Semjaza

There's good music from most any major country, really. I can't say I keep up with what people in Zimbabwae put out, but there's probably good stuff there too. My top few favorite bands are pretty equally mixed between a few different countries. It wouldn't be very worthwhile to claim a best area, although I do admit I mostly listen to music that's in English. As said, a lot of bands from certain areas and decades so sound very similar... Not necessarily in exact theme or sound, but there's always this certain thing about a song where you can be like "oh, that came out of the 80s". Although it seems like the 80s has more weird, defining musical characteristics than any other decade since people apparently fell in love with goofy synthesizers. Certainly most bands that make it to the radio do because labels latch on to an idea and milk it for all its worth. Bands spawn bands that sound just like them and then it feels like that's all there is anymore; it currently is happening with pop punk and I notice labels are trying to cash in on a more "indie rock" sound now. However, even during the 80s when hair metal bands pretty much ruled music for years there was certainly a LOT of stuff that was ridiculously different from that whether it was Ministry or Big Black or the Flaming Lips or whatever else. There's always a huge amount of stuff going on slightly beneath the surface all the time. America has tons of awful bands and tons of good ones. Same with England. Same with Germany. Same with Australia. Same with Japan. For every good band in America there's 15 that rip off their sound and can't manage to be innovative. For every good band in Japan there's another 15 that sound like 80s rock from America. It's all very subjective. So anyway, my thought is that every place has some good aspects and some bad. I don't think there's a "best".

The game doesn't need to be remade and it doesn't need a sequel, in my opinion. However, that would certainly be better than what they're doing with this game. FF7 Snowboarding? Who wants that, honestly? Square is making everything about the game except what people actually want. It's actually funny, in a way. Awhile back they gave a vague, strange answer to the question of why there hasn't been a new game involving FF7 since people love it so much (ironically, FF8 sold better in Japan -- probably here too). They stated that it was something they'd have to be carefully planned so they wouldn't ruin the characters or story in some way; this basically meant it was very unlikely to ever happen. This answer was given well before anyone knew of all these FF7 spin-offs. So, instead of getting a RPG that would potentially ruin the story and characters and universe of the series, we get a snowboarding game and some action titles. How does that work? In any case, Square has right out said the PS3 tech demo doesn't reflect any games in development and they have no plans to remake the title. There's not much more to say about that.

:rolleyes:

At the same time, I don't consider many of those innovations to be intrinsic to Nintendo's consoles. A lot of these things weren't Nintendo inventions as much as they were simply the first real application to console titles. If Nintendo didn't do it, it would have happened eventually anyway. Aside from the D-pad, and maybe L and R buttons, most of the things they've added over the years have had some predecessor in the PC market. Nintendo has mainly just figured out how to time out adapting these ideas to the console sector perfectly. Analog sticks existed before Nintendo; vibrating controllers existed before Nintendo; wi-fi play existed before Nintendo. Hell, even palm devices have ways of doing wi-fi and other connections, but they don't really have any good games. Saying Sony ripped off wi-fi play just seems bizarre to me... especially when not a single DS game has yet to use internet based functions to begin with. Some of these things were just inevitable. Every controller for every thing is destined to become wireless at some point. There used to be wired TV controllers.. We have wireless keyboards and remote controls that turn on fireplaces. Nintendo was the first company to come up with a decent wireless controller for a console, that's true, but I don't really think that other companies doing the same thing with their next-generation controllers is that much of a rip off. A lot of the things Nintendo has used have since become standards, but I don't really think the reason I enjoyed any N64 games was because of a rumble pack. The DS has proved that Mario 64 is equally as fun on a DS, despite the lack of great control compared to the original. My point is that Nintendo is best off worrying about their games themselves than some small controller oddity. The main difference here seems to be that this time the controller is radically different enough that showing it would compromise a lot of what they're trying to accomplish. Maybe it's just me, but a wireless controller, a rumble pack and a stick don't really seem like quite as big of a deal. This honestly seems like the first time they should even bother worrying about being ripped off; assuming it's as amazing and unique as they claim. In my opinion, they really didn't have to show much. I'm not really faulting them for that at all. It's probably a good move to distance themselves from the other two as much as possible. However, it would be nice if they gave some more concrete answers on pretty much anything. I guess we'll find out before the end of the year as Iwata says.

[quote name='Charles']Of course, the irony in all this is that new members are being spun in a negative light. They're being portrayed here as if they're detrimental to the condition of the forums when, in reality, new members are what keep the site lively and functional. If the post quality is lacking in RPGs, then you can't just blame the new membership. I've seen wonderful new members that completely put some mediocre veteran ones to shame. In any case, the message here is that the success of a forum lies in team effort. New members keep forums going and generate fresh activity while older members are supposed to be there to set a standard. A novel concept, huh? So, do that. It's not as if you don't have the means to create your own RPG where you control the quality through sign-ups.[/quote] Quoted for truth. Not everyone is going to write some award winning novella. The best counteraction to poor posting is simply just to post well yourself, I think. If that person is really that terrible, they'll be talked to or removed from the site by the mods anyway. People need time to get used to the functions of this place. Many forums don't require the same levels of certain things that OB does. I think it's unfair to expect each and every new person to automatically and instantly be among the best members here. Most people who would complain loudest weren't exactly hot **** when they started here either.

[quote name='Delta][COLOR=#95005E][SIZE=1]BTW, the FF7 tech demo, that's in-game, right?[/SIZE'][/COLOR][/quote] No one seems very positive as to what was actually rendered in real time on the PS3 at that conference anymore. The stuff they were able to control during the conference obviously was, but since then it's been revealed that much of what was shown was just pre-rendered CG that the PS3 would be capable of rendering in realtime (although I wonder how long it will take games to reach that quality). So, while I don't think it's been said one way or the other about the FF7 tech demo, I'd probably put it in the CG video camp rather than realtime, personally. Not like it matters much anymore since they're not making it into a real game anyway, I guess. Found this interesting: [QUOTE] ...following the unveiling of the PlayStation 3, Factor 5 has decided to abandon both Nintendo and Microsoft, and develop games exclusively for Sony's next-generation console, the PlayStation 3. Eggebrecht told News.com that the power of the PlayStation 3 with its Cell CPU would "free our [Factor 5?s] development," and allow the company to create games that are closer to virtual reality.[/QUOTE] That was somewhat unexpected, but it seemed fairly obvious that Factor 5 has been more concerned with how things look than anything else. After the last game they put out, I can't imagine even diehard Nintendo fans caring much... but you never know.

Yeah, I was always kind of under the impression that Cell was going to live up to its name. In the sense that a lot of their products were going to have them and form almost a single "body" of sorts. I remember the original idea being that things with Cell in them would be almost compatible in a way. Maybe that's changed now.

Considering how far off the next Zelda title is, I guess it'd do the job. It's a really fun game with some unique qualities. There really isn't anything like it on Xbox, honestly. Apparently it includes deathmatch type things. I've not gotten to play it, so I've honestly not looked into it much. I've not activated my latest free Live trial yet.

Wondering if anyone else picked this up for Xbox. It's a new title that's being sold for $20 and it's definitely worth the money. It was developed by MS's Japanese studios, but MS didn't pick it up for US release. Instead, Majesco stepped in (quickly becoming one of my favorite publishers with this and Psychonauts under their belts; they've really turned themselves around). I'm really glad they brought it over because it's a fun, interesting and well presented titled. It's basically an RPG. Your character awakens in a place he doesn't know and finds he remembers very little. Strangely, just like everyone else around him. These people live underground and avoid the surface. The surface is full of enemies and some sort of chemical in the air that leads one to forget their past. Your character (after proving himself more) and others act as scouts that go to the surface and ward off enemies and discover new things. These are presented in mission format where you have to fulfill certain objectives. People compare it to a card RPG, but I find that very misleading. There are no cards to speak of. You don't have anything resembling a deck. Battles feel more like something out of an insane anime-esque action title where you use items you pick up. In this case, the "items" are actually glowing spheres that contain abilities. There are different types such as attack, status and defense. When you find one of these spheres you're given the option to apply it to one of the Xbox's face buttons (A, B, X, Y). Obviously you can only store four different abilities at a time. Some are one use, some last the entire mission. From then on out, you basically just have to fulfill the objectives that include such things as finding and using new abilities, saving someone or killing something else. It sounds simple, but it's a lot of fun. Later on the game gets incredibly hectic and enemies are well equipped to kick your ***. The environments the battles take place in are fully destructable which is insanely cool. If you jump off a high area, you'll leave a crater beneath you when you land. You can knock down entire bridges and platforms, destroy supports and poles, etc. It really gives the game this brutal feeling that you'd expect to see in some crazy anime series. I'm not far enough in to say how interesting the story is, but it's servicable so far. The concept is interesting and well paced and the characters seem interesting in their own ways. We'll see how that goes. Graphically the game is pretty impressive, especially when you think of what you usually get for $20. It has some really strong model and texture work and runs very smoothly. Again, the destructable environments are a really great touch. The only real complaint here is how damn compressed the video is. It looks pretty bad, especially when you consider that the engine could easily run these scenes itself. The art style might turn some people off. The characters (even in their art) are very stylized and look a bit strange, in my opinion. You get used to the style and it's well applied, but it's still somewhat offputting. Anyway, check this game out if you have the system. Only place I found it at was Gamestop. [IMG]http://image.com.com/gamespot/images/2005/009/918888_20050110_screen010.jpg[/IMG]

It's a good album. I personally don't think it is as good as their last two (I don't include Steal This Album since it's more of a "collection"), but it still delivers. They don't seem quite as crazy on this one, but they do retain a lot of the humor that made them enjoyable. I can't see any System of a Down fan not liking it once they give it some time. I wound up liking it a bit more after I played it a couple of times. I'm also looking forward to Hypnotize. I wonder what direction that will go in... I'm under the impression that it doesn't really have the same themes and such as Mesmerize does.

[quote name='Lacuna Coil']Well, the worst lyric wise I suppose, at least the music itself isnt complete noise like it was in Halo 8. [/quote] You think The Downward Spiral is complete noise...? I'm confused lol.

Yeah, overall it is decidedly average even if you ignore the hype of a new NIN release. It has some good tracks, a few okay ones and a couple I think are right out bad. Trent might be going for more of a "song" type album here, but he really needs to work on his writing... The Collector is a great example. Some of the worst lyrics of his career.

I don't know why anyone would think that video was real lol. It was interesting, but it was also incredibly weird and the character designs were really off (not to mention their animation). To me it really smacked of amateur animation design right off the bat.

I like the art from this game. It manages to feel Zelda-esque without being derivative. Anyway, IGN had a nice interview with Aonuma: [url]http://cube.ign.com/articles/616/616559p1.html?fromint=1[/url] Of particular interest to me (and people who keep going "voices!?!?!") was this: [QUOTE]IGN: ... and why is there no voice acting? Eiji Aonuma: As to voice acting, I think what you see on the show floor is pretty much what we've been doing with the series in the past, which is before the text appears you get a very simple voice that pops up and you hear that. In the final version, we do intend to do something slightly different than that. We haven't finalized exactly how we're going to handle the voice in the game, but we are looking into different things. [/QUOTE] I don't expect to see full English voices, but I am somewhat hoping for a foreign language to be included. Somewhat like in ICO, where the characters talked in a made up language. I think that would best fit the series, personally. I doubt it'll happen, but it seems like one of the possibilities Aonuma is referring to.

I don't think it's quite as demanding as GT is in some ways. You don't have to take countless license tests for one. I'm finding that you win enough money (particularly with some of the difficulty settings ramped up) that I've not had much of a problem buying top of the line parts for the cars I use most. Cars themselves sell for quite a bit of money (even more on Live), so if you get rid of one you won you'll probably have enough to nearly max out another car. I think the amount of time spent to what you actually get is better balanced in Forza. I think it might appeal to you a bit more, but I could never say 100%. I'd at least give it a rent and see if you feel the same about that. As for action, I'm not sure what you mean.... I've not played Apex or PGR, strangely. It's not insane like Burnout or anything; it's still a simulation at heart. That doesn't mean that the AI isn't challenging or that you won't have to do a lot of crazy turns or anything, though. If you want to explain what you mean a bit more due to me ignorance on those titles, I'll try to answer it a bit better.

I didn't see a thread on this title, which surprised me. For those that don't know, it a new racing simulation for Xbox that takes a page from the Gran Turismo series. I'm hoping it does as well as it deserves too, but somehow I don't think it is. It somehow manages to be realistic and challenging but even more user friendly than comparable titles. I've been really impressed with the set up of the game and how everything feels. I'm used to GT mechanics, but some things in this game seem almost unforgiving by comparison. The damage models, the handling, how cars react when bumping into eachother from different angles, etc. The game has a variety of modes; the main one is Career. Here you pick a homeland (which determines which areas cars you have easiest access to... America, Asia or Europe) and race. As in other games, you finish races and win money and possibly new cars. How much money you get is determined by a few factors: how far in the game the race is, the rarity of your car, how much you damaged it (deducts money from your wins) and so forth. In the difficulty menus, turning off some helpers and enhancing AI strength and damage realism also raises the amount of money you can win. Forza's default settings don't give or take away from bonuses. One of these helpers is a line that shows you where to drive on the track and how fast to go. Using this you can determine when to start stopping (yellow into red) and when to speed up again (green). It's a small thing but definitely helpful to those who need it. Personally, I recommend turning it off right away because the main thing about this game is getting used to the feel of each car. That line destroys that link between you and the machine and really stops you from realizing how damn well Forza has been crafted. Races are divided much like in GT. You need certain types of cars to get into some (front wheel drive or rear, Japanese car or American, C class license or B class, etc). So obviously you're not going to be able to use one single car throughout the game. Car class is determined by the car's power, as expected. A difference here is that upgrading parts on your car increases what class it is in. You're not going to running a souped up Integra against stock ones because you won't be in the same class. It's in your best interest to keep several cars on hand at a time. Aside from new parts you can also change the look of your car. After market rims, bumpers, window tints and so forth are all available for purchase. You have to be careful though; installing these on a car makes it ineligible for stock races. You can change car colors for free and attach up to a 100 different layers of decals and vinyls to change your car's appearance. You can sell your cars both in-game and online. The cool thing about the online aspect is that you can often get more money utilizing that method. Aside from being able to get new decals and looks and race others, I think that's a nice addition. The game also features something called a "Drivatar". Basically you train this AI by completing tasks and doing well in races that mark your efficiency. This is then applied to an in-game character than can complete races for you. It's not perfect, obviously, but it is a cool feature. The main drawback is that using a Drivatar to win races cuts back your earnings heavily (we're talking like 90% here). The game obviously looks great. Car models are excellent, tracks are gorgeous, framerate is incredibly smooth, lighting and effects are fantastic. It's about what I'd expect from a Xbox racer after Rallisport Challenge 2; especially one that has up to twice as many cars on screen at once as that title. Sound also fares well. Effects are sharp and people have commented that the in-game cars sound just like their real world counterparts (I wouldn't know lol). Music is different for each type of menu and actual racing parts. Some feature instrumental versions of classic rock tracks like Iron Man and others are just random electronic sounding compositions. The actual race music is composed by Junkie XL and gets the job done.Of course, you get to use custom soundtracks as well, which automatically makes me happier with the music selection compared to anything I could have been stuck with otherwise. Anyway, I can answer anything people want to know about it. I'm never sure how much to write or how much not to in these threads. The game has been getting 10s and 9s overall, so it's not just me that likes this title. Strongly recommended. [IMG]http://image.com.com/gamespot/images/2005/121/reviews/920720_20050502_screen011.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]http://www.xbox.com/media/games/forza/sim-forza-0003.jpg[/IMG]

Their E3 coverage has been disappointing. I don't know why they didn't cover the press conferences directly. Tech TV used to air them as they happened live. What excuse does G4TV have? The fact that they didn't get to it till today is a let down. A lot of what they have shown has been heavily edited too. Full trailers have been cut down pretty dramatically. The MGS4 video is a good example. They cut out probably 75% of it, getting rid of all its humor (it's a really funny video, I suggest downloading it). Not to mention the fact that the video says at the end that this does not represent what the game will look like and that it is rendered on the PS2. G4TV made no attempt to clarify that at all for some reason. It's okay if you don't have the internet... but since we all do, I don't know why anyone would bother lol.

[quote name='boxybrown305][COLOR=DarkRed']Maybe, but the way they're all heading, they would cost $400 minimum, probably much more. As i said before, they need to tone it down, otherwise they'll just be too expensive.[/COLOR][/quote] I'm thinking this is going to be the case with this system. Sony is no longer concerned with just being at the forefront, they want to be beyond it. The graphics card alone in the thing is equal to two cards that retail for $500 right now. It has every port I can fathom on it. It's plays Blu-Ray, which isn't even available yet. It's outputting a 1080p image that almost no TV (even some of Sony's own top of the line models) support. Obviously things will cost less in a year's time, but I can't imagine it being so dramatic that even Sony could afford putting this thing at a $300 price point. There's only so much money you can lose on something just to put it inside people's homes. I should also point to this: [url]http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/05/18/news_6125423.html[/url] More specifically, this: [quote]It now appears that Sony may opt for a compromise price-wise, according to the Mainichi Daily News. An article that ran on the Japanese newspaper's Web site said that the PlayStation 3 could potentially sell for under $500. "The new machine, which will have a higher performance capacity than personal computers and provide sophisticated movie-quality images, will be priced at less than 50,000 yen each, according to [Sony] officials," said the paper.[/quote]

These pics from Gizmodo are the best ones yet to determine the size, I think. I've seen pics of people holding it on IGN, but the position of his hand made it very hard to judge. [URL=http://img262.echo.cx/my.php?image=gbamicrohandson26eh.jpg][IMG]http://img262.echo.cx/img262/2871/gbamicrohandson26eh.th.jpg[/IMG][/URL] [URL=http://img262.echo.cx/my.php?image=gbamicrohandson8zd.jpg][IMG]http://img262.echo.cx/img262/8051/gbamicrohandson8zd.th.jpg[/IMG][/URL]

I was going to comment on the idea of downloading games being the "revolutionary" feature because, if you watch the conference, it's very obviously not what they're referring to. That's been taken care of since I last read this. That aspect does interest me. Xbox Arcade was a slightly similar idea, in a sense. People could download random little games. Of course, MS doesn't have access to Super Mario Bros. or whatever else, so Nintendo's idea trumps that automatically. I imagine any charge would be incredibly minimal, as James says. In many cases, I'd not expect over a few dollars for even the biggest titles on N64, honestly, considering it's basically just a ROM download. Overall, the Revolution really is still an enigma, honestly. We really do not know much more about it beyond concepts. Most of the specs weren't revealed, the system shown isn't the final design, the name isn't final, we saw no controller, we don't know what the "unique" aspect of it is that Nintendo feels it can do better than PS3 and 360. That leaves us with very little. It's a shame more wasn't shown about it. At first I found myself somewhat bitter about that, but now my brain just focuses on the fact that [I]only [/I]Nintendo talked of existing, current platforms. MS didn't. Sony didn't either, aside from showing a new FFXII trailer. The fact that they didn't somewhat bothers me, especially considering 360 is coming out so soon after the original. I feel somewhat burned by that as an Xbox owner, especially since they don't even have their backwards compatibility ideas finalized. Regardless, the ideas of innovation and saving the industry somewhat fall flat when juxtaposed with talk of four upcoming Mario spin-offs. Considering we don't know what these games are going to look like or what exactly Nintendo is so damn confident about with this (even still) leaves me hopeful. This isn't the time to show it off, I guess. The comments that have me most hopeful are from Square Enix, surprisingly. While I don't know that I care much about them making a new FF Chronicles game for the system using wi-fi, the comment gives the vague idea that they know a hell of a lot more about it than any of us even remotely do. There really is very little Nintendo has to do to make their fans happy and win over some new people. A lot of it involves online versions of their existing properties, obviously. An online Revolution Pokemon game would be a strong release. The already announced Super Smash Brothers title for the system is huge as well, considering Melee is still the best selling GCN title. I guess I just have to have some faith and hope they actually do these things people want. It's possible. And really, I look at MS's press conference and think to myself "Is this why I play games?" For me, the answer is no. I don't want a device that lets me buy music and videos and play them or know what I'm watching on TV or god knows what else. I don't want to pay some random idiot physical, spendable money for a design they made for my virtual skateboard. I want to play video games. Consoles are slowly turning into entertainment PCs, not video game platforms. The fact that Nintendo is the only company stressing this idea of "Hey, this thing is about games!" makes me somewhat scared for the future.

[quote name='Grammar Panzer][COLOR=Navy']I believe I have. What I trying to get at, was what is there in Punk? What are the elements that people like in Punk? I gave reasons for what I like, what are your, or other Punk fans, reasons for liking Punk? [/COLOR][/quote] The main concept you're seemingly pressing in the first section of your post is that "I don't like it so that means it was never of importance or 'alive'" and in that case I agree with Aiyisha's response. Asking why people to explain to you why they like something you already decided you won't like really doesn't get very far, I've found lol. If you want to listen to something else, be my guest, but it has as much relevence as someone saying they prefer hip hop to punk music. It really doesn't change the flow of this discussion because no one can tell you otherwise because it is your personal taste. Otherwise, the idea that punk is now a movement of clothing fashion is saddening. As I've said before, punk has been marginalized and applied to things it shouldn't be and sold in a wrapped up package... but that's really not what it's supposed to be about. While that idea encompasses the current mainstream movement, I don't think it is something that should be thought of as encompassing [i]all[/i] of punk in its entirety.

Yeah... Current releases of the novel put them in chronological order rather than the order they were made in. I think the written order is far more entertaining. You don't need the prior story line set up for you and I think reading The Magician's Nephew later as a prequel instead is far more effective storytelling. Thanks for the heads up. I'll watch it later. I'm really looking forward to these films. The books are my favorite fantasy series.

There apparently was confusion on some things. 1.) It uses a rechargable battery like DS and SP. 2.) That is a headphone jack. 3.) The screen is smaller according to everything I've read. However, saying "quite a bit" seems to be an exaggeration. I'm wondering if people just [i]think[/i] it's much, much smaller because the screen no longer has that thick border around it like on the GBA/SP. It's obviously not meant to appeal strictly to existing users. Nintendo doesn't need to sell GBAs to the same people four times, they want to sell them to new groups who wouldn't necessarily have bought one before because of the dorky "I'm playing a game!" image that even the SP gave off. I see this appealing more to hipsters than women. Anyway, Kaplan recently said in an interview that they plan to launch it this Summer or Fall.

[quote name='Mario']does any body know when the release date for this game is because i keep hearing june but my friends are saying november of next year so if someone could tell me when its relase date is i can set a reserv foor it and get it. :animeangr[/quote] First of all, your friends are idiots. By November of next year, Revolution and PS3 would already be out. This game doesn't need that much development time, it's largely set in its ways. It's obviously not coming June either. I'd say November of [i]this[/i] year is largely more accurate. Anyway, I've been posting about this game on GS, but no one really comes, so I'm here. I watched some video of the E3 demo that had developer Q&A. It was pretty interesting. The game really looks great and the horse battle segments looked pretty kickass. I think seeing it in motion fixes any qualms I had with the character models. They seem more Zelda-esque than earlier pictures indicated. The only real "news" I got out of it, however, was that Link can communicate with other animals in wolf form and find out things he'd not know otherwise. Other than that, the first reason Link has to leave his small village is the kidnapping of a friend, which obviously leads into the rest of the story in some manner. As for that trailer, I would not use that music as a gauge for what to expect in-game. It's a trailer of a million parts stuck together, anything could be layered over it considering Nintendo's obvious access to orchestras. From Gamespot: [quote]Next up, they showed the Zelda trailer from the Nintendo press conference one more time, and talked a bit about the portions of the trailer that weren't in the E3 floor demo. The first question was about some of the audio from the trailer, and whether or not the trailer was a fully orchestrated piece of music. Mr. Kondo revealed that it was indeed a full orchestra, because the trailer called for something with a good dynamic sound to match the forcefulness of the images. The music was composed by Kondo's sound team, and the arranger was Michido Oshima, apparently a famous music arranger for Japanese movie and television soundtracks. Miyamoto adds that Ms. Oshima was apparently a big fan of Nintendo, and was happy to have the opportunity to work with them. Kondo also adds that this was his first opportunity to record a track with a full orchestra; [B]he reveals that the orchestra won't be used throughout the entire game, but will appear in especially dramatic scenes,[/B] at which point Aonuma jokingly pointed out that this will only occur when it's "fiscally responsible" to do so.[/quote]

Personally I think this song is ridiculously obnoxious, but to each their own. The song really does absolutely nothing for hip-hop in general that hasn't been done before, so I'm not really understanding this "OMG A REVOLUTION IN MUSIC!!!" type praise it is receiving by some in this thread. Particularly because it is incredibly simple in every sense I can think of. Being able to dance to it or whatever is one thing, as most music of its type features some sort of decent groove/beat, but that's not going to win this song any awards. People who claim to not like rap/hip-hop generally don't even look much into it, I find. If one thinks all songs in the genre are about sex or "bling" or whatever else, they obviously haven't looked beyond what's forced into their ears on the radio (radio charting is next to meaningless considering "independent parties" pay stations to play certain things). There's far better stuff than 50 Cent out there, mainstream or otherwise, as far as I'm concerned. The same goes for this song in particular.