Then I grew more familiar with Klout. I began hearing rumblings as to how it was changing the way we’re perceived online and even in real life. It was scary to think companies would start using Klout scores to determine job candidacy. It isn’t entirely unreasonable for potential employers to check your level of influence across various social networks to determine if you’re right for a particular position. Think about it, there are so many marketing opportunities online, companies are either starting to, or need to start looking for ways to leverage their brand’s influence by using the influence of their employees.

Where was my Klout score going to get me in life? It remains to be seen if it will get me anywhere worthwhile, especially at a great company. It’s given me a couple perks, I received Spotify and Crowdbooster accounts, beyond that I didn’t gain much. That is, until I became obsessed with raising my score.

I read an interview that stated there were many ways to raise your Klout score. One way was the quality of friends and followers you have. If I had (God, please forbid) Justin Beiber following me on Twitter, that would raise my Klout score more than if I had 100 of those spamming pornographers. In addition the best way to raise your Klout score is to instigate action among your followers. Are they retweeting your tweets? Are they clicking your links? Are they responding to your updates? All these things and more are used to calculate your score. I realized upon reading this, l wasn’t engaging my audience.

I looked at my Facebook News Feed and realized no one really was engaging their audience. No one was instigating any sort of discussion. We were all part of this enormous social network and yet none of us were taking advantage of the opportunities it presented. We could do something radical, we could actually get to know one another! Not only on Facebook, but also Twitter which has become more of a way to broadcast than to converse.

This is where things changed for me. I began engaging my audience. Rather than just sit idly by reading status updates and maybe contribute to light discussion, I became an instigator. Being an introvert, it sucked stepping out of my comfort zone. I started posting fun questions that made people think. I asked for opinions. I asked for people to respond. They did, and my Klout score rose. I’m still no “Celebrity” according to Klout, but over the course of a couple of months I was able to raise my score nearly 30 points; now I hover around 50. I went from “Conversationalist” to “Socializer”, to “Networker” and now I sit comfortably at “Specialist”.

My resolve is constantly tested. Preserving a high Klout score requires effort, oftentimes more than I’m willing to invest. I check my score daily to see if it’s changed. If it’s fallen, I know I didn’t make the effort to engage my friends or make new ones. Klout is a great way to measure not only your online influence, but also if you’re maintaining your online friendships. And while I may never get a great job from obsessing over my Klout score, I definitely have earned better friendships.

It was tradition that my mom, grandfather and I would go opening day. We battled the crowds and folks who would dress up as their favorite character, thankfully, I was never one to cosplay, there were limits to my obsession. My grandfather never read any of the books, but he appeared to appreciate the movies for what they were and wanted to have a part in the hoopla, like the rest of us. My mom was like me, she read the books a couple of times or more and it was just recently that we both reread and watched the series before Part 1 of Deathly Hallows came out in theaters.

Now that I have seen the final movie, I believe they did a pretty good job. While watching, I thought about why a movie made from a book is either good or bad. In regards to Harry Potter I wondered why do I feel that this particular movie is good. I think it was relatively faithful to the source material, but I don’t think that alone makes it a good movie. In some cases it makes me wonder if a movie can be good if it’s faithful to the source. Why convert a book to a movie if a perspective isn’t going to be taken?

I recently watched a making of Harry Potter documentary on Bio. It went through each of the movies and talked with directors, producers and actors about the making of the movies. How each of the directors took a specific point of view and tried to put their individual stamp on the series, yet stay true to the story. I think about this newest movie and I wonder, what stands out? How does this movie differentiate itself from the other movies in the series? The action was good, but is the action better than the other movies? The acting? The special effects? The script?

I like to think of the striking difference we were met with when the “Prisoner of Azkaban” came out. This was the movie that changed the tone of all the other movies. It was the one that took a chance and showed that these kids were growing up and they were going up against real evil. Everything about that movie was darker and more sinister. Gone was the vibrancy of the previous Harry Potters, this was the Harry Potter that I looked forward to, the one I imagined and the one that set the bar for all the Harry Potters to come.

How does Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 2 compare? I sit here watching the cursor blinking because I don’t know. I feel like the movie met the status quo. I think expectations were met, but I don’t think my expectations were exceeded. I wonder if they could ever have been exceeded. As I was watching the movie, I was checking off list items in my head. Did they do this? Yes. Did they do that? Yes. Did they do this justice? Yes. Overall, I impressed, but not surprised.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 2 is a good movie. It’s scale is epic and you will get lost in the frenzy. There is so much they do right and very little done wrong. It’s non-stop action and you will have a great time living vicariously through these beloved characters for the last time. It’s a fitting end to a series that many of use have grown-up and for some, grown-older with.

This is bittersweet for me. I was looking forward to this movie. Possibly not for the same reasons as many others might have been. I lived and breathed the Harry Potter books and movies for nearly 13 years. I can scarcely remember a time when my nose wasn’t glued to one of the books. I read through the series a couple of times, and have read my favorites more times than I can remember. It was a series of books that revitalized my interest in reading, and as far as I could remember, before the Harry Potter books, there weren’t many books that were written that appealed to boys. Harry Potter brought an imaginative world to an entire generation of not just boys, but girls and adults too. Literally watching it all come to an end is sad, but also liberating. I know now, I can move on.

The unbundling is actually good for consumers. That must sound weird considering this is partially what people are complaining about. However, I see it as a way to save money. I took a look at my current plan, for $19.99 I get 3 DVDs out at-a-time and unlimited streaming. My new, comparable plan increases to $23.98. That sounds like a $4 increase, but I’m not looking at it that way. The $23.98 is the 3 DVDs out at-a-time plan ($15.99) + the Unlimited Streaming plan ($7.99). By unbundling, I now have the freedom to look at other streaming options, like HuluPlus, a service I’ve been wanting to try. If I continued to spend $19.99 for my Netflix plan and I decided I wanted to try HuluPlus, I would have ended up paying $27.98 a month. In essence, I’m saving $4.

Much of the chatter I’m hearing from people was how they are canceling the subscription and moving to Redbox, Blockbuster, HuluPlus or a combination of the three. I’ve considered this throughout my Netflix membership. In fact it was during the last price increase that I remember contemplating Redbox. Looking at Redbox now, it would cost me an additional $5-$8 a month to rent the same number of DVDs I’m renting now through Netflix (21-24); that doesn’t include an $8 a month streaming plan. Total cost for Redbox and HuluPlus/Netflix Instant Watch, $29-$32 a month.

Looking at Blockbuster’s plans, I can get 3 DVDs out at-a-time for $19.99 without streaming. There is no value there. The only advantage that Blockbuster has over Netflix is game rentals, and many new releases are available before Netflix. The reality is, I can wait for new releases to be available on Netflix. I’m never in that much of a hurry to see a movie. Blockbuster’s service will cost me an additional $4. Again, including a streaming plan the total cost of Blockbuster and streaming is, $28 a month.

So you see, even with the price increase, Netflix is still the better deal for me. Right now, my average cost per movie/program on Netflix by mail and streaming is 18¢. Will that eventually go up with the new increase? Maybe a little, but what people have to realize is Netflix is a business, not a family. They provide a service to make money. I feel when a company brings enjoyment to people and these same people are then faced with the reality that they are dealing with a business, they feel betrayed.

When I hear people on Facebook and Twitter talk about Netflix, they mention more expensive options. If it was really about the money, they would know Netflix is ultimately the better deal. Betrayal runs deep and the blind rage that comes with it doesn’t allow people to think clearly. So they react aggressively and impulsively, that’s what I’m seeing now. It’s one thing if you rent less than 8 movies a month, maybe then Netflix won’t save you much over Redbox. Folks just need to calm down, logically look at the options, then cancel if they can’t make it work. They shouldn’t impulsively cancel something that once brought them happiness.

Life isn’t simple anymore. Back in the day, and I suppose back in everyone’s day at one time or another, the only time I would get a video game was on my birthday and at Christmas. There was the very rare moment when I would save up enough money to buy one myself. Mostly, I relied on the kindness of my family to be the enablers of my habit. Now that I’m grown, and have a vast amount of disposable income (he says, sarcastically), I’m able to buy games at my discretion.

Growing up has presented a problem for me. As I’ve grown, I saved all the games that I have ever received or acquired. Before I began selling them off, I had nearly 800 games. After watching a couple of seasons of Hoarders, I started to realize that the physical isn’t as important anymore. That in essence, we shouldn’t “own” in a traditional sense, but rather use. This becomes a striking realization with gaming and was a shocking blow for those during the transition from the Nintendo to the Super Nintendo. The realization that our favorite games, the games that we slaved to get by mowing lawns or doing chores were not going to work on the new system. It all seemed like a huge waste and I remember my Mom thinking it stupid at the time.

This happened for another generation of hardware and the sting of not being able to play older games on the next-gen hardware dulled. We were used to it, we no longer expected it. Not until the launch of the PlayStation 2 were we introduced to backwards compatibility, although the Atari 7800 was backwards compatible with Atari 2600 games. However, by that time, with all the promises of NURBS and what-not the PS2 was capable of, the idea of playing a bunch of blocky games held little interest. Now with the current generation of hardware, we sort of expected it, if not hoped for it.

Backwards compatibility came in a limited form for the current generation of hardware. Initially the PS3 was able to play PS2 games because it had the Emotion Engine. In later models, Sony decided to cut the Emotion Engine out of the design to save money, and gave the excuse they wanted people to focus on buying PS3 titles and not PS2 titles. Microsoft, chose to emulate the original Xbox with software. This only allowed specific Xbox games to be played on the Xbox 360. This meant Microsoft chose which games would be allowed to play on their newest console. Nintendo did the world a solid with the Wii because it is fully backwards compatible with GameCube games.

You’re probably wondering why I’m yammering on about backwards compatibility. Well, that is the advantage of digital distribution. Since it can be downloaded, you can feasibly take it with you from generation to generation of console, even if the manufacturer decides to use something as crazy as crystal cubes as it’s medium. In addition, because there is no physical copy of the game, it doesn’t take up any physical space. For me, these are two huge advantages.

There is a big disadvantage, that is the power of retail. Retail, whether online or good ol’ brick and mortar have limited space available to store goods. There are only so many spaces on a shelf. They are constantly needing to cycle through inventory. This results in game discounts or clearances. You won’t find these kinds of discounts or clearance prices with games distributed digitally, because storage is never a problem. Take for instance Borderlands Game of the Year edition. On Amazon.com, the Borderlands GotY for Xbox 360 costs (as of this writing), $36.54. The GotY edition has all the expansion packs for the game currently available. On Xbox Live you can get Borderlands for, $19.99, but then you have the option to buy each of the four expansion packs separately at $10.00 each. In the end, the same game you can get on Amazon for $36.54 will cost you $59.99 on Xbox Live. That’s a $23.45 difference!

Owning physical copies of games is what we’re used to, and there is a sense of satisfaction when you can watch your game collection grow. It’s also a great feeling to put money down and get something you can hold in your hand; something tangible that you can place on your shelf. While a physical copy of a game may take up space, you don’t need to be connected to your console or the Internet in order to play or get information about it. You can take the case off the shelf, read the back and maybe check out some screenshots.

This type of physical ownership gives you the option to sell or trade games that you no longer play. This would pave the way for you to afford more games, or the newest console coming out. Digital downloads, don’t give you that freedom. Once you pay for it, you own it for life and there is nothing you can do to recoup any money. This poses an interesting dilemma when deciding on what to purchase. Knowing the limitations with digital downloads, it would cause me to rethink, or think really hard about whether or not I want to buy the game.

Owning physical copies of games is not without it’s disadvantages. I have already touched on them when describing the advantages of the digital download process. For me the biggest disadvantage is storing a physical copy of a game. After realizing that I was no longer owning games, but hoarding them, I saw how having physical copies of anything was drowning me. Before coming to this understanding, I never would have thought a digital copy would be a viable option. Now, looking at how much space is being taken up with games, owning physical copies seems to be less of a desire.

Another disadvantage is backwards compatibility. We are never guaranteed that discs are going to work with the next generation of hardware. Of course, we are never guaranteed that a digital copy of a game is going to work on next generation hardware too, but it seems more likely. There may come a time in the future where all consoles won’t have disc drives and any disc based game won’t work, but that is another post all together.

All of this is going through my head when I decide on buying a game. Unfortunately all this over-thinking often prevents me from buying games. Is it worth the potentially extra cost to not have to store a physical copy of a game and have a better chance of getting backwards compatibility in the future? Or is it better to own a physical copy of a game so that I could trade or sell the game in the future and possibly get them at a lower price? UGH, the pros and cons of each leave me stumped. Until I figure out what’s best, I’ll just rent and take what people give me.

You can’t throw a rock at your computer screen without hitting a web series. They could be about anything. Here’s the deal, as interesting, or funny, or dramatic as they claim to be, they rarely hit the mark. What you’re left with is a super awkward series, that doesn’t go anywhere, but may have excellent production value.

Hold on, what’s a web series? Think of it as a television series that’s on the web. They’re not very long, probably no more than 10 minutes and can range from being professionally done, or done by a bunch of talentless hacks that have no business creating anything for the consumption of others. Kinda like me and this blog. Well, kinda like all bloggers and blogs.

Anyway, then there is HAWP (Hey Ash, Whatcha Playin’?), a super awkward web series that doesn’t go anywhere (but somehow does), and has really not-excellent production value. The only difference? This one is good. Not only is it good, but it’s smart, clever, and hysterically funny. It provides intellectual satisfaction, but also gives you that kind of emotional satisfaction from watching a smart, layered idea written and presented in a clever way. Each episode gives you that last piece of the puzzle feeling.

The most remarkable thing about it? It’s centered around video games. Video game web series are sometimes the most offensively stupid series you can find on the web. There are those acclaimed ones like The Guild or Mega64 or even machinima ones like Red vs. Blue, but each one never captured my attention. I mean, I’m not a big MMO fan, so The Guild is sorta lost on me. The others never resonated with me for one reason or another. Maybe because they were a web series…boring.

I was watching GT.TV (Gametrailers TV) on Spike, which I hate because they never start it on time and it always cuts the ending where they finally get to the game that I want to know about. It’s  annoying, although I could change my TiVo settings. Regardless, up popped HAWP. I immediately thought it was going to be insanely idiotic, which was what I thought about the Keith Apicary series GT.TV ran during 3 episodes. With my expectations low, I steadied my thumb on the fast-forward button of my TiVo remote. It would have only taken one wrong word and I would have just lumped HAWP with the rest of those web series rejects.

The wrong word never came. Anthony, Ash’s older brother was sitting on the toilet when Ash barges in and begins to quickly ramble off her idea for Nintendoland. I thought to myself throughout her ramble, “That’s a good idea. That’s a good idea. That’s a good idea.” By the end of it, I said flatly, “That was funny.” GT.TV went to commercial and I promptly forgot about it.

On June 9, 2011, I come across an episode about E3. It was good and it prompted me to go to their website, http://www.heyash.com. I found the first episode and began watching it. It was funny. I proceeded to go through the first season in one sitting. The next day, I watched the second season and what episodes were available of the third, all the while laughing hysterically, tears streaming down my cheeks and getting a pretty intense ab workout.

Needless to say, I’m obsessed. I started listening to their intelligent podcast (where they frequently talk about my favorite things, Doctor Who, Firefly, and video games) and I have their DVD’s on my Amazon Wish List if anyone is interested in buying them for me. My birthday is coming up.