some thoughts about .hack

One of the more capturing songs from .hack//sign is  the theme song named after the game in the show's world by which the viewer experience the show.

The TV show backdrop is pre-WoW mmo games such as Dark Age of Camelot, Lineage 2 and Everquest 2. as a saga the .hack utilize the advents of this new games as ways of socializing to explore a particular part of the interaction of technology and society that is  the substitution of human interaction to an imaginary one at first, but also how the dwelling in this cyber arena overtake one life without noticing(be it by the nature of technology to be a utility that always tend to go to the background or the nature of the substitution that the game contextualization can bring). this in turn highlight the artificialness of the experience as the game back drop highlight how one is free to come and go freely without real consequence, but once it has consequence it is queer(in so far as the realization of the viewer). but the artificialness never stays within the realms of being odd to the viewer, the show by bringing it to light aim to show the sense of paradox of how social activity become so isolated in terms of experience.

before delving into the manner by which the show explore the themes lets give a general background. .hack//sign  is a show set in the not so far future where a company named CC corp released a vr computer that took over the world and released a game named "The World"(shortened to R1) the game premise is the usual fare of mmorpg in the time where you go on some pve, hang up in the world and engage with the lore that is hidden within the game world. the show follows a player named "Tsukasa" who got stuck in R1 and a particular bug(or unintended ai) start to follow him and protect him. two players who are caring encounter him (named Bear and Mimiru) and start investigate him, at first they thought he is some event character but soon realized he is a human player who got stuck and try to release him from the game. along the way the bug shelter him and let him cause havoc and put human players in comatose after he pk them and they try to solve it along with the ingame mod-knights.

so how does it go about exploring the themes? first, the main utility is when a human player in some manner stopped the normal interaction of making the game an alternative reality. this is done in the tv show by making a human player  not only engaging the game as a distant activity(that is allowed by "logging off" but living in the game world as part of its very fabric and without being able to escape. one need to notice this happen not because the player wanted to but by accident outside his control and without him being able to do anything about it. for him he just passing by and frustrated. though the show don't just stop there the bug that "joined" him is causing harm to other human players, putting them in comatose whenever they interact. thus the game world stopped being neutral, and it is not because any human agent but an ai that accidently slipped in and the trivialization of the game and vr as a utility.(later on the franchise will play with it in more substantial manner.)

that is enough to ground in the most basic manner to ground the substitution, but where does the artificial nature of the experience come in? as the show start Mimru notice that tsukasa activity is unusual, sure he do some bugs, she is aware of some hackers here and there, but she sees that he have more natural interaction, for example the berries he eat them as if they are food to him, as he can say they are sweet or sour. she sees him doing what could be taken as daily life events, or when he suffer it is as if he is in real pain. this is deneutrlize the game as experience, she is worried or rather at first curious but later on want to help and bring Bear abroad.  which also become worried. then they realize the comatose victims in the real life are victims of his, so there is sense of urgency on one hand but also sense that the game world itself changed in the place it took. they start to explore in the real world, try to find hints about the player identity and so on. on top of this main narrative you constantly see how the main characters have a weird relation where you mostly see them ingame and in manner that is rather obsessive(the op named obsession around this theme in particular).

but the show don't stay on this level for it also show the emptiness that come around. not in blunt fashion, as it is a slow show, but in steady manner.
the Assasin that follow along selfishly for loot(who is most likely a 13 years old in character) constantly hang around an adult Priest who scheme with him in game only to be revealed that the said Priest is more engaged in R1 than her life, but also show how unfulfilling it is as to her it is manner of escape the daily life.

another contrast is by the mod-knight gang. they are the sort of decency cop of the game world hired by the company with a special suit and organization. they are being lead by a Blue priest who is quite weak but her main time is in the world being around rping as the leader of them, so much so that it is her. so much so, when they get disbanded the said priest is lost in R1 but even more lost in the actual world.

however all of those are nothing compared to what Tsukasa represent. Mimiru is curious about Tsukasa because his manner of engagement with R1 seems appealing, she is quite an heavy player. she sees in Tsukasa someone who breath the world which she can only engage externally, it is a sort of envy at first but to the viewer it is in contrast to Tsukasa actual experience, he is alone in the world, can't really engage with other players nor can he take part with the activities. even if he could take part in the intended activities they get dull fast. in order to enhance the distance the ai (Morgana) is trying to jail him within her claws, a weird monster follows him by her order and protect him,  and he even get a chance to play with the world in the unintended manner. but that is not enough and ultimately R1 for Tsukasa is truly a jail and isolating.

to make it clear, the above sub elements work only because this very tension tsukasa represent. for tsukasa become an ideal type and each of the agents see in him something else. Mimiru see in Tsukasa a different sense of R1 which she want yet not  realize what she wants, while you as a viewer can see the place in which she miss the mark. Bear see in Tsukasa a sense of mystery in R1 which later transfer to pity - mystery as he treat tsukasa as a game event at first, some type of lore or so puzzle that unique from the regular activity, but soon he realize the actual happening and see in it the misery. the priest along with the Assassin see in Tsukasa a sort of new challenge compared to the regular pve events they were doing while tsukasa just want to be left alone. and the mods who are overly invested in their rp see in him a nuisance to the order they want to create while for tsukasa at times it is not even in his control but by the control of the ai.

the show reveal all of those tensions by perspective is not being caused by any of the player but by the game world and yet the thing that change is never the game world. they all just happen to fall into there in different path of life with different mindset on what they want from R1, or one may say what they want in their life. yet what they put  investment in, R1, will never be fulfilled as the only reason they think it will be fulfilled is that they are not part of R1(if they were part of R1 they would become Tsukasa who live their dream) and besides R1 itself became something else with an AI that now make it an entity separate in itself that can cause things of its own will.

with that note here are the said lyrics that at least to me invo.
You are here alone again
in your sweet insanity
all to calm, you hide yourself for reality
do you call it solitude? do you call it liberty?
when all the world turns away to leave you lonely

The fields are filled with desires
all voices crying for freedom
but all in vain they will fade away
there's only you to answer you, forever

In blinded mind you are singing
a glorious hallelujah
the distant flutter of angels
they're all too far, too far to reach for you

I am here alone again
in my sweet serenity
hoping you will ever find me in any place
I will call it solitude
when all my songs fade in vain
fly my voice, far away to eternity.

On historicity and laws

after religion, or constitution, start to examine itself historically its can only delineate and make itself weak in slow and agonizing process. without noticing, slowly but steadily, the code describing the principles of laws change its meaning.

at first people can notice that by this understanding something change and point it out. depending on the spirit of their time, namely in how open they are open to the change, so the the understanding of the principles will start to change. secondly as the historical understanding start to build up so a new principles start to arise as facade, creating facade on the previous most sacred. finally after series of changes like this the principles change without recognition and the original tradition which they went out from get more and more forgotten and hidden , all awhile nobody can even notice that the code that guide their life have changed so drastically.

 some might keep the code written or even maintain the lawgivers writings and life, but once the principles changed enough, they would be so far gone to build again.

the less sophisticated way we see it today is in the idea of progress,  so when the liberals go against the past in hope to a better future proudly, they do it through the historical lens, they attack the foundation of the lawgivers in themselves and even challenge the very authority of the tradition as they see in front of their eyes a new, and they would claim better, times ahead. from the conservative it seems they see the same thing only instead of looking on the future, they see the better future as the past as they understand it through the historical lens. all awhile they are not noticing that by the lens they change the very ground they are standing on, as they are not living in the mythical past.

both of the sides end up changing the tradition from within, one try to change the tradition embedded in the civil law through the historical lens but also put new tradition above it which he sets as goal, the other try to understand the tradition of the civil law as well his own unique tradition to some degree and in the process change it. 

On Mazinger Z & the war of modernity

while watching the original Mazinger Z I just realized how fear of war the narrative itself. its will probably fall under over analyze kid show with robots, but I guess its fit my liking for kid shows with robots.

1. The scientist in mecha show have double role, both the bringer of peace and the evil conqueror. in the show its start by presenting the bringer of peace, the grandpa of the main character, Dr. Kabuto, which later on succeed by one of his students who show his discoveries of a new alloy called "Japanimium" in a somewhat adversary of defense and for a better technology. he also build the main mecha in the show used to defend form the evil enemy. on the other side there is Dr. Hell, a rough student of , Dr. Kabuto, who discover an Mycenaean temple with bunch of destructed robots, when they check the records in the temple they find out that the Mycenaean built this robots to war which ultimately ended up destroying themselves. Dr. Hell renew the robots the help of a scientist team with the hidden plan in mind of world domination.
In it we see play with the role of science, both as a defense and bringer of good and help to maintain society, but as bringer of war which connected to unjust, chaos and war. the backdrop in it is of course WW2 and Hiroshima, event which lend echoes throughout much of the mecha world, surely the production as well as Go Nagai are not strangers to the work of Osamu Tezuka or Yokoyama which heavily dealt with such issues in series such as Tetsujin 28th, Tetsuwan Atom, and so on.
2. play on the Classical vs modernity, both in their good and bad, but ultimately lead to highlight the imperfection in them. the evil forces flash out to be originated form the Mycenaean, hence the past. the choice itself is also unique as the specific time have some classical element but its not classical in the classical sense, that is saying its not a prime example to learn from when we usally think on Ancient Greek. Dr. Hell shown constantly in backdrop of greek temple with his mage like stick(which translated erroneously in HK subtitles to crabstick) he both show the past in his sources, imagery, and combined with small touch of anti-religious messages inherited by the European tradition Japan partially absorbed. the focus is on the war in fairly one sided manner but with the images its show more complex image then just the big evil doctor and the dealing itself is with the usage of technology in war.

On the other hand, the good side show as modern city dwellers, blessed with the technology, liberal life and overall peaceful, though behind it lies the danger of the technology. as Dr. Hell is creation of this world, and the main robot, Mazinger Z have his own inner demons, as its embed within itself a demonic uncontrollable force, which can always come out. in fact the opening shot of Dr. Kabuto showing the new alloy to some government and investor like figures also hide such tenets on the role of technology as well as the immediate development for defense. further more when Dr. Hell find the temple its as if he was finding Atlantis, hidden culture that for some reason in Japan took the face of war in more then just Mazinger Z, but also Umi no Triton.
3. Its a bit outside the claim on war but another interesting feature is in the contrast between heroes and villains, the main hero of the show Kouji Kabuto showed as a simple young man who try to help in full-heart and passionately, there is no ambiguity in his aim and overall he pretty naive image, naivety that also contain tacitly danger of lack of knowledge and gullibility. on the other hand the evil main agent, Baron Ashura, is a two-faced "monster" half face male and the other female, in the manga at least he contain certain tragic elements as backstory that slowly build up. In a way its can be connected as if I remember correctly Ashure play similiar role of naivety, only he dragged down to the dark side, though I can't recall completely. a lot of Ashura reflection in the story is on what can be called the war within as its character that in fact contain two and at certain parts, each part of Ashura can disagree with the other, at least from what I recall from the manga and other entries in the Mazinger saga.

Objectivity in news sites in the light of GamerGate

In GamerGate through its progress, a thought was developed that news sites should be objective. this article aim to show that the objectivity which members of GamerGate strive for in the media, transformed into idealized to the point of meaningless form which is not achievable and would only hinder the usage of media as a consumer

The origin of the issue start with the idea of objectivity. in the discussion the word objective, which wasn't necessary the role of the news site to begin with as news article inherently contain analyze  in manner that show clear cut separation but yet linked to facts which are indeed objective.

In writing, the objectivity is more of a scale, in most cases the writer would write based of facts something that is true, but you will always have his own input in it(as a subject write it), whatever he want to insert or not. in the interpretive kind, which is practiced in journalism as form of recording events(in some sense pretty close to historiography today), just the mere "x happened" or "x gonna be released" is not enough as there is always context to the release. yes, there is the factual sources as evidently, it is based on real event, which in fact happen or gonna happen in the case of news, but the core of the writing need to give context or interpretation on what does it mean with connection to other events just as much, and in the case of news site its can contain possible interpretation on the future.

Otherwise, as the alternative GamerGate's advocates want, its would even more obfuscate the subjective realm of the writer, and indeed the current way of conduct operate as its operate in order to combat it, in many cases such kind of writing include at first the clear cut events being reported as well clear separated part on what the interpretation of the writer, which include how does such news arrive today by connection to other events or phenomena, and as news mainly report on the present to near future its include views on where does it lead.

Example of it can be seen in the most questionable sites such as Kotaku and Polygon, which had a lot of backlash in recent months. in their news articles never really claimed otherwise nor did any other site, they always had section with the facts which is the overview or in other words the objective part, as well the interpretation for such events, in most cases separated with mark like "its could be seen", "as I see it" and other derivatives that declare "this part is not factual but the analysis" in the end.

The fact the sites reports have subjective elements its not far from the role of the media to interpret and in fact I would say that its derive to indistinguishable from its  primary role, to report about the present and the possibilities in the near future from this present as they are the one knowledgeable and have time to research as well develop a view to judge by. with the analogy to history, its close to the way historian develop a way to research, hence way to look on the phenomena he researching.

such view of objectivity also leaked in even more flawed manner to review, which members of GamerGate advocated to striving for 100% objective review, in other words, overview, when in fact such notion isn't even the basis and intention of  review to begin with.

ultimately the review will strive to give a image to the consumer on how the game work as a unity, view that inherently subjective by its role and how its operated by. its OK to disagree with review as in Bayonetta 2 or more recently with the backlash against Hatred. but to silence the writer would mean the death of the review and transforming it to a mere overview which would still contain the writer opinion only in far more hidden manner.

To exemplify what I mean by it, review meant to be more on the subjective analytic side of the objectivity scale, in it the main content its not the mere facts, if we compare it to math "1+1=2", but what does the fact means and what they create, hence if I add  unit of "sheep" with another unit of "sheep" I will have two different  unit of the kind "sheep" which will create a herd. similarly to the analogue  the review aim to analyze why the gameplay working or not working; what is the visual appeal or the lack of in the game, not just fidelity but under such category there is also the consistency of the theme, its connection to interactivity and more connection that inherently subjective.

Furthermore on the obfuscation of transforming the review to just an overview, not only contain within it just objective facts as evidently different people will focus in it on different things. and in itself without explanation and the analysis would be meaningless as a guide to the consumer, as just saying "the graphics look outdated" or even "the graphical elements can confuse in x,y,z instances" its not enough as the inherent subjective element that stand in its core is not explained and in fact even more dangerously in such style of objective report remain hidden as if its not there.


Honestly, I don't see the appeal of objective review, When I buy a game I don't see how an overview can help me decide, as its lack any context or explanation. behind such ideas I would argue that lie exactly what GamerGate as a platform that advocate to openness  can be seen as form of censorship for opinion some group of gamers don't like(like in the case of Bayoneta 2 review). pretty similar to the straw-man "SJW" which try to kill any voice that don't agree to its worldview . furthermore its hide the core problem, which not discussed as much here but I may elaborate in the future, that the news used as a long hand of advertisement, and therefore can be less critical and help to gamers as consumer. something that can be seen since the early video game reviews newspaper which were nothing more then a toy advertisement block. the recent case of Kotaku not invited, exemplify it to me even more that such view didn't change under this foundation, nor did I see indication of less bribery in the form of press kit, rewards for bias reports(like in Shadow of Mordor if I remember correctly) and review guides, which give foundation to far bigger problems then just a "SJW" review/

Game as art

 The subject of games as art, art as media with deeper meaning, is a long heated debate. The debate have multiply facades, staring with the terminology itself and with the question “What is a game?”, question that till these day perplexing many due to the different world and ways to communicate that each game present within itself.

Although terminology can be hard, it is almost a non-issue.  Answering this question might help to progress the discussion, but its clearly apparent that one clear definition can't be achieved, due to the inherent nature of the subject. It seems much as open to change, both by the perception of the player, and by the creators.who unlike other mediums have far more open space in the design of the message.

The second issue people struggle with is the way the message being conveyed. unlike other art forms, the message portrayed in the game is far more subtle and less focused. even if it tries to be more apparent, its interactive nature makes the language  of the message harder to recognize by known tools form previous media, such as cinema, as they're inherently different.

This interactivity and direct player involvement so inherent to the game as media that none of the other media forms can help explaining the message themselves, and when looking for it, there need to be look within the game itself and after it, see how does outsiders media help it.

Furthermore just like in paintings, music and other media we consume, not every piece try to have a meaningful message. Its might have some message, but definitely not something as deep or even engaging. People, who claim that every game has meaning often get a rightful response that certain titles lack this deeper meaning being talked about in the overall premise.

That of course not saying there is no message. Its might be insignificant one or pointless, but every game does have some story to it, and some goals that drive the players. The difference tends to happen because the interactive nature, which change for example the story from closed story, with begging, conflict and ending to open and forming story. This can be seen even in the simple games such as “Pong” or “Tetris”, which often come as an example. The story within them is the progress of the players, and through it, the game invoke many emotions in order to push the player just a little further.

I do see where people against this look are coming from, especially through the mangled use of “art” in such a pointless manner from many critique, which use the term just to attack it on the cultural level but without giving clear indication on the deeper questions that need to be ask, within such definition.

What I can't see is the attempt to reduce games to a meaningless activity. Yes, not every game have definite meaning, and even if its have some meaning, its can turn to be more on the relative to the person. But in all cases people don't play games just to play games, we have a drive to play through them, its can be from the story and character interaction or even to the challenge, and the personal improvement in the mechanics compare to one self or the community. And statements such as “Game is only entertaining\ for fun” or the general reduction of the merit are just as fallacious and missing the point game.

In the end, the discussion around the issue its not inherently bad even if some use it, and its certainly can expand the look we have on games and the ways we can evaluate them. A more moderate look can certainly help to make a more fruitful investigation and less to pollute the initial look from non-interactive media.

Umi no Triton - Review

Umi no Triton

I recently finished the  series after long pause I not really remember the start as much but I will  try to outline as how I remember.

The series called Umi no Triton and released in 1972, the original manga made by Tezuka Osamu(Hi no Tori, Tetsuwan Atom, Black Jack)

Story

Umi no Triton is  series about Triton, kid that for all he know lived as normal human, he could swim for long and was a bit different in general so everyone picked on him but he lived his normal  village life.
One day awaken his army to conquer the sea  and attacked the village by now Triton started to find about his history and about his family.
after realizing that the enemy targeted him he leave to a journey in fear of endangering the village and to save the ocean.

throughout the journey he reveal more about his  past and his connection and what happened to Atlantis, fight different fish enemies.

Availability 

The only release available is based on HK subs(Chinese bootleg), while I've seen HK subs that reach lower level in terms of V\A quality and translation its still pretty terrible.
get the point across but in bad manner and with awful amount of inappropriate curses and sex hints.
Actually the main reason I watched it with lengthy pauses but as I said there is bunch of HK subs that even worst and can get sillier .

Opinion

The series heavily relies on the MoTW but do it in  a good way, each episode does expand characterization and advances the story, the bosses feel different enough in terms of style.
While its could be childish the message feel like something that can reach anyone which I guess similar to other  Tezuka Osamu manga and anime adaption.

The animation for the show sort of standard to the time, In terms of art anime still felt to me like part of the transition into color so coloring a bit wonky to the characters (not in Tiger Mask levels but  a bit like Getter Robo and Mazinger Z) , the background look fairly intimidating and provide great atmosphere of exploration, I espcially like Poseidon statue design which every time its pop out I felt quite jumpy.
The movement itself could be choppy but its TV series and you except that for certain degree.

The sound is ok in terms of OST and usage of it but not something that memorable, the main theme usage done extremely well to enhance the show and great in itself.

ניקוד במשחקים

הרבה משחקים אוהבים לכלול ניקוד כחלק מהמשחק, במיוחד במשחקים הקלילים יותר.
זה אלמנט שקל להכניס בתאוריה, הוא נותן מדד לכמה השחקן טוב ואפשר לקשר אותו בצורה יותר קלה למכניקות אחרות ועל הנייר זה באמת נשמע כמו רעיון טוב אבל מה שהרבה משחקים נכשלים לעשות זה לגרום לו ליהיות חלק מהמשחק.

מבחינה של משחקים ניקוד זה תמיד היה אלמנט חשוב ובא בצורות שונות אבל משהו שאנשים שוכחים זה למה?
שאתה משחק בכל משחק ספורט, כן יש ניקוד בין אם זה מספר השערים שהובקעו בכדורגל, כמות הרצים שהצליחו לעשות סיבוב בבייסבול, סלים בכדורסל או משחקי COIN OP שהיו מערכות שלמות סביבם שקשורים באופן ישיר לרמת קושי של הריצה והסיכון שהשחקן לוקח.
אבל מה שמשותף לכולם זה העובדה שהניקוד לוקח חלק מרכזי במשחק, בכדורגל או כדורסל כל הרעיון של שער בא ממימד אסטרטגי וביצועי של איך הצלחת להתגבר על הגנות האויב על השטח ולהבקיע את הגול או את הסל, כל המשחק סובב סביב הניסיונות להתקיף, להתחמק מהגנות היריב שתמיד מפריע ולא לתת לכדור להחטף מהקבוצה שלך ובשביל באמת להצליח.
בבייסבול הניקוד מבוסס על הטכניקה שלך ושל הקבוצה באופן ישיר בין אם את הזורק את הכדור והטכניקה של הזריקה והמשחק מוחות שלך בין החובט ולהפך.
אבל מה שיהיה קשור בכל דוגמא זה ההעובדה שלשחקן יש שליטה לניקוד, הניקוד זה לא רק כמה כדורים הצלחת לחטוף או כמה אויבים הרגת אלא איך, בספורט אין באמת צורך במערכת מסובכת לניקוד ברוב המקרים אבל זה בגלל שהאלמנט האסטרטגי מפשט ומכסה את הפער.

ברמה של משחקי מחשב זה בעיקר בא ממכונות ארקייד אשר היה בהם מכניקות יחסית פשוטות בבסיס ככה שכן היה אפשר לבחון איך השחקן הצליח אבל בין היתר היה בהם מערכות, לפעמים מוסבכות פי כמה למשחקים, בהרבה מהמקרים היו קשורים באופן ישיר לכמה השחקן העלה את הדירוג הקושי ולקח סיכונים.
משחק כמו Darius Gaiden נגיד היה די ישיר כמו רוב המשחקי יריות לרוחב אבל כלל כמה אלמנטים בשביל שלשחק לניקוד באמת יהיה מעניין:
1. העלת רמת הקושי עי לשדרג את הנשק הראשי בסוף שלב גורמת להעלת רמת הקושי עם כמות יריות, כמות אויבים ויריות.

2. אתה יכול לתפוס בוסים באמצע שלב, דבר די מסוכן  כי אתה חייב לירות בנקודה ספציפית, תקבל בונוס ניקוד די גדול אבל זה גם יעלה את רמת הקושי לאורך המשחק בנוסף לסיכון.

הקישור של הניקוד זה באופן ישיר לאיך אתה משחק, מתכנן את המסלול שלך בין העץ שלבים והעלת רמת הקושי בכל שלב ובסך הכול הקישור בין הניקוד לאסטרטגיה והטכניקה של השחקן ישירה.
אתה רוצה להשיג יותר ניקוד כי ככה אתה משחק יותר טוב ויותר מבין את המשחק ומתכנן את עצמך

או נגיד  DoDonPachi  גם משחק די ישיר מבחינת מערכת ניקוד של Chain ואיסוף של חפץ שנותן למשחק עיניין ביחד עם העיצוב שלבים, הניקוד מראה כמה אתה טוב מבחינת תכנון המסלול והביצוע שלו והעיצוב שלבים באמת מאפשר לך את זה.
לעשות Chain מלא לשלב זה דבר מספק שאתה רוצה לעשות למרות שזה ממש קשה.

Giga Wing גם היה עם מערכת ניקוד די מעניית שהתבססה על להחזיר את הכדורים עם מגן שנטען, המשחק מעודד אותך לנסות תזמונים שונים וזוויות של החזרה בשביל איסוף קל אבל מקסימלי וזה די פתוח לך לחקור ולהתעמק.
בדכ ככל שתחזיר יותר טוב ככה יותר סיכוי שתעבור.

הבעיה מתחילה שמשחקים עברו שינוי או המטרה של הניקוד נשכחה.
ב- Wolf 3d באמת עיניין מישהו אם  הוא ניקד ממש גבוה? אותי אישית זה לא עיניין אף פעם.
מה שכן עיניין אותי זה למצוא את הסודות, להרוג את האויבים ולעבור את הבוסים שהיו מספקים, הניקוד היה שם רק בשביל ליהיות שם ולהגיד כמה גביעים או מה שז הלא יהיה שהיה צריך לאסוף\איזה משהו רנדומלי עם ההריגות שאף פעם לא התקשר לכלום, משהו שברוב המקרים רק האט את המשחק ולא היה קשור וזה סתם היה שם והעמיס אלמנטים על המשחק.

WOLF3D דוגמא טובה לתופעה של המעבר למרות שפחות באה לידי ביטוי היום, אבל עדיין זה לא משהו שהתשנה יותר מדי.
אפילו היום אפשר למצוא מדי פעם איזה FPS שדוחף ניקוד בסוף קמפין עפ' מספר לא ידוע של גורמים ובלי הקשר, זה לא פוגע באופן ישיר אבל זה לא מוסיף ומיותר, או המספר הרנדומלי שמופיע אחריי כל מטרה במשחק

גם במשחקי אסטרטגיה היה את זה ברמה מסוימת עם הסטאטים בסוף קרב שאתה מסתכל עליהם ולא אומרים לך כלום או עוזרים לך לנתח.
המשחק גם ככה כל כך ממוקד באלמנט האסטרטגי, של בניית מחנה וצבא, איסוף משאבים וכל זה התנקז בסופו של דבר אל איך  אתה ניצלת את הצבא והמשאבים, לראות נתונים על כמה עץ האויב אסף לא באמת ישנו לי כי הנתונים האלה תלויים בכל כך הרבה דברים וכל כך פתוחים  מבחינת מה השפיע אליהם שרק לראות את הקרב באמת יוכל לעזור לי להכניס את זה להקשר.

הבעיה הכי גדולה שמצאתי זה במשחקי "Arcade" של היום(או לפחות ההגדרה של זה היום).
כמעט כל משחק פלאש או Indie שיצא לי לשחק כלל ניקוד ברמה כלשהי, ברוב המקרים הניקוד היה שם כי זה קל לעשות ניקוד על כל אויב שמת בהם, אבל מבחינת השפעה וקישור של הניקוד על הגיימפליי זה לא היה קיים.

הרבה מהם כן מתבססים על משחקי Arcade וניקוד זה היה חלק מאוד מרכזי מההעולם הזה אבל ברוב המקרים הניקוד כמעט ברמה של המערכת ניקוד הלא קיימת של 1942, היא שמה אבל רק ליופי ולא באמת משנה לשחקן או למשחק, ברוב המקרים אין במשחקים את הרמת קושי של 1942 ואז הכל נופל.
האלמנט החשוב של המשחק שבאמת הרבה מהההשאבות והרצון של השחקן באה ממנו יוצא שטוח ודל ולא משנה כמה יהיה ערכי הפקה גבוהים הוא תמיד יפגע בזה במקום כלשהו.

זה משהו שחשוב מאוד למשחק במימד הכי בסיסי(להכניס את מה שהופך את השחקן טוב באלמנטים השונים של המשחק למספר ונוסחא ובאמת לחבר הכל לחבילה אחת). אם טיפה חשיבה אני בטוח שהיוצר היה יכול לחשוב על דרך לקשר את הניקוד למשחק באופן ישיר מעבר להרגת X אויבים וכל אויב מביא לך Y ניקוד ויוצר נוסחא שבאמת ברורה ונותנת מקום לכל אלמנט מהמשחק אבל משום מה זה איכשהו תמיד מרגיש כמו משהו שפיספסו בשלבי בסיס.