|
Same rules apply, per usual. Please use the appropriate threads (QQ, Brag, Champion, etc) whenever appropriate. Keep the resident Banling content.
Thanks. Happy Gaming. |
On March 05 2012 19:19 Hidden_MotiveS wrote:Show nested quote +On March 05 2012 19:11 rob.au wrote:On March 05 2012 18:42 ihasaKAROT wrote: Twitter needs a sarcasm smily...
Dota2 devs are waaaay too serious. You know, for devs that are remaking an old game exactly like it was...
That twitchskin looks nice tho, too bad twitch is still troll #1 in most ppls eyes :/ It was a pro player not a dota2 dev Obviously a moron though. Dota 2 pros are all morons though... they kill their own guys all the time :p They even kill their own towers sometimes!
PS : I hate Rumble even more since I play him...
|
On March 05 2012 19:54 mr_tolkien wrote:Show nested quote +On March 05 2012 19:19 Hidden_MotiveS wrote:On March 05 2012 19:11 rob.au wrote:On March 05 2012 18:42 ihasaKAROT wrote: Twitter needs a sarcasm smily...
Dota2 devs are waaaay too serious. You know, for devs that are remaking an old game exactly like it was...
That twitchskin looks nice tho, too bad twitch is still troll #1 in most ppls eyes :/ It was a pro player not a dota2 dev Obviously a moron though. Dota 2 pros are all morons though... they kill their own guys all the time :p They even kill their own towers sometimes! PS : I hate Rumble even more since I play him...
Did any of the LoL developers actually ever made some statements of why certain mechanics were not ported into LoL? I'm just curious from a design point of view. They obviously wanted to create a different gameplay but apart from that, did they ever got more specific?
|
They made note not to include things that detract from "fun," like denying. That's their general viewpoint, I never played dota so I dunno what else was considered.
|
On March 05 2012 19:54 mr_tolkien wrote:Show nested quote +On March 05 2012 19:19 Hidden_MotiveS wrote:On March 05 2012 19:11 rob.au wrote:On March 05 2012 18:42 ihasaKAROT wrote: Twitter needs a sarcasm smily...
Dota2 devs are waaaay too serious. You know, for devs that are remaking an old game exactly like it was...
That twitchskin looks nice tho, too bad twitch is still troll #1 in most ppls eyes :/ It was a pro player not a dota2 dev Obviously a moron though. Dota 2 pros are all morons though... they kill their own guys all the time :p PS : I hate Rumble even more since I play him... haha, why is that?
|
On March 05 2012 20:46 Shiv. wrote:Show nested quote +On March 05 2012 19:54 mr_tolkien wrote:On March 05 2012 19:19 Hidden_MotiveS wrote:On March 05 2012 19:11 rob.au wrote:On March 05 2012 18:42 ihasaKAROT wrote: Twitter needs a sarcasm smily...
Dota2 devs are waaaay too serious. You know, for devs that are remaking an old game exactly like it was...
That twitchskin looks nice tho, too bad twitch is still troll #1 in most ppls eyes :/ It was a pro player not a dota2 dev Obviously a moron though. Dota 2 pros are all morons though... they kill their own guys all the time :p PS : I hate Rumble even more since I play him... haha, why is that? I'm guessing because he's so fat and therefore last hitting is impossible when you try to do it yourself
|
They are very open about it. There are some forum posts by Game designers explaining why they do stuff. It's great.
Basically, like R04R says, they don't put (or try to minimize) mechanics that are anti fun, or you have no control about them, like:
- Dodge (too variable, either it doesn't work, or you avoid all damage, and it's kinda random) - Mana burn (either mana burn does nothing, or it burns all your mana and you cant play)
etc
|
On March 05 2012 20:17 BlueSpace wrote:Show nested quote +On March 05 2012 19:54 mr_tolkien wrote:On March 05 2012 19:19 Hidden_MotiveS wrote:On March 05 2012 19:11 rob.au wrote:On March 05 2012 18:42 ihasaKAROT wrote: Twitter needs a sarcasm smily...
Dota2 devs are waaaay too serious. You know, for devs that are remaking an old game exactly like it was...
That twitchskin looks nice tho, too bad twitch is still troll #1 in most ppls eyes :/ It was a pro player not a dota2 dev Obviously a moron though. Dota 2 pros are all morons though... they kill their own guys all the time :p They even kill their own towers sometimes! PS : I hate Rumble even more since I play him... Did any of the LoL developers actually ever made some statements of why certain mechanics were not ported into LoL? I'm just curious from a design point of view. They obviously wanted to create a different gameplay but apart from that, did they ever got more specific?
Don't know RIOT's viewpoint, but I consider it stupid to have to finish off your minions. it makes things too complicated and newcomers will be easily phased out.
|
Manaburn in LoL is abit silly since alot of champions are fury/energy/cooldown based and simply have no mana.
|
On March 05 2012 21:15 ihasaKAROT wrote: Manaburn in LoL is abit silly since alot of champions are fury/energy/cooldown based and simply have no mana.
Are there any heroes in DotA/DotA2 that are like that? Just curious as I haven't played DotA for about 6 years.
But I doubt teams would pick a bunch of non-mana heroes just to counter the other teams mana burn. However, I suppose if the mana burner was a solo lane and he depended on mana burn or something then yea, it would be really easy to counter pick in LoL.
|
Not sure, havet played Dota in about the same time
Btw what ever happend to that riot5 website?
|
They've talked about a handful of abilities, but mostly with regard to how they go against certain design patterns that Zileas set out.
|
On March 05 2012 21:19 Mios wrote:Show nested quote +On March 05 2012 21:15 ihasaKAROT wrote: Manaburn in LoL is abit silly since alot of champions are fury/energy/cooldown based and simply have no mana. Are there any heroes in DotA/DotA2 that are like that? Just curious as I haven't played DotA for about 6 years. But I doubt teams would pick a bunch of non-mana heroes just to counter the other teams mana burn. However, I suppose if the mana burner was a solo lane and he depended on mana burn or something then yea, it would be really easy to counter pick in LoL. Well Huskar uses HP for everything but his heal which is his only skill that costs mana.
Obsidian Destroyer has infinite mana and it's always at 100% so mana burn doesn't do anything apart from damage vs him.
That's about it, I think.
(So mana burn damages everyone but is not that useful vs some)
|
|
On March 05 2012 20:17 BlueSpace wrote: Did any of the LoL developers actually ever made some statements of why certain mechanics were not ported into LoL? I'm just curious from a design point of view. They obviously wanted to create a different gameplay but apart from that, did they ever got more specific? LoL uses fundamentally different design philosophies compared to DotA. I've talked about Zileas' Rules of Game Design before, which is one of the major philosophies the Riot Team uses.
One important thing that the design team really emphasised was "Don't put in arbitrary mechanics just because you can." This in particular is why denying isn't in LoL. Denying was a by product of the WC3 engine. However, just because you can do something doesn't mean you should put it in. Denying is counter-intuitive, and the team felt it wasn't a fun mechanic. Sure, you can create depth from lane interactions, etc. However, it feels like an arbitrary wall you put in just to create complexity. It's like playing Tennis with lead shoes and super bouncy balls. Sure, the game is now more "complex and deep". But what have you sacrificed to do so?
Another thing with LoL is that it is designed to cater to a wider audience than DotA was. Sure, you have to simplify things. Does that matter though? Sure, part of your target audience will be very bad. Again, is that necessarily a bad thing though? Good games don't have to be a massive complex web of interactions that only the absolute experts understand. Games just have to be as complex as they need to be to create meaningful interactions between players. If you can create meaningful interactions through arbitrary mechanical complexity or simple but subtle processes, it's generally preferable to keep it simple. Now that doesn't mean you can't have really complex and mechanically difficult tasks in games, far from it. But if it doesn't suit your purpose, then don't do it.
For instance, LoL has the brush mechanics, as well as Summoner Spells. Both are simple concepts that change the dynamic of the laning phase that introduce complexity and interaction in their own way. In the same manner, the Agi/Str/Int system of DotA was simplified into AP and AD. Again, they changed mechanics where they felt it wasn't necessary to keep them. Does this make LoL a bad game for dumbing it down, or DotA a bad game for having silly arbitrary mechanics that were a by-product of the WC3 engine? No. They're different games that have decided to focus on different aspects and need to be treated as such.
|
There are also differences between the overall power level of characters. A lot of the time I laugh when I hear people go "why isnt XXX from dota in the game, or isnt XXX ability cool, it should be in the game." We are talking about a game where trynd ulti is casable on allies, and is on a 15 second cd or something like that.
There are other things as well. Mana burn, for example, doesnt work in lol because it disproportianatly hurts the people you DONT actually want to mana burn.
|
|
On March 05 2012 22:38 Chiharu Harukaze wrote:Show nested quote +On March 05 2012 20:17 BlueSpace wrote: Did any of the LoL developers actually ever made some statements of why certain mechanics were not ported into LoL? I'm just curious from a design point of view. They obviously wanted to create a different gameplay but apart from that, did they ever got more specific? LoL uses fundamentally different design philosophies compared to DotA. I've talked about Zileas' Rules of Game Design before, which is one of the major philosophies the Riot Team uses. One important thing that the design team really emphasised was "Don't put in arbitrary mechanics just because you can." This in particular is why denying isn't in LoL. Denying was a by product of the WC3 engine. However, just because you can do something doesn't mean you should put it in. Denying is counter-intuitive, and the team felt it wasn't a fun mechanic. Sure, you can create depth from lane interactions, etc. However, it feels like an arbitrary wall you put in just to create complexity. It's like playing Tennis with lead shoes and super bouncy balls. Sure, the game is now more "complex and deep". But what have you sacrificed to do so? Another thing with LoL is that it is designed to cater to a wider audience than DotA was. Sure, you have to simplify things. Does that matter though? Sure, part of your target audience will be very bad. Again, is that necessarily a bad thing though? Good games don't have to be a massive complex web of interactions that only the absolute experts understand. Games just have to be as complex as they need to be to create meaningful interactions between players. If you can create meaningful interactions through arbitrary mechanical complexity or simple but subtle processes, it's generally preferable to keep it simple. Now that doesn't mean you can't have really complex and mechanically difficult tasks in games, far from it. But if it doesn't suit your purpose, then don't do it. For instance, LoL has the brush mechanics, as well as Summoner Spells. Both are simple concepts that change the dynamic of the laning phase that introduce complexity and interaction in their own way. In the same manner, the Agi/Str/Int system of DotA was simplified into AP and AD. Again, they changed mechanics where they felt it wasn't necessary to keep them. Does this make LoL a bad game for dumbing it down, or DotA a bad game for having silly arbitrary mechanics that were a by-product of the WC3 engine? No. They're different games that have decided to focus on different aspects and need to be treated as such.
I read through that massive wall of text, you cleverly hid behind that link Thx that was actually interesting. I think I can see it for some mechanics although I must say I don't really see it for all of them. Anyways I was already a bit tense to ask the question because many people seem to have strong opinions on the topic. So I won't go into questions about specific mechanics.
On a related note about that design mechanics principle. How do these various fb games fit in? I mean I think they are horrible but they seem to be really successful and people play them.
|
Does any subset of teamliquid besides ours NOT hate lol? Seriously that thread is beyond retarded.
|
On March 05 2012 23:18 BlueSpace wrote:Show nested quote +On March 05 2012 22:38 Chiharu Harukaze wrote:On March 05 2012 20:17 BlueSpace wrote: Did any of the LoL developers actually ever made some statements of why certain mechanics were not ported into LoL? I'm just curious from a design point of view. They obviously wanted to create a different gameplay but apart from that, did they ever got more specific? LoL uses fundamentally different design philosophies compared to DotA. I've talked about Zileas' Rules of Game Design before, which is one of the major philosophies the Riot Team uses. One important thing that the design team really emphasised was "Don't put in arbitrary mechanics just because you can." This in particular is why denying isn't in LoL. Denying was a by product of the WC3 engine. However, just because you can do something doesn't mean you should put it in. Denying is counter-intuitive, and the team felt it wasn't a fun mechanic. Sure, you can create depth from lane interactions, etc. However, it feels like an arbitrary wall you put in just to create complexity. It's like playing Tennis with lead shoes and super bouncy balls. Sure, the game is now more "complex and deep". But what have you sacrificed to do so? Another thing with LoL is that it is designed to cater to a wider audience than DotA was. Sure, you have to simplify things. Does that matter though? Sure, part of your target audience will be very bad. Again, is that necessarily a bad thing though? Good games don't have to be a massive complex web of interactions that only the absolute experts understand. Games just have to be as complex as they need to be to create meaningful interactions between players. If you can create meaningful interactions through arbitrary mechanical complexity or simple but subtle processes, it's generally preferable to keep it simple. Now that doesn't mean you can't have really complex and mechanically difficult tasks in games, far from it. But if it doesn't suit your purpose, then don't do it. For instance, LoL has the brush mechanics, as well as Summoner Spells. Both are simple concepts that change the dynamic of the laning phase that introduce complexity and interaction in their own way. In the same manner, the Agi/Str/Int system of DotA was simplified into AP and AD. Again, they changed mechanics where they felt it wasn't necessary to keep them. Does this make LoL a bad game for dumbing it down, or DotA a bad game for having silly arbitrary mechanics that were a by-product of the WC3 engine? No. They're different games that have decided to focus on different aspects and need to be treated as such. I read through that massive wall of text, you cleverly hid behind that link Thx that was actually interesting. I think I can see it for some mechanics although I must say I don't really see it for all of them. Anyways I was already a bit tense to ask the question because many people seem to have strong opinions on the topic. So I won't go into questions about specific mechanics. On a related note about that design mechanics principle. How do these various fb games fit in? I mean I think they are horrible but they seem to be really successful and people play them.
not everyone, in fact the probably the majority of people, aren't serious gamers. Something where you can put 5-10 minutes in and feel like you get something out of it is satisfying for people who either don't know of any more in depth forms of gaming, or don't have the time or interest to pursue anything else. It's also probably why iOS games, like angry birds, are becoming increasingly popular as well.
|
On March 05 2012 23:18 Two_DoWn wrote: Does any subset of teamliquid besides ours NOT hate lol? Seriously that thread is beyond retarded.
TL LoL community the best TL community
|
|
|
|