Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Valve Trademarks 'DOTA'

Posted by Soulskill on from the vi-sitter-i-ventrilo dept.

An anonymous reader tips news that Valve Software has filed a trademark claim for the term "DOTA," fueling speculation that the company will soon reveal a new Defense of the Ancients game. Voice actor John St. John recently said he was recording for such a game in a post to Twitter. The tweet was subsequently deleted. Last year Valve hired 'Icefrog,' lead developer for the original DotA mod.

141 comments

  1. DOTA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Nobody gives a shit.

  2. At first I was angry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Then I saw that they had the original DotA developer on board. Then I just got worried that DoTA for WC3 and its clone on SC2 would get sued.

    1. Re:At first I was angry by Tridus · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Except they don't. They have the second maintainer of DotA Allstars on board (the original developer of that worked on League of Legends). DotA itself was made by yet another person who isn't involved in either of them.

      I'd love to know how you trademark something made by someone else and which someone else has already used on released games.

      --
      -- "So they told me that using the download page to download something was not something they anticipated." - Bill Gates
    2. Re:At first I was angry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I'd love to know how you trademark something made by someone else and which someone else has already used on released games.

      It's pretty easy when that someone else didn't bother to trademark their brand name. You don't have to register a trademark, but you do have to throw a TM next to the name every time you use it. Neither DotA nor DotA All Stars ever did this, so anyone is free to trademark it. If the original dev had trademarked it, he would have had to transfer that trademark to allow someone else to use it to make DotA All Stars, who then would have had to transfer it to the new maintainer to allow him to continue to use it. And since that second maintainer now works for Valve, he would have been free to transfer it to them.

    3. Re:At first I was angry by Impeesa · · Score: 1

      Like all innovative things, the original has served its purpose, and been laid to rest. From the ashes, not one, but many successors rise. And inevitably, one will bear the name of its father - even if, like present-day Napster or Atari, it is at best a shambling husk of a brand compared to the original.

  3. Ok but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What about Half Life? Is this franchise dead or something?

    1. Re:Ok but... by WaroDaBeast · · Score: 1

      What about Half Life? Is this franchise dead or something?

      I'm afraid the franchise has reached its half-life.

      --
      "The body may heal, but the mind is not always so resilient." -- Deus Ex: Human Revolution
    2. Re:Ok but... by Pharmboy · · Score: 5, Informative

      What about Half Life? Is this franchise dead or something?

      I doubt it, they are supposedly working on the last Episode, but I'm not shocked that it is taking so long. Remember, whatever happens in the last episode, it sets the stage for the next game. You don't want to kill off people who would be handy later on. The franchise is still very popular, very profitable, and the highest ranking games on Metacritic's website. The rumors of the franchise's death have been greatly exaggerated.

      They are talking about making the last episode much scarier, which I think is the right thing to do. I remember the first Half-life literally giving me chill bumps, and making me jump with the head crabs and other assorted critters. The last interview that Gabe gave on it (that I am aware of) was a few months ago: http://multiplayerblog.mtv.com/2010/03/26/valve-wants-their-next-half-life-to-scare-you/

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    3. Re:Ok but... by Tukz · · Score: 1, Informative

      You do realise that Valve have got more than 1 studio, right?
      It's a seperat studio making Half-life.

      --
      - Don't do what I do, it's probably not healthy nor safe. -
    4. Re:Ok but... by Lillebo · · Score: 1

      Some scholars argue that the next full game to the series will not be Half-Life 3, as Valve considers Episodes 1, 2 and the upcoming Episode 3 to be "Half Life 3".

    5. Re:Ok but... by bcat24 · · Score: 4, Funny

      What about Half Life? Is this franchise dead or something?

      I'm afraid the franchise has reached its half-life.

      So it's only mostly dead? There's a big difference between mostly dead and all dead. Mostly dead is slightly alive. With all dead, well, with all dead there's usually only one thing you can do.

    6. Re:Ok but... by Pharmboy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Which is why I didn't say HL3 or HL4, just "the next game". There is also the potential for a prequel, or a game from a different point of view, like they did with Opposing Force and Blue Shift. Simply staying in the same time and universe, there is huge potential for a game where you don't even see Gordon, as a Combine, or play a citizen that organizes the underground railroad, etc. Personally, I would love to play a game as DOG, with the gravity gun and maybe one or two other "powers", doing combat while Gordon is elsewhere. Just kicking Combine ass and breaking stuff. These would likely be smaller/shorter games, but the potential is still there for some cool $19.99 games or part of a pack of games, like the Orange Box.

      They would be expanding on the current universe, and while not adding much depth, they would add breadth to the series while being easy enough to keep to the original canon. While Opposing Force and Blue Shift were not as good as the original HL, (the main issues that held them back was some game play quirkiness and some of the tasks were a bit too much of a grind) but they were still good games in the same universe and worth playing through more than once.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    7. Re:Ok but... by calzakk · · Score: 1

      half dead

    8. Re:Ok but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      left for dead

    9. Re:Ok but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some scholars argue that the next full game to the series will not be Half-Life 3, as Valve considers Episodes 1, 2 and the upcoming Episode 3 to be "Half Life 3".

      Maybe the next game could be like a prequel to Half Life. Like the episodes we now know as 1, 2, and 3 are really like episodes 4,5, and 6 and the new episodes would be the real episodes 1, 2, and 3. We could like learn about Gordon Freeman's youth, and what transpired to make him the silent, crowbar swinging physicist he is today. Maybe he had a rich, powerful girlfriend but she like died or left him. And there's like this funny talking Rasta dude who's like really dumb and no one can stand him but he won't go away.

      Man, just imagine if they did something like that.

    10. Re:Ok but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now Gabe Newell has stopped slagging OSX & Linux off, I decided to stop hating him so much.

      However, when someone throws useless buzzwords around like "Emotional Palette"; I can't help but want to sandpaper their face off.

    11. Re:Ok but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about Half Life? Is this franchise dead or something?

      I'm afraid the franchise has reached its half-life.

      So it's only mostly dead? There's a big difference between mostly dead and all dead. Mostly dead is slightly alive. With all dead, well, with all dead there's usually only one thing you can do.

      Rifle through their pockets and look for loose change!

    12. Re:Ok but... by carp3_noct3m · · Score: 1

      Half-life was my original love when it comes to PC games. That I am still able to say after all these years that I truly trust Valve that whatever the next installment and ones after that will be of superb quality and lots of fun, not to mention with awesome new modding potential. Valve and by extension Steam is a bastion of the pc gamer industry, despite its often pointed out flaws (usually said to be DRM and longevity)

      --
      "It's ok, I'm completely secure as long as my iron is off"
    13. Re:Ok but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where do "Not quite dead" and "Getting better" fit in?

    14. Re:Ok but... by IICV · · Score: 1

      With all dead, well, with all dead there's usually only one thing you can do.

      ... Go through his clothes and look for a long jump module?

    15. Re:Ok but... by amentajo · · Score: 1

      At the time that WaroDaBeast posted "I'm afraid the franchise has reached its half-life," any posts made after it would be more than half dead, which is one acceptable criterion for "mostly dead."

    16. Re:Ok but... by bcmm · · Score: 1

      So it's only mostly dead?

      Clearly, the franchise is bricked.

      --
      # cat /dev/mem | strings | grep -i llama
      Damn, my RAM is full of llamas.
    17. Re:Ok but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are talking about making the last episode much scarier, which I think is the right thing to do. I remember the first Half-life literally giving me chill bumps, and making me jump with the head crabs and other assorted critters. The last interview that Gabe gave on it (that I am aware of) was a few months ago: http://multiplayerblog.mtv.com/2010/03/26/valve-wants-their-next-half-life-to-scare-you/

      I don't mind that as long as they balance it with the humor that's also been the trademark of the HL series. I wouldn't say the first HL was scary--more that it created moments of suspense, where the game could startle you effectively. That's not necessarily horror--that could be said of any successful suspense, action, mystery, or horror work.

      In parts of HL2, I think they got dangerously close to getting so self-absorbed in horror that it become a cliched survival-horror FPS. Thankfully, they always pulled out of it enough that didn't happen.

      The best of the HL series blends sci-fi, action, and horror with a distanced humor that prevents it from becoming tedious and stifling. I worry that they'll kill what makes it successful by trying to make it "more" of anything. If I wanted more horror I would pick from any number of other games--Doom, FEAR, L4D, Crysis, etc. etc. etc.

    18. Re:Ok but... by Pharmboy · · Score: 1

      Case in point: Valve games are the only games I buy at full retail before they come out. Everything else, I wait until they go on sale. Partly because I trust their quality, and honestly, partly out of customer loyalty.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    19. Re:Ok but... by Pharmboy · · Score: 1

      That is well put. I agree with your assessment of HL2, which was still very good, and offered something new, but didn't have the same "thrills" that the first had. I still say an in universe/time small game where you play as DOG could be quite humorous and fun. Been thinking about it more: Just the gravity gun in the right hand and a missile launcher in the left. No weapon swapping. And with regular but temporary powerups to make the gravity gun the GOOD one, where you can pickup live people and toss them like rag dolls. And when you die, you are revived by cut scenes of Kliner and/or Alyx repairing you, and scolding you for getting yourself in trouble. A series of maps with a final destination of some kind, maybe where you meet up with Alyx and Gordon before all the water towers, etc. Lots of potential for raw, fun destruction with humorous results. I always thought that they could have expanded on DOG if given time or the right venue.

      Wish I could mod, if for no other reason that to make and play that game.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    20. Re:Ok but... by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      OMG, I'd love playing as a 'citizen' against the Combine in the Half-Life world. IF they did it right,

      Personally, I've been waiting anxiously for a MMOFPS set in a post-apocalyptic/urban riot/or zombie world: basically something akin to Fallout 3, but MMORPG and focused on team/squad type tactics, while retaining significant RPG characteristics/customizations that would make each character 'unique' but not necessarily better.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    21. Re:Ok but... by Pharmboy · · Score: 1

      Exactly! Setup the underground railroad, maybe maps to where you escort scientists to safety, etc. Others where you simply take out communications facilities, etc. Use makeshift weapons, maybe even go undercover as a Combine to sabotage a facility, at the risk of getting caught. They are NOT fully exploiting the potential of the universe.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    22. Re:Ok but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so its... Still Alive?

    23. Re:Ok but... by WaroDaBeast · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it's been left for dead.

      --
      "The body may heal, but the mind is not always so resilient." -- Deus Ex: Human Revolution
    24. Re:Ok but... by suomynonAyletamitlU · · Score: 1

      Look at me, still posting when there's science to do...
      When I read your posts, it makes me glad I'm not you.

    25. Re:Ok but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Think about the gaps between the Toy Story films! Irregular, but still excellent. If it means in five or six years we get ray-traced perfected 3D Half Life 3 (the marketing writes itself), then I'm quite okay with that.

    26. Re:Ok but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sell it to EA Games and let them run crappy sequels ad infinitum?

  4. dota by bakamorgan · · Score: 1

    Might give the game a try since valve is behind it. Wonder how many people will go from a free game to one you have to buy now.

    1. Re:dota by omgarthas · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I get your point, but the clerk and the store didn't hand me a copy of Warcraft 3 for free

    2. Re:dota by BigJClark · · Score: 1


      *cough* counterstrike *hack*

      --

      Hi, I Boris. Hear fix bear, yes?
    3. Re:dota by Cristofori42 · · Score: 1

      I bought WC3 for the sole purpose of playing dota which I played at a LAN party a few times. I know quite a few people who have also done this - this leads me to suspect that the makers of dota have generated a nice bit of profit for Blizzard.

      --
      "Is that dad? Either that or Batman's really let himself go."
    4. Re:dota by Hawke666 · · Score: 1

      You mean like they did with Alien Swarm? Oh wait...

      Nah, they’ll just release a (probably Source-based) standalone DoTA game, for free. Free games drive Steam accounts, which drive large numbers of purchases when other games are on sale.

    5. Re:dota by Haffner · · Score: 3, Insightful

      As a fairly avid gamer who has played well over 2000 games of dota (TDA gamecount is in the 1200s), and someone who plays dota as his main game, let me be the first to say: DotA is NOT a good game to get in to. While I love it and think its a terrific game, it is extraordinarily difficult to get into. There are over 90 heroes, each of whom possess 4 skills. There are also probably 60 something (guessing off the top of my head) items. In order to be able to play and enjoy the game, you need to know 1) skills for every hero, and 2) item builds for the heroes you play.

      I have tried to get my friends to try dota- the ones that used to play have largely quit for HoN or sc2. The only people I can recommend dota to are the ones that a) are skilled strategy game players, b) enjoy playing wc3, and c) are willing to dedicate the roughly 50+ hours necessary to simply UNDERSTAND dota.

      Dota is a competitive, balanced, and rewarding game, but it takes a tremendous time investment before one can enjoy it. In my opinion, for beginners, dota will not be truly fun until you are able to understand the other team/players' strategies and counter them. Most low level dota consists of farming up items and then trying to kill things. While this might be fun for a while, this is like playing l4d2 with computers: it's fun, but you're missing out on the most crucial part of the game

      Lastly, most dota players are terrible people. They feign ignorance, love to blame others, and can singlehandedly ruin a game. This is something you need to understand - just one player can make an otherwise great game miserable. Especially in low level league play (like TDA or THR) where there are penalties for leaving a game early, having one of these people on your team can make for 45 minutes of hell. Also, most players won't really progress beyond these leagues, so if you're trying to get in to dota, this is what you have to look forward to.

      That said, best of luck... It would be great to have new dota players, or a standalone REAL dota game (that exactly mirrors the wc3 variant - my problem with HoN is it's too different).

      --
      "Going to war without the French is like going deer hunting without your accordion." ~General Norman Schwarzkopf
    6. Re:dota by PachmanP · · Score: 1

      As a fairly avid gamer who has played well over 2000 games of dota (TDA gamecount is in the 1200s), and someone who plays dota as his main game, let me be the first to say: DotA is NOT a good game to get in to. While I love it and think its a terrific game, it is extraordinarily difficult to get into. There are over 90 heroes, each of whom possess 4 skills. There are also probably 60 something (guessing off the top of my head) items. In order to be able to play and enjoy the game, you need to know 1) skills for every hero, and 2) item builds for the heroes you play.

      Well since it's pretty obvious you don't know anything and you're just a casual player, STFU N00B!!

      --
      You're thinking small. Why miniaturize the laser, when we could instead enlarge the sharks? -John Searle
    7. Re:dota by Haffner · · Score: 1

      Its probably a lot more than that, actually... I just threw out a number. 2 Building shops @ ~12 each, lady/dwarf at 12 each, for 48, special shop for ~60 + 6 recipe shops at average of 10 is probably total of more like 120.

      tl;dr, my above number was not well thought out.

      --
      "Going to war without the French is like going deer hunting without your accordion." ~General Norman Schwarzkopf
    8. Re:dota by alanebro · · Score: 1

      I found the same problem, by the way. I got a friend to try it, and he did ok as a few heroes. However, his problem was that he couldn't ever tell what an enemy was going to do to him. He ended up getting frustrated after a few games and never touched it again.

    9. Re:dota by tibman · · Score: 1

      So what's the missing crucial part from l4d2 on the computer?

      --
      http://soylentnews.org/~tibman
    10. Re:dota by bakamorgan · · Score: 0

      a sequel within a years time?

  5. Business model by Issarlk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    1 - choose a popular mod to an existing game.
    2 - hire the devs
    3 - release standalone Steam version
    4 - PROFIT!

    1. Re:Business model by Netshroud · · Score: 5, Informative
      That's exactly their business model.
      • Counter-Strike
      • Day of Defeat
      • Team Fortress 2
      • Alien Swarm
      • Portal

      It doesn't surprise me in the least,

    2. Re:Business model by Winckle · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Hey it's a sound business model that results in quality polished games. Can't knock them for it. :)

    3. Re:Business model by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except both HoN (Heroes of Newerth) and LoL (League of Legends) already exist to do this.

    4. Re:Business model by digitig · · Score: 1

      1 - choose a popular mod to an existing game. 2 - hire the devs 3 - release standalone Steam version 4 - PROFIT!

      5 - ???

      Well, that step has to be in there somewhere.

      --
      Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
    5. Re:Business model by wynterwynd · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Except technically speaking, Portal was not a mod. It was based off of a proof-of-concept puzzle game called Narbacular Drop.

      Other than that, yep.

      I can't see it as anything but good for gaming. Gamers know what gamers want and so far the groundswell approach they use has produced some truly great games.

      --
      "Not all who wander are lost" -- JRR Tolkien
    6. Re:Business model by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yea, I think in schemes that actually generate a profit, the list goes something like this:
      1. do stuff
      2. do other stuff
      3. Profit!
      4. ???
      5. Hookers and blow

    7. Re:Business model by PrimalChrome · · Score: 3, Funny

      eh...how exactly are they profiting off of Alien Swarm? I suppose that with a $0.00 pricetag and the expense of bandwidth they make it up in quantity of sales?

    8. Re:Business model by Shanrak · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Every additional download of steam (which is required for alien swarm) means an additional exposure to some of their weekend and special sales. Its an excellent way of getting your advertising out, and at the same time it inflates steam user count so it shows publishers how big of a customer base they are losing if they choose to not publish on steam.

      --
      This post may or may not contain cancer causing materials.
    9. Re:Business model by lwsimon · · Score: 1

      Agreed. I wish they'd take up Insurgency: Modern Infantry Combat. I still play that game just about daily, but the community is fading fast. I'm going to have to pick a new game soon, if they don't start active work on the sequel :(

      --
      Learn about Photography Basics.
    10. Re:Business model by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Sigh
      1. Collect underpants
      2. ???
      3. Profit!

      Step 2 was proven, in 2007, to be "sell to Rob Malda". Because he's a pervert that gets off on soiled boy's underwear.

    11. Re:Business model by delinear · · Score: 1

      It also doesn't preclude them charging for it in the future (maybe a GoTY edition with some unique extras) or bundling it with some of their other releases and charging for the whole pack (a la Orange Box), or even using the popularity to sell the console ports. Plenty of ways to profit from an initial zero price (assuming you have a product that's worth more than zero, just giving stuff out for free obviously won't help if nobody wanted it - fortunately Valve seem to have a good hit to miss ratio).

    12. Re:Business model by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But Alien Swarm is still free. (at the moment) At least until it gains more groundswell.

    13. Re:Business model by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Portal was actually a mod called Exite. (http://www.exitemod.com/)

      It even had multiplayer! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMOKQtr4EjI&feature=related)

    14. Re:Business model by biovoid · · Score: 1

      No it wasn't. Parent was correct. I downloaded and played Narbacular Drop before it became Portal. It had nothing to do with Valve, Source Engine or Half-Life before the team was hired by Valve.

  6. Major developer trademarks original MOBA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As Valve acquires the "original" name and a prominent developer of this, one of the newest, game types to surface in a long time. Of course this is big news, sure others have beaten them to the punch in developing standalone clones, but this one might combine both originality and good gameplay. Unlike HoN (Heroes of Newerth) or LoL (League of Legends) where you get either or.

  7. Summary is wrong, as usual by Tridus · · Score: 5, Informative

    Icefrog is NOT the original developer. I don't know where that nonsense keeps coming from.

    The original developer is named Eul, and he made it way back before The Frozen Throne came out. He then stopped supporting it. Guinsoo then made DotA Allstars. Icefrog took that over at version 6, and is the current maintainer.

    I don't know how you go from "second maintainer of a remake" to "original author", but it's amazing how fast that spread around the Internet.

    --
    -- "So they told me that using the download page to download something was not something they anticipated." - Bill Gates
    1. Re:Summary is wrong, as usual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Icefrog is NOT the original developer. I don't know where that nonsense keeps coming from.

      The original developer is named Eul, and he made it way back before The Frozen Throne came out. He then stopped supporting it. Guinsoo then made DotA Allstars. Icefrog took that over at version 6, and is the current maintainer.

      I don't know how you go from "second maintainer of a remake" to "original author", but it's amazing how fast that spread around the Internet.

      The victor writes the history books!

      Icefrog has a job, some $ and fame!

      Who is this Eul guy you speak of... ?

    2. Re:Summary is wrong, as usual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      I would like to add that genre is not "DOTA", it is "AoS".
      The original map that created these types of custom games was called "Aeon of Strife". It is a starcraft custom map.

    3. Re:Summary is wrong, as usual by sammysheep · · Score: 3, Informative

      Completely true. However, IceFrog has been developing DoTA since 2005. Eul created his version in 2003 (or 2002?). Which means Guinsoo probably developed DoTA for around 2 years. While not the original developer, IceFrog has developed the game for around 5 years and his contributions have made DotA very balanced and interesting to play.

    4. Re:Summary is wrong, as usual by syazhani · · Score: 1

      Have you played the other versions? They're imbalanced, buggy and not newbie friendly at all. IceFrog can call it his creation and most people won't argue, given the efforts he put in, and community that has grown around v6. Maybe his mistake was using the same map name.

    5. Re:Summary is wrong, as usual by Tridus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I played it all the way from the original Eul version, and those weren't buggy or newbie hostile at all. It got a lot more hostile to newbies in remakes as the complexity shot through the roof.

      There's really no problem with him maintaining it, he's done a good job. There is a problem with claiming they're in the moral right to trademark it because the original author is working there, because that's a bald faced lie.

      --
      -- "So they told me that using the download page to download something was not something they anticipated." - Bill Gates
    6. Re:Summary is wrong, as usual by apoc.famine · · Score: 1

      On top of that, a bunch of guys made this mod a stand-alone game, with a pretty bitching "subscription" model. Check out League of Legends. It's the same old DoTA, new characters, graphics, and items, because they couldn't mooch off any of the original artwork, free to download and play. The profit part? The heroes rotate through a lineup of like 10% of the heroes every week. If you want access to your favorite one all the time, you need to unlock it with money or in-game earned points. (Mostly money, at this point I think.) There are skins to buy, and a "rune" system that adds a few pct to various character attributes. While you can get all the runes with in-game earned points, it's far more efficient to purchase them. For the hardcore gamers, that's the way to go.

      Having played a lot of DoTA, I have to say, LoL is vastly superior. You can shop while dead, the menu and game search blows the old DoTA one out of the water, and with levels and ranking, you actually get semi-evenly matched games a good percentage of the time. It's a very focused, polished game. I'm not sure that Valve can do any better. It will be interesting to see, however. Although I doubt they can beat the price of LoL.

      --
      Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
    7. Re:Summary is wrong, as usual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I remember going through the map archives trying to find early versions when Eul had been developing. There were definitely some fun heroes.

      If I remember, Guinsoo went on to do League of Legends?

    8. Re:Summary is wrong, as usual by Graf+Eisen · · Score: 1

      Completely true. Eul created it around 2003. Eventually he stopped editing it due to waning interest and an injury to his hand, at which point the map was edited by a succession of 2 or 3 people who he chose, one of those being myself(I went by Sesshoumaru back then, if you have the OLLD RoC DOTAs you can probably find my name in some of them). The switches in editors were actually very good for the map's balance, since Eul didn't play competitively and thus had to go off of what other people told him about balance issues. Eventually TFT came out, and due to massive mechanic changes to certain abilities in the expansion that would've required removing/recreating probably half of the abilities in the game with different mechanics, it was decided to keep the addon as a Reign of Chaos only addon. Eventually some people(Guinsoo, I guess.. it's been a while, I can't remember) cracked the protection scheme that had been put on the map, and "stole" DOTA and made their own competing TFT version without Eul's permission. That version was known as DOTA Allstars. Eventually, a year or more down the road, Eul released the map unprotected since the RoC community had died down to only the really competitive players, and he had decided to move on to other things. Not trying to blame Icefrog for anything, although I'll readily condemn what Guinsoo did. People need to get their facts straight, however -- Icefrog and Guinsoo didn't create the game. For that matter, Eul didn't create the concept either(Aeon of Strife was his inspiration for DOTA), but DOTA gained much more popularity than AoS ever did. Also I 100% agree that people are much more newbie unfriendly now than they were back in the day. A few months ago for shits and giggles I decided to try DOTA Allstars, and people were anything but helpful.

    9. Re:Summary is wrong, as usual by Graf+Eisen · · Score: 1

      You're either thinking of "other" versions hacked together by some random person, or you're just lying through your teeth. Guinsoo and Icefrog didn't make a new map with the same name, they literally took(stole, tbh) the map and made their own edits to it. For quite some time the only edits were to characters and abilities -- the core framework of the game operated fine. DOTA was easily the most played custom map in RoC, well before Guinsoo and Icefrog entered the picture. If it exhibited the traits you described, I sincerely doubt it would have been as successful as it was.

    10. Re:Summary is wrong, as usual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you played the other versions? They're imbalanced, buggy and not newbie friendly at all.

      Seriously? Less newbie friendly than DotA?

      You've actually frightened me. From nothing more than two sentences transferred over the internet, you have made me shiver in sheer, stark terror right here in my chair. The mere thought that there exists a game, nay, even a concept MORE hostile to newbies than DotA fits the category of Things That Must Not Be pretty sufficiently.

      Have you considered becoming a horror writer?

    11. Re:Summary is wrong, as usual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're in the legal right to trademark it because no one has previously attempted to trademark it and they're likely about to release a product that will benefit from defending the trademark. Moral right is a bit harder to decide. Considering it's been almost 10 years and the previous authors had made no attempt to create or defend a trademark, and considering that 99% of the assets and 60%+ of the gameplay they used to create the game could be considered the intellectual property of Blizzard, one might wonder if the original authors had a moral right to any trademark that yielded a commercial profit to begin with.

    12. Re:Summary is wrong, as usual by snorb · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Been getting into LoL recently, and while I agree it's very polished (I really like the character designs and the free-to-play model is a good one), the one area that Valve could improve on is making it more newbie-friendly. While LoL may be more newbie-friendly than DoTA, that's like saying Venus is less hot than the sun. It's still not a very hospitable place. It's basically a full-time job to get up to speed with all the acronyms, jargon, and conventions. You join your first match of LoL and your teammate says something like: "I'm going jungle Amumu with an AP Sunfire build so I can tank the carry in the lane with my ult when they ping." and then they get mad at you when you have no idea what they're saying. Don't get me wrong, I do like the game, it's just really hard for beginners like me.

      Compare the steep learning curve of TFC where you have to master grenade jumping with every class just to compete with how easy it is to pick up TF2. So hopefully Valve will do something similar with DoTA, and make it accessible.

    13. Re:Summary is wrong, as usual by Sheepmage · · Score: 1

      I worked on one of the versions on TFT, around the time All Stars popped up. At the time, DotA was really in its infancy and I felt like we were all just trying to figure out ways to make it better. The core gameplay was brilliant, but there were numerous balance issues that we were trying to address (as well as working to make the heroes, abilities, and items more exciting).

      What All Stars did was make DotA really, really popular by polishing everything and innovating constantly. When it came out, it took a lot of the best ideas from all the different versions, and put it all together into one package. That's why it's called "All Stars" - it took the best heroes from all the versions. They even took a few ideas from the version I worked on. And then they just kept adding things and improving all aspects of the gameplay.

      That all said, Ice Frog really deserves most of the credit. He and his developers took DotA from a niche mod to a popular and very competitive game. I have no problem with the fact that he used our ideas, as we were doing it for fun and we just wanted to see a great game develop from our efforts. So, good for him. I'm happy to see Ice Frog make some money from all that work and of course, I've had the benefit of being able to playing All Stars all these years.

    14. Re:Summary is wrong, as usual by ddt · · Score: 1

      Icefrog did all the hardest work, by far. He brought the hero count up to absurd numbers and did amazing amounts of polish and balance work as well as technical work to keep the file size reasonable. What he has pulled off is phenomenal.

    15. Re:Summary is wrong, as usual by xenapan · · Score: 1

      Meh. I'm a pretty regular player. I've only ever bought ONE character (and I dont play it more than 20% of my games) IMO their profits come in through the batches of skins they constantly push out, the "sales" and bundles. And since this week, rune pages. I havent found the need to actually pay for heroes so I can afford my runes. And what you say is incorrect. Runes can ONLY be purchased with ingame points (other than two which come in an expensive bundle) According to people on the forums, Icefrog worked on HoN as well so there will be little impact on LoL in terms of competition. If you wanna check yourself, its in the announcements section of the forums.

      --
      insert funny sig here
    16. Re:Summary is wrong, as usual by sammysheep · · Score: 1

      It's actually gotten slightly more user friendly in the latest versions with the Tavern and Item Shop restructuring. A feeble attempt but a welcome one.

      You're right, DotA is complex. But then you have to ask yourself, would you keep playing it over and over again if it weren't so full of variety and depth? Being newbie-friendly is great, but there's often a trade-off with complexity. I for one welcome our new IceFrog overlords.

      Back to the parent thread: valve can make the game more player-friendly (if not newbie) by adding reconnection features, custom match-making, and their own dedicated servers. Ask any DotA player, it's the rage quitting/dropping in DotA that truly ruins the game, and if the DotA "switch" option has helped a little, a robust stand-alone DotA from Valve could help a lot.

  8. League of Legends, etc. etc. FLOOD THE MARKET by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Uh, I enjoyed DOTA some, and it was definitely a pretty fresh idea. I love that Valve hires developers in the mod scene that do good things (counter strike, team fortress, portal, I could go on).

    However, League of Legends is just getting into season 1, becoming IMO the pretty ideal DOTA game. I play it alot and it has improved greatly on the gameplay. And they just keep adding characters!

    On TOP of that, there was Demigod, which was a more full 3d DOTA but it mostly flopped, and furthermore there is Heroes of Newearth.
    All that in addition to people still playing DOTA on war3, not to mention all the new DOTA clones coming out in starcraft2, taking advantage of all the new tools.
    Valve hired icefrog, one of the lead DOTA developers, awhile back. Thats awesome. However, you're telling me a game developer only has ONE game idea? Comeon, I'm sure that guy has like 10 more ideas, much less valve's gotta have tons of game ideas kicking around.

    So, why does Valve need to make a DOTA game? This seems SUPER SUPER unneccesary. I usually love valve's games, but WHERE THE HELL IS HALF LIFE?
    WE HAVE 10 DOTA CLONES ALREADY. We just wanna play episode 3 :(

    Hopefully it'll be some kinda free and open source thing like they just did with alien swarm. If its $20, I don't see it competing with League of Legends (free!) and if its $60, I don't see ANYONE buying it. So... hm. Not sure what they're thinking here...

    1. Re:League of Legends, etc. etc. FLOOD THE MARKET by Cruciform · · Score: 1

      They're probably thinking the for an investment equivalent to a small advertising campaign they build a fresh team that learns to work together, and create a product that keeps them in the public eye while the bull that is Blizzard rampages through the China shop.

    2. Re:League of Legends, etc. etc. FLOOD THE MARKET by toastar · · Score: 1

      Is there a good Starcraft2 DOTA/AOS clone yet, Most that i've played are mediocre at best

    3. Re:League of Legends, etc. etc. FLOOD THE MARKET by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everyone that has spent time in LOL, HON, and DOTA knows that HON is now the daddy and the others are for the sad peeps that can't handle a challenge. HON is better in graphics/hero control/Stat Recording/Hero Selection/Items. It really is not even close. The RUB is that you have to make it through all the hard core guys and actually become capable. Which most of you sad gamers can't do. So go on and talk about the weak games and ignore the daddy, but truth is truth even when it hurts.

    4. Re:League of Legends, etc. etc. FLOOD THE MARKET by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you seen the Data editor? I'm a programmer and even I think that shit is COMPLEX and DEEP.

      It will take a while for the diamonds to show up.

  9. Name by al3 · · Score: 3, Informative

    It's Jon St. John, not John St. John.

    1. Re:Name by mobby_6kl · · Score: 1

      Yep, and it's that Jon St. John. Which makes me think this won't actually be a "Defense of the Ancients" game, but that it's the new Duke Nukem installment. It even starts with a "D", I can't be wrong!

    2. Re:Name by ITBurnout · · Score: 1

      Now that's wishful thinking! No longer Duke Nukem Forever, but now Duke Of The Ages? Do Over 'Til Abandoned?

  10. I'm still stuck with yesterday's story by Yuioup · · Score: 3, Funny

    I read "Valve Trademarks 'HOPA'"

    Y

    1. Re:I'm still stuck with yesterday's story by thegarbz · · Score: 2, Informative

      Hot Of Piece Ass!

    2. Re:I'm still stuck with yesterday's story by OverlordQ · · Score: 0

      HOt Piece of Ass.

      --
      Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
  11. Vi-sitter-i-ventrilo-dept by Hinhule · · Score: 3, Funny

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aTJncWndUB8

    If anyone was wondering.

    1. Re:Vi-sitter-i-ventrilo-dept by Old+School+Saturn+Fa · · Score: 1

      Vi sitter här i venten och spelar lite DotA å pushar på å smeker, med motståndet vi leker. -Basshunter

      --
      The tragedy of the human condition is that empathy is, by definition, impossible.
    2. Re:Vi-sitter-i-ventrilo-dept by WalksOnDirt · · Score: 1

      For those who don't know, the above post is referring to this.

      --
      a,e,i,o,u and sometimes w and y (at be if of up cwm by)
    3. Re:Vi-sitter-i-ventrilo-dept by Hinhule · · Score: 1

      Vi sitter här i venten och spelar lite DotA å pushar på å smeker, med motståndet vi leker. -Basshunter

      (Oh no you started an infinite loop!)

  12. Valve should get its priorities straight... by maweki · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    and stop doing such nonsense as releasing and developing games but release the native steam client for linux.

    Seriously, it has been long enough now.

    After that, you can go back to business as usual and do as many games and mods and maps (and whatnot) as you like and I – as a long time linux user – can finally start caring!

    1. Re:Valve should get its priorities straight... by theIsovist · · Score: 1

      You'll be waiting for a very long time for a Linux client. There will never be a native client until Linux's market share on home boxes reaches a level comparable with either the mac or windows OS. It's simple economics and the reason why, until now, that apple's gaming scene has been anemic. No point in spending money if you won't make it back.

    2. Re:Valve should get its priorities straight... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yeah, right... http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=valve_steam_announcement&num=1

    3. Re:Valve should get its priorities straight... by VGPowerlord · · Score: 1

      Phoronix has been saying stuff like that for years, and yet it hasn't materialized yet.

      The original logic was that, because Valve ported their shared libraries to Linux, this CLEARLY meant that there was going to be a Linux client. Except that dedicated server binaries use said libraries.

      Now, they're saying because some X11 (GTK?) code exists to draw the main Steam window, Valve must be working on a client. And yet, it doesn't. As far as we know, this was originally how Valve was designing the Mac OSX version before realizing that they'd need to do Cocoa for performance reasons.

      Phoronix also cite a single source (and a second source that is an exact duplicate of the first source) that Valve said a Linux Steam client was coming. If that's true, why haven't any of the gaming news sites picked up on this?

      --
      GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
  13. Could be the game my friends and I wanted. by lem0n263 · · Score: 1

    I played the WC3 DotA back in the day, but ever since HoN and LoL came about my friends and I have schismed into two camps. We all enjoy DotA like games but some of us prefer HoN for its likeness and capture of the DotA feel, while others prefer LoL for its easier gameplay and less harsh punishments for mistakes. Perhaps Valve's upcoming DotA like-game could be a game we call can agree to play without getting into HoN vs LoL flamewars. This is assuming that this game will be DotA-Like, of course.

    1. Re:Could be the game my friends and I wanted. by twoallbeefpatties · · Score: 1

      Perhaps Valve's upcoming DotA like-game could be a game we call can agree to play without getting into HoN vs LoL flamewars.

      Are you seriously suggesting that there can be a DotA-like game put out that won't inspire massive flamewars? :D

      --
      Libertarians somehow believe that private businesses should be stronger than governments but weaker than individuals.
  14. League of Legends anyone? by Ed_Bighead · · Score: 1

    A "F2P" standalone of this already exists, more or less. http://wwwl.leagueoflegends.com/

  15. OK, as long as they don't start selling coffee by Jaydee23 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    http://www.costaricanmarket.com/dococorimero.html

  16. History of use by tepples · · Score: 1

    You don't have to register a trademark, but you do have to throw a TM next to the name every time you use it.

    Citation needed. Use in commerce (in this case, selling copies or running game servers) establishes a history of use, and history of use establishes eligibility to register a mark. But if in fact this developer hired by Valve has established a history of use, Valve can rely on this to register the mark.

    1. Re:History of use by GooberToo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Citation needed.

      Unlike other areas of IP, trademark must be actively defended. If you don't inform others of your trademark, you are not defending it. The fact a trademark was not previously filed and according to the gp post, declaration of trademark was never made. As such, it does appear safe to assume they have never made any effort to trademark or defend a trademark.

      Also, this is not Wikipedia or a researched document. "Citation needed". means you are incapable of effective, polite, communication and is frequently a sign of a dumb, lazy, douche bag. All too often, "Citation needed", means the author is too dumb and lazy to use a search engine. If you are not a douche bag, please stop using that phrase when outside of its proper context.

    2. Re:History of use by binarylarry · · Score: 1

      Common law trademarks (TM) only apply in the state your company is in. For federal (and limited international) coverage, you need to apply for a federal trademark.

      Federal trademarks are first come first serve, so whoever files first gets it. It doesn't matter who's using the trademark in the market already (unless they've filed).

      Valve is probably doing this as a defensive measure, so some scumbag doesn't register it and attempt to extort money from them. It's become a fairly generic term though, I wonder how much it'd hold up in court. I mean, if I trademarked "FPS" and sued every publisher on the planet, I doubt I'd make it very far.

      --
      Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
    3. Re:History of use by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well lots of games these days don't get many Frames Per Second anyway :-(

    4. Re:History of use by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      History of use establishes eligibility to register a mark it does not grant the mark. Trademarks do not need to be registered, but unregistered trademarks must declare their mark by using the TM symbol. Simply using a name for something without using the TM to declare an unregistered trademark or registering a trademark is tacit acknowledgment that you don't wish to protect the brand, and anyone can use it. Not to mention that in order to keep a trademark, registered or unregistered, you have to continue to make use of it. Since both Eul and Guinsoo abandoned the project, the relinquished any trademark claims they may or may not have had.

      And I have citations for all of this, but considering you started you post with "citation needed" and then proceeded to make a bunch of claims with no citations, you can look it up your own damn self.

    5. Re:History of use by Raenex · · Score: 1

      If you don't inform others of your trademark, you are not defending it.

      If nobody infringes on the trademark, and you have established usage, then there is no need to "defend" it.

    6. Re:History of use by Zalbik · · Score: 1

      I couldn't find what you were talking about. I did searches for "Trademark law use of TM symbol", read the "Trademark" page on Wikipedia, and "Trademark law".

      Here's what I found:
      On www.inta.org:
      The symbol (TM) is used by companies to notify the public to a claim of rights in a trademark. A (TM) is usually used in connection with an unregistered trademark and does not have any legal status.

      On uspto.gov:
      Are there federal regulations governing the use of the designations "TM" or "SM" with trademarks?
      No. Use of the symbols "TM" or "SM" (for trademark and service mark, respectively) may, however, be governed by local, state, or foreign laws and the laws of the pertinent jurisdiction must be consulted. These designations usually indicate that a party claims rights in the mark and are often used before a federal registration is issued.

      from trademarklawlitigation.com:
      A trademark can be a word, name, symbol, device or any combination thereof which is used to identify and distinguish the goods or services of one company from goods or services of another. In order to qualify as a trademark, the mark must be used in federally regulated commerce, and the mark must be distinctive. In a nutshell, the distinctiveness requirement means that a mark cannot describe the underlying product, or if it does describe the product, the mark must have been used extensively enough in commerce to acquire a certain level of market recognition (i.e. secondary meaning). Moreover, some marks will not be protected as trademarks, even if they are well recognized by consumers as trademarks (forbidden marks).

      Can you please provide a reference of some kind? There seems to be no specific laws regarding the TM symbol. i.e. there is no law that states "you have to throw a TM next to the name every time you use it".

      Now, that being said, you probably would have a much better chance of winning a lawsuit if you consistently use the TM symbol, but that is not what the GP post claimed.

      Or to make a much shorter post:
      Citation needed.

    7. Re:History of use by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      Unlike other areas of IP, trademark must be actively defended. If you don't inform others of your trademark, you are not defending it.

      Yeah, but that doesn't mean somebody else can just go arbitrarily trademark the word you've been using and then sue you for continuing to use it. At worst, "DotA" should become a generic term.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  17. Episode 3 by tepples · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    We just wanna play episode 3

    Revenge of the Shit? NOOOOOOO!

  18. Alternative to "Citation needed"? by tepples · · Score: 1

    All too often, "Citation needed", means the author is too dumb and lazy to use a search engine.

    So instead of "Citation needed", should people say "Please provide Google keywords" instead?

    1. Re:Alternative to "Citation needed"? by GooberToo · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      So instead of "Citation needed", should people say "Please provide Google keywords" instead?

      Again - douche bag. Patent law is hardly some obscure Internet reference. As my original post said, go to your nearest search engine. If YOU are ignorant of a subject, its hardly everyone else's job to rectify YOUR ignorance.

      This particular subject is extremely well known and extremely well covered on the Internet (including /.) and is extremely easy to get information on, assuming your not a dumb, lazy, douche bag. In short, rather than say, "Citation needed", you should have gone to your nearest search engine and shown the world you're neither dumb or lazy.

      Contrary to popular trends, it is not everyone else's job to educate you. And if, after making a good faith effort to find the material on your own, its not that hard to say, "I couldn't find what you were talking about. I did searches for x, y, and z. Can you please provide a reference of some kind?" Which is infinitely better than the, "Bullshit! Prove it!", which is all too often associated with, "Citation needed". The former is passive aggressive while the later is polite and indicates you are not a dumb, lazy, douche bag.

    2. Re:Alternative to "Citation needed"? by GooberToo · · Score: 1

      Opps...was suppose to read, "Patent/trademark law..."

    3. Re:Alternative to "Citation needed"? by tepples · · Score: 2, Informative

      Patent law

      is not under discussion; trademark law is. I would imagine that regular Slashdot readers are far more familiar with patent and copyright law than with trademark law, simply because far more Slashdot stories have been about the use of patent and copyright law than about the use of trademark law.

      its not that hard to say, "I couldn't find what you were talking about. I did searches for x, y, and z. Can you please provide a reference of some kind?"

      Is it also characteristic of a douche bag to say "I did a search for x, but the vast majority of Google's search results had their full text behind the Springer, Wiley, or Elsevier paywall, and I am not willing to pay $30 per article just to participate in a Slashdot discussion"?

    4. Re:Alternative to "Citation needed"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If YOU are ignorant of a subject, its hardly everyone else's job to rectify YOUR ignorance.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophic_burden_of_proof

    5. Re:Alternative to "Citation needed"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      owned.

    6. Re:Alternative to "Citation needed"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pretty much trademark law requires use and requires defense. Lapses if not used, and must not be generic. Prior use can kill trademarks. The prior use establishing DOTA as a Genre may make this hard to defend. Trademarks are different than copyrights and patents, as patents and copyrights are designed to defend the companies from being copied. Trademarks are designed to defend the consumer, so the consumer is not confused and knows what they are buying. For example, knowing you're buying a real Apple rather than a clone using the name and taking advantage of the reputation of Apple to the detriment of the consumer. If a consumer is not confused, then there is no problem, so Apple Computer versus Apple Corp wasn't a problem until Apple Computers started selling music and it could be confused with the Beatle's music company that also sells music. DOTA has a problem that the genre itself is known as DOTA and has prior useage.

    7. Re:Alternative to "Citation needed"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dipshit! There is no burden of proof. This is not a research paper! Fucking idiot! This was already pointed out.

      You're seriously retarded!

  19. How was this even found? by MikePikeFL · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I know this is only slightly on topic- but how was this registration found? Did they have to pay money to search the system?

    What if I wanted to just go searching for a term? Or for all terms registered by a company? What stops people from doing that?

    --
    "Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes hurtling down the highway" -Andrew Tanenbaum
    1. Re:How was this even found? by Qzukk · · Score: 2, Informative

      USPTO has a search engine, which if you know enough about how they categorize everything, you can find a lot of stuff in there. They even do neat things like categorize the shapes of logos (eg 26.19.01 - Spheres (geometric)).

      Mostly, though, the engine is a flaming pile of shit, driven largely by sessions that make it next to impossible to figure out how to link to results. Even if you find your specific trademark, the search results page link to the trademark document uses your session ID. In fact, you can't even link to the search page itself (anyone following it gets an invalid session error), you'll have to go through the index page so it can create a session for you.

      http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/index.jsp

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
  20. Opposition to trademark registration by tepples · · Score: 1

    Federal trademarks are first come first serve

    Even if someone files an opposition claiming prior use sometime in the next thirty days?

    1. Re:Opposition to trademark registration by binarylarry · · Score: 1

      yeah, but they'd have to have a valid reason for opposition.

      If the trademark isn't deemed too generic or previously registered, they're screwed even if they've been using the trademark for some time.

      --
      Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
  21. Sure, but why bother? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't believe that Valve can create a better DotA clone than HoN (Heroes of Newerth).

    I'll reserve my judgement (and my dollars) until I see what they actually ship.

  22. Heroes of Newerth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One can only wonder how this affects Heroes of Newerth, which has enjoyed popularity among DotA players. The company behind it, S2, has recently released the game as a pay-once model (similar to Warcraft 3, where you pay for the game once and can play online indefinitely without charge) and the game-play, multi-player aspect, and graphics are impressive to say the least.

    1. Re:Heroes of Newerth by tys90 · · Score: 0

      I love HoN, they really took steps to address all the downsides to DOTA, mainly being that it was tied to Warcraft III. It has a very DOTA feel to it, which League of Legends did not in my opinion. Their client is nice and the biggest surprise to me is that the people that play the game are much more educated on the game. I would play 5 DOTA games in a row where people just have NO CLUE, even 3 or 4 years after the game became popular. In HoN, this means that 5v5 games actually require teamwork to win if you are above 1500 PSR. That said, I feel like the genre isn't really growing and that as more stand-alones come out that it will split the community

  23. And Steam is their real money maker these days by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 3, Insightful

    One might notice that they've become extremely lax with regards to development. Source has badly stagnated and as such they aren't really selling any engine licenses. Their own game development proceeds at a snail's pace. However Steam sales are extremely brisk. They are making tons of money on it.

    Also Steam is very much a "One platform to rule them all," kind of setup. Steam doesn't play well with others. Their DRM, Steamworks is mandatory for all games on Steam, but also free for anyone to use. In fact retail titles use it now... But if a game is Steamworks then you have to install and run Steam to play the game. This also means you have to allow distribution of your game on Steam, but also that you game probably cannot be distributed on any other download platform. While they don't require that, it is how things go by default. After all, Impulse does not want you to have to download a game through their service, then once it is installing go and install Steam which will ALSO have to run.

    Valve really seems to want to push Steam as the one and only way to do games. Everything will be on there, even if you happened to buy it in a store. To that end, pushing Steam to the maximum number of people possible is a real smart idea.

    Don't get me wrong, I use Steam and own many games on it, but they do have a bit of the big brother, "We want to control all your media," type stuff going on. If that's your goal, putting out some free products to achieve it is worth while.

    1. Re:And Steam is their real money maker these days by Reapman · · Score: 1

      Steam's not quite as big brother as your putting it out to be.. a counter example is Dawn of War 2. Picked it up on the weekend at a LAN Party, bought it directly off steam. However it's technically a Games for Windows Live game, so playing multiplayer i had to actually make a Live account. Invites to join the game went through GfW (well, that was the plan, thanks to GfW sucking so bad we never did get a game going)

      Thought it a bit odd that I could open up the Steam interface while having the Games for Windows Live fugly interface open, too.

    2. Re:And Steam is their real money maker these days by modecx · · Score: 1

      One might notice that they've become extremely lax with regards to development. Source has badly stagnated and as such they aren't really selling any engine licenses. Their own game development proceeds at a snail's pace. However Steam sales are extremely brisk. They are making tons of money on it.

      As far as I can tell, selling Source licenses hasn't ever been a main focus for Valve. And as far as advancing the engine itself: most of the bells and whistles would be lost on (or even detract from) their most popular games. TF2 is extremely popular due to its own virtues, and I bet it'll still be popular with the cartoony look well after games based on more advanced engines are forgotten.

      This also means you have to allow distribution of your game on Steam, but also that you game probably cannot be distributed on any other download platform.

      It means no such thing. There are plenty of games sold on Steam which are distributed by other methods--and games sold that way never touch Steam... Big name and indie games alike. Of course on the same token you also have the third-party retail-box games which must be attached to Steam (as you mentioned).

      Do they want to be the hub for every game? You bet. It's every corporation's wet dream to be the center of their own universe. So far they haven't been evil about it--that's one good thing... And it gives big developers reason to abandon *BAD* DRM like SecuROM.

      --
      Constitutional rights may be respected, repealed, or modified; but they must never be ignored.
    3. Re:And Steam is their real money maker these days by tibman · · Score: 1

      I don't think you're correct about steamworks being required. I currently play SC2 through steam. I didn't really care too much about steamfriends and stuff until i had to make a LIVE account for DOW2, a BattleNet account for SC2, an EA account for Spore & B:BC2, a Relic Online account for Company of Heroes.

      I'm also sure that if you have a game on steam, you can still distribute it via any other means. For example World of Goo and most big console FPS titles.. like Modern Warfare and Battlefield series. Steam isn't trying to "rule them all", in my opinion. But steam makes for a fantastic platform to play your games in. I can form a group/community centered around a specific server or idea or just for meta-gaming. My friends can see if i'm available or not to play. If a friend is online at 2am because he can't sleep and joins a game.. i see it and i can join in.

      I do share some of your concerns about steam becoming big brother though. I hope other online distribution platforms continue to grow and perhaps steam can form some bridges to/from other platforms.

      OT: I'm waiting for the new Worms game to come out.. already pre-purchased for myself and a few friends.

      --
      http://soylentnews.org/~tibman
    4. Re:And Steam is their real money maker these days by totally+bogus+dude · · Score: 1

      I don't think it's invasive as that. Bohemia Interactive have their games on Steam, but also sell them at retail and via their own digital distribution platform (Sprocket). They're also on Direct2Drive and other things. Only the Steam version of the game requires Steam; the others have absolutely no dependency on it whatsoever. Additionally from what I've read, the beta patches and all mods etc. work fine with the Steam version, and you don't even need to have Steam running in order to play it.

      I think Eagle Dynamics are also putting (or have put) some of their games like Black Shark on Steam; but there's no way they'd be doing that if it made their other versions have to grow a Steam-dependency.

      I think publishers tying the game to Steam is just out of convenience, not any kind of mandate from Valve. It's a fairly strong DRM that seems to have become widely accepted by gamers, and it essentially limits resales. I imagine a lot of publishers love it for those features alone.

    5. Re:And Steam is their real money maker these days by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes! For extra giggles, open up the game menu (escape of F10, depending on the game), then hit Home to open the GFWL interface, then hit Shift+Tab to open the Steam interface and giggle as you can still baaaaarely make out the infantry in the far background behind 3 panes of overlays scittering to and fro.

  24. Correct information - mod parent up by vecctor · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The original DotA for WC3:RoC was very polished and MUCH less complicated.

    The thing I liked about it was that it didn't have the "avalanche" effect that all-stars did. The characters could only level to 10, and the items were not ludicrously powerful - so there was no point at which certain heroes became absurdly powerful. I always felt allstars devolved into item farming.

    --
    Why, yes I have been touched by His noodly appendage. And I plan to sue.
    1. Re:Correct information - mod parent up by Haffner · · Score: 1

      It's really just rock paper scissors on a large scale, but with the wins depending heavily on the how, not the what, with regards to heroes chosen and played. Some lineups will innately beat others, but if you give me a "perfect" winning strategy, no matter what it is, I can find a way to counter it.

      --
      "Going to war without the French is like going deer hunting without your accordion." ~General Norman Schwarzkopf
  25. LoL, HoN, and DotA by twoallbeefpatties · · Score: 2, Interesting

    There's apparently some politics going on beneath the surface regarding the various people working on these projects, not the least of which is the mild enmity between people who play League of Legends and people who play Heroes of Newearth (LoL is more casual and follows a Korean-free-game pricing model while HoN is more similar to DotA and just charges an upfront fee). Another DotA figure, Pendragon, hinted at this split in philosophy when he wrote an open letter announcing that he would be leaving the DotA All-Stars project.

    "Although I doubt they can beat the price of LoL." There's also problems here. Speaking as someone who currently plays LoL (I might have a solo rating higher than 1250 if I played more than a few games a week), there's a lot of whinging right now about the constant nickel-and-diming of LoL's pricing structure. It is possible to earn nearly everything in the game through just grinding matches (character skins being the only true exception), but the point cost of purchasing new characters and stat-enhancing runes is so high that anyone wanting to play at a truly competitive level ends up needing to spend some money for boosts eventually. It's a model that works fine for purely casual play, but I count myself as one of the people that wishes we could just pay $50 flat and get everything so that we could play high-level matches right away.

    Having said all of that, I had no interest in DotA until my friends online got me into LoL, which has been a lot of fun despite some issues. I haven't had much interest in HoN, but I wouldn't mind seeing what the new DotA project ends up looking like.

    --
    Libertarians somehow believe that private businesses should be stronger than governments but weaker than individuals.
    1. Re:LoL, HoN, and DotA by Xsydon · · Score: 1

      You can actually buy the collector's edition from Best Buy, which gives you 20 or so characters and a $10 RP card. I used that $10 card + $20 worth of extra points to purchase the digital Hero pack, which gives you another 20 characters. I was left with less than 10 characters to purchase and ended up using all of my IP for runes. Worked out pretty well.

    2. Re:LoL, HoN, and DotA by twoallbeefpatties · · Score: 1

      I actually did buy the collector's edition on sale for about $20. That gave me a lot of the "vanilla" characters and $10 worth of RP or so. Part of the problem is that I bought a lot of the wrong runes when I first hit level 20 or so. Y'know, I bought health/level seals and a couple of other things that I thought would be good general use things but now I want to replace them all. That's the bigger problem - you can afford one or two full sets of runes a couple of good characters without too much trouble, but if you want to be able to fill different rolls or tailor your runes to different champions within that role (Amumu, Udyr, and Shen all could use different runes to tank) and to also buy new champions to keep up with the metagame and then buy more rune pages on top of that... There's a LOT that you can spend points on, and if you want to play semi-competitively, then it really helps to stay on top of it all.

      --
      Libertarians somehow believe that private businesses should be stronger than governments but weaker than individuals.
  26. This could have potential! by Muse011 · · Score: 1

    I always thought that all Antimage was missing to be the ultimate DOTA character was a nice hat.

  27. Heroes of Newerth by neonv · · Score: 0

    There is already a game based on DOTA, separate from Warcraft 3. It's called Heroes of Newerth (http://www.heroesofnewerth.com/).

  28. I think people are confused by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

    And misunderstood what I wrote. You can have games on Steam and on other things. However, if you use Steamworks as your DRM, which is something Valve is pushing for retail games, then your game MUST use Steam. Steamworks cannot separate from Steam. So whereas something like Impulse::Reactor works without Impulse, Steamworks doesn't work without Steam. That means if you have a Steamworks game, like Supreme Commander 2 or Just Cause 2 or Fallout New Vegas they are available ONLY retail and Steam, not on other online distribution platforms. If you look at Impulse and Direct2Drive you'll find Supreme Commander 1 and the expansion on them, but not SupCom 2. Reason is that SupCom 2, being a Steamworks game, requires Steam and neither service wants you to have to install a game form their service which then requires another service to be installed.

    Also, Steamworks is pushed by being free to all. If you want DRM for you game and don't want to pay, Steamworks is available. You just have to agree your game can be sold on Steam as well as retail. However the other part, the thing you don't have to agree to but find out is a fact, is that Steam is the only online service that then can carry your game.

    Basically Steam is working to create a situation where they are more or less the exclusive online distributor and even if you buy retail, the games ties in to Steam anyhow. Contrast this to the Impulse and Impulse::Reactor situation where using Reactor means you have to allow your game to be sold on Impulse, but the DRM is separate from Impulse so it can go on other services using the same DRM no problem, and not require Impulse to be installed and running.

    1. Re:I think people are confused by tibman · · Score: 1

      I do not understand how they cannot make TWO versions of the game. Any game that is on PC and Console is already divided into two versions, like i said before. Just because you sell a copy of your game with steamworks, doesn't mean you cannot sell a version without it.

      For example, you can play SupCom2 via steam.. OR you can play it on your Xbox360. That was a decision that they made. If they wanted a second PC version minus steamworks, they could have done it.

      --
      http://soylentnews.org/~tibman
  29. Once again, we are the borg by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You will be valvesimmilated!

    Defense of the Ancients.... by Valve, the creators of Left 4 Dead, Counter-Strike, Half-Life 2, Alien Swarm, Portal and Day of Defeat.

    What is next?