Crytek trademarks 'Crysis Warhead'

by Kyle Orland { Mar 11th 2008 at 7:30PM }

The good folks over at Trademork have noticed a March 3 USPTO posting by Crytek for "Crysis Warhead," which could either refer to a sequel to the best-selling PC game, one of those rumored console ports or a scary new experimental explosive (or possibly a long-overdue remake of an Amiga classic. Or a strange new candy. Or ...)

The recent filing isn't Crytek's first hint at extension of the brand -- the company has also filed for trademark protection of "Crysis Wars" and "World in Crysis." Whatever the inevitable sequel/spin-off/port/expansion ends up being called, we just hope they cap the system requirements now. That way, we may actually have a computer that can actually run the game in its most beautiful detail when it eventually comes out.

Tags: crysis, hint, rumor, sequel, trademark, USPTO

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

Neebs @ Mar 11th 2008 7:33PM

They are all probably just prospective marks for sequels/expansions/ports.

LaughingTarget @ Mar 11th 2008 7:39PM

Better be an expansion or sequel, cliffhanger endings are the most horrible, despicable, disgusting thing to ever consider doing. Finish the damned story.

Ihavepants @ Mar 11th 2008 8:19PM

Plus the last few levels of Crysis were terrible anyway.
But they found a way to make the end worse.

Einhanderkiller @ Mar 11th 2008 8:10PM

'Crysis Wars' and 'World in Crysis'?
Sounds like two RTS games I know.

I recently played Crysis on Very High detail on my cousin's computer. Needless to say, the graphics were jawdroppingly gorgeous. And the performance wasn't as bad as everybody said. With his 8800GT, Crysis
ran at framerates comparable to most console games.

Jeff @ Mar 11th 2008 8:16PM

Joystiq, you suck. Honestly.

The making fun of Crysis' system requirements got old when the game came out and realized that at medium, it ran and looked better than any other PC game on the market.

Ihavepants @ Mar 11th 2008 8:20PM

Plus the game runs just fine with an 8800.

Vidikron (FU) @ Mar 12th 2008 1:49AM

@Ihavepants

heh... well, that depends on what resolution and what detail. I had it one very high with an 8800 GT and it played pretty good most of the way at 16x10, but it became a near slideshow in the final battle.

Ihavepants @ Mar 12th 2008 3:55AM

Yeh my 8600 ran fine all the way through with most settings on high.

Bits that killed it though were the snow and the first alien machine on the ship.

Monge161 @ Mar 11th 2008 9:04PM

omg i love the candy

rowdyone @ Mar 11th 2008 11:46PM

Hells yeah! Used to love em when I was a kid.

thewalrusking @ Mar 11th 2008 9:54PM

Why the hell do all these console fan boy websites still hang on the Crysis requirements, my 3 year old pc played it on low, but 3 years old! My new rig that cost a total of a huge and oh my god $600 NO NOT 6000, can play it on medium and some settings on high. i just laugh when consoles fans try to make fun of pc games. But it pisses me off cause the expense issue is the biggest reason people dont get into pc games. The very pc they write these comments on can play alot of new games, just by adding a $150 gfx card. You dont need those absolutely retarted $8000 computers. Do you drive a $200,000 car?

Shawn @ Mar 11th 2008 10:00PM

Hey Kyle, instead of linking to the dumb ass story about Crysis's sytem reqs, why don't you link to a post about how Crytek proved you could run Crysis on an $800 dollar machine? It's doesn't take much to run the goddman game, jc.

WTF is wrong with Joystiq??

Kyle Orland @ Mar 12th 2008 10:13AM

Guys, you all need to chill out re: the system requirements joke. It was just a throwaway line about the _fact_ that Crysis is near the high end of processor and graphic-card intensive games. It was an issue in many many reviews of the game, and just because _you_ can run it just fine with your $150 graphics card doesn't mean everyone else can or wants to.

Chill out.