Sunday, December 9, 2012

Apocalypse Later.


 "Let me put it this way. We lost the Stanley Cup and we rioted.  What would we do if we couldn't put gas in our cars?"
Donovan Hides, TIR Science Correspondent
I’ve just finished reading John Varley’s Slow Apocalypse, in which an rogue bio-engineered micro-organism destroys the world’s petroleum supply by first solidifying it and then making it explode. The result, of course, is the downfall of civilization, after which it's every man (and woman) for him (or her) self, accompanied by widespread rioting and looting, biker gangs roaming the streets (presumably having shown the foresight to stock up on gasoline) and starvation and disease taking their toll on the population.

It was an interesting read, although somehow surprisingly low in drama. To be fair to Varley, I'm willing to admit that I’ve become a bit jaded - I think I may have been to the end of the world one time too many, as per Robert Silverberg. However, unlike zombie apocalypses, giant asteroid apocalypses, alien invasion apocalypses, global warming apocalypses and all-the-electrical-stuff-stops-working apocalypses*, Varley’s end of the world scenario is something that I could see as a very real possibility under the right circumstances. The question of what happens when fossil fuels run out has been a looming spectre for decades now, and all Varley has to do is accelerate the process.

The title of the novel reflects the fact that there is a four month spooling up period during which the governments of the world are apparently aware of the problem. In the case of the U.S. authorities, inadequate stopgap measures such as fuel rationing and car pooling are instituted while they attempt to surreptitiously deal with the situation, after which the penny drops and everything rather suddenly goes to hell in a handbasket.

Varley’s story is set in California, with most of the action taking place in Los Angeles - where better to start a disaster that involves not being able to drive?  More importantly, Los Angeles exists in a desert, apparently completely dependent on outside sources of food, water and energy, all of which would quickly run out if the transportation system was disrupted.

Varley also loads the dice in favour of chaos. Not only do Los Angeles' neighbouring oil fields (and the La Brea tarpits) explode, but there’s a 9.4 Richter scale earthquake and resultant flooding from broken dams, followed by a massive firestorm. On a national level, an attempted military coup adds insult to injury by crippling the ability of the government to address the situation. After the smoke quite literally clears, there appears to be very little left of the various governing bodies, and survivors band together in small self-sustaining** enclaves that exist at an almost pre-industrial level.

But here’s the question: would the elimination of fossil fuels, specifically oil-based fuels (coal and natural gas are unaffected) lead to the end of the world, or, more accurately, to a full-blown Mad Max-style downfall of civilization? Especially if the governments of the world had four months notice?

Given the current interest in global warming, carbon debt, and general environmental awareness, I'd like to think that the answer is "no".  Right now there's no serious incentive for switching to biofuels, but the potential is there. With some minor adjustments, any car can run on ethanol, and diesel engines were originally designed to run on corn oil rather than fossil fuels. It would take more time, but an emergency situation would accelerate the development of vehicles powered by fuel cells, and although hybrid electrical vehicles may not exactly be commonplace,  they're certainly an established technology, as are natural gas vehicles.

I doubt that four months would be enough time for a complete conversion, but it would be plenty of time to first let people know about the upcoming problem, and second to reassure them that solutions and substitutes were being put in place as quickly as possible.  And the punchline?  After all was said and done, it might even be cheaper at the pumps.
- Sid

*Obviously we need to come up with a term for this - I'm open to suggestions.

** There's a slightly snarky little comment at the end of the book about how these communities are completely committed to recycling and reusing absolutely all waste and garbage. Yes, it took a global disaster to make that happen...

Oh, and did I mention that Jaws isn't science fiction?



Dear Space Channel:

Treasure Island is not a fantasy story.  The presence of pirates may add interest to a tale, but pirates per se are not part of the fantasy genre, in spite of what the Walt Disney Company and Captain Jack Sparrow would have you believe.  Therefore, fond though we are of Eddie Izzard, there is not one reason in the world for you to be showing the two-part British adaptation of Treasure Island.  Yes, Elijah Wood makes an appearance, but he does not play a hobbit - therefore, as with Mr. Izzard, as much as we may like Elijah Wood, that still doesn't make this a fantasy movie.

If you would like a list of more appropriate genre material for broadcast purposes, I refer you to my July 8th, 2007 letter regarding Dead Calm.

Sincerely yours,
Sid

That's it?


"I want everyone to know that I really appreciate all the hard work. You know, watching you guys is like a night in, watching my favorite movie. What was the name of that movie again? Oh, yes. Attack of the stupid bungling idiots who can't find an bigger idiot running around dressed like a bat! Now get to it! 
[Yawns]  
I'm getting bored."
The Joker, Batman: Arkham Asylum
I recently purchased a copy of Batman: Arkham Asylum, the critically acclaimed award-winning 2009 PC game in which the Joker orchestrates a takeover of the asylum with the eventual goal of modifying the serum which gives Bane his strength, using the resulting Titan formula to create an army of monstrous henchmen, and then dumping the leftovers into Gotham's water supply: result, chaos.

Batman, who has just delivered the Joker to the Asylum when the action begins, has a challenging night ahead of him.  He must fight off an army of inmates from Blackgate Penitentiary who are temporarily at Arkham as part of the Joker's plot, subdue escaped Arkham patients, go mano e mano with Bane, recapture the Joker's equally twisted girlfriend Harley Quinn, deal with an infestation of mutated plants created by Poison Ivy, overcome the effects of the Scarecrow's fear potion - oh, yes, and defeat the Joker, too.

As you might imagine based on Batman's approach to crime fighting, Arkham Asylum is primarily a hand to hand combat game, which kept me from purchasing a copy for a long time (well, three years anyway).  I have a substantial background in first-person shooter games, with the accent on the word "shooter", but as a PC rather than console gamer I haven't been terribly interested in mastering the multitude of keyboard commands that are involved in punching, blocking, dodging and kicking.  However, with the Mac version of the game on sale for $20, I decided that it was worth the investment just to see what all the fuss was about.

I have to say that I was pleasantly surprised by how much I enjoyed playing Arkham Asylum. In spite of my doubts about the fighting system, I was able to hold my own against all comers, but the game doesn't simply require that a player memorize complicated keyboard combinations in order to knock out evildoers.  Batman is outnumbered and alone, surrounded by armed criminals. He levels the playing field by concealing himself and picking off his opponents one by one, swinging from the rafters or making his way through air ducts and hidden tunnels, a strategy which requires careful thinking as much as actual combat skill.


In order to help him accomplish his goals, Batman's utility belt is equipped with the usual array of helpful items:  batarang, grappling gun, explosive spray-on gel, a decoder for electronic locks, and so on.  He also has the option of viewing the environment in "detective mode", which activates scanners in his cowl and allows the player to see hidden elements and scan the capabilities and locations of opponents. The integration of the grappling gun to make the game a three dimensional experience is brilliantly done, and in fact the entire interface - fighting, moving, hiding and investigating - is simple and elegant.

But in spite of all that, I was ultimately disappointed by the game, for a very simple reason.  As I mentioned above, I've spent a lot of time playing first person shooters, and that experience has taught me to expect a certain pattern in gameplay: increasingly difficult scenarios punctuated by boss fights, culminating in a final boss fight which is the most challenging part of the game and which very likely requires multiple attempts to achieve victory.

In Arkham Asylum, I was more aware of the villains that I didn't fight than the villains that I did.  There's no sign of the Penguin, no Catwoman (although, come to think of it, Selena Kyle may not end up at Arkham when she gets caught), Clayface remains behind bars, the Riddler is a constant voice-over presence but never physically appears in the game, and Two-face is just briefly mentioned at the end of the game in a radio call from Gotham.  Batman never actually fights Killer Croc, he just runs away from him, and although the Scarecrow appears several times, his role is more psychological than physical.


When I reached what turned out to be the end of the game, with Batman confronting a Titanic Joker in a makeshift arena, I was actually a bit puzzled and wondering what was going to happen - how the Joker would escape, where the game would go next, how the plot would deal with the Joker's sudden physical dominance, where and how he'd change back. When Batman defeated the Joker and the credits began to roll, I was completely surprised to discover that I was finished, without even really breaking a sweat in the final confrontation.

I can make a case for wanting to avoid following the mainstream, and overall I enjoyed the game, but ultimately I ended up feeling like the Joker:  I appreciated all the hard work, but at the end, I was bored.
- Sid