When YARA + DAVINA became mothers within a month of each other, they didn't step back from their practice – they stepped forward together. The socially engaged artist duo began collaborating as a job share, determined to remain visible in an industry that too often sidelines mothers. Their work – which spans everything from poetry to bronze public sculptures – is rooted in play, accessibility and political intent, often exploring themes of care, identity, and who art is really for. In this candid Q&A, they reflect on making time (and peace) with imperfection, the pressures of doing it all, and why motherhood has only deepened their creative drive. How has motherhood influenced your creative process or career choices? Brian Sewel, the art critic, said in 2008 that "Female artists fade away in their late 20s or 30s. Maybe it's something to do with bearing children". Yes, motherhood has had a profound influence on our career choices. We became a duo after becoming mothers, and we had a deep wellspring of desire to nurture our babies and also nurture our art practice, not letting it fade away. Being a mum gave us a wider range of being and a deeper depth of what it means to be human. It filled us with more ideas, not less… we had more determination and more creative ideas than ever. In 2016, our hack on motherhood was to start collaborating as a duo as a 'job share'. We had been friends and admirers of each other's work for 11 years prior, and both of us became parents within a month of each other. We realised we both wanted to be present mothers but also visible artists. We literally started working together so we could work part-time but have a full-time practice between us. We are driven to make powerful, playful and fun contemporary art, alongside being mothers, to challenge ideas like Tracy Emin, who said, "There are good artists that have children. They are called men." We are good artists, and we are not only women; we are mothers! Photo credit: Alice Horsley What's been the biggest challenge in balancing creativity and caregiving? Time and some guilt! Quite literally, there is little time to parent and make art. But we were both determined to be part-time mums, part-time artists and full-time friends. This duo works because we both understand the limitations of our free time: we are always there to step up when the other needs a break, has sick children, or craves space for ourselves. It was almost like an intuitive dance, where we had become in tune with each other's outside demands and rhythm. As artists, we often have to travel extensively for work, which can put considerable pressure on our partners and be unsettling for our children. So guilt slips in every now and then. Luckily, we both support each other in those times and remind each other that to parent and care for others effectively, it is essential that we make time for our art practice and thus ourselves. With time, we hope our children will respect and understand the role art played in our lives and why we had to find a balance that worked for us as creative beings. We work together every weekday, and we always find ourselves talking and supporting each other with our parenting alongside making work. We both deeply feel that we were put on this planet to create great art, to push the boundaries of what art is and can be, and with whom it can be made and for whom it can be made. And we can do this while raising children. Photo credit: Alice Horsley Have you felt pressure to 'do it all,' and how do you navigate that? Yes, we feel it all the time, from ourselves as much as from society! One of our mottos that we tell ourselves is 'Good Enough'. We have talked about getting these as matching tattoos ( we love to wear matching outfits). Essentially, it is impossible to do everything really well. We need to prioritise what things need to be brilliant and what things can just be good enough. These priorities shift daily, creating an interplay between our personal and professional lives. Being a duo allows us to pick up each other's slack when needed. Photo credit: Nick Turpin What changes would you like to see in the creative industry to better support mothers? In 2016, we participated in a British Council residency at Portland State University titled 'Motherhood: A Social Practice'. We explored motherhood in the creative world, and our passion was to create more family-focused residencies and secure funding to support childcare. We wanted programmers to consider simple things, such as family-accessible residences, and work around term times. Things have dramatically changed since then, but we need to see more changes. People like Lizzie Humber and her daylight collective are doing amazing things, thinking about programming parent-accessible daytime culture. When we live in a time where Evening Standard art critic Brian Sewell says things like, "Only men are capable of aesthetic greatness.", women, in general, have a tough time, never mind mums! We are passionate not only about supporting artist mothers but also about working with and for mothers. Our public artwork, WOMAN - WHOLE, was created alongside, with, and for mothers on the Regents Park Estate, commissioned by ODAC, Camden. We subverted the idea of manholes, creating a series of bronze-cast covers embedded in the pavements of Camden. These permanent public artworks playfully remind us that, as women, we are whole. Photo credit: Hugo Glendinning

More enterprises have moved to pay-for-performance salary and promotion models that measure progress toward goals -- but how do you measure goals for a maintenance programmer who barrels through a request backlog but delivers marginal value for the business, or for a business analyst whose success is predicated on forging intangibles like trust and cooperation with users so things can get done? It’s an age-old question facing companies, now that 77% of them use some type of pay-for-performance model. What are some popular pay-for-performance use cases? A factory doing piece work that pays employees based upon the number of items they assemble. A call center that pays agents based on how many calls they complete per day. A bank teller who gets rewarded for how many customers they sign up for credit cards. An IT project team that gets a bonus for completing a major project ahead of schedule. The IT example differs from the others, because it depends on team and not individual execution, but there nevertheless is something tangible to measure. The other use cases are more clearcut -- although they don’t account for pieces in the plant that were poorly assembled in haste to make quota and had to be reworked, or a call center agent who pushes calls off to someone else so they can end their calls in six minutes or less, or the teller who signs up X number of customers for credit cards, although two-thirds of them never use the credit card they signed up for. Related:In short, there are flaws in pay-for-performance models just as there are in other types of compensation models that organizations use. So, what’s the best path for IT for CIOs who want to implement pay for performance? One approach is to measure pay for performance based upon four key elements: hard results, effort, skill, and communications. The mix of these elements will vary, depending on the type of position each IT staff member performs. Here are two examples of pay per performance by position: 1. Computer maintenance programmers and help desk specialists Historically, IT departments have used hard numbers like how many open requests a computer maintenance programmer has closed, or how many calls a help desk employee has solved. There is merit in using hard results, and hard results should be factored into performance reviews for these individuals -- but hard numbers don’t tell the whole story.  For example, how many times has a help desk agent gone the extra mile with a difficult user or software bug, taking the time to see the entire process through until it is thoroughly solved? lf the issue was of a global nature, did the Help Desk agent follow up by letting others who use the application know that a bug was fixed? For the maintenance programmer who has completed the most open requests, which of these requests really solved a major business pain point? For both help desk and maintenance programming employees, were the changes and fixes properly documented and communicated to everyone with a need to know? And did these employees demonstrate the skills needed to solve their issues? Related:It’s difficult to capture hard results on elements like effort, communication and skills, but one way to go about it is to survey user departments on individual levels of service and effectiveness. From there, it’s up to IT managers to determinate the “mix” of hard results, effort, communication and skills on which the employee will be evaluated, and to communicate upfront to the employee what the pay for performance assessment will be based on. 2. Business analysts and trainers Business analysts and trainers are difficult to quantify in pay for performance models because so much of their success depends upon other people. A business analyst can know everything there is to know about a particular business area and its systems, but if the analyst is working with unresponsive users, or lacks the soft skills needed to communicate with users, the pay for performance can’t be based upon the technology skillset alone.  Related:IT trainers face a somewhat different dilemma when it  comes to performance evaluation: they can produce the training that new staff members need before staff is deployed on key projects,  but if a project gets delayed and this causes trainees to lose the knowledge that they learned, there is little the trainer can do aside from offering a refresher course. Can pay for performance be used for positions like these? It’s a mixed answer. Yes, pay per performance can be used for trainers, based upon how many individuals the trainer trains and how many new courses the trainer obtains or develops. These are the hard results. However, since so much of training’s execution depends upon other people downstream, like project managers who must start projects on time so new skills aren’t lost,  managers of training should also consider pay for performance elements such as effort (has the trainer consistently gone the extra mile to make things work?), skills and communication.  In sum, for both business analysts and trainers, there are hard results that can be factored into a pay for performance formula, but there is also a need to survey each position’s “customers” -- those individuals (and their managers) who utilized the business analyst’s or trainer’s skills and products to accomplish their respective objectives in projects and training. Were these user-customers satisfied?  Summary Remarks The value that IT employees contribute to overall IT and to the business at large is a combination of tangible and intangible results. Pay for performance models are well suited to gauge tangible outcomes, but they fall short when it comes to the intangibles that could be just as important. Many years ago, when Pat Riley was coaching the Los Angeles Lakers, an interviewer asked what type of metrics he used when he measured the effectiveness of individual players on the basketball court. Was it the number of points, rebounds, or assists? Riley said he used an “effort" index. For example, how many times did a player go up to get a rebound, even if he didn’t end up with the ball? Riley said the effort individual players exhibited mattered, because even if they didn’t get the rebound, they were creating situations so someone else on the team could. IT is similar. It’s why OKR International, a performance consultancy, stated “Intangibles often create or destroy value quietly -- until their impact is too big to ignore. In the long run, they are the unseen levers that determine whether strategy thrives or withers.”  What CIOs and IT leadership can do when they use pay for performance is to assure that hard results, effort, communications and skills are appropriately blended for each IT staff position, and its responsibilities and realities -- because you can’t attach a numerical measurement to everything -- but you can observe visible changes that begin to manifest when a business analyst turns around what has been a hostile relationship with a user department and you begin to get things done. 

More enterprises have moved to pay-for-performance salary and promotion models that measure progress toward goals -- but how do you measure goals for a maintenance programmer who barrels through a request backlog but delivers marginal value for the business, or for a business analyst whose success is predicated on forging intangibles like trust and cooperation with users so things can get done? It’s an age-old question facing companies, now that 77% of them use some type of pay-for-performance model. What are some popular pay-for-performance use cases? A factory doing piece work that pays employees based upon the number of items they assemble. A call center that pays agents based on how many calls they complete per day. A bank teller who gets rewarded for how many customers they sign up for credit cards. An IT project team that gets a bonus for completing a major project ahead of schedule. The IT example differs from the others, because it depends on team and not individual execution, but there nevertheless is something tangible to measure. The other use cases are more clearcut -- although they don’t account for pieces in the plant that were poorly assembled in haste to make quota and had to be reworked, or a call center agent who pushes calls off to someone else so they can end their calls in six minutes or less, or the teller who signs up X number of customers for credit cards, although two-thirds of them never use the credit card they signed up for. Related:In short, there are flaws in pay-for-performance models just as there are in other types of compensation models that organizations use. So, what’s the best path for IT for CIOs who want to implement pay for performance? One approach is to measure pay for performance based upon four key elements: hard results, effort, skill, and communications. The mix of these elements will vary, depending on the type of position each IT staff member performs. Here are two examples of pay per performance by position: 1. Computer maintenance programmers and help desk specialists Historically, IT departments have used hard numbers like how many open requests a computer maintenance programmer has closed, or how many calls a help desk employee has solved. There is merit in using hard results, and hard results should be factored into performance reviews for these individuals -- but hard numbers don’t tell the whole story.  For example, how many times has a help desk agent gone the extra mile with a difficult user or software bug, taking the time to see the entire process through until it is thoroughly solved? lf the issue was of a global nature, did the Help Desk agent follow up by letting others who use the application know that a bug was fixed? For the maintenance programmer who has completed the most open requests, which of these requests really solved a major business pain point? For both help desk and maintenance programming employees, were the changes and fixes properly documented and communicated to everyone with a need to know? And did these employees demonstrate the skills needed to solve their issues? Related:It’s difficult to capture hard results on elements like effort, communication and skills, but one way to go about it is to survey user departments on individual levels of service and effectiveness. From there, it’s up to IT managers to determinate the “mix” of hard results, effort, communication and skills on which the employee will be evaluated, and to communicate upfront to the employee what the pay for performance assessment will be based on. 2. Business analysts and trainers Business analysts and trainers are difficult to quantify in pay for performance models because so much of their success depends upon other people. A business analyst can know everything there is to know about a particular business area and its systems, but if the analyst is working with unresponsive users, or lacks the soft skills needed to communicate with users, the pay for performance can’t be based upon the technology skillset alone.  Related:IT trainers face a somewhat different dilemma when it  comes to performance evaluation: they can produce the training that new staff members need before staff is deployed on key projects,  but if a project gets delayed and this causes trainees to lose the knowledge that they learned, there is little the trainer can do aside from offering a refresher course. Can pay for performance be used for positions like these? It’s a mixed answer. Yes, pay per performance can be used for trainers, based upon how many individuals the trainer trains and how many new courses the trainer obtains or develops. These are the hard results. However, since so much of training’s execution depends upon other people downstream, like project managers who must start projects on time so new skills aren’t lost,  managers of training should also consider pay for performance elements such as effort (has the trainer consistently gone the extra mile to make things work?), skills and communication.  In sum, for both business analysts and trainers, there are hard results that can be factored into a pay for performance formula, but there is also a need to survey each position’s “customers” -- those individuals (and their managers) who utilized the business analyst’s or trainer’s skills and products to accomplish their respective objectives in projects and training. Were these user-customers satisfied?  Summary Remarks The value that IT employees contribute to overall IT and to the business at large is a combination of tangible and intangible results. Pay for performance models are well suited to gauge tangible outcomes, but they fall short when it comes to the intangibles that could be just as important. Many years ago, when Pat Riley was coaching the Los Angeles Lakers, an interviewer asked what type of metrics he used when he measured the effectiveness of individual players on the basketball court. Was it the number of points, rebounds, or assists? Riley said he used an “effort" index. For example, how many times did a player go up to get a rebound, even if he didn’t end up with the ball? Riley said the effort individual players exhibited mattered, because even if they didn’t get the rebound, they were creating situations so someone else on the team could. IT is similar. It’s why OKR International, a performance consultancy, stated “Intangibles often create or destroy value quietly -- until their impact is too big to ignore. In the long run, they are the unseen levers that determine whether strategy thrives or withers.”  What CIOs and IT leadership can do when they use pay for performance is to assure that hard results, effort, communications and skills are appropriately blended for each IT staff position, and its responsibilities and realities -- because you can’t attach a numerical measurement to everything -- but you can observe visible changes that begin to manifest when a business analyst turns around what has been a hostile relationship with a user department and you begin to get things done. 

The shoehorning of AI into everything has programmers at Amazon feeling less like the tedious parts of their jobs are being smoothly automated, and more like their work is beginning to resemble the drudgery of toiling away in one of the e-commerce giant's vast warehouses.That's the bleak picture painted in new reporting from the New York Times, in which Amazon leadership — as is the case at so many other companies — is convinced that AI will marvelously jack up productivity. Tasked with conjuring the tech's mystic properties, of course, are our beleaguered keyboard-clackers.Today, there's no shortage of coding AI assistants to choose from. Google and Meta are making heavy use of them, as is Microsoft. Satya Nadella, CEO of the Redmond giant, estimates that as much as 30 percent of the company's code is now written with AI. If Amazon's to keep up with the competition, it needs to follow suit. CEO Andy Jassy echoed this in a recent letter to shareholders, cited by the NYT, emphasizing the need to give customers what they want as "quickly as possible," before upholding programming as a field in which AI would "change the norms."And that it has — though this is less due to the merits of AI and more the result of the over-eager opportunism of the company's management. Three Amazon engineers told the NYT that their bosses have increasingly pushed them to use AI in their work over the past year. And with that came increased output goals and even tighter deadlines. One engineer said that his team was reduced to roughly half the size it was last year — but it was still expected to produce the same amount of code by using AI.In short, new automating technology is being used to justify placing increased demands at their jobs."Things look like a speed-up for knowledge workers," Lawrence Katz, a labor economist at Harvard University, told the NYT, citing ongoing research. "There is a sense that the employer can pile on more stuff."Adopting AI was ostensibly optional for the Amazon programmers, but the choice was all but made for them. One engineer told the newspaper that they're now expected to finish building new website features in just a few days, whereas before they had several weeks. This ludicrous ramp up is only made possible by using AI to automate some of the coding, and comes at the expense of quality: there's less time for consulting with colleagues to get feedback and bounce ideas around.Above all, AI is sapping all the joy out of their profession. AI-amalgamated code requires extensive double checking — a prominent critique that can't be ignored here and is one of the main reasons skeptics question whether these programming assistants actually produce gains in efficiency. And when you're reduced to proofreading a machine, there's little room for creativity, and an even more diminished sense of control."It's more fun to write code than to read code," Simon Willison, a programmer and blogger who's both an enthusiast of AI and a frequent critic of the tech, told the NYT, playing devil's advocate. "If you're told you have to do a code review, it's never a fun part of the job. When you're working with these tools, it's most of the job."Amazon, for its part, maintains that it conducts regular reviews to ensure that its teams are adequately staffed. "We'll continue to adapt how we incorporate Gen AI into our processes," an Amazon spokesman told the NYT.More on AI: AI Is Replacing Women's Jobs SpecificallyShare This Article

Game Designer (gn) - Combat & ControlsKeen GamesFrankfurt am Main 60594 DE1 hour agoApplyJoin a team of super dedicated and driven people!Keen Games is an independent developer and publisher with a long history of developing games for PC, consoles, and handhelds. Working at Keen Games means working with super experienced, passionate, and humble people.In 2024, we successfully released Enshrouded in Early Access and are now preparing for our 1.0 launch. We're looking for a Game Designer who’s passionate about responsive combat, fluid controls, and engaging class gameplay. You actively seek out player and team feedback and use it to improve the moment-to-moment experience. From fine-tuning combat feel to refining enemy encounters, you’ll help us deliver a polished and satisfying game for 1.0 and beyond.Your Job Opportunity as a Game Designer!Are you ready to shape thrilling combat experiences and make every battle feel unforgettable? Join our experienced design team at Keen Games and take on the challenge of shaping the future of gaming!What you’ll do:You help shape and refine core combat experiences - including player controls, enemy AI, class gameplay, and encounter setups in the world editorYou collaborate with our 3Cs programmers and other designers to improve responsiveness, snappiness, and overall combat feelYou develop innovative gameplay systems and evolve existing ones while aligning with genre conventions for frictionless and engaging long-term playYou grow and learn together alongside our dynamic projects to create the best possible experience for playersWhat you bring to the adventure:Know how to make a game shine!You’re experienced working on both moment-to-moment gameplay (like player controls polishing and combat tuning)Keep Players coming back for more! You are experienced in combat balancing and understand how to make combat feel exciting, responsive, and varied through iteration and attention to detailEmpower players! You have the ability to design meaningful, engaging player choices in a sandbox environment.Work within our team! You have strong collaboration and communication skills to work seamlessly with diverse teams and ensure your design visions and new systems are clearly understood and realizedCollaborate effectively! You have the adaptability to iterate based on community feedback and internal playtests.What we have to offer:Be part of a dynamic and highly creative team that inspires innovationEnjoy a competitive salary that recognizes your talentGrow your skills and career with exciting development opportunitiesRecharge with paid vacation days - balance matters!Stay healthy and covered with comprehensive health care and benefitsCelebrate success with epic events and unforgettable partiesWe value your personality and passion!We prioritize personality and passion over formal education. You'll be part of a supportive, diverse team where creativity and independence are celebrated. Create Your Profile — Game companies can contact you with their relevant job openings. Apply

In Unity 2021 LTS, UI Toolkit offers a collection of features, resources, and tools to help you build and debug adaptive runtime UIs on a wide range of game applications and Editor extensions. Its intuitive workflow enables Unity creators in different roles – artists, programmers, and designers alike – to get started with UI development as quickly as possible.See our earlier blog post for an explanation of UI Toolkit’s main benefits, such as enhanced scalability and performance, already being leveraged by studios like Mechanistry for their game, Timberborn.While Unity UI remains the go-to solution for positioning and lighting UI in a 3D world or integrating with other Unity systems, UI Toolkit for runtime UI can already benefit game productions seeking performance and scalability as of Unity 2021 LTS. It’s particularly effective for Screen Space – Overlay UI, and scales well on a variety of screen resolutions.That’s why we’re excited to announce two new learning resources to better support UI development with UI Toolkit:UI Toolkit sample – Dragon Crashers: The demo is now available to download for free from the Asset Store.User interface design and implementation in Unity: This free e-book can be download from hereRead on to learn about some key features part of the UI Toolkit sample project.The UI Toolkit sample demonstrates how you can leverage UI Toolkit for your own applications. This demo involves a full-featured interface over a slice of the 2D project Dragon Crashers, a mini RPG, using the Unity 2021 LTS UI Toolkit workflow at runtime.Some of the actions illustrated in the sample project show you how to:Style with selectors in Unity style sheet (USS) files and use UXML templatesCreate custom controls, such as a circular meter or tabbed viewsCustomize the appearance of elements like sliders and toggle buttonsUse Render Texture for UI overlay effects, USS animations, seasonal themes, and moreTo try out the project after adding it to your assets, enter Play mode. Please note that UI Toolkit interfaces do not appear in the Scene view. Instead, you can view them in the Game view or UI Builder.The menu on the left helps you navigate the modal main menu screens. This vertical column of buttons provides access to the five modal screens that comprise the main menu (they stay active while switching between screens).While some interactivity is possible, such as healing the characters by dragging available potions in the scene, gameplay has been kept to a minimum to ensure continued focus on the UI examples.Let’s take a closer look at the UIs in the menu bar:The home screen serves as a landing pad when launching the application. You can use this screen to play the game or receive simulated chat messages.The character screen involves a mix of GameObjects and UI elements. This is where you can explore each of the four Dragon Crashers characters. Use the stats, skills, and bio tabs to read the specific character details, and click on the inventory slots to add or remove items. The preview area shows a 2D lit and rigged character over a tiled background.The resources screen links to documentation, the forum, and other resources for making the most of UI Toolkit.The shop screen simulates an in-game store where you can purchase hard and soft currency, such as gold or gems, as well as virtual goods like healing potions. Each item in the shop screen is a separate VisualTreeAsset. UI Toolkit instantiates these assets at runtime; one for each ScriptableObject in the Resources/GameData.The mail screen is a front-end reader of fictitious messages that uses a tabbed menu to separate the inbox and deleted messages.The game screen is a mini version of the Dragon Crashers project that starts playing automatically. In this project, you’ll notice a few revised elements with UI Toolkit, such as a pause button, health bars, and the capacity to drag a healing potion element to your characters when they take damage.UI Toolkit enables you to build stable and consistent UIs for your entire project. At the same time, it provides flexible tools for adding your own design flourishes and details to further flesh out the game’s theme and style.Let’s go over some of the features used to refine the UI designs in the sample:Render Textures:UI Toolkit interfaces are rendered last in the render queue, meaning you can’t overlay other game graphics on top of a UI Toolkit UI. Render Textures provide a workaround to this limitation, making it possible to integrate in-game effects into UI Toolkit UIs. While these effects based on Render Textures should be used sparingly, you’ll still be able to afford sharp effects within the context of a fullscreen UI, without running gameplay. The following images show a number of Render Textures from the demo.Themes with Theme style sheets (TSS): TSS files are Asset files that are similar to regular USS files. They serve as a starting point for defining your own custom theme via USS selectors as well as property and variable settings. In the demo, we duplicated the default theme files and modified the copies to offer seasonal variations.Custom UI elements: Since designers are trained to think outside the box, UI Toolkit gives you plenty of room to customize or extend the standard library. The demo project highlights a few custom-built elements in the tabbed menus, slide toggles, and drop-down lists, plus a radial counter to demonstrate what UI artists are capable of alongside developers.USS transitions for animated UI state changes: Adding transitions to the menu screens can polish and smooth out your visuals. UI Toolkit makes this more straightforward with the Transition Animations property, part of the UI Builder’s Inspector. Adjust the Property, Duration, Easing, and Delay properties to set up the animation. Then simply change styles for UI Toolkit to apply the animated transition at runtime.Post-processing volume for a background blur: A popular effect in games is to blur a crowded gameplay scene to draw the player’s attention to a particular pop-up message or dialog window. You can achieve this effect by enabling Depth of Field in the Volume framework (available in the Universal Render Pipeline).We made sure that efficient workflows were used to fortify the UI. Here are a few recommendations for keeping the project well-organized:Consistent naming conventions: It’s important to adopt naming conventions that align with your visual elements and style sheets. Clear naming conventions not only maintain the hierarchy’s organization in UI Builder, they make it more accessible to your teammates, and keep the code clean and readable. More specifically, we suggest the Block Element Modifier (BEM) naming convention for visual elements and style sheets. Just at a glance, an element’s BEM naming can tell you what it does, how it appears, and how it relates to the other elements around it. See the following BEM naming examples:Responsive UI layout: Similar to web technologies, UI Toolkit offers the possibility of creating layouts where “child” visual elements adapt to the current available size inside their “parent” visual elements, and others where each element has an absolute position anchored to a reference point, akin to the Unity UI system. The sample uses both options as needed through the visual elements of the UI.PSD Importer: One of the most effective tools for creating the demo, PSD Importer allows artists to work in a master document without having to manually export every sprite separately. When changes are needed, they can be done in the original PSD file and updated automatically in Unity.ScriptableObjects: In order to focus on UI design and implementation, the sample project simulates backend data, such as in-app purchases and mail messages, using ScriptableObjects. You can conveniently customize this stand-in data from the Resources/GameData folder and use the example to create similar data assets, like inventory items and character or dialog data in UI Toolkit.Remember that with UI Toolkit, UI layouts and styles are decoupled from code. This means that rewriting the backend data can occur independently from the UI design. If your development team replaces those systems, the interface should continue to work.Additional tools used in the demo include particle systems created with the Built-in Particle System for special effects, and the 2D toolset, among others. Feel free to review the project via the Inspector to see how these different elements come into play.You can find reference art made by the UI artists under UI/Reference, as replicated in UI Builder. The whole process, from mockups to wireframes, is also documented in the e-book. Finally, all of the content in the sample can be added to your own Unity project.You can download the UI Toolkit sample – Dragon Crashers from the Asset Store. Once you’ve explored its different UI designs, please provide your feedback on the forum.Then be sure to check out our e-book, User interface design and implementation in Unity. Download

Chinese AI startup DeepSeek has released an update to the R1 reasoning AI model that took the tech world by storm when it was launched at the beginning of the year. The open-source model sent shockwaves through the AI industry as its efficient use of compute and memory resources helped it match leading US models’ performance at a fraction of the cost. The new version, DeepSeek-R1-0528, has a whopping 685 billion parameters, meaning it can perform on par with competitors such as o3 from OpenAI and Gemini 2.5 Pro from Google. The company says the model’s accuracy has increased from 70% to 87.5%, which means that the risk of hallucinations has been significantly reduced. Furthermore, DeepSeek has reportedly become better at so-called vibe coding, where AI tools generate code based on natural-language conversations with programmers. TechCrunch notes that Deepseek-R1-0528 likely cannot run on consumer computers without modification, which signals that the target audience is professional users. The new version of DeepSeek can be downloaded from the Hugging Face platform. Detailed information on the changes is also available there.

The big Leslie Benzies interview: MindsEye, Everywhere, and the double-edged sword of GTA How Build A Rocket Boy developed its debut project Feature by Samuel Roberts Editorial Director Published on May 30, 2025 As the producer behind the Grand Theft Auto games from GTA 3 through to GTA 5, as well as Red Dead Redemption and LA Noire, any project with Leslie Benzies' name on it is going to be a lightning rod for attention. MindsEye, the first game from Benzies' studio Build A Rocket Boy, is getting plenty of it – even if some of that attention has been less positive. MindsEye is a single-player third-person shooter with vehicle gameplay, set in a Las Vegas-style city called Redrock. It's a techno-thriller story about a former soldier called Jacob Diaz – but it's clear from visiting BARB in Edinburgh this week that the game is envisioned as a gateway into something much larger, both in the fiction of MindsEye, and for players who pick the game up. That includes a user-generated content platform called Build.MindsEye, where players on PC can create levels using relatively straightforward tools that incorporate any object in the game. When asked if third-person shooter levels or driving sections were the limits of the build side of MindsEye, the developers showed other examples of how they can be used, like massively increasing the proportions of a basketball, dropping it into the world, and functionally making an in-game version of Rocket League. Still, while MindsEye launches on June 10, 2025, for PC and consoles, many questions remain unanswered, including the future of its long-gestating Everywhere project. Benzies sat down with GamesIndustry.biz earlier this week to talk us through his vision for the game. This interview has been edited for brevity and clarity. Image credit: Austin Hargrave What's your grand vision for MindsEye? What will it be at launch, and where is it going in the future? MindsEye is one story in an epic universe. The other stories take place at different time periods, and [at] different locations in the universe. This story is Jacob Diaz's story. There are also other stories within MindsEye, so we tell the backstories of other characters Jacob will meet. That's the way we're going to fill out the universe over time – so when you travel around, all the stories will be connected by one overarching theme, and each story will have different mechanics. And we'll give these mechanics to players within the creator tools. What will happen with the game after launch? [The studio] will support the game through Play.MindsEye, with continuous new content. Some of the content, like races, are made just for fun. But [with] most of the content, we'll try and incorporate it into the story. So once you've played the big overarching ten-year plan, you'll have a very good idea of what this universe looks like. We have plans to add multiplayer, [and] we have plans to make a full open world. And of course, we've also got to look at what players are creating, and incorporate that into our plans. Given the ease of the tools, we think there's going to be a high percentage of players who will jump in and give it a pop, see how it feels. Hopefully some will create compelling content we can then promote and make that part of our plans to push to other players. Is it best to think of MindsEye as the first game in a series of games? Or one game as part of a larger experience? MindsEye sits bang in the middle of our story. So, we're going to go back 10,000 years, then we're going to go forward a certain amount of time. It's the relevant piece of the puzzle that will have players asking questions of what the bigger story is. We've intentionally not released footage of huge parts of the game, because we don't want to spoil anything for players. But this story does take some unusual twists. What's your vision for the multiplayer component of the game? I guess there's two sides to the answer. The dream from the building side is to allow players the opportunity to create their own multiplayer open world games with ease. So anyone could pick up the game, jump in, drive around, stop at a point where they see something of interest, build a little mission, jump back in the car, drive again, build another mission. Once you've built a couple of hundred of these, you've built your own open world game. So, that's the build side. From our side, we want to [create] a place where people can socialise, play together, and engage in the stories that we build. So, we do have plans next year to launch an open world multiplayer game that takes place a year after MindsEye finishes. In the interim, we also have an open world free roam game that spans from when MindsEye finishes to the launch of the open world multiplayer game. All of these stories interconnect in a fairly unique and original way, which I think players like these days. They like the complexity of deeper stories. You're selling the base game at launch, with a pass for upcoming content additions. Do you have a vision for how you're going to package future stories in the overarching MindsEye experience? It depends on the scale of the story. Some will be free, and some will be paid. After you left Rockstar Games, what came next? What led to you building the studio? I spent a few years looking into some other things: going [into] some property development. Using some of the games experience, we made a thing called VR-Chitect, which allowed you to build houses and view them in VR. I spent a lot of time in Los Angeles at this point, and this is when the droughts were very bad. I got into [making] these machines that would suck water out of the air. Still sitting in my back garden in Los Angeles is this big clunky machine, it works like an air-conditioning unit. It could suck up one thousand litres of water. So I got involved with that. But there's really nothing like making games. The different types of people – the lawyers, the accountants, the programmers, the artists, the dancers, the singers – that bunch of people in one big pot, all working together, and turning something from a piece of paper into [something on the] screen – that's where I get my excitement. Since I was a kid, that's what I've wanted to do. I thought, 'I better get back into making games' because nothing else was as much fun. What was the journey towards creating MindsEye as your first standalone release? Your first game's always your hardest. You have to build systems, you have to build the team. Everything is new. You don't really see a lot on the screen until way down the line, because you're building underlying systems, physics systems, the gameplay systems. It's a slow start, but what you end up with is an engine, and obviously we use Unreal, which provides a certain level of support and building. On top of that, we've got to build our own stuff. [Plus], we have to pack up everything we build and present it nicely for the creator tools. So it adds this extra layer of complexity to everything. But now, given where we are, the speed that we can iterate, we can very quickly place enemies, place vehicles, place puzzles, whatever, and get a feel for a game. We've now got a great, experienced team – a lot of talented guys in there. In the old days, you'd get a game, stick it on the shelf, and you'd wave goodbye. It's not like that anymore. You're continually fixing things. When you release a game, you've suddenly got, not a hundred testers, but hopefully millions of testers. You've got to continually fix, continually optimise, and especially with the tools that we've got, we want to continually create new content. So MindsEye is a standalone game, and Everywhere is not mentioned anywhere on the Steam page. But obviously there's a strong 'build' component to this game, which was part of the Everywhere pitch. What does this mean for Everywhere, and what was behind the decision to package the game this way? This is all part of a bigger story and ecosystem that we've got planned. Everywhere is going to show up again pretty soon. Everything we're working on, there's a story behind it – a big overarching story. So Everywhere will come back, and it fits into this story somewhere. I can't tell you [where], because it would be a spoiler. But that's going to reappear soon, and it will all be a part of the same product. "I'm not sure it would've been smart as a company to say, 'we are going to compete with the biggest game on the planet'" Leslie Benzies, Build A Rocket Boy In terms of the tools, the tool doesn't really care what world you're building in. It sits separately. So any game we create, it will naturally work on top of it. But we're big fans of keeping everything thematically connected, or connected through a narrative, and you'll see it. The bigger story will become obvious, once you've played through all of MindsEye. Then you might start to see how it all connects together, to the Everywhere world. Has the landscape for something like Everywhere, or the build component to MindsEye, changed as platforms like UEFN have taken off or Roblox has become so huge? It's great to see these tools being used by people. I build a lot with my son, and when he builds, I see the excitement he gets. It reminds me of when I was a kid with my Dragon 32 computer, managing to get a little character moving on the screen – that excitement of, 'wow, I did that'. Giving that to other people is massive. It's still very difficult to build in Roblox. For example, when my son wants to do it, I have to jump in. I used to be a programmer, and I struggle to build in there. When he wants to run around and scream with his friends he's in Roblox; when he wants to build he'll jump into Minecraft, because Minecraft is a much easier system to build within. And I think we sit somewhere in the middle: you can get very high quality, fun games, but they're very easy to build. I think we're at the infancy of this in video games. We're at the very beginning of it, and we're going to see way, way more of it. It doesn't necessarily have to be presenting it to your friends, or to an audience. I think the process of creating for a human being is fun in itself. MindsEye has been positioned as a linear game. You are best known for creating open world games. What was behind the decision to make MindsEye a more linear, narrative-driven experience? I think certain stories are more difficult to present to players in an open world setting. Open world gives you freedom – you don't necessarily want freedom to portray a story. For MindsEye, it's a very set time in a character, Jacob Diaz's, life. You pick up as Jacob when he arrives in Redrock, and then you leave Jacob at a certain point in the future. And so, it'd be very difficult for us to have an open world in there. It's horses for courses: it depends what you're doing. But for Jacob's story, it had to be a linear game. Having said that, there are open world experiences in there, and we can build them through Build.MindsEye. There is a free roam open world mode, where you play [as] a different character and you see his time, from the end of MindsEye, to the point of our next big planned launch. Again, they're all connected through a narrative, and we really want to show the universe, show the stories that have taken place in the universe, the characters in that universe, and see how they've experienced the same experience but from different viewpoints. "The dream from the building side is to allow players the opportunity to create their own multiplayer open world games with ease" Leslie Benzies, Build A Rocket Boy Was there ever a discussion about creating a more traditional GTA competitor? In design, you look at a lot of different options. I'm not sure it would've been smart as a company to say, 'we are going to compete with the biggest game on the planet'. I'm not sure that would be the best business decision to make. We went through a bunch of different designs, and to tell our story, this is what we landed on. MindsEye is priced more like a game from a decade ago at $60, and it'll take around 20 hours to finish. Can you talk about how you settled on the game's length and scope, and how you made that decision around price? So you've got the MindsEye campaign, and yes, it'll be about 20ish hours. But you do have all this other side content: there's going to be this continuous stream of content. These days, there are so many different options for people. It's not just games: there's streaming TV, so many good shows out there. I don't think you can have filler content in games. I think people want the meat, and they want the potatoes. We've tried to make as much meat as we can, if that makes sense. I think that's a good length for a game. What you also find through data, is that [with] big games, people don't play them all. The majority of people – 60% or 70% of people – don't actually play games to the end. So when you're making something, I would prefer – I'm sure the team would say the same – [that] you had the whole experience from start to finish, and not create this 200-hour game. Create something that is finishable, but have some side things that will fill out the universe. A lot of the side missions on the play side of MindsEye do fill out the characters' back stories, or do fill out what was happening in the world. On price: the world's in a funny place. People are worried about the price of eggs. So value for money, I think people appreciate that when times are difficult. I was curious why you waited until quite late in the day to reveal the build element of the game, only because it seemed you were being quite church and state with how MindsEye is releasing versus what Everywhere is. So in general, we believe – and again, it goes back to the amount of information, the amount of options people have these days – I don't think you can have extended marketing times. It's very expensive, we're a start-up. I think you lose interest from people. There are so many things for people to do, that if you extend it, you're not punching through to the place you need to be. I've seen other games, nine years before launch, it's getting talked about. I'm not sure that's the way of the world these days. You'll see there are games that never go to market: the day of launch was the marketing campaign, and it worked very well. So I think we tried to compress ours down for that reason. On the MindsEye.Play [continuous content] part of it, yeah, maybe we should've got that out there sooner, but it is a nice little surprise to give players. That's the thing with marketing – you never know what's the right or wrong way to do it, you've got to go with your gut, your senses, and test it. Being who you are, it brings a certain level of expectation and attention. Do you find it a double-edged sword, launching a new studio and launching a new game, with your background? Yes. There's always comparisons, and I think that's how humans work. As kids, we're taught to put a triangle into a triangular hole, and a square into a square hole. I think we do that for the rest of our lives, and we like to describe something new as 'it's X plus Y, with a bit of Z in there'. It makes things easy for us. It's maybe humans optimising the way we communicate. So there are comparisons. It serves us well in some ways, it doesn't serve us well in others. Dave Grohl said it well when he formed the Foo Fighters: nobody's interested in the Foo Fighters, all they were interested in was Nirvana. The guys have built something very cool, and I just hope people can see it for what it's trying to be.

GameFromScratch.com Top Code Editors & IDEs in 2025 The following is a round-up of popular and still in development tools for game programmers, specifically code editors, terminal based editors, IDEs and modern AI assisted tools. If you are looking for a new editor hopefully you will find it here. We go into slightly more depth with each tool The post Top Code Editors & IDEs in 2025 appeared first on GameFromScratch.com.