40k vs. Starcraft

[flaming_squirrel]

A game is not a book last time I checked so Its kind of retarded to compare writers when they are for two differant things.
The starcraft campaign has absolutely demolished anything that dawn of war ever offered?
Wheres your fantastic stories? What? Can you hear the crickets chirping?
And the Dawn of War series IS 40 k.
Oh I see starcraft demolishes Dawn of war in every aspect thanks.
Thus it better then 40k.

So what you're basically saying is back story is of no importance, huh.

Fantastic stories? Gaunts Ghosts series, Horus Heresy series, both best sellers.

You made absolutely no valid points, especially as Starcraft is a very simple cut and paste rip off of 40k. Not that I'm really blaming Blizzard for that, as many people have said SC was originally a 40k based strategy game.



Also I really wish people would stop acting like 40k originated from Dawn of War, go do some research.

 

[Airsoftslayer93]

Im pretty sure warcraft was originally a warhammer fantasy game, and therefore starcraft would have been inspired by 40k

 

[fundayz]

Warhammer/Warhammer 40k are incredibly better IP's than whatever Warcraft/Starcraft can ever hope to be.

The depth of the lore is better, the races are more varied and have much more character, the setting is actually original rather than a copy, more complex themes are used in the storytelling, etc.

This is nothing new.

 

[Jodah]

I dunno whats worse, the console vs pc fight or the Warhammer/40k vs Warcraft/Starcraft fight.

 

[OneEyeX]

40k. Blizzard games rarely interest me, with the exception of Warcraft 3 & Diablo 2.

Warcraft 3?

You mean DotA?

 

[flaming_squirrel]

For those who're unsure of how long 40k video games have been going:

1992: Space crusade
1993: Space hulk
1995: Final Liberation
1998: Chaos Gate
1999: Rites of War
2003: Fire Warrior
2004: Dawn of War
(Winter assault, dark crusade, soulstorm)
2006: Glory in Death, no, I'd never heard of it either
2007: Squad Command
2009: DoW2
(Chaos Rising, Retribution)


2011: Space Marine
2013: Dark Millenium Online


So even when only taking video games into account I'd say they've been pretty successful with 15 releases.

 

[SpaceCop]

Blizzard has long been influenced by Games Workshop. Orc being green? Started by the Warhammer guys. And there are rumours out there that the first Warcraft was originally going to be a Warhammer adaptation that GW backed out of before development was finished--though I don't know if I'd go so far as to believe that.

But really, sci fi and fantasy are genres with little-to-no real originality. Everyone borrows from everyone else. Starcraft has huge doses of Warhammer 40k in it, yes, but also, say, Aliens. And hell, most of the background for WH40k, including space marines, terminators and bolters, was taken from an earlier tabletop game called Laserburn.

Geeky genres share a lot of overlap. I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing.

And as a last note, Andy Chambers, who was a big name at Games Workshop throughout their entire history and a writer of the Warhammer 40k rulebooks, was hired by Blizzard as the creative director for Starcraft II.

So. You know.

 

[TitanAtlas]

Both great games, but Starcraft is more popular due to its simpler approach on rts gaming...

Starcraft is a simple and visually beautifull game to play on, with an interesting story...

On the other hand 40k is much heavier and more dedicated to die hard fans and heavy rts players (you dont start playing 40k and become a master like in starcraft). 40k system is heavier and way more complicated, thus its unpopular due to that. Its the kind of games that you need 2 things... to know the way around the units and buildings and to be a great tactician...

That the huge difference with starcraft nd 40k... the strategies on starcraft are easier, from the way the units move around to the amount of things each creature can or not do... you still will have 'builds' suited to end youre enemy, easy tactics if you will... In 40k you need to know what youre unit does, and how it reacts to every situation, evolve youre squads and upgrade them (or lose them in a completely stupid way, like charging against an enemy). In 40k you win more, by watching the fire of youre units, to know when you need to back down (loosing a squad on 40k is way more heavy and dangerous than loosing a unit or a fist full of units on starcraft).

Both are great games, one for newcomers (not saying starcraft is easy all the time... its multiplayer provides a worthy challenge sometimes with lots of interesting approaches on how to win), and one for the more heavy rts players (if you find a worthy challenger in 40k you could have very long matches!! xD).

Loved the art styles and how both games look similiar in what comes to races ;D

 

[teebeeohh]

Captain obvious strikes again.

 

[Lunar Templar]

I think the internet is well aware of this connection and has been for quite some time.

Your point?

I would challenge that. I saw a post on the topic about the trailer for space marine basically decrying it for being the distillation of everything terrible about the genre "They've even called it Space Marine! How much more unoriginal can you get." I had to explain that Space Marines pre-date any of the pale bastards that dare take the name.

Gamers have this weird thing about games where being the 1st to do something is for some reason really important, whereas being a copy, even if a BETTER copy is somehow inferior.

The way I look at it, Starcraft takes a concept like tabletop gaming and makes it cheaper and user-friendly. And they were massively successful with it. Yeah, 40K came first, but 1st doesn't mean that you are the best.

not always the best , I prefer 40K to SC, due in part to the lore, what little of it I've read, mind you, i claim to know not a whole lot about 40K, but enough to find it better then SC, but that's beside the point.

and really, dose the similarity even matter any more? 40K has its own (better IMO) games, and more over, more then just one kind of game, where as SC is just an RTS, hell even the RTS 40K plays way differently then SC (hell yes to no time wasting farming BS in single player) so ... why do we need to keep going on about this?

 

[weker]

I never really saw the Eldar = Protoss connection though. Protoss are way tougher than flimsy space elves.

Take note of their long heads, slender bodies, physic like powers, love of blades, and general seer themes (acting like sooth sayers and spirit guides)

 

[Irony's Acolyte]

Please don't be a troll... please don't be a troll... please don't be a troll...

Look, Starcraft no doubt took some influence from 40k but it is not a carbon copy (especially not because a few things look similar). Plus, it isn't like 40k is totally original in and of itself. Eldar are space elves, 'Nids are Xenomorphs from the Alien series, and Space Marines are influenced by Starship Trooper.

This argument has been done to death. Can we all just avoid the flame war and accept that they're similar but aren't rip-off of each other, but two separate universes that have their own content?

 

[Da Orky Man]

Well it depends, are you comparing Starcraft to the tabletop game or to the "video" games. Because from a video game perspective Starcraft was first to appear.

As if. The first 40k game was Space Crusade, released in 1992. How about Vengeance of the Blood Angels, 1995? Or Final Liberation, 1997?
StarCraft was released in 1998.

 

[Freshman]

As a starcraft fan who also plays 40K, your totally on the ball. The toss and eldar are pretty different IMO, and really I don't think the similarities are too big of a deal. They really only copied one unit for the terran ( I guess reaper = assault marine so 2) and practically all of the zerg... but whatever. 40K still has way better fluff.

 

[weker]

Not keen on starcraft as the only good thing about is the fact that its so well balanced, apart from that I find it as a bland basic rts. dawn of war one is good but i find it hard to get to grips with, the second is much better and is a nice spin on the RTS genre.
I dislike that starcraft 2 didn't add anything to the genre.

 

[manythings]

I think the internet is well aware of this connection and has been for quite some time.

Your point?

I would challenge that. I saw a post on the topic about the trailer for space marine basically decrying it for being the distillation of everything terrible about the genre "They've even called it Space Marine! How much more unoriginal can you get." I had to explain that Space Marines pre-date any of the pale bastards that dare take the name.

Gamers have this weird thing about games where being the 1st to do something is for some reason really important, whereas being a copy, even if a BETTER copy is somehow inferior.

The way I look at it, Starcraft takes a concept like tabletop gaming and makes it cheaper and user-friendly. And they were massively successful with it. Yeah, 40K came first, but 1st doesn't mean that you are the best.

I played starcraft and was mostly unimpressed. It was ok but not the insane orgasmfest that it's supposed to be. Dawn of War 1+2 are far better.

 

[manythings]

I think the internet is well aware of this connection and has been for quite some time.

Your point?

I would challenge that. I saw a post on the topic about the trailer for space marine basically decrying it for being the distillation of everything terrible about the genre "They've even called it Space Marine! How much more unoriginal can you get." I had to explain that Space Marines pre-date any of the pale bastards that dare take the name.

Erm, what? You're challenging what exactly? I never said anything about who was first or anything about Space Marine or the originally of either title. I was merely pointing out that this thread has been done to death and is pretty pointless.

I was challenging that people are well aware that Starcraft is picking over Warhammer 40K territory since so many don't know that 40K is far, far older.