Escapist Podcast: 083: SimCity, Story-Based RPGs and Google Glass

[The Escapist Staff]

083: SimCity, Story-Based RPGs and Google Glass

This week, The Escapist crew discusses SimCity's launch day woes, the upcoming Google Glass device and the problems with privacy that may come with it. Also, we discuss how the definition of "literally" is being changed (much to Susan's chagrin), and the best way to play Story-Based RPGs.

From here on out, we're going to do our best to ensure each podcast also features video! But if you prefer the audio-only version of The Escapist Podcast, it's available for free from our iTunes [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/rss/videos/podcast/167-e15a29097a5b663fa43b258772591ecc.xml] page!

Watch Video

 

[cynicalsaint1]

Just started watching but re: Susan's scar story - is wrong that I'm getting more sympathy pain in my teeth than forehead?

 

[Migs]

Thanks for the PodCat!

 

[Susan Arendt]

Just started watching but re: Susan's scar story - is wrong that I'm getting more sympathy pain in my teeth than forehead?

No, not wrong! I can't imagine how she managed to come out unscathed, but that must've really hurt.

 

[Migs]

In future, for the rest of us, could you please put a direct link to the Audio Only version please?
Not all of us are iTune loving users.

 

[Hoplon]

The Immigrant song cover was Trent Reznor/Atticus Finch with Karen O from the Yeah Yeah Yeah's on Vocals.

 

[WMDogma]

In future, for the rest of us, could you please put a direct link to the Audio Only version please?
Not all of us are iTune loving users.

From what I understand from our IT guys, you can download the MP3 through the Podcat's RSS feed.

The Immigrant song cover was Trent Reznor/Atticus Finch with Karen O from the Yeah Yeah Yeah's on Vocals.

I've heard that version before! It's pretty wicked.

 

[bliebblob]

Itunes version seems to be borked

"An error has occured while downloading 083: Simcity, ... An unknown error has occured (8006)"

 

[bdcjacko]

So...the new SimCity does not have a single player mode where you can play offline? This confuses and angers me.

Also thank you Susan for introducing me to Plague Inc.

 

[InvictusSum]

I can't download the iTunes version either.

 

[Hoplon]

The Immigrant song cover was Trent Reznor/Atticus Finch with Karen O from the Yeah Yeah Yeah's on Vocals.

I've heard that version before! It's pretty wicked.

It's something alright, I just want them to do the Dr Who theme like that.

 

[Caffiene]

From what I understand from our IT guys, you can download the MP3 through the Podcat's RSS feed.

You can (usually). This week the RSS download is broken for me just like the iTunes apparently is for others.

 

[Fugitive Penguin]

Itunes version seems to be borked

"An error has occured while downloading 083: Simcity, ... An unknown error has occured (8006)"

Chiming in with a "me too!" This same error ('083') occurs with a non-iTunes RSS/podcast reader (BeyondPod for Android).

If you're going to remove this feature, then please remove it from the list of RSS feeds at: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/rss/

 

[Yal]

Itunes version seems to be borked

"An error has occured while downloading 083: Simcity, ... An unknown error has occured (8006)"

I get "Invalid episode media type" from my podcast app. Corrupt file, I reckon.

 

[Eric the Orange]

Much better positioning the camera this time around. Good job.

 

[bdcjacko]

On the topic of the google glasses, you guys are completely over estimting the power of such a device and the scope of database it is searching to look up. It will probably work out to be nothing more than a fancy bar code reader, then someone will figure out how to get it to look up product info from logos and trademarks.

But for the ability for it to see someone's face and recognize them is is completely unrealistic with current technology. For example, the Kinetic. I am the only person programmed into my kinetic, so it has a database of one. I have to get its attention so it can recognize my face. For it to recognize my face, I have to stand 4 or 5 feet away, while facing it standing still for 10 seconds and then it tells me it doesn't recognize me and I realize the window is open. Then I have to close the window, and do it all over again before I give up and sign in the old fashioned way.

So now these Google Glasses, they will probably need the person to be standing still and looking straight ahead Bethesda NPC style, take a few seconds to map their face and then crunch through a picture database to not find a match. Even if it did, and lets assume for a second the it even found the right person (which would be astonishing) how would this picture be linked to any relevant information besides name? What, are the glasses then going to go to the google search engine and find 30 blog post that has the persons name appearing in them. And the you scroll down till you get to the white page search that shows the addresses of all the John Does, J. Does, Jonathan Does that live in Anytown USA? Of course this is assume there is a decent 4G or wireless service around.

My point is there are so many point at which this breaks down look up people, it wouldn't work anytime soon. And even if the technology was there, anyone who has worked in database management can tell you that you will not find that kind of information just by looking at a face in real time. Plus you will probably need some sort of input devise to narrow search fields and cull down any information it does find to the useful parts. You can tell when someone is taking pictures or video of you with a phone, so you will be able to tell someone is eye-googling you with these glasses when they are typing away at your wrist keyboard. You literally won't have anything to worry about from this until the global corporation starts making us go in for bi-annual face scans and record updating.

 

[WMDogma]

To everyone having problems nabbing the mp3 from iTunes or our RSS feed, I've got our techie guys taking a look into it now to see what the issue is. Thank you for your patience!

 

[cynicalsaint1]

RE: The technical issues on SimCity

Really its a question of whats being done where. How much of the game is being run on the servers? How much information do you have to send back and forth? Ideally (in my mind) you'd want the game to be running mostly client side and minimize the amount of information you have to send back and forth for the game to function properly. For example the city is running client side and the only information you need to send back are some basic stats about your city that are important in how neighboring cities interact.

However if they're running the game mostly off the server then well, you have to send all that data back to the client and every running city is going to be a much bigger drain on that servers resources since the server is now not only responsible for sending data back and forth between clients, but also the city itself.

So it could definitely be a software issue as much as it is a hardware issue. It really just comes down to how they designed the game. Personally I think they'd have to be crazy to take the latter approach - it would however give them more direct control over things, make the game harder to pirate, etc. So who knows?

The more information you're required to send the faster the pipes are going to get clogged, and the more of the game that's running on the server the fewer pipes they're going to have.

 

[caravan29]

<p class=MsoNormal>With my history in Technical Editing, I understand Susan's anger with the new revision of &quot;literally&quot;; however dictionaries are supposed to record how a word is used in society, not prescribe how the word should be used. Since a large portion of English speakers use &quot;literally&quot; as an emphatic adverb or intensifier, then dictionaries have a responsibility to record that meaning.

<p class=MsoNormal>This is more a benefit to English second-language speakers. Imagine a Korean man, studying English, visits New York City and while walking on the street hears, "With all these restrictions on zoning, this city is literally killing homeowners." Having the amended version of literally listed in the dictionary adds needed clarity for second-language speakers (and for all speakers), and reduces the anxiety that Korean man was about to have.



Signifier[/I] for those who are familiar with Structuralism/<span class=SpellE>Deconstructuralism). A language is constructed by society, through the interaction of individuals; thus words and their meanings are decided by society. If enough people decide that literally means "to indicate that some metaphorical or hyperbolical expression is to be take in the strongest admissible sense" (Oxford English Dictionary), then the meaning of this word has changed. And this phenomenon, called Semantic Shift, <span class=GramE>occurs an incalculable number of times within any language.



My personal favorite is the word "awful", which once meant "Worthy of profound respect" or "Sublimely majestic", but now means "terrible, dreadful, [or] appalling" (Oxford English Dictionary).

 

[Agayek]

One thing I just can't stop myself from saying about the Google Glasses debate:

All of you guys arguing about how it violates privacy are operating from a flawed premise. You're operating on the assumption that those glasses can identify people by face alone and find personal information, AND that it is not possible to take a picture of someone with your smart phone, use that to identify them, then find the exact same information using the phone's browser.

You should be able to see the flaw in that argument. You're assuming two contradictory facts are true. If the glasses could identify someone on sight, that same person could be identified through the use of a smart phone's camera.

Ergo, your argument collapses.

You definitely raise valid points, and we should all be very concerned about our privacy in the modern era, but the glasses are not going to be what causes those violations of privacy. Having personal information on the internet, and the internet being accessible anywhere, is what causes it. The only solution is to ensure that every piece of information that you give to anyone you don't personally know and trust is something you would not be upset if the entire world knew.