letters to H

DMC Color Key: ■ 3827 Golden Brown Pale ■ 413 Pewter Gray Dark ■ 970 Pumpkin Light ■ B5200 Snow White

Dimensions: 199 by 199 stitches. Font: 'Cavalhatriz.ttf' by Daniel Noronha. Border: Original Work.

(also to be clear—i haven't bought any of Natsume's so called Harvest Moon games after the split because i've heard they... aren't very good. i've only ever played the Story of Seasons games and the older Harvest Moon games before they became separate franchises.)

also based on some of your posts—i really hope your housing situation improves soon! it's rough out there :/

Hey! Thanks for the message. Long post to compliment your ask!

So let's start with the advertising.

Natsume's advertising practices fall in a legal gray area, skewed heavily towards fraudulent and anti-consumer. They retained the rights to the name "Harvest Moon", which has been an established trademark for 30 years. You know this, I know this, we all know this.

The problem however, is that they as a company were not developers for the entire 30 year duration. They do not own the rights to 牧場物語. They do not own the rights to Innocent Life, or Rune Factory for that matter either. They never have.

While they had a contract with Victor which was then grandfathered into Marvelous, the California-based Natsume Inc.'s role was only to serve as the publisher for the Bokujou Monogatari series as well as some of the other Victor IPs. As a publisher, their services included: overseas marketing and publications, overseas market trend analysis, localization and localization QA, general QA, and player sentiment feedback and consultation.

They did not start "making" their own titles and acting outside the scope of a publishing and consultation firm until after their publishing agreement was dissolved.

Often, I hear it said that they created the puzzle game spinoffs, "Puzzle de Harvest Moon" and "Harvest Moon: Frantic Farming". This isn't entirely true. They conceptualized* a spin-off idea, pitched the idea to Marvelous, and gained their permission for official licensing of Bokumono characters and assets (provided by Igusa Matsuyama). The actual game building and development was handled by a studio called Platinum Egg.

*Conceptualized is a word I use as loosely as possible, with all the sarcasm I can ooze from my mouth. Frantic Farming is wholesale Panel de Pon! but with a Bokumono coat of paint. Natsume was set to publish it in Japan, but the release got cancelled despite having the game ready to play. Maybe it had something to do with the fact the name was straight up ぼくものキャラクターズ 野菜でポン! (Bokumono Characters Yasai de Pon!) which bears the "de Pon!" from Panel de Pon! without having gained title licensing permission from IntSys or Nintendo, a move that would have attracted the attention of the established Panel de Pon fanbase? 🤔 Hmm. Surely not...

The first game that Natsume ever "made" under the name "Harvest Moon" began production immediately in 2011, once the merger for Marvelous was set in motion, and released in 2014. But again, this was not an in-house production. They outsourced development and asset creation to a Japanese studio called "Talbot inc." (which I think has been renamed to Appci in recent years...) You see, Natsume inc. is very good at slapping their logo on something, pointing at it, and patting themselves on the back.

In addition to the above, years of precedent from gaming journalism inappropriately saying variations of "Natsume's long line of farming games" or shortened to "Natsume's classic Harvest Moon series" has done a major disservice to the series' perception in the west and is a huge factor in how Natsume continues to coattail the success of 牧場物語, hereby named Story of Seasons overseas.

But yep, that's not all. The last major decade milestone produced one of the most purposely deceptive graphics and marketing campaigns.

(ahem)

You're reading that right, folks! The next game in the series after 牧場物語はじまりの大地 (Harvest Moon: A New Beginning, 2012) is NOT 牧場物語つながる新天地 (Story of Seasons, 3DS 2014); it is in fact Harvest Moon: The Lost Valley (2014, but only in English because we aren't allowed to sell this game in Japan!) Totally real! It's the series you've always known! Story of Seasons? Clearly a ripoff out of nowhere, trying to impede on our lineage. Pay them no mind! Just keep handing us money! You don't think we would, hah, actually lie to you or anything, right?

Finding these was a nightmare, because as you may have guessed, Natsume was very tightly controlling of the media release on their "20th anniversary" title. Of all the E3 2017 booths, Natsume's was part of the 1% who heavily restricted sharing anything out that wasn't specifically hand-picked to media and game journalists. I wonder why.....?

It isn't difficult to look at any of this and see how they intentionally draw people in on the name...but I think what really pulls the acid into my mouth is how they use Igusa's artwork just enough - via signage and backdrops, and the Classic Bubble Cow - mixed in with their own merchandise to completely blur the line. Yuck.

Hey, congratulations! You made it through all of that!

BUT WAIT, THERE'S MORE!

Let's talk about those interviews in the Harvest Moon 20th Anniversary book, shall we?

Ignoring the segments from two out of three of the original developers - Tomomi Yamatate and Setsuko Miyakoshi specifically, take a look at the rest of those interviewed.

Seiichi Kizu - He was the director of operations for Pack-in-Soft under Pack-in-Video and executive producer of the Nushi Tsuri (River King) series. After the merger of Victor into Marvelous, he retired quietly and hasn't been in games seriously since 2003 (barring a reprised supervisor and consultant role in 2008). He was not involved in Natsume operations, and only worked directly with the original team to support production efforts. So basically, another credibility prop.

Taka Maekawa - This is Natsume inc.'s CEO. He's the suited guy in the pictures above surrounded by signage and plushies. Yeah.

Get a load of this guy.

Q: The premise for Light of Hope differs substantially from other entries in the series. What inspired the shift to beginning with a character washing up on a storm-ravaged island?

A: "Since this project started as the title to celebrate twenty years of Harvest Moon, going back to the roots (the very first SNES version) was the basic idea I had in my mind. Also, at the same time, I wanted to include something different, which became the idea of rebuilding the island."

Alright, so here we have a few issues already:

- Conflating the "SNES version", which is 牧場物語SFC, as their own IP. Those roots aren't yours to recall.

- The premise of Light of Hope has the player wash up on an island after a storm, repair the colored light houses, and bring the goddess back with the light. There's building the community from zero too...

That sounds a lot like Island of Happiness (牧場物語キミと育つ島) and Tree of Tranquility (牧場物語やすらぎの樹) there, buddy. Oh and Light of Hope has a witch and wizard! So tie in Animal Parade 牧場物語わくわくアニマルマーチ) here too, I guess? Gee, almost seems like we're not really reflecting on the original game and more like we're targeting people who really liked the Bokumono 10th anniversary era ...

The rest of his segment doubles down on the whole "return to our roots in the SNES" version while deliberately sidestepping further inquiry of the series legacy by diving into more generic questions about Light of Hope itself. The only ties to the "legacy" are the segments by actual original staff from the Bokujou Monogatari series they used as props. And I will keep calling them props because that's exactly what they became here.

If that wasn't frustrating enough, it's pretty damning that they never brought in Yasuhiro Wada, the creator and leader of the original trio of developers, for a nice sit-down and chat to discuss the series anniversary. You can't simply say "oh he isn't involved with the series anymore" because why on earth would Seiichi Kizu be there then?! Or Yamatate? Miyakoshi?? Sure, "He was unavailable" is plausible, but that's generally pretty weak and often a cop out. There's more holes here than Swiss cheese, and the whole thing smells like a can of anchovies.

Also me: YOU KNOW WHAT I DESERVE A CAT

new kitty unlocked meet Koga

YES. the way this hasn’t left my mind….Like okay they’re still Victorians. They’re still sexist and homophobic. My thought for this alternate history is third gender people are expected to only marry into already married couples. And they’d probably throw in a lot of Christian Holy Trinity and Mary Joseph God imagery to religiously validate triads.

Or three people (of all different genders of course bc again. They’re Victorian) could marry all at once but the courting situation would be a nightmare.

This is why it was so important for women to marry well: even if you worked as a married woman (and many women did), your money wasn't actually yours. It's one thing to have to live with a drunk asshole; it's worse to have that drunk asshole be the sole person who decides if that paycheck goes towards rent or more booze.

So, having a trinity/three parts of one whole entity would totally fit Victorian ideas of coverture. I think you'd still have it be men > everyone else, because they'd expect some kind of hierarchy, and even within the Trinity, God is still the leader.

Second thought: separate spheres. The Victorian era was very heavily focused on men being involved in the "dirty" business of work/politics/etc., and women being more morally pure and better suited to the domestic sphere (the whole "angel of the house" thing). Obviously this wasn't actually or practically true a lot of the time, but it was the aspired-to standard, the thing you'd measure people against to say if they were acting appropriately as members of their gender or not.

So you'd need a third sphere for Honorables to inhabit that is completely separate from the work/domestic dichotomy, or create an entirely different three-way dichotomy. Basically, you'd need a thing to point to, like "X is very ladylike" or "Y is not manly," but for Honorables.

So, extrapolating:

You'd still have "Mr. and Mrs. Robert Smith," it'd just be, "Mr., Mrs., and Mx. Robert Smith" (differentiating by title, not by first name). I could actually see there being a different title for unmarried vs. married Honorables, like Master vs. Mister or Miss vs. Madam/Missus. Mix vs. Max, maybe?

I think Honorables would definitely need to have some kind of dowry. It actually might be even more necessary, because unless the guy is insanely wealthy on his own, you're going to need enough money to support three people, not just two.

The idea of who should be in charge of household accounting has always waffled between a man’s job and a woman’s job. Is teaching the realm of governesses and school mistresses or lecturers and professors. Academics are too weak and frail to be masculine but too logical and rigorous to be feminine.

Thus, men, even if they're unqualified on whatever area of knowledge they're dealing with, and even if they have no understanding of their or other people's feelings whatsoever, still possess an inherent and intangible quality that makes them the only part truly suited for decision making.

Woman: Caretaker

Honorable: Assistant/Advisor