Originally posted by Zeppelin4 The more I hear about this game the less interesting it becomes. Its funny is Landmark sounds like its going to be a better game then EQNext.
I'm quite the opposite, every detail makes both games sound better and better. They've yet to really announce anything that has hit me as "OMG they did what". All seems pretty on track to what they've been hinting at forever.
Landmark was a surprise but makes sense. I think there will be a decent number of people that only play it and attempt to make cash as long as it continues after EQN's launch. Can see many of the minecraft/builder communities making a lot of amazing things. Wouldn't even doubt if we see SOE cater to the top end builders and grant them special plots of land or lower restrictions to allow them a lot more freedom in size and what not.
Same defense. I said something stupid, but you can't articulate how it was stupid or even false. You want to champion the Street Fighter franchise go ahead man.
Ok last time I respond to this because it's getting pretty silly. So I will give you a quick crash course on the fighting game genre. None of this is specific to SF series. There are concepts like zoning, pressuring, turtuling, reading or sometimes called baiting. There are tactics like poking, mix-ups, crossovers, whiffs, these things unlike the concepts are often specific to each character as to how they are done. There also more detailed things like learning hitboxes and frames.
There are various tournaments held around the world for some of these games. One of the largest ones is EVO http://evo.shoryuken.com/ , usually held in vegas. To qualify for that you have to have placed in others. The list of participants often has reaccuring people in it because those people are just that good.
Your thinking that fighting games give an illusion of strategy shows you basic misunderstanding of the genre. It's well known that sight reaction is to unreliable. So the common practice of higher level players is to learn how to make quick pattern recognitions of how an opponent fights. Often top players can loose the first round or two then go on a tear and win every round after that. They basically figured their opponent out. Get two top players and you can see the back and forth game that can come from that.
Now I'm sure this all means I take it to personal, but you wanted an argument so there ya go :P. All I see is a guy who made assumptions about something he/she is ignorant of. All because you just couldn't concede to the other poster that yes there are games with a small number of basic moves that can have a lot of complexity to them.
Same defense. I said something stupid, but you can't articulate how it was stupid or even false. You want to champion the Street Fighter franchise go ahead man.
Ok last time I respond to this because it's getting pretty silly. So I will give you a quick crash course on the fighting game genre. None of this is specific to SF series. There are concepts like zoning, pressuring, turtuling, reading or sometimes called baiting. There are tactics like poking, mix-ups, crossovers, whiffs, these things unlike the concepts are often specific to each character as to how they are done. There also more detailed things like learning hitboxes and frames.
There are various tournaments held around the world for some of these games. One of the largest ones is EVO http://evo.shoryuken.com/ , usually held in vegas. To qualify for that you have to have placed in others. The list of participants often has reaccuring people in it because those people are just that good.
Your thinking that fighting games give an illusion of strategy shows you basic misunderstanding of the genre. It's well known that sight reaction is to unreliable. So the common practice of higher level players is to learn how to make quick pattern recognitions of how an opponent fights. Often top players can loose the first round or two then go on a tear and win every round after that. They basically figured their opponent out. Get two top players and you can see the back and forth game that can come from that.
Now I'm sure this all means I take it to personal, but you wanted an argument so there ya go :P. All I see is a guy who made assumptions about something he/she is ignorant of. All because you just couldn't concede to the other poster that yes there are games with a small number of basic moves that can have a lot of complexity to them.
Thanks for getting my point about the relationship to number of combat options and complexity that was going way, way above ignore_me's head.
I think the basic ideal of having fewer abilities is that they will be more mechanically intricate. This is how you keep the game interesting with very few abilities. For example, let's look at a block ability in WoW vs. what it will probably look like in EQ:N:
In WoW: reduces the damage you take on the next hit(s). Maybe prevents you from getting critted based on some other stats.
In EQ:N: Reduces the damage you take and everyone positionally behind you is protected. Since mobs hit in various arcs/columns, this can be pivotal in keeping your party alive... especially since threat isn't really a thing.
My point is that abilities will be much more dynamic and their impacts will be dependent on many other factors. With 8 abilities like this, the game should be challenging enough and plenty fun, IMO.
I'd also like to point out that EQ1 had practically no abilities, especially for certain classes. Even as far as PoP, my raiding warrior had 3 useful abilities that I would use regularly (auto-attack, taunt, and kick). I had a few others with long cooldowns (disciplines) that I would use occasionally. Did this prevent the game from being challenging and exciting? Far from it! Sometimes having fewer options makes a game harder...
I think the basic ideal of having fewer abilities is that they will be more mechanically intricate. This is how you keep the game interesting with very few abilities. For example, let's look at a block ability in WoW vs. what it will probably look like in EQ:N:
In WoW: reduces the damage you take on the next hit(s). Maybe prevents you from getting critted based on some other stats.
In EQ:N: Reduces the damage you take and everyone positionally behind you is protected. Since mobs hit in various arcs/columns, this can be pivotal in keeping your party alive... especially since threat isn't really a thing.
My point is that abilities will be much more dynamic and their impacts will be dependent on many other factors. With 8 abilities like this, the game should be challenging enough and plenty fun, IMO.
I'd also like to point out that EQ1 had practically no abilities, especially for certain classes. Even as far as PoP, my raiding warrior had 3 useful abilities that I would use regularly (auto-attack, taunt, and kick). I had a few others with long cooldowns (disciplines) that I would use occasionally. Did this prevent the game from being challenging and exciting? Far from it! Sometimes having fewer options makes a game harder...
You've got it. Unfortunately the way you explained it just doesn't register with some of these people. It's an issue of perceived complexity vs. actual complexity. Some gamers enjoy the feeling of an intricate system (without it actually being intricate). While others like actually complex mechanics (even if that means they feel stupid / overwhelmed at the beginning).
Same defense. I said something stupid, but you can't articulate how it was stupid or even false. You want to champion the Street Fighter franchise go ahead man.
Ok last time I respond to this because it's getting pretty silly. So I will give you a quick crash course on the fighting game genre. None of this is specific to SF series. There are concepts like zoning, pressuring, turtuling, reading or sometimes called baiting. There are tactics like poking, mix-ups, crossovers, whiffs, these things unlike the concepts are often specific to each character as to how they are done. There also more detailed things like learning hitboxes and frames.
There are various tournaments held around the world for some of these games. One of the largest ones is EVO http://evo.shoryuken.com/ , usually held in vegas. To qualify for that you have to have placed in others. The list of participants often has reaccuring people in it because those people are just that good.
Your thinking that fighting games give an illusion of strategy shows you basic misunderstanding of the genre. It's well known that sight reaction is to unreliable. So the common practice of higher level players is to learn how to make quick pattern recognitions of how an opponent fights. Often top players can loose the first round or two then go on a tear and win every round after that. They basically figured their opponent out. Get two top players and you can see the back and forth game that can come from that.
Now I'm sure this all means I take it to personal, but you wanted an argument so there ya go :P. All I see is a guy who made assumptions about something he/she is ignorant of. All because you just couldn't concede to the other poster that yes there are games with a small number of basic moves that can have a lot of complexity to them.
Thanks for getting my point about the relationship to number of combat options and complexity that was going way, way above ignore_me's head.
It's because you two were arguing something completely different than what I originally posited. Street Fighter has nothing to do with what I was originally talking about, so whoever that was that chimed in brought a bad analogy to the table and derailed the whole thing. To your credit, I was sucked in by your trolling, but it was fun so no matter.
Original Argument: MOBA button layout relies on short term memory so there is no need to access long term or intermediate memory.
Counter: Street Fighter takes Strategy and Skill and you don't know what you are talking about!
I think the basic ideal of having fewer abilities is that they will be more mechanically intricate. This is how you keep the game interesting with very few abilities. For example, let's look at a block ability in WoW vs. what it will probably look like in EQ:N:
In WoW: reduces the damage you take on the next hit(s). Maybe prevents you from getting critted based on some other stats.
In EQ:N: Reduces the damage you take and everyone positionally behind you is protected. Since mobs hit in various arcs/columns, this can be pivotal in keeping your party alive... especially since threat isn't really a thing.
My point is that abilities will be much more dynamic and their impacts will be dependent on many other factors. With 8 abilities like this, the game should be challenging enough and plenty fun, IMO.
I'd also like to point out that EQ1 had practically no abilities, especially for certain classes. Even as far as PoP, my raiding warrior had 3 useful abilities that I would use regularly (auto-attack, taunt, and kick). I had a few others with long cooldowns (disciplines) that I would use occasionally. Did this prevent the game from being challenging and exciting? Far from it! Sometimes having fewer options makes a game harder...
You've got it. Unfortunately the way you explained it just doesn't register with some of these people. It's an issue of perceived complexity vs. actual complexity. Some gamers enjoy the feeling of an intricate system (without it actually being intricate). While others like actually complex mechanics (even if that means they feel stupid / overwhelmed at the beginning).
I think this makes sense. But why then not shoot for a good mix of the two (perceived complexity and actual complexity). I think you correctly identified the two approaches, but are they mutually exclusive? Even if they are, wouldn't it make sense to conform the interface of the game to varied tastes and not fix it just in one form?
Default the bar to MOBA controls, but then allow people to inflate or add a bar for more controls (even if non-combat or consumable for that perceived complexity you mentioned).
Original Argument: MOBA button layout relies on short term memory so there is no need to access long term or intermediate memory.
Counter: Street Fighter takes Strategy and Skill and you don't know what you are talking about!
Actually counter arcument is: Your assumptions are wrong about MOBA's and their complexities. Les give you something easy to see if you get it, lets look at something like streetfighter that at first view looks like all you do is press buttons haphazardly but where the actuality is far more complex...
If you don't get the argument using such an easy analogy then you never will. Nice chatting, shame it was wasted time.
Original Argument: MOBA button layout relies on short term memory so there is no need to access long term or intermediate memory.
Counter: Street Fighter takes Strategy and Skill and you don't know what you are talking about!
Actually counter arcument is: Your assumptions are wrong about MOBA's and their complexities. Les give you something easy to see if you get it, lets look at something like streetfighter that at first view looks like all you do is press buttons haphazardly but where the actuality is far more complex...
If you don't get the argument using such an easy analogy then you never will. Nice chatting, shame it was wasted time.
It was a bad analogy, which had no relation to the original argument. Apples to Oranges
It was a bad analogy, which had no relation to the original argument. Apples to Oranges
Bad analogy?
You mean a MOBA with few buttons but complexity beyond what would initially be apparent in comparison to a game with many more buttons..
and
Streetfighter with few buttons but complexity beyond what would initially be apparent in comparison to a game with many more buttons..
Yeah, apples and oranges...
Yes, your analogy is bad. Thanks for trying to bring up my comparison, but I'm not falling for it. When Street Fighter has anything in common with an MMORPG besides being displayed on a screen I will take that analogy seriously. You just got butt hurt because I dissed your favorite pastime and can't let it go.
Go ahead though, say it again, maybe if you say the same thing ten more times it will be true. Didn't you say you were done wasting your time responding to me anyway?
David confirmed again that combat is MOBA inspired.
He also said that roles still exist in the game, but every situation will need different kinds of roles. You are going to want people that can stand in front of the group and shield them from damage as well as players that will play support such as buffing, healing or even get others out of harms way.
There will be gigantic challenges in EQN, but not structured raid content like found in other games. There will be powerful mobs in the world and players will have to decide and figure out how many players they need to bring them down. The raid mobs are also not static. If players brings down a green dragon in a room, it won't be there for someone else.
He said that the content doesn't just consist of large mobs, but places like Crushbone that will have thousands and thousands of orcs in it.
On the topic of Landmark, he said no one will be able to destroy another player's creation unless he is given permission. He said that the potential for the future in Landmark as they bring in stuff from EQN such as PVP will be players being able to create their own PVP in Landmark.
such as PVP will be players being able to create their own PVP in Landmark."
Sony has historically done a lot for pve raid concepts. They have done nothing whatsoever for breaking any barriers, raising a single bar, and so forth, in regards to pvp. Now it seems it's another "just let the players deal with it however they want with the few tools we give them."
The amount of laziness in pvp concepts for Sony just floors me. Is it really that hard to consider a few other titles that have had massive, epic, warfare between realms? Pvp in EQ next isn't faction based between obvious evil races (the ones we all grew up with in fantasy)...and a paladin, for example. How epic is that?
Why is it so hard for a billion dollar organization to understand that it's okay to aspire to the level of the great authors, who consistently teach us about the tension between great empires, not Billy's Human, Elf, Goblin, Froglock group vs Timmy's Goblin, Froglock, Elf, human group.
Nothing groundbreaking at all here - just the same mediocrity we've been fed for years.
Originally posted by ignore_me ugh. Where combat is concerned MMO players have been thrown under the bus to attract the MOBA crowd. He says it in the interview. Money-wise this makes sense, but it's a dick move to be honest.
The two first EQ, but also WoW, Rift, LotRO and many more all have traditional MMO combat. You can still play those, most for free. It's not a "dick move" to not want to make all games the same.
They're making it the same as the other MOBAs. And while I don't find traditional tab target fun, I also don't like 3 buttons and a thumb up the butt either.
The EQ fans didn't get much out of this game, thus the comment.
EQ fans still have EQ, with a new XPac in beta right now. This is a new game. This is a different game, set in a different Norrath. If you want EQ, you can play EQ. There are plenty of games that offer what you are looking for. There is nothing this game has in common with MOBAs outside of possible group role playstyles
The problem bub, is that no matter how often they update these old games, people want new games with new worlds and new lore and well, new period. The second problem, which compounds the issue is that the majority of MMO releases within the last couple of years and for the foreseeable future are all action combat. The only notable exception being Final Fantasy XIV. I think we 'tab target' players deserve more than one single MMO to be released within the last and next two years.
It was a bad analogy, which had no relation to the original argument. Apples to Oranges
Bad analogy?
You mean a MOBA with few buttons but complexity beyond what would initially be apparent in comparison to a game with many more buttons..
and
Streetfighter with few buttons but complexity beyond what would initially be apparent in comparison to a game with many more buttons..
Yeah, apples and oranges...
Yes, your analogy is bad. Thanks for trying to bring up my comparison, but I'm not falling for it. When Street Fighter has anything in common with an MMORPG besides being displayed on a screen I will take that analogy seriously. You just got butt hurt because I dissed your favorite pastime and can't let it go.
Go ahead though, say it again, maybe if you say the same thing ten more times it will be true. Didn't you say you were done wasting your time responding to me anyway?
This is for "Ignore_me"
I'm just going to jump in the middle here. I am a avid MMO fan, a avid gamer in general, and I love Mobas (well the only one I've played is league of legends)
But you saying "you only have 3 buttons, so its simple" is so ignorant it makes you look foolish. sure you only use 4 skills....unless you are a champ where your 4th skill transforms you so you actually have 7 skills, and lets not talk about your 2 summoner skills, or your active items..
AND not to mention that out of your 4 PRIMARY skills each one of them have different effects.
Like "your Q attack does X damage and stuns any champion" unless you combine it with your E attack.. in which case it does something entirely different.
So honestly when you say Mobas are simple it just proves to me you have never played one for more then 30 minutes.. if that. So its hard to listen to anything you say when I know you are just making crap up.
It was a bad analogy, which had no relation to the original argument. Apples to Oranges
Bad analogy?
You mean a MOBA with few buttons but complexity beyond what would initially be apparent in comparison to a game with many more buttons..
and
Streetfighter with few buttons but complexity beyond what would initially be apparent in comparison to a game with many more buttons..
Yeah, apples and oranges...
Yes, your analogy is bad. Thanks for trying to bring up my comparison, but I'm not falling for it. When Street Fighter has anything in common with an MMORPG besides being displayed on a screen I will take that analogy seriously. You just got butt hurt because I dissed your favorite pastime and can't let it go.
Go ahead though, say it again, maybe if you say the same thing ten more times it will be true. Didn't you say you were done wasting your time responding to me anyway?
This is for "Ignore_me"
I'm just going to jump in the middle here. I am a avid MMO fan, a avid gamer in general, and I love Mobas (well the only one I've played is league of legends)
But you saying "you only have 3 buttons, so its simple" is so ignorant it makes you look foolish. sure you only use 4 skills....unless you are a champ where your 4th skill transforms you so you actually have 7 skills, and lets not talk about your 2 summoner skills, or your active items..
AND not to mention that out of your 4 PRIMARY skills each one of them have different effects.
Like "your Q attack does X damage and stuns any champion" unless you combine it with your E attack.. in which case it does something entirely different.
So honestly when you say Mobas are simple it just proves to me you have never played one for more then 30 minutes.. if that. So its hard to listen to anything you say when I know you are just making crap up.
It's why I stopped replying to the person. I mean the persons handle is 'Ignore_me', it's probably good advice. That guy said something about mobas needing short-term memory to play as opposed to certain mmos needing long term memory to play. Really just shows he/she knows nothing about how memory works. The person is really just making crap up and puking it onto the forums.
I haven't really been watching this game because I do not want to get my hopes up. But I did love the part about thousands of orcs in crushbone. I remember parking my 60 monk at zone and calling, " Level 60 engineer in zone call out your trains for inspection." I could stay busy for hours derailing trains for people.
Originally posted by Drakephire It would be nifty to see actual massive groups of MOBS, rather than the predictable 3 mob spawn camps you see all over MMOs these days.
It sounds great in theory but goood luck having all that and it not being a slide show where you cant do a single thing because the lag is so bad.
The main advantage moba's have is their combat is extremely reactive and focuses more on things like cc/smart use of tactical skills in relation to your environment and the combat situation rather then the combat becoming super repetitive and mostly going through set rotations of skills.
Combat in Dota 2 boils down to spamming your damage cooldowns and ending a fight before the other team can react, i.e. the 'deathball' meta. Offense has totally outpaced defense. People either blow up in seconds or they run away and hug a tower. It's not a very dynamic experience.
Comments
I'm quite the opposite, every detail makes both games sound better and better. They've yet to really announce anything that has hit me as "OMG they did what". All seems pretty on track to what they've been hinting at forever.
Landmark was a surprise but makes sense. I think there will be a decent number of people that only play it and attempt to make cash as long as it continues after EQN's launch. Can see many of the minecraft/builder communities making a lot of amazing things. Wouldn't even doubt if we see SOE cater to the top end builders and grant them special plots of land or lower restrictions to allow them a lot more freedom in size and what not.
Ok last time I respond to this because it's getting pretty silly. So I will give you a quick crash course on the fighting game genre. None of this is specific to SF series. There are concepts like zoning, pressuring, turtuling, reading or sometimes called baiting. There are tactics like poking, mix-ups, crossovers, whiffs, these things unlike the concepts are often specific to each character as to how they are done. There also more detailed things like learning hitboxes and frames.
There are various tournaments held around the world for some of these games. One of the largest ones is EVO http://evo.shoryuken.com/ , usually held in vegas. To qualify for that you have to have placed in others. The list of participants often has reaccuring people in it because those people are just that good.
Your thinking that fighting games give an illusion of strategy shows you basic misunderstanding of the genre. It's well known that sight reaction is to unreliable. So the common practice of higher level players is to learn how to make quick pattern recognitions of how an opponent fights. Often top players can loose the first round or two then go on a tear and win every round after that. They basically figured their opponent out. Get two top players and you can see the back and forth game that can come from that.
Now I'm sure this all means I take it to personal, but you wanted an argument so there ya go :P. All I see is a guy who made assumptions about something he/she is ignorant of. All because you just couldn't concede to the other poster that yes there are games with a small number of basic moves that can have a lot of complexity to them.
Thanks for getting my point about the relationship to number of combat options and complexity that was going way, way above ignore_me's head.
Boy this thread really degraded quickly...
I think the basic ideal of having fewer abilities is that they will be more mechanically intricate. This is how you keep the game interesting with very few abilities. For example, let's look at a block ability in WoW vs. what it will probably look like in EQ:N:
In WoW: reduces the damage you take on the next hit(s). Maybe prevents you from getting critted based on some other stats.
In EQ:N: Reduces the damage you take and everyone positionally behind you is protected. Since mobs hit in various arcs/columns, this can be pivotal in keeping your party alive... especially since threat isn't really a thing.
My point is that abilities will be much more dynamic and their impacts will be dependent on many other factors. With 8 abilities like this, the game should be challenging enough and plenty fun, IMO.
I'd also like to point out that EQ1 had practically no abilities, especially for certain classes. Even as far as PoP, my raiding warrior had 3 useful abilities that I would use regularly (auto-attack, taunt, and kick). I had a few others with long cooldowns (disciplines) that I would use occasionally. Did this prevent the game from being challenging and exciting? Far from it! Sometimes having fewer options makes a game harder...
You've got it. Unfortunately the way you explained it just doesn't register with some of these people. It's an issue of perceived complexity vs. actual complexity. Some gamers enjoy the feeling of an intricate system (without it actually being intricate). While others like actually complex mechanics (even if that means they feel stupid / overwhelmed at the beginning).
It's because you two were arguing something completely different than what I originally posited. Street Fighter has nothing to do with what I was originally talking about, so whoever that was that chimed in brought a bad analogy to the table and derailed the whole thing. To your credit, I was sucked in by your trolling, but it was fun so no matter.
Original Argument: MOBA button layout relies on short term memory so there is no need to access long term or intermediate memory.
Counter: Street Fighter takes Strategy and Skill and you don't know what you are talking about!
Survivor of the great MMORPG Famine of 2011
I think this makes sense. But why then not shoot for a good mix of the two (perceived complexity and actual complexity). I think you correctly identified the two approaches, but are they mutually exclusive? Even if they are, wouldn't it make sense to conform the interface of the game to varied tastes and not fix it just in one form?
Default the bar to MOBA controls, but then allow people to inflate or add a bar for more controls (even if non-combat or consumable for that perceived complexity you mentioned).
Survivor of the great MMORPG Famine of 2011
Actually counter arcument is: Your assumptions are wrong about MOBA's and their complexities. Les give you something easy to see if you get it, lets look at something like streetfighter that at first view looks like all you do is press buttons haphazardly but where the actuality is far more complex...
If you don't get the argument using such an easy analogy then you never will. Nice chatting, shame it was wasted time.
It was a bad analogy, which had no relation to the original argument. Apples to Oranges
Survivor of the great MMORPG Famine of 2011
Bad analogy?
You mean a MOBA with few buttons but complexity beyond what would initially be apparent in comparison to a game with many more buttons..
and
Streetfighter with few buttons but complexity beyond what would initially be apparent in comparison to a game with many more buttons..
Yeah, apples and oranges...
Yes, your analogy is bad. Thanks for trying to bring up my comparison, but I'm not falling for it. When Street Fighter has anything in common with an MMORPG besides being displayed on a screen I will take that analogy seriously. You just got butt hurt because I dissed your favorite pastime and can't let it go.
Go ahead though, say it again, maybe if you say the same thing ten more times it will be true. Didn't you say you were done wasting your time responding to me anyway?
Survivor of the great MMORPG Famine of 2011
such as PVP will be players being able to create their own PVP in Landmark."
Sony has historically done a lot for pve raid concepts. They have done nothing whatsoever for breaking any barriers, raising a single bar, and so forth, in regards to pvp. Now it seems it's another "just let the players deal with it however they want with the few tools we give them."
The amount of laziness in pvp concepts for Sony just floors me. Is it really that hard to consider a few other titles that have had massive, epic, warfare between realms? Pvp in EQ next isn't faction based between obvious evil races (the ones we all grew up with in fantasy)...and a paladin, for example. How epic is that?
Why is it so hard for a billion dollar organization to understand that it's okay to aspire to the level of the great authors, who consistently teach us about the tension between great empires, not Billy's Human, Elf, Goblin, Froglock group vs Timmy's Goblin, Froglock, Elf, human group.
Nothing groundbreaking at all here - just the same mediocrity we've been fed for years.
Moving on.
The problem bub, is that no matter how often they update these old games, people want new games with new worlds and new lore and well, new period. The second problem, which compounds the issue is that the majority of MMO releases within the last couple of years and for the foreseeable future are all action combat. The only notable exception being Final Fantasy XIV. I think we 'tab target' players deserve more than one single MMO to be released within the last and next two years.
This is for "Ignore_me"
I'm just going to jump in the middle here. I am a avid MMO fan, a avid gamer in general, and I love Mobas (well the only one I've played is league of legends)
But you saying "you only have 3 buttons, so its simple" is so ignorant it makes you look foolish. sure you only use 4 skills....unless you are a champ where your 4th skill transforms you so you actually have 7 skills, and lets not talk about your 2 summoner skills, or your active items..
AND not to mention that out of your 4 PRIMARY skills each one of them have different effects.
Like "your Q attack does X damage and stuns any champion" unless you combine it with your E attack.. in which case it does something entirely different.
So honestly when you say Mobas are simple it just proves to me you have never played one for more then 30 minutes.. if that. So its hard to listen to anything you say when I know you are just making crap up.
Please check out my channel. I do gaming reviews, gaming related reviews & lets plays. Thanks!
https://www.youtube.com/user/BettyofDewm/videos
It's why I stopped replying to the person. I mean the persons handle is 'Ignore_me', it's probably good advice. That guy said something about mobas needing short-term memory to play as opposed to certain mmos needing long term memory to play. Really just shows he/she knows nothing about how memory works. The person is really just making crap up and puking it onto the forums.
It sounds great in theory but goood luck having all that and it not being a slide show where you cant do a single thing because the lag is so bad.
+3
I can't wait to create my own Lion King and kill 20 mobs solo with a big mace..
Combat in Dota 2 boils down to spamming your damage cooldowns and ending a fight before the other team can react, i.e. the 'deathball' meta. Offense has totally outpaced defense. People either blow up in seconds or they run away and hug a tower. It's not a very dynamic experience.