3DS | PC | PS4 | PS5 | SWITCH | VITA | XB1 | XSX | All

RapeLay (PC) review

"If you aren't a perv familiar with Illusion's games, you don't have any business reviewing their games. Seriously. It's like asking a male mysogynic gay chauvinist to write about fem lib: if you think you're going to get the objective truth, I have some beachfront property to sell you. "

If you aren't a perv familiar with Illusion's games, you don't have any business reviewing their games. Seriously. It's like asking a male mysogynic gay chauvinist to write about fem lib: if you think you're going to get the objective truth, I have some beachfront property to sell you.

This site may be called "honestgamers", and I suppose the staff review is his honest opinion of the game, but the rating is absolute bollocks. Virgin Roster doesn't get the flack this game does, and yet the protagonist in that title is even more of a monster. This game also doesn't even pretend to place importance on the story, whereas Virgin Roster is done in the ren'ai style of games where the story is central.

Toss the flimsy, laughably unbelievable premise aside - you won't have trouble doing this if you know what you're doing (and if you don't, what the hell are you doing with this kind of game in the first place?) - and the meat of the game is basically 3D sex. This isn't about rape; it's about fantasy. RapePlay is about rape just as much as shooting games are "murder simulators", to use an oft-quoted press quote.

That is to say, the title is only incidental to the action. An unfortunate premise to be sure, but that shouldn't stop you in your enjoyment of a good wank. And a good wank it delivers, because RapePlay is one excellent 3D sex game. In keeping with Illusion's fine tradition of quality, the girls look superb, right down to the shiny sheen of sweat on adorable litte Manaka's skin. They also respond pretty damn realistically (for a h-game), none of the prerendered still-art shit you get from the majority of other h-games. The voice acting is also excellent, this really does sound like sex instead of the hit-and-miss of most h-games.

As with most h-games, completing certain sequences unlocks stuff, the difference being here it's all about the sex and not about deciding whether girl A really wants you to take her to the park or to the mall. A sex game without pretensions; what more could you want? Alright, I admit the premise could've been less controversial - but I'm tired of wimpy-ass high school kid protagonists who has all the girls flinging themselves on him.

Also, there is very little violence, aside from the initial forgettable story sequences. There's no S&M, no hitting the girls, no torturing them or cutting them up. In fact the protagonist himself can get killed if you do it wrong, isn't karma great? The girls themselves only protest fairly mildly before succumbing to your attentions, not unlike the majority of other h-games. If the mere subject of rape makes this game taboo, what does that say for other h-games? If you believe other games are all nice lovey-dovey couples having clean fun, I have another beachfront property to sell to you. Borderline non-consensuality pervades this genre, get over it. This game is no different.

The only peeve I have with the game is with the iffy camera controls, and the shoddy fan translation - oh, I bought my own copy, I understand Japanese pretty good, I was just wondering what the Scene made of this.

RapePlay is one superb h-game. Don't let the ignorant reviews stop your enjoyment of this offering from Illusion.

Community review by Trucidation (February 16, 2009)

A bio for this contributor is currently unavailable, but check back soon to see if that changes. If you are the author of this review, you can update your bio from the Settings page.

Feedback

If you enjoyed this RapeLay review, you're encouraged to discuss it with the author and with other members of the site's community. If you don't already have an HonestGamers account, you can sign up for one in a snap. Thank you for reading!

	dementedhut posted February 21, 2009: This isn't about rape; it's about fantasy. RapePlay is about rape just as much as shooting games are "murder simulators", to use an oft-quoted press quote. Maybe I'm just extremely dense, but, I don't understand what you're getting at here. I would like further explanation, if possible.
	Lewis posted February 22, 2009: I'm actually genuinely not sure if this review is tongue-in-cheek or not. Either way, unless the thread progresses in some interesting way, I can't be bothered doing this all over again. EDIT: Actually... "This game also doesn't even pretend to place importance on the story" That's my main issue with it. It doesn't even try to contextualise it. Maybe your point is that, well, at least it's honest about this. But the result is you're left with a game about raping women for your own gratification, and nothing else. I've said it before and I'll say it, I'm sure, hundreds of times again: if a game comes along where the sole purpose is to coerce innocent people into agreeing to be brutally slain, for nothing more than player gratification, then that would get my goat just as much. But shooting games are A) generally contextualised by a narrative and B) predominantly about self-defence. You can't rape someone in self-defence.
	WilltheGreat posted February 23, 2009: To paraphrase, "This review also doesn't even pretend to place importance on the game". This is not a review. It's an attempt to rebut another review of the same game, and not a very good one I might add. As is this should have been posted in a feedback thread or a blog, not as a stand-alone review.
	zippdementia posted February 23, 2009: Yeah, I'm probably one of the most liberal people here in terms of free-speech and free-form in reviews, and even I think this isn't worth being on our site. It's not a review by anyone's standards. It is a response to Zigfried's review, and while I do think it would have merit on the forums as it raises some interesting (if maybe not very eloquent) points, it has NO BUSINESS being listed as a review. Delete, please.
	Genj posted February 23, 2009: RapeLay - not about rape.
	dementedhut posted February 23, 2009: I disagree with taking the review down. Yes, it's basically a response to Zig's review, but, if you take out the first two "paragraphs" and the final line in the review, it still ends up being a review, his opinion, of the game.
	EmP posted February 23, 2009: I'll eleberate on this later, perhaps, but you should all know early on in this that the review is not going anywhere. I'm burnt out on the subject on the moment, but I'll be happy to get back to it after I have this RotW out of the way. In the meanwhile, I'll steal this from the AIM convo WQ's been forcing me through over and over for days, despite telling her constantly how tired I am of the subject matter. And that I'm ill! She doesn't care. Not a bit. Blazing Wolf 111: Eh. Nothing. I'm just happy that feedback for certain reviews agrees with my sentiments exactly. Seems you're on your own for that one. >_> Empleh16: I'm fine with that. Empleh16: I'm never going to censor other people's opinions and the day the site starts to play moral Big Brother is the day I quit. Blazing Wolf 111: That's fine. That's not the argument, though. No one thinks it's quality based on argument alone except you. Maybe you're the one letting yourself be biased - your want of letting any opinion be posted (Which is a legitimate stance) is clouding your judgment of quality writing. Empleh16: Not at all, I've just discussed this into the ground for the last week. I claim counter-point: I think everyone's eagerness to keep unpopular opinion at bay has made them blind to what is clearly not a great review, but by no means the worst this site has hosted. Empleh16: If we allow the odd meh review in for normal games then we can't suddenly hide behind a wall of morality when one of equal quality shows up just because it's based on an ugly subject. Empleh16: The Rapelay review is, for instance, much better than the last three RecentElectronics reviews submitted. Actually, that pretty much covers it. We, as a site, choose to host hentai reviews and we've no right to then decide which opinions are right and wrong. Even if we objectivly disagree with them, what right do we have to take them down? If we could do this, then any Chrono Cross review above a 4 would be fair game for EmP snipings. This review isn't going to win RotWs or gain critical acclaim and, ironically, the only attention it would ever really receive is that offered to it by this topic.
	zippdementia posted February 23, 2009: I should be clear that I don't think this is a WRONG review. Personally, I thought the last reaction to that guy who attacked Zigfried's Rapelay review was ridiculous. Some people (you know who you are) had a raging tantrum fit that someone thought that Rapelay wasn't the worst thing to happen to morals in the last decade and cried wolf until the topic got deleted. I DO think that this isn't much of a review, though. At least a discussion of the gameplay would be nice. In any case, it doesn't matter. I respect your feelings on this matter, EMP. They err on the side of free-speech and free-form review, and that's fine by me. I'd much rather have that than "big brother," as you've said. Now that I'm hopefully clear as to where I stand, I'll be done with this.
	zigfried posted February 23, 2009: I, on the other hand, do think it is a WRONG review. But people are allowed to be wrong, as long as it doesn't screw with others' lives. He doesn't come across as trying to be controversial for controversy's sake, so it's not a trolling review or anything like that. He's just... wrong. //Zig
	wolfqueen001 posted February 23, 2009: Alright. See how EmP loves me? Deal with this every day, I must. sigh For the record, in case anyone doesn't know he's kidding and exaggerating, this is the only the second time I talked to him about this. He's just tired of discussing it elsewhere. And he really is sick. Anyway, he missed the part where I explained why I thought the review was worse than the three this RecentElectronics person's reviews. I'll summarize my stance on this since the convo was wiped when my AIM decided it had a debugging issue that never caused any problems before. I thought this review, from an argumentative point alone, was garbage. It's main "premise" (if it even has one) is to attack Zig's review and nothing else. He doesn't provide any real examples from the game - he just slides over one point then goes onto another without going into any kind of depth (fine in my opinion - I honestly don't want to read reviews about rape or hentai or anything else disgusting like that in any circumstance (no offense, Zig), and the only reason I read this was to see why the hell it was deemed a "quality" argument for hte site). Anyway, without any real indepth analysis - the only thing he really 'analyzes" are the comparisons to other hentai games, which actually may be the review's only valid point. But aside from that, it's just a poorly expressed opinion without sufficient evidence and example that essentially attacks a reviewer and anyone who agrees with said reviewer (Zig) for their beliefs. Wow. I think that was a longer summary than the actual convo itself. And I'm out. I wasn't originally going to comment in this, but EmP forced me to defend myself.
	zippdementia posted February 23, 2009: The point of a review isn't to comment on whether a game is right or wrong. The point is to give people a clear enough sense of the game so that they know whether or not they would want to play it. Take that as you will, and decide whether it is for or against this or Zig's review.
	wolfqueen001 posted February 23, 2009: That's my point - he doesn't give a sense of the game. And he argues that Zig's view is wrong. I'm saying that from a purely objective point of view, this review doesn't do what you say it's supposed to do. Setting aside the morality of the subject matter, it's not a functional piece as it is now at all. Unless you were talking to Zig with that remark, in which csae, I don't know why you didn't refer to him directly.
	zippdementia posted February 23, 2009: If you'd read my other posts, you'd already know that I think this isn't a valid review. And not because of the rape thing. If someone had written a review like this for Alien vs Predator I would've looked at it askance.
	wolfqueen001 posted February 23, 2009: I did read your posts. I was clarifying my point because you seemed to mistake my objective approach to the review. I never suggested you didn't think it invalid on grounds of argument, but you seemed to think I thought it invalid solely on moral grounds alone. Whatever, though. Let's all just say this was one big misunderstanding and call it a night. I'm tired of arguing. I do want to clarify something else, though, since that didn't come out well from me in EmP's cited quotes. I agree (generally) with the free speech thing. Even if we hate the opinion the review represents - which we do, strongly; anyone here does, realy, except the author of this review apparently - it shouldn't be stopped on that alone. However wrong it feels for me to be saying that, especially since I got all pissy at everyone else getting pissy about that one topic being deleted. Maybe I've just given up and conceded to the fact (or come to my senses; however you want to look at it... but good grief, it's rape; there I feel better now). Oh, well, I guess. =/
	zippdementia posted February 23, 2009: I don't necessarily disagree with this person's sentiments. I think your anger on the subject of Rape, WQ, has led you to assume that anyone who doesn't call Rapelay the worst thing ever is somehow condoning rape. That's not the point of Trucidation's rant. He presents a very different game from the one Zig presents and, frankly, I don't know which of them to believe. I haven't played Rapelay, and probably won't... I'm not good with PC games. Remember that it's this kind of senseless banning which we bitch about when companies attack Grand Theft Auto for being too violent, or when they ban a game because of sexual content. the more I read Trucidation's review, the more I'm with EMP. I still think Trucidation should go back in and attempt to legitamize his review some by adding some details, but should it get erased? Probably not.
	overdrive posted February 23, 2009: The qualm I had with the review was the one mentioned by others in that it seems to more argue with Zig's points than make it's own. That was brought up SECRETLY and Zig didn't seem to take issue with that. That was good enough for me. I would like a more fleshed-out reasoning behind the user's endorsement of this game, obviously, and would call out to that person to expand upon those thoughts, but I have no issue with it being here. The site's name is HONESTGAMERS, after all AND there is a very large library of hentai reviews here. To refuse an honest attempt to justify a controversial (and disturbing) game would be hypocritical. I mean, we do have a 5/10 staff review (by former staffer Pup) for an (I think) amateur-created PC game where you control the Columbine killers. And the main reason for the mediocre rating was because of how AFTER the school part of the game, it turns into a DOOM-esque underworld massacre. While I have no desire to play that game, I fully support the fact we have a review of it up on the site and wouldn't want anyone requesting it be taken down because it "glorifies/rationalizes/whatever" the two killers. Like I said, this review isn't by any means perfect.....but compared to others we've RECENTLY accepted, it ain't that bad. My last RotW, I had a handful of short sectioned reviews that were mainly above GFaqs territory due to quality grammar. A couple of days ago when I went to the review queue, I quickly jumped out to let someone else make the call on the first one that popped up (the one for Lost Odyssey that EmP approved and started a thread on). To me, it wasn't the sort of review I'd like having up due to a number of the points EmP made, but I can get a bit of an "elitist" attitude at times (especially pertaining to blah flame-bashes of games I just bought and am looking forward to playing due to tons of good things I've heard from more reputable sources). With that in mind, I decided to let someone else make the call because I didn't want my personal bias to get in the way of our accepting/refusing policies.
	asscam posted February 23, 2009: This review covers a game about rape. Look at me! I'm an ass! How do you think rape makes me feel?
	wolfqueen001 posted February 23, 2009: I give up. I tried explaining myself, several times, and it's just not working. Anyone reading my posts will get where I'm coming from, I hope, but I'm kind of tired of being misinterpreted. I've looked at this as objectively as possible, so I'm tired of people slamming me for not being objective with this when I've only presented the argumentative flaws in the review. If my readily admitting to not liking the review based on its opinion alone makes this invalid, then screw that. That's like saying other people who argue against the review's logical stipulations alone hate the review only for its opinion, which is stupid. If you think the argument is sound enough argumentatively on the site, good for you. I still say he needs to lose the digs at Zig and the rest of the community who disagree with him and flesh out his ideas more, but whatever. You're also missing my other point. I don't agree with banning something based on the morality of its content alone. When games get bitched about in Congress or whatever for "affecting our kids because of violence, etc" I get pissed because it should be the parents who monitor their own children. But I do support banning something based on its quality (read: different from morality) of content, which this site seems to uphold so valiantly yet has failed to do so for quite some time now it seems like.
	Suskie posted February 23, 2009: This review isn't going to win RotWs or gain critical acclaim Not according to Drella! Hur hur hur. But anyway. I don't really understand your argument, Zipp, mainly because you request for its deletion one moment and then get on WolfQueen's case for feeling the same way the next. This is an atrocious review; I'm glad we can all agree on that. I generally agree with what EmP said, though it seems everyone in this thread does as well, so I won't elaborate. The issue, I suppose, is whether this qualifies as a review. A review is supposed to offer an individual's insight into why they liked/disliked the game; based on that standard, this review earns its place on the site. As long as it's grammatically sound and isn't completely unrelated to the game in question, I don't see what the problem is. I mean, if this doesn't qualify as a review, who's to say some of the more intelligent unconventional opinion pieces/rants on this site (like Drella's Pong, which remains my favorite review on HG) shouldn't get deleted too? It's a dreadful, dreadful review with a central message I don't want to be associated with. But the guy is simply a pervert and nothing more. Frankly, I think this topic has already exceeded the amount of attention the review deserves, but here I am contributing to it, so whatever.
	WilltheGreat posted February 23, 2009: Not according to Drella! Hur hur hur. But anyway. Topic over. Suskie wins. But seriously, this review shouldn't be taken down. We've had horrible reviews before here on Honestgamers, and I believe we should give this one the same treatment as any other stinker: Namely, picking it apart line-by-line and shaking our collective heads at how poor a piece of writing it is.
	wolfqueen001 posted February 23, 2009: Alright. I concede. Suskie explained it better than anyone else here to me why this should stay up, and now I'm satisfied, I guess. I will say, though, that it's odd Zipp and I got into such a pointless discussion in the first place, especially since his initial reaction (at the beginning of the topic) was to agree with me. Maybe he was swayed (much more easily than I, I might add) by posts that came after him, but still. How silly is that? Anyway, I like I like Will's idea. Let's all do that. Except that I'm quite through discussing this issue as is. I just want to sleep now. -_-
	darketernal posted February 24, 2009: It's an awful review, but I have seen worse on this site whenever a random one pops out on the main page in "Looking for a good read". I heard that there were dark times in this site's history, when crap was posted from various people which was just as bad, if not worse then this "controversial" review. And it stayed on. Let this stay on too then.
	georox posted February 24, 2009: I just want to throw my opinion out here now... If we are going to start removing things deemed bad/low quality/objectionable, I would like to nominate myself as the Minister of Censorship of HonestGamers. I feel I could do a wondrous unbiased job of nuking things into nonexistence.
	JANUS2 posted February 24, 2009: Fantastic. Your first job is to make sure all XBox games get 10/10.
	darketernal posted February 24, 2009: That would be something that EmP would do.
	EmP posted February 24, 2009: That just proves it's the right thing to do.
	zippdementia posted February 24, 2009: The reason I changed my mind was because while originally the review was being attacked for not really being a review, several PMs I received as well as some discussion in this thread had people showing that they really didn't like it, once again, because of its position and wanted it down as such. And I'm against that. Sure, the end results might've been the same, but for me it's all about the journey.
	georox posted February 24, 2009: Pffft, nothing gets 10/10! Except EarthBound. Infact, it gets 11/10, because it goes to 11. Oh, but in my complete improbability of being wrong, I also proclaim any game with a gun not called "Fallout" "Fallout 2" "Fallout 3" or "Earth Defense Force 2017" to now get a 1/10. I've already declared my word final. Honestly, rather this game is good/bad has content/doesn't, the point is it gets attention. It's a damn good strategy, the only better thing I could imagine is "Uwe Boll sucks off Jack Thompson - The Game" Imagine how many sites would cover it, while saying they need to stop talking about it? :D
	zippdementia posted February 24, 2009: Georox... a voice of reason in a tide of darkness.
	Lewis posted February 25, 2009: The final word, as I am the best: It's a user review. The second we start censoring our readers' opinions, we start compromising the wonderful community ethic that is the very heart and soul of Honest Gamers. I disagree vehemently with the review, and the poorly-disguised digs at the staff review are awkward and silly. But it's nothing compared to the ludicrous comments you see on Eurogamer or N4G. Some of those are just plain offensive and even threatening (Oli Welsh receiving a death threat for his MGS4 review, anyone?), whereas this is just a slightly misguided argument that seems to miss a few trillion points about the game. That happens sometimes.
	bloomer posted February 25, 2009: I read this before there was any topic, and I didn't remark upon it internally as being much different in content to hentai reviews I've read before. That is, they talk about the nature of the porn content, usually accepting that the game content is pretty poor or low, often unvarying from game to game. So whatever the politics, as a review it's pretty par for the genre. It would never have occurred to me that users would say it was such an abysmally written review that it needed to be pulled down. The only poority of grounds I see in that department is the crime of specifically referring to someone else's review.
	Daisuke02 posted February 25, 2009: I had a good laugh at the review telling us that "u don't know what tha fukk ur talkin' about unless u understand Illushun's games!!" and then calls RapeLay "RapePlay." Das irony.
	Lewis posted February 25, 2009: I've actually seen it referred to as both names...
	zigfried posted February 25, 2009: The box has "RapeLay" written on the front in English (big letters even), so spelling it any other way usually means someone doesn't actually own the game. ...despite any claims to the contrary they may make. //Zig
	georox posted February 25, 2009: I want said box. It would look wonderful to bring into class and set down infront of me. I would love to see the evil glares people would give.
	zippdementia posted February 25, 2009: You all have it wrong, actually, and I've been meaning to bring it up since I read Zig's review for the first time. It's RapElay
	Lewis posted February 26, 2009: I think the UK press is all over it as "RapePlay" at the moment after a major newspaper misprinted its name, then.

You must be signed into an HonestGamers user account to leave feedback on this review.

User Help | Contact | Ethics | Sponsor Guide | Links

© 1998 - 2025 HonestGamers
None of the material contained within this site may be reproduced in any conceivable fashion without permission from the author(s) of said material. This site is not sponsored or endorsed by Nintendo, Sega, Sony, Microsoft, or any other such party. RapeLay is a registered trademark of its copyright holder. This site makes no claim to RapeLay, its characters, screenshots, artwork, music, or any intellectual property contained within. Opinions expressed on this site do not necessarily represent the opinion of site staff or sponsors. Staff and freelance reviews are typically written based on time spent with a retail review copy or review key for the game that is provided by its publisher.