After playing through Infinite Undiscovery I still haven't the faintest clue as to what the title is supposed to mean. It sounds meaningful, but the game is neither infinite nor does it challenge the player to "undiscover" anything.
Clocking in at around 20 hours, this game is hardly representative of its impressive pedigree. I can't recall a Star Ocean or a proper Final Fantasy game with so little substance. This is nearly unheard of for a game spanning two DVDs. But what is there is done well.
Extremely heavy on story, the narrative and characters are developed well. I happen to be one of those individuals who doesn't cry foul at plentiful cut scenes, but I must admit that this one started pushing the limits of what I thought was acceptable.
Perhaps my imagination is running away with me, but I couldn't help but notice some visual similarities with one of my favorite series: Ys. When he's in full armor Capell closely resembles Adol Christin, and Balbagon - an auxiliary character - appears similar to Adol's best friend Dogi. I have to wonder if this was intentional.
The music is ambient and fitting, but largely unremarkable, much like Final Fantasy XII.
Visually the architecture and cut scenes are a microcosm of Final Fantasy XII, with large sweeping camera pans across tall ornate buildings.
Gameplay wise, this game was very obviously using the same engine as Final Fantasy XII. It's as if someone took Final Fantasy XII, stripped out 75% of the depth and made it into an Action RPG. The character development and AI control of the other party members seems to follow a similar progression but the player is given very little visibility into or control over them.
The item creation system is almost as cryptic as it is frustrating. The items you can craft are dependent upon who you "connect" with. To connect with another character that character either has to be in your current party, or you have to locate him/her in a town or village. Trying to locate a party member in a town or village can be a lengthy and frustrating process. There is no way to tell which items a character can craft without actually connecting with him/her to view the list. The quickest option is usually to change out party members while in town and then exit town to get them to "connect". The problem with this is that, frequently, the story will not allow you to leave town. It also forces you to decide between who can craft the best items and who is the best in battle when choosing team members. Fortunately (or unfortunately if you look at it that way) the items available for crafting are rarely ever better than what you can buy in shops. Supposedly frequent crafting will cause your crafting ability to increase and make new items available, but I was never able to see any progress from this.
Changing party members can only occur while you are in a town, or at certain points in the game you are given a one-time option to change out party members. This can happen before a boss fight, for example. I would have expected the developers to at least give the player access to this feature at save crystals, but evidently that would be asking too much.
In a badly failed attempt to reinvent the oft mimicked Active Time Battle (ATB) system made famous by Final Fantasy IV, Infinite Undiscovery will not pause the action while you browse through a menu. Instead of adding another layer of strategy to the fighting, the game simply severely penalizes you for wanting to access your menu during a battle. For example, I purchased and equipped a sword with a water element. I had been using it for over an hour when I suddenly encountered a group of water based enemies that I was accidentally healing every time I attacked. They weren't particularly strong enemies, but in the time it took me to open my menu and equip another sword, my party was wiped out and I lost an hour of gameplay. The fatal flaw of this system is that when the menu is open your character is paralyzed. I can understand not allowing the player to attack while using the menu, but to not be able to move? What piece of reality is that trying to simulate? Also of annoyance is that there isn't a way to quickly exit the menu once you've done your business and want to get back to the battle. Instead, it is necessary to cancel out of every menu in the same order they were opened. If the developers had allowed the character to move around, and provided some sort of quick menu exit, this feature would have added the desired challenge without being a complete kick in the face.
Healing during battles can be painful to the ears. Left to their own devices the other characters will simply attack constantly. If you want them to heal each other or themselves it is necessary to hit the Y button. This doesn't put them in a first-aid mode where they keep healing until everyone is topped off or near it, no, it's only good for one heal, then it's back to attack attack attack. When dealing with boss fights where area effect spells hit everyone at once, it becomes necessary to repeatedly mash the Y button. This wouldn't be such a problem, except that it elicits a voice clip of Capell either imploring someone to do some healing, or asking if they have. This gets old very quick and was the single most annoying aspect of the game for me.
With so many negatives, it might be easy to get the impression that I didn't like the game, but that's really not the case. It was a decent game and enjoyable, but I see all of the ways it could have been done better and I can't help but point them out. It's definitely worth a play through, but not at $60. This game was obviously produced in a very short amount of time, and should have been priced accordingly at around $40.
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Monday, July 07, 2008
Playing the "Heaven and Earth" series from Quintet
A couple of months ago, I was reminiscing, as I often do, about the good ol' days of gaming. And, of course, the good ol' days will vary from one gamer to the next, but for me, it was the heyday of the Super NES.
One game that held a special nuanced memory for me was Actraiser. It was one of the earliest SNES games and like all good early titles sought to show off the capabilities of the new hardware. To this day I think the phenominal orchestrated soundtrack, tight controls, and gorgeous colorful graphics make it a great demo piece for the SNES.
Like many good things, however, there wasn't nearly enough of it to quench my thirst. Just when the game started to hit it's stride, and I started to really get into the "zone", excited about what I'd be doing next, it was over. When the credits rolled, my heart sank. I rushed out and picked up a copy of ActRaiser 2 (I didn't play the first game until well after it came out, so the sequel was readily available). ActRaiser 2 disappointed me in that it departed from the original in too many ways to recapture its essence. I never finished it.
So a couple of months ago I remembered ActRaiser and happened across its Wikipedia entry. As is often the case, after reading the article, I started tumbling down the Wikipedia rabbit hole and ended up learning all about the developer that made ActRaiser, Quintet, and about another game as famous for its obscurity as for its quality - Terranigma.
I learned that Quintet went on to make another SNES game called "Soul Blazer" with a theme similar to ActRaiser. I also learned that it was unofficially the start of a series of games fans had dubbed "Heaven and Earth".
Amazed that I had never heard of this before, I immediately scoured the local used game shops for a copy of Soul Blazer. I found one and played through the game in a couple of days. The game told the story of a greedy king that sold the souls of his kingdom to the devil for money. He didn't see the foolishness of dealing with the devil until the devil came for his soul. The English adaptation didn't call him the devil, just as it didn't call your benefactor God, but that's what those characters were meant to represent. The game consists of defeating the demonized souls of the citizens that the king sold and restoring the world to its state before the devil took over. Although it was almost completely different from what I remembered of ActRaiser, it managed to capture some of the addictive gameplay and kept me hooked until the very end.
The next game in the series was "The Illusion of Gaia". I had actually bought the game years ago and never played it. I was on an RPG kick and bought pretty much anything I could find with the intention of playing it later on. It worked out remarkably well in this case. So the Illusion of Gaia was quite a bit heavier on story than I remember many SNES games at the time. The production values seemed a bit higher than Sould Blazer - better graphics, more action. But it played like a cheap knockoff of Seiken Densetsu II (The Secret of Mana). The difficulty of the boss fights seemed disproportionate to the stuff leading up to them, so I only really died on boss fights - some of which took upwards of 30 minutes to figure out. Kinda reminded me of Mega Man's pattern-based boss fights. Still the characters were compelling and the story, while still very Japanese in its unliklihood, was compelling. The rest of this paragraph is a spoiler. The game world is filled with references to actual places on Earth, but the references aren't exact. Instead of a continent, Euro is a large town. The Nazca lines of Peru are actually where India is located etc... There is a large comet careening towards Earth (Final Fantasy fans will find this very familiar) and its light is causing creatures on the planet to evolve into monsters. After defeating the monsters and collecting several mystical statues, you gain the power to confront the evil soul of the "Dark Gaia" - the horrific intelligence behind the comet. When the dust clears the comet changes course, but it expelled enough evolutionary light to re-order the continents and suddenly you've gone from a 50 B.C. like world to the world of 1994.
After that we have what some consider the end of the series, "Terranigma". This is a game with an odd history. Its primary quirk is that although it was officially released in the English language, it was never released in the United States. This makes it a much sought-after title for collectors. This is a trend reversal of sorts because generally Europe and Australia get screwed out of quality game releases. I never realized that half of the challenge of the game would be getting past the technical hurdles just to actually play the thing.
A couple of years ago I heard about Terranigma and tried to buy it. I even bought a Super Honey Bee adapter so it could be played on my U.S. Super NES system. But I was outbid on the Ebay auction for the game itself, so I was stuck with an adapter and nothing to adapt with it. Well, once I learned that the game was made by Quintet, and further that it was part of the "Heaven and Earth" series, I redoubled my efforts to get a copy. After winning my auction I spent a couple of hours digging through dozens of boxes and several closets filled with gaming crap to locate the stupid adapter. When the game arrived, however, I received a shock. The adapter that I had had for the last two years for this one purpose, didn't work. It did what it advertised it would do - it bypassed the lockout chip on the Super NES, but apparently the engineers at Nintendo had devised an additional way to stop people from playing out-of-territory games by the time that Terranigma came out. Terranigma was only released in English in Australia and Europe. Both countries use a different television standard than the U.S. and Japan. Long story short, the screens refresh at a different rate in Europe than they do in the U.S. The game checks this refresh rate and if it finds the system running at the U.S. refresh rate, all you get is a screen telling you that you can't play the game because you're out-of-territory. Of course, my SNES runs at the U.S. refresh rate of 60Hz - otherwise the TV wouldn't display it properly. So I started furiously digging on the Internet for answers - a game this popular, this has to be a known issue and there has to be a solution to it that doesn't involve emulation.
After searching and searching, I was surprised to find how little information there is out there about playing Terranigma on a U.S. SNES. In general a lack of information about something like this either means that it can't be done, or it's so easy, no one thought anyone would need specific instructions. After a couple of hours of searching, however I discovered two options, one was to buy a Pro Action Replay for the SNES as they are the only adapter cartridge that are known to work with that game, but it would have to be a specific version of the adapter, and they usually went for over $100 on Ebay. The other was to spend $5 on bits from Radio Shack and wire in a 50/60Hz switch on the console. Such a switch is usually installed to allow European and Australian gamers to play U.S. and Japanese games, but since the consoles are effectively identical, it works both ways. Since I have 5 Super NES's, including one that's already marked up by some joker who etched his name and social security number into it, I opted to go the cheap route and mod the console. There are plenty of sites that will show you how to add a 50/60Hz switch, just not many that will explain that that's what's needed for Terranigma.
So the mod worked and I can play Terranigma on a proper Super NES now. After playing through the first few hours of the game, I can say that this is, in fact, one of the most polished SNES Action RPG's I've ever played. The graphics, sound, combat engine, options, weapon and armor system, and in-game help are all on par with the best the SNES has to offer. While it's no where near "the best game on the system" as a lot of hype-monger fanboys would have everyone believe, it is a significant leap in complexity and depth over Quintet's other offerings. It's quite a bit better than several titles that did make it to the U.S. so I have to wonder why it was never brought here. My only guess so far is that Nintendo didn't like the sloppy job Enix did with the English translation. Normally when a game is localized from Japanese to English, a new "half-width" character set is added to the game's memory to take advantage of the fact that English letters don't need as much space on screen as Japanese letters. This is particularly evident in the text of games like "Secret of Mana". Terranigma is a perfect example of why localizers normally do this. All of the English text uses the same width as the Japanese characters so it looks like there's a space after every letter and two spaces between words. It's not a horrible thing to adapt to, but it does make it difficult to read the dialogue.
Finally I learned, that although Quintet dissolved for all practical purposes after the 16-bit era, they did re-form under a new name and spit out one last game that is arguably an unofficial sequel to Terranigma: Granstream Saga on the Playstation. That's another game that I picked up some time ago but never played. I won't know if it's any good until I finish Terranigma, but once again it pays to be a pack rat.
One game that held a special nuanced memory for me was Actraiser. It was one of the earliest SNES games and like all good early titles sought to show off the capabilities of the new hardware. To this day I think the phenominal orchestrated soundtrack, tight controls, and gorgeous colorful graphics make it a great demo piece for the SNES.
Like many good things, however, there wasn't nearly enough of it to quench my thirst. Just when the game started to hit it's stride, and I started to really get into the "zone", excited about what I'd be doing next, it was over. When the credits rolled, my heart sank. I rushed out and picked up a copy of ActRaiser 2 (I didn't play the first game until well after it came out, so the sequel was readily available). ActRaiser 2 disappointed me in that it departed from the original in too many ways to recapture its essence. I never finished it.
So a couple of months ago I remembered ActRaiser and happened across its Wikipedia entry. As is often the case, after reading the article, I started tumbling down the Wikipedia rabbit hole and ended up learning all about the developer that made ActRaiser, Quintet, and about another game as famous for its obscurity as for its quality - Terranigma.
I learned that Quintet went on to make another SNES game called "Soul Blazer" with a theme similar to ActRaiser. I also learned that it was unofficially the start of a series of games fans had dubbed "Heaven and Earth".
Amazed that I had never heard of this before, I immediately scoured the local used game shops for a copy of Soul Blazer. I found one and played through the game in a couple of days. The game told the story of a greedy king that sold the souls of his kingdom to the devil for money. He didn't see the foolishness of dealing with the devil until the devil came for his soul. The English adaptation didn't call him the devil, just as it didn't call your benefactor God, but that's what those characters were meant to represent. The game consists of defeating the demonized souls of the citizens that the king sold and restoring the world to its state before the devil took over. Although it was almost completely different from what I remembered of ActRaiser, it managed to capture some of the addictive gameplay and kept me hooked until the very end.
The next game in the series was "The Illusion of Gaia". I had actually bought the game years ago and never played it. I was on an RPG kick and bought pretty much anything I could find with the intention of playing it later on. It worked out remarkably well in this case. So the Illusion of Gaia was quite a bit heavier on story than I remember many SNES games at the time. The production values seemed a bit higher than Sould Blazer - better graphics, more action. But it played like a cheap knockoff of Seiken Densetsu II (The Secret of Mana). The difficulty of the boss fights seemed disproportionate to the stuff leading up to them, so I only really died on boss fights - some of which took upwards of 30 minutes to figure out. Kinda reminded me of Mega Man's pattern-based boss fights. Still the characters were compelling and the story, while still very Japanese in its unliklihood, was compelling. The rest of this paragraph is a spoiler. The game world is filled with references to actual places on Earth, but the references aren't exact. Instead of a continent, Euro is a large town. The Nazca lines of Peru are actually where India is located etc... There is a large comet careening towards Earth (Final Fantasy fans will find this very familiar) and its light is causing creatures on the planet to evolve into monsters. After defeating the monsters and collecting several mystical statues, you gain the power to confront the evil soul of the "Dark Gaia" - the horrific intelligence behind the comet. When the dust clears the comet changes course, but it expelled enough evolutionary light to re-order the continents and suddenly you've gone from a 50 B.C. like world to the world of 1994.
After that we have what some consider the end of the series, "Terranigma". This is a game with an odd history. Its primary quirk is that although it was officially released in the English language, it was never released in the United States. This makes it a much sought-after title for collectors. This is a trend reversal of sorts because generally Europe and Australia get screwed out of quality game releases. I never realized that half of the challenge of the game would be getting past the technical hurdles just to actually play the thing.
A couple of years ago I heard about Terranigma and tried to buy it. I even bought a Super Honey Bee adapter so it could be played on my U.S. Super NES system. But I was outbid on the Ebay auction for the game itself, so I was stuck with an adapter and nothing to adapt with it. Well, once I learned that the game was made by Quintet, and further that it was part of the "Heaven and Earth" series, I redoubled my efforts to get a copy. After winning my auction I spent a couple of hours digging through dozens of boxes and several closets filled with gaming crap to locate the stupid adapter. When the game arrived, however, I received a shock. The adapter that I had had for the last two years for this one purpose, didn't work. It did what it advertised it would do - it bypassed the lockout chip on the Super NES, but apparently the engineers at Nintendo had devised an additional way to stop people from playing out-of-territory games by the time that Terranigma came out. Terranigma was only released in English in Australia and Europe. Both countries use a different television standard than the U.S. and Japan. Long story short, the screens refresh at a different rate in Europe than they do in the U.S. The game checks this refresh rate and if it finds the system running at the U.S. refresh rate, all you get is a screen telling you that you can't play the game because you're out-of-territory. Of course, my SNES runs at the U.S. refresh rate of 60Hz - otherwise the TV wouldn't display it properly. So I started furiously digging on the Internet for answers - a game this popular, this has to be a known issue and there has to be a solution to it that doesn't involve emulation.
After searching and searching, I was surprised to find how little information there is out there about playing Terranigma on a U.S. SNES. In general a lack of information about something like this either means that it can't be done, or it's so easy, no one thought anyone would need specific instructions. After a couple of hours of searching, however I discovered two options, one was to buy a Pro Action Replay for the SNES as they are the only adapter cartridge that are known to work with that game, but it would have to be a specific version of the adapter, and they usually went for over $100 on Ebay. The other was to spend $5 on bits from Radio Shack and wire in a 50/60Hz switch on the console. Such a switch is usually installed to allow European and Australian gamers to play U.S. and Japanese games, but since the consoles are effectively identical, it works both ways. Since I have 5 Super NES's, including one that's already marked up by some joker who etched his name and social security number into it, I opted to go the cheap route and mod the console. There are plenty of sites that will show you how to add a 50/60Hz switch, just not many that will explain that that's what's needed for Terranigma.
So the mod worked and I can play Terranigma on a proper Super NES now. After playing through the first few hours of the game, I can say that this is, in fact, one of the most polished SNES Action RPG's I've ever played. The graphics, sound, combat engine, options, weapon and armor system, and in-game help are all on par with the best the SNES has to offer. While it's no where near "the best game on the system" as a lot of hype-monger fanboys would have everyone believe, it is a significant leap in complexity and depth over Quintet's other offerings. It's quite a bit better than several titles that did make it to the U.S. so I have to wonder why it was never brought here. My only guess so far is that Nintendo didn't like the sloppy job Enix did with the English translation. Normally when a game is localized from Japanese to English, a new "half-width" character set is added to the game's memory to take advantage of the fact that English letters don't need as much space on screen as Japanese letters. This is particularly evident in the text of games like "Secret of Mana". Terranigma is a perfect example of why localizers normally do this. All of the English text uses the same width as the Japanese characters so it looks like there's a space after every letter and two spaces between words. It's not a horrible thing to adapt to, but it does make it difficult to read the dialogue.
Finally I learned, that although Quintet dissolved for all practical purposes after the 16-bit era, they did re-form under a new name and spit out one last game that is arguably an unofficial sequel to Terranigma: Granstream Saga on the Playstation. That's another game that I picked up some time ago but never played. I won't know if it's any good until I finish Terranigma, but once again it pays to be a pack rat.
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
Summer 2008
I find it interesting to compare my expectations of the things I looked forward to all year and my thoughts after I actually got to experience them.
This year I was really looking forward to several movies.
The Happening -
Before: This looked like an intriguing mystery with a thought-provoking premise.
After: This movie is crap, and is easily M. Night Shaymalan's second worst film ever. The #1 in crapulence is, of course, and always will be the unwatchable "Unbreakable." The actors were underutilized for this snoozefest. We don't need any more movies telling us human beings how horrible we are being to the planet, we just don't. And we don't need any more MNS movies without any basis in possibility. From square one, the plot was a dud and it had me wondering if anyone is out there keeping these goofy writers in check anymore. The production values were non-existent. There were two scenes where the boom microphone is clearly visible hanging over the characters' heads like it was meant to be in the scene or something. Just poor work all around. Everyone involved ought to be embarrassed.
Prince Caspian -
Before: Although the BBC version was sufficiently interesting, I always wanted to see Reepicheep portrayed a little more realistically.
After: I've pretty much already gone over this one, but it was disappointing enough that I'm not really planning on buying the Blu-ray when it comes out. The writers should have realized from the success of the books and the first movie that there is no need to shoehorn in entirely new and crappy storylines in order to make the pacing of the movie fit into the "Three Acts" mold. Reep was pretty sweet though.
Speed Racer -
Before: The Wachowski brothers have been a big let-down since the first Matrix film. And although I wasn't really acquainted with the original television series, it didn't seem to be all that interesting. I had heard about the oddball cameras they were using to obtain eye-popping visual effects, and that was pretty much all I was looking forward to.
After: Not only was the movie thoroughly fun, but it was bright colorful interesting and fairly long (I hate 90 minute movies - it makes me feel like I'm getting ripped off). The racing sequences reminded me of one of my favorite video game franchises - F-Zero. Despite the kiddy dialogue (which I rather enjoyed) the plot is fairly complex, filled with secrets and double-crosses. The characters, while incredibly stereotypical and over-the-top dramatic, are very well developed. I'll definitely be buying this when it comes out.
The Dark Crystal (Yes the one from the 80's) -
Before: I had seen posters, and rental boxes for this movies for most of my childhood. It kept getting re-released, so I figured it must be interesting enough to compare with something like Labyrinth.
After: I know I don't technically pay to watch these movies when I get them from Netflix, but I still want my money back. This movie must have been a blight on Jim Henson's career, and looks more like a cry for help from a band of hopelessly chained drug addicts than anything approaching cinema. I suspect that altered states of consciousness are required to derive the implicit metaphysical meaning that just isn't there. One might argue that it's a kid's movie, but that's hardly a worthwhile defense since exposing children to such dribble is probably considered child abuse in most municipalities. The plot was straightforward and insipid. The protagonist was hideous, the pacing was terrible, and the cinematography had all of the hallmarks of being done by a blind man. And that's all I have to say about that.
The Incredible Hulk -
Before: My first thought was that there ought to be a law preventing a franchise from being "reinvented" more than once in the same decade. We just got a modern-special-effects Hulk movie back in 2003 so what gives? But at the same time, it does have Ed Norton, so it can't be bad, can it? Sure, it's got Liv Tyler of my-only-acting-ability-is-crying-scenes fame, but that can't drag it down too much can it?
After: I was very surprised by the quality of storytelling. Ed Norton makes a great Bruce Banner. Liv got her pouty-crying scene that she gets in every movie she's ever in, but it was ignorable (maybe I'm finally developing an immunity to her evil powers!). The special effects were interesting, not over-the-top or stupid like in the 2003 movie. And the little tie-in at the end of the movie caused more excitement than I would have expected.
Iron Man -
Before: I didn't really know much about Iron Man at all. I'd seen the comic illustrations and heard people talking about this movie for years, but it was just another in a long line of Marvel super heroes that were probably cool, but whatever. When I heard Robert Downey Jr. was going to be playing Iron Man, I thought someone got a wire crossed, but like a train wreck, I wanted to see what the hell that could be like.
After: This was actually one of the best comic book to movie adaptations I've seen since the X-Men trilogy, and Robert Downey Jr. was brilliant. I can't comment on whether the personality matches the comic book version, but it was definitely interesting enough to make me a fan.
I also had a chance to play a number of Video Games this year.
Metal Gear Solid 4 -
Before: I've been mildly interested in the Metal Gear universe since the first game debuted on the NES. Admittedly I still haven't figured out how to get past the first stage in that game. But when Metal Gear Solid came out for the PS1, I was instantly hooked on its interesting gameplay and intriguing plot. My enthusiasm for the series took a sharp dive when the majority of MGS2 was taken up with the whiny unlikable character "Raiden", and a plot that didn't make sense by itself. A lot of people lost faith in the series at that point. When MGS3 came out, there was barely any fanfare. My personal supreme disappointment with MGS3 was the fact that despite being technically sophisticated, Hideo Kojima had not seen fit to include a widescreen mode. I barely played more than a couple of hours before losing interest. Because of my mixed experiences with the first three games, I figured 4 would be a crap-shoot. It was hard to tell if it would be any good.
After: I haven't finished the game yet, but after pouring nearly 20 hours into it, I'm ready to cast my vote to nominate it for the award for "coolest thing ever". This game is singularly the greatest foray into interactive entertainment I've ever taken. It seems like all of the action games I've ever played up to this point were just practice. MGS4 takes an everything-and-the-kitchen-sink approach that could have just as easily ended up being a messy frustration and blends it into a seamless action story, with some of the prettiest graphics I've ever seen. The controls are so natural and responsive, I never find myself fighting against them to get the game to do what I want. The story, which largely seeks to tie up all of the loose plot threads from the other games, features some of the scariest social commentaries I've ever seen. I find myself wishing that everyone was a gamer so that they could experience the beauty of it.
Haze -
Before: I had just finished playing some very solid FPS games like Killzone, Half Life 2: Episode 2, and Halo 3, and just finished the marvelous Ubisoft game, Assassin's Creed when I saw the trailers for Haze on PSN. The trailers were very pretty High-Definition and easily out-shined everything out there in terms of realism. I started drooling over this game back in September. It was supposed to be released in November. The game was delayed numerous times to "make sure they got it right." I remember thinking to myself how that was a good thing because the game should be even better than what was in the trailer.
After: Haze originally retailed for $59.99. Less than three weeks later it was marked down to $39.99. That's about matches the disparity between my expectations and what I got instead. The game wasn't in HD so most of the text was blurry from the upscaling effects. The frame rate still sucked, despite the sacrifices in the level of detail made to help the game run smoother. The arsenal was tiny, and the NPC dialogue was repetitive and annoying. This game is quite a bit worse than the tralier that drew me in for it several months ago.
Devil May Cry 4 -
Before: I have always been a fan of the DMC series because it borrows so heavily from the gothic themes in Castlevania Symphony of the Night. Much like the Metal Gear Solid games, 1 was awesome, 2 was horrible, 3 was passable but I lost interest because it wasn't in widescreen. Knowing that 4 would be widescreen and high-definition, I figured it would be awesome. Despite some bad experiences with PS3 games, I decided to go with the PS3 version over the XBOX360 version because I thought the limited edition packaging looked cooler on the PS3 and Capcom swore blind that the games were identical on both systems.
After: I shouldn't have trusted Capcom when they said that both games were identical. The XBOX360 version of the game was slightly superior in terms of graphics - the PS3 version was full of "jaggies", and the PS3 game featured a 30 minute-long forced Hard Drive installation (because Capcom is too lazy to figure out how to use the Blu-ray drive properly). If that wasn't bad enough, the installation process has an undocumented flaw that caused me no end of frustration for the first four hours that I attempted to play the game. If you are downloading demos or videos from PSN while installing, the Hard Drive will interleave the data to speed up write speed. 99% of programs in existence wouldn't even notice this, but for some reason DMC4 absolutely has to be installed contiguously (ie. not interleaved) or the game will randomly crash. So stop your downloads before you install, thanks for the heads up, Capcom:P Anyway, the game itself was the testosterone-laden, demon-killing, sword-swinging, heavy-metal playing romp that I expected it to be and I thoroughly enjoyed it.
This year I was really looking forward to several movies.
The Happening -
Before: This looked like an intriguing mystery with a thought-provoking premise.
After: This movie is crap, and is easily M. Night Shaymalan's second worst film ever. The #1 in crapulence is, of course, and always will be the unwatchable "Unbreakable." The actors were underutilized for this snoozefest. We don't need any more movies telling us human beings how horrible we are being to the planet, we just don't. And we don't need any more MNS movies without any basis in possibility. From square one, the plot was a dud and it had me wondering if anyone is out there keeping these goofy writers in check anymore. The production values were non-existent. There were two scenes where the boom microphone is clearly visible hanging over the characters' heads like it was meant to be in the scene or something. Just poor work all around. Everyone involved ought to be embarrassed.
Prince Caspian -
Before: Although the BBC version was sufficiently interesting, I always wanted to see Reepicheep portrayed a little more realistically.
After: I've pretty much already gone over this one, but it was disappointing enough that I'm not really planning on buying the Blu-ray when it comes out. The writers should have realized from the success of the books and the first movie that there is no need to shoehorn in entirely new and crappy storylines in order to make the pacing of the movie fit into the "Three Acts" mold. Reep was pretty sweet though.
Speed Racer -
Before: The Wachowski brothers have been a big let-down since the first Matrix film. And although I wasn't really acquainted with the original television series, it didn't seem to be all that interesting. I had heard about the oddball cameras they were using to obtain eye-popping visual effects, and that was pretty much all I was looking forward to.
After: Not only was the movie thoroughly fun, but it was bright colorful interesting and fairly long (I hate 90 minute movies - it makes me feel like I'm getting ripped off). The racing sequences reminded me of one of my favorite video game franchises - F-Zero. Despite the kiddy dialogue (which I rather enjoyed) the plot is fairly complex, filled with secrets and double-crosses. The characters, while incredibly stereotypical and over-the-top dramatic, are very well developed. I'll definitely be buying this when it comes out.
The Dark Crystal (Yes the one from the 80's) -
Before: I had seen posters, and rental boxes for this movies for most of my childhood. It kept getting re-released, so I figured it must be interesting enough to compare with something like Labyrinth.
After: I know I don't technically pay to watch these movies when I get them from Netflix, but I still want my money back. This movie must have been a blight on Jim Henson's career, and looks more like a cry for help from a band of hopelessly chained drug addicts than anything approaching cinema. I suspect that altered states of consciousness are required to derive the implicit metaphysical meaning that just isn't there. One might argue that it's a kid's movie, but that's hardly a worthwhile defense since exposing children to such dribble is probably considered child abuse in most municipalities. The plot was straightforward and insipid. The protagonist was hideous, the pacing was terrible, and the cinematography had all of the hallmarks of being done by a blind man. And that's all I have to say about that.
The Incredible Hulk -
Before: My first thought was that there ought to be a law preventing a franchise from being "reinvented" more than once in the same decade. We just got a modern-special-effects Hulk movie back in 2003 so what gives? But at the same time, it does have Ed Norton, so it can't be bad, can it? Sure, it's got Liv Tyler of my-only-acting-ability-is-crying-scenes fame, but that can't drag it down too much can it?
After: I was very surprised by the quality of storytelling. Ed Norton makes a great Bruce Banner. Liv got her pouty-crying scene that she gets in every movie she's ever in, but it was ignorable (maybe I'm finally developing an immunity to her evil powers!). The special effects were interesting, not over-the-top or stupid like in the 2003 movie. And the little tie-in at the end of the movie caused more excitement than I would have expected.
Iron Man -
Before: I didn't really know much about Iron Man at all. I'd seen the comic illustrations and heard people talking about this movie for years, but it was just another in a long line of Marvel super heroes that were probably cool, but whatever. When I heard Robert Downey Jr. was going to be playing Iron Man, I thought someone got a wire crossed, but like a train wreck, I wanted to see what the hell that could be like.
After: This was actually one of the best comic book to movie adaptations I've seen since the X-Men trilogy, and Robert Downey Jr. was brilliant. I can't comment on whether the personality matches the comic book version, but it was definitely interesting enough to make me a fan.
I also had a chance to play a number of Video Games this year.
Metal Gear Solid 4 -
Before: I've been mildly interested in the Metal Gear universe since the first game debuted on the NES. Admittedly I still haven't figured out how to get past the first stage in that game. But when Metal Gear Solid came out for the PS1, I was instantly hooked on its interesting gameplay and intriguing plot. My enthusiasm for the series took a sharp dive when the majority of MGS2 was taken up with the whiny unlikable character "Raiden", and a plot that didn't make sense by itself. A lot of people lost faith in the series at that point. When MGS3 came out, there was barely any fanfare. My personal supreme disappointment with MGS3 was the fact that despite being technically sophisticated, Hideo Kojima had not seen fit to include a widescreen mode. I barely played more than a couple of hours before losing interest. Because of my mixed experiences with the first three games, I figured 4 would be a crap-shoot. It was hard to tell if it would be any good.
After: I haven't finished the game yet, but after pouring nearly 20 hours into it, I'm ready to cast my vote to nominate it for the award for "coolest thing ever". This game is singularly the greatest foray into interactive entertainment I've ever taken. It seems like all of the action games I've ever played up to this point were just practice. MGS4 takes an everything-and-the-kitchen-sink approach that could have just as easily ended up being a messy frustration and blends it into a seamless action story, with some of the prettiest graphics I've ever seen. The controls are so natural and responsive, I never find myself fighting against them to get the game to do what I want. The story, which largely seeks to tie up all of the loose plot threads from the other games, features some of the scariest social commentaries I've ever seen. I find myself wishing that everyone was a gamer so that they could experience the beauty of it.
Haze -
Before: I had just finished playing some very solid FPS games like Killzone, Half Life 2: Episode 2, and Halo 3, and just finished the marvelous Ubisoft game, Assassin's Creed when I saw the trailers for Haze on PSN. The trailers were very pretty High-Definition and easily out-shined everything out there in terms of realism. I started drooling over this game back in September. It was supposed to be released in November. The game was delayed numerous times to "make sure they got it right." I remember thinking to myself how that was a good thing because the game should be even better than what was in the trailer.
After: Haze originally retailed for $59.99. Less than three weeks later it was marked down to $39.99. That's about matches the disparity between my expectations and what I got instead. The game wasn't in HD so most of the text was blurry from the upscaling effects. The frame rate still sucked, despite the sacrifices in the level of detail made to help the game run smoother. The arsenal was tiny, and the NPC dialogue was repetitive and annoying. This game is quite a bit worse than the tralier that drew me in for it several months ago.
Devil May Cry 4 -
Before: I have always been a fan of the DMC series because it borrows so heavily from the gothic themes in Castlevania Symphony of the Night. Much like the Metal Gear Solid games, 1 was awesome, 2 was horrible, 3 was passable but I lost interest because it wasn't in widescreen. Knowing that 4 would be widescreen and high-definition, I figured it would be awesome. Despite some bad experiences with PS3 games, I decided to go with the PS3 version over the XBOX360 version because I thought the limited edition packaging looked cooler on the PS3 and Capcom swore blind that the games were identical on both systems.
After: I shouldn't have trusted Capcom when they said that both games were identical. The XBOX360 version of the game was slightly superior in terms of graphics - the PS3 version was full of "jaggies", and the PS3 game featured a 30 minute-long forced Hard Drive installation (because Capcom is too lazy to figure out how to use the Blu-ray drive properly). If that wasn't bad enough, the installation process has an undocumented flaw that caused me no end of frustration for the first four hours that I attempted to play the game. If you are downloading demos or videos from PSN while installing, the Hard Drive will interleave the data to speed up write speed. 99% of programs in existence wouldn't even notice this, but for some reason DMC4 absolutely has to be installed contiguously (ie. not interleaved) or the game will randomly crash. So stop your downloads before you install, thanks for the heads up, Capcom:P Anyway, the game itself was the testosterone-laden, demon-killing, sword-swinging, heavy-metal playing romp that I expected it to be and I thoroughly enjoyed it.
Friday, May 23, 2008
Prince Caspian Review
Any fan familiar with the literary versions of the Chronicles of Narnia can tell you that the books are practically screenplays already.
A number of challenges face a writer trying to adapt a novel to a screenplay. One of the biggest comes from the fact that novels are generally longer and contain more detail than a typical screenplay. Screenwriters usually have to remove enough that the movie can fit into the 90-180 minute length without sacrificing so much detail that the overall story suffers. They usually do this by condensing or rearranging events. Pacing can also represent a problem. A novelist can get away with whatever placement of events makes sense to tell the story - even when that means long stretches of very little action or excitement, but a screenwriter will find him/herself putting an audience to sleep if the interesting bits, be they action or discovery, don't continue to come at a steady pace.
Understanding how difficult it can be to balance these things, I can usually forgive screenwriters taking certain liberties with a beloved story. I don't usually like it much, but I can reason why they did what they did.
With the Chronicles of Narnia, however, they'll get no such understanding from me. The books are already proper length for a screenplay at give or take 200 pages. They're expertly paced and don't suffer from any plot stalling. There are no redundant details - there is exactly as much exposition and action that is needed to tell the story and not a drop more. So there should be no reason to condense or remove any details in the books.
Unfortunately the writers who penned the screenplay for Prince Caspian think a little too highly of themselves and made the lamentable decision to embellish the story in nonsensical and unnecessary ways. I could almost forgive this desecration if it wasn't for the fact that they removed bits of the original story to make room for their un-inspirational additions.
The writers felt it necessary to continue the character assassination of Peter that they began with the Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe. In the first movie, they depicted Peter as a more modern boy who would run away from responsibility when the window broke. If you read the book, Peter clearly has a strong sense of responsibility and would face up to punishment, never running away.
In the Prince Caspian movie, Peter is portrayed as being a power-hungry slob that lets his anger rule him. Instead of focusing on Caspian's well-being and doing Aslan's will, Peter tries to (literally) fight Caspian for control of the Narnian army. And if that wasn't enough he leads the army on a foolhardy siege of the Telmarine castle that ends in defeat. The main point of the added siege sequence seems to be to make Peter realize what a bastard he's being so he'll give control back to Caspian. They could have more easily accomplished this by writing Peter as he was in the book where he wasn't a bastard to begin with, and practically tripped over himself to make sure he wasn't encroaching on Caspian's rightful rule.
Essentially the writers dumped the entire first chapter of the book in favor of adding a scene where Peter gets into a fight with several boys at the train station before they go back to Narnia, and the siege scene. They also felt it necessary to generate a romantic sub-plot between Susan and Caspian that promptly went absolutely nowhere and accomplished nothing but making purists like myself angry.
Moving away from my hatred of the embellishments and character assassination, the movie was quite enjoyable if one ignores the book it was based on.
Reepicheep is far and away my favorite character in the Prince Caspian story and the animators did an awesome job on him. I thought Eddie Izzard was an odd choice for him, but it fit better than I would have imagined.
Peter Dinklage went above and beyond with his portrayal of the cynical and fearsome Trumpkin. And I don't think I've ever seen Warwick Davis look quite so evil as when he played Nickabrick.
The animators, make-up artists, and actors did a great job of breathing life into the myriad fantasy creatures Lewis included in the stories, and the settings were beautiful.
I really hated Liam Neeson as a choice for Aslan's voice in The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe, but somehow it wasn't as grating and out of place here.
I also appreciated the good degree of violence that played out - specifically that none of it was removed to appease the absurdly anti-violence mentality that so many modern organizations that purport to be in the interest of children insist on purveying.
The music and photography were particularly noteworthy. The framing always maintained interest without being overly awkward, or plain. The musical scores complimented the scenes they accompanied and never distracted.
The film was longer than I would have expected, owing chiefly to the lamentable additions to the story. It actually takes me less time to read the entire novel than the running time of this film.
I can only request, and hope that the writers don't screw with the Dawntreader in 2010 as badly as they did with Caspian.
A number of challenges face a writer trying to adapt a novel to a screenplay. One of the biggest comes from the fact that novels are generally longer and contain more detail than a typical screenplay. Screenwriters usually have to remove enough that the movie can fit into the 90-180 minute length without sacrificing so much detail that the overall story suffers. They usually do this by condensing or rearranging events. Pacing can also represent a problem. A novelist can get away with whatever placement of events makes sense to tell the story - even when that means long stretches of very little action or excitement, but a screenwriter will find him/herself putting an audience to sleep if the interesting bits, be they action or discovery, don't continue to come at a steady pace.
Understanding how difficult it can be to balance these things, I can usually forgive screenwriters taking certain liberties with a beloved story. I don't usually like it much, but I can reason why they did what they did.
With the Chronicles of Narnia, however, they'll get no such understanding from me. The books are already proper length for a screenplay at give or take 200 pages. They're expertly paced and don't suffer from any plot stalling. There are no redundant details - there is exactly as much exposition and action that is needed to tell the story and not a drop more. So there should be no reason to condense or remove any details in the books.
Unfortunately the writers who penned the screenplay for Prince Caspian think a little too highly of themselves and made the lamentable decision to embellish the story in nonsensical and unnecessary ways. I could almost forgive this desecration if it wasn't for the fact that they removed bits of the original story to make room for their un-inspirational additions.
The writers felt it necessary to continue the character assassination of Peter that they began with the Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe. In the first movie, they depicted Peter as a more modern boy who would run away from responsibility when the window broke. If you read the book, Peter clearly has a strong sense of responsibility and would face up to punishment, never running away.
In the Prince Caspian movie, Peter is portrayed as being a power-hungry slob that lets his anger rule him. Instead of focusing on Caspian's well-being and doing Aslan's will, Peter tries to (literally) fight Caspian for control of the Narnian army. And if that wasn't enough he leads the army on a foolhardy siege of the Telmarine castle that ends in defeat. The main point of the added siege sequence seems to be to make Peter realize what a bastard he's being so he'll give control back to Caspian. They could have more easily accomplished this by writing Peter as he was in the book where he wasn't a bastard to begin with, and practically tripped over himself to make sure he wasn't encroaching on Caspian's rightful rule.
Essentially the writers dumped the entire first chapter of the book in favor of adding a scene where Peter gets into a fight with several boys at the train station before they go back to Narnia, and the siege scene. They also felt it necessary to generate a romantic sub-plot between Susan and Caspian that promptly went absolutely nowhere and accomplished nothing but making purists like myself angry.
Moving away from my hatred of the embellishments and character assassination, the movie was quite enjoyable if one ignores the book it was based on.
Reepicheep is far and away my favorite character in the Prince Caspian story and the animators did an awesome job on him. I thought Eddie Izzard was an odd choice for him, but it fit better than I would have imagined.
Peter Dinklage went above and beyond with his portrayal of the cynical and fearsome Trumpkin. And I don't think I've ever seen Warwick Davis look quite so evil as when he played Nickabrick.
The animators, make-up artists, and actors did a great job of breathing life into the myriad fantasy creatures Lewis included in the stories, and the settings were beautiful.
I really hated Liam Neeson as a choice for Aslan's voice in The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe, but somehow it wasn't as grating and out of place here.
I also appreciated the good degree of violence that played out - specifically that none of it was removed to appease the absurdly anti-violence mentality that so many modern organizations that purport to be in the interest of children insist on purveying.
The music and photography were particularly noteworthy. The framing always maintained interest without being overly awkward, or plain. The musical scores complimented the scenes they accompanied and never distracted.
The film was longer than I would have expected, owing chiefly to the lamentable additions to the story. It actually takes me less time to read the entire novel than the running time of this film.
I can only request, and hope that the writers don't screw with the Dawntreader in 2010 as badly as they did with Caspian.
Friday, April 04, 2008
Anti-Gun Advocates Don't Need No Stinking Evidence
This article on Fox News is just one of many that infuriate me. The Second Amendment has increasingly come under fire by news media and reactionaries alike as we approach the anniversary of the VA Tech shootings. I'm sure the same thing is going to happen when we approach the Von Maur (Omaha, NE) incident's anniversary. It really gets my blood boiling to listen to these people.
For example, in the linked article above, the reporter explores two options about how to deal with the VA Tech shootings. One option, is to make more laws further restricting the acquisition of firearms, the other is to accept that laws, by nature, do not stop criminals, merely punish them after the fact, and just arm everyone. I might almost have made it through the article without getting angry if not for the fact that the reporter described continuing to disallow students to carry guns on campus as erring on the side of caution. That's the very issue being debated here. In my opinion, erring on the side of caution is giving everyone the ability to defend themselves.
I don't for a moment suggest that it's a good idea to start arming people who are uncomfortable or unfamiliar with guns, but for those of us who haven't been conditioned to automatically assume that guns are evil by nature, and not amoral tools, our right to defend ourselves should not be infringed.
It's an old argument, and one for which I've never heard an articulate or worthwhile rebuttal, but the simple fact is that a person willing to kill another in cold blood has already decided to violate the law so he/she is not likely to be tripped up by something as trivial as a gun law. They certainly aren't tripped up by the absurd stickers forbidding the carrying of firearms at the facilities where they commit their atrocities.
Trying to make "gun free zones" has been proven time and time again to be ineffective in preventing homicide by a motivated individual. It fails for much the same reason that communism does; it can only work when everybody believes in the same thing, and that's simply not possible. Not only is it impossible, but it is antithesis to the foundation of what we call American Values. We have rights to different viewpoints and opinions, different faiths and occupations, different dreams and hopes. This isn't true just because we like it that way, it's because the founders of our way of life recognized that it was harmful and ultimately futile to try to force everyone into the same mold.
It is simply impossible to prevent people from going crazy and killing others in the process. Some people are just prone to it, and despite our best efforts, they will get it done. The only logical response to this is to even the odds in favor of everyone else. If everyone is armed, will people still get killed? Absolutely, but not nearly as many. Recent news reports about that church in Colorado have pretty much proven that to be the case. It amazes me that so many officials are so reluctant to allow college students to arm themselves voluntarily.
It's relatively obvious that they're concerned with the responsibility of making such a decision. It amazes me that they consider their own personal liability more important than the lives of the people who would be saved by such a thing. Can we please start electing people with some spine?
For example, in the linked article above, the reporter explores two options about how to deal with the VA Tech shootings. One option, is to make more laws further restricting the acquisition of firearms, the other is to accept that laws, by nature, do not stop criminals, merely punish them after the fact, and just arm everyone. I might almost have made it through the article without getting angry if not for the fact that the reporter described continuing to disallow students to carry guns on campus as erring on the side of caution. That's the very issue being debated here. In my opinion, erring on the side of caution is giving everyone the ability to defend themselves.
I don't for a moment suggest that it's a good idea to start arming people who are uncomfortable or unfamiliar with guns, but for those of us who haven't been conditioned to automatically assume that guns are evil by nature, and not amoral tools, our right to defend ourselves should not be infringed.
It's an old argument, and one for which I've never heard an articulate or worthwhile rebuttal, but the simple fact is that a person willing to kill another in cold blood has already decided to violate the law so he/she is not likely to be tripped up by something as trivial as a gun law. They certainly aren't tripped up by the absurd stickers forbidding the carrying of firearms at the facilities where they commit their atrocities.
Trying to make "gun free zones" has been proven time and time again to be ineffective in preventing homicide by a motivated individual. It fails for much the same reason that communism does; it can only work when everybody believes in the same thing, and that's simply not possible. Not only is it impossible, but it is antithesis to the foundation of what we call American Values. We have rights to different viewpoints and opinions, different faiths and occupations, different dreams and hopes. This isn't true just because we like it that way, it's because the founders of our way of life recognized that it was harmful and ultimately futile to try to force everyone into the same mold.
It is simply impossible to prevent people from going crazy and killing others in the process. Some people are just prone to it, and despite our best efforts, they will get it done. The only logical response to this is to even the odds in favor of everyone else. If everyone is armed, will people still get killed? Absolutely, but not nearly as many. Recent news reports about that church in Colorado have pretty much proven that to be the case. It amazes me that so many officials are so reluctant to allow college students to arm themselves voluntarily.
It's relatively obvious that they're concerned with the responsibility of making such a decision. It amazes me that they consider their own personal liability more important than the lives of the people who would be saved by such a thing. Can we please start electing people with some spine?
Monday, March 31, 2008
The Desert Eagle 50 Action Express
I'm a relative n00b when it comes to weapons. I'm not one of those guys who can watch a movie and tell you the make and model of every gun used, or field strip an M-16 blindfolded. I am, however, a U.S. citizen that believes that I'm honor bound to practice the right to own and bear arms to ensure that, among other things, the government maintains a healthy respect for me and my household.
I was recently in an argument with a co-worker over the necessity of owning firearms which are designed and intended primarily for shooting other human beings. When I related a couple of the stories I have read (real life accounts, not fiction) about people in pre-communist Russia, and pre-WWII Germany being ordered to relinquish their weapons, and only discovering afterwards that the reason was to minimize troop casualties when the army showed back up a day or week later to confiscate livestock and other goods, and to force able-bodied young men in the family into military service. His response was "but this is America, that could never happen here." I asked him why he thought that made any difference, and his response was "we're a democracy." Now, the U.S. is not, and has not ever been, to my knowledge, a democracy, but a republic with democracy-like representation. I didn't quibble over that, but did tell him that the countries I mentioned enjoyed similar forms of government prior to being overtaken by fascists. I went on to express my belief that the reason we are and will remain a republic is precisely because the government cannot force us to do otherwise, and the government cannot force us to do otherwise because the Second Amendment prohibits the government from prohibiting citizens to keep guns which would make such an effort too costly and ineffective to attempt. I still could not convince him it was so. He seemed to believe that America has been and will remain a "free country" simply because it's citizens have been granted the authority to vote and we like things this way.
My personal belief is that an inherent mistrust of the government is a healthy necessity that we all need to develop - even those people who comprise the government aught to carefully question the motive of every action they are asked to take. I'm not saying that we ought to develop a liking for lawlessness as some have suggested when they have heard me say this, but that we ought to always keep in perspective that the government exists for the sole purpose of serving our needs, not we its. The practical meaning of this is that if the government's requirements of you are reasonable and necessary, you ought to comply, but if the government's requirements become unreasonable or are still enforced although unnecessary you ought to fight back. There is considerable room for interpretation in those statements, and necessarily so because, just like our constitution, which the U.S. Supreme Court is fond of pointing out was loosely written, the actual meaning is contextual and will change over time.
Basically my reason for owning a gun is for protecting myself, my family, and my home from aggressors, regardless of who the aggressors are - it could be a burglar or it could be a soldier following illegal orders to violate my rights and freedoms.
So when I told that same co-worker that I was going to try one (Desert Eagle) out, and I related what I knew of it, he asked, "why would you need something like that?" My answer is that I didn't, but I don't have to need a sports car to want one either. It still fulfills the need but has a little extra kick for fun. I wanted to try one out because it's one of the most well-known and largest caliber hand guns available, and it looks freakin' cool.
I tried one out at a local gun range and learned why some friends with more experience had warned me away from it.
Firing the gun felt like hanging onto a standard claw hammer while someone hit the head with a 10-lb sledge. It was very difficult to rapid-fire with any degree of accuracy at all. And in true n00bish fashion, I found myself instinctively closing my eyes before squeezing the trigger. I could only hit around 6 inches of a target 25 feet away. I'm much more accurate with smaller calibers.
I figured I might just need a lot of practice to get used to the power. The ammunition worked out to cost something like $1.60 per round, so practice would be prohibitively expensive.
On the upshot, the gun is accurate enough that I could still use it effectively in a confrontation with a perpetrator in my home, and loud and destructive enough that even if I missed it would probably convince the perpetrator to disengage.
I was recently in an argument with a co-worker over the necessity of owning firearms which are designed and intended primarily for shooting other human beings. When I related a couple of the stories I have read (real life accounts, not fiction) about people in pre-communist Russia, and pre-WWII Germany being ordered to relinquish their weapons, and only discovering afterwards that the reason was to minimize troop casualties when the army showed back up a day or week later to confiscate livestock and other goods, and to force able-bodied young men in the family into military service. His response was "but this is America, that could never happen here." I asked him why he thought that made any difference, and his response was "we're a democracy." Now, the U.S. is not, and has not ever been, to my knowledge, a democracy, but a republic with democracy-like representation. I didn't quibble over that, but did tell him that the countries I mentioned enjoyed similar forms of government prior to being overtaken by fascists. I went on to express my belief that the reason we are and will remain a republic is precisely because the government cannot force us to do otherwise, and the government cannot force us to do otherwise because the Second Amendment prohibits the government from prohibiting citizens to keep guns which would make such an effort too costly and ineffective to attempt. I still could not convince him it was so. He seemed to believe that America has been and will remain a "free country" simply because it's citizens have been granted the authority to vote and we like things this way.
My personal belief is that an inherent mistrust of the government is a healthy necessity that we all need to develop - even those people who comprise the government aught to carefully question the motive of every action they are asked to take. I'm not saying that we ought to develop a liking for lawlessness as some have suggested when they have heard me say this, but that we ought to always keep in perspective that the government exists for the sole purpose of serving our needs, not we its. The practical meaning of this is that if the government's requirements of you are reasonable and necessary, you ought to comply, but if the government's requirements become unreasonable or are still enforced although unnecessary you ought to fight back. There is considerable room for interpretation in those statements, and necessarily so because, just like our constitution, which the U.S. Supreme Court is fond of pointing out was loosely written, the actual meaning is contextual and will change over time.
Basically my reason for owning a gun is for protecting myself, my family, and my home from aggressors, regardless of who the aggressors are - it could be a burglar or it could be a soldier following illegal orders to violate my rights and freedoms.
So when I told that same co-worker that I was going to try one (Desert Eagle) out, and I related what I knew of it, he asked, "why would you need something like that?" My answer is that I didn't, but I don't have to need a sports car to want one either. It still fulfills the need but has a little extra kick for fun. I wanted to try one out because it's one of the most well-known and largest caliber hand guns available, and it looks freakin' cool.
I tried one out at a local gun range and learned why some friends with more experience had warned me away from it.
Firing the gun felt like hanging onto a standard claw hammer while someone hit the head with a 10-lb sledge. It was very difficult to rapid-fire with any degree of accuracy at all. And in true n00bish fashion, I found myself instinctively closing my eyes before squeezing the trigger. I could only hit around 6 inches of a target 25 feet away. I'm much more accurate with smaller calibers.
I figured I might just need a lot of practice to get used to the power. The ammunition worked out to cost something like $1.60 per round, so practice would be prohibitively expensive.
On the upshot, the gun is accurate enough that I could still use it effectively in a confrontation with a perpetrator in my home, and loud and destructive enough that even if I missed it would probably convince the perpetrator to disengage.
Thursday, January 31, 2008
Circle of Nothing
These are the lyrics to a song I wrote a long time ago:
CIRCLE OF NOTHING
Indiscriminate decision from eyes that once have seen
With slightly clouded vision and dismissed it as a dream
Turn from light to darkness to try to see with their own glow
The eyes that seek the truth they want and not the truth they know
Unrealistic expectation from men of both minds
Turns the cross of healing to the burning sword that blinds
Men will claim allegiance in their mouth but not in heart
And men who know the answer will still turn and depart
Self defeating human nature an inescapable disease
And the only thing that proves to each of us we’re free
A great divide of the things we hide
From those that feed our pride
Designates the the things we hate
And the flags we wear outside
Far from logic or calling divine
Chooses their sides and draws for them the line
What motivates their loving and loathing
Is an ever recycling circle of nothing
To place your trust in one who’s eyes merely touched the story
And not to see yourself is to give a traitor glory
Your ears will dance with magic of the words you want to hear
And your heart will crush with anguish when that magic disappears
Enduring of this hardship will surely seed your fate
You’ll seek reconciliation, let hatred dominate
Or shake your fists at God and gauge his faithfulness by man
Because your pride was burned from faith acquired second hand
A grandchild of the king seeking to claim the throne
Slay the unrighteous blood ‘till you see that blood’s your own
Far from logic of calling divine
Chooses your side and draws for you the line
What motivates your loving and loathing
Is an ever recycling circle of nothing
Plain and simple is the way the truth and light
All pervading forgiveness to replace any wrong with right
Blood shed for the cause of life free for you to take
Not to accept is the only possible mistake
Far from logic of calling divine
Can choose your side and draw for you the line
If you make your heart a temple of loathing
You’re forever bound in a circle of nothing
Taken to a place you sought but did not seek
Hearing Him repeat the words you thought but did not speak
And ask questions of the things you knew but did not think
The darkness will envelop leaving not a thing to see
And forever abolish this foolish feint of ambiguity.
Monday, January 28, 2008
Toy Poodles: The Silent Menace: The Untold Story of Bobby Tables
Owning a dog is a family tradition that dates back to a long time ago when families started keeping dogs around. Dogs can be faithful companions, warm your feet at night, warn you of intruders or pull you from a burning building.
Despite such a glowing reputation as "man's best friend", some breeds of dog have garnered a reputation for being unpredictably brutal, and dangerous. Thankfully a number of forward-thinking lawmakers have summarily banned dangerous breeds like the American Pit Bull, the German Shepherd Dog, the Doberman Pincer, the Sugar Glider (technically it's a squirrel but it's considered just as deadly by some Wisconsin residents), The Chihuahua (the puppies were found to be a choking hazard for hungry seniors who unsuspectingly confused the miniature canine for a popular menu item at Taco Bell), and last but not least the Rottweiler.
As every breed of dog that is potentially dangerous has been clearly identified and banned by visionary lawmakers in some areas of the country, those citizens can walk the streets without fear of being mauled by dangerous animals on the prowl. Many believe that if we can just get these laws enforced across the country, the number of dog related deaths and injuries can be brought down to zero. All dangerous breeds can be safely eliminated.
But does a recent change in policy at Home Depot point to something more sinister? The popular retailer of hardware, grills and discount software has recently reversed its "pet friendly" policy, barring the use of dogs in its facilities. Store managers were silent as I pondered calling them to ask for a comment, and I can only take this to mean that there is a potentially explosive cover-up in the works.
Consider the story of little Bobby Tables, a bright-eye'd boy of six who accompanied his father to Home Depot to get an eight-year-old copy of solitare and some wood screws. His father had promised to bring him to Dairy Queen for an ice cream cone that afternoon. It was a soft-serve delight that the boy would never have the chance to enjoy. While Bobby's father was busy perusing Home Depot's selection of table saws, little Bobby told his father that he was going to look at Thomas The Train DVDs in the $1.99 bin at the end of the aisle. That was the last time Bobby was seen alive.*
"I heard a scream, so I flipped my camera phone and ran to the scene. In case I could send a picture to 911 or somethin'," said Phillip Dittmeyer, the first responder to the scene, and this was among the grizzly images he captured:
Fifi, an innocent-looking wild toy poodle was left to roam the aisles of Home Depot back in 2003. The employees and staff would feed Fifi beef jerkey and occasionally paint thinner, to lighten his mood.
"He was really just a mascot for the stores. He loved the kids. Occasionally people would say he bit them, but there was never any proof - most of us just figured that Fifi was trying to help the kids get their fingers unstuck. There's a lot of dangerous stuff around the store," said the evening-shift manager of Store 117 who agreed to speak with us on condition of anonymity.
After the closed casket service for little Bobby Tables, his father Wilbur probably said, "You just never think of a toy poodle in that way. I mean it's not like it's a[expletive deleted] Sugar Glider for [expletive deleted] sake. People have to know about this, I mean I'm sure I could hold my own against one of them, but a kindergartener doesn't stand a chance. Where is the legislation to ban these [expletive deleted] baby-killing monsters?"
Where indeed, Wilbur; where indeed. When I attempted to learn about any pending legislation to ban the breed by staring at the Google search page, I drew a blank. As it turns out, there is no legislation being considered to ban the possession of these cuddly-looking killers. In fact, when I thought about going back to do follow-up interviews, I found that all trace of the incident had been erased from local newspapers, and had never made it to the national press. All that remains is the new policy that says "no pets allowed" in Home Depot, and when asked about the justification, the manager grew silent and would only say knowingly, just above a whisper in confidence, "Somethin' probably happened down south."
At first I thought maybe it was an innocent mistake, a desire not to spread fear and angst about what could be a fictional account of a toy-poodle related death, and not a plot to cover up the long history of this vicious white murder-machine. Then I found more evidence of the cover-up masquerading as a badly-doctored attempt to fabricate an alibi for Fifi.
Are we to believe the testimony of every suspected killer who says "i is innosint"? Do we truly live in a society where a brutal creature like Fifi can be allowed to roam freely in the aisles of other non Home Depot stores? This reporter hopes not. Echoing a statement on behalf of the fathers of Bobby Tables everywhere, "Dear God, won't someone please think of the children."
*These statements have not been evaluated by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
Despite such a glowing reputation as "man's best friend", some breeds of dog have garnered a reputation for being unpredictably brutal, and dangerous. Thankfully a number of forward-thinking lawmakers have summarily banned dangerous breeds like the American Pit Bull, the German Shepherd Dog, the Doberman Pincer, the Sugar Glider (technically it's a squirrel but it's considered just as deadly by some Wisconsin residents), The Chihuahua (the puppies were found to be a choking hazard for hungry seniors who unsuspectingly confused the miniature canine for a popular menu item at Taco Bell), and last but not least the Rottweiler.
As every breed of dog that is potentially dangerous has been clearly identified and banned by visionary lawmakers in some areas of the country, those citizens can walk the streets without fear of being mauled by dangerous animals on the prowl. Many believe that if we can just get these laws enforced across the country, the number of dog related deaths and injuries can be brought down to zero. All dangerous breeds can be safely eliminated.
But does a recent change in policy at Home Depot point to something more sinister? The popular retailer of hardware, grills and discount software has recently reversed its "pet friendly" policy, barring the use of dogs in its facilities. Store managers were silent as I pondered calling them to ask for a comment, and I can only take this to mean that there is a potentially explosive cover-up in the works.
Consider the story of little Bobby Tables, a bright-eye'd boy of six who accompanied his father to Home Depot to get an eight-year-old copy of solitare and some wood screws. His father had promised to bring him to Dairy Queen for an ice cream cone that afternoon. It was a soft-serve delight that the boy would never have the chance to enjoy. While Bobby's father was busy perusing Home Depot's selection of table saws, little Bobby told his father that he was going to look at Thomas The Train DVDs in the $1.99 bin at the end of the aisle. That was the last time Bobby was seen alive.*
"I heard a scream, so I flipped my camera phone and ran to the scene. In case I could send a picture to 911 or somethin'," said Phillip Dittmeyer, the first responder to the scene, and this was among the grizzly images he captured:
Fifi, an innocent-looking wild toy poodle was left to roam the aisles of Home Depot back in 2003. The employees and staff would feed Fifi beef jerkey and occasionally paint thinner, to lighten his mood.
"He was really just a mascot for the stores. He loved the kids. Occasionally people would say he bit them, but there was never any proof - most of us just figured that Fifi was trying to help the kids get their fingers unstuck. There's a lot of dangerous stuff around the store," said the evening-shift manager of Store 117 who agreed to speak with us on condition of anonymity.
After the closed casket service for little Bobby Tables, his father Wilbur probably said, "You just never think of a toy poodle in that way. I mean it's not like it's a
Where indeed, Wilbur; where indeed. When I attempted to learn about any pending legislation to ban the breed by staring at the Google search page, I drew a blank. As it turns out, there is no legislation being considered to ban the possession of these cuddly-looking killers. In fact, when I thought about going back to do follow-up interviews, I found that all trace of the incident had been erased from local newspapers, and had never made it to the national press. All that remains is the new policy that says "no pets allowed" in Home Depot, and when asked about the justification, the manager grew silent and would only say knowingly, just above a whisper in confidence, "Somethin' probably happened down south."
At first I thought maybe it was an innocent mistake, a desire not to spread fear and angst about what could be a fictional account of a toy-poodle related death, and not a plot to cover up the long history of this vicious white murder-machine. Then I found more evidence of the cover-up masquerading as a badly-doctored attempt to fabricate an alibi for Fifi.
Are we to believe the testimony of every suspected killer who says "i is innosint"? Do we truly live in a society where a brutal creature like Fifi can be allowed to roam freely in the aisles of other non Home Depot stores? This reporter hopes not. Echoing a statement on behalf of the fathers of Bobby Tables everywhere, "Dear God, won't someone please think of the children."
*These statements have not been evaluated by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)