Arkham City

I finally got down to playing Arkham City, and this time I opted to go with the gamepad as my primary input. Seeing as how the game was originally developed for console, I figured it'd be more fun on the pad. Surprisingly, the pad on default settings proved to be a less enjoyable option than my doing the same with mouse and keyboard back in Arkham Asylum. I've not played very far so I shall not make generalizations of the gameplay, but my impression so far is that the combat just isn't quite as sophisticated as I thought it would be given that the game is the second in the series. For starters, Batman still blends the attack across what looks like 20 meters, which is a pretty absurd distance even for the caped crusader. Moreover, it seems so far that it's very possible to counter a strike using a regular attack, which is unusual enough considering that the proper way to deal with it is the counter move itself. Of course, I am not judging it as such, just stating the facts as they are. I'm sure the gameplay was done the way it is to keep the game fun for everyone, but it just seems improbable in a real fight scene. I did really enjoy the new freedom in gliding and the open world approach, however. It feels good, to be able to explore the city and basically work the criminals the way Batman would've in the comics. Perhaps I shall write again, or not. There is Diablo 3 on the horizon after all, and I imagine it shall take up a little of my time for a while after.

The Avengers

If you haven't already watched it, and love the Marvel comics, why are you reading this? Get out there and watch the film already. Joss Whedon managed to get the common theme of protecting the world from imminent destruction with tried and tired Marvel characters together to create what I'd regard as a masterpiece as far as the Marvel movies are concerned. I came to the movie expecting little more than the usual Marvel action flick, but got much more than I anticipated. The film manages to pull the Avengers characters (excepting Spidey) into action highlighting the tensions and vulnerabilities between them, and forging it into a narrative that is humorous in all the right places while preserving the intensity and seriousness that accompanies a world saving struggle. While there are the usual minor authenticity issues and plot holes, Avengers manages to mostly hold together as a rather engaging and memorable action flick while solidly preserving each characters' unique personalities. Overall I can say that I am very pleased with the movie, and that it deserves a solid 8.5/10.

The Night Shift

I was talking with a few of my more nocturnal friends, and it seems that we are in agreement that it would be very nice indeed were it possible for companies to run proper night shifts. By that I do mean professional shift work across the board, rather than the usual select few professions. Realistically, there is no reason for modern cities to stick to the traditional agrarian schedule. True, the pragmatists would argue that the agrarian 9-5 is the current de facto standard and that we should adapt to it. However, I think the time is also ripe for societies and economies to consider viable alternatives. With modern technologies, work is no longer bound to the cycle of the sun, and it is every bit a realistic option to have work done in the dead of night. Now, consider the cost of running a city approximately half of its potential 24 productive hours. For starters, the largely monolithic clock creates peak hours that cause major congestion. Moreover, it makes for deserted times where crime becomes a fairly viable option. Not to mention the economic cost of having stuff shut down for about half a day either way. Running a proper night city will mitigate that, along with the silliness whereby retail stores close at precisely the same time that offices are open. And in a city, that's precisely when everyone's just not free to do any shopping. If anyone is willing to think about it, that really doesn't make sense. Of course, in order to pull off the vision of a night city, it needs to be run as a complete system. I've seen how the cities creep towards the night concept, with 24 hour supermarkets and cinemas running past 12 midnight, but all in all it remains a fringe activity at best. Without childcare, schools, offices and such running the night shift as well, it becomes extremely difficult to get things moving properly. Given the right stimulus, however, I foresee the 24 hour city can be a rather enriching approach for any city that implements it.

L'Arc En Ciel World Tour - Singapore

Tonight, I had my first ever emergency concert. Yes it sounds funny, but it happened regardless. A friend called me and said hey she's got tickets for the L'Arc En Ciel concert. Omg? OMG! Wait wha... Ok well it's easily the first time a call came in saying that I had a chance to pop over to a 20th anniversary one-night-only concert by a band that I kinda like and it's in 2 hours. Sweet. Couldn't say no anyway. The concert itself went off with a bang, quite literally. The band played their songs one after another, with pauses in between but nothing too major. The songs were sufficiently familiar that the audience could easily sing along. Things were a bit too loud for me (as usual) and I was mildly disappointed that the audio guy let the speakers distort during some parts of the songs. Sometimes it pays not to max the sound system out. Regardless the soreness in my ears and dazzle to my eyes, I did have a whale of a time and certainly did not regret attending. As usual, Hyde's being his cute charming ageless self, raising the temperatures of a goodly number of people with his mere presence. Lovely. I find that I have the annoying inability to appreciate things as they are. Throughout the concert, I couldn't help but notice how easily the audience was manipulated by cues from the band and the SFX crew. They even aped certain animations that were played during the intermission periods and generally worked with the performers. True, some may say that it is out of sport, but I think there's more than a little herd instinct thrown in. Regardless, people were certainly having fun and I guess that's what really counts. Overall I'd say it was a right unforgettable experience, one that I actually appreciate. Sadly it'll live on exclusively in my memories, because there was no opportunity to photograph or film it. Or get someone's autograph or whatever. Not that I really mind. On a completely unrelated note, the lingering hollowness still haunts me. There's something that I need, and it still eludes me, keeping me from feeling truly happy.

Lockout

There are some movies that start strong and grow progressively worse towards the end. Lockout is one such movie. The premise of an orbital prison a'la futuristic Alcatraz is intriguing, and then as usual things go wrong, which necessitates the insertion of a special forces trooper to get the situation rectified. The movie starts strong, with a believable orbital prison, and strong characters that are distinctive and likeable. Well maybe not likeable by everyone but certainly very distinct. For moments there I thought I detected hints of Blade Runner, Mission Impossible and Half Life 2, which is generally indicative of fun times ahead. And the fun times kept going till it seems that the low budget production started running out of steam, rapidly careening into a rushed ending that is uncharacteristically disjointed. Unfortunately, really, and we were having such fine moments together. Overall there's not a lot to say. This show's an action flick about a hostage rescue by a single dude from a whole hostile prison population, with all that entails. Unfortunately, the rushed hind quarters and other miscellaneous foulups force me to give it a 5.5/10. It could've been so much better had they fleshed out the narrative in the right places, but it is what it is.

The Cabin In The Woods

Bunch of young people go into a cabin in the middle of the woods. Bad things happen and they start dying. If this sounds like the opening to a bad survival horror movie, you'd be right. However, the entire premise of Cabin is sufficiently unique that you'd probably be pleasantly surprised. Not to spoil anything, the movie certainly isn't your run of the mill survival horror. It is something of a huge elaborate conspiracy setup, whereby a bunch of kids are sent to a cabin in the woods, to face off against some classic horror movie monsters. And yes, the monsters are actually real. The movie manages to subvert a lot of the classic horror stereotypes in the context of a setup, where the common horror flick archetypes act the way they do because of manipulations by puppeteers in a command room somewhere. Given how novel the show's premise is, it's difficult to say much without spoiling the story, but suffice to say that I am greatly pleased by how they turned the genre on its head. You'd never see horror movies the same way again. What keeps this movie from true greatness is the pacing (which is a double edged sword), whereby the true premise of the story is only revealed right at the end. On one hand it keeps you guessing, but on the other it creates a niggling doubt that perhaps the reveal could've come earlier. Despite this, I am quite happy that for once, the story was designed from the start to get everyone killed. As many would know, I don't like people much, and it's awful nice to see blood spilled in gratuitous volumes while ensuring minimal survivability. It also helps that the show takes a turn that is a wee bit Portal at one point. Those who've played the game would understand. Regardless, I would say this movie has the makings of a cult classic and is nowhere near as cheesy as it may seem to be at first blush. It gets 8/10 from me.

Battleship

You sank my Battleship! A movie by Hasbro featuring the board game is something that perks my ears, because I played the game ages ago and I am greatly curious about how they might shoehorn the gameplay into a movie. If anything, I know that it is improbable to impossible, so I came to the movie fully expecting a funny flick. My expectations were met. An alien invasion comes to earth after signals were fired into space at another earthlike planet. As the premise goes, it's absolutely certain that a civilization capable of sending ships to visit us from some faraway planet is quite capable of kicking human butt. And they do. I especially like the highlight of the show, with the aliens and their weird chainsaw ball of doom. The story itself is fraught with more holes than my battleship had when it sank to the bottom of the ocean. The story is implausible from how the aliens were really quite incompetent for a race that flew all the way across space, to how they had the usual fragile central command based military systems and just how their weaponry works. And how the humans revived a particular ship to fight for them. Despite this, I love Hasbro for making the movie, as it's also full of Battleship references. To hint, it has a real battleship in the action scenes, real shelling of targets on a grid and actual pegs very much like what you see in the board game. And a little discussion on a frigate vs a battleship. Implausible aliens and apparently bad acting (I can't actually detect bad acting, unfortunately) aside, I think this movie is made primarily for kids and fans of the Battleship board game. In terms of story I'd give the movie a 2/10 for the sheer amount of plotholes, but 8/10 for managing to shoehorn key Battleship moments into an actual movie while preserving the look and feel of the boardgame brought to life by a dude very much like Michael Bay. Leave your logic at the door and enjoy the fireworks.

On Holy Ground

This will sound strange, but I do seem to discern a difference between holy ground and other normal spaces. Now, when someone mentions holy ground, people often think religious sites. That is a reasonable assumption, what with their being consecrated and all. However, that's not all the case. Religious spaces aren't necessarily holy ground.

I've been to many churches and temples, and each time I pass the threshold I just feel nothing. It's as if I've just walked into any other mall. At that point I thought well alright, so holy ground just feels like any other place. And then I step into some old churches, temples, cemeteries and the like and I get a whole other experience.

Stepping through onto true holy ground feels odd, to say the least. It's like stepping through a membrane to another space. For me it actually burns a little, but otherwise it's a pretty overwhelming feeling of peace and there's a certain awe to it. Hell it makes me feel as if I'd burst into flames if I accidentally touched some holy artifact there (I probably would, but don't want to put that to the test). I think the effect is noticeable by regular folk, as you'd see them speaking in hushed tones and basically acting reverent even though there is no religious authority figure around to dictate their conduct. It just seems to happen naturally.

I visited Naritasan temple over at Narita, Japan and I am pretty sure some of it is indeed holy ground. It has that very distinctive feeling, and it was only upon getting back did I realize that it was a temple for over 1000 years. Strangely, it's the places that are at least hundreds of years old that truly feel holy. Perhaps it is a factor of the time that people have spent earnestly worshipping at the site, or something of the sort. Regardless, it sometimes pains me to realize just how hollow modern religious sites can feel, being little different from a common mall or coffee shop.

Our Glorious Dead

I was at the Titanic exhibit today, and was slightly underwhelmed. I expected more from the exhibit, but I suppose the designers did what they could given the crazy space constraints around here. What struck me, however, was getting the boarding pass of a passenger who was actually aboard, and reading the person's life story in brief on the back.

Now, I wouldn't care about the John Smith who happened to be sitting right next to me on the metro, and really even if he told me a one liner about his life I just couldn't be arsed. Ordinarily, I believe a whole lot of people would agree with me. Yet, when it comes to a tragedy like the Titanic's sinking, suddenly everyone becomes a person of interest. I find it hypocritical. Just because we know the manner of a person's death doesn't make the person automatically interesting. In fact, it the voyeurism inherent in understanding a dead person's past that drives this sudden interest. By my definition, if you are only interested in a person after they're dead, it is a right fine example of hypocrisy.

Frankly, if a person proves to be uninteresting in life, I see little reason for their being interesting in death. Unfortunately, we seem to have set ourselves precedents for glorifying the dead, and strangely I seem to be relatively alone in seeing the irony of this. If we are to be interested in people, start while they're alive. Otherwise, let us not care at all.

Privacy

Sometimes I really do wonder at what social media brings people. On the surface, it allows mass interpersonal interactions to occur synchronously and asynchronously, thus bringing everyone together in one big happy family. Yet with technology, we can always be sure that every goodness is effectively a double edged sword, and social media is no exception.

As people have known for quite some time, social media like Facebook is a pretty good source of information for investigations. Those who are most connected to the social media have the most information on themselves out there. The most involved ones even provide live updates on their daily lives (not sure why I'd want to know that, but thanks anyway). With this information, friends can better understand other friends and law enforcement find this to be quite the boon as well. Unfortunately, stalkers can do exactly the same.

What worries me is the propensity of such lack of privacy to become habitual, in that people realize that they cannot avoid the breach without simultaneously cutting themselves off from the social stream. For many people, that is actually a very high price to pay. The problem here is that the value of privacy will go down as a result, and I foresee people not protecting their privacy as zealously as they previously would have. This is especially worrying, in that it brings us closer to a world without barriers for the common folk, but the walls remain in place for those in power...

Living With Inequality

Orwell raises a good point with inequality, in that one needs a frame of reference in order to understand that one's being oppressed in the first place. After watching Hunger Games, it also reminds me of how we live with gross inequality on a daily basis while being conditioned not to think overly much of it. Consider the fact that I am typing this on a rather high end machine that may be well over the annual income of another person out there. The inequality is right here before me, and before the one who happens to read this entry.

For those in richer urban environs, it is the sheer normalcy of everyday life that blinds us all to the struggles of others. For the desperately poor, the "normalcy" of everyday urban life is so far out of reach that the frame of reference cannot even exist. The other problems would be indoctrination, where each person is basically taught to accept ones' lot in life and by extension not seriously consider that of others. It blinds people as surely as Big Brothers' propaganda.

One of my friends commented that wow...in the Hunger Games, the rich folk of the higher districts live such ostentatiously rich lives in comparison to the drab poverty of the lower districts. I pointed out hey...that's precisely the life we're living, except we're the ones on top. It is indeed food for thought. For me, where there is an increase in wealth, the distribution should be as equitable as possible. This does not mean giving away what one rightfully earned, but to provide everyone equal opportunities to earn their own keep.

1984

I've taken to rereading Orwell's 1984 recently, and I've gained a new perspective on the matter. I remember reading it years ago and not quite getting it, because I didn't quite have an interest in the subject of how authoritarian systems work, and thus read it more like your average novel. After going through it in more detail this time, I've come to realize just how much thought went into the novel's creation, and how well Orwell actually understood authoritarianism. More interestingly, the concepts have stood the test of time disturbingly well and become quite prevalent in the recent years, albeit in a somewhat different form.

Interestingly, while Ingsoc in the book promises the equitable distribution of wealth while concentrating it amongst the select few, the capitalist system of today does the exact same thing while promising to increase the wealth of all. Where Ingsoc winds up brainwashing everyone into mindlessly accepting the system despite having to engage in doublethink, people in capitalist societies are made to accept this inequality simply because they are taught that there is no suitable substitute. People simply stop thinking about alternatives.

Given the general degeneration of democracy in today's world, the interconnectedness of the internet forcing people to think about how much of their information leaks all over the place and the omnipresence of monitoring devices, arguably the world of 1984 exists in a mutated form today. Media has become our panopticon, where citizens are being watched over by fellow citizens in a sort of self-inflicted thought police. Governments claim to be disadvantaged and disempowered by the internet, while using the same reasoning to increase their own control through heavily regulating media. And wealth distribution is extremely unequal. How, then, is this not 1984? Has Oceania truly always been at war?

Tiredness

I've come to realize that humans use "tiredness" as a rather generic term for a variety of drained states. That is, tiredness is used interchangeably to describe a state of sleepiness (lack of sleep), being drained (emotionally drained) or exhaustion (physical tiredness from activity). For me, the terms are independent, which means that one can be any number of the three at a time, or even all of the above. Unfortunately, the propensity to use the generic term irks me from its ambiguity.

The distinction is important to me, because there are different remedies for "tiredness". If one is sleepy, one sleeps. If one is tired, one merely rests. And if one is feeling down, one needs cheering up. The problem is when one doesn't distinguish between the problems and winds up using the wrong solution. That certainly does not improve the situation. As always, I figure that self-awareness is a big deal and it can certainly help improve one's well-being.

Fun In The Sun?

I was at a resort with my colleagues for some team event, and I was reminded of just how little fun it was to be out there in the open without cloud cover. Ordinarily I'd think hey spot of sunblock, shades hell it's going to be mostly ok. And then I just forget exactly how much it hurts and then there's the matter of the heat. Overall, I'd say while doing a luge down a hill is incredibly fun, it was an experience spoiled by the sun and heat.

What a shame, but frankly I can never understand how people can term it fun in the sun at all. Not unless they're outright masochists straight from Hell. Or perhaps that's exactly what they are. Regardless, I know for a fact that it's just not the kind of thing for me. I'd much prefer to do the same thing at the resort at night, just looking at the ships' lights out at sea and just enjoying the cool breeze. Now that is a much better way to chill out.

New Rulers Of The World

I was reading Pilger's work when I thought about the abuse of power in general. It is especially bad when it's a matter of the abuse of good faith, taking advantage of others under the pretext of helping them. Worst of all, it's outright hypocrisy where the bully then proceeds to convince others that he's just trying to help.

I tend to regard betrayal as one of the few truly cardinal sins against myself. It is something that I literally do not forgive. For a greater power to become an oath breaker is unpardonable. Unfortunately, the way power works, it is also often impossible to deal with them even if their deception were to be revealed. The worst thing is that the most advantageous way to live life is to play along with the bully and thereby become traitorous bullies themselves.

Disgusting. Then again, whenever advantage is to be had and selfish humans are inclined to pursue profit, it seems inevitable that they'd play along regardless of morality.

The Salary System

The salary system is quite remarkably broken, for something so prevalent. Everything from the scaling to the way it is distributed. Take for example how a CEO can earn stupid numbers of millions while the grunts may not always be able to count their thousands. Clearly the inequality is massive, and when cuts happen it invariably hits the lower ranks while the higher ups still get their bonuses (albeit reduced) and no pay cuts at all. You'd think the reasonable thing to do would be to cut salaries across the board instead of losing expertise from laying off staff.

Then comes the matter of how increments work. Oddly enough, the percentage points apply across the tiers, causing a geometric salary increase as base salary grades are raised. This means that a 7% increase for a grunt is much much smaller than the 7% that a CEO may get for similar high performance. Barring a promotion, it is actually impossible for the lower rankers to actually catch up.

A possible alternative would be to have absolute increases in salaries at increment time, such that both lower and higher rankers receive the same increment range due to their performance. That should help flatten the curve.

Those Lonely Humans

I like going out at night. There's a certain freedom to it. Sometimes I stop by a 24 hour place like a MacD's at 3am to snack and read a book. However, every time I do this, I cannot help but notice the lonely humans everywhere. Now, it may seem like I am lonely myself, doing things like sit around with a book in the middle of the night. But then again I am there for the purpose of unwinding. What I see is a whole bunch of humans sleeping at the tables or just sitting there apparently deep in thought. Knowing what I know about humans, they're probably not very happy about their lives since most would probably be lying in bed at home instead of sleeping at some fast food joint.

I am reminded of my late friend (whose death anniversary will come around in a couple weeks) and that was the exact same place I last met her before she finally successfully offed herself. She was sitting there in the middle of the night as well, frightened of her hallucinations, and her mom was coming later in the night to pick her up. Tragedy, really, but I still believe she's better off dead since she wasn't going to get any real help. Truly, that's a better place to be for some humans.

Back to the living lonelies, I look at them sleeping at the eatery and think...wow are they homeless? Do they have nowhere else to go to? Or are they just so tired that they fall asleep after a late night supper? As I walk home I see more humans sleeping on the benches around my area, and think the same thing. It is impossible to tell if they are truly vagabonds (they don't look the part) or they're just out there having a cooler rest out in the open. I'll probably never know.

The Bane Of Design

The rapid advancement of technology should help design in theory. More options become available, limitations fade away, design can be free to operate without constraints. In theory, the technology we have today should have made a whole slew of truly creative intellectual property. Yet, it seems this is not so.

The whole hypersaturated market of virtually identical first person shooter games and movies like John Carter attest to this. Something has gone wrong, that the new affordances of technology aren't fostering increased creativity, but seem to have reduced it instead. My take is that technology has become a form of creativity in and of itself, where the eye candy and special effects have led to complacency. Where one was bound by massive constraints just 2 decades ago, forcing creative thinking around technological limitations, now one simply slaps a pretty new skin on a stinking old carcass and calls it a whole new creation. Goodness gracious me.

Designers and other creative people need to find their way out of this rut, to stimulate themselves to think outside the box that superior presentation technology has ironically locked them into. To fail to see this is to allow technology to become the bane of design.

John Carter

John Carter. Interplanetary traveler, Martian loyalist, tycoon. An epic love story that spans two planets, with the lives of everyone concerned in peril were it not for the actions of our intrepid hero. One would be led to expect that the movie would be spectacular. Unfortunately, it was not.

John Carter is a typical story of a traveler who is thrown into a foreign culture, struggles to assimilate, but eventually manages to help protect it against its foes. Of course, the hero always tries to return to that culture in the end. Last Samurai, Dances With Wolves, etc etc. It's a common enough narrative, and is not inherently original in any form. What makes such a narrative memorable and truly enjoyable is the immersion where the viewers think they understand what's going on, what the cultures stand for, and wind up rooting for the hero. This was not to be.

The movie falls short when it substitutes CGI for narrative, where the foreign culture happens to be alien looking beings, and the enemy is just another form of human. On Mars. Yet, throughout the narrative, it is unclear just why they are fighting, why it's even possible for an earthling to romance a martian, what the stakes of the fighting truly are, and basically anything that matters that isn't part of the romance or combat. None of these are made clear in the story.

The overall incoherence of the narrative prevents the viewer from truly appreciating the high budget production, and it is actually disgusting to see all that money splurged to basically reskin an old tale without adding anything particularly special. I'd say this movie deserves a 4/10.

The Giggle Factor

Society has a powerful conformity mechanism, and it's called the giggle factor. Anything that lies outside the common boundaries of the masses will be laughed out of the house. As a result, the socially oriented humans will be inclined to avoid incurring the wrath of the giggle factor anytime soon.

This avoidance of the giggle factor is apparent in the sheer reluctance to seriously explore possibilities outside the realm of accepted science for example. This is regardless the actual quality of the commonly accepted science in question (most speak of it as if they know, but they retain a shallow understanding at best).

While I can understand the general guideline of sticking to mainstream thought patterns as a shortcut to staying away from shams and scams that plague alternative thought processes, I find it rather restrictive and rather like closing one's mind off prematurely. It also leads to the reluctance to question taboos, which may have well lost their practical value over the ages, yet still remaining from lack of informed querying. This seems to be rather unfortunate and a hindrance to progress.