Accept it, Dota 2 is better than LoL
- Thread starter gr33nFIEND
- Start date
Agreed.
I can't believe people like OP are still trying to have a dick size contest over these two games.
Edelweiss
New member
biGb1313
New member
Too right mate xD
DarthMol
New member
Haha, imagine if the next Dark Souls game turned out to be a MOBA!!!!
Mwhaha, hope the thought gives you nightmares
Saint_Dee
The Phantom Poet
1. Click-bait feature article is click-bait... to the tenth degree.
2. Did I mentioned click-bait? The flame-bait is real. In any case I'm still trying to figure out if this is satire or anything comic related because for the most part the humor is completely lost on me (and I say this as a Dota 2 addict and shoutcaster who happens to dabble in LoL).
3. If you're still reading at this point, let me give you my objective 2 cents on the two games being pitted against each other, for whatever that's worth.
Still here? Really? Well, you're in for an earful
Dota 2 vs League of legends, which is better? A question to certainly bring out the passion and potential vitriol from avid fans of each game trying to sell you on why their game is the better of the two. The answer? It doesn't matter because it doesn't exist. The real question is which is best suited to you?
PART I
Depth in Complexity vs. Depth in Accessibility
The first thing that you'll hear immediately when this debate is sparked, is that LoL is the easier game and Dota 2 has more depth. Well, yes and no. It can't be argued that in terms of game mechanics, Dota 2 is definitely the more complex and difficult of the two which is a double-edged sword because on one end the game always offers a somewhat more dynamic experience because of a multitude of mechanics that range from simple things like denying, turn rates, cast points, to more complex things like how different heroes and spell interact with each other (even allowing special cases that can be uncovered), how different items work on different heroes (not to mention the effect on passive abilities and the like), manipulating the jungle and it's creeps to your own end, using buybacks to your own benefit (or detriment), the map design and how it can be exploited, and don't forget the roster of +107 unique Heroes that fall within different roles and each have unique abilities on top of their different stats and traits (strength, intelligence, agility), and the list goes on and on and on (seriously, this game is complex). While these mechanics offer a complex, deep, and probably more dynamic experience. This deep, and complex experience is probably Dota 2's biggest draw point.
On the flip side, this does mean that the learning curve is one of the steepest out there, and this can do a lot to deter players early on because the amount of things at play in a single game of Dota 2 can be overwhelming especially considering how punishing the game can be if you're not aware of the mechanics at play. It does have a detailed tutorial mode to alleviate this somewhat.
Which is League of Legend's biggest draw point, it's accessibility. There's a reason that LoL has waaaaaay more concurrent and peak players (although a small portion of the numbers can be attributed to the fact that LoL was released before Dota 2), because it's more accessible in it's learning curve, at least early on, as the mechanics aren't as complex as in Dota 2. No minion denying, most of the items in LoL aren't active and tend to offer stats and buffs to champions, turn rates isn't a thing. Champions have somewhat similar characteristics to Heroes in Dota 2, in that attack damage, armor, mana and health regen exist, but these champions aren't given similar traits in the vein of strength, intelligence, and agility. All in all, the game is slightly easier to get into just on mechanics alone, but that's not to say the game is incomplete or lacking in depth as some would have you believe. Though it offers a similar 5v5 three lane experience, because of the map design, there's a slightly different experience (most evident in the jungle and the way it works), where Dota 2 gives you jungle creeps for gold and XP (maybe an ability or creep of your own in certain hero cases), LoL gives you jungle minions for gold, XP, and buffs. Where Dota 2 gives you Roshan, LoL gives you The Baron and the dragons.
On top of that, the Champions in particular (currently in a roster of +119) are worth noting because Heroes in Dota 2 normally have 3 abilities and the fourth being the ultimate, whereas LoL Champions have 4 + an ultimate. Then we've masteries, runes, and summoner spells. Then there are modes that aren't within the same 5v5 tri-lane map concept, while Dota 2's modes are within that concept (I'm not really going to talk events ala Diretide and the like).
So all in all a probably more accessible game that might deter some because the complexity doesn't match its competitor and might appear shallow in light of it.
The meta of both games is constantly evolving or outright changing as the respective developers release patches and balances for the games, this pretty much adds to each game's strong suits and weak points, as the complexity of one game can be overwhelming with the creative leashes being non-existent, and the other game's somewhat more traditional sense of keeping to tried and tested methods of playing, might have it feeling somewhat stagnant.
Heroes/Champions and the Free-to-Play model
Roster count and variety really are a moot point, because both games offer rosters with unique characteristics, abilities, roles, aesthetics that one can't really for one or the other game (+107 Heroes to +119 Champions).
But it does bring up the point of each game's Free-to-Play model.
Valve's model? You get to play the entirety of the Dota 2 for free, and you could play to your heart's content without paying a dime (you probably won't though). Where they bring in money, is the cosmetic items (purely cosmetic) that are created by Valve and the community since Valve allows artists to create to items and potentially get a cut of the profit, and because their game's design lend itself so well to the spectator sport that this game has become, you also get to buy tickets to view competitive matches in-game with commentary.
Riot on the other hand chose a more conventional approach. You get to play LoL for free, but you have to play a little to get the most of this game as there is what's called a hero rotation which means you can unlock heroes with an in-game currency (or real monies
) while you try out 10 heroes that are available in the rotation. This also goes for Summoner Spell, Masteries, and Runes.
The argument for Dota 2? All of the heroes are available which means you can play whoever you want, whenever you want, regardless of whether you're a noob getting started or a veteran pwning noobs. On the flip side, one must mention that having all these heroes available from the word go can have the issue of being overwhelming considering the game's complexity, and players could end up sticking to what they know rather than actually getting to play every hero on the roster.
The argument for LoL? The free rotation somewhat allows players to test out a good portion of the roster to see where they in the great of things. It also solves the comfort zone issue, it doesn't take that much game time to unlock a champion. The flip side? Well, masteries, summoner spells, and runes are involved in this model as well, and it might smack somewhat of pay-to-win (not saying it is, but it's something to note), because it might make the game feels skewed to those who've shelled out for these bonuses.
...PART II to follow
2. Did I mentioned click-bait? The flame-bait is real. In any case I'm still trying to figure out if this is satire or anything comic related because for the most part the humor is completely lost on me (and I say this as a Dota 2 addict and shoutcaster who happens to dabble in LoL).
3. If you're still reading at this point, let me give you my objective 2 cents on the two games being pitted against each other, for whatever that's worth.
Still here? Really? Well, you're in for an earful
Dota 2 vs League of legends, which is better? A question to certainly bring out the passion and potential vitriol from avid fans of each game trying to sell you on why their game is the better of the two. The answer? It doesn't matter because it doesn't exist. The real question is which is best suited to you?
PART I
Depth in Complexity vs. Depth in Accessibility
The first thing that you'll hear immediately when this debate is sparked, is that LoL is the easier game and Dota 2 has more depth. Well, yes and no. It can't be argued that in terms of game mechanics, Dota 2 is definitely the more complex and difficult of the two which is a double-edged sword because on one end the game always offers a somewhat more dynamic experience because of a multitude of mechanics that range from simple things like denying, turn rates, cast points, to more complex things like how different heroes and spell interact with each other (even allowing special cases that can be uncovered), how different items work on different heroes (not to mention the effect on passive abilities and the like), manipulating the jungle and it's creeps to your own end, using buybacks to your own benefit (or detriment), the map design and how it can be exploited, and don't forget the roster of +107 unique Heroes that fall within different roles and each have unique abilities on top of their different stats and traits (strength, intelligence, agility), and the list goes on and on and on (seriously, this game is complex). While these mechanics offer a complex, deep, and probably more dynamic experience. This deep, and complex experience is probably Dota 2's biggest draw point.
On the flip side, this does mean that the learning curve is one of the steepest out there, and this can do a lot to deter players early on because the amount of things at play in a single game of Dota 2 can be overwhelming especially considering how punishing the game can be if you're not aware of the mechanics at play. It does have a detailed tutorial mode to alleviate this somewhat.
Which is League of Legend's biggest draw point, it's accessibility. There's a reason that LoL has waaaaaay more concurrent and peak players (although a small portion of the numbers can be attributed to the fact that LoL was released before Dota 2), because it's more accessible in it's learning curve, at least early on, as the mechanics aren't as complex as in Dota 2. No minion denying, most of the items in LoL aren't active and tend to offer stats and buffs to champions, turn rates isn't a thing. Champions have somewhat similar characteristics to Heroes in Dota 2, in that attack damage, armor, mana and health regen exist, but these champions aren't given similar traits in the vein of strength, intelligence, and agility. All in all, the game is slightly easier to get into just on mechanics alone, but that's not to say the game is incomplete or lacking in depth as some would have you believe. Though it offers a similar 5v5 three lane experience, because of the map design, there's a slightly different experience (most evident in the jungle and the way it works), where Dota 2 gives you jungle creeps for gold and XP (maybe an ability or creep of your own in certain hero cases), LoL gives you jungle minions for gold, XP, and buffs. Where Dota 2 gives you Roshan, LoL gives you The Baron and the dragons.
On top of that, the Champions in particular (currently in a roster of +119) are worth noting because Heroes in Dota 2 normally have 3 abilities and the fourth being the ultimate, whereas LoL Champions have 4 + an ultimate. Then we've masteries, runes, and summoner spells. Then there are modes that aren't within the same 5v5 tri-lane map concept, while Dota 2's modes are within that concept (I'm not really going to talk events ala Diretide and the like).
So all in all a probably more accessible game that might deter some because the complexity doesn't match its competitor and might appear shallow in light of it.
The meta of both games is constantly evolving or outright changing as the respective developers release patches and balances for the games, this pretty much adds to each game's strong suits and weak points, as the complexity of one game can be overwhelming with the creative leashes being non-existent, and the other game's somewhat more traditional sense of keeping to tried and tested methods of playing, might have it feeling somewhat stagnant.
Heroes/Champions and the Free-to-Play model
Roster count and variety really are a moot point, because both games offer rosters with unique characteristics, abilities, roles, aesthetics that one can't really for one or the other game (+107 Heroes to +119 Champions).
But it does bring up the point of each game's Free-to-Play model.
Valve's model? You get to play the entirety of the Dota 2 for free, and you could play to your heart's content without paying a dime (you probably won't though
). Where they bring in money, is the cosmetic items (purely cosmetic) that are created by Valve and the community since Valve allows artists to create to items and potentially get a cut of the profit, and because their game's design lend itself so well to the spectator sport that this game has become, you also get to buy tickets to view competitive matches in-game with commentary.Riot on the other hand chose a more conventional approach. You get to play LoL for free, but you have to play a little to get the most of this game as there is what's called a hero rotation which means you can unlock heroes with an in-game currency (or real monies
) while you try out 10 heroes that are available in the rotation. This also goes for Summoner Spell, Masteries, and Runes.The argument for Dota 2? All of the heroes are available which means you can play whoever you want, whenever you want, regardless of whether you're a noob getting started or a veteran pwning noobs. On the flip side, one must mention that having all these heroes available from the word go can have the issue of being overwhelming considering the game's complexity, and players could end up sticking to what they know rather than actually getting to play every hero on the roster.
The argument for LoL? The free rotation somewhat allows players to test out a good portion of the roster to see where they in the great of things. It also solves the comfort zone issue, it doesn't take that much game time to unlock a champion. The flip side? Well, masteries, summoner spells, and runes are involved in this model as well, and it might smack somewhat of pay-to-win (not saying it is, but it's something to note), because it might make the game feels skewed to those who've shelled out for these bonuses.
...PART II to follow
Last edited:
Saint_Dee
The Phantom Poet
PART II
Different philosophies on eSports... Do you even APM (yes, that is a joke about a dead competitive game I'm not even talking about)
Valve has a somewhat more lax approach to the Dota 2 eSports, allowing a lot of things to be community driven. Different organization organize tournaments and have their own standard of quality within their own tournaments. ESL, JoinDota, Beyond The Summit, DreamHack to name a few. Valve of course has an annual event, The International, which is the grand poobah of all eSports tournaments, if the increasingly spectacular prize pool is anything to go by (TI4 raised more than $10M with the help of the community through compendium purchases since Valve only puts up $1.6M... The technicality of that is another argument though). This allows for a multitude of opportunities for teams of all tiers to get a piece of the pie. It allows different organizations to get a piece of the pie, and it honestly equals a lot more Dota 2 events which is a yay for spectators. Spectators also feed into the prize pools of the premium tournaments by buying themed items and interactive compendiums, along with tickets (started by The International 2013). In truth, the game's design does so much heavy lifting that Valve can afford this lax approach that is beloved by the community.
The uglier side of this is that even though teams have more opportunities to gain glory, the team structures and organizational structures, don't lend themselves to a stable ecosystem which is why rosters are never a stable thing as Valve doesn't really control that outside The International invites. Production outside what you get game can also prove inconsistent as each organization, including Valve will have varying levels and standards of quality, sometimes to the detriment of the spectators.
Riot, on the hand, have a more structured and controlled approach. They have a say and a hand in most premium LoL tournaments (heck, they helm most of them). And they have guidelines and rules for premium tournaments. They have five major regional professional leagues which all have a role feeding (not a pun) and leading into the World Championships which averages $1-2M in prize pools which is solely funded by Riot. Since LoL as a game doesn't lend itself to the competitive viewership as well Dota 2, Riot has to do a lot of heavy lifting in terms of production. This is evident in the consistency and production quality at display when games are streamed. In terms of the eSports ecosystem, it may seem like there's less opportunity, which is true. Riot does a lot to compensate, shoutcasters are actually given training and get income from Riot. Team structures are formalized which means stable income (granted this can vary within different tiers). Which is to say Riot's treatment of eSports is akin to mainstream sports treatment than any other game out there.
This does mean it's somewhat constricted, and one can't simply ignore the fact that the game's design lends itself poorly to the eSports side of things.
tl;dr In conclusion, if you're still reading (goodness knows how you survived my rambling), the real question is, which is better suited for you? Depth in Complexity or Depth in Accessibility? All you can play Hero buffet or Champion rotation with slightly more incentive to learn more champions? Riot or Valve, and their take on eSports? Cake or Pie?
tl;dr tl;dr Dota 2 and LoL are somewhat similar yet different enough that a simple which is better argument does a disservice to both games, their fans, and those coming in blind.
Different philosophies on eSports... Do you even APM (yes, that is a joke about a dead competitive game I'm not even talking about)
Valve has a somewhat more lax approach to the Dota 2 eSports, allowing a lot of things to be community driven. Different organization organize tournaments and have their own standard of quality within their own tournaments. ESL, JoinDota, Beyond The Summit, DreamHack to name a few. Valve of course has an annual event, The International, which is the grand poobah of all eSports tournaments, if the increasingly spectacular prize pool is anything to go by (TI4 raised more than $10M with the help of the community through compendium purchases since Valve only puts up $1.6M... The technicality of that is another argument though). This allows for a multitude of opportunities for teams of all tiers to get a piece of the pie. It allows different organizations to get a piece of the pie, and it honestly equals a lot more Dota 2 events which is a yay for spectators. Spectators also feed into the prize pools of the premium tournaments by buying themed items and interactive compendiums, along with tickets (started by The International 2013). In truth, the game's design does so much heavy lifting that Valve can afford this lax approach that is beloved by the community.
The uglier side of this is that even though teams have more opportunities to gain glory, the team structures and organizational structures, don't lend themselves to a stable ecosystem which is why rosters are never a stable thing as Valve doesn't really control that outside The International invites. Production outside what you get game can also prove inconsistent as each organization, including Valve will have varying levels and standards of quality, sometimes to the detriment of the spectators.
Riot, on the hand, have a more structured and controlled approach. They have a say and a hand in most premium LoL tournaments (heck, they helm most of them). And they have guidelines and rules for premium tournaments. They have five major regional professional leagues which all have a role feeding (not a pun) and leading into the World Championships which averages $1-2M in prize pools which is solely funded by Riot. Since LoL as a game doesn't lend itself to the competitive viewership as well Dota 2, Riot has to do a lot of heavy lifting in terms of production. This is evident in the consistency and production quality at display when games are streamed. In terms of the eSports ecosystem, it may seem like there's less opportunity, which is true. Riot does a lot to compensate, shoutcasters are actually given training and get income from Riot. Team structures are formalized which means stable income (granted this can vary within different tiers). Which is to say Riot's treatment of eSports is akin to mainstream sports treatment than any other game out there.
This does mean it's somewhat constricted, and one can't simply ignore the fact that the game's design lends itself poorly to the eSports side of things.
tl;dr In conclusion, if you're still reading (goodness knows how you survived my rambling), the real question is, which is better suited for you? Depth in Complexity or Depth in Accessibility? All you can play Hero buffet or Champion rotation with slightly more incentive to learn more champions? Riot or Valve, and their take on eSports? Cake or Pie?
tl;dr tl;dr Dota 2 and LoL are somewhat similar yet different enough that a simple which is better argument does a disservice to both games, their fans, and those coming in blind.
Last edited:
Dragonic
New member
I prefer HoN simply because it was the first MOBA I tried after I simply could not get used to DotA.
HoN was much easier to understand. Then DotA2 came out that implemented the same easier layout of HoN(I guess LoL did it first but I simply didn't know of it) but I simply could not care to be honest. However I did give it a try and simply didn't like the feel. The End.
HoN was much easier to understand. Then DotA2 came out that implemented the same easier layout of HoN(I guess LoL did it first but I simply didn't know of it) but I simply could not care to be honest. However I did give it a try and simply didn't like the feel. The End.
Crzwaco
New member
Also you can actually see when a hero is going to do something in Dota stuff happens instant.
Ikraam_Samsodien
New member
My take as a LOL player and occasional Dota2 player. With Dota2, it is much easier for 1 person to carry the game for the team.
I have been in matches where 1 vs 5 and the single person wipes out the entire enemy team. I enjoy both games throughly, but i find dota2 more time consuming. Also the complexity gets to me. After 1 or 2 games, i change to LOL so that i can have a more laxed enjoyable experience.
I have been in matches where 1 vs 5 and the single person wipes out the entire enemy team. I enjoy both games throughly, but i find dota2 more time consuming. Also the complexity gets to me. After 1 or 2 games, i change to LOL so that i can have a more laxed enjoyable experience.