terminator_genisys_2015_movie-2560x1440

Movie Thoughts – Terminator: Genisys

Film & Movies
Alright, I thought, since I end up doing these kinds of “quick analysis” kind of conversations with friends of mine anyhow, (and since I love sharing upcoming videos and everything on my feeds anyway), I might as well try this out and see what comes of it.
I’m not really a huge fan of “react” videos, just because I don’t much enjoy having someone else talking over the trailer as I’m trying to watch it, but let me jot some thoughts, anyhow.
– BK

 

“Come with me if you want to reboot.”

Well, it looks like the T-800 bought a ticket to X-Men: Last Stand, and quickly said to itself, “That’s how I’ll be back.”

The Terminator franchise has been a very popular (and lucrative) one over the years, owing in no small part to the ever precise and robotic performance of Arnold Schwarzenegger. Myself, I’m really with the majority consensus that says the series really “peaked” with Judgment Day, but I still enjoyed War of the Machines, and the scrappy, overblown and practical effects laden action scenes.

(Then again, I seem to ALWAYS like scrappy, overblown, and practical effects laden action scenes – Which is why I have an unrequited love for the Expendables movies, except for the third one, which just wasn’t up to par. Different topic for a different day.)

Alright. With my personal biases on the table, let’s talk Genisys trailer.

First off, the recasting of John Connor for the fourth time. Good idea, I think. One of the most interesting things to me is how this film is apparently looking to wash the taste of Salvation out of the collective Terminator psyche. While the main characters of that film are both featured in Genisys, placing Connor firmly into the background and centering things back on Sarah seems like a great start.

(Anyone else think it’s randomly interesting that we’ve Jason Clarke and Emilia Clarke in the same film? Both Malcolm and Daenerys will do a great job, I’m sure, but Clarke and Clarke as mother and son. How random.)

I also hope that we get to find out where Connor got those sweet badass face-scars. Did a T-800 rip off the side of his face or something?

Alright, so we’ve got Reese going back in time to “save” Sarah again, a la the first film, but this time something else has happened, so the timeline is all screwy, and Sarah is basically in the same role as John Connor was in Terminator 2, with her very own vintage walking, talking, death-machine Arnold father-figure, who apparently gets to take a shotgun to the mint-box model who nakedly arrives. (Though, that could just be clever editing misdirection – We never see the T-800 actually shoot its counterpart in the trailer.)

In any case, that’s the basic plot, then – Reese gets sent back in time to a history that’s different than the one in the first movie, because of some kind of new timeline created by the “Old” T-800 having arrived and raised Sarah.

Cool.

The rest of the trailer is random exposition dialogue thrown over even cooler action shots, so let’s talk about the shots.

The T-1000 self-mutilation javelin – Awesome. While there’s certainly going to be plenty of CGI with the liquid metal effects, the blend of practical throughout even just that small sequence is a good sign of that scrappy look that Terminator needs.

T-800 caretaking and self-examination – Some of the most interesting scenes in Judgment Day are a young John Connor trying to teach humanity to a killing machine. (“I swear I will not kill anyone.”) The T-800s can learn and adapt, but doesn’t seem as prone to self-introspection as the short moment at 1:51 would indicate.

Of course, throughout the series, the T-800 has lost limbs, performed self-repairs and the like, but here it looks as if it’s actively contemplating something, which seems new. Might the age of this specific machine have allowed it to develop more of a personality beyond just a blunt machine?

It’s an interesting thought, and an extension of the ideas that were brought up in T2 about the soul within the machine.

The action continues with more scenes, including a straight-up Dark Knight trailer flip copy with a bus on the Golden Gate. Not so sure about the physics on that one, as it looks like the bus hit a van and then flipped straight over. Kind of a weird cut, but whatever.

Other effects look awesome. The practical nature of it all just looks great. Plenty of grit, which is awesome. Chase scenes, destruction, guns, explosions… All the things that one should expect from a Terminator movie.

Plus, the ending of Arnold diving face-first into a helicopter is straight-up badass.

Overall, I’m pretty excited about this. The movie looks like a good kind of reboot, and an interesting way to extend the series that seems like a logical extension of the series mythos. Obviously, we’ll see how it goes, but I’m onboard. Back to the grit, back to basics, and based around what looks to be a good setup and characters.

So, come July 2015, let’s go watch T-800 vs T-1000 part two. Cause apparently, this time, it’s personal. Lol.

FalloutBag2

Subtle Geek Chic

Film & Movies, Gaming, Life

So, the other night I went with a friend to go see Expendables 3 (which, unfortunately, wasn’t as great as I would have hoped for as a fan of the first two, but I attribute that almost exclusively to them wiping out Terry Crews in the first fifteen minutes. Um, spoilers, I guess. Yeah – Wait for that movie at the dollar theater.).

But there was a fun little Easter egg that ended up in the movie that kind of pulled us out of the experience.

ExpendablesN7

When Barney (Stallone) and the “new kids” are interrogating Stonebanks (Mel Gibson) in the van, it’s supposed to be an intimately difficult scene. Stonebanks is goading Barney into just killing him right there, taunting him and getting him angry. I’d imagine the scene was rather intense.

Or, it would have been, had I not been so distracted by two “N7″ logos on a couple of hats hanging behind Gibson.

For those unaware, the N7 logo is associated with the Mass Effect games series. From the wiki:

N7 is a vocational code in the Systems Alliance military. The “N” designates special forces and the “7” refers to the highest level of proficiency. It applies to marines who have graduated from the Interplanetary Combatives Training (ICT) program.

The little logos made me laugh, especially for the inside joke that was clearly the work of some set worker who was able to sneak this by everyone. Clever, clever.

I’ve always enjoyed items that I’ve taken to calling “Subtle Geek Chic,” or things which don’t look extremely out of place in any context, but for those “in the know,” carry a little extra meaning.

As an example, on my car are three logos which look like any number of random car-aftermarket vinyls that you might see on a tuner car. That is, except the logos look like this:

These logos represent three of the main weapon manufacturers of Borderlands, and though most people don’t give them a second glance, those who are aware of what they mean usually make a comment.

I’ve seen Aperture Science polo shirts, and I keep eyeing this satchel with the “New California Republic” logo emblazoned on it (that seems perpetually out of stock!), along with numerous other examples.

There is a difference to me, I think, between these kind of “second layer” references to things that are more interesting than simply a surface image. As a big Captain America fan, I have a number of items with the shield logo emblazoned on them, but I wouldn’t classify these as “Subtle,” if only because of their purpose and notoriety.

The purpose of the shield, as well as the bat-symbol, the Superman “S,” etc, is to shine forth as a symbol, which is a little counter to the idea of Subtle Geek Chic.

Conversely, a t-shirt with “Citadel Custodial Services” on it, or a twisted pendant of “The Marker,” those both fit, as they are subtle without proclaiming their purpose overtly.

This is also why I’ve never been much into cosplay, I guess. Not because I don’t find the concept awesome – There’s some really impressive work out there, and I was sorely tempted to try building out a Dead Space 2 Advanced RIG at one point – But more because I’ve always enjoyed the “secret language” of fans, especially when those references can be passed by others without them knowing that they’ve missed anything.

It’s similar to inside jokes. When it’s just between you and a select few, then it carries a special meaning. It carries with it a wealth of shared experiences and moments that only those “in the know” remember. But when everyone’s already heard the joke, then the joke gets stale, and it loses some of its special-ish-ness.

On another (sidetracked) note, I think this may also be why people are so averse to spoilers – Those who know about something want to connect with others who have also experienced the same – the inside joke. They even want to bring others into the joke, but not really at the expense of the joke itself, so they encourage the “outsider” to have the experience for themselves in order to then become “in the know.”

While the whole thing may seem a little exclusionary, I actually feel like it’s kind of the opposite. When I’m asked about something that I wear, that I carry, or whatever, I’m open to explaining what it’s about, but it’s really just a matter of “getting it.”

That said, though, sometimes it’s nice to be part of your own club, and that’s okay, too.

Bienvenidos a la fiesta, amigos!

signature2

Arcade

Insert Coin

Gaming, Life, Rants

Back in the game!

No matter how long its been since I jumped into a game, I can always seem to jump back in and figure it out after a little bit. Doesn’t seem to matter how long it’s been, either. The muscles, the mind, they remember these things, and how to do them, even if the skills have been sitting dormant for a few months, or even a few years.

I sometimes like to think of life as a big arcade. Every game is new, and you certainly have some preferences, but all of the machines are there, ready for you to try them out.

dk-quarter_image

Of course, every machine has a cost to start up – some of the classics are easier, just a quarter. Others may be a little more – fifty cents. The new ones, now those cost the most. Sometimes two, three, or even five dollars to try something truly cutting-edge. And there you stand, in the middle, looking at all the cabinets, and having the sights and sounds wash over you in a cacophony of digital input.

Inadvertently, you often start with your old favorites. You find a cabinet you’re familiar with, and rest your hands on the cabinet, the button positions instantly familiar to you, and the joystick settling comfortably in your palm. You toss in a quarter, and off you go. Sure, you may fail a couple of times, but you quickly figure it out, getting back into the saddle, impressed with what you remember.

Throughout the arcade, though, are other experiences. Some look more difficult and you don’t know if you’re up to it, some look unfamiliar, and you’re unsure if you’d even enjoy it, though it looks as if those who are playing those cabinets are certainly enjoying themselves.

Problem is, you don’t want to look like an idiot. You don’t want to put two dollars into the machine just to fail quickly and then have someone else make fun of you for it.

So, you just stick with the machines you know. You wait until that cabinet is clear, and no one else is watching, and then you give it a shot. You try it, you fail. You try again, and you fail. You try, and then succeed! You start doing well!

You notice that a couple people are watching you play out of the corner of your eye, and it starts to be a little distracting. You suddenly fail.

Up comes the screen “Continue? Insert Coin.”

If you want to try again, it’s going to cost you, and now, there are people watching. Are you going to put up the cost and try again?

– – – – –

Of course, the metaphor is a little strained, but here’s the point – How often do we talk ourselves out of trying something because it’s difficult? Because it’s unfamiliar? Because we might get ridiculed, or we’ve never tried it before? Or maybe because the cost to start was a little more than we were ready to give?

Fact is, the arcade of life doesn’t care whether you play or not. Someone will, because others are always playing. There’s always another quarter right there on the screen, with someone else ready to play when you fail, and they’re chomping at the bit to get in on the game.

To stand in the middle of the arcade and just watch others play – That’s the worst. You may only have a few quarters, but there are games that you can play. Get out there and try.

There’s always going to be games you don’t get a shot at. Experiences that you’re going to miss out on, but you’ve got to make a choice. You’ve got to take a step towards one of the machines, and drop a quarter.

Gotta insert the coin, and press start.

Signature

Foul

Calling Your Own Fouls

Gaming, Life

Recently, I’ve been playing a lot of basketball. Mostly pickup games at the gym. Now, I’m not the most spectacular player by any stretch of the imagination. In fact, I’m often reminded by my teammates that I’d probably fit in better on a football field than a basketball court, but I’m still learning.

The nature of the pickup game, though, is such that there usually isn’t a referee. Most often, there’s nobody whose job it is to make the calls, enforce the rules, and make sure that everyone’s playing fair. Because of this, it’s really left up to the individual players to call our own fouls, track our own out of bounds, and watch for travelling, keep track of the score, and decide what is and isn’t “fair play.”

It’s a raw version of Huizinga’s magic circle, especially considering that, regardless of the individual players’ full, half, or even just partial understanding of the rules is generally just submitted to whomever the players believe best understands them.

Put another way, I often have a hard time with the intricacies of basketball rules: Three in the key, hand is part of the ball, proper screening, hand on the back when you’re defending, boxing-out techniques, foul rules on rebounds… There are just so many things that I don’t completely understand the specifics of, and so I generally try to take what more-experienced players on the court tell me as truth.

All players, upon entering the court’s magic circle, agree to abide by the group’s consensus of calls on the court, for most anything, except for one rather specific instance.

Fouls. Everyone is expected to call their own fouls. When you foul someone, you’re expected to say something, so that the offended player/team can get the ball back and everyone can start playing again.

Maybe a Foul.

Maybe a Foul.

Now, of course, because it’s a bunch of human beings playing, as opposed to robots, this opens up the system to abuse, as players are allowed to self-determine what is and is not a foul. The system’s effectiveness is determined by honesty, which can sometimes be difficult to ascertain when both individuals in a situation are in conflict, each with a stake in the outcome of a decision.

So, we appeal to sportsmanship, and the desire for fair play, in the hopes that our own common decency will allow us to look a little past our personal gain towards the greater goal of everyone getting back to the game and playing again.

Granted, the stake and the repercussions may not be all that high in a pickup basketball game, and so generally things go relatively smoothly. But not always.

On Facebook, forums, and message boards, or even in random conversations in real-life, I feel like we similarly enter into a “magic circle” when we offer an opinion. We agree to allow for others to look over something that we’ve stated, and respond to it.

Much like a game of pickup basketball, we tend to pick teams quickly, deciding for or against a given opinion, with those who don’t care choosing not to enter the circle. What is interesting, though, is how quickly we end up in a foul situation, with two or more individuals battling over a “call” that was made.

The desire is not to get back to the game, instead, the game is transformed into “winning the call,” and we pride ourselves on our own moral victories over another individual simply because we were “right” and they were “wrong.” We delude ourselves into believing that the “call” is what’s important, when the reality is that even when you have a referee, sometimes the wrong call is made. Sometimes it doesn’t come out in your favor, but you’ve got to keep on going, and keep on playing anyway.

But so often, we don’t do that. Instead, we focus on the call, we let it boil inside of us. We get angry, bitter, or spiteful that someone would dare make the call against us. Or, on the flip side, we instead make the call pre-emptively, assuming a foul before the play has even occurred. We call foul when, in fact, the play was clean to begin with.

Now, of course, the metaphor is starting to get away from me here, but I’d just like to leave it at this – We, each of us, are either playing the game, or we’re standing on the sidelines watching. Each time that we engage someone else, each time that we decide to share our thoughts with others, we consciously decide to take a shot.

From that point in, you’re in the magic circle, you’re on the court, and you don’t always get to decide who’s going to be playing with you. But that doesn’t mean that we can’t show a little good sportsmanship. Play the game.

Because unlike basketball, there’s not always a clear winner. But if we don’t learn to call our own fouls, you can be sure there will be plenty of losers.

Signature

League2

The League of Legends Gun Armory

Gaming

I had an interesting discussion with a colleague the other day, after we were discussing the free-to-play game design models at length. After tossing around the obligatory annoyance for the differences in monetization, we started talking about what it really was that bothered us about F2P games in general. Was it the fact that not everything was included in a game? Was it having to pay for things multiple times? Maybe just that gamers are, by and large, cheapskates? Or is it the lack of meaningful compensation for the player’s money much of the time?

Our ideas went all over the place, and though it wasn’t a discussion with any particular goal or agenda, we did start discussing something interesting that I wanted to write about.

league_example

Every time the annoyance at F2P gaming comes up, someone will, inevitably, bring up League of Legends. Now, that’s not without merit – League is easily one of the most high-profile and profitable free-to-play games in the world, and they’ve not only survived, but thrived on F2P, generating revenues rumored to be upwards of $100 Million per year.1

This is even more staggering when you consider that the game has largely avoided the derision that has seemingly attached itself permanently to the F2P moniker, eliciting groans from gamers when they hear the term. Instead, League has proven to be very popular, and I’m consistently curious why that is, but that’s a discussion that’s being had all over the place, and not really what I wanted to bring up.

(Though, I will say, the next point was brought up in conjunction with an aside comparison between Diablo 3 and Borderlands 2 which, owing to their perspective top-down and FPS views, may have had some influence in the conversation.)

I came to a realization last night as I was talking with my friend, and realized that, if you pull back to a high level, the Champions in League of Legends are no different than choosing a different “gun” in Call of Duty/Battlefield/Planetside 2, etc. Fundamentally, the “playstyle” of the weapon may change, but the “purpose” of the weapon is essentially the same, in that the player is contributing his/her skills to the completion of the overall goal.

The value difference between a LoL champion and gun, however, is notable. When you purchase a champion, you’re gaining an entirely new way to play the game. Four new skills, a new strategy, a new playstyle, and an individual narrative backstory and character round out your purchase, resulting in something that’s well-worth your initial investment.

By comparison, a gun, well, shoots stuff. Maybe reloads faster, or has a faster fire rate, more damage. But that’s it.

I’ve been thinking a lot lately over different games, and how others might better utilize the free-to-play space in ways that don’t feel cheap or lacking value for the player, and it feels like there’s something here. When a purchase is meaningful, it offers something unique to the player. Unique enough to change the way that the game is played, but still familiar enough that the entirety of the game that they’ve been enjoying is not different just because they made the purchase. (Borderlands 2 has done tremendously well with this strategy. Not in a F2P model, of course, but in their DLC. Topic for another day.)

So here’s the thought that I wanted to share today – How can we make the purchase of a gun, or really, anything in a free-to-play experience, have the value that a champion in League of Legends does? If we can figure that out in our own games, I think the benefits will follow.

Signature

Sources: 1. Games Industry International – Persons of the Year 2012