Current Events > League of Legends got nothing on Dota 2 highlight/play compliatoins

(+) Yeah! (+)

Source 2 allows video producers easy tools to create awesome little scenes that enhance gameplay video highlights.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e7BqiREIIso

---

We are electric

---

Well dota is a better game in every way so its not surprising

---

There's just something about Dota 2 that I don't like visually. I dunno cool plays just don't look all that cool. I can tell what's going on is supposed to be impressive, but not really impressive to see a bunch of projectiles kinda weakly flapping towards the enemy even though some of those floppy shit do a lot of damage

---

legendarylemur posted...

There's just something about Dota 2 that I don't like visually. I dunno cool plays just don't look all that cool. I can tell what's going on is supposed to be impressive, but not really impressive to see a bunch of projectiles kinda weakly flapping towards the enemy even though some of those floppy shit do a lot of damage

Zoom in and move the camera around, it actually looks rather impressive to me.

---

I don't play either but man Dota 2 players must be insecure as heck that they constantly need to go around saying "Dota 2 is better than LoL".

---

Played both DOTA 2 and LoL. DOTA2 visually is boring and the same characters are used for the best plays.

League of Legends, I love the character designs a lot better.

---

Wedge Antilles posted...

I don't play either but man Dota 2 players must be insecure as heck that they constantly need to go around saying "Dota 2 is better than LoL".

I mean, League took the spotlight.

Wedge Antilles posted...

I don't play either but man Dota 2 players must be insecure as heck that they constantly need to go around saying "Dota 2 is better than LoL".

No insecure so much as sad such an inferior game is more popular.

Dota 2 has all heros for free. That's nuts.

---

F1areaGaman posted...

No insecure so much as sad such an inferior game is more popular.

Dota 2 has all heros for free. That's nuts.

Dota just has way too many unfun mechanics, it's fun to watch but not play.

---

So I don't have to make another topic - Is DOTA 2 really a Tower-Defense game? I thought it was like Diablo or WoW

---

Frosted_Midna posted...

Played both DOTA 2 and LoL. DOTA2 visually is boring and the same characters are used for the best plays.

League of Legends, I love the character designs a lot better.

so you were like bronze tier in LoL and guardian in DotA 2?

worlds for dota used 110+ champs, I wanna say they used all but 1 but I think theres a few that didnt see play.

lols worlds used less than 40 champs. Not even lol fans try and say that LoL has more diversity.

---

Zeeak4444 posted...

so you were like bronze tier in LoL and guardian in DotA 2?

worlds for dota used 110+ champs, I wanna say they used all but 1 but I think theres a few that didnt see play.

lols worlds used less than 40 champs. Not even lol fans try and say that LoL has more diversity.

Yeah the last TI almost every hero was used.

Dota 2's balance is quite good. It's because every hero is unique in a specific way rather than the template of most League Heros.


---

Dots 2 champs got nothing on my girl Vi.

---

DOTA2 players remind me of Tool fans. This isn't negative, just its something I noticed for awhile.

Bad_Mojo posted...

So I don't have to make another topic - Is DOTA 2 really a Tower-Defense game? I thought it was like Diablo or WoW

Sort of? It's like a mini RPG where you defend towers with your team, yes. But the goal is to defeat the "Ancient" structure in the enemies base.

---

dameon_reaper posted...

DOTA2 players remind me of Tool fans. This isn't negative, just its something I noticed for awhile.

I kind of know what you mean. I'm also a huge Tool fan <_<.

But I play bass so I kinda have to be.

---

Balance as a point is overrated. At no point in an e-sports popularity factor did balance play that big of a part. That is to say there shouldn't be utter imbalance because that's a horrible viewing experience, but there's a seriously diminishing to negative return for improving balance after a certain point.

For a more obvious point, it's on whether or not balance is actually entertaining to watch. If there's a bunch of limiting factors that stifle the speed or constant reflex checks of the plays that are happening for the sake of balance, and it came down to players themselves finding fun in nailing that long cd move, it's not gonna succeed as an e-sports to a general audience. FPS is easy to watch because on a surface level, a lot of shit is happening for casuals to be impressed by, but also on a deeper level, long time watchers can still appreciate the overall level of the gameplay.

Excessive champion variety is not a good thing for viewers. If you limit the champions used for a year, then by the end of it, a lot of viewers are more familiar with what's on the screen. This is why you often find people who haven't watched League for a while easily jump back into watching it and their viewership actually increasing this year than last despite less champions being played.

Bigger champion and skill expression range is bad for players. I've been like really absorbed in e-sports for a while, and a thing I hear a lot from players doing very frank and open interviews is their actual % of skill shown on the screen. They were arguing that because the meta changes often, truly great players stay on top like Faker, and one-tricks or non-flexible players keep falling off. So playing professionally became a game of how many characters they can play at like 40% and not absolutely lose to people playing the character at 80-100%. A lot of teams sometimes prevailed over better teams by picking op 40% champs over underpowered 80% champs. But that's not reliable, so they prefer the kind of meta that have 4-5 champs on each role that they can instead play at 60-70% because that makes it easier to compete with whoever was lucky to be able to play their 80-100% champs.

One other example is that Melee is still alive despite Ultimate existing. More than 1 ex-pros have talked about how Ultimate just has too many characters and match-ups to study for, that a jank pick from lower tier players can often just randomly end runs of higher tier players, and higher tier players just knock each other out in losers, leading to poorer top 16s.

I dunno, I just often see people who are almost exclusive in the Dota 2 sphere say a few things that I just don't think applies to e-sports. At the end of the day, it's purely entertainment and competition second. If you like the game more because of this or that, I think it's reasonable, but you also shouldn't be confused by League e-sports blew up over Dota 2's

---

legendarylemur posted...

Balance as a point is overrated. At no point in an e-sports popularity factor did balance play that big of a part. That is to say there shouldn't be utter imbalance because that's a horrible viewing experience, but there's a seriously diminishing to negative return for improving balance after a certain point.

For a more obvious point, it's on whether or not balance is actually entertaining to watch. If there's a bunch of limiting factors that stifle the speed or constant reflex checks of the plays that are happening for the sake of balance, and it came down to players themselves finding fun in nailing that long cd move, it's not gonna succeed as an e-sports to a general audience. FPS is easy to watch because on a surface level, a lot of shit is happening for casuals to be impressed by, but also on a deeper level, long time watchers can still appreciate the overall level of the gameplay.

Excessive champion variety is not a good thing for viewers. If you limit the champions used for a year, then by the end of it, a lot of viewers are more familiar with what's on the screen. This is why you often find people who haven't watched League for a while easily jump back into watching it and their viewership actually increasing this year than last despite less champions being played.

Bigger champion and skill expression range is bad for players. I've been like really absorbed in e-sports for a while, and a thing I hear a lot from players doing very frank and open interviews is their actual % of skill shown on the screen. They were arguing that because the meta changes often, truly great players stay on top like Faker, and one-tricks or non-flexible players keep falling off. So playing professionally became a game of how many characters they can play at like 40% and not absolutely lose to people playing the character at 80-100%. A lot of teams sometimes prevailed over better teams by picking op 40% champs over underpowered 80% champs. But that's not reliable, so they prefer the kind of meta that have 4-5 champs on each role that they can instead play at 60-70% because that makes it easier to compete with whoever was lucky to be able to play their 80-100% champs.

One other example is that Melee is still alive despite Ultimate existing. More than 1 ex-pros have talked about how Ultimate just has too many characters and match-ups to study for, that a jank pick from lower tier players can often just randomly end runs of higher tier players, and higher tier players just knock each other out in losers, leading to poorer top 16s.

I dunno, I just often see people who are almost exclusive in the Dota 2 sphere say a few things that I just don't think applies to e-sports. At the end of the day, it's purely entertainment and competition second. If you like the game more because of this or that, I think it's reasonable, but you also shouldn't be confused by League e-sports blew up over Dota 2's

Dota 2 has maybe 1/10th the viewership of LoL, however, it's still in the top 10 Esports games. Match variety is a factor for viewers watching, especially long-term viewers, like people who actively play the game I don't feel League holds a candle as the variety of strategies that can be played in any given Dota match is more akin to an RTS compared to League.

Fair points you have but I think the barrier of entry is higher but the longevity of the scene is larger.

My two cents.


---

League of legends doesn't sell fan mods in lootboxes so they are a million times better.

---

F1areaGaman posted...

Dota 2 has maybe 1/10th the viewership of LoL, however, it's still in the top 10 Esports games. Match variety is a factor for viewers watching, especially long-term viewers, like people who actively play the game I don't feel League holds a candle as the variety of strategies that can be played in any given Dota match is more akin to an RTS compared to League.

Fair points you have but I think the barrier of entry is higher but the longevity of the scene is larger.

My two cents.

ya thats how I feel, I took the title as highlight videos and reels you enjoy as a fan.

i dont think theres ever been a question that LoL was the better casual viewers game.

i say this as someone who was in masters in League. Loved the game but its not without some massive issues.

---

F1areaGaman posted...

Sort of? It's like a mini RPG where you defend towers with your team, yes. But the goal is to defeat the "Ancient" structure in the enemies base.

Ah, got it. Thanks

---