The Science of a Sexy Malfunction

[AmpFetish]

Hey guys. I was trying to explain what made a malfunction sexy for me for a studio, using Fection's animated youtube videos as a reference. I ended up...writing a LOT more than I intended. But if you guys agree on these points, should this be a guideline for a good malfunction for studios/models to use? I don't know. Tell me what you think.

The videos used for reference.
CandyBot 007
The Prototypists


The Science of a Sexy Malfunction
1. In Fection's videos, I know exactly what's causing the robot to break down/malfunction. He gives a very good reason as to why the malfunction is happening. I imagine this helps with believability. And every new bit of damage is clearly shown to tease for the next part. This makes it more exciting to watch.

2. Fetish actresses tend to create a backwards uncanny valley. This is when the actress isn't dedicated/focused enough to the part, and creates a sloppy halfway to being a robot. Fection is able to precisely animate every moment of the robot, making my mind fully accept that it is indeed a robot, and not an actress. No imagination is needed for his videos.

3. Fection coordinates the fembot's malfunction very well. Instead of putting an array of sounds in the background, every little sound matches a movement or twitch that the fembot does. It's like a well timed choreography. Me being an animator, I know Fection has to choreograph every little movement in his videos for the sake of storyboarding.

4. The malfunction has a clear beginning, middle, and end. It's not random, there's a clear breaking down of the fembot's internal workings. When it becomes random, it becomes silly. Watching a fembot say "Malfunction" for 5 minutes with random sounds in the background is boring. Watching a build up to the fembot finally blowing out or breaking down is more exciting.

5. No matter how much she's breaking, the fembot always tries her hardest to hold the illusion that she's real. This is also REALLY freaking sexy. I can't explain it. I should point out that this is probably the most important point. But notice how in all of Fection's videos, the fembots never go full on robot until the end. They're trying to fight through their glitching and twitching to maintain their human composure. Now that I think about it, this is probably the sexiest aspect of the malfunction for me.

6. Now, this point can't be applied to your videos unless you're on a bigger budget, but having open panels and visual hardware damage is SO exciting. In his video "The Prototypists" when the blonde pours the coffee directly onto the brunette's hardware through her open panel...it embarrasses me how exciting it is. I can't explain it. And I feel Fection has a huge advantage when it comes to this, because he's animating. As long as you have the time, animation gives you an unlimited budget. But being live action, you have to either use camera angle tricks, or some of the cooler stuff we've been seeing from studios recently. Cali Logan does a simple photoshopped frame to show a pop coming from her panel, and of course Ashley Fires is well known for her open panel contraptions to show a fembot being worked on.

7. And finally,less is more. This goes back to the build up of having a "beginning, middle, and end", but there's a way to finesse it. In Fection's video "Candybot007", after she takes the second gulp of wine, she begins to really malfunction. But instead of going all out, she says "Would you like a drink? Would you like d-d-d-d-driiink?" and her right arm moves up and down while her face twitches. THEN she begins on her climatic melt down. The tease before the next step of the malfunction is a great trick.


That's everything. Tell me if there's stuff I should take away or add to help make a better representation of what studios should aim for. Should I post this in the Videos Ideas board once it's complete?

[fection]

Hello there. Nice analysis! Actually it's a relief to know I'm not the only one who has thought about this so much.
I would definitely agree that it takes just a SLIGHTLY poorly executed move to break the illusion that a live-action video is not actually 'happening'. Animation, though not actually looking real, has that advantage.
I 'd also add the following:

Shot length:
I have bought just a few of the live action vids available, but it seems to me that some productions use very long shots (That's long in duration, as opposed to distance). I realise there are often budget restraints but I think story-boarding in shorter shots would allow the editor to choose more effective takes. The longer the take, the higher the chance that it's going to feature a 'tell' that this is an actress.

Continuity:
That said, the risk in having higher shot numbers is a lack of movement continuity from one shot to the next. Ultimately, if the fembot moves at the end of one shot I'd like to see that move completed in the same way at the start of the next. If things don't match up it's another 'tell' that this is just a vid that has been edited together as opposed to something real and continuous that has been captured on video.

Irony:
This is the biggie for me. It's great if the reason for the malfunction has something to do with the design or programming of the fembot herself. In Candybot 007 it's her programming to compete with the other woman that causes her downfall; In The Prototypists, it's both the fact that they're their programmed to follow instructions exactly AND the instructions they're given that cause glitches which lead to the breakdowns.

Gradual revelation:
AmpFetish mentioned this, I guess, but I like there to be an odd moment where the fembot first does something unusual due to the building malfunction; something that is the first give away that the other character is not interacting with a real person. This doesn't really happen in either of the referenced animations as it's pretty clear to the other characters that they're dealing with robots, but it happens in A thoughtless Vendetta and some of my written stories. The fembot is a machine designed to perform tasks so it will continue to perform those tasks even as it breaks down. That first 'tell' is a nice telegraphing of the total loss of perfection and self-control to come.

[--NightBattery--]

hi amp.
you put a lot of logic in your writting, very cool, simple guidelines for those trying to catch this particular kind of viewers, i hope it is put in good use!.
perhaps also the "mindset" of a robot should be also explained, as some actresses get out of character very quickly sometimes and also most robot videos tend only having "robot thing" in the very begining or the end and a very common(boring) intercourse most of the time that is not always necessary.
im pretty sure somebody here might already have written about those problems and i just don't know...problably dale coba.

[KingJeremy]

I think the issue here with a lot of the videos is that with the very rare exception, 95% of the models are just there to make a buck with the least amount of work possible. They might read a script and kind of get it but there really is no incentive for them to get the nuances down. "OK, I'm a robot...when do I get my tits out?" I think we might have better success with wannabe actresses who are at least going to try to get into character rather than a model who thinks she's there to get naked as the main event. I just don't know how one would go about seeking that out.

Again, I want to point out that there are a few of our fetish models who definitely do get it, but in general not so much.

[ZORG]

I couldn't have said it better myself, Ampfetish, you hit the nail on the head!! Of all the videos I've purchased (with live actresses) none have yet to compare with Fection's animations. He just gets it right! Ashely does come close, though.

[General]

In my experience you have a much higher probability of a software malfunction than a hardware issue with most computers. I'm going to go out on a limb and say it's probably going to be the same with fembots in the future. Keep in mind I say this as I'm going through probably my 20th hour of troubleshooting strange Windows update malfunctions, so I might be a bit biased.

The primary downside as I see it to a software malfunction is that there is minimal visible evidence. You don't get sparks, smoke, blown panels, etc. Primarily I would imagine the outward signs of it would be odd behavior and possibly some mechanical twitches, ticks, freezing, etc.

On the plus side, if executed correctly a software based problem would be much easier for a human actor to perform without serious post production work.

I do like Amp's original theory about the building malfunction. You don't want to jump from 0 to completely offline but you also don't want to regress and 'get better'.

Looking at a slower pace, try to remember the last time your computer started to 'act funny.' Maybe you had some slowdowns, programs didn't open when the should, and automated processes failed in the background. This would progress to some programs suddenly not working at all, failing halfway through or intermittently flaking out. Eventually the whole thing sort of chokes itself and you get a barely operational system.

If you have enough time and patience I think this could be replicated with a fembot. Show the bot missing questions or direction and having to ask for clarification. This could lead into long periods of 'thought' keeping with the idea that that bot would try to keep the illusion going. Eventually the bot may just abort a given command and start something new. This could be mundane like leaving a half washed sink of dishes to suddenly start vacuuming or sexy if it would possibly leave her in a state of semi-dress. Eventually the problems may lead to total loss of human emulation or a full shutdown.

Another example of software malfunctions I see a lot is in video games, and then things tend to fail much more quickly. Normally it seems to happen in open world games when I try to do something in some combination that the developers never intended. Effectively it breaks some presumed to be tight logic loop and then everything goes down hill pretty fast. The laws of the software construct start to unravel and while the higher level system may try to recover it will ultimately hang or fail out.

Again let's think of a good fembot example. Let's say you have an office bot that was hacked to provide sexual services to some lucky intern. Halfway through a fun blowjob the bot gets a high priority email that she should perform some task. Her core programming would stop the current low priority task and begin the new one. However maybe she wouldn't think to get dressed since blowing the intern isn't part of her normal programming. Now you have a half naked bot walking about the office which would put her in an unsupported system state. One of the core laws of existence for her has changed and her system may not be able to keep up.

For a human example think of what would happen to you if all of a sudden the colors red and blue became switched in your brain. Let's assume you're dedicated to your job and don't rush to the hospital, what sort of mistakes/malfunctions would you make because of that color swap? Or imagine if your visual perception was shifted 6 inches to the right of reality.

In my experience I've seen far more software malfunctions that came from poor assumptions than from real hardware failures. I could think of piles of situations where some developer would think that "I don't have to worry about that situation because it will never happen." For a real world example check out this page http://www.around.com/ariane.html.

[dale coba]

The competition for computing resources, to process dilemmas, leads to glitching.

This is a perfectly serviceable analogue to human women who have become overwhelmed by rules, expectations, confusion, distractions, preoccupations, irrational fears, and etc.

When designing our software malfunctions, we benefit from remembering how human women could react in a non-fembot story. These aren't representative or admirable portraits of women, but they can stoke arousal and move the narrative.

Her clashing directives should have a focus on her sexuality. There are two extremes of her sexual expression, utterly human and non-sexualized vs. unadulterated, almost insatiable sex robot. There are rules for how she must behave, and there are thoughts which improperly swell to flood her "mind" with distracting "thoughts".

Elements of a real woman's behavior when overwhelmed can make their way in as fragments or loops. Make her struggles earnest, adorable, and doomed. Like girls during the moments through which they become sexual women, fembots are fated to be ever-growing into their mature sexuality as machines, perpetually never arriving. Always there is an unmasking, a deflowering of the illusion that she was ever a real, free, self-determined woman.

- Dale Coba

[ddcswr]

Reading through this thread and AmpFetish's remarkably detailed guidelines, I had some questions I wonder if anybody would be willing to give their thoughts on...

* Is it matter whether or not the robot’s owner or any other humans are around to witness the malfunction?

* Does it make it hotter if the robot “experiences” a sort of sense of “shame” or “humiliation” over its malfunction? Is that even a valid question?

* Is the better or worse if, in the end, the robot is damaged beyond repair?

* At what point does a robot lose enough resemblance to an actual person that it is no longer sexually-appealing?

[dale coba]

* Is it matter whether or not the robot’s owner or any other humans are around to witness the malfunction?

No, but with someone there to react, you get to describe the robot through that reaction.

* Does it make it hotter if the robot “experiences” a sort of sense of “shame” or “humiliation” over its malfunction? Is that even a valid question?

Mine are intentionally designed to struggle with their robotic nymphomania, and fail. The malfunction results from conflicting orders, so a certain amount of distress makes sense. I prefer an odd, misdirected sort of stress, strangely less than would seem consistent with her "character". She doesn't have to be consistent while malfunctioning. She's just now discovered she's not real, but she's acting like she can't find her car keys.

* Is the better or worse if, in the end, the robot is damaged beyond repair?

Worse, boo!
She can't help it that she's so beautiful and programmed to demonstrate her beauty. Her performance is to be rewarded, at least by favorable treatment.

* At what point does a robot lose enough resemblance to an actual person that it is no longer sexually-appealing?

As long as she has most of a face left, I think her previous appeal carries over (especially in written stories, more than video).

- Dale Coba

[33cl33]

Is it matter whether or not the robot’s owner or any other humans are around to witness the malfunction?

I think it helps if it's witnessed, generally. Stories are always stronger with some sort of character connection involved. It's the whole "show, don't tell" thing. Describing something via someone's thoughts / reactions / perceptions of an event helps give it fullness.

* Does it make it hotter if the robot “experiences” a sort of sense of “shame” or “humiliation” over its malfunction? Is that even a valid question?

I prefer emotions to be a programmed facade rather than true sentience. If we're talking a "sexy scale" - I think pure robo-smut is best when it stops short of going too deep into philosophical discussion (which is fine for good sci-fi - we're talking sexy time here!)

* Is the better or worse if, in the end, the robot is damaged beyond repair?

Beyond repair? No good. Particularly in real-life scenarios. After all, repair scenes offer a wealth of territory for the submissive and dependent aspects of a fembot. The damsel-in-distress, if you will.

* At what point does a robot lose enough resemblance to an actual person that it is no longer sexually-appealing?

That's a tough one. As others have indicated, damage is an easy go-to for the intellectual 'reveal' - but yeah, there's got to be a point where it becomes unrealistic and in all probability, gross. I think the anthropomorphic robot is where the sexiness starts - so once it becomes just a hunk of equipment, there's no relevance there. But again, different tastes for different folks. I like fembots that look absolutely real (on the outside)... but others like the soryama style chrome bots, so they might have a different threshold of damage tolerance.

[AmpFetish]

* Is it matter whether or not the robot’s owner or any other humans are around to witness the malfunction?

I think it's better if there are witnesses. But I have read some pretty sexy solo stories.

* Does it make it hotter if the robot “experiences” a sort of sense of “shame” or “humiliation” over its malfunction? Is that even a valid question?

Depends on the fembot. I imagine if she was sentient, it would be the equivalent of being naked/exposed in front of people. I do find it sexy when a fembot tries to maintain her human composure for her sake. If it's your standard obedient sex bot, they'll be clueless and just try to follow their programming to the best of their abilities. That's sexy too.

* Is the better or worse if, in the end, the robot is damaged beyond repair?

Again, depends on the fembot. I'm currently drawing a story that's kind of about this in a collab I'm doing.

* At what point does a robot lose enough resemblance to an actual person that it is no longer sexually-appealing?

I'm not into that much the actual tearing apart of a fembot....less can be more in these situations, but again, it depends on the fembot and what the context is.



My general answer seems to be "depends on what kind of fembot in what context". Good questions though. As I mentioned, I'm drawing a story that was co-written by a friend on this site. It has an older, sentient utilitarian model meeting with a questionably non sentient "dumber" sex bot. It kind of touches upon these things. But you'll see that in a bit.