Blog: Recent Articles

I have discovered something extremely disturbing today, which I cannot let go unremarked and uncorrected. I have discovered that I don’t know the term for a group of groundhogs!

Wikipedia has a very nice list of animal names, which includes the collective nouns for each animal. Groundhogs, and even marmots, are noticeably absent from that list. A quick Google search reveals that I’m not the only crazy person out there. Now what do I do if I come across a ___ of mafia groundhogs who attempt to “make me an offer I can’t refuse” and barely escape with my life? How am I supposed to recount such a tale if I don’t know the correct collective noun to use?!

I mean, is it just because groundhogs are largely solitary? But they still live together in burrows. So do we call them “burrow groups”? Families? Or, if you look at the list of animal names, a group of squirrels is called a “dray” or “scurry.” Since groundhogs are marmots, and marmots are a type of ground squirrel, do these terms apply to groundhogs? Can you apply hypothetical syllogisms to collective nouns? So far it’s the best lead I’ve got.

I just finished playing Mass Effect, a Bioware science fiction role-playing game for Xbox 360 (what I played) and now PC. When I bought my Xbox back at Christmas, I knew that Mass Effect was on my short list of Games I Wanted. It had received high praise and excellent reviews; the commercials made it look like the sort of game I would enjoy—I like science fiction, and I like combat as long as the game isn’t all combat. So a couple of weeks ago, I bought Mass Effect at about half price on eBay and began playing.

Many reviewers hailed Mass Effect as the best game of the year. I wouldn’t go that far, but then again, I‘m not a gamer, and my experience in games this year hasn’t been all that much. It is definitely one of the best games I have ever played; however, it does have several weak points that prevent me from enjoying it as much as I would like. I’ll cover those later.

Mass Effect may have the best story of any game this year. As a RPG, you get to play a character and make decisions that affect the story and the character’s development. In Mass Effect, you get to customize your character’s sex, appearance, first name, and military training. My character, Lance Shepard, was a vanguard. I felt this would give me a nice balance—I‘m not good enough at combat to be a soldier, but I didn’t want to fully devote myself to something like a technical or biotic role. Vanguard seemed to be a good “best of both worlds” choice. Of course, I can always play the game again, with a different character class, make different decisions, and see how the outcome goes from there. This is definitely one of Mass Effect’s strengths.

The story is classic science fiction space opera. It does use the old “ancient enemy returns after millennia” plot, and the enemy does happen to be a species of sentient machines (that seems rather popular these days—that isn’t our immersion in technology talking at all…). So it isn’t too original in that respect. However, you have to give Bioware points from the sheer depth of the Mass Effect universe. There are several distinct species, each with a clearly-defined culture, history, strengths, weaknesses … I don’t know how many people worked on the writing and arts for the game, but they went all out. Each of the planets visible has a little description of it, and sometimes a little relevant history. They’ve thought out how the eponymous technology works, what other technologies we have; they named the various weapons and ammunition upgrades … the amount of information packed into that game boggles my mind.

So it comes as no surprise that there will be spin-off novels and sequels—the universe of Mass Effect is too rich to not do that. It would be such a waste. Apparently Bioware’s got Mass Effect 2 in the works, with more planned after that. And I will buy them, as long as they continue to be this good. Because it’s enjoyable. And hopefully, each one will improve on the parts that hindered my enjoyment.

The first thing I noticed was the lack of a tutorial. Not being a very experienced gamer, tutorials are helpful to me. Some people may not need or want them, which is why having optional tutorials is a fair compromise. Mass Effect just throws you into its combat interface, and it took me some time to get used to it. Oh well.

Some portions of the game got very repetitive. Now, I went all out and did almost every possible side assignment. Had I not done that, maybe it wouldn’t have felt so repetitive. I am, of course, talking about the Mako vehicle used to get around the terrain of alien planets. That was boring, and in some cases, rather difficult. There were also some combat situations in which I repeatedly died, causing me to get frustrated, but that isn’t so much bad game design as my own ineptitude.

But please, please, please, Bioware … please release the next game with a way to skip cutscenes. I can stomach the corny dialogue, but the fact of the matter is simple: I do not need to watch the same cutscene several dozen times over when I die and my last save point is before the cutscene. Since you don’t let me save during combat, I cannot save after the cutscene, so I’m forced to watch it over … and over … and over. It also harms the replay value of the game, since I don’t necessarily want to watch a cutscene now that I know what it says.

Apparently the PC version corrects some of the game’s flaws, and hopefully Mass Effect 2 will have smoothed out any other bugs (parts of the physics engine kind of seem weird; I occasionally got stuck in spots I shouldn’t have). Mass Effect is, overall, a great game with a couple of serious flaws (did I mention I’d like to be able to skip cutscenes?). It’s not for everyone. If you dislike RPGs in general, this game isn’t going to change your mind about them—your ears may start to bleed from the almost endless expository dialogue. But if you like RPGs, and if you especially like science fiction, Mass Effect promises you adventure.

…but if I did, I‘d make it as entertaining as possible.

I do not believe that any human being is justified in taking the life of another human being. The death penalty does not make sense if you’re an atheist, and it doesn’t make sense if you’re a theist. If you are an atheist, then you probably don’t believe in an afterlife. In that case, you are depriving the murderer of existence without inflicting any form of punishment. Since all humans do eventually die, the murderer will die of natural causes eventually. Why not inflict as much punishment before then? Execution robs you of that. If you are a theist, then you probably do believe in an afterlife, which means a “hell” in which the wicked experience divine retribution. However, once again, if you execute a murderer, then he or she will go straight to Hell. And if you do happen to be wrong about the whole “God” thing, you‘ve let that murderer off the hook. Now, since there is a zero per cent chance of the murderer living forever, then it makes sense to inflict as much temporal punishment as possible, then let the murderer experience eternal damnation upon his or her death.

So that’s my position on the death penalty. I wonder though, why is the modern form of execution (i.e., lethal injection) so humane? If the person being executed is truly terrible enough to warrant death, why be nice and quick about it? Moreover, he or she has inflicted so much psychological damage to society, and he or she won’t be paying taxes anymore, so we might as well milk him or her for as much as he or she is worth before executing this person.

To that end, if I were in favour of the death penalty, I’d like it to be as fun to watch as possible. Maybe we should do it the way the Romans did, and feed people to lions. Think about it. In our capitalist society, there‘d be a new niche market for lion tamers to train lions to eat people on command. There’s the entertainment value of watching someone being eaten by a lion—hey, the government could even charge admission and recoup some of the losses from killing one of its citizens. The families of the victims could receive complimentary videos of the execution—fun for the entire family!

A humane death penalty is hypocritical.

And yes, if I were a lion tamer, I would like a nice big hat that says “Lion tamer” in bright neon flashing letters. And now for something completely different.

Pretentious title, no? This is actually just something that occurred to me while having a bath (baths are great that way).

I don’t know which particular set of neurons collided to produce this aspect of my personality, but I’ve never been one to concern myself with body image—mine or anyone else‘s. Physically I’m rather lucky in that I lead a sedentary lifestyle but have a high metabolism and a slim build. So I‘m very tall and rather thin. If I were more physically active, I might actually be fit and perhaps develop some muscles, but those same neurons decided that I would prefer to sit in front of a glowing screen and push electrons about while writing blog entries discussing the pushing of those same electrons.

Where was I? Oh yes, body image. I’ve never been particularly concerned with my body image. However, since I bike to work during the summer—an increased level of physical activity—I started thinking about how this would affect my body. In the bath tub I looked at my thighs and thought, “Wow, are my thighs really that big?” That thought made me think about body image, and I realized that I don’t know if my thighs are that big, because I don’t know what “normal” thighs look like—mostly because there’s no such thing as “normal” thighs. I expect that everyone’s thighs are slightly different.¹

Society rams body image propaganda down the throats of self-conscious adolescents, adults, and Jack Russell terriers. But the “ideal” body image changes with the times, shifts and drifts enough that the idea of a “normal” body is completely fallacious. Unfortunately, there is no blueprint to the human body—we have our genome, yes, but there is no instruction manual that says, “The ideal male thigh will consist of the following measurements….” No doubt some cheeky scientist has done a study to determine the ideal proportions of body parts in order to construct a race of physically-flawless, mentally-superior supermen. The experiment has clearly gone horribly wrong, however, because it appears that they have produced the opposite result: increasingly obese, intellectually-deficient individuals.

This is where the epiphany would be if there were one. There’s not, however. Firstly, what I’m saying is not earthshaking (the number of earthshaking revelations remaining is quite low, and I possess none of them). Secondly, I‘ve completely wandered off on a tangent and have no idea what I’m going to say next.

So there.

• [ 1 ] Except for you clones out there, but don’t feel bad. You’re all unique on the inside.

I’ve been saying it for years: Cookie monster’s new platform of cookies as a “sometimes food” is a travesty. Finally it gets some mainstream media coverage from Stephen Colbert!