#oneaday Day 652: New Tricks - done

I've finished watching the full run of New Tricks, the BBC sort-of police procedural about the "Unsolved Crime and Open Case Squad", or UCOS, a unit in London's Metropolitan Police made up of one actual police officer and several other retired coppers. I enjoyed it a lot, even if the cast changes in its latter seasons arguably made it into a bit of a different show, and it meandered a bit in search of its own identity as a result.

New Tricks opens with UCOS being fronted by Sandra Pullman (Amanda Redman), a semi-disgraced police officer who gained notoriety after shooting a dog on a bungled raid that left the person she was supposed to be rescuing paralysed after falling out of a window. She assembles a colourful team of former police officers, including the diamond geezer Gerry Standing (Dennis Waterman), the extremely neurodivergent Brian "Memory" Lane and the relatively-normal-but-talks-to-his-dead-wife Jack Halford.

Between them, they form an initially uneasy alliance that subsequently blossoms into both genuine friendship and a wonderful sense of camaraderie as they solve a series of cold cases, many of which have been dormant for 20-30 years or more. As a result, Pullman more than redeems herself in the eyes of her superiors — though she still occasionally gets stick about the whole dog-shooting thing — and her band of merry old men find some meaning in their lives, as well as some closure in some longstanding issues.

This core cast remains constant for a significant proportion of the show, and we get to know them all very well. Halford is the first to leave; after finding closure on the murder of his wife, he departs to live out the end of his life peacefully after discovering he has a terminal illness. Lane is next to go, once again after reaching some closure on his "case that got away" — closure that involves him sacrificing his new career in the name of justice and the truth when he accuses a powerful member of the police for wrongdoing.

Standing lasts the longest, sticking around until the second episode of the show's final season. The two-part story that sees him departing after having faked his own death gives him a good story to go out on; he didn't have quite the same "issues" hanging over his head as Halford and Lane, so he needed something like this to make his departure an event of note in the same way, and it worked well, revealing some hitherto unknown details about his past career that felt very much in keeping with what we had learned about him over the course of the prior eleven seasons.

The replacement cast members include the Glaswegian Steve McAndrew (Denis Lawson), who is rebuilding his life following estrangement from his wife and son; Dan Griffin (Nicholas Lyndhurst), who is a frighteningly competent, knowledgeable individual who acts a bit as the group's "Superman" at times, despite occasionally demonstrating himself to be a bit unaware in terms of social interactions; and the latest to join the group, following Standing's departure, is Ted Case (Larry Lamb), a superstitious but intelligent former detective with a gift for interviewing witnesses and interrogating suspects. Outside of the "old men" of the group, Pullman is eventually replaced by Sasha Miller (Tamzin Outhwaite) towards the end of the series, and while this is probably the biggest upheaval the series saw, she settles into the new role quickly and does a good job.

New Tricks, across its entire run, strikes a good balance between the inherent comedy in such an unusual, eccentric ensemble cast, and the inherent darkness of a series about investigating longstanding cold cases, typically murders. The show thankfully sidesteps some of the clichés of police procedurals after its initial episodes; the pilot episode and the first couple of regular episodes give Pullman a superior who is the very definition of the stereotypical "shouting police chief", but before long he is replaced by Robert Strickland (Anthony Calf), an altogether calmer individual who, while coming from a background of privilege, often sides with "the little guy" (relatively speaking) rather than The Establishment as a whole. In the context of the series, this means that while he is often outwardly a by-the-book sort of individual, on the down-low he is immensely supportive of UCOS' eccentricities and lets them get away with a lot — because they get results.

(Yes, I know UCOS can be argued to be part of "The Establishment" also, given that they are a police department in their own right. But New Tricks makes a point of showing that the police as a whole are certainly not infallible, and there are several cases that involve the unit uncovering corruption within the organisation, eventually bringing justice to someone who had been wronged, many years ago in some cases.)

New Tricks' biggest strength is in its characters. We get to know the initial ensemble cast particularly intimately over the course of their time with the show; the later additions are also plenty likeable and get their own stories to shine, though by the simple fact that they have less time on screen in total, we never feel we quite get to know them as well as Pullman, Standing, Lane and Halford. Ted Case is the character who suffers the most in this regard; joining the cast full-time partway into its final season, some of his development feels a little rushed — although this, in itself, works quite well in the context of his character. The reveal that he is gay is handled in a particularly entertaining way that, from the relatively little we know of him at that point, feels very much in keeping with how he does things.

Given that the show ran for a long time — 2003-2015, to be exact — means that things change quite significantly in society over the course of its complete run. The show starts in a pre-smartphone age, for one, though the team are all comfortably using tablets (as in, iPads, not little boxes of pills) by its conclusion, and, as you might expect from the composition of its cast, issues such as sexism and ageism are explored. Several episodes, particularly later in the show's overall run, also deal with crimes that have a racial component or that involve domestic abuse and sexual assault, and while the show isn't particularly gory or shock-horror, it also doesn't shy away from real issues.

I'm sure there's plenty one could criticise about the show as a whole, particularly as today, in 2026, a lot of people have a somewhat skeptical view of the police and their role in society — and the way in which police-centric TV shows can somewhat "whitewash" this fact. But taking it as pure escapism — as a fun detective show with some colourful characters — it was highly entertaining, and I'm glad I took the time to watch it from start to finish.

Now I need something to replace it…

Want to read my thoughts on various video games, visual novels and other popular culture things? Stop by MoeGamer.net, my site for all things fun where I am generally a lot more cheerful. And if you fancy watching some vids on classic games, drop by my YouTube channel.

If you want this nonsense in your inbox every day, please feel free to subscribe via email. Your email address won't be used for anything else.

#oneaday Day 651: New project idea

I've had an idea for A Creative Project. I get these every so often. Sometimes I follow through on them, sometimes I start them and don't finish them, sometimes I don't even start them. This one is actually one I've been mulling over in my brain for quite a long time, and I think I'm just going to go ahead and do it.

Rather frustratingly for you, I'm not going to give you any details on it just yet because it's something I want to keep secret until I'm ready to launch it. It's the kind of thing that's going to take quite a while to put together, you see, and I want to launch it when it's in a "complete" state rather than doing things piecemeal. It is, however, something that I hope folks will find worthwhile and valuable, and it will allow me to realise something that I have wanted to achieve for quite some time, but have never really quite figured out the best way to go about.

I'll be honest: the reason why my brain is always mulling over Creative Projects is because as I get older, I feel increasingly… I don't know, "concerned" about What I Will Leave Behind. I'm not planning on dying any time soon, I hasten to add, but when I look back over my time on this Earth, I want to feel like I achieved something that mattered. My wife and I have not had kids and are not going to have kids (through mutually agreed choice) and as such any "legacy" I leave behind will have to depend on what I was able to achieve in the time allotted to me.

Now, I'm sure one could say that I have already "left something behind" — several things, in fact. There's this blog, there's MoeGamer, there's the stuff I wrote for various websites (although most of those are now defunct and thus only accessible via the Internet Archive and/or websites that have ingested all the material from a now-dead other site), there's the contributions I've made to magazines over the years, there's my YouTube channel, there's all the Evercade manuals I've had a hand in writing, there's the blogs and videos I've made for Evercade.

And yet, I dunno, I sort of feel dissatisfied. I feel like relatively few people know who I am. When people look back on sites like USgamer and GamePro, I'm never mentioned. Whenever I've launched new Creative Projects, they don't get any buzz from peers I may have worked with or adjacent to. Don't get me wrong, I have absolutely no desire to be "famous" (or "infamous", for that matter) — but sometimes it does just feel like it would be nice to have a little bit of recognition (or, hell, just acknowledgement) for the hard work I've done over the years.

As always, if you're reading this, the above is not directed at you. If you're reading this, you probably Give A Shit about me, and that is nice, so thank you. I'm just talking more broadly. I'm not getting any younger, and it seems that getting vaguely maudlin over whether or not you have "achieved" anything in your lifespan is a natural thing to do when one is not getting any younger.

There's a line from the Final Fantasy IX manual that always sticks with me at times like this. For the longest time I was convinced it was attributed to Zidane, but it's actually attached to Freya's character profile in the original manual. The line is "To be forgotten is worse than death."

I probably don't need to explain myself there, do I…?

If you want this nonsense in your inbox every day, please feel free to subscribe via email. Your email address won't be used for anything else.

#oneaday Day 650: Games for Children

I read an article earlier that annoyed me a bit. I'm not going to link to it partly because I don't want to send any particular ire in the author's direction, and partly because it wasn't this specific article that annoyed me, but rather a common talking point that it used as its central thesis.

The relevant quote is this (and I'm aware this is probably as good as linking to it, but whatever; statistically speaking, most people probably can't be arsed to search for it, and the rest think asking an AI will get them a meaningful answer. That latter group are wrong and cunts, by the way.):

I think we need to start acknowledging that too many adults are evaluating games like they're up for the Booker Prize when instead they're well-constructed children's books. We don't need to pretend. We'd be better off being real.

This argument primarily came about because some folks have been looking at the recent Pokémon game, Pokopia, as a reflection on life in a world without humans, and life in a world living with the results of climate change.

The thing with art is that it's a subjective thing. There's authorial intent, to be sure, but there is also the very specific, very personal reaction that someone has to something. And that comes from somewhere. And if multiple people are saying the same things, independently of one another, there's clearly something in the work that speaks to people who are on a particular wavelength.

With that in mind, I feel like it's the height of arrogance to describe something as being childish, which is the main core argument that annoys me not just about this piece, but about other thinkpieces along these lines. Sure, Pokopia is a game designed to be sweet and colourful and friendly to kids or inexperienced gamers, but that doesn't mean it's completely incapable of saying something.

I add to this: being aimed at children does not mean something has lesser value, either. There's a vast canon of "children's literature" out there that is well worth reading by adults today, because it stands up not as "books for kids", but simply as well-crafted stories. Another objection I have to the argument above is that by using a phrase like "well-constructed children's books" as a diminutive, reductive way of talking about things, you are, by extension, implying that nothing designed for kids can have any broader cultural value.

It's an ongoing thing that certain portions of Terminally Online people in particular like to bring up: that Games Have Bad Stories. And it's bollocks! Just as in any medium, there are games that do have bad stories, yes, but there are also many, many examples of those that have good stories. Great stories, even. The implication behind the sentence "too many adults are evaluating games like they're up for the Booker Prize when instead they're well-constructed children's books" is that "games, as a medium, will never have the same value as another medium that I consider inherently more valuable".

I haven't played Pokopia so I can't comment on the specifics of that case. But I can comment on a vast number of other games that very much are worthy of exploring with detailed critique and analysis. I write about many of them over on my other site, MoeGamer! The most recent thing I have written about over there at the time of writing is the incredible Esoteric Ebb, a game that is about as far from being a "well-constructed children's book" as it's possible to be. (And yes, I know I said I wouldn't pick on that article specifically; it just so happens that this particular quote is especially symptomatic of the issue I'm talking about.)

The core thesis of the piece in question is that "we all need to be more honest" when we're talking about games. And I don't necessarily disagree with that. There's a lot of criticism out there where people look at a game and complain about something that it isn't — and which, in many cases, it has never purported to be — rather than evaluating whether or not it was successful at what it was actually trying to do, whether that was implicit or explicit. (I wrote about this back in 2013 on USgamer, now archived on MoeGamer. If you want to know more, look up John Updike's rules for literary criticism.)

But "being honest" doesn't mean that you just go "ah, games are all just children's books, not like real literature and art" and be done with it. Critical, artistic and literary analysis has a place in writing about the medium, whether the subject under discussion is something as seemingly breezy and lightweight as Pokopia, or something as dense and philosophical as Esoteric Ebb.

Video games have been around for a very long time now — and, moreover, using the medium as a means of storytelling is now very well-established in its own right. At some point, the thing we need to "be honest" about is the fact that the medium as a whole is mature, and that there's absolutely no problem with treating it as such.

If you want to treat video games as nothing more than a throwaway bit of fluff that makes you feel better of an evening, I'm not stopping you. There is great value in having something you enjoy that you don't need to engage with on a level beyond "I like doing this because it makes me feel good". But don't throw around "we all need to" like it's some great unacknowledged, universal truth. If someone finds greater artistic, creative value in something and you just don't see it — perhaps just be honest, say you don't get it yourself, and move on. No need to tell everyone else that they're doing it wrong.

If you want this nonsense in your inbox every day, please feel free to subscribe via email. Your email address won't be used for anything else.

#oneaday Day 649: Collapse

I'm exhausted. Busy day at work, big lunch, long and tiring drive home. A mostly good day, though, aside from the twat driving at 45mph in the middle lane of the M3.

Lunch was good. The boss treated us to a meal at a local (to the office) Turkish place. I had calamari as a starter followed by lamb moussaka. It was really good, but it made me just want to nap for the afternoon!

On the way back, I listened to some stuff from Sbassbear, a musical collective on YouTube that are probably best known for their Game Grumps remixes, which are consistently hilarious and incredible in their quality.

Tonight I listened to two of their more "conceptual" albums. The first was GrumpWave, which was a series of 30+ minute lo-fi tracks with some of Arin and Dan's more thoughtful conversations overlaid. It was a rather contemplative listen, and I really enjoyed it.

The other thing I listened to was Fever Dream Radio, an ADHD nightmare of an album designed around the concept of a restless, anxious soul constantly channel flipping on the radio. It's a lot to take in but was frequently hilarious. Musical comedy is tricky to do well, because to really succeed you have to absolutely commit to The Bit, but Sbassbear has always taken even their most ridiculous compositions and arrangements very seriously. If you think you can handle it, I recommend giving it a listen in its entirety.

Oh, also we have no Internet at home so I'm writing this from bed on my phone. And on that note, time for some very well earned sleep!

#oneaday Day 648: Kim Bab Keyboard

I've been doing this wrong all this time. I'm on my umpteenth monthly visit to the office, blogging from a hotel room, and somehow it has only just occurred to me that you can, in fact, plug a keyboard into a phone and type on that rather than using the touchscreen. Altogether a much more pleasant experience, and much more conducive to actually writing something of substance.

Of course, I cannot actually promise that anything following will actually be of substance, but at least I won't be complaining about how much I don't like typing on my phone, because right now I'm typing on my nice keyboard.

I don't really know why this has never occurred to me before. I think at least part of it is down to the fact that plugging a keyboard into a device that is considerably smaller than the input device always felt… "extravagant" somehow, to an unnecessary degree. But I guess it's not that strange. On a trip up to the Edinburgh Fringe with the university Theatre Group (many years ago at this point), I purchased a portable wireless keyboard to use with my Palm handheld, and that was perfectly acceptable to me. So, since I have my keyboard in my bag anyway because I'm bringing my computer to work, I figured I might as well use it for this.

So what have I got to report today, other than the usual long drive down some of the worst roads in the country? (The M25 sucks, as has been well-established on these very pages on numerous occasions, but the A1 is full of potholes now, too.) Well, I decided for my food this evening I'd do something a bit different; rather than loading up on a big bag of portable junk from the nearby Morrisons, I thought I'd try a local Korean place that I've walked past many times and been intrigued by, but never actually given a go.

So I decided to give it a go — and this was, it seems, a very good idea, because the food was delicious. I don't know Korean cuisine particularly well, but the lady behind the counter was extremely helpful, even going so far to ask me if I'd ever eaten the food they had on offer before, and offering me some suggestions and recommendations accordingly. I eventually plumped for Korean chicken kim bab (I think that's spelled right), which is essentially Korean sushi rolls.

This is what they look like:

They were delicious! As well as the Korean fried chicken with a delicious sweet but spicy sauce, there also appeared to be some combination of cucumber, cabbage, carrot and (I think) white daikon radish. And, thankfully, no onion or onion-adjacent stuff. I've found that Korean food doesn't seem to have a lot of onion in it, unlike cuisine from some other areas of east Asia, so I'm absolutely fine with that.

So yeah. That was a good decision, and I will be going there again — perhaps to try something a bit more adventurous next time. It was definitely a substantial, satisfying meal, and at £9 for a generous portion it wasn't excessively expensive either. Sure, it's more than a supermarket sandwich, but it was also several orders of magnitude more tasty. And probably not terrible for you, either.

So that was a nice discovery, and has put me in a relatively pleasant mood for the remainder of the evening. Now I'm just killing time in my room until it's time to sleep, then we have a Big Exciting Meeting (that I've been reassured doesn't mean anything Bad) tomorrow, and the boss is taking us all out to lunch, which will be nice. I know I complain a lot about having to do this monthly visit, but honestly, it's nice to actually see everyone semi-regularly, and if we get treated to something tasty, so much the better.

On that note, then, I think I'm going to spend an hour or two playing some Activision games on Evercade, then hopefully get a good night's sleep for what should be a busy but rewarding day tomorrow. Have a pleasant evening!

#oneaday Day 647: The third 9th Dawn

Just recently, I have returned to a game I really enjoyed when I first tried, but never got around to finishing. That game is 9th Dawn III: Shadow of Erthil from Valorware, which is a delightfully rough-round-the-edges but made-with-heart game that feels like a classic PC game from days of yore, but has enough modern aspects to it to make it feel right at home on console (Switch, specifically, where I am playing.)

I came back to this because Limited Run put up 9th Dawn Remake for preorder recently, and I was reminded that I had been enjoying 9th Dawn III up until the point I put it down in favour of something else. So I decided to go back. And, if you're wondering, no, you don't need to play 9th Dawn (Remake) and/or 9th Dawn II before III.

The simple elevator pitch for 9th Dawn III is that it's a large, open-world RPG presented from a top-down 2D perspective. It has real-time combat primarily driven through twin stick shooter-like mechanics, and when playing on gamepad it has a Final Fantasy XIV-esque hotbar system, whereby holding a trigger and pressing one of the face buttons or directional pad controls allows you to trigger various abilities.

It's more Diablo than Baldur's Gate for the most part — though the thing I'd probably compare it to more than anything is something like World of Warcraft. You can wander around the world as you see fit, step into dungeons as you discover them, and level up a wealth of different skills, including a number of crafting options. There are no character classes, so you can build your character according to the way you like to play — and this also means that you can change up how you're playing quite easily, too. Some items of equipment have certain skill requirements, but it's a simple matter to train up to a level where you can use them — and immensely satisfying when doing so allows you to use a weapon that increases your damage output by a good 10x or more.

One thing I particularly like about the game is the way it implements dungeons. Each dungeon is quite a substantial, self-contained challenge in its own right, and while they initially look quite "open", there's often a good route to take through them, and in taking that route you will gradually unlock a number of shortcuts back to earlier areas. The game tracks your percentage completion of each dungeon, measured by how many of the "ability coins" you have found and whether or not you have beaten the main "boss" enemy in each dungeon, allowing you a clear sense of when you've done everything "important" — but there's often a nice amount of random loot to be found outside of these core "objectives".

It's a game that has a lot of interesting, interlocking systems, but which is very easy to pick up and play, and quite enjoyable to just spend an evening with, hacking and slashing your way through all and sundry. Also, you can recruit monsters and summon up to 10 of them to fight alongside you, which is immensely satisfying.

I'm a long way off beating the game — it's a big 'un! — but I'm having a lot of fun with it right now, so I'm going to stick with it for the immediate future. I'm interested to see quite how powerful you can get by the conclusion to proceedings. I'm hoping for some Diablo III-style huge numbers — given that I'm level 20-something and already putting out four-figure damage, that's entirely within the realm of possibility. Fun times await!

If you want this nonsense in your inbox every day, please feel free to subscribe via email. Your email address won't be used for anything else.

#oneaday Day 646: #justice4rts... again

The thoroughly lovely video maker and online pal RoseTintedSpectrum has just received an unwelcome email from YouTube informing him that his channel is "no longer eligible for monetisation" due to "reused content". A link in the email then goes on to define "reused content" as material that "is not clearly an original creation of this channel and may have been repurposed from another source without adding significant original commentary, substantive modifications or educational or entertainment value."

If you've ever watched any of Rosie's videos, you will know that he absolutely adds "significant original commentary, substantive modifications" and "educational or entertainment value" to every one of his videos. If you're unfamiliar, Rosie's shtick these days is to go through an old TV show and provide acerbic, sarcastic but thoughtful commentary that is frequently hilarious. This commentary is often punctuated with original creative work that Rosie has produced, including remixes of songs in the show, all-original songs that he has created, and sometimes some absolutely brilliant overdubbing and re-editing.

His difficulties largely seem to stem from the fact that he primarily covers old TV shows now, and, as you might expect, making use of clips of these is rife with potential copyright issues. However, YouTube's provisions — and indeed the legal definitions of "fair use" and "fair dealings" — allow the use of copyrighted material, so long as the creator using that work is making substantive changes to them, making it clear that they cannot in any way be confused for the original material.

No-one is going to watch a video on Rosie's channel and say that he is making anything that could be confused for the original. No-one can possibly watch his channel and say that he has not made substantive, creative changes to the stuff he is providing commentary on. He puts in a whole lot more effort than a lot of "reaction" YouTubers — and at the very least, his work could be described as "reaction content". In reality it's much more than that, but since "reaction content" is one of the specific examples YouTube provides of material that can safely be monetised, it's a relevant, absolute bare minimum definition.

The infuriating thing about whenever something like this happens is the completely opaque way in which YouTube communicates these things. There's a problem with "reused content" — sure. Where? When? What video? Why, exactly, is this being picked up on now when it's been fine for several years? None of those questions are answered by YouTube, and you can bet your sweet bippy that they will make it as hard as humanly possible to speak to a living, breathing person who should be able to get this resolved in a matter of minutes.

It's bad enough when something like this happens to small creators who are making little to no money off YouTube. But Rosie, who has found some decent success on the platform over the last few years — and deservedly so — is using YouTube as an important income stream to support himself and his family. For that to be suddenly taken away without warning last thing on a Sunday night, of all times, is completely unacceptable.

At the very minimum, platforms like YouTube should be legally obligated to say exactly what the problem is when inflicting as harsh a punishment as "you now can't make any money from your videos". I suspect the reason they don't is because the majority of this shit is the fault of their "automated systems", and they don't want to admit that sometimes (quite often) they get things very, very wrong.

This is, after all, the second time this has happened to Rosie after a similar incident in November of 2024. Thankfully, that was eventually resolved after a concerted effort by Rosie and people who cared about him — here's hoping that this time is similarly fixed, and our friend can get back to doing what he does best, and what he loves doing.

In the meantime, if you're not subscribed to Rosie, drop by his channel. He's got a lot of great videos there, and deserves your support.

If you want this nonsense in your inbox every day, please feel free to subscribe via email. Your email address won't be used for anything else.

#oneaday Day 645: I do not need Gaming Copilot. No-one does

Apparently, three weeks almost to the day after the new AI person in charge of Xbox said that they wouldn't let Xbox become overrun with slop, Xbox has announced that it will be launching a slop generation feature that you can use right on your console!

It's Gaming Copilot! Something absolutely no-one asked for! The world's least popular lying plagiarism bot, shoehorned into the console brand that is seemingly determined to fast-track itself into becoming the world's least popular console!

I do not understand this. I do not want this. I do not understand why people think anyone wants this. It is an oft-overused line, but I come to gaming to escape from all the annoying bullshit of real life — which includes lying plagiarism bots — and not to talk to my fucking Xbox. I do not want my games console to "help" me or offer "advice" (and, given the inaccuracy rate of generative AI, I use those terms loosely) and I certainly do not want or need it to be a "companion".

The people pushing this bullshit have absolutely no understanding of what makes good games work, and why people enjoy good games. At GDC, there was a Google demonstration about how chatbots could power NPCs, and their showcase involved a random nobody in an 8-bit Final Fantasy-style RPG babbling on for three pages about their daily routine. The executives who think this is a good idea are impressed because people can "ask anything" to any character in the game. Anyone who has ever played a game with characters that talk to you will know that writing decent NPC dialogue is an art; it needs to balance worldbuilding with helpful advice, without bogging things down too much with, say, three pages of meaningless waffle from a random townsperson. Google's demonstration does none of this correctly.

And Gaming Copilot completely misses the point of everything, too. Today's games are incredibly, wonderfully immersive, transporting players to a whole other world where they can be someone else and achieve things that are impossible in reality. The best games are full of moments of organic discovery and the joy of play — although there's a whole other discussion to be had about modern game design, particularly in the triple-A space — and absolutely do not need a fucking chatbot listening to everything you do. It is not a substitute for having an actual friend, and it is not a substitute for looking up information from someone who knows the game inside out and can offer you well-sourced, helpful advice.

"Oh, but you can just say what you want instead of having to look it up!" Yes, you can, but if you can't guarantee it will be correct — which you absolutely fucking cannot — then what is the point? Plus where do you think all this information that it is offering you is coming from? That's right, the hard work of people who actually took the time to assemble all that information. And you can bet your fucking ass that Gaming Copilot will not credit the sources of this information, because it certainly isn't doing so in the early demo videos that are currently circulating.

I'm so tired. I'm so tired. The video game medium is in a fucking disastrous state. Earlier today, I saw someone actually say it is in the worst position it has been in since the Great Global Video Game Crash of North America back in '83, and while I'm not sure we're at "burying things in the desert" territory just yet — at least partly because the overwhelming amount of software available today is mostly digital — it's becoming increasingly clear that things are absolutely fucked. Game Key Cards, always-online games, perpetual development roadmaps, live service games — all of it is just driving people like me, who have been involved with gaming since its very inception, far, far away.

At least if everything does come crashing down in the next few years, there is still a rich library of games from between the late '70s and now to enjoy. With each passing day, and with every announcement of Some New Bullshit, I feel increasingly like just packing in "Modern Gaming" altogether and living my life with the games I have in my collection right now.

If you want this nonsense in your inbox every day, please feel free to subscribe via email. Your email address won't be used for anything else.

#oneaday Day 644: Resident EEEEEVIL... SIX

I'm playing Resident Evil 6 right now, in my ongoing attempts to Finally Catch Up on the series as a whole. I had been led to believe that this one was Not Very Good, but I've been enjoying it so far. It's definitely leaning hard on the action angle rather than feeling like "traditional" survival horror, and it's very setpiece-led and linear, but it's been enjoyable so far. It's definitely the most "big budget action movie" the series has been up until this point, and I don't necessarily think that's a bad thing; we are, after all, talking about a series that has always involved rocket launchers, cartoonishly evil villains and giant slobbering monsters.

I'm intrigued to see how the other characters' campaigns play. I am currently on the last chapter of Leon's campaign, and that has definitely been quite action-focused. Supposedly the other campaigns each have their own distinct gameplay focus, so I am intrigued to find out what that really means — or if, as I suspect, it is just marketing waffle that doesn't really mean anything.

The game clearly being designed for co-op play isn't nearly as bothersome as it was in Resident Evil 5, as your computer-controlled partner when playing solo isn't a complete idiot, and you don't have to worry about managing their inventory, health and ammunition. Plus the overall way the game controls feels much more up-to-date than Resident Evil 5's cumbersome control method did; Resident Evil 6 pretty much uses the conventions of modern third-person shooters, with the only real concession to survival horror tradition being the necessity to hold a button to draw your weapon and aim, rather than being able to fire "from the hip".

There have been some spectacular moments so far, and a few mildly annoying bits, but on the whole it's been a worthwhile journey so far, and I'm glad I've taken the time to play through all the games in the series up until this point. It's a series that has a thoroughly interesting history — and the recent remakes are rare examples of remakes making things significantly better than their predecessors. The PlayStation originals of the first three will always be special to me, mind, as I was playing them during what was probably the happiest period of my life.

I wonder if Code Veronica will ever get the remake treatment? It's certainly a prime candidate for it, but it also sometimes feels like an entry in the series Capcom would rather we all forgot about. It's the only entry in the series that there's no easy way to play on modern platforms today (either in "original" or "remake" form) and that's a bit of a shame; it was a significant moment for the series, being its first shift into full 3D, although my one enduring memory of it is not picking up enough grenade launcher ammunition to be able to beat the boss on the plane at the end of Claire's first section!

Anyway, Resident Evil 6 is fun. Some may well argue that it's not very "Resident Evil", but honestly, having played a big chunk of the series now, like many long-running series, it is not, and never has been, one simple thing. Resident Evil 6 is just an example of it going in one particular direction — and, from what I understand, the seventh goes a very different way after that, too. No bad thing! I'm looking forward to finally getting on to the most recent ones, as I've heard lots of good things about them, though have managed to remain mostly unspoiled on them, too.

There's four campaigns of gloriously silly action movie nonsense to survive first, though, so I better get on with it!

If you want this nonsense in your inbox every day, please feel free to subscribe via email. Your email address won't be used for anything else.

#oneaday Day 643: An interesting thing for you to try

Today, I'd like to share an Interesting Thing with you. Click here to see what it is. I promise it is neither goatse nor a RickRoll (although I would say that if it was either of those things, wouldn't I?)

No, it's a test to see if you can distinguish between two quite-similar-to-extremely-similar colours. All you have to do is click on the screen where you think the (vertical) dividing line between the two differently coloured halves of the screen is.

Sounds easy, right? To begin with, you probably will find it quite easy. But as it progresses, it becomes really quite challenging — although you'll probably notice some peculiarities as you continue.

For starters, you'll likely notice the dividing line more easily if you move your head or even just your eyes. There's probably a scientific reason behind this, and this makes me feel like I should have probably read the companion blog post to this little test before starting to type here, but oh well. No time like the present, is there?

Okay, I've read it, and it's complicated (but quite interesting). Basically there's a value called the "Just Noticeable Difference" (or "JND") and this determines whether or not we can distinguish two very similar colours as actually being different from one another.

A commonly agreed JND measured on one popular scale (used in the test linked above) is 0.02; colours that exhibit this "distance" between one another are different from each other, but to most people who are just glancing at them, they will look the same. The test introduces slightly artificial conditions by making you actively look for the differences — plus it also depends a bit on how well your display is calibrated — but it's still an interesting way to see quite how solid your perception of colour is — and whether or not that varies between different colour types.

For me, my weakness was bright pinks. I found it quite difficult to distinguish between those, but had much less difficulty with darker, less saturated or overall duller colours. I still scored considerably better than the "average", though — my score was 0.0056.

Give it a go! It's much more interesting than doomscrolling… and definitely a better use of your time and the planet's resources than using Google Gemini if you're bored.

If you want this nonsense in your inbox every day, please feel free to subscribe via email. Your email address won't be used for anything else.