Talk:Atlus

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

General Information Discussion[edit]

I removed the reference to Megami Tensei as Atlus' "most famous" franchise since I'm skeptical that it's more famous than Double Dragon. It may be so in Japan but I doubt it is in English-speaking countries -- that is to say, among the English Wikipedia's audience. A look at the level of detail in the franchises' respective English Wikipedia articles seems to support that theory, but anyone with evidence to the contrary should of course present it here and edit the article accordingly.

I also changed the use of bold and italics in the article as follows: bold for the first occurrence of the article's title in its body, italics for the titles of specific video games, and mere capitalization for the names of franchises and companies. The first two standards are supported by [1] and [2], but the decision about franchises is an arbitrary one. Triskaideka 15:04, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I believe you are correct that MegaTen isn't the most popular or well known in the US, but it should be noted that they often use Jack Frost (a character from the MegaTen series) as a mascot.--Dustin Asby 23:49, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Megami Tensei is the most famous "in-house" developed game. That is just fact, no other Atlus developed series comes close. While Double Dragon Advance was released in America by Atlus, They did not develop the title Million corp. did. The Megami Tensei section should stay.Zippedpinhead 13:36, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quality of Article[edit]

I don't understand the reasoning behind the games lising on this page. It's not chronological or alphabetical by system. Also, I added Atlus's Virtual Boy game Jack Bros. which makes me think this list need a disclaimer stating its incompleteness.--Dustin Asby 23:49, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dustin, It wasn't out of order until recently. When I first came across the list it was in alphabetical order by name of console. I've adjusted the recent changes to that order. I agree that a disclaimer regarding incompleteness should be added. I'd been meaning to add Jack Bros. for a while now.--Sallizar 17:45, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I added a PlayStation portable section, along with their first title released on said system.Zippedpinhead 21:18, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ogre Battle:MotBQ for SNES[edit]

I was under the impression that this title was published by Enix. Should it be removed?--Sallizar 17:51, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It was developed by Quest and released through Enix in North America. I'm unsure who the Super Famicom publisher was. Atlus rereleased the game for the PlayStation in 1997. I made the changes to this entry, but I havn't checked related articles.--Dustin Asby 21:11, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Games published section[edit]

I'm a bit confused about this section, were all these games even published by Atlus USA? Also, the article does also talk about the main company in Japan, shouldn't we highlight the games they developed somehow?

Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney[edit]

That was developed *and* published by Capcom, so I took it off and ended the first part with "The Trauma Center series."

No mention of DonPachi+DoDonPachi?:[edit]

because they were involved in its publication or something, you know. their name appears in the attract mode for the arcade versions of those games. it must mean something. -70.160.166.121 16:02, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

oh yeah and esprade and guwange too. -70.160.166.121 07:50, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Splitting up Atlus and Atlus USA?[edit]

The article does not differentiate between Atlus and Atlus USA very well, instead alternating between the two in a confusing manner. For example, Tactics Ogre and Megami Tensei are mentioned in the same sentence, even though Tactics Ogre was not developed by Atlus Japan and most Megami Tensei games have not been translated by Atlus USA, meaning that the two series share nothing in common. Why not split them up into two sections, or better yet, two wikipedia articles? Atlus and Atlus USA are almost completely different companies - there are many Atlus games not translated by Atlus USA, and many Atlus USA games that were not made by Atlus. Stephen986 08:01, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

splitting them up into two separate sections isnt a bad idea. Evaunit666 01:55, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They were orginally two seperate sections, but certain other people thought it would be best to have them combined into one article. The school of thought being that ATLUS USA is ATLUS for America and the better portion of all english speaker/readers. If this article had an equally long section about ATLUS Japan then it would make sense to split them up. Zippedpinhead 02:09, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For the long list of games part, is it just atlus USA games, or both USA and JAPAN? Even if theres only one article, both groups should be represented. Ive added games from both groups to the list (since the page is ATLUS, not atlus usa) and i think it might be useful if we put a japanese label next to the japanese games. Evaunit666 00:16, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Erase SMT info or make a section with his games[edit]

I think it's excesive the info about Shin Megami Tensei series, since its very extensive and it's about Atlus as company, not about this series. And if this series is famous, what about Power Instinct series, not mentioned here?? I think it should be a section about famous Atlus game series instead using the first part of this article only refered to SMT series. Is that or simply erase SMT info and just talk about the company. Basara-kun 05:39, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone know a lot about the actual company, not just the games? Evaunit666 00:50, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removing unsourced statements[edit]

A few seconds ago, I removed a large chunk of information from this article. This was because of the lack of sources - please get sources before adding them back in. Some of these statements were also written from a very specific (game player in the niche is this company operates in) point of view, making them not only unsourced, but also bad for the article. Furthermore, some of the claims were dubious. User:Krator (t c) 22:34, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jack Frost merge[edit]

Jack Frost (mascot) should probably be merged here. It's a short article, and I don't think there's much room for expansion. Pagrashtak 17:49, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I say go for it. Evaunit♥666♥ 03:53, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merged. Pagrashtak 18:15, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could use info on their publishing strategy[edit]

IE: How minimum numbers published equals easier though much smaller profits, and fan buzz through scarcity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.74.198.219 (talk) 01:47, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gamasutra had an interview with Atlus in which this was stated. Look there for your references. DrSturm (talk) 02:04, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
can you find a link? Evaunit♥666♥ 03:22, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Etrian Odyssey II: Heroes of Lagaard[edit]

Why has this article not been made? I mean Atlus is making this game and its due date is June 17th or so, so why doesn't the game have an article yet? All that's really mentioned is in the sequel section of the Etrian Odyssey article. Kiminatheguardian (talk) 23:19, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Be bold and create one yourself : ] im here if you need any help. Evaunit♥666♥ 01:20, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
But, I'm not sure really where I'd begin... *pokes fingers together* Kiminatheguardian (talk) 20:27, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've never created an article on my own, you see. But yeah... someone's going to need to start it eventually. It's coming out in June. Kiminatheguardian (talk) 12:53, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Etrian Odyssey II: Heroes of Lagaard there you go : ) sorry that took awhile. Evaunit♥666♥ 00:25, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Atlus in the credits of Sting's last game[edit]

Reference here: [3] --Raijinili (talk) 06:35, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

US Flag next to Index Holdings[edit]

Any sources to confirm this? Index Holdings article mentions that it is headquartered in Japan not the US and so does their official website http://www.index-hd.com/english/company/index.html I'm going to remove US Flag and replace it with Japan's Flag. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.147.0.109 (talk) 10:42, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Atlus USA it's separated entities... --Ald™ ¬_¬™ 01:28, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Dozens"[edit]

"It is known for developing the role-playing series Shin Megami Tensei which, counting spin-offs, has dozens of installments."

Anyone else feel that this reads very strange? If there's a list of Megami Tensei games, why not give a specific number? (Although there is in fact two dozen Shin Megami Tensei games listed) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.243.128.148 (talk) 06:31, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of Atlus games[edit]

Brandnew list made by Sillent DX (talk).

The old list: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_Atlus_games&diff=454828898&oldid=452383364 ... If some game from the old list is not included in the new list, just add it. --Hydao (talk) 15:11, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Atlus sales 2011[edit]

http://andriasang.com/comyog/ Axem Titanium (talk) 19:54, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

History section is a joke[edit]

So a company founded in 86 has no history prior to be bought by Takara in 2003? Someone who knows please expand on the company's actual history.68.51.193.141 (talk) 19:49, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What is Atlus's standpoint on PC gaming?[edit]

A good number of people I know adore games made by Atlus, but it's very rare to hear of a PC version of one of their games- Like Catherine for instance, despite being wildly popular among video game fans as of late. Would someone perhaps be willing or able to provide information to the article on what Atlus's plans are for more PC friendly games?

If you find an article about Atlus' plans for PC, then yes, we can use that as a source and write a bit about it. I can't really find anything about it, though.--IDVtalk 12:23, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Atlus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:59, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Atlus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:34, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Misdirected wikilinks[edit]

@Dissident93: Re Special:Diff/951851646: yes, the links were broken. A target of the form A#B takes the reader to page A (and to section B within it, if that exists). I can understand the argument that the first link is not broken, as someone has kindly put up a redirect sending the reader to (a non-existent section of) the right page as a workaround, but the other three simply lead to the wrong article. Certes (talk) 12:06, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • When I first created the redirects I could have sworn they redirected properly. But it seems they must be piped to avoid this (for now anyway). ~ Dissident93 (talk) 21:13, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Atlus&oldid=1205945831"