Adeptus Noobus wrote:Gorbles wrote:Psycho wrote:Did you seriously make a table...?
Given how difficult the written arguments seem to be for people to accept, data visualisation is a common and indeed recommended way of disseminating information to the public.
Well the picture contains errors.
1. Hitting and dodging skillshots....
That is a
VITAL part of DoW 2 and 3! To a degree even that it can decide the outcome of the entire match.
2. Turrets defending your base...
If the giant laser shooting structure can not be considered a defensive base structure I am not sure what can be.....
According to this (random) graph DoW 3 would score 7 instead of 5 points. There is literally no doubt at all that Relic incorporated multiple key MOBA elements into DoW3. They even selected the keyword "MOBA" for their steam page....So, there is that.
Let's compromise, then. I agree on the first point, raising the score to 6.
I will argue on the second point, because you didn't quote the impactful consequence of "base fights not occurring", when they absolutely do. So that's six for each game.
And certainly, even if you pushed it to a 7, you still have astoundingly-similar scores across the board for all three iterations of the franchise. They all have similar levels of what people arguably consider to be "MOBA" concepts. A genre that rose out of a classic RTS game, informed by RTS design patterns, and shaped by the limits of the WC3 game engine. Even LoL, which first changed the concept (and became the first major MOBA title), was designed by one of the original DotA developers (Pendragon). The RTS roots are clear and obvious, straight from WC3.
Relic may have incorporated MOBA "elements" into DoW III, but no more than they have a history of doing, especially with DoW II. That's the point. There's no point calling DoW III a MOBA unless you also call DoW II a MOBA. And, if you agree with the table, even some design aspects have their roots in vDoW.