Yeah, I apologise for the generalization. There are definitely female gamers out there that take an active interest in the industry and aren't just relegated as sex-objects. It was just the high percentage of paid booth babes at E3 that were simply acting as eye-candy that made me frustrated at an industry that I feel could use a little more broadmindedness about that kind of thing.
Having freelanced on and off for a couple of gaming companies, I've honestly felt that the American gaming industry has been unhealthy for a while - young boys making prurient games for young boys, with only the occasional break-out title that's appealing to a more diverse audience. Not that I'm against a little prurient fun now and then, but any objective visitor to E3 will quickly realize the fanboy infatuation and shallow flashiness alongside very little constructive cultural presence (not to mention very few women outside of skin-tight clothing).
This is the problem with an industry that's engaging in design-by-comittee. Back when all it took was six or seven guys in a garage to create a video game, real innovation was easy. Now with games approaching or surpassing major motion picture budgets, you have tight-fisted executive boards that are terrified of anything outside of the mainstream, and rely heavily on tried-and-true rehashed sequels.
The well-known fanboy corruption of the video game media has contributed to this culture for a long time now, and only recently are we starting to see a little stabilization in both video game exposure and video game reporting. It's a little embarrasing that an article like this should be remarkable for it's candor, as opposed to being the norm.
Hmmm... I, too, found myself slightly annoyed at how knee-jerk the "empire" of whedon's future is always being refered to as totalitarian, when it's not necessarily. There's no shortage of scenes of happy Alliance people going about their business in the series or the film, of the strong stability and prosperity of the core worlds, in fact, the beginning of the film shows River attending the kind of outdoor school that seems amazingly idyllic.
Whedon's empire seems to be faulted more with neglect of its frontier planets than with crushing enforcement - A tragic situation, but not something to be compared with Hitler or Palpatine.
There are, of course, the nastier elements of the Alliance government: the blue hands group and the syndicate that was attempting to program River, a scary reminder of all the evil things parts of our own government are probably engaging in.
Er... My intention is not to make a political point in an article already tainted by runaway slashdot political ideology clash, but to note that Whedon likes to give us more subtly complicated forces of evil. For instance, (spoiler warning) the ending of the film gives us almost a redemption of its major villain. What do you think about that?
The article does a great job of defining "hacking" in its own terms. Unfortunately it doesn't do such a great job defining "science" vs. "art".
Science easily requires as much creativity as any art. And any true artist that is passionate about his work will pursue it with strict logical focus, just like a scientist.
It's only in the last century that these two "disciplines" have seperated definitions in the common view... It's difficult for me to really even appreciate the point in even trying to define hacking as either one or the other. Maybe it's both?
Of course, I'm a total art school geek, so my view's pretty biased.
Slashdot Mirror
RTS stands for real-time strategy. As opposed to, say, turn-based strategy.
maid perfect sence 2 me.
Yeah, I apologise for the generalization. There are definitely female gamers out there that take an active interest in the industry and aren't just relegated as sex-objects. It was just the high percentage of paid booth babes at E3 that were simply acting as eye-candy that made me frustrated at an industry that I feel could use a little more broadmindedness about that kind of thing.
Having freelanced on and off for a couple of gaming companies, I've honestly felt that the American gaming industry has been unhealthy for a while - young boys making prurient games for young boys, with only the occasional break-out title that's appealing to a more diverse audience. Not that I'm against a little prurient fun now and then, but any objective visitor to E3 will quickly realize the fanboy infatuation and shallow flashiness alongside very little constructive cultural presence (not to mention very few women outside of skin-tight clothing).
This is the problem with an industry that's engaging in design-by-comittee. Back when all it took was six or seven guys in a garage to create a video game, real innovation was easy. Now with games approaching or surpassing major motion picture budgets, you have tight-fisted executive boards that are terrified of anything outside of the mainstream, and rely heavily on tried-and-true rehashed sequels.
The well-known fanboy corruption of the video game media has contributed to this culture for a long time now, and only recently are we starting to see a little stabilization in both video game exposure and video game reporting. It's a little embarrasing that an article like this should be remarkable for it's candor, as opposed to being the norm.
Hmmm... I, too, found myself slightly annoyed at how knee-jerk the "empire" of whedon's future is always being refered to as totalitarian, when it's not necessarily. There's no shortage of scenes of happy Alliance people going about their business in the series or the film, of the strong stability and prosperity of the core worlds, in fact, the beginning of the film shows River attending the kind of outdoor school that seems amazingly idyllic. Whedon's empire seems to be faulted more with neglect of its frontier planets than with crushing enforcement - A tragic situation, but not something to be compared with Hitler or Palpatine. There are, of course, the nastier elements of the Alliance government: the blue hands group and the syndicate that was attempting to program River, a scary reminder of all the evil things parts of our own government are probably engaging in. Er... My intention is not to make a political point in an article already tainted by runaway slashdot political ideology clash, but to note that Whedon likes to give us more subtly complicated forces of evil. For instance, (spoiler warning) the ending of the film gives us almost a redemption of its major villain. What do you think about that?
You mean a black market on a seedy frontier world? Hmmmmmmm...
More like space courtesans... They have a guild and everything. Also, don't forget the space cannibals. Space cannibals are awesome.
Nope. No aliens. An entirely human universe. There are space cannibals, though. Can't go wrong with space cannibals.
The article does a great job of defining "hacking" in its own terms. Unfortunately it doesn't do such a great job defining "science" vs. "art".
Science easily requires as much creativity as any art. And any true artist that is passionate about his work will pursue it with strict logical focus, just like a scientist.
It's only in the last century that these two "disciplines" have seperated definitions in the common view... It's difficult for me to really even appreciate the point in even trying to define hacking as either one or the other. Maybe it's both?
Of course, I'm a total art school geek, so my view's pretty biased.