Square Enix Enters DEI Death Spiral

Their Future Is 'Locked' In...

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:

"Come join us for our Pride Live Stream featuring Little Goody Two Shoes (@AstralShiftPro) on Tuesday at 11am PDT/7pm BST! twitch.tv/squareenix We'll be chatting and giving away some game codes! See you there 👋🏳️‍🌈"

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:

"The western branch of Square Enix does not know how to market LGTS despite it being a really good Yuri horror game. All they have to do is call it Yuri and the culture war people would be less likely to dogpile."

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