One of the best Google Doodles I’ve enjoyed in the whole of recorded history was released recently in honor of the 2020 Olympic games in Japan, which were postponed 1 year due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
The doodle is an HTML5 game that feels distinctly nintendo-esque. You play as Lucky Cat, who visits Champion Island to play in games and do good deeds for the island’s inhabitants, who are all anthropomorphic animals. The game pays direct homage to the sort of fetch quest and minigames found in action/adventure/RPG games for the GameBoy, with a distinct Zelda/Link’s Awakening feel to much of it, perhaps mixed with a bit of pokemon. Of course, the entire thing celebrates many aspects of Japanese culture, both traditional and modern.
The graphics are in a 16-bit SNES style and the cut scenes are done in an anime style. Overall the minigames are not super challenging, but are fun and enjoyable as light entertainment, although the mountain climbing gave me some trouble due to the time limit to complete the courses.
I played through the entire thing and thoroughly enjoyed it.
A couple weeks ago, I saw a news headline somewhere about how the open source software project Audacity had been compromised as spyware, and that users who are concerned about freedom and privacy should not upgrade to version 3.
This article on ArsTechnica (purports to) debunk this scare story, but I think they arrive at a bogus conclusion. The highlighted text in the screen capture of the article below shows why.
Spyware is concerned with violating users privacy, period. It doesn’t matter whether there’s a good reason for it, or if it is legally mandated. If the software is gathering information for you, not on your behalf, and reporting it to someone else not you, without your express, informed consent, it fits the definition of spyware. Period.
The “data necessary for law enforcement” category might sound good to many people. Laws are nominally good, and law enforcement must therefore also be good, right?
Sure… Except in corrupt regimes. How might they abuse this?
A better question might be: What legitimate use might they have for this?
Audacity is vague as to exactly what data is “necessary” to provide to law enforcement.
My guess is that copyright cops want some way to track Audacity users who use Audacity in violation of copyright. Of course, there’s not really a way to know if the use of a copyrighted audio file might fall under Fair Use, and Big Copyright does not care — they are the enemy of Fair Use, unconditionally. They want to protect their interests, which means, ultimately, totalitarian-level control over all media, whether they own it or not.
But in more fantastical paranoid scenarios, law enforcement could encompass nominally “anti-terrorist” technologies that can be abused to target political enemies, minorities, etc. I don’t know that this is a thing, but depending on how vague Audacity’s project maintainers are, it could conceivably be a thing. If the perceived threat is that terrorist organizations use software to create media messages, embedding tracking data in the files to identify the computers that were used to produce it, geotag via IP address the location where those computers are, etc. is feasible, at least in principle.
Moreover, there’s little to stop evil regimes from requiring that all software must include whatever data gathering they see fit, turning computers into Big Brother boxes. We may not even be all that far from that reality as it is, given what we know about state actors and non-state actors dark influence the web and on mobile device apps.
The “telemetry” data gathering that vendors use to improve their product and see how users use their products are pretty standard by now, and most people aren’t going to be impacted by that, at least not in a negative way. But it’s a door opened a crack that enables a slippery slope of “if you can collect this, we can require you to collect what we want” so in a way telemetry features is a bit of a trojan horse. But as long as developers are transparent about what they gather, and make it opt-in, I don’t really have a problem with it.
The article does mention that these alleged spyware features are only in official builds, so if you don’t want them, you can compile the project from source and they will not be there. While good, only a very small number of people will compile a software project from source for themselves.
A colleague with an interest in IT and legal issues pointed out to me that:
As I understand it a third party like Audacity DOES have to hand over records if subpoenaed by law enforcement but DOESN’T have to *create* those records if it wasn’t going to create them anyway. E.g., if cops demand the WordPress server logs that I have, I do have to hand them over. But I don’t have to have logs at all if I don’t want to.
So no, they’re doing more than they have to to comply with the law. They could just not collect the information.
I would like to know more about this WSM Group — I googled and there’s a lot of three-letter acronym organizations that use this, but the most likely one, I would guess, could be WSM Music Group, Ltd.
According to wikipedia, they’re in Hong Kong. So, China’s oppressive laws are shaping the way “Free” (libre) software used worldwide is being developed? China is a huge IP violator and (obviously) privacy violator for its citizens, and there’s plenty of examples of Chinese electronics companies (such as Lenovo, Huawei, etc.) embedding insecure backdoors and spyware out the wazoo into consumer products.
So, no, I do not feel at all assured by any of this.
The cashier told me $10.60. I gave her a $20 and a $1.
She tried to give me the $1 back, I said, “That’s so you can give me back a $10.”
She says “Oh” and gives me a $10.
Since she was trying to give the $1 back to me, she had already entered the amount paid as $20, and so the cash register tells her the change should be $9.40, so she starts counting out $9.40 in change.
I watch her for a couple of seconds, hoping she’ll realize her error, but she doesn’t, so I say, “You already gave me back the $10, I just need the $0.40.”
She got confused, because the cash register told her she owed me $9.40 in change on a $10.60 transaction paid for by a $20. She tried to think about it for a minute, then pulled out her cell phone and ran the calculation on her calculator app.
She ran it twice, and it took like 3 minutes, and I just stood there patiently, waiting for her to catch up. I could have browbeat her with an explanation of how $21 – 10.6 != 10 + 9.4, but instead, I just let her do her thing with the calculator, and she got there, all on her own. Good for her.
I didn’t get angry about it, as it is easy to get angry about someone who derps on a simple math problem, but I am realizing that it’s better not to react that way. I’ve heard this same story told a thousand times, and the teller almost always is telling a “kids these days” story, implying how doomed we are because math education has failed, and hoo boy the new generation coming up sure is frightfully dumb.
The reality is, though, that while math education could be done in better ways, people will always make mistakes now and then, and it’s actually not that big of a deal, nearly all of the time. The times when it could be a big deal, usually those mistakes get caught before they end up causing a big deal.
Math’s important, don’t get me wrong, but I don’t feel like blowing up at someone over my impatience of not getting the coins quickly enough so I can go devour my food.
And don’t get me wrong, I’m not some enlightened buddha-saint, either. I get plenty angry enough all the time as it is, but someone making a simple mistake isn’t something to get angry about; I reserve it now for malicious people, who fortunately seem to exist mostly online. But there’s a fuckton of them, and being angry at them takes enough of my time as it is.
So for this cashier, I just let her take the time she needed. She finally realized what I had been trying to tell her, and I joked and said, “I would have kept it, but you probably would have gotten fired.”
She thanked me for being honest and gave me the $0.40.
I walked away and realized that my alignment must be drifting more toward Lawful good.
But really it’s just that I don’t need $9 that badly that I’d watch someone make a mistake in my favor that could lose them their job.
Then I got back in my car, and read the news about Dan Kaminsky, and had to eat a really sad burrito.
Dan was so smart, probably every day of his life he probably felt like I felt like with the cashier a few minutes ago, dealing with computer programmers who made stupid math mistakes that could cost them their job.
I almost called them “computer programmer idiots” in that last sentence, but I went back and edited that out.
The programmers aren’t idiots either, but when you see the same mistakes enough times, it can try your patience and make you wonder what it would take to get the message through to everyone so you could never have to see that mistake made again.
I didn’t know Dan all that well, but we both spoke at the same conference once. He was friends with a lot of my hacker friends who I’ve met in the infosec sphere. He had an absolutely stirling reputation for both brilliance and kindness, and from watching the talks he gave, he was an incredible human being. The world will be less safe without him.
I’m sorry I didn’t know you any better than I did, Dan. You did a lot with your life, and the stories I’m reading now from your friends say even more about the person you were. Thank you for being that person.
I like video games, old and new. But I had more time to play video games when I was younger, and so I like the games that I spent the most time with the best, because they are most familiar to me. So I mostly like old games.
I also like new games that evoke the feeling of playing the old games that I liked.
There’s a lot of talk about “retro gaming” in the gamer communities I follow, and a recurring topic of conversation is to ask what the definition of “retro” is.
Usually people have some guideline, like “anything older than 10 (or 20, or some other arbitrary cutoff age) years old is retro”. Or sometimes they’ll refer to retro as anything that ran on an 8-bit or 16-bit processor. Then there’s a bit of discussion about console generations, about the transition from EEPROM cartridges to optical media, CD-ROM to DVD-ROM, and then the more recent transition away from optical media to solid state and digital download. People attempt to draw circles around the different features in order to define some set of characteristics that define retro.
I believe that these discussions are misguided.
Retro isn’t a thing that something becomes when it gets sufficiently old.
Rather, retro is when someone, in the present, does something in an outdated or obsolete way, creating something in the style of something that is now old.
Atari was state of the art. NES was state of the art. SNES was state of the art. N64 was state of the art. Sony Playstation was state of the art. The Wii was state of the art. Even if it wasn’t using cutting edge technology — Nintendo has a history of using less expensive, less impressive hardware than Sony/Microsoft, but is nonetheless state of the art in its current generation.
A game programmed to run natively on the Switch, but that looks and feels like a NES game, like Shovel Knight, is retro. The original Super Mario Bros. will never be retro — it is old, not retro. Super Mario 35, Nintendo’s 35th anniversary celebration that re-imagines the original SMB, is retro. An indie game written in for PCs that evokes the look and feel of a game that could have been implemented on the hardware of a generation or two ago, is retro.
Retro is something new made to resemble or evoke something old.
Today, David Crane, Garry Kitchen, and Dan Kitchen announced their new company, Audacity Games, a venture aimed at the niche market of retro gaming. They plan to release new games on physical cartridge for still-popular vintage game systems such as the Atari 2600.
This seems crazy at first blush. The Atari 2600 ceased manufacturing in 1993. Yet millions of working consoles still exist, and there’s a strong community of enthusiastic fans. Every year, homebrew developers continue to release new games for the system, and it seems that if anything this has been growing in recent years rather than tailing off.
While no new hardware has been manufactured in decades, companies like AtGames and Hyperkin have also helped to keep interest in the old consoles alive by manufacturing compatible new hardware. And of course, there’s also emulation software.
Update: Audacity has announced their first two titles, Circus Convoy and Casey’s Gold. What I like about this announcement is that it came out within a day or two of the announcement of the new company. What I also like about this is that these games are coming soon — this isn’t a crowdfunding pitch for a game that might get released in 2-5 years; these are games that are ready to go and will be released in the very near future.
The announced price is on the steep side — at $60, they’re targeting a price point that competes with first party Nintendo releases. I’m skeptical that these games will sell well at that price. The homebrew market tends to price games at $30-40 for physical copies, with ROM downloads often available for use with emulators for free. So it’ll be interesting to see how these titles do on launch. Perhaps the star cachet of the Crane and Kitchen names, the quality of the games, and the novelty of the enterprise will carry the day.
I’m about halfway through Once Upon Atari: How I Made History By Killing an Industry by Howard Scott Warshaw, and loving it.
Howard Scott Warshaw, if you didn’t know, was a programmer for Atari in the early 80s. He worked in their console division, where he developed the games Yar’s Revenge, Raiders of the Lost Ark, and E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial for the Atari 2600. These were groundbreaking games on the most popular home console of its day, and accomplished many “firsts”.
In 1983, the video game market suddenly collapsed, due to a combination of a multitude of factors, but at the time Warshaw’s E.T. was often given blame for causing what came to be known as the “Great Crash of ’83’. E.T. has often been referred to as “the worst video game of all time” but that is quite unfair to the game, which pushed the limits of the Atari 2600 hardware, and while not perfect, was by no means a bad game — although it was drastically over-produced by Atari, leading to a huge amount of unsold inventory, which hurt the company’s bottom line. Warshaw was given 5 weeks to develop the game, a feat thought by his managers to be impossible given that most Atari 2600 games took about 6 months to develop.
This is all well known and chronicled history for video game fans. Warshaw to his credit has been remarkably accessible and open about his story for some time, and has given numerous interviews over the years. He’s even been known to appear on the Atari Age facebook page and comment once in a while. He’s truly a legend of the industry, and a wonderful, brilliant human being. This book details his story, how he came to work for Atari, what went on there during his tenure (confirming a lot of the oft-retold stories about the workplace culture), and how he faced the indignity of being cast as the creator of the “worst game of all time”.
Warshaw left Atari and went on to become a licensed psychotherapist and has helped people like himself, who worked in the high tech field to deal with the immense pressures that they’re put under to be creative, be correct, and deliver products that will make billions of dollars for themselves or their shareholders.
I haven’t gotten to that part of the book yet, but from what I already know of his story, his approach to dealing with failure, or at least the perception that he had been responsible in large part for a massive and very public failure of what had just a year prior been the fastest growing company in the history of the world, is remarkable as it is instructive. He has embraced the label, but adds to it that his Yar’s Revenge is often cited as one of the best video games on the Atari, thus giving him the rightful claim to having the greatest range of any game developer. Turning a negative into a badge of pride, he has faced the critics, rebutted them with not just clever rhetoric, but also facts, figures, and sound reasoning, and provides us an example of how “failure” often isn’t failure, that perceptions matter, that what you tell yourself matters, and that above all it does not define us — we have the power, if we choose to use it, to define ourselves.
Warshaw’s writing style is accessible, not overly technical, candid, often quite humorous, warm and insightful. Reading his book makes me admire him even more than I did, and grateful for the handful of times that he’s Liked something that I’ve said on the Atari Age facebook page, and most of all, thankful for the many hours I spent as a young child engaging with, and enthralled by, his digital creations.
I absolutely love this beautifully produced fake documentary that was published last week.
Imagine the gameplay possibilities. In BOTW, all we can really do with Bokoblins is kill them or ignore them. Occasionally there are encounters where we run into Bokoblins harassing some Hylian travelers or hunting animals. These encounters have their purpose — they allow Link to rescue the Hylians and do something heroic, while the hunting parties provide a demonstration to the player that hunting is possible activity that they could participate in themselves in the game.
But these encounters are somewhat limited and shallow. They don’t build and develop to anything greater. They hint at what could be, however, and I find the possibilities tantalizing.
This video shows potential for a much greater depth possible in the game. If you unlock the “monster shop” Fang and Bone, operated by the creepy, nocturnal Kilton, you can buy monster themed items, including a mask. These masks can be used to fool enemies of the type that the mask is of that you are one of them, allowing you to encounter them without having to fight them. The items from Fang and Bone are not really crucial to completing the game — in fact, they’re completely unnecessary. And in my run through the game, I encountered the shop very late in my exploration of Hyrule, and thus had accumulated so much power that the shop seemed almost pointless. I didn’t need disguises at this point — I was already comfortable hunting down Lynels and Dragons. So I did not explore these possibilities and discover this area of the game very much at all. Clearly, I missed out on some enjoyable, amusing bokoblin antics by not diving into this aspect of the game more.
As I played through Breath of the Wild, I often felt guilty about killing the Bokoblin enemies. They’re almost cute, they’re almost not really dangerous, and it’s clear from their scripted idle behavior that they have a tight-knit tribal culture.
They hunt, they sit around their camp fires, they cook, they dance, they sleep. Sure, they don’t differentiate between people and prey animals as much as we’d prefer, and Bokoblins might get nasty if they detect a threat, but can you blame them? They’re just trying to survive. Why can’t we just get along?
A problem I have with Breath of the Wild is that for being a vast game, it’s depth doesn’t really match its breadth, and thus the game begins to feel repetitive after a certain point. You usually encounter Bokoblins in camps, and they’re pretty much all the same. There’s a camp fire, a few bokoblins sitting about, maybe a cave or some other shelter, a couple of watch towers. You can approach pretty closely and they mostly won’t notice you. And when you grow tired with scouting about the edge of their range of vision, you can pretty much run up at any point and straight up murder them through button mashing without much risk.
They don’t fight very well — your attacks almost never miss, almost always disrupt them, and if you’re just full-on aggressive with them, you can keep them reeling and beat on them repeatedly until they die, which doesn’t usually take very long. Conversely, their attacks aren’t too strong, usually have a big windup that telegraphs to you that you need to either dodge or interdict with a pre-emptive counter attack of your own, and if they do hit you, they will hurt a bit, but you’ll probably be able to shrug it off and hit back and gain the upper hand.
I like bokoblins, and I think they have a lot of potential, but I just don’t find them as interesting as they could have been if they’d been developed a bit more. It seems like a shame, because it feels like a considerable amount of work went into developing them to the point that they were. They exhibit a lot of different behaviors and it gives them personality. The bokoblin documentary shows this quite well. But there’s not that much that you can really do with them, or need to do with them, beyond slaughtering them whenever you encounter them.
This video, though, shows a glimpse of what could have been. Imagine if there were alternatives to fighting that were not just viable, but interesting, rewarding, and even necessary.
Imagine if you could help an injured or trapped bokoblin, and gain its trust.
Imagine if you could approach a camp of freezing, starving bokoblins, and if you approached with your weapons un-equipped, they didn’t immediately regard you as a threat, and if you approached them with your hand outstretched, holding a food item, they would tentatively approach and you could give them the food and then they’d be grateful.
What could they then offer you? Might they trade with you for something that they own, or guard? Might they show you a secret, or allow safe passage through a difficult to get to part of the map? Might you learn how to co-exist peacefully, and put an end to the age-old conflict once the evil Ganon is finally defeated? Might you become an honorary member of their hunting band, and gain allies who come to your aid later when you’re ambushed by another band of hostiles?
I’ve been playing video games for nearly four decades now, and as games become more realistic and immersive, I find myself wanting that reality to offer me solutions to conflicts other than violence and destruction.
I don’t want to be misunderstood in saying this. During my whole life, there has been a pushback against violence in video games. I like videogames, and I like violent videogames. I like shooting everything on the screen, and games where you do nothing but destroy and fight never ending waves of enemies. I just have played enough of them.
I think game designers can challenge themselves, advance the state of the art, and delight players by providing different challenges and different solutions to problems apart from straightforward brute force. And to be fair, Breath of the Wild does this, quite a bit more than most games. It’s just that most of these alternative approaches apply themselves to the games physics puzzles than to dealing with foes. When it comes to foes, you basically can fight, run away, or avoid. The combat system does offer a lot of variety. But what if you encountered foes and didn’t have to fight or sneak? What if you could bribe, negotiate, deceive, trade?
In the late 1990s, games like Thief received critical acclaim because they tried something different — rather than killing everything in the game to overcome challenges, what about using stealth and trickery to avoid violent confrontation that is designed to be impossible to overcome? Nearly 25 years later, I want still more options.
Even in the original Legend of Zelda, we didn’t always fight enemy creatures. Moblins were an overworld enemy who hurled spears at us, and our options were to fight or avoid. But not all of them behaved as enemies.
And who could forget the hungry Goriya from Level 7, who cannot be fought, only placated with food?
There are encounters in Breath of the Wild where Link can give an NPC food or another item, so this sort of interaction with bokoblins wouldn’t be unprecedented, and indeed would have seemed fitting and natural, and a callback to earlier Zelda adventures.
I have a feeling that we’ll get to see such complex, multifaceted interactions in games eventually, and probably we don’t have too much longer to wait for it.
It was a $16.4M purchase in 2015, and during this time they put a ton of development into GMS 2, released it, and so it’s a bit concerning that this hasn’t resulted in YoYoGames becoming a more valuable property.
On the other hand, I can well understand it. In the past several years, I have never felt comfortable with the new GMS 2.x UI. I find it awkward, unintuitive, ugly, and frustrating to use compared to the GMS 1.4 and earlier versions that I learned first. And at the same time, competing technologies like Unity 3D, Unreal Engine, and Godot been strong competition.
From a coding standpoint, there’s no question that the GML programming language has gotten better and better as YoYoGames continued to develop it.
From a UX standpoint, it’s been a crapshoot. The UI has some nominal improvements, but overall I feel like they changed too much too fast, and I could never get used to it. I spend way more time looking for the feature I want to use, and then wondering why it doesn’t work the way I think it should, and it completely kills my productivity and along with it my desire to work with the tool.
In fact, it’s a big part of why I haven’t done much game development in the last year, and have mostly dropped out of the pursuit.
I hope the new owner does better and continues to make improvements with GameMaker. It was very good at its original intended purpose of making it easy for game developers who are not primarily programmers to create simple 2-D games.
Many amazing games have been built with GameMaker over the last 22 years, which shows clearly the merit of putting simple, usable tools into the hands of creators who wouldn’t know where to begin with tools intended for professional programmers. Hopefully even more will be made in the years go come.
It will be interesting to see what the new owner does with the property. I want to see a product like GameMaker continue to serve the market it has traditionally done well with, while offering features that make it viable for professional game developers as a first rate tool.
Usually we hate to forget things. But one of the best things about being able to forget is that you can have a cherished experienced again as though for the first time.
REDDER was a game by indie game developer Anna Anthropy and first released on the web in 2010. I played it for the first time not long after, and it remains to this day one of my favorite puzzle platform games. Few games have made me want to design my own games as much as REDDER, and that’s perhaps the highest compliment I can think of to give it.
I’ve re-played it multiple times since then, and always enjoy it so much.
This year is the first year that Adobe has ended support for Flash, the technology that REDDER was originally built on. I have written previously on the impending death of Flash, and what that means for tens of thousands of video games that were built with it during its 25+ year history.
I feared that this would result in a vast, rich cultural legacy becoming more and more inaccessible. I still fear that. Adobe didn’t just drop support for Flash, didn’t just cease continuing development of it. They pulled the plug. Browsers stopped supporting it, so now in order to run Flash objects in a browser, one needs to keep an outdated browser. This of course has its own problems, and very few people will continue do do it. Moreover, as the userbase moves into a post-flash browser-scape, web hosts will over time have less and less incentive to continue hosting legacy Flash experiences, and in time perhaps the only ones that will persist will be deliberate historical preservation efforts.
That’s a damn shame, because REDDER belongs in the Smithsonian, or the Library of Congress, or both.
Fortunately, Anna Anthropy has re-packaged Redder, in a desktop OS format that wraps a Flash player into stand-alone application, and allows it to be enjoyed on Windows and Mac OS X. It is available for $5 on itch.io, and is worth every penny.
What a beautiful thing it is that I can forget this game just enough to be able to come back to it and experience it again, re-discovering the solutions to the maze and helping my little space explorer friend in their quest to collect all the diamonds to replenish his stranded spaceship.
The platforming is basic. You move, you jump, that’s it. There’s no wall jumps, no edge hanging, no coyote time, it’s pure basic simple. There’s no shooting, no destroying enemies. Your only tools are your brain, to figure out how to get past obstacles and get to where you need to go, and your agility, to accomplish the task. There are save points, to make the deadly obstacles a lot less annoying. There are switches to flip, which toggle special colored platforms into and out of existence, which serve as doors and platforms that block your way or create bridges to access deeper reaches of the world or traverse deadly obstacles to add an element of risk to the challenges you’ll face. When one type is on, the other type is off. And together they serve as the building block of the platform puzzles you’ll need to solve to win the game.
As you progress through the game, the graphics and music begin to glitch. It’s subtle at first, a tile here and there, and it adds an element of mystery to the game. As you continue to collect diamonds, the glitching increases, until, near the end the entire game is out of control with random tile animations. When the final diamond is collected, the entire facade is stripped bare, and everything turns into raw collision boxes, color coded — a clean, pure visual language.
There are only three types of hazard in the game: patrolling robots, which traverse horizontally and are deadly to touch but never react to your presence in any other way; “drip guns”, which shoot deadly pellets that you must duck, jump, or otherwise avoid with good timing, and electrical fields which don’t move and must be avoided.
For all its simplicity, the game provides an engaging challenge to find your way through the complex, maze-like alien world, and collect all 27 diamonds.
One thing I love about REDDER is that there are no locks. You start out with all your powers, and apart from the switch platforms that are the only real puzzles blocking your progress, there’s nothing preventing you from doing anything, going anywhere that you can go in the game, from start to finish.
What I love about this is that this forces the design to challenge you in ways other than “oh if you get the item, you can get past this”. This comes down to understanding the map — the twisting, interconnected pathways connecting the grid of screens that comprise the world of REDDER, how platforms and switches relate to one another, flipping switches in the correct order to allow passage, and having a modest desgree of skill to master the timing and agility needed to make the jumps and avoid the dangers.
It’s a casual play — I would call the vibe relaxing. The music is soothing and evokes a spirit of exploration and puzzle solving. The game provides a fun challenge without relying on fear, anxiety, or frustration. Toward the end of the game, as the graphics and background music become increasingly glitch-ified, the game does start to produce a bit of anxiety. If you’re playing the game late at night, it can almost feel like your lack of sleep is to blame for the game’s breaking down. I really like this. To me it is the “something extra” that gives the game a memorable mystery, a question left unanswered, which both frees and empowers the player to come up with their own explanation, should they choose to.
Additionally there are three secret hidden rooms off-map. These serve no purpose other than to delight you for finding them, and perhaps provide a clue or an auteur’s signature.
It seems there have been a few changes from the original in this version. I don’t remember these secret rooms having these messages — a web search reveals that the original REDDER had secret rooms with the words “ANNA” “TRAP” and “PART”. TRAP and PART are of course pairs that make a palindrome, and ANNA is a palindrome, and REDDER is a palindrome. There’s something up with palindromes in this game.
But I don’t know what ROB? OWOR and BORR mean. It makes me wonder what else may have changed, and why the changes were made.