Chindie

I've been very cynical about that leak since it first emerged. IIRC it was initially at least being spoken about as being as much as 2 years old. I will tell you now that the price is bullshit if any of that is accurate at all. A $299 launch price is not far off what Microsoft currently sells a 6 year old console with Kinect at now. Ain't happening.

When it first came out, Halo was a revelation, there weren't shooters like that on consoles, with huge levels and wide open spaces and the vehicle side of things. And it brought loads of things that changed the genre to the fore - regenerating 'health', 2 weapon limit... And then it had a very compelling multiplayer. The thing is, it's now not really special. I enjoyed the game back then as a novelty really, it was a new experience, and with that gone all the little annoyances reveal themselves. The series as a whole suffers from it because it's a series that hasn't really changed much. They've remained popular because of the initial awe, and because the multiplayer is bizarrely popular.

I've finally started on Halo Anniversary, been sat on my shelf since release more or less. I'm not the biggest fan of the Halo franchise but I did enjoy the first years ago when I played it on the PC. Playing it today, with tarted up visuals... I really don't like it. It's harder than I remember and has levels that go on and on and on... It's not particularly fun, it's tedious.

Celtic can **** off generally, but I don't want them anywhere near this league. I wouldn't be too happy if they chose to start at the very bottom either, in all honesty.

Aren't the Dutch famously great lovers of chocolate sprinkles? (not a euphemism, despite the other things Amsterdam, at least, is famous for). Chocolate sprinkles on everything.

I was kinda hoping the Danes would go through, not to be though by the looks of things. This is a tragic Dutch side. Talent by the bag full going forward but a hideous defence and seemingly no team guile.

The thing with City is that it's not really a sandbox - theres something approaching an open world but it doesn't give you the tools to play with that you expect of a sandbox. And while it is an open world, in a way, it's really more of an open hub. I'd expect an open world to be fairly seemless, a large majority of the game taking place in a world without loading into new areas. What Arkham City does is basically take the hub idea of the asylum in the previous game, and expand on it, adding a bit more genuine gameplay to that hub and also making it more open (as opposed to the narrow 'doughnut' of the previous game). It's a decent trick, it's only when you think about it that the game isn't as open as you might think, it has the same foundations of it's predecessor, a hub, and 'levels' spreading out off it. Games have had the same spine for years, but the Arkham games do it very well and elegantly.

This job hunt is making me go funny in the head. I'm doing an application at the moment, emailed again which for some reason I just dislike more than sending a letter, but I'm umming and arring over sending it now or waiting till tomorrow, being concerned they might ignore it if it's come on a Sunday... I need a job before I end up driving myself crazy.

Oh no doubt. I was talking to a mate about them the other night, he reckoned you had to consider them dark horses. I argued they're a good side but had 2 major problems - they've not got a striker or attacking player generally who is genuinely top class/amongst the very best in the world, Kerzhakov being decent, and Arshavin being inconsistant and lazy. And secondly, they're incredibly full of themselves, and believe themselves to be far better than they are, which leads to the complacency that leads to the scares they had in other games, and I agree that it is probably what cost them them ultimately. But I still reckon they were best side in that group. The Poles suffered for having 4 decent players and then a pretty average squad behind them, and being unable to really pressure sides for any length of time. The Greeks are simply poor, fairly well organised but with nothing otherwise, they don't even really have anything approaching the Poles '4 good players'. And the Czechs are just decent across the board barring up top where they're wanting. For all of Russias flaws, I'd have bet on them to beat each of those teams 9 times out of 10.

The Russians were the best side in the group by a distance imo. If they could finish they'd have a goal difference of about +20. They absolutely trounced the Czechs, should have scored about 4 again against Poland and only conceded from a screamer, and by the sounds of things should have had a few against Greece too. Admittedly the Greeks should have a pen. Had Kerzhakov been firing on all cylinders they'd have walked the group. I don't think anyone from a neutral position can claim the Greeks 'aren't that bad'. Despite results, they've been poor imo Greece are a talking point of the world at the moment, it's not a huge leapr to make reference to the country being buggered, the team is the country's representative after all. As for Spain etc not having the debt mentioned, have you not heard reference to Group C as 'the Group of Debt'? The Greeks have had poor decisions, so have other teams (in Englands first game the ref was unable to decide minute to minute what constituted a foul. In other games refs have been keen to hand yellows like sweets one minute and turn down cast iron calls the next). It's slightly absurd to make out theres some kind of conspiracy against the Greeks, because they're Greek, like you've suggested. The plus side of our continental leaning supporters here being a bit uptight about the refs, of course, is that whenever someone claims that England is somehow unique for whinging about the ref, I'm pointing to these threads. A Dutch supporter and a Greek in particular And thats unsurprising but please, glance over the top of the Hellenic glasses for a moment - you're probably the worst team in the whole thing and while there have been some poor decisions against you, it's probably the least of your worries

I didn't say the Greeks didn't deserve to go through - they matched the criteria, through they go by the rules of the tournament. I'm just massively disappointed by that fact. I've got nothing against Greece. But I contend that they are poor, poor side. Poor sides beat good ones all the time, thats fair enough. I just think it's a shame, as a neutral, such a bloody bad side advanced. IMO it is embarassing, for the Russians, for the Poles, possibly for the tournament. The Greeks have been crap. I didn't say they didn't know the rule. They've **** up, they should have beaten Greece. I personally dislike the rule. In this case, it's lead to the advancement of a side that will make the spectacle of this tournament worse. If I was Greek, I'd be overjoyed (and **** knows they need something to be happy about). But I'm not. I'm interested in watching a fun tournament. Last night was the first Greek game I didn't watch. In the others I've seen a laughable side play. I'd sooner see less of that and more of a fun side, like the Russians were. I won't get on to the refs screwing you angle, poor decisions have been made tournament over. Congratulations to the Greeks for getting through. I'd rather they hadn't.

City has better gameplay mechanics, they fiddled with the combat just a little and polished it up, and made encounters have more variety with new enemy types and tactics, and being a more open setting has more interesting traversal systems (gliding about the place mostly), and has more fun with that environment. They also added in lots of extra things to do - the Riddler stuff is almost a campaign in it's own right, and there are a few side stories to pick up on as you explore the City, running into Bane for example. They also expanded massively on the challenge room side of the game. Arkham Asylum is a tighter game, the entire thing is driven by a tight plot that sees you go from one place to another, and the only diversion is things like the Riddler trophies and puzzles. Theres not a lot in it. Asylum has a better story (just), and is more cohesive. City is a more accomplished, ambitious and confident game. If you loved Asylum you'll love City once you get used to the slight differences.

Football purist I see :| :? Considering that England won't be winning this tournament, and I'm watching a lot of matches as a neutral, I don't think it's particularly bizarre to want the better sides to watch to advance. The Greeks play hideous football and are shit. It's slightly embarassing they've gotten through imo. If it was Villa, I don't give a rats arse what football we play so long as we win. Sadly it isn't Villa and the closest I've gotten to Greek was eating in a Greek restaurant about 3 years ago. So you'll forgive me for being disappointed that a fun Russian team have fallen foul of a stupid rule on deciding a tie break and a bunch of no-hopers advanced.

I can't deny being a little disappointed that the Greeks are through, for the pure spectacle of the thing - they've been **** terrible and awful to watch.

Well, the Stallone version did it and the one thing that film got largely right is the look of the thing. You can get away with a lot with regards comic films if you're careful about the art direction of the entire thing - imo, you could have a film where Wolverine wore his traditional costume if you nailed the tone and look of the entire thing. Which is difficult, but not impossible. I want the film to be good, Dredd has potential for a great film... I just don't think this has the budget or the solid united vision behind it, to manage it. Hopefully it'll be decent enough to warrant another crack with a bit more cash.

It's perfect fodder for this thread. Really doesn't matter but it's so annoying. the place I ended up going with was a very different take on my usual order but also worked out cheaper, was perfectly nice (probably tastier than the usual in all honesty) and good service all the same. May have struck lucky on the first try...

How do Juve still own Giovanco? IIRC, they do and they don't. Parma have 50% of his contract, Juve the other half. Juve would have to buy out the 50% they sold to Parma and then sell him if they wanted to use him for anything else. Last I heard was that Inter fancied him.

Having to take the risk of trying a new curry house since the last couple of orders from my usual place has seen them screw it up, missing things off the order. They're great otherwise, fast and good quality, but I'm not giving them more custom after 2 cock ups in a row. Sods law, of course, dictates that the new place I end up taking the plunge with will be bollocks.

Yup. The commentary team trying to make out he meant to score like that made me cringe a little. I'm still sure that Welbeck really isn't much cop.

Not entirely convinced he meant to do that...

Never seen a keeper so caught out from being unsighted as that one, he's not seen it till it's going past him.

I can't hate him.

Well, at least someone likable scored it...

Excellent goal - great cross, emphatic header.

Ah Mellberg, a man who clearly believes that, if you're going to foul a guy, make it obvious. You've gotta love him.