Bar of Adventure

That's not actually the name of the TVTropes entry. The idea is a bar or tavern or club that provides a meeting place for the various heroes, and in many cases, is the neutral grounds where they can also meet up with the bad guys.

There is entangled with it the concept of a central spot, a hub location, for loosely connected adventures. This bar might be in the borderlands of space or in a sprawling multi-cultural trading town or a big city with a violent underbelly.

Basically, this bar is not just a place to relax, it is a place where the next adventure begins.

And boy does this tie into tiki culture, because tiki has since its invention packaged exoticism and the lure of adventure right down to the very drinks.

I am working on the first chapter of The Tiki Stars. My protagonist Rick Starr had a Mai Tai in his hands...and I stopped to look it up. Because part of the game I'm playing is that Ray's bar, out on a sandy spit and across the tidal flats from the spaceport of this colony world, is not just a Bar of Adventure where crooks and drunks, smugglers and revolutionaries are known to meet, it is also the Birth of Tiki. An imaginary version that is no less re-invented than Donn Beach's colorful past.

I was also crossing it with the idea of a pilot's bar, with the typical memorabilia (pictures from the war, a prop hanging on the wall, that sort of thing). I wasn't sure if that made a good blend with the tiki decor, which historically started as, basically, all the crap Donn had lying around that he could pin on a wall.

Yeah. That Mai Tai? Aside from the contested origins of the recipe...so there's Victor Bergeron in the mix, and Sven has a word about that, of course...it also was likely based on and certainly has a relationship to the Test Pilot, the Q.B. Cooler and the PB2Y.

Yeah. Q.B. stands for "Quiet Birdmen," a fraternity of...pilots. There is very much already a connection to pilots, and specifically, W.W. II pilots, in the early days of tiki.

***

But outside of that...

I think this is a good project for me. I am still reading up (now a great -- and angry -- book on the relationship between the nuevomexicanos and Los Alamos). And getting new ideas. But the tiki book is bringing me back to very basic writing, writing on the sentence level. Stopping at every adverb (I've got a problem with those) and with every noun of world-building, asking if this detail is really necessary, and if it is confusing.

The incredibly freeing thing is that I don't feel constrained by the real world. This is a big problem for me in the Athena Fox books; I started them in reaction to the bad history of the typical "Archaeological Adventure" and that sort of infected the process to where I didn't want to alter the menu of a (real) restaurant I wasn't even giving the name of in the text.

I'm not the only one. There's a phrase I've forgotten that gets used around writing circles for when a writer goes out of their way to explain something that the audience was, actually, quite willing to just take on faith. This one is so old, it shows up in Homer. There are several bits where Odysseus goes on laboriously about why he didn't do this other thing instead.

One suspects in that case the "imagined reader" was in fact a very much there in person heckler as the story was being told (from memory) by a story-teller. And that answer to audience objections ended up getting codified in text when Homer wrote it all down.

For the tiki book, if something in the world looks like it could raise a question with the reader...I just go and change it.

Retro

Got talking with my tiki advisor and newly excited for that novel. So many basic questions to solve yet. Take world-building. What kind of world am I after? What kind of world-building am I using (that is, how much of the Gernsbakian explain-the-tech stuff is appropriate for the style I'm after)? How much world-building at all?

I mean, I don't even know if there are aliens.

Minor work on my personal tiki shrine -- aka, things I can have around me while I write. Found a nifty (plastic, but it looks okay) mp3 player shaped like an old transistor radio. Have tiki mugs. Thinking rattan mats...maybe even a palm.

***

Also retro is the new LORA I tried out in my SD install. Broke Automatic111 again (which is good) but finding it easier and easier to do a clean re-install so it is working again (which is bad). I'm only doing stuff for my own amusement and all I need in my life is another time sink.

But anyhow. I'd been bookmarking some "look like an illustration" LORA but not using them because I didn't quite see the point. Now I do. There's an unreality about AI creations which is rather off-putting. Well, turns out that making it look like an illustration and not a photograph eases past the worst of the Uncanny Valley. 

That, and this library is just really deep, and seems very good at interpreting. That could be the new model; tried out SDXL, now using a fork off that. It is much better at parsing prompts, though things like color words do have a tendency to go wild and spam over everything (the "man on a beach with a white shirt" problem).

I was having very little luck txt2img with the new LORA and was about to give up on it. See, most illustrations have story in them -- even if the "story" is just "proud engineer points at the new car." And I am all about story. Well, AI can only associate pixel patterns. That's one of the basic problems. There's no underlying logic outside of "this pixel pattern is often found near this pixel pattern" (which is why a wire will turn into a panel line half-way across a control panel, and vice-versa).

And there's no understanding of function, which is not just "the wire needs to be connected at both ends" (and not turn into a painted border in the middle), but the underlying logic to, say, a pose.

But it can inherit that given a proper reference. Turns out between the model and the LORA my local SD install has become really, really good at "reading" a source image and reconstructing what is actually going on. Well, things like humans holding swords or which part of a torch is actually on fire, it still has trouble with. But enough of the original logic of the source image is getting preserved that there is some decent mimicry of, well, story. 

***

And speaking of time-sinks. Still feeling so lousy that Satisfactory is all I feel up for some days. My last video just reached 1K views and a bunch of likes, which is a huge surprise. I guess people like my aesthetic.

But I am contemplating another build, this time heavily modded and with most of the alternate play options switched on, like free materials and no spiders.

One of the mods allows you to replace your trains with more historical-looking ones. With that and a texture mod, could maybe perhaps do something that isn't modern brutalism-plus-neon (which is practically the default look for most of the extreme builders. Called by one of my video commenters "reminds me of Portal."

Moving Day

I am...not sure about the changes in Satisfactory 1.0

I know they play-tested the thing, but that was with a closed beta (unlike the Early Access through version 0.8) There are several things that radically change the paradigm -- and are possibly in need of more balancing than they saw.

One of the biggest crunches in pre-1.0 was getting yourself and building supplies around the map. The two major strategies were either a really good bidirectional network (so you could run out to a remote factory and stock up on some necessary part for the new build) or depots, whether centralized and massive, or more like the "construction shack" buildings I was making that produce locally all the parts you need to build your new factory.

Or simpler "plop" factories, which I've been using a lot in my latest play-through. These are one-blueprint compact things that you set down and leave churning away filling a storage container of basic things like concrete.

To really make a good construction site depot you needed to add facilities to handle trucks and/or trains. Which made the depots more elaborate. And that in a large sense is the greater purpose of the game. Basically, you finish the game in order to get an (in-game) coffee cup. So making things work efficiently, or look cool, or be impressively large (or all three) is the real purpose of play and the reason the game is so addicting.

Yeah, so that changed.

1.0 added the Dimensional Depot. Stock gets teleported from wherever you are manufacturing it, straight into your interdimensional pockets. You don't need to run across the map (much) because you are almost done installing lights in the new factory but ran out of quartz.

They can't be hooked into a production line, at least. So those complicated supply lines are still there for major manufacturing sites. For the process of new construction, though -- these have streamlined it to the point of making it completely different.

And dimensional depots change another paradigm -- when you include things like the way they nerfed the deliverables for Tier 5.

Used to be, you couldn't get past early game on hand-crafting and plopping down a single Manufacturer and a bunch of spaghetti conveyors as the absolute minimum to reach your deliverables and unlock the next technology tier.

Yeah, well that changed. You can skip the hassle of conveyor belts and trains and all of that just by physically dropping by your machines at intervals and refilling them out of your own interdimensional pockets. And that's not the worst. With the addition of Somersloops, you can sloop the parts (it is a two-for-one return for the same amount of supplies) and that brings the targets well within what you can do with a couple of machines and a few containers plopped down on the ground without walls or even a foundation under them.

Basically, most of the reason to build a factory at all just went away. I've unlocked ALL the tech now, and I've just started building anything actually nice looking.

Okay, there was a bit of scale involved. I'm getting better with blueprints and I used saved blueprints from the last game (including some mega-blueprints made with a mod that isn't even installed on the new save) that could create a fairly large factory without anything but hooking them up to power and raw ore.

***

Other than that.

The desert start was a good one. I started this time right at the little oasis, which I carved up with a chainsaw and fed to a huge array of biomass converters for early-game power. Iron copper and coal are all over the place in that part of the world, and there's quartz sulfur and caterium not that far away.

Well, I'm finally at the point of the game where I have all the tech unlocked all the way to the end of the tech tree, all the Awesome shop unlocked, and all the key alternate recipes. And have (mostly with plop factories) enough supplies to build as much as I care to build.

I'm just...not quite as enthralled about building. The new multi-modal railroad system just doesn't look as nice as I'd hoped. And there's a few other odd changes, such as adding new fuels to the tier that mean you can keep expanding and altering your fuel generators and never go nuclear at all. 

And even drones. Used to be drones were restricted by having to use batteries, which were so hard to build you had to ship them (often using a second set of drones). Well, now the little guys will use local fuels. Ouch.

Oh, so here's my second video, messing around with the elaborate transit network I was talking about as a way to handle the personal logistics of a 0.8 build...

Teal Deer

Got another comment on the Paris book. I am so starved for comments and criticism. I have zero reviews on that book, not even any ratings -- it sunk into the Amazon pond with nary a ripple.

I knew it was going to be dense before I even started. The main plot thread was intended to be a sort of Umberto Eco conspiracy theory, winding together multiple weird tidbits of history. The bulk of the book, I rapidly decided, was going to be "friends chatting in cafes." That's what was going to fill the page count, not climbing monuments or solving puzzles or having a knife fight in the catacombs or whatever.

But what are they going to chat about? Well, the Paris art scene is a natural. The real-world alternative is philosophy and I don't do that -- my readers should thank me for that! Which turned out to work for the mystery because then instead of stuff about Bavarian Illuminati I could do stuff about Monet and Gaugin.

From a top-down view of the process, I get too much "stuff" in the books because I start with plot and themes and search for things that will carry that plot and illustrate those themes. And in the bad old world of "Show don't tell" that means being concrete. A specific thing means you can dramatize the delivery instead of having a maid-and-butler walk on to do an info-dump on the reader. And dramatizing implies a scene, which fills out your chapter plan and lets you work out the pacing and timing of your outline.

So we've moved from the necessary plot information of "This is a military base and they have guards" to getting stopped by two Air Force people in a jeep who have some amusing interactions.

And here's the problem, which I seem to increasingly have. And that is that the real world rarely offers the perfect platonic ideal of the thing that demonstrates the thing. Instead you have things that are sort of about the theme you are after, or include part of the clue you are trying to leave, but like any ordinary ornery individual they are also doing a bunch of other things.

And that means this thing, this perfect set-piece that delivers the information, is hairy with extraneous detail. And worse; the thing you turned to for an explanation of something plot-relevant itself begs explanation. 

In the Japan book I have a quick info-dump about the historical ninja, for which I expanded on a display/semi-museum that I'd actually been to. So a real place, the Toei Edo-era standing set. Which is also these days pretty much a ninja theme park. So getting to that museum for the info-dump pretty much required explaining why there is such a museum in this part of town and why it is surrounded by multi-colored ninja.

***

But that may not actually be it.

I'm thinking today that maybe the problem isn't coming from the top down, it is happening at the root, at the sentence and paragraph level. And is potentially an artifact of both the way I craft sentences, and the working method when I am doing them.

I largely write fast, at a sentence level. I don't worry a lot about word choices and I don't really stop that often to look things up. I am these days writing in a strong narrative voice, even when not in First Person. But having a motor-mouth auto-didact who geeks out about history certainly makes it worse; it is the natural narrative "voice" for Penny/Athena Fox to drop a zillion historical and pop-cultural references in as she goes.

Every single one of my critical readers has constructed this version of my work-process in their minds where I stare at a line of text trying to figure out how to cram in yet another bit of history...which I then proceed to waste another week in researching.

That's not what is happening. My natural narrative voice seems to reach for analogy more than description, and it is always drawing comparisons. So my process is actually I do a first-pass which is written almost as fast as that character would talk. Then I go back and take out as much as I can without destroying the integrity of the sentence.

The problem is made worse because I write in spurts, and I dream up new things for the following chapters as I am working on the current one. So in the heat of the moment I might name-drop Xenophon, but I almost immediately realize I could make a running gag of it. Before I've finished that writing session, the Xenophon references are a thread winding their way through the narrative and the scene to where there would be a lot of editing to try to replace them and stitch the wounds closed where they'd been.

And I've already come up with a payoff. And I love payoffs. Plot threads should when possible come to a conclusion that the reader will find justified for the work getting there. 

And I am not entirely ignoring that future reader in this process. One short running gag in the Paris book is about Monet haystacks. He was learning about light, you see, and painting them...but never mind all that. All you need to know is he got a reputation for haystacks in different colors and a critic even called it out.

It came up quite naturally when I was doing a nickel-explanation for Expressionism -- set at a museum exhibit, because fortunately there is such a thing in Paris. My lecturer character was talking about light and mentioned the haystacks, and because it was funny, quoted that critic I mentioned. I think it works and is illuminating as to what the Impressionists were, why they mattered, and what they have to do with the rush of the modern world, the fin d'seicle and the Paris Exposition and future shock and all that (which is, in my essay, at the core of Steampunk.)

But now it was out there. Hux makes a comment about Lo Lo's "Radium Dance" (yes; scientific exploration and future shock, all wrapped in one!) He comments her dresses were in more colors than a Monet haystack.

And when Penny is tailing the would-be treasure hunting gang through a Virtual Van Gogh exhibit, she briefly hides behind a haystack. And comments again.

***

It might even be a flaw with Discovery Writing. There's a big element of seat-of-pants in my process. And I've mentioned before that especially when I am working and there's no time to write, I think about the book and I dream up stuff that I now want to include.

But I still feel it isn't "stuff." It isn't add-ons, chocolate sprinkles. It is the muscles and tendons that make the story move. It is just that, as in real biology, those muscles and tendons aren't neat. They sort of go all over the place and there's a lot of them to keep track of (yes, I studied Artistic Anatomy once).

I hear about writers who write "lean." Not only do they go back to add adjectives and descriptions and otherwise put Color Commentary until their drab retelling of events has become a proper Monet haystack, they also go back later to add the things that I can't see writing the story in the first place without!

Like, the plot. Like love interest. Like the theme; the reason any of this is happening and why the reader should care.

I just don't see it.

And now we're circling around again to why I can't just go around with a red pencil and take out all the haystacks. It isn't just on a sentence level where I am left with a gap in the logic of the sentence. And when the sentence would be three words long and too short for the rhythm if I didn't come up with one more thing to say. One more verbal tick or bit of description, something that will add another three words and make the meter come out.

It is also on a story level. The big plot and the underlying themes aren't expressed in singular well-defined things that I can prune around. There's no "The Empire is evil -- hey, look at this Darth Vader dude!" There's Sith and First Order and merchant princes and Jabba and the underworld and...

The historical vision underlying the book is the fin d'siecle (and no, for my blog posts, I don't look up spelling). The accelerating technological change, the social change that goes with it, and industrialized warfare in the form of W.W.I is racing towards them. Writers and politicians and philosophers and artists are trying to make sense of the new world.

And that's why Monet haystacks.

I'm faster on my own

 Or so Aloy says at various points in the game. 

Most of my play-throughs, though, it's really been the opposite. Horizon Zero Dawn is not quite Metal Gear Solid, or even Alien: Isolation but it really does help to use the stealth mechanics. Or, at least, to plan ahead, scope the ground, and lay traps.

One big reason is, oddly, that stealth is cheaper. You've got arrows that can take down a machine in a couple of shots but they cost a lot of resources to craft.

Stealth kills cost nothing but a little time.

That is, if they are spear kills. Which brings me around to the flip side of the equation. As in all games, the NPCs are dumb as rocks when it comes to combat, and especially the friendly ones prioritize getting close-up in melee -- that is, putting themselves in danger instead of staying up on the ridgeline sniping.

Thing is, the character design is so good in Horizon Zero Dawn I care about these characters. Fallout 4, despite liking several of the companions, I can stand to see them in danger (with the exception of Dogmeat. I'll always go to his aid.) Starfield, well, I've made my feelings clear there. But even with these games, there's an emotional grab when allies are in danger that makes you want to run out there and protect them any way you can.

Which usually involves running into the thick of things. Forget hiding in the bushes and taking carefully aimed sniper shots only when the conditions are perfect. Instead it is jump in with spear swinging. Or as Gordon Frohman put it, "Must kill with my fists because guns too slow!"

Grotesque

The gaming community has found its latest outrage. Personally, I think this is overdue, the way the similar problems Adobe is having was. The large companies have merged too much and become far too distant from actually serving their customers. It makes sense that pot would boil over with louder and louder cries from said customers.

In any case, Ubisoft and Assassin's Creed is at it again. Once one of very few companies that were doing a first-person/third person experience (that is, something other than a top-down tactical game) based in history. Games that offered the chance to walk the streets of Alexandria or climb Notre-Dame de Paris.

 Yeah, that was already a bad sign. When Viollet-le-Duc reconstructed the old cathedral under the combined impetus of Haussmann and a public stirred to interest by Hugo, every grotesque created and carved was unique. But go parkour around the thing in the game, and you have the strange experience of encountering nothing but Le Strynge, over and over.

Forgivable in a way. Game assets are a conserved quantity and they didn't want to have to create every single Evangelist (on the spire) and Biblical King (on the facade) as individual models. Also, they were constrained by IP; there are protections to the stained glass, for instance, meaning Ubisoft couldn't just copy the stuff.

And there are artistic decisions I would probably make myself. Such as including the spire, even though the pre Viollet-le-Duc spire was rather smaller, and history indicates it might not have even made it as far as the French Revolution (and was certainly a mess by that time anyhow). But the spire is so much the look of it, part of the essence of the building, you'd lose that frisson if you presented a building without it.

There's a similar artifact in the latest (as yet un-released) game; an ocarina that looks to have been repaired by kintsugi. Well, that technique of repairing pottery with gold would be a decade or two early, and unlikely to be applied to (or work well) with a musical instrument. However, I'd reserve disagreeing with this if it is an artistic choice; the thematic resonance of the broken thing restored by metal to something that is both broken and repaired, old and new, is just full of potential symbolism.

However.

You can't see it very well in this image, but even to I -- who is hardly an expert on Japanese castles -- this leaps out as badly as the xerox grotesques on their version of Notre Dame.

That's the Shachihoko of Nagoya Castle, they are famous, and just as famous is that there are two of them. On the highest roof, and deeply symbolic. Covering every castle in the game to add a little more architectural interest is blind to the reality of the historical buildings, the highly codified styles of Japanese architecture, and their meaning.

According to a rising tide of native Japanese commenters (it tells you how bad it is that Japanese are making public statements about how badly they feel their culture is being served) this is all over the game.

But it isn't entirely creative decisions, and it isn't just laziness (although one can never rule these out). No, there is something else that also was visible way back in Assassin's Creed: Unity (the one set in Paris during the French Revolution.)

In Unity, blame might be cast in the direction of Abbe Barruel, author of one of the first histories to promote the same conspiracy-mongering about the Revolution that Unity also wants us to believe. (Basically the "rich merchants manipulated the stupid peasants into overthrowing a king they actually kind of liked" narrative.)

For Assassin's Creed: Shadows the book and name are even clearer. Thomas Lockley, who is a living historian, and far too happy to get "interviewed" on Ubisoft's pet podcast. His work may be of a higher standard than the Royalists that tainted the Unity story (to be fair, the games needed something to work in the Templars/Assassins conflict -- although oddly, they left that alone in Black Flag, where the pirates were quite happy to have their own story separate from all that conspiratorial nonsense). Still, it all reminds me far too much of the more than one Hollywood product that made use of a certain well-known "Plastic Shaman" rather than talk to actual Tribal experts.

There's a narrative here. History is always a narrative, historical fiction even more so, but it is increasingly off-kilter in the AC series; through the series it has fallen from the Enzo stories being deeply rooted in real currents of Italian history, to the entire game of Valhalla becoming nothing but a lame fantasy Viking retread. It is slipping off the slope until it stops having any link to history, and instead is just a theme-park background for the usual wearing hoods and stabbing people game play -- a looter-shooter with wrist blades instead of laser pistols.

Two of the Japanese commentaries I've watched so far were struck -- as struck as I was about the shachihoko -- by the really, really strange rice fields. They had that peculiar incoherence about them we associate with AI now; the shapes were there, but they made no sense. Where's the drainage? What are they doing in the fields in this season and this is clearly not a harvest (unlike what the dialog says). And why are there random bales of rice lying around where they will mildew and get infested by weevils?

There's no sense to it...and this is Japan. Rice is at the base of the economy and society. Taxes are collected in rice. Wealth is measured in rice. There are gods of rice. Ceremonies are based around the growing cycle of...rice.

It isn't like you can't put the whole thing in a game and get it right.

Getting it wrong isn't merely lazy; it is disconnecting your game, from gameplay to story to theme to message, from any attempt to engage with real places, real people, and real history. It is time for Ubisoft to stop claiming they are in any way attempting accurate history. They ducked out when it came to Notre-Dame de Paris, rightly explaining that their game model would be of no use to those reconstructing the cathedral after the fire.

Getting into a shit-throwing contest about how they did their homework and Assassins Creed: Shadows IS SO historical? Stop that.

Respect the rice!

Stimpacks

Finally the improvement is solid. I have managed to drive across town for brunch, as well as shop for groceries. 

And getting a bit of reading done. In my current rotation is a book on the history of NEST, a book on issues in indigenous archaeology, and a book on land rights and environmentalism at White Sands which is really a nice capsule history of the area -- and a lot of the things I want at play in the novel.

Oh, and Albee's book is waiting in the wings. I have yet to find a book I want on the Navaho and uranium mining (the ones I've found so far are only in expensive hard-cover). And there's a few other things I want to read up on.

(Other than, the legend of the Spear of Antioch in the context of the Crusades...a thesis project I discovered and have been enjoying reading).

Oh, and there will be a dual-time element in this book. Sort of. It isn't going to be Oppy's time, or anything like that. It is going to be sketches, done in third-person omniscient. This book has the widest historical scope of any of the Athena Fox stories, one almost Stapletonian in scale (aka Last and First Men). 

So far the sketches on my list include Lucy, the Egtved Girl, someone either in Berengia or Doggerland, an immigrant -- possibly at Ellis Island -- and "Seagull," from pissing on the bus tire to having stew with villagers in the Altai Krai.

***

The world still doesn't mean enough to me. I am finding it hard to engage with anything, but especially with fiction. Still, when my concentration was too bad for anything else I did manage to spend a little time playing games.

Tried out Nier Automata because I had heard the story was interesting. Actually, the story is depressing, and the game pretty much forces you to help it belabor the point (I seriously stopped shooting at the poor little robots unless I really, really had to). It also has a brutal save system, which combined with truly odd control mapping and camera and un-helpful prompts (the game is designed for controller and runs poorly with keyboard and mouse) left me restarting the game from practically scratch FAR too often.

Eventually it just bored me.

On the other hand, between Windows updates and the (very small) possibility that bugthesda actually did some work on it, Fallout 3 actually plays now. I'm finally to the Museum of Technology and really, really thinking about another fast-travel back to Megatown to purchase more stimpacks (threw all my points in small arms and INT -- I'm a total glass cannon).