Skip to main content
Main Content

Event: The Matchmaker

Posted 2025-02-09 15:52:03
#1461679
Just to clarify: I'm only against another change on how the event works, this year, as the technicalities already confuse players well enough. Any undoing or even major change seems better to do so next year, just to be safe.

@Auris now when it comes to a manner to signal to more roleplay focused players to what gender a datable is attracted to, I'd prefer if the text or anything implying they don't vibe with your lead to have mechanically no effect, no minus affection as a completionist I hate to crawl through dates and not 100% them after so much effort given how some wolves hate my lead's personality and eyes orz.

But I do think that the new eyes on a realistic wolf won't look out of place much, given the yellow and purple bland, that app will be an option when design a new lead aa well, for sure.
Volk
#15627
Posted 2025-02-09 15:57:49
#1461684
Yeah, that would be fine too! Anything to let me know which wolves are interested in my lead would be nice, the execution here doesn't really matter to me. Even if they just auto-showed the sexuality part at the start, but again I do think it's a cool choice it has to be unlocked considering that is very personal info.
And yeah!! I try to avoid taking eyes into consideration as much with my realistic wolves to be fair because there's some really cool unrealistic eyes (cold, fae, changeling, tranquil, and saros are some of my favorites) that I don't want to lock myself out of (though I do get tempted to go full realistic- like my current lead has plain yellow eyes).
Auris
#40721
Posted 2025-02-09 15:59:32
#1461686
I still think the latest poll was biased trying to persuade into "playersexual" option by the way it was written:


Compared to the previous poll that looked neutral for real.
Dżanek
#24018
Posted 2025-02-09 16:17:47
#1461702
Dza's addition really makes me wonder what was the exact intention with how the preferences option is supposed to work, were we supposed to date all our datables and fully locked out of dating the others for the rest of the event or were we supposed to eventually get the others when we ran out of the ones attracted to our leads?
The newer poll seems to imply the former very strongly, so maybe what we had until yesterday was a patchwork solution?
Volk
#15627
Posted 2025-02-09 16:45:05
#1461729
I mean, if they want to give all wolves to all genders why have an option to choose? This only makes nonbinary leaders players unhappy because the pool is unfair for them. And this happens for the third time. If i would play as nonbinary this would really feel discouraging
Bluejay
#5910
Posted 2025-02-09 17:05:51
#1461738
Devs simply wanted NPCs to be made playersexual. The majority in the poll didn't matter. If it had, NPCs wouldn't have been playersexual in the previous year, but they were, against the poll's most voted option.

I guess the purpose of the poll was to check whether introducing playersexuality was controversial but due to insignificant difference in votes and below 50% of the most voted result, it was decided to implement it for the duration of the event.
Dżanek
#24018
Posted 2025-02-09 18:05:22
#1461801
Agreed @Bluejay

I feel like the simple solution would've been to equal out the dating pool instead of disregarding their sexuality orientation
★ Atmosfera
#8870
Posted 2025-02-09 18:05:47 (edited)
#1461802
Way I see it, the event was originally intended to have wolves with preferences. Oaken, since he was mentioned, only likes females. Therefore, only players who identified as female would get him. Period. Players who chose male or NB that year could only get the decor of him via trading with other players. (The decor hadn't existed initially either, but the point still stands. You couldn't get Oaken if you were male/NB because Oaken simply isn't attracted to males/NB. That's how he was designed.)

But when players found out that NB had a significantly smaller pool of dates and thus much less LB in the long run, the idea to make all NPCs 'playersexual' came into play. This was originally meant to be a temporary fix - intended to last that first year and that first year alone. The NB pool was expected to be balanced out by the next year, and if it wasn't, then keep the vague preference in place until the pools were fair.

As of now, the pools are still not balanced. Regardless of whether players dislike it, the open-ended dating should stay in place because the imbalance that caused it is still in place.

I'm on the side of hating the playersexual nature of the event. I was for it at the beginning because I thought it would only continue for a year or two, not be permanent. These NPCs were written with intent in mind and they're all a bland blob of vague pansexuality now, many have even had their dialogue - again, that was written with intent - butchered to reflect that. Willa no longer calls you 'the potential father of her pups' but rather 'the potential parent of her pups.' But she wants a male to be with and have pups of her own blood with, that's her whole deal. Even Brad, for all his flaws, is clearly designed to be a womanizer. That was intentional, but it's muddled now that this aggressively straight frat-ass-lookin' boy is suddenly into males.

I'm not someone who's super gung-ho about representation, but to see it be built up on purpose and then ripped away does feel off. It's just a few lines of dialogue here and there, but for some of them, their preferences were a part of how they interacted with the player. For those, it feels like part of them has been washed away. It feels especially weird for the strictly straight and strictly gay characters. I can't express in words exactly why, but I'm sure it has something to do with real life similarities.

All my yapping aside, getting rid of the playersexuality would go over badly. Many players got used to it and highly prefer it, through any number of personal reasons. The expectation of impossibly getting every decor every year without buying them, the insane increase in LB due to always unlocking new NPCs, having favorites in different preference pools, I could go on. It's a cat let out of the bag situation. Now that players have been given that freedom to date whoever they like, they aren't going to want that to change.

There isn't a change that can be made that will make everyone happy. It's impossible, and the closest it could probably get is maybe the queer-platonic idea. I've had my criticisms about WD, but holy shit, I don't envy the devs on this. I wish y'all luck, seriously.

Edit to add, since Sloane's post below reminded me: Accusing the devs of rigging it intentionally because they wanted it playersexual all along is... for the sake of civility, let's just go with incredibly silly. if they wanted it playersexual from the start, they would have made it that way from the start. There wouldn't even be a gender preference option in that case.

To end on any positive note I can, I find the two new NPCs adorable. Their art is great and their designs are unique enough to stand out in their own way. Curious about the next two newcomers!
Whirligig
#11137
Posted 2025-02-09 18:16:40 (edited)
#1461813
I think this really getting blown out of proportion 💀
(I think I meant that it was getting super angry-ish or something, getting echoed more and more, but I was/am half-asleep and can't for the life of me remember the correct phrase/meaning I was thinking of)

I don't think the devs were like, "we're gonna rig it" or whatever, I thinks that people really did want it to be playersexual. And something I want to emphasize (because people seem to be getting more agitated (??))

A good majority won playersexual in the last poll


But a good majority also aren't here to justify their decision, because they don't have anything to add (which absolutely valid!! I'm only here because I already was lmao)

There's always going to be discontent. Always. But the devs are ultimately the final say.

And like someone said earlier, having a RP mechanic that doesn't take from the romance is what is best. Okay, sure, people might be able to get incredibly lucky and obtain a decor they wanted for cheap or free. But people see a market and will charge an arm and a leg. A scarce few are unreliable, especially when others will absolutely buy out the cheap and turn to sell it higher.

Admittedly, I lost where I was going with this, but I think what I mean to get across is this:

- The Devs didn't word the poll to cover their asses
- It really doesn't take away rep, since it's currently impossible to have it only as flavor text (not affecting Affection)
- A majority voted playersexual; not every single thing can be included (queerplatonic, asexual, poly, etc.) (which is kinda sad, because aroace rep would make me sob happy tears you have no idea)
- Uhhh I completely forgot what my last point was :(



Unrelated, sorta, but oh my GOD do I hope we get some aro, ace, or even aroace bases because that would be soso cool

(Edit to fix some miscommunications, my apologies)
Sloane
#9468
Posted 2025-02-09 19:07:59 (edited)
#1461846
We are entitled to express our opinions and feel the way we do, just as you are. It's okay if you disagree with the opposing viewpoint. However, it's not acceptable to dismiss our emotions with phrases like "blowing it out of proportion" or "the developers put their foot down," regardless of your intentions. I strongly believe that, regardless of your feelings about the change, it diminishes the representation of sexual orientation.

The change disappointed me, especially since I was unaware of the poll. Nonetheless, I still find the event fun and enjoyable.
★ Atmosfera
#8870
Search Topic