Miracle on Turf

With such a busy news day and an even busier weekend upon us, I thought that another blog post would be appropriate. The veritable flood of news on Friday gives me a fair bit of material to talk about, but there is really only one story that dominated my day: The Game.

The annual grudge-match between Michigan and Ohio State has taken a backseat to other more "important" games this Saturday. Oklahoma-Texas Tech and Penn State-Michigan State might be more fashionable or more loaded with BCS implications, but The Game is always the most interesting game when people least expect it to be.

Michigan has a historically abysmal team at 3-8. Ohio State has a good team that has come up short of expectations at 9-2. In any fair and logical universe, Ohio State wins this game by 20.5 points. Unfortunately, the fair and logical universe is but a distant parallel to the one which we occupy. The best and most memorable games of the series have been won by the underdog. However, the underdog in tomorrow's game has never been so poor. Quite frankly, there are virtually no ways for me to reasonably plot a Michigan victory tomorrow. Michigan can keep the game close, but it would take an epic collapse from Ohio State to push Michigan over the edge.

I dare not make a final score prediction, but I will be surprised if Ohio State covers the spread.



Every year, I am amazed by the emotion that this game brings out. I hate Notre Dame/the Yankees/the Cowboys as much as any other American and Michigan State is always an amusing distraction. Ohio State, though, is in a different league. I maintain a certain degree of respect for Ohio State that Notre Dame could never earn, but at the same time I feel a deep vitriolic loathing of the Buckeyes. I always forget what it feels like a week after and that feeling doesn't return until the Wednesday before the next meeting. I want Michigan to win badly, but this year will require a miracle of 1980 US Olympic Hockey team proportions. I believe in two things: Ohio State sucks and miracles.

Recommended viewing this weekend:

- Michigan-Ohio State game
- NOT the new film Twilight. Honestly, a little bit of me dies every time I see media coverage of squealing high schoolers at theatres across the country, not to mention flashbacks of boy bands in the 90s. Here's a great idea. Instead of going out to see an underage, vampiric, love-drama fest, go to your local library and borrow Bram Stoker's Dracula.
- Detroit-Tampa Bay football game. Feel free to ignore the game and look for me in the crowd, or, rather, amongst the empty seats.

Recommended reading this weekend:

- Aforementioned Bram Stoker's Dracula with conditions
- The National Intelligence Council's Global Trends 2025: A Transformed World

The NIC's latest Global Trends assessment is a fascinating projection of international relations, trade and conflict in 2025. Weighing in at 120 pages, it is by no means "light reading," but it is not overloaded with techno-babble or difficult concepts. You can obtain your own personal pdf here.



GO BLUE!

Under My Skin

This past weekend I went to the movie theatre to see Quantum of Solace, the latest James Bond movie. The movie was exciting and an overall enjoyable experience. It wasn't as good as Casino Royale, but it was definitely better than the last few Pierce Brosnan films. On a quick aside, I find it an interesting coincidence that the director of Casino Royale was the same guy who directed Goldeneye. In my opinion, those two movies are the best Bond films since at least 1980.

Anyway, this post comes to you today in the name of the two worst things about the action sequences in contemporary films: shaky cam and absurdly over-powered punch effects.



The first case is prominently featured in Quantum of Solace. In fact, the opening action sequence makes heavy use of the shaky cam, to its own detriment. The up-close and unstable camera shots fail to provide an adequate view of the setting, which I have actually visited and is quite amazing, and doesn't provide the most exciting and comprehensive view of the action. Furthermore, these shaky cam shots can be nauseating after not too long. Unfortunately, Youtube does not have any clips from the opening chase sequence from Quantum of Solace, so here are some notable chase sequences from Casino Royale and Goldeneye (for those who have seen Quantum of Solace, note the lack of shaky cam).



Some might like the shaky cam action of Quantum of Solace, and I'll admit that it can be effective when used with discretion, but I feel like something is lost when the shaky cam becomes the staple camera shot for action scenes.

"Absurdly over-powered punch effects" is the other element of action sequences that annoys me. I first noticed this particular effect when I saw The Dark Knight this past summer. Again, The Dark Knight was a great movie, and, unlike Quantum of Solace, it surpassed the excellence of its predecessor. Back to the punching, the sound mixing folks for this movie went completely overboard. Since I want to have some diversity in my audio-visual aids, I will use pictures and language to illustrate the problem.

If you were to take an M1 Abrams tank...



Fill the M1 Abrams tank with uncooked meat...



Then take that meaty machine up in an airplane, drop it from 10,000 feet, and record the sound made on impact...



You would get a close approximation of the sound made by a single punch in The Dark Knight!



Perhaps the effect was exacerbated by watching the film in an IMAX theatre, but I know that other movies have mixed their sound effects in a similar fashion.

On a final and somewhat related note, I was really disappointed with the villain in Quantum of Solace. Dominic Greene was a bit of a wimp and his plan was remarkably low key. If writers want to go for the evil businessman as a villain, then they need to write and cast better. I thought that media tycoon Elliot Carver from Tomorrow Never Dies was an interesting character and Jonathan Pryce did a great job playing the part.

For those that do not go see Quantum of Solace, make sure you check out the new trailer for the J.J. Abrams Star Trek movie! A download mirror is linked at the bottom of the first page of comments if you want to save a copy to your computer.

Treading Water

The big news this week is the potential government bail-out of the "Big Three" Detroit car manufacturers (General Motors, Ford, Chrysler). In complete opposition to my blog mantra, I don't think I take a very moderate viewpoint towards this entire debacle. I disagreed with the $700 billion bail-out dealt out for the sinking financial markets, but I will also admit that my understanding of the situation doesn't warrant me adding my voice to the din. When it comes to the Detroit automakers, I can understand the situation from living in Michigan for a long time and from the fact that understanding the financial mumbo-jumbo with AIG, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, etc. is impossible for the layman.

At the most basic level, the "Big Three" do not deserve a bail-out of any form. These companies having been hemorrhaging money for years and have clearly lost their ability to innovate at a competitive pace. For the past decade, these automakers have fattened themselves on truck sales while barely paying lip service to the market for fuel-efficient vehicles. For every published success of a Detroit car company, they gloated. Whenever Toyota or Honda was mentioned in a positive story, they patted themselves on the back and tried to figure out how to do it better.

I honestly doubt that a bail-out of the "Big Three" will ignite innovation or even save them from bankruptcy. In fact, if the government decides to prop-up these industrial dinosaurs, they will be stifling innovation from competitors like Toyota, Honda or even Tesla Motors. Today, many of the airlines that declared bankruptcy in the post-9/11 airline bloodletting are in better shape than they were before. Perhaps the same will happen for the "Big Three," if not, I won't shed a tear for the companies.

However, the real danger from letting these companies hit rock bottom is the effect on the massive supply infrastructure. If the "Big Three" bottom-out, then auto parts suppliers, machining shops, dealerships, mechanics, employees and pensioners will suffer. This chain of companies and people that rely on the success of the "Big Three" are not the ones responsible for a sagging industry. A government bail-out should protect the chain while the car manufacturers stumble, not the other way around.

Amidst all the noise generated over the Detroit automakers, we can easily lose sight of the fact that this economic downturn does not merely damage U.S. companies, but foreign brands as well. Toyota employs over 36,000 people in 13 facilities in the U.S. and Honda employs more than 25,000 people across 25 facilities. The recession within the automotive industry is not limited to the "Big Three," they are just being hit harder because the management has lost the ability to run a business. If Toyota or Honda fell on hard times, I somehow doubt they would get the attention that GM, Ford and Chrysler are getting.

What upsets me the most about this situation is that these stagnant car companies are going to get their money. A truly epic political lobby is fighting for the bail-out and anyone with a sane perspective can't get a word in. Governor Granholm, the United Auto Workers union and nearly every major representative of Michigan in Washington, D.C. lobbies heavily in favor of "Big Three" bailouts and limp fuel mileage restrictions. I really like Senator Carl Levin when it comes to foreign affairs and matters of state, but I wish he would shut-up when it comes to dealing with the "Big Three." Former Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney came into Michigan during the nomination campaign and spouted lofty rhetoric pandering to the auto companies and workers. John McCain came to Michigan and offered some of his "straight-talk" (back when he was still "straight-talking") and lost the Michigan primary by a mile. I think President-elect Obama made a mistake in inviting Governor Granholm to his provisional economic committee and he would make a huge mistake in giving her a cabinet position. In my eyes, she has done very little to improve the economy in Michigan and holds no credibility whatsoever in economic matters.

The Detroit car manufacturers and their lobby are well overdue for a rude awakening.

A few months ago, I visited the Ford Rouge plant in Detroit. The facility is really amazing. Ford has gone to great lengths to create an eco-friendly building, and, hopefully, it becomes a model for all future industrial sites. Then the great ironic tragedy of Ford appears. The Rouge plant is used to make the popular, gas-guzzling F-150 pick-up truck. Even worse, the facility was shutdown (it was not the weekend) and the tour guides said that the shutdown was on indefinite terms.

If the bail-out is inevitable, then what can be done to strong-arm the "Big Three" to innovate? Three things: strict gas mileage restrictions, purge the management and protect the aforementioned chain. Again, I want to reiterate that American-flavored innovation has rarely been done through governmental strong-arm tactics. Great American innovators like Henry Ford, Orville and Wilbur Wright, and Thomas Edison created new ideas and things without governmental interference. What would Henry Ford say if he were still around today? Hopefully, he would tell his descendant to sell the Lions to an owner that actually cared about the franchise.

For those of you seeking another, parallel perspective: Thomas Friedman to the rescue!!!

With all this silly talk of bailing out sinking motor vehicle companies, I felt the need for a more uplifting message to close this out.



In the face of all this doom and gloom, remember that happiness is just one Yakety Sax video away.

Aftermath

"The true strength of our nation comes not from the might of our arms or the scale of our wealth, but from the enduring power of our ideals - democracy, liberty, opportunity and unyielding hope."


200,000 people + 1 Obama in Grant Park, Chicago

So, a lot of Americans were joyful, inspired, and amazed on Election Night. You can count me among them. However, I cannot help but feel bittersweet about the results of the election.

Watching Senator McCain's concession speech was one of the saddest moments of the election for me, and I mean that in the most sober and serious way that I can. That speech embodied the exact reason for John McCain's loss in the election. I found the behavior of the Republican core represented in that crowd to be repulsive. They booed when McCain acknowledged Obama's historic victory and urged reconciliation of petty party divisions. The Republican Party is a dinosaur and the hardest of the hardcore supporters are members of shrinking demographics that are ignorant of the country that America has become. John McCain represented the potential for Obama-esque change within Republican Party, but instead he was forced to bow to the party base. The true John McCain did not run on the Republican ticket this year. John McCain was turned into a puppet of the party and ultimately sacrificed in an election cycle that Republicans lacked the perspective to compete. He deserves much better. The media often talks about the muzzling of Sarah Palin, but the disfigurement and mutation of John McCain was the greatest sin of the Republican party. He does have a share of the blame, but I have a hard time placing true culpability on his shoulders.

This brings me into speculation about the future of the Republican Party. In the coming months, Republicans are going to have to pick up the pieces and figure out how to go forward. There are two schools of thought within the Republican Party in these seemingly post-apocalyptic days for the conservative brand: The Palinites (noted for a distinct lack of thought and attachment to ancient political methods) and the moderate wing of the party. My fear is that Republicans will latch onto their criticism of John McCain that he wasn't conservative enough. If the Republican Party swings more to the right under the leadership of Governor Palin, then they are doomed to irrelevance and a third party will emerge to replace it.

My case against such a move is the dearly departed Republican hero, Ronald Reagan, and the Republicans' adopted son, John F. Kennedy. Look how these two guys swept their way into the White House: they appealed to centrist ideals and created entire demographics carved out of the opposition to vote for them. These men enjoyed immense success in their elections, governance and legacies. They are counted among the greatest presidents in the history of America. Now look at George W. Bush. He paved his way into office by supercharging his ideological base and governed through strong-arm tactics. He exploited the divisions in our nation to push his vision of America. No one in America, except that party base that still supports him, can deny the immensely negative legacy that he leaves.

I will admit that I am encouraged by the closing months of the Bush Administration. He has demonstrated a distinct willingness to be helpful and has graciously and humbly acknowledged the impact of Barack Obama's victory. Mr. Bush is probably trying to end his tenure on as high a note as possible and I think that is admirable.

David Brooks of the New York Times said, "Reagan had an immense faith in the power of ideas. But there has been a counter, more populist tradition, which is not only to scorn liberal ideas but to scorn ideas entirely. And I'm afraid that Sarah Palin has those prejudices" (CNN) The Republicans need more people like McCain, circa 2000, not fewer. I hope that they are not so blinded by their righteous rage that they fail to notice how they were beat and how they have been successful in the past. Republicans need to survive because they do have ideas that are good for America.

As expected, Republicans across Washington were mauled in the election. This phenomenon is not surprising, but it was, in some cases, unfortunate. John McCain will return to the Senate where I hope he will return to he old ways. He will not be joined by two of his moderate Republican compatriots: Gordon Smith of Oregon and John Sununu of New Hampshire. These victims of the D.C. purge will be missed greatly. The next Senate needs Republicans that offer constructive resistance to Democratic legislation. We cannot afford to lug the weight of bitter right-wingers that seek to block every attempt at progress. What really makes me angry is how good guys like Smith and Sununu get voted out of the Senate, but convicted felons like Ted Stevens of Alaska are given another chance. These Alaskan conservative mavericks are definitely not the right thing for America. Hopefully, the not corrupt members of our Senate will swiftly "/gkick" this idiot and get an honorable person to fill his seat. Maybe Smith and Sununu will play a role in the reshaping of the Republican Party from outside the spotlight; after all, President-elect Obama said I could hope.

CNN was reporting on Wednesday night that Obama would be receiving his first Top Secret briefing on Thursday morning. I wouldn't be surprised if this contained a great deal of information concerning the Russia's latest reaction to the plans to build a anti-ballistic missile shield in Eastern Europe. On Wednesday, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev promised to deploy short-range missiles in the territory of Kaliningrad. It is certainly difficult agree with such a move, but it is not terribly difficult to understand why Russia is doing it.



The harsh realities of the world shaped by George W. Bush are going to hit Obama from day 1. I know that Mr. Obama has the ability to tackle the big problems facing America and he has my support. I hope he finds a good group of people to support and advise him, but he would have to try really hard to make poorer selections than the current President. Again, to Mr. Bush's credit, he has demonstrated some willingness to pick a few competent cabinet members, even if it took him more than one try.



P.S. I couldn't find a copy of the Wednesday New York Times or Chicago Tribune anywhere in Kalamazoo today. If anyone knows where I can get one, as long as it is not a $100 copy from eBay, let me know!

Update:

I just dug up an interesting article about the future of the Republican Party on BBC.com. The article is spot on with most of the analysis; however, I do take exception to the final point. The Republicans need more than a compelling leader to turn around their fortunes. Regaining the trust of the electorate, as Obama and the Democrats did, requires a compelling leader delivering a compelling message which speaks to people at that point in time.

What is so impressive about Mr. Obama's campaign was its inclusive nature. Not too long ago (3-4 election cycles), many of the things said about the Republicans now were being said about the Democrats. In particular, the claim that the diversity of the party would cause an internal battle. The post-Clinton Democrats were internally divided like the Republicans of today. The difference is that this battle was inevitable after years of Karl Rove's strategy of supressing moderate voices and supercharging the conservative base (created a confusing message this time around). Now that the Democrats have kicked the Republicans out of the places of power, the moderate voices want to restore the Republican party to relevance. However, the old guard of the G.O.P. don't want to sacrifice a sliver of their ideology for the sake of inclusiveness and progress.

So, I expect to see some fireworks over the coming months. Republicans may not see the White House until 2016 or even 2022, but they'll have to find a voice and a message first.

Democracy

I'm not going to endorse a candidate. I believe in the power and sanctity of the secret ballot, not to mention my Constitutional right to a secret ballot. My earlier posts have indicated my preferences and I don't see much reason to publicly acclaim my vote.

What I do want to acclaim is the importance of participation in government. I personally believe that America is in the midst of a historically pivotal moment. Politicians tell us about how dire and important every election is, but they are wrong. Granted, saying that requires perspective and a certain degree of historical hypothesizing, but it is hard to ignore the gravity of the decisions that need to be made over the next 4-8 years.

Essentially, all Americans are stockholders in this nation. In a nation so populous, wealthy and powerful, it is difficult to realize the power of an individual. By voting, one declares one's willingness to choose a representative most able to make the nation thrive and, thus, one's choice to improve the nation, community and self.

Millions have sacrificed themselves over millenia to preserve freedom and democracy. Most notably, people of non-democratic societies have even sacrificed in order to preserve democracy. One always thinks of the Athenians at Marathon, Cicero in Rome, Parliamentarians in England, American Revolutionaries at Saratoga and the Allied armada at Normandy. What about oligarchic Spartans at Thermopylae, or the Communist Russians in Stalingrad? They aren't the shining defenders of democracy, but their contributions were significant nonetheless. Voters don't need to participate to such a degree, they need only cast a vote.


Unsung heroes of democracy?

If you don't know who you want to vote for in the presidential race, go vote anyway. State and local elections are also important and they have a more direct impact on your day-to-day life. I suggest looking up a local chapter of the League of Women Voters in your state and district and read over the voter's guide (here's the one for Michigan). If that fails you, then local newspapers often print a voter's guide (hopefully with an online version).

If all these arguments fail to convince you recalcitrant voters, then maybe Aristotle will...



"If liberty and equality, as is thought by some, are chiefly to be found in democracy, they will be best attained when all persons alike share in the government to the utmost."

The Coming Storm

Great storm clouds billow and broil on the horizon. From the swamps of Florida to the coal mines of Pennsylvania to the oil fields of Texas a great tempest is upon us all. The great national nightmare has returned to haunt the dreams of Americans once more. PLUS, there is an election tomorrow which could prove to be of some interest!

The great disaster which will soon strike our nation has terrorized us for years with visions of dreams unrealized and truths unrevealed. Indeed, the horror of which I write is none other than the Bowl Championship Series of college football. Football is passionately followed by untold millions in America and across the globe (Canada, too). In my opinion, college football fans are the most passionate because of the close ties people develop with the schools they attend. Furthermore, the regional nature of conferences and rivalries brings out a spirit of competition that hearkens back to the days of pre-federal government. That silliness aside, these fans, schools, conferences, leagues and entertainment networks have instituted the most nonsensical and unjust system to determine the best team in the land.

Outside of the FBS (formerly known as Division I) denomination of NCAA football teams, champions are decided through a playoff or tournament system. Furthermore, all of the other major college sports (basketball, ice hockey, etc.) also determine national championships through tournaments or playoffs. All of the major professional sports leagues also decide their champions through playoff systems. The BCS system was put into place to assert some form of legitimacy to the random national championship awarded to the winner of one of the major bowl games at the end of the season. Some computers and supposed experts vote on the best 25 teams in the FBS subdivision of NCAA football and the top two teams at the end of the season play each other for the national championship. As a result, the bowl games maintained an air of tradition (which I admit is of some value), the regular season games maintain their importance (also a good thing), the student-athletes get to maintain their focus on studies (*rolls eyes*), and the entertainment networks and corporate sponsors get to fatten their cash cow bowl games through sponsorship and intense controversy. Unfortunately, the victims of this ridiculous system are the legitimacy of any national champion and the fans.

So, back to this impending doom thing. I guess I am over-hyping this whole situation, but I feel the need to fight fire with fire and I don't want to have to do another BCS rant post. This happens every year and it is going to happen once again. More than one team is likely going to be eligible for the national championship game based on a number of factors. These factors, of various legitimacy, include: number of losses, late season losses, quality of schedule, relative conference strength, recent team/conference bowl records, most recent victory (teams that play weeks after others have complete equally lengthy seasons hold significant advantages). In the current situation, rumors are swirling that an undefeated Penn State team could get snubbed by a one loss SEC team, Big 12 team, or, God forbid, USC. Granted, there is still a lot of football left to be played, but the fact that this situation is even remotely possible is unacceptable.



I'll admit that I have my own opinion on the Penn State snub hypothetical. I believe that any undefeated team from one of the BCS conferences is deserving of national championship consideration over ANY one-loss team, regardless of the circumstance. If the BCS is supposed to turn every regular season game into a playoff game equivalent, then one loss is damning evidence of inferiority. This situation is irrefutable simply because it is the nature of this BCS god that we worship before the altar of commercialized football.

The only way to restore common sense and legitimacy to college football is to implement a playoff or tournament. I care little for how it's done, aside from the fact that we would need, at least, an 8-team playoff to preserve the current bowl system.


Here's one potential solution that include all of the FBS conferences.

I would make only one request: create a major bowl game that is held at a northern site. I want to see how SEC, Big 12 and Pac 10 schools deal with a "neutral site" game away from their home stadiums in the balmy south and west. Let's see how the Floridas, USCs and Texases deal with a game at Soldier Field in January.


Yeah, they'll probably have to take down that ski jump for the game.

Update:

Barack Obama just endorsed a college football playoff system on the Monday Night Football halftime show! If that doesn't put some momentum behind the Revolution to Overthrow the BCS, then I doubt anything will. John McCain wants to stop the use of performance-enhancing drugs. A good answer, indeed, but a better one would be to address the third great sin of American sports: the goal line trapezoid in NHL hockey!


"WTF" indeed...

A Confession

I bought Fallout 3 on launch day. You may ask, "Big deal..." Here’s why…

First of all, I absolutely hated Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion. I played its predecessor, Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind, to death. Morrowind was a wonderful open-world, fantasy RPG from Bethesda Softworks. The story was engaging and epic, and the world was brilliantly crafted with unique regions that had distinctive plant, animal and humanoid life (along with different styles of architecture). I will admit that the visuals have not aged well (plus the game was poorly optimized at launch) and the combat system was a bit wonky.

In the lead-up to Oblivion, I was really excited. I even pre-ordered the collector’s edition for PC and bought a DVD drive for my computer (undoubtedly the best thing to come out of that debacle). Then, I played it. It was terrible. Everything that I loved in Morrowind was not present in Oblivion; furthermore, Bethesda managed to carpet bomb this game so bad that collateral damage was inflicted across the game. The world was expansive, but bland. Every area was essentially the same view with the same creatures. Even though the world was big, Morrowind felt bigger (the benefits of reduced render distance, no mounts and no fast travel). The graphics were pretty (save character models, especially the faces), but it was a system hog. The combat and magic system was improved, but the scope was reduced. The most damning indictment of Oblivion was a gross “dumbing down” of the RPG elements. NPCs were lifeless, dialogue trees were sparse, and every enemy in the game leveled with you. This produced the ridiculous phenomenon of bandits and highwaymen clad in ebony armor and brandishing glass weaponry. I’m sorry, but why do they need to prey on travelers when they can afford to acquire and maintain some of the most expensive equipment in the world?


Guess which map comes with the quality game...

In defense of Oblivion, the complaints raised against it are similar to the ones raised against Morrowind by devotees of its predecessor, Daggerfall. I never played Daggerfall, so I clearly lack some perspective. However, if Daggerfall fans disliked Morrowind, then they probably felt the same about Oblivion.

So now Bethesda has got its greedy little fingers on the Fallout franchise. Needless to say, I have been a bit worried. Fallout 1 & 2 were deep, post-apocalyptic, isometric-view, turn-based RPGs. Fallout 3 is a first/third-person shooter with RPG elements (“Oblivion with guns” is the flame-bait). This worry was exacerbated by the last two years when I lived with a roommate who vehemently criticized Fallout 3 (if you are reading this, Hi Jackson). I sympathized with his views entirely, and, after the Oblivion disaster, my reservations were inflamed into true concerns. Yeah, it looked damned cool, but it clearly isn’t even close to the Fallout RPG standard.

A few weeks ago, I decided to take matters into my own hands. I bought a copy of Fallout 2 so I could decide for myself if Fallout 3 was truly an Oblivion treatment for the Fallout franchise. Unfortunately, Fallout 2 came up short of my high expectations. Fallout 2 did have some impressive open-world RPG elements and the dated graphics weren’t terrible. However, Fallout 2’s game design has aged terribly and I do not doubt that if Fallout 2 were released today, ignoring the visuals, it would probably not be reviewed very well. This game is hard as hell. I frequently died in the early areas and the combat system seemed cumbersome and unreasonable. The game manual suggests to save often (after and before battles) and in as many save slots as possible. Not only is this immensely frustrating, but it is bad game design. In an RPG, I want to focus on managing my character and immersing myself in the game world. Having to save every few minutes prohibits the suspension of disbelief and indicates that the combat system has not been properly balanced. Fighting a level 1 ant should not be a battle of attrition that, 50% of the time, leaves me unable to kill a second one without using a very finite supply of healing abilities. Adding auto-save functionality would not fix this game, but it would solve some of the tedium of saving.

Ok, so I didn’t enjoy the five hours I spent in Fallout 2. This assuaged many of my doubts about Fallout 3. The arguments of the Fallout purists began to convince me less. I think that Bethesda’s re-imagining of the Fallout world is a welcome one, but they should strike the “3” from the title because I don’t think that it is a true sequel. I would suggest: Fallout: Road to the White House, Fallout: Washington, etc.


Sweet, sweet irradiated brains.

Delay induced update: Fallout 3 is great. I'm only a few hours in since I have to split time with Fable 2 and taking care of dogs (*sigh*). So far, I am impressed. Running and gunning, like in a shooter, is a surefire way to get killed. Using the RPG-esque V.A.T.S. system is the way to go and the slo-mo kills are cool. The most impressive feature so far: beard selection for male character. The number of facial hair styles available is mind-boggling and truly unprecedented (no "five-o'clock shadow" option, but the "Honest Abe" makes up for it). Unfortunately, you can definitely tell that Fallout 3 runs on a modified Oblivion engine. The animations are, at times, very poor, especially if you play from the third-person perspective.

In other news…

Fable 2 is also awesome. I have been slashing, sniping, blasting, price controlling and farting my way into the hearts and minds of the people of Albion. I am on an open-world game overload with GTA IV and Fable 2. Fallout 3 is really piling on the gaming hours (plus Gears of War 2 coming next week). Once again, this is the most wonderful time of the year for lovers of the video game.

Bioware and Lucasarts made the rumors official and announced the continuation of the Knights of the Old Republic series with Star Wars: The Old Republic. They are hoping to craft a truly story-driven MMORPG. The interviews that have been given so far have gotten me excited, but I still have reservations. First and foremost, I really wanted KotOR III and not an MMO sell-out game. It’s no use getting all worked up now though. “SWTOR” is 2-4 years from release and probably closer to 4.