Month: February 2008

  • When video games started getting popular in the late 1970s, early '80s, the play mechanics were a lot simpler then. Most of the competition and drive to play a game over and over again was to get a high score. From there you try and beat other people's high score, and others do the same. With a high score, people can claim bragging rights, announcing what a "bad ass" gamer they are. By the late 1980s, throughout the '90s, and pass the turn of the century, high scores just stopped mattering. It started being all about the games itself, and how far you can complete one. But nowadays, from the release of the xbox360 and it's use of "achievement points," Microsoft was able to successfully bring back that urge to get that high score and at the same time get gamers to see how far they can go to complete a game.

    Each game for the xbox360 comes with a certain amount of achievements you can unlock. The way these achievement points work is that whenever you do something specific in a game, be it completing a level, or doing a particular task, the points of your "gamerscore" goes up. That gamerscore is tied to that gamer's identity for people to compare their scores, and we are once again having people compare their score with the rest of the gaming community.

    Since Microsoft announced they were having a gamerscore system, people were skeptical as to how important it would be for gamers in general. I mean, what's the point right? What ended up happening is that it tapped into the competitive nature of gamers and now people are actually getting to the point where they are playing a game they don't even like, just for the purpose of getting a higher score from unlocking achievements. We call them "achievement whores." It also ended up being beneficial to the xbox360 itself, because if there was a multi-console game available for all the consoles (360, PS3, Wii), some gamers would rather get the 360 version because of the achievement points.

    Now me personally I don't care much for raising my gamerscore, although I do feel a little bit happier whenever I unlock an achievement. I am fascinated though at the length gamers will go to just to be on the top of leaderboards, or having a high gamerscore, or being a high level character in an online game. I'm guilty of that urge myself at times, but at least I've been very good at keeping it in check (put it this way, my four digit gamerscore as seen below is uncomparable to the six digit scores I've seen out there).

  • "Lent" is here again, and although I'm not a die hard practicing Catholic, I do observe the "no eating meat on Fridays" tradition. This year however, I was thinking of actually giving up on something, which is also another tradition that I've never actually tried to do. The question is what am I giving up? The other question is how much am I willing to give up?

    The silly thing is that most Catholics choose the easy way out, by choosing something they can moderately attempt to give up on. Most of the time it has to do with food that is "kinda" bad for you (junk food), and that is definitely doable. Trying to give up on something that is actually a vice of theirs (addiction to cigarettes, gambling, alcohol, etc) is definitely in the spirit of Lent. However, asking somebody to give up on an addiction cold turkey doesn't always work. Giving up on a recreation (TV, video games, sex) is another thing people try and do, although I would think that it should be something that is affecting you in a negative way, and that just goes back to addiction.

    So what am I choosing? I am going the easy way out and choose something from the food group. My New Year's resolution was to really cut down on drinking soda, and I've honestly been really good about that so far. So for Lent I'm going to completely stop drinking Soda. To add to that, I'm also going to stop eating candies, chocolate bars, etc.  I am going to cheat a bit here however, and allow cakes or pastries for me to eat. hehe

    There you go, forty days of no soda or candies. Let's see how that goes.

  • You Are 28% Capitalist, 72% Socialist
    You tend to be quite wary of businesses, especially big business.
    While you know that corporations have their place, you tend to support small, locally owned shops.
    As far as the rich go, you think they're usually corrupt and immoral.
    What I'm Listening To This Week...


  • When MP3's first came about in the mid to late 1990's, the prospect of listening to music that isn't tied down to a compact disc was very appealing. Then the early to mid 2000's gave way to the digital music boom, thanks to file sharing programs and the popularity of the iPod. The question that was brought up in the beginning however was whether digital music was a good enough substitute to duplicate the audio quality found in a CD. Ofcourse it depends on the bitrate of the ripping and what not to determine the quality, but for the majority of consumers the answer is a solid YES. This is testament to how many people nowadays rely on digital music to listen to their music collection, and it's no secret that CDs aren't as popular as they used to be.

    Now that it's come to the point in my life where I too am also listening to digital music more than CDs, it seems that everything is going along as they should right? Maybe. Because of the way things are now, there is a negative side effect to the digital music era. It's something that the majority of us may not have really considered much. The sound quality of some music this decade actually seem to sound worse, and it's not the fault of the digital medium. I couldn't put my finger on it for quite some time now, but the drums, vocals, guitars, all sound "less defined" than I think they should be, and I'm not talking about whether it's purposely distorted either. The only reason why I even noticed this was because I have some music where when I played it louder, I can actually hear more underlying "hidden" sounds that I never noticed before, which is pretty cool and almost like an easter egg. Then there's some music where all I get when playing it louder, is a loud noisy mess. Now why is that? Blame it on the recording? Blame it on the production? Blame it on the digital compression? Blame it on the band? I did not know what to make of it, until I read an article in Rolling Stone Magazine that explained it all...

    The Death of High Fidelity
    - In the age of MP3s, sound quality is worse than ever

    (http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/17777619/the_death_of_high_fidelity)

    If you are a fan of music, do yourself a favor and read the article.

    Also check out these youtube videos that demonstrates what the article is talking about.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Gmex_4hreQ
    and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7t40xBpqfE
    also http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xkkqsN69Jac

    I even brought this up to Nick Price, the drummer for the Meg & Dia band (which I'm a big fan of), and this is what he said... "so good and sadly so true. I hate this MP3 shit! It really does sound like garbage!
    Does anyone realize what's happening to music?
    It is getting really really really bad!
    Something Real is like that. It's so compressed that you can't even hear half of the stuff that I played.
    I'm really bummed out on the state of music right now, the sad thing is no one really seems to understand!"

    Learning all that, it gives some reason to why I've been saying "it sounds better live" a lot these past years. This "loudness war" is horrible, and is really a growing problem with music today. Since it's not something a lot of people know about, it's ironically a "silent" problem with music today.

  • As a guy or an American in general, do we *need* to watch the Superbowl? Even if you are not necessarily a huge fan of the sport? Watching for the Superbowl commercials seems to be a popular reason to watch the game as well, but nowadays you have the ability to see them online. So it boggles me a little bit how it's almost mandatory to be in the spirit of the Superbowl for a lot of people, that it may as well be a recognized holiday like Christmas or Thanksgiving. It's so prevalent in American culture that by the end of the game, you can't help but know who won, even if you weren't looking for that answer. In fact if anything else, you should know who won, or you might be seen as somebody who has been living under a rock.

    Despite me saying all that though, I'll traditionally be at my parent's house on a Sunday, where my family will be watching the game. Football games can be entertaining to watch, so I suppose I shouldn't be too negative about the Superbowl. I guess this post goes out to the people out there who act fake about being excited about the Superbowl, just because they "want to belong." For the rest of us, it's just another game.

  • Recently, Pedigree has been showing commercials about helping dogs in shelters. If there's one thing I do not like having to look at, are dogs in their cages in shelters, because I'm reminded of the tragedy of it all. It's just sad when the dogs gives such a happy look at prospective owners, but then the people just keep walking by. Yet despite the constant rejections, the dog still looks so hopeful, even though their chances of getting out of a shelter is pretty small. It's just sad sad sad I tell you.

    The two times I got my dogs from the pound, I actually did not look at any of the other dogs that I wasn't going to adopt. I would just look above the cages for the number that the dog I want to rescue is at. I'm able to do that because my wife (then girlfriend) would in advance actually look through the shelter's website for a dog she likes, and if I agree to one that I think we should get, I would just get the cage number. It's much harder for me to have to look at all the dogs behind cages in person, so this method works best for me. I still feel a little guilty about the dogs that were in / next to the cage that my dog was in, as I don't know what happened to them.

    So please, I implore anybody out there who wants to get a pet dog. Go to the shelters and rescue one, before considering getting an expensive pure bred dog from a store.