WTF

As for the breaks. I thought there were three there was a long break and two short breaks of a week and 2 weeks and now another one till March 23rd after the coming episode. also I hear will be in the show. No idea what he'll be yet.

I wasn't being totally serious of course about the like entire posts but good to know it's coming. However yeah liking statuses would be nice if it was working again. Personally I don't want to like or dislike any post because opinions are great and I hope try to come off as agreeing or disagreeing regardless of hitting like/dislike . But yeah I do agree that at times when we strongly disagree with someone the rep system can be a force of antagonism. And @peeter01 it still tells you if you're friendly on your profile page

Also yeah next episode should be good but man the mid season breaks are annoying. I mean how many breaks did this season have.

While I'm not the one to post this kind of image, it does show that technically it's not easy to identify what that is. I can show you what it is. As for specific points from the book. I can't remember them at the moment but it's mostly to do with shape and form and like I mentioned before breasts with such curvature and small nipples aren't conducive to breast feeding which is the primary function of breasts, a mammalian feature, for mammals. When one function is overcome by another function then there's a reason for such an evolution. I mean take a look at the breasts of most mammals and you'll find that the nipples are quite elongated. Compare human ones to monkeys even. As for theories and gravity, while dean is right. The issue is that there's often a mixup between hypothesis and theories. A scientific theory and what's used in common vernacular as a theory are different as the givens, procedure, proof and inference are different when speaking in scientific terms and layman's terms. For instance we're not going to go on about ATP synthesis during photosynthesis when we explain to a regular person, we'll just say plants create food/energy from sunlight taking in CO2. While that's correct in a broad sense, it's not quite accurate. Gravity as a Force is almost considered fictitious because it is a very weak force, it's infinitesimally weaker than electrostatic force that holds the subatomic particles of an atom together. There are plenty of forces stronger than gravity. Yet when talk about large bodies it is sufficiently important. However gravity as we knew it or explain in layman's terms isn't as big a deal anymore. I'd say a bigger issue in quantum physics is the higgs boson particle because of the tendency of certain scientists who require 'funding' to try and place all their bets to this particle being a singular particle that obeys a crap load of properties. A lot of scientists are rightfully sceptical about it because instead of isolating it, we just keep adding properties to it. Also I dislike the misnomer of calling it the God particle, it isn't the God particle but rather a particle that could be the fundamental element of matter. Speaking of matter, I don't even want to get started on how wrong theories from the mid-90s on anti-matter to even a lot of modern theories are. Anti-matter needs to be something that consistently emits energy and is stable in emitting energy which is why when matter and anti-matter collides it creates well the end of everything technically. It's not the whole BS of negative nucleus and so on and so forth, that's negative matter. You want to discuss things that we know very little about then there's dark matter. I mean really what is dark matter - we have no clear idea. We know it's there. What exactly are its properties, what is it's potential. we know very little about all of these things. Instead people who are sceptical about science ask questions for which we do have answers for. I do not mean on this forum but in general. Also Dean in his own way is explaining Scientific Inquiry and Scientific Method. The whole process from observation to inference. Scientific Method hasn't changed since the time of Plato and Aristotle but what we know has changed a lot. I mean back in the early days people literally believed that mice came from cheese (The world is flat theory did not originate in the earliest societies, they believed it was spherical or circular for the most part, it originated later). Here's a bit of Trivia: Thomas Dolby, singer of 'she blinded me with science' and who pretty much created ringtones (and thus got paid for years whenever they were created (Even now I believe)) is also a member of the Flat Earth Society (yeah it's exactly what it sounds like). There are also mathematicians who like to prove that the earth is flat. The thing about arguments and the way human logic works is that we can convince ourselves to believe in what we are likely to believe provided we're given enough direction in that side. It's valid for everyone regardless of belief.

I like this thread. *searches for thread like button* *finds only post like* boo I don't mind either way. Though I might be more tempted to press like if it says I like it rather than it says a number which makes it odd to know who liked what . Right now I ignore rep.

Uh it's not me just jumping to conclusions. This from The Naked Ape which is actually considered popular and it's written by a famous anthropologist, Desmond Morris. The book was first published in 1967. It explains a lot of things, not just based on randomness but based on evolutionary evidence. The fact that the hair on our bodies are streamlined probably proves that at some point we might have gone back to the water or had a semi-aquatic experience. It's the book that looks at several things such as why (this was the 60s so it was beatlemania) women used to scream and get all giddy towards pop singers when they actually didn't have any desire to sleep with the said people. if you're interested in reading it --> http://www.amazon.com/Naked-Ape-Zoologists-Study-Animal/dp/0385334303/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1329524554&sr=8-1 I'm not saying it's entirely true today because there's been advancements since but it's an important book in anthropology and everyone should read it at least once. Mind you some of the stuff such as why the human brain and penis being bigger amongst primates were refuted and disproved but not everything in the book is fake or false. He did have sufficient evidence to back a fair number of his claims. People who take issue with humans being compared to animals have found issue with the book of course. Regardless it's an interesting read. As for the example I stated, i might have extrapolated about cleavage and butt-crack (can't remember if that exact bit was in it) but it clearly mentioned the breasts of women being like the posteriors of animals. There is a reason why most animals are attracted to the posteriors and why animals still greet each other by sniffing butts and why even today a fair number of men are attracted to butts. I mean there's evidence to all of this but I'm not writing a thesis paper right now. I'm sure you can look it up. However I'm also sure you can look up evidence to the contrary if you'd like but not from scientific sources. Mind you, scientists are always the people who usually go - we're not sure and we don't know for the most part. With a few exceptions of course.

I wonder how many people remember that Mendel, the father of genetics, was a Friar. I wouldn't say dogs are a man-made species per se but rather human directed species. Evolution works in that what is successful for procreation and enables to species to survive in an environment is what it's survival nature tries to focus on for the next generation. For instance the whole coming into existence of mammals. Every other family lays eggs (oviparous) and doesn't give live birth. This was because in most of those organisms, the baby would be seen as a foreign body that was attacking the host (mother) and if the baby were to be formed inside the mother it would be killed by the mother's antibodies. However there was a viral infection (and there's proof of this btw) that allowed for mammals to have their young grow inside of them. Here are other fun indicators of human evolution - breasts. In a lot of mammals the butt is the focus of male sexual attraction. When humans started to walk erect the butt isn't something that would be seen so the breasts evolved in order to excite the males. You see if the sole function of the breasts was to feed the babies then the nipples would be much more elongated but instead the stronger purpose of the breast is to attract males. If you were wondering yes Cleavage = buttcrack in evolutionary terms. Similarly with lips, they are meant to be red and prominent this is where the skintones play an important part because the DNA expresses itself such that if your natural skintone is darker your lips would be more protuded for women so as to show that they have a healthy area down there. (I know I often tell this, but skincolour isn't hereditary; the amusing thing is we assumed so till the late 90s In fact it was present even in my scientific texts and the whole abcABC aspect and then in 2002 or so they found out that colour isn't hereditary and that it's just the gene expression in relation to the environment). Also in all honesty technically the human physiology works that men should be the ones wearing high heels. Most men do have much better legs than women naturally. Women need to mostly work out to get the shape and tonality which occurs in many men naturally. It's something that I came to found out during my human physiology and art classes and got confirmed by my anthropologist friend. Of course society won't accept it, that's a different story. Just like modern society is going to say pink is for girls and blue for boys when it was the reverse in the 1800s. All animals that we domesticate have adapted themselves to being preferred by us either by choice or because we killed the others. So obviously the ones that lived were the ones that showed traits that we liked. No species is man-made just human-directed. For instance if all humans were to die out, the most natural predator would be the cat which no longer confined to human households would grow to the same size as the big cats. Dogs already do exhibit pack behaviour like wolves - the thing right now is their pack is your family unit. Take the humans out of the equation and over time many dogs will revert and regress to their origins. There are species that might not make it but a good majority would.

Forgetting all these specific points of view for a moment, and particularly after reading TME's microrant (which I agree with FYI) about how it's both and neither freedoms, I do wonder how long it will take before the word of law is almost like a religion unto itself. A lot of laws set out by nations and states were created to protect people, interests and such. Some are outdated and we'd like to think that nations are continuously evolving entities but the well established nations have not seen 'radical' change in their laws and constitutions since inception. Yes there are changes for what is allowed and a few minor changes to try an accept a more modern mentality but the fact that people and eventually even officials misread what the true intention of the law is brings an important question. How long will we let them stand before clarification? On one hand it's amorphous and there's change but on the other there's a lot of staticness and the very fact that language itself changes over time to the point that some laws are pointless yet still stand is scary. Sure we may laugh and say oh yeah there's laws against bringing goats to covent garden on any day except those 3 alloted days but there are others that haven't really been changed that no one bothers to look into. I mean shouldn't we actually redefine a certain number of laws outside of court-cases and when need arises so that there's at least a sense of fairness (the world isn't fair, i think we all know that - it's what we make of the fairness) instead of leaving it at the last minute when someone desperately needs the law to change for some reason or the other? Question is why do we encourage the study of law but not the library management of law to tell people ok the validity of this law is in question, new laws need to be instated for these things, etc so that we get the authorities rolling on updating records properly rather than wait till some incident happens. Wouldn't it technically be more cost-effective to do so? Or are we so programmed to let things work the way they are until shit happens (in fact that's pretty much how Operating Systems work - there are no deadlocks till it actually occurs)

Well I don't know which controller you're referring to since there were two here. The MD1 was okay but the MD2 , the lower one in the image, while really comfortable to hold compared to the first was frankly crap because the keys were far too close and it was pretty hard to master combo moves and things that required the x y and z buttons. It just felt so off. It's how I learnt how to use the controller as a fight stick by using two fingers which worked pretty good even in the PSX era with Tekken 3. Also on the subject of wired/wireless mice it's easy to have a tidy desk with a wired mouse, just requires some efficient cabling is all

Personally I like the DS3 and often get it on offers and I rarely buy third party controllers. i've had enough of those during the snes/megadrive era thanks to my father. I honestly like the DS3 (motion in joy is sweet)and use that for my PS3 and PC (have 3-4 around the house). I also have a wired 360 controller for the PC and a wireless one for the 360. Honestly the first 360 controller sucked, then they quietly released a newish one in between before they released the silver one (the old ones had gray sticks and d-pads and the next one had both in black (I use that one for my PC) and it's a lot less squeaky. First party controllers are usually priced high but the rechargeable batteries they use in the DS3 are really good considering that most people have had theirs for 3-4+ years. It is possible to get them for a fair bit cheaper though if you can look around. I remember paying £20 for mine (new). Peripheral costs are how most console manufacturers make the money on selling the consoles at a loss. For years wii-remotes were highly overpriced too. The one argument I don't understand is when people say that because they have large hands the DS3 sucks. My hands are pretty big - they're about 24cm long and 13cm wide and I've never had any problems with it. The most uncomfortable controllers were the NES and Mega Drive 2 (1 was painful to hold but it wasn't crap) personally. I do dislike the gamecube and xbox controllers since i feel the sticks are asymmetrical for me. I prefer symmetry in my design. However they aren't uncomfortable either.

I've met Timo on a few occasions (the director of Iron Sky). Honestly he can come off as a loony, but the man has some really good ideas. However his offbeat methods of crowdfunding have helped him come out with this film. Also for personal or rather familial reasons I really hope the upcoming trailer for Snow White gets a positive reception.

Oh yeah I did buy a few games... BeMine Bundle Indie Royale Valentine's Day Kingdoms of Amalur Neverdead Malicious etc. I'll post next week after the vita and such purchases

Well you could have got it from Greenmangaming for 33% off so if you're in the UK it works out to approx 16.66£ (this was yesterday though unfortanately) or $20 and it's a steam registrable game. Had people gone that route it's reasonable even for here. BTW it's amalur, AMALUR dammit. Not Alumar . Everyone's making that mistake XD. It's like the rouge-rogue thing. I've spent about 25 hours on that game already and need more time to play it. Meh so sucks that I've not had so much free time.

I've decided to get the 3G version. I mean yeah all i'd need is wifi but here's the thing the 3G one comes with the GPS chipset inside of it so when we do end up getting 4G MiFi here in the UK (properly that is) this would give me more accurate positioning data which could be interesting if certain games decide to use it properly. Basically after the first month I intend to use my 3G phone as a wifi hotspot for the vita. However when you think about the future it's probably best to go 3G. At the moment Sony has said that looking at Japanese sales it's 1:1 ratio between the two and technically the price difference after you discount wipeout for £5 with the first vodafone topup it comes to a difference of £26 approx (if you could wipeout as £28 which is what it's going for). So really save £26 just to get wifi. Really? Honestly I don't see the saving if you're getting one at launch. If you aren't then yes there's probably going to be major savings. (in addendum: for me the price difference works post wipeout out to £25 but for those with amazon it should work out to £27 approx (if you're getting wipeout from say zavvi it's 27.95) ) Currently Launch lineup for me is Uncharted, Lumines retail Wipeout 2048 (i know the loadtimes even after the patch but eh), escape plan and motorstorm rc on digital. Will wait on the pricedrop for the rest. This isn't me trying to ratify my decision but rather the price difference is far too little to be of actual significance (it's the price of a single game, which would drop in price eventually anyway). Plus data is confirmed to be topup here and 3G isn't locked to a network in the UK so after the first month you're free to do whatever. The only cost of getting the 3G if you went by the amazon deal is wipeout would be on the mem card hogging 1.6GB and being slightly slower due to access times. It's up to the individual to weigh their choices

That applies to anything outside the western market in the past; it's changed a lot since then. I remember that there were countries where video and game rental stores made money out of distributing pirated copies of films and games (because not everyone had fast broadband). Here's the thing though pirated stuff back then went through a much more complicated and shady network of thieves, mafia and what not. These days pirates are more a product of corporate espionage as well. Fun fact: till about 4 or so years ago; one of the men (yes it's a guy in this case) who was part of the US screenings or censor board (can't remember which) used to decrypt the films and sell them to the film pirates in Hong Kong from where they sold it and it also got to become digital copies. Pirated films were always being pirated by people who have access to the film industry. It still happens to a lesser degree at VFX firms. However that's in markets with a delayed release, elsewhere people do pirate because of other reasons. The problem here is that we act and treat the world as if it's an open market and yet we have regional values which make for regional censorship. They're trying to unify digital content releases in the EU (new laws), however that could pose a problem considering Germany's strict laws and censorship and the fact that they're the strongest economy. Twisted Metal is being censored here (Again) and if they unify releases we might find a lot of digital releases once again unavailable due to censorship which of course can bring back the piracy issue yet again.

Actually this is one of those rare cases where there is no right answer (differences between men and women). At least not scientifically speaking. TN's closest to the ball because of the focus on individuality which is true. There's not a world of difference in men and women if you take away hormonal functionality. The expression of the chromosomes and the hormones are pretty much what makes us. The fundamental difference between men and women is that you can't raise men and women to be a unigender or sexless and expect them to be equal. It doesn't work. Simple reason is this, sure you can isolate them for a while as children and give them the whole notion of equality but when children develop into adolescents they find out that there are certain advantages to being part of a gender (It's also why being neither and in-between is incredibly hard). Males compete with vigour, strength is key during the growth phase and they realise that possessing physical attributes helps them out while growing up. If they fail to take advantage of it, it only lasts during their youth. The intellectual males also are aware of this but not everyone focuses on physicality but on materialism and possession of tangibles which is also advantageous in getting a mate. Women know their physicality is definitely something that gets them up the social ladder and in fact use that in most cases combined with intellect to get where they want. In gender swapped roles for men and women it's only the obtaining of tangibles that swaps the gender roles technically (in a general case). The man who's unable to do so uses his physique or thinks he can use it (but it's only required in moderation) and in case of societies that are flourishing a protective man isn't required and thus more feminine men are preferred by women which leads to what we had in the early 2000s. The economy goes down and we see that 'protective' looking men are once again preferred. I chose the hetero example but it works similarly in most sexualities that are attracted to some sex (again depending upon your constituents). Technically there is no common brain pattern amongst men or women but there are strong hormonal exhibitions that cause men and women to exhibit certain traits. Both men and women have testosterone and estrogen and the balance in their bodies is key in determining their nature. Part of this is genetics and part food and environment. In all honesty it is highly possible to change the hormonal balance of a person and change their sexuality to some extent (not entirely though). Think of it like diluting what exists and no this does not mean that you can be convinced to be another sexuality and this isn't some simple procedure either that one day you wake up and find yourself of a different sexuality. It is the primary hormones that control our balance that makes us different from one another and as a result no group is entirely alike but at the same time there are people who can be quite alike regardless of gender and the relationships that come from these random combinations are a thing of beauty regardless they be good or bad. However there are similarities in every relationship and this is due to the functions of each partner in the relationship. For instance the breadwinners be it male or female generally go by the oldworld male patriarchal types of hunter-gatherer and that's definitely more of a testeronal effect. If it was more estrogenal they would want to make the growing and living environment better and this applies to both men and women. The relationship dynamics work only in that nuclear unit though; in the larger world it depends on individual and group interaction. The sad thing is that when both men and women who have one hormonal aspect dominant are forced into roles that they don't like it is quite detrimental to the individual. Being heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, asexual, pansexual whateversexual is to do with your chemical constituents - the core will always be what you're made of and the rest would be environmental and chemical factors. Saying things like what Cynthia Nixon said as in choosing to be a lesbian is quite dishonest. It's like an ambidextrous person says oh I chose to be left-handed; not everyone has that choice. When it comes to marriage, it's already being redefined. It's hard to stick to original meanings of anything which I'm sure we can all agree on from the English vs English thread. It's only essential when it comes to legal terms because of the rights it grants people who are united as a couple under law. Besides personally despite being married I think it's an archaic instituion - the only reason I'm married in the legal sense is because it protects me and my wife's rights as a couple, ownership, visas (I hold multiple long-term visas in other countries and it's easier to bring your partner rather than your girlfriend, EU and US citizens do require visas in a fair number of Asian and Middle Eastern countries and visit visas are too short). If the governments recognised two people who were together as being together outside of 'marriage' I'd be all for it and be out of this stupid institution. I admit a 'wedding' is nice but the whole 'marriage' thing feels forced upon by laws that are outdated. For a moment I thought it would be political debate about candidates but it seems to be one about morality, sexuality and issues. There is one thing however that I will bring up. There are strong differences in conservative and liberal values in most societies as in amongst those who follow them. Typically people who vote conservative are afraid of change, fear their position in society is being eroded away as in things they value and the politics embarks on fear tactics. However they are more quicker to see the change as it happens. When it comes to liberals they generally tend to deal with conflicting ideals and sometimes a bit extreme and honestly they do fit in the more undecided and uncertain landscape. While they are open to new values, it's because of the internal conflict initially. They don't see the change but embrace change in general. BTW this isn't related to politics but rather personal ideology as when it comes to politics most parties are centrist today and out of touch with the real issues and focusses on issues that show up high on skewed statistics. P.S. You are free to tldr and ignore my wall of text

Did you just revive a thread that was dead for nearly a year? XD.

Well to be fair that's just the full list of games on the PSN, most are playable some aren't. Some aren't downloadable yet for those who have their vitas on them (that's just the store not being ready yet since the thing isn't out till the 22nd of course and they're in the process of sorting that) but can be downloaded from their PS3s or their PCs if they have them downloaded via mediago.

Actually somewhat wrong there The PSP content yes it should be compatible, the download lists aren't perfectly in sync yet (store issues) but if you have a PS3 you can download the installers and transfer them to the Vita. Same thing applies to the minis. PS1 games support will be patched in around launch window. It's not in yet will be soon. PSN games of course not(but we all knew that) and PS2 titles are a negatory (I'm pretty sure Shuhei Yoshida of SCWSS knows the most about it and he said no PS2 titles on the PSN are supported on the Vita, at least not currently planned). Edit: FYI if you're ordering from Amazon UK they've dropped the vita plus memory card price to £214.99 (229.99 inc an Ubi game). Edit 2: if the starter kit is what you're after you could always drop £10 at game or gamestation which works out to £10 credit for future purchases [tech making the box free which by itself does have a decent value for frobisher says, £5 off one of 4 games {escape plan, super stardust delta, hustle king, and little deviants (making them approx 6.99, 2.99, 2.99 and 12.99 approx I believe)} who cares about the home items or avatar and some cheapish ltd earphones.]

Honestly the UMD passport thing is not worth it. We're not going to get more than a 50% discount at best. Right now in the EU we do have a PSN powersale and a lot of titles are getting discounted to those prices so if you do want to purchase those titles badly there you go. If not you're really not getting your money's worth with such a program besides certain titles won't be on the PSN because of licensing issues. Most of us were aware of this already and as for me I'm still keeping my PSP with UMD features. If we've learnt anything from this generation is that backwards compatibility is always going to be dropped. 360 has limited compatibility to start with, PS3 dropped PS2 compatibility in 2008, the Wiis dropped gamecube compatibility last year. 3DS dropped GBA compatibility and we're unlikely to get most of the games on the eshop either. The future is digital (albeit overpriced on consoles) and if you want things to carry over just buy them digitally. As long as companies are operational it doesn't matter. Besides if you're afraid of losing your stuff via digital purchases while it's not legal you can transfer your ISOs, installers on consoles and PC and store them on an external drive in case the companies kill your DL lists. Personally we're only going to live to be a 100 most likely and I doubt gaming is what's going to concern me as a hobby when I'm 65+. As of right now I can still play everything I've owned since the late 80s in some form or the other through the things I've purchased and that's all that matters to me. I'm sure they'll be fine for the most part for the next few decades. I am glad we moved away from CDs (those got scratched so often unless you bought gold plated ones - Kodak[rip] Gold CDs were awesome in the late 90s, silver to a lesser extent). I did sell my Go though since PSN/SEN only allows you to authorise 2 handhelds at a time and I'm keeping my PSP3k3. I do have about 20 or so digital PSP games excluding minis and ps1 titles. Right now I just want them to make sure that all PSP titles are compatible with the Vita digitally around release and PS1 later. Besides that there's lots of games I want for it. It's not like I play my PS2 titles on my PS3 or gamecube titles on my wii etc (It's nice to have a little retro room and when you do get around to living on your own/buying a house try to find some space to do that ) I bought my 3DS and only own 6 games(retail) and 4 digital for it so far but have spent around 300 hrs playing the device which makes it worth it for me and knowing the games I want coming out for the vita plus the ones I'm getting is good enough for me. The basic issue for most people isn't the cost of the device but the justification of costs and if there's not enough spending money people like to state one purchase is better than the other. It's why there are so many smartphone supporters because people believe they want just one device but the truth is there's room in the market for more than one device of any kind and the more people acknowledge it the better (People are civil on this forum but there's far too many where people just like to put down one device over the other). On a more topical note, I found out that I can get a bunch of games by the middle of March for extremely low prices (about a third of the RRP for some) from my source so I might wait out on a few games outside of Lumines and the digital purchases. Just wondering if I should get Uncharted or Wipeout on release - which do you guys think is better waiting on a few weeks for? PS: sheesh I'd typed this up hours ago and then had to rush out for a few meetings only to see this now :/. I guess I do type a lot and forget about it.

Well this is all rumour and speculation but the way I look at it, we know that MS is trying to bring their marketplace to the PC. With Windows 8 they already have a games marketplace on the PC which goes by the name of Xbox and there's been screenshots of Live games such as iloMilo, Hydro Thunder, etc heading to that platform. The way i see how MS will approach the next Xbox is probably going to unify PC and console gaming from their perspective. While steam will still exist they will try to see if they can edge steam out a bit by offering a native windows marketplace from which you can buy content soon as you authorise and install windows. We know the start bar is already gone. The whole used game thing doesn't really happen on PCs anymore anyway and even if you do backup by the next generation it's most likely going to be that you only get half of your game content on the disc and the other half needs to be downloaded and activated. Eventually we are going to find that whatever you do buy physically just won't work whatever device you get it on. It'll be the arm that they'd use to tie content to your account. There's nothing to stop you from selling your console titles and buying used games but you'd probably be locked out of a good chunk of the content for which you'd have to pony up. Technically 95% of my purchases are new anyway so it doesn't personally affect me though it's not something I would entirely agree with. However I can see them tying user discs to content and appeasing customers by giving discounts on the digital versions or even giving it away for free. There's an easy way for them to give it away for 'free' - a new Live subscription tier. This would mean that once you've activated a game on your account+console you can download the digital versions for a nominal fee to free depending on the subscription tier. Anyone buying it used can play some element of the game - most likely anyone buying the game used can only play single player and that too with some content removed. Pay up and you get the whole experience. It's just an evolution of project 10 dollar and the online pass. Sometimes certain things make less sense on the 360. People pay MS to play games online (The extras of Live are primarily there in the US and to a lesser extent the UK - the other markets are pretty much SOL) and then they pay the publishers to play it online in case they bought it used. Consumers are willing to let this exist and in fact they are pleased to see their sales reach ridiculous extents with it. If people want to change, then they need to stop buying the products which would force them to be competitive but I suppose people are willing to let it slide. After all history and trends are written by the winners. I wouldn't blame the companies for most of the things that happen but the consumerist nature of gamers that they are willing to pay these amounts for it. I hope the next generation makes it easier to develop on all platforms and then we might see some real competition. Personally I want it to be a handheld generation with PCs as the main focus in the homespace provided we don't see some stuff happening with windows 8. I'm pretty sure Windows 8 is going to bring some undesirable changes too and not just in the things we've seen. The only thing this makes me realise is that I do feel old and it's not been that long since I was 30.

Yeah I was going with the wifi but for me the savings just come to about 25 quid approx now. I don't really intend to use the 3G that often but if I did feel like it knowing you have the option isn't entirely bad. I know that a lot of London will have decent wifi coverage (the only good thing to come out of the Olympics technically - I really hope I'm on holiday or working outside the UK in July) but 3G isn't bad for the whole asynchronous gaming feature that's present in some games.

It's not a plan. It's a topup pay as you go deal for the 3G. I don't plan on using the 3G via vodafone after the first 250 is up and will use my other smart sims. £5 nets you activation 250MB and wipeout thus killing the cost technically by 50+5-minus the cost of wipeout which works out to 20-28 depending on where you're getting it from.