| Forum Index > LoL General |
|
Vlanitak
Norway3045 Posts
edit: Pheilox will still just be support subbing as far as I know, and while nothing is confirmed they might pick up Soaz for top lane (he did an okay job with fnatic yesterday ) what is going to be interesting is: who will they have play top against CLG.EU today in the Medion Challenge? | ||
|
Redox
Germany24794 Posts
On June 05 2012 02:15 Mogwai wrote: why is it big? he makes good points in there and nothing he's saying is damning or praising any game's gameplay. it's merely a discussion of business models and how they drive priorities of companies. What he says about business models is way more important than what he says about gameplay. He makes business decisions, hes not a player. If he said anything about gameplay it would be irrelevant. And if the head of IEM thinks sc2 is dying because of its model and praises LoL, it might mean they will support and develop their LoL competions more than the sc2 ones in the future. Also important for prize money development for example. | ||
|
Mogwai
United States13274 Posts
| ||
|
1ntrigue
Australia948 Posts
On June 05 2012 02:07 Redox wrote: Wow, its pretty big if the head of IEM says that publicly. Surprised there is no thread in the sc2 section yet. It's not the best PR for Carmac to say it, but it's a mere truism. Only the most blinded or short-sighted SC2 fan believes that SC2 will still be a mainstream esport for 10 years after Legacy of the Void. League of Legends is a brilliant model for in terms of business (consistent revenue), for gamers (continuing support and new additions), as well as esports (stable or growing playerbase). If Riot retains its healthy enthusiasm for improving its game then LoL can indeed be the first esport to make it as a mainstream "sport" in society. It will require evolution and even revolution, e.g. making it playable on tablets, updating graphics every few years, new game mode additions, new mechanics, and reactive additions based on the rest of the gaming industry. The benefit of an online game is that it is self-sustaning if the game company has the belief that it is not a problem to reinvent its own game (unlike current MMOs, which I find really surprising and a huge lost of opportunity). | ||
|
Seuss
United States10536 Posts
Still, we gamers tend to think largely about gameplay/human interest and forget that sports, and eSports, are also about money. It's good that someone in a relevant position made a point of bringing that oft-disregarded side of things to the forefront. | ||
|
overt
United States9006 Posts
It doesn't benefit them from a financial standpoint and I'm not even certain it would benefit LoL from a gameplay standpoint. Like, would this games eSports scene die if let's say five years from now there are like 200 champions? It's certainly going to be harder and harder for new players to get into the more champions exist but couldn't you argue that the release of new champions every two weeks helps keep the majority of their player base sticking around? Like I do agree with carmac in the sense that the game doesn't get as stale or boring to me as other multiplayer games because of how often we get new content so would the game truly suffer if Riot continued to release a new champion every two weeks? That's roughly 24 new champions each year. | ||
|
BlackMagister
United States5834 Posts
| ||
|
Eppa!
Sweden4641 Posts
| ||
|
Mogwai
United States13274 Posts
| ||
|
overt
United States9006 Posts
On June 05 2012 03:58 Mogwai wrote: I believe that in tune with the MtG comparison, they will most likely start limitting champion pools for certain events in the future (probably years from now tbh, I don't think there's a rush for this atm). This would make sense but would also be kind of sad. I don't think they'll disable champions for regular play (both normals and ranked) but the idea that years from now in the future they might only allow champions from let's say, "Fizz patch onward," at tournaments could be sad. Like, it'd kind of suck to know that one day years from now we could never see Ashe or Annie in competitive matches ever again. But yeah, this seems like the most likely scenario as I honestly do not believe Riot is ever going to stop releasing two champions a week. Wouldn't make any sense to do that. | ||
|
spinesheath
Germany8679 Posts
On June 05 2012 04:07 overt wrote: This would make sense but would also be kind of sad. I don't think they'll disable champions for regular play (both normals and ranked) but the idea that years from now in the future they might only allow champions from let's say, "Fizz patch onward," at tournaments could be sad. Like, it'd kind of suck to know that one day years from now we could never see Ashe or Annie in competitive matches ever again. But yeah, this seems like the most likely scenario as I honestly do not believe Riot is ever going to stop releasing two champions a week. Wouldn't make any sense to do that. You would eventually see Ashe and Annie again. Recycled into two "new" champions. Heck, they could even simply re-release old champs after retiring them for a couple of years and they would be "new" again! But... that analysis was petty pathetic to be honest. "LoL's business model doesn't have the two weaknesses mentioned above, therefore it has no weaknesses at all" - great logic right there. There is no reasoning why people would stick to a decade old game just because they occasionally release rehashed versions of existing content either... | ||
Beyonder
Netherlands15103 Posts
| ||
|
NotTheMonker
United States131 Posts
On June 05 2012 04:13 Beyonder wrote: is it just me that is annoyed by the casters who name all the skills by their rightful name every single time? Noone knows what they are called. I hear them talking about it 'It is what sets me apart from the other casters'. Yeah, but one always needs to deduce which skill they mean >_> And Im a 1800 player, what about the lower lvl players. I like when they call the skills by their real names. You can often pick up what skill they are talking about from the game context, and it helps you learn the names of the skills. Also, it is completely unambiguous. | ||
|
Seuss
United States10536 Posts
But if you're a caster you can pretend you're actually one of those nerds by simply knowing the names of champion abilities. Then viewers just assume you have every champion's mechanics and ratios memorized. Nevermind that using descriptive terms like "shield", "stun", "ultimate", and "passive" are way more clear save in certain iconic circumstances (e.g. Vlad's "Pool", Ashe "Arrow" etc.). | ||
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On June 05 2012 03:58 Mogwai wrote: I believe that in tune with the MtG comparison, they will most likely start limitting champion pools for certain events in the future (probably years from now tbh, I don't think there's a rush for this atm). There's not a whole lot of precedent in the genre for it. If they keep up this aggressive champ release cycle then I'd agree. | ||
|
overt
United States9006 Posts
On June 05 2012 04:13 Beyonder wrote: is it just me that is annoyed by the casters who name all the skills by their rightful name every single time? Noone knows what they are called. I hear them talking about it 'It is what sets me apart from the other casters'. Yeah, but one always needs to deduce which skill they mean >_> And Im a 1800 player, what about the lower lvl players. Yeah, it gets really annoying. I'd much rather have a caster say, "Soraka silenced him" or "Soraka used her E" instead of "Soraka used Infuse!" Because honestly I don't give a shit what the skills are called I just care about what they do. | ||
|
CeriseCherries
6170 Posts
| ||
|
Redox
Germany24794 Posts
On June 05 2012 04:13 Beyonder wrote: is it just me that is annoyed by the casters who name all the skills by their rightful name every single time? Noone knows what they are called. I hear them talking about it 'It is what sets me apart from the other casters'. Yeah, but one always needs to deduce which skill they mean >_> And Im a 1800 player, what about the lower lvl players. I remember some casters saying that some viewers always ask them to do that. I dont get it either. If they want to be with the fans or whatever they shoul use the monikers for the skills used by the players. | ||
|
JackDino
Gabon6219 Posts
On June 05 2012 04:10 spinesheath wrote: You would eventually see Ashe and Annie again. Recycled into two "new" champions. Heck, they could even simply re-release old champs after retiring them for a couple of years and they would be "new" again! But... that analysis was petty pathetic to be honest. "LoL's business model doesn't have the two weaknesses mentioned above, therefore it has no weaknesses at all" - great logic right there. There is no reasoning why people would stick to a decade old game just because they occasionally release rehashed versions of existing content either... Recycled into 2 new champions? You mean 1, global tibbers best skill in league. Flying bears. | ||
|
BlackMagister
United States5834 Posts
http://www.twitch.tv/kaostv Just tuned in but what the heck? 32 mins and the score is only 2-2 kills. CLG EU sounds like they just split push the whole game. Oh it was AP kog. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War League of Legends Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Other Games |
|
The PondCast
KCM Race Survival
WardiTV Invitational
Lambo vs Shameless
Rogue vs uThermal
Percival vs YoungYakov
TBD vs GgMaChine
OSC
OSC
ArT vs MindelVK
MiniZergUA vs TBD
Shameless vs TBD
Ultimate Battle
OSC
OSC
ByuN vs MaxPax
herO vs Krystianer
Percival vs Shameless
LetaleX vs YoungYakov
Nicoract vs Gerald
GgMaChine vs ArT
CranKy Ducklings
IPSL
TerrOr vs IJ_Terran
rasowy vs Hazorath
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
