• tamiya_tt02@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    3 months ago

    I’m a little confused. Deadlock is a 3rd person MOBA in a sea of MOBAs. Concord is a 3rd person hero shooter in a sea of hero shooters. Seems to me like this is Valve magic, even though ex-Destiny devs worked on Concord.

    I’m not planning on playing either one due to my lack of good Internet, I just find it a bit strange.

    • ThrowawayOnLemmy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      72
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Valve’s ‘magic’ is play testing something to the point it’s a polished experience that people keep coming back to. They put in the work to see how their game plays, and adapt where they feel it’s needed. If Sony did near the play testing on Concord that Valve did on Deadlock, I’d bet their game would be pretty fun too.

    • Coelacanth@feddit.nu
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      3 months ago

      To note also, is that in addition to Valve magic Deadlock is created by Icefrog - the lead developer and designer behind Dota 2 (and DotA: All-stars for years before that). You can see his fingerprints all over Deadlock, and despite it clearly being at the alpha stage you can still see he knows intimately what makes a good MOBA tick.

    • Ibaudia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 months ago

      Valve has the resources and incentive to take years and years making something fun with no worry about profitability. Steam is their product, the games Valve releases on Steam are just reasons to spend money on their platform.

      • Reggie@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        3 months ago

        How tf is this a monopoly? There are other mobas you can buy, even on their own store. And if you meant steam, that’s also not a monopoly, there are lots of other stores. Most just suck and are not even beginning to understand why steam has its standing.

        • GeneralEmergency@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          understand why steam has its standing.

          Because they forced people who bought physical copies to download a proprietary launcher?

            • GeneralEmergency@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              3 months ago

              Valve. Keep up man, pick up on the social cues

              Retail copies of half-life 2 required Steam, and that was just the beginning. I returned several physical copies of games over the years because of the Steam requirements.

          • Reggie@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            And what has that to do with a monopoly? They forced other developers to sell their game on steam? No, over time it developed into a platform that was just more convenient in so many ways than physical copies, for gamers and developers. Steam wouldn’t have taken off if it was as shitty as the launchers from ea/ubi and so on. And so what if they were the first ? Wow released in the same year and had its own proprietary launcher, so they could charge users monthly. While Steam is free and their servers are free to use. It’not like we wouldn’t live in a world without proprietary launchers it it weren’t for steam, we would just have shitty ones, almost exclusively. Just compare the the movie/tv-show platforms, all the same shit in different shades of brown.