Some of you are probably aware of my feelings on the new PSP GO. And if you aren't, suffice it to say, that I'm a little conflicted. It sounded like a good CONCEPT, and I was excited to hear about an update to the PSP lineage, however, I think it looks ugly as sin. That's not really the point of this blog, I guess.
"Unboxings" are a type of video that became popular on the internet for obsessive nerds all over the world. I myself got a huge chunk of my youtube-viewership through the unboxing of at least 2 PSP's. Like most good things on the net, the concept was (and partially is) a COMPLETELY foreign concept to the average Layman-America. I remember trying to explain it to the skater kid that would hang outside the grocery store I worked at. He acted like it was the most odd behavior he'd ever heard of.
Nevertheless, I have never known an unboxing to go beyond the realm of the hobbyist, but recently with the announcement and release of both the coming PSP GO and the PS3 Slim, I've seen "official" unboxings done by people at gaming media companies, who have been given the hardware ahead of time. Right now I have a youtube video pulled up that's of an unboxing done by the fellows at IGN.
It all feels pretty wrong to me. It doesn't feel like I'm really watching a legitimate unboxing video, in the same way that a wedding wouldn't really feel like a proper union of two people if FOX NEWS was reporting on it, or if someone was getting paid to do it. My first objection is that this feels, to me, like another attempt to shift the balance of power from average citizens to corporate entities with corporate mindsets. It's not enough to control the mainstream media, but it would appear that the domination of underground culture is on the agenda as well. In fact, just the other day, I was reading a an article concerning 4chan and the fact that companies feel that new media is less accessible to advertisement agencies. I would wager that they were expressing the notion that they would like that to change.
The other objection I have with this is the potential for corruption. How long ago was it that a video game journalist was fired for giving SOME VIDEOGAME a bad a review? It was either on Gamespot or IGN, I don't really recall, but either way, the game in question had been produced by the same company that was advertising on the site, and it was a big media story (among the inter-webs that is) that the reviewer was fired for giving it a negative score. My point here is that if the first unboxings (which tend to be like "reviews" in nature) are handled by corporations and not the consumers what is to ensure that they won't lie through their teeth to protect the maker of the product. They might, for instance, pick up the new PSP Go and say,
"Oh, it's bloody comfortable to hold." And then, with that advice in mind, you go out to purchase one, only to find out that it feels like a brick in your hand. Granted, this could just be avoided by waiting for joe-shcmoe to do a review of it on youtube, and it's probably not likely that such a huge flaw would be glossed over by IGN, but still, I would rather entrust my views to a video that was "home grown."
------------------------------------------------
In response to the previous post about "official unboxings and reviews" username: CarnageDissilusion left this comment:
"I believe unboxings and reviews are about opinions rather than stone facts. I would rather John Smith told me the PSPgo was uncomfortable rather than Sony telling me it's comfortable as hell.
I based my purchase of a PSP3000 on TKE's review and some other users..."
This brings an interesting point to mind, concerning the trustworthiness of non-consumer product reviews. I recall that around the same time that I released my review of the PSP 3000, so did a far more prolific website known as CNET. While I attempted to illustrate the now INFAMOUS scan-lines that PLAGUE the 3000 model, CNET didn't seem to think it was something that should be mentioned.
There were over 30 pages of complaints on the official Sony Forums, and even so, Sony sent us all e-mails saying that it wasn't even a problem. Personally, I try to ignore the scan-lines, however, if I had known that it was like this BEFORE I had purchased it, I most likely wouldn't have.
Saturday, September 19, 2009
Saturday, September 5, 2009
Oh, RIGHT, Because it's a FEATURED VIDEO!
Moments ago, I was tooling around on youtube re-watching some of the older episodes of a really talented internet show by Anthony and Ashley Birch. Some of you may be familiar with the series "Hey Ashley Watcha Playin'?" Anyway, I had just finished one episode, when I wanted to move on to another, so I moved my cursor over to the side bar, where Youtube had placed all of the "related videos," 19 out of 20 of which were OTHER EPISODES CREATED BY ASHLEY AND ANTHONY BIRCH!
What was the 20th video that WASN"T made by those two? A COMPLETELY UNRELATED VLOG by some partner channel, of course.
In response to the mere PRESENCE of this video near the greatness of an episode of HAWP, I left this comment, which I'm sure will be thumbed down to death by her little army of fanboys (can't say I don't employ my own):
"How does THIS count as a related video to an episode of "Hey Ashley Watcha Playin'?" It has NOTHING at all to do with the content of the previous video I was watching, which had ONLY OTHER EPISODES OF THAT SHOW AS RELATED, and neither video contains a congruent TAG so WHY was this video linked to the last? Oh that's right, it's a "featured video" thereby meaning that youtube pushes it regardless of how relevant or talented it is, so that they can build mega-channels that get more ad-revenue."
Now, I'm certain that with a pretty face and a "charming" little accent a girl like this could get attention on the internet almost anywhere. So all I ask is WHY does Youtube need to be BOOSTING her views by placing her in a "related videos" section that she CLEARLY doesn't belong in? This is what username THEREALWEEKLY news was saying in his video entitled "HULU-TUBE" that it would SEEM that Youtube was using certain methods to give some users an advantage over the competition, thereby allowing less "radical users" to gain more views and generate more profit from Youtube from advertisements. Have a look at this link, won't you? AND IN THE NAME OF GOD PAY ATTENTION AT THE 2 MINUTE MARK!
Davidsfarm explains that Youtube is going broke...
Now, I have no reason to believe that Davidsfarm or the newspaper he is quoting is lying to me, and the situation he describes sounds absolutely plausible. Now, were you paying attention to what he said between 2:00 and 2:20? Davidsfarm explained that the newspaper article describes that advertisers don't like to be associated with MANY of the more popular videos on Youtube because they weren't made in Hollywood and lack a professional touch. Were I granted permission to read into this, I would also speculate that the reason Youtube recently promised to DEMOTE video views for "innapropriate content" was because many videos that were popular probably had controversial or counter-cultural material in them, which is something that advertisers wouldn't want to be associated with either (even though we like it.)
To remedy their situation, I propose that Youtube has and will continue to manipulate the views on the videos that they consider to be more neutral and "Californicated" (like Fred) in order to ensure that the new "most popular" videos which will be granted advertisements, won't offend Youtube's source of profit, the advertisers, who have, in essence, already called us all "niggers," by suggesting that what WE find enjoyable (and have produced ourselves) is not WORTHY of pushing their products, unlike the nice, rich white people on television shows like "THE OC" and "CSI."
A lot of people who read opinions like this are tempted to object, saying that Youtube and the advertisers who support them should be allowed to run their business in whichever way they choose. *COUGH* *COUGH* republicans *COUGH* And while, to some degree, I concour, but that's like saying,
"McDonald's doesn't want to place nutritional facts right up there on the WALL because it would make people think twice about eating there, if they could see how much fat and calories is in a single order of anything."
I understand that. I also understand that McDonald's uses inferior food products to create cheaper meals for the consumers, which are more profitable than healthier, quality alternatives. THAT"S WHY I DON"T EAT AT MC"DONALD"S!!!
Considering that I have seen MANY instances of very suspicious activity by the administration on Youtube, all of which only reinforces the idea that Youtube and it's advertisers would rather TELL US WHAT WE WANT WATCH rather than letting us decide, I am only encouraged NOT to want to use Youtube in the first place.
so far I've witnessed and hear reports of:
- Youtube removing videos of Hezbollah firing rockets into Israeli housing
- Youtube REMOVING MULTIPLE USER ACCOUNTS FOR UPLOADING ANTI-SCIENTOLOGIST VIDEOS!!!
- Youtube removing a video review of the game "GTA: Chinatown Wars" for featuring "copyrighted video clips contianing samples of gameplay." That is actually INCREDIBLY unconstitutional, considering that product review is the BIGGEST and most heavily sited example of fair use out there. Funny, the game publishers didn't attack G4 or Gametrailers or Gamespot for using video clips to conduct review of their product, I wonder why SamueltehG33k's video needed to be removed?
- Youtube removing overall views from Davidsfarm's page
- Youtube removing the video ratings from some of the menus so as to avoid blantant corporate come-on videos from being "1-starred-to-death."
- Youtube removing MILLIONS of views from username Butchykid624's account
- Removing videos for inappropriate content that never actually existed
- Youtube attempting to force all of it's users to adopt the beta channel layout, which reportedly, is created so that old videos that generate views more slowly and gradually (like mine or any other cult channel videos) will be phased out a lot quicker. I don't have a link to the video where I originally heard this, but I don't need one. To find out for yourself, just go onto a youtube channel that has that layout and use it to watch a video. Even when you click on that particular video and bring it up onto the page's video player, it does NOT count as a view, thereby ROBBING views from users like Virgin1d4 (my favorite youtuber) who's videos I watch over again. When I watch them on his channel now, he doesn't get any of those views. Hmm, too bad he's autistic (I was told) and likes to talk about video games in a funny accent. I'm sure if he was "normal" and liked to talk about getting boozed and taking hawt girls to the prom Youtube would fucking love him!
What was the 20th video that WASN"T made by those two? A COMPLETELY UNRELATED VLOG by some partner channel, of course.
In response to the mere PRESENCE of this video near the greatness of an episode of HAWP, I left this comment, which I'm sure will be thumbed down to death by her little army of fanboys (can't say I don't employ my own):
"How does THIS count as a related video to an episode of "Hey Ashley Watcha Playin'?" It has NOTHING at all to do with the content of the previous video I was watching, which had ONLY OTHER EPISODES OF THAT SHOW AS RELATED, and neither video contains a congruent TAG so WHY was this video linked to the last? Oh that's right, it's a "featured video" thereby meaning that youtube pushes it regardless of how relevant or talented it is, so that they can build mega-channels that get more ad-revenue."
Now, I'm certain that with a pretty face and a "charming" little accent a girl like this could get attention on the internet almost anywhere. So all I ask is WHY does Youtube need to be BOOSTING her views by placing her in a "related videos" section that she CLEARLY doesn't belong in? This is what username THEREALWEEKLY news was saying in his video entitled "HULU-TUBE" that it would SEEM that Youtube was using certain methods to give some users an advantage over the competition, thereby allowing less "radical users" to gain more views and generate more profit from Youtube from advertisements. Have a look at this link, won't you? AND IN THE NAME OF GOD PAY ATTENTION AT THE 2 MINUTE MARK!
Davidsfarm explains that Youtube is going broke...
Now, I have no reason to believe that Davidsfarm or the newspaper he is quoting is lying to me, and the situation he describes sounds absolutely plausible. Now, were you paying attention to what he said between 2:00 and 2:20? Davidsfarm explained that the newspaper article describes that advertisers don't like to be associated with MANY of the more popular videos on Youtube because they weren't made in Hollywood and lack a professional touch. Were I granted permission to read into this, I would also speculate that the reason Youtube recently promised to DEMOTE video views for "innapropriate content" was because many videos that were popular probably had controversial or counter-cultural material in them, which is something that advertisers wouldn't want to be associated with either (even though we like it.)
To remedy their situation, I propose that Youtube has and will continue to manipulate the views on the videos that they consider to be more neutral and "Californicated" (like Fred) in order to ensure that the new "most popular" videos which will be granted advertisements, won't offend Youtube's source of profit, the advertisers, who have, in essence, already called us all "niggers," by suggesting that what WE find enjoyable (and have produced ourselves) is not WORTHY of pushing their products, unlike the nice, rich white people on television shows like "THE OC" and "CSI."
A lot of people who read opinions like this are tempted to object, saying that Youtube and the advertisers who support them should be allowed to run their business in whichever way they choose. *COUGH* *COUGH* republicans *COUGH* And while, to some degree, I concour, but that's like saying,
"McDonald's doesn't want to place nutritional facts right up there on the WALL because it would make people think twice about eating there, if they could see how much fat and calories is in a single order of anything."
I understand that. I also understand that McDonald's uses inferior food products to create cheaper meals for the consumers, which are more profitable than healthier, quality alternatives. THAT"S WHY I DON"T EAT AT MC"DONALD"S!!!
Considering that I have seen MANY instances of very suspicious activity by the administration on Youtube, all of which only reinforces the idea that Youtube and it's advertisers would rather TELL US WHAT WE WANT WATCH rather than letting us decide, I am only encouraged NOT to want to use Youtube in the first place.
so far I've witnessed and hear reports of:
- Youtube removing videos of Hezbollah firing rockets into Israeli housing
- Youtube REMOVING MULTIPLE USER ACCOUNTS FOR UPLOADING ANTI-SCIENTOLOGIST VIDEOS!!!
- Youtube removing a video review of the game "GTA: Chinatown Wars" for featuring "copyrighted video clips contianing samples of gameplay." That is actually INCREDIBLY unconstitutional, considering that product review is the BIGGEST and most heavily sited example of fair use out there. Funny, the game publishers didn't attack G4 or Gametrailers or Gamespot for using video clips to conduct review of their product, I wonder why SamueltehG33k's video needed to be removed?
- Youtube removing overall views from Davidsfarm's page
- Youtube removing the video ratings from some of the menus so as to avoid blantant corporate come-on videos from being "1-starred-to-death."
- Youtube removing MILLIONS of views from username Butchykid624's account
- Removing videos for inappropriate content that never actually existed
- Youtube attempting to force all of it's users to adopt the beta channel layout, which reportedly, is created so that old videos that generate views more slowly and gradually (like mine or any other cult channel videos) will be phased out a lot quicker. I don't have a link to the video where I originally heard this, but I don't need one. To find out for yourself, just go onto a youtube channel that has that layout and use it to watch a video. Even when you click on that particular video and bring it up onto the page's video player, it does NOT count as a view, thereby ROBBING views from users like Virgin1d4 (my favorite youtuber) who's videos I watch over again. When I watch them on his channel now, he doesn't get any of those views. Hmm, too bad he's autistic (I was told) and likes to talk about video games in a funny accent. I'm sure if he was "normal" and liked to talk about getting boozed and taking hawt girls to the prom Youtube would fucking love him!
Wednesday, September 2, 2009
Benny's Barking (Youtube Outtake)
Time for a surprise! While I was trying to shoot the last video I uploaded to youtube my dog Benny was barking and although it's not too audible in the video, I could hear it clearly and it was throwing me off and derailing my train of thought. So I excused myself thinking I would return later and finish the video, all in one take, however I soon discovered that the dog was barking at my family who had come home with groceries and they would probably want my help. If you can't understand what I'm saying to discourage Benny from barking, I was hollering the phrases:
"Benny, I'll kills ya!"
"Come here, Benny, Come right here."
and
"Come here Pisuzu," which is a reference to Benny and demon possession, the name Pisuzu being the devil that possessed Regan in the movie "The Exorcist." At least I THINK that's how you spell it.
"Benny, I'll kills ya!"
"Come here, Benny, Come right here."
and
"Come here Pisuzu," which is a reference to Benny and demon possession, the name Pisuzu being the devil that possessed Regan in the movie "The Exorcist." At least I THINK that's how you spell it.
Monday, August 31, 2009
It's About a Town that Burned Down or Something...
I had a good childhood... it was perfect, actually... There are so many things that I miss from back then, for instance, how easily I frightened. These days I'm not really scared by anything, nothing fictional anyway, but when I was a lad, every horror movie was un-see-able, every eerie novel was forbidden, every ghost story told by the camp fire was so mysterious and beyond understanding. Rumors of haunted classrooms stayed with me for weeks, dark hallways gave me the willies, and no spooky tale ever held an ending that was foreseeable, it was always unexplainable and felt chillingly real to me. In fact, when I was 4 or 5 years old there was a video rental store less than a mile from my house, where I would wander around the horror section, looking at the box art on the VHS copies of "Friday the 13nth" and "Silence of the Lambs." Just by looking at those boxes I got scared even imagining what the art could possibly symbolize. These days however, we're all a little more desensitized.... Damn...
Either way, one of my fonder memories was of a commercial for a video game that left me shaken and curious beyond all means as to what the game was about. I was 8 or 9 years old then, and the commercial was for the infamous "Silent Hill." I've searched for the commercial, casually, over the internet, but I still can't seem to find that particular one. I'm not even sure it was the ORIGINAL game and not one of it's sequels, but then again, I was fairly young the original came out in 99, so that would lead me to believe it was. However, I don't remember the twisted imagery as much as the voice over (don't misread me, though, the imagery still made me shiver) All I remember was a girl's (or woman's) voice saying something like,
"I'm going to Silent Hill. You were there before. You told me never go to Silent Hill, but I went there anyway *Balalaika in the background going tickilickalickalicka*"
Regardless of which game it was, I was pretty certain I wouldn't be able to unravel this "mystery" myself, given that I wasn't all that good at games back then, I mostly just watched my bigger brother play, and even so, I wondered if I would be too terrified to beat such a nightmare. Still, I had to know. I went to school and almost immediately some of the kids where talking about it. I wasn't very popular (infamous is a better word for it) but all the kids there could easily relate to my curiosity surrounding the horror game that we had all seen the commercial for. (The advertisement must have been playing during SOME sort of kids programming, otherwise we probably wouldn't have watched it) Some of the kids reported to have played it, but were immediately called out, since they didn't know anything about it. Some proclaimed that they had older cousins or siblings that HAD played it, but the most that we ever got from them was,
"It's about a town that caught fire or something...."
Last Christmas my brother bought for me a copy of "Silent Hill: Homecoming." Mind you, at this point I understood a little more about the games than your average frat-monkey, and I had learned to eat popcorn and giggle while watching SAW IV. (Does that make me sick?) With casual interest, I had watched the review on Gametrailers.com, and I can't say that I would have bought it with my own money. But this was a gift, and I have to admit that I had been itching for a new game to play.
Ok ready? This is your reward for READING THIS FAR! Here's a video I made out of frustration after getting stuck SEVERELY and for poor reasons while playing this game. I never released it until now:
Yeah, that puzzle... my, my, my. Don't be mislead by the video, I still enjoyed playing the game. I actually wrote a review of it on Gametrailers, just for the hell of it. Unfortunately, Gametrailers is also changing it's website for the worst, and through the power of bad coding found a way to HIDE people's hand written reviews on the site, probably in an effort to divert more attention to the site's video reviews, from which they generate more profit. I was forced to run a google search, and luckily it came up:
http://www.gametrailers.com/users/TolstoyKafkaEvsky/gamepad/?action=viewreview&id=51794
In that particular review, though, I couldn't describe EVERYTHING that made me love that game, and I think the biggest reason why I was so impressed was simply because I had low expectations to begin with. For a long time I've theorized that the secret to enjoying video games (among other things) is partially to be very pessimistic when beginning, and then when the game SURPASSES your expectations you feel you were better off for the experience. Also, the other thing I was craving for at the time that this game satisfied so well was the feeling of the "Zombie Apocalypse Scenario." Silent Hill: Homecoming had a similar flavor to the movie "I AM LEGEND," which also helped to fulfill people's desire to be "The Last Man Left." Don't ask me why, but I am pretty certain that there are many people out there who are still praying for the zombie invasion (or the less cliche' equivalent of that) perhaps because we feel that it would give us all a chance to improve our lives in a very strange way. If that sounds preposterous then I propose that one should watch the episode of Futurama where they describe an evil Santa-bot (played by John Goodman) goes on a merciless rampage every Christmas, and through their collective fear of becoming victims, it causes everyone to reach out for each other, and comfort one another. As if, such a catastrophe would somehow re-humanize us, allow us to go back to a more primal place, and destroy the bland, inhuman, corporate society that is in place now......
I said SOME people might want that, not necessarily me... just stop starring, alright!?
Anyway, after the game was over, I felt that I would definitely need another experience very similar to that. After a little research, I decided to go out and purchase "Silent Hill 3," vaguely recalling the positive X-Play review of the game, as I walked up to the counter and forked over my debit card. The bad camera angles and clunky "TANK controls" didn't bother me at all, for some reason I've always felt quite at home while playing games like that, and of course the oldest excuse for building horror games in that fashion is proposedly because:
"It makes the prospect of combat or fleeing more terrifying."
In fact, after playing Silent Hill 3 (and finding it unsatisfactory) I became enthralled for a few weeks with my old Playstation 1 copy of "Dino Crisis." The whole experience got me saying,
"They just don't make games like this anymore." And miraculously it didn't make me feel old at all to say that.
As I was saying, after the first few chapters of "Silent Hill 3" I stopped playing. Originally, I tried to prepare myself for the shift I would inevitably feel between the American approach to horror and the Japanese technique, however it was to no avail. In a cutting statement against the game, I once compared the experience of "Silent Hill 3" to:
"Walking around a grimy hotel, while off-putting music plays, trying all the handles on the doors to see which one's were open, while casually trying to avoid hideously disfigured beggars who are obviously on some form of narcotics."
Doesn't exactly sound like the ideal horror experience to me. Months later (a few days ago) I ran out of any other video games to play, and out of desperation I moved my PS2 downstairs, turned off all the lights, snuggled Benny up beside me, and loaded in "Silent Hill 3." I began playing from where I had left off, having pretty much the same dull experience as before. But I kept playing this time, and for some miraculous reason the quality of the game seemed to improve. Perhaps it was because for all those months I had not played the game, and had been thinking poorly of it, and as I said before, this set the standards of what I was expecting quite low, and therefore, easy to surpass.
Just last night I finished the game, and in the end, the voice acting got better, the environment felt slightly less tired, the story actually fulfilled promises of coherency, and I felt something akin to satisfaction. My only complaint is that the ending boss wasn't anything like what I was expecting, and could only be described as slightly anti-climactic.
My collective experience in Silent Hill games has left me with a desire to make some sort of cinematic "credit" to the series, a short skirt of film, something that could replicate the feeling in film. I recognize that they've already made a movie (and greenlit the sequel) but that's not exactly what I meant. Try as they might can Hollywood REALLY recapture the elusive notion of Silent Hill? Well, I suppose that's up to interpretation.
Either way, one of my fonder memories was of a commercial for a video game that left me shaken and curious beyond all means as to what the game was about. I was 8 or 9 years old then, and the commercial was for the infamous "Silent Hill." I've searched for the commercial, casually, over the internet, but I still can't seem to find that particular one. I'm not even sure it was the ORIGINAL game and not one of it's sequels, but then again, I was fairly young the original came out in 99, so that would lead me to believe it was. However, I don't remember the twisted imagery as much as the voice over (don't misread me, though, the imagery still made me shiver) All I remember was a girl's (or woman's) voice saying something like,
"I'm going to Silent Hill. You were there before. You told me never go to Silent Hill, but I went there anyway *Balalaika in the background going tickilickalickalicka*"
Regardless of which game it was, I was pretty certain I wouldn't be able to unravel this "mystery" myself, given that I wasn't all that good at games back then, I mostly just watched my bigger brother play, and even so, I wondered if I would be too terrified to beat such a nightmare. Still, I had to know. I went to school and almost immediately some of the kids where talking about it. I wasn't very popular (infamous is a better word for it) but all the kids there could easily relate to my curiosity surrounding the horror game that we had all seen the commercial for. (The advertisement must have been playing during SOME sort of kids programming, otherwise we probably wouldn't have watched it) Some of the kids reported to have played it, but were immediately called out, since they didn't know anything about it. Some proclaimed that they had older cousins or siblings that HAD played it, but the most that we ever got from them was,
"It's about a town that caught fire or something...."
Last Christmas my brother bought for me a copy of "Silent Hill: Homecoming." Mind you, at this point I understood a little more about the games than your average frat-monkey, and I had learned to eat popcorn and giggle while watching SAW IV. (Does that make me sick?) With casual interest, I had watched the review on Gametrailers.com, and I can't say that I would have bought it with my own money. But this was a gift, and I have to admit that I had been itching for a new game to play.
Ok ready? This is your reward for READING THIS FAR! Here's a video I made out of frustration after getting stuck SEVERELY and for poor reasons while playing this game. I never released it until now:
Yeah, that puzzle... my, my, my. Don't be mislead by the video, I still enjoyed playing the game. I actually wrote a review of it on Gametrailers, just for the hell of it. Unfortunately, Gametrailers is also changing it's website for the worst, and through the power of bad coding found a way to HIDE people's hand written reviews on the site, probably in an effort to divert more attention to the site's video reviews, from which they generate more profit. I was forced to run a google search, and luckily it came up:
http://www.gametrailers.com/users/TolstoyKafkaEvsky/gamepad/?action=viewreview&id=51794
In that particular review, though, I couldn't describe EVERYTHING that made me love that game, and I think the biggest reason why I was so impressed was simply because I had low expectations to begin with. For a long time I've theorized that the secret to enjoying video games (among other things) is partially to be very pessimistic when beginning, and then when the game SURPASSES your expectations you feel you were better off for the experience. Also, the other thing I was craving for at the time that this game satisfied so well was the feeling of the "Zombie Apocalypse Scenario." Silent Hill: Homecoming had a similar flavor to the movie "I AM LEGEND," which also helped to fulfill people's desire to be "The Last Man Left." Don't ask me why, but I am pretty certain that there are many people out there who are still praying for the zombie invasion (or the less cliche' equivalent of that) perhaps because we feel that it would give us all a chance to improve our lives in a very strange way. If that sounds preposterous then I propose that one should watch the episode of Futurama where they describe an evil Santa-bot (played by John Goodman) goes on a merciless rampage every Christmas, and through their collective fear of becoming victims, it causes everyone to reach out for each other, and comfort one another. As if, such a catastrophe would somehow re-humanize us, allow us to go back to a more primal place, and destroy the bland, inhuman, corporate society that is in place now......
I said SOME people might want that, not necessarily me... just stop starring, alright!?
Anyway, after the game was over, I felt that I would definitely need another experience very similar to that. After a little research, I decided to go out and purchase "Silent Hill 3," vaguely recalling the positive X-Play review of the game, as I walked up to the counter and forked over my debit card. The bad camera angles and clunky "TANK controls" didn't bother me at all, for some reason I've always felt quite at home while playing games like that, and of course the oldest excuse for building horror games in that fashion is proposedly because:
"It makes the prospect of combat or fleeing more terrifying."
In fact, after playing Silent Hill 3 (and finding it unsatisfactory) I became enthralled for a few weeks with my old Playstation 1 copy of "Dino Crisis." The whole experience got me saying,
"They just don't make games like this anymore." And miraculously it didn't make me feel old at all to say that.
As I was saying, after the first few chapters of "Silent Hill 3" I stopped playing. Originally, I tried to prepare myself for the shift I would inevitably feel between the American approach to horror and the Japanese technique, however it was to no avail. In a cutting statement against the game, I once compared the experience of "Silent Hill 3" to:
"Walking around a grimy hotel, while off-putting music plays, trying all the handles on the doors to see which one's were open, while casually trying to avoid hideously disfigured beggars who are obviously on some form of narcotics."
Doesn't exactly sound like the ideal horror experience to me. Months later (a few days ago) I ran out of any other video games to play, and out of desperation I moved my PS2 downstairs, turned off all the lights, snuggled Benny up beside me, and loaded in "Silent Hill 3." I began playing from where I had left off, having pretty much the same dull experience as before. But I kept playing this time, and for some miraculous reason the quality of the game seemed to improve. Perhaps it was because for all those months I had not played the game, and had been thinking poorly of it, and as I said before, this set the standards of what I was expecting quite low, and therefore, easy to surpass.
Just last night I finished the game, and in the end, the voice acting got better, the environment felt slightly less tired, the story actually fulfilled promises of coherency, and I felt something akin to satisfaction. My only complaint is that the ending boss wasn't anything like what I was expecting, and could only be described as slightly anti-climactic.
My collective experience in Silent Hill games has left me with a desire to make some sort of cinematic "credit" to the series, a short skirt of film, something that could replicate the feeling in film. I recognize that they've already made a movie (and greenlit the sequel) but that's not exactly what I meant. Try as they might can Hollywood REALLY recapture the elusive notion of Silent Hill? Well, I suppose that's up to interpretation.
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
What'd'fuck's up with Collard Shirts?
A few weeks ago I read a very worth-while web-comic by prominent Furry artist Jay Naylor. If you're not familiar with his work, he draws anthropomorphic animal-people normally having sex and discussing life, love, and Ayn Rand-ian philosophy like the psychopathic mouth pieces his characters are. Regardless of his republican nonsense, though, "Better Days" is STILL a very good work, which I found absolutely engaging, for it's novel story, endearing art style, and original characters, who I got to watch grow up in front of my eyes, in the course of 2 days (which is how long it took me to casually read through all 24 chapters.) Even if I don't subscribe to half of his objectivist bullshit I still tried to entertain some of the values that I read about, and I fear that perhaps I might have taken too much of it all to heart. Here's one page in particular that I took offense at, but somehow ended up letting it effect me too much:
The older people in my family used to nag me about not wearing collard shirts. They would tell me that I looked silly wearing shirts with band logo's on them. Before now it never really bothered me, but in the recent months I've been feeling like a change of wardrobe might be nice, and I guess this sort of encouraged me in my mind to go through with it. It's not like I would LOOSE all my old Metal Gear Solid shirts if I wore some "nice" shirts now and again. Plus a little conformity might help me get a job sooner rather than later. Unfortunately whenever it comes to clothes (specifically shoes, and I guess, collard shirts) finding a good fit isn't easy.
This is me in a new collard shirt that I bought from a prominently black store in the city (don't look at me like that, their style is a little bit different from the stuff that's offered in Sears or Macy's...) Anyway, it's a medium, it fits well in the shoulders (which for some reason is a problem with me, I don't really look like I have broad shoulders, but it always feels like coats and shirts are squeezing me there.) So it's a good buy right? Wait... what's this?...
THERE"S ENOUGH ROOM IN THE GUT FOR A COUPLE OF FAT GUYS TO JOIN ME!!!
Seriously, this isn't just me, believe it or not, I was flabber-gasted enough to look up OTHER BLOGS where other guys talk about how hard it is to find a shirt that fits FOR THE EXACT SAME REASON! One guy said that it felt like they were making shirts so that we could all carry inflated beach balls in the gut...
Is this the new style? No, really, it sounds psychotic, but recently I've read TWO articles about "style" that say that the new hip (supposedly) is guys with a gut..... no really, that's what I read. There was a study done in London where women reported that they associated fit muscular stomachs with HOMOSEXUALITY and a little fat around the middle as a sign of masculinity and an "experienced man." *SIGH*... what the fuck? Coudn't they have ENACTED this new "style" BEFORE I LOST 70 POUNDS!? And either way, there are LOADS of stores that sell dresses to STICK-GIRL why can't I get a shirt that contours to me side a little? Oh well, I think the shirt looks ok with my coats and stuff. Maybe it's not so bad.
The older people in my family used to nag me about not wearing collard shirts. They would tell me that I looked silly wearing shirts with band logo's on them. Before now it never really bothered me, but in the recent months I've been feeling like a change of wardrobe might be nice, and I guess this sort of encouraged me in my mind to go through with it. It's not like I would LOOSE all my old Metal Gear Solid shirts if I wore some "nice" shirts now and again. Plus a little conformity might help me get a job sooner rather than later. Unfortunately whenever it comes to clothes (specifically shoes, and I guess, collard shirts) finding a good fit isn't easy.
This is me in a new collard shirt that I bought from a prominently black store in the city (don't look at me like that, their style is a little bit different from the stuff that's offered in Sears or Macy's...) Anyway, it's a medium, it fits well in the shoulders (which for some reason is a problem with me, I don't really look like I have broad shoulders, but it always feels like coats and shirts are squeezing me there.) So it's a good buy right? Wait... what's this?...
THERE"S ENOUGH ROOM IN THE GUT FOR A COUPLE OF FAT GUYS TO JOIN ME!!!
Seriously, this isn't just me, believe it or not, I was flabber-gasted enough to look up OTHER BLOGS where other guys talk about how hard it is to find a shirt that fits FOR THE EXACT SAME REASON! One guy said that it felt like they were making shirts so that we could all carry inflated beach balls in the gut...
Is this the new style? No, really, it sounds psychotic, but recently I've read TWO articles about "style" that say that the new hip (supposedly) is guys with a gut..... no really, that's what I read. There was a study done in London where women reported that they associated fit muscular stomachs with HOMOSEXUALITY and a little fat around the middle as a sign of masculinity and an "experienced man." *SIGH*... what the fuck? Coudn't they have ENACTED this new "style" BEFORE I LOST 70 POUNDS!? And either way, there are LOADS of stores that sell dresses to STICK-GIRL why can't I get a shirt that contours to me side a little? Oh well, I think the shirt looks ok with my coats and stuff. Maybe it's not so bad.
Saturday, July 11, 2009
PS3 Problems (Re-Run)
This is a video that I did for another website a few seasons ago, detailing the visual problem that I seem to have with either my television or my Playstation 3. I also list some of the steps that I have taken to rectify the problem, and I throw myself upon the mercy of techno-geeks everywhere, for I am but a mortal man, who cannot understand what is going wrong while I'm trying to play video games.
I feel rather paranoid whenever I watch this particular video, because this actually features 2 film clips taken at two separate times, in between which I gained a small amount of weight, after deciding that a 900 calorie per day diet was a little excessive. Needless to say, I'm terrified that someone will point out that I've become a helpless fatty... *SNIFF* I suppose I should be off to go PURGE! *VOMITS INTO SINK* Ok, that MAY seem in poor taste, but in reality, I don't have an eating disorder (I hope) and I OBVIOUSLY recognize that someone who is THAT obsessed with looking thin has a mental disorder.
I feel rather paranoid whenever I watch this particular video, because this actually features 2 film clips taken at two separate times, in between which I gained a small amount of weight, after deciding that a 900 calorie per day diet was a little excessive. Needless to say, I'm terrified that someone will point out that I've become a helpless fatty... *SNIFF* I suppose I should be off to go PURGE! *VOMITS INTO SINK* Ok, that MAY seem in poor taste, but in reality, I don't have an eating disorder (I hope) and I OBVIOUSLY recognize that someone who is THAT obsessed with looking thin has a mental disorder.
Ok... Here Goes...
This is the first post I've made on this new blog. This is actually just a test, so if you're reading this, well.... I dunno, but stop it... I mean it... STOP... That's it I'm telling on you...
Ok, let's see... can this thing display video? I mean, Blogspot SAYS you can, but let's see them do it. Uploading test video.... nnnnn-NOW!!
That was a little ditty that was invented for me by one of my fans on youtube. I only used a part of it and only for a little while, but either way, I was pretty flattered that someone offered. The guy who produced it, asked if I would credit him as "Ruben and the Novelty Shack." Kinda funny... anyway, I'm crossing my fingers, knocking on wood, and doing all of those other crazy superstitious things that you do whenever you want something to work.
Ok, let's see... can this thing display video? I mean, Blogspot SAYS you can, but let's see them do it. Uploading test video.... nnnnn-NOW!!
That was a little ditty that was invented for me by one of my fans on youtube. I only used a part of it and only for a little while, but either way, I was pretty flattered that someone offered. The guy who produced it, asked if I would credit him as "Ruben and the Novelty Shack." Kinda funny... anyway, I'm crossing my fingers, knocking on wood, and doing all of those other crazy superstitious things that you do whenever you want something to work.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
