Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

BaronIveagh wrote:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Oh wow...looks like GW got a raw deal, cause the SSI games were gak.
If blizzard made them, the old wh games would have stood the test of time a lot better, and proabably wouldn't have been so damned buggy.

Well, remember at the time Video Games were not big business nor very profitable, and seen as a niche market (you might recall why it's called 'Final' Fantasy, for example). Most companies saw even the best games made from their IP as a tiny sideline at best. Much the way Comic Book companies saw Movie Rights.

And yet we had games such as X-Com, Fallout 1 and 2 and Command of Conquer, all of which were much, much better games than anything SSI churned out.
Besides, this is the 90s we are talking about. Computer games where picking up then and becoming an actual market, and not just a niche.

CthuluIsSpy wrote:
And yet we had games such as X-Com, Fallout 1 and 2 and Command of Conquer, all of which were much, much better games than anything SSI churned out.
Besides, this is the 90s we are talking about. Computer games where picking up then and becoming an actual market, and not just a niche.

I might point out that C&C wasn't for another year. Fallout for another three years. XCom was the only one of those examples that was released at the same time as Warcraft, and SSI had earlier released Neverwinter Nights (the first MMO with graphics and the reason that later games got that name) and Panzer General (which was an awesome for the time RTS). That and they owned, at the time, the video game rights to D&D. It was a bad call for GW, but I can see how it would have looked good to them.

CthuluIsSpy wrote:

BaronIveagh wrote:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Oh wow...looks like GW got a raw deal, cause the SSI games were gak.
If blizzard made them, the old wh games would have stood the test of time a lot better, and proabably wouldn't have been so damned buggy.

Well, remember at the time Video Games were not big business nor very profitable, and seen as a niche market (you might recall why it's called 'Final' Fantasy, for example). Most companies saw even the best games made from their IP as a tiny sideline at best. Much the way Comic Book companies saw Movie Rights.

And yet we had games such as X-Com, Fallout 1 and 2 and Command of Conquer, all of which were much, much better games than anything SSI churned out.
Besides, this is the 90s we are talking about. Computer games where picking up then and becoming an actual market, and not just a niche.

Dude, Chaos Gate was awesome, did you play it? It was like if Fallout Tactics was good. And had terminators.

Joey wrote:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:

BaronIveagh wrote:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Oh wow...looks like GW got a raw deal, cause the SSI games were gak.
If blizzard made them, the old wh games would have stood the test of time a lot better, and proabably wouldn't have been so damned buggy.

Well, remember at the time Video Games were not big business nor very profitable, and seen as a niche market (you might recall why it's called 'Final' Fantasy, for example). Most companies saw even the best games made from their IP as a tiny sideline at best. Much the way Comic Book companies saw Movie Rights.

And yet we had games such as X-Com, Fallout 1 and 2 and Command of Conquer, all of which were much, much better games than anything SSI churned out.
Besides, this is the 90s we are talking about. Computer games where picking up then and becoming an actual market, and not just a niche.

Dude, Chaos Gate was awesome, did you play it? It was like if Fallout Tactics was good. And had terminators.

Yes, I have played it.
It was the buggiest piece of crap I've ever played. And I played some fairly buggy crap.
Heresy? Yes, certainly. Still poorly made, and it still doesn't age well.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

BaronIveagh wrote:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:
And yet we had games such as X-Com, Fallout 1 and 2 and Command of Conquer, all of which were much, much better games than anything SSI churned out.
Besides, this is the 90s we are talking about. Computer games where picking up then and becoming an actual market, and not just a niche.

I might point out that C&C wasn't for another year. Fallout for another three years. XCom was the only one of those examples that was released at the same time as Warcraft, and SSI had earlier released Neverwinter Nights (the first MMO with graphics and the reason that later games got that name) and Panzer General (which was an awesome for the time RTS). That and they owned, at the time, the video game rights to D&D. It was a bad call for GW, but I can see how it would have looked good to them.

No, it wasn't



Chaos Gate - 1998 (SSI)
Final Liberation -1997 (SSI)
Blood Bowl - 1995 (SSI)


Command And Conquer 1 - 1995 (Westwood Studios)
Fallout - 1997 (the same year as Final Liberation) (Interplay)
X-Com - 1994 (Microprose)
Warcraft - 1994 (Blizzard)
Starcraft 1998 (Blizzard)

Starcraft was released the same year as chaos gate, and it is still playable on modern machines, and nowhere near as buggy.
Fallout was recieved in the same year as final liberation, and it is also fully playable (despite some easily fixed graphical errors) and its a complete game.

Command and Conquer was released 2-3 years before the warhammer 40k games, and on the same year as blood bowl, Warcraft a year before.

Out of curiosity, what is Warcraft meant to be a modified version of? The only WHFB game I could find from SSI was Blood Bowl.

But yes, I could see now why GW made such a decision. Still doesn't excuse how bad it was.

Brother SRM wrote:

Bran Dawri wrote:Blizzard games have a lot of 40K references.
One of the units in Warcraft 3 has a line that goes: "This warhammer costs 40K".
I've heard that Starcraft was originally designed as a 40K game, but GW backed out leaving Blizzard to rename most stuff and create Starcraft.

This is just an urban legend that gets propagated by all the winks and nods by Blizzard. There's also the possible coincidence that after Starcraft the Tyranids changed to look scarier, more akin to the Zerg. No clue if they were influenced by the designs from Starcraft, but it would be cool if they were.

There are HUGE differences between SC and WK40.

1. the Terrans are more primitive than the Imperium, if you read book 1 "Legacy of the Xel'naga" you find that life for the civilian is hard (not because of all the war, but because life on these worlds are generally harder)

2. Although similarities can be draw through the artwork, Zergling= Hormagaunt, Siege Tank = Leman Russ. The way the units behave are completely different. A Carnifex in your line is a bad thing but, an Ultralisk opens a big can of whoop ass.

3. You can't even draw any connections in the stories.

Star Craft draws heavily on Rogue Trader for inspiration...but RT is very different than the 40k we know now.

CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Chaos Gate - 1998 (SSI)
Final Liberation -1997 (SSI)
Blood Bowl - 1995 (SSI)


Command And Conquer 1 - 1995 (Westwood Studios)
Fallout - 1997 (the same year as Final Liberation) (Interplay)
X-Com - 1994 (Microprose)
Warcraft - 1994 (Blizzard)
Starcraft 1998 (Blizzard)

Which is what I just said. Other then leaving out Starcraft, which had little to do with what I was talking about.

CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Starcraft was released the same year as chaos gate, and it is still playable on modern machines, and nowhere near as buggy.
Fallout was recieved in the same year as final liberation, and it is also fully playable (despite some easily fixed graphical errors) and its a complete game.

Stopping the presses. Neither of those games work unpatched in modern machines. Starcraft and Fallout have been patched to a fair thee well to make them work. (point of fact, none of SSI's games work unpatched, due to the protection system they used at the time, on top other issues)

CthuluIsSpy wrote:
What is Warcraft meant to be a modified version of? The only WHFB game I could find from SSI was Blood Bowl.

They gave SSI the whole range of their IP. WHFB, 40k, the works as part of the deal. Basically ANYTHING that GW owned, SSI had exclusive rights to make games of. Warcraft was originally going to be a RTS from Blizz set in the Warhammer World. Do you see the conflict now?

This sort of deal used to be pretty common. Now days it's far more limited.

BaronIveagh wrote:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Chaos Gate - 1998 (SSI)
Final Liberation -1997 (SSI)
Blood Bowl - 1995 (SSI)


Command And Conquer 1 - 1995 (Westwood Studios)
Fallout - 1997 (the same year as Final Liberation) (Interplay)
X-Com - 1994 (Microprose)
Warcraft - 1994 (Blizzard)
Starcraft 1998 (Blizzard)

Which is what I just said. Other then leaving out Starcraft, which had little to do with what I was talking about.

No, what you said is that Command and Conquer wasn't released for another year, implying it was the SSI games that came first.
And yet Starcraft and Fallout games work. That is my point; there were fixes, there was support. The SSI just left their games for dead.
Besides, even unpatched, I can still get Starcraft and Fallout to work with some stability. If I played an unpatched game of chaos gate, it glitches up all the time and start crashing.

CthuluIsSpy wrote:
No, what you said is that Command and Conquer wasn't released for another year, implying it was the SSI games that came first.
And yet Starcraft and Fallout games work. That is my point; there were fixes, there was support. The SSI just left their games for dead.
Besides, even unpatched, I can still get Starcraft and Fallout to work with some stability. If I played an unpatched game of chaos gate, it glitches up all the time and start crashing.

You obviously didn't bother to read the next sentence, which specifically said Warcraft.

I would imagine SSI did leave them for dead, having been bought out and made a puppet brand by Mindscape and then Ubisoft, neither company known for their quality support...

If it's a 64 bit OS, both crashed pretty regularly the two occasions I've tried it. Starcraft lasted slightly longer, at a whopping 10 min.

BaronIveagh wrote:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:
And yet we had games such as X-Com, Fallout 1 and 2 and Command of Conquer, all of which were much, much better games than anything SSI churned out.
Besides, this is the 90s we are talking about. Computer games where picking up then and becoming an actual market, and not just a niche.

I might point out that C&C wasn't for another year. Fallout for another three years. XCom was the only one of those examples that was released at the same time as Warcraft, and SSI had earlier released Neverwinter Nights (the first MMO with graphics and the reason that later games got that name) and Panzer General (which was an awesome for the time RTS). That and they owned, at the time, the video game rights to D&D. It was a bad call for GW, but I can see how it would have looked good to them.

That is where you went wrong.
But yeah, SSI getting bought out would explain why the games are so decrepit.


And we went off topic. Sorry about that.

ok, lets see...easter eggs...
Did I already say that demon weapons were directly inspired by the Black Blade from Michael Moorcock's Elric of Melnibone series?

Buttons wrote:

Absolutionis wrote:
Their word for 'Human' is Mon-Keigh... monkey...
On that note, the Tau word for Human is something akin to Gorilla.

The monkey one is pretty noticeable, but I never noticed the similarity between Gue'la and gorilla.

I would argue that is because it is based on this terminology.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gweilo

Which has kinda unfortunate implications, but YMMV on that.