Okay, maybe there is still hope for Project Needlemouse...

[Silverstorms]

Why? Because I like their music. It's just my type of music. It may not be your type, but that doesn't make it bad.

Doesn't make it good either, which is what you are implying.

 

[Tyeforce]

OK. I understand that taste is subjective. But taste needs to be based on something, not just a random "I like this" or "I hate that". I'm really sorry if I'm coming off as a snob, but I can't listen to anything that doesn't have musical interest. I mean, a catchy tune is nice for occasional listening...but...that's about it. Notice how there are tons of people who say "I used to like *insert band/artist here*, but I don't now". And why is that?

Because the music has no lasting value. It seems good at a certain point in time but it's never going to stand up to anything else. I'm not saying everybody should compare their music with Beethoven's 9th and trash their compositions if they're not up there with Ludvig Van, but there should be at least some interesting harmonies, rhythms, and melodies... I dunno.

Bul, people like different things. For me, Crush 40 will never get old. They're one of the few bands that I actually like. You just think differently because you know so much about music and it's such an important thing to you. But a song doesn't have to be a masterpiece to be loved by people. Even the simplest song can be enjoyable. It all depends on your own tastes. Yours are obviously very different from mine. From what I've heard, your music doesn't really appeal to me at all. That's not to say it's bad, because it certainly isn't. It's just not my taste. You see?

 

[Megamannt125]

SA2 has the best soundtrack imo, all the sonic stages have amazing music. (green forest and metal harbor come to mind)

 

[Tyeforce]

SA2 has the best soundtrack imo, all the sonic stages have amazing music. (green forest and metal harbor come to mind)

YESSSSS!!! =D

 

[Entei Slider]

What the hell is "new Sonic appeal"? Glitchy, broken gameplay mechanics?

The only new Sonic games that are really "glitchy" are Sonic Adventure, Sonic Adventure 2, and Sonic the Hedgehog '06, and the glitches were just plain fun in the Adventure games. The gameplay is in no way "broken". >_> The games are fun. You know, the whole reason why games were made in the first place? F-U-N?

So, most of the 3D ones have glitches, according to what you said... also...

glitches...plain fun

What? Glitches are the result of poor development. How are they fun? Don't get me wrong, I understand that games are about fun, but damn, none of the 3D ones have aged well. I used to have fun with Adventure 2 Battle waaay back in the day, but it just doesn't hold up. The gameplay elements are dated and sometimes downright moronic -- who wants to hunt emeralds with Knuckles at 1 mile / hour? -- and the Sonic stages are poorly designed. I guess the Tails/Eggman courses were fun, but only barely... the only redeeming part of Adventure 2 Battle was the Chao Garden. And again, it's very dated and underdeveloped when you think about it.

My main gripe with the 3D games is poor level design and unnecessary filler. The hub worlds are pointless, the voice acting is terrible, and considering the poor in-game graphics engine, all the cutscenes look awful. That, and the music... all the rock music is atrocious! Thank God for Sonic Unleashed, they definitely nailed the music in that one... speaking of Unleashed, it seems to be pretty decent from what I've played of it so far... definitely a nice throw-back to the old games.

When I saw that I knew that you know what your talking about .

 

[Entei Slider]

SA2 has the best soundtrack imo, all the sonic stages have amazing music. (green forest and metal harbor come to mind)

T_T No City Escape?!!?!?!?!?!
That in my eye....er.....ears. Is the best sonic song yet.
And sorry about the double post....

 

[Bulerias]

OK. I understand that taste is subjective. But taste needs to be based on something, not just a random "I like this" or "I hate that". I'm really sorry if I'm coming off as a snob, but I can't listen to anything that doesn't have musical interest. I mean, a catchy tune is nice for occasional listening...but...that's about it. Notice how there are tons of people who say "I used to like *insert band/artist here*, but I don't now". And why is that?

Because the music has no lasting value. It seems good at a certain point in time but it's never going to stand up to anything else. I'm not saying everybody should compare their music with Beethoven's 9th and trash their compositions if they're not up there with Ludvig Van, but there should be at least some interesting harmonies, rhythms, and melodies... I dunno.

Bul, people like different things. For me, Crush 40 will never get old. They're one of the few bands that I actually like. You just think differently because you know so much about music and it's such an important thing to you. But a song doesn't have to be a masterpiece to be loved by people. Even the simplest song can be enjoyable. It all depends on your own tastes. Yours are obviously very different from mine. From what I've heard, your music doesn't really appeal to me at all. That's not to say it's bad, because it certainly isn't. It's just not my taste. You see?

Yeah. There are plenty of people who don't dig my music and I don't take offense... because taste is subjective. But musical quality really isn't. It's sort of a point of no return... once you start analyzing, you analyze even the simplest stuff... hell, there is PLENTY of beautiful, simple music. It's not about simplicity. I love minimalism, for example...

But there's a difference between meaningful minimalism and jamming on a C chord for a 4 minute tune.

 

[Thunder]

SA2 has the best soundtrack imo, all the sonic stages have amazing music. (green forest and metal harbor come to mind)

I liked Sonic The Hedghog 2, and 3's soundtrack :3

 

[Ciaran]

lol@arguing with bul about music, I'd say that he may know a wee bit more than you do Tye.

 

[Tyeforce]

What the hell is "new Sonic appeal"? Glitchy, broken gameplay mechanics?

The only new Sonic games that are really "glitchy" are Sonic Adventure, Sonic Adventure 2, and Sonic the Hedgehog '06, and the glitches were just plain fun in the Adventure games. The gameplay is in no way "broken". >_> The games are fun. You know, the whole reason why games were made in the first place? F-U-N?

So, most of the 3D ones have glitches, according to what you said... also...

glitches...plain fun

What? Glitches are the result of poor development. How are they fun? Don't get me wrong, I understand that games are about fun, but damn, none of the 3D ones have aged well. I used to have fun with Adventure 2 Battle waaay back in the day, but it just doesn't hold up. The gameplay elements are dated and sometimes downright moronic -- who wants to hunt emeralds with Knuckles at 1 mile / hour? -- and the Sonic stages are poorly designed. I guess the Tails/Eggman courses were fun, but only barely... the only redeeming part of Adventure 2 Battle was the Chao Garden. And again, it's very dated and underdeveloped when you think about it.

My main gripe with the 3D games is poor level design and unnecessary filler. The hub worlds are pointless, the voice acting is terrible, and considering the poor in-game graphics engine, all the cutscenes look awful. That, and the music... all the rock music is atrocious! Thank God for Sonic Unleashed, they definitely nailed the music in that one... speaking of Unleashed, it seems to be pretty decent from what I've played of it so far... definitely a nice throw-back to the old games.

When I saw that I knew that you know what your talking about .

The funny thing is, if it weren't for the Chao, I wouldn't have ever gotten into Sonic. My friend asked me if I wanted to buy the game from him, and he thought I'd like it since he knew I loved Pok

 

[-Aaron]

What the hell is "new Sonic appeal"? Glitchy, broken gameplay mechanics?

The only new Sonic games that are really "glitchy" are Sonic Adventure, Sonic Adventure 2, and Sonic the Hedgehog '06, and the glitches were just plain fun in the Adventure games. The gameplay is in no way "broken". >_> The games are fun. You know, the whole reason why games were made in the first place? F-U-N?

So, most of the 3D ones have glitches, according to what you said... also...

glitches...plain fun

What? Glitches are the result of poor development. How are they fun? Don't get me wrong, I understand that games are about fun, but damn, none of the 3D ones have aged well. I used to have fun with Adventure 2 Battle waaay back in the day, but it just doesn't hold up. The gameplay elements are dated and sometimes downright moronic -- who wants to hunt emeralds with Knuckles at 1 mile / hour? -- and the Sonic stages are poorly designed. I guess the Tails/Eggman courses were fun, but only barely... the only redeeming part of Adventure 2 Battle was the Chao Garden. And again, it's very dated and underdeveloped when you think about it.

My main gripe with the 3D games is poor level design and unnecessary filler. The hub worlds are pointless, the voice acting is terrible, and considering the poor in-game graphics engine, all the cutscenes look awful. That, and the music... all the rock music is atrocious! Thank God for Sonic Unleashed, they definitely nailed the music in that one... speaking of Unleashed, it seems to be pretty decent from what I've played of it so far... definitely a nice throw-back to the old games.

When I saw that I knew that you know what your talking about .

The funny thing is, if it weren't for the Chao, I wouldn't have ever gotten into Sonic. My friend asked me if I wanted to buy the game from him, and he thought I'd like it since he knew I loved Pok

 

[Entei Slider]

What did I do? Just stating my opinion about the joy of chao.

 

[Tyeforce]

lol@arguing with bul about music, I'd say that he may know a wee bit more than you do Tye.

I know he knows much more about music than I do, but he doesn't get that people can music that may not be as in depth as some. It doesn't matter which song is "better" than the other, as long as you like it.

 

[Micah]

OK. I understand that taste is subjective. But taste needs to be based on something, not just a random "I like this" or "I hate that". I'm really sorry if I'm coming off as a snob, but I can't listen to anything that doesn't have musical interest. I mean, a catchy tune is nice for occasional listening...but...that's about it. Notice how there are tons of people who say "I used to like *insert band/artist here*, but I don't now". And why is that?

Because the music has no lasting value. It seems good at a certain point in time but it's never going to stand up to anything else. I'm not saying everybody should compare their music with Beethoven's 9th and trash their compositions if they're not up there with Ludvig Van, but there should be at least some interesting harmonies, rhythms, and melodies... I dunno.

Bul, people like different things. For me, Crush 40 will never get old. They're one of the few bands that I actually like. You just think differently because you know so much about music and it's such an important thing to you. But a song doesn't have to be a masterpiece to be loved by people. Even the simplest song can be enjoyable. It all depends on your own tastes. Yours are obviously very different from mine. From what I've heard, your music doesn't really appeal to me at all. That's not to say it's bad, because it certainly isn't. It's just not my taste. You see?

Yeah. There are plenty of people who don't dig my music and I don't take offense... because taste is subjective. But musical quality really isn't. It's sort of a point of no return... once you start analyzing, you analyze even the simplest stuff... hell, there is PLENTY of beautiful, simple music. It's not about simplicity. I love minimalism, for example...

But there's a difference between meaningful minimalism and jamming on a C chord for a 4 minute tune.

Funny you should say that. I was thinking of majoring in something musical related, but I didn't want to overanalyze my music and possibly lose interest in it.

 

[Ciaran]

lol@arguing with bul about music, I'd say that he may know a wee bit more than you do Tye.

I know he knows much more about music than I do, but he doesn't get that people can music that may not be as in depth as some. It doesn't matter which song is "better" than the other, as long as you like it.

I'm going to take my own advice an not argue with you, there is honestly absolutely no point whatsoever, considering everything that anyone ever says to you just bounces straight off your head.

 

[-Aaron]

http://www.youtube.com/v/3rax27_ZIVM

 

[Ciaran]

OK. I understand that taste is subjective. But taste needs to be based on something, not just a random "I like this" or "I hate that". I'm really sorry if I'm coming off as a snob, but I can't listen to anything that doesn't have musical interest. I mean, a catchy tune is nice for occasional listening...but...that's about it. Notice how there are tons of people who say "I used to like *insert band/artist here*, but I don't now". And why is that?

Because the music has no lasting value. It seems good at a certain point in time but it's never going to stand up to anything else. I'm not saying everybody should compare their music with Beethoven's 9th and trash their compositions if they're not up there with Ludvig Van, but there should be at least some interesting harmonies, rhythms, and melodies... I dunno.

Bul, people like different things. For me, Crush 40 will never get old. They're one of the few bands that I actually like. You just think differently because you know so much about music and it's such an important thing to you. But a song doesn't have to be a masterpiece to be loved by people. Even the simplest song can be enjoyable. It all depends on your own tastes. Yours are obviously very different from mine. From what I've heard, your music doesn't really appeal to me at all. That's not to say it's bad, because it certainly isn't. It's just not my taste. You see?

Yeah. There are plenty of people who don't dig my music and I don't take offense... because taste is subjective. But musical quality really isn't. It's sort of a point of no return... once you start analyzing, you analyze even the simplest stuff... hell, there is PLENTY of beautiful, simple music. It's not about simplicity. I love minimalism, for example...

But there's a difference between meaningful minimalism and jamming on a C chord for a 4 minute tune.

Funny you should say that. I was thinking of majoring in something musical related, but I didn't want to overanalyze my music and possibly lose interest in it.

From what I've seen, studying music helps your enjoyment, and there's a certain kick of listening to your favourote bnads and recognizing the techniques they use.

 

[Megamannt125]

Bul, honestly, I don't care about lyrics or technical stuff as long as it sounds good, for example Rhapsody of fire is my favorite band, and their lyrics are pretty random. yet they make my ears orgasm.

 

[Tyeforce]

lol@arguing with bul about music, I'd say that he may know a wee bit more than you do Tye.

I know he knows much more about music than I do, but he doesn't get that people can music that may not be as in depth as some. It doesn't matter which song is "better" than the other, as long as you like it.

I'm going to take my own advice an not argue with you, there is honestly absolutely no point whatsoever, considering everything that anyone ever says to you just bounces straight off your head.

No it doesn't. I listen to everyone. But I'm not going to let somebody change my own opinions. That's not to say that I'm closed minded, I just have my own opinions and beliefs. But people have gotten me to change before, because if it wasn't for an article that DF posted, I probably would still think that I'm straight.

 

[Entei Slider]

http://www.youtube.com/v/3rax27_ZIVM

I lol'd