Category — Games

It is with some trepidation that I even post this here on my blog, but ultimately I believe it is a valid apologetic on the dangers of relativism as a world view. A debate on digital piracy is the vehicle of its delivery.

** Warning **

What follows is a long “discussion” with a member of a gaming forum that I belong to. It is point-counterpoint on an in depth conversation. Is it worth reading? I don’t know, I certainly felt it was worth writing. Normally I don’t get into things like this, but I was baited and couldn’t help myself. Its the only thing that I regret about the entire thing.

It started out innocently enough - I was browsing a topic looking for some information regarding a bug in a new game that I recently purchased. The tide of this particular topic turned to a debate regarding ditigal piracy - basically if pirating games is “OK” or not. I was literally in the midst of thinking “Oh, the crap you find on these stupid forums when someone brought the argument to a whole different level.

The line that hooked me was: “What are you, the typical bible pusher republican who thinks laws are above anything else?”

What? Huh? I jumped from my late night induced half-coma and without thinking, hit REPLY.

In the posts that follow, items in italics are things that the poster is quoting from someone else.

Here is his initial post in its entirety:

Stealing = Wrong.No gray areas.No, that’s wrong.
What are you, the typical bible pusher republican who thinks laws are above anything else?
There are plenty of fricken gray areas.A poor man stealing a loaf of bread to feed his starving family: Right or Wrong?Take some college level morality and philosophy classes, then get back to me.And the one thing that all you “Pir4t3s are EVil!111!” people never understand is this: I personally only download games that I’m unsure of whether or not they are going to be good. If I like it I always go out and buy it. If I do not like it, I delete the game from my hard drive and do not go out and buy it.

The thing you fail to see here is that Lucasarts or Petroglyph do not lose money at all.
If I don’t go out and buy it because I tried and disliked it there is no money to be “lost” because the money wasn’t even there in the first place.My method of pirating is the ultimate one because it’s bulletproof and “morally acceptable”.
It’s simple…if I like the product they’re offering I reward them by buying it always. If I don’t like the product their offering I don’t buy it.
So you jumping on my back about this is the same as saying Lucasarts lose money on car enthusiasts because they don’t know anything about games, so they don’t buy them.If a pirate chooses not to buy a game there is no money lost, because it’s as if this particular pirate was a person who never even knew about games in the first place…so he wouldn’t buy it.
How many times does this need to be said?Obviously the companies lose money on big scale pirating rings who produce huge amounts of CD/DVD’s and sell them illegally on the software black market.But as long as every pirate (on a personal level, not multiple people) followed my model the game companies would not lose a single cent, ever.

And now for my response:

Wow, that was rude and uncalled for…

How would you feel if someone called you a typical elitist democrat snob, whose belligerent air of supposed intelligence is really just a paltry cover for blatant humanist relativity?

Well, even if I step into your world of elastic morality, your comments are still ill mannered and ill thought out.

Look at your elitist attitude:

“Take some college level morality and philosophy classes, then get back to me.”
“My method of pirating is the ultimate one because it’s bulletproof and ‘morally acceptable’.”
“But as long as every pirate (on a personal level, not multiple people) followed my model…”

Beyond that, your argument is horribly flawed. First, it is convoluted by the fact that you still refer to yourself and others as pirates, indicating a basic nature of taking what isn’t yours. Second, you say that you always go out and buy each game that you enjoyed - the problem here is that you are the only one setting the standard. While I’m sure this fits quite nicely into your “everything’s relative” world-view, it just isn’t a realistic mark by which things can be properly measured. Doing as you please and changing the rules to accommodate your whim simply won’t work in a complex society.

In reality, you have NO idea what games you would or would not buy if you didn’t have the opportunity to pirate them for free - you can’t know, because you aren’t in that situation. You can speculate, but you could easily be wrong. If everyone followed your example, as you suggest, chances are that many of them would also get it wrong, resulting in a real loss for the game companies. And, a real loss for them will affect the entire industry because of basic economic reasons - taking utility without reward isn’t good for either side in the long run.

The simple fact of the matter is that piracy is stealing - you may not agree, but I’m sure that Lucas Arts and the authorities in most countries would agree. You are trying to claim that stealing is OK in this particular situation because you want to try the game before you pay for it. I can understand your desire to do this and fortunately for everyone, most game companies understand this desire as well and provide demo versions of their software for this exact purpose. By what logic does your desire for evaluation give you carte blanche to step outside of this mechanism? Who are you to do as you please with someone else’s property?

Also, frankly, your choice of example in proving that gray areas exist - a starving man trying to feed his family - is simply in poor taste and denigrates those who really are hungry every day. You stealing a video game is hardly on the same level and besides being thoughtless, the hyperbole does nothing for your argument anyway.

People who speak in shades of gray never want to admit that at the ends of their spectrum, there is STILL black and white. Gray is impossible without them. To be sure, there are gray areas in life; this just isn’t one of them. Just because you feel justified in taking what doesn’t belong to you, doesn’t mean that it isn’t stealing.

In fact, the only people who can make that determination with 100% accuracy are the folks at Lucas Arts - because the software is their property. And, I think you know what they would say…

He then responded with a few posts that frankly raised my opinion of him quite a bit. I still disagreed with much of what was being said, but at least he started being civil. I won’t reprint his posts in their entirety, as I get most of them as quoted points in my response. If you REALLY want his complete posts, I’d be glad to send them to you, but I highly doubt any of you are that masochistic. Anyway, this is ME responding to him on the second go around.

To start, I would like to say a few things… First, I’m very glad you responded. Normally I stay out of these things, but I just couldn’t help myself. Call it poor judgment at 3:00am. Anyway, I was feeling that I had been too harsh on you, and I see now that you took my argument for what it was and not as an attack. I tried very hard to debate your points, not attack YOU.

Second, as you pointed out, I’m delighted that you have changed your tone and attitude to a level of civility and respect that is so often lacking in these forums. For that alone, I heartily applaud you! For what it’s worth, you have raised my estimation of you quite considerably, even if I still disagree with a number of your points. :)It’s only through respect and honest debate that those of differing minds can ever come to common ground.

Now, to still point out the error of your ways.

The funniest thing is that in the post below yours he actually admits to being one XD

He did, didn’t he? Still, I don’t think you were saying it with good intentions, now were you?How would I feel? Not that bad really, then I would correct you by saying that I’m not a democrat (some issues democrat, some issues republican), and that my intelligence is not “supposed” ^_^

I agree that these monikers are somewhat difficult to confine oneself to, but in a 2 party system it is what we are left with. Conservative and liberal are probably more descriptive, as they at least are more to the point. A republican like Schwarzenegger is vastly different than a Reagan, yet they are both called the same thing.And come on man, don’t harp on relativity

Ah, but I must, because it is at the heart of the issue. This is our disagreement, nothing more. You are doing something that when measured against your relativism, is permissible, even though it directly violates a core belief of most productive societies. You’re right, now that I peruse through it, it seems a bit elitist! It’s easy to go into “elitist” mode on Gamefaqs, where 60% of the population are uneducated 14 year olds who think they know everything.

HAHA! Ahem. Well, despite being less than respectful, I probably have been caught saying something like that on more than one occasion, so I’m the kettle and you are the pot.
Quite frankly I believe a certain degree of elitism is justified, if you think I’m bad you haven’t been around the boards much XD

Hey, are you using a non-sliding scale here? Hmmm… It appears that your elastic-measuring stick does indeed have its limits! But more seriously, I would say that these follow on posts have given me a much better overall opinion of you. While your original comments are a bit over the top (even to your own admission), I do not think that this is your demeanor in general – and for that, frankly, I’m thankful! Semantics.
If I call us: “Moral relativists confined to a certain category within the capitalistic machine” would you be happier?
No, wait! We’ll just call pirates “Care bears” from now on.

Well, yes it is semantics, but they are important in any debate – if we aren’t talking the same language then our meanings are lost upon each other. Most of the world views a pirate as someone who takes what isn’t rightly theirs, so in that frame, I guess I would be happier if you spelled out your definition.Never did I claim to speak on everyone’s behalf. No, but you advocate that everyone does the same thing.

I’ve repeatedly stated that I’m only for this kind of thing if people go out and buy the games to support good companies.

Again, the problem is that your definitions are subjective – that won’t work in an argument like this, as your solution must work for both sides. Oddly enough, though you seem to chafe against “the capitalistic machine”, it provides exactly what you are looking for – a way to reward those companies who provide content that you appreciate and a way to punish those who don’t. The only thing is that your relativism puts a wrench in those workings, as you are the sole judge of when you pay for utility, regardless of the rights or desires of the providing company.

I was talking about me specifically, and as long as I set this standard for myself, I have the personal moral high ground.

Maybe that allows you to sleep at night, but in the end it is meaningless – the rest of the world views your actions as illegal. I can say that 2+2 is 5, but it doesn’t make it so. Your “moral high ground” is nothing but a pile of sand that won’t hold up to the weight.I’m an regular member of society who works and contributes just like everybody else. I abide by societies laws that are actually important for its functioning and well being of its inhabitants. Just because I pirate a game now and then doesn’t mean I “do as I please” and change the rules to “accommodate my whim”.

I don’t doubt that you feel that you are law abiding “where it counts”, but your statement also again proves your convoluted argument. You acknowledge that you are abiding by CERTAIN laws, laws that you deem important for the well being of society’s inhabitants. Those that you deem unimportant, you have no qualms about sidestepping. Exactly how is that not “doing as you please”? You are claiming that you are doing nothing wrong, yet you are (at your own admission) violating certain decrees of the land in which you live. How is that not sidestepping the rules to “accommodate your whim”? The only reason why you say this is because you have not experienced any consequences of your actions. That doesn’t mean they aren’t wrong.Relativism naturally leads to the decay of organized society. You say it’s OK to pirate software, and your neighbor says it OK to take your TV. You may not agree with him, because he is robbing you of the use of it, but that doesn’t matter, because he is using HIS relative scale of morality and simply disregards yours. Now you can’t watch TV and it’s your own logic that did it to you. Society only works if we all play by the same rules. I know - I can hear you now saying that a game is only a “copy” and no one else’s utility is removed by your use of it so the TV analogy doesn’t fit. I’ll get to that in a minute, but for now all I will say is, here you go again using a definition of what is permissible based on your own tolerance for social irresponsibility. I could have easily used an argument of stealing cable, or something like that, but I chose not to. I specifically use the example of a TV because I must push you to the point of getting to something that you DON’T agree with, so that you can see how things look from my side of the argument. You can see how relativism doesn’t work in my example because it directly robs you of something that is rightly yours. But, that’s the problem with relativism as a world view – it then applies to EVERYTHING. You can’t take it out and use it only when it serves your purpose – your fellow man, who is most certainly not guaranteed to be altruistic will simply do the same thing, and in many cases your desires are at odds with each other. What then?

Do you really want a relative society? I highly doubt it, when you think about what that truly means in the long run.I beg to differ. I would still be the same person would I not? I would still read reviews, have the same tastes, know what games I would buy and wouldn’t buy. And if by any chance I didn’t even play games because I couldn’t pirate them, well…the game companies would never get my money…instead of getting it most of the time. Yes, you may be the same person, but your situation would be greatly changed. Now, games that you are on the fence about, you simply pirate and make your decision about after the fact. In the absence of pirating, there is a very good chance that you would buy games (because of curiosity or simple desire for entertainment) that you would never pay for after you have pirated a copy. You simply use the game and determine if it meets some arbitrary, changing level of quality based upon how you feel that day – but if you couldn’t do that, you would end up spending money on things that you later regretted. Thus my point about you speculating…You’re right, I can’t expect the masses to be as smart and methodical about this as I am ^_^
But seriously….I’d say that if they at least tried to follow my model we would decrease game industry losses by 70% or more. Agreed, I would certainly rather have a pirate who does try to reward the companies that make good games rather than one who simply screws everybody at will. I’m not arguing that. I’m arguing that your ability to judge what you would pay for in the absence of piracy is highly suspect, and as such you are robbing game companies of their rightful consideration.Of course the authorities and the publishers would agree, they’re the ones getting my money

Or not, as the case seems to occasionally be.

Let’s just go halfway and say that piracy is a slightly less than legal way of aquiring something, but not full blown stealing, the property rights of IP can be debated (We’ll get to this later).

Ok, I’m sorry, that makes me laugh. Classify the crime if you will, but one can no more be “slightly illegal” than one can be “slightly pregnant”. It is one or the other, and unfortunately for your argument, this is one area where you simply don’t get to choose. Your only recourse is where you choose to live…Correct. They do offer demos, usually containing about 20%… …fleshed out demos that I just go by the demo and don’t pirate.

We’ll get into this when we talk about IP, but suffice it to say that it is up to the game company to decide how it will demo its product. Make your decision solely on this, because that is what they choose to give you. If you do so and still get burned, you’ll know better next time when you consider a game from that company. Just because some companies hide crappy games behind less that revealing demos, does not give you the right to pirate their product. You get to vote with your dollars, that’s your only right.Not to mention my piracy is very limited because I never stray from my own genres and I don’t play games that often, I’d say I pirate a game every 6 months. That’s a discussion for another time though.

Honestly, I suspected that it was fairly limited… But, see my previous statement about being “slightly pregnant”. Tsss…not once did I equatestealing a loaf of bread for your starving family to aquiring a luxury good such as a video game. It’s simply a means to show that gray areas exist, it doesn’t matter how different or exaggarated the variables are.
Obviously this kind of proof for gray areas is needed, as evidenced by our cute little republican who posted after you Ah, yes… I knew your intention when you made the reference; I just wasn’t feeling charitable at the time. The point that I was getting at was that it doesn’t make your case for you at all, and is therefore useless. Why doesn’t it make your case? Because the man is still stealing. Yes, we can understand his choice because of the extenuating circumstances, but that doesn’t change that he has broken the law. It’s just that the extenuating circumstances make it so that his actions are understandable. A court would probably convict him of the crime and commute his sentence. This isn’t a gray area at all. This happens all the time, even in business – companies are convicted of crimes and fined $1.00 usually because there wasn’t an intention to disobey the law. On either front, this doesn’t help your argument – you don’t have extenuating circumstances, and it IS your intention to disobey the law.Correction: Their intellectual property. They don’t own anything tangible. This is a debate that’s raged for eons.
All that’s being “stolen” is information, add to the fact that we aren’t removing something from someone elses possession and you’re going to have a hard time labeling it as “OMG THEFT!”.
Again I feel the need to reiterate that when a pirate, pirates a new version of this information is spawned from nothingness. It never existed beforehand. Nobody has lost their property in any way shape or form.
It’s more akin to borrowing a car, putting it in a fantastic machine that makes a perfect clone, and then giving the car back, the car salesman never lost a cent and he’s free to go about his business.
Now of course you’ll say: “Well if everybody did that the car salesman would go out of business!” Ah, yes indeed, but remember what I said? I’m following my formula here, and I don’t condone wide scale piracy as in selling millions of burned CD’s for 2 cents (Asia and Russia I’m looking in your direction), that is what hurts the industry you see…not an American college student getting a game from the Internet once in a while.

OK, now to this issue. Maybe it’s because you haven’t graduated yet, and that you have more classes to take, but your understanding of IP is limited at best. I don’t say that to be rude, but rather as trying to understand where you are getting such a, hmm…twisted…view of IP law. I’m not happy with the word, but I can’t think of another one at the moment. Anyway… This has not been a debate for eons - the rights of IP holders are not debated. What constitutes IP can be debated, and fair use can be debated, but the rights of those who have IP are not in question. Even ask the Free Software Foundation, one of the most aggressive groups when it comes to relaxing IP rights – they don’t argue the rights of a software manufacturer to their IP, what they want is for it to be freely useable. Even THEY grant a LICENSE, which is proof positive that IP rights are here to stay. How else could society function? To not do so would be to completely remove the primary incentive for progress in many sciences.

And, don’t think that the two items that are open for debate offer you any help. Pirating a game doesn’t fall into either debatable area, so this really doesn’t help your argument at all.I’ll continue to try and show you why you aren’t making any sense using your own analogy of cloning the car.What about the person who researched, funded and manufactured the fantastic machine that you used to clone the car? You may not be robbing the person who provided the car to be cloned, but you are most certainly robbing the person who took the risk of developing the machine to do it. They did so fully expecting to be compensated for the use of their property and you haven’t done so. Even if the incremental cost of you cloning the car is nothing to the machine’s owner, it doesn’t change the fact that you wanted the cloned car and you didn’t pay for the right to USE IT.Bringing it back to reality, this is actually a good segue into software End User Licenses. When you “buy a game”, you don’t in fact own the game at all - you only purchase the right to USE it – the software remains the property of the company that manufactured it. The fact that you choose to ignore the law of the land is again incidental – you are stealing the “right to use” that someone else is expecting to be paid for. They invest time, effort and money into making the software and are taking a substantial risk by doing so. That is why they expect to be compensated for the right to use their property.Can you see how your argument crumbles in on itself? The same thing can be said about sneaking into a movie theater to watch a film in a half filled auditorium, or stealing cable from your neighbor’s line, or a number of any other scenarios like this, where you are sidestepping the grant of a “right to use”. It’s all stealing.And don’t think that your actions don’t have consequences – I’m not talking about you going to jail or being fined, though that may happen one day. I’m talking about the fact that many IP holders are now fighting back by attacking what we DO have the right to do, which is make a facsimile of the IP as long as it falls into “fair use”. That’s what the entire “Digital Rights Management” is all about – attacking fair use. They don’t want me to be able to copy the content that I have a right to use, because they are afraid of you stealing it. If they weren’t afraid of that, they wouldn’t be going down this road.

Now, don’t get me wrong – I don’t support IP holders in that fight. I think its wrong on many fronts, the least of which is shackling the legal user because of the actions of the illegal.\

My point is more to show how your actions are not done in a vacuum and do indeed have real world consequences, even if you don’t feel them just yet.I’ll be as rude as I want to be towards the “lessers” that deserve it…. Ahh, and you were doing so well! Haha!Nice talking to you anyway (seriously, I enjoy a good debate)… Now on THAT we agree. P.S. Miloandrew deserves even more praise after I just discovered that he’s a gamespotter…I was amazed that such a well thought out, readable post could be made by someone of their kind.
Pleasantly surprised my friend…pleasantly surprised At least you ended well. Seriously though, thank you for the compliment. I’m glad that we can have a discussion like this. Nothing bothers me more than people who can’t back up their positions with a well thought out apologetic. Even though I don’t agree with a lot of what you have said, I sincerely applaud you for stepping up to the plate to make your case and am glad that you consider me your friend. The feeling is officially mutual. While I have no right to do so, I would like to ask a favor – please thinkabout what I’ve said before simply reacting to it. If you do, I think you’ll see that your initial argument really does fall apart under the strain of required proof. There is no harm in that, nor is there harm in having the initial belief. There is harm however in continuing to espouse something that is known to be wrong simply because you can’t humble yourself to say that you were initially mistaken. Empires have fallen to the hubris-ate-nemesis cycle – I hope you don’t.

I’m not saying that you have to agree with me – I’m just asking you to be completely sure you that you don’t, before you respond.

Well, kudos to you if you read this far. Point made.

DRM, piracy, relativism, absolute truth

An article at Ars Technica reports on a Chicago TV station’s claims that video games are like drugs - the station cites a social worker who says that as a result children are behaving worse than they did historically.

The Ars article pretty quickly dismisses the possibility, throwing it in with a pile of other emergent social phenomena that simply rubbed mainstream society the wrong way.  It then goes on to discuss if gaming can be truly addictive, discusses how addition itself is a poor word in general and ultimately finds that gaming is more on the order of an eating disorder or compulsive gambling than it is with heroine.

Its an interesting article to be sure, and outside of that, you can weigh many good and bad points relating to video games, but I’d like to take a quick step back and revisit the original claim made by the station.

Personally, I think that this is the drug manufacturer calling the dealer evil.  The average American watches more than 4 hours of TV each day, compared to roughly 7.5 hours spent gaming all week.  Over 98% of all American homes have a television, yet only 50% of American’s play video games.  Are you seeing a trend here?

This TV station is really saying - “Hey, don’t let your fat-ass bratty kids play too many video games!  Polluting their brains is OUR job!”

Now, don’t get me wrong.  I like TV and I like video games - you don’t have to read my blog for long to know that about me.  But it can be appalling the content that is available in both mediums - allowing your kids to be exposed to some of this stuff, when it is questionable if you should be exposed to it is simple lunacy.

But, I think we all know that.  A kid shouldn’t be playing a game like Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas in the first place - if you disagree, then you deserve how your children turn out.

My first point is more along the lines of what TV can put into the mind of a child.  There are very few cartoons out there where the parents are even somewhat helpful, let alone play the part of the heroes.  Usually, parents are the bumbling, can’t-be-trusted type that everything needs to be hidden from - be it a secret lab, or a failed test.  “Keep it away from Mom and Dad!”  The parents in many shows are downright stupid, with the kids being the ones who always have to set them straight.  “Thank goodness for that upstart 7 year old!  She’s so spunky!  HAHA!  Good stuff!”  No, not good stuff.  Fathers tend to fare the worst - they’re almost always stupid or angry or petty or square or…  You get the picture.

What does this do to our children?  It programs them for 4 hours every day that Mom and Dad don’t have the answers, aren’t worthy of their respect and certainly don’t require obedience.  Then they turn around and look at us and realize that the TV is probably right! We don’t have our crap together - 50% of us are divorced, of those that aren’t, large percentages are fighting, cheating or working too much.  Kids come from broken homes, have no father or no mother, or even worse, have 2 mommies or 2 daddies.  Even us Christians don’t fare well in these areas - we’re all messed up too!

Raising kids isn’t easy, especially in a two income family - but don’t blame anything or anyone else for how your children turn out.  To be sure, there are a few extenuating circumstances, but the overwhelming majority of disobedient, disrespectful and ill-adjusted children are directly because of a lack of interactive parenting not because of a presence of interactive gaming or crappy television.

While most people would agree with that statement, we still have the social trends to prove that they don’t act on it.  Why? Because it’s HARD work.  It’s longsuffering work.  And for many in society, there are no clear guidelines to follow.  We do what sounds good… Sorta.  Really, we do what feels good, which usually equates with what’s easiest and gives the least amount of friction.

Isn’t taking the “easy” way out practically synonymous with not doing the right thing?  Why then, do we parent that way?  I believe it is a lack of wisdom.

In the greatest book of wisdom ever gathered, Proverbs, there is a passage that has long caused uproar and consternation among many more “enlightened” parents - “spare the rod, spoil the child”, or more correctly:

He who spares the rod hates his son, but he who loves him is careful to discipline him. (Proverbs, 13:24)

This is often misunderstood and used by weirdoes on both sides to prove completely dissimilar points, neither of which are correct.

In ancient times, a Hebrew man would keep a “rod” or a walking stick.  As he aged, he would carve memories and stories from his life into the wood, creating a repository of everything that he had lived that was worthy of regard.  In a sense, the rod was a container for his wisdom - that which his life had taught him. It would indeed also be used for more mundane things, as any walking stick or staff would be, discipline included.

The point is this - don’t beat your children indiscriminately, but discipline them with careful wisdom, love and understanding.

This doesn’t just mean corporal punishment, but giving them true discipline, in every sense of the word.  Discipline to do things like NOT watch 4 hours of disrespectful television every day.

So, how do we get the wisdom necessary to properly discipline our children?  I believe it starts with God.

The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, and knowledge of the Holy One is understanding. (Proverbs 9:10)

And he said to man,
       ‘The fear of the Lord—that is wisdom, and to shun evil is understanding.’ (Job 28:28)

This isn’t a fear that invokes cringing terror, but rather a spirit of awe, humility and dependence upon our creator.  We learn wisdom by acknowledging that God is who He is - GOD.  By accepting His divine authority and working to understand Him, we gain more wisdom.  Doesn’t this make sense?  The more we acknowledge and understand the creator of the universe, the more we understand how to interact with His creation?

Wisdom is then used to properly discipline our kids so that they aren’t the disobedient, disrespectful and ill-adjusted little children that we all can’t stand and are terrified of raising.

Am I saying I have this all figured out?  Heck no!  I’m learning every day, mess up often, and seek counsel from two different friends that I deeply trust, who have already raised their children in a Godly manner and who have the RESULTS that I would like to see with mine.

So, who is more to blame for the breakdown of juvenile society? The people that cram our children full of disobedient, violent, “kids always know better” images for 2 full months out of every year, or the people who make games that give you more points for screwing hookers and shooting police officers in the head for only half a month out of every year?

Obviously neither - it’s the parents.

gaming, parenting, Christianity, TV

Sony’s PS3 is supposed to be out this spring, but there seems to be several issues that may hold them back.  Of course, Sony isn’t backing down from their date just yet…

First is cost.  The financial people are saying that each box is going to cost over $800 at launch.  OUCH!

Second seems to be the IBM Octopiler, better known as the software that is supposed to tame the beastly Cell Broadband Engine.  See, most programs that run on the PC that you are reading this on, or even that run on gaming consoles are written in some kind of high level language (like C++, Java, etc.).  This language is then turned into a program that you can execute by a “compiler”.  In very simplistic terms, it turns the human readable source code language into the 0’s and 1’s (binaries) that your computer can read and understand.

Well, the Octopiler (multiple armed compiler…) is much more ambitious.  Even its headline is complicated - “Supporting Single Instruction Multiple Data (SIMD) and Heterogeneous Parallelism Automatically!”  Huh?

Well, for those of us who DON’T think in 0’s and 1’s - basically that means that the Octopiler is going to put out binaries that are already optimized for multiprocessor and massively multiprocessor systems.

What’s the wow factor?  That just isn’t being done today.

And you say: “But I know that there are computers with 2 CPU’s in them, and they even have DualCore CPU’s now, with two processors on a single chip.  There is nothing new in that…”

Oh, but there is.  See, in today’s world, most of the heavy lifting of using multiple processors is left to the OS - a huge beefy chunk of code that needs to be BETWEEN the program you want to run and the multiple processors that will actually do the work.  If an application is written to be multi-threaded (meaning it spawns off multiple little processes of data crunching), then the OS can hand off these multiple processing threads to multiple CPU’s.  The program itself doesn’t think about multiple processors - it leaves that to the OS.  And, people write multi-threaded code for many reasons - not just this benefit when running on a dual processor machine.

Well, the Octopiler is set to change all of that.  It is intended to be the next level of compiler - one that can take a sequential program that’s written to a unified memory model, and output binaries that BY THEMSELVES make efficient use of beefy multiprocessing systems like Cell’s.

The closest analogy I can think of is this:

Task

Say you need 16 items, 2 each from 8 different stores.  Your spouse has to follow your plan for a shopping trip and they have to be back home by 5pm with everything purchased.

Today’s Compiler

You are today’s normal compiler, the task is your source code, your spouse is the CPU and the goal is to have all 16 items in your house as quickly as possible.

So, as today’s compiler, you sit down and lookup all the addresses of the stores, map them out and come up with what you think is a logical plan of attack based on distances, etc.  You factor in traffic patterns, pee breaks and lunch. You come up with an exact, optimized step by step process from point A through to Z.  You hand the plan to your spouse and walk them out to the car.  But, when you get outside, you find that there are actually 3 more people there to help your spouse achieve the results (spouse + 3 more = 4 processors).

Hmm..  Nuts.  An agent for the other three people (the OS) takes your detailed A to Z one person plan and tears off individual pieces of it and hands each person 1 store to go to, directing them to come back to him when they are done to receive their next task.  1 person ends up going to 3 stores, 2 people go to 2 stores and the last person only went to 1 store.

The final results?  Even with these inefficiencies, more is still less - time that is.  The job is finished in 1/2 the time you originally expected because of the extra help. Why not 1/4 the time since you had 4 times the number of people?  Easy - the inefficiencies of not knowing all the facts before you made the plan.  A lot of time was “wasted” in extra round trips for each person to receive their subsequent instructions.

The Octopiler

Now you are the Octopiler, the task is still your source code, your spouse is still the CPU and the goal is still standing at home with your 16 items as quickly as possible.

But, this time you know that it won’t just be your spouse going on the trip.  You aren’t exactly sure how many people will be there, but you do know that there will be more than 1.  Instead of mapping out the procedural process (go to store 1 then store 2, etc.), you instead figure out all of the operations that can be done in parallel with each other - meaning that it is completely possible for multiple people to be going to store 1 and store 2 at the same time - that can be done in parallel.  But it is impossible for efficiency to have people going to store 1 and be buying the items from store 1 at the same time - that needs to be done 1 step after the other.

So, once you have figured out the parallel nature of the tasks, you then figure out the relationships that exist between these parallel tasks, taking into account their relative distances from each other, the multiple pee breaks and lunches, traffic patterns, etc.  You then make a little chart that outlines optimized plans for X number of people.  When you find out how many people there will be, all you have to do is look up the plan for that specific number.

So, with your planning done, you walk outside and find out that 3 other people will be working with your spouse.  You hand them each their portion of the 4 person optimized plan while the agent just looks on and nods - the 4 people zoom off to do their work.  The 4 person optimized plan calls for 2 people of the people to each go to 3 stores and for the other 2 to only go to one store.  Since you had all the facts up front, you provided the most efficient plan to accomplish your specific task for the specific number of resources you had at your disposal.

The results? The task is completed in 1/4 of the time allotted for your spouse alone and is also done in 1/2 the time taken by the ”regular” compiler plan.  Why? Because you had an exact plan that was optimized for the specific number of resources for the specific task to be performed.

—–

Now, that is an extreme oversimplification and I even fudged some of the real workings of the two systems to better cram them into my silly analogy.  But, I’m sure you get the point.

You can see how the Octopiler is much different than what currently exists today. It needs to be able to take high-level source code that outlines a unified memory model sequential program and output optimized binaries for a massive, heterogeneous multiprocessor system-on-a-chip.  In fact, this task is so different from what exists today, that it prompted the Ars Technica folks to say this:

This isn’t just a tall order, or even a doctoral dissertation. It’s a generation’s worth of doctoral research. Meanwhile, the PS3 is due out in 2006.

I would say, “One long, expensive step for the PS3; One giant leap for mankind…”

And, that’s why I’m not a full time journalist, and the Ars guys are.

A fun, lenghty game that seems at times impossible, yet easy all at the same time.

KOH is fun, don’t get me wrong, but the difficulty levels seem a bit flawed to me.

You start out picking from any number of different countries in a few different time periods - the country you choose dictates your starting position on the map. Pick poorly, and you’ll regret it the entire game.

You can pick a nation near the edge of the map and not have to worry about having 2 fronts to be attacked, or you can get in the middle of it all, and not have to worry about being cut off by a stronger neighbor. It all depends upon how you want to play.

From here, it is the typical strategy game, with the twist of being able to actually fight each battle your armies get into. If you LOVE that kind of RTS kind of interaction, KOH will seem a bit “lacking” here compared to games like TotalWAR: ROME.

The real game is about the map, troop placements and your royal court. The court is where you will spend a lot time mentoring your captains to influence your empire. You can simply hire a captain (in several different disciplines, like building, martial, spy, etc.) or you can train any adult males in your royal house. But, beware - if you use your King too much on assignment, he won’t be home makin’ babies with the queen, so you may have a schism in your house if your King dies with no adult heir.

On the map, you take of specific territories, each centered around a town. There are surrounding buildings of the town that can be ransaked for resources in an invasion situation. Doing this also draws troops out of the better defended towns, which may be a veritable fortress.

As your martial captains gain levels, you pick special talents for them. These talents make all the difference in the world for the game. A well trained captain will almost never loose against another captain of the same or lesser level - and there is the Achilles heel of the game.
By the time you get a well groomed army (and believe me, it DOES take some time), the game becomes a bit easy. You almost never jump down into the 3D fights anymore - a) because later in the game there are MANY of them going on and b) you’ll do a much worse job than your well trained captain would if left to his business.

There are many other aspects of the game that are fun factors to deal with - like religion (catholic, orthodox, muslim, pagan, etc), famous rebels, spies and civilization advantages that all make the overall task of taking over the world as multifaceted as it should be.

Gameplay Experience:

In one game, I played for about 30 hours building my empire until it was obvious I was going to win - unfortunately, that was when 1/3 of the map was STILL not my territory. But, I hadn’t lost a battle in 2 hours. The rest would be a PLODDING process. Not much fun there - so I started over on a different difficulty level.

And there in lies my complaint with this game - on more difficult levels, the beginning is WAAY too difficult. Oh, you can do it, but it really isn’t much fun. And, on the levels where the beginning is fun to play, the end is just too easy.

Overall though, I did get over 60 hours of enjoyment out of this game.

Bottom Line:

A fun game that can go on forever if you want it to. Great map strategy game that is a bit lite on the 3D RTS simulation for hardcore RTS fans. A bit screwy with difficulty levels.

If you liked DS 1, you’ll like DS2 ’cause its more Dungeon Siege-ier.

DS 2 is just like an update to DS 1, with a few improvements - pets, character powers, etc. Read the any other review, you’ll see what I mean.

I’ll just jump to a bottom line with my “review”:

If you like collecting loot, and finding that 1 piece of equipment that tricks out yer character, etc then you will love this game. There are so many pieces and unique sets, etc. that your head will spin about do you want this one or that one. Gold is basically useless in this game - except at the beginning for buying potions. But half way through the game, you’ll have more of it than you know what to do with - because the items in the shops are WEAK compared to what you find stuffed up some zombies rear.

Voice acting is horrible - what is up with Lothar the half-giant!???

Combat is fun, though your characters usually just kick-tush regardless of how many baddies are thrown at you. Usually 1 or 2 memebers of your team will be the ones to do most of the dieing - usually your mages. Whole swarms of mosters will single them out. Just make sure one of your tanks has a resurrect spell.
This game is fun and makes some marked improvements over the first or LOA. If you liked those, which I did, then you’ll like DS 2. It’s Dungeon Siege-ier!
Only thing I miss from the earlier games is “force cast”, when you could cast projectile spells wherever you wanted, allowing things like plasma balls to bounce around corners, etc. I miss that…

Short and sweet, this is a great game, with a few minor, but persistant flaws.

Time Played: ~45 hours
Platform: PC
Control: Keyboard + Mouse

Any Starfleet hound will tell you that this is probably the best Star Trek game that has been made to date.

The game as a whole is quite a lot of fun - in fact, I finished all 3 campaigns in 3 days, much to the chagrin of my sleeping habits.

Its a typical space SIM where you start out with a small ship and puny weapons and get brought through progressively harder missions, winning Prestige points that will buy you larger vessels and weapons with more punch. There are 3 campaigns - Klingon, Romulan and Federation, to be done in that order to follow a chronological story. The story line is quite good, and Patrick Stewart’s voice talent adds a lot of class to the Federation roles.

The game also has “conquest” mode, where you are basically just supposed to take over the galaxy - I haven’t played with that much, but it just seems to be more open ended action of the same ilk as the campaign. That is probably a good and bad thing - good because it allows you the freedom to fix and re-supply your ship when you want, and bad because it can potentially get monotonous.

You can also play as the Borg in conquest mode.

Now for a few flaws -

Combat can be quite fun, or really frustrating, depending upon the situation. Sometimes it feels like a Ballet of Hippos with these ships just endlessly circling each other, trying to get in the next shot. Other times there is so much going on, you really feel that it is pushing your limits of tactical awareness. So, flaw 1 is potentially monotonous combat situations where you just pick away at each other until one of you dies.

Flaw 2 - the map mode is horribly unintuitive and sometimes quite buggy.

Flaw 3 - actually flying the ship can really be a pain in the tush. Basically you click with the mouse on the 3D window indicating the direction that you would like to turn in. The ship then plots a set turn and executes until that point, with a clock style thermometer reading to let you know how much further you have to turn to meet you last command heading.

I haven’t found a way to tell it to just KEEP turning in that direction. There is a “Set Course to Orbit Target” mode, but that doesn’t work very well i my experience. I have to see if it can be done with a joystick, but I don’t think so. In fact, using the ships systems probably precludes that, because you do have to go back and forth a bit with the mouse to do things like beam assault teams, etc.

Conclusion:Anyway, despite a few flaws that bugged be me the whole time, this is an awesome game, and one that I’ll play for quite some time from now. Its an oldie that requires some looking on EBay, etc, but it is more than worth it.

If you like the Star Trek Universe and space SIMs in general, you’ll find this to be a lot of fun.

Closest Games for Comparison: Master of Orion II (3 sucked!), or Freelancer, sans the merchant aspect.