Diablo 3 – A first world problem

Diablo 3 lags. It doesn’t work sometimes. It’s not fair.

“First world problem” comes the dry response.

What used to be a quirky and pointed way of replying to someone who was needlessly complaining about a tiny, insignificant aspect of their life has fast become the “go to” retort for anyone expressing disdain about anything happening in first-world countries. No mobile phone coverage? Nawww, that’s a first world problem, champ. Government not spending taxes correctly? Chin up, sunshine. That’s a first world problem.

Lag experienced in your Diablo 3 game, even though you’re not playing with anyone? First world problem.

I am beginning to loathe these three words. They’re getting right up there with “u mad, bro” and “no u” as a means to undermine anyone’s argument without addressing the specific points of contention. If someone has a fair and valid criticism of something that they paid money for, should they be denied the opportunity to express disdain in the product they purchased? Of course they do. The basic world of consumerism is built around the idea that people exchange currency for goods which should work as they were advertised. Unfortunately, Diablo 3 was not advertised showing any gameplay footage, however I am not sure if customers would have been enthused if the below was what they could expect every now and then:

From accounts I have heard from people who aren’t arm-flailingly incensed at the lag, Diablo 3 is as excellent and compelling as previous Diablo games. However, I remain unconvinced that Diablo 3 delivers this kind of consistent experience whenever the customer elects to play. Even then, I am still steadfast in my refusal to purchase.

Blizzard have made some decisions here that place the company’s profits above the customers’ needs. The horse and cart are around the wrong way. Happy customers bring profits. Unhappy customers will tolerate your shit for only so long. Understandably, Blizzard needs to protect their IP as pirates impact on profits, as they say.

But according to reports, Blizzard sold 6 million units of Diablo 3 in the first week. The image of pirates simply shrugging and saying “Oh well, we can’t pirate this… might as well buy it” is one I am having trouble believing.

I’m digressing.

The issues being experienced in Diablo 3 could be considered by some to be minor. They don’t impact the game that much, ultimately. But I don’t think I am annoyed by the fact that the game is inconsistent (mainly because I didn’t buy it). I am simply not a fan of the direction that Blizzard, and other companies, are taking with the always-on requirement. It’s changing how we experience our hobby, taking away what freedoms we had in how and when we play our games, and replacing them with a funnel that channels us into their world where they are free to do what they like, so long as we accept their EULA.

The axiom of “The Customer Is Always Right” is being replaced with “The Customer Will Accept What We Say Is Right”.

Diablo 3 Launch Fallout

Diablo 3 Launch Fallout

 

So, the sequel to one of the most beloved games of all time launches amid much anticipation, desire and demand. Unsurprisingly, Blizzards servers swelled like a constipated goldfish, refusing to do anything for anyone until it had a lie down and some desperate gasps.

 

Eventually it all passed, and players worked through the Battle.net orifice and into the Diablo tank to whimsically float around, but not before the most entertaining hour and a half of twitter I have ever witnessed.

 

Of course, the scores from metacritic speaks volumes for the level of disappointment some had, while other reports I read from twitter show a good level of satisfaction.

 

The arguments I see at the moment seem to centre around the bad design decision of Blizzard to structure Diablo like World of Warcraft. Some say that the game is a single player game with multiplayer features, whereas others consider Diablo more akin to an MMO, and if you casually discard common assumptions that it’s not an MMO (based on the fact that the original games weren’t MMOs in the traditional definition), you’re not disappointed with the launch.

 

Alright, Diablo was always a multiplayer game in my eyes. But it was never an MMO. It was always a game heavily entrenched in multiplayer, much like Titan Quest, Borderlands or any other multiplayer game in the past. The level of disappointment, I feel, is due to how the multiplayer is structured now and how it is a far departure from the original and most beloved of Diablo games.

 

It was a multiplayer game, but a multiplayer game on your terms.

 

In my eyes, it doesn’t matter how you pigeonhole Diablo 3, or Battle.net; is Battle.net “DRM”? It doesn’t matter. Is Diablo an MMO? Should you approach it as an MMO? Again, it’s inconsequential. How you look at the game doesn’t take away the ultimate feeling it generates for you. It doesn’t dull the feelings of distaste, nor does it chink at your armour of bliss.

 

What Diablo 3 does is depart so far from peoples’ expectations – expectations borne from Diablo’s history – to present a different structure that is alien to all but MMO aficionados. People didn’t expect it, or at least didn’t think that its impact would be felt so badly.

 

When people see a successor, they expect the same, but better. Diablo 3 is a multiplayer game, but on Blizzard’s terms. Whether you want to or not, you must squeeze through Blizzard’s portal to even lay eyes on the game.

 

From what I can see (and from not owning the game) the outrage has been exaggerated, not from the symptoms of what they’re experiencing, but from something that could have been avoided quite easily by adopting a traditional game structure.

 

Instead, punters who bought in are forced through a system that was devised in order to capitalise on the grey market that emerged from their hard work.

 

To boil it down into a TL;DR:

 

Were Blizzard right to make these changes? Time will tell. Ultimately, it’s their choice.

 

Were these changes in the customers’ best interests? I remain unconvinced

Diablo 3 Boycott

I will not be buying Diablo 3.

Friends of mine look at me curiously when I tell them this. The tilt of the head. The raised eyebrow. That ever so slight twitch that reveals their newfound opinion of me. Clearly I am mad. The successor to one of the most beloved of games, follow up to the very game that we all spent countless hours foraging around in search of treasure, and I’ll be turning my back on it. What on earth could possess me?

It’s a difficult position to justify, as the counter points to my reasons are correct and true. However, it’s more of a philosophical position.

No LAN play. You need to sign into Battlenet.

Yes. It’s this old chestnut that was brought up in the past when it was announced that Starcraft 2 would not support LAN, in favour of a central heaving multiplayer beast that is named Battlenet. Starcraft 2 has been released, and many hours have been whittled away by millions on Blizzards service. LAN play does not seem to be missed. As my friends would state bluntly;

“LAN is not relevant any more. It was great for slow connections many years ago, but high speed connections are everywhere and are cheap”

Absolutely. In fact the new system being employed is far more convenient for those of us with desktop PCs. We don’t need to make multiple trips to our car and go to another location and set up, many thanks to our high speed connections and wonderful Battlenet services. We can game and chat without venturing beyond our dark little rooms lit only by the easy glow of our monitors. However, I recall playing the original Diablo on LAN and whittling away hour upon hour at a friend’s house, drinking beer or wine, stopping occasionally to wander outside to the BBQ, chat about things other than games then settling back in for another round. LAN created this wonderful social atmosphere, parallel with going to a mate’s place to watch football, or maybe even a poker night.

While a LAN may only be conducted once in every while, the option was there to make an event of it. You could even hire out a hall with a bunch of your friends, and link everything together without the need of an internet connection. It didn’t happen all the time, but when it did, it was appreciated.

Piracy. Blizzard needs to look after their work.

I agree that pirates do ruin it a little for hardworking companies, and I’m not going to sit here and say otherwise. They exist and there is a section of people out there who will always copy, download and steal games. But that’s not a thrust of an argument. Simply arguing that it’s futile to combat piracy is a weak angle. The argument, though, is to ask how much of a threat is piracy if they were to keep LAN? Blizzard maintain that to combat piracy is to make legitimate copies worthwhile to buy – to provide content that you can only access with a purchase. Again, very true. From what I can understand, Diablo 3 relies on Battlenet to organise the random dungeons, the monster AI and the loot drops, bringing Diablo 3 more into line with the structure of World of Warcraft. The offshoot of this is that a single player game, or a game that you’re holding with your friends in the same room, may well be affected by server load.

I tried the Diablo 3 beta on the weekend they were testing out their server stress levels. The game when something like this

“Oh look, there’s a monster. I cast a spell at it. No, wait. My dude just waved his arm at the air. Nothing else happened. Oh well. The monsters aren’t moving. They’re just standing there. Why are they just standing there?”

That last sentence was uttered right before there was an explosion of movement as all the monsters raced around the screen like 4 year olds dosed up on red cordial and M&Ms, and my health bar drained of red in an instant. In  a single player game. Yes, I concede that the servers were loaded to the hilt that day… but… it’s a single. player. game. Why is my game subject to the forces of everything external to it? Furthermore, why should my game affect anyone elses? It makes no sense to me. I can understand why Blizzard are working this way, but it’s not convincing me that the game isn’t adversely affected by it. Over time, I can see this improving, but I simply cannot wrap my head around the idea that a game I want to play on my own is of any relevance to anyone outside the realm of me or any of my friends I want to game with. Therefore I do not see the value in the purchase.

Auction House

Some will love it. Others less so. The need to connect to Battlenet would definitely help the integrity of an Auction House, preventing players from duplicating items and undermining the value of other items on sale in the house. For real currency. That’s the kicker. Real currency. I guess having the massive success of World of Warcraft and millions of people emptying roughly AU$15 a month into their bank accounts is too big a deal to ignore. Of course, Battlenet is free, and always will be, but I imagine many suits sitting in boardrooms, stroking their finely groomed facial hair, wondering how they will get people to spend more after making the initial purchase? Oh yes. Auction house.

So, Diablo 3 is introducing an always-connected system to also ensure the integrity of a feature I never wanted, nor would use.

Of course, I don’t want to enter into a “It’s rubbish because I don’t want it” argument, but the Auction House seems completely arbitrary and not a feature worth the sacrifice of LAN.

No Modding

Alright, I am not a modder. I’ve dabbled in the SC2 Galaxy Editor to make a custom game and map. I would love to learn to mod properly. I remember Diablo 2′s modding community. I remember many punters gleaning an enormous amount of longevity with Diablo 2 as a result of mods and improvements. However, when I learned that Diablo 3 would not provide modding, I just sighed. Oh, Blizzard. I simply do not think that there was any way possible to wave a bigger one-fingered salute to the community who arguably cultivated and extended Diablo 2′s success for far longer than it should have.

The original Diablo was ground breaking. I recall that the install disk allowed you to spawn a copy onto another machine so that another player could LAN with you. From that, the other player could learn about Diablo and then make the purchase themselves. Diablo and Diablo 2 seemed to promote gaming as this pastime to enjoy and share. However, the lack of LAN with Diablo 3 feels like Blizzard have changed. They’re funnelling players away from the original values that were arguably reasons for the series initial success and replacing it with the mantra of “Consume”.

So, I have my reasons for boycotting Diablo 3. I understand that LAN is only a small part of the experience, however I do like being given the option. I understand that my reasons are easily countered and could be seen as ultimately minor quibbles on an excellent product. But they’re my reasons.

Where to from here? How would I object? Well, I have already pre-ordered Torchlight 2. That’s a start, and I sincerely hope it gives me enough longevity to carry on for as many years as Diablo 2 delivered.

As a final reason, I remember listening to the Gamecritics podcast one time. The panellists outlined situations in where gamers would all cry and hate on changes that game developers would make, but when launch day rolled around, they were lining up for their copy. Gamers, broadly, simply don’t have the convictions to not have a game they want. I want to be different to this. I want to send Blizzard the clear message that they would listen to, and that is “You are not having my money as a result of the poor decisions I think you have made”. If enough people carried this same message, it would speak far, far louder than any petition.

I sincerely hope that Torchlight 2 succeeds financially on the back of what it offers at the good price it has. I would LOVE to see Torchlight 2 do better than Diablo 3, but that’s a pipe dream that will never happen.

Why do people hate Apple fanboys?

After perusing the quagmire of comments on mainstream news sites in the wake of yet another iThing launch, I read responses that ask a very valid question. The question is, in summary, “Why do people hate Apple consumers so much?”. This subject may become a regular kind of post…

I think this relates more to the fanboys than Apple users broadly, as the kind of obnoxious behaviour you read about is common from people who support any kind of cause, be it Android, OSX, Windows, Linux, Geelong, Yankees, Manchester United or Dyson.

But, Apple fanboys dredge up all kinds of ire, of which I am guilty of dealing from time to time, and I do think that Apple users do cop a lot more than the zealots for, say, Android. So, why am I focussing on Apple fanboys? Because it gives me a chance to put Apple in my headline, so yes… I am a click whore.

So, the first point I offer is below:

#1 – Media saturation

Apple has had a very devout following for decades now. Back in the 90’s, Mac users would decry the prominence of Windows, due to it being buggy, flawed, ugly and riddled with infections. Debates were done over the merits for each system, but the Mac, I feel, was quietly accepted as the niche, quality product that people wanted, but could never justify the premium for a product which wasn’t as prevalent or wide.

Fast forward to the iPhone and people take sit up and take notice. The Apple rumour industry was already a nice little spinner for those concerned with those products, but because the iPhone broadsided a lot of people, it took many by surprise. It was so innovative… so magical… the proverbial double rainbow across the tech world.

The media begins to recognise peoples’ sudden fascination with Apple, joining in with the rumour mill, spurring on more and more buzz about the products. Apple are buying screens. Apple have bought a company. What does it mean?? The speculation, rather than die in the arse like every other quiet product, is only fuelled further by Apple’s notorious secrecy. Apple stories bring clicks (the currency of the internet), but simple reporting on the machinations and actions of the Fruit Corporation aren’t enough. News needs more, and what could be “more” than stories of the batshit insane people who sit around on pavements outside Apple Stores for days on end. These are the biped wallets who wait eagerly and dutifully for that new iProduct and subsequent high-five from the specially trained Apple Genius who has been properly groomed to give just the right amount of palm-slapping force.

For any other product, it would be a small story and press release to announce its arrival. For Apple, the news runs story after story about the next big Apple thing. Interviews with the waiting plebians ask “How long have you been waiting?” or “What feature makes you want the next iThing?” and when the launch happens, and the adoring crowd gather up their device, the media asks them “Are you excited to have it?” or “What is the first thing you’re going to ask Siri?”

The advert for Apple just never stops. It’s like watching Hillsong, but the only recorded footage is of the crowd singing along.

What really blue screens my monitor, though, is that to want anything else means that you’re not news worthy. Midnight launches and queues are not a new thing, but because the fanboys are outside an Apple store, then they are therefore worthy to have their fifteen seconds of fame.

Vale, Steve Jobs

What could I possibly write in my insignificant blog that cannot be found elsewhere? To say too little would be to not acknowledge him properly and to say too much would be indulgent.

The man was influential and an icon.

iPhone 5/4S predictions – how did I go?

Yesterday, I posted my random thoughts as to what I thought would be included in the long awaited successor to the iPhone 4.

So, how did I do?

iPhone 5 will have a slightly larger screen, but still retain the brilliant pixel density of the iPhone 4′s “Retina” display.

Nope. Not even close. It’s just like the old one. However, I remember media and news outlets criticising RIM for not changing its Blackberry designs. Will they do the same here?

Tim will refrain from using the word “magical” as he will try to stamp Apple’s products with his own supernatural adjective, like “angelic”, “miraculous” or “unicorny”.

Haven’t watched the announcement. But I’m sure it was full of Apple’s typical superlatives.

Steve Jobs will make an appearance via Facetime for a minute or two, in a scene not dissimilar to the famous Apple 1984 advert.

Nope. Probably for the best while they try to entrench Cook as Apple’s new leader.

On launch day the iPhone 5 will be available in both black and white. I don’t hold much hope for this prediction, as it won’t let Apple run a campaign later to say that the iPhone is “now in white” in a way that reminds me a little too much of the Simpsons Malibu Stacy episode in where it’s declared that “She has a new hat!”, much to the delight of the screaming fans.

Well, the iPhone 5 won’t be available at all until the next version. But the 4S is available in black and white. So I was part right, yet still mostly wrong…

Much thinner design, which screams style over function. The following weeks after the launch of the iPhone 5 will see stories of people dropping them from the lack of grip. The population will dub it “iDrop”. Apple will say that everyone is calling it “Gripgate”. This will be accepted by all as the new name.

No change, but it still screams style over function (in my opinion). I prefer the 3GS and even the iPhone 1 shape over the iPhone 4.

It will be announced that the antenna is redesigned and improved, even though Apple assured us that there was nothing wrong with the old one.

It’s both a CDMA and GSM antenna. Nifty. But not what I was predicting. I would have thought they’d ditch the flawed antenna. Sure the issue was overblown by the media, but the design, in my eyes, is still flawed.

Cheaper “iPhone 4S” will also be announced. It will also feature the redesigned antenna, but will look like the outgoing iPhone 4 in dimensions. It will also pack the iPad’s A5 processor.

The iPhone 4S will be cheaper, and looks like the 4 and has the A5 processor. But I think this was a no brainer prediction.

Voice commands will be improved, so that you can send emails, make appointments and turn on the screen just by talking to it. It will be triggered when you say the name you give the device. Twin Peaks fans will name their phones “Diane” and wander around chatting aimlessly to no one in particular.

I was right and wrong. I still think people will look silly talking to their phones. However, my opinion will not change the fact that in 12 months time it’ll be commonplace and normal to be seen chatting with your phone.

4G capable phone. People will look confused. Wasn’t the iPhone 4 capable of that? It will support less 3G signals than the outgoing model, but Apple knows that you don’t need that.

No. Just wrong.

Release date will be one week from the announcement. In the US. Everyone else can bugger off until November. The proles immediately jump to their tents and deckchairs and make their regular twice-a-year pilgrimage to the local Apple store.

Mostly right. The part about the people rushing off to queue for the phone was a no brainer, too. It happens – All. The. Time.

NOTE: The last prediction I’ll make relates to how the media and punters will be analysing Tim Cook to the nth degree like he’s some kind of alien who’s wandered in. How much different is he to The Steve? Does he carry himself in the same way? Does he exude warmth and charisma? Is he capable of carrying Apple through in similar steps to the turtle-necked visionary before him? Or will he be a newcomer, a pretender, unable to carry a giant corporation into the future with the same kind of “passion” or similar “vision” or “innovation”.

I have seen maybe one comment relating to the enormous collective shrug that was the iPhone 4S announcement, which outlined that the product “lacked Jobs”, but it’s still early hours since the press conference.

As someone who can be considered as “not a fan” of Apple, some might think I that I would be revelling in the lukewarm aftermath of the iPhone announcement, pointing fingers and laughing at how Apple have dropped the ball in the face of competition.

But the thing is, they haven’t.

The cool reception is not borne from Apple’s nonchalance, but from expectations spiralling madly out of control. This is endemic of the Apple rumour mill which draws a huge bow from the tiniest sliver of news. Because Apple has wow-ed in the past, the bar is subsequently raised to a level to which they could never meet.

I am not sure whether to solely blame the rumour industry surrounding the tech giant, which is increasingly getting traffic on the backs of bullshit, or to blame Apple’s closed environment which fails to properly manage expectations. I remember when before the iPad 2’s announcement, there was speak of a “Retina” display getting crammed into the tablet, despite the facts being that a hi res display of that size would eat away at battery, processor and margins. When the iPad 2 eventually rose, the wails of despair echoed around nations until people eventually got over themselves and bought an iPad 2 anyway.

The iPhone 4S is an improvement in many ways over the outgoing model. It just looks the same, and doesn’t include a couple items that competitors have been selling for a while, such as 4G. Apple has always marched to the beat of its own drum, and if they don’t see the value in including features, they won’t.

Because they don’t have to.

I mentioned on twitter that the 4S is simply the 4, but with a new hat, which is probably not entirely fair. The iPhone 4S is simply Apple being Apple, carrying out it’s plan to the letter, while ignoring the noises from competitors, the media and its customers.

And that, is real power.

iPhone 5/4S predictions

Tomorrow/Tonight’s keynote by newcomer Tim Cook will be notable tomorrow, not just by the announcement of the successor to the iPhone 4, but by the inevitable comparisons people will make to former messiah and Big Brother figure, The Steve Jobs

The coverage will be mad for the announcement. What will the phone look like? What will the antenna do? How will this change everything yet again?

My predictions are as follows:

• iPhone 5 will have a slightly larger screen, but still retain the brilliant pixel density of the iPhone 4′s “Retina” display.
• Tim will refrain from using the word “magical” as he will try to stamp Apple’s products with his own supernatural adjective, like “angelic”, “miraculous” or “unicorny”.
• Steve Jobs will make an appearance via Facetime for a minute or two, in a scene not dissimilar to the famous Apple 1984 advert.

  
  “Facetime now works over 4G. Sure, not everyone has it, but you need it more than 3G”

• On launch day the iPhone 5 will be available in both black and white. I don’t hold much hope for this prediction, as it won’t let Apple run a campaign later to say that the iPhone is “now in white” in a way that reminds me a little too much of the Simpsons Malibu Stacy episode in where it’s declared that “She has a new hat!”, much to the delight of the screaming fans.
• Much thinner design, which screams style over function. The following weeks after the launch of the iPhone 5 will see stories of people dropping them from the lack of grip. The population will dub it “iDrop”. Apple will say that everyone is calling it “Gripgate”. This will be accepted by all as the new name.
• It will be announced that the antenna is redesigned and improved, even though Apple assured us that there was nothing wrong with the old one.
• Cheaper “iPhone 4S” will also be announced. It will also feature the redesigned antenna, but will look like the outgoing iPhone 4 in dimensions. It will also pack the iPad’s A5 processor.
• Voice commands will be improved, so that you can send emails, make appointments and turn on the screen just by talking to it. It will be triggered when you say the name you give the device. Twin Peaks fans will name their phones “Diane” and wander around chatting aimlessly to no one in particular.
• 4G capable phone. People will look confused. Wasn’t the iPhone 4 capable of that? It will support less 3G signals than the outgoing model, but Apple knows that you don’t need that.
• Release date will be one week from the announcement. In the US. Everyone else can bugger off until November. The proles immediately jump to their tents and deckchairs and make their regular twice-a-year pilgrimage to the local Apple store.

Not many predictions this time around. But let’s see what happens. I’ll check back tomorrow with the results.

NOTE: The last prediction I’ll make relates to how the media and punters will be analysing Tim Cook to the nth degree like he’s some kind of alien who’s wandered in. How much different is he to The Steve? Does he carry himself in the same way? Does he exude warmth and charisma? Is he capable of carrying Apple through in similar steps to the turtle-necked visionary before him? Or will he be a newcomer, a pretender, unable to carry a giant corporation into the future with the same kind of “passion” or similar “vision” or “innovation”.

Poor Tim will be probed and prodded, and I think that no amount of grooming could prepare him for what’s in store.

Syndicate’s change in persepective

On the recent news of Syndicate’s change from an isometric view to the typical first person, the internet has had its standard knee-jerk reaction, and burned everything to the ground. So now it’s time to slowly rebuild the faith, little by little, as Syndicate’s development continues.

I lament the change, I’ll be honest. I am greatly disappointed in this new direction. I understand its change and why it is being made, but it effectively crumbles another segment of my memory that remembers gaming’s yesteryear. It was a time when I believed that only good games got sequels, and Bullfrog’s innovative approach to games was unparalleled.

My main beef with this change is as follows:

It’s fundamentally not Syndicate. Syndicate never put players in the shoes of the cyborgs and agents, instead casting you as the malevolent CEO of a corporation who fought rival companies, vying for better tech to give the empire an edge. The agents themselves were only a tool through which global domination was achieved. Like a CEO, you could create attachments with certain agents if you felt, but they were ultimately disposable items – resources to be used and discarded when expired.

That’s, I imagine, part of being CEO. You put your strategies into place and you watch it all play out, getting to soak in the glory of victory, nodding your head to the common people as you’re applauded for a job well done, or simply throwing a tantrum and screaming at your sycophants when things go wrong. Ultimately, as CEO, you have all the power and the ramifications for losses are that your resources get lessened until you eventually get your Golden Parachute.

But it’s a huge missed opportunity as well. With CEO’s of companies becoming celebrities in their own right, like Steve Jobs and Mark Zuckerberg, there was a great chance here. Not to mention the Global Financial Crisis and how those who were ultimately responsible for worldwide misery are still living cosseted lifestyles. Furthermore, let’s not forget how tech companies are controlling their consumers, harvesting information about them, and ultimately affecting what truthes are told and what is forgotten, a la 1984. The corporate environment right now is ripe for commentary, with stories of corporate collusion and lack of ethics not just being works of fiction from imaginative sci-fi writers, but actual commentary.

Putting the player in as a single agent (which is what I’m guessing they’re doing) simply takes a regular shooter and paints it with Syndicate. This new direction puts the player in the thick of the action, which doesn’t so much as ignore what Syndicate was about than thumb its nose completely at its history. CEO’s don’t get their hands dirty. They have plebians for that.

Of course, news of its development coming hot on the heels of the release of Deus Ex: Human Revolution, another game about augmentation with a cyberpunk feel, which gives me even more concern that Syndicate will simply join the masses of me-too games, effectively taking another cherished title from my Amiga days and flushing it down the toilet with Sensible Soccer and Speedball 2.

There is no persuadertron powerful enough to make me like this right now.

Storm in a teacup

Some time ago, Tim Minchin chucked this amusing and very well animated clip of his beat poem Storm:

Far be it for me to disagree with people who are more intelligent and educated than myself. I admit to my lack of education. I admit that I certainly have no answers, and I sure as hell don’t go around trying to convince others to conform to my ideals.

I have seen Tim Minchin Live twice. He has this certain tool for comedic effect, which causes the voice at the back of my mind to wonder whether atheism has found a preacher in Tim. He peppers his performances with punchlines that mock religion while delivering timely pauses before asserting his philosophy is “right”. The post on Tim’s website has garnered much applause, a little dissent and one comment from myself which is a far more concise version of what I’m writing here. I don’t dispute whether he’s right or wrong, though.

In the beat poem, Tim wonders why people simply cannot accept that “…this…” is enough for some people. Of course, I don’t profess to have the answer, but my immediate thought is that when people live their lives, devoid of any kind of purpose or drive, treating each day as simply another lap of the demented carousel that constitutes life, to understand that at the end of it all we are unceremoniously dumped from this life to be forgotten in a matter of decades… it would be difficult to take. Being a tiny, insignificant, ignorant bit of carbon simply isn’t enough for some.

There is a lesson here in surrounding yourself with as many friends, family and various other loved ones so as to enjoy what we’re given – a lesson which the choir who are currently blindly singing the praises of Storm with the lyrics of derision, pointed at believers, possibly fail to see.

Storm is not a piece about trying to correct the blind who believe in souls, the afterlife, or intangible beings, nor is it about ridiculing those who we know to be wrong. What it tells me is that if I am accosted by such an individual, I should understand (not pity) that they have a reason to fill this void of unknown with something that comforts them. So long as they keep it to themselves, this comforting being or belief is harmless.

Who cares whom is right? If 15 years of working has taught me anything, it has been this:

Being right means nothing if the wrong are legion, stubborn and powerful.

For example, I dared suggest to my company that iPhones had to be tested before deployment. I copped a tirade of abuse from people who blindly threw their opinions at me, and when they were proven incorrect, they repeated their opinions at me again, only louder. Eventually they went above my head and the company caved.

Being right is only a benefit if people listen to you. Otherwise you’re simply yelling at the large, indifferent universe.

Written off by version 1.0 issues

My curiosity about the Blackberry Playbook continues, as I search news stories and reviews for information about how this device fits into my life. There’s one resounding thing that seems to eke from each story.

It’s not as good as the iPad, ergo it’s not good.

Just look at the Google results for “Playbook Review“

Headlines include:

PlayBook: Releasing unfinished product is never a good idea

BlackBerry PlayBook review: Too little, too soon

Lackluster PlayBook Reviews Put RIM Chiefs On Defensive

It seems that the glitter-lined wake of the rampaging iPad has changed peoples’ threshold, further convincing me that Apple coats their devices with a thin drug that is absorbed through the skin, giving everyone who uses them a subtle but perceptible high. If a device doesn’t immediately fire off every single synapse in your brain the moment you pierce the shrink wrap, it seems that people simply write it off.

Which is why the headlines above infuriate me. RIM has a genuine contender on their hands, which is capable, slick and offers features that the iPad doesn’t do (like multitasking, a buttonless bezel and full Flash support), and it does them strongly, but because of some simple version 1.0 issues, it’s considered a dud.

I check out Crackberry’s forums and see constant references to how stupid RIM was to dip their toes in this market. I read a damning article on PC World, stating that it shouldn’t be bought because of its size (which is actually be a selling point to me) and because of other issues that can be addressed when it has time to mature.

I agree that with the iPad as the yardstick, that the market is highly demanding to newcomers, but I have known of no device, ever, to have launched brand new without some kind of omission, or some bug that wasn’t addressed later. Hell, how long did it take for the iPhone to get MMS?

I need to at least throw a reference to the best review of the device I’ve seen from Youtuber SoldierKnowsBest.

Far better than most of the other drivel I’ve read.