m totally being serious about all of the answers.
Wasn’t there a game where the MC had an option to sleep with a teacher in order to obtain a good grade? I just can’t remember what game was or who wrote it… Nah, just kidding.
I would feel inclined to say that it’s A Study in Steampunk, where you can become a serial killer, but I find it more tragic rather than morally reprehensible. The MC starts killing criminals thinking that the end justify the means, and the point where tha Mc starts killing innocent people, all free will to try to change it is removed from the player, so it’s more a consequence rather than a choice.
I guess there might be some morally objectionable options in Choice of Robots, since there seems to be routes where you can create highly advanced military robots, but I never tried one of those so I can’t really say.
I also know that there are games about being a villain or that offer a villain route, but those seems to be more lighthearted and try to have some fun with it, so I wouldn’t call them morally objectionable.
Fascinating answers thus far. And it appears that I have, thus far, received two comments for CCH…not sure what that says about me. 
This topic has gradually shifted into ‘where is the line?’ and I think that probably deserves its own topic. I have a few scenes in another story I am writing (it is rather dark) and now I’m wondering “are they too much?” I also think the question of “how does letting the reader choose a morally dubious option differ from regular books where the reader simply experiences character making morally dubious choices differ?” deserves a thread.
CoG stance about condemning some works for trivialising some issues is a very good one. Although even what is consider trivialisation apparently differ from person to person.
There is a game that i resent now, knowing author’s reasoning, that i think it trivialises sexual abuse, yet that game was still released. And apparently not many people share my view about it.
Anyway, i agree with everything said about OP’s changing the game to not include that option, but i want to add that when approaching such topics you need to be carefull not only with player’s actions, but with actions of other npcs aswell, like for example in this case if you thought of maybe some evil npc taking place of player and abusing the captain, it would be still same inapropriate if handled incorrectly.
From a purely devil’s advocate stance, I would argue that if murder versus self defense was so cut and dry, things like the Trayvon Martin case would not have been such hot-button issues.
@Eiwynn Heh, don’t worry, I wasn’t really getting the feeling you thought I was pro-rape. Aside from anyone who was damnfool enough to think that way likely never being dumb enough to admit it, I have two girls and can assure you anyone who even attempts anything with them would experience things that are definitely not publishable by Choice of Games LLC. But I am also not pro for including it in my stories. I think to do so would require tact, skill and most importantly perspective that I do not possess. I just do not know that the right thing is to say that no one else has enough of those qualities to do it in a way that could be constructive, maybe have a positive impact that helps in some small way with that misconception so many places have regarding who is responsible. But as that so recently deceased singer once said, in the end it doesn’t even matter. OP changed his story, and came up with a good alternative that violates trust without violating the woman herself. So all’s well that ends well.
Giving the player this as an option, even if they’re punished for it later, presents it as an option which may be worth taking. They don’t know the repercussions up front, so all they know is that you/the narrator/the game think this is a viable choice, and maybe even an acceptable one. There are so many ways to move a story forward, and I can’t imagine a plot that’d be improved by turning your player into a rapist. I suggest that you cut it, and find another moral quandary for your players instead.