Writing on a touchscreen is just…

Writing is still writing no matter the platform. It’s all about getting the words out, to give them a physical form be it on the screen or on paper. You can write on a piece of paper using a pen. You can write using your smartphone. You can write on your laptop or a desktop computer.

But what I have discovered is that writing on a touchscreen just feel weird and difficult. Some people no doubt won’t have any problems. It’s just not the thing for me.

I got the iPhone X. With its 5.8 inch, nearly edge-to-edge display, it’s way bigger than the iPhone 6s and 7 plus display I used in the past. That means with apps like iA Writer, I can see way more of the text with the keyboard below. The Super Retina HD display meant that text are sharp and clear. Writing on that device had been a joy.

Yet, whenever I tried to write long form, like a short story, my fingers do get really tired from attempting to hit the keys. My fingers are rather fat. Combine that with hyperhidrosis, it means either wrong keys are pressed and I need to hit delete or that the key presses aren’t registered like it should. It slows down my writing by a lot, which is irritating in a way if your thoughts is faster than the words appearing on the screen.

The other issue I have with typing on a touchscreen was the lack of tactile feedback. This is one of the reason why I prefer to write using a keyboard. The sound my finger hitting the keys and the clacky feel when you press the key just feels so good. I know you could enable haptic feedback on the phone such that every key pressed will give you a vibration. But that vibration is missing when you set the phone to silent mode via that switch. Not only that, vibration requires the motors in the phone to work hard and cause faster battery drainage. For the iPhone X, that vibration mode is no more and what you get is simulated keyboard clicks, something that you won’t hear if your phone is on permanent silent mode.

The third issue I have is having to deal with the weight of the device while typing. I know smartphones are small and consider rather light. After all you carry it in your pockets everyday. But it does become heavy when you are holding it in your hands for long period of time as you type. And that particular use case happens quite often if you are writing a long article, an essay or stories. Notes taking is fine actually because those are short burst action and probably won’t be doing it over 1 or 2 hours.

So those three reasons are why I will always prefer to write on a keyboard. And in order to do writings on the go, a portable typing machine is needed. Thus, I decided to reuse the 13inch MacBook Pro (2015) that was in storage. The 15inch MacBook Pro that I’m currently using is just a tad bigger and heavier than what I would like. You know what? Without the keyboard cover, typing on that classic chiclet keyboard is rather delightful. I could type equally fast on it.

And now I’m curious about what’s the primary device that you use to write everyday? And why.

My take on the future of gaming

Video games have come a long way in how they look, how they are delivered, where they are played and how they immerse players.

Let’s begin with a quick history lesson.

Initially, games released in 1950s had only simple 2D graphics that didn’t move across the screen and no sound. Those games were a novelty, not meant for consumers and ran on mainframe computers the size of rooms.

Then the 1960s and 1970s saw games developed that featured moving 2D monochrome graphics and basic sounds running on machines ranging from arcade-sized to home consoles no bigger than your modern day consoles. Games of that era are delivered via cartridges, which are clunky and prone to loading issues.

After that, games went from 8-bit colour 2D graphics to 16-bit colour 3D polygon graphics as the processors powering the game consoles and computers became more powerful and can support complex operations between 1980s to 1990s. At the same time, storage capabilities were also improving as games went from using cartridges to CD-ROM. That means games can be bigger, look better and sound better.

However, the handheld consoles didn’t progress as far. They used technology that were at least one generation behind. For example, the Nintendo GameBoy featured an 8-bit Sharp processor running at 4.19MHz with 8KB internal S-RAM whereas consoles like the Super NES featured a 16-bit CPU, a set of graphic processors called Picture Processors then and at least 64KB of main RAM. That mean the early handheld game consoles could only handle moving black/white 2D graphics. But that didn’t matter. The device was popular enough with consumers for at least a decade.

From 2000 to 2010, the gaming industry saw the release of sixth generation consoles and then the seventh generation with games using bigger disc size due to their better game assets, textures, and cinematic video. During this timeframe, the handheld market expanded. And those consoles featured better hardware that allowed games running on Nintendo DS and Playstation Portable to have the same graphics fidelity found in the yesteryear consoles like the original Playstation, Nintendo 64, Sega Saturn, etc., which were considered pretty good considering the small-form factor and the use of batteries.

With the arrival of the 2010s, smartphones and tablets joined the home game consoles, PC and handhelds as another viable gaming platform. Both of the smartphones and tablets soon establish themselves as the more compelling platforms than the handheld consoles because of their flexibility. They allow users to download games from the Internet via their respective App Stores. Not only that, users can also use the same device to watch video, listen to music and communicate with people. This meant that dedicated handheld gaming machines like the Nintendo 3DS and Playstation Vita would have a hard time on the market because they can’t do what the smartphone can.

To add salt to the injury, the rapid hardware improvement of the smartphone and tablet also meant that developers could now put in better looking game assets, implement complex game logic and gameplay and have better sound that were unheard of in a handheld console. Not only that, handheld consoles are like the home consoles where it could take a while before the software library grows big enough to entice consumers to buy, creating a chicken-and-egg problem. Smartphones, and to a lesser extend tablets, can see more triple-A games due to the open nature, proper SDK support, and larger market share. One good example of triple-A game for smartphone and tablet is Fortnite.

And that’s probably why the Playstation Vita didn’t quite achieve the same level of popularity as the original and the 3DS suffered lacklustre sales initially when they were released during that period.

But it didn’t stop Nintendo from releasing Switch in March 2017. Despite featuring hardware that was a couple of generations old when compared to iPhone 7 and the iPad Pro in terms of performance, it was successful because it can be used in handheld-mode and docked mode, making it the first of its kind. That means gamers can play their beloved games on the same console in either mode without much hassle. Not only that, it has a good support from game developers, which translates to better quantity and quality of games.

One thing to note is that while the game graphics on Switch don’t come close to what the Playstation 4 and Xbox One could do due to its hardware, it is good enough since its smaller resolution can free up more GPU resources to render the game world at a higher fidelity. And some examples of triple-A games that took advantage of that are Doom, Wolfenstein 2: The Colossal Order, Gear Club Unlimited.

While the Switch is the gaming console that run best in handheld mode, Apple’s iPhone and iPad can be argued as the best platforms for mobile AR gaming due to the power of their A-series SOC. Their latest A12X Bionic in the iPad Pro is as powerful as the processor found in a gaming console like the Xbox One while consuming a fraction of the power. With that kind of power, game developers can develop not only graphically intensive games like Infinity Blade 3 and Grid Autosport but also games like The Machines, ARZombi, and AR Dragon that could allow players to interact with overlaid 3D game assets displayed on their mobile devices, depending on where they point their devices, without needing extra equipment or add-ons.

Other than AR, VR is the other thing games took advantage of. Sony released the Playstation VR in 2016 that was well received. Multiple game developers are actively developing games for it which allow players to immerse themselves deeper into the game by having them wear a special headset that project the game world into their eyes and putting them at the center of the experience. A similar effort can also be found on the PC with the Oculus Rift and HTC Vive but that require more powerful computer hardware that put them out of reach for most gamers.

As you can see, the gaming industry does seem to be heading into different directions based on the different platforms. But one thing is clear. Mobile gaming is here to stay. So is living-room gaming.

Then it begs the question, what’s next?

I believe the tenth generation of video game devices would ultimately converge into something that combine hybrid nature of Nintendo Switch with AR capabilities of the iPhone/iPad. The physical device won’t be much larger than the current Nintendo Switch because of fatigue when using as a handheld. It will also come with some kind of dual camera system that allow for correct depth processing and rendering of overlaid graphics.

In terms of technical specification, these game console would most likely have at least eight cores and 16GB of RAM providing to 1.2x the performance of the ninth generation consoles slanted to be released by Sony and Microsoft in the near future. With that, the default resolution of games running on such devices will be at minimum 1920 x 1080p. 4K gaming would also be a breeze for such devices.

Furthermore, VR will also be an integral part of the tenth generation consoles through the use of VR glasses, which will definitely be smaller as compared to the current generation of headset. And despite the advantages of a touchscreen, physical joysticks and buttons won’t go away since they offer better tactile feedback and control. The experience of playing a racing game using virtual joystick on a touchscreen vs a physical joystick is just completely different. If you have sweaty hands, chances are the game won’t register your actions very well.

On the software front, the devices will come with basic internet browsing and media playback/streaming capabilities. Games will be predominantly delivered via the App Store and disc versions probably would give way to the use of game card like what the Switch uses with storage capacity achieving at least 128GB.

Resident Evil 2 Remake – Why I think it’s the best survival horror yet

The first time I played a survival horror video game was during my early teens years at somebody’s house. This somebody was one of those temporary friends you make when you are playing with other people outside at the playground, etc. And that game was Resident Evil Director’s Cut on the Phone.

That game was one that I remembered vividly where I couldn’t seem to get past the first few zombies of the game. The reason probably could be I was too young, naive, and didn’t quite understand the game mechanics.

As I got older, I got to play every single numbered Resident Evil game. Until today, I always saw the franchise as one of the best survival horror entertainment product. And the Resident Evil film series is really enjoyable, not for its survival horror element but for what it actually is: a science fiction action series that has its own take on the franchise.

The other survival horror game that I liked was Dead Space until Dead Space 3 where Electronic Arts decided to bungle up what made the first game so good. Nonetheless, I still enjoyed all the games for the reason that I want to know what happened. I wanted to know who invented the Markers that convert organics, especially humans, into necromorphs. Until today, I hope that someone decided to buy the Dead Space franchise from EA and make it good again.

But I digress. My intention is to talk about the remake of Resident Evil 2 and why I think it is survival horror done right.

The first three games of the Resident Evil series relied on fixed-camera view of the game world as we move the characters using tank control. Due to the limitation of the hardware at that time, the implementation serves its purpose of making you panic when a zombie is coming after you since you will struggle to make the character move to get away only for the camera view to change to another angle, creating a somewhat disorienting experience where you know there is an enemy coming but you may have the best view of what’s around the corner.

Then there is the audio, limited ammunition, monsters jumping out when you least expected it on the first play through and your character do move slower when injured, with the latter being found in Resident Evil 2 and 3. All those elements contributed to making you feel more weary. I do remember quietly cheering my characters to move faster as I was running away from a horde of zombies.

Then with technological improvements, Resident Evil changed to a third-person view mode, starting from Resident Evil 4. This time, the game takes on a more action-oriented style with limited ammunition and sudden appearance of enemies, either in waves or a couple, to make it slightly more “scary”. But the real selling point by then was the storyline, the characters and environment design. As least in my view.

The remaining games just kind of further improve on the third-person, over-the-shoulder view until Resident Evil 7 where it got changed into first-person mode.

During those years between Resident Evil 4 to Resident Evil 7, Dead Space served as what I would call over-the-shoulder view survival horror done right. The dark, poorly lit game world with blood all over, necromorphs jumping out at you and attacking you when you least expected it, limited ammunition and the general creepy and eerie audio all contributed to make it the true survival horror game.

Resident Evil 7 then went ahead to redefine what it is to be a survival horror game by making you only able to see what’s in front of you with its first-person mode. But I personally found it to be nauseating because it was too close to the action. I didn’t quite enjoy that game

Then came Resident Evil 2 remake and there are a few reasons why I think it’s the best survival horror game yet.

The game went with using the same over-the-shoulder view pioneered in Resident Evil 4 but this time, it looks like they took elements from Dead Space to make it the perfect survival horror game based on the various YouTube videos I have watched. The dark corridors that are sometimes claustrophobic. With the over-the-shoulder view, you just don’t really know what’s behind you or around the corner until you turn around. Then there is good use of lighting. You need to rely on a torch light to see dark areas. Enemies like the Licker could be hiding up on the ceiling. The other game that I played which uses that to good effect is The Evil Within. I had to light up certain candles, lamps and whatnot to see what’s around me. Then there’s the enemies jumping out from certain places and hunting you. The good old jump scare technique.

Second, characters can make or break a game and there are few game characters that resonates with the players. You have got Aloy in Horizon Zero Dawn that’s very well received and resonate with a lot of people. She’s a strong female character who fought against the traditions that defined the village from which she was birthed in to explore the world and understand what’s going on while still show compassion for the world around her, though she’s cold at times. Then there is Issac Clarke from Dead Space that’s memorable. And I love him because of his so call ingenuity in crafting weapons using tools used in engineering work in the game universe. He resonates with me considering that I’m a trained engineer too, though on the software side. For Resident Evil, the characters would be Leon and Claire. Unlike Jill Valentine or Chris Redfield, Leon and Claire are the more average characters in terms of skills and abilities who got thrown into an impossible situation. Over the course of the game, we get to see them grow and survive the outbreak. And that’s in the original game. Now we get to see and experience their stories in Resident Evil 2 in a different way.

Third, we get to revisit a favorite location in the Resident Evil series. Raccoon City. That’s not the say the European setting in Resident Evil 4, the Africa setting in Resident Evil 5 or the multi-nation setting in Resident Evil 6 aren’t good. For the record, I actually like the Tall Oak or Lanshiang part of the game. I always love a good survival horror setting set in a metropolitan area or a place where ordinary people have to live their lives only to die from a disaster. Just like Titan Station in Dead Space 2. It’s just a personal thing. I’m morbid that way. That’s why going back to Raccoon City where it all started is a great thing in my view. And I believe there’s more story to tell there. I actually wish there are more single-player, numbered Resident Evil game set in Raccoon City to show the outbreak from a different perspective. And no don’t cite Resident Evil outbreak 1 and 2. I hated those games because they are so lacking in focus with so many characters, short missions and poor story telling.

The fourth thing is the inventory management system. I think it’s what made survival horror survival horror. And I dare say it’s more realistic. Put it this way, short of having a large haversack on your back, there’s just no way for a person to carry so much stuff. And even if you do, you won’t be nimble enough to move around zombies. In Dead Space, you also got limited space to carry your items. It makes you think about what to bring as you go through the game and then make you backtrack to a “safe location” to retrieve something if you forget it. The journey back sometimes is dangerous since enemies that weren’t there before may just appear. It adds a little bit of tension there.

The fifth reason is the limited resources. In a major disaster, I really don’t think you would be able to find caches of bullets lying around unless you raid an armory before it all began. Even so if you get to raid an armory, you will eventually run out of ammunition. So having you conserve your ammunition by having you decide what you shoot at or run is a great game mechanics. The Evil Within 1 and 2 are the two games that does a great job at this. It can contribute to creating a sense of helplessness when you run out of ammunition or health kits.

Finally, there just isn’t another survival horror game coming out anytime soon that could fill the shoes of Resident Evil. I have personally completed The Evil Within 2 and loved that game. Until the next The Evil Within or someone proceed to make Dead Space 4 the way it is supposed to be, Resident Evil is just the best-in-class survival horror game.

And I digress bit for a rant. Seriously, I just disagree with EA’s stance that they need to change a game so much to cater to a diverse market to make the most money and then killing the franchise just because it didn’t meet sales expectation. To me, it’s just not the right way to go. We have seen enough success stories where companies continue to build their niche products so that it is the best in class product and people will buy.

Now, I’m just really pumped about the game and looking forward to get it when it’s out.