Jonathan Blow

Probably the words are accurate (I don't remember), but the words referred to something different from what the article says they do. As is very common in these things. The way that part of the discussion went was, I said I was not that impressed with where the development of

games has gone as a medium. The interviewer said, are you saying there hasn't been a big increase in diversity of people making games and in themes. I said no, I am not saying that, I am talking about a different thing, that's about pushing on the edges of the art of game design.

As someone in the games press isn't a professional designer and probably was covering many sessions, you can't expect an accurate summary of this kind of thing. (see Gell-Mann Amnesia). I recommend that anyone who is interested in an accurate account of the session

wait for the video. The thing is, the people who are I guess being loud on the internet (I haven't seen most of it) aren't interested in an accurate or truthful summary, they just want to be mad. Again, note that this never happens in response to actual video of my interviews.

I'm not saying it mischaracterizes the conversation in an overall sense, I am saying the specifics are often wrong. But if what people are mad about is that I think game development could be going better, well, they can continue to be mad, because that is what I think!