Here are some thoughts about the debate of "why didn't they take the Eagles to Mordor?" First, the Eagles' eyries were the wrong direction. You may recall that the eyries of the Great Eagles were to the east of Rivendell, in the middle of the Misty Mountains (which, by the way, were being overrun by orcs and goblins), and Mordor was to the south.
Second, how would they have gotten word of their request for transportation to the Eagles without attracting unwanted attention? You will recall that the only way to reach the eyries was by flying. Trying to get to the Eagles in order to ask them to take some Hobbits to Mordor would have been a perilous journey in and of itself, not to mention they didn't have time for it.
Third, the Eagles are a proud race who help when it suits them (more on that later), and who's to say whether they would have agreed or not?
The Eagles rescued the dwarves and Bilbo from the Orcs because they enjoyed ruining the sport of the orcs. Later, they carried Thorin & Co. to the Carrock in repayment of a debt to Gandalf. At the Battle of Five Armies, I see their assistance as pest control: They were ridding their mountain homes from creatures who were crowding out or destroying their food sources. Sixty years later, when Frodo was leaving Hobbiton, the Eagles had their own problems (orcs were encroaching on their territory again) and wouldn't have been able to help even if they wanted to.
It is unclear to me why they showed up at the Battle of the Black Gate. Perhaps they were not the Great Eagles of the Misty Mountains, but rather the Eagles of the White Mountains (which is a lot closer to Mordor). Or perhaps they started gathering after receiving word from Gandalf. Recall that Gandalf was rescued from Zirakzigil by Gwaihir the Windlord (who, if I remember correctly, was the Chief of the Eagles at this time). By that time, the Fellowship was on the river, being shadowed by winged Nazgul, making it difficult for the Eagles to meet up with them.
Remember, the Fellowship was supposed to be traveling in secret, and that is hard to do when riding on the backs of giant eagles. That is why they couldn't take the Eagles to Mordor.
Saturday, May 26, 2018
Tuesday, November 11, 2014
Games
The first games I played were embedded in the quest for the action games, kind of a shoot-'em-up type. The first (robotube) was frustrating because my shots weren't going where I wanted them to. The second (Asteroid)was more challenging to me. It took me a bit to figure out how to move my ship before I died, but once I did, I wanted to play again to try and beat my score. I didn't want to give up quite so easily as I did on the first game. Another frustrating thing about the first game is that I couldn't start a new game after I lost so I couldn't learn from my mistakes and do better.
Next set: Other Games. I played poker (which was embedded) and then I played Tiny Explorers. Poker seemed kind of mindless. I can see that being a game done in the background while listening to the teacher lecture. On a plus note, it can teach how to be careful with money. Tiny Explorerers is a quick thinking logic game where the user guides robot explorers safely to the exit. I say quick thinking because you have a time limit to get the robots to safety, and as you progress through the levels, the time limit remains the same but there are new obstacles to get around with each level. I rather enjoyed playing it, because it forced me to think on my feet to save the exploring robots. The benefits of such logic-building experience should be obvious
Round 3: Narrative Games. The first thing I want to say is that the game of Zork is incredibly frustrating to me. I struggled to find the right combinations and commands. However, my mastermind gaming quality grants me a measure of stubbornness that keeps me telling myself "I will beat this. I will not be defeated by a story!" Eventually, my frustration gets the better of me and I gave up trying to figure out the correct commands to yield results. On the other side, I can see the appeal this game has. It was fun (at first) to try and figure out the sequence of commands that would make the game progress. However, I found the lack of graphics to be a little disappointing. Part of the frustration came when Zork didn't do what I told him to. Flip side, it's a good exercise of the imagination.
Sim games: These can be fun. My frustration with the embedded game is that I could not figure out how to bring in revenue to increase my budget. Without that budget it was difficult to progress in the game. Without progress, it was nigh impossible to keep my interest in the game. That is all I have to say about that.
Other 2: Puzzle games: This is my niche. This is where I thrive. Tetris is awesome. It's just so fun to watch the lines disappear, especially when you complete three or four or even five at a time. It's gratifying, to say the least. However, that was nothing compared to the mental challenge of Construction Fall. I reveled each time I completed a level (even though I had to restart the level multiple times). The appeal is that it encourages creative experimentation, which can be useful in real life. And quite fun. Experimentation is part of success, which for me is the thrill of it. That is all.
Narrative 2: Peasant's Quest. I think the challenges/mini games are too difficult. I spent quite a bit of time trying to get a bow from the archers but never succeeded in getting three bull's-eyes. According to the walk-through I was using, acquiring the bow is essential for progress, so it's understandable how I can get frustrated. I have discovered that for narrative games, results and progress are what keep my interest. Without them, patience wanes,
Action 2:Zulu the elf was the example I provided. It was a fun little game where the elf gets chased by baddies and has to clear the obstacles. As you progress the levels get harder. For the other game, I looked for a mario game online (the embedded flash game wasn't working). That was a flashback to my childhood, where I could spend hours playing mario and trying to rescue the princess. (Well, I actually played other games, but I still spent hours on them). I have found that the best value for these games is as a stress-reliever. Sometimes you just need to jump on the baddies, or spit fire at them, to help you relax or unwind after a long day. It can be quite therapeutic as well.
Sim 2: Kingdom Rush is a fun little defense strategy game. The goal is to keep the villains away from your town by strategically placing different types of defense towers on the road. This game basically teaches you how to best use your assets on a limited budget and a time constraint. Kind of like some real life situations. I think real time strategy games are the most useful of the simulation games because you deal with factors from reality, like a budget and time. Depending on the game, it might also be useful in teaching historical concepts (I'm sure you could write a campaign for World of Warcraft, for example, that would reenact exactly how World War I got started). The creative teacher can figure out how to incorporate the simulation games into their lesson somehow. That is all.
Other Games 3: Line Rider. This game has potential for the sadistic person. I kept drawing loopdeloops hoping the rider was talented enough to perform according to my mental image. Much to the enjoyment of my sadistic side, it didn't quite work out. Depending on how well I drew it, sometimes he couldn't get up the curve and just kept sliding. Another time I did it well enough that he actually made it through the loopdeloop and kept on doing the same one. Eventually, he fell off his bike but kept going around and around. I can definitely see the appeal this game has, especially for teenagers. It is a source of humor to watch the rider fail a course. On the plus side, it can be a good tool to practice your art skills. Mine are seriously lacking, but it's more fun for me to watch the rider fail.
Action 3: First person Shooter: So I played Call of Duty for the first time on this one. I got annoyed with the inaccuracies of the map and where it showed my opponents in relation to me. I guess I focused more on the map and less on my surroundings and consequently I kept dying. However, compared with Doom, Call of Duty was infinitely more fun. I had more space to move and more controls to move with (I could run and jump and aim) in CoD but with Doom, I could barely figure out how to move and shoot anything in my way. With practice, I think Call of Duty would be fun, but it would be harder to put the fun in Doom.
Narrative 3: Zelda is by far my favorite kind of narrative game. It has what the other two have combined into one game. There is plenty of space to explore and it gives you hints if you're heading the wrong direction. It still has challenges but sometimes you can avoid cutting your way through to where you need to go, thus saving time and life. Best part? If you die, you can pick up more or less where you left off instead of having to start from the beginning. The game progresses by achieving objectives, and you can't move onto the next objective until you have completed the prior one. This would be a fun way to teach following progressive instructions (like if you wanted to build something). Now, speaking more from a child's viewpoint, it's a lot of fun to imagine you actually are Link trying to rescue Princess Zelda on this glorious quest. Instead of simply controlling the character, you essentially use your imagination to become the character (except when you die. Then it's ok to be the controller). That is all.
Action 4 Fighting Games: This is in my opinion one of the most pointless genre of games. I couldn't even figure out what buttons cause which effects, so consequently I lost most of my fights. I think the ones I did win were merely by luck. I can't even see how Street Fighter would be a good stress reliever. On the contrary, I think it would add stress and frustration to a novice (such as myself). Only with a lot of time consuming practice (which I don't have the patience for with this kind of game) can this type of game be fun for me.
Action 5 Driving: The Shut up and Drive game was a little too fiendish for me. Mainly because the controls wouldn't respond how they were supposed to. And then it seemed that no matter how many cars I overtook, I was still in 10th place. I thought your ranking was supposed to go up as you passed cars? It didn't seem to matter how many cars passed me either, I was permanently in 10th place. However, my example game Crazy Taxi, was a fun driving game. I started playing and thought to myself, "I want to ride in that taxi". Well, who wouldn't want to ride in a taxi that can jump over other cars? This is a good game for hand/eye coordination because if you jump too late you crash into the car in front of you and you have to slow down and try it again. That is all.
Next set: Other Games. I played poker (which was embedded) and then I played Tiny Explorers. Poker seemed kind of mindless. I can see that being a game done in the background while listening to the teacher lecture. On a plus note, it can teach how to be careful with money. Tiny Explorerers is a quick thinking logic game where the user guides robot explorers safely to the exit. I say quick thinking because you have a time limit to get the robots to safety, and as you progress through the levels, the time limit remains the same but there are new obstacles to get around with each level. I rather enjoyed playing it, because it forced me to think on my feet to save the exploring robots. The benefits of such logic-building experience should be obvious
Round 3: Narrative Games. The first thing I want to say is that the game of Zork is incredibly frustrating to me. I struggled to find the right combinations and commands. However, my mastermind gaming quality grants me a measure of stubbornness that keeps me telling myself "I will beat this. I will not be defeated by a story!" Eventually, my frustration gets the better of me and I gave up trying to figure out the correct commands to yield results. On the other side, I can see the appeal this game has. It was fun (at first) to try and figure out the sequence of commands that would make the game progress. However, I found the lack of graphics to be a little disappointing. Part of the frustration came when Zork didn't do what I told him to. Flip side, it's a good exercise of the imagination.
Sim games: These can be fun. My frustration with the embedded game is that I could not figure out how to bring in revenue to increase my budget. Without that budget it was difficult to progress in the game. Without progress, it was nigh impossible to keep my interest in the game. That is all I have to say about that.
Other 2: Puzzle games: This is my niche. This is where I thrive. Tetris is awesome. It's just so fun to watch the lines disappear, especially when you complete three or four or even five at a time. It's gratifying, to say the least. However, that was nothing compared to the mental challenge of Construction Fall. I reveled each time I completed a level (even though I had to restart the level multiple times). The appeal is that it encourages creative experimentation, which can be useful in real life. And quite fun. Experimentation is part of success, which for me is the thrill of it. That is all.
Narrative 2: Peasant's Quest. I think the challenges/mini games are too difficult. I spent quite a bit of time trying to get a bow from the archers but never succeeded in getting three bull's-eyes. According to the walk-through I was using, acquiring the bow is essential for progress, so it's understandable how I can get frustrated. I have discovered that for narrative games, results and progress are what keep my interest. Without them, patience wanes,
Action 2:Zulu the elf was the example I provided. It was a fun little game where the elf gets chased by baddies and has to clear the obstacles. As you progress the levels get harder. For the other game, I looked for a mario game online (the embedded flash game wasn't working). That was a flashback to my childhood, where I could spend hours playing mario and trying to rescue the princess. (Well, I actually played other games, but I still spent hours on them). I have found that the best value for these games is as a stress-reliever. Sometimes you just need to jump on the baddies, or spit fire at them, to help you relax or unwind after a long day. It can be quite therapeutic as well.
Sim 2: Kingdom Rush is a fun little defense strategy game. The goal is to keep the villains away from your town by strategically placing different types of defense towers on the road. This game basically teaches you how to best use your assets on a limited budget and a time constraint. Kind of like some real life situations. I think real time strategy games are the most useful of the simulation games because you deal with factors from reality, like a budget and time. Depending on the game, it might also be useful in teaching historical concepts (I'm sure you could write a campaign for World of Warcraft, for example, that would reenact exactly how World War I got started). The creative teacher can figure out how to incorporate the simulation games into their lesson somehow. That is all.
Other Games 3: Line Rider. This game has potential for the sadistic person. I kept drawing loopdeloops hoping the rider was talented enough to perform according to my mental image. Much to the enjoyment of my sadistic side, it didn't quite work out. Depending on how well I drew it, sometimes he couldn't get up the curve and just kept sliding. Another time I did it well enough that he actually made it through the loopdeloop and kept on doing the same one. Eventually, he fell off his bike but kept going around and around. I can definitely see the appeal this game has, especially for teenagers. It is a source of humor to watch the rider fail a course. On the plus side, it can be a good tool to practice your art skills. Mine are seriously lacking, but it's more fun for me to watch the rider fail.
Action 3: First person Shooter: So I played Call of Duty for the first time on this one. I got annoyed with the inaccuracies of the map and where it showed my opponents in relation to me. I guess I focused more on the map and less on my surroundings and consequently I kept dying. However, compared with Doom, Call of Duty was infinitely more fun. I had more space to move and more controls to move with (I could run and jump and aim) in CoD but with Doom, I could barely figure out how to move and shoot anything in my way. With practice, I think Call of Duty would be fun, but it would be harder to put the fun in Doom.
Narrative 3: Zelda is by far my favorite kind of narrative game. It has what the other two have combined into one game. There is plenty of space to explore and it gives you hints if you're heading the wrong direction. It still has challenges but sometimes you can avoid cutting your way through to where you need to go, thus saving time and life. Best part? If you die, you can pick up more or less where you left off instead of having to start from the beginning. The game progresses by achieving objectives, and you can't move onto the next objective until you have completed the prior one. This would be a fun way to teach following progressive instructions (like if you wanted to build something). Now, speaking more from a child's viewpoint, it's a lot of fun to imagine you actually are Link trying to rescue Princess Zelda on this glorious quest. Instead of simply controlling the character, you essentially use your imagination to become the character (except when you die. Then it's ok to be the controller). That is all.
Action 4 Fighting Games: This is in my opinion one of the most pointless genre of games. I couldn't even figure out what buttons cause which effects, so consequently I lost most of my fights. I think the ones I did win were merely by luck. I can't even see how Street Fighter would be a good stress reliever. On the contrary, I think it would add stress and frustration to a novice (such as myself). Only with a lot of time consuming practice (which I don't have the patience for with this kind of game) can this type of game be fun for me.
Action 5 Driving: The Shut up and Drive game was a little too fiendish for me. Mainly because the controls wouldn't respond how they were supposed to. And then it seemed that no matter how many cars I overtook, I was still in 10th place. I thought your ranking was supposed to go up as you passed cars? It didn't seem to matter how many cars passed me either, I was permanently in 10th place. However, my example game Crazy Taxi, was a fun driving game. I started playing and thought to myself, "I want to ride in that taxi". Well, who wouldn't want to ride in a taxi that can jump over other cars? This is a good game for hand/eye coordination because if you jump too late you crash into the car in front of you and you have to slow down and try it again. That is all.
Monday, November 10, 2014
Forums
Because I am an avid Doctor Who fan (also known as whovians), I decided to look at a Doctor Who Forum. The one I joined has a subtitle of "Theories even more insane than what's actually happening". That should give you a sense of how... interesting... it is.
A lot of it is people presenting personal theories as to what will happen next, or what has happened, in the "who-niverse" concerning plot twists and character revelations. I guess that places it in the category of self-promotion. Because they are personal theories there is also a bit of controversy. In this case I am using the word controversy to mean that the theories don't always agree. But that's okay because the theorists don't seem to care.
On that note, there doesn't seem to be a lot of policing. A lot of shooting down theories (mainly people going back and rewatching and observing more carefully past episodes) and a lot of counter-theorizing, but like I said, no one seems to care. To me, it's just personal speculation about what may or may not happen in the series.
The other forum I looked at is Gilmore Girls. My wife likes that show, although I don't watch it. (That's Ok, though, because she doesn't watch Doctor Who). I just scratched the surface of the Gilmore Girls Forum, but it has a lot of similarities to the Doctor Who forum. They both have episode-specific subforums and most of the users have profile pictures that have something to do with their respective shows. One thing I did notice is that the Gilmore Girls forum seems to be a bit more organized and Doctor Who is just chaotic with the amount of replies and threads that it has.
So, that's a relatively comparative something-or-other on forums.
The other forum I looked at is Gilmore Girls. My wife likes that show, although I don't watch it. (That's Ok, though, because she doesn't watch Doctor Who). I just scratched the surface of the Gilmore Girls Forum, but it has a lot of similarities to the Doctor Who forum. They both have episode-specific subforums and most of the users have profile pictures that have something to do with their respective shows. One thing I did notice is that the Gilmore Girls forum seems to be a bit more organized and Doctor Who is just chaotic with the amount of replies and threads that it has.
So, that's a relatively comparative something-or-other on forums.
Saturday, October 25, 2014
Trolling
I've learned recently about trolling and other not-nice Internet techniques. When I first started reading, the first thing that came to my mind was a story my grandfather told us when we were kids. Reading about Internet trolls, I came to the conclusion that they are similar in nature to the troll under the bridge: All they want to do is cause trouble for others. I also thought that the best way to beat the troll is to be a better person than he or she is.
I don't hold well with people who try to belittle others, especially for their own amusement. Isn't there enough of that in the world? I think we need to be better than that. A better person lifts and helps others, they don't belittle and demean them.
Sometimes, it's best just to ignore an Internet troll. I think that if you ignore a troll for long enough, eventually they will get bored and move on to other things. In the meantime, the only defense we have against trolls is to be a better person. I have found that helping others to be happy is what helps me to be happy.
So how does one 'be the better person' in regards to Internet trolls? Well, that's where it gets tricky. If you ignore them, they just might continue trolling other people. On the other hand, if you respond to them, you fall into their trap and you've been trolled. My only advice is to use your best judgment, respond when you feel it necessary, but don't go overboard.
I don't hold well with people who try to belittle others, especially for their own amusement. Isn't there enough of that in the world? I think we need to be better than that. A better person lifts and helps others, they don't belittle and demean them.
Sometimes, it's best just to ignore an Internet troll. I think that if you ignore a troll for long enough, eventually they will get bored and move on to other things. In the meantime, the only defense we have against trolls is to be a better person. I have found that helping others to be happy is what helps me to be happy.
So how does one 'be the better person' in regards to Internet trolls? Well, that's where it gets tricky. If you ignore them, they just might continue trolling other people. On the other hand, if you respond to them, you fall into their trap and you've been trolled. My only advice is to use your best judgment, respond when you feel it necessary, but don't go overboard.
Monday, October 13, 2014
Memes
So the past couple of sessions of my Edtech class this semester have been about memes. At the end of our discussions I have a better understanding of what they are and why we use them. I even know how to pronounce it correctly now (I was somewhat ignorant about memes beforehand). One idea about memes that I enjoyed is that memes are 'really deep, or really really obvious'. Most memes take the form of a humor shot (Grumpy Cat, for example). Now I know why memes can be fun (also annoying, at times) to read and create. So if you start seeing a bunch of memes from me on the internet, now you know why (maybe).
Friday, September 19, 2014
Chapter 20: I believe!
“People don’t buy what
you do, they buy why you do it.” At least, that’s what Simon Sinek says. So I’ve
decided to put my ‘why’ in a form of belief statements.
I believe the family is
forever. I believe that really great music should be shared. I believe that
Doctor Who is one of the greatest shows ever written. I believe that ‘book-smarts’
are equally important as ‘street-smarts’. I believe that, if not handled
properly, religion and politics can spark contentious debates.
So, now I want to talk in
more detail about one of these belief statements. I believe that really great
music should be shared. I love the way harmonies and melodies work together to
create something beautiful. Some music has the power to make me smile just by
hearing it. Other music sounds fun. On the flip side, there is also music that
is so horrible it barely counts as music. However, in keeping with the law of
opposition, we must know bad music if we are to recognize the good stuff.
In the end, music is
awesome!
Saturday, September 13, 2014
Chapter 19: Digital Identity
So, the digital world is all around us. We have role playing games, we have business profiles, such as Linkedin. Most of all we have social networks, such as Facebook, or Twitter, or Instagram.
Have you ever thought about your digital profile? Your online presence? I have (recently), by watching some youtube videos and reading some articles. One of the articles I read stated that some employers are required to do online research about an applicant before he or she is hired. In that same article it talked about employers requiring employees/applicants to supply usernames and passwords to their social network sites. It talked about how this would allow the bosses to access information about you that you would rather keep private. It was also mentioned how this action of requiring passwords could influence the company in their hiring/firing decisions.
For employers to require usernames and passwords is, in my opinion, unethical. If a potential employer wants me to give them my username and password, I don't want to work for them. I do not feel comfortable giving them the power to change anything about my profile, or about them having access to personal information about my family.
The other article I read dealt extensively with Locke's Memory Theory. This theory states (in part) that if you have a memory of something, then you must have experienced it. According to the theory, the converse is also true: if you can't remember something, then you must not have experienced it.
I disagree. Memory fades for various reasons. We choose to forget. We grow older. Who among us remembers being a 1-year-old? Yet, obviously we were at some point or we would not be here now. Just because we can't remember a thing doesn't mean that we never experienced it. Another example would be dreams. Many is the time that I wake up, knowing that I dreamt, but retaining no memory of the details of said dream. The fact that I have no memory of the dream doesn't mean I didn't have it.
So, what does all this have to do with Digital Identity? How does this affect me and my online profile? I think that everybody can take steps to protect themselves. Personally, I plan on doing a little experiment. Let's call it 'unplugging'. this experiment will consist of 'unplugging' myself from technology (as far as possible. I am a college student in a digital age, after all. I still need to do homework) for a week or so and see how well I can live without it. Wish me luck!
Have you ever thought about your digital profile? Your online presence? I have (recently), by watching some youtube videos and reading some articles. One of the articles I read stated that some employers are required to do online research about an applicant before he or she is hired. In that same article it talked about employers requiring employees/applicants to supply usernames and passwords to their social network sites. It talked about how this would allow the bosses to access information about you that you would rather keep private. It was also mentioned how this action of requiring passwords could influence the company in their hiring/firing decisions.
For employers to require usernames and passwords is, in my opinion, unethical. If a potential employer wants me to give them my username and password, I don't want to work for them. I do not feel comfortable giving them the power to change anything about my profile, or about them having access to personal information about my family.
The other article I read dealt extensively with Locke's Memory Theory. This theory states (in part) that if you have a memory of something, then you must have experienced it. According to the theory, the converse is also true: if you can't remember something, then you must not have experienced it.
I disagree. Memory fades for various reasons. We choose to forget. We grow older. Who among us remembers being a 1-year-old? Yet, obviously we were at some point or we would not be here now. Just because we can't remember a thing doesn't mean that we never experienced it. Another example would be dreams. Many is the time that I wake up, knowing that I dreamt, but retaining no memory of the details of said dream. The fact that I have no memory of the dream doesn't mean I didn't have it.
So, what does all this have to do with Digital Identity? How does this affect me and my online profile? I think that everybody can take steps to protect themselves. Personally, I plan on doing a little experiment. Let's call it 'unplugging'. this experiment will consist of 'unplugging' myself from technology (as far as possible. I am a college student in a digital age, after all. I still need to do homework) for a week or so and see how well I can live without it. Wish me luck!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)