• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

What's with the MOBA hype/popularity?

...or is it that they're so accessible and easy to pick up and play, that its simplistic nature is what's selling it?

You couldn't be more wrong.

They are games with an insane amount of depth and you need to be extremely skilled if you want to play it on a level the likes of what you see in The International. Don't assume, this is something you'll just have to take for granted. Now I hear you think "but every competitive eSport requires the players to be extremely skilled!", and you couldn't be more right, but you would forget some key differences that make MOBAs much closer to a 'real' sport (and thus more popular) than any other eSport out there.

First and foremost; it's the only eSport where teams truly matter. Unlike first person shooters and fighters individual skill only gets you so far. I could go into great detail explaining why this matters, but if you know how teams in team-based sports like Soccer and Basketball function and are aware of the fact they are WAY more popular with the mainstream than most individual sports out there you should be able to understand why this is essential to explain the high amount of viewers and attention LoL and DOTA get.

Then there is its presentation. MOBAs are infinitly more watchable and, once again, more like some of the world's favorite specator sports than any other eSport out there. Matches can last up to an hour instead of mere minutes, there is a top-down view that makes it easy to keep track of everything happening (this is imo the main reason FPS doesn't really take of as an eSport even though every bro on the planet plays Call of Duty), there are great announcers who don't just know the game well but are actually great at their job announcing stuff and add a lot of fun and excitement to the game (don't understate the importance of this), the list goes on and on. Valve and Riot simply go above and beyond all other eSports by truly creating professional entertainment instead of just striving to be that. There is more to the modern MOBA than just appreciating the skill put on display, while the focus mostly is on the latter in other eSports. Just watch The International or the LCS for a bit and compare it to any other eSport stream out there to see what I mean.

Of course, like any sport, you need to understand the rules to truly enjoy watching a match of it. But while you can enjoy basketball if all you know is that the ball needs to go in the hoop, you can't enjoy chess if you don't know every single rule there is to it. Most eSports are the former, MOBAs generally are the latter. This is why a lot of people like the OP don't get MOBAs: you can't truly enjoy them if you only know the basics. This is true for both players and spectators. You even need to be at least vaguely aware of the powers every champ in the match brings to the table or you'll be completely puzzled once any actual fighting happens. The more you know about a MOBA, the more fun it gets to watch/play, which is why spectators/gamers who stick with them are so obsessed by them. Hell, I've played LoL for more than a thousand hours and even I am still learning stuff.

There is also a lot of diversity. MOBAs contantly change, grow and evolve without having to change its core mechanics (fighters) and there are so many variables in-game that not a single match is the same. That last thing is once again something that makes it more like a non-digital sport. Real life pretty much has infinite possibilites, games don't because that would be a bitch to code. Most eSports come down to who is the best at a few techniques generally accepted as the best while there is still lots of creativity in MOBAs. The former is the reason StarCraft isn't as popular as it used to be. The limit of what is possible is the absolute highest of any multiplayer game out there at the moment, period (except for maybe Minecraft, but guess what game is the subject of the most popular channels and videos on Youtube... ;D).

I could go on for a while, but other big factors are its community (the non-toxic one that is, check out the LoL subreddit for a good example of some of the people you can meet besides angry 13-year olds), friends playing/watching them together (and encouraging anyone they know who doesn't to do so), and boobs (only half joking, just look at every female champ in LoL and the crazy amount of female LoL cosplay. People (read: young males) love those things. Also brings it closer to real sports by the way, just go to pretty much any page in the FIFA World Cup threads for proof in .gif).

tl;dr: Other games try, but MOBAs are the only eSport that come close to having the same formula behind the succes of the worlds biggest spectator sports (Soccer, Basketball, you name it)
 
i'm really scratching my head at people saying MOBAs are spectator friendly
(..and i played the tutorial and a few matches in DOTA2)

fights seem super chaotic and the screen bursts with colourful effects and numbers. they don't mean much if you don't know the spells/abilities beforehand.. and it's not like you can really learn by watching their graphical effects.

Part of it is just getting used to the colors and the effects. Eventually you stop looking at the effects and instead look at the health bar, since you've seen the effects thousands of times.
 
This past weekend was Quakecon 2014. I always look forward year after year for the duel masters tournament, the world's best Quake players come together in Dallas, Texas to play a 1v1 tournament and the action is always exciting and thrilling to watch the display of skill and speed.

Something I noticed over the weekend as I was trying to watch the tournament via Twitch.tv, is the massive numbers Dota 2 and League of Legends pull on a daily basis. I believe there was some sort of DOTA 2 championship in Seattle, WA this weekend but I can't for the life of me understand the hype surrounding the MOBA scene. I've tried and tried to get into both DOTA and LOL, but I just can't understand the fun or much less the skill involved in these types of games. I get the mechanics and the overall point of the game which is to destroy the other team's energy core or whatever object it's called.

My background is competitive first person shooters, it always has been and probably always will be. Quakes, Halos, Battlefields, Counter-strikes, etc.

Even with other competitive games like Street Fighter, Starcraft II, etc, I see the competitive value and entertainment they offer. With MOBAs though...I simply can't "get" it.

What do you guys/gals think is driving this MOBA hype machine? Are the games really that good or is it that they're so accessible and easy to pick up and play, that its simplistic nature is what's selling it?

more accessible than shooters, I'm not sure how. point and shoot, maybe lead a little.

also keep in mind, lol has a giant base, so there aren't that many people watching it.
 
You mean ARTS?

Whatever genre-defining term you prefer.

E: Actually, since my argument about its presentation can also be used to explain to the succes of StarCraft before LoL and DOTA 2 took the world by storm, ARTS might indeed be more fitting.

I honestly think it's an issue of the AI. I know they're fodder, i.e., the minons, but I have a real issue with AI being in a pvp competitive environment

I still believe AI doesn't have a place in a competitive pvp environment, i.e., Titanfall. I get why they're there for MOBAs and I get why they're there for TF, but I still don't agree with the design decision of having them.

Well, the AI is but a way to keep you busy in Titanfall. They are indeed just fodder and I can see why you don't like that and many people agree with you.

You shouldn't see the AI in a MOBA as fodder though, since they are core components of gameplay with no relation to 'normal' kills/points. They are better viewed as either items you have to shoot to get gold (minions/creeps) or objectives you have to destroy to get a bonus (monsters, dragon, baron, etc). Comparing them to the filler bots in Titanfall is comparing apples and oranges.
 
Except that you do not make 50-75 decisions every time you A-Move your deathball to the enemy's front.

Of course that is beside the point. The point being: they are different genres, the decisions are of different level/scale/importance. It is as if you were comparing CHESS to an RTS, concluding that RTS should be fucking harder than high level chess, cause you gotta be quick.

You have to approach this from some reasonable position. Like....first, let us estabilish a baseline, saying "competititve 5v5 games exist". Then add item/stat building to that. Then add a quite complex ruleset with towers, creeps, visibilities, respawns, all that. Then add the champion layer, ~100+ champions, all having different skills. Then add the developer's constant updates and balances to that. And you arrive at a point where you say "okay. SCII is still more micro-intensive, but I accept that the skill ceiling of this can be as high as you want it to be, or as you are capable of achieving".

My only point was how much more involved can it be that it would trump something like SC, which has micro and massive decision making. Dota isn't the only nuanced or detailed game man.

You should download it and try it. Afterwards please link us to the replays so we can see how awesome you are at the game.

Maybe I will...

EDIT: Totally forgot I tried this a year ago! http://dotabuff.com/matches/107315481

I'm sorry I can't do this anymore
 
i'm really scratching my head at people saying MOBAs are spectator friendly
(..and i played the tutorial and a few matches in DOTA2)

fights seem super chaotic and the screen bursts with colourful effects and numbers. they don't mean much if you don't know the spells/abilities beforehand.. and it's not like you can really learn by watching their graphical effects.

Agreed, I've watched a few videos just to see what the big deal with all these MOBA games were and had a hard time following. Fighting games are much better of a spectator sport - even though they're insanely detailed and intricate, it's pretty easy to tell what's going on (save for maybe BlazBlue or some of the more unorthodox Guilty Gear charas), you don't even need to be much of a fighting game fan to appreciate Daigo's 2004 comeback for instance.
 
I feel mobas are actually really easy to pick up, the hard part is really that it has a ton of depth. There is a ton of room for improvement as a player.
 
I read an article that said you need to look at it as a sport to understand it. I'm still skeptical but maybe it might work for you, OP :p

I honestly think it's an issue of the AI. I know they're fodder, i.e., the minons, but I have a real issue with AI being in a pvp competitive environment. In essence, I feel like the MOBA is a Diablo 3 game with and objective-based pvp mode. I love the idea of buying your spells, abilities, etc, as you progress through a given match, but I'm just trying to understand why this type of game, i.e., DOTA 2 and LOL, became so huge in the past few years.

Is it the design? Is it the online functionality?

I'll say one thing that I wish FPS had and that's Starcraft 2's online leagues/divisions. No FPS does that for some reason.

I love competitive esports games, but I guess I'm so used to FPS games and even RTS, that I can't get into the MOBA scene. I'll try again and give it some honest hours of play, but I guess I feel bored when most of my encounters are against AI fodder and turrets.

I still believe AI doesn't have a place in a competitive pvp environment, i.e., Titanfall. I get why they're there for MOBAs and I get why they're there for TF, but I still don't agree with the design decision of having them.
 
This past weekend was Quakecon 2014. I always look forward year after year for the duel masters tournament, the world's best Quake players come together in Dallas, Texas to play a 1v1 tournament and the action is always exciting and thrilling to watch the display of skill and speed.

Can you explain in depth why you find Quake exciting?

Like a lot of the "I don't get X" threads, it comes down to personal preference. I have no idea why you would find competitive Quake thrilling to watch, but it's great that you do.
 
I honestly think it's an issue of the AI. I know they're fodder, i.e., the minons, but I have a real issue with AI being in a pvp competitive environment. In essence, I feel like the MOBA is a Diablo 3 game with and objective-based pvp mode. I love the idea of buying your spells, abilities, etc, as you progress through a given match, but I'm just trying to understand why this type of game, i.e., DOTA 2 and LOL, became so huge in the past few years.

Is it the design? Is it the online functionality?

I'll say one thing that I wish FPS had and that's Starcraft 2's online leagues/divisions. No FPS does that for some reason.

I love competitive esports games, but I guess I'm so used to FPS games and even RTS, that I can't get into the MOBA scene. I'll try again and give it some honest hours of play, but I guess I feel bored when most of my encounters are against AI fodder and turrets.

I still believe AI doesn't have a place in a competitive pvp environment, i.e., Titanfall. I get why they're there for MOBAs and I get why they're there for TF, but I still don't agree with the design decision of having them.

Immense depth and unpredictability is why it's so fun to watch. AI is just another factor that increases depth.

You should just look at MOBAs as they're own thing, rather than apply another competitive sports' expectations upon it.
 
Moba is the genre that accurately conveys the glory of victory and the agony of defeat. The elation I have felt from winning certain games in Dota and the soul-shattering sadness I have felt from losing certain matches is something I have not experienced in any other game.
That's pretty well said actually.

The interesting thing about MOBAs in my opinion, and also probably a large factor contributing to the feeling of glory of winning and agony of defeat, is how practically every single second of the game is part of this on going meta game of control of space and mind (I say mind because you want to convey that feeling of power and danger to your opponent).

I'm really not sure if any other genre has that kind of meta game that is going on practically every single second of the game. Not even RTS.

I don't get it because I just don't understand the mechanics of it or how you win. I watched the entire grand finals set for one of these big tournaments that lasted over an hour and I came away with "meh" feeling. I didn't dislike it but it's not something I'd seek out as I didn't find it that entertaining. I've also seen "best/hypest moments from _____" videos and it still just does nothing for me.
Dunno really, but I think one thing that might help you understand is to try to see this meta game. Look what the players are doing more closely, which creeps they choose to attack and when. When the heroes are moving in and out of direct combat on creeps and when they try to gang on enemy heroes. How and when they get one or 2 hits at a time against an enemy hero without taking any damage themselves.
Try to get in their heads and see what they're thinking. Why they are doing what they're doing. Did that guy just see a good opening for an attack against an enemy hero or did he just decide he was enough powerful for it? Why did he choose that specific hero to attack? Was the enemy hero getting too powerful?

The meta game also largely affects what items and what spells/skills they choose to get.

These things are kind of hard to explain though and I dunno if it helps you, but it might.
 
First and foremost; it's the only eSport where teams truly matter. Unlike first person shooters and fighters individual skill only gets you so far. I could go into great detail explaining why this matters, but if you know how teams in team-based sports like Soccer and Basketball function and are aware of the fact they are WAY more popular with the mainstream than most individual sports out there you should be able to understand why this is essential to explain the high amount of viewers and attention LoL and DOTA get.

What a crock. To quote YOU, "You couldn't be more wrong".

I'm not going to argue whether it's the one where teams matter most or not, but what a ridiculous statement to say they don't "truly matter" in other games.
 
The reason for the hype? It's incredibly easy to build a culture around a genre that was developed by experts for a decade and then released for free. They're games with a strong foundation and are easily accessible; easy to watch and easy to try out. Not many games have that advantage.

And these games are totally RTS games. They parallel RTS games almost exactly. The difference is in how the dynamics are expressed. Aspects of traditional RTS games were rearranged to make things feel more like an action game, but all the foundational strategies remain the same.

You have an economy to manage and upgrades to purchase that determine how much of an overall advantage you have-- a "macro game" where you essentially win based on overall combined power. You also have specific units and actions that can turn the whole game around when you're in a jam or if used at just the right time-- a "micro game" that requires situational tactics, timing and movement. It's important to keep an eye on enemy positions so you know when you attack or defend. You use scouts and observers to gain sight advantage and detectors to flush out invisible units that could wreck you if left unchecked. In general you are always taking a risk to get an edge while denying your opponent of opportunities. Some games have a cut-and-dried outcome early on but drag out for an eternity; a slow and painful death, or and irritatingly long, weird road to victory. Other times, by playing smartly, you can make an incredible turnaround at what looks like you're weakest moment. This is DOTA as much as it is Starcraft.

DOTA is what Starcraft would be if it were built as a team game. Starcraft never got footing as a competitive team game because roles don't exist. Every player can build and use every type of unit. It is grossly inefficient to play a team game like 1v1 because if everyone takes time to scout, build support units and expand evenly you will get absolutely steamrolled by players who focus on assuming roles. In big games, it's easier for one person to be responsible for one thing than four players being responsible for everything. In Starcraft team games one person just techs up like crazy to get heavy-hitting units, another person scouts and supports the other players with situational units, another person might harass constantly to slow enemy expansions and deny opportunities. Sound familiar? Carry, support, and ganker in DOTA. It was a necessity that the genre had to change to support team play. There being such a huge division in strategy based on team or individual play in Starcraft, everyone just had to choose one to stick with, and 1v1 best supported how the game naturally played.
 
I honestly think it's an issue of the AI. I know they're fodder, i.e., the minons, but I have a real issue with AI being in a pvp competitive environment. In essence, I feel like the MOBA is a Diablo 3 game with and objective-based pvp mode. I love the idea of buying your spells, abilities, etc, as you progress through a given match, but I'm just trying to understand why this type of game, i.e., DOTA 2 and LOL, became so huge in the past few years.

Is it the design? Is it the online functionality?

I'll say one thing that I wish FPS had and that's Starcraft 2's online leagues/divisions. No FPS does that for some reason.

I love competitive esports games, but I guess I'm so used to FPS games and even RTS, that I can't get into the MOBA scene. I'll try again and give it some honest hours of play, but I guess I feel bored when most of my encounters are against AI fodder and turrets.

I still believe AI doesn't have a place in a competitive pvp environment, i.e., Titanfall. I get why they're there for MOBAs and I get why they're there for TF, but I still don't agree with the design decision of having them.

The "minions" are essentially rescources. They provide gold, exp and map control. It's how you "gather" and otherwise interact with the rescources that is unconventional. It's a bit less intuitive than say, a "gold mine" or "chop wood". There's item that facilitate gathering creeps and others that facilitate fights. Some do both. The same is true for Heroes, though that is oversimplifying things a bit.

The minions don't actually have much of an AI, they just run along a path (which is always the same) and attack what's in front of them. The jungle creeps just hit you back when you hit them.
 
What a crock. To quote YOU, "You couldn't be more wrong".

I'm not going to argue whether it's the one where teams matter most or not, but what a ridiculous statement to say they don't "truly matter" in other games.

Well to be fair, Most other games are pretty much single player experiences. The FPS is moving away from teamwork, where games like battlefield 1942 and tribes had roles that actually made a difference in actually game play. But In MOBAs (or whatever you want to call it), lack of team work would get you crushed.
 
I think one of the big things that sparked the MOBA genre is the whole free-to-play thing from Riot (and later, Valve). MOBAs really embraced the F2P model which eliminates any barrier to entry. Most people aren't going to watch the competitive scene of a game they aren't playing, so have even if COD sells 15 million copies, that's still a hard cap on the competitive nature of it. Plus, annual releases don't help either, especially compared to MOBAs that are always evolving patch by patch.

I see it like when poker got really popular out of nowhere - it's something anyone can pickup and do with no barrier to entry, so you get a bigger crowd surrounding it.
 
but the moba genre was already big with the original dota, whether it was bnet or GArena...


but yes, cant deny the fact that the f2p model made this genre or atleast this two games fucking whales though
 
I'm really not sure if any other genre has that kind of meta game that is going on practically every single second of the game. Not even RTS.
Yes they do. Map control is always key in RTS, as are mind games. The game constantly evolves and shifts based on what the players build, scout and how they choose to expand onto the map. Unless you're in bronze league.

And some of you are really trying to say that only MOBA games truly make you feel good after a win and bad after a loss? And that MOBA is the only genre in which team play really matters? Ugh. It's that sort of arrogance that makes some of the MOBA community insufferable. Most of the posters in this thread are remaining level-headed about things, but others need to take a step back and try to be objective.
 
I want to understand MOBAs but they seem impenetrable.

Then there is its presentation. MOBAs are infinitly more watchable and, once again, more like some of the world's favorite specator sports than any other eSport out there. Matches can last up to an hour instead of mere minutes, there is a top-down view that makes it easy to keep track of everything happening (this is imo the main reason FPS doesn't really take of as an eSport even though every bro on the planet plays Call of Duty), there are great announcers who don't just know the game well but are actually great at their job announcing stuff and add a lot of fun and excitement to the game (don't understate the importance of this), the list goes on and on. Valve and Riot simply go above and beyond all other eSports by truly creating professional entertainment instead of just striving to be that. There is more to the modern MOBA than just appreciating the skill put on display, while the focus mostly is on the latter in other eSports. Just watch The International or the LCS for a bit and compare it to any other eSport stream out there to see what I mean.
I watched the noob stream and i was not able to understand what was going on.

Football and basketball are easily watchable because you can know the basics and it gets you somewhere. MOBAs are not like that.

Edit:

I'm actively reading to hopefully learn what the hell is going on.
 
My girlfriend doesn't play Dota but she has a very basic understanding of the concepts. While she won't watch tournaments all year long like I will, she has tuned in to The International 4 a few times and has enjoyed the games she's watched.

Hearing the crowd along with the commentators helps her hype significantly, I think it's easier for her to figure out what's a big play and what isn't that way.
 
I honestly think it's an issue of the AI. I know they're fodder, i.e., the minons, but I have a real issue with AI being in a pvp competitive environment. In essence, I feel like the MOBA is a Diablo 3 game with and objective-based pvp mode. I love the idea of buying your spells, abilities, etc, as you progress through a given match, but I'm just trying to understand why this type of game, i.e., DOTA 2 and LOL, became so huge in the past few years.

Is it the design? Is it the online functionality?

I'll say one thing that I wish FPS had and that's Starcraft 2's online leagues/divisions. No FPS does that for some reason.

I love competitive esports games, but I guess I'm so used to FPS games and even RTS, that I can't get into the MOBA scene. I'll try again and give it some honest hours of play, but I guess I feel bored when most of my encounters are against AI fodder and turrets.

I still believe AI doesn't have a place in a competitive pvp environment, i.e., Titanfall. I get why they're there for MOBAs and I get why they're there for TF, but I still don't agree with the design decision of having them.

The moment to moment action in MOBAs while you are killing creeps isn't fun. You feel bored because it's boring.
The fun comes from try to farm and to push the enemy tower or try to poke the enemy (do some damge) while there is a enemy in front of you trying to stop you and kill you, or doing the reverse, trying to push your lane. It's incredibly thrilling. You aren't farming alone, you are farming with a enemy at 3 mts of distance, who may attack you in any moment without notice.
 
MOBAs have extremely high skill ceilings but more importantly due to the way the game is presented are much more viewer friendly as a spectator sport than competitive FPSes are (although fighters are still the most viewer friendly).

Yes, Dota has incredible depth, which is what makes it not get boring. There is a lot you can learn even after 1000 hours. There's always room to improve and ways to try new item builds. I knew nothing about moba's until I tried dota 2 then was hooked. Also playing with four of your friends makes it a social event. There are a lot of factors out of your control in a team fps game, but in dota you just have your own team to deal with.
 
The high view counts on twitch are easily explained. It's more fun to watch these games than to play them.

Except many more people also play them. Dota 2 had over 9 million unique players last month and that is rising month on month.
 
I really don't see how they're more accessible than a FPS.

I don't know about that. If you have someone who has never played a video game to play an FPS and Dota, they'll probably manage a bit better in Dota, they'll probably be able to start attacking dudes instead of looking at the floor the entire time in an FPS.
 
The high view counts on twitch are easily explained. It's more fun to watch these games than to play them.

giphy.gif
 
I'm actively reading to hopefully learn what the hell is going on.

It is easier to learn by playing it. Especially if you have someone who can guide you on the basics.

I probably wouldn't be playing dota 2 now if my friends didn't help me at first.
 
even the MOBA format takes a lot on average for a single game.

in StarCraft if you get to the late game phase, you know you get to see back and forths with insane army compositions and base trade races.

also, the units are not fantasy based and make more sense which means a casual viewer can learn the game by watching.

Part of it is just getting used to the colors and the effects. Eventually you stop looking at the effects and instead look at the health bar, since you've seen the effects thousands of times.
this doesn't apply to casual viewers.. and good luck telling them to not pay attention to the visuals, but to healthbars.
 
Playing Competitive FPS is like playing Foosball/Jitz

Competitive MOBAs are like playing Chess/GO

It is like playing rengo with a bunch of drunk friends who happen to have baseball bats on them. One messed up joseki and you end up dead.

It is worth it for the thrill alone!
 
The high view counts on twitch are easily explained. It's more fun to watch these games than to play them.

There are far more players than viewers at any given time (millions and millions, in the case of LoL alone).

I like the idea of MOBAs, in theory, but I can't just get myself to play one. The metagame is so deep that playing effectively becomes pretty much a full time job, and playing at any level less than 'perfectly effectively' is apparently a good way to get yourself shouted at/called every name in the book in 20-45 minute chunks. When a game relies so heavily on teamwork, when skill ceilings are so high, and when the per-game time commitment is so large, few people want to spend the time to help people improve - every minute spent doing that is a minute spent not getting personally better. As such, it's just easier to belittle the noobs and drive them away (unless they have thick enough skin to withstand abuse for the months needed to get good enough to 'not suck'). I have no MOBA playing friends, either - they either lack the time to commit or the tolerance to abuse necessary to play in random groups.

Obviously, the existing mechanics work and don't keep most people away (hence the immense popularity), but there are plenty of people out there who would prefer an introduction to the genre that's at least perceived to be a tad less abusive.
 
MOBA isnt a good descriptor of this genre. This genre should be part of the RTS or just Strategy genre. ARTS doesn't make sense since all RTS games are action oriented and MOBA (Multiplayer Online Battle Arena) would fit with Quake or Unreal Tournament also. The only people that don't want these game to be called RTS are those that are on a high horse and don't think there is enough micro involved to be in the genre.
 
It's a mix of a lot of things:

1) Low barrier of entry: Most MOBAs are F2P.

2) Accessible gameplay: Although some people dislike RTS controls, most people know how to point and click on a mouse and MOBAs just build on that. At a basic level of play, there's no need for twitch reactions (FPS), combo timing (fightmans) or significant amounts of micro and macro (proper RTSes).

3) Different kinds of depth for different kinds of players: Some people are more mechanical in their approach to gaming, preferring execution over strategizing. Other people are the opposite, preferring to out think their opponents than hitting buttons faster/better. MOBAs support both kinds of players; most people can find something inside a MOBA to appeal to them.

4) Emphasis on real teamwork: It's one of the weaknesses of multiplayer games in general that players don't really feel like part of a team unless they're running with a group of friends all coordinated on Mumble or Teamspeak. This is not true of MOBAs, which demand teamwork and co-dependency at all levels of play, for better or for worse. The upside is MOBAs are a lot more fun to play with friends, although sometimes they'll ruin friendships.

5) Persistence: Changes to MOBAs are always incremental, at least so far. This puts them closer to MMOs than other competitive games, where changes are usually generational, or at least large leaps rather than small ones. There will, in all likelihood, never be a DOTA3, or a LOL2. The same cannot be said of Street Fighter or Starcraft, and every FPS on the market goes through annual/bi-annual revisions, except for the really hardcore ones like Quake III, which probably receives little developer support these days. Everything a MOBA player learns today will be applicable tomorrow. This will be true week to week, month to month, and year to year. Yet there will never be a shortage of new things to look forward to, so long as the MOBA in question is alive.

6) Everyone is playing them: MOBAs get to enjoy the exponential growth of social games, which is where you most often see this kind of "critical mass" of popularity that sends a particular game into the stratosphere, while also having actual depth rather than being one-off fads. So not only can they acquire millions of players, they can also keep them.

There's probably a lot of other stuff but these are the main things that separate MOBAs from other competitive games.
 
MOBA isnt a good descriptor of this genre. This genre should be part of the RTS or just Strategy genre. ARTS doesn't make sense since all RTS games are action oriented and MOBA (Multiplayer Online Battle Arena) would fit with Quake or Unreal Tournament also. The only people that don't want these game to be called RTS are those that are on a high horse and don't think there is enough micro involved to be in the genre.
It's not about elitism, MOBAs and RTS are fundamentally different. Sure they were born from a RTS, but in the end MOBAs are closer to top down RPGs than Starcraft and the like.

If Diablo had team PVP it wouldn't be a RTS
 
They're called MOBAs because almost everyone calls them MOBAs now, except for genre semantics pedants or people bitter over Rito monopolizing MOBA perception.

Personally, I like "Lords Management".
 
the most important thing for any spectator sport is whether or not you play the sport yourself. mobas are by far the most popular to play and thus they will be the most popular to watch.
 
the most important thing for any spectator sport is whether or not you play the sport yourself. mobas are by far the most popular to play and thus they will be the most popular to watch.

Only true of esports I think, most people in the world don't actually play official fut-de-bol, but it is the single most popular sport in the world.

But yeah. And the really exciting thing is that strategies and tactics innovated by the pros will, through exposure, trickle down to lower levels of play, so the community feels tighter overall.
 
I don't personally care for them, but I'd sooner watch DotA than competitive FPS. They're accessible in terms of entry cost (free) but they're by no means easy to learn.

This. As an RTS and strategy fan I'd rather spectate a MOBA than an FPS. That said any game with a "professional" scene is an instant turn-off to me. I just feel it alters the community for the worse. Anecdotally I've never seen someone who plays MOBAs describe them as "fun", just "addictive" and "frustrating". That's just my experience though. I've no doubt the genre has genuine appeal to millions of people.
 
As someone who plays Counter-Strike and Quake, DOTA2 and LoL are not more accessible than those games. Nowhere near. Counter-Strike and Quake are 100x better at 'pick-up-and-play' than games like DOTA2.

You're also probably the only person I've seen to suggest they're popular because they're accessible, unless you're talking just about the barriers to actually obtaining and running the game (Free to play, will run on anything).
 
This. As an RTS and strategy fan I'd rather spectate a MOBA than an FPS. That said any game with a "professional" scene is an instant turn-off to me. I just feel it alters the community for the worse. Anecdotally I've never seen someone who plays MOBAs describe them as "fun", just "addictive" and "frustrating". That's just my experience though. I've no doubt the genre has genuine appeal to millions of people.

moba communities were toxic long before there was money involved. like with dota 1.
 
As someone who plays Counter-Strike and Quake, DoTA2 and LoL are not more accessible than those games.

What a compelling argument.

Counterargument:
New player walks into CS, needs to figure out how to join a server (I'm assuming 1.6, not Source or GO), needs to figure out how to buy guns, and which ones are worth buying, needs to learn the map layout. Walks out into the open and dies immediately with zero feedback or suggestions for future play.

New player walks into League, gets thrown into a tutorial covering all the basic elements of the game, and is limited to fighting braindead bots for their first few games so they can find their MOBA legs. There's also enough downtime between engagements to ask teammates for advice, and teammates can pick up the new players' s while they spend time learning rather than playing.

I think it's obvious which one is friendlier to new players.

I mean the TTK alone puts CS and Quake out of the reach of many gamers.
 
Top Bottom