You might not like what you're about to read. Consider yourself warned.
For the past month, I've been desperately trying to get Morrowind's recording to work again. It's not a codec issue or anything, it's just that what allows me to play Morrowind in my Mac environment is conflicting with my recording software. I can play and record Mac games just fine but Morrowind footage ends up being black.
I guess the clue was that Morrowind was running surprisingly smooth until I start recording - which turns into a hideous slideshow... that records black. So whatever made Morrowind run better on my Mac is making recording essentially impossible.
You know the saying "Don't fix what ain't broke"? Well it partially applies in this situation as I updated a few softwares. The thing is, I don't know which software is the culprit. You see, I updated to Mac OS X Lion the moment it was available, I then updated ScreenFlow which allows me to record my videos so that it could run on the new OS and I did the same thing with Crossover Games (which makes Morrowind-on-Mac possible). So, basically, every software that made the Morrowind LP possible was updated and something in the mix is failing to work harmoniously.
You might be thinking "why don't you simply revert them back?" well, that's because the saying only PARTIALLY applies? My computer WAS broken and desperately needed the update(s) for many aspects of my life; be it work, casual computing or even gaming.
... it just fails for Morrowind or, more specifically, it fails for the Lets Play since the game runs like a dream when I'm not recording.
What's putting even more fuel to the problem is the issues I've been getting with my Youtube channel lately. Granted, I haven't been very frequent with my uploads but I had my reasons. It's not like I don't WANT to play Morrowind or Oblivion, it's just that I COULDN'T. Well, nothing stops me from uploading some Oblivion videos other than the fact that Morrowind's LP would remain broken.
These days, I'm either exhausted from work or troubleshooting my LPs or, worse yet, trying to moderate my channel. It probably has been just as frustrating for me as it has been for you. I know how frustrating it is to not have your show available (a show that you invested time in).
Something needs to be done on all fronts or else Morrowind's LP is canned. On the first front (and this is a personal thing), I need to try and do less stuff each day. If I do get home by 7pm, I should take an hour to eat and go to bed at 10pm at the latest and maybe then I'll have the energy to play Morrowind once or twice a week or god forbid every day like I want to. Because, right now, I'm less productive by trying to stay up all night to do productive stuff... a vicious circle that CAN be broken. So I'll try to work on that.
The second issue is probably the most complicated one to tackle as it is technical in nature. My setup HAS to change somehow because this roller-coaster of a technical mess isn't working for me. The first step will be to go back to my original Parallels Desktop setup, the end result is slower than Crossover Games but it causes less issues with recording. The reason why I haven't done that yet is simply because my Parallels Desktop client needs to be updated as well... or else you would've seen Morrowind videos already. Unlike the others, this update is expensive. It's expensive because what I get out of it isn't worth the money as I don't use Windows on my laptop to work anymore... and all my games work on Crossover Games if they're not already native to OS X. Not to mention that there's no guarantee that it would work either.
So why not just Bootcamp and go directly in Windows? Ever since I started my Oblivion LP, I've been thinking it. Why I haven't done so already is simple: because I'm stubborn. The picture-in-picture that I'm known for has to stay. I know other LPers managed to get a webcam setup in Windows, I just haven't figured it out yet. This is probably the best solution as it'll also help my future Skyrim LP. If I can get it to work for Morrowind, it should work for Skyrim as well. I need something that won't require me to sync 4 tracks at every session.
As for my Youtube channel, I have done a lot of thinking and the answer is unfortunate but simple: I'll just have every comment go through the validation process. More work for me, you say? Maybe. The way I see it, it'll just take a lot of time before I get to approve your comment(s). There is the ban hammer to consider and I am willing to wield it with brutality but, since I have ZERO patience with that sort of thing, I might end up banning my entire audience.
So what am I doing? I don't know. I suppose I can start uploading Oblivion more regularly for a bit and then work on fixing Morrowind every once in a while. That's what I did last time...
Sunday 28 August 2011
Sunday 14 August 2011
On Anticipations
I think it's obvious that I'm a gamer. Those categorized as such will often succumb to a very maddening shortcoming: impatience. Impatience has many ways of manifesting especially in gaming. While most end up annoying the heck out of those around you, there is at least one that really only affects oneself.
Waiting for a game to come out in stores is painfully annoying. I had to think for a while to see if "painfully" was the right choice of words to describe it. What is the symptom of anticipation? A constant reminder that one has the time to play said game despite being unavailable and, at the same time, one doesn't feel like playing anything else during the wait. It's painful because the time wasted thinking about it or reading about it could've been spent on either playing another game or doing something else (and possibly more productive) and the person in question is AWARE OF IT. It's disrupting and I think we've all been there.
I consider myself lucky because that feeling is very new to me. When growing up, I played the games that were available to me and those games were rarely new. In fact, I don't recall receiving video games as presents or going to a store to see rows of games on the shelves. All I know is that I had games and I played them. They were just there. It wasn't until I was in my teens that I was introduced to the concept of going to a store to get games.
Marathon and Warcraft comes to mind; and then I discovered sequels. The thing is, I was so "late in the game" (get it?) that I didn't have to wait for the sequels to come out. They had already come out one or two years prior.
A very good example of this is Diablo. After playing the game for two years, I happen to come across Diablo II in stores. So I bought it and started to discuss the awesomeness of the game to my new friends in college who, to my surprise, informed me of Lord of Destruction (Diablo II's expansion pack). I was still playing through Act 1 at that time and I already had new features and more content. While I secretly hoped for a Diablo 3, it never was a game that I was anticipating until Blizzard Entertainment announced it back in 2008.
The Elder Scrolls is a mystery to me because it was one of those games that people always told me about back when Morrowind was the new thing in RPGs but I just shrugged it off thinking I wouldn't be interested. Can you blame me? I had my Diablos; TWO of them! Then World of Warcraft showed up. While I knew WoW was coming, it didn't think I'd be willing to pay a monthly fee so I didn't wait for it (in fact I was playing Neverwinter Nights in online persistent realms). When I decided to play WoW (after trying the beta), the game was out.
I bought Oblivion on launch day (in 2006) including a DVD player for an old PC that was donated to me by a friend. That was the biggest video game related purchase I've ever done even to this day... It's also my first PC game purchase. That's the real big mystery for me. How does a Mac user just go out and buy not only a PC game (and a single-player game at that; I'm a multi-player guy), but PC hardware for a machine that was barely making the minimum requirements to play said game... On launch day? The E3 demo did it. It had completely sold me on the concept and while the video looked too good to be true, I figured that if I could experience a fraction of what I saw in the demo, I'd be satisfied.
Since then I've bought GuildWars, Dungeon Siege II-III (the original being available on the mac) and Magicka. And now I find myself "caught up" and for the first time in my life, I'm eagerly waiting for my games to come out in stores. It's a strange feeling and I laugh every time I think about it. What's stranger still is the shift of priorities in my games. I find myself anticipating Skyrim much more than Diablo III (a game I've been wanting to play for 10 years now). It's almost embarrassing, actually, but it really illustrates the quality and magic of The Elder Scrolls. Maybe it's because I don't really notice the wait for Diablo III as much anymore......
Not only that, I've been writing these blogs on the go with my iPad 2. I've had it since it came out and, like The Elder Scrolls, it has also shifted my habits. Other than doing my 3D work and record Let's Play videos, I don't really use my laptop anymore. The iPad completely took over my lifestyle. As a Mac user, that sort of shift is not uncommon. But the strange part is that I'm now considering buying a PC to play Skyrim. I hate the Windows platform with a passion. I sound like a grumpy old guy at work when I have to use my PC machine (I also work with a Mac).
Skyrim is a "killer app" for a platform I despise. The idea would be to "live" with my iPad and play a select few games on the PC. The thought of buying a console has crossed my mind. They're decently priced, having no mods never bothered me and it would do the things I'd want it to do save for the awkward controllers. Perhaps I could even get into the Halo games if I got an Xbox. I've been wanting to try out firefight for a while now... Then again, I'd be missing out on GuildWars 2. Its funny to consider that, despite being very good, the other games don't have the same effect as The Elder Scrolls.
Regardless, The Elder Scrolls might be my biggest video game related purchase once more and I know it'll be worth every penny.
Here's my list of anticipated games:
- Skyrim.
- Diablo 3.
- GuildWars 2.
Now I have to find the time to play them all as they're all coming out around the same time-frame.
Waiting for a game to come out in stores is painfully annoying. I had to think for a while to see if "painfully" was the right choice of words to describe it. What is the symptom of anticipation? A constant reminder that one has the time to play said game despite being unavailable and, at the same time, one doesn't feel like playing anything else during the wait. It's painful because the time wasted thinking about it or reading about it could've been spent on either playing another game or doing something else (and possibly more productive) and the person in question is AWARE OF IT. It's disrupting and I think we've all been there.
I consider myself lucky because that feeling is very new to me. When growing up, I played the games that were available to me and those games were rarely new. In fact, I don't recall receiving video games as presents or going to a store to see rows of games on the shelves. All I know is that I had games and I played them. They were just there. It wasn't until I was in my teens that I was introduced to the concept of going to a store to get games.
Marathon and Warcraft comes to mind; and then I discovered sequels. The thing is, I was so "late in the game" (get it?) that I didn't have to wait for the sequels to come out. They had already come out one or two years prior.
A very good example of this is Diablo. After playing the game for two years, I happen to come across Diablo II in stores. So I bought it and started to discuss the awesomeness of the game to my new friends in college who, to my surprise, informed me of Lord of Destruction (Diablo II's expansion pack). I was still playing through Act 1 at that time and I already had new features and more content. While I secretly hoped for a Diablo 3, it never was a game that I was anticipating until Blizzard Entertainment announced it back in 2008.
The Elder Scrolls is a mystery to me because it was one of those games that people always told me about back when Morrowind was the new thing in RPGs but I just shrugged it off thinking I wouldn't be interested. Can you blame me? I had my Diablos; TWO of them! Then World of Warcraft showed up. While I knew WoW was coming, it didn't think I'd be willing to pay a monthly fee so I didn't wait for it (in fact I was playing Neverwinter Nights in online persistent realms). When I decided to play WoW (after trying the beta), the game was out.
I bought Oblivion on launch day (in 2006) including a DVD player for an old PC that was donated to me by a friend. That was the biggest video game related purchase I've ever done even to this day... It's also my first PC game purchase. That's the real big mystery for me. How does a Mac user just go out and buy not only a PC game (and a single-player game at that; I'm a multi-player guy), but PC hardware for a machine that was barely making the minimum requirements to play said game... On launch day? The E3 demo did it. It had completely sold me on the concept and while the video looked too good to be true, I figured that if I could experience a fraction of what I saw in the demo, I'd be satisfied.
Since then I've bought GuildWars, Dungeon Siege II-III (the original being available on the mac) and Magicka. And now I find myself "caught up" and for the first time in my life, I'm eagerly waiting for my games to come out in stores. It's a strange feeling and I laugh every time I think about it. What's stranger still is the shift of priorities in my games. I find myself anticipating Skyrim much more than Diablo III (a game I've been wanting to play for 10 years now). It's almost embarrassing, actually, but it really illustrates the quality and magic of The Elder Scrolls. Maybe it's because I don't really notice the wait for Diablo III as much anymore......
Not only that, I've been writing these blogs on the go with my iPad 2. I've had it since it came out and, like The Elder Scrolls, it has also shifted my habits. Other than doing my 3D work and record Let's Play videos, I don't really use my laptop anymore. The iPad completely took over my lifestyle. As a Mac user, that sort of shift is not uncommon. But the strange part is that I'm now considering buying a PC to play Skyrim. I hate the Windows platform with a passion. I sound like a grumpy old guy at work when I have to use my PC machine (I also work with a Mac).
Skyrim is a "killer app" for a platform I despise. The idea would be to "live" with my iPad and play a select few games on the PC. The thought of buying a console has crossed my mind. They're decently priced, having no mods never bothered me and it would do the things I'd want it to do save for the awkward controllers. Perhaps I could even get into the Halo games if I got an Xbox. I've been wanting to try out firefight for a while now... Then again, I'd be missing out on GuildWars 2. Its funny to consider that, despite being very good, the other games don't have the same effect as The Elder Scrolls.
Regardless, The Elder Scrolls might be my biggest video game related purchase once more and I know it'll be worth every penny.
Here's my list of anticipated games:
- Skyrim.
- Diablo 3.
- GuildWars 2.
Now I have to find the time to play them all as they're all coming out around the same time-frame.
Wednesday 10 August 2011
Diablo 3 going to hell?
To put it bluntly, Blizzard Entertainment has announced recently that Diablo 3 will require a constant connection to the Battle.net servers in order to play. As disappointed as I am by that fact, I had to take some time to think about it.
Would I really play in single-player? No. That's not my thing. I'm a Battle.net guy after all. So why am I bothered by lack of single-player, or even LAN for that matter?
The answer is in two parts:
Firstly, as a consumer, I expect MORE features in the products I buy. Diablo 2 had eight player CO-OP, 5 character classes, a more robust online experience, a personal stash, more variety of item mechanics (gems, weapon sets, tomes, etc), a better presentation and a more polished gameplay (the ability to run). I probably missed a few but that's a lot of improvements over the original.
Now, I'm not suggesting that Diablo 3 won't have it's share of improvements, but it seems that they're taking a few steps back at the same time. You have to stop and think about the reasoning behind their design choices; at least the one they're feeding us. To prevent hackers and cheaters.
Before I talk more about my opinion on this, I have to point out something about this logic. It's a very good one. One might say: "why don't you separate the characters between offline and online? That'll prevent the cheating, right?". It's not about whenever or not a character is online that causes the hacks and cheats, its how the game handles the information that allows these things to exist.
When playing multi-player games, the computers involved have to send each other information. Character location, health, items, attacks, etc. It's all encrypted but it's a heck of a lot easier to decode that when it's happening on an isolated network (read : LAN). Online games have a security advantage because it's all run by the servers... The servers tells your computer what's going on and your computer can't change that.
That's why Starcraft 2 doesn't have LAN support. It's also a bitch to code so no LAN = simpler code. If Starcraft 2 had LAN, hackers would be able to figure out the intricacies of the code and ruin the game for everyone. Anything that's client side can be easily hacked.
But here's the second part: Starcraft 2 is a COMPETITIVE game. Diablo 3 is not. In fact, it's practically exclusively PvM (player vs monster - or PvE for the young folks). So why can't Diablo 3 have an offline mode when Starcraft 2 does? For security reasons? Bullshit! Of the two games, Starcraft is the one that needs the uptight security. It's a game designed to play against people.
"Well," you might say to yourself, "Diablo 3 does have an auction house involving real money. You wouldn't want that to be cracked and abused."
That's true. One might be able to crack the code if the auction house was part of the SINGLE-PLAYER experience... What? Hello? You're going solo and your offline, just make your auction house a server-only deal and your problem is solved. If your playing solo, the last thing on your mind is trading with other players. Sure, you'll be able to do that in Diablo 3 but at what cost? The lack of offline mode? No thanks!
As disappointed as i am, I'm still buying it. Curse you, Blizzard!
Would I really play in single-player? No. That's not my thing. I'm a Battle.net guy after all. So why am I bothered by lack of single-player, or even LAN for that matter?
The answer is in two parts:
Firstly, as a consumer, I expect MORE features in the products I buy. Diablo 2 had eight player CO-OP, 5 character classes, a more robust online experience, a personal stash, more variety of item mechanics (gems, weapon sets, tomes, etc), a better presentation and a more polished gameplay (the ability to run). I probably missed a few but that's a lot of improvements over the original.
Now, I'm not suggesting that Diablo 3 won't have it's share of improvements, but it seems that they're taking a few steps back at the same time. You have to stop and think about the reasoning behind their design choices; at least the one they're feeding us. To prevent hackers and cheaters.
Before I talk more about my opinion on this, I have to point out something about this logic. It's a very good one. One might say: "why don't you separate the characters between offline and online? That'll prevent the cheating, right?". It's not about whenever or not a character is online that causes the hacks and cheats, its how the game handles the information that allows these things to exist.
When playing multi-player games, the computers involved have to send each other information. Character location, health, items, attacks, etc. It's all encrypted but it's a heck of a lot easier to decode that when it's happening on an isolated network (read : LAN). Online games have a security advantage because it's all run by the servers... The servers tells your computer what's going on and your computer can't change that.
That's why Starcraft 2 doesn't have LAN support. It's also a bitch to code so no LAN = simpler code. If Starcraft 2 had LAN, hackers would be able to figure out the intricacies of the code and ruin the game for everyone. Anything that's client side can be easily hacked.
But here's the second part: Starcraft 2 is a COMPETITIVE game. Diablo 3 is not. In fact, it's practically exclusively PvM (player vs monster - or PvE for the young folks). So why can't Diablo 3 have an offline mode when Starcraft 2 does? For security reasons? Bullshit! Of the two games, Starcraft is the one that needs the uptight security. It's a game designed to play against people.
"Well," you might say to yourself, "Diablo 3 does have an auction house involving real money. You wouldn't want that to be cracked and abused."
That's true. One might be able to crack the code if the auction house was part of the SINGLE-PLAYER experience... What? Hello? You're going solo and your offline, just make your auction house a server-only deal and your problem is solved. If your playing solo, the last thing on your mind is trading with other players. Sure, you'll be able to do that in Diablo 3 but at what cost? The lack of offline mode? No thanks!
As disappointed as i am, I'm still buying it. Curse you, Blizzard!
Monday 8 August 2011
See yah starside!
I realize that a lot of people come to me to hear my thoughts about gaming in general. How do I play games? What makes a particular game better than another? What do I do when I'm not playing games? How much time do I spend on a particular game? What do I do for a living? Does gaming affect my social and/or romantic life? etc.
I have my doubts that an average joe would give a crap about what I do or think, but a lot of people have shown genuine interest in my past time. WHY? I not really sure. Perhaps they can associate with me. I like to think it's because I know and truly understand the reasoning behind my opinions... or better yet, I know how to express them. Theoretically speaking, of course. And they, in turn, understand that. Maybe it's a perspective they haven't seen yet or maybe they finally found a like-minded soul and are curious to see how much further that connection goes.
The longer I observe society, the fewer people seem to be capable of sharing opinions and/or ideas. It's not necessarily a bad thing. You're not a bad person for not knowing why you like something. Indecisiveness is a pet-peve of mine, however. It's a double-edged sword really because those that do share their opinions turn out to be tools that really don't have an opinion for themselves or they're merely full of themselves. A least a lot of folks seem that way. I hate those kind of people but who said I wasn't one of them? How do I justify my self-claimed seclusion from that kind of people? I like to believe that I'm not a hypocrite; oblivious to my potential flaw.
Some say I'm cocky. To them, I say: "I'm just confident in what I do. Be ready to put your beliefs in the line or get out of my way." If you can't handle an argument, don't start one. "Prove me wrong and you'll see how humble I am."
I got my hands full making videos already but there's a lot of potential downtime that can be utilized productively (mainly while I'm in the commute). It seems there's so much more than I can share I could almost picture my mind exploding and broadcast my thoughts to everyone as each pieces of my brain reaches them.
I'm not alone, I'm sure. The trick is to reach people individually and not as a group. You know what they say: "A person is smart, but people are stupid."
Is this the next step? A blog? I'm honestly not sure yet. It seems very wishy-washy "hello journal" type of thing to do which is typically not something I do. However, like my Lets Play of Morrowind, it might turn out being something far greater than I imagined. The biggest difference being one medium has a potential audience other than myself. Maybe then I'll be able to answer my question in the 2nd paragraph.
I'll just write and see if I really am an asshole or not.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)