EA steals from Games Workshop
- Thread starter ChaplainOrion
- Start date
Recommended Videos
How is that image even remotely connected to anything in this thread? Even someone who has no experiance with 40K can see that the 1995 models and the EA tanks are exactly the same. They haven't even tried to hide the fact that they are blatant copies. If that's not copyright infringement then I don't know what is. Unless there was some secret deal with GW and EA (which I doubt).Grey Day for Elcia said:Boy, the sheeple sure do enjoy finding reasons to "hate" EA. Which is funny, because they'll all still buy their products. It's cute how people on the internet throw around words at the slightest provocation, chuck a little tantrum, rant for a week and and then open their wallets and make new releases push sales records sky high.
Wonder what it'll be cool to hate next...
At least Blizzard had the courtesy to make SOME alterations to GW's IP when they made both Warcraft AND Starcraft.
Yes indeed, captcha, EA has to "face the music". But, frankly, I feel no inflated indignation on behalf of GW. They lost my loyalty a long time ago when they murdered my wallet via a slow, hemhorraging agent called INFLATED PRICES.
Yes indeed, captcha, EA has to "face the music". But, frankly, I feel no inflated indignation on behalf of GW. They lost my loyalty a long time ago when they murdered my wallet via a slow, hemhorraging agent called INFLATED PRICES.
Just clarifying a bit, not correcting.Soviet Heavy said:
The Leman Russ is a Land Raider with a turret. In turn the Land Raider is inspired by some british WWI tanks. Especially the track and the side sponsons.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:British_Mark_V_%28male%29_tank.jpg
The Baneblade is far too fantastic to be a working tank. It looks like GW mixed and matched a lot of different historical tank components, probably by looking at pictures.
You do know what a copyright is don't you? Because GW would absolutely have the copyright to those original designs, and the models there are not so different that they don't clearly infringe on their IP. They're nearly identical for Thor's sake.Regnes said:
Now, I'm sure no one will get sued, but that's only because the game isn't out and the models will undoubtedly be changed. But if EA released the game as is, GW would be well within their rights to sue them. And whoever created those models absolutely should be fired for them. It's lazy work, actual theft, and would have left EA open to a pretty big lawsuit had those made it all the way to the final game before being released. Honestly, I don't think the person who made them even deserves to work in the industry at all.
The Land Raider is a mark V driving backwards. My point about the Baneblade chassis still stands, but there are so many guns on the thing I can't imagine where they'd stuff an engine and crew compartment.Bostur said:Just clarifying a bit, not correcting.Soviet Heavy said:
The Leman Russ is a Land Raider with a turret. In turn the Land Raider is inspired by some british WWI tanks. Especially the track and the side sponsons.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:British_Mark_V_%28male%29_tank.jpg
The Baneblade is far too fantastic to be a working tank. It looks like GW mixed and matched a lot of different historical tank components, probably by looking at pictures.
This reminds me how my greatest wish is for GW to make a IG mission, in the same exact vein as the Tales of Valour mission, where it focuses on the lives of the crew of a King Tiger Tank. Imagine a game based around being the crew of a Baneblade. Awesomesauce much?!?
Uh guys, I know we all love to hate EA. But they're a publisher, are they developing this game? If they're not, then they didn't do this. They just... oversaw it.
Imperial Guardsmen are small and scrawny, almost like Gretchin they will fit somehow. ;-)Soviet Heavy said:
The thing that strikes me about the C&C pictures is how accurately they are copied. And it's not like the Baneblade is a unique, creative design. It's just a bunch of bits thrown together. The EA designers could have used the same approach and ended up with a design that looked different. There are probably hundreds of games using variations of modern tank chassis like the Baneblade without looking like a copy.
its expensive as hell but boy is it addictivePalademon said:
im surpised Warhammer isnt a class A drug yet
Alliances is actually really fun, I'd recommend you try it. Your bases can actually get destroyed by pvp and it sets you back, the wave based attack and defence allows for a ton of different approaches, and so on.MammothBlade said:
As for the copies, not being funny but games designers tend to have nerd culture engrained in their brains. A lot of the Devs probably play warhammer, and are doing this pretty much subconciously.
I could be wrong, but the fact that they're EXACT copies makes me think that the designers actually thought they were original in their brain after not remembering the original source.
E: Though to be clear, it shouldn't be called CnC at all. The only elements is shares are minor design ones and the tiberium. But the gameplay itself is good.
I doubt this is really "real",and it's just somebody out to get EA and make them look bad (given the current hating nature of EA*). Most likely somebody who is hired within EA had done their own private renders of some of GW tanks (or EA had tried to convince GW for a future game and had some renderings made for showing; neither never meant for a public release).
Said images got accidentally released and suddenly its the next C&C game!
*[I hate EA, but only for making BioWare end development of ME3 short; leading to a crappy ass-pull ending]
Said images got accidentally released and suddenly its the next C&C game!
*[I hate EA, but only for making BioWare end development of ME3 short; leading to a crappy ass-pull ending]
Actually, you don't know anything at all about the images posted. Because someone tells you EA made them you believe them? Because someone makes an image and says EA was in charge of the original designs, you nod along and file the info away under fact? Christ.TimeLord said:
I could have made this exact same thread, only instead of EA, I could have said Bioware was in charge of the original design--everything else about the thread would remain the exact same--and you would be saying Bioware is guilty of copyright infringement. You realize how insane that is, right? A random person makes a claim and you instantly side with them, despite having no information at all, besides what they tell you.
Ready, watch this:
Look at these "new" tanks for Command and Conquer:
It's not even funny about how they're almost the exact same thing.
_
Using your logic, this new post is a fact. Go ahead and tell us how horrible Activision is for stealing these designs.
I'm confused. You posted an image before about the MW boycot but no one here said "OMG Boycot EA because they stole GW stuff". Considering the evidence we have to work with, i.e the OP link and picture, I'll make my judgements from that until someone gives me evidence that proves my opinion wrong.Grey Day for Elcia said:
Evidence so far says EA have copyrighted GW stuff.
Your second image doesn't show but I'm guessing they copied...DoPo said:Wow, this must be embarrassing. This reminded me of that World of Darkness artist who...took some inspiration.
Hunter the Vigil - the Aegis Kai Doru illustration
What he might have been inspired by
What evidence? Go ahead, show me proof that EA made those designs and that they have no legal right to do so. I'll wait here. Off you go.TimeLord said:
Whaaat? You caaaan't? You're just willing to make the claim that a company has broken the law because someone shows you an image? "Well no one has shown me evidence EA didn't do it. So... they must have! Derp."