I suppose it happens often enough...Canada has had federal elections every other year for almost the last decade. It's hardly a surprise that a country this size is divided. Different regions have different needs. On the East Coast, the collapse of the fisheries and traditionally strong unions have made it the traditional grounds of the far-left NDP. Quebec's distinct society-within-society have created the basis of a party based solely on looking out for number one, the Bloc Quebecois. The hyper-left Green party has its stronghold in BC, and the Conservatives the West. It's all a patchwork. Mostly, it's Liberals and Conservatives as the big dogs.
The Liberals have never really been anything but a 'I guess it's better than nothing' choice since Trudeau left them. And lately, the Conservatives have been doing very little, trying to toe the line as the inevitable upsurge of leftist new voters (produced by left-leaning educational institutions) start to stop throwing rocks and use their votes. I wonder how much longer it will take for the idiots who were smashing up downtown last summer to realize that it's easier to change the country using a ballot than a ball-peen hammer.
At any rate, I've been thinking about the election. Will it be more of the same? Another minority government constantly doing nothing for fear of an inevitable no-confidence motion? I'm still voting Conservative, because frankly there's no other party which even vaguely lines up with my ideals.
Des
Thursday, March 31, 2011
Saturday, January 29, 2011
On Horror: Lessons from Dead Space 2
Well, sorry I've been gone so long. I recently got Dead Space 2, the sequel to the game that really got me started on writing horror. More than being a fun, scary-as-hell game, I find that dissecting the game is actually very worthwhile for understanding it works. Well, why it scares, and applying that to writing.
1. Force People to Pay Attention to Detail
Dead Space isn't an especially easy game, which is where we get the 'survival' part of survival-horror. You're an engineer with a motley assembly of mining equipment taking on hordes of mutant zombies that require dismemberment due to the their distributed nervous system. Since this series is set on space stations/ships, there's a lot of fans and ductwork around so people can breathe and whatnot. Of course, this is also a popular avenue for the smaller zombies (children, babies, skinnier ones) to travel in. It doesn't take long before you start regarding every fan and ceiling duct with suspicion on principle. This isn't helped by the spectacular audio, which features everything from muffled speech to skittering sounds and taps that could be either an off-time fan, or a monstrosity lying in wait. Any sound could be a warning- there are plenty of enemies, some who sneak, some who flank, some who howl to summon others. At least two kinds actively communicate with other zombies.
Speaking of dismemberment, the game also punishes you for not paying attention to detail by having some of the wounded monsters lie doggo once wounded, or simply when you arrive. Other humans have been fighting them as well, so you never know if a dead one you roll up up on is REALLY dead. You learn to check carefully, since there isn't exactly a dearth of supplies around. You learn to be careful, so I'm going to try to figure out a way to work that into my story.
2. Familiarity Breeds Horror
Necromorphs (the primary antagonists in Dead Space) aren't scary because they have claws or teeth or are particularly murderous. They're scary because they're familiar. You can tell that they were human at some point. Their heads are largely intact, minus lower jaws. vestigial arms hang from their fronts. They wear clothing. The smaller ones look like deformed children. Some look like skeletonized dogs. You can tell what they were by looking at them.
Likewise, even on a starship, an elementary school and hospital look like they do today. Washbasins. Beds. Flowers. There's one particular scene where you walk into the lobby of the doctor's office, and it looks just like one. There are balloons. A gift shop soaked in blood. Discarded magazines and cards. An abandoned wheelchair. It could be any doctor's office anywhere, minus the body parts and blood.
Those are the two big lessons I took away so far. Suspect everything, and the more familiar and comforting something seems, the easier it is to subvert that feeling.
Des
1. Force People to Pay Attention to Detail
Dead Space isn't an especially easy game, which is where we get the 'survival' part of survival-horror. You're an engineer with a motley assembly of mining equipment taking on hordes of mutant zombies that require dismemberment due to the their distributed nervous system. Since this series is set on space stations/ships, there's a lot of fans and ductwork around so people can breathe and whatnot. Of course, this is also a popular avenue for the smaller zombies (children, babies, skinnier ones) to travel in. It doesn't take long before you start regarding every fan and ceiling duct with suspicion on principle. This isn't helped by the spectacular audio, which features everything from muffled speech to skittering sounds and taps that could be either an off-time fan, or a monstrosity lying in wait. Any sound could be a warning- there are plenty of enemies, some who sneak, some who flank, some who howl to summon others. At least two kinds actively communicate with other zombies.
Speaking of dismemberment, the game also punishes you for not paying attention to detail by having some of the wounded monsters lie doggo once wounded, or simply when you arrive. Other humans have been fighting them as well, so you never know if a dead one you roll up up on is REALLY dead. You learn to check carefully, since there isn't exactly a dearth of supplies around. You learn to be careful, so I'm going to try to figure out a way to work that into my story.
2. Familiarity Breeds Horror
Necromorphs (the primary antagonists in Dead Space) aren't scary because they have claws or teeth or are particularly murderous. They're scary because they're familiar. You can tell that they were human at some point. Their heads are largely intact, minus lower jaws. vestigial arms hang from their fronts. They wear clothing. The smaller ones look like deformed children. Some look like skeletonized dogs. You can tell what they were by looking at them.
Likewise, even on a starship, an elementary school and hospital look like they do today. Washbasins. Beds. Flowers. There's one particular scene where you walk into the lobby of the doctor's office, and it looks just like one. There are balloons. A gift shop soaked in blood. Discarded magazines and cards. An abandoned wheelchair. It could be any doctor's office anywhere, minus the body parts and blood.
Those are the two big lessons I took away so far. Suspect everything, and the more familiar and comforting something seems, the easier it is to subvert that feeling.
Des
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
Memejack!
Alright, jacked from Sigboy's blog: What song would you be, if you could be a song?
Fire and Fury, from the Starcraft soundtrack. Ohhhhhhhh yeah.
Des
Fire and Fury, from the Starcraft soundtrack. Ohhhhhhhh yeah.
Des
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
Cratering
I've been writing a lot more recently, but instead of writing in a straight line, I've been using a technique called 'cratering'. You pick a major plot point, or series of them. Expand them a bit, then fill in the space. It's turning out to be much easier to write something that you've had a recent idea about than try to force it.
Well, it's working for me. I hope m story doesn't come out, for a lack of a better word, soupy.
Des
Well, it's working for me. I hope m story doesn't come out, for a lack of a better word, soupy.
Des
Friday, October 1, 2010
To License, or Not to License?
So, I know I've been absent. I did a brief foray into the world of security work again, and it sucked. So, there I was, catching up on my blogs, when I saw Lawdog's series of gun control posts. I looked over the suggestions in his Background Checks post. As I did so, I thought to myself...this sounds a lot like a basic licensing program. It functions to separate those who can and can't own a firearm. Of course, it shouldn't tell you what kind you should have, but that's a different subject. So, back to the licensing idea, the people the state declares unfit fall into roughly two categories:
1. Criminals who have committed crimes sufficient for them to be barred the basic human right of self defense.
2. Those deemed mentally deficient by the state.
Some people wonder why those in category one are still alive or out of prison. What happens if they were simply deemed 'negligent with a firearm' or something similar? I mean, not like 'popping off rounds in suburbia for teh lulz', but how about something like 'I accidentally carried into a post office'. That might be grounds for other sanctions, but is it the sort of thing that should remove a person's right to firearms forever? I endorse it in cases of 'terminal stupidity', such as the case of people shooting friends while they wear bulletproof vests. That kind of idiocy should merit the penalty for both parties, should they survive.
Now, the second part is where things get tricky. People will scream bloody murder about suicide rates among gun owners, as if they couldn't be trusted. I read somewhere that almost everyone goes through a 'severe depressive episode' at least once in life. Really, it's understandable. Heartbreak, loss of a parent...but if you seek help for it, does this mean you should have your guns taken away? I don't think so. I mean, I had a real rough time in August once I got dumped. Spending ten days with Sigboy and getting my recoil therapy on was something that helped me a lot. But, back to the question, does being depressed at some point mean that you no longer have the right to self-defense? I definitely think people on the Mental Health Express (schizophrenics, etc who do the six months out of the hospital, six months in) shouldn't have access to firearms. But where do you draw the line? Does someone with a long term, chronic depression problem not have the right to self-defense?
In Canada, the recent dealbreaker on the death of the long gun registry was the fact that the brother of one of the MP's voting killed himself with a rifle two days before the vote. How do people expect to use a licensing system or the registry to prevent that? Sometimes, it just happens. Even if you roundly violate someone's right to medical privacy, sometimes you just can't prevent it. Case in point- a couple of years ago, a buddy of mine from the army got a medical discharge from the army. He's living free, fat stack from the government. Two weeks later, word comes back that one day, he walked into the back yard, and blew his brains out with his shotgun. No warning. No history of substance abuse or depression. Just walked outside and offed himself. No note, nothing. I'm not sure how common that is, but still. How in the name of God would this have been prevented by even the most invasive legislature?
Since I've mostly come up with a fistful of questions, I'm going to propose something of a solution that will, no doubt, be attacked as unconstitutional. Do a basic license, a lot like a driver's license. Hell, attach it to the driver's license, as a little 'G for gun-safe!' symbol on the back. You renew it whenever you renew your driver's license. Basic check: Violent criminal or deemed mentally unfit? No? Alright, go buy some guns! Declared unfit? Turn over your driver's license, because if I don't want you to have something that makes little pieces of metal go fast, I certainly don't want you to have something that makes a tonne of metal go fast. As far as faking a driver's license goes, have potential purchasers show two pieces of ID.
How's that for a slice of fried gold?
Des
1. Criminals who have committed crimes sufficient for them to be barred the basic human right of self defense.
2. Those deemed mentally deficient by the state.
Some people wonder why those in category one are still alive or out of prison. What happens if they were simply deemed 'negligent with a firearm' or something similar? I mean, not like 'popping off rounds in suburbia for teh lulz', but how about something like 'I accidentally carried into a post office'. That might be grounds for other sanctions, but is it the sort of thing that should remove a person's right to firearms forever? I endorse it in cases of 'terminal stupidity', such as the case of people shooting friends while they wear bulletproof vests. That kind of idiocy should merit the penalty for both parties, should they survive.
Now, the second part is where things get tricky. People will scream bloody murder about suicide rates among gun owners, as if they couldn't be trusted. I read somewhere that almost everyone goes through a 'severe depressive episode' at least once in life. Really, it's understandable. Heartbreak, loss of a parent...but if you seek help for it, does this mean you should have your guns taken away? I don't think so. I mean, I had a real rough time in August once I got dumped. Spending ten days with Sigboy and getting my recoil therapy on was something that helped me a lot. But, back to the question, does being depressed at some point mean that you no longer have the right to self-defense? I definitely think people on the Mental Health Express (schizophrenics, etc who do the six months out of the hospital, six months in) shouldn't have access to firearms. But where do you draw the line? Does someone with a long term, chronic depression problem not have the right to self-defense?
In Canada, the recent dealbreaker on the death of the long gun registry was the fact that the brother of one of the MP's voting killed himself with a rifle two days before the vote. How do people expect to use a licensing system or the registry to prevent that? Sometimes, it just happens. Even if you roundly violate someone's right to medical privacy, sometimes you just can't prevent it. Case in point- a couple of years ago, a buddy of mine from the army got a medical discharge from the army. He's living free, fat stack from the government. Two weeks later, word comes back that one day, he walked into the back yard, and blew his brains out with his shotgun. No warning. No history of substance abuse or depression. Just walked outside and offed himself. No note, nothing. I'm not sure how common that is, but still. How in the name of God would this have been prevented by even the most invasive legislature?
Since I've mostly come up with a fistful of questions, I'm going to propose something of a solution that will, no doubt, be attacked as unconstitutional. Do a basic license, a lot like a driver's license. Hell, attach it to the driver's license, as a little 'G for gun-safe!' symbol on the back. You renew it whenever you renew your driver's license. Basic check: Violent criminal or deemed mentally unfit? No? Alright, go buy some guns! Declared unfit? Turn over your driver's license, because if I don't want you to have something that makes little pieces of metal go fast, I certainly don't want you to have something that makes a tonne of metal go fast. As far as faking a driver's license goes, have potential purchasers show two pieces of ID.
How's that for a slice of fried gold?
Des
Friday, September 3, 2010
On Cop Hate, or Des Shits on Some Douche in a Systematic Manner
Why Some Douche Hates Cops
Let us break this shit down henceforth:
1. I hate cops because they don't do anything for me, and have a slim chance of doing so!
Well, that nice, Fat Douchebag Hipster. It's likely that most crimes against you wil be minor, or that you will be one of the lucky few who go their lives without being victimized by the criminal element. It's also likely you're not poor, so you don't live in a high crime area, so your crib don't get broke into every other month. You lack a vagina, so your likelihood outside of jail of being raped is almost nil. You are, in fact, one of the least likely persons to be victimized in society. What about everyone else? Or can you not comprehend the concept of 'good for people who aren't you'?
2. Cops jacked my weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeed! I done bought it fair and square!
It's weed. Your misuse of your money is not their concern. Two points: Caveat Emptor, and Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
3. Ignorance is no excuse for criminal activity!
That's right, it's not. Be a responsible citizen, how's about?
4. The cops are the private army of the Establishment, maaaaaaaaaaaaaaan!
Firstly, the Establishment is not out to get you. Secondly, it is not the police's job to be your personal advocate in whatever opinion you happen to hold. They aren't the arbiter of your personal beliefs. If you have a bone to pick with the Establishment...well, welcome to humanity. No one likes the way things are. Get your cope on. And another thing! Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. Don't bust up yo hood, and your protest won't get cracked down on.
5. The Poh works for the government, which is corrupt, which means THEY'RE corrupt!
Welcome to the real world, douche fag. There's graft in everything you do. Nothing's fair. Time to look beyond yourself and to the greater good. You don't like it? Then vote. Vote with your wallet and the ballot. Don't bitch on youtube because the cops jacked yo weed. Suck it up like a man, and carry on. Or, don't do stupid shit. Police are a fact of life, they're not going away. So limit the stupid shit you do, you self-entitled asshat.
Des
Let us break this shit down henceforth:
1. I hate cops because they don't do anything for me, and have a slim chance of doing so!
Well, that nice, Fat Douchebag Hipster. It's likely that most crimes against you wil be minor, or that you will be one of the lucky few who go their lives without being victimized by the criminal element. It's also likely you're not poor, so you don't live in a high crime area, so your crib don't get broke into every other month. You lack a vagina, so your likelihood outside of jail of being raped is almost nil. You are, in fact, one of the least likely persons to be victimized in society. What about everyone else? Or can you not comprehend the concept of 'good for people who aren't you'?
2. Cops jacked my weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeed! I done bought it fair and square!
It's weed. Your misuse of your money is not their concern. Two points: Caveat Emptor, and Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
3. Ignorance is no excuse for criminal activity!
That's right, it's not. Be a responsible citizen, how's about?
4. The cops are the private army of the Establishment, maaaaaaaaaaaaaaan!
Firstly, the Establishment is not out to get you. Secondly, it is not the police's job to be your personal advocate in whatever opinion you happen to hold. They aren't the arbiter of your personal beliefs. If you have a bone to pick with the Establishment...well, welcome to humanity. No one likes the way things are. Get your cope on. And another thing! Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. Don't bust up yo hood, and your protest won't get cracked down on.
5. The Poh works for the government, which is corrupt, which means THEY'RE corrupt!
Welcome to the real world, douche fag. There's graft in everything you do. Nothing's fair. Time to look beyond yourself and to the greater good. You don't like it? Then vote. Vote with your wallet and the ballot. Don't bitch on youtube because the cops jacked yo weed. Suck it up like a man, and carry on. Or, don't do stupid shit. Police are a fact of life, they're not going away. So limit the stupid shit you do, you self-entitled asshat.
Des
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
Why the Ground Zero Mosque is a Bad Idea
How did anyone ever think this was a good idea? Seriously, I wonder about the soft heart (and headed) liberals some days. Let's go over this once again:
1) You are building a soft target in what some can arguably call an insulting place.
While everyone loves tolerance, I don't see a huge rush to put up a Serb embassy in Srebrenica. Or a statue of Stalin in Katyn. People are understandably upset about the murder of their loved ones. So, can someone please explain to me how putting up a symbol of the cause that butchered them next to the site of the massacre can be construed as anything but insulting or submissive?
2. You are building a soft target in a nest of very angry people.
As previously mentioned, this mosque is not only an affront to the memory of the people who died, but placed in the middle full of their friends and family. Do you really think that's a bright idea? Don't you get the concept that your parishioners and property will likely be subject to daily harassment and abuse?
3. You have made your mosque a very clear target for extremists.
Every Cletus, Jim Bob and Billy Bob Thorton in the continental US will want to see this mosque destroyed. It will be under constant threat. This may, of course, be what higher leadership wants, but the fact remains that peaceful Muslim Americans are still both civilians and Americans. Lack of sense aside, they deserve the same protections everyone else is afforded.
All in all, I oppose the mosque based on common sense- it'll be a punching bag for the city, will worsen relations between Muslims and New Yorkers, and quite frankly the downtown doesn't really need another crater.
Des
1) You are building a soft target in what some can arguably call an insulting place.
While everyone loves tolerance, I don't see a huge rush to put up a Serb embassy in Srebrenica. Or a statue of Stalin in Katyn. People are understandably upset about the murder of their loved ones. So, can someone please explain to me how putting up a symbol of the cause that butchered them next to the site of the massacre can be construed as anything but insulting or submissive?
2. You are building a soft target in a nest of very angry people.
As previously mentioned, this mosque is not only an affront to the memory of the people who died, but placed in the middle full of their friends and family. Do you really think that's a bright idea? Don't you get the concept that your parishioners and property will likely be subject to daily harassment and abuse?
3. You have made your mosque a very clear target for extremists.
Every Cletus, Jim Bob and Billy Bob Thorton in the continental US will want to see this mosque destroyed. It will be under constant threat. This may, of course, be what higher leadership wants, but the fact remains that peaceful Muslim Americans are still both civilians and Americans. Lack of sense aside, they deserve the same protections everyone else is afforded.
All in all, I oppose the mosque based on common sense- it'll be a punching bag for the city, will worsen relations between Muslims and New Yorkers, and quite frankly the downtown doesn't really need another crater.
Des
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
