This Is Me #15

Small Wikipedia Rant

I was first made aware of Wikipedia when I was in high school. To me, it was like a universal "Spark Notes", that would give me a general overview of things I needed to know for class, which were usually enough to understand elementary concepts. Teachers didn't like this idea, much like they didn't like the idea of students using "Spark Notes" to understand books instead of reading the material themselves. It's understandable as a teacher because your teaching method is being circumvented. If you're teaching the book and Spark Notes just tells students what each allegory represents and where poetic and literally devices are used, there's really not much point in a teacher repeating the same ideas in front of a class room. It's much the same when students can look at the Wikipedia page for "Early Modern Europe" and get a concise idea the history of that period. Simply, such a convenient and in depth resource renders both the teacher and their teaching mediam such as novels and textbooks, useless in terms of conveying information (teachers are still relevant to facilitate learning).

I remember most arguments against Wikipedia were that they were "untrustworthy" as a source. In fact, I was not allowed to cite it in any papers even throughout my days in university. And while that may have been true initially, that is no longer the case. The organization, policing, and accuracy checking that Wikipedia has done for its content has made it comparable to its predecessor, the hard copy encyclopedia. Moreover, Wikipedia has replaced the encyclopedia (where are you, Britannica?) in the economy. It's free to the user, easy to access through the internet, it's layout allows fast mobile loading, it's content is created from volunteers, and has a robust search engine.

However, even though Wikipedia has replaced the encyclopedia in modern society, I fear it will take much longer for it to be used in the classroom. Textbook companies will continue to lobby the use of their expensive products in schools, an area of the budget which could be potentially cut and given to better educators or used to compensate a higher standard of educators.

This Is Me #14

This vs. That: League of Legends success compared to Starcraft 2

Fifteen years ago, Blizzard ruled the world. They came out with multiple titles, namely Diablo and Starcraft that were loved by the community. I'm not very familiar with their shortcomings because I was so young at the time. Being young, all I know is that I enjoyed playing the games. And generally, this is the consensus I get from the gaming community. You will never hear players criticizing these games. Maybe we know more now, maybe those games really were perfect. It doesn't really matter anymore because Blizzard has fallen from grace and the successors to those titles have fallen short.

Today, League of Legends, a free-to-play, multiplayer-online-battle-arena (MOBA) game, is king. And by a wide margin. In the majority of aspects, from popularity to profit margin to E-sports relevance, it's hard to disagree with the fact that the recent past and future belong to LoL. Why is this and why hasn't Starcraft 2 taken its rightful place on the throne?

1. Market Penetration: You can bet that everyone and their grandmother who played Starcraft was looking forward to the release of Starcraft 2. This is a game that engulfed an entire generation and already had an established fan base. It's easy to see that making a sequel would be very profitable for Blizzard. However, this is a new age, an age of creative digitization and diligent monetization that are designed to make everything convenient for the buyer. We don't buy games at Best Buy anymore. We order them on Amazon, we download them off Steam, or there are even FREE games that we don't need to pay money for. League of Legends is one of those free games. It didn't start with the same fan base as Starcraft, but it was able to creep its way into more computer hard drives. I didn't need to buy a $50 copy and put the CD in my disk drive. I just downloaded the game and was off on my way. My wallet wasn't any lighter (at the time) and that meant less commitment. This game didn't have to be good because I hadn't invested in it yet. So while Starcraft 2 started with a larger fan base, the next generation who had no familiarity with it had no reason to commit. And let's be honest, downloading a game with the click of a mouse is easier than asking Mom and Dad for some money to burn on video games.

2. Multiplayer Aspect: I can make a crude comparison of Starcraft to something like Civilization or Age of Empires. There are really only two types of game play, pvp and pve. This is simple and it's almost always been this way. However, games like Counter-Strike (which led to a whole genre of FPS games) and Defense of the Ancients (a LoL predecessor) allowed friends to play with each other. They could be on the same team and in fact, they were meant to be on the same team. The core of the games involved team work. This was simply not true of Starcraft or things like Civilization. Even now, I don't play Civ 5 against my friends because it's easier to just beat up on bots together. Everyone has fun that way. If I take out my friend with a Reaper rush super early, he/she is not going to be happy. However, in League of Legends, you're supposed to play with your friends on the same team. You have the same successes and struggles, and like a really hard Chem AP class, it brings friends together against a common enemy.

3. Mechanical Gameplay: Any game with a lot of strategy takes mastery of the game mechanics to develop a proficiency when playing. This means that games with a large amount of things to learn can be extremely rewarding when game mechanics are executed correctly (like being good at basketball vs being good at hop scotch). However, when a game is very hard to learn, some will not even take up the challenge to learn the game. Which is why I stick to hop scotch. Starcraft 2 and League of Legends are both mechanically intensive games, but Starcraft 2 blows LoL out of the water in this regard. Actions per minute (APM) is one of the most important stats in SC2, and coupled with a good knowledge and correctly executed strategies, can make you a beast whether you play Terran or Zerg. I tuned into an SC2 stream once and I just heard endless amount of keyboard clicking. It's really insane. When we take APM into LoL's world, this stat really doesn't matter much at all. Reactions and timing still do, but overall, you don't need to micro or macro as many things. Some may say that this reduces the skill cap of the game, that this means the game is inferior as it's easier to play, but I don't buy it. Let's take mountain climbers who climb Mt. Kilimanjaro vs. mountain climbers who climb Mt. Everest. If you can climb Kilimanjaro, it's not like you don't know how to climb a mountain. Sure, Everest is harder, but no one can say the amount of skill it took you to climb Kilimanjaro was nothing. There are only a handful of people who climb Everest, but far more who climb Kilimanjaro. When we apply this to League of Legends and Starcraft 2, it's easy to see why people would opt for an easier, yet still pretty rewarding game in LoL.

4. Team Strategy: How many of us have watched a chess match? I haven't and I hold nothing against people who do but I'll propose the same question for golf. I haven't watched a tournament and I hold nothing against those who do but I'll propose the same question for basketball. I have and I hold nothing against people who don't but I will say that statistically, team games like basketball and football are more popular when it comes to viewership of pro-games. Why is this? I believe it's because we believe there are so many different places in which things can go right or wrong and it's therefore more spectacular to watch when it all goes right or disastrously wrong. SC2 is a 1 v 1 game, matching pure individual skill. It's a lot like real time chess. League of Legends is a 5 v 5 game, matching teamwork and strategy. It's not about who can micro their character better (for the most part), it's about pressuring bottom to take a free dragon. This is much more appealing and easier to watch for spectators in E-sports because it's a much more macro game. Moreover, it's easier to focus on things. 10 players in the game mean that 10 things can impact the game. In SC2, you can have 15 hydras against 12 reapers against 3 colossi , etc etc. A layman can focus much more easily when you make game play based around less units and this also leads to greater market penetration and developing fan bases.

This Is Me #13

This is the most sarcastic song I've heard in a long time. And it describes my mentality towards people perfectly!

I don't know about Paramore, but as the one "singing" the song, I feel like I only say these lyrics because I am someone who feels that the world orbits around me sometimes. It's not something active that I try to do but it's something I do nonetheless. However, this is not even something I realized a year and a half ago. Therefore, with this realization, I need to rub this in everyone's face who doesn't yet know this.

And, yes, it is fun.

This Is Me #12

If God was willing to share his glory with me, who do i still screw up? Why am I not a perfect being? I hate failing. I hate falling short. If Christianity was real, why would I have to wait on what's promised?

This Is Me #11

Final Countdown

Six hundred seconds

Until the clock beckons

And Cinderella gets her wish

No more washing dishes

She'll have servants who listen

To the sound of her voice

Her choice is to go to the palace

Or back to making salads

Would paradise even be the place for her?

Maybe she'd rather go to a place she deserves

This Is Me #10

Christianity Nay

At what point do Christians stop obeying, word for word, what the Bible says? One passage most Christians don't follow is , 1 Cor 11:2-16, regarding head coverings for women in church. There are some churches (power to them) that do follow this tradition but most do not. Paul clearly states that women must have this head covering, yet it's a section of the Bible that is easily dismissed in most of the circles I've been apart of. The most common argument I've heard is that, "That was a cultural thing and it doesn't really apply to us now."

And in fact, this argument lines up with one that I've heard from a lot of non-Christians with regards to disobeying the Bible in its entirety. They argue it's outdated, it was written two thousand years ago, our culture is much more progressive now, etc. It has sections of it that are great, are used in weddings, but a lot of that hoopla is just not for the modern folk anymore. Obviously, applying the argument to this degree is not something that the majority of Christians agree with. But where is the line to be drawn? It seems like a very weak argument to say that part of the Bible can be flat out ignored in practical application but all the other stuff needs to be followed completely and in its entirety.

This Is Me #9

Nisekoi Anime Review

Nisekoi is another show that has emerged in the Winter 2014 season. The story revolves around the heirs to two rival gangs, one being a guy and the other being a girl. The gangs are about to go into an all out war when the bosses decide to create a fake relationship between their children, the two heirs, and create peace between the gangs who would've otherwise fought to the death and destroyed the city. The day is saved, but this plot point is mainly a distraction as the main goal is to create a situation where a guy and a girl (who have extreme disdain for each other) are forced to get to know each other better and will probably turn a 180 and fall in love.

I find each episode entertaining enough, though I can't help but think it's a show full of distractions. The most obvious distraction is their artsy fartsy art style that they kind of shuffle in and out of different scenes. It reminds me a lot of the style that Nisemonogatari uses, involving a lot of unusual spacing, contrasting visual patterns, and close ups of character's faces (or even just parts of their face). It works in Nisemonogatari because the writers have also scripted the dialogue and music to be just as disjointed and unusual as the art style. You can see what they're trying to do and everything adds up to be one big ball of art fart. However, in Nisekoi, I feel the frames with unusual spacing clashes with the rest of the scene. It looks pretty but I feel that it's mainly a gimmick to try to be different. They don't let the characters carry the load of the entertainment like a show like Toradora! would. And I do feel that's important because it's a romantic comedy. If I don't find the characters appealing, why do I care if they fall in love?

That being said, they make great use of the close-ups to accentuate emotional responses. And even if it's a gimmick, there is entertainment value in an unusual art style purely because it's a novelty. I can nitpick at Nisekoi a lot, but at the end of the day, it delivers in entertainment, which is the biggest factor of them all.

8/10 a very watchable show but nothing innovative here just yet