4,393 Forum Posts by "DroopyA"
Wow, that sucked... fucking Notepad. Let me re-post that in a format that doesn't completly suck:
At 2/23/09 01:10 PM, HandsomePete wrote: I guess you missed the part where it was stated how tiresome this argument was
Then why respond. I guess you missed the multiple times that I've politely explained to you that this is all just for mindless entertainment. It's a shame me and you can't just have a friendly discussion without you retaining water and shoving a truck load of sand in your vagina.
1) That's what I mean when I say that Hair Metal doesn't mean the same thing as Metal Metal.
Sure it does... why would hair metal not be considered a form of metal? That's like saying the Rammones aren't punk, they're more like pop rock simply because the standard of punk music has changed over the years. It was punk when they did it... they had a punk rock attitude and they did it to promote the punk rock way of life. Therefor, it's punk rock and it always will be regardless of how many Green Days and Pennywise show up to change the sound of Punk forever.
As far as Bon Jovi are concerned, the only reason they're not considered a metal band is because they progressivly changed to show that metal wasn't the genre they wanted to be associated with. If Slippery When Wet was the last album they ever made, they'd be a metal band... but because Bon Jovi himself, and the band, continued to slow and soften their sound it became blatenly obvious that there was nothing metal about Jovi from either a musical or a lifestlye point of view.
It became clear that Shot through the Heart was more like a trendy fluke then it was a heavy metal statement. Welcome to the Jungle wasn't a trendy cash in on a current radio trend. It was raw, and real... the fact that it sold was just a bonus.
Jovi never wanted to be the most extreme... he never wanted to be the fastest, loudest, or known for being a trouble maker or a party king. There was nothing metal about his attitude, and the majority of his songs and his entire career reflect that. Jovi, isn't metal.
GnR, on the other hand, showed great pride in being obnoxious drunken fucks who didn't care what anyone thought. They got pleasure out of making the front page based on fight fights, not their music. They never changed their look or their sound to cash in... even when love-ballads where hot, GnR never went that route. That's not to say that some of their songs didn't hit as ballads, but I think it's obvious that Sweet Child O Mine and "I'll be there for you" where written for two entirely diffrent reasons. Truth be told, some of the guys in GnR didn't even like Sweet Child O Mine, they just used it cause they needed a song for the album and Axel was fond of it. Had it been up to Slash, nobody would have ever heard that song... It wasn't until the 90s that songs like Don't Cry and November Rain would appear... long after the ballad trend was over.
Jovi was a trend follower. He played the middle road and wrote whatever was popular at the time. When Def Leppard where kicking ass, Jovi wrote "Shot through the heart". When "Every Rose has it's thorn" got big, Jovi wrote "I'll be there for you". He did what he liked, but also did what he knew would sell. There was no extreme anything behind it... it wasn't metal, just trendy.
Jovi is about as metal, as Green Day are punk rock.
Being macabre doesn't make you metal, playing Metal music does.
And GnR didn't play metal music? It's 1985... everyone was listening to Heart. People where so nieve that Dee Snider had to go to court and fight for his right to sing "We're not gonna take it" of all things. Think about it... We're not gonna take it was considered so bad that he had to fight in a court of law for the ability to retain the rights to sing it. He did so for not just Twisted Sister, but all metal bands... hell, any musician who wanted to freely express himself.
If "We're not gonna take it" was so bad and rowdy that it litterally scared Tipper Gore into a frenzy, GnR had to be the work of Satan himself. Screw "we're not gonna take it", Axel was calling everybody N***ers and Faggots, and the albums mandatory parental advisory told everyone to go fuck themself if they where offended by it.
I don't see how we can say "Twisted Sister where metal" but then turn around and say GnR aren't when it's obvious the two share an awful lot in common.
The fact that GnR wore black and used violence and death on their album art is just furture proof of the metal attitude. They're not like Jovi who stumbled into a Hair Metal hit but wore brown vests and had album artwork that featured nothing other then a band logo and a cd name. Bon Jovi fails where the GnR attitude picks up... which is why Jov is rock, and GnR are metal. There is a very clear and distinctive diffrence between the two.
It's strange that someone who claims to be punk rock wouldn't understand this. Are you implying that there is no "punk rock attitude" in the punk rock scene? Are you implying that I would be punk rock if I simply removed the solos from my bands music? Are you implying that even though I hate everything punk rock stands for, and can't stand any of the original punk rock bands, that I'd still be just as punk as you if I played powerchords and covered the occasional No Doubt track?
Blink 182 are just as punk rock as the Sex Pistols? Green Day just as punk as the Clash? The Crass and the Exploited not as punk as the Offspring? Iggy Pop not as punk as Avril Lavigne?
Who are you trying to kid here... your music of choice requires just as much lifestyle dedication as mine, yet you claim not to understand my point? I do hope you can clafiry this for me.
At 2/23/09 01:10 PM, HandsomePete wrote: I guess you missed the part where it was stated how tiresome this argument was
Then why respond. I guess you missed the multiple times that I've politely explained to you that this is all
just for mindless entertainment. It's a shame me and you can't just have a friendly discussion without you
retaining water and shoving a truck load of sand in your vagina.
1) That's what I mean when I say that Hair Metal doesn't mean the same thing as Metal Metal.
Sure it does... why would hair metal not be considered a form of metal? That's like saying the Rammones aren't
punk, they're more like pop rock simply because the standard of punk music has changed over the years. It was
punk when they did it... they had a punk rock attitude and they did it to promote the punk rock way of life.
Therefor, it's punk rock and it always will be regardless of how many Green Days and Pennywise show up to
change the sound of Punk forever.
As far as Bon Jovi are concerned, the only reason they're not considered a metal band is because they
progressivly changed to show that metal wasn't the genre they wanted to be associated with. If Slippery When
Wet was the last album they ever made, they'd be a metal band... but because Bon Jovi himself, and the band,
continued to slow and soften their sound it became blatenly obvious that there was nothing metal about Jovi
from either a musical or a lifestlye point of view.
It became clear that Shot through the Heart was more like a trendy fluke then it was a heavy metal statement.
Welcome to the Jungle wasn't a trendy cash in on a current radio trend. It was raw, and real... the fact that
it sold was just a bonus.
Jovi never wanted to be the most extreme... he never wanted to be the fastest, loudest, or known for being a
trouble maker or a party king. There was nothing metal about his attitude, and the majority of his songs and
his entire career reflect that. Jovi, isn't metal.
GnR, on the other hand, showed great pride in being obnoxious drunken fucks who didn't care what anyone
thought. They got pleasure out of making the front page based on fight fights, not their music. They never
changed their look or their sound to cash in... even when love-ballads where hot, GnR never went that route.
That's not to say that some of their songs didn't hit as ballads, but I think it's obvious that Sweet Child O
Mine and "I'll be there for you" where written for two entirely diffrent reasons. Truth be told, some of the
guys in GnR didn't even like Sweet Child O Mine, they just used it cause they needed a song for the album and
Axel was fond of it. Had it been up to Slash, nobody would have ever heard that song... It wasn't until the
90s that songs like Don't Cry and November Rain would appear... long after the ballad trend was over.
Jovi was a trend follower. He played the middle road and wrote whatever was popular at the time. When Def
Leppard where kicking ass, Jovi wrote "Shot through the heart". When "Every Rose has it's thorn" got big, Jovi
wrote "I'll be there for you". He did what he liked, but also did what he knew would sell. There was no extreme
anything behind it... it wasn't metal, just trendy.
Jovi is about as metal, as Green Day are punk rock.
Being macabre doesn't make you metal, playing Metal music does.
And GnR didn't play metal music? It's 1985... everyone was listening to Heart. People where so nieve that Dee
Snider had to go to court and fight for his right to sing "We're not gonna take it" of all things. Think about
it... We're not gonna take it was considered so bad that he had to fight in a court of law for the ability to
retain the rights to sing it. He did so for not just Twisted Sister, but all metal bands... hell, any musician
who wanted to freely express himself.
If "We're not gonna take it" was so bad and rowdy that it litterally scared Tipper Gore into a frenzy, GnR had
to be the work of Satan himself. Screw "we're not gonna take it", Axel was calling everybody N***ers and
Faggots, and the albums mandatory parental advisory told everyone to go fuck themself if they where offended by
it.
I don't see how we can say "Twisted Sister where metal" but then turn around and say GnR aren't when it's
obvious the two share an awful lot in common.
The fact that GnR wore black and used violence and death on their album art is just furture proof of the metal
attitude. They're not like Jovi who stumbled into a Hair Metal hit but wore brown vests and had album artwork
that featured nothing other then a band logo and a cd name. Bon Jovi fails where the GnR attitude picks up...
which is why Jov is rock, and GnR are metal. There is a very clear and distinctive diffrence between the two.
It's strange that someone who claims to be punk rock wouldn't understand this. Are you implying that there is
no "punk rock attitude" in the punk rock scene? Are you implying that I would be punk rock if I simply removed
the solos from my bands music? Are you implying that even though I hate everything punk rock stands for, and
can't stand any of the original punk rock bands, that I'd still be just as punk as you if I played powerchords
and covered the occasional No Doubt track?
Blink 182 are just as punk rock as the Sex Pistols? Green Day just as punk as the Clash? The Crass and the
Exploited not as punk as the Offspring? Iggy Pop not as punk as Avril Lavigne?
Who are you trying to kid here... your music of choice requires just as much lifestyle dedication as mine, yet
you claim not to understand my point? I do hope you can clafiry this for me.
Starcraft.
The Use Map Settings and the free Map Editor make it better then anything else out.
It was OK. I had just started to get into it when I got robbed. I had cleared out all of the Oblviion gates and gathered my army for the final seige when my 360 was stolen. Needless to say, I lost to save file and just haven't had the time, or the want, to start all over.
Which is my biggest problem with the game... it's too big. There's not quick way to do anything. Everything you do, will always take weeks of your life.
It's decent, but it doesn't look good enough for a DS title. It looks boring and pointless to be honest.
It could be fun, but it looks dated. Maybe he should apply for a WiiWare thing or some form of XBox Live distribution. If anything, publish it for the PC. Release it online and publish it himself... he's already gotten all the PR he needs. If his game is fun, word of mouth would carry it from there.
Maybe if the DL sales pick up, Nintendo might finally give in to his demands.
I don't play online much... but personally, I despise sniper riffles. I find any game that features snipers is usually unfun.
There's always 17 people fighting over who gets the gun and the entire game revolves around people camping in a window and hundreds of unseen, unavoidable deaths from an unskilled player half a map away.
I find games are more fun when they force everyone in close quarters with equal weapons. Sniper rifles have their place, but they're getting far too popular for my taste and I find that most games would be more fun if you could (or people actually would) just simply turn them off.
I think the end of racism will come not by forcing people to not make notice of race, but when everybody realises that it's just a fact of life and means little so lets have fun with it.
If you make it taboo, it'll always seem like the forbidden fruit. The racist jokes will be funnier and the desire to tell them greater because they present a greater shock.
If everybody would just realize race doesn't matter and just learn to laugh at themselfs and each other, no one joke would be any worse then the next and people would just give up on picking on race only because it doesn't provide any added bonus... no shock points.
In the rare case race jokes do appear, they're interipted as just simply a "joke" and nobody every thinks racisim is a part of it. Joking a black guy is the same as joking a white guy and thus racisim kills itself.
You can't force racisim out of existance... it only dies through complete and utter acceptance. Accpetance means excepting both the positive and the negitive aspects of the culture.
When some black comedian makes a black movie where all the white characters are stuck up nerds and business men nobody complaigns... so why bitch when it happens the other way around? Sounds like the only racism here, is coming from you.
When I was little I always wanted to be a successful business man... like a Donald Trump. I wanted to be an entrepreneur of some sort, own some business... make money off the hard work of others while I stay at home and sleep with supermodels in the backseat of one of my many rare sports cars.
But as I got older I realized money and items weren't so important. It's just stuff and none of it makes you a better person. Now days, I don't really have any goals or ambition. I just go where fate takes me and I ask for just enough to live. Anything more then that falls under the category of greed and I'd rather do without it.
The only expenses I really justify are video games and musical equipment. But everybody has to have a hobby right?
At 2/23/09 12:34 PM, DonchizzleJr766 wrote: America would be less fat.
Big Macs aren't made out of chocolate.
Makes sense... white people are the majority where I live. It's not a racist thing, just a fact.
If I was in Africa I would probably specify only the white race as the majority of the people are black, thus it's safe to assume that the general term "guy" refers to your average guy... which wold be black. A White guy here would be out of the ordinary and thus worth specifying.
Saying "some black guy pushed me in africa" wouldn't make much sense. It's like saying "Some guy with eyes pushed me".
You would try to define a person by a unique trait... not a common one. A one armed man, a midget, a black guy, etc...
Sorry for the double post, didn't have enough room last time for the links.
At 2/21/09 03:17 AM, Lost-Thought wrote: metal song: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JAagedeKd cQ
Judas Priest PainKiller - released in 1990.
hard rock song: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btLRy4EHF 0k&feature=related
Guns N Roses - Paradise City, released in 1987. Written by the band in the back of a van on their way home from a gig... possibly places it's written date in 1986. Regardless, we have a 3 or 4 year diffrence... not much of a fair comparison.
On the other hand, here's a Judas Priest song from 88.
If that is metal, Rocketqueen and Nightrain have to be.
At 2/20/09 04:44 PM, HandsomePete wrote: Look, I'm not here calling you an idiot or making fun of you, but again, I don't know why you'd ask a question to which you're clearly not ready to hear the answer.
Maybe, just maybe... it's because I wanted to be friendly and talk to new people about everyday things like music. Why is that so hard to understand? Why do you feel that everything has to be a serious life-or-death situation in which there can only be one answer? And why do you feel that I'm the one not listening when you're just as easily refusing to take into account anything I've said? Why would you reply to a topic to which you clearly weren't ready to hear the response?
This is a debate... what else where you expecting? It wouldn't be much of a topic if I responded to the first person who posted here with "I agree" would it?
We've gotten 3 pages of fun out of it and we've managed to kill a fair amount of time. Isn't the the point of a forum? Also, this is the last time I'm explaining this... if you can't have a friendly conversation with me then just simply don't respond. I refuse to waist any more time trying to expalin to you the basics of human communication nor do I want my topic revereted from music to a pointless flame war because you don't know how to be polite. From hear on out, if it's not about GnR or the diffrences between metal and rock, you will get no response.
I hate to pull the trump card, but Bon Jovi was once considered a Hair Metal band.
But only for a short time. Nothing else Bon Jovi ever did was metal... he had a few hit songs that seemed to match the metal genra of the time but none of the rest of his songs or albums ever followed suit. Bon Jovi also never carried the heavy metal attitude or garnered a heavy metal fan base. Bon Jovi wasn't on the road with Antrhax or Metallica and I'm not sure you would find a single metal fan on the planet who would consider anything Bon Jovi did as "metal".
See, this is where the 'attitude' comes in. Bon Jovi didn't act the part... they didn't look the part either. They very lightly touched on playing the part, but they didn't sell it to those who where involved in the metal scene nor did they garner their fame through heavy metal antics or tours with other heavy metal groups. Bon Jovi are rock.
And please, for the love of Shiva, quit using the "toured with Metallica" defense.
Why? Why would I just drop a key argument in my case? Because you don't have anything to play against it? That's not fair... I'm not just going to bow down and hand you the debate simply because you're not creative enough to come up with anything to debate against it. I would consider GnR and Metallic tour a key part in why GnR are a metal band. Once again, if they weren't metal, metal fans wouldn't want to hear them and they wouldn't have been co-headliners on the biggest touring metal show since Ozzfest.
Big name tours have more to do with business than they do with talent or genre.
Madonna was more popular then metallica... Metallica didn't tour with Madonna. Genre has a lot to do with it.
You asked people what they thought. This isn't about you.
Actually, it is. It's my topic. Maybe, for once, this isn't about you... did you ever stop to think about that?
Pump was about as artistic as the Jonas Brothers.
You missed the point. Metal bands are known for their dark and twisted album artwork. It's like a staple in the metal genra. Where rock bands like Aerosmith have album covers featuring toys or two trucks questionably humping, metal bands use skulls, death, and violent crimes to sell their artwork.
GnRs album artwork featured murder and rape. That's a 'metal' album cover... when that was too much, it was replaced with the color black and skulls... also big features for metal bands. If GnR was a rock band, their album artwork probably would have been just a logo (ALa: Van Halen) or some random, unoffensive image like an empty city street.
play in a band who's every song is about Necrophilia... So are we metal?
Possibly... it would depend on the content. If the lyrics are extremely graphic, generally offensive, and show little or no respect for the victems and the decesased while possibly makeing the criminal appear to be the hero, then yes... you are a metal band. Even if you wear sweater vests and play accoustic guitars, if your lyrical content offends the masses, then you're most likely metal as you're doing to make people mad, not because you actually want to spread a message.
If your lyrics are deep and used to spread awareness for the situation at hand then probably not. You still could be if your music reflects one of the extremes of the metal genra... but if you're not that loud or fast then you're just rock or punk. Metal isn't a black and white genre like other forms of music. Metal is more about the attitude then it is the music. That's why metal can range from Hair-metal, to black-metal and cover everything inbetween, including jazz, tecno, and just mathmatics-based noise.
At 2/20/09 05:57 PM, EpicFail wrote: Judas Priest is metal...
Guns N Roses are more rock...
Why? What makes Judas Preist more metal then GnR? How is "breakin' the law" heavier then Welcome to the Jungle or Rocketqueen?
At 2/20/09 06:44 PM, OverCynicalBlasphemy wrote: Or to keep the OP from arguing that Bon Jovi is metal its like saying Jonas Brothers are hard rock cause they play guitar or that FOB is good just because they have a lot of fans.
Why would I agrue Bon Jovi are metal? Where did that even come from? Until now, I've never even mentioned Bon Jovi. HandomePete did... and he claimed they where metal, not me. I know you where trying to insult me, but thanks for the support... I'm glad to see that we both agree that Bon Jovi aren't metal. Too bad this topic isn't about Bon Jovi huh?
At 2/20/09 07:06 PM, wildfire4461 wrote: Metal is not about the sound, it's about the ATTITUDE (then maybe the sound).
Agreed... metal is an attitude. That's why the metal genra has so many sub-categories... it's why you can have both hair and black metal... because metal fans realize that it's not the particular style of the song that makes it metal, but the attitude behind the music. GnR did not match the Rock n Roll attitude of 1985. They where metal heads... and other metal heards saw and respected that. Which why GnR albums sold to metal fans which is why GnR albums had metal album artwork, and it's why GnR where able to co-headline with the biggest name to ever hit the heavy metal genra without tanking or completly bombing out.
At 2/20/09 07:12 PM, DeIirium wrote: Man what the fuck are you talking about, no music genre is defined by attitude, of course its the sound.
What's the sound of heavy metal then? Keep in mind, the sound you describe needs to match all forms of metal, not just trash or progressive metal. What one sound can incompass Mortician, Candiria, Pantera, Disturbed, and Dimmu Borgir?
Also what exactly is the "metal attitude"? I´ve never heard of this shit.
I like to think of it as simply "not giving a fuck and doing what it takes to have fun". Pushing the limits and not paying any mind to what others think of you. It's sort of like punk rock, but without the bullshit "anti-establishment" message. metal heads don't care enough to take up a cause... we're too busy having fun to care about how much money a complete stranger makes off of wal-mart a day.
At 2/21/09 12:22 AM, OverCynicalBlasphemy wrote: You are so obviously the OP's alt.
My alt is "lolomfgisuck". I only use it when I feel like trolling. Just ask the mods if you don't believe me.
At 2/21/09 01:14 AM, Armadilldo wrote: double bass drumming
Black Sabbath
heavily palm muted, power chord based riffs
Power Chords? This is metal, not punk.
non- girly vocals
Iron Maiden?
manly lyrics
Dio-Rainbow in the dark?
horrendous profanity
I can't even quote the one in a million lyrics here, NG won't let me post if I do. Also: GnR Advisory sticker told those offended to "Fuck off". Signed G n F'n Roses
At 2/20/09 03:51 PM, HandsomePete wrote: The MUSIC says metal. Doesn't anyone remember the Onyx/Biohazard tag team in the early 90's?... Actually, chances are no, but I do. Biohazard was still Metal afterward, and Onyx was still rap. Billy Corgan used to hang out with Marilyn Manson.. Are either of them in the same genre? No.
What are you talking about? How does a collaberation on one song have anything to do with Guns N Roses living a heavy metal life style and selling their music to heavy metal fans? Anthrax did a song with Public Enemy and Michael Jackson joined forces with Lionel Richie and Kenny Loggins to record "We are the world". So what?
I think you're missing my point about just how big it was to co-headline with Metallica. We're talking about shows that go so out of hand people got trampled to death and riots ensued. Seriously... riots.
I see tons of shit bands playing with bands I wanna see. Not saying that GnR is shit, per say.
This was Metallica and Guns N Roses. It could have been Metallica and Slayer... or Metallica and Anthrax... but it wasn't because metal heads wanted to see Guns N Roses more.
Because to be Hair Metal, you need the word HAIR in there... Haven't you ever taken that test? How long was the 100 years war? What is Cat Gut made of? It's a bunch of misnomers.
It's still a form of metal. Are you implying Metallica aren't metal because the word Thrash or Speed comes first?
Gaaah... Nooooo... Ok, fuck it, I'm done point by pointing this... You asked whether people thought GnR was metal or not, and aren't listening to any of the argument.
You're not exactly hearing anything I say either. I've yet to hear you say... "good point" so from where I'm sitting, you're easly just as guilty as me. Besides, did you actually think this conversation would change anyones mind? It's the internet... and worse yet, it's Newgrounds. How serious did you think this was going to get? I just want to debate it because I'm bored and have nothing else to do. It's been a good time killer for the both of us and I'm sorry if you're getting upset instead of just having fun.
If you'd have started with "Guns and Roses is the best metal band ever"
Why would I say that? That's not true at all. In fact, that's not even what I'm trying to argue... I don't care if you think they're good, I just want you to admit that they're a metal band.
And what's with all the "Rape victim" shit?
The original artwork to the Appitite album featured a robot in a trench coat raping a helpless blond on the side of the street. The picture feaurted pantys around the ankle and everything. It caused a big controversy and some stores refused to sell the album. Other stores where preassured to place brown bags over the front of the records. It was later changed to a tattoo that Axel had previously gotten on his arm of him and his bandmates in skull form.
I think it's an important peice in the argument for them being metal as having offensive album art is usually a staple for metal bands.... where as rock groups usually aim for something more artistic or random (IE: Aerosmith with Pump). Guns N Roses took the Cannible Corpse approach here and put monsters and rape on the front of their album. When that was removed, Skulls followed. That's something metal bands do... not rock bands.
What are you even talking about, some girl that got beat up, (probably by Axel, given his past) and somehow that makes them Metal?
...see, as I said earlier... everyone who disagrees with me is either too young to have seen and heard GnR when it was new, or just foolish. I'll consider your lack of knowledge about the early GnR contorversy days as "foolish".
At 2/20/09 01:53 PM, Platinum wrote: OP is an idiot and refuses to accept that calling GnR metal is like calling Beastie Boys rap.
That's so odd... because to me, it's balently clear that GnR are not a rock band. Maybe it's because I was alive in 1985 to see it all go down. It's funny, because I don't recall anybody standing in line for hours to get their hands on a copy of use your Illusions at midnight listening to Phil Collins.
1985 was along time ago... Aerosmith wouldn't release Pump for four more years... and it's most rocking songs would be "Janies got a gun" and "Love in an Elevator". Ride the Lightining had just been released but has yet to reach the top 100 on the Billboard charts. Metallica are touring Europe opening up for a band called "Tank" to shows with an average of 1,000 people in the audience. Wham are toping the billboard charts with Madonna's "Like a Virgin" in a close second. Bryan Adams has just released "Heaven" and Freddy Cougar is just about to see his first sequal. We've yet to go Back to the Future, "Teen Wolf" seemed like a good idea for a movie, and MTV is barely 3 years old.
Van Halen are just becoming Van Hagar and your parents think Def Lepord are too loud. The fashion on the streets involves neon and the current trend in Rock and Roll is leg warmers and big hair. Songs about dancing currently make the most money. Metal is sonanomous with Kiss, nobody has yet to scream their vocals, and Bruce Dickenson is the voice of metal. Eddie, is our god. Twisted Sister are the devil and Dee Snider is about to go to court and testify in front Al and Tipper Gore in order to defend his right to be able to continue singing such offensive songs as "We're not gonna take it".
Somewhere out there... Guns N Roses are wearing black leather and shooting herion to the point where they can't even stand. Axel is drunk and throwing beer bottles at a guy in the audience who said something about someones mother, and their about to click off into any number of classic songs found on the appitite for destruction album... except Sweet Child O Mine, it has yet to be written. The audience is small but loyal, and most of the people there are long haired stoners wearing blue jean sleavless jackets with metal band patches swen into the back. There's not a Bryan Adams fan in the house...
I don't see how GnR can be Rock and Roll in this world. It just doesn't make sense... they don't fit in with the other bands in the Rock Category. The media hates them and often blames them for things that aren't their fault, none of the members care about press or promotion, and all of them seem to enjoy pissing everybody off and just generally getting into trouble. 5 years from now Appitite for Destruction will win Favorite Heavy Metal album at the American Music Awards and the band will follow up the win with Favorite heavy Metal artist later that night. 2 years later, they would Co-Headline a tour with Metallica.
It just doesn't sound the like the career of a rock band.
OP is a genius and I agree 100%.
+1 supporter.
At 2/19/09 08:29 PM, HandsomePete wrote:You do realize GnR toured with Metallica right? As a second headliner...Sooooo... that makes GnR Metal? How about when Aerosmith and Run DMC worked together, is Aerosmith a rap group now?
Yeah, it does make GnR metal... not all by itself, but it is proof that they're more metal then rock. GnR was a bunch of long-haired tatooed leather and chain wearing drug users with skulls and rape victems on the front of their albums featuring loud, fast songs with multiple ear-peircing solos about casual sex and the late-night underground drug scene who fist fought their front row fans durring their headling tour with the biggest band in Heavy Metal since... well... ever.
All of that says 'Metal'... not just the tour. But the tour is a big peice of it... Metallica weren't the peice of shit they are now. This tour took place durring the highlight of their career... they could have toured with anyone... and the only other band that could pull in enough metal heads to make it worth their while, was Guns N Roses. That says METAL lound and clear to me.
If GnR weren't a metal band, Metal heads wouldn't have wanted to see them and they would have never been able to tour with the biggest metal band in the world.
If you're still considering GnR Metal...
Still? Why would I not STILL consider them metal? Once again why do we boot musicians out of their musical genra just because they retired? Why do you STILL consider Black Sabbath metal but you won't give that same respect to GNR? Why are GNR listed as a band that "was" metal, but isn't anymore when that same standard doesn't apply to any other band on the planet?
This has to stop here... bands can't be removed from their genra due to age. Twisted Sister, Sabbath, Iron Maiden, will all always be metal bands regardless of what year it is. It's all about respect... they laid the groundwork for your metal bands today. Don't strip them of their purple heart just because their war is over.
Because, like I said, it was never really "Metal," it was hard rock. Hair Metal is about as Metal as Soft Rock is Rock.
How can you say that? Do you not feel that attitude has anything to do with it? Then you know nothing of metal... if attitude doesn't make a metal band then why are Candiria considered metal when they actually play more freeform jazz then anything? Why is a jazzy metal band still a metal band?
The freaking Police were heavier than Bruce Springstein.
Agreed, and Bruce Springstein is what people considered Rock n Roll in that time period. If that lame ass old woman shit is rock, then GnR have got to be metal.
Sabbat is heavier than GnR and it had a totally different sound scheme and dynamic. Modern metal has much more in common with the likes of Electric Funeral. GnR didn't do stuff like that.
I don't care about modern metal... I mean, I do... but not in this conversation. GnR aren't a modern band, they died out in the mid 90s. They started in the mid 80s. It's all about what was considered metal in 85.
1985... Prince, Madonna, Wham, Heart, Pat Benetar, Phil Collins, Duran Duran, Sting, Tears for Fears, Mr Mister, Foreigner, Dire Straits, ZZ Top... I'm pretty sure GnR where way more Hardcore then these groups. I'd consider that metal.
There is no reason to consider Poison Metal.
WHAT? Why not? Is Hair Metal no longer a form of metal? So what is metal then... Slipknot? I mean, they play fast and have screaming vocals... according to you, that seems to be all that matters. Sorry Judas Preist... :(
Second though on this... doesn't the existance of Hair Metal and GnRs strange absense from the genra make them more metal?No. That makes absolutely no sense.
Sure it does. "Your Mamma don't dance" and "Rocket Queen" have a real similar style and feel... yet one song was done by a bunch of guys in high heels and makeup, while the other was written by a bunch of heroin addicts.
I say this... because it's important to note that music isn't the only thing that defines a band. The attitude of the members counts just as much. And although GnR weren't as wild as Slayer musically, the attitude and their utter disgust for the modern trends in society is what drove them into the deeper realms of metal. It was obvious Slash and Axel weren't pretty boys... it was obvious that they wanted nothing to do with the glam-rock scene. They where the same as Metallica... but with a diffrent style. They where ugly, dirty, fuck ups that wanted to do little more then play loud, get fucked up, and have a good time. That's heavy metal... thats why heavy metal fans listened to them... that's why they are a heavy metal band.
Not that it should even matter... once again, Poision = Glam METAL. If Poision are a form of metal, GnR have to be too.
The music was still pretty similar, which should really be the basis of your claims,
It is... Hair metal is metal... GnR where heavier then that. They weren't as heavy as Metallica but they where heavier then Posion. Poision < GnR < Metallica.
Posion = metal
GnR = metal
Metallica = metal
GnR are a metal band. Always have been, always will be. If the music doesn't say it on it's own, the bands look (or lack there of), attitude, and history should prove otherwise.
Axel came out in baseball catcher's equipment or something like that half of the time... Come on...
And? Are you implying that no metal band has ever worn some silly costume on stage? Alice Cooper, Manson, and Gwar would probably argue otherwise.
And there were plenty of hair metal bands who threw skulls and crap on their shit.
Here's a Poison T-Shirt
Wow... a metal band with metal icons on their Shirt... go figure. Poison are a metal band... got a Lisa Lobe shirt featuring a raped corpse?
ADAM is like money... well, not really, but that's the best way to think of it. They explain more later.
Right now, all you need to know is that with ADAM you can buy new powers... things like shooting fire from your hand and whatnot. Killing the girls provides you with more ADAM... it's been a while but if I remember correctly , saving the girls still gives you ADAM, just not as much.
The choice is yours and effects the end of the game. But do one or the other... there is an ending if you save some and kill some, but it's pretty much the same ending you get when you kill them all so don't waist your time with that.
Game looks absolutly amazing.
Being a fan of Katamari it makes me wish I owned a PS3... if I did, I would call in sick to DL this title just to play it all day long in complete and utter happiness.
Even that video made me joyful.
I love 'em... they add replay value to games, encourage exploration or experimentation with in-game features you might have otherwise missed, and it gives you a sense of acomplishment for going out of your way to do something in a video game.
Best yet, is that it provides proof that you actually did it. Gone are the days of the NES where everyone had claimed to beaten Ninja Gaiden without knowing who actually did, and who just saw a screenshot of the ending in the latest issue of Nintendo Power.
My only complaint is that online achivements aren't seperated from Single player achivements. I hate it when it looks like I didn't do shit in a video game I crushed simply because 47 of the 50 achievements involve online play... something I don't frequently take part in.
It would be nicer if gamerscores read something like:
Single Player: 11,540 / 20,000
Multiplayer: 100 / 20,000
But since the score doesn't really mean anything, I'm not worried if that doesn't happen.
At 2/19/09 03:48 PM, Jackho wrote: yeah i rented this game and once i realized how crap and short it was i quickly flew trough the storyline and got all acheivements and then eagarly got rid of it
Same... two more chapters to go. Hopefully I finish it tonight.
It's not terrible, it's just not any fun. It's like the worst parts of every video game shoved into one title. There's a lot of pointless conversation with needless responses to sort through... bad mini games that involve finding hidden items and math, avoiding unkillable enemies, keeping track of how much fire you have, etc...
Don't get me wrong, none of it is difficult, but it's still there. It's predictible and doesn't feature much variety. Every chapter requires a trip through the jungle... which turns out to be a mini-game of finding markers on trees while avoiding black smoke or invisible gunmen.
A journey through a dark section of map, which requires constantly lighting tourches and lighters...
or those damn fuse boxes, which is something I wish I had time for in the original post.
For those that don't know, the game features this terrible puzzle based min game dealing with an electrical circut and a series of fuses. Basically you're given a circut board but the intersection of the diffrent circuts are missing their connecting fuses. You have a few diffrent types of fuses to choose from, each fuse diverts the electrical current in diffrent ways (some will just make them turn, other are 3 or 4 way splitters). Each fuse eats up a bit of the electric current though... so the idea is to figure out how to get the current to it's destination while still maintaing enough power to power whatever it is you're trying to supply power to.
So you'll start with 100. If you now use a 4-Way fuse you'll lose 15 power. So the power in the other 3 directions is now 85. A left turn fuse is 5 points... so if you use this on the top current your top current will be 80 while the other two will still be 85. My ending box needs 65 power... so the goal is to figure out how to not only stear the power to the end, but with the right peices to keep the power 65 of higher.
Maybe it's because I don't watch the show... but I don't understand why that's there. I mean, it's unfun and doesn't seem to apply to the TV show in any way, shape, or form... it's like the developers needed to create their own mini-game and for some reason thought Math Problems where the way to go. It's just one more annoying thing that's kind of easy, but completly unfun to do.
So far the story has been hit or miss. I'm going to wait until it's over before I pass a judgment on it, but so far it seems pretty bland and kind of predictible. Maybe there's going to be a decent shocker at the end... but so far I haven't really seen or found anything out that's really made me want to keep playing. As it stands now, I could be happy just guessing as to how it ends.
On the other hand, from what little I know of the show, it seems like the devs did a really good job putting in key show locations. I would think that's probably worth something... you get to take part in some key points in the show... not to spoil anything but at one point you even have to enter in the Numbers in the computer. It was stupid and pretty unexciting from a gaming point of view... but from a fan point of view, I bet that was pretty cool. I could see a lot of non-gamers being pretty stoked over things like that.
It's a good rental if your a fan... maybe worth 10 bucks.
At 2/19/09 01:04 PM, HandsomePete wrote: Hair Metal
Second though on this... doesn't the existance of Hair Metal and GnRs strange absense from the genra make them more metal?
I mean... Hair Metal bands wore makeup, made themself look pretty, and spent a lot of time on flashy stage shows and backstage anticts with strippers. But GnR weren't that... when the trend in metal was to wear pink and sink about having a "good time", GnR where wearing black leather and drinking themself into fist fights. Their songs where about massive drug use and their album artwork featured skulls and rape victems.
Doesn't that say "heavy metal" loud and clear? They played faster, they played louder, and they refused to give a fuck about public image or joining in on the current trends. Even their artwork had the popular metal imagry... skulls and rape victems.
At 2/19/09 01:04 PM, HandsomePete wrote: That doesn't change my response at all though. Metallica in the 80s was metal:
You do realize GnR toured with Metallica right? As a second headliner...
There's a reason the new nickname for Hair Metal is Cock Rock.
I've never heard anyone refer to a Cock Rock band... although the term Hair METAL is still widly popular. The key word there, is METAL. I fail to see how a band is no longer metal just because time has passed... older bands aren't going to be as heavy as the newer ones... they're old and don't write new music, thus it's impossible to keep up with the modern changes. But to strip a metal band of it's metal title just because they retired is bullshit. We don't do that to sport-stars or presidents... why would do it to musicians?
In 1985 Bruce Springstein was Rock n Roll... I think it's fair to say GnR where a lot heavier then that, thus rendering them Metal. Keep in mind Metallica and Slayer where Thrash metal... I hate to be a sub-genra guy but it is important here. Metal didn't start with Metallica, it just got faster. Sabbath started the metal movement in the 70s... and there are, and where, plenty of metal bands that didn't need to speed pick their way into the genra. I would think GnR is one that fits in nicely. If we can rank Poision as a form of metal, I think GnR deserve their place without argument.
At 2/19/09 02:05 PM, Nessbeatsfox wrote: Well first of all, why does it matter. If you like them, why should the specific genre apply?
It doesn't... I just want to hold a conversation with other human beings for the sake of killing time. It's a pointless, friendly debate.... not everything in life has to be a serious life-and-death situation. It is possible to just talk about things for the fun of it, you know?
Second, "metal" is "some form of rock". So if they are metal, then they are rock.
Not falling for this. There are genras of music for a reason... it's because one form IS NOT the same as another. There is a diffrence between metal and rock... just because one inspired the other doesn't mean they are the same in the end. Rock was inspired by country, does that mean Mortician are a country a band?
I got a few games for Christmas but I've yet to have time to play them all. Fallout 3 has seen less then 2 hours of play, and Gears of War 2 still sets on my shelf unopened... because of this, I decided now was the time to use my GameFly subscription for something other then games I think will be good... I want something short and easy... something I can beat in a few days and send back so I can get back to playing games I got for Christmas. I wanted to use my "free game rental" for something stupid... something diffrent. I'm looking for a unique experiance... even if I know it'll come at the cost of fun gameplay mechanics.
This time around, I opted for LOST: Via Domus.
It's based off the popular TV show which, until now, I knew little to nothing about. My mother use to watch it so I saw the odd episode here and there when I would go visit. Something about a smoke monster, some numbers, a fat guy that I really liked even though I knew nothing about him, etc... I figured the game would be an interesting way to dive into the pop-culture trend. Worse case scenario, I get a few laughs and some easy achivements.
For those who know nothing, a little backstory. As I understand it, everybody was on an airplane that crashes over the ocean. Most of the people die but a small handfull survive. Strangly enough, all of the survivors have some shady history to uncover, and sometimes, their shady pasts intertwine with each other. The real problem, is that you're not alone on the island. There's are other people there... hostile people that may be trying to kill all of you. These people are now refered to as "the others".
The idea of the game is that you, the player, is on Flight [whatever] when it crashes on the island. The catch, is that you can't remember anything about your past... not even your own name. This causes some confusion with the other survivors as to wether or not you're even a survivor... how do they know you're not one of "the others" just faking amnesia as a way to infiltrate their camp?
I'll start here by saying that I really enjoyed this approach to the game. It allows you to explore the island from a first-person perspective (even though the game is 3rd person view) and really makes you feel like you're a part of the show. I can imagine this would be a big feature to actual fans of the show... it opens up the island and makes it feel more personal since it places you at the heart of the experiance instead of opting to force you into the role of an already existing character.
But the game immediatly shows its flaws. For starters, there is zero character customization. Considering it's a low-budget game for a TV show I can see the absense of a face sculpting application... but having zero customization for a game that places YOU as the main character seems highly disapointing. You get nothing... there is no way to change clothes, get a haircut, or add a tattooe. You don't even get to choose a skin tone or sex. If you're a black girl looking to be placed on the island... too bad... better prepare yourself to become a white guy, and fast... because that's your only option.
If anything, I would think adding a character select menu would be obvious... even if it's just between a male and female model.
Regardless, the game itself actually looks alright. The rendered scenes are sharp and the editing is done in a way that resembles television shows. Story scenes are detailed with a lot of character interaction and each chatper/stage of the game starts off with a "Last time on Lost..." short that highlights all of the events of the previous chapters. It's a nice touch but something about it slightly off that makes me feel as if the game was desigined with the idea that players would stop playing for a while after every stage.
If you try to play two or three stages in a row, you're forced to re-watch the same cut scenes almost back to back... which is odd and feels broken even though it's techincally by design. I guess this is something that may seem more 'in-place' if I had actually watched the show. But from a gamers point of view, it's a little odd.
Gameplay is pretty simple. The map features the same open-worldness as a Fable game... the map looks huge and you can sort of go anywhere you want whenever, but each map is blocked off into smaller sections by uncrossable obsticles. So although it looks like you can just wonder off into the forest, you can't... you'll only take a few steps before bumping into a big rock or a downed tree... leaving you stuck to a pretty narrow and pre-determined path. To make matters worse, a lot of the time you won't be allowed to leave an area until you've completed your local tasks. Going the wrong way or getting too far off track will result in a "I have to get my bearing" message and a reloading of the screen... turning your character around and now allowing him to leave.
It's not bad... it's not broken... it's just not good. It's your typical 'game based off a show' type of design. I get the real distinctive feeling that the game was purposly dumbed down so that everybody, including your mother and little sister, could play without too much frustration. Although that's probably a wise choice from a marketing standpoint, it really hurts the game as it closes out a lot of the fun of exploring and really kills the feel of being placed on a big empty island. Instead, it's more like taking a walk through a wildlife preservation.
The game is broken up into seven diffrent stages. Each stage consists of 6 smaller checkpoints that tell a section of your characters story. It sounds advanced, but it's really not... although most of the checkpoints require some form of challenge, some are as easy as talking to a survivor or leaving a room.
A typical gameplay run will start you off on the beach... survivors thrown about the island. Some in their homemade huts, others at "the hatch" (if you know what that is). You have a diary that helps keep track of what you remember and what you need to do. You'll get a small quest update at the start that provides you with your first hint to your first task. Usually this involves going somewhere and talking to somebody.
Talking to people is simple... there are no RPG elements to the game so it doesn't matter what you say as you can always re-talk to everybody and re-say everything as many times as you want. This is my favorite part of the game because each reply has a custom animation... and each character has strange in-game quirks about them. Hurley likes to give me the sex eyes... while the black guy had this weird head bobble going on after he finished his sentances.
Eventually somebody will say something that will trigger a flashback. Here you'll be given peices of a broken picture before being tossed back in time. At this point you'll have to use your camera to re-snap the photo seen before the flashback started. Getting the picture will allow you to remember what happened and unlock a peice of your past. Don't worry if you miss the photo though, you get as many tries as you want and there is zero punishment for being wrong.
The only other gameplay mechanic is manevering the jungle. Which is as simple as walking up to amarker on the tree and examining it. It'll give you a hint to where the next marker is... follow the markers, reach your destiniation. You can die here... often times this is where you get chased by "the others" and once, even the smoke-monster. It's pretty easy and only a challenge if you overthink the situation.
I'm almost out of room so I'll make this quick... also, there are dark caves. You have to always have a light as beeing in the dark for too long will get you killed. You have a lighter, you just have to turn it off and on when you see water, bats, or it gets too hot. Also, you can buy torches... you can't jump and running doesn't control well so you just walk and take it easy... reach the end of the cave to complete this task.
It's ok... good rental if you're a fan of the show. Pretty mediocore for everyone else. It's a real laid back title.
5 out of 10.
At 2/19/09 11:47 AM, ForNoReason wrote: does that many people still care about GNR? I would consider them light metal, seeings as the genre of metal has evolved so much since GNR originally came out...
Not to me... Metal is a way of life, and if you where metal you still are metal. Black Sabbath is easily just as dated, yet nobody questions them as a metal band so why the double standard for GNR?
At 2/19/09 11:50 AM, CaptainDonutRanger wrote:
There isn't a real thing that depicts metal, rather than heaviness.
I would disagree here again... lots of metal bands have something to offer other then just heaviness. Iron Maiden and Dragonforce come to mind. Now true, those guys are a tad bit heavier then say, Creed, but they're still not what I would consider 'heavy' when you agknowledge the existance of bands like Vehemence or Cannibal Corpse.
At this point, you have to ask what it is that makes a band metal... is it the speed? Then how can bands like Crowbar be metal? Is it the screaming vocals? Then why are Black Sabbath and Iron Maiden metal?
To me, metal is all about attitude... it's like the blues in the sense that you can't just play the blues, you have to be the blues. A metal band is metal because of the attitude they present with their music. If the band is doing what they're doing because they want to shock people, set new standards, or just simply because they don't care enough about other peoples opinions to realize that their sound is outrageous and awkword... then it's metal. I think GNR fit nicely into this category... if you look at GNR as a whole, you'll notice that they never really tried to please anyone. Everything from the album art and lyrical content to the look and escapades of the members of them self wreaks of "Fuck you"... and the music that comes from that has to be metal. It's the only thing all metal bands have in common.
just like ACDC is just barley on the border of hard rock...
My point exactly... AC/DC are rock simply because they don't have the heavy metal attitude. Kiss, on the other hand, where widly considered metal... until Gene turned them into a marketing gimmick. Once Kiss lost the "Fuck everyone and lets just have fun attitude", they lost their metal standings.
At 2/19/09 12:00 PM, InsertFunnyUserName wrote: I wouldn't exactly consider them metal, but they're too hard to be rock, either.
At which point I would question the bands attitude... regardless of how drunk Creed get, they'll never be metal. Why? Because they'll never have the metal attitude. It's just like being a biker... you can own a harley, but that doesn't make you a Biker. It just makes you a guy that rides a motorcycle. You're not a Biker, unless you live and die by the Biker way of life.
At 2/19/09 12:37 PM, HandsomePete wrote: It took him 14 years and cost him all of his relevance to come out with an album that would've been on the fringe of the end of the genre if it had come out then.
I knew this would come up after I posted it and re-read what I wrote. I really wanted to add that I dont consider the new GnR, as GnR since none of the GnR members are still in the band. GnR is a name that Axel stole through high priced lawers and an unwillingness to move on or let it go. He owns it only because the other members in the band didn't care enough to fight for the name... they had new things they where doing.
New GnR isn't metal. I do agree there. I consider the Spegetti Incident the last GnR album. Everything that followed was simpley "Axel Rose"
Run up the score... it sucks for the other team and their fans... but I have my own team and my own fans to worry about. That's the nature of the game... sports are sports because everybody is in it to win.
The other team, as professionals, should understand this and realize that it's nothing personal.
At 2/19/09 11:47 AM, Reed wrote: I've never really considered them metal but now that I think about it I guess they could be. Who cares what exact genre they fit into anyway
Who cares about anything we talk about here? It's life... what else are you going to do with your time? Might as well socialize with the rest of society right?
Also... they could be? They COULD BE? You're talking about the same band that drank and drugged themself so stupid before shows that they had to physically lean on their amplifiers to hold themself up on stage. This... while being lead by a crazy front man who fist fought their front row fans durring their headling tour with Metallica.
I wouldn't think there's any COULD Be about it... that sounds pretty metal to me.
I say they're metal... I'd also say anyone that disagrees with me is either really young or just plain foolish. Regardless, it's a topic that usually comes up and everytime it does thre are always people who disagree with me.
So let's settle this Newgrounds... do you consider GNR Metal or some form of Rock?
And be prepared to backup your answers with reasons. This isn't a postCount+1 topic... it's a serious debate... one that may very well determin the future of our universe.
It would be cool... if I could pick the band.
The bigest problem is that not everybody likes the same type of music... so if a bad band is chosen, a lot of people will be put off the game.
For instance, I would never play Half Life if the soundtrack was done by Green Day.... simply because I fucking hate Green Day.
Nobody really has anything against orchstrated music so it's a good medium to use as it can keep everybody happy and still be used to it's full potential to pull out the feel of the game.
Can you imagine Green Day trying to write music that pulls you into the intensity of a gun fight? It would probably fail misserably and seriously hurt the overall fun / feeling of the game.
In other words, it just wouldn't work.
At 2/16/09 01:12 PM, Centurion-Ryan wrote:At 2/16/09 12:53 PM, DroopyA wrote: Where's the stage where Metallica sue you?There's probably an unlockable money skin for Lars Ulrich.
lol, Lars turns into a giant dollar bill. The more notes you hit, the larger the donomiation on the front becomes. At the end of the stage, if you don't think you earned enough, you can button mash the red button to send out court orders to all the fans at the show to increase your revenue.
Where's the stage where Metallica sue you?
