Rise and Shiny recap: Crystal Saga

Rise and Shiny recap: Crystal Saga - Off-topic

There's a lot to be said for automation. Thanks to automated processes, our society hums along more nicely than it ever has. But should we include our playtime on the list of things we want to automate? Is it possible to enjoy something like an MMO if we really don't control it at all? If we assemble our army men and wind them up, is watching them go as much fun as controlling what they do?
Ah, such deep questions stemming from such a simple game. Crystal Saga
is a browser-based, free-to-play, Flash-based MMORPG (there's a mouthful) that allows players to do a lot of things, including fully automate the grinding process. I can hear the potential comments already, so click past the cut and let me explain it more.
I need to clarify what I mean when I say "fully automated." It's not as though you can tell your little on-screen character that you want it to go here, attack this, and rescue that. It's not quite that in-depth. Basically the developers have added in a system that allows you to place your character into "AFK mode." How much time he can remain in AFK mode depends on a special item that you can get from quests or from the cash shop (I was AFK for hours and hours and never spent a dime), and what happens during that AFK time depends on what specifically you told your avatar to do during that time.
You're essentially telling your character which mobs to attack, when to heal or use a healing potion, and whether to loot or not. As I say in the livestream, you "set it and forget it" like the Ronco Rotisserie. You can also click a link in your quest to auto-walk back to town or to a specific NPC, and you can auto-walk to any number of quest objectives. In fact, you can play this game and level up without ever really using more than a few buttons.
Gaming purists needn't worry; this system is not new or uncommon. In fact, if you have ever played EVE Online, Alganon or a few other titles, you have automated your play. Yep, if anything, the offline skill training that EVE popularized is much less labor-intensive than Crystal Saga's AFK mode. While I AFKed in Crystal Saga, I had to at least watch for enemies in case I was overwhelmed. Clicking "learn" in a game like Alganon takes no work at all. Hours or days later, you log in your character to find him or her smarter than before! The wonders of science!
More good news: You don't need to worry whether other players, readers, or super-cool column writers care about how you play. Crystal Saga is for younger players, true, but accessibility is not only for them. I found the automated system to be really fun. In an AFK way, of course. I liked coming back to backpacks filled with goodies, and I still had to go back to town and sell the items and organize my skills. In fact, I've realized that AFK modes in games like Crystal Saga only shine light on how incredibly boring and trivial leveling-up has become in many MMOs. The archaic system of advancement hasn't changed in years and years, so why not do away with the process, or make it something that we simply don't have to sit there and watch?
Again, I know what you are thinking. "But that's what makes MMOs fun!" I get that many of you might feel that playing the game is the fun part. I agree that playing is fun. But grinding is not. Of course, this raises another question: Why didn't Crystal Saga just design a better way of leveling? Or better yet, why doesn'tCrystal Saga do away with leveling altogether and invent a brand-new way to play MMOs? Good question, Beau. I think the answer is that these devs do not care to redesign the entire process but instead want to speed it up and get you to the good stuff. In a world filled with "AAA," indie, and free-to-play games that are all filled to the brim with massive amounts of grind, I appreciate these AFK systems that are showing up more often. Give me a cash shop filled with every single item in the game and we have a deal.
I've been playing Oblivion a lot lately. We have all probably played it a lot. If not, we jammed on Morrowindbefore that. Remember "fast travel?" You know, the ability to click on an area in the map and instantly transport there, instead of traveling the long, literal way on horseback? We have all used it at some point. I use it when I am faced with an incredibly long (but not difficult) ride. If it is dangerous and within a 15-minute window, I will be on the trail. Games like Crystal Saga allow for the same choices, and I appreciate that. Long ago I lost the feeling that even the mere presence of such systems tainted my gameplay. They exist, and I don't care.
The rest of the game is fun and colorful, including the pet system. I like the fact that the game runs on anything and that there are always players around. Other than those few facts, there's not much more you need to know about your first several hours in the game (which is how long I generally spend in a game before writing this column). It sort of pains me to say so, but the existence of an "AFK mode" is about the only thing I came across that makes Crystal Saga much fun. It sounds weird, but I got the same feeling when I found pocketfuls of goodies that I used to get when I logged into EVE and saw that my skill training was completed. It's worth checking out, even just to surprise yourself.
Next week I will be looking at Starjack Online, a free-to-play empire-builder that has sucked me in. For some reason, the game does not allow me to stream or video it, so look for a screenshot-heavy article next time. Now, go log in!

Related

Call of Duty? FIFA? GT?

I couldn't possibly care less about these sort of games. This puts me in, I'd venture, less than 3% of the young male population of this country who can buy an Xbox or whatnot in the first place.
Discuss.

Homework or a public speaking competition? Sweet Idea, will post my arguments once others give me ideas
Sent from my HTC Desire using XDA App

More like inciting a flame war. ^_^ j/k
I've never liked racing, shooting, or sports games, which I've found doesn't sit well with most men my age (22). Just wondering what fellow techies think.
Usually I get a "wow, I can't believe another human being has different tastes than me" response. I don't think I've ran into a "Wow you're so gay" response but it's only a matter of time. =/

ninestraycats said:
More like inciting a flame war. ^_^ j/k
I've never liked racing, shooting, or sports games, which I've found doesn't sit well with most men my age (22). Just wondering what fellow techies think.
Usually I get a "wow, I can't believe another human being has different tastes than me" response. I don't think I've ran into a "Wow you're so gay" response but it's only a matter of time. =/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yep same. I'm different to everyone in my school. Everyones got iphoned, I got a Desire, now everyones jealous haha.. anyways, I like racing and shooting games. Just the real ones. CoD and GT not things like killzone or WoW. Though I don't play often, every 2–3 weeks maybe, I do enjoy some adrenalin pumping through my veins when I due just begore the end of the mussion. It makes me more determined to finish correctly the next time etc..
Everyones always asking me when I'm online next to play a bit of CoD or whatever and I just don't understand how you can become addicted to something that doesn't actually exist. Well it does but not really, you know what I mean : )
Sent from my HTC Desire using XDA App

LOL been a gamer for too long. But I have never told anyone that they were "gay" because they didn't like to game.
But.. usually they were women.

well im different to everyone in my school.
most of the lads in my year like football and cod.
"medal of honor- is ****"
"driving games - ****"
"every other game apart from cod and fifa- is ****"
i have been called gay because i have long hair and i like rock music and drum and bass (and others).
i think the reason they call you gay is because they don't like people that are different and like other things.
about 1 year ago everyones phones where sony ericssons (crap ones)
and samsung tocco lites (horrible)
but 1 lad had a t-mobile g1.
i had my 7 year old htc himalaya brick (excellent phone)
now quite a few have htc's desires, hero, legend. (and obviously don't know about xda (what a pitty))
people seem to follow other people and call you weird because you are not following.
sorry if i drifted off topic.
i like driving games, fps (half-life excellent!!)

im a gran turismo guy i love that game, i also enjoy a nice helping of cod now and then too, i cant stand football soccer or basketball games though

COD - meh
FIFA - meh
GT5 - drool
Well, an explanation is warranted for the above...
I never really got the hang of FPS games in multiplayer, mostly because I used to pwn at CounterStrike and Half-Life, but a hiatus during my formative days (read, TEENAGE) lost my edge in FPS games. Mostly I will check out the single player experience, and if it gains enough traction amongst my friends, I'll get the original copy. Mostly, for group enjoyment purposes, we game L4D if we wanna play FPS. I'm just waiting for Crysis 2 (as an excuse to upgrade my Gfx card more than anything else )
FIFA... well... is a game for douchetards who imagine that they have the skills needed to take Leo Messi/CR to whatever glories that in real life they couldn't achieve (both for the gamers and the players). Simply said, it gives little to none benefits, and merely act as an escapement and commercial device. For the more serious guys, we play futsal, which is like football played in a netball field. Pacing is fun, especially since players with less stamina can join in and height doesn't bring that much of a benefit (read, GIRLS CAN PLAY TOO). And for the brainiacs, we play Football Manager 2011.
GT5 is going to be something of a old history for me. It's more of a nostalgia device than something of real enjoyment. Back in the days, me and my brother played GT1, GT2, GT3, and probably GT4. To my brother, who is an engineer by now, it is the most accurate depiction of a car on the race-track. I'll skip the nostalgia bit... Anyway, since neither of us own a PS3, and neither of us plans to own a PS3, this game will forever reside in the droolworthy section of our hindbrains, possibly forever.
The problem with me is I'm probably in the less than 0.05% zone. I'm a self-professed geek that likes to party and do sports. I could, enjoyably, spend the afternoon tinkering with my PC/phone or just dump everything to hang out with friends, chilling out and maybe finding the answers to life (we checked, its not 42).
So gaming is cool and all that, but it's not the be all and end all for me

Gotta say... I love GT5 lol. I think I like it more than GT3 or 4 because I'm actually trying now lol. I used to have a Game Shark, Code Breaker, and Action Replay to cheat my way to having (basically) infinite cash, the AI guys wouldn't move, and every car would have like 16x acceleration lol. It made it fun cause I could get what I wanted when I wanted, but ruined the sense of accomplishment needed to make it feel way better. I actually HAVE to try and succeed in this now, which is awesome imo.
Call of Duty is cool, but I'm not into it as much anymore as I am with GT5 now.
FIFA is a game I'll never play. I don't do sports, nor like them; especially soccer.
Sent from my Droid Incredible running Myn's Warm Two Point Two RLS5.

sakai4eva said:
To my brother, who is an engineer by now, it is the most accurate depiction of a car on the race-track.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is VERY cool and I didn't know that. Sucker as I am for new experiences, it makes me want to play it again with this knowledge.
sakai4eva said:
Pacing is fun, especially since players with less stamina can join in and height doesn't bring that much of a benefit (read, GIRLS CAN PLAY TOO).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Haha, I hope I'm reading your implications right: b/c size isn't an issue, women can play the sport side-by-side with men. The other implication would be a little... off-putting. >.<

flyboyovyick said:
well im different to everyone in my school.
i have been called gay because i have long hair and i like rock music and drum and bass (and others).
i think the reason they call you gay is because they don't like people that are different and like other things.
i like driving games, fps (half-life excellent!!)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry I paraphrased your Quote
1) Nothing wrong with Long Hair and playing Bass. I did both for a long time - but now the hair fell out and I play a little guitar (i.e. it stares at me taunting me on the wall collecting dust due to RL stealing all my time)
2) Your unique... just like everybody else
3) Half Life is probably the BEST GAME EVER. And I'm a sucker for driving games. I haven't purchased GT yet as I know my wife would kill me while I was going around the track at 4am.

YOU DON'T LIKE THOSE GAMES!!! wow!!, i didn't know another human being could have such different taste to me.
But seriously 'normal' at my school is f'd up compared to everybody elses, screamo metalheads and emos rule the street and jocks are considered to be on the same level as the scum you find in public toilets... its a weird place.
Im lucky anyway because im a self admitted nerd at school but for some strange reason nobody believes me? (WTF's with that!?!) Which is especially strange considering people are paying me to set up snow leopard hackintosh on their pc's.
My favorite shooter is Gears o' War 2 (can't really call it fps), but, uh, what do you guys think of bioshock? I personally don't like it, much to the disdain of all my friends who are obsessed with it.

urbanengine1 said:
But seriously 'normal' at my school is f'd up compared to everybody elses, screamo metalheads and emos rule the street and jocks are considered to be on the same level as the scum you find in public toilets... its a weird place.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow, that is strange. At my school there was no "jock" contingency either, but why would there necessarily have to be, stereotypes are stereotypes.
What IS indeed common to probably every school ever are cliques. I'm guessing it's the 'us vs. them' mentality that's so crucial to so many living things.

ninestraycats said:
FIFA?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Soccer is the worst game (notice I didn't call it a sport) in the history of mankind.

The Last Words of Programmer Bill Zeller

*Warning!* Contains content that you may not agree with!
I was going through my hard drive and found this cached from Gizmodo, about a year ago. Mature responses only, please! And remember, you can talk to people about your worries, you really can.
Bill Zeller * 2011
I have the urge to declare my sanity and justify my actions, but I assume I'll never be able to convince anyone that this was the right decision. Maybe it's true that anyone who does this is insane by definition, but I can at least explain my reasoning. I considered not writing any of this because of how personal it is, but I like tying up loose ends and don't want people to wonder why I did this. Since I've never spoken to anyone about what happened to me, people would likely draw the wrong conclusions.
My first memories as a child are of being raped, repeatedly. This has affected every aspect of my life. This darkness, which is the only way I can describe it, has followed me like a fog, but at times intensified and overwhelmed me, usually triggered by a distinct situation. In kindergarten I couldn't use the bathroom and would stand petrified whenever I needed to, which started a trend of awkward and unexplained social behavior. The damage that was done to my body still prevents me from using the bathroom normally, but now it's less of a physical impediment than a daily reminder of what was done to me.
This darkness followed me as I grew up. I remember spending hours playing with legos, having my world consist of me and a box of cold, plastic blocks. Just waiting for everything to end. It's the same thing I do now, but instead of legos it's surfing the web or reading or listening to a baseball game. Most of my life has been spent feeling dead inside, waiting for my body to catch up.
At times growing up I would feel inconsolable rage, but I never connected this to what happened until puberty. I was able to keep the darkness at bay for a few hours at a time by doing things that required intense concentration, but it would always come back. Programming appealed to me for this reason. I was never particularly fond of computers or mathematically inclined, but the temporary peace it would provide was like a drug. But the darkness always returned and built up something like a tolerance, because programming has become less and less of a refuge.
The darkness is with me nearly every time I wake up. I feel like a grime is covering me. I feel like I'm trapped in a contimated body that no amount of washing will clean. Whenever I think about what happened I feel manic and itchy and can't concentrate on anything else. It manifests itself in hours of eating or staying up for days at a time or sleeping for sixteen hours straight or week long programming binges or constantly going to the gym. I'm exhausted from feeling like this every hour of every day.
Three to four nights a week I have nightmares about what happened. It makes me avoid sleep and constantly tired, because sleeping with what feels like hours of nightmares is not restful. I wake up sweaty and furious. I'm reminded every morning of what was done to me and the control it has over my life.
I've never been able to stop thinking about what happened to me and this hampered my social interactions. I would be angry and lost in thought and then be interrupted by someone saying "Hi" or making small talk, unable to understand why I seemed cold and distant. I walked around, viewing the outside world from a distant portal behind my eyes, unable to perform normal human niceties. I wondered what it would be like to take to other people without what happened constantly on my mind, and I wondered if other people had similar experiences that they were better able to mask.
Alcohol was also something that let me escape the darkness. It would always find me later, though, and it was always angry that I managed to escape and it made me pay. Many of the irresponsible things I did were the result of the darkness. Obviously I'm responsible for every decision and action, including this one, but there are reasons why things happen the way they do.
Alcohol and other drugs provided a way to ignore the realities of my situation. It was easy to spend the night drinking and forget that I had no future to look forward to. I never liked what alcohol did to me, but it was better than facing my existence honestly. I haven't touched alcohol or any other drug in over seven months (and no drugs or alcohol will be involved when I do this) and this has forced me to evaluate my life in an honest and clear way. There's no future here. The darkness will always be with me.
I used to think if I solved some problem or achieved some goal, maybe he would leave. It was comforting to identify tangible issues as the source of my problems instead of something that I'll never be able to change. I thought that if I got into to a good college, or a good grad school, or lost weight, or went to the gym nearly every day for a year, or created programs that millions of people used, or spent a summer or California or New York or published papers that I was proud of, then maybe I would feel some peace and not be constantly haunted and unhappy. But nothing I did made a dent in how depressed I was on a daily basis and nothing was in any way fulfilling. I'm not sure why I ever thought that would change anything.
I didn't realize how deep a hold he had on me and my life until my first relationship. I stupidly assumed that no matter how the darkness affected me personally, my romantic relationships would somehow be separated and protected. Growing up I viewed my future relationships as a possible escape from this thing that haunts me every day, but I began to realize how entangled it was with every aspect of my life and how it is never going to release me. Instead of being an escape, relationships and romantic contact with other people only intensified everything about him that I couldn't stand. I will never be able to have a relationship in which he is not the focus, affecting every aspect of my romantic interactions.
Relationships always started out fine and I'd be able to ignore him for a few weeks. But as we got closer emotionally the darkness would return and every night it'd be me, her and the darkness in a black and gruesome threesome. He would surround me and penetrate me and the more we did the more intense it became. It made me hate being touched, because as long as we were separated I could view her like an outsider viewing something good and kind and untainted. Once we touched, the darkness would envelope her too and take her over and the evil inside me would surround her. I always felt like I was infecting anyone I was with.
Relationships didn't work. No one I dated was the right match, and I thought that maybe if I found the right person it would overwhelm him. Part of me knew that finding the right person wouldn't help, so I became interested in girls who obviously had no interest in me. For a while I thought I was gay. I convinced myself that it wasn't the darkness at all, but rather my orientation, because this would give me control over why things didn't feel "right". The fact that the darkness affected sexual matters most intensely made this idea make some sense and I convinced myself of this for a number of years, starting in college after my first relationship ended. I told people I was gay (at Trinity, not at Princeton), even though I wasn't attracted to men and kept finding myself interested in girls. Because if being gay wasn't the answer, then what was? People thought I was avoiding my orientation, but I was actually avoiding the truth, which is that while I'm straight, I will never be content with anyone. I know now that the darkness will never leave.
Last spring I met someone who was unlike anyone else I'd ever met. Someone who showed me just how well two people could get along and how much I could care about another human being. Someone I know I could be with and love for the rest of my life, if I weren't so ****ed up. Amazingly, she liked me. She liked the shell of the man the darkness had left behind. But it didn't matter because I couldn't be alone with her. It was never just the two of us, it was always the three of us: her, me and the darkness. The closer we got, the more intensely I'd feel the darkness, like some evil mirror of my emotions. All the closeness we had and I loved was complemented by agony that I couldn't stand, from him. I realized that I would never be able to give her, or anyone, all of me or only me. She could never have me without the darkness and evil inside me. I could never have just her, without the darkness being a part of all of our interactions. I will never be able to be at peace or content or in a healthy relationship. I realized the futility of the romantic part of my life. If I had never met her, I would have realized this as soon as I met someone else who I meshed similarly well with. It's likely that things wouldn't have worked out with her and we would have broken up (with our relationship ending, like the majority of relationships do) even if I didn't have this problem, since we only dated for a short time. But I will face exactly the same problems with the darkness with anyone else. Despite my hopes, love and compatability is not enough. Nothing is enough. There's no way I can fix this or even push the darkness down far enough to make a relationship or any type of intimacy feasible.
So I watched as things fell apart between us. I had put an explicit time limit on our relationship, since I knew it couldn't last because of the darkness and didn't want to hold her back, and this caused a variety of problems. She was put in an unnatural situation that she never should have been a part of. It must have been very hard for her, not knowing what was actually going on with me, but this is not something I've ever been able to talk about with anyone. Losing her was very hard for me as well. Not because of her (I got over our relationship relatively quickly), but because of the realization that I would never have another relationship and because it signified the last true, exclusive personal connection I could ever have. This wasn't apparent to other people, because I could never talk about the real reasons for my sadness. I was very sad in the summer and fall, but it was not because of her, it was because I will never escape the darkness with anyone. She was so loving and kind to me and gave me everything I could have asked for under the circumstances. I'll never forget how much happiness she brought me in those briefs moments when I could ignore the darkness. I had originally planned to kill myself last winter but never got around to it. (Parts of this letter were written over a year ago, other parts days before doing this.) It was wrong of me to involve myself in her life if this were a possibility and I should have just left her alone, even though we only dated for a few months and things ended a long time ago. She's just one more person in a long list of people I've hurt.
I could spend pages talking about the other relationships I've had that were ruined because of my problems and my confusion related to the darkness. I've hurt so many great people because of who I am and my inability to experience what needs to be experienced. All I can say is that I tried to be honest with people about what I thought was true.
I've spent my life hurting people. Today will be the last time.
I've told different people a lot of things, but I've never told anyone about what happened to me, ever, for obvious reasons. It took me a while to realize that no matter how close you are to someone or how much they claim to love you, people simply cannot keep secrets. I learned this a few years ago when I thought I was gay and told people. The more harmful the secret, the juicier the gossip and the more likely you are to be betrayed. People don't care about their word or what they've promised, they just do whatever the **** they want and justify it later. It feels incredibly lonely to realize you can never share something with someone and have it be between just the two of you. I don't blame anyone in particular, I guess it's just how people are. Even if I felt like this is something I could have shared, I have no interest in being part of a friendship or relationship where the other person views me as the damaged and contaminated person that I am. So even if I were able to trust someone, I probably would not have told them about what happened to me. At this point I simply don't care who knows.
I feel an evil inside me. An evil that makes me want to end life. I need to stop this. I need to make sure I don't kill someone, which is not something that can be easily undone. I don't know if this is related to what happened to me or something different. I recognize the irony of killing myself to prevent myself from killing someone else, but this decision should indicate what I'm capable of.
So I've realized I will never escape the darkness or misery associated with it and I have a responsibility to stop myself from physically harming others.
I'm just a broken, miserable shell of a human being. Being molested has defined me as a person and shaped me as a human being and it has made me the monster I am and there's nothing I can do to escape it. I don't know any other existence. I don't know what life feels like where I'm apart from any of this. I actively despise the person I am. I just feel fundamentally broken, almost non-human. I feel like an animal that woke up one day in a human body, trying to make sense of a foreign world, living among creatures it doesn't understand and can't connect with.
I have accepted that the darkness will never allow me to be in a relationship. I will never go to sleep with someone in my arms, feeling the comfort of their hands around me. I will never know what uncontimated intimacy is like. I will never have an exclusive bond with someone, someone who can be the recipient of all the love I have to give. I will never have children, and I wanted to be a father so badly. I think I would have made a good dad. And even if I had fought through the darkness and married and had children all while being unable to feel intimacy, I could have never done that if suicide were a possibility. I did try to minimize pain, although I know that this decision will hurt many of you. If this hurts you, I hope that you can at least forget about me quickly.
There's no point in identifying who molested me, so I'm just going to leave it at that. I doubt the word of a dead guy with no evidence about something that happened over twenty years ago would have much sway.
You may wonder why I didn't just talk to a professional about this. I've seen a number of doctors since I was a teenager to talk about other issues and I'm positive that another doctor would not have helped. I was never given one piece of actionable advice, ever. More than a few spent a large part of the session reading their notes to remember who I was. And I have no interest in talking about being raped as a child, both because I know it wouldn't help and because I have no confidence it would remain secret. I know the legal and practical limits of doctor/patient confidentiality, growing up in a house where we'd hear stories about the various mental illnesses of famous people, stories that were passed down through generations. All it takes is one doctor who thinks my story is interesting enough to share or a doctor who thinks it's her right or responsibility to contact the authorities and have me identify the molestor (justifying her decision by telling herself that someone else might be in danger). All it takes is a single doctor who violates my trust, just like the "friends" who I told I was gay did, and everything would be made public and I'd be forced to live in a world where people would know how ****ed up I am. And yes, I realize this indicates that I have severe trust issues, but they're based on a large number of experiences with people who have shown a profound disrepect for their word and the privacy of others.
People say suicide is selfish. I think it's selfish to ask people to continue living painful and miserable lives, just so you possibly won't feel sad for a week or two. Suicide may be a permanent solution to a temporary problem, but it's also a permanent solution to a ~23 year-old problem that grows more intense and overwhelming every day.
Some people are just dealt bad hands in this life. I know many people have it worse than I do, and maybe I'm just not a strong person, but I really did try to deal with this. I've tried to deal with this every day for the last 23 years and I just can't ****ing take it anymore.
I often wonder what life must be like for other people. People who can feel the love from others and give it back unadulterated, people who can experience sex as an intimate and joyous experience, people who can experience the colors and happenings of this world without constant misery. I wonder who I'd be if things had been different or if I were a stronger person. It sounds pretty great.
I'm prepared for death. I'm prepared for the pain and I am ready to no longer exist. Thanks to the strictness of New Jersey gun laws this will probably be much more painful than it needs to be, but what can you do. My only fear at this point is messing something up and surviving.
—-
I'd also like to address my family, if you can call them that. I despise everything they stand for and I truly hate them, in a non-emotional, dispassionate and what I believe is a healthy way. The world will be a better place when they're dead—one with less hatred and intolerance.
If you're unfamiliar with the situation, my parents are fundamentalist Christians who kicked me out of their house and cut me off financially when I was 19 because I refused to attend seven hours of church a week.
They live in a black and white reality they've constructed for themselves. They partition the world into good and evil and survive by hating everything they fear or misunderstand and calling it love. They don't understand that good and decent people exist all around us, "saved" or not, and that evil and cruel people occupy a large percentage of their church. They take advantage of people looking for hope by teaching them to practice the same hatred they practice.
A random example:
"I am personally convinced that if a Muslim truly believes and obeys the Koran, he will be a terrorist." - George Zeller, August 24, 2010.
If you choose to follow a religion where, for example, devout Catholics who are trying to be good people are all going to Hell but child molestors go to Heaven (as long as they were "saved" at some point), that's your choice, but it's ****ed up. Maybe a God who operates by those rules does exist. If so, **** Him.
Their church was always more important than the members of their family and they happily sacrificed whatever necessary in order to satisfy their contrived beliefs about who they should be.
I grew up in a house where love was proxied through a God I could never believe in. A house where the love of music with any sort of a beat was literally beaten out of me. A house full of hatred and intolerance, run by two people who were experts at appearing kind and warm when others were around. Parents who tell an eight year old that his grandmother is going to Hell because she's Catholic. Parents who claim not to be racist but then talk about the horrors of miscegenation. I could list hundreds of other examples, but it's tiring.
Since being kicked out, I've interacted with them in relatively normal ways. I talk to them on the phone like nothing happened. I'm not sure why. Maybe because I like pretending I have a family. Maybe I like having people I can talk to about what's been going on in my life. Whatever the reason, it's not real and it feels like a sham. I should have never allowed this reconnection to happen.
I wrote the above a while ago, and I do feel like that much of the time. At other times, though, I feel less hateful. I know my parents honestly believe the crap they believe in. I know that my mom, at least, loved me very much and tried her best. One reason I put this off for so long is because I know how much pain it will cause her. She has been sad since she found out I wasn't "saved", since she believes I'm going to Hell, which is not a sadness for which I am responsible. That was never going to change, and presumably she believes the state of my physical body is much less important than the state of my soul. Still, I cannot intellectually justify this decision, knowing how much it will hurt her. Maybe my ability to take my own life, knowing how much pain it will cause, shows that I am a monster who doesn't deserve to live. All I know is that I can't deal with this pain any longer and I'm am truly sorry I couldn't wait until my family and everyone I knew died so this could be done without hurting anyone. For years I've wished that I'd be hit by a bus or die while saving a baby from drowning so my death might be more acceptable, but I was never so lucky.
—-
To those of you who have shown me love, thank you for putting up with all my ****tiness and moodiness and arbitrariness. I was never the person I wanted to be. Maybe without the darkness I would have been a better person, maybe not. I did try to be a good person, but I realize I never got very far.
I'm sorry for the pain this causes. I really do wish I had another option. I hope this letter explains why I needed to do this. If you can't understand this decision, I hope you can at least forgive me.
Bill Zeller
—-
Please save this letter and repost it if gets deleted. I don't want people to wonder why I did this. I disseminated it more widely than I might have otherwise because I'm worried that my family might try to restrict access to it. I don't mind if this letter is made public. In fact, I'd prefer it be made public to people being unable to read it and drawing their own conclusions.
Feel free to republish this letter, but only if it is reproduced in its entirety.

that's depressing, but it puts things in perspective. I read it all.
thanks.
--sent from my glacier.

Horrible that he got so constantly downed by his family and those around him that he never felt he could trust anyone enough to open up and tell what happened to him. I don 't know that he could have been helped because what he went through had to have been scarring beyond belief, but at least he may have had a chance.
At least the work he did left a positive impact on the world for a lot of people.

Is there a TL;DR version?

jaszek said:
Is there a TL;DR version?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Skim it. Only version available, sorry.
Sent from my HTC Intruder

Bump. Definitely something worth reading.

This man needed Jesus so badly. It's heartbreaking to hear of things like this.

Old organ player learning piano

Something totally off-topic....
My missus wants to try and have the kids learn piano... The older one shows an aptitude towards music, and she has had several toy pianos and plays them well enough I guess... The younger one probably will too - music is in her family. Anyway, long story short, I now have a piano.
So, I used to be a reasonably good organ player (i.e. 2 manuals and pedal board), but I stopped playing about 15 years ago... I reckon I could give this a bash too, and I dusted off my old sheet music and started giving it a go... I've forgotten most of the chords but I have a couple of toys that show me where to place my mitts, so it's within the realm of learning again. After a few days, I can play a few hours in the seat, I can play a couple of songs through with some reasonable success. Funnily enough, my brother could play guitar well, but nobody else in my entire extended family could so much as carry a tune in a bucket.
Now, an organ and piano look pretty much the same... But they're certainly not. So I feel like a total n00b at this because I'm hitting the keys too lightly to register, or inconsistently in pressure. And of course I keep tying my hands in knots because I would play with my hands on different manuals on an organ. And the pedals do different things too. I had a look through beginners books, but I already know how to read the music, and I know what key to hit to sound C.. But starting to go higher than this, they of course assume knowledge of how to play a piano..
So therefore, if anyone has some experience in this, can you recommend some resources to help transition? If I really have to go back to square one, I hope there are some beginners books out there without the friendly cartoon characters offering their encouragement

Where's the WOW? *Edit: More WOW now with a controller :)

You know, leading up to my purchase of the Gear VR I watched countless Oculus Rift videos where the user was simply dumbfounded, dismayed and amazed by the complete immersion of the experience. Lots of swearing and laughing. A sense of "no longer being in the real world".
The Gear VR has a better screen than the Oculus Rift and the FOV is just slightly less (96 degrees vs 100 degrees). But to be honest, although it's cool, I am NOT getting that WOW moment where I feel I've been transported to another world. I can see pixels, I can see the binocular effect. Yeah it's cool but for me anyway, not remotely immersive. Perhaps 360 videos would be immersive if they weren't so badly out of focus. I can watch quality HD movies in the Cinema but those are movies on a screen - again not immersive - I'm not IN the action. Games come the closest but Android games tend to be a bit on the cartoonish side. Of the games I've played only Anshar and Darknet give me the sense I'm IN the game, Anshar being the best (I really wish they would release the full game - getting tired of playing one level forever).
So are these people in the Oculus videos just easily impressed? Don't get me wrong, the Gear VR is a fun device and worth the $200, but it just isn't AMAZING for me like all those folks in the videos seem to think the Oculus is. Never once have I felt like laughing or swearing or just being giddy at the experience. It's neat, but for me that's about it.
** Update: Turns out the best most immersive games for the GVR (such as Herobound) require a controller. Since I did not own a bluetooth controller previously I was not aware. Herobound is a very impressive VR game and gives a good sense of immersion. Very promising.

Maybe it's like hypnosis. Some people are easier to hypnotize than others. Maybe with VR it is just easier for some people to feel IN the environment than others? Dunno.

I guess the sad thing about the GVR is that we will never have games that can compete with what a PC with graphics card can spit out. There is an app to allow you to play PC games on your Note 4, but the lag over wifi is so bad they are kind of unplayable and you can't hard tether for obvious reasons.

Let it go man. if you dont like it - stop using it. But youve said all there is to say.

stevegee111 said:
Let it go man. if you dont like it - stop using it. But youve said all there is to say.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow, do you actually read posts before responding or just blurt things out? I said on numerous occasions in this thread that I like the GVR and it is worth the money, it just isn't the WOW experience I was hoping for. My advice to you, since you're new and clearly don't know better, is read the words someone has said before commenting on them.
SMH

Actually there is one experience for me that does have the WOW immersive feeling. It is the Lunar Theater in Oculus Cinema. When the lights come up just looking at that is so amazing. I don't care about silly fuzzy 360 videos, give me more content like THAT, not only to sit and look at but to roam and explore. Even have a moon monster or two jump out at me.

...and your point is?
the gear VR is a fun early adopter thing to experience the current status quo of VR. its impressive in some ways, not so much in others. thus the "innovator edition", thus no finished product on the open market yet from neither samsung nor oculus nor anybody else, thus the very transparent "this is only for people who like to come along for the ride early on" policy. the paths to better products is known, the technology is not quite there yet, but its already a lot of fun for some, and less fun for others. the end.
not sure what youre trying to accomplish here.

zorglub667 said:
...and your point is?
the gear VR is a fun early adopter thing to experience the current status quo of VR. its impressive in some ways, not so much in others. thus the "innovator edition", thus no finished product on the open market yet from neither samsung nor oculus nor anybody else, thus the very transparent "this is only for people who like to come along for the ride early on" policy. the paths to better products is known, the technology is not quite there yet, but its already a lot of fun for some, and less fun for others. the end.
not sure what youre trying to accomplish here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Um, did you READ the OP? Let me explain again. I am responding to the fact videos I have seen of people using the Oculus Rift (which has an inferior screen to this) that has them utterly gobsmacked. They laugh, they swear, they are AMAZED. Considering this device has a superior image I was expecting the same and am disappointed I have not experienced those emotions.
If you had actually read the OP I wouldn't have to repeat myself.
P.S., They are selling this commercially through BestBuy brick and mortar stores, so let's not pretend this is some alpha unit for "innovators" only, despite the clever name. Other than better content, I doubt future iterations of the Gear VR will be much improved until we get higher res displays.
** Dude, 13 posts in 8 years and you decide to finally pontificate in my thread?

Folks, if you disagree with my viewpoint that is your prerogative, but at least show that you read the words I wrote before commenting. It is clear from the last two individuals that they did not read the OP.

So another thread about the screen door effect ruining the experience for you'? Wasn't it enough to ruin just the one? IF you don't like the experience then sell the device and wait for the Note 5 or 6 (4K/5K screens) and Gear VR2.
The videos are a bit fuzzy I agree, but moving the device closer to your face will definitely increase your FOV (difficult to measure/calculate by just how much). Moving the lens further from your eyes doesn't make the pixel-issue disappear, but instead distorts the outer edges and makes for a worse experience (no wonder you hate it so much; you are lessening the amount of "in-focus" light that reaches your eyes while making the black edges all the more visible).
This is an INNOVATOR's edition and if you fail to see that then you truly shouldn't own one. The experience is the best VR experience we can achieve as of yet, and you aren't apparently able to comprehend that fact, and the fact that people are different; some aren't as anal about pixels being visible as you are, thus the "wow amazing!"-effect they get when using it..

1. i did read your opening post.
2. that some people have no trouble to oversee the obvious resolution shortcomings while others do, and that you in particular are disappointed in the resolution, all that has been discussed many many times now, i would say. would you disagree?
3. it appears you are pretty quick at judging people. my post was not meant as an offense in any way. i must say i found the tone of your reply surprisingly aggressive. we're just chitchatting about a tech gadget here. no reason to get worked up about it.
still fail to see the point in opening yet another thread about the same topic. no idea what youre trying to archieve by this.
yes, we will only get better resolution, once we have small displays with even higher resolution than the current qHD generation. in case anyone didnt know that already...
no, i do not think that the way samsung/oculus sell this is a cheat in any way. i fondly remember the *numerous* disclaimers i had to click through to get mine. rarely has a manufacturer tried so hard to NOT sell me a product
the product isnt even advertised in the slightest. if at all, one could argue that it appears that samsung has been quite surprised by the demand. what little batches they put out seem to have sold out pretty much anywhere rather quickly. so: demand is up even though its so openly communicated to be an prototype-y product, so the usual dynamics of the free marketplace kick in, so bestbuy jumps on the bandwagon. it appears, that many people seem to be fine with the current shortcomings. an argument could be made if they tried to sell this to people without letting them try it out first. to kind of HIDE the real nature of it or something. but that does not seem to be the case anywhere, and i dont find that surprising either - overall, most people really seem to react very much on the "wow, wtf!" side of things. that it didnt wow you, im really sorry and i mean that completely without any sarcasm whatsoever. but i think its enough to discuss this in 2 or 3 threads and opening yet another still seems kind of pointless to me. many people are impressed. you are not. what else is there to say?
oh, btw: ive been around on XDA for a long time (ever since the very early windows mobile days when HTC was still selling its phones not under the HTC brand but labeled as MDA/XDA/whatever). this is an old account i had forgotten and ressurected because i forgot the password of another. if you feel the need to judge people based on something as artificial as a forum post number, well: to each his own.

Toss3 said:
So another thread about the screen door effect ruining the experience for you'? Wasn't it enough to ruin just the one? IF you don't like the experience then sell the device and wait for the Note 5 or 6 (4K/5K screens) and Gear VR2.
The videos are a bit fuzzy I agree, but moving the device closer to your face will definitely increase your FOV (difficult to measure/calculate by just how much). Moving the lens further from your eyes doesn't make the pixel-issue disappear, but instead distorts the outer edges and makes for a worse experience (no wonder you hate it so much; you are lessening the amount of "in-focus" light that reaches your eyes while making the black edges all the more visible).
This is an INNOVATOR's edition and if you fail to see that then you truly shouldn't own one. The experience is the best VR experience we can achieve as of yet, and you aren't apparently able to comprehend that fact, and the fact that people are different; some aren't as anal about pixels being visible as you are, thus the "wow amazing!"-effect they get when using it..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And thanks for proving my point. You say, "so another thread about screen door effect ruining the experience for you?" Can you please point to me where in my OP I mention screen door effect at all? Right. I don't mention it. Not once.
This is a thread about whether you feel a "sense of immersion" that makes you say WOW. I am pleased that so many of you do. I have now shown this device to 10 people and not a single person has reacted that way. The general reaction has been, "Well, it's kind of cool but not what I expected" I ask them if they feel like they are "there" and not a single person has said yes. Most of my friends are older successful business people who aren't amazed by the latest bit of kit. Maybe older people have a more difficult time entering the VR world because they've been in the real world so long? 3 different people said, "Based upon the videos I've seen online I was expecting more (paraphrasing)".
The one exception, as I mentioned, is the actual theater (not the film but the theater itself) in Oculus Cinema. People thought the moon was the coolest and wondered why there wasn't more content like that. I'm hoping Oculus (or a developer) creates more soon.

BestBuy is now selling this device out of their retail stores with demo units set up in hundreds of locations. They are selling it at full retail. Name one other "beta" product that has ever been sold in this manner? I don't think that setting up store demo's is an attempt to "talk you out of buying this device".
I think by calling it an "Innovator Edition" Samsung is sort of giving themselves a "get out of jail free" card. Yes, here is our "Innovator Edition", don't expect much but oh yeah, we're selling it at BestBuy with demo units for full price. That's fine. They call it marketing. I do like this device and think it is well worth the $200 - as I have stated on numerous occasions which some members apparently miss each and every time.
I think the fact is (as I said in the OP that no one read), some people have more of a suspension of disbelief about VR than others. To me, while cool, most of it just seems like as handy film viewer (which is worthwhile on it's own). This is also the reaction my friends who have seen it give. Perhaps the real problem is simply content. There are some moments which are immersive - which I also stated but everyone seems to miss.
Assuming the GVR is truly a "beta" (it's really not - you don't sell betas in stores), what are people expecting from future products? This is plastic, some lenses, a headstrap and some electronics. Perhaps they will come up with some miracle lenses which parse out all pixelization? I honestly doubt that. The Gear VR is what it will be. What will change is the phone and content.

Here's one thing to keep in mind folks. Very very very few people come to forums such as this to discuss the Gear VR. Those who come tend to be fanboys and enthusiasts, and that's perfectly cool. The mistake people make is that they take the impressions of the few individuals here and project that over the marketplace.
On the other hand I am attempting to see this product through the eyes of the average non-enthusiast consumer. Many here say their friends have loved the product. We tend to associate with those who think as we do. In my own experience, the reaction has been far more muted.
If you wish to comment in this thread, please discuss the topic of immersion. Attacking me is not OT. If you don't like what I have to say, don't read the thread, simple as that.
** I'm wondering if people using the Oculus are having a more immersive experience not because of the technology but because of superior content? Watched a YouTube of a guy playing Assetto Corsa on the Rift and it looked incredible.

Hi folks,
If you don't want to participate in this thread or any other created by the OP or feel that it's not contributing to the well-being of XDA, please don't post. Trolling and arguing is not allowed on any thread. If people would learn to ignore others, possibly there would be less negative back and forth posts. Everyone, please ignoring threads and posts you don't like. Differing opinions are fine and it's ok to disagree with them but it's really not that serious. However, if something is bothering you to the point of distraction, then call a moderator.
Regards

mitchellvii said:
And thanks for proving my point. You say, "so another thread about screen door effect ruining the experience for you?" Can you please point to me where in my OP I mention screen door effect at all? Right. I don't mention it. Not once.
This is a thread about whether you feel a "sense of immersion" that makes you say WOW.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
which is exactly the point where one could argue that thats exactly the same thing. because, why again is it that you feel a lack of immersion? judging from most of your posts, that would be...oh right, the screen door effect.
q.e.d.
mitchellvii said:
I am pleased that so many of you do. I have now shown this device to 10 people and not a single person has reacted that way. The general reaction has been, "Well, it's kind of cool but not what I expected" I ask them if they feel like they are "there" and not a single person has said yes. Most of my friends are older successful business people who aren't amazed by the latest bit of kit. Maybe older people have a more difficult time entering the VR world because they've been in the real world so long? 3 different people said, "Based upon the videos I've seen online I was expecting more (paraphrasing)".
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
so, to be a bit more blunt, youre saying that in contrast to these friends of yours, whoever would disagree with their findings probably does so because...they "havent been in the real world for so long"? or maybe because theyre not "successful business people". or maybe because theyre "fanboys" that "make the mistake of not seeing this through the eyes of the average non-enthusiast consumer".
those are the things you are implying (albeit in a somewhat subtle, suggestive way). well then, so be it. i will leave this discussion, but id like to point out towards the forum moderation that the question about who is trolling and who is not is at the very least somewhat debatable.

zorglub667 said:
which is exactly the point where one could argue that thats exactly the same thing. because, why again is it that you feel a lack of immersion? judging from most of your posts, that would be...oh right, the screen door effect.
q.e.d.
so, to be a bit more blunt, youre saying that in contrast to these friends of yours, whoever would disagree with their findings probably does so because...they "havent been in the real world for so long"? or maybe because theyre not "successful business people". or maybe because theyre "fanboys" that "make the mistake of not seeing this through the eyes of the average non-enthusiast consumer".
those are the things you are implying (albeit in a somewhat subtle, suggestive way). well then, so be it. i will leave this discussion, but id like to point out towards the forum moderation that the question about who is trolling and who is not is at the very least somewhat debatable.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Once again you are attributing your interpretation to my intent then damning me for it. Do us both a favor and take my words at face value. I don't have a subtle meaning or agenda.
I was simply expressing the experiences of my friends and because it disagrees with your experience it has apparently short circuited your brain and convinced you that you possess psychic powers.
Couple factoids you should consider. Most people who lurk (read but do not comment) at this forum probably do not yet own the GVR. They are just here to read feedback from owners. The average typical consumer that buys a GVR from BestBuy has no idea XDA even exists, and so they won't be commenting. So we are left with mainly enthusiasts who are at least somewhat invested in the idea they made a good purchase. That's not to say their opinion is not 100% valid, but it is to say that one should not project the opinions here to the rest of the marketplace. The sample is skewed. It is my opinion that the typical non enthusiast consumer will not be as impressed with the sense of immersion as you are. My friends which are a good sample of an older non enthusiast demographic were not. They all thought it was cool. No one was saying OMG and begging me to try it again.

Here's a perfect example in the differences of perceived immersion:
I just played DreadHalls after watching a YouTube of a full grown man playing it. He was so frightened that I literally thought he was going to pee his pants. He had to take a break mid-game just to catch his breath and calm his nerves.
So anyway, I just played it. Seriously, WTF? I might have found this scary when I was 8. Just think really really weak Doom. I say weak Doom because Doom actually was scary. Immersive? I guess if cartoon bricks and groaning noises are immersive for you. So here is an example of a user who was actually physically frightened by a game I just found silly. He kept saying, "Wow, it's like I'm really there!" I kept saying, "Wow, cartoon bricks!"
I don't blame the Gear VR. A large part preventing me from experiencing immersion is simply a lack of content. I'm also spoiled by years of triple monitor gaming with a fast PC and awesome video card. Now THAT'S immersive. When they create games that have the realism and texture of the Lunar Theater, then I'll start getting more excited about this platform.

Just played HeroBound for the first time (didn't have a controller before). Now that game is very immersive. The opening scene with the big volcano is amazing. If you haven't played that game definitely give it a try. Hopefully someone will bring that level of graphics to a 1st person shooter.

Haha, I get what you mean. I read one thread on reddit saying that he was 'crying' after using the gearvr for the first time. LOL. Seriously, I just don't get it. I want VR to succeed so much, but I also have my feet on the ground and don't let the hype go straight to my head. Using it, the sweet spot for focus is tiny, right in the middle of the lense, look up or down left or right without moving your head and it immediately starts to get proportionally blurry. The resolution reminds of looking at one of those digital projectors from 10 years ago, the panasonic AE300. The resolution was quarter HD, like the iPhone 4 except blown up on a massive screen. That's what movie watching experience is like in Occulus Cinema, the black screen door probably takes 30% or more of the 'full' image, it just looks really bad, and that's not even talking about the low ass resolution this rectangle takes up.
Some might say I'm being too harsh, whenever I get a new product I find all the flaws first and gradually get used to those flaws if I decide to keep it. But I never say this product is better than it really is. Some might get caught up on the hype train and want for VR to succeed so much they never talk about what's currently wrong/broken or what can be improved. I think it will succeed eventually, but clearly the GearVR is not a consumer ready product. I honestly laugh thinking if Samsung released GearVR without Oculus and John Carmack's expertise. I mean the smoothness of the experience is what makes it special, not the lenses, or the screen.
Having said that, the one place it just works is games. Herobound, that ring toss game, Ikarus. These fixed point experiences are much better imo, competely avoids motion sickness and maximises the phone's graphic ability. The sea creatures of Ocean Rift have a solidity and fluidity that creates a compelling experience and makes me believe that VR is inevitable. The comments from people really depend on what previous experience and expectation the user has. Most people don't expect anything, don't have anything to compare it to and are amazed with Google cardboard when they first see it. The main issue that disappointed me was the fact that I had paid 250 for lenses that have barely acceptable focus and awful peripheral vision. GearVR needs way more adjustment, not only distance, but angle and individual lense focus.
Then regarding the media quality of the 360 video demos. Ranging from meh to this is terrible. The best material has been from alternative sources It's disappointing that Samsung supplied such low quality videos with the premier of a new category. One would think they want to prove what VR is really capable of. At least host a site where users can download high quality 360 video, 360 is probably overrated too, 180 is very immersive and a better balance of quality vs filesize.
The catalogue currently available is still small. I can see how new users can blow through content in a few days and leave the GearVR to gather dust. Overall this is very much a beta product. Procuring one was a pain in the hole as well, much like the Note 4 process. Samsung should definitely copy how Apple rolls out products.

Opinions on Top Gun: Maverick SPOILER WARNING

If you've seen the movie, go ahead and share your thoughts here. I'll go first. Obviously, I understand this is just a movie, it's made for the entertainment value, but I can't help picking it apart.
Overall, I think the movie did what it was supposed to do - a "feel good" flick about America. The nostalgia was nice. But, my experience as a Marine veteran as well as knowledge of military aviation raised a lot of issues for me.
First...The SR-72/Aurora/Darkwing project. It's plausible that someone like Maverick could indeed become a test pilot, but most such projects are run under the Air Force, at the end of a pilot's career. It would have made more sense to put this at the end of the movie, although he would have a literal snowflake's chance in hell of surviving a Mach 10+ disintegration. The human body cannot withstand supersonic ejection; the force of the air stream can literally rip your body apart. Maverick would have been pink mist. Also...You crash a multi-billion (if not trillion) dollar prototype, chances are you'll never fly again.
This brings me to the bar scene, where apparently no one knows who he is, and he eventually gets thrown out by Hangman and the other pilots. The problem with this is, someone like Maverick would have quite the reputation; everyone there would have been buying him drinks, not throwing him out on his ass. Not to mention anyone in the military knows you don't put your hands on an O-6.
I do like the line where he tells Penny "Being a fighter pilot is what I am". This is true for pretty much every career pilot I've known - their whole life revolves around it, and when it's over, they have a lot of trouble finding a sense of purpose. It's tough to know you're staring at the end of something you've done (and loved) your entire adult life, wondering what the hell do you do now?
The element of TOPGUN itself, the Navy's Strike Fighter Tactics Instructor program, was rather lacking. The pilots were all graduates of TOPGUN, sure...but the idea that only they could perform the mission doesn't make sense. In reality, the military would simply use whatever assets that were the closest and most capable. But, assuming all this...Why are all these pilots struggling against G's like 2nd week flight school boots in the G trainer? They're fighter pilots, not truck drivers. They should be well used to handling high Gs with composure. Then Phoenix crashes her jet...Bird strikes are a thing, engine flameouts are a thing, but she apparently forgot all the boldface procedures. Chances are she'd still have at least limited power even with a fragged motor, and there's no reason she'd lose control of the jet. Still, she crashed it, and they still somehow sent her on this high risk mission. In reality, that wouldn't happen...She wouldn't necessarily be grounded, but she'd be off the team after that. And why are they flying out of NAS North Island? TOPGUN has been at NAS Fallon since 1996, and it's just a waste of gas to fly back and forth that far. That being said, they could have been training at MCAGCC Twentynine Palms, also out in the middle of the Mojave desert. Also, why are two admirals running TOPGUN? And what's the point of Hangman? His story arc is basically "mean girl" > "Not mean girl". No pilot would volunteer for mission commander; if anything they'd fight about who DOESN'T want to be mission commander.
The mission itself doesn't make a whole lot of sense. It's extremely unlikely that something high risk like this would be flown by a four ship strike package of Rhinos (Super Hornets). A real strike package would have included AWACS, air superiority fighters, SEAD taking out the SAMs, most likely some EA-18G Growlers...and if they absolutely had to be subtle, they'd use F-35Cs....assuming the mission wasn't carried out by Air Force B-2's. GPS jamming is a thing, but it's much harder to jam laser, and they'd probably drop some SEALs in to lase the target for them. The whole valley thing doesn't make a whole lot of sense, either. No way is any adversary going to leave such an obvious back door open. That entire valley would be littered with SAMs, MANPADs, and AAA....and if for whatever reason they didn't see them on radar (which they would have while they were out to sea) they would definitely have heard them. The TLAM strike does make sense, but they'd probably program them with an off-axis waypoint so they didn't come in from the same direction as the fighters. The pilots wouldn't be too happy about missiles flying a couple hundred feet over their heads; if one goes haywire, that could be it for you or your wingman. It's worth noting that TLAMs are subsonic cruise missiles, too, so they wouldn't be outrunning fighters cruising at 400+ knots.
The diving delivery doesn't make a whole lot of sense. F/A-18s are 4th generation fighters; laser guided bombs don't have to be dropped in a dive, they just have to be dropped into a virtual "basket" where the seeker head can acquire the laser signal. They could do this while staying under the rim of the mountain crater.
The F-14 scene is pretty cool, although if he'd taken off using flaps...he might have saved the nose gear. But, if he saved the nose gear, he wouldn't be able to barricade, and movies have to have tension, right? That being said, the chances of surviving against not just one, but two Su-57s in a F-14 are...Not great. The Felon's capabilities are doubted, sure...the cockpit looks like it has very poor rear visibility...but, it is a 5th gen fighter with 3D thrust vectoring. It would make quick work out of the heavy, ungainly F-35, let alone a Tomcat, and modern heat seeking missiles like the AIM-9X and R-73 (R-74 in the Su-57's case) are hard to decoy with flares. There's no way flying through a canyon would confuse the Felon's systems...they'd just hang back and keep firing missiles until they brought the Tomcat down. They wouldn't bother following it through the canyon, either...they could just fly a couple thousand feet above and behind and maintain visual contact.
Finally...nobody would be crowding the flight deck celebrating. Everyone topside has a job; if your job doesn't involve you being on the flight deck, you won't be there. Their first priority would be ensuring nothing caught fire, and they did that. Second priority would be clearing the deck, because an aircraft carrier is busy 24/7 with launches, recoveries, and training.
Anyway, that's just my take. Feel free to share yours.

We Were Soldiers and Hamburger Hill are good... never liked Tom bs Cruise at all.

blackhawk said:
We Were Soldiers and Hamburger Hill are good... never liked Tom bs Cruise at all.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hacksaw Ridge was pretty excellent too. I'm not a huge fan of Cruise either but the intent here is to talk about what we like or didn't like about Maverick

V0latyle said:
Hacksaw Ridge was pretty excellent too. I'm not a huge fan of Cruise either but the intent here is to talk about what we like or didn't like about Maverick
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Numerous technical errors as usual... try to pretend you're stupid, don't think, pretend it's not Tom Cruise and the movie might be ok.
Probably not.
I once shot out a 30" crt with a 9mm Glaser safety slug because Tom Cruise was on it at that time. Got him center mass
Deeply satisfying and the micro shrapnel from it was incredible. Replaced the crt for $169... it was so worth it.
After thinking over, watch Spy Hard instead. Far more believable, better script and acting too

Dang! Glad I saw the movie before reading all of this. I loved it! Could care less about all the technical authenticity or whatever, I go to the movies to forget about the real world, and if I wanted to see all this technical stuff, I could have saved the $60 bucks, had a few sips of Scotch and looked it all up on the interwebz, and forgotten all about it anyways!
Good thing Badgers are simple creatures!

Badger50 said:
Dang! Glad I saw the movie before reading all of this. I loved it! Could care less about all the technical authenticity or whatever, I go to the movies to forget about the real world, and if I wanted to see all this technical stuff, I could have saved the $60 bucks, had a few sips of Scotch and looked it all up on the interwebz, and forgotten all about it anyways!
Good thing Badgers are simple creatures!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Any critter that decorates its den entrance with bones from its plunders isn't a simple creature

blackhawk said:
simple creature
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you meant, Simply effective!

Badger50 said:
I think you meant, Simply effective!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Simply hungry too
Meh... saw it.
Great cinematography... at times,
sound track- meh,
script- another death star miracle... it was pretentious and rehashed.
wokeness- a token women top gun, lame.
It had a click to it but it felt like a 80yo cougar making a pass at you.
It's ok... hella better then any of the new woke Disney crap

Guess I'll watch it again. Older Tom Cruise isn't nearly as anoying as young TC.
What do two F18 pilots, Wombat and Mover think?
They bring up some interesting aspects of the movie.
I want to believe... *explodes into pink mist*

The sequel to a classic created another classic...Tom Cruise back as Maverick is fantastic...a film to watch and re-watch..

V0latyle said:
If you've seen the movie, go ahead and share your thoughts here. I'll go first. Obviously, I understand this is just a movie, it's made for the entertainment value, but I can't help picking it apart.
Overall, I think the movie did what it was supposed to do - a "feel good" flick about America. The nostalgia was nice. But, my experience as a Marine veteran as well as knowledge of military aviation raised a lot of issues for me.
First...The SR-72/Aurora/Darkwing project. It's plausible that someone like Maverick could indeed become a test pilot, but most such projects are run under the Air Force, at the end of a pilot's career. It would have made more sense to put this at the end of the movie, although he would have a literal snowflake's chance in hell of surviving a Mach 10+ disintegration. The human body cannot withstand supersonic ejection; the force of the air stream can literally rip your body apart. Maverick would have been pink mist. Also...You crash a multi-billion (if not trillion) dollar prototype, chances are you'll never fly again.
This brings me to the bar scene, where apparently no one knows who he is, and he eventually gets thrown out by Hangman and the other pilots. The problem with this is, someone like Maverick would have quite the reputation; everyone there would have been buying him drinks, not throwing him out on his ass.
I do like the line where he tells Penny "Being a fighter pilot is what I am". This is true for pretty much every career pilot I've known - their whole life revolves around it, and when it's over, they have a lot of trouble finding a sense of purpose. It's tough to know you're staring at the end of something you've done (and loved) your entire adult life, wondering what the hell do you do now?
The element of TOPGUN itself, the Navy's Strike Fighter Tactics Instructor program, was rather lacking. The pilots were all graduates of TOPGUN, sure...but the idea that only they could perform the mission doesn't make sense. In reality, the military would simply use whatever assets that were the closest and most capable. But, assuming all this...Why are all these pilots struggling against G's like 2nd week flight school boots in the G trainer? They're fighter pilots, not truck drivers. They should be well used to handling high Gs with composure. Then Phoenix crashes her jet...Bird strikes are a thing, engine flameouts are a thing, but she apparently forgot all the boldface procedures. Chances are she'd still have at least limited power even with a fragged motor, and there's no reason she'd lose control of the jet. Still, she crashed it, and they still somehow sent her on this high risk mission. In reality, that wouldn't happen...She wouldn't necessarily be grounded, but she'd be off the team after that. And why are they flying out of NAS North Island? TOPGUN has been at NAS Fallon since 1996, and it's just a waste of gas to fly back and forth that far. That being said, they could have been training at MCAGCC Twentynine Palms, also out in the middle of the Mojave desert. Also, why are two admirals running TOPGUN? And what's the point of Hangman? His story arc is basically "mean girl" > "Not mean girl". No pilot would volunteer for mission commander; if anything they'd fight about who DOESN'T want to be mission commander.
The mission itself doesn't make a whole lot of sense. It's extremely unlikely that something high risk like this would be flown by a four ship strike package of Rhinos (Super Hornets). A real strike package would have included AWACS, air superiority fighters, SEAD taking out the SAMs, most likely some EA-18G Growlers...and if they absolutely had to be subtle, they'd use F-35Cs....assuming the mission wasn't carried out by Air Force B-2's. GPS jamming is a thing, but it's much harder to jam laser, and they'd probably drop some SEALs in to lase the target for them. The whole valley thing doesn't make a whole lot of sense, either. No way is any adversary going to leave such an obvious back door open. That entire valley would be littered with SAMs, MANPADs, and AAA....and if for whatever reason they didn't see them on radar (which they would have while they were out to sea) they would definitely have heard them. The TLAM strike does make sense, but they'd probably program them with an off-axis waypoint so they didn't come in from the same direction as the fighters. The pilots wouldn't be too happy about missiles flying a couple hundred feet over their heads; if one goes haywire, that could be it for you or your wingman. It's worth noting that TLAMs are subsonic cruise missiles, too, so they wouldn't be outrunning fighters cruising at 400+ knots.
The diving delivery doesn't make a whole lot of sense. F/A-18s are 4th generation fighters; laser guided bombs don't have to be dropped in a dive, they just have to be dropped into a virtual "basket" where the seeker head can acquire the laser signal. They could do this while staying under the rim of the mountain crater.
The F-14 scene is pretty cool, although if he'd taken off using flaps...he might have saved the nose gear. But, if he saved the nose gear, he wouldn't be able to barricade, and movies have to have tension, right? That being said, the chances of surviving against not just one, but two Su-57s in a F-14 are...Not great. The Felon's capabilities are doubted, sure...the cockpit looks like it has very poor rear visibility...but, it is a 5th gen fighter with 3D thrust vectoring. It would make quick work out of the heavy, ungainly F-35, let alone a Tomcat, and modern heat seeking missiles like the AIM-9X and R-73 (R-74 in the Su-57's case) are hard to decoy with flares. There's no way flying through a canyon would confuse the Felon's systems...they'd just hang back and keep firing missiles until they brought the Tomcat down. They wouldn't bother following it through the canyon, either...they could just fly a couple thousand feet above and behind and maintain visual contact.
Finally...nobody would be crowding the flight deck celebrating. Everyone topside has a job; if your job doesn't involve you being on the flight deck, you won't be there. Their first priority would be ensuring nothing caught fire, and they did that. Second priority would be clearing the deck, because an aircraft carrier is busy 24/7 with launches, recoveries, and training.
Anyway, that's just my take. Feel free to share yours.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The best Way to explain what I think is summed up in the video of this guy..
*not my video* hope it’s ok to post
I think maverick died in the beginning and lived his dream afterlife. However, we will never know.
I’ve read many posts about it, so I don’t think I’m the only one (besides the guy making the video).
It makes sense. But if he died that also means.. no part 3. 🫤

Cv7676 said:
The best Way to explain what I think is summed up in the video of this guy..
*not my video* hope it’s ok to post
I think maverick died in the beginning and lived his dream afterlife. However, we will never know.
I’ve read many posts about it, so I don’t think I’m the only one (besides the guy making the video).
It makes sense. But if he died that also means.. no part 3. 🫤
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's one way to put it.
On another topic, I saw several comments on YouTube insisting that they used minimal CGI in the movie because Tom Cruise apparently doesn't like doing CGI. So, explain these:
- The SR-72 Darkstar is still in development; if there are any flying prototypes, they are undoubtedly UAVs, much less capable of Mach 10.
- The US military has very specific rules on "safety bubbles" in training - a buffer zone around your aircraft that MUST be clear of other aircraft, the only exceptions being formation flight. Even professional stunt pilots like the Blue Angels and Thunderbirds maintain "bubbles" of at least several hundred feet and use perspective angles to create the illusion of much closer proximity for maneuvers such as the head on break. Why would the military break hard and fast rules written in blood for a film?
- There are only 5 total flying Su-57/PAK-FA fighters, all in the Russian Air Force. How exactly did the Navy gain cooperation from a historically belligerent foreign military to use their 5th generation fighters for a film?
- The only flying F-14 Tomcats are all owned by Iran, again historically belligerent towards the United States, so same problem as above. While a real F-14 was used in the movie, it's a non-flying airframe with no engines or avionics that was shipped in pieces to the film set.
- The missiles...think those were real?
- The one thing that MIGHT be real would be the Mi-24 helicopter, just because there are so many all around the world.

V0latyle said:
That's one way to put it.
On another topic, I saw several comments on YouTube insisting that they used minimal CGI in the movie because Tom Cruise apparently doesn't like doing CGI. So, explain these:
- The SR-72 Darkstar is still in development; if there are any flying prototypes, they are undoubtedly UAVs, much less capable of Mach 10.
- The US military has very specific rules on "safety bubbles" in training - a buffer zone around your aircraft that MUST be clear of other aircraft, the only exceptions being formation flight. Even professional stunt pilots like the Blue Angels and Thunderbirds maintain "bubbles" of at least several hundred feet and use perspective angles to create the illusion of much closer proximity for maneuvers such as the head on break. Why would the military break hard and fast rules written in blood for a film?
- There are only 5 total flying Su-57/PAK-FA fighters, all in the Russian Air Force. How exactly did the Navy gain cooperation from a historically belligerent foreign military to use their 5th generation fighters for a film?
- The only flying F-14 Tomcats are all owned by Iran, again historically belligerent towards the United States, so same problem as above. While a real F-14 was used in the movie, it's a non-flying airframe with no engines or avionics that was shipped in pieces to the film set.
- The missiles...think those were real?
- The one thing that MIGHT be real would be the Mi-24 helicopter, just because there are so many all around the world.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you watch Hamburger Hill or We Were Soldiers you don't have turn off your your intellect while watching, but it may get bruised. Hamburger Hill is one of the most realistic war movies ever made. My Nam buddy Al said "It was like that!". It seems plotless and random, horrible $hit happens just like war. Hard to say who "won".
I've watched Hamburger Hill over a dozen times.
Das Boot (director's cut) is another excellent war movie. Uboat ace Captain Eric Topp was a consultant for that film.

blackhawk said:
If you watch Hamburger Hill or We Were Soldiers you don't have turn off your your intellect while watching, but it may get bruised. Hamburger Hill is one of the most realistic war movies ever made. My Nam buddy Al said "It was like that!". It seems plotless and random, horrible $hit happens just like war. Hard to say who "won".
I've watched Hamburger Hill over a dozen times.
Das Boot (director's cut) is another excellent war movie. Uboat ace Captain Eric Topp was a consultant for that film.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah. And the whole point of Top Gun is a feel good all American movie. If we want to talk about ridiculously unrealistic, how about Mission: Impossible...

V0latyle said:
Yeah. And the whole point of Top Gun is a feel good all American movie. If we want to talk about ridiculously unrealistic, how about Mission: Impossible...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah I blew MI off after a few minutes
The Bruce Lee movies still impress, he was pulling punches and nunchuk hits so fast it was a blur even at 40fps? Wow. Like Jimi on the guitar, where they mere mortals?
Two oldies but goodies are the original Freaks (all the freaks are real) and Spider Baby with a young Sid Haig, a stellar performance from Lon Chaney jr plus more top shelf character actors.

blackhawk said:
Yeah I blew MI off after a few minutes
The Bruce Lee movies still impress, he was pulling punches and nunchuk hits so fast it was a blur even at 40fps? Wow. Like Jimi on the guitar, where they mere mortals?
Two oldies but goodies are the original Freaks (all the freaks are real) and Spider Baby with a young Sid Haig, a stellar performance from Lon Chaney jr plus more top shelf character actors.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Typical movie framerate is 24fps. I've honestly never watched the Bruce Lee movies so I don't know.

V0latyle said:
Typical movie framerate is 24fps. I've honestly never watched the Bruce Lee movies so I don't know.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe 36fps, they deliberately used a higher frame rate to shoot the action scenes. Don't ask me how they integrated that?

blackhawk said:
Maybe 36fps, they deliberately used a higher frame rate to shoot the action scenes. Don't ask me how they integrated that?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Now there's a technical brain teaser. Before digital film, both cameras and film projectors were mechanical, so the movie had to be played at the same rate at which it was filmed. Variable speeds would be a problem since the soundtrack was synchronized to the film as well. It's not so difficult with digital technology, but most video encoders use a static frame rate - the BIT rate can be variable, wherein the "depth" of the information recorded can vary, but the frame rate generally doesn't.
Now if they shot the entire movie in 36fps, that would make sense.

V0latyle said:
Now there's a technical brain teaser. Before digital film, both cameras and film projectors were mechanical, so the movie had to be played at the same rate at which it was filmed. Variable speeds would be a problem since the soundtrack was synchronized to the film as well. It's not so difficult with digital technology, but most video encoders use a static frame rate - the BIT rate can be variable, wherein the "depth" of the information recorded can vary, but the frame rate generally doesn't.
Now if they shot the entire movie in 36fps, that would make sense.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
36fps it appears to be. Lee was incredibly fast and formidable.

blackhawk said:
36fps it appears to be. Lee was incredibly fast and formidable.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh okay, so they shot at 34fps, which resulted in a bit of a "slow motion" effect when played at the standard 24fps.

Database Develop

welcome