You're probably thinking, "Hold on. Assassin's Creed is an ongoing franchise. If you have a problem running it, it's probably your computer, bro. Upgrade that shit or go home."
Hear me out. I'm talking about the original Assassin's Creed game. You know, the one with Altair. This game is pretty widely available now. And it remains the only Assassin's Creed game on Steam that does not require Uplay. Also, being older, it runs quite well on a variety of older computers. My copy came from GOG.
However...
Many users (myself included) are installing the game on any platform (even Uplay!) and firing it up, only to have game lock up on the Ubisoft loading screen. Really, Ubisoft? You'd think they would at least patch the game so people could see who to complain about (or not...). Some people can actually get the game to start, but the minute that they activate any kind of continuing achievement (like collecting those damn flags), the game would lock up and crash. Great, right?
There is a very simple solution: disconnect from the internet before you play the game.
Apparently, Assassin's Creed is programmed to check with an Ubisoft server at startup and / or when activating collectibles (like those damn flags). Except, this particular Ubisoft server is off-line. When the game cannot successfully contact the server, the game crashes.
Oh, Ubisoft. Still harassing gamers from beyond the veil...
Thursday, February 26, 2015
On Game Length
With so many outlets dissing on The Order: 1886 for its length, it seems the perfect time to discuss acceptable game length. Prominent game critics have all shared their opinions. And many of the opinions are as indefinite as any logical discussion of the issue should be. Here's why.
Everyone plays games in their own way. What is five hours for one person may be ten hours or more for another. It takes me about 12 hours to complete an Alan Wake walkthrough - another 2 hours if both additional episodes are included. Friends have completed Alan Wake in 6 hours. It took me 15 hours to complete Remember Me. Others have done it in 8. I tend to be a "slow" gamer who does not see the value of speed runs (but if speed runs stir your blood, good for you!).
And the length of a game frequently has nothing to do with the quality of the game. Remember Me stands as one of the great missed opportunities; there was so much that could have been done with the fantastic world that was created. I purchased it, linear story-line and all, for $10. It took me 15 hours to complete. I feel I got my money's worth, because I found it gripping and enjoyable. And I'll be replaying it at some point in the future. Dishonored is a short game; the main story-line can be completed in 8 hours or less (though replayability is high). I purchased the GOTY edition for around $12, and feel I got my money's worth. I purchased Just Cause 2 for $5 (with all the DLC), and currently have over 100 hours on it. Is it a better game than Dishonored or Remember Me? I think Just Cause 2 does different things than those games, and comparing it with the other two isn't a fair comparison. Play-time shouldn't even enter the conversation.
This does not to give license to game companies to rip consumers off, though. So at some point, play-time HAS to enter the discussion. That is the conundrum. Who wants to spend $20 for 2 hours of gameplay? (Metal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes) Who wants to spend $10 for a mobile-ported game that is the only released part of what was projected to be a 3-part series? (Deus Ex: The Fall) Even Alan Wake (which has special associations for me) isn't exactly inviting replays; and the sequel / expandalone, American Nightmare, is barely 3 hours long for $10.
The bottom line is, what do you value in video games, and how much are you prepared to pay for it?
Do your own research when purchasing any game (or anything online, for that matter). Read the reviews, enter the forums. Though even there, misinformation and spite is wide-spread. I cannot tell you how many times I have seen a game trashed in the forums because the game did not do what people thought it should, or did it in a different way (Thief 2014, anyone?). If The Order: 1886 ever comes to PC, I'll probably be picking it up - if I can get it for around $7.50 - $12. Because that is what 6-10 hours of narrative-driven gameplay is worth to me. What is it worth to you?
Everyone plays games in their own way. What is five hours for one person may be ten hours or more for another. It takes me about 12 hours to complete an Alan Wake walkthrough - another 2 hours if both additional episodes are included. Friends have completed Alan Wake in 6 hours. It took me 15 hours to complete Remember Me. Others have done it in 8. I tend to be a "slow" gamer who does not see the value of speed runs (but if speed runs stir your blood, good for you!).
And the length of a game frequently has nothing to do with the quality of the game. Remember Me stands as one of the great missed opportunities; there was so much that could have been done with the fantastic world that was created. I purchased it, linear story-line and all, for $10. It took me 15 hours to complete. I feel I got my money's worth, because I found it gripping and enjoyable. And I'll be replaying it at some point in the future. Dishonored is a short game; the main story-line can be completed in 8 hours or less (though replayability is high). I purchased the GOTY edition for around $12, and feel I got my money's worth. I purchased Just Cause 2 for $5 (with all the DLC), and currently have over 100 hours on it. Is it a better game than Dishonored or Remember Me? I think Just Cause 2 does different things than those games, and comparing it with the other two isn't a fair comparison. Play-time shouldn't even enter the conversation.
This does not to give license to game companies to rip consumers off, though. So at some point, play-time HAS to enter the discussion. That is the conundrum. Who wants to spend $20 for 2 hours of gameplay? (Metal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes) Who wants to spend $10 for a mobile-ported game that is the only released part of what was projected to be a 3-part series? (Deus Ex: The Fall) Even Alan Wake (which has special associations for me) isn't exactly inviting replays; and the sequel / expandalone, American Nightmare, is barely 3 hours long for $10.
The bottom line is, what do you value in video games, and how much are you prepared to pay for it?
Do your own research when purchasing any game (or anything online, for that matter). Read the reviews, enter the forums. Though even there, misinformation and spite is wide-spread. I cannot tell you how many times I have seen a game trashed in the forums because the game did not do what people thought it should, or did it in a different way (Thief 2014, anyone?). If The Order: 1886 ever comes to PC, I'll probably be picking it up - if I can get it for around $7.50 - $12. Because that is what 6-10 hours of narrative-driven gameplay is worth to me. What is it worth to you?
Tuesday, February 24, 2015
AMD Current and Next-gen
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-carrizo-apu-excavator-processors-cpu,28608.html
Really excited about this, even though I don't plan on purchasing a laptop in the near future. It is no secret that AMD products have lagged behind Intel's in terms of sheer power. AMD has compensated by offering their aging tech at prices that are very attractive to the low-cost builder. The FX-series of AMD processors are done, developmentally, but not over, as prices to continue to drop. (Recently saw a six-core FX-6350 for $89. Are you kidding me?)
The efficiency demonstrated by Carrizo is just the tip of the iceberg, though. Excavator is a development of the Steamroller core, hence not really new. Carrizo, like Kaveri before it, is a test-bed for AMD's REALLY big release, scheduled to come in 2016: the all-new from-the-ground-up Zen core. So, even though Carrizo may not demonstrate enough CPU core improvements to suddenly even the playing field with Intel, it's success should rather be judged on just how successful the technical innovations are (like integrating the South Bridge onto the die). Every single technology, from saving space on the die to Bridge integration to power-saving of the CPU stack - it is all preparation for the Zen core. Of course, Carrizo is not destined for desktops. Desktops will see a Kaveri refresh this summer, code-named Godavari. While a slight boost in clocks is promised, it remains an incremental increase that is all but a stop-gap until Zen arrives.
Not much is really known about the Zen core, other than it will be small (around 14 nm), and incorporate elements from both x86 design and ARM design (and potentially be compatible with both, which would be highly unique). There is a great interview on YouTube with CPU design guru Jim Keller about the direction of Zen's development, though obviously he cannot be too explicit. There are rumors that the Zen APU will have an 8-core CPU, a GPU with 1024 stream processors and DDR4 compatibility (salivating...). Still rumors at this point. If the Zen APU delivers at least six cores (or equivalent) and at least 800 stream processors, that will still be a significant stride over the current-gen Kaveri.
Have to say I'm very happy with the direction AMD is going. Hopefully they last long enough to actually make the market splash they need to remain viable for the long-term.
Mid-2016 seems like a long way away...
Update 3/16/2015
AMD releases more specifications of Carrizo:
http://www.amd.com/en-us/press-releases/Pages/amd-discloses-architecture-2015feb23.aspx
Really excited about this, even though I don't plan on purchasing a laptop in the near future. It is no secret that AMD products have lagged behind Intel's in terms of sheer power. AMD has compensated by offering their aging tech at prices that are very attractive to the low-cost builder. The FX-series of AMD processors are done, developmentally, but not over, as prices to continue to drop. (Recently saw a six-core FX-6350 for $89. Are you kidding me?)
The efficiency demonstrated by Carrizo is just the tip of the iceberg, though. Excavator is a development of the Steamroller core, hence not really new. Carrizo, like Kaveri before it, is a test-bed for AMD's REALLY big release, scheduled to come in 2016: the all-new from-the-ground-up Zen core. So, even though Carrizo may not demonstrate enough CPU core improvements to suddenly even the playing field with Intel, it's success should rather be judged on just how successful the technical innovations are (like integrating the South Bridge onto the die). Every single technology, from saving space on the die to Bridge integration to power-saving of the CPU stack - it is all preparation for the Zen core. Of course, Carrizo is not destined for desktops. Desktops will see a Kaveri refresh this summer, code-named Godavari. While a slight boost in clocks is promised, it remains an incremental increase that is all but a stop-gap until Zen arrives.
Not much is really known about the Zen core, other than it will be small (around 14 nm), and incorporate elements from both x86 design and ARM design (and potentially be compatible with both, which would be highly unique). There is a great interview on YouTube with CPU design guru Jim Keller about the direction of Zen's development, though obviously he cannot be too explicit. There are rumors that the Zen APU will have an 8-core CPU, a GPU with 1024 stream processors and DDR4 compatibility (salivating...). Still rumors at this point. If the Zen APU delivers at least six cores (or equivalent) and at least 800 stream processors, that will still be a significant stride over the current-gen Kaveri.
Have to say I'm very happy with the direction AMD is going. Hopefully they last long enough to actually make the market splash they need to remain viable for the long-term.
Mid-2016 seems like a long way away...
Update 3/16/2015
AMD releases more specifications of Carrizo:
http://www.amd.com/en-us/press-releases/Pages/amd-discloses-architecture-2015feb23.aspx
Sunday, February 22, 2015
On Gaming the "Right" Way
I was trawling the forums yesterday, and I came across a thread started by a someone who said:
"Hi all, I'm new to [Game X]. I'm loving it so far. Anybody have any tips for helping me play the right way?"
This started me thinking. Is there really a "right" way to play a video game?
I don't think so. Here's why.
Video games are viewed as an entertainment experience by many. But in many games, and in RPGs in particular, they are more than just a beginning, middle and end. They represent a problem to solve. Playing "right" or playing "wrong" is not the point of video gaming, because players who hold themselves to someone else's standard of right and wrong play are fated to be disappointed in the experience the game provides. It's like trying to pick up every collectible and read every little note and sheet of paper within a game; it is too easy to lose track of the game objective. The player becomes adrift on a sea of secondary objectives and minutiae, never experiencing the game for himself / herself. The "right" way to play a game is to grapple with it yourself, and find your own solutions.
Finding your own solutions involves making mistakes. Some of those mistakes wound a gamer's pride. Like going into a boss battle with only one health potion. That is unquestionably stupid. And it is wrong. The game lets you know this by forcing you to die repeatedly until you get the message. The question then becomes, are you going to reload a save from before the boss fight, purchase a boatload of potions, then fight the boss, or are you going to throw your hands up in the air in disgust at your own stupidity? (Or worse, blame the game for your own problems?) But wait a minute: the concept of "making a mistake" implies that there IS indeed a "right" and a "wrong" way to play.
Perhaps instead of thinking of de facto right and wrong way to play, it is better to conceive of a video game's "path to success." I define a "path to success" as a method of playing a video game such that all primary objectives are completed without undue frustration on the part of the player. Some games offer multiple paths to success. Some offer only one. It can be fun to mix parts of different paths (in games that permit that), and come up with your own path to success. When presented with multiple paths, the question of the "right" or "wrong" way to play becomes moot, because how to play the game devolves entirely onto the player's personal preference. The Mass Effect games are a great example of this. When presented with a single path, playing "wrong" is not really possible (thinking of Alan Wake here); there is one way to go - all that needs to be done is traverse the path that is laid out.
Now, if someone asks the right way to play a specific path, it is possible to receive a more objective answer. Like how to take the Stealth path in Deus Ex: Human Revolution, or how to lead the Shimazu clan to domination in Shogun II Total War. But if someone asks the "right" way to play Deus Ex: Human Revolution or Shogun II Total War in general, that tells me that maybe the asker is someone afraid to make a mistake and learn from it. Or perhaps the asker simply has seen people having fun with the game and wants to have the same fun - and thinks that playing the way their friends play will impart the same amount of joy. Or perhaps the asker is looking for a quick-start shortcut to getting the most out of the game en route to consuming it as quickly as possible before moving on to the next game.
They are missing the point of playing video games in the first place. Video gamers are fascinated by discovery, creativity and problem solving, whether the game under discussion is Farmville, Age of Empires, Saints Row or Dragon Age Inquisition. What is the right way to play? Who cares. Have FUN!
"Hi all, I'm new to [Game X]. I'm loving it so far. Anybody have any tips for helping me play the right way?"
This started me thinking. Is there really a "right" way to play a video game?
I don't think so. Here's why.
Video games are viewed as an entertainment experience by many. But in many games, and in RPGs in particular, they are more than just a beginning, middle and end. They represent a problem to solve. Playing "right" or playing "wrong" is not the point of video gaming, because players who hold themselves to someone else's standard of right and wrong play are fated to be disappointed in the experience the game provides. It's like trying to pick up every collectible and read every little note and sheet of paper within a game; it is too easy to lose track of the game objective. The player becomes adrift on a sea of secondary objectives and minutiae, never experiencing the game for himself / herself. The "right" way to play a game is to grapple with it yourself, and find your own solutions.
Finding your own solutions involves making mistakes. Some of those mistakes wound a gamer's pride. Like going into a boss battle with only one health potion. That is unquestionably stupid. And it is wrong. The game lets you know this by forcing you to die repeatedly until you get the message. The question then becomes, are you going to reload a save from before the boss fight, purchase a boatload of potions, then fight the boss, or are you going to throw your hands up in the air in disgust at your own stupidity? (Or worse, blame the game for your own problems?) But wait a minute: the concept of "making a mistake" implies that there IS indeed a "right" and a "wrong" way to play.
Perhaps instead of thinking of de facto right and wrong way to play, it is better to conceive of a video game's "path to success." I define a "path to success" as a method of playing a video game such that all primary objectives are completed without undue frustration on the part of the player. Some games offer multiple paths to success. Some offer only one. It can be fun to mix parts of different paths (in games that permit that), and come up with your own path to success. When presented with multiple paths, the question of the "right" or "wrong" way to play becomes moot, because how to play the game devolves entirely onto the player's personal preference. The Mass Effect games are a great example of this. When presented with a single path, playing "wrong" is not really possible (thinking of Alan Wake here); there is one way to go - all that needs to be done is traverse the path that is laid out.
Now, if someone asks the right way to play a specific path, it is possible to receive a more objective answer. Like how to take the Stealth path in Deus Ex: Human Revolution, or how to lead the Shimazu clan to domination in Shogun II Total War. But if someone asks the "right" way to play Deus Ex: Human Revolution or Shogun II Total War in general, that tells me that maybe the asker is someone afraid to make a mistake and learn from it. Or perhaps the asker simply has seen people having fun with the game and wants to have the same fun - and thinks that playing the way their friends play will impart the same amount of joy. Or perhaps the asker is looking for a quick-start shortcut to getting the most out of the game en route to consuming it as quickly as possible before moving on to the next game.
They are missing the point of playing video games in the first place. Video gamers are fascinated by discovery, creativity and problem solving, whether the game under discussion is Farmville, Age of Empires, Saints Row or Dragon Age Inquisition. What is the right way to play? Who cares. Have FUN!
Saturday, February 21, 2015
Side-Quest: Getting Crysis to Run on PC (64-bit)
Despite having poured thousands of hours into my favorite games, I somehow missed out on Crysis (the first one). So, when it was on sale on Steam over Christmas, I picked it up.
Then I tried installing it. Dun dun dun... CRASH! Repeatedly. Turns out this is a common problem.
There are lots of problems getting the game to even launch. Then there are problems using the 64-bit executable. Now I have no trouble executing some complicated "back up x file, then change setting y" type of stuff, but there's some consumer outrage whenever I have to do that. I paid for a working product. It darn well better work. If it doesn't, the question becomes whether I want to go through the trouble. For Crysis, there are some simple steps to follow that result in a working game without having to modify any game files.
You will need an Origin account.
1. Purchase Crysis on Steam or on disc (if you purchase on Origin, go to step 3). The game has been steeply discounted during major holidays, so wait until for a sale if possible.
2. Activate the game's license key with EA, so that it will appear in your Origin library. The tricky part here is that if you try to activate Crysis using the Origin software, you could get an "Invalid Key" error. To activate it, you have to enter the key on EA's support website. Activating here will successfully add Crysis to your Origin library.
3. Download and install Crysis from Origin.
4. You might think you're done, but the minute you try to launch the game, it will crash once again. You might think that the game is simply broken, but that is not the case.
5. Navigate to the folder Crysis is installed to (in my case, F: > Games > Crysis
6. I want to run Crysis using the 64-bit executable, so go into the Bin64 folder.
7. Double-click Crysis.exe to launch the game.
(This solution only works on computers with 64-bit operating systems.)
The game should launch. Exactly why the game launches directly from the executable and not from Origin is a mystery to me.
If you use this method for Steam (install Crysis via Steam, go into the Steam Crysis folder and launch using the executable), the game will still crash. A bait-and-switch move to get more people to use Origin? Who knows. The Origin version of Crysis does use a patched version of EA's infamous Securom DRM; it now uses your Origin credentials to verify ownership. So you DO need to be logged in to Origin to run the game.
Crysis runs smooth and solid now, and still looks amazing for an older title.Unfortunately the multiplayer component is off-line, but hey: what price nostalgia (or, in my case, discovery)?
Quest Completed.
Bonus: EA's support site activation service will also work with Crysis 2 and Crysis Warhead.
Then I tried installing it. Dun dun dun... CRASH! Repeatedly. Turns out this is a common problem.
There are lots of problems getting the game to even launch. Then there are problems using the 64-bit executable. Now I have no trouble executing some complicated "back up x file, then change setting y" type of stuff, but there's some consumer outrage whenever I have to do that. I paid for a working product. It darn well better work. If it doesn't, the question becomes whether I want to go through the trouble. For Crysis, there are some simple steps to follow that result in a working game without having to modify any game files.
You will need an Origin account.
1. Purchase Crysis on Steam or on disc (if you purchase on Origin, go to step 3). The game has been steeply discounted during major holidays, so wait until for a sale if possible.
2. Activate the game's license key with EA, so that it will appear in your Origin library. The tricky part here is that if you try to activate Crysis using the Origin software, you could get an "Invalid Key" error. To activate it, you have to enter the key on EA's support website. Activating here will successfully add Crysis to your Origin library.
3. Download and install Crysis from Origin.
4. You might think you're done, but the minute you try to launch the game, it will crash once again. You might think that the game is simply broken, but that is not the case.
5. Navigate to the folder Crysis is installed to (in my case, F: > Games > Crysis
6. I want to run Crysis using the 64-bit executable, so go into the Bin64 folder.
7. Double-click Crysis.exe to launch the game.
(This solution only works on computers with 64-bit operating systems.)
The game should launch. Exactly why the game launches directly from the executable and not from Origin is a mystery to me.
If you use this method for Steam (install Crysis via Steam, go into the Steam Crysis folder and launch using the executable), the game will still crash. A bait-and-switch move to get more people to use Origin? Who knows. The Origin version of Crysis does use a patched version of EA's infamous Securom DRM; it now uses your Origin credentials to verify ownership. So you DO need to be logged in to Origin to run the game.
Crysis runs smooth and solid now, and still looks amazing for an older title.Unfortunately the multiplayer component is off-line, but hey: what price nostalgia (or, in my case, discovery)?
Quest Completed.
Bonus: EA's support site activation service will also work with Crysis 2 and Crysis Warhead.
Friday, February 20, 2015
Failed Mission - Lenovo & Superfish
If ever there was a reason to build your own computer or buy one without an operating system, this is one.
This is a pretty good summary of the story, though it is all over the tech-net right now.
Cheap tech is awesome (when it works). Laptops and computers have come down in price by a large amount compared to even five years ago. It's not just that the tech has gotten cheaper; it's that computer manufacturers have found new ways to monetize their platforms. Lenovo isn't alone here. I used to buy a lot of Hewlet-Packard products, and the case was similar. I remember purchasing an HP laptop that came with AOL Online installed (yes, it was a while ago lol). It also had the Rhapsody Music Player, Real Player, and almost half a dozen quick-search browser bars installed upon purchase. The subsidies those (and other) companies paid helped lower the cost of the laptop. That's how I was able to afford it in the first place, which means the subsidy thing was successful - it resulted in the sale of an HP product due to the lower price.
From the looks of it (and this may change), was Lenovo simply naive about what sort of advertising (bloatware) deal it was making? There's no point in going Full-McCarthy at this point. The lesson that can be learned here is that perhaps not even manufacturers understand all the ramifications of internet - and that just because you can make money off of something doesn't mean you should. Are there back doors like this in other companies' products? Almost certainly. The Superfish deal sounds like any other bloat-ware subsidy that computer manufacturers make to lower their bottom line. Lenovo got caught first, though, so they will take the brunt of the bad press.
Any story involving surveillance is news today, obviously. As stories swirl about that point fingers at a number of different organizations surveilling and hacking ("It's North Korea!" "It's the NSA!" "It's China!"), privacy becomes more important than ever. The problem isn't that people in general hide things; the problem is that everybody hides something, whether on a material or a psychological level. Hiding or concealing is one of the most basic coping mechanisms that exists, whether it is being an asshole online to hide the fact that a person is secretly a coward, or sharing too much online to hide the fact that a person's life is actually empty. Hiding things is a basic part of human nature. Take that away, and a part of humanity has been stripped away as well.
The attempt to expose human patterns of behavior (i.e. internet browsing) is invasive of my humanity, of who I am as a person. Why would I want to let some organization extrapolate my habits from my browsing history? Information from me and others (for free, no less) and used to map potential markets. And it is not even markets that is really being mapped; the tracked information simply allows for more focused advertising. I am not giving any corporation or organization implicit permission to track me, unless a window pops up asking for my permission and I click "Allow."
But if I click "Don't Allow," what assurances do I have that they (whatever corporation or business in question) won't track me anyway? There is none. Would having an "Allow" button absolve Lenovo from the current uproar? (Because, after all, the user would have given permission to Superfish). Of course not. Because it is the responsibility of the manufacturer to know exactly what is going into the product that they sell. Ignorance and / or precedent ("everybody else does it!") is no excuse.
I recommended a friend purchase a Lenovo product two weeks ago. Now I am glad they didn't. Recommendations going forward will be based on either DIY desktops or no-OS laptops. Yes, whatever operating system that is installed will have its own trackers and updaters, but hey, better the devil you know than the devil that installs itself and tracks you without your permission.
UPDATE: Lenovo is contrite and posted this reply on their website.
This is a pretty good summary of the story, though it is all over the tech-net right now.
Cheap tech is awesome (when it works). Laptops and computers have come down in price by a large amount compared to even five years ago. It's not just that the tech has gotten cheaper; it's that computer manufacturers have found new ways to monetize their platforms. Lenovo isn't alone here. I used to buy a lot of Hewlet-Packard products, and the case was similar. I remember purchasing an HP laptop that came with AOL Online installed (yes, it was a while ago lol). It also had the Rhapsody Music Player, Real Player, and almost half a dozen quick-search browser bars installed upon purchase. The subsidies those (and other) companies paid helped lower the cost of the laptop. That's how I was able to afford it in the first place, which means the subsidy thing was successful - it resulted in the sale of an HP product due to the lower price.
From the looks of it (and this may change), was Lenovo simply naive about what sort of advertising (bloatware) deal it was making? There's no point in going Full-McCarthy at this point. The lesson that can be learned here is that perhaps not even manufacturers understand all the ramifications of internet - and that just because you can make money off of something doesn't mean you should. Are there back doors like this in other companies' products? Almost certainly. The Superfish deal sounds like any other bloat-ware subsidy that computer manufacturers make to lower their bottom line. Lenovo got caught first, though, so they will take the brunt of the bad press.
Any story involving surveillance is news today, obviously. As stories swirl about that point fingers at a number of different organizations surveilling and hacking ("It's North Korea!" "It's the NSA!" "It's China!"), privacy becomes more important than ever. The problem isn't that people in general hide things; the problem is that everybody hides something, whether on a material or a psychological level. Hiding or concealing is one of the most basic coping mechanisms that exists, whether it is being an asshole online to hide the fact that a person is secretly a coward, or sharing too much online to hide the fact that a person's life is actually empty. Hiding things is a basic part of human nature. Take that away, and a part of humanity has been stripped away as well.
The attempt to expose human patterns of behavior (i.e. internet browsing) is invasive of my humanity, of who I am as a person. Why would I want to let some organization extrapolate my habits from my browsing history? Information from me and others (for free, no less) and used to map potential markets. And it is not even markets that is really being mapped; the tracked information simply allows for more focused advertising. I am not giving any corporation or organization implicit permission to track me, unless a window pops up asking for my permission and I click "Allow."
But if I click "Don't Allow," what assurances do I have that they (whatever corporation or business in question) won't track me anyway? There is none. Would having an "Allow" button absolve Lenovo from the current uproar? (Because, after all, the user would have given permission to Superfish). Of course not. Because it is the responsibility of the manufacturer to know exactly what is going into the product that they sell. Ignorance and / or precedent ("everybody else does it!") is no excuse.
I recommended a friend purchase a Lenovo product two weeks ago. Now I am glad they didn't. Recommendations going forward will be based on either DIY desktops or no-OS laptops. Yes, whatever operating system that is installed will have its own trackers and updaters, but hey, better the devil you know than the devil that installs itself and tracks you without your permission.
UPDATE: Lenovo is contrite and posted this reply on their website.
Side-Quest: Disabling V-Sync in Mass Effect 3
Waiting for my graphics card to get back from its second warranty repair (c'mon, Asus, you're better than this!). Meanwhile, I'm getting by with my backup video card, a Radeon 6670 with 1GB of GDDR5. Needless to say, graphics performance is greatly reduced, to put it mildly. People wouldn't need "backup" graphics cards, of course, if their primary hardware functioned as it should.
Having to turn a lot of settings down, but one thing I don't want to compromise: resolution. And right there, I am really limiting myself, but there it is. My monitor has 1080p native, and if I go with anything else in a large number of games, the visuals simply look like crap. So 1080p it is then. That means lots of jaggies and screen tearing, unfortunately, because Vertical Sync causes a lot of lag on an under-powered system.
TL:DR.
Mass Effect 3 has appreciable stutter and lag when running on my 6670. The problem is that the card is not powerful enough to render the game at a constant 60fps, so all that needs to be done is to disable V-sync. But there is no option to disable Vertical Sync in its options menu. It is still possible to turn it off, however, by editing the GamerSettings.ini in the Config folder (always back up core files before altering them!) Thanks to user evilsofa on hardforum.com for this solution.
1. Find GamerSettings.ini, and open it in Notepad.
2. At the bottom of the [SystemSettings] section, add these three lines:
UseVSync=True
SmoothFrameRate=True
MaxSmoothedFrameRate=62
I only need the V-sync setting, so I guess you could just add that without the other two. Since it was listed as part of the solution, though, I'm including it.
3. Change the "UseVSync" value from True to False. Click "save" and exit Notepad.
And voila! Stutter eliminated. Mission accomplished.
Collateral Damage: Screen tearing is now omnipresent.
Having to turn a lot of settings down, but one thing I don't want to compromise: resolution. And right there, I am really limiting myself, but there it is. My monitor has 1080p native, and if I go with anything else in a large number of games, the visuals simply look like crap. So 1080p it is then. That means lots of jaggies and screen tearing, unfortunately, because Vertical Sync causes a lot of lag on an under-powered system.
TL:DR.
Mass Effect 3 has appreciable stutter and lag when running on my 6670. The problem is that the card is not powerful enough to render the game at a constant 60fps, so all that needs to be done is to disable V-sync. But there is no option to disable Vertical Sync in its options menu. It is still possible to turn it off, however, by editing the GamerSettings.ini in the Config folder (always back up core files before altering them!) Thanks to user evilsofa on hardforum.com for this solution.
1. Find GamerSettings.ini, and open it in Notepad.
2. At the bottom of the [SystemSettings] section, add these three lines:
UseVSync=True
SmoothFrameRate=True
MaxSmoothedFrameRate=62
I only need the V-sync setting, so I guess you could just add that without the other two. Since it was listed as part of the solution, though, I'm including it.
3. Change the "UseVSync" value from True to False. Click "save" and exit Notepad.
And voila! Stutter eliminated. Mission accomplished.
Collateral Damage: Screen tearing is now omnipresent.
Thursday, February 19, 2015
Failed Mission - Google Music
One of the fun parts about creating a new profile from scratch online is that I can try to do all the stuff right that I didn't do right when I first created profiles etc. Because if you set up an online profile incorrectly, chances are you are stuck with that incorrect thing FOR EVER.
Anyways...
When I was setting up this blog and its accompanying Google+ profile, I thought I would utilize Google Play as well for some of my music. No need to risk copyright infringement notices by uploading favorite songs to YouTube. I'd just use Google Play, a free service, and upload my favorite songs from CDs I have ripped THAT I OWN. Well, I'm progressing through the intro screens, blah blah blah, until I get to this one.
Are. You. Kidding. Me.
So... I still have to have a "form of payment" on file to use a free service? To verify my country of residence. Because of Google's "music deals," whatever the hell they are. Look, conspiracy theories aside (or not - a topic for another post), I know Google uses cookies to track my IP address. Why can't my country be verified from that? It's not like I'm using the Tor browser. And why do "music rights" (which I assume refer to copyright and proliferation of ripped content) matter for what is supposed to be a personal service that is NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION OF SAID CONTENT? And what if something is uploaded that Google has a problem with? Well, the fines will certainly be easy to levy. Because they already have my payment information on file.
There is, apparently, some kind of premium service for Google Play that costs $9.99 a month. I don't know what it is. I beta-tested Google Play when it was invite-only (on my alternate profile), and there was no talk of a premium level of the service then. But I do know Google tried to click-trick me into agreeing to a 30-day trial of it. I can just see myself receiving some email in the future, notifying me of some change in the Terms of Use for Google Play (Terms of use stuff usually defaults to TL:DR), and suddenly I'm being charged money to even use the service - because they already have my payment information.
I don't blame Google for trying to make money off of their service. But there is no need for me to enter payment information for a free service. Sheesh.
Anyways...
When I was setting up this blog and its accompanying Google+ profile, I thought I would utilize Google Play as well for some of my music. No need to risk copyright infringement notices by uploading favorite songs to YouTube. I'd just use Google Play, a free service, and upload my favorite songs from CDs I have ripped THAT I OWN. Well, I'm progressing through the intro screens, blah blah blah, until I get to this one.
Are. You. Kidding. Me.
So... I still have to have a "form of payment" on file to use a free service? To verify my country of residence. Because of Google's "music deals," whatever the hell they are. Look, conspiracy theories aside (or not - a topic for another post), I know Google uses cookies to track my IP address. Why can't my country be verified from that? It's not like I'm using the Tor browser. And why do "music rights" (which I assume refer to copyright and proliferation of ripped content) matter for what is supposed to be a personal service that is NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION OF SAID CONTENT? And what if something is uploaded that Google has a problem with? Well, the fines will certainly be easy to levy. Because they already have my payment information on file.
There is, apparently, some kind of premium service for Google Play that costs $9.99 a month. I don't know what it is. I beta-tested Google Play when it was invite-only (on my alternate profile), and there was no talk of a premium level of the service then. But I do know Google tried to click-trick me into agreeing to a 30-day trial of it. I can just see myself receiving some email in the future, notifying me of some change in the Terms of Use for Google Play (Terms of use stuff usually defaults to TL:DR), and suddenly I'm being charged money to even use the service - because they already have my payment information.
I don't blame Google for trying to make money off of their service. But there is no need for me to enter payment information for a free service. Sheesh.
Welcome to My Blog!
My name's Abe.
I like video games.
I enjoy a lot of other stuff, too. Cake (screw you, GLaDOS), chocolate, movies, music, daily news and events. But mostly games. Sometimes I'll post a lot. Sometimes I might let weeks lapse between posts. I expect I'll post a little bit of everything here.
But still, games. I guess it's best to give my gaming history.
I loved hanging out in arcades when I was a kid. No surprise that I play a lot of video games now, I guess. Though it's taken me a while to get here (I'm over 30). My first game was Quake 2, which I first played in 2002. Then I tried out Age of Empires II (with the Conqueror's Expansion), and played nothing else for a while. Next up was the Total War series. The first Medieval Total War was a great companion; I have no estimate of the number of hours I whiled away while dealing with yet another resurgent Papacy. Then Rome Total War launched, and I played a bit of that. Probably my most-played title was Medieval II Total War. I really got into the whole mod scene. I tried out one mod after another, never really playing them much, but awed at the amount of variety.
And that takes me to 2013. I had a lot of events happening in my life, and contracted pneumonia in February of that year. A lot of things changed. I decided to explore more things that I might enjoy, instead of constantly trying to please other people. I discovered YouTube "let's play" videos of people playing video games. One of the first games I started to observe was a play-through of an old game called Assassin's Creed. The game plus its sequel was cheap on Amazon, so I bought it.
So it began.
Playing games started as a distraction. It was still a new experience to me, so every time Al-tair made a jump I was slightly elated. Every time he lost a little bit of sync, my hands would scrabble around my keyboard, desperately trying to do better. Still a distraction. Then I played Alan Wake. Now, Alan Wake has its limitations, as anyone who has played it will know. But I never knew that games could be like that. That they could have gripping stories, beautiful scenes, and moving characters. Even now that I have played many more games and realized that Alan Wake has a linear story-line and repetitive combat, it still holds a special place for me.
From there, it was a hop and a skip to more games of even greater caliber. The Assassin's Creed franchise has some superb moments (Black Flag is one of my favorite games). The Batman Arkham series is forever installed on whatever computer I am currently using. So is the Mass Effect trilogy (almost have a maxed manifest in Mass Effect 3 multiplayer). Dragon Age Origins, The Witcher, Tomb Raider (2013), Deus Ex: Human Revolution, Red Faction: Guerrilla, Saints Row. The list goes on and on.
Point is, I was late to gaming. Nearly two years on, there are still so many games I haven't played, and so many games that I want to revisit. For video gaming, I think we live in a great time. Games can be better than ever, with better graphics than ever, with better voice actors than ever. Hardware companies are making new strides in all phases of computers - more processing power for less electricity, great value-for-money computers that are easy to build yourself. Even as duplicity, corruption and strife run rampant in the societies of the world, there has never been a better time to play video games.
I'm starting this blog because there is more that I want to say than can be fit into a single game review. And though video games and the tech required to play them remain primary, I expect to be sharing and commenting on a number of issues and events that happen in the world as well.
So, welcome to Abe's Mission Control! Glad to have you aboard.
I like video games.
I enjoy a lot of other stuff, too. Cake (screw you, GLaDOS), chocolate, movies, music, daily news and events. But mostly games. Sometimes I'll post a lot. Sometimes I might let weeks lapse between posts. I expect I'll post a little bit of everything here.
But still, games. I guess it's best to give my gaming history.
I loved hanging out in arcades when I was a kid. No surprise that I play a lot of video games now, I guess. Though it's taken me a while to get here (I'm over 30). My first game was Quake 2, which I first played in 2002. Then I tried out Age of Empires II (with the Conqueror's Expansion), and played nothing else for a while. Next up was the Total War series. The first Medieval Total War was a great companion; I have no estimate of the number of hours I whiled away while dealing with yet another resurgent Papacy. Then Rome Total War launched, and I played a bit of that. Probably my most-played title was Medieval II Total War. I really got into the whole mod scene. I tried out one mod after another, never really playing them much, but awed at the amount of variety.
And that takes me to 2013. I had a lot of events happening in my life, and contracted pneumonia in February of that year. A lot of things changed. I decided to explore more things that I might enjoy, instead of constantly trying to please other people. I discovered YouTube "let's play" videos of people playing video games. One of the first games I started to observe was a play-through of an old game called Assassin's Creed. The game plus its sequel was cheap on Amazon, so I bought it.
So it began.
Playing games started as a distraction. It was still a new experience to me, so every time Al-tair made a jump I was slightly elated. Every time he lost a little bit of sync, my hands would scrabble around my keyboard, desperately trying to do better. Still a distraction. Then I played Alan Wake. Now, Alan Wake has its limitations, as anyone who has played it will know. But I never knew that games could be like that. That they could have gripping stories, beautiful scenes, and moving characters. Even now that I have played many more games and realized that Alan Wake has a linear story-line and repetitive combat, it still holds a special place for me.
From there, it was a hop and a skip to more games of even greater caliber. The Assassin's Creed franchise has some superb moments (Black Flag is one of my favorite games). The Batman Arkham series is forever installed on whatever computer I am currently using. So is the Mass Effect trilogy (almost have a maxed manifest in Mass Effect 3 multiplayer). Dragon Age Origins, The Witcher, Tomb Raider (2013), Deus Ex: Human Revolution, Red Faction: Guerrilla, Saints Row. The list goes on and on.
Point is, I was late to gaming. Nearly two years on, there are still so many games I haven't played, and so many games that I want to revisit. For video gaming, I think we live in a great time. Games can be better than ever, with better graphics than ever, with better voice actors than ever. Hardware companies are making new strides in all phases of computers - more processing power for less electricity, great value-for-money computers that are easy to build yourself. Even as duplicity, corruption and strife run rampant in the societies of the world, there has never been a better time to play video games.
I'm starting this blog because there is more that I want to say than can be fit into a single game review. And though video games and the tech required to play them remain primary, I expect to be sharing and commenting on a number of issues and events that happen in the world as well.
So, welcome to Abe's Mission Control! Glad to have you aboard.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)