Saturday, September 10, 2016

Why “No Man’s Sky” Is A Great Game!





The following post is a break from the normal topics that are discussed on this blog. This post is strictly an opinion piece about the newest space exploration video game, by Hello Games, No Man's Sky.
_________


In 2013 the British video game developing company Hello Games introduced to the gaming community, and the world at large, the space exploration video game, No Man’s Sky (NMS). 


NMS is supposed to be so big that you won't be able to complete all of it. It assaults the player with over 18 quintillion planets to explore, a variety of extra terrestrial rocks, flora and fauna to discover and the ability to become either allies or enemies of aliens races. In NMS the player can do business with the alien races, or get into all out dog fights for steeling the cargo from their huge freighters. Having played NMS for many hours, I can confirm this to be the case. However, this is all there is to do; (okay, that and run around each planet you land on getting resources to either sell or beef up your starship and spacesuit - a mandatory aspect of the game if you want to live.) Wait a minute! “That’s all there is to do? Isn’t that enough? What’s the problem here?”

There are some major complaints coming from the gaming community about NMS. One issue arrises from the simple nature of procedural regeneration as a form of video game development. NMS was generated, not through intentional and artistic thought, but through mathematical algorithms. Procedural generation expert Kate Compton states this: 

[Your] algorithm may generate 18,446,744,073,709,551,616 planets. They may each be subtly different, but as they player is exploring them rapidly, will they be perceived as different? I like to call this problem the 10,000 Bowls of Oatmeal problem. I can easily generate 10,000 bowls of plain oatmeal, with each oat being in a different position and different orientation, and mathematically speaking they will all be completely unique. But the user will likely just see a lot of oatmeal.1

Aesthetically speaking every planet seems to be the same. One theme among many planets is a difference in colour scheme and a mountain over here instead of over there, but in the end what we have are just mountainous planets. Other planets are more forestry, but again one planet may be a bright orange, and purple, and pink forest while another is a dark red, blue, and brown forest - different but still nothing but forests; and some planets do have large bodies of water while others are nothing but waterless rocks. In the same way with the exception of small distinguishing features, all the flora and fauna seem to be the same on all planets. In sum it seems that all you need to do is discover let's say 10-20 planets and you’ve functionally (not literally of course) discovered all 18 quintillion planets. Why? They are all virtually the same.

(NOTE: This has been my observation so far, insofar as to how far I traveled into the universe. It is possible that I simply didn’t land on planets yet that are completely unique from what I’ve experienced thus far; and this is something of course that I hope to do as I progress through the game.) 

This leads then right into another complaint about NMS. The game play is also very repetitious. One necessary task that all players are commissioned with is to gather resources to stay alive by beefing up their spacesuit which protects the player from a variety of deadly environments that can be found on many planets. As the player traverses through the universe and land on planets they are having to always be on the lookout for resources to keep them alive. This gets boring after a while. In sum the major things to do in NMS is: 

  1. Fly from planet to planet.
  2. Discover alien flora, fauna and geology.
  3. Gather resources to stay alive.
  4. Dog fight with other spaceships for resources to sell to make money to advance your starship; and which will also cause you to grow in allegiance with the alien races that are being attacked by these enemy starships. 
  5. Attack huge star freighters for resources and try to stay alive long enough to get to a space-station so to sell the goods so to make money to advance your starship.
  6. Do business with aliens races so to advance your starship. 
  7. Repeat steps 1-6.
  8. Repeat steps 1-6.
  9. Repeat steps 1-6.



I'm sure you get the drill. Listing these activities like this defiantly gives the impression that there is plenty of stuff to do in NMS. And this would be correct. However why is the player doing all of this? This is the biggest complaint that many people in the gaming community has had about NMS. NMS is not focused on any mission, except to travel to the centre of the universe; but it doesn't tell you why you are to do this. So what is there to encourage you to do it? You decide why you are going to the centre. 

This is one feature about NMS that makes it a great game however! Unlike most games where the gamer gets to be brought through a pre-scripted story, such as in Metal Gear Solid 5, NMS forces the player to be the writer of the adventure that they are on. They get to design the backstory of who they are and why they are doing what you are doing - such as discovering all the different species of animals, and planets, and spending half their time collecting zinc, and taring down elements of gold and copper. 

Hello Games has done something wonderful for the player even if many people are not aware of it: they’ve given the player the opportunity to use their own imagination. As a NMS player, I am not at the whim of the imagination of the Hello Games team. I am left to make my own NMS experience interesting; and if I cannot do that, then that is strong evidence for how reliant I am on others to tell me a story. Hello Games plopped me into a universe sized sandbox - metaphorically speaking - that has nothing but sand to play with, and with nothing but the barest of essentials to work with,  - again metaphorically speaking as I am given starship - and tells me to create my own story. 

To conclude there are other ways that NMS is a great game, and perhaps I’ll allude to them in the future, but this is one reason why I appreciate Hello Games and the work that they put into developing No Man’s Sky.

_______________

Monday, May 23, 2016

Is It Reasonable To Believe In Miracles?

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/
7/7d/Cherry_Tomato_on_Vine.JPG

A few days ago, I embarked on a new summer project: gardening. I went to various places collecting what I needed and the next day I assembled my crops; my landlord put the kibosh on me bringing a cow home and so I had to settle for Miracle Grow as my fertilizer. About an hour after planting my crops I went to check on them: nothing! I lamented on Facebook:

I planted my Cherry Tomato plant and Lavender flower seeds over an hour ago! Where are my crops?!

My comment was for pure comical purposes as I know that growing plants takes time, work and patients; and the following Sunday at church I caused a friend to chuckle when I told her about my new project and (again for comical purposes only) lamented that I used Miracle Grow fertilizer: "It says "Miracle Grow", not "Natural grow". Naturally growing crops takes time, but I used Miracle Grow! It's been over an hour, where's my miracle!"I lamented.

The idea of miracles is controversial as it flies in the face of the observable facts of reality. It would truly have been a miracle if my tomato plant grew to full size and flowered me some little juicy Cherry tomatoes within an hour of being planted and watered; and to date, I have never heard of such an event happening. However does a lack of personal witnesses for such growth mean that such an event can't happen? It is of course not within the realm of normality but is it within the realm of possibility? Yes, if you have a miracle worker in play.

In todays skeptic society many Christians are under pressure to believe what is explainable within natural means; and if they can't explain something, yet still believe it to be true, they are ridiculed as fools. However this should never be! Christians should allow the "miracle explanation" to be a viable explanation for something. Why? Just because something is not explainable through one paradigm doesn't mean that another paradigm cannot explain the event in question. Science offers a wonderful form of discovery but it is limited in what it allows us to discover; and so sometimes science has to step aside and let another side of life have the spotlight. This allows reality to be seen more fully.

However Christians ought not to go from one extreme of trying to explaining everything within the realm of scientific inquiry so to save face in this skeptical community, to the equally opposite irrational position of calling "everything" a miracle! In 1994, I went to Toronto for a Billy Graham, Youth Crusade with my church youth-group. I was lucky that I was with my youth leader because for a time we got separated from my youth group. My youth group was about a group of 30 youth, with no identifiable features to tell them a part, in a group of about 20,000 youth, who likewise didn't have any identifiable features; (can we say "needle in a haystack" boys and girls?!) My youth leader had a pare of binoculars with him and so we used them to see if we could locate our group of 30 specific teenagers in the group of 20,000 teenagers. He put the binoculars up to his eyes, randomly pointed upwards and "boom!", he found our entire youth group, together on the first try, up in the nosebleed section of the baseball stadium that hosted the event that night.

One may argue that was "a miracle" as: "what are the chances of finding 30 specific youth, together, in a group, in a group of 20,000 youth on the first try?" The answer is: improbable but possible. It was fantastic that we found the group on the first try, and we prayed that we would find our group as we were both unsettled about being separated from the group; and when we found our group we were both very relieved. To this day I believe that God heard our prayer and eased our jitters; but because it was mathematically possible that our group was together and discoverable on the first random try it was not a miracle that we found them on the first try. However does that mean that God wasn't at work and that we just beat the odds? No, as something doesn't need to be naturally or mathematically unexplainable for it to be the work of God.

If that wasn't a miracle: what is a miracle? A miracle is simply an event that is not possible within natural means, such as my crops growing from seeds to tomatoes in just one hour. However what if I prayed that day for a quick harvest and my crops did spring up ready for the picking within an hour of being planted: how is explaining this phenomena as a miracle an invalid explanation? If Scripture is true and that God created the world from nothing (cf. Genesis 1:1) (a violation of the 1st Law of Thermodynamics: a.k.a, "a miracle"), which includes my plants doesn't God have the ability to cause my crops to grow within record time? Yes! He created them with the ability to emerge within 7-10 days, so it stands to reason that He has the ability to speed up the process if He so chose to do so.

Therefore one reason why Christians should allow a miraculous event to be a miracle and not try to explain it away naturally is because it is possible if God is in play. A miraculous event is not explainable within science, but there are a lot of facts of reality that science cannot explain, but that doesn't mean that they are any less factual than gravity is, factual.

Another reason that a Christian ought to allow miracles to be a part of reality is without one specific miracle happening we will all die in our sins and transgressions. The apostle Paul writes that in order to be saved from eternal damnation we first must confess that Jesus is LORD and believe that His Father in heaven raised him from physical death (cf. Romans 9:10). Jesus was physically dead and three days later (known as "Easter Sunday) He was not. Jesus was not a zombie, He was - again - a living being. God regenerated the dead cells of His body and gave His body new life. Jesus did this so to pay the consequences of sin (cf. John 6:23a) and to give us sinners eternal life through a regenerated physical existence of our own (cf. 1 Corinthians 15:42-49; John 6:23b). If miracles can't happen, then Jesus didn't rise from the dead (1 Corinthians 15:12-18), leaving us all to be condemned to eternity without God in Hell.

A third reason why miracles ought to be supported is simply due to the fact that they show God's awe and wonder. God has 100% sovereignty and power over His creation and every miracle God does shows His mighty power. Moreover, this natural creation performs the same function (cf. Romans 1:20); even though a sunrise or a sunset it is not a miraculous event, as pointed out above the mere existence of the sun and the rest of creation is the face of a miracle that has already happened namely creation; and thus there is a miracle worker in play who deserves to be honoured and worshiped.

To conclude, Christians ought to represent miracles when they appear. Miracles show God's glory through creation, and they show that the picture of reality is a lot more complicated than what one mere academic field, namely science can highlight for us.

Sunday, March 27, 2016

What Was Jesus' Real Sacrifice?

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3e/Marco_
palmezzano%2C_crocifissione_degli_Uffizi.jpg
The Easter weekend is the time when social media outlets like Google+, Facebook and Twitter are hot with articles, blogs and video-blogs, a.k.a vlogs all talking about the extravagant claim of the resurrection of the dead Jesus of Nazareth. On the Friday (known as "Good Friday") Christians retell the story of Jesus arrest, beatings and crucifixion and on Easter Sunday articles and videos on Jesus' resurrection from the dead are presented.

As such then I won't add to the already mix of papers that surround these two days but instead encourage you to go to reputable sources to find out the truth that surrounds this weekend of love and why it is in deed a time of love. I have listed a couple of trustworthy resources below to aid you in your journey in the Christian faith and all of its claims.

However I would like to ask this one question: What was Jesus' real sacrifice? The Christian claim is that Jesus suffered a horrible physical death on the cross on Friday and then on the Sunday, He rose from the dead. These two events paid the penalty that you and I owed God for breaking His laws and conquered the effects of eternal death. However on the Friday was it just His life that He 'gave up'? No. The apostle Paul argues:

[Who], although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. (Philippians 2:6-8)

Paul argues that the first real sacrifice Jesus made is celebrated in North America on December 25: Christmas. That is the very act of coming down as human, not in human form, as if He wore a human costume, but as a natural human being. Paul's word homoiōma[i] (ὁμοίωμα) (Philippians 2:7) translated in English as "the likeness"holds the notion of something being that something. The logical law of identity states that something is that something, e.g. an apple is an apple, it is not a pear or a banana, it is an apple. In the same way then Jesus is human. This was for God in the literal sense a natural demotion as He is much better than humans.

Jesus was naturally divine, and thus He had the right to demand that others identify Him as divine just as much as He had the right to act on His divine nature. Did Jesus then give up His glory? In the applicable sense, yes. Before He was arrested Jesus is recorded praying to His, Father: "glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was," (John 17:5) (my emphasis). Jesus always had the glory at His fingertips, but He willingly put it aside in exchange for abuse, rejection and death for the sin of the slave of sin. In sum Jesus became the target for hatred by humans and the object of His, Father's wrath, instead of the slave to sin who was the one who is truly deserving of His, Father's wrath.

These sacrifices are what He made. He gave up His right to act on His glory, something that was rightfully His and the right for easy and automatic justice, as he could have, if He wanted to, destroyed us all in the fires of Hell. He didn't need to save anyone! The earthbound, physical and sociological suffering that He endured was how it was materialized in His life here on earth. Why did He pay for the penalty for our sins the way He did? Great question! I'll leave the answer for another day. All we need to do today is reflect on his sacrifice for you and me.

______________

[i] - https://www.blueletterbible.org/nasb/phl/2/1/t_conc_1105007 

______________

Resources

- faithbeyondbelief.ca 
- The Case For the Resurrection of Jesus