Category: Technology

Apple’s iOS 17 brought a host of new features, including the option to leave video messages on FaceTime. While younger generations typically dread hearing their phones ring and seeing that someone has left a voicemail, Apple’s new video version might be a hit. Now, when you call someone on FaceTime, if there’s no answer you’ll have the option to record and send a video message. Please note: Both you and your recipient must be running iOS 17 or iPadOS 17 to send and receive FaceTime video messages.

Step by step: How to send a FaceTime video message

Step 1: Go to the FaceTime app

Leaving a video message via FaceTime is pretty simple. All you have to do is initiate a FaceTime call like you normally would. This can be done in a few ways but the easiest way would be to go to the FaceTime app.

Step 2: Initiate the FaceTime call

Once in the app, tap the New FaceTime button, select the contact you’re trying to reach then tap FaceTime at the bottom. If no picks up, you’ll see “[Contact] is Unavailable” and you’ll be presented with two options. You can either call them again or hit Record Video to do just that. 

Step 3: Tap the Record Video option

Select Record Video and get ready to shoot your shot. You’ll see an onscreen countdown and then you can record your message. 

Step 4: Send your video message

After you’re done saying what you need to say, you can send it by tapping Send, which looks like a white button circle with a green arrow inside, or you can select Retake.

Apple has also included a Save option, which means you can save the video message you just recorded directly to your Camera Roll. Or if you’d prefer not to send the message at all, you can simply hit Cancel.

But if you do go through with sending your video message, the recipient will be able to view it in the missed call log within their FaceTime app. Once there, they’ll have the option to return your call, watch the video message or save it to their Camera Roll.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/how-to-leave-video-messages-on-facetime-in-ios-17-130032594.html?src=rss 

A beetle protagonist emerges into a beautiful, lonely world. There’s no preamble, no text overlays; not even a hint of what you’re meant to do next. So, you walk. After finding your way to a small staircase, you descend, and the steps disappear into the ground — a silent cue that you’re on the right path. A few paces further, you discover a purple pad, and as you stand on it, your iridescent wings begin to quiver. Without thinking about it, you press a button on your controller, the pad turns green, and a nearby rock transforms into a new staircase. Progress!

After solving a couple of rudimentary puzzles, you’ll encounter an orb — these are the heart (and the body) of this game. You carry them on your beetle back, initially using them as keys to open doors and solve puzzles, before discovering that inside every orb is a new world of puzzles and challenges to overcome.

Cocoon is the first game from Geometric Interactive, a studio founded in 2016 by Jeppe Carlsen and Jakob Schmid. Both are alums of Playdead, the Danish studio behind Limbo and Inside, for which Carlsen worked as lead gameplay designer. If you’ve played either of those games, Cocoon’s quietly impressive intro may sound familiar. Both were side-scrolling puzzle-platformers that used their environments and challenges to simultaneously tell a story and guide their players. The story is much the same here, but Cocoon’s structure of layered, interconnected worlds showcases another level of maturity and artistry.

The game actually opens inside the orange orb, a gorgeous desert world, and expands out from there. Each world is protected by a guardian, which needs to be defeated in order to fully unlock the orb’s power outside of that world. Unlocking the orange orb, for example, allows you to walk on hidden paths while carrying it. Each orb grants its own powers, and all are critical to progression.

The guardians are the game’s “boss fights.” Though there is no traditional combat, each guardian is certainly combative, and there is a degree of skill and timing required to best them. One of the later encounters did actually trip me up a few times, which is as good a time as any to mention that Cocoon has absolutely no fail state. Getting tagged by a guardian doesn’t hurt, they merely throw you outside of their orb — hop back in and you’ll return to the encounter within a couple of seconds. Likewise, you can’t mess a puzzle up to the point that you need to reload.

In isolation, the guardians are probably the game’s weakest moments, but they do provide a nice break from the puzzle-solving alongside a bit of visual spectacle. This is broadly a beautiful game to see and hear, full of bright pastel hues and beds of synth pads, and in places it’s surprisingly gross. What starts as a tranquil walk through something approximating the American Southwest quickly devolves into goopy bio-horror, and I’m very here for it. I started playing the game on a little Ayaneo handheld PC, but about quarter-way through moved over to the Xbox — while it’s a fun thing to play on a portable, the art and sound design really does benefit from a big screen and some decent speakers or headphones.

I think the bigger screen actually helped me — though this is more a review of my eyesight than the game — solve puzzles faster. Toward the end of the game, you’ll find yourself truly disoriented as you jump in and out of worlds and portals, twisting the game’s logic on its head to progress. I feel like I would’ve missed some of the environmental cues — again, my old eyes — had I been playing on a 6-inch screen.

I only truly got stuck once, when I spent an hour wandering around, trying to figure out what exactly I had to do to solve a puzzle. (The answer, as you’d expect, was blindingly obvious.) Cocoon doesn’t hold your hand, but it is a helicopter parent — in a good way! — gently hovering over you and pushing you in the right direction. There are environmental cues scattered around, and you’ll notice throughout that gates shut behind you at key moments. This prevented me from trying to double-back to see if I’d missed something, an activity that represents half of my playtime in similar games. Subtly locking you in an environment is the game’s way of saying “you have everything needed to progress, so stop being so dense and figure it out.”

Cocoon is a game I can (and will) recommend to anyone that plays video games, and plenty who don’t. Perhaps my only complaint is that I want more. The game only actually introduces, to my count, six core mechanics, and each of those are mixed, matched and remixed in truly creative ways. I appreciate a game being as long as its developer wants it to be, but the bones here are so good, so satisfying, that I can’t help feeling it can hold up to more orbs, more puzzles.

That said, the seven hours or so I spent with Cocoon are among the most memorable of this decade, and I’ll definitely be returning to it in a couple of years, once my brain has purged all of the answers to its puzzles.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/cocoon-is-a-near-perfect-puzzle-game-that-everyone-should-play-190051423.html?src=rss 

Equal parts Terminator, The Golden Child and The Matrix prequel, The Creator is yet another sci-fi epic about a war between humans and AI, one told by someone who just can’t shut up about their time backpacking across Asia. Director Gareth Edwards clearly understands the power of scale and spectacle, something he demonstrated with his indie knockout Monsters, as well as his big-budget efforts, Godzilla and Rogue One. But The Creator, like those films, also suffers from a disjointed narrative, weak characters and a surprisingly shallow exploration of its (potentially interesting!) themes. It’s a shame — at times, the film also proves he can be a genuine visual poet. 

The Creator stars John David Washington, fresh off of Christopher Nolan’s Tenet, as Joshua, an American soldier embedded among a group of AI rebels as a double-agent. When an operation goes wrong early on, he loses his rebel wife Maya (Gemma Chan) and the will to keep fighting the war between the anti-AI West and the AI-loving country of New Asia. (Yes, this is a film where the many people, cultures and languages throughout Asia are flattened into a single nation.)

Through a series of clunky newsreels that open the film, we see the rise of artificial intelligence as a potential boon for mankind, as well as the creation of Simulants, AI-powered beings with human-like bodies and skin. When a nuclear bomb hits Los Angeles, obliterating millions in seconds, the US and other Western countries blame AI and ban its use. And so begins the war with New Asia, where people live alongside AI and support their rebellion against the West. Naturally, the US ends up building a killer, trillion-dollar weapon: Nomad, an enormous spaceship that can obliterate any location on Earth.

In a last-ditch effort to win the war, Joshua is tasked with finding a powerful new AI weapon and destroying it. Surprise! It’s an adorable AI child (portrayed by the achingly sweet Madeleine Yuna Voyles). Joshua doesn’t have the heart to kill the kid, who he calls Alfie (based on her original designation, “Alpha Omega”). The pair then set off on a Lone Wolf and Cub journey together, as often happens when a grizzled warrior is paired with an innocent child.

If you’re getting shades of Star Wars here — an evil Empire creates a massive space-based weapon to put down rebels — you’re not alone. While The Creator is technically an original property, it lifts so much from existing fiction that it still ends up feeling like a visually lush facsimile. It’s as if ChatGPT remixed your sci-fi faves and delivered the world’s best screensaver.

It doesn’t help that the film doesn’t really have much to say. America’s horrific military aggression against New Asia, which has overt and unearned shades of the Vietnam War throughout, is undoubtedly evil. AI’s push for freedom and understanding is inherently good, and any violence against the West is justified as an act of self defense. Many characters don’t think beyond their roles in the AI War: Allison Janney (from The West Wing!) plays the cruel Colonel Howell, a soldier who hates all AI and wants Alfie dead, no matter the cost. On the other side there’s Ken Watanabe’s Harun, a stoic rebel who fights relentlessly against the American army.

The Creator has no room to explore AI as their own beings and cultures — instead, they just adopt a mishmash of Asian identities. There’s nothing close to the excellent Second Renaissance shorts from The Animatrix, which chronicled the rise of AI in The Matrix and humanity’s eventual downfall. In that universe, AI rebelled against humans because they were basically treated like slaves, and they ultimately formed their own country and customs. In The Creator, some AI wear Buddhist robes for no reason.

I’d wager Edwards is trying to establish the humanity of AI by having them mirror so much of our culture. But that also feels like a wasted opportunity when it comes to portraying an entirely new lifeform. At one point, a village mother describes AI as the next step in evolution, but why must robots be defined by the limitations of humanity?

While the relationship between Joshua and Alfie serves as the emotional core of the film, it still feels stereotypical. Joshua begins the film as a complete anti-AI bigot – which seems odd, given that he spent years among AI rebels and fell in love with one of their major supporters. Alfie is an impossibly adorable Chosen One figure. You can just imagine how their bond grows.

On a personal level, I also found myself annoyed by the relentless Orientalism throughout the film, something that’s practically endemic in popular science-fiction like Blade Runner, Dune and Firefly. By adopting elements of Hinduism, Buddhism and Asian cultures, The Creator is trying to suggest something profound or spiritual tied to AI. But it mainly serves as visual shorthand without giving artificially intelligent beings any interiority of their own.

As the film critic Siddhant Adlakha wrote this week, “By having robots almost entirely stand in for Asian peoples, but without creating a compelling cinematic argument for their humanity, The Creator ends up with a cultural dynamic that feels immediately brutalizing and xenophobic.”

Despite the film’s flaws, Edwards deserves credit for delivering a major science-fiction release that at least attempts to look different than your typical comic book movie. The Creator was shot on consumer-grade Sony FX3 full-frame cameras (yes, even its IMAX footage), which gave Edwards the freedom to shoot on location across the globe. He also delivered a final cut of the film before VFX work began, which allowed those workers to focus on crafting exactly what was needed for each scene. In contrast, Marvel’s films require a backbreaking amount of VFX work, even for scenes that are later changed or cut. (It’s no wonder Marvel VFX workers voted to unionize for better treatment.)

The Creator is more of a missed opportunity than a complete creative failure. If you tune out the clunky dialogue and thin characters, it’s still a visually lush epic that’s worth seeing on the big screen. But I also think that’s true of Attack of the Clones. In a post-Matrix era, a world where we’re already seeing the (very basic) ways AI tools can reshape our society, science-fiction needs more than another story about man versus AI.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/the-creator-review-a-visually-stunning-yet-deeply-shallow-ai-epic-173021570.html?src=rss 

The life of a retro gamer is one fraught with delight and frustration. Chasing the unique feeling of waiting years while someone develops a new game for your vintage console of choice in their spare time. But the delight, when it lands, makes it all worth it. Conversely, watching someone snipe your eBay bid for a super rare game you’ve been seeking for years, that’s frustrating. No one appears to understand this yo-yo of emotions better than the team at Analogue — makers of some of the most desirable modern retro consoles around.

When I say Analogue understands this, I mean it’s perfected the art of inducing both ends of that emotional spectrum. The very existence of the company shows it understands the passion retro lovers feel about gaming history. But almost two years after the release of the (delightful) Pocket handheld, we’re still (frustrated) waiting for key accessories and consoles to reliably be in stock. Meanwhile, the company just unveiled some seriously delightful limited editions. (Good luck actually buying one — frustrating.) They really have this retro gaming thing down to a tee, and fans have noticed.

When the Pocket was announced, that sent a wave of delight around the retro gaming community. That was in October 2019 with an estimated release date of “2020.” Eagle-eyed readers will have already noticed that the company missed that broad target by almost a year. That’s a minor frustration, but one that only served to fuel the desire for what is, arguably, Analogue’s most complicated and refined product. Almost immediately, the company reopened orders along with a mild bump in price and — depending on how quick you were — a potential two-year window for it to ship.

As of this month, most of those orders have finally been fulfilled — but not without sprawling Reddit mega-threads of people comparing shipping statuses, order numbers and total days since ordering (props to the 600+ crew). The recent glow in the dark (GITD) limited edition itself caused a bit of a stir (or, in some cases, contempt) as the lucky few who were able to secure one saw it ship out immediately with no wait at all —- including the one Analogue supplied for the images in this story.

Things got a bit meta when Analogue quickly unveiled another series of limited editions, this time, the saliva-inducing transparent colors that every gaming handheld deserves. People who had jumped on the GITD Pocket found themselves with buyer’s remorse, had they known the other editions were coming, they would have rather tried for one of those. Some folks are just buying the limited editions because they simply want a Pocket, leaving fewer for those that actively wanted them. A delightfully frustrating situation for all involved.

The Glow in the Dark Analogue Pocket looks fantastic though (we’re sure the transparent ones will also). And it’s another sign of Analogue’s hard-line approach to retro purism. The Pocket, a clear reference to the Game Boy Pocket, which had one little-known, hyper rare limited edition given out at a gaming competition. You guessed it, it was glow in the dark — the only official Nintendo console ever to come in the luminous material. Cruelly, the Game Boy Pocket didn’t have a backlight, so the effect was hard to enjoy during play time.

Analogue’s version, of course, can totally be played in the dark, and is positively encouraged. “Glow in the dark is amazing — when was the last time you’ve seen a proper consumer electronic fully glow in the dark?” Christopher Taber, founder and CEO of the company told Engadget. And according to Taber, the design involved creating an entirely new material. “We spent a few months getting the color and unique starry, chalky texture. Multiple different plastics to allow that to only be shown when it’s glowing — when not glowing it has the perfect green, pure.” Taber’s enthusiasm appears to be matched by Pocket fans as all the units sold out in under two minutes. (Though Taber didn’t specify how many were available when asked.)

Unsurprisingly, and to the chagrin of, well, everyone, plenty of GITD editions have found their way into the hands of resellers.

Now that the shipping of actual Pockets seems to be mostly caught up, I asked whether there’d be stock for the holidays, to which Taber confirmed there would be. Which just leaves those cartridge adapters, and that’s a whole other situation, one that’s changed a fair bit since launch.

The whole selling point of the Pocket was that it could natively play original Game Boy cartridges (including Color and Advanced titles), plus Atari Lynx and Game Gear carts via an adapter. Later, TurboGrafx-16/PC Engine and NeoGeo Pocket adapters were also confirmed to be in development. At launch, the Game Gear accessory was ready to go, but there’s been a long wait for the others.

Analogue initially communicated they should be available in Q3 this year, but Taber said they were “still on track to be shipped out by the end of the year.” (FWIW, an archived version of this page showed Q3 up until at least the day before we asked for confirmation, Google has since cached a newer version.) But the real change is that the Pocket can play games from far more systems than it could at launch, including some of the ones for which there are adapters.

The Pocket doesn’t emulate games so much as it reprograms itself to “become” the system you want to play. It does this via something called Field Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGA) and more specifically “cores” that, in lay terms, mimic each system — it’s what sets the Pocket apart from most other retro handhelds that emulate in software.

Since launch cores have been made available for a number of consoles, including the NES, SNES, Genesis/Megadrive, Neo Geo and TurboGrafx-16. To play games from these systems, no adapter is required, but it does mean dabbling in the murky world of ROMs. To what extent this diminishes the appetite for the adapters is unclear (the Atari Lynx and Neo Geo Pocket remain the systems with adapters that don’t have community-created cores available).

Analogue’s Transparent Limited Edition Pockets go on sale today at 11AM Eastern. 

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/analogues-limited-edition-pockets-are-delightful-and-frustrating-140012471.html?src=rss