A serial killer is stalking the streets, and his murders are a work of art. That’s more or less the premise behind Psycasso®, a tongue-in-cheek 2D pixel art game from Omni Digital Technologies that’s debuting a demo at Steam Next Fest this week, with plans to head into Early Access later this year. Playing as the killer, you get a job and build a life by day, then hunt the streets by night to find and torture victims, paint masterpieces with their blood, then sell them to fund operations.I sat down with lead developer Benjamin Lavender and Omni, designer and producer, to talk about this playfully gory game that gives a classic retro style and a fresh (if gruesome) twist.Let’s start with a bit of background about the game.Omni: We wanted to make something that stands out. We know a lot of indie studios are releasing games and the market is ever growing, so we wanted to make something that’s not just fun to play, but catches people’s attention when others tell them about it. We’ve created an open-world pixel art game about an artist who spends his day getting a job, trying to fit into society. Then at nighttime, things take a more sinister turn and he goes around and makes artwork out of his victim's blood.We didn’t want to make it creepy and gory. We kind of wanted it to be cutesy and fun, just to make it ironic. Making it was a big challenge. We basically had to create an entire city with functioning shops and NPCs who have their own lives, their own hobbies. It was a huge challenge.So what does the actual gameplay look like?Omni: There’s a day cycle and a night cycle that breaks up the gameplay. During the day, you can get a job, level up skills, buy properties and furniture upgrades. At nighttime, the lighting completely changes, the vibe completely changes, there’s police on the street and the flow of the game shifts. The idea is that you can kidnap NPCs using a whole bunch of different weapons – guns, throwable grenades, little traps and cool stuff that you can capture people with.Once captured on the street, you can either harvest their blood and body parts there, or buy a specialist room to keep them in a cage and put them in various equipment like hanging chains or torture chairs. The player gets better rewards for harvesting blood and body parts this way.On the flip side, there’s a whole other element to the game where the player is given missions each week from galleries around the city. They come up on your phone menu, and you can accept them and do either portrait or landscape paintings, with all of the painting being done using only shades of red. We've got some nice drip effects and splat sounds to make it feel like you’re painting with blood. Then you can give your creation a name, submit it to a gallery, then it goes into a fake auction, people will bid on the artwork and you get paid and large amount of in-game money so you can then buy upgrades for the home, upgrade painting tools like bigger paint brushes, more selection tools, stuff like that.Ben: There’s definitely nothing like it. And that was the aim, is when you are telling people about it, they’re like, “Oh, okay. Right. We’re not going to forget about this.” Let’s dig into the 2D tools you used to create this world.Ben: It’s using the 2D Renderer. The Happy Harvest 2D sample project that you guys made was kind of a big starting point, from a lighting perspective, and doing the normal maps of the 2D and getting the lighting to look nice. Our night system is a very stripped-down, then added-on version of the thing that you guys made. I was particularly interested by its shadows. The building’s shadows aren’t actually shadows – it’s a black light. We tried to recreate that with all of our buildings in the entire open world – so it does look beautiful for a 2D game, if I do say so myself.Can you say a bit about how you’re using AI or procedural generation in NPCs?Ben: I don’t know how many actually made it into the demo to be fair, number-wise. Every single NPC has a unique identity, as in they all have a place of work that they go to on a regular schedule. They have hobbies, they have spots where they prefer to loiter, a park bench or whatever. So you can get to know everyone’s individual lifestyle.So, the old man that lives in the same building as me might love to go to the casino at nighttime or go consistently on a Monday and a Friday, that kind of vibe.It uses the A* Pathfinding Project, because we knew we wanted to have a lot of AIs. We’ve locked off most of the city for the demo, but the actual size of the city is huge. The police mechanics are currently turned off, but there’s 80% police mechanics in there as well. If you punch someone or hurt someone, that’s a crime, and if anyone sees it, they can go and report to the police and then things happen. That’s a feature that’s there but not demo-ready yet.How close would you say you are to a full release?Omni: We should be scheduled for October for early access. By that point we’ll have the stealth mechanics and the policing systems polished and in and get some of the other upcoming features buttoned up. We’re fairly close.Ben: Lots of it’s already done, it’s just turned off for the demo. We don’t want to overwhelm people because there’s just so much for the player to do.Tell me a bit about the paint mechanics – how did you build that?Ben: It is custom. We built it ourselves completely from scratch. But I can't take responsibility for that one – someone else did the whole thing – that was their baby. It is really, really cool though.Omni: It’s got a variety of masking tools, the ability to change opacity and spacing, you can undo, redo. It’s a really fantastic feature that gives people the opportunity to express themselves and make some great art.Ben: And it's gamified, so it doesn’t feel like you’ve just opened up Paint in Windows.Omni: Best of all is when you make a painting, it gets turned into an inventory item so you physically carry it around with you and can sell it or treasure it.What’s the most exciting part of Psycasso for you?Omni: Stunning graphics. I think graphically, it looks really pretty.Ben: Visually, you could look at it and go, “Oh, that’s Psycasso.”Omni: What we’ve done is taken a cozy retro-style game, and we’ve brought modern design, logic, and technology into it. So you're playing what feels like a nostalgic game, but you're getting the experience of a much newer project.Check out the Psycasso demo on Steam, and stay tuned for more NextFest coverage.

Transcript [MUSIC]      [BOOK PASSAGE]   PETER LEE: “In ‘The Little Black Bag,’ a classic science fiction story, a high-tech doctor’s kit of the future is accidentally transported back to the 1950s, into the shaky hands of a washed-up, alcoholic doctor. The ultimate medical tool, it redeems the doctor wielding it, allowing him to practice gratifyingly heroic medicine. … The tale ends badly for the doctor and his treacherous assistant, but it offered a picture of how advanced technology could transform medicine—powerful when it was written nearly 75 years ago and still so today. What would be the Al equivalent of that little black bag? At this moment when new capabilities are emerging, how do we imagine them into medicine?”   [END OF BOOK PASSAGE]     [THEME MUSIC]     This is The AI Revolution in Medicine, Revisited. I’m your host, Peter Lee.    Shortly after OpenAI’s GPT-4 was publicly released, Carey Goldberg, Dr. Zak Kohane, and I published The AI Revolution in Medicine to help educate the world of healthcare and medical research about the transformative impact this new generative AI technology could have. But because we wrote the book when GPT-4 was still a secret, we had to speculate. Now, two years later, what did we get right, and what did we get wrong?     In this series, we’ll talk to clinicians, patients, hospital administrators, and others to understand the reality of AI in the field and where we go from here.   [THEME MUSIC FADES] The book passage I read at the top is from “Chapter 10: The Big Black Bag.”  In imagining AI in medicine, Carey, Zak, and I included in our book two fictional accounts. In the first, a medical resident consults GPT-4 on her personal phone as the patient in front of her crashes. Within seconds, it offers an alternate response based on recent literature. In the second account, a 90-year-old woman with several chronic conditions is living independently and receiving near-constant medical support from an AI aide.    In our conversations with the guests we’ve spoken to so far, we’ve caught a glimpse of these predicted futures, seeing how clinicians and patients are actually using AI today and how developers are leveraging the technology in the healthcare products and services they’re creating. In fact, that first fictional account isn’t so fictional after all, as most of the doctors in the real world actually appear to be using AI at least occasionally—and sometimes much more than occasionally—to help in their daily clinical work. And as for the second fictional account, which is more of a science fiction account, it seems we are indeed on the verge of a new way of delivering and receiving healthcare, though the future is still very much open.  As we continue to examine the current state of AI in healthcare and its potential to transform the field, I’m pleased to welcome Bill Gates and Sébastien Bubeck.   Bill may be best known as the co-founder of Microsoft, having created the company with his childhood friend Paul Allen in 1975. He’s now the founder of Breakthrough Energy, which aims to advance clean energy innovation, and TerraPower, a company developing groundbreaking nuclear energy and science technologies. He also chairs the world’s largest philanthropic organization, the Gates Foundation, and focuses on solving a variety of health challenges around the globe and here at home.  Sébastien is a research lead at OpenAI. He was previously a distinguished scientist, vice president of AI, and a colleague of mine here at Microsoft, where his work included spearheading the development of the family of small language models known as Phi. While at Microsoft, he also coauthored the discussion-provoking 2023 paper “Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence,” which presented the results of early experiments with GPT-4 conducted by a small team from Microsoft Research.    [TRANSITION MUSIC]   Here’s my conversation with Bill Gates and Sébastien Bubeck.  LEE: Bill, welcome.  BILL GATES: Thank you.  LEE: Seb …  SÉBASTIEN BUBECK: Yeah. Hi, hi, Peter. Nice to be here.  LEE: You know, one of the things that I’ve been doing just to get the conversation warmed up is to talk about origin stories, and what I mean about origin stories is, you know, what was the first contact that you had with large language models or the concept of generative AI that convinced you or made you think that something really important was happening?  And so, Bill, I think I’ve heard the story about, you know, the time when the OpenAI folks—Sam Altman, Greg Brockman, and others—showed you something, but could we hear from you what those early encounters were like and what was going through your mind?   GATES: Well, I’d been visiting OpenAI soon after it was created to see things like GPT-2 and to see the little arm they had that was trying to match human manipulation and, you know, looking at their games like Dota that they were trying to get as good as human play. And honestly, I didn’t think the language model stuff they were doing, even when they got to GPT-3, would show the ability to learn, you know, in the same sense that a human reads a biology book and is able to take that knowledge and access it not only to pass a test but also to create new medicines.  And so my challenge to them was that if their LLM could get a five on the advanced placement biology test, then I would say, OK, it took biologic knowledge and encoded it in an accessible way and that I didn’t expect them to do that very quickly but it would be profound.   And it was only about six months after I challenged them to do that, that an early version of GPT-4 they brought up to a dinner at my house, and in fact, it answered most of the questions that night very well. The one it got totally wrong, we were … because it was so good, we kept thinking, Oh, we must be wrong. It turned out it was a math weakness [LAUGHTER] that, you know, we later understood that that was an area of, weirdly, of incredible weakness of those early models. But, you know, that was when I realized, OK, the age of cheap intelligence was at its beginning.  LEE: Yeah. So I guess it seems like you had something similar to me in that my first encounters, I actually harbored some skepticism. Is it fair to say you were skeptical before that?  GATES: Well, the idea that we’ve figured out how to encode and access knowledge in this very deep sense without even understanding the nature of the encoding, …  LEE: Right.   GATES: … that is a bit weird.   LEE: Yeah.  GATES: We have an algorithm that creates the computation, but even say, OK, where is the president’s birthday stored in there? Where is this fact stored in there? The fact that even now when we’re playing around, getting a little bit more sense of it, it’s opaque to us what the semantic encoding is, it’s, kind of, amazing to me. I thought the invention of knowledge storage would be an explicit way of encoding knowledge, not an implicit statistical training.  LEE: Yeah, yeah. All right. So, Seb, you know, on this same topic, you know, I got—as we say at Microsoft—I got pulled into the tent. [LAUGHS]  BUBECK: Yes.   LEE: Because this was a very secret project. And then, um, I had the opportunity to select a small number of researchers in MSR [Microsoft Research] to join and start investigating this thing seriously. And the first person I pulled in was you.  BUBECK: Yeah.  LEE: And so what were your first encounters? Because I actually don’t remember what happened then.  BUBECK: Oh, I remember it very well. [LAUGHS] My first encounter with GPT-4 was in a meeting with the two of you, actually. But my kind of first contact, the first moment where I realized that something was happening with generative AI, was before that. And I agree with Bill that I also wasn’t too impressed by GPT-3.  I though that it was kind of, you know, very naturally mimicking the web, sort of parroting what was written there in a nice way. Still in a way which seemed very impressive. But it wasn’t really intelligent in any way. But shortly after GPT-3, there was a model before GPT-4 that really shocked me, and this was the first image generation model, DALL-E 1.  So that was in 2021. And I will forever remember the press release of OpenAI where they had this prompt of an avocado chair and then you had this image of the avocado chair. [LAUGHTER] And what really shocked me is that clearly the model kind of “understood” what is a chair, what is an avocado, and was able to merge those concepts.  So this was really, to me, the first moment where I saw some understanding in those models.   LEE: So this was, just to get the timing right, that was before I pulled you into the tent.  BUBECK: That was before. That was like a year before.  LEE: Right.   BUBECK: And now I will tell you how, you know, we went from that moment to the meeting with the two of you and GPT-4.  So once I saw this kind of understanding, I thought, OK, fine. It understands concept, but it’s still not able to reason. It cannot—as, you know, Bill was saying—it cannot learn from your document. It cannot reason.   So I set out to try to prove that. You know, this is what I was in the business of at the time, trying to prove things in mathematics. So I was trying to prove that basically autoregressive transformers could never reason. So I was trying to prove this. And after a year of work, I had something reasonable to show. And so I had the meeting with the two of you, and I had this example where I wanted to say, there is no way that an LLM is going to be able to do x.  And then as soon as I … I don’t know if you remember, Bill. But as soon as I said that, you said, oh, but wait a second. I had, you know, the OpenAI crew at my house recently, and they showed me a new model. Why don’t we ask this new model this question?   LEE: Yeah. BUBECK: And we did, and it solved it on the spot. And that really, honestly, just changed my life. Like, you know, I had been working for a year trying to say that this was impossible. And just right there, it was shown to be possible.   LEE: [LAUGHS] One of the very first things I got interested in—because I was really thinking a lot about healthcare—was healthcare and medicine.  And I don’t know if the two of you remember, but I ended up doing a lot of tests. I ran through, you know, step one and step two of the US Medical Licensing Exam. Did a whole bunch of other things. I wrote this big report. It was, you know, I can’t remember … a couple hundred pages.   And I needed to share this with someone. I didn’t … there weren’t too many people I could share it with. So I sent, I think, a copy to you, Bill. Sent a copy to you, Seb.   I hardly slept for about a week putting that report together. And, yeah, and I kept working on it. But I was far from alone. I think everyone who was in the tent, so to speak, in those early days was going through something pretty similar. All right. So I think … of course, a lot of what I put in the report also ended up being examples that made it into the book.  But the main purpose of this conversation isn’t to reminisce about [LAUGHS] or indulge in those reminiscences but to talk about what’s happening in healthcare and medicine. And, you know, as I said, we wrote this book. We did it very, very quickly. Seb, you helped. Bill, you know, you provided a review and some endorsements.  But, you know, honestly, we didn’t know what we were talking about because no one had access to this thing. And so we just made a bunch of guesses. So really, the whole thing I wanted to probe with the two of you is, now with two years of experience out in the world, what, you know, what do we think is happening today?  You know, is AI actually having an impact, positive or negative, on healthcare and medicine? And what do we now think is going to happen in the next two years, five years, or 10 years? And so I realize it’s a little bit too abstract to just ask it that way. So let me just try to narrow the discussion and guide us a little bit.   Um, the kind of administrative and clerical work, paperwork, around healthcare—and we made a lot of guesses about that—that appears to be going well, but, you know, Bill, I know we’ve discussed that sometimes that you think there ought to be a lot more going on. Do you have a viewpoint on how AI is actually finding its way into reducing paperwork?  GATES: Well, I’m stunned … I don’t think there should be a patient-doctor meeting where the AI is not sitting in and both transcribing, offering to help with the paperwork, and even making suggestions, although the doctor will be the one, you know, who makes the final decision about the diagnosis and whatever prescription gets done.   It’s so helpful. You know, when that patient goes home and their, you know, son who wants to understand what happened has some questions, that AI should be available to continue that conversation. And the way you can improve that experience and streamline things and, you know, involve the people who advise you. I don’t understand why that’s not more adopted, because there you still have the human in the loop making that final decision.  But even for, like, follow-up calls to make sure the patient did things, to understand if they have concerns and knowing when to escalate back to the doctor, the benefit is incredible. And, you know, that thing is ready for prime time. That paradigm is ready for prime time, in my view.  LEE: Yeah, there are some good products, but it seems like the number one use right now—and we kind of got this from some of the previous guests in previous episodes—is the use of AI just to respond to emails from patients. [LAUGHTER] Does that make sense to you?  BUBECK: Yeah. So maybe I want to second what Bill was saying but maybe take a step back first. You know, two years ago, like, the concept of clinical scribes, which is one of the things that we’re talking about right now, it would have sounded, in fact, it sounded two years ago, borderline dangerous. Because everybody was worried about hallucinations. What happened if you have this AI listening in and then it transcribes, you know, something wrong?  Now, two years later, I think it’s mostly working. And in fact, it is not yet, you know, fully adopted. You’re right. But it is in production. It is used, you know, in many, many places. So this rate of progress is astounding because it wasn’t obvious that we would be able to overcome those obstacles of hallucination. It’s not to say that hallucinations are fully solved. In the case of the closed system, they are.   Now, I think more generally what’s going on in the background is that there is something that we, that certainly I, underestimated, which is this management overhead. So I think the reason why this is not adopted everywhere is really a training and teaching aspect. People need to be taught, like, those systems, how to interact with them.  And one example that I really like, a study that recently appeared where they tried to use ChatGPT for diagnosis and they were comparing doctors without and with ChatGPT (opens in new tab). And the amazing thing … so this was a set of cases where the accuracy of the doctors alone was around 75%. ChatGPT alone was 90%. So that’s already kind of mind blowing. But then the kicker is that doctors with ChatGPT was 80%.   Intelligence alone is not enough. It’s also how it’s presented, how you interact with it. And ChatGPT, it’s an amazing tool. Obviously, I absolutely love it. But it’s not … you don’t want a doctor to have to type in, you know, prompts and use it that way.  It should be, as Bill was saying, kind of running continuously in the background, sending you notifications. And you have to be really careful of the rate at which those notifications are being sent. Because if they are too frequent, then the doctor will learn to ignore them. So you have to … all of those things matter, in fact, at least as much as the level of intelligence of the machine.  LEE: One of the things I think about, Bill, in that scenario that you described, doctors do some thinking about the patient when they write the note. So, you know, I’m always a little uncertain whether it’s actually … you know, you wouldn’t necessarily want to fully automate this, I don’t think. Or at least there needs to be some prompt to the doctor to make sure that the doctor puts some thought into what happened in the encounter with the patient. Does that make sense to you at all?  GATES: At this stage, you know, I’d still put the onus on the doctor to write the conclusions and the summary and not delegate that.  The tradeoffs you make a little bit are somewhat dependent on the situation you’re in. If you’re in Africa, So, yes, the doctor’s still going to have to do a lot of work, but just the quality of letting the patient and the people around them interact and ask questions and have things explained, that alone is such a quality improvement. It’s mind blowing.   LEE: So since you mentioned, you know, Africa—and, of course, this touches on the mission and some of the priorities of the Gates Foundation and this idea of democratization of access to expert medical care—what’s the most interesting stuff going on right now? Are there people and organizations or technologies that are impressing you or that you’re tracking?  GATES: Yeah. So the Gates Foundation has given out a lot of grants to people in Africa doing education, agriculture but more healthcare examples than anything. And the way these things start off, they often start out either being patient-centric in a narrow situation, like, OK, I’m a pregnant woman; talk to me. Or, I have infectious disease symptoms; talk to me. Or they’re connected to a health worker where they’re helping that worker get their job done. And we have lots of pilots out, you know, in both of those cases.   The dream would be eventually to have the thing the patient consults be so broad that it’s like having a doctor available who understands the local things.   LEE: Right.   GATES: We’re not there yet. But over the next two or three years, you know, particularly given the worsening financial constraints against African health systems, where the withdrawal of money has been dramatic, you know, figuring out how to take this—what I sometimes call “free intelligence”—and build a quality health system around that, we will have to be more radical in low-income countries than any rich country is ever going to be.   LEE: Also, there’s maybe a different regulatory environment, so some of those things maybe are easier? Because right now, I think the world hasn’t figured out how to and whether to regulate, let’s say, an AI that might give a medical diagnosis or write a prescription for a medication.  BUBECK: Yeah. I think one issue with this, and it’s also slowing down the deployment of AI in healthcare more generally, is a lack of proper benchmark. Because, you know, you were mentioning the USMLE [United States Medical Licensing Examination], for example. That’s a great test to test human beings and their knowledge of healthcare and medicine. But it’s not a great test to give to an AI.  It’s not asking the right questions. So finding what are the right questions to test whether an AI system is ready to give diagnosis in a constrained setting, that’s a very, very important direction, which to my surprise, is not yet accelerating at the rate that I was hoping for.  LEE: OK, so that gives me an excuse to get more now into the core AI tech because something I’ve discussed with both of you is this issue of what are the right tests. And you both know the very first test I give to any new spin of an LLM is I present a patient, the results—a mythical patient—the results of my physical exam, my mythical physical exam. Maybe some results of some initial labs. And then I present or propose a differential diagnosis. And if you’re not in medicine, a differential diagnosis you can just think of as a prioritized list of the possible diagnoses that fit with all that data. And in that proposed differential, I always intentionally make two mistakes.  I make a textbook technical error in one of the possible elements of the differential diagnosis, and I have an error of omission. And, you know, I just want to know, does the LLM understand what I’m talking about? And all the good ones out there do now. But then I want to know, can it spot the errors? And then most importantly, is it willing to tell me I’m wrong, that I’ve made a mistake?   That last piece seems really hard for AI today. And so let me ask you first, Seb, because at the time of this taping, of course, there was a new spin of GPT-4o last week that became overly sycophantic. In other words, it was actually prone in that test of mine not only to not tell me I’m wrong, but it actually praised me for the creativity of my differential. [LAUGHTER] What’s up with that?  BUBECK: Yeah, I guess it’s a testament to the fact that training those models is still more of an art than a science. So it’s a difficult job. Just to be clear with the audience, we have rolled back that [LAUGHS] version of GPT-4o, so now we don’t have the sycophant version out there.  Yeah, no, it’s a really difficult question. It has to do … as you said, it’s very technical. It has to do with the post-training and how, like, where do you nudge the model? So, you know, there is this very classical by now technique called RLHF [reinforcement learning from human feedback], where you push the model in the direction of a certain reward model. So the reward model is just telling the model, you know, what behavior is good, what behavior is bad.  But this reward model is itself an LLM, and, you know, Bill was saying at the very beginning of the conversation that we don’t really understand how those LLMs deal with concepts like, you know, where is the capital of France located? Things like that. It is the same thing for this reward model. We don’t know why it says that it prefers one output to another, and whether this is correlated with some sycophancy is, you know, something that we discovered basically just now. That if you push too hard in optimization on this reward model, you will get a sycophant model.  So it’s kind of … what I’m trying to say is we became too good at what we were doing, and we ended up, in fact, in a trap of the reward model.  LEE: I mean, you do want … it’s a difficult balance because you do want models to follow your desires and …  BUBECK: It’s a very difficult, very difficult balance.  LEE: So this brings up then the following question for me, which is the extent to which we think we’ll need to have specially trained models for things. So let me start with you, Bill. Do you have a point of view on whether we will need to, you know, quote-unquote take AI models to med school? Have them specially trained? Like, if you were going to deploy something to give medical care in underserved parts of the world, do we need to do something special to create those models?  GATES: We certainly need to teach them the African languages and the unique dialects so that the multimedia interactions are very high quality. We certainly need to teach them the disease prevalence and unique disease patterns like, you know, neglected tropical diseases and malaria. So we need to gather a set of facts that somebody trying to go for a US customer base, you know, wouldn’t necessarily have that in there.  Those two things are actually very straightforward because the additional training time is small. I’d say for the next few years, we’ll also need to do reinforcement learning about the context of being a doctor and how important certain behaviors are. Humans learn over the course of their life to some degree that, I’m in a different context and the way I behave in terms of being willing to criticize or be nice, you know, how important is it? Who’s here? What’s my relationship to them?   Right now, these machines don’t have that broad social experience. And so if you know it’s going to be used for health things, a lot of reinforcement learning of the very best humans in that context would still be valuable. Eventually, the models will, having read all the literature of the world about good doctors, bad doctors, it’ll understand as soon as you say, “I want you to be a doctor diagnosing somebody.” All of the implicit reinforcement that fits that situation, you know, will be there. LEE: Yeah. GATES: And so I hope three years from now, we don’t have to do that reinforcement learning. But today, for any medical context, you would want a lot of data to reinforce tone, willingness to say things when, you know, there might be something significant at stake.  LEE: Yeah. So, you know, something Bill said, kind of, reminds me of another thing that I think we missed, which is, the context also … and the specialization also pertains to different, I guess, what we still call “modes,” although I don’t know if the idea of multimodal is the same as it was two years ago. But, you know, what do you make of all of the hubbub around—in fact, within Microsoft Research, this is a big deal, but I think we’re far from alone—you know, medical images and vision, video, proteins and molecules, cell, you know, cellular data and so on.  BUBECK: Yeah. OK. So there is a lot to say to everything … to the last, you know, couple of minutes. Maybe on the specialization aspect, you know, I think there is, hiding behind this, a really fundamental scientific question of whether eventually we have a singular AGI [artificial general intelligence] that kind of knows everything and you can just put, you know, explain your own context and it will just get it and understand everything.  That’s one vision. I have to say, I don’t particularly believe in this vision. In fact, we humans are not like that at all. I think, hopefully, we are general intelligences, yet we have to specialize a lot. And, you know, I did myself a lot of RL, reinforcement learning, on mathematics. Like, that’s what I did, you know, spent a lot of time doing that. And I didn’t improve on other aspects. You know, in fact, I probably degraded in other aspects. [LAUGHTER] So it’s … I think it’s an important example to have in mind.  LEE: I think I might disagree with you on that, though, because, like, doesn’t a model have to see both good science and bad science in order to be able to gain the ability to discern between the two?  BUBECK: Yeah, no, that absolutely. I think there is value in seeing the generality, in having a very broad base. But then you, kind of, specialize on verticals. And this is where also, you know, open-weights model, which we haven’t talked about yet, are really important because they allow you to provide this broad base to everyone. And then you can specialize on top of it.  LEE: So we have about three hours of stuff to talk about, but our time is actually running low. BUBECK: Yes, yes, yes.   LEE: So I think I want … there’s a more provocative question. It’s almost a silly question, but I need to ask it of the two of you, which is, is there a future, you know, where AI replaces doctors or replaces, you know, medical specialties that we have today? So what does the world look like, say, five years from now?  GATES: Well, it’s important to distinguish healthcare discovery activity from healthcare delivery activity. We focused mostly on delivery. I think it’s very much within the realm of possibility that the AI is not only accelerating healthcare discovery but substituting for a lot of the roles of, you know, I’m an organic chemist, or I run various types of assays. I can see those, which are, you know, testable-output-type jobs but with still very high value, I can see, you know, some replacement in those areas before the doctor.   The doctor, still understanding the human condition and long-term dialogues, you know, they’ve had a lifetime of reinforcement of that, particularly when you get into areas like mental health. So I wouldn’t say in five years, either people will choose to adopt it, but it will be profound that there’ll be this nearly free intelligence that can do follow-up, that can help you, you know, make sure you went through different possibilities.  And so I’d say, yes, we’ll have doctors, but I’d say healthcare will be massively transformed in its quality and in efficiency by AI in that time period.  LEE: Is there a comparison, useful comparison, say, between doctors and, say, programmers, computer programmers, or doctors and, I don’t know, lawyers?  GATES: Programming is another one that has, kind of, a mathematical correctness to it, you know, and so the objective function that you’re trying to reinforce to, as soon as you can understand the state machines, you can have something that’s “checkable”; that’s correct. So I think programming, you know, which is weird to say, that the machine will beat us at most programming tasks before we let it take over roles that have deep empathy, you know, physical presence and social understanding in them.  LEE: Yeah. By the way, you know, I fully expect in five years that AI will produce mathematical proofs that are checkable for validity, easily checkable, because they’ll be written in a proof-checking language like Lean or something but will be so complex that no human mathematician can understand them. I expect that to happen.   I can imagine in some fields, like cellular biology, we could have the same situation in the future because the molecular pathways, the chemistry, biochemistry of human cells or living cells is as complex as any mathematics, and so it seems possible that we may be in a state where in wet lab, we see, Oh yeah, this actually works, but no one can understand why.  BUBECK: Yeah, absolutely. I mean, I think I really agree with Bill’s distinction of the discovery and the delivery, and indeed, the discovery’s when you can check things, and at the end, there is an artifact that you can verify. You know, you can run the protocol in the wet lab and see [if you have] produced what you wanted. So I absolutely agree with that.   And in fact, you know, we don’t have to talk five years from now. I don’t know if you know, but just recently, there was a paper that was published on a scientific discovery using o3- mini (opens in new tab). So this is really amazing. And, you know, just very quickly, just so people know, it was about this statistical physics model, the frustrated Potts model, which has to do with coloring, and basically, the case of three colors, like, more than two colors was open for a long time, and o3 was able to reduce the case of three colors to two colors.   LEE: Yeah.  BUBECK: Which is just, like, astounding. And this is not … this is now. This is happening right now. So this is something that I personally didn’t expect it would happen so quickly, and it’s due to those reasoning models.   Now, on the delivery side, I would add something more to it for the reason why doctors and, in fact, lawyers and coders will remain for a long time, and it’s because we still don’t understand how those models generalize. Like, at the end of the day, we are not able to tell you when they are confronted with a really new, novel situation, whether they will work or not.  Nobody is able to give you that guarantee. And I think until we understand this generalization better, we’re not going to be willing to just let the system in the wild without human supervision.  LEE: But don’t human doctors, human specialists … so, for example, a cardiologist sees a patient in a certain way that a nephrologist …  BUBECK: Yeah. LEE: … or an endocrinologist might not. BUBECK: That’s right. But another cardiologist will understand and, kind of, expect a certain level of generalization from their peer. And this, we just don’t have it with AI models. Now, of course, you’re exactly right. That generalization is also hard for humans. Like, if you have a human trained for one task and you put them into another task, then you don’t … you often don’t know. LEE: OK. You know, the podcast is focused on what’s happened over the last two years. But now, I’d like one provocative prediction about what you think the world of AI and medicine is going to be at some point in the future. You pick your timeframe. I don’t care if it’s two years or 20 years from now, but, you know, what do you think will be different about AI in medicine in that future than today?  BUBECK: Yeah, I think the deployment is going to accelerate soon. Like, we’re really not missing very much. There is this enormous capability overhang. Like, even if progress completely stopped, with current systems, we can do a lot more than what we’re doing right now. So I think this will … this has to be realized, you know, sooner rather than later.  And I think it’s probably dependent on these benchmarks and proper evaluation and tying this with regulation. So these are things that take time in human society and for good reason. But now we already are at two years; you know, give it another two years and it should be really …   LEE: Will AI prescribe your medicines? Write your prescriptions?  BUBECK: I think yes. I think yes.  LEE: OK. Bill?  GATES: Well, I think the next two years, we’ll have massive pilots, and so the amount of use of the AI, still in a copilot-type mode, you know, we should get millions of patient visits, you know, both in general medicine and in the mental health side, as well. And I think that’s going to build up both the data and the confidence to give the AI some additional autonomy. You know, are you going to let it talk to you at night when you’re panicked about your mental health with some ability to escalate? And, you know, I’ve gone so far as to tell politicians with national health systems that if they deploy AI appropriately, that the quality of care, the overload of the doctors, the improvement in the economics will be enough that their voters will be stunned because they just don’t expect this, and, you know, they could be reelected [LAUGHTER] just on this one thing of fixing what is a very overloaded and economically challenged health system in these rich countries.  You know, my personal role is going to be to make sure that in the poorer countries, there isn’t some lag; in fact, in many cases, that we’ll be more aggressive because, you know, we’re comparing to having no access to doctors at all. And, you know, so I think whether it’s India or Africa, there’ll be lessons that are globally valuable because we need medical intelligence. And, you know, thank god AI is going to provide a lot of that.  LEE: Well, on that optimistic note, I think that’s a good way to end. Bill, Seb, really appreciate all of this.   I think the most fundamental prediction we made in the book is that AI would actually find its way into the practice of medicine, and I think that that at least has come true, maybe in different ways than we expected, but it’s come true, and I think it’ll only accelerate from here. So thanks again, both of you.  [TRANSITION MUSIC]  GATES: Yeah. Thanks, you guys.  BUBECK: Thank you, Peter. Thanks, Bill.  LEE: I just always feel such a sense of privilege to have a chance to interact and actually work with people like Bill and Sébastien.    With Bill, I’m always amazed at how practically minded he is. He’s really thinking about the nuts and bolts of what AI might be able to do for people, and his thoughts about underserved parts of the world, the idea that we might actually be able to empower people with access to expert medical knowledge, I think is both inspiring and amazing.   And then, Seb, Sébastien Bubeck, he’s just absolutely a brilliant mind. He has a really firm grip on the deep mathematics of artificial intelligence and brings that to bear in his research and development work. And where that mathematics takes him isn’t just into the nuts and bolts of algorithms but into philosophical questions about the nature of intelligence.   One of the things that Sébastien brought up was the state of evaluation of AI systems. And indeed, he was fairly critical in our conversation. But of course, the world of AI research and development is just moving so fast, and indeed, since we recorded our conversation, OpenAI, in fact, released a new evaluation metric that is directly relevant to medical applications, and that is something called HealthBench. And Microsoft Research also released a new evaluation approach or process called ADeLe.   HealthBench and ADeLe are examples of new approaches to evaluating AI models that are less about testing their knowledge and ability to pass multiple-choice exams and instead are evaluation approaches designed to assess how well AI models are able to complete tasks that actually arise every day in typical healthcare or biomedical research settings. These are examples of really important good work that speak to how well AI models work in the real world of healthcare and biomedical research and how well they can collaborate with human beings in those settings.  You know, I asked Bill and Seb to make some predictions about the future. You know, my own answer, I expect that we’re going to be able to use AI to change how we diagnose patients, change how we decide treatment options.   If you’re a doctor or a nurse and you encounter a patient, you’ll ask questions, do a physical exam, you know, call out for labs just like you do today, but then you’ll be able to engage with AI based on all of that data and just ask, you know, based on all the other people who have gone through the same experience, who have similar data, how were they diagnosed? How were they treated? What were their outcomes? And what does that mean for the patient I have right now? Some people call it the “patients like me” paradigm. And I think that’s going to become real because of AI within our lifetimes. That idea of really grounding the delivery in healthcare and medical practice through data and intelligence, I actually now don’t see any barriers to that future becoming real.  [THEME MUSIC]  I’d like to extend another big thank you to Bill and Sébastien for their time. And to our listeners, as always, it’s a pleasure to have you along for the ride. I hope you’ll join us for our remaining conversations, as well as a second coauthor roundtable with Carey and Zak.   Until next time.   [MUSIC FADES]

It’s fairly easy to block the constant, incessant advertising that appears on YouTube. Google would prefer that you don’t, or pay up (quite a lot) to make them go away. Last weekend, the company started its latest campaign to try and badger ad-block users into disabling their extensions. Since then, it looks like YouTube has escalated things and is now intentionally slowing down videos. Posters on Reddit and the Brave browser forum have observed videos being blacked out on first load, approximately for the length of pre-roll ads, with a pop-up link that directs users to the ad-blocking section of this technical support page. “Check whether your browser extensions that block ads are affecting video playback,” suggests Google. “As another option, try opening YouTube in an incognito window with all extensions disabled and check if the issue continues.” PCWorld staff has seen this in action, using uBlock Origin Lite. Google Ad-block extension developers quickly got around the pop-up issue earlier this week, with one AdGuard representative calling the process “a classic cat-and-mouse game.” But if Google wanted to instigate a more serious crackdown on users blocking ads without paying up, it could do so easily—and we’ve seen it pull this same move before. Posters on the latest issue speculate that the slowdowns might be tagged to specific Google or YouTube user accounts that were detected blocking ads previously, which would bypass any kind of interaction with a specific browser or extension. I can’t independently confirm that’s happening, but it wouldn’t surprise me. It also wouldn’t shock me if Google is seeing a larger percentage of YouTube users blocking advertising, as is the case all across the web, as the quantity of advertising rises while quality takes a nosedive. YouTube video creators are having to get, well, creative to seek alternate revenue beyond basic AdSense accounts, as sponsored videos are now constant across the platform and more channels put new videos behind paywalls on YouTube itself or via other platforms like Patreon. YouTube is attacking the issue from other angles as well. Tech-focused creators that show how to use third-party tools to block ads or download videos from the site (again, without paying the steep fees for YouTube Premium) are getting their videos taken down and their accounts flagged, for violation of the extremely vague policy around “harmful and dangerous content.” If I may editorialize a bit: Google, if you want more people to subscribe to YouTube Premium and remove advertising, you need to make it cheaper. Charging $14 per month just to get rid of ads is the same cost of a premium subscription from other sources where users can watch full movies and series. YouTube as a platform is a much lower bar and just doesn’t compete at that level. I’m not going to pay that much to get rid of ads, not when it doesn’t actually get rid of all the ads—those sponsored and subscriber-only videos are still all over the place—and the site is filling up with AI slop. “Premium Lite,” which neuters the offerings for mobile and music-focused users, doesn’t make the cut either. And to be clear, I have no problem paying for the stuff I watch. I already pay more than $15 a month to support the individual YouTube channels I enjoy, like Second Wind, Drawfee, and several tech podcasts. But I do it via Patreon because sending that money through YouTube feels gross. If Google wants people to pay up, it needs to lower the price enough so that it’s no longer worth the hassle of blocking them. It’s a lesson that the music, movie, and game industries learned a long time ago as they fought the initial wave of internet piracy… and now seem to be forgetting again.

Published June 14, 2025 10:00am EDT close Top lawmaker on cybersecurity panel talks threats to US agriculture Senate Armed Services Committee member Mike Rounds, R-S.D., speaks to Fox News Digital NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles! Your home address might be easier to find online than you think. A quick search of your name could turn up past and current locations, all thanks to people finder sites. These data broker sites quietly collect and publish personal details without your consent, making your privacy vulnerable with just a few clicks.Sign up for my FREE CyberGuy ReportGet my best tech tips, urgent security alerts, and exclusive deals delivered straight to your inbox. Plus, you’ll get instant access to my Ultimate Scam Survival Guide — free when you join. A woman searching for herself online. (Kurt "CyberGuy" Knutsson)How your address gets exposed online and who’s using itIf you’ve ever searched for your name and found personal details, like your address, on unfamiliar websites, you’re not alone. People finder platforms collect this information from public records and third-party data brokers, then publish and share it widely. They often link your address to other details such as phone numbers, email addresses and even relatives.11 EASY WAYS TO PROTECT YOUR ONLINE PRIVACY IN 2025While this data may already be public in various places, these sites make it far easier to access and monetize it at scale. In one recent breach, more than 183 million login credentials were exposed through an unsecured database. Many of these records were linked to physical addresses, raising concerns about how multiple sources of personal data can be combined and exploited.Although people finder sites claim to help reconnect friends or locate lost contacts, they also make sensitive personal information available to anyone willing to pay. This includes scammers, spammers and identity thieves who use it for fraud, harassment, and targeted scams. A woman searching for herself online. (Kurt "CyberGuy" Knutsson)How do people search sites get your home address?First, let’s define two sources of information; public and private databases that people search sites use to get your detailed profile, including your home address. They run an automated search on these databases with key information about you and add your home address from the search results. 1. Public sourcesYour home address can appear in:Property deeds: When you buy or sell a home, your name and address become part of the public record.Voter registration: You need to list your address when voting.Court documents: Addresses appear in legal filings or lawsuits.Marriage and divorce records: These often include current or past addresses.Business licenses and professional registrations: If you own a business or hold a license, your address can be listed.WHAT IS ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (AI)?These records are legal to access, and people finder sites collect and repackage them into detailed personal profiles.2. Private sourcesOther sites buy your data from companies you’ve interacted with:Online purchases: When you buy something online, your address is recorded and can be sold to marketing companies.Subscriptions and memberships: Magazines, clubs and loyalty programs often share your information.Social media platforms: Your location or address details can be gathered indirectly from posts, photos or shared information.Mobile apps and websites: Some apps track your location.People finder sites buy this data from other data brokers and combine it with public records to build complete profiles that include address information. A woman searching for herself online. (Kurt "CyberGuy" Knutsson)What are the risks of having your address on people finder sites?The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) advises people to request the removal of their private data, including home addresses, from people search sites due to the associated risks of stalking, scamming and other crimes.People search sites are a goldmine for cybercriminals looking to target and profile potential victims as well as plan comprehensive cyberattacks. Losses due to targeted phishing attacks increased by 33% in 2024, according to the FBI. So, having your home address publicly accessible can lead to several risks:Stalking and harassment: Criminals can easily find your home address and threaten you.Identity theft: Scammers can use your address and other personal information to impersonate you or fraudulently open accounts.Unwanted contact: Marketers and scammers can use your address to send junk mail or phishing or brushing scams.Increased financial risks: Insurance companies or lenders can use publicly available address information to unfairly decide your rates or eligibility.Burglary and home invasion: Criminals can use your location to target your home when you’re away or vulnerable.How to protect your home addressThe good news is that you can take steps to reduce the risks and keep your address private. However, keep in mind that data brokers and people search sites can re-list your information after some time, so you might need to request data removal periodically.I recommend a few ways to delete your private information, including your home address, from such websites.1. Use personal data removal services: Data brokers can sell your home address and other personal data to multiple businesses and individuals, so the key is to act fast. If you’re looking for an easier way to protect your privacy, a data removal service can do the heavy lifting for you, automatically requesting data removal from brokers and tracking compliance.While no service can guarantee the complete removal of your data from the internet, a data removal service is really a smart choice. They aren’t cheap — and neither is your privacy. These services do all the work for you by actively monitoring and systematically erasing your personal information from hundreds of websites. It’s what gives me peace of mind and has proven to be the most effective way to erase your personal data from the internet. By limiting the information available, you reduce the risk of scammers cross-referencing data from breaches with information they might find on the dark web, making it harder for them to target you. Check out my top picks for data removal services here. Get a free scan to find out if your personal information is already out on the web2. Opt out manually : Use a free scanner provided by a data removal service to check which people search sites that list your address. Then, visit each of these websites and look for an opt-out procedure or form: keywords like "opt out," "delete my information," etc., point the way.Follow each site’s opt-out process carefully, and confirm they’ve removed all your personal info, otherwise, it may get relisted.3. Monitor your digital footprint: I recommend regularly searching online for your name to see if your location is publicly available. If only your social media profile pops up, there’s no need to worry. However, people finder sites tend to relist your private information, including your home address, after some time.4. Limit sharing your address online: Be careful about sharing your home address on social media, online forms and apps. Review privacy settings regularly, and only provide your address when absolutely necessary. Also, adjust your phone settings so that apps don’t track your location.Kurt’s key takeawaysYour home address is more vulnerable than you think. People finder sites aggregate data from public records and private sources to display your address online, often without your knowledge or consent. This can lead to serious privacy and safety risks. Taking proactive steps to protect your home address is essential. Do it manually or use a data removal tool for an easier process. By understanding how your location is collected and taking measures to remove your address from online sites, you can reclaim control over your personal data.CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APPHow do you feel about companies making your home address so easy to find? Let us know by writing us at Cyberguy.com/ContactFor more of my tech tips and security alerts, subscribe to my free CyberGuy Report Newsletter by heading to Cyberguy.com/NewsletterAsk Kurt a question or let us know what stories you'd like us to cover.Follow Kurt on his social channels:Answers to the most-asked CyberGuy questions:New from Kurt:Copyright 2025 CyberGuy.com. All rights reserved.   Kurt "CyberGuy" Knutsson is an award-winning tech journalist who has a deep love of technology, gear and gadgets that make life better with his contributions for Fox News & FOX Business beginning mornings on "FOX & Friends." Got a tech question? Get Kurt’s free CyberGuy Newsletter, share your voice, a story idea or comment at CyberGuy.com.

As President Donald Trump kicked off a birthday military parade on the streets of Washington, DC, what’s estimated as roughly 2,000 events were held across the US and beyond — protesting Trump and Elon Musk’s evisceration of government services, an unprecedented crackdown by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and countless other actions from the administration in its first five months. Held under the title “No Kings” (with, as you’ll see, one conspicuous exception), they’re the latest in several mass protests, following April’s Hands Off events and a wave of Tesla Takedown demonstrations in March.As The Verge’s Tina Nguyen went to downtown DC, we also sent reporters to No Kings demonstrations spanning the country, plus a “No Tyrants” event in the UK. How would they unfold after promises of “very heavy force” against protesters in the capital, after the deployment of thousands of military troops in a move a judge has bluntly called illegal, and after promises to “liberate” the city of Los Angeles from its “burdensome leadership” by local elected officials? What about the overnight killing of a Minnesota Democratic state representative and her husband, and the shooting of a Democratic state senator and his wife?The answer, at the events we attended, was fairly calmly — even against a backdrop of chaos.Downtown Los Angeles, CaliforniaAn inflatable baby Donald Trump, dressed in a diaper, hovered over throngs of people rallying outside of Los Angeles City Hall. Demonstrators outnumbered clumps of California National Guard members in fatigues posted up along sidewalks. “Go home to your families, we don’t need you in our streets,” one young person wearing a long braid down her back tells them while marching past. “Trump come catch these hands foo!” the back of her sign reads. I can’t see what the front says, but I can tell there’s an empty bag of Cheetos pasted to it.The big baby joins the march, floating through the streets of Downtown LA over demonstrators. A flatbed truck rolls ahead of it, the band — maybe LA’s own Ozomatli? — singing “We don’t like Trump” to the tune of “We Want The Funk.” Ducking inside Grand Central Market from the march, I talk to Puck and Twinkle Toes — two demonstrators in line for the public restrooms. Twinkle Toes tells me she’s part of an activist clown collective called Imp and Circumstance, wearing pink and white clown makeup and a striped pink and white bow wrapped around a loose hair bun atop her head. She’s here exercising her right to free speech, she says. Demonstrators in Los Angeles marched alongside an inflatable Donald Trump baby dressed in a diaper.“The more people that are out here, the more we know that this is not okay. That we don’t want an autocrat. We want democracy,” Puck tells me, adding that the Pride March in Hollywood last weekend was “nothing but love and sunshine” despite protests and burning driverless cars making headlines in downtown. “The news tries to make you think all of LA is rioting. It’s not.” Puck says.Back out on the streets, a young man quickly writes “Fuck ICE” on a black wall with white spray paint before a group of older demonstrators wearing floppy hats shushes him away — warning him that tagging will only attract more law enforcement.Further along, another older man with tufts of white hair sticking out under his Lakers cap walks stiffly and slowly along under the summer sun. A Mexican flag draped across his shoulders, he crosses Hope Street. A young man wearing a Nike cap makes his way over to ask if he wants water; the old man accepts a bottle and keeps walking without stopping. The march has looped around downtown, and is coming to an end back at City Hall. As I make my way to my bus stop, a line of police vehicles — sirens blasting — whizzes past me, back toward the crowd still gathering around City Hall.The Los Angeles Police Department issued a dispersal order for parts of downtown Los Angeles later in the afternoon, citing people “throwing rocks, bricks, bottles and other objects.” Law enforcement reportedly cleared crowds using gas, and the LAPD authorized the use of “less lethal” force.— Justine CalmaPortland, OregonFour different “No Kings” protests in the greater Portland area on Saturday drew massive crowds of tens of thousands across the city. Various activists, government officials, and representatives for politicians spoke at the rallies, which also featured music and live performances. (One advertised free drag shows.) Protesters of all ages came with dogs, strollers, flags, banners, and hand-made signs. At the downtown waterfront, some tourist boats appeared to still be departing, but the bike rental stand (which also sells ice cream) was closed for the day with a hand-lettered explanation reading “No crowns, no thrones, no kings” and “Americans against oligarchy.” Women appearing to be organizers passed out free American flags; many attendees came with their own American flags modified to fly upside down. Most protesters brought signs expressing a wide range of sentiments on the theme of “No Kings.” Some signs were surprisingly verbose (“If the founders wanted a unitary executive (a king) we’d all still be British”) while others were more succinct (“Sic semper tyrannis”). Others opted for simple images, such as a picture of a crown crossed out, or — less frequently — a guillotine. Image: Sarah JeongThe waterfront park area was filled with people from the shoreline to the curb of the nearest street, where protesters held up signs to passing cars that honked in approval. The honking of a passing fire truck sent the crowd into an uproarious cheer. Portland is about a thousand miles from the border with Mexico, but the flag of its distant neighbor nation has emerged as protest iconography in solidarity with Los Angeles. The rainbow pride flag was flown as often as the Mexican flag. Military veterans were scattered throughout the crowd, some identifying themselves as having seen action in conflicts spanning from Vietnam to Afghanistan. Emanuel, an Air Force veteran, told me that he had turned out in defense of the constitution and due process, saying, “Nobody has any rights if one person doesn’t have any rights.” Image: Sarah JeongAnger was directed at ICE and the mass deportations all throughout the day, in signage, in chants, and in rally speeches. The previous night, about 150 people protested at a local ICE facility — coincidentally located by the Tesla dealership — a mile south of downtown, near a highway exit. The ICE facility protests, which have been continuous for some days, have been steadily building up. A couple of “No Kings” signs were present on Friday. (The following day, a handful of “Chinga la migra” signs would show up at the “No Kings” protests). Demonstrators stood on the curb urging passing cars to “Honk if you hate fascists,” successfully eliciting car horns every few seconds, including some from a pristine white Tesla. Federal law enforcement in camo and helmets, their faces obscured, maced and shot at protesters with pepper balls, targeting them through the gates and sniping at them from the rooftop of the building. A handful of protesters — many wearing gas masks and respirators — formed phalanx formations in the driveway, wielding umbrellas and handmade shields. On Saturday, a speaker at one of the “No Kings” rallies advertised the occupation of the ICE facility, saying, “We’re a sanctuary city.” The crowd — replete with American flags both upside down and right side up — cheered. — Sarah JeongNew Port Richey, FloridaNearly every intersection on Pasco County’s State Road 54 looks the same: a cross-section of strip malls, each anchored by a Walmart or Target or Publix, surrounded by a mix of restaurants, nail salons, and gas stations. It’s not an environment that is particularly conducive to protests, but hundreds of people turned out in humid, 90-plus degree weather anyway. The overall size of the crowd is hard to determine, but it’s larger than I — and other attendees — anticipated, given the local demographics. (Trump won 61 percent of the vote in Pasco County in 2024.) New Port Richey, FL. Image: Gaby Del ValleEveryone is on the sidewalk; an organizer with a megaphone tells people to use crosswalks if they’re going to attempt to brave the six-lane highway. Two days earlier, Governor Ron DeSantis said Floridians could legally run over protesters on the street if they feel “threatened.” New Port Richey, FL. Image: Gaby Del ValleSo far, most drivers seem friendly. There are lots of supportive honks. One woman rolls down her window and thanks the protesters. “I love you! I wish I could be with you, but I have to work today!” she yells as she drives away. Not everyone is amenable. A man in a MAGA hat marches through the crowd waving a “thin green line” flag and yelling “long live the king!” as people in the crowd call him a traitor. A pickup truck drives by blasting “Ice Ice Baby,” waving another pro-law enforcement flag. The protesters have flags, too: American flags large and small, some upside down; Mexican; Ukrainian; Palestinian; Canadian; different configurations of pride and trans flags. Their signs, like their flags, illustrate their diverse reasons for attending: opposition to Trump’s “big beautiful” funding bill, DOGE’s budget cuts, and ICE arrests; support for immigrants, government workers, and Palestinians. One woman wears an inflatable chicken suit. Her friend pulls an effigy of Trump — dressed to look both like an eighteenth-century monarch, a taco, and a chicken — alongside her.New Port Richey, FL. Image: Gaby Del ValleMost of the demonstrators are on the older side, but there are people of all ages in attendance. “I thought it was going to be maybe 20 people with a couple of signs,” Abby, 24, says, adding that she’s pleasantly surprised at both the turnout and the fact that most of the protesters are of retirement age. Abe, 20, tells me this is his first protest. Holding a sign that says “ICE = GESTAPO,” he tells me he came out to support a friend who is Mexican. Three teenagers walk by with signs expressing support for immigrants: “While Trump destroys America, we built it.” “Trump: 3 felonies. My parents: 0.” As I drive away, I notice nine counter-protesters off to the side, around the corner from the main event. They wave their own flags, but the demonstrators seemingly pay them no mind.— Gaby Del ValleHistoric Filipinotown, Los AngelesWearing a camo baseball cap — “Desert Storm Veteran” emblazoned on the front — Joe Arciaga greets a crowd of about 100 people in Los Angeles’ Historic Filipinotown around 9:00AM.“Good morning everyone, are you ready for some beautiful trouble?” Arciaga says into the megaphone, an American flag bandana wrapped around his wrist. The faces of Filipino labor leaders Philip Vera Cruz and Larry Itliong, who organized farm workers alongside Cesar Chavez, peer over his shoulders from a mural that lines the length of Unidad Park where Arciaga and a group called Lakas Collective helped organize this neighborhood No Kings rally. “I’m a Desert Storm veteran, and I’m a father of three and a grandfather of three, and I want to work for a future where democracy is upheld, due process, civil rights, the preservation of the rule of law — That’s all I want. I’m not a billionaire, I’m just a regular Joe, right?”, he tells The Verge.Joe Arciaga speaks to people at a rally in Historic Filipinotown, Los Angeles. Image: Justine Calma“I am mad as hell,” he says, when I ask him about the Army 250th anniversary parade Donald Trump has organized in Washington, DC coinciding with the president’s birthday. “The guy does not deserve to be honored, he’s a draft dodger, right?” Arciaga says. He’s “livid” that the President and DOGE have fired veterans working for federal agencies and slashed VA staff.Arciaga organizes the crowd into two lines that file out of the park to stand along Beverly Blvd., one of the main drags through LA. Arciaga has deputized a handful of attendees with security or medical experience with whistles to serve as “marshals” tasked with flagging and de-escalating any potentially risky situation that might arise. Johneric Concordia, one of the co-founders of the popular The Park’s Finest barbecue joint in the neighborhood, is MCing out on Beverly Blvd. He and Arciaga direct people onto the sidewalks and off the asphalt as honking cars zip by. In between chants of “No hate! No fear! Immigrants are welcome here!” and rap songs from LA artist Bambu that Concordia plays from a speaker, Concordia hypes up the organizers. “Who’s cool? Joe’s cool?” He spits into the microphone connected to his speaker. “Who’s streets? Our streets!” the crowd cheers. An hour later, a man sitting at a red light in a black Prius rolls down his window. “Go home!” he yells from the intersection. “Take your Mexican flag and go home!”The crowd mostly ignores him. One attendee on the corner holds up his “No Kings” sign to the Prius without turning his head to look at him. A few minutes later, a jogger in a blue t-shirt raises his fist as he passes the crowd. “Fuck yeah guys,” he says to cheers.By 10AM, the neighborhood event is coming to a close. Demonstrators start to trickle away, some fanning out to other rallies planned across LA today. Concordia is heading out too, microphone and speaker still in hand, “If you’re headed to downtown, watch out for suspicious crew cuts!” — Justine CalmaSan Francisco, California1/10Most of the crowd trickled out after 2pm, which was the scheduled end time of the protest, but hundreds stayed in the area. Image: Vjeran PavicLondon, UKLondon’s protest was a little different than most: it was almost entirely bereft of “No Kings” signs, thanks to the fact that about two miles away much larger crowds were gathered to celebrate the official birthday of one King Charles III. “We don’t have anything against King Charles,” Alyssa, a member of organizers Indivisible London, told me. And so, “out of respect for our host country as immigrants,” they instead set up shop in front of the US embassy with a tweaked message: “No kings, no crowns” became “no tyrants, no clowns.” London, UK. Image: Dominic PrestonOf the hundreds gathered, not everyone got the memo, with a few painted signs decrying kings and crowns regardless, and one brave Brit brandishing a bit of cardboard with a simple message: “Our king is better than yours!”London, UK. Image: Dominic PrestonStill, most of the crowd were on board, with red noses, clown suits, and Pennywise masks dotted throughout, plus costumes ranging from tacos to Roman emperors. “I think tyrants is the better word, and that’s why I dressed up as Caesar, because he was the original,” says Anna, a Long Island native who’s lived in London for three years. “Nobody likes a tyrant. Nobody. And they don’t do well, historically, but they destroy a lot.”For 90 minutes or so the crowd — predominantly American, judging by the accents around me — leaned into the circus theme. Speakers shared the stage with performers, from a comic singalong of anti-Trump protest songs to a protracted pantomime in which a woman in a banana costume exhorted the crowd to pelt a Donald Trump impersonator with fresh peels. London, UK. Image: Dominic PrestonDuring a break in festivities, Alyssa told the crowd, “The most threatening sound to an oligarch is laughter.”— Dominic PrestonProspect Park, Brooklyn, New YorkThe No Kings protest at Brooklyn’s Grand Army Plaza was a calmer affair. Instead of gathering under the picturesque memorial arch, protesters were largely sequestered to a corner right outside Prospect Park, with some streets blocked off by police. The weekly farmers market was in full swing, meaning people cradling bundles of rhubarb were swerving in and out of protest signs that read things like, “Hating Donald Trump is Brat” and “Is it time to get out the pitch forks?” Like during the Hands Off protest in April, New York got rain on Saturday.Prospect Park, Brooklyn. Image: Mia SatoThe area where protesters were gathered made it difficult to count the crowd, but there were hundreds — perhaps a few thousand — people that streamed in and out. At one point, some protesters began marching down the street alongside Prospect Park, while others stayed at Grand Army Plaza to chant, cheer, and hold signs up at oncoming vehicles. With its proximity to the public library, the park, and densely populated neighborhoods, the massive intersection is a high-foot traffic area. Cars blared their horns as they passed, American flags waving in the chilly afternoon breeze.Jane, a Brooklyn resident who stood on the curb opposite the protesters, said she isn’t typically someone who comes out to actions like this: before the No Kings event, she had only ever been to one protest, the Women’s March. (Jane asked that The Verge use her first name only.) Prospect Park, Brooklyn. Image: Mia Sato“I’m deeply concerned about our country,” Jane said, pausing as a long stream of trucks and cars honked continuously in support of the protesters in the background. “I think Trump is behaving as an authoritarian. We’ve seen in Russia, in Hungary, in Hong Kong, that the slide from freedom to not freedom is very fast and very quick if people do not make their voices heard,” Jane said. “I’m concerned that that’s what’s happening in the United States.” Jane also cited cuts to Medicaid and funding for academic research as well as tariffs as being “unacceptable.”Prospect Park, Brooklyn. Image: Mia SatoThe event was peaceful — there were lots of kids present — and people were in good spirits despite the rain. Protest signs ran the gamut from general anti-Trump slogans (“I trust light tampons more than this administration”) to New York City-specific causes like “Andrew Cuomo can’t read” (there is a contenious mayoral election this month). One sign read, “Fix your hearts or die,” an iconic line from the late director, David Lynch’s, Twin Peaks: The Return. And of course, amid nationwide immigration raids that have been escalated by the involvement of the federal government, ICE was top of mind: one sign simply read, “Melt ICE,” and another protester held a large “NO ICE IN NYC” sign. Though it was smaller and more contained than other events, the protest didn’t lack conviction: attendees of all ages stood in the cold rain, chanting and blowing into vuvuzela, banging the lids of pots and pans. At one point a man stood on the median on the street, leading the group in chants of “No justice, no peace.” Cars laid on the horn as they drove by.— Mia SatoAkron, OhioIt’s been raining pretty hard the last few days in Akron, OH, so much that I didn’t think there’d be a large turnout for our chapter of the No Kings protest. But I was emphatically proven wrong as the crowds I saw dwarfed the Tesla Takedown protests last month. Officially, the protest was to take place in front of the John F. Seiberling Federal Building on Main Street in Downtown Akron. But the concentration of people spilled over from that small space down Main Street and up Market Street. All told, though there were no official counts, I estimate somewhere between 500 to 900 people in this blue enclave in Northeast Ohio.The mood was exuberant, buoyed by supporters who honked their horns as they passed. The chorus of horns was nonstop, and when a sanitation truck honked as it went by, cheers got louder. The chants the crowds were singing took on a local flare. Ohio is the home of the Ohio State Buckeyes and anywhere you go, shout “O-H” and you’ll invariably get an “I-O” response. The crowds used that convention to make their own chant, “OH-IO, Donald Trump has got to go.”There was no police presence here and the crowd was very good at policing itself. Ostensibly out of concern for the incidents where people have rammed their cars into protestor crowds, the people here have taken up crossing guard duties, aiding folks who wish to cross Main or Market Streets. Toward the end of my time at the protest, I saw an older gentleman wearing Kent State gear and holding a sign that read, “Remember another time the National Guard was called in?” His sign featured a drawing of the famous photo from the event in which four Kent State students during a protest of the Vietnam War were killed by National Guard troops. I caught up with him to ask him some questions and he told me his name was Chuck Ayers, a professional cartoonist, and was present at the shooting. Akron, OH. Image: Ash Parrish“When I saw the National Guard in front of the federal building in LA,” he told me, “It was just another flashback.”He did not tell me this at the time, but Ayers is a nationally recognized cartoonist, noted for co-creating the comic strip Crankshaft. He’s lived in Ohio his entire life and of course, drew that sign himself. As he was telling me about how seeing news of the National Guard being deployed in LA, I could see him strain to hold back his emotions. He said it still hurts to see this 55 years later, but that he was heartened to see so many people standing here in community and solidarity. He also said that given his pain and trauma he almost didn’t come. When I asked why he showed up when it so obviously causes him pain he said simply, “Because I have to.”— Ash ParrishOneonta, New YorkOn a northward drive to Oneonta — population roughly 15,000, the largest city in New York’s mainly rural Otsego County — one of the most prominent landmarks is a sprawling barn splashed in huge, painted block letters with TRUMP 2024. (The final digits have been faithfully updated every election since 2016.) It’s Trump country, but not uniformly Trumpy country, as evidenced by what I estimated as a hundreds-strong crowd gathered in a field just below Main Street that came together with a friendly county-fair atmosphere. Kids sat on their parents’ shoulders; American flags fluttered next to signs with slogans like SHADE NEVER MADE ANYONE LESS GAY, and attendees grumbled persistently about the event’s feeble sound system, set up on the bed of a pickup truck. It was the kind of conspicuously patriotic, far-from-urban protest that the Trump administration has all but insisted doesn’t exist.Image: Adi RobertsonBeyond a general condemnation of Trump, protest signs repped the same issues being denounced across the country. The wars in Gaza and Ukraine made an appearance, as did Elon Musk and Tesla. A couple of people called out funding cuts for organizations like NPR, one neatly lettered sign reminded us that WEATHER FORECASTING SAVES LIVES, another warned “Keep your nasty little hands off Social Security,” and a lot — unsurprisingly, given the past week’s events — attacked mass deportations and ICE. An attendee who identified himself as Bill, standing behind a placard that blocked most of him from sight, laid out his anger at the administration’s gutting of the Environmental Protection Agency. “I think if it was not for protests, there would be no change,” he told me.The event itself, supported by a coalition including the local chapter of Indivisible, highlighted topics like reproductive justice and LGBTQ rights alongside issues for groups often stereotyped as Republican blocs — there was a speech about Department of Veterans Affairs cuts and a representative from the local Office for the Aging (whose words were mostly lost to the sound system’s whims). Rules for a march around the modest downtown were laid out: no blocking pedestrians or vehicles, and for the sake of families doing weekend shopping, watch the language. “Fuck!” one person yelled indistinctly from the audience. “No, no,” the event’s emcee chided gently. The philosophy, as she put it, was one of persuasion. “We want to build the resistance, not make people angry at us.”Image: Adi RobertsonBut even in a place that will almost certainly never see a National Guard deployment or the ire of a Truth Social post, the Trump administration’s brutal deportation program had just hit close to home. Only hours before the protest commenced, ICE agents were recorded handcuffing a man and removing him in an unmarked black car — detaining what was reportedly a legal resident seeking asylum from Venezuela. The mayor of Oneonta, Mark Drnek, relayed the news to the crowd. “ICE! We see you!” boomed Drnek from the truckbed. “We recognize you for what you are, and we understand, and we reject your vile purpose.”The crowd cheered furiously. The stars and stripes waved.- Adi RobertsonSee More: Policy

Meet Martha Swope, the Legendary Broadway Photographer Who Captured Iconic Moments From Hundreds of Productions and Rehearsals She spent nearly 40 years taking theater and dance pictures, providing glimpses behind the scenes and creating images that the public couldn’t otherwise access Stephanie Rudig - Freelance Writer June 11, 2025 Photographer Martha Swope sitting on a floor covered with prints of her photos in 1987 Andrea Legge / © NYPL Martha Swope wanted to be a dancer. She moved from her home state of Texas to New York to attend the School of American Ballet, hoping to start a career in dance. Swope also happened to be an amateur photographer. So, in 1957, a fellow classmate invited her to bring her camera and document rehearsals for a little theater show he was working on. The classmate was director and choreographer Jerome Robbins, and the show was West Side Story. One of those rehearsal shots ended up in Life magazine, and Swope quickly started getting professional bookings. It’s notoriously tough to make it on Broadway, but through photography, Swope carved out a career capturing theater and dance. Over the course of nearly four decades, she photographed hundreds more rehearsals, productions and promotional studio shots. Unidentified male chorus members dancing during rehearsals for musical West Side Story in 1957 Martha Swope / © NYPL At a time when live performances were not often or easily captured, Swope’s photographs caught the animated moments and distilled the essence of a show into a single image: André De Shields clad in a jumpsuit as the title character in The Wiz, Patti LuPone with her arms raised overhead in Evita, the cast of Cats leaping in feline formations, a close-up of a forlorn Sheryl Lee Ralph in Dreamgirls and the row of dancers obscuring their faces with their headshots in A Chorus Line were all captured by Swope’s camera. She was also the house photographer for the New York City Ballet and the Martha Graham Dance Company and photographed other major dance companies such as the Ailey School. Her vision of the stage became fairly ubiquitous, with Playbill reporting that in the late 1970s, two-thirds of Broadway productions were photographed by Swope, meaning her work dominated theater and dance coverage. Carol Rosegg was early in her photography career when she heard that Swope was looking for an assistant. “I didn't frankly even know who she was,” Rosegg says. “Then the press agent who told me said, ‘Pick up any New York Times and you’ll find out.’” Swope’s background as a dancer likely equipped her to press the shutter at the exact right moment to capture movement, and to know when everyone on stage was precisely posed. She taught herself photography and early on used a Brownie camera, a simple box model made by Kodak. “She was what she described as ‘a dancer with a Brownie,’” says Barbara Stratyner, a historian of the performing arts who curated exhibitions of Swope’s work at the New York Public Library. An ensemble of dancers in rehearsal for the stage production Cats in 1982 Martha Swope / © NYPL “Dance was her first love,” Rosegg says. “She knew everything about dance. She would never use a photo of a dancer whose foot was wrong; the feet had to be perfect.” According to Rosegg, once the photo subjects knew she was shooting, “the anxiety level came down a little bit.” They knew that they’d look good in the resulting photos, and they likely trusted her intuition as a fellow dancer. Swope moved with the bearing of a dancer and often stood with her feet in ballet’s fourth position while she shot. She continued to take dance classes throughout her life, including at the prestigious Martha Graham School. Stratyner says, “As Graham got older, [Swope] was, I think, the only person who was allowed to photograph rehearsals, because Graham didn’t want rehearsals shown.” Photographic technology and the theater and dance landscapes evolved greatly over the course of Swope’s career. Rosegg points out that at the start of her own career, cameras didn’t even automatically advance the film after each shot. She explains the delicate nature of working with film, saying, “When you were shooting film, you actually had to compose, because you had 35 shots and then you had to change your film.” Swope also worked during a period of changing over from all black-and-white photos to a mixture of black-and-white and color photography. Rosegg notes that simultaneously, Swope would shoot black-and-white, and she herself would shoot color. Looking at Swope’s portfolio is also an examination of increasingly crisp photo production. Advances in photography made shooting in the dark or capturing subjects under blinding stage lights easier, and they allowed for better zooming in from afar. Martha Graham rehearses dancer Takako Asakawa and others in Heretic, a dance work choreographed by Graham, in 1986 Martha Swope / © NYPL It’s much more common nowadays to get a look behind the curtain of theater productions via social media. “The theater photographers of today need to supply so much content,” Rosegg says. “We didn’t have any of that, and getting to go backstage was kind of a big deal.” Photographers coming to document a rehearsal once might have been seen as an intrusion, but now, as Rosegg puts it, “everybody is desperate for you to come, and if you’re not there, they’re shooting it on their iPhone.” Even with exclusive behind-the-scenes access to the hottest tickets in town and the biggest stars of the day, Swope remained unpretentious. She lived and worked in a brownstone with her apartment above her studio, where the film was developed in a closet and the bathroom served as a darkroom. Rosegg recalls that a phone sat in the darkroom so they could be reached while printing, and she would be amazed at the big-name producers and theater glitterati who rang in while she was making prints in an unventilated space. From left to right: Paul Winfield, Ruby Dee, Marsha Jackson and Denzel Washington in the stage production Checkmates in 1988 Martha Swope / © NYPL Swope’s approachability extended to how she chose to preserve her work. She originally sold her body of work to Time Life, and, according to Stratyner, she was unhappy with the way the photos became relatively inaccessible. She took back the rights to her collection and donated it to the New York Public Library, where many photos can be accessed by researchers in person, and the entire array of photos is available online to the public in the Digital Collections. Searching “Martha Swope” yields over 50,000 items from more than 800 productions, featuring a huge variety of figures, from a white-suited John Travolta busting a disco move in Saturday Night Fever to Andrew Lloyd Webber with Nancy Reagan at a performance of Phantom of the Opera. Swope’s extensive career was recognized in 2004 with a special Tony Award, a Tony Honors for Excellence in Theater, which are given intermittently to notable figures in theater who operate outside of traditional awards categories. She also received a lifetime achievement award from the League of Professional Theater Women in 2007. Though she retired in 1994 and died in 2017, her work still reverberates through dance and Broadway history today. For decades, she captured the fleeting moments of theater that would otherwise never be seen by the public. And her passion was clear and straightforward. As she once told an interviewer: “I’m not interested in what’s going on on my side of the camera. I’m interested in what’s happening on the other side.” Get the latest Travel & Culture stories in your inbox.

As AI faces court challenges from Disney and Universal, legal battles are shaping the industry's future | Opinion Silicon advances and design innovations do still push us forward – but the future landscape of the industry is also being sculpted in courtrooms and parliaments Image credit: Disney / Epic Games Opinion by Rob Fahey Contributing Editor Published on June 13, 2025 In some regards, the past couple of weeks have felt rather reassuring. We've just seen a hugely successful launch for a new Nintendo console, replete with long queues for midnight sales events. Over the next few days, the various summer events and showcases that have sprouted amongst the scattered bones of E3 generated waves of interest and hype for a host of new games. It all feels like old times. It's enough to make you imagine that while change is the only constant, at least it's we're facing change that's fairly well understood, change in the form of faster, cheaper silicon, or bigger, more ambitious games. If only the winds that blow through this industry all came from such well-defined points on the compass. Nestled in amongst the week's headlines, though, was something that's likely to have profound but much harder to understand impacts on this industry and many others over the coming years – a lawsuit being brought by Disney and NBC Universal against Midjourney, operators of the eponymous generative AI image creation tool. In some regards, the lawsuit looks fairly straightforward; the arguments made and considered in reaching its outcome, though, may have a profound impact on both the ability of creatives and media companies (including game studios and publishers) to protect their IP rights from a very new kind of threat, and the ways in which a promising but highly controversial and risky new set of development and creative tools can be used commercially. A more likely tack on Midjourney's side will be the argument that they are not responsible for what their customers create with the tool I say the lawsuit looks straightforward from some angles, but honestly overall it looks fairly open and shut – the media giants accuse Midjourney of replicating their copyrighted characters and material, and of essentially building a machine for churning out limitless copyright violations. The evidence submitted includes screenshot after screenshot of Midjourney generating pages of images of famous copyrighted and trademarked characters ranging from Yoda to Homer Simpson, so "no we didn't" isn't going to be much of a defence strategy here. A more likely tack on Midjourney's side will be the argument that they are not responsible for what their customers create with the tool – you don't sue the manufacturers of oil paints or canvases when artists use them to paint something copyright-infringing, nor does Microsoft get sued when someone writes something libellous in Word, and Midjourney may try to argue that their software belongs in that tool category, with users alone being ultimately responsible for how they use them. If that argument prevails and survives appeals and challenges, it would be a major triumph for the nascent generative AI industry and a hugely damaging blow to IP holders and creatives, since it would seriously undermine their argument that AI companies shouldn't be able to include copyrighted material into training data sets without licensing or compensation. The reason Disney and NBCU are going after Midjourney specifically seems to be partially down to Midjourney being especially reticent to negotiate with them about licensing fees and prompt restrictions; other generative AI firms have started talking, at least, about paying for content licenses for training data, and have imposed various limitations on their software to prevent the most egregious and obvious forms of copyright violation (at least for famous characters belonging to rich companies; if you're an individual or a smaller company, it's entirely the Wild West out there as regards your IP rights). In the process, though, they're essentially risking a court showdown over a set of not-quite-clear legal questions at the heart of this dispute, and if Midjourney were to prevail in that argument, other AI companies would likely back off from engaging with IP holders on this topic. To be clear, though, it seems highly unlikely that Midjourney will win that argument, at least not in the medium to long term. Yet depending on how this case moves forward, losing the argument could have equally dramatic consequences – especially if the courts find themselves compelled to consider the question of how, exactly, a generative AI system reproduces a copyrighted character with such precision without storing copyright-infringing data in some manner. The 2020s are turning out to be the decade in which many key regulatory issues come to a head all at once AI advocates have been trying to handwave around this notion from the outset, but at some point a court is going to have to sit down and confront the fact that the precision with which these systems can replicate copyrighted characters, scenes, and other materials requires that they must have stored that infringing material in some form. That it's stored as a scattered mesh of probabilities across the vertices of a high-dimensional vector array, rather than a straightforward, monolithic media file, is clearly important but may ultimately be considered moot. If the data is in the system and can be replicated on request, how that differs from Napster or The Pirate Bay is arguably just a matter of technical obfuscation. Not having to defend that technical argument in court thus far has been a huge boon to the generative AI field; if it is knocked over in that venue, it will have knock-on effects on every company in the sector and on every business that uses their products. Nobody can be quite sure which of the various rocks and pebbles being kicked on this slope is going to set off the landslide, but there seems to be an increasing consensus that a legal and regulatory reckoning is coming for generative AI. Consequently, a lot of what's happening in that market right now has the feel of companies desperately trying to establish products and lock in revenue streams before that happens, because it'll be harder to regulate a technology that's genuinely integrated into the world's economic systems than it is to impose limits on one that's currently only clocking up relatively paltry sales and revenues. Keeping an eye on this is crucial for any industry that's started experimenting with AI in its workflows – none more than a creative industry like video games, where various forms of AI usage have been posited, although the enthusiasm and buzz so far massively outweighs any tangible benefits from the technology. Regardless of what happens in legal and regulatory contexts, AI is already a double-edged sword for any creative industry. Used judiciously, it might help to speed up development processes and reduce overheads. Applied in a slapdash or thoughtless manner, it can and will end up wreaking havoc on development timelines, filling up storefronts with endless waves of vaguely-copyright-infringing slop, and potentially make creative firms, from the industry's biggest companies to its smallest indie developers, into victims of impossibly large-scale copyright infringement rather than beneficiaries of a new wave of technology-fuelled productivity. The legal threat now hanging over the sector isn't new, merely amplified. We've known for a long time that AI generated artwork, code, and text has significant problems from the perspective of intellectual property rights (you can infringe someone else's copyright with it, but generally can't impose your own copyright on its creations – opening careless companies up to a risk of having key assets in their game being technically public domain and impossible to protect). Even if you're not using AI yourself, however – even if you're vehemently opposed to it on moral and ethical grounds (which is entirely valid given the highly dubious land-grab these companies have done for their training data), the Midjourney judgement and its fallout may well impact the creative work you produce yourself and how it ends up being used and abused by these products in future. This all has huge ramifications for the games business and will shape everything from how games are created to how IP can be protected for many years to come – a wind of change that's very different and vastly more unpredictable than those we're accustomed to. It's a reminder of just how much of the industry's future is currently being shaped not in development studios and semiconductor labs, but rather in courtrooms and parliamentary committees. The ways in which generative AI can be used and how copyright can persist in the face of it will be fundamentally shaped in courts and parliaments, but it's far from the only crucially important topic being hashed out in those venues. The ongoing legal turmoil over the opening up of mobile app ecosystems, too, will have huge impacts on the games industry. Meanwhile, the debates over loot boxes, gambling, and various consumer protection aspects related to free-to-play models continue to rumble on in the background. Because the industry moves fast while governments move slow, it's easy to forget that that's still an active topic for as far as governments are concerned, and hammers may come down at any time. Regulation by governments, whether through the passage of new legislation or the interpretation of existing laws in the courts, has always loomed in the background of any major industry, especially one with strong cultural relevance. The games industry is no stranger to that being part of the background heartbeat of the business. The 2020s, however, are turning out to be the decade in which many key regulatory issues come to a head all at once, whether it's AI and copyright, app stores and walled gardens, or loot boxes and IAP-based business models. Rulings on those topics in various different global markets will create a complex new landscape that will shape the winds that blow through the business, and how things look in the 2030s and beyond will be fundamentally impacted by those decisions.

Microsoft offered up a fairly light Patch Tuesday release this month, with 68 patches to Microsoft Windows and Microsoft Office. There were no updates for Exchange or SQL server and just two minor patches for Microsoft Edge. That said, two zero-day vulnerabilities (CVE-2025-33073 and CVE-2025-33053) have led to a “Patch Now” recommendation for both Windows and Office. (Developers can follow their usual release cadence with updates to Microsoft .NET and Visual Studio.) To help navigate these changes, the team from Readiness has provided auseful  infographic detailing the risks involved when deploying the latest updates. (More information about recent Patch Tuesday releases is available here.) Known issues Microsoft released a limited number of known issues for June, with a product-focused issue and a very minor display concern: Microsoft Excel: This a rare product level entry in the “known issues” category — an advisory that “square brackets” or [] are not supported in Excel filenames. An error is generated, advising the user to remove the offending characters. Windows 10: There are reports of blurry or unclear CJK (Chinese, Japanese, Korean) text when displayed at 96 DPI (100% scaling) in Chromium-based browsers such as Microsoft Edge and Google Chrome. This is a limited resource issue, as the font resolution in Windows 10 does not fully match the high-level resolution of the Noto font. Microsoft recommends changing the display scaling to 125% or 150% to improve clarity. Major revisions and mitigations Microsoft might have won an award for the shortest time between releasing an update and a revision with: CVE-2025-33073: Windows SMB Client Elevation of Privilege. Microsoft worked to address a vulnerability where improper access control in Windows SMB allows an attacker to elevate privileges over a network. This patch was revised on the same day as its initial release (and has been revised again for documentation purposes). Windows lifecycle and enforcement updates Microsoft did not release any enforcement updates for June. Each month, the Readiness team analyzes Microsoft’s latest updates and provides technically sound, actionable testing plans. While June’s release includes no stated functional changes, many foundational components across authentication, storage, networking, and user experience have been updated. For this testing guide, we grouped Microsoft’s updates by Windows feature and then accompanied the section with prescriptive test actions and rationale to help prioritize enterprise efforts. Core OS and UI compatibility Microsoft updated several core kernel drivers affecting Windows as a whole. This is a low-level system change and carries a high risk of compatibility and system issues. In addition, core Microsoft print libraries have been included in the update, requiring additional print testing in addition to the following recommendations: Run print operations from 32-bit applications on 64-bit Windows environments. Use different print drivers and configurations (e.g., local, networked). Observe printing from older productivity apps and virtual environments. Remote desktop and network connectivity This update could impact the reliability of remote access while broken DHCP-to-DNS integration can block device onboarding, and NAT misbehavior disrupts VPNs or site-to-site routing configurations. We recommend the following tests be performed: Create and reconnect Remote Desktop (RDP) sessions under varying network conditions. Confirm that DHCP-assigned IP addresses are correctly registered with DNS in AD-integrated environments. Test modifying NAT and routing settings in RRAS configurations and ensure that changes persist across reboots. Filesystem, SMB and storage Updates to the core Windows storage libraries affect nearly every command related to Microsoft Storage Spaces. A minor misalignment here can result in degraded clusters, orphaned volumes, or data loss in a failover scenario. These are high-priority components in modern data center and hybrid cloud infrastructure, with the following storage-related testing recommendations: Access file shares using server names, FQDNs, and IP addresses. Enable and validate encrypted and compressed file-share operations between clients and servers. Run tests that create, open, and read from system log files using various file and storage configurations. Validate core cluster storage management tasks, including creating and managing storage pools, tiers, and volumes. Test disk addition/removal, failover behaviors, and resiliency settings. Run system-level storage diagnostics across active and passive nodes in the cluster. Windows installer and recovery Microsoft delivered another update to the Windows Installer (MSI) application infrastructure. Broken or regressed Installer package MSI handling disrupts app deployment pipelines while putting core business applications at risk. We suggest the following tests for the latest changes to MSI Installer, Windows Recovery and Microsoft’s Virtualization Based Security (VBS): Perform installation, repair, and uninstallation of MSI Installer packages using standard enterprise deployment tools (e.g. Intune). Validate restore point behavior for points older than 60 days under varying virtualization-based security (VBS) settings. Check both client and server behaviors for allowed or blocked restores. We highly recommend prioritizing printer testing this month, then remote desktop deployment testing to ensure your core business applications install and uninstall as expected. Each month, we break down the update cycle into product families (as defined by Microsoft) with the following basic groupings:  Browsers (Microsoft IE and Edge); Microsoft Windows (both desktop and server); Microsoft Office; Microsoft Exchange and SQL Server;  Microsoft Developer Tools (Visual Studio and .NET); And Adobe (if you get this far). Browsers Microsoft delivered a very minor series of updates to Microsoft Edge. The  browser receives two Chrome patches (CVE-2025-5068 and CVE-2025-5419) where both updates are rated important. These low-profile changes can be added to your standard release calendar. Microsoft Windows Microsoft released five critical patches and (a smaller than usual) 40 patches rated important. This month the five critical Windows patches cover the following desktop and server vulnerabilities: Missing release of memory after effective lifetime in Windows Cryptographic Services (WCS) allows an unauthorized attacker to execute code over a network. Use after free in Windows Remote Desktop Services allows an unauthorized attacker to execute code over a network. Use after free in Windows KDC Proxy Service (KPSSVC) allows an unauthorized attacker to execute code over a network. Use of uninitialized resources in Windows Netlogon allows an unauthorized attacker to elevate privileges over a network. Unfortunately, CVE-2025-33073 has been reported as publicly disclosed while CVE-2025-33053 has been reported as exploited. Given these two zero-days, the Readiness recommends a “Patch Now” release schedule for your Windows updates. Microsoft Office Microsoft released five critical updates and a further 13 rated important for Office. The critical patches deal with memory related and “use after free” memory allocation issues affecting the entire platform. Due to the number and severity of these issues, we recommend a “Patch Now” schedule for Office for this Patch Tuesday release. Microsoft Exchange and SQL Server There are no updates for either Microsoft Exchange or SQL Server this month.  Developer tools There were only three low-level updates (product focused and rated important) released, affecting .NET and Visual Studio. Add these updates to your standard developer release schedule. Adobe (and 3rd party updates) Adobe has released (but Microsoft has not co-published) a single update to Adobe Acrobat (APSB25-57). There were two other non-Microsoft updated releases affecting the Chromium platform, which were covered in the Browser section above.

We may earn a commission from links on this page.After spending about a week with the Nintendo Switch 2, I have to admit that it’s a good console. It’s priced fairly for its sleek form factor and the performance it offers, and it sets Nintendo up to stay relevant while gaming graphics only continue to get more complex. And yet, for my own personal tastes, it’s still not my handheld of choice. Instead, I’ll be sticking to Valve’s Steam Deck, the first and still overall best handheld gaming PC, at least going by value for money. And if you don’t necessarily care about Nintendo’s exclusive games, there’s a good chance it might be the better option for you, too.The Steam Deck is cheaper than the Switch 2Out of the gate, the most obvious reason to get a Steam Deck over a Nintendo Switch 2 is price. Starting at $400 for a new model, it’s only modestly cheaper than the Switch 2’s $450, but that’s only part of the story. Valve also runs a certified refurbished program that offers used Decks with only cosmetic blemishes for as low as $279. Restocks are infrequent, since Valve is only able to sell as much as gets sent back to it, but when they do happen, it's a heck of a great deal.That said, there is one catch. The Steam Deck OLED, which offers a bigger, more colorful screen and a larger battery, is more expensive than the Switch 2, starting at $549. However, it’s maybe a bit unfair to compare the two, since the Switch 2 does not use an OLED screen and comes with less storage. If all you care about is the basics (I’m perfectly happy with my LCD model), the base Steam Deck is good enough—it’s got the same performance as the more recent one. And that performance, by the way, ended up being about on par with the Switch 2 in my testing, at least in Cyberpunk 2077 (one of my go-to benchmark games).The Steam Deck is more comfortable to hold than the Switch 2This one is a bit of a toss-up, depending on your preferences, although I think the Steam Deck takes a slight lead here. While the Nintendo Switch 2 aims for a completely flat and somewhat compact profile, the Steam Deck instead allows itself to stretch out, and even though it’s a little bigger and a little heavier for it, I ultimately think that makes it more comfortable.At 11.73 x 4.60 x 1.93 inches against the Switch 2’s 10.7 x 4.5 x 0.55 inches, and at 1.41 pounds against the Switch 2’s 1.18 pounds, I won’t deny that this will be a non-starter for some. But personally, I still feel like the Steam Deck comes out on top, and that’s thanks to its ergonomics.I’ve never been a big fan of Nintendo’s joy-con controllers, and while the Switch 2’s joy-con 2 controllers improve on the Switch 1’s with bigger buttons and sticks, as well as more room to hold onto them, they still pale in comparison next to the Steam Deck’s controls. Steam Deck in profile (above) vs. Switch 2 in profile (below) Credit: Michelle Ehrhardt On the Switch 2, there are no grips to wrap your fingers around. On the Steam Deck, there are. The triggers also flare out more, and because the console is wider, your hands can stretch out a bit, rather than choking up on the device. It can get a bit heavy to hold a Steam Deck after a while, but I still prefer this approach overall, and if you have a surface to rest the Steam Deck against (like an airplane tray table), weight is a non-issue.Plus, there are some extra bonuses that come with the additional space. The Steam Deck has large touchpads on either side of the device, plus four grip buttons on the back of it, giving you some extra inputs to play around with. Nice.It’s a bit less portable and a bit heavier, but for my adult hands, the Steam Deck is just better shaped to them.The Steam Deck has a bigger, cheaper library than the Switch 2This is the kicker. While there are cheap games that can run on the Switch 2 courtesy of backwards compatibility and third-party eShop titles, the big system draws (Nintendo-developed titles like Mario Kart World, for example) can get as pricey as $80. Not to say the Steam Deck doesn’t have expensive games as well, but on the whole, I think it’s easier to get cheap and free games on the Steam Deck than on the eShop.That’s because, being a handheld gaming PC, the Steam Deck can take advantage of the many sales and freebies PC gaming stores love to give out. These happen a bit more frequently on PC than on console, and that’s because there’s more competition on PC. Someone on PC could download games either from Steam or Epic, for instance, while someone on the Switch 2 can only download games from the Nintendo eShop.So, even sticking to just Steam, you’ll get access to regular weekend and mid-week sales, quarterly event sales, and developer or publisher highlight sales. That’s more sales events than you’ll usually find on the Nintendo eShop, and if you’re looking for cheaper first-party games, forget about it. Nintendo’s own games hardly ever go on sale, even years after release.But that’s just the beginning. Despite being named the Steam Deck, the device can actually run games from other stores, too. That’s thanks to an easily installed Linux program called Heroic Launcher, which is free and lets you download and play games from your Epic, GOG, and Amazon Prime Games accounts with just a few clicks. Credit: Heroic Games Launcher This is a game changer. Epic and Amazon Prime are both underdogs in the PC gaming space, and so to bolster their numbers, they both regularly give away free games. Epic in particular offers one free PC game every week, whereas if you’re a Twitch user, you might notice a decent but more infrequent amount of notifications allowing you to claim free Amazon Prime games. Some of these are big titles, too—it’s how I got Batman: Arkham Knight and Star Wars Battlefront II. With a simple install and a few months of waiting, you could have a Steam Deck filled to the brim with games that you didn’t even pay for. You just can’t do that on Nintendo.And then there’s the elephant in the room: your backlog. If you’re anything like me, you probably already have a Steam library that’s hundreds of games large. It was maybe even like this before the Switch 1 came out—regular sales have a tendency to build up the amount of games you own. By choosing the Steam Deck as your handheld, you’ll be able to play those games on the go, instantly giving you what might as well be a full library with no added cost to you. If you migrate over to the Nintendo Switch 2, you’re going to have to start with a fresh library, or at least a library that’s only as old as the Nintendo Switch 1.Basically, while the Switch 2’s hardware is only $50 more expensive than the Steam Deck, it’ll be easier to fill your Steam Deck up with high quality, inexpensive games than it would be on the Switch 2. If you don’t care about having access to Nintendo exclusive games, that’s a huge draw.TV Play is a mixed bagFinally, I want to acknowledge that the Steam Deck still isn’t necessarily a better option than the Switch 2 for everyone. That’s why I’m writing from a personal perspective here. Like all gaming PCs, it’ll take some fiddling to get some games to run, so the Switch 2 is definitely a smoother experience out of the box. It’s also got less battery life, from my testing. But the big point of departure is TV play.Playing your portable games on a TV on the Switch 2 is as simple as plugging it into its dock. With the Steam Deck, you have to buy a dock separately (the official one is $79), and even then, you have to connect your own controller to it and manually find suitable TV graphics settings for each game on its own. It’s not nearly as easy or flexible.And yet, for folks like me, I’m willing to say that even TV play is better. Or, depending on what type of PC gamer you are, monitor play.That’s because you’re not limited to playing your Steam Deck games on the Deck itself, dock or not. Instead, you can play on the Deck when you’re away from your home, and then swap over to your regular gaming PC when you’re back. Your Deck will upload your saves to the cloud automatically, and your PC will seamlessly download them. While not as intuitive as plugging your Switch 2 into its dock, the benefit here is that your non-portable play isn’t limited by the power of your portable device, whereas docked Switch 2 play is still held back by running on portable hardware.The tradeoff is that maintaining a dedicated gaming PC in addition to a Steam Deck is more expensive, but maybe more importantly, requires more tinkering (there are ways to build a cheap gaming PC, after all). And I think that’s the key point here. If you want a simple-to-use, pick-up-and-play handheld, the Switch 2 is a great choice for you. But if you’re like me, and you’re not afraid to download some launchers and occasionally dive into compatibility settings or swap between two devices, the Steam Deck might still be the best handheld gaming device for you, even three years later.

Best of Summer Game Fest 2025 trailers – Mortal Shell 2, Game Of Thrones and more GameCentral Published June 7, 2025 3:33am Updated June 7, 2025 7:01am The Resident Evil and friends show (YouTube) Watch all the most interesting trailers from the biggest summer preview event of the year, including Sonic Racing: CrossWorlds, Code Vein 2, and Wu-Tang: Rise Of The Deceiver. You never know what you’re going to get with Summer Game Fest, the would-be replacement for E3 hosted by The Games Awards creator Geoff Keighley. Some years there’s tons of big name reveals and some years it’s mostly just AA and indie titles. This is one of those years. That doesn’t mean there was nothing of interest, but the mic drop reveal at the end of the two hour long show was Resident Evil Requiem, and it was by far the biggest game to be featured. Despite being only a day after the Nintendo Switch 2 launch, and Nintendo registered as a partner, the only time the console was even mentioned was a brief ad for Cyberpunk 2077: Ultimate Edition. Although that does probably increase the chances of a Nintendo Direct later in the month. There were a few notable trends for the games at this year’s Summer Game Fest: a lot of Soulslike titles with dark grey visuals, a lot of anime games, and plenty of live service titles still trying their luck at hitting the big time. So, if the thought of that doesn’t appeal you may find the pickings relatively thin. Although there’s also Jurassic World Evolution 3 and the Deadpool VR game if you fancy something different. Mortal Shell 2 Expert, exclusive gaming analysis Sign up to the GameCentral newsletter for a unique take on the week in gaming, alongside the latest reviews and more. Delivered to your inbox every Saturday morning. The first annoucement was Mortal Shell 2, a sequel to the 2020 Dark Souls clone that is still one of our favourite Soulslikes not made by FromSoftware. Developed by a mere 30-man team (Keighley was keen to highlight that many of the games were by surprisingly small developers) the sequel seems to be going for a more overt horror atmosphere, while there was a lot more gun combat than usual for the genre. It’s out sometime in 2026. Death Stranding 2: On The Beach It’s never a surprise to see Hideo Kojima at a Geoff Keighley event but the cut scene he decided to show for Death Stranding 2 was not exactly the most enthralling. It featured Luca Marinelli as Neil and his real-life wife Alyssa Jung as therapist Lucy, arguing about the fact that he’s forgotten who she is. Neil is apparently the villain of the piece, and the one dressed up in Solid Snake cosplay in some of the previous images. The game itself is out in just a few weeks, on June 26. Sonic Racing: CrossWorlds Sega had a strange little dig at Mario Kart World during their reveal of Sonic’s latest kart racer, pointing out that it has cross-play… even though Mario Kart is obviously only on Nintendo formats. The game looked good, but the focus of the demonstration was crossover characters from other games, including Hatsune Miku, Ichiban Kasuga from Like A Dragon, Joker from Persona 5, and Steve from Minecraft. The game will be released on September 25 for every format imaginable. Code Vein 2 We’re really not sure the art style in this unexpected sequel to the 2019 Soulslike works very well, with its anime characters and realistic backdrops, but at least it’s something a bit different. The original didn’t seem quite successful enough to justify a follow-up, but the action looks good and at least it’s one Soulslike that’s not copying FromSoftware’s visuals as well as its gameplay. It’ll be released for Xbox Series X, PlayStation 5, and PC sometime next year. Game Of Thrones: War For Westeros It does seem madness that there’s never been a console action game based on Game Of Thrones. There still isn’t, but at least this real-time strategy game isn’t just some seedy mobile title. Unfortunately, the pre-rendered trailer never showed a hint of any gameplay, so there’s no clue as to what it’s actually like, but apparently it involves ‘ruthless free-for-all battles where trust is fleeting and power is everything’. It’s out next year and seems to be PC-only, which is a shame as it could have worked as a spiritual sequel to EA’s old Lord Of The Rings real-time strategies. Onimusha: Way Of The Sword It’s been a very busy week for Capcom this week, with Pragmata re-unveiled at the State of Play on Wednesday and Resident Evil Requiem being the big reveal at the end of Summer Game Fest. But we also got a new gameplay trailer for the reboot of Onimusha, which looks extremely pretty and continued the series’ tradition of not even trying to have anyone sound like they’re actually from Japan (like Resident Evil, the originals only had English voiceovers). There’s no release date yet, but it’s out next year on Xbox Series X/S, PlayStation 5, and PC. Felt That: Boxing One of the strangest reveals of the show was what seems to be a Muppet version of Punch-Out!!, with the potty-mouthed puppets taking part in what also probably counts as a homage to Rocky. The gameplay does seem almost identical to Nintendo’s old boxing game but hopefully there’s a bit more to it than that. The game doesn’t have a release date and is currently scheduled only for PC. ARC Raiders Expected to be the next big thing in online shooters, the only thing ARC Raiders has been missing is a release date, but it finally got that at Summer Game Fest. It’ll be out on October 30 for Xbox Series X/S, PlayStation 5, and PC, which is interesting because that’s right around the time you’d expect this year’s Call Of Duty to come out – and the new Battlefield, if EA launches it this year. ARC Raiders’ strong word of mouth gives it a head start though, which could make for an interesting autumn shootout. Out Of Words When we interviewed Jospeh Fares about Split Fiction, we asked him why he thought no one had ever tried to copy his games, despite their huge success. He didn’t know but finally another developer seems to have wondered the same thing and Out Of Words does look very reminiscent of It Takes Two in particular. The hand-crafted, stop motion visuals are neat though and it’s definitely one to watch, even if it doesn’t have a release date yet. Lego Voyagers Another game taking inspiration from Split Fiction, at least in the sense that it has a friend pass that means only one person has to own a copy of the game to play online co-op. It’s by the creators of the very good Lego Builder’s Journey and rather than being based on Lego licensed sets, or any other established toy line, it’s all about solving puzzles by building Lego structures. If it’s as good as Lego Builder’s Journey it’ll be doing very well indeed, although there’s no release date yet. Mixtape Between South Of Midnight and The Midnight Walk, and Out Of Words, stop motion animation Is suddenly very popular for video games. The art style in this new game from Annapurna was notably different though, and while we’re not entirely sure what’s going on in terms of the gameplay the 80s soundtrack sounds like it’ll be the best thing since GTA: Vice City. Acts Of Blood Made by just nine people in Indonesia, this very bloody looking beat ‘em-up looked extremely impressive, and also very reminiscent of the violence in Oldboy. We didn’t quite gather what was going on in terms of the story but we’re sure revenge has something to do with it, as you beat down hordes of goons and get a Mortal Kombat style view of an opponent’s skeleton, when you manage to put a big enough dent in it. It’ll be out on PC next summer. Scott Pilgrim EX We can’t say we’ve ever been fans of Scott Pilgrim, either the comics or the film, but the 2D graphics for this new scrolling beat ‘em-up look gorgeous. It’s clearly intended as follow-up to Ubisoft’s film tie-in from 2010, which was well received by many, and is by the same team behind Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Shredder’s Revenge and Marvel Cosmic Invasion (which was also at Summer Game Fest and announced Rocket Racoon and She-Hulk as characters). It’ll be out on current and last gen consoles and PC next year. Hitman: World of Assassination Although 007 First Light did get a quick name check on stage, developer and publisher IO Interactive instead spent their time talking about Agent 47 in MindsEye and Mads Mikkelsen in Hitman: World of Assassination (aka Hitman 3). He’ll be reprising the role of Le Chiffre as the latest elusive target in the game – a special character, usually played by a famous actor, that is only available to assassinate for 30 days, starting from today. That’s neat but it’s also interesting that it implied IO has a considerable amount of leeway with the Bond licence and what they can do with it. Lego Party! The other Lego game to be unveiled was an outrageously obvious clone of Mario Party, only with 300 different minifigures instead of the Mushroom Kingdom crew. These can be rearranged in trillions of different combinations, in order to compete for stars golden bricks and play 60 different mini-games. We’re big fans of Mario Party (and Lego) so if this manages to be as fun as Nintendo’s games then we’re all for it. It’ll be release for both consoles and PC this year. Blighted A new game from Drinkbox Studios, makers of Guacamelee! and Nobody Saves The World is immediately of interest but this Diablo-esque role-player looks a bit more serious and horror tinged than their previous games. It also seems to be channelling Hades creator Supergiant Games, none of which is a bad thing. Whether it’s a Metroidvania or not isn’t clear but at certainly points in the trailer it definitely seems to have co-op. It’s not certain which formats it’s coming to but it’s out on PC next year. Infinitesimals A lot of people are probably going to compare this to online survival game Grounded, but the plot makes it sound like a more serious version of Pikmin, with aliens visiting Earth and battling with both insects and some sort of mechanical robot menace, as you search for your lost crew. It’s out for consoles and PC next year and while there’s very little concrete information on the gameplay the visuals certainly look impressive. Wu-Tang: Rise Of The Deceiver Whether you care about the Wu-Tang Clan or not this had some of the nicest visuals of any game at the show. They seemed fairly obviously influenced by the Into The Spider-Verse movies, but that’s no bad thing, and we’re only surprised that hasn’t happened before. The idea of a Wu-Tan action role-playing game was leaked quite a while ago, where it was described as Diablo meets Hi-Fi Rush, which does seem to fit with what you see in the trailer. There’s no release date so far. Into The Unwell There were a lot of great looking games at the show, but this might have been our favourite, with its 40s style animation reminiscent of a 3D Cuphead. It’s a bit hard to tell exactly what’s going on with the story but you seem to be playing an alcohol abusing cartoon character who’s been tricked by the Devil into… taking part in a third person action roguelite, that also has three-player co-op. There’s no release date but if it looks as good as it plays it’ll be doing very well indeed. Stranger than Heaven The final reveal before Resident Evil Requiem was what was previously codenamed Project Century and while it looks like a Yakuza spin-off it’s not actually part of the franchise, even though it’s by the same developer. Sega didn’t explain much, but when the game was first introduced it was set in Japan in 1915 and yet this trailer is set in 1943 (i.e. in the middle of the Second World War). More Trending Given the codename that probably implies you’re playing in multiple time periods across the whole century. There was no mention of formats or a release date though, so it’s probably still quite a while away from release. Resident Evil Requiem was the biggest news of the night (YouTube) Email gamecentral@metro.co.uk, leave a comment below, follow us on Twitter. To submit Inbox letters and Reader’s Features more easily, without the need to send an email, just use our Submit Stuff page here. For more stories like this, check our Gaming page. GameCentral Sign up for exclusive analysis, latest releases, and bonus community content. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. Your information will be used in line with our Privacy Policy