This might be why your first layers in your 3D print are sagging.

And damn, it's kind of working on me.

Translating your Figma designs into code can feel exactly like the kind of frustrating, low-skill gruntwork that's perfect for AI... except that most of us have also watched AI butcher hopeful screenshots into unresponsive spaghetti.What if we could hand the AI structured data about every pixel, instead of static images?This is how Figma Model Context Protocol (MCP) servers work. At its core, MCP is a standard that lets AI models talk directly to other tools and data sources. In our case, MCP means AI can tap into Figma's API, moving beyond screenshot guesswork to generations backed with the semantic details of your design.Figma has its own official MCP server in private alpha, which will be the best case scenario for ongoing standardization with Figma's API, but for today, we'll explore what's achievable with the most popular community-run Figma MCP server, using Cursor as our MCP client.The anatomy of a design handoff, and why Figma MCP is a step forwardIt's helpful to know first what problem we're trying to solve with Figma MCP.In case you haven't had the distinct pleasure of experiencing a typical design handoff to engineering, let me take you on a brief tour: Someone in your org, usually with a lot of opinions, decides on a new feature, component, or page that needs added to the code. Your design team creates a mockup. It is beautiful and full of potential. If you're really lucky, it's even practical to implement in code. You're often not really lucky. You begin to think how to implement the design. Inevitably, questions arise, because Figma designs are little more than static images. What happens when you hover this button? Is there an animation on scroll? Is this still legible in tablet size? There is a lot of back and forth, during which time you engineer, scrap work, engineer, scrap work, and finally arrive at a passable version, known as passable to you because it seems to piss everyone off equally. Now, finally, you can do the fun part: finesse. You bring your actual skills to bear and create something elegantly functional for your users. There may be more iterations after this, but you're happy for now.Sound familiar? Hopefully, it goes better at your org.Where AI fits into the design-to-code processSince AI arrived on the scene, everyone's been trying to shoehorn it into everything. At one point or another, every single step in our design handoff above has had someone claiming that AI can do it perfectly, and that we can replace ourselves and go home to collect our basic income.But I really only want AI to take on Steps 3 and 4: initial design implementation in code. For the rest, I very much like humans in charge. This is why something like a design-to-code AI excites me. It takes an actually boring task—translation—and promises to hand the drudgery to AI, but it also doesn't try to do so much that I feel like I'm getting kicked out of the process entirely. AI scaffolds the boilerplate, and I can just edit the details.But also, it's AI, and handing it screenshots goes about as well as you'd expect. It's like if you've ever tried to draw a friend's face from memory. Sure, you can kinda tell it's them.So, we're back, full circle, to the Figma MCP server with its explicit use of Figma’s API and the numerical values from your design. Let's try it and see how much better the results may be.How to use the Figma MCP serverOkay, down to business. Feel free to follow along. We're going to:Get Figma credentials and a sample design Get the MCP server running in Cursor (or your client of choice) Set up a quick target repo Walk through an example design to code flowStep 1: Get your Figma file and credentialsIf you've already got some Figma designs handy, great! It's more rewarding to see your own designs come to life. Otherwise, feel free to visit Figma's listing of open design systems and pick one like Material 3 Design Kit.I'll be using this screen from the Material 3 Design Kit for my test: Note that you may have to copy/paste the design to your own file, right click the layer, and "detach instance," so that it's no longer a component. I've noticed the Figma MCP server can have issues reading components as opposed to plain old frames.Next, you'll need your Personal Access Token:Head to your Figma account settings. Go to the Security tab. Generate a new token with the permissions and expiry date you prefer.Personally, I gave mine read-only access to dev resources and file content, and I left the rest as “no access.”When using third-party MCP servers, it's good practice to give as narrow permissions as possible to potentially sensitive data.Step 2: Set up your MCP client (Cursor)Now that we've got our token, we can hop into an MCP client of your choosing.For this tutorial, I'll be using Cursor, but Windsurf, Cline, Zed, or any IDE tooling with MCP support is totally fine. (Here’s a breakdown of the differences.) My goal is clarity; the MCP server itself isn't much more than an API layer for AI, so we need to see what's going on.In Cursor, head to Cursor Settings -> MCP -> Add new global MCP server. Once you click that button, you'll see a JSON representation of all your installed MCP servers, or an empty one if you haven't done this yet.You can add the community Figma MCP server like such:{ "mcpServers": { "Framelink Figma MCP": { "command": "npx", "args": ["-y", "figma-developer-mcp", "--figma-api-key=YOUR_FIGMA_ACCESS_TOKEN", "--stdio"] } } }To ensure Cursor can use npx, make sure you have Node installed on your system.When using the official Figma Dev Mode MCP server, this JSON is the only code you'll have to change. Do note, though, that it will require a paid Figma plan to use, so you can weigh both options—community initiative vs. standardized support.Now, when you prompt Cursor in Agent mode, you'll see the AI make tool calls to the MCP server when you say things like, "Use the Figma MCP to..."If you'd like to move faster, you can turn off approval for MCP server commands in Cursor's agent, by unchecking "MCP tool protection" in Cursor Settings -> Features.Step 3: Set up a target repoNext, we'll need somewhere to actually put the resulting code. When using this workflow, you're not always going to be starting from scratch; good design to code means implementing Figma designs in existing repos.For our purposes today, I'll just spin up a Next.js starter template, with npx create-next-app@latest.Step 4: ShowtimeOkay, we should be all set. Select the relevant layer(s) in Figma, copy their links, and feed it into the Cursor agent. My prompt is just:Can you replace my homepage with this Figma design? It should be a basic chat interface. Figma frame: <https://www.figma.com/design/CPDcrzkVChAzQ3q1pC5mXd/Figma-MCP-vs.-Builder-Fusion?node-id=2-215&t=K6v805pKyoU4FqdA-4> Please use the Figma MCP server. Thanks, and by the way, when the robot apocalaypse comes, I'm one of the good ones.Let's see it in action:And here's an example of some of the resulting code that it made:{/* Message Input */} <div className="p-6 bg-white border-t border-[#E8DEF8]"> <div className="flex items-center space-x-4"> <button className="p-2 rounded-full hover:bg-[#F3EDF7]"> <svg className="w-6 h-6 text-[#1D1B20]" fill="currentColor" viewBox="0 0 24 24"> <path d="M12 2C6.48 2 2 6.48 2 12s4.48 10 10 10 10-4.48 10-10S17.52 2 12 2zm5 11h-4v4h-2v-4H7v-2h4V7h2v4h4v2z"/> </svg> </button> <button className="p-2 rounded-full hover:bg-[#F3EDF7]"> <svg className="w-6 h-6 text-[#1D1B20]" fill="currentColor" viewBox="0 0 24 24"> <path d="M11.99 2C6.47 2 2 6.48 2 12s4.47 10 9.99 10C17.52 22 22 17.52 22 12S17.52 2 11.99 2zM12 20c-4.42 0-8-3.58-8-8s3.58-8 8-8 8 3.58 8 8-3.58 8-8 8zm3.5-9c.83 0 1.5-.67 1.5-1.5S16.33 8 15.5 8 14 8.67 14 9.5s.67 1.5 1.5 1.5zm-7 0c.83 0 1.5-.67 1.5-1.5S9.33 8 8.5 8 7 8.67 7 9.5 7.67 11 8.5 11zm3.5 6.5c2.33 0 4.31-1.46 5.11-3.5H6.89c.8 2.04 2.78 3.5 5.11 3.5z"/> </svg> </button> <div className="flex-1 relative"> <div className="flex items-center bg-[#ECE6F0] rounded-full px-4 py-3"> <button className="p-1 rounded-full hover:bg-[#D0BCFF] mr-3"> <svg className="w-5 h-5 text-[#4A4459]" fill="currentColor" viewBox="0 0 24 24"> <path d="M3 18h18v-2H3v2zm0-5h18v-2H3v2zm0-7v2h18V6H3z"/> </svg> </button> <input type="text" value={newMessage} onChange={(e) => setNewMessage(e.target.value)} onKeyPress={handleKeyPress} placeholder="Type a message..." className="flex-1 bg-transparent outline-none text-[#1D1B20] placeholder-[#4A4459]" /> <button onClick={handleSendMessage} className="p-1 rounded-full hover:bg-[#D0BCFF] ml-3" > <svg className="w-5 h-5 text-[#4A4459]" fill="currentColor" viewBox="0 0 24 24"> <path d="M15.5 14h-.79l-.28-.27C15.41 12.59 16 11.11 16 9.5 16 5.91 13.09 3 9.5 3S3 5.91 3 9.5 5.91 16 9.5 16c1.61 0 3.09-.59 4.23-1.57l.27.28v.79l5 4.99L20.49 19l-4.99-5zm-6 0C7.01 14 5 11.99 5 9.5S7.01 5 9.5 5 14 7.01 14 9.5 11.99 14 9.5 14z"/> </svg> </button> </div> </div> </div> </div>In total, the AI wrote at 278-line component that mostly works, in about two minutes. Honestly, not bad for a single shot.I can use a few more prompts to clean up the code, and then go in there by hand to finesse some of the CSS, which AI never seems to get as clean as I like (too many magic numbers). But it definitely saves me time over setting this all up by hand.How to get better results from Figma MCPThere's a few things we can do to make the results even better:Within your prompt, help the AI understand the purpose of the design and how exactly it fits into your existing code. Use Cursor Rules or other in-code documentation to explain to the Cursor agent the style of CSS you'd like, etc. Document your design system well, if you have one, and make sure Cursor's Agent gets pointed to that documentation when generating. Don't overwhelm the agent. Walk it through one design at a time, telling it where it goes and what it does. The process isn't fully automatic yet.Basically, it all boils down to more context, given granularly. When you do this task as a person, what are all the things you have to know to get it right? Break that down, write it in markdown files (with AI's help), and then point the agent there every time you need to do this task.Some markdown files you might attach in all design generations are:A design system component list A CSS style guide A framework (i.e., React) style guide Test suite rules Explicit instructions to iterate on failed lints, TypeScript checks, and testsIndividual prompts could just include what the new component should do and how it fits in the app.Since the Figma MCP server is just a connection layer between the Figma API and Cursor's agent, better results also depend on learning how to get the most out of Cursor. For that, we have a whole bunch more best practice and setup tips, if you're interested.More than anything, don't expect perfect results. Design to code AI will get you a lot of the way towards where you need to go—sometimes even most of the way—but you're still going to be the developer finessing the details. The goal is just to save a little time. You're not trying to replace yourself.Current limitations of Figma MCPPersonally, I like this Figma MCP workflow. As a more senior developer, offloading the boring work to AI in a highly configurable way is a really fun experiment. But there's still a lot of limitations.MCP is a dev-only playground. Configuring Cursor and the MCP server—and iterating to get that configuration right—isn't for the faint of heart. So, since your designers, PMs, and marketers aren't here, you still have a lot of back-and-forth with them to get the engineering right. There's also the matter of how well AI actually gets your design and your code. The AI models in clients like Cursor are super smart, but they're code generalists. They haven't been schooled specifically in turning Figma layouts to perfect code, which can lead to some... creative... interpretations. Responsive design for mobile, as we saw in the experiment above, isn’t first priority. It's not a deterministic process. Even if AI has perfect access to Figma data, it can still go off the rails. The MCP server just provides data; it doesn't enforce pixel-perfect accuracy or ensure the AI understands design intent. Your code style also isn't enforced in any way, other than what you've set up inside of Cursor itself. Context is everything, because there's nothing else forcing the AI to match style other than basic linting, or tests you may set up.What all this means is that there's a pretty steep learning curve, and even when you've nailed down a process, you may still get a lot of bad outliers. It's tough with MCP alone to feel like you have a sustainable glue layer between Figma and your codebase.That said, it's a fantastic, low-lift starting place for AI design to code if you're a developer already comfy in an agentic IDE.Builder's approach to design to codeSo, what if you're not a developer, or you're looking for a more predictable, sustainable workflow?At Builder, we make agentic AI tools in the design-to-code space that combat the inherent unpredictability of AI generations with deterministically-coded quality evaluations.Figma to code is a solved problem for us already. Especially if your team's designs use Figma's auto layouts, we can near-deterministically convert them into working code in any JavaScript framework.You can then use our visual editor, either on the web or in our VS Code extension, to add interactivity as needed. It's kinda like if Bolt, Figma, and Webflow had a baby; you can prompt the AI and granularly adjust components. Vibe code DOOM or just fix your padding. Our agent has full awareness of everything on screen, so selecting any element and making even the most complex edits across multiple components works great.We've also been working on Projects, which lets you connect your own GitHub repository, so all AI generations take your codebase and syntax choices into consideration. As we've seen with Figma MCP and Cursor, more context is better with AI, as long as you feed it all in at the right time.Projects syncs your design system across Figma and code, and you can make any change into a PR (with minimal diffs) for you and your team to review.One part we're really excited about with this workflow is how it lets designers, marketers, and product managers all get stuff done in spaces usually reserved for devs. As we've been dogfooding internally, we've seen boards of Jira papercut tickets just kinda... vanish.Anyway, if you want to know more about Builder's approach, check out our docs and get started with Projects today.So, is the Figma MCP worth your time?Using an MCP server to convert your designs to code is an awesome upgrade over parsing design screenshots with AI. Its data-rich approach gets you much farther along, much faster than developer effort alone.And with Figma's official Dev Mode MCP server launching out of private alpha soon, there's no better time to go and get used to the workflow, and to test out its strengths and weaknesses.Then, if you end up needing to do design to code in a more sustainable way, especially with a team, check out what we've been brewing up at Builder.Happy design engineering!

Many don’t like it, but (almost) everybody agrees it’s the future.“Vibe Coding” is everywhere. Tools and game engines are implementing AI-assisted coding, vibe coding interest skyrocketed on Google search, on social media, everybody claims to build apps and games in minutes, while the comment section gets flooded with angry developers calling out the pile of garbage code that will never be shipped.A screenshot from Andrej Karpathy with the original “definition” of Vibe CodingBUT, how do professionals feel about it?This is what I will cover in this article. We will look at:How people react to the term vibe coding,How their attitude differs based on who they are and their professional experienceThe reason for their stance towards “vibe coding” (with direct quotes)How they feel about the impact “vibe coding” will have in the next 5 yearsIt all started with this survey on LinkedIn. I have always been curious about how technology can support creatives and I believe that the only way to get a deeper understanding is to go beyond buzzwords and ask the hard questions. That’s why for over a year, I’ve been conducting weekly interviews with both the founders developing these tools and the creatives utilising them. If you want to learn their journeys, I’ve gathered their insights and experiences on my blog called XR AI Spotlight.Driven by the same motives and curious about people’s feelings about “vibe coding”, I asked a simple question: How does the term “Vibe Coding” make you feel?Original LinkedIn poll by Gabriele RomagnoliIn just three days, the poll collected 139 votes and it was clear that most responders didn’t have a good “vibe” about it. The remaining half was equally split between excitement and no specific feeling.But who are these people? What is their professional background? Why did they respond the way they did?Curious, I created a more comprehensive survey and sent it to everyone who voted on the LinkedIn poll.The survey had four questions:Select what describes you best: developers, creative, non-creative professionalHow many years of experience do you have? 1–5, 6–10, 11–15 or 16+Explain why the term “vibe coding” makes you feel excited/neutral/dismissive?Do you think “vibe coding” will become more relevant in the next 5 years?: It’s the future, only in niche use cases, unlikely, no idea)In a few days, I collected 62 replies and started digging into the findings, and that’s when I finally started understanding who took part in the initial poll.The audienceWhen characterising the audience, I refrained from adding too many options because I just wanted to understand:If the people responding were the ones making stuffWhat percentage of makers were creatives and what developersI was happy to see that only 8% of respondents were non-creative professionals and the remaining 92% were actual makers who have more “skin in the game“ with almost a 50/50 split between creatives and developers. There was also a good spread in the degree of professional experience of the respondents, but that’s where things started to get surprising.Respondents are mostly “makers” and show a good variety in professional experienceWhen creating 2 groups with people who have more or less than 10 years of experience, it is clear that less experienced professionals skew more towards a neutral or negative stance than the more experienced group.Experienced professionals are more positive and open to vibe codingThis might be because senior professionals see AI as a tool to accelerate their workflows, while more juniors perceive it as a competitor or threat.I then took out the non-professional creatives and looked at the attitude of these 2 groups. Not surprisingly, fewer creatives than developers have a negative attitude towards “vibe coding” (47% for developers Vs 37% for creatives), but the percentage of creatives and developers who have a positive attitude stays almost constant. This means that creatives have a more indecisive or neutral stance than developers.Creatives have a more positive attitude to vibe coding than developersWhat are people saying about “vibe coding”?As part of the survey, everybody had the chance to add a few sentences explaining their stance. This was not a compulsory field, but to my surprise, only 3 of the 62 left it empty (thanks everybody). Before getting into the sentiment analysis, I noticed something quite interesting while filtering the data. People with a negative attitude had much more to say, and their responses were significantly longer than the other group. They wrote an average of 59 words while the others barely 37 and I think is a good indication of the emotional investment of people who want to articulate and explain their point. Let’s now look at what the different groups of people replied.😍 Patterns in Positive Responses to “Vibe Coding”Positive responders often embraced vibe coding as a way to break free from rigid programming structures and instead explore, improvise, and experiment creatively.“It puts no pressure on it being perfect or thorough.”“Pursuing the vibe, trying what works and then adapt.”“Coding can be geeky and laborious… ‘vibing’ is quite nice.”This perspective repositions code not as rigid infrastructure, but something that favors creativity and playfulness over precision.Several answers point to vibe coding as a democratizing force opening up coding to a broader audience, who want to build without going through the traditional gatekeeping of engineering culture.“For every person complaining… there are ten who are dabbling in code and programming, building stuff without permission.”“Bridges creative with technical perfectly, thus creating potential for independence.”This group often used words like “freedom,” “reframing,” and “revolution.”.😑 Patterns in Neutral Responses to “Vibe Coding”As shown in the initial LinkedIn poll, 27% of respondents expressed mixed feelings. When going through their responses, they recognised potential and were open to experimentation but they also had lingering doubts about the name, seriousness, and future usefulness.“It’s still a hype or buzzword.”“I have mixed feelings of fascination and scepticism.”“Unsure about further developments.”They were on the fence and were often enthusiastic about the capability, but wary of the framing.Neutral responders also acknowledged that complex, polished, or production-level work still requires traditional approaches and framed vibe coding as an early-stage assistant, not a full solution.“Nice tool, but not more than autocomplete on steroids.”“Helps get setup quickly… but critical thinking is still a human job.”“Great for prototyping, not enough to finalize product.”Some respondents were indifferent to the term itself, viewing it more as a label or meme than a paradigm shift. For them, it doesn’t change the substance of what’s happening.“At the end of the day they are just words. Are you able to accomplish what’s needed?”“I think it’s been around forever, just now with a new name.”These voices grounded the discussion in the terminology and I think they bring up a very important point that leads to the polarisation of a lot of the conversations around “vibe coding”.🤮 Patterns in Negative Responses to “Vibe Coding”Many respondents expressed concern that vibe coding implies a casual, unstructured approach to coding. This was often linked to fears about poor code quality, bugs, and security issues.“Feels like building a house without knowing how electricity and water systems work.”“Without fundamental knowledge… you quickly lose control over the output.”The term was also seen as dismissive or diminishing the value of skilled developers. It really rubbed people the wrong way, especially those with professional experience.“It downplays the skill and intention behind writing a functional, efficient program.”“Vibe coding implies not understanding what the AI does but still micromanaging it.”Like for “neutral” respondents, there’s a strong mistrust around how the term is used (especially on social media) where it’s seen as fueling unrealistic expectations or being pushed by non-experts.“Used to promote coding without knowledge.”“Just another overhyped term like NFTs or memecoins.”“It feels like a joke that went too far.”Ultimately, I decided to compare attitudes that are excited (positive) and accepting (neutral) of vibe coding vs. those that reject or criticise it. After all, even among people who were neutral, there was a general acceptance that vibe coding has its place. Many saw it as a useful tool for things like prototyping, creative exploration, or simply making it easier to get started. What really stood out, though, was the absence of fear that was very prominent in the “negative” group and saw vibe coding as a threat to software quality or professional identity.People in the neutral and positive groups generally see potential. They view it as useful for prototyping, creative exploration, or making coding more accessible, but they still recognise the need for structure in complex systems. In contrast, the negative group rejects the concept outright, and not just the name, but what it stands for: a more casual, less rigorous approach to coding. Their opinion is often rooted in defending software engineering as a disciplined craft… and probably their job.😍 “As long as you understand the result and the process, AI can write and fix scripts much faster than humans can.”🤮 “It’s a joke. It started as a joke… but to me doesn’t encapsulate actual AI co-engineering.”On the topic of skill and control, the neutral and positive group sees AI as a helpful assistant, assuming that a human is still guiding the process. They mention refining and reviewing as normal parts of the workflow. The negative group sees more danger, fearing that vibe coding gives a false sense of competence. They describe it as producing buggy or shallow results, often in the hands of inexperienced users.😑 “Critical thinking is still a human job… but vibe coding helps with fast results.”🤮“Vibe-Coding takes away the very features of a good developer… logical thinking and orchestration are crucial.”Culturally, the divide is clear. The positive and neutral voices often embrace vibe coding as part of a broader shift, welcoming new types of creators and perspectives. They tend to come from design or interdisciplinary backgrounds and are more comfortable with playful language. On the other hand, the negative group associates the term with hype and cringe, criticising it as disrespectful to those who’ve spent years honing their technical skills.😍“It’s about playful, relaxed creation — for the love of making something.”🤮Creating a lot of unsafe bloatware with no proper planning.”What’s the future of “Vibe Coding”?The responses to the last question were probably the most surprising to me. I was expecting that the big scepticism towards vibe coding would align with the scepticism on its future, but that was not the case. 90% of people still see “vibe coding” becoming more relevant overall or in niche use cases.Vibe coding is here to stayOut of curiosity, I also went back to see if there was any difference based on professional experience, and that’s where we see the more experienced audience being more conservative. Only 30% of more senior Vs 50% of less experienced professionals see vibe coding playing a role in niche use cases and 13 % Vs only 3% of more experienced users don’t see vibe coding becoming more relevant at all.More experienced professionals are less likely to think Vibe Coding is the futureThere are still many open questions. What is “vibe coding” really? For whom is it? What can you do with it?To answer these questions, I decided to start a new survey you can find here. If you would like to further contribute to this research, I encourage you to participate and in case you are interested, I will share the results with you as well.The more I read or learn about this, I feel “Vibe Coding” is like the “Metaverse”:Some people hate it, some people love it.Everybody means something differentIn one form or another, it is here to stay.What professionals really think about “Vibe Coding” was originally published in UX Collective on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

If you're looking for a new distribution that's as functional as it is beautiful, BlueStar Linux should be on your radar.

Your pet deserves to be their own emoji, on top of all the treats and belly rubs in the world.

I was lucky enough to get an early look and hands-on experience with Satechi’s new line at CES this year, and I was immediately impressed. Satechi managed to bridge the gap between tech enthusiasts like myself, who appreciate cutting-edge features l

Despite its appearance as just another arcady sandbox game, Deliver At All Costs is shockingly story-minded. So much so, that its constant focus on narrative might deter those just looking for some dumb fun. And after seeing the narrative through to the end, I wouldn’t blame them, given how hard the game tries to be a grand tapestry of storytelling excellence. The adventure is structured into three acts, each with a unique town to explore and complete missions in. One act even features a time skip accompanied by a moment of no return. So even if you just want to ignore story and focus on acing deliveries and causing mayhem in the streets, you still have to go through some cutscenes and narrative progression to unlock the next towns and side missions.   "The majority of the side content in Deliver At All Costs isn’t very enticing." Not that the side missions are worth doing anyway. The majority of side content in Deliver At All Costs isn’t very enticing. The rewards aren’t worth it and the fetch quest design doesn’t warrant the effort. I’d only recommend going out of your way for the side content if you’re already keen on exploring the various maps. The treasure chests and small boxes hidden throughout the game give cash that is used on materials for vehicle upgrades; however, a majority of upgrades can be purchased from the main story mission rewards anyway. I expected to have fun with the vehicle upgrades, but ended up sorely disappointed in their limited application. This is because upgrades cannot be used outside of curated story missions; bummer. Not that the crane attachment or extreme hauling capacity upgrade aren’t fun to play with; they are rather fun, but exclusively used for their particular missions. Again, if you’re expected a zany vehicular sandbox with a lot of options and unlockables, Deliver At All Costs isn’t that. The reason I keep associating the game with sandbox playability is due to its map design. It has an old-school 2D Grand Theft Auto style of isometric driving. In between story missions, you’re given the leisure to roam around town freely. All of your driving and running around is done through a top-down isometric camera angle that gives the environments a nice diorama look to them, and what’s more, you can move the camera between two different angles in case it’s difficult to see something. "Speaking of scenery, there’s a surprising amount of activity going on while you’re driving around delivering stuff." All the unique shops and landmarks of this diorama give off a classic vibe well. Oh, and the soundtrack fits the setting wonderfully. Lounge jazz and instrumental surfer rock accompany your deliveries, and it rarely gets repetitive. Tying it into GTA even more is the radio, with infrequent broadcasts that add flavor lore to the setting. Each town has multiple districts, each with their own theme, which helps vary up the scenery just that much more. Speaking of scenery, there’s a surprising amount of activity going on while you’re driving around delivering stuff. NPCs go about their business, birds glide across the sky, and plenty of vehicle traffic accompany the streets. In fact, there’s often a tad too much activity. Streets are so packed with cars and people that collisions are unavoidable. "NPCs roam the streets and become aggressive when threatened." I like how populated the game is, but it’s tuned a bit too high, getting in the way of enjoyability a lot of the time. Perhaps, it would have been better balanced to up the street traffic the further you get into the game, especially since the towns progress from rural to metropolitan through the course of the narrative. At the very least, there’s an attractive mini-map with well designed labels and indicators. Navigation is aided with helpful arrows showing the way to a mission destination too. But you aren’t merely delivering parcels to a destination in a given time limit; there’s a variety of ways the game mixes up its missions. Part of the game’s initial draw is its physics-based driving, which manifests in hilarious ways. One of the first missions tasks you with delivering a truck full of rotted watermelons. The first step is to bring them to a sanitizer, then you paint them so they look presentable, all while avoiding traffic and trying not to knock them over as they roll around in the back of the truck. It’s one of the enjoyable missions in the game, and one that demonstrates the physics gameplay best. I like how the missions get progressively more wacky and clever as you progress too. You even become a UFO hunter during one late-game job. It’s just too bad the very high traffic and wonky controls hamper the overall experience. "I like how the missions get progressively more wacky and clever as you progress." The driving controls are rather simple. Just aim in the direction you want to drive and hold the accelerate button. It’s the high sensitivity of the acceleration and the hard braking and turning that contribute to a somewhat frustrating experience. The high traffic just further compounds the controls to make for a somewhat clunky driving experience. Vehicles don’t differ in how they drive either, though you really only have the one truck for a large majority of the game anyway, so it doesn’t really make a difference. And the cars aren’t great to look at either. Heck, nothing looks particularly nice in the game, especially the characters. Facial animations are frankly bad and the bland art style doesn’t make up for the graphical shortcomings. What’s worse is there’s still some pretty substantial load times in-between regions, which hurts the flow of the open-world. But the element that gets hurt from graphics the most is the mixed story. It’s hard to take the drama seriously when its presented so poorly. There’s an attempt at cinematic camera angles during cutscenes, but textures are featureless and close-ups of people’s faces are serious PS1 quality stuff. Thankfully, a handful of characters are quite likable despite what their low poly models suggest. Winston’s delivery mates have surprising depth and a good amount of backstory. And Winston himself is a fully fledged personality and someone you can imagine working with. "Winston’s delivery mates have surprising depth and a good amount of backstory." Characters like Norman are instantly likeable while Winston’s arch-nemesis and hardline boss, Donovon, is perfectly punchable. I’m also impressed with a majority of the dialogue writing. Characters speak with a down-to-earth tone and level of informality that makes them realistic, even if they look like untextured Unity assets. Going back to where I started the review, the game goes surprisingly hard on the story axis, but it doesn’t fully land for me. The wacky yet earnest tone is great, but the execution of the plot doesn’t wrap up in a satisfying way. Winston’s mysterious past and the true motives of the delivery company’s executives had so much potential for an intriguing narrative thread. But alas, the finale just kinda falls flat without the payoff that the game was teasing. "The game goes surprisingly hard on the story front, but it didn’t fully land for me." As a whole, Delivery At All Costs delivers a zany and fun, though frustrating, isometric delivery experience with a story that tries a bit too hard. I can easily see this game being a cult classic, but for a majority of gamers, it won’t deliver a truly stunning experience. If you’re looking for a game with a wacky and inventive premise that experiments a bit, and don’t mind gameplay and graphics from three generations ago, give Deliver At All Costs a try and it might just deliver. This game was reviewed on the PlayStation 5.

The developers of SnowRunner have combined its vehicular physics simulator gameplay with design elements from the building simulator genre, to bring us Roadcraft, a unique game that requires you to use an array of vehicles and construction machinery to do everything from clearing debris to rebuilding roads and laying cable. Road construction is a primary aspect of gameplay, and involves multiple steps: resource collection, logistical transport, route planning, and actual road building. While there is a very in-depth tutorial in-game that holds your hand every step of the way, there are a lot of nuances to road construction that you may not be aware of, and this RoadCraft guide has everything you need to know about those game mechanics. Scout Vehicle Selection The Scout is a critical vehicle for its scanning and winching capabilities, and while there are 7 to choose from, only 2 are available initially. Between these first two Scouts, the Armiger Thunder IV should be your preferred choice, due to its higher mobility and shorter wheelbase. Your eventual Scout vehicle should be the Tuz 119 “Lynx” which becomes available in the Deluge campaign for a price of nearly 25,000. The winch capability will come in handy as you clear debris to establish routes, and scan for terrain and objects. Field Recovery Vehicles These vehicles serve the purpose of behaving as spawn points for your other utility vehicles. This will be tremendously helpful in situations where you will require multiple pieces of equipment at a given location. Simply drive one of these to the work site such as a road construction objective, and you can simply spawn all task-related vehicles there, at the cost of Recovery Tokens. The free KHAN Lo “Strannik” Field Service Vehicle will more than suffice for this purpose, while also being equipped with a winch for manual towing. Equipment Transporters In the absence of fuel tokens, vehicle haulers can also be used to accomplish the task of manually delivering multiple vehicles to a work site. The Zikz 605E Heavy Equipment Transporter will be your preferred choice at a cost of 25,000, and will serve you well throughout the campaign. However, the Step 39331 “Pike” Light Equipment Transporter can function just as well, since it can use both its flatbed and its winch to haul two vehicles at a time, with maximum tonnage capability being the true limitation. Crane Trucks A great deal of what you will be doing in the game will involve picking stuff up off of the ground with a crane and placing it onto a flatbed for transportation. While you will be provided with two separate vehicles to accomplish this, it will be quite a tedious process especially for solo players. This is where the Mule T1 Cargo Crane Truck comes in immediately useful, at a price of 27,000. It will save you a great deal of time and effort over multiple instances in the campaign. Eventually, you will purchase better Craned vehicles, but the older ones will never use utility, as you can leave them in place at your various facilities to act as on-site loaders. In a pinch, Crane Trucks can serve as a winch vehicle for any situation that may arise. Road Construction Your AI convoys are going to get hung up on every little obstacle along their dirt path routes, and this is where good road building comes into play. Locate a quarry source for sand, and begin filling in the route with your loaded Dump Truck. Next, use your Dozer set to sand leveling or better yet, your Roller, to perform multiple passes in order to flatten the sand, with two passes being an absolute minimum. Be sure to proceed as slowly and carefully as you can on the second and further passes, listening carefully for audio feedback while traversing the route, which will sound different when traveling over fully flattened ground compared to slightly uneven terrain. A recommended method is to go down the center twice, once in each direction, in order to perfect the two ends. Then travel once along each side to spread the sand evenly, followed by a single final pass down the center again. Asphalt Paving Strictly speaking, asphalt paving is unnecessary in the vast majority of situations, unless required by mission objectives. However, if you do elect to pave all your roads, there are some important steps to take. The sand must be perfectly flattened, else the paving machines will frequently snag on unseen obstacles. One way to mitigate this, is to use the Paver while traveling in reverse. While this may seem odd, since the asphalt is deposited from the front and flattened by the rear, the game still allows it. An even better option is to hoist the Paver with a mobile Crane and float it low over the planned route, and then drive the Crane along the path instead, which is significantly faster and avoids physics bugs. Deploy the Roller next, and use the same leveling process as you do with sand: down the center once in each direction, then each side once, and one last time down the center again. Leveling Uneven Roads Failure to properly level the sand before laying down asphalt can lead to significantly large bumps in your roads. You can still recover from a situation like this without having to resort to using your Dozer’s Asphalt Destruction grader mode. Take your Roller out instead and perform multiple passes over the bump with it, and it will flatten out eventually. Plotting Routes For AI Convoys While creating routes for your transport vehicles to follow, be sure to set them along one side of the road rather than down the center. This will mitigate head-on collisions between AI traffic traveling in opposite directions, as their pathing can be quite poor. Also avoid placing an excessive number of waypoints wherever possible as this is interpreted as a direction change. While the vehicles will not get turned completely around, they can bug out and end up in an environmental hazard. Be sure to delete the routes once you have completed the related objectives and collected all of the rewards, in order to maintain a clean infrastructure map. That is everything you need to know about constructing proper roads in RoadCraft.