The Storyteller

I’ve been on a bit of a Gaiman reading kick recently. Right near the beginning of GRaBaW, I talked a bit about Neil Gaiman, and I’m pretty sure I may have dropped one or two hints about how he was my favorite author.

“Neil Gaiman (@neilhimself on Twitter) is one of my absolute heroes, and probably my favorite author of all time (you’re certainly going to see more from him on here!)”

*Ahem*. Well, in the last few weeks, I’ve made it through a couple more of his books that I had yet to read - one older, one brand new. Sidenote: it is my continuing goal to get through everything he’s written. Given that I claim him as my favorite author, it seems pretty deplorable not to do so. But that’s one for next year, as I think GRaBaW merits a bit more variety.





First, there was Stardust, first published in 1998. Since it was made into an excellent film in 2007, this is usually my go-to reference when describing Gaiman to people who haven’t heard of him. Unfortunately, people who haven’t heard of him seem to also be people who didn't see Stardust. Which is doubly sad.

I’ve always very much enjoyed the film adaptation, but had never got to reading the book. I heard from friends that it was significantly different from the film, so I thought I was prepared for this - but, as it turns out, I really wasn’t.

At their cores, both the film and the books are fairy tales and share many elements in theme and content - but it’s similar to the difference between the slightly fluffy things that many people now consider fairy tales to be and the harsh reality of the Grimms stories. I won’t say that Stardust was ‘sanitised’ for the big screen, but it was definitely made more palatable to a wider film audience - with some dramatic action scenes added in, and some of the more interesting side adventures expunged. I will say that the film was worth it for [film spoilers in link] Robert De Niro alone, though.

If you enjoyed the film, read the book - it’s better. If you didn’t enjoy the film, read the book. It’s better.






Gaiman’s newest work, The Ocean at the End of the Lane, released just a few weeks ago, has been getting a lot of attention and prompting an interesting range of reactions (mostly adulation). Those I know who read it before me had some interesting takes - mostly, they were unsure precisely what to make of it. Now that I’ve finished, I understand how they feel.

The protagonist of Ocean is an unnamed, timid boy of seven years. The novel is written from his perspective, and the relative simplicity of the writing made a narrator who seemed oddly heartbreaking, though I still cannot entirely articulate why.

It is hard to separate the protagonist from Gaiman himself. Is this meant to be difficult? Probably less so than I think, but the parallels between the two are so strongly inbuilt that I found them next to impossible to ignore. This was not helped by the fact that I listened to much of it in audiobook format - read by Gaiman himself.

I’m still not sure what to make of The Ocean at the End of the Lane. It actually feels like a very simple book - and the fact that it started life as a novella makes complete sense. The story that unfolds is relatively straightforward in outline, but is permeated with that nebulous magic of Gaiman’s universe. The relatively simple writing underscores this. The story is told through the eyes of a child, and that makes the stakes feel so high, when the drama and pain is so personal.

The best advice I can give about Ocean is - if you’re thinking of reading it, do so, and form your own opinion. Reviews and other people’s opinions always only get you so far, and I think that’s doubly true with this book. If you haven’t read any other Gaiman, there are definitely more accessible and imagination-capturing places to start, but for Gaiman fans, this is a must.

I am intrigued to see that Gaiman is now working on his own game - Wayward Manor. As many people have pointed out ‘just because he’s a great writer, doesn’t mean he knows how to make a great game’, and that’s true, but as he himself points out in the linked video, he is a storyteller. It doesn’t mean the game will be great, but I honestly don’t expect it to be anything less than a wholly compelling story.

We’re coming into week 31 as I write this, and I’m currently at 32 books down, which is an excellent feeling. Still have a full 20 more to go, but at this point, that doesn’t seem so bad.


Fragile Things - Neil Gaiman (2006)
The Night Circus - Erin Morgenstern (2011)
The Revolution of Saint Jone - Lorna Mitchell (1988)
Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy - John Le Carré (1974)
I Can Make You Hate - Charlie Brooker (2012)
Looking For Jake and Other Stories - China Miéville (2005)
The Pillars of the Earth - Ken Follett (1989)
The Bloody Chamber - Angela Carter (1979)
Jobs* - Walter Isaacson (2012)
The Plague - Albert Camus (1947)
Ready Player One* - Ernest Cline (2011)
Slaughterhouse Five - Kurt Vonnegut (1969)
The Good Man Jesus and the Scoundrel Christ - Phillip Pullman (2010)
Brave New World - Aldous Huxley (1931)
Storm Front* - Jim Butcher (2000)
Anansi Boys - Neil Gaiman (2005)
Fool Moon* - Jim Butcher (2001)
Iron Man: Extremis - Warren Ellis (2006)
Ultimate Thor Vol.1 - Hickman, Pachego & Vines (2010)
How To Eat Out - Giles Coren (2001)
How To Be A Woman - Caitlin Moran (2011)
In The Garden of Beasts* - Erik Larson (2011)
Pirate Cinema - Cory Doctrow (2012)
Fahrenheit 451 - Ray Bradbury (1953)
The Long Earth - Terry Pratchett & Stephen Baxter (2012)
The Illustrated Man* - Ray Bradbury (1951)
The Long War - Terry Pratchett & Stephen Baxter (2013)
The Player of Games - Iain M Banks (1988)
Ender's Game - Orson Scott Card (1985)
Stardust - Neil Gaiman (1998)
The Knife of Never Letting Go* - Patrick Ness (2008)
The Ocean at the End of the Lane* - Neil Gaiman (2013)

Currently Reading:

Facing Violence - Sgt. Rory Miller
The Hunger Games - Suzanne Collins
Terra* - Mitch Benn

The Player of Ender's Game

Two books following a common theme this week - and one that is very dear to my heart indeed. I didn’t intentionally stack these up thus, but I got through both The Player of Games (Iain M Banks) and Ender’s Game (Orson Scott Card), two classic sci-fi novels which I’ve somehow managed not to read so far in my life.

The Player of Games is actually the second novel in the late Iain M Banks’ Culture series. I’ve been meaning to read some Iain Banks sci-fi for years - and this was recently brought up again by the sad news of his cancer and recent death. I’ve read novels he’s written under his ‘Iain Banks’ name, but never ‘Iain M Banks’. The Culture series comes highly recommended, but several people encouraged me to start with Player rather than Consider Phlebas, the series’ first novel.

I was certainly not disappointed. This is the first ‘hard’ sci-fi I’ve read for quite a while, where I really felt that the setting was something so ‘other’ as to require getting your head around to appreciate. In the Cuture, Banks created a society which, at leisure, really does seem to be a credible Utopia (readers of the other books may have information that contradicts this, but I’m only going on what I have seen!), even twenty years after the novel was written.

The novel focuses on Jernau ‘Morat’ Gurgeh, a famous and extremely talented Culture game player (the title ‘hero’, if he can be considered such), who is experiencing feeling increasingly disaffected with his lot in life - in spite of, and in fact due to, the comfort and ease of life in the Culture.

“...the true gambler needs the excitement of potential loss, even ruin, to feel wholly alive.”

“The game’s the thing. That’s the conventional wisdom, isn’t it? The fun is what matters, not the victory. To glory in the defeat of another, to need that purchased pride, is to show that you are incomplete and inadequate to start with.”

“The individual is obsolete. That’s why life is so comfortable for us all...No one person can have any real effect anymore.”

This disaffection prompts a few erratic turns in Gurgeh’s behaviour, until, finally, the chance of a true, meaningful challenge is dangled in front of him. Everything unfolds from here, and delivers with increasing satisfaction.

I’d recommend this to even those who are not fans of ‘traditional’ science fiction. The setting requires a small amount of getting your head around to truly understand the motivations of the Culture characters, and where their perspective is routed - maybe this is something you already have if you’ve read the first book, I’m not sure. But the book is extremely compelling, and every payoff satisfying.

Ender’s Game has a very different pace and structure, but I found almost as enjoyable. There are some ongoing controversies ongoing with the author, Orson Scott Card. I say ‘controversies’; I actually don’t think it’s all that controvertial - Scott-Card is a bigotted dick - but I remain of the opinion that we should be able to separate artists from their art. There is a more important question raised around the upcoming film adaptation of Ender’s Game (with Harrison-freaking-Ford!), but I digress...

Ender’s Game tells the story of Andrew ‘Ender’ Wiggin, an exceptionally talented tactician being hand-reared to apparently defend humanities future from the alien race known as the ‘buggers’. Told almost entirely from the six-year old Ender’s perspective, with a few teasers at the start of each chapter pointing to the bigger picture, the story unfolds with Ender being put through Battle School, to test his abilities and develop him to become the commander they need.

I don’t want to go into too much detail for fear of spoiling things, but it’s a really interesting analysis of the psychology of strategy - to such an extent that it’s recommended reading for various ranks of the U.S. Marine Corps. It’s a short and easy read, so definitely think this is worth picking up.

Ender’s Game is actually intended as a short introduction to a longer series of novels with an apparently very different scope and nature. I’m told that the rest of the series is interesting, if less worthwhile. I’m trying to avoid getting locked into too many series at the moment - which is frustrating, as I’ve read some very strong openings (or seconds, in the case of The Player of Games), but I want to keep a bit of variety going on right now.

Well, that’s all for now. I’m managing to stay just ahead of the curve, currently on 31 books right at the start of week 30 - so expect a couple more updates soon.

Fragile Things - Neil Gaiman (2006)
The Night Circus - Erin Morgenstern (2011)
The Revolution of Saint Jone - Lorna Mitchell (1988)
Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy - John Le Carré (1974)
I Can Make You Hate - Charlie Brooker (2012)
Looking For Jake and Other Stories - China Miéville (2005)
The Pillars of the Earth - Ken Follett (1989)
The Bloody Chamber - Angela Carter (1979)
Jobs* - Walter Isaacson (2012)
The Plague - Albert Camus (1947)
Ready Player One* - Ernest Cline (2011)
Slaughterhouse Five - Kurt Vonnegut (1969)
The Good Man Jesus and the Scoundrel Christ - Phillip Pullman (2010)
Brave New World - Aldous Huxley (1931)
Storm Front* - Jim Butcher (2000)
Anansi Boys - Neil Gaiman (2005)
Fool Moon* - Jim Butcher (2001)
Iron Man: Extremis - Warren Ellis (2006)
Ultimate Thor Vol.1 - Hickman, Pachego & Vines (2010)
How To Eat Out - Giles Coren (2001)
How To Be A Woman - Caitlin Moran (2011)
In The Garden of Beasts* - Erik Larson (2011)
Pirate Cinema - Cory Doctrow (2012)
Fahrenheit 451 - Ray Bradbury (1953)
The Long Earth - Terry Pratchett & Stephen Baxter (2012)
The Illustrated Man* - Ray Bradbury (1951)
The Long War - Terry Pratchett & Stephen Baxter (2013)
The Player of Games - Iain M Banks (1988)
Ender's Game - Orson Scott Card (1985)
Stardust - Neil Gaiman (1998)
The Knife of Never Letting Go* - Patrick Ness (2008)

Currently Reading:

Facing Violence - Sgt. Rory Miller
The Ocean at the End of the Lane - Neil Gaiman

App of the Week: XCOM

This would totally have been my App for last week if I'd had time to write it up (and one of the reasons I didn't have time was that I was playing on this app...)

XCOM: Enemy Unknown is a 2012 strategy game based on the earlier XCOM and UFO games. I played XCOM for the first time earlier this year, when it was finally made available on Mac, and was instantly hooked. Your goal is to defend earth against increasingly overwhelming odds as a powerful and technologically advanced alien race invade.

Your time is split between high-level base management, setting research projects, managing the engineering team building items and facilities, and trying to mitigate the general panic which breaks out from alien activity. The rest of the time, you command your squads in turn-based combat against the aliens, with a variety of objectives.

XCOM launched on iPad a few weeks ago, and it makes the jump to tablet VERY well. It's pretty much perfectly designed for a touchscreen (with a few minor annoyances, but I think most of those come from being used to the desktop version). Pretty much all of the original game has made it over intact.

XCOM is addictive partly because it is HARD. There are different options for difficulty, but the fact is that incautious tactics at any difficulty will get your soldiers killed, undoing your hard work in training them, failing you missions, and bringing you closer to losing the game. There is a real sense of working against the odds - the aliens start out vastly better equipped than you, and only seem to continue to possess all the unfair advantages as the game marches on. So when you do execute some excellent tactics that destroys them without taking any damage to your squad, you feel real elation.

For an iPad App, XCOM ain't cheap, coming in a whopping £13.99. I'm pretty sure that's the most I've spent on any one app, definitely a game, but it does feel worth it. This is a full-blown AAA gaming title  which just happens to have come over to a tablet. If this sounds like your thing (and, as ever, it's not for everyone), seriously consider picking this up. That said, as with most apps, it will inevitable go on sale at some point, so you could consider waiting. Or pick it up on another platform. I'm not picky. But you won't regret having played this game. Until you're sobbing in the corner that your squad, which you named after all your pet cats, have been brutally killed by Sectoids.

https://itunes.apple.com/gb/app/xcom-enemy-unknown/id639544885?mt=8

Gaming Articles

More posts on the way soon, both on GRaBaW and gaming, but in the meantime, I came across a couple of quite nice articles concerning both video and tabletop games, which may be of general interest. 

First - a Rock Paper Shotgun interview with the mighty Charlie Brooker, on his history with videogames, and how they (somewhat inadvertently) made his career. 

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/07/15/gaming-made-me-charlie-brooker-part-1/

Second - a nice introduction to board gaming on The Dread Gazebo ('So You Want To Be A Board Gamer'). http://dreadgazebo.net/intro-to-board-gaming-part1/

Pandemic (2013 Edition)

In the first of my reviews of some specific games, I'm looking at an all-time classic: the award-winning Pandemic. 

Pandemic 2013

Publisher: Z-Man Games

Players: 2-4 (five with expansion)

Play Time: 30-40 mins

Pandemic is a co-operative strategy board game in which players take the role of an elite, disease-fighting unit from the Center for Disease Control (CDC) in Atlanta. Using a unique set of special abilities, the team must work together, travelling the globe, treating infections, and conducting research to prevent a series of deadly diseases spreading into a global Pandemic.

I picked up Pandemic a week or so ago, along with the 'On The Brink' expansion. I had heard a lot about it, and had high expectations - which were easily met. My first impression was just how good the game looked - a lot of work has gone into improving various pieces and designs for this 2013 edition.

A large, but manageable number of components (plus: petri dishes!)

Gameplay

Pandemic is a very simple game to learn, and pretty quick to play. Adopting winning strategy and tactics, however, is much more challenging! There is enough scope to vary the difficulty to remain fun and challenging for veterans and newbies alike.

Each turn, a player moves their character, driving or flying round the globe, generally focussing on limiting the damage the diseases are doing. Then, they draw two cards from the Player Deck. These are generally helpful things: city cards, which you need to collect in order to cure the diseases, but which can also be used for fast travel or constructing research centres; or action cards, special one-off but significant advantages. After this, they reveal a number of cards from the Infection Deck, and mark the resultant spread of the disease on the board. 

The complications come in the form of Outbreaks and Epidemic cards. Outbreaks occur when disease in a city has reached saturation point, and spreads out to neighbouring cities (bringing you one step closer to losing the game). Epidemic cards are the fly in the ointment of the Player Deck. When drawn, they speed up the infection rate, and cause revealed city cards to be shuffled and placed on top of the deck. This speeds the game towards its sweaty, fevered conclusion. 

I LOVE these mechanics. The simple-yet-elegant Epidemic mechanic causes the same cities to recur dangerously regularly, presenting an immediate and worrying threat. The one upside is that it at least helps you determine your current threat level, as you know which cards go back on top. The outbreaks can cause chain reactions, which is usually a very quick way to lose the game suddenly. 

Challenge

I've mentioned losing the game a few times. As ever with cooperative games, it's you pitted against the game, and the game is holding all the cards. Too many outbreaks, over-wide spread of one disease, or drawing all of the player cards, cause you to lose. To win, you just need to cure all four diseases. It's that simple. 

The challenge comes in acquiring enough cards of the correct colour, and getting them in the hands of one players. The restrictions on hand size and passing cards around make this difficult, but not too frustrating (without this, the game would simply be too easy). The difficulty is scalable, as you can set the number of epidemic cards in the player deck at the start of the game. Four for beginners, five for normal, up to seven for Legendary.

The challenge actually scales really well - adding more players means that you receive fewer cards at the start of the game. You have more people to control and manage outbreaks across the board, but it's much harder to get the right colour cards into one person's hands to cure the diseases quickly enough. 

The 'On The Brink' expansion adds a few cool ways to ramp up the challenge, such as unexpected disease behaviour, a fifth, mutating disease, or a 'Bio-Terrorist' - one player working against the group to spread a new disease. I haven't really had the chance to try out most of these, but they look to change things up enough to keep the challenge high (if you need it!).

Pretty board, doomed world.

Social

Pandemic is a nice social game. It's easy to learn, quick to set up, and can be played in easily less than an hour. I find that more casual game players, are, understandably, less keen to learn and play some of the epic 3-4 hour 'big box games' (love them though I do!), but Pandemic hits the sweet spot of being suitable for just about everyone. 

The cooperative aspect is always a big tick in this area. Since everyone is working together, new players aren't trying to hold their own against more experience ones. People also strategise as a group, meaning that it's more relaxed, and a bit easier to chat during the game. 

The one downside to this is that there's little to stop experienced players dictating everyone's moves. This pretty much defies the point of the game, though, so I think most reasonable players just won't do this. It's fine to plan together and make suggestions, but everyone has to have their own agency as a player, or you may as well just be playing it solo (though that is surprisingly fun!).

Overall

Pandemic is a very well-crafted game, with some simple but powerful mechanics that give it a real challenging edge with lots of replay value. This is definitely something that both seasoned gamers and those that prefer casual games can enjoy together.

Seriously, the game has won so many awards for a reason...  This is definitely worth picking up, or finding a friend who owns a copy, so you can lose together in style.

Who's It For?
Pretty much everyone!

The Good
Simple, quick game which is accessible to all.

The Bad
You will lose a lot, and want to keep playing. Okay, so that's not actually a negative, but it's really hard to come up with one for this game.

Rating

(Five petri dishes, out of a possible five)


If you want to see more on Pandemic, check out the Tabletop episode:

The Long War

In a rare piece of reading consistency, I followed up my reading of The Long Earth immediately with the sequel - The Long War (on my shiny new Kindle, mwhaha). This is partly down to the quality of the first one, but also because I wanted to read it with the Pratchett/Baxter author talk still fresh in my mind.

The Long War is pretty consistent in both quality and style with the first one. The theme of an exploration novel which came out so strongly in the first one is still very prominent. At times, it actually gives off a very Star Trek vibe - not something I want to go into too much (discover it for yourself), but I'm sure I can't be the only one to have found this.

The strength of the setting is still very obvious. Not too many new elements are introduced to shake up the formula. Since the book is set a decade further down the line, it's more of a continuation of the 'thought experiment' of how the phenomenon of stepping affects humanity 10 years on. Again, as I said last time, there's clearly still a lot more scope for the series inherent in the setting.

This setting is hung around largely the same group of characters. A few new ones are introduced, both to expand the 'core group' from The Long Earth, and to provide some new perspectives and storylines. It's nice to see a half-decent proportion of good female main characters. I actually enjoyed reading Maggie's arc the most, which is one of the most separated from the main plotline.

This bring me onto my last big thought. As with The Long Earth, I felt that there was an odd narrative structure to the book. While a lot of time is spent establishing the context and backdrop to the events, not much actually happens throughout. There's a comparatively low sense of threat throughout The Long War - it's still present, and is strong than in the first book, but it's disarming. 

Parts of the section towards the end left my scratching my head slightly in terms of character motivations relating to what actually takes place. Again, I'm avoiding details because it would be spoilers, but I didn't quite sit right with me. That's not enough to significantly negatively impact on my impressions of the book. 

I certainly don't think that these books should follow some cookie-cutter recipe to hit all the beats we are expecting (thus becoming more predictable) - and I get the sense that avoiding this and reaching a different pace is intentional - but it's noticeable. The stakes don't seem to be all that high until the very last chapters of the book. That's something I quite enjoy - Baxter and Pratchett have made it a setting worth exploring, and it is on the whole enjoyable to do so with their characters, but I know that it's not for everyone. 

Week 28
28/52

Fragile Things - Neil Gaiman (2006)
The Night Circus - Erin Morgenstern (2011)
The Revolution of Saint Jone - Lorna Mitchell (1988)
Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy - John Le Carré (1974)
I Can Make You Hate - Charlie Brooker (2012)
Looking For Jake and Other Stories - China Miéville (2005)
The Pillars of the Earth - Ken Follett (1989)
The Bloody Chamber - Angela Carter (1979)
Jobs* - Walter Isaacson (2012)
The Plague - Albert Camus (1947)
Ready Player One* - Ernest Cline (2011)
Slaughterhouse Five - Kurt Vonnegut (1969)
The Good Man Jesus and the Scoundrel Christ - Phillip Pullman (2010)
Brave New World - Aldous Huxley (1931)
Storm Front* - Jim Butcher (2000)
Anansi Boys - Neil Gaiman (2005)
Fool Moon* - Jim Butcher (2001)
Iron Man: Extremis - Warren Ellis (2006)

Ultimate Thor Vol.1 - Hickman, Pachego & Vines (2010)
How To Eat Out - Giles Coren (2001)
How To Be A Woman - Caitlin Moran (2011)
In The Garden of Beasts* - Erik Larson (2011)
Pirate Cinema - Cory Doctrow (2012)
Fahrenheit 451 - Ray Bradbury (1953)
The Long Earth - Terry Pratchett & Stephen Baxter (2012)
The Illustrated Man* - Ray Bradbury (1951)
The Long War - Terry Pratchett & Stephen Baxter (2013)
The Player of Games - Iain M Banks (1988)
Ender's Game - Orson Scott Card (1985)

Currently Reading:

The Knife of Never Letting Go* - Patrick Ness
Stardust - Neil Gaiman

Ready Player One

Here we are again. This is the last post I'd planned in my 'gaming overview' series. I may  do more, but that depends on my having enough to say ('that's clearly not been a problem so far' *snarf snarf*). One thing I'd definitely like to do more of is talking about some individual games (of all varieties), in the same manner I have been with books.

This isn't strictly related to anything. I just wanted to show off the lovingly girlfriend-made Companion Cube

So, onto the actual topic at hand - video games. I think most people reading this would have at least played something that qualifies as a video game - especially with the proliferation of mobile gaming and so-called 'casual' games. As with other forms of gaming, however, that doesn't mean that most people actually enjoy them!

The basic premise that, shockingly, seems to be missed by those that are quick to dismiss video games as silly, pointless or harmful (a group which includes a lot of the media, particularly in the US - though this thankfully seems to be changing), is that, as with books and films, there is an intense amount of variety in the medium! Just as there are trashy books and mindless or outright bad films, you do get the lowest common denominator garbage being turned out by studios. Sadly, (again, like films), these seem to make up the majority of the market at any given time, so the best can be lost to those who don't watch the industry amid the rest of the noise.

What we get with the best games, however, is an experience that can easily supersede the best films. An exceptional game, is, hands down, a more powerful experience than an exceptional film. You are put into the place of the character(s) in a way that films can never hope to match (cf. my post on RPGs). You ARE that character for the game, acting for them, even if we are not given control of, or even agree with, their decisions (depending on the style of game). 

The emotional impact of these games cannot be overstated, and it is something I wish more people were open to taking the time to experience. The games with this level of payoff, however, tend to be the ones that require a reasonable time investment - 6 to 30 hours and upwards. This, though, in storytelling terms, is the real value that gaming brings over films, books, and television - putting you right there in the place of a character. Making you live the experience.

All that, however, is assuming that story is the driving force behind the game. 'Good' games do not necessarily mean good storytelling. I would say that the ideal is an solid balance between excellent gameplay matched with a robust story (such as Red Dead Redemption), but there is a lot to be said for those that swing more towards (amazing) story with okay gameplay (Bioshock Infinite), and I'll happily play something which is all about the gameplay, with paper-thin plot (Demon's Souls). It all depends on what you're looking for and enjoy.

It's with these last few examples that we really see the case for 'video games as art'. Video games like these - which are very few and far between are transcendent. With Red Dead Redemption, we have a depiction of a dying age - the Old West in America in 1911, and a timeless story of regret with a single recurring message - you can't outrun your past. I honestly can't talk in as much detail as I would love to about this game without spoiling it, but it succeeds in carefully exploring its setting and depicting a beautiful range of characters, all the while delivering a fantastic gameplay experience.

The original Bioshock was a stroke of creative genius, embodying the Objectivist philosophy of Ayn Rand in the form of an underwater city - an industrialist's utopia, and exploring the inevitable disaster that follows. In this, you actual find a deceptively deep study of human choice. All in a beautiful, psuedo-Steampunk Art-Deco style wrapper. Atlas Shrugged just can't step to that. I'm not even going to talk about Bioshock Infinite, since it's so new (don't want spoil things!), but that moves the needle so far further the original in terms of ambitious achievement.

Demon's Souls swings in totally the other direction. As I mentioned above, the plot is 'paper thin'. I think there's a whole lore behind the game - there's certainly a cut-scene at the beginning which tries to explain this, but it really. Doesn't. Matter. From what I've seen of it and the characters, it's a little odd and rather weak. The sole reason I play Demon's Souls is because it is a really, really challenging, in a way in which video games don't tend to be now. This has been a bit of a trend in the last few years - some games ramping up the difficulty - a bit of a throwback to the earlier days of gaming.

Demon's Souls is punishing, but fair. It does not babysit you (at all - there's so little in the way of explanation or tutorial!), but what it does reward is honing your skill as a player. Even when you've improved your character and their equipment to a reasonably competent level, you can still be taken down by relatively low-level enemies if you let your guard down and get overconfident. Death is not permanent, but will set you back significantly, respawning all enemies and putting you back at the start of the level. The bosses are epically difficult, and you will often have to die to them multiple times to figure out a strategy - requiring you to replay most of the level each time. 

For someone like me (and I know it's not for everyone - the amount of cursing I come out with while playing is testament to this) that is appealing and addictive. Sometimes. 

So, there concludes my thoughts on video games, and, for now, on gaming. I shall be following up with some specific, more review-like posts in the near future.

App of the Week: Trello

Less fancy-gaming fun this time, more function. This isn't just specifically an app - more of an overall service for project management (it's more exciting that it sounds). Trello lets you build index-card style project boards, add details, comments, due dates, etc. to the cards, and move them between lists as required. Simple concept, very versatile.

I've got to give credit to Jack for putting me on to this one. I'm using it for more and more at the moment - it's been my go-to to-do manager at work for a while (To Do, Doing, Done, and some other specific lists), but I now use it to organise stuff for this blog and other writing (Ideas Stack, Pending, Doing, Done), and even now for books/games/films that I want to list/track.

It's a free online service, with excellent apps on iOS and Android - so check it out at www.trello.com.

ReKindling

I got a Kindle! I previously used a Sony Reader, which did a fantastic job, but sadly has been on its last legs in terms of draining battery and increasing latency in reading/page turning, which sadly made it very difficult to use to read regularly.

My Amazon-inclined friends have all been pointing me towards the Kindle Paperwhite (with curious chants of 'one of us! one of us!'). Amazon has been instrumental in the proliferation of ereaders and digital reading for the masses, and I've rarely heard a bad word spoed about them - at least from those who don't dislike using ereaders at all.

First impressions - it's great. Amazon know how to nail it in terms of user experience - it shows up in a stylish, minimalist (shades of Apple) black box, meaning that it's open and activated in your hands in seconds. Awesome.

It's really cool - enjoyable to hold and read on, buy books (*cough* sales funnel *cough*), and has some great ancillary features. I'm sure I'll share more on it as I continue to use it, but very impressed so far.

Guess what I'm reading...

How the Other Half Read: Children's Fiction is Not Just For Children!

George and I were exhorted by his mum to read some books written for the younger reader. I have three offerings so far, the first of which is Treasure Island. I'd never read this before, never seen a film of it, and I finally understand who Blind Pew is. This is a great swash-buckling adventure, although, I have to say, I think I enjoyed the beginning when Jim Hawkins meets his very first pirate at least as much as I enjoyed the second half of the book when he's creeping around the island humming 'fifteen men on a dead man's chest' (or so I imagine that's how he creeps). An oldie but a goodie.

Second, is a book I have read before, but could barely remember: Hideous Kinky. The title confuses everyone; yes, it *is* a children's book; the two girls in it just happen to really like those two words. This book transports you all the way to Marrakech and its young narrator tells you of her adventures with her big sister, Bea, as her mother does a whole bunch of stuff that, reading the book as an adult, seems pretty irresponsible. However, since I discovered recently that the story is actually autobiographical, I shan't publicly question the mother's actions further. I tried to list my favourite bits, but there are just too many of them; this is a great book which makes Morocco seem all the magical since its wonders are seen through the eyes of a small child.

Thirdly, (appropriately enough) comes the third book in a series: Percy Jackson and the Titan's Curse.  I know, I'm a Classicist; this is probably why I find these books so enjoyable, as I notice all the little references (which are clearly put there for Classics teachers to find), but my pupils love these books too, so there must be more to them than self-congratulatory allusion-spotting, I don't want to spoil the first two books, so shan't say too much, but basically, dark forces are rising against the Olympian gods and it's up to their (very much put-upon) illegitimate, half-blood children to save the day. One of the things I really loved about this book in particular is that the gender balance was right on the money - in the previous two books there is one excellent, prominent female character, but there are two male ones - in The Titan's Curse the girls are running the show. It's a shame that we're so used to there just being the one main girl that having equal, or superior, numbers of female main characters is comment-worthy, but there you go. The whole series of books is highly enjoyable and well-worth a look; they're a quick read and a great reworking of the Classical myths.

Check in next time for some seriously screwed up fiction!

G xxx

Books completed in chronological order of reading:

Stabat Mater, Tiziano Scarpa (2011)

Facing Violence, Rory Miller (2011)

Un Lun Dun, China Mieville (2007)

Open Secrets, Alice Munro (1994)

The Dragon Queen, Alice Borchardt (2001)

Tipping the Velvet, Sarah Walters (1998)

The lost books of the Odyssey, Zachary Mason (2007)

The Hobbit, JRR Tolkien, (1937)

The Sandman: Preludes and Nocturnes, Neil Gaiman, (1991)

The Hypnotist, Lars Kepler, (2012)

The Strain (2009), The Fall (2010), The Night Eternal (2011), Guillermo del Toro and Chuck Hogan

The Good Man Jesus and the Scoundrel Christ, Philip Pullman (2010)

Angry White Pyjamas, Robert Twigger (1997)

50 shades of Feminism, ed Lisa Appignanesi et al (2013)

Further Voices in Vergil's Aeneid, R O A M Lyne (1987)

The Journal of Dora Damage, Belinda Starling (2007)

Hideous Kinky, Esther Freud (1992)

Percy Jackson and the Titan's Curse, Rick Riordan (2007)

Disgrace, Jussi Adler Olsen (2012)

Treasure Island, Robert Louis Stevenson (1883)

Romanitas, Sophia McDougall (2005)

Selected Poems, Sophie Hannah (2013)

Playing a Role

Given that my last two posts on gaming rapidly spiralled out of my control and became rather compendulous in length, I was planning on resolving to keep this one shorter. Then I remembered I was going to be writing about roleplaying games (or RPGs), and realised that on this, of all topics, I am quite likely to have a lot to say. As I start to write this, I'll try and keep it to a sensible length (not least so there's a chance that someone might actually read it!), and failing that, may split it across one or more posts.

For those who might not know what an roleplaying game is - in a broad and generic sense - it's quite self-explanatory. It's a game in which you are somehow projecting yourself into a different role. While that can actually end up applying to a lot of different games that aren't truly RPGs (such as some of the 'big box' tabletop games I mentioned last time), specifically, an RPG is a game where you play a character and describe their actions. 

Generally, though not always, there is a rules element to the game, with varying degrees of complexity, which are used to resolve actions. If my character is trying to break down a door, for example, I could roll a number of dice, factoring in the strength of my character and what the door is made of, to see whether or not they succeed. 

These games usually feature one person acting as a game master (GM) to describe the world and facilitate the players' interaction with it. As a player takes on the role of one character, the GM takes on the role of EVERY non-player character in the world. 

The first roleplaying game - the absolute classic, which most people will think of when you mention RPGs - is, of course, Dungeons & Dragons. Created by Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson in the 1970s, D&D introduced a whole new form of gaming to the world, which has grown and grown ever since. D&D is an epic fantasy world, complete with monsters, magic, heroes and villains. The GM is referred to as the 'Dungeon Master'. There is a heavy emphasis on combat and exploration, but this really depends on the group - it would be easy to run a politicking, balance-of-power campaign, Game of Thrones style. 

If this book could talk...it would probably say 'I can't get rid of these NERDS.'

D&D is by no means the only system available, though - far from it. For any style and setting you can think of, there will be either a fully-fledged game, or a system which would lend itself to it. Horror, science fiction, fantasy, comedy, superheroes - you name it. All it takes is a group, a GM and the imagination to get started. 

One of my personal favourites is the 'World of Darkness' setting by White Wolf. It's actually an old system which was updated in 2004. It represents a gothic horror setting in the modern world, with various rulesets for different aspects of the supernatural - vampires, werewolves, mages, and stranger things - each of which lends itself to exploring a different broad theme. 

The settings are masterful and give you scope for all sorts of different game styles, from mortals against the odds and unknown horrors, to vampires vying for political control of a city. One of the things I love about it is that the rule system is simple, effective and satisfying, letting you tailor it more towards a cinematic style of play or a more gritty realism. It's easy for new players to pick up, and the fact that it is anchored in the modern world makes the setting very accessible too. Sidenote: my favorite side-series in this setting (which I've never had the chance to play/run) is 'Requiem for Rome'. VAMPIRES IN ANCIENT ROME.

You also end up with lots of gorgeous books.

RPGs are perhaps the strongest examples of something I referred to in my first post - escapism. You are trying to put yourself in the place of a character different from you, with the agency to act and explore a whole different world. This can be anchored with pictures, maps, even props, or a simple grid representing the game world, but it is firmly routed in imagination and descriptive communication. The job of the Game Master is to set the stage, your job is to act on it. The show Community actually does a very good (though sideways and humorous) job of capturing the essence of this, in the episode Advanced Dungeons and Dragons (yes, that one). This is enhanced by the fact that, the majority of the time, you create your own character, defining their background, personality and nature, and bringing them to life within the game system. 

Since first being introduced to Dungeons and Dragons by a friend's dad when I was about 11, I've become pretty firmly ensconced in a GM role. Throughout my my teens, I was DM for various D&D campaigns (and sundry other games) with a group of friends, spanning a series of epic adventures over the years. 

Also in my teens, I ended up running a couple of play-by-forum (World of Darkness) games with other interested people from around the world. I did this for about three years. Playing this sort of thing by forum is actually pretty impractical - it lets you take a lot of time to work on descriptive writing, but it means that any sort of gameplay progresses glacially slowly. Now I'm running another online game (D&D, via Google Hangouts and the excellent Roll20 virtual game board tool) with a group of friends. 

As I mentioned in my first post, it's easy to write off gaming activities as pointless. There is certainly a culturally ingrained reaction when people hear Dungeons and Dragons mentioned - that's it's the purview of extreme geeks, something fundamentally sad that's perhaps even worthy of scorn. It's a byword for sad geekery. 

Seriously, what's geeky about this? These are literal bargain-bin adventurers.

This almost invariably, as with so many things, seems to come from a lack of understanding or familiarity, but that's usually hard to convey to people in brief. The time I've put into GMing over the years has taught me a whole lot, such as thinking on my feet (you really need this…), various writing skills, world- and setting-building, and, in a weird way, presentation skills (I have a natural aversion to putting myself on the spot in front of people, but that's precisely what GMing requires). 

I'm sure I could go on with this topic, but I'll cut myself off there, in the interests of brevity (though the number of paragraphs tell a different story). My parting thought is that I view RPGs as one of the most under-appreciated, yet accessible, forms of gaming. If you have a GM who knows the score, it is possible to play (enjoyably and completely) with practically no knowledge of the system at hand. At its purest, you describe your actions, and the GM helps you resolve these within the framework of the game. This also makes it one of the most liberating forms of gaming. Even sandbox-style, open-world video games are naturally restricted by their nature. Boardgames impose rules restrictions for simplicity or style, but in roleplaying games, the only limitations are those imposed by your character or the setting. 

Back again next Monday for some thoughts on the major blockbusters of the gaming world - the video games. 

It's the forehead of MYSTERY!