Ahh the gaming culture personally i think its birth was around the same time doom raided the offices of the world bringing in the concept of cross network gaming and larger communitys of people with a common interest of gaming.
Im sure there are many people out there who would disregard gaming as a culture without fully understanding the community scale and dare i say almost cult status of it in modern society. With LAN partys becoming more and more common in which i myself hold one once a month between my friends, its clear that it is becoming more and more a regular part of our lifes and definatly the more dominant choice of entertainment in the household.
But obviously me saying this doesnt explain the sheer scale of gameing as a culture and its importance. LAN events such as i-36 at Stoneleigh Park which is the biggest LAN party in the UK with thousands of participants each year who get along with each other becuase they all have one common interest.. not to mention there is nothing more satifying than a friendly game of shooting the hell out of your friends and random strangers lol...
When i take a look at myself and games in my life i realise it occupys a huge part of my life.. even when i go out to try and escape from that fact i normally get asked what im doing a uni and unless i lie and say im doing something boring like law, i get 3 hours of game talk so all in all i cant escape it. Its worse now because i feel i have to buy the latest games and consoles simply to study and keep in touch with new graphic movements and styles so what started off as playing games for the fun of it is now an obsessive education move (or at least i try to pass it off as that).
What scared me was when i realised i had so many friends on xbox live that i had never met in reality and the same goes for msn. These days i try to meet as many of them as possible as i have travelled across the country once or twice to meet people as have they travelled to meet me.
Eiter way gaming as a culture is increasing even more as wii brings older generations into the picture and cross network gaming spreads further worldwide..
Wednesday, 25 February 2009
Game Industry?? meh its doing alright...
Probably one of the fastest growing industry's in the world and still snubbed as a lazy profession by most ( from my experience it is mostly plumbers who have this view i say this because Ive been told it by 3 different ones now... it cant be a coincidence). Even in this Global economical meltdown although slightly effected by down turn in sales from costumers moth filled wallets in which has resulted in several companies with to much ambition and very little budget to cease to exist. Other than that the games industry is virtually unscathed and continues to grow at an alarming rate.
After talking to a few of my friends/colleagues who work in the industry or at least did work for many years in the industry, they all seem to give similar responses tho granted it depends on their job but the universal answer always boiled down to pressure. When working to a tight budget and/or deadline naturally the pressure is on to be fast and still maintain a professional level of efficiency in the work that is produced. I know at least some of the bigger company's hire in house councillors which straight away to me says that plumbers really need to read this.
I guess the big question is what are the implications of the meltdown on the future of the games industry and to be honest if anything i think it will create a boom as new companies will pop up and of course this will also bring new creative idea for games.
After talking to a few of my friends/colleagues who work in the industry or at least did work for many years in the industry, they all seem to give similar responses tho granted it depends on their job but the universal answer always boiled down to pressure. When working to a tight budget and/or deadline naturally the pressure is on to be fast and still maintain a professional level of efficiency in the work that is produced. I know at least some of the bigger company's hire in house councillors which straight away to me says that plumbers really need to read this.
I guess the big question is what are the implications of the meltdown on the future of the games industry and to be honest if anything i think it will create a boom as new companies will pop up and of course this will also bring new creative idea for games.
Tuesday, 10 February 2009
Gameplay?? Ahhhh blasphemy
Yes Yes before i even start this i would like to say i use this word and do accept it as a valid term to describe the overall quality of a game so even tho im going to possibly moan about it i do use it.
Ok then, well i guess ill start with what is gameplay. Gameplay is a made up term stringing the words game and play together, that is the obvious observation and even more obvious is what it is used to describe... Well for some my mother thought it was a new way of saying i want to play a game, which i suppose makes sense.
The definition of gameplay is kinda sketchy really but overal very similar and to help me get this across i will be qouting from two sources which are the following..
[http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=11137]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gameplay]
Normally i would dismiss most information on wiki but to be fair i think the definition and information provided on there is a good representation of what it is. Game play is used to describe the story quality,graphics,sound,features and replay value and in my mind shows the word really is just a use for lazy game reviewers as mentioned in another blog a while back.
Either way it provides the information neccessary for gamers to decide whether they would like the game or not but the term is used more widely and has been accepted and is now used by game companys which brings me to the gamesutra link. The link if you havent read it already is a interview with Peter Molyneux, one of the lead developers on the Fable series. He achknowledges the word gameplay and in his reply to the questions he tells not only of its importance but the increasing demand for more of it to enhance the gaming experience.
Gameplay is something that can be perfected with perfect planning and excellent storyline and graphics but of course this also requires time and gamers are notoriously impatient when it comes to release dates. So no gameplay is not just a random load of graphics and other bit mashed together. It takes planning and concideration of what the customer wants and the best way to fit it together seamlessly.
Ok then, well i guess ill start with what is gameplay. Gameplay is a made up term stringing the words game and play together, that is the obvious observation and even more obvious is what it is used to describe... Well for some my mother thought it was a new way of saying i want to play a game, which i suppose makes sense.
The definition of gameplay is kinda sketchy really but overal very similar and to help me get this across i will be qouting from two sources which are the following..
[http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=11137]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gameplay]
Normally i would dismiss most information on wiki but to be fair i think the definition and information provided on there is a good representation of what it is. Game play is used to describe the story quality,graphics,sound,features and replay value and in my mind shows the word really is just a use for lazy game reviewers as mentioned in another blog a while back.
Either way it provides the information neccessary for gamers to decide whether they would like the game or not but the term is used more widely and has been accepted and is now used by game companys which brings me to the gamesutra link. The link if you havent read it already is a interview with Peter Molyneux, one of the lead developers on the Fable series. He achknowledges the word gameplay and in his reply to the questions he tells not only of its importance but the increasing demand for more of it to enhance the gaming experience.
Gameplay is something that can be perfected with perfect planning and excellent storyline and graphics but of course this also requires time and gamers are notoriously impatient when it comes to release dates. So no gameplay is not just a random load of graphics and other bit mashed together. It takes planning and concideration of what the customer wants and the best way to fit it together seamlessly.
Tuesday, 3 February 2009
Show the characters some lovin ^_^
If there is one thing i always take note of its characters.. From there personality to their actions that follow because of the decisions they make due to it.
A character can have extremely strong influences over your emotions whether it be the connection of getting a innocent character like Heather through a death infested mansion to routing for the uneducated and extreme underdog 'Rocky Balboa' willing him on to win and get that last punch in, its from films and games like 'Rocky' and 'Silent Hill' we get these funny attachments to characters and their lives.
The question is why??? We know its just a film or a game yet we do actually care.. i think there is several reasons for this and the obvious one for a gamer at least is it effects their life in the sense they desperately want to complete their game.
Aside from that as far as games are concerned its the same reason we get attached to movie characters.. Subconsciously i believe we all picture ourselves in their position. Asking questions such as, i wonder what its like to be in that position?what would i do? and what would i do in their situation?... In a sense we do what Mike said in the other weeks lecture. We run simulations in our heads of ourselves in their position and this gives us a sense of emotion towards the character.
Another example i remember well was in the 'Lord Of The Rings'. Poor little Frodo didn't want that ring but he was burdened with it and it turned his quiet life in the beautiful green Shire into a journey through hell. Apart from the sympathy that he was lumbered with that stupid ring there was also a sense or admiration later as he had the chance to just walk away and leave the rings fate in the hands of other but he chose not to. This made the little hobbit an underdog and hero and the instant reaction to a underdog and hero is to back them up and that what everyone who went to see that film was doing, this even spread to other characters in the film.
When it comes down to getting an audience to feel like this much of it i think is dependent on a joint effort between both the script writers and the actors... The script writers may define the narrative and story that puts the character through scenarios we can picture ourselves in, but they don't put the soul or personality into a character that is required to allow the audience to fully relate to a character, that is down to the actor.
The actors often are the ones who define the characters looks along with the directer but its how they are portrayed and the sense of realism and belief in the way they vocalise their lines and its this belief factor that is key to triggering some of these emotions and connections.
Moving off films and back to games...
A good game character is crucial to a game and once again I'm going to refer to an underdog as a example. "Guybrush Threepwood Mighty Pirate" oh how misunderstood Guybrush is lol. Hes the pirate that sucks at being a pirate yet we love him for it because he doesn't give up and lives in this fantasy world that he's the greatest pirate that ever lived. Whats so clever about Guybrush is everything! from his gormless expressions and long rather silly looking face, to his rather childish voice and dim witted comments throughout the game. In a way even if monkey island didn't have a great storyline (which to be honest it doesn't really) it would still be a great game because we all love following Guybrush on his unfortunate adventures.
In other words, and this applys in films to! it takes a good character to make a film or game sell and preferably more than one gets the biggest hits and overall makes the difference between a hit and a miss with film goers and gamers.
A character can have extremely strong influences over your emotions whether it be the connection of getting a innocent character like Heather through a death infested mansion to routing for the uneducated and extreme underdog 'Rocky Balboa' willing him on to win and get that last punch in, its from films and games like 'Rocky' and 'Silent Hill' we get these funny attachments to characters and their lives.
The question is why??? We know its just a film or a game yet we do actually care.. i think there is several reasons for this and the obvious one for a gamer at least is it effects their life in the sense they desperately want to complete their game.
Aside from that as far as games are concerned its the same reason we get attached to movie characters.. Subconsciously i believe we all picture ourselves in their position. Asking questions such as, i wonder what its like to be in that position?what would i do? and what would i do in their situation?... In a sense we do what Mike said in the other weeks lecture. We run simulations in our heads of ourselves in their position and this gives us a sense of emotion towards the character.
Another example i remember well was in the 'Lord Of The Rings'. Poor little Frodo didn't want that ring but he was burdened with it and it turned his quiet life in the beautiful green Shire into a journey through hell. Apart from the sympathy that he was lumbered with that stupid ring there was also a sense or admiration later as he had the chance to just walk away and leave the rings fate in the hands of other but he chose not to. This made the little hobbit an underdog and hero and the instant reaction to a underdog and hero is to back them up and that what everyone who went to see that film was doing, this even spread to other characters in the film.
When it comes down to getting an audience to feel like this much of it i think is dependent on a joint effort between both the script writers and the actors... The script writers may define the narrative and story that puts the character through scenarios we can picture ourselves in, but they don't put the soul or personality into a character that is required to allow the audience to fully relate to a character, that is down to the actor.
The actors often are the ones who define the characters looks along with the directer but its how they are portrayed and the sense of realism and belief in the way they vocalise their lines and its this belief factor that is key to triggering some of these emotions and connections.
Moving off films and back to games...
A good game character is crucial to a game and once again I'm going to refer to an underdog as a example. "Guybrush Threepwood Mighty Pirate" oh how misunderstood Guybrush is lol. Hes the pirate that sucks at being a pirate yet we love him for it because he doesn't give up and lives in this fantasy world that he's the greatest pirate that ever lived. Whats so clever about Guybrush is everything! from his gormless expressions and long rather silly looking face, to his rather childish voice and dim witted comments throughout the game. In a way even if monkey island didn't have a great storyline (which to be honest it doesn't really) it would still be a great game because we all love following Guybrush on his unfortunate adventures.
In other words, and this applys in films to! it takes a good character to make a film or game sell and preferably more than one gets the biggest hits and overall makes the difference between a hit and a miss with film goers and gamers.
Monday, 5 January 2009
I can be creative me...
This is a very difficult entry but what is creativity? how do you define it? well im going to give it my best shot.
Creativity surrounds us, its in every man made object in some shape or form. Just take a look at a common object in the household such as a table or a cabinet. These all came from designs which either started on paper that somebody sat and thought about or straight out of the carpenters head. It even gets bigger than that just take a look at the nature of modern buildings and the higher desire to get curves to replace corners. These are two examples of creativity on a large and small scale outside of the games industry which shows how important it is.
Without creativity we would live in a generic world.. in fact without the combination of curiocity and creativity we would not have most of the technology we have today. Who created it though? well we only have to look at ourselves for the answer to that. We all have this drive or urge to stand out and be different in the little things we do dont you agree?
Well its this thirst to be different that spured this desire to create new things. Take clothes for example, its a creative industry like the games industry. I know a few people who do fashion and for this i have asked them why they do it, their answer wasnt for the money (though obviously being a job it does help) they told me it was because they enjoyed designing new, different and wild ideas that make people more individual.
In games creativity is pretty much a necessity in todays market. creativity in games depends on the departments really, as the text document is creative in its own way and the concept art goes without saying. That then follows over to Modelling but really modelling and animating is an observation and not really creativity unless the modelling is done straight from a person head.
Id say creativity is majorly enhanced by technical limitations. Think about it this way when something breaks and you are limited to what you can repair it with, you have to make the best of what you have and the same applys when a artist is given a specification.
For example if an artist is given a limit for a character of 1000 triangles then they have to create an imitation of life using low detailed meshes, which relys on the form and method but most of all and this is the biggest creative factor, the textures...
The textures have to be good and its not an imitation as it has to be better than life and its because of this that i see why Ben Mathis has such a passion for low poly character modelling.
When you try to point out creativity in games it doesnt stop at just the graphics which really are the obvious representation. The programmers also play a part in providing good gameplay and realistic physics which in some cases arnt always based on real life also theres the AI for NPC's (non-playing characters).
I think the best company i have seen for creativity is definatly 'Rare' all of their games are like childrens games for adults or never quite reflect reality but are still satisfyingly realistic.
My idea of creativity is being different and creating from scratch, in other words fresh new designs and styles that have not been used before but its easier said than done.
In addition a great thing i just seen on air crash investigation which explained why they had pilots in plane. Its because in the event of a problem arising they trust that the pilot has the creativity to solve a problem that a thoughless computer cannot. Which sums it up that its all about thought!
Creativity surrounds us, its in every man made object in some shape or form. Just take a look at a common object in the household such as a table or a cabinet. These all came from designs which either started on paper that somebody sat and thought about or straight out of the carpenters head. It even gets bigger than that just take a look at the nature of modern buildings and the higher desire to get curves to replace corners. These are two examples of creativity on a large and small scale outside of the games industry which shows how important it is.
Without creativity we would live in a generic world.. in fact without the combination of curiocity and creativity we would not have most of the technology we have today. Who created it though? well we only have to look at ourselves for the answer to that. We all have this drive or urge to stand out and be different in the little things we do dont you agree?
Well its this thirst to be different that spured this desire to create new things. Take clothes for example, its a creative industry like the games industry. I know a few people who do fashion and for this i have asked them why they do it, their answer wasnt for the money (though obviously being a job it does help) they told me it was because they enjoyed designing new, different and wild ideas that make people more individual.
In games creativity is pretty much a necessity in todays market. creativity in games depends on the departments really, as the text document is creative in its own way and the concept art goes without saying. That then follows over to Modelling but really modelling and animating is an observation and not really creativity unless the modelling is done straight from a person head.
Id say creativity is majorly enhanced by technical limitations. Think about it this way when something breaks and you are limited to what you can repair it with, you have to make the best of what you have and the same applys when a artist is given a specification.
For example if an artist is given a limit for a character of 1000 triangles then they have to create an imitation of life using low detailed meshes, which relys on the form and method but most of all and this is the biggest creative factor, the textures...
The textures have to be good and its not an imitation as it has to be better than life and its because of this that i see why Ben Mathis has such a passion for low poly character modelling.
When you try to point out creativity in games it doesnt stop at just the graphics which really are the obvious representation. The programmers also play a part in providing good gameplay and realistic physics which in some cases arnt always based on real life also theres the AI for NPC's (non-playing characters).
I think the best company i have seen for creativity is definatly 'Rare' all of their games are like childrens games for adults or never quite reflect reality but are still satisfyingly realistic.
My idea of creativity is being different and creating from scratch, in other words fresh new designs and styles that have not been used before but its easier said than done.
In addition a great thing i just seen on air crash investigation which explained why they had pilots in plane. Its because in the event of a problem arising they trust that the pilot has the creativity to solve a problem that a thoughless computer cannot. Which sums it up that its all about thought!
Monday, 29 December 2008
From Box to Brick (game technology)
Ahhh console evolution its a very unappreciated science people just know the next one will be better but dont ever take time to look at the evolution of this magnificent industry.
Consoles differ so much today from those in the 60s and i dont mean in the obvious way that being performance i mean in design the look the style you can almost guess the decade simply by looking at a consoles exterier casing slightly sad really lol.
Any way down to the tasks... and its plain and simple for the first part yes the industry was focused completely on the interfaces and getting the most out of what was extremely primative technology at the time in other words if you were to take my list of 3 from the previous blog on storylines this is as it was then.
1,gameplay ( extremely simple mostly involving just left and right or up and down motions)
2,graphics ( even more simple and mostly just blocks on the screen that either moved or didnt)
3, storyline (non existant but thats because the industry was more focused on development visually and getting the most out of the primative machines which really doesnt differ much from today).
I cannot argue thought at the time with this being new technology, it did fasinate people much as the realism of todays games compel it was impressive for its time and nobody cared what it looked like on the outside or as a matter of fact what the graphics were full stop. They were perfectly happy with there little white blocks moving on screen ^_^.
These days standards have definatly changed. People like nice looking consoles and it brings me back to my first impression of the N64. Im not sure why but i thought the console was the best looking one i had ever seen as it gave options in colours and even transparent designs, but it was more than that... It wasnt box'y like other consoles of the 90's it had more about it and id go as far as saying it was the the first pretty console lol, that at least started the idea of variations on a commercial level as opposed to sonys silver playstation that was released as a special edition.
Ive always said curves are the future for any design simply because there is nothing cool about a brick. Id definatly count XBOX 360 as a brick but with its custom templates it makes it a bit more acceptable ontodays markets as does the Wii, however the PS3 is a look to the future in almost every way though Sony lack the motivation and innovation of Microsoft and Nintendo to come up with anything different but better graphics.
When it comes down to personal opinion on the user interfaces through all of the consoles i have played, id have to say the the best one i have seen is the Xbox 360's latest one which is just so lush but even the old one was nicely layed out and very easy to navigate. I know many would say the PS3's or a more primative one such as the Dreamcasts or PSX/1 but im thinking of it in terms the most features yet the easiest to navigate and still looking nice and 360's interface has all of that. I cant even knock the controller it may look a freak but its so much better designed than the PS3 controller. It would seem that Microsoft admired the Gamecube controller alot and always said the gamecube controller was one of the best.
By far the worse interface i have ever seen is that of the Gamecube! Although it has a good controller design as most of Nintendos consoles do, its interface just isnt nice to look at though admitedly its got a bit more about it than that of the PS2 or PSX/1. Nethertheless its still harder to navigate than other consoles but at least they ammended this with the Wiis nice and simple interface.
The future of video games is definalty heading in a game pad free enviroment and personally i already think the joystick is dead and buryied! Wii has pathed the way for a new generation in gaming where interactivity is the new major factor and i think hand free gaming is coming in the near future.
Consoles differ so much today from those in the 60s and i dont mean in the obvious way that being performance i mean in design the look the style you can almost guess the decade simply by looking at a consoles exterier casing slightly sad really lol.
Any way down to the tasks... and its plain and simple for the first part yes the industry was focused completely on the interfaces and getting the most out of what was extremely primative technology at the time in other words if you were to take my list of 3 from the previous blog on storylines this is as it was then.
1,gameplay ( extremely simple mostly involving just left and right or up and down motions)
2,graphics ( even more simple and mostly just blocks on the screen that either moved or didnt)
3, storyline (non existant but thats because the industry was more focused on development visually and getting the most out of the primative machines which really doesnt differ much from today).
I cannot argue thought at the time with this being new technology, it did fasinate people much as the realism of todays games compel it was impressive for its time and nobody cared what it looked like on the outside or as a matter of fact what the graphics were full stop. They were perfectly happy with there little white blocks moving on screen ^_^.
These days standards have definatly changed. People like nice looking consoles and it brings me back to my first impression of the N64. Im not sure why but i thought the console was the best looking one i had ever seen as it gave options in colours and even transparent designs, but it was more than that... It wasnt box'y like other consoles of the 90's it had more about it and id go as far as saying it was the the first pretty console lol, that at least started the idea of variations on a commercial level as opposed to sonys silver playstation that was released as a special edition.
Ive always said curves are the future for any design simply because there is nothing cool about a brick. Id definatly count XBOX 360 as a brick but with its custom templates it makes it a bit more acceptable ontodays markets as does the Wii, however the PS3 is a look to the future in almost every way though Sony lack the motivation and innovation of Microsoft and Nintendo to come up with anything different but better graphics.
When it comes down to personal opinion on the user interfaces through all of the consoles i have played, id have to say the the best one i have seen is the Xbox 360's latest one which is just so lush but even the old one was nicely layed out and very easy to navigate. I know many would say the PS3's or a more primative one such as the Dreamcasts or PSX/1 but im thinking of it in terms the most features yet the easiest to navigate and still looking nice and 360's interface has all of that. I cant even knock the controller it may look a freak but its so much better designed than the PS3 controller. It would seem that Microsoft admired the Gamecube controller alot and always said the gamecube controller was one of the best.
By far the worse interface i have ever seen is that of the Gamecube! Although it has a good controller design as most of Nintendos consoles do, its interface just isnt nice to look at though admitedly its got a bit more about it than that of the PS2 or PSX/1. Nethertheless its still harder to navigate than other consoles but at least they ammended this with the Wiis nice and simple interface.
The future of video games is definalty heading in a game pad free enviroment and personally i already think the joystick is dead and buryied! Wii has pathed the way for a new generation in gaming where interactivity is the new major factor and i think hand free gaming is coming in the near future.
Saturday, 27 December 2008
Christianity, Religion and Destruction? thoughts
On with the theory now, yes it is very controversial and if you are deeply religious then i am sorry if it offends you!!
My theory involves several factors which more than likely will either confuse you or make you think either way it still leaves more questions than answers so lets dive straight in!
The first part of the theory is that religion served two purposes and neither of them involved the creation of life on our planet however they gave a reasoning to a blank subject. The first real reason is that they need answers to unanswerable questions that only science could answer but the lack of technology prevented the answers from being given although now we have some answers now all they have done is produced more questions...
Obviously this doesnt help answer the questions that bug us deep down for every day of our misrable existance on this floating rock in the endless void of space.
The second reason is the most logical reason behind religion and that is that it was used as an early form of law and order. If people believed they were going to hell if they commited a crime well they were less likely to commit a crime!
The problem is at least in Christianity one guy takes advantage of the system and claims he is the son of god when he could have just been a very clever magician of his time, afterall with the likes of Houdini and David Blaine and Darren Brown who are we to think that these clever tricks were not possible back the times of jesus. Not to mention people were extremely nieve and gullable in those days a few party tricks and you could be the new messiah.
This introduces the possibility of possibly one of the biggest hoaxs of all time! Was jesus out to decieve the jewish people into thinking he was the son of god.. to pull the the illusion of being killed via crucifiction all in the effort to unbalance both the jewish faith and the roman religion!
His methods make sence Houdini was famous for his escapology in which jesus could have done a similar trick when placed in the tomb the crucifiction could have been nothing more than a illusion including the so called holy spear which was the the final blow to Jesus in the bible. In order to gain the following in the masses a simple psychological trick could be used and that is follow the crowd!.
We still do it today we follow a crowd because we know theres a reason and curiocity gets the better of us if not we all get the urge and not one person can deny it. So Jesus simply gained a small following of people these would be known as the 12 appostles, but what if in fact they were merely a means of drawing a crowd in the early days with the later intent to spread the hoax across the country and then the world.
however thats obviously missing more proof before something like that could count as a true theory so ill be sure to research and think more on the matter.
Back to Religion in general they say stopping religion would stop wars but thats not true.. we would still fight because we wouldnt have a reason for our existance! So it would be like 2 Cocketals in a small pen without any chickens, when they are left without a purpose or any meaning they fight and we are the same.
Besides religion is the driving force behind finding the answers as once again it provides the questions and to keep sanity provides answers but the answers produce more questions in a sence we will never know the meaning of life through science thats something religion can decide but if we made it up unintentionally then we will never know the answers.
Either way this theory spells destruction and that is true well its tru if we follow religion we will fight , if we dont have religion we will fight.. if the hollocaust comes we are boned because of science as it questions god therefore it can be seen as evil. But then annoyingly that would lead someone back to thinking what jesus said would actually prevent disaster as it would bring peace, to bad its something humans are not capable of, magician or not the guy may have thought the same thousands of years before me now.
TBC+Amended...
My theory involves several factors which more than likely will either confuse you or make you think either way it still leaves more questions than answers so lets dive straight in!
The first part of the theory is that religion served two purposes and neither of them involved the creation of life on our planet however they gave a reasoning to a blank subject. The first real reason is that they need answers to unanswerable questions that only science could answer but the lack of technology prevented the answers from being given although now we have some answers now all they have done is produced more questions...
Obviously this doesnt help answer the questions that bug us deep down for every day of our misrable existance on this floating rock in the endless void of space.
The second reason is the most logical reason behind religion and that is that it was used as an early form of law and order. If people believed they were going to hell if they commited a crime well they were less likely to commit a crime!
The problem is at least in Christianity one guy takes advantage of the system and claims he is the son of god when he could have just been a very clever magician of his time, afterall with the likes of Houdini and David Blaine and Darren Brown who are we to think that these clever tricks were not possible back the times of jesus. Not to mention people were extremely nieve and gullable in those days a few party tricks and you could be the new messiah.
This introduces the possibility of possibly one of the biggest hoaxs of all time! Was jesus out to decieve the jewish people into thinking he was the son of god.. to pull the the illusion of being killed via crucifiction all in the effort to unbalance both the jewish faith and the roman religion!
His methods make sence Houdini was famous for his escapology in which jesus could have done a similar trick when placed in the tomb the crucifiction could have been nothing more than a illusion including the so called holy spear which was the the final blow to Jesus in the bible. In order to gain the following in the masses a simple psychological trick could be used and that is follow the crowd!.
We still do it today we follow a crowd because we know theres a reason and curiocity gets the better of us if not we all get the urge and not one person can deny it. So Jesus simply gained a small following of people these would be known as the 12 appostles, but what if in fact they were merely a means of drawing a crowd in the early days with the later intent to spread the hoax across the country and then the world.
however thats obviously missing more proof before something like that could count as a true theory so ill be sure to research and think more on the matter.
Back to Religion in general they say stopping religion would stop wars but thats not true.. we would still fight because we wouldnt have a reason for our existance! So it would be like 2 Cocketals in a small pen without any chickens, when they are left without a purpose or any meaning they fight and we are the same.
Besides religion is the driving force behind finding the answers as once again it provides the questions and to keep sanity provides answers but the answers produce more questions in a sence we will never know the meaning of life through science thats something religion can decide but if we made it up unintentionally then we will never know the answers.
Either way this theory spells destruction and that is true well its tru if we follow religion we will fight , if we dont have religion we will fight.. if the hollocaust comes we are boned because of science as it questions god therefore it can be seen as evil. But then annoyingly that would lead someone back to thinking what jesus said would actually prevent disaster as it would bring peace, to bad its something humans are not capable of, magician or not the guy may have thought the same thousands of years before me now.
TBC+Amended...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)