Quotulatiousness

April 29, 2010

Sudden uptick in Guild Wars 2 information releases

Filed under: Gaming — Tags: , — Nicholas @ 13:10

The nice folks who published Guild Wars five years ago are now preparing Guild Wars 2 for release . . . sometime. No firm release date has yet been revealed. This week, however, has seen a lot of new information released about the upcoming game, including:

  • Guild Wars 2 Design Manifesto by Mike O’Brien, one of the company founders.
    “So if you love MMORPGs, you should check out Guild Wars 2. But if you hate traditional MMORPGs, then you should really check out Guild Wars 2. Because, like Guild Wars before it, GW2 doesn’t fall into the traps of traditional MMORPGs. It doesn’t suck your life away and force you onto a grinding treadmill; it doesn’t make you spend hours preparing to have fun rather than just having fun; and of course, it doesn’t have a monthly fee.”
  • The first confirmed profession in GW2, the Elementalist. One of the eight professions in the new game (there are ten in GW, so we’re definitely losing at least two of the current ones). Victor’s favourite GW character is his Elementalist. He’s looking forward to finding how the character class has been changed in the new game.
  • Some quite substantial changes to the combat system from what we’re used to in GW: Combat, Part 1: Skills and Combat, Part 2: Weapons, Professions and Races. It sounds like the changes are going to make the combat experience a whole lot more interesting (possibly harder to master, but definitely more interesting).
  • Five Years in Tyria by James Phinney, a brief tribute to GW on its fifth anniversary.

Parents, don’t let your kids grow up to be fiction authors

Filed under: Economics, Media — Tags: , — Nicholas @ 12:26

Charles Stross lays out the miserable truth about the practical issues when you try to write fiction for a living:

Most people have a very romanticized view of what it is that authors do. Firstly, there’s a widespread perception that the workload involved is relatively easy — in modern western nations, the level of functional literacy is high enough that a majority of the population can read a book, and write (at least to the extent of thumbing a 160-character text message on their phone). Because there is no obvious barrier to entry as with music (where proficiency with musical instruments clearly takes practice), most people assume that writing a novel is like writing a text message — you put one word in front of another until you’re done. The skills of fiction composition are largely invisible, until you try to actually do it. Secondly, many people harbour peculiar ideas about how much money there is in commercial publishing — and when disabused of the idea that selling a first novel is a road to riches, they assume it’s because the evil publishers are conspiring to keep all the money to themselves (rather than the unpalatable truth — publishing commercial fiction is hard work for little reward). Finally, there’s the Lifestyle chimera.

In short: it’s actually work to write for a living. The pay sucks for the vast majority of fiction writers. You face all the risks of a start-up business, but the potential pay-off is lottery-odds unlikely to come your way. Unlike other work, creative writing can’t be done (for most authors) in a predictable regular way:

Putting words in a row is wearying work. When they’re flowing fast, I can sometimes reach a dizzying peak output of 2000 words per hour for a couple of hours — not in fiction, but in a blog entry or a non-fiction essay. I’ve occasionally had death march sessions in which I pumped out as much as 10,000 words in a day. But such Stakhanovite output isn’t sustainable; a 10,000 word day is usually followed by a three-day-weekend to recover from it. A more realistic target for a full-time professional writer is 500-1000 words of finished prose per workday, corresponding to about 1-2 hours of writing, 2-4 hours of polishing, and another couple of hours of thinking about what they want to say, and how to say it. Like anyone else, they need weekends and vacation weeks and time to do the housekeeping. 1000 words per day for a 250-day working year (50 weeks of 5 days a week) works out at 250,000 words per year — or two 320 page novels.

There’s one SF/Fantasy author who seems to publish a new book every month, but he’s extremely unusual. For most authors, one or two books per year is pretty good output.

More wineries to screw it up, er, I mean “on”

Filed under: Economics, Science, Wine — Nicholas @ 12:17

The debate over wine bottle seals may not be quite over, but the evidence is mounting that modern screw-top closures (PDF document) are going to win out over traditional cork and modern synthetic cork closures:

The image above shows the state of 14 bottles of white wine sealed under various closures 125 months (just over 10
years) after bottling. This closure trial was conducted by the Australian Wine Research Institute to assess the relative
effects of cork, plastic and screw cap closures on bottle-aged wine and has unequivocally shown the superiority of
screw caps in aging wine.

[. . .]

The bottled wines were systematically analyzed over a 10 year period by sensory and analytical methods and
photographed (you can see the sequential photographs below). The bottle sealed with a screw cap is positioned on the
far left. While the pictures tell a convincing story, leaving little doubt as to which seal provides the most effective
method of preserving a wine, it is the sensory evaluation results that are most revealing. The wines sealed under screw
cap were still drinkable and showing appealing secondary aged characters while retaining freshness.

In spite of the obvious colour differences, those bottles all hold the same wine, from the same vintage. The bottle at the far right has darkened quite significantly and there’s quite a lot of sediment accumulated at the bottom of the bottle. Just looking at it, you’re probably correct to say it’s dead — don’t even bother uncorking it.

H/T to Michael Pinkus for the link.

Did Bruno Ganz do too good a job playing Adolf Hitler?

Filed under: History, Media, Technology — Tags: , , , , , , — Nicholas @ 12:11

Now that you actually have to work at it to find some of the Downfall parodies on YouTube, John Naughton looks at the cultural power of remix culture, which has been most recently popularized by Bruno Ganz in his mesmerizing performance as Adolf Hitler:

Ganz’s performance is a real tour de force, so much so that the New Yorker critic wondered aloud if it would have the effect of humanising Hitler. But the scene had another, equally extraordinary, side-effect. It became the basis for a wildly successful and entertaining comic virus, in which people used everyday video-editing software to remix the scene in modern contexts (politics, sports, technology, popular culture). The German soundtrack was left unchanged, but new subtitles were added and then the results were posted on YouTube.

[. . .]

Some of these parodies are tiresome. But many are side-splittingly funny, a testimony to the power of remixing as a way of enlivening cultural life. Nevertheless, not everyone is delighted by this new art form. Jewish organisations have been understandably disturbed by the way the architect of the Holocaust has been turned into a comic turn. “Hitler,” said the director of the Anti-Defamation League, “is not a cartoon character”.

[. . .]

The YouTube remix culture is thus a new take on a venerable tradition. I wouldn’t argue that the Downfall spoofs are high art, but they are evidence of bottom-up creativity and intelligence in a new medium. And if we allow narrow considerations of intellectual property to stifle this creativity, then we may all, except for the lawyers, live to regret it.

Back to 1996

Filed under: Randomness, Technology — Tags: , — Nicholas @ 08:07

BoingBoing linked to this online time machine, which shows you what your website would look like (and sound like) back in 1996:

Presenting Geocities-izer!

All the spin that’s fit to print: Bigotgate

Filed under: Britain, Media, Politics — Tags: , , , , — Nicholas @ 07:52

After British PM Gordon Brown accidentally threw himself into the political woodchipper with a remark about a “bigoted woman”, the spin doctors are having a time with it:

Matthew Taylor, former chief adviser on political strategy to Tony Blair

“It is clearly disastrous and also a terrible thing to happen before the final leaders’ debate, which Gordon Brown has to win. He’s given Clegg and Cameron ammunition. The only thing is that expectations now will be so low. They won’t be on the floor, they will be in the cellar. Rock bottom. He’ll have to pull off the performance of the century.”

Olly Grender, former director of communications for the Lib Dems:

“This is the second electric moment in the campaign, the first being the first leaders’ debate. It is going to dominate every news bulletin and will be trailed particularly by the rightwing media. It was classic Gordon Brown, speaking to somebody, giving her a list of six things without asking her anything.

[. . .]

Iain Dale, Conservative political commentator and former political lobbyist

“I can’t remember any politician doing anything this crass. We’ve had this sort of thing before. Who would have thought that when Prescott punched someone it would do his reputation good? But he called a 66-year-old woman a bigot. If we call anyone a bigot who mentions immigration, then that covers thousands of people.

[. . .]

Charlie Whelan, former press secretary for Gordon Brown

“It’s all media clatter rubbish. What makes this story exciting is the media are involved. You’ve got human interest, then you fling in the media and, hey bingo: the wonderful moment the media have been looking for. It’s wonderful to talk about it and to Twitter about it, but normal people looking at it don’t see it in the same way.

Actually, Whelan may have the right idea: the whole situation has galvanized the British media, but it’s not yet clear if it will cause anything more than a temporary blip on the radar as far as the actual voting public is concerned.

All the Senate’s a stage, and Goldman Sachs merely a player

Filed under: Economics, Politics, USA — Tags: , , , — Nicholas @ 07:19

Although in this case, it’s the Senators as walking shadows, poor players that strut and fret their hour upon the stage and then (if we’re lucky) are heard no more. Megan McArdle isn’t impressed:

The statements from the Senators make it clear that they are not holding this hearing in order to find out what happened; that’s the SEC’s job. They’re holding this hearing in order to be televised yelling at investment bankers. Claire McCaskill’s rant was particularly irrelevant to the actual question at hand, but all of them are mostly trying to express outrage, not make any coherent assessment of the strengths of the SEC’s case.

Powered by WordPress