Robert Khuu Presents

Playing with flowers

Recently, the same company that made “flOw” released a new game on the PS3 entitled “Flower.” Here’s a video of the game in action:

The “characters” that you play aren’t so much a “characters” so much as they are a flowers in a city apartment that are dreaming of a dead gray field. The object of the game is to collect enough flower petals in an effort to reinvigorate those grayed out grassy fields. Control is handled through the PS3 Controller’s motion sensor. Turn the controller left (like a steering wheel) and the petals will turn left. Tilt the controller backwards and the petals will fly into the air. Overall, motion control is pretty well implemented. I am sure this game will re-open the question of whether video games can be art, but, regardless of whether that issues is settled or not, this game is still pretty fun in the mean time. The tagline, if it isn’t already, for this game should be “play and relax.” The gameplay is so soothing that when I started playing this game, I didn’t know 2-3 hours had passed. It’s a little like a good book. I wouldn’t necessarily schedule time to sit there and read a book, but if I’m between things, I’ll read the book. Same applies here.

There isn’t much variety in terms of gameplay. Some of the levels try to mix it up by having you “paint” the grass with colorful lights, but it’s just more of the same. I think the game tends to accomplish what a lot of games are missing: it finds 30 seconds of pure, rewarding fun and repeats it as often as possible without becoming repetitive.

Tags: Flower, PS3, ThatGameCompany

Car hide and go seek

I recently bought a 2009 Toyota Yaris after my previous car decided to do $3000 worth of damage to itself. So far, I really do like the Yaris. I haven’t really encountered any deal-breaker problems. The only “problem” I have is the Yars’ size. Not because of it’s actual size, but it’s size in relation to other cars. It’s so small that it’s usually dwarfed by other cars and I tend to have a tough time finding it once I’ve parked it in a full lot. Usually, it’s some SUV soccer mom vehicle that’s blocking my view of the car, but even a regular sedan can block my view. I already had enough trouble looking for my old car in the parking lot. Now, it usually takes a moment of panic in addition to 2-3 minutes of looking for my car. I didn’t realize how big American cars really were until I started driving the Yaris. Since practically everyone out in the Midwest drives an American car, I’m usually outmatched 99% of the time. I’m just glad this is my last snowy winter so that I don’t have to play this game in the snow.

Tags: car, Toyota, Yaris

I really wish they wouldn’t scream

Here’s a crazy thought:

With advanced robotics becoming cheaper and more commonplace, the challenge isn’t how we learn to accept robots—but whether we should care when they’re mistreated. And if we start caring about robot ethics, might we then go one insane step further and grant them rights? Source: Wired.

Taken from a US legalistic perspective, the simple answer would be “no.” The US Constitution only refers to “persons” and robots have not (yet) fallen under that definition. It would probably take a Constitutional amendment to confer “person-hood” status to robots, but changing the Constitution is no simple feat (Art. 5 requires both passage in Congress and 3/4 of the State’s legislatures). State Constitutions operate in a similar manner, but are easier to amend depending on the state. We’re more likely to see a state recognition of robot rights before we see a federal recognition due to those relative differences.

On the other hand, the Wired article makes a really good point about how more and more children are growing up with robotic toys and, just like my generation’s change in attitudes towards technology, perhaps those young children will have a different perspective on how we should treat robots. This change is already coming, albeit slowly, in some countries. Again, from the Wired article:

In 2007, a South Korean politician declared that his country would be the first to draw up legal guidelines on how to treat robots; the UK has also looked into the area (though nothing substantial has come of it anywhere). Source: Wired.

A more philosphical observation is that perhaps these rules are not for the machines themselves, but for our humanity. A few of the comments to the article (and the article itself) argue that as robots become more lifelike and humanlike, what does that say about a person willing to torture a robot? What does that tell us about human psychology? A more practical concern is that as machines become more intelligent, we don’t want them to do the Skynet thing by mistreating them. For now, without strong AI, robots are just toys that simulate behavior. Without that, it’s nothing more than a video game. There is no self-awareness to really hurt. No self-awareness to really consider as “person.” Person-hood implies that robots contain qualities that make them a “person.” Merely simulating emotions does not seem to be the complete picture of what a “person” is.

Tags: robots, Skynet, toys

Rule of Law in an Unfettered Utopia

You can call it a video game or massive social experiment, but EVE Online has several interesting results. For the uninitiated, EVE Online is a space MMORPG made by CCP where players do what most players do in MMORPGs: do things to get better things for their character. The most distinguishing feature of EVE Online is that the developers take a laissez faire approach to the in world economy and legal system. More »

Tags: capitalism, CCP, EVE Online, MMO, rule of law

Boardgame: Arkham Horror

In our continuing quest to become ostracized by society, some law school friends and I have picked up the activity of playing boardgames. Think Settlers of Catan minus the resource management. The game that we played was Arkham Horror (pictured below).

The game is set in a Lovecraftian city where all sorts of portals to unknown lore related extra-dimensional locations spring up. The point of the game is to close the portals and kill the monsters that come from those portals before the countdown timer runs out. Oh, did I mention there was a countdown? At the beginning of the game, you randomly draw an ultimate evil and, depending on which you draw, the instant game will be limited by the corresponding number of rounds. To “win,” you either have to seal all portals before you run out of rounds or you can simply fight the “ultimate evil” or you simply lose if you pick the wrong ultimate evil. Strategy-wise, your group is basically working together and has to decide to either attempt to shut down portals or to bulk up with the intention of killing the ultimate evil. There is a lot of long term thinking involved due to the round limitations. Luck is also factored into it in the form of rolling dice and drawing random cards. For example, one of our party members was completely debilitated by a curse that he could not remove for the entire game. That curse he had basically lost us the game.

Overall, a rather complicated game with complicated mechanics, but really easy to pick up and learn while you play.

Tags: Arkham Horror, boardgames, Cthulu, dice, Lovecraft