Boycott Atlus

[Kim]

Originally Posted by rpgdemon

Liz: Show videos or screenshots of the parts of the games that demonstrate these things. Don't just tell us that the main characters want to beat up a gay character, show us the video. You've scratched the surface of the content, but it's not a synopsis of what's there, you've shown almost nothing from what they're advertising. You've told what they're advertising, but being able to see for yourself something is much more effective than being told about it.

I made the tumblr a few days ago and am spacing out updates so that 1. It keeps showing up again and again and again in the Atlus tag on Tumblr and 2. It takes a bit to gather shit.

[Arcanum]

RE: This article

That pun is great. How can you hate such an excellent pun?


On a more serious note, I hope you're doing more than just encouraging a boycott. I can understand that at this point you're just trying to raise awareness, but boycotting alone probably won't do anything (and most of the time when the internet claims they're boycotting something they just go out and buy it anyway). Maybe once you have enough supporters you can start a letter writing campaign to Atlus to help draw their attention to your cause, and not just the internet's attention.

Anyway, Demon's Souls and 3D Dot Heroes are the only Atlus-related games that I own, and nothing they are currently working on interests me in the slightest so I can't really say I'm going to boycott them. Still, best of luck to you.

[Pip Boy]

I have to say that the degree of sensationalism I'm seeing in this effort makes me take it with a grain of salt. There isn't a whole lot in all this that makes me feel I have any reason to dislike Atlus except to take your word for it that they're dicks. Maybe you could post more of the actual offending content rather than just describing it while showing other, unrelated content? I'm also curious about the two drawings of the girl on the cover, since one of them really is a lot more revealing even outside of the parts covered by the title lettering. Could you perhaps demonstrate where in the game that second image appears?

You might also take more care to be respectful in your responses, Liz. If someone isn't quite convinced of your point, you'll get a lot farther by providing them with more evidence and building your case rather than shouting about derailing and entitlement. Such accusations make you seem immature and damage any case you're making accordingly.

I also share some in the sentiment that I don't think Atlus is an appropriate target for this campaign. If you're really so mad about this and want to put a stop to it, wouldn't it make a lot more sense to go after the developers of the offending content instead of the publishers. I feel like attacking Atlus just sends the wrong message.

EDIT: To clarify my stance on this so there is no room for misunderstanding, I do acknowledge the overuse of the "sex sells" marketing strategy and the constant typifying of the GBLT community in media, and I agree that some proactive action is warranted to help push the media away from catering to close-minded audiences.

There is another side to this argument, however, which is that these games are developed in another culture where this kind of thing is not looked upon as seriously as it is here. While Im not saying that this makes the issue completely dismissable, it is worth considering that there are much worse offenders out there compared to whom Atlus doesn't look all that bad.

EDIT: Building off of Arcanum's post following this one, you might consider including this clip of gameplay footage to strengthen your case about the character being scantily clad with stronger context. (I think it should be obvious based on what its meant to demonstrate that the video is a little on the NSFW side)

[Arcanum]

Just gonna add on the subject of discrepancy between the Code of Princess promo picture and the box art, looking at gameplay footage she's still pretty damn scantily clad, regardless of whatever subtle differences.

Also the box art changes seem to have the intent of making it more "appropriate for public viewing" while the regular promo art is "full on nerd boner."

[Bells]

Originally Posted by Pip Boy

I have to say that the degree of sensationalism I'm seeing in this effort makes me take it with a grain of salt. There isn't a whole lot in all this that makes me feel I have any reason to dislike Atlus except to take your word for it that they're dicks. Maybe you could post more of the actual offending content rather than just describing it while showing other, unrelated content? I'm also curious about the two drawings of the girl on the cover, since one of them really is a lot more revealing even outside of the parts covered by the title lettering. Could you perhaps demonstrate where in the game that second image appears?

You might also take more care to be respectful in your responses, Liz. If someone isn't quite convinced of your point, you'll get a lot farther by providing them with more evidence and building your case rather than shouting about derailing and entitlement. Such accusations make you seem immature and damage any case you're making accordingly.

I also share some in the sentiment that I don't think Atlus is an appropriate target for this campaign. If you're really so mad about this and want to put a stop to it, wouldn't it make a lot more sense to go after the developers of the offending content instead of the publishers. I feel like attacking Atlus just sends the wrong message.

EDIT: To clarify my stance on this so there is no room for misunderstanding, I do acknowledge the overuse of the "sex sells" marketing strategy and the constant typifying of the GBLT community in media, and I agree that some proactive action is warranted to help push the media away from catering to close-minded audiences.

There is another side to this argument, however, which is that these games are developed in another culture where this kind of thing is not looked upon as seriously as it is here. While Im not saying that this makes the issue completely dismissable, it is worth considering that there are much worse offenders out there compared to whom Atlus doesn't look all that bad.

EDIT: Building off of Arcanum's post following this one, you might consider including this clip of gameplay footage to strengthen your case about the character being scantily clad with stronger context. (I think it should be obvious based on what its meant to demonstrate that the video is a little on the NSFW side)

And this is a more polite and better tought way of saying the words i said back on page two...

...i'm not grumpy!

[Kyanbu The Legend]

Yeah Atlus really went too far with that rediculus outfit they have the main lead wearing.

Why couldn't they just give her some badass white armor? It would have been so much better. The movement seems a bit floaty here and there but that has nothing to do with Japan's sexism problems.

EDIT: my bad, thought this was one of Atlus's personal projects.

[Pip Boy]

Atlus didn't make that art, nor did they create the game. Their mistake in this was failing to refuse to publish the game because of its sexist content.

EDIT: Actually, rereading my own words there really convinces me this boycott is misplaced.

[rpgdemon]

Originally Posted by Pip Boy

Atlus didn't make that art, nor did they create the game. Their mistake in this was failing to refuse to publish the game because of its sexist content.

EDIT: Actually, rereading my own words there really convinces me this boycott is misplaced.

The way that it works: A publisher will generally finance the development of a game after it's been pitched to them. Depending on the contract, they can jerk the developer around one way or another, and they will generally be in charge of the promotional materials/advertising.

There's not enough information to go off of, but it is at least possible that Atlus was responsible for the marketing of the game, or they might have pushed the developer to make a "sexier" lead.

Conversely, Atlus may have only known that development milestones were reached, but did not actually involve themselves with the game. That would be silly, but it's not unheard of for publishers to just throw a wide net, publish a lot of games, and not really involve themselves any of them. In this case, Atlus is not directly responsible for the materials or the content of the game, they're just being approached by developers who need help getting published/with raising capitol. In a case like this, Atlus is like, "Here, let me help you license what you've already made/Let me pay for the development of what you pitched." They're not involved in the creative directions. They'll want to publish the game even if it's objectionable, because they've already sunk millions into it's development.

[Bells]

So something perhaps maybe possible maybe having happened is enough to boycott a entire company now?

And no company forces a developer to make a game sexier, they have their marketing department doing research and pooling information together to see how to best sell this game for the target audience they want in order to properly reach their financial goals with the game... if it was not possible to profit from the idea, the project would never been green lit in the first place... they only define the best set of rules for the artists to work on and how the best advertise and which mediums and what buzzwords to use to better affect their target audience.

[rpgdemon]

Originally Posted by Bells

So something perhaps maybe possible maybe having happened is enough to boycott a entire company now?

And no company forces a developer to make a game sexier, they have their marketing department doing research and pooling information together to see how to best sell this game for the target audience they want in order to properly reach their financial goals with the game... if it was not possible to profit from the idea, the project would never been green lit in the first place...

What I mean is, someone greenlights a project. The project chugs along, they send the stuff in to the publisher, and now the marketing people take a look at it. "No, you need to get more boobs in that shot". And then they send that back to the developers, and they're pretty much forced to put more boobs in that shot.

I made an edit to my post about the role of the publisher, while you were posting, since it wasn't really that great previously. The publisher does choose what they greenlight, so the fact that they greenlit such projects does still reflect poorly on them, it just reflects less poorly than if they were developing the projects.

I'm still not sold on the idea of the boycott or on the idea of not boycotting, I'm just trying to clarify what's going on behind the scenes and what Atlus's role is, so that people can make their own informed decisions.