PDA

View Full Version : PS3 vs. Wii vs. Xbox 360



sally
January 25th, 2007, 04:54 PM
the uk release for the playstation 3 has been formally announced today and they are going to cost 425pound. i was just wondering if anyone can tell me how much they are over there?
many thanks, sal

Ninjahedge
January 25th, 2007, 05:41 PM
$600 american.

They are not worth getting right now. The game list is small, and they still have some glitches to work out (one firmware patch has already been released).

Prices are unlikely to go down, but buying a $600 system that only has 4 real games, and only 1 being worth it, is, well, not worth it.

Save your $$ for now and wait for a summer promo.

FrankHegly
January 26th, 2007, 07:42 AM
I agree....

or better still buy an Xbox 360... better graphics, cheaper and better games..... (if only it had MGS4)

Alternativley look at the European prices. The UK has high VAT compared to say good old Switzerland. In fact Switzerland is good for buying consoles... since not many people buy them... I could walk into any shop today and pick up a WI... can't see the happeing anywhere in the UK.

The advantage of buying a european console is that its PAL and conforms with European Electrical Safety Regulations.

Sony is using this piece of legislation to block imports, so you could have the console conviscated at customs if you were to buy one in the states and take it to the UK. They reason this by saying that you could sell on the product, which has not passed European Safety Regulation. :(

OmegaNYC
January 27th, 2007, 01:43 PM
Kid, this is coming from a major gamer.


Buy this:


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/17/Wii_Wiimotea.png/260px-Wii_Wiimotea.png

spatulashack
January 27th, 2007, 04:55 PM
Kid, this is coming from a major gamer.


Buy this:


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/17/Wii_Wiimotea.png/260px-Wii_Wiimotea.png


Yes because we all know how many great games the Wii has to offer. There's Zelda... and ummm, Zelda.... and oh yeah Zelda. At least PS3 has Resistance and MotorStorm. To be honest both the Wii and the PS3 aren't worth buying yet. I just don't buy into the whole crazy fanboy pushing of certain systems over another. They all have their advantages and disadvantages

NoyokA
January 27th, 2007, 05:38 PM
Only game system I've ever had was a gameboy and thankful for it.

Joelio
March 29th, 2007, 06:52 PM
425 pounds??? $600 USD?? JESUS!! It's friggin' $1,200 over here in NZ!! Damn!!

Gregory Tenenbaum
March 29th, 2007, 07:09 PM
Better still you can play just about any game on a PC right? I suppose consoles are really for the hard core gamers. :cool:

As for the original poster, when are we going to see a Brit interested in New York for something other than the shopping?

We all know that the UK is the biggest rip off joint on planet earth, and makes even Tokyo and Moscow look bargain, but really. :confused:

Gregory Tenenbaum
March 29th, 2007, 07:10 PM
425 pounds??? $600 USD?? JESUS!! It's friggin' $1,200 over here in NZ!! Damn!!

425 pounds sterling would be surely be about the same as $1200 NZ dollars?

Joelio
March 29th, 2007, 07:14 PM
^^ But no one takes that in to account. They just consider THEIR price to be the MAIN price, for example, something might cost 10 bucks here and 10 pounds in UK. It doesn't really matter what the number is, just the currency.

At least I think that can be proved true...

HSL
March 29th, 2007, 07:55 PM
425 pounds??? $600 USD?? JESUS!! It's friggin' $1,200 over here in NZ!! Damn!!

In China where the system is made, it cost $2400 US. WTF!!! :eek:

Ninjahedge
March 30th, 2007, 09:26 AM
^^ But no one takes that in to account. They just consider THEIR price to be the MAIN price, for example, something might cost 10 bucks here and 10 pounds in UK. It doesn't really matter what the number is, just the currency.

At least I think that can be proved true...

Not really. Only among the people that do not know the difference "Between a dollar and a Pound".

Also, consoles are generally better for the public, the tecnologically naieve. They are cheaper thana computer with a video card that could match, their control systems are more intuitive and readily available, and their games are USUALLY 100% on spot at release (no need for patches, although that is changing now that they have HD's!!)

I would have to say it is a toss up, but the console is still a definite winner when it comes to same-room multiplayer. Two peopel sitting at a KB has never been very fun!!! ;)

Joelio
March 30th, 2007, 04:16 PM
^^ Yeah, and when you buy a game for a console you don't have to go home and install it. And you know it's gonna work on your console. I went and tried to install SimCity 4 and SimCity 4: Rush Hour, and that took me about half an hour, and it didn't even work.

...but consoles and PC's usually have different games for them, which makes them equal in terms of the amount and quality of games (not graphics, just the satisfaction of the customer, although for some reason graphics is now a big deal among all my friends and they won't get a game if the graphics suck). For example, you can get SimCity for PC but not Xbox (although I hate Xboxes), but Halo and Halo 2 etc is only available for Xbox.

I think the topic of the "winner" of what's better between consoles and the PC is debatable, so I wouldn't bring it up here, as it could make enemies between users and start a huge argument that could last for paaaaages....

And I really hate different currencies... they get really confusing after a while. Especially on websites like Amazon.

NewYorkDragon
March 30th, 2007, 07:09 PM
Using your PC as a gaming console is only worthwhile if you have a computer built for gaming. IE: Alienware

And those are expensive,...so forget that. I have a 360 now but don't like it all too much. Might sell it and get a PSP.

PS3 is great and all,...but the game selection isn't large right now. I was a Wii owner from Dec - March and I got rid of it cause' of the lack of sports games currently out.

Ninjahedge
April 2nd, 2007, 10:09 AM
Using your PC as a gaming console is only worthwhile if you have a computer built for gaming. IE: Alienware

Um, no.

Dells new line also works, and you can also build your own for less. It is not that difficult.


And those are expensive,...so forget that. I have a 360 now but don't like it all too much. Might sell it and get a PSP.

I spend about $1600 on mine, including a dual core and a 7950GTX card. Plays just about everything out there at a higher detail and resolution than both eth 360 and PS3.

But I can also E-mail, IM, do my spreadsheets and Photoshopping on it.


PS3 is great and all,...but the game selection isn't large right now. I was a Wii owner from Dec - March and I got rid of it cause' of the lack of sports games currently out.

Game production is the achilles heel of most of the consoles. 360 has some games, but it is lacking as well.

We will see what happens by next X-mas. If the 3 does not get any decent games, bug free, by that time, they will be in trouble.

Gregory Tenenbaum
April 4th, 2007, 06:22 PM
What do most of you guys think of the PS3 v XBox 360 v Wii?

I guess that the Wii is mainly for kids?

What I am really interested in is whether the Blu-ray or HD-DVD capabilities of the PS2 vs XBox swayed your decision, or merely the games.

Have any of you used the consoles as blu-ray or HD-DVD players? What are your impressions?

NewYorkDragon
April 4th, 2007, 11:07 PM
As I stated earlier in the thread (I think),...I used to own a Wii. It's not mainly for kids, although some people will say that. It has a lot of kids games but it also has games like Resident Evil 4, Red Steel, Scarface, Splinter Cell, Call of Duty, ect. I got rid of it cause' of the lack of sports games.

I got a 360 now. A Blu-Ray player is built-in with the PS3, but personally -- I prefer the HD-DVD. While I don't have the 360 HD-DVD player -- I plan on buying it in a few months or so. HD-DVD fits me better cause' all Universal Studios titles are on HD-DVD.

Blu-Ray is out-selling HD-DVD but some of my favorite movies are made by Universal. 360 has good games and some exclusive ones, while Sony just lost like 2 exclusive titles.

Bottom line is -- if you want to buy the system mainly for the high-definition DVD player, get the PS3. But if you're as big on gaming as you are on movies, then just get the 360.

My 50 cents.

Gregory Tenenbaum
April 5th, 2007, 03:29 AM
Hi Dragon

Interesting comments.

I am trying to guess who will win the "Blu-ray v HD-DVD War" going on now. I have my reasons for this, totally unrelated to gaming...

Joelio
April 5th, 2007, 03:14 PM
What do most of you guys think of the PS3 v XBox 360 v Wii?

I don't care. I just bought a Ps2.

OmegaNYC
April 5th, 2007, 06:21 PM
PS2 sucks! :p Nah, it is still the best system out there. But I want a Wii so bad!

Gregory Tenenbaum
April 9th, 2007, 11:46 AM
PS2 sucks! :p Nah, it is still the best system out there. But I want a Wii so bad!

So does that bad guy from Miami Vice, Jose Yero. You remember this guy?

http://www.imdb.com/gallery/ss/0430357/Ss/0430357/50cmyk.JPG.html?path=pgallery&path_key=Ortiz,%20John%20(I)

I never suspected that he was a closet console gamer. He looked like he was more into hookers and coke. Watch and see Omega, I think you have a fellow Wii fan here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ClsgEZbrN54

ryan
April 9th, 2007, 11:52 AM
Hi Dragon

Interesting comments.

I am trying to guess who will win the "Blu-ray v HD-DVD War" going on now. I have my reasons for this, totally unrelated to gaming...

No one will win - there's already a machine that will play both, and I don't think any manufacturer wants to pay royalties to a monopoly. Besides, in a few years storage media will be entirely irrelevant. You'll just download the content and store it however you like.

Ninjahedge
April 9th, 2007, 12:04 PM
ryan, not quite....

You would still like to have smoething to staore and transport it on when you get it...


So we have a ways before disks are gone.

They will not last long, however, if they do not make them cheaper and eventually make them burnable at home (the very thing that the RIAA/MPAA fears!).

I can't wait until solid state like the CF cards get up to the 100G range they have been talking about!!!

ryan
April 9th, 2007, 12:38 PM
Pressed disks have a decade at most, so I won't be investing in any over-priced format - especially when they'll be obsolete almost immediately. By the time the Blu Ray/HD DVD format war resolves itself, neither will be particularly high resolution. Resolution for media will increase gradually as storage and in-home bandwidth allows (like itunes and their half VGA resolution), so why lock in to one format? TV manufacturers aren't going to commit to one standard either.

Ninjahedge
April 9th, 2007, 01:56 PM
Pressed disks have a decade at most, so I won't be investing in any over-priced format - especially when they'll be obsolete almost immediately.

I have had pretty good luck with them so far (knock on wood). I can see where you are coming from though.

But things like DVD's are great when they only cost you 50 cents a disk. They are MUCH better than tape cassettes! (And they used to run you $3.50 for the "metal" Hi Fi brands!!!)

I think they are just looking at the media wrong.


By the time the Blu Ray/HD DVD format war resolves itself, neither will be particularly high resolution. Resolution for media will increase gradually as storage and in-home bandwidth allows (like itunes and their half VGA resolution), so why lock in to one format? TV manufacturers aren't going to commit to one standard either.

What they have to do is stop being so boorish and try to get these formats out NOW before technology moves far enough to make them obsolete because of their small support/consumer base.

If they do not have many people with HD/Blu before digital media gets better, or goes in a different direction, then they will be stuck with a beta/laserdisk.

You would think they would know by now that it is not important to prove who is best at this point, but to get the media in the hands of as many in the general public as possible before that obsolescence work-point comes around.

Gregory Tenenbaum
April 9th, 2007, 02:01 PM
I disagree Ryan.

First, there are a lot of PS3 fans out there who want content for their machines. Rather than downloading things, when they are in the mall on Sunday and see that film they like on Blu-ray - they will buy it. It's just what people do.

Second, quality is going down not up when it comes to online products. All of the MP3s you see are compressed, some of them are damn awful compared to the original LP or CD. The LP of course has the best quality, but the CD has the best digital quality available (not counting DVD audio which never really took off).

Do you think that people with CD quality music collection will ever give that up? Those with LPs? Never. The downloads you can get are poor in comparison - listen to a comparison and you will see what I mean. Really really poor audio. Great for the pocket on the subway, not so good for home cinema/audio. Unlike listening to music on their Ipod, I dont think that we will see millions watching movies on their Ipods. Maybe their laptops. Its a lot easier to carry 10 Blu ray discs than take up another 500 Gig hard drive on a small laptop which you want for installed programs and documents.

Third, to download a 50 gig movie will take a long time. You can put 50 gigs onto a Blu-ray, and thats only double sided - they are developing 4x and 8x discs which can hold a lot more. Even if there ends up being 2160p HD in a few years, (4x resolution of 1080p), you can still fit more than a movie and its extras onto a single Blu-ray disc.

Fourth, the discs can be used as a backup to hard drives, just like many use DVDs for now.

Fifth, people like to collect things and buy things. Especially when theres the promise of quality. I think that people will like the idea of the tangibility of their movie/tv series being on a disc instead of on their hard drive.

PS Ninja, Metal tapes are still used in the recording industry. They offer far better quality than any DVD (not better capacity) but of course, being analogue are subject to wow and flutter instead of the DVDs digital degredation. Thats why they are used in very expensive recorders. All throughout the music business. All of the great recordings are on reel to reel tape.

Also, ever wonder why the police still use reel to reel recorders in the backs of vans, with wires etc? Best quality = analogue quality.

Ninjahedge
April 9th, 2007, 02:23 PM
Um, no.

They use reel to reel because that was teh best quality they had at the time. A lot are starting to use digital as they get to other formats such as lossless FLAC, high rate MP3 and VBR MP3 (variable bit rate).

You have to know what you are shopping for online when you are looking for MP3. If you buy a rip of a song at 128KBps or any equivalent format, you get a song on 4 megs of data. You do not hear any difefrence until you listen to it on a good pair of phones, or at home where teh hiss, krishing noise and other high-end signal loss is readily apparent.

You try the same at a 196KBPS or a higher VBR and you do not hear this. (VBR is generally better on the faster machines and players. It will reduce your bitrate on a quiet or small bandwidth section down to very little, and crank it up again when things get more complex. The equivalent of using less storage space to save a full screen of one color blue rather than an individual storage of every single pixel as "blue #224").

Digital has come a long way since its inception, and a lot of that is trickling through to the mainstream.

Like I said, you really have to know what you are looking for to find the better stuff though. Why would Sony go out of its way to provide the best Christine Agulerra rip of their disk to a 12 year old that would not know the difference?

BTW, ripping your own disks at home makes it so much easier to make mixes and other things. To be able to play them in your house as part of a system rather than one place, on disk (or 6 for carusel).

I gave my disk player to my parents! It took me a couple of weeks to rip all my disks, but I did it. I am thinking of re-ripping them now that I have more room!

And I think that brings us back to ryans point. If you can store everything you have on a hard drive that costs $100, why pay for 10 disks at $20 apiece and an even more expensive player or ripper?

ryan, I think you are right, but I think it is only because the music industry and others are not looking at it the right way.

ryan
April 9th, 2007, 02:51 PM
GT, I'm all for quality in film - that's why I go to theaters to see the real thing, but the success of itunes and iPods with music will be replicated with movies. My guess is sooner than later (and itunes starts a movie before it's fully downloaded, so download time is a quibble). Sony would love to hear you say that PS3 owners will drive Blu Ray to the mainstream, but that's not going to happen (look at psp movies, DAT, or any of their other proprietary formats). Sony alienates as many people as they convert. The mass market is only a few years into DVD's, and people aren't going to leave them behind that fast.

No matter what, it's too early to buy hardware for Blu Ray or HD DVD, and I'm convinced you'll see a combo player (http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/04/09/rumors-of-a-samsung-bd-up5000-combo-player-swirl-again/) make the "war" irrelevant.

Gregory Tenenbaum
April 9th, 2007, 03:54 PM
Guys

Yes and No.

First, VBR and MP3 is not the same as PCM. Its a lot different to listen to. Sure, a lot of people wouldn't know the difference. Why? Well thats because they have never played an LP or a PCM (CD) recording on good speakers or good headphones or on any headphones. Its way better than FM radio quality, so listening to the radio does not cut it. FLAC is not used for professional recording, PCM is - FLAC is merely a way to compress PCM. VBR and MP3 is not used professionally at all.

A lot of people's ears are being dumbed down with Ipods. VBR and MP3 do that to you. Even CD Quality 48/16 PCM is not the same as an LP. Not even close. But PCM is the best digital recording format we have (used professionally at higher bitrates such as 96/24 from usually analogue reels or masters).

So I cannot agree that people don't care. People with money will buy a higher quality product if they are educated about the differences. I for one know a ton of people who still buy opera and music on LP simply because it is better. Portable? No. Better sound? Yes.

As for the movies becoming downloadable, well, actually in some respects the quality of digital HD made movies now is actually better than that of film. Why? Well, the resolution of a Viper (as used in Miami Vice) or a Hollywood scale HD camera is much better than 35mm film. But people still like film because they like the look of film. Dynamic range, shot properly: less noise in shadows etc. They like its look.

As for the medium, well, people are going to buy movies because they can. They can browse on a sunday afternoon and make their choice. Only guys like the Wii Fan/Jose Yero lookalike posted above in my earlier post stays inside all day and doesnt go to the shops. Most people like to shop, and browse and buy.

At the end of the day, downloading 50 GB is too much. Can you imagine that? The disks may get bigger but people will not want to put their collection on their hard drives. The downloading speed will not improve much at all unless new land and sea cables are installed everywhere and give faster download speeds. The content will become bigger with higher definition content and there will be more of it. Not just video, but higher definition audio like 7.1 audio at very high bitrates.

The fact is that people have thousands of PS3s and they are looking for content. A 30 minute HD 1080i/p content with normal sound is going to be approximately 1.3 Gig. No one wants to download 1.3 Gig every day let alone 25 or 50 Gig. Thats a lot of memory.

When you are faced with that, or paying 20 dollars for a great movie on a 50 GB disc at the best quality possible, many will buy the blu-ray disc instead of that pizza they were going to buy. No one will wait 3 days for their internet connection to be tied up downloading a 50 Gb movie.

When 100 GB drives were released years ago people said that there would be no more DVDs. Then 50 GB and 250 GB media discs were invented. They are light and take up next to no space. They are also offboard your machine.

Ipod made sense for people who wanted portable audio. Lets face it, there were few competitors and now everyone is dumbed down to MP3 and VBR. Some people like me listen to PCM on a portable and few others are listening to FLAC. But as for portable video, watching a 5 or even 10 inch screen does not make sense. People want the big displays with the dazzling quality. I would doubt it if a PS3 owner didnt at least want to try to look at some of their movies on blu-ray. They will buy. It happened with DVD, it will happen with Blu-ray.

Gregory Tenenbaum
April 10th, 2007, 03:28 AM
Jose Yero, the bad guy from Miami Vice waiting for his Wii:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17AODNPdezM

Punzie
April 20th, 2007, 12:28 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17AODNPdezM
The beginning said, "GT TV". At the end, I saw that it stood for "GameTrailers.com". How could this happen?:)

Punzie
April 20th, 2007, 12:39 AM
I thought that the teens who told me about it were putting me on. Then I looked it up, and lo and behold...


From The Times
April 17, 2007

Er, Nintendo, Wii have a problem

The Wii is a must-have for the gamer generation — but instead of burning calories and making them fit, it may be giving them aching backs, sore shoulders and even “Wii elbow”

http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00158/Nintendo_Wii_158156a.jpg
Peta Bee

It is fair to say that the Nintendo Wii (pronounced wee) has become the virtual bane of many parents’ lives: it is the computer game that promises to get their children off the couch, or the PlayStation — if only it can be tracked down.

Launched before Christmas, it soon became the most soughtafter gadget in Britain. Yet stores that sold out in December — and there were many — are still out of stock, while the waiting list of impatient and disgruntled junior consumers grows ever longer.

Such is demand for the Wii, which retails at £179, that it is reportedly selling for bids of up to £600 on eBay (admittedly with lots of extra games).

What sets the Wii apart from rival computer games is the way it allows players to mimic the physical aspects of a game such as golf, tennis, boxing or baseball, via a hand-held remote control unit that communicates with a sensor sitting on the television.

With their purchase, gamers get Wii Sports, a package of five games including golf, bowling, tennis, boxing and baseball. A secondary device — which is attached via a cable and mimics a variety of objects from fishing rods to samurai swords — can be bought separately. In all, more than two dozen games are available including Rayman Raving Rabbids, in which players shake the remote control aggressively, and Red Steel, which involves wielding it like a handgun.

Unlike other games that require little more activity than the pressing of thumbs and fingers on a console, Wii players must move, even jump — backwards, forwards, side-wards and up — to get the highest scores.
In many ways it seems a perfect compromise — yes, it’s a computer game but it is also, perhaps, a solution in part to the obesity epidemic. At least, that is what the manufacturers would have a generation of parents anxious about the inactive lifestyles of their children believe.

But many experts are concerned about the marketing of the product. Critics argue that this is calculated to ease the conscience of parents who have neither the time nor the inclination for active play with their children.
And if Nintendo is so concerned about the expansion of waistlines, then perhaps it should plough some of its profits into funding children’s activity schemes or grassroots sport, they suggest.

“They claim that the Wii closely simulates a game such as tennis, so why not give kids a real racket and get them to go outside and play?” says Jo Tuffrey, a personal trainer and former PE teacher based in Berkshire. “The bottom line is that this is still a computer game. It still has a television set as a focus and, in that respect it still promotes a slothful, inactive lifestyle.”

However, the results of a study at Liverpool John Moores University, released in February, provided promising statistics on the Wii’s ability to burn calories. Professor Tim Cable, director of the school of sport and exercise sciences, and his colleagues found that, in theory, regular Wii use could shift 27lb (12.25kg) a year.

It sounds impressive — but closer inspection of the research, which was part-funded by Nintendo’s marketing company, reveals that the figures are based on an average 12.2 hours of “gaming” a week by 13 to 15-year-olds.

The scientists conceded that while the Wii burnt 40 per cent more calories than using a traditional console (ie, while sitting on the sofa), it was “never going to be as effective as getting out and playing sport”.
Using the game can also, it appears, have some unhealthy side-effects. As those players who have managed to get hold of it spend more time using the Wii, some are noticing that hours waving the game’s controller around can add up to fairly intense exertion — which results in aches, pains and overuse injuries. They are reporting a host of musculo-skeletal complaints including aching backs, sore shoulders and a condition dubbed “Wii elbow” by The Wall Street Journal.

The British Chiropractic Association (BCA) has recently cautioned that Wii injuries are plentiful and says that precautions against them should be taken. “Any unaccustomed exercise or activity lays you bare to problems that could occur from prolonged periods of active movement.

So treat the Wii like a gym workout — warming up and cooling down thoroughly,” says Tim Hutchful, a BCA spokesman. “It is also important to take frequent breaks, which should be every 15 to 30 minutes for those who don’t exercise regularly.”

Some Wii games have pop-up reminders every 15 minutes advising gamers to take a break. Yet research has shown that children play on their Wiis for up to six hours at a time.

Sammy Margo, a spokeswoman for the Chartered Society of Physiotherapists, is not surprised at the injury rates linked to the game. “Children think of them as ordinary computer games but they are not,” she says.

“To play a Wii tennis game, for instance, they need to build up a fair amount of speed to hit the virtual ball. They wouldn’t play two hours of conventional tennis, yet they are doing that with this game — and that is bound to result in some injuries.”

Since the Wii’s popularity has risen, so too has the number of websites cataloguing the injuries linked to it. Sites such as wiihaveaprob-lem.com list dozens of difficulties incurred by users, many with accompanying photographs of the damaged body parts. One girl, for instance, suffered a dislocated knee after playing on the Wii in inappropriate footwear.

Collisions are another common hazard. Flailing arms can sometimes inadvertently smack into lamps, furniture and competing players.
On ign.com (http://ign.com/) , a site that reviews video games, one player reports losing her grip and sending the controller flying into a glass lampshade that smashed and cut her hand. Another mistakenly whacked his girlfriend as he played Wii tennis, and also accidentally hit his dog while Wii bowling.

A spokeswoman for Nintendo says that it has received no complaints from gamers about muscle soreness. Indeed, the game was not meant to be an alternative to the gym, she says, and “if people are finding themselves sore, they may need to exercise more”.

Remarkably, Nintendo suggests that while it might be more fun to play the games aerobically by leaping around, it is possible to play without leaving the couch Dr Ian Campbell, medical director of the charity Weight Concern, says that parents should limit the time that children play on the Wii and encourage them to play outside. So save £179 and buy a pair of tennis rackets instead.

A Wii warm-up

Tim Hutchful, of the British Chiropractic Association, gives a guide to a preWii warm-up:

1 Shoulder shrug — slowly shrug your shoulders towards your ears. Hold for two to three seconds, then relax. Repeat three times. Because it is easier to relax a muscle after you have tightened it, you will relax the muscles in the shoulder and allow the blood to flow into the arms.

2 Wrist stretch — slowly stretch the wrist backwards, hold for two to three seconds, then slowly stretch it forwards and hold for two to three seconds. Repeat three times. This exercise prevents tightening of the wrists.

3 Make a fist — hold the arm at right angles from the elbow. Make a fist and tense it, and the whole of your arm. Hold for two to three seconds, then relax and let the arm flop to your side. Repeat three times. This will help the blood flow and tone the muscles.

4 Neck muscle stretch — try to make a double chin, to stretch the muscles at the base of the neck. Hold this position for two to three seconds and repeat three times. Always stretch very slowly.

5 Lower back loosen — standing with your feet a shoulder-width apart, slowly circle your hips five revolutions to the right and then five revolutions to your left.

http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/article1661085.ece

WebErr
April 20th, 2007, 04:24 AM
In Russia dominate PC-games. And cybersport.
Like WarCraft3 and CounterStrike.
Favorite games is Gothic 1,2 (not 3rd), The Elder Scrolls (any), Heroes of Might and Magic (any). Usually RPG or strategy, some action or 3D shooter.
Someone like World of Warcraft - it is MMORPG.

Personally I like Bard's Tales. Very funny and interesting! :)