Traits

Posted in

#2426 by mrkew
2021-02-06 at 20:35
< report >
if the exact height is known, we ought to follow the current bondary i.e. 140 to 180 for average height (though I personally like the 145 to 175 for average height)
That leaves the same problems the old system had. I personally really like the idea of tall and short being dependent on the text or obvious portrayal compared to others characters, rather than simple numbers.
#2427 by myopius
2021-02-06 at 22:20
< report >@beliar For example, what do you think about a trait description like this for Tall? (Taking and leaving whatever parts you want.)

Tall:
This character is described as being atypically tall for a person their age and gender. This information can be stated directly, or inferred, but should be based on the VN's text rather than its visuals.

For example, if an adult character is described as tall relative to an elementary school student, this trait does NOT apply. However, if an adult man is described as tall relative to other adult men, or an elementary school girl is described as a head taller than the other girls in her class (and hasn't skipped a year), this trait DOES apply.

WARNING: This trait should NOT be applied based on measured height. It's for in-text descriptions. If you know a character's exact height in centimeters, add that data separately. If you don't, and the VN's text doesn't talk about their height, just assume they are average height for their age and gender, and don't bother to add any height traits to them.


There's room for modification, especially when you consider that it's not easy to transition from the current tall/short traits to these ones. I suppose you'd have to remove them from every or nearly every character, and appeal to users to start from scratch by remembering which characters were viewed as unusually tall/short, and scrounge through Older/Younger Appearance for non-supernatural cases... and you might want to do something like name them Atypically Tall/Short, at least at first, to prevent mistaken re-taggings. But anyway, this kind of description is what I was intending when I talked about literary tall/short traits in my previous post.
#2428 by beliar
2021-02-08 at 16:57
< report >Changed a few things to your description, Myopius:

This character is described as being atypically tall for a person their age, gender and species. This information can be stated directly, or inferred by comparing them to other characters in the same VN.

For example, if an adult character is described as tall relative to an elementary school student, this trait does NOT apply. However, if an adult man is described as tall relative to other adult men, or an elementary school girl is described as a head taller than the other girls in her class (and hasn't skipped a year), this trait DOES apply.


I don't like your insistence not to apply the trait based on the visuals. In my opinion, if a character is portrayed as clearly towering over every other character, the trait should apply, even if nothing is explicitly said. For me, visuals would be one of the implicit methods to determine the height.

Moreover, it seems you intend not to apply tall/short at all for the characters, whose height is known. That seems strange to me. For example, if a few VN characters exclaim "Wow, this guy is 220 cm tall", and we clearly can see he is taller than everyone else, then the trait obviously applies.

That said, there were so many guys shouting about the current height system, but now they are all keeping mum. It will be too late once I make changes and toss out the current traits. So, speak now or forever be silent.
#2429 by barfboy
2021-02-08 at 20:05
< report >Is this Spit-roast or does that specifically need to be oral sex?

NSFW
link
#2430 by myopius
2021-02-08 at 21:34
< report >@beliar That modified description looks fundamentally solid to me. The "and species" part is even something I had in there in one of my drafts after considering your dwarf/giant examples, and figured you might add back in. There are still a few points on my mind, though, about things which could cause confusion if left alone. Let me just explain some of my reasoning in more detail now.

I don't like your insistence not to apply the trait based on the visuals. ... Moreover, it seems you intend not to apply tall/short at all for the characters, whose height is known.
I agree that it's non-intuitive. Here are some of my thoughts.
- In the case of visuals: I'd say they're subjective and often hard to judge in CGs. VNs also differ in whether they depict male sprites as being much taller or about the same height (in terms of vertical position on the screen) as female sprites, and whether they depict female sprites as being about the same height or not. I'm literally just picking a random VN from recent threads as an example: Koiken Otome's Yuzu and Akane are 10 cm apart in height, which is around half a head at least, but Akane barely looks taller. I mean, it's also possible one heroine wears high heels and the player just can't see it, or that one just stands up straighter. Which just emphasizes the subjective nature of most of these judgments.
- In the case of a 220 cm character: I expect that you picked such an extreme height as an example because it's impossible not to say this person is unusually tall (if they're supposed to even be human). Specifically speaking, I don't think there's any logistical problem applying Tall to every character who is 220 cm. But to the users, there'll always be a major grey area when it comes to the low end of tall and high end of short, so I think it'd be important to be strict about any cm requirements in trait descriptions. More importantly, since the database now provides the ability to search based on height in cm, I feel like it's just not necessary. (The reason I wanted to specifically remind to users that they should search for a character height in cm based on their preference for tall/short is also partly connected to the fact we'd be transitioning away from the old height traits, so users who are still used to the old traits could perhaps benefit from a clear explanation on what role centimeters now have in this trait.)
- To return to the core issue: A purely text-based definition might seem non-intuitive, but it's actually the result of asking myself two questions. Q1. What is the most objective definition for tall/short? Q2. What is the most useful definition for tall/short? ...Here's why. A1. The problem with cm is that every user has a different culture with a different view of exactly what's tall/short. The only way to judge it properly is to look at the cultural context of the story itself, in other words, the writer. In that case, what's more objective than being able to say "yes, the writer did specifically describe that character as being a head short than the other character, or have that side character mention that the heroine is often mistaken for a middle schooler" and then (if there's an edit war) being able to produce a screenshot with evidence? A2. "Useful" is very subjective, but I personally rephrase this question as: what do I suppose people who look for tall/short really want from these traits? Sure, part of the time they might just be able to see a certain visual contrast in character art, or keep in mind a character's cm-based height, and derive enjoyment from that... But what's more direct and immersive than their height itself being a highlight part of the narrative, which the characters talk about and emphasize? It's like the difference between having "Tsundere" under the "Personality" section of a character's profile on the VN dev's website, and actually reading the tsundere's cute lines in the VN itself. So that's why I chose to emphasize the role of the text.

As usual, feel free to take or leave what you want from what I've brought up. Since you retained the first sentence with its phrase "atypically tall for a person their [etc]" I feel that we're fundamentally on the same page, after all. So even if we didn't discuss these details, I expect that they would be ironed out over time anyway. It's certainly possible to have functional definitions for tall/short that incorporate cm and/or some kind of visual standard.
#2431 by naiohoras
2021-02-10 at 02:03
< report >Average Height should be made as non-applicable. it generates an error if you forgot to remove it when editing a character.

and requesting mass edit that replace Tall (obsolete) to Tall and the same thing to Short (obsolete).Last modified on 2021-02-10 at 02:07
#2432 by myopius
2021-02-10 at 03:03
< report >@#2431/naiohoras A mass edit wouldn't work, since the new traits are different from the old ones. For example, the old traits don't account for edge cases like tall kids. Part of the expectation behind these new height traits is that they'll be used sparingly in cases where their height has significance beyond being a data point. And if people want to find characters above or below a certain number of cm, like what the old traits were for, that's possible to do. (By the way, the new trait descriptions look great to me. Hopefully the mum people like them too...? We'll see. Thanks, beliar.)Last modified on 2021-02-10 at 03:08
#2433 by naiohoras
2021-02-10 at 05:31
< report >ahh I didn't take that into consideration. I guess I need apply it one by one then.
#2434 by beliar
2021-02-10 at 06:21
< report >Deleted traits should disappear from the char entries during the db update, shouldn't they? At least that how it used to be, unless Yorhel's changed something. Either way, let's wait for the db update and see what happens.
#2435 by yorhel
2021-02-10 at 12:32
< report >
Deleted traits should disappear from the char entries during the db update, shouldn't they?
No, that's what t11617 was for, though running that now will result in 12806 edits. Unlike tags, traits are part of a character's edit history, after all. Kinda ouch, but can do.

This also uncovered an issue that I didn't really consider deleted traits upon editing a character. Non-applicable traits are kept on edit, should we keep that same behavior for deleted traits?

EDIT: btw, current list of deleted traits that are still applied:
Average Height (12789)
H to M Cup (14)
C Cup (11)
B Cup (6)
A Cup (5)
D Cup (4)
Skirtall (1)
N+ Cup (1)
Last modified on 2021-02-10 at 12:37
#2436 by beliar
2021-02-10 at 15:45
< report >Huh, I thought you can do ghost edits that will not result in over 9000 notifications, but if not, then it's indeed "ouch".

In that case, an alternative would be treating deleted traits like non-applicable and clearly marking them in the edit form, or to make so that deleted traits are auto removed when the character in question is edited. Not sure which approach would be better.

Edit: And you probably can run the script for al those "Cup" (see you pee) traits. It's kinda gross they are still here :-DLast modified on 2021-02-10 at 15:46
#2437 by naiohoras
2021-02-10 at 16:02
< report >
In that case, an alternative would be treating deleted traits like non-applicable and clearly marking them in the edit form, or to make so that deleted traits are auto removed when the character in question is edited. Not sure which approach would be better.
imo it's better to go for the latter option since deleted trait is not needed in the DB thus should just be removed from the character info, while non-applicable traits often need to be replaced with another trait, so it stay.
#2438 by mrkew
2021-02-10 at 17:48
< report >Can Twin Sister be tweaked a bit to include triplets and up? Or should another trait be made for that?
#2439 by barfboy
2021-02-10 at 18:24
< report >Good idea. So I went ahead and made one mrkew. It's probably long overdue
Triplet+ Sister
also brother
Triplet+ BrotherLast modified on 2021-02-10 at 18:26
#2440 by yorhel
2021-02-10 at 19:35
< report >
Huh, I thought you can do ghost edits that will not result in over 9000 notifications
I could make them ghost edits like that, but then that's still rather a lot of new edits filling the edit history.

I actually had a better idea, since it doesn't really hurt to keep those deleted traits around, I've updated the site to properly support just that. Deleted traits still show up in the edit form and are marked as such, but you can safely ignore them and they won't throw an error anymore. Deleted traits won't display on character pages and the status of a trait is now also displayed in the changes table. With this it should be safer to delete or undelete popular traits without causing an avalanche effect on the rest of the database.
#2441 by beliar
2021-02-10 at 19:47
< report >Thanks. I think this is a reasonable solution.
#2442 by naiohoras
2021-02-13 at 16:55
< report >I think it's about time we change up Hero and Heroine's descriptions.

lately, a user has been downvoting hero / heroine tags in non-romance VNs with the following reason said in this link. while I kinda get where they come from, it's just not how hero / heroine truly mean.

in literature, the term hero / heroine can be used for a character that takes important role in the story. usually, but not limited to, the protagonist and their allies. it's not limited to Romance VN and doesn't have to be a character specific ending. when a character have a significant role in the story, then they can be called a hero.

the current descriptions are indeed misleading and might lead to another confusion in the future, so I suggest to discuss a new description.Last modified on 2021-02-13 at 16:58
#2443 by beliar
2021-02-14 at 19:03
< report >Actually, the Hero and Heroine tags were initially created with an intention to be exclusively used for the romance options. We already have a way to tell if a character performs a major function in the story, and that is labeling them Main/Side characters.

Relabeling Hero/Heroine not only goes against the very idea of this tag as a romance indicator, but it's completely redundant due to us already having a way to tell if someone is a major character.

In this case I'm actually siding with the user in question, as in my mind using Hero/Heroine tags for non-romance VNs is a clear case of mistagging.

Of course, the next level decision, would be implementing the whole new tagging system to clearly delineate which characters have routes, which would make the current Hero(ine) tags mostly obsolete. However, despite the feature being often requested, it has stalled at the primary level of creating a definition.
#2444 by naiohoras
2021-02-15 at 04:57
< report >It’s like prescriptivism and descriptivism debate all over.
sure, it might be initial intention to separate romance and non-romance VNs with hero / heroine tags, but we already so used to hero / heroine tag used in both genre and we see nothing wrong with it. reforming the whole tagging system will just end up making a mess and confusing (and most likely displeasing) most of the users here, especially older ones. the current Hero / Heroine tags are fine as it is. plus, reforming the tagging system will make the advanced search feature way more complicated than it already is.

making a whole new tag is really unnecessary and will only create more mess. the only thing we got wrong here is the description and we only need adjust it a little to be more general. I’m more inclined to make those “has a route” trait instead.

regarding “has a route” traits, I think it’s better to think “Walkthrough” section in the DB instead. it would be pretty useful for the DB to have them as database. moreover, it’s pretty hard to find walkthrough for VNs sometimes, especially raw Japanese VNs. it would be great to create a walkthrough without having the need to create a blogsite first.

just an early thought, but making the walkthrough like this link will tackle many questions such as “does the character have an ending?” “how many ending the VN have exactly?” “what kind of ending this character have?” etc.

unrelated to the matter in hand, Idol Manager and Producer traits seem to be the same.Last modified on 2021-02-15 at 04:58
#2445 by myopius
2021-02-15 at 06:06
< report >The term hero/heroine typically refers to love interests in the context of VNs (as well as similar media like anime and manga). If you can read Japanese, the answer in this link does an impressive job explaining the different connotations of these words in detail. link So the current tag descriptions look accurate to me. Fortunately, it doesn't sound like there's any real functional disadvantage to leaving the tags as-is, because people can always search for traits instead of tags. Rather, they should be encouraged to do so. Because at this point, the character DB is way more suited for finding VNs with certain characters than the tagging system.
#2446 by naiohoras
2021-02-15 at 07:48
< report >
The term hero/heroine typically refers to love interests in the context of VNs
yes, typically, but not limited to. it’s typical because most VNs have romance plot, but currently, they are used in non-romance VN as well, and there’s nothing wrong with that since it follows more general definition of “hero”.

for the link you provided, the person explained about hero, heroine, and protagonist in more common use in shounen and shoujo manga. and perhaps you already know as well that not all shonen manga have a romance plot, and they still use the term hero / heroine for the protagonist or their partner (相手).

because people can always search for traits instead of tags. Rather, they should be encouraged to do so
one thing: don’t underestimate people laziness. that’s why there’s shortcut to everything we do. that’s why there’s ease of accessibility in design. that’s why MAL is more popular than AniDB.
if “people don’t read description” is a thing, despite it being one click away, then why would they bother using the advanced search?
tags are very convenient for general use, and we shouldn’t try to get rid of it. plus, we shouldn’t forget how the actual things are in the DB. right now, there are many hero / heroine tags that used in non-romance VN. Death of Heroine, Hero Based on Real Person, etc. and they have never been a problem until today.Last modified on 2021-02-15 at 07:48
#2447 by myopius
2021-02-15 at 11:52
< report >Oh, so that's why you mentioned prescriptivism versus descriptivism before. I thought you didn't recognize the basis for VNDB's definitions of hero and heroine, and thought that only your definition was right. So you do recognize it... But you are saying you prefer a different ("more general") definition.

Again, maybe I'm saying something you already know, but the thing to keep in mind about VNDB is that when dealing with tags and traits that can refer to multiple possible things in the English language... definitions are chosen which will help the traits and tags be distinctive and useful. A "more general" definition is not inherently better. If you believe prescriptivism is always wrong, you would also want to argue that, for example, Body Hair should remove the phrase "not on their head" because the head is technically a part of the body. In which case, people who search the DB for characters with body hair will also end up finding all characters with hair on their head.

It does seem like there's probably a lot of mistagging on tags such as the ones you listed. Normally it doesn't seem problematic to use the word hero/heroine for tags that refer to a character trait (like tsundere or imouto), but when a tag is centered around a plot event (like death) or setting info (like being based on a real person) it seems like non-charage could have as much claim to these tags as charage. This could be an issue worth bringing up in t3617.Last modified on 2021-02-15 at 12:11
#2448 by naiohoras
2021-02-15 at 13:07
< report >
But you are saying you prefer a different ("more general") definition.
yeah, in this particular case. and I didn't say that presciptivism is wrong. seeing how initially the hero / heroine tags were supposed to be used in the DB, and how they are actually used in the DB, following descriptivism is more efficient this time, which require only changing the description to a broader definition.

traits and tags be distinctive and useful
and why is making hero / heroine tags exclusive to romance VN useful? applying Romance and its child tags to a VN can already describe what's the VN about, how the hero/heroines are romanceable. to the contrary, hero / heroine tags exclusive to Romance VN only will end up having their potential wasted, not to note that Death of Heroine and Hero Based on Real Person are only two example I picked from many tags available.
#2449 by barfboy
2021-02-23 at 06:49
< report >So I came across the same question again, this time a little different.

What qualifies as 'sex' between girls? Is this sex?
link

Is she raping her friend? Do I need to add the 'slut' trait to her character (because she's indiscriminately doing this to girls because she finds it funny/sexy). Or is this just molestation or something different?

Similarly, as I asked before and didn't really get an answer.
Kokoha does the same to Minamori Touka
Do I need to add sexual traits? Do I remove the Naked (Not Sexually Involved) trait from her character? Or is she just messing around, not actually sexually involved if all she ever does in any visual novel is lick her friend's pussy till she orgasms?

Basically, what counts as 'sex' between girls?
#2450 by zakashi
2021-02-23 at 13:03
< report >
I’m more inclined to make those “has a route” trait instead.

Like
👍