Tarantio doesn't have a personal statement currently.
29 years old
Gender Not Set
gah i should probably update this...
im a big gamer, i love writing and reading and lots of outdoor stuff. meesa luving musak.
and other stuff...
Anti-spambot check: No
Joined: 28-March 03
Profile Views: 2,235*
Last Seen: 29th November 2011 - 02:06 AM
Local Time: May 25 2013, 10:24 AM
2,157 posts (1 per day)
* Profile views updated each hour
11 Mar 2011
Hey folks, a good friend of mine, Alan Jack, here in Dundee has a lady friend who resides in the states, and their first anniversary is coming up. They can't afford to get together, so they've entered a competition on Facebook to win a trip for her to come visit him. Aww...
Thing is, at the minute they're in the lead, but not by much (30 votes or so right now), so I thought, since it's such a nice thing to want I would ask all you fine folks who might be on Facebook to give them a quick vote. All you have to do is click, there's no "likes" necessary and no apps will be after your info, or anything like that, just click:
and click on the vote button, and leave a wee message. I'm sure Alan Jack (that's his first name, btw, I know, weird) will greatly appreciate even such a small gesture.
Let love shine on! /cheese
28 Oct 2010
As some of you know, I'm finally doing my honours year at Uni, where I'm studying Computer Games Technology (final year, where we get our degree grade), and a large part of the year (half our credits, hence half our final grade) is the honours project and dissertation. I know quite a few of you folks on the board are gamers to some degree, others writers, and all of you are intelligent, so I thought I'd post up a quick blurb about what I've chosen as my research question, as well as a link to my blog, in the hopes that those of you interested might give it a read and, preferably, give me some feedback every now and then. Also, if anyone knows of relevant research material, suggestions are more than welcome; I need to get reading and taking notes ASAP.
So, my research question:
"Can existing story writing techniques be adapted for use by an A.I. to generate plots for story-driven games?” is what it says on my blog; this is an early draft of the question, though.
Over the next six months or so I'll be researching and experimenting the topic, with the aim of creating a set of tools to build simple, structured plots, as well as a procedural AI to do the building; at this stage, my primary focus is the toolset, with the AI experiments being used to prove their success.
I'm keeping a blog here. It's fairly small at the moment, but we're still in the stage of setting and presenting our research questions just now, so there'll be more on a regular basis.
I appreciate any time you all take to have a look at least, and anyone with comments or suggestions gets a free hug at the project's (hopefully successful) conclusion.
15 Jul 2010
Personally, I'm a fan of red. It's been scientifically proven that sports teams that play in red have a psychological advantage for the intimidation the colour induces in their opponents. It's also as low a frequency of light as the human eye can perceive. And everyone knows "Red wunz goes fasta!"
Blue, on the other hand, is common as muck. The sky is blue (behind those clouds), and thus so is the sea. Ours is the Blue Planet, yet everyone knows Mars is way cooler than earth (and not just due to its further distance from the sun, oh no...). Dancing girls and dominatrices don't go about wearing blue pvc outfits; it's strictly (haha) black or red for these professionals, and who are we to question their expertise?
And purple? don't get me started on purple. All those beatniks like to pretend it's a "cool" colour, but it's not even present in natural light; it has to be created by mixing two seperate wavelengths. Talk about high-maintenance!
Face it, all the better colours have some red in them; orange, pink and, yes, even the Popular Choice, purple. Red is where it is at. Convince me otherwise, if you can; I dares ya!
4 Apr 2010
I'm going to try to avoid spoilers in this thread, so if anyone replying could do the same, I'm sure people who haven't seen it yet would appreciate it
So, what do folk think of the new series of Doctor Who? Not just the new Doctor himself; so much has changed from the previous series it's almost unrecognisable. What do folk like/dislike so far, and how does it compare to your expectations/previous series?
Personally, I enjoyed the new episode. It had some dodgy moments (in the kitchen, near the start), but overall I was happy. Matt Smith managed not to be too irritating, and once he got a bit of composure towards the end I thought he really showed some promise. I'll refrain from commenting much on Karen Gillan; her casting and role are unfortunately in the sort of alignment to give me funny feelings just below my tummy, so I'm biologically biased there. I think the most objective thing I could say about it is that I think she hasn't been given the strongest introduction from a writing standpoint; the other companions (from Rose onwards) generally had a bit more involvement in their introduction to the TARDIS, while Amy feels a bit "tacked-on". Hopefully that'll improve, though, and in the meantime I'll content myself hoping to see that french maid outfit... ¬.¬
As for the new TARDIS... From what I had heard/read so far there was going to be more to it, not sure if the Doctor describing it was what they were talking about, or if we're actually going to get new sets for all those "extra rooms" they promised. I'd like to see that sort of thing, as the new control room only looks different to me from close up...
As for whether Matt Smith can do better than David Tennant? Everyone's asking that question and it annoys me a bit, as I preferred Christopher Eccleston in any case...
2 Feb 2010
I noticed something really odd last night, thought I might comment on it here; after playing Mass Effect 2 and romancing Miranda (voiced by and modelled after Yvonne Strahovsky, who plays Sarah in the TV show Chuck), I watched a new episode of Chuck last night. The first time I saw Sarah on screen, the little part of me that is my manly manliness sniggered to itself "hehe, I've seen her bewbs!" (from ME2, sort of). I didn't find this thought odd until a little later in the episode, when Sarah was parading about in her underwear.
Any of you who've watched Chuck may know that this isn't a rare occurence either, and that the underwear in question is invariably skimpy. It hit me at this point that I remembered the virtual encounter with her digital counterpart much more vividly than I had any of the times the actual actress had been strutting her stuff in far more revealing attire, and this slightly blew my mind.
So mostly today I've been considering the psychological effects of games compared to films/TV in a new light, and how much easier I found it to identify with an interactive digital environment than a real-life (albeit filmed) one. I haven't come to any sweeping conclusions on the subject, but it shocked me that Yvonne Strahovsy's assets were the trigger to such a big re-evaluation of some strongly held beliefs...
Also, it's led me to wonder about the perception of adult themes in the two different media; Chuck isn't a watershed program strictly, yet even it has much more explicit content than Mass Effect 2 (BBFC rated the game 15, PEGI rated it an 18!), and it involves actual footage as opposed to 3D graphics. It recalls the so called controversy over the first ME game's inclusion of a "sex scene" with an alien, which was pitifully tame and actually pretty corny in reality.
So here's what I wanted to get other people's views on:
The standard of censorship of adult themes in games is probably still suffering from the medium's association with children (gaming is still widely seen as a kids' pastime), but television and film both flaunt sex, violence and the likes to draw in viewers. This situation exists despite the fact that it is technically more difficult for a child to get an age-restricted game than it is for them to be watching TV after the watershed (for instance switching to BBC3 at nine pm on Sundays for Being Human will probably lead to the kid watching sex scenes or something very violent or bloody, whereas the same kid would have to fork out £30+ to a retailer who would break the law by selling a game rated too high for their age).
In the light of these obvious double standards, does something need to change, and if so, what? I understand that changing the perception of games as childish is nigh on impossible, but changing the censorship standards on one or both of the media is something that could be addressed by the authorities in question. Personally, I'm undecided at this point, mostly due to the shift in my perception of the effect of immersive versus spectative entertainment, and though my background leads me to lean towards saying that things are unfair toward gamers at the moment, I'm also wondering if a cautious approach to extending adult themes available in such a medium is actually a wise approach.
In any case, I can say with certainty that Ms. Strahovsky's breasts are the most thought-provoking pair I've ever encountered in my tenure as a young male (read: boobie expert).
19 Dec 2010 - 7:56
10 Dec 2010 - 18:21
24 May 2010 - 10:01
4 May 2010 - 23:50
12 Apr 2010 - 1:38
Other users have left no comments for Tarantio.
|Lo-Fi Version||Time is now: 25th May 2013 - 10:24 AM|
|Use these links if you're going to shop at Amazon and a percentage of what you spend goes towards helping this site!|