Your satire tags confuse me. Is your entire post satire? Because it's making an awful lot of sense.RobCoxxy said:
Even if I do think "D/E" is a bit harsh on the guy.
Article Calls out Space Marine for "Ripping Off" Gears of War
- Thread starter Soviet Heavy
- Start date
Even if I do think "D/E" is a bit harsh on the guy.
I dont know a whole hell of a lot about Warhammer...
I dont really think Space Marines is even close to GoW....I (go go flame protection!) thought it looked like Dynasty Warriors...aka ME vs ALL YOUR DUDE! sort of gameplay...
As someone who doesnt know a whole hell of a lot about it...I hope this explains a decent amount to know something (not start forumwarz w/ pros) but enough to be like X Y Z etc etc
I dont really think Space Marines is even close to GoW....I (go go flame protection!) thought it looked like Dynasty Warriors...aka ME vs ALL YOUR DUDE! sort of gameplay...
As someone who doesnt know a whole hell of a lot about it...I hope this explains a decent amount to know something (not start forumwarz w/ pros) but enough to be like X Y Z etc etc
He also has two books apparently I bet one of them is The World is Flat, honest! and The Brain is a useless internal organ.
Haha. Alternatively: It was a stupid question and the answer was obvious.
'What colour is the sky?'
'Blue?'
'Blue, eh? How suspiciously correct. You've obviously been doing your homework.'
Okay, having read his longer-than-the-actual-article disclaimer, the point he's (unsuccessfully) trying to make has a pretty large kernel or truth to it. It's fair to say that the game's existence is most likely riding on the success of Gears, as far as 'hey, this kind of third person shooter seems like a pretty excellent way to present a Space Marine game'. The claim that anything is directly derivative beyond that is just the product of insufficient knowledge of WH40K, which again is scarcely a crime (although he is guilty of jumping to conclusions and a lack of research). Of course they have chainswords, they're Space Marines. They have chainswords. It's established.
That?s funny because when Gears 1 came out, I was wondering why White Dwarf didn?t publish an article about how much it was ripping off 40K.
You're right about Dwarfs; Tolkien nicked ('adapted') those from Norse mythology (although I don't know if they were necessarily short before Tolkien).Davey Woo said:
You're right about Elves, too - they were Saxon (German); Tolkien nicked those as well (they were more pixy-ish originally, though).
He made up Orcs - although 'goblins' predate Tolkien the ones in folklore are more like mischievous elves; his orcs and goblins are fairly unique (and he definitely defined the way they look and act nowadays).
Hopefully you can stand a bit less corrected now, because you were corrected far too much there.
(and why am I getting non-Roman characters in the captcha?)
And you know the WORST part.
Marcus Fenix isn't even a Space Marine.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ma0DqoMhd90
Just after the 1:30 mark Dom says:
"welcome Back to the ARMY, SOLDIER"
In america you NEVER mix up the Army and the Marines you you will get your lilly as kicked so bad, they may dress similar and carry similar weapons but they are TOTALLY different. And it is american Tradition to not refer to Marines as "soldiers". In fact Marcus and his team are never described as being in any sort of Marine Corps. They are Army through and through.
Also the Space part of Space Marine... Marcus and his friends never go into space. Quite the opposite they spend more time underground than in any kind of ship, sea ship or space ship.
People jsut seem to assume that Marcus Fenix and his buddies are Space marines because you know what THEY ARE SO DERIVATIVE OF SPACE MARINES! Like from Warhammer 40k
If they were actually to explicitly call themselves marines it would jsut be
Marcus Fenix isn't even a Space Marine.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ma0DqoMhd90
Just after the 1:30 mark Dom says:
"welcome Back to the ARMY, SOLDIER"
In america you NEVER mix up the Army and the Marines you you will get your lilly as kicked so bad, they may dress similar and carry similar weapons but they are TOTALLY different. And it is american Tradition to not refer to Marines as "soldiers". In fact Marcus and his team are never described as being in any sort of Marine Corps. They are Army through and through.
Also the Space part of Space Marine... Marcus and his friends never go into space. Quite the opposite they spend more time underground than in any kind of ship, sea ship or space ship.
People jsut seem to assume that Marcus Fenix and his buddies are Space marines because you know what THEY ARE SO DERIVATIVE OF SPACE MARINES! Like from Warhammer 40k
If they were actually to explicitly call themselves marines it would jsut be
wow never knew that, ironically that is hilarious right there.FreelanceButler said:
OT: htis is..ridiculous, and i have no idea why so many people care about the opinion of someone with obviously no credibility..
still, for the lulz its a bit funny to poke at
Treblaine, that Army thing is just the biggest insult to injury. I thank you for adding to my rage. The world will explode shortly.
First and foremost, this is my problem with journalism nowadays; Journalists are so quick to touch on the hot buttons of the reader that factuality be damned. Even the escapist is guilty of this on occasion. But it's never to this Dean's levels. The Dean scale will have to be implemented to rate bias and ignorance displayed in a writer's work.
I'm going to just put two things out. Gears of War is (erroneously) billed as the creator of the cover mechanic. So much so that if you do not use it, you will die. Supposedly added realism to the TPS genre. Hide, heal back up, lean out of cover to pop off some shots. Repeat until game beaten.
Space Marines do not believe in cover. They do not believe in retreat. They do not believe in the concept of 'overwhelming numbers'. They know their duty to the Emperor and they know Fury. The Developers of the game themselves say if you want to continue to live, you continue to fight. You will only regain health by killing and increasing your rage, which is somewhat true to the source material (SOMEWHAT true. Fury in the source material as pushed Space Marines to do wonderful things). Huge difference number one.
Huge difference number two: Space Marines can easily be a Dynasty Warrior's clone if ANYTHING. Hordes of enemies around you, you take out your weapon and dive right in. You cut, you saw, you gib in the name of the Golden Throne. You are the death dealer, a being that is not quite human any more due to surgeries, gene manipulation, and cybernetics (first one to even think about Halo, please remember when Warhammer 40K developed..). You can get out and dish out the pain, and Space Marines most of the time prefer face to face combat. If I can be so bold, you can probably play most of the game just with Melee. How the hell is that a rip off of a game that is 90 percent Guns.
The excuse that "hey, this game looks like something I've already played." puts questions towards your standpoints as a reviewer and a writer. As a reviewer, you're not supposed to judge by biases. Every game must be looked at fresh and seen from what it does right. To be honest, not many hero stories stray from Beowulf, but we still want to feel gripped. If an IP can do that, we can overlook that it fits a frame given that there are so few unique frames of stories left. If you have done this professionally for 15 years, you should have noticed that it could be played as a Melee heavy game instead of a strictly Guns only game should have been the first thing that popped to your mind.
And frankly, what does it say that you seemingly ignored that function to play it like a game you're familiar with?
Lastly, this puts me in mind of Ebert and Roeper's review of the remake of Dawn of the Dead. They Begrudgingly had to recommend it because it was gripping, the story telling was good, believable characters, and the like. But they both wanted to pan it because it had zombies and they hate zombies. Guess what, reviewers? you're not here to talk about what you personally like. We listen to you because we believe (and I don't know if we should any more) that you have an insider's knowledge that can break the game down to the fundamentals and tell us if they do it right or not. More and more, reviewers are going from Biases. Why are we the consumer allowing this to happen, and others profit from it when we are all individuals and just need to know if the flipping game works and it's up to us if we'd like the story (Which is a personal matter anyway)?
First and foremost, this is my problem with journalism nowadays; Journalists are so quick to touch on the hot buttons of the reader that factuality be damned. Even the escapist is guilty of this on occasion. But it's never to this Dean's levels. The Dean scale will have to be implemented to rate bias and ignorance displayed in a writer's work.
I'm going to just put two things out. Gears of War is (erroneously) billed as the creator of the cover mechanic. So much so that if you do not use it, you will die. Supposedly added realism to the TPS genre. Hide, heal back up, lean out of cover to pop off some shots. Repeat until game beaten.
Space Marines do not believe in cover. They do not believe in retreat. They do not believe in the concept of 'overwhelming numbers'. They know their duty to the Emperor and they know Fury. The Developers of the game themselves say if you want to continue to live, you continue to fight. You will only regain health by killing and increasing your rage, which is somewhat true to the source material (SOMEWHAT true. Fury in the source material as pushed Space Marines to do wonderful things). Huge difference number one.
Huge difference number two: Space Marines can easily be a Dynasty Warrior's clone if ANYTHING. Hordes of enemies around you, you take out your weapon and dive right in. You cut, you saw, you gib in the name of the Golden Throne. You are the death dealer, a being that is not quite human any more due to surgeries, gene manipulation, and cybernetics (first one to even think about Halo, please remember when Warhammer 40K developed..). You can get out and dish out the pain, and Space Marines most of the time prefer face to face combat. If I can be so bold, you can probably play most of the game just with Melee. How the hell is that a rip off of a game that is 90 percent Guns.
The excuse that "hey, this game looks like something I've already played." puts questions towards your standpoints as a reviewer and a writer. As a reviewer, you're not supposed to judge by biases. Every game must be looked at fresh and seen from what it does right. To be honest, not many hero stories stray from Beowulf, but we still want to feel gripped. If an IP can do that, we can overlook that it fits a frame given that there are so few unique frames of stories left. If you have done this professionally for 15 years, you should have noticed that it could be played as a Melee heavy game instead of a strictly Guns only game should have been the first thing that popped to your mind.
And frankly, what does it say that you seemingly ignored that function to play it like a game you're familiar with?
Lastly, this puts me in mind of Ebert and Roeper's review of the remake of Dawn of the Dead. They Begrudgingly had to recommend it because it was gripping, the story telling was good, believable characters, and the like. But they both wanted to pan it because it had zombies and they hate zombies. Guess what, reviewers? you're not here to talk about what you personally like. We listen to you because we believe (and I don't know if we should any more) that you have an insider's knowledge that can break the game down to the fundamentals and tell us if they do it right or not. More and more, reviewers are going from Biases. Why are we the consumer allowing this to happen, and others profit from it when we are all individuals and just need to know if the flipping game works and it's up to us if we'd like the story (Which is a personal matter anyway)?
The amount of fail in that one quote is extraordinary, he even takes the time to promote Gears 3 as he couldn't resist that a new iteration is being released soon. Does he own Microsoft/Epic-Games stock?FutureJarhead16 said:
But worse is how he suggests that Gears of War is a derivative of the US Marine Corps.
Oh yeah clearly the Marine Corps from:
-the complete lack of any nautical references
-the complete lack of any US Marine rank structure
-repeatedly referring to themselves as the Army and Soldiers
-not wearing a codified uniform nor any rank insignia
-not wearing any camouflage
-using "chainsaw bayonets"
-Using lever-action rather than pump-action shotguns
-Absolutely no emphasis on "every (marine) a Rifleman"
-No committal to Marine fighting tactics
-Using absolutely none of the familiar Marine jargon (Jarhead, "ahoy", "uuhuurah")
Gear of War have NOTHING to do with the US Marine Corps, almost every element of their design is derivative of creative works like Warhammer 40k and its own previous work such as the Unreal Tournament (That Cliffy B did not work to create).
well if you read the article of the link you see that the guy is saying that space marine is riping gears off on mulitple levels. yeah the 'lore' or even better: the looks. he is writing over the fact that space marine is copying those bulky space marine and heavy weapons. everyone knows with a bit of common sense (and google) that warhammer is older then gears. but the writes is also stating that the game is as also ripping off the gameplay of gears and that bothers me the most. i am really anoyed by people who are saying that something is a rip-off from something else, so yeah, i made a comment on that. i don't think it was worth repeating how stupid this guy is in implying that warhammer 40K ripped of gears.WaaghPowa said:
I did read the article, and the fact that gameplay is similar is not a problem since almost every game within the same genre has similar, or same, gameplay mechanics. Why is he picking on Space Marine? Why not Mass Effect 2 since that's more like Gears of War gameplay wise. Every game within every genre shares similar, or same, gameplay elements and to claim that one is "ripping off" another within said genre, is silly. The only real mentions to gameplay he makes are that it's a TPS with guns and that you can chop people with a chainsaw. If he wanted to simply say that the gameplay was similar, fine. The outrage is that he stupidly claims WH40k, a 30 year old game, is ripping off gears in the lore department.blackdwarf said:
Gameplay reminds me way more of Transformers: War for Cybertron than Gears of War or Mass Effect. Space Marine doesn't even use cover systems, does it? And you can also switch to using melee weapons. It just seems way more like War for Cybertron to me.
Not that I'm screaming ripoff.
Not that I'm screaming ripoff.
this makes me laugh, being a fan of muse well before twilight got its angsty teen claws into them, i can see the funny side of it. the best part is if these fans knew anything about twilight, it is common knowledge that stephanie meyer is a muse fan, if they were not that famous she wouldn't be a fan and similarly not commisioned them to write neutron star collision. back to the subject of space marine and research, don't write a damn article if you aren't clever enough to revise the subject matter first...Saelune said: