unpopular retro opinions

[TheFocus]

Perfect Dark is better then Goldeneye

Show No Mercy only has a few interesting songs on it

Hvis Lyset Tarr Oss>Filosofem

GTA: SA hasn't aged quite as well as people say

 

[Thelokk]

22 hours ago, Maes said:

The Golden Axe dragon has nice, long, smooth, sexy legs.

 

 

....what? They really are.

Now that I think about it, those dragons were unusual in that they had pretty human-like leg joints, and not the usual "chicken walker" anatomy usually attributed to fantasy dragons, and seen on dipedal dinosaurs.

 

Damn I love this game's palette so much. 

[D0M0]

Legend of Zelda Franchise had a consistent problem with controls.

In the N64 games, you had to use some awkward joystick to move and aim and I just found that annoying to deal with on a game that has a playtime of 30 hours.

I just don't find that fun.

 

(PS: We don't talk about Skyward Sword)

[Stupid Bunny]

On 7/11/2022 at 2:33 PM, mrthejoshmon said:

Have I explained before that I think Turok is actually abysmal?

 

I don't think Turok is fun, it's a mindless exercise where the combat is unsatisfactory and sometimes just painful and the platforming is that special 90's jank that inspires naught but abject misery (The Treetop Village is saddening).

 

The speed of the game would be nice if the level designers didn't feel like stretching corridors out to obscene proportions ("The Catacombs" didn't need 1 corridor that's 5 miles long, why is there 3 of them?).

 

And the final fight against a sponge was the most miserable fight I've had outside of Destiny 2, or comically the quickest non-issue when I whipped out the Chronosceptre and 3 shot him.

 

I love the absolute hell out of Turok: Dinosaur Hunter, but also you are right about all of these things plus a lot of other specific things you didn't mention (that "puzzle" in The Ruins with identical teleporters that drop you into lava swarming with dragonflies can eat a dinosaur dick.  And so can the dragonflies.)  Also the respawning leapers drive me up the mother pheasant plucking wall and I've tried to convince myself that the particle accelerator can prevent respawns but I'm not sure that's true.  In fact all the constant respawns are horrible.  I don't know why I so enjoy a game that is so objectively full of asshole design but I do anyway.

 

Btw fun fact the regular, non-Tek arrows can be used to one-shot any non-boss (and apparently non-robot) enemy, debatably making them the most powerful weapon in the game

[mrthejoshmon]

9 minutes ago, Stupid Bunny said:

 

I love the absolute hell out of Turok: Dinosaur Hunter, but also you are right about all of these things plus a lot of other specific things you didn't mention (that "puzzle" in The Ruins with identical teleporters that drop you into lava swarming with dragonflies can eat a dinosaur dick.  And so can the dragonflies.)  Also the respawning leapers drive me up the mother pheasant plucking wall and I've tried to convince myself that the particle accelerator can prevent respawns but I'm not sure that's true.  In fact all the constant respawns are horrible.  I don't know why I so enjoy a game that is so objectively full of asshole design but I do anyway.

 

Btw fun fact the regular, non-Tek arrows can be used to one-shot any non-boss (and apparently non-robot) enemy, debatably making them the most powerful weapon in the game

I must have forgotten about the teleport part but the mere mention of it brought flashbacks of misery.

 

It's a shame because I actually went into Turok 1 and 2 prepared to absolutely like it, the first game in the series I had played was Turok: Evolution and I actually really like that game. I heard Evolution was considered the worst one (until the reboot came along and took that crown) so I was convinced that if I liked Evolution I would love 1 and 2.

 

Turns out a lot of hate for Evolution was because it was absolutely nothing like 1 and 2 at all, also the flying sections.

[Lippeth]

1 hour ago, D0M0 said:

(PS: We don't talk about Skyward Sword)

The Wii controls are what saved that game for me. It was just fun to wave the sword around. I remember doing the boss rush to get the Hylian shield and was quite proud of the trophy, but after starting a new game plus the shield was gone which was very irritating. So I loaded an older save, got to that point and did it all again. And I never had the desire to play it again. Skyward Sword is the only Zelda game I had fun playing since A Link to the Past, and I didn't even think it was that good.

[Aaron Blain]

5 hours ago, D0M0 said:

Legend of Zelda Franchise had a consistent problem with controls.

Videogames were having a very hard time figuring out moving and targeting during the first few years of 3d. Zelda: OOT's "Z-Targeting" system was actually a huge step forward.

 

Try some ps1 action/platform games like Tomb Raider, MedEvil or Croc, for comparison.

[heliumlamb]

On 8/1/2022 at 2:35 AM, map11has2names said:

Show No Mercy only has a few interesting songs on it

i can see why anyone would feel this way about show no mercy but it does not happen to be the case for me.
my unpopular opinion is that show no mercy is the best recorded work of the "california heavy guitar music" going on in the 80's
it does the whole "evil motorhead" vibe way better than venom ever did imo, even if venom sounds closer to the platonic ideal of an "evil motorhead".
definitely more solid side to side than hell awaits, and thankfully not marred by rick rubin tinnitus induction. (does rick rubin even touch a mixer?)

another unpopular metal opinion: bolt thrower's realm of chaos is the best death metal album that isn't named altars of madness of all time

[Koko Ricky]

Honestly about 99.99% of metal, even the old stuff, fuckin' sucks. For every Motorhead, Judas Priest, Pantera, Darkthrone, Napalm Death or Dying Fetus, you get a thousand bands that are either pathetic soundalikes, one-trick-ponies, or lack compositional skills. Countless bands that, even back then, had no sense of dynamics, refused to trim the fat, or insisted on an obnoxious vocal style. It's one of the worst genres of music that has ever existed. 

[Ludi]

Mega Man 4 is the best Mega Man game

 

System Shock 1 is better than 2

 

[TheFocus]

4 hours ago, Koko Ricky said:

Honestly about 99.99% of metal, even the old stuff, fuckin' sucks. For every Motorhead, Judas Priest, Pantera, Darkthrone, Napalm Death or Dying Fetus, you get a thousand bands that are either pathetic soundalikes, one-trick-ponies, or lack compositional skills. Countless bands that, even back then, had no sense of dynamics, refused to trim the fat, or insisted on an obnoxious vocal style. It's one of the worst genres of music that has ever existed. 

 

[Thelokk]

4 hours ago, Koko Ricky said:

Honestly about 99.99% of metal, even the old stuff, fuckin' sucks. For every Motorhead, Judas Priest, Pantera, Darkthrone, Napalm Death or Dying Fetus, you get a thousand bands that are either pathetic soundalikes, one-trick-ponies, or lack compositional skills. Countless bands that, even back then, had no sense of dynamics, refused to trim the fat, or insisted on an obnoxious vocal style. It's one of the worst genres of music that has ever existed. 

 

Unironically agree tbh.

[heliumlamb]

6 hours ago, Koko Ricky said:

Honestly about 99.99% of metal, even the old stuff, fuckin' sucks.

absolutely not just the case with metal. trust a certified record store floor sitter, a patient, curious crate sifter with open ears. and even then music that one person just absolutely does not enjoy will be THE banger of all time to another, so it goes. plenty of dumpy music all around!

 

there's always going to be music you, the prospective listener, might not like out there, was in the days of plastic discs and tapes and even more so now with wider access to tools to make any and all manner of music. at this rate there's thousands and thousands of tracks going up on distribution services like, but not limited to bandcamp, youtube, and spotted fy every day. you can rest assured that not all of it might hit what you consider "good music", and having little to no barrier to entry for music distribution is a good thing, in theory. it's good knowing that people can get their music heard by anyone internationally within a manner of minutes after hitting upload. no more having to rely on people running a label big or small, mastering/cutting engineers or pressing plants and duplication houses. it has led to a greater expanse of things to hear, undoubtedly, which in turn lowers the chance of anyone actually listening to your music sadly. this makes getting and just even seeing modern music released on physical media even more "special", and absolutely worth having to wait nearly a year for the pressing plants to no longer be busy with Yet Another Round Of Beatles Represses.

[Ozcar]

On 8/2/2022 at 8:57 AM, Koko Ricky said:

Honestly about 99.99% of metal, even the old stuff, fuckin' sucks. For every Motorhead, Judas Priest, Pantera, Darkthrone, Napalm Death or Dying Fetus, you get a thousand bands that are either pathetic soundalikes, one-trick-ponies, or lack compositional skills. Countless bands that, even back then, had no sense of dynamics, refused to trim the fat, or insisted on an obnoxious vocal style. It's one of the worst genres of music that has ever existed. 

[Lippeth]

I find TMNT II: The Secret of the Ooze much more enjoyable to watch than the first movie. Sure it has problems with some of the story beats and Super Shredder being criminally underused, but the less "dark and serious" tone makes for an overall fun experience. A quicker pace, great one liners, amazing sets and costume design, and cool music. Even the Vanilla Ice scene is a laugh. I do enjoy a lot about the first movie, but its dark, gritty mood and forced love story don't hold a candle to the fun of Secret of the Ooze.

Edited August 6, 2022 by Lippeth

[QuaketallicA]

On 8/2/2022 at 8:57 AM, Koko Ricky said:

Honestly about 99.99% of metal, even the old stuff, fuckin' sucks. For every Motorhead, Judas Priest, Pantera, Darkthrone, Napalm Death or Dying Fetus, you get a thousand bands that are either pathetic soundalikes, one-trick-ponies, or lack compositional skills. Countless bands that, even back then, had no sense of dynamics, refused to trim the fat, or insisted on an obnoxious vocal style. It's one of the worst genres of music that has ever existed. 

Sounds like hubris to me, to think you are better than so many others. Personally I've found a lot of underground/lesser known bands from back then that are really great. Maybe not superstar great for one reason or another, but still good in their own right. 

 

if you honestly believe that you can't have listened to very much other than the most popular bands.

[Koko Ricky]

57 minutes ago, QuaketallicA said:

Sounds like hubris to me, to think you are better than so many others. Personally I've found a lot of underground/lesser known bands from back then that are really great. Maybe not superstar great for one reason or another, but still good in their own right. 

 

if you honestly believe that you can't have listened to very much other than the most popular bands.

 

Having been a heavy metal fan for 20+ years, I've experienced the entire gamut of the genre, spanning more than five decades and countless sub-genres, from the highest surface layers to the most underground niches. I've been to numerous concerts over the years, and have thoroughly studied the use of music theory within various styles. If I lacked this level of expertise, I'd have very little to say. 

 

This isn't about elitism, because I do not believe in objectivity in regards to musical preference; but I do believe, from the decades of observation, that metal is on the whole very self-limiting. For awhile, you had bands coming from blues, jazz, country, punk, and early rock traditions, which was a wonderful creative period that was eventually distilled into a very small pool of characteristics that is largely centered around a handful of techniques, such as power chords, palm mutes, tremolo picking, dissonant intervals, etc.

 

The music ends up being defined by texture and technique, rather than actual theory, in many cases. If you learn a thing or two about chord progressions, scales, and compositional techniques, you start to realize that so many bands just meander about, failing to establish strong motifs or creating proper connective tissue for riff changes. Either that or they're poppy bands that clamp down on predictable phrases and are as boring as the rest of contemporary radio pop. I love some metal, old and new--but most of it sucks, a sentiment I've noticed is shared by most every metal fan I talk to. 

[TheFocus]

18 hours ago, Koko Ricky said:

 

Having been a heavy metal fan for 20+ years, I've experienced the entire gamut of the genre, spanning more than five decades and countless sub-genres, from the highest surface layers to the most underground niches. I've been to numerous concerts over the years, and have thoroughly studied the use of music theory within various styles. If I lacked this level of expertise, I'd have very little to say. 

 

This isn't about elitism, because I do not believe in objectivity in regards to musical preference; but I do believe, from the decades of observation, that metal is on the whole very self-limiting. For awhile, you had bands coming from blues, jazz, country, punk, and early rock traditions, which was a wonderful creative period that was eventually distilled into a very small pool of characteristics that is largely centered around a handful of techniques, such as power chords, palm mutes, tremolo picking, dissonant intervals, etc.

 

The music ends up being defined by texture and technique, rather than actual theory, in many cases. If you learn a thing or two about chord progressions, scales, and compositional techniques, you start to realize that so many bands just meander about, failing to establish strong motifs or creating proper connective tissue for riff changes. Either that or they're poppy bands that clamp down on predictable phrases and are as boring as the rest of contemporary radio pop. I love some metal, old and new--but most of it sucks, a sentiment I've noticed is shared by most every metal fan I talk to. 

look man, not everyone cares to learn fucking music theory. from what I'VE heard, from MY experiences, the best musical art came from not "the theory of music", but the genuine, real emotions that musicians use and create. applying that much thought to basic things in music, is IMO, why we have so much boring shit now.

[Thelokk]

Sigh... still down to the same old tired argument. 'They sound so cold and technical', 'they don't know music theory'... 3000+ years into human history, can we finally realize art is about context and goals, not arbitrary standards and signpost, be them to one extreme or the other? Pure musical theory has exactly the SAME chance to breed musical miracles that some garage has, and the other way around. 

[mrthejoshmon]

Nu-Metal is the only metal genre I like and the best band is Static X, other genres have their appeal to other people which is understandable.

 

This is all I have to say because I don't understand why we're always so militant about metal, like it's not actually that life or death y'know.

[Ozcar]

.

Edited October 21, 2022 by Ozcar

[TakenStew22]

7 hours ago, Ozcar said:

Dbz American Soundtrack > Dbz Japanese Soundtrack (Still love the japanese soundtrack)

 

 

I'm sure this isn't unpopular but I 100% agree with it.

[QuaketallicA]

On 8/6/2022 at 6:37 AM, Koko Ricky said:

 

Having been a heavy metal fan for 20+ years, I've experienced the entire gamut of the genre, spanning more than five decades and countless sub-genres, from the highest surface layers to the most underground niches. I've been to numerous concerts over the years, and have thoroughly studied the use of music theory within various styles. If I lacked this level of expertise, I'd have very little to say. 

 

This isn't about elitism, because I do not believe in objectivity in regards to musical preference; but I do believe, from the decades of observation, that metal is on the whole very self-limiting. For awhile, you had bands coming from blues, jazz, country, punk, and early rock traditions, which was a wonderful creative period that was eventually distilled into a very small pool of characteristics that is largely centered around a handful of techniques, such as power chords, palm mutes, tremolo picking, dissonant intervals, etc.

 

The music ends up being defined by texture and technique, rather than actual theory, in many cases. If you learn a thing or two about chord progressions, scales, and compositional techniques, you start to realize that so many bands just meander about, failing to establish strong motifs or creating proper connective tissue for riff changes. Either that or they're poppy bands that clamp down on predictable phrases and are as boring as the rest of contemporary radio pop. I love some metal, old and new--but most of it sucks, a sentiment I've noticed is shared by most every metal fan I talk to. 

 

 

Is it not possible after 20 years the novelty has simply worn off/you're burned out on the genre? I've only been a metalhead for a fraction of as long as you, but I still get burned from time to time. Just because it doesn't do it for you anymore, that doesn't mean it "sucks."

 

A lot of popular music is "predictable" in the sense that some things just naturally sound good and not everything necessarily does. Plus, people tend to imitate their heroes, and every player learns from the techniques and theory accumulated by previous generations.

 

I've never understood the obsession with using exotic scales--don't get me wrong, I love them. (the phrygian and phrygian dominant are some of my favorites, as well as all the major modes) but there's nothing wrong with sticking to good old pentatonic minor. Predictable? Only because it's so dependable and reliable. I don't know if you are this kind of fan, but there's always that guitar elitist somewhere who looks down on things for not being obtuse enough, and that's just silly to me. Scales and chords, in my view, are just tools. You're the craftsman who makes something out of them. No tool is inherently better or worse; it's how you use it.

 

Can I ask, what exactly do you consider "metal"? I'm just asking because the genre is so huge. When I try to find a new band of the last 10 years or so, it's hard to find something that isn't very dissonant and growly. But the kind of metal I'm more into is bluesy 70s stuff or 80s new wave and hair/glam, which is wildly different. Or thrash. 

 

On the other hand, if you're talking about meaningless technicality "shred" vs soulful playing and songwriting, then I can somewhat agree. While they're certainly not mutually exclusive, the latter will always trump the former in my view. Meaningful music is always more important than complexity.

[Koko Ricky]

@QuaketallicA, it's important to note that my dismissive attitude toward metal is somewhat typical of what being a fan of something for a long time can entail. A few of my favorites include Morbid Angel, Cannibal Corpse, Napalm Death, Angel Witch, Motorhead, Iron Maiden, Autopsy, Pantera, White Zombie, Mr. Bungle, Darkthrone, Ozzy, Sunn 0))), etc. My passion for metal is juxtaposed with a growing frustration I've had with what I perceive to be a deep flaw within the music, which is a broad lack of compositional knowledge.

 

This is not a comment on whether not one is utilizing an exotic scale and more about how the sheer diversity of music across history, Western and otherwise, is attributable largely to idiosyncratic utilization of theory; everything from country to polka to dubstep to city pop is informed by theory. Any modern radio pop hit follows a diatonic progression. 

 

Metal, following its initial development in the 70s, largely abandoned diatonic/modal phrases for largely chromatic ones, and the thing about chromaticism is that your music will tend to meander if you apply it without the context of theory. As this became more commonplace, an increasing number of bands built careers on arrangements that are often unfocused and filler-oriented.

 

This, combined with overly compressed mixes and a general disdain for working outside comfort zones, makes for a genre where dynamics and timbre are largely similar from one moment to the next; it creates a kind of dull, static wall of sound that is always at 10. This has become the norm and I sometimes vent about it.  

[QuaketallicA]

On 8/7/2022 at 7:57 PM, Koko Ricky said:

@QuaketallicA, it's important to note that my dismissive attitude toward metal is somewhat typical of what being a fan of something for a long time can entail. A few of my favorites include Morbid Angel, Cannibal Corpse, Napalm Death, Angel Witch, Motorhead, Iron Maiden, Autopsy, Pantera, White Zombie, Mr. Bungle, Darkthrone, Ozzy, Sunn 0))), etc. My passion for metal is juxtaposed with a growing frustration I've had with what I perceive to be a deep flaw within the music, which is a broad lack of compositional knowledge.

 

This is not a comment on whether not one is utilizing an exotic scale and more about how the sheer diversity of music across history, Western and otherwise, is attributable largely to idiosyncratic utilization of theory; everything from country to polka to dubstep to city pop is informed by theory. Any modern radio pop hit follows a diatonic progression. 

 

Metal, following its initial development in the 70s, largely abandoned diatonic/modal phrases for largely chromatic ones, and the thing about chromaticism is that your music will tend to meander if you apply it without the context of theory. As this became more commonplace, an increasing number of bands built careers on arrangements that are often unfocused and filler-oriented.

 

This, combined with overly compressed mixes and a general disdain for working outside comfort zones, makes for a genre where dynamics and timbre are largely similar from one moment to the next; it creates a kind of dull, static wall of sound that is always at 10. This has become the norm and I sometimes vent about it.  

 

I figured it was likely an exhaustion as is natural when you're too familiar with something for a long time. You got to move on sometimes, and there's plenty of other genres out there.

 

I had to look up what diatonic means. If your idea of what good music can be is it must be diatonic, that's pretty limiting. Even the blues scale would not be diatonic, which is the cornerstone of all rock, including metal. If there were a venn diagram between "diatonic" and "chromatic" there would be a MASSIVE other category that things would fall into. Rejecting all of metal for some chromaticism in some instances is like dismissing the entirety of classical music and its different eras because of you find atonalism in the early 20th century to sound too random.

 

My personal beliefs on theory is that knowledge of that stuff is good to have in the background. Once you know it, or absorb it rather, it becomes a lot easier and more instinctive to naturally and creatively play things that sound nice, possibly even expand your creative horizons. But theory isn't a strict rulebook that must be adhered to (well not anymore, maybe hundreds of years ago it was, or unless you're in school and they want you to). Rock 'N 'Roll especially is supposed to be the music of rebellion, of breaking all the rules and being edgy, but in a way that's just damn awesome. I have a good feeling if you round up all the classic articles of the genre, you'll find that the songs were composed from the minds and souls of the musicians, not a theory algorithm. Academics can sit and analyze why a song works all they want, but when you're making something yourself, the only thing that matters is "does it feel right?" and trying to break new ground and do something interesting and unique sounding while you're at it.

[Koko Ricky]

I enjoy most all genres of music, especially jazz and fusion (my all time favorite band is Steely Dan). I also enjoy a lot of metal. Diatonic or not, if it sounds good it sounds good. Most music has chromatic passages; without those stray notes, music would be boring. Black American music specifically was a particularly interesting deviation from the rigidity of European classical music and shaped most of what the 20th century sounded like; hence the "blue" notes that wedge themselves between major scales. So obviously I'm invested in the whole gamut, not just diatonic phrasing.

 

I just happen to feel there are too many metal bands that try to break the rules without learning then first, or just plain lack ambition. Metal that I used to find corny, like Rob Zombie, Pantera and solo Ozzy, I now enjoy more because of how tight their compositions and performances are. But there's a lot of heavier stuff that now bores me because the guitarist just meaders in this radius around the first five frets, or arpegiates endlessly without direction. Vocalists afraid to test their range. Drummers with no groove that blast all day. Uninspired basslines that just follow the root notes of the guitarist. Sadly the oversaturation of the market mostly produces this kind of sound; and yet I still have a passion for metal. 

[TheFocus]

Star Wars was never really that great...

Paul Bostaph and Dave Lombardo are equals on the drums

the 90's were cooler than the 80's (the style and vibe of the decade is more interesting to me)

physical media was never meant to last

[scalliano]

Quake II campaign is best campaign.

[Ozcar]

.

Edited October 21, 2022 by Ozcar

[Ozcar]

Edit: December 2022: half life 2 and doom 3 graphics are both best.

Edited December 5, 2022 by Ozcar