Talk:League of Legends

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Thesevenseas (talk | contribs) at 22:13, 4 November 2010 (→‎Edit request from TalixZero, 4 November 2010: Completed Request). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconVideo games B‑class Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles
BThis article has been rated as B-class on the project's quality scale.
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Note icon
A request for a screenshot has been made to help better illustrate the article. (VG images department)
Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:
  • There have been headers removed from this page over time. These are sources and lack of a neutral point of view. These were not discussed on the talkpage at any time, and after some time they were removed. If you have beef with the article, please bring it up here before slapping a derogative header on it.
  • There was a lot of discussion on the genre, with a number of options being proposed. Riot proposed the term 'MOBA', and other players in the genre suggested DotA-based game (DBG). It came down to what genres are being listed by game review sites, such as GameSpot. They list it as an Action-RPG, so that is the current title. If there is any more genre debate please refer to the edit noted: "Cleaning out old discussions. Refer to this edit to see old material. Is this normal?", and if your question is still not answered, post here before edit warring the genre on the article.
  • Referral links are not cool, period. Generally people haven't been too persistent with it, but if they do it repeatedly we can temp block them from editing the page (it's vandalism).
  • We still need screenshots.
  • I just changed the class to B from Stub, where it's been since the article was created. Please discuss here if you disagree.

Jozrael (talk) 23:32, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Self Publishing in Europe

The article needs to be updated to reflect the recent move by Riot to directly publish and host the European version of the game.
FAQ
Notice of server transfers
Frohike14 (talk) 00:50, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't this page make some reference to HoN? They are both pretty much the same, basic gameplay wise. 124.187.103.43 (talk) 08:52, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They are competitors, not really related. Just as StarCraft II isn't referencing other competitors, neither should LoL really. Both LoL and HoN (rightly) reference DotA, as that was their inspiration. They are entirely separate projects, so I see no need for either to reference the other as they have ostensibly no impact on each other aside from market share.71.250.13.112 (talk) 03:49, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Importance

This game should be mid or high importance IMO in terms of VG wiki importance. It's an extremely popular game now. An example is the xfire most played list. On June 06 at 2:30am PST, the list was:
World of Warcraft 56,206
Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare Multiplayer 15,702
League of Legends 11,933
Battlefield: Bad Company 2 7,835
Call of Duty 2 Multiplayer 7,123
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 Multiplayer 5,973
Counter-Strike: Source 4,579
Allods Online 4,223
Silkroad Online 4,105
Heroes of Newerth 3,856
(note that most of those are mid or high importance articles)

Another example is that it's gamespot rating, where it is the #4 most played PC game by their metrics. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.175.3.187 (talk) 09:32, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lastly, it was one of the earliest western games that was a hardcore game AND free to play, AND did it in a way that wasn't really 'pay2pwn' (not to mention this gamble was successful) so it's very important from a business history perspective. I think the powers that be in the BG project should consider this for mid standing at least.


From their metrics, I certainly don't think it is high importance. "Series and games that have been shown to have a lasting impact on a genre, culture or the industry itself; typically need a few years to assess this impact. e.g. Pokémon, Final Fantasy (series), Bard's Tale". Take Pokemon for example: this game is nowhere near its cultural penetration.

As for medium, I figured it was too soon to tell. It only came out in October (although beta far before of course), and while it is PHENOMENALLY successful, and certainly groundbreaking in terms of pricing structure...I wasn't sure it was clear cut mid. So I left it at low, but I'd certainly like to see it rated mid. Anyone else have thoughts on this?71.250.13.112 (talk) 03:42, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like someone moved it to mid. I think between the popularity and it's importance from a business perspective (well executed game that is free to play in the west), Mid is reasonable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.175.3.187 (talk) 15:47, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Referral Spam

Looking at the edit history of this page, it seems like the majority of edits are people trying to get "referral" bonuses by having people click signup links that indicate being invited by a specific person. Perhaps this page should be given low-level protection? ~rezecib (talk) 22:04, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I definitely agree. I will make the request -- Rick Van Tassel user|talk|contribs 22:31, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm putting in another request -- Ruzihm user|talk|contribs 13:18, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Attributes section

The first July 3 edit removed the attributes section (full of helpful definitions for new players) and incorporated it into a more natural discussion in the Champion section. While I think he did it generally well, a lot of definitions were lost (such as disabler, etc.). I just wanted to discuss doing that here. We can reapply the changes if you feel that it's worth the loss of breadth.Jozrael (talk) 00:32, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

some parts reads like a gameguide

everything from section 2 (Gameplay) to section 3.1.2 (Runes) reads like a gameguide to me 80.167.200.244 (talk) 21:40, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So it does. Be bold. :) -- Ruzihm user|talk|contribs 12:03, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Clash of Fates

Should this even be listed here? It was only billed as this before beta, and switched long before release. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jozrael (talk • contribs) 00:01, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If the new history section was added, this should be included thereinJozrael (talk) 06:18, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Attributes

I think this long list is quite unnecessary, and not very descriptive of the actual gameplay. I think it would be accurate to point out some of the more basic champion types like 'Tank', 'DPS', 'Nuke' and soforth. Or maybe just remove it alltogether. --Swend (talk) 14:16, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

History section

It occurs to me that a lot of the current article is unimportant (in the main section) to the casual reader. These include lists of dates of release of various mechanics of the game, as well as reviews of the game at launch which is vastly different from the current game. I propose eliminating all sections of the article that are not relevant to the current state of the game (and mentions to dates thereof), and putting them in a new history section near the bottom. Thoughts?Jozrael (talk) 06:11, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Use of IP/RP for ingame boosts.

Just a minor problem I had when reading the article, it mentions that runes in game can be bought with only IP in the "store" section, so as to not sell power. However, the previous line states that boosts to IP can be purchased with RP. Therefore it logically follows that RP can be used to buy power in game via runes, and the line referencing runes for IP should have the last couple words deleted. Selodin (talk) 12:19, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, no. You still need to play the game to get power. So it's not just a matter of paying to get power. You just get an increase in your average power-per-game rate (assuming you only buy runes with the IP). I'll make it clearer in the article, but we should keep the distinction that purchases do not directly translate into runes. -- Ruzihm user|talk|contribs 12:31, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DBG Edit War

Can someone ban Atchucan from editing this page? Over the past 2 years, he keeps showing up and changing the genre to DBG, which no one else uses. All press uses MOBA or Action-RTS or Action-RPG (most predominant is Action-RTS). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.248.195.22 (talk) 19:02, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion concerning genre

There is a discussion taking place on Talk:Dota (genre)#Merger proposal that I hope can provide more decisive resolutions to:

  • Whether we should have an article for the genre, as it now has a significant number of games in it
  • What the article about the genre should be named, and by extension, what name for the genre should be used on the relevant games' pages

Currently it's mostly been a 2-sided discussion, and I know it's been discussed here in the past, so any input from the contributors given the new climate would be welcome. ~rezecib (talk) 04:53, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from TalixZero, 4 November 2010

In the awards section, decapitalize the "G" in game.

TalixZero (talk) 20:48, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Set Sail For The Seven Seas 333° 17' 15" NET 22:13, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:League_of_Legends&oldid=394870005"