League of Legends has over 100 million monthly active players, ~8x larger than Dota 2
- Thread starter Interfectum
- Start date
Dota is first mover.
davepoobond
you can't put a price on sparks
Still have yet to play it. I do feel like an outlier there
Yes but it died along with WC3 ...
since we're on a new page
let's all try to remember that other people's games doing well does not make our game any less successful and that two awesome games can coexist in peace
let's also try and ask ourselves why is it that we care so much about prizepools
saying it's just being first is not only inaccurate but also ignoring the bigger reasons why league is so popular and successful
it might all have been a happy accident but it's undeniable that riot did a ton of smart things that lead to the game's success
- streamlining the most arcane doto mechanics to make a more immediate and action-y game, while still being faithful to its very hardcore this-game-is-most-definitely-not-for-everyone roots
- being extremely communicative and transparent with their community through patches, dev blogs, interactions on forums, etc.
- going hard on esports early on and supporting it through the years
- expanding league through regional rito branches/chinese $$$
reducing the phenomenon that is league to "they just were there first" is just a really bad read on why league became as huge as it did
let's all try to remember that other people's games doing well does not make our game any less successful and that two awesome games can coexist in peace
let's also try and ask ourselves why is it that we care so much about prizepools
but doto existed before league
saying it's just being first is not only inaccurate but also ignoring the bigger reasons why league is so popular and successful
it might all have been a happy accident but it's undeniable that riot did a ton of smart things that lead to the game's success
- streamlining the most arcane doto mechanics to make a more immediate and action-y game, while still being faithful to its very hardcore this-game-is-most-definitely-not-for-everyone roots
- being extremely communicative and transparent with their community through patches, dev blogs, interactions on forums, etc.
- going hard on esports early on and supporting it through the years
- expanding league through regional rito branches/chinese $$$
reducing the phenomenon that is league to "they just were there first" is just a really bad read on why league became as huge as it did
Yup, especially when you consider that Heroes of Newerth released around the same time as League, and it was more faithful to the original Dota.
WaterAstro
Member
HoN wasn't free initially, right? That was a real killer for it when going up against League.
Riot's aggressive marketing and constant attempts to sabotage Dota helped.
HoN wasn't F2P in the beginning.
HoN wasn't F2P in the beginning.
Yeah, it wasn't F2P to start with. Obviously there's more to it than being first, as zkylon posted above.
hon wasn't f2p on release so that probably had a big influence on it
also forgot to mention that league released with a fairly smart and fair f2p system during an era where p2w mmos were kind of a rampaging nightmare
riot sold overpriced palette swaps for a long while and paying for champions does suck but it's a system that was relatively fair and a system that a ton of games (mobas, fighting games, shooters, etc.) since have followed so, good or bad, rito clearly figured out a system that works
agree on the former but i doubt the latter mattered too much
HON first created Monkey King too!
Strangely enough it did pretty respectably during the initial paid phase. It was even split between the 2 dotakids for awhile. But the F2P transition wasn't handled well and they had one really vulgar dev/cm flaming players.
Yeah, for sure. It's not the best f2p system right now compared with getting all champs/heroes for free, but at the time it was one of the better f2p systems.
ashecitism
Member
Not sure why you're bringing Boss Key and Lawbreakers into this. It's not a MOBA, but a class based shooter. It will try to compete with Overwatch. Epic and Paragon would be a better example.
FarFromAnyGame
Banned
This actually made me laugh!
Yeah I'm a university prof. Game design. Wouldn't be surprised if like sixty percent of my class plays it. All this while I'm extolling the genius of Mario, they're probably thinking who the fuck is Mario.
LordRaptor
Member
You teach game design and are completely unfamiliar with LoL?????
Like... you should legitimately rectify that.
There are LoL specific ly derived theories of game design that have entered wider design vocabularies, such as "anti-fun".
Define "died"
I don't think 13 million players as "died".
It's 8x smaller than LoL's obviously, but I don't think you can call any game that has 13 million players "dead".
Probably because theories like "anti-fun" are complete and total whack. I know their most frequent examples of their "anti-fun" is Bloodseeker's ultimate from Dota or mana burning in general (particularly Anti-Mage), but the definition of "anti-fun" is so nebulous that it really doesn't make much sense.
Regardless of that, you really should dwell a bit into what terminology modern game designers use when interacting with their userbase in regards to LoL and MOBAS and competitive online games in general.
There are many evolved systems, mechanics, "feelings" in place that sound to make no sense in paper, but are actually good abstractions for what is happening within the games and to those who play them.
Abilidebob
Member
DOTA 2 has both Icefrog and Eul.
But the "feelings" do make sense on paper actually.
Example:
In Dota 2, Spectre's attack sound used to be this little whimpy sounding "whiff" thing, that was hard to get a feeling of when your attack was actually going through. Now there's a "shing" on it and it's much more satisfying and easy to tell when the attack is going through.
Dreams-Visions
Member
out of that long-ass post, all you took out of it was that Boss Key and Lawbreakers weren't great comparisons.
thanks for that valuable insight..
LordRaptor
Member
No, it is actually a very good analysis of why some things are - again, to use a LoL design terminology - toxic to gameplay.
Anti-fun is where something is so much unfun for other players that it vastly outweighs the fun the person using it is having, to the extent that there is a net loss of fun from the game.
To give an example that literally nobody will dispute and keep it abstract, cheaters in online gaming.
The cheater is having 'fun' by pwning everyone else with zero effort.
The opposing team have no methods to stop the cheater, and are not having fun.
The rest of the cheaters team cannot play the game as it was designed anymore and are also not having any fun.
Cheating in online gameplay is therefore anti-fun.
You're moving the goalposts here, we are talking from a game design perspective. I don't know how you jumped to cheaters, unless you are equating something like Rupture and cheating, which would be a really poor argument if that's the case.
LordRaptor
Member
I'm giving a clear cut example of "anti-fun" in action to illustrate what the design concept means and that it is not 'nebulous', it is very specific.
I am not using examples you have given because you disagree with those examples, and are stating the concept itself is stupid because you disagree with the application; I'm showing you it isn't.
You haven't shown me anything, you've told me that cheating isn't fun for everyone else when that isn't a game design thing at all.
In terms of game design (which was what we were discussing here, so once again, you are moving the goalposts), anti-fun is still nebulous. That would be like saying "Well soccer isn't fun to play against people that just keep kicking the ball out of bounds to run down the clock" vs "Soccer isn't fun to play against people that just grab with their hands and throw it in the net"
Stone Ocean
Member
Anti fun is basically the idea of counterplay - more precisely, the lack of. Something that you can't react to and play around is "anti fun". Like say, a champion that summons ranged pets on a short cooldown that slow you - so you can't reach him - and heal him - so even if you reached him at some point he'll just get over your damage.
LordRaptor
Member
No, I literally just explained to you in specific game design terms why not taking steps to curtail cheating is bad game design - it is anti-fun.
There are no "goal posts". I'm not saying "thing is anti-fun" or "thing is not anti-fun".
I am trying to explain to you what the concept of anti-fun entails, so that you aren't dismissing it because you disagree with examples given of anti-fun. It is not "nebulous" as you keep saying, it is very specific.
*I* disagree with examples Riot has given of anti-fun - they claimed that 'medic' archetypes are inherently anti-fun, but I could not disagree more with that assessment.
Regardless, the concept of "anti-fun" is an elegant design pattern to understand.
idk i thought the zileas's list of anti-patterns was super interesting and thought provoking stuff, specially at a time when stuff like counterplay and stuff weren't as big as a concern as they seem to be today
anti-fun is really easy to understand if you do read that
i think they talked negatively about medic archetypes in a league context more than anything, where they have historically proven to be impossible to balance and super frustrating and tedious to play against
But then again: streamlining League of Legends to a lower standard has caused this "anti-fun" issue.
In this case by removing some features of the original Dota concept but on other other hand keeping some of those features. It's just a logical causality if you leave out some important gameplay elements.
I doubt that creating a problem on your own and then giving your own problem a name has much to do with general game design theory.
Princess Carl
Member
League of Legends has a lot of achievements too!
Most active players in a Moba
Most toxic community
Most women in a moba
Most crazy ppl playing it
etc
What an odd list.
LordRaptor
Member
As much as some of you want to turn this into another DOTA versus LoL thread I literally have zero interest in participating in that.
People designing on super popular games get fast tracked on design insights. Riots designers have shared them.
The post zkylon linked to is a very interesting essay on design aspects Riot has learnt.
Someone teaching game design should really be familiar with these things, as - rightly or wrongly - they are influential in modern game design thinking.
People designing on super popular games get fast tracked on design insights. Riots designers have shared them.
The post zkylon linked to is a very interesting essay on design aspects Riot has learnt.
Someone teaching game design should really be familiar with these things, as - rightly or wrongly - they are influential in modern game design thinking.
They are exactly the same, LoL's design and balance decisions are going the same way as SC2 once did.
The genre's popularity doesn't really matter regarding these decisions, once you fuck up the game's core there is no turning back.
Unfortunately, League of Legends is a flawed beast in many aspects, it won't be long until the fanbase starts to shrink.
this is most definitely not a 100% biased way of looking at it for sure
This exactly what I was talking about was the problem here. This list makes no sense. Example from it:
They say "Burden of Knowledge", but what exactly is that? Reading the skill and actually watching what happens? I realize this was referring to WC3 Dota when it was written, and in Dota 2 these things are more obvious (for Rupture, you hear a loud sound of a rupture, and a sound and visual of blood running out as you move and keep losing health like crazy. Even in Dota 1 though, would you not read the skills of the heroes you are playing against? Should you not have to learn what is in the game? You're not going to have all knowledge handed to you on a silver platter up front, because that would be impossible, but it's not too much to ask to just watch the obvious and figure out what these things do. It's not like these things are hidden from you somehow, the skill description and obvious fact that you are losing health if you are moving are pretty clear.
LordRaptor
Member
Seriously dude, stop nitpicking the examples given and try and unerstand the underlying concept.
Its like saying global warming can't be real because it was cold last winter.
Its like saying global warming can't be real because it was cold last winter.
It's saying that making a move that has no "tell" of what's gonna happen is bad design, your own example of how the move works in DotA 2 includes the description of the tell/cue, therefore, if the character fails to dodge or counter, it's a fault of their skill, not an unfair move badly designed that leaves no room for counter upon sight.
Most modern MOBAS and MMORPGs have well defined tells and cues for fair play, for example, Wild Star made huge emphasis on them, calling them in game "telegraphs".
You can see in modern LoL design that they make the cues of moves noticeable to avoid this pitfall.
???
i don't see how it doesn't make any sense, that example is super clear
idea here is that you don't have to read a guide to learn how to counter certain things, if you see a ball of fire going in your direction it's pretty clear you should stay out of its path. if you're applied a unique debuff that only hurts you when you move i can't imagine that being easily to figure out because both how strange and specific that effect is and also because you can't tell what it does until you're already afflicted by it
it's not about "reading the skills", it's about abilities being properly telegraphed and requiring similar effort from the person on the attacking end than the victim.
even if you disagree with a point or two the general idea of that list is very easy to understand, it's that the both players should always be interacting rather than one unidirectionally inflicting things upon the other
honestly i'm giving you the benefit of the doubt here by not considering you're being purposely thick, but given some of the things you've been saying i feel less and less inclined to
So now we're stooping to personal attacks, that's great buddy.
What isn't telegraphed about these things? I mean can you honestly not tell me this isn't "telegraphed"?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gf8HgbLF-7Y
it's not a personal attack, i'm just saying it's hard to tell cos you're actually being rather dense about it, obsessing about the example rather than the actual point being made
also i'll remind you this was written in 2010 when dota 2 didn't even exist, but even then valve clearly agrees with the idea behind this which is why they put a big ass indicator to it (that still doesn't tell me i should stop moving but ok)
i mean what's your point here?
if the rule doesn't make any sense why are you arguing that dota actually follows it by making their skills telegraphed?
if you take issue with the example why are you saying the rule makes no sense instead of just saying it's a bad example?
I agree the example isn't very good but I do think it's not worth arguing over the example and more just trying to focus on the main point (the concept) and "anti-fun".
I mean the problem isn't that it's related to LoMas but that any competitive internet game that requires team work will make people hostile towards each other just as much as their opponents. It moves the general trash talking between opponents towards their team mates.
I mean at some point the onus should be on the player to read what moves do as well. It's not hidden from the players, it's just not something that is compulsory to actually starting and playing a game. Like I could play 3 dozen hours of DotA 2 and not see a certain hero and not know what their moves are but that isn't a "flaw" in the game design, I think. Otherwise you'd have to put a giant encyclopedia in front of the player before they even try to play the game the first time.
You are delusional if you think calling someone "purposely thick" isn't a personal attack. Get a grip.
I'm quite aware it was made before Dota 2 was a thing, it's still telegraphed well in WC3 Dota.
Move = you lose a bunch of health
Don't move = you don't
Watch your debuffs, as you should be doing, and you would even do in LoL. There's tons of examples of things like this. I could get into Invoker but that's an entirely different beast.
LordRaptor
Member
Can we agree that in general, without naming any game in specific, being killed by a reason you don't understand, looking it up after the fact, and saying to yourself "Well, how the fuck was I supposed to know that?" is not good game design?
Is that a thing we can concede?
Is that a thing we can concede?
LordRaptor
Member
Cool, so you get the point about Burden of Knowledge as a design principle.
MISSION ACCOMPLISHED
Man some of this list reads like treating the player like a baby and never do anything that might make them feel bad (and assume they are idiots and design for that). I mean I get that's where the anti-fun moniker comes in but it seems really restrictive and short-sighted in a lot of ways. The only concession I can make for it is that it only really matters in very specific games (i.e. competitive multiplayer) but even then it feels inherently flawed and to treat it as a design paradigm seems doubly flawed.