|
|
#31
01-18-2011, 08:13 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Ridiculous name. Oleg obviously had to give up his discussion with an incompetent moron at Ubisoft. When the communication is so bad between a developer and a publisher we can only cross our fingers that Oleg wishes to continue on to Korea. Probably he will just give up 1C and instead concentrate on his photography and next job.
|
|
#32
01-18-2011, 08:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
This forum has got cancer. Caused, mainly, by a bunch of spoilt brats. If putting words into Olegs mouth, wild speculation and negativity are your thing then look no further than the 1c IL-2 forum. I've said it before, some on here act like a gang of moaning old ladies. I've some advice.. If you don't like the DRM/Box/Graphics/Campaign/Publisher/Name/Spitfire Manual/ then don't buy the game. Simple. It'll be a good way of cleaning out the games gene pool too.
|
|
#35
01-19-2011, 03:24 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Exactly. The people who see the problem of the title are not unhappy because they just think it sounds bad. These are the people who are thinking not just for themselves but for others and the future. The people who don't see a problem are the ones that think "Its not a problem for me, I know its a new game and I'm buying whatever, If you don't like it don't buy it" this is a selfish way of thinking.
The fact is the the majority of people who may be inclined to buy this game will not know anything like as much as most people on this forum. Someone may see IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of dover on a shop shelf and say to themselves "wow is that old game still going? are they still making updates?, anyway I think I'd rather get something a bit newer" Storm of war: Cliffs of dover, is too clunky and as someone else mentioned there are too many ...... of ...... titled games. It would also need a sticker saying from the makers of Il-2, which isn't ideal. I suggested Sturmovik 2: Cliffs of dover,would have been better because it is clearly shows it is a new game and of the IL-2 series. Just by looking at the name the shop buyer would now think "wow a sequel to Il-2 Sturmovik, I used to love that old game. I'm going to have to try this new one" It works both ways and it is a pretty cool word afterall. The fact the it Cliffs of dover just happens to have the same abbreviation as another game is not a problem at all. I really don't think anyone here will be going around calling the game cod. To me it is a childish thing to use an abbreviation of a very short sentence and not some thing the type of people who will be interested in this would do. This is neither confusing nor a marketing problem.
__________________
 XBL GT: - Robotic Pope HyperLobby CS: - Robot_Pope Last edited by Robotic Pope; 01-19-2011 at 03:52 AM.
|
|
#36
01-19-2011, 07:11 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Guys, let's not point fingers and argue about what name is best from an aesthetic (and thus, purely subjective) point of view.
I don't care what the name is as long as: 1) It makes it clear that it's a game about flying airplanes in WWII, possibly making a mention of the sub-setting/theater of operations and 2) There's a small piece of text that makes it even clearer that it's made by the guys who made IL2 BUT it's completely new from the ground up and definitely not part of the original 10 year old series. My humble opinion is that if we want something done about it, it will need to be done just as a way to ensure better market penetration, as in "dear 1c team, we your fans fear you might lose some sales because of this" and not in a manner of "omg,lolz, this is a stupid title, plx change". I'm exaggerating here and ending up being a wannabe forum comedian with a bad taste in jokes, but you get my drift  If there's a case to be presented to the devs and most importantly the publishers, it will have to be done this way. "Sirs, this might cost you money" would be enough to grab their attention. Why do we care? Because we want a game that will sell well enough so that we can see expansions in the future. Let's not complicate things any further than they have to be. If the community here is concerned about the title and wants to start a vote/poll or whatever let's start from the basic stuff instead of individually giving our own example. I'm sure that if it can be changed in the 2 months until release and we make the publisher realize what kind of title would be fitting for the game, they would have enough people getting paid to come up with a better name. The issue is not if or how much i like the name, but the two numbered points i made above and this: Quote:
We want it to install and play fine right out of the box with no or minimal hassle involved so that everyone can spend their time going "oooh" and "aaaah" and "did you see that?! amazing!" for the first few hours/days, without the slightest bit of sour taste involved in the process. And guess what, Oleg Maddox and his team want and need the same thing. Heck, even Ubi wants it. Just because they make a killing with other titles doesn't mean they want even one of their published games to do poorly, no matter how much of a niche genre it is in. 
|
|
#37
01-19-2011, 12:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#39
01-19-2011, 02:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
If you buy a game without reading the box you deserve everything you get. If it's confusing people it says more about the people it's confusing, than it does the trailer.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
