dW

Awaiting the Wii

two Responses (now closed)

Needless to say the Wii is the console I am most looking foward to this go around. I am not a huge console gamer. I don’t own a lot of games. I only buy games that I catch wind of that I might enjoy or I know I will. I’m a huge RPG gamer as well, so most games don’t really appeal to me. I have absolutely no interest in the Xbox 360 as I have relatively no interest in Microsoft products as a whole. It’s not out of a hatred of the company, but a recent history of releasing second-rate products at high prices.

PlayStation 3

Sony has a more recent problem with substandard products than Microsoft has and is hurting for it. Sony only has one moneymaker anymore in the consumer products area (the other is their movie business), and that’s the Playstation line of gaming console systems. The PlayStation 3 is, however, interesting to me, but the high price tag turns me off. I can’t afford to blow $600 on a gaming console that has few games out for it, none I have any interest playing. Why should I pay for a console that I’d only play the games I have currently for the PlayStation and the PlayStation 2 on it? Even then it does a bad job at doing that.

The designer side of me screams out in the horror of what the console looks like. It’s predecessor wasn’t much better in the looks department either. The logo is something that really turns me off as it is set in an extremely popular typeface popularized by the Spider-Man movies. It’s general concensus when designing a logo not to use popularized typefaces. You shy away from using typefaces that were recently popularized. The only thing worse would have been to set the logo in the “Got Milk” typeface or the Harry Potter typeface. This is a phenomena called “Pigeonholing.” Fonts become so popular after used on something equally as popular that the typeface loses its allure. The PlayStation 3 logo is even more unoriginal since the originator of the typeface’s popularity is releasing Spider-Man 3. Two logos almost identical (even containing a 3 at the end) are used on popular products. I guess their idea is that since they both own the movie rights and the console then it’s alright.

The PlayStation 3, however, is the winner when it comes to graphics capabilities by a longshot, beating out the XBox 360 and the Wii by a 1000 miles. Its video and audio capabilities as well are top notch, providing what the other 7th generation consoles should. I will talk more about this later.

The Wii

Nintendo is trying to shake up the gaming world with a different way of playing games. I’ve watched video showing off the Wii’s controller and am dying to try it out myself. The Wii has actual good games out for its launch (it’s all a matter of opinion). It can play GameCube games as well which is a plus, a first for Nintendo by the way. There are a few downsides to the console, though.

Its graphics are subpar to today’s standards. They did improve upon the GameCube’s graphics capabilities, although not by much. They are giving us yesterday’s graphics capabilities tomorrow. This is not a good move in my opinion because a new computer bought with an average video card is capable of better graphics than a Wii. Graphics, however, doesn’t make a game. Nintendo is hoping their new methods of playing games will save them from this criticism. Systems with poorer graphics have won the console war in the past, notably the Atari 2600 (over the Intellivision) and the Playstation (over the Nintendo 64 [this really is debatable]). Nintendo’s game development skills are superior to just about any other company out there, so that is a plus for the console.

The controller itself is a downside. Why? Well there are attachments to the controller that make you have to purchase additional attachments to play many different kinds of games. Their new remote isn’t going to work for all games at all. I think Nintendo knows this, though. Thankfully the console does come with an attachment, the famed “nunchaku” attachment.

Last and least of my favorite downsides to the console is the lack of modern audio and video capabilities. The PlayStation 3 is capable of high definition (1080p) with HDMI and toslink (optical) audio output at 7.1 SurroundSound using Dolby Digital. The Wii is only capable of 480p using component and standard RCA analog audio output using Dolby ProLogic II that’s been around since God knows when. Why? The 480p resolution doesn’t bother me as much, but the video output does. Component is a great analog output format, but when many people have high definition TVs capable of HDMI or DVI input it’d be a good idea to provide that and a built-in upscaler. It’s sad when a $100 DVD player provides toslink audio and DVI output with a built-in upscaler. Sure the Wii can do more. I would have gladly paid more for a model capable of that. Digital video output is a new thing for a console, but optical audio is not. It’s sad when a 6 year old console is capable of better audio output than a new one coming out today.

The last downside could be a damning thing for the Wii in my opinion. People with high resolution capabilities (I use a computer monitor for my TV and am planning to upgrade farther) aren’t going to play a console that looks like shit on their displays no matter how cool their controller is. They are relying upon a consumer’s upscalers to provide video to their high definition displays. Some early HDTVs didn’t even have one. They would just blow up the picture to the size of the screen. You get an extremely pixellated picture. This is fine for 6 year old consoles as users would understand the limitation of those consoles, but not for brand new ones.

Even with the last downside being a potential dealbreaker for me I will buy a Wii. Before I will probably be able to purchase a Wii (due to the lack of them after they’re all bought at launchtime) I will have a secondary display on my Mac that will serve the purpose of a secondary display as well as a TV/gaming station thanks to some nice equipment from Gefen. This secondary display will be high definition whether the Wii likes it or not.

Where’s the Math?

one Response (now closed)

The New York Times published an article about the lower standards in Math in American schools these days. They wonder how to improve math skills.

It appears to me the places that are having Math problems are the places in the United States that “reformed” their math programs. Louisiana usually ranks pretty low in the education department in the United States, but I cannot say I had a poor education. I was blessed with excellent teachers throughout elementary, middle, and high school. I furthermore had parents who cared about my education and stressed to me the importance of a good education. I was told that I was exceptionally intelligent and that I should take advantage of the excellent school system I was in. I believed them and did well throughout school, especially in mathematics and grammar.

Schools and school systems are never going to be good without community support. If the community doesn’t care about their children’s education then the school isn’t going to function properly. The students in turn will not care and will not get an education. That’s the bottom line.

Basic mathematics is not hard. Basic mathematics is a necessity. What’s the problem with the current system of doing things? The basic problem is the calculator itself. When I was a kid we were not allowed to use calculators at all until I was in junior high where we had to take a series of tests to prove that we understood properly how basic math works. We could use our calculators then. I remember having to be tested every single year except my senior year (I didn’t take a math class that year) on basic math skills. We were tested again on basic math skills on the ACT.

Even when the parents care for their child’s education the school system has mainly failed them in teaching proper mathematics all because of a simple machine. The calculator is an evil machine for a child. My nephew just started school and there is a girl down the street that’s in third grade. They were playing school one day, and as a result the girl was creating a make believe classroom out of her own experiences in school. My nephew was sitting at a desk with a calculator on his desk. She told him to figure out the problems on the board as fast as he could on the calculator. I asked her, “Do you use calculators in school?” Her reply was, “Yes, sir. We all have calculators. We’re required to have them.”

Kids being able to use a calculator in the classroom in the third grade is wrong. At the third grade level a student still doesn’t have the full grasp of mathematics, but only a subset of it. For the most part they are just learning multiplication and division at that level (I was taught multiplication before I even started school). Why allow them to use a calculator? Because the teachers are too lazy to teach the kids to do it in their heads like their parents and grandparents did. Easily available and cheap technology is making us weak. I can do computations in my head that make kids look at me in awe. My father can do basic math problems in his head most of the time faster than someone could punch the buttons on a calculator. He’s 70 years old. The first step in proper mathematics education is to ditch the calculators until students can be properly tested (7th grade level) on their knowledge of basic math. Repeated testing throughout junior high and high school is essential. It assures the faculty and the parents that the kids are capable of doing basic math even while using a calculator to figure out geometry, algebra, and calculus.

To understand mathematics a child has to understand how to add, to subtract, to multiply, and to divide. Everything else from ratios, percentages, and decimals all involve these four fundamental things. They have to understand the proper steps you go through to solve those types of problems. Memorization of simple mathematic computations is vital as well. Students should be tested yearly on their memorization of basic math skills by taking a 100 simple math problem time test. I had to take tests like that regularly until I was able to do all 100 in a minute. To do 100 simple math problems such as 2+2, 3×6, etc. in a minute is slow. How many kids these days would be able to do something as simple as that? Not many. The ones that do would be considered geniuses by today’s standards.