Game Mechanics etc.

[Hassat Hunter]

Since when is DoTA2 a RPG?

 

The system is so different, I can't honestly use it as comparrison in this case...

[Wizaerd]

The concern with balance is not that there must be some picture-perfect equal distribution of power amongst attributes, classes, builds, any kind of choice.

 

The concern is that now matter how you build your party, it'll be viable to play until the very end of the game:

 

Some of us "play the system", we find out the best builds, party compositions etc. pretty fast, we are willing to restart the game, reload a battle already won to try something else, and so on. I am one of those people. But many people who play RPGs do not "play the system", they just play the game as it comes. They should be able to boot up the game, make those initial choices, and play the game to the very end without worrying about "did I make the right choices at the start?". This is the reason for caring about balance.

 

This is how I tend to play.  I don't take a lot of time, read a lot of online information, and don;t really pre-plan my characters.  I make choices as they're provided and offered based on what may currently be happening.  I give some thought towards future activities, but I mostly just stick with what is offered at the time.  I have played many RPG games where I ended up gimping my character horribly either because the scenario required a strict combination of skills & talents, and if you didn't pick those things, you were SOL. I remember hating those games.

[Caerdon]

 

Reading the forums, it strikes me that there are a lot of people scared and resistant to any change, but if something can be improved, surely go for it? Pen & paper and video games are, after all, completely different; why restrict a video to pen and paper drawbacks? Nostalgia is all well and good, but there have always been numerous fundamental flaws in any D&D edition, so for me one of the best things about this game will probably be the fact it isn't limited to replicating a flawed system. And if some mechanic does turnout to be dodgy, it can be altered later, so it isn't the end of the world.

 

I don't think it's so much "scared and resistant to change", but more "scared that it might end up being yet another dull, bland action RPG". I hated Diablo, and WoW, and Dragon Age 2, and Dungeon Siege. The fact that there does seem to be a scarily high emphasis on combat, and the fact that they're using D&D4e as part of their inspiration, doesn't help alleviate any fears in that regard.

 

Also, it's not exactly 'change' if it's going to be like every other RPG currently on the market...what would be 'change' is if they made it into an actual roleplaying game - you know, the type where how you present yourself and how you interact with NPCs is just as important as which combat abilities you choose!

 

 

Yet it's astounding to me how little faith and how little benefit of the doubt some people give to the devs. The whole point of this game is that it's not another moder MMO or ARPG. Still, if a dev were to utter a word like "cooldown" - a word that can represent ten different ideas that can be implemented in a hundred different ways - he'd be crucified for trying to make the game yet another WoW. Have some faith, people - and some respect, too.

 

(Just to be clear: this wasn't directed at you.)

[Lephys]

Yet it's astounding to me how little faith and how little benefit of the doubt some people give to the devs. The whole point of this game is that it's not another moder MMO or ARPG. Still, if a dev were to utter a word like "cooldown" - a word that can represent ten different ideas that can be implemented in a hundred different ways - he'd be crucified for trying to make the game yet another WoW. Have some faith, people - and some respect, too.

I know what you mean, . At times, it seems about like this:

 

"Wait, this game has GUNS in it?! IT'S EXACTLY THE SAME AS CALL OF DUTY!"

[Ffordesoon]

Whenever I read one of those posts, I always think of the horse from Ren & Stimpy that would get a sour expression on his face and go, "No sir, I don't like it!"

[Fatback]

Since when is DoTA2 a RPG?

 

The system is so different, I can't honestly use it as comparrison in this case...

How is it totally different you level up skills and get items sounds like a basic crpg to me.

 

And fits as a good way to look at balance and how to balance things. If you would prefer we can keep looking at the bg series for balance options.

[Lephys]

^ I hate to tell you, but in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare (and all since, that I'm aware of), you level up and get items. Those might be RPGish elements, but that doesn't make Call of Duty an RPG, any more than it makes DOTA an RPG.

[Fatback]

I hate to tell you there is a lot to learn about balance from other games than just your bg's or your dragon ages. Your all so in the box.

[Fatback]

You all funded a spiritual successor and most of that spirit was an art style the games are honestly meh.

[Fatback]

And maybe I loosely compared dota to an rpg and because of your closed minded ideas on what this project should be you didn't even see any possibilities of what I was talking about. Maybe because I didn't preorder the game 2 years in advance from kick starter idk. Sometimes it seems like you guys have been playing solely these games for 15 years.

[Fatback]

You all want interesting tactical fights look at dota those are fun team fights. Bg combat, no bg2 combat a little better mostly because of the absurdity and how powerful you get.

 

And I understand that you all are just gonna flame but i don't really care. I want fun fights with a good story, not the auto attack your way threw 3/4 of a game.

Edited March 29, 2014 by Fatback

[Mr. Magniloquent]

I would define RPG more along the lines of having a meaningful choice in not just the development of your character, but more importantly how that character influences the events in a game. In that sense, Icewind Dale and even Planescape: Torment more closely exemplify an adventure game, while Arcanum and Fallout are more representative of a actual RPG.

[Ffordesoon]

@Fatback:

 

Actually, if you hadn't flown off the handle, I would have mentioned that I play just about everything released, Dota 2 included, and that it is worth looking at in terms of copping tactical mechanics. The Infinity Engine did start out as an RTS engine, after all.

 

Furthermore, had you stayed your tongue but a moment, you might have learned that some people who frequent these boards have a more liberal definition of the term "RPG," myself included. While I wouldn't call Dota 2 an RPG, I would call a lot of things - including things I don't like, such as MMOs - RPGs. I would in a pinch even call The Sims an RPG, in fact, and that's arguably more "out there" than calling Dota 2 an RPG!

 

You might also have learned that many of us - again, myself included - are acutely conscious of the mechanical deficiencies of the Infinity Engine games we love so much, and are absolutely open to a more tactical, in-the-moment experience.

 

But instead of reaching across the aisle, you chose to throw an ugly little temper tantrum because one person didn't immediately agree with your conception of what an RPG is. That's just as bad as the worst actions of those you have demonized. I recommend taking a look in the mirror, friend.

[Lephys]

@Fatback:

 

There's a difference between flaming you, and simply pointing out a distinction. Suggesting DOTA 2 isn't really an RPG, per se, isn't somehow calling you a moron. It's just an observation.

 

If you want to point out what we can learn of the balance of combat viability from that game, that makes perfect sense. But, that has almost nothing to do with whether or not it's an RPG. And responding to the first mention of this with "items and levels totally make it an RPG" is changing your argument from the initial "here's how this game could be useful to observe" to "what makes an RPG and what doesn't," which isn't serving your original intent at all.

 

So, instead of getting worked up, I encourage you to try simply acknowledging people's sentiments about what is or isn't an RPG, and continuing on with what actually is relevant to your initial point and presenting that.

[Fatback]

The main reason this forum agitates me is when people say something like and is a good fit for looking at things like balance. Everyone ignores it and makes comments about cod and getting items. Why not go hm how so with the balance or, yes it is interesting how the team fight dinamic works with so many different characters and no 2 games are the same. Wasn't that what we were originally talking about being afraid that all classes would become the same for the sake of balance.

 

Everyone would rather **** on mmo's and skyrim.

[Hassat Hunter]

Yup, Fatback is a DotA2 player alright...

 

There's a distinct difference between balancing PvP and PvE. For starters, the counters will be alot less useful since by default an AI will use them less useful than a player. So a purely PvP based setting will be too easy for PvE. That's why RTS against AI are very different than PvP for example.

And thus in RPG's (PvE) instead of just using stuff like that which would make sense if players use it, are making it up from the very wrong outset from the start. Something which should be avoided if you want the player to actually an interesting and slightly challenging experience.

[Suburban-Fox]

So much talk about 'balance' on this forum...has everyone gone True Neutral on me, or have I wandered into a druid's grove? (a D&D druid, that is, not a real life ancient Briton druid)

 

I personally hope it's not balanced. I hope the fighter totally outclasses everyone in the field of combat, and that nobody can hope to match a fighter in a straight up fight, apart from another fighter. I don't want a lightly armoured thief with a rapier standing toe to toe with a knight in full harness and expecting to survive.

[Fatback]

Yup, Fatback is a DotA2 player alright...

 

There's a distinct difference between balancing PvP and PvE. For starters, the counters will be alot less useful since by default an AI will use them less useful than a player. So a purely PvP based setting will be too easy for PvE. That's why RTS against AI are very different than PvP for example.

And thus in RPG's (PvE) instead of just using stuff like that which would make sense if players use it, are making it up from the very wrong outset from the start. Something which should be avoided if you want the player to actually an interesting and slightly challenging experience.

The bot ai scripts in that game are very good and can be pretty difficult, and bots is pve

[Lephys]

Fatback... calling something not-an-RPG is not the same thing as asterisking on it.

 

I like Call of Duty... as a competitive multiplayer shooter. And they could like... stop making 17 of them, really, and give up on the campaigns. But, still...

 

I like DOTA.

 

You called DOTA an RPG, and someone merely questioned its being one, to which you responded "you level up skills and get items," suggesting that that's what makes an RPG. I then presented an example wherein you do such things in a game that isn't really an RPG.

 

Again, you could've just called "fair enough" and emphasized what we can still take from something like DOTA, regardless. But, instead, you decided everyone hates you and doesn't even care what your point is. False. We don't know your point doesn't hinge upon DOTA actually being an RPG or not until you tell us.

[Fatback]

I had a long day at work that involved a fair amount of booger sugar so I was in a rampage state so I do apologize.

[ReyVagabond]

Back to how a game like this can benefit from ideas of other type of games.

I do think it possible, to search for inspiration for the combat part of the game, in MMOs and MOBAs, because that’s what those games focus on, Balance and Combat.

Some of those like, the deck building of Guild Wars 1, that have Asymmetrical / symmetrical balance. And in it last iteration it is full fledged party single player game.

 

And back to balance in the sense that one character is a late bloomer mage, where he is there just to waste space at the start of the game and then boom, the rest of the team is there to waste space.

I prefer a steady balance where each class a or many has rols to fill and they can do it in different ways and maybe they can do stuff there are not primary able to do but because the party is build that way they can do it.

 

But that’s just me.

[anameforobsidian]

Of course you can draw inspiration from anywhere, but the ability balance of MOBA's reflects far different needs than a single-player rtwp game.  Skillshots are weighted because they're more likely to miss.  Healing is far less of a factor since there's less asymmetric boss fights, and you want players to work really hard for asymmetric team fights.  Stuns, counter-stuns, and dashes are far more present because the game is expected to be fought over a large map rather than the single room experience of d&d (or even MMOs).  Finally, tanks have far less power over other players to force attacks, because every time you do that in a multiplayer game you are taking control away from another player and that player is not having fun if it lasts for a substantial amount of time.