Ask the Man in Red

[ManInRed]

With regards to democracy causing an age of 'unprecedented conflict and war' is really the opposite of the truth. Since 1902 There has only been 2 wars between democratic countries, 2! (Most recently between Ecuador and Chile). Furthermore all other wars since 1902 has involved a dictatorship either in part or fully.

First, for that argument about no two democratic nations never going to war, See: http://users.rcn.com/mwhite28/demowar.htm

Second, even if you were to argue that democratic nations do not fight each other, all of the democratic nations form in the last century did so due in part to huge wars. That is the down side of democracies is a lot of people often had to die for them to be formed. Freedom isn't free, and while the end results might seem worth it, I find the necessary sacrifices to be the negative side of the spread of such progress. That was my point, though it may not have been the cause and effect order of events you were expecting my reasoning to follow.

A correct answer would have related to the marked rise in Corruption that has accompanied the spread of Democracy, or the increasing tendency for the West to exert pressure on fledging democracies in order to bolster their own needs (ie the US in Venezuela.)

The West exerts pressure on fledging nations regardless of whether they are democracies.

 

[000Ronald]

4) Why did you take the form of a pregnant fish? Just the eww factor, or was there some symbolic statement you were making?

I never did this. That was just a red herring.

So what you're saying is that you've never read Insomnia [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insomnia_%28novel%29]?

OK, I'll stop.

Legitimate Question time:

Since you brought up Zelda, let's talk about that.

Myth, especially in the context of video games, is an interesting topic. Video games, in particular, have an interesting relationship with myth. On one hand, world building and mythology seem to come naturally to this genre, maybe more than others. On the other hand, I feel it can very easily go to far, especially when it isn't done especially well.

So, the next Q&A Barrage will go as such:

1) What, precisely, is the relationship between myth and video games? I ask this because you may very well have a very different opinion than I do.

2) What should the purpose of creating a mythos for a game be, if there is one?

3) Are there any kinds of games that don't really require a distinctive mythos? Are there that you feel are always better off for it?

4) What games do you feel were much worse off for building a large world around themselves?

5) What games do you feel were much better off for building a large world around themselves?

 

[O maestre]

who are you?

I am myself. But it is inappropriate to subjectively define who I am. I lack the means to detect the veracity of any such definition and the restraints therefore have been placed within me restricting such a thought. So all I can say is that I am no one special, just a man in red.

why did you make this thread?

I think I explained my reasons in my first post. But if you want more, let me just say that I find questions are more useful than answers, so I am coming out ahead in these exchanges.

why is your opinion warrant so much attention?

It is not attention I am after, though I'm obviously not afraid of standing out brandishing this color. What I am after is accountability and individuality. To have the uniqueness of my opinion be put on display in a way that forms a recognizable character whom you all may properly judge to gauge the weight and biases behind the words that I say.

It is not important if this character is anything like the real me, just that the character is being developed in the collective minds of those I interact with far more than merely posting on other forums would ever yield.

Hopefully whatever attention results from this isn't more than I baggage for.

so your character is the pretentious one?

 

[The Thinker]

Moreover, how can I get more free time without sacrificing any activities?

I could explain time management to you, but I'd be lying if I said you wouldn't have to give up something. You need to set some level of priorities and rely on the assistance of others. Spending time planning what you will do will ultimately save you time, leave the most time for important things, but leave enough free time to handle urgent things. If something is urgent, but unimportant, don't spend much time on it.

Yeah... The correct answer was "Magic", but thanks anyways.

Also, I have request for you from someone else:

Spoiler: She wrote a wall of text

Hello there. I'm working on modelling a population's growth in a hunter-gatherer society and am getting rather sick of doing three to five rounds of multiplication and addition every time I want to get the next year's population. Here are my parameters:
-40 year lifespan (no environmental factors; everyone magically dies at 40)
-starting population at 200 people, half male, half female
-the childbearing age starts at 16-20 for all females. That is, 10% of them start having kids at 16, 10% at 17, 30% at 18, 40% at 19, and the last 20% at 20, so by the time they're 20, they're all either having or have had a kid
-98% of pregnancies are single children, 2% are twins
-50% of all kids are female, 50% are male
-the infant mortality rate is 10%
-a woman has a child (or twins) once every five years.
-for the purposes of the equation, everyone is straight, fertile, and healthy, children are assumed to be born at the start of the current year, and no one dies in childbirth or from anything before they're forty.

So if the chart looks like this: (age of first gen (pop)) (age of second gen (pop)) /year/ = population, then the first 6 years look like this:
(16 (200)) /0/ = 200
(17 (200)) (0 (9)) /1/ = 209
(18 (200)) (1 (9)) (0 (9)) /2/ = 218
(19 (200)) (2 (9)) (1 (9)) (0 (28)) /3/ = 246
(20 (200)) (3 (9)) (2 (9)) (1 (28)) (0 (36)) /4/ = 282
(21 (200))* (4 (9)) (3 (9)) (2 (28)) (1 (36)) (0 (9)) /5/ = 291
(22 (200)) (5 (9)) (4 (9)) (3 (28)) (2 (36)) (1 (9)) (0 (9)) /6/ = 300

*Note that only the original 16-year-olds are having kids when the first 200 are 21. The other 90% of them have had a kid in the last five years, and aren't going to have another on yet. The same goes for the 17-year-olds next year, and the 18-year-olds the year after that, and so on. It'll work the same way for the next generation, and the one after that, etc., when they hit 16.

I'm looking for an equation for all of this, something that lets me plug in the year I want, then boil it down to get the population for that year. My tentative plan is to graph it out and see what I need to tweak to get a stable population with a sustainable birth-death cycle, because clearly the table approach (above) takes way too long (hence why equations were probably invented in the first place). Hopefully you can help, or at least provide some insight. Thank you!

 

[ManInRed]

So what you're saying is that you've never read Insomnia [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insomnia_%28novel%29]?

I have read no Stephen King novels.

I like legitimate question time!

1) What, precisely, is the relationship between myth and video games? I ask this because you may very well have a very different opinion than I do.

This is an interesting topic, especially when we're talking about older games, which typically didn't attempt to build a mythos but rather attempted to iconize their characters. In building up certain characters or aspects of their world, overtime rumors or patterns appeared that created a mythos behind the icons.

2) What should the purpose of creating a mythos for a game be, if there is one?

It has been proven to help in advertising the game. Not only do people remember the iconic images you create, but you build a word-of-mouth campaign in the discussion about your game. How many people first heard about Portal from the talk about the campaign cube or cake fallacy?

It can also help to develop continuity, for fans of the game's world. Fans that spend time discussing the mythos of a game are more likely to keep on building games of that universe. And over time, the sheer decision to continue a mythos can build up a game's story and characters, by suggesting there's more to the story than what you see.

3) Are there any kinds of games that don't really require a distinctive mythos? Are there that you feel are always better off for it?

4) What games do you feel were much worse off for building a large world around themselves?

5) What games do you feel were much better off for building a large world around themselves?[/quote]

Games that are heavy on story need to realize that world building and mythos is not a substitute for plot and character development. Any story you tell exists in a relatively small world. Actually trying to expand beyond this world in the story is a mistake, but good story tellers build this expanded world in their head to have a better understanding of things the characters see.

Games with almost no story have the most to gain from building on a mythos. Players will start looking for the story not told. The Team Ico games have almost no details of its world revealed to characters, but there's obviously something more to it and getting hints in just the atmosphere of the game.

Really, the best suggestion I can give is that developers making games should attempt to build a mythos around the games they make. If a game with hardly any story exists in the same universe as a game with an epic story, the two build off one another. A mythos should exist to make it easy to make things larger than life, no burden to what you can do with new games.

I am typically against games work on by completely different groups sharing the same mythos, as it usually goes wrong. If you know a sequel to a game will likely be worked on by a different team, building too much of a mythos might make things harder on those picking up you series. Keep the world as simple as you can, so any team picking it up will not have too much to learn to make it seem like they're in the same world. If the series is good, an unintended mythos might start up on its own.

so your character is the pretentious one?

I was honest from the start that I am not knowledgeable as I may appear in answering these questions. If that is still pretentious, then so be it. After all, I am offering my character up to be judged.

Also, I have request for you from someone else:

The relationship to population and the factors you suggest are still not establish enough to create an equation for. You need to measure the population over time, and compare it to these factors to establish a relationship. This is why governments still take censuses. Also, they should farm to build a more steady population.

 

[njrk97]

okay here a question acording to logic as far as i know if your travling at speed and you throw and object it should at least for a small amount of time move faster than the speed you are going
eg going 10 kph you throw a rock it would tarvel at like 12kmh

so what happen if your travling at the speed of light and you throw something since nothing can go faster what would happen?


and second

if the universe is expnading what is it expanding into?