ASCII by Jason Scott

Jason Scott's Weblog

GET GIRL —

I really do like Hentai Games. I will now spend umpteen paragraphs qualifying that statement.

When you say “Hentai Games” at this point you’re actually referring to way too huge a genre, like if you said “Action Games” instead of “First Person Shooters”, “Platformers”, “Shoot-’em-Ups”, and so on. So to be more specific, I’m a big fan of “Tree-Based Dating-Sim Romance Games”.

In these games, you play the part of an indecisive person, usually obscured in identity, who’s at a critical juncture of his life but lacking any real direction of where to go next. You are introduced to a variety of characters, and among them are a number of girls your age (and sometimes younger and older). They say things, you have some plot, and a number of decision trees pop up. Do you go to the movies with a girl who asked you to take her somewhere, or do you stay home? Do you work at the store today, or go to the library? After between 15 and 30 decisions, you will reach some sort of conclusion, where you will be either in a relationship with one of the girls, or alone, or possibly a completely evil person devoid of soul and heart.

Like everything else in the entire world, this game genre has high points and low points and a lot of stuff in between. Obviously I don’t care for every single example of this genre, instead preferring the ones that share a number of specific traits:

  • A Byzantine construction of situational setups and interrelating plotlines not unlike an episode of Fawlty Towers or Noises Off.
  • Asiding cultural references to Japanese or American trends, such that your characters have a sense of reality even though they live in one a few planes of existence over.
  • Art where they obviously hired a talented artist and gave them enough money to do more than 10 drawings.
  • Characterization where you actually feel you’re looking at a half-dozen different people and not the same person six times with different colored hair.

Here’s some concrete examples. In Tokimeki Check-In!, your family, which runs a hot springs Inn in the country, has bought a new inn and your parents are concentrating on the new property, leaving you in charge of the old. You’re left with three trusted staff: a cook who’s a little older than you, a maid who has been a friend since childhood, and an older gentleman who has been running the facilities of the Inn for a very long time. You welcome into your Inn a total of about eight girls, who sometimes are traveling together and sometimes alone. There’s an artist, a dark and mysterious girl, a trio of college students, a pair of girlfriends. The timeline takes place over three days, and during that time you get up to all kinds of trouble, deal with all sorts of conflicts, and make nice with some patrons and anger others. Meanwhile you’ve got some sort of conflict with the cook, an unsure relationship with the maid, and a variety of drunken escapades. At the end of these three days, you will find yourself everywhere from nearly engaged to utterly shamed, trapped in a crime family or simply waving goodbye to your happy and rested patrons.

Oh, it gets better. In Plenty of Pretty Sisters, you find your house is beset by aliens, who have appeared in the form of four cute girls. One of them has used a memory ray on your parents such that they suddenly believe that they have five kids, that is, you and these four girls. They range from cold and unfeeling (one’s a robot, another is some sort of space spirit) to fist-shaking emotional whirlwinds. Through the use of this memory gun and a variety of situations involving alien invasion, you both try and save the world and also get hooked up with one of your “sisters”.

Dozens of these games come out every year, and some are, like I said, very good and a lot are very bad. The reasons for this should be obvious: just like anyone with a camera and a pad of paper can throw together a film, so can anyone with a contract anime artist and a competent programmer throw together something that resembles a game.

But what I specifically like about these games are the tree-based narrative shifts, specifically when the characters in each tree plays variant roles. This is what’s as or more compelling than the inherent aspect of the game where you might hook up with the girls; it’s that in one juncture someone is your girlfriend, in the next one an enemy. A dance where you walk around inside meets one person; hanging out in the parking lot meets another. If the person putting together the tree is talented, this real inclusive world happens, and you feel the machine of destiny grinding slowly with your every choice. Playing the game over and over is even more rewarding, as you find that scant references in one scene are front and center action from another point of view. This is, at the core of it, what I find compelling about interactive narrative in general, and part of what drove me to work on GET LAMP.

If you’ve never played one of these things before, and have no idea what I’m talking about, I’ll go ahead and suggest the services of J-List, an excellent and trustworthy software site, with a strong sense of customer satisfaction and proper treatment. Of the games they list, I suggest the JAST Memorial Collection, which has three of these games for an inexpensive price ($15).


Maximalized Pandas —

I recently got a phone call from Vistaprint.

I use Vistaprint for my business cards and other occasional printing jobs, mostly because they have an excellent web interface for uploading art, previewing it, and indicating what features you want in your printed works. I don’t have to deal with a person, and the prices are very cheap. I’ve used them for a few years. The super-rush-it-like-crazy options are especially helpful to a person like myself. This was how we had a stack of Blockparty postcards at the ANSI Art Event in January. (Write me if you want a few to pass around.)

A phone call from Vistaprint could have meant anything; I was in arrears, they wanted feedback on the products, or they sold me down the river. This one was kind of the last acting like the second. The nice lady on the phone said hello, and said she was from Vistaprint, and what did I think of the company. I told her it was great because they do what they say and the stuff gets to me on time and I don’t have to talk to people. She didn’t take that hint, or ignored it.

She then explained to me that Vistaprint had a whole new range of products, services and brand identity work they could do for my company, mostly centered around design and using their in-house group to give me the power of a team of dope-smoking art-school kids at a fraction of the cost. She didn’t say “dope-smoking art-school kids”, or really anything about the team, just that they’d do right by my brand. I think she mentioned in some way that my brand could use a little polishing up. And that they’d do it.

So I let her blow out the gas bag, her part of the game, and then said thanks, but I like what I got and if I need more, I’ll certainly go to the site and use the other services. What I didn’t mention is that Vistaprint‘s automated software interface hard-sells you on a dozen (a dozen!) add-ons, like “want to put this on notepads? want to put this on magnets? want to put this on letterhead?” and you have to keep clicking “fuck no” “fuck no”, “goddamn it no” and then it tries to give you a free magazine subscription. I’d kind of forgotten that aspect of things but now I was being delightfully reminded of it.

And I was definitely being reminded of it because she clicked further into a phone tree. “Before you go, sir, I’d like to also talk about..” See, that’s a sure sign of two very specific vector points: she didn’t take any notes on my positive feedback (or clicked a simple radial button on a screen to indicate “satisfied” or other completely generic feedback), and she wasn’t really there to see what I thought of the company, but to be a human version of the stupid cascading pile of add-ons that Vistaprint puts on their site, with the additional weight of a real person in a friendly voice doing it instead of a machine.

Somewhere in Vistaprint’s offices is some gal or dude who, sitting at their little modern desk, got the great idea to outsource customer satisfaction. Oh, they thought they were adding value by increasing customer feedback through the third-party group that effectively sold them on this idea that the way to keep customers was to badger them endlessly about how much Vistaprint ruled. Seeing the goose’s golden eggs needed a little extra shine, they threw the goose into a washing machine.

It’s all about maximalizing, the idea that you haven’t hit the “plus plus” top level of flowthrough on your profits and customer base, and doing what you can to ensure every last goddamn cent you could potentially wrench out of your customers. All of the greedpigs remember that from business school, but they always seem to forget the laws of diminishing returns and of perceived value-add. If you hit everybody who comes into your shop with a hammer and take their wallet, then the people who DO keep coming in will ensure greater income for you as they keep giving you wallets, but the remainder of the people will avoid the hammer-hitting shop and go to the just-gives-you-product shop. Which has a “We don’t hit you with a hammer” sign in the window. And gives you cheaper prices on Sunday.

When I bought a digital recorder, I bought it from Sweetwater, a music retailer out of Indiana. This digital recorder was about seven hundred bucks, so it was something vaguely expensive, although nothing like outfitting a new studio or buying a really nice guitar or anything. I wanted to record my talks, so I got this nice thing and still use it frequently.

Sweetwater called me at some point afterwards, to make sure that I got what I wanted, that I was happy, and that they appreciated me using them for business. I was my usual curmudgeonly self, and said something on the order of “You’re doing quite a bit for a guy who just bought a single piece of equipment; you’re pretty snuggly little pandas over there.” The fellow on the phone laughed and said he didn’t want to be a bother or anything. He didn’t upsell, and he didn’t tell me how to increase my brand awareness or that they had a music school or in-house songwriting teams to help me fill out my album and he certainly didn’t keep going along a phone tree when I said I was all set. He just wished me well and told me to call if I needed anything.

8-9 months later, I wanted to get a better battery for the recorder. It turned out to be somewhat expensive, because the charger was a custom one and the battery was custom too. I did, however, order it through Sweetwater.

On the way back from an interview I’d conducted a state away, I was taking a short nap in my (parked) car, when I got a call. It was Sweetwater. The call was specific: they would have to third-party order the charger (the battery could come immediately) and this would take a few weeks but go right to me when it showed up. I said that was all a-ok with me, because I’d gone without this thing for months and so another month wouldn’t make a difference.

He thanked me, and he said “Glad we could be of help, and we’ve hopefully done our best not to be too snuggly a set of pandas.

Just like the Vistaprint clicking into the rails of a phone tree when I wasn’t interested in her maximalized profits, the implications of his statement hit me. Not only had they listened to the content of my request, that I not be bothered unless absolutely necessary, the previous caller (who was not the current one) had marked down in my account information the exact words I used. I actually verified this on the spot that this was the case. And I was very impressed. And the item I asked for came as I requested it, a few weeks later, covered in candy. (This is something Sweetwater does, in case you need music equipment and you’re hungry.)

Both are attempts to maximalize. One is good at it. One isn’t.


The Syslink Manual —

Here’s a letter sent to me recently:

I’ve been a big fan of Textfiles.com for a while now, and I loved your BBS documentary; I am looking forward to seeing GET LAMP and ARCADE when you are finished with them, I know that they’re both going to be great.

I started calling BBSs in the summer of 1983 with my Commodore VIC-20 and 300 baud VICMODEM. One of the very first boards that I became a regular caller to was the Providence, RI SYSLINK (401-272-1138). This was programmed, created, and run by Don Lambert and his company, Software Interphase (I think the entire “company” consisted of just him at the time). I had heard about the much better known Chicago SYSLINK (never called it, though), and I believe that there was another SYSLINK board that was running someplace in Massachusetts at the time, but the Providence “Flagship” SYSLINK was one of the first and most popular BBSs in Rhode Island in the early 80’s, and literally one of a handful in the state when I stumbled across it in 1983.

As a paying member of the board ($25 a year), I was sent a copy of the “SYSLINK User Operations Manual, version 3.0”, which I have scanned into PDF form and attached for your review. I had found this buried in a box of paperwork and other flotsam from my teens and early 20’s. Please note the little slip of paper that someone had taped to the front cover with my User ID, password, and the two Providence access numbers. Pages 1-1 and 1-2 list a brief history of SYSLINK, which you may find interesting. Though not a part of the original manual, I have also included both sides of a SYSLINK promotional flyer that was mailed to me at some point; I’m guessing that Don must have handed these things out at computer shows and meetings, and mailed them to prospective customers.

The contributed PDF of the scanned manual is located here. It’s 4.3 megabytes.

I became aware of SYSLINK during the first year of production on the BBS Documentary, when I was in the process of going to Chicago to interview both Ward Christensen and members of CACHE, the Chicago Area Computer Hobbyists’ Exchange. This was the user’s group meeting where Christensen and Suess met and came up with the idea of the BBS, so there was important history there.

Besides interviewing Ward, I also attended a CACHE meeting and set up in an adjacent classroom, where I interviewed a number of the members attending that month’s meeting. Among them was George Matyaszek, who had run the Chicago SYSLINK BBS for 19 years, from 1981 to 2000, ending its excellent run only a couple years previously. I’m sure it must have seemed like a real nice wrap-up to have a documentary filmmaker show up to get Chicago SYSLINK’s story.

I interviewed George and another compatriot, Peter Hru, for about 45 minutes. (All the interviews on that day were short so I could get as many different folks as possible.) It says something that George and Peter show up quite a few times in the final documentary; his speaking style cut through the concepts deftly and got right to the point.

I also remember a particularly nice gesture at the end of the interview. After shaking my hand, George handed me $50. I demurred, but he insisted. I don’t recall the exact words he said, but they were along the lines of appreciation that someone was making the effort to tell the BBS story, and that this was going to cost me an awful lot of money. He was right, of course, and I did appreciate the cash.

CACHE, it appears, has disbanded in the years hence. The website has gone dark, and I assume the second-oldest computer user’s group has finally reached the end of its lifecycle. I’m sad but not surprised; I still recall the shock I felt when the Boston Computer Society folded up in 1996, and that was ten years before CACHE did.

Leafing through the SYSLINK manual, you get a nice sense of the commercial side of BBSes, and what issues were pertinent to Sysops of the day (the day being 1986). Mention is made of the SYSLINK “Bash”, attended by six people (and a wild success, according to the manual). These numbers-of-achievement are peppered throughout Syslink’s listed history, with people buying one of the first 50 modems in Rhode Island, or only 40 BBSes running in Rhode Island in 1986. I can’t back up too many of these numbers, or dispute them.

Notably, the manual insists that the SYSLINK software is not for a BBS but for an ITE, or Information Transfer Exchange, a location where “information is transferred to, from and through”. This term does not catch on, but in the time this manual is written, the field is wide open to call things whatever you want. There’s also an excellent listing of possible uses for an ITE, ranging from small businesses and schools through to radio stations and “personal use”. The product defines itself, and then provides its own relevancy.

And it’s definitely notable that this is a product, with well-laid-out manual and extensive documentation; there are very few commercial BBS products in 1986, and certainly not that many in multiple revisions and being sold. PC-BOARD was relatively new, TBBS was in effect, and a number of other products dotted the landscape, but the vast majority are freeware or shareware.

I appreciate being sent these artifacts; people who consider themselves students of this era always work better from primary materials, and there’s a lot of good stuff in this one.


Conspiracy’s a Special Word —

I got a nice letter in the mail today.

Hi,
I may be contacting the wrong person, but were you involved in the
production of a short called "Conspiracy Rock" about the JFK
assassination?  I loved that and have been looking for a copy of it
for years.  Are copies available?

What’s touching about this is that he’s actually been looking for it for either 7 or 15 years. Quite a long time, indeed. And he’s right. I’m the person he’s talking about. Good detective work there, although I do believe I mentioned it in my BBS Documentary biography.

I don’t think I mentioned this in detail on this weblog, so here we go.

Back in college (I attended 1988-1992), my roommates were involved in a comedy troupe. Emerson College had three at the time: Emerson Comedy Workshop, This Is Pathetic, and Swolen Monkey Showcase. (The “Swolen” spelling was on purpose.) My roommates were involved with This is Pathetic.

TIP would do two shows a year, fun multi-hour shows that played off like a fun variety hour. There were skits, videos, musical numbers, the whole gamut. As it were, the people involved had a strong musical bent when I knew of it so there were actually a nice selection of musical pieces. Additionally, my roommate Scott Rosann had an incredible eye for filmmaking (he far outstrips mine) and so some really nice parodies were shot.

Anyway, at some point an idea was hatched to do a parody of Schoolhouse Rock, but to do it about the Kennedy Assassination. I have completely forgotten why this was thought to be a good idea, but I wasn’t in on that part. I know they assembled a lot of people for this, with both writers, musicians, and singers. Scott’s girlfriend was a background singer, one of the TIP members was the lead singer, and so on. It was quite something.

But the idea was to parody the Schoolhouse Rocks, so they asked me to do the animation. So, I got involved in it, and was eventually handed the soundtrack. I constructed a bunch of additional visual parody images related to this event, and to Schoolhouse Rock in central.

Traditionally, this sort of animation was done using cells, where you draw something and it’s on some plastic and you lay some plastic over the drawn backgrounds. (CAPS and the use of computers in animation was some time off for a college student.) I couldn’t do cells, so we did paper cutouts, and I was given a team of people, some of the singers, even, to sit there and methodically cut out different drawings I’d done so that if a character was in front of a frame, the frame was carefully cut out so we got that transparency effect even though there was no transparency to be had.

Emerson had an animation camera lab. In this lab, you had a camera aimed straight down, and then you could take a single shot, a single frame of animation, and then you’d swap out the elements and do the next frame. It was quite tedious. But wait, there’s more! To do things like fades, where you’d go from one thing to another, you would take 15 frames of something, and slowly close the lens after each frame until it was at 0, and then you would rewind 15 frames, replace the image with what it was fading to, and then take the 15 frames slowly opening to normal.

To know what went where, I had to listen to the recorded music and make notes to myself where various phrases came and went. Here’s a typical stanza from the song (to the tune of “Noun”):

A commission was appointed to look around
And to see whatever could be found
Some depositions were destroyed, a larger scandal to avoid
A commission was appointed to look around

So basically I had this audio track, which would I would listen to and make notes on a pad about how many frames each line was, along with any word points that might be relevant. (578) A Commission was (594) appointed to look around (605) And to see whatever (619) could be found (630)…. and so on.

In the case of the main body of the animation, it was a hopelessly complicated endeavor. There would be animation cycles (sets of character animation) for someone standing in front of an screen, with animation cycles within that. Since stealing is the way things are done, you can view the original “Noun” animation here on YouTube.

So I set about to copy as much of this as I could. I limited the animation as they did, had a lot of repetition, but also incorporated additional parody elements of Schoolhouse Rock. I recall my favorite joke was having the motorcade go by and the words “Bang! What was that?” show up, which were duplicated from another Schoolhouse Rock. It was quite the plan.

I have a memory relevant to this production worth noting.

I set off to do this animation in the animation room one night, and since it was a 3 minute animation, that meant shooting 4,320 frames. This is a lot of work. I knew it’d be a lot of work but it was REALLY a lot of work. I started to do it, to put it all together, and as the hours went on, and I was desperately keeping track of (at one point) five simultaneous integer counts, I just fuckin’ snapped. I mean, I totally lost it. We were bucking up against the deadline, it was the Monday before the show’s debut on Friday…. the pressure got to be too much. I came back to Scott at the apartment and just cried and cried. So many people, so much depending on me getting it right, and I had just completely gone off the rails. I was devastated.

Scott, showing his incredible people skills (he’s better at filmmaking AND people than I am), sat down with me, calmed me down, and asked simply, what was it I needed to be successful? What was missing? And I said I needed someone to help me. Maybe with someone else to take some of the number load off while I was tracking exposure levels and pulling the right set of drawings from the right folder (actual folders, mind you), then maybe I could pull it off.

The next night I was in there with Mike. This was a different TIP member than my roommate Mike, but a Mike I thought of as a hard-drinking, hard-druggin’ party-ass son of a bitch. Bearing in mind that I have never had alcohol or drugs, this meant he was probably entirely normal, but still, it was an odd-couple matchup we had going.

Well you know, he was the best fucking assistant you could ask for. He knew not from anything related to animation, and when I explained what was up, he just patiently did what I needed. Kept track of counts, handed me the right frames, and watched me re-use drawings constantly without too many questions. I was the animation guy and he was the numbers assistant, and we sailed through it as a team, over a few hours.

The film was taken to the processors, who got it back to us on Thursday. We took it back to Emerson’s film room and played the soundtrack and the film together to see what editing needed to be done, and in what I consider a miracle never to be duplicated, we didn’t need a single one. You heard right, the whole thing sync’ed up perfectly from start to finish, absolutely. From the first moment through to the last, it was timed perfectly. Thank you, Mike.

Then it was a matter of getting a place to do a film-video transfer on Friday morning, and that Friday night, we played it for the audience for the first time. It was a galactic hit. The initial animation happened, and the audience would think we did some little ten-second ha ha, and then it would go on for three minutes, a full-on cartoon with in-jokes, Schoolhouse Rock references and Kennedy Assassination ‘jokes’. It was edgy, fun, and weird.

Graduation came in 1992, and everyone went their separate ways. Then, in 1993, this thing happened.

I forgot who talked to who, but Comedy Central wanted to buy the rights to this thing for a year. I left it to Scott and the rest to negotiate, and for $1,200, Comedy Central got their rights. I’d moved onto temping but the word came down, that it was now going to be playing on the cable channel. In fact, they played it on the 30th anniversary of the assassination, which I thought was a little out there, but hey.

This cartoon got mentioned in a few small places, and I remember finding a reference in a column about how it was “the only good thing to come out of all the media surrounding the anniversary”. Very cute.

So we had $1,200 in cash but the fact was that the animation had something like 9 creators, and maybe more if you started counting singers and musicians and stuff. So what to do? Well, throw a party.

So we all blew the cash on renting a hotel room in Times Square for the New Year’s celebration, 1993-1994. We had it catered, and there were a few bedrooms in that thing. (I got a couch.) I remember sneaking out into the main times square just to be out there, and it was pretty crazy. I got to be in Times Square for the drop, and so I have that nice memory. Also, we’d all not seen each other since graduation, so it was kind of a reunion.

I didn’t see much of the gang after that, but they’d mostly moved away and I stayed in Boston, and that’s how life goes.

The animation had been sent to Saturday Night Live as a submission, but it’d been rejected. A few years later, they came out with Conspiracy Rock, a parody of Schoolhouse Rock. Yes, I am saying just what you think I’m saying.

The film went into memory, and I moved on to games and computers and all the rest of my sorry little life.

But somewhere in 1999, the word came down: it was going to play at Sundance.

It turned out that Scott and Mike and others had had this film at the end of a demo reel, kind of a fun little ender for people who were tolerant enough to sit through the reel. And when they sent some stuff to Sundance, the request came down, “we want the one at the end of the tape”.

So it played at 2000 Sundance, in the Shorts section. How about that. I considered going but my job at the time was a tad stress-ful and I couldn’t just disappear off to Utah. So I missed all that. But it was pretty weird to have something play at Sundance as part of the official program.

Now, at some point along this, you, the 21st century reading office, respond in kind: “Let us see this work, immediately, for free, with a single mouse click.” And you know, I’d even do that for you, but I don’t have a direct copy of it. I lent the video to someone and he never returned it, and Scott or Mike never digitized it, so it’s kind of in limbo. It’s on my list of “things to digitize” but I haven’t done it. The film/tape is sitting in my office as one of the to-do piles. I have a lot of to-do piles, as you might guess.

Every once in a while, someone reminds me I did this, and I’m happy to be reminded. I should reward them with a copy of it someday. Maybe this’ll be the year, 15 years later.

UPDATE: Well, I’ll be. A pristine version of it is now online: Ladies and Gentlemen, Conspiracy Rock.


The Strip-Miners —

There’s this slightly ugly trend that’s been going on in documentary filmmaking for a while. I’m sure it has some roots going many years back, but it’s come into my radar and I’m not sure how well it’s been covered or mentioned, so I figured I might as well pipe up.

Succinctly: For years, promoters and production types have been approaching documentary filmmakers, people who have dug some sort of story from reality, and have purchased the fictional remake rights.

I will be the first to admit I’m rather curmudgeonly about the documentary form, considering it a very special genre of film in which directors are implicitly making promises to the audience, promises that they could easily renege on without the audience being the wiser. The audience, to some level, is brought to believe that what they’re seeing is either filmed reality or film composed from reality. How much any member of the audience is willing to accept this for any amount of time is up in the air, but when you see action occurring, you think that you’re seeing filmed reality, and when you see people talking to the camera, you think you’re seeing someone being in some way interviewed in actual reality. All interviews can be cut weird and all interviewees can lie, but they’re really lying, like someone who is standing in front of you might be lying to you.

There are films that ape the documentary style, for example Woody Allen’s Husbands and Wives, in which his characters seem to be followed by a documentary crew and the people within it are answering interview questions at various juncture points throughout the film. It brings in a strange other reality for the film, and someone who doesn’t know who Woody Allen is might think this was a real documentary. There was a film I saw in film school which appears in every way to be a documentary about a girl going out and the cameraman is interviewing her and at some point she breaks down and reveals she was recently raped, and the students watching it were shocked when it had credits of actors playing the parts and we were told it was a scripted fictional play. This is all grey area and artists being artists so I don’t have much to say about them other than maintaining they should have truthful labels and not be filed under “documentary”.

Conversely, there is a scene at the end of Michael Moore’s Bowling for Columbine that I do consider a breach of trust: He hammers Charlton Heston about gun control, which is fine, and typical journalistic assholery towards a greater good, perceived or otherwise. But at the end of this sequence, Heston walks away, and Moore calls him to show him a picture of a little girl who died from a shooting. This scene is impossible. The reverse shot we see simply cannot have been filmed at the same time we see Heston reacting to a photo. Moore might be actually showing the photo in the shot with Heston in the background and Moore in the foreground, but that reverse shot is being done at a later time, before they leave the grounds. Flat out. I consider that a lie, no matter how much it clears up the narrative flow for Moore’s editors. There is no grey area for me, I consider it wrong.

But I have no such concerns about most movies, even ones “based on a true story”. Even I know that when something is “based on a true story” it could mean that there once was a real story about someone, and all it shares with this story is both guys owned a dog. Or they lived in Portland, Oregon. Or they had a wife named Jill. It’s complete fluff and irrelevant that it was “based on a true story” just as much as that it’s “filmed on location”. I don’t apply any standard to it and dismiss it as fiction and enjoy or don’t enjoy it on its merits.

Such a low consideration, then, becomes problematic when that fictionalized story is “based upon” a documentary, especially when in all ways the documentary is based off of reality and therefore you know it’s not just a small overlap of details but many of them, and that what you are seeing is a hyped-up action-packed remake of real events. That brings in something, some weight or cachet, that an audience, including myself, might put upon the work. That’s significant.

There was a film called Dogtown and Z-Boys which I saw back in 2001 at my local theater, which I really enjoyed. I forgot why I wanted to see it other than I was really getting into documentaries and this one looked pretty cool and so off I went. I was really taken with how great the editing was, how it had so much vintage footage and portrayal of all these events, and I was also blown away by how good it looked. This was, in some ways, what strengthened my resolve to the idea that I, too, would make a documentary.

The issue, however, is that the film has a couple problematic aspects that I wasn’t aware of at the time. For example, one of the people in it, Stacy Peralta, is also the director. That’s not a fantastic situation, to have your movie be about something and you’re one of the major players in the story. Glen Friedman, a photographer for skateboard magazine, is an interviewee and also a producer of the film. The film is also funded by Vans, a shoe and apparel company. An article that goes in all sorts of pointing-finger detail about this is here.

But all that aside, what happened was that four years later, we had a fictional film based on the documentary, based on reality. Called Lords of Dogtown, this coming of age story used real people’s names, remixes some of the events, and has actual people in cameos near characters playing them. Are you going to watch it on its own merits? Or are you thinking that, because it’s based on a real story, it’s got some additional weight to throw around because things you’re watching are “reality”? It is, in other words, successfully more troubling than the original Dogtown documentary.

From here, my concerns about there being a trend start to fall together. Grey Gardens (1975), considered to be one of the classics of documentary form, is about the story of two distant relatives of Jackie Kennedy, living their lives in a dilapidated house and going some form of Mad. Grey Gardens (2008) is to be a fictionalized version of same, with Drew Barrymore and Jessica Lange playing the parts of the two women from the first documentary, and a few dozen additional actors thrown into the mix. This new fictional film should also not be confused with The Beales of Grey Gardens (2006), which is another documentary by the same documentary filmmakers who made the 1975 Gardens.

And before the question comes to you, yes, I was approached on several occasions to sell or otherwise collaborate on fictionalized versions of the BBS Documentary. In one case one of the reporters who told my story was asked if we wanted to collaborate on a book or film, and in another case I was approached directly by a smiling, smarmy producer type who was more than happy to help me realize the full potential of my project by making a fictional script and who quickly became insulting, abusive and phone-throwing when I told him in impolite terms my own version of “fuck off”. I was let into a lot of homes and told a lot of special stories by a lot of people who trusted me. I consider turning around and making Wargames with more tits to be a betrayal of that trust.

So I started asking filmmakers, when I went to their screenings, and after the question period had ended and I was chatting them up at a later time, if they too had been approached for the fictional/story rights. So far, basically all have. Some had even sold them, before the film was even released. I think this is now the norm and is being done consistently. Or, conversely, is well on its way to being consistent in the case of unique stories that can’t just be made up without obvious pointing to the original documentary.

I don’t like this at all, not one bit. I consider it strip-mining of the worst sort, taking stories of people that are being told in these crafted works, and then turning them out on the street corner to be jazzed up, dashed about, tarted around with death and lipstick and repackaged again and again. I’m sure there’s a thousand little stories the directors can tell themselves about why this is a fantastic idea, but I am not in the least bit interested.

But the tragic part, or maybe the best part of all, is there’s nothing I can really do about this. It’s just another revenue stream being exploited, another quick-fix to sagging storylines that’s patched on, another cheap trick in an industry that prides itself on cheap tricks.

But I thought you might like to know about it.


Shmoocon —

I’ll be attending Shmoocon next month, the weekend of the 16th of February. This will be of interest to some people because my presentation will include actual GET LAMP edited footage.

The schedule’s over here, and there I am at 3pm on Saturday. The conference is basically sold out, so unless you have a ticket already, I don’t think you’re going to get in. Feel free to hang out with me in the hotel lobby, however. I’ll be there a lot.

Last year I punched the One Laptop Per Child in the face, and that was an enjoyable time. (I wrote about it here.) It even got some press, here and here and so on.

What exactly am I showing? Well, I’ve been editing a massive set of sequences about the cave Adventure is based on, so I’ll be showing those, as well as talking about the processes the Cave Research Foundation use for safety and tracking, and a bunch of related stuff to these two subjects. I’ll do my best to record and get some of the talk online at some point.

Always a good time at the Shmoo.


Geek Entertainment —

The ANSI Art show I attended earlier this month got a little video coverage, courtesy of Geek Entertainment, a “web-broadcast” television show that purports to cover some sort of general geek-relevant topics, which the site lists as “web 2.0, tagging, AJAX, social software and the bubble juice known as VCs”. All well and good.

The episode is certainly useful for some nice video footage of the gallery and how packed it was, and the appearance of one of my heroes Jacob Appelbaum in an interview was a nice bonus. You see the scrolling ANSIs, the dedicated ANSI circuit boards (I purchased one) and a bunch of other details in there. Again, all fine and good.

But I guess I’ve been lucky enough to have avoided or missed out on the “journalist” Irina Slutsky, who is the blonde microphone-wielding terror that provides the bulk of the commentary/description of the context of ANSI art. Holy hamburger in a can is she horrible.

Fine, apologists can explain to me in grating detail that the short turnaround for getting these microvideos out the door would necessitate a few shortcuts, but the descriptions she blorts out are beyond mere speediness and into negligence.

Using phrases like “secret identity in the nether regions of the web-er-net” strikes me as what it probably is, a disposable, hipster reference to internet culture, one in this case that spans decades, because it sounds like you have even a middling grasp on its context. Which she doesn’t.

If it matters at all, I went to school for just what she’s doing, that is, attempting to not look like an idiot on video, and having the camera continue to focus on her while she dumbly nods along doesn’t do anyone any favors either. “AND WHAT IS BBS?” is not, if you’d pardon the term, hard-hitting journalism. And while we’re over here, “So here I am with” is not the best way to start with every fucking shot.

I think if this was called “WebNet Now!” or some other generic, meaningless title, I wouldn’t be so bothered, but you’d think that something with the word “Geek” in the title wouldn’t be filled to the brim, and I mean absolutely jam-packed, with such poorly-constructed pseudo-news that acts like the people watching weren’t born 30-60 minutes ago. Geek, after all, is quite a provocative word, and part of the pride of geekdom is that if you don’t know something, you possess the skills to look it up instantaneously and integrate it into your own personal “web-er-net”.

Do I have an example of someone doing it right? Well, I was interviewed by Kevin Pereira for the now-gone G4 series “Pulse” about my BBS Documentary. We talked for an hour on the phone, and then he came out to interview me with a crew, and then the whole thing was cut together into a story about my project. I found it treated me with respect, got the message across, and while there were shortcuts within it that I wouldn’t have approved of in the editing room, you never felt like Kevin, or myself, or my subject, were fuckin’ idiots.

Here’s that news story. Sorry, it’s a 30 megabyte WMV file, but that’s what VLC is for.

I see no excuse for a “Geek” show to be so insulting and stupid, and I’ll be glad never to watch it again.


Zero Stars —

I have a soft spot in my heart, maybe even a warm and loving relationship, with speed runs.

Speed runs, in this case, refers to a genre of video game recordings wherein people play through a game as fast as they possibly can.

The gold standard for me is “Quake Done Quick (With a Vengeance)” which is a sequel to Quake Done Quick, and represents a speed-run through the iD software game Quake at its most vicious difficulty, and which utterly decimates the point of the game in favor of a level of speed that you wouldn’t think was possible. How fast? Well, there are levels which they complete in nine seconds. If you watch this film and know anything about how the game works, then seeing the tricks employed are magical. (There’s a Google Video version up for quick and easy browsing.)

How do they go through a level in 9 seconds? Well, one of the cinematic aspects of the Quake game was having the exit for the level just tantalizingly out of reach, perhaps viewable from the bottom of a huge room, or across an uncrossable chasm. The actual physical distance of each level exit was short but the built-in puzzle aspect meant that to really achieve that nearby goal was to go through an enormous amount of hurdles. Well, since Quake Done Quick would use tricks to make uncrossable things crossable or high-altitude exits reachable, that massive set-up would just melt away.

After a short time, people who played Quake discovered an interesting technique, which was shared far and wide: rocket jumping (or conversely, grenade jumping). To increase a sense of realism, the Quake engine had a nice trick where an explosion near you would throw your body away from the center of it. So if a rocket blew up to your right, you’d find yourself hurt badly and thrown to the left. Well, all one had to do was jump and aim a rocket below you at the floor, and its explosion would increase the jump by a noticeable degree. Oh yeah, it’d hurt, make no mistake. But you’d go higher and so you’d find yourself in a place that you weren’t supposed to be able to reach, usually with lots of health to make up for your entirely sociopathic and suicidal act. It most likely didn’t occur to the playtesters that someone would use this technique to actually advance in a level, or hurt themselves insanely to manipulate access throughout a game’s map. But they did, they do, and Quake Done Quick shows this technique used to the hilt.

There are multiple places in that video where I see someone throw a grenade and jump on it for lift. In one case, they throw the grenade while swimming in water, and arrive at said grenade at just the perfect time to blow themselves upward to a distantly high shelf, and solve the level in 13 seconds. In another, they throw a grenade off a ledge, jump off the ledge and land perfectly on the exploding grenade to fling themselves up the same distance to an opposite ledge. This is Cirque Du Soleil for gamers.

Like a lot of such weird hobbies, there’s been a number of variations upon the themes and techniques so that they have to be demarcated clearly before you watch them. One of these is the idea of “tool-assisted” speed runs. In these cases, you use an emulator and/or constant reloading to get the most perfect game. Sometimes you slow down the game to half speed, play at that level, and then return the game to full speed when you play it back. In these levels, you go from it being amazing, to a sort of bizarre art. Watch, for example, this video of Super Mario 3 in tool-assisted mode, and then skip ahead to 2 minutes in and watch what appears to be God Almighty playing Nintendo.

Like any “sport”, the use of this sort of enhancement can lead to accusations of cheating or not playing fair, and I certainly agree that comparing a game played by a single person in one take and one played by multiple people doing thousands of takes is not legitimate. But I do think there’s a place for both these approaches.

The two big tracking organizations in this are The Speed Demos Archive and Tool-Assisted Speed Runs, which do their best to provide the most up-to-date short-timed videos of played games in existence. I am especially taken with the level of precision that TASvideos keeps in terms of what techniques are used, what to watch for, who did it, and so on. But both are pretty kick-ass.

But there’s one set of speed runs I just can’t seem to get enough of, and that’s Super Mario 64.

I get a little weird about that game because of several bits about it that really amaze me. First of all, I really do consider it a perfect 10 out of 10. It got a 10 in several magazines at the time of its release in 1996, and because gaming culture generates controversy and flatulence, this was a big deal. To get a ten, some speculated, meant there could never be a more perfect game. This is, of course, retarded, but like I said, retarded is fuel for gaming culture, so it bounced back and forth for a while. But I am firmly on the side that in 1996, Super Mario 64 was truly a perfect 10 of a game. The variation, the game play, the massive size of it, was all just fantastic.

Such is that perfection that watching people play it quickly using all manner of tricks and glitches, is hypnotizing and attractive to me. In the game you collect stars. There are 120 possible stars in the game. Once you collect 70, you can actually “win” the game, although it’s only when you track down and win all 120 that you get the real kudos. So, people have successfully played through the game, tool assisted and not. Here is a 120 star tool-assisted speed run, which takes about an hour and 41 minutes to complete. It’s quite beautiful to me.

But it turns out you can glitch the system; there was the “bunny trick”. At one point in the game, about sixteen stars in, you are able to chase down and catch a bunny. When you do this, he gives you a star. But more than that, it lets you walk around with the captured bunny post capture. And even more than that, there is a bug where you can drop and pick up the bunny quickly and it stops paying attention to doors. As a result of this little oversight, you can get through a door that’s not supposed to be openable until way further along the game, and which allows you to get to the final boss and win the game having only sixteen stars captured.

It is too easy to focus on the fact that the trick works rather than why. It works because the door is a real thing, that will eventually open. This may sound obvious, but it’s not. In years previous to games like Super Mario 64, just because there was a door somewhere didn’t mean that there was anything behind that door. That door was, effectively, a painting that was later replaced with a real door when all the objects you needed were assembled. But before then, there was nothing you could do to get through that door, because, again, not a real door. But in the era of Mario 64, that means that there was a working set of rooms, all functioning, all in place, and it was only the addition of new powers or the ability to unlock portals that granted you access to this persistent environment. This is both minor, and the most important thing in the world.

The sixteen-star hack was amazing. But then someone did it in 1 star.

To do it in one star, they had to depend on an interesting glitch in the system, where if you jammed little mario in a strange location in the first room of the castle, it would blow him into another piece of the map. It’s surreal to watch, like something out of the Matrix. One moment he’s jumping around and the next moment he’s flying through the castle at top speed and jammed into a door, which he should never have gotten into.

And then someone used this trick to do it in zero stars. Zero stars! He walks into the castle, as any tourist and rube and then he’s face to face with the final boss, ready to kick some ass. Here’s a youtube link of this action, and it’s at the 1:10 mark that you say to yourself “you ok, little guy?” and then he’s suddenly blowing through the castle at 100mph and right into a high-end level. And then he just keeps going from there. The run is tool-assisted but still great to watch. And zero stars.

I have issues with the terms “cheating” as being applied here, sicne it’s made clear that the emulator and slowdown techniques are in play. But more than that, there’s a greater situation here.

During the GET LAMP documentary, one person puts forward the theory that we, as people, are changed by technology. As technology advances and we absorb this into our daily lives, we internally change our processes and selves to accommodate this new methodology. I buy into this theory entirely. So what I am saying is that the people who play Quake Done Quick or who slam Mario with zero stars are not the same human beings the games were written for. A decade of time, learning new ways to play games, changes your relationship to the original games, and so what is meant to be reliant on your lack of familiarity with the world is no longer to the game’s advantage. I can think of no more appropriate example of this, than speed runs.

I wrote this in two hours. I look forward to your film of you doing this faster.


Blockparty Speakers List Finalized —

We’ve finished assembling the speaker’s list for Blockparty 2008, the second Blockparty. Here’s the list, as it appears on the site.

The Fat Man: Art Behind Enemy Lines: A Target-Rich Environment

fatnudie.jpg
In the first five minutes of his talk, Fat will define Art once and for all,
especially in context of high technology creation and experience. Thus
having taken the mystery out of it and having reduced it to a science, he
will quickly realize that he has ruined the whole damn thing. The rest of the
talk will consist of his backpedalling like mad, trying in vain to put the
cork back in the giant monkey’s butt before the whole Blockparty is covered
with icky, sticky dogma.


The Fat Man, George Alistair Sanger, has been creating music and other
audio for games since 1983. He is internationally recognized for having contributed
to the atmosphere of over 250 games, including such sound-barrier-breaking greats
as Loom, Wing Commander I and II, The 7th Guest I and II, NASCAR Racing, Putt-Putt
Saves the Zoo, and ATF. He wrote the first General MIDI soundtrack for a game,
the first direct-to-MIDI live recording of musicians, the first redbook soundtrack
included with the game as a separate disk, the first music for a game that was
considered a “work of art,” and the first soundtrack that was considered a
selling point for the game.


On a 380-acre ranch on the Guadalupe River, The Fat Man hosts the annual
Texas Interactive Music Conference and BBQ (Project Bar-B-Q), the computer/music
industry’s most prestigious and influential conference.

Jake “virt” Kaufman: FM Synthesis – Beyond the Adlib

Photo by minusbaby
Like Silly Putty, potato chips, and penicillin, FM synthesis was a delightful accident. It was most famously used in the Yamaha DX-7 keyboard,
allegedly designed by the Japanese as revenge for World War II, and seen by the knob-twisting analog crowd as “like trying to paint your hallway
from outside through the letterbox.” Despite this, it took pop music by storm, and inexpensive one-chip FM synthesizers flooded into in video
games, home computers, and even mobile phones.

Luckily for us, an entire industry of pointy-headed sound programmers has largely tamed FM since the 80s, and figured out how to create every type
of sound imaginable. In an uncanny impression of an expert synthesist, Jake will show that for all its mathematical intrigue and spy-novel
thrills, FM is easy, free, and fun to use, and sounds neat!


Jake Kaufman is equally happy writing for a Game Boy or an orchestra. He recently created music and sound effects for Konami’s Contra 4 for the
Nintendo DS, described by critics as “awesome” and “dude, awesome”. Following in the footsteps of pioneers like the Fat Man (see above), he aims
to advance the state of the art even as he squeezes every drop of goodness out of older technology. He participates in the chiptune community and
the demoscene, and is the founder of VGMix, a site devoted to fan arrangements of game music.

Fred Owsley: Circuit-Bending Will Get You Laid!! (Maybe)

fowl.jpg
Circuit-Bending is the art of taking things apart, putting them back
together, and ending up with a brand new, completely unexpected
mutation of the original parts. Think of sampling, but with hardware.
Nothing’s out of bounds when you circuit-bend the piles of consumer
electronics available around you, and the results can be insightful, weird,
or just a great way to spend a weekend. Circuit-bender Fred Owsley will
walk you though an introduction to the tools and trades of circuit-bending
as well as show off his own recent works involving everything from a
gas mask to a “that was easy” button that is anything but easy.


From a very young age, Fred has always liked to take things apart,
from all his toys to the interior of the family van, few screws were
left intact. With an interest in electronic music, a soldering iron,
some electronics know-how and toys from goodwill, he started circuit
bending in 2005. So far his projects have included various keyboards,
keytars, a gas mask, a musini, and a recently finished x0xb0x. When
not at his regular job as a computer security researcher, he can be
found at his workbench abusing some electronic toy into producing
amazingly horrible noise.

Jim “Trixter” Leonard: Self-Preservation Mode: Lessons Learned While Archiving Demoscene History

Trixter

To stay ahead of the curve, demos have always used hardware to the fullest extent available, sometimes in unorthodox and unauthorized ways. But when that hardware becomes yesterday’s news, it is those very tricks that cause such demos to become lost to history. For half a decade, Hornet has been working on the Mindcandy series, a collection of DVDs reproducing demos to the best of their ability. But what’s involved in that process? Trixter of Hornet will discuss how a combination of ebay, charity, and outright fakery can be used to restore for the present what has nearly been lost to the past, and how you can apply these techniques to your own archival projects.


Jim Leonard is the founder of MobyGames, the world’s largest online game database,
and the MindCandy series of demoscene DVDs. Jim was involved in the PC demo scene in the 1990s as well
as the archival demogroup Hornet, and the residual flashbacks of that episode prompt him to code 8088 assembler for fun in his spare time.
Every few months, some part of the Internet discovers “8088 Corruption” and freaks out. Jim, meanwhile is musing about Mindcandy Part III and the next big thing to save.

Jeri Ellsworth: CPU Not Required: Making Demos with FPGAs

Jeri Ellsworth
In the endless battle to make your demo quicker, more impressive and yet
still balance the changes in CPU, a whole other way of approaching this
situation exists: FPGAs. Short for Field-Programmable Gate Arrays, this
dedicated hardware, well-documented and fun to program, will give you
speed and flexibility that a world of softcode and compilers just can’t
touch. After going over the basics of this hardware, a simple demo will be
presented and the process explained.


Jeri Ellsworth is best known as the engineer behind the C64-DTV, a
Commodore-64-in-a-Joystick that has sold over half a million units. She
has founded a computer chain, designed race cars, and is hard at work
building a classic arcade in Oregon.

Tim Cowley: Automated Psychedelia : Translating sound into color and motion

Tim Cowley
If you’ve always wanted to know how to create programs that simulate the neurological disorder ‘synesthesia’, or the effects of hallucinogenic drugs, look no further! This seminar will rocket through a brief history of psychedelia and synesthesia and how it relates to computer graphics and music, define key technological elements of a generic music visualization framework, discuss important problems relating to meaning extraction and presentation, and present a simple HLSL-powered, graphics hacker oriented, visualization framework. All of the source code for the framework will be available as well.


Madman. Genius. Visionary. Psychonaut. Graphics God. Bodhisattva. These are all words that Tim Cowley would write into his own bio, if he were a little
more arrogant. Tim has been shovelling triangles as fast as he could since he got his hands on an OpenGL Red book in 1999. Since 2003, he’s been making
demos with the Northern Dragons, on the GBA, PSP, in TextMode, and occasionally using one of them expensive ‘graphics cards.’ He currently works on the
3d engine inside MS Office, is preparing to start his M.Sc. at Digipen, and is about to reach 1 million downloads on
the Psychedelia visualization pack.


The Most Popular Thing Ever —

Oh, there’s been some great hits in my webserving past. The word gets out, and thousands of people start visiting a specific URL or location on one of my sites. This has included the “Freedom, Justice and a Disturbingly Gaping Ass” weblog entry on this site (78,000 visitors in a single day) and Koalas are Little Bitches (30,000 in a single day). And there’s even been a few cases of the mass of bandwidth being unfathomable, like when I idly mentioned having 1,700 arcade manuals. That one killed a ten megabit connection for a week.

But in terms of sheer numbers, I’ve never encountered anything like Jesus Cat.

I collect flash animations. Of course, I collect a lot more than just flash animations, but I definitely collect flash animations. I use scrapers on 4chan and other sites, and I actually sort them out. The result has been tens of thousands of these things. Some are horrifying (animals are killed, or someone falls to their death). Some are bizzare (animations combining all sorts of people and images in a non-sequitir manner). And some are just music played to something funny.

One of these is Jesus Cat, which is meant to be as silly as it seems. Nothing big, that’s just what it is. (It plays music, in case you’re somewhere you’d prefer not to hear music.)

It’s not a particularly deep creation: a cat jumps out of a boat and walks on water to the shore, to the tune of Our God is an Awesome God and with the words “Jesus Cat” pulsing in the corner. It’s 371k, almost instantaneous on many connections.

Whatever reaction you get in the first 4 seconds is about all you’re going to get out of it; it loops forever, and any amount of time watching it reveals what’s going on: shallow water, cat trying to get back to land, just hops in the shallow water and is free. Someone’s doing some work in the water behind him and easily belies the depth of the pond at this location. In other words, under analysis, it utterly falls apart. It’s a simple eye trick, and the music and words (in the opposite corner) distract you enough for the conjunctive disorder that might make you laugh. Or not.

I happened to show this to an IRC channel, and linked to a “stuff I have lying around” directory on one of my servers.

Two days later, 91,000 people visited.

And it was that specific URL too, and since I didn’t put it anywhere other than that channel, once, it meant someone gave it to someone else, or pasted it in another IRC channel, and then it just exploded outward. I see 3,000 matches for the original URL, and if you spend the time browsing them, you find lots of commentary. I’ll save you time and tell you the general responses:

  • Hilarious!
  • Stupid.
  • That cat’s not REALLY walking on water.
  • This reminds me of endless other cat stuff HERE’S SOME LINKS
  • I will now riff on the idea of a cat as a savior for the next paragraph.

91,000 throws it way past anything I’ve done, ever with regards to serving a popular file. Some of the others might have more longevity over the Jesus Cat (the Goatse article, for example, is still packing them in a year later) but for sheer popularity, Jesus Cat stands above them all.

God bless his wet, matted little fur.

I suppose I could come up with lame “look I’m better than those people” theories about why the cat is so popular, but I’m rather sure it’s because it’s compact, gets what it wants to get across, and is 371k. You go and you’re there. And two words, Jesus Cat, sum up the entire experience for you. If I had to pin it on anything, I’d go for that: ease and compactness. It is truly Dawkins’ idea of a meme, a replicating virus that uses human brains.

And now I spread it again. Oh no.