It’s on Polygon, which writes cultural and political essays on games - they’re not really reviews focusing on game mechanics, player experience etc ( well they do talk about it but it’s usually drowned under other concerns ).
Whether you agree with them or not is not my point ( and yes in this particular case they visibly dislike the game designer’s politics and this eats up a large part of the article) - just that it’s expected .
The fact they look like reviews is very confusing though ( I looked around the website this one is under ‘impressions’ not ‘reviews’ though ) unless you consider politics should be an integral part of reviews but that’s a complicated discussion.
I wish they were a bit more self reflective about this. The author says, “I’m not raising these points to get a dig in on Blow for a perspective I personally disagree with,” but come on, let’s be real. You absolutely are raising these points to get in a dig at him, if only because you know your audience will complain if you don’t. Like, I find Blow to be a huge blowhard (nominative determinism at work) but having played the Witness, you can absolutely write a review of that game without mentioning his politics and I seriously doubt that Order of the Sinking Star is different. If you want to write about his politics, that’s great, there’s a lot of grist there to discuss. But stop pretending you’re doing something other than opinion journalism
It seems perfectly pertinent to show the wide gap between the game's message and the developer's message.
So weird that you want journalists to "shut up and play ball" while the developer doesn't have to. If anything, it is Blow and Trump who are finding and attacking political enemies everywhere, all the time. You are fine with culture wars, but only when they come from one side - the other side is dirty and terrible to have the galls to do the same.
No, Blow "plays ball" in the things he produces: his games aren't political as far as I know. But the journalist does not play ball: He includes political jabs when reviewing games without political jabs.
(For both parties it is legitimate to throw political punches in other contexts, like on social media.)
I don't know that we can entirely avoid discussing politics in the context of a game where even his publisher felt the need to publicly disavow his political views.
It's also a game that incorporates work from a wide variety of other creators, several of whom made well-publicised statements that they would not have agreed to be a part of this had Blow's current political views been common knowledge at the time.
> I don't know that we can entirely avoid discussing politics in the context of a game where even his publisher felt the need to publicly disavow his political views.
Of course we can! If some far-left activist makes a puzzle game without activism in it, we should do the same and judge the game on its own terms, without need for political discussion or publisher statements.
> It's also a game that incorporates work from a wide variety of other creators, several of whom made well-publicised statements that they would not have agreed to be a part of this had Blow's current political views been common knowledge at the time.
This is like the collaborators of our hypothetical far-left puzzle creator disavowing him for being woke. That's obviously just as bad. If the work (the game in this case) has no political content, the political convictions of the collaborators don't matter.
> If some far-left activist makes a puzzle game without activism in it
If a far-left activist made an overly non-political game incorporating the work of other leftists, they would catch flak from their own compatriots over betraying their principals for money.
Look, "separating the art from the artist" is all very well, but we can't do that without acknowledging the political views of the artist(s) (especially when the artists are publicly beefing over said views)
> If a far-left activist made an overly non-political game incorporating the work of other leftists, they would catch flak from their own compatriots over betraying their principals for money.
I don't think that's true. It doesn't make any sense. Leftists would obviously be perfectly okay with collaborating with other leftists on whatever.
The point was that people on both the left and right should be okay with collaborating with people of the opposite end of the political spectrum when it comes to apolitical projects.
Imagine you were only allowed (or willing) to contribute to the Linux kernel if your personal unrelated political views align with those of Linus Torvalds. That would obviously be crazy.
> Look, "separating the art from the artist" is all very well, but we can't do that without acknowledging the political views of the artist(s)
Absolutely we can! We don't go around referencing the political opinions of our car mechanic or hair dresser, because these don't matter for the quality of their jobs. Exactly the same holds for game designers who make unpolitical games.
> The point was that people on both the left and right should be okay with collaborating with people of the opposite end of the political spectrum when it comes to apolitical projects
> We don't go around referencing the political opinions of our car mechanic or hair dresser, because these don't matter for the quality of their jobs
The hair dresser example is the worst example you could have thought of, given the importance of hairdressing for the African-American population. Or just see how parents and very serious people freaked out when teenagers started keeping long hair during the 60s-70s.
Hairdressing is extremely political.
As for the car mechanic example, I wouldn't be black and have my car "repaired" by a racist who would overcharge me out of spite and could sabotage my brake lines. Or just talk with women about their experience with car mechanics and see how much their political opinions on women don't matter.
Again, you can afford not to engage with politics at the hair salon or the garage only because you belong to the dominant group.
Start talking to people who aren't like you and you will discover a lot of things you never see in your life. That's what it means to be "woke": it is to awaken to the experience of people who are looked down upon.
It's not. You don't have to evaluate their political opinion to evaluate the quality of the hairstyles. You can just look at their work. Whether the hairdresser is on the left or right, he/she can't and won't force a hairstyle on you which you don't want.
> As for the car mechanic example, I wouldn't be black and have my car "repaired" by a racist who would overcharge me out of spite and could sabotage my brake lines.
This is ridiculous. You could equally have chosen an example of you as an old white man, with a woke car mechanic who overcharges you and sabotages your brake lines out of spite. But you didn't. Because that would be just as absurd. But you only see your political enemy, right-wing people, as evil, not left-wing people, your political allies. That this is extreme political bias I need not point out.
>You could equally have chosen an example of you as an old white man, with a woke car mechanic who overcharges you and sabotages your brake lines out of spite. But you didn't.
Because it is ridiculous. It is a completely absurd premise born in a mind that tries to "both sides" things that are not the same. "Woke" is not reverse racism.
"He [Donald Trump, who lied for years Barack HUSSEIN Obama isn't American, never said he was wrong and is still insisting loudly on the HUSSEIN, lied about Haitians eating cats and dogs, and many, many, many other racist lies and wipping up hatred] is the best President we have had in my entire life, by far. It's a miracle. I just hope it doesn't abruptly go bad."
You invented the stuff in brackets. He didn't write any of it. He can like Trump for other reasons, e.g. for getting rid of DEI laws or for reducing illegal low-skilled immigration.
This certainly doesn’t mirror my experience of cloud gaming (gfn) which is indistinguishable from local gaming to me, incl 4k. By and large it’s a significantly better experience than local gaming: silent, cheap, non configuration/setup, works almost everywhere for me etc .
Your article is 6 years old(!) , cloud gaming has gone a long way. If anything , try it first.
Cloud gaming has a latency problem that cannot be fixed because the speed of light being a thing. I play many titles that require fast reflexes and any latency is unacceptable.
Also I muck around with mods, emulators etc. PC Gaming isn't just whatever is on the Steam Store.
I used Nvidia GeForce now for some months and must admit that I can't feel a difference most of the time.
I tried call of duty warzone and even this was great multiplayer experience. (Game is a mess with GeForce now, can't remember shader cache and must recreate it every GeForce now session)
You don't feel the difference until you play without the lag.
I've got something like 1400 hours in HellDivers 2, playing Level 10 I don't want to experience any lag. I recently changed the configuration of my machine and I've able improve framerates/frame pacing and it make a lot of difference when playing the game i.e. some melee counters I can much more easily perform.
I used GeForce now for the summer as I wanted to avoid a hot pc in my room.
Any game I played with GeForce now I also played local, yes there is a minimal difference, but sometimes I got better feeling with multiplayer as the cloud service had better connection to the game servers than my local provider.
And I will prefer most multiplayer games with my local machine, but it impressed me very much (more than stadia and Xbox cloud)
If my provider has a bad peering to the gameservers, but a good peering to the cloud gaming servers, you get a better gaming experience with cloud gaming.
No it isn't. You would have bad peering between you and the game server. It doesn't make much sense however you try to explain it away.
You are adding an extra latency between you, the game server and the other players. Playing mental gymnastics about how it could be better when it can't isn't going to convince me or anyone else.
Conversations like these feel like the sort of conversations people were having at the end of days of the Amiga where they were talking about the custom chips and all that jazz being better ignoring the fact that people were buying Voodoos and Soundblasters.
If i get 150-200 ping direct connected to the gameserver, vs 20ping on the cloud gaming vm + 60ms from connection to the cloud gaming, you get a better multiplayer experience.
Never said its the default or that i want convince someone, but it happens to me at least with two games at the evening.
I think gp was providing numbers just to give an example of why it might work, not actual numbers. Their point was mostly that internet routes are noisy and not guaranteed in performance ie you might not go through the best possible path.
While the numbers might differ , I know this is technically possible from my experience in corporate environments buying links to minimize latency. Basically your isp might optimize for a different function ( cost, etc ) than Nvidia ( who wants to make make players happy and subscribe ).
My isp used to throttle Netflix or YouTube ( I don’t remember ), and gfn users occasionally report better performance when using a vpn ( it’s usually throughput not latency though ).
Even if I pretended what you said might be true, the ISP would still be noisy between you and Nvidia. So you would still have the latency between you, Nvidia and the game server.
It still doesn't make sense, however you try to create imaginary scenarios where it might make sense. A lot of people in tech seem to do this, where they will try to invent fantasy scenarios to prove people wrong. It is extremely tiresome.
This ignores all the obvious other problems with game streaming, e.g., what happens when their servers have an outage? What happens when they decide they aren't going to support a title anymore?
It matters for anything multiplayer shooter and even single player games with quicktime events. Using WiFi, wireless controllers, TVs with frame pacing and bluetooth headsets adds latency already in your own house of around 10-50ms (although it is a combined latency, not network).
I know and I can't use cloud gaming myself in part because of the games I play and because I'm used to 240fps PC latency so no game can feel good, I can barely stand using steam link for couch gaming. But there are loads of people that wouldn't notice the difference if they're used to 30fps consoles and loads of games where the latency doesn't matter.
It matters in almost every game I play as well, but for some it doesn't really matter like Baldurs Gate 3, Blue Prince, etc. And I think if you're used to 30fps on console you might not notice a difference in most games, but if you're used to 240hz/fps on a PC any game will feel atrocious until you get used to it.
Yes. I stopped playing video games when 3d happened ( mid to end of the 90s) because most games were either uninteresting (3d for the sake of 3d), or plain ugly.
I started playing again during lockdown, and that was a bit of a shock - modern games are gorgeous, use 3d properly, and often enough have brilliant stories. I still play pixel art games - as you say, it’s timeless .
While I certainly played several shooters (DOOM, Quake, CS) a bit, but not with any passion.
But my favorite early 3D game was Total Annihilation. Which is not a 3D game. It's a 2D game with a 3D rendering engine. Classic RTS isometric POV, but all of the benefits of a 3D engine (arbitrary model rotations, movement dynamics, rockets flying through the air, shrapnel...oh, the shrapnel).
Similarly with Warcraft III, another RTS done with a 3D engine. Its gift was the interstitial cinematics done with the engine for story telling purposes.
In both these cases, 3D added immensely to an ostensibly 2D experience. I also imagine once they got things sorted out, it made things much easier for the level and scenario designers to be able to just put Objects into their flat-with-some-terrain 3D worlds.
I remember TA very distinctly - my brother was very good at it, I’ve always been hopeless at RTS games.
You’re right - 3d improved the game. However outside of examples such as this one , I feel that it generally took a while (15 years maybe ?) for game designers and coders to eventually find a middle ground , as in use the latest technical fad, but still make a game that is pleasant to play and better than without the technical fad.
But for whatever reason, here in HN you see a lot of people that don't play games but feel the need to give their opinion on the gaming industry, criticize modern gaming, and ramble on how old games where better. I find it really weird...
No, as the previous poster said, this is my lived experience, and I play games these days. I’m neither criticizing modern gaming nor rambling on how old games were better. If anything I have a very solid gaming culture, having spent a great amount of time trying out things.
What I’m saying is that there was a time ( which lasted for a while ) when 3d games experiences were worse than 2D games, and it took a while for 3d games to catch up.
Surprisingly enough ( to me at least) games evolved in the right direction (immersive games with stories and good gameplay and not just more empty technical demos ) when the industry might have gone wrong instead.
I’ve been busy catching up with what I’ve missed ( which is extremely enjoyable since time is a very good way to find out what’s good ), and it feels like things got better around 2010-2015 so 15 years after it stopped being interesting.
There are timeless early 3d games too. Metal Gear Solid or FFVII are popular examples, but there are also: Thief, Morrowind, Deus Ex, American McGee's Alice, and many more.
Then again, it is indeed a much different aesthetic than pixel art.
That's fair. I haven't played Metal Gear Solid for a long time but I did replay Deus Ex a few years ago and it still holds up. The low resolution is a bit of a problem but it's not a barrier.
Early 3D on the PC was better than on the N64, though. The low draw distance and blanketing everything with fog was pretty horrendous in a lot of games.
Ff7 is an interesting example : I’ve never understood the appeal of the original game which I’ve always found to be truly hideous, including when it came out. It looks like chunky pixel soup - I’d rather have 2D pixel art which looks clean.
Now, I played the remake recently - the game is actually excellent ! It’s just that at the time ( to me at least ) the original art was so ugly as to ruin the game / break immersion. This is an issue I’ve never had with 2D games, pixelated or not.
Yeah, I’d agree, I definitely wouldn’t classify FF7 as graphically timeless.
I think most people would agree that early 3D games (PSX and N64 era) - particularly ones attempting to achieve texture-mapped photorealism, like FF7, GoldenEye, Tomb Raider etc. did not age gracefully, at least where graphics are concerned.
Contrast that with something like Mario 64, which, while still chonky, looks way better because it’s so highly stylized.
I've noticed that stock mesh/texture Deus Ex has staying-power partly because everything is visually cohesive. Most objects have similar levels of detail and follow similar implicit rules for how they are (or aren't) complex.
This is, unfortunately, easy to ruin that with partial mods, breaking your immersion when two objects from different universes are in the same room.
It’s exceedingly frustrating, and you either get an awful lot of exposure ( say you stop reading in English , only read in Norwegian and read 10k pages a year ) or you grind and learn word lists.
The good news is that word lists are now much easier to learn thanks to SRS systems.
Try an android keyboard and go back to an iphone. Having switched back and forth between both systems it’s quite remarkable how bad the iphone keyboard is. In practice , typing on an iphone means constant typos, bad autofix, and bad suggestions.
Completely agree. I switched from Android to iOS... 6 years ago now? and the keyboard immediately felt off. I thought it was just something related to needing to adjust, but I reused my old Android (Pixel 3a) for the first time a few days ago (cuz I'm working on an Android app and wanted to try it on an actual phone) and the keyboard just works. No typo, no ass completions, I can actually type fast as I feel it and the text ends up mostly (99%) correct on the first try. On iOS I sometimes really struggle writing exactly what I want (the worst offending situation is iOS "correcting" a word when I hit send, so what's sent is literally not what I typed)
As someone who has had an iPhone since the 3GS (I'm so old), but tries Android out every now and then - I can wholeheartedly agree.
The only real advantages iOS have left are not being run by an advertising/tracking company (which is reducing as Apple looks for services revenue) and the quality and variety of indie iPhone and iPad apps (yet Apple are happy to make those same devs extremely unhappy).
I used to have galaxy S phones with some aftermarket keyboard whose name I forget. It was quite popular at the time, and was fairly happy with it.
When I moved from a gs5 to an iPhone 7, I was amazed at how much better the typing experience was. But it has now gotten to a point where I feel like a drunk monkey would type better than I do.
I would actually go one step further and claim that typing has not come back to the speed and accuracy of Blackberry and Nokia phones with physical keyboard. It's taking so long that we may actually destroy humanity with AI before we have fast and accurate keyboards again.
I switch between Android and iPhone every few cycles, and I really do miss my swipe keyboard on Android.
iPhone swipe and tap keyboard always gives me trouble. I hate that it keeps trying to type my contacts’ names.
Also, text selection OSS frequently maddening. Yes, I swiped “is” and it decided I’m a fan of open source software… When I try to select some words or position my cursor, iOS always wants to put the cursor far away from where I held my finger. Doesn’t make a lick of sense.
I don’t want a new screen time experience , I just want it to work. Much to my surprise, it’s extraordinarily brittle, to such an extent that it’s virtually useless.
As a parent of kids with iThings, the parental controls/screen time experience is incredibly bad. I have no idea why they are not interested in having it work.
100% agree. We had to turn it off because it was too frustrating for everyone involve. Now we’re at “trust, but verify” where “verify” is looking at Screen Time stats at the end of each week.
My only plausible explanation is that no one who works at Apple has kids.
I've never been quite clear that the numbers are completely trustworthy, but at least the counting is more solid than the restrictions and the passwords.
One thing I've noticed on my own device, that, counter-intuitively, screentime also seems to include time when the screen is off, e.g. playing music through Safari with the screen turned off.
As an example of the fragility of the screentime passwords, the password on a child's device can often be removed by simply turning off the screentime password - it will not always prompt for the current password. Until recently, I actually thought that it was intentional that a password was not required to disable the screentime password on a child device.
I recently had a crazy experience where many restrictions and a screentime password seemed to suddenly get enabled on a child's device. We had just turned on screentime, but without restrictions or a password. It seems as though a bug caused the restrictions to revert to those used a long time ago during an exam period, with very strict time restrictions. It was almost unusable, and no one knew the screentime password. The crazy part is that I tried dozens of passwords - many on the first day, and then one a day for weeks. I was certainly the only one touching the device from that point. One day, when I tried to turn off the screentime password, it just turned off. Unlike every other day for the past few weeks, it did not prompt for a password at all.
> So you’re telling me that I can trust the on device numbers enough?
Not at all :-) But at least this process doesn’t lead to pain and suffering because either the ScreenTime notification doesn’t arrive on a parent device, or the “Allow” action isn’t picked up by the child’s device. The whole messaging part to get permission to do something is really unreliable, at least in our household.
I expect the following from such a system : I set a time limit per app/set of apps,and the phone locks said apps once the limit is reached. In theory, this is what it does, in practice it almost never works : it doesn’t lock, gets broken whenever you upgrade the os, gets broken whenever your child upgrades the os, can be trivially bypassed by a kid, cannot be unlocked when you want it to unlock remotely etc I’ve also seen trivially bad data ( phone usage when it was in my pocket ). It’s worth noting you also need an Idevice to set it remotely - if your significant other has an android device he or she is out of luck.
I was very surprised at how appallingly bad it was - just try it for a few weeks and you’ll immediately notice it’s badly broken but somehow doesn’t fix it.
Contrast this to google’s system which, well, works.
Edit : it’s so mind bogglingly bad that I’m genuinely curious to talk to someone who works at apple about this.
So I don't have kids but in the keynote I remember them making a big deal about totally revamping it in 27. I know they definitely added a way to officially lock it (with a passcode) so your kids won't be able to theoretically just deactivate screen time. I think before you technically could do sorta the same thing (you can restrict almost any app to require FaceID or passcode to unlock).
There's also the assistive access or whatever which really locks the phone down but that seems more like for old people.
Alternatively if you wanted to get advanced you could maybe (not sure if it's free) create an Apple business account and try to manage the phone like corporations do. Or you may just be able to generate a configuration profile for free and add to the device. I would expect that process to be a lot more robust generally. You can control pretty much anything. Downside is if you don't have an MDM your stuck with whatever settings are baked into that config profile. Depending what you want to restrict you could pair it with something like NextDNS and lock it down to only safe sites.
Sounds like Android is way better though in this regard. Having to setup a child specific account at the beginning of setup sounds like a pain. If I ever have kids makes me really want to only give them a dumb phone or something like the new (unreleased as of yet) Commodore Callback - has some smartphone features but intentionally no social media
The main problem here is that even if they revamp it, it likely still won’t work since the most basic features don’t work as advertised . It’s like buying a car and it won’t start every other day and will only move backwards.
My least favorite part is how the parental controls are locked into iMessage. There's no way to manage parental controls from anything other than another iDevice. I suppose this is a sales strategy for them - parent must buy an iDevice as well.
Whether you agree with them or not is not my point ( and yes in this particular case they visibly dislike the game designer’s politics and this eats up a large part of the article) - just that it’s expected .
The fact they look like reviews is very confusing though ( I looked around the website this one is under ‘impressions’ not ‘reviews’ though ) unless you consider politics should be an integral part of reviews but that’s a complicated discussion.
reply