With some feral critters I can understand the zoofilia argument, but not with fantasy creatures. Just throwing the zoo-blanket over feral dragons, gryphons etc. is too much.
It's not about whether it'd be good/bad to include these characters. It's more like that the levels of interactivity, posability, reaction, character customisation etc in the game come from using a base model, and anything on four legs won't work with that model. It's an issue right back at fundamental mechanics, not at anyone making choices based on acceptability of or interest in a species.
I am aware that quadruped creatures will require a new bone strucutre, set of body parts and animations. It is a good enough reason for me to leave it out (for now at least), but screaming zoophilia as a reason I am not okay with.
The game is built around a single animation skeleton that is shared
by every character in the game, a massive library of programmatic
animations for that skeleton, as well as a single bank of body parts
that are designed to snap into place with each other on top of that
skeleton.
This system allows a pretty good amount of flexibility, but it only
supports characters that stand on two legs and adhere to the rough shape
of the skeleton. In order to support feral / taur characters, I would
need to create (and maintain) an alternate skeleton, an alternate set of
programmatic animations, and an alternate library of body parts for
each.
This would effectively mean building an entire second game from
scratch. The only parts of the game I'd be able to reuse for
ferals/taurs are the pleasure/orgasm mechanics and things like movement,
dialogue, inventory, etc.
It's simply too much work. There might eventually be some sort of
hard-coded interaction that caters to the feral/ taur crowd, but feral
characters will not be fully supported."
Guys, fucking a feral in this game wouldn't be zoophilia. Doing this as a anthropomorphic beast (or furry if you prefer) would be the equivalent of fucking a crazy person. A feral animal is wild but descended from domesticated individuals. This would just be rape, not zoophilia. Also the argument that zoophilia is wrong because animals can't consent to sex is completely falsified, animals do consent to sex; a bitch for example, when a bitch goes into heat, they will go to the nearest living thing with a dick and present themselves as to relieve themselves. Also, come on guys, did you forget you're not human in this game? But, it is in the FAQ that ferals (and taurs) will require a different skeletal system in order to work, and that would take way to long as the game only supports the current skeleton.
Also, zoophilia isn't globally illegal. In-fact only 37 states of the USA banned zoophilia, and even less have high level charges. Do people think that anyone that performs zoophilia is grabbing animals and choking them into consent? If you do think this is true, then please revise your "facts", and ask/read yourself the following: (1) Why can people be arrested for "animal cruelty" if they themselves are presenting themselves to an animal (If you don't understand: humans will present themselves, generally to male animals, and if the animal accepts, also known as consenting, they will proceed to mount and "dominate" their human). (2) Why do you think animals don't run from a human when a human tries to perform a sexual act on them, such as, a blowjob, fingering, and fucking? As a human approaches an animal in a sexual fashion, they don't just grab the animal and slam themselves into them, as this is dangerous and can cause pain to the animal, and the animal will also panic and attack, but instead they very slowly rub the shaft or vagina of an animal to state that they want the animal, but they won't take them. After enough rubbing eventually the animal understands what is happening, and they will prepare themselves. A male dog will wait for the human to assume a position, as you can train animals to have sex the way you want it instead of them always dominating you in doggy position, and then the male dog will mount the human and begin thrusting. But in the case of bitches, they will instead go into the female lead of the doggy position, and wait for you to begin slowly, and I mean slowly at first because the dog may not be used to this and the human could cause injury if they're too fast, inserting themselves into the bitch in a safe position and angle that insures that the bitch won't be injured. (3) Animals have a sexual orientation like humans do, this is why some animals will not have sex with a man and instead choose a woman, but the opposite is possible and has been recorded several times. This means that male animals do not have to be forced to have sex with a human male. Some male animals, even prefer to the bottom bitch in a human to animal relationship, and the male animals will go present themselves to their human if they feel horny. This also applies to the human male being, like I said before, the bottom bitch. (4) Male dogs will stop if the human tells them to, but this also applies when the positions are reversed. The animal taking/giving it, can be trained to suddenly stop and walk away if they feel like stopping.
Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying there isn't beastiality, which is the word you use in the case that the animal or human did not consent to this animal on human sexual interaction, but there is a difference between zoophilia and beastiality. To restate, zoophilia is the consensual act of sex between a human and an animal, but beastiality is the non-consensual of sex between a human and an animal. The only similarities between the two words are that they involve sex with an animal, that humans and animals can be in both positions, and the people who assume it's wrong, don't actually know the meaning behind these two words.
In conclusion, please don't assume animals can't consent, thus automatically portraying the human who performs these acts on them as rapists, and don't assume that humans don't act as the bitch in the case of rape (In which the animal will grab the human and dominate them by biting the human if they try to move) or consensual sex. Please, next time you're going to go complain about "crimes against nature", don't assume that just because we're more advanced than the animals around us, that we invented consensual sex. Realize that humans are also animals, and just because we can talk, doesn't mean that we aren't.
If you did not feel like reading this because tl;dr, then I'll sum it up for you. Animals can consent, humans and animals can trade positions in the case of who will act as the bitch, zoophilia is not beastiality, beastiality is the rape between a human and an animal, that humans also get raped by animals, and that zoophilia is not rape, as it takes the opinion of an animal to decide if sex is okay (animals will consent by, in the case of a female animal, presenting themselves to their human, and in the case of a male dog, the human has act as the bitch and present themselves to the animal, and if the male dog is submissive, then it will instead present itself to the human the same way a sub human or bitch would. Thank you for reading
technically cross-species is zoophilia.. Since zoophilia is cross-species.. So i dont see how some furries are so harshly against it when their bf's or gf's is possibly a different species.. Making that zoophilic according to law.. Besides.. Zoophilia isnt always rape.. Its the same as for two of the same species.. Would be jut as much rape.. Make that illegal too and more rape will appear.. Im just using commin sense and logic.. Im neither for zoophilia or against it.
Ideas
this is zoophilia please dont use this in the game
seen from the game's perspective.. If your character as well as the subject are feral.. There is no "zoophilia"
zoophilia.
Fek gives out the price tag. 3 Million USD for feral to implement. XD
With some feral critters I can understand the zoofilia argument, but not with fantasy creatures. Just throwing the zoo-blanket over feral dragons, gryphons etc. is too much.
At least include feral dragon and gryphons
It's not about whether it'd be good/bad to include these characters. It's more like that the levels of interactivity, posability, reaction, character customisation etc in the game come from using a base model, and anything on four legs won't work with that model. It's an issue right back at fundamental mechanics, not at anyone making choices based on acceptability of or interest in a species.
I am aware that quadruped creatures will require a new bone strucutre, set of body parts and animations. It is a good enough reason for me to leave it out (for now at least), but screaming zoophilia as a reason I am not okay with.
I thought it was explicitly stated on the dev site that feels would NOT be included?
Damn, *ferals , autocorrect is an asspain.
No feels will be included at all? Won't we lose a demographic?
It is, it's in the FAQ.
Guys, fucking a feral in this game wouldn't be zoophilia. Doing this as a anthropomorphic beast (or furry if you prefer) would be the equivalent of fucking a crazy person. A feral animal is wild but descended from domesticated individuals. This would just be rape, not zoophilia. Also the argument that zoophilia is wrong because animals can't consent to sex is completely falsified, animals do consent to sex; a bitch for example, when a bitch goes into heat, they will go to the nearest living thing with a dick and present themselves as to relieve themselves. Also, come on guys, did you forget you're not human in this game? But, it is in the FAQ that ferals (and taurs) will require a different skeletal system in order to work, and that would take way to long as the game only supports the current skeleton.
Also, zoophilia isn't globally illegal. In-fact only 37 states of the USA banned zoophilia, and even less have high level charges. Do people think that anyone that performs zoophilia is grabbing animals and choking them into consent? If you do think this is true, then please revise your "facts", and ask/read yourself the following: (1) Why can people be arrested for "animal cruelty" if they themselves are presenting themselves to an animal (If you don't understand: humans will present themselves, generally to male animals, and if the animal accepts, also known as consenting, they will proceed to mount and "dominate" their human). (2) Why do you think animals don't run from a human when a human tries to perform a sexual act on them, such as, a blowjob, fingering, and fucking? As a human approaches an animal in a sexual fashion, they don't just grab the animal and slam themselves into them, as this is dangerous and can cause pain to the animal, and the animal will also panic and attack, but instead they very slowly rub the shaft or vagina of an animal to state that they want the animal, but they won't take them. After enough rubbing eventually the animal understands what is happening, and they will prepare themselves. A male dog will wait for the human to assume a position, as you can train animals to have sex the way you want it instead of them always dominating you in doggy position, and then the male dog will mount the human and begin thrusting. But in the case of bitches, they will instead go into the female lead of the doggy position, and wait for you to begin slowly, and I mean slowly at first because the dog may not be used to this and the human could cause injury if they're too fast, inserting themselves into the bitch in a safe position and angle that insures that the bitch won't be injured. (3) Animals have a sexual orientation like humans do, this is why some animals will not have sex with a man and instead choose a woman, but the opposite is possible and has been recorded several times. This means that male animals do not have to be forced to have sex with a human male. Some male animals, even prefer to the bottom bitch in a human to animal relationship, and the male animals will go present themselves to their human if they feel horny. This also applies to the human male being, like I said before, the bottom bitch. (4) Male dogs will stop if the human tells them to, but this also applies when the positions are reversed. The animal taking/giving it, can be trained to suddenly stop and walk away if they feel like stopping. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying there isn't beastiality, which is the word you use in the case that the animal or human did not consent to this animal on human sexual interaction, but there is a difference between zoophilia and beastiality. To restate, zoophilia is the consensual act of sex between a human and an animal, but beastiality is the non-consensual of sex between a human and an animal. The only similarities between the two words are that they involve sex with an animal, that humans and animals can be in both positions, and the people who assume it's wrong, don't actually know the meaning behind these two words.
In conclusion, please don't assume animals can't consent, thus automatically portraying the human who performs these acts on them as rapists, and don't assume that humans don't act as the bitch in the case of rape (In which the animal will grab the human and dominate them by biting the human if they try to move) or consensual sex. Please, next time you're going to go complain about "crimes against nature", don't assume that just because we're more advanced than the animals around us, that we invented consensual sex. Realize that humans are also animals, and just because we can talk, doesn't mean that we aren't.
If you did not feel like reading this because tl;dr, then I'll sum it up for you. Animals can consent, humans and animals can trade positions in the case of who will act as the bitch, zoophilia is not beastiality, beastiality is the rape between a human and an animal, that humans also get raped by animals, and that zoophilia is not rape, as it takes the opinion of an animal to decide if sex is okay (animals will consent by, in the case of a female animal, presenting themselves to their human, and in the case of a male dog, the human has act as the bitch and present themselves to the animal, and if the male dog is submissive, then it will instead present itself to the human the same way a sub human or bitch would. Thank you for reading
In order to be actually effective, a "tl:dr" tag needs to be by itself isolated from other bodies of text.
You know, like how bodies of humans need to be separated from bodies of animals. For the reasons listed in this video.
I know it starts off with a few history and biology lessons but it gets to the point eventually.
Also, a defense of zoophilia isn't going to change the fact that ferals are left out of RACK2 due to resource & time management.
I would like to see this happen but see the FAQ. Personally, this is no better than the loli shit that goes around and that's just a gray area.
http://furry.science/#faq
technically cross-species is zoophilia.. Since zoophilia is cross-species.. So i dont see how some furries are so harshly against it when their bf's or gf's is possibly a different species.. Making that zoophilic according to law.. Besides.. Zoophilia isnt always rape.. Its the same as for two of the same species.. Would be jut as much rape.. Make that illegal too and more rape will appear.. Im just using commin sense and logic.. Im neither for zoophilia or against it.