Tuesday 18 October 2011

Facts of the day

Here are facts for today


18th Oct:

  1. A chicken with red earlobes will produce brown eggs, and a chicken with white earlobes will produce white eggs
  2. Instead of a Birthday Cake, many Russian children are given a Birthday Pie
  3. One-third pound stalk of broccoli contains more vitamin C than 204 apples
  4. China has more English speakers than the United States
  5. The national anthem of Greece has 158 verses

A little blog change...

Dear readers,

I am going to make a little change in how I shall post my daily updates. From now on I will make a new post each time for the "facts of the day" and "A-Z of inspiration" as well add new ones to the pages.

With kind reguards,

Mr Generalist

    Monday 10 October 2011

    Beauty vs sexy

    Recently I was idly looking through a magazine I found on a bus and while flicking through I stumbled on to page about "beautiful celebrities", but the thing I noticed is none of these woman were shown in a "beautiful" way. All of them were leaving nothing to the imagination by showing every provocative part of their body. Now as a guy I'm obviously not complaining but it got me thinking... Being "beautiful" and being "sexy" used to be two different things, but nowadays everyone sees it as the same thing. Take these for example:

                                           
    Here are examples of two women who share the same type of beauty. On the left is Marilyn Monroe, known throughout the 1950s-60s as the most beautiful woman in the world. On the right is Christina Aguilera; Singer, actress and since the release of her music video "dirrty" 2002; one of the sexiest celebrities. As you can see there are very obvious similarities in their beauty, both have bleach blonde hair and full lips along with long eye lashes to bring out their eyes. Both of these women are obviously objectively beautiful but when looking at these two pictures, the way in which they convey their beauty are done in two very different ways.


    Marilyn Monroe:
    When looking at the Marilyn Monroe picture the first word that comes to mind is "beautiful"(no matter what your taste in woman is, objectively you can say that this is a good looking woman). She has a seductive look in her eyes which along with her gown and earrings have also a show a look of elegance and femininity. Her hair is bright blonde which gives her the glowing look (also along with her diamond/pearl earrings) which will make her stand out in a crowd and make all the men's heads turn.

    This picture does have a slight sexual feel to it but the overall theme of it is to show how beautiful she is. Her outfit (although you cannot see all of it) shows slight cleavage but mainly covers up most of her breasts and so leaves it up to the man to "fill in the gaps". The use of the colour white is the main source of the elegance in this picture. A direct link people build up from the colour white is "purity" and "honesty" this is general due to the colour of angel wings and heaven being made of clouds.


    Christina Aguilera: 
    When looking at this picture the first words that come to mind are to do with her looking sexy compared to being beautiful. Although alot of the same techiques that were used in the picture of Marilyn Monroe are used here you can see there is a subtantual difference in what affects it has on use in terms of how we view this photo and of course, Christina Aguilera.

    Just like Marilyn Monroe, Christina Aguilera has shining beach blonde hair that will instantly make her stand out from the crowd. Its longer in length and has more of a wavy/free look which gives the impression of her being more laid back and fun (compared to Marilyn who's every hair was precisely in place to give her the "picture perfect" look). The use of untamed but tamed hair is a techique alot of models will use to show more of a fierce, sexy look although in this picture Christina's hair isnt exactly as wild and crazy as it could be to fulfil this look it does mean that having this hair style is used for a more sexually seductive, but in a more natual looking way.

    The facial expression Christina is making, is again, a very seductive one. She has her eyes closed and her head slightly tilted to the side which is a techique alot of models use to let off a sexual vibe in photos. This is because it makes them look like more of a "free spirit" sort of person because it shows they are relaxed and carefree. The photo is taken with a low shot point up at her, This (along with the facial expression) makes her look like a elegent/sexy goddess but also it makes her look more dominant due to her "looking" down at us, but the fact that she has her head tilted to the side makes it much less of a threatening shot but more a sexy one because...

    -Quick Science lesson!-
    In a book i have recently been reading, author Dr. Richard Wiseman spoke about a way in which you can give off a more friendly impression towards a person is simply smile and tilt your head to the side a bit. The reason behind this is because smiling is an obvious sign among humans as friendliness, this is something everyone knows conciously. On the other hand, titling your head to the side and showing your Jugular vien is a subconcious sign of friendliness. This is due the the fact that if this vein is cut you will surely die, so humans, just like all of animals naturally try to protect this vein from being exposed and thats why when animals fight they always go for the neck.

    Think about when you are around friends, you are able to sit close to them and allow them to come close to you without you feeling awkward in anyway, but when you go to the doctors and they want to check your neck to see if its swollen when you have the flu you feel very uneasy. This is again is due the our natural instinct to project our Jugular vien from being exposed. Another simple example is when you meet someone new there is only so far you and the person can get before you feel uneasy, this is due to the same reason.

    When it comes to men and woman, a subconcious sign woman will let off to show they are attracted to a man is when they tilt their head to the side either when they are listening to the man or talking to him. This is a classic thing you will see in the movie as an obvious sign that the girl likes the guy, she always smiles and tilts her head to the side. This is a sign of trust and men will naturally pick this sign up without realising it and begin to feel like the woman is more comfortable around them aswell as attracted to them (another sign being if they laugh at your crappy jokes..). This is why men have a natrual urge to not only want to kiss a woman's lips but also their neck, it shows the woman they are not a threat but instead more trustworthy.
    -End of Science Lesson!-

    So not only does her pose make her much less of an actually threat but more of a playful one she is also showing signs of attraction which in turn; will get us as men more interested in her.

    Her outfit, just like Marilyn's one (from what i can see of it), is white. But it has a different affect on how we see her compared to Marilyn...
    Judging from chest up (Like Marilyn's): Because you see quiet a bit more cleavage from this outfit it gives alot more sexual feel than an elegant one with only a slightly seductive look. Although there is only an inch or two difference, showing this much totally takes away the elegance that the white brings to the photo but instead replaces it with alot more sex appeal (its funny how much a couple of inches can make..yes its also a penis joke, shame on you for laughing). So now because the balance of white and sexy and changed from being more white elegent heavy to more sexy heavy what has it done for the colour white? Well in my opinion it has given Miss Christina more of a fake honesty look, kind of how if a woman was to wear a school girl outfit she will be so hot because although she may look innocent you know she really is just trying to be sexy. This (again, along with the facial expression) I think gives it more of a "take me now" look, or maybe im just getting too carried away.


    So as you can see there is a big difference in how a woman’s beauty is portrayed within a photo within the 1950-60s. For Marilyn, it was more about leaving so much to the imagination, where as in Christina’s photo is more up in your face with how sexy she is and she knows it.

    Since the increase of the celebrity culture, the way in which celebrities dress now has such a big affect on the fashion world. Think of any world famous female singer (as an example), most of them (if not all) are very sexual in way they dance, dress and with the lyrics they sing. Now think about when you go to a club, basically all of the woman go around where nothing but a piece of cloth and dry humping the men. Because women see others doing it on TV so much and men say they find them attractive, then this drives the non celebrity women to start doing the same thing and try to recreate the sexy glamour they see on TV in the clubs. But there is something these woman don’t realise… There are two types of attractiveness in my opinion, “sexually attractive” and “attractive” and both are very different from each other.

    Sexual attractiveness is when a guy is only attractive to a woman physically because the woman is basically making him horny from what she are doing and/or the way she is dressing. Every woman knows men get turned on by sight, where as women are turned on by mind (and you wondered why your girlfriend doesn’t want to have sex with you when you walk into the room butt naked….). So when a woman walks into a club with basically nothing more than a piece of cloth on and dry humping all the guys, you are sure to see a line of drooling horny guys behind her trying to get her attention and hopefully sleep with her. Now for this short time the men are strongly attracted to the woman because they are horny but once this sexual attractiveness is gone (by sleeping with her) the man will loose interest very quickly. See the thing is sexual attractiveness is very strong starting but easily short lived…

    Attractiveness is when a guy is first attracted to the beauty of a woman rather than her sexiness. When a guy sees a beautiful woman they instantly develop a crush on them and will want to find out more about them, get to know them more so they can build up a big picture of how goddess like this woman is (where as if they are only sexually attracted to them they only care what the girl is drinking and if he has any chances of sleeping with her). The beauty of a woman is what captures the guy’s attention and she will forever stay on his mind until he finds out something more about her, if it’s good he will want to date her, if it’s bad then he will want to forget her.

    I can understand why a woman would prefer a sexy look to a beautiful one, when a man is sexually attracted to a woman he is more likely to make it very obvious, he follows her around, wiping the drool from his chin… Woman love getting attention from men (as men do from woman), it makes them feel good about themselves and the way they look and so to make themselves feel better quicker they can dress sexually as this will make heads turn and men flock around her like horny sheep, but as I said once a man gets what he wants he looses interest. So the woman will have to find a new target and start the cycle of being centre of attention for this short while all over again. Now another reason why this is understandable is because when a guy is attracted to the girl (not in just a sexual way) he doesn’t like to show it, he will talk to her but play it cool compared to being in a club where he will start dry humping her leg. Not all women can tell when someone finds them attractive nor will all the men that are attracted talk to her. So they won’t ever get the same confident boost as if they were to wear a scarf for a dress in a club.

    To summarise (I promise it's nearly over): Overall it seems the way in which we now want to portray a woman’s beauty has become increasingly more sexual as time has gone on. From only getting teased and leaving most of it up to the imagination, in only 50 years a big jump has been taken in how sexual we prefer beauty to be rather than pure, goddess-like. I predict that this general “flaunt it if you got it” fashion idea is part of a cycle and I believe that woman will start dressing in more a teasing way again very soon because lets face it, if things were to get anymore sexual then the music channel will not be allowed to air till after 9pm. I think it will change from being “sex goddess” to “sacred goddess” look again very quickly because if it only took fifty years to get it from where it was back then to now and it's starting the reach the edge of being acceptable than I reckon the new fashion will be more about what the man doesn’t see than what he does.

    Lets put it this way, if Madonna is around for any longer and things become even more sexual then all hell is going to break loose…..

    (click to see full size)


    Monday 26 September 2011

    Why are computer games getting easier and shorter?

    For me, whenever I speak to someone who plays computer games and are above the age of 20, one topic that always seems to come up is how easy games are becoming. This got me thinking as to how and why this is and so I thought I would share my insight and view on this, interesting and increasingly more popular topic within the gaming community.

    First the obvious... As time goes on the graphics of games are getting increasingly better, thinking back to when computer games first became popular there were so many that will always remain as classics and as still very fun games to play, but have you ever noticed that alot of the games you will think of  are also probably too hard to complete even by todays extreme gaming community?

    Take for example pacman, from watching a brilliant documentary film called "king of kong" i found out there are 255 levels in pacman. Around 12 of which are actually original levels but are just repeated several times each. This game will forever remain as one of the most well known games out there and people still find it quite entertaining to play it, but yet very few can get passed the first level or two (I myself have managed only up to level four before failing miserably) . Even though no one really gets far in this game it is still loved by everybody, it shows that if a game is simple enough, but still fun, graphics never have to be an issue because its not what matters when it comes to quality games (Another great example of quality gameplay but bad graphics is final fantasy VII, yes when it was first realised the graphics were top of the line but by todays standards they are nothing, but yet people never complain about the graphics, instead they always talk about how absolutely amazing this game is and square enix haven't bothered to remake it because there really is no need to)

    Okay so we got pacman as our classic example, now lets take a modern day one... "Call of duty modern warfare 2" (CoD). In my opinion this game is very, very entertaining so I not against people when they say how amazing this game is, but when compared on a basic gaming level to pacman I would say pacman will still be more popular as a "gaming classic" fifty years from now and heres why:



    For me, on a basic level there are a few things that make a game forever popular, storyline, memorable characters, and good gameplay.

    Storyline: Now pacman doesnt have a storyline so it scores no points for that and CoD has a storyline (Im guessing) but no one will remember it, only the fact that you have to kill a load of guys for whatever reason. So CoD losses points for having a stoyline but not actually trying to impress us with it.

    Memorable Character: Everyone knows pacman and what he looks like, he is the most basic and memorable game icon out there and again i believe its down to simplicity. Big points to pacman. CoD doesn't have any memorable characters because all the army guys look the same just with different weapons, again CoD looses points.

    Gameplay:  There is something is the simply gameplay of pacman that makes it slightly addictive but forever memorable. Controlling a yellow head and having collect little balls and fruit while getting chased by ghosts around a grid doesn't exactly sound fun but for some weird reason it is, and surprisingly its very very fun. Now for CoD in terms of gameplay meaning you vs the computer, there's not that much to it. The thing which makes this game memorable is the player-vs-player (pvp) aspect of it, which does still count as gameplay but in a totally different way from pacman. the pvp of this game is probably the best I have played for this genre of game. grabbing a machine gun and filling your opponent with bullets with everything around you is blowing up, for some strange reason, has an fascinating appeal to it. I wonder why...


    When i first picked up pacman as a child i was never able to get passed the first level but yet i still continued to play it and it still remains in my mind as one of the best all time classic games even though it is a near impossible game to complete. CoD on the other hand was, just like pacman, a very fun game to play as soo as you first pick it up, but i found it way too easy (playing story mode and against people online). Now im not saying i am a master at first person shooters (fps), but im sure when playing this game anyone thinks they are the next John Wayne of the fps world. So even though CoD is obviously a much easier game compared to pacman people still find it highly entertaining.

    The obvious reason behind CoD fame lies in a few things; Great graphics, explosions, and destroying real players online.

    It seems like there is a basic rule for  every game that comes out these days, 'if the graphics arent stunning then the game is crap'. Ask any young gamer what their favourite game is and i bet that 99% of them will say a game thats visually stunning but lack in storyline and gameplay. You could put it down to because games these days have the capability to stun you with the graphics but then again, when playstation one was out hardly any games relied on great graphics as a selling point to their games. The majority of them were about storyline and even if they were advertised for having great graphics the gameplay was still probably better than most games out these days.

    Another must have for new realised games is 'online play'. I think this is why stoyline and gameplay (offline) is affected so much, because everyone cares more about being able to play with their friends than going through a great story. Another thing you will notice when it comes to story modes in alot of games is the ability to skip through cut scenes and texts. This is a great feature to have but i think it was put in place more because people dont care whats happening because the story didnt impress them enough. I think game creators now see it as "lets put any text/ cut scene in there along with a skip button because no one is actually going to bother to read/watch it". The only reason why people rush though story modes these days  is to unlock things that allow them to play more online content (instead of taking their time and enjoying the game). Knowing that their audience is just wanting the bonuses from completing the story mode, creators make it as quick and painless as possible to do so.

    Remember when games were hard but still enjoyable but now whenever you cant beat a boss you get frustrated that you cant kill them in one hit? Remember when you couldnt beat one of the elite four but still kept aiming to have you name in the hall of fame? Remember trying to kill Sephiroth being such pain in the ass? These days because everyone can ask game designers for a bigger weapon to beat a boss (updates) they use this so much that game designers save the hassle of having thousands upon thousands of people complaining about the game being too hard by just having the one hit kill weapon already in the game and ready to use. When it actual fact the complaints they are sending to the designers secretly read this "im not skilled enough to beat this boss and i cannot be bothered to become better at this game so i demand you put something in so that i can kill him without having to use more than one finger but still feel the sense of achievement.....NOW!" This is exactly why games are becoming easier and easier as time goes on. The ability to complain and demind an easier route has become such as simple thing to do that im sure soon you will be purchasing already completed games with everything unlocked and yet you will be congratulated for doing this and be awarded for your efforts of clicking the "buy" button the game's retailer website.


    To summarise (finally): The basic reason(s) as to why games are getting easier as time goes on is because people care more about graphics than gameplay, more about PVP than PVE (playing against the computer; Player versus environment), how powerful the weapon is that you are holding than the skill it takes kill the boss (or player), but still want the sense of achievement. Because the internet has given gaming the ability to complain and change games when needed for an actual good reason, we have decided to rape this service and use it to make things easier and faster for us, instead of enjoyable and challenging.

    ........But we can change it. Think about it, we have the ability to complain and criticise, so doesn't that mean we have the ability to thank and applaud those for creating a tough but fun game? yes people can complain about games being too difficult but if you are also willing to show you still are finding it fun and nicely challenging then surely games will continue to stay at (or turn back to) a tough, but fun level of quality gameplay and storyline.

    I could continue to rant about this annoying topic, but i think i have said enough and covered enough points, let me know what you think...