Every place I've been around doesn't care if they're super current. Now that all the vendors are doing expiring certs, expired certs are still certs in the eyes of most hiring managers. "Oh yeah you know Jimmy is Cisco certified but I think it expired last year or something. We'll get him into update it eventually" is the general tone you hear from the managers. If the cert even matters, if you passed a test 2 years ago and it's $5,000 to stay "current" I don't think many managers care, if they care about certs at all. That's just one of those "oh, you have them, OK" items on a resume, like a bachelor's.
If you want trustworthy employees, act as a trustworthy organization.
Feedly has been good for my uses thus far. Multi-platform, web support, and it can be "toned down" enough for lightweight / rapid reading. Google Currents offers some cool layout options (for Android), but really lacks in terms of feed support and managing subscriptions. I'm by no means a power user with RSS, but find my bare requirements (self-managed lists/groups, mark read after viewing, iOS/Android/Browser support, images disabled in headline view) best served by Feedly.
Microsoft has stated that it will be "up to the publisher" whether the titles will support used sales. Sony obviously hasn't built it in to their end, but what about publishers? Ultimately I wouldn't be surprised to see EA, Activision, etc. including serial numbers and on-line activation schemes with their PS4 titles. I like the pro-consumer stance Sony is taking, and it's good to see them turn it around at some level, but that is a hanging question - have they come out and stated that they won't support publisher-based used sale restrictions? I don't fully trust them - their history with proprietary formats and DRM says more about their stance than a single press event.
The flashlight issue peeved everyone, but the most annoying part of the game (in my experience) was the "monster closets". That felt like a very dated mechanic and ruined the atmosphere.
The question is, why should they? At least in the industry I'm in, managers are not there to have vision or innovate. That's the role that sales fulfills, and executive leadership. Managers are there to ensure that the innovation is feasible (is the "vision" even possible to do in reality?) and profitable. Compensation goes down that same path. The sales force and executive teams take the role of entrepreneurs, and get the biggest rewards. Managers are there to steer the ship, not chart the course. The rewards of that may fall above those who are simply assigned to perform tasks, but it's nowhere near the level of those bringing the new business in the door. Granted, I work in a manufacturing-related industry, so things may be different but a bit "loose" in terms of structure. Management tends to organize the capable employees into groups that can execute the ridiculous specs to which sales staff sell without any concept of technical feasibility or profitability. "Whatever the customer asks for, sell it and let production sort it out". In our industry, managers tend to be skilled & veteran operators - it may be different in others.
Isn't that the truth. I spent maybe $60 on Steam & The Humble THQ bundle combined. I've got enough backlog to put me through 2014 at this point. The games of 2013 will be exciting once they've got GoTY editions, been fully patched, and liquidated on a Steam sale.