Category: Personal and Opinion

#oneaday, Day 35: In Praise of Last Gen

An oft-had discussion in gaming is what constitutes the "golden age" of gaming, or indeed if there has even been one.

For some, it's the age of the arcade, when games were designed for pure fun and nothing else—besides emptying your pocket of quarters/local equivalents, of course. For others, it's the home consoles of the NES era; others still, the 16-bit wonderment of the SNES and Genesis/Mega Drive. For yet others… You get where this is going, I'm sure.

For me, the golden age will forever be the PS2 era. I didn't always think this was going to be the case; I remember playing PS2 games for the first time and thinking they were graphically impressive, but somehow lacking the "magic" of my favourite PS1-era games, particularly when it came to JRPGs. It took time, but the PS2 gradually proved itself as a force to be reckoned with, with a gigantic library of excellent titles (and an even bigger library of fucking awful ones) and the kind of backing from the public that Microsoft and Nintendo could only have dreamed of in those days. Funny how things change.

The thing is, being unemployed and skint as I am at the moment, I'm finally getting around to attempting to beat some of the PS2 titles that have sat, under-loved, on my shelf for years now. Final Fantasy XII is my current project: I'm now over 60 hours into it and still loving every minute. It's struck me while playing FFXII that it seems to be a much more infrequent occurrence that a current-gen (360, PS3 or Wii) game will grab me in quite the same way as numerous titles from the PS2 era did… and indeed still are.

I wonder how much of this is down to graphics. Naughty Dog aren't far from the truth with their jokey "next-gen filter" option in Uncharted; an increasing number of games in the current generation are looking increasingly interchangeable, with "gritty", "realistic" graphics often winning out over vibrant colours. There are exceptions, of course, and I discussed a number of these the other day.

I don't think it's just visual character, though; I think the way games are designed and consumed has changed considerably since the PS2 days, too. Look at the number of people who Achievement-whore these days. More often than not, this takes place not through a desire to see everything the game has to offer, but instead to line up their shiny virtual trophies on their virtual shelf and brag to their friends. The social side of gaming is cool, sure, but what happened to gaming just purely for the sake of fun?

There's no reason for these people to want to 100% Final Fantasy XII, for example. There's no public way of recognising your achievement besides actually telling people. But I think that's kind of a good thing, personally—if you want to be a hardcore insane idiot and complete every insanely difficult hunt, clear out every unnecessarily difficult area just for the satisfaction of knowing you have, that's great. But there's no feeling of "obligation" to do so—the person who storms straight through FFXII's main quest without exploring the side content is getting their money's worth just as much as the hardcore insane idiot.

But in games with Achievements these days, many people feel that they haven't got their money's worth unless they 1000G/Platinum Trophy the game. And in many cases, some of those Achievements and Trophies are enormously tedious collectathons (Assassin's Creed), forced replays of lengthy games (Mass Effect, Dragon Age) or encouragement to completely remove any "meaning" and sense of consequence from moral choices in games (any game that has separate Achievements for completing quests/levels in multiple different ways, thereby encouraging saving before "important" bits, then reloading and replaying just to get said Achievements).

Screw that; I'm just as guilty as the next man or woman of Achievement-whoring at times. But spending such a protracted period of time in the company of a last-gen game without all that bollocks to think about is giving me pause for thought. Are things really moving in the right direction?

It makes me a little sad to think that there's a generation of gamers now who have no idea what gaming life pre-Achievements was like—and with Sony's ditching of PS2 support on the PS3 and Microsoft's woeful "backward compatibility" (I use the term loosely) on the Xbox 360, it's becoming more and more unlikely that newer gamers will have the opportunity to explore that side of gaming—and then even if they do, they'll probably be put off by "ugly" SD graphics. Look at how much snobbery people have towards the Wii's graphics now.

Do I have rose-tinted specs when it comes to looking at last-gen gaming? Perhaps. But I'm more than happy to live in the past, if so.

#oneaday, Day 34: #whatstigma?

Comedienne Rebecca Front posted the following tweet yesterday, and was somewhat surprised at the level of response it got:

It was a bold move, particularly for a public figure, but in doing so she inspired a veritable plethora of people to "come out of the closet", as it were, and admit that they had suffered mental health issues, be they depression, anxiety, panic attacks, OCD or any number of others.

Front's aim with the original tweet was to encourage people to talk openly about the things they felt without feeling a stigma attached to it—hence the hashtag. And it was genuinely touching to see the number of people who latched on to this topic, confessing how they suffered from numerous "hidden" ailments in their mind whilst going about what otherwise seemed to be perfectly "normal" lives.

In fact, Front conjectured that some form of mental illness affected almost everyone. That may appear to be an exaggeration, but the number of people responding to her original tweet, coupled with the fact that #whatstigma became the top non-promoted trending topic in the UK for a good few hours yesterday, made it clear that there were plenty of people out there who do suffer from these things and perhaps haven't had the opportunity to talk about them, or don't feel comfortable talking about them.

It's no surprise, really, that there's a perceived stigma surrounding mental illness, however. Back in last May, Janet Street-Porter made some ill-advised comments suggesting that depression was being used as a fashion accessory—that people were just saying they were suffering because it was the "in" ailment to have.

There may well be some people who deliberately exaggerate their feelings of "being down" into "depression"—if there are, then they really should find better things to do with their lives. But these people aside, people do genuinely suffer. And it's not just a case of "snapping out of it", of "cheering up", of saying "chin up" enough times. It doesn't just go away; it sticks around, for years sometimes. Like anything, there are peaks and troughs; the peaks can feel like you've escaped it, finally, that you're in the clear, that you can get on with enjoying your life. But then a trough comes along, plunges you deep into the darkness and the long climb back out begins again.

I've felt this way—I still do. And I know many, many other people—some in person, some via the Internet—who also do. I didn't recognise my depression for what it was until I spent some time with someone who explained it to me at university. I recognised the feelings she described and knew that I'd felt them myself, too. It wasn't just a case of feeling "a bit sad". It was a variety of factors piling up in such a way that made it very difficult to deal with life's trials, whatever they might be.

And I hate it. The feeling of helplessness that comes with it; of having days when you just don't want to get out of bed; of times when nothing can stop you from feeling regrets, anger, fear, shame; of wondering if it'll ever end. For some people, it becomes just something about you—something you deal with. For others, it's an acute condition which can be treated. But for most people, there are underlying causes that need to be dealt with rather than attacked with "quick fixes".

In my case, these underlying causes are well-documented, and I'm doing what I can to fix them. This makes me feel a little better most of the time—knowing that I'm making the effort to do something about these underlying causes is good motivation to keep doing what I do. But there are still days when I find myself wondering if it's worth it, if anything is ever going to come of all these efforts that I'm making.

I won't know unless I keep trying, I guess.

My feelings on this made clear, now, here's the shameless plugging. In May, I'll be running the BUPA 10K with a couple of very lovely friends I've met via the One A Day Project. All three of us will be running in aid of the mental health charity "Mind". I'd certainly appreciate it a great deal if you can spare a bit of virtual loose change to fling my way via my fundraising page. Every little bit will help people to get the help they need to overcome these difficulties.

Thanks for reading this; thanks for your help; and thanks for your support.

#oneaday, Day 33: Twitter: A Skewed Window on a Weird World

Twitter is many things, as I've said a number of times on this blog before. It's arguably my primary means of communication these days, since the vast majority of my friends are quite-to-a-very long way away, and asynchronous communication is nice and convenient. It's a good source of information (in fact, Twitter themselves now describe themselves as an "information source" rather than a means of "short, timely messages" like they used to) and a good way to keep up with what people you're interested in are up to—and not just when they're having a shit.

By far the most remarkable thing it does, though, is something that it wasn't originally designed to do, but which it was always naturally going to do, given its nature. And that is the way it can give an eye-opening snapshot of "this day in history". Even when seemingly nothing is happening.

Today, there happened to be several things of (in some cases questionable) note occurring. Depending on where the tweets were coming from, it was interesting to see the differences and priorities.

By far the most horrifying tweets were emanating from the Middle East, where Egypt has been undergoing some not-inconsiderable turmoil. Today, there were violent clashes in Tahrir square, and via one Middle East-based person I follow who was RTing someone stuck in the middle of the violence and horror, it was possible to get a "first-hand" account of what was going on. It was oddly sobering to see the whole thing unfold, and although I didn't know the person being RTed in question, I was hoping that their tweets would keep coming and end on a positive note. I didn't want to think about what a sudden cessation of the "commentary" would have meant.

Elsewhere in the world, Australia was preparing for an enormous cyclone. They haven't had a great deal of luck over there recently. Due to the fact I don't think I follow anyone who actually lives in Australia, most of the reportage on the incident that I saw today was pretty cold and clinical, although this image, showing what said cyclone would look like if it were en route to the UK instead of Australia, gave pause for thought.

And then there was the curious incident of Justin Lee Collins' new girlfriend, which was reported by the Daily Mail today featuring a series of obnoxious paparazzi pictures of the couple on holiday. The article in itself was objectionable enough—as far as I'm concerned, celebrity squeezes aren't news, even if they're squeezing another celebrity—but what I found rather surprising was the reaction from quite a few (games journalist) people I knew on Twitter.

It transpires that the "mystery brunette" the Mail was referring to is actually someone who works in PR for the video games industry. I don't know the person in question and have never had any direct contact with her, so I wasn't much the wiser once people had explained the whole situation to me. But a lot of people seemed to find the whole situation hilarious—something which I found rather bewildering.

Now, granted, there's a certain element of "hey, I know that person!" if you see an acquaintance or friend in the paper. But personally speaking, whether or not the games journalism biz had "got one up on the Mail" (normally cause for celebration), if I was the woman in question, I'm not sure I'd be particularly happy about the widespread discussion amongst a number of people I may well have had direct contact with in the past. It's not her fault she got snapped by some paparazzi scumbag. Some may say it's an occupational hazard of dating a "celebrity", but that's no excuse. Her privacy has been invaded; and while the discussion of the fact "we know who she is and the Mail doesn't" hasn't been malicious in tone, it's drawn an unwarranted degree of attention to her.

In my opinion, anyway. But then I've never been one for any kind of gossip; people's relationships are their own business—not mine, not yours and certainly not the Daily fucking Mail's.

On a more uplifting note, one positive thing that came out of Twitter today was the #whatstigma hashtag started by comedienne @RebeccaFront. Via this hashtag, she was encouraging people to speak openly about mental illness, depression, anxiety and so forth, without fear of judgement or, well, stigma. It was heartening to see how many people took to it, and proof positive that there are plenty of people out there who are getting on with their lives despite struggling with difficult mental conditions. It was also, hopefully, a slap in the face to the sort of people who like to say "get over it". (Hello again, Daily Mail.) I'd actually like to write a bit more on this subject as it's one I do feel strongly about, but I think I'll save that for another day.

So, on the 2nd of February 2011, what happened? Several shit things. One invasion of privacy. And thousands of people stepping up to publicly say something about themselves without fear or shame.

While not the most positive day the world has ever seen, to say the least, it was certainly an interesting day. Will it go down in the history books? Who knows? But those of us who were here have our own personalised record of the whole thing. And that's pretty cool.

Good job, Internet.

#oneaday, Day 32: Brown Ops

Earlier today, this animated image from Insomniac Games' Resistance 3 did the rounds. Impressive. But also rubbish.

Ooh, controversial.

But seriously, look at it again. What is the one thing that sticks in your mind after watching that short clip? You probably answered either "post-apocalyptic", "monster" or "brown".

The trouble with things like this is that they completely lose their impact after a time. I'm sure Resistance 3 is technically very proficient, particularly if that clip was rendered using the game engine, which I'm guessing it was. But the fact it looks like Gears of War meets Fallout meets any other post-apocalyptic brown "destroyed beauty" sort of environment completely kills any interest for me—there's just too much of it around. And not just in the sci-fi genre; I haven't played Modern Warfare 2 for months (I traded it in after I got bored and decided I had no interest in the rest of the Call of Duty series after it) but my one enduring memory of that game, too, is that there was a lot of brown around.

This is nothing new, of course. I vividly remember getting all excited over the original Quake, the first high-profile "true 3D" first-person shooter. My brother, obviously already sick of it having been exposed to it every day on PC Zone, referred to it as "oh, the brown game". And yes, Quake was overwhelmingly brown, though there were a few blue bits in it too. This was just the beginning, though.

Yes, post-apocalyptic environments probably are going to be grey, brown and miserable. Although one thing that Halo: Reach shows is that it is possible for armageddon to be happening and it still be a vibrant place filled with colour. In the case of that game, it's arguable that the impact of the destruction is all the more profound because of the splashes of bright colours that are everywhere.

Or alternatively, developers, how about fewer games involving things that have collapsed or are in the process of collapsing? Fewer games where there's nothing but rock and stone? More games in organic, natural environments that aren't dead. More games that aren't afraid to take a few risks and be a bit more stylised rather than "gritty" and "realistic". Some of my favourite games of all time are the Timesplitters series, proving once and for all that I don't hate FPS games, I am just very tired of them all being identikit and boring. Timesplitters was colourful, distinctive and humorous but still managed to be atmospheric. And the news that CryTek are considering resurrecting the series fills me with an enormous amount of joy… and hope that they don't fuck it up.

Perhaps this is why I like JRPGs at a time when more and more people seem to be getting switched off by them. They may be their own particular kind of generic, but at least they offer some colour as part of their aesthetic.

#oneaday, Day 31: Looking Back Through a Lens

I love photos. In one of my many houses at university, I had a whole corridor whose walls were papered with photographs I'd taken throughout the course of the previous year. It may well have looked a bit serial killer-ish, but I liked it (until I took them all down shortly before moving out and discovered the wall behind was actually damp and mouldy—thanks a lot, scumbag landlord) and it provided a nice visual record of what had gone on.

This was in the days before digital cameras were particularly widespread, of course, so these were actual photos on actual paper. I took a lot of photos, but there was still no way it'd be possible to take as many as you can with today's cameras. That meant that each captured memory had to be just so, and there was no going back to try again; you caught it, or you missed it. Simple as that.

Of course, nowadays, it's much easier to capture and keep a memory, assuming you don't do something ridiculous to your computer like take it into the bath with you. But that doesn't mean photos lose any of their impact, or the memories contained therein. I'll bet I can take a random selection of photos from my iPhoto library and be able to explain each and every one of them.

In fact, let's do just that. I'll give you ten, just so we're not here all night. Hold on, I'll be right back.

So without further ado, here we go.

Would you look at that? We went and got a nice one to begin with. This is the wedding day (obviously) of my friends Rob and Rachel. Instead of confetti, they had bubbles. It was awesome, and we all ate a lot of food and got quite drunk. Fact: Rob and Rachel were one of the first couples I knew who got together at university and are still going strong today. I salute you, you lovely pair.

Aha. There are actually two separate stories behind this one. The guy in white makeup is, I believe, a chap called James Gaynor, who was starring alongside me in a production of Marivaux's L'Epreuve, also known as A Test of Character. He was playing a character called Frontin, I was playing a character called Lucidor. Lucidor was in love with a girl called Angelique, who was played by a most lovely lady named Sarah, but there was a long and complicated plot involving Frontin pretending to court her on Lucidor's behalf and it all got a bit French.

As for the mobile phone and the text on it: the mobile phone was mine at the time (Nokia REPRESENT), "sonicfunkstars" was the name of the fake band I made music under (using Sony's ACID Music software and approximately 24 CDs of samples, most of which I probably never used) and "txtr's thumb" was the name of my second album. Interestingly (not really), "sonicfunkstars" is still my Xbox LIVE ID, and it's one of the only places on the Internet where I'm not "angryjedi" or some variant thereof. The other is YouTube.

(Exclusive: I found the title track from said album. It used to irritate the fuck out of anyone with a Nokia phone. You'll see why.)

Ah yes. I can tell you exactly what is going on here. This is during my second year at university. The location is my friend Chris' bedroom. Under the desk is Sam, who is drunk, and spent most of the night seeing what tiny spaces he could contort himself into.

Lying on the floor is Steph, who is reading a book—possibly Bridget Jones' Diary. In the background is her erstwhile boyfriend Brett, my most enduring memory of whom is when he burst in the front door of Steph's house, furious that "someone's drawn knobs all over my car". Someone had indeed drawn knobs in the snow that was all over his car, and Sam and I naturally knew absolutely nothing about it.

But that was not the occasion in this photo. No. This was simply a social gathering at Chris' house—Sam, Steph and I were all flatmates in the first year, so we often took the opportunity to hang out together. We'd "lost" a couple of flatmates along the way to other social groups, but we'd stuck together for a lot of the time.

One of whom was the rather magnificent Beki, seen pictured here with Sam, again. This photo was taken on our hall of residence bar's "70s Night", a night where only the six of us from Flat A33, Hartley Grove Halls, Southampton, made the effort to dress up. Sam is wearing a woman's shirt.

Whizz forward to last year, and we have a picture of a game of Scotland Yard in progress, one of the very few games I'm aware of that provide you with a hat as part of its components. Pictured is Tom. Not pictured is Sam. And me. Obviously.

This Post-It space invader adorned the front wall of Ruffian Games' studios in Dundee. Obviously a little light relief after getting Crackdown 2 out the door.

Back in time to the first year at university again, we see here the midst of Operation Shopping Trolley, our attempts to stealthily remove the shopping trolley that had inexplicably appeared in our flat overnight. "Inexplicably" as in for once it wasn't one of us who had brought it up. Notice the cunning ninja disguises Sam and I have adopted.

This is Dungeonquest, one of either the best or worst games ever created depending on your outlook. It's a game where you have an approximately 23% chance of survival (they tell you this in the instruction booklet), and is almost completely determined by blind luck. Combat is resolved almost literally by rock-paper-scissors… except here it's slash-mighty blow-leap aside. I was astonished to discover that they have actually remade this monstrosity. I was also quite tempted to pick up a copy, but that would be a very silly idea.

To this date, this is still the most literary piece of graffiti I've ever seen, found on the back of the cubicle door in the gents' toilets in The Hobbit pub, Southampton. The whole door was something to behold; there were full-on conversations and slagging matches going on between various wall-writers, an excerpt of which you can see here. Theatre Studies was repeatedly accused of gayness. A bit rich coming from people hanging out in gents' toilets.

And why don't we end with this one, then? This offensive masterpiece was produced by the cast of Southampton "Rattlesnake!" Theatre Group's production of Alan Ayckbourn's Round and Round The Garden whilst finishing off rehearsals prior to taking the show to the Edinburgh Fringe. We'd all gone a little bit stir crazy by then, and so we took to lite-vandalising the whiteboards in the lecture theatre where we'd been rehearsing. ("Lite" because you could just rub it off. But we did leave it there for the lecturer to discover in the morning.)

Look closely and you'll see a selection of details; Pac-Man re-imagined to become Sonic the Hedgehog eating shit, some stickpeople having a threesome, some anagrams, a victim's eye view of the Ku Klux Klan looking down on someone they've just thrown down a well, an out-of-context stage direction from the play made to sound dirty just by the simple addition of "just the way I like it" and my excellent drawing of the entire cast of the show, except me, because while I was quite happy to draw all the others I didn't feel confident drawing myself. Also, BUTTOCKS.

There you go. Proof that I have an incredible memory for silly crap. And proof that even if you've forgotten me, I probably haven't forgotten you.

#oneaday, Day 30: Julia

The Internet is a curious thing, as we all know. It's given us LOLcats, cakefarts, puddingfarts (so I'm told… I haven't dared look that one up yet), Twitter, Rickrolling, gayrolling, that kid throwing a WoW-related (fake) strop and jamming a controller up his arse, porn, dancing chicken man, leekspinning and all manner of other things besides.

The other thing it gives you is people.

As a kid at school, I often wondered what it would be like to meet people outside the local community where I lived. I grew up in a small village in the countryside that had a pretty close-knit community. You could probably name most of the local "characters" off the top of your head if you had a good think… largely because pretty much everyone got involved with everything. And, just to add to every country stereotype ever, there was even a semi-regular "village show" which was inevitably filled with middle-aged men and women making jokes that were smutty and/or at the local vicar's expense. It's pretty neat to see a close-knit community like that, actually, though I question how much it actually happens these days. It probably does, though I doubt to the same degree.

I remember when the Internet came to town, though. Or, more specifically, in the form of CompuServe, which wasn't the "proper" Internet—that was a mysterious and difficult thing that no-one quite understood at the time. CompuServe was a window onto the rest of the world; people who were potentially far away that we all had access to for the first time.

CompuServe had one of the earliest chatrooms around—this was so long ago that the term "chat" hadn't taken on the widespread meaning it had today. No, in keeping with the times (or possibly not), CompuServe elected to call their chatroom facility the "CB Simulator". You know, because it was like CB radio in that you could talk to random strangers. Only it was completely different because you were just typing things.

I remember "meeting" a few people through this facility, with one in particular springing to mind. Her name was Julia, and she was from somewhere near Manchester. We got chatting and hit it off pretty quickly, and thus began a long campaign of emailing each other back and forth. I can't remember any of the things we talked about—the usual teenage things, I imagine—but I remember that we were getting on well and it felt like we were pretty "close".

So eventually, we had the opportunity to meet. She was going to Alton Towers with her friends, and as it happened, my friends and I were planning a similar trip. So we decided to make our trips coincide. I was pretty excited about the whole thing. She'd sent me a couple of (clean!) photos which seem to have managed to travel from computer to computer with me completely unintentionally, and she hadn't promptly cut off all contact when I sent her a photo of myself looking slightly uncomfortable in a dinner jacket on prom night. Which was a good sign.

I'm not sure what happened. Perhaps it was shyness, perhaps it was the presence of all our other friends "cramping our style", perhaps it was the fact that one of my friends was hitting on one of her friends (and doing quite well, from what I could tell), perhaps I wasn't what she'd expected or hoped for (she totally was what I was hoping for, she was a hottie)… but we found it pretty difficult to talk to each other in "real life". It was weird; we'd told each other lots of things, including plenty of "secrets", but as soon as we were faced with one another it was suddenly like starting over… and it became a missed opportunity, sadly. We drifted off and lost contact after that. There was no "breakup" or words spoken in anger; things just… "stopped".

I think about Julia every so often and wonder what she's doing with her life. I hope she's happy, wherever she is.

#oneaday, Day 29: Dedicated to Dedication

It's hard to talk about your own good qualities without appearing conceited and self-obsessed. But I think we know each other well enough by now for you to be aware that I'm normally one for focusing on the negative things about myself. As such, a rare celebration of Something That I Am Good At should be applauded.

Go on, applaud. (You don't have to applaud. But good on you if you genuinely started applauding there.)

I have absolutely no hesitation in my mind when someone asks me what my best quality is. Without a doubt, it's my dedication. If I start something, by God I'm going to finish it come hell or high water. It may take a long time, it may take lots of swearing, but I am going to do it.

This blog is perhaps the most immediate example of this, now a year and ten days of daily posts strong, but there's plenty of other instances in which this characteristic of myself shows itself. Let's take today, for example, I woke up in a foul mood and decided after a bit of moping around, a bacon sandwich and two cups of coffee that I was going to go out for a walk in an attempt to clear my head a bit. And it was going to be a "long" walk.

I didn't have a particular route in mind, nor did I have a particular distance planned. I just set off, pointed in a particular direction and started walking. I reached the next village over from where I live—always a strangely satisfying thing to do, like you've made some sort of epic journey—and turned back. I eventually came to a crossroads where I had three choices; go back the way I came (the "short" way), turn right and do a big "loop" around the other next village over (the "moderate" way) or turn left and do an unnecessarily massive "loop" (the "long" way). Guess which way I picked?

That's right. The long way. I realised shortly into my journey up the long way that the long way was, in fact, considerably longer than I had anticipated, and the fact that I was wearing twice the number of layers on my top half than on my bottom half meant that my torso and head were lovely and toasty, while my testicles were slowly turning into ice blocks. It would have been easy to turn back from the long way and head back via the short way—I hadn't got that far. But no; I decided I was going to stick out this journey however long it eventually ended up being. (A total of 12.5km altogether, if you were wondering.)

Some may call that stubbornness. Some may call it bloody-mindedness. Some may call it stupidity. I call it dedication to see something through once you start it. And it's something that's a regular part of my life. I like that about myself, and it's not often I get to say that.

#oneaday, Day 28: He Seems Nice

Fellow #oneadayer @Bungiesgirl wrote an excellent post the other day about "The Curse of Mr Nice Guy". She hit the nail bang on the head; there are times when it almost seems that it doesn't pay to be a nice person, for a guy at least.

Thinking about it, I'm not actually sure I've ever known anyone who's used the oft-quoted "I love bad boys" line. But I certainly know a couple of people who have consistently ended up with people who make them miserable when it may be that there is, in fact, someone standing right in front of them who would provide them with what they want out of a relationship. Only, because they're one of the proverbial "Mr Nice Guys", they're not even in the running for that person's affections. At least, not in the "anything more than friendship" sort of case.

Some people call this "friend-zoning", where Mr Nice Guy has become too good a friend to even be considered relationship material. I'm not sure where this phenomenon or the term to describe it originally came from, but it happens all the time, and adds an interesting twist to the age-old question of whether or not men and women can possibly be friends with each other without the desire to insert parts of each other into various orifices getting in the way.

The simple answer to said age-old question is, of course "Yes, don't be silly". Take stock of your friends for a moment and there's probably a good balance of both boys and girls there. And there are probably some people of the opposite sex (assuming heterosexuality for the purposes of this argument) that you don't want to jump at the first opportunity. Even when drunk. The reasons for this could be many; maybe you don't fancy them, maybe you value your friendship too much, maybe you've even had a relationship with them in the past. But the fact is, opposite-sex friendships can and do happen.

It's when they're a little lop-sided that difficulties happen, and such is often the case with Mr Nice Guy.

Let's take a hypothetical situation. Ms Ladygirl is having a tough time of it. Her partner, Mr Wrong, isn't what she wants, but she doesn't want to leave him—either she doesn't want to be alone or she has somehow convinced herself that she "loves" him. She confides in Mr Nice Guy, who 1) fancies her and 2) thinks it's blindingly obvious that he could do a better job of providing her with happiness, cake and orgasms than Mr Wrong could ever do. Mr Nice Guy, being a decent, upstanding sort of chap, though, also generally does not like to exacerbate situations where emotions run high by throwing his own, possibly unexpected, feelings into the mix. So he listens to Ms Ladygirl, offers her support, takes care of her, holds her hair out of her face when she's sick, carries her home when she gets wasted and then leaves her to sleep while he walks home to go and have a biiiig wank and cry into his pillow.

It's a difficult (and, I hasten to add, completely hypothetical) situation. But what should Mr Nice Guy do? If he says nothing, then obviously nothing will happen for him. If he says something, though, Ms Ladygirl may interpret it as a selfish act—"I want you. So get rid of him."—whereas he in fact meant it more as "You're not happy. I want to see if I can make you happier than he does."

Of course, there's always the chance that Ms Ladygirl would correctly interpret his advances, cast aside Mr Wrong and happily live forever after with Mr Nice Guy. But due to the nature of your average Mr Nice Guy, that doesn't happen that often.

Which is a pity, really, because Mr Nice Guys, as their name suggests, are in fact very nice guys. They're not boring, they're not clingy, they're not any of the assumptions you might care to make about them. They're people too; people who like helping others and hope that one day their caring, considerate, compassionate nature will bring them a partner who truly deserves their attention.

So if you're a Ms Ladygirl and you're clearly dating a Mr Wrong, I'd strongly urge to to pay attention to those non-spoken, non-obvious telepathic signals that the Mr Nice Guy you inevitably know is highly likely sending you.

Do the guy a favour. Grab him by his lapels and kiss him. Neither of you will regret it.

#oneaday, Day 27: To Whom It May Concern

Dear God/Cthulhu/Nyx/Nicola from Girls Aloud/Kefka/Des/Mr Denton/GLaDOS/G-Man/Bhaal/Fate/whoever is actually in charge of everything,

I'm not a praying man. You know that. I'm not even a religious man. But I'm asking for a favour. One little favour. That surely won't be much for someone of Your calibre of magnificence/horror/weirdness/hotness/badassness/system specifications.

Said favour will only take up one day. One day. 24 hours on this Earth. You can spare a day, right? I don't mind what You do on the day after. You can rain down locusts, devour the planet, send forth Your spawn into the wilds, ruin the world, remake it in Your own image or hire a guy with a crowbar to kick some ass. I don't care.

All I ask is that for one solitary day, all of the Nice People get to have a Good Day. A Good Day together that they can all enjoy at the same time. Maybe down the pub. Because inevitably, what happens right now is that Person A has a Bad Day, Person B has a Fucking Terrible Day, Person C has a Great Day and Person D is "meh" about the whole thing. Person B is thrust into the very depths of depression. Person A moans about their day, but then feels guilty as soon as they come across Person B's problems, which are clearly worse than their own. Person C wants to celebrate their Great Day but doesn't want to make Person A and B feel bad or envious, while Person D gets all the shit from the other three lumped on them as they all vent their frustrations on the one truly neutral party in the whole debacle. And then no-one wants to go down the pub.

This is clearly a Very Silly Situation. Now, Your own personal ideology may not be particularly compatible with the concept of a Good Day. But look at it this way: if You're the type to go devouring worlds, covering them with fire and/or making things "fall into shadow" (whatever that means—surely you can just turn on a light) then surely won't it hurt more if You fuck shit up immediately after everyone has had a Good Day? Yeah. Now we're talking, right?

If, on the other hand, You're the benevolent type, then think how much good spiritual-currency-of-your-choice You'll acquire from the provision of a universally Good Day. People will be happy and they'll be inclined to thank You for said provision. That'd be nice, wouldn't it? I played Populous. I remember how it works. More mana means MOAR VOLCANOES. You know You want to.

Now, there are, of course, some flaws in this plan: namely, that one person's Good Day may well cause someone else to have a Bad or even a Fucking Terrible Day. But I trust that You, in your infinite wisdom, will be able to sort something out. If it helps, You can limit the Universally Good Day to people that are "nice", haven't pissed me off recently and aren't likely to. Or just my friends. I'm cool with that.

Basically, what I'm saying is: sucky things keep happening to Good People. Please, for one day, stop it and let people just enjoy life for once. I know that I'd be very grateful. And I know there are plenty of others out there who would too.

So at least think about it, huh?

Amen/Ia! Ia! Cthulhu fhtagn!/May you always draw the right cards/You are well sexy/Synthesised laughs are the best/You're a twat but I like you despite yourself/I like your sunglasses/This was a triumph/May you always be a Free-Man/FACE ME FACE THE NEW LORD OF MURDER/Korah matah korah rahtahmah/Yours faithfully,

Pete

#oneaday, Day 26: On Culture, and Farting on Things

The other night, I posted a question on Formspring. I thought I sent it to just a couple of friends but apparently somehow shared it with the entire Internet, as a lot of people, some of whom I hadn't come across on Formspring before, appeared to be very enthusiastic to answer it. I was somewhat surprised at the amount of depth people were putting into their answers, because it was, after all, a somewhat flippant question that I wasn't expecting people to take seriously at all. How wrong I was.

This was the question:

Out of The X-Factor/American Idol and equivalents; Jersey Shore; the music of Girls Aloud; the Call of Duty series; and cakefarts (don't look it up, it's exactly what it sounds like), which has had the most beneficial impact on society, however small?

My thinking behind it was this: here is a list of arbitrarily-chosen things that are all either irritating, disgusting, amusing or awesome depending on your outlook. Is there one that people see as significantly "better" than the others?

Turns out not, actually. Everyone had some good points to make.

@Ajguy had a short but sweet answer:

Cakefarts by far. Yes, I am familiar. And yes I've gotten a lot of friends with it.

It's probably important to choose who you're going to show Cakefarts to carefully, because after all, it is exactly what it sounds like. But it's the sort of thing you can show to people and they certainly won't forget it in a hurry. (If you're not familiar, seriously, don't look it up, especially if you're at work; the clue's in the name) If you are acquaintances with people who don't "get" the Internet, you'll be an Instant Legend.

@Cidergirli agreed with AJ, but for different reasons:

I'm going to have to go with cakefarts, purely because it's the only one which appears to be open and honest about its use of cake. Also: cake.

@MJPilon had a thoughtful take on the issue and came out in favour of American Idol/X-Factor:

The answer I have off the top of my head is American Idol and equivalents because despite all the craziness that has sprung up around these shows, at their heart, these shows demonstrate that people should not give up on their dreams and that if they work for it, they can achieve what they desire. Anything which can still evoke these feelings and notions in people are beneficial for society.

He was concerned immediately after that he may have missed the point of the question, but I think that's a decent answer; though personally I feel that "ambition" shouldn't require a TV show to inspire people to reach for the stars.

@C64Glen came out in favour of Girls Aloud, though not for the reasons you might expect. Or possibly the reasons you might expect, given his username. I wasn't familiar with the factoid he shared, though. TIL.

Girls Aloud easily, some of the tracks and production on the 'Out of Control' album is great. Some of it by former C64 musician Matt Gray. E.g. Untouchable (instrumental)

@Shinogu showed where his priorities lie with his response:

Jersey Shore? They were the only people of that selection at the LittleBigPlanet 2 World Record event.

@Cilllah, ably aided by @Culley25, got straight to the point of the matter:

All of them prove one very important fact – mental illness makes money.

Fair point. @Bungiesgirl then came up with an image that you will either find delicious or nightmarish depending on your opinion of two of the things mentioned in the original question:

Surely it is a combination of Girls Aloud and Cakefarts?! Girls aloud because they have a hot(ish) redhead, cakefarts just for the LOL! preferably these two things should be brought together into one super site of Girls Cakefarts Aloud.

I like the redhead in Girls Aloud. Nicola. She has a name. Nicola. I like Nicola. I understand she's not the most popular option. That's just fine by me.

Sorry, where was I? Oh, right. @minifig came up with some fair points in favour of Girls Aloud and Call of Duty, with a disclaimer:

Call of Duty probably wins it, since the development of the game has at least pushed a few technological boundaries a little way, and probably just enough to outweigh the huge timesink it is for the people that play it. However, I think Girls Aloud probably come second since:
1. They have a couple of songs that aren't too offensive and
2. The amount of masturbation they've induced may well have had an impact to reduce the fertility of large numbers of men, thereby reducing the world's already excessively large population.

Not that I like either CoD or Girls Aloud.

It was around this point that the answers started to gradually increase in length, depth and intensity of feeling. Here's @docbadwrench:

Thankfully, I only know what a few of those things are. However, I think I get the general point.

Based upon the available data, I would have to conclude that Call of Duty has the most beneficial (though incredibly small) impact upon society. It encourages aiming, which is highly important if you use a gun.

In fact, if all fans of the aforementioned list could improve their aim, then they might kill one another; this could be another net gain for society. Perhaps, if we could plant subliminal messages into Call of Duty games encouraging people to buy guns. Then, extending the message further, perhaps their American Idol viewing parties would include handguns, just lying around on the table, in case there's a conflict about whether the latest off-key primadonna is the bestest of them all.

Definitely Call of Duty.

"allpointsnorth", whom I'm not sure I know on Twitter (apologies if I do) had this to say:

I suppose the knee jerk and natural response is that none of those programmes have any beneficial impact, but that would be a touch lazy and, not really fair.

Like most things it depends upon how you measure it. If we take beneficial to mean that more people enjoyed it so it must be more beneficial then I suppose I'd have to say Call of duty? 55 million sold worldwide. I guess Call of Duty would also fall into the 'brought economic rewards to many' view of beneficial too, though I'm sure that Jersey Shore brings in the cash too as will Girls Aloud.

However, I'm not really a big fan of measuring society against some sort of scale. I don't think it really works like that. To break society down in such binary ways is tempting as it allows us to explain and comprehend the world around us so much more simply. However, society isn't simple and what benefits one, no doubt, harms another. Even if that harm falls into a socially acceptable form of harm that we ignore.

Of the things here I'd say that Girls Aloud benefited me most as I've enjoyed a selection of their poptastic hits and the videos to go with them more than Jersey Shore, Call of Duty or Cakefarts – none of which I have seen. So, clearly, the music of Girls Aloud is the winner here and has done the most to benefit society at large.

Interesting point. What is "beneficial" to society? Is it something that brings economic rewards? Something that benefits art and culture? Something that makes people happy?

@planetf1 had a simple but accurate answer to my question:

I'd go for xfactor/idol simple as it's given a lot of people pleasure, helped many with a career/breaking into the music industry, has stimulated discussion & allowed many people to share a common experience.

Discussion there certainly is; like it or hate it, during any high-profile "reality" show on TV, Twitter will be abuzz with discussion about the show in question, whether it's in-depth debates about which floppy-haired twat is the "best" or people ranting and raving how much they don't care about whatever programme it is.

Two more, then we're done. @MituK had this wonderfully analytical, scientific approach to share on the subject:

Ooh, interesting. Well, let's assume that 'beneficial impact' can go into negatives, and assess each accordingly.

I know that there is a difference between X-Factor-type-shows and Jersey Shore, but both seem to elevate fame for it's own sake; even where hard work and talent are not what is being rewarded. This has led to a whole generation(s) of kids valuing fame for it's own sake, rather than as a consequence of hard work. Definitely negative impact. We'll give this a -5 rating for 'beneficial impact'

Similarly, the music of girls aloud – this has created tunes I can happily bop along to when in the mood, but it's also meant Cheryl Cole, who most little girls (according to a recent survey) would like to grow up to be, so this creates the same problem as described in the first paragraph. We'll give this an arbitrary rating of -0.5, weighing up those two things…

The CoD series – hmm, perhaps there has been no negative impact other than the already-existing self-perpetuating desire for studios to churn out yet more of these types of games. HOWEVER, it's existence has no doubt also inspired some of the many smart people interested in game design to want to create more interesting video game experiences (think indie scene). So, perhaps in a way this has had beneficial impact of +2 (of course I'm being idealistic here).

Cakefarts get a 'beneficial impact' rating of 0, because that is precisely how long I want to think about cakefarts.

So, on that scale, CoD wins, I guess!

And finally, @jennfrank shares a convincing argument in favour of Jersey Shore:

I've had more conversations about Jersey Shore than I've ever had about Idol or Talent or Call of Duty, and while these are all legitimate cultural milestones, OH MY GOD, don't get me started on all the million reasons Jersey Shore is my heart and soul.

I love these earnest people earnestly, without a wrinkle of irony–I do!–and I love their passion for life and their perfectly foreign codes of morality and chivalry and fashion. But it's this amazing anthropological study that no other show dares attempt, which is edgy in its way, and the cast, in turn, are these amazing actors who improvise their warts, these utterly authentic famewhores who relish in their own faults and even explain them all out, looking directly into the camera in partial states of drunkenness and undress.

Watching the show, for me, reproduces much the same crackle I felt as a tween watching early Real World, but instead of feeling a voyeur's envious thrill at the specter of adults away from home for the first time, I instead know the envious thrill of watching kids away from home for the first time. So it's the same, and it's not the same.

Also, these folks are classy: Snooki is a NYT bestselling author, and Jenni "JWOWW" Farley is a spectacularly talented painter.

So there you have it. Points in favour of all of them, and proof positive that easily-derided cultural phenomena sometimes carry more significance than you might think personally.

Still hate X-Factor, though.