It appears Sony isn't COMPLETELY ready to bury the Concord hatchet just yet. Rumors are now swirling that Firewalk Studios’ troubled multiplayer shooter may soon re-emerge as a free-to-play (F2P) title, with the company hoping to salvage literally anything from what has been widely regarded as the biggest flop in gaming history...

The speculation stems from recent activity on Concord's Steam database, with updates to the game's files being logged as recently as October 8. Screenshots taken from SteamDB are making rounds on Reddit, and while the changelog remains a mystery, gamers believe the updates point to a potential F2P relaunch.

Sony's Last Option for Concord: Free-to-Play

Concord, once hyped hard by Sony and the games media/journo mafia as a major AAA release, has been anything but successful. The open beta performance indicated disastrously low player engagement, despite the significant resources Sony poured into the project. With HUNDREDS of millions already invested, there aren't many avenues left for Sony to explore, and transitioning Concord into a free-to-play (F2P) model seems to be their last-ditch effort to recoup some of their losses—or at the very least, generate some positive momentum around the game...?

It’s no secret that F2P has worked wonders for some struggling titles in the past. By lowering the cost to entry, they can bring in a wider audience, and who knows- potentially turning things around by monetizing through in-game purchases and battle passes...? Hey at least - that's the idea behind it - but in practice, Concord has far more issues than just the cost to play it. This could be Concord’s only chance for any survival, but it’s important to note that even this move is no guarantee of success. I remain skeptical - and Concord may already be too far gone to be saved.

The Industry's Response: Doubts Over the Comeback

Despite the buzz surrounding Concord's potential shift to free-to-play - when you’ve got a project that failed so spectacularly out of the gate... even an F2P model may not be enough to undo the damage done to its reputation.

Gamers have already rejected Concord in its original form. Bringing it back as F2P might attract some curious players for an initial bump, but it’s unlikely to retain them unless significant improvements are made to the game itself. Character models, game modes, and a reason to pick it up and play it over the competion.

Firewalk Studios Prepares for Impact

Amid all the speculation, Firewalk Studios is reportedly bracing for impact. The studio has faced intense scrutiny following Concord’s disastrous launch, and while they’re hopefully working hard behind the scenes to breathe new life into the project, the reality is that their window for redemption is closing rapidly... and tbh - I'm kinda shocked that Sony is now tripling down on the sunk cost into this game. They've come this far, maybe they're thinking, what's a few million more to get it back to the finish line again?

The pressure on both Firewalk and Sony to turn this around is beyond immense. Should this F2P speculation turn out true, it'll undoubtedly be viewed as their last-ditch attempt to salvage some - any sort of - semblance of success from Concord. However, the odds are stacked against them, and it remains to be seen whether this move will be the lifeline the game desperately needs, or just another chapter in its decline...

What’s Next for Concord?

For now, we'll have to wait and see what Sony’s next move will be. While screenshots of Concord’s Steam files being updated hint at a possible F2P release, nothing official has been announced yet. Whether this change could signal a revival or the final nail in the coffin for Concord, well... only time will tell.

The game's fate could FINALLY be decided in the coming months, and as of now, going free-to-play may be the only card Sony has left to play in this high-stakes bet. Whether it pays off or ends in another costly misfire is anyone’s guess...

~Smash

Src/Cred: Pirat_Nation on X

Kim Belair attempted to paint a rosy picture of her company and herself as the perpetual victims of an 'unjust' hate campaign at the XOXO fest 2024... But she conveniently left out ANY of the context whatsoever - important key details explaining why the gaming community, up to and including Elon Musk - have taken issue with SBI in the first place.

She then proceeds to attack Elon Musk for daring to share his opinion on them publicly, ignoring why he criticized Sweet Baby Inc. in the first place, and instead, claiming he was responsible for bringing a 'wave of hate' to her company.

...and we're only just getting started.

Welcome to Sweet Baby Inc. CEO Kim Belair's MASTERCLASS in gaslighting....

At the 2024 XOXO festival, Kim Belair, CEO of Sweet Baby Inc., took the stage for 21 minutes and 2 seconds of what can only be described as a masterclass in gaslighting.

Belair presented herself as a "narrative expert," but after (painfully) listening to her entire speech, it was clear that her true expertise here lies in the lies. Spinning a story where her company is always the wronged party, never acknowledging any wrongdoing or accountability - EVER.

The audience was fed the idea that Sweet Baby Inc. is simply a small, kind group of lovingly passionate developers that just have a passion for making games awesome that were being targeted by harassment! She made ZERO mention of why people are genuinely upset. It was honestly baffling how anyone could listen to this and not come away with questions. Is it SBI? No... It must be the entire world out to get them that are the problem here!

What Belair conveniently glossed over throughout was the troubling behavior within her own company. She failed to mention how Sweet Baby Inc.'s employee Chris Kindred tried to cancel the YouTuber Kabrutus, going as far as attempting to get his Steam account shut down for the "crime" of curating a list of Sweet Baby Inc. games. The 'list' was created from Sweet Baby Inc's own website with their own publicly available information - to help consumers make informed choices, but Kindred's response was to try to erase it, and that’s not all...

Those who have been following the channel for a while would remember that this is the very same Kindred who also attempted to have the me fired from my old job, slandering them as a "racist bigot" without any basis. Of course, Belair made no mention of this in her victim-focused narrative... Because that would collapse her house of cards.

Then there's Camerin Wild, another Sweet Baby Inc. employee, who once gave a presentation filled with anti-white rhetoric, making it clear that their goal was to "burn the game industry to the ground."

Or how about Maya Felix Kramer, who has a well-documented history of making inflammatory and racist comments on social media? Yet, Belair remained silent on these glaring issues during her talk, instead painting the entire gaming community as part of some grand conspiracy to take down her company for no reason.

Belair even took a moment to throw a jab at Elon Musk, who she labeled a "noted buffoon" - almost as if - she's allowed to call others names and whatever she wants, but as soon as anyone labels her, it's oh no! Everyone is a racist bigot! Rules for me, not for thee in full swing.

But again, she left out the crucial details of why Musk or anyone else in the gaming industry would feel compelled to speak out. She and her company ilk have been at the forefront of controversy, and the outcry isn’t about "diversity" or "woke-ifying" games, as she suggested—it’s about the toxic, unprofessional behavior of Sweet Baby Inc. employees and the complete and utter disastrous impact they’ve had on the projects they touch.

The reality is, companies that work with Sweet Baby Inc. always seem to find themselves mired in failure and financial ruin. Their involvement seems to almost guarantee failure. But rather than address these concerns honestly, Kim Belair continues to weave a tale where Sweet Baby Inc. is the victim, refusing to take responsibility for her team’s actions and instead blaming the entire world for their problems.

Watching Belair's presentation was a stomach-turning exercise in watching someone dodge accountability while claiming to be targeted unfairly. The sad truth is, this isn't about harassment or hate campaigns—this is about the gaming community rightfully calling out an awful company and the awful people that occupy it who have not only failed to deliver on its projects but has also... employed these individuals who act with impunity, causing harm to others without consequence or any accountability.

The gamers are not the problem here, Kim. You are.

~Smash

Sweet Baby Inc. has completely redesigned their website, scrubbing away a significant amounts of info that used to detail their partnerships and projects. Gone are the pages that linked their name to specific games and developers—now replaced with a bare-bones overview of what they claim to do for the gaming industry.

If this isn’t an attempt to dodge the growing backlash against their work... then I don’t know what is.

As someone with millions of Chrome tabs open typically, I stumbled upon this discovery when I revisited an old tab. The page dedicated to their past projects threw a 404 error, which led me to refreshing it again and again a few times—no luck. Curious, I then decided to navigate to their homepage, only to find it unrecognizable from what it used to be. It was stripped down to barebones - devoid of the detailed information that used to be a hallmark of their site. Originally, the top scroll bar included "Projects", "Approach", "Outreach", "Newsletter", "Contact", and "Francais":

All mentions of partner companies and the games they were connected to? Gone. Only a vague description of their "services" remained.

What could have prompted such a drastic change? If a company was genuinely proud of their work and stood by their impact on the gaming industry, why limit the visibility of that work? You'd expect MORE transparency, not less.

For example - they used to show all the company's that hired them...

and now?

....GONE.

After all, Kim Belair, Sweet Baby Inc.’s co-founder, often claims in interviews that any backlash against her company is simply rooted in “hate campaigns” ...But if it were merely hate, wouldn't they want to openly stand behind their projects and showcase the positive impact they claim to have? Be MORE Transparent?

The truth is simple: they know the reality of their work is far from what they want the public to believe.

Sweet Baby Inc. has made a name for itself by injecting DEI (Diversity, Equity, Inclusion) elements into games, often unnecessarily, stirring up problems that didn't exist to begin with—only to get paid to "fix" the very issues they created in the first place. It's a lucrative business model, but built on very shaky foundations. By now limiting the visibility of their past collaborations and projects, they’re hoping to shield themselves from the growing criticism of their role in undermining the gaming industry with hollow, forced changes. But here’s the thing—hiding only intensifies scrutiny.

It's not going to work.

Their attempt to sweep things under the rug is shady af, plain and simple. The more they try to distance themselves from the backlash, the more the spotlight will find them. The website redesign only underscores again that they’re feeling the pressure and trying to control the narrative, but that won’t stop the truth from coming out. Instead of open transparency, which would allow them to defend their work against what they always try and label as baseless criticism, Sweet Baby Inc. is going in the opposite direction, opting to shield themselves from the very industry they claim to want to improve.

Gamers are not easily fooled. Sweet Baby Inc. may think that by scrubbing away traces of their involvement in certain projects, they can evade the conversation. But in reality, they've just invited a whole new level of scrutiny. What are they hiding? And if they’re so proud of their work, why not put it on display?

These are questions that demand answers.

The "Learn More" button and "Contact Us Here" button both redirect to the same exact 'contact us' page. It made me look into who even put the site together and turns out...

Oh... and their website is designed by Studio Lutalica...

These are the same folks that left Twitter for the following reason... and I quote:

These folks aren't helping the game industry. They are perpetuating a straight-up cult. Of course they'd be hired and paid by Sweet Baby Inc. to design their site. It's one big club, making money behind the scenes pushing gender conformity as a business model... And its gross.

The truth is simple—Sweet Baby Inc is known their DEI injection strategy - one that has thankfully been increasingly seen as BS - and because of that - they’re doing everything they can to hide it. The gaming industry deserves better than this, and the more they try to conceal, the more glaring their role in its problems becomes.

The more people that shine a light on SBI, the better.

~Smash

In a viral social media exchange, Alyssa Mercante, an activist from Kotaku known for her misleading takes, lawsuit threats, and contacting my spouse trying to get us divorced, among a laundry list of other personal attacks on the entire video game community at large - recently found herself dismantled by one: Thomas Mahler, the director behind Ori and the Blind Forest and Ori and the Will of the Wisps. What started as a heated online interaction quickly evolved into an outright schooling by Mahler, whose calm, composed response stood in stark contrast to Mercante’s rude and confrontational approach. Let's start at the top, to show exactly how these people all work together to push a false narrative. This is a perfect exhibit of just that.

The saga began when Quelaag (@xIngenue on Twitter, pictured below - Now in protected mode, because... of course) claimed to be involved in the development of the Ori games.

A claim Mahler questioned with polite skepticism.

She stretched that 'truth' so far that it's safe to say she was straight up lying...

Maher said: "I’m the director behind both Ori games, and I don’t know who you are or how you were affiliated with Ori," Mahler posted, effectively starting the public conversation.

Turns out 'technically' she was involved in 'gaming' because she... worked for a telemarketing company that was hired to research user data for xbox at one point. O...k, but no she didn't 'work' on the actual game like she tried to initially claim. Thx @WizardsOGL for the info:

While the now hidden post because of protected mode, here's what she said caught in a screenshot prior:

For those not familiar... She also deleted the following post:

Because clearly this is a pattern of lies being established. Mahler responded cordially:

This is important because effectively she was pretending to have a standing in the game industry to speak from a place of personal experience and influence - when in reality... it wasn't that at all. As @MadCADLad said on Twitter jokingly:

In response, Mercante jumped in and almost immediately resorted to name-calling, calling Mahler a "dickhead," a move that shifted the tone of the exchange sharply.

But instead of returning the insult, Mahler kindly explained the creative process at Moon Studios, highlighting how normal it is to have disagreements in a collaborative environment like game development.

Tbh, the dude spent WAY more time trying to be cordial with Alyssa than she earned, but as he explained later, he had some free time to address the situation.

Mahler further dismantled Mercante’s behavior by patiently explaining that at Moon Studios, arguments are part of the process, where passionate developers work hard to contribute their ideas and arrive at the best possible solution. He stated,

Without even breaking a sweat, Mahler continued to educate Mercante on the nature of creative work, acknowledging that sometimes tough decisions must be made, and sometimes... work needs to be revisited as part of the ever-evolving creative process.

He framed it as a standard part of game development. He even cited Legend of Zelda creator Shigeru Miyamoto’s famous "Upending the Tea Table" metaphor, illustrating that even the best directors pivot during the creative process.

Mercante, unable to match Mahler's professionalism, doubled down, but Mahler ended the exchange by addressing her insults with grace.

The final nail in the coffin came when Mahler signed off with, "Yours, Dickhead" - using her own insults to disarm and neutralize her aggressiveness with humor. Pure gold. This probably earned Mahler an incoming C&D from Alyssa, as she loves threatening lawsuits to anyone who dares embarrass her publicly... even though she continues to bring this all upon herself. Mahler’s class act won the day, with many on Twitter noting how effortlessly he dismantled Mercante’s claims and attitude.

The whole entire exchange highlighted a pretty significant issue in the industry: the gigantic gap between "journalism" and game development. Mercante’s extremely rude approach didn’t stand a chance against Mahler’s calm, educated, and experienced explanation of how real game development works. This is why the activists posing as journalists need to move on to another past career. It hurts the entire industry attacking the devs making great games just to get attention.

Fufu (@fufuwaydayo) put it best:

Alyssa Mercante may have come into this exchange with her violent word warrior guns a-blazin', but Thomas Mahler calmly dismantled her, one fact at a time, while maintaining a level of kindness that left her with little more than her insults to fall back on.

~Smash

The remake of Until Dawn for PlayStation 5 and PC is facing a... rough reception, with numerous issues that have left many disappointed, to say the least. Not only has the remake launched with technical bugs, but the player numbers on Steam are alarmingly low compared to other PlayStation exclusives that have transitioned to PC...

According to SteamDB, the game has peaked at just 2,607 concurrent players, a figure that looks great vs. Concord or Dustborn, but in reality, it pales in comparison to the likes of Ghost of Tsushima and God of War — two other major titles that saw well over 70,000 concurrent players on their PC debuts from Sony.

While we don't have the numbers for the game's actual budget at this time, rumors suggest it wasn't cheap, leaning upwards of over 50 million dollars.... and yeah this is a remake of a game that has been released what feels like an infinite amount of times already. These numbers have to be far less than any of Sony's lowest projections...

So, what went wrong? Welp... there are several reasons.

One major issue is the lighting. As we discussed last week on Saturday Night Hypnosis, the remake’s lighting changes have drastically impacted the game’s atmosphere, with several scenes looking way worse than in the original. The original Until Dawn featured chilling, moody and dark lighting that contributed significantly to the horror experience.

The remake, however, changes these iconic visuals with much brighter, warmer tones in some early scenes that simply don't evoke the same sense of dread... Oh and it's worth mentioning that on top of that, the framerate often dips below what even the PS4 version had:

A developer from the original Until Dawn chimed in on this issue in a YouTube comment on Hypnotic's channel (below). They explained how the game had to be remade from scratch using Unreal Engine 5, and while they attempted to stay faithful to the original, a lot of creative liberties were taken — especially with the lighting, which was a major point of contention that we discussed at great length.

According to the dev, the lighting in early scenes was meant to create contrast with the later, darker moments, but unfortunately - this change dilutes the game's horror tone from the very beginning... Kinda misses the whole point of it. It altered the original horror tone. As the developer explained, the warmer lighting tones seen early in the game were originally intended to create a contrast with the darker, more unsettling blue hues later on, but this idea was scrapped in the original version to maintain a consistently eerie atmosphere. Reflecting on the change, the developer remarked:

This attempt to return to the early concepts has backfired hard, with many feeling that these 'new' lighting detracts from the game’s once chilling atmosphere... Myself included.

Beyond these visual missteps, Until Dawn's remake is also suffering from significant technical issues on both PC and PS5. Players have reported broken ray tracing, poor optimization, low framerates, and bugs that ruin immersion.

To make matters worse, the game was released at a FULL price of $59.99, with no cheaper upgrade path for those who already owned the original. For many, paying that much for a nine-year-old game with only minor improvements ...simply isn't justifiable. Why not just by the original at $20 bucks? It's an overall better experience by most accounts anyway.

The timing of the release hasn't done it any favors either. With the Silent Hill 2 remake releasing around the same time and dominating the horror genre... Until Dawn is struggling to carve out space for itself right now in a crowded landscape of horror.

Combine that with the fact that Horizon Zero Dawn is offering an upgrade path for just $10, and it’s easy to see why gamers are looking elsewhere for their next big adventure. Oh - and a PSN sign in is required for Steam/PC. All these choices are just... it's all so head scratching!

In the end, Until Dawn's remake feels overwhelmingly unnecessary, especially given that the original still holds up remarkably well. Instead of enhancing the experience, the remake has diluted it — with some even calling it a cash grab. Despite Ballistic Moon acknowledging the issues and promising fixes in an upcoming patch, the damage looks like it was already done for this once beloved horror game.

~Smash

Jacob Geller, a popular (million+ sub channel) YouTuber and apparent "consultant" on Konami and Bloober Team’s Silent Hill 2 remake, has previously suggested the world would be better without gamers...

Geller, who admits to working for Hit Detection LLC—a company similar to Sweet Baby Inc. known for pushing progressive activist agendas in gaming—recently announced his involvement with the remake on Twitter. Sharing a screenshot of his name in the game's credits, he wrote:

On the surface... bad enough... but his past posts have raised eyebrows for his disdain toward the very community he is now working for. On top of coming across as a very smug woke industry defender... Supporting anti-gamer establishments like DEI consulting companies isn't the 'W' you think it it, Jacob... and based on how he carries himself, he sounds like a real 'winner'.

In 2019, Geller responded to a post from Compulsion Games writer Bijan Stephen, who asked for the “dumbest idea” that would still make the world better. Geller replied in a QT bluntly, “No gamers” Har har har.

This dismissal of the gaming community has upset fans of the Silent Hill franchise, among others. But it doesn’t stop there, because of course you already know - folks like Jacob are pattern individuals.

Geller's disdain for gamers feels limitless. Browsing through his twitter to see his takes on the game community tells you right away that he constantly hates gamers fighting for good games, calling them names, like 'lunatics' above... Or pretending there isn't an organized mafia of activists behind the scenes that pretend to have ethics when at the end of the day, some have been compromised.

It has roots stretching back over a decade. In 2013, he suggested that "Maybe there’d be more girl gamers if guy gamers didn’t act so incredibly unlikable," adding yet another divisive take.

His remarks go off the rails when he jumps to discussing far-right recruitment through gaming also fed into this narrative, attempting to link today’s supposed "alt-right movements" to the GamerGate controversy... in reply to Kotaku of all places. With such a track record, it’s no surprise that his involvement in the Silent Hill 2 remake has concered those who feel like the game’s development has been compromised by ideological agendas rather than staying true to the spirit of the original...

It's further proof that the very people employed by these outlets are typically the most racist, bigoted, and hateful creatures on the planet, projecting themselves on everyone else to distract.

Off topic, but still curious enough to note - surrounding the release, Konami recently deleted a post announcing that the Silent Hill 2 remake was designed for “modern audiences.”

The post was published at the end of May, included a video featuring Bloober Team developers discussing how they aimed to modernize the game for a new generation of players - here's a screenshot of that now deleted post:

However, the phrase “modern audiences” raised suspicions that the game was being injected with a DEI agenda, especially following the redesign of certain characters like Angela.

Konami's decision to remove the post only fueled these concerns, leading to speculation that the studio is quietly trying to market the game as non-political while still infusing it with identity-driven content.

The industry insiders continue to gaslight, mislead, and distract you. They time and time again tell you, often times (as in this case) that they do not like you... and at the same time, ask you to buy their game. It seems like it makes no sense... but then again, when you're an activist posing as a gamer... It kinda does.

...and they can't stand that it's being pointed out.

~Smash

I’ve been thinking about this situation more, and... it’s far worse than many folks originally thought. At first, the whole ‘thing’ was being viewed as ‘increasing’ focus on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) at companies like Microsoft - just another 'phase' of corporate social responsibility initiatives. But no. After digging deeper, the reality is far more insidious...

The BRIDGE program that Kirsche (@KirscheVerstahl) has been warning us about is here, and it’s being hidden in plain sight. Official DEI departments have been replaced by something far more covert: a rebranding under the guise of Benchmarking Race, Inclusion, and Diversity in Global Engagement (BRIDGE).

This isn't just another "check-the-box" diversity initiative; it's a strategic operationalization of DEI principles that embed into the very DNA of a company’s culture and business model… without the ability to point to a specific dept. of DEI as the culprit for the inevitable downfall.

"Be your authentic self"

Unless... that means you're a normal, straight white male...

What Is BRIDGE?

BRIDGE is an institutional survey designed to assess the state of DEI across various sectors globally. It stands for Belonging, Representation, Inclusion, Diversity, and Equity, with the "G" representing the gap they aim to bridge… which is about as gay as the people behind this ‘initiative’.

But here's where it gets tricky: after years of collecting DEI data, BRIDGE has evolved into a 2.0 initiative, as detailed on their website wearebridge.com.

This transformation wasn't just a rebranding; it was about attempting to normalize DEI as an integral part of how businesses function. DEI is no longer a separate entity or department; it's being deeply woven into the fabric of every decision, especially hiring practices.

In their words, BRIDGE is about operationalizing inclusion as a business practice, not just a moral imperative. And this is where things take a turn.

According to their CEO, Sheryl Daija, "We are trying to change the narrative of DE&I from a philosophy, or even a moral imperative—which obviously it is, but that hasn't gotten us to where we need to go—to figure out how we operationalize inclusion as a business practice." Which, yes… sounds about as crazy as she looks.

Their ‘mission’ is clear: to fundamentally alter the cultural landscape of corporations globally. It’s no longer about having a DEI team or department—it’s about making DEI invisible, integrating it into everything from hiring practices to product development. And they’re doing it quietly. Purposefully.

Microsoft’s Role in All This

The most alarming part? Microsoft is a key player in all this nonsense.

In a recent September 11th BRIDGE SmartBrief, a section called "Cultural Competency and DEI Initiatives" outlined how companies like Microsoft are paving the way for transformational change in DEI and ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) standards.

Kirsche has been on top of this from the jump, and posted a tweet about BRIDGE’s Sheryl Daija speaking at Microsoft’s panel during the Cannes Lions festival, with Microsoft’s branding prominently displayed PowerPoint slides. Key phrases like "AI & Impact" and "Economics, Inclusivity, Sustainability" were showcased, exposing Microsoft’s deep involvement in this initiative. They don’t want this to get out. They try not to mention it anywhere… but the hard evidence is right there.

The BRIDGE tactic is being employed at one of the world’s largest tech companies, hiding DEI practices under the guise of ESG while continuing to operationalize DEI as part of their business model. Instead of having an ‘official’ DEI department that’s easy to spot and criticize, Microsoft is embedding DEI across their organizational framework, making it harder for those who oppose these initiatives to push back… initiatives that insert non-gamers into crucial roles for hiring gamers.

The passion… is gone.

The Halo Studios Case

A prime example of this covert operationalization is what’s happening at Halo Studios. Melissa Boone is in charge of hiring - and based on looking at her LinkedIn profile, has some extreme personal biases, heavily influenced by her sexual identity and her connection to the DEI/ESG framework. Bring your true self, as long as that’s not including being a straight heterosexual male…

This is a clear indication of BRIDGE being utilized at Microsoft. Hiring decisions are being made not based on who can push the gaming industry forward or who has the talent and passion for creating groundbreaking experiences being best for a position… but rather - to fulfill ESG goals.

This is not “racism” or “sexism” or any other “ism” the DEI proponents try to pin on critics. It’s reality—and it’s tragic.

Unqualified, non-gamers are placed into roles simply to check diversity boxes, with no passion for the medium they’re working on.

The sad truth is that it’s not only happening in the gaming industry but across many sectors where DEI is becoming the DNA of business operations.

It’s quietly but effectively reshaping the future, all while ruining game experiences.

BUT.... It's Not Just Melissa Boone...

Executive Producer Casey Wu and COO Elizabeth Van Wyck have brought their own activist-driven priorities to the table at Halo Studios, raising concerns about whether they are more focused on pushing ideological agendas than creating quality games. I mentioned this in my previous coverage, but it's worth noting that in 2019, Casey Wu was part of a panel titled "Open Worlds: Women and Diversity in Gaming," where she promoted the dubious claim that "45% of gamers are women."

This statement was designed to push a narrative about representation... realistically, it's detached from the actual player base that built franchises like Halo. Instead of focusing on the core audience that made the series a success, Wu is more interested in reshaping the industry according to her social agenda. The emphasis on "being your authentic self" is celebrated—but only if that self fits the preferred DEI narrative, sidelining any straight white men who have historically formed a significant part of the gaming industry's success... You know... With pure passion instead of checkboxes?

Elizabeth Van Wyck, with her long-standing career at Microsoft, shares similar activist tendencies. She’s been actively involved with AnyKey, an organization that prioritizes social justice and inclusion in gaming, reflecting her alignment with broader DEI efforts.

Like Wu, Van Wyck promotes the ideas of "authenticity" but ...again, it's selective—advocating for certain identities while alienating others. Her activism raises the question: is her focus on reviving the Halo franchise or simply fulfilling ESG mandates? Do these people ACTUALLY play video games??

Both Wu and Van Wyck are far more concerned with making statements and headlines than crafting the immersive, quality gameplay that Halo fans expect, contributing to the inevitable franchise's doom.

Don't believe me? Just wait...

In the meantime, grab some popcorn.

A More Insidious Reality

This isn’t a phase that’s going to pass. BRIDGE is here, and it’s the new face of corporate DEI initiatives—designed to be harder to spot, more ingrained in the business ecosystem, and nearly impossible to push back against. Microsoft’s role in this transformation, and Halo Studios' downfall, is an unfortunate sobering example of how far this operationalization has gone.

Companies like Microsoft are using BRIDGE to reframe their DEI goals, replacing the overt DEI teams with something far more covert and deeply entrenched in corporate operations. And in doing so, they are not just reshaping the workplace—they are reshaping the industries they dominate.

It’s not about diversity, equity, and inclusion anymore. It’s about reshaping the future of industries to serve ESG goals, at the expense of creativity, passion, and industry expertise. And sadly, it’s happening …right under our noses.

~Smash

The once mighty Halo series, a flagship of gaming history and the golden goose of Microsoft's Xbox, has found itself in a strange position in recent years—struggling to recapture the magic that made it a phenomenon. And now, the latest move from the developers— (originally) 343 Industries —suggests desperation rather than genuine progress...

They released a video announcing they are rebranding to "Halo Studios," supposedly heralding a fresh start for the beloved franchise. One employee summed up their rationale by saying, "We knew we had to make a change in order to take us into the future." But what does this change really mean? Not much, apparently. They kept the exact same employees and simply slapped a new label on the studio, as if a name change alone could save the Halo we once knew.

But wait, they’re also using Unreal Engine now! The announcement was made with a flourish, as if this single decision would magically solve everything that has gone wrong over the years. It came across as 'Look, guys, we’re using Unreal Engine now!'—the sarcasm practically wrote itself.

They can put a new coat of paint on something rotten, but it still smells like the same old crap. The truth is, the people make the game, not a new engine or a rebranded studio name. The root of the problem is more systemic, and it’s disheartening to see the real issues go unaddressed, not that we're really surprised...

Let's face it, Halo's reputation has taken a nosedive, and the perception online is overwhelmingly negative. It doesn’t hold a candle to the behemoth it once was. The decline isn't just about the decline in quality of the games—it’s about the direction and the people at the helm. Sure, there are talented developers there, but over the years, it’s become obvious that 343 (now "Halo Studios") has been plagued by an internal culture that doesn’t align with what made the original Halo games great.

This has included developers openly expressing disdain for the core aspects of Halo. As I covered in a previous video, one developer even admitted they "felt wrong" making weapons for the game, as if working on the franchise's iconic arsenal was some kind of moral issue.

If the team creating Halo is uncomfortable with its core mechanics, it’s no wonder the game itself has felt like a pale shadow of its former self. Then there’s Melissa Boone, the chief of staff—rainbows, purple hair and all!

Typically, a chief of staff is someone who ensures that the team functions smoothly, a role vital in any large organization. But when you look at Boone's background, it becomes even harder to understand how it relates to Halo.

She holds a PhD in social psychology, focusing on AIDS and HIV, and I struggle to see what this has to do with a sci-fi shooter franchise. It's not that someone with these qualifications can’t work in gaming, but when it comes to leading a team tasked with delivering on a series about heroism, alien worlds, and intense battles, the connection seems more than a stretch...

Add to that her insistence on using terms like "Latinx," a label widely rejected by the community it claims to represent, and it’s clear that this is someone whose priorities just don't align with making a great Halo game...

Many people are rightfully worried about the chief of staff at Halo Studios, Melissa Boone, and her obvious ideologically driven activism. However, she's not alone in this push- The laundry list of questionable employees goes on and on and on.

Huge shoutout to Tebow at Minimal Effort Podcast/Gaming for the additional research - give him a sub - He's closing in on 10k and a great channel for news.

Executive producer Casey Wu and COO Elizabeth Van Wyck are also bringing their own activist agendas to the table, which raises serious questions about the direction of the studio...

Casey Wu, for instance, was on a panel back in 2019 called "Open Worlds: Women and Diversity in Gaming" where they were pushing the dubious claim that "45% of gamers are women." This type of narrative is an obvious attempt to reshape the industry based on misleading statistics rather than catering to the ACTUAL player base that built franchises like Halo.

Such ideologically driven priorities, which seem to be more about making headlines than making great games, are part of what has led to the decline in the quality of the series...

Then we have Elizabeth Van Wyck, the COO, shares a similar pattern of activism. Elizabeth has been a Microsoft employee for many years and she's been involved in various activist circles, including sitting on a panel for AnyKey, a group that prioritizes activism and social justice in gaming.

While I always stand by that representation and inclusion are important, it has to be natural and not forced. The fact that these individuals are all heavily involved in advocacy outside of their core responsibilities raises questions about whether their focus is truly on revitalizing Halo or.. More likely, if it's about pushing an agenda that ultimately does not resonate with most players.

The decline of the Halo series can be traced back to decisions influenced by people who seem disconnected from the essence of what made the franchise great in the first place—those who care more about making a statement than about making a quality game that honors its legacy.

Hiring the right people is crucial, and that starts and ends with leadership. Unfortunately, the gates have been opened at "Halo Studios" for individuals who appear to be more interested in pushing an agenda than in keeping the Halo spirit alive. This isn’t the Halo we grew up with—crafted by passionate developers who loved the game they were making. This new version is all but dead, replaced with a soulless iteration that struggles to understand what made Halo so special in the first place.

The original team at 343 Industries that created the Halo Master Chief Collection:

...Compared to what it looks like these days over there. I can't help but see bloat:

The name change, the Unreal Engine adoption— all of it just feels like generic window dressing. Without addressing any of the REAL issues from within the studio—the people and the culture—it’s unlikely that anything will actually change moving forward.

Halo deserves better than this, but as long as those in charge keep focusing on the wrong things to distract from the actual issues, the franchise will continue to fall short of what it could have been.... and you know it's Joever when Kotaku activists start running damage control on it...

While we'll always have the memories of yesteryear... The future of Halo has fallen.

~Smash

The latest trailer for the upcoming Tomb Raider Netflix cartoon dropped on IGN, giving us a good look at Lara Croft’s character design. As someone genuinely interested in this adaptation, I eagerly clicked play.

What we all saw, and what I've discovered behind the scenes in the production room since, has left me speechless...

It wasn’t Lara Croft, the fierce and iconic archaeologist we all know and love, but rather something else entirely. It looked like a man with long hair. From the community's reactions, I wasn't the only one who felt this way.

"Larry Croft" is the first name that comes to mind when watching this 'new' animated portrayal of Lara Croft, and for good reason. The design choices are baffling from a sane human being perspective; she's now got broad shoulders, a flat chest, muscles everywhere... and an overall masculine look that strips away her classic femininity with the trademark 'generous' chest assets. She looks like a He. That's a dude with long hair... we just need to call him by his real name now - Larry.

It truly is another reminder that everything woke turns to sh*t.

The disappointing design of Lara Croft led me to do deeper digging, and of course I discover... there’s a very specific reason for this drastic change — the director, "Joey" Soloway. Soloway, formerly known as Jill, is an American television creator, writer, and director well-known for their work on the Amazon series Transparent, a show celebrated for its exploration of LGBTQ themes, and Six Feet Under, another well-acclaimed production. Soloway now decided to start identifying as non-binary and gender non-conforming and changed their name from Jill to Joey in 2020. Totally stable and definitely no agenda being shoved into this cartoon, though, of course.... Right?

After looking more into Soloway's history, it became clear why Lara Croft's design in the Netflix series feels so... off. I knew it had to be something, but I honestly wasn't expecting it to be this... Obvious and blatant.

Soloway’s approach has always been to break gender norms, and it seems that same philosophy has been applied here — turning Lara, the epitome of a strong, independent female character, into... Let's face it... a man. One of the aspects that made Lara Croft a beloved character was her combination of physical acrobatics, wit, and femininity, and this balance seems to have been discarded in favor of a "progressive" reimagining that turns her into a more... androgynous figure.

The response from the community has been overwhelmingly negative, and it’s easy to see why. Fans don’t appreciate when the core of a beloved character is altered, especially for the sake of adhering to current social agendas. Terms like "woke garbage" and "gross" are being echoed repeatedly on social media. One fan even called it "Uni-boob. Gross woke garbled cock trash," while another bluntly commented, "What did they do to her!?" The sentiment is clear — this isn't the Lara Croft that fans recognize or want.

The problem with this direction isn’t just that it changes how Lara looks, but that it also sends a message to long-time fans that their attachment to the character as she was is somehow wrong or outdated. When a character as iconic as Lara Croft is altered in such a way that she no longer represents the traits that made her iconic, it feels like a slap in the face to the fans who have supported the franchise for decades.

It doesn't stop with Joey/Jill either... turns out that Mariel Hester, now known as Ari H., was also involved in the production of the Tomb Raider Netflix series as a storyboard artist. Ari, who was originally listed as a she from posts from powerhouse studios, now identifies with he/him pronouns.

They previously worked on Castlevania as well, which... may explain some of the creative shifts that led to the downfall of that series. With a history of involvement in projects that have taken controversial directions, Ari's role in the Tomb Raider adaptation seems to align with the ongoing trend of pushing social agendas at the expense of the core elements that made these franchises beloved. Yay!!!

It's unfortunate because to be honest, I was genuinely interested in this adaptation. A Tomb Raider series that could expand on Lara's rich lore, her daring adventures, and her evolution as a character would have been exciting. Instead, nope... what we’ve received is yet another example of "woke" revisionism taking priority over quality storytelling and staying true to what made a character iconic in the first place.

I'm fine if you want to make your own crap to spew to the masses and fail on your own, but stay away from established beloved franchises!

Netflix’s Tomb Raider animated series had the potential to captivate both new audiences and long-time fans, but it seems the creative choices made by Joey Soloway have steered the series into a territory that alienates the very people who were excited to watch it - at least, from what we've seen thus far, and putting together pattern recognition. While representation and inclusivity in media are important, forcing those concepts by fundamentally changing an existing character — one beloved for being unapologetically herself — isn't the way to do it.. Nor will it ever be. It only serves to drive a wedge between creators and the audience.

So now we’re left with Larry Croft, a hollow shell of what Lara once was, directed by someone who clearly has an agenda that didn’t include staying true to the core of this legendary character. It seems that Netflix, once again, took a beloved franchise and "re-imagined" it into something that leaves us all wishing they had just left it alone. You hate to see it...

~Smash

Square Enix continues to slap fans of their beloved brands in the face by pumping out the gay. They've made a shift in their approach to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), embracing these 'values' openly, despite having distanced itself from Sweet Baby Inc. on the surface. Not the best look here.

Their recent actions, from opening their own internal DEI dept to attempting to censor a Dragon Quest interview at Tokyo Game Show 2024, to now promoting a Pride-themed live stream for Little Goody Two Shoes reveals a that word we keep seeing come up again and again... a 'pattern' of behavior. There is now an established clear agenda that increasingly forces woke narratives into their content. This shift raises some serioyus questions about the broader implications for their brand, as well as the direction in which they've been taking their games as of late...

This concern all came to a head with the Square's latest EXTREMELY controversial tweet:

Square Enix is now randomly promoting Little Goody Two Shoes, a game originally released on November 7th, 2023, with very little fanfare. While many felt that Little Goody Two Shoes was a decent game with a unique blend of eerie and nostalgic charm, Square Enix's decision to market it heavily under the Pride banner seems to be an attempt to pander to a specific demographic for a short-term boost in sales. However, it's hard to see this as any kind of sustainable strategy for Square Enix's long-term image, especially when factoring in their approach to handling audience feedback: Locked replies.

What's especially troubling here isn't just the tweet itself, but how they have locked the comment replies to the tweet before anyone so much as had the chance to say a peep.

By doing so, Square Enix is silencing the community's opinion on the matter, which is always a failed attempt to control the narrative and avoid any public backlash. In an industry where we thrive on engagement and discussion, restricting replies only fuels the skepticism and suspicion around motives. It shows a lack of confidence in their stance—if they believed the messaging would resonate with their audience, there would be no need to restrict opinions... right?

This marketing approach highlights a clear misunderstanding of the game's appeal. I'll be honest - I'm not too familiar with this game, but thanks to Dash Attack's insights, we can see that Little Goody Two Shoes could have been marketed effectively as a "Yuri horror game"...

Yuri is a niche -but popular genre in Japan- that draws significant interest from its own dedicated audience.

As Dash Attack put it:

Instead of leaning into the game's genuine qualities—like its narrative depth, creepy atmosphere, and multiple endings that make it possible to complete the game without engaging in a romance storyline—Square Enix opted to instead... tie it explicitly to Pride. WTF? The result is that instead of the game standing on its own merits - which I'll be honest - looks pretty interesting... it has now been linked to broader socio-political conversations that will certainly alienate potential players.

Was it worth it?

Little Goody Two Shoes, developed by AstralShiftPro, is an intriguing title with its roots in a small Portuguese indie studio known for their earlier work on Pocket Mirror. It combines a fairy tale aesthetic, 90s anime vibes, and a deeply unsettling atmosphere, making it a truly unique horror experience. With ten different possible endings, it offers players the chance to shape protagonist Elise's story in a way that reflects their choices. Think about what could have been if marketed properly! But no - instead of celebrating these features, someone over at Square Enix has decided to inject unnecessary messaging that ultimately detracts from the game's own identity, doing it a clear disservice. WHY!?

This isn't just about Little Goody Two Shoes. It's part of a larger pattern in Square Enix's recent behavior, such as their rumored attempts to scrub an interview from the internet after a Dragon Quest creator expressed views that were critical of what they called "ridiculous inclusivity."

The insistence on pushing an LGBTQ agenda—even at the expense of erasing dissenting voices—is a very worrying sign of a company that's far more interested in maintaining a curated image than truly listening to their audience.

Meet... Mina

Square Enix's Toshiyuki Itahana had previously introduced a character named Mina, designed to resemble the birds of paradise flower, as part of their push to further an LGBTQ agenda for some unknown reason. The character's vibrant, exaggerated appearance is being used to forcefully insert LGBTQ representation into their games, even in places where it feels completely out of context. This pandering is an obvious attempt to elevate Mina's prominence, despite the character not fitting organically into the existing narrative structures. I wouldn't be surprised if Square eventually developed an indie title with Mina as the lead, in an over-the-top effort to fully embrace this trend of pandering - Hell I expect it at this point. While I and many gamers have no issue with people's sexual preferences, the persistent injection of these 'themes' into every aspect of gaming feels strange and unnecessary, especially when it disrupts the core gaming experience.

There's definitely something going on in the background. Square Enix's decision to fully embrace DEI in such a forced and heavy-handed way raises some tough questions about the direction of the company. What could have been a charming indie horror game is now overshadowed by the very politicization the company seems intent on forcing into its product lineup. The question here now is whether such a strategy will benefit the company in the long run, or if this misguided marketing push will do lasting damage to the brand... Let's be honest - we all already know the answer to that one. Square is Ubisoft 2.0 in the making, and it's got to make you wonder. Why?

Rather than pandering to a specific demographic for short-term gains, Square Enix should've instead focused on presenting their games authentically and trusting their audience to appreciate the content for what it is, not for the political and social statements attached to it. The approach they've taken may yield a momentary sales bump, but it's no going to have far more negative consequences on the overall perception of the company moving forward.

But hey... Now we've heard of the game from this situation and now I'm talking about it, so on some level... it worked.

But no, it wasn't worth it.

~Smash

Let's be honest - we all see it happening in real time here - Ubisoft is spiraling out of control amid a slew of internal problems and external backlash. The once-dominant game development company (trust me, I was there 3,000 years ago, Gandalf) now finds itself on the brink of a total collapse, and the behavior of its employees only further underscores the complete disconnect between Ubisoft and the gaming community. In the latest example, Monetization Director Stevy Chassard lashed out at gamers and even his fellow developers, reminding everyone why Ubisoft's clueless approach is putting the company on a collision course with bankruptcy.

Stevy Chassard's Meltdown: Gamers Are the Problem?

A week after Ubisoft’s announcement of its lowered financial outlook, which included delays for Assassin's Creed Shadows and disappointing sales for Star Wars Outlaws, Stevy Chassard - The Monetization Director at Ubisoft decided to vent his frustration on LinkedIn. His post was a passionate, if a bit... misguided, rant against gamers and even his own colleagues, who he accused of celebrating the company’s failures. I gotta be honest, this comes across as a dude that is in way over his head for a director role at a (once) massive corporation...

"I rarely post on social media, but today I am sad. Ashamed and sad. The gaming industry is rough at the moment, we all know it," Chassard wrote, lamenting the negative reactions online. "But seeing how ‘gamers’ react on social medias, wishing ill-fate to companies and people alike, is sad. (And not only towards Ubisoft)."

Weird. Never once have I witnessed any prominent figure in the social media space 'cheer on' the general "downfall" of any organization in the game space - tho I have seen plenty of examples of F around and Find out, as well as unique incidents within a company that we have expressed dismay with....

Chassard's tirade didn’t stop there. He turned his criticism inward, directing it at his fellow industry professionals who dared to comment on Ubisoft’s issues.

“What is even more revolting, is coming on LinkedIn and seeing the same comments from people within the industry,” Chassard complained. He went on to accuse these developers of affecting "thousands of employees that are already impacted by all the hate despite doing their best to deliver incredible experiences."

Let's be clear.... People are more than welcome to state their opinions. If they don't align with yours, it doesn't mean that they are actively destroying your organization. This needs some severe self reflection on Chassard's end... Which is wild because if anyone should understand how business works, it SHOULD be the money guy....

To many, this post highlighted how out of touch Ubisoft’s upper management is with the gaming community. Instead of introspection or acknowledging the genuine complaints from gamers, Chassard blamed customers for the company's failures, accusing them of spreading hate simply because the product "does not please you." He ended with a plea: "We are all on the same boat, please please please, stop spreading hate, we should all uplift each other instead of bringing each other down." Spare me.

Business is brutal and the game industry has proven time and time again that it is beyond bloated with useless jobs and unqualified employees. The irony of Chassard's plea for unity wasn't lost on the community, especially as it came from a company so dedicated to "woke ideology," pushing agendas that seem increasingly disconnected from the player base. Despite Ubisoft CEO Yves Guillemot's insistence that the company is "entertainment-first" and not pushing any specific agenda, the Diversity, Inclusion, and Accessibility page on Ubisoft's website reveals a different story.

Statements from Raashi Sikka, Ubisoft's Vice President of Global Diversity and Inclusion, emphasize the company’s commitment to embedding diversity and inclusion across its games and workforce. (Thx ThatParkPlace for the research on this!)

A Company on the Brink of Collapse

Stevy Chassard’s meltdown comes at a time when Ubisoft is facing its most dire financial outlook in years. The company recently downgraded its expected yearly net bookings to €1.95bn and admitted it would have "around break-even non-IFRS operating income and free cash flow." On top of that, the anticipated sales for Star Wars Outlaws have been softer than expected, and the delay of Assassin’s Creed Shadows to February 2025 has only added to the overwhelming investor anxiety.

In the midst of these issues, a bombshell rumor from Bloomberg has surfaced that Tencent Holdings Ltd. and the Guillemot family are considering options to take Ubisoft private. The report suggests that this potential buyout is a response to Ubisoft’s declining market value—losing more than half of it in just one year—and the growing pressure from investment firm AJ Holdings, which has been urging the company to accept a buyout. This story made the stock SPIKE hard, upwards of nearly 35% in an hour!

The ramifications of such a buyout could be severe for Ubisoft’s workforce. According to Insider Gaming’s Tom Henderson, the company could be forced to cut staff by as much as 40%, or roughly 8,000 employees, as part of an effort to stabilize its finances and make it a more attractive buyout target.

Ubisoft currently employs around 20,000 people across more than 45 studios worldwide, and a mass layoff of this scale would significantly impact their ability to deliver on upcoming projects.

Disconnect with Gamers and Employees Alike

Chassard’s outburst, coupled with Ubisoft’s commitment to "focus on queer representation in games" and its wildly illegal mentorship program that discriminates against men, paints a picture of a company deeply entrenched in its ideology and disconnected from both its audience and the reality of the gaming market.

Even high-level executives like Yves Guillemot have made promises that appear to be nothing more than empty rhetoric. Guillemot’s supposed "player-centric approach" rings hollow when a top executive like Chassard is publicly lashing out at the very people Ubisoft claims to serve.

The lack of self-awareness and accountability at Ubisoft explains directly why the company has fallen the way it has. Instead of listening to player feedback and adjusting course, the leadership has chosen to double down on their decisions, even if it means alienating their core audience. How good is that DEI money? Was it worth it? It’s no wonder that rumors of a buyout and massive staff cuts are swirling, as the company seems intent on ignoring the real issues...

With executives like Chassard at the helm as a DIRECTOR (...how?), it’s clear that Ubisoft is on a collision course with bankruptcy, unable—or unwilling—to learn from its mistakes. If Ubisoft wants to survive, they'll need more than a buyout or a fresh cash injection. They need a fundamental change in their attitude towards its players, its employees, and the direction it’s taking its games.

Until then, Chassard’s rant will serve as a testament to just how clueless Ubisoft’s leadership... truly is.

~Smash

Another victory is in the books for us as the GoFundMe campaign has officially been restored! After a brief suspension that had me questioning the safety and reliability of crowdfunding platforms, I'm happy to be able to announce that GoFundMe has cleared me of any wrongdoing. It’s a moment of relief—but it also raises some serious concerns about the power of online detractors and the platform’s policy enforcement...

The email I received from GoFundMe’s Trust & Safety team went as follows:

It’s nice to see GoFundMe ultimately doing the right thing, and I appreciate their willingness to look into the matter fairly. However, what remains far more deeply troubling is just how easy it was for my campaign to be taken down—even temporarily—by haters. Thankfully, the GoFundMe campaign was suspended after I had already closed the ability for anyone to donate more, as the goal had been more than exceeded thanks to an incredible outpouring of support from the community... Yet, despite reaching that goal, and despite being transparent and above board, some people with malicious intentions still managed to get the campaign flagged and temporarily removed.

Let’s be honest: platforms (ESPECIALLY) like GoFundMe have their own vested interests. They take a portion of the funds that are raised, and there may even be potential tax implications on my end (which I’m still figuring out).

For full transparency here, let's breakdown what the donations looked like:

Despite these challenges, the campaign managed to collect well over the original $2,500 goal I set to cover the legal fees associated with defending myself against Alyssa Mercante's attacks on my freedom of speech.

Totaling over $6,400 in less than a day!! I can’t begin to express my gratitude enough for the overwhelming support from all of you. All funds have officially been sent away from GoFundMe and to my bank account to fight this battle.

This victory isn't just mine—it's ours. We showed that as a community, we can come together and fight back when things get tough... and I honestly again, cannot thank you enough.

All that said, while I celebrate this win, the larger issue looms: why was it so easy for my campaign to be derailed by detractors in the first place? GoFundMe needs to rethink their policies and safeguards... This should NEVER be allowed to happen. If a campaign that was closed for donations, had already met its goals, and followed all the rules can still be flagged and taken down due to false claims, then what does that say about the security of anyone else using the platform? How many others have been subjected to the same unjustified scrutiny, and how many campaigns never make it back online?

The system isn’t perfect, far from it.. and we just saw firsthand how vulnerable legitimate fundraisers can be to bad-faith attacks. But for now, the important thing is that we're back - and we're still winning! My legal expenses thus far are more than covered, and that’s all thanks to each and every one of you who pitched in, shared the campaign, and offered support in other ways. You turned a difficult situation into a rallying cry, and we came out victorious on the other side. Whether it was financial, or getting the word out - It was amazing all the same.

So, here’s to all of you. Thank you for believing in me, for helping to fund the defense, and for standing up against the nonsense. We made this happen together, and I couldn’t be prouder of the community we’ve built. Let's keep pushing forward. Let's keep winning.

~Smash

The controversy surrounding Dragon Quest III HD-2D Remake continues to unravel, and it seems that Square Enix is now determined to try and erase all traces of it from the internet. The focal point of this drama originated at the Tokyo Games Show, in a situation I covered a few days ago.

Dragon Quest creator Yuji Horii and former Weekly Shonen Jump Editor-in-Chief Kazuhiko Torishima made some specific remarks about the game's 'forced' design changes. The subsequent fallout happening right now suggests that the once Japanese gaming giant may be trying to suppress a discussion they find uncomfortable... or, better stated, where they feel they are forced to bend the knee to the 'woke agenda'.

Of course, the first thing the 'hate mob' starts to do is jump to in with their attacks aligning Yuji Horii with Hitler, because hard-core lefty reasoning...

The interview in question, which was posted and translated by Valute News (@saou0345 on X), contained some ...noteworthy comments. Yuji Horii expressed his discontent about having to cover up characters and remove gender options for the Dragon Quest III HD-2D Remake to comply with international regulations, particularly from the United States.

Torishima added to this by making a bold criticism of "Western compliance" as an evil disguised as good—a force compelling Japanese media to alter their content. These blunt statements have since been misinterpreted and caused waves across social media.

In response, Valute News issued an apology, claiming that an error occurred in their English subtitles. Specifically, they mistakenly translated "Puritan" as "sex education." The tweet from Valute News read:

Shortly afterward, the video was deleted from Valute News' account, and the original interview, which had been uploaded to YouTube, was made private. Pretty fking sus. Just saying... The timing of these deletions coincided ...suspiciously with mounting backlash from social media, especially from some of the more vocal "woke" commentators who took issue with Yuji Horii's remarks. This led a lot of gamers to speculate on if Square Enix may have pressured Valute News to take down the video to prevent any further association of Dragon Quest with anti-compliance sentiments.

It wouldn't be the first time a major publisher has tried to clean up an inconvenient narrative, but the extent of Square Enix's response in this case has only added to the intrigue. Not only did Valute News remove the video AND issue a subsequent apology (like... why do that?), but other statements have surfaced, seemingly condemning the mistranslations and media coverage. This has fueled even more speculation that a coordinated effort is being made to erase any trace of what might be perceived as unfavorable comments by the creators.

One of the more critical parts of the interview that sparked outrage was Kazuhiko Torishima's remark on compliance:

The phrase was likely a direct critique of the standards imposed on Japanese creators when adapting content for an international audience, particularly the United States. The mention of American regulations seems to have struck a chord, as Torishima went on to reference the challenges faced when selling manga in America due to age ratings, implying that regulations are way too restrictive and culturally invasive.

The fallout from the comments and their subsequent mistranslation brought additional scrutiny to Horii's earlier remarks about the removal of gender options in Dragon Quest. Horii explained:

How dare he speak the truth in the modern era! The audacity of him! His statement clearly frustrated many Western activists, and it appears that Square Enix didn't appreciate the negative attention it brought on. The game's adjustments—adding clothing to female characters and changing gender options— have been made in an attempt to cater to changing social norms and regulatory demands, but the response from Horii and Torishima shows they were far from happy about these decisions... and moreso, perplexed by it all.

Adding to the sus-ness, Yubo & Masirito’s KosoKoso Broadcasting Station (Thx ThatParkPlace for the find) later claimed that Valute News had "maliciously" misinterpreted and misrepresented Torishima's remarks. They even requested that viewers refrain from sharing any further edits or translations of the original video to avoid spreading incorrect information. The lengths that the station and other involved parties have gone to distance themselves from the initial statements strongly suggests that external pressures—likely from Square Enix—were made aimed at stifling the controversy.

To top it off, the interviewer girl who was asking the questions at TGS to Horii even further solidifies this notion...

She publicly said that the removal of context and spreading of mistranslated information, is not ok:

The entire situation highlights a concerning trend in the industry: when creators voice dissenting views or criticism of regulatory standards that don’t align with the current accepted social narrative, companies respond by attempting to "scrub" the record for existence. The scrubbing of the video, the issued apologies, and the sudden silence around the interview seem to point to Square Enix trying to save face under pressure from social media and other external forces.

What’s most troubling is that the original, raw content of the interview may never see the light of day again. Despite the apology supposedly only being about a potential mistranslation of a single word, it’s hard to believe that this minor error justifies these extreme measures—deleting videos, issuing statements, and private uploads. It’s more likely that Square Enix is scrambling to control the narrative and prevent the spread of sentiments that could jeopardize their carefully curated, global-friendly image.

Ultimately, this incident raises huge questions about transparency in the gaming industry and the rights of creators to express themselves freely, even when their opinions don’t align with the agendas of global corporations or specific activist groups. For now, it seems Square Enix would rather censor and scrub evidence than allow creators like Yuji Horii to speak honestly about the challenges facing their beloved series. And unfortunately, unless the interview somehow resurfaces... we may never know the full story behind this situation, but the way things have been going, your best guess - is probably accurate...

~Smash

In the realm of video game journalism and its increasingly contentious landscape, Alyssa Mercante’s defenders have proven themselves relentless in their quest for control. This isn’t just about protecting their 'friend' —it's about power and censorship at ANY cost. The latest chapter in this seemingly never-ending saga shows the true extent of the tactics being employed, and it’s nothing short of pure evil activism.

The latest incidents reveals the depths to which these defenders are willing to go. After initiating a GoFundMe campaign to cover legal expenses and push back against harassment, I soon found myself on the receiving end of a targeted campaign to shut it down. These individuals—unwilling to allow my side of the story to be heard—resorted to one of the oldest forms of censorship in their playbook that they learned from friend of Alyssa, Nick Calandra: "go after their funding sources"

A Coordinated Campaign of Suppression

Let’s be clear, this isn't an isolated or accidental occurrence. The phrase “go after their funding sources” rings all too familiar, having become a notorious battle cry among certain activists when attempting to dismantle their critics. Their aim here isn't to engage in any debate or discuss differing opinions; it’s to destroy the ability of their opponent to even exist in the discourse.

And they've succeeded here... at least temporarily. After numerous reports, GoFundMe suspended my account for alleged “use of a direct name” and “defamatory language.” The irony, of course, is that this is the exact behavior these defenders profess to oppose—silencing, intimidation, and outright bullying. Weird how that road only goes one way...

But what matters to these activists isn’t whether their actions align with their so-called values. It’s about power, control, and enforcing a narrative where only their side gets to speak.

The Hypocrisy of Supposed Justice

When Alyssa Mercante’s defenders scream about “harassment” and “unfair treatment,” one could potentially be tempted to think they’re genuinely interested in justice or fair play - assuming they know nothing of her and her 'ilk'. But in reality, they utilize these tactics only to protect their own interests. The actions taken against my GoFundMe campaign speak volumes. These people aren’t concerned with right and wrong; they’re concerned with ensuring their critics are eradicated.

GoFundMe’s decision to suspend my campaign based on a barrage of reports from the same group of individuals reveals the susceptibility of these platforms to manipulation. The activism going on here is not about grassroots change or societal improvement—it’s about removing opposing voices from public forums.

A Shift Toward Totalitarian Suppression

I'm not well-versed in the area of crowdfunding for myself, and GoFundMe may not have been the wisest choice initially. If this were to ever come up again, I would seek alternative funding on platforms like GiveSendGo. It's clear that the very same individuals who shut down the initial GoFundMe campaign will be then seeking ways to cut off that alternate avenue. Their drive is relentless: They will stop at nothing to ruin you.

The call for direct donations, while more difficult to manipulate, also comes with drawbacks—it lacks the visibility that platforms like GoFundMe provide. Full transparency has always been a key of my approach with all this BS, but the evil force I’m contending with here has made that more difficult than ever before. They want nothing less than total annihilation of my ability to speak, fund, and defend myself publicly.

The Danger of Relentless Activists

These activists are not interested in discourse, reconciliation, or progress—they want full compliance. They're determined to silence anyone who opposes them, using whatever tools are at their disposal, be it deplatforming, targeting funding, or social ostracization. In their minds, they’re justified in their actions, convinced of their righteousness as they trample over literally anyone who stands in their way.

This is the pure evil behind Alyssa Mercante's defenders. They refuse to stop until their opponent is entirely incapacitated—until they have complete control of the narrative. They use terms like “justice” and “equity,” but they practice something far different: silencing dissent, stamping out criticism, and leaving scorched earth in their wake. This isn’t about my GoFundMe. This is about a larger movement that uses bullying and censorship as weapons to enforce compliance.

They’ve shown time and time again that if they can’t win the debate on merit, they’ll resort to destroying their opponent’s means of fighting back. We’re not simply facing activists here. We’re facing totalitarians—individuals who demand complete control and will stop at nothing to get it. The truth is, no amount of compromise or middle ground will suffice for these people. They are driven by a belief that their ideology should be unquestionable, and any dissent is to be crushed without hesitation... and this is something I'm constantly relearning as I go here.

A Call for Awareness

The recent actions against my GoFundMe aren't surprising, but they are telling. Hell - I even mentioned the initial attempts to have it shut down in my victory video. These people serve as a stark reminder of what we’re dealing with: a group that stops at nothing to destroy anyone who challenges their narrative. They will “go after their funding sources,” they will manipulate platforms into silencing dissenting voices, and they will continue pushing until there’s no opposition left standing!

For those who are considering speaking out, know this: their tactics are dirty, their methods are deceitful, and they WILL target you with everything they have. But we cannot allow them to silence us. The more they reveal their methods and the true extent of their totalitarian drive, the more we must stand firm, shining a light on their hypocrisy and their unyielding push for unchecked power.

Direct donations, alternative platforms, and speaking openly despite their intimidation—these are the tools we need to use to continue standing against the coordinated, relentless, and purely evil activism that is determined to silence all who disagree.

As always and again, THANK YOU for your unwavering support in this ongoing battle. We keep winning the fights, but this war... never ends.

~Smash

Just the other day, I was on a livestream on Valliant Renegade's channel with a bunch of awesome folks, one of which who was Endymion. We discussed the ongoing situations at Sony surrounding the upcoming Ghost of Yōtei and specifically, how his insider informed him how Sony was taken back ...at a number of things. During the stream, Endymion said that Sony executives were allegedly blindsided by the introduction of a female protagonist in the game.

Let me be clear—first off - I find part of this extremely suspect.

Ghost of Yōtei is being developed by Sucker Punch, which is a Sony studio (Sony acquired them back in 2011), and it takes years to produce a game of this magnitude. Are we really supposed to believe that Sony had no idea about the main character’s gender?

~Endymion

To put it bluntly, the idea that a massive corporate entity like Sony, with all its oversight and investment, was unaware that Sucker Punch was making Atsu—the new female character—the protagonist is simply beyond unbelievable. Sony isn't a hands-off publisher; they're deeply involved in the projects of their studios from inception to release. Not that I think Endymion is straight up lying here, but there's got to be some sort of lost info in the conversation. This would be unreal. They provide funding, they control milestones, and they hold a significant degree of creative control. The idea that Sucker Punch could have "blindsided" Sony with the protagonist's identity at the trailer release stage debuting at a State of Play that Sony themselves puts together and compiles... is just laughable.

What I do find believable, though, is that Sony was genuinely shocked by the backlash. The executives are either super out of touch—or didn't care—that the actual audience wasn't on board with this direction.

He went on to say:

Sony's response, or rather, lack of anticipation in regards to fan reactions, reveals just how out of touch they are with the gaming community. Ghost of Tsushima has an incredibly loyal fanbase, one that fell in love with Jin Sakai's story. We wanted MORE of that. Changing the focus to a new character—especially one with a very different background and gender—was bound to be contentious, particularly for a franchise with such a dedicated following. Not to mention the actress is an activist, not helping the situation by proactively blocking so many people on Twitter that she was actually blocking some folks that were defending her...

The reactions to the Ghost of Yōtei trailer tell the story clearly - like mine from above... I'm still so torn about all this. Many of us felt abandoned, lamenting the departure from Jin's journey, while others have compared the move to Ubisoft's DEI-focused decision-making in Assassin's Creed Shadows. The parallels were drawn quickly, and the criticisms were harsh, with many pointing out that Sony's diversity and inclusion policies seemed to have directly influenced the game's direction.

Ghost of Yōtei is surrounded in controversy already- due to the casting of Erika Ishii as Atsu. Ishii's activism, which includes her extremely vocal support for defunding the police and strong opinions on transgender rights. Sony should have anticipated that casting an outspoken activist with such pivotal roles and how they would invite scrutiny, especially given the charged climate around the gaming industry's intersection with social issues these days. The backlash wasn’t just about the character; it was about the perception that Sony was pushing a broader agenda, one that fans weren’t necessarily interested in being a part of... and we all know how that ends...

Former Sony Chairman Shawn Layden's response didn't help matters either (above). Telling people who dislike the changes to "just not buy it" ... It just solidifies the perception even more that Sony in general is indifferent to the desires of its player base. It's the same kind of dismissive attitude that we've seen time and time again, where valid criticism is written off as toxic or irrelevant. Their arrogance isn't new, but it’s precisely why Sony and Sucker Punch seemed surprised by the backlash—because they assumed gamers would either embrace the changes or stay quiet.

In our livestream discussion, Endymion highlighted how insiders were shocked by the confusion that resulted from the trailer. Mid-level Sony employees reportedly thought Ghost of Yōtei would be a direct sequel focused on Jin Sakai. The reality that Sony wasn't even communicating its creative choices internally is just insane to me. This miscommunication and surprise reaction show that Sony is struggling to align its corporate vision with the expectations of gamers, and it seems like no lessons were learned from previous controversies like The Last of Us Part II...

In the end, it's clear that the higher-ups at Sony are seemingly losing touch with what players want. They underestimated the connection fans had with Jin Sakai and overestimated the enthusiasm for a dramatic shift to a new protagonist. This isn't just a creative misfire—it's an example of how poorly managed communication, both within a company and with its fanbase, can derail a major game release even months prior to launch. While Ghost of Yōtei may indeed still find its audience, it's clear that Sony's gamble is costing them in terms of loyalty and trust. And considering the mixed reactions and internal confusion, this entire episode is just one more sign of how disconnected they’ve become from the players that built their success...

~Smash

Some People Aren’t Meant for Translation Positions.

The Case of Katrina Leonoudakis...

Translation is an 'art' that requires a nuanced understanding of not only languages but also cultural contexts and the integrity of the original work.. and with any art, certain 'activists' will use the cracks to squeeze in personal agendas. Increasingly it feels like those entrusted with the 'craft' of localization are actually doing far more harm than good. This is clearly the case with Katrina Leonoudakis, a notorious figure in the anime, manga, and video game localization industry, who's been caught on camera admitting to changing the meanings of words, while simultaneously being condescending to those who challenge her practices.

Her words here reveal that some people simply aren’t meant for translation work... and in fact, based on the direction of the industry - because of people like her and this attitude, will soon be replaced by A.I. anyways...

The Admission: “I’m Not Sorry for What I Did”

On January 16th, Katrina Leonoudakis tweeted her unapologetic confession: "I’m not sorry for what I did to Inukai 3."

The reference is to her work on My Life as Inukai-san's Dog, which she proudly claimed as her "finest work yet." Rather than adhering to a faithful representation of the original, Katrina took plenty of creative 'liberties'—infusing her localization with inappropriate slang and altering the tone to suit her personal narrative.

The alterations she made weren’t just stylistic adjustments—they fundamentally changed the nature of the content.

Examples included lines like, “I-I’m sorry I yeeted you okay?” and “Nekotani looks like she needs eye bleach.”

Such slang-laden dialogues in My Life as Inukai-san's Dog not only changed the tone but also undermined the intended authenticity of the story, directly misrepresenting the characters and their relationships. Leonoudakis herself boasted about these changes, seemingly aware of how far removed they were from a true representation, while insulting those who preferred accuracy... Because she knows she has power to control a narrative.

Condescension Toward Critics

In response to a fellow translator's question on why she chose to alter the translation, Leonoudakis replied, "This may surprise you, but I love the material. The translation is not for you. (Translation: You are not the intended audience)."

This sentiment is troubling, particularly coming from a so-called "professional" in a role of significant responsibility in entertainment. Her statement directly implies that her work is only meant for a narrow audience that aligns with her preferences, disregarding the source material’s integrity and alienating the very fans who want a faithful translation.

Leonoudakis continued, stating that her goal as a translator was to “identify the target audience and translate with them in mind.”

She rationalized her actions by referencing “equivalent experience,” a concept in translation theory.

However, her logic becomes inherently flawed when this "equivalent experience" results in major deviations from the original message, showing a strong disconnect between maintaining authorial intent and tailoring content for an audience. It’s one thing to adapt humor or cultural references for better understanding, but quite another to transform an entire message until it no longer resembles the original.

A Long Path, but the Wrong One

Leonoudakis’ background reveals a lifelong passion for Japanese culture and language, starting from her teenage years and culminating in professional training in translation and localization. She pursued Japanese as a double major at UC Irvine, participated in the JET program, earned her master's degree in Translation at Kent State University, and worked extensively within the gaming industry, including stints at SEGA of America and Deluxe. It’s evident that she has both the experience and knowledge needed to translate accurately—yet her approach reveals deeper issues.

Her admission of altering content, as in the case of My Life as Inukai-san's Dog, demonstrates that all her "academic" and "professional background" may not have provided her with the key aspect that should govern everything she does in the field of translation: respect for the original creator's intent. There’s a sense of cockiness in her remarks that exposes a belief that she, rather than the author, knows best what the audience needs. This isn’t just a failure of translation but a failure of ethics—a disregard for the original work and the creator's vision.

Translation or Personal Agenda?

In a professional field where maintaining cultural and thematic fidelity is of utmost importance, such practices are harmful. They risk misleading audiences, distorting original messages, and, ultimately, failing in the translator’s duty to serve as a bridge between languages and cultures.

The Broader Implications

Translation is not just about words; it’s about conveying culture, emotion, and the original creator's intent to a new audience. The type of localization practices adopted by Leonoudakis and her admitted disdain for those who are fluent in Japanese or have learned the language demonstrates a troubling trend among certain translators who feel entitled to shape narratives to fit their personal perspective.

It is a reminder that not everyone is suited for translation work—especially those who view the material with disdain or those who prioritize their agenda over the work they are entrusted to deliver.

The role of a translator is not to change but to convey, and that requires humility and a deep respect for the source material.

Katrina Leonoudakis is also pro-union for the AEGIS. Wonder why. Perhaps she sees the writing on the wall that she is not long for her job, and feels that a union could stave off losing the job... at least for the moment?

She may have the resume and qualifications of a seasoned translator, but her actions make it clear that her understanding of the responsibility involved is lacking. If anything, this is proof positive that some people simply aren’t meant for the critical role of bringing another culture's stories to the world—because to do so effectively, one must first respect and preserve the authenticity of the original work, not twist it into something else entirely.

~Smash

(Src/Thx: Twitter, BoundingToComics!)

Yes, it's ridiculous, but multiple separate reports makes one thing clear - where there's smoke.. there's fire... and something major is changing…

The news that Ubisoft is rumored to be making major changes to the portrayal of Yasuke in Assassin's Creed Shadows has sent shockwaves through the gaming community. After announcing a three-month delay, Ubisoft is appearing to now be undertaking the herculean task of altering not just minor details but potentially... an entire character arc in a game that is supposedly "feature complete." Tom Henderson of Insider Gaming dropped the megaton bomb rumor.

As someone who's worked in the game industry, I can't overstate just how significant—and risky—this move is. It screams of desperation and poor planning, potentially now also alienating ALL sides in the ongoing cultural and creative debates that have plagued Ubisoft's recent releases.

What a mess.

Changing a Story Midstream: A Developer's Nightmare

Anyone who's worked on a game knows that making major narrative or character changes late in development is unthinkable. It’s like trying to fix the foundations of a house after the roof is already in place!

Assassin's Creed Shadows was initially touted as a feature-complete game, with an official release date pushed back and now set for Black History Month - Feb 2025. Yet here we are, witnessing Ubisoft scramble to rewrite Yasuke's story and alter how he's portrayed? WTF lol... From my perspective, this undertaking is no less than a mad dash to rectify years of purposeful oversight—something that should've been addressed long before the game's "feature-complete" milestone was achieved.

It isn't just about tweaking dialogue or cutting a problematic line; it's about completely restructuring gameplay mechanics, the narrative arcs, and even the character's identity to align better with the expectations of historical accuracy and audience sensitivity. This level of change requires reworking the design of multiple systems and re-contextualizing the game’s content, all of which is expensive, time-consuming, and highly prone to generating new issues in the process... None of which Ubisoft has endless amounts to be able to deal with these days.

Endymion Rumors Support The Chaos at Ubisoft

Endymion recently covered the situation in an extremely exposing video. In it, he stated,

...and why Ubisoft chose Yasuke over this male Japanese character? Endymion said:

He later added:

A Desperate Move That Alienates Everyone

The rumored changes reflect a clear attempt to satisfy critics who raised concerns over the original portrayal of Yasuke—concerns that ranged from the game's historical inaccuracy to... wait for it...giving Yasuke a hip-hop musical theme. Many folks felt that this was not only completely inappropriate, but extremely disrespectful to Japanese heritage. By trying to make these changes now, Ubisoft runs the risk of alienating every single person involved.

For those who wanted a more 'historically' faithful and nuanced portrayal of Yasuke (read: literally no one except Thomas Lockley to sell a book), these rumored sudden changes come across as a half-baked attempt to avoid backlash. Instead of embracing a well-thought-out representation, the modifications seem reactive rather than proactive—a response to criticism instead of a coherent vision from the start. On the other hand, players (if anyone?) invested in the game and the character as initially conceived might feel betrayed, questioning Ubisoft’s commitment to its original story.

And let’s not forget the developers themselves, who reportedly have been ignored by management in their calls for a delay. The rumors indicate that some team members had been pushing for changes or at least a delay for quite some time, but their concerns were brushed off in favor of rushing the game to release. The fact that Ubisoft management is only now addressing these issues—ONLY after MONTHS of public backlash and disastrous feedback from early trailers—highlights a troubling lack of foresight and respect for the creative process. This is a fire that won't go out.

The Cost of Not Listening

The lessons Ubisoft should have learned from past blunders are apparently falling on deaf ears. In the wake of the Star Wars Outlaws flop, it should've been obvious that rushing a game to meet these arbitrary deadlines without ensuring its quality is a recipe for disaster. With Yasuke, it seemed like Ubisoft was doubling down on its DEI mistakes. The move to add or change elements in Yasuke’s storyline feels like a gamble to appease everyone, but history has shown us that rushed, reactionary decisions rarely pay off in the gaming industry.

This desperate gamble could have been entirely avoided if Ubisoft had just listened from the beginning—to the developers and to the players. By incorporating genuine, meaningful representation and historical accuracy into Yasuke's character during the conceptual stage, none of these drastic, late-stage revisions would be necessary... But this is Assassin's Creed, where they've never had a real historical figure as a main protagonist of a story. Why now? They’ve painted themselves into a corner where no one—neither the fans of the series, the critics, nor even the developers—can be truly satisfied.

A Risky Gamble That Could Sink the Franchise

At this point, it's safe to say that Ubisoft is in dire straits if they’re willing to rewrite the portrayal of a major character this late in the game’s development cycle. Not only does this indicate a lack of proper planning and vision, but it also speaks to a company that is desperately trying to cling to relevance in an increasingly competitive market. The response to Yasuke’s portrayal highlights Ubisoft's continuing struggle to balance representation with authenticity while trying to cater to a diverse audience.

But taking such a risk is unlikely to yield the result they hope for. The original implementation, with its bizarre musical choices and awkward dialogue, likely alienated a chunk of the player base who saw it as culturally tone-deaf. Now, by ripping these elements out and retrofitting a new narrative, they’re at risk of alienating yet another part of their audience—those who might have already accepted the character as he was or are wary of last-minute changes made under public pressure.

Could This Have Been Avoided?

It’s wild to think that all of this chaos and uncertainty could have been avoided if Ubisoft had made the right calls from the start. It’s a painful reminder of how crucial the initial stages of character development and narrative planning are. By championing DEI instead of authentic storytelling, it's how a mess like this begins in the first place. Bringing actual historical experts on board at the eleventh hour, after having already established a character that was bound to provoke backlash, is not just careless—it's indicative of a far broader mismanagement issue at Ubisoft. It’s about more than just a delay; it’s about the cost of not doing things RIGHT - from the beginning, and about a company that seems to be in constant reactive mode rather than leading with vision and confidence.

In the end, this hasty rewrite might be the most telling sign yet of Ubisoft's ongoing struggles. It shows that they are aware, to some degree, of their mistakes but still lack the foresight to correct them in a way that isn’t rushed and desperate. Whatever the outcome of Assassin's Creed Shadows, it's a reminder that you can’t keep ignoring the voices of your developers, experts, and fans without eventually paying the price. Ubisoft's willingness to take such a wild, last-minute chance is perhaps the biggest signal yet of just how dire things have gotten.

~Smash

Recently, I found myself in a situation that I never imagined I’d be in—running a fundraiser on GoFundMe to help cover legal costs. My lawyer, Ron Coleman, is defending me against Alyssa Mercante's ongoing harassment campaign, which continues to escalate against both me and my channel. Turning to the community for support was... not an easy decision, but I'd had so many of you reach out asking how you could help - the response has been nothing short of incredible. I genuinely can't thank everyone enough for having my back.

When I launched the GoFundMe with a goal of $2,500, I hoped that we could reach it or even come close at some point - just to help with the legal expenses. But I was absolutely blown away when we managed to SMASH that goal in just 4 hours. It was humbling to see so many of you step up to help, showing just how powerful the gaming community can be when we support each other.

To each and every one of you—whether you gave $500 (Melonie, ABF you guys rock!!) or a few bucks—every bit has helped, and I want to thank you from the bottom of my heart. Or those who made videos covering it - 8BitEric, Kilted Cajun, Hypnotic, Will of the Fans, aTraes, Side Scrollers, Valliant Renegade, Yellow Flash, Legal Mindset and a TON of others - The insane amount of support not only provided the financial means to fight back - but - also showed that we're not alone in standing up against her continued harassment and time-wasting accusations. The sense of solidarity this community has shown is beyond inspiring... and I am truly grateful.

The Dark Side of the Response

Of course, it’s not all roses. There's always another side to the coin, and the support for Alyssa Mercante speaks volumes. Those who align with her seem to want nothing but to see me fail, at all cost...

...Just in hopes to watch my world come crashing down. It's genuinely sad that instead of coming together as gamers, there's always some people out there actively trying to tear down what we’ve built.

I’ve had some people share with me screenshots of some of them attempting to report the GoFundMe campaign, saying it doesn't qualify as an "emergency."

Think about that—people actively going out of their way to try and stop others from supporting me. It’s beyond pathetic, but that’s the reality of the kind of people who support Alyssa.

Shocking, right?

Anyway- It genuinely pained me to have to reach out to you guys for this support. But the reality of this situation left me with no other choice... While the support has been incredible, it's a double-edged sword. Alyssa's now using this opportunity to disparage not just me but the entire gaming community at large. Her frivolous cease-and-desist threats are nothing but another attempt to paint all of us in a negative light, proving once again her true agenda: she’s an activist pushing her own narrative, with no care for gaming, gamers, or our community. This is someone who’s been propped up by Kotaku, and it's clear she does not have the best interests of gamers at heart.

But - good news: The haters have failed... and real gamers are rising up. We’re not going to be silenced, and we’re certainly not going to let anyone bully us into submission. This community has shown time and time again that when we unite, we achieve incredible things. We’re here to support each other, and we’re not going anywhere!

To everyone who contributed, shared the campaign, or simply stood by me—thank you. Ron is the best - and the best comes at a cost. This fight isn’t just about me; it’s about standing up against the forces that seek to divide us and control our community. And I have no doubt we’re on the right side of history.

Thank you so, so much.

~Smash

The upcoming Dragon Quest III HD-2D Remake has found itself at the center of a growing controversy. Recent remarks from the game's creator, Yuji Horii, suggest that Square Enix’s decision to remove gender options and alter character designs weren't born from internal desires at Square Enix, but rather - from pressure imposed by American regulations. These changes have caused a huge backlash among fans, who've accuse the company of pandering to modern Western ideologies.

In a recent interview at the Tokyo Game Show (above), Horii discussed these changes, implying that they were necessary to comply with international regulations—particularly those from the United States. He mentioned that too much skin exposure would lead to a higher age rating, limiting the game's potential audience.

His frustration with these constraints was clear as day and honestly refreshing to finally hear the truth in all this, as he admitted to not fully understanding why such extreme measures were necessary. Me too, Yuji. Me too...

The decision to remove the choice between male and female characters was another point of contention. Horii revealed that Western regulations had forced them to abandon the traditional gender options, instead labeling characters as “Type 1” and “Type 2.” This change has baffled both developers and fans alike:

Horii questioned, explaining his confusion surrounding these mandates.

The impact of American regulations on Japanese game development has grown more visible in recent years, and Horii’s comments suggest that this influence is more pervasive than many had initially given it credit for... which is saying something.

Former Weekly Shonen Jump Editor-in-Chief Kazuhiko Torishima echoed these concerns, describing Western compliance as a kind of "evil disguised as good." He pointed out that the United States' narrow-minded approach to content regulation—especially regarding sex education and age ratings—has had a trickle-down effect on Japan. The pressure to categorize content for age groups and avoid potential lawsuits has forced many Japanese companies, including Square Enix, into uncomfortable positions, altering their products to unnecessarily meet these foreign standards.

I've been particularly upset by the removal of male and female character options, which have instead been replaced by “Type 1” and “Type 2” labels. But of course - I'm not alone. For many, this change undermines much of the charm and traditions from the Dragon Quest franchise, leading to calls for boycotts and angry forum posts. This sentiment echoes across various online communities, where fans feel that the game’s alterations are emblematic of a much larger, concerning trend in modern gaming.

Adding fuel to the fire, the remake's character designs have also come under scrutiny. Some players have noticed significant changes, including the removal of exaggerated features from trolls and added clothing on the female hero. Fans like Perma Banned on X argue that these alterations are not just stylistic but driven by corporate pandering to Western interests. He tweeted:

Then there was Manga Lawyer, who wrote,

He continues:

This situation serves as yet another reminder of how the gaming industry is being shaped—not by the developers and creators who bring these stories to life—but by external forces who hold the power to determine what can and cannot be shared with audiences. This is a problem. A problem that constantly requires attention. As soon as we look away, they try to steal back what isn't theirs.

You all know who I'm referring to...

The ideologically-driven woke narrative. The real evil here.

A Personal Apology to Square Enix

I want to take this moment to apologize to Square Enix. In my initial take, I had wrongfully assumed that their internal "ethics" department was solely responsible for the censorship and changes made to Dragon Quest III HD-2D Remake.

While the existence of this department definitely poses a problem for future projects and may still even influence some levels of censorship, it's become clear from Horii’s comments that Western ideologies and the rating boards are the main culprits behind these changes. It’s the full autonomous control these ratings boards wield that has created a narrative of censorship, particularly when it comes to dictating what can or cannot be shown in all-ages content. Square Enix, like many other developers, is simply responding to these outside pressures in order to keep their games accessible to broader audiences, which... unfortunately has led to decisions that feel out of touch with the original spirit of the game.

Horii’s candid discussion about these issues highlights just how much creative freedom is being stifled by these regulatory bodies, and I believe it’s important to acknowledge that Square Enix is not entirely to blame for the changes. The real issue lies in the overarching influence of Western cultural standards that are being forced upon foreign companies, leading to these unwelcome alterations in beloved franchises.

~Smash

A picture of Dustborn’s pop-up exhibit (Above) at the Tokyo Game Show recently surfaced online, and it’s nothing short of embarrassing. In the image, three seats are set up for attendees to play the game, but all three are completely empty. Not a single person is sitting down to experience this supposed "revolutionary" narrative-driven action-adventure game. It's almost poetic—a perfect visual representation of Dustborn itself: a hollow, uninspired, and utterly ignored attempt to push an agenda rather than deliver engaging gameplay.

Still Looking For That "Modern Audience"

While Red Thread Games insists on promoting Dustborn with lavish displays and showroom space at one of the biggest gaming events in the world, the game's performance on Steam tells a very different story. As of writing, there are only 8 people playing the game on Steam. That’s right—just 8 people out of millions of Steam users are currently interested in Dustborn. And this isn’t an isolated moment at all... The game’s all-time peak of concurrent players? A pitiful 83 people. It’s a staggering number for a game that’s been promoted as an important "narrative" experience.

But it gets worse. There have been multiple instances where Steam’s concurrent player count for Dustborn has hit zero. Times when literally no one in the world is playing this 'new' game, yet Red Thread Games somehow feels justified in blowing money on extravagant artwork and renting prime floor space at the Tokyo Game Show.

A Waste of Taxpayer Money

What makes the situation even more absurd is how much taxpayer money has been funneled into this project. Red Thread Games has benefitted from public funding and grants, all of which are essentially being thrown away on what is shaping up to be a massive flop.

Instead of using public funds responsibly to develop a product gamers actually want to engage with, they’re squandering it on extravagant exhibitions and marketing efforts over in Tokyo that are more focused on pushing propaganda than providing any actual entertainment... Really makes you wonder...

Despite countless opportunities and backing from industry heavyweights, Dustborn has consistently failed to gain traction. The game was published by Quantic Dream, a studio with a reputation for pushing narrative-driven experiences, yet... even their influence couldn’t save this project from mediocrity. Dustborn was given prime promotional spots at major events like The Game Awards and GamesCom, where it had trailers featured during key moments. Xbox also threw its weight behind the game, pushing it to their audience as a notable release. The marketing efforts didn’t stop there—companies like Mi5 Communications were hired to promote the game, even going as far as to recruit streamers to play it. The sheer push behind this trash makes you wonder what more was going on behind the scenes... There was even a physical release, with copies making their way all the way to Japan, showcasing how much was invested to make this game a success. Yet despite all this, Dustborn continues to fall flat, proving that no amount of marketing or high-profile partnerships can fix a fundamentally flawed product.

Gamers have made it clear: they don’t want to play this trash game. It’s not our fault that Dustborn can’t muster any genuine interest outside of Hypnotic begrudgingly livestreaming the trash heap... Or When Madam Savvy did a gut-wrenching playthru... Instead of listening to feedback or recognizing their mistakes, Red Thread Games continues to double down, wasting even more resources on promotion for a game that’s been dead on arrival.

A Sad Summary

The image of Dustborn's empty exhibit at the Tokyo Game Show is more than just a snapshot—it’s really the chef's kiss - a perfect summary of the game's trajectory. No one's interested, no one's playing, and yet, somehow, the developers think it's wise to throw more money down the drain. This relentless push, funded by EU taxpayers, serves as yet another reminder that you can’t force people to care about something they don’t want. The numbers on Steam don’t lie, and neither does the empty booth. Gamers have moved on, and it’s time for Red Thread Games to accept that reality.

But first... we laugh.

~Smash