I’m a fan of Alan Hazelden and Draknek’s work but stating upfront that he a) wasn’t involved with the work directly but b) agreed for it to be used years ago, while then going on to write what seems to read as a light hit-piece for Blow himself, and then using that to launch into a point about how his politics and Blow’s don’t align (not relevant for puzzle game progeny) feels like more like him using the trailer for Blow’s game as a trampoline for his own personal beliefs and politics.

He also used the same thread to mention his own grant fund while not acknowledging that Thekla (Blow’s company) also has (or had at some point) a similar scheme [1]

Meanwhile the various accusations about Blow’s politics beliefs are mysteriously missing, or at least seem to be large extrapolations from other Twitter comments also not cited. Is there something in the thread I missed?

[1] https://www.gamesindustry.biz/thekla-raises-grant-money-for-...

> These games are the starting point, but the bulk of the game is new puzzles combining mechanics from different games together

Seems like the puzzles are novel, but the mechanics are not?

The core idea of the witness wasn't novel either. The novelty was how far they went with it.

Seems like the original puzzles were licensed for this game, in which case why not?

I haven't played any of these games, but "explains otherwise" seems to be a misrepresentation given that the commenter you linked is saying himself that Blow's game combines ideas and rulesets from several other previous games.

Elsewhere in the arstechnica comments you linked

> But, uh... this isn't a "Linus Torvalds is a jerk" sort of situation. "Controversial" undersells just how outlandish and inappropriate Blow's views are. Blow is a full-bore fascist sympathizer who also doesn't seem to think that women have any role to play in his profession.

What's going on on these platforms? Is there any serious evidence to the strong claims?