Blue Dragon

When Mistwalker's Blue Dragon was announced for the Xbox 360, expectations were high. After all, the project reunited three individuals responsible for some of the best RPGs of all time -- producer Hironobu Sakaguchi, composer Nobuo Uematsu and artist Akira Toriyama. Yet upon the title's release, reviews were painfully mixed. Now I understand why.

Blue Dragon suffers from at least two significant problems. First, it is as old school a Japanese RPG as one can get, right down to its traditional turn-based battle system. Some aficionados might take to this sort of thing, but others will be turned off because it isn't particularly well-balanced. While it is a rather elegant take on an old standard, it takes an inordinate amount of grinding to level up one's characters and learn new skills to let the system come into its own, and by then one has already played almost 80 percent of the game. In this regard, there's very little character growth gameplay-wise. Worse, the story is actually quite forgettable.

Second, there's really no reason for the game to be on a next-generation console. There's nothing technically remarkable about Blue Dragon: graphics and controls are serviceable at best, though both could have probably been implemented on a Playstation 2. As an early offering for the Xbox 360 some of this is understandable; yet the unbearably slow load times that accompany the otherwise average production value make the experience all the more frustrating (yes, even after the NXE dashboard update). If anything, the only thing that Blue Dragon has going for it is its musical score, with the exception of some terrible boss battle music.

There are some bright spots, though. The sidequests prior to the final act are plenty challenging (in fact, the game needed more of these) and thoroughly improve the experience one has with the game. Also, as mentioned, like any RPG Blue Dragon becomes so much more fun to play the more powerful one's character party becomes, which unfortunately in this case can only be realized far too late in the game. Thus, there are rewards for the patient -- but perhaps only for the patient.

It's a pity Blue Dragon didn't turn out better than it did, which is to say more than just average. It's almost as if Sakaguchi hoped that an RPG built around the concept of characters using magical shadows in battle would be enough to carry the day. Clearly it wasn't, which makes one wonder about what might have been had the concept been fleshed out and implemented more carefully because, yeah, the idea is pretty cool.

Wikinomics

The only reason it took me as long as it did to get my hands on a copy of Wikinomics is that I waited for the paperback edition. Sure, I was curious, but I didn't much relish the thought of having to transport a hardbound book between Manila and New York (and possibly back again). Now that I've gotten to read it, I'm afraid it wasn't exactly worth the wait, but that might be more my fault than the book's (or its authors').

To quote the subtitle, Wikinomics is about "how mass collaboration changes everything". No, it's not about Wikipedia, though the online encyclopedia is discussed in the book. Rather, it's about peer production and how technologies are making it possible for people to work together on projects and in ways as never before. The authors argue that in this day and age of collaborative technologies, individuals and institutions that embrace openness, peering, sharing, and acting globally will have an edge versus those who do not. Thus the book is devoted to elucidating upon these points by identifying successful examples of each of these principles put into practice.

Sounds interesting? I submit that it is, except... none of this is particularly new to me. I don't mean that in a boastful sense (as if I know all there is to know about these things), but there are any number of books that have already dealt with these themes in much the same way, albeit in varying degrees. Chris Anderson's The Long Tail. Thomas Friedman's The World is Flat. Alvin and Heidi Toffler's Revolutionary Wealth (and to think that I didn't particularly like this book, considering). More, I think it's because of having grown up (personally and professionally) within the environment described throughout Wikinomics that the book elicited a somewhat confounded "Yeah, so?" reaction from me.

Overall, that is. Clearly, the value added that Tapscott and Williams offer in the book lies in the examples they use to illustrate their point, which on balance are interesting. Yet Wikinomics suffers like most business books in that its authors try too hard. In getting their point across they like to coin terms and phrases that, quite frankly, are pretentious: "ideagoras" (marketplaces for ideas), the "New Alexandrians" (shared databases that likened to modern day libraries of Alexandria), "Enterprise 2.0" (the collaborative business model that thrives in the new environment described throughout the book), heck the notion of "wikinomics" itself comes across as overkill. Why? Again, because I feel that the authors tend to overstate their case.

I think this is problem is endemic to books that touch upon subjects such as these. For those familiar with such trends -- whether it's second nature to them or they've read extensively about it, or because that's really the environment within which they work -- books like Wikinomics tend to generate a ho-hum sort of response. So it was with me. But for those who need a reader on these trends -- because they belong to the "old guard" that does things traditionally or because they are keenly interested in documenting how much things are different now -- then books like this are a valuable resource. Indeed, looking through the positive reviews collected in the book's opening pages and back cover, it's rather obvious that those enamored of Wikinomics charms are mostly already established professionals that have experienced the things detailed in the book late in their careers. For them, such things are or have been challenges. But it will not be so for an entire generation to whom such changes in technology or the workplace are less challenges than facts of life. I find it difficult to see how such people can find a book like Wikinomics the least bit riveting (though I grant that one of the more interesting chapters in the book is specifically about the Net Generation).

Ultimately, a book is no more or less than what we hope to get out of it. I suspect so it is with Wikinomics.

KenKen? Can!

Sudoku's been all the rage for a couple of years now. I'd say it's appeal is twofold: first, it's an appealing puzzle because it's based entirely on logic; second, it's thoroughly engrossing because every such puzzle has a discernible solution (if one tries hard enough). More, as if plain vanilla Sudoku weren't addictive already addictive, it so happens that there are any number of Sudoku variants for the thoroughly numbers-obsessed -- and occasionally the word-obsessed, too.

Because it's numbers-based, Sudoku gives some people the illusion that they're good at math (particularly those not particularly adept at the subject). Little did I realize that there's actually a Sudoku-like puzzle that's arguably just as addictive but specifically math-based: KenKen.

KenKen takes some of the principles of Sudoku but throws some math into the equation (pun intended). The size of the grid can vary, but the fundamental principle remains the same: any horizontal row or vertical column must contain every number they can fit (one through six for a six by six grid, for example) with no repetitions. But unlike Sudoku where the placement of some initial numbers gives clues as to how the remaining ones must be situated, in KenKen the entire grid is blank. Instead, there are mathematical rules that apply to certain groupings of adjacent cells that help one solve the overall puzzle. For instance, a "10+" found in a group of three cells mean that the numbers in those three cells must add up to ten; a "4/" in a group of two cells mean that the quotient of the two numbers must be 4. And so forth.

It's not nearly quite complex as it sounds and is rather easy to get the hang of after a few tries at it. Personally, learning about it through an article on Cnet already got me hooked, mainly because I can see the potential. Clearly, the mathematical component adds as much as it takes away, providing some more information that should be useful but at the same time complicating matters as there are many combinations by which a mathematical operation can yield the same sum, product, difference or quotient -- in short, the makings of a great puzzle challenge.

[My Latest Puzzle Love: KenKen (Cnet)]
[New York Times KenKen Puzzles (NY Times)]

Presentation Thursdays

On the internet, content is king. The more I think about it, between the two and a half years I spent as a teacher (on two continents, mind) and my affinity for using slideware, I'm actually sitting on lots of content that would just go to waste if no one gets to see my presentations anymore. And not just my lecture slides, either: it goes without saying that every so often I have to make that corporate presentation I wish had had a bigger audience.

But then I learned about Slideshare. Thus my idea for "Presentation Thursdays" was born.

Every now and then, on a Thursday, I'll post a presentation from my archives and include some accompanying commentary. Because most of these were prepared for academic purposes, I'll try to offer some remarks in the hope that anyone reading might learn something new. But for the most part, I also intend to use this opportunity to reflect upon making presentations in general: what works, what doesn't, what can be done differently, etc. After all, I read Presentation Zen, too, so it's amusing to see the evolution of my own presentation sensibilities over time, if only in a cringe-inducing sort of way.

One caveat however: where the lecture slides are concerned, I have no intention of updating their content anymore. What you see is what you get, warts and all. Sure, if anyone sees an error or would like to debate a point I welcome feedback (leave a comment). Maybe I'll get around to amending the presentation sometime. Or maybe I won't. I'm afraid I just don't have the time to do so as diligently as I'd like.

So to kick off Presentation Thursdays, here's a presentation I made about making effective presentations. No joke. Short commentary follows below.



I prepared these slides for a training session with incoming senior college students in 2005. This was the first presentation I made using Keynote 2, and I got a kick out of using a Mac program to teach people how to use Powerpoint (taking screenshots of the program via a combination of Grab and Virtual PC). The slide template is based on the demo presentation accompanying Keynote 2. To this day, I still use the "navigator bar" layout as my default template whenever I'm in a pinch.

This was also the first time I ever experimented with using hyperlinks in my presentation to jump from slide to slide. I've never looked back since.

It's a shame that Slideshare doesn't capture animations (builds), as I included a bunch of relatively fancy ones here to great effect. The "screenshots" of Powerpoint cube in/cube out corresponding to the points being made in the text, and the "right click menus" pop up/pop out to simulate them actually being used. Fun stuff. Obviously, this was back in the day I was fond of using lots of animations in my presentations. I've since grown out of that phase and nowadays rely solely on slide transitions.

Incidentally, I also have a Quicktime version of this presentation that preserves the interactive links. It turns out that the "export to Quicktime" capability of Keynote is actually pretty useful -- even if the filesize becomes unwieldy (in this case, over 100MB).

If there are any problems viewing this presentation, or for those interested, it can be downloaded in PDF format from my Slideshare page (Creative Commons license applies).

Project Vesperia

It was because of Tales of Vesperia that I decided to invest in an Xbox360. I'd never played any of the games in the Tales series; at best, I did get to see my brother plod through Tales of Symphonia on the GameCube (he never did finish it) only to be disappointed at the sheer paucity of cutscenes. But reading about Vesperia prior to its release offered some hope. Indeed, most of its reviews and previews gave the impression that it was the next-generation RPG of its time, a definite must-have title exclusively on the 360.

So I took the plunge. And having finished the game over 120 hours later, I must say that it most certainly lives up to almost all expectations.

From the title sequence alone it's hard to miss the game's overall production quality. The cel-shaded graphics are stunning, driven largely by the character designs from Kosuke Fujishima (of You're Under Arrest and Ah! My Goddess! fame). In fact, playing the game is itself like playing through an anime feature, with in-game graphics giving the animated cutscenes a serious run for their money. The soundtrack is well composed, giving the game its own epic feel. More, gameplay-wise, the action-oriented battles are thoroughly engaging and a welcome break from the "I hit you / you hit me" turn-based system favored by games of the Final Fantasy variety. Finally, the voice acting found extensively throughout the game is actually quite good and another reason why Vesperia evokes the sense of watching first-class anime more than simply playing a video game.

From a technical standpoint, therefore, it's quite clear that Namco-Bandai have used the 360's capabilities to their fullest to come up with a remarkable RPG experience. However, for an RPG, Vesperia does fall short in its story-related elements in at least two ways. It's almost a given that Japanese RPGs like these have a convoluted story to boast of -- otherwise it wouldn't be fantasy -- but by any reasonable standard Vesperia's isn't as fluid as it ought to be. This is a fault of storytelling more than anything else. The plot zigs where one expects it to zag, to the point that it's hard to feel an emotional connection with the characters'. The fact that it's difficult to express exactly what the game's about (something to do with the abuse ancient technology mired up in a government conspiracy -- just read about it on Wikipedia) or who exactly the villain is (I can't really say, to be honest) are evidence of weaknesses in the storytelling that could have perhaps been avoided with a tighter, more coherent and consistent plot.

Further, I feel that there are Japanese cultural elements peppered throughout the game that are at odds with Western sensibilities. In particular, I took exception to the theme of vigilante justice that underlies a large part of the plot. I've never been one to subscribe to principle that the ends justify the means, and playing through the game it would appear that this is a theme that the developers wanted to get across -- that heroes have to sometimes resort to extraordinary means to protect those dear to them. That didn't sit well with me at all. Yet the more I thought about it, this was probably a failed attempt to translate/localize bushido principles for Western audiences, something that would have made more sense in the Japanese context.

Notwithstanding these blemishes, Tales of Vesperia remains a very solid, enjoyable and engaging title. It's been a while since I devoted over a hundred hours to any game (for RPGs, about sixty is average for me) and even then I wouldn't have minded if it were longer. It's everything a modern RPG should be: easy on the eyes, loaded with action and utterly engrossing. A must-have title for the 360? Perhaps. For Japanese RPG enthusiasts? Most definitely. As far as I'm concerned, Tales of Vesperia has raised the bar for what I expect from RPGs for this next generation of consoles, and nothing will ever be the same again.

Apple Bites

A few weeks before the holidays, I'd experienced a host of problems at the office with my trusty old Powerbook.

First there was the matter of being unable to change my network settings. While trying to select the appropriate network profile -- because I maintain several, for good order -- I was greeted by an error message indicating that my network settings had "been changed by another application" (see above). I thought it was just a minor glitch at first, only to discover that clicking "ok" wouldn't dismiss the dialogue box. It would keep on popping back up, leaving me unable to select or alter my network preferences.

It goes without saying I grew very worried very quickly. Indeed, the unthinkable crossed my mind: could it be a virus? I did some research and found that it wasn't. But it was something equally irritating: the culprit was a system update that I finally got around to installing, which for reasons I still cannot comprehend is actually known to cause just this problem. Naturally, my reaction was a mix of relief and annoyance, more so upon finding out that the known solution to the problem required a bit of tinkering around. Ordinarily I'd have taken the time to apply the fix, but given that I was working on several things at the time -- not the least of which was my dissertation -- and didn't want to rock the boat only to risk regretting it later, I decided I'd rather live with the problem by working around it.

Sometime thereafter I began to receive complaints from people that they couldn't open attachments I'd sent over. Offhand, I thought this was a real world case of "Hello I'm a Mac / And I'm a PC", but it was actually a little more complicated than that. It so happened that the recipients of my emails had received attachments apparently renamed and without their file extensions.

This was an issue: Had my email account been hacked? Was someone messing around with my email? After some snooping around, I discovered that there was a deus ex machina at work. See, I use my Mac's Mail application to download and send my email via Gmail, which for the most part has been quite reliable over the years. Yet it would appear that the Gmail team has altered the mail service code such that the filenames of attachments containing spaces get truncated at the first space, hence the "renamed" files with no extensions. What's odd, however, is that the problem only seems to manifest itself if the recipient works on a Windows computer. It's my understanding that viewed from a Mac, the filenames retain their extensions and can thus be opened by the appropriate program. On Windows PCs they don't, making it a hassle to explain to the person on the other end exactly what s/he should use to access the file.

Fine: in the ordinary course of business, it's inevitable that one will experience computer trouble, whether these be hardware- or software-related. No problem with that. But from my standpoint, the fundamental reason why I switched to a Mac in the first place is because it operates much more simply and (more importantly) plays nice with Windows, even if the opposite is not entirely true. Yet when it ceases to play nice, more so for reasons caused by their very developers (it was an Apple Software Update, dammit!) or due to changes that occur behind the scenes (Et tu, Gmail?) it leaves a sour taste in the mouth.

Yes, it's quite sobering to realize that when my computer has a bad day at the office, I do as well.

The Electronic Carbon Footprint?

It was bound to happen: a Harvard University physicist has created quite a stir for research estimating the amount of carbon dioxide generated by a typical desktop internet search. Take those insights, factor in the volume of searches handled by Google, and you have working guesstimates for the ecological impact of the world's leader in online search.

By itself it's pretty interesting stuff, I'd say, mainly because it puts a spotlight on the environmental impact of what goes on in the cloud. Smokestacks, gas guzzlers and endangered species intuitively come to mind when the topic of global warming climate change comes up, so the time is just about right to turn a critical eye to the internet. After all, servers, routers and all the things that keep the cloud going run on fossil fuels, too, albeit in a more indirect and far less obvious fashion.

[Measuring your Google search's carbon footprint (Cnet)]

Dissertating 13

The most recent developments in my ongoing dissertation are as follows:

Received word recently from my adviser that the proposal looks promising, so I'm now working on making some improvements before vetting it through the other faculty members who'll be my readers and thereafter scheduling the requisite presentation. If all goes well, I'm looking at presenting the proposal in April or May.

Submitted a similar draft to the Central Bank for their remittance conference in late March. Will receive feedback by the end of January.

Was disappointed to learn that neither Blogger nor Wordpress can host my R code or workspaces. The simplest workaround would be to save them as .doc or .pdf files, but I was hoping I could preserve the original R format. As soon as I figure something out, I'll begin to post some of my working documents here.

Realized that my formatted data was off by a scale of 100 (i.e. two decimal places). Such are the perils of working with different databases and currencies. Fortunately, this oversight only affects the scale of my preliminary results (though I feel like an idiot, nonetheless).

So there it is. While I remain guardedly optimistic -- with emphasis on both "guarded" and "optimistic" -- all in all this is a good start to another year of dissertating.

A Number, By Any Other Name

Mathematicians get excited by the strangest of topics. The search for the highest prime number, for instance, or to what decimal they can recall the square root of pi. Things of that nature.

I jest of course. Still, it's interesting to see the debates that rage in the field, for which reason this article from The Economist recently caught my attention. It's strangely amusing -- if in an oddly philosophical fashion -- to read about arguments for and against the notion of what makes a number a number.

[When 1, 2, 3...is not enough (The Economist)]

On Lotteries and Economic Decision-Making

Well, it looks like the folks over at Economix are on a roll. Here's another interesting piece on economic decision-making, touching upon otherwise irrational choices (from an economic perspective, anyway) and lotteries. Good stuff. It's short, sweet, and quite informative -- the trifecta of layman's social science.

[Helping People Make Good Choices (via Economix)]

In Vino Veritas

From an economic perspective, normal goods are those that we consume more of as our income increases and less of when incomes decline. For all intents and purposes, wine is probably a normal good -- more precisely, a luxury good -- despite the notion that people tend to drink more when times are bad (to drown out their sorrows and all that).

So why not use wine as an indicator of how the economy is doing? That's exactly what Catherine Rampell has written about over at Economix. Obviously, I get a kick out of such off-the-beaten-path economic analysis, hence the write-up here. Really, economics can and should be this fun and interesting all the time, alcohol or no.

[Wine as an Economic Indicator (via Economix)]

Life Statement

The coming of a New Year is always a time for introspection. Some mark the occasion by reflecting upon the year that was and looking forward to the year that will be, often with a list of resolutions in tow that, it is hoped, help them turn over the proverbial new leaf. With the same sentiment in mind, I thought it would be appropriate to go an entirely different route by developing my own personal mission statement -- a life statement, if you will.

You might think it a bit much, but the notion of a personal mission statement isn't unusual at all. Personally, I recall first coming across the idea in Stephen Covey's 7 Habits of Highly Effective People. I grant, however, that it's not for everyone -- neither are New Year's resolutions, mind -- and the fact that it's taken over a decade to get around to making one for myself goes to show that it's one of those concepts that does take a while to warm up to.

It's not easy to figure out exactly how to express what I would like my life to be about in a simple statement. There are just so many things to consider in order to get it just right. But in the course muddling through, the one thing that I did keep in mind (oddly enough) was that whatever I came up with had to be as catchy as Google's. It's no secret that I admire the company's philosophy, particularly that part of it that can be summarized in the words "don't be evil". That right there is a great principle to abide by, not just for corporations but for individuals, too.

Yet the more I thought about it, something was lacking. On balance, I don't want my life to be guided by the words "Don't be evil"; I'd rather have it defined by the principle "Do good".

There is a difference. The former is a prohibition (it speaks of what not to do), whereas the latter encourages (by conveying exactly what should be done). While it can be argued that the first is more elegant in the sense that it gives more room to maneuver, I submit that the latter is the better of the two precisely because it is harder to live by. Can one truly avoid doing some evil in any situation? I doubt it, good intentions and situation ethics not withstanding. On the other hand, can a person do some good even in the face of bad circumstances? I would like to think so, and if only for that reason the latter comes across as a superior yardstick to be measured against.

Yes, life should be about doing good. But not in the dole-out sense of the word. It's about helping out where one is able. Aspiring to be extraordinary. Striving for excellence. Having passion for one's work. Showing compassion for others. Being fair to all parties concerned (including oneself) in all circumstances. Occasionally, it also means making the most out of a bad situation, such that it results in as positive an outcome as possible. None of these for the sake of vanity or popularity or so you can give yourself a well-deserved pat on the back. Rather, each of these things for their own sake -- and because by so doing, one leaves the world a little better than one found it.

Admittedly, none of these things are easy. In fact, they may even be a tad naive. But does it really matter? Nothing worthwhile ever came easily, and sometimes it's the most naive of principles (think of the life lessons you picked up in kindergarten) that we end up carrying with us for the rest of our lives and have the most meaning. And yes, it goes without saying that I wish I could express these thoughts more eloquently, but failing that I suppose there's no way one can go wrong with keeping it simple and direct to the point:

Do good.

Enrich the lives of others.

Enable them to achieve their potential.

Empower them to be good, too.

That's my life statement. What's yours?