<p>Wordle was acquired by the NYT at the beginning of this month </p>

Wordle was acquired by the NYT at the beginning of this month

New York Times has not made Wordle harder, computer scientist says

The publication has only removed six words

Saman Javed
Sunday 27 February 2022 11:13
Comments

A computer scientist has averted the internet’s most pressing suspicion; no, The New York Times (NYT) has not made Wordle harder.

David Andersen, a professor of computer science at Carnegie Mellon University in Pennsylvania, US, has compared the source code of the original game with the NYT version, finding that only six words have been changed.

For the uninitiated, Wordle is a daily word game which sees players guess a five-letter word in six tries or less.

Originally created by software engineer Josh Wardle as a present for his partner, it was acquired by NYT for an undisclosed seven-figure sum at the beginning of this month after gaining popularity on social media.

In a thread posted to Twitter, Andersen said the NYT had changed the original word list in “very small ways” and had removed just six words – fibre, lynch, agora, pupal, slave and wench – likely because they may have caused offence.

“They added no new words,” he said. “They also removed some possible words from the dictionary of guesses – again, mostly things that might offend.”

Andersen said that while his findings show that the publication did not make the game harder, people’s feelings that the game “feels harder” are valid.

“This is a hard sequence of words in both original Wordle and NYT Wordle,” he added, explaining that recent days had more repeated letters and uses of the letter “u”.

He also pointed out how adapting to Wordle’s new platform could be affecting how well people play.

“Your symptoms are valid for other reasons: The NYT version of Wordle loads more slowly, because the page has gotten larger. Even small reductions in responsiveness reduces people’s perception of games,” he said.

“The font changed! The layout got wider. This can have a big effect for people who play on a laptop or desktop.”

Andersen also provided an explanation as to why Wordle 241 gave users two different words, agora and aroma.

This is because NYT had removed agora from its list, but the change had not been reflected in all players’ browsers.

When asked by one Twitter user why she was able to play the word “agora”, Andersen said: “Some people are still having the old version, most likely to happen if you’ve left it open in a browser tab and not closed it/force refreshed it since the [NYT] acquisition,” he said.

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Please enter a valid email
Please enter a valid email
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Please enter your first name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
Please enter your last name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
You must be over 18 years old to register
You must be over 18 years old to register
Opt-out-policy
You can opt-out at any time by signing in to your account to manage your preferences. Each email has a link to unsubscribe.

By clicking ‘Create my account’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Join our new commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in