English task unrelated to the rest of the blogs content

DRM

Do you know the definition of insanity?

Actual content:

 DRM is a rather irritating addition on games that many consumers complain about, but some of the larger companies support. The always on DRM requires constant internet connection to check that you bought the video game legitimately and if you attempt piracy it will block you. Piracy is a big issue that many companies are worried about and think it is a necessity to prevent it.

 Electronic Arts and Blizzard are an example of them. They put DRM on some of their products. However, they turned out to be a disadvantage on their long term sales. When it comes to big games with massive hype behind them it will cause a gigantic chaos on launch day. Blizzard's game Diablo 3 had the infamous "Error 37" which did not allow the players to play that game. Their excuse was that they wanted to implement "Real-money auction house" which allowed the users sell digital in-game items for real or in-game money and DRM was required to prevent the abuse of the system, but it was an addition that nobody wanted. The EA published Sim City had different problems. People had to wait for a 20 minute queue before starting the game and the "Cheetah speed" in it was removed later because it was something the server was not strong enough for. It only prevents piracy in the short term because they will crack it no matter what. Companies keep putting DRM on games repeatedly with no success.

 There are other companies that accept piracy and refuse to put DRM on their games. Such as CD Project and Dennaton Games. Dennaton Games were sympathizing with pirates, which turned out to be an intelligent decision because the sympathy was returned and those people bought their games. CD Project's Witcher had also no DRM exposing it to pirates, but their number of sales was much bigger than the pirated copy. They also created GOG.com which is a DRM free computer game sale and distributor service competing with Steam which has a more acceptable DRM.
 Even though i do not agree with piracy I also believe that companies should not always on DRM. If they want to prevent piracy they should find a more consumer friendly way.
The video used was made by Jim Sterling. If you liked his video subscribe to "Theescapistmagazine".

School project task: Write a persuasive essay!

 The evil individuals wearing suits decided to put always-on DRM on games. Meaning they cannot play the game what they paid for if the internet goes out, which always happens. It happens to every single person in the world. The internet providers simply cannot give connection through eternity. Not even the richest people in the world. They call always on DRM always on Digital Rights Management, but in reality it always on Dishonorable Restriction from Mankind.
 They say it is there to prevent pirates from getting the game. However, they are too idiotic to realize that those people will eventually overcome those obstacles and find a way to get it no matter how complex they are. After they do that there is no point for keeping that abomination, but they do it. the only thing it does is punishing the consumers who bought the game. It is funny that pirates offer a better service than those who sell it legitimately because the people do not have to deal with DRM.
 The definition of insanity according to Albert Einstein is repeating the same thing over and over again expecting something to change when it will never happen. Therefore, I can say that the devils in suits are insane because they keep putting DEM on their games expecting less pirates and more profit when it will never happen.
 I have witnessed many of these failures, but there is a particular example which is the biggest one : "Diablo 3" Diablo was a franchise made by Blizzard. The first one was good and fun game with barely a story. It became famous and many people played together through Local Area Network. Many years later the second one came out. Long delay in game sequels were unusual. However, it was revolutionary and it had a wonderful story. It became more famous. People have been eagerly waiting for the third one for 12 years. It turned into a big disappointment in their life. The game was fine, but the launch was a disaster. They had to login to a server because of DRM even in singleplayer. However, because there were too many people who wanted to play the game the server could not handle it and it gave one message: "Error 37". So many people were infuriated, that there was an outcry in the internet.
 The creators of Sim City, another well known franchise, tried to do an improved version of always on DRM, even saying  they wanted to do it better than Diablo 3. That was a wish which could never be granted. They also had a horrible start when the game was released. People had to wait in a 20 minute queue whenever they wanted to play, elements of the game were taken away and people lost their save files because the server could not register them. This is the definition of insanity. As a busy person I can say that I do not have time for this garbage and I am not wasting my time on buying bad quality product.
 See the point I am trying to make? Always on DRM is nothing, but trouble. It is not there to improve our gaming experience, but to punish us instead of the pirates. I believe this type of business strategy is insulting, idiotic and disgusting. I want this to be banished from this world.

Morality

The good, the bad and Lee Everett

Actual content:

 The majority of video games have a linear story-line (if it has any) with no way to affect its story, but when it is non-linear there are some which lets you change the events of the game through a morality system. For example: "Bioshock", " Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic", "Mass Effect", "Dishonored".

 Sadly, the games I mentioned do not deal with it very well. In the past when was playing "Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic" I was trying to play a neutral character, but the choices it offered was you being the shining example of humanity or a gigantic jerk, no middle ground and took away so much immersion of the game. Other people had that problem too and they also complained about it.

 On the other hand, there is a game that does it too well. It is called "Witcher". It is highly praised for its quality mature fantasy story based on Andrzej Sapkowski's work where the world was incredibly grim. The problem with it was there was no morally good decision, only bad. For example either you support racist human oppressing others or insane elves and dwarfs destroying everything standing in their way. For every choice you get a bitter taste in your mouth because whenever you do something someone suffers for it.

 Fortunately, "Walking Dead" succeeds when it comes to morality. The protagonist Lee Everett is faced with many difficult choices. It does not judge you whatever option you clicked on. The decisions in it are more direct and they all make sense logically because every one of them can be justified. It is wonderful how they managed to make the players react to situations. It might sound horrible that some people let a teenager die in the game, but there are many reasons for doing that and there ratio of people picking the option is very close to each other. The morality in this game really helped it become the game of the year of 2012 in many award shows.

 I hope at least some future video games will follow this example to make the game have a better story.

The video is made by Daniel Floyd. If you liked his video subscribe to "Extra Credits".
Based on the article http://extra-credits.net/articles/pacing-morality-and-the-walking-dead/

School project task: Analyze an article!

http://extra-credits.net/articles/pacing-morality-and-the-walking-dead/

 For those who do not want to read the article, it is about the pacing and morality in a game called the "Walking dead" written by Daniel Starkey. This written work starts a lot different from other articles. He begins it with an introduction of himself. Some people might think it is pretty pointless. However, I think it is somewhat useful to the reader. "Why?" you might ask. I believe when someone writes an article where expressing opinion is a major part of it, the audience should know who the person is because it is beneficial to be aware of what to expect from him/her later assuming that he/she is going to write more articles. There is one minor thing that he is missing. He should have added a jump break at the end of his personal introduction since there are people who do not care about him and only want the actual content from him.
 As for the rest of the content he demonstrates his examples clearly and he perfectly describes what he thinks of it when expressing his opinions. Quality content is difficult to make in such quantity so I really respect him for making them. Personally I really like his content and probably others too.