"I sexually Identify as an Attack Helicopter. Ever since I was a boy I dreamed of soaring over the oilfields dropping hot sticky loads on disgusting foreigners. People say to me that a person being a helicopter is Impossible and I’m ****ing ******ed but I don’t care, I’m beautiful. I’m having a plastic surgeon install rotary blades, 30 mm cannons and AMG-114 Hellfire missiles on my body. From now on I want you guys to call me “Apache†and respect my right to kill from above and kill needlessly. If you can’t accept me you’re a heliphobe and need to check your vehicle privilege. Thank you for being so understanding." - Guuse
"uh, I identify as counterstrike and I find this globally offensive" - ???
"uh, I identify as counterstrike and I find this globally offensive" - ???
Not sure what we are even discussing, but i will roll with it!
Not sure what you are trying to say here, but my point is that yes they are both in a hardcore Genre. But they are still entirely different games. You require aim in both Call of duty and counterstrike. But that doesn't mean it is a huge difference. (Maybe not such a huge difference in your eyes, but i would actually say that the two is a nice comparision).
And i would not say League is easier to learn. It is not about the game, it is about who or what teaches you the game. And considering Valve are working by the looks of it a by far superior set of tutorial missions. It looks like Dota 2 might be alot more totally new player friendly in the not so distant future.
You brought it up >;(
I agree, just stating my own experience and theories why in the beggining.
Also, :p
So it is just a personal opinion then? Fair enough.
I am not bringing up the argument: "IT IS LAIKE IN IRL LEWL". More of the: The only reason you would have a issue with this is because you come from a previus Dota style game where there is no turn animation.
A player coming in blindly from another kind of game like a first person shooter or an RTS like starcraft would never find it out of place. It is just a league player thing.
I was thinking about the number of heroes / spells that are not just a Critt by the way, so my guess is f
airly accurate.
Wouldn't say random is bad in all games, Most of the fun in games Like Blood bowl, DnD and other tabletops. Irellevant to the topic of discussion but i digress.
Psedo random is quite the difference from True random, because you as a player can predict and abuse it to some extent. Kinda like a deck of cards. If i know a fight is gonna take X amount of Seconds i can expect Y amount of critts.
And considering we are not talking about a 25% chance to stun a target on each hit. But actually an around 8% chance, a stun lock longer than 2 procs in a row is insanely small to give a game breaking effect. Especially considering you have to be in meele range to dish out these stuns.
The judgments you have to do on the fly. The added depth is what makes it enjoyable. The WOW factor is just iceing on the cake.
Ofcourse it is impossible to expect everything, but you can be prepared for an awful lot.
But you can affect the Pseudo-random element, since it is not True random, it is a huge difference. Yes True RNG is impossible to predict, and that is the nature of it. But you can do some rough estimates of your chances with a Pseudo system. Your entire argument seems to be around: True random.
And i mention league because people have a tendency to forget that it got way more random elements in terms of the critt system, not that it is bad. Just always think it is funny when People call Dota ******** for a couple of spells when every single Hero in league got a critt.
Quoted:
They're both hardcore, period. Don't pollute the definition..
Their skill-ceilings are fairly equal(DotA 2 probably being slightly higher), but as I said: the biggest difference lies in that LoL is easier to learn because of the move towards transparent game mechanics.
Your conclusion has nothing to do with your statements. Being better or worse has nothing to do with the difference in skill-requirements. Especially when the two games are so similar.
Their skill-ceilings are fairly equal(DotA 2 probably being slightly higher), but as I said: the biggest difference lies in that LoL is easier to learn because of the move towards transparent game mechanics.
Your conclusion has nothing to do with your statements. Being better or worse has nothing to do with the difference in skill-requirements. Especially when the two games are so similar.
Not sure what you are trying to say here, but my point is that yes they are both in a hardcore Genre. But they are still entirely different games. You require aim in both Call of duty and counterstrike. But that doesn't mean it is a huge difference. (Maybe not such a huge difference in your eyes, but i would actually say that the two is a nice comparision).
And i would not say League is easier to learn. It is not about the game, it is about who or what teaches you the game. And considering Valve are working by the looks of it a by far superior set of tutorial missions. It looks like Dota 2 might be alot more totally new player friendly in the not so distant future.
Quoted:
Ignoring the point regarding LoL and DotA 1(as it isn't relevant):
You brought it up >;(
Quoted:
ea, this part of the discussion gets nowhere with the lack of any concrete way to prove a point. Let's leave it at that.
Also, lol at your trashtalking.
Also, lol at your trashtalking.
I agree, just stating my own experience and theories why in the beggining.
Also, :p
Quoted:
I'm a person? A sentient being?
What a pointless statement to make..
What a pointless statement to make..
So it is just a personal opinion then? Fair enough.
Quoted:
Don't bring real life into a discussion about games. I'll just make your argument moot by asking how much sense a staff-wielding panda makes.
I am not bringing up the argument: "IT IS LAIKE IN IRL LEWL". More of the: The only reason you would have a issue with this is because you come from a previus Dota style game where there is no turn animation.
A player coming in blindly from another kind of game like a first person shooter or an RTS like starcraft would never find it out of place. It is just a league player thing.
Quoted:
Instead of going for the 'old doesn't mean bad' route, how about you focus on why it's not bad?
Psuedo-random is still random, and random is still bad, no matter which game it is being used in.
5? There's a list of 10 heroes and 13 items just here: http://www.dota2wiki.com/wiki/Pseudo-random_distribution
And I'm certain there are more.
Still, crits are minor things compared to CC reliant on chance. Not finding fault with RNG-based CC would entail an intellect only rivaled by garden tools.
Oh, and stop trying to divert attention away from the question at hand to a by defaming the "opposing" game. It's really obvious.
Psuedo-random is still random, and random is still bad, no matter which game it is being used in.
5? There's a list of 10 heroes and 13 items just here: http://www.dota2wiki.com/wiki/Pseudo-random_distribution
And I'm certain there are more.
Still, crits are minor things compared to CC reliant on chance. Not finding fault with RNG-based CC would entail an intellect only rivaled by garden tools.
Oh, and stop trying to divert attention away from the question at hand to a by defaming the "opposing" game. It's really obvious.
I was thinking about the number of heroes / spells that are not just a Critt by the way, so my guess is f
airly accurate.
Wouldn't say random is bad in all games, Most of the fun in games Like Blood bowl, DnD and other tabletops. Irellevant to the topic of discussion but i digress.
Psedo random is quite the difference from True random, because you as a player can predict and abuse it to some extent. Kinda like a deck of cards. If i know a fight is gonna take X amount of Seconds i can expect Y amount of critts.
And considering we are not talking about a 25% chance to stun a target on each hit. But actually an around 8% chance, a stun lock longer than 2 procs in a row is insanely small to give a game breaking effect. Especially considering you have to be in meele range to dish out these stuns.
Quoted:
What positives? That 'WOW factor' you mentioned? That's one positive(not plural), which is easily outdone by the other side of the same coin.
The judgments you have to do on the fly. The added depth is what makes it enjoyable. The WOW factor is just iceing on the cake.
Quoted:
Preparing '100%' for anything is impossible, you will always have to take 'small risks' regardless of RNG(i.e: your argument is moot).
RNG does add another level of complexity, but it's a level that players can't affect and as such is a very cheap way of adding complexity. RNG adds fake depth, not depth that is worthwhile for the players.
RNG does add another level of complexity, but it's a level that players can't affect and as such is a very cheap way of adding complexity. RNG adds fake depth, not depth that is worthwhile for the players.
Ofcourse it is impossible to expect everything, but you can be prepared for an awful lot.
But you can affect the Pseudo-random element, since it is not True random, it is a huge difference. Yes True RNG is impossible to predict, and that is the nature of it. But you can do some rough estimates of your chances with a Pseudo system. Your entire argument seems to be around: True random.
And i mention league because people have a tendency to forget that it got way more random elements in terms of the critt system, not that it is bad. Just always think it is funny when People call Dota ******** for a couple of spells when every single Hero in league got a critt.
PotatisFarfar wrote:
my point is that yes they are both in a hardcore Genre. But they are still entirely different games. You require aim in both Call of duty and counterstrike. But that doesn't mean it is a huge difference. (Maybe not such a huge difference in your eyes, but i would actually say that the two is a nice comparision).
A more viable comparison would be Quake live and Xonotic. You're bad at this..
Quoted:
And i would not say League is easier to learn. It is not about the game, it is about who or what teaches you the game. And considering Valve are working by the looks of it a by far superior set of tutorial missions. It looks like Dota 2 might be alot more totally new player friendly in the not so distant future.
There's a difference between learning through playing and learning through guides. LoL is a lot better when it comes to learning through playing(because of transparent game mechanics, as I've said). It's possible that DotA 2 will be a lot better on the guide front, but that remains to be seen.
Quoted:
So it is just a personal opinion then? Fair enough.
And you're not stating your personal opinions?
You really don't seem to understand how pointless that statement was...
Quoted:
I am not bringing up the argument: "IT IS LAIKE IN IRL LEWL". More of the: The only reason you would have a issue with this is because you come from a previus Dota style game where there is no turn animation.
A player coming in blindly from another kind of game like a first person shooter or an RTS like starcraft would never find it out of place. It is just a league player thing.
A player coming in blindly from another kind of game like a first person shooter or an RTS like starcraft would never find it out of place. It is just a league player thing.
You said "Do you expect a person to turn instantly to one side to the other in real life?"
You talked ********, I called you out on it. Don't try to squirm your way out.
You're also talking ******** regarding FPS games. FPS games don't have turning animations. Stop talking out your arse.
Are you sure SC2 has turning animations? Because after all the things you've pulled out your arse, I'm not sure I can trust you on that..
As has been said previously: turning animations were a way to mask deficiencies in a game engine. They no longer serve any purpose and are yet another example of a non-transparent game mechanic.
Quoted:
Psedo random is quite the difference from True random, because you as a player can predict and abuse it to some extent.
No, no they are not.
You really don't seem to understand what the mechanics entail beyond the most basic principle, so don't argue that they are something they're not.
Sure it could be abused, there's only one problem. It's still based on random chance.
Psuedo-random is still random, and random is still bad, no matter which game it is being used in.
Quoted:
And considering we are not talking about a 25% chance to stun a target on each hit. But actually an around 8% chance, a stun lock longer than 2 procs in a row is insanely small to give a game breaking effect. Especially considering you have to be in meele range to dish out these stuns.
Uhuh? This disproves no part of my point. RNG CC is pants down, outhouse incest ******ed.
Quoted:
The judgments you have to do on the fly. The added depth is what makes it enjoyable.
The 'on the fly' decisions are there with and without any kind of RNG. It's in the ****ing nature of a multiplayer game..
Quoted:
The WOW factor is just iceing on the cake.
Please use basic English grammar.
Quoted:
Ofcourse it is impossible to expect everything, but you can be prepared for an awful lot.
Irrelevant to the point I made. The point still stands.
Quoted:
And i mention league because people have a tendency to forget that it got way more random elements in terms of the critt system, not that it is bad. Just always think it is funny when People call Dota ******** for a couple of spells when every single Hero in league got a critt.
It's like you're contradicting yourself.
You say that bash isn't so bad because the chance to be gamebreakingly good is very low, but then you say that LoL is way worse because it has crit, when crit has much less effect on most gameplay than CC does.
And I'm really not trying to protect LoL, I don't even play the game anymore. I'm saying this from an unbiased perspective.
"Games may not be art, but this one did wonderful things to my ****." - Roger Ebert
"I AM PRETTY SURE THIS MANGA IS VIOLATING SOME LAWS ABOUT CHILD PORNOGRAPHY
I CANNOT GET ENOUGH
****" - mencretnas, on Gigantomakhia
"I AM PRETTY SURE THIS MANGA IS VIOLATING SOME LAWS ABOUT CHILD PORNOGRAPHY
I CANNOT GET ENOUGH
****" - mencretnas, on Gigantomakhia
Embracing wrote:
comparing two games with different game focuses and saying one is better than the other just because theyre in the same genre
geniussss
Replying to Cuddles?
You're pretty late to the party :P
He just posted a few ******ed comments and then ignored any intelligent responses.
"Gold can't buy you rape." - Mr Sark
Embracing wrote:
seems like im late
Anyways your debate's pretty interesting (despite the few insults between you and potatis)
I have no knowledge on game dev and design so I can't say for anything :P
Me and searz are men, we can take some **** talk.
Quoted:
But you can affect the Pseudo-random element, since it is not True random, it is a huge difference. Yes True RNG is impossible to predict, and that is the nature of it. But you can do some rough estimates of your chances with a Pseudo system. Your entire argument seems to be around: True random.
A pseudorandom number generator (PRNG) takes a so-called seed and then gives you a "random" number by using some basic calculatons (mostly bitwise operations for efficiency). Taking the number that was then produced as the seed the next calculation produces a sequence of numbers. The period is the amount of numbers it takes for the sequence to repeat itself. Generally, good PRNGs have a high period to make it incredibly hard to predict the behaviour. LCG is a great example of how simple but elegant these algorithms are; and yes, sure you can predict them, if you have all the information but the player has no way of obtaining this so it's basically true random for them.
TRNGs or true random number generators do exists but aren't frequently used in games because they are more computationally expensive. They take as input usually a hardware state that can vary greatly. This makes it impossible to predict the numbers, effectively making them true random. However, for gamers, both are random and impossible to work with.
Quoted:
A more viable comparison would be Quake live and Xonotic. You're bad at this..
Never played Xonotic. So how could i know >;(. Still point stands, hugely different games.
Quoted:
There's a difference between learning through playing and learning through guides. LoL is a lot better when it comes to learning through playing(because of transparent game mechanics, as I've said). It's possible that DotA 2 will be a lot better on the guide front, but that remains to be seen.
League maybe is better. But that is like saying a cow **** smells abit less than donkey ****. Since only learning to play League (on an acceptable level mind you) only by solo play and trial and error, is incredible hard.
They way more effective way of learning how to play a game as complex as Dota, and to some extent league, is to actually be thought, either by guides, ingame or from another person.
Quoted:
And you're not stating your personal opinions?
You really don't seem to understand how pointless that statement was...
You really don't seem to understand how pointless that statement was...
I was pointing out how you are comdeming a game mechanic as bad in all situations, even though you are in no position to make that call other than personal prefrence.
Quoted:
You said "Do you expect a person to turn instantly to one side to the other in real life?"
You talked ********, I called you out on it. Don't try to squirm your way out.
You're also talking ******** regarding FPS games. FPS games don't have turning animations. Stop talking out your arse.
Are you sure SC2 has turning animations? Because after all the things you've pulled out your arse, I'm not sure I can trust you on that..
As has been said previously: turning animations were a way to mask deficiencies in a game engine. They no longer serve any purpose and are yet another example of a non-transparent game mechanic.
You talked ********, I called you out on it. Don't try to squirm your way out.
You're also talking ******** regarding FPS games. FPS games don't have turning animations. Stop talking out your arse.
Are you sure SC2 has turning animations? Because after all the things you've pulled out your arse, I'm not sure I can trust you on that..
As has been said previously: turning animations were a way to mask deficiencies in a game engine. They no longer serve any purpose and are yet another example of a non-transparent game mechanic.
I am squirming around the subject? you are the one hanging up one little un relevant detail, when i have said clearly what i mean.
And last time i checked it actually took time to turn around in a fps.
Me throwin ****? I am not the one throwing insults to avoid discussing stuff ;). (Starcraft got em btw. "Turn [Left/Right]
Used to rotate the character in place.")
You would have a point, but it falls flat on its face when you see that yes, it actually have an effect on gameplay and the way the game is played. Predicting were to aim spells, see when an enemie is about to turn on you and spell / item interaction is all exampels how turn animation affect the game in a major way.
And still i ask you, how is it Non-transperent? The only thing i have heard from your side is: It have no purpose (false), it WAS used to mask calculating done (Irrelevant) and that i like to grab my *** alot.
Quoted:
Psuedo-random is still random, and random is still bad, no matter which game it is being used in.
You are not much a a Poker player then are you? There is a huge difference of Predicting and being able to change chance, to just dumb random luck.
Quoted:
The 'on the fly' decisions are there with and without any kind of RNG. It's in the ****ing nature of a multiplayer game..
So you only need to think about 1 thing in a game now? Because last time i checked you could have multiple mechanics to keep in mind, you know. Add more depth?
Quoted:
Please use basic English grammar.
Icing on the cake? ಠ_ಠ
Quoted:
Irrelevant to the point I made. The point still stands.
you are saying my point about your point being irrelevant is irrelevant? Who knew?
Quoted:
It's like you're contradicting yourself.
You say that bash isn't so bad because the chance to be gamebreakingly good is very low, but then you say that LoL is way worse because it has crit, when crit has much less effect on most gameplay than CC does.
And I'm really not trying to protect LoL, I don't even play the game anymore. I'm saying this from an unbiased perspective.
You say that bash isn't so bad because the chance to be gamebreakingly good is very low, but then you say that LoL is way worse because it has crit, when crit has much less effect on most gameplay than CC does.
And I'm really not trying to protect LoL, I don't even play the game anymore. I'm saying this from an unbiased perspective.
I am not talking about Bash, i am talking about the elements of RNG. And CC works way differently in Dota than it does in LoL, so alot of league players see a 1 second stun as a huge ordeal, when in reality it is not much alone, there is always exeptions ofcourse though.
And yeah i am saying League is way worse in the sure Quantity of RNG it have. Wich is in fact a fact... Ok that was bad i am sorry.
I remember FFXI had 4 or 5 lists of numbers and used them sequentially to trigger "random" events like opening chests. However, the list came out and getting 5 crits in a row or obtaining all rare items became really easy.
i really do not enjoy randomization in somewhat already volatile games, since it risks temendously taking the skill from it. Also, randomization is usually very limited in in computing aplications like gaming, where you really can't spend too much time iterating numbers to achieve a "random" number from a seed.
i also would like to show you this:
i really do not enjoy randomization in somewhat already volatile games, since it risks temendously taking the skill from it. Also, randomization is usually very limited in in computing aplications like gaming, where you really can't spend too much time iterating numbers to achieve a "random" number from a seed.
i also would like to show you this:
You need to log in before commenting.
Yeah sorry, came up with a bad example; couldn't think of another champion since I haven't played in awhile but what I'm basically trying to say is you can't put so much emphasis on an element of the game that's so small and rule out other aspects of the gameplay. The minor RNG elements in some abilities are just icing to the cake on the particular heros.
Icing on the cake? ಠ_ಠ
You're implying that it's a good thing with that sentence...
Yes, RNG is a fairly small part of the entire game, but that doesn't make it better nor worth ignoring.
Your thoughts on the matter don't seem entirely coherent, so I suggest sitting back and reading what the others have to say.