Video game reviewing was pioneered by such outlets as Electronic Gaming Monthly in 1989 throughout the United States, and Famitsu, a popular Japanese magazine, that unlike EGM, has been around since 1986 and exists to this day. What do video game reviews contribute to society? What do video game reviews solve or whom do they help?
Barely, if anyone and anything at all.
Video games are enjoyed by many. Some are savvy, devout know-it-alls and some are casual. Of course, there are exceptions, but for the most part, this remains true. A susbstantial number of those savvy gamers are active message board posters, and will stop at absolutely nothing to do everything in his or her power to further evangelize his or her supposed "ultimate video game".
Although I sadly do not have a credible metric that will support the number of vocal message board members, let me have you know there are quite a few that may be unquestionably categorized as Nintendo, Sony, or Microsoft fanboys; all the while, wearing their biases on their sleves during a rampant message board discussion.
Similar to those lifeless few who conduct the bulk of their political debating on YouTube, message board users will senselessly argue the merits of one video game or console over another to the point where you're convinced his religion is in the name of Sony or Microsoft. You would think people in this day and age would persue endeavors slightly more worthwhile, right? I suppose this is the way people perform business these days; in the most brash and hostile manner possible. I mean look at what our town hall meetings have degenerated into. This is a generation of dynamic "change", action, innovation, and versatility. Although most of this is achieved through long, arduous arguments that never may never seize for years on end. Only until then, will bills be passed, laws modernized, problems alleviated, roads fixed, and maybe even hardcore, skeptical, egotistical gamers annihilated.
The simple act of expressing thoughts or ideas can be both satisfying and rewarding. But with so many publishing outlets saturating the industry on the internet, it's becoming increasingly more difficult to stake out a claim to fame or credible following that reliably will visit the site each day or so. At the same time, it's easy to see why reviewing video games is such a sought-after job: playing video games and writing what you think of the experience the game provided is essentially all that's required of a video game reviewer.
With the wake of EGM in mind, shoddy imitators are inevitable. So gamers are tasked with answering the question: Which source do I trust? By most, such a question is met by a resounding "Metacritic!". Metacritic, most notably known for its aggregation of the review scores of many video game-centric outlets, is a widely trusted destination for the devout gamer.
Ultimately, games are not only used as a form of entertainment, but also a source of debate. Consider the verbal assaulting that has taken on the internet no different than a debate team. Same nerds, new generation.
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
Friday, October 2, 2009
Does anyone subscribe to Nintendo Power anymore?
This has been something that has been bothering me for some time now -- Nintendo Power, a magazine that I have grown up with isn't nearly as interesting as it once was...
I've been a subscriber of Nintendo Power for up to ten years now, and either my expectations have increased or the games the Nintendo Power staff cover have gone down the drain. I mean, compare the covers Nintendo Power has boasted in their earlier days. From Megaman, to Mario, to Metroid back in "the good 'ol days", now to Sonic and his shi### friends, Indiana Jones and the Staff of Whatever, and Generic Minigame Ripoff Party!.
Clearly, Nintendo Power is not to blame. The supply of hardcore games on Nintendo consoles have since slowed from the days of Goldeneye and Super Mario 64. So who is the target demographic for Nintendo Power? Children who use the Wii as a primary console, and idolize everything Sonic and Pokemon? I think that's safe to say. Here's a fairly reliable look at Nintendo Power's demographic, whether intended, or not.
Whether the Nintendo Power staff is to blame or not, for the past several years Nintendo Power has failed to jump out of the pages the way EGM did, both aesethetically and in terms of writing personality. Although the games covered aren't particularly interesting by any stretch of the imagination, the staff doesn't seem to be very interested themselves in selling, or convincing their audience that a particular game will be fun. (Maybe after all the movie-licensed cashins, it's slightly harder to be optimistic about games) It seems they approach each magazine as an arduous task, loftily critiquing games in order to avoid hate mail or controversy.
I've noticed since the redesign, Nintendo Power never seemed to step out of their boundaries. They always strictly covered games, with a minscule piece about video game art towards the end of the magazine. Now I'm not asking for a Maxim magazine that tries to appeal to all 17-30 year old males; converging women, [presumably] cars, and video games into one gigantic disaster. But much like The Official Xbox Magazine, and EGM, I would enjoy seeing some intellectual pieces that aren't inextricably cranked out each month -- with some thought, perspective, insight, and maybe even a little personality. (Kind of like Robert Ashley's articles featured in EGM)
I've come to the unbelievable conclusion that Nintendo Power is no longer for me. When Mario and Sonic at the Winter Olympics is featured as the cover, I must say goodbye, even as much as that hurts ten years down the line. Sorry Nintendo Power, but you are not what you once were.
So does anyone else either still subscribe to Nintendo Power, or consider ending your subscription?
I've been a subscriber of Nintendo Power for up to ten years now, and either my expectations have increased or the games the Nintendo Power staff cover have gone down the drain. I mean, compare the covers Nintendo Power has boasted in their earlier days. From Megaman, to Mario, to Metroid back in "the good 'ol days", now to Sonic and his shi### friends, Indiana Jones and the Staff of Whatever, and Generic Minigame Ripoff Party!.
Clearly, Nintendo Power is not to blame. The supply of hardcore games on Nintendo consoles have since slowed from the days of Goldeneye and Super Mario 64. So who is the target demographic for Nintendo Power? Children who use the Wii as a primary console, and idolize everything Sonic and Pokemon? I think that's safe to say. Here's a fairly reliable look at Nintendo Power's demographic, whether intended, or not.
Whether the Nintendo Power staff is to blame or not, for the past several years Nintendo Power has failed to jump out of the pages the way EGM did, both aesethetically and in terms of writing personality. Although the games covered aren't particularly interesting by any stretch of the imagination, the staff doesn't seem to be very interested themselves in selling, or convincing their audience that a particular game will be fun. (Maybe after all the movie-licensed cashins, it's slightly harder to be optimistic about games) It seems they approach each magazine as an arduous task, loftily critiquing games in order to avoid hate mail or controversy.
I've noticed since the redesign, Nintendo Power never seemed to step out of their boundaries. They always strictly covered games, with a minscule piece about video game art towards the end of the magazine. Now I'm not asking for a Maxim magazine that tries to appeal to all 17-30 year old males; converging women, [presumably] cars, and video games into one gigantic disaster. But much like The Official Xbox Magazine, and EGM, I would enjoy seeing some intellectual pieces that aren't inextricably cranked out each month -- with some thought, perspective, insight, and maybe even a little personality. (Kind of like Robert Ashley's articles featured in EGM)
I've come to the unbelievable conclusion that Nintendo Power is no longer for me. When Mario and Sonic at the Winter Olympics is featured as the cover, I must say goodbye, even as much as that hurts ten years down the line. Sorry Nintendo Power, but you are not what you once were.
So does anyone else either still subscribe to Nintendo Power, or consider ending your subscription?
Thursday, September 24, 2009
An Unrequited Love: Top Gear
By: Michael Lenoch
Top Gear is a show that features insightful reviews of practical everyday cars, to seemingly ironic critiques of ear-splitting supercars, as if that was to say they were cost-efficient or worth their generally steep prices. By this banner of Top Gear at the top, it may appear as a generic, European-centric science show. Well, I can confidently say, it is not some explosive-laden, destruction-filled show made for 12-year-olds; but rather, much more.
To avoid monotony, the producers always seem to know when to break from reviewing cars. This is done by throwing some challenges and celebrity appearances, where the celebrities take a spin on the Top Gear test track in a 'reasonably priced car' into the mix. But as for the challenges, they vary from utterly absurd and unlikely endeavors of impossibility, to demonstrations that may actually prove useful. For example, in this segment on "Cars for 17 year olds", there are moments that serve as comedic relief, although I don't imagine this challenge would be found as useful by anyone -- it's purely intended to be entertaining. And does a solid job doing so.
The car reviews progress as an average novel, film, or video game review would, and use understatement and fictitiousness to their advantage. Each review is captured by a camera in the car itself, as well as several cameras places periodically throughout the test track. Top Gear's test track was previously owned by Lotus Motors, and serves as a great litmus test, filled with wide variety of broad and sharp turns and a quarter-mile strip of runway that gauge the acceleration, top speed, grip, and overall performance of the given car quite accurately.
The reviews themselves have a distinct formula that nearly every successive review either improves upon, or follows exactly. Traditionally, the reviews come to a "But", "However", or "Although", and sometimes may even degenerate into harsh and senseless criticisms, eviscerating either the most minute or gargantuan failings of the given manufacturer. But what makes the reviews genuinely entertaining are the gleeful expressions any of the three presenters may use. This comes as refreshing to know the person you are watching on television is actually enthused with whatever he is presenting and loves his job, not himself.
The Stig is Top Gear's mascot. He is a wordless driver, dressed in white Alpinestars overalls, with a white helmet, whom of which outmatches any of the charismatic hosts in terms of lap times and inherent driving skill.
To the credit of BBC, the "identity of the white-suited Stig ... has been an open secret within the motoring world for some years, with newspapers refraining from publishing his name, to uphold the spirit of the programme." I simply love the unabashed approach the Top Gear crew embraces in order to run with the unknown racecar driver cliché, or in this case, the Stig.
There are very few programmes that can rival Top Gear's level of entertainment value, and for that matter, even fewer auto shows. The sly, gentlemanly British sense of humor makes Top Gear even more appealing.
As an American, I adore the blatantly honest criticisms of cars that have been all but conspicuously absent on even the most enthusiast of networks here in the land of the stars and stripes, such as the Speed Channel. I doubt I will ever tire of watching Top Gear. Good on ya mates, and motor on!
Top Gear is a show that features insightful reviews of practical everyday cars, to seemingly ironic critiques of ear-splitting supercars, as if that was to say they were cost-efficient or worth their generally steep prices. By this banner of Top Gear at the top, it may appear as a generic, European-centric science show. Well, I can confidently say, it is not some explosive-laden, destruction-filled show made for 12-year-olds; but rather, much more.
To avoid monotony, the producers always seem to know when to break from reviewing cars. This is done by throwing some challenges and celebrity appearances, where the celebrities take a spin on the Top Gear test track in a 'reasonably priced car' into the mix. But as for the challenges, they vary from utterly absurd and unlikely endeavors of impossibility, to demonstrations that may actually prove useful. For example, in this segment on "Cars for 17 year olds", there are moments that serve as comedic relief, although I don't imagine this challenge would be found as useful by anyone -- it's purely intended to be entertaining. And does a solid job doing so.
The car reviews progress as an average novel, film, or video game review would, and use understatement and fictitiousness to their advantage. Each review is captured by a camera in the car itself, as well as several cameras places periodically throughout the test track. Top Gear's test track was previously owned by Lotus Motors, and serves as a great litmus test, filled with wide variety of broad and sharp turns and a quarter-mile strip of runway that gauge the acceleration, top speed, grip, and overall performance of the given car quite accurately.
The reviews themselves have a distinct formula that nearly every successive review either improves upon, or follows exactly. Traditionally, the reviews come to a "But", "However", or "Although", and sometimes may even degenerate into harsh and senseless criticisms, eviscerating either the most minute or gargantuan failings of the given manufacturer. But what makes the reviews genuinely entertaining are the gleeful expressions any of the three presenters may use. This comes as refreshing to know the person you are watching on television is actually enthused with whatever he is presenting and loves his job, not himself.
The Stig is Top Gear's mascot. He is a wordless driver, dressed in white Alpinestars overalls, with a white helmet, whom of which outmatches any of the charismatic hosts in terms of lap times and inherent driving skill.
To the credit of BBC, the "identity of the white-suited Stig ... has been an open secret within the motoring world for some years, with newspapers refraining from publishing his name, to uphold the spirit of the programme." I simply love the unabashed approach the Top Gear crew embraces in order to run with the unknown racecar driver cliché, or in this case, the Stig.
There are very few programmes that can rival Top Gear's level of entertainment value, and for that matter, even fewer auto shows. The sly, gentlemanly British sense of humor makes Top Gear even more appealing.
As an American, I adore the blatantly honest criticisms of cars that have been all but conspicuously absent on even the most enthusiast of networks here in the land of the stars and stripes, such as the Speed Channel. I doubt I will ever tire of watching Top Gear. Good on ya mates, and motor on!
Sunday, September 20, 2009
How the Prevalence of Technology Affects Us Directly
By: Michael Lenoch
Specifically, the internet, one of man's many impressive innovations in technology throughout the past 100 years has rendered as a primary aid to many, and a detriment to even more. As a preface, according to Wikipedia, one of the most cautiously trusted, yet popular websites of today, the year 1996 witnessed an enormous growth of internet users, up to a 100 percent increase. Personally, I can remember as a mere toddler witnessing the rudimentary AOL screens my father browsed as he shared information with friends throughout the early nineties. Now, the internet has spanned tremendously throughout the past several years, so much so, that computers in schools are becoming a commodity. This is both for better and for worse: children have an entire world of information at their fingertips, yet with such information it's as if children these days are implicitly being encouraged by their parents and teachers to live unscrupulous and unconcerned lives, lacking the thoroughness their parents boasted. As parents haven't grown up with the internet, they generally don't understand what it is like to become less as thorough in one's work or research, and ultimately do whatever they can to encourage leisurely internet "research" or "learning", scouring the mostly trustworthy words of Wikipedia.
From my own perspective, living in America, industries always seem to be on the move, businessmen seem to never be ceasing, and people driving on even the most tranquil of suburban streets are constantly rushing to reach his or her next destination. Psychologically, as most people these days seem to essentially live, or carry out business, communicate with friends or family, read the latest news, listen to music, or to conduct any number of a modern human's day-to-day needs on the internet, peoples' rushed lifestyles seem to be directly be correlating to the streets, boardrooms, and classrooms of today.
To demonstrate this 'failing' [by traditional standards] of a generation, take a look at any given message board. Message boards are intended to serve as virtual places where people can intelligently communicate and share opinions on specific topics. For the most part, any message board that is not met with sufficient moderating is doomed to fall to the wayside and to diminish in popularity, as the discussions will inevitably lose their focus, and no longer will users exemplify a desire to talk in-depth about the given matter or topic. Coincidentally, when researching to get somewhat acquainted with the topic of the 'short attention-span generation of internet users', I entered that very query on Google, which yielded this message board discussion: http://www.webmasterworld.com/forum9/4639.htm .
The original poster says:
"Does the internet encourage short attention spans?
I was at an internet site a few minutes ago looking up some code (DOM event models as it happens ;)) and although I was at an excellent, visually appealing site with just the sort of content I was looking for, I found myself instinctively scanning the page to find the information I wanted as quickly as possible, get the information in a hurry and then head off (after a quick bookmark I will probably never see again) somewhere else.
I think this might be a symptom of internet search culture, in that you are forced to analyse information at a fast rate in order to find the best site and good content, or risk getting bogged down in poor sites and pages.
I scan the serps looking for the ideal match, click through several sites after looking around briefly to see if the result was a good match. If I don't find it fast, I'm outta there.
Which would be fine if I only did this when trying to find a good site, but now I'm catching myself doing it on really useful sites too...
I'm sure we've all seen lots of 'hit and runs' on our sites in referrer logs. Designers (and SEOs) are encouraged to put the content we think visitors want as noticeably and as high up the page as possible, so we are teaching visitors that if it's not there, it's not a match.
Is it just me? Do I need to take some deep breaths and stop drinking so much coffee, or are attention spans on the web destined to go the same way as TV audiences?
Be interested to hear any thoughts :)"
-pixel
In that message board discussion, the participating users commonly misspell words, and often neglect grammar rules, which is a similar behavior to that of the average YouTube user, commenting on any number of videos. Why is it though, that internet users generally always seem to be in a hurry, or carelessly cobble together words that are supposedly representative of some asinine thought that no one else but him or herself will have any hope on earth of understanding? Now how was that for long-winded?
As a perfect example of this short attention-span generation of degenerates, my sister demonstrates a lack of desire to think or contemplate abstractly. In school, she thinks with a single-layered intellect: "Do the work, quickly." It's possible she's been influenced by my father's strict, Machiavellian-like work ethic that he has surely ingrained in her, or even a lifestyle she's carved out in order to cope with her homework load. Her lack of any perceivable abstract thought whatsoever may be due to the way her friends communicate or perceive the world, which is on a single-dimensional, or concrete basis. Though, if my sister were to speak intelligently among, [which by that, I mean not saying the word "like" every sentence], it would be considered obstructive or strange, when the descriptive depiction is not entirely necessary. So, it all comes down to context, I suppose.
But even then, supposing "it all comes down to context", ignores how shallow her intellect truly is. And to me, that's not fair. People like myself, who think of politics, society, and current events in-depth are rewarded on a relatively rare occasion in terms of grades, with English papers and History essays for example. While schools have become more attune to teaching students with pitiful vocabularies and an unassuming imaginations, recommending concretely-minded mathematicians to prestigious universities, while the Philospher Kings [like myself, of course], by their innate abilities may as well get them no where. For all intents and purposes, no one cares in this day and age how beautifully one can construct a sentence, but how efficiently one can solve a problem that requires no extent of imagination. We are sorely in need of a renaissance. God knows how many mechanics working at Mike's Tires and Oil Shop are secretly brilliant composers of spirit and word, without half knowing it themselves. I digress.
As I come to a close, the most interesting part of all of this chatter is how people in this modern age are nearly encouraged to carry out these simplistic, mathematic, take-it-for-what-it-is type of lifestyles, and are gratified even though they rarely seem to exude any degree of thought. We who think outside the box are flogged and discouraged. Whoops, there goes another artist of superb intellect. Gone forever.
By my own observation, it is a shame the common populace of today demonstrates such little discernment that was once present many moons ago. People seem to instinctively carry out the processes of life, and to let the flow of life carry them.
SOURCE:
"Does the internet encourage short attention spans?" Webmaster World. Web. 20 Sept. 2009..
Specifically, the internet, one of man's many impressive innovations in technology throughout the past 100 years has rendered as a primary aid to many, and a detriment to even more. As a preface, according to Wikipedia, one of the most cautiously trusted, yet popular websites of today, the year 1996 witnessed an enormous growth of internet users, up to a 100 percent increase. Personally, I can remember as a mere toddler witnessing the rudimentary AOL screens my father browsed as he shared information with friends throughout the early nineties. Now, the internet has spanned tremendously throughout the past several years, so much so, that computers in schools are becoming a commodity. This is both for better and for worse: children have an entire world of information at their fingertips, yet with such information it's as if children these days are implicitly being encouraged by their parents and teachers to live unscrupulous and unconcerned lives, lacking the thoroughness their parents boasted. As parents haven't grown up with the internet, they generally don't understand what it is like to become less as thorough in one's work or research, and ultimately do whatever they can to encourage leisurely internet "research" or "learning", scouring the mostly trustworthy words of Wikipedia.
From my own perspective, living in America, industries always seem to be on the move, businessmen seem to never be ceasing, and people driving on even the most tranquil of suburban streets are constantly rushing to reach his or her next destination. Psychologically, as most people these days seem to essentially live, or carry out business, communicate with friends or family, read the latest news, listen to music, or to conduct any number of a modern human's day-to-day needs on the internet, peoples' rushed lifestyles seem to be directly be correlating to the streets, boardrooms, and classrooms of today.
To demonstrate this 'failing' [by traditional standards] of a generation, take a look at any given message board. Message boards are intended to serve as virtual places where people can intelligently communicate and share opinions on specific topics. For the most part, any message board that is not met with sufficient moderating is doomed to fall to the wayside and to diminish in popularity, as the discussions will inevitably lose their focus, and no longer will users exemplify a desire to talk in-depth about the given matter or topic. Coincidentally, when researching to get somewhat acquainted with the topic of the 'short attention-span generation of internet users', I entered that very query on Google, which yielded this message board discussion: http://www.webmasterworld.com/forum9/4639.htm .
The original poster says:
"Does the internet encourage short attention spans?
I was at an internet site a few minutes ago looking up some code (DOM event models as it happens ;)) and although I was at an excellent, visually appealing site with just the sort of content I was looking for, I found myself instinctively scanning the page to find the information I wanted as quickly as possible, get the information in a hurry and then head off (after a quick bookmark I will probably never see again) somewhere else.
I think this might be a symptom of internet search culture, in that you are forced to analyse information at a fast rate in order to find the best site and good content, or risk getting bogged down in poor sites and pages.
I scan the serps looking for the ideal match, click through several sites after looking around briefly to see if the result was a good match. If I don't find it fast, I'm outta there.
Which would be fine if I only did this when trying to find a good site, but now I'm catching myself doing it on really useful sites too...
I'm sure we've all seen lots of 'hit and runs' on our sites in referrer logs. Designers (and SEOs) are encouraged to put the content we think visitors want as noticeably and as high up the page as possible, so we are teaching visitors that if it's not there, it's not a match.
Is it just me? Do I need to take some deep breaths and stop drinking so much coffee, or are attention spans on the web destined to go the same way as TV audiences?
Be interested to hear any thoughts :)"
-pixel
In that message board discussion, the participating users commonly misspell words, and often neglect grammar rules, which is a similar behavior to that of the average YouTube user, commenting on any number of videos. Why is it though, that internet users generally always seem to be in a hurry, or carelessly cobble together words that are supposedly representative of some asinine thought that no one else but him or herself will have any hope on earth of understanding? Now how was that for long-winded?
As a perfect example of this short attention-span generation of degenerates, my sister demonstrates a lack of desire to think or contemplate abstractly. In school, she thinks with a single-layered intellect: "Do the work, quickly." It's possible she's been influenced by my father's strict, Machiavellian-like work ethic that he has surely ingrained in her, or even a lifestyle she's carved out in order to cope with her homework load. Her lack of any perceivable abstract thought whatsoever may be due to the way her friends communicate or perceive the world, which is on a single-dimensional, or concrete basis. Though, if my sister were to speak intelligently among, [which by that, I mean not saying the word "like" every sentence], it would be considered obstructive or strange, when the descriptive depiction is not entirely necessary. So, it all comes down to context, I suppose.
But even then, supposing "it all comes down to context", ignores how shallow her intellect truly is. And to me, that's not fair. People like myself, who think of politics, society, and current events in-depth are rewarded on a relatively rare occasion in terms of grades, with English papers and History essays for example. While schools have become more attune to teaching students with pitiful vocabularies and an unassuming imaginations, recommending concretely-minded mathematicians to prestigious universities, while the Philospher Kings [like myself, of course], by their innate abilities may as well get them no where. For all intents and purposes, no one cares in this day and age how beautifully one can construct a sentence, but how efficiently one can solve a problem that requires no extent of imagination. We are sorely in need of a renaissance. God knows how many mechanics working at Mike's Tires and Oil Shop are secretly brilliant composers of spirit and word, without half knowing it themselves. I digress.
As I come to a close, the most interesting part of all of this chatter is how people in this modern age are nearly encouraged to carry out these simplistic, mathematic, take-it-for-what-it-is type of lifestyles, and are gratified even though they rarely seem to exude any degree of thought. We who think outside the box are flogged and discouraged. Whoops, there goes another artist of superb intellect. Gone forever.
By my own observation, it is a shame the common populace of today demonstrates such little discernment that was once present many moons ago. People seem to instinctively carry out the processes of life, and to let the flow of life carry them.
SOURCE:
"Does the internet encourage short attention spans?" Webmaster World. Web. 20 Sept. 2009.
Saturday, September 12, 2009
2 Cents on Shopper's Remorse and One's Core Values
By: Michael Lenoch
Every time I have purchased virtually anything, I have felt some degree of remorse. Be that a far cry from my bohemian roots, or how I grew to perceive the world and distinguish the value of hard-earned money, I am what one may call a "Saducee".
For all my life I have thought in terms of extremes. Take a car for example, and what young boys hope to one day do with them: to customize or upgrade. I envisioned any number of modestly priced cars I hoped to one day assume from the standpoint of a ten-year-old, fully decked out in anything from improved exhaust systems, to mildly necessary body kits, purely for cosmetic and unique purposes. The other side of the spectrum exposes one of my core values as well. By the earlier end of my teenager years (which are currently in progress), I hoped [and still do] to move to Germany, and to appreciate what truly matters in life, outside all of the glamour and glitz that occupies our unquestionably secular lives. Sure, I do in fact take time to relax in my backyard, not only by playing soccer, but also taking my dog on walks throughout the unadulterated plot of 8.8 acres of land that sits alongside the yard. At the United States' core, essentially every citizen has the ambition to achieve that particular person's ideal extent of wealth or success. This is not a negative thing per se, but capitalism does indeed by its very nature, promote an expansionist-like ambition in many of the workers that blissfully reside within it. To provide a concrete example, imagine the 8.8 acre plot of land that sat near my backyard. Sadly, within a few years, that very plot of land could very well be gobbled up by some young and inspiring real estate agent trying to get a buck or two. Therein lies on a microcosmic level, how as populations across the world grow, "vacant", or otherwise wildlife-inhabited parts of the world will continue to diminish.
Recently, I took the time to very briefly snoop my sister's room and view her numerous treasures that render her carpet ostensibly invisible. Lying throughout her room, which is larger than that of my own, were absurdly tall leather, and presumably expensive boots that I was shocked to witness my sister's possession of them. Over the past few years, day after day, my family's computer's Internet Explorer tabs would be occupied by Nordstrom's, Neiman Marcus,
and Free People shopping carts, ready to buy hundred-dollar shoes, boots, jewelry, dresses, skirts, and God knows what else. This is in all my expressible honesty, a travesty to use the fewest possible words of the English language. I ask for so little from my parents, yet day after day, my sister inevitably will insist on them ordering her a new article of clothing online, or them dropping her off at a high-profile, opulent mall, that mind you, is not what one would call "close".
But from a different perspective, this circumstance can be viewed as healthy for me. As I witness my own sister ask for anything that will supposedly lead to her heart's content, I know that having such a materialistic outlook on life is bound to lead to failure or ultimate discontent. By asking for such an innumerable amount each month, my father begins to think he is buying my sister love. Saying "thank you" in most cases is an empty gesture, devoid of meaning or spirit. I haven't the slightest clue as to how my father would understand a "thank you" or even a sign of appreciation, such as a smile, or a gasp of excitement as she would witness the package for the first time as a gesture of love. I think as of late, my sister's unreasonable desire for clothing and accessories has somewhat slowed, and my father has realized taking out checks for things that truly are not quite so important in life are not top-priority.
Every time I have purchased virtually anything, I have felt some degree of remorse. Be that a far cry from my bohemian roots, or how I grew to perceive the world and distinguish the value of hard-earned money, I am what one may call a "Saducee".
For all my life I have thought in terms of extremes. Take a car for example, and what young boys hope to one day do with them: to customize or upgrade. I envisioned any number of modestly priced cars I hoped to one day assume from the standpoint of a ten-year-old, fully decked out in anything from improved exhaust systems, to mildly necessary body kits, purely for cosmetic and unique purposes. The other side of the spectrum exposes one of my core values as well. By the earlier end of my teenager years (which are currently in progress), I hoped [and still do] to move to Germany, and to appreciate what truly matters in life, outside all of the glamour and glitz that occupies our unquestionably secular lives. Sure, I do in fact take time to relax in my backyard, not only by playing soccer, but also taking my dog on walks throughout the unadulterated plot of 8.8 acres of land that sits alongside the yard. At the United States' core, essentially every citizen has the ambition to achieve that particular person's ideal extent of wealth or success. This is not a negative thing per se, but capitalism does indeed by its very nature, promote an expansionist-like ambition in many of the workers that blissfully reside within it. To provide a concrete example, imagine the 8.8 acre plot of land that sat near my backyard. Sadly, within a few years, that very plot of land could very well be gobbled up by some young and inspiring real estate agent trying to get a buck or two. Therein lies on a microcosmic level, how as populations across the world grow, "vacant", or otherwise wildlife-inhabited parts of the world will continue to diminish.
Recently, I took the time to very briefly snoop my sister's room and view her numerous treasures that render her carpet ostensibly invisible. Lying throughout her room, which is larger than that of my own, were absurdly tall leather, and presumably expensive boots that I was shocked to witness my sister's possession of them. Over the past few years, day after day, my family's computer's Internet Explorer tabs would be occupied by Nordstrom's, Neiman Marcus,
and Free People shopping carts, ready to buy hundred-dollar shoes, boots, jewelry, dresses, skirts, and God knows what else. This is in all my expressible honesty, a travesty to use the fewest possible words of the English language. I ask for so little from my parents, yet day after day, my sister inevitably will insist on them ordering her a new article of clothing online, or them dropping her off at a high-profile, opulent mall, that mind you, is not what one would call "close". But from a different perspective, this circumstance can be viewed as healthy for me. As I witness my own sister ask for anything that will supposedly lead to her heart's content, I know that having such a materialistic outlook on life is bound to lead to failure or ultimate discontent. By asking for such an innumerable amount each month, my father begins to think he is buying my sister love. Saying "thank you" in most cases is an empty gesture, devoid of meaning or spirit. I haven't the slightest clue as to how my father would understand a "thank you" or even a sign of appreciation, such as a smile, or a gasp of excitement as she would witness the package for the first time as a gesture of love. I think as of late, my sister's unreasonable desire for clothing and accessories has somewhat slowed, and my father has realized taking out checks for things that truly are not quite so important in life are not top-priority.
Wednesday, September 2, 2009
Breaking away from Exhibitionism: Facebook
By: Michael Lenoch
Such has our world as of late been consumed by the social time-sink, or Facebook. To my outspoken dismay, this is to the detriment of modern teenagers.
Never has there been a website that nurtured the average teenager's ability to glaze over the website's own text. You're with it if your Status is short. You're not if it's long, or if you gave it any thought at all. You're with it if you quoted a recent popculture reference verbatim. You're not if you come up with a clever aphorism of your own that provokes some thinking.
Facebook, otherwise known as the electronic organization of brainless commentary and social interaction, is a vomit-provoking site to say the least. Meaningless clubs that supposedly pair Facebook members with similar interests, coupled with endless and unremarkable messages and Statuses are certain to leave one with the thought: "Why did I ever decide to join Facebook in the first place?"
To quote Andy Ostroy from the Huffington Post;
"What started out as a social networking site for college kids has somehow turned into a cesspool of self-absorbed way-too-old-to-be-fucking-around-on-Facebook adults who think that the rest of us actually give a shit about what they're drinking, eating, thinking, reading, watching, and/or are listening to every five minutes. They post their top 5 records, movies and TV shows. They post "25 Random Things About Me" lists. And they tell us constantly what they're "fans of." One person is a fan of "grilled cheese." I kid you not. What have we come to when grilled cheese has its own Facebook page? Someone clearly has way too much time on their hands."
To think people who attend my school know various people purely from his or her Facebook profile is a social nightmare come true. The site is inundated with depraved teenagers who use Facebook as a way to "express" him or herself. That's not expression, that's beating someone over the head with all of your interests and activities at any given moment that no one cares to the slightest degree.
"The site is overcrowded with attention-starved [teenagers] essentially screaming "look at me... look at me!" all day long. They change their profile photos as often as I change my underwear, and they've somehow convinced themselves that their lives are infinitely interesting all the time. The "audience factor" is just way too attractive to these folks. It's drunken karaoke without the booze and the bad singing, but with all the requisite self-indulgence."
In what instance will I ever in my lifetime find any of this information useful whatsoever -- senseless musings of obviously confused teens, the regurgitation of music lyrics, and the stereotypical ignorance teenagers have been so apt to promote and reinforce.
But in the spirit of a carefully orchestrated crescendo, I must confess how I initially became a Facebook member. By my Sophomore year, I transferred to a new school. Prior to that time, I wisely neglected becoming a Facebook member, thinking, "It's simply not for me." But when I did in fact, break down and submit to the ubiquitous Facebook regime, there was nothing particularly remarkable, even from the outset. Sure it was helpful to get to know people before I stepped foot in my new school, but Facebook is a depressing waste of time that blares in your face how little people care about you no matter how little, or considered your contributions are, especially relative to your fellow self-absorbed peers.
SOURCE:
Ostroy, Andy. "I Hate Facebook." The Huffington Post. 25 Mar. 2009. Web. 2 Sept. 2009..
Such has our world as of late been consumed by the social time-sink, or Facebook. To my outspoken dismay, this is to the detriment of modern teenagers.
Never has there been a website that nurtured the average teenager's ability to glaze over the website's own text. You're with it if your Status is short. You're not if it's long, or if you gave it any thought at all. You're with it if you quoted a recent popculture reference verbatim. You're not if you come up with a clever aphorism of your own that provokes some thinking.
Facebook, otherwise known as the electronic organization of brainless commentary and social interaction, is a vomit-provoking site to say the least. Meaningless clubs that supposedly pair Facebook members with similar interests, coupled with endless and unremarkable messages and Statuses are certain to leave one with the thought: "Why did I ever decide to join Facebook in the first place?"
To quote Andy Ostroy from the Huffington Post;
"What started out as a social networking site for college kids has somehow turned into a cesspool of self-absorbed way-too-old-to-be-fucking-around-on-Facebook adults who think that the rest of us actually give a shit about what they're drinking, eating, thinking, reading, watching, and/or are listening to every five minutes. They post their top 5 records, movies and TV shows. They post "25 Random Things About Me" lists. And they tell us constantly what they're "fans of." One person is a fan of "grilled cheese." I kid you not. What have we come to when grilled cheese has its own Facebook page? Someone clearly has way too much time on their hands."
To think people who attend my school know various people purely from his or her Facebook profile is a social nightmare come true. The site is inundated with depraved teenagers who use Facebook as a way to "express" him or herself. That's not expression, that's beating someone over the head with all of your interests and activities at any given moment that no one cares to the slightest degree.
"The site is overcrowded with attention-starved [teenagers] essentially screaming "look at me... look at me!" all day long. They change their profile photos as often as I change my underwear, and they've somehow convinced themselves that their lives are infinitely interesting all the time. The "audience factor" is just way too attractive to these folks. It's drunken karaoke without the booze and the bad singing, but with all the requisite self-indulgence."
In what instance will I ever in my lifetime find any of this information useful whatsoever -- senseless musings of obviously confused teens, the regurgitation of music lyrics, and the stereotypical ignorance teenagers have been so apt to promote and reinforce.
But in the spirit of a carefully orchestrated crescendo, I must confess how I initially became a Facebook member. By my Sophomore year, I transferred to a new school. Prior to that time, I wisely neglected becoming a Facebook member, thinking, "It's simply not for me." But when I did in fact, break down and submit to the ubiquitous Facebook regime, there was nothing particularly remarkable, even from the outset. Sure it was helpful to get to know people before I stepped foot in my new school, but Facebook is a depressing waste of time that blares in your face how little people care about you no matter how little, or considered your contributions are, especially relative to your fellow self-absorbed peers.
SOURCE:
Ostroy, Andy. "I Hate Facebook." The Huffington Post. 25 Mar. 2009. Web. 2 Sept. 2009.
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
I hate the routine
By: Michael Lenoch
I hate the routine
I hate the routine, the forced lifestyle that all of us must endure,
I hate the routine that has provoked the dark suicidal thoughts in us all,
I hate the routine that makes me grateful for any free time I may have,
I hate the routine that makes me keep track of time,
I hate the routine that forces me to write in order to cope,
I hate the routine that requires no creativity, as those who have mastered the routine, yet are clearly less intelligible than myself succeed,
I hate the routine that surges stress in us all daily,
I hate the routine that mercilessly knocks the inkling of personality we each resembled, prior to our embracing the routine,
I hate the routine that supposedly, will one day make formidable professionals of us all,
I hate the routine that limits our time we spend with our families,
I hate the routine that mandates me to sit in a classroom full of students all day who consider themselves brilliant purely because they happened to fill in answer C, rather than answer A,
I hate the routine that consists of a blaring alarm clock, and a gloomy morning,
I hate the routine that was employed by adults who assume ubiquitous stupidity of teenagers,
I hate the routine that restricts my full potential in activities I consider worthwhile and a possible profession, such as writing,
I hate the routine that has me witness innumerable faces that appear sleepy and lifeless,
I hate the routine that situates me with individuals who dismiss me entirely,
I hate the routine that consists of a large amount of teenagers who have no desire to learn and to succeed,
I hate the routine in which I witness individuals who assume their wit based on the name of the school they attend,
I hate the routine in which so much more could be done other than the undeniably objective, mind-numbing homework we are assigned each night,
I hate the routine in which I must endure a senseless beating of the French language a year behind, when I could be enjoying the brilliant sounds of the German language, a year ahead,
I hate the routine that has me sitting in a stifling library on the fourth floor, contemplating every drawback, and hoping for the most of every hardship,
I hate the routine in which I must suffer criticism, misunderstandings, as well as ignorance,
But I do in fact love the routine in which I can sit down, satisfied, knowing I either contributed to the English language in one form or another, or have at the very least, provoked some sort of questioning.
I hate the routine
I hate the routine, the forced lifestyle that all of us must endure,
I hate the routine that has provoked the dark suicidal thoughts in us all,
I hate the routine that makes me grateful for any free time I may have,
I hate the routine that makes me keep track of time,
I hate the routine that forces me to write in order to cope,
I hate the routine that requires no creativity, as those who have mastered the routine, yet are clearly less intelligible than myself succeed,
I hate the routine that surges stress in us all daily,
I hate the routine that mercilessly knocks the inkling of personality we each resembled, prior to our embracing the routine,
I hate the routine that supposedly, will one day make formidable professionals of us all,
I hate the routine that limits our time we spend with our families,
I hate the routine that mandates me to sit in a classroom full of students all day who consider themselves brilliant purely because they happened to fill in answer C, rather than answer A,
I hate the routine that consists of a blaring alarm clock, and a gloomy morning,
I hate the routine that was employed by adults who assume ubiquitous stupidity of teenagers,
I hate the routine that restricts my full potential in activities I consider worthwhile and a possible profession, such as writing,
I hate the routine that has me witness innumerable faces that appear sleepy and lifeless,
I hate the routine that situates me with individuals who dismiss me entirely,
I hate the routine that consists of a large amount of teenagers who have no desire to learn and to succeed,
I hate the routine in which I witness individuals who assume their wit based on the name of the school they attend,
I hate the routine in which so much more could be done other than the undeniably objective, mind-numbing homework we are assigned each night,
I hate the routine in which I must endure a senseless beating of the French language a year behind, when I could be enjoying the brilliant sounds of the German language, a year ahead,
I hate the routine that has me sitting in a stifling library on the fourth floor, contemplating every drawback, and hoping for the most of every hardship,
I hate the routine in which I must suffer criticism, misunderstandings, as well as ignorance,
But I do in fact love the routine in which I can sit down, satisfied, knowing I either contributed to the English language in one form or another, or have at the very least, provoked some sort of questioning.
Monday, August 17, 2009
My Aspiration to Live in Germany
It is senseless,
It is bound in pride,
It is nigh inexplainable,
It harkens to a lack of identity in the land of the stars and stripes,
It makes me question my allegiance to the red, white, and blue,
It shocks me how generic the texts of the land represented by a bald eagle truly are,
It gives me a sense of longing,
A sense of parting from my ancestry, a loss of my heitage and my roots in history,
A yearning desire that envisions myself speaking a language proudly that was spoken by my great fathers long ago,
A culture that is more united than these supposed united states,
A culture that doesn't beat itself up about sports feuds, messy divorces, and petty arguments, debating the implications behind the First Amendment,
But rather, a relaxed lot, who understand the core values of life, and are not driving everywhere by car and chopping every tree in sight to achieve them.
It is bound in pride,
It is nigh inexplainable,
It harkens to a lack of identity in the land of the stars and stripes,
It makes me question my allegiance to the red, white, and blue,
It shocks me how generic the texts of the land represented by a bald eagle truly are,
It gives me a sense of longing,
A sense of parting from my ancestry, a loss of my heitage and my roots in history,
A yearning desire that envisions myself speaking a language proudly that was spoken by my great fathers long ago,
A culture that is more united than these supposed united states,
A culture that doesn't beat itself up about sports feuds, messy divorces, and petty arguments, debating the implications behind the First Amendment,
But rather, a relaxed lot, who understand the core values of life, and are not driving everywhere by car and chopping every tree in sight to achieve them.
Monday, August 3, 2009
John Davison, the sensationalist
(As a preface, John Davison, former 1up/EGM employee, runs a site called WhatTheyPlay.com, and is a popular guest on my personal favorite podcast, Listen Up!.)
Lately because I've been listening to multiple podcasts; Gamespot UK podcast, Listen Up!, Giant Bomb, and (World Soccer Daily, although that's irrelevant), I've had a spectrum of opinions throughout the various shows, and have noticed how much of a sensationalist John is. He makes out every game that he spent 5 minutes playing and didn't frustrate him to be the next game of the year. He commonly uses words like "Awesome", "Excellent", "Spectacular", and "Great", which can get a bit confusing. First of all, for the most part, all of the words I mentioned have identical connotations, and when used, can be perceived to pertain to the same standard or quality. I feel John needs to be more careful when speaking about games, because from first-hand experience, I've bought some iPhone games that I've been greatly disappointed with because of how "Good" he describes every game he mentions. John needs to use subtlety to his advantage. He clearly must have no idea what kind of influence he has on gamers -- because if Uncle John says it's good, it's nearly guaranteed the boards will be either up in arms in regret, or in love with John's weekly recommendation by the following week.
I might be taking a bit of a diversion here, but I think John would be better suited talking about books on a podcast. Books educate. Books have never done anything wrong. Books are worth reading even if the subject is not particularly interesting because you are bound to learn something new. And most importantly, books have never wasted anyone's time. John's approach to talking about games is very fey or whimsical. Don't misinterpret this though; what I mean by "fey or whimsical" is that John rarely has had the misfortune of having to take a chance on a game that he has been told was good -- he always has the opportunity to try a game before commiting a purchase by the very nature of his job. John certainly has expressed instances in which he has been burned by buying a game, but he seems less critical if "he spent 5 minutes or more playing a game and it didn't frustrate him". So in some cases, it appears as though he forgot what it means to be a gamer -- and indeed is going on by assumptions.
All in all, John needs to be more careful with his words, not use words like" Spectacular" for every game he talks about, truly get down to what makes a game fun -- not what it is about -- which is inevitably what the show gets caught up in on nearly every show. It's not always worth the time to know what the game is about, but rather whether it is worth my time.
Lately because I've been listening to multiple podcasts; Gamespot UK podcast, Listen Up!, Giant Bomb, and (World Soccer Daily, although that's irrelevant), I've had a spectrum of opinions throughout the various shows, and have noticed how much of a sensationalist John is. He makes out every game that he spent 5 minutes playing and didn't frustrate him to be the next game of the year. He commonly uses words like "Awesome", "Excellent", "Spectacular", and "Great", which can get a bit confusing. First of all, for the most part, all of the words I mentioned have identical connotations, and when used, can be perceived to pertain to the same standard or quality. I feel John needs to be more careful when speaking about games, because from first-hand experience, I've bought some iPhone games that I've been greatly disappointed with because of how "Good" he describes every game he mentions. John needs to use subtlety to his advantage. He clearly must have no idea what kind of influence he has on gamers -- because if Uncle John says it's good, it's nearly guaranteed the boards will be either up in arms in regret, or in love with John's weekly recommendation by the following week.
I might be taking a bit of a diversion here, but I think John would be better suited talking about books on a podcast. Books educate. Books have never done anything wrong. Books are worth reading even if the subject is not particularly interesting because you are bound to learn something new. And most importantly, books have never wasted anyone's time. John's approach to talking about games is very fey or whimsical. Don't misinterpret this though; what I mean by "fey or whimsical" is that John rarely has had the misfortune of having to take a chance on a game that he has been told was good -- he always has the opportunity to try a game before commiting a purchase by the very nature of his job. John certainly has expressed instances in which he has been burned by buying a game, but he seems less critical if "he spent 5 minutes or more playing a game and it didn't frustrate him". So in some cases, it appears as though he forgot what it means to be a gamer -- and indeed is going on by assumptions.
All in all, John needs to be more careful with his words, not use words like" Spectacular" for every game he talks about, truly get down to what makes a game fun -- not what it is about -- which is inevitably what the show gets caught up in on nearly every show. It's not always worth the time to know what the game is about, but rather whether it is worth my time.
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Area 5 is sorely lacking
I can remember the 1up Show, and how interesting and solid each discussion featured on the show was. After watching this week's Area 5 show, I'm afraid to say that Area 5 is sorely lacking. In contrast to the 1up Show, when Ryan, Jason, Cesar, Jay, and Matt were filming some of the most articulate writers the video game industry has seen, the show was highly entertaining. The idea of inviting other video game writers is a plus, but on this week's show, I could barely understand what Cesar was trying to convey during the Call of Juarez discussion . Maybe I am a fool, or maybe Cesar needs to work on his communication skills or build his vocabulary. When he was trying to say how he felt about Call of Juarez as a whole, he kept rephrasing what he said a few seconds ago. Cesar alone is not to blame. Let's be honest, there's a reason the Area 5 guys aren't invited to podcasts. They are spectacular video producers, and I commend them for that, but they are not the most articulate game critics. They certainly do a great job explaining their personal experiences, but can barely make a solid critique about a game, which is why they made such an appropriate fit making the 1up Show with the verbally articulate 1up guys. I can understand how stressful it can be improvising these discussions (whether they are or are not), but as an honest consumer, I felt like no one on the Call of Juarez discussion clearly indicated whether it was something I should look into or not. Maybe I'm harping too much on the Call of Juarez discussion alone, but relative to Area 5's quality work in the past, this simply didn't seem to fit.
No offense Area 5 guys, just some constructive criticism
No offense Area 5 guys, just some constructive criticism
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)