Manic Miner: The Opera

If you, like me, have fond memories of Matthew Smith’s 1983 game Manic Miner (playable here), chances are you are from Europe. It’s a pivotal game in the European history of games, but little known in the U.S.

Someone out there is apparently sufficiently fond of the game to compose an opera about it.

(Philosophical question of the day: does composing an opera about something always imply a fondness of it?)

(Via GameSetWatch.)

New version of Firefox due to FarmVille

If you are using Firefox, you have probably been asked to upgrade to 3.6.6 over the weekend. You may notice that the list of fixed bugs only has one item.

Yes, the primary motivation behind Firefox 3.6.6 is that 3.6.4 introduced problems for FarmVille players. (A new 10-second timeout for Flash sometimes prevented FarmVille from loading.)

From this we can learn that Firefox developers are not (willing to admit that they are) playing FarmVille. Obligatory critical comment in the bug report:

(I have a few comments about the prevalent anti-FarmVille sentiment, but more about that later.)

Is Soccer Un-American?

In my experience, we Europeans tend not to think of soccer (yes, football) as particularly left-wing or democratic, or egalitarian, or non-competitive, but with the World Cup just starting, a few U.S. commentators have been arguing in full force for exactly that.

Here’s Gary Schmitt explaining that Americans (read: U.S. Americans) only enjoy sports in which the best team wins. Latin Americans and Europeans are different of course.

For sure, there may be a number of reasons that is the case but my suspicion is that the so-called “beautiful game” is not so beautiful to American sensibilities. We like, as good small “d” democrats, our underdogs for sure but we also still expect folks in the end to get their just desert. And, in sports, that means excellence should prevail. Of course, the fact that is often not the case when it comes to soccer may be precisely the reason the sport is so popular in the countries of Latin America and Europe.

Oh, Gary’s evidence that soccer is not about the best team winning: The U.S. beating Spain last year in the Confederations Cup.

Here’s Matthew Philbin similarly arguing that soccer doesn’t require skill, agility and so on, unlike American sports.

And to conservatives, the troubling aspects of the game aren’t confined to the pros. Soccer requires comparatively little from children but the ability to run after the ball – the risk of failure for anyone except maybe the goal keeper is zero. Even the strong chance that any given game will end in a tie makes it attractive for parents reluctant to impart life’s difficult lessons to young kids.

It must baffle soccer partisans that Americans haven’t taken to their game. After all, the United States is a sports-obsessed nation.

Americans look to sports to teach work ethic, teamwork and responsibility, in addition to the physical and mental skills necessary for competition. They love underdogs and “Cinderella stories” and “Evil Empires” and “bums,” “Hogs” and “No-Name Defenses.”

And Americans like to think their sports reflect something about them. Michael Shackelford of Bleacher Report praised football because it, “requires a combination of power and agility, brute strength, and grace … In other words, it requires American characteristics in order to succeed.”

You can’t make this stuff up.

(Links via Gawker.)

Tuesday Changes Everything (a Mathematical Puzzle)

The last two weeks have seen heated debate about a mathematical puzzle posed by Gary Foshee and reported by  New Scientist (discussions here and here and here).

Gary Foshee, a collector and designer of puzzles from Issaquah near Seattle walked to the lectern to present his talk. It consisted of the following three sentences: “I have two children. One is a boy born on a Tuesday. What is the probability I have two boys?”

“The first thing you think is ‘What has Tuesday got to do with it?'” said Foshee, deadpan. “Well, it has everything to do with it.” And then he stepped down from the stage.

This is the answer: 13/27.

Many people will intuitively say that the answer is 1/2 (=the chance of having a boy or a girl), but probability aficionados will give the answer 1/3, since this is the Boy or Girl Paradox: We are not told that the speaker has a child and is waiting for another, but that he already has two children. Two children can come in four configurations: 1) boy/girl, 2) girl/boy, 3) girl/girl, 4) boy/boy. Since he has one boy, we are looking at the options 1, 2, or 4. Only the boy/boy combination includes two boys, so the probability is 1/3. In other words, order matters and completely changes probability.

So what has being born on a Tuesday got to do with it? Why would the answer not still be 1/3? The New Scientist has a good explanation toward the bottom of the article. Simply count the different combinations of genders and weekdays, which gives the result (number of combinations with two boys, at least one of which was born on a Tuesday) / (number of combinations with at least one boy born on a Tuesday). The result really is 13/27.

This is the best illustration I have found: This shows all the boy/girl pairs as well as the possible weekdays on which they could be born. Green represents situations with two boys, at least one of which was born on a Tuesday. Yellow represents at least one boy born on a Tuesday. Red is neither. Hence the answer is green/(green+yellow)= 13/(13+14)  = 13/27.

But again, what has Tuesday got to do with it?

More below.

Continue reading “Tuesday Changes Everything (a Mathematical Puzzle)”

Guimark2: Some HTML, Flash, Java benchmarks

And now for something completely different.

My past as a Commodore 64 demo programmer means that I find benchmarks quite irresistible. What is the fastest way to accomplish a given task?

Following Steve Jobs’ denunciation of Flash as slow, Sean Christmann recently posted his Guimark2 test suite for comparing vector, bitmap, and text rendering across platforms. Sean built Flash and HTML versions of the tests. One of the clear results was that HTML5 just isn’t that fast yet.

But being mostly a Java programmer, I couldn’t help building Java versions (perhaps I wanted to counter the perception that Java is slow). You can try the Java tests here, Vector, Bitmap, Text and compare them to the tests on the Guimark2 page.

Here are the results from the two machines I tested on:

Test/OS XP, HTML XP, Flash XP, Java OS X, HTML OS X, Flash OS X, Java
Vector 11.9 21.9 20.7 4.5 19.8 31.9
Bitmap 4.3 12.7 208.2 13.0 12.9 42.0
Text 19.2 1.5 11.4 29.9 16.6 14.1

Test results in Frames Per Second (Higher is better)

As you can see, on my two test machines, the Vector test is fastest in Java on OS X, the Bitmap test is fastest in Java on XP (5 times faster than any other platform/language), and the Text test is fastest in HTML on OS X.

Is this always the case? No. As can also be witnessed on the Guimark2 page, these results are highly variable between different OS configurations, browsers. As far as I can make out, really high Java bitmap scores require an ATI or NVidia graphics card, and may not always be present on Windows Vista or 7. On OS X, Flash runs faster in 32-bit Safari, while Java runs fastest in 64-bit Safari (tested here). And so on.

Benchmarking is a lot more complicated than it used to be, but I just thought I’d share these results. The tests also link to the source code if you are interested. Feel free to post your results here or on the Guimark2 page.

PS. Test machines:

  • 2007 Lenovo ThinkPad T60p running Windows XP, Firefox 3.6, Java 1.6, Flash 10.
  • 2010 15″ MacBook Pro running Snow Leopard, Safari (64-bit), Java 1.6, Flash 10.

More about Downsides to External Rewards

Following my earlier discussion of external rewards, here’s a video discussion how increased monetary rewards can lead to decreased performance. The studies mentioned here suggest that monetary rewards work well for mechanical tasks, but have negative impact on cognitively challenging tasks.

The video then discusses how things like open source and personal purpose fly in the face of traditional ideas of economical incentives.

There are many things to say about this, but I have been entertaining the idea that the “surprising finds” in the video are an artifact of a cognitive bias: Many people (such as economists) are fully aware that they are personally motivated by many different things such as pride, ambition, personal interests, social relations and so on … but nevertheless assume that everybody else is only motivated by money and gold stars.

Silly, isn’t it?

*

I am not sure how directly this can be translated into the question of achievements and rewards in video games as there appear to be big differences between monetary and symbolic rewards. More about that later.