Actually, the fact of Captain America's (potential) death reveals nothing about the Civil War, other than the (non-surprising) fact that Cap doesn't die during the War.
"Also, in a preemptive response to the inevitable "Final Fantasy games invented the need for a strategy guide" comments: Shut up! Just because you're too dumb to figure out how to do things in the game without the guide, or you're too lazy to take notes while you play so you can actually remember the important details and figure things out on your own doesn't mean the strategy guide is *required*."
In some cases, I would concur - there -are- games which do not need a strategy guide in order to be played and enjoyed. However, there are some things in the Final Fantasy series which are damn near impossible to figure out without one - I'd refer specifically to Final Fantasy VII as the trendsetter for this. I played the game through, and not once do I recall ever hearing in game about how to find the absurdly over-powered Knights of the Round materia.
My second point of contention would be that some people - myself included - play games as escapism from the real world. I'm a philosophy major in his third year at college - do you honestly think I want to have to take notes while I try playing through Final Fantasy X?
And still everyone talks about the GC like it's a dead console and has lost the console war.
It's certainly not a dead console, but Nintendo has definitely surrendered the initiative when it comes to the console wars.
Back when the NES was in its' prime, it ruled supreme - I remember selling my Sega Master System so I could play Mario Bros. That was cool when I was, say, 8 or 9.
By the time I turned 16, though, my tastes changed. Concepts which were unfamiliar to me at age 8 were at the forefront when I was 16. Nintendo offered nothing to me in the way of those tastes - sure, I could play Mario Kart 64 or Killer Instinct on N64; alternately, I could play Tekken, Gran Turismo, or Final Fantasy VII on PSX.
Nintendo has entrenched itself in the young child market; these are not the kids who shell out $50 for the games - and they have a hard time convincing their parents to do so. Sony, on the other hand, is directly appealing to the 16-25 y/o market, which can afford to buy a new game every week.
Is it really any wonder, then, that Nintendo is lagging? The GC may be a great console, but it is not appealing to the market which supports gaming, and may well die from it.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, the fact of Captain America's (potential) death reveals nothing about the Civil War, other than the (non-surprising) fact that Cap doesn't die during the War.
If you switched the name "DJ Drama" with "Radiohead" or "Aphex Twin", nobody would suggest that they be arrested.
In some cases, I would concur - there -are- games which do not need a strategy guide in order to be played and enjoyed. However, there are some things in the Final Fantasy series which are damn near impossible to figure out without one - I'd refer specifically to Final Fantasy VII as the trendsetter for this. I played the game through, and not once do I recall ever hearing in game about how to find the absurdly over-powered Knights of the Round materia.
My second point of contention would be that some people - myself included - play games as escapism from the real world. I'm a philosophy major in his third year at college - do you honestly think I want to have to take notes while I try playing through Final Fantasy X?
And still everyone talks about the GC like it's a dead console and has lost the console war. It's certainly not a dead console, but Nintendo has definitely surrendered the initiative when it comes to the console wars. Back when the NES was in its' prime, it ruled supreme - I remember selling my Sega Master System so I could play Mario Bros. That was cool when I was, say, 8 or 9. By the time I turned 16, though, my tastes changed. Concepts which were unfamiliar to me at age 8 were at the forefront when I was 16. Nintendo offered nothing to me in the way of those tastes - sure, I could play Mario Kart 64 or Killer Instinct on N64; alternately, I could play Tekken, Gran Turismo, or Final Fantasy VII on PSX. Nintendo has entrenched itself in the young child market; these are not the kids who shell out $50 for the games - and they have a hard time convincing their parents to do so. Sony, on the other hand, is directly appealing to the 16-25 y/o market, which can afford to buy a new game every week. Is it really any wonder, then, that Nintendo is lagging? The GC may be a great console, but it is not appealing to the market which supports gaming, and may well die from it.