2019年3月29日 星期五

The Ultimate List of The 19 Best URL Shortener Services

  1. Al.ly

    Al.ly is another very popular URL Shortening Service for earning money on short links without investing any single $. Al.ly will pay from $1 to $10 per 1000 views depending upon the different regions. Minimum withdrawal is only $1, and it pays through PayPal, Payoneer, or Payza. So, you have to earn only $1.00 to become eligible to get paid using Al.ly URL Shortening Service.
    Besides the short links, Al.ly also runs a referral program wherein you can earn 20% commission on referrals for a lifetime. The referral program is one of the best ways to earn even more money with your short links. Al.ly offers three different account subscriptions, including free option as well as premium options with advanced features.
  2. Linkshrink

    Linkshrink URL Shortener Service provides you an opportunity to monetize links that you go on the Internet. Linkshrink comes as one of the most trusted URL Shortener Service. It provides an advanced reporting system so that you can easily track the performance of your shortened links. You can use Linkshrink to shorten your long URL. With Linkshrink, you can earn anywhere from $3 to $10 per 1000 views.
    Linkshrink provides lots of customization options. For example, you can change URL or have some custom message other than the usual "Skip this Ad" message for increasing your link clicks and views on the ad. Linkshrink also offers a flat $25 commission on your referrals. The minimum payout with Linkshrink is $5. It pays you through PayPal, Payza, or Bitcoin.
  3. Cut-win

    Cut-win is a new URL shortener website.It is paying at the time and you can trust it.You just have to sign up for an account and then you can shorten your URL and put that URL anywhere.You can paste it into your site, blog or even social media networking sites.It pays high CPM rate.
    You can earn $10 for 1000 views.You can earn 22% commission through the referral system.The most important thing is that you can withdraw your amount when it reaches $1.
    • The payout for 1000 views-$10
    • Minimum payout-$1
    • Referral commission-22%
    • Payment methods-PayPal, Payza, Bitcoin, Skrill, Western Union and Moneygram etc.
    • Payment time-daily

  4. Shrinkearn.com

    Shrinkearn.com is one of the best and most trusted sites from our 30 highest paying URL shortener list.It is also one of the old URL shortener sites.You just have to sign up in the shrinkearn.com website. Then you can shorten your URL and can put that URL to your website, blog or any other social networking sites.
    Whenever any visitor will click your shortener URL link you will get some amount for that click.The payout rates from Shrinkearn.com is very high.You can earn $20 for 1000 views.Visitor has to stay only for 5 seconds on the publisher site and then can click on skip button to go to the requesting site.
    • The payout for 1000 views- up to $20
    • Minimum payout-$1
    • Referral commission-25%
    • Payment methods-PayPal
    • Payment date-10th day of every month

  5. BIT-URL

    It is a new URL shortener website.Its CPM rate is good.You can sign up for free and shorten your URL and that shortener URL can be paste on your websites, blogs or social media networking sites.bit-url.com pays $8.10 for 1000 views.
    You can withdraw your amount when it reaches $3.bit-url.com offers 20% commission for your referral link.Payment methods are PayPal, Payza, Payeer, and Flexy etc.
    • The payout for 1000 views-$8.10
    • Minimum payout-$3
    • Referral commission-20%
    • Payment methods- Paypal, Payza, and Payeer
    • Payment time-daily

  6. Linkbucks

    Linkbucks is another best and one of the most popular sites for shortening URLs and earning money. It boasts of high Google Page Rank as well as very high Alexa rankings. Linkbucks is paying $0.5 to $7 per 1000 views, and it depends on country to country.
    The minimum payout is $10, and payment method is PayPal. It also provides the opportunity of referral earnings wherein you can earn 20% commission for a lifetime. Linkbucks runs advertising programs as well.
    • The payout for 1000 views-$3-9
    • Minimum payout-$10
    • Referral commission-20%
    • Payment options-PayPal,Payza,and Payoneer
    • Payment-on the daily basis

  7. Ouo.io

    Ouo.io is one of the fastest growing URL Shortener Service. Its pretty domain name is helpful in generating more clicks than other URL Shortener Services, and so you get a good opportunity for earning more money out of your shortened link. Ouo.io comes with several advanced features as well as customization options.
    With Ouo.io you can earn up to $8 per 1000 views. It also counts multiple views from same IP or person. With Ouo.io is becomes easy to earn money using its URL Shortener Service. The minimum payout is $5. Your earnings are automatically credited to your PayPal or Payoneer account on 1st or 15th of the month.
    • Payout for every 1000 views-$5
    • Minimum payout-$5
    • Referral commission-20%
    • Payout time-1st and 15th date of the month
    • Payout options-PayPal and Payza

  8. Clk.sh

    Clk.sh is a newly launched trusted link shortener network, it is a sister site of shrinkearn.com. I like ClkSh because it accepts multiple views from same visitors. If any one searching for Top and best url shortener service then i recommend this url shortener to our users. Clk.sh accepts advertisers and publishers from all over the world. It offers an opportunity to all its publishers to earn money and advertisers will get their targeted audience for cheapest rate. While writing ClkSh was offering up to $8 per 1000 visits and its minimum cpm rate is $1.4. Like Shrinkearn, Shorte.st url shorteners Clk.sh also offers some best features to all its users, including Good customer support, multiple views counting, decent cpm rates, good referral rate, multiple tools, quick payments etc. ClkSh offers 30% referral commission to its publishers. It uses 6 payment methods to all its users.
    • Payout for 1000 Views: Upto $8
    • Minimum Withdrawal: $5
    • Referral Commission: 30%
    • Payment Methods: PayPal, Payza, Skrill etc.
    • Payment Time: Daily

  9. CPMlink

    CPMlink is one of the most legit URL shortener sites.You can sign up for free.It works like other shortener sites.You just have to shorten your link and paste that link into the internet.When someone will click on your link.
    You will get some amount of that click.It pays around $5 for every 1000 views.They offer 10% commission as the referral program.You can withdraw your amount when it reaches $5.The payment is then sent to your PayPal, Payza or Skrill account daily after requesting it.
    • The payout for 1000 views-$5
    • Minimum payout-$5
    • Referral commission-10%
    • Payment methods-Paypal, Payza, and Skrill
    • Payment time-daily

  10. Dwindly

    Dwindly is one of the best URL Shorten to earn money online. It offers the opportunity to earn money for every person that views links you have created.
    Its working is simple. You need to create an account and then shorten any URLs with a click of a button. Go on to share your shortened URLs on the internet, including social media, YouTube, blogs, and websites. And finally, earn when any person clicks on your shortened URL.
    They offer the best environment to you for earning money from home. They have even come up with a referral system where you can invite people to Dwindly and earn as much as 20% of their income.
    It has built-in a unique system wherein you get the opportunity to increase your daily profits when you analyze your top traffic sources and detailed stats.
    Best of all, you get the highest payout rates. The scripts and the APIs allow you to earn through your websites efficiently.
    Last but not the least you get payments on time within four days.
  11. Adf.ly

    Adf.ly is the oldest and one of the most trusted URL Shortener Service for making money by shrinking your links. Adf.ly provides you an opportunity to earn up to $5 per 1000 views. However, the earnings depend upon the demographics of users who go on to click the shortened link by Adf.ly.
    It offers a very comprehensive reporting system for tracking the performance of your each shortened URL. The minimum payout is kept low, and it is $5. It pays on 10th of every month. You can receive your earnings via PayPal, Payza, or AlertPay. Adf.ly also runs a referral program wherein you can earn a flat 20% commission for each referral for a lifetime.
  12. Wi.cr

    Wi.cr is also one of the 30 highest paying URL sites.You can earn through shortening links.When someone will click on your link.You will be paid.They offer $7 for 1000 views.Minimum payout is $5.
    You can earn through its referral program.When someone will open the account through your link you will get 10% commission.Payment option is PayPal.
    • Payout for 1000 views-$7
    • Minimum payout-$5
    • Referral commission-10%
    • Payout method-Paypal
    • Payout time-daily

  13. LINK.TL

    LINK.TL is one of the best and highest URL shortener website.It pays up to $16 for every 1000 views.You just have to sign up for free.You can earn by shortening your long URL into short and you can paste that URL into your website, blogs or social media networking sites, like facebook, twitter, and google plus etc.
    One of the best thing about this site is its referral system.They offer 10% referral commission.You can withdraw your amount when it reaches $5.
    • Payout for 1000 views-$16
    • Minimum payout-$5
    • Referral commission-10%
    • Payout methods-Paypal, Payza, and Skrill
    • Payment time-daily basis

  14. Oke.io

    Oke.io provides you an opportunity to earn money online by shortening URLs. Oke.io is a very friendly URL Shortener Service as it enables you to earn money by shortening and sharing URLs easily.
    Oke.io can pay you anywhere from $5 to $10 for your US, UK, and Canada visitors, whereas for the rest of the world the CPM will not be less than $2. You can sign up by using your email. The minimum payout is $5, and the payment is made via PayPal.
    • The payout for 1000 views-$7
    • Minimum payout-$5
    • Referral commission-20%
    • Payout options-PayPal, Payza, Bitcoin and Skrill
    • Payment time-daily

  15. Linkrex.net

    Linkrex.net is one of the new URL shortener sites.You can trust it.It is paying and is a legit site.It offers high CPM rate.You can earn money by sing up to linkrex and shorten your URL link and paste it anywhere.You can paste it in your website or blog.You can paste it into social media networking sites like facebook, twitter or google plus etc.
    You will be paid whenever anyone will click on that shorten a link.You can earn more than $15 for 1000 views.You can withdraw your amount when it reaches $5.Another way of earning from this site is to refer other people.You can earn 25% as a referral commission.
    • The payout for 1000 views-$14
    • Minimum payout-$5
    • Referral commission-25%
    • Payment Options-Paypal,Bitcoin,Skrill and Paytm,etc
    • Payment time-daily

  16. Fas.li

    Although Fas.li is relatively new URL Shortener Service, it has made its name and is regarded as one of the most trusted URL Shortener Company. It provides a wonderful opportunity for earning money online without spending even a single $. You can expect to earn up to $15 per 1000 views through Fas.li.
    You can start by registering a free account on Fas.li, shrink your important URLs, and share it with your fans and friends in blogs, forums, social media, etc. The minimum payout is $5, and the payment is made through PayPal or Payza on 1st or 15th of each month.
    Fas.li also run a referral program wherein you can earn a flat commission of 20% by referring for a lifetime. Moreover, Fas.li is not banned in anywhere so you can earn from those places where other URL Shortening Services are banned.
  17. Short.am

    Short.am provides a big opportunity for earning money by shortening links. It is a rapidly growing URL Shortening Service. You simply need to sign up and start shrinking links. You can share the shortened links across the web, on your webpage, Twitter, Facebook, and more. Short.am provides detailed statistics and easy-to-use API.
    It even provides add-ons and plugins so that you can monetize your WordPress site. The minimum payout is $5 before you will be paid. It pays users via PayPal or Payoneer. It has the best market payout rates, offering unparalleled revenue. Short.am also run a referral program wherein you can earn 20% extra commission for life.
  18. Bc.vc

    Bc.vc is another great URL Shortener Site. It provides you an opportunity to earn $4 to $10 per 1000 visits on your Shortened URL. The minimum withdrawal is $10, and the payment method used PayPal or Payoneer.
    Payments are made automatically on every seven days for earnings higher than $10.00. It also runs a referral system wherein the rate of referral earning is 10%.
    • The payout for 1000 views-$10
    • Minimum payout -$10
    • Referral commission-10%
    • Payment method -Paypal
    • Payment time-daily

  19. Short.pe

    Short.pe is one of the most trusted sites from our top 30 highest paying URL shorteners.It pays on time.intrusting thing is that same visitor can click on your shorten link multiple times.You can earn by sign up and shorten your long URL.You just have to paste that URL to somewhere.
    You can paste it into your website, blog, or social media networking sites.They offer $5 for every 1000 views.You can also earn 20% referral commission from this site.Their minimum payout amount is only $1.You can withdraw from Paypal, Payza, and Payoneer.
    • The payout for 1000 views-$5
    • Minimum payout-$1
    • Referral commission-20% for lifetime
    • Payment methods-Paypal, Payza, and Payoneer
    • Payment time-on daily basis

How To Download Pubg For Pc In Tamil

Subscribe My Channel
 Fortnite id DEEPAKDKS
Pubg mobile game id deepakdks8124
 rules of survival id deepakdks
 fortnite game download link https://www.epicgames.com/fortnite/en...
pubg pc emulator game download link https://syzs.qq.com/en/

It's Astonishing...

   ...how many half projects I have. Or projects that are virtually finished but not quite and so have never been played and our interests have moved on since.

   I blame two things, primarily: my glacial painting pace, even assuming I am painting actively at the time, and OOOOOOOO Shiny Syndrome. OSS is a dread disease that affects so many gamers. It's a disease that I am sure will be recognized in the next revision of the mental health handbooks.

Wrapping Up For 2018 With Google Play And Android

Posted by Patricia Correa, Platforms & Ecosystems

Earlier this year we highlighted some of Google Play's milestones and commitments in supporting the 1M+ developers on the Play Store, as well as those of you working on Android apps and games and looking to launch and grow your business on our platforms. We have been inspired and humbled by the achievements of app and game developers, building experiences that delight and help people everywhere, as some stories highlighted in #IMakeApps.

We continue to focus on helping you grow thriving businesses and building tools and resources to help you reach and engage more users in more places, whilst ensuring a safe and secure ecosystem. Looking to 2019, we are excited about all the things to come and seeing more developers adopt new features and update to Android P.

In the meantime let's share some of the 2018 highlights on Google Play and Android:

Building for the future

Along with Android P we have continued to help the Android developer ecosystem, launching Android Jetpack, the latest Android Studio, and Kotlin support. Developers are also now able to add rich and dynamic UI templates with Slices in places such as Google Search and Assistant, APIs for new screens support, and much more. Discover the latest from Android 9, API Level 28.

Smaller apps have higher conversion rates and our research shows that a large app size is a key driver of uninstalls. At I/O we launched a new publishing format, the Android App Bundle, helping developers to deliver smaller and more efficient apps with a simplified release process, and with features on demand - saving on average 35% in download size! On devices using Android M and above, app bundles can reduce app size even further, by automatically supporting uncompressed native libraries, thereby eliminating duplication on devices.

You can build app bundles in the Android Studio 3.2 stable release and in Unity 2018.3 beta, and upload larger bundles with installed APK sizes of up to 500MB without using expansion files, through an early access feature soon to be available to all developers.

Richer experiences and discovery

Discovery of your apps and games is important, so we launched Google Play Instant and increased the size limit to 10MB to enable TRY NOW on the Play Store, and removed the URL requirement for Instant apps. Android Studio 3.3 beta release, lets you publish a single app bundle and classify it or a particular module to be instant enabled (without maintaining separate code).

For game developers, Unity introduced the Google Play Instant plug-in and instant app support is built into the new Cocos Creator. Our app pre-registration program, has seen nearly 250 million app pre-registrations, helping drive app downloads through richer discovery.

Optimizing for quality and performance

Android vitals are now more actionable, with a dashboard highlighting core vitals, peer benchmarks, start-up time and permission denials vitals, anomaly detection and alerts, and linking pre-launch reports - all so that you can better optimize and prioritize issues for improved quality and performance.

There are more opportunities to get feedback and fix issues before launch. The Google Play Console expanded the functionality of automated device testing with a pre-launch report for games, and the launch of the internal and closed test tracks lets you push your app to up to 100 internal testers, before releasing them to production.

Insights for your business, now and in the long term

Metrics are critical to optimize your business and we've added new customizable tools in the Play Console, with downloadable reports to help you evaluate core metrics. Including cumulative data, 30-day rolling averages, and roll-ups for different time periods to better match the cadence of your business.

You can now configure the statistics report to show how your instant apps are performing, analyze different dimensions and identify how many install the final app on their device. The acquisition report shows users discovery journey through to conversion - with average revenue per user and retention benchmarks against similar apps. You can also find the best performing search terms for your store listing with organic breakdown - helping to optimize efforts to grow and retain a valuable audience.

Increasingly developers are adopting subscriptions as their core monetization model. The dedicated new subscriptions center means you can easily change subscription prices, offer partial refunds for in-app products and subscriptions, and also make plan changes in Play Billing Library version 1.2. Learn how to keep subscribers engaged; users can pause plans, giving you more control with order management and the cancellation survey.

Discover how to use all the new features and best practices on the Academy for App Success, our interactive free e-learning platform, offering bite-sized courses that help you make the most of Play Console and improve your app quality.

Make sure you follow @googleplaydev and sign up to our newsletter to stay ahead of all our updates in 2019! We hope these features and tools will enable us to continue a successful partnership with you in the New Year - follow our countdown for a daily highlight. From all of us at Google Play - happy holidays.

How useful did you find this blog post?

2019年3月28日 星期四

Movie Reviews: Thor: Ragnorak, Justice League, Valerian And The City Of A Thousand Planets, Victoria And Abdul

See all my movie reviews.

Thor: Ragnarok: This movie has received heaps of praise, and much of it is for the very things that I hated most about it. And I basically hated this movie.

First off, the plot (spoilers, as if): there isn't one. Thor has to escape from something, then he and Loki get lectured at by their dying immortal father, then their sister shows up and breaks Thor's hammer, then Thor gets caught in some arena, has to fight Hulk for some reason - which is pointless, since they are both indestructible and anyway we all know they won't die. Then they escape, and then Asgard blows up and Thor and the rest of the cast is in a spaceship.

It's not a plot, it's a series of disconnected comedy and battle sequences, with zero tension and not a single character worth a damn. Every hero is going to survive, and even if they don't, there is not a whit of emotional interest if seeing them survive or not (and if they are killed, they'll probably just get resurrected again in the next movie). Hela is so unbeatable, that every fighting scene she was in was a complete waste of screen time: everyone else is beaten, whoop-dy do. Why bother filming it? Loki, the one person who at least had some interesting character in his other movies, is now useless window dressing with almost no character at all. There is only one memorable scene in the movie, and it's the only scene in which Loki displays his old trickster character. It lasts for 30 seconds, and then we're back to an endless blank nothing of emotional involvement.

I honestly don't remember a single line of dialogue outside of "We work together!" and the scene I mentioned above. Was the movie funny? I cracked a smile three times. Admittedly, if I had not seen the trailers, I would have cracked a smile four times. The acting is mostly adequate but unremarkable, and the sets, visuals, directing, and so forth are adequate and unremarkable. There is one pretty scene which would have been enjoyable if it wasn't basically a copy of the scene we saw a few months ago in Wonder Woman. Four cracked smiles are not enough to sustain a movie. There is no tension, and there is nothing and no one to root for. There is no bigger message to learn. There is no real reason for this movie to exist.

There is no explanation as to how Thor's hammer is so easily broken. Thor rips out a hammer shaped piece of plumbing that causes as much damage as his original hammer. Huh? Even after smashing into the Hulk and vice versa, the hammer shows not a single piece of wear. Banner falls hundreds of feet onto a solid surface - without turning into the Hulk - and, rather than dying, the scene is played for laughs (he is unscathed, of course). Thor must have lived for thousands of years, yet he doesn't remember that he is the freaking God of thunder and lightning until he cries like a baby because he does not have his hammer to play with - what a puny god. Any one of these was just freaking insane. But mostly, who cares??? The movie is a bunch of unfunny attempts at insult and slapstick humor and Attack of the Clones levels of emotional dialogue. It's like Deadpool, only I hated Deadpool more because Deadpool was also immoral and visceral, which made me feel sullied. This movie was merely a pathetic waste of time.

Justice League: DC comics follows up a series of boring, gritty, dark, mumbling slugfests - followed by the excellent Wonder Woman - with a return to boring, gritty, dark, mumbling, slugfest. They never learn.

If there was more than 90 seconds of daylight in the movie, I must have missed them. The origin stories are cookie cutter and uninteresting, the characters are one dimensional, at best, and no one has a relationship or seems to care about anyone or anything other than being cool. With the exception of Amy Adams, who has nothing to do but be Superman's girlfriend.

Ezra Miller's Flash takes the role played by Spider-man in the Marvel movies: wisecracking and boyish, but hardly relatable. Gal Gadot continues to be superhuman, but all she gets to do is bash people and make a few encouraging remarks. Henry Cavill as Superman managed to use his tiny screen time to exude a little more personality than the others. The bad guy, the other heroes, and the mcguffin were forgettable.

As were the action scenes. Look, guys, good fight scenes are not ones where lots of people get bashed repeatedly until one of them finally bashes harder and wins, while everyone else walked away un-scarred. Good battle scenes are ones where the bashing is kept in context and a story continues to unfold. Where victory is not finally bashing a lot harder, but where humanity is exhibited, emotional connections are made or rebuffed, and entirely new things come into play (for example, see The Dark Knight). You recent superhero film makers just don't seem to get it; I mean, you make lots of money, so I guess you're fine. But your movies are emotionless shells. They are no better than episodes of superhero TV shows.

Please: give me stories and characters, not beams of light, wisecracks, things going smash, and guys in suits posing. Lots and lots of posing.

This movie was, at least, not terrible or fatally flawed, so it earns its place among the watchable but forgettable of superhero movies.

Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets: This flawed, beautiful movie was incredibly creative and generally fun. It has a simple Avatar-like theme of some peaceful creatures, some big bad bosses, cute creatures, and mystery. It also has two cute main characters who look like they are barely out of their teens (Dane DeHaan and Cara Delevingne). Unfortunately, while they act well, there is not a smidgen of chemistry or fun between them. A major subplot hangs around their emotional relationship, written by someone who has no clue how to write relationships. So, although the characters are not exactly one-dimensional, they are not engaging.

The move is still fun, since the main plot - who is attacking the floating spaceship and why? - works fine. It is so inventive and fresh, you kind of wish that whomever is behind the visuals and the bestiary would have been working for the Star Wars production team. A visual feast full of surprises, directed and shot well.

Victoria and Abdul: This flat biopic introduces a topic but doesn't do much with it. Apparently, Queen Victoria spent some of the end of her life in the presence of some Muslim Indian man who was plucked out of India to perform a meaningless ceremony for her, but whom she came to think of as a teacher, despite his occasionally hiding or omitting certain aspects of the truth from her. Everyone around her hates him because he is Indian, not to mention that he is taking time and attention away from things she should be doing.

Judi Dench is a treasure, of course, but Abdul (Ali Fazal) and everyone else puts in fine performances. Costumes and cinematography are adequate. But it's not really much of a story, and the story that there is is not developed properly. For example, the movie introduces a Chekhov gun by having Abdul tell Victoria about a mango early on in the movie. In the middle of the movie, someone brings her a mango, but it is rotten. I'm not an expert filmmaker, but even I know that somewhere near the end of the movie there needs to be another mango. Either Victoria finally gets to eat a ripe one before she dies, or Abdul returns to India and reflects on a mango tree, thinking of Victoria, or something. But no. We never hear of mangoes again; the thread is simply forgotten.

Other interesting story elements were hiding in the screenplay, but they also never made it out. Victoria and Abdul walk and talk, everyone else threatens them (both), and then it's all over. The main characters' changing feelings towards each other are presented, but not well. I was left feeling hollow.

How To Install The Unsigned Driver On 64Bit Windows 8/10 (OLD DRIVER VERSION)

Note: The instructions listed in this post are for the old version of the mouse acceleration driver that required running Windows in test mode. It is recommended to use the newer version of the driver here.


This method keeps Windows in Test Mode for the driver to work.  (I have been running my copy of Windows 10 in Test Mode since the day I installed it.)  If you are on an older version of Windows, you should be able to use the DSEO method to turn test mode off after you have signed the driver yourself (see the official installation instructions for details).

  1. Download the latest version of the driver from povohat's site.
  2. Open a command prompt with administrator privileges, and type:
    Bcdedit.exe -set TESTSIGNING ON
    (if the operation failed, you may need to go to your BIOS settings 
    and turn secure boot off, then do step 2 again.  Note that if you 
    are dual booting linux, GRUB has overwritten the MBR that BCDEdit 
    tries to access, and I don't know how to get around that.)
  3. Reboot.
  4. Verify that the corner of your desktop shows "Test Mode"
  5. Open device manager
  6. Under "mice and other pointing devices", right click your mouse device (eg: "HID-compliant mouse")
  7. Select update driver software
  8. Browse my computer for driver software
  9. Let me pick from a list of device drivers on my computer
  10. Have disk
  11. Locate moufiltr.inf
  12. Select HID Mouse (moufiltr) and press next
  13. Continue past any warnings about unsigned drivers and/or compatibility
  14. The OS may prompt you to reboot, and you should do so if required
At this point, you should be able to run the GUI (currently not included in the driver zip - DL here), change the post-scale values to 0.5, click save changes, and feel that your mouse sensitivity has been cut in half.   Congratulations, it's now installed on 64bit Windows 8/10!

If you got a Code 10 or Code 45 error message upon installing the driver, that means b8 mysteriously dislikes your computer.  If you unplug your mouse and connect it to a different USB port, you should be back on the normal Windows mouse driver.  Download b7 here and start again from device manager as above with the b7 file instead (note that download zip includes a version of the GUI that works with b7, but not b8).  If you're still having problems, let me know!

The Illusion Of An Analog World

There is something about unclear options which make choices a lot more interesting. This post goes into the reasons behind this, and various ways of achieving it in games.

Warning: this post will include some spoilers for Spec Ops: The Line. 

The typical example for a choice in a game is something like this:


The situation is clearly set up and you are explicitly told what your options are. While they are most common in interactive movies, these sort of choices existing in just about every genre. They are easy to setup and can easily give a sense of moral drama. However, they miss out on a really important aspect of making real-life choices: that you are almost never aware what your options are or what they lead to.

Here is another example of a choice:


The player could avoid the incoming bullet by going down, or they could do it by going up. This is a choice very much in the same vein as the one from above. However there is no explicit prompt that asks the player what direction they want to go in. Instead the choice is implicitly stated through the use of the game's mechanics. And in contrast to the explicit choice, it is unclear just what the options are. The choice might lack the ethical implications from the previous one, but the choice itself is way more interesting. It also feels like an ingrained part of the play experience instead of something that is an obviously designed situation.

Super Mario derives this choice purely from the functioning of its basic mechanics. Simulation is another game genre that does this, but manages to add a bit more philosophical depth to the choices. For instance, in a simulation game focused on survival you might not have enough food for all your party members and have to make a decision on who lives and dies. When these things work well it can have a tremendous impact - but more often that's not the case. Letting your simulated party members starve to death very rarely give rise to the same strong feelings as a scene in a game like The Walking Dead. Let's unpack why this is so.

---

In order for a choice to be made, the player need to understand that they are making one. The cornerstone of this is the player's access to affordances. The player must have a robust mental model where they understand how the various aspects of the world work, and what abilities they can use to affect it. A choice then arises when it becomes clear to the player that there are two or more separate ways in which they can progress. Basically, the player understands that are at least two distinct plans for them to make, and they need to chose one of them. When this is crystal clear, the player has a choice on their hands.

Most games feature these sort of choices all the time. "What ammo should I use?", "What path should I take?", "Should I sneak or just attack?". As I explained in an earlier post, the selection of plans is a fundamental part of gameplay. What makes a choice carry depth is that there's something major at stake. So not only does the player need to understand that a choice is happening, but also that a major decision is happening. And in order to elicit the correct emotional response there needs to be a particular setup and framing.

A game like The Walking Dead has an easy time of it setting up all of these requirements. First of all, the game is explicitly stating that a choice is happening. It is impossible to miss. Secondly, since there is so much focus on the choice, it is quite clear that it is of major importance. Finally, The Walking Dead is heavily plotted and the designers have a great deal of control over what happens before the choice. It is relatively easy for that game to make sure the player is in the right frame of mind.

Things are much harder for a simulation game. Here the player takes part in choices all of the time and it's harder to work out which ones are crucial and which ones are minor. The player might miss entirely what their choice is about. For instance, take the choice where the player needs to choose whom from their group to let die. It might be that the player doesn't understand that they are running out of food, or thinks that they have some ways to survive. So at the crucial moment when the player decides who lives and who dies, they might be thinking about other things entirely. On top of that, even if the player grasps what the choice is about, it might be lacking proper build-up. The player might not be in the right mood, or have a suitable level of affection for the characters and so on.

It may of course be possible to improve the simulation to take things like this into account. However, this is very likely to run up against the complexity fallacy which I wrote about last week. Chances are that these additions to complexity will not be noticeable and instead just make the game harder to design and code.

---

Instead, there's a middle ground here. Instead of explicitly stating the choices, it is possible to set up a situation that is driven by established gameplay mechanics. Since the setup is not something that happens dynamically, it's possible to properly signpost the scenario. That way you can make sure that the player is in the right mood. But when the actual situation arrives there is no menu popping up that flags a choice moment. Instead the instruction to choose can come from the story mechanics (e.g. a character can speak), or, better, arise from how the situation is designed. The actual options are then chosen, not through an abstract menu, but through interacting using standard gameplay mechanics.

The best example of this sort of design is a scene from Spec Ops: The Line. Late in the game the player finds themselves surrounded by civilians. These people are not too happy that you are here and start throwing rocks at you. It is a very dangerous situation and it is clear that you need to get out of there. At this point, the player basically only has a single verb at their disposal: "shoot". So what can you do? You really don't want to shoot civilians, but you also don't want to die. The player really has two options here. One is to shoot at the civilians, killing a few of them and making the others run away. The other option is to simply shoot in the air and scare them off, killing nobody.


The thing is that, since the game doesn't tell you what your options are, shooting in the air is not obvious to a player. And that is what makes this choice so interesting and makes it feel like a real choice. Had a prompt popped asking you to choose between "fire at civilians" and "fire in the air", the situation would have been radically different and would have lost a lot of its impact. But since you select the option with a gameplay mechanic, it not only feels like a proper part of the playable narrative, it also means that you are uncertain of what your options are.

Having choices like this makes the game feel analog. Under the hood the choice is just as discrete as the ones you would make in The Walking Dead, but it doesn't feel like it. It feels like there are a spectrum of choices to be made, a continuous space of options, and not simply "this way or the other". This concept of choices feeling analog is really important and I'll talk about it more later on.

Spec Ops: The Line features half a dozen or choices of this kind. For instance, there is one where you are to chose which of two prisoners lives or dies by shooting one of them. But what the game doesn't tell you is that there is a third options, which is to target the men that are holding the prisoners captive. Another scenario has you deciding whether or not to kill a war criminal. And again, it's unclear just what your options are. The game simply puts you in a situation where it is possible to kill him. That there is a choice to be made is something you have to make up your own mind about.

Another interesting aspect of Spec Ops: The Line is how it handles the consequences of its choices. The solution is that it simply doesn't. It just sets up the situations in such a way that either choice makes sense for what happens later in the story. While I don't think it is possible to always shy away from showing consequences, it can be very helpful in maintaining the analog feeling. Because the moment you show a consequence, it makes it clearer that there is a discrete aspect to your choice. But if you keep consequences hidden, the possibility space is larger and the player is free to fantasize more just about what took place.

---

It's worthwhile digging a bit deeper into this. What is it that makes the choices in Spec Ops: The Line different from a game where the options are explicitly stated? The key difference is that in the former, the player is in a position of uncertainty. There's no clear-cut information to go by and the player is forced to fill out informational gaps using their imagination. When the options are explicit there is no need for this. The brain always wants to optimize, so any concrete piece of information will remove any mental guesstimation. This leads to Spec Ops: The Line having a much more vivid mental model of the scene. Remember, we play the game based on what is in our heads - not what is in the actual systems - so that means the game itself becomes a more interesting experience.

This is what the "feeling of analog" is all about. By having situations where not everything is clearly cut and where the player is free to imagine a wide range of freedoms. The goal is for it to seem like there are a continuous space of possibilities. This makes the situation feel real and organic. It lessens the feeling of there being a designer guiding your every step, despite the experience being just as guided as in the more explicit case.

It's worth noting that there can be drawbacks to this approach. Just like in the pure simulation case, the player might misunderstand what the choice and its implications are all about. An explicit approach with a prompt laying out all the options will always be better at this. But it will also never feel analog. So there may very well be situations where an explicit choice is the right way to go. As always in design, one shouldn't get hung up on the manner of implementation, but to focus on what the end results are.

In SOMA we tried to make all of the choices feel analog, and used a similar approach the one in Spec Ops: The Line. We presented a situation and then used common game verbs to let the player make their choice. The idea was to make the choices feel embedded in the game experience, and judging from feedback we have gotten, it feels like it worked out very well.

The only choice in SOMA that didn't work properly was when you decided the fate of Wau. Here we failed create a proper emotional setup, and didn't spend enough time on implementing consequences. A lot of this was due to this choice coming quite late in design, and it feels like it shows. It is a good reminder that you can't just casually throw in these sort of choice-moments. One needs to make sure that the player is in the right mental state when they occur, and that you follow up on them in an appropriate matter. Just because something is supposed to feel analog doesn't mean it doesn't require a strict, and guided, implementation for it all to work out.

---

It is not only moral choices that can take advantage of becoming more analog. There are a wide range of other types of gameplay where it is worth considering if it can be made more analog. A good example of this is in interactive fiction (ie, good old text adventures). Normally these are controlled by simply typing commands into a parser. The type of commands are things like "pick up lamp", "look under the carpet", "remove dust from the table", and so forth.


So, normally, there is no explicit prompt saying what sort of commands are possible. You have to infer the space of possibilities by reading the descriptions you get as you explore the current environment you are in. You are building up a mental model of the place at hand, and the character you are playing as, and using that to build a sense of what is possible to you. When this all works out, it feels great. It really feels like there is a living, breathing world for you to interact with. It feels analog.

This system comes with issues though and the most common one is the "guess the verb" problem. The player might know exactly what to do, but can't figure out the right commands that allow them to do it. This is really frustrating and it breaks down the sense of immersion. A way to fix this is to make it clear exactly what the various verbs at your disposal are. This solves the problem, but it adds a new one: the game loses its sense of being analog. 

I think it's worthwhile to give this a test yourself. First try a normal interactive fiction game. I would recommend something like Lost Pig as it allows a lot of commands and, especially in the beginning, shows just how engaging it is to play something that lets you type whatever you want at a blank prompt. After you have done so, try out Walker and Silhouette and only use the highlighted words to play. The two experiences are very different. Sure, the latter makes it a lot easier to progress and removes some frustration. But on the other hand, it removes a lot of what makes the medium interesting in the first place.

I think this is a really good example of just how important the feeling of analog is. Implementation-wise, these two interactive fiction games are really similar, to the point of basically being the same. But the way that they chose to do their user interface radically changes the experience. By forcing the player to build an internal mental model of the game's world, the experience becomes so much richer.

---

There are lots of other instances where the feeling of analog can be useful. Another good example are puzzles. I recently played through 999 which has "escape the room"-like puzzles. While these can be quite fun to play, the way they are set up it is incredibly obvious that the game wants you to reproduce a specific number of steps. You are basically trying to read the designer's mind to find a very specific chain of actions that lead to a success state. This doesn't feel very analog.


A big reason this is so is because the game will only respond to very specific commands. Most of these commands are not part of a generic verb-set either. For instance, you only ever use a screwdriver in a specific place and so forth. So you never really build a mental model of how the world functions, because such a model would basically be worthless. It is much better to think of each object as a specific case of "what does the designer want me to do with this?".  As such the world becomes stale and never gets a rich mental model. This is a very common problem with puzzles.

However, there are puzzle games that manages to work around this. One of the best examples is Portal. In this game is rarely feels like you are following a set path. Instead it feels like you are discovering a solution. It feels analog. And this is despite the solution being no less designer-directed than your average escape-the-room game. A core reason why Portal is different is that it always uses a foundational set of mechanics for solving the puzzles. You have your portal gun, the ability to pick up certain objects and to move around. That is it. Nothing else is used in order to progress. On top of that, there is a coherent design to all of this encouraging you to build a mental model around it.


There might only be one specific sequence of events to solve a puzzle. But when playing Portal you are not as aware of this. Much of the time it's not even clear after you have completed a section. Because the puzzles are based on foundational verbs, it is much less clear whether there were other possible solutions available. There is often the sense that you could have completed it in another way.

This consistency in actions also means that you can mentally simulate a number of possibilities. You know up front the type of interactions that are possible and can use that to work out the sort of things that you can do in order to progress. And that without needing to interact with the world at all. What this means is that you are able to make plans. You can think about what steps to take in advance and be fairly confident all of these are possible to execute. As discussed earlier, making plans is a core part of what makes gameplay engaging. This is another reason why making choices feel analog is good - it also makes it feel more like proper gameplay.

The consistency in actions is not the only thing that makes Portal feel analog. The level design itself also plays a big role.  By just giving the right number of hints, the player never feels pushed along a certain path, nor are they completely bewildered about what they are supposed to be doing. By not pushing the player too much, the game makes sure that the player comes up with ideas on their own. This gives a much greater sense of picking one solution out of many, instead of going along an intended route. And by making sure the solutions never feel too obscure, players refrain from trying to brute force a puzzle. Brute forcing can be quite damaging to the feeling of an analog world as this forces the player breaks down the world to its basic components, revealing the non-analog nature of it all.

Getting the level of handholding right is not an easy task and how to achieve it varies a lot from game to game. The basic idea is the same, though: you want to make the player understand what to do without revealing what your preferred route is. There needs to be enough uncertainty for the player to start building a vivid mental world around a situation. But there can't be too much uncertainty as that means there is nothing to build a world on.

---

Another example of crafting analog worlds is the closet-hiding in Amnesia. We chose to simulate this using a physics-based interaction system. We also tried to make the behavior an implicit part of the gameplay, and never directly state how it is supposed to work. Despite this, a great number of players still entered closets to hide and opened the door slightly to see if the coast was clear. We could have just had an explicit prompt and some specific controls when you are hiding behind doors, but it doesn't feel like that would have been the same kind of experience. This way, the world has a much great sense of being an analog one.

There are bound to be tons of game mechanics that could make good use of becoming a bit more analog. One obvious example is dialog response, where I think there would have been a lot more to gain if the options could be chosen by using core mechanics instead from an explicit menu.

How could you go about making a scene more analog? I think there are two main aspects that you need to implement:

  • The choice selection must be made by using a set of core mechanics. The number of ways in which these mechanics can be used must also be so large that the player can't easily grasp the options available. For instance, if the player can only punch red objects, and you enter a room with a single red object, the situation doesn't feel very analog.
  • The hints on how to complete the scene can't be too direct. There needs to be a certain level of vagueness so the player feels that they have come up with the solution themselves. It's also important to teach the player (through play if possible) how the core mechanics functions. The idea is that when they encounter a choice moment (be that a puzzle, moral choice, etc.) they have an intuitive understanding of they ways they can approach it.
It's also important to not just focus on the interactions at hand, but to think of it as a multi-scene setup. In order for the player to be in the right state, and to have the right mental model, there's a lot of setup required. It is really important to think holistically about these things.


---

I think there's a lot to be gained by thinking in terms of making a world more analog. I also think that it's something that hasn't really been explored enough. It is quite common to just take something that works through explicit means and stick with it. Crafting scenes in an analog way is a lot more work, but I also think it can be really rewarding. It's also a very good concept to have in mind when trying to merge more standard narrative approach with proper gameplay. Analog worlds are a core part of evolving Interactive Storytelling.


2019年3月27日 星期三

ST To Amiga Conversion - Ranarama - Coming Soon!

Ranarama was developed by Graftgold and published by Hewson way back in 1987. Released on numerous platforms, this Gauntlet-like arcade adventure unfortunately failed to appear on the Amiga platform. Thankfully, this long-running situation may soon be rectified.

Taking a break from his ST to Amiga conversion of platformer Starquake, Galahad has been busy converting the ST version of Ranarama over to the trusty Amiga platform.

Here's a recent (6th Jan) post of his from over on the English Amiga Board;
"Fear not, Starquake is not forgotten, and 'should' be ready for release at the end of this month. 
As a diversion from all things Starquake, and Christmas, and kids, and shouting, and building F*CKING Lego sets, I thought i'd take a look at Ranarama. I say take a look, but an hour later it was ready for its first trial run......and bugger me, it was working first time. 
 A few bug fixes later and a working joystick routine and the Frog is moving around the game. 
Still plenty of work to be done, but just an example of where we are right now."


Once the initial excitement from EAB members had died down, talk then turned to the soundtrack. Could an Amiga 500 (the conversion is being coded to hopefully run on an Amiga 500) decode and play the original AY soundtrack in realtime?

Unfortunately, with the overhead involved in running the game code there simply wouldn't be enough CPU power left to play the original soundtrack. Thankfully, fellow EAB member musojon74 came to the rescue, and is now working on an Amiga version of the game music. You can check it out at https://www.instagram.com/p/BAUo9-8mdab/

I'll upload further Ranarama related developments to the blog as and when they're announced. In the meantime, if you'd like to follow the chatter for yourself visit THIS LINK over on the English Amiga Board.

2019年3月26日 星期二

The Celebrity And The Sybil



SPOILER ALERT

Plot details follow for Perfect Blue!


Image used for criticism under Fair Use. All rights to Manga Entertainment.



"The persona is a complicated system of relations between individual consciousness and society, fittingly enough a kind of mask, designed on the one hand to make a definite impression upon others, and, on the other, to conceal the true nature of the individual."

- Carl Jung, "The Relations between the Ego and the Unconscious."


"Men look at women. Women watch themselves being looked at."

- John Berger, Ways Of Seeing


"Who are you?"

Too many people view celebrities as public property. Once you achieve a certain amount of fame, you enter into the public domain, an object to be fetishized, judged, and worshiped. This sickening obsession has not abated an inch since the 20th century, and with the onset of social media, has only exacerbated.

Although Perfect Blue is set in Japan, so many of its observations can carry over to the United States, and I imagine, much of the world. Before watching this film, I had viewed most celebrities, particularly those in pop music, with condescension. I often saw them as entitled, talentless, narcissistic, and just plain ignorant. However, in spite of my personal reservations, Perfect Blue helped me realize these celebrities are, well, people. They may not the same problems that you and I have, but they still have problems. These are problems of a different sort, that are in some cases, worse than ours. There's a constant, publicized pressure on celebrities not to gain weight, say all the right things on every position, and spill the juicy details of their sex lives. Everywhere you may go, cameras, cameras, cameras, all capturing wardrobe malfunctions, your face without makeup, and a personal date on the beach. Is it really any wonder that hackers leak celebrity nude photos in this toxic environment? The media practically encourages it. With fame comes the loss of privacy. This privacy may be returned, somewhat, should the public have an attention span too short for your antics. You find yourself reduced to the occasional butt of the joke for a late night talk show host.

Persona and Simulacra

Perfect Blue's leading star Mima Kirigue, is a pop singer for the group CHAM, which is on the wane. While Japanese pop idol groups may seem insufferable today, with their irritable high-pitched squeals, during the 1990s (when this film was released), they seemed ready to vanish altogether. The preceding decade was seen as the golden age for pop idols, who flourished on prime-time television shows. As entertainment reporter, Masaru Nashimoto, told The Japan Times, "TV is about the only medium idols were born in, and talent agencies sought to maximize their appearances as much as possible," (Matsutani). By the 90s, however, the act was getting tired and with the rise of the Internet, anyone could be an idol and bypass the traditional gatekeeper of a talent agency. What defines an idol has diffused into something more ambiguous, with so many out there, and some, like Hatsune Miku, made purely out of pixel. The idols made a comeback, however, in the mid-2000s, with the mega-group, AKB48, rising to prominence in 2007. The appeal of idols isn't just in their superficial music, but also in presenting a fantasy of adolescent love. It's a fantasy that cannot be violated without severe personal cost, as dating for these idols is banned. AKB48's Minami Minegishi, who was unfortunate enough to be caught breaking this taboo, felt so overwhelmed with shame that she shaved her head and publicly apologized. Idols exist to project a fantasy, and Mima wishes to exchange this fantasy for another, as an actress.

Mima, like many pop idols in the 90s, tries to transition to more serious work, but the trouble is that pop idols aren't taken very seriously. Try as she might to be Mima "the actress", she'll always be seen as Mima "the idol." This is particularly made evident when she's dressed up in an outfit similar to her "idol" one for the erotic rape scene. Can Mima ever completely change her identity from pop star to actress, or does she have an independent identity separate from either occupation? It all brings back to mind Tyler Durden's adage in the film, Fight Club, "You are not your job." What belies this statement is the sentiment that your occupation doesn't define who you are, and that your "true" identity exists separately from your public persona. This is a statement that is both true and false. It is true insofar that there is more to a person than what they do to pay the bills, but it is false insofar that it denies a person's occupation as a part of their identity. When I say "Michael Jackson", you think, "musician." When I say "Leonardo Da Vinci", you think, "painter." When I say "Marlon Brando", you think, "actor." This isn't to say that a person can't be versatile in multiple fields, as was evident from Da Vinci, but as far as the public is concerned, his persona is first and foremost as that of an artist who painted "Mona Lisa" and "The Last Supper." Changing your identity to suit yourself does not so easily shift your persona in the eyes of the public. Joe Scarborough's new ventures into rock music won't change his long-held persona as the host of Morning Joe. Of course, there are counter examples. Marky Mark went from an obnoxious rapper to Oscar-worthy acting talent Mark Wahlberg. It is a transformation so successful that many who know him mostly for acting are ignorant of his past life. Even so, this does little to affirm Durden's statement, "You're not your job." Wahlberg's jobs may have changed, but he is still very much, as far as the public is concerned, an actor, and little else. So the relevant question is this, does changing jobs change you as a person? Did becoming Mark Wahlberg change Marky Mark into a different person, or is he still the same person behind a different veneer?

That question is the central thesis of the film. Should Mima define herself on the basis of what she does or on the basis of how the public receives her? The popular public perception of Mima, the one which her most ardent fans wish to preserve, is manifested online through the website "Mima's Room." Her most obsessed fan, Me-Mania, believes that the digital Mima, the Mima as he loves her, is more "real" than the one who left pop to be an actress. Mima herself even starts to hallucinate seeing this version. She looks happier, freer. When a person makes a radical shift in what they do, they often start back from square one, and have to build a new reputation from scratch. They are born again. Mima is so blinded, as we all are, by the success of her past self, that she forgets the mountain of failures it took to get her there. In any case, the prospect of creating a digital celebrity persona that behaves in a manner indistinguishable from the real thing, or rather, our popular perception of it, is not too far off. Computers brought Tupac back to rap with Snoop Dogg and Dr. Dre at Coachella, Audrey Hepburn back to sell Galaxy Chocolate, Bruce Lee back to sell Johnnie Walker, and Peter Cushing back to reprise his role as Grand Moff Tarkin in Rogue One. As disturbed as we may be by this technological necromancy, I can only see its abuse continue for the near future. It will go beyond, say, having Jimi Hendrix back in concert to play "Purple Haze" or George Carlin back on stage to repeat his "Seven Words" routine. We'll have whole genres of films and television featuring dead celebrities. Horror films with Bela Lugosi. Sitcoms with Lucille Ball. Comedies with the Marx Brothers. Westerns with John Wayne. Musicals with Rogers and Astaire. Pornos with Marilyn Monroe. Don't fool yourself into thinking that music and literature will be exempt from this necrophilia. Artificial intelligence has already proven to be able to compose music and write books, so who's to say we won't have A.I. that can mimic the styles of dead artists to pen a new Shakespeare play or finish Schubert's Eighth? We've already had a computer write a new Game Of Thrones novel for fans too impatient with George R.R. Martin. The celebrity is not a human being, they never were. They are but another commodity to be bought, sold, and repurposed however one wishes. Technology will only elevate this trend.




Mima is an object, and by everyone she is objectified. The most blatant objectifier is Me-Mania, who is an "otaku" in the truest sense of the word. While "otaku" has come to refer to anime fans, in the original Japanese, it was a derogatory term for obsessed enthusiasts. Someone obsessed with trains, for instance, was a "train otaku." Me-Mania is a "Mima otaku." That obsession leads to a feeling of ownership, particularly a sexual one. Society pressures celebrity women to open up sexually, because many feel entitled to their sexuality, from their relationships, to their nudity, to their orgasm. Me-Mania is, in this sense, a bit of a scapegoat, because he is only but the end result of a culture of objectification complicit in us all. The filmmakers objectify Mima as much as Me-Mania does, in fact, theirs is is far more pernicious, because it hides behind the veneer of artistic expression. The screenwriter, not impressed with Mima's acting, decides to throw her into an eroticized rape scene, and though we know it not to be real, it feels real. The lustful faces of actors as they see her strip on display, perhaps an unmasking of how the filmmakers truly see Mima. They value her flesh more than her talent. Me-Mania attempts to rape Mima in the very spot where the scene was filmed, revealing the connective tissue between desire in fiction and desire in real life. A softer violation occurs when Mima is pressured into posing nude for a magazine. The photos are tasteful and artistic, with Mima smiling all the way through, but again, this too, is a fantasy. Not long after, there's a poignant moment where we see Mima huddled in the bath, perhaps trying to reclaim her stolen nakedness. I enjoy sexual imagery as much as the next person, but Perfect Blue asks of you to scrutinize these images, how much of this was really done out of the women's consent, and how much is more a woman being contorted to fit into another's demand? I am reminded of Bernardo Bertolucci's surprise rape scene of Maria Schneider in The Last Tango In Paris, Hugh Hefner using Marilyn Monroe's nudes without permission to launch Playboy, Paul Verhoeven filming Sharon Stone's vagina without her knowledge in Basic Instinct, and Harvey Weinstein pressuring Salma Hayek into a sex scene in Frida. It isn't a coincidence, either, that when the screenwriter and the photographer are murdered, they are both stabbed in the eyes, the photographer also in the crotch. While they both went about objectifying her differently, but they objectified her all the same.

Before concluding, I may as well mention that Perfect Blue was the probable inspiration for Darren Aronofsky's Black Swan. It similarly stars a woman driven to succeed in the arts, but suffers from a psychological state that confuses fantasy and reality. Black Swan also brings to mind Dario Argento's Suspiria, which had an aspiring ballerina go to a ballet school, that is unbeknownst to her a witches' coven. Black Swan, however, is more about sexual awakening and artistic passion, than it is about celebrity personas and institutional sexism. While the sex in Black Swan is erotic, it certainly didn't seem to go anywhere, with awkward moments like Nina getting assaulted by her teacher, who seems to develop something of a relationship with her. Further, Black Swan never quite reaches the level that Perfect Blue does of leaving the viewer completely confused over what's real and what isn't. Yet for all it's flaws, Black Swan, at least, had a resolution, and a beautiful one at that, with Nina possibly dying for her art, which is more than can be said for the mess that is the ending of Perfect Blue.

Perfect Blue makes a similar mistake that Fatal Attraction did in its climax, resolving its conflicts through a violent slasher ending. The resolution starts off with a very interesting twist, that it was Mima's manager, Rumi, who was behind the murders. Like Me-Mania, she feels just as entitled to own the image of Mima, the "pop idol." She, too, was an objectifier. There's an exciting chase through the streets, but it all awkwardly ends with Rumi in a mental ward, and Mima laughing to herself that she knows who she is. It feels more like a Hollywood mandated ending than a true resolution, and to be frank, comes off as rather insulting, given the psychological trauma that Mima had just suffered prior. Just as Fatal Attraction brought up interesting questions of obsession and marital infidelity, it turns Glenn Close into a Psycho knock-off, and we're left to assume that Michael Douglas and Anne Archer go back to being a happy family. Similarly, the problems and contradictions raised by Perfect Blue are far more interesting than how they are resolved. We never know why she suffered those hallucinations, if she was able to successfully the transition from pop star to actress, if she even wants to inhabit either of these roles, and how she intends to deal with the sexism still evident in the entertainment industry. Instead, Mima is freed from this burden of difficult self-examination by laying all the blame on someone else. She may know who she is, but we certainly don't. Mima, who are you?

Mima's personal troubles aside, the broader questions that the film makes about society are left hanging in the air. Is your identity what you do, how society sees you, how you see yourself, or a combination of the three? Can a person hold separate identities without one bleeding into the other? What is the boundary between reality and fiction, in a world where fiction increasingly mimics reality? How much does what we see in the media inform the way we see the world? Is fiction always presented as fiction? Should it be? Is reality always presented as reality? Should it be? These questions are not answered in the film, but perhaps, if we're honest, they never will be.








The Art Of Anime


"When Did Mimi Get So Cute?"
http://sansuthecat.blogspot.com/2016/05/when-did-mimi-get-so-cute.html

"Evangelion, Or Something Like It."
http://sansuthecat.blogspot.com/2015/10/evangelion-or-something-like-it.html

"Yuri Vincit Omnia."
http://sansuthecat.blogspot.com/2015/03/puella-magi-madoka-magica-yuri-vincit.html

"FLCL: Insanity Defined."
http://sansuthecat.blogspot.com/2014/10/flcl-insanity-defined.html
"Barefoot In The Park."
https://sansuthecat.blogspot.com/2017/01/barefoot-in-park.html

"Sakura No Aware."
https://sansuthecat.blogspot.com/2017/06/sakura-no-aware.html




Bibliography

Kon, Satoshi, dir. Perfect Blue. Manga Entertainment, 2000. Film. DVD.

Matsutani, Minoru. "Pop 'idol' phenomenon fades into dispersion." The Japan Times, August 25, 2009. Web. https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2009/08/25/news/pop-idol-phenomenon-fades-into-dispersion/#.Wka1HXlG3IU


NFS Most Wanted The Best Car Racing Game Link For Android

Hello friends,Today I am going to tell you about crazy car racing game NFS most wanted for android. And as we all enjoy car racing game in our P.C and Mobile too, so NFS most wanted car racing game is one of those games that you must play once. Music in the background is awesome when you play NFS car racing game on P.C
Gaming-guruji-blog-nfs-download

NFS most wanted game for android is a fantastic car racing game where you just race in some fascinating way and be at the top 3 position to go to next level.

Once you start playing game I guarantee, you are not going to leave the game quickly.


The gaming guruji blog has brought you a nfs most wanted car racing game download link in this blog for android user but remember nfs downlod link is third party link which takes you to Google drive and you should download all the files and read instruction before installing game.

Game files are in heavy size so make sure you have at least at least 2gb fast data connection available at the time of downloading this amazing game NFS Most wanted.

Nfs-most-wanted-gaming-guruji-blog

If you have any problem in downloading or installing game, then you can comment us.


NFS most wanted car racing game file is modded so don't worry. Just download and start playing this amazing car racing game but this is not an easy car racing game and not even like asphalt 8 where you can easily win the race, so keep patience and try with different cars and tricks to win the race.

Do not forget to thank Guruji for bringing you such a wonderful car racing game NFS most wanted download link in free.

How to install NFS Most Wanted Racing Game on Android

  • Get the Need for Speed most wanted file and download its data that are mostly in obb format.
  • Turn off your 3g and wifi connection before installing.
  • Now install the game.
  • After installation,Don't open it.
  • Extract the NFS most wanted Data file by using any zip extractor.
  • Now after extracting you have a folder with obb file(s). Put this folder into the location sdcard/Android/Data/ and name this folder to com.ea.game.nfs13_na
Don't put the obb file without folder because you need to provide the correct path.



Link (Both obb and apk file)
New Link for data file (Mediafire)

APK Link (For mediafire data file)

NFS Most Wanted 1.3.128 OBB data file Link

NFS Most Wanted 1.3.128 APK

So download and enjoy and share this post to everyone.