Crash Bandicoot – Teaching an Old Dog New Bits – part 2

This is the eleventh of a now lengthy series of posts on the making of Crash Bandicoot. Click here for the PREVIOUS or for the BEGINNING of the whole mess.

The text below is another journal article I wrote on making Crash in 1999. This is the second part, the FIRST can be found here.

 

And finally to the point!

Both the rapid lifecycle of a video game console and the consistency of the hardware promote video game development strategies that are often very different from the strategies used to make PC video games.   A side-effect of these strategies and the console development environment is that video games released later in the life of a console tend to be incrementally more impressive than earlier titles, even though the hardware hasn’t changed.  Theoretically, since the hardware doesn’t change, first generation software can be as equally impressive as later generation titles, but in reality this is seldom the case.  It may seem obvious that a developer should try to make a first generation title as impressive as a last generation title, but actually this strategy has been the downfall of many talented developers.  There are many good and valid reasons why software improves over time, and the understanding and strategizing about these reasons can greatly improve the chances for a developer to be successful in the marketplace.

Difficulties of Console Video Game Development

There are many difficulties that are encountered when developing a console video game, but the following is a list of several major issues:

  • Learning curve
  • Hardware availability and reliability
  • Bottlenecks
  • Operating System / Libraries
  • Development tools
  • In-house tools
  • Reuse of code
  • Optimization

Learning curve

The learning curve may be the most obvious of all difficulties, and is often one of the most disruptive elements of a video game’s development schedule.  In the past, video games were often developed by small groups of one or more people, had small budgets, ran in a small amount of memory, and had short schedules.  The graphics were almost always 2D, and the mathematics of the game were rarely more than simple algebra.  Today, video games have become much more complicated, and often require extremely sophisticated algorithms and mathematics.  Also, the pure size of the data within a game has made both the run-time code and the tool pipeline require extremely sophisticated solutions for data management issues.  Furthermore, 3D mathematics and renderings can be very CPU intensive, so new tricks and techniques are constantly being created.   Also, the developer will often have to use complex commercial tools, such as 3D modeling packages, to generate the game’s graphics and data.  Add into this the fact that Operating Systems, API’s, and hardware components are continually changing, and it should be obvious that just staying current with the latest technology requires an incredible amount of time, and can have a big impact on the schedule of a game.

The console video game developer has the additional burden that, unlike the PC where the hardware evolves more on a component or API level, new console hardware is normally drastically different and more powerful than the preceding hardware.  The console developer has to learn many new things, such as new CPU’s, new operating systems, new libraries, new graphics devices, new audio devices, new peripherals, new storage devices, new DMA techniques, new co-processors, as well as various other hardware components.  Also, the console developer usually has to learn a new development environment, including a new C compiler, a new assembler, a new debugger, and slew of new support tools.  To complicate matters, new consoles normally have many bugs in such things as the hardware, the operating system, the software libraries, and in the various components of the development environment.

The learning curve of the console hardware is logarithmic in that it is very steep at first, but tends to drop off dramatically by the end of the console life-span.  This initial steep learning curve is why often the first generation software isn’t usually as good as later software.

Hardware availability and reliability

Hardware isn’t very useful without software, and software takes a long time to develop, so it is important to hardware developers to try to encourage software developers to begin software development well in advance of the launch date of the hardware.  It is not uncommon for developers to begin working on a title even before the hardware development kits are available.  To do this, developers will start working on things that don’t depend on the hardware, such as some common tools, and they may also resort to emulating the hardware through software emulation.  Obviously, this technique is not likely to produce software that maximizes the performance of the hardware, but it is done nevertheless because of the time constraints of finishing a product as close as possible to the launch of the console into the market.  The finished first generation game’s performance is not going to be as good as later generations of games, but this compromise is deemed acceptable in order to achieve the desired schedule.

When the hardware does become available for developers, it is usually only available in limited quantity, is normally very expensive, and eventually ends up being replaced by cheaper and more reliable versions of the hardware at some later time.  Early revisions of the hardware may not be fully functional, or may have components that run at a reduced speed, so are difficult to fully assess, and are quite scarce since the hardware developer doesn’t want to make very many of them.  Even when more dependable hardware development kits becomes available, they are usually difficult to get, since production of these kits is slow and expensive, so quantities are low, and software developers are in competition to get them.

The development kits, especially the initial hardware, tend to have bugs that have to be worked around or avoided.  Also, the hardware tends to have contact connection problems so that it is susceptible to vibrations, oxidation, and overheating.  These problems generally improve with new revisions of the development hardware.

All of these reasons will contribute to both a significant initial learning curve, and a physical bottleneck of having an insufficient number of development kits.   This will have a negative impact on a game’s schedule, and the quality of first generation software often suffers as a consequence.

Bottlenecks

An extremely important aspect to console game development is the analysis of the console’s bottlenecks, strengths, weaknesses, and overall performance.  This is critical for developing high performance games, since each component of the console has a fixed theoretical maximum performance, and undershooting that performance may cause your game to appear under-powered, while overshooting may cause you to have to do major reworking of the game’s programming and/or design.  Also, overshooting performance may cause the game to run at an undesirable frame rate, which could compromise the look and feel of the game.

The clever developer will try to design the game to exploit the strengths of the machine, and circumvent the weaknesses.  To do this, the developer must be as familiar as possible with the limitations of the machine.  First, the developer will look at the schematic of the hardware to find out the documented sizes, speeds, connections, caches, and transfer rates of the hardware.  Next, the developer should do hands-on analysis of the machine to look for common weaknesses, such as:  slow CPU’s, limited main memory, limited video memory, limited sound memory, slow BUS speeds, slow RAM access, small data caches, small instruction caches, small texture caches, slow storage devices, slow 3D math support, slow interrupt handling, slow game controller reading, slow system routines, and slow polygon rendering speeds.  Some of these things are easy to analyze, such as the size of video memory, but some of these things are much trickier, such as polygon rendering speeds, because the speed will vary based on many factors, such as source size, destination size, texture bit depth, caching, translucency, and z-buffering, to name just a few.  The developer will need to write several pieces of test code to study the performance of the various hardware components, and should not necessarily trust the statistics found in the documentation, since these are often wrong or misleading.

A developer should use a profiler to analyze where speed losses are occurring in the run-time code.  Most programmers will spend time optimizing code because the programmer suspects that code is slow, but doesn’t have any empirical proof.  This lack of empirical data means that the programmer will invariable waste a lot of time optimizing things that don’t really need to be optimized, and will not optimize things that would have greatly benefited from optimization. Unfortunately, a decent profiler is almost never included in the development software, so it is usually up to the individual developer to write his own profiling software.

The testing of performance is an extremely important tool to use in order to maximize performance.  Often the reason why software improves between generations is that the developers slowly learn over time how to fully understand the bottlenecks, how to circumvent the bottlenecks, and how to identify what actually constitutes a bottleneck.

Operating system / Libraries

Although the consoles tend to have very small operating systems and libraries when compared to the operating systems found on the PC, they are still an important factor of console video game development.

Operating systems and support libraries on video game consoles are used to fill many needs.  One such need is that the hardware developer will often attempt to save money on the production of console hardware by switching to cheaper components, or by integrating various components together.  It is up to the operating system to enable these changes, while having the effects of these changes be transparent to both the consumer and the developer.  The more that the operating system abstracts the hardware, the easier it is for the hardware developer to make changes to the hardware.  However, remember that this abstraction of the hardware comes at the price of reduced potential performance.  Also, the operating system and support libraries will commonly provide code for using the various components of the console.  This has the advantage that developers don’t have to know the low-level details of the hardware, and also potentially saves time since different developers won’t have to spend time creating their own versions of these libraries.  The advantage of not having to write this low level code is important in early generation projects, because the learning curve for the hardware is already quite high, and there may not be time in the schedule for doing very much of this kind of low-level optimization.  Clever developers will slowly replace the system libraries over time, especially with the speed critical subroutines, such as 3D vector math and polygonal set-up.  Also, the hardware developer will occasionally improve upon poorly written libraries, so even the less clever developers will eventually benefit from these optimizations. Improvements to the system libraries are a big reason why later generation games can increase dramatically in performance.

Development tools

On the PC, development tools have evolved over the years, and have become quite sophisticated.  Commercial companies have focused years of efforts on making powerful, optimal, polished, and easy to use development tools.  In contrast, the development tools provided for console video game development are generally provided by the hardware manufacturer, and are usually poorly constructed, have many bugs, are difficult to use, and do not produce optimal results.  For example, the C compiler usually doesn’t optimize very well; the debugger is often crude and, ironically, has many bugs; and there usually isn’t a decent software profiler.

Initially developers will rely on these tools, and the first few generations of software will be adversely effected by their poor quality.  Over time, clever programmers will become less reliant on the tools that are provided, or will develop techniques to work around the weaknesses of the tools.

In-house tools

In-house tools are one of the most important aspects of producing high performance console video game software.  Efficient tools have always been important, but as the data content in video games has grown exponentially over the last few years, in-house tools have become increasingly more important to the overall development process.  In the not too distant future, the focus on tool programming techniques may even exceed the focus on run-time programming issues.  It is not unreasonable that the most impressive video games in the future may end up being the ones that have the best support tools.

In-house tools tend to evolve to fill the needs of a desired level of technology.  Since new consoles tend to have dramatic changes in technology over the predecessor consoles, in-house tools often have to be drastically rewritten or completely replaced to support the new level of technology.  For example, a predecessor console may not have had any 3D support, so the tools developed for that console most likely would not have been written to support 3D.  When a new console is released that can draw 100,000 polygons per second, then it is generally inefficient to try to graft support for this new technology onto the existing tools, so the original tools are discarded.  To continue the previous example, let’s say that the new tool needs to be able to handle environments in the game that average about 500,000 polygons, and have a maximum worst case of 1 million polygons.  Most likely the tool will evolve to the point where it runs pretty well for environments of the average case, but will most likely run just fast enough that the slowest case of a 1 million polygons is processed in a tolerable, albeit painful, amount of time.  The reasons for this are that tools tend to grow in size and complexity over time, and tools tend to only be optimized to the point that they are not so slow as to be intolerable.  Now let’s say that a newer console is released that can now drawn 1 million polygons a second, and now our worst case environment is a whopping 1 billion polygons!  Although the previous in-house tool could support a lot of polygons, the tool will still end up being either extensively rewritten or discarded, since the tool will not be able to be easily modified to be efficient enough to deal with this much larger amount of polygons.

The ability of a tool to function efficiently as the data content processed by the tool increases is referred to as the ability of the tool to “scale”.  In video game programming, tools are seldom written to scale much beyond the needs of the current technology; therefore, when technology changes dramatically, old tools are commonly discarded, and new tools have to be developed.

The in-house tools can consume a large amount of the programming time of a first generation title, since not only are the tools complicated, but they evolve over time as the run-time game code is implemented.  Initial generations of games are created using initial generations of tools.  Likewise, later generations of games are created using later generations of tools.  As the tools become more flexible and powerful, the developer gains the ability to create more impressive games.  This is a big reason why successive generations of console games often make dramatic improvements in performance and quality over their predecessors.

Reuse of code

A problem that stems from the giant gaps in technology between console generations is that it makes it difficult to reuse code that was written for a previous generation of console hardware.  Assembly programming is especially difficult to reuse since the CPU usually changes between consoles, but the C programming language isn’t much of a solution either, since the biggest problem is that the hardware configurations and capabilities are so different.  Any code dealing directly with the hardware or hardware influenced data structures will have to be discarded.  Even code that does something universal in nature, such as mathematical calculations, will most likely need to be rewritten since the new hardware will most likely have some sort of different mathematical model.

Also, just as the in-house tool code becomes outdated, so does game code that is written for less powerful technology.  Animation, modeling, character, environment, and particle code will all need to be discarded.

In practice, very little code can be reused between technological leaps in hardware platforms.  This means that earlier generation games will not have much code reuse, but each new generation of games for a console will be able to reuse code from its predecessors, and therefore games will tend to improve with each new generation.

Optimization

By definition, having optimal code is preferable to having bulky or less efficient code.  It would therefore seem logical to say that to achieve maximum performance from the hardware, all code should be completely optimal.  Unfortunately, this is not an easy or even practical thing to achieve, since the writing of completely optimal code has many nuances, and can be very time-consuming.  The programmer must be intimately familiar with the details of the hardware.  He must fully understand how to implement the code, such as possibly using assembly language since C compilers will often generate inefficient code.  The programmer must make certain to best utilize the CPU caches.  Also, the programmer should understand how the code may effect other pieces of code, such as the effects of the code on the instruction cache, or the amount of resources that are tied up by his code. The programmer has to know how to effectively use co-processors or other devices.  He must develop an algorithm that is maximally efficient when implemented. Also, the programmer will need to measure the code against the theoretical maximum optimal performance to be certain that the code can indeed be considered to be fully optimal.

Writing even highly optimized code for specific hardware is time-consuming, and requires a detailed knowledge of both the hardware and the algorithm to be optimized.  It is therefore commonly impractical to attempt to highly optimize even a majority of the  code.  This is especially true when writing a first generation game, since the developer is not familiar enough with the intricacies of the hardware to be very productive at writing optimal code.  Instead, it is more productive to only spend time optimizing the code that most profoundly effects the efficiency of the overall game.  Unfortunately, the identifying of what code should be optimized can also be a difficult task.  As a general rule, the code to be optimized is often the code that is executed most frequently, but this is not always the case.  Performance analyzing, testing, and profiling can help identify inefficient code, but these are also not perfect solutions, and the experience of the programmer becomes an important factor in making smart decisions concerning what code should be optimized.

As a programmer gets more familiar with the intricacies of the hardware, he will be able to perform a greater amount of optimizations.  Also, when developing later generation games, the programmer will often be able to reuse previously written optimized code.  Plus, there is often more time in the schedule of later generation titles in which to perform optimizations.  This accumulation of optimal code is a big reason why games often improve in performance in successive generations.

Other Considerations

There are many other reasons to explain the improvement in performance of next generation software that are not directly related to programming for a video game console.  For example, developers will often copy or improve upon the accomplishments of other developers.  Likewise, developers will avoid the mistakes made by others.  Also, developers acquire and lose employees fairly frequently, which creates a lot of cross-pollination of ideas and techniques between the various development houses.  These and many other reasons are important, but since they are not specific to console video game development, they have not been specifically discussed.

CLICK HERE to CONTINUE to PART 3.

 

Subscribe to the blog (on the right), or follow me at:

Andy:  or blog

Also, peek at my novel in progress: The Darkening Dream

or more posts on

GAMES or BOOKS/MOVIES/TV or WRITING or FOOD.

Crash Bandicoot – Teaching an Old Dog New Bits – part 1

This is loosely part of a now lengthy series of posts on the making of Crash Bandicoot. Click here for the PREVIOUS or for the FIRST POST .

Below is another journal article I wrote on making Crash in 1999. This was co-written with Naughty Dog uber-programmer Stephen White, who was my co-lead on Crash 2, Crash 3, Jak & Daxter, and Jak 2. It’s long, so I’m breaking it into three parts.

 

Teaching an Old Dog New Bits

How Console Developers are Able to Improve Performance When the Hardware Hasn’t Changed

by

Andrew S. Gavin

and

Stephen White

Copyright © 1994-99 Andrew Gavin, Stephen White, and Naughty Dog, Inc. All rights reserved.

 

Console vs. Computer

Personal computers and video game consoles have both made tremendous strides in graphics and audio performance; however, despite these similarities there is a tremendous benefit in understanding some important differences between these two platforms.

Evolution is a good thing, right?

The ability to evolve is the cornerstone behind the long-term success of the IBM PC.  Tremendous effort has been taken on the PC so that individual components of the hardware could be replaced as they become inefficient or obsolete, while still maintaining compatibility with existing software.  This modularity of the various PC components allows the user to custom build a PC to fit specific needs.  While this is a big advantage in general, this flexibility can be a tremendous disadvantage for developing video games.  It is the lack of evolution; the virtual immutability of the console hardware that is the greatest advantage to developing high quality, easy to use video game software.

You can choose any flavor, as long as it’s vanilla

The price of the PC’s evolutionary ability comes at the cost of dealing with incompatibility issues through customized drivers and standardization.  In the past, it was up to the video game developer to try to write custom code to support as many of the PC configurations as possible.  This was a time consuming and expensive process, and regardless of how thorough the developer tried to be, there were always some PC configurations that still had compatibility problems.  With the popularity of Microsoft’s window based operating systems, video game developers have been given the more palatable option of allowing other companies to develop the drivers and deal with the bulk of the incompatibility issues; however, this is hardly a panacea, since this necessitates a reliance on “unknown” and difficult to benchmark code, as well as API’s that are designed more for compatibility than optimal performance.  The inherit cost of compatibility is compromise.  The API code must compromise to support the largest amount of hardware configurations, and likewise, hardware manufacturers make compromises in their hardware design in order to adapt well to the current standards of the API.  Also, both the API and the hardware manufacturers have to compromise because of the physical limitations of the PC’s hardware itself, such as bus speed issues.

Who’s in charge here?

The operating system of a PC is quite large and complicated, and is designed to be a powerful and extensively featured multi-tasking environment.  In order to support a wide variety of software applications over a wide range of computer configurations, the operating system is designed as a series of layers that distance the software application from the hardware.  These layers of abstraction are useful for allowing a software application to function without concerning itself with the specifics of the hardware.  This is an exceptionally useful way of maintaining compatibility between hardware and software, but is unfortunately not very efficient with respect to performance.  The hardware of a computer is simply a set of interconnected electronic devices.  To theoretically maximize the performance of a computer’s hardware, the software application should write directly to the computer’s hardware, and should not share the resources of the hardware, including the CPU, with any other applications.  This would maximize the performance of a video game, but would be in direct conflict with the implementations of today’s modern PC operating systems.  Even if the operating system could be circumvented, it would then fall upon the video game to be able to support the enormous variety of hardware devices and possible configurations, and would therefore be impractical.

It looked much better on my friend’s PC

Another problem with having a large variety of hardware is that the video game developer cannot reliably predict a user’s personal set-up.  This lack of information means that a game can not be easily tailored to exploit the strengths and circumvent the weaknesses of a particular system.  For example, if all PC’s had hard-drives that were all equally very fast, then a game could be created that relied on having a fast hard-drive.  Similarly, if all PC’s had equally slow hard-drives, but had a lot of memory, then a game could compensate for the lack of hard-drive speed through various techniques, such as caching data in RAM or pre-loading data into RAM.  Likewise, if all PC’s had fast hard-drives, and not much memory, then the hard-drive could compensate for the lack of much memory by keeping most of the game on the hard-drive, and only spooling in data as needed.

Another good example is the difference between polygon rendering capabilities.  There is an enormous variation in both performance and effects between hardware assisted polygonal rendering, such that both the look of rendered polygons and the amount of polygons that can be rendered in a given amount of time can vary greatly between different machines.  The look of polygons could be made consistent by rendering the polygons purely through software, however, the rendering of polygons is very CPU intensive, so may be impractical since less polygons can be drawn, and the CPU has less bandwidth to perform other functions, such as game logic and collision detection.

Other bottlenecks include CD drives, CPU speeds, co-processors, memory access speeds, CPU caches, sound effect capabilities, music capabilities, game controllers, and modem speeds to name a few.

Although many PC video game programmers have made valiant attempts to make their games adapt at run-time to the computers that they are run on, it is difficult for a developer to offer much more than simple cosmetic enhancements, audio additions, or speed improvements.  Even if the developer had the game perform various benchmark tests before entering the actual game code, it would be very difficult, and not to mention limiting to the design of a game, for the developer to write code that could efficiently structurally adapt itself to the results of the benchmark.

Which button fires?

A subtle, yet important problem is the large variety of video game controllers that have to be supported by the PC.  Having a wide variety of game controllers to choose from may seem at first to be a positive feature since having more seems like it should be better than having less, yet this variety actually has several negative and pervasive repercussions on game design.  One problem is that the game designer can not be certain that the user will have a controller with more than a couple of buttons.  Keys on the keyboard can be used as additional “buttons”, but this can be impractical or awkward for the user, and also may require that the user configure which operations are mapped to the buttons and keys.  Another problem is that the placement of the buttons with respect to each other is not known, so the designer doesn’t know what button arrangement is going to give the user the best gameplay experience.  This problem can be somewhat circumvented by allowing the user to remap the actions of the buttons, but this isn’t a perfect solution since the user doesn’t start out with an inherent knowledge of the best way to configure the buttons, so may choose and remain using an awkward button configuration.  Also, similar to the button layout, the designer doesn’t know the shape of the controller, so can’t be certain what types of button or controller actions might be uncomfortable to the user.

An additional problem associated with game controllers on the PC is that most PC’s that are sold are not bundled with a game controller.  This lack of having a standard, bundled controller means that a video game on the PC should either be designed to be controlled exclusively by the keyboard, or at the very least should allow the user to optionally use a keyboard rather than a game controller.  Not allowing the use of the keyboard reduces the base of users that may be interested in buying your game, but allowing the game to be played fully using the keyboard will potentially limit the game’s controls, and therefore limit the game’s overall design.

Of course, even if every PC did come bundled with a standard game controller, there would still be users who would want to use their own non-standard game controllers.  The difference, however, is that the non-standard game controllers would either be specific types of controllers, such as a steering wheel controller, or would be variations of the standard game controller, and would therefore include all of the functionality of the original controller.  The decision to use the non-standard controller over the standard controller would be a conscious decision made by the user, rather than an arbitrary decision made because there is no standard.

Chasing a moving target

Another problem associated with the PC’s evolutionary ability is that it is difficult to predict the performance of the final target platform.  The development of video games has become an expensive and time consuming endeavor, with budgets in the millions, and multi year schedules that are often unpredictable.  The PC video game developer has to predict the performance of the target machine far in advance of the release of the game, which is difficult indeed considering the volatility of schedules, and the rapid advancements in technology.  Underestimating the target can cause the game to seem dated or under-powered, and overestimating the target could limit the installed base of potential consumers.  Both could be costly mistakes.

Extinction vs. evolution

While PC’s have become more powerful through continual evolution, video game consoles advance suddenly with the appearance of an entirely new console onto the market.  As new consoles flourish, older consoles eventually lose popularity and fade away.  The life cycle of a console has a clearly defined beginning:  the launch of the console into the market.  The predicted date of the launch is normally announced well in advance of the launch, and video game development is begun early enough before the launch so that at least a handful of video game titles will be available when the console reaches the market.  The end of a console’s life cycle is far less clearly defined, and is sometimes defined to be the time when the hardware developer of the console announces that there will no longer be any internal support for that console.  A more practical definition is that the end of a console’s life cycle is when the public quits buying much software for that console.  Of course, the hardware developer would want to extend the life cycle of a console for as long as possible, but stiff competition in the market has caused hardware developers to often follow up the launch of a console by immediately working on the design of the next console.

Each and every one is exactly the same

Unlike PC’s which can vary wildly from computer to computer, consoles of a particular model are designed to be exactly the same.  Okay, so not exactly the same, but close enough that different revisions between the hardware generally only vary in minor ways that are usually pretty minor from the perspective of the video game developer, and are normally transparent to the user.  Also, the console comes with at least one standard game controller, and has standardized peripheral connections.

The general premise is that game software can be written with an understanding that the base hardware will remain consistent throughout the life-span of the console; therefore, a game can be tailored to both exploit the strengths of the hardware, and to circumvent the weaknesses.

The consistency of the hardware components allows a console to have a very small, low level operating system, and the video game developer is often given the ability to either talk to the hardware components directly, or to an extremely low hardware abstraction layer.

The performance of the components of the hardware is virtually identical for all consoles of a given model, such that the game will look the same and play the same on any console.  This allows the video game developer to design, implement, and test a video game on a small number of consoles, and be assured that the game will play virtually the same for all consoles.

CLICK HERE FOR PART 2


Subscribe to the blog (on the right), or follow me at:

Andy:  or blog

Also, peek at my novel in progress: The Darkening Dream

or more posts on

GAMES or BOOKS/MOVIES/TV or WRITING or FOOD.

iPad 2 – Less is More

Second Generation iPad

Being the consummate gadget man, I succumbed to the iPad 2 upgrade. In fact, I even ordered it at 1:01am, only 1 minute after they went on sale (at the Apple online store). Despite my jumping on the bandwagon, it took 13 days to come too. Mostly because I got a 3G model and those were slow to ship.

In any case, over the last year I have been pleasantly surprised at how incredibly useful the iPad is. I’ve already written one article about it, which is all still true. I owned a kindle before the iPad and found that to be of very limited use. Primarily it was good for long vacations where I previously would have dragged 20-30 paperbacks (weighing down my suitcases). With the kindle, just one little device covered that. And the thing had a tremendous battery life. But reading on it was annoying, mostly because the page turning was so slow and the screen only held about 60% of s single paperback page.

Enter the iPad. Seemingly just a giant iPhone, it’s actually radically different. As a book reader it holds a full page, and it’s fast. You can flick back and forth fast enough that it’s “browsable.” This was excruciating on the kindle. The screen is a little harder on the eyes, and the battery life only 10-12 hours instead of weeks, but the speed and size are more important to me. Plus, when you get an email, or feel the obsessive compulsive need to check today’s blog stats, you can just flip over instantly (IOS 4.2 on — so useful I was running the beta for months). It’s also just a darn comfortable way to do all your casual computer crap in bed, in the kitchen, watching tv, etc. There are a number of reasons why. Unlike even a laptop, it’s instant on, you can tuck it in the couch and grab it when an email comes in or you feel the need to look up actors on imdb (which I now do constantly). The battery life is such that as long as you charge it while you sleep, you can do whatever the hell you want with it during the day and not worry. This is so not true of any laptop, including the amazing MacBook pros and airs with their long battery life. You still have to plug them in if you are going to use them all day. The iPad isn’t a necessity, but it sure is convenient.

The First Generation, in a Tuff-luv case

Now as to the iPad 2. If you don’t have an iPad and are at all interested (plus have the disposable $500-829). Get one. The first gen ones are going on sale cheap now too. But if you already own a first gen iPad, it’s more about personal tolerance for being slightly outdated. The new one doesn’t do anything the 1st can’t except for video chat. But it is thinner, lighter, and about twice as snappy. For me, that alone is worth it. As I said, I’m a gadget freak and I use the pad all the time, everyday. The thinness and weight are noticeable, as is the speed. It’s certainly snappier. Apps load faster, the muitasking flips between apps much more smoothly. Not that the first iPad was slow, but this is faster. If you are into the games the GPU is supposedly 9x faster. Infinity Blade and the like seem very zippy now, and they weren’t bad before.

One other thing worth mentioning is the developer only multitouch gestures added to iOS 4.3. Now to use these, you have to connect the iPad to your Xcode 4 enabled Mac and turn on developer mode. This is a free download for devs, or a $5 purchase from the new Mac AppStore. I’ve only been using these for a few days but they’re awesome. Here’s yet another example of how Apple likes gets the little things right. There are 4 gestures. One to bring up and down the multitasking bar. Another to go back to the home screen, and a pair to flip back and forth between apps. It’s surprising how convenient and natural these are.

I haven’t gotten used to the subtle button changes on the new iPad yet. There is more angle to the bevel and this gives the physical controls, including the docking jack, a slightly increased inset, but I’m sure in a couple of days they’ll seem normal.
I got one the the crazy new covers too. I love the cool magnetic lock and the auto turn on / turn off feature. We will see how well the cleaning component does. The thing is ultra slim and light in the cover, particularly compared to the cushy but bulky full leather case I had on the old one. But on the other hand it’s a bit slick, and I’ve already fumbled it once and certainly don’t want to drop it. I might have to see if someone sells some sticky little tape/decal. That was a nice thing about my old case.  I have a thin sticky rubber case on my iPhone 4 for just for the texture.

All and all the iPad 2 is like everyone says, a typical Apple evolutionary tuneup to an already brilliant product. Certainly it’s better in nearly all ways, and the combination of Apple design, software, and heavy vertical integration makes it hands down the only tablet worth considering. I’m writing this blog post on it while out on the town, and while theoretically I could do that on my phone, I never would.

My previous iPad article can be found HERE.

Side by Side

The thickness

 

Bleeding Violet

Title: Bleeding Violet

Author: Dia Reeves

Genre: Paranormal YA

Length: 84,000 words, 454 pages

Read: March 14-20, 2011

Summary: Unique, good, and very different.

_

This is a weird weird book, and I mean that in a good way. Nominally, it’s about a schizophrenic girl, Hanna, who’s dad has died and who decides to move in unannounced with her mom she’s never met. But her mom doesn’t live in a normal town. She lives in some kind of weird place in Texas where gates between universes have let all sorts of strange monsters and realities in. A town with its own supernatural police.

The voice here is really fun. It’s first person past, but with a sort of cavalier devil-take-care crazy-girl style. I liked it. Some sentences were fantastic (both literally and figuratively). Not exactly in the lyrical kind of way that you might expect, but because of their deft wit, and quick and creative way of describing utterly fantastic goings on.

Because this book is FILLED, PACKED, STUFFED, with weird monsters and magic. Reeves uses the protagonist and POV character very deftly to explain it, or mostly just show what happens. She doesn’t feel the need to combine herself to easy concepts either. For example, sound sucking, student grabbing, invisible squids live inside the high school windows and one of the characters defeats them with a deck of playing cards! It’s a tribute to her skill that I could follow nearly all of this stuff. And it’s compact too, not being a very long book and containing dozens of strange encounters. The descriptions are lean but vivid. Occasionally she violates POV slightly on the side of clarity because the protagonist is new to this stuff and she explains it with a bit more understanding than she might be expected to have. But this isn’t very noticeable. Now I do wonder if someone with less experience reading speculative fiction in all its forms might have trouble with this novel. I mean, I’ve read A LOT (5000+ speculative novels), and played hundreds if not thousands of video games with magical systems etc. We won’t even count the movies and TV shows. Certainly someone who likes their reality… well… real, would be put off by the book. I wasn’t. The supernatural flavor was really interesting and unique, reminding me ever so slightly of something like the eerie Lost Room, or the wonderful but very out of print Marianne series by Sherri S Tepper.

The choice of using such a fractured POV character was interesting. There could be an argument that the entire book was some sort of delusion. I myself just treated Hanna’s view point as literal, and everything she saw as factual. The protagonist, and some of the other characters for that matter, don’t feel entirely real. They aren’t cardboard per se, as they feel well rounded, they just have a bit of surreal style to them that comes from their rather depressed moral compass. There’s a lot of killing and murder in this book, often horrifically grisly in fact, and no one seems to care too much. One of your best friends has been impregnated by evil demon spawn who are eating her from the inside out, well, just cut them out and leave her bleeding to die. That sort of thing. It works in the story, but if you stop and thing about the reactions any non psychopathic person might have… These characters just move on. It didn’t  really bother me in the context of this story as the narrator’s view point tends to whitewash away the consequences.

There’s also a good bit of cavalier sexuality — a welcome break from the self censorship that seems to be the norm since the 90s. Hanna is certainly open minded in that regard, and likes to take off her clothes. Unfortunately 🙂 there isn’t a lot of detail, like most everything else in the book a lot is left to the imagination. This is also part of the trend. To tell the truth Judy Blume’s Forever (1975) is still the most explicit teen book I can remember.

Overall, this is a great book, but it’s much more FANTASTIC than your typical paranormal. Being a fantasist, that was more than fine with me.

Fraiche Santa Monica

Restaurant: Fraiche Santa Monica [1, 2]

Location: 312 Wilshire Blvd., Santa Monica, CA 90401. Phone : 310.451.7482

Date: March 19, 2011

Cuisine: Cal French Italian

Rating: On the way up.

_

This particular location adjacent to the Barnes and Noble on Wilshire near the promenade has a fairly checkered past. Two or three years ago the Fraiche group turned it into Riva. This was supposed to be a coastal Italian, but to my taste wasn’t really Italian at all — although they made a decent Pizza. In any case, it failed and they rebooted it as Fraiche Santa Monica with an entirely new menu and staff, albiet an identical interior. This is sort of a spin off of the Culver City location (REVIEW HERE).

One corner of the back room. I didn’t have much of a wide angle lens (food after all). It’s a pretty nice space.

The wine by the glass list.

“Bourgogne Pinot Noir, Les Chapitres de Jaffelin, Burgundy, 2009.” As a burghound this was about the bare limit of drinkability for Pinot Noir. A little sour and acidic and decidedly unbalanced. But then again, I rarely expect much from “Bourgogne” (Burgundy which is not AOC to a particular village or vineyard).

The bread was hot out of the oven, and very nice and crunchy. Oilve, mashed and oiled.

Today’s menu. This is actually the second time I’ve eaten at Fraiche SM (I did so once right after they opened) and in the meantime they have moved the menu to be much closer to the new one at Fraiche Culver City (detailed review of that here).

“POACHED PEAR SALAD, Endive, baby wild arugula, candied walnuts, Point Reyes blue cheese, red wine vinaigrette.”

“Baby Beets, House Made Ricotta / Orange / Pistachio.” Sweetness of the beets meshes with the cheesy sauce. Beet salads have become very passe, but when well done (like this one), I like them.

“ROASTED PEPPERS ARUGULA & BURRATA, Shallots, 12 year old balsamic and extra virgin olive oil.” This was as good a Burrata as I’ve had at a restaurant. They still aren’t quite as sensual as my own take on the cheese.

“Valpolicella Ripasso, Classico Superiore, David Sterza, Veneto, 2008.” Much better than the generic Burgundy. This was a fine wine of the type. Grapey, but not as much so as an Amarone.

“MUSHROOM RISOTTO, Arugula, Pine Nuts, Pecorino.” Nice nutty, mushroomy risotto.

“AGNOLOTTI, Mushrooms,  mascarpone, truffle butter.” These are really good. The pasta is nice fresh egg pasta. It tastes mostly of butter and mushroom. Butter!

“GARGANELLI, Mushroom Bolognese, Parsley, House Made Ricotta.” I actually expected this to be a meat pasta, but it’s vegetarian with the “ragu” being made from mushrooms. It was tasty, particularly the ricotta which, being homemade, was more like a real Sicilian Ricotta than one usually gets here. The mushrooms leant it a fairly rich taste, but it wasn’t heavy at all (like a meat one would be).

“Rigatoni, Beef & Pork Ragù / Scallion / Gruyère.” This one was great. basically a Bolognese, but really good. Close even to one of my ultimate pasa favorites, the lamb ragu at Capo (SEE HERE).

We were too full for desserts but Fraiche has really good ones, so I snuck in a photo of the Budino from a trip to the culver city joint. You can look there for a bunch more dessert photos. The dessert menu is nearly identical.

“Carmel Budino, Vanilla Mascarpone, Sea salt.” Mildly carmel/creamy with that nice salt factor. Good, but not quite as good as the similar dessert at Gjelina (SEE HERE).

Fraiche SM seems to be settling into its groove. It was better than last time, and quite a bit better than Riva. It isn’t a lot different than the Culver City location, but the menu is slightly smaller, and missing the assorted “pots of stuff” that are fairly unique over there. It does still have the very good fresh pastas. I need to try I nice meaty one.

TV Review: Downton Abbey

Title: Downton Abbey

Genre: Historical (England 1912-1914)

Watched: March 14-19, 2011

Status: First Season (second coming fall 2011)

Summary: Great Television!

 

My parents, as lifelong anglophiles and Masterpiece Theatre viewers, recommended this British TV series set in 1912-1914. It wasn’t a hard sell once I read the blurb, and I’m so glad we watched it. This is really fine television.

Downton Abbey is a fictional great English country estate, owned by the middle aged Earl of Grantham. He has a loving wife and three daughters, not to mention about 30 assorted housekeepers, maids, footmen, and the like. What he doesn’t have is an heir, as his cousin, the closest male relative went down with the Titanic. The major family drama here is the conflict between the complex English system of inheritance (and this earl’s specific case) and the circumstances. The playground is an anything but simple household that contains no less than 20 major cast members.

No show or movie I’ve ever seen before so intimately details complex organization of great estate like this. I’m always fascinated by the evolution of everyday living (for rich and poor alike) and anyone who thinks the rich keep on getting richer ought to see this. And then remember that a 100 years earlier a house like this would have had five times the servants. Also dominant are the politics and different roles of the various staff and family members. 1914 is the end of an era, as the double whammy of World War I/II will shatter the aging remains of Europe’s cast system like a crystal vase dropped off the Empire State Building (HERE for some of my thoughts on that). In any case, this series is to a large extent about this particular moment, so indicative of the long history of social change. We have employee rights, women’s franchise, choice in marriage and family, even the availability of healthcare and the installation of the telephone.

But that’s not what makes it good, merely interesting. What makes it good is the phenomenal writing and acting. Maggie Smith (younger viewers will know her better as Professor Minerva McGonagall) is a standout as the reigning Earl’s crotchety old mother, but the entire cast is great. For this many characters, they are each highly distinct and multidimensional. Some you love, some you love to hate, but they all make it entertaining. Downton Abbey is not a series about sudden murders or gratuitous brothel scenes like the great HBO dramas (and I love those too!), but instead a series of intertwined character studies that reveal their era as well as timeless facets of human nature.

So unless you thought Transformers 2 was high entertainment, go watch!

Not so Glad about Gladstones

Restaurant: Gladstones Malibu [1, 2]

Location: 17300 Pacific Coast HwyPacific Palisades, CA 90272. (310) 454-3474

Date: March 18, 2011

Cuisine: American Seafood

Summary: Fast bordering on brusque

 

Two months to the day after I tried the slightly revamped Gladstones (REVIEW HERE), we decided to go back for a dinner. The two of us walked in the door at 6:30. They had us walking out at 6:55. A new record in whirlwind service. So fast that I was in physical pain, my stomach in spasm from having wolfed down the food.

“Dragonfruit mojito.” This concoction was disgustingly sweet, tasting of artificial strawberry and whatever weird kind of fruit is baked into “dragonfruit bacardi.” I dislike this trend of overzealous corporate marketing and lazy bartenders in which drinks are made with “flavored” alcohols instead of actual mixers. There is really no circumstance where this kind of factory flavored drink tastes better than just mixing. It is “easier.” Like pre-mixed Chernobyl green margarita mix. As the rest of the cocktails were this sort, I moved on to a glass of wine.

Bread. Warm sour-dour. Nothing to complain about here.

“CRAB CAKES  Remoulade, Arugula & Fennel.” These arrived as the words of our order were hanging in the air, but they were tasty enough. Not on the level of either the Houstons or Capo crabcakes, but respectable.

“BAKED SALMON CARTOCCIO  Saffron Potato, Roast Fennel, & Olive Herb Tapenade.” Must like what we made at our own dinner party the week before. But not bad either. Too bad it arrived while I was still working on my appetizer — and I’m a fast eater.

“CURRIED COCONUT SHRIMP  Jasmine Rice, Yellow Curry, Thai Basil & Passion Fruit.” I had ordered this two months before and enjoyed it immensely. Something was really wrong with it tonight. Maybe the fact that they cooked it in 3 minutes flat? The sauce was totally out of balance. The curry flavor very muted and the lime massively dominant. It just didn’t taste good that way, being almost unpleasantly sour.

The bus boy was pulling our plates from us as I was literally forking the last couple shrimp. I mean I had to reach into the air to get them. The waitress teleported over, asked if we wanted dessert, hearing the negative, slapped the check down. They weren’t rude or unpleasant, but it was all so rushed that I felt an almost compulsive need to hurry in order to match their pace. I don’t mind a fast dinner sometimes, but this was ridiculous.

More fundamental, I also worry about quality control in the kitchen. Things just seemed much more lackluster than the previous time I was here. And it’s very expensive — overpriced in fact. So I don’t think I’ll be back for a while.

Takao Two

Restaurant: Takao [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

Location: 11656 San Vicente Blvd, Los Angeles, CA 90049. (310) 207-8636

Date: March 13, 2011

Cuisine: Japanese / Sushi

Rating: 9/10 creative “new style” sushi

_

I’ve already covered Takao in some detail HERE, but we went back (we go often) and I built another “custom omakase” trying some different things. The full menu and some information on the history of the place can be found through the above link.

House cold sake. Masumi “Okuden-Kanzukuri” Nagano prefecture.

Miso soup. I think if you ask they have a couple different types. This is the basic scallion and tofu.

Big eye tuna sashimi. This displays the fish at it’s finest.

Wild Japanese Scallop sashimi. I love good scallops. These had that pleasant meaty texture, and the soft “scallopy” flavor.

Tai (red snapper), with garlic, salt, red peppercorn, onions, olive oil. A very bright flavor, and the peppercorns, not spicy at all, add a nice textural component.

Main lobster tempura (1/2). Takao has a lot of interesting tempuras. Uni (my second favorite), sardine, crab, unusual seafood pancake with shiso, and more. This is a decadent favorite of mine, and in a half portion is pretty reasonable.

Rock Shrimp Tempura Dynamite. The underlying component is in itself tasty. Sweet rock shrimp perfectly fried. Then you ad some dynamite with it’s zesty zing and it gets even better. For those not in the know Dynamite is a warm sauce consisting of mayo, sriarcha hot sauce, and masago semlt roe.

This is a very traditional Japanese egg custard with bits of mushroom, shrimp, and white fish baked inside. It has a very subtle mellow eggy flavor I find nostalgic from my many trips to Japan.

Just some of the sushi.

In the very front, Wild Japanese Scallop sushi. Behind that next to the wasabi is Tai (red snapper).

In the back, chu-toro (fatty tuna belly). Melts in your mouth!

Salmon of course.

Kanpachi (young yellow tail).

In the center, Ika (squid), perfect chewy pasty texture.

And fresh raw Tako (octopus). Most places serve it only frozen/cooked. This had a bit of yuzu on it, delicious.

On the left, Ikura (salmon eggs), and on the right Uni (Santa Barbara Sea Urchin). Both delicious.

Albacore with a bit of ginger and scallions.

Salmon tempura cut roll (technically for my two year old).

A bit more sushi. In the back grilled Unagi (fresh water eel) rolls, and Hamachi (yellowtail) and scallion rolls.

Kani (Alaskan king crab) sushi.

Tamago (sweet egg omelet) sushi.

And some vanilla mochi balls (ice cream covered with sweetened pounded rice). The red stuff is strawberry sauce.

Takao is top flight as always. I tend to enjoy ordering ala carte like this best, but it’s actually more expensive than getting an omakase, perhaps because I order a lot more sushi.

For my LA Sushi index, click here.

Tithe – A Modern Faerie Tale

Title: Tithe – A Modern Faerie Tale

Author: Holly Black

Genre: Paranormal YA

Length: 66,000 words, 310 pages

Read: March 13, 2011

Summary: Well written and evocative.

 

This is the second Holly Black book I’ve read. I enjoyed White Cat (REVIEW HERE) a lot and so I went back to read her debut novel. And liked it even more.

The similarities are striking. Both are short YA books, with nice prose and likable main characters thrown into ‘weird’ paranormal situations. Both have the action so condensed as to occasionally be confusing. Both wrap themselves up in the last quarter in a way that compromises the believability of the secondary characters. Both have unhappy but not completely tragic endings. While White Cat’s premise is perhaps a tad more original, I found Tithe‘s creepy fairy flavor more to my taste. Not that I didn’t like the first, but I really liked certain things about the second.

Tithe is written in third person past, with the protagonist Kaye dominating the POV. Mysteriously, approximately 5-10% is from the point of view of her friend Corny, and about 2% from the romantic interest. These outside POVs felt wrong, and at least in the Kindle version, no scene or chapter breaks announced the transitions. Every time one happened I was confused for a paragraph or two and knocked out of the story. Still, said story was more than good enough to overcome this minor technical glitch.

Kaye is an unhappy 16 year-old with a loser mom. When they move back to New Jersey she is rapidly involved with the Fey, discovers she’s a green skinned pixie, and gets drawn into a conflict between the Seelie and Unseelie (rival fairy) courts. It’s a fun read, and the prose is fast and evocative of the fey mood. Ms Black seemed to have done at least some research and the feel is quite good. The loose descriptive style sketches some rather fantastic creatures and scenarios, and that works. There is some darkness (which I like), and wham bam death of secondary characters without the proper emotional digestion. There is sexuality, but no sex (boo hiss!).

But I really like the way she handled the fairies. There isn’t a lot of description, but what there was left me filling in my own detailed, sordid, and mysterious collage of imagery.

I was loving the first two third of the book, and then it pivoted a bit and lost me a little. Don’t get me wrong, I still liked it, but the last third felt sketchier. The author had a bunch of double takes and betrayals on her outline, and it felt to me that it didn’t really matter if the secondary characters got to be true to themselves — they just followed the script. The protagonists best friend dies in like two seconds, and there is barely any reaction. Everyone also seemed to roll way too easily with the rather gigantic punches (as in Fairies are real). And to be darn good at picking up new powers in no time at all. This is a typical issue, and very hard to address perfectly, but it always bugs me when magic seems too easy. White Cat had the same final act issues.

It’s still a fun book — way above average — with nice prose and breakneck pace. But the potential for great gave way to merely very good.

Seconds at Sam’s by the Beach

Restaurant: Sam’s by the Beach [1, 2, 3]

Location: 108 W. Channel Rd.(PCH), Santa Monica, CA 90402. 310-230-9100

Date: March 12, 2011

Cuisine: Cal French International

Rating: Stellar food and unparalleled service.

ANY CHARACTER HERE

I already covered the background to Sam’s in my FIRST REVIEW. Let’s just say this is a local place with an unusual and inventive menu that’s worth a drive.

I’d never heard of this “lesser” Bordeaux, but Sam opened this half-bottle and it was very nice. Characteristic Saint-Emilion smooth. The 8 or so years gave it just enough age to settle the tanins.

Today’s menu.

The usual amuse. Little fried pockets of spinach and cheese.

Homemade bread and the olive oil sesame dip.

“Roasted Beet Salad, mixed with onions and tomato in Aged balsamic dressing, served with Feta Cheese croquet.”

This was a special. Seared Kanpachi (young yellowtail) with arugula, avocado, tomatoes, in a citrus ginger vinaigrette. The dressing was to die for, and mated perfectly with the sushi grade fish.

“Vegetarian Crepes. Homemade Crepes filled with Swiss chard, wild mushrooms and zucchini served in tomato coulis.” This is a half order, as the normal one has two of the burrito-like crepes. This is a very nice vegetarian option, and surprisingly hearty. The sauce is bread dippingly yummy.

“Lamb Chorizo Risotto, Carnaroli rice prepared with lamb sausage, fresh spinach, feta cheese, in meyer lemon broth.” This isn’t your typical Italian Risotto either, but it’s spectacular, and much lighter. There is a lovely tang from the lemon, and the sharp goat cheese, and the sausage is to die for.

The dessert menu.

His creme brulee is straight up traditional, and it’s the second best I’ve ever had in the world (there was this one in Avignon…). The meat of it is thick, creamy, and all vanilla.

A new dessert (at least for us). This take on the flowerless chocolate cake is moist, dense, and chocolately — as it should be.

Sam is also starting a new thing for Sunday nights, pizza night!  He has a pizza oven. We’ll have to come back and try these, see how they compare to my Ultimate Pizza. I’m particularly eager to try the Shawarma.