As you probably heard, Apple recently announced a new version of iTunes, iTunes 8. The new version adds a feature called "Genius," which is sort of a Pandora's Box/Last.fm rip-off that recommends more iTunes purchases based on your past iTunes purchases. The new update also serves to further bloat the iTunes + QuickTime package, to the tune of about 4mb, though I'll admit I don't quite remember how big prior iTunes + QuickTime downloads have been. 75mb seems excessive for a music player and a media format I care nothing about, though.
Oh, and don't forget about the pre-checked Safari in the "New Software" box. Nice try (again) Apple.
But wait, there's more! After my install, Apple Software Update re-checked for updates, and now it wants to add further garbage to my computer:
MobileMe Control Panel? What?
I don't own an iPhone or an iPod Touch. Why would I want (or need) a MobileMe control panel on my computer?
This is even further baffling because after the last iTunes update, I had MobileMe Control Panel installed in my Windows Control Panel, and I had not been informed or let alone, agreed to, any sort of MobileMe software installation. Now it has been covertly removed from my computer, and then added to the Apple Software Update utility.
Maybe other people share my feelings and don't like Apple sneaking their software onto my computer? Is Apple trying to assimilate my computer by adding small bits of it's software here and there, until one day I turn on my computer and I find I'm running Mac OS?
Either way, Apple is quickly overstaying its welcome on my computer, and I don't appreciate it. The next time I find random Apple software floating running in and out of my computer all willy-nilly, I'm uninstalling iTunes and using WinAmp.
Oh, and when I closed Apple Software Update, I we met with this gem:
I've tried not to watch any of it, but by chance I caught a bit of the Republican National Convention this evening, while trying to relax after work. As you've probably guessed from the title of this post, I am completely disgusted by the whole thing.
I try to stay away from the topic of politics here for the most part, but the tiny bit of the convention that I happened to see (Mitt Romney's portion of the show) made my blood boil, and I simply have to say something about it.
During my brief viewing, Mr. Romney continued beating the desparate drum of nationalism and fanning the flames of divison and hatred between countrymen. Over and over, he stated in so many ways that the Republican party is the party of patriotism and love for country, and that to be anything else is anti-American, supporting terrorism, ad naseum.
I'm tired of this utterly stupid stance. It's a pathetic attempt to appeal to your fears of the unknown, and it makes me sick that anyone in any political party would find need to wield this ridiculous argument against his fellow American.
We all want this country to be great. We all want this to be a good place for our children. We want the U.S. to be a prosperous country where anyone who's willing to put in the work can make something for themselves. That is the "American Dream," is it not?
To suggest that someone who strives for the same things as you, but by slightly different means, is completely against the U.S. and ideals that drive it is completely insane. I'm perfectly happy sharing this country with others who have all sorts of different ideas from mine - that's what makes the world work, after all. Working together with people who don't share the same thoughts as me helps me grow as a person, and helps us all accomplish many otherrwise impossible goals. Anyone who has any sort of relationship with other people can recognize that compromise is the corner stone of progress, and yet instead of encouraging people to work together and help maintain unity during these trying times, the Republican party would rather see the nation's citizens bicker amongst themselves.
Demonizing one party or the other for striving to make this country great in a different way than you accomplishes nothing but create divisions between neighbors, relatives, and friends. It makes people look upon others with fear, and it prevents people from enjoying life.
Neither party wants bad things to happen to this country. Neither party is helping terrorists. Neither party is any more patriotic or "American" (whatever that means) than the other.
Let's stop this shit once and for all. Whether you're liberal, conservative, or somewhere in between the two, I urge you to look past all this superficial patriotism garbage, and look at the real issues. The people who use this rhetoric are crooked liars, and you are a fool if you fall for it, no matter which party is pushing it at you.
As a gamer, I'm not normally the type to look down upon the gaming habits of others. Sure, I'll make the odd quip about "freestyle" DDR players now and then, but generally I don't give my fellow gamers too much grief for doing whatever it is they choose to do.
This stance has led me to defend Guitar Hero/Rock Band, games which I have played very minimally, whenever someone brings up the "you should just learn a real instrument" argument. I've even argued this point with my dad, who is an actual musician (he plays bass guitar). I had an epiphany at a GameStop which changed my views on this slightly, and which makes me wonder about how far the rhythm games can go before they've gone too far. It also makes me wonder if I'm the only person who's ever had an epiphany at GameStop.
While I was at GameStop, they had a Guitar Hero III display set up. Instead of the usual speakers, the display was outfitted with headphones so interested players could try the game out without disturbing other shoppers too much. I was waiting in line to order a game. A kid who was obviously familiar with Guitar Hero walked up to it and - headphones on, guitar in hand - got set to play. The people in line in front of me were going back and forth with an employee about trading in games, so I curiously looked on as the kid began to run through a jam session.
I heard the game in a way I'd never heard it before. Without the music to accompany the rhythmic input, the mechanical monotony of the whole thing was instantly exposed. And while I know that many games, some of my favorites probably, could be broken down into a series of infinitely repeatable hand motions, the illusion of Guitar Hero, nay all rhythm games, had been broken from this moment forth.
Enter Rock Band.
Guitar Hero got me used to seeing people rocking out holding small, plastic guitars with buttons instead of strings, but I'm not sure that I'll ever be able to accept the ridiculous menagerie that is the full band ensemble of Rock Band. Not only does this setup look completely ridiculous standing before the TV in anyone's living room, but it costs a small fortune, and so starts to encroach on the grounds of "you might as well just learn to play a real instrument." Feast your eyes on this piece of work:
All this for a video game? Really? Do I even need to say anything else...?
If you're going to put all the effort into buying, building, and learning to play these ridiculous game controllers, why not just put in a little extra effort and learn the real thing? It'll likely be more personally satisfying, and could even land you a career you'd always dreamed about, but never really considered.
Don't get me wrong though - I still don't wholly agree with the naysayers; I don't really think anyone is trying to substitute real musical talent with a game of Guitar Hero or Rock Band. There is definitely a place in the world for our beloved rhythm games. I personally think it's awesome that an entire family can rock out to tunes in Rock Band, with each member on a different instrument. I like that Guitar Hero is doing its part to revive interest in classic rock. And hey, even those DDR freaks dancers have impressed me from time to time. I just feel like these things have gone a bit too far (the drum kit above being a prime example), and if there's a possibility for some non-electronic achievements now and then, why not take them? I think that with the advent of more advanced (and expensive) "instruments" that argument is becoming more valid.
Alright, I'm done preaching. Public service time is over. Pick up the plastic guitar, and rock on.
Driving to work today, I only passed by one Cingular store, but I could see a small throng of people standing outside of it, waiting for it to open. Listening to the radio, I heard that the frenzy had reached a higher pitch in the bay area, where some people have been waiting outside of Apple stores since Wednesday, and lines have extended to span almost a block of city streets.
What earth-shattering, ground-breaking, head-exploding new product are all these sad souls waking up early for?
The iPhone 3G, of course. A slight upgrade to the iPhone.
As a somewhat frequent visitor of Digg during the work week, I'm actually quite sick of hearing about it, if you want to know the truth. Almost every other story submitted has been about the iPhone 3G, and each one seems to try to make something as mundane into something interesting more so than the last, and not coincidentally, insult my intelligence more.
Want to watch someone activate their iPhone?
Or navigate an application store?
Or take it out of the bloody box, and handle it?
All covered, courtesy of fanboys, Engadget, and the piece of trash that is Gizmodo. And it makes me sick. How pathetic has our society become that we waste minutes and hours of our lives standing in line for an upgraded telephone?
It's gotten to the point where I feel like I'm about the only man in his mid 20's in California who doesn't shit himself every time someone mentions the iPhone - a sad reality. I even had the displeasure of listening to KGO interview a guy who was first in line at one of the Apple stores in San Francisco, who admitted he already had an iPhone, but wanted a second version phone as well.
Yes, in this time of economic downturn, people are buying a second version of the same phone they already own because it has a few more features than the last. At the time of this writing, Apple's stock is down 1.9% - on a big product launch day, no less - and people are still casting away their barely-year-old old iPhones so they can browse the internet on it slightly faster. And people wonder why our economy is tanking.
This foolishness must stop. Currently, I'm using an LG Chocolate 2, and I really like it - it's easily the best phone I've ever owned. It does everything I need it to do, and it looks cool. But I am not going to rush out and buy the LG Chocolate 3 when they release it, especially not if my current phone is working fine. In fact, the next time I buy a phone will likely be when this one stops working. And I'm not going to participate in the ridiculous douchebaggery that permeates the iPhone crowd, and take videos of myself opening the box, using the phone, or buying applications. I'm a tech guy, and even I find this crap completely neurotic, obsessive, and just plain disgusting.
Clichéd as it is, let me start this with a few definitions:
Mundane-adjective
2. common; ordinary; banal; unimaginative.
Uninteresting-adjective
1. arousing no interest or attention or curiosity or excitement.
Stupid-adjective
2. characterized by or proceeding from mental dullness; foolish; senseless.
Mundane, uninteresting, and stupid. These three words perfectly describe one of the newest internet cesspools, Twitter.
If you took MySpace, dropped it into a special machine designed to wring out everything but the superficiality, narcissism, and lust for attention, and then you took what was left, put it into some bullets, and then fired them at the internet with an automatic machine gun, you'd have Twitter. And probably a few dead bystanders.
For anyone out there who is not familiar with Twitter, it's a lot like having a blog, except instead of taking the time to think about and actually write a cohesive collection of sentences, your updates consist of one-liners and simple thoughts. To better illustrate my description, here are some example Twitter entries:
"its already 10:30???!?!? when did that happen??"
I dunno, maybe while you were sitting there posting stuff on Twitter?
"Speaking of food.....lunchtime!"
Nobody was speaking of food.
"At the hospital waiting on Labor and Delivery."
It really sounds like you've got more important things to do than Twitter.
"Why do I hear windchimes in the office?"
I dunno, but you should get that checked out.
"confused by backpack"
Average Twitter user.
"I can't stop eating DORITOS!!! mmmmmm"
Perhaps the first advertisement on Twitter?
"i started a juice fast yesterday... i now think my stomach is eating itself!"
Yes, that rare feeling us humans call "hunger".
Twitter users call these small messages "tweets." I refuse to do that.
There's a reason why I don't speak aloud every little random thought that goes through my head, let alone post them in my blog. It's because, like everyone else, most everything I think about throughout the day (and most of the stuff I do, for that matter) isn't interesting enough to share with people. And the same goes for everyone else, regardless of who you are.
Nobody cares if you're eating Doritos. Nobody cares about your momentary confusing over a backpack. Nobody cares if you hear windchimes in your office. These things are not important.
And yet, thanks to Twitter, the internet is bombarded with a constant stream of similar garbage. I honestly can't think of a bigger waste of time - sitting around posting and reading things on Twitter makes a full day of World of Warcraft seem like an exceedingly productive thing to do. It gives a bad (worse) name to social networking on the internet, and cheapens somewhat more legitimate outlets of information, like blogging.
Twitter annoys me worse than lolcats, and I think that given the chance, I would purge every memory of its existence from the collective consciousness of mankind. If you use Twitter, please just stop. You're ruining the internet for everyone.
If you've been keeping up with my blog, you know that I've been pretty excited about Grand Theft Auto 4. Actually, looking back on my posts, I guess I haven't written about it all that much, but you can attribute that to my intentional avoidance of all things that might reveal too much about the game to me. Yes, I want to go in with a completely fresh view of the game. To my credit, I have been talking up the game something fierce to my friends (in the hopes of having some fun people to play online with), and I went out and pre-ordered the game at my local GameStop last week.
Last night, the game went up for sale at midnight. I'd been debating on whether or not I wanted to go out and pick it up then, and finally I decided I'd just drive by the store and see how many people there were. If the line was huge, I'd simply turn around and leave; I normally have to get up for work around 6:15 AM, so waiting in line for an hour and then only playing for a few minutes is out of the question.
When I rolled by the store, I felt my judgment give way to temptation. The line looked about 50-60 long, but my gamer lust rationalized that each person in line would be anxious to the get the game, and would thus spend as little time as possible at the register. I got out of my car, and stood behind the last guy in line. After a moment I decided I'd check my wallet to see if I even had my pre-order receipt with me (even though I'm pretty sure GameStop will honor the pre-order regardless).
It was at this time that the man in front of me finished a drag on his cigarette and turned around.
"If you haven't been here since 5, you've got to go inside and exchange your receipt for a second receipt." These are the words he said to me.
"Really?" I stammered. The prospect of having to wait in not just one huge line, but now another was not something I wanted to think about. Confusion and fury were gripping me.
"Yup," came the smoking man's reply.
I took a step out of line to survey the scene, and then my judgment got a better grip on me again. If I waited in line here for an hour, I'd barely have any time to play when I got home. I'd go to sleep late, get up early, and be too tired the next day to work efficiently and, more importantly, enjoy some GTA4.
"I think this line's a bit too long for me," I muttered, and I turned and left. 60 man line and second receipts be damned - I'll be picking up my copy this afternoon on my way home from work.
The trend is annoying. It's deceptive. It's insulting to my intelligence. And sadly, it shows no signs of ever coming to an end. I am speaking, of course, about the video game industry's constant use of CGI (computer generated imagery) trailers.
My disgust for this practice has been sloshing around inside my head for a while now, but the issue really peaked for me back in 2006, when Sony unveiled supposed in-game footage of Killzone 2, which later turned out to be a CGI trailer. There was a lot of backlash over this, and I agree with all of it - it pointed out both how tempting it can be for game companies to deceive the public with CGI, and how easy it can actually be when our game systems are almost capable of producing such visuals anyway.
Imagine you're putting together an awesome movie. It finally comes time in production to get the word out and get people excited for the upcoming film. Your press agent asks for some promotional materials to show people... what would you give them? Would you create a video of animated characters and special effects, completely unlike the visual style of your film?
Of course not - it's ridiculous to even suggest it. But if you were working on a game instead of a movie, you'd probably come to the (erroneous) conclusion that as long as it's generated by computers somehow, it should pass for a good way to show off your game.
I find this trend annoying because, when I hear about a new game, I want to see what it looks like. If I watch a commercial or download a trailer, I want to see the game in action to get a feel for how it will play, how good the graphics are, etc. The last thing I want is a CGI trailer that gives absolutely no clear idea of what the game is about. What good does that do?
My other main beef with CGI trailers is the fact that I sometimes get the sense that they are meant to masquerade as real game footage, and the deceptiveness of this disgusts me. As game graphics get better and our systems become more advanced, the line between CGI and real-time rendering is getting blurrier. So not only does it sometimes seem pointless for a studio to release CGI when real game footage would be just as good, it also makes the CGI route seem like studios just want the public to think their game will look better than it does. For gamers, this isn't usually much of a problem - people who are used to viewing game graphics and computer-generated videos can usually tell the difference between the two - but it is still a very low-class thing to do, in my opinion, and just serves to confuse people who aren't dedicated game-players.
In the end, I suppose my complaints don't hold a heck of a lot of weight, considering the games industry has been in constant growth for many years, despite the rampant use of CGI trailers. Pre-rendered computer-generated videos definitely have a place in there somewhere, but I really think that publishers / developers should always try to show real footage first. I know that sometimes it's important to get PR materials out the door, in order to generate buzz for upcoming games, but if they just took a little extra time to polish existing videos and screenshots of the actual game, they'd be doing both themselves and their fans a favor.
After years of watching Sega take their greatest mascot and slowly change him from excellent to terrible, this is the only logical conclusion I can come to. Look at the last handful of Sonic games, and you'll see what I mean. Ever since his crossover into the third dimension, Sonic the Hedgehog has been a name to fear, and for all the wrong reasons.
Imagine my disappointment when I read the news that a new Sonic game is on the way - and this time Sonic Team is setting out to definitively prove that the concept can work in 3D. Feel like crying yet?
Entire generations of gamers have all but written Sonic games off at this point, and it really is a shame. The early Sonic games were brilliant - excellent level design and solid gameplay elements lent themselves to create a truly memorable and fun experience. And yet with every new release, Sega further proves to us that they now care nothing about the franchise, and I fear that this new game will be more of the same.
So why do I still hold out hope for the speedy blue Erinaceinae? At this point, i'm not really sure. I guess I just hate to see a handful of awesome games get trashed by people who've never played them, merely because their successors are utterly terrible.
Now it seems rather obvious to me, but apparently the knuckle-heads over at Sega have a hard time grasping this one, so let me write a couple of paragraphs about it. The underlying problem with all the new Sonic games is that the concept of Sonic the Hedgehog does not, can not, and will not translate to 3D. All it takes is a cursory look at the history of the franchise to understand why.
The original Sonic games were about exploration, speed, and control. As you ran around the massive levels, you got to explore many different routes, each with a unique set of traps and situations for the player. Often, even the slightest variation on your route through a level would result in the discovery of a whole new area - many containing secret power-ups or even gateways to special levels. Players enjoy being rewarded for straying off the main path, and the original games were genius in their delivery of this concept. Unfortunately, this notion is lost in the translation to 3D, because your view is no longer confined to your immediate surroundings; you can see the entire level ahead of you as you play. Other games, like the Mario and Zelda series, have found their own ways of preserving exploration in a 3D environment, but it is obviously a rather large beast to tame, and I am not sure that it could work for Sonic.
The aspects of speed and control are also hurt greatly by the third dimension. In 2D, you were running either left or right, and all you had to do to dodge obstacles was jump, spin, or try to stop. Massive speeds could be achieved because the options the player had were relatively simple, so the player didn't have to think about all sorts of button combinations or moves to avoid trouble. Simple, but effective. In the newer 3D iterations of Sonic, almost all the speedy segments are usually on-rails ring collecting orgies, which I can almost understand, given the lack of control you have in any free-roaming running environment. 2D Sonic gave you ultimate control of a fast hedgehog and asked you to use them as best you could to conquer a difficult game. 3D Sonic took away your control and asked you to conquer an easy game. Guess which one turned out to be more fun?
There are certainly many more reasons why the original concepts of Sonic the Hedgehog do not translate into 3D, but I am tired of going on about this. Every time Sega announces a new Sonic game, I hope that they'll do the right thing and make a 2D version with 3D graphics, but each time I am let down. There is so much possibility left in the realm of 2D games - and yet we move farther away from that with each new game released, for better or (usually) for worse.
One thing that does make me slightly more optimistic about Sonic Unleashed is that Sega has finally decided to stop adding weird-looking, exotic characters to the mix, and has instead settled on the three core players, Sonic, Tails, and Knuckles. Unfortunately, this is tainted slightly by the fact that Sonic is taking a cue from Twilight Princess and will now have the ability to transform into a wolf of some sort. Ah, well.
I will (ignorantly) hold out hope that Sonic Team proves me wrong this time around. And there's always a slim chance that someone from Sega will read my blog and remove all the things I find annoying in these games, right?
Right?
Well, I wrote it anyway. And now I'm going to go play some classic Sonic on my Xbox.
Update: Upon further inspection of some of the footage floating around out there, it seems like Sonic Team may have actually taken notes and done something right - the game looks like it just might be a 2D game with 3D graphics. I'm sure I'll have more to say about this when further details come to light, but for now, color me an excited shade of blue!
I've owned four cell phones in my life, and one iPod. 3 of the phones had games on them when they came into my possession, and I bought one game for my iPod. None of these games were fun. Let's face it: games on mobile devices are, by and large, pretty stanky. And despite large companies throwing larger amounts of money into the production of mobile games, I don't see the situation getting any better. Here's why!
The Price is Wrong
When I picked up my latest phone (an LG Chocolate 2), I was sad to find that it came with absolutely no games installed. The most entertaining thing you can do with it directly out of the box is listen to the pre-loaded ring tones or play with the animated dining tip calculator... in other words, there's a void of entertainment that needs filling. So I get on Verizon's website to see what kind of games they offer for download, and what do I find? A bunch of crappy games that I play for free on my PC, but which cost between $6 to $10 on my phone - and that's ignoring the fact that many of these games will not work unless your service is active, and (as I understand it) then they go ahead and use air time (minutes on your plan) while you play. Um... what? I'm sorry, but I'm not going to pay $10 to play yet another version of Tetris, all while using up my precious minutes.
I've Lost Control
Another problem I have with mobile games is that almost across the board, the controls for these games suck. From simple platform games like "Gem Collector" to that crappy version of Tetris I have on my iPod, poor controls seems to be a common thread. I can't place all the blame on the people who worked to make these games however - most of them have come up with very creative solutions to deal with the lack of practical game controls on mobile devices, and the range of devices their games can run on. The issue here is that even though we demand a lot from our mobile devices, there is an effort to keep the physical user interface as simple as possible. The easier my gadgets are to control, the better. The part I hate is that, despite the fact that most of the developers behind this hardware know that games will be played on their devices, they seemingly don't take this into consideration during product design. Sure, my cell phone's got a pretty nice little processor inside, but if all the buttons on the phone are too small for my fingers, or require too much force to press, how am I supposed to enjoy any kind of gaming with it?
Power Hunger
Now here's the real deal-breaker for me: Let's say you've found a game you simply love to play, you've bought it, and you've mastered the controls. Now you're just settling down to get in some quality game time, and your phone / iPod just shuts down right in the middle of everything. "WTF!" you think to yourself. "I've only been playing for a few minutes!" Thus is the way of the mobile game - you're now stuck at the airport, outside the dressing room, or maybe just in the bathroom, with nary a speck of entertainment to be found. You can't call anyone. You can't listen to any music. And you could've sworn that the little worthless piece of junk you're holding in your hands was fully charged just 15 minutes ago. Yes folks, if it's not price or control issues that get you, the lack of sufficient battery hunger will. And while this certainly isn't the case with all mobile devices, as we ask more and more of our gadgets, it will continue to be a growing problem. Battery life is the bane of all things wireless, and she is a harsh mistress indeed.
There are more reasons why I hate mobile games... lack of quality, lack of depth - I could go on. But for now, I think this should suffice. If you really want games on the road, I suggest picking up a Nintendo DS.
