Once again, Sam Altman wants to show you the future. The CEO of OpenAI is standing on a sparse stage in San Francisco, preparing to reveal his next move to an attentive crowd. “We needed some way for identifying, authenticating humans in the age of AGI,” Altman explains, referring to artificial general intelligence. “We wanted a way to make sure that humans stayed special and central.” The solution Altman came up with is looming behind him. It’s a white sphere about the size of a beach ball, with a camera at its center. The company that makes it, known as Tools for Humanity, calls this mysterious device the Orb. Stare into the heart of the plastic-and-silicon globe and it will map the unique furrows and ciliary zones of your iris. Seconds later, you’ll receive inviolable proof of your humanity: a 12,800-digit binary number, known as an iris code, sent to an app on your phone. At the same time, a packet of cryptocurrency called Worldcoin, worth approximately $42, will be transferred to your digital wallet—your reward for becoming a “verified human.” Altman co-founded Tools for Humanity in 2019 as part of a suite of companies he believed would reshape the world. Once the tech he was developing at OpenAI passed a certain level of intelligence, he reasoned, it would mark the end of one era on the Internet and the beginning of another, in which AI became so advanced, so human-like, that you would no longer be able to tell whether what you read, saw, or heard online came from a real person. When that happened, Altman imagined, we would need a new kind of online infrastructure: a human-verification layer for the Internet, to distinguish real people from the proliferating number of bots and AI “agents.”And so Tools for Humanity set out to build a global “proof-of-humanity” network. It aims to verify 50 million people by the end of 2025; ultimately its goal is to sign up every single human being on the planet. The free crypto serves as both an incentive for users to sign up, and also an entry point into what the company hopes will become the world’s largest financial network, through which it believes “double-digit percentages of the global economy” will eventually flow. Even for Altman, these missions are audacious. “If this really works, it’s like a fundamental piece of infrastructure for the world,” Altman tells TIME in a video interview from the passenger seat of a car a few days before his April 30 keynote address.Internal hardware of the Orb in mid-assembly in March. Davide Monteleone for TIMEThe project’s goal is to solve a problem partly of Altman’s own making. In the near future, he and other tech leaders say, advanced AIs will be imbued with agency: the ability to not just respond to human prompting, but to take actions independently in the world. This will enable the creation of AI coworkers that can drop into your company and begin solving problems; AI tutors that can adapt their teaching style to students’ preferences; even AI doctors that can diagnose routine cases and handle scheduling or logistics. The arrival of these virtual agents, their venture capitalist backers predict, will turbocharge our productivity and unleash an age of material abundance.But AI agents will also have cascading consequences for the human experience online. “As AI systems become harder to distinguish from people, websites may face difficult trade-offs,” says a recent paper by researchers from 25 different universities, nonprofits, and tech companies, including OpenAI. “There is a significant risk that digital institutions will be unprepared for a time when AI-powered agents, including those leveraged by malicious actors, overwhelm other activity online.” On social-media platforms like X and Facebook, bot-driven accounts are amassing billions of views on AI-generated content. In April, the foundation that runs Wikipedia disclosed that AI bots scraping their site were making the encyclopedia too costly to sustainably run. Later the same month, researchers from the University of Zurich found that AI-generated comments on the subreddit /r/ChangeMyView were up to six times more successful than human-written ones at persuading unknowing users to change their minds.  Photograph by Davide Monteleone for TIMEBuy a copy of the Orb issue hereThe arrival of agents won’t only threaten our ability to distinguish between authentic and AI content online. It will also challenge the Internet’s core business model, online advertising, which relies on the assumption that ads are being viewed by humans. “The Internet will change very drastically sometime in the next 12 to 24 months,” says Tools for Humanity CEO Alex Blania. “So we have to succeed, or I’m not sure what else would happen.”For four years, Blania’s team has been testing the Orb’s hardware abroad. Now the U.S. rollout has arrived. Over the next 12 months, 7,500 Orbs will be arriving in dozens of American cities, in locations like gas stations, bodegas, and flagship stores in Los Angeles, Austin, and Miami. The project’s founders and fans hope the Orb’s U.S. debut will kickstart a new phase of growth. The San Francisco keynote was titled: “At Last.” It’s not clear the public appetite matches the exultant branding. Tools for Humanity has “verified” just 12 million humans since mid 2023, a pace Blania concedes is well behind schedule. Few online platforms currently support the so-called “World ID” that the Orb bestows upon its visitors, leaving little to entice users to give up their biometrics beyond the lure of free crypto. Even Altman isn’t sure whether the whole thing can work. “I can see [how] this becomes a fairly mainstream thing in a few years,” he says. “Or I can see that it’s still only used by a small subset of people who think about the world in a certain way.” Blania (left) and Altman debut the Orb at World’s U.S. launch in San Francisco on April 30, 2025. Jason Henry—The New York Times/ReduxYet as the Internet becomes overrun with AI, the creators of this strange new piece of hardware are betting that everybody in the world will soon want—or need—to visit an Orb. The biometric code it creates, they predict, will become a new type of digital passport, without which you might be denied passage to the Internet of the future, from dating apps to government services. In a best-case scenario, World ID could be a privacy-preserving way to fortify the Internet against an AI-driven deluge of fake or deceptive content. It could also enable the distribution of universal basic income (UBI)—a policy that Altman has previously touted—as AI automation transforms the global economy. To examine what this new technology might mean, I reported from three continents, interviewed 10 Tools for Humanity executives and investors, reviewed hundreds of pages of company documents, and “verified” my own humanity. The Internet will inevitably need some kind of proof-of-humanity system in the near future, says Divya Siddarth, founder of the nonprofit Collective Intelligence Project. The real question, she argues, is whether such a system will be centralized—“a big security nightmare that enables a lot of surveillance”—or privacy-preserving, as the Orb claims to be. Questions remain about Tools for Humanity’s corporate structure, its yoking to an unstable cryptocurrency, and what power it would concentrate in the hands of its owners if successful. Yet it’s also one of the only attempts to solve what many see as an increasingly urgent problem. “There are some issues with it,” Siddarth says of World ID. “But you can’t preserve the Internet in amber. Something in this direction is necessary.”In March, I met Blania at Tools for Humanity’s San Francisco headquarters, where a large screen displays the number of weekly “Orb verifications” by country. A few days earlier, the CEO had attended a $1 million-per-head dinner at Mar-a-Lago with President Donald Trump, whom he credits with clearing the way for the company’s U.S. launch by relaxing crypto regulations. “Given Sam is a very high profile target,” Blania says, “we just decided that we would let other companies fight that fight, and enter the U.S. once the air is clear.” As a kid growing up in Germany, Blania was a little different than his peers. “Other kids were, like, drinking a lot, or doing a lot of parties, and I was just building a lot of things that could potentially blow up,” he recalls. At the California Institute of Technology, where he was pursuing research for a masters degree, he spent many evenings reading the blogs of startup gurus like Paul Graham and Altman. Then, in 2019, Blania received an email from Max Novendstern, an entrepreneur who had been kicking around a concept with Altman to build a global cryptocurrency network. They were looking for technical minds to help with the project. Over cappuccinos, Altman told Blania he was certain about three things. First, smarter-than-human AI was not only possible, but inevitable—and it would soon mean you could no longer assume that anything you read, saw, or heard on the Internet was human-created. Second, cryptocurrency and other decentralized technologies would be a massive force for change in the world. And third, scale was essential to any crypto network’s value. The Orb is tested on a calibration rig, surrounded by checkerboard targets to ensure precision in iris detection. Davide Monteleone for TIMEThe goal of Worldcoin, as the project was initially called, was to combine those three insights. Altman took a lesson from PayPal, the company co-founded by his mentor Peter Thiel. Of its initial funding, PayPal spent less than $10 million actually building its app—but pumped an additional $70 million or so into a referral program, whereby new users and the person who invited them would each receive $10 in credit. The referral program helped make PayPal a leading payment platform. Altman thought a version of that strategy would propel Worldcoin to similar heights. He wanted to create a new cryptocurrency and give it to users as a reward for signing up. The more people who joined the system, the higher the token’s value would theoretically rise. Since 2019, the project has raised $244 million from investors like Coinbase and the venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz. That money paid for the $50 million cost of designing the Orb, plus maintaining the software it runs on. The total market value of all Worldcoins in existence, however, is far higher—around $12 billion. That number is a bit misleading: most of those coins are not in circulation and Worldcoin’s price has fluctuated wildly. Still, it allows the company to reward users for signing up at no cost to itself. The main lure for investors is the crypto upside. Some 75% of all Worldcoins are set aside for humans to claim when they sign up, or as referral bonuses. The remaining 25% are split between Tools for Humanity’s backers and staff, including Blania and Altman. “I’m really excited to make a lot of money,” ” Blania says.From the beginning, Altman was thinking about the consequences of the AI revolution he intended to unleash. (On May 21, he announced plans to team up with famed former Apple designer Jony Ive on a new AI personal device.) A future in which advanced AI could perform most tasks more effectively than humans would bring a wave of unemployment and economic dislocation, he reasoned. Some kind of wealth redistribution might be necessary. In 2016, he partially funded a study of basic income, which gave $1,000 per-month handouts to low-income individuals in Illinois and Texas. But there was no single financial system that would allow money to be sent to everybody in the world. Nor was there a way to stop an individual human from claiming their share twice—or to identify a sophisticated AI pretending to be human and pocketing some cash of its own. In 2023, Tools for Humanity raised the possibility of using the network to redistribute the profits of AI labs that were able to automate human labor. “As AI advances,” it said, “fairly distributing access and some of the created value through UBI will play an increasingly vital role in counteracting the concentration of economic power.”Blania was taken by the pitch, and agreed to join the project as a co-founder. “Most people told us we were very stupid or crazy or insane, including Silicon Valley investors,” Blania says. At least until ChatGPT came out in 2022, transforming OpenAI into one of the world’s most famous tech companies and kickstarting a market bull-run. “Things suddenly started to make more and more sense to the external world,” Blania says of the vision to develop a global “proof-of-humanity” network. “You have to imagine a world in which you will have very smart and competent systems somehow flying through the Internet with different goals and ideas of what they want to do, and us having no idea anymore what we’re dealing with.”After our interview, Blania’s head of communications ushers me over to a circular wooden structure where eight Orbs face one another. The scene feels like a cross between an Apple Store and a ceremonial altar. “Do you want to get verified?” she asks. Putting aside my reservations for the purposes of research, I download the World App and follow its prompts. I flash a QR code at the Orb, then gaze into it. A minute or so later, my phone buzzes with confirmation: I’ve been issued my own personal World ID and some Worldcoin.The first thing the Orb does is check if you’re human, using a neural network that takes input from various sensors, including an infrared camera and a thermometer. Davide Monteleone for TIMEWhile I stared into the Orb, several complex procedures had taken place at once. A neural network took inputs from multiple sensors—an infrared camera, a thermometer—to confirm I was a living human. Simultaneously, a telephoto lens zoomed in on my iris, capturing the physical traits within that distinguish me from every other human on Earth. It then converted that image into an iris code: a numerical abstraction of my unique biometric data. Then the Orb checked to see if my iris code matched any it had seen before, using a technique allowing encrypted data to be compared without revealing the underlying information. Before the Orb deleted my data, it turned my iris code into several derivative codes—none of which on its own can be linked back to the original—encrypted them, deleted the only copies of the decryption keys, and sent each one to a different secure server, so that future users’ iris codes can be checked for uniqueness against mine. If I were to use my World ID to access a website, that site would learn nothing about me except that I’m human. The Orb is open-source, so outside experts can examine its code and verify the company’s privacy claims. “I did a colonoscopy on this company and these technologies before I agreed to join,” says Trevor Traina, a Trump donor and former U.S. ambassador to Austria who now serves as Tools for Humanity’s chief business officer. “It is the most privacy-preserving technology on the planet.”Only weeks later, when researching what would happen if I wanted to delete my data, do I discover that Tools for Humanity’s privacy claims rest on what feels like a sleight of hand. The company argues that in modifying your iris code, it has “effectively anonymized” your biometric data. If you ask Tools for Humanity to delete your iris codes, they will delete the one stored on your phone, but not the derivatives. Those, they argue, are no longer your personal data at all. But if I were to return to an Orb after deleting my data, it would still recognize those codes as uniquely mine. Once you look into the Orb, a piece of your identity remains in the system forever. If users could truly delete that data, the premise of one ID per human would collapse, Tools for Humanity’s chief privacy officer Damien Kieran tells me when I call seeking an explanation. People could delete and sign up for new World IDs after being suspended from a platform. Or claim their Worldcoin tokens, sell them, delete their data, and cash in again. This argument fell flat with European Union regulators in Germany, who recently declared that the Orb posed “fundamental data protection issues” and ordered the company to allow European users to fully delete even their anonymized data. (Tools for Humanity has appealed; the regulator is now reassessing the decision.) “Just like any other technology service, users cannot delete data that is not personal data,” Kieran said in a statement. “If a person could delete anonymized data that can’t be linked to them by World or any third party, it would allow bad actors to circumvent the security and safety that World ID is working to bring to every human.”On a balmy afternoon this spring, I climb a flight of stairs up to a room above a restaurant in an outer suburb of Seoul. Five elderly South Koreans tap on their phones as they wait to be “verified” by the two Orbs in the center of the room. “We don’t really know how to distinguish between AI and humans anymore,” an attendant in a company t-shirt explains in Korean, gesturing toward the spheres. “We need a way to verify that we’re human and not AI. So how do we do that? Well, humans have irises, but AI doesn’t.”The attendant ushers an elderly woman over to an Orb. It bleeps. “Open your eyes,” a disembodied voice says in English. The woman stares into the camera. Seconds later, she checks her phone and sees that a packet of Worldcoin worth 75,000 Korean won (about $54) has landed in her digital wallet. Congratulations, the app tells her. You are now a verified human.A visitor views the Orbs in Seoul on April 14, 2025. Taemin Ha for TIMETools for Humanity aims to “verify” 1 million Koreans over the next year. Taemin Ha for TIMEA couple dozen Orbs have been available in South Korea since 2023, verifying roughly 55,000 people. Now Tools for Humanity is redoubling its efforts there. At an event in a traditional wooden hanok house in central Seoul, an executive announces that 250 Orbs will soon be dispersed around the country—with the aim of verifying 1 million Koreans in the next 12 months. South Korea has high levels of smartphone usage, crypto and AI adoption, and Internet access, while average wages are modest enough for the free Worldcoin on offer to still be an enticing draw—all of which makes it fertile testing ground for the company’s ambitious global expansion. Yet things seem off to a slow start. In a retail space I visited in central Seoul, Tools for Humanity had constructed a wooden structure with eight Orbs facing each other. Locals and tourists wander past looking bemused; few volunteer themselves up. Most who do tell me they are crypto enthusiasts who came intentionally, driven more by the spirit of early adoption than the free coins. The next day, I visit a coffee shop in central Seoul where a chrome Orb sits unassumingly in one corner. Wu Ruijun, a 20-year-old student from China, strikes up a conversation with the barista, who doubles as the Orb’s operator. Wu was invited here by a friend who said both could claim free cryptocurrency if he signed up. The barista speeds him through the process. Wu accepts the privacy disclosure without reading it, and widens his eyes for the Orb. Soon he’s verified. “I wasn’t told anything about the privacy policy,” he says on his way out. “I just came for the money.”As Altman’s car winds through San Francisco, I ask about the vision he laid out in 2019: that AI would make it harder for us to trust each other online. To my surprise, he rejects the framing. “I’m much more [about] like: what is the good we can create, rather than the bad we can stop?” he says. “It’s not like, ‘Oh, we’ve got to avoid the bot overrun’ or whatever. It’s just that we can do a lot of special things for humans.” It’s an answer that may reflect how his role has changed over the years. Altman is now the chief public cheerleader of a $300 billion company that’s touting the transformative utility of AI agents. The rise of agents, he and others say, will be a boon for our quality of life—like having an assistant on hand who can answer your most pressing questions, carry out mundane tasks, and help you develop new skills. It’s an optimistic vision that may well pan out. But it doesn’t quite fit with the prophecies of AI-enabled infopocalypse that Tools for Humanity was founded upon.Altman waves away a question about the influence he and other investors stand to gain if their vision is realized. Most holders, he assumes, will have already started selling their tokens—too early, he adds. “What I think would be bad is if an early crew had a lot of control over the protocol,” he says, “and that’s where I think the commitment to decentralization is so cool.” Altman is referring to the World Protocol, the underlying technology upon which the Orb, Worldcoin, and World ID all rely. Tools for Humanity is developing it, but has committed to giving control to its users over time—a process they say will prevent power from being concentrated in the hands of a few executives or investors. Tools for Humanity would remain a for-profit company, and could levy fees on platforms that use World ID, but other companies would be able to compete for customers by building alternative apps—or even alternative Orbs. The plan draws on ideas that animated the crypto ecosystem in the late 2010s and early 2020s, when evangelists for emerging blockchain technologies argued that the centralization of power—especially in large so-called “Web 2.0” tech companies—was responsible for many of the problems plaguing the modern Internet. Just as decentralized cryptocurrencies could reform a financial system controlled by economic elites, so too would it be possible to create decentralized organizations, run by their members instead of CEOs. How such a system might work in practice remains unclear. “Building a community-based governance system,” Tools for Humanity says in a 2023 white paper, “represents perhaps the most formidable challenge of the entire project.”Altman has a pattern of making idealistic promises that shift over time. He founded OpenAI as a nonprofit in 2015, with a mission to develop AGI safely and for the benefit of all humanity. To raise money, OpenAI restructured itself as a for-profit company in 2019, but with overall control still in the hands of its nonprofit board. Last year, Altman proposed yet another restructure—one which would dilute the board’s control and allow more profits to flow to shareholders. Why, I ask, should the public trust Tools for Humanity’s commitment to freely surrender influence and power? “I think you will just see the continued decentralization via the protocol,” he says. “The value here is going to live in the network, and the network will be owned and governed by a lot of people.” Altman talks less about universal basic income these days. He recently mused about an alternative, which he called “universal basic compute.” Instead of AI companies redistributing their profits, he seemed to suggest, they could instead give everyone in the world fair access to super-powerful AI. Blania tells me he recently “made the decision to stop talking” about UBI at Tools for Humanity. “UBI is one potential answer,” he says. “Just giving [people] access to the latest [AI] models and having them learn faster and better is another.” Says Altman: “I still don’t know what the right answer is. I believe we should do a better job of distribution of resources than we currently do.” When I probe the question of why people should trust him, Altman gets irritated. “I understand that you hate AI, and that’s fine,” he says. “If you want to frame it as the downside of AI is that there’s going to be a proliferation of very convincing AI systems that are pretending to be human, and we need ways to know what is really human-authorized versus not, then yeah, I think you can call that a downside of AI. It’s not how I would naturally frame it.” The phrase human-authorized hints at a tension between World ID and OpenAI’s plans for AI agents. An Internet where a World ID is required to access most services might impede the usefulness of the agents that OpenAI and others are developing. So Tools for Humanity is building a system that would allow users to delegate their World ID to an agent, allowing the bot to take actions online on their behalf, according to Tiago Sada, the company’s chief product officer. “We’ve built everything in a way that can be very easily delegatable to an agent,” Sada says. It’s a measure that would allow humans to be held accountable for the actions of their AIs. But it suggests that Tools for Humanity’s mission may be shifting beyond simply proving humanity, and toward becoming the infrastructure that enables AI agents to proliferate with human authorization. World ID doesn’t tell you whether a piece of content is AI-generated or human-generated; all it tells you is whether the account that posted it is a human or a bot. Even in a world where everybody had a World ID, our online spaces might still be filled with AI-generated text, images, and videos.As I say goodbye to Altman, I’m left feeling conflicted about his project. If the Internet is going to be transformed by AI agents, then some kind of proof-of-humanity system will almost certainly be necessary. Yet if the Orb becomes a piece of Internet infrastructure, it could give Altman—a beneficiary of the proliferation of AI content—significant influence over a leading defense mechanism against it. People might have no choice but to participate in the network in order to access social media or online services.I thought of an encounter I witnessed in Seoul. In the room above the restaurant, Cho Jeong-yeon, 75, watched her friend get verified by an Orb. Cho had been invited to do the same, but demurred. The reward wasn’t enough for her to surrender a part of her identity. “Your iris is uniquely yours, and we don’t really know how it might be used,” she says. “Seeing the machine made me think: are we becoming machines instead of humans now? Everything is changing, and we don’t know how it’ll all turn out.”—With reporting by Stephen Kim/Seoul. This story was supported by Tarbell Grants.Correction, May 30The original version of this story misstated the market capitalization of Worldcoin if all coins were in circulation. It is $12 billion, not $1.2 billion.

PERFORMANCE ART With technical improvements, Pokemon Scarlet & Violet are utterly transformed on Nintendo Switch 2 What a difference a frame rate makes. On more powerful hardware, Pokemon Scarlet & Violet are practically different games Article by Alex Donaldson Assistant Editor Published on June 4, 2025 I can scarcely think of a game as hampered by its performance as the original Nintendo Switch release of Pokemon Scarlet & Violet. I can think of loads of games that perform worse, of course - broken, shattered releases - but I struggle to think of a great game so thoroughly compromised just from how it runs. That was the log behind my 2022 review of the games, where I called the games a “super-effective new vision” for the series but bemoaned how it ran. The game became famous for stop-motion windmills and distant cliffsides that looked like they’d fallen out of a Nintendo 64 game. The truth is, Scarlet & Violet’s brilliant design and peppy attitude deserved better. Now, three years on from release, Scarlet & Violet is about to get better with a Switch 2 update that I’m going to go ahead and call a total I was invited by The Pokemon Company to take an early look at the patched Switch 2 version of the game - which is always a sign of confidence, given I was quite a noisy detractor of the original game’s performance. I’m honestly not sure what to say other than: wow, what a difference. It is absolute night and day stuff. To the sort of people who say that frame rate doesn’t really matter, I challenge them to play Scarlet & Violet on Switch 2 and then go back to the original. I dare you. As friend of the site Joe says in Serebii's video preview embedded below, it ain’t doable. Watch on YouTube With a crisp presentation at a higher resolution and with a frame rate that as far as I can tell sits at a rock solid 60fps for the vast majority of the time, this is a world apart from the stomach-turning rollercoaster highs and lows of the original release. Distant Pokemon and world elements are no longer slideshows - yes, those infamous windmills are fixed! This isn’t just about technical bragging rights. The difference in how this game now runs is profound enough that it changes the flow and feel of the game. Scarlet & Violet were by design the most footloose and expansive Pokemon games of all time, channeling the open world chops of everything from Skyrim to Breath of the Wild into a Pokemon setting and setup. The performance was a drag on that - if the frame rate tanks every time you whip the camera around to see a nearby approaching threat or take in a distant vista, you’re ripped right out of the game. By stabilising everything, the performance is utterly transformed. Aside from the nebulous concept of ‘game feel’ being improved by the technical advancements, there are also real boons in terms of gameplay. Wild Pokemon spawn in and swarm across the rolling fields and the like in greater numbers. The subtle delay that you’d perceive, that hitch when encountering a wild Pokemon, is eliminated. Menus that were sluggish are now snappier and more responsive. Pokemon Box sprite icons now spring to life instantly. These are small quality of life changes that add up to something greater. Perhaps most importantly battles are now less plodding in their pace, which was frequently obliterated by certain move animations could send the frame rate crashing. It has to be said, it’s not all perfect. The level of detail settings remain pretty aggressive - which means as you’re galloping along at a glorious 60 frames atop your trusty Poke-steed, flowers and other micro detail pop in around you. It’s not ideal. Also, to be honest, the game now being technically accomplished does help to expose the art style for what it is - which is in need of a bit of tightening, I feel. The addition of HDR does really help the colorful exuberance of Paldea to shine, though. In all it’s a triumph, anyway. This is the game Scarlet & Violet should’ve been. Moreover, it feels like the most technically accomplished main-line Pokemon game… possibly ever? Certainly of the 3D era. As with 120fps mouselook Metroid, playing 3D Pokemon at 60fps feels like you’re doing something illegal, frankly. But this is now the way to play these excellent games - and with good-performing Pokemon games now on the table, my excitement for this year’s Pokemon Legends Z-A has skyrocketed.

Ivanka Trump has made it clear that she's done with politics. That hasn't stopped her and husband Jared Kushner from remaining an influential political couple.They have not formally reprised their roles as White House advisors in President Donald Trump's second administration, but they've remained present in Donald Trump's political orbit.While Ivanka Trump opted out of the 2024 campaign trail, she and Kushner still appeared at the Republican National Convention, Donald Trump's victory party on election night, and the inauguration. Kushner also reportedly served as an informal advisor ahead of Donald Trump's trip to the Middle East in May, CNN reported.Ivanka Trump, who is Donald Trump's eldest daughter, converted to Judaism before marrying Kushner in 2009. They have three children: Arabella, Joseph, and Theodore.Here's a timeline of Ivanka Trump and Kushner's relationship. 2007: Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner met at a networking lunch arranged by one of her longtime business partners. Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner in 2007. PAUL LAURIE/Patrick McMullan via Getty Images Ivanka Trump and Kushner were both 25 at the time."They very innocently set us up thinking that our only interest in one another would be transactional," Ivanka Trump told Vogue in 2015. "Whenever we see them we're like, 'The best deal we ever made!'" 2008: Ivanka Trump and Kushner broke up because of religious differences. Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump in 2008. Patrick McMullan/Patrick McMullan via Getty Images Kushner was raised in the modern Orthodox Jewish tradition, and it was important to his family for him to marry someone Jewish. Ivanka Trump's family is Presbyterian. 2008: Three months later, the couple rekindled their romance on Rupert Murdoch's yacht. Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner in 2008. David X Prutting/Patrick McMullan/Patrick McMullan via Getty Images In his memoir, "Breaking History," Kushner wrote that Murdoch's then-wife, Wendi Murdoch, was a mutual friend who invited them both on the yacht. May 2009: They attended the Met Gala together for the first time. Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump at the Met Gala. BILLY FARRELL/Patrick McMullan via Getty Images The theme of the Met Gala that year was "The Model As Muse." Ivanka Trump wore a gown by designer Brian Reyes. July 2009: Ivanka Trump completed her conversion to Judaism, and she and Kushner got engaged. Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump in 2009. Billy Farrell/Patrick McMullan/Patrick McMullan via Getty Images Kushner proposed with a 5.22-carat cushion-cut diamond engagement ring.Ivanka Trump told New York Magazine that she and her fiancé were "very mellow.""We go to the park. We go biking together. We go to the 2nd Avenue Deli," she said. "We both live in this fancy world. But on a personal level, I don't think I could be with somebody — I know he couldn't be with somebody — who needed to be 'on' all the time." October 2009: Ivanka Trump and Kushner married at the Trump National Golf Club in New Jersey. Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump on their wedding day. Brian Marcus/Fred Marcus Photography via Getty Images The couple invited 500 guests, including celebrities like Barbara Walters, Regis Philbin, and Anna Wintour, as well as politicians such as Rudy Giuliani and Andrew Cuomo. July 2011: The couple welcomed their first child, Arabella. Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner with Arabella Kushner. Robin Marchant/Getty Images "This morning @jaredkushner and I welcomed a beautiful and healthy little baby girl into the world," Ivanka announced on X, then Twitter. "We feel incredibly grateful and blessed. Thank you all for your support and well wishes!" October 2013: Ivanka Trump gave birth to their second child, Joseph. Ivanka Trump with Arabella Rose Kushner and Joseph Frederick Kushner in 2017. Alo Ceballos/GC Images He was named for Kushner's paternal grandfather Joseph and given the middle name Frederick after Donald Trump's father. March 2016: Kushner and Ivanka Trump welcomed their third child, Theodore, in the midst of Donald Trump's presidential campaign. Ivanka Trump carried her son Theodore as she held hands with Joseph alongside Jared Kushner and daughter Arabella on the White House lawn. SAUL LOEB/AFP via Getty Images "I said, 'Ivanka, it would be great if you had your baby in Iowa.' I really want that to happen. I really want that to happen," Donald Trump told supporters in Iowa in January 2016.All three of the couple's children were born in New York City. May 2016: They attended the Met Gala two months after Ivanka Trump gave birth. Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump attend the Met Gala. Kevin Mazur/WireImage Ivanka Trump wore a red Ralph Lauren Collection halter jumpsuit.On a 2017 episode of "The Late Late Show with James Corden," Anna Wintour said that she would never invite Donald Trump to another Met Gala. January 2017: Ivanka Trump and Kushner attended Donald Trump's inauguration and danced together at the Liberty Ball. Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner on Inauguration Day. Photo by Rob Carr/Getty Images The Liberty Ball was the first of three inaugural balls that Donald Trump attended. January 2017: After the inauguration, Ivanka and Kushner relocated to a $5.5 million home in the Kalorama section of Washington, DC. Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump's house in Washington, DC. PAUL J. RICHARDS/AFP via Getty Images Ivanka Trump and Kushner rented the 7,000-square-foot home from billionaire Andrónico Luksic for $15,000 a month, The Wall Street Journal reported. May 2017: They accompanied Donald Trump on his first overseas trip in office. Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump with Pope Francis. Vatican Pool - Corbis/Corbis via Getty Images Kushner and Ivanka Trump both served as advisors to the president. For the first overseas trip of Donald Trump's presidency, they accompanied him to Saudi Arabia, Israel, the Vatican, and summits in Brussels and Sicily. October 2019: The couple celebrated their 10th wedding anniversary with a lavish party at Camp David. Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner at a state dinner. MANDEL NGAN/AFP via Getty Images All of the Trump and Kushner siblings were in attendance. A White House official told CNN that the couple was covering the cost of the party, but Donald Trump tweeted that the cost would be "totally paid for by me!" August 2020: Ivanka Trump spoke about moving their family to Washington, DC, at the Republican National Convention. Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump at the Republican National Convention. SAUL LOEB/AFP via Getty Images "When Jared and I moved with our three children to Washington, we didn't exactly know what we were in for," she said in her speech. "But our kids loved it from the start." December 2020: Ivanka Trump and Kushner reportedly bought a $32 million empty lot in Miami's "Billionaire Bunker." Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump's plot of land in Indian Creek Village. The Jills Zeder Group; Samir Hussein/WireImage/Getty Images After Donald Trump lost the 2020 election, Page Six reported that the couple purchased a 1.8-acre waterfront lot owned by singer Julio Iglesias, Enrique Iglesias' father, in Indian Creek Village, Florida.The island where it sits has the nickname "Billionaire Bunker" thanks to its multitude of ultra-wealthy residents over the years, including billionaire investor Carl Icahn, supermodel Adriana Lima, and former Miami Dolphins coach Don Shula. January 2021: They skipped Joe Biden's inauguration, flying with Donald Trump to his Mar-a-Lago residence in Palm Beach, Florida, instead. Ivanka Trump, Jared Kushner, and their children prepared for Donald Trump's departure on Inauguration Day. ALEX EDELMAN/AFP via Getty Images Donald Trump did not attend Biden's inauguration, breaking a long-standing norm in US democracy. While initial reports said that Ivanka Trump was planning to attend the inauguration, a White House official told People magazine that "Ivanka is not expected to attend the inauguration nor was she ever expected to." January 2021: The couple signed a lease for a luxury Miami Beach condo near their Indian Creek Village property. Arte Surfside. Antonio Citterio Patricia Viel Ivanka Trump and Kushner signed a lease for a "large, unfurnished unit" in the amenities-packed Arte Surfside condominium building in Surfside, Florida.Surfside, a beachside town just north of Miami Beach that's home to fewer than 6,000 people, is only a five-minute drive from Indian Creek Island, where they bought their $32 million empty lot. April 2021: Ivanka Trump and Kushner reportedly added a $24 million mansion in Indian Creek Village to their Florida real-estate profile. Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner on a walk in Florida. MEGA/GC Images The Real Deal reported that Ivanka and Kushner purchased another Indian Creek property — this time, a 8,510-square-foot mansion situated on a 1.3-acre estate. June 2021: Several outlets reported that the couple began to distance themselves from Donald Trump due to his fixation on conspiracy theories about the 2020 election. Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner behind Donald Trump. Kevin Lamarque/Reuters CNN reported that Trump was prone to complain about the 2020 election and falsely claim it was "stolen" from him to anyone listening and that his "frustrations emerge in fits and starts — more likely when he is discussing his hopeful return to national politics."While Ivanka and Kushner had been living in their Miami Beach condo, not far from Trump's Mar-a-Lago club in Palm Beach, Florida, they'd visited Trump less and less frequently and were absent from big events at Mar-a-Lago, CNN said.The New York Times also reported that Kushner wanted "to focus on writing his book and establishing a simpler relationship" with the former president. October 2021: Ivanka Trump and Kushner visited Israel's parliament for the inaugural event of the Abraham Accords Caucus. Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump in Israel. AHMAD GHARABLI/AFP via Getty Images The Abraham Accords, which Kushner helped broker in August 2020, normalized relations between Israel and the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Sudan, and Morocco.During their visit, Ivanka Trump and Kushner met with then-former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and attended an event at the Museum of Tolerance Jerusalem with former US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. August 2022: Kushner released his memoir, "Breaking History," in which he wrote about their courtship. Jared Kushner. John Lamparski/Getty Images for Concordia Summit "In addition to being arrestingly beautiful, which I knew before we met, she was warm, funny, and brilliant," he wrote of getting to know Ivanka Trump. "She has a big heart and a tremendous zest for exploring new things."He also wrote that when he told Donald Trump that he was planning a surprise engagement, Trump "picked up the intercom and alerted Ivanka that she should expect an imminent proposal." November 2022: Kushner attended Donald Trump's 2024 campaign announcement without Ivanka Trump. Kimberly Guilfoyle, Jared Kushner, Eric Trump, and Lara Trump at Donald Trump's presidential campaign announcement. Jonathan Ernst/Reuters Ivanka Trump released a statement explaining her absence from the event."I love my father very much," her statement read. "This time around, I am choosing to prioritize my children and the private life we are creating as a family. I do not plan to be involved in politics. While I will always love and support my father, going forward I will do so outside the political arena." July 2024: Ivanka Trump and Kushner made a rare political appearance at the Republican National Convention. Donald Trump and Melania Trump onstage with Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner. Jason Armond/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images Ivanka Trump did not campaign for her father or give a speech as she had at past Republican National Conventions, but she and Jared Kushner joined Trump family members onstage after Donald Trump's remarks. November 2024: They joined members of the Trump family in Palm Beach, Florida, to celebrate Donald Trump's election victory.

There are very few philosophers who become part of popular culture, and often, if their ideas become influential, people don’t know where they came from.Niccolò Machiavelli, the great 16th-century diplomat and writer, is an exception.I don’t know how many people have actually read Machiavelli, but almost everyone knows the name, and almost everyone thinks they know what the word “Machiavellian” means. It’s someone who’s cunning and shrewd and manipulative. Or as one famous philosopher called him, “the teacher of evil.”But is this fair to Machiavelli, or has he been misunderstood? And if he has been, what are we missing in his work?Erica Benner is a political philosopher and the author of numerous books about Machiavelli including my favorite, Be Like the Fox, which offers a different interpretation of Machiavelli’s most famous work, The Prince.For centuries, The Prince has been popularly viewed as a how-to manual for tyrants. But Benner disagrees. She says it’s actually a veiled, almost satirical critique of authoritarian power. And she argues that Machiavelli is more timely than you might imagine. He wrote about why democracies get sick and die, about the dangers of inequality and partisanship, and even about why appearance and perception matter far more than truth and facts.In another of his seminal works, Discourses on Livy, Machiavelli is also distinctly not authoritarian. In fact, he espouses a deep belief in republicanism (the lowercase-r kind, which affirms representative government).I invited Benner onto The Gray Area to talk about what Machiavelli was up to and why he’s very much a philosopher for our times. As always, there’s much more in the full podcast, so listen and follow The Gray Area on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Pandora, or wherever you find podcasts. New episodes drop every Monday.This interview has been edited for length and clarity. The popular view of Machiavelli is that he wanted to draw this neat line between morality and politics and that he celebrated ruthless pragmatism. What’s incomplete or wrong about that view?What is true is that he often criticizes the hyper-Christian morality that puts moral judgments into the hands of priests and popes and some abstract kind of God that he may or may not believe in, but in any case doesn’t think is something we can access as humans. If we want to think about morality both on a personal level and in politics, we’ve got to go back to basics. What is the behavior of human beings? What is human nature? What are the drives that propel human beings to do the stuff that we call good or bad? He wants to say that we should see human beings not as fundamentally good or evil. We shouldn’t think that human beings can ever be angels, and we shouldn’t see them as devils when they behave badly.But the basic point is if you want to develop a human morality, you study yourself, you study other humans, you don’t put yourself above other humans because you’re one, too. And then you ask, What kind of politics is going to make such people coexist?I take it you think his most famous book, The Prince, is not well understood?I used to have to teach Machiavelli and I would just say, It’s a handbook for tyrants. But he wrote the Discourses, which is a very, very republican book. So that’s the first thing that sets people off and makes you think, How could he have switched so quickly from writing The Prince to being a super-republican writing the Discourses? So that’s a warning sign. When I started seeing some of the earliest readers of Machiavelli and the earliest comments you get from republican authors, they all see Machiavelli as an ally and they say it. They say he’s a moral writer. Rousseau says, “He has only had superficial and corrupt readers until now.” If you ever pick up The Prince and you read the first four chapters, and most people don’t read them that carefully because they’re kind of boring, the exciting ones are the ones in the middle about morality and immorality and then you come to chapter five, which is about freedom.And up to chapter four, it sounds like a pretty cruel, cold analysis of what you should do. Then you get to chapter five and it’s like, Wow! It’s about how republics fight back, and the whole tone changes. Suddenly republics are fighting back and the prince has to be on his toes because he’s probably not going to survive the wrath of these fiery republics that do not give up.So who is he talking to in the book? Is he counseling future princes or warning future citizens?It’s complicated. You have to remember that he was kicked out of his job and had a big family to support. He had a lot of kids. And he loved his job and was passionate about the republic. He was tortured. He doesn’t know what’s going to happen next. He’s absolutely gutted that Florence’s republican experiment has failed and he can’t speak freely. So what does a guy with a history of writing dramas and satire do to make himself feel better? It’s taking the piss out of the people who have made you and a lot of your friends very miserable, in a low-key way because you can’t be too brutally satirical about it. But I think he’s really writing to expose the ways of tyrants.Would you say that Machiavelli has something like an ideology or is he just a clear-eyed pragmatist?He’s a republican. And again, this is something that, if you just read The Prince, you’re not going to get. But if you read the Discourses, which was written around the same time as The Prince, it’s very, very similar in almost every way except that it praises republics and criticizes tyrants very openly. Whereas The Prince never once uses the words “tyrant” or “tyranny.” So if there’s a guiding political view, whether you call it “ideology” or not, it’s republicanism. And that’s an ideology of shared power. It’s all the people in a city, all the male people in this case. Machiavelli was quite egalitarian. He clearly wanted as broad of a section of the male population to be citizens as possible. He says very clearly, The key to stabilizing your power is to change the constitution and to give everyone their share. Everyone has to have their share. You might want to speak a little bit more for yourself and the rich guys, but in the end, everyone’s got to have a share.Should we treat Machiavelli like a democratic theorist? Do you think of him as someone who would defend what we call democracy today?If you think the main principle of democracy is that power should be shared equally, which is how I understand democracy, then yes. He’d totally agree with that. What kind of institutions would he say a democracy has to have? He’s pretty clear in the Discourses. He says you don’t want a long-term executive. You need to always check power. I realize we exist in a very different world than Machiavelli, but is he a useful guide to understanding contemporary politics, particularly American politics?This is a really Machiavellian moment. If you read The Prince and look not just for those provocative quotes but for the criticisms, and sometimes they’re very subtle, you start to see that he’s exposing a lot of the stuff that we’re seeing today. Chapter nine of The Prince is where he talks about how you can rise to be the ruler of a republic and how much resistance you might face, and he says that people might be quite passive at first and not do very much. But at some point, when they see you start to attack the courts and the magistrates, that’s when you’re going to clash. And he says, That’s when you as a leader — and he’s playing like he’s on the leader’s side — that’s when you’ve got to decide if you’re going to get really, really tough, or are you going to have to find other ways to soften things up a bit?What would he make of Trump?He would put Trump in two categories. He’s got different classifications of princes. He’s got the prince of fortune, somebody who relies on wealth and money and big impressions to get ahead. He would say that Trump has a lot of those qualities, but he’d also call him this word “astutia” — astuteness, which doesn’t really translate in English because we think of that as a good quality, but he means calculating shrewdness. Somebody whose great talent is being able to shrewdly manipulate and find little holes where he can exploit people’s weaknesses and dissatisfactions.This is what he thought the Medici were good at. And his analysis of that is that it can cover you for a long time. People will see the good appearances and hope that you can deliver, but in the long run, people who do that don’t know how to build a solid state. That’s what he would say on a domestic front. I think there’s an unsophisticated way to look at Trump as Machiavellian. There are these lines in The Prince about knowing how to deploy cruelty and knowing when to be ruthless. But to your deeper point, I don’t think Machiavelli ever endorses cruelty for cruelty’s sake, and with Trump — and this is my personal opinion — cruelty is often the point, and that’s not really Machiavellian.Exactly. I wouldn’t say Trump is Machiavellian. Quite honestly, since the beginning of the Trump administration, I’ve often felt like he’s getting advice from people who haven’t really read Machiavelli or put Machiavelli into ChatGPT and got all the wrong pointers, because the ones that they’re picking out are just so crude. But they sound Machiavellian. You’re absolutely right, though. Machiavelli is very, very clear in The Prince that cruelty is not going to get you anywhere in the long term. You’re going to get pure hate. So if you think it’s ever instrumentally useful to be super cruel, think again.This obviously isn’t an endorsement of Trump, but I will say that something I hear often from people is that the system is so broken that we need someone to smash it up in order to save it. We need political dynamite. I bring that up because Machiavelli says repeatedly that politics requires flexibility and maybe even a little practical ruthlessness in order to preserve the republic. Do you think he would say that there’s real danger in clinging to procedural purity if you reach a point where the system seems to have failed?This is a great question. And again, this is one he does address in the Discourses quite a lot. He talks about how the Romans, when their republic started slipping, had “great men” coming up and saying, “I’ll save you,” and there were a lot before Julius Caesar finally “saved” them and then it all went to hell. And Machiavelli says that there are procedures that have to sometimes be wiped out — you have to reform institutions and add new ones. The Romans added new ones, they subtracted some, they changed the terms. He was very, very keen on shortening the terms of various excessively long offices. He also wanted to create emergency institutions where, if you really faced an emergency, that institution gives somebody more power to take executive action to solve the problem. But that institution, the dictatorship as it was called in Rome, it wasn’t as though a random person could come along and do whatever he wanted. The idea was that this dictator would have special executive powers, but he is under strict oversight, very strict oversight, by the Senate and the plebians, so that if he takes one wrong step, there would be serious punishment. So he was very adamant about punishing leaders who took these responsibilities and then abused them.Listen to the rest of the conversation and be sure to follow The Gray Area on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Pandora, or wherever you listen to podcasts.See More:

Pixel superfans have been invited to a sneak preview event next month, suggesting a schedule change.

Apple prepares to cry wolf over gaming again | Opinion Gaming on Apple platforms is set to be a WWDC focus once again – but with the company increasingly pushed to open up its app ecosystem, maybe this time the wolf is real Feature by Rob Fahey Contributing Editor Published on May 30, 2025 Apple's developer-focused annual WWDC event kicks off in a little over a week, which means that it's time once again for one of the industry's most well-established games of farce; in which Apple, the GM, tries to convince us all that this time, no this time, it's really truly serious about gaming, and we, the players, all try to keep our faces straight and our eyes unrolled. It's a ritual that often skips a year or two but always comes back with a vengeance – Apple cites some impressive numbers about hours or dollars spent on games on their platforms, wheels out a famous developer to wax lyrical about the power of the hardware and demonstrate a build of their game, and announces some new iOS features related to gaming. With love-bombing of the games industry complete for another few years, they promptly delete us from their contacts and pretend not to know us when they walk past us in the supermarket. The reason we all still pay attention to this merry-go-round, though, is because just as it's hard to take seriously any of Apple's claims of yet another Damascene conversion to gaming religion, it's also impossible not to take seriously the importance of the platforms the company controls. There are 2.35 billion active Apple computing devices in the world right now. The company doesn't break down those stats into Macs, iPhones, and iPads, but we know there are well over a billion iPhones in those numbers. Most of those devices are perfectly good gaming devices, at least in terms of what their hardware is capable of. The existing mobile gaming market – while a large market by any measure – is still only scratching at the surface of the potential growth for the gaming market that could be reached through that installed base. Having one of Apple's boy-who-cried-wolf moments actually turn into a genuine commitment to gaming would be a major step towards realising that – which makes them very hard to ignore, even if we're pretty sure we know all the steps to this dance by now. So what's this year's love-bombing going to consist of? We don't know which development luminary they'll bring on stage, but it does seem pretty certain that there's a shiny new gaming-centric app that's going to be built into the next release of iOS, replacing the rather clunky Game Centre with a more streamlined game launcher (which may encompass games bought on other stores on macOS, a bit like how the Apple TV app shows the next shows in your watchlists on Netflix and other streaming services) and providing various editorial and social features. Image credit: Apple It's not clear whether this is just a new app, or if it actually represents an overhaul of the services layer of Apple's gaming offerings – for example, whether it's going to have things like chat, matchmaking, teams and so on implemented in a way that centres on the app but also available in games via an overlay or direct integration through an API. That sounds fine and dandy, though of course the Game Centre app this will replace is a reminder of one of the previous iterations of the "Apple is serious about games this time" dance. What's perhaps more interesting, though we don't yet know if it'll get an on-stage mention at WWDC, is that this is coming just as Apple wraps up the acquisition of its first ever game studio – RAC7, the studio best known for creating Sneaky Sasquatch, which has been a very steadily performing hit on the Apple Arcade service since its launch. Now, there's a very obvious caveat here before we start speculating about Apple trying to build out a game development studio system: RAC7 is a micro-studio consisting of just two people, so while it's apparently going to continue operating more or less autonomously as a wholly-owned studio, there's still a bit of a whiff of an acquihire about the situation. It makes sense for Apple to bring a studio that's been pretty solidly committed to Arcade, and successful on the platform, into the fold in this way even if it's only so that they can be used as consultants and testers for upcoming changes to the service offering. The core concept of the Apple Arcade offering – a ton of well-vetted games that are guaranteed not to be packed with microtransactions and ads – remains very compelling, especially for parents While that may be a bit of a letdown to people who got excited at the prospect that Apple would follow its efforts at building up movie and TV production studios with a similar move into gaming, this acquisition does still send a cautiously positive signal. Apple acquires small companies all the time, but it's never done so with a games studio before, so the willingness to do this suggests that it is tacitly aware of a lack of internal know-how and skills related to this market segment, and moreover, that it remains quite committed to Apple Arcade. That second part is important, because honestly, it's quite easy to forget that Apple Arcade exists sometimes. It's a bit of a cypher to a lot of the industry, I think; it was launched with much fanfare but it now essentially just sits there occupying zero mindshare for most of the gaming sector and its consumers. However, there have been some hints that it's actually quite successful commercially – a tricky thing to measure given that its primary commercial target is driving subscription numbers and retention metrics for the all-encompassing Apple One service, but at the very least there's never been a suggestion from Apple that it's unhappy with how it's performing in that regard. The core concept of the offering – a ton of well-vetted games that are guaranteed not to be packed with microtransactions and ads – remains very compelling, especially for parents, and it seems reasonable to posit that it's quietly doing a very solid amount of business off in demographic sectors that rarely engage with the traditional games industry. This, to some extent, might explain why Apple has ghosted the industry after its most recent bouts of love-bombing; Apple Arcade and the infrastructure that supports it isn't terribly meaningful to the traditional games industry, but actually accomplishes quite a lot of Apple's own internal goals with regard to gaming. That leads us to another crucially important piece of context to bear in mind when watching what the company unveils at WWDC this year – that this may be a series of strategic moves that are less about enticing the games industry to focus on Apple platforms, and more about preparing the ground for the possibility of major parts of the games business simply turning up on Apple's turf unannounced and uninvited. That spectre has been raised by various different legislative and legal moves in major markets over the past few years, all of which seem to be pointing in a similar direction – that Apple is going to be forced to open up its platform to third-party app stores, or at the very least streaming apps. The company is still fighting its corner in the courts in a lot of places, but I suspect it knows that the clock is ticking, especially in some of its most lucrative global markets. While the commercial threat posed by actual app stores is probably minimal (most people just aren't going to install a whole other app management ecosystem when the path of least resistance works fine), the threat from game storefronts is very real. Epic, Steam, and Xbox are all potentially going to have functional storefronts on iOS in one form or another in the coming years – which means an end to Apple's era of taking for granted that games will just keep churning out giant stacks of App Store cash despite being largely held at arm's length by the company. Rethinking its gaming app software and buying a small studio are far from sufficient to win a war on this new front if it opens up – but if they indicate some actual momentum building up, they might not be a bad start.

Michalina Janoszanka, “Motyl (Butterfly)” (ca. 1920s). Image courtesy of Public Domain Review June 2025 Opportunities: Open Calls, Residencies, and Grants for Artists May 30, 2025 Opportunities Colossal Every month, we share opportunities for artists and designers, including open calls, grants, fellowships, and residencies. Make sure you never miss out by joining our monthly Opportunities Newsletter. Innovate Grant awards two $1,800 grants each quarter to one visual artist and one photographer. In addition, twelve applicants will receive honorable mentions, be featured on the website, and join a growing community. International artists and photographers working in any medium are eligible.Deadline: 11:59 p.m. PST on June 26, 2025.Open Calls Artadia Awards (San Francisco Bay area) Artists receive unrestricted funds of $15,000, and honoraria will also be provided to finalists.Deadline: June 1, 2025.Artists are welcome to submit proposals for temporary, site-specific public art projects to be showcased throughout Nashville during the Artville festival weekend, September 26 to 28, 2025. Selected artists will be invited to accept a grant to bring their creative visions to life, plus the chance for a cash prize. Total cash prizes equal $10,000.Deadline: June 4, 2025.Women in Watercolor International Juried Competition (International)Deadline: June 8, 2025. The Vilcek Foundation will award six $50,000 prizes to young immigrants working in fashion curation, material innovation, makeup, hair, writing, curation, styling, design, and photography. Read more on Colossal.Deadline: June 9, 2025.Art Renewal Center Salon Competition (International)Deadline: 11:59 p.m. PST on June 12, 2025. Weather Photographer of the Year (International) Hosted by the Royal Meteorological Society, this competition showcases the world’s most striking weather and climate photographs and raises awareness about the environmental issues putting our planet at risk. Open to photographers of all ages and abilities, the contest offers a £5,000 cash prize.Deadline: June 19, 2025.AAP Magazine #49 B&W Photography Open Call (International) The contest is open to any interpretation of black-and-white photography. Winners will receive $1,000 and their winning image(s) or full portfolio published in AAP Magazine, vol. 49, There is a $35 entry fee for the first three images, plus $5 for each additional image.Deadline: June 24, 2025.Midwest Open (Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota) The Midwest Open is Woman Made Gallery’s annual exhibition highlighting women and nonbinary artists living in the Midwest. All media and subject matter are eligible, and cash prizes range from $100 to $300. There is a $35 submission fee.Deadline: June 28, 2025.Makers, artists, and crafters are eligible to submit works that demonstrate technical mastery and a connection to cultural tradition through a singular, one-of-a-kind handcrafted piece. The winner will receive $25,000, and four finalists will also receive grant funding.Deadline: June 30, 2025.16th Epson International Pano Awards (International) This panoramic photography contest is open for entries and offering more than $50,000 in cash and prizes. There is an $18 entry fee.Deadline: July 21, 2025.Grants Art Fluent Evolution Grant (International) Art Fluent awards a $1,000 grant to one visual artist each cycle. The unrestricted funds may be applied toward any expense to enhance the artist’s ability to create work. There is a $35 entry fee.Deadline: June 6, 2025.Get Ready Grants provide craft artists with up to $1,000 for activities to safeguard their studios, protect their practices, and prepare for emergencies. Priority is given to applicants who have been underrepresented in the craft community, including BIPOC and folk/traditional artists.Deadline: June 10, 2025.Ian Potter Cultural Trust Emerging Artist Grants (Australia) Two funding rounds annually are open to individual artists working across disciplines who can apply for grants of up to AUD $15,000. This round funds travel or projects that commence after September 19, 2025.Deadline: June 17, 2025.Grants for Artists’ Progress (Washington State) This program offers 65 unrestricted grants of $1,500 for artists working in all disciplines across Washington State.Deadline: June 23, 2025.This $10,000 grant is designed to highlight an existing body of work by a Black trans woman visual artist. Four finalists will also receive $1,250.Deadline: July 2, 2025.Liu Shiming Art Foundation’s Artist Grants (International) Each year, the Liu Shiming Art Foundation selects up to five artists to receive a $5,000 grant. Visual artists working for at least two years (but not more than 10) are invited to apply for a grant in support of a current or new project.Deadline: August 21, 2025.Vital Impacts offers one $20,000 grant to an established environmental photographer, along with six $5,000 grants to emerging photographers from around the world. These funds are specifically earmarked for the development of documentary projects focusing on environmental stories.Deadline: September 15, 2025.The Adolf and Esther Gottlieb Emergency Grant (International) This program provides one-time financial assistance to qualified painters, printmakers, and sculptors whose needs resulted from an unforeseen catastrophic incident and who lack the resources to meet that situation. Awardees typically receive $5,000, up to $15,000.Deadline: Rolling.This fund commissions visual artists to create company projects on a rolling basis. Awardees will receive between $500 and $5,000.Deadline: Rolling.Pollock-Krasner Foundation Grant (International) The foundation welcomes applications from painters, sculptors, and artists working on paper, including printmakers. Grants are intended for one year and range up to $50,000. The artist’s circumstances determine the size of the grant, and professional exhibition history will be considered.Deadline: Rolling.Residencies, Fellowships, & More The Farm Margaret River Residency (International) This five- to eight-week residency is geared toward site-responsive projects and engagement with the land. Residents receive a $7,500 stipend, studio space, accommodations, and travel assistance.Deadline: 5 p.m. AWST on June 2, 2025.Wassaic Project 2026 Residency Program (International) Wassaic Project is accepting proposals for the 2026 summer and winter residencies. Artists receive a semi-private studio space; private room in a shared house (the Family program receives a private house); access to a wood shop, print shop, and kiln; staff support; and programming such as our visiting artist program, artist talks, studio visits, open studios, artist presentations, etc. The residency fee is $900, and fellowships are available. There is a $25 entry fee.Deadline: June 2, 2025.Headlands Center for the Art Artist-in-Residence (International) Residencies of four to ten weeks include studio space, chef-prepared meals, housing, travel, and living expenses. Artists selected for this program are at all career stages and work in all media, including drawing, painting, sculpture, photography, film, video, new media, installation, fiction and nonfiction writing, poetry, dance, music, interdisciplinary, social practice, arts professions, and architecture. There is a $45 application fee.Deadline: June 2, 2025.Banff Centre Artist in Residence – Winter 2026 (International) Individual and duo visual artists at any stage of their career are eligible for this residency, which offers focus in a supportive learning environment. During five weeks, participants are encouraged to self-direct their research and time and cultivate new directions. Studio space is provided.Deadline: June 11, 2025.Prairie Ronde Artist Residency (International) These five- to six-week residencies offer a $2,000 stipend, $500 travel grant, and housing to artists interested in interacting with the former Lee Paper Company mill in Vicksburg, Michigan. There is a $25 application fee.Deadline: June 15, 2025.Stove Works Residency (International) This program invites eight residents for one to three months. Six studios are designed for artists who require significant space in their practice, while the other two are for writers, curators, and academics. There is a $30 application fee. Deadline: June 15, 2025.Women’s Studio Workshop (International) WSW is accepting applications for two programs: A studio residency open to artists working in intaglio, letterpress, papermaking, screenprinting, darkroom photography, or ceramics; and an education residency for artists interested in working with local students. Both tracks offer studio space and housing.Deadline: June 15, 2025.Artists, ecological scientists, and scholars wanting to explore connections to nature, land conservation, historic preservation, agriculture, and community building are invited to apply for this program. Studio space, accommodations, a $200 per week stipend, and more are provided.Deadline: 5 p.m. PST on June 20, 2025.Peters Valley School of Craft Residency (International) This program is open to artists working in blacksmithing, ceramics, fibers, jewelry and fine metals, wood, and printmaking. Residents spend two weeks or one month in fully equipped studios, receive a $500 or $1,000 stipend, and are offered housing. There is a $10 application fee.Deadline: July 1, 2025.Penland School of Craft (International)Deadline: July 2, 2025. The Kyoto Retreat (International) Artists, curators, and writers are eligible for this four-week retreat in Kyoto for research, exploration, and inspiration. Chosen applicants receive a round-trip flight, a private bedroom, and $800 to supplement meals and local transportation.Deadline: July 15, 2025.If you’d like to list an opportunity, please contact [email protected]. Next article

Shenzhen-based 3D printer manufacturer Elegoo has introduced a new RFID Ecosystem for its upcoming printer line, including the upcoming Elegoo Saturn 4 Ultra. This system integrates RFID-tagged resin bottles, an Elegoo-designed scanner, and cloud-connected print profiles. Elegoo has opened a public feedback solicitation on its website and GitHub page to refine the implementation and encourage community input. The company is currently testing several use cases, such as automatic profile loading, material usage tracking, and batch traceability. Elegoo says these features aim to streamline workflow, reduce errors, and assist in quality assurance. However, in a GitHub post, the company emphasized that its RFID system is optional and will not lock users into proprietary materials. An open approach to a closed-loop trend? The Elegoo RFID Ecosystem enters a broader conversation in the additive manufacturing (AM) industry regarding material-locking strategies and proprietary ecosystems. As discussed in a recent 3D Printing Industry analysis, the proliferation of closed systems has triggered renewed debate about interoperability, user autonomy, and long-term value for manufacturers and end-users alike. Elegoo appears to be taking a middle-ground approach: providing automation and traceability features via RFID while maintaining support for third-party materials. In the Elegoo RFID Tag Guide, developers are encouraged to create and test custom tags, with detailed instructions and example code provided to the open-source community. Developer-centric rollout The Elegoo Saturn 4 Ultra, which serves as the first testbed for the RFID system, uses a dedicated RFID reader to retrieve data from tags affixed to resin bottles. These tags store encoded information such as resin name, type, batch number, and print profile metadata. The printer’s firmware can automatically sync this information with cloud-hosted slicer settings for optimal prints. According to the company, future updates may include compatibility with other Elegoo printers and additional features like usage history logging, tamper detection, and resin validation for regulatory compliance. Color scheme guide possibly used for tag classification or UI indication in Elegoo’s RFID material system. Image via Elegoo. A call for collaboration In its official blog post, Elegoo invited users, developers, and material manufacturers to contribute feedback and propose new applications. The company has not yet announced a formal launch date for the ecosystem or its associated hardware. Elegoo, known for its budget-friendly resin and FDM printers, has been expanding its R&D efforts in recent years. With the RFID ecosystem, it now joins other AM firms experimenting with embedded metadata and smart materials integration to support traceability, security, and ease of use. Interoperability and user autonomy The debate about open vs closed ecosystems has increasingly intensified in additive manufacturing discussions. For example, Bambu Lab’s controversial firmware update that introduced new authentication protocols, sparking concerns about third-party compatibility and user autonomy. Subsequent coverage highlighted pushback from the open-source community, including Orca Slicer developers, who rejected integration with Bambu Connect over transparency and access concerns. These cases underscore how interoperability is not only a technical issue, but a strategic and ideological one shaping the future of the AM sector.RFID in 3D printing While RFID integration is more common in logistics and supply chain management, researchers and companies are beginning to explore its potential in 3D printing. Scientists at Swinburne University developed biosensing RFID tags using 3D printed hybrid liquids, enabling applications in health diagnostics and environmental sensing. Meanwhile, materials firm Supernova unveiled a new resin cartridge system embedded with RFID to improve compatibility and process control in high-viscosity 3D printing platforms. These developments suggest that RFID could play a growing role in material authentication, traceability, and automated workflow management within additive manufacturing ecosystems.Subscribe to the 3D Printing Industry newsletter to keep up with the latest 3D printing news. You can also follow us onLinkedIn and subscribe to the 3D Printing Industry YouTube channel to access more exclusive content. At 3DPI, our mission is to deliver high-quality journalism, technical insight, and industry intelligence to professionals across the AM ecosystem.Help us shape the future of 3D printing industry news with our2025 reader survey. Featured image shows Elegoo RFID system displayed on a resin bottle, designed to communicate encoded material data to the printer. Image via Elegoo.

What worked in The Witcher 3 and what didn't: looking back on a landmark RPG with CD Projekt Red "We learned a lot of lessons down the road." Image credit: CD Projekt Red Feature by Robert Purchese Associate Editor Published on May 31, 2025 Do you remember what you were doing when The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt was released? It came out on 19th May 2015. I remember because I was inside CD Projekt Red at the time, trying to capture the moment for you - a moment I'm unlikely to replicate there or anywhere else. I recall sitting in the studio's canteen in the small hours of the morning, after a midnight launch event in a mall in Warsaw, chewing on a piece of cold pizza and wondering out loud what would come next for the studio, because at the time, who could know? One era was ending and another was about to begin. Would it bring the fame and fortune CD Projekt Red desired? Today, more than 60 million sales of The Witcher 3 later, we know the answer is yes. The Witcher 3 became a role-playing classic. It delivered one of the most touchable medieval worlds we've explored, a rough place of craggy rocks and craggier faces, of wonky morales and grim realities, of mud and dirtiness. And monsters, though not all were monstrous to look at. It was a world of grey, of superstition and folklore, and in it stood we, a legendary monster hunter, facing seemingly impossible odds. The Witcher 3 took fantasy seriously. But the decade since the game's release has been turbulent for CD Projekt Red. The studio launched its big new sci-fi series in 2020 with Cyberpunk 2077, and though the game has now sold more than 30 million copies, making it monetarily a success, it had a nightmarish launch. The PS4 version had to be removed from sale. It brought enormous pressure, growing pains and intense scrutiny to the studio, and CD Projekt Red would spend a further three years patching and updating - and eventually releasing an expansion - before public opinion would mostly turn around. Today the studio returns to safer ground, back to The Witcher world with the new game The Witcher 4, and as we look forward to it we should also look back, to the game that catapulted the studio to fame, and see what has been learnt. The Witcher 3 is at version 4.04 today, a number that represents an enormously long period of post-release support.Watch on YouTube It all began with naivety, as perhaps any ambitious project should. It's easy to forget that 14 years ago, when The Witcher 3 was being conceived, CD Projekt Red had never made an open-world game before. The Witcher 1 and The Witcher 2 were linear in their approaches. It's also easy to forget that the people making the game were 14 years younger and less experienced. Back then, this was the studio's chance at recognition, so it aimed high in order to be seen. "The Witcher 3 was supposed to be this game that will end all other games," Marcin Blacha, the lead writer of the game, tells me. Simply make an open-world game that's also a story-driven game and release it on all platforms at the same time. How hard could it be? "When I'm thinking about our state of mind back in those days, the only word that comes to my mind is enthusiastic," Blacha says. "It was fantastic because we were so enthusiastic that we were full of courage. We were trying to experiment with stuff and we were not afraid. We were convinced that when we work with passion and love, it will pay off eventually." Every project has to begin somewhere and for Blacha, the person tasked with imagining the story, The Witcher 3 could only begin with Ciri, the daughter-of-sorts to The Witcher's central monster hunter character Geralt. As Blacha says, "The most important thing about Geralt and the most important thing about the books is the relationship between Geralt, Ciri and Yennefer. I already did two games with no sign of Ciri, no sign of Yennefer, and then we finally had a budget and proper time for pre-production, so for me, it was time to introduce both characters." It's a decision that would have major repercussions for the rest of The Witcher series at CD Projekt Red. Blacha didn't know it then, but Ciri would go on to become the protagonist of The Witcher 4. Had she not been the co-protagonist of The Witcher 3 - for you play as her in several sections during the game - who knows if things would have worked out the same way. It's an understandable progression as it is, though there is still some uncertainty among the audience about Ciri's starring role. But Ciri's inclusion came with complications, because the Ciri we see in the game is not the Ciri described in the books. That Ciri is much closer to the Ciri in the Netflix Witcher TV show, younger and more rebellious in a typical teenager way. She might be an important part of the fiction, then, but that doesn't mean she was especially well liked. "People were thinking that she's annoying," says Blacha, who grew up reading The Witcher books. CD Projekt Red, then, decided to make a Ciri of its own, aging her and making her more "flesh and bone", as Blacha puts it. He fondly recalls a moment in the game's development when reviewing the Ciri sections of the game, and saying aloud to studio director Adam Badowski how much he liked her. "I didn't know that she's going to be the protagonist of the next game," he says, "but I said to Adam Badowski, she's going to be very popular." Once Ciri had been earmarked for inclusion in The Witcher 3, the idea to have her pursued by the phantom-like force of the Wild Hunt - the members of which literally ride horses in the night sky, like Santa Claus' cursed reindeer - came shortly after. CD Projekt Red had introduced the Wild Hunt in The Witcher 2 so it made sense. The outline of the main story was then laid down as a one-page narrative treatment. Then it was expanded to a two-page treatment, a four page treatment, an eight page treatment and so on. At around 10 pages, it already had the White Orchard prologue, almost the entirety of the No Man's Land zone, and a hint of what would happen on Skellige and in Novigrad. When it was around 40 pages long, the quest design team was invited in. CD Projekt Red made their Ciri older than she is in the books. | Image credit: CD Projekt Red The quest design team's job is to turn a story into a game, and this was a newly created department for The Witcher 3, created because the old way of writers designing the quests wasn't working any more. "We were struggling a bit with making sure that every written story that we have prepared is also a story that we can play well," Paweł Sasko says. He joined CD Projekt Red to be a part of that quest design team. The quest design team carves up a narrative treatment, paragraph by paragraph, and expands those into playable questlines for the game. "It's basically something between game design and a movie scenario," Sasko says. There's no dialogue, just a description of what will happen, and even a one-paragraph prompt can balloon into a 20-30 page design. Among the paragraphs Sasko was given to adapt was a storyline in No Man's Land concerning a character known as the Bloody Baron. The Bloody Baron storyline is widely acclaimed and has become synonymous with everything Sasko and CD Projekt Red were trying to do with the game. It's a storyline that probes into mature themes like domestic abuse, fatherhood, and love and loss and grief. More importantly, it presents us with a flawed character and allows us time and space to perhaps change our opinion of them. It gives us layers many other games don't go anywhere near. When Sasko first encountered the storyline, there was only an outline. "It said that Geralt meets the Bloody Baron who asks Geralt to hunt a monster and look for his wife and daughter, and for that, he is going to share information about Ciri and tell Geralt where she went. That was pretty much it." And Sasko already knew a few things about what he wanted to do. He knew he wanted to show No Man's Land as a Slavic region bathed in superstitions and complex religious beliefs, one that had been ravaged by famine and war. He also knew the tone of the area was horror because this had been outlined by Blacha and the leaders of The Witcher 3 team. Says Blacha: "My opinion is that a successful Witcher game is a mix of everything, so you have a horror line, you have a romance, you have adventure, you have exploration. When we started to think about our hubs, we thought about them in terms of a show, so No Man's Land, the hub with the Bloody Baron, was horror; Skellige was supposed to be an adventure; and Novigrad was supposed to be a big city investigation." But there were key missing pieces then from the Bloody Baron sequence we know today. The botchling, for instance - the monstrous baby the quest revolves around. It didn't exist. It was an idea that came from Sasko after he read a Slavic bestiary. "Yes," he says, "the botchling idea came from me." The Bloody Baron. | Image credit: Eurogamer / CD Projekt Red He wanted the botchling to be the conduit through which more mature themes of the story could be approached - something overt to keep you busy while deeper themes sunk in. It's an approach Sasko says he pinched from Witcher author Andrzej Sapkowski, after deconstructing his work. "What he's doing is he's trying to find universal truths about human beings and struggles, but he doesn't tell those stories directly," Sasko says. "So for instance racism: he doesn't talk about that directly but he finds an interesting way how, in his world, he can package that and talk about it. I followed his method and mimicked it." This way the botchling becomes your focus in the quest, as the Baron carries it back to the manor house and you defend him from wraiths, but while you're doing that, you're also talking and learning more about who the Bloody Baron - who Phillip Strenger - is. "I wanted you to feel almost like you're in the shoes of that Bloody Baron," Sasko says. "Peregrination is this path in Christianity you go through when you want to remove your sins, and that's what this is meant to be. He's just trying to do it, and he's going through all of those things to do something good. And I wanted the player to start feeling like, 'Wow, maybe this dude is not so bad.'" It's a quest that leaves a big impression. An email was forwarded to Sasko after the game's release, written by a player who had lost their wife and child as the Baron once had. "And for him," he says, "that moment when Baron was carrying the child was almost like a catharsis, when he was trying so badly to walk that path. And the moment he managed to: he wrote in his letter that he broke down in tears." There's one other very significant moment in The Witcher 3 that Sasko had a large hand in, and it's the Battle of Kaer Morhern, where the 'goodies' - the witchers and the sorceresses, and Ciri - make a stand against the titular menace of the Wild Hunt. Sasko designed this section specifically to emotionally tenderise you, through a series of fast-paced and fraught battles, so that by the time the climactic moment came, you were aptly primed to receive it. The moment being Vesemir's death - the leader of the wolf school of witchers and father figure to Geralt. This, too, was Sasko's idea. "We needed to transition Ciri from being a hunted animal to becoming a hunter," he tells me, and the only event big enough and with enough inherent propulsion was Vesemir's death. Eredin, the leader of the Wild Hunt, breaks Vesemir's neck. | Image credit: Eurogamer / CD Projekt Red But for all of the successful moments in the game there are those that didn't work. To the team that made the game, and to the players, there are things that clearly stand out. Such as Geralt's witcher senses, which allow him to see scent trails and footsteps and clues in the world around him. Geralt's detective mode, in other words. Sasko laughs as he cringes about it now. "We've overdone the witcher senses so much, oh my god," he says. "At the time when we were starting this, we were like, 'We don't have it in the game; we have to use it to make you feel like a witcher.' But then at the end, especially in the expansions, we tried to decrease it so it doesn't feel so overloaded." He'd even turn it down by a further 10 to 20 per cent, he says. There were all of the question marks dotted across the map, luring us to places to find meagre hidden treasure rewards. "I think we all scratch our heads about what we were thinking when trying to build this," Sasko tells me. "I guess it just came from fear - from fear that the player will feel that the world is empty." This was the first time CD Projekt Red had really the player's hand go, remember, and not controlled where in the world you would be. Shallow gameplay is a criticism many people have, especially in the game's repetitive combat, and again, this is something Sasko and the team are well aware of. "We don't feel that the gameplay in Witcher 3 was deep enough," he says. "It was for the times okay, but nowadays when you play it, even though the story still holds really well, you can see that the gameplay is a bit rusty." Also, the cutscenes could have been paced better and had less exposition in them, and the game in general could have dumped fewer concepts on you at once. Cognitive overload, Sasko calls it. "In every second sentence you have a new concept introduced, a new country mentioned, a new politician..." It was too much. More broadly, he would also have liked the open-world to be more closely connected to the game's story, rather than be, mostly, a pretty backdrop. "It's like in the theatre when you have beautiful decorations at the back made of cardboard and paper, and not much happens to them except an actor pulls a rope and it starts to rain or something." he says. It's to do with how the main story influences the world and vice versa, and he thinks the studio can be better at it. Ciri and Geralt look at a coin purse in The Witcher 3. This is, coincidentally, the same tavern you begin the game in, with Vesemir, and the same tavern you meet Master Mirror in. | Image credit: Eurogamer / CD Projekt Red One conversation that surprises me, when looking back on The Witcher 3, is a conversation about popularity, because it's easy to forget now - with the intense scrutiny the studio seems always to be under - that when development began, not many people knew about CD Projekt Red. The combined sales of both Witcher games in 2013 were only 5 million. Poland knew about it - the Witcher fiction originated there and CD Projekt Red is Polish - and Germany knew about it, and some of the rest of Europe knew about it. But in North America, it was relatively unknown. That's a large part of the reason why the Xbox 360 version of The Witcher 2 was made at all, to begin knocking on that door. And The Witcher 3, CD Projekt Red hoped, would kick that door open. "We knew that we wanted to play in the major league," says Michał Platkow-Gilewski, vice president of communications and PR, stealing a quote from Cyberpunk character Jackie. That's why The Witcher 3 was revealed via a Game Informer cover story in early 2013, because that was deemed the way to do things there - the way to win US hearts, Platkow-Gilewski tells me. And it didn't take long for interest to swell. When Platkow-Gilewski joined CD Projekt Red to help launch the Xbox 360 version of The Witcher 2 in 2012, he was handing out flyers at Gamescom with company co-founder Michał Kicinski, just to fill presentations for the game. By the time The Witcher 3 was being shown at Gamescom, a few years later, queues were three to four hours long. People would wait all day to play. "We had to learn how to deal with popularity during the campaign," Platkow-Gilewski says. Those game shows were crucial for spreading the word about The Witcher 3 and seeing first-hand the impact the game was having on players and press. "Nothing can beat a good show where you meet with people who are there to see their favourite games just slightly before the rest of the world," he says. "They're investing their time, money, effort, and you feel this support, sometimes love, to the IP you're working on, and it boosts energy the way which you can't compare with anything else. These human to human interactions are unique." He says the studio's leader Adam Badowski would refer to these showings as fuel that would propel development for the next year or so, which is why CD Projekt Red always tried to gather as many developers as possible for them, to feel the energy. It was precisely these in-person events that Platkow-Gilewski says CD Projekt Red lacked in the lead up to Cyberpunk's launch, after Covid shut the world down. The company did what it could by pivoting to online events instead - the world-first playtest of Cyberpunk was done online via stream-play software called Parsec; I was a part of it - and talked to fans through trailers, but it was much harder to gauge feedback this way. "It's easy to just go with the flow and way harder to manage expectations," Platkow-Gilewski says, so expectations spiralled. "For me the biggest lesson learned is to always check reality versus expectations, and with Cyberpunk, it was really hard to control and we didn't know how to do it." It makes me wonder what the studio will do now with The Witcher 4, because the game show sector of the industry still hasn't bounced back, and I doubt - having seen the effect Covid has had on shows from the inside of an events company - whether it ever will. "Gamescom is growing," Platkow-Gilewski says somewhat optimistically. "Gamescom is back on track." But I don't know if it really is. Michał Platkow-Gilewski cites this moment as one of his favourite from the Witcher 3 journey. The crew were at the game show PAX in front of a huge live audience and the dialogue audio wouldn't play. Thankfully, they had Doug Cockle, the English language voice actor of Geralt, with them on the panel, so he live improvised the lines. Watch on YouTube Something else I'm surprised to hear from him is mention of The Witcher 3's rocky launch, because 10 years later - and in comparison to Cyberpunk's - that's not how I remember it. But Platkow-Gilewski remembers it differently. "When we released Witcher 3, the reception was not great," he says. "Reviews were amazing but there was, at least in my memories, no common consensus that this is a huge game which will maybe define some, to some extent, the genre." I do remember the strain on some faces around the studio at launch, though. I also remember a tense conversation about the perceived graphics downgrade in the game, where people unfavourably compared footage of Witcher 3 at launch, with footage from a marketing gameplay trailer released years before it. There were also a number of bugs in the game's code and its performance was unoptimised. "We knew things were far from being perfect," Platkow-Gilewski says. But the studio worked hard in the years after launch to patch and update the game - The Witcher 3 is now on version 4.04, which is extraordinary for a single-player game - and they released showcase expansions for it. Some of Marcin Blacha's favourite work is in those expansions, he tells me, especially the horror storylines of Hearts of Stone, many of which he wrote. That expansion's villain, Master Mirror, is also widely regarded as one of the best in the game, disguised as he is as a plain-looking and unassuming person who happens to have incredible and undefinable power. It's not until deep into the expansion you begin to uncover his devilish identity, and it's this subtle way of presenting a villain, and never over explaining his threat, that makes Master Mirror so memorable. He's gathered such a following that some people have concocted elaborate theories about him. Lead character artist Pawel Mielniczuk tells me about one theory whereby someone discovered you can see Master Mirror's face on many other background characters in the game, which you can, and that they believed it was a deliberate tactic used by CD Projekt Red to underline Master Mirror's devilish power. Remember, there was a neat trick with Master Mirror in that you had already met him at the beginning of The Witcher 3 base game, long before the expansion was ever developed, in a tavern in White Orchard. If CD Projekt Red could foreshadow him as far back as that, the theory went, then it could easily put his face on other characters in the game to achieve a similar 'did you see it?' effect. The real villain in the Hearts of Stone expansion, Gaunter O'Dimm. Better known to many as Master Mirror. There's a reason why he has such a plain-looking face... | Image credit: CD Projekt Red The truth is far more mundane. Other characters in the game do have Master Mirror's face, but only because his face is duplicated across the game in order to fill it out. CD Projekt Red didn't know when it made the original Witcher 3 game that this villager would turn into anyone special. There was a tentative plan but it was very tentative, so this villager got a very villager face. "We just got a request for a tertiary unimportant character," says Mileniczuk. "We had like 30-40 faces for the entire game so we just slapped a random face on him." He laughs. And by the time Hearts of Stone development came around, the face - the identity - had stuck. Expansions were an important part of cementing public opinion around The Witcher 3, then, as they were for cementing public opinion around Cyberpunk. They've become something of a golden bullet for the studio, a way to creatively unleash an already trained team and leave a much more positive memory in our heads. Exactly what went wrong with Cyberpunk and how CD Projekt Red set about correcting it is a whole other story Chris Tapsell told recently on the site, so I don't want to delve into specifics here. Suffice to say it was a hard time for the studio and many hard lessons had to be learned. "The pressure was huge," Platkow-Gilewski says, "because from underdogs we went to a company which will, for sure, deliver the best experience in the world." But while much of the rhetoric around Cyberpunk concerns the launch, there's a lot about the game itself that highlights how much progress the studio made, in terms of making open-world role-playing games. One of my favourite examples is how characters in Cyberpunk walk and talk rather than speak to you while rooted to the spot. It might seem like a small thing but it has a transformative and freeing effect on conversations, allowing the game to walk you places while you talk, and stage dialogue in a variety of cool ways. There's a lot to admire about the density of detail in the world, too, and in the greater variety of body shapes and diversity. Plus let's not forget, this is an actual open world rather than a segmented one as The Witcher 3 was. In many ways, the game was a huge step forward for the studio. Cyberpunk wasn't the only very notable thing to happen to the Witcher studio in those 10 years, either. During that time, The Witcher brand changed. Netflix piggybacked the game's popularity and developed a TV series starring Henry Cavill, and with it propelled The Witcher to the wider world. Curiously, CD Projekt Red wasn't invited to help, which was odd given executive producer Tomek Baginski was well known to CD Projekt Red, having directed the intro cinematics for all three Witcher video games. But beyond minor pieces of crossover content, no meaningful collaboration ever occurred. "We had no part in the shows," Pawel Mileniczuk says. "But it's Hollywood: different words. I know how hard it was for Tomek to get in there, to convince them to do the show, and then how limited influence is when the production house sits on something. It's many people, many decision makers, high stakes, big money. Nobody there was thinking about, Hey, let's talk to those dudes from Poland making games. It's a missed opportunity to me but what can I say?" The debut trailer for The Witcher 4.Watch on YouTube Nevertheless, the Netflix show had a surprisingly positive effect on the studio, with sales of The Witcher 3 spiking in 2019 and 2020 when the first season aired. "It was a really amazing year for us sales wise," Platkow-Gilewski says. This not only means more revenue for the studio but also wider understanding; more people are more familiar with The Witcher world now than ever before, which bodes very well for The Witcher 4. Not that it influenced or affected the studio's plans to return to that world, by the way. "We knew already that we wanted to come back to The Witcher," Platkow-Gilewski says. "Some knew that they wanted to tell a Ciri story while we were still working on Witcher 3." But, again, with popularity also comes pressure. "We'll have hopefully millions of people already hooked in from the get-go but with some expectations and visions and dreams which we have to, or may not be able to, fulfil," Platkow-Gilewski adds. You can already sense this pressure in comments threads about the new game. Many people already have their ideas about what a new Witcher game should be. The Witcher 4 might seem like a return to safer ground, then, but the relationship with the audience has changed in the intervening 10 years. "I think people are again with us," Platkow-Gilewski says. "There are some who are way more careful than they used to be; I don't see the hype train. We also learned how to talk about our game, what to show, when to show. But I think people believe again. Not everyone, and maybe it's slightly harder to talk with the whole internet. It's impossible now. It's way more polarised than it used to be. But I believe that we'll have something special for those who love The Witcher." Here we are a decade later, then, looking forward to another Witcher game by CD Projekt Red. But many things have changed. The studio has grown and shuffled people around and the roles of the people I speak to have changed. Marcin Blacha and Pawel Mielniczuk aren't working on The Witcher 4, but on new IP Project Hadar, in addition to their managerial responsibilities, and Pawel Sasko is full-time on Cyberpunk 2. It's only really Michał Platkow-Gilewski who'll do a similar job for The Witcher 4 as on The Witcher 3, although this time with dozens more people to help. But they will all still consult and they're confident in the abilities of The Witcher 4 team. "They really know what they're doing," says Sasko, "they are a very seasoned team." "We learned a lot of lessons down the road," Platkow-Gilewski says, in closing. "I started this interview saying that we had this bliss of ignorance; now we know more, but hopefully we can still be brave. Before, we were launching a rocket and figuring out how to land on the moon. Now, we know the dangers but we are way more experienced, so we'll find a way to navigate through these uncharted territories. We have a map already so hopefully it won't be such a hard trip."