I am such a great guy. I mean seriously, I'm so good to me.
I don't really have much money to spare, and yet I still stole 45 dollars from myself today and bought a couple of games on Steam. I mean, the charity of buying me presents like that, when I really can't afford it, is just something to commend me for. Thanks, me. Thanks a bunch.
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
Prince of Persia, starring Jake Gylenhaal's Abs!
If you're a gamer, then ever since the Mario Bros movie came out over a decade ago, you've been waiting for years to see the day when somebody makes a good video game movie. There have been quite a few failed attempts, even if you don't count Uwe Boll (I swear he's doing it on purpose), and most of us have lost hope at this point.
And yet, every time we hear about something that might get made in the next four or five years, there's that little voice that goes "hey, have some faith. Maybe they'll get it right this time!"
Two years ago, a little birdie told me that Prince of Persia: Sands of Time was getting made into a movie. The below link will take you to a brief interview with the director about the film, which is in post-production and comes out next year. It seems to have a bit of a budget, as well as Jake Gylenhall.
Most of what's said in this interview concerns me. They seem to be talking excitedly about how they're planning to follow the routine conventions and take no risks whatsoever.
On the other hand, some of the fight scenes look like they could be good, the set actually looks really impressive, and it seems that the people making the movie are seriously dedicated to making it good.
[labored sigh] I always get my hopes up, and they are always dashed. Already the cycle begins to repeat. But hey, maybe they'll get it right this time?
http://kotaku.com/5248168/ogle-chesty-jake-in-this-prince-of-persia-movie-footage
Overly elaborate automated traps, sand monsters, copious amounts of acrobatics (preferably several hundred feet off the ground with a breathtaking view of a destroyed city in the background), and some good sword fights. I am asking for that much, because those were all it took to make the games great. Incidentally, I consider the PoP trilogy (as a whole) to have been one of the best game series in the last console generation, despite some severe flaws.
And yet, every time we hear about something that might get made in the next four or five years, there's that little voice that goes "hey, have some faith. Maybe they'll get it right this time!"
Two years ago, a little birdie told me that Prince of Persia: Sands of Time was getting made into a movie. The below link will take you to a brief interview with the director about the film, which is in post-production and comes out next year. It seems to have a bit of a budget, as well as Jake Gylenhall.
Most of what's said in this interview concerns me. They seem to be talking excitedly about how they're planning to follow the routine conventions and take no risks whatsoever.
On the other hand, some of the fight scenes look like they could be good, the set actually looks really impressive, and it seems that the people making the movie are seriously dedicated to making it good.
[labored sigh] I always get my hopes up, and they are always dashed. Already the cycle begins to repeat. But hey, maybe they'll get it right this time?
http://kotaku.com/5248168/ogle-chesty-jake-in-this-prince-of-persia-movie-footage
Overly elaborate automated traps, sand monsters, copious amounts of acrobatics (preferably several hundred feet off the ground with a breathtaking view of a destroyed city in the background), and some good sword fights. I am asking for that much, because those were all it took to make the games great. Incidentally, I consider the PoP trilogy (as a whole) to have been one of the best game series in the last console generation, despite some severe flaws.
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Dada Daa Da Duh
A few days back, I watched Jurassic Park again. And you know what, those still look like real fucking dinosaurs. Long after the kung fu in the matrix stopped looking like magic and started looking like photoshopped ripple effects, Spielberg's dino-fest still looks freaking awesome.
Still, on an island full of natural prey, why are the T-rex and Velociraptors so hell-bent on eating these people? I mean, you actually see the T-rex drop a Gallimimus to check and see if there's a child-McNugget behidn a log. I mean seriously, the three people combined probably don't weigh more than that meal he just dropped, and several more of the buggers had stopped to watch him eat.
Awesome movie, but I think Spielberg overestimated just how much these creatures would have cared that there were people running around. Still, just in case he was right, Raptor-proof your home today!
Still, on an island full of natural prey, why are the T-rex and Velociraptors so hell-bent on eating these people? I mean, you actually see the T-rex drop a Gallimimus to check and see if there's a child-McNugget behidn a log. I mean seriously, the three people combined probably don't weigh more than that meal he just dropped, and several more of the buggers had stopped to watch him eat.
Awesome movie, but I think Spielberg overestimated just how much these creatures would have cared that there were people running around. Still, just in case he was right, Raptor-proof your home today!
Monday, May 11, 2009
Dear Webcomic Authors...
I put forward the following, simple plea to all webcomics out there. Particularly, the young ones that have not yet built up a large archive.
When denoting addresses for your comics, please use a numerical numbering system, instead of a date-based one. Date-based record-keeping is fine for a visually interactive database (such as your archives page) but when it's text-based (i.e. trying to find the page you want by editing the text in the address bar) sequential filing makes a LOT more sense.
When denoting addresses for your comics, please use a numerical numbering system, instead of a date-based one. Date-based record-keeping is fine for a visually interactive database (such as your archives page) but when it's text-based (i.e. trying to find the page you want by editing the text in the address bar) sequential filing makes a LOT more sense.
Saturday, May 9, 2009
Losing my Relig... oh wait. There it is.
So finals are over. I'd say thank God, but I've been particularly sketchy on what/if I believe regarding a higher power these days. I have always had a feeling that there is something up there, but for many years now, I've been rather vague as to what or whom.
Agnosticism is, in my opinion, the closest thing to right a person can be when it comes to picking a religion. To state with any level of certainty that there is nothing is no less a leap of faith than any other religion, and short of God himself revealing it to you (yeah, suuuuure He did) it's highly unlikely that any of the particular faiths got it just right, much less that you chanced upon the correct one. Still, agnosticism leaves one very frustrated when you need to say a quick prayer to someone, ask for a blessing, or just plain thank the heavens for your good fortune. If you default to a particular god, it feels like I'm committing a heresy against agnosticism. If you just pray to "whoever," I have a hard time believing "whoever" is up there is going to be especially persuaded. "Dear what's-your-name, please help me pass my accounting test tomorrow, Amen." I mean, if I was an all-powerful deity and my subjects couldn't even be bothered to guess my name, I doubt I could be bothered to alter reality in their favor. I wouldn't do favors for friends when they can't remember my name, why would I do it for my subjects?
And so, I think I'm going to start my own religion. I'm at least 20% serious here. It might drop to 10% after lunch, I'm not sure yet.
In Accounting, everything has always been about balance. It's an impossibly intricate system in which every action demands an equal and opposite reaction, thus necessitating a perfect balance at all times. Imbalances simply cannot happen in Accounting. This is not to say that it's against the rules for there to be no balance, as it is to say that it is impossible. If things in an accounting system do not appear to balance, then you have erred. The balance is there, it's always there, you've simply failed to properly measure things. It is no more possible for your debits to be unequal to your credits than for a large mass in space to naturally repel smaller masses rather than attract them.
Accounting is, for most intents and purposes, a theoretical, rather than a physical science. It measures something that is not tangible. Physics, chemistry, and even psychology, for example, are attempts by humanity to define in human terms the reality of what is going on. What is going on, in these cases, is always physical. Accounting is an attempt to express, in human terms, what is going on, but it's not physically happening. While it's true that some assets (like a building) have a physical form, we are not measuring anything physical about that asset. We are not measuring it's weight, or it's size, but rather it's worth. We are measuring what this asset could yield, what a liability could cost, or what assets and liability unit of equity entitles the holder to. We are measuring something that, while it has no physical form, truly impacts the physical world every day. If the dollar were to lose all its value, an accounting system that measures in dollars would naturally adjust itself to represent this change (for example, a physical asset would be worth more dollars, because dollars are worth less but the asset's physical worth remains unchanged). In other words, we are measuring power.
Thus far, accounting is the science of studying the power of wealth. But I imagine the most basic principle of balance can be applied to power in all its forms. In all systems, there is a balance. the power of wealth is a man-made system, and is therefore incredibly simple, relatively speaking. There are only two sides which must balance, and a finite number of forces that can act upon the balance. As hard as it is to understand even this simple system, it is an immensely rudimentary facsimile of more complicated systems, like ecosystems, or the universe itself.
Yes, that's right, the universe itself is a system of perpetual balance. Perpetual meaning that at no point is there an imbalance. It's not that when one thing acts to change that balance, another thing acts to readjust it, but rather that actions and there associated reactions occur simultaneously. Whenever one thing happens, something else happens not in response, but in tandem, to maintain the perpetual balance. This balance could no more be upset than the very laws of reality could shift and readjust themselves. It's not a question of probability or the lack of sufficient force, but rather it is a logical impossibility.
This is the Great Balance, in which we all have some amount of weight, both through our physical forms, our actions, and even our thoughts and beliefs. Everything that we do has a reaction, and everything that happens has happened as part of a balance. Although you most assuredly can impact the world around you, events of "chance" are simply the random result of the universe maintaining itself. All the other forces within the system go through various actions, and the concurrent reactions are what resulted in the world being the way it is.
So from now on, when the machinations of the Great Balance are in my favor, I shall be grateful to the Balance. When they oppose me, I shall curse It, if I'm feeling cheeky. This does not provide an ideal answer to my afore-mentioned troubles, as the Great Balance is more of a natural state of things than a sentient god, but all things considered, that doesn't necessarily make it any less likely to care.
And, with all that in mind, I'd like to say. Fuck the Balance, because I didn't get my 3.5 GPA.
This has been,
B.S.
PS: There were no spelling errors to correct when I finished this post, and this post was highlighting the potential existence of a higher power. Coincidence? I think so.
[EDIT: damn you Kurt. Damn you and your keen sense of grammar.]
Agnosticism is, in my opinion, the closest thing to right a person can be when it comes to picking a religion. To state with any level of certainty that there is nothing is no less a leap of faith than any other religion, and short of God himself revealing it to you (yeah, suuuuure He did) it's highly unlikely that any of the particular faiths got it just right, much less that you chanced upon the correct one. Still, agnosticism leaves one very frustrated when you need to say a quick prayer to someone, ask for a blessing, or just plain thank the heavens for your good fortune. If you default to a particular god, it feels like I'm committing a heresy against agnosticism. If you just pray to "whoever," I have a hard time believing "whoever" is up there is going to be especially persuaded. "Dear what's-your-name, please help me pass my accounting test tomorrow, Amen." I mean, if I was an all-powerful deity and my subjects couldn't even be bothered to guess my name, I doubt I could be bothered to alter reality in their favor. I wouldn't do favors for friends when they can't remember my name, why would I do it for my subjects?
And so, I think I'm going to start my own religion. I'm at least 20% serious here. It might drop to 10% after lunch, I'm not sure yet.
In Accounting, everything has always been about balance. It's an impossibly intricate system in which every action demands an equal and opposite reaction, thus necessitating a perfect balance at all times. Imbalances simply cannot happen in Accounting. This is not to say that it's against the rules for there to be no balance, as it is to say that it is impossible. If things in an accounting system do not appear to balance, then you have erred. The balance is there, it's always there, you've simply failed to properly measure things. It is no more possible for your debits to be unequal to your credits than for a large mass in space to naturally repel smaller masses rather than attract them.
Accounting is, for most intents and purposes, a theoretical, rather than a physical science. It measures something that is not tangible. Physics, chemistry, and even psychology, for example, are attempts by humanity to define in human terms the reality of what is going on. What is going on, in these cases, is always physical. Accounting is an attempt to express, in human terms, what is going on, but it's not physically happening. While it's true that some assets (like a building) have a physical form, we are not measuring anything physical about that asset. We are not measuring it's weight, or it's size, but rather it's worth. We are measuring what this asset could yield, what a liability could cost, or what assets and liability unit of equity entitles the holder to. We are measuring something that, while it has no physical form, truly impacts the physical world every day. If the dollar were to lose all its value, an accounting system that measures in dollars would naturally adjust itself to represent this change (for example, a physical asset would be worth more dollars, because dollars are worth less but the asset's physical worth remains unchanged). In other words, we are measuring power.
Thus far, accounting is the science of studying the power of wealth. But I imagine the most basic principle of balance can be applied to power in all its forms. In all systems, there is a balance. the power of wealth is a man-made system, and is therefore incredibly simple, relatively speaking. There are only two sides which must balance, and a finite number of forces that can act upon the balance. As hard as it is to understand even this simple system, it is an immensely rudimentary facsimile of more complicated systems, like ecosystems, or the universe itself.
Yes, that's right, the universe itself is a system of perpetual balance. Perpetual meaning that at no point is there an imbalance. It's not that when one thing acts to change that balance, another thing acts to readjust it, but rather that actions and there associated reactions occur simultaneously. Whenever one thing happens, something else happens not in response, but in tandem, to maintain the perpetual balance. This balance could no more be upset than the very laws of reality could shift and readjust themselves. It's not a question of probability or the lack of sufficient force, but rather it is a logical impossibility.
This is the Great Balance, in which we all have some amount of weight, both through our physical forms, our actions, and even our thoughts and beliefs. Everything that we do has a reaction, and everything that happens has happened as part of a balance. Although you most assuredly can impact the world around you, events of "chance" are simply the random result of the universe maintaining itself. All the other forces within the system go through various actions, and the concurrent reactions are what resulted in the world being the way it is.
So from now on, when the machinations of the Great Balance are in my favor, I shall be grateful to the Balance. When they oppose me, I shall curse It, if I'm feeling cheeky. This does not provide an ideal answer to my afore-mentioned troubles, as the Great Balance is more of a natural state of things than a sentient god, but all things considered, that doesn't necessarily make it any less likely to care.
And, with all that in mind, I'd like to say. Fuck the Balance, because I didn't get my 3.5 GPA.
This has been,
B.S.
PS: There were no spelling errors to correct when I finished this post, and this post was highlighting the potential existence of a higher power. Coincidence? I think so.
[EDIT: damn you Kurt. Damn you and your keen sense of grammar.]
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
Red Sandbox
So last night, I took a break from studying and fired up the free demo for Red Faction: Guerilla. I think it is important to say, before discussing the game, that I was actually a bit disappointed at first. I've been looking forward to this title for more than a year, mostly because I think that the geo-mod concept (I'll explain that shortly) is a long overdue innovation. Obviously, the game wasn't going to live up to a year's worth of being hyped up in my own mind, and it didn't. It did, however, deliver everything it promised and then some, and once I brought my sky-high standards down a bit, I had a darn good time with the demo.
So what's it like? Think GTA. On Mars. With a 100% destructible environment. And the police are always after you. And there are a lot more explosions.
Frankly, I think I need to go into a bit more detail on the 100% destructible environment thing. I’m not sure you’re getting me here. 100%. Everything can be broken. And that's not like every building has a health meter, and if you damage it enough it will come crumbling down, oh no. If struck with enough force (preferably a vehicle collision or a remote charge, but a sledgehammer works just fine in a pinch) absolutely anything in the game will break. Basically, you hit a building’s wall with a sledgehammer or car, and you will eventually bust a hole in that wall. The building stands up in accordance with a physics engine, so if you break enough of the walls on the first floor, there is nothing to support the roof, and it will collapse under its own weight. Bringing the building down is not so much a function of doing "enough" damage, but taking out the support structure and letting science do the real legwork.
Now, at first I thought it was awfully strange how much I had to bust out a building’s support structure to get it to fall over. I mean, I’d say around 50-60% of the first floor of a 1-story building had to be taken out to get the roof to collapse. But I recently realized something that actually helps that make sense. Mars has approximately 38% of Earth’s gravity. The buildings are usually comprised of very thick stone walls with sound structural integrity, and the demo didn’t feature a lot of top-heavy buildings (i.e. buildings with multiple stories). Also, once you hop into your giant walking death machine (fun fact: in Red Faction, mining vehicles are infinitely superior to military vehicles in every way) it’s just plain awesome how quickly things fall down. The way you can swat tanks aside and knock over buildings is reminiscent of Rampage for the old 8-bit.
As much fun as it is, I worry that, eventually, knocking things over and killing lots and lots of people might get old. At some point, I can see myself saying “eh, you’ve seen one skyscraper come tumbling to the ground, you’ve seen them all.” Although, in a couple weeks when the game comes out, I am going to bet $60 that it will take a long time for me to say that.
Another thing about this game is that it looks to be very much a sandbox. If GTA was just plain boring to you, then you might not be totally stoked about this. Alternatively, if you love sandbox titles and destroying things, then this will light your ass on fire, Theo.
I strongly recommend at least giving the demo a whirl. It costs nothing. Do give it some time, because the controls feel quite awkward at first. You get used to them after a while.
So what's it like? Think GTA. On Mars. With a 100% destructible environment. And the police are always after you. And there are a lot more explosions.
Frankly, I think I need to go into a bit more detail on the 100% destructible environment thing. I’m not sure you’re getting me here. 100%. Everything can be broken. And that's not like every building has a health meter, and if you damage it enough it will come crumbling down, oh no. If struck with enough force (preferably a vehicle collision or a remote charge, but a sledgehammer works just fine in a pinch) absolutely anything in the game will break. Basically, you hit a building’s wall with a sledgehammer or car, and you will eventually bust a hole in that wall. The building stands up in accordance with a physics engine, so if you break enough of the walls on the first floor, there is nothing to support the roof, and it will collapse under its own weight. Bringing the building down is not so much a function of doing "enough" damage, but taking out the support structure and letting science do the real legwork.
Now, at first I thought it was awfully strange how much I had to bust out a building’s support structure to get it to fall over. I mean, I’d say around 50-60% of the first floor of a 1-story building had to be taken out to get the roof to collapse. But I recently realized something that actually helps that make sense. Mars has approximately 38% of Earth’s gravity. The buildings are usually comprised of very thick stone walls with sound structural integrity, and the demo didn’t feature a lot of top-heavy buildings (i.e. buildings with multiple stories). Also, once you hop into your giant walking death machine (fun fact: in Red Faction, mining vehicles are infinitely superior to military vehicles in every way) it’s just plain awesome how quickly things fall down. The way you can swat tanks aside and knock over buildings is reminiscent of Rampage for the old 8-bit.
As much fun as it is, I worry that, eventually, knocking things over and killing lots and lots of people might get old. At some point, I can see myself saying “eh, you’ve seen one skyscraper come tumbling to the ground, you’ve seen them all.” Although, in a couple weeks when the game comes out, I am going to bet $60 that it will take a long time for me to say that.
Another thing about this game is that it looks to be very much a sandbox. If GTA was just plain boring to you, then you might not be totally stoked about this. Alternatively, if you love sandbox titles and destroying things, then this will light your ass on fire, Theo.
I strongly recommend at least giving the demo a whirl. It costs nothing. Do give it some time, because the controls feel quite awkward at first. You get used to them after a while.
Sunday, May 3, 2009
Tweet on this, you Commie Son of a Bitch!
A series of slightly humorous, completely unrelated things that I'd have blogged about over the past few weeks if I had time.
- My desk is now a fortress. I have arranged two monitors, my speakers, my computer's case, a coffee tin, and a lamp in such a manner that my cat is completely unable to get up here and climb all over my keyboard. This took forever, but I think I've finally got it to where it's impenetrable.
EDIT: Nevermind. Somehow he hurdled the monitor fence. Stupid ninja-cat... - Terra drew me a picture of a fairy riding a unicorn, which is stabbing a care-bear. It is awesome, and is now taped to the side of my PC so I can look at it whenever I'm feeling down.
- I've said it once before but it bears repeating: I have a new PC, and it is glorious.
- Despite a concerted effort, I am utterly unable to convince Windows Media Player that Blind Satellite's "Flight School" is, in fact, not performed by Voices of Masada, and does not belong on the Dark Awakening, Vol. 5 album. Windows Media player continually renames the the song Flight, and claims that it was composed by Leydon, Martin, and Shah. I cannot seem to reorganize it under a different album, no matter how many times I edit or redownload it.
- [two witty and poignant cents in on the gay rights/religion debate on Kurtharsis]
- A little while back, I learned how to say "crossdresser" in sign language, when I saw a crossdresser walk past a deaf couple.
- The weather sure has been nice lately
- I met Theo's new lady-friend. She is quite the hip individual. 4.6 Megafonzies.
- I should be studying right now
- I've been going to quite a bit of theater lately. I saw Arabian Nights (awesome) and Winesburg
- Note for the above: The version of Bare that I saw was without any nudity. And this isn't like the time I didn't notice the blue wang in Watchmen, there really weren't any exposed penises. I have confirmed this.
- L4D is qutie entertaining, now that I have a PC that can run it, but the lag I experience makes it border on unplayable. I'll be almost done healing myself, then a half second of lag will make me start all over. Or I'll be the one responsible for holding a particular bottleneck for the rescue, and then suddenly the screen will freeze for a few seconds, and then there's 50 zombies through the window. It doesn't happen often, maybe 2-3 times per play-through, but it's all manner of annoying.
- For the first time ever, I'm seeing how Twitter might have been useful to me at some point.
- I should really be studying now.
- When my PC crashed last month, I lost all my music. We're talking like 6 gigs of music. I now have almost nothing. If I manage to visit STL in the Summer, and I bring my PC, I hope somebody can help me fix that.
- [something clever about this whole pig flu thing]
-
I recently cracked Fallout 3 back open, and played through the Operation: - In case you didn't hear me the first time, watch There Will Be Brawl right freaking now.
Okay, I think I'm done.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
