Now for those of you that aren't aware, I've just finished one hell (pun) of a paper on the character of Satan in John Milton's Epic poem, Paradise Lost. It was a fun time.
Well not really, but I sound like a mopey little emo kid if I say it was a goddamn bitch.
In any event, I have learned something from this experience, something very very valuable.
1. All, and I mean all, scholarly papers are bullshit.
2. You can't say anything about a character has thousands of lines in a poem 12 books long in 8 pages.
So I wrote 11, clever ehh?
However, I really liked the poem in and of itself, and Satan is one badass of a character. I mean seriously, can you imagine what milton was thinking in his little brainstorming sessions.
"Let's see, let's see, I need to write an epic, preferably about something epic.... Oh! I know! I'll write about the the battle between heaven and hell, make it 12 books long, famously ambiguous, and have the main character be Lucifer."
...
Of course some Scholars will say that the main character is the Son of God, or Adam, or just straight up God, ignore them, they're commies.
I just really liked the whole thing, I mean it just feels like epic done right. Sure the Iliad is sweet (lets go fight a ten year war over some dumb bitch!), and the Odyssey is really cool (I'm gonna wander around the mediterranean for 10 years, after spending 10 years at troy (convenient how those numbers work out, isn't it?)), or... the battle between heaven and hell that shaped the entire Christian mythos and has the origin of original sin, man getting kicked out of paradise (hence paradise lost, Milton is a clever bugger ain't he?), and Satan fighting God with cannons (I kid you not), ohh and Angels throwing mountains at each other. In short, it's a good time.
Plus we have this character, Satan. Now I know what all of you are thinking, which is how interesting could Satan be? He is after all, evil, like Darth Vader Evil, not exactly a deep and varied guy. Except that he is a deep and varied character, who leads a republican revolt against the tyranny of God, who is conflicted over his methods (Gasp!), values freedom and personal choice, and yes is a power hungry devil, but a cool one.
I liked Paradise Lost, and if you have a hankering for a 17th century epic that will most likely leave you feeling confused (and slightly disheveled) then you should pick it up.
Angels killing each other with mountains and cannons, need I say more?
Thursday, March 20, 2008
Monday, February 18, 2008
The Great Drought
I'm not sure if this is specific to Athens, or if this is a much wider spread epidemic. In either case, it sucks, like really really sucks, and desperately needs to be contained. I'm speaking, of course, of the paucity of marijuana.
It's really kind of strange to be honest. Everyone has seen that scene in Reservoir Dogs, where the undercover cop starts his "getting in the with the bad guys story." It starts of course with a weed drought. Now when I watched this scene, I always laughed. It seemed so ridiculous, no weed? Like none? Psssh, it could never happen. Too many smokers in this college town.
But here I sit, dry as a the Serengeti.
Fucked. Up.
What makes it all the stranger is simply how widespread it is. I've tried everyone, and I mean everyone I know that could possibly have a hookup. Same response, "Sorry Dude, I'm out." Which leads to one of two conclusions really. Either us potheads are far more interconnected than I previously thought we were, or something happened far up the chain. Which in turn leads to the interconnected theory.
So what happened? Why is everyone out? I'd love to be able to dissect this on any sort of sociological scale. To see how the flow of drugs moves, ebbs and flows, the reasons behind these changes in the market. I find it to be incredibly interesting, however, being at the very bottom of this pyramid, I can't see shit of what's going on.
In any case, the drought should break soon. Well, maybe not break, but I should be able to get back into the swing of things. Just in time to break in my new bubbler on my birthday no less. But I'll remember this time though, out of its simple uniqueness if nothing else.
Peace out, and good luck getting high.
It's really kind of strange to be honest. Everyone has seen that scene in Reservoir Dogs, where the undercover cop starts his "getting in the with the bad guys story." It starts of course with a weed drought. Now when I watched this scene, I always laughed. It seemed so ridiculous, no weed? Like none? Psssh, it could never happen. Too many smokers in this college town.
But here I sit, dry as a the Serengeti.
Fucked. Up.
What makes it all the stranger is simply how widespread it is. I've tried everyone, and I mean everyone I know that could possibly have a hookup. Same response, "Sorry Dude, I'm out." Which leads to one of two conclusions really. Either us potheads are far more interconnected than I previously thought we were, or something happened far up the chain. Which in turn leads to the interconnected theory.
So what happened? Why is everyone out? I'd love to be able to dissect this on any sort of sociological scale. To see how the flow of drugs moves, ebbs and flows, the reasons behind these changes in the market. I find it to be incredibly interesting, however, being at the very bottom of this pyramid, I can't see shit of what's going on.
In any case, the drought should break soon. Well, maybe not break, but I should be able to get back into the swing of things. Just in time to break in my new bubbler on my birthday no less. But I'll remember this time though, out of its simple uniqueness if nothing else.
Peace out, and good luck getting high.
Saturday, January 5, 2008
Close Combat
I was kind of bored with all of my computer games a few weeks back, so to find something new I started digging around Wikipedia. Wikipedia is great for this by the way, just type in a genre or what have you and you'll be swimming in games. So because I'm on a tactical game fixation I'm rooting around that section, and eventually end up in tactical board games. Which didn't really bother me in the slightest, obviously you can't pirate a board game (well, you might be able to, but it'd way more bother than it's worth) but if I see something I might like, I can go to my gaming store back home and they'll probably have it.
So anyway I'm on the wiki for Avalon Hill's advanced squad leader (a board game) and I see a tiny little link at the bottom for a computer game series called close combat. According to the two sentence blurb. it's based on this world war 2 themed board game. Naturally interested, I click, dig around for about a half hour, and then go to pirate bay and download all six games.
The game's wiki had mentioned that the graphics are dated, but it also said that it got great reviews for gameplay. The links at the bottom of the page confirmed that, along with a bit of independent research on my part. So when the downloading finished I fired up Daemon tools, installed it, and tried to play, thinking that'd I'd be able to jump in and have some good ol' tactical fun.
Man, was that a mistake. After playing for about five minutes and having no idea what the hell was going on I stopped the game, went back to the main menu and tried the tutorials. Which, as it turns out, are about as helpful as stepping in dog shit. So losing faith and heart I went on the game's forums and read around the newbie section. And there was this thread that had some weird title like read here before posting. So I clicked, and the very first post said something like, before asking questions, go and read your manuals! Good advice.
Seeing as I had pirated versions of the game, I naturally didn't think of this course of action. But like pretty much every other game this century, it included the manuals in .pdf form. So I read the manuals, which were really helpful as it turned out. So I fired up the game again, started the very first historical battle (the close combat version of a one map quick game) and proceeded to get my ass handed to me by the computer. Which was disappointing to say the least, but I read on the forums some more, went over the tactical help sections of the manual, and in the course of this found out a pretty important fact. If you treat your little digital people like real people, and actually use real world tactics, you'll still probably lose to the sometimes brutal AI, but you might not look like a total assmuncher.
Which brings me to an interesting point about the close combat series of games. They try and simulate real life psychological responses to combat stimuli. Which in essence means that you have to treat your dudes like real people. Unlike most RTS games, these guys wont charge a firing machine gun, or stand like numb skulls in the open while receiving heavy fire. They wont take initiative usually, but if they're getting pounded and they don't have any other orders, they'll try and change the situation sor they're not getting shot at. It's incredibly frustrating at first, because its so different from pretty much any other tactical game. But after a while you get used to it, and it makes it much more fun. You get really interesting responses too, green troops surrendering under fire, that one guy going completely apeshit and saving your ass. And in the campaign mode, where you can carry units over from mission to mission, you actually get attached to your little dudes. It's a strange feeling to be reluctant to send digital soldiers into withering machine gun fire, cause in pretty much all other games, it's taken for granted that that's what you're going to do.
What really makes the close combat games interesting though, is just the interesting stuff that happens on the battlefield. when you throw in that psychological element, it basically makes you have no fucking idea what exactly is going to happen. For example, if you take the premier world war two RTS currently, company of heroes, you can tell right off the bat what's going to happen when some infantry get surprised by a tank, namely, they're going to get trounced. Just the way it works. And that applies to pretty much every other conflict in the game, it's a very paper rock scissors kind of gameplay. Which isn't a bad thing by a longshot, I enjoy company of heroes very much, but it's not the same as close combat.
What happens in close combat depends on a number of elements, but assuming the tank just kind of appears right next to the infantry, it'll probably open up with its machine gun and turn them into hamburger, but only probably. The infantry could swarm all over the tank, drop molotov cocktails on it, and turn it into so much rubble. Or they could be scared shitless and simply run away, you never know quite what's going to happen. And that's what keeps you on the edge of your seat in these games, cause sometimes its all on the line, and you hope you gave the right orders, but it's really up to those little digital people.
For example I was playing through an operation, which is a series of linked maps where your troops carry over from mission to mission. It's a lot of fun, but anyway, I was playing as the Germans against the Russians and I was trying to take this bridge. So I had my troops hustling over it to cover on the other side and out of fucking no where this group of Russian infantry opened up on my bottlenecked guys. I any other video game they would have soldiered on taking a nasty amount of casualties, but they did what you or I or anyone would have done, they stopped dead in their tracks and hightailed back across the bridge to cover. In the next couple of minutes I called in a mortar on the enemy infantry and got my dudes across the bridge, but that was the first time I really realized I couldn't treat these guys like so much cannon fodder.
The next moment was even better in my opinion, It was a snowy map and there was this series of Russian entrenchments up on a hill. The hill had this commanding field of fire and it was surrounded by a ton of open ground, which basically meant that if my guys went near it they were gonna get nailed hardcore, but I couldn't exactly ignore it either because if I wanted to win this map, I needed to take that hill. So I positioned some infantry and a few machine guns at the bottom of the hill in some trashed buildings in my placement phase, and sure enough, machine gun and anti-tank fire comes pouring off the hill as soon as the game started. Now there really wasn't a whole lot of room for maneuver, so if I wanted to get at these guys I had to come straight at them, which was a really bad idea. So I did what any reasonable person would have done, blasted the crap out of the top of the hill with mortar fire, and dropped smoke shells right in front of the position, which gave me a fair amount of concealment. and then I rushed the hill. It was a tough fight even then, but the tension and the feeling of that moment was great. Despite the so-so graphics I felt like I could see exactly what was happening. My troops cowering in the rubble under heavy fire, the arcing mortar shells first blasting the enemy position then providing needed smoke and concealment. And then the pell-mell rush up the hill, breath frosting in the cold Russian air, carrying that super heavy equipment. Then through the smoke and right into the trenches of the suppressed enemy. The best part about that is that that moment really wasn't unique, I've had other like that since, but it just really drove home the feel of the game.
The last moment was the one that made me realize that I was going to play this game for a good long while. I had some tanks and infantry advancing through some trees towards this line of entrenchments (it was very world war one-esque map) and on my right flank this emplaced and unmovable Russian AA gun began blasting my troops with enfilade fire. Which sent most of those forward units running for the rear with a lot of casualties. So I call in some mortar fire on it and swing a few tanks around to get a good shot, but nothing is really working, it keeps on murdering my infantry and it takes out a tank to boot, which is seriously not cool, those things are expensive. So finally one of my panzers lines up this beaut of a shot, the gun is pointing 90 degrees away from it, and my tank shoots... and fucking misses. So now that nasty AA gun is swinging around and once it does, bye bye tank, which I really can't afford at this point, I still have a whole freaking line of entrenchments to break through. I'm frantically trying anything to distract it, I try calling in some mortars, but they're reloading, my infantry is cowered and I can barely get these guys moving in the right direction, let alone providing some suppressing fire. My other vehicles are obscured by the trees, which while that means the AA gun can't shoot them, they can't shoot at it either. So it's all on this tank, they're reloading their main gun and that damn AA just keeps swinging around closer and closer. Finally the AA gun lines up its shoot and boom! My tank blasts it to hell and back. It was great moment, I practically leaped up in the air. It turned out to be the turning point too, the Russians fled the map a few minutes after the AA gun got destroyed. But that is what makes this game series great, you never know what's going to happen, plus it has great realistic tactical combat. If you're interested in that kind of thing at all, and you can get past the fairly old school learning curve, you'll have a lot of fun. what more can you ask from a game?
So anyway I'm on the wiki for Avalon Hill's advanced squad leader (a board game) and I see a tiny little link at the bottom for a computer game series called close combat. According to the two sentence blurb. it's based on this world war 2 themed board game. Naturally interested, I click, dig around for about a half hour, and then go to pirate bay and download all six games.
The game's wiki had mentioned that the graphics are dated, but it also said that it got great reviews for gameplay. The links at the bottom of the page confirmed that, along with a bit of independent research on my part. So when the downloading finished I fired up Daemon tools, installed it, and tried to play, thinking that'd I'd be able to jump in and have some good ol' tactical fun.
Man, was that a mistake. After playing for about five minutes and having no idea what the hell was going on I stopped the game, went back to the main menu and tried the tutorials. Which, as it turns out, are about as helpful as stepping in dog shit. So losing faith and heart I went on the game's forums and read around the newbie section. And there was this thread that had some weird title like read here before posting. So I clicked, and the very first post said something like, before asking questions, go and read your manuals! Good advice.
Seeing as I had pirated versions of the game, I naturally didn't think of this course of action. But like pretty much every other game this century, it included the manuals in .pdf form. So I read the manuals, which were really helpful as it turned out. So I fired up the game again, started the very first historical battle (the close combat version of a one map quick game) and proceeded to get my ass handed to me by the computer. Which was disappointing to say the least, but I read on the forums some more, went over the tactical help sections of the manual, and in the course of this found out a pretty important fact. If you treat your little digital people like real people, and actually use real world tactics, you'll still probably lose to the sometimes brutal AI, but you might not look like a total assmuncher.
Which brings me to an interesting point about the close combat series of games. They try and simulate real life psychological responses to combat stimuli. Which in essence means that you have to treat your dudes like real people. Unlike most RTS games, these guys wont charge a firing machine gun, or stand like numb skulls in the open while receiving heavy fire. They wont take initiative usually, but if they're getting pounded and they don't have any other orders, they'll try and change the situation sor they're not getting shot at. It's incredibly frustrating at first, because its so different from pretty much any other tactical game. But after a while you get used to it, and it makes it much more fun. You get really interesting responses too, green troops surrendering under fire, that one guy going completely apeshit and saving your ass. And in the campaign mode, where you can carry units over from mission to mission, you actually get attached to your little dudes. It's a strange feeling to be reluctant to send digital soldiers into withering machine gun fire, cause in pretty much all other games, it's taken for granted that that's what you're going to do.
What really makes the close combat games interesting though, is just the interesting stuff that happens on the battlefield. when you throw in that psychological element, it basically makes you have no fucking idea what exactly is going to happen. For example, if you take the premier world war two RTS currently, company of heroes, you can tell right off the bat what's going to happen when some infantry get surprised by a tank, namely, they're going to get trounced. Just the way it works. And that applies to pretty much every other conflict in the game, it's a very paper rock scissors kind of gameplay. Which isn't a bad thing by a longshot, I enjoy company of heroes very much, but it's not the same as close combat.
What happens in close combat depends on a number of elements, but assuming the tank just kind of appears right next to the infantry, it'll probably open up with its machine gun and turn them into hamburger, but only probably. The infantry could swarm all over the tank, drop molotov cocktails on it, and turn it into so much rubble. Or they could be scared shitless and simply run away, you never know quite what's going to happen. And that's what keeps you on the edge of your seat in these games, cause sometimes its all on the line, and you hope you gave the right orders, but it's really up to those little digital people.
For example I was playing through an operation, which is a series of linked maps where your troops carry over from mission to mission. It's a lot of fun, but anyway, I was playing as the Germans against the Russians and I was trying to take this bridge. So I had my troops hustling over it to cover on the other side and out of fucking no where this group of Russian infantry opened up on my bottlenecked guys. I any other video game they would have soldiered on taking a nasty amount of casualties, but they did what you or I or anyone would have done, they stopped dead in their tracks and hightailed back across the bridge to cover. In the next couple of minutes I called in a mortar on the enemy infantry and got my dudes across the bridge, but that was the first time I really realized I couldn't treat these guys like so much cannon fodder.
The next moment was even better in my opinion, It was a snowy map and there was this series of Russian entrenchments up on a hill. The hill had this commanding field of fire and it was surrounded by a ton of open ground, which basically meant that if my guys went near it they were gonna get nailed hardcore, but I couldn't exactly ignore it either because if I wanted to win this map, I needed to take that hill. So I positioned some infantry and a few machine guns at the bottom of the hill in some trashed buildings in my placement phase, and sure enough, machine gun and anti-tank fire comes pouring off the hill as soon as the game started. Now there really wasn't a whole lot of room for maneuver, so if I wanted to get at these guys I had to come straight at them, which was a really bad idea. So I did what any reasonable person would have done, blasted the crap out of the top of the hill with mortar fire, and dropped smoke shells right in front of the position, which gave me a fair amount of concealment. and then I rushed the hill. It was a tough fight even then, but the tension and the feeling of that moment was great. Despite the so-so graphics I felt like I could see exactly what was happening. My troops cowering in the rubble under heavy fire, the arcing mortar shells first blasting the enemy position then providing needed smoke and concealment. And then the pell-mell rush up the hill, breath frosting in the cold Russian air, carrying that super heavy equipment. Then through the smoke and right into the trenches of the suppressed enemy. The best part about that is that that moment really wasn't unique, I've had other like that since, but it just really drove home the feel of the game.
The last moment was the one that made me realize that I was going to play this game for a good long while. I had some tanks and infantry advancing through some trees towards this line of entrenchments (it was very world war one-esque map) and on my right flank this emplaced and unmovable Russian AA gun began blasting my troops with enfilade fire. Which sent most of those forward units running for the rear with a lot of casualties. So I call in some mortar fire on it and swing a few tanks around to get a good shot, but nothing is really working, it keeps on murdering my infantry and it takes out a tank to boot, which is seriously not cool, those things are expensive. So finally one of my panzers lines up this beaut of a shot, the gun is pointing 90 degrees away from it, and my tank shoots... and fucking misses. So now that nasty AA gun is swinging around and once it does, bye bye tank, which I really can't afford at this point, I still have a whole freaking line of entrenchments to break through. I'm frantically trying anything to distract it, I try calling in some mortars, but they're reloading, my infantry is cowered and I can barely get these guys moving in the right direction, let alone providing some suppressing fire. My other vehicles are obscured by the trees, which while that means the AA gun can't shoot them, they can't shoot at it either. So it's all on this tank, they're reloading their main gun and that damn AA just keeps swinging around closer and closer. Finally the AA gun lines up its shoot and boom! My tank blasts it to hell and back. It was great moment, I practically leaped up in the air. It turned out to be the turning point too, the Russians fled the map a few minutes after the AA gun got destroyed. But that is what makes this game series great, you never know what's going to happen, plus it has great realistic tactical combat. If you're interested in that kind of thing at all, and you can get past the fairly old school learning curve, you'll have a lot of fun. what more can you ask from a game?
Tuesday, January 1, 2008
The New Year and HBO
A happy Hew Year to everybody, I hope you all enjoyed it and got royally plastered or something. Mine was fairly tame, but I did go drinking and smoking and partying and such. So I would consider it a good time, but not the blow out, end all, beat all party that New Year's is cracked up to be.
In any event, I hope everybody had a good time.
HBO
I've been borrowing Chuck's DVDs of The Sopranos for a while now, and I have to say that I really enjoy that show, its really good and all that. Despite the favorable feeling that the sopranos gives me though, I've always been slightly reluctant to watch any other of the HBO dramas. Nothing drew me to them so to speak.
Man have I had a change of opinion.
I've been watching Rome and Deadwood the past couple of days, and quite simply, I'm blown away. Rome is great, that perfect mixture of historical epic and personal human stories. I likes it a lot.
Deadwood is what has really grabbed my eye though. Just so you get a picture of how awesome it is, Imagine the best western you've ever watched. Now make make it more awesome by a factor of five, throw in really talented actors and acting, great writing, a setting that will your jaw drop in its attention to detail, and make it 36 hours long.
I love Deadwood.
I haven't finished the first season yet, and I'm thinking about posting some sort of post mortem when I do. Just to codify all the thoughts and feelings I have towards the show, but what I'll probably do is either start watching the season over again, or go and try to nab the second season from Chuck.
Incidentally, I have over a hundred pages views on this blog thingie. I have to wonder, who are you people, and what interests you here? Isn't there TV and video games to be watched and played?
Readers... I'll never understand 'em.
Later everybody, all 101 of you.
In any event, I hope everybody had a good time.
HBO
I've been borrowing Chuck's DVDs of The Sopranos for a while now, and I have to say that I really enjoy that show, its really good and all that. Despite the favorable feeling that the sopranos gives me though, I've always been slightly reluctant to watch any other of the HBO dramas. Nothing drew me to them so to speak.
Man have I had a change of opinion.
I've been watching Rome and Deadwood the past couple of days, and quite simply, I'm blown away. Rome is great, that perfect mixture of historical epic and personal human stories. I likes it a lot.
Deadwood is what has really grabbed my eye though. Just so you get a picture of how awesome it is, Imagine the best western you've ever watched. Now make make it more awesome by a factor of five, throw in really talented actors and acting, great writing, a setting that will your jaw drop in its attention to detail, and make it 36 hours long.
I love Deadwood.
I haven't finished the first season yet, and I'm thinking about posting some sort of post mortem when I do. Just to codify all the thoughts and feelings I have towards the show, but what I'll probably do is either start watching the season over again, or go and try to nab the second season from Chuck.
Incidentally, I have over a hundred pages views on this blog thingie. I have to wonder, who are you people, and what interests you here? Isn't there TV and video games to be watched and played?
Readers... I'll never understand 'em.
Later everybody, all 101 of you.
Thursday, December 27, 2007
The Influence of Media
The movie High Fidelity has an interesting line in the beginning. John Cusack sits theres with his gigantic headphones on and says: am I miserable because I listen to pop music, or do I listen to pop music because I'm miserable?
It's an interesting point, does the media we consume determine how we feel? Or does how we feel determine our choice of media? (I know it's repetitive) I don't have an answer really, I'd like to think that I alone have power over my emotions and such, but I know that isn't true. It's probably a bit of both really which is how most things like this go.
It's interesting nonetheless, and I might follow this up with some more definite observations. How much does my media influence me? A topic for time when I care.
It's an interesting point, does the media we consume determine how we feel? Or does how we feel determine our choice of media? (I know it's repetitive) I don't have an answer really, I'd like to think that I alone have power over my emotions and such, but I know that isn't true. It's probably a bit of both really which is how most things like this go.
It's interesting nonetheless, and I might follow this up with some more definite observations. How much does my media influence me? A topic for time when I care.
Monday, December 24, 2007
Christmas Eve
So I'm back in town for Christmas. It's about what I expected, fairly boring, monotonous, and occasionally I get to see an old friend. I enjoy the latter.
I'm not really sure what to say really, I haven't done a whole lot, I suppose I could relate to you some stories or something, but I doubt you'll find that in any way interesting.
Well, in any event, have a Merry Christmas....
Or I'll kick you in the nuts.
Cheers!
I'm not really sure what to say really, I haven't done a whole lot, I suppose I could relate to you some stories or something, but I doubt you'll find that in any way interesting.
Well, in any event, have a Merry Christmas....
Or I'll kick you in the nuts.
Cheers!
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
Military History and Stuff
So for those of you that aren't aware (which is an interesting thought, what's zero divided by zero? well... zero I suppose, be much cooler if it was infinity or something (which in fact it might be, you can't actually divide anything by zero, but I digress)) I'm currently reading Shelby Foote's The Civil War: A Narrative. It's a great series, a monster too, it's three books all about a thousand pages each, clocks in at about 1.2 million words. I'm currently about halfway through the second book, in the lead up to the battle of Gettysburg.
I really enjoy reading it, which is kind of strange. I've read other sorts of historical writing, and I have to tell you, despite being a history major, most of it is a chore. The only saving grace of the stuff is that I'm interested in what happens. After all, I do like history. But Foote makes it, well, engaging. He describes the leaders in detail, goes off on random descriptive tangents (he compared General Hooker's state of mind at the battle of Chancellorsville to a character in a Hemingway novel for example) talks about the battles in glorious depth, ties it all together on political and military levels, and also throws in these random stories about the events that add this great human element. For example, during the siege of Vicksburg, General Grant blew up a mine under the confederate trenches. Now ultimately, the mine didn't do anything of significance, (besides the fact that it was a military action in a historic and pivotal battle) but what it did do was blow a black slave cook through the air, and into the Union lines. This obviously, has all the historical significance of swiss cheese, but it makes for great reading.
In any event, kudos to Foote for making the Civil War readable and most of all, enjoyable. You should pick it up if you have any interest in the Civil War, just don't expect to finish it for about 6 months, I've been reading it since August or late July... can't remember when I started it exactly.
Stuff
Recently, I got bored (surprise, surprise!) and I was looking for a some sort of play by email or over the internet game, to maybe screw around with. In my searches I started to look for this game I had heard about a couple of years back, I couldn't remember any specifics, but I knew it was some kind of sci-fi tactical game, and that you could play it by e-mail. Using the amazing powers of Wikipedia and Google, I actually manged to find it. It's called Laser Squad Nemesis, and it's pretty sweet.
It's made by the same guys who created X-COM: UFO Defense, and man was that game a life sucker. I remember when I first got X-COM a few years back, I had no idea what I was in for. But to stay slightly on tangent, I'll come back to that.
Laser Squad Nemesis (LSN for short) is a futuristic tactical game, pitting four races against one another in a turn based arena. It's fairly cliche in that regard, and the story is non-existent. The sinlge player is basically a training ground for the multi player arena too. In addition, the production value on the thing is simply not there, it looks like it was made in 1996 or something. So why on earth am I talking about it?
Because the multi player rocks. It's not without problems though.
What makes it stand out is its method of turn based play. In most turn based tactical games, there's a strict I go then you go mentality. You'll see it everywhere, and while that can be fun, it most certainly doesn't take advantage of the fact that you're playing on a computer as opposed to a board. Now some games do switch it up a bit, mainly by changing it from; you move all your pieces then I move all of mine, to I move one of mine and then you move one of yours until we've moved all the pieces once; and then start over. What LSN does is give you simultaneous turns.
What I mean by that, is that you have all your units on the map and then you give them orders for the next ten seconds of play (ten seconds in the length of a turn). It fairly simple stuff usually, run up to that wall, shoot to the left if you see a bad guy, cover this zone, etc.. But what really makes it fun is that is gives this amazing element of realism to the game. Quite suddenly, real world tactics such as flanking, suppression fire, leapfrog advancement, all of it, becomes pertinent, useful, and above all, necessary. You can't really do that in a normal turn based game, the system just isn't built for it in any real kind of fashion.
Plus with the play by e-mail system, you can play on your own time. Test our your orders, plan that perfect double envelopment maneuver, and in general, just have a fun time being an armchair General.
Flaws
The Game can be hard to get a hold of at times, mainly because the production value is pretty low (I suppose you get what you pay for, it is a 17$ game). Units are hard to tell apart, the sounds and graphics leave everything to be desired, and sometimes despite your best efforts, you can't get those little buggers on screen to do what you want. In essence though, that's all superficial nonsense. I still play games from years ago, snazzy graphics do not good game play make. If you don't believe me, check out pretty much any of the lackluster big budget titles to come out the past couple of years. The thing that really gets you, is the multi player interface.
Now above, I said I like the play by email style. And I do, but it really sucks at times. And I wish they had put a couple more options in here, like maybe an option for a real time game. And yes you can do that, there is a hot seat option (no one does hot seat though, I mean come on), but I'd like to just long on to server, hop into a game, and just play for an hour or two. Instead, I have to sit around and wait for the bugger on the other end to get off his fat ass and send me his orders for the next turn. For example, I'm currently in two games, both started about 2 days ago. In one, I'm on turn five. In the other I haven't even got to move my troops yet, I set out my deployment orders and then... nothing, not a peep from the guy. Irksome, to say the least.
Now this problem is easily fixable, play with friends! At least then you can go and talk to the guy, and tell him to send his orders already. And I'm working on that angle too, but nobody gets into this stuff really. And as you can probably surmise, you have to wade through a lot of crap to get to the good stuff in this game. Who wants to do that? Well me for one, but I don't count.
Laser Squad Nemesis, a great game that has a lot of flaws.
As far as X-COM goes, I've got enough stuff to do a whole other post. So I'm going to do that sometime in the future. But to be honest, I won't say anything you haven't read or heard from everyone else who's played the game. So do a Google search, and maybe I'll talk about something else next time I feel like posting.
I really enjoy reading it, which is kind of strange. I've read other sorts of historical writing, and I have to tell you, despite being a history major, most of it is a chore. The only saving grace of the stuff is that I'm interested in what happens. After all, I do like history. But Foote makes it, well, engaging. He describes the leaders in detail, goes off on random descriptive tangents (he compared General Hooker's state of mind at the battle of Chancellorsville to a character in a Hemingway novel for example) talks about the battles in glorious depth, ties it all together on political and military levels, and also throws in these random stories about the events that add this great human element. For example, during the siege of Vicksburg, General Grant blew up a mine under the confederate trenches. Now ultimately, the mine didn't do anything of significance, (besides the fact that it was a military action in a historic and pivotal battle) but what it did do was blow a black slave cook through the air, and into the Union lines. This obviously, has all the historical significance of swiss cheese, but it makes for great reading.
In any event, kudos to Foote for making the Civil War readable and most of all, enjoyable. You should pick it up if you have any interest in the Civil War, just don't expect to finish it for about 6 months, I've been reading it since August or late July... can't remember when I started it exactly.
Stuff
Recently, I got bored (surprise, surprise!) and I was looking for a some sort of play by email or over the internet game, to maybe screw around with. In my searches I started to look for this game I had heard about a couple of years back, I couldn't remember any specifics, but I knew it was some kind of sci-fi tactical game, and that you could play it by e-mail. Using the amazing powers of Wikipedia and Google, I actually manged to find it. It's called Laser Squad Nemesis, and it's pretty sweet.
It's made by the same guys who created X-COM: UFO Defense, and man was that game a life sucker. I remember when I first got X-COM a few years back, I had no idea what I was in for. But to stay slightly on tangent, I'll come back to that.
Laser Squad Nemesis (LSN for short) is a futuristic tactical game, pitting four races against one another in a turn based arena. It's fairly cliche in that regard, and the story is non-existent. The sinlge player is basically a training ground for the multi player arena too. In addition, the production value on the thing is simply not there, it looks like it was made in 1996 or something. So why on earth am I talking about it?
Because the multi player rocks. It's not without problems though.
What makes it stand out is its method of turn based play. In most turn based tactical games, there's a strict I go then you go mentality. You'll see it everywhere, and while that can be fun, it most certainly doesn't take advantage of the fact that you're playing on a computer as opposed to a board. Now some games do switch it up a bit, mainly by changing it from; you move all your pieces then I move all of mine, to I move one of mine and then you move one of yours until we've moved all the pieces once; and then start over. What LSN does is give you simultaneous turns.
What I mean by that, is that you have all your units on the map and then you give them orders for the next ten seconds of play (ten seconds in the length of a turn). It fairly simple stuff usually, run up to that wall, shoot to the left if you see a bad guy, cover this zone, etc.. But what really makes it fun is that is gives this amazing element of realism to the game. Quite suddenly, real world tactics such as flanking, suppression fire, leapfrog advancement, all of it, becomes pertinent, useful, and above all, necessary. You can't really do that in a normal turn based game, the system just isn't built for it in any real kind of fashion.
Plus with the play by e-mail system, you can play on your own time. Test our your orders, plan that perfect double envelopment maneuver, and in general, just have a fun time being an armchair General.
Flaws
The Game can be hard to get a hold of at times, mainly because the production value is pretty low (I suppose you get what you pay for, it is a 17$ game). Units are hard to tell apart, the sounds and graphics leave everything to be desired, and sometimes despite your best efforts, you can't get those little buggers on screen to do what you want. In essence though, that's all superficial nonsense. I still play games from years ago, snazzy graphics do not good game play make. If you don't believe me, check out pretty much any of the lackluster big budget titles to come out the past couple of years. The thing that really gets you, is the multi player interface.
Now above, I said I like the play by email style. And I do, but it really sucks at times. And I wish they had put a couple more options in here, like maybe an option for a real time game. And yes you can do that, there is a hot seat option (no one does hot seat though, I mean come on), but I'd like to just long on to server, hop into a game, and just play for an hour or two. Instead, I have to sit around and wait for the bugger on the other end to get off his fat ass and send me his orders for the next turn. For example, I'm currently in two games, both started about 2 days ago. In one, I'm on turn five. In the other I haven't even got to move my troops yet, I set out my deployment orders and then... nothing, not a peep from the guy. Irksome, to say the least.
Now this problem is easily fixable, play with friends! At least then you can go and talk to the guy, and tell him to send his orders already. And I'm working on that angle too, but nobody gets into this stuff really. And as you can probably surmise, you have to wade through a lot of crap to get to the good stuff in this game. Who wants to do that? Well me for one, but I don't count.
Laser Squad Nemesis, a great game that has a lot of flaws.
As far as X-COM goes, I've got enough stuff to do a whole other post. So I'm going to do that sometime in the future. But to be honest, I won't say anything you haven't read or heard from everyone else who's played the game. So do a Google search, and maybe I'll talk about something else next time I feel like posting.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)