POLL: Dota 2 or League of Legends?


Dota 2 or LOL  

117 members have voted

  1. 1. Which to start playing?

    • Dota 2
      50
    • League of Legends
      42


Recommended Posts

I will concede that. I mispoke this and the truth is not that it doesn't have junglers, but that junglers are not required nor are they as prevalent.

And I accept corrections. What I know of Dota is what I have heard, viewed and played. I apologize for making incorrect statements and I appreciate your correcting me (which I have addressed above).

If you need corrections to such a BASIC thing, as I said, you have no idea about these games to make any comment. Please, stop embarrassing yourself.

No, in context my statement was that it didn't fix the problems I have with Dota, seeing as it is its sequel. Other Moba's also try too heard to replicate Dota (HoN) for example and instead of creating a fun atmosphere end up with a very tense and unforgiving one where the burden of knowledge is of greater influence than your actual skill level at times. I don't enjoy a game where simply not knowing about something the game never tells you about means you are at a severe disadvantage. Dota is considered more skillful because it is the "deeper" game. But I don't think how much you have to know to be able to play the game should necessarily be the only kind of depth measured. Nor does knowledge directly reflect skill. The more knowledge dictates the game, the less influence skill plays. At least that's my experience with every game. Sure, you can't eliminate the fact that knowing how to play will always net an advantage but you can curb that effect. When I sat down and tried to learn Dota 2, even after 10 games I still felt lost even with friends explaining things to me. Much of the game felt redundant and bogged down my experience. I felt like, in comparison to League where I could easily jump in and play, I was juggling 10 different things and wasn't paying attention to actually playing. That can be a downside if the game gets in the way of its own experience. There are very few games where the burden of knowledge factor didn't stop me from playing (EVE, Chromehounds) and that's because of an incredibly constructive and helpful community. I haven't found that in Dota 2.

As I said, there is nothing to fix. Dota is constantly evolving at its own pace and it will continue to do so. Dota is not changed for the sake of change.

Dota is about skill, knowledge, the ability to process that knowledge in split second and turn it in to skill. That is why we love Dota. Don't preach your meaningless/uninformed ideas about changing what made Dota such immensely popular.

You like games where you can jump in and play? good for you. Go play LoL. It is a casual game for casual people like you. We do not care.

We care about a game that is competitive and intense. Where every split second counts. Every little decision/action has its consequences etc etc.

I just don't enjoy people claiming a game is better because it is harder to play. I couldn't car eless about a game "taking skill" relative to other games. The difference between two players is measure within that game, not across multiple games so what it comes down to is whether or not a game gets in the way of a player. I feel LoL gets in a player's way less than Dota.

I did not claim one game is better than other. I merely pointed out the differences. But you seem to take it as bashing.

On the other hand, you are the one constantly bashing Dota/Dota2* and promoting LoL. Superiority complex much?

* You do not even understand the purpose of Dota 2 and that's why you keep saying "it didn't fix the game."

Valve/Riot's respective buisness models.

I hate Riot's business model. Pay 2 Win is the worst **** possible.

Note: this has no relation with the actual game itself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That doesn't make my argument wrong. Just because WoW and EVE aren't Moba's doesn't change the fact that 30 million play the supposedly simple WoW over the extremely complex yet amazingly deep EVE Online (which has around 400,000). My point is complexity does not beget better, nor does making things more difficult to do mean it is any better at determining a player's skill. As long as the playing field is even between two players their skill levels will be evident. You don't need a deep game to determine that. Just a balanced one.

Yes, it does. Because you're making a totally asinine comparison.

You're comparing a space-based ship/fleet combat MMO, to a character based fantasy MMO built on an already popular setting. And then trying to draw a parallel to two similar, competing games. You've gone so far beyond apples and oranges at this point, you're at Apples, Oranges and Pineapples.

The balance argument isn't exactly in your favour either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you need corrections to such a BASIC thing, as I said, you have no idea about these games to make any comment. Please, stop embarrassing yourself.

Well, apparently Dota 2 initially didn't have any jungling. So my statement wasn't entirely wrong. It has been a while since I played Dota 2.

As I said, there is nothing to fix. Dota is constantly evolving at its own pace and it will continue to do so. Dota is not changed for the sake of change.

Dota is about skill, knowledge, the ability to process that knowledge in split second and turn it in to skill. That is why we love Dota. Don't preach your meaningless/uninformed ideas about changing what made Dota such immensely popular.

You like games where you can jump in and play? good for you. Go play LoL. It is a casual game for casual people like you. We do not care.

We care about a game that is competitive and intense. Where every split second counts. Every little decision/action has its consequences etc etc.

This is my point, the assumption that because Dota is harder it is a better game. This is a fallacy. Just because something is more difficult doesn't make it better. You practically accuse LoL of being "casual", as if it can't be just as "hard core" when played in a competitive manner. Why is a game automatically at a disadvantage just because they made it easier to get into? That is an elitist, hard-core PC gamer viewpoint. You claim that the complexity of the game is what made it "immensley popular". Well, the simplicity of League coupled with the dynamics that simplicity brings (ap vs ad, jungle buffs, multiple builds on champions, runes, masteries, etc) have made the game incredibly popular. In fact, the most popular game in the world. Yet that's because it is "casual", which is bad for some reason.

I did not claim one game is better than other. I merely pointed out the differences. But you seem to take it as bashing.

On the other hand, you are the one constantly bashing Dota/Dota2* and promoting LoL. Superiority complex much?

* You do not even understand the purpose of Dota 2 and that's why you keep saying "it didn't fix the game."

This is the thing, I have stated there was a particular aspect of the game I didn't like that Dota 2 didn't really change. The game is overcomplicated on of being so fast paced you barely have time to make an "intelligent" decision. Sort of like the difference between a twitch shooter and an arcade shooter. Twitch play is highly based on muscle memory and practice rather than tactical decision making. That is the experience I get with dota, twitch Moba. LoL is a bit slower, but the decisions you make are very tactical in nature. You can switch run pages/masteries in champion select based on your lane opponent and because of its slower pace you have time to think some things out before enacting them. You may say this is too "easy", but I prefer to not lose just because my "muscle memory" isn't as fast as the other guy.

On the other end, you've constantly accused LoL of being simpler, or "casual" and in the context that you have used it this is a negative accusation. So yes, out of the gate you are saying Dota 2 is better because LoL is casual.

I hate Riot's business model. Pay 2 Win is the worst **** possible.

Except its not pay 2 win. In fact, you can't even pay to win. Runes are the only thing you "pay" for, and they are ONLY available with in-game currency which is earned from playing matches. Which means you have to PLAY 2 WIN.

Yes, it does. Because you're making a totally asinine comparison.

You're comparing a space-based ship/fleet combat MMO, to a character based fantasy MMO built on an already popular setting. And then trying to draw a parallel to two similar, competing games. You've gone so far beyond apples and oranges at this point, you're at Apples, Oranges and Pineapples.

The comparison isn't the thing you should be getting caught up on. Its the point. If you would like to make an actual counter argument then please, by all means tell an example where people flocked to complexity over a simpler alternative. Heck, Civilization V was heavily simplified from its predecessors and it was on the top of the Steam played list for a long time.

The balance argument isn't exactly in your favour either.

What? I never mentioned one or the other being balanced. I'm saying the difficulty of a game isn't a factor for determining who is more skillful within the game, just whether or not that game puts them on a level playing field. How does that not work in my favor? Are you suggesting that LoL is more unbalanced that Dota 2? Cause honestly I don't know which is more balanced.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another point to make, how come if League of Legends is bad in some people's opinion, they still achieved these great numbers ?

http://majorleagueof...infographic.png

I didn't know anyone said League of Legends is bad. It's just a matter of preference. The games are based on the MOBA formula but differ in other areas. In the case of Dota 2, it's a harder game to play for newbies. Also, comparing the two games now is a little unfair because LoL has been out since October 2009. And Dota 2 was announced a year later in October 2010 (and unveiled in the summer of 2011 at Gamescom).

It's October 2012 and the game is still in a closed beta test phase (meaning, you'll need an invite to play). It's also the most-played game on Steam which is really good considering it hasn't been opened up to everyone yet.

168isjl.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The comparison isn't the thing you should be getting caught up on. Its the point. If you would like to make an actual counter argument then please, by all means tell an example where people flocked to complexity over a simpler alternative. Heck, Civilization V was heavily simplified from its predecessors and it was on the top of the Steam played list for a long time.

You have no point because your comparison was utterly absurd, thus invalidating any point you were trying to make.

Let's stop with the stupid comparisons to other genres and stick to the Dota genre, kay?

What? I never mentioned one or the other being balanced. I'm saying the difficulty of a game isn't a factor for determining who is balanced within the game, just whether or not that game puts them on a level playing field. How does that not work in my favor? Are you suggesting that LoL is more unbalanced that Dota 2? Cause honestly I don't know which is more balanced.

With a restricted hero pool? Yeah, I am.

Heck, LoL's Pick/Ban phase is basically irrelevant, with teams using the bans to either spell out their team initials or such gems as "ASS" and "GAY".

The game puts the buisness model first, and it shows.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, apparently Dota 2 initially didn't have any jungling. So my statement wasn't entirely wrong. It has been a while since I played Dota 2.

Please. Stop. Embarrassing. Yourself.

Except its not pay 2 win. In fact, you can't even pay to win. Runes are the only thing you "pay" for, and they are ONLY available with in-game currency which is earned from playing matches. Which means you have to PLAY 2 WIN.

It is common knowledge that new heroes are released overpowered and only available thru payment. It is not bluntly pay 2 win, but subtle.

As for rest of your post, keep babbling. I have no interest in those subjects.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have no point because your comparison was utterly absurd, thus invalidating any point you were trying to make.

Let's stop with the stupid comparisons to other genres and stick to the Dota genre, kay?

Alright, but also keep in mind that Dota isn't a genre, its a game. The term is Moba (if we are going to be focusing on correcting people). Still, you've again avoided my question through a fallacy. Please answer this: tell an example where people flocked to complexity over a simpler alternative.

With a restricted hero pool? Yeah, I am.

Heck, LoL's Pick/Ban phase is basically irrelevant, with teams using the bans to either spell out their team initials or such gems as "ASS" and "GAY".

The game puts the buisness model first, and it shows.

You've never played LoL. This comment is a joke. Bans exist to allow players to self-balance the game by eliminating counterpicks and currently broken champions (due to the constant patches, reworks and added champions which change the pool). If you think they are just decoration you are horribly mistaken.

Please. Stop. Embarrassing. Yourself.

This came from a Dota 2 player, so he is embarrassing himself not me.

It is common knowledge that new heroes are released overpowered and only available thru payment. It is not bluntly pay 2 win, but subtle.

Apparently common knowledge outside LoL cause it is flat out wrong. Every champion is currently released with a 6300IP (currency earned through playing) cost and a 975RP (currency purchased with money) cost with a skin bundle which is the ONLY thing not buyable with IP (cause all aesthetics in LoL are cash bought only and have 0 effect on gameplay). You can own every champion and every rune in the game, even the newest ones, without spending a dime.

Newest champ w/ both RP and IP cost

c0z8F.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alright, but also keep in mind that Dota isn't a genre, its a game. The term is Moba (if we are going to be focusing on correcting people). Still, you've again avoided my question through a fallacy. Please answer this: tell an example where people flocked to complexity over a simpler alternative.

No, MOBA is Riot's crappy proprietary term. ARTS is a better description, but still not ideal.

I've avoided your question because it's a stupid question; that is only answerable if you had two identical games where the only variable was complexity.

You've never played LoL. This comment is a joke. Bans exist to allow players to self-balance the game by eliminating counterpicks and currently broken champions (due to the constant patches, reworks and added champions which change the pool). If you think they are just decoration you are horribly mistaken.

If what you said was true, then why do teams ban heroes to spell out their initials and etc? In Dota that would be suicide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, MOBA is Riot's crappy proprietary term. ARTS is a better description, but still not ideal.

I've avoided your question because it's a stupid question; that is only answerable if you had two identical games where the only variable was complexity.

Then apparently to you even the slightest difference in a game makes them incomparable. So what is the point of even having a genre? We can't even compare MOBA/ARTS games according to this conclusion. Or FPS's, or MMO's, or RTS's, or 4X games, or Fighters, or Tower Defense, or Platformers, etc etc etc etc.

That's just stupid. Dota 2, HoN, Dota, LoL, etc all fall within the same mechanical skeleton, theme and objective of gameplay. They are easily comparable, as are any games that share a genre.

If what you said was true, then why do teams ban heroes to spell out their initials and etc? In Dota that would be suicide.

So one instance of this happening apparently makes every ban pick ever pointless? Just because one team was cocky? FYI, all three of those champions are strong picks. It isn't like the arbitrarily banned champions. There are plenty of other ones that could have filled out that anagram that would have been worse. We also don't know if their intention was to actually spell out their name. Things like that happen a lot in banning, such as banning champs with the same splash color, or in a similar order, etc. But to assume that because something quirky like that happens invalidates the process is just absurd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then apparently to you even the slightest difference in a game makes them incomparable. So what is the point of even having a genre? We can't even compare MOBA/ARTS games according to this conclusion. Or FPS's, or MMO's, or RTS's, or 4X games, or Fighters, or Tower Defense, or Platformers, etc etc etc etc.

Yes, the closest reasonable comparision you can make is between LoL and Dota 2, but even in that case you can't draw a reasonable comparison as not only is Dota 2 not "out" yet - but LoL has a significant time lead.

That's just stupid. Dota 2, HoN, Dota, LoL, etc all fall within the same mechanical skeleton, theme and objective of gameplay. They are easily comparable, as are any games that share a genre.

They are easily comparable, yes. But that doesn't mean you can then draw (absurd) comparisons to try and support an argument.

So saying "Dota and LoL both have towers! And LoL's are more powerful!" Fine.

Saying "Call of Duty 4 is a great game because Red Alert 2 has Tesla coils!!!1111" No.

So one instance of this happening apparently makes every ban pick ever pointless? Just because one team was cocky? FYI, all three of those champions are strong picks. It isn't like the arbitrarily banned champions. There are plenty of other ones that could have filled out that anagram that would have been worse. We also don't know if their intention was to actually spell out their name. Things like that happen a lot in banning, such as banning champs with the same splash color, or in a similar order, etc. But to assume that because something quirky like that happens invalidates the process is just absurd.

And the time when they banned "ASS" and "GAY"?

I'm also hearing the same team like to pick heroes which spell MYTSM too. Classy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alright, but also keep in mind that Dota isn't a genre, its a game. The term is Moba (if we are going to be focusing on correcting people).

Dota and other dota-like games are commonly known as "dota-like", "AoS style" etc. Dota is classified as Action RTS. It is not MOBA. I don't care if LoL is MOBA or not.

This came from a Dota 2 player, so he is embarrassing himself not me.

I thought at the start of the thread, you were giving your expert opinions. Now you are arguing with things you heard from someone else. LoL? (pun intended).

Apparently common knowledge outside LoL cause it is flat out wrong. Every champion is currently released with a 6300IP (currency earned through playing) cost and a 975RP (currency purchased with money) cost with a skin bundle which is the ONLY thing not buyable with IP (cause all aesthetics in LoL are cash bought only and have 0 effect on gameplay). You can own every champion and every rune in the game, even the newest ones, without spending a dime.

Newest champ w/ both RP and IP cost

c0z8F.jpg

Earning 6300IP takes like 1 hour I guess :whistle:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, the closest reasonable comparision you can make is between LoL and Dota 2, but even in that case you can't draw a reasonable comparison as not only is Dota 2 not "out" yet - but LoL has a significant time lead.

Um, no. If Dota "doesn't need fixing" then Dota 2 should have a significant lead over LoL. How long two games have been out has little bearing on the design principles used behind each game. I doubt Dota 2 will change as drastically as LoL did over the years unless the community asks for it. And if it does change to a more LoL style then this argument would be over.

They are easily comparable, yes. But that doesn't mean you can then draw (absurd) comparisons to try and support an argument.

So saying "Dota and LoL both have towers! And LoL's are more powerful!" Fine.

Saying "Call of Duty 4 is a great game because Red Alert 2 has Tesla coils!!!1111" No.

I haven't drawn a single absurd comparison. I've made analogies, but no absurd comparisons.

And the time when they banned "ASS" and "GAY"?

I'm also hearing the same team like to pick heroes which spell MYTSM too. Classy.

And lets see what you can ban for those in LoL.

A - Ahri (strong), Akali (hyper carry), Alistar (Top Ban), Amumu, Anivia, Annie (strong), Ashe

S - Sejuani, Shaco, Shen (top ban), Shyvana (strong), Singed, Sion, Sivir, Skarner (strong), Sona, Soraka (strong), Swain (strong), Syndra (strong)

S - Sejuani, Shaco, Shen (top ban), Shyvana (strong), Singed, Sion, Sivir, Skarner (strong), Sona, Soraka (strong), Swain (strong), Syndra (strong)

G - Galio (strong, Gangplank (strong), Garen, Gragas (very strong), Graves (one of the top 3 AD carries)

A - Ahri (strong), Akali (hyper carry), Alistar (Top Ban), Amumu, Anivia, Annie (strong), Ashe

Y - Yorick (probably THE best top laner atm)

M - Malphite (top ban), Malzahar (strong), Maokai, Master Yi, Miss Fortune, Mordekaiser, Morgana (top ban)

Y - Yorick (probably THE best top laner)

T - Talon, Taric (one of the top 3 supports), Teemo (strong), Tristana (strong), Trundle (very strong), Tryndamere (hyper carry), Twisted Fate (strong), Twitch

S - Sejuani, Shaco, Shen (top ban), Shyvana (strong), Singed, Sion, Sivir, Skarner (strong), Sona, Soraka (strong), Swain (strong), Syndra (strong)

M - See above

Oooh, the spelled something funny OMG. Yet in every one of those there are worthy bans. Do you even remember what they were banning?

Dota and other dota-like games are commonly known as "dota-like", "AoS style" etc. Dota is classified as Action RTS. It is not MOBA. I don't care if LoL is MOBA or not.

Who gives two ****s what its called so long as we know what we are talking about? You obviously know that when I say Moba (Multiplayer Online Battle Arena) that I'm talking about Dota like games, or Action RTS's, etc. There is no point in making a big deal of it and I don't see why you guys are so stuck up on this completely pointless argument. If you can make one argument as to why you cannot classify Dota as a Multiplayer Online Battle Arena game then by all means do so. But in the end they are still synonyms.

I thought at the start of the thread, you were giving your expert opinions. Now you are arguing with things you heard from someone else. LoL? (pun intended).

First off, who said I was an "expert". I'm just another player who's giving his opinion, as are you. We don't need to be experts to discuss a game. And yes, a Dota 2 player said there was no jungling in Dota 2 initially, it took time before people attempted to do that in real games. But he's played much more Dota 2 than I have so I can't really say one way or the other. But I get the feeling you aren't interested in that, more so in just pointing out irrelevant things to try and downplay my statements.

Earning 6300IP takes like 1 hour I guess :whistle:

I did just prove you wrong, so now you're going to point out it takes a while and completely avoid the fact that much of what makes the game "competetive" (ie Runes) are only available through playing the game. This doesn't change that everyone is on equal footing past level 30. Everyone has the same capacity to build rune pages, in fact you can even look at another player's runes post match and buy the same page. There are no secrets kept in LoL. It's not as shady or slanted as you make it out to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Um, no. If Dota "doesn't need fixing" then Dota 2 should have a significant lead over LoL. How long two games have been out has little bearing on the design principles used behind each game. I doubt Dota 2 will change as drastically as LoL did over the years unless the community asks for it. And if it does change to a more LoL style then this argument would be over.

Are you really so biased towards Riot you can't even see the glaring flaw in your statement? Dota 2 is both unreleased and unfinished, it's not F2P.

I haven't drawn a single absurd comparison. I've made analogies, but no absurd comparisons.

Okay then, you've made utterly absurd analogies. Happy now?

And lets see what you can ban for those in LoL.

<snip>

Oooh, the spelled something funny OMG. Yet in every one of those there are worthy bans. Do you even remember what they were banning?

So what you're saying is LoL's hero pool is so bloated and homogenised it doesn't matter who they pick/ban. Got it.

I did just prove you wrong, so now you're going to point out it takes a while and completely avoid the fact that much of what makes the game "competetive" (ie Runes) are only available through playing the game. This doesn't change the fact that everyone is on equal footing past level 30. Everyone has the same capacity to build rune pages, in fact you can even look at another player's runes post match and buy the same page. There are no secrets kept in LoL. It's not as shady or slanted as you make it out to be.

So LoL has a large barrier to entry, and requires you to reach for your wallet or arbitrarily grind to gain an equal footing. Doesn't sound very newbie friendly to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you really so biased towards Riot you can't even see the glaring flaw in your statement? Dota 2 is both unreleased and unfinished, it's not F2P.

So your saying because it is unfinished it is pointless to even compare it? That sounds relatively stupid. Unless we assume that what Dota 2 currently is has a high chance of completely and utterly changing by its release. Which I doubt. In fact, nothing I have brought up even touches on specifics so this point is a non-issue.

Okay then, you've made utterly absurd analogies. Happy now?

No, I am not. Calling them absurd is easy. Pointing out WHY they are absurd isn't so much. I've made perfectly valid analogies and your argument was about how Dota wasn't an MMO so the analogy didn't work. Isn't that the point of an analogy? To make a comparison using a different context to demonstrate your meaning? I compared two MMO's, one that was hardcore vs. one that was more casual (relative to each other) to represent the difference between Dota 2 and LoL. Now I admit the genres are entirely different, so I made another comparison between MW3 and CS1.6 (MW3 being casual, CS1.6 being hardcore). So both of these are completely absurd analogs to LoL and Dota 2?

So what you're saying is LoL's hero pool is so bloated and homogenised it doesn't matter who they pick/ban. Got it.

/facepalm

So LoL has a large barrier to entry, and requires you to reach for your wallet or arbitrarily grind to gain an equal footing. Doesn't sound very newbie friendly to me.

You just don't get it. Between levels 1-30 you earn just as much IP as anyone else. While leveling you are matched with like levels. 1-1, 2-2, 3-3, etc as best the game can manage. Everyone at those levels has similar experience and IP to buy champions, runes, etc and as they level they unlock the same Summoner spells and Mastery points. When you hit 30 you have bought several champions, gotten experience in the game, completely earned your mastery tree and perhaps purchased a full rune page of tier 3 runes. None of which costs ANY money. I didn't spend a dime in LoL till I was level 30, and that was only to buy champion bundles (for a cheaper skin). Have you even played this game?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So your saying because it is unfinished it is pointless to even compare it? That sounds relatively stupid. Unless we assume that what Dota 2 currently is has a high chance of completely and utterly changing by its release. Which I doubt. In fact, nothing I have brought up even touches on specifics so this point is a non-issue.

Yes? Do I really have to explain to you why it's unfair to compare an established F2P game, to a game that has only been available via beta invite until recently - where the ability to buy-in for a fairly high price was added, with F2P following some point in the future?

And I'd say yes, Dota 2 will almost certainly have a serious amount of change by release. When they finally are done porting Medusa, Slark, Centaur Warchief, Troll Warlord, Tuskarr, Pit Lord, Terrorblade, Techies, Phoenix... Do I really need to go on?

Dear lord man, I get that you're heavily biased towards Riot but jeez. You're not even using your brain at this point.

No, I am not. Calling them absurd is easy. Pointing out WHY they are absurd isn't so much. I've made perfectly valid analogies and your argument was about how Dota wasn't an MMO so the analogy didn't work. Isn't that the point of an analogy? To make a comparison using a different context to demonstrate your meaning? I compared two MMO's, one that was hardcore vs. one that was more casual (relative to each other) to represent the difference between Dota 2 and LoL. Now I admit the genres are entirely different, so I made another comparison between MW3 and CS1.6 (MW3 being casual, CS1.6 being hardcore). So both of these are completely absurd analogs to LoL and Dota 2?

The point of an analogy is to make a comparison between two similar but seperate entities that has value by simplifying the explanation of a concept.

That does not include making silly comparisons between different games in different genres where there are a myriad of different variables at play that could account for why one game is more popular than another. Mentioning CS1.6 is a particular poor choice, as that game has an insane following for it's age. Shot yourself in the foot on that one.

You just don't get it. Between levels 1-30 you earn just as much IP as anyone else. While leveling you are matched with like levels. 1-1, 2-2, 3-3, etc as best the game can manage. Everyone at those levels has similar experience and IP to buy champions, runes, etc and as they level they unlock the same Summoner spells and Mastery points. When you hit 30 you have bought several champions, gotten experience in the game, completely earned your mastery tree and perhaps purchased a full rune page of tier 3 runes. None of which costs ANY money. I didn't spend a dime in LoL till I was level 30, and that was only to buy champion bundles (for a cheaper skin). Have you even played this game?

LoL places barriers to entry to support it's buisness model, Dota 2 does not. Simple as that. You grind or you pay, that's poor form.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes? Do I really have to explain to you why it's unfair to compare an established F2P game, to a game that has only been available via beta invite until recently - where the ability to buy-in for a fairly high price was added, with F2P following some point in the future?

And I'd say yes, Dota 2 will almost certainly have a serious amount of change by release. When they finally are done porting Medusa, Slark, Centaur Warchief, Troll Warlord, Tuskarr, Pit Lord, Terrorblade, Techies, Phoenix... Do I really need to go on?

Mechanics will not change. Balance, maybe, but not the core mechanics. The game is effectively out, and I doubt from here on there will be drastic changes to the way it plays unless the community requests it or they change their minds and decide to move farther from the traditional Dota formula. Beta maybe be subject to change, but this isn't an Alpha build. Most of the way the game works is in place and is being fine-tuned through data gathering from those participating in the game. You are overestimating the amount of change that can happen once the game has hit an open state.

Dear lord man, I get that you're heavily biased towards Riot but jeez. You're not even using your brain at this point.

I'm the biased one? With comments like "So you're telling me that the champion list is so bloated that banning doesn't matter? Got it." you've taken that trophy. There is a difference between addressing the point and dismissing it without even trying (you are doing the latter). You accuse LoL bans of being pointless, I show you they aren't, then you swap your story and assume that it doesn't matter who you ban because there are just too many champions. Fallacy, fallacy, fallacy.

The point of an analogy is to make a comparison between two similar but seperate entities that has value by simplifying the explanation of a concept.

That does not include making silly comparisons between different games in different genres where there are a myriad of different variables at play that could account for why one game is more popular than another. Mentioning CS1.6 is a particular poor choice, as that game has an insane following for it's age. Shot yourself in the foot on that one.

That's called "taking things too literally". You think the comparisons are bad because you are overanalyzing the comparison rather than viewing it in context. It is easy to even take the "apples to apples" statement and rip it apart for what it is considering there are many kinds of apples. But in the end of the day they are both apples, and Apples and Oranges are both fruits. The comparison is relative to the subject of the analogy but if you'd rather get caught up in specifics then by all means continue chasing your red-herring.

Also:

- CS1.6 - 57,000 give or take

- CS: Source - 37,000 give or take

- MW3 - 3,000,000 give or take

LoL places barriers to entry to support it's buisness model, Dota 2 does not. Simple as that. You grind or you pay, that's poor form.

You are flat out wrong. I am sorry, but this is just false. There is no barrier that cannot be bypassed without cash. I've explained it to you best I can, but you seem determined to just throw it aside. And you call me biased.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mechanics will not change. Balance, maybe, but not the core mechanics. The game is effectively out, and I doubt from here on there will be drastic changes to the way it plays unless the community requests it or they change their minds and decide to move farther from the traditional Dota formula. Beta maybe be subject to change, but this isn't an Alpha build. Most of the way the game works is in place and is being fine-tuned through data gathering from those participating in the game. You are overestimating the amount of change that can happen once the game has hit an open state.

Are you incapable of reading? I just explained to you exactly why Dota 2 is not "effectively" out.

And honestly, if you think hero additions in Dota are strictly balance changes only, you evidently haven't spent any effort in trying to play Dota. Rubick, Wisp and Lone Druid are all prime examples of this.

I'm the biased one? With comments like "So you're telling me that the champion list is so bloated that banning doesn't matter? Got it." you've taken that trophy. There is a difference between addressing the point and dismissing it without even trying (you are doing the latter). You accuse LoL bans of being pointless, I show you they aren't, then you swap your story and assume that it doesn't matter who you ban because there are just too many champions. Fallacy, fallacy, fallacy.

You showed me LoL's pool is nothing but "strong" heroes that can be picked/banned interchangeably.

That's called "taking things too literally". You think the comparisons are bad because you are overanalyzing the comparison rather than viewing it in context. It is easy to even take the "apples to apples" statement and rip it apart for what it is considering there are many kinds of apples. But in the end of the day they are both apples, and Apples and Oranges are both fruits. The comparison is relative to the subject of the analogy but if you'd rather get caught up in specifics then by all means continue chasing your red-herring.

No, it just sucked full stop. You made a(n admittedly) dumb comparison between EVE and WoW, then dug the hole deeper by referencing MW3/CS1.6, where the favour in the latter is towards my side of the argument because CS1.6 has vastly higher numbers while also having been out for longer than the entire CoD series has existed.

Please, stop digging.

You are flat out wrong. I am sorry, but this is just false. There is no barrier that cannot be bypassed without cash. I've explained it to you best I can, but you seem determined to just throw it aside. And you call me biased.

No, you're just incapable of reading. I never said that you were forced to use cash, I said you were forced to use cash or grind. Dota 2 gives you the entire pool from the start, that's all there is to be said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you incapable of reading? I just explained to you exactly why Dota 2 is not "effectively" out.

And honestly, if you think hero additions in Dota are strictly balance changes only, you evidently haven't spent any effort in trying to play Dota. Rubick, Wisp and Lone Druid are all prime examples of this.

Since when did a hero addition change the mechanics of the base game? Did they have to move towers around the map? Change the map size? Remove other heros? Add more creeps? How in god's name did hero additions completely alter the game? What mechanics were removed and added from the game as a result of their additions that were not specific to the hero's themselves?

You showed me LoL's pool is nothing but "strong" heroes that can be picked/banned interchangeably.

No, that was a list of ALL the champions in that list, not all of them being good bans. I labelled the ones that can be good bans and the ones that are top bans (which was roughly 1/3-1/2 of the list for each letter).

No, it just sucked full stop. You made a(n admittedly) dumb comparison between EVE and WoW, then dug the hole deeper by referencing MW3/CS1.6, where the favor in the latter is towards my side of the argument because CS1.6 has vastly higher numbers while also having been out for longer than the entire CoD series has existed.

Please, stop digging.

You obviously can't read your own graph. That was the number of people playing steam, not for Counter Strike 1.6 alone. Eve and WoW have genre differences and MW3 does, in fact, have a vastly larger playerbase than 1.6 ever had or does have.

No, you're just incapable of reading. I never said that you were forced to use cash, I said you were forced to use cash or grind. Dota 2 gives you the entire pool from the start, that's all there is to be said.

From you:

LoL places barriers to entry to support it's buisness model, Dota 2 does not. Simple as that. You grind or you pay, that's poor form.

Now you didn't specifically say that, but in the end you make it sound like the only way to be even is to pay which is untrue. In fact, LoL has one of the best f2p models in the industry where nothing that actually effects gameplay is purchasable with real money. The only thing that you can buy is Skins and Champions (which not all of the are 6300IP, and have been reduced in IP pricing many times). In fact, 10 of the champions in the game can be bought with less than 4 wins, or less than 7 losses (so in 45 hours you can own 10 champions and lose every match). You don't even need to own every champion to be competitive. You just need a good pool of them. You only need 15 champions available to play Ranked matches in League as well, so by the time you hit 30 you should have more than 10 champions anyways. Also don't forget the fact that 10 champions are free every week, so even without a champion at the start you have 10 to pick from for the week and it rotates, allowing players to try their champions before spending their earned currency on them.

I don't understand where you think there is this huge, tedious and unfriendly barrier for players. Would you rather they spend time learning the game or be unwittingly thrown at players already in the mix and have been for a long time? What's more "fair"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since when did a hero addition change the mechanics of the base game? Did they have to move towers around the map? Change the map size? Remove other heros? Add more creeps? How in god's name did hero additions completely alter the game? What mechanics were removed and added from the game as a result of their additions that were not specific to the hero's themselves?

Oh, I don't know. When you can steal the opposing team's abilities, tether to another hero and teleport both of you to anywhere on the map, oh and buying items on your bear familiar that let you farm/push another lane remotely.

And it doesn't even stop there.

No, that was a list of ALL the champions in that list, not all of them being good bans. I labelled the ones that can be good bans and the ones that are top bans (which was roughly 1/3-1/2 of the list for each letter).

Strong, strong, strong, strong, strong, strong, strong.

You obviously can't read your own graph. That was the number of people playing steam, not for Counter Strike 1.6 alone. Eve and WoW have genre differences and MW3 does, in fact, have a vastly larger playerbase than 1.6 ever had or does have.

Clearly you are blind, because I hate to break it to you but:

Current / Peak

51,015 53,109 Counter-Strike

31,813 33,371 Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3 - Multiplayer

Now you didn't specifically say that, but in the end you make it sound like the only way to be even is to pay which is untrue. In fact, LoL has one of the best f2p models in the industry where nothing that actually effects gameplay is purchasable with real money. The only thing that you can buy is Skins and Champions (which not all of the are 6300IP, and have been reduced in IP pricing many times). In fact, 10 of the champions in the game can be bought with less than 4 wins, or less than 7 losses (so in 45 hours you can own 10 champions and lose every match). You don't even need to own every champion to be competitive. You just need a good pool of them. You only need 15 champions available to play Ranked matches in League as well, so by the time you hit 30 you should have more than 10 champions anyways. Also don't forget the fact that 10 champions are free every week, so even without a champion at the start you have 10 to pick from for the week and it rotates, allowing players to try their champions before spending their earned currency on them.

Don't try and backpedal now, I clearly said pay -OR- grind. It's not my problem you didn't read it correctly the first time.

I don't understand where you think there is this huge, tedious and unfriendly barrier for players. Would you rather they spend time learning the game or be unwittingly thrown at players already in the mix and have been for a long time? What's more "fair"?

I'd rather they be given the entire game mechanically, with a basic tutorial and a practice mode with bots. Which Dota 2 does 2/3, with the tutorial still WiP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, I don't know. When you can steal the opposing team's abilities, tether to another hero and teleport both of you to anywhere on the map, oh and buying items on your bear familiar that let you farm/push another lane remotely.

And it doesn't even stop there.

Then you are incorrect. These things happen in League whenever a new champion is released which something slightly more quirky than usual. Items only buyable by specific champions. Characters that can teleport across maps or disappear in bushes. Champions that can swap places, two you across the map, have a reverse mana bar, etc. Do these change the fundamentals of the game? No. They are just new, her/item specific mechanics that shake things up a bit. You could have or not have them in the game and it would still be Dota.

Strong, strong, strong, strong, strong, strong, strong.

/facepalm

Clearly you are blind, because I hate to break it to you but:

Current / Peak

51,015 53,109 Counter-Strike

31,813 33,371 Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3 - Multiplayer

Yeah, on Steam. Where is MW3's playerbase? The CONSOLES.

Don't try and backpedal now, I clearly said pay -OR- grind. It's not my problem you didn't read it correctly the first time.

That's true, you didn't. Crimson Rain did, which is what I was mentioning.

It is common knowledge that new heroes are released overpowered and only available thru payment. It is not bluntly pay 2 win, but subtle.

I'd rather they be given the entire game mechanically, with a basic tutorial and a practice mode with bots. Which Dota 2 does 2/3, with the tutorial still WiP.

Burden. Of. Knowledge. I'd rather players learn the game before getting tossed into advanced tactics immediately. Especially if they don't have teammates that are helping them out. I am an advocate of learning the hard way but not at the expense of others. Throwing everything at someone right away gives them so many options that many will blank out and not know what to do. This has nothing to do with a tutorial. The only reason you guys are ok with no levels/progression through the game is because you are seasoned Dota players and already understand the game. That doesn't help new players. Everyone has to start somewhere and starting them in an arena with seasoned players is the fastest way to get them to quit the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.