Without a decent proportion of "smart, talented, dedicated individuals" you're most likely going to fail whatever methodology you use.
Problem seems to be there's a large industry (and certified professionals embedded in middle-management) who have vested interests in pitching approaches, not solutions - and however good a programmer you are, you're not going to make the 'big-bucks' without at least flirting with management. This is a good thing, but tends to make people tie their colours to a particular mast.
IMHO most methodologies are good - some have particular strengths for particular tasks/organizations - but basically they're just common sense (formalized in a way that you can slap on a power-point and justify to the clueless guy with the money).
A theoretical worker works for a company that switched from water-fall to Theory of Constraints. He was naturally dubious, but after his intro decided that he quite liked the idea (he's certainly been guilty of coasting on a task that was coming along nicely and was going to finish by the planned end date).
Then the bad stuff happened - "We automatically lop 25% of the estimate as this is more efficient".. I can see some savings, but howabout we're more realistic and just see if this stops stuff over-running. Then we start planning (tasks, estimates, buffers, dependencies etc) and start piecing it together. End of the first day we've formalized that this project cannot be delivered ontime using TOC. So well somebody decides some dependencies can be removed. Oh, and then somebody else starts adding 'programmer tbc 1' to the plan etc.
Basically, projects fail for all manner of reasons and this is often associated to the methodology. Reality is that it's the same old humans pushing the same problems into the systems, which then just fail with slightly different nomenclature.

But that's just to play the latest versions of Mario, Zelda etc.
Problem is I'm reluctantly to continually buy the consoles for those ~5 games a generation (makes those games damn-expensive).
The games are clearly being used to make me buy the hardware, and finally I think I've had enough.
I still remember Twilight Princess being 'shoved' into the Wii (and then appearing on the GC anyway). Life would be much easier if they just did a Sega.

I'm definitely back with my PC after a brief flirtation with my 360. Whole multitude of reasons:
PC is 'better' - long current console generation means even a modestly priced PC can spank any console.
Steam - Only service that actually delivered on it's promise of a 'digital-dividend'. Getting hold of a new game easy and usually cheap. Steam sales are a frenzy of gluttony for anything I've ever vaguely been interested in. Consoles whilst able, have been gutted by desire to keep publishers happy (I don't think it's possibly to download anything on my Vita that isn't £10 more expensive than buying the physical game from Amazon). Unlike many people (or at least vocal people), I'm fine with the killing of the 2nd hand game market - I just want to get something back in return.
Back to the subject, I think the WiiU is dead in the water - the people who Ninty brought into gaming with the Wii are now feasting on their ipad games. Whilst back-porting a touch-screen to a console will probably be 'compatible' with these users, I fail to see how this is going to get them to bin the ipad that they own.
PS4 - I dunno, just seems more of the same with a few bolted on software features - "share to youtube!"... oh ffs. Play a game as it downloads! (I can do this anyway, and I suspect I'm not going to be buying any digital games from you, see above).
Xbox One I think has a chance - and for some of the features it's being bashed for. I feel the TV component is going to be the seller for a couple of reasons. Most of us have a laptop/tablet/phone to hand as we watch, and I refuse to believe anybody out there hasn't scrabbled to see "what else was that guy in?". Additionally, rather than being a host for video clients, this Xbox seems to have it baked in deeper. I can easily see when you upgrade your cable subscription, you'll be offered a basic box, a Tivo or a XBOne. As happens in the mobile market, there'll be the contract and the physical client (which 'only costs a few dollars a month') - ffs they could even chuck a discounted family gold account in, along with your movie package.
Oh - and something that's been touched in is the fact what you see is a VM running - one for the game, and one for your TV. With my thinking hat on, this is ideally designed to allow what I mentioned above. The 'Game' VM is identical for all users and upgraded by MS - the 'Media' side can be customized for your cable operator.
Just realized I've wandered completely off-topic - but I guess it's mainly when I look (or even think about) the Wii-U, I'm not sure where it fits in - WHO is the target market?

9/11 gave you a bloody-nose, and the TSA is what you take away as your 'problem' You (we) went into Iraq - http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/18/panorama-iraq-fresh-wmd-claims I'm not even aware of any allegations on Afghan involvement - but hey, see what we did there - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-21547542 And even before all of that kicked off, the US had managed to bugger up most of South/Central America - and defended funding of organizations like NORAID. Still, having to show papers to get on a plane, and not being allowed to fap with your gun must have been really hard for you.

"Remember that in a police state, policies are implemented to make things easier on police"
I assume these infringements include ridiculous infringements like the power to arrest people and... well pretty much any power any police agent or government has over that of a common citizen.
Now personally I have all manner of issues with powers granted by states, to states, and their enforcers - but I accept that in the main part they're trying to protect us, and have some perspective.

http://www.raspberrypi.org/archives/2569

More interesting question is around import duty. I think I read (possibly when last trying to work out where the f*ck my OpenPandora was) that there's different import duties on finished electrical good and components (these being more expensive). Even assuming assembly cost is the same, it means it always costs more to assemble in the UK.

It's not the flying part - it's the hitting the ground you should be scared of.
I never used to have a problem with flying, and I'm still 'fine' with it - but I still remember with f'in terror a take-off I had from LHR.
Go down the runway, nose up, we're going up - and then we drop like a stone for a few seconds on what I assume was an air-pocket. Seeing things on the ground getting significantly bigger whilst the nose is still pointing up is *not* a good feeling.
Now the majority of my brain is reasonably comfortable with the idea there was never really a danger, but my lizard cortex takes a couple of G&Ts to completely silence now.

It's just something a bit different.
An option we'll all shortly have, we didn't have before.
Of course it's not going to be wanted by 99% of us - but surely you can find it in your heart to be glad that somebody out there is at least trying to innovate.
Razer, who were previously just an accessory maker of random gaming bits actually seem to be trying to push the boundary and putting some investment into creating interesting products - and then actually bringing them to market.

Full Disclosure: I own one of their mouse-mats - and it's the finest mouse mat I've ever seen/used.

my original post wasn't meant to be a troll, just exasperation.
I've been playing games on PCs for way too long - and it used to be a pretty miserable experience. Having to use Qemm, buying old graphics cards on ebay so I could mount an extra 1/2 meg of RAM chips on my Ultrasound to load the full MT32 samples, trying to patch Tomb Raider so it run with my m3D and then finding the copy of the game I'd bought seemed to be a different build etc. All the time consoles were just sitting there with games you plugged in and "they just worked".
Since DirectX and the other MS APIs they introduced, drivers were made for these, games were made for the drivers and finally the PC seemed to be a platform you could actually recommend as a gaming platform to somebody who didn't want to fiddle with IRQs etc.
Now I'm fascinated with what Valve is currently doing - I love steam and I'm reasonably sure I'm never going to buy another console again. If Valve can supply a Linux build with certification for hardware beneath and games that run over the top, I'm more than willing to give it a go - but all of this push just seems to be to make something 'as good' as what we currently have on Windows. Aside from the cost of the Windows OS, I'm not really sure what massive advantage I get (more efficient driver is a good start though), but I can be reasonably sure there will be disadvantages which many people seem to be hell-bent on glossing over.

If Gaming under Linux is so great, why are we all still using windows?
Yes, I'm sure Linux is better than it was and I'm sure there are many fine reasons why you prefer Linux over Windows - but to put this as bluntly as I can "Anybody who suggests that linux is a better gaming OS than Windows is a dribbling retard".
See also OSX - a fine OS, but just not what you should be installing if you want to play games.

This is one of the topics that repeatedly comes up and just starts me grinding my teeth. You may not think it's right, you may not think it's fair, but it is a fact so overwhelming that any protestation makes you come across as a dogmatic fool

Mainstream publishers are the 'real' bosses.
Assuming the point of Humble-bundles is to raise money for charity - then I'd assume they'd be gunning to get GTA-V and CoDx in bundles ooooh months before the publisher release. That's what would get them the most money.
In reality, I think the HBs are like Steam Sales - a chance to mop up the huge number of people who're aware your game was great, but never quite got around to buying it - but they get the benefit of a the charity-aura, and you feel a bit better about picking it up. The whole DRM & Indie component is entirely irrelevant to most purchasers. If anything getting SR3 into this bundle will get the attention of those who previously were completely unaware of Indie Games.

Well not exactly with what you've said, but in how it impacts me.
Firstly - I've never had a problem with Steam. I buy games, it appears in my library and it's always loaded if I'm online, or not. I pay and it works. Not only works, but gives me greater convenience than a CD or a bunch of floppies - I get a definite advantage and I've yet to see a downside.
Doesn't make me a DRM fan though - I've had major issues with Origin (oooh a $5 voucher as compensation I can use to buy another game that won't f'in run etc).
I think the original posters selection of Steam and Spotify are valid - yes I know I'm risking being locked out if they screw up, but they haven't and I've got some massive benefits non-DRM platforms are unable to offer.
More to the point, I've stopped pirating certain items. Music (Spotify), Books (Kindle) & Games (Steam) - I can hand-on-heart state I've paid for every single one in the last 5 or so years. Films & TV... erm I'll plead the 5th on that.
It's not a money issue (although I'm sure that depends on personal circumstances), it's an objection to having arbitrary hurdles chucked between me and the media I want. I'm reasonably sure that I'm not alone in this stance. *Most* people don't have an issue with DRM per se. *Most* People actually wish to pay a fair price for the media they consume. If a service offers them the opportunity to do this, then they will - and they'll consume more.

I *actively like Steam* This offer did nothing to dent that either. I paypal up, I get a code I copy&paste into Steam and OOOh there are the games.

but surely no more a 'publicity grab' than all the indie-game devs trying to make their mark?
*somebody* in THQ has pitched this on the basis they'll get a return on their property of "whatever people think it's worth", and I assume some drone piped up to say that "potentially we'll get nothing back" - just seems pathetic that some posters are gloating on the fact "They gave nothing to the dev" They made the game, they deserve something.

I'm just completely bemused by the seeming response.
THQ did a good thing. Somebody within the company went to bat for this, made it happen, and people respond like this?
FFS.