Oh I have, yet that doesn't affect my point about why many people refer to Crysis Warhead as Crysis 2.
Did I say "I refer to Warhead as Crysis 2"? No. You assume I think Warhead should be called Crysis 2, when I'm just making an observation about people referring to Warhead as Crysis 2, on the logic that it's the second game in the franchise, irrespective of it being a prequel/sequel/episode/whatever.
No it doesn't affect my point since my point is not commenting about Crysis Warhead's nomenclature. It's an observation, which you're taking as an argument....for argument's sake. Case closed, now.
Say Whaa! =xD
Crytek never said, Crsis warhead is crysis 2, so it shouldn't be called crysis 2. Case closed.
Like I said, it shouldn't be called crysis 2, neither should crytek be blamed for it.
Wrong observation. Case closed.
Learn to read.
Yes, they never said that, yet people end up referring to Warhead as Crysis 2. Therefore, they failed with naming, consumers can refer to a product whatever the hell they want to. Now if they continue to call Crysis 2 the way it is, uninitiated buyers could avoid it thinking they've already played the game (when they actually ended up playing Warhead)
No Warhead shouldn't be called Crysis 2, but consumers can't be blamed for that.
Failed argument, case closed, back to topic.
You learn to read. You agreed to calling episodes as a sequel yourself and are defending it. I know how to read, don't give me that age old crap when you lose the argument.
They should be blamed for it and should be corrected.
Persisting on the same thing over and over won't make it right. Case closed.
No, I never said episodes should be labeled as sequels, but labeled in a way that doesn't let people confuse them for sequels (like someone refered to Warhead as Crysis 2).
Correct them? Yes. Blame them? No, there's just no grounds for that.
Tell yourself exactly that, not me.
Publishers can label it the way they want and consumers should be able to refer to the actual name the publisher gave to the game, not something they think it should be called. I was right. I'm not getting a hardON. You are beating a dead horse here.
No grounds for what? Nobody is suing anyone here.
See what I mean?
Yes publishers can name it what they want to, but they shouldn't leave it to the consumers to be convinced they've not already played it. Rather it's the publisher's job (since it's their product they're selling here) to make sure consumers don't get confused, not the consumers' headache to get the name right.
There's no basis to blame the consumers for getting a name wrong. Consumers think that since Warhead was the second game in the franchise, it's convenient to refer to it as Crysis 2. Money moves from consumers to publishers, not the other way round. It's up to the publishers to make sure there's no confusion among people about the name. Valve did that in a much better way, calling Half Life 2 Episode xx the way they were.
Huh?
Really? Its not rocket science. You just have to look at the label when you purchase the game.
What the hell? They shouldn't refer to it as crysis 2. its wrong!
So? Consumers purchase the game because they like it the studio developing the game. Consumers are not doing a charity here. They should refer the game by its original name to avoid confusion. The publishers already named it. They did their job. Its not hard to refer to the game by its name given to it by its publishers. =heheh
It's not rocket science to give a proper name that gives no scope for confusion, either.
They're wrong alright, but it's not up to them to get it right.
Correct. I'm sure Harikiran does, too, but when he's sure he's not played the Crysis 2, he'll go get it.
They kind of are, it's their money that keeps publishers alive, not the publishers' game that keeps consumers alive. It's Consumerism 101.
It's equally not hard to give a name that leaves no scope for confusion.
Yes its not. The name they give is right, because they own it, not the consumers.
Yes it is.
Wow, you are saying that consumers give a charity to the producers for paying them for their work? You need to understand economics and business 101.
It is. They're buying the game that has a name. They should refer to it by its name.
Yes its not. The name they give is right, because they own it, not the consumers.
Its only multiplayer, no ?
There's also a single-player campaign like Modern Warfare, but it's not as good. People buy BC2 for its multiplayer.
Does multiplayer need a 2mbps type of connection ?
Not at all, 512 kbps should be fine for gameplay with voice-chat on. It's the updates that make you wish you had a faster connection. Every 3 or so weeks the game does a 300 MB update.
