Hey all I’m working on a capstone project at the moment that is taking most of my time (and all of my computing power). Updates will be spotty at best for the next two months.
Review of: Grounded: The Making of the Last of Us. (2013)
What is the central premise of the documentary?
This is a look at the making of “The Last of Us.” There isn’t necessarily a central premise but it does provide an interesting look at a ground breaking game. It cover’s everything art related in the game including some really great insight from the actors and designers on how to integrate the traditional concerns of visual style, story pacing, and sound use with a sleek user interface and the AI in the game play.
Who is this documentary for?
This is a really cool look at the thought process and workflow behind a triple-A game. So this documentary offers a lot of stuff for anyone interested in the cutting edge of video games. “The Last of Us” was known for its use of motion capture technology and for being one of the few major new IPs in the last few years, as well as a really intense and ambiguous story. Also it shows the incredible work that Naughty Dog is doing. So if you want more information on how to use motion capture technology, (which can be achieved through the use of consumer tech for a lot less than you might think) the necessary adaptations that had to be made to the models after they were created, how they make sound effects, or how different it is for actors doing motion capture rather than straight voice work in games. This is an unparalleled look at the development of a triple A title. And the fact that it’s the development of a new IP makes it even better.
Who is this documentary not for?
If you’re not interested in video games at all this probably isn’t for you, but other than that it’s a really deep look into a wide segment of game development that few people will ever get to see.
Additional Commentary:
This isn’t really my type of game for the most part. I do like Fallout but I’m pretty selective about my post-apocalyptic fiction. However, I enjoyed this documentary so much. The actors identified with their characters so much and would often change the story and dialogue because it’s how they felt it would go. And it made it one of the best games ever. It remains to be seen if another “The Last of Us” will be made, but this documentary showed how to create an almost perfect post-apocalyptic world. No matter what your particular interest in game design, you will find something inspiring here.
Rating and Recommendation:
I really enjoyed this. And I think that unlike a lot of the documentaries I’ve reviewed I’m likely to go and re-watch this one several times. If you have an interest in the design process, and how modern games are made, you owe it to yourself to watch this. If I have one criticism, it’s that it was too short. This is just packed with so much good information. So 9/10 for anyone interested in this side of games.
Review of I am StreetFighter (2013)
What is the central premise of the documentary?
To call this an objective documentary would be misleading. This was originally released by Capcom (the same people who make the Street Fighter games) as part of the 25th anniversary collector’s edition of Street Fighter. And it’s not even a history or a biopic of a particular player. It’s really just a bunch of people talking about how Street Fighter makes them feel.
Who is this documentary for?
If you’re interested in who the best players in the competitive sphere were when this film was made this is probably for you. And I suppose if you want testimonials from players you can watch this as well.
Who is this documentary not for?
Truthfully most players and most people in general. There is no real discussion of the history of Street Fighter or fighting games as a genre. No character concept discussion, very little about what specific tangible effects Street Fighter has had on the genre. There is nothing here but a couple of guys talking up a game series they’re heavily invested in. And there isn’t much here for the casual player either. This is heavily focused on the competitive scene and a few super stars within that scene. Their commentary is interspersed with Capcom representatives talking about how what makes street fighter great. Also if you’re hoping for any reasonable criticism of the sexism that is rampant in the community you’re not going to find it here. Although the fact that I think you can count maybe 3 women in the entire film and all of them are just there incidentally might be citable as part of the problem.
Additional Commentary:
I do enjoy the fighting game genre. It’s a highly technical genre with a rich history and wildly varied game play. And it has always had certain tendrils that different genre fans follow. But recently I think Capcom in particular has gone off the rails. Street Fighter V’s E3 footage was full of even skimpier costumes, crotch shots, and ridiculous sound effects. And even in this documentary the focus was overwhelmingly male. This wasn’t a documentary, it was an infomercial. There was no discernible criticism or information actually delivered that wasn’t in service of Capcom.
Rating and Recommendation:
This was awful. The only thing this film did well was show the excitement of members of the community who attend tournaments. 2/10 for everyone but people who attend tournaments. And I can’t be bothered to guess what they would think about it.
Review of: Jacked: The Outlaw Story of Grand Theft Auto by David Kushner ISBN: 978-0-470-93637-5
What does this book mean to do?
If you’re thinking you’ve heard the name David Kushner before you have. David Kushner is well known in the video game industry for writing Masters of Doom, and being a regular contributor to Wired and IEEE Spectrum. In his book Jacked, David Kushner examines the evolution of Rockstar Games to the industry powerhouse they are today, and their constant battles with the anti-game crusader Jack Thompson. He covers everything from Sam Houser getting his start at DMA’s mailroom to the eventual rifts that would drive founding members of the company to move on.
Who is this book for?
If you are a fan of GTA, if you want more information about the so called hot coffee mod that rocked the internet and got Rockstar into a massive amount of trouble when it’s existence was discovered, if you have any interest in the origins of Rockstar and how a couple of Brits came across the pond and created one of the most popular and controversial game series ever, this book is for you. The writing style is engaging and easy for all levels.
Who is this book not for?
If you’re a supporter of Jack Thompson or an unapologetic Rockstar fan boy, be aware that neither of them come off looking particularly well. The excesses and ugly sides of Rockstar are on frank display. Sam Houser’s violent tendencies are shown. Jack Thompson comes off as just being a lunatic, and his lies about the gaming industry are not the actions of an honest crusader but a deranged man with too much time on his hands. So if you’re afraid of the ugly sides of either of these people you’re not going to like this book.
Additional Commentary:
There actually isn’t that much to say about this book. It’s well written and honest. I wish all books about gaming were like this. And I want David Kushner to write more books. You’ll get in an in depth look at Rockstar’s corporate culture, and the development of their biggest title. You’ll also get an idea of the controversy that has followed them from the beginning and how some of their developers became uncomfortable at how brutal their games had become. You’ll see exactly how far Sam Houser wanted to push the envelope and where he still intends for games to go.
Rating and Recommendation:
If you’re interested in the story of Rockstar read it. You’ll like the inside look at one of the most controversial companies. It’s a fast read and would make a pretty good airplane book or bus book. Will it stay on your shelf? Eh maybe if you’re a serious fan of Rockstar. And I do like the book, but I doubt I’ll reread it.
Review of: The art of video games by Chris Melissinos and Patrick O’Rourke ISBN: 978-1599621104
What does this author intend to do?
With the help of Patrick O’Rourke (who created the composite images that make this such a visually striking book), Chris Melissinos presents a companion book to the Smithsonian exhibit of the same name that he curated. This book not only presents the artwork but also has a number of interviews that talk about how the art was created and the interaction between the art and the technology and how both the technology and the art drive each other.
Who is this book for?
If you want to better understand the medium of video games as art you can’t go wrong here. Chris Melissinos is one of the most passionate, knowledgeable, and well-spoken people I’ve ever read on the subject. The book talks not only about the inspiration but the technical challenges and opportunity that influence the visuals, music, and story. And like other works on video games as art the subject of how interactivity makes video games different than any other medium is also discussed.
Who is this book not for?
If you’re looking for early stage art like concept art and the models that some designers will build as physical references for their digital creations, you’re not going to find it here. The images in this book are all final stage although encompassing a wide range of games and eras.
Additional Commentary:
I’ve been trying to explain games as art to people of my parent’s generation for a while. Chris Melissinos does a great job of presenting the importance of different aspects of video games. And the interviews he uses are well selected presenting different perspectives and experiences within the industry. And I really appreciate that this book does as much as it can to also include game music as part of that art although being a book it’s difficult for it to convey the importance of music to a scene. And I also appreciate the acknowledgement of how interwoven the technology and artistic choices are.
Rating and Recommendation:
This is a coffee table book, but it’s a well written coffee table book. It’s visually striking, and often you’ll hear me complain about not getting the motivation behind a game with other books. You don’t have that problem here. This is a book about video games as art and it’s very well done. So if you’re interested in the art you have a great book here. 10/10. If you’re looking for a narrative you’re not going to find it here so know that going in, this is really a coffee table book but even if you have just a general interest in the choices that go into making games it’s a solid book. 7/10 general interest.
Review of: Think Python By Allen B. Downey ISBN: 860-1234620983
What is the central premise of the book?
This was actually written as an answer to all of the very thick long and obtuse text books that beginning CS students often start with. In Allen Downey’s [slightly paraphrased] words: “It’s better for them to be assigned 10 pages they read than 80 they don’t.” So the premise of the book is not as much to teach people to code in python (although he covers a lot of great things) but to create a guide for new programmers to follow through short and easy to understand chapters on how to think about solving programming problems.
Does the author follow through on that premise?
Yeah…this is not a spoiler free environment. I’m new to this so I review mostly those things that I’m excited about. Or was excited about. But yes, he gives a great explanation of some of the most difficult concepts that modern high level languages present. And while this is not a deep book in terms of python, he skims the surface of pretty much anything you might be interested in except specific programs like Blender and GIMP.
Who is this book for?
This is for people who are new to programming. If you want to think in steps, if you want to learn step by step how to debug, and how to look up most intermediate situations in Python, this book is for you. I can’t say I’ve read every beginner programming book out there but I’ve read a lot of them, and this one is short, to the point, and really has great sections in every chapter on debugging the specific problems that might arise with the topics discussed. It also has a follow on website that will ensure you get through this course with a little bit of googling.
Who is this book not for?
If you’re a really experienced programmer this book probably isn’t for you. This covers a lot of python in a good way, if you’re not experienced in python you will gain a working knowledge, but you won’t dive deep into the language. And if you’re not really “experienced” but you really know python you won’t find a deep compendium on python here.
Additional Commentary:
When I started programming I wanted to make games. It’s all I’ve ever really wanted to do. Most programmers won’t end up there (not least of all because Google pays way more). However, this book does introduce things that a lot of intro courses don’t, like GUIs and databases. It doesn’t dive deeply into these things but don’t despair. If you are starting out this is a great book for a few reasons. 1. Python is one of the simplest languages to learn. This and Javascript are often considered the simplest languages to learn basic programming math and logic in (If you’re in a classical programming course you’ll probably study C or C++ because so much stuff is built in them). 2. He has the best explanation about some of the most difficult concepts in programming for beginners. Objects, Recursion, and the difference between classes, functions, and methods can be really difficult for some people (no shame in that, the way they’re explained usually sucks). But he does a great job explaining them in a way that is nonthreatening and usually fun. 3. This book focuses on teaching concepts that will be applicable across languages. 4. He includes great appendices on debugging which can be one of the most frustrating parts of programming.
And I specify that this is for beginners. Because the book keeps the jargon to a minimum, it doesn’t overload people with material (I was once assigned a 700 page book as an intro text to programming), and there are a ton of great examples and exercises that are complemented by his website that gives code examples and solutions. I also believe this book is being consistently updated and is available for pay-what-you-can on Greenteapress.
Rating and Recommendation:
This is not a definitive book on python. But it is a great book for people who are new to programming. If you are new, you will find a lot of helpful advice. 9/10 for you. You might not find deep advice on everything you’re interested in, but you will find lots of practical advice and ways to practice your new found skills. If you’re looking for a deep book that deals with all the ins and outs of python (something that should not be dealt with in any intro course), you might find something interesting, but nothing that really dives deep into python (of course if you read the intro you would know that isn’t his intent). So 4/10 for you.
Review of: The Atomic Cafe Directed By Jayne Loader, Kevin Rafferty, and Pierce Rafferty (1982)
What is the central premise of the documentary?
I’m going to roll this question and the follow through into a single section for this review. Atomic Café is an older documentary but still quite unique and relevant. It examines what I would generally call the atomic era spanning from the end of WWII to the Partial Test Ban Treaty of 1963. And how it does this is entirely through period materials. There is no narrator, all the voices you here are from recordings during this time period. Through skillful cuts and inclusion of film, not only of nuclear tests and propaganda, but daily life, popular music, and culture from these years, Jayne Loader, Kevin Rafferty, and Pierce Rafferty paint a picture of the combined optimism and terror that living under the constant threat of nuclear war created.
Who is this documentary for?
If you’re interested in propaganda, American attitudes and life in the mid-20th century regarding the threat of global life ending war this is an amusing and frightening film. It creates a story even without the use of a narrator.
Who is this documentary not for?
If you’re looking for a pronuclear or even really an antinuclear weapons documentary this won’t satisfy you. It’s a stark look at a period that I hope we’ll never return to where misinformation and misplaced optimism were flying everywhere. This is really a piece that presents a bunch of information (crafted information of course through the cuts and pacing choices) but it doesn’t present a message in the way that many other documentaries do.
Additional Commentary:
Normally I wouldn’t review something this old. I mean this film came out in 1982. But there is something special about this one. And I referenced it when I talked about “Pandora’s Promise” so I thought why not. Every documentary has a message but this one is implicit through their presentation choices rather than having a narrator tell you what you should get from the film. From the songs where people sing about atomic weapons as an amusing comparison to the return of Jesus Christ (also illustrating the sincere belief of many that this was a holy war), to the shocking belief of many students at the time that the USA could stop Soviet bombs from falling on them, to brutally blunt expected casualty figures from government officials, this is a look at an era that has been mythologized in many popular books, movies, and video games and still provides a strong source of material for speculation in popular media.
Rating and Recommendation:
This is a favorite documentary of mine personally although other people’s reactions will be mixed. I know for some of you it’s going to just be horrifying. There are gruesome images of the effects of atomic explosions on people and animals. The less known and sad story of the people of the Bikini Atoll being displaced so the area could be used for testing is also mentioned in this film although not in depth. If you are particularly sensitive to this sort of thing, I would advise caution. For some of you the music is going to make you want to go replay the Fallout or Wasteland series. I’m also not going to give a numerical rating because it’s just not that sort of film. It doesn’t present a thesis and then set out to prove it. Rather it is a rare first-hand look at an era that many of us don’t actually remember anymore. But I can say I think this is a fascinating watch. And that it should be a staple of classes on 20th century American history and for fans of post-apocalyptic fiction alike.
Review of: Pandora’s Promise Directed by Robert Stone (2013)
What is the central premise of the documentary?
That renewables are so far behind fossil fuels in how much electricity they generate, that to mitigate the effects of anthropogenic climate change we need to really consider bringing more nuclear plants online.
Does the director follow through on that premise?
This is a touchy subject for many people. The documentary makes several good points regarding the explosion of need for electricity in the developing world, the way that the environmental groups are just as dogmatic as the “drill baby drill” conservatives and the amount of crazy propaganda and misinformation out there. But overall yes they present their case.
Who is this documentary for?
If you’re on the fence on nuclear energy, I would suggest watching it. At the very least you’ll get a better understanding of what the numbers actually say regarding background radiation, normal exposure rates, the truth about the Chernobyl and TMI, and how contaminated these places really are. If you’re pronuclear, you’ll find more clarity here about what went wrong in these situations, how the media covers nuclear energy, and how things have changed although the new reactor designs aren’t covered in here.
Who is this documentary not for?
If you’re a staunch anti-nuclear advocate, you’re not going to have your mind changed.
Additional Commentary:
As some people know I used to work in the nuclear industry for an engineering company doing safety testing for equipment meant to prevent a Loss of Coolant Accident. This equipment is being vetted for the AP 1000 reactors. And the accidents in question took place years ago, the new designs are much safer with fewer moving parts than even the IFRII which they highlight near the end. I am pronuclear because I’ve seen how extreme the studies are and how much redundancy is being built into the new generation. And I see a real danger from climate change. Personally I’m also excited for ITER to come online and hopefully prove fusion is an economically viable and safe method of generating energy. The title of the film, references the legend of Pandora’s box. And nuclear energy is very similar, treated improperly radiation and nuclear fuel can be deadly. We didn’t do anyone any favors early in our understanding of these unique materials when we were using radium in all sorts of things that it had no business being in. And the early treatment of the nuclear energy as a problem free panacea was unfair as well. If you want to see how ridiculous some of this propaganda was, check out “Atomic Cafe”. But the energy source has matured, and is much safer and cheaper throughout it’s life cycle than most other forms of electricity.
Rating and Recommendation:
You can argue that this is a propaganda piece, and I think they left out some important numbers. But I would still encourage people to watch it. Obviously I’m not entirely disinterested in this although I think I’m objective. If you have an interest in the realities of the nuclear power situation today. I think you’ll find it interesting and compelling 8/10. If you are dogmatically anti-nuclear you’re not going to have your mind changed. It would be a waste of your time to watch this but you might learn something anyway. 3/10 for you.
Review of: Thinking About Video Games By David Heineman (2015) ISBN: 978-0-253-01715-4
What is the central premise of the book?
This is not a history, but rather David Heineman intends to use interviews with key figures in the gaming industry and community to stimulate cross-disciplinary and cross-community communication, with a focus on gaming history and how we write about it, gaming economics, and the different facets of gaming culture.
Does the author follow through on that premise?
Yes, this is a very academically focused (although certainly not unreadable) book. The book is divided primarily into three sections and each is comprised of a series of interviews with people like Nolan Bushnell, Eugene Jarvis, Chris Grant, and Ed Fries. Each of these people discuss different facets of the gaming industry that will also play into a particular interest of different readers. For me the most important chapters were the interviews with Ed Fries where he talked about the development of the Xbox and how the economic choices lead a primarily Windows based team to develop the box over the team that had previously worked on the SEGA Dreamcast, Chris Melissinos who was instrumental in developing the exhibit The Art of Video Games for the Smithsonian, and how if we believe that art is fundamentally designed to provoke a response be it positive or negative that we must consider video games as art not only in the visual sense but in the music, storytelling, and programming the interactivity as well in a way that we can no achieve with any other medium, and Ian Bogost who not only talks about what it means to study video games as an academic discipline but also what it means to be a writer, reviewer, and an academic. Bogost in particular skewers the social sciences for their insistence in many cases of revering the opinions and writings of those that came before. And he’s able to really do this because game studies is such a young field.
Who is this book for?
If you’re interested in the thought processes, and challenges of video game design and what it means to be involved in video game culture, this book is for you. It will deal with issues of gender, art, economics, and self-identity in the game world, both internally to the game and externally in broader culture. These interviews are cleaned a bit for readability, but they offer the sort of magazine like candor that is often missing in broad histories.
Who is this book not for?
If you’re looking for a light read or an overview of this history of video games, this isn’t the book for you. This is a challenging book in many ways, from the vocabulary to the subject matter. You will almost certainly disagree with some of the things that are said in this book. It makes some controversial arguments, and to really enjoy it you’ll need to be willing to step back, think critically about what’s being said, and reflect on your own beliefs.
Additional Commentary:
This book really makes you think during each chapter. It will challenge your notion of history as many of the game histories we have draw as much on gaming mythology as anything and of course the process of interviewing individuals means that the prejudices of those individuals and the lens through which they see their own lives over time will mean that there are inconsistencies in histories. Additionally you’ll need to consider your place in the gaming world, are you a “hardcore gamer” what does that mean? When you think of video games as art how do you see that art, is it in the story, is it the graphics, is it how it all comes together? I think strongly of “Bastion” when I read this book and consider some of these questions. Ultimately the story is pretty standard, save the destroyed civilization. But when you combine the artwork with the way it’s presented in game play (something else that no other medium really needs to consider), and the music and voice acting choices, it creates something that is memorable and inspiring. Also I think of my education in the Social Sciences and winced when I read Bogost. He’s right, I can remember writing papers in graduate school where you’re showing you read the primary sources for the class by cramming in citations and it is silly. We knew it was silly at the time but it’s what you’re often required to do to show you know the material. So if you’re interested in thinking critically and academically about video games or if you want a deeper perspective as a potential designer this is a good book for you.
Rating and Recommendation:
Well the audience for this book, I would argue, is pretty small. It’s really for people who want to go beyond the surface layer of being a fan of video games. And that’s not many people. Which is ok. I think games are primarily for playing. They can be educational certainly but if you spend all your time looking at how games work and why they work, you’re missing the point in my opinion. But if you do want to really think about the challenges and try to take a more academic perspective this is a good place to start. It’s not going to cover all the aspects of the game world but it will cover many of them. So 9/10. If you merely play games and want a history, or if you are interested in the technical side with art work and programming you’re not going to find much here for you. You might glean some interesting details from some of the interviews but largely you’re going to be bored. 2/10 for you.
Review of: Tesla: Master of Lightening PBS (2000)
What is the central premise of the documentary?
To educate viewer about the man Nikola Tesla. His rise, his fall, his inventions, and his contemporaries.
Does the director follow through on that premise?
Yes. Be aware that this is a dramatized biopic aimed at lay people. If you have even a background knowledge of Tesla you’re not going to find this to be that interesting. Voice overs, recreations and a certain level of sensationalism is found in here.
Who is this documentary for?
If you’re a fan of Victorian inventors or have heard of Tesla but don’t know anything about his work or his competition with Edison, it’s worth a watch. It’s a PBS documentary so it’s reasonably well produced. It is not the most interesting documentary I’ve ever seen though so be aware of that. It’s full of mostly good information, but whereas something like “Video Games: The Movie” is a love letter to a medium, this is a research paper in visual form. The dramatizations do make it a bit more watchable but it means there is a lack of primary source documentation aside from static images (somewhat understandable of course as Tesla died in 1943).
Who is this documentary not for?
If you already know a decent amount about Tesla you’re going to take issue with some of their claims (such as the account of the oscillator test) you’re also going to be annoyed if you’re a fan of Edison. He comes off quite poorly and very petty in this documentary. Also if you’re an electrical engineer you’re going to be annoyed by small things such as the confusion of voltage and current.
Additional Commentary:
Standard BBC or PBS documentary, if you’re interested in the subject you’ll like it. It is still rather dry watching though. But even if this documentary was sensationalized a bit with speculation on the bizarre events after Tesla’s death, there is no denying that PBS did an adequate job of covering his birth, his life, his competition with Edison, and his eventual fall as his ideas became more and more outlandish. Some of those ideas would be proven true of course, but there is a decent amount of conspiracy theory fodder here as well.
Rating and Recommendation:
I can’t rate this very highly. It’s well produced. Mostly good information. But it’s quite dry, relies overly on read letters and journals and dramatic zooms on still photographs. And the coverage of his death and the events following it are very sensationalized. It’s great fodder for conspiracy nuts. And I’m really tired of these pseudo documentaries. So unless you’re a Tesla nut or like shows like “Ancient Aliens” I have to give this about 5/10. If you really like Tesla you’re not going to find anything new here, but you will find an affirmation that Tesla was cheated by Marconi and Edison. So if that sounds good to you, maybe you’ll get a bit more value out of it. 8/10 for people who really like documentaries and Tesla.
nonfictiongeek 