Three for the weekend and hopefully some uncalled for but also a fair bit of thinking to go along with your next sip of coffee.

Accessing Valhalla – Descriptive Video Works on producing audio-transcribed trailers for Assassin’s Creed

Ubisoft seems to be putting more and more energy into accessibility accommodations, even if it’s for a trailer this time. It’s interesting to hear how such a process goes about but also kind of refreshing that —compared to other fields— there seems to be wider and more systematic communication when a company like Ubisoft’s involved. Be it out of industry-wide habit or genuine interest and concern for every part of such a process, I’d argue it’s for the best.

India needs an industry where games like Raji can thrive

This one struck a chord as the difficulties Indian game devs face when trying to convince investors of their vision feels so familiar in my part of the world (Greece). Sometimes we think it’s all about the size of the market. India is huge though. And its mobile gaming market is nothing to sneeze at either. And yet mentality is the most important part. It takes time for the maturity needed to realise game development isn’t a binary proposition —either a way to turn a quick buck or juvenile entertainment. There’s also everything in between. Culture can hold games back in a region. Which is infuriating. At the same time, the realisation that this proves there is a cultural link to gaming can be all the more patient among us feed their hope for the future.

Do film critics punish films with bigger budgets?

My philosophical objections to most of the epilogue’s points are too many but I do love Stephen’s work.

Across the whole dataset, there is no connection between budget and review scores (with a Pearson score of -0.07, which is not statistically significant). That said, if there were, it would only reveal the connection, not prove bias. It could be that bigger budget movies are actually better/worse than smaller titles.

This will help me win a few bets.

I have left off most names as (a) there isn’t space; and (b) many fall below the level of statistical significance to be useful (the scores, not the critics!)

Love how Stephen understands that, sadly, the last parenthesis is essential, especially in the age of the web.