Post 2000, humans lost their souls

edited April 2011 in General Chat
Is it just me or has technology ruined things somewhat?

I know, thats a stupid thing to say right?

Or is it me that just thinks people have lost touch with each other, and movies and music has gone downhill, computer games suck also.

I was in the DVD shop the other night and this guy was there with his kids and his kid was like dad can we get this game, and his dad says "does it have good graphics?" And I instantly thought, yep, thats all you would care about right? It might have amazing graphics but you're gunna be disappointed when you find out they skimped on the game-play.

Nothing is new anymore, theres no mystery to anything.

Seems the better technology gets the worst things become. Everyone, hey including me somewhat has a bloody screen in-front of their face for 90% of their days now.

We are turning into electrical goods consumers. Addicts?

I dunno, am I crazy to say this? I feel humanity has lost its soul.
«13

Comments

  • edited April 2011
    Dono about that but i lost around 200,000 souls in demons souls recently
  • edited April 2011
    Listen to music nowadays, its utter shit. Movies that come out are shit.
  • edited April 2011
    Music today isn't that bad. In fact, there's plenty of great music around nowadays; it's just not in the charts. Charts music is definitely horrible; I'll agree with you there. I disagree about movies being crap nowadays. Of course, a lot of them are terrible, but we had our fair share of horrible movies in the past too; we just don't remember the crap ones, only the good ones. And since we only remember the good films from the past, we subconsciously adopt the belief that most or all movies from recent eras are great. It's just that movies today are different. In 10-20 years from now, we'll probably be saying the same thing about this era - "Oh, all movies are terrible these days. What happened to the classics like 'Lord of the Rings' or the fun films like 'Pirates of the Caribbean'?
  • edited April 2011
    I don't know about that, I really enjoyed inception :). Also, when I was a kid, I was dazzled by games that had good graphics in their time. It's pretty normal for kids to be more interested in that stuff. I feel that there are plenty of good games coming out these days, although that comes down to personal taste.
  • edited April 2011
    I guess its just Nostalgia acting up.

    There has always been a lot of crap out there, but there are still gems out there.

    Especially when it comes to indie games.
    Minecraft, Braid, Machinarium, World Of Goo, Fate of The World, Dejobaans Stuff (e.g. reckless disregard for gravity), Penumbra/Amnesia are all great examples of innovation.

    As for statements like "are the graphics good?", you have to realise its pretty much the same as "does this movie have good explosions/other effects?".
    Gaming is much more mainstream these days, and like movies, there are a lot of casual consumers out there which generally have similar tastes and are pretty easy to pander to so thats why the big publishers and developers try to please them, its just easier.

    EDIT: And I agree with Hayden, there is a lot of good music still out there.
    Recent examples: The Final Frontier, Black Swans and Wormhole Wizards, Captain EO's Voyage, What if this CD had Lyrics?,Saturday Morning Apocalyspse, Anything by OCRemix.

    These two songs pretty much sum up the entire music industry:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0Gs4xGw1Eg
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijr4rwb2WbE
  • edited April 2011
    I agree about music. When it comes to discovering new bands, I cant really be arsed any more. Ive got a bunch of stuff I listen to over and over, but as for going to gigs and discovering new music its all crap (cant remember the last time ive been blown away by an album). Then again thats probably just me, not the music industry

    Not sure about technology making games worse. Most of my favourite games over the last few years have been on psn or steam. As long as games like Braid and Machinarium are coming out theres still hope
  • edited April 2011
    Lonnie wrote: »
    Is it just me or has technology ruined things somewhat?

    I know, thats a stupid thing to say right?

    No, I wouldn't say it's a stupid thing to say. Right now, humans are in a greater state of disconnection today than ever. Things are becoming very virtual, and it is a point of concern.
    Or is it me that just thinks people have lost touch with each other?

    To a degree, yeah, if we're talking about real life connections here. Of course we have all of this new technology, and new ways of communicating with each other; easier and more convenient ways. But connection through technology is a lot more shallow and, yes, more soulless.
    computer games suck also.

    I was in the DVD shop the other night and this guy was there with his kids and his kid was like dad can we get this game, and his dad says "does it have good graphics?" And I instantly thought, yep, thats all you would care about right? It might have amazing graphics but you're gunna be disappointed when you find out they skimped on the game-play.

    Yeah, I too hate the way that mainstream gaming is going; how things are becoming more focused on shiny, realistic visuals rather than real depth, texture and quality. But bear in mind that this is mainstream gaming. Yeah, mainstream gaming, like mainstream music, has become entirely corporate; it's all about money. Big game companies will make short, unoriginal games with amazingly realistic graphics just because they know that graphics are the current trend and therefore the main selling point. Big artists and music labels will pump out short, unoriginal songs with mundane lyrics, repetitive choruses and the grossly lathered autotune for the same reason - because that's what sells. Trends and fads win over quality, so that's what top gaming companies and top record companies focus on. As a result, yes, it creates utterly soulless junk. But it's outside of the mainstream that you'll find true quality, innovation and originality.
    I dunno, am I crazy to say this? I feel humanity has lost its soul.

    I wouldn't go that far. I think you get this impression and this feeling because the world is a very different place to what it was back when you were young. Loads of people in all different time periods have felt a similar way when such development and progression take place; the world around them changes, and it makes them feel uncomfortable, and even frightened. I think it's just that the world we have now bears no resemblance to what we've had in previous decades; all the things that we find nostalgic no longer exist in our modern world, so everything seems foreign to us. And since nostalgia and happiness are closely linked, we ultimately feel that this new world holds no joy; no happiness; no soul ;).
    EDIT: And I agree with Hayden, there is a lot of good music still out there.
    Recent examples: The Final Frontier, Black Swans and Wormhole Wizards, Captain EO's Voyage, What if this CD had Lyrics?,Saturday Morning Apocalyspse, Anything by OCRemix.

    High-freaking-five, Mr. Vortex! I thought that 'The Final Frontier' was simply an amazing album, and one of Maiden's best. I actually believe Maiden's last four albums ('Brave New World' - 'The Final Frontier') to actually be the best albums they've ever produced. Actually, this applies to most of my favourite bands & artists - I find that their later stuff (late 90's onward) to actually be their best material.

    Oh, and by the way, I still need to buy Satch's latest album. Tell me, is it better or worse of than 'PSatMoR'?
  • edited April 2011
    Hayden wrote: »
    Oh, and by the way, I still need to by Satch's latest album. Tell me, is it better or worse of than 'PSatMoR'?

    Thats a tough one. Both albums are about the same overall, but I think PSatMoR may just be a tad bit better due to one song: "Professor Satchafunkilous" which is just pure genius!! :D
  • edited April 2011
    Hayden and co thats exactly what I mean. Mainstream stuff sucks and I literally go to my belove Alice In Videoland DVD shop here in NZ (amazing shop by the way) to hire out awesome underground/indie/international movies because there is simply nothing worth watching from Blockbuster etc. So many hidden gems that fall through the cracks because it wasn't starring Brad Pitt or some other flavour of the month actor.

    I think thats my issue also, I do feel disconnected, even from using the Internet to communicate with people.

    Same with metal bands I go see locally. Most bands are 2 bit imitators who are there for the image and the fact they play 'sick' pounding 7 string riffs to impress their little mates. BOOORING. Wheres the passion, soul and originality gone? Yeh dude, lets friggin copy each other like cardboard cut outs.
  • edited April 2011
    Thats a tough one. Both albums are about the same overall, but I think PSatMoR may just be a tad bit better due to one song: "Professor Satchafunkilous" which is just pure genius!! :D

    I actually find "Diddle-Y-A-Doo-Dat" to be the album's best moment, personally. Probably because it sounds a little Deep Purple-y, and anything that sounds remotely like Deep Purple is automatically in my good books. I'll have to go back and listen to the album again though, seeing as how my taste has diversified somewhat since the last time I listened to it.
    Lonnie wrote: »
    Same with metal bands I go see locally. Most bands are 2 bit imitators who are there for the image and the fact they play 'sick' pounding 7 string riffs to impress their little mates. BOOORING. Wheres the passion, soul and originality gone? Yeh dude, lets friggin copy each other like cardboard cut outs.

    Well of course; there's an absolute sea of posers and uninspired rip-offs out there in the metal world (and in many other genres too, but metal's probably the worst for it), but there's plenty of originality out there still. Go YouTube-ing one day; look up obscure sub-genres and search for examples. Or hang out on some music forums, or ask for some recommendations, or something. I take it you're someone who has quite a varied range of tastes, yes?
  • edited April 2011
    Hayden wrote: »
    Deep Purple
    Probably the greatest band of all time. (Its a close one between them and Iron Maiden really. Though I'd argue Blue Oyster Cult were brilliant as well...)
  • edited April 2011
    Probably the greatest band of all time. (Its a close one between them and Iron Maiden really. Though I'd argue Blue Oyster Cult were brilliant as well...)

    Deep Purple truly are great. I actually think that I'd rate them above Zeppelin. I try not to admit that usually, because I love Zep so much as well. But, when it really comes down to it, and I'm being completely honest with myself, Purple is the winner. They've been so consistently brilliant for so long, and they're still going strong nowadays. Then again, Zep do have "Kashmir"...

    Iron Maiden - legends, undoubtedly (that goes without saying). I'm so glad they've finally been properly recognized in the mainstream music world, what with the recent Brit Award and Grammy.

    Blue Oyster Cult, I need to listen to properly. I really don't know why I haven't gotten around to doing so already :confused:.
  • edited April 2011
    [QUOTE=Well of course; there's an absolute sea of posers and uninspired rip-offs out there in the metal world (and in many other genres too, but metal's probably the worst for it), but there's plenty of originality out there still. Go YouTube-ing one day; look up obscure sub-genres and search for examples. Or hang out on some music forums, or ask for some recommendations, or something. I take it you're someone who has quite a varied range of tastes, yes?[/QUOTE]

    Yes.
    Probably the greatest band of all time. (Its a close one between them and Iron Maiden really. Though I'd argue Blue Oyster Cult were brilliant as well...)

    There is no 'greatest band of all time'.
  • edited April 2011
    Lonnie wrote: »
    Listen to music nowadays, its utter shit. Movies that come out are shit.

    No, it just wasn't made for you. Another generation, a new kind of sound. Think about it: I doubt most older people (or people in general) will enjoy chiptunes, yet it's a huge thing for most gamers. Especially those who grew up with earlier game consoles.


    Also, nostalgia goggles seem to be rather prevalent in this thread.
  • edited April 2011
    Giant Tope wrote: »
    Also, nostalgia goggles seem to be rather prevalent in this thread.

    Not exactly true for me at least.
    Considering that the bands I like were most prevalent in the 60s and 70s where I was born early 90s (91 to be exact, which makes me only 20 years old! XD).

    As for games though, yeah. You're probably right.
  • edited April 2011
    I think you're just getting old Lonnie, there's always something that's corrupting the yoof of the day, be it the computer box, the telly box, the novella or the opium being smuggled by scurillous wags from the fields of China.

    You keep up for as long as you can and then you just go "feck it, i'm good"
  • edited April 2011
    Not exactly true for me at least.
    Considering that the bands I like were most prevalent in the 60s and 70s where I was born early 90s (91 to be exact, which makes me only 20 years old! XD).

    Nostalgia glasses are still prevalent for those not born in that time for the reason that the stuff that you listen to are the best trickled through the decades. This is the same reason that people who admire the renaissance only admire it through a lens of rosy glasses. And no one from that time even lives anymore.

    Look at what you like. That's two decades worth of music that you enjoy. By the time you were born, all that music was already sorted out. You didn't have to sit and wade through junk titles to get to the bits of gold, whereas now you actually have to do so. This gives off the impression that there's not a whole lot of good songs now, but really it's just that we've yet to get everything out.
  • edited April 2011
    This is a common psychological factor in which we highlight our pasts and glorify them, tending to think of them being better than the current day.

    In reality, music of the past was shite too. For all the classic music such as the Beatles and Led Zeppelin of the old days, it was songs like "Sugar Sugar" by the Archies topping the charts back then.

    The past is not superior to the present, nor the present superior to the past, they are simply filled with different challenges and movements.
  • edited April 2011
    "The year is 1969 and, speaking of the Beatles, the Fab Four release Abbey Road, arguably their best album. And even if you forget about the Beatles, in 1969 you had Jimi Hendrix, Pink Floyd, and Led Zeppelin. A cultural revolution. And do you know what the number one song of 1969 was? The song that the most people bought and wanted to listen to? Sugar Sugar by The Archies. Yeah, explain that one away. Must be the exception that proves the rule?"

    Read more: http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-popular-phrases-that-make-you-look-like-idiot_p2#ixzz1Im4UlPZe
  • edited April 2011
    Lonnie wrote: »
    Hayden and co thats exactly what I mean. Mainstream stuff sucks and I literally go to my belove Alice In Videoland DVD shop here in NZ (amazing shop by the way) to hire out awesome underground/indie/international movies because there is simply nothing worth watching from Blockbuster etc. So many hidden gems that fall through the cracks because it wasn't starring Brad Pitt or some other flavour of the month actor.

    Source Code, Toy Story 3, Inception, True Grit, 127 Hours, The Social Network... just some films from the past year that you'd find in Blockbuster and are worthy of watching. I think it's quite pretentious to dismiss a film just because it had a big budget, wide distribution or was simply popular. You can't blanket all mainstream stuff under one banner. There's certainly a lot of hidden gems out there that a lot of people look past (Richard Ayoade's recent Submarine I suspect may be one), but every director starts somewhere. It's like praising Duncan Jones' Moon or Chris Nolan's Memento and then dismissing Source Code and Inception just because they star Jake Gyllenhaal and Leonardo DiCaprio respectively.
  • edited April 2011
    Saying nothing that's new is any good just makes you sound old, man. My parents don't generally enjoy the music I like, and I doubt my grandmother is in love with the music they like. Just because you're set in the sound you like doesn't mean everything else is crap.

    As for movies, again, part of the problem is, again, that you're older. When you're a kid you can't always tell when something's total shit. I remember going to see the Super Mario Bros. movie when I was a kid and LOVING it.

    Edit: And while I'm not a huge fan, I'm pretty sure you can't describe Brad Pitt as "flavor of the month" at this point. Interview With the Vampire (great movie btw) was like '94 or '95.
  • edited April 2011
    Everything mainstream now sucks. No music is good, few movies and television shows are good, all cartoons now are horrible. Everyone is trying to push limits, so we don't have the boundries we used to have (and in some cases still should have). Not to mention technology giving anyone whatever they want when they want it with no discrepency. All I know is I'm afraid to see how the human race will turn out in the future. All this is coming from (what some may consider) a kid, who should be enjoying all this new crap along with the rest of them but just doesn't get it, although I do owe everything good that's happened to me in the past few months to a computer (hooray for animation!).
  • edited April 2011
    Mathman, please read what Dashi, Pinchpenny, and I had to say. Do not get me wrong, I do love indulging myself with the gems of the past. Does that make the past better? Not really. They had their own sets of faults and shit.

    Extending further, it kind of bothers me when people say they only acknowledge the first 150 Pokemon. Anyone who does this: You kind of look stupid. I'm sorry. What is mewtwo even supposed to be? You grew up in the 90s. Great. Why are you being an elitist about pokemon?
  • puzzleboxpuzzlebox Telltale Alumni
    edited April 2011
    mathman77 wrote: »
    Not to mention technology giving anyone whatever they want when they want it with no discrepency.

    Hoo boy, my skippered yacht in the Whitsundays can't be far away now! :p

    As for music, it's easier than ever for independent artists to get their sound out to a wide audience. You don't need to be signed to a label any more - pretty much anyone can produce their own album and sell it online. Surely that has greatly diversified the sort of music that's available. You just need to look for the gems amongst the pebbles.
  • edited April 2011
    Giant Tope wrote: »
    What is mewtwo even supposed to be?

    The clone of Mew whos stronger but somehow can't lern any move it wants like Mew could.:cool:
  • edited April 2011
    There's one statement I sort of agree with concerning technology: "The holodeck will be mankind's last invention."
  • edited April 2011
    In all fairness, listening to today's music is worse than having diarrhea and then dying of dehydration.
  • edited April 2011
    Giant Tope wrote: »
    it kind of bothers me when people say they only acknowledge the first 150 Pokemon. Anyone who does this: You kind of look stupid. I'm sorry. What is mewtwo even supposed to be? You grew up in the 90s. Great. Why are you being an elitist about pokemon?

    Gotta catch 'em all, gotta catch 'em all! Except for new ones I mean. Fuck them. They can go catch themselves.
  • edited April 2011
    Giant Tope wrote: »
    Extending further, it kind of bothers me when people say they only acknowledge the first 150 Pokemon. Anyone who does this: You kind of look stupid. I'm sorry. What is mewtwo even supposed to be? You grew up in the 90s. Great. Why are you being an elitist about pokemon?

    The first 150? Psh... I only acknowledge Squirtle, Pikachu, and MissingNo.
  • edited April 2011
    In all fairness, listening to today's music is worse than having diarrhea and then dying of dehydration.

    What do you define as 'todays' music? Because I can easily define 'yesterdays' music by "Sugar Sugar".
  • edited April 2011
    ShaggE wrote: »
    The first 150? Psh... I only acknowledge Squirtle, Pikachu, and MissingNo.

    I have a strong sentiment for Snorlax.
  • edited April 2011
    DAISHI wrote: »
    What do you define as 'todays' music? Because I can easily define 'yesterdays' music by "Sugar Sugar".

    Ke$ha. Rebecca Black. John Mayer.
  • edited April 2011
    Again, I go back to the Archies.
  • edited April 2011
    Ke$ha. Rebecca Black. John Mayer.

    If these are the only people you think are playing music these days, you're kind of deaf.
  • edited April 2011
    Giant Tope wrote: »
    If these are the only people you think are playing music these days, you're kind of deaf.
    Everyone knows that the only music in the world is the music that the television tells you about.
  • edited April 2011
    what people don't seem to understand is that when you watch a video like "friday" it gives it more views making the singer richer. So if they can release a really bad song and still get money they have nothing to lose
  • edited April 2011
    Giant Tope wrote: »
    Mathman, please read what Dashi, Pinchpenny, and I had to say. Do not get me wrong, I do love indulging myself with the gems of the past. Does that make the past better? Not really. They had their own sets of faults and shit.

    Extending further, it kind of bothers me when people say they only acknowledge the first 150 Pokemon. Anyone who does this: You kind of look stupid. I'm sorry. What is mewtwo even supposed to be? You grew up in the 90s. Great. Why are you being an elitist about pokemon?

    Well, I will admit there are a few gems around today, I just have some trouble finding them. 95% of the music I listen to is older than me!

    Also, I acknowledge all the Pokemon, but still think the originals were the best. Nobody beats Pikachu. Nobody.
  • edited April 2011
    mathman77 wrote: »
    Nobody beats Pikachu. Nobody.

    My Cubone begs to differ!
  • edited April 2011
    I hope we've all listened to Arcade Fire before we begin to write-off contemporary music.

    Just quietly chugging away becoming one of the biggest bands in the world
  • edited April 2011
    mathman77 wrote: »
    Well, I will admit there are a few gems around today, I just have some trouble finding them. 95% of the music I listen to is older than me!

    Did you read my thing about how it's easy to come to the conclusion that older things are better because you get the gems pre-picked out because they were already laid out through time?
Sign in to comment in this discussion.