Web Clips for 7/1/09

Sorry about my recent infrequent posting, work is sucking up a bit more time than normal, Bobbicus seems to be picking up the slack, though. And I'll be getting off my ass as soon as I can. Anyway. Love Letters From Dick. The RPS review of Arma 2, I'm intrigued. You know FMyLife (if not then here), now check out MyLifeIsAverage.

PC Gaming is dead!

Yeah, like I said before, anyone who says this can safely be disregarded, as they are either a blithering idiot that mindlessly repeats whatever the internet tells them or they have a serious problem with cognitive thinking. PC gaming is going to be thriving for as long as PC's exist, plain and simple. I'm not talking about flash games and bejeweled clones, either. Yes, PC gaming has lost market shares and revenue to consoles. Yes, major developers like Epic have ditched their PC roots for consoles. Yes, many bigger budget titles are being developed cross platform. Many people bemoan this as the decline of PC games, I see it as a good thing. That's right, large developers leaving the PC platform is good. You see, when all the companies who are chasing the dollars of the mainstream have left, that leaves the companies who make games because, you know, they like to make games. Stardock, Valve, TaleWorlds, Zero-Point software, 3000 Ad; all these companies are based around creating games that they want to play, and getting funding from other people who enjoy those types of games. It's no coincidence that all these companies are self-published - so the business decisions are being made by people who actually know the business, and not a bunch of suits obsessed with fellating shareholders. I can't stand Darek Smart's games. They're clunky, obtuse, buggy as hell, and visually unappealing. Yet I think it's awesome that he can continue to fund and produce games that he enjoys, because other people enjoy his games enough to finance them. Now, these markets have always been there, and they would thrive even without consoles drawing away the money chasers. Still, the fact remains that games are an expensive media, and large publishers have more marketing dollars than anyone else, meaning that many great titles have been lost in a sea of dog turds. Now, most of the dog turds are going to the consoles, giving smaller developers some breathing room. So now, PC gaming isn't dying. It's losing alot of fat. Just like in people, this weight loss means a happier, healthier industry.

*Insert trend here* is Dead!

This happens every so often. A journalist will come crawling out of the woodwork, spot a product going into a decreasing trend, and crow about how desktop computers are dead or something else equally as idiotic. I don't know if it's just an attempt to grab page hits or the writer genuinely not having a basic grasp of economics (or reality,) but it's quite depressing to see an article like that get any attention. Really, the writer of that article should be gently shushed and led into an isolated room where he cannot embarrass himself further. Desktops aren't dead. PC Gaming isn't dead. There's a difference between "no longer dominant" and "dead." Desktops have lost a large chunk of the market to laptops, but the thing is, desktops never actually "owned" that demographic. My mom, for example, has owned two desktops and two laptops. She basically uses a computer for email, to look up directions, news, or other information on the internet, and to store pictures from her camera and email them to people. That's it. She gets on it maybe 5-6 times a day for a few minutes at a time. A few years down the line, when the computer is old, slow, and the cheap hardware starts to fail, she buys a new one. Most computer users are like my mom. Most computer users have always been best served by a laptop. So these massive sales decreases don't represent the decline of the desktop, they represent the desktop losing a market that it got by default because there wasn't any competition. A desktop is superior to a laptop in almost every way (the one area it loses out on is convenience and portability.) A desktop will be faster, cooler (in the temperature sense,) cheaper, and longer lasting than a comparative laptop - especially if it is built from scratch. If you do more than two or three hours of work at a computer a day in one place, you are better served by a desktop. The difference between 5400 rpm and 7200 rpm won't bother my mom, but someone working for extended periods will. And that's not even bringing 10000 rpm drives into account. Second, dual monitors have been shown to produce a large increase in productivity. If you're plugging your laptop into dual monitors all the time, you're basically using a gimped desktop with none of the advantages of a laptop. Finally, little boosts like cheaper ram, faster processor, and a better videocard all might not make a huge difference, but it adds up to a significantly smoother experience when you're at your computer longer than a half hour. There's also the economics of it. Americans can afford to buy a replacement computer every few years. Most of the rest of the world can't. I can double my desktop's processor speed and add two more cores for $200 - and that's before I overclock it (which I can do because of my large heatsinks and well-ventilated case.) I can spend about $50 a year to keep my desktop cutting edge. I don't even need to buy peripherals more than once, because my monitor, mouse, keyboard, and speakers are going to last me at least 5 more years. So desktops aren't dead. They've just stopped serving a market that didn't really want them in the first place. Desktops are going to be around far longer than the self-important journalists who prophesize their demise, at any rate. I own a desktop and a netbook, because each plays to it's strengths. The netbook is portable, the desktop powerful, and neither is going to die out anytime soon.

Web Clips for 6/30/09

Things on a White Background.

Gizmodo says the desktop PC is dead, I say lies. Interesting (if a little flamey) discussions nonetheless.

Basic speed reading principles.

Lulz of the Time

 

Be vewy vewy quiet, I'm hunting Decepticons.

Web Clips for 6/29/09

A fake Green Lantern trailer.

Disney was (is?) a tad sexist.

Wikipedias enormous list of music genres.

Even more Firefox Wallpapers.

Web Clips for 6/28/09

Some Call of Duty 4 fan ramblings.

Keyboards need a revamp, but nobody wants change.

Facebook is way too important.

Coping with Michael Jacksons death? NSFW.

Lesser Known Firefox Extensions: Add to Search Bar

The Firefox search bar comes with the ability to search google and a bunch of other sites in a pull down menu, making it quick and easy to search. But what if you'd like to add another site to the search bar? Well, you're out of luck.

UNLESS of course, you have the Add to Search Bar Firefox extension, which lets you add any site with a search box to the Firefox search bar. Just visit the site you'd like to add, right click the search box, and (as pictured) just select the Add to Search Bar option. Really comes in handy for all those sites you frequent often. a couple of suggestions being Mininova, The Pirate Bay, ixQuick, WolframAlpha, any blog you frequent, anything really.

A simple and effective extension that does what it says and saves time. Add to Search Bar

Lulz of the Time

 

You're not fooling anyone.

Web Clips for 6/27/09

Old-but-still-good article on frames per second in different media.

Left 4 Dead fan art here and here. And a L4D Dawn of the Dead mod.

Play some desktop blues.

Some good ol' Bartlet pwnage.

Articles and things coming.

Web Clips for 6/26/09

This reminded me of this. It's funny as hell, Watch the video, "You're gonna be slapping your troubles away"

Internet Explorer 8 propaganda. sad really.

You can now get Battlefield Heroes for free.

Zefrank is back.

Web Clips for 6/25/09

A really great article from Edge on Metacritics effect on the game industry. Really a must-read.

Apparently, as well as being a great multiplayer platform, the N64 claims the greatest game of all time.

Resist the urge to click in this innovative interface.

Lulz of the Time

You've probably seen it, but it never ceases to amuse: Don't ask for help on the internet.

Web Clips for 6/24/09

A drunk Russian guy survived a five story fall, twice.

The funny web series Actors.

Awesome classic prorec article about LOUDER IS BETTER. Long, but very informative and worth the read.

A fun way to browse nature photography, photo mosaic style.

Nintendo 64: The Best Multiplayer Console?

So, full disclosure, I've only ever personally owned two video game consoles: one was the Sega Master System II (which maybe I'll talk about later), and the other was the Nintendo 64. I personally haven't felt the need to invest in any other console since. But unfortunately, last year all of my games and controllers for my N64 were stolen (bummer right?) and I've been unable to play my precious since.

But this summer I've been going through the process of re-buying my peripherals and library of games (and probably picking up a few new ones), because I will be providing the N64 goodness in the living room of an on-campus house come fall semester (which I'm mad exited about). Though I'm not here to ramble on about the N64 being the best console ever (I would never make a claim like that, because it's basically all personal preference/ dependent on the games). Though I do think each console has its strengths and weaknesses, and where the N64 really shines, is multiplayer. Here's why:

~~First off, the hardware, It's designed to work well with multiple people:

~There's four plugs for controllers by default, which is way more convenient than the PS1/2 or any predecessor. Sure, you could buy an adapter, but it's just much more convenient to have four player capability from the get-go. It also means that most games had four player multiplayer support, and developers spent more time refining the multiplayer component.

~The controllers, while a little odd, were pretty damn durable (unless you played a lot of mario party), easy to clean after nights of Mario and Pizza, and introduced some great innovations like joysticks, trigger buttons, and expansion slots. The controller ports also were secure enough, but popped out easily with a good yank, meaning the N64 was immune to overly exited moments, and tripping over the wire wouldn't send the console flying off of the shelf.

~The cartridge system is optimized for multiplayer games. While there were technical disadvantages in the form of small storage size, resulting in stretched, low-res textures (though this was offset by the N64's graphics chip, which was capable of trilinear filtering, making textures smooth). For multiplayer they were awesome. First, cartridges can't be scratched accidentally, and while there were issues (who's never needed to blow on a cartridge?), on the whole they were much more durable than pretty much any other media. They're also much faster, meaning almost zero loading times. Who wants to wait to start up some Smash Brothers or Goldeneye? Not me. Also, the small storage size is much more fitting for a simple multiplayer racing game or fighter rather than a single player epic with large levels or an expansive RPG.

~~Second, It's all in the games, Fu. Let's check out some real multiplayer gems: 

~Super Smash Brothers:

This game redefined the fighter and possibly multiplayer gameplay. The physics of the original stand out to me as being much better than its successors. There's not as many characters as the other games, but damn the original is hard to beat in sheer multiplayer fun. There was a ton of different modes, as well as the ability to fight on a team. The items were fun and varied. I don't think there's any gamer who can't give you a long and hilarious anecdote about a night filled with the original Smash Brothers.

~Goldeneye 007/Perfect Dark:

As well as being genre-defining single player classics, Goldeneye and Perfect Dark had insanely fun multiplayer FPS action. Whether it's the satisfaction (or frustration) from blowing someone up with a proximity mine in the library in Goldeneye, or the shared sense of success that comes with ganging up to defeat that PerfectSim in Perfect Dark, both of these were solid contenders for hours of multiplayer fun.

Mario Kart 64:

The N64 really excels in racers, and Mario Kart 64 is no exception. Featuring a ton of new game modes as well as full 3d environments, four players, and a whole slew of changes that really solidified the franchise, Mario Kart 64 is a blast.

~StarFox 64:

This game is a tad debatable, as it's primarily a single player game, but the multiplayer is certainly nothing to laugh at. Four players can duke it out in the Arwing aircraft, the Landmaster tank, or as a character on foot, with a bazooka. The single player is also really fun to watch, has a lot of replay value, and is pretty short. The levels are short enough to alternate between people. Not all games need to be the centerpiece of the party, and this is where Starfox 64 really excels.

~San Francisco Rush 2049:

Futuristic rocket cars WITH WINGS? Check. Highly detailed futuristic version of San Francisco? Check. Awesome multiplayer race modes? Hellz yea check. Rush 2049, as well as enjoying great success in the arcades, had a whole slew of great ways to play in the home. One of my favorites was battle mode, which put you against up to 3 other players in a large map filled with tons of different weapons including rockets, lasers, gatling guns, and sonic blasters, which sent out a shockwave of sound that killed anything within a general area. There's also stunt mode, where players drive around a map filled with ramps, and use their wings to pull tricks and score points. The more insane the stunt, the more points received. There's a slew of customization options, parts and colors for every car. A racing game that really has a ton of great features for every type of racing fan.

~Pokemon Stadium: Sure now it's a little dated, but this game isn't any less fun. And don't forget all of the awesome pokemon-themed mini-games that can be played by up to four people. There's the Ratatat race, the Sandshrew dig competition, Ekans throwing, and a ton of other awesome fun games. The main battle is no multiplayer slouch either, enabling anyone to battle eachother's pokemon. Who doesn't love to see their pokemon battle in full 3D, with a huge crowd cheering them on and the announcers awesome cheesy lines: "Oh it's Charizard!" "But is it down and out!?" and straight from the game boy: "Critical hit! It's Super Effective" Nowadays everyone's got thier old red/blue cartridges lying around with all level 100 pokemon. Well put them to the test!

~Mario Party: A true party video game consisting of 50 mini-games. Mario Party is not only accessible to everyone, but really, really fun. It's led to 7 sequels, and for good reason. There's something for everyone in Mario Party. Be careful, though, the mini-games tend to be hard on your controller. That's mostly because people tend to get really into them.

~Destruction Derby 64: A greatly enhanced version of it's PlayStation counterpart, Destruction Derby 64 is, again, not your typical racer, there's a ton of game modes, including the unique "bomb tag." Bomb tag starts off with up to four players, and several NPCs. There's one "bomb" that can be passed from player to player by crashing into eachother. Hold on to the bomb to score points, but too long, and you'll explode. There's also straight, last-car-standing, destruction derby. And destruction races, where half of the players start at one side of the track, and the other half start at the other end. There's tons of awesome ways to have fun in this game.

There's just so many great multiplayer games out for the N64. I can't highlight all of them, so I'm going to list some more here. These are all N64 games with amazing multiplayer:

Ridge Racer 64
Jet Force Gemini
Worms Armegeddon
F-Zero X
WipeOut 64
Conker's Bad Fur Day
Gauntlet Legends
Wave Race 64
Excitebike 64
Quake 1
Quake 2
Duke Nukem 64
Duke Nukem Zero Hour
Hydro Thunder
Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 2
San Francisco Rush
Rush 2: Extreme Racing USA
Donkey Kong 64
Mortal Kombat 4
Mario Party 2
Star Wars Episode 1: Racer
Pokemon Stadium 2
Mario Party 3
Cruis'n World
Cruis'n Exotica

Hell. Of. A. List. All of these are truly awesome games. Along with some truly awesome PS1 favorites with graphical updates and new modes. There's also Gauntlet Legends, which is a hugely creative four player co-op action RPG. There's WipeOut 64, and the Quake series, which (while the graphics were better on the PC at the time) gives the N64 some great frag action. There's co-op Duke Nukem, the arcade favorite Hydro Thunder, crazy space racer F-Zero X. Jet Force Gemini allowed for third person combat with dogs and rockets, and Conkers Bad Fur Day's multiplayer was just as creative as the single player.

The N64 was by no means the perfect system, and there's a big multiplayer elephant in the room that I haven't talked about yet: Yes the Xbox 360 (also the PC, but I'm talking about consoles here). What with four player wireless controllers, internet connectivity, Guitar Hero, Rock Band, Halo 1-3, Left 4 Dead, Burnout Paradise, Rainbow Six Vegas, and a ton of other great features and games, it's sure giving the N64 a run for its money. Hell, even the Wii has a bunch of N64 games in the virtual console. Still, though, what the N64 did for multiplayer is still trying to be copied today. And certainly during its time, it was the cornerstone of every games party, and every living room that housed it.

Web Clips for 6/23/09

AWESOME simple website for creating and managing public lists.

If you haven't seen the video of riot police in Tehran running away from the massive crowd of protesters, watch it now. Truly amazing. Also notice that the crowd is THROWING BACK the tear gas grenades.

An F-111C doing a Dump and Burn. What's a dump and burn?

All Videogames Are Not Created Equal

And yet, it appears to be the current mindset that they are. Take, for example, this fixation on game length that has the industry by the balls. Despite what a lot of people seem to think, game length is not some arbitrary thing where longer equals better. You see people tossing around phrases like "more game for your dollar" and it's worthy of a facepalm. Cheaper is not always better. Americans are obsessed with cheap food and that obsession has garnered us an obesity epidemic. Likewise, many games are stuffed full of fat in order to pad the game length, because the public can't wrap their head around the concept that sometimes a game is short. The Halo series, for example, is infamous for its cut and paste level design. The Library level from the original game is probably the most extreme example (it was basically two corridors repeated over and over and over again, with enemies swarming at you the entire time) but even the third game had you complete a level, and then go straight back through that same level - backwards. I'm not against going through previously played areas again, of course, but there should be some significance to it. In Half-Life 2, one of the first areas you enter is a large plaza huge vidscreens broadcasting propaganda and metrocops pushing you and other blue-jumpsuited civilians around. Towards the end of the game, you go through this same plaza - except now you're leading a revolution and your insurgents are pulling down the vidscreens and fighting back against their former oppressors. In this instance, retreading old ground serves to show the player how far he's come and the effects his actions have had on the world. In Halo, it served no purpose other than being a cheap way to extend the "gaming dollar." Sure the Library made Halo an hour or two longer, but that extra hour was a tedious slog that left a bad taste in the player's mouth. Half-Life and Daikatana both cost the same when they came out, but I don't think you'll find anybody that says an hour of Daikatana is worth the same as an hour of Half-Life. Halo isn't the only series to engage in padding, of course. Lots of games do it, because if they don't, they're criticized for it. Take Portal, for instance. It was widely hailed for its innovative mechanics, humor, and polish. And yet, nearly every critic complained that it was too short, possible not worth $20. This is pretty much bullshit. The entire attraction of Portal is that its gameplay and antagonist were unique and different. If portal were much longer, then the gameplay would have started to become repetitive, and GlaDos would lose much of her charm through over-exposure. Instead, the players are left wanting more. I think 90% of complaints about games being too short come from the fact that the player is enjoying themselves and wants to continue playing. This is a good thing - it's much better to end on a high note than to drag an experience out until it becomes banal. Another thing that people do is break a game into components. A game is far more than the sum of its parts, and to try and analyse each bit on its own is misleading and unproductive. Take Call of Duty 4, for instance. It drew criticism for its short singleplayer campaign. Once again, just because it was short does not mean it was low quality. I don't like the Call of Duty series (I refer to it as "whack-a-nazi/terrorist," because that's what it is) and yet I still admire the campaign for its taut level design and some really surprisingly powerful moments. And really, its besides that point - because multiplayer is the real meat of the game. Probably the best example of this is when people criticized the Battlefield series for weak offline play. My favorite was when people would rag on the AI. First of all, why the hell are you playing a Battlefield game offline? Second, you're complaining that a development team working on a game designed around large numbers of humans coordinating didn't waste time and money trying to develop a bot that could mimic human behavior, ingenuity, and flexibilty? For that matter, would kind of bot would have sufficed? "Aha!" people say, "But Bobbicus, if the offline mode never had a chance of being high quality, why put it in at all?" The answer, you smug bastards, is that the offline mode is extremely high quality- for the purpose it plays. The offline mode exists for the sole reason of allowing players to explore maps and orient themselves to how weapons, vehicles, etc. behave in peace, so that they play better online. It's not supposed to be an alternative to online play. Another example of this kind of thinking is Mount and Blade. Mount and Blade is the single best medieval combat simulator ever released. Ever. This is not an exaggeration - there has not been a game released which captures mounted as well as Mount and Blade. And yet this title has a 72 rating at metacritic, with many reviewers bashing it to pieces. The most cited reason is the graphics (I shan't say anything more about this because I will rant about it at length. Suffice to say that the graphics in this game do their job, but won't be winning any awards.) The second is that the parts of the game that aren't combat are underdeveloped. Of course they are, you twats. Mount and Blade is not an RPG. Saying Mount and Blade has shallow RPG elements is like saying Microsoft Flight simulator has lackluster building detail - it's not the Goddamned point of the game! Yes, you have stats - because they affect how you perform in battle. Yes, you can raise a band of warriors - because you will command them in battle. Yes, you can accept quests, trade goods, and even take over a small fiefdom - because it affects how much money you have and thus, the number and quality of troops you can (say it with me now) take into battle. The game is about men (and women) bashing in the heads of other men (and women.) It's not about an epic story, or in depth role-playing. So yes, conversations are shallow and stilted - because the developers had better things to spend time and effort on (the combat.) And yes, these extraneous elements do their job marvelously, because as fun as it is to lead a band of mounted knights into combat, supported by Nordic footmen and elite bowmen, it's even more fun when you've fought with this men for several years, watching them grow from raw recruits into hardened warriors even as your character grows from a weakling who can barely ride a horse into Beowulf. It gives the combat backstory and makes it impactful. It's notable that not a single review, positive or negative, has criticized the game's combat. Finally, this perception can lead to misplaced expectations. Take the recent Left 4 Dead 2 fiasco, with whiny self-important bit...I mean loyal fans screaming in true Angry Internet Man fashion that Valve had reneged on its promise to support L4D post release. Most of these people based their arguments on the post-release content provided for another Valve game, Team Fortress 2. These people make the assumption that since both games are multiplayer-oriented online games created by Valve, they would receive the same kind of post-release support. This is very simple-minded and quickly falls apart with even the slightest bit of thinking, not that an Angry Internet Man cares for such a thing as rational thought. Team Fortress 2 is a symmetrical, deatmatch based game. The only difference between Red and Blue is player skill and class selection. If you give the Scout another gun, both sides will have access to that gun. The balancing act is not between teams, but between classes, essentially making sure that none become too powerful or too weak. Most importantly, TF2 is all about competitive play - there's no equivalent to L4D's campaign mode. Contrast this for L4D, which is an asymetrical game. The two teams are wildly different - the identical, durable survivors are nothing like the Special Infected, and the Horde is a third factor. If you give the survivor's a new gun that is actually different enough to warrant its inclusion, you have to give the Infected a new way to counter that, and vice-versa for giving new abilites (or new types) to the Infected. Second, L4D has a co-op mode which the survivors must be balanced for. A L4D map is a long, linear experience as opposed to an arena- style game, and needs to accomodate Tanks, Witches, Hunters, Smokers, Boomers, and the Hords. Third, what exactly would you add? Really the only thing that wouldn't be extraneous or throw balance completely off would be a new campaign. TF2 took about 7 months before its first 2 official maps (far simple than a L4D campaign, which contains 5 continuos complex maps,) and L4D has been out a little more than 6 months. The Survivor Mode update was a good example of the kind of content L4D can be expected to receive - two campaigns tweaked for versus play (more work than it sounds like, there are a lot of variables to be accounted for) a new mode with a new map designed for it, as well as existing maps tweaked for this gameplay mode (once again, people love to flaunt their ignorance by decrying this as "little more than tweaking a few scripts." Examing the maps side by side reveals quite a few substantial changes, all of which have been extensively tweaked and playtested.) So yeah, videogames are different. Big surprise, right? Just do me a favor, before you blast a game for being too short, or for not having multiplayer, or for having a certain aspect of gameplay be shallow, just think about why that may be, and if more would actually be better.

Web Clips for 6/22/09

3 vids today.

Hate, the internet, and gaymers. Also, GayGamer.net.

John Hodgman about Obama's geekyness, in front of Obama.

Incendiary ammo (and a silenced MAC 10) in Left 4 Dead 2. This game will rock the face.

Lulz of the Time

Go watch Star Trek. No, I mean the real one.

Web Clips for 6/21/09

A project with the goal of making the internet less stupid.

That much forwarded double pic illusion. You know, the one that doesn't cite any sources. Still, it's a cool pic.

Some aggregated linux humor.

A little old but great article on why the airline industry is so fucked up. Sans Sienfeldian remarks (mostly).

WD TV HD Media Player: The Pirate's Media Center

 

So, you've "acquired" digital media. Movies, music, pictures, TV. It's all in different formats and it's all stuck on your computer. How do you sit at home, break out the Doritos, and watch it on your TV? Well, you could drop $900+ on a Home Theater PC, or the cheaper option is to burn DVDs (assuming you have a DVD burner and player) which takes hours to do (encoding time, burning time, setup etc.).

But here's the thing. And the thing is called the Western Digital WD TV HD Media player. It's a little box (just over 6 inches long) with 2 USB ports, a composite TV out, an HDMI out, and a remote.

"But how do I use this thing to fix the issue you bring up?" you may ask. Well, it's simple: Plug any USB drive with media on it into the WD TV, plug the WD TV into your TV, and enjoy.

Yup, it's that friggin' simple, just plug in your external hard drive to the WD TV, and it plays the media on it. WD TV supports a ton of video formats, from .avi files encoded pretty much any way there is to HD .mkv files to .mpegs to .movs. It plays a ton of audio formats as well, including more obscure ones like .flac and .ogg, as well as your standard .gif, .jpeg, .bmp, .png image formats. Plus the firmware gets updated regularly with close ties to the community over at the WD TV Wiki.

It's also really portable, since the device itself is small, everything is truly plug and play, and all you'll have to lug around is your external media. Really, WD TV will accept pretty much anything that can be recognized as a "mass storage device" so even flash drives, SD cards and readers, or cameras can be used.

The kicker: this little box will set you back $100. Though I've seen it on sale at various times for around $70. Still, that's not too much considering I've personally found mine to be the most convenient way, not only to play my digital media on the TV, but to bring it with me everywhere.

Oh, and it's not like the device was designed to be used for pirated media. But hey, neither was Bit Torrent.

The interface is dead simple, and includes the ability to index the media on the drives connected to it, as well as simple file browsing. It's truly an awesome device.

WD TV.

WD TV at Newegg.

Epic Fail - Rosetta Stone

So Backdoorangel left a comment on my writeup about BYKI mentioning Rosetta Stone. I feel obligated to point out that Rosetta Stone is nearly useless for language learning.

Don't get me wrong, the program is very good at what it does, which is training you to recognize images, sounds, and scripts in a foreign language. The problem is that this is nearly useless for becoming fluent in a language or even facilitating learning a language independently.

One of my biggest issues with Rosetta Stone is that it uses the exact same pictures and vocabulary for every language (except Swahili, which features black people in its pictures.) Every language starts you off saying phrases like "the boy is in the airplane" or "the girls are jumping off the table." Not only are these fairly useless phrases to know, but this "one size fits all" approach doesn't even come close to being effective at all languages. Oftentimes what RS gives is flat-out wrong.

Let's take Arabic as an example. First, RS uses Modern Standard Arabic, which is the form of Arabic used in official documents, newspapers, broadcasts, etc. - and not spoken by laymen at all. Nonetheless, it's a good starting point because all the colloquial dialects of Arabic use it as a basis, so becoming familiar with a dialect is mostly a matter of vocabulary. Unfortunately, RS doesn't even attempt to introduce grammar, or complex subjects such as conjugating in tenses or possession. It can't, because you can't convey such things in static pictures and sound samples.

Second, some of the usages are archaic. RS Arabic uses some archaic tenses that are not used anymore, meaning that anyone saying a phrase from RS would probably be met with funny looks. I've heard the Russian version suffers from this as well, teaching you phrases that are technically correct but would make you look like a prat (think about somebody coming up to you and saying "It is my wish to be informed of the directions to the nearest hotel."

Third, the "one size fits all" approach has quite a few pitfalls. The Arabic word for boy (which is introduced in RS in lesson 1) is walid. The thing is, this is also the word for "child," but someone could go through all $300 of Rosetta Stone and never know that, because it doesn't fit the pre-designed template. Also, the word for father is wAlid, but since RS never goes into detail about how alif can act as a consonant or a vowel, this difference in meaning never gets an explanation.

Finally, I take issue with this whole "learn the way a baby learns" thing. I hate to say it, but it's impossible to learn the way a child learns, because adult students are not children Or brains function differently, are not still growing at an accelerated rate, and we already have huge stores of knowledge to draw upon. Also, think how a child learns to speak - first spluttering sounds, then simple words, then grammatically incorrect babytalk, and gradual improvement over a period of 4-6 years of constant immersion. Unless you go to a foreign country and have people talk to you in only the foreign language, than there is no way to mimic that environment.

Honestly, you're better off taking the $150 it costs for the basic level and buying a good textbook, BYKI, and finding somebody fluent to talk to. And for what it costs to get the complete course you could have some quality tutoring time.

I think the biggest selling point of RS is that it's easy and natural. Unfortunately, becoming fluent in a foreign language is neither. It's fun, rewarding, satisfying, and damn hard. There's no magic bullet, and there sure is hell is no software that can replace hard work, enthusiasm, and actual immersion in a foreign environment. So if you really want to learn Japanese, don't buy Rosetta Stone, do like Jake did - take some classes and get your ass over to Japan.

Web Clips for 6/20/09

Avoid a speeding ticket.

How to install games on linux with wine.

Choose the linux distro that's right for you.

Anatomy of a black hole.

Cool Thing of the Week: Before You Know It

So I have been posting much less frequently lately, and with good reason. For the past three weeks I've been attending Arabic summer school 3 hours a day, 4 days a week. And frankly, Arabic is hard. Now, I'm pretty good with grammar (I honestly never thought I would hear myself say that, but Arabic grammar is simpler than most Latin languages) but the thing that's killing me is vocabulary. And that's where BYKI steps in. BYKI can best be described as flashcards on crack. The program is divided into lists of vocab, which are taught to you in a three step process. 1) Overview of the words 2) Foreign-Native translation 3) Native Foreign translation For example, I picked at random the list "colors," as I had no clue what any of the colors are in Arabic. First the program walked me through the colors, then, it presented me with an Arabic word and asked me to say or think the English translation. When I had done so, I hit a button, the correct translation was shown and I was asked if I was right or not. When I began getting them all correct consistantly, the next step was for me to type in the English translation. Then, I was given the English and asked to say/think the Arabic, self reporting if I were correct or not. The final step was for me to type in the correct Arabic translation - the program brings up a virtual keyboard for non-English layouts. Frankly, it works marvelously. The real kicker here is typing in the foreign language - it really makes things stick in your brain. Also of note is that fact that every time a foreign word is show, they play a sound sample of a native speaker saying the word. The program comes with an impressive array of vocabulary - approximately 2000 words, an excellent start, plus the progam comes with the ability to create your own lists and import lists created by others. As an example, I have found several lists that were created for use with my textbook and they've been a tremendous help. So basically the program comes with about a years worth of vocab and the ability to expand upon it infinitely. Furthermore, the program is smart. It analyses which words you have trouble with, then makes sure to repeat these words often and under different circumstances - for example right after a word that is very similar, or similar meaning. One example from my studies, I misidentified the word for "writing" ad the word for "reading." BYKI then proceeded to alternate the words for "reading" and "writing" for the next 30 cards until I have those two words (and the differences between them) drummed into my head for all eternity. Basically, once the program says you've finished a list, you've actually learned it very well. (As a test, I went back to the colors list a few days later. I didn't make a single mistake.) BYKI also monitors how long its been since you last reviewed a list, and has such features as creating a refresher test from random words of lists you've finished, or alerting you when it's been awhile since you've covered a subject. All in all it's the most comprehensive and intelligent vocabulary program I've seen. Please note that this is a vocabulary and phrase oriented program, and as such it can only be a supplement to studying a language, not a replacement. You still need a good teacher to show you how the language works and teach you grammar, and Immersion is still by far the best way to attain fluency. BYKI just makes vocabulary acquisition far more pleasant and effective. If you're learning a language, I highly suggest you get the free version and try it out. Oh, and one final note - when you buy your software, you get to download an executable. There's no serial, no limited installs, no nothing. Just a single .EXE. It's wonderful. Also, I am a complete moron for forgetting to add: The software is pricey at $70, but there's a 20% discount through the end of this month if you use the following code at checkout: ond20off. $55 dollars is less than I paid for my Arabic textbook. Even if you don't buy it, you can use all the community lists at the website for free- you just don't get all the fancy tracking or the built in lists. So basically, BYKI has awesome free resources at their website, and even more available for less than a shitty console game. When you take into account the fact that the program will be useful up until the moment you're fluent in the language, it's a damn fine deal.

Comments etc.

Comments are now open to all, so all you anonymous lurkers can come out of hiding and join in the conversation. Unless you're all spambots, in which case fuck off.

If there's too much spam I'll probably turn the registration requirement back on. Which isn't that bad as we use open ID and google accounts, and you should have one of those anyway.

We're also past our 150th post. woo.

Lulz of the Time

This happened to me in Crysis 1.0 (which had its fair share of bugs). I really wish I could have recorded it. I blew up a gas station and this tank started coming at me, it was driving over the rubble shooting at me, when all of a sudden it started lifting up into the air by its back until it was balancing on its turret as you see here. it continued to lift up into the air and went up and up untill I couldn't see it anymore, balloon style. You'll notice there's another tank on my HUD, that one started coming at me too, ran over the same spot, but this time just LAUNCHED up into oblivion. WTF right?

Get Some Important Reading Done With Comical

Ever download a comic in .cbr or .cbz format, and not know how or what to do with it? Well look no further. Comical is a totally cross-platform comic book reader with a huge list of awesome features.

In addition to readiing basically any comic book file, Comical can read regular .rar files (provided they're filled with images), .zip files, or even directories. It can read .jpeg, .gif, .tiff, .png and more image formats. It can also prefetch and cache pages for speedy page flipping.

This makes it not only great for reading comic books, but also makes it awesome for slideshows, or viewing pictures in general. You can adjust the image size by percentage, or fit it to pretty much any width you'd want. And since it's meant to resize comic images, everything is really sharp and detailed.

The downside is the program hasn't really been updated since 2006, but you won't really notice. I mean, it views images, how much updating does it really need.

Comical.

Web Clips for 6/19/09

Turn your boring, default ubuntu into a mean motherfucking soldier of darkness. No-CD cracks for legal purposes. Awesome fractals from DeviantArt. A character that makes things backwards. The cell phone signal blocker. Now only $30 AND it blocks 3G.

Lesser Known Firefox Extensions: PermaTabs

This is an awesome, and pretty self-explanatory add-on. It turns any tab you like into a "permanent tab" that can't be accidentally closed, and is unaffected by opening and closing the browser. To enable or disable a permanent tab, simply right click it and check or uncheck the "Permanent Tab" option. Simple and easy.

It's really useful for keeping things like email, RSS reader, or an oft-visited site always available. It really shines when combined with FaviconizeTab.

The one I'm linking to is experimental, and technically called "PermaTabs Mod," but don't let that stop you. It's really stable (I've never encountered or heard of an issue) and is basically only experimental because it's recently been ported from the Firefox 2 version.

PermaTabs.

Wiki of the Week: Wikiversity

This weeks wiki is that of knowledge, or rather, fostering it. Wikiversity is a Wikimedia project that is devoted to learning resources, projects, and curriculum. In a backwards-way, you can actually browse and get a lot of neat information. It's easy to see how this could be a great self-teaching resourse as well as an invaluable resource for anyone even remotely interested in, or working in something related to education.

It's unfortunately not as complete as it should be, and many upper-level and niche courses are still under development, but for major topics it's a great way to go about teaching, self-teaching or just learning.

Wikiversity.

and "Wikiversity" from Wikipedia.

Web Clips for 6/18/09

Yup, my idea of a substantive post is a game review. There will be more substance from other authors here soon.

Download Ubuntu Netbook Remix, it's a flavor of Ubuntu that's optimized for (you guessed it) netbooks. I'd highly suggest at least dual booting and giving it a try, there's a tweaked GUI that makes great use of the little screen real estate you have, as well as a whole bunch of other netbook-centric features. Most people also report a longer battery life. It's also easy to install from a flash drive. Check it out.

A really great 404.

An online database of keyboard shortcuts.

lol, graffiti.

some sweet firefox wallpapers.

And Jonathan Coulton on personal productivity and GTD over at lifehacker.

Yet Another Sandbox Title: A Review of Prototype

Ugh, I thought I'd never write a review here, it's not like there isn't enough already out there, and no one comes here for reviews, so anything I write about games I tend to try to stay away from just reviewing them, but everything I started writing about this game just turned into a review - or something close enough to a review that it might as well be a review anyway. Anyway:

Ok, Prototype is an "open world" game, which means an inevitable comparison to the Grand Theft Auto series. So here it is: Prototype is like GTA, except you're an unstoppable killing machine, and the zombie apocalypse is involved.

Sound interesting? Triple-A titles tend to do that. Oh yea, this is a big title:

I'm a huge GTA fan and a huge open world fan. I love open world games because they're stress-free. If you don't want to worry about a story, you don't have to. You can just drive around, doing jack shit, playing around with guns and explosions without any motivation to do anything. It's great, and I spend hours doing just that. It's actually rare that I finish the storyline of any given sandbox title.

My latest sandbox game that I'd been sinking countless hours into was GTA 4. Though, it kept pissing me off. You see, I kept longing for the days of GTA 3 and Vice City, where jumping off of the tallest building wouldn't kill you, the cops couldn't take three shotgun blasts to the chest and still shoot, there were tanks, helicopters with missiles, rampage mini-games, and the main character actually wore their seat belt.

I was also sick of the wonky controls. Too often I would try to climb up to a ledge, but instead would vault over it and fall 50 feet to my death. Cuz that's what I wanted. Or I'd be firing an RPG on top of a building, but the game decided that I wasn't actually aiming at the FBI agent below, but the ledge at my feet, and I'd have to watch myself get blown to bits in slow motion. This happened in the earlier games as well, but it wouldn't kill you, so you could do the health cheat afterwards and go back to killing. Sure, the graphics in GTA 4 are better, but hey, the developers name is Rockstar, not Glam Rockstar.

Um, anyway, imagine my delight when I found a game where the main character not only is completely unaffected by gravity, but is also mostly unaffected by explosions. Though he could probably lose the overly-angsty hoody and popped collar.

You are Alex Mercer, a guy who wakes up in a morgue having lost his memory, but gained ridiculous super-powers. Which I would say is a pretty decent trade off. He goes on a hunt to try to uncover why he is the way he is, and kill the people responsible not only for doing this to him, but also for releasing a virus on Manhattan that turns the city into zombies. Or something like that. The story's actually not too bad if you're into the whole "governments are evil" thing. It's told fairly well, cutscenes aren't painful, and voice acting is decent. It's not Deus Ex good, but maybe it's Deus Ex 2.

Though, like Painkiller, It's not really the story that's important. What's important is that you can tear an innocent civilian in two with your bear hands, and absorb their body for health. Your power is basically you can alter yourself at a genetic level, and turn your arms into claws, a giant blade, Hulk fists, a whip thingy, and a giant shield. You can sprout spikes from the ground, shoot tendrils from your palms, and morph into anyone you absorb. There's an absolutely huge list of powers and moves you can buy with experience points (called "evolution points" in the game, which is pretty lame) that you obtain for doing pretty much anything.

In this way it's almost like an RPG, you can choose what powers you'd like to upgrade and taylor them to your playstyle. It's actually what kept me playing the game, because I knew if I finished just one more level I'd get acces to a new ability.

Actually, I'm sick of telling you what the game is about, go read (or skim) the Wikipedia, and Metacritic entries for the game. Good? Ok, moving on.

First, huge props to the devs for the PC version. I was very pleased. There was no apparent DRM of any kind, except for a CD check. The install was simple and went on without a hitch, there was automatic gamepad support, as well as keyboard support, which I know sounds weird, but it's outrageous how many games I play on the PC where, during a tutorial, the game will say something like "Press [Left Trigger] to aim." and I have to open up controls to see what they're talking about. But none of that here. The game also ran exceptionally well on my middle-of-the-road system (and man, it pains me to say that, since just two years ago it was top-of-the-line. Damn you moore's law). I was able to crank up all the shinies (even vsync and AA) and run it at my native resolution of 1680x1050. The game ran smooth and never crashed, which is saying a lot for a 1.0 release. It's really great to see a game that is actually a final product, and not a buggy POS that needs 3 or so patches before it's even remotely playable (here's looking at you, S.T.A.L.K.E.R). The graphics themselves are not really that great, They look almost last-gen with higher res textures, which is unusual for a big title. The game still looks damn good, though. And again, it's not about the graphics as much as it is about killing people. Plus a lot of effort was put into the animations. Everything is very fluid and killing people is very, very satisfying. Most people say that you really should use a gamepad for this game. I used both, and found that I actually liked the keyboard and mouse better. It all comes down to personal preference, but if you're worried about it then I can say it was definitely a better experience with the keyboard and mouse, as the difficult combos and such are simply easier when there's more buttons. Ok, so moving on to that actual game. It starts off really great, once you get past the tutorial levels. But as the story progresses and things move on, the game actually gets significantly worse, for a variety of reasons: 1.) The more powers, abilities, and attacks you gain. The more difficult it becomes to control your character, so what used to be a simple jump or climb, is now a quadruple flip into a glide attack that destroys a city block. It makes simple things like grabbing people (which becomes more and more important) very troublesome. There were many times where I'd try to pick up a gun next to me, but instead would blow up a tank across the street with ground spikes, sending the entire military after me. 2.) The difficulty curve, while somewhat linear, is kinda cheap. So you took out 50 soldiers in the last level? How about 100? You thought 7 tanks and 3 helicopters was easy? Well how about 14 tanks and 6 helicopters? It makes things much more chaotic than they need to be, and combined with reason #1, becomes extremely frustrating and predictable. 3.) The boss battles suffer from the same problem as the difficulty curve, but also, they're FUCKING RIDICULOUS! But not in a good way. Not in the epic way. I remember one of the major boss battles (spoiler) where you fight a main character, Elizabeth Greene, who is literally a giant puffy vagina on a stick. I timed it, and it took me 45 FUCKING minutes to beat her, and I didn't die once. That's just too long. She had so much heath that it just becomes annoying. Here is a 2 part video of a guy doing it in 15ish minutes (which is still a long-ass time for a boss battle), though he has upgrades which you don't have in that portion of that game yet, and has obviously fought her before: Notice she has 4 HUGE HEALTH BARS! WHY ON GODS GREEN EARTH WOULD YOU DO THAT! She spits rocks at you, shoots heat-seeking green energy thingys, sends hunters at you (which are sort of like the zombie equivalent of tanks) as well as a ton of other attacks, and zombies, and the military is also fighting you with everything they have. It's as if the developers realized that they'd made your character too powerful, and tried to compensate. The last boss battle is also stupidly difficult, though a little less absurd. 4.) The missions are rerepepetititivtivee as fuck. Here's the objectives for one of the missions near the end of the game: 1~ Destroy a helicopter before it leaves the area. 2~ Destroy two helicopters before they leave the area. 3~ Destroy three helicopters before they leave the area. 4~ ok, I'm not telling you this one. See if you can guess. That's right, FOUR HELICOPTERS! YAY! AWESOME GAYME DEZINE GUYZZZ! 5.) Free-roam gets less and less appealing as you progress through the game. There is a zombie infection slowly spreading through the city, and while it IS cool to free-roam around a zombie apocalypse for a while, it is a novelty that quickly wears off and I ended up yearning for the ability to explore just plain-old Manhattan. The game makes up for it with the ability to, once you've finished the story, start a new game with all of your existing powers retained. which is cool, but at the beginning you lack the ability to hijack choppers and tanks, which again makes free-roaming not as fun as it could be. 6.) The targeting system is abysmal, and again gets more annoying the more enemies there are and the more chaotic the missions get. So often I'd try to aim at the giant boss charging at me, but the targeting system would decide that it was more important to focus my wrath upon the taxi behind me. All in all though, a whole lot is forgivable when you go back to the fact that you can run through cars and crowds of people with a giant bio-blade. Free-roaming is still a real blast. And not all of the missions are a total bust. Did I mention the bio-blade?

The stealth aspect is actually really well done. It's pretty simple, the devs weren't really out to try anything new and wonky, but what's there is solid and it works. basically one of your powers is the ability to morph into other characters. So to infiltrate a base, you'll consume and morph into a general, then just walk in. It's pretty cool, and you can escape the military this way in free-roam. There's also the affectionately named "patsy" ability, where you accuse others of being you in disguise, and get to watch the other soldiers hesitate, then open fire. It's great. So, overall, this isn't a game that's going to stand the test of time. It's not going to win any awards, and it's not really deep or insightful. But hell, it's a damn fun game, and really, isn't that what we're going for here? I mean c'mon, there's over 20 animations just for eating people. As well as hundreds of other ways to reign destruction and terror upon a city already dealing with a zombie infection. If the missions annoy you, just blow off steam by attacking a military base and watch as the puny soldiers cower at the might of your bio-blade. I've certainly got more than my money's worth, and I'll continue to blow shit up for at least the near future. In fact, I think I've found my new go-to sandbox title.

Impulse Deals

So some of you might have heard of a little company called Stardock. Well, these folks have developed their own Steam-type app that doesn't require you to be logged in to play your games. It's interesting, and more importantly there's some pretty good deals on there. Far Cry 2 - $18 Assasin's Creed - $18 Galactic Civilizations 2: Ultimate - $40 Sid Meier's Pirates - $10 Civ III complete - $5 In my opinion, for buying singleplayer games Steam < Impulse < GOG; but Steam is better for multiplayer games due to its robust community features.

Web Clips for 6/17/09

Once again, substantive things are in the works, just hold on while I finish this level.

Best graphics cards for the money, for June. Very trustworthy source.

Countdown timer, on the web.

Make reading on the web better.

I'm a huge fan of this guy. Download all his music legally and for free on Jamendo.

Decode all of those tinyurls.

You Are Beautiful installations.

Yakko counts tibet.

And you're not official without an official seal.

Oh yea, I'm playing around with the banner again. One of these days I'll get it.

Eastbound & Down, et al.

Apologies for the lack of posting, but here are a couple of things: 1. I hate the Lakers. 2. Lauren is officially done with the Hills: check out the last shot of her driving away from Speidi's wedding: reminded me of a scene from Breakfast at Tiffany's if Hepburn had been a blonde. All praises due to Hisham Abed, the director of photography and his incredible work; I probably won't watch it as much if it just a vehicle for Speidi and Audrina now, but hopefully MTV will bring him back to work on the City with Whitney. 3. I know I'm a little behind on the times, but in my early summer cathing-up on movies and (good) tv, I have to say Eastbound & Down is probably my second favorite current HBO show next to Curb. Danny McBride plays a former star baseball player, Kenny Powers, who comes back to his hometown in rural North Carolina after losing his talent and money. He gets a job teaching phys ed to middle schoolers, where he works alongside his old high-school flame. While much of the humor is tied to the Frat Pack/Apatow style (raunch, tossed-off one liners, unnecessarily prideful down-on-their-luck losers. etc.), it's still funny as hell for any taste. Will Ferrell and collaborator Adam McKay produce it with McBride, and ferrell makes an obligatory guest appearance as a car salesman who has a tempestuous relationship with the hubris-wallowing Powers. Some of the best moments include a cathartic jet-ski ride with a half-naked woman being tossed into the water, an ecstasy-fueled dance immediately followed by vomiting, a heartfelt expression of love to a woman's voluminous bosom, and a classically awkward premature ejaculation. Funny shit, and all the episodes are available online somewhere for your free perusal. 4.Oh, and cop the El Michels Affair's Enter the 37th Chamber; ill versions of Wu-Tang songs by one of the dopest funk groups around.

Firefox 3.5

Is great. In particular, it's eliminated the nasty "freeze upon loading a new page" issue that plagues SSD devices (like my netbook.) I strongly suggest everyone give it a try.

Web Clips for 6/14/09

Yea yea, I've missed a few days. I have a good excuse though, I was playing video games. Maybe I'll be doing a review or so soon. And here's a few extra clips for the lateness.

Anyway, get better headphones (also, in the $100 range, I'm a fan of the Allesandro MS-1s and the Audio-Technica ATH-AD700s).

Another quote site, this one's got a great interface that makes it easy to browse.

A cool, cheap-yet-powerful game engine.

Left 4 Dead, in java.

And Stickman Exodus, episode 1.

Mind, prepare to be boggled.

Guest Writer Julian Suhr: "Drag Me To Hell" Review

It's my pleasure to offer you another guest post from Julian Suhr, author of the movie review blog Never Mind The Bats. Enjoy.

I'm kind of at a loss as far as reviewing "Drag Me To Hell" goes, largely because I really don't like horror movies. I can't see the point of needless fear for fear's sake, especially as we begin to live in increasingly terrifying times. Of course, I have an elaborate double standard at work: I like horror movies that I like. Zombie movies are fine, as were "The Host" and "Let The Right One In." And I don't consider Hitchcock movies to be horror (even though the ones I enjoy are more thrillers, but whatever). My taxonomy breaks down like this: movies may be scary or what have you, but a horror movie is one with no point other than to terrify the bejesus out of the audience well after the actual viewing experience is over, and for no real reason of improvement or deeper meaning. It's kind of an extremely subjective definition, as what it boils down to is "whatever doesn't leave me quaking at little noises late at night isn't horror," but I think I've got a point, although my definitions might be a bit off. Take a zombie movie, "28 Days Later." It's pretty goddamn intense throughout, kind of scary, but all in a survival way. Zombies are simply a threat that needs to be dealt with; eliminate the threat and life proceeds as usual. To get further analytical (I spent the cold month of January in a film class on zombie movies, which may have been damaging to my long term mental health, so you'll have to bear with me), "28 Days" can be viewed as an anti-Hobbesian fantasy about the futility of absolute government power, resulting corruption, and the occasional importance of living life nasty, brutal and short (simultaneous thanks and apologies to Christian, the man who is responsible for me bringing this interpretation to you. I have a sinking suspicion that my Hobbes might be a little bootleg, but the core idea seems solid enough). It's also a really smart movie beyond the philosophy and my parantheticals, with heavy post-apocalyptic images, allusions to 9/11, and plenty of other stuff that I can't remember at the moment. Basically, my favorite zombie movie, because the badass zombie violence serves a purpose. Zombie movies, as I was shown in January, provide a means of addressing real-world problems through apocalyptic and audience-friendly scenarios; kind of like satire, but with a lust for human flesh. And I think that the same can go for all other sorts of intelligent horror movies. I've already praised "Let The Right One In" for being as much about human nature and brutality as it is about vampires, and I'm sure that there are other horror movies out there, all excellent, that are about more than the monsters or spirits at hand. We could oversimplify things and refer to these things as "good" horror movies, and they all have the common characteristic that they don't terrify as much as other horror films that use cheap shock tactics and irrational decisions. In these "good" horror films, the real fear is of something deeper psychologically or philosophically than immediate suffering at the hands of evil beings. This fear leads to contemplation instead of adrenaline rushes, and therefore is less terrifying. But I fail to see the point or pleasure of watching something that uses the power of films to exploit audiences via fast cutting, grotesque special effects, and ominous music only for the sake of scaring. Shitty action movies, sure, they're escapist fluff (although I want the two hours of my life that "Hitman" took back). Shitty comedies can be okay as well; I know a guy who loves incredibly mediocre romantic comedies because he finds them unintentionally hilarious, which also brings us to the sort of movie that's so bad it becomes funny, a distinction that defies genre. But I will never for thelife of me understand people who enjoy horror movies. All that rather brings into question my credentials for reviewing a horror film, doesn't it? But "Drag Me To Hell" is unquestionably a horror movie, and one deftly made at that. Setup, as usual, is simple: a loan officer, desirous of promotion, denies a loan extension for an old woman. Poor choice, because this old woman is some kind of a witch-gypsy capable of cursing people. She does, and then young loan officer (forget the names here, and don't feel like looking them up, because they don't make a difference) is tormented by demons, causing her to try and break the curse. It's that simple, but it's very well done. Sam Raimi uses all manner of little tricks and slights-of-film to convey a sense of lingering dread, and we do get rather emotionally involved with young loan officer, which is of course the problem: once we care about a character, we make their problems ours, and then cower in fear. The acting is good, the dialogue inoffensive, and the colors and images (I have no idea why I still remember this) very pleasing and full. Even the special effects are subtle. Like I said, this is a very accomplished horror film. And that's exactly the problem- I can't help but feel a little betrayed by Sam Raimi for making a straight-up scary movie. This was supposed to be a funny horror movie; indeed, "Evil Dead" was invoked in many reviews I read. Unfortunately, all the humor is very subtle and plays second fiddle to the main task of terrifying me with lurking demons and other fucked-up repugnant shit, to paraphrase Jules Winnfield. From what I've seen of "Evil Dead"- and I need to see more- everything is firmly tongue in cheek, lead by Bruce Campbell's wonderful self-assuredness. There is no Bruce Campbell here. Young loan officer girl grows more and more terrified as the movie progresses, only occasionally saying something approaching one-liner quality. The humor comes from the incredible pettiness of the offense (a loan deserves this? really?) and the occasional grotesque torments inflicted upon young loan officer girl, including being puked on thrice and having to wrestle a dead body twice. If there was more of this, and it was all campier, everything would have been a celebration of horror's absurdities, and I would have been a happier camper. Instead, Raimi turns his talents to a straight-up machine for scaring, with no redeeming ending or message. It's very good for what it is, and what it is isn't at all my bag, and leaves me feeling a little frustrated with humanity. Come on guys, do you really need lurking demons to make you fear for a few blissful hours? Read a newspaper. Apologies for length and subjectivity. I really didn't have a lot to say critically due to firmly entrenched opinions on the subject matter, so I decided to foist said opinions upon you. Enjoy, and hopefully join me in my quest to end pointless horror.