I wasn't aware of that. Are they talking about a standalone version of DoTA, or mod?JerrytheBullfrog said:
Blizzard: Valve Shouldn't Trademark DotA
- Thread starter Tom Goldman
- Start date
Because that means somethings being done. Even though I like the game, I've got to agree that the good old WC3 engine is starting to show its age here and there. If IceFrog thinks this is the best way to go about it (and I'm sure he agrees with the whole trademarking thing), then believe they'll make something that's in the best interest of the general player.GoGo_Boy said:
From this site's front page [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/104629-BlizzCon-2010-Blizzard-Adding-L4D-DotA-to-StarCraft-2], it looks like it's a free mod to SC2, like DotA was a WC3 mod.ImprovizoR said:
As I understand it, the issue is that the "original person" who made the game DOESN'T work for Valve. IceFrog is probably the best-known DotA developer, and arguably the one who presided over it in its heyday, but the game itself was the collaborative work of a number of different WC3 modders. Just because one of the guys who made it is on board with Valve, does that mean that they should all of a sudden get the rights to the name? I'm not sure that sits right with me.Gindil said:
That doesn't change the issue, though, that DotA was created by a number of people in the WC3 community. Just because IceFrog may be the most well-known and the most influential doesn't mean that it was any less a community project. (And I used to be part of the DotA community; I submitted tons of ideas for heroes and items ... none of which were ever used, but I digress).GiantRedButton said:
Yes, because Blizzard's original parent company Vivendi decided to merge its gaming division, including Blizzard, with Activision, this means they can't call someone else on a bullshit decision?Xanthious said:
wtf?
Which is why they're releasing their own Blizzard All-Stars for free and not trademarking the idea, yeah?Dexter111 said:
Can we stop the knee-jerk reactions people? This is just silly
I still prefer a standalone game to a mod. But I gotta try that SC2 DoTA. Sounds sweet.JerrytheBullfrog said:
I'm not taking sides in this, mainly because I've not played DotA, but I've got these views:
I don't think Valve are in the wrong. That name was floating about and they took it. Warcraft 3 came out forever ago, and Blizzard (And the various communities around DotA) have had years to pick up the name legally. If any publisher/studio could put time and money into it, it's Valve. Look at Portal - That started life as an indie project and thanks to Valve, it became a cult hit. Look at CS - That started as a mod, and has grown into one of the most successful FPS games of all time, again, thanks to Valve.
But in a way I can see Blizzard's point. It's something strongly associated with Blizzard, even if just for the fact it was created within a Blizzard game. However, if they were as "about the community" as they say, then they would do more than kick up a hissy fit about it.
Basically, I have to side with the "Blizzard are pissy because Valve got it" people. But I believe that Valve could pull this off, and I wouldn't trust Blizzard to do it at all. They're too busy with WoW, SC2, Diablo 3, probably a bunch of other projects and filling Kotick's coffers.
I don't think Valve are in the wrong. That name was floating about and they took it. Warcraft 3 came out forever ago, and Blizzard (And the various communities around DotA) have had years to pick up the name legally. If any publisher/studio could put time and money into it, it's Valve. Look at Portal - That started life as an indie project and thanks to Valve, it became a cult hit. Look at CS - That started as a mod, and has grown into one of the most successful FPS games of all time, again, thanks to Valve.
But in a way I can see Blizzard's point. It's something strongly associated with Blizzard, even if just for the fact it was created within a Blizzard game. However, if they were as "about the community" as they say, then they would do more than kick up a hissy fit about it.
Basically, I have to side with the "Blizzard are pissy because Valve got it" people. But I believe that Valve could pull this off, and I wouldn't trust Blizzard to do it at all. They're too busy with WoW, SC2, Diablo 3, probably a bunch of other projects and filling Kotick's coffers.
Valve valve valve, I always knew something absurd and uncalled for would come from you.
Just change the name... HoN, LoL, and more are out there. Blizz has their DotA for SC2, and there's the original for WC3... If you go by trademarking this name you'll be taking credit for Blizzards engine and the hard work from its creators.
Just change the name... HoN, LoL, and more are out there. Blizz has their DotA for SC2, and there's the original for WC3... If you go by trademarking this name you'll be taking credit for Blizzards engine and the hard work from its creators.
We're on some random INet forum with 90% fanboys and haters who are immune to any arguments. It's... just pointless.JerrytheBullfrog said:
People say "Blizzard just announced a free Starcraft 2 DotA Mod and never even attempted to trademark this name for obvious reasons (let's be honest, people would've hated them if they did so anyways ;P)".
Next comment:
"Oh god Activision Blizz Kotick wants to rape our wallets and sell their own DotA for big bucks lolz. Too late bitches, Valve's the man!"
Edit:
CONFIRMED
Nifty said:
You obviously haven't been following the MLG recently. Just look at the BlizzCon tournaments and whatever it was where that Fruit dealer guy won hundreds of thousands of dollars in an international tournament.Christopher Dudgeon said:
CS is old hat.
OK first off, what about League of Legends or Hero's of Newerth. Blizzard knew that these games were being developed and have done nothing to collect royalties from them even to this day. Secondly Valve will charge you for Dota2 because of how much content there is, so expect anywhere from a $9.99 - $19.99 price tag. On a last note Icefrog has tried to shut down Hon in the past I think (or another DotA clone I don't remember) and couldn't pull it off. Now that Valve is backing him he could have all other similar games to shut down once Valve gets the licence. Also nobody apparently likes Icefrog from what I read; Tskr s look for yourself. http://icefrogtruth.blogspot.com/ImprovizoR said:
But they claim their games to be 'DotA' non-the-less. If it were trademarked by another company I'm not sure they could say "it's like DotA..." or something of the like.Xzi said:
Got to agree with Blizzard at this point, mostly because if anyone should have the ability to trademark it, it should be the original creator(s) of DotA, not some companys.
Valve's gonna drop it, I'm sure.
But what about when Blizz's point is that NO company should have the name of a community created thing? You say that Blizzard had years to pick up DOTA trademark, but this stance here is that they didn't want to because they thought it belonged to their community.coldalarm said:
And anyone who says "they're only developing their DotA now because of Valve" is full of crap. From what I've heard there's no way this was developed in only a few weeks.
Ahahaha... ahahahaaaa... The company that charges people 30 bucks for an in-game mount now thinks it can dole out advice on business ethics. Too rich.
Odds are good this simply upset their own plans in some way.
Odds are good this simply upset their own plans in some way.