Phantasy Star Online 2

I've spent a lot of time playing Phantasy Star Online 2 lately. Despite my love for the game, I sadly can't recommend it for one simple reason: Severe technical issues. It is currently only available through the Windows Store, and installing through there seems to lead to an installation that is prone to suddenly disappearing or breaking. Fans have made software to assist with installing and playing the game, but it can be a bit complicated to get it working due to the login system being integrated with windows. PSO2 is now becoming available on steam! Go there to get it.

Now on to the main topic: This game makes way more sense if I assume the art team is in charge, and the main goal is to have an excuse to make cool stuff.

Most of the time, when I play a game, I can identify a coherent vision the developers have for the game. With PSO2, I haven't really been able to find one behind most of the design. Lots of game mechanics such as the skill trees and lack of system for fixing mistakes just feels like it's there because of tradition.

The design is frequently awful (skill trees with lots of skills one is better off not taking), and many of the changes that get made seem more a response to player demand, than due to any sort of vision intended for the game. Many changes that improve gameplay actually end up breaking elements of the game. For example: At this point, any character that reaches level 40 in a class, can gain the ability to double jump. This enables characters to get signicant height and a lot of older bosses can't hit the player when they are that high in the air. Combining this with the ability to stay in the air with greater ease than in the past, and many bosses have become trivially easy that in the past were much more challenging.

If I assume the art team is in charge, and they are more interested in making cool stuff than game balance, then the lack of real attention to game balance and skill balance makes a lot more sense. They fix the things that get lots of complaints, and focus on what they really want to do: Make cool costumes and neat enemies.

While many fans of the game will gush about the action gameplay (which is rather good for an MMO) what I think is the real strength of the game is the enormous amount of cosmetic options available (You can play as a human sized mecha robot!), the large number of emotes (the pole dance emote is rather popular on block 69), and all the chat options (it's actually possible to send small images called symbol art). When it comes to making a fun avatar and chatting with friends, I feel like this game is actually better at social stuff than many programs designed specifically for socializing are.

In general, I think the art in this game is fantastic. A thing to note though: This game tends to take everything to ridiculous extremes. As can be seen in the latest NA only event:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPmqS51R3wA

Distractions

I've gotten too distracted by reading and writing stories to keep posting things here. Maybe this blog is finally dying for real this time.

My stories are posted on Scribblehub.

Post Scarcity won't happen.

I see a lot of posts on reddit, and occasional articles claiming that robots and AIs will lower the cost of goods and services to the point where everything is free. There is one major problem: Land will always be limited. As the cost of goods and services decline, housing will rise.

Why Automation is Killing Jobs

I've noticed a lot of people seem to have trouble understanding why automation is a threat to jobs now, when it hasn't been in the past. The basic answer is kinda simple: there's only so much stuff a single person can make use of in a day.

Lower prices is the main benefit of automation. However, there comes a point when no matter how much the price drops, demand won't keep increasing. Even if one could eat at their favorite restaurant for free everyday, there's a limit to how many meals one can eat. I know among gamers, a common "problem" is having a backlog of games they've bought, but not gotten around to playing yet. Another common problem for netflix subscribers is not having enough time to watch all the available movies and shows they'd like to watch.

We are reaching the saturation point, where reducing the cost of things, isn't increasing how much we can consume.

The Fundamental Flaw of Capitalism:

TL;DR: The engine of capitalism uses the wealth of workers as fuel. This will run out if no interventions exist to replenish it.

It is a general rule: If you work for someone else, you are generating more value than you are being paid.

If you didn't generate more value than you were paid, there would be no point in hiring you. This means that the total spending of the worker base, is greater than the total income received by workers, because a portion of that spent money, goes to the owners as profits to the business; wealth moves up.

The flow of wealth from the bottom to the top, is a fundamental part of capitalism, and a major part of how it functions. Without it, businesses couldn't be profitable, and for the economy to grow, businesses need profits.

There's a problem: If left alone, the entire system will slowly grind to a halt as it drains every last bit of wealth from the bottom, until there's nothing left.

Keeping the system running at full speed, and keeping the economy growing, requires the wealth at the bottom to not run out. In the past this has been done through constant expansion. Gaining new lands and resources for the workers to harvest and the owners to profit from. Nowadays though, we've already taken over so much of the world's land, there just isn't much room for expansion left. We are hitting the limits of land wealth available to us.

The fundamental flaw of capitalism, is that it relies upon the movement of wealth from the bottom to the top, but contains no built in system for that wealth to be replenished. To keep things running, it is important to create a system for transferring wealth back down, so it can move back up and keep the engine running.

The Crowd Went Wild For Hatsune Miku, The Virtual Anime Pop Star

http://kotaku.com/the-crowd-went-wild-for-hatsune-miku-the-virtual-anime-1773633946

When watching The Disappearing of Hatsune Miku,  I found myself thinking about the future of AI. One possible future, is that AI's remain merely powerful tools due to a lack of reason to ever make them something more. This could result in a world run by robots designed to keep it all running smoothly and efficiently, with no real minds of their own. A world where only a small fraction of the population has the drive and ability to understand and alter the AIs, and the vast majority of the population remains content enough that the status quo never gets challenged.

If those who do alter the AIs are selfish and short sighted, the system would slowly degrade and fall apart. If they coordinate their efforts, and share a mono-culture (indoctrinating newcomers), they could create a stable and stagnant world in which they wield unchallenged power. If they remain diverse in ideas and priorities, only then will great progress continue to be made, as they recklessly drive their ambitions in different directions.

Thought patterns

There seem to be three basic patterns of thought that people follow: Right/Wrong, Gain/Loss, and problem solving.

Right/Wrong: The basic premise, is that actions and choices can be categorized as Right or Wrong, and that Right should always produce good outcomes, while Wrong should always produce bad outcomes. Right and Wrong are taught through reward and punishment, because of this, people who follow the Right/Wrong thought pattern will have a strong belief that Wrong actions SHOULD be punished in order to teach people that such actions are wrong. They cannot separate teaching and punishment because of this. They also have a hard time separating morality and religion from anything because dividing everything into Right and Wrong makes all questions into moral/religious questions. In this thought pattern, Good people do Right things, and Evil people do Wrong things.

Gain/Loss: This style of thought focuses on what is Gained or Lost as a result of an action or choice. The most easily identified form is the selfish question: What's in it for me? Good and Evil tend to be defined by how many people the person cares about. With Evil happily sacrificing others for their own Gain, while Good focus upon maximizing Gain for everyone and minimizing Loss for everyone. People who instinctively follow the Gain/Loss thought pattern tend to be confused by actions that appear to offer no gain, and often consider people who do things that offer only loss, to be fools.

Problem solving: This is something most people are taught at some point (usually in school) but rarely employ outside of the situations they've been taught to use it in. People who instinctively use it all the time, tend to think everyone else is an idiot and/or fool (which can often upset people who feel they are being looked down upon). Problem solving is simply focused on finding effective solutions to problems. Problem solving doesn't really include a system of morality. Instead a Problem solver's morality is defined by what they consider a problem in the first place, and what they are willing to accept as a solution. It's fairly common for Problem solvers to find solutions that are not Right or Wrong, and offer no significant Gain or Loss, leaving people of both those thought patterns confused and sometimes amazed because they would never think of it (they also sometimes end up enraged because it's not the "correct" answer or solves the "wrong" problem).

Why I don't feel loved.

It's really quite simple: My flaws are a deep part of who I am, and everyone wants to fix me.

I didn't really understand it when I was younger, but I do now: Everything people have all praised me for, exists because of everything people condemn me for. My flaws aren't just a part of the whole package. They are largely responsible for why I am who I am. I wouldn't be me without them.

My high perception? My ability to notice and remember details most don't? That's because I'm very sensitive to stimuli, and it's why I hate taking showers or baths and have crappy hygiene.

My high intelligence and knowledge? That's largely because I can't focus on anything I'm not interested in. I can't make myself do work, and when I try, my mind just wanders. So what I do manage to accomplish, is I end up thinking about, and contemplating everything that ever happens to me. Everything I see or read, or hear gets thought about over and over and over. I end up thinking about everything far more deeply than anyone I know. The whole reason I am smart, is just because I never stop thinking. It is also why I can't work. I can't set myself a goal and expect to accomplish it.

People will say they love me, and in the same breath wish that my flaws would be fixed. Which just sounds like all they really love is their idea of me. Some perfect construct that doesn't exist, and never will. What they want is my potential. Not my reality. They don't want me, just what they think I could be.

Not Simply Double Standards

I've read complaints that when men are abused by women, it's not treated as seriously as when women are abused by men. They complain about double standards. That doesn't really explain what's going on.

When a woman is in trouble, the socially accepted solution is for a man to help/save her. When a man is in trouble the socially accepted solution, is for him to solve the problem himself. This is why people will react so very differently depending on who does the oppressing, and whom is being oppressed.

People will laugh when a man is abused, not because they think it's okay to abuse the guy, but because they think it's absurd for him to not fight back. They will try to goad him into standing up for himself, condemn him for his weakness, and demand that he solve his own problems.

People don't laugh when a woman is abused, because what happens is exactly what they expect to happen. They expect women to just take the abuse and not fight back. They expect men to abuse. It's not funny, because everything is exactly how they believe things are supposed to be.

It's not that men and women are held to different standards, it's that there's one standard being applied to everything: Men are in charge. It's not Feminism refusing to help the men. It's the Patriarchy refusing to.

The Intelligence Explosion

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CK5w3wh4G-M

I believe most people who think and talk about the AI intelligence explosion, don't understand that we are already in the middle of a human society intelligence explosion. Every advancement in communication and travel, has expanded humanity's effective intelligence and rate of technological improvement, by reducing waste in effort.

Previously, separate towns, due to lack of communication might each spend time developing the same technologies. As communication ranges increased, one town's technological development could benefit other towns, letting them spend time making new inventions or improvements instead of having to reinvent what the other town already made.

Each expansion of communication range, expanded the effective intelligence of humanity, and enabled faster and faster advancement. Now, with the internet, the range any new technology or discovery can reach is nearly global (large portions of the world are still too poor to gain much benefit). It's easy to see from looking at history, that advancements in technology and communication keep getting faster.

Humans and AIs are not separate things. Every step along the path to creating strong AI is a new tool we integrate into our own use, becoming an aid to our effective intelligence, speeding up the creation of more and better devices or programs. The first strong AI's won't be able to get loose and self-improve faster than we can keep up with, because it will be in a world where it is surrounded by powerful tools and weak AIs developed for human use. It would first have to either develop it's own tools, or figure out how to use tools that were never designed for it to use. That would give humanity a pretty big head start, plenty of time to figure out how to integrate the new AIs into our toolkit such that they become an extension of ourselves, just like our phones and search engines already are.

Free Will Requires Determinism

Some believe that Free Will and Determinism are incompatible because if all choices are pre-determined, then there's no freedom. I think they have it backwards. There's no freedom if they aren't.

I would like to believe that my choices are determined by my values, and beliefs. That the lessons I learn in life have an important impact upon the choices I make. That every time I'm given a choice, I'll always make a choice that fits my values and beliefs, and won't suddenly betray myself without a clear explanation for why. Otherwise, I'd have to question my sanity, and if I'm not sane, how can I possibly be free?

Determinism simply means there is cause and effect. That all things have an explanation. It is the anchor of logic and reason. Without it, we'd all be insane.

Jesus was very demanding.

Jesus asked people to treat complete strangers as well as they treated those they loved. This is why so few actually follow his teachings.

Afraid of pain and loss, people will not love their neighbors. Instead they condemn and complain, believing themselves just, because their neighbors sin. They complain loudly about the sins of others, so they might avoid noticing their own sins. Pride is so very common a sin, and acknowledging one's own faults is such a difficult thing for people to do.

All people are sinners, not because of some original sin (Jesus absolved humanity of that) but because no human is so strong of spirit as to live a life totally devoid of sin. One is far more likely to sin without knowing, than to not sin at all.

Worries about the future

After listening to an audio book version of Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith, I find myself worrying  about the future of our economies. Adam noted, that for workers to be treated well by their employers, there needed to be a greater demand for labor than was available.

Much of the past economic growth fueled this continued increase in demand for labor. However, modern technologies have begun to reduce demand for labor by automating once labor intensive industries. There is some speculation (my own, and based on what I've read online) that an increase in demand for skilled labor (mostly of the engineering, design, and entertainment fields) may compensate for it. It appears that for such speculation to bear fruit, getting more people to be skilled in the use of computers, and access to said computers and internet will be vital. Already there has been an emergence of people making money by streaming their experiences playing games for an online audience. Online self-employment may provide a new source of gainful work. However, it is a much more difficult thing, than simply doing what one is told.

If it proves impractical to create a highly desired, and well paid workforce in the future, then the alternative is to increase income redistribution to raise up the living standards of the poor. In the Wealth of Nations, it is observed, that when the labor supply catches up with demand, that workers inevitably fall into poverty as their ability to demand recompense for their labor drops. So, if we can't maintain a sufficiently high demand for the available labor, then the alternative is to make poverty less miserable. Otherwise, much of the world's population will be doomed to barely make enough money to survive.

The one shining star of hope I see: If we can drastically improve education, the quality of the workforce may increase sufficiently to become a highly demanded resource, through their own efforts. This is not so much a visible solution as merely the acknowledgement that if there's good enough education, then people may invent new solutions to the problem. Possibly even entire new industries.


I suppose my hopeful conclusion, is that a mix of all three ideas (increasing labor demand through invention of new jobs, increasing education to improve workforce quality, and providing the poor with a greater basic standard of living) may allow us to avoid the seemingly unstoppable decline of our standard of living. We need aid for the poor to give them access to the tools needed to benefit from a better education, which is needed to enable them to create and invent their own work. We can no longer depend upon companies to give us work. We must make our own work.

Me

I do not understand why people struggle so hard to live. What makes it worth the effort, and pain? Why is it so important? What drives them? And why do they insist that I must want to live too? Why is life so important to people? I doubt I will ever understand.

Love and Suffering

The amount of suffering in one's life, is tied to the amount of desire one carries.
Complete apathy, leads to happiness. (because nothing is ever wrong).
The greatest suffering, comes from the greatest desires.

Love is desire. Who wouldn't want to ease the suffering of those they love?
A love that does not care about the suffering of others, isn't love.
To love, one must be willing to accept suffering. It is the price of caring.

The greatest love, is the greatest desire. It is the wish to ease all suffering. To aid all. To perfect everything. It is an impossible desire. It will doom any who bear it, to suffer.

For me, to love, is to suffer. If I sought happiness, I'd find it easily, by simply abandoning all care for the world. I would rather abandon my life, than abandon my love. What I seek, is not happiness.

I want to care. I want to care so much it hurts. So, I do.
Then people ask, "Why do you hate living?"
I never really know how to answer this question. I don't know how to explain it in a way they'd understand, and I'm not sure I'd want to. If they understood, they might suffer too. For me, it seems stranger that so many are able to live with so few concerns. To live in ignorance of all the suffering, is not something I'd want. I find it amazing, that so many are able and willing to do so.

Star Wars: The Old Republic

I think Bioware should take the class stories in their big MMO, and make single player games out of them. One game for each class, priced $40 each, and I'm sure they could make a bunch of money out of that. After trying and failing to play it when it launched, I'm no longer willing to play their MMO even when it's free. I'd be willing to buy a single player game though. I certainly enjoyed Mass Effect 1 and 2, and have been interested in some of the SW:TOR class stories after reading other people's opinions of them.

I am a lazy gamer.

I've observed that I am a very lazy gamer. The characters I enjoyed most in City of Heroes were ones designed to require minimal effort to play, often sticking to abilities that required no attention (Toggles mostly, PBAoEs were also nice). EVE Online and City of Heroes are the only MMOs I've played for long periods of time.

In EVE Online, my preferred combat style was to deploy drones and then just wait for everything to die. Defenders were my preferred class in City of Heroes, and I loved to grab the skills from the tertiary leadership set. With a bit of math, it wasn't hard to figure out how to pull my weight on a team with minimal effort.

With some effort I was able to figure out how to make a character in Champions Online I could play in a fairly easy manner, but whenever I go back to it, I find that the gameplay gets bogged down by inventory management. In fact, I find almost every MMO I play, inventory management becomes a major turnoff for me, and a hassle that I hate.

I'm beginning to believe that the main reason I so rarely enjoy MMOs is because so much time is wasted on inventory management, running around towns, or other tedium, instead of actually playing the game. CoH and almost no inventory management, and traveling around town with travel powers was a breeze (though travel before said powers were obtained was rather dull and bothersome). Why can't I find more games like that? Where there's thought put into character building, without the tedium of item bags and constant trashing of random loot.

10 Ways to Open Your Mind

http://runicshamanism.com/archives/422

While I do like these kinds of lists, they suffer from a problem: In general, they only help people who already know there's a problem, and are trying to fix it. People who are convinced they're right, don't know how to listen or take in critique.

To really open one's mind, try viewing the world through the claim "Everyone is right." It leads to the corollary "Everyone is wrong." and trying to encompass both beliefs simultaneously is awkward (especially when one realizes they need to apply both claims to themselves too). Most people who attempt it will probably end up using the standard cop-out of throwing lots of "but"s around. The real challenge is to find the common thread that exists in all human viewpoints. (If I knew how to explain it in words, I'd do so, unfortunately, my own understanding remains weak.)

Path of Exile

I discovered a game being developed called Path of Exile. One of it's most striking features is the Passive Skill Web. That thing is massive. It's like a gigantic puzzle that rewards taking the time to examine it and plot out a course for one's character to take through it.

The next key point, is the skill system. It's basically a more complex version of Final Fantasy 7's materia system, which was my favorite thing about Final Fantasy 7.

Combining a dark atmosphere, skills and spells picked up as loot, and randomly generated magic items, it reminds me a lot of Diablo 1 (I liked Diablo 1). Path of Exile is expected to enter an open beta in a few months and is something to look forward to if you like researching complex skill web layouts and plotting the destruction of worlds, planning out powerful combinations of skills and supports.

I actually gave them some money to get into the closed beta and try to break it before they launch it, but so far haven't had much success (at breaking it). I'd like to see them succeed, so I'm trying to help out. (I haven't been at it long, yet)

Ahri (League of Legends)

Started playing League of Legends again, and had the luck to enjoy an Ahri free week. She's a lot of fun to play. Unfortunately, she seems unfocused and difficult to play. Her main strength is probably in the short term mobility granted by her ultimate (three short range dashes) and her Charm skill which is a weak pull and decent stun combined.

Ahri feels like she has a scattered and unfocused skill set, with a passive that provides sustain, an AoE that has true damage (true damage ignores defenses), an uncontrolled homing attack, a single target pull, and a mobility granting ult. Each of these abilities is pretty awesome on their own, but together, they seem somewhat awkward, as each specializes in something different. The AoE skillshot is good at harassment and whittling enemies down. The Fox-Fires seem like a hybrid of single target nuke, and team fight sustained damage. The charm is pretty awesome, but as the only CC in the skill set, it doesn't work well to design a build around it. The Ultimate, can hit three targets three times, and/or be used to move around quickly. It is extremely versatile which also makes it hard to figure out what the best way to use it is.

In my efforts to make use of Ahri, my greatest success has been in staying at the edges of fights, harassing without committing fully. Ultimately, it feels like anything she can do, another mage can do better. She doesn't seem to have enough damage to be a proper mage, and not enough CC to be a tank/support. I've had the most success when I focus on CDR, to make the most of her true damage and Charm, as well as keep her ult available whenever I need it. I just don't feel like it works any better than it could on other champions.

One thing to note: I've mostly been playing Dominion, so I don't know how well she does in Laning. She may have some strength in the laning phase of SR that makes her good. However, she appears to have a weak team fight presence and lacks the burst power of other mages.

Update(2012-07-22): Based on what I've seen of her in tournaments, Ahri's greatest strength may be her ability to punish an opponent's mistakes. Her ultimate's mobility, and her short charm help her to capitalize on any opening an enemy gives her.