Could Halo have come up with something a little less GW-ish than "Forgeworld" for it's level builder? This might just be coincidence, and it might just be that I don't like the Halo games, but it seems like a lot of things rip off of those few nuggets of originality that GW has. See virtually anything that Blizzard has ever produced. Now I'm not saying that GW has never ripped off of anyone. They do it all the time. Sometimes it's a bit tongue-in-cheek, such as naming all the Lizardmen special character mounts after the Dinobots, and sometimes it's a bit more overt, like Tyranids, Space Marines, and half of WHFB. But I am tired of people getting into the hobby and saying "Man, those Orks are totally just a rip-off of WoW."
I dunno, just my $.02.
I see your perspective and I agree, but it reaches farther back than that.
Older players will know MANY references from Warhammer that were homages, or rip offs, or lifts or whatever you want to call them that predate examples of people lifting GW work (like forgeworld).
I think 'kid kyoto' (perhaps ???) once posted a thread with side by side artwork that predated many codex covers and basically showed nearly lifted designs for most of the GW concepts from gurps covers, and other pre dated sources, especially for Necrons and Tau.
Also fiction lifts borrow very heavily from a variety of sources that predate the entire GW lexicon, for example:
Of course Lord of the Rings Generally paved the way for the Entire Fantasy Genre, including DnD and of course Warhammer much later, including High Elves, Wood Elves and Especially Orks (depicted as brutish and un intelligent.
These are just some of the big and obvious ones, there are a lot more.
Its interesting to learn the history check these works out if you haven't already they are all great reads! Hopefully everyone is already familiar with them.
In final comment, please understand the humor in a claim like 'Halo ripped off GW for Forgeworld', or 'Warcraft ripped off Warhammer' in a scope that includes homages to original fictional works that are over 50 years old. Which could be interpreted as comical in it's short sightedness.
I prefer to think that each generation revisits great stories and puts their own fresh perspective on them, and we as gamers and lovers of the art should welcome these fresh interpretations!
Ok, halo made this feature called "Forge" where you could edit maps etc. Now they have expanded it into an actual "world" so they just went.. Well we have a forge in a world.. lets call it "Forge World".
I'd say the Halo bit is coincidence. Could be a loving homage from a 40K fan on the dev team, but I rather doubt it. If GW had never started using the term, it's not unlikely that someone would've tried to put "scifi" and "creation" together and came out with "forgeworld." You know how GW is - if they haven't sued, it's because Bungie's legal dept. is bigger than theirs is. But they'd still throw a hissy fit.
I'd say that both scifi and fantasy works are about 60% derivative, 35% coincidentally similar, and 5% utterly ridiculous (due to a quality-slaughtering insistence on total originality). Of course Blizzard and GW draw inspiration from common sources, as well as each other. However, each company has injected a dose of personality into their respective races and, while there is a good deal of commonality, the personalities are distinct.
Everyone wants to be the cool kid who did it first (or, in this case, the cool kid who plays the game that did it first), which is exactly why they're claiming first rights. Sure, you could show them dated material and steal their thunder, but that makes you an even bigger nerd-elitist tool. Might still be worth it, though. Sometimes I'll assume unnecessary levels of pomp (to my own detriment) just to shut down someone that bugs me.
Then again, you could always carry a stack of decades-old scifi and fantasy novels around with you to the FLGS. When anyone scoffs at derivative works, just shout "Get your head out of your " and throw the whole stack at them.
Murray wrote:Ok, halo made this feature called "Forge" where you could edit maps etc. Now they have expanded it into an actual "world" so they just went.. Well we have a forge in a world.. lets call it "Forge World".
Shouldn't really get fussed out about it.
Murray has it right. And fwiw, it's "Forge _ World"... if that makes any difference . They already had the forge, and now it's in a map I think? But "Forge _ Map" doesn't sound nearly as cool...
Space Marines - Starship Troopers, Robert A. Heinlein
Chaos - inspired by the Book of Revelations. Khorne is the Red Horse, Nurgle is the White Horse (both incarnations, really), Tzeench is the Black Horse, and Slaneesh is the death of the Eldar. A nod to Lovecraft and Moorcock thrown in, obviously.
Orks - oh come on. JRR
Elves/Eldar - Yep, him again
Tau - reasonably clearly Karl Marx, and basic communist ideology.
Imperial Guard - World War I/II (mostly I). Hive cities basic dystopian futures.
Necrons - basic man vs. machine Terminator stuff. I'm sorry, reasonably clear grab at the entire idea of the Terminators, because Terminators were 'cool.' Later expanded to get actual plot and stuff.
Anyone who claims 40k got ripped off is pretty much clinical.
RisingPhoenix wrote:A nod to Lovecraft and Moorcock thrown in, obviously.
Far more than a nod. I'd say the basic concepts are more or less directly lifted from Moorcock - including the very symbol of chaos, the eight-pointed star.
Augustus wrote:
I prefer to think that each generation revisits great stories and puts their own fresh perspective on them, and we as gamers and lovers of the art should welcome these fresh interpretations!
HEY! you just stole from the Dropkick Murphys!
What's so new about what you're saying?
It's a new generation with the same sad song.
What's so new about what you're saying?
Just another generation with the same sad song.
But yes, I agree. Every "new" idea someone has, is either coincidence, or influenced by something else. There are very few original idea's or thoughts. If you think of something, someone else has probably had the exact same thought as you have, perhaps in a different order, or different context. It's all the same.
obviously the real thing we should be watching is if GW does anything about it. They're pretty quick to push around smaller fish, but will they take a swing at Bungie who have Microsoft's money to hide behind?
Athera wrote:obviously the real thing we should be watching is if GW does anything about it. They're pretty quick to push around smaller fish, but will they take a swing at Bungie who have Microsoft's money to hide behind?
No.
There is no logic behind GW wanting to do anything to Bungie.
Its not even about money.
The only reason why Gw would want to defend and IP/trademark/copyright is to threats within the wargaming industry.
Video Game industry is much different, and a different genre/medium.
RisingPhoenix wrote:A nod to Lovecraft and Moorcock thrown in, obviously.
Far more than a nod. I'd say the basic concepts are more or less directly lifted from Moorcock - including the very symbol of chaos, the eight-pointed star.
Psst.
Look up Citadel Miniatures and "Eternal Champion".
Back in the early heyday of Citadel, they actually produced an Elric of Melnibone game series, under license.
Supposedly Moorcock's lawyers, however, weren't very good at their job...and basically everything that Citadel made for the game(including the source material and vague descriptions of Chaos, etc) ended up becoming Citadel's IP since they filed for protection on the depiction presented by their models as standard.
Athera wrote:obviously the real thing we should be watching is if GW does anything about it. They're pretty quick to push around smaller fish, but will they take a swing at Bungie who have Microsoft's money to hide behind?
No.
There is no logic behind GW wanting to do anything to Bungie.
Its not even about money.
The only reason why Gw would want to defend and IP/trademark/copyright is to threats within the wargaming industry.
Video Game industry is much different, and a different genre/medium.
Alpharius wrote:Even YOU can't be OK with that, if it is true...
What the hell is that supposed to mean?
If GW blatantly steals stuff, it's very different than how they are now with the vague "inspirations".
Anyways, that's just what I've heard pop up from time to time about why Moorcock is so zealous in refusing licensing now. Supposedly, the man learned how to draw from scratch just so he could keep artists out for whenever they do covers for reprints of his books.
But considering there's also a rumor that Moorcock sat in and helped them flesh out the Warhammer Fantasy world back in its heyday...it's a weird situation where I don't have all the answers.
However, I do have to say I like Gav Thorpe far more than Moorcock as an author. Even if "Aenarion" kept bringing up in the front of my mind "The White Wolf"...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Platuan4th wrote:
Alpharius wrote:Even YOU can't be OK with that, if it is true...
Of course he can, that's what being a fanboi is all about!
Fanboi implies I like everything they do.
I loathe the Marine centricism of 40k.
And I hate with the passion of a thousand fiery suns that they still let the Morrisons sculpt.
Manchu wrote:I like Gav Thorpe. But that's ridiculous.
And I like Michael Moorcock, but still. As time went on, Moorcock's stuff became so incredibly formulaic that it's not even funny. I can't even finish the last compilation of Elric novels("The Dreaming City" is the compilation, not sure what 3 books it is right now) simply because I've read it all before.
Kanluwen wrote:As time went on, Moorcock's stuff became so incredibly formulaic that it's not even funny.
Yeah, that's a good point. But this goes back to our Abnett v. Watson disagreement. I'm more impressed with writers that produce worlds, even if they can't keep up the quality over time. You're more impressed with writers that can consistently tell great stories in those worlds.
Kanluwen wrote:As time went on, Moorcock's stuff became so incredibly formulaic that it's not even funny.
Yeah, that's a good point. But this goes back to our Abnett v. Watson disagreement. I'm more impressed with writers that produce worlds, even if they can't keep up the quality over time. You're more impressed with writers that can consistently tell great stories in those worlds.
Quite frankly, Thorpe's done a fantastic job in actually "creating" the Sundering era Ulthuan. I highly suggest "Shadow King", as the story of the Anars is far more interesting than Malekith's hissy-fits.
Alpharius wrote:Thorpe > Moorcock = Loss of Whatever Remaining Credibility Kanluwen May Have Had
My opinion>Alpharius.
Because it's mine.
Moorcock's no Robert E. Howard. He's not even a Glenn Cook.
Is some of his stuff good? Yeah. But on the whole...it's kinda boring as time goes on.
Conversely, Gav Thorpe's really hit his stride with the Sundering series. Prior to that...he wasn't that great.
See now, I assumed you were joking with that comment...until I read your comments on Moorcock and Gav Thorpe.......interesting, but misguided...IMHO.
You see, Moorcock created something, yes it might have gotten samey, or boring! I have heard the same said about Frank Herbert....but these guys actually innovated, while the likes of Gav Thorpe and Ben Counter, etc, only repackage ideas that have fallen from the lips of Giants.
The novels GW churn out are generic at best, obvious story lines and obvious characters...bad guy is bad cause he's bad, good guy is good cause he's good.....its written for children, and avoids going into a characters motivations, probably for fear of turning away those who seem to wish for a "quick hit reading experience!"
It makes me laugh how absolute the GW Sci Fi setting is, for example, if a Marine turns renegade he automatically turns to Chaos...its that simple.....and his motivations? well, he's bad, what more do you want
See now, I assumed you were joking with that comment...until I read your comments on Moorcock and Gav Thorpe.......interesting, but misguided...IMHO.
I was actually joking about Dune ripping off Halo. There's no feasible way it could have been done, and there's nothing similar to the Flood, no spice, etc shared between the two .
You see, Moorcock created something, yes it might have gotten samey, or boring! I have heard the same said about Frank Herbert....but these guys actually innovated, while the likes of Gav Thorpe and Ben Counter, etc, only repackage ideas that have fallen from the lips of Giants.
The problem isn't so much that it gets boring or samey with Moorcock and Frank Herbert...it's that the authors start out so strong and then end up just so...wasted continuing to write the same material over and over and over. "Chapterhouse of Dune" being a perfect example.
Gav Thorpe started out like crap with the Last Chancers and "Angels of Darkness". Now he's doing stuff like "Aenarion", "Shadow King", "Malekith"...he's found his stride, and he's improved since he started. That's far more commendable than just starting off superduperstrong
Graham McNeill started out like an absolute tool with some of the Ultramarines novels. And his Time of Legends stuff about Sigmar just nabbed him a David Gemmell fiction award.
The novels GW churn out are generic at best, obvious story lines and obvious characters...bad guy is bad cause he's bad, good guy is good cause he's good.....its written for children, and avoids going into a characters motivations, probably for fear of turning away those who seem to wish for a "quick hit reading experience!"
I'm really going to point out "Shadow King" here. Yrianath is the perfect character example.
Spoiler:
Is he a bad guy for being manipulated by the Naggarothi? No.
Is he a good guy for after being manipulated and put into power as regent of the Phoenix Throne, just sitting back and letting Tiranoc and Ulthuan go down the drain? Gods no.
I can't go into much more than that without being really spoileriffic.
It makes me laugh how absolute the GW Sci Fi setting is, for example, if a Marine turns renegade he automatically turns to Chaos...its that simple.....and his motivations? well, he's bad, what more do you want
You really need to read some better Black Library authors then. "Soul Hunter" has a pretty good look into the Night Lords and how they loathe Chaos...yet accept it as part of the universe at large.
As for Marines turning renegade automatically turning to Chaos...
Well yeah. Of course that happens. Where else would they go?
The Tau wouldn't take them, and I'm pretty sure they'd have nothing that would appeal to the Astartes anyways.
Eldar won't take them, Necrons won't take them, etc etc.
But the renegade warbands and Legions...they offer a path to a greater power, endless slaughter and reveling in battle that the Astartes were bred for.
Kanluwen wrote:Warcraft did rip off Warhammer though. That and the Starcraft ripoff(oh sorry, "homage") have been well-known for awhile now.
What did Starcraft supposedly rip off? It certainly wasn't 40k - their bio-creatures aren't straight copies of Tyrannids, and the concept predates 40k by a long shot. Their 'space marines' are nothing like 40k space marines, they're much closer to Heinlein's Mobile Infantry than 40k marines, and the name is not exactly an original creation. People ripping off the same original sources that 40k ripped off aren't ripping off 40k.
eledamris wrote:Could Halo have come up with something a little less GW-ish than "Forgeworld" for it's level builder? This might just be coincidence, and it might just be that I don't like the Halo games, but it seems like a lot of things rip off of those few nuggets of originality that GW has.
Oh please. What originality. If you paid any attention over the years GW has ripped off a tone of things from other sources. if someone takes from them? Whats good for the goose is good for the gander.
Kanluwen wrote:Warcraft did rip off Warhammer though. That and the Starcraft ripoff(oh sorry, "homage") have been well-known for awhile now.
What did Starcraft supposedly rip off? It certainly wasn't 40k - their bio-creatures aren't straight copies of Tyrannids, and the concept predates 40k by a long shot. Their 'space marines' are nothing like 40k space marines, they're much closer to Heinlein's Mobile Infantry than 40k marines, and the name is not exactly an original creation. People ripping off the same original sources that 40k ripped off aren't ripping off 40k.
Starcraft and Warcraft both were unlicensed, unasked for attempts by Blizzard at the time to sell Games Workshop to hand over the licensing to them from SSI Interactive.
Blizzard approached GW with the finished product in hand, complete with Eldar, Tyranids, and Space Marines and thinking they'd be a shoe-in to get it from GW.
GW didn't, so rather than Blizzard doing something completely original they altered a few things here and there like names, basic structures of the characters etc(or are you really going to tell me that the Zerg "Overmind" isn't a flatout copy of the Hive Mind? That the Protoss being psychics with a "Path" that their race follows, and the last creations of a dying race doesn't match up the Eldar being the creations of the Old Ones? Or that the Terran Marines being ordinary criminals jacked up on stimulants and wearing heavy powered armor that they're locked into doesn't match the Space Marine fluff of that timeframe?) but otherwise left their game alone and published it.
Vladsimpaler wrote:He had credibility before? No gak.
The things you learn...
Sorry, who are you again?
Oh right. Another tween poster who seems to fail to realize that opinions don't equal fact.
Although I'm flattered that you seem to think so highly of mine, I'll kindly ask you to step the feth off with the personal attacks.
Kanluwen wrote:
Starcraft and Warcraft both were unlicensed, unasked for attempts by Blizzard at the time to sell Games Workshop to hand over the licensing to them from SSI Interactive.
Blizzard approached GW with the finished product in hand, complete with Eldar, Tyranids, and Space Marines and thinking they'd be a shoe-in to get it from GW.
Isn't the other side of the story that they were cooperating up until the point that the game was done and then GW refused to license it leaving Blizzard high and dry? If so of course they would change some stuff and release it, otherwise it would cost them a lot of money. If Blizard are the villains and GW had a case against them why is there seemingly no evidence of litigation?
Kanluwen wrote:
Starcraft and Warcraft both were unlicensed, unasked for attempts by Blizzard at the time to sell Games Workshop to hand over the licensing to them from SSI Interactive.
Blizzard approached GW with the finished product in hand, complete with Eldar, Tyranids, and Space Marines and thinking they'd be a shoe-in to get it from GW.
Isn't the other side of the story that they were cooperating up until the point that the game was done and then GW refused to license it leaving Blizzard high and dry? If so of course they would change some stuff and release it, otherwise it would cost them a lot of money. If Blizard are the villains and GW had a case against them why is there seemingly no evidence of litigation?
I've never heard any real hard reasoning that explains as to why GW would collaborate with a completely unknown company, when SSI Interactive's games were doing just fine.
But anyways:
Supposedly the reason there's no litigation because those were still the days of GW being in its infancy, and they didn't foresee Starcraft or Warcraft becoming a success.
Basically, it all boiled down to: "Why bankrupt a small company and screw themselves in the process with legal fees and expenses bringing it to court, only to get nothing in the process?".
Kanluwen wrote: Starcraft and Warcraft both were unlicensed, unasked for attempts by Blizzard at the time to sell Games Workshop to hand over the licensing to them from SSI Interactive.
Blizzard approached GW with the finished product in hand, complete with Eldar, Tyranids, and Space Marines and thinking they'd be a shoe-in to get it from GW.
GW didn't, so rather than Blizzard doing something completely original they altered a few things here and there like names, basic structures of the characters etc(or are you really going to tell me that the Zerg "Overmind" isn't a flatout copy of the Hive Mind? That the Protoss being psychics with a "Path" that their race follows, and the last creations of a dying race doesn't match up the Eldar being the creations of the Old Ones? Or that the Terran Marines being ordinary criminals jacked up on stimulants and wearing heavy powered armor that they're locked into doesn't match the Space Marine fluff of that timeframe?) but otherwise left their game alone and published it.
Where do you get this from? There is NO evidence. In fact, there is evidence to the contrary(at least with Starcraft) if you actually ASK GW. GW had NO idea Starcraft was being released. They were amused at how similar the design aesthetics are, but they didn't see any grounds for litigation and were never approached to make it a 40K game, at least according to the studio and marketing departments.
Of course, you can tell me that they were lying to our faces at Gamesday '99 and 2000 and continue to spread your little conspiracy theory, but you'll still be wrong.
And if your theory IS true, why is there no records(or ANY information, really) regarding it except hearsay on wargaming sites?
See now, I assumed you were joking with that comment...until I read your comments on Moorcock and Gav Thorpe.......interesting, but misguided...IMHO.
You see, Moorcock created something, yes it might have gotten samey, or boring! I have heard the same said about Frank Herbert....but these guys actually innovated, while the likes of Gav Thorpe and Ben Counter, etc, only repackage ideas that have fallen from the lips of Giants.
The novels GW churn out are generic at best, obvious story lines and obvious characters...bad guy is bad cause he's bad, good guy is good cause he's good.....its written for children, and avoids going into a characters motivations, probably for fear of turning away those who seem to wish for a "quick hit reading experience!"
It makes me laugh how absolute the GW Sci Fi setting is, for example, if a Marine turns renegade he automatically turns to Chaos...its that simple.....and his motivations? well, he's bad, what more do you want
Oh hi there I see you haven't read any GW novels written in the last 10 years.
Platuan4th wrote:
Where do you get this from? There is NO evidence. In fact, there is evidence to the contrary(at least with Starcraft) if you actually ASK GW. GW had NO idea Starcraft was being released. They were amused at how similar the design aesthetics are, but they didn't see any grounds for litigation and were never approached to make it a 40K game, at least according to the studio and marketing departments.
Except that's not how it's described by any of the licensing department if you ask them about it.
Of course, you can tell me that they were lying to our faces at Gamesday '99 and 2000 and continue to spread your little conspiracy theory, but you'll still be wrong.
Considering I was at GD Baltimore '99 and 2000 sitting in on their seminars, and never heard them say anything at all regarding Starcraft...
I'd say you're thinking of another time when they must have denied it.
And if your theory IS true, why is there no records(or ANY information, really) regarding it except hearsay on wargaming sites?
And where's any records saying it's not true? The say so of GW's marketing department and the studio?
Since when do they handle anything IP/licensing related?
This thread makes me LAWL... This thread is the first time I have heard of anyone attempting to call Blizzard in for lifting ideas from GW...
GW fanbois standing up for the 'rights' of GW... blindly believing that GW invented Orcs, Elves, Ogres and the like...
GW lifted alot of its most recent sculpts from World of Warcraft... its sad really... then when AoW does something better GW fanbois cry about it... seriously.
@Kanluwen - a Martketing department handles most of a company's IP, with paralegals handling the documents side of things.
AvatarForm wrote:This thread makes me LAWL... This thread is the first time I have heard of anyone attempting to call Blizzard in for lifting ideas from GW...
GW fanbois standing up for the 'rights' of GW... blindly believing that GW invented Orcs, Elves, Ogres and the like...
Noone's saying they did. However, there's undeniable parallels in the way they behave in both universes that are far too similar.
GW lifted alot of its most recent sculpts from World of Warcraft... its sad really... then when AoW does something better GW fanbois cry about it... seriously.
Okay...?
There's no crying here. Get your panties out of a bunch or go back to the Blizzard forums if you don't like hearing people talking about them.
@Kanluwen - a Marketing department handles most of a company's IP, with paralegals handling the documents side of things.
Er, no. That's what a "licensing" department is for.
Great movie BTW The bugs are what i thought tryanids looked like before I looked at WD or went on their website. Except for the big blubby thing...That was my idea of what the hivemind looked like (still is today)...
Cadichan Support wrote:Great movie BTW The bugs are what i thought tryanids looked like before I looked at WD or went on their website. Except for the big blubby thing...That was my idea of what the hivemind looked like (still is today)...
I'm assuming you've never read the book, because it's a godawful movie that deserves to be burnt in massive pyres for defiling Heinlein's name. >.>
Kanluwen wrote:
Noone's saying they did. However, there's undeniable parallels in the way they behave in both universes that are far too similar.
Okay...?
There's no crying here. Get your panties out of a bunch or go back to the Blizzard forums if you don't like hearing people talking about them.
Have you seriously read some of the fanboi responses on here? 'Noone'?
Blizzard forums? Dude, you are here spouting crap which you cannot back up and others can and have shut down with known fact.
Er, no. That's what a "licensing" department is for.
Sorry, but I worked in Marketing for one of the big 4 banks in Australia... we handled the IP and there was no such entity as a 'Licensing Department'... Im quite sure if GW is as profit motivated as they seem to be a Licensing Department would be something that can be shaved and you can squeeze your little paralegal fanbois into the unemployment queue and have 1 remain to handle this item.
Thus, you can deny and 'Er' all you want, you are still incorrect and a sodding fanboi.
This has got to be a very good contender for the crappest thread for the year. 2 & a bit pages because some company uses the term "forgeworld" - really?
fullheadofhair wrote:This has got to be a very good contender for the crappest thread for the year. 2 & a bit pages because some company uses the term "forgeworld" - really?
+1
But hey, lets argue over which company stole what from who for another page!
Seriously people, turn off the damn computer and go outside for some time.
Oh hi there I see you haven't read any GW novels written in the last 10 years.
Hmmm, not really sure how to respond to this.......stupidly, I've kept coming back to GW drivel time and time again, partly in the hope that it will get better, and partly because I realise that if it doesn't, its at least a throw away read.....you know, something for the airport lounge, or bath time / toliet reading.
In terms of time frame, I've been suckered into purchasing and reading quite a lot of their recent stuff (quite strange, considering how little I think of it ).....I think I'm well positioned therefore, in my opinion.
Of course, you're free to ignore my thoughts / opinions in place of your own.
Kanluwen wrote:Er, no. That's what a "licensing" department is for.
Sorry, but I worked in Marketing for one of the big 4 banks in Australia... we handled the IP and there was no such entity as a 'Licensing Department'... Im quite sure if GW is as profit motivated as they seem to be a Licensing Department would be something that can be shaved and you can squeeze your little paralegal fanbois into the unemployment queue and have 1 remain to handle this item.
Thus, you can deny and 'Er' all you want, you are still incorrect and a sodding fanboi.
Yeah! Silly Kanluwen, everyone knows that banks have loads of intellectual property to license out, I mean look at all the games universes Barclays created!
You can't forget the smash hit game that they licensed out last year, using their IP: "Stock Analyst 3: The Double Dip Recession"
Or not.
Just because you worked in marketing at a bank and the licensing was merged with marketing, doesn't mean that GW doesn't have a licensing department, they have much more IP to license, in the forms of games like Dawn of War and Warhammer Online, and in films like the Ultramarines Movie.
Oh hi there I see you haven't read any GW novels written in the last 10 years.
Hmmm, not really sure how to respond to this.......stupidly, I've kept coming back to GW drivel time and time again, partly in the hope that it will get better, and partly because I realise that if it doesn't, its at least a throw away read.....you know, something for the airport lounge, or bath time / toliet reading.
In terms of time frame, I've been suckered into purchasing and reading quite a lot of their recent stuff (quite strange, considering how little I think of it ).....I think I'm well positioned therefore, in my opinion.
Of course, you're free to ignore my thoughts / opinions in place of your own.
Of course we're going to ignore them when despite your claims to the otherwise, your posts demonstrate that you actually HAVEN'T read any of it...
I highly doubt anything in halo is ripped from Warhammer as they aren't similar in the slightest. Forge World just happens to be pure coincidence as I'm sure barely anyone in bungie who had a say on the map name even knew what GW is.
inb4 Spartans and Space marines. Completely different backgrounds. /Thread
Oh hi there I see you haven't read any GW novels written in the last 10 years.
Hmmm, not really sure how to respond to this.......stupidly, I've kept coming back to GW drivel time and time again, partly in the hope that it will get better, and partly because I realise that if it doesn't, its at least a throw away read.....you know, something for the airport lounge, or bath time / toliet reading.
In terms of time frame, I've been suckered into purchasing and reading quite a lot of their recent stuff (quite strange, considering how little I think of it ).....I think I'm well positioned therefore, in my opinion.
Of course, you're free to ignore my thoughts / opinions in place of your own.
And the older stuff? what did you like?
I always find the Slayer series a good read (not a lot of "evil for the sake of evil") and the Angelika Fleischer novels are also to be recommended as warhammer fiction IMO.
for the rest, well... I read a really good homage to "with fire and sword/the deluge" called "Riders of the Dead" (Dan Abnett I think).
I am a little surprised that any individual who considers themselves well versed in science fiction would ever state that any of GWs world or race concepts are wholly original. For instance, if I told you that there was a book written a few years before 40K came out that was centered around heroic marines from Terra that wore suits of fully enclosed, powered armor with a backpack that held the power source, you fanbois would call me a liar. Then I could tell you that the armor came in three types, the standard marine type, the extremely heavy version and a scout version. They set out from Terra to reclaim space for mankind from an insectoid race of aliens that was terrorizing the galaxy. I know more lies, right?
Wrong. The book was "ARMOR" by John Steakley and it hit bookstores world wide (that includes little old England) in late 1984. Seems to me that a bunch of Sci-Fi geeks, like the ones that worked at a little fledgling game company, might have read a book like that and been "inspired" to make a game out of it three years later. Hell, even the original cover art looks like a space marine concept drawing.
The idea wasn't original to John Steakley either. Back in 1977, some guy wrote a book about a race of "Bugs" with a hive mind that had twice attacked and nearly destroyed the earth. You might have read it? The guy was Orson Scott Card and the book was "Enders Game"
Oh wait, he didn't create that idea either. Robert A Heinlein did it in the 1950's. I would be willing to bet he drew "inspiration" from somewhere as well.
And Gav Thorpe IS a terrible writer. "Kill Team" is the perfect example. The premise is that they desperately need each of these individuals and their extremely singular and valuable skill sets in order to complete this terribly important mission. Then during training, the leader arbitrarily kills one of the operators. Well, I guess they needed all of them but THAT guy. Pfft.
Oh, I almost forgot about the C.A.D.S. series by John Sievert. A series of books starting in early 1985 about a bunch of post apocalyptic solders in armored space suits who used rocket pistols. (Sound like a bolt pistol to anyone?) They rode around on tricked out trikes (Squats anyone?) that were loaded with weapons systems out the whazoo. There were already three novels from this series in the stores before Rogue Trader was published.
But I doubt 40K was influenced by any of that. Rick Priestly was just an incredible genius that came up with this totally new concept in a vacuum.
Kanluwen wrote:GW didn't, so rather than Blizzard doing something completely original they altered a few things here and there like names, basic structures of the characters etc(or are you really going to tell me that the Zerg "Overmind" isn't a flatout copy of the Hive Mind?
Do you believe that GW originated the concept of a hive mind? I mean, seriously, it's an old, old SF concept, accusing Blizzard in the 1990s of copying something that has been in books since at least the 1930s. ZOMG someone copied the same thing that GW copied from decades ago, HOW TERRIBLE.
That the Protoss being psychics with a "Path" that their race follows, and the last creations of a dying race doesn't match up the Eldar being the creations of the Old Ones?
Do you think that GW invented the concept of psychics/mystics following a certain path to avoid disaster? ZOMG Blizzard used another old concept that GW ripped off ages ago, OH HORRORS!
Elder weren't creations of the Old Ones back when Starcraft came out, that fluff changed well after 2000 when GW fleshed out Necrons, so if anything GW stole that from Blizzard, not the other way around. Elder were just an old race up until sometime around 4th edition.
Or that the Terran Marines being ordinary criminals jacked up on stimulants and wearing heavy powered armor that they're locked into doesn't match the Space Marine fluff of that timeframe?) but otherwise left their game alone and published it.
Space marines have never been criminals jacked up on stimulants locked into heavy powered armor. What GW fluff are you reading that had anything remotely like that? In old fluff marines were more like what Guard Stormtroopers are today, but they never were criminals locked into armor. And marine armor was never the heavy flight suits Starcraft uses, it's alwas been human-sized not highly over-sized. ZOMG Blizzard did something that's not what GW did, they're copying GW inversely!
Blizzard might have tried to get GW to buy a Science fiction game from them, but since this is the first I've heard of it I'm going to need a better reference than 'some guy who's not very familiar with science fiction says so'. And that is irrelevant to whether or not SC is a ripoff of 40k; it has it's own background and look, which is highly distinct from 40k, but is science fiction so draws on some of the same tropes.
Kanluwen wrote:Noone's saying they did. However, there's undeniable parallels in the way they behave in both universes that are far too similar.
If there's anything more than superficially similar between the cultures of WoW Orcs and WHFB Orcs, I'll eat my left shoe.
WoW orcs are green except when they're not, that's a huge similarity if you ignore the brown ones. Also they fought against humans, clearly that's ripped straight from GW. They also have a battle cry, so that's ripping off "Waaaaggh" from GW. They're aggressive, obviously that didn't come from Tolkien, so again they're ripping off GW. Oh, they use axes, that's another GW rip. If you try hard enough, everything in fantasy is a rip of WHFB, and everything in SF is a rip of WH40k, even stuff that was written before either franchise started.
Kanluwen wrote:Noone's saying they did. However, there's undeniable parallels in the way they behave in both universes that are far too similar.
If there's anything more than superficially similar between the cultures of WoW Orcs and WHFB Orcs, I'll eat my left shoe.
WoW orcs are green except when they're not, that's a huge similarity if you ignore the brown ones. Also they fought against humans, clearly that's ripped straight from GW. They also have a battle cry, so that's ripping off "Waaaaggh" from GW. They're aggressive, obviously that didn't come from Tolkien, so again they're ripping off GW. Oh, they use axes, that's another GW rip. If you try hard enough, everything in fantasy is a rip of WHFB, and everything in SF is a rip of WH40k, even stuff that was written before either franchise started.
They stand on 2 legs , thats ripped off from GW They have have sharp teeth , thats ripped from GW They are very muscular , thats also from GW They dont have melodious war shouts , instead they have blood curdling roars , thats also from GW
People have some really bizarre ideas about what constitutes a 'rip off'. Fantasy is derivative. All of it. Tolkien took his fantasy creations from old myths. None of it is original, the art is found in putting new twists and new ideas onto old works.
Picking out who used a concept or an idea first is a fun game, but it doesn't tell us anything about the quality of the work. Using it first doesn't mean using it well, afterall.
One of the things I like most about GW has been their willingness to embrace the pastiche nature of the universe. It's a shame that that's slowly been dropped by GW in favour of a more coherent tone.
The issue with GW is not that they have been inspired by, borrowed from and down right stolen other peoples ideas over the last 30 years. The issue is not that many of the ideas and concepts GW touts as it's own date back to the earliest recorded history, being part of legend and folklore as long as men have sat around a campfire and wondered what was out there in the dark.
The real issue with GW is that they are trying to convince people, perhaps because they are truly convinced themselves, that they created and now own every little single sci-fi and fantasy idea out there. I used to think it was funny, until people started to actually side with GW. Then I was just stunned. Stunned that people are either so lacking in intelligence that they believe everything they read or hear with out even a little bit of skepticism , or they are just too fricken lazy to to actually do any research into a subject to find out the truth for themselves.
If you look up any idea that GW thinks they created, you will find other people that did it first. Perhaps slightly different, perhaps not. Then research those people and their work and you will find someone that did it before they did. And so on and so forth. There really is very little "new" under the sun.
Don't get me wrong, anything GW came up with they should be able to protect. It is just that they have come up with almost nothing.
For Example:
Tau: The 19th letter of the Greek alphabet. The name of an alien race in the game "Freelancer" two years before GW released the Tau Codex
Dante: A 14th century poet named Dante Alighieri wrote the "Divine Comedy", which has been more commonly known by the name of its opening portion, Inferno, just a few hundred years before GW thought it would be cute to name a character Dante and give him an Inferno pistol.
Nostramo: The Night Lords home world is a slight letter adjustment of the name of a book written in 1904. Nostromo was written by Joseph Conrad.( What was the name the Emperor gave Night Haunter?) The book is basically the Horus Heresy story.
If you just research just about anything you think GW created, you will find that they did not. The fact that GW tries to tell people they own these ideas, attacking any person that has the audacity to write anything "inspired" by their thievery, like a pack of rabid dogs, makes them unscrupulous men without honor. In other words, corporate business men.
taebeck wrote: The issue with GW is not that they have been inspired by, borrowed from and down right stolen other peoples ideas over the last 30 years. The issue is not that many of the ideas and concepts GW touts as it's own date back to the earliest recorded history, being part of legend and folklore as long as men have sat around a campfire and wondered what was out there in the dark.
The real issue with GW is that they are trying to convince people, perhaps because they are truly convinced themselves, that they created and now own every little single sci-fi and fantasy idea out there. I used to think it was funny, until people started to actually side with GW. Then I was just stunned. Stunned that people are either so lacking in intelligence that they believe everything they read or hear with out even a little bit of skepticism , or they are just too fricken lazy to to actually do any research into a subject to find out the truth for themselves.
If you look up any idea that GW thinks they created, you will find other people that did it first. Perhaps slightly different, perhaps not. Then research those people and their work and you will find someone that did it before they did. And so on and so forth. There really is very little "new" under the sun.
Don't get me wrong, anything GW came up with they should be able to protect. It is just that they have come up with almost nothing.
For Example:
Tau: The 19th letter of the Greek alphabet. The name of an alien race in the game "Freelancer" two years before GW released the Tau Codex
Dante: A 14th century poet named Dante Alighieri wrote the "Divine Comedy", which has been more commonly known by the name of its opening portion, Inferno, just a few hundred years before GW thought it would be cute to name a character Dante and give him an Inferno pistol.
Nostramo: The Night Lords home world is a slight letter adjustment of the name of a book written in 1904. Nostromo was written by Joseph Conrad.( What was the name the Emperor gave Night Haunter?) The book is basically the Horus Heresy story.
If you just research just about anything you think GW created, you will find that they did not. The fact that GW tries to tell people they own these ideas, attacking any person that has the audacity to write anything "inspired" by their thievery, like a pack of rabid dogs, makes them unscrupulous men without honor. In other words, corporate business men.
+1, also, can I adopt you?
Also, Rick Priestly is the devil.
Gav Thorpe is to authors what a quadraplegic is to lap-dancing. Sure, he can do it, but not as well as those equipped to do so.
sebster wrote:People have some really bizarre ideas about what constitutes a 'rip off'. Fantasy is derivative. All of it. Tolkien took his fantasy creations from old myths. None of it is original, the art is found in putting new twists and new ideas onto old works.
Picking out who used a concept or an idea first is a fun game, but it doesn't tell us anything about the quality of the work....
+1
Augustus wrote:I prefer to think that each generation revisits great stories and puts their own fresh perspective on them, and we as gamers and lovers of the art should welcome these fresh interpretations!
Certainly controversy is fun, especially in forums. But I have seen this come up before and regret when the discussion follows this pattern:
Well my favorite <great fictional thing> is better than, or pre dates, or ripped off from your favorite <great fictional thing>.
We ought to recognize the great common elements, and appreciate the advancement of the genre and the myriad permutations making for greatly expanded worlds that comes with every retelling.
eledamris wrote:Could Halo have come up with something a little less GW-ish than "Forgeworld" for it's level builder? This might just be coincidence, and it might just be that I don't like the Halo games, but it seems like a lot of things rip off of those few nuggets of originality that GW has. See virtually anything that Blizzard has ever produced. Now I'm not saying that GW has never ripped off of anyone. They do it all the time. Sometimes it's a bit tongue-in-cheek, such as naming all the Lizardmen special character mounts after the Dinobots, and sometimes it's a bit more overt, like Tyranids, Space Marines, and half of WHFB. But I am tired of people getting into the hobby and saying "Man, those Orks are totally just a rip-off of WoW."
I dunno, just my $.02.
Man, you wrote this post in English. Don't you know that people have been doing that for literally YEARS now? Hell, English is just a ripoff of Latin anyway. Jeez.
eledamris wrote:Could Halo have come up with something a little less GW-ish than "Forgeworld" for it's level builder? This might just be coincidence, and it might just be that I don't like the Halo games, but it seems like a lot of things rip off of those few nuggets of originality that GW has. See virtually anything that Blizzard has ever produced. Now I'm not saying that GW has never ripped off of anyone. They do it all the time. Sometimes it's a bit tongue-in-cheek, such as naming all the Lizardmen special character mounts after the Dinobots, and sometimes it's a bit more overt, like Tyranids, Space Marines, and half of WHFB. But I am tired of people getting into the hobby and saying "Man, those Orks are totally just a rip-off of WoW."
I dunno, just my $.02.
Man, you wrote this post in English. Don't you know that people have been doing that for literally YEARS now? Hell, English is just a ripoff of Latin anyway. Jeez.
Technically, it's mostly German as read by a blind Frenchman.
I dislike Halo as well, but I'm not going to get all up in arms about this. Everyone draws inspiration from all types of common sources and each other, it's what they do with the ideas and how they twist them that makes them their own.
In other news the sun came up in the east this morning.
Goliath wrote:Since when has GW gone around saying that they invented all of Sci-Fi and Fantasy?
Did I miss the world-wide memo?
And can you give me an example of times that GW has attacked people for writing stuff based off of their "thievery"? (as you put it)
taebeck certainly is comedy gold. I reallly didn't expect anyone to be dim enough to literally take my last post and blow it up into a full-blown rant.
Taebeck, here's a hint. When you have to completely make up a target for your 'righteous indignation,' that should be a hint about just how full of it you really are.
Seriously, you've never actually read 'Armor' have you, because your synopsis sounds like the most you did was glance at the back of the book. And the similarities between it and Space Marines, or even any other facet of 40k? Pretty close to non-existent, beyond they both have sci-fi powered armor in a war setting. Take a guy and put him in fancy armor, and there's a pretty good chance someone, somewhere, has already done something similar. Direct comparisons to 'Armor' are particularly laughable. Take any of the eponymous suits and plant them in the 40kverse, and they could probably tear through an entire marine chapter while only working up a moderate sweat. The military, setting, scale, none of it meshes. The only coinciding factors are a focus on sci-fi guys in fancy armor.
Seriously, if you're going to tear into GW, do it for something they've actually done wrong, not some custom crafted little butthurt you made for yourself.
Seriously, you've never actually read 'Armor' have you, because your synopsis sounds like the most you did was glance at the back of the book. And the similarities between it and Space Marines, or even any other facet of 40k? Pretty close to non-existent, beyond they both have sci-fi powered armor in a war setting. Take a guy and put him in fancy armor, and there's a pretty good chance someone, somewhere, has already done something similar. Direct comparisons to 'Armor' are particularly laughable. Take any of the eponymous suits and plant them in the 40kverse, and they could probably tear through an entire marine chapter while only working up a moderate sweat. The military, setting, scale, none of it meshes. The only coinciding factors are a focus on sci-fi guys in fancy armor.
Well I really stirred up the fanboi nest this time. I am so very sorry. I should have realized that certain portions of this crowd need small words and a short bus.
Are you so blindly loyal to GW's johnson that you refuse to admit the fact that they were influenced by outside sources. You said yourself that if you put a guy in fancy armor, there is a pretty good chance that someone has done it before. I guess you meant EXCEPT GW. When they did it, they were the first, right? Sounds like fanboi douchebagery to me. The differences between Armor and the 40K universe are indeed many. I never said for a moment that GW purely plagiarized the book, only that many of the concepts were strikingly similar. Of course they changed some things. When you create a game in the environment of the 80's, you can't have your heroes running around drinking, cursing like sailors and screwing every female they see. That doesn't change the fact that the similarities I described before are absolutely real. I say that the curious on the site should go out and do the research, then make up their own minds.
By the way, if the suits in Armor are that all powerful compared to a Space Marine, why is it that they kept dying in droves to slow moving ants with crappy little heat guns?
In any case, you missed the point. Games Workshop has taken ideas and concepts from other sources. Have you ever read the copyright footer on a GW book. They try to copyright everything in the book as their wholly owned IP. Even the ink.
It seems to me that GW feels all others should consider it an honor to have their IP used in any way by GW. But you damn well better not try to work up anything remotely similar to GW IP or they will aggressively defend their IP in court.
But they'd still throw a hissy fit.
" and throw the whole stack at them.
. They already had the forge, and now it's in a map I think? But "Forge _ Map" doesn't sound nearly as cool...
