If anyone else caught this, then my apology, but they could have shortened "new and existing players" to "all players" or just "players", unless I'm overlooking something. ?♂️
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Popular Browser Game 'Wordle' Sold to The New York Times, Will Remain Free 'Initially'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
By choosing words with less frequent letters. For instance, it took me 6 guesses to guess proxy and prick. Proxy because of the 'x' and 'y', and prick because it's a bit naughty. And disagree about Spelling Bee. For one, it's free, even though I play Spelling Bee for free, mainly to see if I can get the pangram. But Wordle also has the advantage that you don't waste much time on it, as you would if you had to try and get all allowed words for Spelling Bee, AND, as far as I know, Wordle won't disallow an actual word the way Spelling Bee does sometimes, nor include words that are arguably not proper words.
Last edited:
Good for the developers, but I wish it was a company that favored standalone apps; even as a NY Times subscriber, it's easier to click on Mini Metro or other games with standalone apps then searching through The NY Times app for their games. I can't count how many times I've wanted to play Vertex, only to have it not show up with crosswords, tiles, etc.
Wordle ended about two weeks ago when every single FB and Twitter post was about it. And it only takes ten lines of coding to make a duplicate, so why are people worried it will vanish? Oh well, games. Win, lose, play.
good on the guy for making money.
so what if NYT bought it? they don't own the game itself. There are a crap load of different versions of this game. There are TV shows and there's nothing stopping others making their own app game.
NYT wasted their money ?
so what if NYT bought it? they don't own the game itself. There are a crap load of different versions of this game. There are TV shows and there's nothing stopping others making their own app game.
NYT wasted their money ?
Coming up with the idea of this particular implementation of this class of games and getting lucky to have it become a phenomenon is a rare event. But, once it's there, the idea and mechanics are so simple, any passable programmer can code a clone of it in a single workday. In terms of intellectual property, the only thing there is the name; there's no legal protection available for the rules, so as long you don't call your version Wordle, you're clear, which is why there's already dozens of clones of it. Trying to profit from something so easy to copy is incredibly difficult, so the programmer was right to take a payout and let it be someone else's problem to figure out how to ruin it and drive people to all the alternatives.
It is easy. I suspect 6 letters would be even easier, because you'd get more information with each guess. Four carefully crafted words could tell you about 24 letters.
He basically sold a 200 line programmed version of a 90s UK TV show!
Fair play.
Fair play.
Why pay for something then give it back for free?
something is fishy here
whats the problem here? they will make replicas now , there are many programmers out there. This has been done before.
something is fishy here
whats the problem here? they will make replicas now , there are many programmers out there. This has been done before.
Yep, NYT just purchased popularity and the name to lure in more subscribers, it's that simple. To be fair, it's a nicely done game and I like the simplicity. I bet there are dozens of versions being written now to take over those disenfranchised players that won't sign up to play Wordle.
Very rarely is something 'free' in this world because there is always something hidden behind it. In the case of 'free' software/apps that are owned by large companies/businesses, they require you to 'sign up' to their website to get access to the 'free' software/app but in doing so your personal data is then sold off to 3rd party advertisers.
Unfortunately this is the world we live in today, if you want something you have to be prepared to give up your personal information to do so so others can sell it.
Unfortunately this is the world we live in today, if you want something you have to be prepared to give up your personal information to do so so others can sell it.
Not really surprising it ended this way. When a corporation dump a truckload of cash at your front door, who would say “no”? I expect an app will soon show up in the App Store and Google Play. Is free to play with ads or you can subscribe without ads.
Caveat emptor. I subscribed to NYT once on one of their limited-time only subscribe for only $1 offers, pay immediately with one click with Apple Pay. When I tried to unsubscribe no record of my purchase or email, subscription department only deals with subs bought through their sales department, hour long phone call, you'll have to contact Apple or your credit card company, yadayadayada. Did finally sort it out but … never again.
Hello US Centric app!
If New York Times buys it, I surely hope that we international users can get a piece of the pie too.
edit. btw.. I meant a piece of the pie as in allowing people overseas access to this Wordle! app. I just thought I'd mention for my own benefit should I get in trouble because someone thinks that I mean to get a piece of the money that NYT pays the developer.
Even if you all read it as I originally thought - then I felt the need to edit.
If New York Times buys it, I surely hope that we international users can get a piece of the pie too.
edit. btw.. I meant a piece of the pie as in allowing people overseas access to this Wordle! app. I just thought I'd mention for my own benefit should I get in trouble because someone thinks that I mean to get a piece of the money that NYT pays the developer.
Even if you all read it as I originally thought - then I felt the need to edit.
Last edited:
Right on. Here in the UK shedloads of people play it every day and no one is going to buy a subscription to an American newspaper to carry on playing, I’ll bet you would look in vain on the sports pages for the Cricket scores!
Exactly..
Opening the NYT Sports section - finds <insert crickets meme> eg. awkward silence.
Well, that was easy. How about handball then? nope..
I'm not a huge sports fan, but I recognize that there are people who are.
Every time someone rolls out "If it's free, then YOU'RE the product" I cringe - it's a classic example of if something sounds clever and catchy then it must be true. Yes, sometimes there's a non-monetary price you pay for things, but free can still mean free. For example, in what way have I been 'the product' with Wordle up to now?
As part of the millions of players/users, you were the main "product" that was sold to the NYT. The NYT bought "Wordle" for the significant userbase more than the game itself. If users (products) like yourself didn't exist, it wouldn't have been worth anything to the NYT.
