Neoseeker : News : League of Legends slowing champion release schedule, raising initial champion price to 7800 IP
Sort by date: ascending descending
0 thumbs!
^
Azuma Dec 20, 12
Wouldn't the extra time between champs make up the difference in cost? You would potentially have an extra 1-2 weeks of time to gain the 1500 IP. So I personally don't see it as big deal.
0 thumbs!
^
Lorx Dec 20, 12
Bringing DotA2 into this is silly fanboy talk. DotA2 sets out to be different than LoL, and vise versa. Let the games live in peace, there's no need to vigorously bicker over which is better.

Math:
  • 6300 every 2 weeks
  • 7800 every 3 weeks
That's:
  • 3150 IP a week
  • 2600 IP a week
How this is being perceived as more expensive is beyond me.

If people don't want that extra 550 IP they are saving every week, I'll gladly take it and spend it on some of those cheaper old champions that are now becoming a normal price reduction plan. Something put in to directly benefit free players.

Never taken an ethics class before, but I'd like to think Riot asking me to farm less IP per month to keep up with releases, is something agreeable. I've never come across an instance where Riot didn't respect their players and what they have to say. Hopefully that day will never come.
Staff
0 thumbs!
^
bluexy Dec 20, 12
Guys, again, if you can say that 1000 IP is nothing, then awesome, you are one of the few, the proud, the minority of League of Legends players that this effects only in small ways.

For a majority of players the change will result in shaving to wait another month or two to potentially buy a new champion, or simply giving up on purchasing a new champion ever. It says it straight in the quote, this change is meant to exclusionary.

It's worth putting on someone else's shoes and seeing how these changes affect the greater LoL community.
0 thumbs!
^
Marc Dec 20, 12
Like Bluexy said, casual players make up the majority of the LoL fanbase. Most of these players don't have time to collect the points needed for heroes in the first place. The price rise is just a slap in the face. Riot isn't pandering to anybody with this update they are just straight up charging more money, I wouldn't play it off as if they are catering to the "hardcore" LoL fanbase because its clearly not their intention.

quote bluexy
It's a difference in philosophy and ethics that should be recognized.often.
There are no ethics to it. Its common sense for a player to be able to successfully counter pick and choose heroes that work well of each other and make an actual team composition without worrying if you have a certain hero unlocked. The only DotA-like that sells heroes is LoL and its extremely odd.
0 thumbs!
^
BluAnimal Dec 20, 12
quote Marc
they are just straight up charging more money.
Doesn't look like RP prices went up.

And again, no one is making you buy the new champion on release, if you want to, those 7-8 extra games are the price you'll have to pay.
0 thumbs!
^
Marc Dec 20, 12
quote BluAnimal
quote Marc
they are just straight up charging more money.
Doesn't look like RP prices went up.
Do I have to explain why this would in turn make people buy more RP?
0 thumbs!
^
WakeCraterWind Dec 20, 12
quote Marc
Do I have to explain why this would in turn make people buy more RP?
They aren't charging more money, even if more people will in the end purchase RP. Would you consider free sodas at an all-you-can-eat buffet "straight up charging more money" even though they essentially make people pay more for less? It's the same principle. There are plenty of business strategies that get you more bang for your buck despite never touching prices.

quote bluexy
says it straight in the quote, this change is meant to exclusionary.
... and add to that, "for a week". This only affects those people who purchase Champions with IP within the week that they are released. Considering the majority of on-release purchases are with RP, that's not saying a lot.
0 thumbs!
^
Marc Dec 20, 12
If you had to do pushups everytime you went to get a sprite rather than paying then no I wouldn't call it free.

quote WakeCraterWind
There are plenty of business strategies that get you more bang for your buck despite never touching prices.
What sort of "bang" are you getting from buying a single hero in a DotA game?
0 thumbs!
^
PuMan Dec 20, 12
I don't get what the problem is. The price increase is only for the first week and then the new champ goes back to the same old 6300. If you care enough that you MUST have the new champ right off the bat then it seems that you care enough about the game to have earned that IP, or bought RP. If not, then just wait a week... You'll have earned even more IP by then anyway. No one is forcing you to spend the extra IP. Hell no one's forcing you to buy the shiny new champ, period.

I don't think comparing Valve and Riot is entirely fair. Valve is... Valve. They are legendary in the gaming industry. All Riot has is League. They've monetized their game in a way that works for them and their community deems "fair."

In all honesty I'm more excited about the regular IP reductions on old champs. For every new champ that comes out an old one gets an IP reduction. Whats more fair than that?
0 thumbs!
^
WakeCraterWind Dec 20, 12
quote Marc
If you had to do pushups everytime you went to get a sprite rather than paying then no I wouldn't call it free.

quote WakeCraterWind
There are plenty of business strategies that get you more bang for your buck despite never touching prices.
What sort of "bang" are you getting from buying a single hero in a DotA game?
If you want to look at playing video games as a "cost" then sure, it's not free. For the rest of the world, however, we like to call free, whatever doesn't cost us money. As for LoL's direct competitor, DotA 2 has a pricing advantage in that they are backed by a large company and can absorb costs while hurting competitors, while also being small enough at the moment to have lower costs. I guarantee you however, that as membership in DotA 2 grows, Valve with have to resort to more and more aggressive marketing in order to justify the cost. I ask you, if DotA 2 is really, really free to play in that you rarely feel incentive to purchase goods, then where will their revenue com from? DotA 2 isn't a charity. Maintaining those world-wide servers along with internal testing for balancing, design teams for new content, paying salaries, all cost lots and lots of money.

From here, DotA financial model can go three routes.

a) They can go the parasitic route, where they take losses and leech off of their mother company for as long as possible to drive competitors to the ground, and then bounce back and mark a profit since you've d*ck-moved your way into a monopoly.

b) They can go the spectacular third-party route, in which they become so popular they can keep themselves afloat solely on advertising.

c) They give you incentives to pay for content; I.E, the LoL model.

It's going to end up being one of the three. A can't last forever. It's hard to justify to the company and even harder for shareholders. B is going to be extremely difficult, given that even LoL is feeling the squeeze, despite rampant success in the eSports world. To fully commit to model B, DotA 2 would have to surpass LoL's achievements and put DotA 2 on the same revenue level as the MLB or NHL. Or they just go C, and you find DotA 2 advocates repeating the words made by their LoL counterparts months or years earlier, in order to justify the rising "cost".
0 thumbs!
^
Marc Dec 20, 12
WHAT? Thats quite the assumption, but obviously doesn't hold an argument seeing as its all speculative.

We are talking about a company who made its top fps game free to play, or sold 3 of its largest games in a box set for 20 dollars, or pretty much runs a PC gaming monopoly in a closet in Seattle. DOTA2 isn't a money drain in the first place, Valve didn't create DotA, they just revamped the engine and models and made it look pretty. In return they get a huge influx of Steam downloads, an extremely dedicated fanbase, and a small cosmetic item shop that will wheel in dosh on the side, its quite enough for everybody. What kind of PC gamer wouldn't have Steam downloaded with DOTA2 on it after it releases? In a business sense its extremely profitable.
0 thumbs!
^
WakeCraterWind Dec 20, 12
How much do you think developing the engine cost? What about all of the animations and voiceacting? The debugging process? The internal testing? What about pre-release? Mind you, the a developing studio costs hundreds of thousands of dollars a month. It is a huge investment, just like any not-crap game is.


Sure, you can say they "get" an influx of Steam downloads, and a small cash shop where people dabble, but that's it. You have to compare that against the cost of a balance team to maintain the game meta, a design team to produce new content, an network team to maintain the servers, a marketing team, a customer relations team, etc, etc, etc. Those are all running costs. Costs that, if not met on a basic level by revenue from the game itself, will eventually run the project into the ground.

Sure you get intangible benefits. Try explaining intangibles to shareholders when the budget for DotA 2 has a big fat red number with a lot of zeros behind it. You can't. Shareholders are dumb. They'll ask why can't they cut this or that to improve the bottom line.

Eventually, DotA 2 will have to find cash somewhere. If it really is a free as you say, it won't last.
0 thumbs!
^
Bass Ultra Dec 20, 12
  • People that are hardcore will get the latest champion even if its a thousand IP more
  • Less people getting the latest champ means less people dodging games because they can't try the latest champ (Seriously, it can be pretty hard to actually play the latest champ during its first week.)
  • More people playing the PBE because of previous point = more testers
  • Champion prices are now constantly going down so you can buy MORE champions
Seriously, its a win-win for everyone. Can't buy the latest champion, oh well, ima just buy the now cheaper Lee Sin or Vayne.
0 thumbs!
^
Lorx Dec 21, 12
quote bluexy
Guys, again, if you can say that 1000 IP is nothing, then-
This is the amount all players save, even if they buy on release week. 550 IP a week less that every player needs to farm.

7800 is larger as a number than 6300, yes. But what is completely ignored here is frequency. To afford a new champion, per week, any given player has to play less games per week in order to afford new champions on day 1 even at the 7800 price point. 550 IP less a week you need to gain. 1650 per each average release timeframe. That's if you decide the champion really isn't worth it, and you decide to wait a week longer, saving you that extra 1500 for a grand total of 2150.

This is not bad for players. New players, old players, people who play a little, people who play a lot. It is a flat decrease in the amount of IP you need to gain each week to afford new releases. There is only one type of player this affects, and that is a player who specifically plays to gain IP for a new champion, never simply to play the game. Dunno what to call those kinds of players, Pokemon Summoners? Only playing to catch 'em all? Never playing to simply...play, thus having a kind of IP income for simply having fun? Either way, if they wait out a week, they can still do what they do now, for whatever reason they try for that in the first place.

Underlines are there specifically because this is the...fifth time this has been mentioned here that I can remember. I've brought it up three times, Inuyasha has also noted it, Azuma as well. It has yet to actually be acknowledged or rebutted by anybody claiming the opposite.
Last edited by Lorx :: Dec 21, 12
0 thumbs!
^
Lorx Dec 21, 12
Separate post in the hope that the above is short enough where it actually gets read this time.

quote Marc
WHAT? Thats quite the assumption, but obviously doesn't hold an argument seeing as its all speculative.

We are talking about a company who made its top fps game free to play, or sold 3 of its largest games in a box set for 20 dollars, or pretty much runs a PC gaming monopoly in a closet in Seattle. DOTA2 isn't a money drain in the first place, Valve didn't create DotA, they just revamped the engine and models and made it look pretty. In return they get a huge influx of Steam downloads, an extremely dedicated fanbase, and a small cosmetic item shop that will wheel in dosh on the side, its quite enough for everybody. What kind of PC gamer wouldn't have Steam downloaded with DOTA2 on it after it releases? In a business sense its extremely profitable.
LoL and DotA2 cater to two separate types of people. There's some overlap, tournament-level play, hardcore people, but as for the casual gamer, LoL tries to help them. DotA2 not so much, as a direct revamp of the original, it is very, very painful for new players, and is not made to be casually enjoyed. It's learn or die. Neither needs to be better than the other, neither needs to justify it's existence to the other game. Not sure why you feel the need to do that for the developers, when neither has ever voiced they care about each other. It's like comparing CoD to Borderlands. Yeah they're shooters, but the people they market to are different, they're not competing, nor do the developers care about the other series.

On the cash flow front, Riot's trying solo to keep up the LoL servers, which by this point are, well, gigantic. Valve's got cash inflow to help out from DotA2 still costing money to enter, advertising on Steam, cuts from sales on games, you know, the billion things Valve makes money from. Not saying Valve is evil, I love Valve, but you are comparing apples to oranges.

And really, the apple doesn't care what the orange does. Nor does it probably want bad rep by members of it's community bashing on the orange. They're happily co-existing, as two kinds of fruit.

In short, take a chill pill Marc. Nobody here is trying to make you hate DotA2 and love LoL. We are perfectly fine with playing a game we enjoy, peacefully. If you want I can send you a fruit basket as a truce?
Last edited by Lorx :: Dec 21, 12
^
Sponsored
Sort by date: ascending descending
- This news story is archived and is closed to new comments now -
Newsletter
Latest News
Latest Inhouse
Cooler Master Nepton 280L Liquid Cooler Review Fractal Design Core 3300 Mid Tower Case Review EVGA Tegra NOTE 7 & ASUS Transformer Pad TF701T Review Cooler Master Seidon 120XL Liquid Cooler Review NZXT Phantom 240 Case Review Thermaltake Urban T81 Full Tower Case Review
(0.0863/mc/web8)