Firefox Add-on ScribeFire – Screaming Buskids

I’ve installed a Firefox add-on that lets you blog from anywhere without having to go through a tedious login, so maybe I’ll start updating again!

But I doubt I’ll keep the old format, it was getting to be a hassle to cut an paste every time. I think I’ll just play it by ear for the most part.

Today’s mini review:

Screaming kids on the bus!

Verdict – 0/10 – They both look like chubby little boys, but one is a chubby little girl (or a boy named Melissa)! Who can control them? Certainly not their father.

Videogame Reviews

It’s so meta right now.

Videogame reviews are a joke. Ha ha ha. Being a person with a passion for the games industry, it’s difficult to watch as year after year no advances are made in the videogame review formula. Some surface issues include:

• A review is not a list of features.
• A review is not a synopsis of the storyline.
• A review cannot be boiled down to “buy it” or “don’t buy it.”
• Reviews don’t have to be written so that a 10 year old can understand it, especially if it’s for a Mature rated game.
• Reviews for ‘Mature’ rates games should not be listed on the same review areas right next to the ‘Kids’ titles. No wonder there’s been such a problem with keeping minors form purchasing violent games (the film industry is actually much worse with this, but video games get the blame.)
• Reviews should not be ranked out of 10 if reviewers give bad games 5’s, good games 7’s, groundbreaking games 9.8’s, and unplayable pieces of garbage (literally so buggy that they should not have been released as a consumer product) 3 to 5. It’s okay to be a little harsher! Or just keep doing what you’re doing and subtract 5 from every score and call it out of 5.

This is all fairly basic things that other media have long taken into account, and have been mentioned in other deconstructions of the videogame review. A review is a critical look at the content, the message, and yes, the style, the features, and the plot, but this means looking beyond “the plot doesn’t make a lot of sense, but the graphics are so good you won’t care!” Why doesn’t the plot make sense? In this case the reviewer has only done half the work, offering no examples and assuming that everyone prefers pretty graphics to content. This also occurs in movie reviews, but this is usually the lower end of the spectrum (tellingly, the movie reviews written by videogame review sources.) Of course it’s a fine line between spoiling something and offering a critical view, but I’m sure the writers out there can manage.

(edit: The opposite of this is equally irritating, where a reviewer is so blasé and “unbiased” about the game they’re reviewing that they make observations like “If you liked the game before this one in the series, you may find that you like this one too” or “If you like games in this style, you may like this game.” Thanks a lot. That really told me a lot about the game. )

There’s a few other problems that bother me even more, and they aren’t the same as the surface issues listed above. These are deeper issues to do with the writing itself. They’re not as easy to fix, because not everyone may benefit from their implementation, only those concerned with how videogames are affecting culture, society, children, adults, thought patterns, learning potential, the past and the future will benefit. Which is to say, everyone.

• Games aren’t deconstructed to find what core skills and specific knowledge they teach. Even if game developers aren’t trying to teach something (they should be), people will always be taking something away from the game, no matter how trivial it seems. I would like to see more exploration on what games are teaching. I think it would allow parents to make more informed choices about games to let their kids play. It would also point out stagnation in the industry, and allow developers reason to explore new vistas beyond a very western “good vs evil; let’s have a war.” I think we’ve learned all we need to there.
• Themes aren’t often expressed in video game reviews. This is very important in books, movies, comics, and many other mediums, but I don’t remember ever seeing an exploration on the themes presented in “Ratchet & Clank: Up Your Arsenal.” In the same way you probably won’t see anyone spending time analyzing “Not Another Teen Movie” maybe some video games don’t deserve this treatment, but I think more than only the most artistic games deserve some analysis. Sure we could all write about “Shadow of the Colossus” forever, but why not write about the themes of abandonment, paternity, and friendship presented in “StarFox 64?”
• Games are open to interpretation. Tying in to the last note, games can mean what you believe them to mean, as long as you can back yourself up within reason. Fans spend years debating the meaning of every chapter of the “Metal Gear Solid” saga, but in my memory this is about the only game dissected in this way. Is it because it’s one of a very few post-modern games? That certainly makes it more ambiguous and easy to speculate about. Maybe Sonic the Hedgehog is a metaphor for progress: we CAN return order and stability to the world, we CAN stop pollution and damage to the environment, but the solution is to plow forward at breakneck speed until a final solution becomes clear! Anyone who says that games are too shallow to be interpreted in this way, I’ll poke your eye out. Even A. A. Milne’s “Winnie the Pooh” is open to interpretation, and that’s “kid stuff,” right?
• Perhaps most importantly, reviewers need to start asking “What does this game do for videogames?” I think it may be important to begin shunning games that are derivative, play on shock factor, or aren’t socially responsible. But that’s just me. In any case, videogames need to be analyzed in a way that can determine if they validate videogames as a medium. Again, personally I don’t think videogames need validation, but the rest of the world’s not there yet. This is common in other fields of art, like Music or Visual Art, some works are credited with moving their art forwards, attaining new heights and subsequently inspiring others.
• Games reviewers need to spend more time researching WHO made each game, who directed it, who are the lead artists, who wrote the score, etc. Beyond a very select few “videogame celebrities” known only to those very close to the industry, people outside have very little to go on when purchasing a new game. Unlike comics, novels, movies, art, music, every other medium of art imaginable, videogames exist in a vacuum. Despite the huge amount of people who contribute to each title, none of them are given credit, except in the (often skip-able) credit sequence. Attaching a name to a media allows consumers to make a more educated choice, as with movies. If you liked “The Departed” you might like “Raging Bull”, because Scorsese directed them both. This sort of referal system doesn’t exist in the video game industry. I think it’s important to a medium’s image, as well as relatability.

I don’t think arguments like “No one wants this, because there’s no demand” don’t stand. People never know what they want until it’s put in front of them. Gamers are getting older, and whether they’re going to keep playing or not depends heavily on the content being presented. If the reviews, and the content of the games themselves can’t mature with the population then people can’t be blamed for losing interest. Some would argue that it’s only natural that people lose interest in video games as they get older; games are for kids, and are just a meaningless pastime, vapid entertainment. Sadly, I’d agree for the most part. Maybe people need a new way to think about video games. A heavyhanded analysis of “Super Paper Mario” might allow someone who was previously uninterested to enjoy it on a deeper level than they initially thought possible, but this isn’t only the reviewer’s task. Games themselves need to become more than just entertainment if they want to stay relevant.

CONCEPT: 3/5 – Current reviews at least allow some exploration into what a game is about, which is better than nothing.

INNOVATION: 1/5 – I have to admit, I’ve stopped reading reviews altogether because they don’t hold the information that I am interested in. I couldn’t care less about level 3’s killer boss fight. Let me find that on my own. Tell me what the game’s ABOUT.

SATISFACTION: 1/5 – Not a whole lot of satisfaction going on here, hence the spiel.

EXECUTION: 2/5 – Well, they put words into lines called sentences that convey some information.

FUN FACTOR: 1/5 – So un-fun that I stopped reading them entirely.

OVERALL: 2/10 – Urgh. I’m not blaming any one person or publication for what I perceive as these problems, but I think we can work together to give videogames the intellectual respect they need.

Answer to Three Questions in Video Form – Update 1

Now I’m part of “this thing”

Updated for Awesome! (below)

I’m not happy with this. Let’s look more closely. In realizing the full potential of my camera I’ve made a video of myself answering three questions that Gus posed to me. Now, in writing about it, I think I’ve become very self referential and irritating. Who cares what I think? I don’t care what other people who post all manners of videos on YouTube think, especially when they’re posting their personal thoughts on other videos. I even feel annoyed that I had to use the word “YouTube” in a post on this blog. Now I’ve used the work “blog”! Augh! This is snowballing out of control.

The video itself is alright, there’s an unpleasant hum throughout, but that seems to be the standard for small digital camera videos. Visual quality is okay. I’m also irritated that just like everyone else out there, I did this at my desk. It does offer a window into the marvels of my desk, however. The fact that I have teeth strewn about it is worrisome.

I’m a little sad that (even now) I’m not talking about ideas as much as I’d like, and instead talk about events as they reflect on me. This is not how I want to write most of the time, and I try to stay away from it. Although this is a journal of sorts, and the video itself appends the journal, I would rather have at least some depth. To write inspired by daily events, but not actually reference myself, or perhaps only in passing to allow the reader to imagine the process of my day to day life. The video does not help this, it’s a depiction OF my life, although not an accurate one because while it was ad-libbed I was still acting.

Anyway, enjoy, hope you find it amusing!

CONCEPT: 3/5 – Not so bad, seemed like a good idea at the time!

INNOVATION: 2/5 – Everyone and their dog AND their dog’s dog are making these things it seems like.

SATISFACTION: 5/5 – Out of all categories I’m probably least ’satisfied’.

EXECUTION: 3/5 – Very little work was actually done. I chose to leave my hand reaching out to turn off the camera in because it was easier.

FUN FACTOR: 3/5 – It was fun!

OVERALL: 7/10 – I’m too hard on myself, it was pretty fun to make.

Bonus illustration of situations discussed herein by Miss S. Blakey!

Emo Photos

How to show your true self with a digital camera, step by step

If you’ve ever wanted a picture that captures how you really feel inside, something that may be too complicated for words and needs to be seen, here’s how to take your own emo photos. I learned this from a friend today; previously I was not able to express myself in this way.

1. Get a digital camera.
2. Find a setting that’s not too cliche, but still ‘indie’.
3. Take a picture from above your head, at a 45 degree angle from the front of your nose. (a friend can make this easier)
4. Look into the camera and take the picture.

Extra points for: Asymetrical hair, the amount of the colour black in the photo, how high up you can look without moving your head.

Things to watch out for: Don’t take the picture in a mirror. If necessary, use the mirror to look in the viewfinder and take the picture that way. Seriously, this isn’t a joke people. How hard is this to figure out.

Examples:

WRONG.

Almost there… Not looking into the camera, and the angle is wrong. Also, you’re in a washroom. Are those your parent’s towels?

Done! Note the look of yearning to be free, and the Goonies poster.

CONCEPT: 2/5 – You can’t express your feelings with images! That makes no sense! Better stick to your blogging.

INNOVATION: 1/5 – myspace.com

SATISFACTION: 3/5 – It’s not really that bad of an angle to take a picture at, especially if you’re tall. It’ll let people see what the top of your head looks like (they are wondering).

EXECUTION: 4/5 – Stick to these simple rules and you’ll do fine.

FUN FACTOR: 4/5 – Can be pretty fun. Get a bunch of friends together and spend the evening taking mopey pictures of each other and laughing.

OVERALL: 3/10 – If you’re under 15 or over 25, this is inappropriate behaviour. Actually, no one is exempt.

Commenting On Posts

Try it, you’ll like it

Since I’ve never done it myself, I’m not sure the procedure. I assume it’s fairly easy, but I think commenting on a post requires clicking on the COMMENT thingy above each one.

Go on, it’s okay. I like hearing what people think. If you ever left a comment and were sad because I didn’t reply, please don’t be. I haven’t replied to any of the comments left on the site. What do you think, would it be better if I did? I think follow ups may make this seem like a more legitimate enterprise. Would you be more interested in commenting if there were FABULOUS PRIZES involved?

Leaving comments is cool, and lets me see who’s reading the site. It also gives me valuable counter information to my normal ranting, which I enjoy. I’ve decided to embrace critiscism whenever possible, because if you can’t take it you shouldn’t dish it out. So correct grammar, point out flaws in arguments, and generally get all up/grill etc.

CONCEPT: 4/5 – Leaving a comment is a cool way to let people know you’re cool!

INNOVATION: 4/5 – There’s still time, you can be one of the first.

SATISFACTION: 4/5 – The only thing more satisfying is passing a law you penned. When was the last time you did that?

EXECUTION: YOU/5 – This, gentle reader, I leave to your discretion.

FUN FACTOR: 3/5 – Reading’s more fun than contributing.

OVERALL: 7/10 – Aw, you don’t have to if you don’t want to.

Weekend Warzone #4 – Dance Party, Crazy Times, Awesome Town

Dance Party

I’m not sure I’m familiar with this concept. I assume it’s a party in which dancing is mandatory, or at least encouraged. I’ve never known anyone who’s thrown a party where they explicitly state that people must dance. In fact, most of the parties I go to very little dancing occurs. There’s always those parts where a song you like starts playing, and you dance for a few seconds to celebrate, but I’ve never danced to and entire song.

There are, however, Those Girls. Those Girls are the two girls who may or may not be drunk, but begin dancing with each other in an area of the party. Those Girls don’t always go to parties, and sometimes one goes and is just That Girl, but without someone to dance with That Girl she usually stops much sooner than Those Girls would. Those Girls can dance just forever. They don’t need to have people watching them, but they will dance out of your way if you need to get by. They never miss a beat either. Later they go home and sleep together.

I think a dance party might be fun. You’d have to prepare with water and things, and wear dancable clothing. Clear a space on the floor as well, or people will trip on the shoes by the entry way and fall onto the coffee table covered in beer cans. That’s a mess no one wants to watch. Except it makes a great YouTube.

CONCEPT: 4/5 – Good idea guys! I hope people come and actually dance, because otherwise it sort of ruins the concept.

INNOVATION: 2/5 – People been dancin’ since before your daddy’s daddy. If you can get everyone to dance though, you’re a master of innovation.

SATISFACTION: 2/5 – Often people break the rules and don’t dance enough. A fully satisfying dance party would have NON. STOP. DANCING.

EXECUTION: 3/5 – A party is a party, and a party is good, no matter the outcome. Unless someone loses an eye. Then it’s not a party, it’s Your Funeral.

FUN FACTOR: 5/5 – Always.

OVERALL: 8/10 – Let’s have one!

Crazy Times

There’s bound to be some arguement over crazy times. Some people like them, and some people hate them. The nature of the craziness and the time is what can make them good or bad. The times I’m talking about here are the times so crazy with your friends, you start having a dance party… in [insert crazy area]!!! This can be something like your mouth, a beach, a hot tub, a car, the highway, a sushi bar, or an entire summer. Crazy times are flexible.

Everyone’s just balls to the wall happy, and they’re not afraid to say it. Crazy times!

CONCEPT: 5/5 – It’s awesome town to have crazy times.

INNOVATION: 4/5 – Crazy times are always different, because by definition they must be spontaneous.

SATISFACTION: 4/5 – Extremely so. The only bad thing is when they end or you have to go to bed. Then you might be a little upset.

EXECUTION: 3/5 – Usually pretty good, but sometimes they can end prematurely, or turn sour when that guy no one likes shows up.

FUN FACTOR: 5/5 – Pretty much the best. These are times you talk about years down the road. “Remember that crazy time?” Yes, everyone does.

OVERALL: 9/10 – Wheee!

Awesome Town

A pitch for a TV show made by the guys from The Lonely Island, Awesome Town is a comedy. While they started out slowly, making videos for fun, Andy/Ardy, Jorma (YORMA), and Akiva/Kiv, are now starring on and writing SNL, and are responsible for most of the entertaining skits. Actually, that was last year, I’m not sure if they’re still around on there. But they probably are.

Awesome Town is the last bastion of hope for humanity against poverty, disease, and war. It’s a pretty funny place too. Anything I could try to say about it won’t have the same effect as just watching it. If there’s a chance you missed it in the last, oh, five years on the internet, take 20-15 minutes and laugh a bit. The shorter cut is the funnier one, I think, and doesn’t have the painful studio audience bits to grit your teeth through. It does have one brief scene of mild pornography used comedically, but that could be either an attraction or a deterant depending on your tastes.

CONCEPT: 4/5 – These guys are creative and funny. Awesome town would be a place I’d like to visit every week if I could. Instead we get this one shining episode.

INNOVATION: 3/5 – The comedy is unpredictable, and they got good chops.

SATISFACTION: 3/5 – I’m sorry there’s not more episodes is all. Left me wanting more.

EXECUTION: 4/5 – A surprisingly high level of production.

FUN FACTOR: 5/5 -Fun all the way!

OVERALL: 7/10 – Well executed. I’m glad they’re in the media moreso now.

Verdict - Crazy Times! These times last a lifetime of memories, and in the end that’s all that’s important.

3D-Stereogram Tetris

Magic Eye mixed with Tetrominoes

Someone gone made a stereogram version of everyone’s favourite blocks-in-a-well game, Tetris. This seems to me to be a bad idea, but a great concept. I’ll explain in the first ever PROS vs CONS post!

PROS:

1. It’s Tetris, the most played video game of all time.
2. It’s creative.
3. It’s art.

CONS:

1. It’s a stereogram. No one actually likes Magic Eye. I mean, maybe in 1996, but as I mentioned earlier, Time Travel is not possible.
2. Tetris can be frustrating, no need to make it moreso.
3. Not everyone can even see stereograms, especially moving ones depicting gameplay.
4. Eye strain is not a thing I tend to associate with a good time.
5. During play, my eyes tend to focus back on the screen when I move them. It’s hard to maintain the 3D image when there’s movement.
6. The gameplay isn’t even all there. The blocks are not entirely visible when they first appear at the top of the screen, so the player has to wait for them to scroll down once or twice to see what the block actually is, and pressing down (to try to alleviate the problem) immediately lands the block. This is typically what the UP button is used for in other Tetris games, but UP is instead used for rotate. Huh?

Fortunately, I can see stereograms fairly easily and consistantly, and had a go at playing. I enjoyed one user’s comment that the boss wouldn’t know that you were playing a video game if he saw this on your screen at work. Well, perhaps YOUR boss is completely computer illiterate, but most people understand that if you’re only using the arrow keys and are staring vacantly at a blurry picture of nothing you’re probably not working.

CONCEPT: 3/5 -Not bad as a show of skill, but lacking as a game.

INNOVATION: 4/5 – I’ve never seen a moving, much less interactive, stereogram before.

SATISFACTION: 2/5 – The gameplay is all garbled, but being able to see what I’m doing is rewarding.

EXECUTION: 3/5 – Far from perfect, some of the 3D effects stray outwards from the blocks, and the controls and gameplay quirks bring it down.

FUN FACTOR: 2/5 – Less fun than normal type tetris.

OVERALL: 6/10 – A nice idea executed a bit too roughly to score higher.