Tuesday, March 28, 2006
SSBM Tourney #2
Most, if not all, who reads this knows about the Smash Melee tournament held by the UW Gamers club last night. Tournament format was the same as the Mathsoc one a year ago, triple elimination, you get to play against people with similar win-loss records.
First and foremost congratulations to Duy who won yet again. Whee now I get to claim that I play w/ King of Smash of UW all the time muhahaha.
As for myself I didn't fare so well, knocked out with a 4-3 record. Lost twice to the same person (who also played a Fox) and to a Peach.
Overall I am satisfied with the tournament, this year's competition level was a lot higher than last year's, where I was able to coast through most of my matches. Actually come to think of it I tend to lose the matches that are close, so that's certainly saying something. Need to step it up when the going gets tough with money on the line.
Psychologically speaking, in my losses I didn't really keep to my gameplan of being a total coward. Maybe I should've went with that. I think that I played a more aggressive style than I usually do, and hence had quite a few self destructs, and those cost me big time. The last match hurt especially 'cause I had a one stock lead, then I SD'd and lost my focus.
Oh well, shows that I play this game best leisurely.
In terms of levels and items, my matches tend to turn out fairly neutral. That is, I wasn't at a large advantage or disadvantage because of the selection of stages and the randomness of items. I did witness quite a few matches where an unfortunate capsule/crate explosion turned a match around.
Job well done for Alan and Bao as well, they went out with 4-3 and 5-3 records respectively. I think I lost before Alan did (or let's say I did), so now I'll claim the title of "worst SSBM player" out of the UW group muhahaha. Justifies me using cheapass tactics and cowardice, ooooohhhhh yeeeaaaahhh.
As mentioned the level of competition was a lot higher, and my one regret of not being able to advance to the final rounds was that I didn't have a chance to play some of the better players in the tournament besides Duy. I was most interested in seeing how I'd play against Justin's Falco, see who'd win the reflector battle, heh.
Most notable difference in the styles of play I saw in all the matches was a lack of ninjaliciousness, or, I guess people play with more honour than we do, ha ha.
It was fun, and I'd definitely do it again if the timing is convenient. Maybe they can hold a team tournament, he he.
Funny/interesting points of the tournament:
- "ooo's" and "aaah's" whenever Duy uses the hookshot against walls for jumping
- "oh god"'s I heard from at least one of Duy's opponents when he was dishing out pwn soup
- Justin has excellent hands when it comes to control, near flawless execution of what he wanted to do
- still didn't see much wavedashing from characters that should use them, say Marth or Samus
- I need to learn how to fight a good Fox
First and foremost congratulations to Duy who won yet again. Whee now I get to claim that I play w/ King of Smash of UW all the time muhahaha.
As for myself I didn't fare so well, knocked out with a 4-3 record. Lost twice to the same person (who also played a Fox) and to a Peach.
Overall I am satisfied with the tournament, this year's competition level was a lot higher than last year's, where I was able to coast through most of my matches. Actually come to think of it I tend to lose the matches that are close, so that's certainly saying something. Need to step it up when the going gets tough with money on the line.
Psychologically speaking, in my losses I didn't really keep to my gameplan of being a total coward. Maybe I should've went with that. I think that I played a more aggressive style than I usually do, and hence had quite a few self destructs, and those cost me big time. The last match hurt especially 'cause I had a one stock lead, then I SD'd and lost my focus.
Oh well, shows that I play this game best leisurely.
In terms of levels and items, my matches tend to turn out fairly neutral. That is, I wasn't at a large advantage or disadvantage because of the selection of stages and the randomness of items. I did witness quite a few matches where an unfortunate capsule/crate explosion turned a match around.
Job well done for Alan and Bao as well, they went out with 4-3 and 5-3 records respectively. I think I lost before Alan did (or let's say I did), so now I'll claim the title of "worst SSBM player" out of the UW group muhahaha. Justifies me using cheapass tactics and cowardice, ooooohhhhh yeeeaaaahhh.
As mentioned the level of competition was a lot higher, and my one regret of not being able to advance to the final rounds was that I didn't have a chance to play some of the better players in the tournament besides Duy. I was most interested in seeing how I'd play against Justin's Falco, see who'd win the reflector battle, heh.
Most notable difference in the styles of play I saw in all the matches was a lack of ninjaliciousness, or, I guess people play with more honour than we do, ha ha.
It was fun, and I'd definitely do it again if the timing is convenient. Maybe they can hold a team tournament, he he.
Funny/interesting points of the tournament:
- "ooo's" and "aaah's" whenever Duy uses the hookshot against walls for jumping
- "oh god"'s I heard from at least one of Duy's opponents when he was dishing out pwn soup
- Justin has excellent hands when it comes to control, near flawless execution of what he wanted to do
- still didn't see much wavedashing from characters that should use them, say Marth or Samus
- I need to learn how to fight a good Fox
Wednesday, March 15, 2006
"Age-old" Topic: Activism vs Indifference
Pretty sure this kind of topic has been raised before, and pretty sure all of us has discussed this in some venue or another before, but hey, it came to mind, so I'll blog about it, muhahahaha.
As most of you (should) know, McGuinty (or however you spell it) government has lifted the tuition freeze on post-secondary (or was it university?) education. Basically what this means is that the tuition that we are paying now, is stand to increase by 5% (or more?) starting this fall.
Now, seeing as that most of those who read this blog are going into their final year, this doesn't concern us that that much. I myself, because of Co-op, will only have 1 term in the upcoming increased tuition year (assuming my spring term tuition remains the same). In either case, most of us will duck (or have ducked, Bao =p) the blunt of the fallout of this decision.
I read an article today about York University students signing a petition for the government to put back on the tuition freeze. Some dude from like, the Ontario University Student's Association or something like that says the government has the ability to freeze tuition for at least a year. Generally the student side want tuitions to keep on hold until at least the next provincial election.
Now, in politically sensitive debates such as these, both sides will throw "favourable" statistics to solidify their position. So I'm not going to bother with analyzing whether the comparision between tuition rate increase rates with general inflation levels is a sound argument or not. Partly due to me forgetting most of Phil 145 (Critical Thinking), mostly due to me being lazy and not wanting to bother with the analysis.
I remember my initial reaction to the news (I heard about this maybe 2 weeks ago?): "I'm glad that I'm graduating in 2007, which means that I'll only be paying higher tuition for 1 term, 2 at most". Self-serving yes, but so is the nature of man, or, in more direct way, that's how I function, regardless of any ethical or overall guiding "good" principles. If there's an issue to consider, I'd probably first think how this will impact myself first, then consider others.
Since I'm not on campus, I can pretty much use Co-op as an excuse as to not take an "official position" in this debate. But I was thinking that if I were on campus, would I sign a petition if I were approached in SLC? The answer is probably yes, since I probably don't want to look like a jerk and signing the petition can only help me. But truthfully, I don't think I much care for the situation either way. Reason? Because it doesn't really concern me.
Of course, this is a pretty selfish way to proceed in life, only care about topics/events that have an impact on oneself. But that's how I've been most of my life, come to think of it. Out of curiosity, how many of you have participated in some sort of activist movement (or say supported a said movement) that does not concern your own self in any sort of way? (That is to ask, how many of you are a better person than I, ha ha). I probably will defend the student side if asked for support, but I don't see myself actively engaging in activities/events to show that I will support it. I'm not going to drive into Waterloo if one of you tell me that they are accepting signatures for similar petition at SLC.
To show that I'm not that bad of a guy, I'd like to point out that I do often donate to charity/charitable drives when asked for it by friends/family, heh. In fact, I just donated at least 4 (new) game's worth of dollars to a friend's fundraising thing for cancer research (he's going to do a triathalon in return, he he). 4 games! Think of all the dust that could've been collecting on my self! (Cue: halo on head) The sacrifice! Just mind-booglin' isn't it? =p
Anyways, just wanted to see what you guys think (no pressure! leave your thoughts if you wish) on the level of zeal one should show on topics that one has an opinion on, but does not really concern/impact oneself. Should we go "Greenpeace" and protest everything till kingdom come? Or should we just sit back and go on with our own lives? (Fairly extreme options that I've put up there)
At the very least I've wasted 5 minutes of your day, muhahaha, or, perhaps I've enlightened you to embark on a self-finding journey across the enigma of your own purpose in life.
...
No you can't have your 5 minutes back.
As most of you (should) know, McGuinty (or however you spell it) government has lifted the tuition freeze on post-secondary (or was it university?) education. Basically what this means is that the tuition that we are paying now, is stand to increase by 5% (or more?) starting this fall.
Now, seeing as that most of those who read this blog are going into their final year, this doesn't concern us that that much. I myself, because of Co-op, will only have 1 term in the upcoming increased tuition year (assuming my spring term tuition remains the same). In either case, most of us will duck (or have ducked, Bao =p) the blunt of the fallout of this decision.
I read an article today about York University students signing a petition for the government to put back on the tuition freeze. Some dude from like, the Ontario University Student's Association or something like that says the government has the ability to freeze tuition for at least a year. Generally the student side want tuitions to keep on hold until at least the next provincial election.
Now, in politically sensitive debates such as these, both sides will throw "favourable" statistics to solidify their position. So I'm not going to bother with analyzing whether the comparision between tuition rate increase rates with general inflation levels is a sound argument or not. Partly due to me forgetting most of Phil 145 (Critical Thinking), mostly due to me being lazy and not wanting to bother with the analysis.
I remember my initial reaction to the news (I heard about this maybe 2 weeks ago?): "I'm glad that I'm graduating in 2007, which means that I'll only be paying higher tuition for 1 term, 2 at most". Self-serving yes, but so is the nature of man, or, in more direct way, that's how I function, regardless of any ethical or overall guiding "good" principles. If there's an issue to consider, I'd probably first think how this will impact myself first, then consider others.
Since I'm not on campus, I can pretty much use Co-op as an excuse as to not take an "official position" in this debate. But I was thinking that if I were on campus, would I sign a petition if I were approached in SLC? The answer is probably yes, since I probably don't want to look like a jerk and signing the petition can only help me. But truthfully, I don't think I much care for the situation either way. Reason? Because it doesn't really concern me.
Of course, this is a pretty selfish way to proceed in life, only care about topics/events that have an impact on oneself. But that's how I've been most of my life, come to think of it. Out of curiosity, how many of you have participated in some sort of activist movement (or say supported a said movement) that does not concern your own self in any sort of way? (That is to ask, how many of you are a better person than I, ha ha). I probably will defend the student side if asked for support, but I don't see myself actively engaging in activities/events to show that I will support it. I'm not going to drive into Waterloo if one of you tell me that they are accepting signatures for similar petition at SLC.
To show that I'm not that bad of a guy, I'd like to point out that I do often donate to charity/charitable drives when asked for it by friends/family, heh. In fact, I just donated at least 4 (new) game's worth of dollars to a friend's fundraising thing for cancer research (he's going to do a triathalon in return, he he). 4 games! Think of all the dust that could've been collecting on my self! (Cue: halo on head) The sacrifice! Just mind-booglin' isn't it? =p
Anyways, just wanted to see what you guys think (no pressure! leave your thoughts if you wish) on the level of zeal one should show on topics that one has an opinion on, but does not really concern/impact oneself. Should we go "Greenpeace" and protest everything till kingdom come? Or should we just sit back and go on with our own lives? (Fairly extreme options that I've put up there)
At the very least I've wasted 5 minutes of your day, muhahaha, or, perhaps I've enlightened you to embark on a self-finding journey across the enigma of your own purpose in life.
...
No you can't have your 5 minutes back.
Monday, March 06, 2006
Mindset of Being Entertained
I probably thought of posting on this topic before, but never got around to it. Once again it probably is one of those ideas that pop into my head when I'm not in a position to update (at work or away from a computer).
People have said that I'm smart. I've been called a genius. Personally I definitely don't think I'm any genius, or any smarter than the average person, but that's not the point. What I've never really heard is that I'm an intellectual.
The point I'm trying to make is that I may be smart, but I'm not an intellectual. Well, at least not the pondering type.
For the most part, when I'm not in school, I barely put my mind to any good use. I don't indulge in critical thinking of current events, I don't consider the manifestations of political situations. If not for a long daily commute to work listening to 680 News and browsing Google News at work, I am for the most part quite ignorant of worldly matters.
In fact, most of my non academic mental concentration goes into some sort of gaming and such. For example, I can spend 2 hours at work looking up stuff on Diablo 2, planning my characters' equipment and skills and such.
(I'm getting there, slowly)
Ok, the true point of this post, or at least, the original intention of this post, is about how I personally, and what I notice in other people, approach objects of entertainment.
Case in point, Wen in a recent post analyzed the game mechanics of Kingdom Hearts, a look at the game from a more technical standpoint. In that light, I agree with him that KH is not a very good game; it has a fairly shallow battle system, the plot is highly predictable and cliches are found everywhere.
Although Wen did not enjoy the game (or so it seems from his recent post), I on the other hand very much enjoyed the game. I played through it in a span of about 2 weeks, logging about 50-60 hours from my recollection. And I thoroughly enjoyed every part of the game, from the repetative hack and slashing of enemies to farm for stuff, to the mindless and pointless gummi ship "space invaders" sequences you have to go through.
So I was wondering why is it that I was able to enjoy the game while Wen (and I assume there are many other gamers) didn't. I think one aspect of this is the mindset one has when approaching mediums of entertainment.
Unless it is an obvious attempt at being dramatic, I rarely analyze any aspect of a game/movie/tv show etc. Rarely do I try to guess/predict what happens next in a plot line, although sometimes I do in mysteries. I will easily shrug off small plot inconsistencies or impossibilities. However, I do apply a double standard =p: this only applies if I am entertained by the medium. If I don't think that the medium is entertaining, I am more than willing to start looking for plot holes to give myself more reasons to dislike it, heh. Basically, I don't use my mind very much when I am doing something for entertainment. I guess I just sit back and go along with the ride first, and only point out where the ride can improve if it didn't thrill me as I thought it would.
There are of course, exceptions. A bad detective/mystery story I will most certainly not enjoy, and I probably will point out plot holes in adventure flicks that fail to entertain. I also actively think and strategize (or try to) when I'm playing Smash. That is to say, my mind is not totally on auto-pilot when I'm engaging in leisure activities =p
I guess one succinct way of putting this is that I'm pretty shallow when it comes to entertainment. If it does it's job (being that I'm entertained), I'm usually willing to put aside the critical thinking cap (which, I probably put on like 5 times a year).
For example, I'm pretty sure there are some parts in the new season of 24 that pushes the plausibility factor a little. It's kind of like certain events go the favour of the terrorists, just so that they can be more threatening and add to the drama/suspense. I'm totally down with that. A few small implausible events won't turn me away from the enjoyment I have from watching the show.
Another way to look at it is that I'm just lazy. Too lazy to think if things really makes sense. Maybe that's why I was into wrestling for like 4 years, most of high school and 1st year in university.
Mindless entertainment does have its values I think. Well, at the very least it broadens my choices for entertainment.
But I suppose other people have different approaches to these things, or, perhaps they're just more studious and more of an intellectual than I. I've heard on radio that "reality tv" is the most fake programs on all of television, that shows like American Idol purposely put people who can't sing on the show for Simon to bash, and have them act like they've been shattered by Simon's comments. Frankly, I've just never thought about that possbility. Watching people get zinged is entertaining enough for me (although I've watched like, 3-5 episodes of American Idol in all). Although hearing that comment made me think about some of the more outrageous "reality tv" shows, like that Joe Schmoe + American Idol hybrid that UPN or something like that showed. I guess you'd have to be pretty dense or full of yourself to think one can win an alleged "singing contest" if you have zero talent to boot, heh.
But oh well, I like this mentality of being easily amused, so I'll stick with it =p.
People have said that I'm smart. I've been called a genius. Personally I definitely don't think I'm any genius, or any smarter than the average person, but that's not the point. What I've never really heard is that I'm an intellectual.
The point I'm trying to make is that I may be smart, but I'm not an intellectual. Well, at least not the pondering type.
For the most part, when I'm not in school, I barely put my mind to any good use. I don't indulge in critical thinking of current events, I don't consider the manifestations of political situations. If not for a long daily commute to work listening to 680 News and browsing Google News at work, I am for the most part quite ignorant of worldly matters.
In fact, most of my non academic mental concentration goes into some sort of gaming and such. For example, I can spend 2 hours at work looking up stuff on Diablo 2, planning my characters' equipment and skills and such.
(I'm getting there, slowly)
Ok, the true point of this post, or at least, the original intention of this post, is about how I personally, and what I notice in other people, approach objects of entertainment.
Case in point, Wen in a recent post analyzed the game mechanics of Kingdom Hearts, a look at the game from a more technical standpoint. In that light, I agree with him that KH is not a very good game; it has a fairly shallow battle system, the plot is highly predictable and cliches are found everywhere.
Although Wen did not enjoy the game (or so it seems from his recent post), I on the other hand very much enjoyed the game. I played through it in a span of about 2 weeks, logging about 50-60 hours from my recollection. And I thoroughly enjoyed every part of the game, from the repetative hack and slashing of enemies to farm for stuff, to the mindless and pointless gummi ship "space invaders" sequences you have to go through.
So I was wondering why is it that I was able to enjoy the game while Wen (and I assume there are many other gamers) didn't. I think one aspect of this is the mindset one has when approaching mediums of entertainment.
Unless it is an obvious attempt at being dramatic, I rarely analyze any aspect of a game/movie/tv show etc. Rarely do I try to guess/predict what happens next in a plot line, although sometimes I do in mysteries. I will easily shrug off small plot inconsistencies or impossibilities. However, I do apply a double standard =p: this only applies if I am entertained by the medium. If I don't think that the medium is entertaining, I am more than willing to start looking for plot holes to give myself more reasons to dislike it, heh. Basically, I don't use my mind very much when I am doing something for entertainment. I guess I just sit back and go along with the ride first, and only point out where the ride can improve if it didn't thrill me as I thought it would.
There are of course, exceptions. A bad detective/mystery story I will most certainly not enjoy, and I probably will point out plot holes in adventure flicks that fail to entertain. I also actively think and strategize (or try to) when I'm playing Smash. That is to say, my mind is not totally on auto-pilot when I'm engaging in leisure activities =p
I guess one succinct way of putting this is that I'm pretty shallow when it comes to entertainment. If it does it's job (being that I'm entertained), I'm usually willing to put aside the critical thinking cap (which, I probably put on like 5 times a year).
For example, I'm pretty sure there are some parts in the new season of 24 that pushes the plausibility factor a little. It's kind of like certain events go the favour of the terrorists, just so that they can be more threatening and add to the drama/suspense. I'm totally down with that. A few small implausible events won't turn me away from the enjoyment I have from watching the show.
Another way to look at it is that I'm just lazy. Too lazy to think if things really makes sense. Maybe that's why I was into wrestling for like 4 years, most of high school and 1st year in university.
Mindless entertainment does have its values I think. Well, at the very least it broadens my choices for entertainment.
But I suppose other people have different approaches to these things, or, perhaps they're just more studious and more of an intellectual than I. I've heard on radio that "reality tv" is the most fake programs on all of television, that shows like American Idol purposely put people who can't sing on the show for Simon to bash, and have them act like they've been shattered by Simon's comments. Frankly, I've just never thought about that possbility. Watching people get zinged is entertaining enough for me (although I've watched like, 3-5 episodes of American Idol in all). Although hearing that comment made me think about some of the more outrageous "reality tv" shows, like that Joe Schmoe + American Idol hybrid that UPN or something like that showed. I guess you'd have to be pretty dense or full of yourself to think one can win an alleged "singing contest" if you have zero talent to boot, heh.
But oh well, I like this mentality of being easily amused, so I'll stick with it =p.
