A while ago, I related how the Mario enemy Lakitu's Japanese name, Jugem, is a throwback to a Japanese tongue twister and some folklore that many children know.
Let's delve into some of the Japanese behind the lyric. As with the last time we did a Japanese Lesson, there will be a lot of Japanese characters in this post, so it's best if you view it on a device that can read them properly.
If you remember the anecdote attached to the tongue twister, it was about a priest giving a young boy a name that would grant him a long, long life. So the priest gives him a name with all sorts of meanings that could suggest many years without death. (I feel like the next sentence is going to be about what the Polish guy said to the Mexican. Oh well.)
Here is the tongue-twister once again:
Jugemu jugemu
Gokou no surikire
Kaijari suigyou no
Suigyoumatsu unraimatsu fuuraimatsu
Kuu neru tokoro ni sumu tokoro
Yaburakouji no burakouji
Paipo paipo paipo no shuuringan
Shuuringan no guurindai
Guurindai no ponpokopii no ponpokonaa no
Choukyuumei no chousuke
Now, what does it mean? Well, even if you are native Japanese, some of it is a bit head-scratchy, so we'll take each line one post at a time.
Let's start with the title of the tongue twister. Jugemu jugemu (寿限無、寿限無) is combination of three kanji that means something close to "everlasting life" or "life without limits." But be careful, this doesn't actually mean immortal to a modern Japanese ear, like the word fushi (不死), literally "without death" or fujimi (不死身), or "indestructible," do. Please note the second word is closer to the impervious definition of immortal, and often is used to describe somebody with an indomitable spirit, who never gives up. Another word for immortality would be furou (不老), or somebody who never ages. You can quite often see the two terms put together, as furoufushi (不老不死).
So please don't go around using the word jugemu to mean "everlasting life," or "everlasting gobstopper." The reason it means that in this special case is because ju (寿) is a character of celebration and can also be read as kotobuki -- the whole thing kind of comes across as "cheers for a good, long life." You'll see this kanji particularly at this time of year when a new year rolls around, or at certain birthdays, to wish the person a continued happy, long life.
It is quite important to remember that you will not see this kanji a whole lot in relation to life. jumyo （寿命) or "life span" is one word that comes up in daily parlance. You could use it to describe the life span of anything, from a planet to a tree to a person. But if you wanted to use life as in the human philosophical concept, jinsei (人生) would be better, as in "My life sucks" or ore no jinsei ha saitei da yo (俺の人生は最低だよ）. Whereas seimei (生命) describes all types of life (and is another word that is derived by repeating two kanji with the same rough meaning, as the second one, inochi (命) also means life, but in a more holistic way). If you wanted to talk about your current life you'd use a word like seikatsu (生活). This describes more of your daily habits, routines, where you live, how much you wank, those types of things. [Note that you may recognize the sei (生) character as meaning life, and it does, among other things, but so does the katsu (活) character. In fact, the verb for life commonly uses the former, but sometimes, for poetic effect, will use the latter. For instance, ikaseru (活かせる) is likely to be used to mean "make something come to life" or "make the most of something."] So if you're trying to communicate more clearly in Japanese, one thing you should definitely watch out for are the nuances in what types of things different kanji with the same basic meaning can convey.
So let's review the meanings of life:
sei 生 - the most basic, humanistic term for life
inochi 命 - life, as in the soul or spirit that burns within an individual until it dies
katsu 活 - activity, animation, life as the expression of movement
kotobuki 寿 - life as a happy congratulation of its continuance, also a piece of the word sushi by the way
(Unfortunately, almost none of these kanji or terms are commonly used to mean "lives" as in chances to try again in a game. That's a special discussion for another day.)
Meanwhile, gemu is actually a reversal of mugen (無限), which means "unlimited." Another way to say that in Japanese is kagiri ga nai (限りがない), which is simply saying a very similar thing to "there's no limit." (If you have absolutely no imagination for language, you might think "there's no limit" and "unlimited" mean the same thing. If so, you have my pity.) These days, nai often does not have a kanji attached to it, but if it does, it is most often the one we see at the end of jugemu, in this form: 無い.
So we can parcel out the pieces of the word to mean "may there be no limit to your happy, long life."
Right then, now that you've gotten a handle on life (all thanks to my blog) tomorrow's post will be about the second line, gokou no surikire, which is far more rooted in history and philosophy, and thus much harder to explain. Be ready, be vigilant, strike while the Japanese is hot!
Showing posts with label Mario. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mario. Show all posts
11/24/2013
Don't Open the Box: Mama Mia, My Dear Korea!
 |
| Viva Korea! |
 | |||
| My lovely black mage badass, Medea! |
As my brothers and friends played through Super Mario USA, we'd say "Mama mia!" when we died. One time, I said, "Mama mia, poor Medea!" when I died as the princess, because you know, the princess was helping out like Medea did. It caught on.
One of my friends was a master at Super Mario USA. Her family had moved from Korea to work in Japan. She was my first Korean friend. We always left the hardest parts to her. It was in one of those levels where you have to be very careful how you bomb the rock walls to move on and in a dubious case of carelessness, she accidentally died. Cue, "Mama mia, poor Medea!" I thought I would be clever and add "From Korea" to the rhyme.
From that point on, the rhyme got longer and longer as we added more silly things to it. Anything we could think of that rhymed with "mia" got in. The chain got very long, but it always started with, "Mama mia!" and ended with, "Poor Medea!" At one point we added "Pizzeria" and of course if you eat something, what's the funniest food-related thing in the world to a nine-year-old? If you guessed poop, congratulations, you either understand children, are one yourself or are a child at heart -- all good things if you ask me! So the pizzeria chain evolved into "Pizzeria, poopa-pee-a, diarrhea!"
Now keep in mind we were just playing around, so we didn't really pay any particular attention to the order we were rhyming in. Here's what the finished monster looked like:
Mama mia
Two and three-a
It's a me-a
No, it's a she-a
Drives a Kia
From Korea
Pizzeria
Poopa pee-a
Diarrhea
Ants and bee-a
Gonna sting-ya
Poor Medea!
Harmless and fun, right? Well, not entirely. Unfortunately, our little rhyme was so catchy to us, we'd often sing it when not playing the game. My Korean friend sang it at home in front of her parents. I'm not sure how fluent they were in English, but all that stuck out to them was "Korea" and "poop."
We got in trouble. While my parents were understanding and tried to reason with her parents, I'm afraid I was never allowed to play with my Korean friend again. It was obvious to me and my brothers that we weren't trying to be mean to Koreans. My dad and mom simply warned me that no matter how innocent the intentions are, one should never put country names anywhere close to defecating terms. I did take the advice, of course and I've been lucky to make many other good Korean friends since then, but I can't help but think this when I look back on it:
Mama mia! Poor Medea!
11/21/2013
Mr. Fix It: How Random Battles and Lives Systems are Like Balding Remedies
Dear Sazanami,
My friend just recommended what he called a great RPG to me. But I starting playing it and to my horror, it has random battles!
I spent good money on this game! Why would my friend do that to me?
-Quaff, a Hairy Middle-Aged Accountant from Wisconsin
My dear Quaff,
I have a friend who has been blessed with a natural affinity toward beauty. Without any effort, he has maintained a nicely muscular frame, avoided any nasty kind of facial blemish and been endowed with lovely, floppy hair whose default state is permanent sexy. He doesn't use skin products, work out or constantly fuss with his hair.
As if dragged by some beauty inertia, his careless handsomeness has led him to become as vain as the sorceress from the Gummi Bears, Lady Bane. About a year ago, nearing the last futile bleats of his roaring twenties, my friend found his hair was starting to thin. This caused a sense of crisis in him until the day he saw a tip on variety show that advised people to stand on their head a little each day. Doing so would increase circulation to the head, which is needed for healthy hair growth, so goes the traditional wisdom.
At this point, I imagine many who read this can be dragged into two categories. You could be the curious, open-minded type who is sometimes easily fooled, "Oh, does that help stave off balding?" Or you could be the type who scoffs at such things as if they were irrational nonsense, "Scientists have found no direct link between such silly remedies and hair growth."
However, like usual, I think the truth is in the middle somewhere. It would appear that the prevailing fact is that once hair follicles stop growing -- not simply falling out, as from brushing or cancer treatment -- that's it, there's no getting them back. Until evidence comes saying otherwise, that's what I think is the truth. On the other hand, as somebody who was pulled into endless bathroom sessions to confirm that yes, my friend's hair did seem to be thinning at an alarming rate, with no discernible sickness or malady causing it, and seeing how he looks now, I can confirm that his hair definitely made a recovery. Apparently, the trick has worked for others as well.
That may down to what they and my friend did though. He's never been the type who can stand on his head, or do cartwheels, but every morning, after introducing an exercise regimen of various push-ups, pull-ups and the like, he spent some time against the wall teaching himself to stand on his head. Now, he has become quite an acrobatic guy who can walk on his head and do some impressive body-bending tricks.
He also started to take in more minerals, cut down on snacks and eat more fruits and vegetables. He learned to become more flexible and changed his sedentary lifestyle to something a little more athletic and healthy.
I think what happened is a combination of good living habits made his remaining hair much thicker and staved off any additional hair loss. He perhaps realized that nobody stays beautiful forever without at least a little effort. Either way, the change has made him a healthier person. He still doesn't use balding creams or spend hours in the bathroom, but indulges in good habits to maintain the pride in his natural beauty.
This could be called a healthy kind of vanity: a kind that inspires movement in a better direction and does not make the person seem like a massive piece of dick lint. So elements that have passed out of favor in video games, like random battles and lives systems, are at their best when they are inspired by a healthy kind of vanity. I bet you thought I would compare them to balding because such old video game ideas were once considered normal and natural, and have now faded away, didn't you? Gotcha!
No, no. The truth is that some people go bald and others keep their hair. (Some games still use old ideas for their mechanics, others adapt the new ones.) There is a third category of person though. They try endless remedies, like tonics or implants and such, to regrow their hair. (Some game designers throw in old elements without thinking much, in a misguided attempt to recapture the old days.) In this third category, there is still another person like my friend who practices healthy vanity. (They continue to carry on the tradition of the old games by thinking about the reasons why they started to fade and adopting healthier practices to prevent them falling out of favor.)
There are many unhealthy practices that went on with lives systems and random battles that led to some gamers thinking these ideas are now obsolete.
Because it was easy to design, older RPGs would repeatedly vomit out easy battles and with little care, attention or thought, one could mop up the chunky brown monster goo by taping down their A button. There weren't many engaging ideas in the battles, but that's not because they were random. Another complaint was that, like a wannabe rapper interrupted by his mom yelling to come to dinner, it interrupts the flow of the game and happened too frequently, which isn't so much a complaint leveled at the mechanic as it is due to sloppy game design or an incompatible taste between the developer's intentions and the player's wants.
Likewise, now that we can save our games to hard media independent from the game itself, the consensus seems to be that nobody wants to replay the same portion of the game. If a game isn't much fun anymore under the duress of repeated play, how good could it have really been? Even if it's a game where the appeal comes in experiencing the interactions, like any good story, it should inspire another go eventually (any parent who gets a nighttime request for the same book for weeks on end can tell you this). Everyone has their personal level to which they like to repeat an experience. Which would be healthier: insist that the only modern ideal of game design should be to keep the player going forward as much as possible, at all times, or that there is a spectrum of different preferences that can be catered to by knowing your audience?
Random battles, as a design element, still have a lot of value.
They can be a boon to developers with scarce resources. Inventing a system for encounters where battle initiate through contact with a visible object involves animating, programming and designing a whole host of symbols or enemies to populate the world and then designing environments so that players can avoid them, but are fostered into enough battles to keep the difficulty curve in the desirable area. Doing this incorrectly makes the whole thing cascade into the same kind of frustrations that poorly implemented random battles used to cause; players can still get caught into a series of battles that cause tedium and frustration because of AI routines, enemy or area designs. Developers who want to focus on character growth, intricate tactics or other mechanics; they can skip implementing symbol encounter battles and focus on the mathematical equations and ratios that are much easier to tweak and change.
Random battles also allow for interesting and fantastic contradictions. You can have a knight crawling in a series of narrow pipes and fighting witches and ogres. Some may say that ruins immersion, but many will also say they don't care about that, and like the strange gap, and rightly so for both parties. Random battles also help less coordinated players who do not like to have to contend with any action elements. They're also great for preserving surprise and tension.
Similarly, leaving the concept of lives and continues to drown with the Titanic would seriously hurt the design scope of surviving games. Many have noted that modern Mario games are so easy that "it makes the concept of lives meaningless." I wouldn't go that far. For one thing, I still encounter younger children or less skilled players who play Mario levels and can't get through a level without running out of all their lives. "Exactly! That's why there shouldn't be any lives. Just replays!" Not so fast.
Many games adopt a difficulty structure where the challenges grow more complex as the game continues. If a player is having trouble completing a certain stage, one reason might be that they have not learned or perfected skills in earlier stages that would help them. Designing a lives system that punishes the player by requiring a play-through of earlier stages can be a great strength of the design. Players may be reminded of other ways to play, might strengthen skills that could help with further portions and encounter situations that may provide hints or new insights to their current problem. In real life, is it reasonable to say anyone should just their charge their horns into their problems without taking a breather, looking at it from a different angle, telling the intern to do it instead, or going back to an earlier step? I think most would agree, it's often not healthy to do it this way.
There are many benefits of a lives system such as bragging rights, infinite 1-up tricks, rewards for exploration or skill, pithy comments about getting a life and easy numerical comparisons of how much more skilled one player is to another. Anyone who has played modern Mario games know also that it can also be fun just to stop and find ways to generate lives.
There are all sorts of other mechanics that have come under fire by using hyperbolic statements that call them archaic, like turn-based battle systems, save points or indeed, even things like boss battles and boss rushes. These well-trodden, traditional game mechanics are much like works of art whose perceived quality fluctuates based on the cultural values of the people who view them (also because plebes point at them and say, "I don't understand it, therefore it has no value.")
Let's keep them around by involving a healthy amount of skepticism toward sketchy ways bad designers implement them, letting them wax and wane like the hairline of a recurring chemotherapy patient, and by indulging in healthy vanity to keep the tradition alive.
Yours If You Want Me to Be,
Sazanami
My friend just recommended what he called a great RPG to me. But I starting playing it and to my horror, it has random battles!
I spent good money on this game! Why would my friend do that to me?
-Quaff, a Hairy Middle-Aged Accountant from Wisconsin
My dear Quaff,
I have a friend who has been blessed with a natural affinity toward beauty. Without any effort, he has maintained a nicely muscular frame, avoided any nasty kind of facial blemish and been endowed with lovely, floppy hair whose default state is permanent sexy. He doesn't use skin products, work out or constantly fuss with his hair.
As if dragged by some beauty inertia, his careless handsomeness has led him to become as vain as the sorceress from the Gummi Bears, Lady Bane. About a year ago, nearing the last futile bleats of his roaring twenties, my friend found his hair was starting to thin. This caused a sense of crisis in him until the day he saw a tip on variety show that advised people to stand on their head a little each day. Doing so would increase circulation to the head, which is needed for healthy hair growth, so goes the traditional wisdom.
At this point, I imagine many who read this can be dragged into two categories. You could be the curious, open-minded type who is sometimes easily fooled, "Oh, does that help stave off balding?" Or you could be the type who scoffs at such things as if they were irrational nonsense, "Scientists have found no direct link between such silly remedies and hair growth."
However, like usual, I think the truth is in the middle somewhere. It would appear that the prevailing fact is that once hair follicles stop growing -- not simply falling out, as from brushing or cancer treatment -- that's it, there's no getting them back. Until evidence comes saying otherwise, that's what I think is the truth. On the other hand, as somebody who was pulled into endless bathroom sessions to confirm that yes, my friend's hair did seem to be thinning at an alarming rate, with no discernible sickness or malady causing it, and seeing how he looks now, I can confirm that his hair definitely made a recovery. Apparently, the trick has worked for others as well.
That may down to what they and my friend did though. He's never been the type who can stand on his head, or do cartwheels, but every morning, after introducing an exercise regimen of various push-ups, pull-ups and the like, he spent some time against the wall teaching himself to stand on his head. Now, he has become quite an acrobatic guy who can walk on his head and do some impressive body-bending tricks.
 |
| My hair will be victorious against the ravaging of time! |
He also started to take in more minerals, cut down on snacks and eat more fruits and vegetables. He learned to become more flexible and changed his sedentary lifestyle to something a little more athletic and healthy.
I think what happened is a combination of good living habits made his remaining hair much thicker and staved off any additional hair loss. He perhaps realized that nobody stays beautiful forever without at least a little effort. Either way, the change has made him a healthier person. He still doesn't use balding creams or spend hours in the bathroom, but indulges in good habits to maintain the pride in his natural beauty.
This could be called a healthy kind of vanity: a kind that inspires movement in a better direction and does not make the person seem like a massive piece of dick lint. So elements that have passed out of favor in video games, like random battles and lives systems, are at their best when they are inspired by a healthy kind of vanity. I bet you thought I would compare them to balding because such old video game ideas were once considered normal and natural, and have now faded away, didn't you? Gotcha!
No, no. The truth is that some people go bald and others keep their hair. (Some games still use old ideas for their mechanics, others adapt the new ones.) There is a third category of person though. They try endless remedies, like tonics or implants and such, to regrow their hair. (Some game designers throw in old elements without thinking much, in a misguided attempt to recapture the old days.) In this third category, there is still another person like my friend who practices healthy vanity. (They continue to carry on the tradition of the old games by thinking about the reasons why they started to fade and adopting healthier practices to prevent them falling out of favor.)
 |
| There go the random battles of my youth. |
Because it was easy to design, older RPGs would repeatedly vomit out easy battles and with little care, attention or thought, one could mop up the chunky brown monster goo by taping down their A button. There weren't many engaging ideas in the battles, but that's not because they were random. Another complaint was that, like a wannabe rapper interrupted by his mom yelling to come to dinner, it interrupts the flow of the game and happened too frequently, which isn't so much a complaint leveled at the mechanic as it is due to sloppy game design or an incompatible taste between the developer's intentions and the player's wants.
Likewise, now that we can save our games to hard media independent from the game itself, the consensus seems to be that nobody wants to replay the same portion of the game. If a game isn't much fun anymore under the duress of repeated play, how good could it have really been? Even if it's a game where the appeal comes in experiencing the interactions, like any good story, it should inspire another go eventually (any parent who gets a nighttime request for the same book for weeks on end can tell you this). Everyone has their personal level to which they like to repeat an experience. Which would be healthier: insist that the only modern ideal of game design should be to keep the player going forward as much as possible, at all times, or that there is a spectrum of different preferences that can be catered to by knowing your audience?
Random battles, as a design element, still have a lot of value.
They can be a boon to developers with scarce resources. Inventing a system for encounters where battle initiate through contact with a visible object involves animating, programming and designing a whole host of symbols or enemies to populate the world and then designing environments so that players can avoid them, but are fostered into enough battles to keep the difficulty curve in the desirable area. Doing this incorrectly makes the whole thing cascade into the same kind of frustrations that poorly implemented random battles used to cause; players can still get caught into a series of battles that cause tedium and frustration because of AI routines, enemy or area designs. Developers who want to focus on character growth, intricate tactics or other mechanics; they can skip implementing symbol encounter battles and focus on the mathematical equations and ratios that are much easier to tweak and change.
Random battles also allow for interesting and fantastic contradictions. You can have a knight crawling in a series of narrow pipes and fighting witches and ogres. Some may say that ruins immersion, but many will also say they don't care about that, and like the strange gap, and rightly so for both parties. Random battles also help less coordinated players who do not like to have to contend with any action elements. They're also great for preserving surprise and tension.
Similarly, leaving the concept of lives and continues to drown with the Titanic would seriously hurt the design scope of surviving games. Many have noted that modern Mario games are so easy that "it makes the concept of lives meaningless." I wouldn't go that far. For one thing, I still encounter younger children or less skilled players who play Mario levels and can't get through a level without running out of all their lives. "Exactly! That's why there shouldn't be any lives. Just replays!" Not so fast.
Many games adopt a difficulty structure where the challenges grow more complex as the game continues. If a player is having trouble completing a certain stage, one reason might be that they have not learned or perfected skills in earlier stages that would help them. Designing a lives system that punishes the player by requiring a play-through of earlier stages can be a great strength of the design. Players may be reminded of other ways to play, might strengthen skills that could help with further portions and encounter situations that may provide hints or new insights to their current problem. In real life, is it reasonable to say anyone should just their charge their horns into their problems without taking a breather, looking at it from a different angle, telling the intern to do it instead, or going back to an earlier step? I think most would agree, it's often not healthy to do it this way.
There are many benefits of a lives system such as bragging rights, infinite 1-up tricks, rewards for exploration or skill, pithy comments about getting a life and easy numerical comparisons of how much more skilled one player is to another. Anyone who has played modern Mario games know also that it can also be fun just to stop and find ways to generate lives.
There are all sorts of other mechanics that have come under fire by using hyperbolic statements that call them archaic, like turn-based battle systems, save points or indeed, even things like boss battles and boss rushes. These well-trodden, traditional game mechanics are much like works of art whose perceived quality fluctuates based on the cultural values of the people who view them (also because plebes point at them and say, "I don't understand it, therefore it has no value.")
Let's keep them around by involving a healthy amount of skepticism toward sketchy ways bad designers implement them, letting them wax and wane like the hairline of a recurring chemotherapy patient, and by indulging in healthy vanity to keep the tradition alive.
Yours If You Want Me to Be,
Sazanami
11/19/2013
Don't Open the Box: Lakitu is a Tongue Twister
Quiz! Who is that creepy guy in the clouds throwing his red spiny friends at you from his fortress of solitude? Yeah that guy, the one on the left. If you come from North America or an English-speaking country, you might know that his name is Lakitu.
 |
| A violent hikikomori |
You might recognize the word Jugem from the item Jugem's Cloud, which in Super Mario Bros. 3 allowed you to skip levels! (Funny how today that doesn't seem to be as appealing a concept, isn't it? Nowadays hopping on his cloud will help you explore more of the level or open up new ones.)
Sure, in English, he lacks a tu, that makes perfect sense, considering the world of cloud ballerinas and their single tus. But Jugemu? That makes no sense at all!
Well, maybe, but I remember a childhood tongue twister that is known as Jugemu. It goes like this:
Jugemu jugemu
Gokou no surikire
Kaijari suigyou no
Suigyoumatsu unraimatsu fuuraimatsu
Kuu neru tokoro ni sumu tokoro
Yaburakouji no burakouji
Paipo paipo paipo no shuuringan
Shuuringan no guurindai
Guurindai no ponpokopii no ponpokonaa no
Choukyuumei no chousuke
I loved this tongue twister as a kid. I could always get to the middle part easily, my mouth rattling it off at 400 RPM, but the middle part (that starts with yaburakouji) always messed me up. It still does to this day. I can even do the last few lines perfectly. If it weren't that dastardly middle line and its pesky syllables.
The tongue twister was said to be created when a man asked a priest to name his child something that would ensure he had a long life. The priest came up with all sorts of long-lived metaphors, legends and expressions, which form each part of the verse. (The very name Jugemu is an amalgamation of Japanese characters meaning "no end to the life line.") Can you imagine someone being named that? "Jugemu jugemu, gokou no surikire ... blah blah blah ... shuuringan ... blah blah blah ... chousuke, can you pass me the salt?"
If you are fluent in Mushroom Kingdom common sense, like all right-thinking people are, you will remember that Lakitu/Jugemu tends to come back no matter how many times you kill him and will follow you to the ends of the earth (or at least the stage). Do you think that's why Nintendo named him Jugemu? Can you say the tongue twister as fast as you can?
11/08/2013
Don't Open the Box: Wrecking Crew
When you mess up so badly you can't win the game anymore, press select to go back to the title screen. Wrecking Crew is like taking care of vicious animals. Observe their behavior so they don't bite you. Press select to call it a day. Go to the hospital on the way home from work and bandage your wounds. Think about what you did. Start again another day.
I am smarter than horror movie characters. I would not get trapped. I would not get killed. I would be the final boss. But in Wrecking Crew, red and purple Pringles cans chase me. They get me in horror movie slasher situations. And then I cannot outsmart a 20 year old AI. At least in games you have extra lives. Mario is reborn smarter, but I get sadder and sadder. Evil potato chips. Chip Star tastes better anyway.
 | |
| Evil Pringles | cans |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)