Ah, too bad. Which albums did you try? If anything, Flood is my favorite, but it's as far from anything punk as it gets.
I've only heard a few songs on Youtube, no full-length album. I'll check out "Flood" though, thanks.
sonicpacker wrote:
Zebrahead or Sum 41. You can call Sum 41 mainstream as much as you'd like, but the fact is, they make good music. Whether it's their old "pop" punk stuff, or their newer, harder feel. As for Zebrahead...here you go:
I was a huge fan of Sum 41 when I was 13 years old. Loved their stuff. (I'm 24 now) I tried listening to them again a few years ago, and hated it. Way too simplistic and generic. Also, I've always considered them kind of a "pop rock" band, certainly not punk.
And it's weird that you cite them considering you said you dislike metal; their "new, harder feel" is supposedly inspired by their guitarists' love of metal, according to the band itself.
sonicpacker wrote:
Thanks for the links.
Honestly, to me they sound exactly like a million other pop punk and alt rock bands. Simplistic, boring riffs. Crappy high-pitched rapping. No real melody. Not sure why you broke it up into "harder", "medium", or "softer"; none of it sounds remotely heavy. They're soft pop songs.
They sound like a slightly better Limp Bizkit, and believe me, that's a bad thing.
Anywho, if people are posting links, I might as well mention one of the strangest and most unique "metal bands" ever, if you can even call them that. ("Band" as well as "metal")
Ayreon is one guy that gets a bunch of different people to work on each of his albums. The music is a mix of metal, rock, classical music, and folk music, including wind instruments like digirus. (Seriously...) There are usually about 20 different singers on each album plus entire orchestras.
Each album is also a concept album with a specific story plus an overarching science fiction plot. The albums are ridiculously long; 15-20 songs, and many over 10 minutes in long.
It's like a bizarre metal opera, and unlike anything I have ever heard before;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iefHFBZp6NAhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L7mmusY0Enw
Post-punk and sludge are an interesting take on punk. I'd recommend Boris, start with Heavy Rocks or Akuma no Uta. This band plays lots of stuff from ambient to drone metal, and is very much recommended.
Thanks for the mention. Oddly enough, I've listened to Boris before, on the recommendation of a friend. Didn't like them, though.
Not precisely what I meant, but again, cute stuff. Here's a substantive question, though; is MLP the best childrens' cartoon you (or any other fan of the series) has seen?
Personally, it's among the better ones I've come across, but worse than both "Pinky and the Brain" and "Conan the Adventurer" among English language ones, and also inferior to "Capitan Vrungel", "Vinnie Pukh", "Cheburashka", and a few other Soviet works I grew up watching as a 4 year-old in Moscow.
And if there's a music performance in MLP as catchy and funny as this one, please let me know.Warp wrote:
You, on the other hand, have called me in particular and the community in general "infantile", "obsessed fanboy" and "having tastes of a 8-year old". (And no, before you object, I did not call you a fat beer-drinking etc. guy; I simply said that your behavior reminds me of that kind of behavior, iow. a bit on the hypocritical side.) Why do you need the feel to insult me and the fans of the show?
I really should just ignore this, but "obsessed fanboy" and "tastes of an 8 year-old" was very specifically about you and your behavior in this topic, while "infantilization" was a broad statement about all of modern Western society and their entertainment consumption. I have yet to make any general remark, positive or negative, about the fans of MLP.
I would actually love to hear any modern-day punk or alternative that doesn't suck. (The only punk/alternative that I enjoy is from the 70s and 80s) Are there any particular recommendations you have in mind?
However, since you keep bringing it up, I will tell you why the show has popularity with an older crowd, too; it's the infantilization of modern-day culture.
That claim would be more believable if most kids' shows were popular among teenagers and adults. They aren't, hence your claim is BS.
No, my claim isn't bullshit, since not only were the examples I cited instances of adults liking works targeted at juveniles, (and not because of their intrinsic content) but there are PLENTY of cartoons with a massive adult following nowadays.
Look at something like Spongebob a few years back.
But fine, you have the tastes of an 8 year-old, Warp. You've proved your point.
Warp wrote:
You have a curiously aggressive attitude towards this phenomenon. I'm wondering why.
The only one who has been "curiously aggressive" here is you.
I made a single post stating my view on the show, which wasn't even particularly negative. I wrote absolutely nothing about the show's following or any "phenomena". (Are you confusing me with someone else?) That was going to be the end of my participation in the topic.
Then, you showed up and started angrily responding to my every post. You sound like an obsessed fanboy who can't handle that someone doesn't like his favorite show (which every other MLP fan here seems to be able to), but isn't smart enough to come back with any substantial arguments.
Warp wrote:
(It actually reminds me of those fat mustard-stained-shirt-wearing beer-drinking unkempt men sitting on their couch watching a local news story about eg. an anime convention and muttering "nerds, get a life".)
HAHA, an ad hominem fallacy to go along with the populist fallacy you keep citing? How appropriate.
Sorry to disappoint you, but I'm actually more on the skinny side, I don't drink beer, none of my shirts have mustard stains (as far as I can tell, at least), and my home doesn't have either a couch or a television.
I will admit to occasionally being unkempt and having a slightly ambivalent attitude towards anime conventions; I enjoy a lot of anime, but would never go to one, although my present girlfriend (who is nerdier than I am) has been to a few and keeps trying to convince me...
Warp wrote:
And btw, you still missed my point. Again: You didn't say "this is a low-quality show". You said "there's not much that this has to offer to this periphery demographic", to which I objected. That's not the same thing.
Well, until you make a comment about the actual content of the show, I think responding to any more of your posts will probably be a waste of time.
In the meantime, there have been posts actually dealing with the show;
Dragonfangs wrote:
That said, IronSlayer, not liking the show is fine, but based on the points you made, I would implore you to watch 1 or 2 more episodes before totally writing it off. The first two aren't very representative, and the 3rd is in the lower end of the quality spectrum that the show provides.
Maybe I'll give it a shot!
Ferret Warlord wrote:
Fluttershy gives you two examples; just ignore Rainbow's unnatural voice acting in the first, though.
The first one was quite amusing, probably moreso than anything I have seen so far. Even had a punchline. I chuckled a bit. The second one was cute, but predictable after having seen the first one, lessening the potential humor.
Anyways, for me, good humor is heavily dialogue-based, (compare MLP to an animated comedy show like "The Simpsons" or (I know this isn't totally fair) "Archer") which MLP doesn't have in part because of its main target audience. They try to do some physical comedy, but I guess they don't want to scare the little kids since it's frequently too tame.
Ferret Warlord wrote:
At this point I'm convinced most fans have more fun being fans than they do actually watching the show.
The "populist argument" as you call it (with which you probably mean "argument from popularity", which I think is not the same thing) isn't actually stupid in this case.
You didn't say "this show is not very good" to which I replied "most people disagree with you". You said "there's not much content for a certain age range". If that were true, then not many people from that age range would watch the show. Quite many do, which means there is some content there that they like. (After all, there are hundreds if not even thousands of kids programs playing currently around the world, and the vast majority is not followed by any significant number of teenagers nor adults. This show is. There must be something different about it.)
The populist fallacy is idiotic and irrelevant in every instance that it's used, including this one. Once again, argue the actual merits of the show...if you can. Otherwise, I get the impression you're an offended fan with no substantive rebuttals to make.
However, since you keep bringing it up, I will tell you why the show has popularity with an older crowd, too; it's the infantilization of modern-day culture. This phenomena has nothing to do specifically with MLP; you can see it everywhere.
25 year old guys watching brain-dead CGI superhero films intended for 8 year-olds (compare this to what an adult crowd watched for most of the 70s, whether it be "Network", "Last Tango in Paris", or "The Godfather"), women in their 40s becoming raving fans of "Twilight", etc.
Yes, lots of adults nowadays have juvenile tastes. If that's the best defense you can make for your beloved show, I rest my case.
Warp wrote:
Strong characterization, humor, emotional appeal, innocent fun. Not boring to watch.
Characterization? The little horsies are all meant to be simple cliches of one kind or another. You have the outgoing tomboy horse, the sweet Southern horse, the shallow/fashion-obsessed horsie, etc.
Which is totally fine for a kids' show, by the way. But "characterization" is about the worst possible argument you could make for the series, even if you love it.
As for "humor", it's a bunch of horsies doing cutesy horsie things. It might elicit a smile here and there, but not actual laughter. I challenge you to link me to a single episode which features a genuinely funny joke.
Lastly, when it comes to "emotional appeal", if MLP manages to do that for you, I would recommend checking out Danielle Steele's romance fiction, as well as "Eat Pray Love", and any number of other Julia Roberts chick flicks.
Personally, I find them to be brain-dead, emotionally manipulative garbage, but hey, they are a little bit smarter than "Twilight", and since you thought that was okay...
Warp wrote:
There are certainly much worse things one could be watching than this.
Yes, and there are much better things one can be watching, too.
Which is why I find it so weird that you chose to respond to and argue with my post, since I did mention MLP is very much above average by the standards of a typical kids' cartoon.
But there's not much content for those in the 13+ year old age range.
They disagree with you.
Actually, most don't. However, even if you were correct about the numbers, I've always considered the populist argument really goddamn stupid. Lots of people love Twilight, at least ten times more than those that like MLP; are those suddenly great books and movies according to you, Warp?
Argue the actual merits of the show, not the lame "lots of other people like it" fallacy.
Anywho, I watched the first three episodes, and despite the show being pretty average, I probably would have given it a few more shots, except for two things;
1. The really heavy-handed moralizing at the end of each episode. Nothing wrong with teaching kids a lesson, but it's way too long and repetitive, and often not a very good lesson, either.
2. Related to that, the outpouring of emotion, especially near the end of each episode is just way too much. They pour it on way too thick, purposely cranking the histrionics up to 11.
This is a very common, cheap, and frankly manipulative trick to use with kids. (Since it's much easier to rile up their emotions and elicit sadness from them than it would be for adults) As Ferret Warlord rightly noted, the end of episode 2 is probably the worst example of this, but I saw it during the end of episode 3, too.
Overall, it's an above-average childrens' cartoon show that is decidedly average by adult standards, with several very annoying elements.
Better than I expected at first glance, but nowhere near good enough to actually keep watching.
Watched the first couple of episodes.
It's not bad; certainly a level or two higher than most crappy kids' shows. At the same time, it's not particularly good or special, either.
It's a competently made cartoon for little kids that doesn't suck. But just because it's not horrible doesn't automatically make it worthwhile. There's just not enough content, action, or humor for me to call it particularly entertaining, let alone good.
It's fine for the kiddies, and if I had a 6 year old daughter, I would probably be happy that she liked it. But there's not much content for those in the 13+ year old age range.
Most Western cartoons I watched and liked as a kid turned out to be horrible shit when I re-watched them when I became older, like Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles.
Even so, a few of the things I watched that stood up to later viewing, like "Conan the Adventurer" or "Pinky and the Brain" are at least a little bit better than "My Little Ponies". So even among the genre of "Western cartoons for little kids", I don't think it's the absolute best.
Insanely difficult question, since there are so many genres of metal, all of which sound completely different from one another. I like most of them though, and it really depends what I'm in the mood for; to me, they might be as different as jazz and classical music.
For old-school metal, it's Iron Maiden and if they count, GNR.
For thrash metal (favorite genre), it's Slayer, Megadeth, and Pantera.
For death metal, let's go with Children of Bodom.
For black metal, probably Gorgoroth and Emperor.
For progressive metal, Shaolin Death Squad and Ayreon.
Oh, I wasn't trying to imply they're always getting paid by the makers of the show. Main message was that it's mostly an act by them and I know for a fact that some of them are privatly making money for pretending to be the idiots they seem to be. For others it's just the attention. Let's see if you'll still find it as funny when another guy turns up and does basically the same thing but in a leopard suit on the next show. ;p At some point, it just gets lame.
For someone who links to crappy K-pop and boring lip-sync videos, you sure talk a lot of shit about other peoples' links, huh?
Focus-
Link to video
No, you just haven't realized yet that guys like him get paid to do stuff like this. They aren't completely nuts, they're just pretending to be for your entertainment. The makers of the show hope you don't notice and keep watching it.
Yeah dude; I used to live in LA and had friends that were casting directors and producers. I know how this shit works.
That being said, most of the crazies you see on reality shows are NOT being paid. Reality shows are notably stingy with their budgets; no one wants to pay someone when you can get a suitably entertaining replacement for free.
Regardless, I don't know what it has to do with the video being funny or not.
You sound like an 8 year old who just discovered Santa is fake and goes around telling every adult this. Believe it or not, most of us are aware that reality shows are largely scripted.
Kuwaga wrote:
Makes you feel good because it makes you feel superior.
No, it makes me feel good because it's freaking funny, especially coupled with the goofy lyrics and horrified crowd reaction.
Anyways,
FocusLink to video[/video]
Yes, Tub is correct; there is no standard notation for this.
If you choose to write a number as a sum of powers of ten ie the standard base 10 representation, as Tub noted, it should be possible to convey what you're trying to do, but there is no special notation.
It's funny; there was a giant topic about the presently published Super Mario 64 movie, where multiple users complained about the camera angles hurting their eyes. I didn't think it was that bad, but did find it a bit annoying.
The reason I mention it is that this particular movie is a hundred times worse in that regard; I had to pause it just 50 seconds in, since my eyes were hurting like crazy from the awful bright graphics and horrible frame-rate combined with the speed.
I'm sure it's a fine run technically, but if it gets published, I would give it less than a 1.0 on the entertainment scale. It is "unwatchable" in a very literal way.
No vote.
I think it sets both a bad precedent and takes something away from the board's quality.
The problem I see with that is that you are, basically, suggesting that the forum should tolerate regular use of rude language from a person if that person contributes positively in other ways.
Yes, that is exactly the way I see it.
What you choose to "tolerate" is entirely up to you. Personally, I have a problem with really stupid posts that add nothing to a particular topic.
Now, there are a lot of those on any message board, even in a more intelligent forum like this one. Does this mean the users who make the worthless posts should be perma-banned too, since I can barely "tolerate" it?
I was a moderator for a large site, and for me, the answer was an easy "no".
Meanwhile, I never had a problem with people using coarse language, and that included a disgruntled member or two calling me a "fucking idiot". (And keep in mind too that Xkeeper never wrote anything even half as extreme, or directly insulted ANYONE)
So again, what you choose to be offended by, or have to "tolerate" is completely up to you.
For you, someone using impolite language is a big deal. For me, it's not.
For you, it's not a big deal that a valuable contributor is no longer posting here. For me, it is.
Clearly, we have different standards.
Warp wrote:
A bit like the two things would cancel each other out and thus the overall result is ok.
Let's not trivialize here.
As mentioned above, we clearly just assign different values to such things. For me, someone using mildly rude language is essentially a neutral interaction; I don't care. For you, it's a strongly negative one.
Meanwhile, for me, reading intelligent posts is a hugely positive experience. For you, I'm sure it's also quite positive, but probably not enough to make up for how negative the mildly rude language is.
Warp wrote:
It's still there, and a lot of people are going to read it. It doesn't have to be tolerated.
You're certainly entitled to your view, but let's not pretend that either you or I speak for "a lot of people".
Anyways, I realize that adelikat's decision won't be swayed by a completely random member, but I wanted to point out that not everyone has a problem with the posts in question, and it's a poor trade-off and precedent when quality contributors are banned for being impolite.
Actually, there's only 1 castle. You just jump between 2 parallel versions of it.
Which would make for 2 castles, no?
Anyways, I was not talking about the storyline; I mean purely the gameplay elements. Castle A has different room design and enemies throughout than in Castle B, so they might as well be two different ones.
Link to video
Maybe I'm just weird, but I can't stop laughing at this. The song itself is hilarious; I'm going to start using "Bill Clinton stuff" in my own lexicon!
I was surprised at the posts that got Xkeeper banned. They are relatively mild, and while frequently hyper-critical and unnecessarily rude, still cogent discussions of the topic. On many occasions they added something useful to the thread. Most notably, his mention of a bug in the LUA script was a hugely beneficial post. It was an example of why he should have been kept, not banned!
I realized I'm just a random member as opposed to a part of the staff or even a player, and thus my view means less (as it should, by the way), but being a part of the forum, I think it sets both a bad precedent and takes something away from the board's quality.
After all, as adelikat admitted, Xkeeper was a former player and a talented coder who wrote useful posts. He contributed something positive to the message board. As for what he did that was negative, he basically hurt a few peoples' feelings with "meanly" worded posts.
Hell, he didn't even call anyone an "idiot" (which many other non-banned members have done at one time or another...including this very topic!) or any other direct insult; he just wrote his views in an uncivil manner.
So again, as a random member, I disagree with the ban, think it sets a bad precedent for the board, and makes us a little less enlightened.
An enormous improvement on a run that had been tackled by other excellent TAS'ers in the past.
Very entertaining to watch too, and the glitches were awesome. Obvious yes vote.
To me, there is definitely something unique about the gameplay of this movie relative to the other published runs for HoD, and it looks great overall, like most Metroidvanias.
In other words, an easy "Yes" vote.
Not only was the run extremely annoying to look at visually, but the run-through itself was not particularly impressive nor interesting, either! No tricks, clever strategies, glitches, nothing.
For something like Sonic to resemble a decent SDA run is pretty bad.
Combining horrible game choice with lackluster gameplay (not the fault of the runner himself, but rather, the stages not making for good TAS material), it's an easy No vote.