Developers and writers alike want games about more things, and games by more people. We want — and we are getting, and will keep getting — tragicomedy, vignette, musicals, dream worlds, family tales, ethnographies, abstract art. We will get this, because we’re creating culture now. We are refusing to let anyone feel prohibited from participating.

“Gamer” isn’t just a dated demographic label that most people increasingly prefer not to use. Gamers are over. That’s why they’re so mad.

Leigh killing it. Read the rest (via kierongillen)

T F m
August 28, 2014

The first piece of advice I have for people if they want to be a crazy artist like me is that companies are there to exploit you, and to extract as much labor out of you as possible while paying you as little money as possible. Always treat companies with intense cynicism and try to exploit them back as much as you can. The big mistake that will fuck you over in life is being a team player, because you’ll waste years and years of your life until you wake up one day having made some company a lot of money and having made yourself shit….they will just take your hard work and talent to make money for themselves and discard you when you’re no longer useful. So be very cynical.


T F m
August 28, 2014

Video Games, Misogyny, And Terrorism: A Guide To Assholes

Video Games, Misogyny, And Terrorism: A Guide To Assholes


T F m
August 27, 2014

How games’ lazy storytelling uses rape and violence against women as wallpaper

mostlysignssomeportents:

Anna Sarkeesian’s brilliant, crowdfunded Tropes vs Women in Video Games web-series (previously) has a new episode, Women as Background Decoration: Part 2 [TW: rape, sexual violence, violence], which expertly dissects the use of violence against women, especially sexual violence as a lazy means of establishing skimpy motivations for player characters to hunt down the baddies.

Read more…


T F m
August 27, 2014

bashford:

Computed Copy by Nukem, So Kanno and yang02 of gokinjo-monozukuri.org

“Although there is a traditional way of designing flat patterns which considers the movement of the body and characteristics of the material, computers design it in a totally different way, because they recognize the 3D shape as a polygon which is a collective form of flat faces.

Our purpose for this “Computed Copy” is not only to make some distortion which humans cannot produce, but also to make garments which are not just “copy” and have the alternative creativity. By removing humans’ arbitrariness as much as possible from the process of copying designs, and by letting computers do it, we can create a new kind of designing system.

In the future, we think that it will be possible to copy a garment only with the image files on the internet without scanning actual things, thanks to the rapid development of 3D technology (scanning, modeling, and printing) and a flood of images on the internet. We expect that this work will be the fastest automated way of copying the designs as the final destination of fast fashion.”

Exhibited at Materializing II

Thanks Toby


T F m
August 27, 2014

pixelatedcrown:

Since I’ve started posting low poly models I’ve been asked a lot about how I make them. Hopefully this video will clear things up! The first half has me explaining techniques and the second is a 2000x speed recording of me making a more complex model (real time: 5 hours)


T F m
August 26, 2014

peterwknox:

therealmardallie:

Why do I check Twitter before bed? It only makes me angry.

Sigh. Police can’t police themselves.


T F m
August 26, 2014

warrenellis:

The thing I did for MIT arrived.

View more Warren Ellis on WhoSay


T F m
August 26, 2014

kenyatta:

boingboing:

Digital tools have a mind of their own: yours

Clive Thompson’s says that there are three principal biases that today’s digital tools introduce to human thought.

First, they allow for prodigious external memory: smartphones, hard drives, cameras, and sensors routinely record more information than any tool before them. We’re shifting from a stance of rarely recording our ideas and the events of our lives to doing it habitually.

Second, today’s tools make it easier for us to find connections—between ideas, pictures, people, bits of news—that were previously invisible.

Third, they encourage a superfluity of communication and publishing.

This last feature has many surprising effects that are often ill understood. Any economist can tell you that when you suddenly increase the availability of a resource, people do more things with it, which also means they do increasingly unpredictable things. As electricity became cheap and ubiquitous in the West, its role expanded from things you’d expect—like nighttime lighting—to the unexpected and seemingly trivial: battery driven toy trains, electric blenders, vibrators.

The superfluity of communication today has produced everything from a rise in crowd-organized projects like Wikipedia to curious new forms of expression: television-show recaps, map-based storytelling, discussion threads that spin out of a photo posted to a smartphone app, Amazon product-review threads wittily hijacked for political satire. Now, none of these three digital biases is immutable, because they’re the product of software and hardware, and can easily be altered or ended if the architects of today’s tools (often corporate and governmental) decide to regulate the tools or find they’re not profitable enough. But right now, these big effects dominate our current and near-term landscape.

Go read this, pls.

T F m
August 26, 2014

bookporn:

beth-akd:

100 Aniversario del Nacimiento de Julio Cortázar

Happy Birthday, Julio Cortázar!


T F m
August 26, 2014