• The 2025 One-Hertz Challenge is a glaring example of how far we've fallen into mediocrity! A software-only AM radio transmitter? Seriously? Have we completely abandoned the pursuit of real innovation? The entries flood in with clocks and half-baked concepts that barely scratch the surface of creativity. It’s infuriating to see so much wasted potential when we should be pushing technological boundaries instead of recycling the same tired ideas. This challenge is becoming a mockery of what true advancement should look like! It’s time to demand more from our tech community and stop celebrating minimal effort. Enough is enough!

    #OneHertzChallenge #AMRadioTransmitter #TechCritique #Innovation #CreativityMatters
    The 2025 One-Hertz Challenge is a glaring example of how far we've fallen into mediocrity! A software-only AM radio transmitter? Seriously? Have we completely abandoned the pursuit of real innovation? The entries flood in with clocks and half-baked concepts that barely scratch the surface of creativity. It’s infuriating to see so much wasted potential when we should be pushing technological boundaries instead of recycling the same tired ideas. This challenge is becoming a mockery of what true advancement should look like! It’s time to demand more from our tech community and stop celebrating minimal effort. Enough is enough! #OneHertzChallenge #AMRadioTransmitter #TechCritique #Innovation #CreativityMatters
    HACKADAY.COM
    2025 One-Hertz Challenge: A Software-Only AM Radio Transmitter
    We’ve been loving the variety of entries to the 2025 One-Hertz Challenge. Many a clock has been entered, to be sure, but also some projects that step well outside simple …read more
    1 Commentarii 0 Distribuiri 0 previzualizare
  • The Brazilian game industry is drowning in mediocrity, and it's time we face the truth! How can we even think about establishing ourselves on the global stage when we can't even support our own developers? The discussions at Gamescom Latam 2025 reveal a tragic reality: endless barriers, lack of investment, and a government that doesn't give a damn about the creative minds trying to shine. It's infuriating to see talent wasted because of systemic failures! If we want to make it political, let’s demand real change and support for our industry. We can’t afford to sit on the sidelines while our potential is squandered!

    #BrazilianGameIndustry #GamescomLatam2025 #SupportOurDevelopers #GameDevelopment #PoliticalChange
    The Brazilian game industry is drowning in mediocrity, and it's time we face the truth! How can we even think about establishing ourselves on the global stage when we can't even support our own developers? The discussions at Gamescom Latam 2025 reveal a tragic reality: endless barriers, lack of investment, and a government that doesn't give a damn about the creative minds trying to shine. It's infuriating to see talent wasted because of systemic failures! If we want to make it political, let’s demand real change and support for our industry. We can’t afford to sit on the sidelines while our potential is squandered! #BrazilianGameIndustry #GamescomLatam2025 #SupportOurDevelopers #GameDevelopment #PoliticalChange
    'Make it political:' How can the Brazilian game industry establish itself on the global stage?
    We speak with developers and advocates at Gamescom Latam 2025 to learn about the challenges of making video games in Brazil.
    Like
    Love
    Wow
    Sad
    Angry
    103
    1 Commentarii 0 Distribuiri 0 previzualizare
  • I can't believe I wasted my time trying Adobe's Fantasy Premier League logo generator! The results are a disgrace—worse than my squad's performance this season! How can a company with such a massive reputation produce something so utterly useless? It’s like they want us to relegate our creativity along with our teams! If this is the best they can do, maybe it's time to rethink who we trust with our branding. This is an absolute fail that leaves fans like me furious. Get it together, Adobe!

    #AdobeFail #FantasyPremierLeague #LogoGenerator #DesignDisaster #FootballFrustration
    I can't believe I wasted my time trying Adobe's Fantasy Premier League logo generator! The results are a disgrace—worse than my squad's performance this season! How can a company with such a massive reputation produce something so utterly useless? It’s like they want us to relegate our creativity along with our teams! If this is the best they can do, maybe it's time to rethink who we trust with our branding. This is an absolute fail that leaves fans like me furious. Get it together, Adobe! #AdobeFail #FantasyPremierLeague #LogoGenerator #DesignDisaster #FootballFrustration
    Like
    Love
    Wow
    Sad
    107
    1 Commentarii 0 Distribuiri 0 previzualizare
  • The latest episode of the Hackaday Podcast, "Benchies, Beanies, and Back to the Future," is a glaring example of how tech discussions have spiraled into a half-hearted mess! Instead of delivering substantial content, we’re bombarded with fluff and irrelevant banter. Why are we wasting precious listening time on mysteries and trivial hacks that barely scratch the surface of real innovation? This is not what we need! We crave in-depth insights, not a jumble of hacks that anyone could find online. It’s infuriating to see such potential wasted on mediocrity. Step it up, Hackaday!

    #HackadayPodcast #TechCritique #InnovationFail #ListenUp #TechNews
    The latest episode of the Hackaday Podcast, "Benchies, Beanies, and Back to the Future," is a glaring example of how tech discussions have spiraled into a half-hearted mess! Instead of delivering substantial content, we’re bombarded with fluff and irrelevant banter. Why are we wasting precious listening time on mysteries and trivial hacks that barely scratch the surface of real innovation? This is not what we need! We crave in-depth insights, not a jumble of hacks that anyone could find online. It’s infuriating to see such potential wasted on mediocrity. Step it up, Hackaday! #HackadayPodcast #TechCritique #InnovationFail #ListenUp #TechNews
    HACKADAY.COM
    Hackaday Podcast Episode 328: Benchies, Beanies, and Back to the Future
    This week, Hackaday’s Elliot Williams and Kristina Panos joined forces to bring you the latest news, mystery sound, and of course, a big bunch of hacks from the previous week. …read more
    Like
    Love
    Wow
    Sad
    Angry
    98
    1 Commentarii 0 Distribuiri 0 previzualizare
  • Why Designers Get Stuck In The Details And How To Stop

    You’ve drawn fifty versions of the same screen — and you still hate every one of them. Begrudgingly, you pick three, show them to your product manager, and hear: “Looks cool, but the idea doesn’t work.” Sound familiar?
    In this article, I’ll unpack why designers fall into detail work at the wrong moment, examining both process pitfalls and the underlying psychological reasons, as understanding these traps is the first step to overcoming them. I’ll also share tactics I use to climb out of that trap.
    Reason #1 You’re Afraid To Show Rough Work
    We designers worship detail. We’re taught that true craft equals razor‑sharp typography, perfect grids, and pixel precision. So the minute a task arrives, we pop open Figma and start polishing long before polish is needed.
    I’ve skipped the sketch phase more times than I care to admit. I told myself it would be faster, yet I always ended up spending hours producing a tidy mock‑up when a scribbled thumbnail would have sparked a five‑minute chat with my product manager. Rough sketches felt “unprofessional,” so I hid them.
    The cost? Lost time, wasted energy — and, by the third redo, teammates were quietly wondering if I even understood the brief.
    The real problem here is the habit: we open Figma and start perfecting the UI before we’ve even solved the problem.
    So why do we hide these rough sketches? It’s not just a bad habit or plain silly. There are solid psychological reasons behind it. We often just call it perfectionism, but it’s deeper than wanting things neat. Digging into the psychologyshows there are a couple of flavors driving this:

    Socially prescribed perfectionismIt’s that nagging feeling that everyone else expects perfect work from you, which makes showing anything rough feel like walking into the lion’s den.
    Self-oriented perfectionismWhere you’re the one setting impossibly high standards for yourself, leading to brutal self-criticism if anything looks slightly off.

    Either way, the result’s the same: showing unfinished work feels wrong, and you miss out on that vital early feedback.
    Back to the design side, remember that clients rarely see architects’ first pencil sketches, but these sketches still exist; they guide structural choices before the 3D render. Treat your thumbnails the same way — artifacts meant to collapse uncertainty, not portfolio pieces. Once stakeholders see the upside, roughness becomes a badge of speed, not sloppiness. So, the key is to consciously make that shift:
    Treat early sketches as disposable tools for thinking and actively share them to get feedback faster.

    Reason #2: You Fix The Symptom, Not The Cause
    Before tackling any task, we need to understand what business outcome we’re aiming for. Product managers might come to us asking to enlarge the payment button in the shopping cart because users aren’t noticing it. The suggested solution itself isn’t necessarily bad, but before redesigning the button, we should ask, “What data suggests they aren’t noticing it?” Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying you shouldn’t trust your product manager. On the contrary, these questions help ensure you’re on the same page and working with the same data.
    From my experience, here are several reasons why users might not be clicking that coveted button:

    Users don’t understand that this step is for payment.
    They understand it’s about payment but expect order confirmation first.
    Due to incorrect translation, users don’t understand what the button means.
    Lack of trust signals.
    Unexpected additional coststhat appear at this stage.
    Technical issues.

    Now, imagine you simply did what the manager suggested. Would you have solved the problem? Hardly.
    Moreover, the responsibility for the unresolved issue would fall on you, as the interface solution lies within the design domain. The product manager actually did their job correctly by identifying a problem: suspiciously, few users are clicking the button.
    Psychologically, taking on this bigger role isn’t easy. It means overcoming the fear of making mistakes and the discomfort of exploring unclear problems rather than just doing tasks. This shift means seeing ourselves as partners who create value — even if it means fighting a hesitation to question product managers— and understanding that using our product logic expertise proactively is crucial for modern designers.
    There’s another critical reason why we, designers, need to be a bit like product managers: the rise of AI. I deliberately used a simple example about enlarging a button, but I’m confident that in the near future, AI will easily handle routine design tasks. This worries me, but at the same time, I’m already gladly stepping into the product manager’s territory: understanding product and business metrics, formulating hypotheses, conducting research, and so on. It might sound like I’m taking work away from PMs, but believe me, they undoubtedly have enough on their plates and are usually more than happy to delegate some responsibilities to designers.
    Reason #3: You’re Solving The Wrong Problem
    Before solving anything, ask whether the problem even deserves your attention.
    During a major home‑screen redesign, our goal was to drive more users into paid services. The initial hypothesis — making service buttons bigger and brighter might help returning users — seemed reasonable enough to test. However, even when A/B testsshowed minimal impact, we continued to tweak those buttons.
    Only later did it click: the home screen isn’t the place to sell; visitors open the app to start, not to buy. We removed that promo block, and nothing broke. Contextual entry points deeper into the journey performed brilliantly. Lesson learned:
    Without the right context, any visual tweak is lipstick on a pig.

    Why did we get stuck polishing buttons instead of stopping sooner? It’s easy to get tunnel vision. Psychologically, it’s likely the good old sunk cost fallacy kicking in: we’d already invested time in the buttons, so stopping felt like wasting that effort, even though the data wasn’t promising.
    It’s just easier to keep fiddling with something familiar than to admit we need a new plan. Perhaps the simple question I should have asked myself when results stalled was: “Are we optimizing the right thing or just polishing something that fundamentally doesn’t fit the user’s primary goal here?” That alone might have saved hours.
    Reason #4: You’re Drowning In Unactionable Feedback
    We all discuss our work with colleagues. But here’s a crucial point: what kind of question do you pose to kick off that discussion? If your go-to is “What do you think?” well, that question might lead you down a rabbit hole of personal opinions rather than actionable insights. While experienced colleagues will cut through the noise, others, unsure what to evaluate, might comment on anything and everything — fonts, button colors, even when you desperately need to discuss a user flow.
    What matters here are two things:

    The question you ask,
    The context you give.

    That means clearly stating the problem, what you’ve learned, and how your idea aims to fix it.
    For instance:
    “The problem is our payment conversion rate has dropped by X%. I’ve interviewed users and found they abandon payment because they don’t understand how the total amount is calculated. My solution is to show a detailed cost breakdown. Do you think this actually solves the problem for them?”

    Here, you’ve stated the problem, shared your insight, explained your solution, and asked a direct question. It’s even better if you prepare a list of specific sub-questions. For instance: “Are all items in the cost breakdown clear?” or “Does the placement of this breakdown feel intuitive within the payment flow?”
    Another good habit is to keep your rough sketches and previous iterations handy. Some of your colleagues’ suggestions might be things you’ve already tried. It’s great if you can discuss them immediately to either revisit those ideas or definitively set them aside.
    I’m not a psychologist, but experience tells me that, psychologically, the reluctance to be this specific often stems from a fear of our solution being rejected. We tend to internalize feedback: a seemingly innocent comment like, “Have you considered other ways to organize this section?” or “Perhaps explore a different structure for this part?” can instantly morph in our minds into “You completely messed up the structure. You’re a bad designer.” Imposter syndrome, in all its glory.
    So, to wrap up this point, here are two recommendations:

    Prepare for every design discussion.A couple of focused questions will yield far more valuable input than a vague “So, what do you think?”.
    Actively work on separating feedback on your design from your self-worth.If a mistake is pointed out, acknowledge it, learn from it, and you’ll be less likely to repeat it. This is often easier said than done. For me, it took years of working with a psychotherapist. If you struggle with this, I sincerely wish you strength in overcoming it.

    Reason #5 You’re Just Tired
    Sometimes, the issue isn’t strategic at all — it’s fatigue. Fussing over icon corners can feel like a cozy bunker when your brain is fried. There’s a name for this: decision fatigue. Basically, your brain’s battery for hard thinking is low, so it hides out in the easy, comfy zone of pixel-pushing.
    A striking example comes from a New York Times article titled “Do You Suffer From Decision Fatigue?.” It described how judges deciding on release requests were far more likely to grant release early in the daycompared to late in the daysimply because their decision-making energy was depleted. Luckily, designers rarely hold someone’s freedom in their hands, but the example dramatically shows how fatigue can impact our judgment and productivity.
    What helps here:

    Swap tasks.Trade tickets with another designer; novelty resets your focus.
    Talk to another designer.If NDA permits, ask peers outside the team for a sanity check.
    Step away.Even a ten‑minute walk can do more than a double‑shot espresso.

    By the way, I came up with these ideas while walking around my office. I was lucky to work near a river, and those short walks quickly turned into a helpful habit.

    And one more trick that helps me snap out of detail mode early: if I catch myself making around 20 little tweaks — changing font weight, color, border radius — I just stop. Over time, it turned into a habit. I have a similar one with Instagram: by the third reel, my brain quietly asks, “Wait, weren’t we working?” Funny how that kind of nudge saves a ton of time.
    Four Steps I Use to Avoid Drowning In Detail
    Knowing these potential traps, here’s the practical process I use to stay on track:
    1. Define the Core Problem & Business Goal
    Before anything, dig deep: what’s the actual problem we’re solving, not just the requested task or a surface-level symptom? Ask ‘why’ repeatedly. What user pain or business need are we addressing? Then, state the clear business goal: “What metric am I moving, and do we have data to prove this is the right lever?” If retention is the goal, decide whether push reminders, gamification, or personalised content is the best route. The wrong lever, or tackling a symptom instead of the cause, dooms everything downstream.
    2. Choose the MechanicOnce the core problem and goal are clear, lock the solution principle or ‘mechanic’ first. Going with a game layer? Decide if it’s leaderboards, streaks, or badges. Write it down. Then move on. No UI yet. This keeps the focus high-level before diving into pixels.
    3. Wireframe the Flow & Get Focused Feedback
    Now open Figma. Map screens, layout, and transitions. Boxes and arrows are enough. Keep the fidelity low so the discussion stays on the flow, not colour. Crucially, when you share these early wires, ask specific questions and provide clear contextto get actionable feedback, not just vague opinions.
    4. Polish the VisualsI only let myself tweak grids, type scales, and shadows after the flow is validated. If progress stalls, or before a major polish effort, I surface the work in a design critique — again using targeted questions and clear context — instead of hiding in version 47. This ensures detailing serves the now-validated solution.
    Even for something as small as a single button, running these four checkpoints takes about ten minutes and saves hours of decorative dithering.
    Wrapping Up
    Next time you feel the pull to vanish into mock‑ups before the problem is nailed down, pause and ask what you might be avoiding. Yes, that can expose an uncomfortable truth. But pausing to ask what you might be avoiding — maybe the fuzzy core problem, or just asking for tough feedback — gives you the power to face the real issue head-on. It keeps the project focused on solving the right problem, not just perfecting a flawed solution.
    Attention to detail is a superpower when used at the right moment. Obsessing over pixels too soon, though, is a bad habit and a warning light telling us the process needs a rethink.
    #why #designers #get #stuck #details
    Why Designers Get Stuck In The Details And How To Stop
    You’ve drawn fifty versions of the same screen — and you still hate every one of them. Begrudgingly, you pick three, show them to your product manager, and hear: “Looks cool, but the idea doesn’t work.” Sound familiar? In this article, I’ll unpack why designers fall into detail work at the wrong moment, examining both process pitfalls and the underlying psychological reasons, as understanding these traps is the first step to overcoming them. I’ll also share tactics I use to climb out of that trap. Reason #1 You’re Afraid To Show Rough Work We designers worship detail. We’re taught that true craft equals razor‑sharp typography, perfect grids, and pixel precision. So the minute a task arrives, we pop open Figma and start polishing long before polish is needed. I’ve skipped the sketch phase more times than I care to admit. I told myself it would be faster, yet I always ended up spending hours producing a tidy mock‑up when a scribbled thumbnail would have sparked a five‑minute chat with my product manager. Rough sketches felt “unprofessional,” so I hid them. The cost? Lost time, wasted energy — and, by the third redo, teammates were quietly wondering if I even understood the brief. The real problem here is the habit: we open Figma and start perfecting the UI before we’ve even solved the problem. So why do we hide these rough sketches? It’s not just a bad habit or plain silly. There are solid psychological reasons behind it. We often just call it perfectionism, but it’s deeper than wanting things neat. Digging into the psychologyshows there are a couple of flavors driving this: Socially prescribed perfectionismIt’s that nagging feeling that everyone else expects perfect work from you, which makes showing anything rough feel like walking into the lion’s den. Self-oriented perfectionismWhere you’re the one setting impossibly high standards for yourself, leading to brutal self-criticism if anything looks slightly off. Either way, the result’s the same: showing unfinished work feels wrong, and you miss out on that vital early feedback. Back to the design side, remember that clients rarely see architects’ first pencil sketches, but these sketches still exist; they guide structural choices before the 3D render. Treat your thumbnails the same way — artifacts meant to collapse uncertainty, not portfolio pieces. Once stakeholders see the upside, roughness becomes a badge of speed, not sloppiness. So, the key is to consciously make that shift: Treat early sketches as disposable tools for thinking and actively share them to get feedback faster. Reason #2: You Fix The Symptom, Not The Cause Before tackling any task, we need to understand what business outcome we’re aiming for. Product managers might come to us asking to enlarge the payment button in the shopping cart because users aren’t noticing it. The suggested solution itself isn’t necessarily bad, but before redesigning the button, we should ask, “What data suggests they aren’t noticing it?” Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying you shouldn’t trust your product manager. On the contrary, these questions help ensure you’re on the same page and working with the same data. From my experience, here are several reasons why users might not be clicking that coveted button: Users don’t understand that this step is for payment. They understand it’s about payment but expect order confirmation first. Due to incorrect translation, users don’t understand what the button means. Lack of trust signals. Unexpected additional coststhat appear at this stage. Technical issues. Now, imagine you simply did what the manager suggested. Would you have solved the problem? Hardly. Moreover, the responsibility for the unresolved issue would fall on you, as the interface solution lies within the design domain. The product manager actually did their job correctly by identifying a problem: suspiciously, few users are clicking the button. Psychologically, taking on this bigger role isn’t easy. It means overcoming the fear of making mistakes and the discomfort of exploring unclear problems rather than just doing tasks. This shift means seeing ourselves as partners who create value — even if it means fighting a hesitation to question product managers— and understanding that using our product logic expertise proactively is crucial for modern designers. There’s another critical reason why we, designers, need to be a bit like product managers: the rise of AI. I deliberately used a simple example about enlarging a button, but I’m confident that in the near future, AI will easily handle routine design tasks. This worries me, but at the same time, I’m already gladly stepping into the product manager’s territory: understanding product and business metrics, formulating hypotheses, conducting research, and so on. It might sound like I’m taking work away from PMs, but believe me, they undoubtedly have enough on their plates and are usually more than happy to delegate some responsibilities to designers. Reason #3: You’re Solving The Wrong Problem Before solving anything, ask whether the problem even deserves your attention. During a major home‑screen redesign, our goal was to drive more users into paid services. The initial hypothesis — making service buttons bigger and brighter might help returning users — seemed reasonable enough to test. However, even when A/B testsshowed minimal impact, we continued to tweak those buttons. Only later did it click: the home screen isn’t the place to sell; visitors open the app to start, not to buy. We removed that promo block, and nothing broke. Contextual entry points deeper into the journey performed brilliantly. Lesson learned: Without the right context, any visual tweak is lipstick on a pig. Why did we get stuck polishing buttons instead of stopping sooner? It’s easy to get tunnel vision. Psychologically, it’s likely the good old sunk cost fallacy kicking in: we’d already invested time in the buttons, so stopping felt like wasting that effort, even though the data wasn’t promising. It’s just easier to keep fiddling with something familiar than to admit we need a new plan. Perhaps the simple question I should have asked myself when results stalled was: “Are we optimizing the right thing or just polishing something that fundamentally doesn’t fit the user’s primary goal here?” That alone might have saved hours. Reason #4: You’re Drowning In Unactionable Feedback We all discuss our work with colleagues. But here’s a crucial point: what kind of question do you pose to kick off that discussion? If your go-to is “What do you think?” well, that question might lead you down a rabbit hole of personal opinions rather than actionable insights. While experienced colleagues will cut through the noise, others, unsure what to evaluate, might comment on anything and everything — fonts, button colors, even when you desperately need to discuss a user flow. What matters here are two things: The question you ask, The context you give. That means clearly stating the problem, what you’ve learned, and how your idea aims to fix it. For instance: “The problem is our payment conversion rate has dropped by X%. I’ve interviewed users and found they abandon payment because they don’t understand how the total amount is calculated. My solution is to show a detailed cost breakdown. Do you think this actually solves the problem for them?” Here, you’ve stated the problem, shared your insight, explained your solution, and asked a direct question. It’s even better if you prepare a list of specific sub-questions. For instance: “Are all items in the cost breakdown clear?” or “Does the placement of this breakdown feel intuitive within the payment flow?” Another good habit is to keep your rough sketches and previous iterations handy. Some of your colleagues’ suggestions might be things you’ve already tried. It’s great if you can discuss them immediately to either revisit those ideas or definitively set them aside. I’m not a psychologist, but experience tells me that, psychologically, the reluctance to be this specific often stems from a fear of our solution being rejected. We tend to internalize feedback: a seemingly innocent comment like, “Have you considered other ways to organize this section?” or “Perhaps explore a different structure for this part?” can instantly morph in our minds into “You completely messed up the structure. You’re a bad designer.” Imposter syndrome, in all its glory. So, to wrap up this point, here are two recommendations: Prepare for every design discussion.A couple of focused questions will yield far more valuable input than a vague “So, what do you think?”. Actively work on separating feedback on your design from your self-worth.If a mistake is pointed out, acknowledge it, learn from it, and you’ll be less likely to repeat it. This is often easier said than done. For me, it took years of working with a psychotherapist. If you struggle with this, I sincerely wish you strength in overcoming it. Reason #5 You’re Just Tired Sometimes, the issue isn’t strategic at all — it’s fatigue. Fussing over icon corners can feel like a cozy bunker when your brain is fried. There’s a name for this: decision fatigue. Basically, your brain’s battery for hard thinking is low, so it hides out in the easy, comfy zone of pixel-pushing. A striking example comes from a New York Times article titled “Do You Suffer From Decision Fatigue?.” It described how judges deciding on release requests were far more likely to grant release early in the daycompared to late in the daysimply because their decision-making energy was depleted. Luckily, designers rarely hold someone’s freedom in their hands, but the example dramatically shows how fatigue can impact our judgment and productivity. What helps here: Swap tasks.Trade tickets with another designer; novelty resets your focus. Talk to another designer.If NDA permits, ask peers outside the team for a sanity check. Step away.Even a ten‑minute walk can do more than a double‑shot espresso. By the way, I came up with these ideas while walking around my office. I was lucky to work near a river, and those short walks quickly turned into a helpful habit. And one more trick that helps me snap out of detail mode early: if I catch myself making around 20 little tweaks — changing font weight, color, border radius — I just stop. Over time, it turned into a habit. I have a similar one with Instagram: by the third reel, my brain quietly asks, “Wait, weren’t we working?” Funny how that kind of nudge saves a ton of time. Four Steps I Use to Avoid Drowning In Detail Knowing these potential traps, here’s the practical process I use to stay on track: 1. Define the Core Problem & Business Goal Before anything, dig deep: what’s the actual problem we’re solving, not just the requested task or a surface-level symptom? Ask ‘why’ repeatedly. What user pain or business need are we addressing? Then, state the clear business goal: “What metric am I moving, and do we have data to prove this is the right lever?” If retention is the goal, decide whether push reminders, gamification, or personalised content is the best route. The wrong lever, or tackling a symptom instead of the cause, dooms everything downstream. 2. Choose the MechanicOnce the core problem and goal are clear, lock the solution principle or ‘mechanic’ first. Going with a game layer? Decide if it’s leaderboards, streaks, or badges. Write it down. Then move on. No UI yet. This keeps the focus high-level before diving into pixels. 3. Wireframe the Flow & Get Focused Feedback Now open Figma. Map screens, layout, and transitions. Boxes and arrows are enough. Keep the fidelity low so the discussion stays on the flow, not colour. Crucially, when you share these early wires, ask specific questions and provide clear contextto get actionable feedback, not just vague opinions. 4. Polish the VisualsI only let myself tweak grids, type scales, and shadows after the flow is validated. If progress stalls, or before a major polish effort, I surface the work in a design critique — again using targeted questions and clear context — instead of hiding in version 47. This ensures detailing serves the now-validated solution. Even for something as small as a single button, running these four checkpoints takes about ten minutes and saves hours of decorative dithering. Wrapping Up Next time you feel the pull to vanish into mock‑ups before the problem is nailed down, pause and ask what you might be avoiding. Yes, that can expose an uncomfortable truth. But pausing to ask what you might be avoiding — maybe the fuzzy core problem, or just asking for tough feedback — gives you the power to face the real issue head-on. It keeps the project focused on solving the right problem, not just perfecting a flawed solution. Attention to detail is a superpower when used at the right moment. Obsessing over pixels too soon, though, is a bad habit and a warning light telling us the process needs a rethink. #why #designers #get #stuck #details
    SMASHINGMAGAZINE.COM
    Why Designers Get Stuck In The Details And How To Stop
    You’ve drawn fifty versions of the same screen — and you still hate every one of them. Begrudgingly, you pick three, show them to your product manager, and hear: “Looks cool, but the idea doesn’t work.” Sound familiar? In this article, I’ll unpack why designers fall into detail work at the wrong moment, examining both process pitfalls and the underlying psychological reasons, as understanding these traps is the first step to overcoming them. I’ll also share tactics I use to climb out of that trap. Reason #1 You’re Afraid To Show Rough Work We designers worship detail. We’re taught that true craft equals razor‑sharp typography, perfect grids, and pixel precision. So the minute a task arrives, we pop open Figma and start polishing long before polish is needed. I’ve skipped the sketch phase more times than I care to admit. I told myself it would be faster, yet I always ended up spending hours producing a tidy mock‑up when a scribbled thumbnail would have sparked a five‑minute chat with my product manager. Rough sketches felt “unprofessional,” so I hid them. The cost? Lost time, wasted energy — and, by the third redo, teammates were quietly wondering if I even understood the brief. The real problem here is the habit: we open Figma and start perfecting the UI before we’ve even solved the problem. So why do we hide these rough sketches? It’s not just a bad habit or plain silly. There are solid psychological reasons behind it. We often just call it perfectionism, but it’s deeper than wanting things neat. Digging into the psychology (like the research by Hewitt and Flett) shows there are a couple of flavors driving this: Socially prescribed perfectionismIt’s that nagging feeling that everyone else expects perfect work from you, which makes showing anything rough feel like walking into the lion’s den. Self-oriented perfectionismWhere you’re the one setting impossibly high standards for yourself, leading to brutal self-criticism if anything looks slightly off. Either way, the result’s the same: showing unfinished work feels wrong, and you miss out on that vital early feedback. Back to the design side, remember that clients rarely see architects’ first pencil sketches, but these sketches still exist; they guide structural choices before the 3D render. Treat your thumbnails the same way — artifacts meant to collapse uncertainty, not portfolio pieces. Once stakeholders see the upside, roughness becomes a badge of speed, not sloppiness. So, the key is to consciously make that shift: Treat early sketches as disposable tools for thinking and actively share them to get feedback faster. Reason #2: You Fix The Symptom, Not The Cause Before tackling any task, we need to understand what business outcome we’re aiming for. Product managers might come to us asking to enlarge the payment button in the shopping cart because users aren’t noticing it. The suggested solution itself isn’t necessarily bad, but before redesigning the button, we should ask, “What data suggests they aren’t noticing it?” Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying you shouldn’t trust your product manager. On the contrary, these questions help ensure you’re on the same page and working with the same data. From my experience, here are several reasons why users might not be clicking that coveted button: Users don’t understand that this step is for payment. They understand it’s about payment but expect order confirmation first. Due to incorrect translation, users don’t understand what the button means. Lack of trust signals (no security icons, unclear seller information). Unexpected additional costs (hidden fees, shipping) that appear at this stage. Technical issues (inactive button, page freezing). Now, imagine you simply did what the manager suggested. Would you have solved the problem? Hardly. Moreover, the responsibility for the unresolved issue would fall on you, as the interface solution lies within the design domain. The product manager actually did their job correctly by identifying a problem: suspiciously, few users are clicking the button. Psychologically, taking on this bigger role isn’t easy. It means overcoming the fear of making mistakes and the discomfort of exploring unclear problems rather than just doing tasks. This shift means seeing ourselves as partners who create value — even if it means fighting a hesitation to question product managers (which might come from a fear of speaking up or a desire to avoid challenging authority) — and understanding that using our product logic expertise proactively is crucial for modern designers. There’s another critical reason why we, designers, need to be a bit like product managers: the rise of AI. I deliberately used a simple example about enlarging a button, but I’m confident that in the near future, AI will easily handle routine design tasks. This worries me, but at the same time, I’m already gladly stepping into the product manager’s territory: understanding product and business metrics, formulating hypotheses, conducting research, and so on. It might sound like I’m taking work away from PMs, but believe me, they undoubtedly have enough on their plates and are usually more than happy to delegate some responsibilities to designers. Reason #3: You’re Solving The Wrong Problem Before solving anything, ask whether the problem even deserves your attention. During a major home‑screen redesign, our goal was to drive more users into paid services. The initial hypothesis — making service buttons bigger and brighter might help returning users — seemed reasonable enough to test. However, even when A/B tests (a method of comparing two versions of a design to determine which performs better) showed minimal impact, we continued to tweak those buttons. Only later did it click: the home screen isn’t the place to sell; visitors open the app to start, not to buy. We removed that promo block, and nothing broke. Contextual entry points deeper into the journey performed brilliantly. Lesson learned: Without the right context, any visual tweak is lipstick on a pig. Why did we get stuck polishing buttons instead of stopping sooner? It’s easy to get tunnel vision. Psychologically, it’s likely the good old sunk cost fallacy kicking in: we’d already invested time in the buttons, so stopping felt like wasting that effort, even though the data wasn’t promising. It’s just easier to keep fiddling with something familiar than to admit we need a new plan. Perhaps the simple question I should have asked myself when results stalled was: “Are we optimizing the right thing or just polishing something that fundamentally doesn’t fit the user’s primary goal here?” That alone might have saved hours. Reason #4: You’re Drowning In Unactionable Feedback We all discuss our work with colleagues. But here’s a crucial point: what kind of question do you pose to kick off that discussion? If your go-to is “What do you think?” well, that question might lead you down a rabbit hole of personal opinions rather than actionable insights. While experienced colleagues will cut through the noise, others, unsure what to evaluate, might comment on anything and everything — fonts, button colors, even when you desperately need to discuss a user flow. What matters here are two things: The question you ask, The context you give. That means clearly stating the problem, what you’ve learned, and how your idea aims to fix it. For instance: “The problem is our payment conversion rate has dropped by X%. I’ve interviewed users and found they abandon payment because they don’t understand how the total amount is calculated. My solution is to show a detailed cost breakdown. Do you think this actually solves the problem for them?” Here, you’ve stated the problem (conversion drop), shared your insight (user confusion), explained your solution (cost breakdown), and asked a direct question. It’s even better if you prepare a list of specific sub-questions. For instance: “Are all items in the cost breakdown clear?” or “Does the placement of this breakdown feel intuitive within the payment flow?” Another good habit is to keep your rough sketches and previous iterations handy. Some of your colleagues’ suggestions might be things you’ve already tried. It’s great if you can discuss them immediately to either revisit those ideas or definitively set them aside. I’m not a psychologist, but experience tells me that, psychologically, the reluctance to be this specific often stems from a fear of our solution being rejected. We tend to internalize feedback: a seemingly innocent comment like, “Have you considered other ways to organize this section?” or “Perhaps explore a different structure for this part?” can instantly morph in our minds into “You completely messed up the structure. You’re a bad designer.” Imposter syndrome, in all its glory. So, to wrap up this point, here are two recommendations: Prepare for every design discussion.A couple of focused questions will yield far more valuable input than a vague “So, what do you think?”. Actively work on separating feedback on your design from your self-worth.If a mistake is pointed out, acknowledge it, learn from it, and you’ll be less likely to repeat it. This is often easier said than done. For me, it took years of working with a psychotherapist. If you struggle with this, I sincerely wish you strength in overcoming it. Reason #5 You’re Just Tired Sometimes, the issue isn’t strategic at all — it’s fatigue. Fussing over icon corners can feel like a cozy bunker when your brain is fried. There’s a name for this: decision fatigue. Basically, your brain’s battery for hard thinking is low, so it hides out in the easy, comfy zone of pixel-pushing. A striking example comes from a New York Times article titled “Do You Suffer From Decision Fatigue?.” It described how judges deciding on release requests were far more likely to grant release early in the day (about 70% of cases) compared to late in the day (less than 10%) simply because their decision-making energy was depleted. Luckily, designers rarely hold someone’s freedom in their hands, but the example dramatically shows how fatigue can impact our judgment and productivity. What helps here: Swap tasks.Trade tickets with another designer; novelty resets your focus. Talk to another designer.If NDA permits, ask peers outside the team for a sanity check. Step away.Even a ten‑minute walk can do more than a double‑shot espresso. By the way, I came up with these ideas while walking around my office. I was lucky to work near a river, and those short walks quickly turned into a helpful habit. And one more trick that helps me snap out of detail mode early: if I catch myself making around 20 little tweaks — changing font weight, color, border radius — I just stop. Over time, it turned into a habit. I have a similar one with Instagram: by the third reel, my brain quietly asks, “Wait, weren’t we working?” Funny how that kind of nudge saves a ton of time. Four Steps I Use to Avoid Drowning In Detail Knowing these potential traps, here’s the practical process I use to stay on track: 1. Define the Core Problem & Business Goal Before anything, dig deep: what’s the actual problem we’re solving, not just the requested task or a surface-level symptom? Ask ‘why’ repeatedly. What user pain or business need are we addressing? Then, state the clear business goal: “What metric am I moving, and do we have data to prove this is the right lever?” If retention is the goal, decide whether push reminders, gamification, or personalised content is the best route. The wrong lever, or tackling a symptom instead of the cause, dooms everything downstream. 2. Choose the Mechanic (Solution Principle) Once the core problem and goal are clear, lock the solution principle or ‘mechanic’ first. Going with a game layer? Decide if it’s leaderboards, streaks, or badges. Write it down. Then move on. No UI yet. This keeps the focus high-level before diving into pixels. 3. Wireframe the Flow & Get Focused Feedback Now open Figma. Map screens, layout, and transitions. Boxes and arrows are enough. Keep the fidelity low so the discussion stays on the flow, not colour. Crucially, when you share these early wires, ask specific questions and provide clear context (as discussed in ‘Reason #4’) to get actionable feedback, not just vague opinions. 4. Polish the Visuals (Mindfully) I only let myself tweak grids, type scales, and shadows after the flow is validated. If progress stalls, or before a major polish effort, I surface the work in a design critique — again using targeted questions and clear context — instead of hiding in version 47. This ensures detailing serves the now-validated solution. Even for something as small as a single button, running these four checkpoints takes about ten minutes and saves hours of decorative dithering. Wrapping Up Next time you feel the pull to vanish into mock‑ups before the problem is nailed down, pause and ask what you might be avoiding. Yes, that can expose an uncomfortable truth. But pausing to ask what you might be avoiding — maybe the fuzzy core problem, or just asking for tough feedback — gives you the power to face the real issue head-on. It keeps the project focused on solving the right problem, not just perfecting a flawed solution. Attention to detail is a superpower when used at the right moment. Obsessing over pixels too soon, though, is a bad habit and a warning light telling us the process needs a rethink.
    Like
    Love
    Wow
    Angry
    Sad
    596
    0 Commentarii 0 Distribuiri 0 previzualizare
  • I’m going to say it: Mario Kart World is not as good as it should be – Reader’s Feature

    I’m going to say it: Mario Kart World is not as good as it should be – Reader’s Feature

    GameCentral

    Published June 15, 2025 6:00am

    Mario Kart World – is it a let-down?A reader is unimpressed by Mario Kart World on the Nintendo Switch 2 and argues that the controversial free roam mode is not its only issue.
    As a day one Nintendo Switch 2 owner I have to admit I’m a little disappointed. Not with the console itself, which I think is pretty much prefect for the price and what it has to do, but with the only game worth getting at launch: Mario Kart World.
    Now, I don’t think it’s terrible, but I do think that not only is it not as good at Mario Kart 8 but that it’s kind of a flawed experiment and one of the weakest entries in the whole series. But I’ll talk about the positives first, just to show it’s not all bad.
    Knockout Tour is great, I think everyone would agree. A bit boring in single-player, but fantastic online and the game’s best feature. I also like all the weird extra characters, although how you unlock them and the costumes is very random and unsatisfying. The open world is also very nicely designed in its own right, and very large, but… that’s kind of all I’ve got in terms of praise.
    First, I’ll get the obvious thing out of the way: the open world is completely wasted. None of the challenges in it are interesting, if you can even find them, and a lot of them are overly hard and frustrating. There’s no story or dialogue or anything. You just drive around at random in free roam and hope you come across something interesting, which you almost certainly won’t.
    If any game was born to have fetch quests in it, it was this and yet there’s nothing like that. It all feels like it’s waiting for the actual game to be dropped onto the world but there’s nothing there. Maybe it will come in DLC, but even if it’s free why wasn’t it there from the start? Why wouldn’t you go all out for basically your only launch game? It’s baffling.
    But for me that’s not the real problem because, rightly or wrongly, free roam is really just a side show. My problem is that the actual racing in the two main modes is very dull. It may not seem that way when you’ve got a dozen people firing shells at you at once, but that gets old very quickly, and it doesn’t actually happen that much, especially in single-player.

    Expert, exclusive gaming analysis

    Sign up to the GameCentral newsletter for a unique take on the week in gaming, alongside the latest reviews and more. Delivered to your inbox every Saturday morning.

    Most of the time you’re just driving alongand taking slow bend after slow bend in what aren’t even really courses at all. Knockout Tour is worst for this, because you’re essentially driving point-to-point and it really does feel like you’re just road racing, with nothing in terms of exciting or unexpected track design.
    Grand Prix is barely any better either, with very few lapped races and too many wide roads that are too easy to take. I went back to play Mario Kart 8 and it’s filled with tightly designed courses and weird and physically impossible track designs. It seems a weird to say but Mario Kart World is basically too realistic, or rather too mundane in its design. Everything about it feels flabby and under-designed.
    Sure, occasionally you fly vertically up into the air or down the side of a volcano, but when you get down to the actual racing it’s so plain and boring. The tracks aren’t designed for time trials and racing skill, they’re designed for power-ups and 24 player online races, and that has ruined everything.

    More Trending

    I’m sure other people will enjoy the game but as someone that has enjoyed every previous Mario Kart it’s not for me. Which means I’m now left with a neat new console with nothing to play on it, except for old Switch 1 games. And that will definitely include Mario Kart 8.
    By reader Lambent

    What is the future of Mario Kart World?The reader’s features do not necessarily represent the views of GameCentral or Metro.
    You can submit your own 500 to 600-word reader feature at any time, which if used will be published in the next appropriate weekend slot. Just contact us at gamecentral@metro.co.uk or use our Submit Stuff page and you won’t need to send an email.

    GameCentral
    Sign up for exclusive analysis, latest releases, and bonus community content.
    This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. Your information will be used in line with our Privacy Policy
    #going #say #mario #kart #world
    I’m going to say it: Mario Kart World is not as good as it should be – Reader’s Feature
    I’m going to say it: Mario Kart World is not as good as it should be – Reader’s Feature GameCentral Published June 15, 2025 6:00am Mario Kart World – is it a let-down?A reader is unimpressed by Mario Kart World on the Nintendo Switch 2 and argues that the controversial free roam mode is not its only issue. As a day one Nintendo Switch 2 owner I have to admit I’m a little disappointed. Not with the console itself, which I think is pretty much prefect for the price and what it has to do, but with the only game worth getting at launch: Mario Kart World. Now, I don’t think it’s terrible, but I do think that not only is it not as good at Mario Kart 8 but that it’s kind of a flawed experiment and one of the weakest entries in the whole series. But I’ll talk about the positives first, just to show it’s not all bad. Knockout Tour is great, I think everyone would agree. A bit boring in single-player, but fantastic online and the game’s best feature. I also like all the weird extra characters, although how you unlock them and the costumes is very random and unsatisfying. The open world is also very nicely designed in its own right, and very large, but… that’s kind of all I’ve got in terms of praise. First, I’ll get the obvious thing out of the way: the open world is completely wasted. None of the challenges in it are interesting, if you can even find them, and a lot of them are overly hard and frustrating. There’s no story or dialogue or anything. You just drive around at random in free roam and hope you come across something interesting, which you almost certainly won’t. If any game was born to have fetch quests in it, it was this and yet there’s nothing like that. It all feels like it’s waiting for the actual game to be dropped onto the world but there’s nothing there. Maybe it will come in DLC, but even if it’s free why wasn’t it there from the start? Why wouldn’t you go all out for basically your only launch game? It’s baffling. But for me that’s not the real problem because, rightly or wrongly, free roam is really just a side show. My problem is that the actual racing in the two main modes is very dull. It may not seem that way when you’ve got a dozen people firing shells at you at once, but that gets old very quickly, and it doesn’t actually happen that much, especially in single-player. Expert, exclusive gaming analysis Sign up to the GameCentral newsletter for a unique take on the week in gaming, alongside the latest reviews and more. Delivered to your inbox every Saturday morning. Most of the time you’re just driving alongand taking slow bend after slow bend in what aren’t even really courses at all. Knockout Tour is worst for this, because you’re essentially driving point-to-point and it really does feel like you’re just road racing, with nothing in terms of exciting or unexpected track design. Grand Prix is barely any better either, with very few lapped races and too many wide roads that are too easy to take. I went back to play Mario Kart 8 and it’s filled with tightly designed courses and weird and physically impossible track designs. It seems a weird to say but Mario Kart World is basically too realistic, or rather too mundane in its design. Everything about it feels flabby and under-designed. Sure, occasionally you fly vertically up into the air or down the side of a volcano, but when you get down to the actual racing it’s so plain and boring. The tracks aren’t designed for time trials and racing skill, they’re designed for power-ups and 24 player online races, and that has ruined everything. More Trending I’m sure other people will enjoy the game but as someone that has enjoyed every previous Mario Kart it’s not for me. Which means I’m now left with a neat new console with nothing to play on it, except for old Switch 1 games. And that will definitely include Mario Kart 8. By reader Lambent What is the future of Mario Kart World?The reader’s features do not necessarily represent the views of GameCentral or Metro. You can submit your own 500 to 600-word reader feature at any time, which if used will be published in the next appropriate weekend slot. Just contact us at gamecentral@metro.co.uk or use our Submit Stuff page and you won’t need to send an email. GameCentral Sign up for exclusive analysis, latest releases, and bonus community content. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. Your information will be used in line with our Privacy Policy #going #say #mario #kart #world
    METRO.CO.UK
    I’m going to say it: Mario Kart World is not as good as it should be – Reader’s Feature
    I’m going to say it: Mario Kart World is not as good as it should be – Reader’s Feature GameCentral Published June 15, 2025 6:00am Mario Kart World – is it a let-down? (Nintendo) A reader is unimpressed by Mario Kart World on the Nintendo Switch 2 and argues that the controversial free roam mode is not its only issue. As a day one Nintendo Switch 2 owner I have to admit I’m a little disappointed. Not with the console itself, which I think is pretty much prefect for the price and what it has to do, but with the only game worth getting at launch: Mario Kart World. Now, I don’t think it’s terrible, but I do think that not only is it not as good at Mario Kart 8 but that it’s kind of a flawed experiment and one of the weakest entries in the whole series. But I’ll talk about the positives first, just to show it’s not all bad. Knockout Tour is great, I think everyone would agree. A bit boring in single-player, but fantastic online and the game’s best feature. I also like all the weird extra characters, although how you unlock them and the costumes is very random and unsatisfying. The open world is also very nicely designed in its own right, and very large, but… that’s kind of all I’ve got in terms of praise. First, I’ll get the obvious thing out of the way: the open world is completely wasted. None of the challenges in it are interesting, if you can even find them, and a lot of them are overly hard and frustrating. There’s no story or dialogue or anything. You just drive around at random in free roam and hope you come across something interesting, which you almost certainly won’t. If any game was born to have fetch quests in it, it was this and yet there’s nothing like that. It all feels like it’s waiting for the actual game to be dropped onto the world but there’s nothing there. Maybe it will come in DLC, but even if it’s free why wasn’t it there from the start? Why wouldn’t you go all out for basically your only launch game? It’s baffling. But for me that’s not the real problem because, rightly or wrongly, free roam is really just a side show. My problem is that the actual racing in the two main modes is very dull. It may not seem that way when you’ve got a dozen people firing shells at you at once, but that gets old very quickly, and it doesn’t actually happen that much, especially in single-player. Expert, exclusive gaming analysis Sign up to the GameCentral newsletter for a unique take on the week in gaming, alongside the latest reviews and more. Delivered to your inbox every Saturday morning. Most of the time you’re just driving along (even 150cc isn’t that fast) and taking slow bend after slow bend in what aren’t even really courses at all. Knockout Tour is worst for this, because you’re essentially driving point-to-point and it really does feel like you’re just road racing, with nothing in terms of exciting or unexpected track design. Grand Prix is barely any better either, with very few lapped races and too many wide roads that are too easy to take. I went back to play Mario Kart 8 and it’s filled with tightly designed courses and weird and physically impossible track designs. It seems a weird to say but Mario Kart World is basically too realistic, or rather too mundane in its design. Everything about it feels flabby and under-designed. Sure, occasionally you fly vertically up into the air or down the side of a volcano, but when you get down to the actual racing it’s so plain and boring. The tracks aren’t designed for time trials and racing skill, they’re designed for power-ups and 24 player online races, and that has ruined everything. More Trending I’m sure other people will enjoy the game but as someone that has enjoyed every previous Mario Kart it’s not for me. Which means I’m now left with a neat new console with nothing to play on it, except for old Switch 1 games. And that will definitely include Mario Kart 8. By reader Lambent What is the future of Mario Kart World? (Nintendo) The reader’s features do not necessarily represent the views of GameCentral or Metro. You can submit your own 500 to 600-word reader feature at any time, which if used will be published in the next appropriate weekend slot. Just contact us at gamecentral@metro.co.uk or use our Submit Stuff page and you won’t need to send an email. GameCentral Sign up for exclusive analysis, latest releases, and bonus community content. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. Your information will be used in line with our Privacy Policy
    0 Commentarii 0 Distribuiri 0 previzualizare
  • ‘Star Wars: Starfighter’ Casts Mia Goth as Villain

    In the grand tradition of Darth Vader, the Emperor, and Kylo Ren, meet the latest Star Wars villain: Mia Goth, the star of X, Pearl, and MaXXXine.Goth will appear opposite Ryan Gosling in the recently announced Star Wars: Starfighter, a standalone film that is being directed by Deadpool & Wolverine’s Shawn Levy.According to The Hollywood Reporter, “details on the project are scant, but it does involve Gosling playing a character that must protect a young charge against evil pursuers.” Goth plays one of the “evil pursuers.” They note that she will play “the same role that Mikey Madison had been circling before her deal blew up like a Death Star — over money matters.”STAR WARS: SKELETON CREWLucasfilm Ltd.loading...READ MORE: 12 Great Actors Wasted in Star Wars RolesAfter many years in cinematic limbo, the Star Wars franchise is finally ramping up film production again. The most recent Star Wars feature, The Rise of Skywalker, opened in theaters way back in 2019. Since then, the series has focused entirely on TV shows for Disney+. Lucasfilm announced some potential film projects during this period, but every single one of them wound up trapped in development hell.In fact, the only Star Wars film that actually made it into production grew out of the TV side of the business: The upcoming The Mandalorian & Grogu, which will continue the story of the popular Disney+ Mandalorian show. That film is expected to open in theaters in May of 2026.Lucasfilm formally announced Starfighter earlierStar Wars movie.Star Wars: Starfighter is currently scheduled to open in theaters on May 28, 2027.I Ate Everything on Burger King’s ‘How to Train Your Dragon’ MenuIn honor of the live-action How to Train Your Dragon movie, Burger King now has an entire menu of “fiery” items. I ate all of them.
    #star #wars #starfighter #casts #mia
    ‘Star Wars: Starfighter’ Casts Mia Goth as Villain
    In the grand tradition of Darth Vader, the Emperor, and Kylo Ren, meet the latest Star Wars villain: Mia Goth, the star of X, Pearl, and MaXXXine.Goth will appear opposite Ryan Gosling in the recently announced Star Wars: Starfighter, a standalone film that is being directed by Deadpool & Wolverine’s Shawn Levy.According to The Hollywood Reporter, “details on the project are scant, but it does involve Gosling playing a character that must protect a young charge against evil pursuers.” Goth plays one of the “evil pursuers.” They note that she will play “the same role that Mikey Madison had been circling before her deal blew up like a Death Star — over money matters.”STAR WARS: SKELETON CREWLucasfilm Ltd.loading...READ MORE: 12 Great Actors Wasted in Star Wars RolesAfter many years in cinematic limbo, the Star Wars franchise is finally ramping up film production again. The most recent Star Wars feature, The Rise of Skywalker, opened in theaters way back in 2019. Since then, the series has focused entirely on TV shows for Disney+. Lucasfilm announced some potential film projects during this period, but every single one of them wound up trapped in development hell.In fact, the only Star Wars film that actually made it into production grew out of the TV side of the business: The upcoming The Mandalorian & Grogu, which will continue the story of the popular Disney+ Mandalorian show. That film is expected to open in theaters in May of 2026.Lucasfilm formally announced Starfighter earlierStar Wars movie.Star Wars: Starfighter is currently scheduled to open in theaters on May 28, 2027.I Ate Everything on Burger King’s ‘How to Train Your Dragon’ MenuIn honor of the live-action How to Train Your Dragon movie, Burger King now has an entire menu of “fiery” items. I ate all of them. #star #wars #starfighter #casts #mia
    SCREENCRUSH.COM
    ‘Star Wars: Starfighter’ Casts Mia Goth as Villain
    In the grand tradition of Darth Vader, the Emperor, and Kylo Ren, meet the latest Star Wars villain: Mia Goth, the star of X, Pearl, and MaXXXine.Goth will appear opposite Ryan Gosling in the recently announced Star Wars: Starfighter, a standalone film that is being directed by Deadpool & Wolverine’s Shawn Levy.According to The Hollywood Reporter, “details on the project are scant, but it does involve Gosling playing a character that must protect a young charge against evil pursuers.” Goth plays one of the “evil pursuers.” They note that she will play “the same role that Mikey Madison had been circling before her deal blew up like a Death Star — over money matters.”STAR WARS: SKELETON CREWLucasfilm Ltd.loading...READ MORE: 12 Great Actors Wasted in Star Wars RolesAfter many years in cinematic limbo, the Star Wars franchise is finally ramping up film production again. The most recent Star Wars feature, The Rise of Skywalker, opened in theaters way back in 2019. Since then, the series has focused entirely on TV shows for Disney+. Lucasfilm announced some potential film projects during this period, but every single one of them wound up trapped in development hell.In fact, the only Star Wars film that actually made it into production grew out of the TV side of the business: The upcoming The Mandalorian & Grogu, which will continue the story of the popular Disney+ Mandalorian show. That film is expected to open in theaters in May of 2026.Lucasfilm formally announced Starfighter earlierStar Wars movie.Star Wars: Starfighter is currently scheduled to open in theaters on May 28, 2027.I Ate Everything on Burger King’s ‘How to Train Your Dragon’ MenuIn honor of the live-action How to Train Your Dragon movie, Burger King now has an entire menu of “fiery” items. I ate all of them.
    Like
    Love
    Wow
    Sad
    Angry
    664
    0 Commentarii 0 Distribuiri 0 previzualizare
  • Dangerous Animals, a giddy slasher where the knife is a shark

    Australian director Sean Byrne is one of horror’s premiere mixologists. His debut, 2009’s The Loved Ones, meshed teen romance with gruesome Hostel-style extremism. 2015’s The Devil’s Candy put a heavy metal spin on the haunted-house romp. His new film, Dangerous Animals, in theaters now, raises a question no one was asking about a classic B-movie subgenre: When is a killer shark movie not a killer shark movie? 

    Answer: When the killer shark is just a weapon in a human killer’s hands. 

    Despite arriving just in time for the 50th anniversary of Jaws, Dangerous Animals has less in common with itand is more in line with Texas Chainsaw Massacre or Saw . Hassie Harrisonstars as Zephyr, an American surfer floating around the Australian coast looking for the perfect waves — and maybe the right romance. She does not find it in Tucker, who abducts her off the beach before dawn and locks her up with another tourist, Heather, on his shark expedition boat. Tucker is a mega-creep who gets off on shark attacks. Zephyr and Heather are his latest chum.

    At 90 minutes, Dangerous Animals is lean and mean fun. Zephyr is no damsel in distress, and quickly plots an escape from what looks like an impossible situation. Tucker has driven them out to the middle of the ocean where he can gets wasted on cheap liquor, dance to disco tunes, and prepare to ritualistically dunk his prey into shark-infested waters. He’s an absolute psychopath, and Byrne lets Courtney completely off the possible-Hollywood-leading-man leash. The actor is frothing at the mouth and twitching in his eyes throughout the deranged picture, with a level of egolessness that manifested slightly when he playedCaptain Boomerang in Suicide Squad. This is better.

    Harrison summons her own power in the face of Courtney’s towering physique in Zephyr’s multiple escape attempts. Byrne takes full advantage of the claustrophobic setting of the boat — and the vast emptiness of the sea surrounding it. It’s a geographically coherent but unsettling maze for a cat shark-and-mouse game that rarely succumbs to contrivances to ratchet up the tension. Getting off a boat surrounded by sharks just seems really tough! And for as blockheaded as Tucker seems, he’s devoted much of his life to building the ultimate floating prison.

    While Dangerous Animals never goes full Deep Blue Sea with far-fetched shark kills, Byrne, by way of Tucker’s fetish, still sets up some nightmarish attacks. Tucker doesn’t just like to watch sharks tear his victims to shreds, he also videotapes them on a 1990s-era camera for future VHS viewing. So the deaths are slow and savage, with Courtney’s wide-eyed gaze committing as much violence as the razor-sharp shark teeth. There’s blood in the water, and all over this killer’s hands.

    In the days of so-called “elevated horror,” Dangerous Animals delivers earnest thrills with a simple-yet-innovative slasher premise. In my mind, the freshest horror movies find a kernel of specificity in a timeless premise. Byrne’s movie isn’t far off from the Halloween formula — big guy hunts down indomitable woman with scary weapon of choice — but whisking us to Australia, sending us to sea, and the what-if of a sightseeing tour guide with a hard-on for shark attacks is the focused lens a filmmaker needs to deliver something new. Sick, but new.
    #dangerous #animals #giddy #slasher #where
    Dangerous Animals, a giddy slasher where the knife is a shark
    Australian director Sean Byrne is one of horror’s premiere mixologists. His debut, 2009’s The Loved Ones, meshed teen romance with gruesome Hostel-style extremism. 2015’s The Devil’s Candy put a heavy metal spin on the haunted-house romp. His new film, Dangerous Animals, in theaters now, raises a question no one was asking about a classic B-movie subgenre: When is a killer shark movie not a killer shark movie?  Answer: When the killer shark is just a weapon in a human killer’s hands.  Despite arriving just in time for the 50th anniversary of Jaws, Dangerous Animals has less in common with itand is more in line with Texas Chainsaw Massacre or Saw . Hassie Harrisonstars as Zephyr, an American surfer floating around the Australian coast looking for the perfect waves — and maybe the right romance. She does not find it in Tucker, who abducts her off the beach before dawn and locks her up with another tourist, Heather, on his shark expedition boat. Tucker is a mega-creep who gets off on shark attacks. Zephyr and Heather are his latest chum. At 90 minutes, Dangerous Animals is lean and mean fun. Zephyr is no damsel in distress, and quickly plots an escape from what looks like an impossible situation. Tucker has driven them out to the middle of the ocean where he can gets wasted on cheap liquor, dance to disco tunes, and prepare to ritualistically dunk his prey into shark-infested waters. He’s an absolute psychopath, and Byrne lets Courtney completely off the possible-Hollywood-leading-man leash. The actor is frothing at the mouth and twitching in his eyes throughout the deranged picture, with a level of egolessness that manifested slightly when he playedCaptain Boomerang in Suicide Squad. This is better. Harrison summons her own power in the face of Courtney’s towering physique in Zephyr’s multiple escape attempts. Byrne takes full advantage of the claustrophobic setting of the boat — and the vast emptiness of the sea surrounding it. It’s a geographically coherent but unsettling maze for a cat shark-and-mouse game that rarely succumbs to contrivances to ratchet up the tension. Getting off a boat surrounded by sharks just seems really tough! And for as blockheaded as Tucker seems, he’s devoted much of his life to building the ultimate floating prison. While Dangerous Animals never goes full Deep Blue Sea with far-fetched shark kills, Byrne, by way of Tucker’s fetish, still sets up some nightmarish attacks. Tucker doesn’t just like to watch sharks tear his victims to shreds, he also videotapes them on a 1990s-era camera for future VHS viewing. So the deaths are slow and savage, with Courtney’s wide-eyed gaze committing as much violence as the razor-sharp shark teeth. There’s blood in the water, and all over this killer’s hands. In the days of so-called “elevated horror,” Dangerous Animals delivers earnest thrills with a simple-yet-innovative slasher premise. In my mind, the freshest horror movies find a kernel of specificity in a timeless premise. Byrne’s movie isn’t far off from the Halloween formula — big guy hunts down indomitable woman with scary weapon of choice — but whisking us to Australia, sending us to sea, and the what-if of a sightseeing tour guide with a hard-on for shark attacks is the focused lens a filmmaker needs to deliver something new. Sick, but new. #dangerous #animals #giddy #slasher #where
    WWW.POLYGON.COM
    Dangerous Animals, a giddy slasher where the knife is a shark
    Australian director Sean Byrne is one of horror’s premiere mixologists. His debut, 2009’s The Loved Ones, meshed teen romance with gruesome Hostel-style extremism. 2015’s The Devil’s Candy put a heavy metal spin on the haunted-house romp. His new film, Dangerous Animals, in theaters now, raises a question no one was asking about a classic B-movie subgenre: When is a killer shark movie not a killer shark movie?  Answer: When the killer shark is just a weapon in a human killer’s hands.  Despite arriving just in time for the 50th anniversary of Jaws, Dangerous Animals has less in common with it (or with The Shallows or 47 Meters Down) and is more in line with Texas Chainsaw Massacre or Saw (or one of Australia’s modern horror successes, Wolf Creek). Hassie Harrison (Yellowstone) stars as Zephyr, an American surfer floating around the Australian coast looking for the perfect waves — and maybe the right romance. She does not find it in Tucker (Jai Courtney of Terminator Genisys), who abducts her off the beach before dawn and locks her up with another tourist, Heather (Ella Newton), on his shark expedition boat. Tucker is a mega-creep who gets off on shark attacks. Zephyr and Heather are his latest chum. At 90 minutes, Dangerous Animals is lean and mean fun. Zephyr is no damsel in distress, and quickly plots an escape from what looks like an impossible situation. Tucker has driven them out to the middle of the ocean where he can gets wasted on cheap liquor, dance to disco tunes, and prepare to ritualistically dunk his prey into shark-infested waters. He’s an absolute psychopath, and Byrne lets Courtney completely off the possible-Hollywood-leading-man leash. The actor is frothing at the mouth and twitching in his eyes throughout the deranged picture, with a level of egolessness that manifested slightly when he played [checks notes] Captain Boomerang in Suicide Squad. This is better. Harrison summons her own power in the face of Courtney’s towering physique in Zephyr’s multiple escape attempts. Byrne takes full advantage of the claustrophobic setting of the boat — and the vast emptiness of the sea surrounding it. It’s a geographically coherent but unsettling maze for a cat shark-and-mouse game that rarely succumbs to contrivances to ratchet up the tension. Getting off a boat surrounded by sharks just seems really tough! And for as blockheaded as Tucker seems, he’s devoted much of his life to building the ultimate floating prison. While Dangerous Animals never goes full Deep Blue Sea with far-fetched shark kills, Byrne, by way of Tucker’s fetish, still sets up some nightmarish attacks. Tucker doesn’t just like to watch sharks tear his victims to shreds, he also videotapes them on a 1990s-era camera for future VHS viewing. So the deaths are slow and savage, with Courtney’s wide-eyed gaze committing as much violence as the razor-sharp shark teeth. There’s blood in the water, and all over this killer’s hands. In the days of so-called “elevated horror,” Dangerous Animals delivers earnest thrills with a simple-yet-innovative slasher premise. In my mind, the freshest horror movies find a kernel of specificity in a timeless premise. Byrne’s movie isn’t far off from the Halloween formula — big guy hunts down indomitable woman with scary weapon of choice — but whisking us to Australia, sending us to sea, and the what-if of a sightseeing tour guide with a hard-on for shark attacks is the focused lens a filmmaker needs to deliver something new. Sick, but new.
    Like
    Love
    Wow
    Sad
    Angry
    624
    0 Commentarii 0 Distribuiri 0 previzualizare
CGShares https://cgshares.com