World's Worst Man

I don't see how Ruth's numbers are comparable to Bonds when you take into account the era that he played in. If anything, they are more impressive due to the fact that no one who came before him was putting up even close to the numbers he was. I've also often heard that ballparks in that era were a fair bit larger than they are today. Maybe that was before or after Ruth, I don't know. Steroids absolutely are a reason to disqualify the guy, especially when there's such a sharp contrast between his "careers". If two players put up equal numbers (which isn't the case here, but it's just an example), and one of them is a proven steroid user, I'm calling the other guy the better player. There's a reason why steroid users are DQed in the Olympics or other events. It provides obvious advantages in certain areas. If Bonds numbers didn't so sharply ramp up after his steroid use, then maybe there's a case for him. But his numbers early in his career, while impressive, were not going to put him into the "best ever" debate. That's why I don't think he should even be considered.

Czech's a good guy to respond to in these discussions. The presence of performance enhancing drugs is unfortunate. The problem is that Bonds is hardly alone in their use. He is singled out because of his accomplishments, but their are many other players in the game who took advantage of PEDs, everyone's favorite players possibly among them. MLB needs to do what they can to eliminate PEDs, but I've never been quite comfortable vilifying the players that used them in the past. Fans need to remember that the home run record is just a number. It says nothing more than that Barry Bonds hit 755 home runs in Major League Baseball games. It does not make Bonds the greatest home run hitter of all time, more than Hank Aaron had the honor before. And World's Worst Poster, it is hardly a stretch to ask whether Barry Bonds is the greatest player of all time. Yea actually it is a stretch, unless you live in Bonds' dream world where he is perfectly clean. And even if you did, Ruth's numbers are still inarguably better, and if you want to point to Bonds' speed and defense in his pre-roid career, I'll point to Ruth being a high-end pitcher earlier in his. Good dig though, especially since you really did absolutely nothing to support your claim.

I'm pretty sure Bonds' record will be remembered as being tarnished by his steroid/GH/whatever the fuck else usage. Whether it's officially recognized as being bullshit or not, public opinion will recognize it as bullshit. Also, on the best "sluggers" - Career slugging percentage. 1. Babe Ruth+* .6898 2. Ted Williams+* .6338 3. Lou Gehrig+* .6324 4. Albert Pujols .6219 5. Jimmie Foxx+ .6093 Barry Bonds is 6th, but I personally would not rate him on anything other than his pre-bloated, steroid using numbers. On a slightly related note, dipshit know-nothings like Joe Buck and Tim McCarver should really do some research before saying bullshit like "Barry Bonds might be the best player ever", when even if you take into account his steroid elevated numbers, Babe Ruth fucking destroys him in pretty much everything of importance. God I hate Buck and McCarver.

Bonds, Palmeiro and McGuire, heh. If ARod was on the same stuff as those guys, he'd finish with about 900 home runs. I'd really be surprised if Rodriguez doesn't break the record a good year or two before he turns 40.

They're preparing for a terrorist attack on Tintagel, and they thought Pendragon was a real dragon.

Sony and Microsoft both (try to) make their money on software. They sell their hardware at a loss to keep the price down, and hopefully get a big install base, which will then drive software sales. They get a cut of all game sales, and they also have their first party studios where they theoretically get all of the profits. It does seem like a bizarre and risky way of doing things. If the console sells well, it can eventually turn a profit on it's own (see; PS2), because the manufacturing costs eventually will drop low enough to where they can sell at a profit; and with such a large install base, you have exorbitant software sales. That's one reason why system life is important, and one reason why Sony's long-term approach should eventually benefit them. But if the console doesn't perform to a certain standard, the developer is pretty much hosed because they don't have a big install base to sell games to, and theyre not going to be able to overcome the losses incurred on the hardware.

The Xbox 360 problems are caused by a faulty heat sink and/or motherboard design. Some of the more tech savvy folk have even figured out a way to fix the problem quite easily without having to send it in. It involves putting something under the heat sink to stabilize it so it doesn't come out of position. It's not so much a guess as it is a logical deduction. It's already been established that the 360 failures are due to shoddy manufacturing stemming from Microsoft wanting to cut costs. That is why a great number of the systems have no lifespan. The billions of dollars it's going to cost them/has cost them is a good lesson I think.

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

They'll still be releasing sports games, as seems to be the case with every "obsolete" last-gen console, but whether or not any good, original games will be released is the question. Looking over the post-2007 PS2 release list, there are a bunch of titles slated, but very few if any look interesting.

Why would I get a PS3 when I barely want a PS2? In you only care about one game then, why get a PS2 at all? Just get a Dreamcast for $20 on ebay and get Fire Pro D, which is almost exactly the same as Fire Pro R.

Barry Bonds tweaked his knee again and won't play tonight in LA. What bad luck he has :(

If you're worried about the PS2's future, just get a PS3 before they nerf the backwards compatibility. The PS2 has the finest library of games of any system, so there's plenty of games you could get even if there won't be much quality coming for the PS2 in the future.

Angus Glen is a mickey mouse course. If the RCGA wants the Canadian Open to be important again, don't hold it at a course where the players are flirting with -20 for the week. Glen Abbey was a decent challenge last time, and Hamilton G&C had some high scores if I remember correct. But never again at Angus Glen, never again.

It was pretty much the worst movie I've ever seen based solely on the fact that Russ Cargill didn't turn out to be Hank Scorpio in disguise.

I don't know how anyone could claim that the "waggle" controls are pointless in a shooting game. You're using the wiimote to point at the part of the screen where you want to aim. You can move faster and more precise than you can with an analog stick. It's not as frustrating and is much more fun.

Can't have guys clogging up the bases, you know?

Ryu Nakata, the director of NOAH, announced that Samoa Joe is going to be on NOAH's Yokohama show in October. This happened yesterday on Samurai TV, and it's from a buddy of mine in Japan. The German site www.purolove.com is also reporting it. All I need to say is that it's about time.

The PS3 and Wii have similar amounts of good titles, yet the PS3 is the one with the "NO GAMEZ" stigma. Actually, let me qualify that by saying non-Nintendo fanboys also make fun of the Wii for not having any games. It is amusing to poke fun at the consoles for having very little quality software, especially when said console has a lot of fanboys who like to constantly remind people of how awesome it is, but some people seem serious in their criticism. Anyone who was around for any console launch in the last oh, 12 years (outside of the Dreamcast) knows that launches and launch-windows tend to suck horribly for good games. PS2, the best console of all time, was complete and utter rubbish for a good year+ after it's launch. And we all know how that turned out.

It would only pay well for big-name stars. Lesnar and Angle for example, got some serious coin for working in Japan. Lesser name guys won't get paid very much, and if they started at the bottom, they probably wouldn't become over enough to where they would be getting that big money. Saying every wrestler in the US wants to end up in the WWE is completely asinine, as there's many examples that prove otherwise. That being said, if you clean up both WWE and TNA, then you've covered the two most attractive destinations for American/Canadian wrestlers. You might have the odd guy (Danielson) who chooses ROH over WWE or TNA, but I'd say the overwhelming majority have their sights set on WWE and/or TNA.

The biggest addition to the gameplay is espionage, which is more of a pain than it needs to be. You have to make spies and send them into the other country, which can get tedious. They also added a medieval version of the UN, which is about the only way you can lead a pacifist game without making a lot of military units. Otherwise it's just like the old Civ where the AI will frequently declare if you don't build up a huge army. There doesn't seem to be any new diplomacy options other than what I've mentioned though. Some of the new civs are welcome (Byzantine Empire, Charlemagne's Frankish Empire), and others are puzzling due to their insignificance (Holland, Khmer). All and all, there's not a lot of big changes, it's still basically the same game. They added a bunch of different scenarios with modified gameplay, so if you like Civ scenarios, that's good for you. To me, the fun of the game is building an empire from scratch, so I'm not much of a fan of the scenarios.

I played it for a while and then stopped. It was really tedious and uneventful a lot of the time. The control wasn't very good either. It wasn't terrible or anything, but it's a "just kind of there" game.

Hey Capcom, put mouse/keyboard compatibility in the PS3 version, thanks. After playing RE4 on the Wii, I really, really don't want to have to use a gamepad in RE5.

The Heavenly Sword demo is comically short, but god damn if the game doesn't look great. There are a ton of different attack patterns, there's a fair bit of strategy and timing on offense and especially defense, and the game just looks like poetry in motion as you play it. If the full game is of decent length, I'm definitely going to pick it up.

It's not that hard. The most "in-depth" thing you have to do is make sure the on/off buttons get fitted into the new case, which is a fairly simple thing to do if you just look at it.

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/22771.html Now here's a Metroid retrospective by the same guy who did the LoZ and FF retrospectives. I want these for all of the really good game franchises.