Not to say I think there is NO variety in LoL champs, but I can't be the only one that is definitely not in agreement with their view that their champ pool is apparently the very definition of creativity and variation, can I?
They're drinking their own koolaid for sure, but at the same time I don't think they're terribly uncreative. I do sometimes feel, however, that when they remake champions they too often murder older ideas which are still serviceable.
For example, even though he isn't a frequent pick I find Zilean's kit amazingly cohesive and well designed. But you can be certain that if Riot remade him they'd shy away from abilities that act as pure utility. His Rewind might come paired with mana regen or CDR, and his Time Warp might gain damage over time when cast on an opponent. For whatever reason "pure" abilities are no longer kosher, which I find odd and saddening.
On August 17 2012 08:34 nojitosunrise wrote: Blaze's analysis of Frost vs CLG.NA
Thanks for posting that, very informative and well made. I like the slow-motion replays of major fights and graphic overlays, makes it much easier to see everything that is going on. Are there more of these?
On August 17 2012 07:05 Perplex wrote: How is riot's business model sustainable?
Seems very sustainable. The thing I'm worried about is how it can continue as an ESPORT if there's a new champ every 2 weeks. At some point there's just going to be a shitload of champs (actually I think we already crossed that point).
If I show you a list of the original 150 pokemon, will you be able to tell me a good number of their names? More then likely for most people who grew up on them or played the game, or watched the show they can. Many of those people can also tell you what that guy does in a general sense.
I am not too worried about Riot crossing this taboo line of 100 when to tie in to the video posted a page back, the champions themselves are iconic. You know what Rammus is going to be tanky and reflect damage on people hitting him because he's an armadillo. You have a pretty good idea that Tristana is going to be shooting the crap out of things because of that giant hand cannon. Just like you know Charmander is going to deal fire damage and that Hitmonlee is going to be a fighter pokemon.
*shrug*
Shen is the only exception to this lol. When I first started playing he was free and I was like "sweet, he's gonna be a ninja assassin!"
Man, at first I was like, "wow, his English is so good!"
Then I realized I'm dumb.
Haha I thought the same thing at first.
But man, I really hope this type of analysis continues. So insightful to listen to even if I could never even dream of doing something like that in an actual game.
On August 17 2012 07:05 Perplex wrote: How is riot's business model sustainable?
Seems very sustainable. The thing I'm worried about is how it can continue as an ESPORT if there's a new champ every 2 weeks. At some point there's just going to be a shitload of champs (actually I think we already crossed that point).
Hasn't beaten dota's numbers yet, so...
At the rate LoL is releasing heroes, they will pass DotA's hero count roughly 2 months from now (3 if 6.75 comes out in that time and Icefrog adds new heroes)
On August 17 2012 07:05 Perplex wrote: How is riot's business model sustainable?
Seems very sustainable. The thing I'm worried about is how it can continue as an ESPORT if there's a new champ every 2 weeks. At some point there's just going to be a shitload of champs (actually I think we already crossed that point).
If I show you a list of the original 150 pokemon, will you be able to tell me a good number of their names? More then likely for most people who grew up on them or played the game, or watched the show they can. Many of those people can also tell you what that guy does in a general sense.
I am not too worried about Riot crossing this taboo line of 100 when to tie in to the video posted a page back, the champions themselves are iconic. You know what Rammus is going to be tanky and reflect damage on people hitting him because he's an armadillo. You have a pretty good idea that Tristana is going to be shooting the crap out of things because of that giant hand cannon. Just like you know Charmander is going to deal fire damage and that Hitmonlee is going to be a fighter pokemon.
*shrug*
You're sort of missing the reason why it starts getting hairy with so many heroes.
For the guys that are already into the game, it's not that big of a deal, because they only have to incrementally learn a new hero as it comes out. You get them one at a time, so its not that big of a deal to figure them out as you go.
The main problem is that for new players and uninitiated spectators (which you need to be able to accommodate as a major E-sports title), increasing the number of heroes in the game drastically increases the learning curve necessary to play the game. In Pokemon this wasn't a big deal because you were exposed to the game first as a single player game and got to learn them at your own pace. But when a new spectator gets thrown in the deep end watching a game of competitive LoL, having more stuff for them to have to figure out doesn't help them.
On August 17 2012 07:05 Perplex wrote: How is riot's business model sustainable?
Seems very sustainable. The thing I'm worried about is how it can continue as an ESPORT if there's a new champ every 2 weeks. At some point there's just going to be a shitload of champs (actually I think we already crossed that point).
Hasn't beaten dota's numbers yet, so...
At the rate LoL is releasing heroes, they will pass DotA's hero count roughly 2 months from now (3 if 6.75 comes out in that time and Icefrog adds new heroes)
On August 17 2012 07:05 Perplex wrote: How is riot's business model sustainable?
Seems very sustainable. The thing I'm worried about is how it can continue as an ESPORT if there's a new champ every 2 weeks. At some point there's just going to be a shitload of champs (actually I think we already crossed that point).
If I show you a list of the original 150 pokemon, will you be able to tell me a good number of their names? More then likely for most people who grew up on them or played the game, or watched the show they can. Many of those people can also tell you what that guy does in a general sense.
I am not too worried about Riot crossing this taboo line of 100 when to tie in to the video posted a page back, the champions themselves are iconic. You know what Rammus is going to be tanky and reflect damage on people hitting him because he's an armadillo. You have a pretty good idea that Tristana is going to be shooting the crap out of things because of that giant hand cannon. Just like you know Charmander is going to deal fire damage and that Hitmonlee is going to be a fighter pokemon.
*shrug*
You're sort of missing the reason why it starts getting hairy with so many heroes.
For the guys that are already into the game, it's not that big of a deal, because they only have to incrementally learn a new hero as it comes out. You get them one at a time, so its not that big of a deal to figure them out as you go.
The main problem is that for new players and uninitiated spectators (which you need to be able to accommodate as a major E-sports title), increasing the number of heroes in the game drastically increases the learning curve necessary to play the game. In Pokemon this wasn't a big deal because you were exposed to the game first as a single player game and got to learn them at your own pace. But when a new spectator gets thrown in the deep end watching a game of competitive LoL, having more stuff for them to have to figure out doesn't help them.
This is why the PKMN method of having a fair number of irrelevant heroes would work perfectly. People get shown a game of LoL, maybe they become a fan of someone like Froggen or Dyrus and copy their hero choices to start. The only people who really get upset by making some champs irrelevant are the "old school" players who don't want Kat/Eve/Twitch changes, and they are exactly the same people who cry when they bring the Charizard/Blastoise/Venusaur/Pidgeot/Pikachu/Dugtrio lineup to a real pokemon battle (where my Starmie/Chansey/Alakazam/3 other irrelevant pokemon lineup paralyzes them to victory).
On August 17 2012 07:05 Perplex wrote: How is riot's business model sustainable?
Seems very sustainable. The thing I'm worried about is how it can continue as an ESPORT if there's a new champ every 2 weeks. At some point there's just going to be a shitload of champs (actually I think we already crossed that point).
Hasn't beaten dota's numbers yet, so...
At the rate LoL is releasing heroes, they will pass DotA's hero count roughly 2 months from now (3 if 6.75 comes out in that time and Icefrog adds new heroes)
On August 17 2012 07:52 Parnage wrote:
On August 17 2012 07:35 Chill wrote:
On August 17 2012 07:05 Perplex wrote: How is riot's business model sustainable?
Seems very sustainable. The thing I'm worried about is how it can continue as an ESPORT if there's a new champ every 2 weeks. At some point there's just going to be a shitload of champs (actually I think we already crossed that point).
If I show you a list of the original 150 pokemon, will you be able to tell me a good number of their names? More then likely for most people who grew up on them or played the game, or watched the show they can. Many of those people can also tell you what that guy does in a general sense.
I am not too worried about Riot crossing this taboo line of 100 when to tie in to the video posted a page back, the champions themselves are iconic. You know what Rammus is going to be tanky and reflect damage on people hitting him because he's an armadillo. You have a pretty good idea that Tristana is going to be shooting the crap out of things because of that giant hand cannon. Just like you know Charmander is going to deal fire damage and that Hitmonlee is going to be a fighter pokemon.
*shrug*
You're sort of missing the reason why it starts getting hairy with so many heroes.
For the guys that are already into the game, it's not that big of a deal, because they only have to incrementally learn a new hero as it comes out. You get them one at a time, so its not that big of a deal to figure them out as you go.
The main problem is that for new players and uninitiated spectators (which you need to be able to accommodate as a major E-sports title), increasing the number of heroes in the game drastically increases the learning curve necessary to play the game. In Pokemon this wasn't a big deal because you were exposed to the game first as a single player game and got to learn them at your own pace. But when a new spectator gets thrown in the deep end watching a game of competitive LoL, having more stuff for them to have to figure out doesn't help them.
This is why the PKMN method of having a fair number of irrelevant heroes would work perfectly. People get shown a game of LoL, maybe they become a fan of someone like Froggen or Dyrus and copy their hero choices to start. The only people who really get upset by making some champs irrelevant are the "old school" players who don't want Kat/Eve/Twitch changes, and they are exactly the same people who cry when they bring the Charizard/Blastoise/Venusaur/Pidgeot/Pikachu/Dugtrio lineup to a real pokemon battle (where my Starmie/Chansey/Alakazam/3 other irrelevant pokemon lineup paralyzes them to victory).
There are huge problems with your idea. LoL heroes are sold piecemeal, pokemon are not. If someone spends $10 on venusaur only to find out venusar is "irrelevant" and useless the instant he steps onto ranked you've got a customer relations problem because you just sold him what amounts to snake oil. Play venusaur for $10! Always lose! You're still happy and handing us money, right!?
Which brings me to my second point, it's not profitable. You want as much of your product to be relevant as possible since even older champions can be bought by new players entering the pool, while newer champions obviously need to be relevant to your older audience for them to consider buying them. If you really limit the relevant champs and don't rotate their OP-ness you won't make money, but if you do rotate them people will accuse you of selling power (which they already accuse Riot of all the freakin' time).
Pokemon gets away with it because (a) I can play single player and scrub it up while completely ignoring you and (b) I pay for all the pokemon at once so it's not like $60 went down my toilet because I made my team from the wrong pokemon.
On August 17 2012 07:05 Perplex wrote: How is riot's business model sustainable?
Seems very sustainable. The thing I'm worried about is how it can continue as an ESPORT if there's a new champ every 2 weeks. At some point there's just going to be a shitload of champs (actually I think we already crossed that point).
Hasn't beaten dota's numbers yet, so...
At the rate LoL is releasing heroes, they will pass DotA's hero count roughly 2 months from now (3 if 6.75 comes out in that time and Icefrog adds new heroes)
On August 17 2012 07:52 Parnage wrote:
On August 17 2012 07:35 Chill wrote:
On August 17 2012 07:05 Perplex wrote: How is riot's business model sustainable?
Seems very sustainable. The thing I'm worried about is how it can continue as an ESPORT if there's a new champ every 2 weeks. At some point there's just going to be a shitload of champs (actually I think we already crossed that point).
If I show you a list of the original 150 pokemon, will you be able to tell me a good number of their names? More then likely for most people who grew up on them or played the game, or watched the show they can. Many of those people can also tell you what that guy does in a general sense.
I am not too worried about Riot crossing this taboo line of 100 when to tie in to the video posted a page back, the champions themselves are iconic. You know what Rammus is going to be tanky and reflect damage on people hitting him because he's an armadillo. You have a pretty good idea that Tristana is going to be shooting the crap out of things because of that giant hand cannon. Just like you know Charmander is going to deal fire damage and that Hitmonlee is going to be a fighter pokemon.
*shrug*
You're sort of missing the reason why it starts getting hairy with so many heroes.
For the guys that are already into the game, it's not that big of a deal, because they only have to incrementally learn a new hero as it comes out. You get them one at a time, so its not that big of a deal to figure them out as you go.
The main problem is that for new players and uninitiated spectators (which you need to be able to accommodate as a major E-sports title), increasing the number of heroes in the game drastically increases the learning curve necessary to play the game. In Pokemon this wasn't a big deal because you were exposed to the game first as a single player game and got to learn them at your own pace. But when a new spectator gets thrown in the deep end watching a game of competitive LoL, having more stuff for them to have to figure out doesn't help them.
This is why the PKMN method of having a fair number of irrelevant heroes would work perfectly. People get shown a game of LoL, maybe they become a fan of someone like Froggen or Dyrus and copy their hero choices to start. The only people who really get upset by making some champs irrelevant are the "old school" players who don't want Kat/Eve/Twitch changes, and they are exactly the same people who cry when they bring the Charizard/Blastoise/Venusaur/Pidgeot/Pikachu/Dugtrio lineup to a real pokemon battle (where my Starmie/Chansey/Alakazam/3 other irrelevant pokemon lineup paralyzes them to victory).
There are huge problems with your idea. LoL heroes are sold piecemeal, pokemon are not. If someone spends $10 on venusaur only to find out venusar is "irrelevant" and useless the instant he steps onto ranked you've got a customer relations problem because you just sold him what amounts to snake oil. Play venusaur for $10! Always lose! You're still happy and handing us money, right!?
Which brings me to my second point, it's not profitable. You want as much of your product to be relevant as possible since even older champions can be bought by new players entering the pool, while newer champions obviously need to be relevant to your older audience for them to consider buying them. If you really limit the relevent champs and don't rotate their OP-ness you won't make money, but if you do rotate them people will accuse you of selling power (which they already accuse Riot of all the freakin' time).
Pokemon gets away with it becasue (a) I can play single player and scrub it up while completely ignoring you and (b) I pay for all the pokemon at once so it's not like $60 went down my toilet because I made my team from the wrong pokemon.
People will still pay for something they love, even if its not relevant anymore.
This is more a long-term thing, like if LoL actually becomes a super stable e-sports thing (like pro-sports level stable), It's always possible to do 1/4 year mini-seasons, with rotated limited champ pools by random. So for example if LoL got to be like 200 champs big, do 75-100 champ rotations selected at random ever 3-4months, at least for pro-scene. It would always keep it fresh. Especially if you have a really active pro-scene~.
On August 17 2012 07:05 Perplex wrote: How is riot's business model sustainable?
Seems very sustainable. The thing I'm worried about is how it can continue as an ESPORT if there's a new champ every 2 weeks. At some point there's just going to be a shitload of champs (actually I think we already crossed that point).
Hasn't beaten dota's numbers yet, so...
At the rate LoL is releasing heroes, they will pass DotA's hero count roughly 2 months from now (3 if 6.75 comes out in that time and Icefrog adds new heroes)
On August 17 2012 07:52 Parnage wrote:
On August 17 2012 07:35 Chill wrote:
On August 17 2012 07:05 Perplex wrote: How is riot's business model sustainable?
Seems very sustainable. The thing I'm worried about is how it can continue as an ESPORT if there's a new champ every 2 weeks. At some point there's just going to be a shitload of champs (actually I think we already crossed that point).
If I show you a list of the original 150 pokemon, will you be able to tell me a good number of their names? More then likely for most people who grew up on them or played the game, or watched the show they can. Many of those people can also tell you what that guy does in a general sense.
I am not too worried about Riot crossing this taboo line of 100 when to tie in to the video posted a page back, the champions themselves are iconic. You know what Rammus is going to be tanky and reflect damage on people hitting him because he's an armadillo. You have a pretty good idea that Tristana is going to be shooting the crap out of things because of that giant hand cannon. Just like you know Charmander is going to deal fire damage and that Hitmonlee is going to be a fighter pokemon.
*shrug*
You're sort of missing the reason why it starts getting hairy with so many heroes.
For the guys that are already into the game, it's not that big of a deal, because they only have to incrementally learn a new hero as it comes out. You get them one at a time, so its not that big of a deal to figure them out as you go.
The main problem is that for new players and uninitiated spectators (which you need to be able to accommodate as a major E-sports title), increasing the number of heroes in the game drastically increases the learning curve necessary to play the game. In Pokemon this wasn't a big deal because you were exposed to the game first as a single player game and got to learn them at your own pace. But when a new spectator gets thrown in the deep end watching a game of competitive LoL, having more stuff for them to have to figure out doesn't help them.
This is why the PKMN method of having a fair number of irrelevant heroes would work perfectly. People get shown a game of LoL, maybe they become a fan of someone like Froggen or Dyrus and copy their hero choices to start. The only people who really get upset by making some champs irrelevant are the "old school" players who don't want Kat/Eve/Twitch changes, and they are exactly the same people who cry when they bring the Charizard/Blastoise/Venusaur/Pidgeot/Pikachu/Dugtrio lineup to a real pokemon battle (where my Starmie/Chansey/Alakazam/3 other irrelevant pokemon lineup paralyzes them to victory).
There are huge problems with your idea. LoL heroes are sold piecemeal, pokemon are not. If someone spends $10 on venusaur only to find out venusar is "irrelevant" and useless the instant he steps onto ranked you've got a customer relations problem because you just sold him what amounts to snake oil. Play venusaur for $10! Always lose! You're still happy and handing us money, right!?
Which brings me to my second point, it's not profitable. You want as much of your product to be relevant as possible since even older champions can be bought by new players entering the pool, while newer champions obviously need to be relevant to your older audience for them to consider buying them. If you really limit the relevent champs and don't rotate their OP-ness you won't make money, but if you do rotate them people will accuse you of selling power (which they already accuse Riot of all the freakin' time).
Pokemon gets away with it becasue (a) I can play single player and scrub it up while completely ignoring you and (b) I pay for all the pokemon at once so it's not like $60 went down my toilet because I made my team from the wrong pokemon.
People will still pay for something they love, even if its not relevant anymore.
Uh, when exactly am I supposed to be getting nostalgic so that I can ignore the uselessness of my new champion that I'd be lucky to play during a free week?
People will spend money in stupid ways but if you burn them enough they won't touch the stove no matter how many flowers you put in front of it.
On August 17 2012 11:47 wei2coolman wrote: This is more a long-term thing, like if LoL actually becomes a super stable e-sports thing (like pro-sports level stable), It's always possible to do 1/4 year mini-seasons, with rotated limited champ pools by random. So for example if LoL got to be like 200 champs big, do 75-100 champ rotations selected at random ever 3-4months, at least for pro-scene. It would always keep it fresh. Especially if you have a really active pro-scene~.
This honestly makes a whole lot more sense than purposely keeping tons of champions nerfed even though it does open up some interesting champion interactions.
On August 17 2012 07:05 Perplex wrote: How is riot's business model sustainable?
Seems very sustainable. The thing I'm worried about is how it can continue as an ESPORT if there's a new champ every 2 weeks. At some point there's just going to be a shitload of champs (actually I think we already crossed that point).
Hasn't beaten dota's numbers yet, so...
At the rate LoL is releasing heroes, they will pass DotA's hero count roughly 2 months from now (3 if 6.75 comes out in that time and Icefrog adds new heroes)
On August 17 2012 07:52 Parnage wrote:
On August 17 2012 07:35 Chill wrote:
On August 17 2012 07:05 Perplex wrote: How is riot's business model sustainable?
Seems very sustainable. The thing I'm worried about is how it can continue as an ESPORT if there's a new champ every 2 weeks. At some point there's just going to be a shitload of champs (actually I think we already crossed that point).
If I show you a list of the original 150 pokemon, will you be able to tell me a good number of their names? More then likely for most people who grew up on them or played the game, or watched the show they can. Many of those people can also tell you what that guy does in a general sense.
I am not too worried about Riot crossing this taboo line of 100 when to tie in to the video posted a page back, the champions themselves are iconic. You know what Rammus is going to be tanky and reflect damage on people hitting him because he's an armadillo. You have a pretty good idea that Tristana is going to be shooting the crap out of things because of that giant hand cannon. Just like you know Charmander is going to deal fire damage and that Hitmonlee is going to be a fighter pokemon.
*shrug*
You're sort of missing the reason why it starts getting hairy with so many heroes.
For the guys that are already into the game, it's not that big of a deal, because they only have to incrementally learn a new hero as it comes out. You get them one at a time, so its not that big of a deal to figure them out as you go.
The main problem is that for new players and uninitiated spectators (which you need to be able to accommodate as a major E-sports title), increasing the number of heroes in the game drastically increases the learning curve necessary to play the game. In Pokemon this wasn't a big deal because you were exposed to the game first as a single player game and got to learn them at your own pace. But when a new spectator gets thrown in the deep end watching a game of competitive LoL, having more stuff for them to have to figure out doesn't help them.
This is why the PKMN method of having a fair number of irrelevant heroes would work perfectly. People get shown a game of LoL, maybe they become a fan of someone like Froggen or Dyrus and copy their hero choices to start. The only people who really get upset by making some champs irrelevant are the "old school" players who don't want Kat/Eve/Twitch changes, and they are exactly the same people who cry when they bring the Charizard/Blastoise/Venusaur/Pidgeot/Pikachu/Dugtrio lineup to a real pokemon battle (where my Starmie/Chansey/Alakazam/3 other irrelevant pokemon lineup paralyzes them to victory).
I don't mean to drag things off topic but do people really play R/B/Y competitively? Even as a kid it didn't seem remotely balanced to me, psychic types just explode everything.
On August 17 2012 07:05 Perplex wrote: How is riot's business model sustainable?
Seems very sustainable. The thing I'm worried about is how it can continue as an ESPORT if there's a new champ every 2 weeks. At some point there's just going to be a shitload of champs (actually I think we already crossed that point).
Hasn't beaten dota's numbers yet, so...
At the rate LoL is releasing heroes, they will pass DotA's hero count roughly 2 months from now (3 if 6.75 comes out in that time and Icefrog adds new heroes)
On August 17 2012 07:52 Parnage wrote:
On August 17 2012 07:35 Chill wrote:
On August 17 2012 07:05 Perplex wrote: How is riot's business model sustainable?
Seems very sustainable. The thing I'm worried about is how it can continue as an ESPORT if there's a new champ every 2 weeks. At some point there's just going to be a shitload of champs (actually I think we already crossed that point).
If I show you a list of the original 150 pokemon, will you be able to tell me a good number of their names? More then likely for most people who grew up on them or played the game, or watched the show they can. Many of those people can also tell you what that guy does in a general sense.
I am not too worried about Riot crossing this taboo line of 100 when to tie in to the video posted a page back, the champions themselves are iconic. You know what Rammus is going to be tanky and reflect damage on people hitting him because he's an armadillo. You have a pretty good idea that Tristana is going to be shooting the crap out of things because of that giant hand cannon. Just like you know Charmander is going to deal fire damage and that Hitmonlee is going to be a fighter pokemon.
*shrug*
You're sort of missing the reason why it starts getting hairy with so many heroes.
For the guys that are already into the game, it's not that big of a deal, because they only have to incrementally learn a new hero as it comes out. You get them one at a time, so its not that big of a deal to figure them out as you go.
The main problem is that for new players and uninitiated spectators (which you need to be able to accommodate as a major E-sports title), increasing the number of heroes in the game drastically increases the learning curve necessary to play the game. In Pokemon this wasn't a big deal because you were exposed to the game first as a single player game and got to learn them at your own pace. But when a new spectator gets thrown in the deep end watching a game of competitive LoL, having more stuff for them to have to figure out doesn't help them.
This is why the PKMN method of having a fair number of irrelevant heroes would work perfectly. People get shown a game of LoL, maybe they become a fan of someone like Froggen or Dyrus and copy their hero choices to start. The only people who really get upset by making some champs irrelevant are the "old school" players who don't want Kat/Eve/Twitch changes, and they are exactly the same people who cry when they bring the Charizard/Blastoise/Venusaur/Pidgeot/Pikachu/Dugtrio lineup to a real pokemon battle (where my Starmie/Chansey/Alakazam/3 other irrelevant pokemon lineup paralyzes them to victory).
I don't mean to drag things off topic but do people really play R/B/Y competitively? Even as a kid it didn't seem remotely balanced to me, psychic types just explode everything.
Not any more, but there was a competitive scene. Tobybro so good hehe~
I'm pretty sure the top guys at Riot have been thinking where they want the competitive scene to look like in one month, one year and three years time.
Thanks for posting that, very informative and well made. I like the slow-motion replays of major fights and graphic overlays, makes it much easier to see everything that is going on. Are there more of these?
Dam that game was really close. CLG could've won vs Azubu frost.
On August 17 2012 07:05 Perplex wrote: How is riot's business model sustainable?
Seems very sustainable. The thing I'm worried about is how it can continue as an ESPORT if there's a new champ every 2 weeks. At some point there's just going to be a shitload of champs (actually I think we already crossed that point).
Hasn't beaten dota's numbers yet, so...
At the rate LoL is releasing heroes, they will pass DotA's hero count roughly 2 months from now (3 if 6.75 comes out in that time and Icefrog adds new heroes)
On August 17 2012 07:52 Parnage wrote:
On August 17 2012 07:35 Chill wrote:
On August 17 2012 07:05 Perplex wrote: How is riot's business model sustainable?
Seems very sustainable. The thing I'm worried about is how it can continue as an ESPORT if there's a new champ every 2 weeks. At some point there's just going to be a shitload of champs (actually I think we already crossed that point).
If I show you a list of the original 150 pokemon, will you be able to tell me a good number of their names? More then likely for most people who grew up on them or played the game, or watched the show they can. Many of those people can also tell you what that guy does in a general sense.
I am not too worried about Riot crossing this taboo line of 100 when to tie in to the video posted a page back, the champions themselves are iconic. You know what Rammus is going to be tanky and reflect damage on people hitting him because he's an armadillo. You have a pretty good idea that Tristana is going to be shooting the crap out of things because of that giant hand cannon. Just like you know Charmander is going to deal fire damage and that Hitmonlee is going to be a fighter pokemon.
*shrug*
You're sort of missing the reason why it starts getting hairy with so many heroes.
For the guys that are already into the game, it's not that big of a deal, because they only have to incrementally learn a new hero as it comes out. You get them one at a time, so its not that big of a deal to figure them out as you go.
The main problem is that for new players and uninitiated spectators (which you need to be able to accommodate as a major E-sports title), increasing the number of heroes in the game drastically increases the learning curve necessary to play the game. In Pokemon this wasn't a big deal because you were exposed to the game first as a single player game and got to learn them at your own pace. But when a new spectator gets thrown in the deep end watching a game of competitive LoL, having more stuff for them to have to figure out doesn't help them.
This is why the PKMN method of having a fair number of irrelevant heroes would work perfectly. People get shown a game of LoL, maybe they become a fan of someone like Froggen or Dyrus and copy their hero choices to start. The only people who really get upset by making some champs irrelevant are the "old school" players who don't want Kat/Eve/Twitch changes, and they are exactly the same people who cry when they bring the Charizard/Blastoise/Venusaur/Pidgeot/Pikachu/Dugtrio lineup to a real pokemon battle (where my Starmie/Chansey/Alakazam/3 other irrelevant pokemon lineup paralyzes them to victory).
I don't mean to drag things off topic but do people really play R/B/Y competitively? Even as a kid it didn't seem remotely balanced to me, psychic types just explode everything.
On August 17 2012 07:05 Perplex wrote: How is riot's business model sustainable?
Seems very sustainable. The thing I'm worried about is how it can continue as an ESPORT if there's a new champ every 2 weeks. At some point there's just going to be a shitload of champs (actually I think we already crossed that point).
Hasn't beaten dota's numbers yet, so...
At the rate LoL is releasing heroes, they will pass DotA's hero count roughly 2 months from now (3 if 6.75 comes out in that time and Icefrog adds new heroes)
On August 17 2012 07:52 Parnage wrote:
On August 17 2012 07:35 Chill wrote:
On August 17 2012 07:05 Perplex wrote: How is riot's business model sustainable?
Seems very sustainable. The thing I'm worried about is how it can continue as an ESPORT if there's a new champ every 2 weeks. At some point there's just going to be a shitload of champs (actually I think we already crossed that point).
If I show you a list of the original 150 pokemon, will you be able to tell me a good number of their names? More then likely for most people who grew up on them or played the game, or watched the show they can. Many of those people can also tell you what that guy does in a general sense.
I am not too worried about Riot crossing this taboo line of 100 when to tie in to the video posted a page back, the champions themselves are iconic. You know what Rammus is going to be tanky and reflect damage on people hitting him because he's an armadillo. You have a pretty good idea that Tristana is going to be shooting the crap out of things because of that giant hand cannon. Just like you know Charmander is going to deal fire damage and that Hitmonlee is going to be a fighter pokemon.
*shrug*
You're sort of missing the reason why it starts getting hairy with so many heroes.
For the guys that are already into the game, it's not that big of a deal, because they only have to incrementally learn a new hero as it comes out. You get them one at a time, so its not that big of a deal to figure them out as you go.
The main problem is that for new players and uninitiated spectators (which you need to be able to accommodate as a major E-sports title), increasing the number of heroes in the game drastically increases the learning curve necessary to play the game. In Pokemon this wasn't a big deal because you were exposed to the game first as a single player game and got to learn them at your own pace. But when a new spectator gets thrown in the deep end watching a game of competitive LoL, having more stuff for them to have to figure out doesn't help them.
This is why the PKMN method of having a fair number of irrelevant heroes would work perfectly. People get shown a game of LoL, maybe they become a fan of someone like Froggen or Dyrus and copy their hero choices to start. The only people who really get upset by making some champs irrelevant are the "old school" players who don't want Kat/Eve/Twitch changes, and they are exactly the same people who cry when they bring the Charizard/Blastoise/Venusaur/Pidgeot/Pikachu/Dugtrio lineup to a real pokemon battle (where my Starmie/Chansey/Alakazam/3 other irrelevant pokemon lineup paralyzes them to victory).
I don't mean to drag things off topic but do people really play R/B/Y competitively? Even as a kid it didn't seem remotely balanced to me, psychic types just explode everything.
the thing with competitive pokemon battling is that its broken into tiers... so you arent even going to get Blastoise vs Starmie or Venasaur vs. Mewtwo.
That way you don't need to balance out all the pokemon, you have pokemon broken into groups by moveset/stats and that makes it pretty balanced
it'd be like if you have 3 differnt queues with champs like ali, ahri, ryze, corki whatever in one, and eve, twitch and trundle in another type of queue and in the middle you have champs who arent really strong but dont suck dick...
if you want to have all 150 pokemon in one giant battling group no one will ever fucking pick arbok
EPT
