@Palomino

Terrorists? I see a crap ton of boys at coed boarding schools and colleges using this to perve on girls. At least that's what I would have done...

@TheLoveDr
I wish I could broom DirecTv. Unfortunately I'm so thoroughly invested in the Sunday ticket package (something I only use four months out of the year) and I so hate Time Warner that it leaves me little alternative other than Dish, and I don't find that package compelling. Either my patience will be rewarded or punished- hopefully Tivo and DTV will decide it's the former with something special that doesn't cost me a future child.

@OG Phenix
I agree with what seems to be a minority opinion here. While the PS2 was an excellent, fun console that took away gobs of my time, my concept of what a console is- my DEFINITION of what a console should and shouldn't do- has been defined by the 360. It SHOULDN'T have an 80% failure rate. It SHOULD bring my friends in disparate locations together in a way that wasn't practical before it existed (none of us were PC gamers), it should offer internet connectivity, it should offer downloadable games, it should offer achievements, avatars, and foster a sense of community that for me was not theretofore unknown. With the exception of the Neo Geo and the 3D0 I have been fortunate enough to have owned every single Nintendo, Sega, Microsoft and Sony console since the NES, and NONE of them changed the game or redefined what gaming substantively was for me the way the 360 did. Not because it's games were so much better, not because the graphics or play mechanics were radically different- but because my friends and I could blow each other to hell fluidy and easily every Tuesday night from the comfort of our own living rooms in our undies.Yes, the PS2, one of which is still in use in my house, deserves its place in the pantheon- but as far as this decade is concern, for me the 360 defines gaming.

"Premiere" DVR? I'm one of those pathetic, lifer, butthurt DirecTv subscribers who is STILL waiting for them to produce an MPEG-4 version so I can shove the two DirecTv branded pieces of garbage that I have in my house so far up that company's collective rear end that they can taste them. Honestly, after five years of their shitty DVRs the new Tivo could be Hamster Powered and I'd be delighted. At this point I've gone through FIVE DirecTv DVRs, and yet I still have my MPEG-2 HD Tivo from 2003. I love shiny new technology, and believe refinement is better- but hurry the fuck up already.

"Pathetic, desperate, butthurt Nintendo hater"... wow. I can't say I've ever been described as such, especially since I've owned every single Nintendo console (with the exception of the virtual boy) since 1984. Additionally, I have owned and played through every single Zelda game on all consoles with the exception of the 3DO, and believe that I have earned the right to say that to a certain extent the *basic* gameplay elements of each game is somewhat derivative from its predecessors. While saying that "it is the same game" is probably a bit of an overgeneralization, seeing as there are many elements that change from game to game, I think I'm absolutely correct in pointing out that the essence of Zelda has remained unchanged since the first iteration- adventure, exploration, discovery and enchantment. My observation wasn't so much a critique as much as it was a commentary that these things never get old, and I would have though that mentioning the special quality that Zelda titles typically have would have betrayed my love for the series. Maybe I should have just come out and said that. But I also admitted that I haven't even played Spirit Tracks yet, and will end up buying it asap. Not sure I deserved the vitriol, but hey, it's the internet, and I'm a big boy.

What I find amazing is our willingness to play this game over and over and over again in spite of the fact that we've pretty much played them eight million times. I suppose that speaks to excellent game design, production values and just that certain something the titles have that capture our imagination. They'll probably end up with my money too.

I have been hating AT&T for so long I seemed to have forgotten why I also hated Verizon: there selfish, money-grubbing, gift-horse-in-the-mouth looking fiscal policies. Back in the early days of smarter dumb phones, they'd sell you a phone with really cool tech but would disable 30% of it so they could profit from their own little closed model. Nowadays. although they pay lip service to embracing "open" platforms, they STILL want to turn something into a marriage that should be casual sex. AT&T may have the absolute WORST freakin' network this side of two tin cans and a string, but at the very least I don't feel like they're making love to my rectum without the benefit of lubricant.

What on earth is costing them so much money? The fact that I can't name a single game should tell me something...

Because airbags, even low-speed airbags, kill children, which is why you have to be a certain height or weight to sit in the front seat. Additionally, since the car makers can't reasonably calculate the distance between the rear of the front passenger/front driver seat and the person in the back due to factors such as the size, age and weight of the child and the position of the seat chosen by the user, it'd be extremely difficult to design a bag that was safe for all children of all sizes who are placed in the back seat. The reason why they don't install seat belt airbags in the front seat is because there are already airbags in the dashboard and the steering column, making the seat-belt airbags superfluous.

If the back seat is empty and the seats aren't buckled, it costs you nothing. If the back seat happens to have your beautiful children under the age of ten they may be substantially less injured in the event of a major collision. I may be a cheap-assed bastard, but some things are worth $3300.