why must thier always be some loser fanboy complaining, I dont read game books... and I am not researching for an hour to find the exact date of a book that still holds no relevance to the subject. so the whole argument of that book is mute.
and if that was the book you were talking about why didnt you link that one? Quit trolling..
if anything it proves my point the books cover shows marines, they have very little similarities, Storm troopers look more like the marines used in starcraft. you know what it shows? that warhammer changed their original designs to be similar to starcraft.
My search took me less than 5 minutes. And yes, the book is relevant, for they are the officially published rulesets by Games Workshop, which define a tabletop edition release date. It is entirely relevant.
I posted the third edition books because you came up with bullshit like
EW!!!, i found one of the Space Marine board peices look at this, it has very little looks compared to the BLizzard marines, in Sc1, remember this is all Warhammer 40k had before their game that came a year after Starcraft 1
Which is, take a guess, wrong.
Let me clarify, aside from the Orc semblance, I don't think there was much ripoff (if any) by Blizzard. I have a concern when you come up with fanboy statements defending Blizzard by saying that GW copied them, when there is no evidence for it.
You say "I'm not trying to bash warhammer", which is not backed up by your other statements like "Warhammer sucks... Tis true.", "Warhammer stole the idea from blizzard to make a medieval fantasy RTS game", "They came to GW one day and asked if they could make a game, GW being the old crabby man that it is refused" and even " I would actually have to say that Blizzard made their orc, and then warhammer kind of copied a little bit of the art style". Sure, those are opinions, but all of those are based on biased and factually wrong statements.
For being such a WH fanboy hater, you surely come up as a WC/SC fanboy.
EW!!!, i found one of the Space Marine board peices look at this, it has very little looks compared to the BLizzard marines, in Sc1, remember this is all Warhammer 40k had before their game that came a year after Starcraft 1
Of course this could be because of Early development and concept art
THough I have to say that Blizzard based their games on the Warhammer SETTING but nothing was really stolen, but that could be because of pre development.
Good to know you are comparing a miniature model, which has to be scaled down both in features and quality. At least pick up codex art or smth.
To be fair, WH and WC orc(k)s anatomy is too close to comfort (green skin, prominent jaws, gorilloid facial features, etc). Lore wise they are insanely far from each other, but there was clearly a notable inspiration (in a good way, mind you).
My search took me less than 5 minutes. And yes, the book is relevant, for they are the officially published rulesets by Games Workshop, which define a tabletop edition release date. It is entirely relevant.
I posted the third edition books because you came up with bullshit like
Which is, take a guess, wrong.
Let me clarify, aside from the Orc semblance, I don't think there was much ripoff (if any) by Blizzard. I have a concern when you come up with fanboy statements defending Blizzard by saying that GW copied them, when there is no evidence for it.
You say "I'm not trying to bash warhammer", which is not backed up by your other statements like "Warhammer sucks... Tis true.", "Warhammer stole the idea from blizzard to make a medieval fantasy RTS game", "They came to GW one day and asked if they could make a game, GW being the old crabby man that it is refused" and even " I would actually have to say that Blizzard made their orc, and then warhammer kind of copied a little bit of the art style". Sure, those are opinions, but all of those are based on biased and factually wrong statements.
For being such a WH fanboy hater, you surely come up as a WC/SC fanboy.
Go play Antioch Chronicles Remastered!
Also, coming soon, Antioch Episode 3: Thoughts in Chaos!
Dont like mapster's ugly white? Try Mapster's Classic Skin!
No I didnt. Learn to read.
Man, you truly excel at doing mediocre research. Because, hey, take a guess:
http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Warhammer_40,000:_Compendium#.T2tHMhEgcWA
Hmm, what does it say here, OH RIGHT, 1989.
At this point I am not even arguing wether thy ripped off or not, only the outright misinformation you spout as facts.
Go play Antioch Chronicles Remastered!
Also, coming soon, Antioch Episode 3: Thoughts in Chaos!
Dont like mapster's ugly white? Try Mapster's Classic Skin!
@Taintedwisp: Go
Thats the third edition. The very first editions date circa 1988. Do your fucking research.
Go play Antioch Chronicles Remastered!
Also, coming soon, Antioch Episode 3: Thoughts in Chaos!
Dont like mapster's ugly white? Try Mapster's Classic Skin!
The ones I linked to were realsed in 1998.
Go play Antioch Chronicles Remastered!
Also, coming soon, Antioch Episode 3: Thoughts in Chaos!
Dont like mapster's ugly white? Try Mapster's Classic Skin!
Good to know you are comparing a miniature model, which has to be scaled down both in features and quality. At least pick up codex art or smth.
Like thse: http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Codices_(List)#3rd_Edition
@zenx1: Go Agreed, case in point:
@Mozared: Go
To be fair, WH and WC orc(k)s anatomy is too close to comfort (green skin, prominent jaws, gorilloid facial features, etc). Lore wise they are insanely far from each other, but there was clearly a notable inspiration (in a good way, mind you).
Go play Antioch Chronicles Remastered!
Also, coming soon, Antioch Episode 3: Thoughts in Chaos!
Dont like mapster's ugly white? Try Mapster's Classic Skin!
I think the main complains lie in how the WH Fantasy/40K orks and the Warcraft Orcs resemble too much each other.
Also, Protoss are a Tau/Eldar ripoff.
Bye.
Go play Antioch Chronicles Remastered!
Also, coming soon, Antioch Episode 3: Thoughts in Chaos!
Dont like mapster's ugly white? Try Mapster's Classic Skin!