Randomly Crap Out Your Opinions Thread

Comments

  • JukeBoxHeroJukeBoxHero Headliner
    edited January 2009
    Rockbandfan23467;1747209 said:
    You aren't gonna nominate him for the next leftover_crack, are you a21?
    Why would he? I don't think he has said any thing bluntly stupid besides having a few views that are obviously not shared by other posters here.
  • a21schizoidmana21schizoidman Prog-nosticator
    edited January 2009
    Rockbandfan23467;1747209 said:
    You aren't gonna nominate him for the next leftover_crack, are you a21?
    nah, he at least has some logic behind his posts, where crack just fumed opinions out of every orifice at any chance he got that made no sense whatsoever
  • a21schizoidmana21schizoidman Prog-nosticator
    edited January 2009
    anyways



    in my opinion

    Wings > the Beatles

    Jet, Junior's Farm, Maybe I'm Amazed, Hi Hi Hi are imho, better than most Beatles songs
  • GowienczykGowienczyk Pooper of Parties
    edited January 2009
    a21schizoidman;1747255 said:
    anyways



    in my opinion

    Wings > the Beatles

    Jet, Junior's Farm, Maybe I'm Amazed, Hi Hi Hi are imho, better than most Beatles songs
    Yeah, Jet is a nice tune; Jellyfish covered that and I love that cover. /irrelevantopinion
  • a21schizoidmana21schizoidman Prog-nosticator
    edited January 2009
    Gowienczyk;1747259 said:
    Yeah, Jet is a nice tune; Jellyfish covered that and I love that cover. /irrelevantopinion
    i didnt really dig Jet til the Crawpuppies covered it at a concert

    anyways, here the Crawpuppies playing Maybe I'm Amazed (bad audio tho)

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TPe_S9xKmww
  • FizzelerFizzeler Washed Up
    edited January 2009
    I would kinda agree that
    Wings > Beatles
    mostly because I think Wings has some better and more catchy tunes like Band On The Run my favorite by them than The Beatles
  • Julio_Strikes_BackJulio_Strikes_Back Headliner
    edited January 2009
    Rockbandfan23467;1747209 said:
    You aren't gonna nominate him for the next leftover_crack, are you a21?
    Your avy made me chuckle. :D
  • Rockbandfan23467Rockbandfan23467 Headliner
    edited January 2009
    It's called "Abby Roadkill"
  • instantdeath999instantdeath999 Washed Up
    edited January 2009
    Rockbandfan23467;1747185 said:
    Here's an explination from someone who shares my opinion:
    Well, I think the Pixies made great music, as well as being highly influential.

    Back to the Beatles thing, I think there is definitely enough material to fill a game. By far, the biggest problem is the guitar, although I would not be the least bit opposed to them charting piano/synth/organ/sitar, or whatever else. In fact, I pretty much expect sitar to be charted.

    What I'm concerned about is the masters. I had no idea stuff before The White Album was usable... but they did get Roy Orbison. Of course, I do believe their later stuff work better, but Twist and Shout, Hard Days Night, Revolution, Taxman, and many other pre-white album songs are pretty much essential.

    The drums will actually be fun, I believe. About on the level of AC/DC. Ringo just mostly keeps the beat, but he will throw in a fill or two. Bass should be pretty fun, and vocals are a no brainer. Guitar could be a bit stale on the majority, but they do have the option of charting other things.

    I guess it's the polar opposite of Guitar Hero Metallica, then. The Beatles will be an all around easy game, not counting vocals (I can see songs like Yer Blues being absolute nightmares on vocals... the pitch changes constantly. Think Bob Dylan)... Metallica will have a pretty ridiculous difficulty curve.
  • FizzelerFizzeler Washed Up
    edited January 2009
    instantdeath999;1747807 said:
    Well, I think the Pixies made great music, as well as being highly influential.

    Back to the Beatles thing, I think there is definitely enough material to fill a game. By far, the biggest problem is the guitar, although I would not be the least bit opposed to them charting piano/synth/organ/sitar, or whatever else. In fact, I pretty much expect sitar to be charted.

    What I'm concerned about is the masters. I had no idea stuff before The White Album was usable... but they did get Roy Orbison. Of course, I do believe their later stuff work better, but Twist and Shout, Hard Days Night, Revolution, Taxman, and many other pre-white album songs are pretty much essential.

    The drums will actually be fun, I believe. About on the level of AC/DC. Ringo just mostly keeps the beat, but he will throw in a fill or two. Bass should be pretty fun, and vocals are a no brainer. Guitar could be a bit stale on the majority, but they do have the option of charting other things.

    I guess it's the polar opposite of Guitar Hero Metallica, then. The Beatles will be an all around easy game, not counting vocals (I can see songs like Yer Blues being absolute nightmares on vocals... the pitch changes constantly. Think Bob Dylan)... Metallica will have a pretty ridiculous difficulty curve.
    The Beatles is full of classics Metallica will be full of extreme metal songs
  • Alright_ComputerAlright_Computer Butt Neck
    edited January 2009
    Fizzeler;1747818 said:
    The Beatles is full of classics Metallica will be full of extreme metal songs
    Metallica has never been anything close to extreme metal. Extreme metal is stuff like death and black metal.
  • instantdeath999instantdeath999 Washed Up
    edited January 2009
    Alright_Computer;1747982 said:
    Metallica has never been anything close to extreme metal. Extreme metal is stuff like death and black metal.
    That's definitely debatable. It can actually be argued that Thrash metal was the first sub-genre of Extreme metal. Though it would definitely be the least "extreme" sub-genre, with the possible exception of power metal.
  • Alright_ComputerAlright_Computer Butt Neck
    edited January 2009
    instantdeath999;1748074 said:
    That's definitely debatable. It can actually be argued that Thrash metal was the first sub-genre of Extreme metal. Though it would definitely be the least "extreme" sub-genre, with the possible exception of power metal.
    That's true for the harder thrash songs, but I wouldn't consider anything by Metallica, especially stuff like the Black Album and Load/Reload, to be extreme metal.
  • Rockbandfan23467Rockbandfan23467 Headliner
    edited January 2009
    Alright_Computer;1748094 said:
    That's true for the harder thrash songs, but I wouldn't consider anything by Metallica, especially stuff like the Black Album and Load/Reload, to be extreme metal.
    But those aren't Thrash.
  • Alright_ComputerAlright_Computer Butt Neck
    edited January 2009
    Rockbandfan23467;1748112 said:
    But those aren't Thrash.
    But he wasn't referring to thrash, just Metallica.
  • instantdeath999instantdeath999 Washed Up
    edited January 2009
    Alright_Computer;1748094 said:
    That's true for the harder thrash songs, but I wouldn't consider anything by Metallica, especially stuff like the Black Album and Load/Reload, to be extreme metal.
    Of course, nothing after the Black album can be considered extreme metal. The whole definition of extreme metal is pretty static anyway, so it's debatable.

    For example, I wouldn't hesitate to call Kill em' All extreme metal, since it is one of the first thrash albums, and I believe the first in America, though I could be and probably am wrong.
  • back_blowsback_blows Washed Up
    edited January 2009
    instantdeath999;1748074 said:
    That's definitely debatable. It can actually be argued that Thrash metal was the first sub-genre of Extreme metal. Though it would definitely be the least "extreme" sub-genre, with the possible exception of power metal.
    I don't think I've heard Power Metal described as an extreme metal sub-genre. You might be thinking of Doom.
  • Rockbandfan23467Rockbandfan23467 Headliner
    edited January 2009
    I've heard every Metal subgenre but Hair and Traditional as Extreme.
  • instantdeath999instantdeath999 Washed Up
    edited January 2009
    I'm no expert, but I've always been under the impression the main sub-genres of extreme metal are Thrash, Death, and Black, with Power and Doom being debatable.
  • GowienczykGowienczyk Pooper of Parties
    edited January 2009
    instantdeath999;1748150 said:
    I'm no expert, but I've always been under the impression the main sub-genres of extreme metal are Thrash, Death, and Black, with Power and Doom being debatable.
    Extreme Metal really isn't a genre, it's just used by ridicilous people. Every person I've talked to who has knowledge doesn't use the term.
  • back_blowsback_blows Washed Up
    edited January 2009
    instantdeath999;1748150 said:
    I'm no expert, but I've always been under the impression the main sub-genres of extreme metal are Thrash, Death, and Black, with Power and Doom being debatable.
    Doom is definitely debatable, but you could draw connections between Doom and the other extreme sub-genres. Power, at least to me, was on the other end of the spectrum and had more in common with Traditional Heavy and NWOBHM.
  • instantdeath999instantdeath999 Washed Up
    edited January 2009
    Gowienczyk;1748171 said:
    Extreme Metal really isn't a genre, it's just used by ridicilous people. Every person I've talked to who has knowledge doesn't use the term.
    Of course, extreme metal is a term, not genre... similar to classic rock or southern rock.
  • GowienczykGowienczyk Pooper of Parties
    edited January 2009
    back_blows;1748172 said:
    Doom is definitely debatable, but you could draw connections between Doom and the other extreme sub-genres. Power, at least to me, was on the other end of the spectrum and had more in common with Traditional Heavy and NWOBHM.
    Power is just traditional heavy metal taken to the next level.

    Heavy Metal part 3, ergo.
  • back_blowsback_blows Washed Up
    edited January 2009
    Gowienczyk;1748189 said:
    Power is just traditional heavy metal taken to the next level.

    Heavy Metal part 3, ergo.
    I'll accept this definition.

    EDIT: The second wave of Black Metal has little in common with Metal.
  • QuinarvyQuinarvy Road Warrior
    edited January 2009
    Opinon:

    There are two many subgeneres of genres, that in their own right, are subgenres.
  • a21schizoidmana21schizoidman Prog-nosticator
    edited January 2009
    Quinarvy;1748869 said:
    Opinon:

    There are two many subgeneres of genres, that in their own right, are subgenres.
    did u see the tag i added?
  • SevinWoohooSevinWoohoo Opening Act
    edited January 2009
    The Beatles aren't that great.
    Megadeth is better than Metallica.
    People who automatically don't like bands just because of their genre/ Last.Fm tags should be castrated.
    Dio is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay better than Ozzy.
    Di'Anno was Maiden's best singer.
  • a21schizoidmana21schizoidman Prog-nosticator
    edited January 2009
    SevinWoohoo;1748894 said:
    The Beatles aren't that great.
    People who automatically don't like bands just because of their genre/ Last.Fm tags should be castrated.
    Di'Anno was Maiden's best singer.
    we may have another L_O nom!
  • SevinWoohooSevinWoohoo Opening Act
    edited January 2009
    a21schizoidman;1748902 said:
    we may have another L_O nom!
    1. I'm not a Communist
    2. I don't like Ska
    3. I can spell.
  • a21schizoidmana21schizoidman Prog-nosticator
    edited January 2009
    SevinWoohoo;1748925 said:
    1. I'm not a Communist
    2. I don't like Ska
    3. I can spell.
    u have 24 posts, how the f*** do u even know who crack is?
Sign In or Register to comment.