Greetings, Soggies!!

Alright.  This is the part of the show where I remember something that almost no one has ever heard of (of course, sometimes folks surprise me).

In the mid-eighties, during the height of Indiana Jones fever, it seemed like every studio in Hollywood had to make some kind of “treasure-hunting adventurer”-style film.  Romancing the Stone.  King Solomon’s Mines.  Firewalker. Even television tried to capitalize on the success of Raiders in the early eighties with shows like Bring ‘Em Back Alive and Tales of the Gold Monkey.

Now, somewhere in the midst of all of those movies and shows that actually formed a blip on the “treasure-hunter” radar, there’s this one little gem of a turd that sneaked in under the door… so much so that to this day I am one of the few people that even knows of its existence:

Jake Speed.

The film came out in 1986.  I have no idea if it even made a theatrical release.  All I do know is that it was on heavy rotation on Showtime around that time.  And I watched the hell out of it.  Written, produced, and starring some guy named Wayne Crawford in the title role, this movie was truly a love letter to himself… that just happened to have a couple of fun sequences and a neat thirties-style roadster with machine guns to fit in with the whole “cool vehicles” theme that was also going on in the eighties.

The movie is about a woman named Margaret whose sister is kidnapped while in Paris by a bunch of white slavers.  Her grandfather, who is a huge fan of the heroes of dime store, pulp novels, suggests she recruit one of them – Jake Speed.  Balking at the idea that her grandfather would even believe that these characters are real, Margaret finds herself face to face with Jake and his partner (I don’t mean that kind) Desmond.  Turns out, these guys really go on adventures, and then write about them to pay for more adventures.  From there, the trio go after the slavers, headed up by an awesome, scenery-chewing John Hurt.

I remember stopping to catch this every time it was on.  Not particularly well done, especially compared to its better, theatrically-run brethren.  But, it had its cheesy charms.  Jake had a special shotgun he called “The Kid”.  This weapon had two special properties that all guns had in the eighties – unlimited ammo and the ability to destroy practically anything with one shot.  Then of course, there was that car.  I would grin with delight every time the side panels opened up and the machine guns came out, blazing down everyone in sight.

Now, the film had two major things going for it as far as I was concerned back then – the aforementioned John Hurt and Karen Kopins.  John Hurt is the main (and maybe the only) reason to watch this movie.  He plays the evil villain so over the top you can tell he’s just having fun cashing a paycheck.  But, he’s so much fun to watch.  Sadly, I wanted to provide a clip of Hurt having a scenery sandwich, but it looks like the movie is so bad that everyone is too embarrassed to even post a clip on You Tube.

Now, the reason why Karen Kopins was such a draw for me in regards to this movie is because I had a huge crush on her.  My long distance love affair with Miss Kopins began with a little film called Once Bitten.  In it, she played the girlfriend of Jim Carrey’s character (yes – that Jim Carrey), who was being turned into a vampire.  The cute, little bob haircut and the girl next door persona had me hooked.  And here she was in Jake Speed, playing a very similar character.

Oh and did I mention that about two-thirds of the way through the film she ends up in her underwear?  For a preteen, that’s a big deal.

Many years later, I still have a guilty-pleasure love for this flick.  The movie hasn’t come out on DVD (nor do I ever expect it to), but I did manage to get it on VHS for about five bucks several years ago in a Wal-Mart bargain bin.  It’s one of the few VHS tapes I still own despite the fact that almost all of my movie and TV collection now resides on DVD or Blu.

And as far as I’m concerned, it’s still worth every penny of that five bucks I spent.

The Don doesn’t chew scenery… he swallows it whole.

According to Merriam-Webster and other dictionaries, the definition of “art” is “a: the conscious use of skill and creative imagination especially in the production of aesthetic objects; also: works so produced b (1): fine arts (2): one of the fine arts (3): a graphic art”. Sounds pretty abstract a concept, right? Left up to the individual? So, then, what you consider art is your opinion, and your opinion only. There are absolutely no facts about what art is.

I touched on the unique and beautiful art style of the upcoming The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword in last week’s E3 article. Since then, new information has come out regarding the visuals, like in this article from Kotaku: “Skyward’s unique visual style, which looks like a halfway meeting between Wind Waker and Twilight Princess, was inspired by Miyamoto’s love of impressionism [art], and the skies in the game are a tribute to [French Post-Impressionist artist] Cézanne.” Wow! When I saw the screenshots linked in my previous article, I remarked that the game looked like a painting. I didn’t know at the time that this was because the graphics were inspired by paintings. Now, whenever someone whines about the art style, you can them an “uncultured pleb”!

This reminded me of Roger Ebert’s latest assertion in April that video games “can never be art”, despite his having no qualifications to speak on this topic since he doesn’t actually play video games. (I want to point out this link to Ebert’s blog freezes my browser every time I load it, so click at your own risk. It won’t factor into my article since it’s not relevant to art, but it’s not exactly getting on my good side here, either, Ebert.) In this article, he backtracked a little and said MAYBE games can be art, but never in our lifetime, and they’ll never, ever be “high (read: real) art”.

Other sites have already addressed Ebert’s crap-stirring topic over and over again, and make for entertaining reads, so I don’t need to go into that here. I’m quite fond of Cracked.com’s take on the whole debate, for the record. Oh, and don’t miss a response article from Ebert all the way back in 2007, in which he repeatedly and openly insults novelist Clive Barker for daring to disagree. The comments on these other articles also do a good job of raising up valid instances of video games as art. I know I’ve never cried at a funeral no matter how much I loved the deceased, but I definitely shed tears at the endings of Link’s Awakening, Secret of Mana, and Ocarina of Time, for example. To me, that is art. It does not have to be art to someone else. What art is is left entirely up to each and every individual.

Art begets art. There are professionally-rendered Mario statues and paintings of Princess Zelda. There’s Video Games Live, bringing game music to the orchestra pit…and orchestrated music IN video games is not an unheard-of occurrence. And now, we have The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword, which has an orchestrated soundtrack and is created to look like an Impressionist painting. Are statues, paintings, and orchestral performances no longer art if their source material is a video game, Ebert? Or are video games themselves art because of the creativity and imagination that goes into them per the dictionary definition, as well as elements normally associated with art, such as orchestrated music and art movement visuals?

When you come down to is that what art is, is left entirely up to personal opinion. I will never consider a good 95% of modern abstract creations to be art. You took a paintbrush, dipped it in black paint, flicked it on a canvas, and named it “Despair”? I could do that in thirty seconds! Your work doesn’t belong in a museum that paid millions of dollars for it; it belongs at the thrift store. Or in the garbage. But the difference between Ebert and I is that he presents his opinion of video games as fact, while I make it very clear right now that my perception of abstract modern art is only one writer’s opinion. And, also unlike Ebert, I won’t tell you that you’re wrong to think otherwise, as he did game designer Kellee Santiago in his blog. (Though I might look at you funny if I find a print of “Despair” hanging in your house. Partly because I made it up. I’ve seen a painting in the Museum of Modern Art in Washington, DC that was virtually identical to my example, but I don’t remember the name.)

Oh, and let’s end on a high (high art?) note. This thread gives me hope for humanity: intrigued by the new Zelda title’s graphics, at least one gamer has taken a (renewed) interest in Cézanne’s work. I doubt this will be the last person to seek out classic art in the face of new art!

And that’s my opinion.

Next week, you’ll probably have to fend for yourselves, as I’ll be buried neck-deep in things outside the Internet. Enjoy a week off from me!

Hallo again, you Spwuggy kids, you!

The three of you who read this column probably noticed the lack of updates last week. The short version is, when the temperature in the computer room is over 85°F, I don’t risk overheating the system by turning it on. Luckily, the responsible central air unit has been fixed, and we’re now back in business!

Let’s get right down to it with a newish feature I’d been wanting to implement since I first started writing for Spwug: MORE PURTY PICKCHURS. If my focus here is supposedly on webcomics, shouldn’t this column be more visual too? I kept putting it off because I had no working tablet or scanner. Finally, I had enough of waiting and started drawing in Photoshop.

After an hour of very painful hand-crabbing from gripping an ancient, unresponsive mouse, I remembered why I had put off drawing on the computer. But it was too late to stop, and you can now reap the dubious rewards of my agonizing labour! Everyone loves MS Paint-style pictures, right? So, let’s get started.

There’s a little television show called Stargate Universe. I doubt anyone here has heard of it. It’s not like geeks ever come to Spwug or anything. But if you have heard of this TV series that I understand is “science fiction”, you probably know that it’s not doing too well compared to its predecessors in the Stargate franchise. Fan and critic complaints range from too much drama, to not enough action, to “Syfy Channel sucks” (a very valid complaint), to excessive shaky-cam, to “Where the heck are all the aliens?!”

I agree with all of the above plus some. If my housemate didn’t keep recording this show on the DVR box, I wouldn’t have watched it past the first few episodes. But instead of just griping, I’ve decided to offer up some suggestions to make the show better. Get your pencils out and take notes, SGU writers. There’ll be a test on this later!

1: More alien action, please! In two seasons so far, we’ve had, what? Labrador Retriever-sized spiders in two episodes. A sandstorm that may or may not have actually been sentient. Neither one showed any sign of anything resembling intelligence compatible with that of the human characters (despite the fact that human intelligence also seems to be a lacking quality in the show, so you’d think they’d understand one another). Though I have this theory that the spiders weren’t REALLY bloodthirsty monsters trying to eat the faces of the stranded humans. They were just lonely and wanted new friends.

Then there was T-Rex’s doughier cousin for about fifteen seconds. I still don’t get why Scott wasted ammo and time shooting at the thing when he could’ve just escaped through the Stargate. Maybe the dino reminded him of his shameful Weight Watchers days.

The only intelligent aliens of note so far have been the anorexic “blues” that keep trying to steal the ship Destiny away from its human crew (who, it could be argued, stole the ship from the ascended Ancients who made it). They really haven’t done anything else of interest so far, unless you count competitive non-eating.

2: The military and civilians aboard Destiny should be allowed to decorate the ship, or at least their respective quarters. Seriously, now. Every single scene aboard the ship takes place in a setting of drab greys and the occasional blue-grey light. No wonder all anyone does is fight and/or cry. I’m surprised half the crew hasn’t committed suicide already. A little colour goes a long way, folks. Maybe some throw rugs and dried flowers. A splash of paint, a few family photos lining the halls, and you go from stranded victims to homeowners of the biggest and most fashionable estate known to mankind!

3: Dr. Nicholas Rush needs to decide which team he supports. I mean, come on, Nicky-baby! This sympathetic-villain-in-one-episode, antihero-in-the-next stuff was old last season. At least he and Colonel Young are no longer at each other’s throats every five minutes. (Kudos for the next pic go out to housemate Thoradin, whose idea of a D&D setting for Young and Rush was far more amusing than my original pic of Rush shouting about how he was going to hijack the ship’s systems to obey only him and then give everyone onboard the puppies he and his dead wife never got to have.) For some reason, this scene works best in my head in stick-figure format.

4: The final suggestion doesn’t need pictorial accompaniment. To save the Stargate franchise, Syfy should go back in time, NOT cancel Stargate SG-1, NOT cut its budget, and watch the money come rolling in. But we all know Syfy can’t do anything sensible, time travel or no. This is why The Lost Room still has never moved beyond a pilot miniseries.

Did you pay attention, Stargate Universe writers? I may have just saved your show there.

That’s it for this week. Tune in next time, when we may or may not have more hand/mouse-drawn pictures. It really depends upon how masochistic I’m feeling. You’ll just have to come see to find out!

Don’t you hate it when something you love just…stops with no resolution? Webcomic fans know this pain all too well. Your favourite webcomic is chugging along, picking up fans right and left, in the middle of an epically epic storyline, when suddenly…a month goes by with no updates. Then two months. Then six. The artist puts up a brief blog post that says, “Being swamped by work/school/family, but we’ll be back soon!”

A year later, the site is inhabited only by crickets. It sits there, unchanging, for many more years, or until the server deletes the page. The webcomic is only ever again mentioned in forum discussions where people ask, “Whatever happened to such-and-such comic?”

In the spring, a young geek’s fancy lightly turns to thoughts of loss. Let’s look at a few of the fallen, and sometimes missing, friends that I would have loved to see get a proper ending. We’ll be doing this again later, by the way. I have a pretty long list of comics I used to read that stopped without ending, and they make for great nostalgia columns, eh? Plus, there are other unfortunate webcomics being abandoned all the time….

5ideways by K. Sandra Fuhr – This supernatural apocalyptic thriller started off with a strong story and intriguing characters in 2005, only to taper off with updates as Real Life continued to eat away at the artist’s free time. By 2008, the comic was officially on hiatus, and the site sat largely untouched until November 18, 2008, when a “5ideways will return soon” graphic was tossed up on the front page. “Soon” was a bit of a stretch, sadly, as there have been no updates since then. However, the extremely talented creator didn’t just up and abandon webcomics completely. If her name sounds familiar, that’s because you may already have read/be reading her other works: Boy Meets Boy (completed), Friendly Hostility (completed, and reviewed here), and Other People’s Business (ongoing, and blurbed about at the bottom of this page).

Absurd Notions/Why the Long Face, both by Kevin Pease – The first, running from 1999 to 2007, focused on the work and play misadventures of a group of young-adult friends with varied hobbies (though they all seemed to enjoy tabletop gaming) and the occasional bout of mad science. You know, what has since become a staple of webcomics. The second ran from 2003 to 2007 and focused on the creator’s musings about life in general. Both trickled to a halt around the same time (with Absurd Notions in the middle of a story). Sometime in 2008 or 2009, I asked Pease about further updates. He mentioned that he didn’t intend to drop his comics completely, but it looks like if that’s still true, we’ll be waiting a while longer for updates. A certain Spwug webcomic writer can keep hoping!

Chrono Trigger Rip-Off (at least they’re honest!) by Mark and Tom (and possibly someone else; it’s not too clear) – Sprite comics are reviled by art elitists for not using original art, but I LIKE sprite strips. LOVE them, even. I love sprite art and everything you can do with it. I love sprites being used for tributes and parodies of the games they come from. This webcomic did all that. Sprite comics are all over now, and the whole “Video game sprites cause mayhem while behaving in naughty ways that are totally out of character with how they behave in their canon” thing is done and overdone, and often done wrong. Chrono Trigger Rip-Off isn’t exactly a unique entity now, but back when I found it (likely pre-2001, but the archives only go back to January of that year), sprite comics were a fairly shiny new concept for me. I got a lot of good laughs out of this comic and enjoyed the fact that it even had a plot. And while there’s nothing unique about the strip by today’s standards, I still regret that it died out in 2004 with its story unfinished.

RPG World by Ian Jones-Quartey – You just can’t talk about unfinished business in webcomics without invoking the granddaddy of them all. RPG World went from a superstar of webcomics to a lesson in how NOT to end a story during its final battle. (The lesson is: DON’T STOP UPDATING DURING THE FINAL BATTLE.) Remember that? This webcomic started off strong in 2000. It updated regularly, the story kept getting better and better, Cherry’s butt kept getting bigger and bigger, the audience grew steadily–even friends who otherwise never read webcomics read RPG World. Every breath was bated as the story blazed into its climax. Beloved characters were killed. World-altering secrets were revealed. The final boss was confronted. The heroes geared up for the greatest fight in history. And then…nothing. In 2005, the comic ground to a halt. It tried to defibrillate itself with fillers and side stories on very sporadic occasions until June 2007. Finally, the artist admitted what the audience already knew; he had no intention of completing the story. He was too busy, he’d lost interest, didn’t like seeing his old art, etc., etc….

Recently, he put out the word that he felt bad for leaving the audience in the lurch and wanted to find a new artist to take his scripts and finish the story. I’d dearly love to see that, but since then, there’s been no word on finding a new artist. The site has been dead for so long that I don’t know if anyone who could help even saw his request for a new artist. But if you’re interested, please contact him at his site. I selfishly want to see RPG World finally completed! And if you want to know what eventually helped take Ian’s time away from the comic, watch this show called The Venture Bros. that he’s worked on for a few years. I don’t know if you’ve ever heard of it. I think it’s about siblings who become business entrepreneurs. Also, something about butterflies. Maybe they fund a living butterfly museum together or something. I don’t know. (And if you think I’m being serious here, let’s talk bridges.)

Well, that’s enough out of me for now. I still hope to someday see these old loves of mine completed, before being shoved back in the shoeboxes of the Internet. If there’s a webcomic you enjoyed that ended prematurely, let me know. I’m seeking more stalled comics for future installments!

Greetings, Madballs!

Holy crap.

I’m sure those of you who own one of the “fat” PS3 systems (like me) became quite acquainted with the issue that occurred last Sunday on the right and straight on ‘til Monday.

In short, the non-slim PS3s all took a huge dump.

In a major snafu that most-assuredly gave Xbox 360 owners plenty of ammo in the “Which system is better?” war, a simple glitch with the internal clock ended up wreaking havoc for about twenty-four hours.  For some weird reason, the older PS3 models tried (unsuccessfully, I might add) to turn over from February 28^th to February 29^th, 2010 on Sunday night.  Of course, the system that only does everything (including ride the short bus) did not get the memo that 2010 is not, in fact, a leap year.  The side effect of that?  February still remains short-stacked against her fuller siblings (I’ve always thought of February as a woman – she sure flirts like one).

So, when that internal clock rolled over to the obviously illegal date, those “fat” PS3s immediately wet the bed, making online connection impossible.  Also affected?  Trophy data was either corrupted or non-existent and almost all PS3 games were completely non-playable.

Sony’s response was amusing, yet horrifying at the same time – “Stay off your PS3!”  Sounding like an septuagenarian who just confiscated your Frisbee (do people even play with Frisbees anymore?), the company that uses the same font for Playstation and the Spider-Man movies admitted that they were at a loss, but that the problem was bad enough to warrant treating your system like a red-headed step child (what a sad moniker – I happen to like gingers).

So, like the stalwart troopers that they are, Sony set their tech experts (who obviously have no concept of the Gregorian calendar or this wouldn’t have happened in the first place) to task to find and fix the problem.  Meanwhile, Xbox folks were laughing at our misfortunes right up to the moment when their 360s got their fifth or sixth “Red Ring of Death”, at which point they swore profusely and immediately throw themselves onto some jagged rocks.

At the same time, I was going through a steady decline as withdrawals started to kick in.  It wasn’t noticeable Sunday night, as the problem didn’t occur until after I had already signed off for the evening.  But by the time I got home from work Monday afternoon?  Well, let’s just say that I never realized just how much I use my PS3 until I found out the hard way that about two-thirds of my couch time in the living room requires the use of the third generation Playstation.  I couldn’t play any video games.  I couldn’t watch any movies.  Every time my instincts automatically queued up my arms to reach for the power button on my system I had to stop myself.  In the end, I was forced to “channel surf” – a past time that I’m pretty sure became obsolete right around the same time that Frisbees stopped being something cool that you did in parks and backyards.

Fortunately for me, the Winter Olympics were just over enough to return one of my 8 PM viewing staples to its proper time slot.  After watching the show I bought a Subway sandwich to keep on the air, “Chuck” returned the favor and kept me distracted long enough for Sony to figure out how time is actually kept track of in modern society.  By 9 PM I hesitantly fired up ol’ Bessie based on some positive rumblings I had read in one of the forums I frequent.  Sure enough, my sleek-black beauty was fine and dandy.  She was a little disoriented, still thinking that it was Sunday, February 28^th, but after a gentle correction I was able to play Fallout 3 with only my usual operational glitches and irritations.  All was now right in the world once again.

At least, until all game systems everywhere instantly self destruct while trying to reconcile December 21^st, 2012.

The Don survived the PS3 Blackout of February 29^th, 2010.  He didn’t even get a lousy T-shirt.

It’s that time again, and I bring good news! I’ll get back to the appointed task of webcomic reviews soon. No, I still don’t have the notes for future articles which are sitting on my deceased computer. But I have been assembling NEW notes during the past month and reading new(-to-me) webcomics. I’m happy to say I’m tearing through Aaron Williams’ stellar but recently-halted Backward Compatible (it’s hosted on the sinking ship CrispyGamer.com, so its future is uncertain). I’m also a year and a half’s worth of archives away from having caught up on Ryan Sohmer’s and Lar DeSouza’s Least I Could Do.

So, yeah. Webcomic reviews later. Video game downloadable content reviews now!

Rants about imperfect video games are nothing new to me. Nowadays, in this era of patches, you’re not buying a complete game anymore when you shell out your $65 or so at the cash register. You’re buying the IDEA of a complete game, the POTENTIAL that all the glitches, bugs, and other oversights will someday be fixed by the development team and render the game as playable as it should have been the moment you bought the disc or download.

Sadly, this is all too often not the case. There are far too many instances where developers seem to think, “Well, we’ve made enough money on that title now; we don’t have to fix it anymore. Let’s start on the sequel!”….Which definitely pushes my rage buttons that gamers are doling out big bucks for flawed products. Let’s take a look at a specific title, the incredibly fun, but irritatingly flawed Borderlands.

The game overall is a work of genius. Fun weapons and shields, and there are ways to modify them and make them even more fun. Unique enemies (ever want to shoot psychopathic axe-wielding midgets? Well, now you can!) Humourous dialogue and so many geek references (everything from Bruce Campbell to Joss Whedon’s Firefly) that you know the makers don’t see a lot of sunlight, and you’re extremely grateful for this. Games that are heavy on the FPS aspects don’t usually catch my attention, but I’ve spent far too many hours seeing this game in action that I should have spent working!

Vanilla Borderlands actually runs as it should–most of the time. The downloadable content, however, is another story, and one that continues to light up fan forums.

“The Zombie Island of Dr. Ned”

Nice mustache! I didn’t know you could grow them OUTSIDE the surgical mask like that. Unlike his twin brother(?) Dr. Zed, Dr. Ned is definitely a man of mystery….

I love zombies. Do you love zombies? I also love shooting them in funny settings, where you’re given quests with names like “Brains” and its follow-up quests “Braaains”, “Braaaaains”, “Braaaaaaaaaaaains”, and “Braaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaains” (can you guess what you’re collecting?) I also love parody quests like “Here We Go Again” in which you discover the planet Pandora’s versions of Scooby-Doo’s Shaggy and Scooby…Harry and Skaggy–Skags being the vicious alien dogs of Pandora with rather suggestively-shaped maws. Zoiks!

What I DON’T love are glitches, particularly glitches that never get fixed. If I buy your DLC, developers, I expect it to WORK, and if it doesn’t, you’re supposed to make good on it!

In this Zombie Island DLC, you find and repair a vending machine belonging to the weapons manufacturer Jakobs, where presumably you stand a good chance of buying hard-to-get weapons. Fans cheered this move–a unique vending machine that could help you score some of those rare and powerful weapons we’ve all heard so much about! This was much-needed because most items and their stats are randomly generated. You’re never guaranteed to find a butt-kickin’ gun in normal gameplay, so having a high-end weapons vendor that you can visit any time was a big relief.

….Except that the Jakobs machine stops working if you “turn in” the repair mission for your reward or leave the area for any reason. Once you turn in the quest or return to the machine from another area, it’s once again defunct, and you’re left with those crappy weak guns the enemies always seem to want to drop when they die. The Zombie Island DLC has been out since fall 2009. It’s now winter 2010. WHERE’S OUR BUGFIX, GEARBOX SOFTWARE?! We paid for a fully-functional add-on, not one that’s hobbled in one of its major selling points!

“Mad Moxxi’s Underdome Riot”

So many people bottle up their emotions, it’s nice to see someone who wears her heart on her…uhhhh…never mind.

This one seems like more of an extremely stupid oversight than an outright glitch. In the Mad Moxxi DLC, you fight arena matches against enemies and bosses from the game. There are different levels of challenges, and the greater challenges are twenty rounds long. This doesn’t seem so bad, until you realize that there five “waves” per round in which you battle multiple enemies during each wave, and a different boss every fifth wave.

How long does it take to complete twenty rounds, totaling one hundred waves? If you weren’t lucky enough to find very powerful weapons and shields during normal gameplay, you can realistically spend your entire day in the arena. My housemate took six and a half hours to get from round one to round ten, only halfway done. And this wouldn’t be that bad–a nice long challenge would be FUN, if you could put it down and pick it back up whenever you wanted.

….Except, the developers didn’t include any way to save your game during or between rounds. If your system crashes and needs a restart, or you decide to quit and come back, you have to start all over again. At round one of twenty. Apparently, Gearbox didn’t realize that most people have to work for a living and don’t have unlimited amounts of time to spend trying to complete arena challenges. And let me tell you, those challenges get really, really old after a few hours, knowing you can’t quit without losing all your progress. And here I thought games were supposed to be FUN! Silly me.

So, how about it, game developers? Here’s a little tip from the gamers of the world: we don’t want to pay for faulty, rushed products. We’d rather wait for a thoroughly playtested and bugfixed product that works from the get-go. If you’re going to take our money, at least make sure we get what we paid for.

Thank you, and good night.

Warning: rant doesn’t know when to quit.

Yeah, I know Internet quizzes are too easy when it comes to rant topics. But this the first time I’ve found occasion to do it, so cut me some slack, eh?

This chunk o’ venting applies all across the board of creative arts. And it opens with a plea: creators of all kinds, STOP TAKING THOSE MARY SUE LITMUS TESTS.

Does it seem like an odd thing to write about? I’m sure it does, but I’ve run into this topic six freakin’ times in the past month, and my patience with stupidity only goes so far. Which is to say, not far at all. I’m annoyed with people who make these tests, as well as the people who actually take them in the slightest bit seriously. I mean it. I’m going to smack some heads if I see one more message from someone who’s upset that “the Internet” told them their character sucks unto Sue-ness on some ridiculous quiz just because she has four colours dyed in her hair.

If you’ve spent much time reading online, you’re almost certainly familiar with the Mary Sue/Gary Stu. They go far beyond simple “insert” characters, which are based upon a creator of the work they appear in, but aren’t necessarily Sues/Stus themselves if well-designed. Mary Sues/Gary Stus are characters who are too perfect for the world of the story they’re in, or are so stricken with bad luck despite being “perfect” that you’re supposed to just want to hug them (but often you end up only wanting them to walk off a cliff). They’re always the smart one with knowledge beyond the ken of their peers, the pretty one, and/or the hero. Every other character either wants to sex ‘em or kill ‘em, past the bounds of believability. No matter how badly they behave, other characters easily forgive them–unless those guys are the ones unnaturally obsessed with killing the character. The eyes of the story world’s other characters are always upon the Sue/Stu. The rules of the story’s reality get bent or flat-out broken in order to make a Sue/Stu look better, in both the “Sue/Stu is a shining star” way and the “Sue/Stu is deserving of ultimate sympathy” way. (Look, I’ma just call them all the traditional “Sues” from now on. If Johnny Cash can have “A Boy Named Sue”…then so can I, dammit.)

Unfortunately, as always happens with time and the Internet, the original definition gets warped. People forget how to really define the thing anymore. And suddenly, the definition is incorrectly made so broad that pretty much ANY character can be called a Sue. That’s where the Mary Sue Litmus Tests come in. If you take those quizzes, I estimate there’s a 90% chance your character will be branded a Sue by the test results. I’ll be adding my “research” (if you can call it that) here to prove my point, don’t worry.

For some reason, variations on the “Original Mary Sue Litmus Test” (if such a thing even exists anymore) plague the Internet like a bedbug infestation. For an even more unfathomable reason, budding artists take these tests for their original characters, and take the results seriously, to look at the number of feedback comments wailing “I worked so hard on making my character believable, but this test says she’s just a Sue!” Look, people–as a general rule, Internet quizzes are not written by learned experts. They’re made by bored teens in high school, by college nerds slacking off term papers, and by adult nerds after a long shift behind the cash register at work. I shouldn’t even have to say this, but I will anyways….If you take an Internet quiz–hell, even a random non-quiz website as a valid source of feedback for your creative designs, you’re not just asking for failure. You’re begging for it. Those quizzes and other non-scholarly sources will always steer you in the wrong direction.

What really screws up these tests’ Sue-definitions is that the quizzes use incorrect guidelines to determine Sue-ness. Instead of going by the believability of personality, “perfectness”, and how much the rules are bent for a character, these tests tend to focus on a character’s physical appearance, hobbies, and even their name. I plunked “Mary Sue Litmus Test” into Google and got…well…FAR more results than I wanted to see, given my obvious dislike of this quiz. No, I won’t link to them. I’m giving them too much attention just mentioning them here, really. I took the first six tests that didn’t try to spam me with pop-ups or demand my email address to get my results, and here’s my haul.

Pretty Much Everyone Is A Mary Sue according to these tests, as proven by not just using fictional characters, but also real people, yers truly included. Most of these tests, being near-clones of one another, use similar or identical scoring systems, rating your character from 0 to whatever on the Sue scale (I averaged my scores as best I could).

I took these six quizzes for three characters (two mine from two different canons, third from a video game), two real-life friends of mine, and myself. (And good gods, did that ever take forever. The things I do for you guys….) The results? Five out of those six characters/people were classed as “High Mary Sues.” The only exception was a personal character who’s a talking plant and was classed “Not a Sue”–most of the questions just don’t apply to flora. I tried to answer the questions a second time as if the plant was human, and got a “You’re a Sue!”-type score, though still lower than for us other five human(oid)s. Answers only vary so much when the character changes species. But still, I think your tests are a bit broken, guys. And I’m not the only one–the roleplayers on this LiveJournal community post voiced their own problems with how the quiz they tried was lacking (warning: link contains no-no words). Says LiveJournal user harlecerule: “Basically, the test says ‘Is your character interesting? Okay, they’re a Sue.’ without enough sections for flaws/provisos that turn a ‘Sue trait’ into ‘oh, okay’ to potentially lower the score.” Llamrei replies, “Yeah, that was kind of my impression. Basically their definition of someone who isn’t a Sue is someone who is not out of the ordinary in any way whatsoever.” Browse the 160 comments tot that post, and you’ll see the vast majority of characters tested were high Sues, regardless of how well-designed they were outside of their unique traits.

It gets better, though–the three fictional characters got a LOWER Sue score than the three real people. Yet we were all still High Mary Sues who are completely unbelievable as characters, according to this quiz. My ex-military friend who’s travelled extensively with the forces, learned all about armed combat, has several visible scars from injuries received during training, and earned numerous awards? Totally unbelievable Sue, even though his experience is pretty normal for military personnel. My friend who’s generally considered quite attractive, is multilingual, hotheaded, and very active in conservation groups? Totally unbelievable Sue, even though, again, she’s not that unusual a person in this evolving and competitive world. Me, with an unusual first and last name, frequently mistaken for being a teenager half my age, and left-handed? Totally unbelievable Sue. Apparently having any sort of unique name and DNA that’s been good to me makes me unbelievable as a character. Huh. Who knew. (Of course, I’m not writing up EVERYTHING that affected our Sue-scores…just referencing some of the more ridiculous questions on these quizzes.)

I think it’s the name questions that are some of the most ridiculous. “Does the character’s name mean something?” Unless you made up a name comprised of syllables you like the sound of, EVERYONE’S name means something in some old language. Even common names like John (Hebrew, “God’s grace”) and Margaret (Greek, “pearl”) mean something. Oh, and don’t think you’re off the hook if you just made up a name that has no meaning; unique names ALSO get you Sue points. Being named after anything in nature, such as an animal or meteorological phenomenon, nets you Sue points as well. This is where the test really screwed me, since my parents made up one of my names, and, being of Native American descent, one of my last names is an animal. Which reminds me, having a Native American character puts you in Sue territory in half the quizzes I took. I suppose I should be offended. Apparently, realistic characters don’t have names like Maria TallChief or Peter Blue Cloud. (Go ahead, Google them. I’ll wait.) Really, if you whittle the quizzes down to their bare elements, just having a name puts you in Sue territory, the way some of these tests are rigged. And gods forbid you actually put any imagination into your character’s names! Can’t have creativity when we’re creating, now, can we? That said, you’re toeing the line of Sue-ness when you name your prophesied hero “Destiny” or give names that describe characters’ traits even though no one could have predicted them at birth, like “Oak” for a strong man who’s built like a tree, or “Melody” for a character who loves singing. You can perhaps pull it off if the babies were named based upon some old fortune-teller’s vision of their future at birth, but it’s really a crapshoot.

That’s not even getting into the ways these quizzes repeatedly contradict themselves. Scars appear to be a sore point for whoever writes these things, because I saw two related questions repeated in nearly every test. “Does your character have any visible scarring from battle?” Sue points! “Does your character have no scars despite being in battle?” Sue points! The problem is that these quizzes TRY to be thorough, but they don’t ask enough questions to provide provisos, and also don’t ask the right questions. Just leaving it at “you get Sue points whether or not your character is scarred” is just sloppy writing. Why would you take a quiz about creating art that’s sloppily compiled? As another example, here’re two more contradicting questions that repeat in each of the tests. “Is your character much older than they appear?” Sue points! “Is your character much younger than they appear?” Sue points! It seems that everyone in the History Of Ever must look EXACTLY within their age range. Well, dang. I guess I’ll go punish my naughty genes now.

Additionally, these tests mistake self-insert characters (GOOD if well-written) for Sues (generally always BAD). “Does the character share your beliefs?” “Is the character’s name based off your own?” Dammit, people, how many times must I go into this? Self-inserts are NOT exclusively Sues! And when I was growing up, I was taught that you’re supposed to write what you know. Writing what you know typically does mean that you, the creator, may share a few traits with your characters. But not too much, or you can cross the line into BAD self-insert. Which is largely indistinguishable from a Sue, if a character has many of your good traits and is very skilled, but has few of your faults. I know it’s a very confusing fine line. Which brings me to the final section of this rant-and-a-half….

Basically, physical traits, names, and interests don’t make a character a Sue by default. You can have a Sue who isn’t gorgeous or doesn’t have godlike powers. Conversely, you can have a well-balanced, well-written character who IS beautiful and powerful. While many Sues DO have superior looks, hobbies, intelligence, and/or abilities, those traits do not a Sue make. What makes a Sue is the lack of balance in your character and story design. In order to have them be believable as a character, they must also be believable as a real, flesh-and-blood person. They must make mistakes and bad decisions. They can’t always have the answers. They must have flaws, and they must pay for exercising those flaws–and I mean personality flaws, like occasional cowardice or flying into rages over trivial matters. Being clumsy or missing a finger doesn’t make your character well-rounded. Those are just physical quirks.

If they have extreme power, there still must be limits on that power so they’re not ALWAYS the saviour of everyone around. For example: “Yes, I could destroy the enemy castle with my mind, but the backlash of the power would put me in a coma if it didn’t just kill me, and I’d be totally useless to you guys then.” Or “Yes, I could destroy the enemy castle with my mind, but I can’t control my powers, and it’s not worth the risk that I’d just end up killing all of us by accident instead of the enemies!”

Everyone can’t be in love with or befriend your character. Everyone is not your friend in real life, after all. Not everyone thinks you’re special, and so it must be for your characters. Everyone can’t be talking about your character when they’re not around, or following your character’s every move. Trust me, no one gives a crap about much of the stuff you (all of us) do here in the real world, and the same must hold true in your created worlds if you want balance. It’s just not that interesting for other people to sit around listening to your character explain how they were the sole saviour of the people trapped in the enemy castle by destroying it with their mind. Any rules that you create for your world must also apply to your character. I don’t care if you’ve got a Jedi with a lightsaber in medieval France. That Jedi is still going to need rules and limits on what he can and can’t do, or you’re going to have a very boring character. Your audience wants to see what makes your character sympathetic and human (regardless of actual species). If you don’t give them that, then you won’t have an audience.

So forget about those Internet quizzes, you who took them. Trust them, and you’ll end up with a pile of bland flour instead of an interesting character. Focus on making your creations well-rounded and balanced. Examine the world around you to see how people really behave, and make sure it comes through in your works. Don’t be afraid to get creative! You’ll know you’ve done a good job when you notice your audience steadily increasing and the feedback is overwhelmingly positive. (Exceptions to this include Stephenie Meyer, who is essentially paid to write Sues. But that’s another rant for another time.)

And don’t waste your breath trying to tell me how X character is obviously a Sue because they’re pretty/descended from angels/a great singer, rather than because they never do anything wrong and all the main characters have a crush on them. You need to re-read this article from the beginning if you STILL think crap which isn’t related to character personality development makes a Sue.

Yeah, I think that’s enough from me for now. I’ll be seein’ you all next time…whether you like it or not!

When I do webcomic reviews, it’s mostly to show my love for a comic that I feel doesn’t get enough exposure.* But what about when a comic I love is already popular enough that I probably can’t tell you webcomic fans anything about it that you don’t already know?

*That doesn’t mean I’ll never write reviews for comics I don’t like. But for my past reviews, I’ve just gone through my regular reading list of comics–and I don’t tend to keep reading things that have stayed past their welcome with me. That said, I actually do have a review in mind for a webcomic that I gave up on, but as it’s only a few months old, I’m giving it half a year to improve before I make with the frowny-faces. Fair’s fair.

Originally, I planned to just leave off reviewing these ceWebrities of webcomic fame and only mention them in terms of comic news and what-have-you. Still, though, I couldn’t escape the desire to blow these guys’ horns. In order to satisfy myself without beating too many deceased equines, I’ve settled on a compromise: the mini-review.

This time, I’m singing the praises of Phil and Kaja Foglio’s Girl Genius (with colourist Cheyenne Wright), a success story in print as well as online. Girl Genius has in the past been nominated for the Web Cartoonists’ Choice Awards, the Eisner Award, the Hugo Awards, and the Eagle Awards; it’s won a Hugo and numerous WCCA categories. The Foglios themselves are no strangers to art fans. Phil Foglio is probably most famous for providing his uniquely-styled illustrations to the MythAdventures series of books by Robert Lynn Asprin, as well as creating former Dragon Magazine comic series What’s New with Phil & Dixie (which you should really check out on the Foglio’s website, along with Girl Genius and the equally-entertaining Buck Godot!) See? There’s some serious talent behind this print-comic-turned-webcomic-turned-print-comic! That alone should be enough to persuade anyone who’s heard of Girl Genius but never checked it out to take a look.

But we all like pretty pictures, right? And I did say that Phil’s art style is unique…extremely unique. If you’ve seen his work before, you’ll instantly recognize it again. Combine Phil’s art with the colouring talent of Cheyenne Wright, and you’ve got a lovely little vision of sequential art to massage your eyeballs. Let’s take a look at the art of Girl Genius, in which the Foglios’ love of Victorian-era dress and culture and steampunk are allowed to roam freely. (Kaja invented the term “gaslamp fantasy” to describe the comic’s less punky, but no less steamy, setting. I don’t mean “steamy” in the saucy way, either. I mean it in the “Water plus heat equals steam. The world can be saved by steam!” way.) Girl Genius takes place in a version of Europe where mad scientists known as “Sparks” run rampant with their minions and twisted creations. When the heroes of your comic are mostly inventors with tenuous grips on sanity at best, problem solving tends to take on new and amusing levels of meaning. Let’s pull out that art and allow me to illustrate (hehe) with a recent storyline:

The disembodied voice in the second panel talking about tours is the voice of the mostly-insane castle/fortress/mad laboratory the characters are currently trying to repair…so that its homicidal behaviour is directed against, well, pretty much anyone OTHER than the guys doing the repair job.

But the life of a Spark is not all fun and games and dissecting of brains. When you muck about with the very forces that hold our world together, you’re bound to run into a bit of backlash. One of the Sparks, a prince named Tarvek, ends up with the contagious lethal disease Hogfarb’s Resplendent Immolation, which apparently turns its victims all sorts of pretty, pretty colours before death (which may involve spontaneous combustion, or may just lead to a literal meltdown of the body). And also makes them delirious. But really, who notices the difference when the infected is a mad scientist?

And how do you treat a terminal illness? Well, if you’re ALSO a Spark, the solution is easy: you hook yourself up to the sufferer to stabilize him (which also gives you his symptoms), move his brain into a nice safe jar or something for storage, then kill him, drain his blood, decontaminate it, and then bring him back to life, at which point he’ll be good as new! Simple, huh? I wonder why doctors never use this treatment in our world….

Hijinks ensue, of course, and our heroine Agatha Heterodyne ends up catching the disease herself. Which rather complicates matters, as she was the one who was going to be treating both Tarvek and rival noble Gilgamesh Wulfenbach (who did the hooking up of himself to Tarvek in order to stabilize–and rationalise–him). Oh, you wacky Sparks! But this also brings out the “romance” part of the comic’s tagline, “Adventure, Romance, MAD SCIENCE!” Our two rich boys are both gunning for Agatha’s affections, which means putting her health before theirs:

If you’ve fallen behind (or, gods forbid, never started) reading, how can you not want to read this comic after all that? Have you no sense of adventure? Have you no love of romance? Have you no obsession with MAD SCIENCE!?

Well, now, even without doing character bios and exposition of the overarching plot and whatnot, this Girl Genius “mini-review” was still a bit longer than you’d expect a “mini” to be. But that just shows you how enthusiastic I am about the work of the Foglios and Wright!

Andrew Dobson, skilled artist and Nintendo fan of old, gives his take on Project Natal and the Sony Wand in “Danny and Spot” (I’m showing you two comics that were uploaded together, but it’s the second comic that’s relevant here.) Check out his amazing work at the link above!

Fall has, uh, fallen upon us here at the Casa de Marlink, according to the bright red tree outside our door. Halloween rushed in and blew out with the speed and force of six three-year-olds on a sugar high, leaving us with just the leftovers of candy for trick-or-treaters, decorations to be taken down*, and some form of minor plague that some generous soul donated to the big Halloween party.

*Decorations were left up into November to ensure we did not incur the wrath of Sam by taking them down too early.

While I soothe my aching head and raw throat with honeyed ginseng tea, let’s get down to brass tacks. Or thumbtacks. Who even uses brass tacks anymore?

You might notice this isn’t the monthly webcomic review I’ve normally been doing the first Tuesday of the month, although a comic on the Web still makes a feature here. I’m switching up the way things are done, but since how a writer works is only of interest to the writer, I’ll spare you the details and get to the topic at hand. Well, topics. I’m gonna get random and complain about a few things here. This post was inspired by the Dobson comics you see here and the gripes they reminded me of.

This isn’t NEW-news; we’ve all heard that the Playstation 3 and Xbox 360 are keen on adding motion controls to their systems. The response from the gaming community so far has largely been a big yawning “Meh.” My, the enthusiasm of disapproval sure has fallen since Nintendo announced the Wii Remote a few years back! (Read the “2006″ panel of the above comic to see the reaction I got a few years ago, when I expressed delight at the proposed Nintendo motion controls that have since come to rule the world.)

But, even though I posted a comic here that’s mocking the Wiimote-mockers, I’m not going to tread…too much…into that old territory of how it’s “cool” to hate the big N because they always seem to come out on top (funny, I would think that would be a reason to LIKE them. We’re supposed to like winners who provide quality products for the consumer, right? Or maybe I’m the only one who still values substance over style. Wait. Said I wasn’t gonna go there. I also said I’d call you after last night. Get used to disappointment, kids.) No, my problem with the gamer-dubbed “copycat” motion technology announced by Sony and Microsoft isn’t relevant to the “copycat” part.

We don’t have a 360 in this house, due to there being nothing we wanted to play on it. We do have a PS3, which I pretty much only use as a DVD/Blu-Ray player. I spend basically all of my gaming time on the PC, the Wii, or my older Nintendo systems (and much of my PC gaming is playing Nintendo ROM’s when I’m not playing Oblivion). It’s not that I’m just obsessed with everything Nintendo does to the point that I won’t touch the competition. It’s that I’m obsessed with Nintendo BECAUSE they produce the games I actually like to play and replay, an area in which both Sony and Microsoft have been severely lacking for me. Let’s have another set of Dobson comics to illustrate:

Before anyone says anything, A Boy and His Blob falls under the “third-party” category, not the “new intellectual property” one.

Yeah, I’m not a big first-person shooter fan, nor am I diggin’ the dull “realistic” brown graphics that make backgrounds and items largely indistinguishable and have become the gaming norm. Don’t think I’m ignoring that Nintendo has been known to fall into this trap too (Twilight Princess, why you gotta hurt me so bad with your muted colours? Can’t we go back to the vibrant pallets of your NES and SNES glory days when I could tell one object from another? Even your N64 forays were more vivid!) And many of the PS3 FPS offerings are pretty much all the same thing, graphics-/gameplay-wise. Even the rare stand-out FPS games like Call of Duty: World at War and Battlefield: Bad Company tend to look alike…and play alike in a bad way, which I’ll get into and ties into the motion-control thing….

I can’t comment on the 360’s proposed motion controls beyond quoting a few gamer responses of “Way to do what Nintendo already did!” since I’ve never played a 360, but I’ve got a big problem with Sony’s take. Which is, how can PS3 developers be looking at new types of controls when the ones they’ve been working with for years are still so loose and unresponsive?

There aren’t that many PS3 games I’ve been excited for and actually played. There was Metal Gear Solid 4 (more brown futuristic FPS with a scruffy hero!), Eden, LittleBigPlanet, and the minigame LocoRoco Cocoreccho!, and that’s pretty much it. And I probably would have liked those games a whole lot more, had the controls actually freakin’ worked.

The battle against Vamp in MGS4, for example, took about five times as long as it should have because the CQC maneuver to put someone in a lock-hold only works when it wants to. And let’s not forget the other times during the game that Snake wouldn’t grab what he was supposed to or go where he was told. (Cranky old man.)

In Eden, the controls work like you’re playing underwater with slow response time, which leaves your little character missing easy grab-jumps and constantly falling to the beginning of the level while the timer ticks down. I can generally only play one level at a time, before getting so frustrated at the controls that I quit playing it for the next two months.

LittleBigPlanet…do I even need to get into the controls and hit detection that are so sloppy, even the game’s designers admit there’s something amiss–and then completely reneged on their promise to repair the broken controls by Christmas 2008? I have tried so hard to love this game with all my heart because it’s extremely unique and obviously a labour of love (see also: Stephen Fry narrating), but it’s another one that leads to migraines. I still recommend to friends that they play this game–but as a rental. I can’t justify buying it until you’ve seen if you can love it despite the crappy controls.

LocoRoco…another game that would be so creative and so much fun, if only the damn LocoRocos actually did what they were told, instead of bouncing in place and ogling the pretty butterfly that is clearly telling them to jump on each other and form a stack. Many friends have seen this game on the PS3 and wanted to try it, only to give up after ten minutes of yelling at the screen and shaking the controller.

Ever since the PS3 entered my home, I’ve had this theory that game developers aren’t making games harder–they’re making games harder to play. (Or perhaps making the games themselves “stupider” so that they don’t recognize what you, the player, are trying to do with that weird little alien “controller” thing your PS3 has heard so much about.) And there’s a big difference between the two. People like a challenge. People don’t like watching themselves fail even though they hit the right button at the right time. If developers can’t get regular old button-dominated controls to work as they should, how can they expect to re-revolutionize gaming with a new(ish, *ahem* Nintendo) type of control? Do me a favour, Sony. Get the old right before you move on to the new. Make me love you, as Nintendo made me love them over two decades ago, and continues to make me love them, by getting it right the first time. And Microsoft? At least try to catch my interest next time, okay?

I now end this largely nonsensical ventilation to pop pills for the headache and more tea for the throatache. Catch you on the flip–or catch you at Nekocon this weekend for those who are going, provided I’m not dying of the zombie plague by then!

…congratulations to Richard and Katy, the supreme rulers of the Spwugniverse!!!!!

They are the essence of everything that is Spwug.  Without either of them, this site wouldn’t be here to bring you a daily dose of all things geek.

It was an honor and a privilege to witness the joining of these two forces of good.  They are my friends.  They are my family.  I am proud to be the head writer of something they envisioned, and I am proud to be a part of their lives.

My best wishes to both of you, Pocky Rich and Katy.  Here’s to bigger and greater things.  With your powers combined, anything is possible.