C++ is Not a Scripting Language

Ok, listen up you fuckers: one of the problems with programming and programmers is that a lot of the developers who are really good at coding are not so good at explaining their ideas to others. Being the egoists that programmers are, instead of realising that we don't grasp inter-human communication so well, we tend to think instead that our audience is just too slow to grasp our brilliant ideas. But I digress. What I am trying to say is that when you hack on code in a procedural, scriptish way, it's hard to avoid developing certain conventions that you have to enforce yourself. And probably others whom you work with will have different preferences in the kinds of conventions that they would choose to follow, and it results in big arguments with lots of hand-waving and raised voices. Don't pretend like you don't know exactly what I'm talking about.

C++ is not a well designed programming language, and it does not have an even remotely elegant approach to the whole object-oriented bag, but it does allow for encapsulation, and straight-forward class inheritance is possible. Just because many features of C++ are totally archaic doesn't mean that you have to write archaic C++ code--it is possible to write reasonable object-oriented C++ code just as it is possible to write Objective C. Now here's a trick that all programmers know about, and most programmers are constantly forgetting: if you write your code in a well encapsulated manner, you can make it self-enforcing to the point where your co-workers don't need to argue with you about it. That really is the whole point of encapsulation, and even object-oriented code at all. Otherwise there'd never have been a need to progress beyond the world of C.

So the next time you get in a big argument with another programmer over whether or not such-and-such a way of coding is reasonable, consider whether or not you could have avoided that nasty confrontation if you'd spent more time encapsulating your code and generalizing it to the point where others can use it without worrying about how it works under the hood. It's not a cure-all solution, but you may be surprised at how effective it can be.

Master of Orion 2

When I was listing those ten wargames that I recommend earlier, I totally forgot about Master of Orion 2: Battle at Antares (PC, $10.)  That definitely deserves to be somewhere in the top 10, so I guess Warlords IV is out.

What is it with wargame sequels sucking these days?  Warlords III was a masterpiece, and Warlords IV is pretty much a sham.  Similarly, MoO2 had a huge fan following, and MoO3 has been universally rejected by those same fans.  Are PC game makers getting stupider over time, or what?  Maybe the quality of games, in terms of gameplay, just isn't what it used to be overall.

A Bit of Election Madness

http://atomfilms.shockwave.com/contentPlay/shockwave.jsp?id=this_land&preplay=1&ratingBar=off

Front Mission 4

Fritzkrieg was kind enough to lend me his demo sampler disc for the new Square-Enix strategy wargame "Front Mission 4" for PS2. Fritzkrieg mentioned being disappointed by several artistic aspects of the game, and while I certainly understand his complaints, those same issues barely registered with me. I guess that between titles like Warlords IV and Korsun Pocket, I'm accustomed to dealing with far, far worse in terms of the "look and feel" of strategy wargames. By comparison, FM4 has a lot going for it.

Overall, I was impressed by the game design of FM4. The combat system is relatively simple and emphasizes variety, which I enjoy. One possible gripe--hard to tell from the demo--is that the game may lack the kind of hardcore challenge factor that grognards crave. Korsun Pocket has definitely raised the bar for me in this regard; in terms of "strategic challenge," even strong console titles like Disgaea and Advance Wars hardly even compare. But enough of that, since FM4 is a console wargame after all. The important thing is that it is addictive (check), visually appealing (check), and has enough of a storyline to motivate the audience (check).

It's a little hard to guage the storyline from the demo, but there was a significant amount there. The story arc involving the army regulars who stumble upon the secret money cache of a corrupt Venezualian dictator and decide to make a break for it was particularly appealing--I was amused, and I genuniely want to see more of it. That's much more than I can say for Advance Wars, Final Fantasy Tactics Advance, or Fire Emblem. Even La Pucelle Tactics is a little light on the storyline (better than the aforementioned GBA games, though): it progresses like a happy-go-lucky manga, which is cool, but also lacking in dramatic punch. (As for Korsun Pocket, well, fuck--how can you top a historical re-enactment of a major World War II battle?)

Overall, I've pretty much made up my mind to get Front Mission 4. I've also decided to wait at least a month, maybe two, which has more to do with the volume of new games that I already have than with the strength of FM4 itself. Last I checked, FM4 is going for $70, and while I don't expect it to drop suddenly in price, waiting for a couple of months won't make it any more expensive. So far as I'm able to tell, FM4 is worth the $70 price tag anyway--it would be a steal at $40. My opinion might change, though, once I've got the full version in my hands and have logged some serious time with it.

To summarize, I'm recommending the following turn-based strategy wargames lately:

1. Korsun Pocket - PC, $40
2. Disgaea - PS2, $60
3. Front Mission 4 - PS2, $70
4. Advance Wars 2 - GBA, $45
5. La Pucelle Tactics - PS2, $60
6. Final Fantasy Tactics - PSX, $25
7. Warlords III - PC, $10
8. Final Fantasy Tactics Advance - GBA, $45
9. Fire Emblem - GBA, $45
10. Warlords IV - PC, $10

2004 Asian Moustache Olympics

http://www.livejournal.com/community/asianlipservice/

MAtA Award: Stephen Notley

This one goes out to the author of Bob the Angry Flower (www.angryflower.com), one Stephen Notley. Although his comic strip has hit low points, it remains an honest and thought-provoking piece of work overall, and it is well worthy of this small measure of attention.

Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time

So I managed to pick up Prince of Persia for the PS2 for only $20 brand-new last week. Ashley and I finished it in short order. I'm left with an overall pleasant impression of the game, but that doesn't mean that the game is merely "okay." It's really an absolute gem of a game with a couple of blemishes that, unfortunately, take away from the overall beauty of the experience.

What's good: The story, which has our hero (a Persian Prince, go figure) trying to undo a curse that he's unwittingly unleashed upon his people, is good fun and is well-presented. The two main protagonists have a great chemistry together and are dynamic, in that they actually develop in ways that are noticable during the actual gameplay. Their banter is hilarious and it adds a lot of colour to the game. You really grow to like the main character a lot. The graphics are nothing short of jaw-dropping, with clever environments and character designs. The animation is crisp and beautiful (outstanding work!), and the controls are fluid and for the most part very intuitive. The music works well, but varies from adequete to awesome. The exploration aspects of the game - which have you running along walls, jumping over pits, swinging from ropes, pulling switches, etc. - are fun and challenging, without being too frustrating (or too complicated). The swordfighting is really fun and dynamic, and it's deep enough to keep you on your toes - learning more effecient strategies through trial and error. The use of the Dagger of Time - which enables you to rewind time to undo mistakes, such as falling crotch-first onto a bed of razors or getting a machete to the face, also works well in combat - allowing you to do cool stuff like freeze enemies in time, turn them to dust, or slow them down.

What's bad: The combat can drag on a bit long when the enemies just keep coming and coming, and sometimes 10-on-1 seems just a bit unfair, especially when the enemies only need a few hits to screw you over. The end boss (and ending) are shockingly underwhelming, considering the high quality and intensity of the rest of the game. As with most 3D games, the camera is an issue, but only a couple of times were the issues outright aggrivating. It's a bit short, too.

So, all in all, I'd heartily reccomend it!

Putting a price tag on Canadian lives

A friend of mine posted an interesting rant on his blog regarding the trial of the American pilot who intentionally bombed our soldiers by accident.

Check it out:
http://members.shaw.ca/lillebuen/
(It's the July 6 entry)

So Far, So Good...

Whew... I've finished Mega Man 2 and am part-way through Mega Man. My gaming skills feel like they're coming back with a vengeance... it's almost like I'd forgotten what it is to really care about a video game. 'Course, I did have a bit of that feeling with Day of Defeat recently, and a few others. I'm definitely feeling the Mega Man rush, at any rate--and it's good. Damned good.

My Gaming Skills... Ineffective!

Whew, I just picked up the Mega Man Anniversary Collection for PS2, and Mega Man 2 kicked my ass. I grew up on that game, so what gives? Am I so out of shape? Have my gaming skills really gone that much to pot? No wonder I'm doing so badly at Metal Gear Solid: Twin Snakes, Ikaruga, and Mario Golf--just to name a few. I seriously need to log some time with the blue bomber to revive my gaming skills from the candy-assed shape that years of RPG dedication has left them in. Good grief, man, pull yourself together!