Space Marine "Rips Off" Gears of War
- Thread starter Soviet Heavy
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Nope. In fact the first Space Marines were the Crimson Fists, they were the force that started off the franchise. By 2nd ed the Ultramarines got their own codex (but it was like the modern Space Marine codex which it would be used for most of the chapters) but during 2nd ed it was the Blood Angels that were the frontmen, it wasn't until 3rd ed that the Ultra's became the front men and they have been ever since.tycho0042 said:
I'm stating my opinions on the matter the way a person should, not cruise control for cool with their caps lock stating random facts that probably aren't even true. Maybe I am a bit serious, but that's the point of discussing, if you wanna troll and look stupid, you can do it somewhere else .-.Waaghpowa said:
I know how to settle this. A fight between the Space Marines and the characters from Gears of War. We all know exactly who would win and it would shut up these stupid comparisons.
I really don't see why they must continuously compare these two games. The only similarity between them is they use the third person camera and the main characters could be classified as Space Marines. Many games use third person and Warhammer 40K space marines came first.
They are two different franchises and the Gears marines are pussies in comparison to 40K space marines. Beyond all shadow of a doubt Titus would not only defeat Marcus Fenix, he would defeat his entire platoon and he wouldn't need cover or a gun.
I've just read the article(all before this was ranting).
The voice that I found myself reading this in was a bitchy gay mans voice. The multiplayer is not unbalanced. The rest has already been said.
I really don't see why they must continuously compare these two games. The only similarity between them is they use the third person camera and the main characters could be classified as Space Marines. Many games use third person and Warhammer 40K space marines came first.
They are two different franchises and the Gears marines are pussies in comparison to 40K space marines. Beyond all shadow of a doubt Titus would not only defeat Marcus Fenix, he would defeat his entire platoon and he wouldn't need cover or a gun.
I've just read the article(all before this was ranting).
The voice that I found myself reading this in was a bitchy gay mans voice. The multiplayer is not unbalanced. The rest has already been said.
I figured people would get the irony considering many comments regarding this "Ripping off Gears of War" have people mentioning the fact that if something is a TPS that uses cover, therefore it must be ripping off Gears. By that logic, every TPS game is ripping off Max Payne because it did TPS first and you, occassionally, used cover, and so on. I'm well aware that Max Payne isn't the first, but the comment itself was meant to be as absurd as the "Everything ripped off GoW" claims.Spencer Brelje said:
Basically what he said.Magicmad5511 said:
... Every time I hear someone use the word "rip-off", I want to punch them in the face...
This term is so overused.. it lost all meaning... and not only that, in 95% of all cases it's even uncalled for...
It's ok to compare games and point out similarities...although I still think the similarities between Space Marines and Gears of war are only superficial (bulky (space) marines are fighting against humanoid enemies.. oh and there are chainsaw based weapons involved...).
This term is so overused.. it lost all meaning... and not only that, in 95% of all cases it's even uncalled for...
It's ok to compare games and point out similarities...although I still think the similarities between Space Marines and Gears of war are only superficial (bulky (space) marines are fighting against humanoid enemies.. oh and there are chainsaw based weapons involved...).
Having played both games I disagree with the similarity of gameplay. Gears is all about diving for cover and taking potshots at semi distant enemies, Space marine is about emptying a clip or two into foes before charging headlong into the fray and butchering them wholesale. Honestly I feel its closer to god of war in that way than Gears. (although probably closer to devil may cry without the acrobatics)SmashLovesTitanQuest said:
The D-pad quip was entirely petty on the reviewers part, most of the third person shooters on the x-box use the D-pad exactly for that reason. Overall its an enjoyable game, but I think the score is fair, might boost it a bit higer personally but I'm a bit of a 40k fanboy so it wouldn't really count.
They mentioned that you can't stick to cover. ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME!!! SPACE MARINES DON'T NEED COVER!!! THEY JUST NEED THE FURY OF THE EMPEROR!!! Tbh, I think this "review" suffers too much from being a *****. This is a hack and slash mixed in with some 3rd person shooter. Not gears of 40k. Go ***** about how you can't hide behind a wall to someone that has fucks to give. Cause Space Marines never gave fucks. Ever.
Don't have the game yet, but the demo was fucking fun as hell. Catharsis incarnate. Period.
Don't have the game yet, but the demo was fucking fun as hell. Catharsis incarnate. Period.
Bottom line:
Reviewer is a wanker, didn't review the game just posted his hate
40k came first
A good game can be inspired to take aspects from other games
Space marine is only boring if you just mash the melee button like a xbox live child.
Mutliplayer is balanced, it's just some people don't understand how rolling away from melee users works. Because other games don't have it. So they think they can stand there and take the hit.
Reviewer is a wanker, didn't review the game just posted his hate
40k came first
A good game can be inspired to take aspects from other games
Space marine is only boring if you just mash the melee button like a xbox live child.
Mutliplayer is balanced, it's just some people don't understand how rolling away from melee users works. Because other games don't have it. So they think they can stand there and take the hit.
War for Cybertron? Actually, you're damn right! There's more similarity between Space Marine and War for Cybertron than Gears.Tohuvabohu said:
WH40K existed WAY before Gears; it perfected the hulking armoured fucker with vast guns and melee weapons before CliffyB dreamt of a Lancer Assault Rifle. If anything, Gears copied Warhammer!
As for the game, I've played the demo and although there is the vague resemblance to Gears, it's hardly a clone. There's no cover-based action, it encourages melee fighting and ther eis actual, factual colours! Blue Ultramarines! Green Orks! Blood-red Daemons!
The reviewer was clealry very biased, which is a shame. Space Marine deserves to be looked at it for it's own merits alone, not to be compared to a completely different seires with vague resemblances.
Here are the facts:
Gears is not the First FPS, Wolfenstein 3D is considered to be. FPS have evolved over the year but we can make the argument that every FPS "ripped off" Wolfenstein 3D. Heres a great article on the evolution of the FPS http://www.brighthub.com/video-games/pc/articles/2864.aspx .
As for WH40K "rippng off" Gears well, 40K has been around since 1987 with (Then called WH40K Rogue Trader) and I believe that gears took most, if not all, of it's inspiration on content (not gameplay or mechanics) from the WH40K universe. Heres the history of WH40K. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warhammer_40,000
As for the 2 games, well i beleive they are nothing alike with the exception of the chain weapons, the big bulky super humans, and kiling everything in site. one is cover based one is not. Spacemarine is, for me, a great game. I'm a fan of the universe. Im not saying its a 10 of 10, it could use few tweaks. Id give it an 8 or a 9.
Gears is not the First FPS, Wolfenstein 3D is considered to be. FPS have evolved over the year but we can make the argument that every FPS "ripped off" Wolfenstein 3D. Heres a great article on the evolution of the FPS http://www.brighthub.com/video-games/pc/articles/2864.aspx .
As for WH40K "rippng off" Gears well, 40K has been around since 1987 with (Then called WH40K Rogue Trader) and I believe that gears took most, if not all, of it's inspiration on content (not gameplay or mechanics) from the WH40K universe. Heres the history of WH40K. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warhammer_40,000
As for the 2 games, well i beleive they are nothing alike with the exception of the chain weapons, the big bulky super humans, and kiling everything in site. one is cover based one is not. Spacemarine is, for me, a great game. I'm a fan of the universe. Im not saying its a 10 of 10, it could use few tweaks. Id give it an 8 or a 9.
Its OXM, can you expect much more? Most games journalism surround reviews is pretty awful....actually most games journalism is all round awful. The main issue being there is no target demographic. You also have the issue that it seems most children and teens cannot read or write without it being digitally displayed for them. It boils down the fact that the reviewer had no idea of the subject matter and had done no background work, claiming its a clone because it uses the same button layout for weapon selecting? Sorry how many games use Y or Tri to swap weapons? Or how many racing games use the left stick to steer? Yes it may have the same play style as Gears but when was the last time you heard them complaining then yet another CoD game was coming out? Or another football game?
The quality of journalism is in general decline anyway, at the rate people consume information and the rate it is published, and the fact there can be mass up roar for misleading information most websites post exactly what they are told and not much else. Its very easy to put Space Marine in and find what is exactly the same article 100+ times on many websites.
There will come a point for a lot of things where information is directed into a single stream, it happened with newspapers, they originally only reported on specific subject matter now most papers are tabloids reporting on everything from politics to what famous people ate for dinner. It's already happening to an extent on website such as Kotaku, who have for a long time just posted a snippet of information and then link to the original article on another site. Services such as reddit are the same just user powered. Metacritic is the be all and end all of poor journalism. People who use it (out goes the rational argument) should be shot. The idea of collating numbers and not written words, not that they evidently have any value anymore, into one large database to give an overall opinion is ridiculous. It harks to the days of mass societal acceptance! Does this look cool? Well instead of making an informed opinion for myself I will ask a mass of people and then make my decisions that way. I can't wait till someone gets asked to marry someone and it goes as a facebook status asking what the reply should be and a poll vote.
But I digress, (see I told you the rational argument went out of the window didn't I!) The fact is the number system is floored to its very core. Nothing have be represented by a number in depth, "Oh I gave it a 10, the game is awful but wow it look better then real life"...and the devs paid £/$1k to get it. The way to go with games like this are demos, thats what they are for to let you evaluate the game, do you go out and ask is it time to go to the loo before you do so? The issue is devs have become aware that people do listen to reviews and that is why demos are losing momentum and are getting thin on the ground. If you can get a 9 review (from a system that really never goes much lower then a 7) a lot of users will buy it if they have nothing else to go on. If it get a 9 review but the player gets a demo and doesn't like it, not matter what happens they won't buy the game. That is often why demos are more action packed then the game as a whole and often seem to cut abruptly short to leave the player wanting more, they are also often easier then the end game will be to make the player feel more comfortable with the game and get more reward from playing it then they would otherwise receive.
Also +1 reading skill for getting to the end of my post and if you agree with my post you will get an angry nerd available to your landing party
Also nerd trivia here, Contra had 3rd person sections inside enemy bases, you moved through fixed screens, it was amazing (and hard) but it was a 3rd person shooter, in historical terms the first TPS is accepted to be Radar scope (either 78 or 79) an angled top down shooter giving the idea of depth, while by todays standards its known as a fixed shooter (as there are that many games out there and TPS wasn't a term used then) as on one screen (like space invaders) and angle does change it from top down to 3rd person. Devastators in 88 was the first TPS in the way we think of them now, that lovely old coin-op.
The quality of journalism is in general decline anyway, at the rate people consume information and the rate it is published, and the fact there can be mass up roar for misleading information most websites post exactly what they are told and not much else. Its very easy to put Space Marine in and find what is exactly the same article 100+ times on many websites.
There will come a point for a lot of things where information is directed into a single stream, it happened with newspapers, they originally only reported on specific subject matter now most papers are tabloids reporting on everything from politics to what famous people ate for dinner. It's already happening to an extent on website such as Kotaku, who have for a long time just posted a snippet of information and then link to the original article on another site. Services such as reddit are the same just user powered. Metacritic is the be all and end all of poor journalism. People who use it (out goes the rational argument) should be shot. The idea of collating numbers and not written words, not that they evidently have any value anymore, into one large database to give an overall opinion is ridiculous. It harks to the days of mass societal acceptance! Does this look cool? Well instead of making an informed opinion for myself I will ask a mass of people and then make my decisions that way. I can't wait till someone gets asked to marry someone and it goes as a facebook status asking what the reply should be and a poll vote.
But I digress, (see I told you the rational argument went out of the window didn't I!) The fact is the number system is floored to its very core. Nothing have be represented by a number in depth, "Oh I gave it a 10, the game is awful but wow it look better then real life"...and the devs paid £/$1k to get it. The way to go with games like this are demos, thats what they are for to let you evaluate the game, do you go out and ask is it time to go to the loo before you do so? The issue is devs have become aware that people do listen to reviews and that is why demos are losing momentum and are getting thin on the ground. If you can get a 9 review (from a system that really never goes much lower then a 7) a lot of users will buy it if they have nothing else to go on. If it get a 9 review but the player gets a demo and doesn't like it, not matter what happens they won't buy the game. That is often why demos are more action packed then the game as a whole and often seem to cut abruptly short to leave the player wanting more, they are also often easier then the end game will be to make the player feel more comfortable with the game and get more reward from playing it then they would otherwise receive.
Also +1 reading skill for getting to the end of my post and if you agree with my post you will get an angry nerd available to your landing party
Also nerd trivia here, Contra had 3rd person sections inside enemy bases, you moved through fixed screens, it was amazing (and hard) but it was a 3rd person shooter, in historical terms the first TPS is accepted to be Radar scope (either 78 or 79) an angled top down shooter giving the idea of depth, while by todays standards its known as a fixed shooter (as there are that many games out there and TPS wasn't a term used then) as on one screen (like space invaders) and angle does change it from top down to 3rd person. Devastators in 88 was the first TPS in the way we think of them now, that lovely old coin-op.
I'd take it a step further and say that Space Marine is a Doom clone because you are a space marine with guns killing aliens level by level and checkpoint by checkpoint. While I'm at it, Inception is nothing but a Matrix clone and Limey is nothing but a Pulp Fiction clone. Parasyte is a generic manga and Samurai Champloo is a rip off of Samurai X.CrashBang said:
Seriously though, I'd say that it has enough elements to be called its own game. To simply dismiss something as a clone or generic is poor reviewing and a fallacious argument. I'm not saying whether I agree or disagree with you; I just want a better argument.
Also, the magazine's review is crap. As an industry, we have to hold ourselves to a higher level of critique. We are adults, not children.
