Category: Random crap

What doesn’t fit anywhere else.

“Grumpy Cat” for the Atari 2600

Published by Pab on March 14, 2014

I’m in one of those lacunae that pop up in the middle of an author’s life from time to time. My editor gave me a heads up that the first round of edits for Brothers in Arms will be arriving in my mailbox imminently. Once it does, I will need to drop everything to review the changes and notes, and start out on the rewrites stage.

Of course, being hip-deep in Crush Story could have been an obstruction. To prepare myself to go back into the universe of Bobby, Sarah, and Gabriel, I needed to get Jason and Sam (from Crush Story) out of my head. So I put the novel aside to clear my mental palate and be ready to work.

Of course, my brain doesn’t like being inactive. It wants challenges. It wants to create. So I wrote a video game. To be specific, I wrote a game for the Atari 2600.

For those of you under 30 (which honestly is most of my fanbase) the Atari 2600 was the first widely available reprogrammable video game system. It pioneered the ability to change games by plugging in a different cartridge. It popularized the joystick as a control medium. And it led the way for every system that has come since. The games were simple, but addictive and compelling. And while today people might sneer at the bad graphics and simple sounds, from 1978 through 1982 it was state of the art.

The main challenge in writing a game for the 2600 is to make it as small as possible. The average game for the 2600 is 4K. That is one ten-thousandth the size of “Angry Birds” on your phone. And you only had 128 bytes of memory for your variables. We don’t even talk in bytes any more, only in millions (Gb) and trillions (Tb) of bytes.

So I sat down to write a game. All of the best 2600 games made up for their simplicity with great theming, backstories, and creativity in imagery. So I decided to make my game about Grumpy Cat.

For the action, I recycled a concept I’d used three decades before when I taught myself game programming for the Atari 800 by writing a game called “Herple” which I never released. Your character moved around the screen while being chased by a number of different enemies, trying to collect items that popped up in random places. Easy mechanic, but one that can become challenging when your opponents start to move really quickly.

The theming for the game fell into place naturally. Tardar Sauce wants to eat in peace. But the universe is out to annoy her, which it always seems to do. The player needs to move Tardar Sauce around the screen eating the “noms” (the yellow dot in the screen above). Simple goal, easy to grasp.

Of course, a game needs obstacles, so I created a bunch of “monsters” that would chase through the screen in different ways that the player would have to maneuver Tardar Sauce around.

I came up with five obstacles based on things that Grumpy Cat hates. I drew a smiley face, which would represent happy people. I drew a rough representation of a camera to represent a photographer out to get the meme picture of the year. I drew a Valentine’s heart to represent the concept of love. I drew a “Bluebird of Happiness,” which would flitter up from the bottom of the screen, and I drew a Shiba Inu Doge.

One of the tricks in creating the game was for each of the five “monsters” to move differently, essentially having different artificial intelligence code for each. I made the Happy Person the simplest, moving from the top of the screen to the bottom while chasing after the player as it does so. It moves the slowest of all the monsters.

The photographer moves down the screen twice as quickly as the happy person, but is the same speed as the happy person in going from left to right.

The Doge is the toughest enemy. Like the photographer and happy person it will chase you down, but while it moves from top to bottom at the same speed as the happy person, it’s twice as fast in moving from left to right. At higher speeds, you have to try and get above the Doge as quickly as possible, or it will chase you down.

For the hearts I needed something different. They also move from the top of the screen to the bottom, but I didn’t want them to chase Tardar Sauce down. Instead, they will pick a direction (left or right) and move in a diagonal as they move down until they hit the side of the screen, at which point they just move straight down.

The Bluebird of Happiness was tricky. I decided that it was way too easy to just hang out at the bottom of the screen to dodge enemies before moving up above them, so I had the bird move up the screen, flittering back and forth randomly as it did so. You can’t hang out near the bottom all the time without running the risk of running into the bird.

I have some folks out there play-testing the game (as I call it, poking it with a sharp stick) right now, and will be fixing bugs and making improvements with an eye toward releasing it. Of course, since Grumpy Cat is trademarked and licensed all to heck, I won’t be able to sell the game. However, I will make the binaries available for anyone who wants to play it. And I’ll probably have two cartridges manufactured of the game: one for myself and one for Tardar Sauce’s owners as a thank you for not suing me.

If you know a thing or two about 2600 emulation and homebrew games, or want to learn, you can check out the thread about the game at AtariAge.

A Centsible Proposal

Published by Pab on February 7, 2014

As happens regularly, people are talking about getting rid of the one cent coin (“penny”), saying that it costs too much to produce and has too little value.

Some say that without the one cent coin we would just round every transaction to the nearest five cent mark, but that’s wishful thinking. Every example of where the lowest denomination coin has been eliminated has shown immediate price inflation. Plus, since Americans have been trained to think of their coins not as multiples of cents but fractions of a dollar, the dime will immediately become the lowest effective denomination to many people with the five-cent nickel relegated to the status of half a dime (which was actually what the five cent coin was called from 1792 until 1873).

And when you consider the fact that the US loses more per coin minting the nickel than it ever did on the cent, very soon there will be a push to eliminate the nickel. This will make the dime the de jure, not just de facto lowest denomination.

The answer is not to just stop minting cents and nickels, but to make them cost effective. And the best way to do that is to do what the US did in 1857, 1864, 1873, and 1965: revamp our coinage system almost completely.

The Half Dime

First, to save the five cent coin, we need to actually step backward for the answer. As mentioned above, the five cent coin from 1792 until 1873 (with a seven year overlap at the end with the nickel five cent coin) was a silver piece called the Half Dime. We need to go back to the original concept, and revive the Half Dime as our five cent piece.

The last Half Dime minted in 1873 was 15.9 millimeters in diameter, significantly smaller than the dime. I propose that we make the new half dime the same dimensions as the 1873 model, and make it of the same clad composition as the dime, quarter, and half dollar. To make it easy to tell from other coins in your pocket, I suggest we use what is called an “interrupted edge,” where the edge alternates segments of reeding (the vertical “bumps” on the side of the dime, quarter, and half) and smooth edges.

Since the weight of the new coin would once again be about half of that of the dime, it will remain economical to mint this coin as long as it is economical to keep the same composition for the dime and quarter.

The Smaller Cent

Next, we need to take a lesson from the Eurozone, and make our one cent coin smaller. The Eurocent is currently 16.5 mm in diameter, compared to the current U.S. Cent at 19.05 mm. I suggest actually going slightly smaller to avoid a clash with the Half Dime and the third leg of my reform stool, which I will mention below. I propose a Cent of 15 mm exactly.

The new Cent will look similar to the current cent, since it will keep its copper coating. However, the inner core will no longer be zinc, but steel as is used by the Eurozone, Britain, and Canada. Between the smaller size and the cheaper (and sturdier) material, the coin will be less expensive to produce and last longer.

To ease the transition, I recommend using the current designs (Lincoln/Shield for the Cent and Jefferson/Monticello for the Half Dime). This way, people will have some continuity between the old coins and the new, to help them get used to them.

As old coins arrive back at the Federal Reserve, they can be retired and melted for their constituent metals, to be made into new coins. Since the current Cent and Nickel have more intrinsic value than their face value, this will actually mean a net profit to the government. Both old coins, however, will still remain legal tender and can be spent for years to come.

These two changes are not the end-all, be-all of the change, however. There is still one way to cut down on the number of Cents that are needed each year without suffering the economic consequences of eliminating the denomination altogether. We simply lessen the demand the same way we did during the Civil War.

The Tuppence!

The U.S. had a Two Cent coin from 1864-1873, which was designed to take up some of the demand for Cents, which had been driven out of circulation by hoarders during the Civil War (back when they were made of nickel, which was a semi-precious metal at the time). I say we not only keep the “penny,” but give it its proper sibling again, as have the British and the Eurozone: the “tuppence.”

Since the main use of the Cent nowadays is in making change, adding a Two Cent coin into the mix makes this process easier and cuts down on the number of Cents needed. The Two Cent coin can be minted for only slightly more than the new Cent will be, and would have twice the value, so only half as many would be needed. Where three or four coins are needed today, only two would be needed with this new addition. Instead of three pennies, hand back a tuppence and a penny. Instead of four pennies, hand back two tuppences. And, of course, hand back one tuppence instead of two pennies.

I propose that the Two Cent coin be revived at a diameter of 18.8 mm, slightly larger than the current dime. To distinguish it from the new Cent, Half Dime, Dime, and current Cent and Nickel, it will have a scalloped edge as can be seen above. This edge will make the coin easily distinguishable both visually and by feel. You will know you have a tuppence in your pocket, and can easily distinguish between the four small coins either by looking at them or touching them. And even with this distinctive edge, the new coins will still be able to stack and roll in vending machines, coin counters, or automatic change dispensers.

The tuppence will be the same composition as the new penny, and will change along with it should a cheaper material ever be required.

For a distinctive design, I chose someone woefully neglected on American money: Theodore Roosevelt. Roosevelt singlehandedly started the design revolution in American coinage that gave us the St. Gaudens gold coins, the Lincoln Cent, and eventually the Buffalo Nickel. Since the Mint recently released a Theodore Roosevelt coin in the Presidential Dollars series, there is an engraving handy that can be adapted easily to become the obverse of the new Two Cent coin.

For the reverse, I chose an animal linked forever with Teddy Roosevelt: the Bull Moose with whom he compared himself when launching his 1912 campaign for the Presidency. It will also be reminiscent of the much beloved Buffalo Nickel, and a chance to pay homage once again to conservation and American wildlife on our coins.

The graphic below shows the relative sizes of the three new coins, alongside the current Dime and Quarter Dollar, so you can see the system I propose at work.

With these changes, the American coinage will not only be cheaper to produce, but will once again be logical. The smallest denomination will be the smallest coin. The Five Cent piece will be smaller than the Ten Cent piece again. And the new Two Cent piece will fill a need better than an ever increasing number of One Cent pieces ever could. And all without the inflationary affects of doing away with our smallest coin.

1 Comment

Why Build a World Only to Blow it Up? (The Problem With YA Trilogies)

Published by Pab on January 10, 2014

In the past several years, I’ve gone through what, to me, had to be three of the most disappointing Young Adult trilogies ever.

Those three are the Divergent series, the Maze Runner series and the Hunger Games series.

Wait…what?

Surprised? Yeah, they’re three of the most popular dystopian YA series of recent years. They sell more books in a week than I’ll sell in two lifetimes. They’ve launched or are launching movie franchises that will gross into the bazillion dollar range.

And they’re all very well written and enjoyable.

I did not say they weren’t good – hell, I think The Hunger Games is a 21st Century Red Badge of Courage and Catching Fire a 21st Century All Quiet on the Western Front and deserve to be studied alongside them – I said I found them disappointing.

And here’s why.

SPOILERS ABOUND!

Why Do You Build Me Up….

Suzanne Collins, Veronica Roth, and James Dashner are expert world builders. Panem is a well-envisioned society whose development is deliberately stunted by the tyrannical Capitol. The world of the Factions is believable and fascinating. The Glade is a peek at what The Lord of the Flies might have been like if the asshole to cool guy ratio had been a little better. They’re all functional, but imperfect societies and leave the reader wanting to discover more.

Let’s start with The Hunger Games. I don’t think there is a single character we meet in District 12 who couldn’t have a good story told about them. You want to know more about Gale’s brothers. Each of the characters in the Hob has a backstory that’s hinted at. Hell, I’d sit down and read a book about Greasy Sae’s childhood. These are good characters and have so much to discover.

Then as we move on beyond the fence, we have eleven other Districts out there. Each of them have their own culture, their own values, and their own stories to tell. We get some little hints about these cultures during Katniss and Peeta’s tour, and from other tributes, but there are huge gaps that could be filled, and stories that could be told.

Moving on to Roth’s dystopian Chicago, each of the factions has a very defined role in society and they all depend on each other for survival. We are told early on how this arrangement came to be, and it’s one of those rare creatures in Sci-Fi: a dystopian origin that is vague without being annoyingly so; we don’t know how the world blew up, but we how society pulled itself back up afterward, which is the important thing.

I’d even go so far as to dispute the “dystopian” label for the world of the Factions. I’d argue it’s almost a Utopia as it’s actually set up. Everything works, and everyone has their place. And it’s not oppressively caste-oriented either. You choose your own future. You decide what faction you want to belong to and if you pass the test you are in.

There’s a lot to be explored here. Why would anyone want to choose Abnegation? What really sets Dauntless apart? Does being in Candor really give you the right to be as much of a douchebag as you want? Again, there’s room for lots of stories to be told.

Next let’s check out the Gladers. These amnesiac boys have built their own little society in the center of a labyrinth. We are told about nearly a dozen different jobs that the boys are divided up into and we get hints of how boys end up in those jobs. Society thrives. If it weren’t for the Runners who go out into the maze trying to find a way out there would be no contact with the Grievers at all and everyone could live reasonably happy ever after.

Three well imagined, well planned, well structured worlds with lots of stuff to explore.

And they’re all completely and irrevocably destroyed by the end of the second book (or in the case of Divergent and The Maze Runner, two thirds of the way through the first).

…Just to Let Me Down?

Mockingjay is a complete departure from the formula of the other Hunger Games books. It’s the story of the new rebellion and the fall of the Capitol. The Districts cease to exist as they are, and we hardly even visit District 12 at all until the very end. Plus, the characters that everyone loves are all killed or mentally raped before the end. Nothing Will Ever Be the Same.

The world of the Factions is falling apart before the end of Divergent. Abnegation is almost completely destroyed. A proper civil war is brewing. Four and Tris have to try and put things back together. By the time we get to Allegiant, the Factions and their story are proven to be essentially a lie, and a Midichlorian-sized macguffin is given for how they got that way.Things have changed so much that we now have two POV characters and two different stories to follow: Four’s and Tris’. (This is not a bad thing, by the way.) Everything you wondered about, and wanted to know more about, no longer exists. Nothing Will Ever Be the Same.

Dashner proves pretty early on that he is not fooling around. He quite openly and happily destroys life in the Glade starting at the halfway point of the first book. By the end, it’s completely fallen apart and even the Maze itself is out of the picture. A whole new challenge awaits. Nothing Will Ever Be the Same.

Which leads me to ask: why spend so much time world building if you’re only going to blow it all up?

Why tempt us with histories of the people of District 12? Why give us such tantalizing glimpses of Candor, Erudite, Amity, and the other Factions if you’re just going to not only destroy them but the reason for them existing? Why discuss the roles each boy plays in the Glade if those roles become irrelevant before the third Act of the story begins?

And Then Worst of All….

It really doesn’t have to be that way. Let’s look at another hot fantasy YA series, the Caster Chronicles. Kami Garcia and Margaret Stohl also built an expansive and fascinating universe with well-rounded characters and intricately designed supernatural species. The first book ends with the Nothing Will Ever Be the Same moment, when it looks like everything we knew was wrong, but the rest of the series is all about restoring the order of things. When the story reached its logical end in Beautiful Redemption, not only had all the characters grown and matured, but everything had been put back the way it was before it was broken. None of the characters will be the same again, but the world will!

Garcia and Stohl have decided to do a spin-off series following two fan-favorite supporting characters (Link and Ridley) as they set off on new misadventures. But if they hadn’t, there was still a Caster World intact enough that readers would know that there could be hundreds of more stories out there if someone wanted, and all they had to do was dream it all up. (Provided a Linkubus didn’t snatch it away from you while you slept.)

Don’t Break My Heart

The dystopian trend in YA is not a bad thing at all. It has brought millions of young readers into the world of Science Fiction, touching upon the “hard sci-fi” aspects of mid 20th Century writers.

But for those of us who have been around the Sci-Fi block a few times and remember the elaborate worlds created by some of the “old school” writers like Niven, Pournelle, Asimov, Heinlein, and Dick, it’s a letdown. There are hundreds of stories set in Niven’s Known Space universe. So many stories grew out of Asimov’s robot stories. Yet each of these new universes exist solely to tell one story, and that story ends up destroying everything.

Panem was created solely so Katniss Everdeen could destroy it. The Factions were created solely so Beatrrice Prior and Tobias Eaton can shut it all down. The Glade exists solely as a place for Thomas to spend some time in before it disappears. Powerful stories, yes, but they needlessly destroy their worlds just to develop one character fully.

There are stories out there that could be told. I want to know those stories. I want to explore those worlds. And they are destroyed. That is why I am disappointed.

Writers remember: you may create the characters, but if they’re well crafted they have lives beyond what you put on paper or the screen. You may build the worlds, but they grow and evolve. Please don’t treat them like window dressing. They deserve better. At least leave room for their stories to grow in people’s minds, even if not on the page.