Latest news with #Proulx
The Verge
3 days ago
- Entertainment
- The Verge
The whiplash of covering Summer Game Fest 2025 in LA
I love going to Summer Game Fest. It's a rare opportunity to connect with my colleagues and friends in person, as well as listen to developers talk about why they make their games. In some ways, this year's SGF gave me everything I love about the event. But while I was comfortably ensconced in a happy bubble, the escalating conflict between demonstrators protesting against immigration raids and the Los Angeles Police Department cast a dark and soul-shaking pall that could not be ignored. Everything started on June 6th, when it was reported that US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) had conducted a raid in LA's fashion district, the same area where most of SGF was being held. I wasn't around to experience that because I was at the YouTube Theater in Inglewood, California, watching Geoff Keighley announce a Game of Thrones RTS and a Wu-Tang game. But when Ian Proulx, Splitgate 2 creator and CEO of 1047 Games, came out with his now-infamous 'Make FPS Great Again' hat, it punctured the illusion of distance in time, space, and tone. In the months since President Donald Trump took office, ICE has ramped up its activities, sending agents to snatch parents from their children and children from their schools, enabled under the auspices that removing immigrants will be what makes America great again. Proulx's hat became the story of the day, if not the whole event. It was the main topic of conversation at the lobby bar of the JW Marriott hotel, where each night of SGF is capped off with a mixer. How could someone choose to reference such a statement, even in jest or irony, as the very people that slogan has been used to target are being snatched up mere blocks away? Saturday was business as usual. Proulx's hat was forgotten as I settled in to work, flitting between wall-to-wall appointments checking out Escape Academy 2, the new Lego Party game, and Deadpool VR with no time to chat or even eat. I didn't check my phone for hours, and every TV was playing a video game. I had no idea what was happening both in Los Angeles and in the White House. But when there was finally a lull, I popped online, where I was greeted with a deluge of messages from people who were watching the news, telling me that something (a nebulous, undefined, but nevertheless urgent something) was happening and that I needed to get back to the safety of my hotel. Thankfully, my worst fears about martial law declarations and curfews didn't come to pass while I was there, but they did after I was back home. People had taken to the streets of LA in protest of ICE action and began moving through parts of the city, demonstrating and occasionally clashing with the police (and autonomous vehicles). But at that moment, when I was hearing that insurrection acts were going to be invoked and that the National Guard was being mobilized to sweep the city, I became legitimately scared — particularly for attendees who weren't citizens and those with immigrant families. How could someone choose to reference such a statement, even in jest or irony? One such colleague, Janet Garcia, wrote an incredible account of what it was like working SGF and being the child of a Mexican immigrant. Her words right now are more important than mine. SGF also coincided with the BET Awards, and honoree Doechii also had a powerful message for the moment. There had already been several stories of international travelers being detained in the US for weeks, and I was scared that if something was happening, my journalist friends from Canada, the UK, and elsewhere could get caught in the mix. Word began spreading that something (again, what that was, nobody could say, and that uncertainty compounded the fear) was happening, and my friends and I all began to start asking aloud: do we need to leave? Some said yes, and I was ready to do just that, but something stopped me. I will never be able to adequately express how weird my job is in situations like this. It's really hard to write about the colorful pixels on a TV when it feels like the world is seconds away from catching fire. And yet I do it every day. Right when I was about to make the decision to leave early, a Capcom PR rep tapped me on the shoulder. I was late to my Resident Evil Requiem appointment. And I went, because in that scary moment I still thought, 'I have a job to do.' I did my best with Requiem, plodding along the abandoned hospital, being suitably impressed by how the sound of Grace's footsteps changed when she walked on the wooden floor vs. the floor covered in bits of broken drywall. But my phone kept buzzing with notifications throughout it all. Midway through the demo, my stress was so high from the ambient spookiness of the game and all the happenings outside the SGF bubble that I couldn't take it anymore. I made my profuse apologies to my PR contact (who was exceedingly gracious and understanding) and left. The mood that night at the hotel was less exuberant. It wasn't just everything going on in LA: the mood of the event itself was the lowest I'd ever seen it in the handful of years that SGF has served as E3's smaller, vibe-ier replacement. There were games there, good ones, but nothing big enough to anchor the show. As the industry faces its third straight year of rampant layoffs, cancellations, delays, and studio closures we're finally starting to see the pipeline of blockbuster games dry up. This was a stark contrast to last year when Sega had Metaphor: ReFantanzio and Shadow Generations, Bandai Namco showed off Shadow of the Erdtree, PlayStation was there with Astro Bot, and Xbox had just announced Gears of War: E-Day. I'm home now. And despite this year's strangeness, I look forward to going back to Summer Game Fest. Because if video games have taught me anything over the years, it's that in the face of overwhelming odds, the best thing one can do is stick together with your friends.
Yahoo
09-06-2025
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
Splitgate 2 Boss Says $80 Skin Bundle 'Slipped Through The Cracks'
1047 studio head Ian Proulx courted controversy at Summer Game Fest last week by taking shots at Call of Duty and wearing a hat with the MAGA-infused slogan 'Make FPS Great Again.' But it was his new multiplayer shooter's eye-popping microtransactions that subsequently turned Splitgate 2 into an online punching bag, and Proulx is now blaming some of those prices on an ex-employee who he says used to work on Call of Duty. One item in particular, an $80 skin bundle called Nano Swarm, quickly made the rounds. While Proulx talked on stage at Geoff Keighley's showcase about his love of old Halo LAN parties and wanting Titanfall 3, his free-to-play arena shooter was plastered with expensive microtransactions and about to get a new battle royale mode, undercutting his critiques of other modern live-service games like Black Ops 6. A silver-colored portal animation from the Nano Swarm bundle alone was originally priced at $34. Proulx has been taking the opportunity to keep posting through the controversy over the weekend, including slashing the prices on all cosmetics and releasing short video diaries updating players on the status of 1047's post-launch priorities for Splitgate 2. 'I've had a lot of people ask me, 'How the hell did this happen in the first place, like an $80 bundle, that's not the 1047 way?'' he said. 'I agree and I thought I would just candidly tell you exactly what happened. So I'll start by saying no excuse of course like I should have been on this, we should have been on top of this. He contionued: The second I got off that stage I called Derek our lead game designer and I said 'Derek did you know we had an $80 bundle, this is news to me, like what the heck, that makes no sense,' and he didn't. Essentially what happened out former head of monetization who happened to come from call of duty was with us for less than a year and was very aggressive on price. Actually prior to his departure we actually originally had founders packs for $100 and battle passes for $10 and the first thing Derek and I did when we revaluated everything a month ago was slash those things so founders went from $100 to $60 and we actually added in game currently that the game originally wasn't going to have we decreased the battle pass from $10 to $5 but unfortunately things slipped through the cracks. In addition to shifting the blame to a past employee and once again trying to beef with Call of Duty, Proulx's explanation doesn't entirely square with the studio's defending of the pricey cosmetics just days prior. 'This pack features our most unique skins with complex animations & artwork,' the official Splitgate 2 account posted back on Friday. 'We have a variety of cheaper options. The game is free to play, & you don't need to buy anything to enjoy it to its fullest. Nothing is pay to win & never will be.' So did the bundle 'slip through the cracks,' or is 1047 just backtracking now in the face of players revolting against a hostile monetization strategy that violates the 'old school' ethos Splitgate 2 wants to cultivate? People have pointed out on the subreddit that the problem isn't just that the prices started out to high. The shooter's in-game shop is also full of slimy practices like fake inflated discounts and currency mismatches so players always have to overspend to get what they want. 'Honestly, the store and its prices really feel like something out of a gacha game, except for the fact I don't think I know of any gachas that have you preorder [battle] passes,' wrote one player. 'Great gameplay, terrible business model,' wrote another. Splitgate 2 is currently sitting at mixed reviews on Steam, though Proulx said the free-to-play shooter reached over 2 million players over the weekend. We'll see if the sequel can stick around longer than its predecessor did. . For the latest news, Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.
Hamilton Spectator
17-05-2025
- Hamilton Spectator
B.C. man gets hunting ban, $13,000 penalty after illegally killing bighorn ram
NORTH VANCOUVER - A British Columbia man has been banned from hunting sheep in the province for three years after he illegally killed a bighorn ram and lied to authorities about where the hunt took place. B.C.'s Conservation Officer Service says in a statement posted to Facebook that Heith Proulx of Kelowna killed the ram in October 2023 near Pavilion Lake, 28 kilometres northwest of Lillooet. The service says Proulx had the animal inspected as required by law a month later and told inspectors the ram was harvested from an area where it was open season on bighorns. But the service says global positioning co-ordinates showed it was killed in a closed area. The service says Proulx admitted to lying about the location of the hunt when officers spoke to him in March 2024, and he has since pleaded guilty to making a false statement to official record keepers under the Wildlife Act. Proulx was fined $13,000 and cannot hunt or accompany other hunters for hunting any type of sheep for the next three years in B.C. The service says much of the fine will go to the Habitat Conservation Trust Foundation, while Proulx had to forfeit all wildlife parts seized in the case to the Crown and retake an outdoor recreation conservation program. 'The harvest of a mature ram from this closed area is contrary to conservation objectives and resulted in an overall harvest that exceeded the annual allowable harvest established to guide sustainable harvest levels,' the service says in its statement. The service says the Fraser River area, which includes Lillooet, supports about half of B.C.'s California bighorn sheep population. It says a provincial senior wildlife biologist who submitted an impact statement to the courts in this case found that the value of an opportunity for non-resident hunters to harvest one wild bighorn ram in B.C. has risen to more than $150,000 in the last few years. This report by The Canadian Press was first published May 16, 2025.
Winnipeg Free Press
16-05-2025
- Winnipeg Free Press
B.C. man gets hunting ban, $13,000 penalty after illegally killing bighorn ram
NORTH VANCOUVER – A British Columbia man has been banned from hunting sheep in the province for three years after he illegally killed a bighorn ram and lied to authorities about where the hunt took place. B.C.'s Conservation Officer Service says in a statement posted to Facebook that Heith Proulx of Kelowna killed the ram in October 2023 near Pavilion Lake, 28 kilometres northwest of Lillooet. The service says Proulx had the animal inspected as required by law a month later and told inspectors the ram was harvested from an area where it was open season on bighorns. But the service says global positioning co-ordinates showed it was killed in a closed area. The service says Proulx admitted to lying about the location of the hunt when officers spoke to him in March 2024, and he has since pleaded guilty to making a false statement to official record keepers under the Wildlife Act. Proulx was fined $13,000 and cannot hunt or accompany other hunters for hunting any type of sheep for the next three years in B.C. Winnipeg Jets Game Days On Winnipeg Jets game days, hockey writers Mike McIntyre and Ken Wiebe send news, notes and quotes from the morning skate, as well as injury updates and lineup decisions. Arrives a few hours prior to puck drop. The service says much of the fine will go to the Habitat Conservation Trust Foundation, while Proulx had to forfeit all wildlife parts seized in the case to the Crown and retake an outdoor recreation conservation program. 'The harvest of a mature ram from this closed area is contrary to conservation objectives and resulted in an overall harvest that exceeded the annual allowable harvest established to guide sustainable harvest levels,' the service says in its statement. The service says the Fraser River area, which includes Lillooet, supports about half of B.C.'s California bighorn sheep population. It says a provincial senior wildlife biologist who submitted an impact statement to the courts in this case found that the value of an opportunity for non-resident hunters to harvest one wild bighorn ram in B.C. has risen to more than $150,000 in the last few years. This report by The Canadian Press was first published May 16, 2025.
Yahoo
14-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Meta faces landmark trial which could break up its tech empire
A trial which could see social media giant Meta forced to sell off Instagram and WhatsApp begins in the US later on Monday. The tech giant, which also owns Facebook, faces an antitrust lawsuit from the US government which alleges the firm bought Instagram in 2012 and WhatsApp in 2014 to eliminate competition, creating a social media monopoly in the process. The US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) approved the acquisitions at the time but as a competition watchdog has continued to monitor the outcomes, and experts say if it wins the case and forces a sale to break up Meta, it could change the landscape of the social media sector. Mike Proulx, vice president research director at analyst firm Forrester, said the case's possible ramifications, and the ongoing uncertainty around the future of TikTok, could see a 'new social media world order' appear. 'The ramifications of this trial, coupled with TikTok's future in limbo, potentially puts the very core of the social media market at play. No longer would Meta be its centre of gravity. 'We haven't seen anything like this since around 2006-2011 – social media's earliest days. 'We'd likely see a renaissance of social media start-ups looking to grab a piece of new social media world order.' Proulx said that, although Facebook is the original and centre pillar of Meta's empire, it could struggle to compete as a social media power and may need to redirect its focus. 'Meta is trying to make Facebook cool again, but the company's social media 'insurance' is – and has been for a while – Instagram. 'Without Instagram and WhatsApp, what really is Meta? Could Facebook seriously compete with a stand-alone Instagram? Can Threads monetise at scale? Doubtful. And the company absolutely should not hang its hat on its fledgling metaverse ambitions. 'Its AI (artificial intelligence) glasses are a bright spot, as is its broader AI work. 'That means, in a broken-up Meta, the company's AI initiatives would usurp its social media roots.' The trial, which begins in Washington DC on Monday, is expected to last several weeks, with Meta founder Mark Zuckerberg and former chief operating officer Sheryl Sandberg both expected to give evidence. Meta is not the only US tech giant under scrutiny over holding an alleged monopoly, with Google also facing the prospect of being forced to sell its Chrome web browser and break up its online search empire. After a judge ruled that the firm does hold a monopoly in online search last summer, the US Department of Justice demanded that a court require Google to sell Chrome, among other remedies to end its market dominance – a position it reiterated last month.
