[001]
186.93.18.142
Current Version
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
\
to:
\\\" that\\\'s why I think it\\\'s safe to consider Knight the third part of a trilogy rather than the fourth part of an ongoing series.\\\"
The flaw of this logic is, if there\\\'s a fourth game that follows them up, there will no longer be a trilogy. Not even a TrilogyCreep if the first three games weren\\\'t acknowledged as a trilogy. A few seconds ago I made a research and I haven\\\'t seen anything from sources (hell, not even fan sites or forums) that viewed them as a trilogy. Just because \\\'\\\'you\\\'\\\' consider them a trilogy means nothing if nobody else does. You really have to understand that, because that\\\'s the reason why you\\\'ve been pulling SquarePegRoundTrope here.
By your logic, the first three \\\'\\\'Harry Potter\\\'\\\' books and films would be a trilogy just because they\\\'re linked in storyline, despite the whole saga being conceived as a heptalogy since its inception. Or the three \\\'\\\'Pikmin\\\'\\\' games just because there are three of them right now.
The flaw of this logic is, if there\\\'s a fourth game that follows them up, there will no longer be a trilogy. Not even a TrilogyCreep if the first three games weren\\\'t acknowledged as a trilogy. A few seconds ago I made a research and I haven\\\'t seen anything from sources (hell, not even fan sites or forums) that viewed them as a trilogy. Just because \\\'\\\'you\\\'\\\' consider them a trilogy means nothing if nobody else does. You really have to understand that, because that\\\'s the reason why you\\\'ve been pulling SquarePegRoundTrope here.
By your logic, the first three \\\'\\\'Harry Potter\\\'\\\' books and films would be a trilogy just because they\\\'re linked in storyline, despite the whole saga being conceived as a heptalogy since its inception. Or the three \\\'\\\'Pikmin\\\'\\\' games just because there are three of them right now.
