LoL: Nitpicking Riot

I like Riot a lot. I think they are basically the only show in town that does F2P right, and LoL has been the best game out for the last few years. I’ve spent more money on LoL in the last two years than any other game (by a solid margin), and I consider every single dollar spent well worth it.

So with that said, I’m a bit disappointed by this post. I get the need to increase the IP cost for a new champ. No big deal. Reducing the price on older champs is a nice change too. I even understand the need to slow the release rate for new champs, and agree that spending more time on them is ultimately the right decision.

Here is the offensive part:

as well as increasing the time you have to earn IP between champion releases.

Don’t treat your players like children (even if many of them are or act like it). The reason you won’t be releasing new champs as quickly has nothing to do with being nice and giving your players more time to earn IP, so why frame it that way?

You have a solid product, a fair business model, and exemplary communication, so with the bar that high, these (notably minor and infrequent) instances stick out and tarnish that stellar reputation.

About SynCaine

Former hardcore raider turned casual gamer.
This entry was posted in League of Legends, Rant, RMT. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to LoL: Nitpicking Riot

  1. First of all, this is a welcome change to most players. The frequency of new champions has been ridicilous and as a consequence it’s gotten really hard to be excited about new champs anymore.
    While the thing you stated isn’t the main reason they are doing this, it is still another positive side-effect of it. It would be understandable that you interpret this as a “PR Spin” on bad news, if there actually WAS bad news…

  2. Hetzau says:

    That is terribly nitpicking. I mean, its just a good bonus of the decision flagged up. It’s criticising good news for putting a true enough spin on the good news.

  3. bigcpwnzj00 says:

    I am pretty sure he said it in reference to some surveys Riot sent out. One of the complaints was ‘I do not have enough time to earn IP inbetween champion releases’.

    Unfortunately I cannot prove that to you, but that is the context I read that statement in.

  4. Torcano says:

    Ya…except for all your talk of Pay2Win being so bad and LoL being so great….they still charge for the right to use champions as well as the textbook Pay2Win rune system.

    Dota 2 does it without charging for any gameplay advantage whatsoever. So I wouldn’t quite say LoL even does “F2P right” in the first place, let alone be the “only” game that does. How exactly are runes different than gold ammo, in a general sense?

    However, I concede that since Dota2 isn’t officially released its not quite a fair contest as of yet.

    But I highly recommend checking it out soon as it does…takes the highly perfected gameplay of Dota Allstars, builds a full game client around it, spices up the visuals, and gives the option for FULLY cosmetic cash shop…no paying for boosts or heroes.

    Not to mention LoL is like preschool Dota….:P

    • SynCaine says:

      Runes can only be bought with IP, not RP. They are also not consumables. Not sure how in any way they compare to gold ammo when that was cash shop only.

      There are also a lot of champs for 450 IP, so by lvl 30 if you don’t have a full rune set and champs to play, you are doing it wrong.

      The problem with DoTA is it’s DoTA, and LoL improved on that old formula. Poor mechanics like denying and the hard-carry are not things I’d want to go back to.

  5. xXJayeDuBXx says:

    Wow, I thought you would have thicker skin that that!

Comments are closed.