Fine, let's figure out The Discourse™ around Mixtape

I have not played Mixtape. I edited and read Tom’s review of it. I’ve seen a few other takes around social media and the internet. And … I don’t think it’s for me. (Besides, it sure sounds like Wax Heads is way better.)

But when I opened Bluesky today, I discovered that the video game corner of The Discourse™ is about Mixtape. So now that’s a whole thing I’ve got to figure out. I had other shit to do today.

Nathan at Aftermath did a better recap than I could, so go read his article first. It boils down to this: Mixtape got good reviews, not everyone thought it was great, people started claiming “industry plant” and “astroturfing,” and people started questioning if it’s even an “indie” game when the publisher is run by Larry Ellison’s daughter. These four things have combined in the outrageslop economy and become The Discourse™ today. There. We figured it out. It’s manufactured outrage nonsense and it’ll go away in a day or two.

But it’s not that simple. Let’s start here: multiple reviews I’ve read — Tom’s included — mention that, while Mixtape is somewhere between fine and good, it’s not really clear who it’s for. And that brings up the only interesting thing to come out of The Discourse™ so far: the particular brand of nostalgia that Mixtape delivers seems to be aimed at white people of a certain age and tax bracket. White and aging also happens to be the majority of game devs, game journalists (myself included), and gamers, so it’s not really surprising that Mixtape got good reviews. Meanwhile, the predictable parts of the internet have also decided that it’s Too Woke™ for daring to including people of color and women. So, yeah. Nothing means anything anymore.

At the same time, not everyone loves the game. If you think a game is bad (regardless of your opinions on its Wokefulness), and all you see are overwhelmingly positive reviews, it starts to feel suspicious. Which makes a kind of sense in a simplistic, solipsistic way. It’s wrong and dumb, obviously, but I can see where it’s coming from. And that’s where words like “astroturfing” (fake grassroots support) and “industry plant” (a product chosen by The Industry as the Next Big Thing regardless of quality) start to get thrown around. (Xbox stepping in didn’t help.)

The Discourse™ argued that the buzz was artificially generated. And I suspect that it’s true, actually. Only I wouldn’t call it astroturfing. I’d call it what it actually is: marketing.

Actually making a video game is only the first step in releasing a video game. Here’s Greg Lobanov:

When you’re working on an unreleased game, you’re basically making a really cool folder on a computer. A lot of people might enjoy having access to that folder, on any variety of devices, but until it’s released it’s just a folder on your computer. A publisher’s job boils down to figuring out the optimal plan to make money off of that computer folder, and then executing that plan.

Publishers handle the marketing of a game for the developers. Marketing like ads and PR and sending out review copies. These things cost money that the publisher fronts (and recoups off of the sales). So yes, sometimes awareness of a product feels artificial. So do commercials. So does product placement. That’s what marketing is.

Now, Mixtape’s publisher is Annapurna Interactive. Annapurna was founded by Megan Ellison, daughter of billionaire Larry Ellison. Obviously, it’s not great that Annapurna is run by a nepobaby funded (at least in part) by a genocidal sociopath. But that doesn’t mean that Annapurna hasn’t published good games. In fact, they published What Remains of Edith Finch, Flower, Outer Wilds, Journey, Kentucky Route Zero, Neon White, Thirsty Suitors, Skin Deep, Lorelei and the Laser Eyes, Cocoon, and Stray.

People were so busy trying to uncover if Mixtape was secretly fascist or secretly an industry plant it completely buried the real scandal, which is that Mixtape is secretly Australian

— Tirk (@tirkarokujo.itch.io) May 12, 2026 at 4:41 PM

Would those games be as popular as they are without the marketing provided by Annapurna? Maybe, but, more realistically, probably not. It’s cynical to just chalk this up to “welcome to capitalism,” but also, welcome to capitalism. The important thing here is that Annapurna didn’t make the games — Mixtape included. Beethoven and Dinosaur made it, and they’re a decidedly small company. Their game just happened to get really good PR from a reputable (if questionable) source.

To be clear, I think it's absolutely justified to criticize Megan Ellison for where her family gets its money. It's even justified to criticize Annapurna Interactive for where some of its money came from. But it's also important to separate that from the games the company publishes and promotes. The devs of those games had nothing to do with that (as far as I know). Does that make working with Annapurna okay? Not really. But it's two different conversations.

So there we go. Mixtape is a game that some people liked and other people didn’t that got good publicity and that’s apparently enough to become The Discourse™. I’m going to go take a nap now.