The now-defunct 'Temptare' done Right...
Very (within the last few weeks) recently, a WebSite-based game came-and-went, that diluted the fun right-out-of-itself. It was named 'Temptare', and had a simple premise.
(As a member of their site) you set up 'games' that your friends log-in and register for. Then it takes that list, and every week randomly pairs the players up.
Each round lasted a full week, and was played just 'during the course' of you living your life that week! (Now THAT is HOT!)
Each paired-couple was given a task (here's where they chickened-out), like 'meet up in a park, and Player A give Player B a foot rub', or whatever. If you did it, each of you get so-many-points (tougher tasks got more points).
It was the honor-system, players log in, and just 'say' they did it. Any time or place during the whole-week of that round, was A-O.K., unless the task said different.
Also, each round, 1-and-only-1 of the randomly-paired-couples got offered the option to do a 'dare'. But the catch, you have to answer yes-or-no BEFORE you get to know WHO or WHAT it is. It only gets 'activated' if BOTH of the pair say 'yes'.
These, were generally a little tougher tasks (I think I saw 'meet up in a park, and staying in public, end up leaving wearing-each-others-underwear' ooooh, wow, they sure knew how to push the edge, eh?!!).
If the 'dare' got 'activated', and the pair does it, they get the points (dare points were higher numbers). But if they DIDN'T, they both LOST that many points.
And they still had their regular 'round' of a task, at the same time.
Games were played to a certain number of points, until one of the players wins.
Okay, an interesting starting-concept, I like it. But, espescially with the computer/web-site involved, it could be Oh-So-Much-Better... (as a self-employed computer-consultant, I guess a look at it differently).
I say, when each player 'registers', they answer a whole-series-of-questions as to what 'limits' they're ready to play up to, what 'limits' they can handle their 'significant other' playing up to, what general geographic area they will play within, who they would-or-wouldn't be open to 'play with', etc...
The computer can then put together the most-lusciously-stimulating pairs-and-tasks, tailored specifically to each player involved. And if a couple each puts in honest answers, they will get the absolutely most true stimulation possible. It would match their REAL turn-ons/offs, not the 'surface, easy-answer, watered-down' turn-ons/offs they might otherwise SAY they wanted/didn't-want.
Obviously, the computer can handle Large groups as well (I think the mentioned site had a 5-person limit. ridiculous). Espescially if you get 'geographic play boundaries' as part of the info. A game could span an entire County, or even State..!!
Since it would be tailored to whatever the players wanted-and-could/couldn't-handle, there'd OB-vi-ous-ly be a FULL-RANGE of timid-to-Tawdry task and dares to be played.
Could be hot, Hot, HOT..!!
The bit still nagging me is the whole 'self-reporting' if you 'did' the tasks or not. Maybe somehow have 3-players randomly-paired? 2-to-perform-the-task, and the third to be an objective 'judge', present at the event to validate it?
What'ya guys think??
Any other twists or changes you can see??
Does this whole idea spark-anyone-elses-frisky-ness-buzzer, or just mine?? Current Mood: mischievous