Command And Conquer 4

Yup. I finally got down to actually trying that monstrosity. And I don't mean it in a good way, as much as I like some monsters. Command and Conquer 4 is what appears to be a rather poor attempt at reimagining the gameplay of the C&C series. Simply put, Tiberium Twilight makes me sad. I'm officially calling it the equivalent of Twilight (the movie) in the C&C series.

Ok good things first, because the rest is just upsetting. I find it awesome that the designers decided to try to reimagine the RTS gameplay, with a mobile base and different unit paths depending on the player's current class. In fact, they made a clear effort to emulate Relic's capture point centric gameplay. Overall, the high concept had quite some potential.

Now the bad. Which is practically everything else. Command and Conquer has always been about tech tree climbing and massed armies. In fact, it's what sets the franchise apart from the other RTS with population caps and hence limited squads engaging in combat. Nobody will ever forget the tank rushes and their equivalents. What came out of the mix was combat that felt pointless. In lieu of resource gathering, there was the forced gathering of tiberium crystals on the map for upgrades while moving small squads of troops that just didn't feel particularly differentiated (they were, btw) and really no sense of omgsomeone'sstealingmygold.

The campaign was unpardonably tepid, and the game was clearly made for multiplayer...which the C&C franchise wasn't really optimal for. The missions in 4 were even worse than in 3, failing to deliver the sort of FMV goodness that made the early games in the series. After hearing about what happened to Red Alert as well...I'm just sad.

Kung Fu Panda 2

Po is back, and he's funnier than ever. It's rare for me to see a sequel that's actually better than the original, and this one is it. It also means I'm bracing myself for disappointment over its sequels, as mean regression will set in sooner or later. I'm gona enjoy this high while it lasts.

So. What's improved? Everything. Storyline, art quality, lighting, action. It's all over the top and just as implausible as it was before. It's even thrown in a touching rendition of Po's history and how he came to be adopted by a silly old goose. All I can say is that his journey of self discovery continues, and is every bit as meaningful (perhaps more so) than it originally was. Awesome sauce! (And there's no charge for awesomeness)

I'd say if you haven't watched it already and it isn't on the big screens anymore, rent the gorram thing. It's totally worth it. 8.5/10.

That Strange Bag

I had a rather weird experience today, so I suppose I shall document it, as is customary. I bought a tripod today. It came in a regular thin plastic bag. Usual stuff. I'm quite excited about the tripod, by the way. My mom is egging me to get rid of the junk in my room, but that's another story for another day.

Well anyway this morning, I realized that the stone from my bracelet was coming off, but I figured it'd hold so I wore it out and planned to fasten it later in the day. As Murphy's Law dictates, I suddenly decided to check my wrist and found that the gem was gone. Bummer! I dumped my bracelet in the bag since it was largely useless without the center piece.

As I was getting off the bus enroute home, I saw something black sticking to the bag. Turned out it was my pocket knife. In fact, the knife's pocket clip somehow got stabbed into the bag and the bag effectively stole my pocket knife from my pocket. Bad bag!

Then when I got home, I wanted to take the bracelet out and fix it with something else I had lying around. Well what the heck...there was something shiny rolling about in it, along with my bracelet. Turns out my bracelet's gem actually fell into the bag as well. *looks at bag suspiciously*

Creators, Players And Followers

All systems come from somewhere. There are rules either created or derived, and everything follows from there. In people systems, there are three main categories, as there are in other participatory systems: Creators, players and followers.

Arguably, a creator in a system is the most creative, if not necessarily the most powerful. They are the ones who helped set up the system, though sometimes systems create themselves and are purely procedural. I would also consider a really high end player to be a creator, since the player seeks not to play within the rules anymore, but to change the system itself.

Then we have the regular players who understand the system to varying degrees, but will operate primarily within the confines of the system without attempting to change them. Some players may become sufficiently adept to actually become a quasi-creator. A true player works the rules to their advantage, or to the advantage of those whom they wish to benefit.

Finally, we have the sheep known as followers, who play exclusively within the rules without making any special effort to maximize their personal benefit from the rules. Indeed, a follower may even operate through hearing of the rules from others, and thus have an indirect understanding of what they are.

Karma Does Not Exist

I am a karma skeptic. I do not believe that there's a cosmic force of fairness out there, which will punish evildoers and protect the good. As far as I can tell, that does not happen. Bad people get away with the bad things they did, good people get bullied, the world trudges on.

Actually, if it does exist, it is currently patently unverifiable. There's no objective way to measure karma. Everything can be claimed to be attributed to something unknowable. Oh that bad guy will have his just desserts in his next life. *BZZZ* Unverifiable. Something bad will happen to the person sometime in the future for what he just did. *BZZZZ* Doesn't always happen, and if it happens it seems like something that could possibly happen to anyone anyway. Ok so I murdered someone and someone I love gets into a car crash a week later. Would that necessarily mean that my actions caused the car crash somehow? Can it be verified? *BZZZ* Nope.

Despite all this, people believe in it anyway and look out for the signs of karma in action. A dictator starts having deformed children. Karma. An evil businessman who ripped everyone off gets arrested. Karma. It gives people a sense of comfort in the illusory innate fairness of the universe. I've learned that this matter is one of belief, and no amount of rationality will serve to debunk it. I've challenged others on the matter and only received an unverifiable challenge in return: Why don't you do something bad. You'll see what happens. Well no. I won't see what happens, 'coz it doesn't happen immediately after, I can't predict when it'll happen and even if it did I can't be sure that it wouldn't have happened anyway regardless of my actions.

In my view, the universe is as fair as the humans make it. Nothing more, nothing less. And as things go, humans make it unfair. Big deal. I accept that something bad may happen to me at some undefined point in the future and there's nothing I can do about it. But that isn't karma. That's just how life is. It's unfair. Live with it.

New Games

I've been observing the Western game industry and am frankly quite saddened by the fact that they're stagnating in design ideas and seem to view improved graphical quality as an "upgrade" of old franchises. If there are any major gameplay differences, chances are they are incremental at best.

With the introduction of more atmospheric games like Arkham Asylum and Bioshock, I'm wondering at the untapped pool of design ideas. It is truly difficult to come up with something new, but there's always something that many people can relate to. And that would involve mashups of what they have experienced in one way or another. Here, I am thinking of childhood experiences and games.

One thing that truly appeals to players of atmospheric games is the novelty of the experience. What I am considering is what would it be like to abstract a childhood experience, with the fears and fantasies and make a totally different gameplay and atmosphere with it? As a child, everything is new. There is joy in discovery, and fear in the unknowns. Everything is just bigger out there. Can a game be made out of it?

It is a shame that I have precious few childhood memories. I barely remember my past and I don't even recall childhood games...if I played any at all. I probably did, I think. Ah, well. That would throw a wrench in the works should I try to tap my own experiences for this endeavor, but I'm sure a sufficiently savvy game designer would be able to pick up from here.

Sucking Up

Everyone hates a suck up. It's often painfully obvious that someone is sucking up to a superior, and oftimes the superior seems to be quite oblivious to it. And then there are those who take it to another level, and actually masquerade as hard workers.

I had a discussion with a friend on the matter some days back, and he pointed out that these brown noses are disguising their sucking up efforts as initiative rather than hard work per se. Simply put, the strategy here is to volunteer for as many non-work gigs as possible as long as they're visible to the superior in question. This creates the impression of an outgoing worker full of initiative. It is especially insidious with highly social suckups, because they really do genuinely enjoy participating in such activities, and will have an air of genuine enthusiasm for them.

Herein lies the problem: while these activities have little bearing on actual productivity, they are often in line with management's goals of "team building" and other similarly social-oriented management objectives. It is therefore not hard to see how such people will appeal to the managerial bunch, and indeed may wind up in management themselves.

Of course, this raises some evaluation dilemmas. For one, can someone be regarded as a suckup for actively participating in activities that management likes and endorses when one genuinely enjoys them (regardless of ulterior motives)? For those who do have ulterior motives, is the time and effort spent in such activities justified in terms of the gains? And finally, while visibility will let one be honestly evaluated in a superior light as far as the manager is concerned, is this unfair to other less social but equally effective (often the case, given that they're focused) and genuine hard workers?

I think the general consensus is that performance evaluation is broken and is likely to stay broken for the forseeable future given the limits of human cognition: it is unlikely for a manager to be able to really focus on objective performance evaluations on top of other duties, and humans do rely heavily on things they can observe to make judgments. The optimal solution in this case for less-social employees seems to be to have a token participation in such activities (preferably one that the employee favors). Alternatively, going for high visibility assignments can have a similar effect without involvement in non-productivity related activities. Ah, the joys of working within a broken human system.

The Night Shift

People are generally resistant to radical change, and that does prevent certain more radical considerations from really taking root. I was pondering the merits of the night shift some days back, especially in relation to the fact that it's awfully hot in the daytime and frankly not a very enjoyable work experience in general.

Background. It's mighty hot in the daytime, especially in the tropics. The daylight hours are like clockwork and the temperature never varies greatly. Given these conditions,the air conditioning system of office buildings will be working overtime to cool the place and that takes quite a bit more power than it would were the temperature several degrees lower. In fact, a goodly number of people actually do want the night shift, but it's rarely considered as a true possibility in most companies.

Given the facts, it should actually be feasible if the night shift were implemented at a national level. Amongst the concerns of such an implementation include difficulty in adapting to the new hours, and inability to socialize with friends. Kids, too. But if it this thing were to be the norm, I seriously doubt that would be as much of a concern. As a side effect, I forsee that street crime at night would go down some, as more people are out and about so there are fewer secluded places during the dark hours.

Of course, given how the day shift has been so ingrained in societies everywhere since time immemorial, I'm not sure I'd see a normative shift anytime soon. Well, one can wish...

On Busty Boosters

In this current generation, women are made to feel small if they are...well...small breasted. There is an unrealistic expectation of wasp waists combined with melon assets. But that's not the point of this post. It is about the widespread scam of breast enhancing supplements.

I've been thinking about the matter a lot, and pondering the science in addition to personal reviews. The general consensus is that these things either work a "little bit" or not at all, but it seems that new (and veteran) fools will try the latest product anyway in the hope that this time it'll be different.

I especially liked one observation by a skeptic on the matter. She pointed out that menstrual cycles play a part and can color the observations of bust enhancer users. From my perspective, the matter of bust size is highly salient amongst the growth seekers. That means they will most certainly be watching any changes very carefully, and consequently any changes that are noticed will be magnified in their perception. Throwing in the cycle thing, basically they're going to observe enlargement when the cycle comes. It's also called water retention. Interestingly enough, the leaflets boast being able to effect changes precisely within that time frame. Hmmm! And the "changes" are said to subside after some time. Hmmmmmmm!

Well there's the physics behind it. Unless those supplements are able to channel fat into the area one way or another, it's quite unlikely for the changes to be permanent. Most likely the stuff just has minimal effectiveness if at all, and most likely induces water retention or other sorts of swelling instead of real growth. Bummer, eh?

Maturity

I live in an ageist society. This means, culturally speaking, one is privileged if one is viewed as "old" in some way. Something like seniority from hanging around a job for a long time, just dodging death for a number of decades or just plain acting as if one's older than one really is. Yes, that means "maturity", in a completely arbitrarily defined sense.

Now, I surmise that a goodly number of the locals seem quite intent on projecting that air of maturity. It can be seen from how they religiously show their intolerance of anyone who acts contrary to their idea of maturity (ignoring how that may in itself be conduct typical of somewhat immature high school children) and an emphasis on how those younger than they are...are "children". Or kids. Whatever.

I suppose I could regard this as a socially motivated attempt at soliciting the social benefits associated with age. To me, however, everything within reason is permitted and I am perfectly happy to accept any sort of goofy behavior on the condition that it does not disrupt the bottom line. That also means I have no qualms about tolerating staff goofing about at a sit down restaurant as long as my food comes to me on time and is prepared properly, and that I wouldn't hesitate to take an elderly person to task for being rude. They should really know better, and I have no tolerance for senile delinquents.

On Ghosts And Superstition

I heard a most interesting phrase from a friend today. Someone asked her if she believed in ghosts. To which she responded "Of course I do. I'm Chinese." It was then that it occurred to me: it is possible for superstitions to form part of an ethnic identity. Of course, it should've occurred to me earlier given how certain ethnicities regard certain religions as an integral part of their shared experience and whatnot.

Regarding this sort of (if I may say so) Chinese take on the supernatural, I do still wonder if there is a common thread to the superstitions of the various peoples. The Chinese have a very specific world view, full of taboos and hostile spirits. In fact, anything supernatural seems to be viewed as invariably hostile by the Chinese (with the exception of deities, which are generally benevolent). It is something to be guarded against. In some American (and European) takes on the issue, a number of supernatural presences may be benevolent in addition to the usual pantheon of goody two shoes.

I am largely a skeptic when it comes to the supernatural, primarily because 99% of what people report can be relatively safely regarded as hooey since the phenomenon may be common and/or really easily explained. Take for example the way expansion and contraction of in-wall piping can contribute to the sound of marbles being dropped on the floor (often attributed to the actions of a playful child spirit). Yet, given the ubiquity of the belief in the supernatural, I'm always curious as to whether there's truly a kernel of truth to these beliefs and if so how it may be systematically controlled (or at least predicted). At this point, however, I am mostly of the belief that there may well be something out there, but it remains unproven at this point. I'll put up my I Want To Believe poster sometime. I promise.

Pirates: On Stranger Tides

First things first. I don't care what people think, but I think Keira Knightley to be rather hot, and therefore am less than happy to watch a Pirates flick without her in it. That said, I think the rule of sequels is pretty much true: The longer the series gets, the more tired it tends to become. This particular movie is no exception.

Good things first. There's Jack Sparrow. With Johnny Depp playing as Jack Sparrow. And Geoffrey Rush as Cap'n Barbossa. Good stuff. It's got the usual humorous (and sometimes downright absurd) action sequences. Par for the course. In short, it's like Another Episode in the Pirates series. Nothing truly outstanding. Quest for something, get disrupted along the way, humor injected here and there like Botox, end of tale.

Now, the thing is I really really really really ^ as many as I like...hate the way they incessantly inject romances into shows. Hmm looking back at my movie reviews, I'd say...how many of them have actually appealed to me? None. No Keira Knightley. Ok. That's another minus. Put the two together and then I'm ignoring most of the show that doesn't have Barbossa or Jack Sparrow in it. These remaining bits just lack the sort of oomph they had in Pirates 1 and 2. Well...more like in 1 only, since 2 was getting sorta tired already and I honestly thought 3 spelled the doom of the franchise.

What would I say about this on the whole? Well it's fine for Pirates fans who know what to expect of the series and will most certainly get it. Not so fine for everyone else who would expect something new, groundbreaking or with at least a serious touch of originality. Oh, and fewer loose ends in the story. I'd say...6.5/10, you savvy?

The Panopticon

The internet seems to have become a panopticon of sorts for world leaders. Undoubtedly, one may argue that a country's leadership maintains a stranglehold on information in and out of a country, and can therefore restrict internet access as it pleases. Yet, it is also undeniable that the internet technologies have become sufficiently pervasive that it is now exceedingly difficult to completely silence the peoples' voice short of becoming something of a hermit country much like North Korea.

It cuts both ways. Clearly, the people are being monitored, but this time the panopticon permits the prisoners to stare back. The question now is who the watchers are, and who is watching. In the grand scheme of things, I'd say the leaders are approaching parity with the people. More interestingly, the sheer speed and volume of information dissemination has served to magnify issues the world over. Where only major earthquakes would've made headlines in the days of print media, now even comparatively minor tremblors or even minor tremors may make the peoples' news, massively increasing the salience of issues and events that may have been passed by in the old days. As always, I would find it interesting to see how all this shapes up in the decades and perhaps centuries to come.

Social Joy

Social joy is a curious thing. By the term I really do mean the kinds of people who seem to derive quite some pleasure from the physical company of others. I know some people who are like that, as opposed to the more common lot who simply enjoy the presence of others but with hardly as much gusto.

Being the sort that does not mind being physically alone for extended periods of time, I find it curious and perhaps quite fascinating that anyone could feel otherwise. That is, of course, regardless the fact that clearly many people do. On self analysis, my conclusion would be that I am more averse to the lack of mental stimulation, and I would be quite unbearably bored if I had to sit still for 20 minutes without an objective or novel experience of some sort to accompany me. Yet, the presence of another person more often than not serves only to disrupt those objectives or experiences, thus forcing me to switch to a more social mode that is contrary to my inclinations. In short, social presences are actually less desirable in my context.

I wonder how it is like for other people, who actually have social presences as core objectives to help them while their time away. It is strange, and attempts I have made so far at being social have done little but to leave me feeling hollow as I realize that I've spent otherwise self-productive time with others instead and not quite making me feel embiggened in any tangible way.

Survivalism

The key core of humanity seems to be survival. When the shit hits the fan, the only thing humans are likely to think about is fighting for their own survival. I suppose that's something that's bred into the human genes, which is what keeps those sheep alive this long.

I suppose one of the things that really bothers me about humans in general are the ones who are "realists" who have no personal code of ethics. To be sure, their own real personal ethics would revolve around whatever is most prudent for their survival (whatever form that may take). In short, they would flop whichever way they can, as long as they wind up getting ahead...or at least not be left behind.

I guess in that sense I am not quite a realist. If anything, I may well be a hopeless idealist. If what I believe in and am willing to fight for is less than optimal for my success or survival, I would pursue it regardless. I guess this is the sort of mindset that gets one killed and thus unable to pass on one's genes, which prevents it from spreading further in the gene pool. Whatever the reason may be, I am not very inclined to stand by and watch things happen as long as I have the ability to do something about it. Failing which, I'd be pondering ways to obtain that sort of ability...

Positive Hypocrisy

I hate hypocrites. If anything, people should always be true to themselves, and actually stand by the beliefs they claim to hold. Today, I was thinking about a sermon in church and why it peeved me so much. Basically, it was about how one could cry out "Praise God!" in lieu of expressing anger. Blasphemy!

Now, think about it. What could be closer to the definition of using God's name in vain? Is this not outright blatant hypocrisy? This is precisely what peeves me about the falsely positive Christians out there. They are so outwardly happy no matter what happens, even when it is apparent that their joy is a paper thin facade that they are deceived into maintaining. Sure, it is well and good to be happy when one should be, but it's another to delude oneself into being happy when one truly isn't.

Indeed, I say that if one experiences negative emotions, they should simply embrace it. The emotions exist for a reason. And if they should wish to find ways to curtail excess negativity, that is a good time for prayer and meditation. Slapping an illusory smiley over the problem is not going to solve it, numnuts!

Like Man, Like Dog

When I go out to work, I sometimes pass the sorriest sight I've seen for quite some time. It is this old man with a dog. Now, this old man used to have two rather sad dogs, but only one remains. But that's not the sad part.

The old man was saddled with the dogs because his son's wife didn't like them. But the old man was abandoned by his children as well, so he really has to fend for himself. The old man is hardly able to look after himself, let alone dogs. Understandably, the pups are in really poor shape. Unwashed, mangy and not quite well nourished.

What do I see today? I see the old man, mangy as the one dog. The dog has practically lost half of its fur and has a raw looking wound on one of its legs. It really is a matter of time. I suppose little could be done but to put the dog down. It may even be a mercy to put the man down while we're at it. Sometimes, life can be real unfortunate. Short of euthanasia, I suppose the next thing to do is grimace and bear it.

Personal Standards

I strongly believe in personal standards. A personal standard is a standard one sets for herself, independent of what's out there in the "real" world. In short, it is non-adaptable to "reality" and forms an anchor point of one's identity. It also serves well to cement one's otherness such that one can avoid becoming too assimilated into a social reality, becoming unable to see beyond the reality to the ideals.

I was thinking about this when one of my colleagues made an absurd comment. The subway train we were taking was full of passengers. In fact, there were no free seats at all and a goodly number of passengers were standing. She said...wow the train's practically empty. Why would someone say that, when the train is very clearly crowded? It does not compute.

When I challenged that statement, she pointed out that trains are normally packed like sardine cans. Therefore the train was empty in comparison. Well...I suppose relativism in this case can make life happier, in that one can convince oneself that the situation is better simply because there are worse things out there. To me, however, a fact is a fact. To convince oneself otherwise is self deception...blasphemy by my book. Truly, it is a race to the bottom, because really, it's easy to keep sliding the standard downwards and if people are intent on self deception, they'll find themselves in a cesspool sooner or later. As my other friend says: Just because something is better than something else doesn't make it good.

It's The Little Things...

It's been awhile since I've listened to a track that I truly loved. Tonight, when my friend sent me a Music Box video link, I started thinking about a particular song by that title. It's Music Box by Jennifer Rafferty.

Now, I don't remember if I've written about this particular song before, but frankly I'm still in love with it even after not having heard it for a couple years. In fact, it's the sort of song that can have me paralyzed for some time, just soaking in the tune and the lyrics.

I guess it reminds me of the little things in life that I truly love, but have forgotten. Things like night photography, and certain kinds of music. Perhaps it's the fact that I actually remember and try to revive these interests that prevents me from mindlessly plodding on at work and being absorbed by it. (Not that it's currently the case)

Rainbow Six

I love book exchanges. I like the sheer randomness of the experience, never knowing exactly what you're going to get out of the deal. Well, this time round was no exception. I did my usual tossing out of books that I deemed to be "trash", and then gone on to pick up stuff that I didn't think to be trash at the time. Simple enough. Actually, chances are I'd think they're trash anyway a year from now, but that just lets me dump them back in the book exchange. It's an elegant system.

Now, this year, I managed to pick up a book on runes, which is quite amusing to me seeing as how I've got my own personal set of runes and this is well...about my stuff. Always nice to have books about stuff you already know. And then I happened to see this boring looking book that seemed to have lost its sleeve: Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six. Now, I know some people didn't like the story because it's quite one dimensional and not necessarily credible, but hey I liked it back then, so I picked up the nice hefty hard cover to decide whether I liked to have another copy. And then I saw the silver marker writing on it. Holy crap...Tom Clancy's signature. DIBS!

I later found out that I picked up an autographed limited edition copy of the book. With his old signature, to boot. Well, it's a happy day for me, and I hope someone out there isn't too unhappy about it. I believe we can safely assume that books that wind up at the exchange are unwanted, after all...