Olarin

Ah, sorry I forgot to post sooner, but I've got plenty of singing experience and would enjoy contributing to this, if you're still collecting parts.

For some reason I initially read this as Patrick Stewart instead of Jon Stewart.

Sorry to be pedantic (well, ok, so I'm not really sorry, actually I thrive on being pedantic), but it's a touch misleading to say that viola and cellos are almost exactly the same. They are both members of the violin family, but the differences are numerous: - The viola is held like a violin, and is only slightly larger than a violin. The cello is over twice as big and is held upright between the knees, resting on an endpin. - significant difference in tone - Although lower pitched, the cello has a brighter and more resonant quality, whereas the viola is softer and less piercing than the other string instruments. Anyone reasonably familiar with string instruments could tell the two apart by ear most of the time without much difficulty. (The difference in timbre between viola and cello is actually quite comparable to that between alto and tenor vocalists.) - vast difference in playing technique - If you'd ever heard me trying to play a viola, you wouldn't question this one, trust me... Strictly speaking, it would be more accurate to say that a viola is almost the same as a violin pitched a fifth lower. (Of course I've known viola players who would complain about this statement, saying the viola is a completely different beast and many violinists who double on viola don't play it properly.)

I've got a FF6 jazz waltz remix waiting to be posted which has plenty of cello.

It's an interesting idea, anyway, but I have to admit it seems a little too nebulous to be of much use. It supposed to indicate that the artist is getting a "fair" deal, but what exactly is fair? If you can con an artist into signing a bad contract in the first place, it doesn't seem like it would take much more to get them to approve the use of this logo at the same time. Perhaps it would be a little more meaningful if there was some coherent set of standards that it stood for, and it was administered by some entity such as the musician's union that could maintain publically-available records of who was and wasn't using it legitimately - sort of a better business bureau of the music industry. I'd also be curious to have some data on how much of an effect this would ultimately have on consumers. If a band they like puts out an album they want, are they going to refuse to buy it in the absence of such a sticker? There's no direct "replacable good" in this situation - you could buy something else in the same genre but it won't sound like that band - if that was the album you wanted, that's the album you're going to get, one way or another. Perhaps a few people might take a chance on a purchase because they see the sticker, but that's unlikely to have a large effect. Mostly it seems they're trying to combat the excuse of "well I pirate all my music because the artist doesn't really get compensated if I buy it legit anyway" by giving some indication that everything is somehow on the level. The problem is, everything technically already is on the level - when you see an album in a store, the artist approved that album at SOME point or it wouldn't be there. They may have agreed to a bad deal and gotten shafted, they might be less approving later on when they become unhappy with their cut, but somewhere at the beginning of the process they slapped their John Hancock down on a dusty sheet of parchment and said YES let's do this thing. I suspect that ultimately, the best solution for preventing artists from getting conned out of their share of the pie is for the artists to be better prepared in terms of business and legal knowledge. There are other factors at work here too. First of all, we all know the artist isn't the only one that has to get paid from an album sale. As many of the people who contribute to this site are acutely aware, jobs like mixing and mastering are key elements in the process, and those people earn their paychecks too. Even publicity is vital - most of your potential audience members don't have the time, energy, or interest to spend hours online seeking out indie bands that might provide them incrementally more enjoyment than whatever mainstream dredge is pouring out their radio. In light of all that other work that can go into an album, how do we accurately determine what the artist's fair share really is? Secondly, there are simply too many of us professional musicians! Supply and demand is working against us, especially in a world with technology that allows for massive force-multiplication - a rock power trio can use amplification to fill an arena with more sound than a hundred-and-fifty person orchestra could have produced two centuries ago; one guy with a guitar can be recorded, overdubbed, duplicated, distributed, and played in millions of homes at the same time. Don't get me wrong. I'm entirely in favour of artists getting their due. I'm certainly not trying to defend unethical practices by large companies (or anyone else). I'm trying to make a career as a musician myself. Ultimately, though, I don't think this little logo is going to make a significant dent in the problems facing the modern musician. If it ends up proving me wrong, great.

I'm too lazy to go back and quote, but re: first RPG to have classes - as someone already said, there was surely some old text-based or roguelike in the 70's that had classes. At the very least, we can go back to Richard Garriot's 1979 Akalabeth. But here's a more interesting first - how about first game to have NPC's with everyday schedules? (Sleep, eat, work, etc. at certain times of in-game day.) I believe it's Ultima V, 1988.

I find the discussions of which sorts of activities are good and bad for musicians to make money off of interesting, because I think an important point is being missed: I would contend that live music and recorded music, although obviously related, are two distinctly different mediums. Each allows possibilties the other does not, and although many musicians can successfully create both some are better at one or the other. To suggest that musicians should expect to make most of their money from touring, for instance, de-emphasizes the art of constructing a good album. Although for some musicians an album is merely a sort of documentation to collect songs they have written, some albums are very carefully crafted works of art, sometimes employing extensive overdubbing and other recording-specific production and effects that cannot be effectively re-created in live performance. Furthermore, the two mediums are often employed for different purposes by the audience. There are many jazz albums, for instance, that seek to capture as much of the energy and improvisational intrigue of a live performance as possible, resulting in an album that is lauded by aficionados who are interested in sitting down and listening intently as they would at a live show, but often ignored by consumers interested in a more "casual" listening experience, usually while doing other activities. Some people advocate one type of listening experience over another as what music "should" be rather than accepting that there may be many different legitimate uses for different kinds of music. As I typed this post, zircon posted essentially the same thing in a lot fewer words. I lose.

With the descending minor-key harmonies, "Monsters Don't Hurt Mario" sounds for all the world like it could be a classic Mega Man tune.

I was complaining about there not being any avatars from Ultima, so I thought I'd put a few minutes of my time where my mouth was and do something about it. Here's some from Ultima VII: The Black Gate, by Origin Systems Inc. From left to right: The Avatar (male), The Avatar (female), Lord British, Nystul apparently I can only do 4 per post... LT: Nystul is oogly, but that's not your fault. Good on the rest! so here's Iolo, Shamino, and Dupre: Sorry for the double post. Hope these are formatted ok. LT: Yep. Looks cool.

Alright, fine, I'll pick an avatar. There aren't any avatars from my favorite series of games, Ultima, so I'll settle for something similar, the Elven Archer from Warcraft II. Also, I hate to admit it, but the smug look of arrogant superiority feels appropriate somehow. That probably doesn't speak well of me. This site really needs some avatars from the Ultima series, though. Maybe I'll go dig up and post a few. No wait - what this site really needs is some more remixes from the Ultima series. I'd better get to work on that too.

With regards to game collections - I personally don't find it relevant how the game was packaged. For instance, I acquired Ultimas I-VIII on an Ultima Collection CD that, itself, came in my Dragon Edition box for Ultima IX. But I just listed the games under their own names, i.e. "Ultima V: Warriors of Destiny"; it seems wholly unecessary to put "Ultima IX Dragon Edition: Ultima Collection: Ultima V: Warriors of Destiny". If someone were to give me an original copy of Ultima V in its original packaging for some reason (for collectibility I guess), I wouldn't bother to list it twice; it's the same darn game. Same deal with, for instance, my combo Super Mario Bros. / Duck Hunt cartridge - I just listed the games separately. I suppose an updated version of a game would be another matter, but those usually have something else distinguishing the title anyway ("Anniversary Edition" or "Advance" or something).

So here's a question for debate - should you list a game you've completed but don't own? (I played through several old games a couple years ago when I had a roommate who owned them.)