Author: Carrie

  • Vanquish is a very good bad game

    I’ve just finished playing Vanquish, a truly demented Gears of War-style shooter. I think Eurogamer’s review is spot on.

    Sure, Halo: Reach gives you a jet pack. But Vanquish gives you the ability to slide 40 yards on your knees along concrete, ducking through the legs of a giant bipedal robot while firing rockets at point-blank range into its groin.

    The acting consists entirely of ham, the characters are ridiculous, the story is incomprehensible and it often feels as if somebody’s dropped a dustbin on your head and is beating it with a baseball bat, but it’s an absolute hoot.

  • Nokia: making smartphones smarter

    This has lots of potential: Nokia Situations.

    Nokia Situations helps your device tie more into your life. You can manually define situations, like “In a meeting”, “Sleeping”, “Watching TV”, or “Playing with kids” and define how you want the device to act.  With the application running in the background, your device automatically senses the situation you are in and adapts to it according to your preferences.

    The clever bit is that it’s not just a case of you selecting a profile; it can use location sensing to work out where you are or its clock to find out what time it is and adjust your phone’s behaviour accordingly.

  • I think I’m right about iPad killers: there aren’t any yet

    Reviews of the various so-called iPad killers have been disappointing. I think I know why.

    manufacturers appear to be looking at the wrong things. They’re like musicians who think buying a Gibson Les Paul will turn them into Jimmy Page, or that being a big gobby pain in the arse makes them Bono.

    What makes the iPad special isn’t the hardware. It’s the software.

    My esteemed colleague Craig Grannell agrees with me and adds something I really wish I’d thought of:

    It’s telling that most of the top-selling apps on Android are admin tools, whereas on iOS they’re games, entertainment apps and productivity tools.

  • Wrong about the Beatles

    Last week, I said that The Beatles on iTunes wasn’t a big deal. What kind of diddy hadn’t ripped the CDs or torrented the discography already?

    The kind of diddy that buys 450,000 Beatles albums and 2 million individual tracks, it seems.

    Oops.

  • Beatles for sale. So what?

    About 200 years after it stopped mattering, The Beatles’ catalogue is finally available on iTunes.

    Do you remember where you were when Apple made its world changing, unforgettable Beatles announcement? I was right here, on this chair, in front of this computer, making this face: meh.

  • Fembots, bats, twats

    A few things I’ve written are online: first up, I’m doing Techradar’s weird tech section and I’ve got scary fembots, splattered bats and USB sticks as art.

    If we were asked to describe the last seven days in one word, we’d say “week” – but if we weren’t allowed that word, we’d say “roboty”, “batty”, “flashy” or “printy”.

    And here’s a wee piece about the government’s exciting new plans for “Silicon marshes” in London’s East End and some Google-friendly changes to our intellectual property laws.

    Is it just me, or is there something horribly unethical about all of this? Having Google and Facebook throw Shoreditch a few crumbs while avoiding hundreds of millions, even billions of pounds in tax is a bit like someone stealing your dinner and then offering you a half-chewed chip.

  • Why self publishing sucks (for me)

    We’ve been talking about publishing (or rather, not getting published), and G24 points out:

    You don’t need a publisher these days any more than you need pulped up trees to print on.

    I agree entirely, but I don’t think self publishing is the right road for me. There are lots of reasons for that, but the biggest one is this: I’d rather spend my time writing than marketing, because I’m bloody awful at marketing.

    I think self publishing can work, but I think it only works for very specific kinds of writing and for very specific kinds of people. I think in most cases those kinds of writing are the ones that the mainstream publishing industry doesn’t serve particularly well – sci-fi and fantasy, for example, or erotica, or poetry, or books by famous bloggers. And I think in most cases those kinds of people are those so passionate that they’ll devote extraordinary amounts of time, effort and money for precious little reward.

    One of the big problems with self publishing is that it can cost money. To do it properly, even if you’re online-only, you’ll need to be, or pay for, an editor, a proofreader, a designer, a publicist, a social media marketer and so on. If you can do all those things yourself, I’ve got nothing but admiration for you, because you’re much more talented than I am. And if you can afford to pay for all of those things yourself, you’re much richer than I am.

    Another problem, to me at least, is that self publishing doesn’t give you the editorial process you get with a mainstream agent and publisher. I’ve spent thirteen-odd years being edited, and I can honestly say that with very few exceptions the editorial process has made my writing better. I don’t just mean proofreading here; I mean the whole process, especially the bit where the editor says “that’s a terrible idea. Why don’t you…?” In fiction, having the input of agents and editors who eat, sleep and drink fiction is enormously useful, I think.

    I’m convinced that no matter how good the writer, they can benefit from a good editor.

    Another big problem is that the money isn’t there yet. The Kindle Store, Apple’s iBooks and so on are good business for the companies that run them, because 1 million authors selling 100 copies each is a nice little revenue stream. But if you’re the author of one of those books, that’s bugger-all money.

    The authors making money from ebooks are the ones whose books you see in ASDA – the Stieg Larssons and Stephenie Meyers. There’s a visibility problem with electronic publishing, which is why the ebook charts are dominated by writers with agents, big-name publishers and enormous marketing budgets. We’ve seen exactly the same thing with music: despite the democratisation of music from PC-based studios and Internet distribution, if you want to do big numbers you still need to have a big label behind you.

    I don’t want to be online-only, incidentally: I like real, printed books, and my enormous rampaging ego would quite like to see my name on a poster in the window of Waterstone’s. And that means self publishing is even less attractive.

    As Jane Smith points out on How Publishing Really Works:

    it would be difficult to hire anyone competent to sell your books on percentage, as each bookshop visit would barely cover the travelling costs incurred even if every bookshop approached took half a dozen copies each.

    Even if you do the legwork yourself you’re still likely to end up losing money because of those travelling costs, and because you will only be able to cover a very small part of the country.

    Commercial publishers have their own sales and distribution networks in place. Their sales representatives frequently visit every bookshop in the country, and discuss their new and forthcoming books.

    Commercial publishers also have publicity departments which routinely send out stacks of review copies to TV programmes, newspapers and magazines, to ensure that potential readers will get to hear about each book as it is released.

    The self-publisher simply cannot match this vast sales machine, and so is unlikely to sell anything like as many books: few self-published titles sell more than one hundred copies, while most commercially-published books sell more than a thousand.

    Incidentally, that also demonstrates just how much the odds are stacked against you: even with the backing of a decent agent and a good publisher, few writers sell lots of books. But the numbers are even smaller with self-publishing.

    This takes me back to my first point, which is that I’d rather spend my time writing than marketing because I’m not particularly good at marketing. Having already spent the best part of two years writing something that, for now at least, mainstream publishers aren’t keen on, I think my time would be better spent writing something that will sell rather than doing a half-arsed marketing job that might generate a couple of hundred quid somewhere down the line. Self promotion, sadly, isn’t one of my talents.

  • Ready, fire, aim! Something to check before you write a novel

    Remember that book I was writing? I thought I’d post an update.

    After a lot of work, eight drafts and two printers I’ve sent it out to some people, and I’ve had loads of feedback about it from agents and other publishing insiders. The dialogue is great. It’s really atmospheric. The characters are fun. The book is variously “quite funny”, “funny”, “very funny” and “extremely funny”.

    Nobody wants to take it on.

    Apparently it’s not the writing, but the genre*. It’s a comic thriller, and comic thrillers are the red-headed stepchild of the mainstream fiction business. Everyone knows they exist, but nobody wants them in their publishing house.

    If I’d known that two years ago it might have saved me quite a bit of effort.

    So here’s a top tip. If you want to write novels – that is, if you want to write novels that get published – then it might be an idea to do what Ian Rankin did before you start plotting. Rankin looked at what sold, and concluded that Books With Cops In was the genre for him.

    As for me, I’m starting another one. I’ll tell you about it when there’s something worth saying.

    * In most cases, anyway. A few agents told me that at 67,000 words it’s just too short; for mainstream fiction publishers apparently expect 80,000 words plus or they won’t even look at it. Unfortunately for me 67K is the right length for the story, and any more would make the story sag.

    Update, June 2011: I decided to publish the book myself on Kindle, iBooks and so on. It’s called Coffin Dodgers, it’s doing quite well, and you can find out more about it here, if you like.

  • Politicians and the Internet. It’s never good

    Hello. Sorry if I’ve been quiet lately – Baby Bigmouth was a bit unwell last week so it’s all sleep deprivation around these parts. Not that that’s stopping me from getting angry about tech things. Far from it. Here’s my take on the government’s latest ISP-related idea.

    Rather than, say, reining in Google or telling Facebook to get a grip – something the European Commission thinks the UK doesn’t do properly, which is why we’re being taken to court by the Commission for failing to comply with EU privacy rules – the government wants our ISPs to start censoring.

    I can’t stress this enough: we’re not talking about illegal information here. We’re talking about information that allegedly breaches somebody’s privacy, or that “is inaccurate”. Bye, Facebook! See ya, Wikipedia!

  • How many people will Google’s car kill?

    A fascinating post by Jean-Louis Gassée on Google’s self-driving car:

    The hardware and the software will fail, no question. The real riddle is determining the socially acceptable failure rate. Today, there are about 40,000 car fatalities per year. Note the euphemistic “car fatalities” or “car accidents”, as if the drivers weren’t to blame. You can imagine the news headlines when the first self-driving car fatality happens: Killer Robot! Killer Software! (A literal killer app?). Isaac Asimov, the author of the Three Laws of Robotics will spin in his grave.