Technothriller Games

The role of video games in the decline of the technothriller cannot be discounted. Beyond this, looking at just how closely they matched is fascinating to me.

The first (Splinter Cell) is very unsurprising. The plots of the first few Splinter Cell games match the themes and formats of contemporary technothrillers almost exactly. What else would you expect from a game bearing the “Tom Clancy’s” name?

The second (Metal Gear) is a little trickier, thanks to Kojima’s er, “eccentricity”. The technothriller influence is still definitely there, and at least the original, more grounded Metal Gear Solid is still not that much worse, if at all, than some of the more out-there entries in the genre (which definitely exist).

The Scale Of Poor Champions

Ted Williams and many other Hall of Famers never won a World Series. Herb Washington, a bizarre (and ultimately unsuccessful) experimental “designated runner”, did, although he was partially responsible for the A’s only loss in that series by getting picked off at first in the ninth inning.

The largest group of less-than-ideal champion players are simply bench/low-level players who just happened to be on a championship team. Little needs to be said about them except that they got lucky in that circumstance. (Robert Horry is perhaps the king of these players-he managed to win more championships than Michael Jordan while being only a decent journeyman stats-wise.)

Then there are the players in starring roles who, while not absolute flops, are still less than ideal. The king of these players is Trent Dilfer, the man who won a Super Bowl thanks to his team’s defense and then got cut. “Honorable” mentions include all the starting centers on the Bulls and Warriors dynasties and many of the pitchers on the 1920s Yankees.

 

My Writing Influences

So, two of my biggest nonfiction writing influences are two contradictory people. The first is Shamus Young, a video game critic. I like his stepped-back style with a touch of wit that can really dive deep into literary analysis (particularly his longform analyses of Mass Effect and Grand Theft Auto V).

The second is classic Bill Simmons, the sports commentator. I said “classic” [2000s] Simmons because he became a victim of his own success. But the sort of irreverent, “talks like a real fan attitude” in his early columns and The Book Of Basketball I read and loved growing up has also rubbed off on me.

Trying to balance the two influences can be tough. I can remember some Fuldapocalypse reviews where I was trying to be literary and analytical, and others where my mind was snarky and over-the-top. But they’re there, for better or worse.

Review Cravings

My latest Fuldapocalypse “craving” was thrillers written in the 2000s. As it was not a good decade for that genre (for reasons I’ve explained before and might explain again), why did I go there? It didn’t feel like I wanted a change of pace, as they were stylistically similar in large part to what I’d been reading before and after.

My review craving for low-list 2000s thrillers was probably because I wanted to see “were any worthwhile?” and “if they were bad, how were they bad?” And the answer can be seen in the reviews themselves.

Four Assists

The career of Yinka Dare is worth noting for one number.

Four.

His 100+ game, four season career contained that many assists. A leading soccer player gets that many in one season alone. Now to be fair…

  • Dare played few minutes and almost always only played in blowouts.
  • “Bigs” at the time didn’t have that many assists.

In comparison, Darko Milicic in his rookie season, same general role, same general drawbacks, had… seven assists.

Writing And Blogging

So, blogging has served me very, very well. Especially my Fuldapocalypse book review blog. However, I’ve noticed my reviews on there have been getting shorter and more off-the-cuff.

For the circumstances they were written in, they worked very well, and I’m proud of them. I got to broaden not only my own horizons, but also (hopefully) to share obscure books with my readers. If the convenient situation is “just read a soft ‘51%’ book, then give quick thoughts on it”, it works well.

But now-not so much.

First, I’m going back to long-form writing. I need (and it won’t be the easiest) to get in the mindset of writing 2,000 word or more chapters and not 200-500 word posts. Shifting from “sprinting” to “distance running” is tricky, and going back to the quick and easy posts may be a bad habit in that context.

Second, I’ve had this weird “mediocrity addiction” recently, where I read the first installments of a series, find them to be merely all right at best, then go to the later ones. Meanwhile, I read first installments that I significantly enjoy, and then, somehow, don’t follow up on them. My internal justification is “my brain is too busy to appreciate good fiction, so I might as well go for the outright mush”. That’s kind of self-defeating.

Third, I’ve been in a patch where I don’t have the most to say about my review subjects, and I’m sure the second part has something to do with it-what can you really say about “eh, it was all right I suppose?”

So expect less review blogging. I won’t stop it completely, but I do intend to slow it down, especially once I burn through my pile of “mostly finished” reviews. I’m nervous about going fully into writing long fiction, but I’m also excited, because there’s so much in my mind I want to get out.

Two Sports Similarities

There are a weird number of coincidences between the 1926 World Series and 2016 NBA Finals.

  • Both were seven games and down to the wire.
  • Both featured the first championships for a Midwestern franchise that had a long-time record of flopping around (Cardinals and Cavaliers).
  • Both featured a defeat of a fledgling mega-dynasty (the “Murderers Row” Yankees and “Death Lineup” Warriors)
  • Both mega-dynasty superstars dropped the ball in some fashion in Game 7. (Babe Ruth controversially tried to steal second with two outs and failed[1], while Steph Curry missed his last two shots.
  • The later successes of the mega-dynasty make those mistakes seem less consequential.

[1]The opinion on how wise this was ranges from “Ruth, while not Rickey Henderson by any means, was faster than a lot of people gave him credit for, and thus it was a justifiable gamble to not have to need two hits with two outs” to “Ruth was statistically the worst base stealer of all time.”

Unintentionally Good FICINT

I was somewhat critical of the “FICINT” concept in my last post on it, so I feel it’s fair to provide an example that is both positive and humorous. The prediction of drones, especially drones dropping/carrying weapons, was unintentionally foreshadowed by two missions in the infamous Grand Theft Auto video games. The “Demolition Man” and “Supply Lines” missions are among the most (rightfully) reviled in the series. And yet they were the most accidentally prescient concerning drone proliferation and use. Imagine that.