I just got Resident Evil 5 recently and I'm really happy with it, especially after being let down by the last zombie game. RE5 beats the unholy hell out of Left 4 Dead. I'm confused as to how they got the same rating,(Gamespot gets pretty much every rating ever done wrong, bad games with a multiplayer get rated higher than ones with an amazing singleplayer.) Resident Evil is far more graphic, more visually stunning, actually has cutscenes and a real story, more in dept due to not just being a simulation, handles better due to being a third person shooter, and will even take longer for you to get bored with, unless you actually enjoy your total choice selection of 3 guns or that lame zombie mode. RE5 is not just the next cash to keep a series going, it pushes the bar up pretty high for shooter games and zombies, riveling even Gears of War in visuals and gameplay. For your zombie lust, I highly recommend this game over Left 4 Dead. Left 4 Dead is a shallow, repetitive "shooter instance" game where the enemies are the same every single level, that is also lacking in any kind of story or plotline.

-Drain

I'm waiting for Assassin's Creed 2 and Bioshock 2. Nothing else has really caught my interest except Starcraft 2 and that doesn't really count.

I own both and and it really depends on what you want more out of a game. Gears 2 has a single player that is at least 10 times better than Halo 3, specifically because it's a better game in general and rated Mature, featuring blood and gore. Gears 2 also has better offline playability if you aren't on Live, meaning you can play with a full game of bots by yourself or with a friend, while Halo 3 features only players. You can't play by yourself offline on Halo 3, so at best you can only get 1vs1 or 3-4 players via split screen. Gears 2 gives you 5vs5 by yourself or with a friend by bot usage, which is a really important part of a package for offline users.(Not to mention that 5vs5 with a friend is far bigger and more fun than 1vs1 against him)

The only thing Halo 3 even comes close to challenging Gears 2 is with its online playability, as Gears 2 over live features a very lame matchmaking system and is player capped at 10 people while Halo 3 features up to 16.

Over all I'd say take Gears 2 unless you plan to spend many a hour over Xbox Live shooting. Gears 2 wins 2 out of 3 comparisions, if you are asking a honest game review's opinion.

The site and all other sites claiming to do this are ALL fake. Companies do not do long distance paid beta testing, aka mail you the game and then pay you for your time. You go into the company itself and must see them in person to get the job. They will then make you sign a license agreement, meaning they can sue you if you are found to have "Leaked" the content to the public(such as a torrent site). As an above poster said, you don't see things like this on a torrent site. this is because 1, these sites are fake, and 2, the people really doing the job would be sued and/or fired if they leaked what they were testing. You can also be sure of how obviously fake most are simply because of the retarded things they say. There's no way possible you could get paid up to 120$ an hour, paid beta testers get paid around 8-15$, depending on how deep of a job they are doing and how much paperwork they are responsible for. In other words, a minimum wage job is probably more worth your time. I'd like a beta testing job myself, but there are no game companies in Georgia, so I'm outa luck.

Most of these sites are "legitimate" meaning that they won't take more from you than they say you will, but you still won't get a job as they promise, as you have to go in person to do so. Notice how none of them say you can actually do this through the mail or online, they simply say you can do it "at home". If you don't live near a game company, you'll only find out after paying them that you're wasting your time.(and money)

It should also be worth mentioning that frequent headaches will make such a job just as painful as any other job, specifically when half the games you play you don't like or enjoy, and due to the frequent paperwork involved.

Every blog or review site you see talking about these sites is also fake, to add a false sense of security to lure in people. It isn't just with beta testing, there are millions of websites giving out similar scams.

Wish people who already had the PSP would quit posting against the new version in every single forum I've ever glanced at. No it's not worth buying ANOTHER copy for the upgrade. It's for people who still don't have one, or just want to get another one for any various reason.(Such as gifts or replacements) If you don't like it, don't buy it, but don't come complain about it, that's even worse. It's basically just you saying, "i already have one, why should I have to buy another one?" YOU DONT HAVE TO. You see this same BS in any forum about any new device version, doesn't anyone notice a pattern here? When todays morons get mature tomorrow, yesterdays morons take their place.

As far as DS vs PSP, I'm taking PSP because I favor 1 good screen instead of 2 half decent screens. I also don't like the stick, how can you use that and buttons at the same time? I may also use it as a small DVD player sometimes. DS seems useless to me; if you are worried about the screen, buy a 15$ case. But thats just my opinion.