Politics and the Media

Now I know that in the world with the Internet, mentioning politics is like having a dirty bomb on the lawn of the White House, nothing good will come out of it. I also know that most people that read this post after seeing the title will think I'm about to go pro-liberal, conservative, democrat, republican, or whatever, but the fact is I'm tired of all sides. The media is also on my list because of how close politics and the media tends to be. Also for the fact that I want to shed light on something rather important, and that is how most issues that people become passionate about issues is due to the attention the media gives it and people are simply unaware of this.

Now, the reason I am tired of all sides in politics is due to the fact that both sides are exactly the same. I know this sounds like blasphemy to people on either side because "I can't be like them!" and that kind of helps in proving my point. Both sides are so bent on being so different, if not the exact opposite, that all they ended up doing is having the exact same stories, just conveniently switching some of the dialogue or circumstances so it fits with their agenda. The biggest way I've seen this is when you ask them why things are in the current state they're in. Their explanations will nearly be identical except for who the ultimate person responsible for the situation is. For two sides claiming to be intellectual, they sure aren't living up to that moniker.

The true irony from the division comes from what George Washington said after his 2 terms as President ended. He warned against political parties because they would divide the nation. He looks like a prophet cause American History is full of division due to political parties, and it only worsens today now that people have flocked to the Internet as a new means of pushing their ideals down other people's throat. (Both sides are guilty of this) Political parties, to be fair, are necessary because the people running for election have to have a backing of some kind, but my focus is how divided it makes everyone as compared to what the parties should be doing; working together towards the same goal.

Now I mention the media because they will turn a story that is no big deal into the biggest thing to happen since Jesus Christ came down to Earth. I do put a big amount of blame on the media itself because they are the ones that make the stories, but I believe the majority of the blame goes upon the people because if they didn't tune in, the ratings would go down, and the media would move onto something else. I say media instead of the news because the Internet does fall under the umbrella term of media and the Internet is just as, if not more, guilty than any news outlet. The biggest, and most recent example, is the whole Chick-fil-a fiasco. The CEO of the company gets asked a simple question, gives a simple answer, and now he is being accused of hate crimes like this is the second coming of Westboro Baptist Church.

Now I don't know how people have been raised, I can only truly vouch for myself, but growing up I was taught that you don't assume things about people. There are 2 simple reasons for this: 1. You wouldn't want the same thing being done to you, 2. You end up turning someone into something they aren't. The sad thing is that is exactly what people have done to not just the CEO, but to everyone that works at Chick-fil-a period. Simple employees have been labeled bigots, homophobes, and other far meaner things depending on their gender. As much as I roll my eyes at this entire situation, it also bugs me that we care more about someone's opinion than about a bad economy or people suffering. What also bugs me is that the same people who are trying to go full riot on the entire company would of been throwing the CEO a parade had he said he agreed with gay marriage.

Sorry, that was a bit of a tangent, but I point those things out because the media, including the Internet, began to assume things about the CEO and his company from his one answer. Before you could really have a chance to know what happened, there were protestors, supporters, YouTube videos, posts on Facebook, pages across all other websites, and just an all around explosion over something that should not of been THIS big of a deal. Now perhaps it could of caused some backlash because that happens whenever you stand by your beliefs, but what is happening here is just ridiculous. This isn't the first time that the media has elevated something far beyond what it should of been. What I'm wanting people to do is to become educated on what exactly is the big deal. Some situations are so big of a deal that educated won't calm things down, but it will hopefully cause people to be more thoughtful with what they say in response. An example is that instead of automatically labeling someone a bigot, see what their true beliefs are. Also, ask yourself this one question; is my going around and name calling and judging not the EXACT same thing I'm accusing the other side of? Does perhaps tolerance mean that I have to be ok with people who don't think the same way I do? (I sure hope the answer to that question is obvious)

So in summary, educate yourself over a situation before getting sucked in the latest bandwagon issue. I won't lie, an issue may be a big deal, but a person should decide that for themselves before going around mudslinging and bashing with secondhand knowledge.

My Repsonse to an Article on America

I just read quite an interesting article thanks to a link on Facebook. The name of the article is "The 10 things Americans don't know about America." (That may not be the word for word title, but that title does sum it up) To read the article for yourself, just follow this link http://postmasculine.com/america. I found this to be a great read, but I also found fault with it. Now I am not going to be going through all 10 points and break everything down. I don't have the time and I know that nobody wants to read a post that would end up looking like a small novel.

Before I say what I didn't like, I want to first point out what I did like. I liked the fact that this person made it clear that in the grand scheme of things, other countries don't care about us. This meaning that they don't like, or hate, us nearly as much as the media, including the Internet, wants us Americans to think. People in other countries are just like us; they have jobs, families, and lives to attend to, they don't sit around thinking about America just like we don't sit around thinking about their countries.

Now my biggest issue was being compared to the alcoholic relative that someone dislikes being around. Now I know that within the article, the author pointed out that they are not perfect either and that every country has issues, but it is like when someone says "No offense but..." knowing that whatever they are about to say will be offensive. I know that since the author is an American, or so it was claimed, they are just showing tough love, and the article says this, but it also seems like a bias is showing. Another analogy that is used is when a person moves out and after being around other families, notices the weird things that their family did. They may also discover that some of the values were flat out wrong. Now while I somewhat agree, I have also learned through personal self-experience that when you are separated from your family due to something like college, you see what your parents had correct all along. You will also see what was wrong, but if you came from a good family, then the good outweighs the bad. (I know not all families are good/functional, so that's why I put a bit of a disclaimer)

I know that America is far from perfect, but I just got the feeling that the author saw more bad than good. Not only does this contradict my experience when I traveled to Japan, it also contradicts what I've heard missionaries tell when they return. In both my experiences and theirs, they spoke how much the people liked being around an American. I think the biggest thing this article failed to touch on was the fact that most people don't hate Americans, they hate the American government. To that, I say get in line and join the party cause most of us here feel the same way. What I would like to find out is if the reason why people from other countries dislike the American people is due to actual interactions with Americans, or if it is due to what happens on the Internet? If it is due to the Internet, then I will laugh since it is hardly fair, or justified, to base judgement on an entire country due to what someone does online since the whole issue of anonymity online causes people to act in ways they never would online.

Now the author did point out that part of the dislike is due to the odd way most people in America express themselves. While I agree to an extent, that is also just a culture difference. I know that in Japan for instance that making direct eye contact during the entirety of a conversation or interaction can be taken as offensive. In America, we're taught the opposite. Avoiding eye contact makes people think you're hiding something or that you dislike the other person speaking.

I know that I don't have a large audience to speak to with my blog, but this is something I wanted to speak on because as an American, it just rubbed me the wrong way reading everything that is wrong with this country without listing positive with it, or at least something redeemable. I know the author most likely did not want to offend, or at least I hope not, it still slightly came across that way. Like I said at the start, I enjoyed this article because it is nice to have voices from different views. A person learns and becomes a better person from seeing what others say. A person shouldn't just seek out sources that agree with their opinions either since it doesn't help them in seeing what other people may think. For those reasons, I enjoyed the article.

I know that I didn't cover the entire article, just like I said I wouldn't at the start, but if anyone believes I missed a big point that needed addressing, feel free to comment. If you want to know my opinion on the history aspect of the article, I will share. I didn't mention it since it would seem random with the rest of the post.

So, like always, don't panic, and never forget your towel.

The Progress of Only 10 Years in Videogames

This one is more geared towards video games, but it is still something I believe should be discussed. For those of you who are unaware of HD remixes, it simply is an older game that is brought back to the current console generation with updated graphics and perhaps new features added to enhance the experience. Now this has been fantastic for the most part since it has brought back many games that I enjoyed back in the day, and like just as much now. Where I am just blown away is seeing the progress that has been made in just 10 years in video games. What showed me this was on the Halo Anniversary Collection that came out last November. In the game, with the press of one button, you could switch between the old graphics of the original Xbox, and the current graphics of the Xbox 360. This game was a revival of the first Halo game that came out in 2001. I was stunned to see just how different the two graphic sets were. I am aware of the progress that has been made since the days of the original Xbox, but this game helped put things in perspective. Now where something negative that can, and in some cases has, come in is with the position it puts game developers of long standing franchises.


Now if the franchise is new, or relatively young like Mass Effect or Bioshock, this is something that they don't have to worry about. This deals with older franchise games like Mario, Sonic, and Zelda. I read an interview with the minds behind the latest SSX game, simply called SSX, and the mixed reception it has received since being released. Where the interview ties with this discussion is that the biggest thing the producers wanted to avoid is a HD remix of an older SSX because this was a reboot of the series that had gone quite awhile without a sequel. Where this statement is significant is that a lot of people simply wanted a SSX that was just like past titles instead of something new and going in a different direction. Now there isn't anything wrong with having a sequel being similar to past titles, or at least borrowing things from it, but at the same time, a game has to attempt to evolve and grow. If not, it grows stagnant and ends up being stale.


I believe the best examples of seeing franchises that has successfully, and not so successfully, balanced old and new is Mario and Sonic. For those who are savvy with videogame history, this are the two appropriate characters to use since they were bitter rivals in the 90's, back when Sega had their own consoles. Now Mario, for the most part, has done great with balancing old and new. One could be cynical and say that every open world Mario game is the same, just put in different settings with a few tweaks to mechanics, or that any platforming Mario game is the same as it has been since the 80's. While there is some truth to these statements, the fact is that each Mario game, whether open world or platforming, introduces new things that keeps everything fresh.


Now on the other end is Sonic, though saying this franchise has been a complete disaster would be a lie. The irony in the title is that 10 years ago in 2002, Sonic was riding pretty high with the success of the Sonic Adventure games and handheld games. Then 2006 happened. Sonic the Hedgehog 2006 was terrible. There is no way around it. In fact, the next couple of games after it were no better. Since 2009, Sonic has been trying to find the same balance that Mario has discovered. The fans have not helped since it seems that no matter which direction Sega attempts to take Sonic, the fans fight back demanding that it go another way. It has been very hit and miss, to say the least.

Now all of this is to say that we as gamers need to make sure that we don't force long-running games into a rut by limiting them to "back in the day" only, like with Sonic, and never trying new things. We also need to realize how far games have come in merely 10 years. It is very easy to think that as soon as we moved on from 8 and 16 bit animations to 3D scale animations that the progress has been in small jumps only. The truth is that even from the blocky animation seen in 2001 to the amazing, life-like graphics now in 2012, progress has been rapid and there is no indicator of slowing happening. In 10 more years, we could very easily look back on these games we hail now and just laugh at the graphics. It may seem ridiculous, but I'm certain that if you told people how games would look now in 2001, they would believe it, but not in such a short amount of time.

So in summary, for those of you brave enough to read this far, we need to be open to changes and innovations within a popular and long-running game franchise so that it can continue to grow and stay relevant. Second, we need to recognize the shear amount of progress made in graphics and presentations.

My Generation is Better than Yours

This is a constant argument seen across the Internet. The examples range from TV shows, music, video games, you name it, it has been used. Now going down memory lane and enjoying the nostalgia isn't a bad thing whatsoever, but it becomes bad when those memories give you elitist views towards new trends.

If you have been on popular websites, or even liked certain pages/groups on Facebook, then odds are you have seen pictures and/or posts proclaiming the greatness of the 1990's or whatever the person in question liked in their childhood. As I said there's nothing wrong with remembering great things from earlier times, but in many ways, we have turned into the very people that looked down on us when we were kids. I remember being told how some of the shows I liked to watch were dumb and not like shows from (fill in the era or show name here). I would just blow them off and watch what I wanted. Now that my generation is older, we have become those very people that look down upon the generation in front of us and say "These shows are terrible, shows in my day were much better." This has also been seen in video games in saying how much harder or scarier games were back in the day. Although I love how the Internet is great at bringing people together that have common interests or likes, it has served as a component that worsens this elitist view. It is kind of similar to that view when you're a freshman in high school or college and you swear you will not treat freshmen the same way you were treated when you're a senior and then when senior year comes around, you find yourself treating the freshmen in the exact way you were treated.

Now am I saying we have become our parents/older siblings? In this case, yes we have. People will of course deny this, so don't expect some revelation to occur and suddenly everything gets taken back. If I have learned anything from the Internet, it is that people will rarely, and I do mean rarely, go back on something they said beforehand. This issue can stem from nostalgia, but that is a different conversation that I have attempted to tackle twice now in this blog. Another thing that I believe contributes to this is the fact that people are unable to come to terms with the fact that their preferences or tastes in media will change over time. They can't handle the fact that a genre of music or type of TV show that they loved as a kid doesn't have the same flair now that it had then. I have seen it in my own life with old internet videos that I will watch sometimes because I will think to myself how great they were back in the day, but as I watch, it just isn't the same. The video itself hasn't changed at all, but my tastes in humor, or whatever the video dealt with, has changed as I have matured. This isn't a bad thing at all, and it should never be treated as such. People and things change over time, and we are only fooling ourselves if we think otherwise. Now are there shows, songs, movies, and games that have that timeless ability? There are many that are considered timeless. In fact, on Xbox 360, PS3, and the Wii, they have an entire section on their online store where you can buy old games to play once again. In the video game industry, there has been a big revival of having old games that are classic brought back and redone in HD so people can get a chance to play them again. Hollywood is cashing in on this as well with all of the movies they are re-releasing in 3D or having put out on DVD or Blu-Ray.

The reason I bring up this issue is for one reason:

1. This isn't something new and the cycle needs to be stopped

The 1st reason might be surprising. Unfortunately I could not find the source of this quote, though I swore it was from Mark Twain, but it fits very well here: "Every generation thinks that it is smarter than the one before it, and wiser than the one in front of it." Seeing people brag on the 90's being greater than the 2000's is no different than what people from the 80's said of people from the 90's and so on. There are pros and cons to when we were born and because of that, it doesn't magically make one generation greater than another.  We should always cherish the things that helped us or gave us joy and entertainment in our childhood, but we shouldn't use it as a means to be elitist. So my hope is that the cycle can be broken and we just learn to get along just a bit better because the world is messed up enough with issues without us adding senseless arguing to the mix.

So here's hoping that this has perhaps shed a new perspective to you. If not, well then, I tried.

More Problems with Nostalgia

Hope you guys enjoy the new setup! I'm kind of experimenting right now with different looks, don't be afraid to let me know what you think. 

I arrive back to the very first thing I wrote about when this blog was created, and that deals with the nostalgia problem. A quick summary of my definition of this; when someones past experiences and good feelings with something, be it a movie, video game, or whatever, clouds their judgement towards new things being made. This is best seen whenever there is a new movie or game made from a long running franchise, especially if this new installment came after a long gap of waiting. I am visiting this issue again because it seems like things are getting worse, not that I expected my first post to suddenly fix everything, but the way I see arguments happen and with how intense they become, more needs to be said on this.

A new twist to the nostalgia issue comes when someone's nostalgia has been "broken." This means that they find themselves not liking something now that they may have adored years ago. Sadly, even though I personally enjoyed the game, Duke Nukem is a great example of seeing nostalgia in both ways. The initial way was how Duke Nukem Forever was put up to such a high standard due to nostalgia building up his reputation. It also didn't help that with the Internet becoming the huge hype factory it is now was just fueling the expectations for this game. Once the game came out, people were shocked to see how they no longer approved of Duke's humor. His typical one-liners and macho-manness to any and all situations worked great in the 90's, but in 2011, that was no longer the case. While I personally enjoyed the game, it got blasted by old fans and newcomers alike. With their nostalgia "broken," they began to reevaluate everything about the game and if it really is all that good, but in the end the simple manner is that the game was made in the same fashion, mostly, as the previous ones and what most likely happened is that the people who liked it then have matured in their humor and playing preferences. Though I must say that bashing a game just because the graphics aren't state of the art is completely idiotic, but that is a whole other conversation. 

The reason I believe this is worsening is because people get upset whenever a long standing franchise makes a new addition to their franchise, but they add new twists so that it stays fresh. These same people will also get upset if a franchise always sticks to the same thing when making new additions. This is very much a love-hate relationship. As stated with Duke Nukem, the core of the game in terms of the character and thin plot is the same as it was in the 90's, yet it got bashed heavily; then you get something like the newest Legend of Zelda which introduced some new concepts and tricks to use so that the series doesn't become stale, and although it has been adored by reviewers, other people have just gone crazy with flaming it. There is a phrase in theatre that perfectly sums up this situation, "You're damned if you do and you're damned if you don't."I know I have focused on games in this, but it can be seen in movies, TV shows, and books. 

My suggestion for this is to take away the cloudy goggles of nostalgia when looking at new things. Yes, I enjoyed games I played back in the 90's as well. Street Fighter 2 and Sonic the Hedgehog 2 & 3 are special to me since they're amongst the first games I've ever played, but I won't get so caught up in old memories that I will think that all new Street Fighter games or Sonic games are instantly horrible because they aren't exactly like what I remember back then, of course remembering is the key word since our memory tends to be selective. Now, new games can be terrible, but what I'm saying that we need to at least give them a chance, not just cut them out at the knees before they even have a chance to show how good or bad they are. On the flip side, we don't need to build up things to such a high standard that there is no way they could possibly succeed. I believe if this is done, people will just be happier in general, because although some amount of entertainment can be derived from reading pointless arguments on the Internet, it can also be depressing/angering. Angering because you find yourself getting caught up into the argument, and depressing because it is sad to think that some people appear to have that much hate and anger just boiling inside them.

On a final note, never forget that all forms of media are meant to do one of three, possibly four, things. These things are inform/teach, persuade, and/or entertain. We tend to forget that movies and games are meant to do one or more of those things, though it is usually to just entertain. So in the end, take a deep breathe, relax, enjoy your good memories, and don't get so caught up in the "all new things are terrible, it was better in my day" arguments. 

Are We Too Free on the Internet?

I almost forgot that I even had a blog, but now I am writing again and I wanted to discuss something that I have been wondering quite often for the past couple of months and that is, are we too free on the Internet?

What I mean by this is that on the Internet, we have to ability to openly mock, threaten, demonize, support, sympathize with, or any other verb you can imagine with any person, place, or thing with little to zero consequences. Now while having this much free speech is a great thing, I will always support it, there is a negative consequence that comes from it as well. Because of the fact that 99% of what one will do and say will not harm them whatsoever, it has clouded how we conduct ourselves virtually as compared to reality. It is no secret of how "bloody" forums, chat rooms, and comment sections can get if there is any sort of dispute amongst Internet users, or if someone is purposefully picking a fight in an attempt to get an out of control argument going, they are commonly referred to as trolls. This has led to "cyber-bullying" and although commercials have tried to get a hold on the Internet by saying that whatever you post will last forever and doesn't "truly" come off, just going to any typical website with comment abilities will show that it hasn't really sunk in.

This has caused us to basically treat topics in one of these ways: we agree and type about how much we support it, we don't like what we're reading so we bash, ridicule, and say any and all insults we can think of, or we just move to something else/just express our dislike peacefully (that never happens). There are even stories of kids who end up getting bullied at school because of what they said or did on Facebook, and it turns out that the kid in question does not have a Facebook, and someone else created a profile for them, befriended people from school, and began harassing them. In this case, this kid is being harassed for things they genuinely did not do. Other examples come from online gaming where people will be as nasty and as cruel as possible, and even if their account is banned after being reported, they just create another profile and start over.

So I pose this question because with bills like SOPA, PIPA, and others being proposed, and luckily shot down, it got me thinking. While I NEVER want any of those type of bills passed due to the implications of what could, and would, happen, but I still wonder if perhaps the Internet isn't due for a little humility? I believe SOPA scared so many users because it actually showed how vulnerable the Internet actually is as compared to thinking it is something invincible. For a short period of time, the Internet users were somewhat united against this, but as one could expect, the unity broke away quickly once the bills were gone. This is why I think that perhaps we are too free because if we don't like someone, we can create profile, harass them is they do have a profile on whatever website, or just hack them and either ruin them virtually or in real life. That is A LOT of power to give to millions...scratch that...billions of people especially when the software, hardware, and ability to hack or just create chaos isn't that difficult at all to find or use.

This isn't an easy, "This solution works for every situation," kind of problem, which is exactly what SOPA and PIPA were trying to do with piracy, but it is something that needs discussion. Some would just suggest some maturity on the issue since the tantrums typically seen in chat is reminiscent of an immature child, but that may only work in situations where you are talking to people that personally know you and where you have a profile that has pictures and information of yourself so people will know it is you. In situations where you can be an unknown, or just a fake profile with the picture being taken from using a search engine, then there truly is no consequence to your actions. It is no secret of how vulgar people can be online and the typical rebuke being "You would never say that in real life/to my face" and there is truth there. People have so much security thanks to the computer screen that they act out like they never would normally. So my question is two fold; do you think Internet users have too much freedom and if so, how can we make it more user-friendly? I by no means want to cut down on freedoms, when I say too free, I mean if the freedom of there being little consequence to actions too great?

Video Games: Battle Won, War not Over

This may seem a bit late since the decision regarding rated M video games has already come and gone, the subject at hand is still very relevant and is long from being done.

I also bring this up as a gamer myself who was not very happy at the light that video games were being thrown under. People wanted to make it seem that all video games were ultra violent and that all of them are negatively influencing children more than violent movies, TV shows, or any other media outlet available. Though when I looked up the percentage of games created in 2010 that had a rating of M, I was surprised to find it was only 5% where rated E (which is family friendly) made up 55% of the games that were made. (Source:http://www.joystiq.com/2011/03/15/esrb-breakdowns-say-5-percent-of-games-were-rated-m-in-2010) Also, when looking at the top 10 best selling video games of 2010, there was a 5-4 split between games that were either rated E or T (both are friendly for children) and rated M. (Source:http://www.cnbc.com/id/37616179/The_Best_Selling_Video_Games_of_2010?slide=11)

Part of the argument brought against video games was that the games in question should not be seen by minors and should be treated like porn and be put off in another section of the store. This really rubbed me the wrong way. I am certainly old enough to buy rated M games, so if this was to ever happen it would not apply to me, but the fact that this singled out video games is what I saw as wrong. Porn movies are certainly put in a different section of any store that may sell them, but magazines like Playboy are out in the open for all to see. I am aware of the fact that these magazines are blacked out except for the title. Now this works just fine with small children, well some depending on what they have or have not been exposed to, but when it comes to any child or teenager that is 10 or older, it is very easy to fill in the blanks mentally. This is also true when you see previews for upcoming movies with how they cut off a sentence right before the actor says the cuss word, or when a woman begins to strip down and the screen either goes black or goes to another scene right before anything that would need to be censored in that preview can be seen.

The biggest thing I like to stress is that this lands on the parents to make sure they are aware of what their kids are playing. As someone who has worked in Gamestop, it never ceases to surprise me when I see a parent that just buys a game that is gory or just flat out not for someone at that age. A great example occurs whenever a child brings me a copy of any Grand Theft Auto game and I say how I cannot sell it to them since they are under 17 and therefore against the law for me to sell the game to them. The child goes and gets their parent and I, by law and rule of Gamestop, explain what makes the game rated M. Very rarely does this cause a parent say that they no longer want the game, what usually happens is they just appear to be "listening" and as soon as I finish talking they say "it's fine" or "they can play it, it's not that bad." I'm sorry, but no 12 year old should play Grand Theft Auto or Mortal Kombat, especially since the ESRB lists everything in the game that gives the game the rating it has. But as long as parents give consent, there is nothing that can be done to keep extremely violent games from minors. Even if this law somehow made it, there would still be parents giving consent for these types of games.

So in the end, all I want to make clear is that the parents need to do their job and keep games away from their kids that are not meant for their age. And for those of us that are old enough to get these games, please don't do like what people do for alcohol and tobacco and get these games just to give them to minors.

And remember, Don't Panic, and never forget your towel.