Get ready for this, Seekers; I'm about to discuss matters beyond gaming.

I think we were all pretty shocked when we heard about the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, and even more flabbergasted when we learned just how much oil that pipe was spitting out. By now it's already past being four times worse than the Exxon Valdez oil spill up north, and if easily the largest natural disaster in the history of the world.

But is it really a "natural" disaster?

To be honest, I really don't think that they should have been drilling as deep as they were, not to mention that if they were going to drill down that far, they should have had more safeguards against ruptures in the case of anomalous weather forces buffeting the drilling platform. I can understand that they want their oil, but I just see the circumstances as being far too risky to be drilling in the spot they were, not to mention the monumental liquid pressure of the oil pocket into which they were delving. With the amount of oil coming out daily, it makes you wonder why they didn't have more advanced safeguards againt such incidences.

So as I see it, if they hadn't been drilling there, odds are we wouldn't be seeing this disaster we are experiencing today. Natural disaster my ass; this is human error at its finest.

And for that matter, whose idea was it to put BP in charge of the cleanup? Sure they have the most appropriate equipment for the job, but I don't think it should be just them leading the cleanup. British Petroleum (BP) is the company that put that rig there, and it would obviously be in their best interest to get as much of the oil spewing out into their ownership as possible. I doubt they're looking to cap the flow; odds are they're looking for another way to siphon that oil off into BP hands. I know, it's business, but at this juncture, I think it's in the best interest of the PLANET that we get this thing cleaned up. 'Cause let's be real; if that spill hits the ocean currents, this oil spill could be a global crisis in a matter of a couple years, and do we really want that?

And then there's this new development I'm hearing that apparently the bacteria and algae in the Gulf have dealt with oil before; that they're specially suited to break down oil and restore the balance. I was literally shocked to hear the news say "nature will clean up the mess," in such a way as if to imply that we really shouldn't worry too much about cleaning it up ourselves. Sure the bacteria might be suited to clean, but with the sheer volume of oil that's poured into the Gulf, I can't see any viable way that a mere algae could POSSIBLY clean out millions of barrels of oil, not to mention that the bacteria doing so quite effectively robs the water around it of oxygen. So no matter how you slice it, a dead zone would form.

We've put people on the moon, we've put people into orbit, and we've sent things to Mars. So why does it take so long for them to figure out a proper way to cap an oil pipe? Surely we have the technology; why aren't we using it? I think there's something that we're no being told; I expect status updates every week, and we've not been getting that.

I don't know all the facts, and I'm no biologist, so I could be grossly overreacting. But as the tree-hugging nerd that I am, I just feel like this situation is being handled in a rather inefficient way. And the world's going to be paying for it.

Accepting anti-green flaming now ;)

other musingsthoughts natural disaster oil spill

Read more

Perhaps I'm too psychological for gaming. Or perhaps I don't take it serious enough as everyone else. But I just have to wonder to myself; why do we sometimes take gaming so seriously? Is there any reason for myself to take it more seriously than I do? Or does it even matter?

I've seen my share of gaming forums (an unfortunately repeating example in my musings), and I always see people debating over gaming formats, discussing the future of the platforms, the business going on between publishers and developers, and most of all the debates over exclusive titles and their alliances. Funny thing is, though, the seriousness of these exchanges.

It's not to say it's wrong to discuss technology and such; in fact it's a very healthy thing to do on forum communities, or even communities in general. But especially after the event where Squenix decided to port FFXIII did I realize, even in myself, that people take gaming very seriously, especially when it comes to the games they play.

I mean, look back ten years. Back then, it was regarded as an incredibly geeky thing to do to play video games; the satirical image of a gamer commonly involved inch-thick glasses, braces that could transform into Optimus Prime, and acne that could blind Medusa herself. Nobody really took gamers seriously, and unfortunately those people were usually the target of much verbal abuse (and no, I am NOT speaking from experience). Point is, we didn't take it serious.

If we look at ourselves today, we are much more serious into what happens to what we game to. Some people will insist on the loyalties of one developer to another publisher, others deny the changing of such loyalties. Some flat-out refuse any form of change at all, that things should and will remain the same.

So why do we now care so much? Are we more knowledgeable? Are we more intent on involving ourselves in the gaming world? Perhaps we feel now that being more involved could lead to more influence over the companies and corporations that supply us these incredible entertainment forms. Maybe once gamers became more common and less stereotyped, we figured strength in numbers could make a difference.

What is the mentality of a gamer these days? I suppose asking that question is akin to asking what the mentality of the human being is, seeing as the satirical imagery of a gamer has since diminished, replaced by a more common and wide-ranged view of what being a gamer ensues.

It's incredibly noticable when you take leave of gaming for a day or two, not even thinking about it, and then return. Because in that short reprieve, you've once again sensitized yourself to gaming community, and you notice how much some people seem to care about what happens.

Does it really matter? If a game happens to become multiplatform, does it affect you? And if you gave an answer that wasn't a "No," well, you're wrong. It doesn't, and never will affect you. It's simply all psychological. I suppose this harkens back to my last blog post of Fanboys, because I suppose it's mostly them who are so attentive to exclusives.

But otherwise, is it truly necessary to know every detail about every occurence in the gaming world? Can we not simply enjoy an existence of only knowing what's important and nothing more?

Perhaps. But only if you don't take it serious.

musingsthoughts gaming related dynasty warriors serious gaming thoughts developers stuff

Read more

I dunno, maybe I'm just an overspeculative ass, but it seems to me that, at least in the gaming category, society has turned into one great big competition between consoles, constantly warring over which one is better, which ones sucks, which is really worth your money, etc. I've never been in such a society where such things matter so much to people.

And yet it all seems so normal to me. Is that wrong?

Well, let's look back, shall we? Back to, say, the PSOne. Maybe it was just me not tuning in enough, or the sheer lack of interest over the whole critical aspect of gaming, but it's almost as if there were a lot less fanboys back in that day. I had my PSOne, I had my games; I couldn't care less what Kevin Van'Ord on Gamespot had to say about Spyro the Dragon. Hell, I didn't even know Gamespot existed back then. It was almost as if gamers were just that: gamers. There didn't seem like there was an obligation to need to feel better about one thing or another. You just bought what you wanted and left it at that. Maybe it was because of a lack of online multiplayer, but it was a lot more leisurely.

Fast forward to today.

Look around the internet. Check out the multiplatform gaming forums. Read the comments on youtube videos featuring video games. See that? So much disagreement. People needlessly warring over which console is better, which games suck, and other such things that the rest of the world couldn't give two sh*ts about. Why has our mindset over gaming changed so much since the glory days of the original consoles? What could possibly have pushed us to need to argue and defend our purchases in the ways we do? Perhaps it's because consoles cost more these days, and we feel the need to reassure ourselves we made the right choice. Or maybe people have inadvertently latched onto something and resist the urge to just let it go.

Is it because we're spoiled? Well that can't be it, can it? Maybe it is. When was the last time you've ever seen a thirty year old man gushing on a forum over how much he faps to his Xbox 360? You never have. It's all the little 13 year olds primarily. But what pushed them to have such dedicated views on gaming? There doesn't even seem to be a reason for the to be like that. Hell, I'm guilty myself over being opinionated in one direction, but never to the extent of these people.

And the opinionated nature of these people can be jaw-dropping. Through the countless controversial graphics comparisons of multiplatform video games can be found the very essence of the fanboy, through such things as "this console wins hands down, the other one looks awful," which is by far the most common. I look at these images myself and see no discernable difference whatsoever.

Perhaps it's the fervor of the critical reception. Some people feel the need to have other people decide for them which games are better than others. They will latch onto the reviews and use it constantly as a driving force behind their mindless rantings on their respective forums, most commonly never even going beyond the number attributed to the game, nary reading a word of the review itself. People will read a number; a NUMBER, and judge the game. Whatever happened to individual choice?

For that matter, what happened to thinking for yourself? And since when did voicing merely an opinion become such a controversial thing to do? Is it wrong to dislike a certain game over personal reasons? Must your opinion be questioned and cross-references and disputed? Why do people INSIST on convincing people THEY'VE NEVER MET and WILL NEVER MEET that a certain game is good or bad?

I dunno. Maybe it's just me.

fanboyism gaming consoles debate crazy playstation 3 xbox 360 wii pc playstation 2 ds playstation portable gaming related

Read more
  • Portage, MB, Canada CA
  • Joined Jun 23, 2005
  • Male
  • 21 years young
  • private
  • Student

Statistics

  • Profile views 13,213
  • Number of logins 19,395
  • Forum Posts 7,217
  • Neopoints 18
  • GameGrep Points 5,446
  • User Reviews 3

Game Identities

  • PSN ID Ibisleigh_1
(0.0845/d/web8)