The article focuses on a society of blue squares and yellow triangles which have slight personal biases against diversity, which leads to social segregation.

The article was well-received, especially its visual and playable aspects, and was called a useful educational tool for topics like racial segregation.

[5][8] The article applies ideas from game theorist and economist Thomas Schelling's 1971 paper Dynamic Models of Segregation.

[14] Case said that there was "an effort made to keep players from being scared off by the big stuff"; thus, the article includes jokes, slang, and "cute and friendly shapes".

But I now realize that not only do small local efforts help, but it's the only way any real, lasting societal change is made.The article was released in December 2014; Hart noted that "matters of systematic bias [were] even more topical [at the moment]",[5] and Case said, "There's a huge gap between the racial proportions of the police force and the neighborhoods they're policing, that both reinforces and results from racial tensions.

"[8] Case said that Schelling's models could be identified in that "a black officer [had led] the police force one night" amidst the Ferguson unrest.

[7] The art and code of Parable of the Polygons was made open-source, being released under the Creative Commons Zero public domain license.

[15] A remixed version which includes a green pentagon was made the same year and is featured at the bottom of the article: Several playtesters suggested more than two groups for the later simulations, and the authors wanted to include the green pentagon in the source code and on the bottom of the page to reinforce that race or gender aren't binary, but didn't want to complicate the model.

Kill Screen's Jess Joho wrote, "Parable of the Polygons asks you to tackle Schelling's concepts in a way only a game could.

[2] Laura Moss of Mother Nature Network said that it "accurately illustrates racially segregated neighborhoods", and noted that the article illustrates "Schelling's three major findings": the effect of slight individual bias, the starting game state and the reluctancy to become more diverse, and the necessity of intervention "in creating and maintaining diversity".

[10] Joho said that "demonstrating a difficult reality while still maintaining a sense of actionable hope" was the article's "greatest achievement by far".

[8] Gamasutra's Phill Cameron praised the article for using triangles and squares and effectively dissociating itself from "the prejudices of real life".

[2] Joho wrote that the article is "careful not to throw blame around", and that it constantly emphasizes that personal biases might be "unexamined, unintentional, or even unconscious".

"[5] Amanda Montañez wrote in a Scientific American blog that the shapes assume that "their individual preference for diversity is sufficient to propel their society toward integration", but that "the social system in which they operate prohibits it".

[12] Montañez said that "true progress requires a more active, dramatic shift than expected" and that, in the article, "the complacent squares and triangles must abandon their preconceptions about the nature of 'shapism' and adopt a new, activist stance on integration".