ChAiNz.2da Posted August 12, 2010 Share Posted August 12, 2010 EDIT: oh yeah.. and Avatar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TriggerGod Posted August 12, 2010 Share Posted August 12, 2010 Avatar - I never understood it, and I never watched it. I guess I'm not a fan of 7 foot tall blue people with ape-like noses and who live in the forest. After it came out, a lot of people in my classes was saying how it was the best movie ever, and that they wished life was in 3D like in Avatar. I wanted to punch them all in the face, and for some I may have. Most stars today - Attention whores, all of them. Paris Hilton has been mentioned, but all of them just crave attention. And they'll do anything to get it. I'm tired of hearing news about how Kim Kardashian is getting a tummy tuck, or how Lindsey Lohan is going to jail again. Doctor Who - While I haven't had the apparent pleasure of watching the original Who, I have caught a couple of episodes of this new series and my head hurt too damn much to finish any of them. That coupled with that fact I only see it on at 2 in the morning slot on BBC. Modern Warfare 2 - I admit, I was into it. But over the span of a couple months, I slowly grew bored of its repetitive gameplay, in both single player and multiplayer. In single player you get a half assed plot where an old man tries to replace all those people lost in the nuclear explosion in the first game. In multiplayer, you get guns, and you get to shoot them at people. Occasionally you'll play a different type of game, like Search and Destroy or Capture the Flag, but in the end its just you shooting at a bunch of people with guns. Everybody knew the good hiding spots, all the good glitches, everything the game had. Besides from perhaps that first month, the most fun I had playing MW2 was when someone hacked a lobby, gave us everything, and gave us different ways to play, like with fully auto SPAS, low gravity, and double health. Assassin's Creed (1) - When I played that game for the first time, it was right after AC2 had come out. I got it and wanted to play the first game in the series before I played the second. Took me several months to complete because I couldn't stand all these little itty bitty side quests that are supposed to help you in your little killing quest, but never really helped. I knew I could just not do them, but all those markers on the maps really annoyed me. AC2 was a lot better for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ping Posted August 12, 2010 Share Posted August 12, 2010 Continent, not country. Maybe I should have said "Europe is home to the most advanced countries." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N-5/Prudii Posted August 12, 2010 Share Posted August 12, 2010 Can't believe no one posted this one: Show spoiler (hidden content - requires Javascript to show) Also this one: Show spoiler (hidden content - requires Javascript to show) Jedi Show spoiler (hidden content - requires Javascript to show) Btw, how id Avery get banned? I’m very sorry, but it is against forum rules for the staff to discuss such matters with anyone except the member in question. However, True_Avery wrote a blog that may answer some of your questions. ~ mimartin http://lucasforums.com/blog.php?b=703 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pho3nix Posted August 13, 2010 Share Posted August 13, 2010 Avatar - I never understood it, It's not exactly the most complex movie plot-wise... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N-5/Prudii Posted August 13, 2010 Share Posted August 13, 2010 Sorry about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TriggerGod Posted August 13, 2010 Share Posted August 13, 2010 It's not exactly the most complex movie plot-wise... What I meant was how everybody loved it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ping Posted August 13, 2010 Share Posted August 13, 2010 I get the feeling people liked Avatar for its visual effects and theme. I mean, I was able to accurately predict the plot as the movie went on, but those visuals were damn impressive. The theme - it seemed to be more of "live in harmony with Mother Nature" or "Leave the natives be." Something about that movie certainly resonated with everyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth333 Posted August 14, 2010 Share Posted August 14, 2010 Something about that movie certainly resonated with everyone. I guess I was not part of "everyone" neither were most of the "natives" with whom I work... it takes more than visuals to make a good movie, at least for me. I tried to watch the movie in 3d when it first came out but found myself sick after a few minutes (3d isn't for everyone). I rented the movie a few weeks ago...gosh...what a waste of time (I fast forwarded a few times to get to the end). Anyway, you can find breathtaking visuals just by traveling a little bit and it's for real (ok, no floating pieces of land or no giant smurfs but sometimes often it's much better, and for real...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RC-1162 Posted August 14, 2010 Share Posted August 14, 2010 You call that overrated, I call it inspirational. Depends on what she inspires : Lookie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ping Posted August 14, 2010 Share Posted August 14, 2010 I guess I was not part of "everyone" neither were most of the "natives" with whom I work... it takes more than visuals to make a good movie, at least for me. I tried to watch the movie in 3d when it first came out but found myself sick after a few minutes (3d isn't for everyone). I rented the movie a few weeks ago...gosh...what a waste of time (I fast forwarded a few times to get to the end). Anyway, you can find breathtaking visuals just by traveling a little bit and it's for real (ok, no floating pieces of land or no giant smurfs but sometimes often it's much better, and for real...) By "everyone," I mean the majority of people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astor Posted August 14, 2010 Share Posted August 14, 2010 (3d isn't for everyone) Quite. I think the whole 3d gimmick itself is 'overrated garbage'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drunkside Posted August 14, 2010 Share Posted August 14, 2010 Facebook Forum complaining Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeadYorick Posted August 16, 2010 Share Posted August 16, 2010 I get into debates weekly about games such as Oblivion and Final Fantasy 7. I think they have been explored to death already. The basic fact is that these games pretty much introduced most fans to RPGs. Similar to games like the original Fallout and Baldur's Gate. As such the prospect of playing something completely and utterly different then what they are used to. One game however I still think is blissfully overrated was Fallout 3. Mostly because of how I couldn't play it on consoles (I sold it several hours after I purchased it). I recieved it as a gift for the PC and had to load several realism mods into it. The prospect of shooting a man in the head with a pistol 15 times to kill him was too much. Even then the game's appeal was fairly limited, while I could understand why so many people love Fallout 3. It still had nothing compared to the quality of the original Fallout 1&2. Personally however I think New Vegas will redeem Fallout, with Chris Avellone (My favorite video game writer) at it's helm Show spoiler (hidden content - requires Javascript to show) I think people have voiced there concerns over that several hundred times already. By now it's almost common sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrotoy7 Posted August 16, 2010 Share Posted August 16, 2010 Only an Apple fanboi would say that Considering they started as a search engine written by a couple of young Russkys, I'd say they've come quite a long way in a very short time. Like most, I'm suspicious of their momentum and increasing sense of swallowing all in their path like MS in the 90s, but they do some great things - gmail, greader and android are my top3 of their achievements. Definitely not a fan of their net neutrality proposal though.... mtfbwya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChAiNz.2da Posted August 16, 2010 Share Posted August 16, 2010 Only an Apple fanboi would say that Considering they started as a search engine written by a couple of young Russkys, I'd say they've come quite a long way in a very short time. Like most, I'm suspicious of their momentum and increasing sense of swallowing in their path like MS in the 90s, but they do some great things - gmail, greader and android are my top3 of their achievements. Definitely not a fan of their net neutrality proposal though.... mtfbwya [rant] yes, because owning anything Apple instantly makes me an enemy of Google... "Like most".. really? Read ANY article on an Apple product (that allows comments) and watch the An-drone army march with their Google-can-do-no-wrong slogan. I'm not buying the "like most" bit. Google droids drones are just as bad as any Apple fanboi. period. "Don't be evil"... unless it involves bashing anything Apple of course. But I forgot, the 'Open Source' wins any argument, no matter if the majority of users doesn't understand what open source really is Trust me.. I think Google is the ass-kicking Apple needed, best for both camps honestly. Competition brings progress...but damn. Pc vs Mac doesn't hold a flame towards Android vs iPhone Take my rant with a grain of salt though. After-all I am an Apple fanboi, that's using an Apple wireless keyboard & magic mouse MS keyboard and trackball, folding/gaming/modding on my mac pc's, or playing games on my iPhone Xbox when I'm not streaming movies on my Apple TV ps3 or emailing friends with my mobile me gmail account. TOTAL mac fanboi here. [/rant] Google IS good, but until they can make me a sammich.. they're not all that... hehehe. That and I've been giving Bing a shot here lately and it's a pretty impressive engine. Nice to see that MS isn't totally out of the game yet. They are NOT the mega "nice non-corporation" people make them to be.. and * gasp * they are in the game to make a profit. They make great stuff (Gmail, Greader), they make flops (Knol, Buzz, Wave). They're just as fallible as any other company. But most of all.. they're 'overrated' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drunkside Posted August 16, 2010 Share Posted August 16, 2010 Cliff Burton. Sorry folks, Dave Ellefson is just plain better. ^^ At boozing, yes. At bass, no. RC you dont obviously play any instrument yourself? Cliff Burton´s "god status" is caused by his early death, nothing more. Here be some better, actually almost godlike metal bass players: Martin Mendez(Opeth), Sami Hinkka(Ensiferum), Steve DiGiorgio(Death etc.). And while Im in the "music mode" (like i had something like that, music is the only thing i think about these days:xp: ) Im going to arouse some serious anger: JIMI HENDRIX Sure as hell Jimi had skillz wid da ax and came up with a lot of new stuff, but if you can say with a serious face that he is the best guitar player ever lived I will instantly begin treating you as 1)an idiot. or 2)an idiot who has no understanding of music and has never touched an instrument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Det. Bart Lasiter Posted August 16, 2010 Share Posted August 16, 2010 part of the reason i disagree with that is because you have to be ****ing incredible to still sound amazing after taking a ****load of acid, and jimi did that on multiple occasions. also equipment nowadays is like a billion times better than it was then, which makes a huge difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drunkside Posted August 16, 2010 Share Posted August 16, 2010 part of the reason i disagree with that is because you have to be ****ing incredible to still sound amazing after taking a ****load of acid, and jimi did that on multiple occasions. also equipment nowadays is like a billion times better than it was then, which makes a huge difference. Modern equipment sounds worse than old in my opinion. But equipment doesnt make or break a guitarist. And I was never saying that Jimi was a bad player, just that he is so overrated its ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrotoy7 Posted August 16, 2010 Share Posted August 16, 2010 lolz... chainz, we know you're not actually a part of the hipster crowd If you do get an iP4 though, don't hold it in your left hand!! Speaking of which: I'd like to submit the iPhone4 as overrated. Sure the original iPhone was a revolution in the smartphone market, but this thing..... (This BBCode requires its accompanying plugin to work properly.) mtfbwya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Det. Bart Lasiter Posted August 16, 2010 Share Posted August 16, 2010 Modern equipment sounds worse than old in my opinion. But equipment doesnt make or break a guitarist. And I was never saying that Jimi was a bad player, just that he is so overrated its ridiculous. ehhh... just depends on what you get, but modern equipment is less prone to breaking, allows for higher gain at lower volumes, etc, etc. also, dunno if you've ever done acid, but him being able to play in that state really speaks to his comfort level and connection to his instrument imo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adamqd Posted August 16, 2010 Share Posted August 16, 2010 Jimi Hendrix is not overrated IMHO, People say "well Joe Satriani is better than Hendrix" technically yes, but he started playing because of jimi... to quote a friend of mine: you cannot IMHO successfully argue that any have had a greater impact upon the development of the instrument's role in popular music than Hendrix had. He changed the face of what was possible with the instrument, what the vocabulary could include, what could be explored and accomplished, the role of a lead guitar, what rhythm guitar could do, etc. * Innovation. Jimi was one of the first to achieve some of today's standby techniques, including use of feedback as a musical note. * Songwriting. Even by modern standards, Jimi's songwriting is impressive. It incorporates blues, jazz, and rock in innovative ways - music theory-wise, his songs are an incredibly rich tapestry. * Tone. It may seem like a small thing, but as a guitar player myself, I know the pain of getting the perfect tone to compliment your music - yet Jimi seems to pull it off with ease. Even today, his guitar tones are some of the most sought-out in history. Just look at this video, see the comfort and grace he has with the Guitar, its an extension of his very being>> http://www.veoh.com/collection/s191136/watch/e91146Myh5z8WF"]http://www.veoh.com/collection/s191136/watch/e91146Myh5z8WF"]http://www.veoh.com/collection/s191136/watch/e91146Myh5z8WF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mimartin Posted August 16, 2010 Share Posted August 16, 2010 Look man, you can listen to Jimi but you can't hear him. There's a difference man. Just because you're listening to him doesn't mean you're hearing him.[/Quote] Jimi's name in a "Overrated Garbage" thread, now that is overrated garbage. You must not hear Jimi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JediAthos Posted August 16, 2010 Share Posted August 16, 2010 I don't believe that Hendrix is the absolute be all end all of guitar players, but I don't believe he's overrated either. The guy still did things that most guitar players only dream about, and he influenced an entire generation of players including Clapton, Stevie Ray Vaughn, and Eddie Van Halen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astor Posted August 16, 2010 Share Posted August 16, 2010 Mandalorians: Karen Traviss is an awful writer. Yet, somehow, she has managed to stir the imaginations of thousands of fan boys with her unadulterated love letters to the Mandalorian race, turning them into a noble, misunderstood warrior race, completely removing the mystery and intrigue that made them so interesting in the first place. I could write more, but recently I've decided it's best to ignore them, so i'll just leave it at that. I’ve decided to ignore my own words and expand on why I dislike the Mandalorians and Karen Traviss’ interpretation of them, and why I dislike her as a Star Wars writer, so apologies if my diatribe isn’t to your liking, but this is, after all, my unqualified opinion. Okay, here goes. I’ll start by looking at the Mandalorians as she sees them. 1 – Mandalorians are more awesome than you. Mandalorians, or at least as Karen Traviss would have them, are unrivalled in every field. Their fighter craft are not only faster than an X-Wing, they’re clad in armour (or beskar’gam) that is impervious to everything. This same armour is used by their warriors, and is, unsurprisingly, lightsaber resistant. Let’s take the Legacy of the Force book Revelations as an example. They are also very, very scary. During the course of this book, Jaina Solo visits Mandalore, and it is noted that she is intimidated by them. Jaina Solo, Sword of the Jedi, a Jedi Knight who not only fought the Empire before the age of 10, a veteran of the Yuuzhan Vong War, Dark Nest crisis, and countless other struggle of galactic importance, is intimidated by a group of thugs (albeit well trained ones) who are drinking in a bar. Yet, despite being the leader of Rogue Squadron, and by all accounts one of the best pilots of her time, Mandalorians are apparently better. Just like they are constantly able to best her in combat. "It was over in two seconds flat and he hadn't even used the blade... It was the first time she had been taken down in a saber fight of any kind in years." One fight in this book has her unable to sense the movements of her Mandalorian opponent, again, perhaps unsurprisingly, flooring her instantly. Perhaps it was a one off, or perhaps the Mandalorian was secretly a Yuuzhan Vong. There’s no explanation as to how Mandalorians can’t be read by Jedi (or perhaps there is, so I’ll concede that point if that is the case). Constantly, the Mandalorians beat her into a pulp, because, again, they’re superior to a Jedi in every way (that’s something I’ll discuss later, though). Mirta shouldn't have been able to beat a Jedi's reaction time. But she did." There is even a point when the elite Mandalorians manage to board Darth Caedus’ flagship, killing everything in their path (taking no casualties, thanks to their ubiquitous beskar’gam), and manage to corner and wound him. A Sith Lord. But they don’t kill him. They did, however, totally manage to wound him because they’re awesome. 2 – Boba Fett is more awesome than everybody. The gradual deification of Boba Fett is not KT’s fault. That started when he managed to beat the Sarlacc. Twice. But KT takes it new and nauseating levels. He becomes the Star Wars equivalent of Chuck Norris. So much of the three LotF books written by Traviss are taken up by pointless, vacuous crap about how awesome Boba the Mandalore is. At the start of the series, he is stricken with an illness that will kill him. What’s this? It gets cured? Of course it does! Because Boba Fett is totally awesome! Oh, and he’s also one of those noble, caring Mandalorians, giving to the poor (no, really), and generally being a nice guy when he’s not leading his band of intergalactic Spartans across the galaxy in an unstoppable wave of bad language construction and sheer awesomeness. 3 - Mando’a is not a working language Speech analysts (they can be Star Wars fans too!) have gone over Ms. Traviss’ work on the Mandalorian ‘language’, and have concluded that it isn’t workable. There are far too many breaks in the flow of conversation that it could hardly be called a language at all. Yet, we are constantly treated (and I use the term loosely) to snippets and explanations of what these words mean in every chapter, sometimes every paragraph. Sometimes, these explanations are repeated chapters later just in case we forgot how awesome it is that they have their own words for things. Some characters even think in Mandalorian! I don’t mind the language that much, it must be said. What annoys me is that it is spoonfed to the reader at every opportunity, in addition to more snippets of Mandalorian ‘culture’ and other guff that does nothing to progress the story. It’s just useless filler, and is completely unnecessary. B'ut hey, any ecx'use to us'e apo'strophes, e'h? Traviss as a Star Wars writer - 4 – The Jedi are EVIL I see Vader as a tragic character who's been betrayed by everyone, and I can't help thinking of the Jedi as self-serving unelected elitist spoon-benders making whoopee on Republic taxpayers' credits. It's an iconoclastic journo world-view. Believe me, Order 66 was long overdue. I have a couple of Jedi that I don't want to shoot on sight, but they're my own creations, so I could make them a little humbler and more aware of the consequences they create for others. Getting into Jedi heads was that much harder. But I swore I could get into the most repellent characters' heads and see them as they see themselves, so I had to. I still wouldn't trust the Jedi Council with my wallet, let alone with running my country, but you won't spot that in the books. I keep my spoonbenderist views to myself. Except she didn’t. At every turn, Traviss seemingly does her best to vilify and demonise the Jedi, turning them into space Nazis, without offering any alternative viewpoint of them. They’re evil, end of story. "I left the order because I couldn't stomach how we talked about compassion and then turned a blind eye to using human clones for our slave army... I did whatever I could to atone for the wrong the Jedi did to these men." Of course, it’s not like the Mandalorians have ever kept slaves, is it? Never mind the fact that the Jedi had nothing to do with the creation of the Clones. And that is just one of the many lectures by an ex-Jedi turned Mandalorian on how evil the Jedi really are. Yet not once is the Jedi he is lecturing allowed to defend herself. No, she just stands there, and either has no answer, or agrees with everything he says. Even the Jedi characters in her books, her own creations, believe they are evil. They’re evil, end of story. So much of the three LotF books written by Traviss is taken up by pure hatred (apart from when it’s taken up by guff about Mandalorians) towards the Jedi, and again, no alternative viewpoint is given. They’re evil, end of story. At one point, Traviss even accused fans of the Jedi of being as bad as neo-Nazis (and before you ask for proof, it's here). Which brings me to my next point. 5 – Karen Traviss is not a nice person Rather like the fans she has christened Fandalorians, Ms. Traviss seemed to have a hard time accepting any criticism of her works, even going so far as to name them ‘Talifans’. But I suppose that's alright, they are Jedi fans, after all, so they’re evil, end of story. Let’s look at the word that’s based on – Taliban. The Taliban are an extremist organisation which is currently engaged in acts of terrorism across Afghanistan and Pakistan. Apparently, the criticism levelled at her by Star Wars fans is so hurtful that it warrants a name that evokes a Terrorist organisation. That’s not even mentioning her accusations that fans were sexist when they said she hadn’t researched the topic well enough (which is true enough, she proudly claimed that she had never read any Star Wars material, and wouldn't), or any of the other insults she hurled at fans who offered valid criticisms (again, insults that have been deleted). And, let’s not forget her exit from the Star Wars franchise. She left because she was unhappy with the direction the Clone Wars TV series was taking with numerous things, and that it made some of her work irrelevant (which has been proven not to be case in some areas). I find it hypocritical that she should leave over retconning (which is a laughable claim - she say herself she left over 'contractual' issues - i.e. money), when she was responsible for many retcons, completely ignoring many of the early sources of information concerning Mandalorians (going as far back as the novelisation of The Empire Strikes Back, for instance). The way she behaved was as if she had invented the Mandalorians from the ground up. She didn’t, and to claim so is laughable. She certainly invented them in their current warriors-with-a-heart-of-gold-and-awesome-armour guise, but that was only through ignorance of previously established sources. To add insult to injury, she left before she could finish her Republic Commando series. If, as she has often claimed, she really cared about the series and its fans, surely she would’ve at least seen that through? Unfortunately, throwing her toys out of the pram was more important. I could write and write about this, but I think i've managed to cover my main reasons for thinking they are 'overrated garbage'. [/opinion] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.