# Overrated Skyscrapers



## windowsoftheworld (May 20, 2012)

To oppose the Underrated thread :nuts:


Imo, 1WTC, it's a nice looking tower and all but honestly, it doesn't deserve all the praise it's getting, specially considering the amount of skyscrapers being built all over the world, 1WTC is mediocre at best.


The Shard in london also seems a little overrated, there's nothing impressive about it imo, it's height is underwhelming and the pyramid shape has become tiresome at this point.


----------



## Quall (Feb 15, 2006)

Chrysler Building
Willis Tower
Flame Towers
Gherkin
8 Spruce Street
Absolute World
The Bow
1WTC


----------



## windowsoftheworld (May 20, 2012)

Quall said:


> Willis Tower


Agreed. hno:


----------



## ThatOneGuy (Jan 13, 2012)

Chrysler, Petronas, Gherkin. 


That is all.


----------



## ThatOneGuy (Jan 13, 2012)

dbl post


----------



## Dimethyltryptamine (Aug 22, 2009)

+1 to the Gherkin and Petronas. Am also going to throw in the Burj Al Arab


----------



## KillerZavatar (Jun 22, 2010)

we already had a thread like this.

Chrysler Building
Empire State Building


----------



## Alexenergy (May 10, 2011)

Chrysler, ESB, Gherkin, Old WTC, New WTC, Willis...I think that's all 
As you can see most of them are from USA..


----------



## Vrooms (Mar 4, 2010)

Bank of China Tower, Burj Al Arab, Taipei 101, City of Capitals.


----------



## windowsoftheworld (May 20, 2012)

KillerZavatar said:


> we already had a thread like this.


Link?


----------



## ZZ-II (May 10, 2006)

ThatOneGuy said:


> Chrysler, Petronas, Gherkin.
> 
> 
> That is all.


agree totally kay:


----------



## Kopacz (Mar 16, 2011)

Each and every filler glass boxes that spring up in cities around the world. If it's rectangular and glassy, I hate it. Good materials don't help.
Oh and Jin Mao Tower. It's just too busy and messy.


----------



## hingpit1984 (Dec 22, 2008)

KillerZavatar said:


> we already had a thread like this.
> 
> Chrysler Building
> Empire State Building



+1 for this.

The only thing I like about them are their spires and history.


----------



## Major Deegan (Sep 24, 2005)

This: 










Never understood the apparent popular preference for skeuomorphic designs.


----------



## hunser (Nov 25, 2008)

hingpit1984 said:


> +1 for this.
> 
> The only thing I like about them are their spires and history.


Of course people are going to bash Chrysler and ESB in this thread because 1. they are from the U.S. (whereas all the gaudy towers in China and Dubai are so cool yippee-ki-yay!) and 2. they are old. Let's see what happens with today supertalls in 80 years...


----------



## Mike____ (Mar 15, 2009)

Major Deegan said:


> This:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


+10.. never liked them


----------



## ThatOneGuy (Jan 13, 2012)

hunser said:


> Of course people are going to bash Chrysler and ESB in this thread because 1. they are from the U.S. (whereas all the gaudy towers in China and Dubai are so cool yippee-ki-yay!) and 2. they are old. Let's see what happens with today supertalls in 80 years...


Not really. I love the ESB but I find the Chrysler merely 'above average'

Chrysler is nice, but there's no merit I can find in it to give it above an 8/10 whereas many people see it as the best building in the world. Not that I have a problem with people having it as their favourite, but it's just my opinion.

But I see little merit in petronas or Gherkin.


----------



## KillerZavatar (Jun 22, 2010)

Major Deegan said:


> This:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


i like them, BUT they are still overrated. I think they look cool, and when i hear about Baku or Azerbaijan, these towers are the first thing i think about, yet other than that they are not that special either. :cheers:


----------



## hingpit1984 (Dec 22, 2008)

hunser said:


> Of course people are going to bash Chrysler and ESB in this thread because 1. they are from the U.S. (whereas all the gaudy towers in China and Dubai are so cool yippee-ki-yay!) and 2. they are old. Let's see what happens with today supertalls in 80 years...


Don't feel bad about my comment.

I rated them 9/10


----------



## Avemano (Aug 9, 2012)

The Flames, Baku
Ugly as hell, totally _nouveaux riches_ style.

The Shard, L**don
So ugly, it looks like a hair that the shaver didn't earn to shave.

Burj Khalifa, Dubai
Just tall ... so what ? 

Aspire Tower, Doha
is it a ***** ?


----------



## Sarcasticity (May 21, 2005)

Some of the buildings mentioned here are actually worthy of their praise and glory and its easy for people to say a certain building is overrated if it doesn't fit to their liking.


----------



## Tokyo/Manila (Dec 2, 2012)

tokyo tower,,, tokyo skytree


----------



## Jan (Jul 24, 2002)

Seen from the street below the balconies on Aqua in Chicago look brilliant, but other then that it's just one big value engineered box. Having it seen from the inside out I'd pick this one as quite overrated. Actually from a resident perspective, the balconies themselves can be unpractical in their shape, some of the wider ones are supported by bars _on top_ of the deck. The building has a running track on the podium roof while it sits next to beautiful running tracks along Lake Michigan.


----------



## realitybites-u (Sep 20, 2011)

soup or man said:


> I think it's the opposite. I think Eureka Tower is underrated and should be more well known. For me at least, Eureka Tower is the tower that got me interested in skyscrapers in Australia. Q1 in the Gold Coast is one of the most beautiful skyscrapers ever built. Eureka Tower is a beautiful building.
> ]


i'm sorry but both building is truly overrated. eureka tower in my opinion is an ugly building with a plain and ugly cladding with a weird shape. the q1 tower not ugly but there's nothing special at all about that building. there's a lot building that is much more beautiful than q1 and eureka. and i'm quite surprised that you said petronas is overrated. petronas is and iconic building and people can't deny it that petronas twin towers is one of the best looking building ever built. even it almost 20 years since the building completed, petronas twin towers still looks amazing.. thats my honest opinion..:cheers:


----------



## desertpunk (Oct 12, 2009)

*Shanghai Tower.* The forms are clumsy and the proportions are terrible. It looks like a 2,000 ft. tall damaged muffler.

*1 WTC* ...although I haven't encountered much "praise" for this awful David Childs mediocrity, aside from its height.

*The Shard.* Renzo Piano might execute cladding masterfully but the massing of this tower is almost childish in its crass geometricity. Fortunately his horrific NY Times Tower isn't on this list...because it was never rated highly to begin with.


Anything by Foster+Partners. They suck in too many ways to enumerate in a single thread, much less a post. This was not always the case.

Anything by Raphael Vinoly. I cringe each time this tasteless hack wins another plum commission. This has always been the case.


----------



## Legomaniac (Jun 30, 2012)

Sarcasticity said:


> Some of the buildings mentioned here are actually worthy of their praise and glory and its easy for people to say a certain building is overrated if it doesn't fit to their liking.


yeah, and like everything it is always to personal opinion.


----------



## SydneyCity (Nov 14, 2010)

Marina City...


----------



## guy4versa (Nov 19, 2011)

Chrysler,wilis tower and empire state building


----------



## tim1807 (May 28, 2011)

^^I don't think Chrysler Building is overrated, it's often mentioned here but most of the people outside the US don't even know about it. While it has better style then ESB.


----------



## TheZoolooMaster (Sep 14, 2011)

Kopacz said:


> What do you mean by "some people" ?
> Anyone likes that ? It looks like a big tazer battery ...


I remember someone saying they liked it. That was enough for me to post it here. :lol:


----------



## Fab87 (Jul 16, 2008)

Flame towers, Baku

30 St Mary Axe, London 

Doha Tower


----------



## haikiller11 (Aug 11, 2009)

Burj dubai, petronas, esb, gherkin


----------



## archilover (Mar 19, 2012)

for me,empire state and chrysler are overated..


----------



## isaidso (Mar 21, 2007)

- 30 St. Mary's Axe (London, UK)
- Petronas (Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia)
- The Shard (London, UK)


----------



## poshbakerloo (Jan 16, 2007)

SwissRe Building (Gherkin) is overrated


----------



## Vrooms (Mar 4, 2010)

windowsoftheworld said:


> ^^ it's underrated if anything. hno:


Agree. Although i not a fan


----------



## shabangabang (Sep 17, 2009)

- Gherkin
- Petronas Towers
- Q1
- Burj.


----------



## CxIxMaN (Jun 12, 2009)

Willys tower, Petronas towers, Gherkin, wtc twin towers


----------



## BelgiumKanarie (Sep 5, 2012)

*The Gherkinn is not overated*

I think the gherkin is not overated it has a special kind of architecture.










And even though the building is curved, every panel is flat,
exept for one - the piece at the very top.


----------



## archilover (Mar 19, 2012)

^^wow!architecture splendid!


----------



## Manitopiaaa (Mar 6, 2006)

Oh, and I know the CN Tower isn't a skyscraper per se, but it is one of the ugliest structures ever. I don't understand why people like that monstrosity


----------



## 1Filipe1 (Jul 13, 2012)

Manitopiaaa said:


> Baiyoke Tower II
> Burj Al Arab, Dubai
> Burj Khalifa, Dubai
> Eureka Tower, Melbourne
> ...


:OOO the willis tower is a sexy black beast lol idk how that could be overrated..being built in the 70s at 1450 feet is like the kingdom tower today lol


----------



## tim1807 (May 28, 2011)

Hanging Village of Huaxi. It's not that bad, but it's weird and it's location is the weirdest ever.


----------



## Manitopiaaa (Mar 6, 2006)

^^ It can't be overrated if no one's heard of it


----------



## KillerZavatar (Jun 22, 2010)

Manitopiaaa said:


> ^^ It can't be overrated if no one's heard of it


you havn't heard of it, yet? it is quite famous :cheers: (i love it, though, the design is epic and the location makes it even better, kinda gives it an industrial touch)


----------



## ThatOneGuy (Jan 13, 2012)

I hate the golden ball on top of that one


----------



## Vrooms (Mar 4, 2010)

KillerZavatar said:


> you havn't heard of it, yet? it is quite famous :cheers: (i love it, though, the design is epic and the location makes it even better, kinda gives it an industrial touch)


I've heard of it before but its not a building that is talked about or known by many people. So i dont think it overated:cheers:


----------



## Judazzz (Jul 7, 2006)

That giant, bronze-colored turd in Moscow! God that thing is monstrous (have no clue why so many people like it...)


----------



## owenrita121 (Sep 23, 2012)

1wtc - Would be a nice building if it wasn't for that stupid antenna on top just to add height.

The Shard - It one of the ugliest building I've ever seen, it looks unfinshed and well just plain ugly, it's sad that this is becoming the icon for London as the R.E Swiss is a much better looking building than The Shard.


----------



## southernboy (Feb 2, 2013)

I personally think the Shanghai Financial Center is hideous, and the older Jin Mao Tower. I also think the Burj Dubai is VERY overrated. Sure, it's tall enough, but a ton of it is empty, and I don't see the practicality of having a building that tall in a country the size of Dubai. Most of it is desert, and the wealth there is controlled by a small clique of individuals. Just seems very out of place. The fact of the Burj's height is for sure an engineering marvel, but to me it looks like a giant rising out of the desert, totally out of scale in my opinion.

I love Chicago, but I prefer the John Hancock Tower to the Willis Tower. I like its shape more. I don't like the tubular structure of the Willis. But I definately would take the Willis over any of those Asian monstrosities any day.

I think 1WTC, just like the Twin Towers before it, is UNDERRATED! I think once it's finished, and people start visiting it and appreciating its impact on the skyline, people will really like it. I would argue many already like it more now than they did the twins when they were first built. Plus 1wtc actually fits very well with its surroundings, it fills the New York skyline very nicely, and compliments the other older skyscrapers there like the ESB Chrysler Building.


----------



## owenrita121 (Sep 23, 2012)

southernboy said:


> I personally think the Shanghai Financial Center is hideous, and the older Jin Mao Tower. I also think the Burj Dubai is VERY overrated. Sure, it's tall enough, but a ton of it is empty, and I don't see the practicality of having a building that tall in a country the size of Dubai. Most of it is desert, and the wealth there is controlled by a small clique of individuals. Just seems very out of place. The fact of the Burj's height is for sure an engineering marvel, but to me it looks like a giant rising out of the desert, totally out of scale in my opinion.


hno: When was the last time you looked at Dubai's skyline, your making out it's the only tall building in the city when they have loads now? maybe you should visit The Burj before you knock it.


----------



## tim1807 (May 28, 2011)

Yeah, and it's about how the tower looks not how empty it is.


----------



## jimicorbet (Feb 9, 2013)

What a great looks of shanghai tower is. Shanghai Tower is the rotation of the Guangzhou International Finance Center. It is not complicated. It looks good, bud, I definitely prefer the Jin Mao, perhaps the WFC. The ST and WFC same. They look good, but they are no exception to the tower.


----------



## L.A.F.2. (Jun 26, 2012)

^^ I've said the exact same thing multiple times. It's nice, but it can't touch Jin Mao. :cheers:


----------



## cfredo (Jul 9, 2012)

^^
Definitely! Jin Mao is and always will be the king of Shanghai's skyline!


----------



## L.A.F.2. (Jun 26, 2012)

^^ In my opinion, Jin Mao is the Chrysler Building of Asia. I can almost call it the most beautiful building in the world. The top is just so magnificent. :cheers:


----------



## cfredo (Jul 9, 2012)

^^
Yeah, it's the best thing of the view from the SWFC observation deck.


----------



## ThatOneGuy (Jan 13, 2012)

Towers shouldn't look like cute animals


----------



## L.A.F.2. (Jun 26, 2012)

:rofl: 
You should post that in the "This building reminds me..." thread.


----------



## Eric Offereins (Jan 1, 2004)

lol. that is a good comparison.


----------



## isaidso (Mar 21, 2007)

Manitopiaaa said:


> Oh, and I know the CN Tower isn't a skyscraper per se, but it is one of the ugliest structures ever. I don't understand why people like that monstrosity


It might not be to your tastes, but it was considered an engineering marvel when it was built. So much so that it was declared one of the 7 modern wonders of the world by the American Society of Civil Engineers. It was the tallest structure on earth for 34 years; that's quite a feat. 

The CN Tower is a product of the 1970s: heavy, solid, and muscular. I used to find it ugly, but have done a complete 180 over the years. I now consider it both a classic and a master piece. It's also the tower from which I judge all others.

I know someone who actually moved to Toronto from the Netherlands because of this tower, I kid you not.









*Bravo!
Photo by Metrix X*


----------



## Kintoy (Apr 20, 2009)

Baiyoke II is kinda ugly. I've been there.


----------



## Eric Offereins (Jan 1, 2004)

isaidso said:


> It might not be to your tastes, but it was considered an engineering marvel when it was built. So much so that it was declared one of the 7 modern wonders of the world by the American Society of Civil Engineers. It was the tallest structure on earth for 34 years; that's quite a feat.
> 
> The CN Tower is a product of the 1970s: heavy, solid, and muscular. I used to find it ugly, but have done a complete 180 over the years. I now consider it both a classic and a master piece. It's also the tower from which I judge all others.
> 
> I know someone who actually moved to Toronto from the Netherlands because of this tower, I kid you not.


I agree. Bare concrete doesn't make a building ugly. These modernist structures ofte have more and better detailing than the recent built counterparts.


----------



## tim1807 (May 28, 2011)

Kintoy said:


> Baiyoke II is kinda ugly. I've been there.


It's not great indeed, but where is it overrated?


----------



## GunnerJacket (Jan 25, 2008)

Keeping in mind that "overrated" doesn't mean "bad," just that it's unworthy of the volume/type of praise received...


For me the building where the hype is way too disproportionate with the design has to be the Burj Khalifa. Simply being tall does not equate to being beautiful or the pinnacle of design. I think it's attractive and Dubai has done wonders in building itself into a modern city, but there are nary any elements about the structure that stand out as stunning design features, marvels of architecture or aesthetically trend setting. Yet the volume of exposure, publicity and praise heaped upon this building has been as deep as the building is tall! Compared to the grace of Petronas, which received far less press, Khalifa is vastly overrated.

The Empire State Building could be considered, but it did incorporate many high forms of its style and innovations that built the reputation we know today. That many find it overrated today is in part because of how we've evolved in design _since_ ESB came along. That being said Chrysler is the far more attractive and well done architectural piece of the two. It simply gets far less exposure since ESB has the public viewing platform. 

However, 432 in New York City is poised to overtake the Burj Khalifa, IMO. While it may be an engineering feet to build something so tall and so thin, as an architectural piece I've yet to see anything redeeming of high form. It's as mindless to me as the structures in Minecraft, yet there are many who're preparing to call it the pinnacle of design! Fie, I say!

One man's opinion, of course.


----------



## ThatOneGuy (Jan 13, 2012)

^^ In my opinion, simplicity is a redeeming feature. There are similarly thin and tall towers in Dubai that nobody really cares much about because of their design. They don't really appeal to the simplicity lovers or the detail lovers, so they're not that special.

432 park is a building one can either like or dislike. I personally don't really like how the cladding is laid out, but the rest of it seems like a cool idea. Looks like one of those futuristic scenes from an old movie










@isaidso I too adore the CN Tower!


----------



## wino (Sep 8, 2009)

tim1807 said:


> It's not great indeed, but where is it overrated?


:lol:

he got lost in this thread maybe... :lol:


----------



## Seattlelife (May 15, 2007)

IMHO Shard, TransAmerica, and Petronas Towers are all overrated buildings. They're impressive in height and unique, they just don't do anything for me.


----------



## L.A.F.2. (Jun 26, 2012)

^^ Not much of a pyramid fan, huh?


----------



## 1Filipe1 (Jul 13, 2012)

i seriously think the Jin Mao is overrated i think its one of the ugliest buildings ive ever seen lol it just looks brown and dirty


----------



## ThatOneGuy (Jan 13, 2012)

^^I think the cladding detailing on that one is gorgeous, but the shape is ehhhh...


----------



## 1Filipe1 (Jul 13, 2012)

ThatOneGuy said:


> ^^I think the cladding detailing on that one is gorgeous, but the shape is ehhhh...












i just hate it lol i do like its neighbor alot tho swfc


----------



## cfredo (Jul 9, 2012)

@1Filipe1
You're of course entitled to your own opinion, but Jin Mao is definitely not brown. Only at dusk and dawn it sometimes looks like that (thanks to the highly reflective cladding).
Its "normal" color is silver/blue.


----------



## 1Filipe1 (Jul 13, 2012)

cfredo said:


> @1Filipe1
> You're of course entitled to your own opinion, but Jin Mao is definitely not brown. Only at dusk and dawn it sometimes looks like that (thanks to the highly reflective cladding).
> Its "normal" color is silver/blue.


i said it looked brown, maybe with the pollution makes it always look brown..but i only ever seen it brown either way i hate the design lol


----------



## Seattlelife (May 15, 2007)

L.A.F.2. said:


> ^^ Not much of a pyramid fan, huh?


I didn't even consider that lol. Maybe I'm not a pyramid fan. I do like pyramid tops on towers though.


----------



## World 2 World (Nov 3, 2006)

ThatOneGuy said:


> Towers shouldn't look like cute animals


:lol::lol: :rofl: :lol::lol:


----------



## Kintoy (Apr 20, 2009)

tim1807 said:


> It's not great indeed, but where is it overrated?


the architecture. :cheers:


----------



## Bannor (Jul 23, 2011)

I agree that Jin Mao Tower looks dirty from afar and is overrated.

Another one I would like to point at was the old World Trade Center of New York. They looked like two commie blocks from the 70s. I just wish they could have razed them when there were no people nearby though... :/


----------



## ThatOneGuy (Jan 13, 2012)

Commieblocks??


















What commieblocks have _you_ seen that look remotely like this? :lol:


----------



## Eric Offereins (Jan 1, 2004)

Bannor said:


> Another one I would like to point at was the old World Trade Center of New York. They looked like two commie blocks from the 70s. I just wish they could have razed them when there were no people nearby though... :/


That is just an utterly ridiculous statement.


----------



## tim1807 (May 28, 2011)

Opinions are opinions , but some are not very well thought.


----------



## L.A.F.2. (Jun 26, 2012)

1Filipe1 said:


> i just hate it lol i do like its neighbor alot tho swfc


Hopefully this shot will change your mind:


----------



## Knitemplar (Aug 16, 2008)

L.A.F.2. said:


> Hopefully this shot will change your mind:


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## J349 (Feb 7, 2013)

1WTC looks good, but there are waaaay too many spires, antenna and pointy things in NY that are overrated, particlularly the ESB, Chrysler is underrated if anything, and I much prefer it to the esb.
The old WTC was horrible, and very overrated.
The Shard is a bit overrated but for a country that has been low-rise too long, its an exciting break-through for us to at least get something over 300m, so its bound to be overrated.

I personally don't like the Gherkin but I think its symbolic of the shape of things to come. And thus isnt too badly overrated.

Burj Al Arab is an amazing skyscraper, I don't think its overrated, its stunning. Burj Khalifa is definitely overrated but what do you expect?

The Makkah Royal Clock Tower, Mecca is just plain ugly dunno how anyone can rate it. Looks like its trying to be a modern Big Ben, but completely misses the mark...


----------



## Manitopiaaa (Mar 6, 2006)

The Jin Mao pic above shows why it's so overrated! What is so beautiful about that crown? It looks like a massive clusterfuck! It makes Shanghai World Financial look more beautiful in comparison


----------



## ThatOneGuy (Jan 13, 2012)

^^ It just turns at a 45 degree angle, it's not that unorganized.


----------



## IngMarco (May 10, 2010)

It has a great symethric crown... saying it is unorganized is just ridiculous.


----------



## Seattlelife (May 15, 2007)

I agree about Jin Mao, it is a clusterfuck and that's what I don't like about it.


----------



## garum0 (Jul 26, 2010)

Manitopiaaa said:


> The Jin Mao pic above shows why it's so overrated! What is so beautiful about that crown? It looks like a massive clusterfuck! It makes Shanghai World Financial look more beautiful in comparison


look more beautiful? the bottle opener? ...please
Ok, you don't like Jin Mao, it's possible, but the other is far uglier.


----------



## 1Filipe1 (Jul 13, 2012)

garum0 said:


> look more beautiful? the bottle opener? ...please
> Ok, you don't like Jin Mao, it's possible, but the other is far uglier.


i think the swfc is amazing lol


----------



## L.A.F.2. (Jun 26, 2012)

I love them both, but give Jin Mao the edge over SWFC.


----------



## cantstandya (Oct 27, 2012)

Surprised to see so many people listing the Chrysler building, good proportions and beautiful crown.

Empire State Building (I don't hate it, but its boring and way overrated)
Petronas Towers (never liked these)
Jin Mao Tower (just look at it)
Oriental Pearl Tower (not a skyscraper but I hate this thing with a passion!)
Beekman Tower (Praised for being different, just looks messy in the skyline)
Aqua (same reason)
Transamerica Pyramid (Its iconic, but never cared much for this one, needs a new facade)
Bank of China Tower (always thought this one was boring, the feng shui in this one is overrated)


----------



## L.A.F.2. (Jun 26, 2012)

^^ You're a pretty harsh critic! I agree with that first post (obviously, :lol, but not completely the rest. You bring up good points though, and I see your point on each.

And welcome to the forum. :cheers:


----------



## Bannor (Jul 23, 2011)

But the old wtc were commie blocks... Just because of what happened to them didn't make them less ugly. And I was at wtc in 2000. anyway, lets leave that behind.

cantstandya: wow! The Petronas Towers? Really? I agree that they wouldn't fit into a western skyline, but in KL they feel like they are in the right place. And Bank of China Tower is another nice tower. I've been on top of that one too, and even inside the tower is slick! 

I agree with Transamerica Pyramid though. That one looks awful! And I never liked Oriental Pearl either during daytime. Although at night it looks alright if you stand at the Bund. If that is a viable way of meassuring it at least :/


----------



## cantstandya (Oct 27, 2012)

Bannor said:


> But the old wtc were commie blocks... Just because of what happened to them didn't make them less ugly. And I was at wtc in 2000. anyway, lets leave that behind.
> 
> cantstandya: wow! The Petronas Towers? Really? I agree that they wouldn't fit into a western skyline, but in KL they feel like they are in the right place. And Bank of China Tower is another nice tower. I've been on top of that one too, and even inside the tower is slick!
> 
> I agree with Transamerica Pyramid though. That one looks awful! And I never liked Oriental Pearl either during daytime. Although at night it looks alright if you stand at the Bund. If that is a viable way of meassuring it at least :/


Well honestly, with the exception of the Oriental Pearl, I don't hate any of these buildings I listed, just my take on the most overrated. There are plenty of buildings I just absolutely loathe if we were going down that route!:lol:

The Empire State Buildings for instance, I don't hate it or even dislike it, but feel its severely over hyped because of its historical importance when it really isn't much of a stunner by today's standards. (I'm gonna take heat for that!) The Petronas were just always too busy for my eye, much like others have said about the Jin Mao, beautiful facade but the whole package is too busy for me. If you remember these towers were all the talk for years!

I feel the Bank of China Tower falls into that 1990's attitude of make it as different as possible and history will remember it, almost begging for attention, but it has no actual character once you look past its unusual shape, its facade is very plane.

With the Transamerica its not so much the shape for me, just its blockish grey 1960's finish, locals will find this sacrilegious, but if they slapped some glass paneling on the pyramid portion and some kind of modern chrome paneling on the 'fins' that thing would look superb!



L.A.F.2. said:


> ^^ You're a pretty harsh critic! I agree with that first post (obviously, :lol, but not completely the rest. You bring up good points though, and I see your point on each.
> 
> And welcome to the forum. :cheers:


Yeah I was a little harsh, but thanks for accepting me anyway!


----------



## L.A.F.2. (Jun 26, 2012)

^^ I try really hard to look for the best in buildings, especially if they are popular, and I attempt to refuse hating a building. Most people aren't as kind as I when reviewing buildings. Just find your own groove. :cheers:


----------



## wespje1990 (Apr 23, 2012)

i think The Shard london is extremely overrated. The top is just plain ugly the cladding should have covered all off the building. The shape looks crooked now.


----------



## guy4versa (Nov 19, 2011)

wtc is the winner,


----------



## azey (Jan 1, 2009)

most of the buildings listed heree are amazing....i dont knw what criteria in a design tht u guys considered perfect.....i am surprised,jinmao,shanghaitower,petronas,even burj khalifa and chrysler,these are magnificent......for me burj al arab is overated,tht so called 7 star hotel is ugly


----------



## red_eagle_1982 (Jan 24, 2009)

Eric Offereins said:


> That is just an utterly ridiculous statement.


I agree. The WTC Twins may be simple but its beauty lies in that simplicity. It defined the Financial District skyline.


----------



## ThatOneGuy (Jan 13, 2012)

Anyone who thinks the WTC was just "some big old borin' boxes from the 70s" does not have a full appreciation of architecture.
Maybe a partial appreciation at best, but not a full one. These towers were so important, as well as the rest of the International Modernist architectural movement.


----------



## DecoJim (Dec 6, 2005)

azey said:


> most of the buildings listed heree are amazing....i dont knw what criteria in a design tht u guys considered perfect.....i am surprised,jinmao,shanghaitower,petronas,even burj khalifa and chrysler,these are magnificent......for me burj al arab is overated,tht so called 7 star hotel is ugly


A journalist who described the Burj Al Arab as a "Seven star hotel" was literally overrating the place since no recognized hotel rating organization awards a rating beyond a maximum of five stars (or diamonds)! 

As architecture I do not think it is overrated since it achieved is purpose of attracting a lot of attention with its iconic shape.


----------



## guy4versa (Nov 19, 2011)

i think burj al arab is not overrated..its deserve to be architecture wonder


----------



## tim1807 (May 28, 2011)

Indeed, whoever sees it in real life will be impresed. No doubt.


----------



## city_thing (May 25, 2006)

I've seen it in real life and it wasn't that good.

It's alright, but nothing special.

I think One Canada Square in London is overrated. British people seem to hold it up as some beacon of design, probably because it was their tallest tower for years, essentially their only tower for years. It's not that great, in fact it's pretty boring.










I guess when you're a country starved of skyscrapers, any old thing will do. Luckily now they have some nice new ones.


----------



## Eric Offereins (Jan 1, 2004)

city_thing said:


> I've seen it in real life and it wasn't that good.
> 
> It's alright, but nothing special.
> 
> ...


It's also a very generic design, built in several cities.
I agree that London has some pretty exciting new stuff at the moment.


----------



## isaidso (Mar 21, 2007)

city_thing said:


> I think One Canada Square in London is overrated. British people seem to hold it up as some beacon of design, probably because it was their tallest tower for years, essentially their only tower for years. It's not that great, in fact it's pretty boring.


I find most skyscrapers that go up in London are over rated. They get attention because they are in London. If they had been built somewhere else no one would pay much attention. The British press certainly know how to trumpet their own.

Many London buildings come off as gimmicky, neophyte, and attention seeking. They're trying way too hard to impress people. Hopefully the designs will become more elegant/timeless as we move forward. If things continue as they have, it will end up looking more like a dog's breakfast.

That said, the Shard is a great building. One Canada Square? It's conservative, but it will age very very well. That's more than I can say for the Gherkin, Cheese Grater, Walkie Talkie, etc.


----------



## bozenBDJ (Jul 18, 2012)

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
but what about the 30 St Mary Axe?


----------



## Kopacz (Mar 16, 2011)

isaidso said:


> I find most skyscrapers that go up in London are over rated. They get attention because they are in London. If they had been built somewhere else no one would pay much attention. The British press certainly know how to trumpet their own.
> 
> Many London buildings come off as gimmicky, neophyte, and attention seeking. They're trying way too hard to impress people. Hopefully the designs will become more elegant/timeless as we move forward. If things continue as they have, it will end up looking more like a dog's breakfast.
> 
> That said, the Shard is a great building. One Canada Square? It's conservative, but it will age very very well. That's more than I can say for the Gherkin, Cheese Grater, Walkie Talkie, etc.


While I agree about OneCanada and Walkie Talkie, I don't feel that the Gherkin or Leadenhall will age at all. They're both unique enough to be remembered for years. Even though 30 St. Mary Axe already got some clones, it's most likely the only building you think of when you see its shape.


----------



## city_thing (May 25, 2006)

I like the Gherkin, and it will age well. The Shard has been constructed about 30 times before in China so no one in the rest of the world will really care about it in a few years.

But buildings like the walkie talkie will just look silly in 30 years.

Isaidso really hit the nail on the head. Britain just isn't a country of skyscrapers, and London can't compete with Frankfurt or Paris.


----------



## UmarPK (Jan 27, 2013)

Gherkin tower, one ugly and stupid design; can't believe it got approved.


----------



## Mike____ (Mar 15, 2009)

guy4versa said:


> i think burj al arab is not overrated..its deserve to be architecture wonder





tim1807 said:


> Indeed, whoever sees it in real life will be impresed. No doubt.



The outside is nice, but the interior is damn horrible!


----------



## ThatOneGuy (Jan 13, 2012)

city_thing said:


> I like the Gherkin, and it will age well. The Shard has been constructed about 30 times before in China so no one in the rest of the world will really care about it in a few years.


Wow, I ddn't realize 30 glass pyramids have been built in China.


----------



## JMGA196 (Jan 1, 2013)

I don't know if I should have posted this in the Ugly thread or here... This could be on both...

Totally overrated:



Uploaded with ImageShack.us


----------



## elculo (Aug 18, 2009)

Why do you think the Dubai buildings are overrated? Overrated means that they are recognized by many people as good buildings and you don't agree. 
Can't tell this about Dubai skyscrapers, because everybody thinks they are tacky.


----------



## Jex7844 (Mar 26, 2009)

Burj Khalifa / The Petronas Towers / The Oriental Pearl Tower / The Shard .

@umarpk: I disagree, the Gherkin is so iconic, it ages very well, that's a great looking tower.


----------



## Letniczka (Feb 4, 2007)

elculo said:


> Overrated means that they are recognized by many people as good buildings


Overrated means that they are recognized only by (many) *dilettantes* - people who are blind or have no sense of aesthetics.
Dubai is the most terrible example of architectural shit on Earth as even the pure desert sand is more beautiful.
Einstein said that human stupidity is boundless, and Dubai is a good evidence for his claim.


----------



## azey (Jan 1, 2009)

i think dubai has amazing skyline just some crappy building...
btw,tht spinning tower on tht pic looks interesting


----------



## Frozt (Nov 30, 2012)

Wow,too much hate to Dubai. Also i think its the most hated city in the world and terribly underrated. Also, some buildings of the marina like the infinity,pentominium or ocean heights are amazing.


----------



## ThatOneGuy (Jan 13, 2012)

^^My favourite skyscraper is in an even more hated city (Pyongyang)


----------



## æthær (Dec 30, 2012)

I absolutely love Dubai Marina. It's such a unique skyline and it features EXTREMELY high buildings! Actually I'd say that Dubai Marina is underrated.


----------



## FNNG (Jul 25, 2011)

ThatOneGuy said:


> ^^My favourite skyscraper is in an even more hated city (Pyongyang)


the shape is nice... just that the facade... like.... hno:


----------



## ThatOneGuy (Jan 13, 2012)

^^ The facade is regular reflective glass like at 1WTC


----------



## SO143 (Feb 11, 2011)

- edit


----------



## deadhead262 (Feb 28, 2012)

^2012 world cup


----------



## ThatOneGuy (Jan 13, 2012)

The second picture is so awesome.


----------



## azey (Jan 1, 2009)

i might say pyramid-like design is ILLUMINATI.....lols


----------



## tim1807 (May 28, 2011)

JMGA196 said:


> I don't know if I should have posted this in the Ugly thread or here... This could be on both...
> 
> Totally overrated:


Why do you think Ocean Heights is overrated?


----------



## SO143 (Feb 11, 2011)

ThatOneGuy said:


> The second picture is so awesome.


some of my fav shots of the shard :cheers:


Shard mirrors by Nicky McGregor, on Flickr


The Shard and St Paul's Cathedral from Primrose Hill by manchego_photo, on Flickr


Moody London by **** Nuttah, on Flickr


----------



## ThatOneGuy (Jan 13, 2012)

^^ I don't think posting so many pictures of the shard in the 'Overrated Buildings' thread is such a good idea if you want to promote it. 
You know, people might get ideas...


----------



## SO143 (Feb 11, 2011)

ok no more pics of the shard will be posted from now on :nocrook:


----------



## castillo2008 (Oct 28, 2008)

The Shard is absolutely overrated. I suppose because it's the highest in Europe, but when this situation change, it will be a boring design tower more with nothing special. 
The WTC1 is a terrible project. It's a nothing special tower with a giant, ridiculous and disproportionate antenna to give a notable height to the building. In another place it would be a mediocre tower more, but in this special and significant place I think it's awful!!


----------



## extrawelt (Aug 28, 2010)

> Shard


----------



## deadhead262 (Feb 28, 2012)

Petronas towers are insanely overated


----------



## bozenBDJ (Jul 18, 2012)

^^^^^^
and so is the Burj Khalifa.


----------



## deadhead262 (Feb 28, 2012)

bozenBDJ said:


> ^^^^^^
> and so is the Burj Khalifa.


 Agreed


----------



## tim1807 (May 28, 2011)

castillo2008 said:


> The Shard is absolutely overrated. I suppose because it's the highest in Europe, but when this situation change, it will be a boring design tower more with nothing special.
> The WTC1 is a terrible project. It's a nothing special tower with a giant, ridiculous and disproportionate antenna to give a notable height to the building. In another place it would be a mediocre tower more, but in this special and significant place I think it's awful!!


I think there is no place where a 400+ roof height building with 60x60m sides looks mediocre.


----------



## Frozt (Nov 30, 2012)

I also think the petronas are overrated


----------



## SO143 (Feb 11, 2011)

castillo2008 said:


> The Shard is absolutely overrated. I suppose because it's the highest in Europe, but when this situation change, it will be a boring design tower more with nothing special.


the shard is not only the first supertall but current tallest building in the entire eu. the value of this tower is estimated to be about $3.9 billion. 

plus it's design is unique, unlike the boxy towers you see all over the world. it has already become one of the most recognizable modern landmarks in london.


----------



## Quicksilver (Feb 25, 2005)

city_thing said:


> Isaidso really hit the nail on the head. Britain just isn't a country of skyscrapers, and London can't compete with Frankfurt or Paris.


Really and why London has more skyscrapers than Frankfurt then and same number as in Paris? And it will going to change as number of U/C in London is bigger than in Paris and Frankfurt. Next, the residential towers (140 - 250 meters) are going to pop up like mushrooms in next few years. London is the skyscraper capital of EU at the moment for sure.


----------



## deadhead262 (Feb 28, 2012)

azey said:


> oh sorry but ESB is just not really tht special to me(or most) as it is to you,just look at ur avatar:lol::lol:just my honest opinion ....maybe u like old rusty building


 I was unaware that concrete can rust. Learn new things every day dont you?


----------



## hunser (Nov 25, 2008)

castillo2008 said:


> A tall building can be mediocre, and unfortunately the WTC1 is an example. The WTC1 it isnt a skyscraper more in a medium size city of China... I think this special project for this special place deserved a tower much better. And I'm sorry to say this, because I love New York.


New York has towers which exceed 1WTC in height and design. 1WTC was never competing with anyone, it's simply a _replacement_. Totally different from today where developing countries need something to put their cities on the map. And what's better than a shiny megatall? 

New York has height: 1WTC, 2WTC, HY North, 432 PA, 225W57thStr (all 400m+). 
And New York has class: ESB, Chrysler, AIG, Woolworth, Tower Verre, 2WTC, Hudson Yards, 56 Leonard, Beekman,... and all the countless Art Deco gems. 

What I'm trying to say: 1WTC is not the final pinnacle on the ever changing NY skyline but merely a tower of _many_.


----------



## deadhead262 (Feb 28, 2012)

azey said:


> and stating Petronas insanely overrated is u being complete ignorant
> fyi,Petronas
> -once tallest
> -still the tallest twins
> ...


So what? No other tallest tower has ever been as overated as the Petronas towers. Not even the Chrysler or Burj Khalifa. Petronas cheated for height and are only the tallest twins to roof because of 9/11. It represents Islamic architecture but was designed by an Argintinean/American. Also should we praise every building which represents a religion and call it the best? Why isnt that ugly clock tower in Mecca the best then? 
Also the design is very basic. A child could add a star to a circle and thats all this design really is. 
I like the Petronas, I really do, but people overate it so much I have grown to hate them. I dont know if its because they took the tallest title for Asia or the nice lighting but they are nothing special. There are far better towers just in Asia. 
The shard is better to me also, and its also overated. 
Also I am not American so im not just boosting ESB because. Have you seen the ESB, Chrysler, American international,ect. in person? Maybe that will chage your opinion.


----------



## azey (Jan 1, 2009)

hunser said:


> Jeez, is there even one Malaysian on this forum who doesn't get offended when someone doesn't like the oh so glorious Petronas Towers? It's like the holy grail or something ... get over it.


speak for yourself:cheers:


----------



## azey (Jan 1, 2009)

deadhead262 said:


> So what? No other tallest tower has ever been as overated as the Petronas towers. Not even the Chrysler or Burj Khalifa. Petronas cheated for height and are only the tallest twins to roof because of 9/11. It represents Islamic architecture but was designed by an Argintinean/American. Also should we praise every building which represents a religion and call it the best? Why isnt that ugly clock tower in Mecca the best then?
> Also the design is very basic. A child could add a star to a circle and thats all this design really is.
> I like the Petronas, I really do, but people overate it so much I have grown to hate them. I dont know if its because they took the tallest title for Asia or the nice lighting but they are nothing special. There are far better towers just in Asia.
> The shard is better to me also, and its also overated.
> Also I am not American so im not just boosting ESB because. Have you seen the ESB, Chrysler, American international,ect. in person? Maybe that will chage your opinion.


its not overrated when its the only building to be proud of,in NYC,theres alot of building u can be proud of other thn ESB,for me chrysler is soooo much better thn ESB,i dont care if u like ESB soo much but stop posting on each thread stating Petronas is overrated.....its kinda annoying and too personal i might say


btw,just be proud of ur own country,not others....i mean i adore New York,but I love Kuala Lumpur


----------



## azey (Jan 1, 2009)

deadhead262 said:


> I was unaware that concrete can rust. Learn new things every day dont you?


its a metaphor :nuts:


----------



## azey (Jan 1, 2009)

elculo said:


> I am not saying Petronas are overrated, but how do they represent islamic architecture? To me, the look quite like this:


thnx for comparing Petronas to something equally stunning....


----------



## deadhead262 (Feb 28, 2012)

azey said:


> its not overrated when its the only building to be proud of,in NYC,theres alot of building u can be proud of other thn ESB,for me chrysler is soooo much better thn ESB,i dont care if u like ESB soo much but stop posting on each thread stating Petronas is overrated.....its kinda annoying and too personal i might say
> 
> 
> btw,just be proud of ur own country,not others....i mean i adore New York,but I love Kuala Lumpur


 How is it the only building to be proud of? Malyasia has plenty. Yes the chrysler is better than the ESB, I agree. I keep saying the petronas are overated because they are, that's it. Whenever someone critcises any other building its fine, but the petronas are not allowed to be judged.

I was born in Germany, lived in America and now live in South africa and I try take pride in all their buildings as well as countrys that I have never lived in or been to(eg.china).


----------



## Guaporense (Jul 9, 2008)

*Burj Al Arab*










Design lack's symmetry and it is to over the top. Lacks elegance and feels too artificial. Overall, a very mediocre looking building.

That also applies to most of Dubai's skyline, indeed, the Burj Dubai and the Emirates Towers are the best ones.


----------



## Kiboko (Nov 30, 2011)

^^i bet you've never seen it in person


----------



## Newcastle Guy (Jul 8, 2005)

tim1807 said:


> ^^ Frankfurt has 5 x 200+, *london has 3.*


Six.


----------



## ThatOneGuy (Jan 13, 2012)

CxIxMaN said:


> Ruyonryang Hotel in North Korea is the most overateed


:rofl:

Nice joke :cheers:


----------



## Azrain98 (Nov 27, 2011)

bozenBDJ said:


> ^^^^^^^^
> *pro-Petronas Towers* sentiment much?


not.It's my own opinion. if yes , why ?


----------



## Azrain98 (Nov 27, 2011)

elculo said:


> I am not saying Petronas are overrated, but how do they represent islamic architecture? To me, the look quite like this:


err what is this icard:


----------



## BeLogical (Feb 25, 2013)

Azrain98 said:


> err what is this icard:


 That is an example of architecture that is far superior to the Petronas towers.


----------



## tim1807 (May 28, 2011)

Newcastle Guy said:


> Six.


Which ones then? I only know about the Shard, 1CS and Heron.


----------



## Kopacz (Mar 16, 2011)

Guaporense said:


> *Burj Al Arab*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You know that it's built that way to hold its ground against the winds from the sea ? The taller side is a cutting edge for the winds, that get dispersed towards the wide rear. It's symmetrical if you approach it from the shore.


----------



## Azrain98 (Nov 27, 2011)

BeLogical said:


> That is an example of architecture that is far superior to the Petronas towers.


oh really ? then Petronas Towers that is far superior than you


----------



## Newcastle Guy (Jul 8, 2005)

tim1807 said:


> Which ones then? I only know about the Shard, 1CS and Heron.


Shard, 1CS, Heron, 122 Leadenhall, HSBC Tower and CitiGroup.

The last two are a few cms shorter and are usually around 200m, of course you could argue those if you want to be a pedant about it. What should matter more of course than the heights of the buildings, especially when we're coming down to cms, is the designs. European cities have been lucky enough to have a lot of great ones built and planned over the past few years. The Shard and the Gherkin in London for example, despite some here not liking them, have been very well received and revolutionized attitudes about skyscrapers in the country following the largely abysmal postwar attempts.


----------



## deadhead262 (Feb 28, 2012)

Azrain98 said:


> oh really ? then Petronas Towers that is far superior than you


Grammer?


----------



## tim1807 (May 28, 2011)

Newcastle Guy said:


> Shard, 1CS, Heron, 122 Leadenhall, HSBC Tower and CitiGroup.


The Leadenhall isn't 200m


----------



## Azrain98 (Nov 27, 2011)

deadhead262 said:


> Grammer?


it is wrong ? grammar ?


----------



## tim1807 (May 28, 2011)

^^ Nothing wrong, I guess you are young and english isn't your first language, mine neither.


----------



## Newcastle Guy (Jul 8, 2005)

tim1807 said:


> The Leadenhall isn't 200m


It's 225m. If you mean it isn't 200m yet, then it will be in a couple of weeks so I guess we can wait. But if that was your point then I'm sure you already knew that, so I'm not sure why you'd invite the 200m+ comparison in the first place.


----------



## AnOldBlackMarble (Aug 23, 2010)

JMGA196 said:


> I don't know if I should have posted this in the Ugly thread or here... This could be on both...
> 
> Totally overrated:
> 
> ...


Lets be honest. If this cluster was somewhere in Europe or America, it would be the epitome of modernist skyscraper architecture, but because it is in an Arab nation, at a time when there is a lot of disgust against Arabs, they are to be detested and ridiculed. hno:

Also, since we're in the neighborhood, the Burj Khalifa can NOT be overrated. Just like the State Empire Building, it is a milestone, a first, and will always remain a symbol of such. :cheers:


----------



## Azrain98 (Nov 27, 2011)

AnOldBlackMarble said:


> Lets be honest. If this cluster was somewhere in Europe or America, it would be the epitome of modernist skyscraper architecture, but because it is in an Arab nation, at a time when there is a lot of disgust against Arabs, they are to be detested and ridiculed. hno:
> 
> Also, since we're in the neighborhood, the Burj Khalifa can NOT be overrated. Just like the State Empire Building, it is a milestone, a first, and will always remain a symbol of such. :cheers:


^^

Totally agreed


----------



## deadhead262 (Feb 28, 2012)

AnOldBlackMarble said:


> Lets be honest. If this cluster was somewhere in Europe or America, it would be the epitome of modernist skyscraper architecture, but because it is in an Arab nation, at a time when there is a lot of disgust against Arabs, they are to be detested and ridiculed. hno:
> 
> Also, since we're in the neighborhood, the Burj Khalifa can NOT be overrated. Just like the State Empire Building, it is a milestone, a first, and will always remain a symbol of such. :cheers:


 I dont think the Burj Khalifa and some others in Dubai are overrated, but just look at some of those buildings in the cluster...awful


----------



## FNNG (Jul 25, 2011)

I think the building in Dubai are just normal except few of it are kinda outstanding... 
Actually i feel that Dubai is kinda empty... yes they have lots of highrise... but it's like super big office with few worker... unlike new york, london, singapore, hong kong, tokyo... these city are vibrant and you will feel the soul of the city... like last time i went to dubai... like a dead town... i saw only indian working... but i seldom see arabian working...


----------



## BeLogical (Feb 25, 2013)

Azrain98 said:


> oh really ? then Petronas Towers that is far superior than you


 Im sorry, were you trying to make a cohesive sentence? I couldnt really tell.


----------



## SO143 (Feb 11, 2011)

tim1807 said:


> The Leadenhall isn't 200m


of course not. it is 225m (738ft) tall and designed by one of the best architects on the planet.


----------



## ThatOneGuy (Jan 13, 2012)

I have nothing against Arabs, I just dislike such postmodernism.

The only ones I like from there are Infinity and 23 Marina


----------



## tim1807 (May 28, 2011)

^^ You don't like Ocean Heights?



SO143 said:


> of course not. it is 225m (738ft) tall and designed by one of the best architects on the planet.


not yet


----------



## ThatOneGuy (Jan 13, 2012)

A bit. Can't say I like the balconies that much, though.


----------



## Los Earth (Jun 23, 2011)

hunser said:


> Jeez, is there even one Malaysian on this forum who doesn't get offended when someone doesn't like the oh so glorious Petronas Towers? It's like the holy grail or something ... get over it.


Says the American who was recently offended by someone not like liking the Empire State Building so sees that a forumer says that the Petronas Towers are 10x overrated but the other forumer says it is designed to be Islamic, so YOU say that they are being a crybaby since they are the ones offended by the comment when you just want to be rude with them since they don't find the Empire State Building so special..... whew that took long to say in one breath


----------



## SO143 (Feb 11, 2011)

tim1807 said:


> not yet


it's height is now reached to 205m.


----------



## ThatOneGuy (Jan 13, 2012)

I think the 'underrated' thread makes much more sense than this one.


----------



## tim1807 (May 28, 2011)

SO143 said:


> it's height is now reached to 205m.


Finally :cheers:


----------



## AnOldBlackMarble (Aug 23, 2010)

deadhead262 said:


> I dont think the Burj Khalifa and some others in Dubai are overrated, but just look at some of those buildings in the cluster...awful


I think that is a different point. As a supertall cluster I think this is unequaled anywhere in the world. Now if some of the buildings in the cluster are ugly, well that is a different point, and I agree. There are some in that cluster that I don't like, but probably the ones that I dislike, you may like, and I may hate the ones you like. Taste is personal, but the cluster is iconic.


----------



## SO143 (Feb 11, 2011)

city_thing said:


> Isaidso really hit the nail on the head. Britain just isn't a country of skyscrapers, and London can't compete with Frankfurt or Paris.


you don't know what you are on about. in fact paris has only 1x 210m skyscraper.


----------



## hunser (Nov 25, 2008)

Los Earth said:


> Says the American who was recently offended by someone not like liking the Empire State Building so sees that a forumer says that the Petronas Towers are 10x overrated but the other forumer says it is designed to be Islamic, so YOU say that they are being a crybaby since they are the ones offended by the comment when you just want to be rude with them since they don't find the Empire State Building so special..... whew that took long to say in one breath


I think you confuse me with someone else, probably with deadhead262 (see previous page(s)). Except for that post, I only wrote something about New York. Not once did I get in an argument ESB vs PTT...


----------



## BeLogical (Feb 25, 2013)

SO143 said:


> you don't know what you are on about. in fact paris has only 1x 210m skyscraper.


 That doesnt make London a city of tall buildings. London is a nice city, dont get me wrong, but it will never be a major skyscraper center.


----------



## Quicksilver (Feb 25, 2005)

BeLogical said:


> That doesnt make London a city of tall buildings. London is a nice city, dont get me wrong, but it will never be a major skyscraper center.


And your groundings are based on what? It won't be major in the World but definitely it's now major in Europe. London is full of tall buildings and this number is set to grow in the next 5 years.


----------



## SO143 (Feb 11, 2011)

*CLICK HERE* >>>









by *wjfox*


----------



## tim1807 (May 28, 2011)

Is that about u/c and proposed?


----------



## deadhead262 (Feb 28, 2012)

Londons skyline is just way to spread out. If it was denser it could compete with some of the best.


----------



## SO143 (Feb 11, 2011)

indeed mate


----------



## Kiboko (Nov 30, 2011)

^^So which skyscraper of London is overrated? :dunno:


----------



## MoreOrLess (Feb 17, 2005)

That skyscaper in the country/city I don't like, you know that really awful one.


----------



## guy4versa (Nov 19, 2011)

this is overrated.just look at the concrete.










now look at entrance..how come people praise it like hell? lol.its gem on its era.but not today


----------



## SO143 (Feb 11, 2011)

Kiboko said:


> So which skyscraper of London is overrated? :dunno:


the razor tower hno:


----------



## deadhead262 (Feb 28, 2012)

guy4versa said:


> this is overrated.just look at the concrete.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Its 82yrs old, and I am sure the concrete will be cleaned soon. The entrance is nice and the interior is stunning. Maybe you should see it first.


----------



## guy4versa (Nov 19, 2011)

deadhead262 said:


> Its 82yrs old,


yeah..that is my point,it was the best skyscraper 50years ago.. but not today.


----------



## deadhead262 (Feb 28, 2012)

guy4versa said:


> yeah..that is my point,it was the best skyscraper 50years ago.. but not today.


 Whats better? The only one I can think of is the Chrysler building. Also please dont say the Petronas towers, Burj khalifa, Shard,ect. because they don't even come close. Look at the detail in this building, thats why its still the best.


----------



## windowsoftheworld (May 20, 2012)

Empire state is ****ing gorgeous. Damn you modernists.


----------



## Azrain98 (Nov 27, 2011)

windowsoftheworld said:


> Empire state is ****ing gorgeous. Damn you modernists.


it's not about modernists...it's about an old concrete and overrated  and can you don't said modernists is damn because a people who modernists will hate you hno: forgive me if I'm wrong English :cheers:


----------



## Azrain98 (Nov 27, 2011)

yes esb is so cool


----------



## guy4versa (Nov 19, 2011)

deadhead262 said:


> The only one I can think of is the Chrysler building. Also please dont say the Petronas towers, Burj khalifa, Shard,ect. because they don't even come close. Look at the detail in this building, thats why its still the best.


your statement is "super overrated"


----------



## guy4versa (Nov 19, 2011)

deadhead262 said:


> Whats better? The only one I can think of is the Chrysler building. Also please dont say the Petronas towers, Burj khalifa, Shard,ect. because they don't even come close. Look at the detail in this building, thats why its still the best.


there are lots of building better then esb and chrysler..THAT IS SURE, a better proportion in shape,clean cladding,high quality glass,green technology,lot safer,using modern technology(faster lift, earthquake , fireproof) better location ect..the only things i can describe esb is "old"..i dont know is it positive or negative


----------



## Frozt (Nov 30, 2012)

ESB was incredible 50 years ago. But now its not that incredible... I prefer a lot the chrysler, but I think we shouldn't get stuck in the past. Now there are much incredible buildings than the ESB... With better materials and better shapes.


----------



## deadhead262 (Feb 28, 2012)

guy4versa said:


> there are lots of building better then esb and chrysler..THAT IS SURE, a better proportion in shape,clean cladding,high quality glass,green technology,lot safer,using modern technology(faster lift, earthquake , fireproof) better location ect..the only things i can describe esb is "old"..i dont know is it positive or negative


So what just because a building is newer its superior. The ESB is working hard on becoming environmental. The ESB built with the best there was at the time and it did it well. It still stands up today.
There are no earthquakes in NYC and the lifts are plenty fast.
I know you're just dying to say the Petronas are better but no they are not. In fact they cant even compete, with the Chrysler at least.

Modern buildings are overated.


----------



## guy4versa (Nov 19, 2011)

when we discuss about a good building or bad building...we talk from *fact*,how it was built,the technology,the landscape,the architecture ect..not about how we feeling when we stand beside it!..because people will have different opinion ,different feel and different interest..is that make you clear..full-stop 

for me,what make esb overrated is the way you praise it,the way you want people to agree with you, the way you say "we" while it just only your feeling,posting a large photo, forwarding again and again,degrading other skyscraper.it is too much


----------



## guy4versa (Nov 19, 2011)

deadhead262 said:


> ^Well then no building is overated


building can be overrated when insane people posting annoying large image to waste bandwidth..


----------



## archilover (Mar 19, 2012)

wow,what a nice picture of ESB!(i mean the proportion of the images,the colour and the lighting,not the building itself)it was just amazing on the time when it was build..not now..(no offences,my personal opinion).BK are far superior


----------



## deadhead262 (Feb 28, 2012)

guy4versa said:


> feeling,posting a large photo, forwarding again and again,degrading other skyscraper.it is too much


 I did not post those photos...


----------



## deadhead262 (Feb 28, 2012)

guy4versa said:


> when we discuss about a good building or bad building...we talk from *fact*,how it was built,the technology,the landscape,the architecture ect..not about how we feeling when we stand beside it!..because people will have different opinion ,different feel and different interest..is that make you clear..full-stop
> 
> for me,what make esb overrated is the way you praise it,the way you want people to agree with you, the way you say "we" while it just only your feeling,posting a large photo, forwarding again and again,degrading other skyscraper.it is too much


No, that's absolute f*cking bullshit! I am not into building because of their technology, I enjoy how they look and thats where the ESB beats the new buildings.

I dont care if people agree with me, but you are just being petty in criticizing it. Technology this, technology that...who the hell cares? Is little wayne better than Louis Armstrong simply because he is newer?

The fact that its the most famous building in the world means you're in the minority, and just shows my point. People love it. I don't give a crap if a building can do a full 360 degree turn if it doesn't look good.

Again, are the pyramids also overrated?

Your way of judging is as much opinion as mine.


----------



## deadhead262 (Feb 28, 2012)

archilover said:


> wow,what a nice picture of ESB!(i mean the proportion of the images,the colour and the lighting,not the building itself)it was just amazing on the time when it was build..not now..(no offences,my personal opinion).BK are far superior


The petronas were never amazing and the BK is just big, not a work of art like the Art deco buildings.


----------



## Azrain98 (Nov 27, 2011)

deadhead262 said:


> The petronas were never amazing and the BK is just big, not a work of art like the Art deco buildings.


you actually what ha? you always said PTT and BK overrated and don't you know ESB x100 more overrated. AMAZING? what about ESB? does ESB sooooo amazing? >(


----------



## guy4versa (Nov 19, 2011)

how old are you?


----------



## guy4versa (Nov 19, 2011)

deadhead262 said:


> The fact that its the most famous building in the world means you're in the minority, and just shows my point. People love it.


who are you? god? how you know esb is the famous building in the world?such an arrogant statement..


----------



## deadhead262 (Feb 28, 2012)

guy4versa said:


> who are you? god? how you know esb is the famous building in the world?such an arrogant statement..


 Should I rephrase that, skyscraper. What else is more famous? Please tell me. I have lived in 3 continents and the ESB is the only building each and every person knows. Its shown on hollywood movies so everyone knows what it looks like. 
How is it arrogant? I am not even American.


----------



## deadhead262 (Feb 28, 2012)

Azrain98 said:


> you actually what ha? you always said PTT and BK overrated and don't you know ESB x100 more overrated. AMAZING? what about ESB? does ESB sooooo amazing? >(


 Wow! Great English! I cant even understand what you're saying. 
Alos what makes the Petronas so amazing??????? Yep, nothing except some lighting.


----------



## guy4versa (Nov 19, 2011)

> I have lived in 3 continents and the ESB is the only building *each and every* person knows.
> How is it arrogant?


wow...seem like u did a large scale survey, you know how each and every person opinion in all 3 continent you lived..what a big lies, and big head and arrogant.


----------



## Azrain98 (Nov 27, 2011)

deadhead262 said:


> Wow! Great English! I cant even understand what you're saying.
> Alos what makes the Petronas so amazing??????? Yep, nothing except some lighting.


oh sorry I don't care about my grammar.
what Petronas so amazing? try ask your neighbours.
except some lighting ? forgive me PTT have so much interesting history and art decor than ESB okay


----------



## guy4versa (Nov 19, 2011)

deadhead262 said:


> Alos what makes the Petronas so amazing??????? Yep, nothing except some lighting.


as developing country,we try to show the world, what kind of people live there,its represent 3major ethic...which is

malay(muslim)










chinese










indian










can you told me any skyscraper which symbolize, and implement a traditional architecture in modern looking structure,mixed culture but look so blend in just one tower( i mean two)..as a gateway and welcoming people from all around the world..


*oh yeah..i forgot ESB was inspired from pencil:nuts:


----------



## deadhead262 (Feb 28, 2012)

Azrain98 said:


> forgive me PTT have so much interesting history and art decor than ESB okay


 Lol, what!? PTT are not even Art deco and it DOES NOT have a more interesting history. Are you joking!?


----------



## ThatOneGuy (Jan 13, 2012)

What constitutes an 'interesting history'? Ryugyong Hotel has an interesting history but everyone else still hates it.


You all say fame is the reason ESB is not overrated.

But that's exactly my foint for it _being_ overrated... ESB used to be the only skyscraper I knew about for some time (besides WTC which was always my favourite) but I never really cared for it. I just knew it existed. 


I'm not that big a fan of Petronas, but I dislike comments that say stuff like 'only lighting is the reason people like it' because it's really not true. If you really want to get into arguments like that, people can easily say "ESB is just three boxes with a cylinder and a needle on top and some concrete cladding."

See how loaded phrases affect descriptions?


----------



## Frozt (Nov 30, 2012)

deadhead262 said:


> The petronas were never amazing and the BK is just big, not a work of art like the Art deco buildings.


The BK has got an incredible design based on islamic culture. You can't say the art deco buildings are better than the modern builds. There are ugly art-deco and modern buildings. Personally I think the PTT and the BK have got better design than the ESB, but i like the chrysler. I think the ESB is too simple building for being that overrated. The ESB is good because is big...


----------



## deadhead262 (Feb 28, 2012)

Frozt said:


> The BK has got an incredible design based on islamic culture. You can't say the art deco buildings are better than the modern builds. There are ugly art-deco and modern buildings. Personally I think the PTT and the BK have got better design than the ESB, but i like the chrysler. I think the ESB is too simple building for being that overrated. The ESB is good because is big...


 Fair enough, we have differing opinions. I agree the chrysler is much better, but I also dont think people can say the ESB is cr*p and outdated.
I think on average the Art-deco buildings are better looking imo. The Burj khalifa is a marvel of engineering while the PTT are great fusions of different cultures. However in my book both lie below the ESB.


----------



## wino (Sep 8, 2009)

The design and beauty of Chrysler building never gets old IMO.
I could say that for ESB as well.. 

I wasn't a fan of WTC though..


----------



## guy4versa (Nov 19, 2011)

wino said:


> The design and beauty of Chrysler building never gets old IMO.
> I could say that for ESB as well..
> .


well said..never gets old,and never get better then some new skyscraper


----------



## tim1807 (May 28, 2011)

The grammar is terrible here.


----------



## deadhead262 (Feb 28, 2012)

guy4versa said:


> well said..never gets old,and never get better then some new skyscraper


 *Any better, because its already better than any new skyscraper. You are sad.


----------



## ThatOneGuy (Jan 13, 2012)

" Someone doesn't agree with my opinion? What a sad person."


----------



## jobecob (Feb 7, 2007)

People are so pathetic, which is including me since I'm reading these for entertainment.


----------



## deadhead262 (Feb 28, 2012)

ThatOneGuy said:


> " Someone doesn't agree with my opinion? What a sad person."


That was not my point. I am pointing out the way he twisted that persons sentence.


----------



## wino (Sep 8, 2009)

deadhead262 said:


> That was not my point. I am pointing out the way he twisted that persons sentence.


i know, right?




guy4versa said:


> well said..never gets old,and never get better then some new skyscraper


actually it GETS BETTER.
with more modern designs getting built each year... the few remaining classics become more special and unique.

in comparison, take a look at Renaissance art, compare that to the modern. 
The older it is, the more appreciation it gets.


There is value and beauty in being a "classic" or an "antique".
I think you'd be forced to realize that once PetronasTT gets "older".


----------



## guy4versa (Nov 19, 2011)

judging a good building is not about look in just one perspective.. newer doesnt means better or vice versa.. i personally will judge on it appearance and what make its special,comfortable, convenience,and impact to community, including historical value..i never say petronas is the best skyscraper, but clearly its better then esb after consider all factor


----------



## windowsoftheworld (May 20, 2012)

Historically, ESB will always overshadow Petronas. ESB also had a bigger impact on the skyscraper history than Petronas, without it, god knows where the skyscraper industry would be today. ESB set height standards among other things. ESB did all first, Petronas were subsequent.


----------



## deadhead262 (Feb 28, 2012)

guy4versa said:


> judging a good building is not about look in just one perspective.. newer doesnt means better or vice versa.. i personally will judge on it appearance and what make its special,comfortable, convenience,and impact to community, including historical value..i never say petronas is the best skyscraper, but clearly its better then esb after consider all factor


 I am judging by looks and history only and the ESB is not overrated in that way. I dont care about its tech or impact on community. The petronas were built to bring tourism and to provide cash for the governors friends through the building of it(thats a fact my father was told when he visited a few yrs ago by a resident who worked with them).
Also on your factors: ESB vs petronas
Appearance= Tie
Comfortable=ESB
Impact=Petronas
History=ESB


----------



## guy4versa (Nov 19, 2011)

windowsoftheworld said:


> Historically, ESB will always overshadow Petronas. ESB also had a bigger impact on the skyscraper history than Petronas, without it, god knows where the skyscraper industry would be today. ESB set height standards among other things.


as i say..historical value is one thing..how about other?interior,cladding,lighting,location,tourist spot,floorplan,observation deck,security.ect,? i know there is no point of argument,its just about taste..


----------



## guy4versa (Nov 19, 2011)

deadhead262 said:


> Also on your factors: ESB vs petronas
> Appearance= Tie
> Comfortable=ESB
> Impact=Petronas
> History=ESB


:rock:thats my point,,you should consider everything,not just classic,older, history,legend , or what so ever, all the same thing from beginning ..

but really? comfortable got to esb? while ptt have lot of parking,train station right under the tower,easy access to tower by double decker lift, full glass cladding that allowed more light,more comfortable observation deck?


----------



## deadhead262 (Feb 28, 2012)

guy4versa said:


> :rock:thats my point,,you should consider everything,not just classic,older, history,legend , or what so ever, all the same thing from beginning ..
> 
> but really? comfortable got to esb? while ptt have lot of parking,train station right under the tower,easy access to tower by double decker lift, full glass cladding that allowed more light,more comfortable observation deck?


 Okay I am bored now, lets get a new supposedly overrated building.


----------



## guy4versa (Nov 19, 2011)

:cheerwh..yeah? finally...:banana:let just move on..


----------



## tim1807 (May 28, 2011)

double decker lifts are awkward, 70 Pine st removed it's double decker lifts because of their low popularity.


----------



## windowsoftheworld (May 20, 2012)

guy4versa said:


> as i say..historical value is one thing..how about other?interior,cladding,lighting,location,tourist spot,floorplan,observation deck,security.ect,? i know there is no point of argument,its just about taste..


What about them? You first mentioned these


> special,comfortable, convenience,and impact to community, including historical value.


And ESB is all of that and more.


----------



## FNNG (Jul 25, 2011)

Ok, lets move on 

I hope i wont get attack if i post this. I know lots of ppl say its an icon and its nice. But personally, i feel that this building is kinda overrated. I still prefer the shard, ptt, Chrysler.... 

*Bank of China Tower
*


----------



## deadhead262 (Feb 28, 2012)

^^Maybe, but it was a major player in putting Hong kong on the map.


----------



## wino (Sep 8, 2009)

it stands out in the skyline, even if not the tallest.

actually, I think it is rather underrated..


----------



## tim1807 (May 28, 2011)

Once the tallest building in China, definately not overrated. It's a masterpiece.


----------



## city_thing (May 25, 2006)

I think Bank of China is overrated. It has terrible Feng Shui too, whereas the nearby HSBC Tower has very good Feng Shui (and it's a much better tower too).


----------



## JMGA196 (Jan 1, 2013)

If this beauty was still standing, how would people rate it?



Uploaded with ImageShack.us



Uploaded with ImageShack.us


----------



## deadhead262 (Feb 28, 2012)

^Its actually underrated. Should never have been demolished.


----------



## windowsoftheworld (May 20, 2012)

Yeah, Bank of China is a tad overrated.


----------



## lfcsr11 (Aug 27, 2007)

Th


----------



## Azrain98 (Nov 27, 2011)

yes a bit overrated but I love it


----------



## RegentHouse (Sep 2, 2012)

It hasn't been built, and I hope it won't because it's horrible.


----------



## Alexenergy (May 10, 2011)

The Shard
Yes it's nice, but no more IMHO


----------



## Hayden94 (Oct 21, 2012)

Shard is one of my favourite towers. Definitely worthy of the attention it gets I think!


----------



## ride on car (Apr 1, 2013)

agree!


----------



## deadhead262 (Feb 28, 2012)

^I don't think the shard would get half the attention it gets if it was built outside Europe. First supertall in europe=fame.


----------



## Hayden94 (Oct 21, 2012)

I disagree. It's a good looking tower and any city would be lucky to have it


----------



## windowsoftheworld (May 20, 2012)

Yeah it's overrated. Maybe if it was the pinnacle of pyramidal shaped buildings and set a height standards, but none of the above, it's just a nice looking tower.


----------



## FNNG (Jul 25, 2011)

The shard is one nice looking tower.


----------



## Good Karma (Mar 22, 2011)

The Shard is a great tower and deserves the praise it gets. It most certainly is not overrated. I would love to have it in my City.


----------



## guy4versa (Nov 19, 2011)

the shard is one of the best looking glass skyscraper...its not overared,it deserve the fame


----------



## Denjiro (Jun 18, 2012)

It's a beautiful skyscraper, it would be stunning if it was located in Rotterdam or Saigon, but IMO too many people praise it as a masterpiece... I don't really agree with that, it's nice, but that's it.


----------



## LouDagreat (Jan 30, 2013)

guy4versa said:


> this is overrated.just look at the concrete.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That's not concrete, that limestone. Go learn some facts about the building before you speak shit about it.

Also, those pics don't do justice when you've seen them in person.


----------



## guy4versa (Nov 19, 2011)

LouDagreat said:


> That's not concrete, that limestone. Go learn some facts about the building before you speak shit about it.
> 
> Also, those pics don't do justice when you've seen them in person.


limestone? that make it worst..sorry,


----------



## LouDagreat (Jan 30, 2013)

guy4versa said:


> limestone? that make it worst..sorry,


Whatever.


----------



## JMGA196 (Jan 1, 2013)

^^ You simply can't say ESB isn't special. It was one of the most complex buildings at its time. Building ESB (so as Chrysler Building) was not as "easy" as it is nowadays. Also, the design is very special: as far as I know ESB is the only Art Deco supertall (if you consider that Chrysler Building is something like a mixture of Art Deco and Beaux-Arts or something like that). Plus, ESB has some very interesting history behind. 

Not liking it, and saying its shit are two different things.

---

BTW, this is not so special:










Too many buildings with the same design... :nuts:


----------



## isaidso (Mar 21, 2007)

deadhead262 said:


> ^I don't think the shard would get half the attention it gets if it was built outside Europe. First supertall in europe=fame.


Agree. If the Shard had gone up in Chicago or Chongqinq, it would have gotten about 90% less press.


----------



## tim1807 (May 28, 2011)

If it was in Chicago, it would definately not go unnoticed.


----------



## guy4versa (Nov 19, 2011)

how about if esb was in shanghai or paris...it will be very famous..


----------



## bozenBDJ (Jul 18, 2012)

guy4versa said:


> how about if esb was in shanghai or paris...it will be very famous..


_*Not *as much_, *one *reason why the E.S.B. is popular is because it is located in *New York City, New York, U.S.A.*


----------



## L.A.F.2. (Jun 26, 2012)

The ESB is overrated by the _general public_, but among skyscraper fanatics, it's judged fairly in my opinion. :cheers:


----------



## deadhead262 (Feb 28, 2012)

bozenBDJ said:


> _*Not *as much_, *one *reason why the E.S.B. is popular is because it is located in *New York City, New York, U.S.A.*


 In paris it would be as popular along with any other country.


----------



## deadhead262 (Feb 28, 2012)

bozenBDJ said:


> _*Not *as much_, *one *reason why the E.S.B. is popular is because it is located in *New York City, New York, U.S.A.*


 It would be as popular in any other country if it was built at the same time period.


----------



## Kopacz (Mar 16, 2011)

bozenBDJ said:


> _*Not *as much_, *one *reason why the E.S.B. is popular is because it is located in *New York City, New York, U.S.A.*


I don't know what's the reason for it being popular because of its location. Big Ben is popular because it's in London. The Eiffel Tower is popular because it's in Paris. These structures are a defining element of each city/country and so is ESB. If it wasn't built anywhere else then it just wasn't fit there due to a lot of reasons. 
People can say that they don't like the Beatles, but they can't say they had no talent or that they didn't affect the music industry in any way. ESB made its way into history books and it's hard to deny the fact that it's an icon for NY and probably will be for years and years. If we see people taking pictures of 432 park avenue and not ESB 50 years into the future then we can start talking about the latter being overrated.


----------



## tim1807 (May 28, 2011)

Also because the ESB was thet tallest building for 40 years. If fore some reason the ESB was never build and the CHrusler Building had the title not 1 but 40 years, I bet the Chrysler Building would now be just as famous.


----------



## Mike____ (Mar 15, 2009)

I guess a big part of the Empire State Building's fame got from the King Kong movies.. 
Everyone remembers those scene's/posters..


----------



## LouDagreat (Jan 30, 2013)

I believe when the World Trade Center was still standing, the ESB was overlooked most of the time. There was competition between the two complexes for which one more defined the skyline.


----------



## bozenBDJ (Jul 18, 2012)

tim1807 said:


> If it was in Chicago, it would definately not go unnoticed.


_unless _it was built behind the Sears/Willis Tower .


----------



## L.A.F.2. (Jun 26, 2012)

^^ Or Trump Chicago. Or John Hancock Center. Or Aon Center. :colgate:


----------



## KillerZavatar (Jun 22, 2010)

isaidso said:


> Agree. If the Shard had gone up in Chicago or Chongqinq, it would have gotten about 90% less press.


oh that is so true. In chongqing i stood in front of United International Mansion that just topped out and dominated the skyline and outside of this forum probably noone knows about this tower. i mean even here after 4 years it only gets like a dozen pages total together, yet compared to the Shard it can easily can keep up. if this building and the shard would switch locations it would be exactly the opposite and that has nothing to do with design, shape or building cost. it is just a matter of location. i mean living in europe how often do i read about the shard becoming europe's tallest and how often did i *not read* that moscow has a U/C project that always was taller than the shard, just was still a construction site when the shard finished. And about Laktha Center, which is becoming by far the tallest building in europe (besides federation towers spire) i also never heard of in the press. and not like the shard it is becoming the tallest by more than just 10 meters spire above the second tallest roof 

/rant


----------



## Kopacz (Mar 16, 2011)

KillerZavatar said:


> oh that is so true. In chongqing i stood in front of United International Mansion that just topped out and dominated the skyline and outside of this forum probably noone knows about this tower. i mean even here after 4 years it only gets like a dozen pages total together, yet compared to the Shard it can easily can keep up. if this building and the shard would switch locations it would be exactly the opposite and that has nothing to do with design, shape or building cost. it is just a matter of location. i mean living in europe how often do i read about the shard becoming europe's tallest and how often did i *not read* that moscow has a U/C project that always was taller than the shard, just was still a construction site when the shard finished. And about Laktha Center, which is becoming by far the tallest building in europe (besides federation towers spire) i also never heard of in the press. and not like the shard it is becoming the tallest by more than just 10 meters spire above the second tallest roof
> 
> /rant


Sorry, but that Chongqing tower is so ugly, I would even take a nice 80-meter tower over that monstrosity. Height isn't everything.


----------



## Poul_ (Jan 27, 2011)

for me


----------



## RokasLT (Nov 17, 2010)

l think Flame towers are kinda overrated, becose these towers dosn't look so well at day time then at night.


----------



## hussu123 (Oct 7, 2012)

Manitopiaaa said:


> Oh, and I know the CN Tower isn't a skyscraper per se, but it is one of the ugliest structures ever. I don't understand why people like that monstrosity


i think it is very beautiful :bash:


----------



## hussu123 (Oct 7, 2012)

Guaporense said:


> *Burj Al Arab*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


it is such a beautiful building man. i think u should design then :bash: :bash: :madwife:


----------



## hussu123 (Oct 7, 2012)

Burj Khalifa,extremely overated than required


----------



## hussu123 (Oct 7, 2012)

one world trade centre,nyc


----------



## tim1807 (May 28, 2011)

Ho could one say the Burj Al Arab lacks symmetry, is over the top and than say it's mediocre?


----------



## wino (Sep 8, 2009)

^^ i dunno...?
In the first place, is there a rule that buildings should be symmetrical? :lol:


----------



## Kopacz (Mar 16, 2011)

tim1807 said:


> Ho could one say the Burj Al Arab lacks symmetry, is over the top and than say it's mediocre?


It is symmetrical along one axis, just like most of the buildings... people don't realise its shape was forced by the aerodynamics.


----------



## Ondro (Jul 12, 2009)

Kopacz said:


> I don't know what's the reason for it being popular because of its location. Big Ben is popular because it's in London. The Eiffel Tower is popular because it's in Paris. These structures are a defining element of each city/country and so is ESB. If it wasn't built anywhere else then it just wasn't fit there due to a lot of reasons.
> People can say that they don't like the Beatles, but they can't say they had no talent or that they didn't affect the music industry in any way. ESB made its way into history books and it's hard to deny the fact that it's an icon for NY and probably will be for years and years. If we see people taking pictures of 432 park avenue and not ESB 50 years into the future then we can start talking about the latter being overrated.


I don't think that the locations make sttructures you listed popular. I think it is the other way around. If ESB was built anywhere else, it would make the city popular. Many people don't recognise anything else from NYC but the ESB(not considering the old WTC, we all know why). The same with Eiffel Tower. Those unique buildings that somehow stand out are what defines the location.


----------



## Seoul_Korea (Aug 14, 2013)

*Chrysler Building, New York*









*Empire State Building, New York*









*Bank of China, Hong Kong*









*Willis Tower, Chicago*









*1WTC, New York*









*The Shard, London*









*Shanghai World Financial Center, Shanghai*


----------



## bozenBDJ (Jul 18, 2012)

^^ They are all well-rated + nice designs  .


----------



## isaidso (Mar 21, 2007)

hussu123 said:


> i think it is very beautiful :bash:


That guy is on a mission to say something negative about Toronto at every opportunity. Even when it's not related to the thread, like in this instance, he'll find a way.


----------



## L.A.F.2. (Jun 26, 2012)

Sorry, but all those buildings are where they should be in my opinion, except for the first one, which is a bit underrated to the general population. :tongue3:


----------



## ThatOneGuy (Jan 13, 2012)

^^ I've noticed that guy dislikes a lot of beautiful buildings... including Woolworth and Ryugyong


----------



## RokasLT (Nov 17, 2010)

l think One World Trade Center is kinda overrated. Sears (Willis) tower looks nicer and still dont have copies around the world like OWTC- S. Korea, Incheon; China cities ect. (l'm talking about design of the exterior).


----------



## mckeenan (Apr 17, 2013)

¿The shard overrated? I think not. ¿The Burj khalifa overrated? hno: ¿the Empire State overrated? you can't compare it with skyscrapers done nowadays, its construction begun in the 1930s. Anyway, it was a landmark in its time. Come on guys... be reasonable.


----------



## hunser (Nov 25, 2008)

Seoul_Korea said:


> Chrysler Building, New York
> Empire State Building, New York
> Bank of China, Hong Kong
> Willis Tower, Chicago
> ...


Congrats, you just listed one of the most beautiful skyscrapers this planet has to offer. So what do you like? The Dubai Marina?


----------



## Pals_RGB (Apr 1, 2013)

One building that comes to my mind straightaway, 1WTC, way too-overrated. But i guess it is bcoz of it's location.


----------



## hunser (Nov 25, 2008)

Pals_RGB said:


> One building that comes to my mind straightaway, 1WTC, way too-overrated. But i guess it is bcoz of it's location.


Most likely. 

Most prominent towers u/c which are overrated are these two imo:
- 1WTC (should be taller, antenna is ugly)
- Shanghai Tower (way too curvy for my taste; I don't like organic forms)


----------



## DZH22 (Aug 9, 2009)

How can somebody overrate the Chrysler and ESB?! What the hell did YOUR city have in the 1930's?!?!?!

I "would" agree with 1 WTC, except that I finally saw it in person, and it was awesome. Maybe not a 10/10 skyscraper, but certainly an 8 or 9. It's a worthy replacement for 1 of the twins.


----------



## QuantumX (Mar 19, 2008)

DZH22 said:


> How can somebody overrate the Chrysler and ESB?! What the hell did YOUR city have in the 1930's?!?!?!
> 
> I "would" agree with 1 WTC, except that I finally saw it in person, and it was awesome. Maybe not a 10/10 skyscraper, but certainly an 8 or 9. It's a worthy replacement for 1 of the twins.


That particular post had me a bit confused as well.


----------



## Taller Better (Aug 27, 2005)

The trouble with threads like this is that they very quickly become City vs City, or Country vs Country. People love or hate buildings depending on which city, country or continent they are in. As simplistic and ridiculous as it is, you can see that type of thing happening here quite obviously.


----------



## Puppetgeneral (Jul 9, 2013)

Taller said:


> The trouble with threads like this is that they very quickly become City vs City, or Country vs Country. People love or hate buildings depending on which city, country or continent they are in. As simplistic and ridiculous as it is, you can see that type of thing happening here quite obviously.


An example would be like people from other countries (not America) might say that they dislike the Empire state or WTC because they want their cities to have it but then some people from New york says they are not overrated and they are awesome. And the arguments starts

I am not saying everyone is like this but a lot of people are like this but there are people that really like a building or really dislike a building so its just depends on ones opinion. Others opinion are not right or wrong. Others can't say if my opinion is wrong or right but they might have a different opinion that is different from mine.


----------



## L.A.F.2. (Jun 26, 2012)

Not going to lie, when I saw 1WTC in person, it was kind of underwhelming. Looked maybe 1,000 feet tall, and fatter than I'd imagined. I do think it's a bit overrated.


----------



## Kira_ (Oct 29, 2012)

Cocoon Tower,Tokyo









I don't say it's ugly, it's overrated


----------



## L.A.F.2. (Jun 26, 2012)

Really? I'd say it's underrated if anything. Beautiful building.


----------



## Puppetgeneral (Jul 9, 2013)

I agree, I have never seen that building before, its beautiful. Could it be that you maybe living in Japan and you hear a lot about this building in the Tokyo region, although the outside world doesn't know much.


----------



## bozenBDJ (Jul 18, 2012)

_Mode Gakuen _Cocoon Tower is definately underrated for sure  .


----------



## Kira_ (Oct 29, 2012)

Puppetgeneral said:


> I agree, I have never seen that building before, its beautiful. Could it be that you maybe living in Japan and you hear a lot about this building in the Tokyo region, although the outside world doesn't know much.


No i don't live in Japan, but i hear a lot about this building anyway. People at work always say: Look what solutions was included in this building, look at his elevation, look at his form, blah blah blah :cripes: :sad2:


----------



## Pals_RGB (Apr 1, 2013)

I haven't seen or heard about this building before, i would say its underrated. Maybe over-rated in your place , but not worldwide.


----------



## Puppetgeneral (Jul 9, 2013)

^^ This would definitely be under rated. Kira_, are any your friends from Japan, if not then they are architecture geeks who knows every building in the world. Or its a common building for your friends, they could have worked in it. But something related to it.


----------



## geloboi0830 (Dec 26, 2012)

Here's the cousin of the Cocoon building 

*Mode Gakuen Spiral Tower| Nagoya, Japan*


----------



## hifijohn (Sep 14, 2013)

the sears tower is important to chicagoans becuse it took the title of worlds tallest from nyc. and yes I will always call it the sears tower!!


----------



## NWTS (Sep 24, 2013)

*30 St Mary Axe* (The Gherkin) | The City EC3


30 St Mary Axe by Maciek Lulko, on Flickr


Sunset at the Gherkin by Markse1, on Flickr









http://www.flickr.com/photos/dgbilder/9935936254/sizes/l/in/photostream/


----------



## TowerVerre:) (Dec 1, 2012)

^^ Yeah totally right, it is nice but not much better than the Cocoon Tower IMO.


----------



## NWTS (Sep 24, 2013)

^ The iconic "Gherkin" building is technologically more advanced than the one you are talking about and it won more awards too. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyscraper#Environmental_impact


----------



## TowerVerre:) (Dec 1, 2012)

^^Didn't knew that it is technologically more advanced, that's great, I love it if buildings are environmentally friendly. But I was talking about the design, and that it won more awards only shows that it is overrated. I really like the Gherkin but I never understood the big hype....


----------



## NWTS (Sep 24, 2013)

Cocoon Tower is interesting but it's cladding and quality of materials used in the construction process and also in the building are not top-notch and it is not a symbol of Tokyo, whereas The Gherkin is widely recognised as a modern symbol or iconic landmark of the financial centre of London. In 2006, the building was up for sale with the price tag of £600 (nearly $1bn), making it the most expensive office building in the UK. Besides, it is also more well known than Cocoon because of it's participation in many Hollywood movies. Hearst Tower in NYC is also designed by the same architect who designed The Gherkin.


----------



## geloboi0830 (Dec 26, 2012)

^^ it's totally overrated. since it stands out among the other buildings in the area kay:
for the cocoon tower, imo is underrated since the shinjuku area is dense. Many buildings want attention. the tokyo government building as such.


----------



## Dimethyltryptamine (Aug 22, 2009)

L.A.F.2. said:


> I think Doha Convention Centre Tower is an even better example than Lotte:


That's Grollo Tower in Melbourne. Scrapped over a decade ago.


----------



## ombeck (Sep 17, 2013)

I like the Cocoon Tower but I'm not too impressed by the Gherkin to be honest.


----------



## Archaean (Apr 27, 2013)

Same. The Gherkin isnt a bad looking building but it isnt anything groudbreaking.


----------



## NWTS (Sep 24, 2013)

It gets a lot of attention because of the fact that it represents as an iconic landmark of the powerful financial centre of London. It is even more famous than The Shard (the first and tallest supertall building in the EU). Hollywood movies, Olympic events, BBC and other world leading media frequently use/used it when they want to show London. I think these are the reasons why it gets so much attention.


----------



## JuanPaulo (Feb 26, 2004)

^^ The Gherkin is totally overrated for my taste. The Shard is much more of an impressive and distinct landmark imoho. Hopefully as time goes by, the Shard will assume its role as the most recognizable "landmark" of London - besides the Big Ben, London bridge, et al.....


----------



## Ivanator (Dec 7, 2012)

Personally, I love both the Gherkin and the Shard, and think neither are overrated. I am also fond of the Cocoon tower.


----------



## geloboi0830 (Dec 26, 2012)

*Tokyo Metropolitan Government Building*


TOKYO METROPOLITAN GOVERNMENT BUILDING by ajpscs, on Flickr


----------

