You Can't Judge A Blog Post By Its Title. Unless, Of Course, You Can.

Something else I found out this week is that Ben Miller (of The Armstrong and Miller Show and looking-like-Rob-Brydon fame) was one of the co-writers behind the excellent and hilarious puzzle game MindGym for the PC.

MindGym may have been the second or third PC game I ever really played, and from what I can remember the main part consisted of solving abstract puzzles while being alternatively encouraged and mocked by the narrator, who sounds a bit like Jim Carrey* but is known only as the Personal Trainer. The most effective comparison can probably be drawn with the Nintendo DS let's-make-homework-fun-fest that is Dr. Kawashima's Brain Training. Except if Dr. Kawashima was less distantly polite and more open to smoking pot.

What I'm trying to say is this: the main object of MindGym was to develop different parts of the brain than ordinary puzzle games in a fun and innovative way, a feat that has not been accomplished with an equal degree of humour and originality before or since. Incidentally, it was also the first game ever to win the BAFTA for Interactive Entertainment back in 1998 (beating Douglas Adams) and deservedly so. The puzzles are amusing and challenging, and the graphics and animation is simply beautiful considering the game was made eleven years ago. Bear this in mind when you look at some of the screenshots here.

Sadly there don't seem to be any plans to release an updated version, or a version that will run on something more recent than Windows 98, but I thought this eulogy would ensure that, among a small group of people on the internet, this mini-masterpiece will not be forgotten.

___________________________________________________________

*Do not let this put you off, it's a lot less annoying when you don't have to look at a rubbery, gurning face.

What Nick Griffin On Question Time Taught Us

People who oppose the BNP are just as capable of being massive dicksocks as people who support the BNP.

That is all.

All Sidenote No Substance - pt1

Being the narcisisstic little tart that I am I was looking at my own blogger profile, and it dawned on me, for the first time, that I am 21.

But instead of droning on about that I'm going to tell you something far more useful. Here is the first on my list of TV shows ( that prove to me that contemporary culture is not completely dead.

1. House

Why You Might Not Be That Into It

Everyone in the world has watched at least one episode of House. But even if there could be somebody who hasn't, they would still know the basic premise. Patient is admitted with an interesting illness that peaks the interest of grumpy misanthropic doctor. Patient lies, patient seems to get better, patient suddenly gets a whole lot worse, grumpy misanthrope enters to make patient tell the truth and saves the day.
What tempts a lot of people to dip in and out of House is the way the team deal with a different patient every episode. So at the end of each episode, the story ends with it. The problem with this is that it's easy to think, especially if the viewer hasn't watched a lot of House is that the show is all about the patient in each episode, and the non-patient dialogue and general plot is just filler.

Why You Really Should Be Into It

Because that could not be further from the truth. It is the developments in the characters and their relationships that made the fifth (and at the time of writing most recent) series of House nothing short of spectacular. It was literally the most genuinely moving television I have ever seen. I wept. Like a lost child. And (though I can see how that alone would convince you to stop reading this right now and go out and buy the boxsets) for the stony-hearted there's also blindingly witty dialogue, the clinic scenes which are absolutely hilarious and a particular scene in "Saviors" (season 5, episode 21, last 5 minutes) where Hugh Laurie proves to everyone that he is the single most talented man on the whole doomed planet.
Overall House is exciting, funny and entirely worth sticking with in the long-term. It is a constant source of amazement to me that despite relentless advertising on Channel Five and then Sky One and billboards, magazines, and bus stops that there aren't as many people captivated by it as there should be. Get it seen. You've got no excuses.

Next installment - Mad Men.

There I Was

So there I was thinking something bad's happened when my friend calls me at 1AM.

Turns out he just screamed the Ghostbusters theme tune down the phone then hung up.

I'm going to miss uni so much.

How To Make Friends And Be Alienated By People

I have friends who write Doctor Who fan-fiction on a regular basis, and friends who spend the majority of their free time in IRCs and on imageboards. These friends look down on me for playing a certain online computer game, which, quite frankly, is both embarrassing and grossly unjust.

With the announcement of the new expansion pack “Cataclysm”, World of Warcraft – and its fans – are getting more press attention than ever. But it seems to me that the game is now what Dungeons and Dragons was twenty years ago a leisure activity that, in certain contemporary circles, reduces you from the status of an intelligent, interesting fellow human to a complete social pariah. I'm talking a total lame-ass. A geekwad of epic proportions. You probably have no friends, never leave your darkened computer den to behold the outdoors, and fantasise nightly about elves and gnomes because you've never seen a woman before. It must be true, because you play World Of Warcraft!

In the gaming world there is a divergence between those who play games on the PC, and those who play them on consoles. Console gaming is certainly the more acceptable of the two, due to its association with casual gaming, and socialising, as most console games have a multiplayer option and several controllers. PC gamers are treated by some even inside the gaming world as people who take the whole thing too seriously, put solitary gaming before social interaction, and World of Warcraft is the most notorious culprit of all.

But this is becoming less and less true. A recent advert showed a young man at university playing Mario Kart with his father, at home presumably miles away, on the fun Nintendo Wii. This is hardly different from the way on-line PC gamers use in-game chat and voice chat programs to socialise with the people they are playing with. Even in the LA Times there was a recent article about the close bonds formed by playing on-line with people for a few hours a day, and the BBC News website has in the past published articles advocating the positive effect moderate gaming has on the player's social life. After all, that's what the strongest friendships are based around – shared interests. World of Warcraft is a particularly social game – a large portion of the content relies on co-operation with other players and working as a team, whether in a dungeon fighting a boss, or in a battleground fighting a team of players from the opposing faction.

However, I would be providing an unbalanced argument if I didn't illuminate that sometimes, gaming can become addictive. And yes, people have died from dehydration and exhaustion from playing on-line games for several days at a time non-stop (World Of Warcraft is actually not the worst offender here, but it certainly received the most news coverage). But the addiction is not part of the game; it is part of the player. Most of the people who play do so casually and without taking the game too seriously – the recluse who spends 17 hours a day killing gnomes only exists in the tiniest minority. World Of Warcraft players aren't some different species, born to play, confused and apathetic if asked to do anything else or maybe leave the house. They're just people, who enjoy playing a game. If somebody made a bad decision such as playing chess for two days straight and died because of it, would there be stories all over the news the next day about how harmful and addictive chess is and how it is destroying our society by turning them all into obsessive chess-heads? Of course not. But almost twenty five thousand people have died while playing chess in the last hundred years. And yet the newspapers can't wait to play a new favourite pastime of their own - “Pin The Blame On The Computer Game”.

Despite the calibre of games out at the moment, and the amazing developments in technology in the last few decades gaming is still not a hobby worthy of writing on a CV, which is small-minded and unfair. There is a lot to be said for gaming as a leisure activity in itself. While watching television the brain is in a hypnotic state, and there is only marginally more going on by way of brain activity than there is while you sleep. But gaming not only keeps the brain active and interested, it has also been shown to speed up reaction times and improve hand-eye co-ordination. Gaming in all its forms does not get the credibility it deserves. It is seen by the older generation as a waste of time, but it is really no different from the games they played or still play with their friends in their spare time. It is only the medium that has changed – computer gaming is a both a form of entertainment and a means of bonding with friends, just like any other type of game.

Except Solitaire.