Seduce Me Review

 Pages PREV 1 2
 

Am I the only one that doesn't understand the King of England joke thing

.__.

Andy Chalk:
Seduce Me Review

Even a bit of slap and tickle can't spice up this dud.

Read Full Article

The objective is simple: hit it so hard that whosoever can pull you out will be crowned the rightful King of England.

THAT was the funniest thing I have read since "The Heroin Diaries". Bravo sir.

antipunt:
Am I the only one that doesn't understand the King of England joke thing

.__.

It's like "The sword in the stone", except the stone is a tramp. And the sword is your penis.

Easy enough to understand, right?

Just a great article and now we're done with this game.

rhizhim:

Fappy:

Considering The Jimquisition is "technically pornography" the precedent has already been set!

not really. jimquisition is more of a gorefest.
and you know, riping someones head off and using the head with the still attached spine as a morning star to break other peoples head in is okay dokey, but the glimpse of a dick might upset little jimmy...

At the Escapist Expo, Jim stated that the age gate on his "Gay Mass Effect" video was because said video was "technically pornography," hence the joke. Admittedly, it's one of those you-had-to-be-there jokes, but it is a technically accurate joke.

OT: So what does this game say about us as gamers? Like, if this thing sells well doesn't it sort of pander to the old man stereotype of the gamer as a sex-addicted, violence-craving idiot? Even if it doesn't sell well, won't this still be used by anti-gaming advocates as an example of how we're all horrible perverts, even though pretty much none of us are playing the game?

Lvl 64 Klutz:

Andy Chalk:
The objective is simple: hit it so hard that whosoever can pull you out will be crowned the rightful King of England.

The single best innuendo ever written. EVER.

The first time I heard this was from TuckerMax. If he's the one that came up with it I'm going to have to kill myself.

Ah the porno games. It would seem so easy to mete the two, yet in practice it always fails. I think I had more fun with the dating sims on Newgrounds than any of the professionally produced games from Japanese studios or Leisure Suit Larry.

I think the key, for me at least, is to focus on core gameplay and have sexy bits be on the sidelines. Games like this that attempt to focus on the sexy have weak results. CS or UT where maps or people have spraypainted pin-ups on the walls are fun. Trying to design gameplay around it is not.

antipunt:
Am I the only one that doesn't understand the King of England joke thing

.__.

It's how little Arthur became King Arthur.
Don't worry. I had to read that a few times before it hit me too.

Andy Chalk:

VanQQisH:
I like the card game idea though, what were the other two game types? Was there no Blackjack or Texas Hold'Em? If Go Fish is really the best they can offer, I'd be disappointed.

Nothing as complex as Blackjack or Poker, no. I'm terrible when it comes to cards so I'm not sure what they correspond to aside from "play a higher card than the other guy." It's all very simplistic stuff, though. The Euchre-style game is the most complex one in the bunch.

I think the Conversation game - the one played against 2 opponents, not the small talk variant - is a variant of Hearts as far as I can tell, where your objective is to take only a set number of hands, no more, no less, depending on how high your "bet" is (each conversation has three tiers, each rewarding different amounts of popularity/intimacy/attraction with the participants). At the low tier you have to win 1 or 2 hands but no more than two; at tier 2 you have to win between 3 and 5 hands; at tier three you have to win 6 or more. Since only 7 hands are played in every game, this can actually prove very challenging, especially if you end up with a hand of either all/mostly trump cards or 0 trump cards.

As for the rest, no idea, I'm not really that well-read on card games.

Regarding Seduce Me itself: I tried it out on a whim and have to say, content aside, it's a very frustrating game to play simply because of how incredibly luck-based everything is. Not exactly news for card games, I realize, but most of these games essentially play just one hand of cards and then end, meaning one bad hand (or one hand that's way too good, as the case may be) screws you over without any ability to change the outcome. It doesn't really matter how knowledgeable about the given card game you are, it's completely possible to fail - indeed, to chain-fail - these games if you're consistently dealt unwinnable circumstances. Never a selling point for a game in my mind when the player can't alter the outcome of events.

 Pages PREV 1 2

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here