I've been so sleepy lately. I've been going to bed at reasonable times, but still have been sleeping in ridiculously late. Then when I finally get up, I start wanting to go back to sleep pretty quickly. This new pattern isn't ideal especially for today.
I've got to get a lot of school work done before leaving this afternoon for a concert. I managed to wake up at about nine this morning, so that's not to awful. I'm almost done with the outline I'm supposed to do that is due tomorrow. I've still got to do some readings as well. I'm just lacking motivation. I'd just rather take a nap that's all.
Yesterday morning I had some strange dreams. The content of the dreams isn't what was strange, but rather how they were happening. I kept falling asleep and waking up like 15 minutes later having this seemingly long and detailed dream. It felt like dreams like those should take longer than that.
I forgot to share a story yesterday about Saturday.
I accidentally bought one extra ticket for the game. So we were looking to sell it to someone it to in the line. Everyone we asked was looking for multiple tickets, then I saw him.
"That guy" I said
He was the creeper extraordinaire. I knew he only needed a single. He did. I'm good at recognizing my own kind, I guess.
Thanks for reading.
-Michael
Monday, April 11, 2011
Sunday, April 10, 2011
Crush
Yesterday, I went to the final Blue Jackets game of the season with my friends Pat, Tommy and Sarita. As I'm generally a hermit crab this is the most unusual of occurrences. It was a fun time. There were loads of Buffalo fans there, which is typical when the Blue Jackets aren't competitive and the team their playing is from relatively close. I mean nothing to extraordinary happened.
The interesting thing I noticed at the game was that there were loads of people dressed up. Ladies were in fancy dresses and guys were in suits. I noticed this initially while standing in line for tickets outside and thought it was a little early for any Prom to be going on. I was more puzzled by the fact that all these people were actually in the Arena for the game in their own section.
I couldn't figure it out last night, but I've come up with a theory. I think it was a Wedding Reception. There was a bride and groom getting their pictures taken across the street as we waited for a table at a restaurant. Why someone would want to have a Wedding Reception at a Blue Jackets game is the only thing that is making me still question it.
So, last night before the game, I saw the biggest crush I ever had while we were at dinner. I didn't say a word. It wasn't like she was at the other side of the restaurant or I'd have to chase her. I don't think it would've been terribly awkward either.
Tweet
How did I rationalize it? Well, I didn't really.
Brilliant ending, I know.
-Michael
The interesting thing I noticed at the game was that there were loads of people dressed up. Ladies were in fancy dresses and guys were in suits. I noticed this initially while standing in line for tickets outside and thought it was a little early for any Prom to be going on. I was more puzzled by the fact that all these people were actually in the Arena for the game in their own section.
I couldn't figure it out last night, but I've come up with a theory. I think it was a Wedding Reception. There was a bride and groom getting their pictures taken across the street as we waited for a table at a restaurant. Why someone would want to have a Wedding Reception at a Blue Jackets game is the only thing that is making me still question it.
So, last night before the game, I saw the biggest crush I ever had while we were at dinner. I didn't say a word. It wasn't like she was at the other side of the restaurant or I'd have to chase her. I don't think it would've been terribly awkward either.
Tweet
How did I rationalize it? Well, I didn't really.
Brilliant ending, I know.
-Michael
Saturday, April 9, 2011
Special Comment- The Biggest Fight Is Yet to Come
How messed up has political discourse become now that John Boehner is seen as 'reasonable?' He certainly isn't, but for some reason everyone is accepting the farce that the Tea Party deserves a seat at the table. It is because the Republican leadership is scared of that extreme wing of their party. A big part of that is the media acting as though the teabaggers are equal to the two political parties. Therefore, their bat-shit insane ideas are given equal opportunity even if their numbers are small.
They're loud and they have an unreasonable pull on the early primaries for the Republicans, so the Republican leadership is hesitant to just cut them out of the deal. The early Republican primaries are largely white-bred and have an uber-conservative electorate. So their pull is exaggerated by the media because their message is insane and loud and they have a pull thanks to the unfortunate scheduling of primaries.
There wouldn't have been a near government shutdown last night had Boehner been willing to lose some of the self-proclaimed Tea Party votes. House Democrats and the non-extremist Republicans could have easily passed the budget, but the Republican is too afraid of the Tea Party to do something like that. The Democrats did nothing but give in the negotiations and nearly wasn't enough as the Tea Party feels they are entitled to get everything they want even though they are merely a small faction within a political party. Not withstanding the fact the Senate and Presidency are in Democratic control.
As big as this budget fight may have seemed, it will be nothing compared to what is coming in a few weeks. There was a way to compromise with the budget. There won't be one when it comes to the debt ceiling.
In advocating not raising the debt ceiling, the Tea Party is basically advocating the collapse of the global economy and American civilization. The United States defaulting on it's loans would cause the an economic crisis that would likely put the Great Depression to shame.
Not only should the debt ceiling definitely be raised, but cutting spending at a time like this is just plain dumb. The deficit doesn't matter right now. The government needs to keep spending. It is the best thing the fragile economy has. The cuts that have already been passed and will be passed for the 2012 budget aren't going to help the economy, because the deficit isn't a drag on the economy right now. What is drag is that money isn't flowing and government has the ability to make that happen by itself.
What's really funny is that the Republicans ran up huge deficits when they weren't in any way necessary. They fail to notice the debt added on by George W. Bush is significant and is much worse than what is being added now. That debt was created for tax cuts for the wealthy and unnecessary wars. That was a period where the budget could have easily been balanced.
Debt and deficit just don't matter at this moment in our nation's history. Tens of Trillions of dollars of debt sounds way more scary than it actually is. We are the world's biggest market, so any country that would demand payment on their loans would be destroying their own economy. Spending is the way out of this shaky economy. It's not tax cuts. It's not dealing with the deficit.
That's not to say that the issue of debt and deficit shouldn't be dealt with, but now isn't the time for that. If the economy is stable and the country's work force is working, the government should definitely not spend the way that it is spending now.
And honestly the way to deal with the deficit isn't through domestic spending. If someone is really serious about that issue they have to be willing to take on Military spending and Entitlement Spending. Those are the areas where real changes can be made. Money to Planned Parenthood isn't a drop in the sea, but spending on an over-size, over-utilized military is absolutely massive.
And that's all I have to say about that.
Thanks for reading and please comment.
-Michael.
They're loud and they have an unreasonable pull on the early primaries for the Republicans, so the Republican leadership is hesitant to just cut them out of the deal. The early Republican primaries are largely white-bred and have an uber-conservative electorate. So their pull is exaggerated by the media because their message is insane and loud and they have a pull thanks to the unfortunate scheduling of primaries.
There wouldn't have been a near government shutdown last night had Boehner been willing to lose some of the self-proclaimed Tea Party votes. House Democrats and the non-extremist Republicans could have easily passed the budget, but the Republican is too afraid of the Tea Party to do something like that. The Democrats did nothing but give in the negotiations and nearly wasn't enough as the Tea Party feels they are entitled to get everything they want even though they are merely a small faction within a political party. Not withstanding the fact the Senate and Presidency are in Democratic control.
As big as this budget fight may have seemed, it will be nothing compared to what is coming in a few weeks. There was a way to compromise with the budget. There won't be one when it comes to the debt ceiling.
In advocating not raising the debt ceiling, the Tea Party is basically advocating the collapse of the global economy and American civilization. The United States defaulting on it's loans would cause the an economic crisis that would likely put the Great Depression to shame.
Not only should the debt ceiling definitely be raised, but cutting spending at a time like this is just plain dumb. The deficit doesn't matter right now. The government needs to keep spending. It is the best thing the fragile economy has. The cuts that have already been passed and will be passed for the 2012 budget aren't going to help the economy, because the deficit isn't a drag on the economy right now. What is drag is that money isn't flowing and government has the ability to make that happen by itself.
What's really funny is that the Republicans ran up huge deficits when they weren't in any way necessary. They fail to notice the debt added on by George W. Bush is significant and is much worse than what is being added now. That debt was created for tax cuts for the wealthy and unnecessary wars. That was a period where the budget could have easily been balanced.
Debt and deficit just don't matter at this moment in our nation's history. Tens of Trillions of dollars of debt sounds way more scary than it actually is. We are the world's biggest market, so any country that would demand payment on their loans would be destroying their own economy. Spending is the way out of this shaky economy. It's not tax cuts. It's not dealing with the deficit.
That's not to say that the issue of debt and deficit shouldn't be dealt with, but now isn't the time for that. If the economy is stable and the country's work force is working, the government should definitely not spend the way that it is spending now.
And honestly the way to deal with the deficit isn't through domestic spending. If someone is really serious about that issue they have to be willing to take on Military spending and Entitlement Spending. Those are the areas where real changes can be made. Money to Planned Parenthood isn't a drop in the sea, but spending on an over-size, over-utilized military is absolutely massive.
And that's all I have to say about that.
Thanks for reading and please comment.
-Michael.
Friday, April 8, 2011
I'll Fight Off The Spring
This is going to be choppy and stupid. Not that everything here isn't that way, but it's bad enough this time that I thought I'd give warning
I hate the Spring. It is without question my least favorite season.
Nothing good ever seems to come out of April. It's never a positive when you bring up what happened on a day in April in History. Bombs kill people, great men are shot and senseless massacres.
Spring is by theory identical to Fall. In practice they just aren't though. I'm sick basically all of the time in both seasons, but it's so much worse in spring.
I've been over how everyone is bitchy in the spring too. Everyone has to bitch about the weather as if it's never happened like this before, but of course it has. It's what fucking spring is. It never just suddenly decides to be warm and then stick. It'll be warm and then it'll be cold. Some days you'll start off in a winter jacket and end wearing shorts. It's the same every year.
Funnier still is the people who refuse to accept that the weather fluctuates. As soon as it hits 70 degrees once, the reasonable clothes go away. It may have been seventy a few days ago, but now it's below freezing. Why are you wearing flip-flops and a mini-skirt?
The worst thing for me though is that it signifies the end of winter. I much prefer the cold.
In summary Spring sucks because: I'm always sick, people are bitchy, the worst month of the year, and the winter ends.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I sound way more upset about that than I actually am. It happens sometimes. It's not all bad. I mean it's nice to not have to scrape off the car. Spending sometime outside is nice too. My Birthday is in spring, so is my brother's and my Mom's.
I'll probably be writing about the (potential) government shutdown tomorrow. Hopefully that will be better.
Thanks for reading.
-Michael
I hate the Spring. It is without question my least favorite season.
Nothing good ever seems to come out of April. It's never a positive when you bring up what happened on a day in April in History. Bombs kill people, great men are shot and senseless massacres.
Spring is by theory identical to Fall. In practice they just aren't though. I'm sick basically all of the time in both seasons, but it's so much worse in spring.
I've been over how everyone is bitchy in the spring too. Everyone has to bitch about the weather as if it's never happened like this before, but of course it has. It's what fucking spring is. It never just suddenly decides to be warm and then stick. It'll be warm and then it'll be cold. Some days you'll start off in a winter jacket and end wearing shorts. It's the same every year.
Funnier still is the people who refuse to accept that the weather fluctuates. As soon as it hits 70 degrees once, the reasonable clothes go away. It may have been seventy a few days ago, but now it's below freezing. Why are you wearing flip-flops and a mini-skirt?
The worst thing for me though is that it signifies the end of winter. I much prefer the cold.
In summary Spring sucks because: I'm always sick, people are bitchy, the worst month of the year, and the winter ends.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I sound way more upset about that than I actually am. It happens sometimes. It's not all bad. I mean it's nice to not have to scrape off the car. Spending sometime outside is nice too. My Birthday is in spring, so is my brother's and my Mom's.
I'll probably be writing about the (potential) government shutdown tomorrow. Hopefully that will be better.
Thanks for reading.
-Michael
Thursday, April 7, 2011
I Don't Want To Line Dance
I'm rather tired of seeing Alan Jackson before every Youtube video I watch. Let me tell you something. I don't want to 'see you down the line.' I mean fucking line dancing? I can't imagine that line dancers is a very big demographic. Who in the hell is this supposed to appeal to? I prefered the Asian man telling me something that violated the laws of thermodynamics.
More importantly, How in the hell do I know Alan Jackson is? I feel like it is a waste of a part of my brain to know some random Country singing.
I think it is a new strategy by some advertising; to be as annoying as possible. I mean why bother creating a decent commercial when a lot of people don't watch them? So, just be as annoying as possible in the mediums where the ads can't be fast-forwarded through. We are were horribly assaulted by those terrible NAPA lip-syncing ads during the NCAA tournament. They were unavoidable because they were during live sporting events.
I wish I had something exciting to share, but really nothing in my day is that worthy. It cost me $42.15 to fill up my truck today thanks to oil speculation on Wall Street. I pre-ordered Mortal Kombat as well. That's the best I can give you guys.
I'll try to think of something better for the next few days.
Thanks for reading.
-Michael
More importantly, How in the hell do I know Alan Jackson is? I feel like it is a waste of a part of my brain to know some random Country singing.
I think it is a new strategy by some advertising; to be as annoying as possible. I mean why bother creating a decent commercial when a lot of people don't watch them? So, just be as annoying as possible in the mediums where the ads can't be fast-forwarded through. We are were horribly assaulted by those terrible NAPA lip-syncing ads during the NCAA tournament. They were unavoidable because they were during live sporting events.
I wish I had something exciting to share, but really nothing in my day is that worthy. It cost me $42.15 to fill up my truck today thanks to oil speculation on Wall Street. I pre-ordered Mortal Kombat as well. That's the best I can give you guys.
I'll try to think of something better for the next few days.
Thanks for reading.
-Michael
Wednesday, April 6, 2011
Re: Sirius Black
In response to Tyrannosauruslexxx's post about Sirius Black yesterday.
In the Order of the Phoenix, Sirius Black is definitely not shown in his best light. Honestly, almost none of the characters are shown in their best light. He seems reckless and at times treats Harry more as a friend, or replacement for James, than he does a godson. Dumbledore won't talk to or acknowledge Harry despite the promises made following Harry's return from Little Hangleton. Harry is a whiny adolescent for most of the book, even locking himself up with Buckbeak after deciding everyone would be better without him.
I think Sirius in the Order of the Phoenix isn't upset that he's stuck in Grimmauld Place like a grounded teenager. It is about not being able to help the Order; not being able to do anything to protect Harry. Lupin, Hagrid, Dumbledore and worst of all Snape were able do be active in the Order. He didn't like that his friends were in so much danger or that his enemy was able to be hero while he had to remain sedentary and could easily be made out to be a coward. Sirius could deal with being stuck in Grimmauld Place, but not while the world was going to hell all around it.
In The Order of the Phoenix, Sirius and Harry were actually in pretty similar situations. Sirius is stuck in his house. Harry is under the thumb of the biggest bitch* in the series. Sirius definitely advised Harry to do some reckless things, but most of it wouldn't put Harry in any real danger. The exception being proposing the meeting in Hogsmeade, but even that probably wasn't as horribly risky as it may seem and is out of desire to see Harry as much as getting out of Grimmauld Place.
Still, I don't think Sirius completely dropped the ball as 'grown-up' in the Order of the Phoenix. There are a few particular points in that book where he put aside his grumpiness and was a bit more parental.
The first is the fight between him and Molly about what Harry should be allowed to know about what was going on with the Order. At that point in Harry's life he had already faced Voldemort three times and certainly deserved not to be kept in the dark about what was going on. Molly was being over-protective. She was not serving as a better parental figure than Sirius. Keeping Harry in the dark to 'protect' him would have likely caused Harry to do something stupid or dangerous.
"Molly, you're not the only person at this table who cares about Harry," said Lupin sharply, "Sirius, sit down."
When the children returned to Grimmauld Place after Mr. Weasley was attacked, Sirius was very mature and acted as a authority figure. He wasn't going to try to rescue Arthur himself. He didn't rush them to go see their father. He was calm and had them stay put and wait for word. That certainly wasn't a rash thing to do, but it was what was for the best.
There's no denying that Sirius had a bad temper. Still, I don't think that hurt his ability to do well as Harry's godfather. This bring me to the Occlumency lessons. I think that what Sirius did when Snape showed up at Grimmauld Place to tell Harry about the lessons is probably what James would have done in that position. It may not have been the wisest thing, to almost duel in the kitchen, but it was out of love for Harry and hatred of Snape. When Harry used Umbridge's fire to talk to Sirius, it was a combination of Lupin's telling him that he must continue with the lessons no matter what and Sirius' indignation that showed Harry how important those lesson's were. Sirius wanting to 'have a word with Snape,' wasn't the smartest thing for him to consider, but it clearly showed how much he cared about Harry and his understanding of the importance of those lessons despite Snape.
"Nice one!" shouted Sirius, forcing Harry's head down as a pair of Stunning Spells flew at them. "Now I want you to get out of---"
Finally that brings me to the Battle at the Ministry. Sirius came to protect Harry. He fought Death Eaters while trying to get Harry to get out of there. He loved Harry cared that Harry was safe way more than he cared about himself and his actions in the battle clearly showed that. Ultimately he died because he loved Harry so much.
Going backwards, in the Goblet of Fire, Sirius was definitely a more sound advice giver to Harry. It was clear to him that Harry was in real danger at Hogwarts that year. Whereas in the fifth year, the danger was real, but in reality Harry was safer in the fifth year than the forth. Voldemort had no chance to get into Hogwarts in year five and unlike year four there was no agent of his in the school.
That's all we really end up getting about Sirius. We know the actual Sirius for two books. He wasn't the best role model. He was definitely arrogant and brash. Still, he loved Harry like a son and having that capacity is amazing considering he was locked in Azkaban for so long. He didn't show Harry how to be the ideal wizard. However, he did show loyalty, courage and the power of love. Those were the lessons Harry really needed; not a how to keep his temper under control.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I couldn't really find a way to put this into the post, but it fits so here it goes.
I really think that Sirius and Dumbledore both feel tremendous guilt about the Fidelius Charm on the Potter's home. It's obvious in hindsight that Sirius' idea to use Peter Pettigrew instead of himself was really dumb. I think this is part of the reason he doesn't fill the father role exactly, but treats Harry more like a peer in some circumstances. He doesn't think he's worthy to fill James' shoes, because he blames himself for his and Lily's deaths.
The strange about that to me is that I think the end result would have been the same, just slightly delayed had Sirius been the secret-keeper. Sirius would have been killed by Voldemort, because as talented of a wizard as Sirius was he would be no match. As we learned after Dumbledore's death, once the Secret-Keeper dies everyone who know about it becomes Secret-keeper. Peter Pettigrew would've undoubtedly would've know about the Potter's home and once Sirius was dead it would be the same result.
I think Dumbledore feels guilt about not forcing James and Lily to make him Secret-keeper. Voldemort wouldn't have dared take on Dumbledore, so the Potter's home and little Harry would have been safe. I think that is at least part of the reason he was always certain of Harry's safety and took such an interest in him.
So today comments are for your thoughts on Sirius Black and the Fidelius Charm.
Thanks for reading and please comment.
-Michael
*Ok, the biggest bitch not named Bellatrix LeStrange
In the Order of the Phoenix, Sirius Black is definitely not shown in his best light. Honestly, almost none of the characters are shown in their best light. He seems reckless and at times treats Harry more as a friend, or replacement for James, than he does a godson. Dumbledore won't talk to or acknowledge Harry despite the promises made following Harry's return from Little Hangleton. Harry is a whiny adolescent for most of the book, even locking himself up with Buckbeak after deciding everyone would be better without him.
I think Sirius in the Order of the Phoenix isn't upset that he's stuck in Grimmauld Place like a grounded teenager. It is about not being able to help the Order; not being able to do anything to protect Harry. Lupin, Hagrid, Dumbledore and worst of all Snape were able do be active in the Order. He didn't like that his friends were in so much danger or that his enemy was able to be hero while he had to remain sedentary and could easily be made out to be a coward. Sirius could deal with being stuck in Grimmauld Place, but not while the world was going to hell all around it.
In The Order of the Phoenix, Sirius and Harry were actually in pretty similar situations. Sirius is stuck in his house. Harry is under the thumb of the biggest bitch* in the series. Sirius definitely advised Harry to do some reckless things, but most of it wouldn't put Harry in any real danger. The exception being proposing the meeting in Hogsmeade, but even that probably wasn't as horribly risky as it may seem and is out of desire to see Harry as much as getting out of Grimmauld Place.
Still, I don't think Sirius completely dropped the ball as 'grown-up' in the Order of the Phoenix. There are a few particular points in that book where he put aside his grumpiness and was a bit more parental.
The first is the fight between him and Molly about what Harry should be allowed to know about what was going on with the Order. At that point in Harry's life he had already faced Voldemort three times and certainly deserved not to be kept in the dark about what was going on. Molly was being over-protective. She was not serving as a better parental figure than Sirius. Keeping Harry in the dark to 'protect' him would have likely caused Harry to do something stupid or dangerous.
"Molly, you're not the only person at this table who cares about Harry," said Lupin sharply, "Sirius, sit down."
When the children returned to Grimmauld Place after Mr. Weasley was attacked, Sirius was very mature and acted as a authority figure. He wasn't going to try to rescue Arthur himself. He didn't rush them to go see their father. He was calm and had them stay put and wait for word. That certainly wasn't a rash thing to do, but it was what was for the best.
There's no denying that Sirius had a bad temper. Still, I don't think that hurt his ability to do well as Harry's godfather. This bring me to the Occlumency lessons. I think that what Sirius did when Snape showed up at Grimmauld Place to tell Harry about the lessons is probably what James would have done in that position. It may not have been the wisest thing, to almost duel in the kitchen, but it was out of love for Harry and hatred of Snape. When Harry used Umbridge's fire to talk to Sirius, it was a combination of Lupin's telling him that he must continue with the lessons no matter what and Sirius' indignation that showed Harry how important those lesson's were. Sirius wanting to 'have a word with Snape,' wasn't the smartest thing for him to consider, but it clearly showed how much he cared about Harry and his understanding of the importance of those lessons despite Snape.
"Nice one!" shouted Sirius, forcing Harry's head down as a pair of Stunning Spells flew at them. "Now I want you to get out of---"
Finally that brings me to the Battle at the Ministry. Sirius came to protect Harry. He fought Death Eaters while trying to get Harry to get out of there. He loved Harry cared that Harry was safe way more than he cared about himself and his actions in the battle clearly showed that. Ultimately he died because he loved Harry so much.
Going backwards, in the Goblet of Fire, Sirius was definitely a more sound advice giver to Harry. It was clear to him that Harry was in real danger at Hogwarts that year. Whereas in the fifth year, the danger was real, but in reality Harry was safer in the fifth year than the forth. Voldemort had no chance to get into Hogwarts in year five and unlike year four there was no agent of his in the school.
That's all we really end up getting about Sirius. We know the actual Sirius for two books. He wasn't the best role model. He was definitely arrogant and brash. Still, he loved Harry like a son and having that capacity is amazing considering he was locked in Azkaban for so long. He didn't show Harry how to be the ideal wizard. However, he did show loyalty, courage and the power of love. Those were the lessons Harry really needed; not a how to keep his temper under control.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I couldn't really find a way to put this into the post, but it fits so here it goes.
I really think that Sirius and Dumbledore both feel tremendous guilt about the Fidelius Charm on the Potter's home. It's obvious in hindsight that Sirius' idea to use Peter Pettigrew instead of himself was really dumb. I think this is part of the reason he doesn't fill the father role exactly, but treats Harry more like a peer in some circumstances. He doesn't think he's worthy to fill James' shoes, because he blames himself for his and Lily's deaths.
The strange about that to me is that I think the end result would have been the same, just slightly delayed had Sirius been the secret-keeper. Sirius would have been killed by Voldemort, because as talented of a wizard as Sirius was he would be no match. As we learned after Dumbledore's death, once the Secret-Keeper dies everyone who know about it becomes Secret-keeper. Peter Pettigrew would've undoubtedly would've know about the Potter's home and once Sirius was dead it would be the same result.
I think Dumbledore feels guilt about not forcing James and Lily to make him Secret-keeper. Voldemort wouldn't have dared take on Dumbledore, so the Potter's home and little Harry would have been safe. I think that is at least part of the reason he was always certain of Harry's safety and took such an interest in him.
So today comments are for your thoughts on Sirius Black and the Fidelius Charm.
Thanks for reading and please comment.
-Michael
*Ok, the biggest bitch not named Bellatrix LeStrange
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
Gaming Tuesday- Homefront
Last time on Gaming Tuesday: I told you that I was fighting the urge to go get Homefront. That I'd just wait until I could pick it up used and on the cheap. Now on Gaming Tuesday:
I bought Homefront. It was a breakdown in my better judgment. I kept hearing about how awesome the multiplayer was and I just went to Gamestop and dropped the full price on it. This is as borderline as I've ever been on whether or not the game is worth it. I'm not going to do a review since it's already been out for a while, but I'll tell you what I think of the game. There will be no major spoilers, if you're worried.
I'll start with the single-player campaign. Simply put, it is below average. The story isn't horrible or even that crazy once you get over the premise, but it is by no means extraordinary. It succeeds in horrifying the player with the first cut scene. You see Americans being shipped to internment camps and most awfully parents being executed in front of their small child. They certainly didn't pull any punches when it came to setting the true horror of the setting.
The player finds a few more horrible scenes as he or she plays through the campaign. Those scenes go along with pretty typical first person shooter type objectives. You know, 'kill all the bad guys and get something' or 'take out something at a certain point,' the status quo. The game play mechanics are identical to Call of Duty, so one won't struggle with the controls in all likelihood.
It sounds fine, but this game was not done very well technically. The graphics are terrible for a game in 2011. There are frame-rate issues caused simply by having your character turn to the side. There is no bullet penetration, which is just annoying. The controls aren't actually sluggish. In fact there as close to Call of Duty 1:1 as I've played, but they end up looking sluggish due to the choppy frame-rate at times.
The thing that is worst about the campaign is how fucking short it is. A game like Homefront, with such a unique story, should not have a campaign that is only five hours. A longer campaign would allow the story to develop more naturally and would just be better. A Call of Duty 4 length campaign would've suited this game very well. It should have been longer, more exciting and should have built to a fantastic crescendo*.
The single player was definitely a big let down in Homefront. There's not even a cool secondary single player game mode. The best props I can give to that aspect of the game is that the collectibles are really cool.
It is then surprising that out of that Single Player came the Multiplayer that Homefront has. I would've thought the focus of a game like Homefront would be single player. It would've been a way for this game to stand out from Call of Duty, whose last two single player campaigns have been lacking. However, that is clearly not how THQ and Chaos went about it. Their focus was obviously multiplayer and they ended up doing very well at it.
The most notable thing about Homefront's multiplayer is the absence of Killstreaks. They are replaced by an in-game currency system called, "Battle Points." You earn these points through getting kills, capturing objectives, taking out enemy vehicles and a few other things. This relieves the stress of getting to your Killstreak reward and thus makes it a much less stressful FPS. You don't have to worry about getting the streaks that you need in Call of Duty, but can focus on getting as many kills as quickly as possible for you to my your reward.
The Killstreaks themselves are pretty cool. You can get into armor or a helicopter. You can use your points to buy recon for your team. This sounds like it would get annoying, but it isn't that awful as it is pretty well balanced. Another cool thing is that a lot of these rewards have a second seat that a teammate can spawn into, which ends up benefiting both players.
Also this game had dedicated servers. Dedicated servers give me a boner.
There certainly are some flaws in the multiplayer. The hitbox is too small. It is really hectic and hard to really get into a good flow since there are so many players on the map. It's not uncommon to get repeatedly fucked by tanks and helicopters. Spawns aren't that brilliant even though they give a bird's eye view.
I really know that Multiplayer is good, because I'm terrible at Homefront, but I still enjoy playing it. I can think of few games I can say that I can actually enjoy while doing terrible, but this is one of them.
Thanks for reading and please comment.
-Michael
*If I had told you how the game ends, it would sound a lot cooler than it actually was.
I bought Homefront. It was a breakdown in my better judgment. I kept hearing about how awesome the multiplayer was and I just went to Gamestop and dropped the full price on it. This is as borderline as I've ever been on whether or not the game is worth it. I'm not going to do a review since it's already been out for a while, but I'll tell you what I think of the game. There will be no major spoilers, if you're worried.
I'll start with the single-player campaign. Simply put, it is below average. The story isn't horrible or even that crazy once you get over the premise, but it is by no means extraordinary. It succeeds in horrifying the player with the first cut scene. You see Americans being shipped to internment camps and most awfully parents being executed in front of their small child. They certainly didn't pull any punches when it came to setting the true horror of the setting.
The player finds a few more horrible scenes as he or she plays through the campaign. Those scenes go along with pretty typical first person shooter type objectives. You know, 'kill all the bad guys and get something' or 'take out something at a certain point,' the status quo. The game play mechanics are identical to Call of Duty, so one won't struggle with the controls in all likelihood.
It sounds fine, but this game was not done very well technically. The graphics are terrible for a game in 2011. There are frame-rate issues caused simply by having your character turn to the side. There is no bullet penetration, which is just annoying. The controls aren't actually sluggish. In fact there as close to Call of Duty 1:1 as I've played, but they end up looking sluggish due to the choppy frame-rate at times.
The thing that is worst about the campaign is how fucking short it is. A game like Homefront, with such a unique story, should not have a campaign that is only five hours. A longer campaign would allow the story to develop more naturally and would just be better. A Call of Duty 4 length campaign would've suited this game very well. It should have been longer, more exciting and should have built to a fantastic crescendo*.
The single player was definitely a big let down in Homefront. There's not even a cool secondary single player game mode. The best props I can give to that aspect of the game is that the collectibles are really cool.
It is then surprising that out of that Single Player came the Multiplayer that Homefront has. I would've thought the focus of a game like Homefront would be single player. It would've been a way for this game to stand out from Call of Duty, whose last two single player campaigns have been lacking. However, that is clearly not how THQ and Chaos went about it. Their focus was obviously multiplayer and they ended up doing very well at it.
The most notable thing about Homefront's multiplayer is the absence of Killstreaks. They are replaced by an in-game currency system called, "Battle Points." You earn these points through getting kills, capturing objectives, taking out enemy vehicles and a few other things. This relieves the stress of getting to your Killstreak reward and thus makes it a much less stressful FPS. You don't have to worry about getting the streaks that you need in Call of Duty, but can focus on getting as many kills as quickly as possible for you to my your reward.
The Killstreaks themselves are pretty cool. You can get into armor or a helicopter. You can use your points to buy recon for your team. This sounds like it would get annoying, but it isn't that awful as it is pretty well balanced. Another cool thing is that a lot of these rewards have a second seat that a teammate can spawn into, which ends up benefiting both players.
Also this game had dedicated servers. Dedicated servers give me a boner.
There certainly are some flaws in the multiplayer. The hitbox is too small. It is really hectic and hard to really get into a good flow since there are so many players on the map. It's not uncommon to get repeatedly fucked by tanks and helicopters. Spawns aren't that brilliant even though they give a bird's eye view.
I really know that Multiplayer is good, because I'm terrible at Homefront, but I still enjoy playing it. I can think of few games I can say that I can actually enjoy while doing terrible, but this is one of them.
Thanks for reading and please comment.
-Michael
*If I had told you how the game ends, it would sound a lot cooler than it actually was.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)