Think back to times gone. There were times when you could guarantee that if a game had a solid story, was innovative, or if a film was going to keep you entertained throughout then it would do well. If there was something re-hashed or boring about these things they would be ignored. From what’s happened in the past month or so, however, these times are clearly over.

In the gaming world we’ve had Call of Nature: Recent Battles 4 breaking records for sales. Twiglet: Old Snack has been setting new levels for midnight viewings and 2012 has been at the top of box offices. We’ve just seen the release of Terminator Salivation on DVD last week, and Transformers: Revenge of the Robots in Disguise who Fell Over out tomorrow we can expect to see them flying off the shelves.

Now I know good films have done well. Good games also sell, but it’s one thing saying that people will go to the cinema and see things like The Men Who Stare at Goats or Fantastic Mr, Fox, even Up in 2D. They will pick up something like Moon on DVD, and grab Lucidity or Left 4 Dead 2 to play on, but these films and games haven’t been making headlines for massive sales, unlike some things that are not only worse, but in some cases completely terrible.

Take a look at the aforementioned war game. There is maybe a 5 or 6 hour single-player campaign. The story is poorly told, it’s not a bad story, it just takes digging to find it, it doesn’t do anything special and it is a sequel to a spin-off of a sequel. Sure there’s a massive multi-player aspect, but with a stupidly inflated price-point, it shouldn’t be setting records for sales. But it is. Twiglet is a film based on books. It’s been almost universally criticised and yet it set the record for most takings on the first day. 2012 beat it in the week’s box office, and as you can read here, it really wasn’t anything special, at least not as far as I was concerned.

I suppose we should be thankful for small mercies, in that the top 10 films of the year only features one “comic book” movie. Although that film is Wolverine: Organs and not actually a good film. Of course, comics haven’t been free of rubbish this year. With most of Marvel’s lines featuring Wolverine at some point and Batman going severely downhill following Batman R.I.P. everything I love seems to be going downhill.

Greatness is still out there. I can still see it, mostly, and the people who want to see things that are good still can. But as soon as a big blockbuster or a sequel, to a spin-off, of a sequel of a remake happens to appear in the cinema or on the shelves, this originality, this masterful story-telling, is all ignored.

It’s a shame, but maybe one day I will see a good foreign film, like The White Ribbon, at my local multiplex. Perhaps people will stop going to see Michael Bay films to gawk at Megan Fox (who can’t act.) Maybe.

MTFBWY

Now, I wasn’t planning to review this game, mainly because I don’t review games I haven’t played, and what I did in Bus Sim was far from playing, but a conversation I had at university today changed my opinion of this game entirely, and I can now say that this game has risen amazingly in my list of games I like.

Bus Simulator Screenshot

The premise of City Bus Simulator 2010 is quite simple. You are Carlos, and you are a bus driver. You drive what is, apparently, a famous bus route, the M42 along 42nd Street in Manhattan. You drive a “realistic” bus along the street, and indeed some side streets, and pick up passengers, as bus drivers tend to do. There is also a service vehicle, and a tutorial mission to help you learn the ropes. Along with the tutorial comes, of course, a free-roam mode, some stand-alone missions, and a campaign.

All sounds great fun, and I bet you can’t wait to get stuck in. Let me explain a few issues I encountered. I couldn’t play the campaign. Now, I may be doing something wrong, and it may have just been an issue with my install, but I couldn’t get in the vehicle to start the first part of the campaign. Just a small snag, I could play the same mission as a stand-alone task without the story line. Although the idea of a “non-violent” campaign that is an “interactive crime story” does sound quite fun.

How New York Appears in Bus Sim

Now, however, I want to explain the exciting part of this game. The bit that makes this game a true great. In the game, or at least in the version I played, everyone spoke German. I have English subtitles, all my menus were English, but the people spoke German. “What’s so great about that?” I hear my reader cry, well it means this isn’t the Manhattan we think it is. This game is, in fact, set in a special Manhattan. This game is about what would have happened if Germany had won World War II.

“Are you sure it isn’t just something that will be fixed in a patch?” you ask. Of course not, because that is not all. There is no in-game map, no arrows on the road, you are sent out in your bus or service vehicle with no directions, just simply some instructions. German Efficiency has been brought to this game, and if you don’t know what it is you’re doing, then tough. You shall be taken behind the sheds and be shot.

There are side-roads here, but I kept running into invisible barriers, proof that the Germans don’t like their drivers running around willy-nilly. This is a game set in an America that the Nazis rule, and it is done so in a very subtle fashion. The controls didn’t all have defaults either. You silly capitalists, wanting everything handed to you. You will work for your fun.

An Audi driving the streets of Manhattan

You will notice the German cars driving the streets, The efficiency with which these cars drive is clearly more German than American, and there are these sirens, but they never seem to get any closer, and none of the emergency vehicles ever have their lights flashing. Of course being a German game, from TML Studios they couldn’t explicitly mention the Nazis, or show swastikas, but all the signs are there.

For those interested in the specs of the game, and purchasing, The game has minimum requirements of :

2.0 GHz Core 2 Duo, AMD Athlon MP multicore processor or comparable

Windows® Vista / XP, DirectX® 9.0c

RAM: Windows® XP 1 GB , Windows® Vista 2 GB

Graphics Card: Nvidia GeForce 86xx or a comparable ATI-Graphics Card

Installations-Size: 3.0 GB

And can be purchased both from the main website here, and from Amazon (UK).

As a simulator that you can pick up and play, this game doesn’t seem that great, I wouldn’t describe it as fun, there’s definitely a problem if you don’t know Manhattan that well, and there are a few small problems. But for a studio to make a game that is not only a simulator, but a simulator set in a world where the Nazis won the war and run the American buses, it’s great.

So there you have it, City Bus Simulator 2010, set in the near future, and about Germany winning World War II.

MTFBWY

Thanks to Simon for helping this idea develop.

Recently, you have been unable to move without people talking about a certain game, mainly because of a certain level in it. Now, I don’t own this aforementioned game, but I have had a go, I have played that level, and I have to admit that I’m not really that bothered by it.

Now, you undoubtedly know what I’m talking about. It’s that new game that’s about warfare, in a fairly modern setting. It is a sequel, to a spin-off of a popular gaming series, and it just so happens that in this game there is a level where, as part of the campaign, you have to go to a place of air travel and shoot some people who are considered “innocents”. Now, I am refraining from naming the game, partly for comedic effect, but mainly because the game has received so much publicity for this level that I really don’t want to give them any more. Let’s be honest, that’s the only reason this level really exists.

OK, so this supposedly sets up the whole game, it could have been done with an FMV, but this is a better way to get you interested, and it is more fun. Marginally. Now, this has been described, almost exclusively in the non-gaming press and media, as you playing as a terrorist. This is not only a lie, it proves that they haven’t played the game. You are an under-cover, black-ops agent, infiltrating a terrorist organisation. It just so happens that in the act of infiltrating, you get dragged into an act of terrorism.

Within the game, it is possible to skip the level, it is also possible to complete the level without killing any of the unarmed civilians. This just reeks of cowardice on the part of the developers. It’s the same as a film maker putting a scene in the film, then flashing up a little message that says it’s OK if you don’t want to watch this. Like having an entirely optional chapter in your book. It implies that what you have is just tacked on, and of no importance. The problem is that the mission is, in essence, an important part of the story. So whilst this mission could draw you in to the game, instead Infinty Ward see fit to take you out. Also it’s the fact this level comes after a James-Bond-esque snowmobile chase. That’s a laughable change of theme.

You can shout from the rooftops about how violent games turn people into murders. You can yell at Infinity Ward for putting in a “terrorist level”, but you will miss the real problem. The level is there to get a response from the player. You are supposed to have an emotional reaction to being asked to kill innocents, and hats off for trying to do that. There is, however, a problem. The level was ruined. You can skip it, you can not take part, and you will still get through. So whilst the inclusion of the level could have been great, could have had me thinking it was special, the implementation is poor. It’s not a good level, and certainly not worthy of all this coverage and public outcry.

Oh, and for £50 or thereabouts, I want more than a 5/6 hour campaign. Yes you give me an “expansive multiplayer”, but you don’t tell me how much that’s worth, you offer a real campaign. So no, I’m not going to rush out and buy this game, unlike every other gamer seems to have.

Now, can we not talk of this game, or level, again?

MTFBWY

Birds and snakes, an aeroplane. It is, as the lyrics go, the end of the world as we know it. However I can, in all honesty say, that having seen it, I don’t feel fine. Watching it, I actually felt quite bored. I am talking about that new “world in peril” movie 2012 from Roland Emmerich, yes, another one from that guy.

Now, I may not be able to claim to be a big fan of these movies. I liked I Am Legend, Independence Day wasn’t too bad, there’s worse out there than Deep Impact, but to get the real “end of the world” movies you need to go a bit further back than the mid-to-late nineties. Beneath The Planet of the Apes (1970), The Poseidon Adventure (1972, not 2006), The Day The Earth Stood Still (1951, not 2008) and On The Beach (1959, not the 2000, made-for-TV, version) all stand out, for me, as the real “world in peril” films, the good ones. Did you start to notice something though? I was quoting the originals, not the remakes. For those out there either not aware of the originals, or who have some sort of natural objection to “old films” this may seem silly, but let me explain.

Take Deep Impact. There is a moment, on the beach, as destruction approaches. You know the moment. That is a great part. It lets you see the interesting part of world destruction, the human side. This is what makes On The Beach so special. It’s about people surviving the initial disaster and preparing for the inevitable. How about Poseidon and The Day The Earth Stood Still. Why would I pick the originals over the remakes. Well, it’s very simple, and comes in the form of three letters. C, G and I, and is similar to why I love Beneath the Planet of the Apes so much. In the remakes of these films all the action that was done with models and real people were replaced with some wiz-kid and a computer. Sure it “looks better”, but it does take all the fun out of it. At least for me. As for Beneath the Planet of the Apes, well, if you want to end the world, you don’t need CGI nanobots, you need to fade to white.

So, that’s enough about other films, let’s talk about the real reason I’m writing this, 2012. The premise of the film, for those not already aware, is that the world is going to end, as the Mayans, and apparently a lot of other people, predicted, due to a rare planetary alignment, causing unusually high solar activity. This means that in 2012, the whole world will super-heat, natural disasters will take over, and the world will be consumed by a flood of biblical proportions. No it isn’t a scientific likely hood, or even a remote possibility, so please leave your sense of disbelief at the door. Please also feel free to leave your memories of any and all previous global disaster films behind, as everything from Poseidon to Deep Impact and Volcano are in here.

The script not only blends all of the disasters from these other films in there, but also ensures that everything you expect from the story is there, the unsuccessful dad, both career- and marriage-wise, the two kids, the ex-wife and her new partner, the dog, who must be saved, and the last-minute peril all make their way in, but of course I can’t tell you how they blend in with the thoroughly unfavourable Russian man and his two, equally unfavourable boys, because that would be a spoiler, even though you can probably work it out for yourself.

The CGI in this film is both impressive, and thoroughly boring at the same time. As someone currently with a 3D modelling module at uni, I know how much hard work can go into making these things, and the detail is quite impressive. The re-used elements, the boring repetitiveness, and the fact an aeroplane can fly through some collapsing buildings, however, just take the edge off. Yes it’s shiny, but it’s not as impressive sitting back knowing that the St Peter’s Basilica is just triangles from a computer instead of a highly detailed model, or that the people falling are pixels, not eve stunt men. Real stunts and high-quality models are what made this genre acceptable, now, well, now it’s just boring.

The other problem seems to be the American leaning towards geography. Everything that happens anywhere not in the states happens around famous landmarks. The Vatican, the Christ the Redeemer statue in Rio, The Eiffel Tower, the tunnel where Princess Diana died, and the fact that people from other countries all talk with over the top, stereotypical accents.

So there you have it. The film is dull, boring, too long (158 minutes, and you feel every, last, lingering second), overly-CGI’d and overly predictable. All that, however, can be summed up even better. As always, the BBFC told you all this in their rating.

Rated 12A for Sustained moderate threat and one use of strong language.

Moderate threat. That is all.

MTFBWY

It is almost a crime to find problems with films starring Michael Caine. He has proven, over a long and varied career, that he can bring parts to life, and he shows no signs of stopping as his time on-screen is, by his own admission, approaching its end. His latest film is Harry Brown, and whilst it is a very good film, I do have a bit of a problem.

For those who haven’t heard, this is the story of an ex-marine vs. the estate hoodies. when his wife dies, and his best friend beaten and stabbed to death, Harry Brown is left alone. He become a vigilante whose aim is to hunt down and kill those evil hoodies responsible for his friend’s death. It’s a revenge film from the point of view of a victim, and therein seems to lie the problem.

It’s being heralded as a “wake up call” in newspapers like the The Daily Mail (Well, “news”papers) and held up as an example of how these horrible hoodies need to be treated. That is to say that we should all get guns and shoot them. Or stab them, or blow them up. The film basically says that vigilantism is the way to go with these thugs, and that the police, who are displayed as overly inept, are entirely worthless.

It is an overly simplified version of what it is to be a “hoodie”. Caine, whilst researching for the role, talked to some kids on the estates that he grew up on himself many years ago, and said that it was more often than not a problem stemming from the family background than something that happens “just for entertainment”. It is touched upon in the film, where an older skin-head is in a car, forcing one of the youths to perform a sexual act on him, before Harry shows up. This youth having already had questions raised about this type of act earlier in the film. This is however only a small part of the film, and not really given any screen time beyond passing comments, and that five second scene.

Whilst Caine is on true form with this film, the same can’t be said for Emily Mortimer, although the problem there may be more that of the part than her talent. It is, however, good to see a director able to use a black screen so effectively. At a time when films feel the need to fill every frame of their run-time with something, using 3D to poke the audience in the eye, and blowing everything up with CGI it is somewhat refreshing to see Daniel Barber know how to cut to black effectively, and how to use people instead of a computer.

So whilst I can’t say that I agree with what the film says, it is enjoyable, if just to see Michael Caine on full form again, and as a break from CGI-fest, end of the world, In 3D films it is something I greet with open arms. That said, I will be going to see 2012 at some point, so wish me luck.

MTFBWY

I will again start this post with what appears to have become a standard disclaimer for this topic. I’m not a big fan of Apple, I don’t like how they work, or most of what they do, and they seem to like annoying me, and so all of you can now rant about me and my hate and completely ignore what I have to say, which is this. A recent article on Digital trends lead with the headline “Apple’s Portable Gaming Emerges as Main Rival to Nintendo” and I found myself thinking, how can a company with no portable gaming device rival Nintendo at portable gaming?

More than that, how can a company with no games at all, be they portable or not, rival Nintendo? This statement will probably upset people as they throw some number at me saying that’s how many games Apple have on the App store, and I will ignore them. That isn’t what I said. I have said that Apple don’t have a portable gaming device, and they don’t have any games.

There is no Apple Games Studios. They do not make their own games for their own platforms, be it for a iMac/MacBook or for the iTouch/iPhone. I ranted earlier this year about how iPhone gaming was apparently “the future” of gaming and of the points I made then, no first party support, nothing over 99 cents sells and the lack of clear acceptance guidelines, have been addressed.

Now, I wouldn’t go as far as CNet did and call the iPhone the worst phone in the world, that would be far too big a claim, even for me, but I also fail to see Ars’ point about it being able to do both the job of a phone and the job of a portable gaming device well. CNet has some valid points regarding the iPhone’s failings as a phone and there are, as I pointed out, failings as a gaming device.

The iPhone is a smartphone. It’s a phone, it plays music, it goes on the internet and it plays games. the iPod Touch is an MP3 player with online capabilities, and it can play games. My Android phone is a smartphone. It’s a phone, it plays music, it goes on the internet, and it plays games. These are not gaming devices. There is a very distinct difference between a device that can play games and a gaming device.

Apple call their device a “Great Portable Game Player”. I’m not sure whether to agree here or not. The device has a secondary, maybe even tertiary, use as a games playing device. There are some OK-ish games on it, buried under the rubbish, it has some nice features, like multi-touch, accelerometer etc, but with no real controls I question its ability to handle some of the games that could make it great.

So contrary to what some press people may be telling you, Nintendo and Apple are not direct competitors. Apple does not have a real “portable gaming device” on the market. And we can all stop caring about the iPhone/iTouch being “the future.”

MTFBWY

For forty years the same question has been asked. No one seems to have been able to answer it. The man who probably knew died 19 years ago and refused to tell Disney before leaving us. So does anyone know? Someone must. Can you tell me? How to get to Sesame Street?

I’ve used this line before on my blog, but I want to use it again here. The first line, the very first line, of Sesame Street. 40 years ago today.

You’ve never seen a street like Sesame Street. Everything happens here. You’re gonna love it!

For forty years those Muppets, made in the depths of Jim Henson’s mind, have been the very definition of that buzzword that didn’t really exist when they first hit the screens in the US. Sesame Street is Edutainment at its finest, well, unless you live in the UK, in which case apparently it isn’t.

Over the past 40 years Sesame Street has spawned 20 international co-productions, and is seen in over 140 countries (I doubt I can even name that many countries, but Sesame Street could probably teach them to me). That is quite an achievement for a show like Sesame Street. In a time when so many kids shows rely on CGI or animation of some sort, for a show where puppets sing “ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ” and tell us that “C is for Cookie” to be a hit is truly amazing.

The show crossed the Atlantic 18 months after the original launch, and up until 2001 Sesame Street was British TVs, first with HTV, then ITV and finally on Channel 4, but sadly, is no longer shown on these shores. The Irish version is broadcast on BBC in Ireland, but the BBC here never really loved the street where everything happened. They refused it initially because it was seen as authoritarian and a “indoctrinating children”. Apparently they didn’t need it because they had Blue Peter and Play School. I’m not too sure about the “indoctrination”, I still call a “Z” a “zed” not a “zee”.

The BBC won’t be taking up Sesame Street just because it’s turned 40 though. Apparently the home-grown shows like “Tikkabilla” and “Show Me Show Me” are better for our kids. Personally I think this is a shame. It’s all very well supporting our own TV industry, even if we seem to ignore our film industry, and teaching kids English instead of American is a plus, even if it does mean that when I was young I was not allowed to read Dr. Seuss at primary school, but there is something about Sesame Street.

It’s hard to imagine kids growing up not knowing about Elmo, Cookie Monster and Oscar. Big Bird was probably very instrumental in me growing up to be tall, and if you can’t have Bert and Ernie, how will kids ever learn to have fun with rubber ducks. It’s not just the shows though, sure they translate all over the world, and tackle specific issues, take the world’s first HIV Positive Muppet from South Africa for instance, it’s also backed by the Sesame Workshop which does a lot of good around the world.

Whether Sesame Street is on in the UK or not, however, is really of no consequence. With their Youtube account posting videos, their website, and other great things on the net, TV isn’t needed for the fix of Sesame Street you require, and after 40 years, there’s plenty of footage around. DVDs, films, it’s all out there, and kids still know who Elmo is, they still know the Cookie Monster, who now eats fruit, and they can still count, (heh, heh, heh). It would be nice though, especially if we can have a UK franchise. Just think, we could have a binge drinking Muppet, and one in a hoodie.

So happy birthday Sesame Street. Elmo’s still 3 and a half, Grover can still be a super hero, Big Bird is still tall and yellow, and Oscar’s still a grouch. Jim’s voice may have sadly left Ernie and Kermit, but the characters live on, and so does his spirit.

This post was brought to you by the letter C.

MTFBWY

Now count with me. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40! 40 years!

So this is the film based loosely, but not too loosely, on the book by Jon Ronson about the psychic arm of the American military. They are the men of the title, and they just so happen to stare at goats (Yes that’s Capra aegagrus hircus) and try to kill them.

The book is about the use of “New Age” techniques by the US military and how they could apply the paranormal for military purposes. It’s a very good book, and I thoroughly enjoyed it. The film takes the content of the book, the fun anecdotes and such, and puts them in to what is essentially a buddy/road movie with George Clooney, Ewan McGreggor, Jeff Bridges and Kevin Spacey.

Whilst the film and the book both start in the same place, an army general attempting to pass through a wall, they split there as the film changes the book’s author Jon Ronson for Ewan McGreggor’s Bob Wilton. Wilton is a newspaper reporter who is in Kuwait, trying to cross the border into Iraq. Whilst at the hotel he meets George Clooney’s Lyn Cassady and they go on a mission into Iraq. Laughs ensue as they get into and out of trouble, and the story of the Psychic Spies (Or Jedi as they are often referred to) is old in a series of flashbacks.

The Hollywood side of the plot is fairly predictable, and in parts quite boring, but the flashbacks to the First Earth Battalion and their crazy paranormal activities are just as fun and entertaining as they are in the book, even if the use of the Predator has been somewhat revealed in the trailers.

As you can probably tell I am slightly undecided on where to stand with this film. I enjoyed the book, and as such the “real” elements of the story are what I find interesting and the tacked on Hollywood storyline feels less than satisfying. The satire and dark humour give this film something, but that can feel dragged down by the predictable and boring nature of the story. Although I will admit that I took some enjoyment from Ewan McGreggor being taught how to be a Jedi. The man may not be too happy about being known for that role in that sci-fi series, but he is, and he can’t escape it.

This is a film, and films need to make money, so the hollywood-isation is understandable, and in some ways acceptable, so doesn’t fully detract from the fun that can be had watching men try to kill goats just by staring at them. It made me laugh and I did keep watching to the conclusion, even if I could see it coming like a brightly painted rhino.

fans of the book won’t be too disappointed, and there is a film in there to be enjoyed without looking too hard. So yes, by all means go and see it, and remember, some of it is more true than you may think, or want to think. Including the bit about Barney.

MTFBWY

The nice people over at MoretotheGame, who I seem to be plugging far too much, are thinking of bringing a new feature to their avid readers, and because they asked nicely, for once, I am going to join in. But because I’m evil, I’m going to jump the gun and post the article here, before they do, so you all get a sneak preview, and I get… well… not much really. The topic: What game should people play before they die. My contribution: Theme Hospital.

Theme Hospital

There are people who don’t like old games. They would see system requirements like 75MHz processor, 16MB of RAM and Direct X 5, and immediately return the game to the shelf to find the latest GTA, Call of Duty or Halo. Those people are fools and deserve to miss out on the greatness that these games have to offer. Others will pick it up and read the blurb which asks “Can you balance the books and the bedpans?” and decide that any sort of financial balancing act is beyond them. “Design maintain and manage a hi-tech hospital facility?” they would scoff, “Making the most of limited resources and turning cures into cash? Who do you think I am?” They chuckle to their equally idiotic friend. “You’ll be struck by the fun, if you don’t get struck off.” They will guffaw, put the game back in the wrong place and then go off to beat a prostitute over the head and claim that this is the best thing ever. They are fools and should be shot. Twice.

Now, whilst I don’t have a specific problem with GTA (even if the franchise is horribly dead), or CoD, which can offer some fun, even Halo, in all its horrendously overrated glory, can provide moments of fun, they do not bear comparison to the joy offered by a Bullfrog title like Theme Hospital.

Let me take you back to your childhood. When you were young and asked “What is it you want to be when you grow up?” you probably said “Batman” or “Wonder woman”, maybe “Princess” for some of the boys at the back, you might have said you wanted to be a fireman, or a vet. deep down, however, we all know what you meant. Really you wanted to be a hospital administrator. You always wanted the pleasure of choosing who to hire, you wanted to manage details like making sure patients had enough seating, you wanted to ensure you had fire extinguishers ready, enough heating to keep people warm. Make sure there were toilets and a staff room. All the little details. You wanted the chance to entertain visiting VIPs, impress the hospital board and get a promotion.

I can hear you all laughing. You think I’m crazy. There is no way that something like this could be fun. What is this silly man talking about? This isn’t a game I should be playing before I die. Well, the intro video will probably go some way to showing you that this game isn’t all about hard work.

(Video from Youtuber NHJBV)

If you think you are in for just simple diseases, think again. This is a 1997 Bullfrog game, it has humour. Diseases include Bloaty head (which needs popping), Invisibility, Slack Tongue (Which needs chopping off) and baldness (Yes there is a cure!). Your wonderful receptionist will ask people not to die in the corridor, keep their germs to themselves and, of course, telling the morgue patients to be quiet. Even hiring staff members can be fun when you read some of the personality descriptions provided.

There is depth to this game, varying missions, all with different requirements, chances to shoot rats between some levels, and trying to get one up on the other, computer controlled, hospitals, all with familiar names. There is a multi-player option, but that isn’t as easy as it sounds. This was a DOS game, and as such the protocols available in the multi-player patch (Serial Cable, Modem, and IPX/SPX) aren’t really available on modern PCs. There are some work-a-rounds, but none for the more recent OSs, at least that I’ve found. That’s no great loss, and the other patch, the one that makes people pregnant, is still alive and kicking.

So why do I want you all to run a hospital before you die? This game is funny. I don’t just mean that you will snicker a bit at people as you watch them use the toilet, I mean there is a layer of humour here that Bullfrog did well in the games of this era. The game play is great, the challenge really does grow as you progress, and the graphics, while not super-realistic, aren’t too shabby for a game that is now 12 years old.

There are no invading armies (except some rats), there are no guns (except for use on aforementioned rats), there are no prostitutes (at least as far as I know), no zombies (although people can die) and there isn’t and Hot coffee (although people can get pregnant), but this is game in many ways superior to GTA IV, CoD 4, Halo 3, and many other modern games.

This is Theme Hospital. On the PC not the PlayStation. This needs to be played before you die.

MTFBWY

—————————————–

The original content of this post is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial-Share Alike 2.0 UK: England & Wales License. Any trademarks or copyrights relating to Theme Hospital, Bullfrog or EA are the property of the respective trademark and copyright holders. They are used under fair use and no infringing claims are intended.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available upon request, via email, to the author.

The British government’s Intellectual Property Office has recently made its commitment to “reshaping” the current copyright system clear, but in this reshaping has “simplification” just gone too far?

The goals of the government have been made fairly clear, they are that the copyright system should be simplified by asking rights holders to broaden their terms of use, allow non-commercial use by individuals legal without seeking rights holder’s permission, make the enforcement strategy less “muscular”, educate of the consequences for infringement and allow an organisation to licence all works in a category (music, photography, film etc.) whether or not the work is from a person signed up with that organisation or not.

Now, I can agree with the first point. simpler licensing is one reason I release both this blog, and the vast majority of my photographs under the Creative Commons licence (Attribution-Non-Commercial-Share Alike for this blog, Attribution on my Flickr). The re-use of these articles, and my photos, are fairly broad, and I also allow people to contact me if they want to use something outside of that scope. Simple and broad terms, however don’t always solve problems, as I will come to in a moment.

The last point, however, I disagree with completely. We currently have legislation in the UK that means you cannot transfer rights equal to that of the author to anyone else. What the government is proposing, however, is that a “collecting society or other organisation with significant representation” can licence all work of a specific body, even if the original author is not part of that society or organisation. In other words, someone else, who I don’t know, and don’t necessarily agree with, can choose a licence for my content. Simpler than the current system, yes, protecting an author’s work, I would question.

Let me now come back to the first point, and the second on the list, which is allowing personal use without the original author’s permission. You can say that because I publish content on the net, I am just asking for it to be stolen. We live in a world where people have copy and paste, and they don’t understand that what they are doing is wrong. This may be true, and the government intention to “educate” may well go some way to help this, but let me use my work as an example.

This blog has, on the left hand bar, a description of my Creative Commons Licence. This is displayed on every page, next to every post, you cannot miss it. It explains very clearly that the content is released by me, for use under certain terms. It’s not hard to see, it explains that if you want to use this outside the scope I can be emailed, and even gives my address. I recently sent an email to a site hosting content, posted by someone else, that came from my blog. Now, I have no issue with my work being spread, it would be ice to get an email saying it’s being used and where so that I know who is seeing what and where, but this posting breached my licence in several ways. It listed a certain forum (who I had already emailed regarding the article’s use) as the author, and it was not released under a similar licence. I emailed the site hosting this content and asked for clarification of these issues. They chose to remove the article and we all went on with our business.

Now this may seem like a grumpy guy demanding his content isn’t used badly. Whilst this may be slightly true, I didn’t request the article be removed, I asked that the credit be corrected and a Creative Commons Licence notice be made. I also had a problem with the fact that I discovered this through a Google search, and not an email from the person who posted the content.

My photos also suffer from some problems. The government commented on how sometimes images can be difficult to identify. My Flickr account gives my name, allows people to contact me via a Flickr message, a photo comment or email, and clearly states the image licence. Whilst I occasionally receive emails or messages asking to use my photos on X site or Y site, the way I usually find my content is via a “Google alert” I have set up. Usually I have no problem with the use, besides the occasional credit to “Nick Stone”. I usually do my best to contact the site owner, or whoever is using the content, to have the name corrected, although this is sometimes not possible.

The government would like to remove the need to seek permission to seek permission for “personal non-commercial use”. As most people seem to ignore this clause anyway, why bother. I licence my content so that people can use my content how they like, if someone objects to this, why should that need to change?

I like to know what my content means to people. I like to know how my content is being shown, and most of all I like to know that people like what I do. I can’t do that if the only thing I see of my work is an email from google saying that a guy called “Nick Stone” is being credited somewhere, like a Discovery Channel blog, because I know that not even Google will show me everyone using my content.

A further change regarding the use of “orphaned” works, with no identifiable author is being considered to allow, for commercial use without credit, and work that the publisher “could not find” the author for, because somewhere like Facebook has stripped the Meta Data. I would just like to say “no” and save that rant for another day.

So yes, “simplify” the copyright law, educate people, but don’t do it if this means a bad deal for people who work hard to generate content. Oh, and people like me who don’t work so hard. Remember guys, if you want to re-use this post, send me an email, it makes me feel loved.

MTFBWY