Game Review: Terrible science; Terribly fun.
THough I doubt I have enough readers to warrant the warning, Spoilers ahead.
Plot: Dystopian future: Desmond, an assassin, is captured by a mysterious corporation, and forced to use a device that allows a person to recount "genetic memory". the main part of the game takes place in his memories, where his assassin's ancestor kills a group of men who are attempting to take over the Holy Land while King Richard and Saladin battle it out.
Now that thats done, I ask, what the hell? The main villains in the game are atheistic Knights Templar. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm, glad to see atheism spread into media like video games. It could only enlighten like-minded thinkers(Except for the eight people who enjoyed the Left Behind game). But the fact that these Templars Atheism is coupled with an overriding desire to conquer and control the world is rather disturbing. The way the game is written seems to imply that the two are one and the same, ans the connection tries to establish the idea that atheists are in and of themselves evil.
The whole game is based around the idea that some artifact, "The Piece of Eden", ostensibly an alien artifact, (according to the Templars, and a... well, from the title you can guess what the christian and islamic characters think is is) can let you control the masses. The Templars ant to use the device to scour religion from the minds of all in the Holy Land(and then control and rule them, but that's a minor detail. Name a political group that doesn't).
I must admit, this is a case where I identify more with the villains than the hero, as much as I enjoyed the game. The Templars were rounding up books of Faith and destroying them for the lies they are, actively converting the learned folk to their way of thinking, blockading the sea to prevent reinforcement from the crusader countries, finding ways to cure things like mental illness and leprosy, and attempting to unite Richard and Saladin to common cause.
And then the Assassin kills them all on faith.
Oh well. The game was fun, anyway.
Edit: Also, did anyone else who played the game noticed that Vidic was a cross between Half-Life 2's Dr. Breen and an evil PZ Myers(of Pharyngula fame)?
Saturday, December 29, 2007
Thursday, December 20, 2007
Harper on CBC
Peter Mansbridge interviewed Stephen Harper on The National earlier this evening. I once again got to admire his skill to show how he didn't say those things that made him look bad, ever, and skirt ever single question thrown at him by beating the audience over the head with how against partisanship he is. Which I can understand, since we Conservatives wouldn't stay in power form long in people in Ontario and Quebec realize that they are being represented because they aren't Alberta.
What caught my ear was his answer to the question "Is Leading more about Canada following what you believe, or you following what Canada believes?" Mr. Harper managed to skirt this one with non-committal line about it being a blend of both. I realized then that Harper us a great politician, but has no idea what a leader is. If your will and the people will is not the same, you shouldn't be leading us. THe question shouldn't come up whether to follow what the people want and what the people need. If they want something the don't need, or need something they don't want, its your job to SHOW them. Thats what a Leader is, Mr. Harper.
What caught my ear was his answer to the question "Is Leading more about Canada following what you believe, or you following what Canada believes?" Mr. Harper managed to skirt this one with non-committal line about it being a blend of both. I realized then that Harper us a great politician, but has no idea what a leader is. If your will and the people will is not the same, you shouldn't be leading us. THe question shouldn't come up whether to follow what the people want and what the people need. If they want something the don't need, or need something they don't want, its your job to SHOW them. Thats what a Leader is, Mr. Harper.
Mass Effect: Needs More Substance
I picked up my copy of Mass Effect last week. Got home, popped it in ye ole ‘360, and spent the weekend amassing as much game time on it as I could. The Verdict?
Need more Mass Effect.
The game is well done, fairly polished, and damn addictive. Once you pick it up, you don’t want to quit. This is why there is a large gap in between this post and the last post. The game stands up to other games of the genre, like the KOTOR series, quite well.
The game UI screens are fairly intuitive, and pretty to look at. The Character Creation screen is a little limited, but this is not oblivion, so I don’t expect that from it. It gives you a nice range, and variable customization options. I have an issue with the navigation UI, and find myself continually swearing at it. The ‘B’ button is exit, and ‘X’ is zoom out. And I press exit every single time I want to zoom out. Every single time.
The main problem with mass effect is near total lack of unique content outside the main mission. Every cluster has only one or two systems, and a system has only one, small square of a barren, desolate world. Every pirate base has the exact same layout, every bunker follows the same exact blueprint. The sky on every nearly identical planetary may is either filled with another looming planet, volcanic ash, or thunderclouds. Mines, for some reason, all follow the same schematic as well.
Every assault rifle looks the same, as well as every shotguns, pistol, and sniper rifle, the only difference between weapons of the same class being stats, and occasionally, a paintjob done by a 4-year old epileptic.
The main campaign, however, make up for the lack of well, anything else, in the game. The rich, interesting worlds of the main quest (there are five), show the potential of what mass effect could have been. The fact that these finally polished worlds are present in the game puts the emptiness of the rest of the world in stark contrast. The multiple ending are all pleasing, and really gets you hooked on the story.
I won’t go into the story, because, well, I don’t want to ruin it, but suffice it to say, there are lots of choices to be made, none of them easy. The only downside to the story bit is the lack of real character interaction. Okay, lack of interaction besides the people you get to fuck.
Overall, I’d give it a 7/10. It lost a mark for reusing the same three pieces of building geometry on every single non-story worlds, a mark for lack of character interaction, and another one for that goddamn B button.
Need more Mass Effect.
The game is well done, fairly polished, and damn addictive. Once you pick it up, you don’t want to quit. This is why there is a large gap in between this post and the last post. The game stands up to other games of the genre, like the KOTOR series, quite well.
The game UI screens are fairly intuitive, and pretty to look at. The Character Creation screen is a little limited, but this is not oblivion, so I don’t expect that from it. It gives you a nice range, and variable customization options. I have an issue with the navigation UI, and find myself continually swearing at it. The ‘B’ button is exit, and ‘X’ is zoom out. And I press exit every single time I want to zoom out. Every single time.
The main problem with mass effect is near total lack of unique content outside the main mission. Every cluster has only one or two systems, and a system has only one, small square of a barren, desolate world. Every pirate base has the exact same layout, every bunker follows the same exact blueprint. The sky on every nearly identical planetary may is either filled with another looming planet, volcanic ash, or thunderclouds. Mines, for some reason, all follow the same schematic as well.
Every assault rifle looks the same, as well as every shotguns, pistol, and sniper rifle, the only difference between weapons of the same class being stats, and occasionally, a paintjob done by a 4-year old epileptic.
The main campaign, however, make up for the lack of well, anything else, in the game. The rich, interesting worlds of the main quest (there are five), show the potential of what mass effect could have been. The fact that these finally polished worlds are present in the game puts the emptiness of the rest of the world in stark contrast. The multiple ending are all pleasing, and really gets you hooked on the story.
I won’t go into the story, because, well, I don’t want to ruin it, but suffice it to say, there are lots of choices to be made, none of them easy. The only downside to the story bit is the lack of real character interaction. Okay, lack of interaction besides the people you get to fuck.
Overall, I’d give it a 7/10. It lost a mark for reusing the same three pieces of building geometry on every single non-story worlds, a mark for lack of character interaction, and another one for that goddamn B button.
Sunday, December 16, 2007
Link now, post later.
http://www.cracked.com/article_15663_god-fuse-10-things-christians-atheists-can-must-agree-on.html
Angry. Can't type.
Angry. Can't type.
Saturday, November 10, 2007
Golden Compass
Antone else familiar with His Dark Materials
Should take note. You've been reading evil, evil hate speech.
From: http://www.catholicleague.org/catalyst.php?year=2007&month=October&read=2306
For starters, why are Catholics afraid of children reading these books? Surely, if the books cause some sort of crisis of faith, the local priest will be able to answer any and all of the issues the books might raise with factual, obviously truthful answers. Oh, right. Facts aren’t their thing.
Or at least what you want them to hear about it. I’m sure if anything is said that conversely affects the point you are trying to make (because I’m almost certain there is a point to this),it will be included in this informative, unbiased pamphlet.
Ah, yes. The “new atheism” is aggressive, dogmatic and unrelenting. So unlike the Catholic League, who believe in tolerance, open-mindedness and meekness And there is nothing wrong with hatred when its justified. Sorta like hatred of the perpetrators of countless Crusades, holy wars, jihads, and ethnic cleansing. Wait, that is religion. And if Catholicism happens to be the form of religion Pullman happens to be most familiar with, what of it? And yes, Catholic league. You are far more aggressive, dogmatic and unrelenting than the English. Congrats.
May the campaign against the film do for it what the campaign against "Married with Children" did for that series.
Because if it doesn’t support Religion, it ain’t free speech.
Anyone who's read the book will also note that they don't kill God. They just kill a Being who built the church, and falsely claimed to have created the Angels and the Universe. In fact, they didn't even kill him. They basically unplugged his life support machine and let the poor guy finally die, he was miserable being alive. Which, oddly enough, is what the Atheist movement is trying to do. Unplug God's life-support machine.
Addendum:
Anyone else find it ironic that the book condemns exactly the same thing what the American Catholic League is trying to do - involvement of religion in politics and personal affairs?
Should take note. You've been reading evil, evil hate speech.
From: http://www.catholicleague.org/catalyst.php?year=2007&month=October&read=2306
The Catholic League wants Christians to boycott this movie precisely because it knows that the film is bait for the books: unsuspecting parents who take their children to see the movie may be impelled to buy the three books as a Christmas present. And no parent who wants to bring their children up in the faith will want any part of these books.
For starters, why are Catholics afraid of children reading these books? Surely, if the books cause some sort of crisis of faith, the local priest will be able to answer any and all of the issues the books might raise with factual, obviously truthful answers. Oh, right. Facts aren’t their thing.
We are launching a major educational campaign designed to alert the public to Pullman's game plan. To that end, we have prepared a booklet, "The Golden Compass: Agenda Unmasked." It contains snippets of what reviewers have said about the film and the books, as well as revealing comments made by Pullman himself; it also contains a synopsis of the trilogy. In short, the booklet is not what we are saying about Pullman's work—it is what he and others have said about it.
Or at least what you want them to hear about it. I’m sure if anything is said that conversely affects the point you are trying to make (because I’m almost certain there is a point to this),it will be included in this informative, unbiased pamphlet.
Pullman represents the new face of atheism: it is aggressive, dogmatic and unrelenting. It is also fueled by hate—by a crusading hatred of all religions, but most especially of ours. His side is counting on our side to lie down and die. He may have experienced little resistance in England, but it's a different story here.
Ah, yes. The “new atheism” is aggressive, dogmatic and unrelenting. So unlike the Catholic League, who believe in tolerance, open-mindedness and meekness And there is nothing wrong with hatred when its justified. Sorta like hatred of the perpetrators of countless Crusades, holy wars, jihads, and ethnic cleansing. Wait, that is religion. And if Catholicism happens to be the form of religion Pullman happens to be most familiar with, what of it? And yes, Catholic league. You are far more aggressive, dogmatic and unrelenting than the English. Congrats.
The reason we are starting our protest early is because it takes time to get the word out, and besides, the media love it when we give them something to chew on. The booklet is being mailed to thousands of influential persons, including film critics and Christian leaders.
May the campaign against the film do for it what the campaign against "Married with Children" did for that series.
While Roman Catholicism is the evil force in Pullman's writings, his real goal is to put a positive face on atheism, getting children to buy his message. Thus, we expect more than Catholics will join our protest.
Because if it doesn’t support Religion, it ain’t free speech.
Anyone who's read the book will also note that they don't kill God. They just kill a Being who built the church, and falsely claimed to have created the Angels and the Universe. In fact, they didn't even kill him. They basically unplugged his life support machine and let the poor guy finally die, he was miserable being alive. Which, oddly enough, is what the Atheist movement is trying to do. Unplug God's life-support machine.
Addendum:
Anyone else find it ironic that the book condemns exactly the same thing what the American Catholic League is trying to do - involvement of religion in politics and personal affairs?
Wednesday, November 7, 2007
Finnish Idiot.
A young fellow in Finnland has gone rather stark, raving mad, and shot up a school. In his Manifesto, available as a .doc on his site (for how long I don't know), goes on about natural selection, the strong ruling over the weak and destroying them, and other such nonsense.
This young fool proclaims himself a "godlike Atheist." Despite the ironic contradiction in terms, I'm sure the religious media will snap this up and run with it like a crack-addict and a hundred-dollar bill. This psychopath has done more damage to the atheist cause than any other current individual in contemporary times.
It appears he has killed seven people, but lacked the good grace to off himself. Sometimes, I wish I was religious, so I could relish the idea of this guy burning in hell.
Sources:
http://www.albaani.org/~ilmari/Tuusula/ - his school Page. Contains Manifesto and Attack information, as well as pictures.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,2206630,00.html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21669167/
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7082795.stm
This young fool proclaims himself a "godlike Atheist." Despite the ironic contradiction in terms, I'm sure the religious media will snap this up and run with it like a crack-addict and a hundred-dollar bill. This psychopath has done more damage to the atheist cause than any other current individual in contemporary times.
It appears he has killed seven people, but lacked the good grace to off himself. Sometimes, I wish I was religious, so I could relish the idea of this guy burning in hell.
Sources:
http://www.albaani.org/~ilmari/Tuusula/ - his school Page. Contains Manifesto and Attack information, as well as pictures.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,2206630,00.html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21669167/
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7082795.stm
Friday, November 2, 2007
The JW's is coming!
That title makes me [sic]. But anyway.
This is the standard argument I use when attempting to deconvert a Jehovah's Witness, and it has met with limited success.
The consensus among JW's, currently, is that the End will come before the death of the generation of people including those currently 75-80 years old. After the rapture, 144,000 of their version of the 'Chosen Ones' prophecy*, whom they call the "annointed" will acend to heaven. all other followers will age normally (or in reverse, as the age may be) into about their late twenties. THen all will live in harmony.
What I see as the downfall of this argument, is that there will be no more children. I ask them; How can God, fount of all kindness, goodness, and fluffly feeling of every sort, take away the fundamental human joy of having and raising children. Children, I argue, are the true source of happiness in the world. How can paradise be without them?
This generally leads to them leaving rather quickly, but, as those of you familiar with this particular will know, that is sort of the point. I don't like talking God at six in the morning, at my door, in my underwear, with a bunch of creepy smiley people. It has, however, caused a small few to challenge their beliefs and alter to a more progressive or mild form of Christianity, and in one case I've become friends with, created a true, blue Atheist.
* I've found that most Cults and major religions(slightly larger Cults) have some version of this 'Chosen Ones' prophecy(I use 'prophecy loosely). Keeps the Flock hopeful, I suppose.
This is the standard argument I use when attempting to deconvert a Jehovah's Witness, and it has met with limited success.
The consensus among JW's, currently, is that the End will come before the death of the generation of people including those currently 75-80 years old. After the rapture, 144,000 of their version of the 'Chosen Ones' prophecy*, whom they call the "annointed" will acend to heaven. all other followers will age normally (or in reverse, as the age may be) into about their late twenties. THen all will live in harmony.
What I see as the downfall of this argument, is that there will be no more children. I ask them; How can God, fount of all kindness, goodness, and fluffly feeling of every sort, take away the fundamental human joy of having and raising children. Children, I argue, are the true source of happiness in the world. How can paradise be without them?
This generally leads to them leaving rather quickly, but, as those of you familiar with this particular will know, that is sort of the point. I don't like talking God at six in the morning, at my door, in my underwear, with a bunch of creepy smiley people. It has, however, caused a small few to challenge their beliefs and alter to a more progressive or mild form of Christianity, and in one case I've become friends with, created a true, blue Atheist.
* I've found that most Cults and major religions(slightly larger Cults) have some version of this 'Chosen Ones' prophecy(I use 'prophecy loosely). Keeps the Flock hopeful, I suppose.
Defining Atheism
I'd like to clear up my definitions of the various forms of atheism. These aren't definitive in the traditional sense, but they are the basic distinction, as I see it, between various forms of Atheism.
- General Atheism: A non-theistic view of the world
- Hard Atheism: The strong disbelief in God's existence in any way. Also: Scientific Atheism.
- Militant Atheism: A form of Hard Atheism, this is the doctrine dictating active de-conversion of Theists to Atheism, but, unlike militant theists, militant atheism does not resort to any sort of actual martial force.
- Soft Atheism: The non-belief in God as defined in popular religion
- Mild Atheism: The default position of the Theist-Atheist debate, neither a negative or positive assertion. Also: Agnosticism, Skeptical Atheism
- Terminal Atheism: The end-stage form of Atheism, for which there is no known cure. The belief that there is no evidence for God to had, anywhere, ever. An awful state to be in, but an unfortunate side affect of intelligence in the modern age. I'm afraid I'll die an atheist.
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
Genesis
And Lord Terminus said, let there be Blogger, and there was, and it was good. And He said Let there be Faithful, and there were, and they were God. And they went forth and multiplied. And the God got bored. And God said, Let there Be entertainment. And there were heathens. And they were Bad. Very, Very, Very bad. Bad.
And the Heathens chose to write about how there weren't no God, and use words like weren't. And this Blog was born.
Okay, I can't write like that anymore. It's hard. I can't fathom how a bunch of manipulative, barely literate, Iron-age priests managed to write a whole book of that crap. In Latin. Which just makes things that much more complicated.
Well, This is my shiny new blog. I hope you like it. If you don't, then... well, you are probably a Theist or New-ager, or even an agnostic. I tend to offend just about everyone but me.
Yes, "so I started a blog". What's that supposed to mean? Oh well. You'll see me around.
And the Heathens chose to write about how there weren't no God, and use words like weren't. And this Blog was born.
Okay, I can't write like that anymore. It's hard. I can't fathom how a bunch of manipulative, barely literate, Iron-age priests managed to write a whole book of that crap. In Latin. Which just makes things that much more complicated.
Well, This is my shiny new blog. I hope you like it. If you don't, then... well, you are probably a Theist or New-ager, or even an agnostic. I tend to offend just about everyone but me.
Yes, "so I started a blog". What's that supposed to mean? Oh well. You'll see me around.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
