FATAL FLAW IN REASONING:
people in lol don't want to win.
"Teamwork" is when the guy who insists on taking middle lane (who is always the team asshole) appoints himself the quarterback and demands everyone follow his every order.
Another "meta" thing that ruined this game is dummies who think that everyone has to group up into a permanent 5 man gang around level 10 because that's what the pros do on twitch tv!
That's because the pros have the coordination to exploit a level/gold advantage and push to victory at that point (a lot of pro games end around level 12). The dummies in bronze league think this applies to them so everyone groups into a 5 man and farts around in a stalemate by a turret. Meanwhile the enemy team was smart enough to split off their carry to push another lane and are getting twice the collective gold.
The louder people screech about the META in a game, the worse they'll turn out to be.
Why does anyone play this fucking thing?
It free, runs on old computers, and is casual/asshole free at first.
It gets horrible as your rank goes up until everyone but the worst people quit.
I am diamond I and while the level of asshole goes down by that point you still get them. I don't play much anymore just out of having gotten bored with the game in general, but it was fun while it lasted. I just log on and ARAM every now and then or do the odd ranked for fun.
This game like all online games has some really raging tryhards but no more then any other online game. I actually think it is kinda nice they made an effort to say "Let's keep the game fun for all while working towards a common goal". More then I can say for some other online games. but yeah overall the community does suck.
|The God of Biscuits |
The community for this game is horrible because the game is terribly designed. One bad teammate has a disproportionate effect on your team. How these awful games are popular is beyond me.
Yup. One lane choking early on is all it takes to send your team into a deah spiral of inevitable defeat 20 minutes later. Most games are decided just on which team has less clueless fools on it.
The frustrating part is you could understand if it was new players, but even when you're playing with peple who have 1500 games under their belt, they STILL have no clue about the basics and you wonder how they haven't learned.
They really need some kind of ranking system that detects whose fault it was for losing a game and demote them more harshly on the ladder so they can stew together on the bottom rung. Right now everyone gets penalized equally even if it was just one hopeless player who cost the game.
If you guys want to play a *good* MOBA-style game, check out Awesomenauts. It's 2D side-scrolling, which cuts out a lot of the hassle of keeping track of shit, and the developers actually bothered with trying to balance out the characters instead of pulling some bullshit where the stock characters are terrible but the paid ones dominate everything else. The community also seems miles beyond any other game like this.
Yes! I've sunk over 150 hours into Awesomenauts over the monhs. It's on sale until the expansion comes out for only . Pick it up NOW if you have or had any interest in the genre.
It's just faster and simpler. Teams are only 3on3 so less chance of one idiot throwig the game. Snowballing isn't quite as hard. And games are usually over in 20-30 minutes so no big if you have a bad game.
The best part is the community is almost asshole free. I see a bad apple maybe in 1 out of 8 games. Compare that to the 3 assholes in every single game of LoL.
Steam name "fahbs" to team up with my Leon!
So, raging is negatively correlated with winning and we're assuming that not raging causes people to win? Isn't it also possible that winning makes people not rage anymore?
|Mr. Purple Cat Esq. |
After seeing loads of dota2 wolrd championship vids and stuff all over pc gaming sites I wanted to play it just to see. I played it a lot during 2 days then stopped.
One thing I find about almost all strategy/tactical games is that I dont want to play them after getting into 'Go' (the ancient chinese board game)
They seem like they have the same stuff goin' on risk/reward game theory etc. but masked by incredibly convoluted layers of bullshit and randomness. Whereas in go thry have pared the game down its absolute purest form. So in go you get to the interesting issues in the game immediately, whereas in dota for example 1st you would have to play for months learning different characters + inventory things + map and also there is the massive element of luck involved in the extremely complex interactions of 10 random people.
|Caminante Nocturno |
What's all this 'lane' shit you idiots keep going on about?
Don't answer that, it was an insult phrased like a question.
| Register or login To Post a Comment|