FF7 Remake

I have complicated feelings in relation to the Final Fantasy VII remake. FF7 is without a doubt one of my favourite games (or possibly my absolute favourite game) ever, so logically I should be excited to see it remade.

However, I also feel like a huge part of why I love it is because of the major things that a remake would change. I love the ridiculous graphics and the fun, campy moments they can provide. I love the horrible translation errors (in which the most shocking and significant scene in the game is accompanied by the misspelling of the word because). I love "this guy are sick" and was crushed when the version available on Steam changed it to "this guy is sick." I love the beautiful backgrounds contrasted with Lego people. I love the way that the graphics add to the charm, camp and often ridiculousness of the game, and also the way that they still function effectively in the game's more serious moments.

I can't imagine the Wall Market with modern graphics. I can't imagine Yuffie angrily shaking her fist at everyone with modern graphics. I can't picture Nanaki and Red in their sailor suits with modern graphics. Chocobo racing with modern graphics would be cool, but altogether a completely different type of experience. These things just worked perfectly with the graphics they had, and I think that remaking them will change the entire experience in a way that will make it a completely different game with a completely different atmosphere altogether.

Niagara Falls Comic Con: All Dressed Up and Nothing to Do

When I went to the Niagara Falls Comic Con for their first year at the new Scotiabank Convention Centre, it was a fairly nice experience. While it was not very big, I liked the casual, mini-con kind of atmosphere.

The lack of lineups and relatively low admission price meant that you didn't have to do much planning. After a year of conventions like Anime North - where you have to book a hotel room about 12 months in advance in order to get a good hotel, and there is so much going on that you have to do a lot of planning beforehand - it was kind of cool to see a convention where you could drop in without even pre-registering, and just have a nice day. You didn't really have to save up for it because it was relatively cheap, and the minimal programming and events meant that you didn't have to worry too much about scheduling. In a way, it was a break for a lot of regular conventioneers who put a lot more work into bigger conventions throughout the year. There wasn't too much to do, but that was ok because that was kind of the point.

Fast forward to 2014 and all of a sudden this mini-con is starting to evolve into a full-fledged, 3-day con. Attendance is up, it has expanded to 3 days, and - correspondingly - the admission price has skyrocketed and lineups have gotten ridiculous. No longer a mini-con, NFCC has now become the kind of convention that requires the kind of planning, saving and commitment that other bigger cons like Anime North and Fan Expo do.

5x5 year review

So my friend Mazie recently did a 5x5 review, and I really like the idea, so I've decided to do my own. I changed one of the categories to better reflect my personal interests, but the rest of the structure is taken from hers.
Edit: My friend Cody has also decided to do one as well!
Here I will be going over my top 5 favourite things of the year from the following 5 categories:
- Movies
- Books
- Games
- Musics
- TV Shows

Also, I have decided to go based on things that I personally experienced for the first time in 2013, rather than things that were newly released in 2013, so that I am reflecting on my year rather than the year of 2013 as a whole. This is what Mazie did in her 5x5 and I really liked that approach, so I have decided to imitate it. Therefore, there are a lot of things on here that didn't actually come out in 2013, but that I personally experienced in 2013.

 Anyway, here are my favourites from those categories:

Movies

5) Pitch Perfect
- I volunteered at an arts camp this summer and all any of the campers wanted to do the whole week was the cup song. They would sing Taylor Swift songs while doing the cup thing, do the cup thing before we ate, and they pretty much spoke in nothing but pure Pitch Perfect references. As I had not seen the film before this week, I had no idea what was going on, and was confused most of the time. After arts camp ended, I decided to watch the movie so I could understand what they had been talking about the whole time, and I actually ended up loving the movie and watching it like 2 more times in a week, and it has since become one of my favourites. It's aca-awesome!

4) Make the Yuletide Gay
- Wasn't really the best movie ever: it relied a lot on lame puns and mediocre innuendo and a lot of things were awkwardly paced and written. However, it made up for this by having a few really, really strong scenes, with a particularly strong ending that made me really happy. Overall, I did really enjoy the movie, even if I have to admit that it was weak in a lot of places.

3) Iron Man 3
Much, much better than Iron Man 2. Although there were some weak spots, I really enjoyed the film as a whole. The interaction between Tony Stark and Harley was delightful, and the Bruce Banner cameo at the end was hilarious.

 2) Thor: The Dark World
I enjoyed this one more than Iron Man. To be fair, though, I also prefer Thor to Iron Man in general, so I'm biased. I love Darcy's character, and it was nice to see her again. Loki's role in the film was fantastic, and the movie overall had the great mix of humour, drama and action to keep me enteratined.

1) Frozen
Anyone who knows me will not be surprised at all that this is at the top of the list. I absolutely loved this film! I found all of the characters to be interesting and enjoyable to watch, and I really like how it undermines a lot of traditional fairly-tale notions about true love and about what types of relationships are important. The music was amazing as well, and I just generally had a fantastic time watching this movie!

Books

5) Dubliners: James Joyce
I technically read part of this before 2013 since I read Araby in first year. However, this summer was the first time I actually read the whole book, so I still consider it to be a 2013 thing.
I have enjoyed everything by Joyce I have read before, but reading the whole collection of stories in Dubliners was probably my favourite experience with him so far. Eveline was particularly heartbreaking, but the collection as a whole was just amazing. Joyce has a way with words that just moves you.

4) The Thief: Megan Turner
I read this novel for a fantasy class I took, and my first reaction was to go on Amazon and order the rest of the series! It starts off a bit dry, and my first reaction was to think that I wasn't going to enjoy it. However, once you get to about the halfway point, it starts to really take off, and you find out why all of the exposition was so important. Turner's series may end up becoming a new favourite for me!

20 Reasons the Poor Can't do Things

So through reading Christina H's fantastic new article on Cracked, I discovered this lovely article posted to Dave Ramsey's bigoted controversial website.

For those who don't want to read the article, it lists "20 things the rich do every day" in an attempt to shame poor people and blame them for their socioeconomic situation.

This post is a direct response to that article, where I will be responding to each of the 20 "things" that he shames poor people for not doing with what I think are pretty common sense responses (although apparently they're not all that common sense since neither the writer of the original article nor Dave Ramsey seem to understand them).

Also, please note that these comments are in direct response to "statistics" from the original article: I'm not trying to create generalizations, I'm responding to the generalizations that the original article makes. I honestly don't think in the kind of binaries that he uses, but I am writing using the same binaries so I can address what he says. So if you're wealthy and reading this, please don't be offended: I'm not bashing rich people, I'm simply responding to the suggestions about "rich" and "poor" that the article makes using the same language. I'm not actually agreeing with the binary divide he makes between "rich people" and "poor people."

Anyway, here we go:

1) He kind of cheated here and put 2 things under one point. Either that or he can't count. But anyways: poor people eat more junk food calories than rich people because junk food is cheaper than healthy alternatives and they can't afford to eat the healthier alternatives that rich people can. If they had the money to buy healthier food, they probably would.

Also, rich people do gamble: it's called the stock market. But I assume the article's clearly fabricated statistics don't take that into account. Poor people gamble in cheaper ways because they can't afford high-risk/high-reward investments because they don't have that kind of money, so they buy a 2 dollar scratch card, because that's what they can afford. Rich people also don't need that little bit of hope for escape that gambling offers, because they are already in a good financial position. Some poor people, on the other hand, rely on that little bit of hope because it's all they have and the only hope they have of not being poor one day.

2) Poor people aren't as hyper focused on a single goal because the goals of "being able to pay this month's rent" and "being able to eat" are things that require a lot of their attention. Because these various essential goals are taken care of for rich people already, they can then dedicate more attention to "some single goal."

3) Poor people exercise less because they have more physically demanding jobs that leave their bodies exhausted and unable to exercise, while rich people typically have jobs with little to no physical labor. They also have less time because they often have to work multiple jobs. Also, they can't afford gym memberships.

Dragon Age 2: Judging a Game on its Own Merit

When Dragon Age 2 was released last March, it sparked a lot of complaints and controversy amongst the fandom. Within several weeks, the game went from being the highly anticipated sequel of the highly successful "Dragon Age: Origins", to a common find on the "previously enjoyed" racks at stores. Forums erupted with complaints, mostly focused around the much smaller scope of Dragon Age 2 when compared to the abundant quests, large world and expansive plot line of Origins.

Considering that all of Dragon Age 2 takes place within the City of Kirkwall and the surrounding mountain of Sundermount, it is true that the game is - at least geographically - much less expansive than Origins, which took place across the entire kingdom of Ferelden. The game also got rid of elements such as the Chanter's Board and the Mage's Collective, which allowed for an incredibly large amount of quests. However, it is foolish to assume that a smaller scale means less quality; rather then being inferior, Dragon Age 2 is simply a different type of game. Many great games take place within a smaller setting; the critically acclaimed Batman: Arkham Asylum took place entirely within Arkham island, and the classic Silent Hill series was completely contained within the town of Silent Hill. Saying that a game  is flawed because it is less expansive is not an accurate statement, as a smaller setting can often add a lot to a game, which I will argue is the case with Dragon Age 2.