Fireproofradiator

Quite agree about the speech Zok, but you can turn it off – ‘Speech’ in the sound item in ‘options’ is where you want to go… I picked this up the other day - based on the price. Enjoyed Quantum Redshift at points but that’s pretty much it as far as my futuristic racing experience goes. I think I could get into it... The handling is mad to begin with, but as people have said, you do get used to it. Keeping the balance in track design is pretty tricky too – too easy and the challenge is gone, too difficult and you turn the game into an exercise in memorization. Powerdrome leans towards the latter, but I’ve found myself doing better on first run through than on subsequent goes. As others have said though, the game's biggest achievement is the sense of speed it delivers. Being English I was disgusted with myself when I almost whooped out loud at the tremendous whack I was going along what felt like a 200 mile straight on the second course… It was phenomenal, and the blurring effects and camera shake really make a difference. (Shame about the water splashes though - one area where QR beats it hands down...) Buy it if you get a chance.

And the initial three minute introduction is simultaneously the most thrilling, frightening and hair-on-the-back-of-your-neck raising television I saw all last year.

(Re: above) Strider, thanks for that. I guess I'd say I was wondering rather than implying whether there'd be any mentions in 'Essentials'. But these are the kind of wonderings the magazine is opening itself up to with this stance unfortunately. Hope the rest of my post makes some valid points though, and congrats on the magazine...

Well I think this is pretty interesting... (and if you don't, maybe you could post in another forum where there is something that interests you...) It says a lot about how the people who put together Gamestm (which I do like) view themselves and their readership. I can understand being hurt by poor treatment by a publisher/developer but it does feel a little as if the magazine is depriving both itself and it's readers by treating a tremendously important (and good) game as if it doesn't exist, in a kind of Stalinist revision-of-history stylee. Are they not going to mention it in the retrospective 'Essentials' section for instance? Ever? That would be a bit silly. Also, the reasons given for not reviewing it, which seem important and matter of principle now, will become less relevant as time goes by, with only the irritating gap in the magazine's coverage to show for the whole business when all's said and done a couple of years down the line. And if I worked for the magazine I'd already be getting bored with explaining the rationalisation for this, as well as irritated by the attention the decision has given to a part of the games industry that the magazine seems to have sucessfully risen above. That's not even to reiterate the point make elsewhere that readers would like to know what GamesTM think of the game. It's a bit odd that the audience, who, like the magazine itself, value the lineage and history of videogames beyond the day-to-day tittletattle and spats that are a part of the industry should miss out because the magazine decides to be drawn into a fight. LIke I say, this is a bit at odds with the grasp of the bigger picture that I found so appealing about the magaine. Moreover, I think that as another poster wrote, doing a review which includes the 'history' here and takes into consideration the amount of time that's passed - perhaps looking at the modding and deathmatch content that's now beginning to appear, would be unique, interesting, and leave Gamestm looking like the good guys. Anyway...

I was looking forward to this, though so I was suprised by how bad tempered and messy the whole thing was. Never really seen any of his tv presenting gigs, but Jimmy Carr's radio show on XFM (Sunday mornings 10-1) is great, with banter between him and his co-host (can't remember his name, sorry) that generally gives me a couple of belly laughs each show. But he seemed very uncomfortable with the way David Walliams and Jonathan Ross seemed to clash, and like Burai said Simon Pegg was unsucessful in galvanising it despite best efforts, Carr seeming to spend a lot of his time saying 'let's move on'. Hilarious. The format was all wrong though, and that's not gonna help matters... When the questions were asked everyone seemed to be unsure as to whether they were meant to be writing stuff down or making gags at this point or wait until the answers were read out (occasionaly from a special guest - with no link to the questions whatsoever! Hooray! Not too much scope for gags there then...) Incredible how they messed it up, really. And I'd be intriuged to know whether Walliams really does think Rossy is a bully (he isn't really, is he?). Walliams seems, as Jimmy Carr suggested, a bit moody... For an idea of how funny Pegg can be in unrehearsed and familiar company buy the Big Train DVD and listen to the commentary.

Cor! I didn't get that Halo deux reference either. Suddenly Parkinson interviewing Ali and Richard Burton doesn't seem so impressive anymore... That came out sarcastic, wasn't meant to be - I think Wossy more or less always seems to be a tremendously nice bloke when he's on telly. And he (exec?) produced Adam and Joe Go Tokyo so he's automatically on the side of the angels. Seem to remember him once trying to talk to someone like Norah Jones or similar about giant robots on his radio show too. She was nonplussed.

Their track on the William Shatner lp - 'Together', is lovely too, btw.

Just bought this an hour ago for a tenner! Pre-owned! Really struggling to think what the silver lining might be... Anyone? All this aside, it does look interesting - I remember E*ge liking it a lot.