Grav-StuG Kickstarter (January 2019)

Grav-StuG Kickstarter 

I am pleased to announce the Grav-StuG, a plastic model kit, will be coming to Kickstarter January 2019!

More details to come.....

 

Dreamforge will be kickstarting several new kits in the coming year.
Each new product offering will be very focused, a single product, its actual production costs and any profits expected will need to be folded into the overall funding goal. This is a strong departure from the retail model, where revenues are gained over time and the investment/debt is front loaded.

 

Product availability outside the initial Kickstarter.
Product availability outside of Kickstarter will be limited, only 100-300 units beyond the total needed to fulfill the Kickstarter will be run for post Kickstarter inventory, some of that will be soaked up by the inevitable issues, damaged kits, mispacked or missing items from a kit and kits that never make it to the backer and were lost in transit.
There may be re-runs offered on popular kits in future Kickstarter's, but there will be minimums that need to be met, typically a 500-unit run will be needed. The best way for a customer to approach this is to buy what you want and what you think you will need at the time of the offering, I cannot make a promise that there will be a second run if the overall interest is not there.

 

Kickstarter Shipping.
Customers will need to pay for the actual shipping costs for the products they back. Shipping, as we all know is very expensive from the US to anywhere outside its borders. Each Kickstarter will be shipped directly from China to mitigate the expense to the customer as much as possible, this means most of the world will likely see a drastic cost reduction, but the US will experience a small increase. Why don't I just ship the US backers from the US? Because it's a hidden cost, shipping to the US, warehouse staff and other costs would need to be calculated into the Kickstarter and would increase the price once the true costs are factored in.

 

How are the Kickstarter's structured?
Each Kickstarter will absorb the costs and required profits into a 1000 minimum unit run. If it costs $40,000 for the molds, production, boxes and other service costs, then the cost of each unit would be $40.00.

What happens if a Kickstarter success outstrips the required funding goal?
Do you get a discount? Discounts will be offered when you pick up multiple kits, not by the overall success of a product or campaign. Those are profits that get re-invested to make DreamForge healthy, to pay for additional stock, to help pay for re-release of the current line of kits, as those tools will need to be re-cut at some point.

 

How will the Kickstarter's differ from other typical campaigns?
To be clear, this is not going to be a song and dance Kickstarter model, there may be extras offered if there is room on the sprues, but anything extra in the form of products adds to the costs and I will not be bulking the costs to deal with that. I am trying to keep the price per kit to you as low as I possibly can.
Most of our campaigns will be short, ten to fifteen days with as much warning as I can provide about an upcoming campaign. I will be active during the campaign, answering questions, taking feedback and interacting with my customers but by the time the project launches, the current product will be locked in and not subject to revision or design changes.
The conversations I have with my customers before a campaign will allow us to develop products together and help deliver the kinds of items you would like to see.

Scale in millimeters:

Verb-noun Vs Noun-Verb

I went to the Roguelike Celebration over the weekend and enjoyed Thomas Biskup's talk about Ultimate ADOM. Among the many interface improvements they're making based on user testing is they're simplifying the controls from the traditional roguelike controls to W A S D + E F. I don't know how roguelike game players will respond to that but I'm a fan! This reminded me of two things from my past, so I thought I'd say a little about those.

Sometime in my teens I got to meet Lord British (Richard Garriott) and Iolo the Bard (David Watson). My mom was shopping, and I went to the computer aisle to browse the games I couldn't afford. Richard and Iolo were talking about Ultima 6. Nobody else was there, so I got to talk to them for half an hour! I learned about OOP, UI, testing, systems thinking, and more. Really cool!

They told me about how they coded puzzles to look for the state of the world (nouns) instead of the player actions (verbs). For example, there was a puzzle where they expected players to cast Telekinesis (ᚩᚣᛕ ORT POR YLEM) on a lever on the other side of a chasm. Instead, during playtesting, they saw that one player killed a party member, tossed the body over the chasm, cast Resurrect (ᛁᛗᚳ IN MANI CORP), then have the party member pull the lever.

Wow! That wasn't something I had ever thought of in the simple games I had written at that age.

Another thing they told me about was the simpler control scheme. Previous Ultimas had a control scheme similar to what roguelike games have. W to wear armor, I to ignite a torch, K to klimb a ladder, D to descend a ladder, B to board a ship, etc. You specify the verb such as J to jimmy a lock and then after that you can choose a noun such as the lock to jimmy.

In Ultima 6 they reversed the order so that the noun came first and then the verb. This meant the game could tell whether you were trying to J jimmy a lock or B board a ship or K klimb a ladder because the game knew that it was a lock or a ship or a ladder. And that meant they didn't need separate keys for these verbs, but instead one key, U use object. There are times when they had multiple verbs for a noun but for the most part they could get away with just one.

I haven't closely followed Ultimate ADOM but I'm guessing they're doing something similar.

The noun-verb thing comes up in another context. After I stopped making games for a living I went into programming language research. My main topic was studying how functional programming languages and object-oriented programming languages can be combined. Something I noticed at the time was that the syntax for functional languages tends to be verb then noun: f(x), whereas the syntax for object oriented languages tends to be noun then verb: x.f(). At some level these can be considered equivalent. You can express with one what you can express with the other. There's a big difference in usability though: auto-complete.

What happens when we auto-complete f(x)? First we need to know all possible f that are valid in this context. Since the programmer has just started typing in the expression, any function is valid, and that means there's a very long list to choose from. It takes many keystrokes to pick one. Second we need to know all possible x that are valid in this context. These are usually local names, so there aren't that many. Knowing the type of f narrows down the list but the list was already small, so there's not much to gain.

What happens when we auto-complete x.f()? First we need to know all possible x. The programmer has just started typing, so any local name is valid, but there aren't many. Typing just one character can narrow down the list to one or two elements. Second we need to know all possible f that are valid in this context. These are methods defined on the type of x, so there aren't that many compared to all possible functions. Knowing the type of x narrows down the list substantially, so there's a lot gained.

The two syntaxes seem equivalent in theory but they aren't in practice. I wonder if people who use regular text editors end up believing the two syntaxes are equivalent, whereas people who use IDEs prefer the object-oriented syntax, even if they're not taking advantage of object-oriented programming (inheritance, subtyping, etc.).

This asymmetry is orthogonal to whether you're using functional or object-oriented programming. It is better for programmers if they can choose from two medium length lists than to have to choose from a very long list (where a lot has to be typed before it's useful) and then a very short list (where not much is gained). You see this in other contexts too. Command line interfaces like DOS, VMS, and Unix shell typically specify a verb first and then the noun(s). GUIs such as Mac and Windows typically specify a noun first by clicking an icon, and then the verb by choosing from the right click menu. In text editors, vim's commands like d0 are verb then text selection (noun), whereas in more conventional text editors (including Emacs) you'd first select some text (the noun) and then invoke a verb like delete. Kakoune is a modal editor that uses noun-verb instead of verb-noun.

In games it seems like it'd be better for players to first choose an object from the environment and then choose from a small set of actions, than to first choose from a large set of actions and then choose from a set of objects. However I haven't surveyed enough games to see what's more common. The next time you're playing a game, look at the structure of commands to see if it's verb-noun or noun-verb.

Dwarves Aren't Just Going To Blue Themselves

I'm gaming tonight so I won't get getting any further on these guys this week. The blue shade and base color are down, it needs 1-2 highlights next and I made hit it with a wash to see if I like it better that way. Leathers, flesh, hair and basing to go!

Bimonthly Progress Report For My Twitch Channel, FuzzyJCats, Sept 2 To November 1

FuzzyJCats Twitch Channel

It's going into December, so as usual, I've been procrastinating because there hasn't been any major changes at the level of no longer caring about viewer numbers. Albeit there are times when I have my neuroses and insecurities about numbers, though I was able to get over it after processing with my best friend, Todd. 

Because that breakthrough was huge, I felt I wasn't making any monumental improvements, except for taking 15 minute breaks after 2 hours of streaming, which helped me to last an extra 2 hours or so, getting in the much needed practice without fatigue.

I didn't think about taking breaks because I see my streamer friends stream 12 hours straight without any breaks. And the meme in Twitch is stream until you drop to gain viewers. I would stream until I couldn't focus any longer (normally around 2 hours) and stop. 

I stopped typing my streamer friends' link as I noted the emotional issues and stress it was causing me. It's so easy to forget to shout someone out that if you don't do so, you're concerned if the person felt slighted. Therefore, I'm only shouting out when being hosted and raided. Further, having excessive shoutouts made the chat harder to read, and I wanted a cleaner interface.

Since this progress report was long overdue and it was in the back of my mind, I was wondering what else can I do in the meantime to take streams to the next level? The answer has to go back to the basics - what do I want to achieve in streaming? Because if I know what I want, I can find out ways to accomplish that goal. Clearly, to "git gud" but specifically what is that? 

This is where the cliches of two heads are better than one, and how you can achieve anything with friends ring true, even as it makes everyone cringe when they hear that.

I kept asking the smotpoker887 extraordinaire how can I improve over and over again, but I wasn't sure what I wanted to accomplish in streaming. After hearing my neurotic rant, Smot merely asked, "why not be the best friend you can possibly be" from streaming.

That is what I wanted to accomplish! This is not too hard because you easily get to know your viewers - by remembering the past stream chats and talking to them through any of the social media messaging - so that when they show up, you can ask how is their house coming along (only if they mentioned that publicly to respect privacy).

Because I don't have photographic memory and we miss a lot of chat while streaming, I've been using Chatty to review the chat logs - this helps remind me of what was said in stream so I can get to know my new viewers better. Thanks to Smot, he explained how I can upload these logs to Google drive since it was hard to read on the potato PC. I can then read these logs anywhere I have access to internet.

Because I was working on being more friendly and engaging, I didn't have as much gameplay (this will improve through practice). As soon as I notice, I say hi as soon as a viewer shows up, but I forgot how I was to focus on then going back to what I was talking about, which takes a lot of mental focus.

I wasn't conscious of using that strat last month. Writing this progress report is quite helpful to concretely remind myself to be less tangential - which is why I want to be more timely in these bimonthly progress reports.

The discussion with Smot occurred maybe 2 months ago, and I got lulled into complacency as we all do as I focused on being more engaging with viewers.

However, recently, I wanted to see how I can be more entertaining: being a friend, but being an entertaining friend, which I think will take streaming to the next level, especially as it's an entertainment media.

After having two sleepless nights, I then talked with my best friend Todd who helped me to be more specific in what I mean by being entertaining. I told him that I wanted to be socially engaging. However, he mentioned the eye-opening reality that hearing another person's conversation may not be entertaining. Saying hello to viewers one after the other is not the most riveting or compelling conversation after all and most likely, only interesting to the person you're addressing.

After clarifying what I wanted, he mentioned the radio broadcasting 101 basics. This was rather shocking considering when you search how to be an entertaining Twitch streamer, no one wrote about this, but this is the most basic thing to do as an entertainer! In other words, that is how behind Twitch is compared to other forms of entertainment. 

Todd mentioned that I can write down the stories I want to tell and rehearse before each stream. After he said that, my immediate thought was "wow, that's so basic!" even as I didn't think about rehearsing. Because we all hear about how much entertainers rehearse out loud, spending hours a day honing their skills.

I noticed that when I have ideas to say while streaming, I even rehearse it in my mind, but when the time comes, I'm too inhibited to actualize how I envisioned it, and it didn't come out as colorful as I wanted it to and falls flat. I also noticed that I wanted to expand on conversational threads, but I hold back for fear of burdening the listener (growing up in the New England area, children were treated as to be seen but not heard). I know exactly why I do these things, but knowing is the easy part, changing is the challenge.s

Therefore, I have to do "inner work", accepting myself and not caring about "acting the fool" on stream for fear of viewers thinking negatively of me. Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) here can work, because what's the worse that can happen if I'm able to rehearse and then act the way I envision the story, uninhibited? The absolute worse is that the viewers think I'm stupid or a loser or bad at acting (which I already know that I am), but who cares? If someone actually writes that and means it (i.e. a true troll, my viewers tease me affectionately on stream) during stream, then ban.

I'm also working on self-compassion - accepting yourself unconditionally - so you don't judge yourself (leads to inhibition ) or others (pinched soul).

Writing down a full-fledged "script" and rehearsing it aloud, practicing may help me to be less uninhibited and perform the way I want it to. I can even force Todd to watch. It'll be an exciting adventure to see if these preparations will significantly improve the entertainment value of the stream!

Goals Achieved:

1. 15 minute breaks = longer streams = more practice
2. No more excessive shoutout commands = less stress, cleaner chat
3. Be a friend (first priority) and easier ways of reading chat logs
1. Be more diligent about reading chat logs
4. Realization of rehearsing scripts

Improvements to be made aside from the above:

1. Make sure I work on the bimonthly progress report as it solidifies what I'm supposed to be working on, and forces me to find out what other things I can improve.
2. More gaming action and fluency as per usual.

The How of Happiness Review

Top 10 Games Of 2019

Our favorite games that we played in 2019 (not necessarily published this year). As usual we've rated these games based on the amount of time we spent playing them, which should be the best indicator of how entertaining they are.

---

10. The Lord of the Rings Trading Card Game

7 plays, 12 hours (average play time 1.71 hours per game)

This excellent game was a staple of our collectible card game diet in the early 2000s, and we started playing it semi-regularly again last year. This year we even bought some new cards (well, published in 2005, but new to us) and we're planning a series of booster draft games over the next few months.

Read the full review.

---

9. Mansions of Madness Second Edition

5 plays, 13 hours (average play time 2.6 hours per game)

After showing up at #6 in 2016 and #3 in 2017, Mansions of Madness dropped off our top 10 list last year, most likely due to the number of other miniatures-heavy adventure games we spent time on. It's a great game that plays almost like a light role playing game, with exploration and puzzle-solving taking precedence over tactical movement and combat, and the built-in app taking the place of a game master or villain player.

Read the full review.

---

8. Western Legends

5 plays, 13.25 hours (average play time 2.65 hours per game)

Western Legends has turned out to be exactly the game we were hoping it would be: an open world adventure game set in the wild west, where players choose whether to gain fame by being an outlaw, a lawman, a gambler, or, as was quite often true about the game's colorful historical characters, a little of each.

Read the full review.

---

7. Marvel Strike Teams

5 plays, 13.25 hours (average play time 2.65 hours per game)

It's too bad that this Marvel Comics miniatures game didn't catch on and isn't likely to see any further development. It had a lot of interesting ideas and concepts that I haven't seen in any other miniatures games, with a strong campaign element and emphasis on character development over multiple games. In this case I think the Heroclix branding did more harm that good, as it really was its own game with very little in common with Heroclix.

Read the full review.

---

6. Roll Player

7 plays, 14 hours (average play time 2 hours per game)

We usually come home from GameStorm (Portland's yearly game convention) with a few new games, but they often tend to be impulse buys that we quickly lose interest in. Not so with Roll Player, which is a great combination of tactical dice rolling and fantasy adventure. Who knew a game about creating a D&D character could be this interesting?

Read the full review.

---

5. Mythic Battles: Pantheon

10 plays, 20.5 hours (average play time 2.05 hours per game)

Mythic Battles: Pantheon was our most anticipated game in 2017, and it clearly didn't disappoint -- it was our number one most played game in 2018, and its number four spot this year is still respectable. It's a great skirmish/board game hybrid that offers the best of both types of game: a ton of different miniatures, a unique card-based system for activating units and a selection of beautifully illustrated boards that simplify movement and line-of-sight. And with around 80 scenarios offering a change to the normal "move to the middle and fight" brawls that most skirmish games tend to be, it will be a long time before we've exhausted this game's possibilities.

Read the full review.

---

4. Conan

12 plays, 20.25 hours (average play time 1.69 hours per game)

This is the fourth year in a row that Conan has made our Top 10. It really is a fantastic adventure game, with a "one vs. many" style of game play that has the structure of a well-designed skirmish game combined with a board game's ease of play and the open-ended flexibility of a role playing game. Unfortunately the game's limited availability and high price point have made it largely inaccessible to a wider market of players, and an upcoming convoluted and confusing Kickstarter campaign doesn't look like it will help matters any.

Read the full review.

---

3. Dinogenics

11 plays, 20.5 hours (average play time 1.86 hours per game)

We weren't sure what to expect from this game: how would it compare to Dinosaur Island? Would it be worth having both games? As it turns out, DinoGenics offers a very different play experience, and while the two games have obvious similarities, they are different enough that we can justify owning both. And while it's core mechanics aren't all that innovative, DinoGenics has proved to be a little easier to get to the table on a regular basis.

Read the full review.

---

2. Dune Collectible Card Game

11 plays, 24 hours (average play time 2.18 hours per game)

Although we were avid collectible card game players during their heyday in the 1990s, Dune somehow passed us by -- we only recently started playing it. It is an old-school CCG through and through, with very complex rules that take a lot of repeat play to master, so this year we decided to commit to playing it regularly. The experience has been a lot of fun, but a little frustrating in that playing the game makes us want to buy more cards (the goal of any CCG), and cards for this one are very difficult to find.

Read the full review.

---

1. Star Wars Outer Rim

11 plays, 34.5 hours (average play time 3.14 hours per game)

This game took us by surprise in several ways. We were aware that it was coming but hadn't really planned on getting it, but a friend brought it over and after a few games we were hooked, and bought our own copy a few days later. It's a "pick up and deliver" style game similar to Firefly or Wasteland Express Delivery Service, but much easier to set up and play, and of course the Star Wars theme is an easy sell on game night -- we've been able to play this game with several different groups and everyone has enjoyed it immensely. Still, we were a little shocked when it turned out to be our most played game of the year.

Full review to come.

---

Honorable Mention

Legendary: A Marvel Deck Building Game

7 plays, 11.5 hours (average play time 1.64 hours per game)

Legendary: A James Bond Deck Building Game

8 plays, 9.25 hours (average play time 1.15 hours per game)

Although technically you could mix together all the different versions of Legendary, we've never felt the need since each version of the game stands on its own so well, both thematically and technically, so we tend to think of each version as a separate game. If we were to add up the time we spent playing the different versions it would easily have made it into the top 5, and with an ever increasing number of IPs being added to the mix, if there isn't a Legendary game for you yet, there probably will be soon.

Read the full review of Legendary: Marvel.

Full review of Legendary: James Bond to come.

---

Most anticipated game of 2020

Judge Dredd: Helter Skelter

As of this writing we just got this game and haven't had a chance to play it yet, but it looks really interesting, with card and movement mechanics similar to Mythic Battles: Pantheon without the sometimes overwhelming amount of content. Plus the game components look to be of extremely high quality. We've been burned on two other Judge Dredd games this year (Judge Dredd: the Cursed Earth was a too-difficult co-op game clearly intended to be played solo, and Judge Dredd: Block War was an unplayable mess), so hopefully the third time will be a charm.

Buds, Blooms, And Thorns Review Of SHŌBU By Smirk & Laughter Games

Buds, Blooms, and Thorns Review of SHŌBU by Smirk & Laughter Games
DisclaimerSupport me on Patreon!

Vitals:
Title: SHŌBU
Designed by: Manolis Vranas, Jamie Sajdak
Publisher: Smirk & Laughter Games
MSRP: $30
2p | 15-30 min | 8+

Introduction:

SHŌBU is a new game from Smirk & Laughter Games that has a feel of a classic abstract strategy game that has been around for centuries.  Two players face off in a battle of wits, trying to eliminate their opponent from one of the four wooden boards that serve as a playing area.  Turns are simple, just take two actions: a Passive Move with one of your pieces on one of your home boards that doesn't affect any other pieces, then an Aggressive Move on either board of the opposite color that can potentially bump your opponent's pieces, maybe off the board.

Blooms:
Blooms are the game's highlights and features.  Elements that are exceptional.

• The game has a wonderfully classic feel, like something that's been played for centuries.
• The aesthetic is great, with the wooden boards, riverstone pieces, and rope divider.
• Simple rules can be taught in minutes and you'll be playing in no time.
• It's a battle of wits that will thrill even the most strategic minded gamers.
• Should appeal to both gamers and non-gamers.  Anyone who likes classic games like Chess, Go, Backgammon, etc. should feel right at home playing SHŌBU.

Buds:
Buds are interesting parts of the game I would like to explore more. 

• The more I play the more I realize the depth to the strategies.
• I love how the alternating board movement causes you to have to think ahead multiple moves as you have to reposition your pieces for your next offensive while still staying on the defense.
• I've read about several variants that use the positioning of the rope piece (which is purely aesthetic in the main game) to change how and where you can move pieces.
• Don't be afraid to sacrifice pieces early on in the game.  Sometimes it's easier to run away when you have fewer pieces on a board while you mount your offensive on a different board!

Thorns:
Thorns are a game's shortcomings and any issues I feel are noteworthy.

• The hardest part of the game is remembering that you have to complete your Aggressive Move on a board of the opposite color from your Passive Move.  This adds to the strategy and puzzle, but is also easy to overlook when you're concentrating on the game.  I've had several occasions where it was realized a turn or two later that someone accidentally "cheated" and even more where we caught the mistake just before the next player was about to move.  This can break the rhythm of the game, but it's mostly the fault of the players, not the game.
• The 15-30 minute game time can be highly variable.  If the two players are of unequal strategic skill the game can be very quick.  Between players of equal skill games can go longer than the 30 minutes, sometimes significantly.  This is true of many games of this nature, however.
• Analysis Paralysis can be a real factor in this type of game.
• What exactly was the rope included for, other than aesthetics?
• SHŌBU is a pain to type since there's no "Ō" on my keyboard!

Final Thoughts:

I really, really like SHŌBU, so much so that it made the number 7 spot on my Top 11 New-To-Me Games of 2019 list!  This is the type of game that I feel, had it been made 1000 years ago, would be a staple in most households around the world.  Strategically I feel it can hold its own against classics like Chess or Go.  Granted, I'm not a professional Chess or Go player, but I think the simplicity, elegance, and strategy in SHŌBU is something that can be studied in depth.  I can see people discussing the strategies behind different opening moves and counter moves, pros and cons of focusing on one board vs dividing attention amongst multiple boards, and heated discussions about when to mount an offensive strike.  Someday I'd love to see old men (and women) sitting around in parks, playing SHŌBU right along with the Chess, Checkers, and Dominos players we see today!

Buds, Blooms, and Thorns Rating:

Bloom!  This game is great and worth
adding to your collection!  It should be
on just about every gamer's shelf. 

Pictures:

Did you like this review?  Show your support: Support me on Patreon!Also, click the heart at Board Game Links , like GJJ Games on Facebook , or follow on Twitter .  And be sure to check out my games on  Tabletop Generation.

GJJ Games Reviews are independent, unpaid reviews of games I, George Jaros, have played with my family and friends.  Some of these games I own, some are owned by friends, some are borrowed, and some were provided by a publisher or designer for my honest feedback and evaluation.  I make every attempt to be both honest and constructively critical in my reviews, and they are all my opinions.  There are four types of reviews on GJJ Games: Full Reviews feature critical reviews based on a rubric and games receive a rating from 0 to 100.  Quick Reviews and Kickstarter Previews are either shorter reviews of published games or detailed preview reviews of crowdfunding games that will receive a rating from 0 to 10 based on my impressions of the game.  Buds, Blooms,and Thorns reviews are shorter reviews of either published or upcoming games that highlight three aspects of a game: Buds are parts of a game I look forward to exploring more, Blooms are outstanding features of a game, and Thorns are shortcomings of a game.  Each BBT review game will receive an overall rating of Thorn, Bud, or Bloom.

About London by J. Ewing Ritchie

I Am Alive Download For Free

I Am Alive Download For Free

SCREENSHOT

System Requirements Of I Am Alive Download Free

• Operating System: Window XP/ Vista/ Window 7/ Window 8
• CPU: Intel Pentium 4 or later
• RAM: 1 GB
• Setup size: 1.8GB
• Hard Disk Space: 2 GB

Brave Browser the Best privacy-focused Browser of 2020

Out of all the privacy-focused products and apps available on the market, Brave has been voted the best. Other winners of Product Hunt's Golden Kitty awards showed that there was a huge interest in privacy-enhancing products and apps such as chats, maps, and other collaboration tools.

An extremely productive year for Brave

Last year has been a pivotal one for the crypto industry, but few companies managed to see the kind of success Brave did. Almost every day of the year has been packed witch action, as the company managed to officially launch its browser, get its Basic Attention Token out, and onboard hundreds of thousands of verified publishers on its rewards platform.

Luckily, the effort Brave has been putting into its product hasn't gone unnoticed.

The company's revolutionary browser has been voted the best privacy-focused product of 2019, for which it received a Golden Kitty award. The awards, hosted by Product Hunt, were given to the most popular products across 23 different product categories.

Ryan Hoover, the founder of Product Hunt said:

"Our annual Golden Kitty awards celebrate all the great products that makers have launched throughout the year"

Brave's win is important for the company—with this year seeing the most user votes ever, it's a clear indicator of the browser's rapidly rising popularity.

Privacy and blockchain are the strongest forces in tech right now

If reaching 10 million monthly active users in December was Brave's crown achievement, then the Product Hunt award was the cherry on top.

The recognition Brave got from Product Hunt users shows that a market for privacy-focused apps is thriving. All of the apps and products that got a Golden Kitty award from Product Hunt users focused heavily on data protection. Everything from automatic investment apps and remote collaboration tools to smart home products emphasized their privacy.

AI and machine learning rose as another note-worthy trend, but blockchain seemed to be the most dominating force in app development. Blockchain-based messaging apps and maps were hugely popular with Product Hunt users, who seem to value innovation and security.

For those users, Brave is a perfect platform. The company's research and development team has recently debuted its privacy-preserving distributed VPN, which could potentially bring even more security to the user than its already existing Tor extension.

Brave's effort to revolutionize the advertising industry has also been recognized by some of the biggest names in publishing—major publications such as The Washington Post, The Guardian, NDTV, NPR, and Qz have all joined the platform. Some of the highest-ranking websites in the world, including Wikipedia, WikiHow, Vimeo, Internet Archive, and DuckDuckGo, are also among Brave's 390,000 verified publishers.

Earn Basic Attention Token (BAT) with Brave Web Browser

Try Brave Browser

Get $5 in free BAT to donate to the websites of your choice.