Thursday, November 21, 2013

Why pay to play online games suck (and other subscription based cloud software)

     This post will be a bit different than normal. Usually I talk about politics but today I'm going to be talking about video games. Video games is another big interest of mine; I started playing them in 1st grade. They're a good stress reliever because it allows someone to completely detach themselves from this fucked up world for just a little bit, and focus on something fun.
      The traditional way of selling and playing video games has been like buying 99% of all other products: you pay for it upfront, a one time deal, and then it is yours forever. This is the way it has been ever since video games were able to be sold to customers and they could take it home. This happened from the 1980's to about the mid 2000's. That's when things started to change, slowly at first, but now, this new way of selling video games is becoming more and more prevalent, and analysts say that eventually, all video games will be sold in the way I'm about to describe. This is rather annoying for me, because this new way completely fucking sucks.
      This new way is that you pay per month to log onto a company's server online to play a game. You no longer have a physical copy of the game. You just have a subscription, a log-in that you use. This sucks for us, the customers, for a number of reasons.
  1. The cost of subscription based software will rapidly become more expensive than buying a physical copy, starting in just the first few months of owning the software. For example, let's say I bought Hellgate London in 2008 for $50. That's all it would cost me to play that game till the day I die. Now, let's look at the second example, where I would pay $10 a month to play Hellgate London online, through the company's servers. In just half a year, it would be more expensive for me to subscribe to that game versus if I had paid a one time price to have a physical copy of it. Fast forward to November of 2013. In the first example, guess how much money I've spent on Hellgate London? That's right, still $50. But how much would I have paid in the second example? A whooping $900.  For one fucking game. That is absolutely mind-boggling how expensive it would be, in addition to how mind-boggling it is that band-wagoning swag fags think this subscription based software is cool and hip and so much better than the "old way."
  2. If you want to avoid paying that astronomical amount as described above, you have to constantly subscribe and un-subscribe to all your video games, based on the ones you're only currently playing at the moment. Let's say you only play 2 video games at a time. So you subscribe to those two for a while, then once you beat the game or tired of playing it, you have to unsubscribe to those 2 games, (to avoid being charged monthly for a game you don't even play), and then subscribe to 2 new video games. What if one of your friends comes over and wants to play a game you're not currently subscribing to? "Oh sorry man, can't play that one, I'm not subscribing to it at the moment."
  3. If your internet goes out, bam, there goes your game. This is critical for people with shitty internet, like me. (Xfinity is ripping my landlord off like a motherfucker. She's paying for 55 mbps and I'm sitting on the fucking computer and can clearly see I'm only getting 5 mbps). Meanwhile, I'm having a blast fighting sand monsters in Prince of Persia, while you're sitting on your ass, not being able to play any of your games, because your internet went out. 
  4. If the company goes under and gets rid of it's servers, then bam, there goes your game. I play a few games, like Hellgate London and Titan Quest, whose companies who made them no longer exist because they went out of business. Guess what, I'm still having a blast playing those games. But if you subscribed to one of these games online, then you lost your game. Sucks for you.       
 
     And this just doesn't go for video games, it applies to other online subscription software that lets you access it in the cloud, such as Microsoft Office 365. Let's say you and 3 other friends decide to get Microsoft 365 for the 4 years you guys are going to be in college. That's $100 per person, if you get the best plan geared towards students. (Some other plans for students are $130 per person, and they only allow you to have Office 365 on one device.)
      But let's say you and your 3 friends are smart and get the actual CD for Microsoft Office 2013. Guess how much that costs each of you? $13.75. I know critics of this idea will say "But the box software of Office 2013 will only let you put it on one computer!" To which I reply "Then install it without internet access and never register it. That way, Microsoft will never know how many times you've installed it!" It's a simple and easy way to save money. My siblings and I did this with Office 2010. We've had it installed on 5 different computers, all for way less than if we did Microsoft 365.
     In conclusion, this is very troubling for gamers like me, because if all video games start to be sold like this, then I'll simply not buy anymore new video games, and I'll just continue to play old video games. I refuse to go through all that BS just to have a little fun. If I spend my hard earned money to buy a game, then I better damn as well be able to play it when I want, how I want, and install it on as many systems as I want to. Combine this problem with the fact that the quality of storyline, gameplay, and the music of video games on a whole has substantially gotten pathetically worse since about 2008, (Skyrim is the one exception, and the only game since 2008 that I'd consider to be one of my favorite games), and we could possibly have the death of the video game industry as we know it.        

Thursday, November 14, 2013

Woman is murdered for asking for help after a car crash

A 19 year old woman, Renisha McBride, was in a car crash with a parked vehicle. A family who was there at the time of the crash offered to help her, because she appeared confused and was bleeding. She refused help, and instead walked a mile to another house, asking for help. The homeowner said he "feared for his life" and shot McBride in the face with a shotgun, killing her.

Renisha McBride
Full story: http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20131111/METRO01/311110095/Autopsy-Detroit-woman-19-shot-face-not-close-range?

Okay, this case is bizarre. There are many things that do not make sense and need answering. The fact that this happened on November 2nd and we still have very few facts about this case is very troubling. As the report in the link says, this story has more questions than answers, specifically:

  1. Why did McBride refuse help at the scene of the accident and not wait for police and an ambulance?
  2. Why did McBride walk a mile to ask for help, when help was already offered to her and refused?
  3. Why did the homeowner shoot McBride in the face for simply walking up to his door and asking for help?
The way I see it, one of two things happened. But the fact remains is that none of us, myself included, really knows what actually happened. All we can do is conjecture based on the facts we already know. So here are the two scenarios:

  1. McBride was wacked out on something, either illegal drugs or using prescription drugs that are used to treat mental health problems but end up making mental health problems worse in a person, (that's a whole different topic). That would explain why she appeared "confused" to witnesses, refused help, refused to stay and wait for police and an ambulance, (which were on their way), and walked a mile to another house. Police report said she actually walked off for a while a first time after initially being in the crash, returned to the scene of the accident, and then, upon hearing the police were coming, walked off a second time. All of that is irrational behavior and one of them is a crime, (leaving the scene of an accident). She didn't want the cops finding out that she was wacked out on something, so she left. I do not believe that simply saying this is a possibility is an insult to McBride or her family. It is a logical theory based on the facts we already know. But again, do I know if this is actually the case or not? Nope, not by a long shot. 
  2. McBride was racially profiled by a white man brainwashed by our pathetic mainstream media, brainwashed into thinking that all black people are criminals so logically the only reason why a black person would be at his house at 3:40 a.m. would be to rob him. So, he did what the brainwashing media tells him to do: shoot. So he did. 
But it's possible that both happened. One does not exclude the other. Just because McBride might've been wacked out on something does not mean that the homeowner could or couldn't racially profile her. This might've been just a freak incident. But, whatever happened, it did show two important things that are the lesson of this week's post:
  • Abuse of drugs while driving is bad, (mmkay). Recreational drug use in private property is not a problem. It's when people abuse it that it becomes a problem. If McBride was on something, it might've had a role on why she did all the irrational and bizarre things that she did. 
  • When someone knocks on your door, even at night, find out who it is and properly identify it he/she is a threat before shooting. The homeowner broke 2 fundamental rules of proper gun use. 1. Always identify your target before shooting. 2. Do not put your finger on the trigger until you are ready to shoot. 
The homeowner said that the discharge of his shotgun was an "accident." There is no accidental discharges of firearms, only neglectful discharges. And, what are the odds that this neglectful discharge happened to be pointed right at McBride's face? What a coincidence, right?!
The homeowner thought McBride was a threat. She was not a threat. Therefore, the homeowner did not properly identify his target. His finger had to be on the trigger for the gun to go off, yet he said it was accident, meaning he did not want to shoot. So his finger was on the trigger when he was not ready to shoot.

A sad and bizarre case. Keep your eye out for developments in this story. Maybe the authorities will figure out what the hell happened and why it happened.