4,393 Forum Posts by "DroopyA"
Fucking loved it. Laughed my ass off almost the entire time.
The 'Almost over film critic' part wher they discuss sterotypes with the asian guy was hilarious.
At 2/25/09 01:46 PM, MEPHILIS1337 wrote:At 2/25/09 10:17 AM, DroopyA wrote: Well... it is a Metallica game so...I said that!
Yeah my bad, I saw that after I posted.
-10 ePoints for me?
Buddhist Monk... in the time of Buddha?
I don't want to own anything... I find it's all just a big hassel and not worth the worry.
GTAIV has little to offer outside of the outstanding graphics. You'll notice that's the first thing everybody says about it... the story, supporting cast, and gameplay features fall after the superb graphics engine. That's not to say that it's a bad game... but that GTA is more about the 'look' and less about the 'fun'.
I don't want to bash GTA... it's a good game. But you need to realize that it's not as fun as other games on the market. There is no character customization, no house customization, no car customization... the mini-games are realistic and based around bowling or playing pool at a bar. The missions are realistic and requier you to spend a lot of time in empty warehouses and dark allies. The story is realistic and often times bland or just downright boring... it's like watching one of The Godfather movies. It's good if you like story but terrible if you like action.
It's definitly a good game and worth checking out, but if you have to make a decision it's improtant you ask yourself what you're looking for in a game. Do you want a more somber realistic experiance, or do you want some crazy action-packed wildness?
Saints Row 2 is anything but real. The graphics are great, but more cartoony and colors are sharper and more vibrant. The city is crazy and unrealistic and the supporting characters are about as sane as Charles Manson himself. Because of this, the game takes on a completly diffrent feel.
Missions require you to storm police stations and shoot up court houses durring important trials... you steal attack helicopters and blow up large sections of the city. Minigames revovle around stealing septic trucks and driving around town spraying feces on everything in sight or throwing yourself into on-comming traffic in order to claim insurance fraud.
it also features complete customization. You can choose everything... height, weight, color, sex, hair style, facial hair, the voice and accent your guy uses when he talks, the way he walks, the way he fights, the way he signals 'good job' to his friends and the way he tells his enemies to 'fuck off'. And they're pretty varied... everything from the middle finger to farting can be used. You also unlock more as you play minigames and take out gangs.
All cars are customizable and you can save cars previously customized for use at any time. If, after you save the car, you wreck it... you can just go to your garage and have one re-spawn for a small price. It's sillier and more fun then GTA... less real.
That's the catch though... nothing about Saints Row is real. There's not even the slightest hint that anything you do in this game could happen in real life. So really, it's not about what game is better... it's about what type of experiance you're looking for.
If you want something real... choose GTA
If you want violent, over the topy 'gangsta'-based cartoon chaos, choose Saints Row 2.
I prefered Saints Row... but then again, I hated GTA simply because I couldn't stand my fucking cusion calling me every 10 minutes asking me to go bowling. IT IS VERY VERY ANNOYING AND DENYING YOUR FRIENDS RESULTS IN A LOSS OF FRIENDSHIP POINTS WHICH MAY REMOVE IN GAME BONUS FEATUERS LIKE FREE CAB RIDES. If you want to keep your friends happy, you have to go bowling, play pool, catch a show, take a boat ride, etc...
I absolutly hated it and just thinking about it now makes me want to go shit on the game disk, then piss on it, then light it on fire.
At 2/25/09 11:21 AM, dELtaluca wrote: The vast majority of people here are so dead-set on thinking they are right that they don't even realise they are ignoring your link :P
Saw the link... who cares.
Basically, a guy says "I made a computer program that may or may not be accurate in calculating what the universe might have been like if this constant value had been changed". Look, black holes everywhere.
There are a number of things that could be wrong here, but most importantly, the universe didn't form with Black Holes everywhere so discuss what it may have been like holds about as much value of me asking you what my life would be like had you been born a chicken. It didn't happen so all we can do is speculating meaning all the answer we come up with are just blind guesses in the dark based around our limited understanding of science and general assumptions about life.
Also, String Theory already covers this. His other links where to a site about diffrent ways the world could end. It's old and I've known about it for a while. It too is all just speculation and doesn't really prove anything so there is no "right" about it.
Fact is, nobody knows anything. None of us know why the universe was created. We don't know how it came to be or how its going to end. Hell, we don't even know that it is going to end. Even theories like the Big Bang, are still just theories. Although they're the most logical and most accepted theories it out, we could wake up one day to find out we where completly wrong. Keep in mind, you're talking about the same science that put the wrong skull on the wrong skeleton for years creating a wrong fossiled dinosaur remains... we tought our children about a proven dinosaur that turned out to not exist. We where close... but close doesn't count when it comes to facts.
What's the saying... close only counts in hand-gernades and horse-shoes.
At 2/25/09 10:46 AM, Xavierthewarlord wrote: ...And the excuse GTA taught the person who got arrested to aim for the head?
History has shown that nobody has ever shot and killed another human being until after the existance of video games.
If you think otherwise, you've been lied to. Liek the Holocaust... lies. Just a terrible rummor that was started after video games corrupted the minds of our children. Nobody like Hitler could ever exist unless they where raised on GTA games, it's a proven, undisputable, scientific fact.
At 2/25/09 10:47 AM, Xavierthewarlord wrote: Are you another AVGN / Irate Gamer? Do you enjoy making yourself suffer by playing these shit-tastic games?
I like the stories in video games... online play is fun, but it's not something I strive for. I'd much rather play and beat 10 diffrent games, then get really good at one titles deathmatch feature.
To me, games are like books. I like to experiance the story, meet the characters, and see the new worlds... because of this, I often choose games that aren't that great gameplay wise, but sound like they have a unique experiance or story to offer.
This is one even I wasn't planning on playing... but my friend got it as a gift and let me borrow it when he was finished. I figured that was pretty nice of him and it wouldn't hurt to see what the game has to offer.
Like I said, it's not bad... I think I was a little harsh on it in my final score... it's more like a 7 or maybe a really low 8 if you like this type of occult stuff.
My biggest problem is mainly the level design. There's nothing to find and no extra places to explore. The maps are all very linnear and the in game fights are very predictible. It's not scary like Doom... you can always tell you're about to get in a fight because all fights take place in big area with lots of debris lying around for cover.
A typical stage plays out like so:
Walk about 15 feet into an obvious battle zone
Fight a bunch of enemies, usually 3 or 4 at a time
Walk about 15 feet into another obvious battle zone
Fight a bunch of enemies, usually 3 or 4 at a time
Walk about 15 feet into another obvious battle zone
Fight a bunch of enemies, usually 3 or 4 at a time
Walk about 15 feet into another obvious battle zone
Fight a bunch of enemies, usually 3 or 4 at a time
End Stage
The characters themself are pretty generic and so far there has been zero back story on any of them. Because of this, I find it hard to keep track of who is who, who has what power, and why they have that power. Instead of using the power system and body switching ability to it's fullest, I find I usually just play with one character and only switch when I have no choice or I die.
The more you use them the more familure you become but even then I often realize too late that there was probably a better way to handle that fight.
I find it's a fun game when I finally turn it on to play it, but I don't really look forward to going home and giving it a good run. I think about it and go "ehh, [something else] would be more fun"... but when I do put it in and start playing it, I find I don't want to turn it off.
The stages are short and although the levels are predictable the game does a pretty good job of keeping you moving forward. Think of COD4... it's got that "one more level" type feel to it. Levels don't seem to take that long so you always get the feeling that five more minutes is all you need... and everybody always has 5 more minutes right? :)
At 2/24/09 12:34 PM, Brick-top wrote: If the universe was created or funtioned differently you'd still be making the same statement because you would be unaware of this version of the universe.
I think the point is that, if the universe was created of functioned diffrent, none of us would be here because it would be impossible for any of this to exist.
You're assuming that the universe would be diffrent, but still just as perfectly balanced to still allow some form of life and a stable existance. At which point... the OPs original point of the universe being perfectly balanced still remains true and just as oddly mysterious.
At 2/23/09 06:49 PM, BananaBreadMuffin wrote: Some people wonder just how long some other people will insist on bitching and moaning about Metallica in, of all things, a Video Game forum.
Well... it is a Metallica game so...
I'm against it... it's not the governments job to tell me how to raise my children. It's also not their job to tell me what I can and can't play, what I can and can't see, and when I can't and can't play/see it.
Government needs to get the fuck out of my personal life...
FOR
1) It's free
2) It's popular
3) It works
4) No DL required
5) It's better then doing nothing
AGAINST
1) Graphics suck
2) Players are tools
3) MMOs are boring grind fests of pointlessness
4) Gotta pay to experiance it all
5) ???
At 2/24/09 05:58 PM, Blaze-Heatnix wrote: What are we discussing? Your review?
The video game... have you played it? Did you like it? Do you want to play it? Did you even know it existed?
What, would you guys rather I make yet another topic discussing how awesome Link is or another Mario vs Sonic? Oh I know, maybe I should stop talking about games I'm playing and ask you what your favorite monster in L4D is.
The front page of this forum is always the same shit and I don't think me dropping in once every few weeks with some info on the game I'm currently playing is hurting anyone. If you don't want to read what people think about video games maybe you shouldn't visit a video game forum.
It's not like this is all I do here... I read almost every topic that comes through here and I reply to a fair amount of them. I don't think me dropping in my two cents about a video game at the end of the day is doing anyone any harm.
Besides that, it's not like I'm reviewing games that already have topics... it's not my fault nobody has made a Jericho post until now. If there was already a topic on Jericho I might have put this there... but there wasn't, so I made my own. I don't see anything wrong with that.
I don't care if you read it, I don't care if you reply... some of these get more responses then others, some go to page 2 without a single response. I don't really care... but the option is here if you want to take part in it.
If you've played the game, or where thinking about playing the game, this is the place to discuss it. It's not my fault I'm educated and realize that a review expressing my personal opinions of the game is better then just typing "lol, I played Jericho. It was cool. Wat do u think?".
Topics like that get locked because they're pointless and give the reader no value. If you don't want to read about video games, leave the video game forum, it's that simple really. Obviously the mods don't mind as none of these have yet to be locked... and I'm going to continue doing them until I either get bored of doing so, or am informed by an official of the site not to.
Hell, my topic on Saints Row 2 actually went on to inspire decent conversation, sparked a few other spin-off topics, and a user even droped in to tell me that they bought the game based souly off what I wrote about it here. Not my fault you have your head so far up your ass you can't realize that maybe you could learn something. Regardless, I don't really care what you think and I'd appreciate it if you'd either stay on topic about the game, or just simply not reply. You're shitty remarks aren't going to change anything I do.
Expect a new review on "Viking: Battle for Asgard" in a few weeks. It should be arriving in the mail today... but I gotta finish Jericho first.
That's a pretty sweet deal if you need a 360.
At 2/24/09 04:44 PM, HandsomePete wrote: There, someone else said it, too. I announce my retirement from this pointless conversation.
Why would you bump this? The conversation was already over... all you're pointless shit-ass attitude did was just restart it (Possibly).
Seriously man, go smoke a blunt or meet a girl... you're wound up pretty tight and really need to learn to relax. It's the internet... we're all friends here man. No need to be an ass.
At 2/24/09 04:16 PM, LTmatt wrote: Dude, if you're going to do this pretentious review ish, just put it in your blog.
Why? Discussing video games is what the video game forum is for.
I always feel like I'm a guy in a painting slowly trying to figure out what I am... only to be baffeled to find out I'm individual peices of ink made from chemicals, made from atoms, etc... completly obvlious to the fact that I exist in a bigger environment created from the exact same basic components that make up myself, arranged in a slightly diffrent order. I'm incapable of understanding this because I'm a painting... the idea of a 3rd dimension, and a 3D world, is beyond me.
After beating Lost: Via Domus, I moved on to a game my friend let me borrow... Clive Barker's Jericho.
I don't have much to say about this one. It's a first person shooter about a unique top secret squad of government officials that deal with the occult and paranormal. I can't believe I'm about to say this... but I think I've seen, read, and played this story about a million times already.
The idea is that a mysterious ancient city has appeared in the middle of a remote desert for no real apparent reason. Instead, there is a giant storm hovering nearby so the government sends in it's occult team "Jericho" to go check it out.
Without handing out any spoilers, the game plays out as you might expect. The city is just the start of some crazy ancient occult wichcraft that will eventually lead to the end of the world if it's not stoped... and as usual, you're the only people that can stop it. The story is slightly more in-depth then that with tales of God and the creation of life but it's all just talk... you don't actually play through those parts and there are no cut scenes to present the story to you. So far, everything has just be told to me from other team members when the time comes for me to 'need to know'.
It's not bad, it's just not good either. There seem to be a lot of FPS's out there these days so it's gotten to the point where a FPS needs to really be something special to get my attention. Unfortunitly, this is just average. The graphics are good, but not great. The AI is ok, but nothing special. The weapons are average and not that fun to play with and the enemies are all very similar... rotten burnt corpses... not to say that's not cool, there's just not a lot of variety.
The catch is that each member of Jericho has a special power. Where as one member comes loaded with heavy weapondry, another comes with the ability to slow time. One member features swords and sniper riffles, while some members are able to stop enemies in their tracks or use the power of fire demons to ignite their enemies in flames. You play a member of the team who is killed early on in the mission. But strangly, you don't actually die... instead, you're able to attach your soul to the body of your team mates thus taking control of that character and gaining their special abilities.
The idea is that each team member has their own strong and weak points... to survive the mission you'll have to jump from body to body in order to use the right powers at the right time to give you the advantage over whatever evil it is I'm suppose to be fighting.
The problem is that the game is kind of boring and pretty predictable... you walk down a hallway and into a room. A bunch of enemies appear and you fight them off. When one enemy dies another takes it place. Eventually this stops and the room is clear... you walk down a path, into a new section of the map where more enemies appear. Fight, kill, move on. This repeates for pretty much the entire game. Worse yet, if a member dies... they can be revived just by walking up to their corpse and tapping the A button... you only lose if all member dies at the same time.
That happens more then you might think though. That game likes to split the team into squads so you don't always have access to everybody... sometimes the 6 man group is a 3 peice cutting your special options and lives in half. To make matters worse, enemies are really strong. They all take a lot of hits to kill and a good chunk of them come packing some serious firepower. No worries though... the game isn't that hard. I'm usually able to defend them off in my first try. Some parts are more difficult but none so hard that I've wanted to throw my controller. 3 or 4 tries at the most.
That's really all there is... in one good sitting I was able to get about half-way through the game... I've yet to finish it but I'm guessing 15 hours, maybe. A decent rental if you like FPS and have nothing else to play, but I wouldn't suggest buying it.
6 out of 10.
lol, I think you just opened a time portal that takes you to my AOL inbox in 1993
Starcraft II is about it.
Maybe Ghostbusters or Brutal Legend... I'll also eventually pick up 50 Cent: Blood on the Sand.
At 2/23/09 07:57 PM, ThoseSneakyFrench wrote: Every time a decent sniper map comes up, it's the same issue. Everyone wants to be a sniper, so that everyone that goes as a normal player can't make it across the map without being destroyed by 6 people aiming for his head; thus forcing them to play as snipers themselves.
That's pretty much how I see it. Which sucks for me because I always take the "Rambo" approach to every game I play. That is, I pick up my default weapon, run out in the open, and start shooting everything I see with a general plan of "kill them before they kill you... also, run around to avoid getting shot".
It works out pretty well... until you get online and all everybody wants to do is sit in a window with a sniper riffle. :(
They have their place... but unfortunitly they've become a staple in every shooter game on the planet and it seems to be the only weapon new-age gamers know how to use.
I was playing Saints Row 2 and my neighbor came over with his son. I let my neighbors son play and the first question he asked was "Where is the sniper riffle". He was upset to find out I didn't know and spent the next 15 minutes trying to find it.
I guess that's cool... as long as he's having fun, but still... it seemed odd that out of all the things to do in Saints Row 2, all he wanted to do was snipe civilians on the street. How boring... to me.
At 2/24/09 08:47 AM, Coop83 wrote: I've never viewed GnR as Metal, to be honest. Sure, some of their tunes are good and the main issue I have with that band is that Axl is a douche who alienated all of the band, killing the golden goose, while they enjoyed a renaissance in the form of Velvet Revolver.
But see, all of that is modern GnR history. It's as if the entire world has forgotten about the age before Guns N Roses... I agree with everything you said. Velevet Revolver are a rock band, plain and simple. And Axel Rose, a douche bag who thought too highly of himself to agknowledge that he needs the band just as much as they need him.
But the real Guns N Roses died after the Spegetti Incident was released. The Illusion albums where the last real GnR albums with original music, and as far as I'm concerned... the "Sympathy for the Devil" cover on the interview with a vampire soundtrack was the last recorded GnR song.
After that the band broke up. Axel sued to keep the name, and that's when the whole "Chinese Democracy" debaucle started taking place.
I don't think I could possibly say that GnR have ever been metal.
That's so odd to me... so I have to ask... where you alive in the 80s? I don't mean to make it sound like I'm discrediting your answer, I'm just curious.
I was 7 when Appittite for Destruction was released. I can clearly remember what the radio and TV looked like before Guns N Roses showed their face to the masses. I remember seeing the GnR albums in brown paper bags behind the counter at the record store. I remember hiding a recorded tape cassette from my parents... I remember Michel Jackson before he was a child molester and I remember hearing "I just died in your arms tonight" on the radio when it was new.
I remember watching the nightly news reports discussing the trampling deaths at the Metallica GnR tour and the occasional reports on Axels latest fan beating. I remember watching MTV news and Kurt Loyder(sp?) covering the mass lines that formed outside numerious record stores awaiting the midnight release of the Use your Illusion cds...
It's all such a metal experiance for me. It sadens me to see todays youth doesn't understand this... the ground work bands like GnR laid so bands like Cannibal Corpse could exist, just forgotten and written into the wrong pages of the history book... next to Bryan Adams of all people. Seems like such a shame to me.
Are your memories similar? Once again, you can consider them rock... not trying to stop you from thinking that, I'm just curious... did you witness GnR first hand, or where you born after GnR where already a household name?
At 2/24/09 11:05 AM, MasterOfDaWay666 wrote: That'd be disgusting, hilarous and shameful to watch.
All at the same time.
Agreed... and picture yourself as God... it's the begining of everything and nothing exists , not even time. You can do anything you want... what do you do?
Me, I'd create the universe. I mean seriously, what's better then this?
I would think wearwolves.
Zombies didn't seem intersted in wild life... they only appeared to hunger for human brains. This gives Werewolves a distincitve advantage when in wolf mode.
That, and zombies don't think... I would think Werewolves would be given added senses like enhanced smell or hearing which would help them hunt and avoide nearby zombies.
Zombies only real strength is numbers... and since zombies don't use guns loaded with Sliver Bullets, I think the Werewolves are pretty safe.
At 2/24/09 10:43 AM, Ridleysoul wrote: Unless the Chaos theory proves to be true, in which case everything is unbelievably slapdash and completely random, meaning the system is flawed, if there even is a system to speak of.
Chaos is part of the plan already... and it's existance doesn't break anything. You can't break the laws of physics... you can't cheat or hack the system. Physics always works, regardless of the current condition. That's why magic doesn't exist. Magic, would be a glitch in the system.
Physics has no glitch. It's perfect... and millions of years of chaos have randomized the interaction of it's elements which have since gone on to create an organized system that we call the universe. It's genius, really.
If there is/was a God... it's as if all he did was create the laws of physics. Then he hit the play button, sat back, and watched the universe run itself.
Come the fuck on man...
can you please do me the favor of putting SPOILER somewhere before you go about telling everybody how the game ends?
At least a game name in the topic header would be nice....
Agreed. The creation of physics is mind-blowing.
It works perfect every time... an un-crashable computer system where taking any one peice of anything and combining it with any other peice of something else can create an infinte amount new things... to an extent where nothing can be created that would violate it's own rules and destroy itself.
It's a flawless system of complete and utter perfection.
At 2/23/09 05:04 PM, Kucharm wrote: 1. How do you explain the strikingly accurate similarities between Horus the sun god and other gods before him and Jesus Christ?
Bullshit movie twisted facts to only point out what they wanted to point out. Hours was a god, not a man... he also didn't have any deciples nor could he have been killed and ressurected from the dead (You know, cause he's a god). The Horus story was changed after Christianity had started taking foot in the surrounding areas. Horus only gained these things after Jesus...
Doesn't prove if it's real, but it answers your question.
2. I know that god "knows the future" but it honestly makes no sense why he would want so many people to be "murdered" in the name of god when this is against one of the ten commandments.
If you where going to control every thing, why even make it? Why give man free-will if all you're going to do is force him to do the right thing all the time? Chaos is an important part of life... if you where God and knew that your creations where safe in death, why would you care if they die? At this point, wouldn't it be best to let them make their own descisions and learn from their own mistakes?
3. Christianity is an old view, why can't people grow up and realize that it is not real.
Because there's no proof that says it isn't real. And you don't have anything that others haven't already found and said... there is enough reason to believe that God does exist and that's all some people need.
Besides, religion is good for society, so even it if is wrong, why do you care? Stop being so negative and look at all the good things it's brought us... the art, the structures, the life lessons, the 10 commandments (basic laws of society), the hope, and the human bonding.
Some people can't believe that Metallica still have a fan base after they sold out, wrote shit music, and sued their fan base.
At 2/23/09 01:27 PM, Killing-joke wrote: They've lost their way, it wasn;t worth waiting like 13years for
Agreed. Axel had written a huge chunk of songs like Comma or November Rain so there was good potential behind the new album, but he didn't write all of the song. It's become blantely obvious that Axel needed the band just as bad as the band needed Axel. Neither Velvet Revolver or the new GnR album has shown any of the unique creativness that the orignal GnR albums did.
Worse yet... it took far too long to make. It might have been good 10 years ago. But not worth the wait. If somebody where to give me 13 years and billions of dollars for studio time, I promise I would deliever an album better then that. 13 years... for one CD... I might be able to make a better album then the Beatles. I mean 13 years... that's a long fucking time. That's like 9 months a song. :)
At 2/23/09 03:43 PM, HandsomePete wrote: Ramones were punk because they were punk. It's... as simple as that.
Why does this logic not apply to Guns N Roses? What makes the Ramones punk by todays standard? I wanna be Sedated is as about as hardcore and punk rock and the "Sk8r Boi"... and I'm being serious here, not just name-droping a crap artist. The styles in music are very similar... yet one is a fake, and the other are Punk Gods. So how do you determin who's real? Doesn't this say "There's more to music then just the music"?
Bon Jovi had the hair, and "rocked." If you're going to insist that GnR is metal, I'm gonna say "Dead or Alive" was, no matter how much I hate that band and that song.
GnR didn't have the hair. Slash has always had the same curly long haired look and when the band first came out, only two of the members had puffy blond hair. The rest where just long haired thugs. I've done you a favor and attached a picture at the bottom for you to look at.
I want you to take note... the right, is Bon Jovi, the left is Guns N Roses. The image at the bottom, 1980s Anthrax. Notice the distinct lack of bright colors and tights in the image on left. While Bon Jovi are smiling and dancing around with their frilly peices of colored cloth dangled off their white jackets and red and yellow spoted tights, GnR are a group of pissed off drunks wearing blue jean jackets and chains. I would think this picture clearly states the diffrence between GnR and their fellow 'Glam-Rock" counterparts.
Ask yourself, do GnR look more at home with the Jovi, or with Anthrax? I think this picture makes a very 'metal' point.
And furthermore, fuckit. Sheryl Crow covered a song of there's. If you're going to keep pounding this, I'm going to have to ask you how metal that was.
Anybody can cover anything they want. That doesn't change the original bands genre. Dynamite Hack covered Easy E and Behemoth covered the Ramones. Does that mean the Ramones are now a death metal band?
Bon Jovi is 0% metal. But they were thought to be "metal" because they were a part of the "hair metal" style.
I understand it fine... and the truth is Jovi's first couple of albums were metal. It's their later work that proved otherwise.
I think the real issue here, is that there was no "hard rock" in the 80s. Hard Rock wouldn't come about until the 90s... when we needed a place to put bands like Def Leppard and Bon Jovi after metal became synonymous with Cannibal Corpse and Metallica.
The key diffrence here, is that GnR didn't fit it with Def Leppard and Bon Jovi... they wheren't those types of guys. After hard-rock was established people tried to shove GnR in there, but that's unjustified as nothing GnR did as a band has anything to do with hard-rock outside of their 'dated' music. But like I said, you can't just strip a band of their title just because time has passed. GnR have the metal attitude... don't they have to be metal band?
I'm saying you're pigeonholing all of a certain set of actions under "metal" when you appear to be pulling them from a different hole.
What? What actions? I've just picked apart sterotypes and pointed out that GnR fits more the metal sterotypes then they do the rock ones. Add that to the intesity of their music compared to the popular music of the time and I don't see how they can be rock.
Once again, Look at the picture. They don't seem like a rock band to me... especially since at the time of that Jovi picture, Jovi where metal. Crappy trendy metal, but metal none the less.
Your goddamn music does not require a lifestyle.
First of all, drop the attitude. I've been nothing but nice and you've done little more that act like an obnoxious twat the entire time. Do you somehow think that your shit-ass attitude makes me think higher of you? I'd probably be more inclined to hear the points you're making if they weren't filled with bullshit remarks like this.
Second, there's no lifestyle to punk? Does this mean Avril is just as punk as Iggy Pop? It's a simple yes or no... if you honestly belive that lifestyle or artist mentallity has nothing to do with the music then you have to say yes.
Playing a fucking triangle for the London Philharmonic then leaving the show to kill a hooker in your hotel room does not make you metal.
Who said it did? This would just make you a murderer... not all murderers are metal heads and not all metal heads are murderers.
