Tuesday, December 17, 2013

why or why not?


 The hardest thing about doing anything, is that you are doing it for everyone along with yourself with the chance that no one will hear, and the place you put yourself in is a place everyone can attack. That in itself may be selfish, that you want someone to hear and appreciate your voice/art/idea the way you have, but on some level it must stem from a desire to share. The same way when you find a really good book, or film, or music you know someone else will like and you hold onto that piece of work and will even defend it because you see it for its merits. And you are thankful for those merits because for whatever time you had an escape, you had something that you felt was great.

On the part of the creator I'd argue it's even more difficult, when you hold that part of you that identifies with the art you are not just risking something that gave you escapism and joy for a time, you are holding up something that is deeply a part of your release. At least if you care about your work.. than what you hold up is almost everything. And having that knowledge as you sit down and go over your work is one of the most terrifying things. I think artists have a tendency to be both the most blind and critical of their own work, in one sense I see them becoming blind to the flaws of their work so they can just release to their passion without hesitation because that is the only way to get it finished, and in another sense I see them agonizing over every out of place detail or miss-step along the way because that is the only way to get better. Every chief considers himself food critic, every artist a authority on their craft, every writer, and so on and so forth. Everyone is a critic, everyone.

And yet the anxiety ridden artist, over-stressed writer, and depressed performer still sit down to their craft. For a time they shut down that part of their brain that asks "why bother", they say "because" and in their release find catharsis in their work. That catharsis shows in the artist and the understanding audience will see it as something true, because at the end of the day it's the way it's done inside the artist that makes it distinguished. And with time that internalized care for the doing, that passion and obsession over the art becomes the guiding light of self criticism and refinement, and in time the informed critics see that as improvement, as a refined craft.  But the audience will not always be understanding and the critics will not ultimately judge the material by the craft or its stand alone merits. And worse then that the artist will not always be within their work nor will they have reflected upon their work enough to take criticism as constructive. 

When I work there are a few things that are always going through my mind. 

All of my life I've been proven a novice... All of it. I'm only halfway decent at anything I consider myself "skilled" at. Anytime someone gives me a task I plan out my procedure based on what experience and education I've had and then look at the task realizing how blatantly lost I am. Only occasionally do I have moments when I'm less lost than the people around me, but it's clear I'm only a step if that ahead. I'm a assistant chef for a living and I can't do anything for myself without burning at least one thing every other week. We're all just stumbling through life, it's okay to acknowledge that. Every professional makes the occasional novice mistake. It's perfectly within the novice's right to be kinda terrible at what they do. I hold this saying to heart so I feel a little less pathetic every day, I hope it helps you too. 

We are the incomprehensibly small and insignificant specs in the briefest moment of time and space and the entirety of our existence will make no difference. 

This will very likely be fact to some effect. Nihilists look at the mother and say "Even if you love your child ever day and work hard to provide for them, there are days when they will hate you, they might even abandon you. When you are old and weak they will be spending too much time with their own families to visit you when you are lonely. You feel fulfilled and individualized by a role that is a simply biological function and ultimately meaningless." they say to the artist "Your work will be misconstrued and ultimately forgotten by the few that recognize it. You're position only fills the world with trivial appeal while you could be doing real good in the world. You're fulfillment is prideful and self-centered, who are you to think you deserve what you've earned for your work?" they say these things to the soldier and to the teacher. But I don't believe nihilists are seeing it through all the way. They view the act as insubstantial because the end result, but I don't think they really think about the fact that it's still happening despite the result, or what that might mean. The mother knows that her child might leave her, but when she goes on loving and devoting herself to her child regardless, when she is doing the act for the sake of the act doesn't that make it more pure? If a mother loves her child because it is her child and she feels at her core the thing to do is love it, that she'll fight herself in moments of anger and frustration because despite herself she loves her child, doesn't that make parenting so much more pure? When the artist looks at their art in the grand scheme and sees how it means nothing but continues despite everything doesn't that make the art that much more genuine and possibly important a thing? 

I think this sense we have towards one another, this awe in the face of true artistic integrity is a reflection of our value of ambition in its most basic form. Because that is a place we can empathize with. When someone wants to write a novel to help pay for their third house it's not something we can easily relate to, it and its owner are just not real to us. When we write short stories or novels we do it for the challenge of doing it. We do it for the love of writing. And when we see someone that has maintained that kind ambition we can relate to, it can be a kind of religious experience for us. We see our favorite musicians or actors, or go to book signings and become star struck. Because we see that ambition maintained in the face of everything as something great and human. Maybe we empathize with that kind of pure ambition, without the money or fame, because deep down we don't consider ourselves good enough to get to that point of fame and wealth...  maybe it's just because deep down that's not something we really want. Typically people say they'd rather do what they love and have to do whatever extra work to make enough to just get by than be rich and not be able to do what they love... 

I think this says alot about us.

I don't know what anyone will think about this or what they'll get out of it, but I wrote it. A part of me wishes  I could say I don't, but I do care what people think and get out of this. An overwhelming part of me cares because this isn't me shouting out into a empty moment in time and space this is me sharing a thought with you, the reader. I hope it finds you well. I hope you think a little better about whatever it is you do but mostly I hope you feel better about yourself. Not more inflated, this has nothing to do with ego. This is not about perception, this is about self worth. Ego is a sense that is compared against other, that is to look at a mirror and think of yourself in the terms you might imagine or hope to imagine other's consider you. Self worth, I believe, is a sense of looking in the mirror and acknowledging a human like every other human. A thing that has unimaginable greatness within it, a thing that is inherently beautiful, and flawed,  hilarious, profound, and caring, and so very valuable. 


Saturday, November 16, 2013

DeconstructionCraft #2

Alright, here's to completing a second. I'm still new and getting the hang of this, "actual writing" thing but I think I'm improving. Slowly but surely. My second contribution to DeconstructionCraft, here I discuss the multifaceted discussion of the interpersonal and social identification that surrounds the label of "Gamer". What defines a gamer and how do we see and treat this label in our culture.. Geh, honestly there is so much that could go into this, the gang at NextLevel could basically write a book all about the label "Gamer". I just brush over theories; Sumner's theory of in group favoritism, Bulter's performance theory, Watt's on personal identity, and Hume's philosophy of taste, which is where my thesis is. If you're interested give it a look, if you don't like what I have to say, next week part two written by my cohort Kevin will go up to show a different perspective on the topic ^^.. That's really what I like about this project, we both kinda have a tendency to over-think things :P When we do our research it's fun to see the two trains of thought branching from the same topic.

Tuesday, October 22, 2013


Oh lord.. That was painful. 

Alright, so DeconstructionCraft is the Bi-weekly column I'm contributing to, and that first argument was a pain. Not just because it covers philosophy of language, and philosophy is something I have limited experience in, or because Wittgenstein is both difficult to grasp and brilliant, and therefor hard to argue.. But because I both procrastinated and had little expertise with the site... last minute finding banners and stuff is irritating. 

 That's all good though, best way to learn. I've gotten one of the most difficult ones checked off the list. What defines a Game. I feel like that should be etched in gold on a varnished board someplace for any game culture journalist when they really dig into the philosophy of that question. Because games really don't exist you know... same with art.. or stories.. They're just made up. Here's my post if you're interested.

Tuesday, September 3, 2013

Keep going indies, big dreamers, and risk takers.

For Dreamers

It really sickens me the number of drafts I see in my post list, and how many of them are basically empty. Tons of articles, started, not finished.

Getting back into the swing of things is rough, school, work, relationships, there's always something. And really that's just life, learning to deal enough to move past the low times is essential and part of everyone's development; keeping true to yourself and keeping good people around you in the process is part of true happiness. And of course all of this is very difficult, though entirely worth it.

To bring this back around to topic. It's really hard to keep going with all of those dreams. This is why we aspire and hold those successful and happy people we see in life in such high regard. The only problem there is we see these more successful people and instead of seeing inspiration so often we get the "Man I could never be that good." gut response and don't try. Unless of course, we actually have no idea the level of work and dedication that's gone into their success, which is where we respond with "Bah, what a idiot, I could do that and be famous." Which is two parts incorrect, one part obvious.

Bit of Reality
And here is my point, the I could do that is where you succeed. That's all there is too it. Add on the assumptions on how much work is actually behind the success and the assumption that you'll wind up famous and you're horribly mislead. You can't know how much work goes into, making a game, writing a novel, creating an internet show, whatever, until you actually do that thing. And you'll never know how much goes into doing that successfully until you do it to completion, and then continue doing it, while enjoying yourself. If you hate what you are currently doing, then you're doing it wrong. Not to say you're doing the wrong thing, but you're doing it wrong. Living the dream is not about the endgame, it's good to have goals and strive towards them, but if the goal is too high for you to feel good about yourself while striving for it, then you're not living the dream. Every goal, every project, ever path, has set backs. Some harder then others, but you will eventually hit all of them. The key to success, is not staying down when you've tripped over the first, dozenth, or millionth set back.

The key to successfully being successful (actually having the enjoyable lifestyle you dreamed of) is not living for the lifestyle, but for your passion. If you see yourself taking entire days just to write the next best selling novel or spending hours behind the computer to be hailed as the next genius video game designer; then you're going to be miserable and you probably won't be very good at what you do. That's because it's only the people who care about what they're doing, instead of comparing themselves and their work to others, are the only ones with the mindset to focus on carry on through the hardships and the setbacks; because they see they're doing what they love, that's what makes them happy, and that's what they go to when times are rough. Of course these people make it look easy, they have the right mindset. Instead of living for their goals, where only in achieving those goals does someone feel fulfilled; they live for their art, where in simply partaking in their art that someone finds joy. Now this might sound like hippy talk, we've had so many people in our lives insist you can't live off dreams, that you need to work for this "backup plan" before going out and doing what you want. All of that I find defeatist and nonsensical for 4 simple reasons.

1. If your goal in life is to have a solid "backup plan" to your dreams, then you will be miserable. 
Because not living with something you truly feel is your propose, is miserable. This is why boring adults have children and then feel better about themselves, because they want and need propose. (not implying that parenting is an empty replacement for any higher cause)

2. Living the dream does not mean being ignorant of reality. It does not equate to quitting your job, leaving your family, and living as some hobo painting the faces of celebrities onto sneakers on the street. It means gearing your life and actions towards self fulfillment while maintaining your responsibilities. Paying the bills, being a parent. Continuing to be in the life of those that care about you. Every action is an investment; measure the cost and return of time and money put in and how much joy and profit you receive out of it. No it's not all about the money, but if what your doing is burning a hole in your wallet/purse to the degree you can't life comfortably and need it as an escape from your situation, then you need to be mindful of your spending with your financial situation. (this is where the comparison of games and drugs come in) If you have student lones you have no business flying out to Florida on vacation with friends or buying two of the next gen consoles, unless you get a serious discount and budget the rest of your year to make up for it. It's about finding a balance between a lifestyle you and your family can feel content with, while doing something that makes you feel better about yourself.

3. There is too much offered in life to assign yourself to "plans" for the future. So much will happen, some opportunities will never present themselves meanwhile others will bombard you daily. Being attentive and listening will show you how much the world has to offer on a daily basis, being honest to yourself will let you see what you should/can do to better yourself, and acknowledging you might be wrong and you probably have more options then you think will let you take steps outside that comfort zone and live a life and be happy when you didn't think you could. Don't limit yourself, simply be honest with yourself. It is only when we are dishonest with ourselves that we end making decisions we will one day look back and regret.

4. Yes it is true that we are only assigned one lifetime, and careers are years in the making. But that doesn't mean after you picked a career in high school or got promoted at your day job that you're stuck in one destiny. There is no such thing as a point of no return. That doesn't qualify wasting years of your life doing nothing with the 'plan' to turn it all around down the road. It simply proves no one is truly lost, they're just ignorant of their standing. It can take only a second to find your feet and then the light. You don't need to force yourself to be content with a life you don't want to live.

So all of you who think you're no good, or that you've fallen too low, know that you're wrong. Know that the only thing that's stopping you from finding your footing is the fog of your own self doubt. That true honesty and having a passion can be light enough to clear an easy path. And that the path is never easy, but when you know you love it you don't notice the effort. And know that the fact you can start off and do this without effort is proof that you are strong and have the potential, and therefor all the requirements to live a dream. So never give up. Even when it's hard and you don't want to continue for the strain, reach out; there are others with your dream that have been in you low and will gladly lend a hand, because they know only thing worse then finding yourself in those low places, is seeing someone just lay there.

Good luck to all of you.

Wednesday, April 24, 2013

Ouya... soon to be [M]

OUYA Revisited 

Well, it's been a while and this is soon to hit stores. That's right the 
$99 game console with the free to play market base has been realized. But, really, how realized is it?

The premise of the Ouya's creation is that game consoles don't need to be big and expensive to run games, and that games don't need to cost you an arm and a leg to purchase -could even be free, and that you should be allowed to mod and hack the crap out of whatever item you've paid good money for. Which, to anyone that understands economics, is a very tall order. And the Ouya was designed to set out to create and fill this non-existent space in the market. The idea was that with Android the console could be small and inexpensive, with a free development kit smaller and indie developers would flock to the Ouya and end up creating a flood of top notch titles, and with these titles and the console going for cheap chips the gamer demographic would turn to Ouya as a sort of console Steam on steroids. What went wrong? Well, first the Ouya isn't actually as powerful as the current Android phone you probably have. And second it's competing with the WiiU out, the PS4 right around the corner, and the whatever-Xbox over the hill. 

It's less powerful then all of these and does not have the line up we assume -and more importantly trust with our money- are coming from Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo. On one hand the Ouya is far cheaper than these other consoles and now that Bioshock Infinite is out nothing seems to be massively grabbing the attention of the consumers right now. This could actually be the perfect time for the Ouya to come out. 

This whole, middle-market indie hot spot plan could really work, especially with the Triple-A Industry in the place it is and this supposed "crash" on it's way. This middle ground market will be the next big thing, if it's from the Ouya though, is still to be seen. This industry -like every industry- thrives on the social buzz of it's products, without the marketing the triple-A titles get the Ouya will inherently have less of a social buzz. Especially without the exclusivity of any high-profile IPs that other consoles have, by comparison the Ouya will inevitably fall into the background. But of course this is all speculative, nothing like this has ever happened before, and the Ouya's unique production and background alone set it apart from the corporate competition  so comparison is pointless, right? Wrong.

Along with it the units shipped to all of the kickstarter benefactors, Ouya is selling in Gamestop right next to the other consoles. It is designed and marketed as an answer and alternate to the higher priced models. In this consoles history, along with recognition as a trail blazer, the Ouya will be compared to the other consoles of the time. Something to note though in this industry is that in the long run a console's worth is not measured souly by the technology under it's hood or even necessarily the money it made compared to this history of all consoles; but by the quality and diversity of its software library. Where the big producers put massive amounts of money and man power into making a handful of titles each year and an even smaller proportion of that will be remembered in the following months the worth consumers place on their three-four hundred dollar device ends up behind the value of roughly ten, fifteen games. Even less if those titles are offered on other preferred more accessible overly useful platforms, say, a computer.

Don't get me wrong, I'm enthralled producers are taking more time and spending serious resources trying to create better products, that is the only way this medium will grow and stretch to its full potential; plus it adds a hard precedent that the smaller studios will have to compete with when creating their own interactive experience. But the time and energy put into creating the moreover lackluster product we see time and time again coming from the triple-A companies does not satisfy the demands of the customer; DLC and patches are only prolonged distractions that are sad attempts to make up for rushed workmanship or to hold the communities attention long enough to ensure they'll be excited for the announcement of the release of the next installment. When none of this works -in most cases- the community looks to satisfy their demands elsewhere. This elsewhere, tends to be Steam, or the digital indie community in general. Plain and simple, customers are more likely to drop ten dollars on three games than fifty on one. And this is where the Ouya has the upper hand. The WiiU has been out for a while now, and how many games have been released for it? The Ouya is not even out yet, and will have a confirmed library of over 500 titles! That's downright unheard of, imagine how many more developers will pick up the Ouya as its community grows. If we're assuming at least the people that backed the Ouya on it's kickstarter page are going to purchase one, you have 65,000 buyer market; which all sounds very profitable, but they've got this whole free to play market base. What's stopping this from just shriveling up from lack of income? We have no idea how that will turn out, nothing similar has ever happened before.

Well actually we have seen this before, and we've seen it succeed. Well not a platform, the Humble Bundle is a pay what you want series of indie game collections that are digitally distributed. Of course the designers give incentive to pay a little extra, if you pay more then the average you get extra titles or features; similar to how the Ouya has free to play with fees for extra features or bonus content. Even while customers are given the choice to pay a single cent for a handful of games the Humble Bundles have, as of February 2013, raised over 33.2 million dollars, with a good percentage of that going to charity. And this did not start off as the pinnacle of the mainstream indie games, these were the awkward and niche genres, the puzzle games and the sidescrollers. This didn't start with never before or exclusive titles, the most mainstream game on the first bundle was World of Goo; a game basically everyone already had, probably pirated. Still the Humble Bundle distribution continues to thrive and brings out more new, exciting, and different titles each sale. The Ouya not only has a chance, but it's very existence makes a pretty strong argument. The Ouya trusts and respects the customers, it trusts the customers to back products and producers they enjoy, it respects the customer's choice to alter a product they've paid for. Most important though, in my mind, the Ouya looks at its customers as friends, instead of as enemies or sheep. And that's something we need more in this industry.

 This was Steve Bullin with a revisit of the Ouya, if you like what you saw or you'd like to see a review of the actual product follow or subscribe to the blog, I will be purchasing an Ouya and reviewing hardware and software later on. Have a good day everyone,(I'm a liar) and don't forget to be awesome. ^^

 Links- Humble Bundle, Ouya

Wednesday, April 17, 2013

Exposition and Micro-Narrative

Steve Bullin

As mentioned in Games Need Better Storytelling part 2, exposition is the integral part of storytelling that delivers the context needed for meaningful world interactions to the player and.. well dang-it here; Extra Credits did a bit on Exposition already. And I guess this should be here too. Anywho, without exposition done well the player will either tune out of the games story and not know what's happening or are less likely to care about what does happen. I bet there are people out there now saying "We'll I don't really care about story, I just like multiplayer and shooting things.", I'm tempted to tell you to leave right now.. But I know that's just because you've become accustom to terrible stories in games. Everyone has those moments they've just started playing a game and they just can't get themselves to care enough to keep playing. They toss the controller aside and turn of their console(or computer) and say "This is so stupid. Why does the game even have me doing this?". And HAHA, you've just proven my point. Narrative is the justification of actions, without it, we don't feel or understand the drive for anything to happen onscreen. It's like reading a very, very terrible fan fiction or .. story written by an inexperienced author. Things like explosions, and gun scenes, and the hero making out with the girl are there just because. And because the creator simply wanted it -without any internal logic or reasoning behind the events happening- the reader really can't get themselves to enjoy, much less understand, the piece. 

Of course there are games like chess or checkers that some might argue have no narrative, to that I say hogwash. Narrative does not always have to embody the form we regularly associate with "story", it simply has to establish a purpose. You draw O's to make a line or cut off the other player's line of X's and win. You move the pieces on checkers to hop over and eliminate all the opponent's pieces. You move the specific chess pieces in certain ways because they each have different titles and properties, you do this to corner the opponent's king. The frog crosses the road and river to get to the other side. You shoot down the missiles because they're nukes and will blow up whole towns and you'll lose. Now the exposition in these simple cases like chess or checkers would simply be the rules. To win you have to corner the king, to corner the king you have to set up a number of your pieces that will entrap him without being at risk of being removed in the following turn themselves. To do that you have to understand the movement of each piece. And there on would be a description of the movements and rules each separate piece abides by throughout the game. 

The same is true (and better explained) with the narrative of Frogger, getting across the road requires you don't die. Dieing is the narrative behind an event that causes and end game, where crossing the road or river is the narrative behind the player moving up the screen. Surviving and getting across without causing an end game is the narrative behind winning the level. Ergo the exposition behind all of these things is the game's explanation of how the narrative fits behind the mechanic and progression of play. When the player causes this end game it was because they were hit by a car, they drowned, ect. The exposition is accomplished in these early forms by graphics and sound effects, and nothing has changed. The narrative behind why something could be in these life/death situation is a frog on the highway near a river. The narrative behind the mechanic of movement is jumping, the exposition of this is the sound effect and the animation of the pixel frog jumping. Likewise the exposition of the frog entering an end game is the death animation and sound following an event that would cause an end state. The exposition delivers the context needed for meaningful world interactions to the player. Avoiding or chasing the pixels on screen mean something and provide the drive for the game, the exposition explains the narrative and creates the framework for the experience.  

(this guy does a bunch of great game recordings check his channel out here)

I'm certain all of us have had moments where, without that framework, we were unable to appreciate an experience. When we were real young and we couldn't figure out the controls we still loved the movement onscreen, but got upset with the game when it didn't do what we wanted. And remember that moment you first picked up a game and really got the controls? It was as if a whole world was opened up to us onscreen. Because of the impute-response and the exposition-narrative on top of it we acquired an understanding to that impute-response happening onscreen and were really able to immerse ourselves into the world. We could feel this sort of kinetic projection between ourselves and the avatar onscreen. We think jump or shoot in our heads and it translates to actions onscreen, our avatar gets hit off a cliff or we misjudge a jump and cringe when we see them fall to their death. We could project ourselves as the character onscreen. This kind of self projection onto the game avatar makes every in-game interaction more intimate and engaging for the player. Here is where dialog comes in. 

How fun is it watching people lean when making a turn?

In truth dialog is simply and extension of the exact same exposition to narrative as mentioned before, it is simply a different form. Similar to how death sound is similar exposition to death animation, it simply engages the player differently in providing that context. End game death text -along with opening menu and file loading- might be one of the most perfected handling of dialog exposition in game simply because it provides pacing and doesn't interrupt the standard gameflow within the piece. It forces that moment of pause and makes the player wallow in their moment of failure, while also giving them time to calm down, or deescalate from the tension of the situation they were in at the moment of the end game. It's like catching your breath before running into battle, it allows a moment of mental preparation and allows the player to feel their triumphs are more meaningful because they were allowed a moment to pause and reassess the challenge before them. Giving that time for players to analyze the game's challenge and strategist attaches that much more meaning to gameplay and different mechanics as they are introduced over time. 

You know when-

-Alright, alright. Dialog exposition. 

The movement in gaming for the past... probably longer then I've been around. Has been to better convey story, character, plot, narrative, within games and to make those characters and story more real and meaningful to the player. I'll take a shot in the dark and say that's actually been the underlying movement throughout entire history of games. But to speak specifically about video games, the movement has been to expand the narrative and world of games through interaction and plot LIKE NO PLAYER HAS EVER SEEN! We see this through the obsession of dynamic choice, more realistic graphic, more realistic physics, character design, character and world interaction, ect. But the simple fact of the matter is that all these things boil down to a flashy exposition of a, normally less then flashy or interesting, narrative. This is where exposition and narrative in games fail, they provide context for a shallow, dull, or downright overplayed narrative. If that narrative is not something players can really relate or get attached to then the motivation built behind everything in the piece is lost to them. All the novels worth of text, dialog interactions, or whatever interactions onscreen that give us context cannot make us interested in a flat world. Now there are a dozen things that can debunk a narrative and ruin a game, but a good example might be those really poorly made web based games. I'm more talking about the, shoot the watermelon or stomp the cockroach, kind of games then FarmVille. The narrative in those games is weak; not just because they're punch, shoot, crush the thing games. But because that's the entire narrative, do this action, "Win a Prize!"; but we know that's a scam so the only narrative is the action itself. The exposition of some watermelon exploding or some cardboard cutout figure getting hit is the reasoning behind the interaction, flashy exposition with an uninteresting narrative. 

Narrative and exposition are two sides of the same coin, the story and the means of storytelling. As we've seen one does not exist without the other even in games without dialog or much in the way of narrative. The best way to learn balance in my opinion is to study experiences that use the least number of forms of exposition as possible to better acknowledge and understand both the underlying narrative and the exact lengths the forms of exposition go to convey the moments of narrative in a game. In other words we should be look at games that have no dialog (or very little) to better understand the importance of it and the importance of just leaving it out when it's unnecessary. By understanding the depth and level of story and characters that can be conveyed through exposition that's easy to include without the slightest break in the gameflow we can more easily study and come to understand the impact of exposition and narrative on a piece. We can learn from games like Journey, the classics from the arcade era, from studying the silent protagonists within Portal, Half Life, Zelda, and mountains of others that I can't think of right now because it's really late. But we'll talk more about those fun specifics in length later.^^

For now, good night everyone, and thanks for tuning in.


Thursday, March 21, 2013


So I almost forgot. I did a bit on theory of translation between games and film. Here is dat.

Hi there. I do things

Ya know, I really do want to keep getting my posts up here. I do. I have a few half done in the drafts that I chip away at every so often. But really there's this other thing I contribute to which is a little more important.. because it's for school and not just fun. 

Here, this is KineCritical.

Our facebook page gets some super interesting posts. 

We're also on our school/internet radio and do podcast about film news and other fun cinema related things.... sometimes we talk a ton of superheros and games... We get distracted. All good stuff though. So watch the Facebook page and we'll let you know when we're live.

And we also have a twitter; encase that's what your into. 

So yeah, on top of the standard student load I do dat, so if whatever Netizens that find there way here feel discouraged by activity and would like to see more of my thoughts (mostly half baked drool) then just comment or send me a message and I will find the time and put something out just for you! Seriously though I will. There is nothing more rewarding then someone enjoying your work.

P.S. I am actually very regularly working on a game related project with a number of  wonderful talented like minded individuals when it comes to games/game theory. 
(this is how I justify sneaking this in) 
And once completed you will be the first to know. ^^