WrestleZone Forums - The Media Hub

Nu-Metal: The Last Musical Revolution??

Alex — Mon, 17 Jun 2013 20:33:34 GMT

So I was reading my Classic Rock magazine and it was saying how Nu-Metal was the last great rock revolution and I'm inclined to agree.

I mean Nu-Metal started in the mid 90s and was massive until about the mid 2000s and i that time span there were several bands that are seen as the pioneers of the genre (Limp Bizkit, Korn, Deftones) then there were the bands that capitalised massively on the scene (Linkin Park, Papa Roach) and then there were bands who just got lumped in with them (Slipknot) and lest we not forget the legions of bands who played that style of music during the time period who probably aren't remembered.

I mean these bands were playing big festivals like Woodstock and you'd see loads of band merchandise everywhere (when I first started secondary school in 2002 I saw loads of Korn and Slipknot stuff) and to this day even with the popularity of the genre waning the bands still get to play either the main stage (sometimes headlining) or headline the second biggest one at festivals and still play pretty big places on tour.

Compare that to Metalcore (arguably the sucessor to Nu-Metal) and it doesn't seem to have blown up like Nu-Metal did. Most of the bands in the genre seem to play medium sized places at best and if they're lucky get to play the main stage at big festivals (but not headline) I know acts like Killswitch Engage and Bring Me The Horizon are the exception, but aside from those two (one I'm a fan of and the other my friends listen to) I'd be hard pressed to name many metalcore acts. I know the genre has a die hard fanbase (one of my friend is one of them) but it doens't really have much crossover appeal

I know there's Indie and Pop Rock/Pop Punk, but they've technically been going for ages with slight alterations here and there over the years so they're technically exempt.

Is today's music so fragmented that there can never really be another rock revolution so to speak (music message boards seem to enforce this) or is the rock stuff that's out now just doesn't have as much crossover appeal that Nu-Metal's rock and rap had??

Nintendo Should Look Into Buying Megaman

KJ — Fri, 14 Jun 2013 02:42:54 GMT

With the announcement of the 4th Super Smash Bros. game came this announcement as well. The Blue Bomber is joining the Melee as he continues to be the most cross-over friendly character in videogames. But what bugs me is the lack of consistency Capcom's had with the legendary character. Since Keiji Inafune's leave from the company whether it's by one reason or another, there is little emphasis on new games for him.

We got 2 more 8-bit games and a cellphone game and that's been about it. Megaman Universe,Online and Legends 3 all fell through the floor and I also remember a 3D/8-bit hybrid remake for Megaman 2 that seemed to vanish. There was a time when there was at least one new Megaman game per year. But once ZX and Star Force fell they just have not really bothered.

Now we got this. That's probably the first time we see the character with a new look on a system since the Nintendo DS Star Force games. Capcom simply license it from what I understand and Nintendo very clearly wanted to swing for the fences with him. They clearly did. Megaman would very clearly benefit from being brought in by the Nintendo family and so would they in my eyes. We've seen them through smash hit after smash hit with Zelda, DK, Kirby, Marion, Metroid and on. Imagine Megaman with the same graphics as the video above in a game in a similar vain to the New Super Mario Bros. games. Or a Megaman X game in a similar vain of Metroid: Other M.

Simply put, I think Nintendo would have the right mindset and ideas to bring the Blue Bomber out of the obscurity he's been the last few years.

Final Fantasy 4 Walkthrough with Dagger

Dagger Dias — Tue, 11 Jun 2013 07:01:25 GMT

Welcome to Dagger�s video game walkthrough series! Some of the older members might remember this from 3 years ago. I started a thread with the intention of sharing a nostalgic walkthrough for the game Final Fantasy 4, but never finished it. We need more video game topics, so I thought I�d bring this topic back and have another go at it.

The first game will be none other than Final Fantasy 4, one of my all-time favorites. I plan on doing other games as well. Most of which will be oldschool titles so that I�ll be able to include gameplay footage as yours truly makes his way through various classics. I have walkthrough videos on my youtube page that I�ll be posting alongside the text, so you can see the action for yourself. I�ll be organizing it as one post per video, and beginning a new post every time the content in the text catches up to where the last video left off. That way the posts don�t get too lengthy.

Even though the box reads Final Fantasy 2, this is the version I am playing in the videos. A little trivia lesson for the few who still do not know. Final Fantasy 4 was the 2nd Final Fantasy title released in the US. The original FF2 and FF3 were NES titles that did not see a global release until many years later, so at first the 4th and 6th games in the series got released on the SNES as FF2 and FF3 respectively.

You�re welcome to share your thoughts on the game or ask me questions. Just please stay on topic and within the rules.

Let�s begin. :)

The Expendables 3 Speculation Thread

Mitch H. Winnfield — Sat, 08 Jun 2013 18:55:03 GMT

Mel Gibson won't direct The Expendables 3, Instead, he's going to be the primary antagonist:

http://www.showbiz411.com/2013/06/07...-expendables-3

Great news, and I'm looking forward to seeing what Mel can do as the main villain. Could be the jumpstart Mel needs, and this will be his first high profiled role in a while.

New editions to the cast include Jackie Chan, Nicolas Cage, Wesley Snipes, Milla Jovovich, and Mickey Rourke is returning.

The Expendables 3 doesn't hit theaters until August 15, 2014, but I really enjoyed the follow up to the original, and well, The Expendables is one of the very action franchises I actually care about.

PS4 vs. Xbox One: Does Sony already have the advantage?

SDS1582 — Fri, 07 Jun 2013 14:09:39 GMT

With news of the new consoles from Sony and Microsoft coming out by year's end, there's already been hype and disappoint from both sides.

I found this interesting opinion piece in which the author thinks Sony has a great opportunity to gain a big advantage over Xbox One by getting simpler rather than more complex:

Quote:

The Xbox One Might Let Sony's PS4 Win By Default

Last night, Microsoft dumped a pile of information into our laps about some of the more controversial specifics of the Xbox One. We heard confirmation about its practices for always on, used game resale, and game ownership in general. Some of the highlights:

- Your Xbox must check in via the internet once every 24 hours, if not, you won�t be able to play games

- It is up to publishers whether or not you can resell your games or gift them to friends

- Discs have nothing to do with ownership, and are only use for installation purposes. Games are simply licensed now

As I read through this list and the expected internet outrage that followed, I had to wonder what Sony must be making of all this.

There are two options for Sony and the Playstation 4. They can march arm in arm with Microsoft backwards in time with practices that actually make gaming less accessible and fun, or reject all of it and possibly win the next console war before it�s even started.

Sony has been eerily silent about all of these issues to date, at least in any official capacity. Yes, in interviews they�ve given us supposed comforts like �no, the PS4 doesn�t need to be always on,� or �yes, the PS4 plays used games.� But both of those things don�t mean what they used to. You might also say given this new information that the Xbox One isn�t ALWAYS on, but it does have to be connected to the internet once a day. Microsoft will say even people with unstable internet can manage that, right? You could say the Xbox One DOES play used games, but �used games� does not mean what it once did because of everything simply being licensed now. So what�s Sony talking about here? I�m not convinced we can say for sure yet.

The truth is we don�t know the full scope of Sony�s plans, despite what they�ve said in interviews so far. The definition of always on and used games have changed so drastically, a sentence or two about either isn�t enough of an explanation. I don�t think we can officially rule out that Sony could have similar policies to Microsoft, in some form or another, but we can hope that isn�t the case.

Sony needs to be learning from what�s happening with the Xbox One right now. The console, as it exists, simply has more cons than pros at this point, something that is almost unfathomable for a new system. It used to be a lot more simple. This is a new video game console. It will play better looking versions of all your favorite games, and give you some cool new ones too. Buy it.

And people did.

But what if all the new features actually became reasons not to buy a new console instead? Yes, it still promises better games, but there are a ton of caveats attached now. In order to access these games, you must put up with a laundry list of restrictions like the ones listed above. Something that�s supposed to be a benefit, the Kinect, is now being seen as an almost Orwellian listening device that much be attached to the console at all times.

So really, what are the selling points for the Xbox One at this point? There are its TV tuning abilities via Kinect control, but as cool as those were in the reveal demo, when you really sat down and thought about it, are you wasting that much time pressing the �input� button on your remote control? Is this solving a problem that actually exists? I don�t believe so.

So what we�re really left with is games, and we haven�t seen many so far. Microsoft�s two big staple franchises are Halo and Gears of War, and I would argue those are the only two that could actually sell systems on their own. The rest of its top titles are shared with Sony, even Call of Duty, though Microsoft seemed to forget that when they made it the grand finale of their Xbox One announcement. They couldn�t even keep Bungie around, and that studio�s next blockbuster, Destiny, is being showcased at the PS4 event during E3.

All of this leaves Sony in a very unique position. If they simply stick with the tenants of the video game industry that have been the norm for years, offline play, used game selling/buying and physical game ownership, they could see a large amount of Microsoft loyalists flood to the PS4 simply because they want a console that can play games easily and without restriction. They�d only have to sacrifice a handful of exclusives to do so. Sony could even promote digital distribution for those who like the convenience, so long as they kept physical discs as an option when it comes to game ownership.

I own both a PS3 and an Xbox 360, and have been called a fanboy of both brands at one time or another. But given the current state of things, the Playstation 4 appears to be shaping up to be the better gaming machine. Sony�s exclusives are more numerous and generally of higher quality than Microsoft�s. Sony touted their technical specs in their reveal while Microsoft masked theirs with mumbo jumbo, implying Sony may have the more powerful machine.

Rather, Microsoft�s ace in the hole was supposed to be that the Xbox One was a glorious �entertainment box.� A revolutionary device that everyone would want to have in their living room. But so far, we haven�t seen it do anything that a combination of a cable box and a PS4 can�t do, other than adding gesture and voice control. Perhaps there are more aspects to it we haven�t seen, but being able to switch inputs by talking to your TV or seeing your fantasy sports stats onscreen is not enough to declare an entertainment revolution.

When it�s all said and done, if Sony rejects the sorts of policies that Microsoft officially put forth last night, they might win the console war, at least in the near future. I have a hard time believing that many people will buy an Xbox One over a PS4 simply to play Halo and Gears of War, or for Kinect�s TV tie-in abilities. And even those advantages might be dramatically outweighed by the internet connection and game ownership policies that so many have claimed to despise.

I don�t know if Sony will seize on this opportunity. It might be too late, and the system has simply been designed to work similar to the way the Xbox One does. In that case, if the two systems end up having more or less the same policies, then it�s just going to be a free-for-all where consumers have two pretty similar choices in front of them, sort of like this past generation. Only this time, consumers will lose as both major companies have colluded in order to eliminate true game ownership or the ability to play offline. Should that happen, maybe Nintendo might finally see some wind in the Wii U�s sales, provided it�s released any worthwhile games by then. Perhaps we haven�t given Nintendo enough credit for staying true to the traditional practices of old.

At this point, the Xbox One seems to be fumbling so badly, it almost seems like Sony would be remiss to not seize on the opportunity. Microsoft�s steps forward appear as backward movement to many, and Sony could win by simply standing still and watching its biggest competitor sink under its own weight. Or they may tie their fortunes together, and it will be the consumers who drown in higher prices and obtrusive restrictions.

Both companies are staying mum until E3 now. I guess we�ll just have to wait and see.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertco...rtner=yahootix

From my perspective, I agree with this guy. I think there seem to be too many cons and too many "hurdles" with the Xbox One. Most of what I've heard from serious gamers has been negative, in terms of their thoughts so far regarding Xbox One. Now, let's all remember, most of this is rumor and it's a little unfair to pass judgment now.

I used to play a lot of video games as a kid (Sega Genesis and SNES were big when I was in middle school and then Playstation in high school).

I played PS2 and the newer systems in college but I wouldn't classify myself as a hardcore gamer. I'd play many different types of games by myself or with others. I had friends that all they did is play these games. Anyway, I got too busy with school and then graduate school that I didn't have time for video games and I kinda lost interest. I have bought an Xbox360 and a few games several years ago but I almost never play.

Now, I kinda want to jump back in to video games but to be honest, I'm scared. From the outside looking in, it looks way, way too complex to just sit down and play. I think that is what this article is getting at. Gamers like me will be intimidated by having to go online, set up accounts, download updates, etc. etc. While Xbox One might appeal to the hardcore gamers, people that want to just sit down and play won't like it and that's where Sony's chance is. Sony can still make their system appeal to hardcore gamers but they can simplify a lot of it so that the 'average' or even 'beginner' can take it out of the box, plug it in and play.

I know there are some serious gamers here. What do you all think of this author's piece above and the future of these two systems?

Freaks And Geeks

PaperGhostopolis — Tue, 04 Jun 2013 08:32:46 GMT

Now like a year ago, a poster here (and a fine poster at that) named jmt made a little thread called the Jason Segel Appreciation Thread and here it is:

http://forums.wrestlezone.com/showth...ht=jason+segel

:) Reading what I had written there, I am glad I lived up to my word and as late as I am, I finally got done with Freaks and Geeks. It was in jmt's thread where I first came across the show 'Freaks and Geeks' and by god, what a show. The cast, the plots, the characters all take you back to '81.

Jason Segel obviously stood out but the Weirs in general had great chemistry. Sam, Bill and Neal's shenanigans are fun. There just so many elements that make the show great.

There are serious topics touched as well, like cheating on your spouse, single motherhood, domestic conflicts and the show does it all in a way that touches your heart and makes you feel for the characters.

I wish I watched this show growing up like I did the Wonder Years.

Share some love and stories people.

Paying For Music? Name Your Price! (The Problems)

Try Hard With A Vengeance — Sun, 02 Jun 2013 16:36:08 GMT

Amanda Palmer's Bandcamp

The above is a link to the Bandcamp Site of Amanda Palmer, former lead singer of Dresden Dolls, now a solo artist touring with the "Grand Theft Orchestra". Yesterday, through her Bandcamp, I downloaded 3 Albums (34 Songs), for less than $3 (�2). There were two reasons for this;

There's no way that I'd have enough money to buy all three albums at the usual iTunes/Store Price, which is around �9.99 in the UK.
Amanda Palmer's Bandcamp has a "Name Your Price" for each album, the lowest price usually being $1. Some are free, but in the world of "Name Your Price", it's difficult to bring yourself to pay more.

Now, after buying all of this music yesterday, something didn't feel right. I thought that I hadn't paid enough, but I knew that I had reasons to pay the low price that I did. In the end, I tweeted Amanda (@amandapalmer if you want to check this out), telling her that I had bought her music & didn't feel that I had enough, the following is what came from it.

Quote:

@AmandaPalmer @RobL94 That's fine

@amandapalmer 19h

@RobL94 do me a a favor instead, and share the songs you like the most with other people. that's often worth more in the long run. x

I then asked her if there was anyway that I could give her some money for the albums in the future, when I could afford it, and she replied;

@amandapalmer 19h

@RobL94 a lot of people ask me this. you can ALWAYS donate randomly on the blog. button's at the bottom. http://bit.ly/blog060113

So, coming out of it, even though I had paid a small amount for a musician's work, she didn't seem to be fussed in the slightest. However, what she thought was better, was for me to share the songs that I liked the most with people, just like you guys on WZ. (See below).

Here come the questions;

What are your thoughts on "Name Your Price" music online?
What price would you pay for an album online if you were able to choose?
Is it better to share music with people when you pay a low price, in the hope that they also pay for the music?

Thanks for answering. Now, Amanda Palmer asked me to share some of her music with you (Hey, you might go buy it!), so here's a few of my favourite songs.

-----------------------------------------------------

Ukulele Anthem - Amanda Palmer

Creep (Radiohead Cover) - Amanda Palmer

The Killing Type - Amanda Palmer & The Grand Theft Orchestra

Oasis - Amanda Palmer.

Finally, Amanda Palmer gave this amazing TED talk, on the Art of Asking, which happens to link in with the paying for music that I've just mentioned. If you have the time, it'd be great if you watched it.

Most Entertaining Sitcom Pairings

PaperGhostopolis — Tue, 28 May 2013 18:57:14 GMT

Now I don't mean romantically here. Well it could be.

You know when there is a big cast on a sitcom and you get these episodes where two or three of the characters get into silly escapades together that really have you lol'ing or lmao'ing...or laughing really hard?

Kinda like that.

Here's an example:

That "I don't know what you're talking about line" still cracks me up. Whenever Ross and Joey where paired, man it was great. Funny ass episodes, and I'll come back to some other FRIENDS episodes later.

One more:

I couldn't find ones with Phil and Dylanl...but ye how good are the episodes with Phil and Dylan. Ty's character is just funny everytime he opens his mouth and them one liners at the end of a scene are gold.

Him and Dylan, epic!

Electronic Entertainment Expo 2013 pre-discussion

The S#cial Sector — Tue, 28 May 2013 12:32:53 GMT

With E3 being literally 2 weeks away from today, and both PS4 and Xbox One stuff out of the way, I'm surprised there isn't much more video game talk... maybe it's because people forget that this section can be utilized for video games as well. :shrug:

Anyway, just like with any annual event, this one seems to be one that gamers both casual and hardcore can get into. With the new consoles announced, surely the peek interest could be when the two consoles are being released, launch titles for the games, and of course what will they do with the current consoles until these games have been released.

And for the added bonus, possibly more WWE 2k14 information could finally be given.

Whatever your interest for E3, discuss it here.

What's In A (Band) Name??

Alex — Sun, 26 May 2013 17:59:44 GMT

So I recently made a thread discussing Chester Bennington becoming the new Stone Temple Pilots singer

http://forums.wrestlezone.com/showthread.php?t=255121

Some of the responses were saying if they changed the name it would be ok.

Its seems that when a member is replaced (most of the time the singer) there are calls for the band to change the name my question is why??

I get that sometimes a member is so integral to a band that carrying on without them would be strange but if they're replaced why should the name be changed. I mean Black Sabbath, Judas Priest, Van Halen and others replaced their singer and carried on (as well as others). Others have had revolving line ups and kept the name of the band (Guns N Roses)

I understand sometimes it's better to try something new with a new slate like Audioslave (who were a different style of music to Soundgarden and Rage Against The Machine) but at the same time similarites are going to be brought up with the previous bands anyway so it's a moot point. I also know keeping the name and releasing new material with different members can actually hurt the material (Guns N Roses with Chinese Democracy) so changing the name would seem appealing and help the new material but I feel it's a moot point also.

My personal opinion is that the music should speak for itself. If you like it good on you if you don't just stick with the stuff you like.

Charity Shop Challenges

Dowds — Wed, 22 May 2013 16:58:01 GMT

This is a bit of an 'on-again-off-again' deal, but when I was at college my class mates and I would pass the time in between classes by rummaging around charity shops rather aimlessly.

To provide some structure to this procrastinating activity, we began to set each other challenges; find a DVD with Cher or Madonna then give it to someone, who would then need to come up with a new challenge etc.

Another friend and I had a Simpsons challenge, where within 3 months we had to find as many 'special' DVDs as opposed to the seasoned DVDs. I technically think I won that as he had enlisted his brother in Glasgow to 'assist' him with the challenge without me knowing, the bastard.

After revisiting the show Hornblower (guilty pleasure) I decided I needed to see Sean Bean being a dick to Frenchmen, so my new challenge is to find the entire Sharpe collection using only charity shops and re-sale shops.

Is this bizarre activity mine alone or has anyone else done something like this?

Any good stories of amazing finds are welcome too.

Chester Bennington: Stone Temple Pilots Singer???

Alex — Mon, 20 May 2013 11:59:18 GMT

So at the start of the year Stone Temple Pilots confirmed they'd fired Scott Weiland from the band. Weiland had been the singer of the band since it's inception. The band broke up in 2003 but reformed in 2008 with Weiland and releasing a new album in 2010.

Scott Weiland has had numerous drug issues over the years with alcohol, heroin and cocaine, often relapsing. He also has bi-polar disorder apparently and doesn't take medication for it. With these issues he is apparantly a handful to work with so the rest of Stone Temple Pilots probably thought it was better to cut their losses and find someone who's less hassle.

Enter Chester Bennington of Linkin Park. (Apparently already recording new music with the band)

Chester Bennington can sing and sing well. While Mike Shinoda is certainly the brains behind Linkin Park, Chester Bennington is certainly the voice.

Personally I'm cautiously optimistic. Bennington can sing and can certainly do the things Scott Weiland can do. I'm just not sure about the lyrics (I'm a lyrics guy) Weiland's lyrics were one of the big reasons I like Stone Temple Pilots and I'm not sure how they're going to handle that aspect. But as to finding a new person to sing for them there are certainly worse people.

I just wonder how Weiland is going to react to this