#oneaday Day 638: Idiots of the App Store

Everyone knows that you shouldn't read Internet comments where the public has been allowed to voice its opinions without any filtering. It's why sensible people avoid looking at 4chan, YouTube comments and App Store reviews. But, like a car crash, sometimes you just can't look away from these comments sections, no matter how infuriating they might end up being.

I made the mistake of browsing the App Store tonight and perusing a few obviously stupid apps which, inevitably, had rather low ratings. Let's see what the reviewers had to make of them, shall we?

First up is Mario and Friends. This decidedly copyright-infringing app makes it very clear in its description that it is a soundboard featuring music and sound effects from classic titles such as Mario, Zelda and Sonic. Let's take a small sample of the reviews:

"This is not a game. Where is my money?" — Cheat11111111

"Please do not buy this app does not work my young grand daughter was so disappointed !!" — ena Sproule

"Thought this was the game what a load of rubbish I mean why wud we want the listen to the music without playing the actual game?? Waist of 69p!!!" — lisa green

"None of the buttons work so it's impossible to play waste of money" — Al24467

What you'll see from most App Store reviews of this type are a few consistent features: overuse of exclamation marks, an inability to know when one sentence ends and another begins, and an inability to use the correct homophone.

Let's take a look at another excellent example: Unlock It! which promises new lock themes for your iPhone and, again, in the description makes it clear that it's a spoof app, not an actual means of overriding a fundamental way the iPhone works. Here are some choice reviews:

"I was so happy that I would be able to Chang e the lock screen but then it turned out to be a scam! I doesn't let you change the lock screen! Do not get it! SO UNHAPPY!!" — Kezmatron

"Should've read the reviews – this is tripe!!" — Jonzo15a

"Don't get it.. I was so happy with idea.. Then so upset with the lies that lied deep inside!! C***S!!" — Bleepsound

"This app is a complete con. Do not buy it. It does not have any of the functionality it claims to offer it simply takes a photo which you can save as your background to imitate a security function. Very poor." — Black and White Army

"A new this app sounded 2 gd to be true" — Dj disco dave

What have we learned from all this? That the sort of person who leaves App Store reviews probably hasn't read the app description before downloading. This type of person can be regularly seen elsewhere on the Internet indulging in very similar behaviour in other places — commenting on N4G having only read the headline, not the whole article; commenting on a YouTube video without watching the video; commenting on a news story without reading the story; commenting on a Facebook page without looking to see what kind of page it is; and numerous others.

It's very simple, people. Slow down. Read things. If you're looking at something, look at it properly. You've taken the time to click a link to something or other — why not check it out properly rather than immediately flying off the handle and crying "scam!"/"fake!"/"bias!"/"fanboy!"/"bullshit!" etc.

Ahhh. It's nice to want things, isn't it?

#oneaday Day 625: Communal Listening

I've seen a fair bit of negativity floating around surrounding Spotify's new (optional) integration with Facebook — for those unfamiliar with the changes, Facebook now has a new Music dashboard which broadcasts the details of what you're listening to from services such as Spotify in real time and provides links for other people to go and listen for themselves.

I've seen several people on several social networks decry this as some sort of gross invasion of privacy, but I can't help feeling they're missing the point in a number of different areas.

Firstly, the whole "Facebook privacy" concern thing is something of a moot point when you consider the point of the site — it's a social network designed to let people connect with each other and share things, whether that's a banal status update, what album they're listening to or the fact they unlocked an achievement in The Binding of Isaac. What you share on there is, ultimately, up to you, and if you're worried about your details being online then — there's no simpler way to say this — don't put them online. Facebook doesn't belong to you. It's never claimed to be a private network and, in many ways, locking yourself in a walled garden when using a social network defeats the object somewhat — if you just want to use it with close friends and family then you might as well just use email.

Taking the music thing specifically, Facebook integration is an excellent idea. Consider how we used to consume music in the pre-Internet days. We'd listen to the radio, watch Top of the Pops, talk with our friends. We might have friends over and listen to a particular band's latest album together — we'd certainly talk about it the following day at school, in the office, wherever you happened to be spending most of your time. Buying a new album was an event — these days, music is just "there", it's just something to have on in the background and people don't think twice about buying a track here, a track there without any thought of its context as part of a larger album. As part of this evolution, the whole real-world social aspect of music has been somewhat diminished.

Which is why embracing online socialisation is a good thing. Your personal musical tastes — key word personal — are your own individual thing, and there's very little reason why you shouldn't want to share them with fellow listeners. In fact, Spotify has always been set up to encourage the discovery and sharing of new tracks thanks to its Spotify URLs and ability to share on Facebook, Twitter and other services. The automatic broadcasting of what you're listening to right now is simply an evolution and automation of the process. And, if you're embarrassed about your musical tastes, then you can always turn the facility off.

Facebook is guilty of many things — pointless interface redesigns, a bizarre definition of what "Top News" is, fiddling around with settings behind your back without telling you and gradually building up a near-monopoly on the social Web — but one thing it has always done over the years is do exactly what it set out to do — provide an online social network with which you can communicate and share with your friends. The precise definition of what you can (and what is worth) sharing has changed and grown over the years — but why shouldn't music be a key part of that? And why, if the infrastructure's already there to do so, shouldn't that process be automatic?

You're very welcome to look at my Music page — here it is.

#oneaday Day 591: Proper Intarnetz Plz

You don't realise how much you're going to miss the "proper" Internet until you don't have it. I'm writing this using a T-Mobile 3G dongle which, to be fair, works perfectly fine for the most part (except for the data limits, which make it impractical for use for anything more than fairly light web browsing) but it's 1) not as fast as "proper" Internet and 2) rather more expensive at £2 per day.

Proper Internet for us is still about two weeks away. I've never quite understood exactly why it takes so long for Internet access (and a phone line, for that matter) to reach your house. After all, in most cases the infrastructure is already in place. Okay, sure, sometimes they have to "send an engineer out" but the last few times I've set up my own Internet access said engineer has done very little besides bring some equipment. While the personal touch is nice, I'd be happier with receiving it by post if someone can just flip a switch a bit quicker.

I know, I know, it's probably considerably more complicated than that, and with all the households in the UK, the finite stock of engineers which can be sent out at any one time only goes so far. But have a heart; how will I watch endless cat videos, play stupid Flash games and indeed download the gigabytes of updates my reinstalled (again) Mac insists are absolutely necessary?

That said, where we are now is certainly a far cry from just five to ten years ago. I recall struggling on with dial-up Internet for a few weeks when moving in to a new place, and inevitably forgetting to disconnect it at one point only to confront the next person to pick the phone up with digital squealing. And even further back than that, I recall dial-up Internet being the only Internet. Getting some time on the Internet (after 6pm, naturally) was a real treat, and downloading a file of 1MB or more was something you had to plan ahead for.

In some ways, I miss those days. It made browsing the Web seem like a "special" experience — particularly with the pain in the arse it was to get some browsers working with certain ISPs. Nowadays, we just take our Facebook, YouTube and Wikipedia for granted.

I guess it's one way of the human race showing how adaptable it is. Give the people a new tool to use and it won't be very long in the grand scheme of things before its widespread adoption worldwide. Perhaps our bodies have stopped evolving, and all future evolution will be done in the digital space?

Perhaps. It sounds like an exciting sci-fi future. But it's all very well until there's a power cut.

#oneaday Day 559: You Can't Go Back

What's done is done. However much you might want to turn back time and do things again, the oft-requested Quicksave feature for Life has never made an appearance in several million years of patches, so I'm pretty much sure that we're stuck with our broken save system with permadeath.

In seriousness, though, a bit of nostalgia-tripping through some old podcasts that some friends and I used to make (long before the Squadron of Shame got all podcasty) reminds me that time has indeed passed — and quite a bit of it. Certain people are no longer in my life. Certain people have shifted to the peripheries of my life. Many of the things I used to do are distant memories. And, of course, I'm no longer 26 years old, as my girlfriend Andie is so keen to point out. (She's going to be on the receiving end of plenty of revenge when she turns 30. Oh yes indeed.)

This sense of change is made all the more prominent in the digital age, given that it's entirely possible to leave a trail of digital detritus across the entire Internet. Some of it gets lost, but some of it remains here and there as evidence of things that are constant and things that aren't.

The aforementioned Gaming with Pedwood podcast MySpace page, for example, is still there, as is, for that matter, my page. (Buggered if I can remember the login details for either of them, though.)

A short-lived attempt at blogging the life of a teacher is also still present and correct, a follow-up to a series of emails I sent during my PGCE. I thought I wrote more than that, but as you can see, it tails off pretty quickly as I discovered that the life of a teacher, particularly in a dodgy chav-infested rathole that was £500k in the red was, in fact, rather stressful, and I thought it would be perhaps unwise to chronicle all that in a totally honest manner at the time.

And my 1up.com page is still up and running, featuring possibly some of my earliest attempts at games-related blogging.

Sadly, a couple of sites are nowhere to be seen. You can get at the Angry Jedi site as far back as 2003 via the Wayback Machine but sadly some of the links and pictures are broken, meaning that some of the MP3 files we created are gone forever. The site I put together for the University of Southampton Theatre Group can also be found via the Wayback Machine — including the very early example of blogging that I did using a Palm Tungsten, a 32MB SD card, a card reader and an Internet café. High tech!

The site that I'm pretty sure I had at petedavison.com — my first experience with WordPress, no less — is nowhere to be seen, unfortunately. And the site I constructed at university, known as Studio A33 (after my first year flat) which distributed the various dodgy Klik and Play games my friends and I created, is also conspicuously absent. This is a great shame, as I had a tremendous urge to play Hobbit Blasters recently. I'm sure it's lurking on a CD somewhere in the garage.

Life moves on at a rate far too rapid for our liking sometimes. It's pleasing to come across such fragments of our digital lives from time to time, as it reminds us of where we've come from, both good and bad places. But we can't go back — however hard you might want to try and recapture the feelings you describe in these digital fragments, you need to accept that it ain't ever going to happen.

#oneaday Day 555: Social Smarts

This story in the New York Times tells of a year-old startup company called Social Intelligence, whose remit consists of assembling a dossier of information on job applicants based on their online activity over the past seven years.

Now, you may argue that employers are perfectly within their rights to carry out background checks on prospective employees, and you'd be absolutely right — it's why schools and other positions which place people in positions where they will be dealing with "vulnerable" individuals require a disclosure check to make sure the applicant doesn't have a checkered criminal past. Evidence of professional honours and charitable work also helps make an employer feel that not everything listed on a CV is a fabrication.

The concerning part is what else Social Intelligence looks for — according to the NYT article, "online evidence of racist remarks; references to drugs; sexually explicit photos, text messages or videos; flagrant displays of weapons or bombs and clearly identifiable violent activity." The concerning part is not the type of content that the company is looking for — it's how it might be stumbled across in a typical Internet search. That is, completely lacking in context. I'm not for a moment condoning violent activity, racism or anything else dodgy. But, frankly, everyone makes jokes, and sometimes those jokes are off-colour. Everyone has embarrassing Facebook photos, many of which are not what they seem. And if someone's had a puff of weed of a weekend and had a good giggle about it with their friends, that doesn't make them an inherently bad person, either.

"We are not detectives," said Max Drucker, CEO of the company. "All we assemble is what is publicly available on the Internet today."

Fair enough; but where does it stop? Once employers get the message that it's okay for companies like Social Intelligence to start trawling through your online background, what's to stop them from rejecting you based simply on something you said to your friends, or who you associate with online. This is particularly relevant given the "amusing" practice of friends "facejacking" or "fraping" each other's accounts given the opportunity — perhaps they left their account logged in, perhaps they left their phone on the table to go for a piss. Regardless of how or why it happened, a good-natured facejacking with all its usual excesses could well lead to someone's job prospects being dashed on the rocks — through no fault of the candidate.

Then there's the privacy question. Not necessarily the "what you share" question — that's a different matter entirely, and one which every individual must decide upon: what are you willing to tell people online? No, the privacy question I'm concerned about here is the divide between the personal and the professional. We're all different people at work — we behave in one way when we're on the clock, expected to be that person listed in the Person Specification and deal with customers and clients in the way we're supposed to, but as soon as 5pm rolls around we're off down the pub, swearing like a sailor, giving each other light-hearted ribbings and possibly making fools of ourselves. This latter part of the day doesn't affect our capability to do the job effectively. This latter part of the day is completely irrelevant to an employer — and, given most social networks' focus on the "personal" rather than the "professional", most social networks save the interminably boring LinkedIn are also completely irrelevant to an employer.

As someone who suffered workplace bullying from management partly as a result of some extremely vague negative comments on Twitter (which didn't mention the company in question at all, I hasten to add) — and witnessed several colleagues get fired over a Facebook prank that went awry — I feel particularly strongly about this. The things I said online were vague, not directed at my employer but at my life situation in general, and designed to let my friends who cared about me know how I was feeling — which wasn't great at the time. My professional life had no place intruding on my personal life — my personal life was not affecting my job performance, which had never been better. There were facts and figures and customer satisfaction surveys to prove it. Ironically, all the poor treatment I received at the hands of this shockingly bad management did was make me more likely to badmouth them now that I've left the company. But specifics of that are for another day.

The best analogy I can think of for Social Intelligence's work would be if as part of your job interview you had someone from the company follow you to the pub in the evening, follow you home, watch you go about your daily business, watch you have a shit, shower, shave, and then go through your bins just for good measure. In the days before social networking sites employers didn't do this, so just because there is the possibility for unprecedented invasions of privacy doesn't mean that it should happen.

Sadly, however, in the modern world, a lot of people seem to think that the words can and should are, in fact, interchangeable. And as such we end up with companies such as Social Intelligence rifling through candidates' virtual dirty laundry in an attempt to come up with the one tragic flaw that means Mr Perfect is not, in fact, quite so perfect for this position after all.

To me, the concept of "watch what you say" goes against everything social media — which should, in essence, be the ultimate form of free speech — stands for. But while this sort of thing is going on, you'd better just double-check those privacy settings, and cancel that account on that swinging site you signed up for "just to take a look."

#oneaday Day 551: Feel What You Feel

It's been a couple of days of bad news, what with the horrible attacks in Norway and today's sad but unsurprising news that Amy Winehouse's somewhat tentative grip on life has finally given out.

Online and broadcast discussion of these matters has been interesting to observe. The media has been all over both of them, as you might expect. The reporting of Winehouse's death was a bit obnoxious, to be honest, with a constant live stream of the view of her street, presumably hoping to see something — anything — newsworthy. In the time I watched, there was nothing newsworthy besides the fact that she had died. The BBC strung this out with a series of quotes from a bizarre selection of people, including the ex-prime minster Gordon Brown's wife.

A lot of Twitter got all indignant earlier on at people expressing sadness over Winehouse's death while considerably more people had died in Norway. Then people got indignant about people's indignance, saying that it's OK to feel things about both pieces of news. Then people got indignant about this, saying that there are people starving in the world, etc. etc. It could have continued indefinitely — I haven't really looked since earlier, but there was severe risk of an infinite loop of indignance going on.

I kind of agree with the second group. As the version of Stalin in Command & Conquer: Red Alert said, "when one man dies, it is a tragedy; when one million die, it is a statistic" (Aside: according to Wikiquotes, this is commonly misattributed to Stalin. I did not know that. TIL.). That may be a harsh way of putting it, but there's a sort of logic to it; when we hear about the death toll in Norway, it's horrifying, but difficult to picture all the individual faces if you didn't know anyone affected personally. Contrast that with Amy Winehouse, whose face everyone knows, and it's easy to see why some people might take that a bit more "personally" despite not knowing her themselves — it's more relatable and, in some ways, easier to deal with.

However, that doesn't mean that it's a case of all or nothing, one or the other. You can feel bad about both things. You can feel bad about those things and the starving children in the world, too, if you like. Or, if you're going through a difficult time in your own life, you can feel free to say "fuck it" to all that and be selfish, too. There's no shame in your own individual feelings, particularly in this media- and Internet-saturated world where it often feels like the things we're supposed to feel about a "tragedy" are prescribed to us, and anyone who doesn't conform is not being appropriately sympathetic or empathetic.

I say feel whatever you want to feel. If you knew someone in Norway who was killed in the attacks, mourn them. If you knew Amy Winehouse, mourn her. If you didn't know anyone involved directly, feel bad for the people who were affected if you want to, but don't feel guilty if the things that are happening to you feel like they're taking priority. The relative severity of incidents gets proportionally amplified the closer they are to you — so something relatively "minor" in the grand scheme of things may seem like the most important thing in the world to you, even with all these other things going on. And that's OK.

The reason I say this is because of the way I spent a lot of last year feeling. Grief is a terrible thing and sometimes it feels like it will never end, but the worst thing I feel you can do while you're grief-stricken is feel guilty about it.

So feel what you feel without guilt. It's your business, and no-one else's.

#oneaday Day 541: Kombo Broken

It's a sad day today as I hear from my good buddy Ryan Olsen that Kombo.com is no more, with the URL now simply redirecting to GameZone.com, who purchased the site a while back.

Kombo.com holds some particular personal significance for me, as it does for many of the great friends I made while working for the site. Compared to many of the grizzled old veterans who had been working on the site since 2005, I was a relative newbie, only joining the team last year.

As most of you probably know by now, last year was Not a Good Year. Having been forced out of a job I genuinely loved by bullying management at the end of the previous year, finding employment in a primary school 40 miles away from where I lived, discovering that yes, Aldershot is indeed a shithole, even when dealing with 8 year olds, I quit my job in March of 2010 to attend PAX East (to this day quite possibly the best few days of my life EVAR) and around a similar time I started contributing to Kombo.com as a news editor. A short while after PAX East, my wife and I separated and I found myself alone in a flat I couldn't afford with no job and seemingly no prospects of finding one that wasn't supply teaching — a career path which would have likely ended rather abruptly with me flinging myself off the nearby Itchen Bridge had I pursued it.

As time went on and my finances dwindled, writing for Kombo every day — even if it was at US-friendly, UK-antisocial hours — gave me something stable to cling on to. This was something I desperately needed during those difficult months. There were many days when I found it very difficult to function as a normal human being, so badly was I hurting. But when it came to time to sit down and work my shift at the virtual news desk, that all went away for a few hours. It was just me, GamesPress, a lot of Chrome tabs and the Worst CMS In The World.

One of my favourite things about working for Kombo, though, was the people I had the good fortune to meet as a result, all of whom I'm happy to count among my friends today. All of them have gone their separate ways since September of last year, when most of us departed from the site due to its heading in a direction that wasn't for us (with some of us forming our anarchic rainbow unicorn collective The Big Pixels, still ably maintained by Geoff Calver). But we all still talk to each other daily — through email, through Twitter, through Facebook, through G+. It's great to see that Kombo, despite being a relatively small site compared to the giants out there, managed to give a lot of people the foot in the door they needed to pursue a career in various parts of the games industry. Some went into PR. Some went into development. Some still write on a hobbyist basis while pursuing other careers, and I write professionally.

It's also been nice to see that diverse members of my groups of friends online knew the name Kombo — even people that I wouldn't necessarily have expected to. The site will be missed, and not just by those of us who wrote for it. It's the end of an era and — sadly — the end of some people's portfolios (archive.org notwithstanding) as the old content seems to have vanished altogether.

Kombo.com gave me a leg-up into the industry and it's part of the reason I write about games as my full time job now. I'll miss it, and I invite you to doff your caps and raise a glass as its flame goes out for the last time.

#oneaday Day 540: Googlopoly

It's strange how the dominance of some companies (Facebook, Activision and, occasionally, Apple) is seen as a negative influence, yet in other cases (Google, Valve and, occasionally, Apple) their prevalence is seen as very much a Good Thing. This is particularly apparent when it comes to looking at Google and what it offers to the denizens of the Web.

Up until a while back, I'd flitted between various email addresses on a semi-regular basis thanks to moving house a lot and getting a new broadband connection in every house. New connection from whichever company had the best deal at the time meant new email address, and it became a running joke between my brother and I that I would eventually get to the point where I'd have an email address for every day of the week.

Fortunately, I managed to nip that in the bud, first with a Yahoo account and then with a MobileMe (formerly .mac) account which, I hasten to add, I got for free during the time I worked at Apple (and a little while afterwards due to them apparently not figuring out I didn't work for them any more until almost a year later — wish they'd carried on paying me, too, that would have been nice). Anyway. I ditched the Yahoo account because of the ridiculous amount of spam it attracted, and Yahoo's spam filters are beyond awful. I used MobileMe and was quite happy with it for a while, as I hadn't used an IMAP account before and it proved to be very useful, particularly when the iPhone came along.

But then I discovered GMail, and since then, I find it very difficult to understand a couple of things: firstly, why people are resistant to Google when it offers a usability experience of such an order of magnitude better than everything else on the market; and secondly, why more people haven't just ripped off Google's ideas wholesale.

Take something as simple as the way you manage your inbox. It's very easy for one's inbox to become completely flooded with bullshit, with unread counts tumbling (err, upwards) into the thousands, particularly if you're subscribed to any mailing lists or get sent endless press releases. It's tempting to select all and delete everything, but you just know that if you do that, you'll really need one of those emails at some point in the near future. You could file it, too, but then you run into the problem of getting increasingly obsessive-compulsive about your filing systems, wondering if a "Friends" folder is good enough or whether you'd rather subdivide it into individual friends… and so on. But no — in GMail, we have the wonder that is the Archive button, which makes the email go away but doesn't delete it. That way, you can find it by searching, but it doesn't clutter up your inbox any more. Genius.

And talking of searching, the most frustrating thing about MobileMe Mail's otherwise pretty good web interface is the fact that you can only search one folder at a time. This is absolutely useless if you want to use it for the purpose of finding out which fucking folder you put that really important email in. In GMail, it's a snap.

You can download all attachments at once. You can preview files in your web browser. You can set up your browser to redirect mailto: links to GMail rather than your soon-to-be-defunct mail client. And the fact it's web-based means that you can get at it from anywhere.

And this, of course, is just GMail. I have to confess that I haven't used some of Google's other services such as Google Calendar a great deal, but I have been spending some time with both Google+ and Google Docs, and frankly we're at a stage now where, for the average user, standalone productivity software is nigh-on irrelevant. Assuming you have an Internet connection — and with broadband and 3G adapters so affordable now, chances are you do — then you have access to all your stuff from anywhere.

The downside, of course, is if your Internet connection fails, or if Google's servers fall over (like they did the other night when they ran out of disk space on the server which stored G+ notification emails) then you could have a problem. But in my time using Google's various services so far, I've never had a problem so serious it compromised my productivity — and most of the time, it's fixed within a matter of minutes or even seconds at times.

Most importantly, though, I don't feel like Google wants to be my sole window onto the Web, which is where I think it differs from Facebook in quite a key way. Zuckerberg's Facebook wants to be the only destination that people will ever need on the Web — hence all the apps, brand pages, games and other bollocks that clutters up the once-clean and simple service. Google, on the other hand, wants to help me out with things I need to do, and then set me loose on the rest of the Web — perhaps sharing some of the cool things I find via G+. It facilitates rather than dictates, and for that reason, barring them doing something really, really stupid I predict that Google services will be a big part of my online life for some time to come.

#oneaday Day 534: Who's Buying the Crap?

I'm pretty sure I already knew this some time ago, but I've come to the not-so-startling conclusion recently that I'm the one buying the crap games and listening to terrible music and enjoying awful films. It's not a conscious decision to be contrary, but I do find myself more willing than some to give creative works that have been somewhat maligned the benefit of the doubt — and more often than not actually end up enjoying them.

The first time I recall this happening was one summer when I was home from university. I got very bored and decided that I was going to go to the cinema by myself, just pick a movie that happened to be on, sit down, watch it and attempt to enjoy it. It was partly borne from a desire to prove wrong the unwritten rule that going to the cinema by yourself is somehow shameful (if it is, why is watching a DVD by yourself OK?) and partly just out of a desire to get out of the house.

The movie I went to see? 2 Fast 2 Furious. It was terrible, of course, but I enjoyed it a great deal. And the reason for this was the fact that I didn't feel "accountable" to anyone — there was no-one with me judging my tastes or making me believe that I should feel a certain way about this piece of entertainment that was bombarding me with nonsense. ("Wow, bro, it's like a ho-asis in here!") Judged entirely on its own merits and on whether or not it performed the function I wanted it to at that specific moment in time — to entertain me without making me have to think too much — it succeeded admirably.

More recently, I found similar joy in Duke Nukem Forever. The thing that annoyed me most about the vitriolic reviews scattered around the web was the fact that all the critics seemed to feel somehow "responsible" for their audience, like they had a moral obligation to dislike it because of its more questionable elements or its rough edges. I played it and enjoyed it — genuinely — and was surprised there weren't a few more people willing to stand up and be counted, saying "look, yes, it is crass, it is rude, it is inappropriate, but for fuck's sake lighten up." But that's by the by — if you found it objectionable, that's your business, but it doesn't make me wrong either.

Most recently, the recent Steam sale encouraged me to pick up Alpha Protocol, a game I've been curious about for some time. Roundly panned on its release for poor AI, questionable game mechanics and outdated graphics, most people seemed to think it was one to pass by. But for three quid I wasn't about to let that happen. So far I've enjoyed it greatly. I don't mind that the shooting and the AI isn't great because I'm not very good at shooters or stealth games. What Alpha Protocol has provided for me so far is a 24-esque espionage plot with action sequences where I at least feel like I'm a badass spy, even if the execution means it's quite difficult to mess things up, from what I can tell. The key thing about the game is its story, and for that, I'm willing to forgive its flaws — some may say too forgiving.

This is a pattern I've continued for as long as I remembered. Back when I bought CDs (oh so many years ago) I tended to purchase music on something of a whim rather than with the charts or peer reactions in mind. I bought things out of curiosity, because I liked the cover art, because I thought the singer was hot. And there's very few of those decisions I regretted, because it gave me the opportunity to experience some things that many other people might never have been exposed to.

I'm cool with that. It gives me interesting things to talk about when people want to know about obscure games, cheesy music or crap films. Everyone knows Halo and Call of Duty are good. But how many people can vouch for the awesomeness of Doom: The Roguelike?

#oneaday Day 533: More Thoughts on Google+

So I've been using the service for a few days now and the fact I've made it a Pinned Tab in Chrome should tell you how much I like it. I think it's got a huge amount of potential, and I sincerely hope that it takes off. I also sincerely hope it doesn't just morph into an identikit Facebook — but hopefully that won't happen, because although Google is gradually spreading itself over all aspects of the web, they haven't (yet) done anything that particularly offends me from a privacy or usability perspective. In fact, every change they've made to their services while I've been a user has been for the better.

So let's go over some thoughts, tips and tricks in handy bullet-point form, for those of you who are just getting started — or those who have been using it for a while. Or those who tried it once and immediately gave up. Or, well, just anyone interested, really.

Circles are made to be used. Use them! Make as many as is practical for you. Don't stick with the Facebook approach of keeping everyone in one Friends list. There will be some crossover between Circles as a natural process, particularly if you and your friends share some common interests, but they're there to be useful. Case in point: today I shared my GamePro articles only with those who are specifically interested in video games (which, as it happens, is most of my friends currently on G+) — once more people get in there, that facility will be a godsend.
The photo interface is gorgeous. The photo viewer looks great and has a nice layout, and the way the photos are tiled on the album page is attractive and distinctive. My only quibble is that you can't rename an album — or so I thought. As it happens, since G+ photo albums are actually albums on Picasa, to change an album name all you need to do is go to Picasa's website and change it there. Hopefully Google will add the facility to do this within G+ shortly — because, as I found out tonight, long album titles break the page layout.
You can format stuff with special characters, not HTML. Putting *asterisks* either side of a word/phrase/sentence/paragraph makes it bold. Putting _underscores_ either side of something makes it italic. Putting -dashes- either side of something makes it strikethrough. You don't appear to be able to underline things.
Buzz is shit. I turned on Google Buzz because it adds a tab to your profile where your Twitter feed, Google Reader shared items and various other goodies can be automatically shared. However, this only appears on your profile and takes literally hours to update, making the auto-import from Twitter in particular utterly useless.
No ads is nice. I know it won't last, but using a social network with no ads makes for a lovely, clean experience.
Face recognition when tagging photos is a good start, but needs work. It doesn't recognise some faces, and it would be nice if it "learned" faces like iPhoto does. Still, it automatically spotting where faces are is a good start.
Resharing should be an option. You can post something then disable reshares and/or comments for it after it's been posted — but that might be too late. You should be able to choose whether or not a post is resharable or commentable before you post it.
+1 is a useful bookmarking function. More sites are starting to use it now, and having a tab on your profile for all your +1s is handy. However, as the feature grows, this list is going to become long and cumbersome. It needs to be searchable, taggable or able to be organised into some sort of hierarchy. +1s also need a Share button if you want to post them to your Circles, as currently your +1s around the Web have nothing to do with G+ besides appearing on this tab.
The current absence of brand pages is wonderful. Another thing that won't last, as every corporation believes it needs a presence on every major social network. But for now, the fact that G+ remains a truly person-based social network is thoroughly pleasant.
Notification bar across all Google apps is great. This means you're always engaged with the service, yet it's not overly intrusive. The fact this is already integrated hopefully means further service integrations in the future — Events auto-syncing with Google Calendar, for example, would be smashing.
Things I'm looking forward to: Themes, non-obtrusive extensions, the iOS app, further integration between Google services, the service being open to everyone.
Things I'm not looking forward to: Social games, brand pages, ads.