EPTyou get used to it but its still awkward
Of Dota2 and League of Legends - Page 2
| Blogs > CreationSoul |
|
FFGenerations
7088 Posts
you get used to it but its still awkward | ||
|
LaNague
Germany9118 Posts
I play league, but i watch dota 2 from time to time. The main difference between both games are that abilities in dota 2 are more powerful. Especially stun durations in dota 2 are at least doubled. loL abilities are not as powerful, but instead are used more often. Other than that the gameplay is roughly the same with each game emphasizing sligthly different skillsets in each area. But i liked the casting of the big tournament, the casters generally were able to explain to me most things. But of course i dont know of they were right or just making things up like some casters do. | ||
|
Targe
United Kingdom14103 Posts
On August 14 2013 02:12 FFGenerations wrote: the screen is zoomed in a little bit too much (compared to bw) you get used to it but its still awkward As someone who came from WC3 I find it to be normal :D | ||
|
n0ave
180 Posts
On August 14 2013 01:25 Seuss wrote: LoL's scoreboard only updates when you have vision of an opponent, so key items are still hidden in a manner similar to DotA. Didn't knew that, haven't played LoL in over 2 years. I just followed some streams and didn't knew this. I have played around 50 hours of LoL, and around 40 of Dota 2.But I have played a lot of Dota, maybe that's why I adapt better to Dota 2 and I spot so many flaws with LoL. Overall it's pretty sad to see that this genre has such huge success, I always preferred War3 over Dota and Sc2 over Dota 2. But in the last year I stopped playing and become mostly a spectator, and I find Dota 2 tournaments much more entertaining then Sc2 or LoL tournaments. | ||
|
3772
Czech Republic434 Posts
On August 14 2013 02:12 FFGenerations wrote: the screen is zoomed in a little bit too much (compared to bw) you get used to it but its still awkward I'm playing on 5:4, and that's awkward. The casters' screens are probably 16 : 9 which is almost two times wider. | ||
|
GogoKodo
Canada1785 Posts
On August 14 2013 00:03 psychopat wrote: I've played maybe 2 games of LoL, maybe 5 of Dota in WC3, 0 of HoN and 0 of Dota2. As someone who's never played, the commentators in between matches were pretty useless. They used so much jargon/acronyms and so few explanations of why they held whatever opinions they had made it pointless and it might as well have just been ads in between matches. I also felt they didn't showcase the items enough during matches. All they ever mentioned was when someone picked up blink daggers and BKBs (which I still don't know what they are, besides being awesome). I'm sure other items are important too and can affect what's coming up, even if it's to a lesser degree. Why's a trilane better than two dual lanes? Why is the early Roshan so important when it seems that no one ever used the Aegis before he respawned anyway? Why is killing the barracks so important when everything you read always says not to push the creep line further towards their tower unnecessarily? Did people ever go back to heal up at their fountain? The stream never showed/mentioned that. I guess I just felt that they didn't make it very accommodating for newer viewers/players, of whom the marquee tournament of the year is bound to cause a large influx.. Other than that, it was pretty entertaining, even without knowing most of the heroes. Felt like everyone thinks Batrider and Wisp (Io?) are overpowered but I have no clue why. I was thinking about this and the only decent solution I could think of is to have some kind of pre or post day discussion for people not familiar with the game. It really wouldn't be very good to add this type of basic knowledge to everything they discuss during the tournament because it would bore a lot of people. Do they do it every time? It would take up so much of the actual discussion time. It would be like going to watch a chess match and every time they discuss some opening they go over how the pieces involved can move. | ||
|
rabidch
United States20287 Posts
| ||
|
docvoc
United States5491 Posts
On August 14 2013 08:28 rabidch wrote: to anyone confused about the laning "meta" of dota: it would take probably an entire guide (or several) to just cover all bases. the why is just answered with jungling + certain hero abilities that make killing heroes or the jungle a lot easier in dota at low levels, plus the map terrain (in lol, very equivalent distances from one tower to the next, and dota almost has a straight flanking side where heroes can hide and juke, something similar to the brush but a lot harder to deal with) I've followed a bit of DotA and apparently all the types of meta that can be used in a pro-game is staggering. In lol there are about 3-4 choices that are all pretty standard, but no one has ever really popularized the try lane, and no one has ever been able to do away with the jungler. Ever. | ||
|
Stratos_speAr
United States6959 Posts
LoL Pros -Very easy to get into and understand -Visuals are pretty easy to understand (for a MOBA) -The game has a very distinct and fun theme/feel/atmosphere to it. Characters have great personalities/flavor, the game actually has some fluff to it, with lore/backdrop actively playing into the game. -Graphics aren't great, but they are stylistic (similar to how Warcraft graphics aren't great, but are stylistic) -Several game modes -Gigantic population, meaning it's easier to get a game and there are more people to meet -Lots of things to work towards and do -Runes/Masteries lets you customize a lot -Items/tooltips very easy to understand Cons -Community is horrible -Metagame is incredibly stale. Competitive LoL sees the same few heroes every game -Costs a lot of money and/or time to get all of the heroes -Runes/Masteries creates a pretty large time/money-related barrier to entry into higher level play -Higher-level play tends to be quite dull; less fights, games are usually dominated by one team, little you can do to come back from deficits. Whereas almost every DotA game I watched this past week was incredibly exciting and dynamic, the vast, vast majority of LoL competitive games are rather boring, one-sided stomps DotA2 Pros -All heroes available initially -Full range of different game mechanics (couriers, denying, etc) -Games are quite dynamic; metagame doesn't clamp down on innovation and creativity quite as much -comebacks are easier -far more fights against enemy players -Graphics are pretty sweet -Higher skill cap Cons -Very hard to understand what's going on on-screen compared to other MOBA's -Tooltips, items much harder to read/understand -Extremely unforgiving when first coming into the game -Very little flavor/feel to the game. Who are these heroes? What do they do? What is this world I'm in? There is almost no atmosphere in DotA. The hero names are really generic and the characters have no significant personality or flavor. -Games tend to take FOREVER. At least 10-20 minutes more than my average LoL game. Sometimes a good thing, often times it's just annoying, because this is simply caused by the game being significantly harder to lock down and finish out your win Essentially, DotA2 is Brood War and LoL is SC2. DotA2 is much better as a competitive game, but LoL is better to enjoy as a simply fun experience. | ||
|
Bash
Finland1533 Posts
An accessible spectator experience is just not what the game is, the lack of translucency has always been DotA's and DOTA2's weakness no question about that, hardly lessened by the fact that a lot of it is simply knowing numbers and mechanics by memorization, but obviously for a rather massive amount of people that is countered by the fact that it's actually fun to play so we don't mind learning. Unlike some other games. | ||
|
WolfintheSheep
Canada14127 Posts
On August 14 2013 09:49 Bash wrote: The sheer bulk of raw information involved in being familiar with DOTA2 makes it impossible for a commentary to be hype/entertaining as well as strategic enough to cater to the core audience while explaining basic stuff to newbies on the side. Simply not feasible, sorry, LD and Luminous simplified their commentary a bit for the finals but there are too many decisions and too much strategy to talk about even during the times when there are no real fights happening to take the time to hold the hands of people who just happened to wander into the room. An accessible spectator experience is just not what the game is, the lack of translucency has always been DotA's and DOTA2's weakness no question about that, hardly lessened by the fact that a lot of it is simply knowing numbers and mechanics by memorization, but obviously for a rather massive amount of people that is countered by the fact that it's actually fun to play so we don't mind learning. Unlike some other games. LoL isn't much better for anyone who doesn't play the game. SC2 is slightly better, but still not. FPS games are really the only ones that you can just turn on a stream and understand the basics of what is going on. | ||
|
Stratos_speAr
United States6959 Posts
On August 14 2013 10:04 WolfintheSheep wrote: LoL isn't much better for anyone who doesn't play the game. SC2 is slightly better, but still not. FPS games are really the only ones that you can just turn on a stream and understand the basics of what is going on. In general, MOBA's are some of the hardest games out there for a spectator to just turn on and understand, but LoL is definitely the easiest one to understand out of them. | ||
|
ahswtini
Northern Ireland22203 Posts
On August 13 2013 22:34 MaxViktory wrote: I watched my first ever MOBA now during TI3. Mostly because I read alliance was kicking ass. What disturbed me was how hard it was to see where on the minimap the screen was centered. The white box-thing that tells you this is very very hard to see compared to Starcraft. Again, it's a lack of familiarity to the game. The entire game is played on the same map, so after a while, you should know exactly where the camera is, without having to look at the minimap. | ||
|
dartoo
India2889 Posts
Save for a few heroes,the rest feel very generic, most of the time it felt they were very place holder. I liked twisted fate,riven,lee sin, tryndamere,ezreal and lux (free win :p),shaco and a few others. The rest felt like they were just there to make the numbers, and really had nothing interesting. I felt this especially with the carries, most of them felt like a modified sniper, and were really boring to play. Another part of this is the itemization, the items again didnt really feel interesting to me. The other is the art style, this is obviously down to personal taste, and I just didnt like their art style, it felt very bland and cheap. I think in terms of getting an "evovled war3 style" HoN did the best job, but I really like dota's art style too. But some things that LoL does do well are things like matchmaking: I actually had decent matches more often than really one sided ones. This might be due to the slighly less snowbally-ness of LoL, but on an average, once you levelled up I felt the people I played with actually had some idea of what they had to do instead of clueless feeder teammate#2 in Dota 2.I still did have the random idiots on the team, but the frequency of it was way higher in dota 2. I actually like that people are made to play a huge number of matches before they are allowed into the more serious matchmaking mode, and also the hero locking part helps in people valuing their purchased heroes, and perhaps makes them invest more time into learning that hero as they've spent either some money or time farming points. | ||
|
StarStruck
25339 Posts
On August 13 2013 23:43 Sn0_Man wrote: PS: League graphics are a disaster. Dota's are (in comparison) excellent. Okay so a few people have said this now and my opinion is the opposite. I like the fact that League uses very bright colors and everything is easy to distinguish; whereas in Dota2 the colors are very dilute and this makes it harder to watch. I tell developers all the time to stay away from flashy graphics and to avoid such colors because it makes it harder for people to watch. You need contrast. Keep in mind, this is coming from someone who enjoys both and really I don't think we should be comparing the two gameplay wise because they're world's apart and there are good reasons for this. | ||
|
Archeon
3247 Posts
Dota 2 is seen by many players as the elite of esports for the elite to watch. The potential knowledge of dota is immense and i doubt that even the best captains understand the game fully. Trying to address the people who dont have a basic understanding of the game and make them understand how a player plays is just not possible, the complexity is both the biggest strength and the biggest weakness of dota. On the other hand one of the reasons why i stopped watching sc2 when i stopped playing is that no caster ever seemed to explain the details, like why player x is going for that build, where he strays from standard and why. Following sc2 barely hold any value for me as the caster didnt help me to understand the players decisions. Somebody wrote that the heroes have no fluff etc, which is not true, every single hero has a background-story and i think that valve did an amazing job with their voice actors. On August 14 2013 11:04 StarStruck wrote: Okay so a few people have said this now and my opinion is the opposite. I like the fact that League uses very bright colors and everything is easy to distinguish; whereas in Dota2 the colors are very dilute and this makes it harder to watch. I tell developers all the time to stay away from flashy graphics and to avoid such colors because it makes it harder for people to watch. You need contrast. Keep in mind, this is coming from someone who enjoys both and really I don't think we should be comparing the two gameplay wise because they're world's apart and there are good reasons for this. Tbh i dont like lol's graphics, it's to colorful for me. To me it looks like a game for very young children, it hurts my eyes, the colors bite each other. Personal preference. I know what you mean by contrast though and i wished there was a way to do it without killing my eyes. On August 13 2013 21:51 CreationSoul wrote: I will admit that before The International 3, I have never watched Dota2 beofre for more than 15 minutes. But I do know the basic concepts of MOBAs (or whatever they are called) from League of Legends. I got into LoL with the Season2 NA qualifiers for S2 Worlds and watched it ever since. These are the main things I observed at the International" The good (about dota2): - the drafting system: I just thought it was better (don't ask me for logical reasons) - the ingame statistics - fight seemed more spread out and seemed to last longer - everything (mainly abilities) seemed so strong, bordering overpowered - the map: it was nice seeing trees being destroyed and the style differences between dire and radiance side - i heard the client is a masterpiece compared to the LoL one (and it's not hard to believe) The bad (about dota2): - the graphics style: not being used to the style, I sometimes had trouble distinguishing heroes from minions (some heroes seemed really really small) - the commentators: they commentary was not targeted to people like me who wanted to get into dota2. I had to keep a tab open just to search who OD was, what BKB was and other stuff. - again this is just me not knowing about Dota, but I didn't understand the metagame at all: what is the off-lane, freefarm lane, why going offensive tri-lane is better than going duo-lane + jungler (as in LoL). I would have liked to have something that explained this to me - maybe it's just coming from LoL, but heroes teleporting all over the place was pretty confusing The interesting (about dota 2): - the buyback system although it wouldn't fit into LoL at all (would be overpowered in the late-game) - the courier system (would also be a broken feature in LoL) - denying: I don't consider it good or bad These are my thoughts. Although I didn't watch every single match, I watched about 20% of the prelimineries and 80% of the playoffs. Dota2 is incredibly complex and even after more than 500 hours of play i am still learning. The commentary is targeted to people who know the game in and out, which can be considered as a bad thing or as a good thing, depending on how you see it. I will try to answer some of your questions, since there are a lot i will try to make it short. -off-lane is the lane where the jungle is on the enemies side of the river (top for radiant and bot for dire). -Freefarm-lane is the opposite one, the safe lane. -Three heroes with nukes are enough to burst most heroes down even without long duration stuns, while two need some auto-attacks in between. That's why tris will usually win against duals and duals are really uncommon. Offensive tris main purpose is to shut the enemies carry down, who will farm in the lane where he gets more exp and gold. Therefore they stay in the lane. The second advantage of offensive tris is that you can get some farm on an additional core/carry, one in your safe-lane and one in the offensive tri. -Depending on the resolution understanding what's happening can be quite the task even if you know every ability. On August 14 2013 00:03 psychopat wrote: I've played maybe 2 games of LoL, maybe 5 of Dota in WC3, 0 of HoN and 0 of Dota2. As someone who's never played, the commentators in between matches were pretty useless. They used so much jargon/acronyms and so few explanations of why they held whatever opinions they had made it pointless and it might as well have just been ads in between matches. I also felt they didn't showcase the items enough during matches. All they ever mentioned was when someone picked up blink daggers and BKBs (which I still don't know what they are, besides being awesome). I'm sure other items are important too and can affect what's coming up, even if it's to a lesser degree. Why's a trilane better than two dual lanes? Why is the early Roshan so important when it seems that no one ever used the Aegis before he respawned anyway? Why is killing the barracks so important when everything you read always says not to push the creep line further towards their tower unnecessarily? Did people ever go back to heal up at their fountain? The stream never showed/mentioned that. I guess I just felt that they didn't make it very accommodating for newer viewers/players, of whom the marquee tournament of the year is bound to cause a large influx.. Other than that, it was pretty entertaining, even without knowing most of the heroes. Felt like everyone thinks Batrider and Wisp (Io?) are overpowered but I have no clue why. bkb is black king bar, an item that makes you immune to most spells and almost all spell damage. It's the thing that gives the golden effect around the hero: http://i.imgur.com/FceHw.jpg . @tri see above. @rosh: rosh equals the gold of a tower, so picking it up is always 1000g (200 each) for your team. While you dont always use the aegis, often the team without aegis will try to stay away from fights if you have one, giving you map control and sometimes free towers. @rax: you dont want to push the creepwave when you are farming them for an extended period of time, which is mostly in the early game. Having the lane pushed gives you lots of vision and an eminent threat to the enemies base if they push. Besides killing a rax cuts your creeps gold value in a half, effectively taking 1/6th of the enemies lane-farm. It also buffs your creeps according to the rax you killed, which is why killing the melee-rax is favored, as there are more melee-creeps so the lane pushes faster. You will need to clear and push back the lane where you lost rax constantly or the creeps will kill your throne, so pushing and smoke ganking becomes significantly harder. @fountain: People sometimes go back to heal up at their fountain, but in most pro matches they get enough regeneration items like tangoes or salves for the laning phase or just play more defensive. Loosing out on exp might mean that you are easy to kill, so the drawback might end up higher than the one from getting less gold by playing defensive. @bat and Io (=wisp, he was renamed recently to Io): bat adds the possibility of easily separating a single enemy, which creates favorable 5v4 scenarios. Io is able to teleport an allied hero to any place on the map which creates lots of map-control and forces the enemies to stick together, reducing their farm. It also means that it is very easy to create situations where you have superior numbers. | ||
|
WolfintheSheep
Canada14127 Posts
On August 14 2013 10:10 Stratos_speAr wrote: In general, MOBA's are some of the hardest games out there for a spectator to just turn on and understand, but LoL is definitely the easiest one to understand out of them. "Easiest" still means spending dedicated time playing the game, or spending every game reviewing a wiki every time an unfamiliar phrase or term is said. Honestly, it's a pointless comparison. Both have such a high threshold of required knowledge that you won't understand either unless you're willing to dedicate the time to do so, even if you've played other MOBAs. And the amount of time required to understand one game (even at a basic level) means both are completely impossible for anyone to just tune in and watch. | ||
Kipsate
Netherlands45349 Posts
I had to borrow a friend's account to play with friends at a LAN party. And on the note of personality, I think its hard in general to give personality to any hero in MOBA's but I think Dota does a decent job at it with incredible voice acting. The way heroes interact with each other when they get kills or get killed is really fun. fuck magic. | ||
|
Fumanchu
Canada669 Posts
But a big thing for me is the lack of disables. There are few heroes who have stuns, and I think only one (lulu?) who has a short transformation disable. There are a wack ton of slows, it seems like everyone has a slow of some sort. I just hate that end game if you've chosen an int based hero, not a thing I know but I'm trying to put in terms for dota ppl, end game you have no chance against an attack damage carry. There's nothing you can purchase that can disable them. There's no item that renders you invisible, or gives you a blink, or allows you to stun/sheep/cyclone/force staff the enemy hero. I can't stand it. However, I have some friends who hate Dota, and love LoL for exactly the same reason. Overall I prefer Dota 2. There's more skill involved IMO. | ||
|
ReignSupreme.
Australia4123 Posts
On August 14 2013 09:47 Stratos_speAr wrote: LoL Pros -The game has a very distinct and fun theme/feel/atmosphere to it. Characters have great personalities/flavor, the game actually has some fluff to it, with lore/backdrop actively playing into the game. Huh? Heroes in Dota have lore aswell, aswell as a large number of voice responses pandered towards other heroes (ie. When a Treant Protector and a Timbersaw are picked in the same match, the responses can vary depending on whether they're allies or against each other. (Just for background, Timbersaw's lore makes him scared of tree-people after they came and destroyed the city he lived in) Ally: There's...a giant...tree-person...right next to me. Stay calm. Ha ha ha ha. Just stay calm. Enemy: If you fall in the woods, and I laugh, will anyone hear me? Not to mention that LoL lore changes whenever Riot deem fit  | ||
| ||
