Vampires...

The world was recently swept with Vampire Fever. It probably started with the TV series True Blood, but it really took off through the sudden fame of the movie Twilight and subsequently the mass consumption of the books it's based on. The entertainment media has suddenly flooded with variations on the theme. New series such as Vampire Diaries (also based on books) and a Twilight board game is the first that come to mind.
But the concept of vampirism has always been present in fiction. The first would probably be Dracula, but with the sudden surge of interest all the old dogs were reawakened. Moonlight, Interview with the Vampire and Queen of the Damned, by extension Anne Rice books, the World of Darkness roleplaying system that I myself am so fond of, Vampire Knight... Suddenly vampires are no longer something to be feared, but something to be admired, adored, or even... worshipped... Why is this?

First I must state that this is written from a mostly male-vampire-to-female-human point of view. In many cases these points apply both ways, but my thinking is linear and heterosexual as I write this.

Now that it has entered the mass media, why does every other person find vampires so attractive? In many cases there's nothing special about them save for the fact that they drink blood. I think it is the element of mystery. People are afraid of what they don't understand, but they are excited and intrigued by the knowledge that there is something they don't understand. The same way you love rollercoasters even though they make you fear for your life. The risk is a rush.

Beside this stands the fact that these popularised vampires are elegant, sophisticated beings. They are the embodiment of suave. Usually they are financially secure to the point that it becomes difficult to judge their net worth. They have a strong lineage and family traditions. Their family and their loyalty towards it is of utmost importance. Essentially they appeal to everything our culture defines as a perfect partner. We find them attractive because they are, in all aspects of society, your key to a comfortable lifestyle.

But what about the fact that they can't go into the sunlight? First let me mention that for the sake of storytelling this detail is often skewed. Some can walk in sunlight for short periods but it makes them violently ill (Moonlight), others have certain artifacts that make them immune to the effects of sunlight (Vampire Diaries), others are quite comfortable under indirect sunlight, but suffer negative effects when exposed to direct sunlight (sparkling characteristic from Twilight). But the aversion to sunlight has a purpose: It shows a weakness. It is difficult to believe that a creature of such magnitude and strength can be brought down by something we find so commonplace that most of the time we barely notice it.

Not only do they attract us in their physical appearance, their strong personalities and financial or social fortunes, they also display a weakness, which our maternal and paternal instincts pick up on. We want to help the weak.

Last point I'm going to ponder on is the concept of immortality. Vampires live forever save for certain extreme conditions (fire, decapitation, sunlight etc). We find them attractive because we fear death and they provide something that can save us from this inevitable unknown.

So as a closing argument, when my friends swoon over a vampire character of some sort, I let them. There's nothing we committed companions can do to stop it. On a purely evolutionary level we are outclassed. Luckily these characters are simply that, fictional beings. All we can do is wait for the infatuation to end...





Words:
"There comes a time for every vampire when the idea of eternity becomes momentarily unbearable. Living in the shadows, feeding in the darkness with only your own company to keep, rots into a solitary, hollow existence. Immortality seems like a good idea, until you realize you're going to spend it alone."
- The Vampire Chronicles: The Vampire Lestat, Anne Rice

Board Games

When I say board game the first thing that popped into your head is probably Scrabble or Monopoly. Though these are both brilliant games, it's not nearly an accurate description of the phrase. Before computers, TV or even radio, board games were one of the most enjoyed indoor pastimes. Some board games have prevented all-out war between nations. Some games have remained unchanged for millennia. And still today board games are a popular pastime in the slightly-less-than-mainstream circles, global sales climbing 23.5% in 2008.

Broadly speaking you can split board games into a few categories, which I'll cover one at a time.

Abstract

These games tend to focus on strategy more than story. Almost everyone can play Chess to some degree, but it's not nearly the only game of its kind. A personal favourite of mine is Go, a Japanese game that evokes the same strategic thinking as Chess but with far simpler rules and a certain degree of elegance that few games can achieve. Another 2-player game I enjoy is Mancala, an old African/Asian game of moving marbles or stones around little pots. For its simplicity in rules there is some amazing strategic depth.

Party Games

It happens every so often that I would be hanging out with friends and a bottle or two of wine, and someone would say "Hey let's play 30 Seconds!" This is a typical party game. Easy to learn, fun to play, with little downtime between turns. Another good example is Clue (I still have a copy called Cluedo, when it was British). Party games tend to finish in under an hour, before it becomes repetitive.

Family Games

Games that are easy to learn and easy to play, and often don't require quite as much strategy. Good examples would be Boggle, Scrabble and Upwords (pictured above). Most family games also make good party games, such as Pictionary.

Eurogames

This is where I got into board games. Eurogames derive the title from the fact that the first games of this style came from Germany and became very popular very quickly. The games tend to have a basic back story to give context and theme, but what makes them most intriguing is that each game has a unique gameplay mechanic that is found in very few other games if any. The most famous eurogame is Settlers of Catan, but Carcassonne, Ticket To Ride (links to video review) and the newcomer Dominion are all worth a mention.

Fantasy Games
These games sacrifice simplistic rules for depth of story and intense scenarios. The games tend to play longer (2-6 hours) and have a very thematic style, usually fantasy but sometimes based on a TV series or game. I wouldn't recommend these games to the beginning board gamer, but if you've played Magic: The Gathering or some form of roleplaying such as D&D you'll fit right in here. Actually, the World of Warcraft game is quite popular... My friends and I have been playing Runebound (pictured above), which is an RPG in board game form. There's also a game for Battlestar Gallactica that many people are raving about.

Wargames

Warning: Only for the hardcore. These games typically take months of buying units, painting them and researching combat strategies. The rules are complex enough to emulate real-life warfare. If you enjoy RTS games you can try this, but it's not for the beginner or even intermediate player, and you'll need quite a bit of cash to get started. The most famous in this genre is Warhammer 40,000 (pictured above). There are also boardgames that give the same type of combat style without the hassle of amassing an army, though the games can still take a few hours to play. I would recommend HeroScape(very pretty) or Warriors of God.

So to conclude, I believe there's a board game out there for everyone. And once you're hooked you'll keep looking for something "the same but different", that will slowly introduce you to the wonderful world of board games. Places to go for more information would be BoardGameGeek, Board Games With Scott and The Dice Tower.

What board games do you enjoy? Comments welcome.

Musicality And Everyday Life

I don't know a single person that doesn't listen to music in some form, whether it's the iPod in your pocket, on the radio or going to clubs. But music has benefits other than providing a backtrack to your daily life.

I'm a musician. I live for my music and I've noticed over the last few months that a sense of musicality helps you in an everyday capacity. You learn rhythm, timing, pitch... You even learn to listen.

Let's start with the basics. If you play an instrument you learn rhythm. This is an invaluable skill when you learn to dance, but is also handy in things like modelling, where you want even, smooth steps. You also learn to predict things more accurately. "1, 2, 3!" If counted at regular intervals, everyone knows when 3 is going to land because the gap between 1 and 2 is the same as 2 and 3.

Timing. The first example I can think of is knowing how long it'll take for a traffic light to change. It's an internal sense of how long things take to happen. It prevents you from jumping the gun, running a red light that changes moments later. It even helps comedians to pause for the exact length of time for comedic effect.

Pitch. If you can play an instrument you can tell when something changes pitch. Did you know that a flat tyre makes a lower sound than a properly inflated tyre? A glass or mug with a chip also produces a different sound.

And this brings me to my last point. You learn to listen. When you study music, they often let you listen to a song and pick out specific instruments or sounds. This skill is handy in all kinds of ways. I've been able to work out what's wrong with my car simply from the sounds it makes. Speaking of cars, I've saved myself from getting run over twice because I heard a car approaching behind me, even through the noise of other cars.

When I was younger, watching TV, I would often turn off the sound and listen for the sounds my mom were making in the house, then guess what she was doing. It was a fun game, but it taught me of the little sounds everyday objects make.

Computers also make sounds. When I sit in bed with my laptop, I sometimes position it in a way that cuts off the airflow into the machine, but withing a few seconds I would notice the hum kick in of the internal fan trying to keep the thing cool, and I know it's suffocating. You can hear the hard drive in a computer churning when it's copying things. When you think the machine has frozen you tend to panic and start pressing buttons. "But wait, the hard drive is still churning. Maybe it's just busy." And invariably it wakes back up when it's done with whatever it was doing.

Besides being a backtrack to your life, music is a skillset. I use my musicality on a daily basis and I'm very thankful to my parents for affording me every opportunity available to develop it.





Words:
"Seriously, we should give up on the idea of anything mainstream because pop culture has splintered into a thousand things and will never be put back together."
-Robert Ashley, guest on Gamers with Jobs Conference Call Ep 126

Encyclopedia?

I don't even remember when I first heard of Wikipedia, but in the last year it's become a part of every net-user's daily life. When you wonder about something, you go to Wikipedia. I've even got a shortcut to it on my phone's home page.

Why? Because it's reliable. Contrary to a certain spoof video (funny even though I disagree with it) the facts are almost always straight. For every user posting random information there is a hundred users correcting it and providing citations to support it. Wikipedia is famous because it's accurate, and it's accurate because it's famous. I've seen pages updated within literally minutes of something happening. Where else would you get this kind of information?

That's exactly my point. Without Wikipedia, where would we get our information? From a hard-copy encyclopedia that's incorrect the moment the editors are done with it? With the coming of the "Data Age", as I like to call it, internet access (and by extension access to information) is available almost anywhere. Are we leaving behind the encyclopedia? Is the process of validating information for print too slow for our needs?

Many blogs operate on the First Post principle. As soon as they catch wind of a rumour, they publish it on their blog. It's the internet. You can always go back and update it when you have more information, but the prestige of being the first publication to announce something makes it a risk worth taking. In a way Wikipedia is the same. As soon as something happens, a user thinks "I probably need to put that on the page" and off they go. If it's incorrect, another user (or the same user) will go and correct it. Because of this, you can go check how many people watched the last episode Lost, literally hours after broadcast.

So is Wikipedia the ultimate and only? No. Why is it the sole source of information on the internet, even maybe the world (because even newspapers now cite it as reference)? Because it provided the right service at exactly the right time. The problem with the internet was, yes there's all the information you will ever need, but are you going to sift through pages of search results pointing to news articles and rumour blogs to find what you're looking for? Wikipedia gives a single point of contact for information, which is then presented with definitions and basic information first, filtering into detail as you read.

As with everything, there is competition, other companies doing the same thing. Google launched Knol. It's essentially Wikipedia, but articles are based on topics and theses rather than defining a concept, and are supposed to be written by an expert in the field. There are some good articles, but when I want to know what films Stanley Kubrick(yes it's linked to the Wikipedia page) made, I'm not going to find it on Knol.

About now I usually make my closing argument. This time it's easy. To write this article, I opened Wikipedia 12 times to check references. That's all you need to know.

Also, if you're the type of person that gets involved in high science arguments over a few drink(happens every weekend), Wikipedia and a cell phone that can access it is an essential part of winning an argument.

Words:

Picture this time...

Smell

How often do you use your nose? Whatever your answer, it's not enough. The world is full of smells. Good and bad smells. Smell can tell you something about your environment that you could never see with your eyes. And my favourite part of using my nose is the memories.

I read once that smell is the sense that connects easiest with memories. For example:

The other day I passed a colleague in the hall and had a sudden flashback of my first job after college. The reason for this was her perfume, the same as that first boss' wife.

When I walk into the men's room at work I'm always reminded of being drunk. Not any specific instance (there aren't very many), just the overall feeling of having had too much to drink. I always go to the bathroom to drink water when I've had too much alcohol, so my brain made a link.

One of my best friends works for Aromatic Apothecary, among other things. Many evenings we all get together for coffee and the entire room would be filled with a complex mixture of incense and oils emanating from her clothes. It makes for quite an olfactory adventure.

Restaurants always carry the most amazing smells. You become hungry simply walking into the place.

And of course nature. Walking between the car and the shop sometime last week, I picked up on a most amazing scent. I mentioned it, and was shown a pine tree growing across the road in a field. That's it. A single tree. It was lovely.

Often I can smell the rain coming. There's a pressure in the atmosphere but my nose screams of fresh water. A storm is coming.

For the last two weeks everything smells of burning wood. It's not a nice smell. It's a warning. Animals tend look around, work out the direction of the threat, and move to somewhere safe. Even my two rats stand up in their cage when there's a fire coming.

I've completely lost the plot that this article almost never had. It's more a musing than a train of thought. I hope it makes you use your nose a bit more...

TV and Plugs

I first noticed it with Mythbusters. "We didn't only perform these tests. To see what else we got up to, go to your website on..."

It's a plug, like so many others. It's been there for ages. But ever since the internet can handle video, they've been hinting at further content. During season 4 of Battlestar Galactica the same thing happened, but they hinted that there are further scenes. Time Warp says that they performed more experiments than they can put in the disappointingly short show, which is quite believable.

However: At what point do they start depriving from the television episodes to bring traffic to their website? It's all fine if they put deleted scenes on the website, but did they purposefully cut those scenes from the episode to generate traffic to their website? Are they important? Are you still getting the full impact of the show if you don't go watch that part online?

It makes sense to drive people to your website. After all, when you have them there, you can sell stupid merchandise to them such as actual Cylon toasters.

What about webisodes? Battlestar Galactica had several seasons of between-television-season episodes. In my opinion the shows didn't greatly impact the way you interpret the next season, but are they a part of the story? Or simply fan fiction with publicity? All they really did was show a little more depth of the situation leading into the next season, to whet the apetite of a prospective audience. 

I think it's fine to have extra footage on the website, as long as it sticks by one of two conditions: The footage is not an integral part of the show, or is included on the box set upon release. When you buy the set, you want everything. In five years' time when you feel nostalgic, you won't be able to find those webisodes again.

We must be wary of this trend. I fear the day I watch Survivor and at the end of the show they say "To see who gets voted off, go to our website". It would mean the end of television as we know it...

Words:
This will be my first post without a relevant quote at the bottom. However, I read this during the week and found it funny:
"Last night I stayed up late playing poker with Tarot cards. I got a full house and four people died"
-Stephen Wright

Docs...

When I say I'm heavy on my shoes, I mean it. I get up in the morning, shower, dress, put on my shoes, and that's where they stay till I get into bed at night. The shoes I wear must go where I go, do what I do. If I want to walk 20 km up Buitengracht street, they take me there. If I want to break into a sprint across a wet field my shoes have to get me to the other side. If I want to stand my ground in a mosh pit I need something to keep me rooted to the floor.

I buy one pair of shoes and wear them until they fall apart. I don't want to waste time deciding which shoes to wear today. Foot goes in, tug on laces, maybe a knot, and off I go into the urban jungle.

On average my shoes last two or three months before they give up. It needs to be strong, comfortable and especially affordable. They will break. I will need to replace them. I can't afford the most expensive shoes every time. I've also figured out that shoes with ankle support is a better idea for me, so that's a requirement aswell.

I tried Converse All Star Hi-tops for a while. Though they are comfortable shoes they don't last very long and get dirty unbelievably quickly. Caterpillar shoes are strong but just don't fit the shape of my feet (slim at the heal, wide at the toes. Fighter's feet, I'm told...) Then one day I decided to try a pair of Doc Martens.

I bought the 8-up laced design. It had the ankle support I needed without being too complicated to lace up every time. I was told to buy them tight. Because it's made of leather they will stretch to fit my feet. The first two days I wore them around the house in the evenings but couldn't bring myself to give up the biker boots I was practically living in at the time.

After two weeks the leather had settled. These were officially the most comfortable shoes I had ever owned. As my foot slipped in it felt like one hand grasping the other. It was like a hug from a loved one, it fit that good. These shoes did literally everything I needed them to. The soles were flexible without being soft. They were a soft walk but I could still feel the road under my feet. The shoes are narrow enough to fit between the car's peddles (manual gearbox thank you) but wide enough to keep my balance when sprinting through crowds on a busy street.

These shoes are cool when it's hot. They keep my feet warm when it's cold. There's no pair of shoes I would rather wear.

I sit typing this with, you guessed it, those same docs on my feet. I forget exactly when I bought them but I'm sure it's been over a year now. The leather looks a bit tarnished but nothing a coat of leather food won't fix. The soles are still solidly part of the shoe thanks to this bright yellow stitching. There's a few indications of the underside thinning but nothing to cause worry.

I understand why these shoes have become such a staple of durability. It's obvious why they've become so famous in 50 years. Very few products are so famous that they make the brand. Moleskine. Converse. Ford. Boeing. Dr Martens.

"The boots and shoes have been especially popular among skinheads, punks, grungers and members of a few other youth subcultures."

-Wikipedia

So why are these shoes so popular in the frowned-upon part of society? I have no idea. We were at a gig last night(pirate party, Strident played) and I can distinctly remember twenty (yes 20) people wearing classic black docs in varying heights. And if you ask any of them, they will never buy another pair of shoes. If those broke, they'd replace them with the same.

It's inexplicable. Docs have become a part of the culture. It's an item of recognition. "So where did you buy your docs?" is a perfectly valid pickup line.

I think the answer is relatively simple: It's a really good, inexpensive, easy to care for pair of shoes. They are so simple, there's nothing that can go wrong with them.

As with any niche-market product, it has become increasingly difficult to find docs in South Africa. I fear the day these finally give out on me. Maybe I should try going barefoot for a while...

Words:
"There is no shortage of guys picking up guitars and trying to get chicks."
-Gamers with Jobs Conference Call Ep 121

Puzzles

When last did you build a jigsaw puzzle?

Can you even remember? It's something our parents did. Or not even. Maybe you remember visiting your grandmother's house and there was an uncompleted puzzle on the dining table. But why don't we see puzzles anymore?

Because kids play computer games and consoles, that's why. You even get jigsaw puzzle games! I've said many times that I am a gamer. I'm not ashamed of it. But I know you can't spend your entire life behind a monitor. Use your hands for once!

Puzzle building has some very important skills to teach, the most obvious ofwhich is pattern recognition and being able to notice a part of something even when presented seperate from the whole. It also improves hand-eye coordination, dexterity and visual memory.

Then there are secondary skills you learn, like planning:

If you're searching for a specific piece but can't find it, maybe you should try building around that piece and getting some more imformation on its shape, or leave it for the time being and try somewhere else. Sometimes you can gather all the pieces that "look like sky" to narrow down your search. That's problem-solving right there!

It also destresses because you can calmly sit and scan the pieces for the one you're looking for. And it's addictive. When you keep finding a piece every few minutes, whole afternoons can fly by. Every time you find a piece it feels like you're getting somewhere and you only need a few more.

Not to mention the amazing artwork. This picture is the puzzle we just finished. When you first look at it you think "but it's all the same colour!". It's not. The clouds in the sky are smooth, the sea is rough. The ghost ship is a very distinct white. Even the lace on her dress allows you to find similar pieces.

I bought my mom a world globe puzzle a year back. Yes, the puzzle is three-dimensional. I've also seen some interesting games made from puzzles. My aunt has a puzzle that doesn't have a picture on the box. It's a murder mystery. You read the little story of how the people came to be in the house, heard the gunshot and found the body. Then the puzzle is the crime scene and as you build you discover the killer's identity.

Jigsaw puzzles are extremely underrated as a pastime. I think everyone should have at least one puzzle in their house at all times, even if you never build it, your children or friends might. And as soon as they do you'll be hooked. Puzzles are cheap in comparison to other games, and will keep you entertained for much longer than a stupid DVD...

Words:
“There are no extra pieces in the universe. Everyone is here because he or she has a place to fill, and every piece must fit itself into the big jigsaw puzzle.”

-Deepak Chopra

Boredom

When I think back to my childhood (when I was about 13), the first thing I think of is the stupid stuff we got up to during summer holiday. Spending hours outside, walking from friend's house to friend's house, getting into trouble as often as humanly possible... Good times were had.

But why did we do this? Why did we mess around for days on end? Because we were bored. We had nothing to do.

A decade later, I have no time to do the things I want to. I realise that this is partly because I now have a job, but if I look purely at the list of things I want to get to, there's ten times more stuff on my list. When I was a kid, we entertained ourselves. We made stuff up. We pretended. These days, you don't have to imagine. If you want a fantasy story, you play a game with a fantasy story in it. If you want to pretend to race around, you go to the carts track and race.

In my day, we built soap box racers. I think I'm one of the last generations to actually do this. You didn't just get in and press the win button with your foot. You actually designed the thing, planned it out, built it, tested it. And when you ended up in a ditch you learnt from the experience and did it better next time.

Kids these days can buy their "soap box racer" at the store. It's plastic. It's made in a factory. And it comes with seatbelts and airbags, because heaven forbid you actually hit something and got hurt. And if somehow you did manage to get hurt, your parents sue the living daylights out of the manufacturor.

How sad is that? That you can't even get hurt anymore. It's an integral part of childhood!

Here's what scares me: Writers use their imagination to create worlds for their readers. Their imaginations are vivid because they played in the garden when they were a kid. They made stuff up. When the children of this generation grow up... where will their inspiration come from? Will they simply derive their stories from the stories they've read before? Will they base it on the inherintly crappy stories in games?

Are we the cause of imagination's extinction?

You don't have to imagine you're a jedi, running around with a broomstick going "woooooom! wooom!". You just play the Star Wars game. Don't get me wrong, the games are great. But at some point kids need to put down the game and actually use their brain.

Be creative. Try to solve problems. Get it wrong. Get hurt. This is how you learn. This is how you discover what it's like to lose. This is what shapes your future. Live it.

Words:
"1000 times I have accepted the drudge work and delivery jobs and assassination requests and diplomatic missions and more for every random person I've met in the game. And yet, I get resentful every time my wife asks me to take out the trash. Something is not right here. And while I'd love to ponder it more, I really do have to get back to the game now. Oh wait, no---I'm at work! Shit!"
-Jeff Green

With Vilest Worms To Dwell

If you've played PC games, there are two games that you will know of. Even if you haven't played them yourself, you know of them. The first on is easy: The Sims. The second one I'm sure you won't guess, but you will recognise it.

My first experience of Worms was when I was 11. I got Worms Reinforcements for Christmas and my two cousins and I played staight through the night until the sun came up. 

What intrigued me about the game was its learning curve. You scale to the game, instead of the game scaling to you. I know it sounds backwards, but allow me to explain: Generally when you play a game they start you out with simple challenges so you can learn the ropes. Then they slowly step up the difficulty so that you're always challenged. In Worms, the game mechanics stay exactly the same. But as you get to know the weapons and how they work, you start making more daring moves, often risking the life of your own worm in pursuit of the enemy. Of course you can scale the abilities of your opponents, and which weapons are allowed when, but how the weapons function and how you use them never changes.

And the most important fact of the game: No matter what weapons you have or how devestating their effect, your enemy can always take you down with a bazooka and a grenade. Because these weapons require time to master. To throw a grenade halfway across the map into a hole no wider than the grenade itself is a feat very few can achieve. And bazooka rounds are affected by the wind, allowing you to shoot around corners! 

What's best of all, is that the game is turn-based. You only need a single computer, a single set of controls, and a single copy of the game to enjoy it with friends. This post came about when we had the idea of playing on the projector. 3 meter wide total wormage!  

The version we're playing is Worms Armageddon (cover pictured below), and is my personal favourite of the series. Even though the game came out in 2001, it runs perfectly on Windows XP and Windows Vista. And the ability to set any resolution means you can play in HD. Later versions of the game became 3D, making it more modern in concept but harder to aim and shoot as effectively as the original 2D game. It also means having to use the mouse and keyboard much more. When we play on the projector, I map the keys to my Rumblepad so we can pass it around easier.

I would urge anyone to try this game, or its many derivative works, for themselves. Links listed on the wikipedia page. And don't worry about violence. It's cartoony graphics. I've seen Road Runner cartoons with more violence.





Words:
"So if reality gets in the way of fun, fun wins."
-Gamers With Jobs Conference Call, Episode 111