Talk:Industry Giant II

Video games Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

A request for a screenshot has been made to help better illustrate the article. (VG images department)

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

Fair use rationale for Image:Industrygiantii cover.jpg[edit]

Image:Industrygiantii cover.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 08:24, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

paragraph removed[edit]

I removed a paragraph because part of it is (1) just not true, and (2) offering unfounded opinions.

"One of the major limitations of the game however, is the absence of other companies (competitors, suppliers, ...) in the game world. This makes that a number of essential business questions as for example make-or-buy decisions cannot be experienced. Overall, the game doesn't come close to the quality and complexity of Capitalism II, which can be considered as one of the best-in-class business simulators. On the other hand, the limitations of Industry Giant II can also be seen as an advantage, as the game offers a very focused simulation field and a quick to learn user interface."

The game does have the potential for computer or human based competition, but not in the scope that would force a player to make a "make or buy" decision. I'm not sure about comparing this to Capitalism 2 as Capitalism 2 can be barely called a logistics simulator and has less realistic graphics.

Agamemnus 02:33, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have both Industry giant 2 and capitalism 2, and I can say that industry player 2 can hardly even be described as a game, while capitalism 2 is one of the greatest games that I have ever played. I don't know what you are talking about when you compare the graphics, since they are equally good, and I also think that you CAN compare the games. In fact, the only reason I bought Industry giant 2, was to see how good it was in comparison with Capitalism 2. It turned out that it sucked. I do however understand why the paragraph was removed, since it has an opinion (I agree on that opinion, but I consider that such opinions should be written here on the discussion page instead). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.235.17.60 (talk) 08:05, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notability tag[edit]

Peer-LAN, can you help establish that this is WP:NOTABLE? Boleyn (talk) 17:07, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]