Thursday, June 2, 2011

Rethinking Scooby Doo

Part 1: Fred Jones

Freddy is known as the leader of the group. He’s also an asshole.

To start with, that van is definitely not his, yet he insists on driving everywhere. Does Fred look like the kind of person who would own a hippie van, complete with shag carpeting? Hell no. He’s a v-neck sweater-wearing, tennis-playing jock with the look and talk of the son of a wealthy Long Island couple. He got everything he wanted when he was a kid because of a status he didn’t earn, and his relationships with others have always been akin to a man owning a bunch of dogs. They do what he says. If they don’t he subtlety punishes them by confidently explaining to the girls of the group (who listen thanks to his infuriatingly good looks) why he is right and the disagreeing party is not worthy of manhood. So of course he drives the van. He calls the shots because he’s entitled to call the shots, just as he’s always been.

His sense of entitlement carries over into the mysteries he drags the group into. He treats everyone they run into as inferiors, never believing a word of what anyone says. He KNOWS he’s the smartest man on the planet, and he’ll be happy to prove it to you. How? By charging into any situation someone tells him not to. He’ll be happy to confront you and make you look like a fool in front of Daphne (that’s what gets her off). Then, when he has to put action behind those words, he drags his group along to do the work he was scared to do in the first place while he and Daphne take off to have a little alone time. Far way from any possible danger. Meanwhile the others trespass through a dark mansion, museum, or crypt looking for the monster Freddy explained didn’t exist.

It doesn’t matter if there really is a monster or not. They’re in a secluded, backwater town with no one around. They could easily be hurt by falling buildings, unseen holes, or any number of natural dangers these places have. They could just as easily be robbed, raped, or murdered. Why are they doing this? Because Freddy-boy is overcompensating for his horrendous insecurities.

He’s selfish, manipulative, and a coward. The worst part? He has no idea that’s what he’s doing. He legitimately believes he is the greatest thing that has ever graced the Earth, and everyone else should listen to him because of it. He even calls the group “gang”, the equivalent of “chief” or “boss” or any other derogatory term disguised as a title of superiority.

Freddy’s the leader because, like so many alpha-dogs in the world, he buries his own inadequacies in the misery he brings others around him.

(Image from www.thepopsite.com. Used to demonstrate and clarify character. Image is the property of Warner Brothers.)

Monday, February 21, 2011

Catch 22


Broken Bells - Sailing to Nowhere

Read it.


Thursday, February 17, 2011

The Prediction


Gnarles Barkley - Going on

Tunisia: Civilian democratic government.
Egypt: Democratic government "under the care of" the military.
Bahrain: Unstable democracy resulting in autocratic government.
Lybia: Democratic government "under the care of" the military.
Yemen: Protracted, bloody civil war leading to a takeover by extremists. Extremist government toppled by Saudi Arabia either through coercion or direct invasion and autocratic government installed.
Iraq: Election of religious leadership.
Algeria: Government maintains power.
Iran: Government maintains power.

I don't like many of these, but I think this will be the outcome after all is said and done in the Arab World.

(photo courtesy of PressTV)

Monday, February 14, 2011

The Real Catacylsm



Cage The Elephant - In One Ear


The MMO world is in chaos. World of Warcraft, the undisputed dictator of the genre for the past six years, is experiencing a Mubarak-style loss of faith with the general population. Part of this is from the changes made in Cataclysm (it’s most recent expansion), but the primary reason regularly agreed upon is simply burnout. The game is old, and it’s starting to show its age. This, naturally, has would-be MMO developers all over the world pissing themselves in excitement. With World of Warcraft going down, could it be possible for another MMO to take its place? Could another company develop a game that won’t be swallowed whole like so many others during the peak reign of WoW?


Probably not. Warcraft will fall like Rome, dividing its player base amongst many different MMOs, one of which will be Blizzard’s own creation. In the meantime, MMO fans who have already burnt out from WoW have been subjected to a lineup of “wanna-be” games that have ranged on a scale of gimmick to horse manure. People have filled forum servers trying to explain what it is that their newest and greatest MMO is going to offer and how it will be so much better than that monstrosity of Warcraft. They tell us we should play this game because we won’t have to grind. They say we won’t have to run long distances. They say we won’t have to waste time in general chat trying to find groups. It’s linear. It’s got a story. It’s a war. You can PvP or PvE and never do the other. They tell us that the casual gamer will be able to keep up with the hardcore gamer.


I’m not sure if the development teams are being run by Helen Keller or if they simply have never played a video game other than Call of Duty before. To break down how far these people have their heads up their asses, let’s take a look at the basic principles that have made super-MMOs just that:


-Open world. This doesn’t just mean I can run anywhere I want. If you don’t get that concept, you shouldn’t be allowed near a computer (I’m looking at you, Warhammer Online). This means that the world should be continuous. I should be able to explore exotic jungles, wander giant cities, dive into deep oceans, and (most importantly) see all the crap that’s in between these areas. The five-mile stretch of dirt road and farms? Yeah, that’s supposed to be there. You know why? Because it’s there in the real world. Removing the “boring” part reminds me that it’s a video game. Not what you’re going for.


-Freedom. Liberté, égalité, fraternité. If I don’t want to do quests for the weirdo Undead, do not make me. If I want to grind ogers to level, I should be able to do that. If I want to do nothing but sit in a city and sell really rare crap I bought for less, let me do it. In fact, reward me for doing it. Runescape has entire classes that don’t fight. Instead they craft stuff and are merchants. That’s cool. It adds an entirely new level of complexity to the game that makes it that much more addicting. That does not mean make a half-assed “everyone has one” alt class. Make “merchant” or “politic” classes primary classes that get experience and level up just like warrior classes, they just do something else in the game. They also have to be needed. It’s not that hard. There are mines scattered in high level zones. These mines hold a material that is used to make epic stuff for combat. Only engineers can mine it. Imagine the complexity of that economy?


-All players are not equal. Casual players do not hold the key to your money. Hardcore players do. Yes, there should be stuff for casual players. There should be more stuff that is hard to get, and it should be only achievable through dedication to getting it done. I’m not talking about ludicrous players (14 hours a day). I’m talking about players that log on once a day for a few hours, more on weekends. And for raids. That’s a hardcore player, and those are the players that are actually going to make it to max level and grind out that cool thing that helps. So give them stuff. Don’t also give that stuff to casual players in a bit to “keep them in play”. I can’t go back to school and earn a second degree in Engineering in only two years because I’m “rested”. If a player wants to work their ass off for something, give them something better than the three that hacked a tree for an hour because they were chatting about their next failed podcast on Skype.


-Non-linear. It’s a world. No one should be holding your hand and leading you to the next town or quest after the first couple levels. Did you forget there are other players in the game? Lots of them? Bring back mentoring. Make players seek out more experienced players to find out where that cool item is, or what area is best after the one their in. It’s adds significant depth when your leveling experience is full of wandering and exploration. It gives it a kind of “coming of age” feel. If I want a narrator to tell me what to do every ten minutes, I’ll play Ocarina of Time.


The point of an MMORPG (full acronym for added effect) is to create another world you can live in to escape boring real life when you have some free time. Adding queues for battlegrounds from anywhere, sectioned off worlds, free points, and instant travel everywhere wrecks this concept. Make us grind stuff. Make us walk. Make us explore. Let us chose more than just our race and class. Go back to your roots. That’s where World of Warcraft started. It deviated, and it’s collapsing.


And what the hell happened to free for all PvP?

Friday, June 18, 2010

Group A: Prisoner's Dilemma (World Cup)


Beck - Strange Apparition

The teams in Group A of the 2010 World Cup are in an interesting position for next week, specifically Uruguay and Mexico. In order to understand what I'm talking about you'll need to understand how the World Cup works, so here is an abbreviated breakdown:

The 32 teams that qualify for the World Cup are divided into 8 groups of 4 labeled "A" through "H" (the US is in Group C). Each of the teams in these groups plays 3 games in the opening round of the Cup against the other 3 teams in the group. So, for example, France is in Group A so they will play Mexico, Uruguay, and South Africa (the other teams in Group A). Depending on the outcomes of these games, each team is given a certain number of points: a win is worth 3, a tie is worth 1, and a loss is worth nothing. The top two teams of each group then advance on to the knockout round (single elimination, bracket format). In the case of a tie in points, the team with the better Goal Difference (goals scored minus goals allowed) is the winner of the tiebreaker.

Currently, Group A looks like this:

1. Uruguay (4 pts)
2. Mexico (4 pts)
3. France (1 pt)
4. South Africa (1 pt)

Uruguay is ahead based on GD (Goal Difference).

All of the teams in the group have played 2 games, leaving just one left in the round. Mexico pulled a huge upset over France, putting them in second. The interesting aspect here is that the finals games are Mexico v Uruguay and France v South Africa.

France should beat South Africa. France is a Soccer world power, whereas South Africa only qualified for the Cup because they are the Host Country and are considered one of the worst sides in the tournament right now. This will give France 3 points, bringing their total up to 4.

Enter the prisoner's dilemma for Uruguay and Mexico. If one side were to win the game, that team would qualify while the other would go into a GD tiebreaker with France (which is impossible to predict). However, if they tie, both teams get a point and both teams automatically qualify for the next round.

Do you play to win (rat them out)? If you do, they will too. If you win you're in. If you lose, depending on France's performance, you're out.

Do you play to tie (stay quiet)? If you do, and they do too, you're both in guaranteed. For one, however, this is terrible sportsmanship. Secondly, you're trusting another team. Now you run the risk of betrayal with a late-game goal.

An age-old question reincarnated and ready to be answered. The game is June 22 at 10am.

Sunday, May 23, 2010

Pacman's A Dick

Johnny Cash - God's Gonna Cut You Down

Google delighted the world the other day when they turned their logo into one of the more popular arcade games from the early 90s: Pacman. Everyone loves a good throwback, and the unannounced addition of this (probably short-lived) game to the otherwise bland search engine homepage was the talk of the town.

While I was playing, however, I had a revelation:. Take a step back and look at the situation. Pacman comes crashing into what I can only assume, based on the immediate hostility, is the home of these five ghosts and starts scarfing down everything in sight. Then, when the ghosts go to chase him out, he turns on them and eats them. Now they're only a pair of eyes and have to go limping back to their bedroom. They don't stop though, they come right back out and go after him again. Kind of reminds you of you someone fighting desperately for their home doesn't it?

So Pacman invades their home, eats all their food, mortally wounds them several times, and then peaces out once everything is gone. We, as the players, have always just assumed that Pacman was the good guy since he's being directly controlled by us. That doesn't mean anything though (look at GTA). I submit that Pacman is a dick.

Thursday, May 13, 2010