Play Babysitting Cream 101
Kirby Apodaca
On september 2020, F95Zone user FuzzyBunny23, got the source code from Dark Coven's Ren'Py conversion and started updating it to fix more bugs, enhance the playability, add new scenes, and trying to complete unfinished routes. As of this writting, beta 0.2.1 version is published, and FuzzyBunny23 estimates that completing this project can take anything from 6 to 12 months.[8]
Most of the time, the window displays a room, with an icon of Cream in the upper right corner. Options at the bottom of the window allow the player to move from one room to another. If the player clicks on Cream, she will appear, and a menu of choices will be shown at the right. The player can then choose an action. Usually, one of the options is "Never mind," which returns to the room display. Sometimes, choosing an action will lead to other actions or choices. For example, the choice to watch cartoons will lead to an opportunity to watch a movie. Cream will fall asleep, and new choices will appear: pull up her dress to peek at her panties or continue watching the movie. Each of these leads to other choices, with different consequences.
The current energy is displayed in the upper left corner of the window at (almost) all times. The other statistics are shown in a black book, "Sonic's Journal" in the upper left corner of the Living Room. The "score" in terms of sexual acts can be accessed through the journal. The purple arrow in the image at the right points to Sonic's Journal.
The game allows seven days to reach the goal of doing sexual things with Cream. Vanilla will return on the morning of the eighth day, and the ending will be played. The current ending is incomplete, but it has a few drawings as teasers of the eventual, complete ending.
It is most important to try lots of different things. Some actions that don't get good results early in the game will get a better result once statistics have been raised high enough. For example, if the player visits Cream in her room and asks her to take off her dress, she will refuse at first. But once she's taken off her dress once, she will do it again. New options appear when she is in her panties, and yet others once she is naked.
In the first few days, most of the useful actions occur in the Living Room, the Backyard, at the Mall and in the Park (plus, of course, the Kitchen whenever Cream is hungry). The player can choose to watch cartoons and then a movie (and get a chance to raise Exposure, Lust, Jerk Off, and/or Peep). Playing a videogame can lead to tickles (and raise Touch). Go swimming and play Marco Polo or "Who can make the biggest splash" -- each of these gives the player an opportunity to raise their statistics. During this part of the game, it makes sense to be profligate with energy. Once the limited set of actions that will raise statistics for the day have been completed, the rest of the energy can be used doing random things that will raise RWC -- playing dolls with Cream, or trying all the different things at the mall, etc.
Toward the middle of the week, once statistics are high enough, the player gets new opportunities. For example, they may see Cream peeking in at them when showering. This gives the player a chance to Jerk Off while she's watching, or to invite her to shower with you. When playing a game, sometimes it's best to lose, and sometimes to win. During this phase, the player needs to be somewhat thrifty with their energy until they've gotten as much as they can, then use it up as during the first few days.
Once Touch is high enough, the player can get Cream to take off her dress. At even higher levels, she will take off her panties. The higher it goes, the more actions will be successful. But not everything works -- the game is still incomplete. Once reaching this point, it's useful to summon Cream to her own room, or to Vanilla's room, where the player can get her naked and (maybe) "do things" to her.
Babysitting Cream comes with an interesting twist on the good old babysitting fantasy. Instead of the classic female babysitter, we have a male babysitter. And instead of a forbidden relationship between the girl and the father, we have the babysitter fucking the teen girl after whom he was supposed to look. But the twists are not stopping here. The protagonists in this story are not humans. You will play as the babysitter, who is no other than Sonic The Hedgehog. The adventure is pretty interesting and although the graphics are a bit cartoonish, the sex is pretty dirty.
In 1997 and 1998, Defendant Tammy Kidd provided home day care services to Aaron Joseph Chastain. On April 10, 1998, Aaron was playing in the yard of Kidd's home while receiving his regular *952 day care services. Unfortunately, the unexpected occurred. Aaron was severely injured when the riding lawn mower Kidd was operating "ran into, against and/or over" Aaron. Standard Mutual's Designation of Evidentiary Matters and Undisputed Material Facts in Support of Summary Judgment ("Standard Mutual's Facts"), 26. Two years later Aaron and his parents ("the Chastains") filed suit against Kidd, seeking damages for injuries he sustained in the accident.[1] The suit before the Court is a declaratory judgment action filed by Standard Mutual Insurance Company ("Standard Mutual"). Standard Mutual seeks a declaration that it has no duty under Kidd's homeowners insurance policy to make payments because of Aaron's injury or to defend and indemnify Kidd against the lawsuit in state court. The parties filed cross motions for summary judgment, which have been fully briefed. For the reasons set forth below, the Court DENIES Aaron Chastain's Motion for Summary Judgment and GRANTS Standard Mutual's Motion for Summary Judgment.
Kidd's yard is next to a pond. Kidd testified that if her grass were long, snakes from the pond would get into her lawn. Deposition of Tammy Kidd ("Kidd Depo.") at 31-32. She further explained that she generally kept her grass mowed so that the children for whom she babysat could play safely in the yard. Id. When asked whether she could have waited and mowed the grass when the children were not at her home, Kidd explained that she could have waited a day or two to mow the lawn and noted that she was not aware of any snakes in her yard at the time she decided to mow it. Id. at 32. When the accident happened, Kidd was mowing the front lawn and believed that the children were playing in the back yard. Id. at 12.
The task before the Court is to determine how the contractual language in Kidd's homeowners policy applies to the accident that caused Aaron's injury. Specifically, we must determine whether the injuries Aaron suffered arose "in connection with" a business engaged in by Kidd. Then, we must interpret the language in the second sentence of the business pursuits exclusion. Gulf Ins. Co. v. Tilley, 280 F. Supp. 60, 64 (N.D.Ind.1967) ("In order to give meaning to the entire paragraph of exclusion, both parts thereof must be construed together.") (citations omitted). We must answer the question, whether "running into, against and/or over" Aaron with the lawn mower was an "act or omission, regardless of its nature *954 or circumstance, involving a service or duty rendered, promised, owed or implied to be provided because of the nature of the `business'" of babysitting.
Much of the Chastain's argument is pinned to the second sentence of the business pursuits exclusion, which states that "[t]his exclusion applies but is not limited to an act or omission, regardless of its nature or circumstance, involving a service or duty rendered, promised, owed, or implied to be provided because of the nature of the `business.'" We think there are serious shortcomings in relying on this provision to support Defendants' arguments. The Chastains argue that "Kidd's act of lawn mowing did not involve services and duties Kidd owed to Aaron because of the nature of her business, to wit: caring for and supervising Aaron." Chastain Memo. at 6 (emphasis added). At least one other court has rejected this argument as applied to facts very similar to those before us. In Commerce Ins. Co. v. Finnell, 41 Mass.App.Ct. 701, 673 N.E.2d 71 (1996), Sean, the child receiving day care services, placed his hand in a bowl of boiling water with which Laureen, his baby-sitter, was preparing cream of wheat for her own lunch. Laureen argued that preparing her own lunch was outside of her business of caring for Sean. Id. 673 N.E.2d at 72. The court disagreed, reasoning that Laureen's "business was to care for Sean and prevent him from being harmed" and that she was paid for performing this work continuously during her work day. Id. at 72. The court found that *956 "[w]hether the injury was caused by what Laureen did do ... or failed to do ... during her working hours ... is of no importance in view of the fact that the policy's exclusion applies to any `act or omission' involving a service rendered or promised which arises out of the business of baby-sitting." Likewise, in our case, whether Aaron's injury was caused by Kidd's act of mowing the lawn where Aaron could be injured by the lawn mower or her failure to ensure that Aaron did not come to harm while in her care, Aaron's injury was due to an act or omission involving the service or duty promised and owed of "caring for and supervising Aaron" as bargained for in the child-care agreement between Aaron's mother and Kidd.[4]
[4] Standard Mutual points out that Kidd mowed the lawn to ensure that the children she was babysitting did not encounter snakes from the nearby pond in the yard and that lawn mowing, therefore, was an activity "connected with" Kidd's business. Standard Mutual's Consolidated Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Jamie's Summary Judgment Motion and Reply Brief in Support of Standard Mutual's Summary Judgment Motion ("Standard Mutual's Reply") at 5. This is a creative, but ultimately fallacious, argument. Under this reasoning, if Kidd injured herself while mowing the lawn at any time of day or night, regardless of whether her charges were in her care, her injuries would not be covered under the policy because lawn-mowing would be "connected with" her business. Lawn-mowing also would be an act "implied to be provided because of the nature of the `business'" since it would be an act necessary to maintaining a snake-free yard. This interpretation of the language is not a reasonable interpretation as required by case law. See Eli Lilly, 482 N.E.2d at 470.
aa06259810