I sincerely doubt they need the plug, but a couple of months ago, while looking through Zero Punctuation back catalogue, I came across 'Unskippable'.
Quickly, let's backtrack. Before I knew my left hand from my right there were a series of TV shows in America (they never got exported to Australia, I think) called Mystery Science Theater 3000. Through the magic of Youtube, about a year ago I managed to watch what is affectionately called "A shitload" of their episodes. It was great fun, and whenever I watch a bad movie I always now get the urge to give it MST3K commentary (however I imagine my ad-libbed version would be far less amusing. Everything's funnier with robots). The general idea is that three characters sit in the corner of the movie screen (as if you were sitting behind them at the cinemas) and talk smack about the movie. Simple concept, great execution.
Back onto Unskippable, when I stumbled upon this I shouted with joy and thrust my arms in the air triumphantly, as if I had achieved some kind of victory, rather then just randomly found this. Unskippable is MST3K done to game intro CGI movies.
Here's a link to their catalogue.
Something you may notice is that their most recent video is "Metal Gear Solid 4: Part 1". Yes, that's right, they're dedicating five weeks of videos to Metal Gear Solid. I gave up on MGS after the first game, but even I find this stuff hilarious. Mainly because I heard of how bad MGS cutscenes were in the past, but now I can see for myself why they're so bad.
Showing posts with label Geekiness. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Geekiness. Show all posts
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Sunday, August 2, 2009
Ultimate showdown of all time
Having just watched Godzilla: Final Wars, I am left with many questions. Many, many questions, of which I will receive no answers.
However there is one answer I will definitely never receive, which upsets me.
If Godzilla fought Superman, who would win?
I'm trying to imagine it, and it is AWESOME, but I can't picture who wins. Let's try to reason this out. First, the ground rules
1. Godzilla is moving to attack Metropolis, but not there yet, so the fight is happening in a relatively sparse area, but with enough debris around to make it interesting. This means Superman HAS to fight him (to protect the city) but Godzilla can't get an unfair advantage by inadvertently threatening people Superman cares for, thus distracting him (E.G. Lois Lane is in danger... again)
2. Godzilla is pissed at Superman and trying to kill him, rather then just ignoring him and moving on.
3. There are no reinforcements on either side.
4. The story is being written by a neutral party, so no vested interest from either DC or Toho.
GODZILLA:
PROS:
- Enormous Strength. As strong as Superman is, I think current presentation of the man of Steel (rather then the bullshit "I'll spin the earth backwards and reverse time" thing) shows him as incredibly strong, but not Godzilla strong. I would go on record that I think Godzilla is stronger then Superman, and could he get a good grip on him it is entirely possible Godzilla has the strength to crush him to death.
- Radioactive breath. While Superman is probably agile to avoid this while flying, at least once this could be sprung on him as a surprise.
- Immense toughness. Godzilla is ridiculously tough, easily tougher then any other villain Superman has faced.
CONS:
- Slow. While his large gait means Godzilla can move pretty fast, Godzilla would not be capable of the kind of rapid self correcting swing needed to swat a human-sized target in mid air while it's flying. It would be like a human trying to hit a fly. Sure some people can catch them, but it's as much luck as it is skill, and you can swing all day without connecting.
- Large target(s). Superman could never miss Godzilla. He's friggin' massive. More importantly, let's assume that Godzilla, like is the case for all animals ever, has relatively sensitive eyes. Those alone are larger then a human, and as such easy targets for Supe's.
- No Kryptonite. That seems to be the only way to beat Superman these days.
SUPERMAN:
PROS:
- Strength. As I said, I don't think Superman is as strong as Godzilla, that said, he IS very strong. He could easily start using abandoned tanks (or equivalent weigh objects) as projectiles by flinging the damn things at Godzilla, who would have a hard time dodging them.
- Speed. Superman is far, far faster then Godzilla. Godzilla would have a genuinely tough time hitting a flying Superman, either with swinging fists, tail, or radioactive breath.
- Heat Vision. Let me start off by saying I do not believe that Superman's heat vision could hurt Godzilla traditionally. However, a blast of that to the eyes would slow ANY giant Monster down.
CONS:
- Not strong enough. Superman is strong and with a myriad of offensive weapons at his disposal. I do not believe either any of them, or he himself, is powerful enough to take down Godzilla. Hell, I don't even think the Hulk, jumping at full strength at Godzilla's head, punching at full strength on the way through, could knock Godzilla over, let alone Superman.
- Not enough leverage. It's shown in plenty of Godzilla movies the most damaging way to hit Godzilla is to throw him around or knock him down. I honestly don't believe Superman could pull that off. The only way I could see that working is if he, in a matter of seconds, flew past at the same angle and hit Godzilla over and over again on the way past. However, that opens him up to a Radioactive breathing to the face.
Y'see, this is my problem. In the vision I paint above, Superman cannot really hurt Godzilla, while Godzilla cannot hit Superman enough to really hurt him. A full blown stalemate, which is as satisfying as a carelessly abandoned blowjob.
However there is one answer I will definitely never receive, which upsets me.
If Godzilla fought Superman, who would win?
I'm trying to imagine it, and it is AWESOME, but I can't picture who wins. Let's try to reason this out. First, the ground rules
1. Godzilla is moving to attack Metropolis, but not there yet, so the fight is happening in a relatively sparse area, but with enough debris around to make it interesting. This means Superman HAS to fight him (to protect the city) but Godzilla can't get an unfair advantage by inadvertently threatening people Superman cares for, thus distracting him (E.G. Lois Lane is in danger... again)
2. Godzilla is pissed at Superman and trying to kill him, rather then just ignoring him and moving on.
3. There are no reinforcements on either side.
4. The story is being written by a neutral party, so no vested interest from either DC or Toho.
GODZILLA:
PROS:
- Enormous Strength. As strong as Superman is, I think current presentation of the man of Steel (rather then the bullshit "I'll spin the earth backwards and reverse time" thing) shows him as incredibly strong, but not Godzilla strong. I would go on record that I think Godzilla is stronger then Superman, and could he get a good grip on him it is entirely possible Godzilla has the strength to crush him to death.
- Radioactive breath. While Superman is probably agile to avoid this while flying, at least once this could be sprung on him as a surprise.
- Immense toughness. Godzilla is ridiculously tough, easily tougher then any other villain Superman has faced.
CONS:
- Slow. While his large gait means Godzilla can move pretty fast, Godzilla would not be capable of the kind of rapid self correcting swing needed to swat a human-sized target in mid air while it's flying. It would be like a human trying to hit a fly. Sure some people can catch them, but it's as much luck as it is skill, and you can swing all day without connecting.
- Large target(s). Superman could never miss Godzilla. He's friggin' massive. More importantly, let's assume that Godzilla, like is the case for all animals ever, has relatively sensitive eyes. Those alone are larger then a human, and as such easy targets for Supe's.
- No Kryptonite. That seems to be the only way to beat Superman these days.
SUPERMAN:
PROS:
- Strength. As I said, I don't think Superman is as strong as Godzilla, that said, he IS very strong. He could easily start using abandoned tanks (or equivalent weigh objects) as projectiles by flinging the damn things at Godzilla, who would have a hard time dodging them.
- Speed. Superman is far, far faster then Godzilla. Godzilla would have a genuinely tough time hitting a flying Superman, either with swinging fists, tail, or radioactive breath.
- Heat Vision. Let me start off by saying I do not believe that Superman's heat vision could hurt Godzilla traditionally. However, a blast of that to the eyes would slow ANY giant Monster down.
CONS:
- Not strong enough. Superman is strong and with a myriad of offensive weapons at his disposal. I do not believe either any of them, or he himself, is powerful enough to take down Godzilla. Hell, I don't even think the Hulk, jumping at full strength at Godzilla's head, punching at full strength on the way through, could knock Godzilla over, let alone Superman.
- Not enough leverage. It's shown in plenty of Godzilla movies the most damaging way to hit Godzilla is to throw him around or knock him down. I honestly don't believe Superman could pull that off. The only way I could see that working is if he, in a matter of seconds, flew past at the same angle and hit Godzilla over and over again on the way past. However, that opens him up to a Radioactive breathing to the face.
Y'see, this is my problem. In the vision I paint above, Superman cannot really hurt Godzilla, while Godzilla cannot hit Superman enough to really hurt him. A full blown stalemate, which is as satisfying as a carelessly abandoned blowjob.
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
No 40K for me
Over the past few weeks I've been developing a burgeoning interest in Warhammer 40,000. Specifically in the background, which had such potential to be cool, but does seem to be squandered.
To summarise my feelings about it: I believe Games Workshop is one of the more heartless companies that exist, and a large number of the people who are heavily interested in their products scare me. They are like Dungeons and Dragons fans who have put hundreds upon hundreds of dollars into a single competition for the sole purpose of beating others. Granted I'm sure there are plenty of normal, healthy fans who realise the purpose of a game is not to win, but to play, but the stories I hear (which I acknowledge will be the extreme ends of things) are not ones about normal people.
Never-the-less, in my search for SOME kind of hobby that I can do when I wish (rather then at some scheduled time of week or month) I toyed with the idea of attempting to collect, model and paint an army of these dudes.
I gave up that idea when I checked out how much it would cost.
For those not involved in this particular subculture, wargames usually function by having each unit be worth a particular points value, and players use a set points value to attempt to beat each other. This means that players will strive to collect a particular total points value worth of models. In Warhammer 40,000 (the game I was looking into) a normal points value army to build up to is 1,500-2,000 points. I calculated a sample 1,500 point army that I might use, went to the official site, and checked out how much this would cost.
$750 arse swilling dollars.
Do you have ANY idea how much alcohol I could buy with that?
Screw that, screw that royally.
I'll stick with my other hobby. It only requires 1 hand*
*I speak, of course, of reading. Only need one hand to turn the pages.
To summarise my feelings about it: I believe Games Workshop is one of the more heartless companies that exist, and a large number of the people who are heavily interested in their products scare me. They are like Dungeons and Dragons fans who have put hundreds upon hundreds of dollars into a single competition for the sole purpose of beating others. Granted I'm sure there are plenty of normal, healthy fans who realise the purpose of a game is not to win, but to play, but the stories I hear (which I acknowledge will be the extreme ends of things) are not ones about normal people.
Never-the-less, in my search for SOME kind of hobby that I can do when I wish (rather then at some scheduled time of week or month) I toyed with the idea of attempting to collect, model and paint an army of these dudes.
I gave up that idea when I checked out how much it would cost.
For those not involved in this particular subculture, wargames usually function by having each unit be worth a particular points value, and players use a set points value to attempt to beat each other. This means that players will strive to collect a particular total points value worth of models. In Warhammer 40,000 (the game I was looking into) a normal points value army to build up to is 1,500-2,000 points. I calculated a sample 1,500 point army that I might use, went to the official site, and checked out how much this would cost.
$750 arse swilling dollars.
Do you have ANY idea how much alcohol I could buy with that?
Screw that, screw that royally.
I'll stick with my other hobby. It only requires 1 hand*
*I speak, of course, of reading. Only need one hand to turn the pages.
Sunday, March 15, 2009
Watchmen comparison
You know what, I was planning out a grand discussion on the comparitive differences between the Watchmen movie and comic, but it's just too hard to do that without ruining the story for people.
So I'll just summarise my thoughts thusly.
1. It is a GOOD MOVIE. It is not a perfect movie, there is alot I would have prefered to see done differently (both to bring it a little closer to the comic, drop things that were completely unnecessary, or just improve the quality of the movie generally).
2. It needed about a third of the songs taken out. Sometimes silence says more then an 80's soundtrack does. It feels to me like the Director paid for the rights to a mess of songs, then thought they wouldn't be getting their money's worth if they didn't use them all.
3. The ending has changed, yes Watchmen fans I know, it sounds like sacrilege. But I will risk your wrath by saying: I Prefer this ending. The one in the comic feels a bit "Hey dude, fuck the what?", whereas this does feel more like a dastardly scheme with the best of intentions.
4. Nite Owl, my previously mentioned favourite character, has more characterisation in this movie. It works well, I think. Plus the actor they got for him did an amazing job in my view. He went from powerless human to powerful masked crusader very smoothly.
5. They did an admirable job of covering all the backstory, I doubt they could have done it better without tacking an extra 30 minutes on an already enormous movie, but still I get the feeling someone who'd never read the Watchmen would be a bit out of their depth.
6. They kinda give away the Silk Specter twist a little early, in my view. Anyone with half a mind could work it out well in advance of it being worked out.
7. The actor playing Rorshach did an admirable job of seeming like a threatening bastard, despite being about 5 foot 6.
8. There are alot of little hints in the movie that they not only paid tribute to some of the miniplots (the news vender and comic reading kid), but probably filmed alot more then they showed with them. I'm looking forward to the extended edition DVD (which according to rumours is going to have the Black Ship plot in it, voiced by the dude who played Leonidas from 300).
Final thoughts? I'd like to see Zack Snyder try to direct something where the entire movie hasn't already been storyboarded for him in a comic. Just for some variety.
So I'll just summarise my thoughts thusly.
1. It is a GOOD MOVIE. It is not a perfect movie, there is alot I would have prefered to see done differently (both to bring it a little closer to the comic, drop things that were completely unnecessary, or just improve the quality of the movie generally).
2. It needed about a third of the songs taken out. Sometimes silence says more then an 80's soundtrack does. It feels to me like the Director paid for the rights to a mess of songs, then thought they wouldn't be getting their money's worth if they didn't use them all.
3. The ending has changed, yes Watchmen fans I know, it sounds like sacrilege. But I will risk your wrath by saying: I Prefer this ending. The one in the comic feels a bit "Hey dude, fuck the what?", whereas this does feel more like a dastardly scheme with the best of intentions.
4. Nite Owl, my previously mentioned favourite character, has more characterisation in this movie. It works well, I think. Plus the actor they got for him did an amazing job in my view. He went from powerless human to powerful masked crusader very smoothly.
5. They did an admirable job of covering all the backstory, I doubt they could have done it better without tacking an extra 30 minutes on an already enormous movie, but still I get the feeling someone who'd never read the Watchmen would be a bit out of their depth.
6. They kinda give away the Silk Specter twist a little early, in my view. Anyone with half a mind could work it out well in advance of it being worked out.
7. The actor playing Rorshach did an admirable job of seeming like a threatening bastard, despite being about 5 foot 6.
8. There are alot of little hints in the movie that they not only paid tribute to some of the miniplots (the news vender and comic reading kid), but probably filmed alot more then they showed with them. I'm looking forward to the extended edition DVD (which according to rumours is going to have the Black Ship plot in it, voiced by the dude who played Leonidas from 300).
Final thoughts? I'd like to see Zack Snyder try to direct something where the entire movie hasn't already been storyboarded for him in a comic. Just for some variety.
Saturday, March 7, 2009
Sustainable evil
In a recent conversation with my brother we remarked upon something that's been bothering me for while. Are you familiar with Dungeons and Dragons? Passingly? Ok, near enough.
In the backstory there's this race of black skinned Elves who are evil (no racial comparisons intended by the designers... hopefully). They are evil pretty much to the last man (although considering how 99.99% of them are evil, there's a surprisingly large number of misrepresented rebels), and as such their society consists of oppression, scheming, political assassinations and vast amounts of "let's fuck over our neighbour and take their stuff". That's all well and good, it provides a good moral reason for the appropriately varied small group of elite warriors and wizards to sneak in and kill them because they're being evil and threatening, and sometimes that's GOOD for a party. No moral considerations, just "bad guys are here, stab their faces in". Oh, and they live in one of the most hostile areas of the world imaginable, where everything wants to eat everything else's faces.
However...
And this is a big BIG however...
As mentioned this is a race of Elves. In common Fantasy one of the normal aspects of Elves is that they breed very, very slowly. Maybe they're so sick of beautiful people they don't get it on much, but in general Elves breed slowly. The only reason the race doesn't die out completely is they're very good at what they do, and so don't die alot.
So a race that constantly kills each other, lives in one of the most hostile lands imaginable, and constantly tries to invade the 'good' surface world... SOMEHOW has a viable population. Call me picky, but this makes no sense. In general if a species is constantly getting picked off, the only way to avoid that is to have LOTS of babies, which it's already established Elves don't do. As an evil race of bastards, this is completely unsustainable.
It is then my brother came up with one of the greatest terms ever.
S.E.R.
Sustainable Evil Race.
A Sustainable Evil Race is one in which the population will never fall below a certain line of sustainable growth, no matter how many of them are killed by "heroic Adventueres" walking in, stabbing them and taking their shit, or the elements, or their environment, or even each other. Orcs and Goblins are normally a good example of this, since there seem to be so many of the bastards you couldn't stop them from showing up, even if you wanted to. Drow and other evil elven-like races? Not so much. Kill a couple and it'd be a genuine blow to the race. Kill an army of races like Kobolds and they'll be up and at'em again in a couple of years.
So, what is required for a sustainably evil race? Let's introduce some faux maths.
B = Birth Rate, how many will be born over a given time period
S = Percent who survive to 'fighting' age, the age they can fight alongside other evil buggers.
E = Environmental dangers, how many will die because of their surroundings over a given time period
I = Infighting dangers, how many will die because of they are all arseholes over a given time period
H = Heroic dangers, how many will die because of "heroes" killing them and taking their stuff over a given time period
L = Locations, how far spread around the world they are
(B x S - E - I - H)^L
An Example or two:
Drow have a low Birth Rate, but most of then survive because of protection by their family. Their environmental dangers are enormous, as is the infighting. Heroes aren't TOO common, but common enough to be a threat. While the Underdark (where they live) is meant to be enormous, it's also meant to be very inhospitable, and as such there aren't too many Drow settlements. As such, it's quite easy to imagine the Drow are NOT a sustainable evil population. If they didn't have as much infighting or heroic encounters it's not hard to imagine they'd have a greater chance of survival.
Goblins breed like rabbit hermaphrodites, alot of them probably die before reaching 'fighting' age because of low resources. They're the bottom of the food chain and bicker among themselves all the time, as well as having enormous problems with huge numbers of threatening heroes. But, and a big but, they are EVERYWHERE. The fact they breed like it's going out of fashion coupled with the fact they're all over the place means the best you can possibly do is wipe out a few tribes, and even then the other tribes will have bred enough in that time to make up for it. Goblins ARE a sustainably evil population.
What's the lesson here kids? If a race is going to have massive infighting, be evil enough to want to invade everywhere, and have major problems with the tough environment, they're going to need to breed enormously just to keep the numbers up. Remember that when you're designing stuff.
In the backstory there's this race of black skinned Elves who are evil (no racial comparisons intended by the designers... hopefully). They are evil pretty much to the last man (although considering how 99.99% of them are evil, there's a surprisingly large number of misrepresented rebels), and as such their society consists of oppression, scheming, political assassinations and vast amounts of "let's fuck over our neighbour and take their stuff". That's all well and good, it provides a good moral reason for the appropriately varied small group of elite warriors and wizards to sneak in and kill them because they're being evil and threatening, and sometimes that's GOOD for a party. No moral considerations, just "bad guys are here, stab their faces in". Oh, and they live in one of the most hostile areas of the world imaginable, where everything wants to eat everything else's faces.
However...
And this is a big BIG however...
As mentioned this is a race of Elves. In common Fantasy one of the normal aspects of Elves is that they breed very, very slowly. Maybe they're so sick of beautiful people they don't get it on much, but in general Elves breed slowly. The only reason the race doesn't die out completely is they're very good at what they do, and so don't die alot.
So a race that constantly kills each other, lives in one of the most hostile lands imaginable, and constantly tries to invade the 'good' surface world... SOMEHOW has a viable population. Call me picky, but this makes no sense. In general if a species is constantly getting picked off, the only way to avoid that is to have LOTS of babies, which it's already established Elves don't do. As an evil race of bastards, this is completely unsustainable.
It is then my brother came up with one of the greatest terms ever.
S.E.R.
Sustainable Evil Race.
A Sustainable Evil Race is one in which the population will never fall below a certain line of sustainable growth, no matter how many of them are killed by "heroic Adventueres" walking in, stabbing them and taking their shit, or the elements, or their environment, or even each other. Orcs and Goblins are normally a good example of this, since there seem to be so many of the bastards you couldn't stop them from showing up, even if you wanted to. Drow and other evil elven-like races? Not so much. Kill a couple and it'd be a genuine blow to the race. Kill an army of races like Kobolds and they'll be up and at'em again in a couple of years.
So, what is required for a sustainably evil race? Let's introduce some faux maths.
B = Birth Rate, how many will be born over a given time period
S = Percent who survive to 'fighting' age, the age they can fight alongside other evil buggers.
E = Environmental dangers, how many will die because of their surroundings over a given time period
I = Infighting dangers, how many will die because of they are all arseholes over a given time period
H = Heroic dangers, how many will die because of "heroes" killing them and taking their stuff over a given time period
L = Locations, how far spread around the world they are
(B x S - E - I - H)^L
An Example or two:
Drow have a low Birth Rate, but most of then survive because of protection by their family. Their environmental dangers are enormous, as is the infighting. Heroes aren't TOO common, but common enough to be a threat. While the Underdark (where they live) is meant to be enormous, it's also meant to be very inhospitable, and as such there aren't too many Drow settlements. As such, it's quite easy to imagine the Drow are NOT a sustainable evil population. If they didn't have as much infighting or heroic encounters it's not hard to imagine they'd have a greater chance of survival.
Goblins breed like rabbit hermaphrodites, alot of them probably die before reaching 'fighting' age because of low resources. They're the bottom of the food chain and bicker among themselves all the time, as well as having enormous problems with huge numbers of threatening heroes. But, and a big but, they are EVERYWHERE. The fact they breed like it's going out of fashion coupled with the fact they're all over the place means the best you can possibly do is wipe out a few tribes, and even then the other tribes will have bred enough in that time to make up for it. Goblins ARE a sustainably evil population.
What's the lesson here kids? If a race is going to have massive infighting, be evil enough to want to invade everywhere, and have major problems with the tough environment, they're going to need to breed enormously just to keep the numbers up. Remember that when you're designing stuff.
Friday, March 6, 2009
I need to play less Armored Core 4
I've already mentioned my love for the Armoured Core series of games stems from the fact I'm actually GOOD at them. It's one of my few games I can perform at a high level at. Granted I'm not a superhuman as some people seem to be (search for AC4 missions on Youtube, there are some ANIMALS on there), but I can hold my own, and given enough practice and time to design a giant robot I can take out most threats.
Case in point: There is a mission in the game where, in normal difficulty, you and two other Armoured Cores (both of them horribly designed) are up against a force of four elite ACs. You're outnumbered, outgunned and outclassed. It took me a few goes and a bit of tweaking of my AC, but I could beat it in the end. Then after finishing the (very short) game I decided to give the Hard version of this mission a try, since apparently you get special items for doing so. Now just so you know, when you do the hard version of a mission in this game it isn't a matter of "hey hey, enemies have higher accuracy", it's a genuinely redesigned mission with more enemies and less allies. Sometimes it's not much harder (a little extra health on the lone enemy), but other times it's genuinely WAY more difficult. In this case it was the latter.
For this mission I had to take on, by myself four weakened Armoured Cores. That is a BIG deal. It took me nine tries, and three difference ACs, but in the end I finally came up with a design that I believed could do it. First time through this final design (The Sledge MK IV) ripped them apart, barely lowering me to half health in doing so.
I had a minor panic attack when I realised this was the game I was "that" guy for. The one game where I rip through things, while normal people who play it struggle.
Then I pushed it aside and dedicated myself to that which takes up WELL over half the gameplay for me. It's not the actual missions, or the simulation/arena stuff, oh no. It's my holy grail.
Customisability.
Say it with me brothers!
Customisability.
Say it for me sisters, in your sexy voices!
Customisability.
I will grant you, the majority of customisation in AC4 is not truly game-altering, the most you can possibly do is change primary three factors
1. How much you can be shot
2. How fast you jet around
3. What guns you shoot
Other alterations are majoritively cosmetic, with their influences being secondary considerations at best. But still, it's enough for me. Even if it is just window dressing to change my ACs head to another design that looks better and offers 1% better armour, at the cost of 1% extra weight... It's still wonderful.
The reason for that is the ability to look back at that which you create and say, even if it has likely been designed by someone else somewhere in the world:
"This is MY Armoured Core 4 design, my NEXT. There may be other ones like it, but this one is mine."
For me it's like the love a car nut has for his vehicle, constantly tinkering with it and trying to get that LITTLE bit extra out of the little bastard. If I'm being honest with myself, I know the tiny alterations I make barely make an appreciable difference, but when I start up a mission with a rejigging of an old design I always think to myself "ahh, that's better". Or starting up a mission with a brand new design my first thought is to categorise the flaws and ponder how I can iron them out.
The game gives points called "FPS" points, which can be used to tweak certain statistics of the giant robot, making some parts of it perform better. Each of these provides a percentage based boost, that in playable terms probably makes almost NO difference by themselves, but throwing 50 or so into one stat can really help. So why, oh why, do I agonise over where to play that last miserable five points? It makes NO difference.
That's customisability for you. It turns a relatively geeky player into an obsessive/compulsive nutcase.
P.S. Yes, I know there are plenty of people out there who are animals at the game who could rip me a new one, but I haven't met them, and I imagine if I do meet them I'll feel like I need a shower afterwards. I'm the best player of the game I've encountered in my (admittedly) limited experience, so in my little world I'm far, FAR too good at the game to be healthy.
P.P.S. Next post I'll ramp up the nerd value by discussing Dungeons and Dragons 4th edition.
Case in point: There is a mission in the game where, in normal difficulty, you and two other Armoured Cores (both of them horribly designed) are up against a force of four elite ACs. You're outnumbered, outgunned and outclassed. It took me a few goes and a bit of tweaking of my AC, but I could beat it in the end. Then after finishing the (very short) game I decided to give the Hard version of this mission a try, since apparently you get special items for doing so. Now just so you know, when you do the hard version of a mission in this game it isn't a matter of "hey hey, enemies have higher accuracy", it's a genuinely redesigned mission with more enemies and less allies. Sometimes it's not much harder (a little extra health on the lone enemy), but other times it's genuinely WAY more difficult. In this case it was the latter.
For this mission I had to take on, by myself four weakened Armoured Cores. That is a BIG deal. It took me nine tries, and three difference ACs, but in the end I finally came up with a design that I believed could do it. First time through this final design (The Sledge MK IV) ripped them apart, barely lowering me to half health in doing so.
I had a minor panic attack when I realised this was the game I was "that" guy for. The one game where I rip through things, while normal people who play it struggle.
Then I pushed it aside and dedicated myself to that which takes up WELL over half the gameplay for me. It's not the actual missions, or the simulation/arena stuff, oh no. It's my holy grail.
Customisability.
Say it with me brothers!
Customisability.
Say it for me sisters, in your sexy voices!
Customisability.
I will grant you, the majority of customisation in AC4 is not truly game-altering, the most you can possibly do is change primary three factors
1. How much you can be shot
2. How fast you jet around
3. What guns you shoot
Other alterations are majoritively cosmetic, with their influences being secondary considerations at best. But still, it's enough for me. Even if it is just window dressing to change my ACs head to another design that looks better and offers 1% better armour, at the cost of 1% extra weight... It's still wonderful.
The reason for that is the ability to look back at that which you create and say, even if it has likely been designed by someone else somewhere in the world:
"This is MY Armoured Core 4 design, my NEXT. There may be other ones like it, but this one is mine."
For me it's like the love a car nut has for his vehicle, constantly tinkering with it and trying to get that LITTLE bit extra out of the little bastard. If I'm being honest with myself, I know the tiny alterations I make barely make an appreciable difference, but when I start up a mission with a rejigging of an old design I always think to myself "ahh, that's better". Or starting up a mission with a brand new design my first thought is to categorise the flaws and ponder how I can iron them out.
The game gives points called "FPS" points, which can be used to tweak certain statistics of the giant robot, making some parts of it perform better. Each of these provides a percentage based boost, that in playable terms probably makes almost NO difference by themselves, but throwing 50 or so into one stat can really help. So why, oh why, do I agonise over where to play that last miserable five points? It makes NO difference.
That's customisability for you. It turns a relatively geeky player into an obsessive/compulsive nutcase.
P.S. Yes, I know there are plenty of people out there who are animals at the game who could rip me a new one, but I haven't met them, and I imagine if I do meet them I'll feel like I need a shower afterwards. I'm the best player of the game I've encountered in my (admittedly) limited experience, so in my little world I'm far, FAR too good at the game to be healthy.
P.P.S. Next post I'll ramp up the nerd value by discussing Dungeons and Dragons 4th edition.
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
R2-D2, an analysis
Wow. Ladies and gentlemen, this is my blog's 150th post. That is a reasonable milestone, and shows a sign of age in the blog. How appropriate then that it falls upon today, my 22nd birthday. It seems that both for me and my blog, a time has come whereupon maturity must reign. We have both grown and developed over this time, one more then the other. I like to believe that as I have matured into what I like to believe is a fine specimen of a man, and as such I like to think this blog has become a genuine example of enjoyable recreational writing. And now, onto the post.
R2-D2 is a giant douche.
I know this topic has been covered before on other blogs, and in many arguements about the effects of the new trilogy on the Star Wars saga, but it is the case.
Let's assemble a collection of facts as visible in the movies.
1. R2-D2 was very familiar with Obi-wan Kenobi prior to the old trilogy. R2 helped Obi-wan and Anakin rescue the Chancellor.
2. R2 was aware that Anakin was Darth Vader. He was present on the lava planet when Obi-wan and Anakin fought, seeing Anakin go crazy-monkey-arse on everyone. The only part that was in any potential doubt was if Anakin went on to become Darth Vader, but considering he was hanging around on the rebel base afterwards where it was all being discussed, surely it would be mentioned at least ONCE around him. If not... you'd have to be stupid not to make the link. Obi-wan wins a fight against Anakin, suddenly Anakin's replaced at the emperor's side by a dude who needs life support to survive.
3. R2 was aware that Luke and Leia were brother and sister.
4. R2 never had his memory wiped, like C3PO did. 5. R2 is more then a mere automated Droid. He is capable of independant thought and decision making. This can be seen in numerous instances in the various episodes. Some notable examples (found in the old trilogy, at the time of most of R2's douchiness) are:
5A. Trying to entice C3PO along on the trip along the sands of Tatooine with promises of adventures.
5B. Actively lying to Luke (via C3PO) in episode 4 in order to get the restraining bolt removed.
5C. R2 making a bunch of protesting sounds when they were closing the door on Luke in episode 5, followed by a disappointed 'whine'.
5D. He displays anger by zapping an Ewok after they release him.
This is among other examples.
6. R2 is capable of independant decision making. This is shown when he stops repairing C3PO despite orders to do so, so he can fix the Millenium Falcon.
So, when we put facts 1 through 6 together, we come to a very specific conclusion.
R2D2 is a bastard.
When he tempts Luke into helping him by promising to show more of the princess booty, it could be argued at that point he hasn't made the link between "Luke Skywalker" from the planet Tatooine and "Anakin Skywalker" from the planet Tatooine, despite having met Uncle Owen's family before and been on THAT EXACT PROPERTY before. He may just be that thick. But then he meets Obi-wan (who claims not to have met him, probably why R2 was treating everyone like he was. He felt annoyed at being snubbed), who mentions Luke's "great Jedi Knight father". Surely he made the connection there.
R2 accompanies the Senator who adopted Leia back to Alderaan. So he should know that the Senator adopted the child (or one of them) that Padme had. From that he could easily deduce there were twins, and that Leia are brother and sister.
Yet he tells neither of them that fact, nor that their father is Darth God-Damned VADER.
If you need further proof? He doesn't even bat an eyelid when he's told C3PO, his constant companion, is going to get his memory wiped. He just. Doesn't. Care.
R2-D2 is a douche.
R2-D2 is a giant douche.
I know this topic has been covered before on other blogs, and in many arguements about the effects of the new trilogy on the Star Wars saga, but it is the case.
Let's assemble a collection of facts as visible in the movies.
1. R2-D2 was very familiar with Obi-wan Kenobi prior to the old trilogy. R2 helped Obi-wan and Anakin rescue the Chancellor.
2. R2 was aware that Anakin was Darth Vader. He was present on the lava planet when Obi-wan and Anakin fought, seeing Anakin go crazy-monkey-arse on everyone. The only part that was in any potential doubt was if Anakin went on to become Darth Vader, but considering he was hanging around on the rebel base afterwards where it was all being discussed, surely it would be mentioned at least ONCE around him. If not... you'd have to be stupid not to make the link. Obi-wan wins a fight against Anakin, suddenly Anakin's replaced at the emperor's side by a dude who needs life support to survive.
3. R2 was aware that Luke and Leia were brother and sister.
4. R2 never had his memory wiped, like C3PO did. 5. R2 is more then a mere automated Droid. He is capable of independant thought and decision making. This can be seen in numerous instances in the various episodes. Some notable examples (found in the old trilogy, at the time of most of R2's douchiness) are:
5A. Trying to entice C3PO along on the trip along the sands of Tatooine with promises of adventures.
5B. Actively lying to Luke (via C3PO) in episode 4 in order to get the restraining bolt removed.
5C. R2 making a bunch of protesting sounds when they were closing the door on Luke in episode 5, followed by a disappointed 'whine'.
5D. He displays anger by zapping an Ewok after they release him.
This is among other examples.
6. R2 is capable of independant decision making. This is shown when he stops repairing C3PO despite orders to do so, so he can fix the Millenium Falcon.
So, when we put facts 1 through 6 together, we come to a very specific conclusion.
R2D2 is a bastard.
When he tempts Luke into helping him by promising to show more of the princess booty, it could be argued at that point he hasn't made the link between "Luke Skywalker" from the planet Tatooine and "Anakin Skywalker" from the planet Tatooine, despite having met Uncle Owen's family before and been on THAT EXACT PROPERTY before. He may just be that thick. But then he meets Obi-wan (who claims not to have met him, probably why R2 was treating everyone like he was. He felt annoyed at being snubbed), who mentions Luke's "great Jedi Knight father". Surely he made the connection there.
R2 accompanies the Senator who adopted Leia back to Alderaan. So he should know that the Senator adopted the child (or one of them) that Padme had. From that he could easily deduce there were twins, and that Leia are brother and sister.
Yet he tells neither of them that fact, nor that their father is Darth God-Damned VADER.
If you need further proof? He doesn't even bat an eyelid when he's told C3PO, his constant companion, is going to get his memory wiped. He just. Doesn't. Care.
R2-D2 is a douche.
Saturday, January 10, 2009
Spiderman's webbing makes no sense
World of Warcraft and Zombies are probably two of my least favourite things. To that end, someone sent me this video today. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjMiDZIY1bM&eurl=http://www.facebook.com/home.php?ref=logo
Warning, this post is going to get very, VERY nerdy. Like, REALLY nerdy. We're talking "If Wolverine fought Spiderman who would win?" nerdy. I know, I'm ashamed of myself. I find myself questioning science facts, I should repeat to myself it's just a comic, I should really just relax (double points to people who get the reference) but this just has been bothering me. Maybe someone can explain it.
- 92. I am ashamed I am so geeky that this even qualifies as a post for me. That is a genuine fact about myself.
Warning, this post is going to get very, VERY nerdy. Like, REALLY nerdy. We're talking "If Wolverine fought Spiderman who would win?" nerdy. I know, I'm ashamed of myself. I find myself questioning science facts, I should repeat to myself it's just a comic, I should really just relax (double points to people who get the reference) but this just has been bothering me. Maybe someone can explain it.
Spiderman's webshooting annoys me.
I'm no physicist, I don't know the precise characteristics of proportionally sized spider-web, but something about Spiderman's webbing around town has just annoyed me. Consider this, replent with badly designed diagrams.
This is an out-of-scale Spiderman swinging through a strangely sparce New York City street, from behind. We see him swinging away from the camera, towards the horizon. He has found himself in the middle of the road swinging off into the distance.
In his swinging, he does what he often does and attaches a strand of web to a building off to his right, in front of him. The approximate dimensions of the line are 64x50 (generic length measurement units), so it's 62^2 x 50^2 = (Square root). Roughly rounded, it's 80 (generic length measurements) long. The point his line is attached to is 275 (approx) GLM's off the ground.
Now I want you all to do something for me.
Now consider this. Take a line of anything (string, whatever) and hold one end against the wall, pull the other end away from the wall so it's at a diagonal angle to it, then pull it in one direction parralel to the wall, then release it. The line will fall straight towards the wall. Even if you provide it with some thrust along the parrallel of the wall, it will only move a short distance before physics pulls it down towards the wall it's held to.
But then surely before Spiderman hits the wall, he'll web onto the street opposite, right? That's what I thought at first, then I realised something. On our inferior-two-dimensional-attempted-representational-of-a-three-dimensional-problem (which I'll trademark as ITDAROATDP, or It 'da ro at DP, if you want it phoenetically) I want you to look at something. In being drawn down to the ground, Spiderman is now FURTHER away from the street opposite, and a longer strand of webbing (probably 120 GLM) is needed to attach, which means he'll just drop closer to the ground.
The trouble with Spiderman's "swinging" is that it ignores one of the primary factors in swinging. When you swing, you hit a lowest point, and then go up. In this going up, you can swing from the point you end at, onto another arc. But the lowest point on Spiderman's webbing arcs are, in fact, a brick wall. Literally. So he needs to swing before he's gone past the lowest point up onto a high point again, meaning he's constantly "re-swinging" from a lower point each time he does it.
There are only two ways I can see it even vaguely working.
1. If Spiderman manages to maintain his vertical height by swinging in a horizontal manner, where he does not approach the ground at the furthest point of his swinging, but to maintain this in a manner countering gravity he would have to swing so fast it would be... quite scary.
2. If the web shooters Spiderman used manages to keep him on a vaguely normal vertical height by 'retracting' the web as it's used. That way he just has to keep swinging before what would be the apex to avoid the buildings, but otherwise his distance from the ground is secure. Never heard any mention of this anywhere. The webbing is meant to be elastic-like, but even then that'd just dip it further to the ground as it stretched, rather then pulling him up.
Holy shit, I cannot believe how nerdy I have been.
I need to go watch some sports, drink beer, and optically fondle attractive women just to be allowed to retain my testosterone.
Sunday, December 7, 2008
Nerdlove
... So there I was, watching my prostate exam being streamed onto youtube as it happened. "Doctor," I said, "are you sure this is standard procedure?" He chuckled. "I'm not a doctor, I'm a tobacconist."
To celebrate one of the most awesome ladies of the internet apparently having a read of my blog(nerdgasm-unlimited.blogspot.com/2008/11/rules-of-net-name.html, the awesome lady in question being Zendulo. If I need to link you to her youtube still (http://www.youtube.com/user/zendulo) you're obviously not a regular reader) I decided to discuss nerdomance.
First, let us define the nerd/geek among us. There are three stages of nerds.
1. The 'passable' stage. This is where the nerd has a great affinity for a nerd-topic or four, quite enjoying them and being very knowledgable about them, but at the same time it's in no way a requirement of this nerd's lifestyle. The Nerd may often try to hide their nerdiness, pretending they don't have any hobbies rather then admiting to their non-nerdy friends they collect little plastic miniatures. If push came to shove, they could put it all away and feel only a few twinges of regret.
2. The 'Lifestyle' stage. A nerd at this stage is 'out of the closet' as it were. They let everyone know what they're about, and if they meet someone with the same interests they'll gladly talk about it for a few hours with them. They love the lifestyle, but they're not obsessed, they can discuss things outside nerdom with ease.
3. The 'Obsessional' stage. At this point the nerd often focuses on a singular topic, but not always, sometimes they can embrace nerdom as a whole. This nerd is both admired for their will power and dedication, and feared for their bizarreness and odd nature. Their dedication to the cause leaves them a LITTLE underprepared for other sitations.
I like to think I fall squarely into the second stage. I don't even try to hide my nerdiness anymore, but at the same time I can function in situations that don't require it. Most nerds would be predominantly stage one, occasionally venturing into stage two for more widespread accepted aspects (major computer games like Halo or World of Warcraft, or movies like Star Wars).
In general, each stage of geek is after something different romantically, to fit in with the nerdiness they've let into their life.
1. For this geek, nerdiness or lack-thereof doesn't matter. If they hooked up with someone, but found they really disliked the person's hobby, they wouldn't struggle too much with a decision to shelve it.
2. The stage 2er isn't likely to put away a reasonably important part of their free time, even if the potential partner is pretty awesome. Instead the stage 2er requires at least some kind of respect for their choices, if not mutual enjoyment. After all, what could be more awesome then a lazy rainy saturday night in sitting next to a significant other watching awesome movies for 7 hours straight, both of you humming the theme tunes and riffing on what they get wrong?
3. Stage 3ers need people interested in their passion, nothing less.
As a stage 2er, I'd need someone with at least a degree of respect for my hobbies and interests. And I've discussed this both in the blog and in real life, if I'm proposing to a lady, I'm gonna do it nerd style. Either I'm gonna go down on a knee with the tip of my sword resting on the ground, or I'm going to wear a brown coat and make a Firefly-style speach. It's a difficult choice.
You know, the idea for this post sounded alot cooler in my head.
Well, I need to finish on a good note, so here:
Best Death Scene Evar.
- 62. My left foot is bigger then my right. A full shoe size bigger. It means I have to get the half-size between them both and have both feet be uncomfortable. ... What? This is "100 facts about myself", not "100 interesting facts about myself." What were you expecting? The age I lost my virginity? Nosy bastards.
To celebrate one of the most awesome ladies of the internet apparently having a read of my blog(nerdgasm-unlimited.blogspot.com/2008/11/rules-of-net-name.html, the awesome lady in question being Zendulo. If I need to link you to her youtube still (http://www.youtube.com/user/zendulo) you're obviously not a regular reader) I decided to discuss nerdomance.
First, let us define the nerd/geek among us. There are three stages of nerds.
1. The 'passable' stage. This is where the nerd has a great affinity for a nerd-topic or four, quite enjoying them and being very knowledgable about them, but at the same time it's in no way a requirement of this nerd's lifestyle. The Nerd may often try to hide their nerdiness, pretending they don't have any hobbies rather then admiting to their non-nerdy friends they collect little plastic miniatures. If push came to shove, they could put it all away and feel only a few twinges of regret.
2. The 'Lifestyle' stage. A nerd at this stage is 'out of the closet' as it were. They let everyone know what they're about, and if they meet someone with the same interests they'll gladly talk about it for a few hours with them. They love the lifestyle, but they're not obsessed, they can discuss things outside nerdom with ease.
3. The 'Obsessional' stage. At this point the nerd often focuses on a singular topic, but not always, sometimes they can embrace nerdom as a whole. This nerd is both admired for their will power and dedication, and feared for their bizarreness and odd nature. Their dedication to the cause leaves them a LITTLE underprepared for other sitations.
I like to think I fall squarely into the second stage. I don't even try to hide my nerdiness anymore, but at the same time I can function in situations that don't require it. Most nerds would be predominantly stage one, occasionally venturing into stage two for more widespread accepted aspects (major computer games like Halo or World of Warcraft, or movies like Star Wars).
In general, each stage of geek is after something different romantically, to fit in with the nerdiness they've let into their life.
1. For this geek, nerdiness or lack-thereof doesn't matter. If they hooked up with someone, but found they really disliked the person's hobby, they wouldn't struggle too much with a decision to shelve it.
2. The stage 2er isn't likely to put away a reasonably important part of their free time, even if the potential partner is pretty awesome. Instead the stage 2er requires at least some kind of respect for their choices, if not mutual enjoyment. After all, what could be more awesome then a lazy rainy saturday night in sitting next to a significant other watching awesome movies for 7 hours straight, both of you humming the theme tunes and riffing on what they get wrong?
3. Stage 3ers need people interested in their passion, nothing less.
As a stage 2er, I'd need someone with at least a degree of respect for my hobbies and interests. And I've discussed this both in the blog and in real life, if I'm proposing to a lady, I'm gonna do it nerd style. Either I'm gonna go down on a knee with the tip of my sword resting on the ground, or I'm going to wear a brown coat and make a Firefly-style speach. It's a difficult choice.
You know, the idea for this post sounded alot cooler in my head.
Well, I need to finish on a good note, so here:
Best Death Scene Evar.
Thursday, December 4, 2008
Pop culture
Is anyone else really REALLY concerned about Elmer Fudd? Hunting rabbits is one thing, but being willing to shoot and kill an obviously sentient rabbit capable of speach and advanced decision making shows signs of being a serial killer in the making, to me.
I would just like to make a few clarifications on what is and is not acceptable regarding attire and actions for the modern nerd who is attempting to camoflague himself as a normal person. For those of you out of the closet, loud and proud about being a geek, I both salute you and offer my apologies that this post will have nothing for you.
1. It is not ok to wear main-stream-pop-culture shirts. Main stream pop culture would be things like Star Wars, Family Guy, Simpsons, Southpark, Lord of the Rings
2. It IS ok to wear non-main-stream-culture shirts, especially nerd ones. The fewer people who 'get' the joke/reference, the better. Everyone else just thinks it's an odd shirt (not unusual, all shirts these days seem to follow some bizarre pattern cooked up by piccasso on acid), but those who get it, REALLY get it. Examples of this would be a shirt with a Red Dwarf quote, a picture of Pintsize (from www.questionablecontent.com) saying something inappropriate, anything from Farscape. Basically if the general populace doesn't realise it's a nerd-shirt, you're fine.
3. Keep fantasy-jewelry to a minimum. You may be able to get away with the ring of power around your neck (although for guys it may look a bit odd), but probably not a crown.
4. The Jedi-Padawan-braid is a no-go. Just... don't even try.
5. The minute you wear a pauldron out into public, you've failed.
6. If you use the following words: 'Pauldron', any word for a specific type of sword (not just generic 'sword'), 'D6' (double points if you use a number other then six) in refering to dice, ANY Klingon, ANY Elvish, 'Star Wars extended universe', roleplay (in non sex situations), Warhammer (in any context), any MMO aside from Warcraft (and even then it's sketchy), then you have failed and been compromised.
7. Attempting to use the force, particularly to choke people, is an instant failure.
8. Never ever try to quantify someone's charisma score. Out loud.
9. You're allowed to admit to gaming. Just don't use the terms 'DPS', 'Tank', 'crack', 'torrent', 'chipped', 'zerg rush', or anything similar.
Note, these are all just for passing as a 'norm' in public. In private and amongst friends, talk about D20's in klingon while wearing the ring of power around your neck and a T-shirt that says has Darth Vader saying "I want YOU" in a parody of the Uncle Sam poster as much as you want.
- 59. I'm capable of making it sound like I've inhaled helium without needing to touch the stuff. It's a party trick with limited applications
I would just like to make a few clarifications on what is and is not acceptable regarding attire and actions for the modern nerd who is attempting to camoflague himself as a normal person. For those of you out of the closet, loud and proud about being a geek, I both salute you and offer my apologies that this post will have nothing for you.
1. It is not ok to wear main-stream-pop-culture shirts. Main stream pop culture would be things like Star Wars, Family Guy, Simpsons, Southpark, Lord of the Rings
2. It IS ok to wear non-main-stream-culture shirts, especially nerd ones. The fewer people who 'get' the joke/reference, the better. Everyone else just thinks it's an odd shirt (not unusual, all shirts these days seem to follow some bizarre pattern cooked up by piccasso on acid), but those who get it, REALLY get it. Examples of this would be a shirt with a Red Dwarf quote, a picture of Pintsize (from www.questionablecontent.com) saying something inappropriate, anything from Farscape. Basically if the general populace doesn't realise it's a nerd-shirt, you're fine.
3. Keep fantasy-jewelry to a minimum. You may be able to get away with the ring of power around your neck (although for guys it may look a bit odd), but probably not a crown.
4. The Jedi-Padawan-braid is a no-go. Just... don't even try.
5. The minute you wear a pauldron out into public, you've failed.
6. If you use the following words: 'Pauldron', any word for a specific type of sword (not just generic 'sword'), 'D6' (double points if you use a number other then six) in refering to dice, ANY Klingon, ANY Elvish, 'Star Wars extended universe', roleplay (in non sex situations), Warhammer (in any context), any MMO aside from Warcraft (and even then it's sketchy), then you have failed and been compromised.
7. Attempting to use the force, particularly to choke people, is an instant failure.
8. Never ever try to quantify someone's charisma score. Out loud.
9. You're allowed to admit to gaming. Just don't use the terms 'DPS', 'Tank', 'crack', 'torrent', 'chipped', 'zerg rush', or anything similar.
Note, these are all just for passing as a 'norm' in public. In private and amongst friends, talk about D20's in klingon while wearing the ring of power around your neck and a T-shirt that says has Darth Vader saying "I want YOU" in a parody of the Uncle Sam poster as much as you want.
Tuesday, December 2, 2008
X vs Y
If a Werewolf bites a dog, does the dog turn into a person at the full moon and prowl around at night ordering takeaway and investing in the stockmarket (two defining attributes of humankind)?
One of the pillars of the geek and nerd community, something that ALL of us have indulged in at one point or another, is the even popular "X vs Y" debate. "If Magneto fought Darth Vader, who would win?" (Magneto, he could just crush the electronics keeping Vader alive, not to mention prevent him from moving his mechanical arms, which seems to be required for him to force-choke people.) It's a staple of our mindset. And so, with that in mind, I present a few new X vs Y's, and my thoughts on the matter. (Note: These are all presented in the spirit of good fun. I'm just coming up with random characters from nerd-culture and throwing them against each other)
Zombies (Romero Style) Vs Werewolves: Werewolves have the initial advantage in that they can rip apart the Zombies and are strong enough to physically crush the head. However against a zombie horde there is only so much close-combat fighting you can do before you'll get bitten. Then we get Werewolves dying of infection at best, or Zombie-Werewolves at worst.
My thoughts on the winner: Zombies.
Obi-Wan (New trilogy) Vs Spiderman: Assuming Obi-Wan doesn't just cheaply mind-trick his way out of it, it's a genuine fight. My opening thought is Spidey would just web the Jedi, but then I realised the lightsaber could cut through the web. Then I though Spidey would take the lightsaber with webbing, but realised Obi-wan could probably keep hold through the force.
My thoughts on the winner: Draw
The Hulk vs Mary Sue: Mary Sue talks the Hulk down from his rage, befriends him, but then dies tragically in a way that will always be remembered and admired despite the fact she didn't really do anything, since the Hulk just gets pissed at her death and kills everyone.
My thoughts on the loser: Us.
Michael Westin (TV show 'Burn Notice'. Good show.) vs McGuyver: Both are improvisational genius' with gadgets. I'll give the edge to Westin because he is a highly skilled fighter and gunman willing to use lethal force, once the gadgets have done their bit.
My thoughts on the winner: Westin
Star Wars vs Star Trek: Star Trek's technology is more advanced, but Star Wars is just plain cooler.
My thoughts on the winner: Star Wars, because I say so.
Spiderman Vs Batman: The two main comic cashcows of the two major comic companies. Spiderman could easily outfight Batman, but Batman would be prepared for the fight and have a dozen plans to let him beat Batman.
My thoughts on the winner: They engage twice, one wins each time, until they find out the Venom Symbiote has infected Joker, and team up to take him down.
- 57. I have a zombie invasion survival plan. Really, that's all that needs to be stated.
One of the pillars of the geek and nerd community, something that ALL of us have indulged in at one point or another, is the even popular "X vs Y" debate. "If Magneto fought Darth Vader, who would win?" (Magneto, he could just crush the electronics keeping Vader alive, not to mention prevent him from moving his mechanical arms, which seems to be required for him to force-choke people.) It's a staple of our mindset. And so, with that in mind, I present a few new X vs Y's, and my thoughts on the matter. (Note: These are all presented in the spirit of good fun. I'm just coming up with random characters from nerd-culture and throwing them against each other)
Zombies (Romero Style) Vs Werewolves: Werewolves have the initial advantage in that they can rip apart the Zombies and are strong enough to physically crush the head. However against a zombie horde there is only so much close-combat fighting you can do before you'll get bitten. Then we get Werewolves dying of infection at best, or Zombie-Werewolves at worst.
My thoughts on the winner: Zombies.
Obi-Wan (New trilogy) Vs Spiderman: Assuming Obi-Wan doesn't just cheaply mind-trick his way out of it, it's a genuine fight. My opening thought is Spidey would just web the Jedi, but then I realised the lightsaber could cut through the web. Then I though Spidey would take the lightsaber with webbing, but realised Obi-wan could probably keep hold through the force.
My thoughts on the winner: Draw
The Hulk vs Mary Sue: Mary Sue talks the Hulk down from his rage, befriends him, but then dies tragically in a way that will always be remembered and admired despite the fact she didn't really do anything, since the Hulk just gets pissed at her death and kills everyone.
My thoughts on the loser: Us.
Michael Westin (TV show 'Burn Notice'. Good show.) vs McGuyver: Both are improvisational genius' with gadgets. I'll give the edge to Westin because he is a highly skilled fighter and gunman willing to use lethal force, once the gadgets have done their bit.
My thoughts on the winner: Westin
Star Wars vs Star Trek: Star Trek's technology is more advanced, but Star Wars is just plain cooler.
My thoughts on the winner: Star Wars, because I say so.
Spiderman Vs Batman: The two main comic cashcows of the two major comic companies. Spiderman could easily outfight Batman, but Batman would be prepared for the fight and have a dozen plans to let him beat Batman.
My thoughts on the winner: They engage twice, one wins each time, until they find out the Venom Symbiote has infected Joker, and team up to take him down.
Saturday, November 22, 2008
Less Common Nerd passtimes 1
Less Common Nerd pass times 1
AKA: "I move my models the length of my penis towards your models"
... So there I was, wrists handcuffed together, the person who'd put them on me passed out with their police uniform in disarray, and a train coming down the tracks towards me. It was that day I decided never to attend another bachelor's party.
If you are a true nerd, you have at LEAST heard of board-war-games. Among the best known are the Games Workshop series, but there are many other examples (Battletech, Heavy Gear, even Risk can be considered one on the outside, although it lacks in one of the more common aspects).
These consist of games in which two or more individuals line up models they have spent hard earned money on and painstakingly assembled and painted to a degree they are content with, then move those models across a tabletop, measuring out certain distances (or counting out 'squares' or 'hexes') to determine if models can damage one another. They then continue this for several hours (some epic games can take a full day to complete) until a winner is declared.
I can understand how this is good for many nerds like myself. It combines three of the most desired requirements for a hobby into one single activity.
1. Singular activity: Assembling, painting and preparing models (not to mention assembling the required rules for an army of them) is not something usually done in a social setting, since it would distract from the delicate work. This is a hobby that can be done by oneself, meaning when a nerd is bored at home they can just start on their hobby in their own time.
2. Group activity: It requires the hobbyist to get together with others of similar interests to get the full enjoyment out of the activity. This encourages the geek away from solely insular activity, where they can be social and enjoy the company of others of similar interests, comparing thoughts on the issue.
3. Competitiveness: Let's face it, we're geeks, we want to be good at what we do. These games allow for direct competitiveness. Your little plastic men against the other guy's little plastic men. This CAN inspire a negative competitiveness (look up 'rules lawyering' or 'munchinism' to learn more about that) but in general, alot of people take it all in good humour, trying their hardest to win, but being graceful in defeat.
With all this in mind, why do I not do it?
I dunno, to be honest. It just bores the bejebus out of me. I don't know what it is about the activity, but I could never get deep into it. The grand narratives of most of them don't interest me as much, and a majority of the time you need to be more competively minded then I am capable of. I read rules, I learn basic strategies. Only in games like the Total War series am I capable of formulating more competitive strategies. It's somewhat disconcerting when it takes months to learn to assemble/paint models well, and even then unless you have a natural talent with it you'll be getting the crap rolled out of you with every game.
It just never grabbed me.
P.S. I'm not a fan of Games Workshop in general.
P.P.S. Heavy Gear is awesome. Mix of RPG and Strategy-war game. Give it a look-see if you're into that kinda thing.
AKA: "I move my models the length of my penis towards your models"
... So there I was, wrists handcuffed together, the person who'd put them on me passed out with their police uniform in disarray, and a train coming down the tracks towards me. It was that day I decided never to attend another bachelor's party.
- 46. I have an ambition one day to go to five different psychics and ask them about my future, just to see how different all their predictions will be. Then I can laugh and quote predictions that happen to be true, when they occur.
If you are a true nerd, you have at LEAST heard of board-war-games. Among the best known are the Games Workshop series, but there are many other examples (Battletech, Heavy Gear, even Risk can be considered one on the outside, although it lacks in one of the more common aspects).
These consist of games in which two or more individuals line up models they have spent hard earned money on and painstakingly assembled and painted to a degree they are content with, then move those models across a tabletop, measuring out certain distances (or counting out 'squares' or 'hexes') to determine if models can damage one another. They then continue this for several hours (some epic games can take a full day to complete) until a winner is declared.
I can understand how this is good for many nerds like myself. It combines three of the most desired requirements for a hobby into one single activity.
1. Singular activity: Assembling, painting and preparing models (not to mention assembling the required rules for an army of them) is not something usually done in a social setting, since it would distract from the delicate work. This is a hobby that can be done by oneself, meaning when a nerd is bored at home they can just start on their hobby in their own time.
2. Group activity: It requires the hobbyist to get together with others of similar interests to get the full enjoyment out of the activity. This encourages the geek away from solely insular activity, where they can be social and enjoy the company of others of similar interests, comparing thoughts on the issue.
3. Competitiveness: Let's face it, we're geeks, we want to be good at what we do. These games allow for direct competitiveness. Your little plastic men against the other guy's little plastic men. This CAN inspire a negative competitiveness (look up 'rules lawyering' or 'munchinism' to learn more about that) but in general, alot of people take it all in good humour, trying their hardest to win, but being graceful in defeat.
With all this in mind, why do I not do it?
I dunno, to be honest. It just bores the bejebus out of me. I don't know what it is about the activity, but I could never get deep into it. The grand narratives of most of them don't interest me as much, and a majority of the time you need to be more competively minded then I am capable of. I read rules, I learn basic strategies. Only in games like the Total War series am I capable of formulating more competitive strategies. It's somewhat disconcerting when it takes months to learn to assemble/paint models well, and even then unless you have a natural talent with it you'll be getting the crap rolled out of you with every game.
It just never grabbed me.
P.S. I'm not a fan of Games Workshop in general.
P.P.S. Heavy Gear is awesome. Mix of RPG and Strategy-war game. Give it a look-see if you're into that kinda thing.
Friday, November 14, 2008
Stupid ideas on the internet for all to see
"Mr Lucus? We've done some focus group testing, and we've found out that no one likes the Jar Jar Binks character. In fact, many people find him offensive."
"You have failed me for the last time."
"Mr Lucus, please, no! *Choking noises*"
"I expect your replacement to be more willing to do as I say."
"*Choking noises, followed by the dull thump of a body hitting the ground.*"
I'm quite bored, and as such going to go watch some DVDs. But before I do, I figured I should update the Nerdgasm.
Then I realised I have nothing worth updating. No grand schemes have come into my head. No trivial nerderific ideas have hit me while drunk (or if they have, I can't remember them). Nothing piques my interest at the moment (at least nothing I can discuss in public among all you voyeurs. Friggin' pervs.)
So, I'm just going to throw some ideas out that I've had regarding a certain topic that most people can appreciate. Computer games.
I'm ashamed, there's nothing remoting approaching interesting there.
I must be uninteresting.
Dang.
"You have failed me for the last time."
"Mr Lucus, please, no! *Choking noises*"
"I expect your replacement to be more willing to do as I say."
"*Choking noises, followed by the dull thump of a body hitting the ground.*"
- 40. I have three swords. I have no need for swords, I do not expect the Saxons to come sweeping down the hill, burning and pilaging what they please. I just have them. One of them was a present for my 18th birthday, two of them my parents brought back from China. One is half a Katana (literally half. It's just for display purposes) while the other is like a tiny cutlass. None of them could do any damage. Well that's a lie, the one I got for my birthday is a relatively heavy longsword, more then capable of giving someone a severe concussion. It's just blunt.
I'm quite bored, and as such going to go watch some DVDs. But before I do, I figured I should update the Nerdgasm.
Then I realised I have nothing worth updating. No grand schemes have come into my head. No trivial nerderific ideas have hit me while drunk (or if they have, I can't remember them). Nothing piques my interest at the moment (at least nothing I can discuss in public among all you voyeurs. Friggin' pervs.)
So, I'm just going to throw some ideas out that I've had regarding a certain topic that most people can appreciate. Computer games.
- Ever heard of the game Battlezone II? I didn't think so. Highly undervalued game of the past. A pretty decent RTS with FPS and vehicle based combat elements. It exposed me to the first time, the problem of the FPS/RTS. Either the 'player' is of equal strength to the units, or they're highly underpowered/focused on bufferage to push them into 'leading', rather then doing it all themselves. If they're of equal strength, nothing can stand up to them since the computer rarely can meet a person for strategy, and so the player can romp through everything. If they're underpowered/buffage, the game plays as a poorly designed RTS, and the FPS elements are crap.
- Mount and Blade. Highly awesome Medieval third-person RPG/Action game. The only game I've ever genuinely LIKED how they've done mounted combat. And watching 15 Horsemen crash ito the flank of a group of 30 infantry/archers, scatteirng them with their impact, is always AWESOME. It's a pity it's an indie game. It just feels unfinished. Then again, if it was studio-made, it would probably be changed majorly.
- If there was a well made fantasy mod for Mount and Blade, including proper spells and crap (very rare, but present, and powerful when used right) I would be in LOVE.
- If they made a studio-made Mount and Blade 2, I would be very, very happy. Especially if they threw in the 'DM' AI I mentioned in a previous post.
- I have three computer games I want to see made in my lifetime.
- The above mentioned Fantasy-Mount-And-Blade-II-with-AI-software. That would be sweet and a half, and anyone who disagrees is a communist, whom I shall sic McCarthy on.
- A Mechwarrior or Heavy Gear RPG. Mechwarrior has RPG rules for it, and Heavy Gear was MADE as an RPG/Strategy board game hybrid. It would be absolutely brilliant, and if the story was well scripted it would be a shoe in for Game of the Year. Think about it, you've got easily three different levels of combat. Infantry, Robot on Robot, Army on Army. The games have built-in political machinations that make the story interesting, and both have to deal with outside invaders causing strife
- Transformers MMOFPS. Infantry combat spiced up by having the infantry changing into vehicles that can alter the way the game plays out. A huge skirmish erupts, the Decepticons send out a group of three Motorcycles to a hilltop nearby. Two of the riders jump off the motorcycles, transform into artillary pieces and lay down some fire. The motorcycles transform into infantry and act as guards alongside the remaining rider. The Autobots send jets over to put down straffing runs on the Decepticons, but the remaining rider transforms into a flak gun and shoots them out of the sky
- If you didn't get at least a nerdection from that last point, you have no soul. Or alternatively you're a woman, in which case you should've at least gotten a metaphorical nerdection. You know, the "If I had a penis, it would TOTALLY be using all my blood supply right about now" kind of feeling.
- I want a badge that says "Ask me about Grim Fandango." Not only would it be a humerous reference to Grim Fandango, it would be a humerous reference to Monkey Island III
I'm ashamed, there's nothing remoting approaching interesting there.
I must be uninteresting.
Dang.
Thursday, November 13, 2008
I can imaginary fight better then you can
If a good compromise leaves everyone unhappy, then wouldn't a bad compromise leave everyone contented? We can now blame all problems around the world on good diplomats.
Gentle readers, I am a geek/nerd as the title of this blog suggests, however there are things above and beyond my level of nerdity. Things so powerful in geekitude that they rock my socks clean off. These are things SO AMAZINGLY NERDY that even I am impressed, while simultaneously being scared.
First off, there is a wikipedia dedicated to Star Wars. Nothing revolutionary, there's a wikipedia for everything (even cocktail recipes).
http://starwars.wikia.com/
But, inside this wiki, there are over 40 pages (some of them small, but still there) dedicated to lightsaber combat.
That's right. A fictional form of combat.
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Lightsaber_combat
Think about it. They made ALL this stuff up themselves. Normal sword fighting stuff is next to useless when talking about lightsabers for two main reasons. Unlike swords, the entirity of a lightsaber's weight is in the hilt, whereas many swords use their weight along the whole length to give their attack some heft. Secondly swords only have specific ways they can hurt (hit the enemy with appropriate strength so that the precise blade of the weapon contacts skin), whereas Lightsabers are pretty open (touch bad guy to hot end. Dead).
So they had to make ALL of this up.
They made up seven 'official' forms 'forms' of fighting (basing most of it on various computer games, I think), writing hundreds of words about the philosophies, techniques and practitioners of each. The forms are named "Shii-Cho", "Makashi", "Soresu", "Ataru", "Shien/Djem So", "Numan" and "Juyo/Vaapad."
Next comes a bit about other forms and techniques used in lightsaber fighting. This includes (among other things):
Sokan: Using terrain to your advantage. Jackie Chan is a master of this.
Form 'Zero': Not using a lightsaber... well gee, I didn't realise one way to use a lightsaber was to not use it.
'Dun Moch': "Distracting and taunting an opponent, a Sith technique". Basically shit talking. If you watch the movies and play the games, pretty much all bad guys in Star Wars do this.
Next the site goes on to talk about 'unorthodox' lightsaber methods, then the "three styles of the new jedi order". Compared to the seven they yaked on about before, this is quite simple.
1. Fast
2. Medium
3. Strong
... They put huge effort into those names.
Finally, the home stretch! ... Wait, what? It's not?
Of course it isn't, because now there are names for all the possible ways you can stab/slice someone with a lightsaber!
Cho mai: Cutting off your opponents hand. This was meant to show honour to cause minimal damage to an enemy. Except, you know CUTTING OFF THEIR FRIGGIN' HAND. I dunno about you, but I LIKE my hand. It does all my favourite things (keep it out of the gutter, pervs.)
Cho mok: Cutting off a limb. Odd name, I'd have called it "OH GOD! MY LEG! ARGH! I was using that! Oh man it hurts!"
Cho sun: Cutting off their weapon using arm. "oh man, I am so sorry. I was trying to cho mai you, but I cho sun'ed you instead. Man, is my face red."
Sai cha: Beheading your opponent. Used on opponents "too dangerous to keep alive". ... Surely if you're trying for non-lethality, then a lightsaber isn't the way to go.
Sai tok: Cutting an opponent in half, "frowned upon by the Hedi because of its Sith-like nature". So it's fine to cut a head off, but the moment you go to the waist it becomes bad?
Shiak: Stabbing someone. Surely you don't need a specific name to stab someone.
Shiim: Apparently so, because this is a different type of stabbing someone. This is a small wound, either as an act of desperation, or just to immobilise an opponent from the pain. AKA. Nearly missing, or being a sadist.
Sun djem: Disarming someone. Get this: "a very diverse sub form; moves ranged from spinning a lightsaber to dislodging an opponent's weapon to kicking or punching an opponent." ... Wow, that is a hell of a range. Almost as if the writers of this article were making shit up, trying to link together things that weren't meant to be linked.
Mou kei: Dismembering an opponent through a circular motion of the lightsaber, aimed at major limbs. So basically... the same as 'cho mak', except with a circular motion, rather then a trapezoidal one.
Next it goes on about 'maneuvers'. I won't bore you with them all, just the 'best' one.
Jung: 180 degree turn. I kid you not. "So then I turned around, sorry, I meant I 'jung'.
Finally it goes on about behind the scene stuff. There's one quote here I actually like from the head choreographer of the fights (Nick Gillard). "I wrote them (the fights) very much like a game of chess played at a thousand miles an hour. And every single move is check."
I admit, part of me is scared... but part of me is also REALLY impressed at how much detail has gone into this stuff.
Seriously guys, have a read of this. It's absolutely hilarious.
- 39. A lifetime of reading comics has left me with an impossibly high standard upon women's beauty. However this is counter-acted romantically, by the fact that a lifetime of reading comics has left me very, very un-picky and willing to settle for just about anythin'.
Gentle readers, I am a geek/nerd as the title of this blog suggests, however there are things above and beyond my level of nerdity. Things so powerful in geekitude that they rock my socks clean off. These are things SO AMAZINGLY NERDY that even I am impressed, while simultaneously being scared.
First off, there is a wikipedia dedicated to Star Wars. Nothing revolutionary, there's a wikipedia for everything (even cocktail recipes).
http://starwars.wikia.com/
But, inside this wiki, there are over 40 pages (some of them small, but still there) dedicated to lightsaber combat.
That's right. A fictional form of combat.
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Lightsaber_combat
Think about it. They made ALL this stuff up themselves. Normal sword fighting stuff is next to useless when talking about lightsabers for two main reasons. Unlike swords, the entirity of a lightsaber's weight is in the hilt, whereas many swords use their weight along the whole length to give their attack some heft. Secondly swords only have specific ways they can hurt (hit the enemy with appropriate strength so that the precise blade of the weapon contacts skin), whereas Lightsabers are pretty open (touch bad guy to hot end. Dead).
So they had to make ALL of this up.
They made up seven 'official' forms 'forms' of fighting (basing most of it on various computer games, I think), writing hundreds of words about the philosophies, techniques and practitioners of each. The forms are named "Shii-Cho", "Makashi", "Soresu", "Ataru", "Shien/Djem So", "Numan" and "Juyo/Vaapad."
Next comes a bit about other forms and techniques used in lightsaber fighting. This includes (among other things):
Sokan: Using terrain to your advantage. Jackie Chan is a master of this.
Form 'Zero': Not using a lightsaber... well gee, I didn't realise one way to use a lightsaber was to not use it.
'Dun Moch': "Distracting and taunting an opponent, a Sith technique". Basically shit talking. If you watch the movies and play the games, pretty much all bad guys in Star Wars do this.
- Emperor: "Something something Dark Side. Something something Destiny."
- Darth Vader: "You've got a twin sister, huh?
Maybe we can get her to join instead the- wait, what? ARGH! My hand! Oh shit, man. Yeah, that shit talking backfired on me. Argh, that hurt." - Darth Tyrannus: "Brave of you boy, but I would have thought you'd have learnt your lesson." "Well I am a slow learner." "... You see, you just insulted yourself there. Well... well done man, just seriously, well done. You just proved your an idiot." "Shut up!" "Oh, another biting remark! You sure put me in my place."
Next the site goes on to talk about 'unorthodox' lightsaber methods, then the "three styles of the new jedi order". Compared to the seven they yaked on about before, this is quite simple.
1. Fast
2. Medium
3. Strong
... They put huge effort into those names.
Finally, the home stretch! ... Wait, what? It's not?
Of course it isn't, because now there are names for all the possible ways you can stab/slice someone with a lightsaber!
Cho mai: Cutting off your opponents hand. This was meant to show honour to cause minimal damage to an enemy. Except, you know CUTTING OFF THEIR FRIGGIN' HAND. I dunno about you, but I LIKE my hand. It does all my favourite things (keep it out of the gutter, pervs.)
Cho mok: Cutting off a limb. Odd name, I'd have called it "OH GOD! MY LEG! ARGH! I was using that! Oh man it hurts!"
Cho sun: Cutting off their weapon using arm. "oh man, I am so sorry. I was trying to cho mai you, but I cho sun'ed you instead. Man, is my face red."
Sai cha: Beheading your opponent. Used on opponents "too dangerous to keep alive". ... Surely if you're trying for non-lethality, then a lightsaber isn't the way to go.
Sai tok: Cutting an opponent in half, "frowned upon by the Hedi because of its Sith-like nature". So it's fine to cut a head off, but the moment you go to the waist it becomes bad?
Shiak: Stabbing someone. Surely you don't need a specific name to stab someone.
Shiim: Apparently so, because this is a different type of stabbing someone. This is a small wound, either as an act of desperation, or just to immobilise an opponent from the pain. AKA. Nearly missing, or being a sadist.
Sun djem: Disarming someone. Get this: "a very diverse sub form; moves ranged from spinning a lightsaber to dislodging an opponent's weapon to kicking or punching an opponent." ... Wow, that is a hell of a range. Almost as if the writers of this article were making shit up, trying to link together things that weren't meant to be linked.
Mou kei: Dismembering an opponent through a circular motion of the lightsaber, aimed at major limbs. So basically... the same as 'cho mak', except with a circular motion, rather then a trapezoidal one.
Next it goes on about 'maneuvers'. I won't bore you with them all, just the 'best' one.
Jung: 180 degree turn. I kid you not. "So then I turned around, sorry, I meant I 'jung'.
Finally it goes on about behind the scene stuff. There's one quote here I actually like from the head choreographer of the fights (Nick Gillard). "I wrote them (the fights) very much like a game of chess played at a thousand miles an hour. And every single move is check."
I admit, part of me is scared... but part of me is also REALLY impressed at how much detail has gone into this stuff.
Seriously guys, have a read of this. It's absolutely hilarious.
Sunday, November 9, 2008
In defence of Bay's Transformers
And so, that's how I lost that bet and had to allow Micheal Jackson to use my skin-tone.
Let me say something that will make me either shunned or celebrated among geeks everywhere. Everyone has an opinion, and it's nearly always the dichotomy view of A or B, there is no AB, aB or Ab.
I LIKED the new Transformers movie. As it is, even with the generous support of car companies it cost 120+ million dollars. That is a HUGE amount of money. A Fleich-tonne. You know what would have taken even more money? If the Transformers had had more time on screen. As it is it successfully carried across how huge and powerful these alien machines were. Let's look over some of the many complaints I've seen leveled at it.
1. Too much human stuff, not enough Transformers.
A. It is much easier to empathise with the humans then with giant alien robots. The Transformers cost ENORMOUS amounts of money to computer animate. They took HOURS to animate even one frame. The only way the movie could have been entirely about the Transformers is if they either made the Transformers look incredibly bland and supernatural with their transformations, or if they deliberately made the movie have a loss.
2. The Transformers look too different
A. Look at the cartoon. The Transformers don't actually transform, they just Morph. Their shapes only vaguely correspond with each other. Try putting that in the movie without it looking ridiculously stupid. I once saw someone put an animation test on youtube showing how Optimus Prime looked fine translating from the cartoon to computer animation. He really, really, didn't.
3. My favourite Transformer wasn't in it
A. Neither was mine (Sideswipe, the king of everything). But in general they could only fit so many transformers into the movie. Stay tuned for the sequel.
4. It's just a pro millitary vehicle
A. They had three options. 1. Don't get the millitary involved. Considering the movie is about Alien Lifeforms practically invading Earth and copying the looks of alot of military vehicles, that's not going to happen. 2. Film the military stuff without military support. The movie cost enough as it is, trying to film military sequences without military support would skyrocket the costs. 3. Film the military stuff with military support, and avoid making the military look like idiots. The lesser of three evils. Hell, real life gives the military bad enough press, might as well allow them this fictional victory.
5. Transformers? More like BAYformers! amirite?
A. No. No you are not, and don't try to pressure Ms Ami Rite to support you.
6. Shia LaBouf sucks.
A. I actually liked his performance in this movie. It was different to the "He's a strong and tough kid who is strong and tough when he needs to be". He nearly pisses himself when the Cops he thought would help him turn out to be a giant robot interrogating him. He does the right thing in the end, but he's not the emotionless warrior, he's just the guy with a strong sense of moral right caught up in something bigger then him. I haven't seen him in many other movies, but I'm willing to bet he plays a similar character in all of them. Meh, he plays it well, and I enjoy seeing it on screen, so I like it.
With all that said, is it a perfect movie? God no. My chief complaint.
Why did they kill JAZZ!? Of all the Transformers to kill, he was the stupidest choice.
A. If you're trying to show how incredibly powerful Megatron is (which I'm assuming is the purpose, since they also showed Optimus casually killing a huge Decepticon, Bonecrusher), why would you choose the second smallest Autobot on the team? Surely Megatron picking on the little guy doesn't seem as threatening as if he casually walked through the firepower Ironhide was putting out, then blew his head off with one blast. THAT would make Megatron threatening.
B. Of all the Transformers you could kill... of all the options available... You choose the BLACK one. C'mon guys. We're past this, aren't we? Seriously, do I have to say it?
C. He seemed like he'd been glossed over the entire movie. Ironhide has enormous guns and quotes old movies, then he does a god-damned Rocket-jump. Rachet gets to do an awesome flip thing against the tank, gets high on electricity and comments on Pheremone levels. Jazz calls humans 'little bitches' while breakdancing, copies Kup's move against the tank, and dies. He doesn't even get a close up, like every other Autobot did. It was like they included him just because they were expected to include Jazz, and so they had someone to kill off.
The worst thing? There are many ways it would be possible to bring him back in the next movie, but chances are they'll bugger up how they do that, making it seem like his death meant nothing, and setting a bad precedent regarding death in the movies.
- 36. I've always wanted to get a T-shirt that says, in Latin "Ask me about Grim Fandango". If anyone ever came up to me and asked about Grim Fandango, I would ask them why they bothered learning a dead language, and what was going through their mind when they thought "Hey, this would be a good plan". I would then feel jealous, since I've always wanted to know Latin.
Let me say something that will make me either shunned or celebrated among geeks everywhere. Everyone has an opinion, and it's nearly always the dichotomy view of A or B, there is no AB, aB or Ab.
I LIKED the new Transformers movie. As it is, even with the generous support of car companies it cost 120+ million dollars. That is a HUGE amount of money. A Fleich-tonne. You know what would have taken even more money? If the Transformers had had more time on screen. As it is it successfully carried across how huge and powerful these alien machines were. Let's look over some of the many complaints I've seen leveled at it.
1. Too much human stuff, not enough Transformers.
A. It is much easier to empathise with the humans then with giant alien robots. The Transformers cost ENORMOUS amounts of money to computer animate. They took HOURS to animate even one frame. The only way the movie could have been entirely about the Transformers is if they either made the Transformers look incredibly bland and supernatural with their transformations, or if they deliberately made the movie have a loss.
2. The Transformers look too different
A. Look at the cartoon. The Transformers don't actually transform, they just Morph. Their shapes only vaguely correspond with each other. Try putting that in the movie without it looking ridiculously stupid. I once saw someone put an animation test on youtube showing how Optimus Prime looked fine translating from the cartoon to computer animation. He really, really, didn't.
3. My favourite Transformer wasn't in it
A. Neither was mine (Sideswipe, the king of everything). But in general they could only fit so many transformers into the movie. Stay tuned for the sequel.
4. It's just a pro millitary vehicle
A. They had three options. 1. Don't get the millitary involved. Considering the movie is about Alien Lifeforms practically invading Earth and copying the looks of alot of military vehicles, that's not going to happen. 2. Film the military stuff without military support. The movie cost enough as it is, trying to film military sequences without military support would skyrocket the costs. 3. Film the military stuff with military support, and avoid making the military look like idiots. The lesser of three evils. Hell, real life gives the military bad enough press, might as well allow them this fictional victory.
5. Transformers? More like BAYformers! amirite?
A. No. No you are not, and don't try to pressure Ms Ami Rite to support you.
6. Shia LaBouf sucks.
A. I actually liked his performance in this movie. It was different to the "He's a strong and tough kid who is strong and tough when he needs to be". He nearly pisses himself when the Cops he thought would help him turn out to be a giant robot interrogating him. He does the right thing in the end, but he's not the emotionless warrior, he's just the guy with a strong sense of moral right caught up in something bigger then him. I haven't seen him in many other movies, but I'm willing to bet he plays a similar character in all of them. Meh, he plays it well, and I enjoy seeing it on screen, so I like it.
With all that said, is it a perfect movie? God no. My chief complaint.
Why did they kill JAZZ!? Of all the Transformers to kill, he was the stupidest choice.
A. If you're trying to show how incredibly powerful Megatron is (which I'm assuming is the purpose, since they also showed Optimus casually killing a huge Decepticon, Bonecrusher), why would you choose the second smallest Autobot on the team? Surely Megatron picking on the little guy doesn't seem as threatening as if he casually walked through the firepower Ironhide was putting out, then blew his head off with one blast. THAT would make Megatron threatening.
B. Of all the Transformers you could kill... of all the options available... You choose the BLACK one. C'mon guys. We're past this, aren't we? Seriously, do I have to say it?
C. He seemed like he'd been glossed over the entire movie. Ironhide has enormous guns and quotes old movies, then he does a god-damned Rocket-jump. Rachet gets to do an awesome flip thing against the tank, gets high on electricity and comments on Pheremone levels. Jazz calls humans 'little bitches' while breakdancing, copies Kup's move against the tank, and dies. He doesn't even get a close up, like every other Autobot did. It was like they included him just because they were expected to include Jazz, and so they had someone to kill off.
The worst thing? There are many ways it would be possible to bring him back in the next movie, but chances are they'll bugger up how they do that, making it seem like his death meant nothing, and setting a bad precedent regarding death in the movies.
Thursday, November 6, 2008
Why MMOs are as evil as Ikea
Three things go into a bar, something initially humourous occurs, but upon later retrospection you realise the joke wasn't that funny, leaving you feel cheated and used.
What kind of nerd blog would this be if I did not pay tribute to the most visible nerd-ism in the past 50 years?
MMOs.
Avoid.
I say that as someone who played City of Heroes for two years.
Ladies and gentlemen, let's look at the general requirement for a computer game. "Entertainment". Now, let's make the following general assumptions.
Statement A: Computer game publishers are businesses, that are attempting to make money.
Proof: It's a common statement of fact that the point of businesses is to make money, and computer game publishers are no different.
Statement B: A large number of the more widely known MMOs are pay-per-month affairs
Proof: Google Warcraft, the most popular MMO ever. Pay per month. Granted this is a weak proof, but this is a commonly accepted idea. Some MMOs are NOT pay per month, but in general they are not the commercial (money making) majority, rather they make less money then their peers, at least in Western countries.
Statement C: It is easier to create 'time sinks' then genuine story arcs.
Proof: A Time sink is a simple "Collect X number of Ys" or "Kill A number of Bs", sometimes supported with a generic story ("Those Wolves sure are plaguing my sheep! Go kill fifty of them").
Statement D: A Time Sink is less fun then plot progression
Proof: Plot progression in a combat based game will involve fighting a vast, vast majority of the time. This makes Plot progression and Time Sinks both about killing things, but plot progression has the added factor of story. At very worst that makes plot progression equally as fun as time sinks.
Note: I have a bias here towards story arcs. However, even if someone actively dislikes story arcs, there is little way that doing so could actively interfere with their fun, since it is (literally) free experience to level up your character. Even then, chances are you'd still have to kill things, which is presumably what someone with no enjoyment of story is playing the game for.
Conclusion A: Statement A + Statement B = For MMO publishers to make money, they need you to be playing their games for a long time.
Conclusion B: Conclusion A + Statement C = MMO publishers want you to be playing for a long time and it is quicker to make time sinks then story arcs.
Conclusion C: Conclusion B + Statement D = Therefore they are far more likely to fill the game with plot sinks then story arcs, despite story arcs being of equal or greater fun. Thus providing evidence that they don't care about fun, so much as trying to keep people playing as long as possible.
And don't get me started on making people 'invest' in the game. No one wants to leave behind something they've invested so much time/social life/money into, especially when they realise how little they've gotten out of it so far.
- 33. I have a deep fear of joining the real world. Where I actually have to WORK for what I require. All my life I've been able to coast by with immense ease, that will soon change. I think that's why I'm writing so much crap no one will ever see, it's my own version of the Monkey-Shakespeare thing. If I type out enough crap, eventually there will be SOMETHING worth money.
What kind of nerd blog would this be if I did not pay tribute to the most visible nerd-ism in the past 50 years?
MMOs.
Avoid.
I say that as someone who played City of Heroes for two years.
Ladies and gentlemen, let's look at the general requirement for a computer game. "Entertainment". Now, let's make the following general assumptions.
Statement A: Computer game publishers are businesses, that are attempting to make money.
Proof: It's a common statement of fact that the point of businesses is to make money, and computer game publishers are no different.
Statement B: A large number of the more widely known MMOs are pay-per-month affairs
Proof: Google Warcraft, the most popular MMO ever. Pay per month. Granted this is a weak proof, but this is a commonly accepted idea. Some MMOs are NOT pay per month, but in general they are not the commercial (money making) majority, rather they make less money then their peers, at least in Western countries.
Statement C: It is easier to create 'time sinks' then genuine story arcs.
Proof: A Time sink is a simple "Collect X number of Ys" or "Kill A number of Bs", sometimes supported with a generic story ("Those Wolves sure are plaguing my sheep! Go kill fifty of them").
Statement D: A Time Sink is less fun then plot progression
Proof: Plot progression in a combat based game will involve fighting a vast, vast majority of the time. This makes Plot progression and Time Sinks both about killing things, but plot progression has the added factor of story. At very worst that makes plot progression equally as fun as time sinks.
Note: I have a bias here towards story arcs. However, even if someone actively dislikes story arcs, there is little way that doing so could actively interfere with their fun, since it is (literally) free experience to level up your character. Even then, chances are you'd still have to kill things, which is presumably what someone with no enjoyment of story is playing the game for.
Conclusion A: Statement A + Statement B = For MMO publishers to make money, they need you to be playing their games for a long time.
Conclusion B: Conclusion A + Statement C = MMO publishers want you to be playing for a long time and it is quicker to make time sinks then story arcs.
Conclusion C: Conclusion B + Statement D = Therefore they are far more likely to fill the game with plot sinks then story arcs, despite story arcs being of equal or greater fun. Thus providing evidence that they don't care about fun, so much as trying to keep people playing as long as possible.
And don't get me started on making people 'invest' in the game. No one wants to leave behind something they've invested so much time/social life/money into, especially when they realise how little they've gotten out of it so far.
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Summarise your sex life with pop culture quotes
... And that's when I had to admit I didn't have my pilot's license.
30. I recently had a great experience. While dressed up as a priest I got to walk past some teenagers (low teens) and comment on something with the statement "I'd go that like a Mother F---er". I have never felt so proud about getting the dirty eye from teenagers.
Just for fun, think of major pop culture quotes that can be applied to someone's sex life (not necessarily yours).
"Whatever you do, don't cross the streams."
- Ghost Busters
"But Luke, going in at that speed, do you think you'll be able to pull out in time?"
- Star Wars - A New Hope
"I thought these these things smelt bad... on the outside...."
- Star Wars - The Empire Strikes Back.
"How can the same shit happen to the same guy twice..."
- Die Hard 2
"Did we get paid?"
- Serenity
I had more in my head walking home, but a wave of tiredness has hit me. Tah.
30. I recently had a great experience. While dressed up as a priest I got to walk past some teenagers (low teens) and comment on something with the statement "I'd go that like a Mother F---er". I have never felt so proud about getting the dirty eye from teenagers.
Just for fun, think of major pop culture quotes that can be applied to someone's sex life (not necessarily yours).
"Whatever you do, don't cross the streams."
- Ghost Busters
"But Luke, going in at that speed, do you think you'll be able to pull out in time?"
- Star Wars - A New Hope
"I thought these these things smelt bad... on the outside...."
- Star Wars - The Empire Strikes Back.
"How can the same shit happen to the same guy twice..."
- Die Hard 2
"Did we get paid?"
- Serenity
I had more in my head walking home, but a wave of tiredness has hit me. Tah.
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Nerds say the darnest things
... And that's how I lost my cojoined twin...
It is a collection of internet chat quotes ranging from the random, to the inane, to the genuinely witty, to the metahumourish. Here are a collection from the top 100.
DeadMansHand: haha, last night, me and pete went out to celebrate his engagement and got hugely drunk
DeadMansHand: we got this great idea to bury eachother in the sand close to the water and see who would chicken out first
DeadMansHand: took about a half hour, but the water got up to my face so i freaked and got out
DeadMansHand: i looked around for pete and he must've chickened out before me and stumbled home or something heh
DeadMansHand: What'd he say when he woke up this morning?
Thirteen-: uhh.. he hasn't come home yet.. i thought he was staying with you?DeadMansHand: holy fuck.
DeadMansHand: i fucking hope im wrong about what im thinking right now
DeadMansHand: im fucking going back to the beach to make sure
DeadMansHand: if he gets home, call me, i don't want to be worrying about this
Thirteen-: will do. you better hope he's not still buried, you'll be in deep shit.
quit: (DeadMansHand)
Tyran: wtf? pete came home last night you fuck. Ken's going to be worrying about this shit all day
Thirteen-: haha yea, but it will be fun while it lasts
join: (PeteRepeat) (bob@3F8C4655.11D1C8C.18637D35.IP)
PeteRepeat: fucking ken
PeteRepeat: ken... that fucker buried me in the sand last night, i ran off about 5 minutes to it, left him there to be an idiot
quiqsilver: pete, ken didn't come back last night, i thought he was with you.
PeteRepeat: oh fuck.
PeteRepeat: if ken shows up, make sure he doesn't know that im at the beach digging for his body. i don't want him to think i care or anything.
quit: (PeteRepeat)
Thirteen-: rofl. Those 2 are going to get a huge surprise when they meet at the beach.
Tyran: i can't beleive how perfect their timing was
anamexis: oh man
anamexis: I was opening a coke, right
--> Beefpile (~mbeefpile@cloaked.wi.rr.com) has joined #themacmind
anamexis: and it exploded
anamexis: ALMOST all over my keyboard
anamexis: but I got it away just in time
-- Beefpile has quit (sick fuckers)
anamexis: :<
DragonflyBlade21: A woman has a close male friend. This means that he is probably interested in her, which is why he hangs around so much. She sees him strictly as a friend. This always starts out with, you're a great guy, but I don't like you in that way. This is roughly the equivalent for the guy of going to a job interview and the company saying, You have a great resume, you have all the qualifications we are looking for, but we're not going to hire you. We will, however, use your resume as the basis for comparison for all other applicants. But, we're going to hire somebody who is far less qualified and is probably an alcoholic. And if he doesn't work out, we'll hire somebody else, but still not you. In fact, we will never hire you. But we will call you from time to time to complain about the person that we hired.
Night-hen-gayle: I gotta go. There's a dude next to me and he's watching me type, which is sort of starting to creep me out. Yes dude next to me, I mean you.
JonTG: Man, my penis is so big if I laid it out on a keyboard it'd go all the way from A to Z
JonTG: wait, shit
[TN]FBMachine: i got kicked out of barnes and noble once for moving all the bibles into the fiction section
Alright, now that my job has been done for me by a website, I'm going to go plan the two Halloween costumes I need this week.
- 29. I have recently begun a campaign to get myself into shape. I found out that in 30 minutes I can cycle (on an exercise bike I recently got) about 14 km. So from now on I am going to cycle every day, adding .1 of a kilometer every day, so it gradually increases. I give it two months before I give up on this.
It is a collection of internet chat quotes ranging from the random, to the inane, to the genuinely witty, to the metahumourish. Here are a collection from the top 100.
DeadMansHand: haha, last night, me and pete went out to celebrate his engagement and got hugely drunk
DeadMansHand: we got this great idea to bury eachother in the sand close to the water and see who would chicken out first
DeadMansHand: took about a half hour, but the water got up to my face so i freaked and got out
DeadMansHand: i looked around for pete and he must've chickened out before me and stumbled home or something heh
DeadMansHand: What'd he say when he woke up this morning?
Thirteen-: uhh.. he hasn't come home yet.. i thought he was staying with you?DeadMansHand: holy fuck.
DeadMansHand: i fucking hope im wrong about what im thinking right now
DeadMansHand: im fucking going back to the beach to make sure
DeadMansHand: if he gets home, call me, i don't want to be worrying about this
Thirteen-: will do. you better hope he's not still buried, you'll be in deep shit.
quit: (DeadMansHand)
Tyran: wtf? pete came home last night you fuck. Ken's going to be worrying about this shit all day
Thirteen-: haha yea, but it will be fun while it lasts
join: (PeteRepeat) (bob@3F8C4655.11D1C8C.18637D35.IP)
PeteRepeat: fucking ken
PeteRepeat: ken... that fucker buried me in the sand last night, i ran off about 5 minutes to it, left him there to be an idiot
quiqsilver: pete, ken didn't come back last night, i thought he was with you.
PeteRepeat: oh fuck.
PeteRepeat: if ken shows up, make sure he doesn't know that im at the beach digging for his body. i don't want him to think i care or anything.
quit: (PeteRepeat)
Thirteen-: rofl. Those 2 are going to get a huge surprise when they meet at the beach.
Tyran: i can't beleive how perfect their timing was
anamexis: oh man
anamexis: I was opening a coke, right
--> Beefpile (~mbeefpile@cloaked.wi.rr.com) has joined #themacmind
anamexis: and it exploded
anamexis: ALMOST all over my keyboard
anamexis: but I got it away just in time
-- Beefpile has quit (sick fuckers)
anamexis: :<
DragonflyBlade21: A woman has a close male friend. This means that he is probably interested in her, which is why he hangs around so much. She sees him strictly as a friend. This always starts out with, you're a great guy, but I don't like you in that way. This is roughly the equivalent for the guy of going to a job interview and the company saying, You have a great resume, you have all the qualifications we are looking for, but we're not going to hire you. We will, however, use your resume as the basis for comparison for all other applicants. But, we're going to hire somebody who is far less qualified and is probably an alcoholic. And if he doesn't work out, we'll hire somebody else, but still not you. In fact, we will never hire you. But we will call you from time to time to complain about the person that we hired.
Night-hen-gayle: I gotta go. There's a dude next to me and he's watching me type, which is sort of starting to creep me out. Yes dude next to me, I mean you.
JonTG: Man, my penis is so big if I laid it out on a keyboard it'd go all the way from A to Z
JonTG: wait, shit
[TN]FBMachine: i got kicked out of barnes and noble once for moving all the bibles into the fiction section
Alright, now that my job has been done for me by a website, I'm going to go plan the two Halloween costumes I need this week.
Friday, October 24, 2008
A riddle
... And that's when I returned his vibrating razor.
27. When it comes to gossip, I am a hypocrite. I tell myself I don't want to know, but then I listen in like a bitch the moment anything's being said about people. I'm an information whore.
What is 12,000 words, 28 pages, and a mark of both shame and pride?
The pen and paper based roleplaying rule system I came up with over the past four days.
I probably shouldn't talk about it too openly, after all this is nerdy on an EXTREME level. EXTREME. Seriously, writing your own roleplaying rule system is worse then writing Star Trek Fan Fiction. Goddamnit, I have no pride at the moment.
... Except in the rule system. Seriously, I like this thing. It's complex enough to cover most eventualities, but not so complex it takes hours to play out.
General overview of the system? Why, thank you for asking hypothetical audience who may or may not read this far into the post.
In general, it's basically a system of opposing dice rolls. It designed to play out Hong-Kong style martial arts action, in the modern world or the ancient world, or even a fantasy martial arts world. There is no realism in this thing. The average statistic value for anything (Strength, agility, durability, perception, etc) is 2. The stats go all the way up to 10, with a strength of 9 being classed as "capable of punching a castle gate down with his bare hands".
So... Yeah. I am such a bad geek it terrifies me. Well, never know, I may somehow end up making a living off my jack of all geeks status somehow. Here's hoping I do.
27. When it comes to gossip, I am a hypocrite. I tell myself I don't want to know, but then I listen in like a bitch the moment anything's being said about people. I'm an information whore.
What is 12,000 words, 28 pages, and a mark of both shame and pride?
The pen and paper based roleplaying rule system I came up with over the past four days.
I probably shouldn't talk about it too openly, after all this is nerdy on an EXTREME level. EXTREME. Seriously, writing your own roleplaying rule system is worse then writing Star Trek Fan Fiction. Goddamnit, I have no pride at the moment.
... Except in the rule system. Seriously, I like this thing. It's complex enough to cover most eventualities, but not so complex it takes hours to play out.
General overview of the system? Why, thank you for asking hypothetical audience who may or may not read this far into the post.
In general, it's basically a system of opposing dice rolls. It designed to play out Hong-Kong style martial arts action, in the modern world or the ancient world, or even a fantasy martial arts world. There is no realism in this thing. The average statistic value for anything (Strength, agility, durability, perception, etc) is 2. The stats go all the way up to 10, with a strength of 9 being classed as "capable of punching a castle gate down with his bare hands".
So... Yeah. I am such a bad geek it terrifies me. Well, never know, I may somehow end up making a living off my jack of all geeks status somehow. Here's hoping I do.
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Geek Cred
... So... yeah... That thing I just told you I did? Don't do that mate. It really burns y- Oh hey I didn't see you there.
What so many people don't know is that that is just scratching the surface. Geekiness is more then an aspect of who you are. It is a way of life. And by that standard, my friends, we are all nerds. Who in our lives doesn't have some factoid they know bizarrely huge amounts about. Computers, gaming, comics, movies, sports, cars, the list goes on and on, we are all nerds about something.
But that makes it odd. For just as music is a part of everyone's lives and has seperated into various strata (mainstream, alternative, indie, etc), so too does geekiness. For my point, I will focus upon electronic gaming. Put your hands up if you're a nerd because you like Halo. Now half of you put your hands down. You're not nerds. The kid who made his own Master Chief costume out of alfoil and cardboard can leave his hand up. As can people who've gotten tattooes of Master Chief. You know why, people who had to put their hands down? because you're not a nerd. You're someone who likes an INCREDIBLY mainstream game. You have no geek cred.
Aha, and now we come to the title. Geek Cred. It's not something to be proud of, to be honest, but we all have it. It's an ultimate contradiction, a mix of "Well at least the geek stuff I like isn't as bad as the geek stuff he likes" and "you sad, sad little person. I can't believe you've never heard of Mount and Blade, an excellent indie game."
Did you all notice that? "My geek stuff isn't as geeky as his geek stuff", mixed with "I'm a bigger geek about it then you."
The easiest way I find to visualise the geek cred chart is to imagine a circle. On this circle, around the edge, are points, each point coresponding to a particular geekiness, and from each point radiating out in a straight line from the centre are the stages of geekiness in that particular field. The closer you are to 'north' on this circle, the less geeky you are. If you fall on the equator of the circle, you are neutral. Above the equater your geekiness is accepted/useful.
Some fields are geeky from the get go. I'm sorry, but at no stage in life can love for Star Trek be called anything other then non-geeky. Star Wars, on the other hand, as a mainstream movie, has fans who are not as geeky. So in that way I would position Star Wars at just below the equator line, while Star Trek is beneath it.
"Just below the equator line? Are you nuts? Have you SEEN those guys who have ACTUAL storm trooper outfits!?"
Yes I have seen them, and I want one.
That is the beauty of the chart. Since the only real measurement in the chart is how far above or below the equator you are, and your geekiness is measured on the straight line of the up-down axis. Notice, if you will, that even if you start JUST below the middle line, by the time you would be on the FAR outer edges (well beyond the scale of the above diagram. E.G. Comparing a 'casual Harry Potter book fan' with "I run Harry Potter roleplaying game where I created the rules for all the spells and have fantasies about Hermine... Hemrinone... Hermaninonie... However her name is spelt), you have drifted FAR beyond the line of acceptibility in normal conversation.
So how do we justify it to ourselves when we occupy a level beneath the equator (which is where I live, incidently, both physically and... spiritually)? Geek Cred.
You're not an online gaming geek unless you've played an MMO and invested MANY hours into it at some point in your life. You're not a gaming geek unless you know that Team Fortress originated as a mod. You're not a music geek unless you turn your nose up at punk band 'covers' where they play the exact same song, just alot faster and out of tune. You're not a fantasy geek unless you can discuss how Tolkein's works formed the basis for the modern fantasy story. You're not a Star Wars geek unless you know how many Lightsaber styles there are. You're not an Eastern RPG geek unless you've earned a Golden Chocobo. You're not a Western RPG geek unless you know what THAC0 stands for.
If you know that, you have cred.
As well as an aspect of your life you fear to share with the world.
- 21. I am 21 and a bit years old. When I was 16 I assumed 18 was the age you started really maturing psychologically. When I was 18 I assumed it was 21. Now I'm 21 and I am assuming it's 25. If I get to 25 and STILL don't see the purpose of lawns, going to 'sales' for things I wouldn't have bought in the first place, redecorating (with anything other then "That is a WICKED pirate flag.") or going out NOT to get drunk, I am just abandoning ALL assumptions about life.
What so many people don't know is that that is just scratching the surface. Geekiness is more then an aspect of who you are. It is a way of life. And by that standard, my friends, we are all nerds. Who in our lives doesn't have some factoid they know bizarrely huge amounts about. Computers, gaming, comics, movies, sports, cars, the list goes on and on, we are all nerds about something.
But that makes it odd. For just as music is a part of everyone's lives and has seperated into various strata (mainstream, alternative, indie, etc), so too does geekiness. For my point, I will focus upon electronic gaming. Put your hands up if you're a nerd because you like Halo. Now half of you put your hands down. You're not nerds. The kid who made his own Master Chief costume out of alfoil and cardboard can leave his hand up. As can people who've gotten tattooes of Master Chief. You know why, people who had to put their hands down? because you're not a nerd. You're someone who likes an INCREDIBLY mainstream game. You have no geek cred.
Aha, and now we come to the title. Geek Cred. It's not something to be proud of, to be honest, but we all have it. It's an ultimate contradiction, a mix of "Well at least the geek stuff I like isn't as bad as the geek stuff he likes" and "you sad, sad little person. I can't believe you've never heard of Mount and Blade, an excellent indie game."
Did you all notice that? "My geek stuff isn't as geeky as his geek stuff", mixed with "I'm a bigger geek about it then you."
The easiest way I find to visualise the geek cred chart is to imagine a circle. On this circle, around the edge, are points, each point coresponding to a particular geekiness, and from each point radiating out in a straight line from the centre are the stages of geekiness in that particular field. The closer you are to 'north' on this circle, the less geeky you are. If you fall on the equator of the circle, you are neutral. Above the equater your geekiness is accepted/useful.Some fields are geeky from the get go. I'm sorry, but at no stage in life can love for Star Trek be called anything other then non-geeky. Star Wars, on the other hand, as a mainstream movie, has fans who are not as geeky. So in that way I would position Star Wars at just below the equator line, while Star Trek is beneath it.
"Just below the equator line? Are you nuts? Have you SEEN those guys who have ACTUAL storm trooper outfits!?"
Yes I have seen them, and I want one.
That is the beauty of the chart. Since the only real measurement in the chart is how far above or below the equator you are, and your geekiness is measured on the straight line of the up-down axis. Notice, if you will, that even if you start JUST below the middle line, by the time you would be on the FAR outer edges (well beyond the scale of the above diagram. E.G. Comparing a 'casual Harry Potter book fan' with "I run Harry Potter roleplaying game where I created the rules for all the spells and have fantasies about Hermine... Hemrinone... Hermaninonie... However her name is spelt), you have drifted FAR beyond the line of acceptibility in normal conversation.
So how do we justify it to ourselves when we occupy a level beneath the equator (which is where I live, incidently, both physically and... spiritually)? Geek Cred.
You're not an online gaming geek unless you've played an MMO and invested MANY hours into it at some point in your life. You're not a gaming geek unless you know that Team Fortress originated as a mod. You're not a music geek unless you turn your nose up at punk band 'covers' where they play the exact same song, just alot faster and out of tune. You're not a fantasy geek unless you can discuss how Tolkein's works formed the basis for the modern fantasy story. You're not a Star Wars geek unless you know how many Lightsaber styles there are. You're not an Eastern RPG geek unless you've earned a Golden Chocobo. You're not a Western RPG geek unless you know what THAC0 stands for.
If you know that, you have cred.
As well as an aspect of your life you fear to share with the world.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)