I attended the opening of the first Applebee's and IHOP dual-branded restaurant in Seguin, Texas.It's the first restaurant of its kind in the United States, though the concept has worked abroad.Dine Brands CEO John Peyton said the restaurant will hopefully attract younger customers.Chain restaurants are betting big on value and choice to attract younger customers amid declining sales across the casual dining industry.The latest example is the opening of the first dual-branded Applebee's and IHOP restaurant in the US.The first-of-its-kind restaurant, which opened on February 18, is located off the side of a major highway in Seguin, Texas, about halfway between San Antonio and Austin.It's rare for chain restaurants to try something completely new.New menu items often come and go as mere trends, and with many chains focusing on nostalgia instead of rebranding, they're sticking with what has already proven successful rather than taking a risk on a new restaurant concept.Chili's popular Triple Dipper, for example, went viral last year and accounted for 14% of the chain's total sales in the second quarter, but it has actually been a menu staple for years although it recently got a refresh with spicier flavors for its chicken tenders and extra-cheesy fried mozzarella.But from the moment I walked into the newly designed Applebee's-IHOP restaurant, I could tell this experience would be completely different from any visit I'd had at either chain before.The new restaurant concept is poised to appeal to a younger audience, a priority for Dine Brands, the parent company of Applebee's and IHOP.CEO John Peyton told Business Insider that Gen Z's tastes were a key consideration before introducing the Applebee's-IHOP hybrid in the US."They love spicy, they love to share, they love to sample, they like to have choice. And so all of those things are important inspirations for how we think about designing our menus and new ideas," Peyton told BI ahead of the restaurant's grand opening."Guests never had the opportunity to have two people at dinner have an omelet and two people have a Bourbon steak, or mix and match," he continued. "That new level of choices you can make here is exactly what we think our younger guests are looking for."Here's what it was like to eat at the hybrid Applebee's-IHOP restaurant.

On March 5, the Supreme Court will hear a case that may involve one of the most toxic examples of NIMBYism in American history. The issue at the heart of Nuclear Regulatory Commission v. Texas arises out of a predictable problem: Absolutely no one wants radioactive waste anywhere near where they live or work, but that waste has to go somewhere.Texas, as the case name suggests, involves an effort by the federal government to store nuclear waste in Texas, and at the same time, solve a problem its struggled with for nearly 40 years. To fully understand whats before the Supreme Court in Texas, we need to go back to 1982, when Congress passed a law that was supposed to establish a permanent repository for all of the radioactive waste produced by Americas nuclear power plants. This waste remains dangerous for thousands or even tens of thousands of years after it is produced, so it made sense to find a spot far from human civilization where it can be buried.But then NIMBY thats not in my backyard politics set in.The US Department of Energy identified several possible sites for the waste, and eventually culled those sites down to three one in Texas, one in Washington state, and Yucca Mountain in Nevada. But, in 1987, before these officials could complete the selection process, Congress stepped in and chose the Nevada site for them.According to a Slate article on the eventual collapse of the Yucca Mountain plan, this choice is easy to explain when you look at who ran Congress at the time. The House speaker was Jim Wright, a representative from Texas. The House majority leader was Tom Foley, from Washington. So Nevada, which had the weakest congressional delegation at the time, lost out.Indeed, according to Rod McCullum of the Nuclear Energy Institute, the 1987 Amendment is now commonly referred to as the screw Nevada bill.By the time President Barack Obama took office, however, the balance of power in Congress had changed. Sen. Harry Reid, of Nevada, was the majority leader. He set out, with the Obama administrations support, to kill the Yucca Mountain project. Congress, at Obamas urging, zeroed out funding for Yucca Mountain. Then, just in case the project wasnt already dead enough, a 2013 court decision ordered the government to stop collecting taxes that would have funded the permanent storage facility until it could figure out where that facility would be located.And that brings us to the present date, and to the issue before the Supreme Court in the Texas case. Without a permanent storage facility on the horizon, the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission turned to an older statute which has been understood to allow it to authorize temporary storage facilities for nuclear waste since the 1970s, licensing a private facility to handle storage in Andrews County, Texas. Texas eventually sued to block this facility, as did a nearby landowner. Their case wound up before a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Two of these judges are from Texas. Its not hard to guess what happened next.RelatedThe Trumpiest court in AmericaAnd so it now falls to the Supreme Court to decide whether this latest attempt to find a place to store some of the most undesirable trash on the planet must falter on the shores of NIMBYism.A tale of two statutesAt its core, the Texas case is about an alleged conflict between two federal laws. The Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 is the statute that was supposed to set up the permanent federal facility, and that was also supposed to create a regime where all nuclear waste would be stored either near the reactors themselves, or at a federally run facility. Meanwhile, the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 has long been understood to permit the government to license private, temporary storage facilities for nuclear waste. (Temporary, it should be noted, does not mean brief. The Andrews County license lasts for 40 years.)Texas, in other words, asks whether the 1982 law effectively overrides the 1954 laws provisions that the government relied on when it licensed the Andrews County facility.As both Texas and the landowner party point out in their briefs, the 1954 law does not explicitly permit the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to license storage of nuclear waste. It does, however, permit licenses for three types of material special nuclear material, source material, and byproduct material which, according to the governments brief, are the three components of spent nuclear fuel.Indeed, the 1954 laws language allowing the NRC to license possession of these three kinds of material is quite broad. The NRC may license possession of special nuclear material for reasons that it determines to be appropriate to carry out the purposes of the law. It may license possession of source material for any use approved by the Commission as an aid to science or industry. And it may license possession of byproduct material for industrial uses or for such other useful applications as may be developed.Though both Texas and the landowner claim that this language should not be read to permit the kind of license at issue in the Texas case, they are swimming against at least a half-century of precedent. The landowners brief concedes that the NRC first claimed the authority to license facilities under the 1954 law in 1975 (it claims that this fact cuts against the governments case, because the NRC waited two decades to claim this power, but the fact remains that this question has been settled for 50 years). The landowners brief also concedes that the NRC finalized regulations governing licenses for such facilities in 1980.That said, the landowners brief does make a plausible if not, exactly, airtight argument that the 1982 law overrides the 1954 laws provisions concerning private storage facilities. (Texass brief, by contrast, is heavy on overwrought rhetoric claiming that nuclear waste must be stored at Yucca Mountain, and light on the kind of statutory analysis that a responsible judge would rely upon in deciding this case.)Among other things, the landowners legal team points to three provisions of the 1982 law which say that the NRC shall encourage storage of nuclear waste at the site of each civilian nuclear power reactor, and take other steps to promote such onsite storage. They also point to a provision calling for a federal storage facility. And, they highlight a provision stating that the 1982 law should not be read to encourage or authorize private storage facilities away from a reactor.As the landowners legal team writes, allowing the Texas facility to exist would discourage creating new storage capacity at reactor sites, the opposite of what the 1982 law was supposed to accomplish.Its safe to say that, when Congress wrote the 1982 law, they imagined a world where nuclear waste would be stored either at reactor sites or at a federal facility, and not at a private facility like the one at issue in Texas. But the 1982 law also does not explicitly repeal the 1954 laws provisions governing the three kinds of nuclear material. So the government has a very strong argument that it can still rely on those provisions to license the facility in Texas.There is a possibility that the Supreme Court will simply make this case go awayTheres a real possibility that the Supreme Court will get rid of this case on procedural grounds, effectively handing a victory to the government.Briefly, the federal law that both Texas and the landowner relied upon to bring their case to the Fifth Circuit permits any party aggrieved by the final order of the NRC to challenge that decision in a federal appeals court. The government argues that, to qualify as a party, Texas or the landowner must have participated as a litigant in the NRCs internal proceeding governing the Andrews County license. While both the state and the landowner took some steps to make their views known to the NRC during that proceeding, neither ever officially became litigants. Thus, the government argues, they do not count as a party to that proceeding which can appeal the NRCs decision, and the Court should toss the case out. The key thing to know about this legal argument is that it may be enough to prevent the justices from reaching the merits of this particular case.If the Court does reach the merits, however, it faces a difficult decision. Allowing the Andrews County project to move forward will undoubtedly trigger the same kind of political backlash that has accompanied every other attempt to pick a site to store nuclear waste. But, if this project is not allowed, its far from clear where the waste would go.See More:

This story was originally published in The Highlight, Voxs member-exclusive magazine. To get early access to member-exclusive stories every month, join the Vox Membership program today.Humans have always tried to glimpse the future. Our methods have improved from the stars and tarot cards to tremendously complex election forecasts. People love predictions, making them and reading about them. How else to explain the popularity of palm readers and legal gambling markets for sports, politics, and more? At Voxs Future Perfect section, our annual predictions are some of our most-read stories. Theres one kind of prediction that does not capture the publics imagination as often but is nevertheless instrumental in shaping how politicians and other powerful people contemplate humanitys future. Welcome to the world of population projections.Estimates from highly respected demographers suggest that the United States of the future might be less populous than that of the past. Those predictions have galvanized the political right, combining a sense of cultural decline with xenophobia to persuade voters that a return to traditional American values which means more child-rearing is the solution.Until recently, the fear had not been too few humans, but too many. A few generations ago, a widespread panic was set off by the dire projections published in the infamous book The Population Bomb, which warned of a wave of famines in the developing world because there would be too many people to feed. Other demographic experts warned around the same time that rapid overpopulation could lead to catastrophic outcomes and threaten humanitys future. Countries like China and India thought they would have too many people in the future and sought to avert overpopulation only to overcorrect and create a self-made demographic crisis in which they will have many elderly people and too few young people to care for them or power the economy.National leaders are now confronting a question that would have been unthinkable a century ago: What if we dont have enough people?This dramatic reversal reflects the inherent uncertainties with population projections. These statistical estimates of the future of our species are imperfect but they are necessary. There are small groups of demographers, scattered around the world at some of our most revered institutions, asking some of the biggest questions of all: How many people will be alive 50 years from now? In 100 or, even 200? How many young people will there be, and how many old people will they have to support? And how will that future population be spread out across the planet, as different countries grow or shrink in wildly different ways?These estimates have evolved from the days when overpopulation fears were rampant. Whereas studies once appeared to show such robust population growth that people feared mass starvation, they now anticipate stagnating or declining populations around the world. Already, more than half of the worlds nations are below the replacement fertility rate of 2.1 children per woman. The University of Washingtons Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation projects that by 2100, nearly every country will have a fertility rate lower than what would be necessary to sustain the human population over time. Some longer-range forecasts, out to 2200 or 2300, paint a portrait of a dying species. But the farther in the future you go, the more uncertain population predictions get those that project centuries from now are little more than a guess. The United Nations current spread of projections for the global population in 2100 goes from less than 7 billion people on the low end all the way to more than 14 billion representing two completely different futures for our species. The median guess is roughly 10 billion. These sketches of humanitys future are not carbon copies of each other, either. Population projections from the UN, the US Census Bureau, the University of Washingtons Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME), and the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), to name a few of the most prominent groups, often share a general trajectory but can significantly differ in specifics. When added up over the decades, the divergences are sometimes stark.Everyone is reaching for answers because, as any good demographer might tell you, we have never seen a country rebound from low fertility rates. The trends have been down, down, down. Japan and South Korea, at the leading edge of this problem, are now in a genuine demographic crisis the kind that awaits the US and Europe if the projections are to be believed, the kind that is already spurring so much societal angst.Were all headed toward a smaller world. The entire global economy has to adjust to an unprecedented reality, Jennifer Sciubba, president and CEO of the Population Reference Bureau, told me. As she explained in a 2023 interview with WBUR: All of our theories about the good life, our economic theories, our political theories those were all developed under conditions of population growth and economic growth. Its really hard to get a paradigmatic shift and say, What if we try to look at the world in a different way?In other words, these projections arent just academic data computations. They matter. So its worth understanding how they work.How population projections workPeople have been methodically tracking their numbers for thousands of years. For the past 500 years, humans have been slowly sharpening their talent for projecting the populations of the future.John Graunt, considered the first modern demographer, used London parish records to estimate population trends with crude statistical methods in the 1600s. A century later, Thomas Robert Malthus, another Englishman, predicted (incorrectly) that food production could not keep pace with exponential population growth, perhaps the first example of what would become a recurring theme of scholars and entire societies being struck by a population panic. In the 1920s, American biologist Raymond Pearl first began to publish population estimates that applied the kind of statistical modeling that is now the foundation of modern demography with margins of error that can become enormous, given the many variables in play.Today, the most authoritative projections come from agencies like the United Nations and the US Census Bureau, and from nongovernmental groups including IHME, the IIASA, and the Population Reference Bureau. Over the past six months, Ive spoken with experts from most of them to better understand these all-important statistical estimates.The foundation of all population projections is to take some basic data points the current population, its breakdown by age and sex, fertility rates and extrapolate them into the future. Right now, the IHME, IIASA and United Nations all project the global population in 2050 will be between 9.6 billion and 9.7 billion not a lot of variation. Barring an unforeseen disruption, that makes sense, given the current world population of about 8 billion and the current global average fertility rate of 2.3 children per woman, a little bit above the human replacement fertility rate of 2.1.But by 2100, the organizations estimates range from 8.8 billion people (IHME) to more than 10 billion (the UN). The Census Bureau doesnt do global projections, expects the population to peak at 369.4 million in 2080 (from todays 340 million), and drop to 365.6 million in 2100. The UN, on the other hand, projects that the US population will exceed 400 million in 2100 a difference of some 35 million, or almost as many people as now live in California.Generally speaking, population estimates tend to be fairly accurate in the short term (up to 20 years out), but less so once you reach 50 and 100 years. The Census Bureau, for example, made some of its most accurate projections about the short-term baby boom of the post-World War II era, when fertility rates briefly rebounded after a Great Depression-era decline. But their longer-range forecasts that expected that boom to continue projected that the US would exceed 300 million people by the year 2000. Instead, the advent of the birth control pill and other cultural and economic trends pushed the fertility rate down evidence of how factors outside a demographers field of study can have enormous unanticipated effects. By the turn of the millennium, the US was home to 281 million people. It is challenging to predict advancements in medicine or shifts in migration or the outbreak of war or pestilence or an economic depression that might affect how many people are alive in the future and where they will live. Still, we have to try. Population projections are necessary to plan for the future. Critical government programs such as Social Security one I think about a lot as a millennial worker depend on our ability to predict the demographic makeup of the country: How many working-age people will there be to pay into the program? How many elderly people will need benefits? Policymakers are constantly monitoring the programs solvency date, adjusting it forward or backward by a few years based on projected population trends, and considering new policies usually either tax hikes or benefit cuts to try to make the program more sustainable. Right now, Social Security is projected to be solvent for 10 more years if the projections are right.Population figures are also a core component of any climate change forecast; the volume of future emissions depends in large part on how many people are alive to consume energy. If we peeled away all the layers of the onion, whats at the center? Its population dynamics, Sciubba told me. According to one estimate, carbon emissions would be more than 40 percent lower by 2100 if the worlds population fell to 7 billion than if it continued to grow to 15 billion roughly the full range of the UNs global projections.Why its so hard to be precise when projecting the futureHeres one way to visualize the imprecision: Any time youre looking at a chart of future population projections, there is a wide cone with a bolded line inside of it. We typically pay the most attention to that line, which is the median outcome. But because they are making probabilistic projections, statisticians would never say the population in year X will definitely be Y. So while there is a median outcome in which projectors are most confident, there are extreme, if less likely, scenarios at the edges of the cone. The set of dotted red lines represents a 95 percent confidence interval, meaning that the UN believes theres a 95 percent chance that world population will fall between 9 billion and 11.4 billion in 2100. The narrower band bordered by the red dashed lines, inside the red dotted lines, shows a smaller range 9.4 billion to 11 billion that reflects an 80 percent confidence interval. The more precise the projection, the less confident forecasters are in its accuracy. Why the uncertainty? Because fertility rates, the foundation of population projections, can be fickle, and even a small shift, only a decimal point or two, could have huge ramifications. Look at the chart above again: The widest ranges the dashed blue lines reflect the arbitrary addition or subtraction of 0.5 children to the fertility rate. That would only require one out of every two couples to decide to have one additional or one fewer child. It doesnt seem like a big change at the interpersonal level, but apply it to the entire human race and it makes a massive difference. In recent years, the UN has overestimated its predictions for fertility rates in South Korea, Colombia, and other nations. That could happen again, moving up the timeline for a demographic crisis.You can technically read projections for the year 2300, which paint a dire picture of humanitys future. These are fascinating documents, and clearly carefully considered. Yet their authors are transparent about how many assumptions they had to make to come up with a cogent estimate and any one of those assumptions could lead them ending up horribly wrong when extrapolating over 200 years. One paper that projected there would be between 2 billion and 26 billion people in the year 2300, for example, made a number of necessary but nonetheless debatable assumptions, namely that global fertility rates would never drop below 1.2 births per woman, given the societal consequences. At such a low fertility rate, the authors write, the human species would then be on a path to extinction. It seems at least plausible that humanity would act collectively or individually well before that point to avoid such an outcome.And yet, in places like Japan and South Korea, where the demographic crisis has already arrived, national leaders have struggled to find effective policies to reverse fertility decline. While these decisions have national and global implications, they are also intensely personal. Its not clear what the government can do to persuade people to have more children.Declines in the fertility rates of wealthy countries have driven much of the recent population anxiety discourse more educated women with higher incomes tend to have fewer babies. These trends might soon impact the rest of the world: Africas current birth rates are high, but as the continent continues to develop economically over the coming decades, fertility rates are expected to drop accordingly. But there is a range of possibilities: In 2021, the UNs median estimate was 3.8 billion people in sub-Saharan Africa by 2100, up from about 1.1 billion today, while IIASA anticipated a billion fewer (2.6 billion) and IHME falls somewhere in between.Sorting through these different projections for sub-Saharan Africa, one of the most volatile regions for demographers because it has both high fertility rates and the potential for rapid economic development, can illuminate how these experts arrive at their different conclusions. Demographers differ in their assumptions about how quickly fertility rates will decline across the continent: In Angola, for example, the UN expects that each woman will bear more than 2.5 children over their lifetime by 2100, while IHME and IIASA anticipate fewer than 1.75 babies. The latter groups include womens educational attainment in their projections, and IHME also accounts for other family planning trends, while the UN doesnt account for those variables. Thats because, while there is certainly evidence that more economic progress leads women to having fewer babies, there is also countervailing research identifying other mitigating factors that may soften the downward trend. That could lead IHME and IIASA to underestimate Africas future population compared to the UN. On the other hand, given UN has overestimated the fertility rates of numerous countries over the past 25 years, there is a case for giving more weight to educational and economic trends.Migration patterns, meanwhile, are not as important when projecting the global population, but they are crucial to how that population might be distributed. Consider the United States: In a high immigration scenario, supported by permissive immigration policy, the Census Bureau projects the US could reach more than 435 million people by 2100. But in a low-immigration scenario, with more restrictions on people entering the country, the population could fall below 320 million in the same time frame. The fertility rate among Americans is already below the 2.1 replacement level.Demographers struggle to account for migration, because its so heavily shaped by unpredictable developments in politics, and many decide to hold current immigration rates constant instead of trying to predict it. But that could affect their accuracy, because there can be big swings in migration patterns, which could then alter the host countrys fertility rate see, for example, the influx of migrants from Africa and the Middle East to Europe over the past decade-plus. Likewise, population experts know that climate change could affect the population of the future, but its hard to know how, so they tend to leave it out of their estimates.The future will continue to surprise usPopulation projections feel so relevant now because of the surge in American natalist discourse. American thought leaders look at projections of a plateauing or perhaps even dropping US native-born population and see different crises: one of declining traditional family values, or a failure of the social welfare state to support families, or a looming economic catastrophe, or the risks of a regressive immigration policy. These figures underscore many of the major political debates in the US and the world today.The question will be what we do about them. As weve seen in the past and the present, the anxieties spurred by population projections whatever their accuracy can result in terrible social damage or inspire aspirational political agendas. India and China are the clearest examples of population fears spiraling out of control. In the 1970s, Indian leaders worried that their population would explode so quickly that the country would be unable to feed all of its people so they instituted a forced sterilization program. Millions of men were subjected to an unwanted and irreversible medical procedure in what is now widely regarded as a serious violation of human rights. And the program was not particularly effective in slowing population growth. Instead, it merely eroded public trust in the government.China, meanwhile, implemented its one-child policy in 1979 for similar reasons, which faced its own criticisms over coercion and unintended consequences. The country formally ended the rule in 2015, and it is now contending with the reciprocal problem to the one it was trying to prevent: It has too few people of a working age, born during the one-child period, and too many people from older generations to support. Many of its cities are emptying out, and advertisements for cemeteries are oddly commonplace.For most of human history, this would have been unthinkable. Humans have long had more children than they expected to survive into adulthood because it was economically necessary. We needed as many children as we could get simply to produce enough food to eat. But the economic and medical improvements of modernity created a possibility that had never existed before: We could have too many people, many in the 20th century feared, because fewer kids were dying in childhood.At this point, it seems safe to say that fears of overpopulation were overblown and we overreacted. Now were back to asking the age-old question: How do we get more people?In the United States, we are seeing diametrically opposed responses to that issue. Conservatives, best represented by Vice President JD Vance, blame the loss of traditional family values and religiosity for the dramatic drops in marriage rates over the last 50 years. Those on the left blame the unbearable costs of raising children in the US, our weak welfare state, and assorted world crises like climate change for discouraging people from having kids. Solve those problems, their thinking goes, and you might see future populations rebound. The stakes are starting to appear existential, threatening the high and rising living standards that much of the world has enjoyed over the last century. If current fertility trends continue, Japan is projected to have only one child total 695 years from now. The country has resorted to desperate attempts to reverse their course, such as clumsily trying to incentivize dating through cash handouts. We should retain our capacity for surprise. Lately, there have been tiny signs of progress: The US marriage rate, a strong predictor of birth rates, has ticked up since the pandemic. South Korea saw an uptick in births for the first time in 10 years, but it still had more deaths than births. China likewise had a rise in births last year, but it would not be enough to stop the countrys population crash. Extinction fears can even leak into the practice of population projections. Demographers sometimes make assumptions that fertility rates cant fall below a certain level. Its almost like a reluctance to predict the future where people just arent having kids anymore, Mark Mather, associate vice president at the Population Reference Bureau, told me. But based on whats been happening over the past generation, the way things have been going, thats exactly what we would predict in 20 or 30 years. Thats a challenge for people trying to make these projections.It is, in a way, a reminder that population forecasters are human beings, contemplating their own speciess future. Their projections may tell us the path were headed on now but they cannot tell us how humanity will respond. That will ultimately be up to us.Youve read 1 article in the last monthHere at Vox, we're unwavering in our commitment to covering the issues that matter most to you threats to democracy, immigration, reproductive rights, the environment, and the rising polarization across this country.Our mission is to provide clear, accessible journalism that empowers you to stay informed and engaged in shaping our world. By becoming a Vox Member, you directly strengthen our ability to deliver in-depth, independent reporting that drives meaningful change.We rely on readers like you join us.Swati SharmaVox Editor-in-ChiefSee More:

The PlayStation Plus games for March 2025 have been revealed, with players able to download and play some huge games this month including the critically-acclaimed Dragon Age: The VeilguardTech16:44, 26 Feb 2025Updated 16:47, 26 Feb 2025PlayStation Plus is bringing more new games to Sony console owners(Image: Sony )PS Plus subscribers at the Extra tier had a field day with the likes of Star Wars Jedi Survivor, but Essentials subscribers now know what they'll be playing after this month's PSN outage and State of Play event.As revealed today (February 26), players will be able to download the much-loved RPG Dragon Age: The Veilguard that some fans can't believe is now going to be free. Not to mention two games that are sure to bring nostalgia to PlayStation fans, including SEGA icon Sonic coming fresh off our big screens and onto PlayStation plus.To top off the week, some would say its "pizza time", while others would go cowabunga for the third game in the line up (read one my friends).Here's all you need to know, as per the PlayStation Blog:Dragon Age came back with a bang in The VeilguardDragon Age: The Veilguard | PS5Unite the Veilguard and defy the gods in this immersive single-player RPG where you become the leader others believe in. When a pair of corrupt ancient gods break free from centuries of darkness, the vibrant land of Thedas needs someone they can count on.Rise as Rook, Dragon Ages newest hero. Be who you want to be and play how you want to play as you fight back and lead your team of seven companions, each with their own rich story. Together you will become The Veilguard.Sonic Colors: Ultimate | PS4The evil Dr. Eggman has built an interstellar amusement park but hes powering it with a captured alien race called Wisps. Use Sonics speed to free the Wisps and gain their amazing powers as you explore six unique worlds, filled with hurdles to overcome. Now with stunning upscaled visuals, additional features, a new game mode and enhanced gameplay its the Ultimate Sonic Colors experience.Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: The Cowabunga Collection | PS4, PS5Thirteen classic Konami TMNT games are assembled in one incredible package! Experience 13 immensely popular and influential TMNT games in a totally radical collection from Konami. These retro nostalgia trips come with a range of new quality-of-life features, including online play for certain games and local couch play, the ability to save anytime and rewind, button mapping, unique development art & sketches, historic TMNT media content and more!Article continues belowAs for when you can play them, get your console storage freed up by March 4. The games are usually available by around 10am, although there's no official timing on that. You will have until March 31 to get these games, so plenty of time.Don't forget, you won't be able to download last month's games for free after the new games cycle in so grab Payday 3, High on Life and Pac-Man World Re-Pac while you can.For the latest breaking news and stories from across the globe from the Daily Star, sign up for our newsletters.

By Isaac Schultz Published February 26, 2025 | Comments (0) | An artist's concept of the the Lucy spacecraft flying past the Trojan asteroids Patroclus and Menoetius. Illustration: NASAs Goddard Space Flight Center/Conceptual Image Lab/Adriana Gutierrez The Lucy spacecraft just got its first good look at the main belt asteroid Donaldjohanson as the NASA mission prepares to explore the Trojan asteroids as far out as Jupiter. Donaldjohanson is not a Trojan asteroid, but is located in a convenient position for Lucy to swing by before continuing on to its main targets. Donaldjohansonnamed for the anthropologist who discovered the fossilized hominid Lucy in 1974is a small main belt asteroid at roughly 3 miles (4 kilometers) in diameter. Newly released NASA images show the asteroid as a faint smudge of light in two viewscaptured by Lucys LOng Range Reconnaissance Imager (or LLORRI, for short). The images (below) show Donaldjohanson as it appeared 45 million miles (70 million kilometers) from Lucy. But the spacecraft will close that distance by April 20, 2025, when it is slated to make a close flyby of Donaldjohanson. During the flyby, Lucy will pass within 596 miles (960 kilometers) of the asteroid. Asteroid Donaldjohanson (highlighted in the square at right) as seen by Lucy. Image: NASA/Goddard/SwRI/Johns Hopkins APL Lucy launched in October 2021 and, very early in the mission, observed the asteroid Dinkinesh and its tiny moon. Late last year, the spacecraft slingshotted around Earthits second gravity assist of our worldas it prepared to speed off to Donaldjohanson. The gravity assist increased Lucys speed with respect to the Sun by over 16,000 miles per hour (25,750 kilometers per hour).Though Donaldjohanson is just a preamble to Lucys main event, the asteroid is compelling in its own right. Donaldjohanson is thought to be a piece of debris from a massive collision about 130 million years ago, a collision that created the Erigone family of asteroids, according to the Lucy mission site. A zoomed-in view of asteroid Donaldjohanson. Image: NASA/Goddard/SwRI/Johns Hopkins APL/Gizmodo Lucy will continue to image Donaldjohanson over the next two months as part of the missions optical navigation program. Donaldjohanson will continue to appear as an unresolved faint smudge until the April 20 flyby.The first Trojan asteroid on Lucys to-see list is Eurybates, which is much larger than Donaldjohansonabout 40 miles (64 kilometers) across. The Eurybates flyby will help researchers understand how the Trojan asteroids ended up mostly together in front of Jupiter in its orbit of the Sun, and why the Trojans have the compositions that they do. The Eurybates flyby will also let Lucy spot Queta, Eurybates puny satellite. The flyby will take place on August 12, 2027. Lucy will perform flybys of a troop of Trojans in the coming years, with the final flyby (of Patroclus and Menoetius, the two asteroids featured in the top image) in 2033. But thereafter, Lucy will stay in a stable orbit and should continue flying through the Trojans for years to come.Daily NewsletterYou May Also Like By Adam Kovac Published February 26, 2025 By Isaac Schultz Published February 26, 2025 By Isaac Schultz Published February 24, 2025 Adam Kovac and George Dvorsky Published February 21, 2025 By Isaac Schultz Published February 20, 2025 By Adam Kovac Published February 19, 2025

A lot of cool new games are on the horizon this year. Obsidians first-person fantasy RPG Avowed just dropped. The Doom Slayer will be planted in an epic new medieval setting in Doom: The Dark Ages.Goro Majima will be getting his sea legs in the upcomingLike a Dragon: Pirate Yakuza inHawaii, and a new set of Vault Hunters will be sporting a million new guns inBorderlands 4. The big question you need to ask yourself is Do I have enough storage to play all these new games? Well, consider picking up the WD_Black storage expansion card for the Xbox Series X and Series S.This 1TB solid state drive is currently 30% off. That brings the price down from $158 to just $110.See at AmazonThe file size of video games have been ballooning over the past decade to some real unreasonable levels. Even though the Xbox Series X comes with a full TB of storage by default, thats really not enough these days. The recently released Call of Duty: Black Ops 6takes up close to 150 GB. If you want more than just handful of games ready to be played without deleting and redownloading stuff, youll want an expansion SSD.Double Your Game StorageThe WD_Black expansion card can triple your Xbox Series Xs storage space by adding another 1TB to your usable space. This external SSD is a simple plug and play solution. It just stick right into the back of your Xbox, no need to open anything up. Then right away youll be able to take advantage of your expanded storage.Microsoft and the Xbox brand have officially licensed the Xbox Velocity Architecture which is used in the base storage that comes with your Xbox Series X. What this means is that the player can still benefit from all of the current generation enhanced memory and storage features of the Xbox Series X while using the WD_Black storage expansion card. That includes Quick Resume which lets you hop between different games in progress on the fly. You wont have to reboot at the startup screen when switching between games. Swap out of a mid-fight Mortal Kombat 1match into a race inForza Horizon 5and then swap right back. Youll find virtually no lag in speed or performance when playing games saved on the WD_Black storage expansion card compared to those save on the internal drive.The WD_Black storage expansion card is $48 off (a 30% discount) for a limited time. Get one for yourself or as a gift for an Xbox player in your life for just $101.See at Amazon

Konga Village / Masahiro Katsume + Mette FredskildSave this picture! Dovalde ButenaiteArchitects: Masahiro Katsume, Mette FredskildAreaArea of this architecture projectArea:10000 mYearCompletion year of this architecture project Year: 2024 PhotographsPhotographs:Dovalde ButenaiteManufacturersBrands with products used in this architecture project Manufacturers: Confido, Contec coating, Kongacph Lead Architects: Masahiro Katsume More SpecsLess SpecsSave this picture!Text description provided by the architects. Konga Village is a unique architectural project nestled in the forests of Dzkija, Lithuania, redefining social sustainability through its architectural language. Designed by Japanese architect Masahiro Katsume, the project fosters a sense of community while ensuring privacy and harmony with nature. Shared spaces, such as a floating sauna, storage units for shared boats and fishing equipment, a fireplace area, and a children's activity zone, contribute to connectedness. Here, the concept of "I" fades, replaced by shared ownership of "us," creating a collective identity among residents.Save this picture!Save this picture!Save this picture!Katsume's human-centered design philosophy emphasizes democratic spaces that enrich residents' experiences and behaviors. The architect's approach shows how architecture can bridge not only humans and nature but also strengthen socially resilient communities. Konga Village becomes more than a residential spaceit serves as a model for future communities that prioritize environmental stewardship and social well-being through thoughtful, sustainable design.Save this picture!Save this picture!This lake-forest area comprises a total of eight identical architectural summer houses, each measuring 75 sq.m. with an additional terrace that offers stunning views of the forest and lake. The house plan features an open space layout, allowing residents to walk around freely and experience a sense of playfulness in their environment.Save this picture!Save this picture!Save this picture!Save this picture!The interior of Konga Village has been crafted by Danish architect Mette Fredskild, whose ten years of living in Japan have significantly influenced her unique Japandi-style design. This aesthetic seamlessly blends Japanese minimalism with Scandinavian functionality, creating warm, inviting spaces that resonate with the overall ethos of the village. This Japanese fluidity enhances the community spirit, making it easy to connect.Save this picture!Project gallerySee allShow lessAbout this officeMasahiro KatsumeOfficePublished on February 26, 2025Cite: "Konga Village / Masahiro Katsume + Mette Fredskild" 26 Feb 2025. ArchDaily. Accessed . <https://www.archdaily.com/1026818/konga-village-masahiro-katsume-plus-mette-fredskild&gt ISSN 0719-8884Save!ArchDaily?You've started following your first account!Did you know?You'll now receive updates based on what you follow! Personalize your stream and start following your favorite authors, offices and users.Go to my stream

In this video, @MartinKlekner breaks down how to quickly create simple cinematic scenes to practice your CG filmmaking skills in Blender. Cinematic Storytelling Course Waiting List: http://cgboost.com/cinematic Download Project Files: https://cgboost.com/resources Cubic Worlds Course: https://cgboost.com/courses/cubic-worlds Blender Launch Pad Course: https://cgboost.com/courses/blender-launch-pad Blender Secrets E-book (affiliate): https://gumroad.com/a/436106355 LINKS https://youtu.be/sTOgDe3EmQ0 Poly Nature Pack: https://blendermarket.com/products/poly-nature-pack-animated-stylized-pack Mixamo: http://www.mixamo.com/ Shakify Add-on: https://extensions.blender.org/add-ons/camera-shakify/ ASSETS Military Character Kit at Blendswap: https://www.blendswap.com/blend/27959 M4 Rifle at Blendswap: https://www.blendswap.com/blend/11037 AK-47 on Blendswap: https://www.blendswap.com/blend/22600 Low Poly RPG at Blendswap: https://www.blendswap.com/blend/17842 Humvee at Blendswap: https://www.blendswap.com/blend/2934 Black Hawk at Blendswap: https://www.blendswap.com/blend/4383 PK-M Kalashnikov at Blendswap: https://www.blendswap.com/blend/18124 Low Poly Grenade at Blendswap: https://www.blendswap.com/blend/20614 M2 .50cal on Blendswap: https://www.blendswap.com/blend/30289 CHAPTERS00:00 - Intro02:30 - Video Overview02:45 - One Minute Summary03:30 - Download the Project Files03:48 - Animation Assets05:26 - Blending Mixamo Animations08:37 - Fixing Root Position11:09 - Appending Assets12:46 - Animating Vehicles14:59 - Environment Breakdown15:54 - Atmosphere & Sky17:20 - Other Models17:48 - Shaders19:34 - Poly Nature Pack20:09 - About the Course20:58 - 3D Cinematic Direction22:01 - Cinematic Approach23:23 - Camerawork27:56 - Zoom & Shake29:46 - Other Approaches30:16 - OutroMY SYSTEMCPU: AMD Ryzen 9 5900 XGPU: GeForce RTX 3080RAM: 64 GBFOLLOW CG BOOST X: https://twitter.com/cgboost Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/cg_boost/ Web: https://cgboost.com/

Join this channel to get access to perks:https://www.youtube.com/@cghow/join Full Video - https://youtu.be/9KqQQYwnkQs Download - https://shorturl.at/ANgdP FAB - https://www.fab.com/sellers/CGHOW Whatsapp - https://bit.ly/3LYvxjK Patreon- https://www.patreon.com/Ashif NFT - https://opensea.io/CGHOW Twitter - https://twitter.com/cghow_ If you Liked it - http://bit.ly/2UZmiZ4 Channel Ashif - http://bit.ly/3aYaniw Support me on - paypal.me/9953280644 #cghow #UE5 #UE4Niagara #gamefx #ue5niagara #ue4vfx #niagara #unrealengineniagara #realtimevfxVisit - https://cghow.com/ Unreal Engine Marketplace - https://bit.ly/3aojvAa Artstation Store - https://www.artstation.com/ashif/store Gumroad - https://cghow.gumroad.com/

Join this channel to get access to perks:https://www.youtube.com/@cghow/join Download - https://shorturl.at/ANgdP FAB - https://www.fab.com/sellers/CGHOW Whatsapp - https://bit.ly/3LYvxjK Patreon- https://www.patreon.com/Ashif NFT - https://opensea.io/CGHOW Twitter - https://twitter.com/cghow_ If you Liked it - http://bit.ly/2UZmiZ4 Channel Ashif - http://bit.ly/3aYaniw Support me on - paypal.me/9953280644Character Shooting Projectile VFX with Impact FX in Unreal Engine 5 Niagara | Download Files #cghow #UE5 #UE4Niagara #gamefx #ue5niagara #ue4vfx #niagara #unrealengineniagara #realtimevfxVisit - https://cghow.com/ Unreal Engine Marketplace - https://bit.ly/3aojvAa Artstation Store - https://www.artstation.com/ashif/store Gumroad - https://cghow.gumroad.com/