Gamesworkshop are giving rights to many companies now, allowing them to make warhammer/warhammer 40k games now. At the same time blizzard is done with the starcraft series after legacy of the void. If gamesworkshop also give the rights to blizzard than i think that would be awesome

1. With starcraft being finished, blizzard won't have any space games anymore. A 40k game series would be a awesome replacement for starcraft as a space war game.
2. With the amount of budget blizzard has, the 40k game they make would be huge and epic.
3. Warhammer 40k's lore, materials, and factions are many times bigger and better than starcrafts so blizzard would plenty to work with.

We already have Dawn of war/Dawn of War 2, rumours of Dawn of War 3, and there's Total Warhammer for WHFB comming out soon; do you really need something else? Also, Blizzard being Blizzard, they'd probably put a monthly fee on it and it won't be availible on Steam.

Maybe a warhammer 40,000 MMO would work?

Dawn of War was a fun game. I liked the 2nd expansion's campaign system.

"Orks, orks, orks, orks... Ready boss!"

Um, you do realise the whole Warcraft series was Blizzard's attempt at a WHFB RTS right? Before the deal was cut?

Starcraft's lore is much more well written and coherent, however. The 40K universe basically makes no sense whatsoever. I would hope that Blizzard can come up with something new on their own better than 40K

Zerg > Tyranids
Terrans > IoM
Protoss > Eldar

I wouldn't sully Blizzard's name with this stuff.

... Blizzard's setting is stolen from Warhammer. You must be on drugs.

Considering that Warcraft and Starcraft are basically converging on having nearly the exact same story barring character names, especially with regards to origins for the races..... Please no.

I don't want Orks to just be honorable misunderstood savages (with a penchant for inexplicable genocide that no one really minds or punishes them for), nor do I want the Imperium to become a lawful good democracy ruled by a human king who always bends over and does what's "honorable", including not marching every genocidal alien into the sea when given the opportunity.

Odds on if this happen they spell it...
Orcs

FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU

Why would blizzards ever want to do this ?
They are one of the few companies that actually takes the time to make high quality games and really cares about their own IP. Doing a quick game based on gw's ip really doesn't seems to fit their style.

Blizzard are smart enough not to get involved with GW. That being said... if a 40k MMO that felt like WoW was released I would do pretty much nothing else than play it.

 Psienesis wrote:
... Blizzard's setting is stolen from Warhammer. You must be on drugs.

If you say so. If they did steal it, they improved it greatly. The IoM is a terrible protagonist. In fact, I want them to lose. I've never rooted against Jim Raynor.

 DoomShakaLaka wrote:
Maybe a warhammer 40,000 MMO would work?

There making one, its called Eternal Crusade.


Blizzard may have a huge budget but it doesnt mean they would dump a ton of it into a Warhammer 40k. Besides GW fan's, the 40k games aren't all that popular.

 morganfreeman wrote:
Considering that Warcraft and Starcraft are basically converging on having nearly the exact same story barring character names, especially with regards to origins for the races..... Please no.

I don't want Orks to just be honorable misunderstood savages (with a penchant for inexplicable genocide that no one really minds or punishes them for), nor do I want the Imperium to become a lawful good democracy ruled by a human king who always bends over and does what's "honorable", including not marching every genocidal alien into the sea when given the opportunity.

^ This. We'll see an erosion of the drimdarkness which underpins the lore. Or they're'll try being grimdark by adding more skulls and expecting it to compensate for a complete re-write of the races' characters- picture Matt Ward turned up to 11.

Please no 40k MMO. I don't want to play as a Space Marine having to pick up Grox droppings for the Planetary Governor's collection.

40k MMO? Yes please. But for the love of all things holy, keep Blizzard away from it.

 TheCustomLime wrote:
Please no 40k MMO. I don't want to play as a Space Marine having to pick up Grox droppings for the Planetary Governor's collection.

A 40k mmo is coming.

But don't worry, you'll get Call of Duty in SPACEEEE instead of rep grinding.

We already have Dawn of war/Dawn of War 2, rumours of Dawn of War 3, and there's Total Warhammer for WHFB comming out soon; do you really need something else?

/thread

Dow1/2/Retri were really great games. If you havent tried them. Do.So. Now.

We really dont need a Blizzard attempt at RTS/MMO/RPG/Muddled/Crazy.

Sure, we're all hoping for DoW3 but the predecessors still rock - even GFX-wise (check out Indrids casts on youtube at high 720dpi).

 Ashiraya wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:
Please no 40k MMO. I don't want to play as a Space Marine having to pick up Grox droppings for the Planetary Governor's collection.

A 40k mmo is coming.

But don't worry, you'll get Call of Duty in SPACEEEE instead of rep grinding.

"Kill 1000 Hive Tyrants to become honored with the <Imperial Inquisition> faction".

Martel732 wrote:

 Psienesis wrote:
... Blizzard's setting is stolen from Warhammer. You must be on drugs.

If you say so. If they did steal it, they improved it greatly. The IoM is a terrible protagonist. In fact, I want them to lose. I've never rooted against Jim Raynor.

Well yeah that's the point, the IoM aren't the protagonists.. Even the "good guys" aren't really all that good. I think many are drawn to 40k for precisely that reason, there aren't any clear protagonists or antagonists.

Martel732 wrote:

Psienesis wrote:
... Blizzard's setting is stolen from Warhammer. You must be on drugs.



If you say so. If they did steal it, they improved it greatly. The IoM is a terrible protagonist. In fact, I want them to lose. I've never rooted against Jim Raynor.



Well yeah that's the point, the IoM aren't the protagonists.. Even the "good guys" aren't really all that good. I think many are drawn to 40k for precisely that reason, there aren't any clear protagonists or antagonists.

QFT. Seriously, Blizz in all good intentions =/= 40k setting. Jim Raynor, was sort of cool.....
But you really want to list out fluff-wise the best of 40ks characters?

GW isnt perfect but a lot of their fluff is darn darn good > Blizz's

 Delicate Swarm wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Psienesis wrote:
... Blizzard's setting is stolen from Warhammer. You must be on drugs.

If you say so. If they did steal it, they improved it greatly. The IoM is a terrible protagonist. In fact, I want them to lose. I've never rooted against Jim Raynor.

Well yeah that's the point, the IoM aren't the protagonists.. Even the "good guys" aren't really all that good. I think many are drawn to 40k for precisely that reason, there aren't any clear protagonists or antagonists.

The problem is that when I want every faction to die, there's no one for me to relate to.

The problem is that when I want every faction to die, there's no one for me to relate to.

Huh? Im lost - surely you like a single faction? If not, why play 40k at all???

 Ratius wrote:

The problem is that when I want every faction to die, there's no one for me to relate to.

Huh? Im lost - surely you like a single faction? If not, why play 40k at all???

No, they are pretty much all hopeless idiots. I play BA, but I hate them at this point because they suck so hard. Most other marine factions I hate and/or dislike. The IoM in general is stupid, impossible, and depressing all at the same time. Given how stupid the IoM is, I hate the BA for working for them at this point.

No, they are pretty much all hopeless idiots. I play BA, but I hate them at this point because they suck so hard. Most other marine factions I hate and/or dislike. The IoM in general is stupid, impossible, and depressing all at the same time. Given how stupid the IoM is, I hate the BA for working for them at this point.

Ooook. but thats absolutely personal preference.

If you hate the IoM/SMs so much try a Xenos faction.

And game mechanics =/= fluff. IoM stomp mostly but we all know 7ed has them hamstrung :(

 Psienesis wrote:
... Blizzard's setting is stolen from Warhammer. You must be on drugs.

StarCraft isn't. This is a myth.

 SDFarsight wrote:
Also, Blizzard being Blizzard, they'd probably put a monthly fee on it and it won't be availible on Steam.

Really? Diablo 3 or any Diablo series doesn't have a monthly fee. Warcraft never had a monthly fee and StarCraft never had a monthly fee. Wow (no pun intended) 1 game they make and charge a monthly fee, and your comment seems like that is all what Blizzard does is charge monthly fees on all their games.

I just want to know who is the person at GW that told Blizzard they don't want any part of them and they could do a better job at making video games.

 Jimsolo wrote:
40k MMO? Yes please. But for the love of all things holy, keep Blizzard away from it.

Why? Because Blizzard made the most popular and enduring MMO of all time and therefore the proper thing to do would be to hate Blizzard for being successful.

In NZ we call that tall poppy syndrome.

 MarsNZ wrote:

 Jimsolo wrote:
40k MMO? Yes please. But for the love of all things holy, keep Blizzard away from it.

Why? Because Blizzard made the most popular and enduring MMO of all time and therefore the proper thing to do would be to hate Blizzard for being successful.

In NZ we call that tall poppy syndrome.

No, because blizzard made one of the best mmo's of all time and has since beat that dead horse so much it's just paste, personally, I hate world of warcraft, it's a terrible game that eats people's lives. Starcraft and warcraft were once great games, but they don't provide what I want from a rts these days, too cartoony in graphics, too simplistic (as a balance factor I've been told) and.... Just not.... Big enough, give me warcraft or Starcraft on the supreme commander scale and I'd be happy, get rid of all that chappy 90's rtsrpg crap.

Imagine a Warhammer 40k game done to the scale of Supreme Commander.
I so hate not being able to zoom out when it comes to most real time strategies.

 MarsNZ wrote:

 Jimsolo wrote:
40k MMO? Yes please. But for the love of all things holy, keep Blizzard away from it.

Why? Because Blizzard made the most popular and enduring MMO of all time and therefore the proper thing to do would be to hate Blizzard for being successful.

In NZ we call that tall poppy syndrome.

I'm not sure what 'tall poppy syndrome' is supposed to mean.

I hate Blizzard games. Mindless clickfests don't appeal to me. I find the storytelling behind Diablo, Warcraft, and Starcraft to be lackluster at best. I think the structure of their most successful MMO is unpleasant, and have consistently found the player base for said game to be charitably described as off putting.

I don't hate them because they're successful. I dislike them because I don't enjoy their style of game. And if there is to be a 40k MMO, I'd like to see a much better system than 'Grimdark WoW.'

 TheCustomLime wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:
Please no 40k MMO. I don't want to play as a Space Marine having to pick up Grox droppings for the Planetary Governor's collection.

A 40k mmo is coming.

But don't worry, you'll get Call of Duty in SPACEEEE instead of rep grinding.

"Kill 1000 Hive Tyrants to become honored with the <Imperial Inquisition> faction".

I'd rather have that than ridiculously low TTK, camping...

Blizzard has had a marked decline in quality since WoW. Not to burst people's bubbles, but they made too much money, too quickly and ended up breaking apart what made the fluff interesting in some elements. WoW is some fustercluck of space time shenanigans and 'noble savage' nonsense with the orcs, Starcraft 2 has the plot that can be summarized as 'Warcraft 3, in space' and Diablo 3 slaughtered any good game mechanics that might have existed. Blizzard doesn't innovate any more, they just continue doing as they've always done, making a few games that get overhyped and then make bank.

It's also a company that merged with Activision, and let's be honest, Actiblizzard is a horrible amalgamation of horror.

JinxDragon wrote:
Imagine a Warhammer 40k game done to the scale of Supreme Commander.
I so hate not being able to zoom out when it comes to most real time strategies.

Now that is a game that I would absolutely adore to play! Supreme Commander is one of my all-time favourite RTS games, and I could see a similarly scaled game work fantastically for 40k.

 Ashiraya wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:
Please no 40k MMO. I don't want to play as a Space Marine having to pick up Grox droppings for the Planetary Governor's collection.

A 40k mmo is coming.

But don't worry, you'll get Call of Duty in SPACEEEE instead of rep grinding.

"Kill 1000 Hive Tyrants to become honored with the <Imperial Inquisition> faction".

I'd rather have that than ridiculously low TTK, camping...

If they could add Space Marine's multiplayer and integrate vehicle combat I would be happy.

Warcraft was originally supposed to be a a Warhammer Fantasy Battle game, and the only reason it wasn't, was because Blizzard wanted more control over their product. Though they ended up breaking up with GW, and then taking their work on that game and turning into their own franchise.

 AegisFate wrote:
Blizzard has had a marked decline in quality since WoW. Not to burst people's bubbles, but they made too much money, too quickly and ended up breaking apart what made the fluff interesting in some elements. WoW is some fustercluck of space time shenanigans and 'noble savage' nonsense with the orcs, Starcraft 2 has the plot that can be summarized as 'Warcraft 3, in space' and Diablo 3 slaughtered any good game mechanics that might have existed. Blizzard doesn't innovate any more, they just continue doing as they've always done, making a few games that get overhyped and then make bank.

It's also a company that merged with Activision, and let's be honest, Actiblizzard is a horrible amalgamation of horror.

This is partially true, as they still do come out with decent content in their newer products, but not in their older products.

One thing I noticed with them is that when they do a "for fun project" that they don't expect to be big, it turns into a major success, but as soon as it does they try to streamline it and essentially murder it. If you look about how they talked about WoW originally, they expected it to be a rather small game as a whole, and we all know how that turned out, but lately it's been awful. Then something like Hearthstone was made as almost a side project, and it was a huge success, yet the newest expansion has put many people off of it.

Maybe that's just the thing about it, Blizzard needs to allow their people to have fun with what they're making as opposed to trying to make a very set and generic product. It just always feels like they come out with something amazingly innovative in their first attempt, and then just opt to neuter it into the same old stuff we see everywhere else the second it becomes popular.

 Tinkrr wrote:
Warcraft was originally supposed to be a a Warhammer Fantasy Battle game, and the only reason it wasn't, was because Blizzard wanted more control over their product. Though they ended up breaking up with GW, and then taking their work on that game and turning into their own franchise.

This.

Blizzard walked away 20 years ago because they didn't want to be tied to somebody elses franchise after same early 90s troubles with Dune-based games and DC comics.

I see no reason why Blizzard would want to get back in.

Allen Adham hoped to obtain a license to the Warhammer universe to try to increase sales by brand recognition. Warhammer was a huge inspiration for the art-style of Warcraft, but a combination of factors, including a lack of traction on business terms and a fervent desire on the part of virtually everyone else on the development team (myself included) to control our own universe nixed any potential for a deal. We had already had terrible experiences working with DC Comics on "Death and Return of Superman" and "Justice League Task Force", and wanted no similar issues for our new game.

http://kotaku.com/5929157/the-making-of-warcraft-part-1

 AegisFate wrote:
Blizzard has had a marked decline in quality since WoW. Not to burst people's bubbles, but they made too much money, too quickly and ended up breaking apart what made the fluff interesting in some elements. WoW is some fustercluck of space time shenanigans and 'noble savage' nonsense with the orcs, Starcraft 2 has the plot that can be summarized as 'Warcraft 3, in space' and Diablo 3 slaughtered any good game mechanics that might have existed. Blizzard doesn't innovate any more, they just continue doing as they've always done, making a few games that get overhyped and then make bank.

It's also a company that merged with Activision, and let's be honest, Actiblizzard is a horrible amalgamation of horror.

I dunno, Hearthstone is new and successful, HotS is new and successful...

 TheCustomLime wrote:

If they could add Space Marine's multiplayer and integrate vehicle combat I would be happy.

You should REALLY check Eternal Crusade.

https://www.eternalcrusade.com/

On a side note, it would be really cool to see someone do something really awesome with a mini game using the Oculus Rift technology.

Imagine being able to upload images of your models to use in the games, and having dice like objects to roll while playing the game. Part of why I never liked the video game versions of GW products (mostly Dawn of War style things) is because it didn't really make me feel like I was getting a mini war game experience, but now we actually have ways of making that a bigger reality.

If anything, things like mini war gaming should be easier to port into the Ocolus Rift, since it's dealing with predominantly static objects, and making cubes with accelerometers isn't that hard. In fact, because there's a grounded physical object, all you'd need was a handful of chips to tack onto the underside of a base of a model, photos/preset images/or video device even, and a square playing area that had at least the minimum dimensions of the board you were playing on, in order to create a very immersive experience. You could even proto-type it using something like chess.

Edit: Realistically it wouldn't even have to be that difficult, it would just need a video device to capture your play field and then super impose the two video streams such that the terrain and their army was displayed on what was otherwise your normal setting, and maybe some other surrounding stuff.

It could be the next wave of internet cafes, except with gaming areas that offer rooms to play in a fully immersed Oculus 40k setting D:

JinxDragon wrote:
Imagine a Warhammer 40k game done to the scale of Supreme Commander.
I so hate not being able to zoom out when it comes to most real time strategies.

Imperial Guard would be awesome for that!

That would be the money-hungriest video game in the existence of mankind.

You'd have to "unlock" each new character model coded into the game for a 10$ Microtransaction, the game would be 90$ (plus 50$ for the day one expansion), and you'd be required to buy assemble and paint a GW miniature (45$, 5000$ Aus) for each character class.

Wonderwolf wrote:

 Tinkrr wrote:
Warcraft was originally supposed to be a a Warhammer Fantasy Battle game, and the only reason it wasn't, was because Blizzard wanted more control over their product. Though they ended up breaking up with GW, and then taking their work on that game and turning into their own franchise.

This.

Blizzard walked away 20 years ago because they didn't want to be tied to somebody elses franchise after same early 90s troubles with Dune-based games and DC comics.

I see no reason why Blizzard would want to get back in.

This is just a myth. No one has of yet managed to provide evidence for this fictive "deal and breakeup" between Blizzard and GW. And since no one will ever be able to provide for the said evidence, I think everyone here would be better off just forgeting about this fairytale all together.

While I certainly think blizzard are capable of making great games, I really don't think they'd be the right fit for 40k. I'm sure they could make a few lovely cinematics for it, but as for gameplay...

Their RTS games tend to follow the formula that they've been refining for quite a while now, and that formula involves marines popping out of factories, blocking enemies with buildings, and troops kiting like their lives depend on it (which they do). I feel dawn of war really pushed what 40k should be like in an RTS. The marines don't pop out of factories and collect wood/gold, they push out immediately and take ground. 40k should be cinematic, with special kill animations for each trooper, soldiers deployed in squads, and hilariously grimdark cheesey voice acting to tie it all together.

I'm sure blizzard COULD do this, but I don't think that they WOULD. Their approach often seems to be the 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it' one, and I don't think their current RTS model would fit with 40k at all.

I'm not certain how well their story-telling would cope with literally everyone being an donkey-cave either.

 Redcruisair wrote:

This is just a myth. No one has of yet managed to provide evidence for this fictive "deal and breakeup" between Blizzard and GW. And since no one will ever be able to provide for the said evidence, I think everyone here would be better off just forgeting about this fairytale all together.

The very post you quoted from links to an interview with Blizzard founding members confirming that
1 - Warcraft was visually inspired by 90s Warhammer
2. - their intention to (possibly) market it as a Warhammer game
3. - the fact that they had contacted GW (though nobody probably signed anything)
4, - their (Blizzard's, not GW's) decision to not go down that route due to, among other things, "bad experience" they had with DC Comics (as well as possibly other, non-disclosed reasons).

That is no myth. Blizzard is on the record for all of this.

The "myth" for the most part is that inversely, GW turned down Blizzard and thus, by extension, a share of the profit of future Warcraft franchises. That popular version seems at odds with Blizzard's description of how things went.

 Ratius wrote:

No, they are pretty much all hopeless idiots. I play BA, but I hate them at this point because they suck so hard. Most other marine factions I hate and/or dislike. The IoM in general is stupid, impossible, and depressing all at the same time. Given how stupid the IoM is, I hate the BA for working for them at this point.

Ooook. but thats absolutely personal preference.

If you hate the IoM/SMs so much try a Xenos faction.

And game mechanics =/= fluff. IoM stomp mostly but we all know 7ed has them hamstrung :(

Then they are hamstrung regardless of the fluff. I can't appeal to the fluff in a game, making it useless to me. I'm not giving gw money for a xeno army. All of which I dislike anyway.

Wonderwolf wrote:
The very post you quoted from links to an interview with Blizzard founding members confirming that

I've read the link and honestly, it's not that hard to write up fake interview. This supposed "Inside Story" doesn't show up anywhere else on internet, not on Blizzard's own website, nor on 3rd parties, who make a living documenting such things.

Wonderwolf wrote:
3. - the fact that they had contacted GW (though nobody probably signed anything)

Aye, nobody signed anything and nobody can prove Blizzard were in touch with GW. There's no evidence for this having ever occurred, so give it a rest m8.

Wonderwolf wrote:
That is no myth. Blizzard is on the record for all of this.

And where is this secret record then?

 Redcruisair wrote:

And where is this secret record then?

Here. (it was a bit hard to find the link in the post with the x4 font size quote from it, I guess)

Anyway, it's really not a case of GW "allowing" Blizzard to do anything. Games Workshop would need to pay Blizzard to make a 40k game. :p

 Furyou Miko wrote:

 Redcruisair wrote:

And where is this secret record then?

Here. (it was a bit hard to find the link in the post with the x4 font size quote from it, I guess)

Yes yes, I have already seen it, though I doubt it's validity.

 Redcruisair wrote:

Wonderwolf wrote:
The very post you quoted from links to an interview with Blizzard founding members confirming that

I've read the link and honestly, it's not that hard to write up fake interview. This supposed "Inside Story" doesn't show up anywhere else on internet, not on Blizzard's own website, nor on 3rd parties, who make a living documenting such things.

I think it would've been noted by Blizzard, if Kotaku & Co. would make up stories about Blizzard executives.

And GW isn't even the focus of said interview.

If you wan't to take it to "there is no proof we landed on the moon"-territory, fine. But barring big tin-foil-hat-media-conspiracies, Blizzard executives said they were inspired by Warhammer and did have talks with GW.

Why would you doubt that? Seems odd and highly unlikely for a totally not-Warhammer related site like Kotaku to risk its credibility by faking an interview with one of the most well-known computer-game creators. Especially if Blizzard could just say .. nope, we never did that interview.

Legend has it that how Warcraft came to be is that GW did just that.... but then GW backed out 2/3rds of the way through and Blizz used what they had and built Warcraft from what they had.

Im not sure if they would do that today. I dout it.

 Redcruisair wrote:

 Furyou Miko wrote:

 Redcruisair wrote:

And where is this secret record then?

Here. (it was a bit hard to find the link in the post with the x4 font size quote from it, I guess)

Yes yes, I have already seen it, though I doubt it's validity.

Are you, perhaps, emotionally invested in it not being true?

 Redcruisair wrote:

Wonderwolf wrote:

 Tinkrr wrote:
Warcraft was originally supposed to be a a Warhammer Fantasy Battle game, and the only reason it wasn't, was because Blizzard wanted more control over their product. Though they ended up breaking up with GW, and then taking their work on that game and turning into their own franchise.

This.

Blizzard walked away 20 years ago because they didn't want to be tied to somebody elses franchise after same early 90s troubles with Dune-based games and DC comics.

I see no reason why Blizzard would want to get back in.

This is just a myth. No one has of yet managed to provide evidence for this fictive "deal and breakeup" between Blizzard and GW. And since no one will ever be able to provide for the said evidence, I think everyone here would be better off just forgeting about this fairytale all together.

http://kotaku.com/5929161/how-warcraft-was-almost-a-warhammer-game-and-how-that-saved-wow

-

Negative, what they need to make is an Augment reality system that populates the empty table top with dynamic terrains (jungle, desert, forest, beach) being threaded on by tanks, weather (dust storm, rain, blizzard snow) blowing about, and even add sound effects. Also allowing internet connection to connect 2 players from across the globe to play virtually on any 6x4 table top.

This way you do not interfere with the sale of physical models. The technology should scan the models on the table and gps the image of the model onto the virtual table for the opponent to view digitally on their home table.

Think of Virtual Table Top game on Steam but you actually move stuff on an empty table and you use the augmented reality to see your opponent's models appearing on the empty table. We can finally add features such as fog of war and night fighting done right!

Martel732 wrote:

 Psienesis wrote:
... Blizzard's setting is stolen from Warhammer. You must be on drugs.

If you say so. If they did steal it, they improved it greatly. The IoM is a terrible protagonist. In fact, I want them to lose. I've never rooted against Jim Raynor.

Do you even understand the point of 40k?

There is no paragon of goodness in 40K. The entire point of 40k is grimdarkness- everything is miserable, everything is doomed, and everybody is a genocidal donkey-cave.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vector Strike wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:

If they could add Space Marine's multiplayer and integrate vehicle combat I would be happy.

You should REALLY check Eternal Crusade.

https://www.eternalcrusade.com/

Eternal Crusade is nothing anybody sane should invest in. It has a junior team that have never worked together now working in a company responsible solely for shovelware, the game was supposed to be released this year and it has only just now entered Alpha, and the list of features dropped is longer than the list of features they have. Plus there's no word on how development of the Xenos faction goes, and for now the alpha only has SM vs CSM.

Nah, blizzard can do better than 40k. Besides, then they would get lumped in with the long line of garbage that has been shovelled out since THQ went under.

Raiding in WoW has only gotten better, unless you lust for the days of Vanilla and one to two mechanic bosses. Or BC where they added a third mechanic and turned it all to 11.

And there's a lot to do out in the world, whether it is pet battles, archaelogy, treasures or dailies, if you can be arsed to leave your garrison.

I'd much rather EA or whomever just give us a 40k COD with imperial guardsmen and chaos cultists.

 Wyzilla wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Psienesis wrote:
... Blizzard's setting is stolen from Warhammer. You must be on drugs.

If you say so. If they did steal it, they improved it greatly. The IoM is a terrible protagonist. In fact, I want them to lose. I've never rooted against Jim Raynor.

Do you even understand the point of 40k?

There is no paragon of goodness in 40K. The entire point of 40k is grimdarkness- everything is miserable, everything is doomed, and everybody is a genocidal donkey-cave.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vector Strike wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:

If they could add Space Marine's multiplayer and integrate vehicle combat I would be happy.

You should REALLY check Eternal Crusade.

https://www.eternalcrusade.com/

Eternal Crusade is nothing anybody sane should invest in. It has a junior team that have never worked together now working in a company responsible solely for shovelware, the game was supposed to be released this year and it has only just now entered Alpha, and the list of features dropped is longer than the list of features they have. Plus there's no word on how development of the Xenos faction goes, and for now the alpha only has SM vs CSM.

I really, really want to like Eternal Crusade and get hyped, but I think this is true. I'm biting my nails and hoping Eldar get through before disaster strikes. HOWEVER, even if it's just Space Marine with better multiplayer, I'd still get it. Space Marine wasn't the most innovative game, but my god it was fun, there's just something so satisfying about dropping feet first and cutting people apart with a chainsword no other game has seemed to get.

Anyway the dev team seems very eager and have good communication with the fanbase so I'm hoping this game turns out half-decent. But they really need an experienced group to even think about tackling something like a Warhammer MMO or RTS. To that end I don't mind EC has been delayed a bit, as long as it's quality.

Dragannia wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Psienesis wrote:
... Blizzard's setting is stolen from Warhammer. You must be on drugs.

If you say so. If they did steal it, they improved it greatly. The IoM is a terrible protagonist. In fact, I want them to lose. I've never rooted against Jim Raynor.

Do you even understand the point of 40k?

There is no paragon of goodness in 40K. The entire point of 40k is grimdarkness- everything is miserable, everything is doomed, and everybody is a genocidal donkey-cave.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vector Strike wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:

If they could add Space Marine's multiplayer and integrate vehicle combat I would be happy.

You should REALLY check Eternal Crusade.

https://www.eternalcrusade.com/

Eternal Crusade is nothing anybody sane should invest in. It has a junior team that have never worked together now working in a company responsible solely for shovelware, the game was supposed to be released this year and it has only just now entered Alpha, and the list of features dropped is longer than the list of features they have. Plus there's no word on how development of the Xenos faction goes, and for now the alpha only has SM vs CSM.

I really, really want to like Eternal Crusade and get hyped, but I think this is true. I'm biting my nails and hoping Eldar get through before disaster strikes. HOWEVER, even if it's just Space Marine with better multiplayer, I'd still get it. Space Marine wasn't the most innovative game, but my god it was fun, there's just something so satisfying about dropping feet first and cutting people apart with a chainsword no other game has seemed to get.

Anyway the dev team seems very eager and have good communication with the fanbase so I'm hoping this game turns out half-decent. But they really need an experienced group to even think about tackling something like a Warhammer MMO or RTS. To that end I don't mind EC has been delayed a bit, as long as it's quality.

You mean the same dev team that hired a hype man (Miguel) who constantly lied on the forums spreading lies of wondrous features that were going to be in the game that never even saw the light of day? Just because the devs actually post on a forum doesn't mean there's any actual communication going on.

The point of 40K is to sell overpriced plastic to middle class men. I get the concept of grimdark, but I find it juvenille and stupid and trite. And poorly executed in 40k since they have to have platic to sell to little timmy as well.

Eternal Crusade has made me awfully salty.

As for GW vs Blizzard, Blizzard wins in terms of writing. GW has some cool trump cards like Space Marines but most of BL is rather mediocre. WoW has lots of mediocre stuff as well, but there's also golden writing like the Arakkoa civil strife, the Mogu with their Thunder King etc.

The more I think on a Warhammer 40k Real Time Strategy, the more I conclude it would have to be a Supreme Commander type deal with massive battle fields.
I lament my lack of programming or modding ability, but if someone else out there has the talent they could try and mix Dawn of War with Supreme Commander.

JinxDragon wrote:
The more I think on a Warhammer 40k Real Time Strategy, the more I conclude it would have to be a Supreme Commander type deal with massive battle fields.
I can't stop thinking of a few mods that existed way back in the day of Total Annihilation, they created units instead of individual models, and once more morn my lack of programming talent.

Or a 40K version of Wargame Airland Battle/Red Dragon https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ea8pI-t2maA

 Ashiraya wrote:
Eternal Crusade has made me awfully salty.

As for GW vs Blizzard, Blizzard wins in terms of writing. GW has some cool trump cards like Space Marines but most of BL is rather mediocre. WoW has lots of mediocre stuff as well, but there's also golden writing like the Arakkoa civil strife, the Mogu with their Thunder King etc.

This confuses me. "GW is bad writing except for a few trump cards. But Blizzard has medicore writing but has good parts!" What exactly is the difference, here?

 Wyzilla wrote:

Eternal Crusade is nothing anybody sane should invest in. It has a junior team that have never worked together now working in a company responsible solely for shovelware, the game was supposed to be released this year and it has only just now entered Alpha, and the list of features dropped is longer than the list of features they have. Plus there's no word on how development of the Xenos faction goes, and for now the alpha only has SM vs CSM.

Any project, specially one done by a team that never did a project this size, is prone to delays. They're trying to do their best, and as for now it already looks better than Space Marine (in fact, it's more or less Battlefield 40k). You can of course not like it, but I do like the idea and the results so far. And I'm not an insane person.

 Wyzilla wrote:
Just because the devs actually post on a forum doesn't mean there's any actual communication going on.

Could you tell us how actual communication would be? They changed things in the game because the community asked them to.

 Psienesis wrote:
... Blizzard's setting is stolen from Warhammer. You must be on drugs.

indeed, and if you didnt know the history between games workshop and blizzard entertainment you are possibly just that ignorant. theres so much bad blood between the two thed sooner shoot each other

Both GW and Blizzard where good at building universes but lately seem to have stagnated ideas. Both seem to hero worship like crazy and create illogical plots around said worshiped heros. Both have a like for oversized characters and impractical designs. Seems like a match made in heaven and yet im 1000% sure such a game would be an abomination. I would much rather Relic continue to make 40K games (DoW 3 please). At least they seem to understand the theme of 40K plus they know how to make Orks look far more badass than anything GW has come up with.

I won't be happy with blizzard till they give me Starcraft: Ghost.

That said, I think blizzard would really excel with a FPS where you play as a Tau Fire Warror.

We should also note that, based on WoW, Blizzard shares GW's love for Big Pauldrons. Big Pauldrons and Big Beards as ways of knowing how powerful/important a given person is.

... but, yes, feth Blizzard and feth anything Blizzard produces until we have Starcraft: Ghost. When that game was pulled, Blizzard became dead to me. I won't even pirate their products.

 DoomShakaLaka wrote:
Maybe a warhammer 40,000 MMO would work?

Oh, Eternal Crusade....rest in pepperonis.

Mantorok wrote:I won't be happy with blizzard till they give me Starcraft: Ghost.

Psienesis wrote:... but, yes, feth Blizzard and feth anything Blizzard produces until we have Starcraft: Ghost. When that game was pulled, Blizzard became dead to me. I won't even pirate their products.

Nova... there's two novels about her and a manga, but that game... is it forever beyond our reach..?

Mantorok wrote:That said, I think blizzard would really excel with a FPS where you play as a Tau Fire Warror.

Heh. Omnissiah knows the last company to try that failed spectacularly...

Battlefield: 40k, anyone?

 Vankraken wrote:
Both GW and Blizzard where good at building universes but lately seem to have stagnated ideas. Both seem to hero worship like crazy and create illogical plots around said worshiped heros. Both have a like for oversized characters and impractical designs. Seems like a match made in heaven and yet im 1000% sure such a game would be an abomination. I would much rather Relic continue to make 40K games (DoW 3 please). At least they seem to understand the theme of 40K plus they know how to make Orks look far more badass than anything GW has come up with.

Archimonde is so huge he won't fit on my screen unless I tilt my camera up so far I can't see the green fire I'm trying to avoid. : /

To be fair, Archimonde is the same height as the setting's Yggdrasil expy. :p

 Jimsolo wrote:
I hate Blizzard games. Mindless clickfests don't appeal to me. I find the storytelling behind Diablo, Warcraft, and Starcraft to be lackluster at best. I think the structure of their most successful MMO is unpleasant, and have consistently found the player base for said game to be charitably described as off putting.

I don't hate them because they're successful. I dislike them because I don't enjoy their style of game. And if there is to be a 40k MMO, I'd like to see a much better system than 'Grimdark WoW.'

Let's not pretend like WH40k gamers are the most pleasant people on the planet. I mean, we've come up with a variety of terms for the jerks among us, and whenever a thread is created asking people to share their stories of WH40k jerks, there's no shortage of stories, and very few among us are able to say we've never played a game against a jerk.

We also tend to drive off a lot of the women who might be interested with our poor hygiene and social skills. And where that fails, we get TFGs to step in, brutally list tailor with no semblance of making things fun or fair, and then remark to their friends about how despite going easy on her, she still lost, which proves that women are terrible at gaming.

 curran12 wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
Eternal Crusade has made me awfully salty.

As for GW vs Blizzard, Blizzard wins in terms of writing. GW has some cool trump cards like Space Marines but most of BL is rather mediocre. WoW has lots of mediocre stuff as well, but there's also golden writing like the Arakkoa civil strife, the Mogu with their Thunder King etc.

This confuses me. "GW is bad writing except for a few trump cards. But Blizzard has medicore writing but has good parts!" What exactly is the difference, here?

...Because mediocre means medium whereas bad means... bad?

As for what I actually wrote, both are mostly mediocre, but I think Blizzard has more good stuff than GW.

I'd disagree with that but BL has been atrocious the last couple of years with so much novella and e-book short story crap, not to mention so little content actually coming out from their top writers.

I'm sure that it's a question of Blizzard not asking for rights, not GW being unwilling to sell them (even for a great price).

It would be a fabulous enterprise, IMO. I know some peeps over at Bliz, and there are a decent number of GW/40k fans there. The art aesthetic is also similar.

However the likelihood of such a project, I think, is virtually zero. It just doesn't make sense for Bliz, because Bliz has its own highly successful fictional worlds, both scifi and fantasy, so why invest in developing someone else's?

There is some company out of Canada working on an MOTA for 40k, I think I saw it on Indrid's YouTube channel a few weeks ago.

If this was Blizzard, it would be 10x the quality, but I am equally sure we would not be hearing about it until after 3 years of development.

I must agree that GW is giving out the 40k license a little too much. Regicide, Kill Team, Space Hulk, Carnage, Some Tower defense game?, Martyr, Armageddon....and the list is growing. While some of these games have ended up being decent little "apps" the line lacks the substance of the DoW franchise, or the old Epic games, or even Chaos Gate.

I have seen the recent Eternal Crusade videos and summaries, and I am not impressed. It looks just like Space Marine multiplayer, nothing else other than the addition of some vehicles, which were purposed prior to the closure of THQ. I think that was a major nail in the coffin for 40k games. Also the fact that Eternal Crusade has been in long development as an MMO, and then with the changing in developers basically started the game over from scratch.

Do any of you remember the gameshots with the Black Templar Standing in front of a titan? That got me amped, but recent Alpha footage looks more like Space Marine, and less like an rpg/mmo we all deserve in the 40k universe. I will give the game a shot when it comes out, but recent GW additions have proven they are whoring out the label to make as much $$$ as they can (which a business should do, hopefully not at the cost of consumers).

The current MMO is pretty much the multiplayer of the Space Marine game that was released a few years ago in consoles PC, a 3rd person arena with a lot more options like vehicles, different classes, upgrades, etc... If you liked the multiplayer you would probably like this version, since they are huge maps and the winning of said maps are supposed to affect the rest of the world as each faction gainst more control of the planet.

It is an OK idea but to fully grasp the feel of 40k you would probably need to be a MMO where you control an army kinda like the AoEO, where you did quests in order to get upgrades for your army and could customize the looks of your army but each mission or battle is an RTS game on its own. Other option would be have control of a squad, and have something like Dragon Age inquisition where you can switch control between the members of your squad while the rest of them are controlled by an AI.

No. Just fraking no.

I played WoW for 11 years now and have steadily seen the sterilization and destruction of everything that made the game unique and interesting. Its catered to casuals and people who are too lazy and unskilled to farm / raid. 40 man Raids and needing cooperation instead of spamming revives and unbalanced abilities before patch works.

Their games have been a mess. SC2 was even worse by consideration of the general public as Blizz (Or should I say Activision-SellOut-Blizzard) tried to capitalize on the growing E sports genre of Online Gaming. Further adding to this they created HotS which was basically their attempt at reeling in some of the cash devoutees of the LoL franchise and Eports surrounding the extremely popular DOTA type game. Which, yes I know, they technically fruitioned but none the less they never capitalized to begin with.

Blizzard / Activision Entertainment is a terrible company filled with sellouts and copout story board directors (If anyone has been to Blizzcon you know what Im talking about with their SIt N talks with the public, as they take their lowbie story writers for WoW and let them burn at the stake in front of the public in humiliation) They dont care about Lore, they dont care about gameplay they dont care about balance, they just want you to spend money.

The problem with the concept of a 40K MMORPG is that you would have to eliminate most of the existing factions as a viable player character.

Orks, not really feasible as a player character in a 40K MMORPG style game (an action game, sure). Tyranids, nope, Necrons, not a chance, Dark Eldar, sorry but no. Daemons, nope. And the really big surprise? Space Marines. Their organization structure doesn't really lends itself to lone warriors roaming the galaxy, at least in a MMORPG style game (sure, mighty heroes may go out on a personal quest now and then, but your standard rank and file don't). Same goes for Imperial Guard/Astra Militarum.

So that leaves us with Inquisition and maybe Sisters for IoM, Chaos Marines/Cultists, Craftword Eldar, and maybe Tau. Beyond Chaos, these are the factions that typically don't immediately shoot each other on sight, have potential for the lone warrior status, and can thus have some communal locations which are vital for an MMORPG style game.

What could be interesting is a Chaos/Inquisition focused game, where you have players explore the galaxy as either an undercover agent of Chaos seeking to undermine the Imperium or an undercover Inquisition seeking to stop the forces of Chaos. Both could interact with each other, and never know what faction the other players belong too initially (which would be an really cool dynamic)

WoW always catered to casuals. Always. People looked at games like EQ, UO, DAoC and the other "first gen" (not really, but that is what they were called) MMOs of the era and said "You know, this is fun, but I hate camping for 18 hours waiting for this one rare mob to spawn so I can get that Phat Lewt".

Thus, WoW did away with Camping, and true XP Grinding, and a lot of the stuff that made those first-gen MMOs such time-sinks. They also were fortunate to have built-in brand awareness, and went on to create one of the most-popular MMOs ever. Of course, that actually had seriously detrimental effects on the MMO industry as a whole, because investors and studios have not yet realized that no one will ever create another WoW, not even Blizzard.

 Ashiraya wrote:

 curran12 wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
Eternal Crusade has made me awfully salty.

As for GW vs Blizzard, Blizzard wins in terms of writing. GW has some cool trump cards like Space Marines but most of BL is rather mediocre. WoW has lots of mediocre stuff as well, but there's also golden writing like the Arakkoa civil strife, the Mogu with their Thunder King etc.

This confuses me. "GW is bad writing except for a few trump cards. But Blizzard has medicore writing but has good parts!" What exactly is the difference, here?

...Because mediocre means medium whereas bad means... bad?

As for what I actually wrote, both are mostly mediocre, but I think Blizzard has more good stuff than GW.

Are you joking? Seriously what does Blizzard actually WRITE? A few lines of dialog for quests in an MMO?

Games Workshop produces easily thousands pages of published fiction every YEAR between codexes, Black Library, Rule Books, Campaign Books, White Dwarf, you name it. They're not even in the same LEAGUE... and you think BLIZZARD is better at it? You are obviously not reading enough, and need to spend less time playing video games. Don't even read some Games Workshop stuff... just go read a book. Recently I've been reading some of the new Witcher novels that have been recently translated, and they're fantastic. I just finished the latest Clive Barker novel, and I'm getting ready to start on Ready Player One, which I've heard is great.

I'm not saying that everything Games Workshop puts to paper is Oscar Wilde, but all you have to do is leaf through the Setting section of the primary rulebook, and you get lots and lots of fantastic writing. I didn't even mention the ForgeWorld Imperial Armour books, which personally I have almost as much fun reading as full blown novels.

I wish I was a multi billionaire who can just buy off GW and close them down so no more warhammer for anyone.

 Filch wrote:
I wish I was a multi billionaire who can just buy off GW and close them down so no more warhammer for anyone.

So, because you don't like it, you have to destroy what everyone else loves?

Gee, that totally doesn't sound like anyone *cough*Hitler*cough*

If you think buying GW would be the end of 40k, you must be a fool.

Murrdox wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:

 curran12 wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
Eternal Crusade has made me awfully salty.

As for GW vs Blizzard, Blizzard wins in terms of writing. GW has some cool trump cards like Space Marines but most of BL is rather mediocre. WoW has lots of mediocre stuff as well, but there's also golden writing like the Arakkoa civil strife, the Mogu with their Thunder King etc.

This confuses me. "GW is bad writing except for a few trump cards. But Blizzard has medicore writing but has good parts!" What exactly is the difference, here?

...Because mediocre means medium whereas bad means... bad?

As for what I actually wrote, both are mostly mediocre, but I think Blizzard has more good stuff than GW.

Are you joking? Seriously what does Blizzard actually WRITE? A few lines of dialog for quests in an MMO?

Games Workshop produces easily thousands pages of published fiction every YEAR between codexes, Black Library, Rule Books, Campaign Books, White Dwarf, you name it. They're not even in the same LEAGUE... and you think BLIZZARD is better at it? You are obviously not reading enough, and need to spend less time playing video games. Don't even read some Games Workshop stuff... just go read a book. Recently I've been reading some of the new Witcher novels that have been recently translated, and they're fantastic. I just finished the latest Clive Barker novel, and I'm getting ready to start on Ready Player One, which I've heard is great.

I'm not saying that everything Games Workshop puts to paper is Oscar Wilde, but all you have to do is leaf through the Setting section of the primary rulebook, and you get lots and lots of fantastic writing. I didn't even mention the ForgeWorld Imperial Armour books, which personally I have almost as much fun reading as full blown novels.

But that fiction is all garbage, makes no sense, and is not internally consistent.

 MadMaverick76 wrote:
I must agree that GW is giving out the 40k license a little too much. Regicide, Kill Team, Space Hulk, Carnage, Some Tower defense game?, Martyr, Armageddon....and the list is growing. While some of these games have ended up being decent little "apps" the line lacks the substance of the DoW franchise, or the old Epic games, or even Chaos Gate.

I have seen the recent Eternal Crusade videos and summaries, and I am not impressed. It looks just like Space Marine multiplayer, nothing else other than the addition of some vehicles, which were purposed prior to the closure of THQ. I think that was a major nail in the coffin for 40k games. Also the fact that Eternal Crusade has been in long development as an MMO, and then with the changing in developers basically started the game over from scratch.

Do any of you remember the gameshots with the Black Templar Standing in front of a titan? That got me amped, but recent Alpha footage looks more like Space Marine, and less like an rpg/mmo we all deserve in the 40k universe. I will give the game a shot when it comes out, but recent GW additions have proven they are whoring out the label to make as much $$$ as they can (which a business should do, hopefully not at the cost of consumers).

Eternal Crusade has absolutely nothing in common with Dark Millennium.

 Wyzilla wrote:

 MadMaverick76 wrote:
I must agree that GW is giving out the 40k license a little too much. Regicide, Kill Team, Space Hulk, Carnage, Some Tower defense game?, Martyr, Armageddon....and the list is growing. While some of these games have ended up being decent little "apps" the line lacks the substance of the DoW franchise, or the old Epic games, or even Chaos Gate.

I have seen the recent Eternal Crusade videos and summaries, and I am not impressed. It looks just like Space Marine multiplayer, nothing else other than the addition of some vehicles, which were purposed prior to the closure of THQ. I think that was a major nail in the coffin for 40k games. Also the fact that Eternal Crusade has been in long development as an MMO, and then with the changing in developers basically started the game over from scratch.

Do any of you remember the gameshots with the Black Templar Standing in front of a titan? That got me amped, but recent Alpha footage looks more like Space Marine, and less like an rpg/mmo we all deserve in the 40k universe. I will give the game a shot when it comes out, but recent GW additions have proven they are whoring out the label to make as much $$$ as they can (which a business should do, hopefully not at the cost of consumers).

Eternal Crusade has absolutely nothing in common with Dark Millennium.

That's the problem. Dark millennium was to be the MMO we all hoped it could be. It was canceled and from its ashes Eternal Crusade rose. So stating it has nothing in common with it is erroneous considering Behaviour hired former Vigil Devs, and that the MMO transferred right at the dissolution of THQ. A quick Google search will yield all this information.

I know this has probably been said, but GW did allow Blizzard to make a Warhammer game.

It was called Warcraft (Don't believe me? Look it up http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/1166551-Finally-confirmed-Warcraft-was-intended-to-be-a-Warhammer-RTS) Patrick Wyatt confirms it in an interview with Kotaku, he was the Producer for WC1&2.

Blizzard do not want anything to do with 3rd party IP, and I don't blame them. But also, why do we have to turn every single IP into an MMO? Keep Warhammer as its meant to be, as a RTS game. I love Blizzard games, but i'd rather let Relic and Sega keep the IP so I can get DoW 3 and Warhammer: Total War.

Also, in regard to OP, Starcrafts lore is a big as Blizzard want it to be since they own it, same as Warcrafts lore. They can make more gak up as they go along. You really, truly believe Blizzard, of all companies, would let Starcraft die? You havn't been paying attention freind (WoW is on its 6th X-pac for Ra's sake)

Izural wrote:
I know this has probably been said, but GW did allow Blizzard to make a Warhammer game.

It was called Warcraft (Don't believe me? Look it up http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/1166551-Finally-confirmed-Warcraft-was-intended-to-be-a-Warhammer-RTS) Patrick Wyatt confirms it in an interview with Kotaku, he was the Producer for WC1&2.

No, they did not. The article that you (among others) have brought up several times by now, is fake.

 Formosa wrote:

 MarsNZ wrote:

 Jimsolo wrote:
40k MMO? Yes please. But for the love of all things holy, keep Blizzard away from it.

Why? Because Blizzard made the most popular and enduring MMO of all time and therefore the proper thing to do would be to hate Blizzard for being successful.

In NZ we call that tall poppy syndrome.

No, because blizzard made one of the best mmo's of all time and has since beat that dead horse so much it's just paste, personally, I hate world of warcraft, it's a terrible game that eats people's lives. Starcraft and warcraft were once great games, but they don't provide what I want from a rts these days, too cartoony in graphics, too simplistic (as a balance factor I've been told) and.... Just not.... Big enough, give me warcraft or Starcraft on the supreme commander scale and I'd be happy, get rid of all that chappy 90's rtsrpg crap.

You think StarCraft and WarCraft are "too simplistic"? In what way? Most units have unique abilities, each race is unique in how it builds, works and fights and balance is pretty great - Each race has a ton of entirely different yet viable play styles which you have to adjust according to the enemies play style. Claiming that Supreme Commander is more complex while it has way less unit types (that are also less diverse and unique) and gameplay mechanics and is generally more of a "spam built stuff and rally point your factories to the battlefield" kind of game kinda baffles me, to be honest.

*edit* Oh, and StarCraft doesn't have that "90's rtsrpg crap", too.

idk, even if the "rumors" are false, the settings are remarkably similar, to the point where GW would be on good standing to sue, so I doubt the claims of falseness. Blizzard just doesn't make the right "scale" of game for warhammer. that was my only complaint about DoW 2, it seemed to small.

 Redcruisair wrote:

Izural wrote:
I know this has probably been said, but GW did allow Blizzard to make a Warhammer game.

It was called Warcraft (Don't believe me? Look it up http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/1166551-Finally-confirmed-Warcraft-was-intended-to-be-a-Warhammer-RTS) Patrick Wyatt confirms it in an interview with Kotaku, he was the Producer for WC1&2.

No, they did not. The article that you (among others) have brought up several times by now, is fake.

Just because you keep repeating that doesn't make it true.

 Psienesis wrote:

 Redcruisair wrote:

Izural wrote:
I know this has probably been said, but GW did allow Blizzard to make a Warhammer game.

It was called Warcraft (Don't believe me? Look it up http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/1166551-Finally-confirmed-Warcraft-was-intended-to-be-a-Warhammer-RTS) Patrick Wyatt confirms it in an interview with Kotaku, he was the Producer for WC1&2.

No, they did not. The article that you (among others) have brought up several times by now, is fake.

Just because you keep repeating that doesn't make it true.

It does when you bother to look past to first few link that show up when you search for info. The rumor has been around since Warcraft was realsed doesn't make it right. How much did they pay for the rights to use GW IP and not attach the IPs me to the title. If you are not going to bother doing real research for they the truth that little tidbit should start you on the right path.

On the other hand, Raynor being a complete arsehole at the end of Heart of the Swarm would make perfect sense if he was a 40k character instead of supposedly a good guy from a heroic fantasy setting.

 MadMaverick76 wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:

 MadMaverick76 wrote:
I must agree that GW is giving out the 40k license a little too much. Regicide, Kill Team, Space Hulk, Carnage, Some Tower defense game?, Martyr, Armageddon....and the list is growing. While some of these games have ended up being decent little "apps" the line lacks the substance of the DoW franchise, or the old Epic games, or even Chaos Gate.

I have seen the recent Eternal Crusade videos and summaries, and I am not impressed. It looks just like Space Marine multiplayer, nothing else other than the addition of some vehicles, which were purposed prior to the closure of THQ. I think that was a major nail in the coffin for 40k games. Also the fact that Eternal Crusade has been in long development as an MMO, and then with the changing in developers basically started the game over from scratch.

Do any of you remember the gameshots with the Black Templar Standing in front of a titan? That got me amped, but recent Alpha footage looks more like Space Marine, and less like an rpg/mmo we all deserve in the 40k universe. I will give the game a shot when it comes out, but recent GW additions have proven they are whoring out the label to make as much $$$ as they can (which a business should do, hopefully not at the cost of consumers).

Eternal Crusade has absolutely nothing in common with Dark Millennium.

That's the problem. Dark millennium was to be the MMO we all hoped it could be. It was canceled and from its ashes Eternal Crusade rose. So stating it has nothing in common with it is erroneous considering Behaviour hired former Vigil Devs, and that the MMO transferred right at the dissolution of THQ. A quick Google search will yield all this information.

Why yes, congratulations. A game dev company hired a person with previous experience on 40k games, even in an alpha state, just like they hired guys from Crytek. Eternal Crusade uses no assets from Dark Millennium- it is not related to DM in any way. It hasn't "risen from the ashes" as Eternal Crusade isn't even using the same engine. It would be pretty damn obvious if the games were actually related, as EC would then have textured models that didn't look like a High School student's first attempt at making a model from scratch for Gary's Mod.

Simply having old staff members does not make a game related. Dark Millennium and Eternal Crusade are completely separate entities if you bothered to look into them at all, nothing produced for DM was transferred over into EC.

 Brennonjw wrote:
idk, even if the "rumors" are false, the settings are remarkably similar, to the point where GW would be on good standing to sue, so I doubt the claims of falseness.

Given how bad GW did last time they tried to take someone to court over an IP dispute I wouldn't be surprised if Blizzard walked away a couple of million richer from that.

There really isn't much that could be sued over, similar concepts do not a lawsuit make, as IP does not cross from one medium to another nor does it cover deviations. That's the exact problem GW had with Chapterhouse, they were trying to say CHs model looked like a bit of art GW did, and that CH models looked similar to GW models (but clearly not exact copies).

Blizzard is too large to have any reason to license other IPs.

They've successfully launched several games of differing genres off the Warcraft IP alone that are mega-popular.

It does when you bother to look past to first few link that show up when you search for info. The rumor has been around since Warcraft was realsed doesn't make it right. How much did they pay for the rights to use GW IP and not attach the IPs me to the title. If you are not going to bother doing real research for they the truth that little tidbit should start you on the right path.

Financial terms of a deal brokered 20 years ago are not likely to be found on the internet, mainly because A) the internet then was not what it is now and b) Those details are probably considered trade secrets, and so would not be publicly available anyway. Especially considering the deal never came to pass, it doesn't matter what the offer was.

But, again, follow Wyatt's words to the source:

http://www.codeofhonor.com/blog/the-making-of-warcraft-part-1

Here, he again discusses the potential deal with GW, which never came about, and directly states that Warhammer was one of the definitive inspirations for Warcraft in terms of looks and appearance. While the core gameplay and mechanics were taken from Dune2 and other, previous RTS games, the fact that it's Orc(k)s vs Humans, and not factions based on other fictional groups (Monochromia Empire vs Desert Farmlandia), *also* coupled with the funny-sounding Orcs posits that WC was, in its intent, designed to be a Warhammer project that just never came to be.

After all, walking into the business meeting with GW, it helps to have a product they can easily identify with, and recognize where it fits into their own product line. WFB was a big deal at the time, so having Humans (Empire) vs Orcs (Orks) only makes sense, your team has already built it and would not (ideally) need to change much if the GW deal went through.

I actually remember hearing about this at the time, warcraft was clearly influenced by fantasy, nothing wrong with that, they've since gone in another (just as awful as aos) direction, shame, as the original warcraft games were pretty good.

 Wyzilla wrote:

 MadMaverick76 wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:

 MadMaverick76 wrote:
I must agree that GW is giving out the 40k license a little too much. Regicide, Kill Team, Space Hulk, Carnage, Some Tower defense game?, Martyr, Armageddon....and the list is growing. While some of these games have ended up being decent little "apps" the line lacks the substance of the DoW franchise, or the old Epic games, or even Chaos Gate.

I have seen the recent Eternal Crusade videos and summaries, and I am not impressed. It looks just like Space Marine multiplayer, nothing else other than the addition of some vehicles, which were purposed prior to the closure of THQ. I think that was a major nail in the coffin for 40k games. Also the fact that Eternal Crusade has been in long development as an MMO, and then with the changing in developers basically started the game over from scratch.

Do any of you remember the gameshots with the Black Templar Standing in front of a titan? That got me amped, but recent Alpha footage looks more like Space Marine, and less like an rpg/mmo we all deserve in the 40k universe. I will give the game a shot when it comes out, but recent GW additions have proven they are whoring out the label to make as much $$$ as they can (which a business should do, hopefully not at the cost of consumers).

Eternal Crusade has absolutely nothing in common with Dark Millennium.

That's the problem. Dark millennium was to be the MMO we all hoped it could be. It was canceled and from its ashes Eternal Crusade rose. So stating it has nothing in common with it is erroneous considering Behaviour hired former Vigil Devs, and that the MMO transferred right at the dissolution of THQ. A quick Google search will yield all this information.

Why yes, congratulations. A game dev company hired a person with previous experience on 40k games, even in an alpha state, just like they hired guys from Crytek. Eternal Crusade uses no assets from Dark Millennium- it is not related to DM in any way. It hasn't "risen from the ashes" as Eternal Crusade isn't even using the same engine. It would be pretty damn obvious if the games were actually related, as EC would then have textured models that didn't look like a High School student's first attempt at making a model from scratch for Gary's Mod.

Simply having old staff members does not make a game related. Dark Millennium and Eternal Crusade are completely separate entities if you bothered to look into them at all, nothing produced for DM was transferred over into EC.

I believe you misinterpret anything that was said. EC has taken majority of its' modeling and animations from Space Marine. As I am not the developer I cannot state this as fact, but a comparison between the two seems relatively obvious to me. In regards to your comments, they are seperate games yes, but one only began after another was canceled. It was also announced within a short window of the canceled DM. Much of the concept of DM is comparable to EC. Take the time to read about DM's original aspirations and game plans versus EC, you will see they have much in common. You also need to read about how DM was going to be changed to a F2P from an MMO and also retitled to a possible name of "Inquisitor." Comparison of the two definitely sees that EC was drawn off of DM, just using the modeling/animations from Space Marine.

For two games to be related they don't need to use the same engine or models. Space Marine and DMO utilized the same engines, but not the same modeling/animations from what was seen of the minimal gameplay footage. All gameplay footage of EC looks like a Space Marine clone as many have pointed out.

 Psienesis wrote:

It does when you bother to look past to first few link that show up when you search for info. The rumor has been around since Warcraft was realsed doesn't make it right. How much did they pay for the rights to use GW IP and not attach the IPs me to the title. If you are not going to bother doing real research for they the truth that little tidbit should start you on the right path.

Financial terms of a deal brokered 20 years ago are not likely to be found on the internet, mainly because A) the internet then was not what it is now and b) Those details are probably considered trade secrets, and so would not be publicly available anyway. Especially considering the deal never came to pass, it doesn't matter what the offer was.

But, again, follow Wyatt's words to the source:

http://www.codeofhonor.com/blog/the-making-of-warcraft-part-1

Here, he again discusses the potential deal with GW, which never came about, and directly states that Warhammer was one of the definitive inspirations for Warcraft in terms of looks and appearance. While the core gameplay and mechanics were taken from Dune2 and other, previous RTS games, the fact that it's Orc(k)s vs Humans, and not factions based on other fictional groups (Monochromia Empire vs Desert Farmlandia), *also* coupled with the funny-sounding Orcs posits that WC was, in its intent, designed to be a Warhammer project that just never came to be.

After all, walking into the business meeting with GW, it helps to have a product they can easily identify with, and recognize where it fits into their own product line. WFB was a big deal at the time, so having Humans (Empire) vs Orcs (Orks) only makes sense, your team has already built it and would not (ideally) need to change much if the GW deal went through.

And that changes the fact my post was about WarCraft not being a GW IP game how. You are following along before posting right. Just because you look into something does mean what you put out belongs to something. I didn't say they never talk to GW about it, I said Warcraft is not or ever been a GW IP, even if it did cross their mind to tie it to the IP while in early development. Again why would you pay for an IP and not use it.