League of Legends (logo pictured) is a multiplayer online battle arena video game developed and published by Riot Games. Released in 2009, the game is free-to-play and is monetized through purchasable character customization. It is available for Microsoft Windows and macOS. Two teams of five players battle in player versus player combat: each player controls a character, each with a different style of play. The game has received generally good reviews, which have trended positively over its long lifespan. In 2019 the game regularly recorded eight million concurrent players, and its popularity has led to tie-ins such as music videos, comic books, short stories, and an upcoming animated series. A massively multiplayer online role-playing game is in development. It is often cited as the world's largest esport; the 2019 League of Legends World Championship had over 100 million unique viewers, peaking at a concurrent 44 million viewers, with a minimum prize pool of US$2.5 million. (Full article...)
Give me a day or so -- I've been trying to find the time to work on this, but thanks for writing this up to give me something to work with. I was a bit lost! — ImaginesTigers (talk) 12:33, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Gog the Mild: See below? I'll keep tinkering. I've about 12,000 words to write for university over the next month so apologies for the delay. Feel free to give me a nudge; I'm trying to stay off-wiki but I should see emails. — ImaginesTigers (talk) 14:17, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nice. 6 characters short, so I have tweaked it slightly. Time is a little short, or the version above is liable to get locked in. I appreciate your RL issues, so if you don't get back within 24 hours I will swap in the version below, as at least you consider it better than the one currently being used. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:26, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm happy with the way it’s looking, I think! I've made a few tweaks to words but mostly I'm happy with it. Sorry I can't devote more time to it. — ImaginesTigers (talk) 20:59, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
League of Legends (logo pictured) is a multiplayer online battle arena video game developed and published by Riot Games in 2009. Two teams of five players each battle in player versus player combat: each controls a character with a unique play style and abilities. At launch, the game was generally well-received; later critical reappraisals, arising as a result of the game's long lifespan, have trended positively, noting the regular content updates. In 2019 the game regularly recorded eight million concurrent players, and its popularity and longevity have led to various tie-ins, including virtual bands, collaborations with Marvel Comics, spin-off video games, and an upcoming animated series. The game is played professionally, and is frequently cited as the world's largest esport; the 2019 League of Legends World Championship had over 100 million unique viewers, peaking at a concurrent 44 million viewers, with a minimum prize pool of US$2.5 million. (Full article...)
According to a random website, this is about 900 characters (including spaces). What do you think, Gog? There's some things (monetisation) that I don't think is especially important here, though I'm wondering if removing the total number of views for the 2019 World Championship was the right move...? — ImaginesTigers (talk) 16:51, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
ImaginesTigers, thats good. But it is 834 characters and it needs to be 925 minimum (1,025 maximum). So feel free to add back the total number of views. And possibly a bit more? And could you put 'has' between "game" and "received"? Cheers. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:10, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nikkimaria I’m on mobile for the next ten hours or so and can’t do it atm, but please feel free to go ahead and do it for me if your time allows. Otherwise I’ll get to it in the morning. Cheers, Eddie891TalkWork04:11, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
4b -- is "non player enemies" the same as the sources "minions"? Could you also point out where "buying progressively more powerful items " is in the source?
Yeah, minions (and monsters) are the only non-player enemies in the game. This is defined more properly in the Summoner's Rift section.
Second part -- fixed. No idea where that came from (it’s not even true).
6 a, b, -- could you point out "champions gain additional abilities" and "Champions build strength by killing enemy players' champions" are in the source?
a. That might have been an earlier version of the article? It’s fixed now, per PMC's feedback!
b. This was a typo. It should say "non-player enemies", meaning minions. Sorry Eddie!
7 -- good
8 -- good
9-- doesn't mention summoner's rift at all, why is it used here?
10 -- the only mention of Summoner's Rift is As you zoom around a verdant battleground called Summoner’s Rift as if strapped to an overhead camera, you’re supposed to read a lot of instruction text at the same time., how does this support it?
RE: 9 & 10: You're right. Come to think of it, this was weird by me, but what I thought I was doing was providing two sources which talk about competitive League of Legends (and how it’s played), and relying on it being obvious that this was Summoner's Rift. I've replaced it with three, explicit sources and re-worded it.
Paywalled from 11 & 12
Can get you access to these if you want it!
13 -- good
14 -- Not seeing where players start the game, additionally-- arent FNs 13 &14 the same?
Fixed this, and yeah. They had different retrieval dates. My bad!
15 -- not seeing One is in the lower-left corner of the map, and the other in the upper-right, are generated in waves, behind the third (source says "a third at the end protecting the base and one of the three inhibitors". Not a sourcing comment, but you may want to mention that the super-minions are allied
Map bit -- fixed.
Waves -- fixed.
RE: Inhibitors; I think this is supported. Full quote: Each team has 11 turrets. Every lane features two turrets in the lane, with a third at the end protecting the base and one of the three inhibitors. The last two turrets guard the Nexus and can only be attacked once an inhibitor is destroyed. Every lane has two turrets in the lane, and a third by the inhibitor (it is behind it, otherwise it couldn't protect it).
Also, fixed that -- PMC mentioned the same.
16 -- good
17 -- not seeing reappear at regular intervals
Here: It first spawns 8 minutes into the game and then respawns again six minutes later, if it's killed before 13 minutes and 45 seconds and in the same spot five minutes after the first one is killed, with that pattern continuing throughout the game, etc.
I was under the impression that all of those monsters that it gives times for are found in the river, not the jungle
Ahh, my bad. Fixed!
18 -- struggling to find require multiple players to defeat
Here: Baron is an incredibly difficult monster to defeat, and it often takes several teammates to do it.
Which supports the Baron, but not " These monsters require multiple players to defeat"
This is about the Baron (and the Dragon). The ones in the river are the big ones, that usually need teams to defeat. The article: Powerful monsters also reside within the river which separates each team's jungle. Each of these monsters requires multiple players to defeat and grants special abilities to its slayers' team. The also is meant to be indicating that these are a different class of monster. Want me to jiggle some things around? I'm not really sure how to right now, but shouldn't be too tricky.
19 -- good
20 -- good
not sourcing, but you may want to define the acronym ARAM
Done! With source.
21 -- not seeing " two other permanent game modes" also, some of the other stuff is more explicitly stated in FN 22, might want to add that to there
22 -- good
23 & 24, not seeing "June 26, 2019"
Fixed!
25 -- good
26 -- not seeing "Unlike both ARAM and Summoner's Rift," and " Windows and macOS clients" -- I'd also prefer a source that actually confirms it did happen, this article just says that it will
Okay. Spent ages on this one -- I can't do it. Me, ferret, and Lee were all looking for ages. None of them support that it came out on that date with cross-play in one reference (though it did; I played it on launch day), but some sources do mention that it came out on that day. I've slapped those two together; I hope that's alright. If not, let me know.
27 & 28, not seeing "regularly featured"
This one got fixed per suggestions from Gog
29 -- does "“declining engagement and burnout” (source) equal "had resulted in players quitting" (article)?
As above!
30 -- good
31 --
not really sure what bit of the article backs up " but a stand-alone product would have the advantage of a significantly lower barrier to entry" -- it feels like its implied but not explicitly stated.
This is the bit: But the mod was an extra download created and maintained by fans that lacked a level of polish and was often hard to find and set up. “We thought maybe we could build this sort of DOTA-style game,” Merrill said. “The more we thought about that the more we were like, ‘Actually, that’s an incredibly compelling opportunity.’” It is kinda implied, and not outright stated. I think the "but" makes it clear that that's what they were trying to improve on, though.
" with an ulterior goal of recruiting interns for quality assurance" -- source doesn't seem to explicitly state interns and mentions that, while QA was the main aim, they were also looking for people to help with design.
So, bit of the article: “They hosted a DOTA tournament at USC. I think the goal was to actually meet students who were interested in games, that were interested in doing game design or [quality assurance] work — mostly QA work to be honest — for their new company,” Jew said. I used "interns" because it’s mentioned, in the next paragraph, that they recruited him as an intern. That said, I've just dropped "[...] interns for quality assurance" and replaced it with "ulterior goal of recruitment"! Is that alright?
from a sourcing standpoint, yes
"and they brought him on board due to his familiarity with the genre and what would become its rivals" -- not seeing this explicitly stated in the source, which just says "a long chat about Warcraft, DOTA, and his playing habits. As soon as it wrapped up, the two offered Jew an $11-an-hour internship.", implying a connection but not, I think, explicitly stating one
Fixed this, I think.
Yup
"and Steve Mescon, who led its support team" -- not seeing this in the source
Really sorry about this one. It got dislodged, and the reference went southward. Fixed now!
" priority towards differentiating their characters from those of Warcraft III" source says "focused on creating entirely new characters" -- is that the same thing?
Fixed!
32 -- not checked
33 -- URL doesn't work for me
Is it the web archive one? It’s working for me, but takes ages to load.
34 -- good
35 -- "on April 10, 2009" source only specifies to "april 2009"
Fixed!
Not sourcing, but I think you don't need the listing of the 17 original champions
This has been removed!
not sourcing, but "double the number to 40" either "double the number " or "to 40" is redundant here
36 & 37-- 36 suggests that the champions were first availible in Feb, doesn't mention april and 37 only mentions "launched in alpha in 2009 ", nothing about beta, I think
Bolding for me. Leave this one with me; I can fix the sources for this one, but will need some more time.
This one is now fixed. The April 2009 thing came from The Washington Post article; I've just preserved the numbers for the other sources and scrapped them from the beta/alpha info!
Based on a revision that by the time you see this is probably outdated. Here's my first spotcheck, some prose comments sprinkled in. Most of the things I found in other sources, so you may just need to move things around to match up. A lot of this is probably resolvable through my lack of video game understanding and chronic don't-want-to-read-the-whole-source-must-use-cntrl-f-itis. Hopefully, I've been reading sources correctly, apologies if not. Eddie891TalkWork12:36, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot for all you've done so far, Eddie. Sorry about how long this is taking (and how big it is).
"The regular scheduling of changes, or "balance patches", did not become standardized until 2014" As a reader, I'm not really sure what this means... Can't tell if it lines up w/ sourcing or not
Have a look now. Made some changes!
thumbsup
43 & 44 support that changes occur "regularly", but I'm not seeing at the end of "every" season
Fixed.
45 -- good
46 -- good
45b -- " The cost of skins varies from $7 to $25" source just says that some skins cost $20 to $25, others cost more lik $7-- not seeing it established that all skins are between that range
You were right; I was super lazy. It took me 2 seconds to find a better source that describes League's actual pricing tiers ($4 to $25).
47 --good
FN 48 is released under CC for free here, though the page numbers are different it looks good
Replaced :] Thanks!
50 -- looks good
I'd argue that "strong ties to real-world issues" doesn't necessarily equal "political themes"
Nor is there any overt political or social message.
FN 56, struggling to find "removing summoners" here
I got the all-clear to use Rift Herald from the source review, so I can actually make this a bit more cohesive. Hopefully this is better!
57 good
58 good
Not sourcing, but I don't see how McNeil's hiring fits in here
Riot started hiring big-name writers after they rebooted the lore (to build out a universe, like Warhammer does)
Not sourcing, but you could specify what "The new fictional setting" is for-- source mentions A card game or is everything set there? Sorry, but I'm just a little confused
Totally fair! The card game is just a card game (it isn't "canon"). But, because they rebooted the setting, the stories that they wrote (introducing non-champion characters and expanding the setting) have been used to make the card game (which obviously includes more than champs) :]
for 70, your ign url doesn't go to a review. The archive.org link lists them as giving it an 8.0/10, yet you say a 9.2/10
My bad, fixed! I've put the 8.0 in the infobox, but the 9.2 was there because IGN re-reviewed the game in 2016 (giving it a 9.2); see Reassessment for details
I've updated the infobox with both re-review scores :]
not sourcing; but is "only a few paragraphs long" relevant?-- you could condense it to "short", perhaps?
Hm... Kinda? If I hear "short biography", I'm still definitely thinking over thousand words (as opposed to 200).
In the sourcing, I only see a designer might spend a couple of hours throwing together a paragraph-long bio for a new character, which isn't, to me, the same
78 -- links to a review by Geoffry Hunt, not Rick MCCormick-- if you fix the link it's good, though I might specify that choosing to play the game was a vote for choice &c, not just the game itself
Whoops! Fixed both.
79 + 80 -- basically fine
81-- could you quote the bit for me-- I think It's there, just struggling to find it
Nah this was my error -- fixed now.
83 lgtm
Could you quote backing up Many outlets said the game was under-developed, with key features missing., I can't seem to make the relevant connections.
Offers only a fraction of what you should expect from a retail product and In its current form, League of Legends' patchwork of features has yet to be stitched into a finished product. from GameSpot; and IGN said Whether motivated by the publisher's schedule or financial necessity, League of Legends was released before it was ready; IGN says Whether motivated by the publisher's schedule or financial necessity, League of Legends was released before it was ready.
84 -- lgtm-- not sourcing, but I get the impression it wasn't only an inadvisable purchase because "the value included $10 of store credit for an unavailable store", you may want to specify
No, but it was introducing that there was a retail version of the game: A physical version of the game was available for purchase from retailers; GameSpot Kevin VanOrd said it was an inadvisable purchase because the value included $10 of store credit for an unavailable store. I think adding other things to the sentence muddles that up, because the unavailable store + the retail edition was the reason that GameStar refused to carry out a review for the game
71-- struggling to find that the missing features had been present in the beta version
The idea that players are enjoying features that they will have to pay for at a later date is almost as obnoxious as having to play the same map over and over again in multiplayer. (page 2) It doesn't mention the beta explicitly, but it’s the beta he is reviewing (a little in advance of the release)
It’s on the second page of the review (same as above): Some features are missing and some features that are currently part of the game will be removed and then sold in the game's store, which launches on November 17 [...] Things are even more aggravating and confusing for players who bought the thirty-dollar collectors edition and are now playing with the exact same feature set as players who simply installed the free version.
Not soucing, but given that the text immediately preceding "Players spent a lot of time in queues waiting for a game" is about a retail version to purchase, I thought that's what people were waiting for. Might be worth clarifying
Fixed!
Could you quote text supporting "Butts was disappointed that no game systems were in place to punish players for abandoning games prematurely"?
All good, Eddie! I think it was just because of the review being over multiple pages (the problems were mostly IGN)
72 --good
not sourcing, but if you list both of iGN's reviews in the table, Gamespot likely should too. Also, can you clarify in the table why there are two scores listed, maybe by placing the years in paranthesis
GameSpot is already there. Unfortunately, no, I can't—it’s a limitation of the table. It uses pre-sets for both the rating and the outlet, so it can't go in either.
88-- actually, he calls the "variety of play" fascinating
True! Fixed; changed a word.
Jackson added that the game's recommendations "might as well be required items" your quote doesn't line up with the source
Fixed!
not sourcing, but you might consider clarifying that Klein was responding to criticism that the new character wasn't "conventionally sexy enough" -- if I had just been reading the article I would have assumed the opposite was true
Yeah! Fixed
92 -- good
FN 88 (supporting "Jackson described League of Legends's progression rate") seems to be the wrong source
Oops! Fixed
90 -- good
94 -- good
95 -- good
96 -- good
97 -- good
98- looks like it was only nominated in 2018, not won
Whoops. Fixed; good catch.
99 &100 good
101 &102 good
At the Golden Joystick Awards, the game was nominated for Esports Game of the Year from 2017 to 2019 -- not seeing 2017, 2018 in the sources, which appear to just list winners
This is what happens when I trust a pre-existing table </3 Thank you. Fixed!
103-5 good
106-9 good
" typically positive players having a bad day." Is this the best way to phrase it-- source talks about "normal" players occasionally acting out-- seems like somewhat of a stretch to go to "typically positive" and "having a bad day"
Fixed
107-9 good
Not sourcing, but is LoL E-sport's biggest attraction, or is E-sports LoL's biggest attraction?
League is the biggest attraction in esports
110-- good
111-- paywalled, but a note that you may want to specifywhat specific sports it outperforms-- there's a big difference between outperforming soccer/football and outperforming, say, racewalking
The full quote is included in the reference, but fixed! Added specifics. Let me know if it’s too unwieldy
seems fine to me
"reported 44 million viewers" It reported 100 million and a peak of 44 million concurrent viewers, it seems to me
Fixed :)
113-- it epitomized the birth of the industry, not the growth, it would seem
Whops, sorry!
where is "Riot Games operates esports 13 leagues internationally" in the sources?
One source gives the numbers; the other describes the regions that they are in
I can't load the source supporting "totaling 109 teams and 545 players"
It’s loading for me. Here's the quote: In 2017, the League of Legends esports circuit is made of more than 545 pros, across 109 teams and 13 leagues. Competing in this year's season, the website reveals, the "bloodiest" game had 79 total kills, while the longest game clocked in at 1:20:01. The shortest game, for comparison, lasted just under 17 minutes. I'll also send a screenshot to you via Discord.
Can confirm that I verified it in a screenshot
"the North American league is broadcast on cable television by sports network ESPN." source only seems to specify that espn broadcasted League of Legends’ Spring Split Playoffs
Fixed! Good catch. "Spring Split" is ignorable but it is important that it is the play-offs
118--good
Mark Cuban owns a 2K team so he isn't "otherwise unassociated with esports"-- I'm also not seeing that he invested in LoL
Wow, that was sloppy. My bad!
paywalled from bloomberg, though it does support Fox buying a team
Is there a reason you say "is an version of the game"?
Yes! I'm an idiot! Fixed :p
" for mobile operating systems Android, iOS, and" I don't see "android, iOS" mentioned in the source?
Fixed
129 looks good
"The third and final League of Legends" do we know it's the final? Also, in the following sentence I don't see 'windows' in the source
It was meant to say "third and final... announced at the anniversary event". re: windows, that's what "PC" means
130, 131 good
Not sourcing, but I'd de-specify "Pentakill is composed of champions Karthus, Kayle, Mordekaiser, Olaf, Sona and Yorick" to "Pentakill is composed of six champions" or something
Fixed!
not seeing "Their first album, Smite and Ignite, was released in 2014"
I can't find it either; removed!
Source also doesn't specify which album reached no. 1 on the iTunes chart
I don't think I agree; it only talks about GOTU
Yeah, it's fine
Not sourcing, but do you need to specify the champions names ("Kai'Sa, Ahri, Akali, and Evelynn"?)
Nope! Removed
Ditto for True Damage
135 -- good
Also ditto
136, 8--good
the article supporting "After a two-year hiatus, Riot Games released a second single from the virtual group in September 2020." is dated August 2020
My bad!
139 --good
140-- good, I think
141-2, good
The quote beginning " "a rare opportunity to showcase its years of lore" doesn't line up with the source exactly
Added "for Riot"
143-- good
144-- not seeing "The series will be set in Piltover and Zaun" and source says "they sure looked a lot like Jinx and Vi," and some fans think it might-- not sure that's the same thing as expected to be about them
This was just me being me. I know, by looking at it, that it’s Piltover and Zaun. I've added another source which fixes both of these issues; it will very very likely be Jinx and Vi and I do think (unlike the others) that it’s worth mentioning since so little is known about the series
Not seeing how that's applicable, could you explain?
Of course! As an audience award, it’s counted by WP:VG as "user generated" content, meaning it isn't eligible for inclusion. If you look at this revision, there were two others that also had to be cut because of this.
Not sure I agree with that, but ok
launched as an open beta on January 24, 2020 only for Windows, " Not seeing windows in the source and I'd rather a source after the release to verify January 24, because launches can be pushed back
I've looked everywhere and can't find a reliable source that says it came out... It did, because I played it then, but all the reviews were published in advance.
You could just say it was "scheduled for release" on that date
It’s okay. I think the beta means a lot less to the article than the actual launch does, so I'm cool with this being gone to keep the size down. The date is there, so I think we're good? :)
ditto for the source supporting the launch at the end of april
I deleted the part about open beta above. Re: the proper release, though, the source was published on May 6, 2020, and the release date is given in the article as "April 27th"
FN 132 ("League of Legends' Metal Band is Getting Back Together". Kotaku UK) pulls up a search that has no results
I see this has been fixed
51 -- 3.75 should probably round to 4%; while the source does attest that "15 to 25%" is Ubisoft's standard, I'm not seeing industry
The analyst says "client-based games". Ubisoft has one of these I think (Rainbow Six: Siege), and it isn't the example given (World of Tanks, not a Ubisoft title). I changed it to industry standard here because I thought "client-based standard" was going to make no sense to readers unfamiliar with games. Advice? — ImaginesTigers (talk)
Your original was fine, I just misread the source
Note that you are right "client-based standard" doesn't make sense to me, industry standard was fine. Sourcing wise it can be changed back
Fixed; PMC was confused about what "client-based" didn't mean anything, so I changed this back :)
"Prior to 2014, players existed in-universe as "summoners", " I think this is just me, but I'm struggling to find 'prior to 2014'
You are not, actually. Is this synthesis? This was the lore prior to 2014 (and then Riot rebooted it).
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Lead
The player base's negative and abuse in-game behavior, criticized at release, persists.
Typo, and also maybe could be expanded on slightly. How could it be criticized at release - did the game already have a player base then?
Fixed the typo, and you can see details in the last paragraph of Reception (before the Reassessment subheading). Basically, League inherited much of the player-base of Dota, which was already pretty bad. The game did have players from release, yeah! There was an open beta period; it’s mentioned in development.
I still think it's a bit confusing for someone just skimming the lead who doesn't have that context. What about expanding it slightly to something like, "The player base's negative and abusive in-game behavior has been criticized since the game's earliest days, despite Riot's later efforts to implement behavioral controls"?
Have a look now!
Looks nice!
Gameplay
from an isometric perspective, or "top-down".
Slightly awkward. Would it work as "from an isometric, or "top-down", perspective"?
Great suggestion. Changed!
Over the course of games, champions gain additional abilities by earning experience points and thereby levelling up. ... Each match is discrete; levels and items do not transfer from one to another.
The first sentence using "games" plural makes it feel contradictory with the second. Can that be clarified?
This should really be "a match". My guess is that the second instance of matches was once much, much closer to the first, so I've changed it to avoid a double word. But now that they're further apart, both can co-exist as match. There is peace on earth.
Speaking as someone who's only superficially familiar with LoL, the gameplay paragraph feels like it could be somewhat beefier to increase clarity on some basic mechanics. How do players level - is it automatic when you hit the XP threshold, or do you have to retreat to home territory? Is there any agency when levelling (ie picking one ability over another, or allocating stat points)? Is there a store at the base, or else how is gold spent?
Ah, this really sucks. I completely agree with you. The problem is that I can't find any reliable sources to say so. Almost all of them are geared towards explaining to people who have never played the game before, but not as players—it’s to make the viewing experience easier. I searched everywhere for just what you're describing; clarity on levelling up. Reviewers don't mention it and contemporary descriptions don't mention it. Levelling up grants two things: stats (an increase to the champion's health, for example), and an ability point, which you put into one of the champ's abilities. But if you look through the sources I've managed to find, and Ctrl+F level, they offer no specifics. I'd really appreciate feedback here.
VG/RS says that Rift Herald is an RS since it's a Polygon production; would this idiot's guide help at all? I googled it last night after posting this and it has explicit details about all of that stuff.
This is great! I'll add some of this in as I go. Most of it is unnecessary, but there's a few crucial details that are important that this can be used for (and I'd found nothing about).
The sentence about "Champions build strength..." could be reworded to build on the previous sentence, which discusses earning XP but not how (I assume by killing enemies & breaking their buildings, but it's not explicit in the text).
I've changed it around a little. More precise information in the Summoner's Rift section. If it still doesn't feel right to you, I can move it out of SR and into bit we're discussing :)
Yeah, that makes more sense.
I'm only being surgical about that paragraph because it feels foundational to me - if you're reading the Wikipedia article about LoL, you probably want to understand the basic gameplay loop, and I don't feel like I entirely do from what's written so far.
Does the next section clarify those problems? The opening paragraph has been really difficult to write (as you've picked out) because of how inter-connected the systems all are. You end up talking in a lot of jargon without speaking very broadly. Let me know!
Trust me, it was hard even to explain Islanders without sounding like I was talking in complete jargon, so I completely understand the difficulty in explaining a waaaaaaaaaay more complex game like LoL.
Summoner's Rift
The Summoner's Rift section is gorgeous. I have very little to pick at, except to clarify maybe that when the enemy's Inhibitor is destroyed, one's own minions become super-minions. (I initially read it like destroying your own Inhibitor was a goal).
Fixed! and thank you ^_^
Actually, one more: the last paragraph in that section talks about lane roles, one champion per this lane, two per that, etc. Are the lane roles set by the game mechanics, or by strategic convention?
Convention! Good catch. I can source this to TechRadar: "The positions you can play are Top, Middle, Bot Lane and Jungle. Of course, you could go anywhere you like, but your teammates might become upset with you." If that doesn't say "convention", I don't know what does.
The Rift Herald source I linked above also has some detail about lane placement.
Done!
Other modes
Does ARAM stand for anything? Is this intended simply as a tutorial mode, or does it affect one's rank?
This is why it’s good to get some unfamiliar eyes on it! ARAM is a for-fun mode, with no competitive aspect to it (there's no ranked ARAM) because it’s random. I've added a source and sentence to explain a little more. Does that make it clear that it’s not a tutorial mode? It’s just a lower-stress mode, where you can go in and play a random champion for 20-25 mins on a much smaller map.
Gotcha. The changes look good - could we reword slightly so it's talking about map details first (one lane, no jungle) and then the random champion thing? Right now we have map detail, champion, map detail.
Is Teamfight really a game mode, or is it a separate game? The game's own article reads like it's a separate game entirely.
OH NO I'VE DREADED THIS DAY. Teamfight Tactics, to me, is its own game. That isn't reflected in sources. TFT's development team say it its own game; Riot's developer blogs say it’s "a game mode within LoL". Recommended source are very muddled, but most call it a game mode. It isn't like Legends of Runeterra, because TFT uses League's character models, art, music, client (for PC and macOS). I initially had a clarification in there and I was asked to remove it. I'll get around to TFT's page sometime soon, and I'll make the distinction on there :)
Hm, I see why it's ambiguous. I wonder if you could include that ambiguity sourced to the primary sources? "Teamfight is described by Riot as a game mode inside LoL, but its developers regard it as its own game"? I won't cry if you don't or can't though.
Honestly, I just think that this is a debate for Teamfight Tactics. I can't really source the "debate" rigorously enough without causing some OR problems, and impeaching the quality of the sources we have. I don't want to throw off the rest of the article for something that is, ultimately, kinda minor as it relates to League. I am always going to be open to making changes on this, though. It does haunt me (and I get regular shit about it from friends who do play League).
Okay, fair enough.
Ultra Rapid Fire mode was intended as a 2014 April Fools' Day prank... does that mean it was actually playable that day, or just joked about on social media and then made live later?
Clarified! It was real, but meant to be only available for 2 weeks and then never again.
After a long period of retirement, Riot disclosed that the mode had resulted in players quitting League of Legends. This sentence is confusing. It's not clear that the first clause refers to the game mode. And the second clause - did Riot say why people had quit over it? Is the mode now perma-retired?
Clarified. Is this better? :)
They elaborated... this sentence doesn't follow logically from the previous, which talks about people getting so mad they quit the game, then this one whips right over to Riot "elaborating" about being creative in designing game modes.
Same as above -- seem better? :)
Yes, to both this and above.
Which leads me to wonder, are there other notable temporary modes? The opening implies there are several, but the paragraph only mentions two.
These are the only two really big ones. But there have been a lot—most only last for 2 weeks and never coming back. I can provide a brief list, but I do think it will corrupt the reliability of the references a bit :p
Yeah, no, the amount of detail you have now is good.
As of 2019, the game regularly peaked Should it be "peaks"? (I couldn't find more recent data on a quick Google search like I'm guessing you tried.) Alternatively I'd say In 2019 the game regularly peaked.
Fixed!
platforms, such as YouTube and Twitch I'd remove the comma here
The game's success has spawned several spin-offs, such as a mobile version and a digital collectible card game. A massively multiplayer online role-playing game based on the game is in development. I think this could be concisified. Maybe The game's success has spawned several spin-offs, including a mobile version, a digital collectible card game, and an in-development massively multiplayer online role-playing game. Though I could also see the five consecutive adjectives being annoying. It could be and a massively multiplayer online role-playing game still in development. Anyway, not a big deal.
Huge fan of "concisified", btw. I'm replicating your changes verbatim. I've read it aloud, and the back-to-back-to-back adjectives sound totally fine to me.
Cool :) Also sorry for the delay, real-life things caught up to me.
In Summoner's Rift, items We should be clear that Summoner's Rift is a game mode rather than a place.
Summoner's Rift is both the primary game mode and the name of the map, so I think this one might actually be okay! Open to your thoughts, though.
Okay, sounds good. You also talk about it shortly after.
There are nine tiers Is "tiers" or "ranks" preferred? I'd like consistency with the preceding sentence
There is a meaningful difference—I can explain it to you! Each tier is made up of divisions. So there's Silver I (highest, before Gold), Silver II, Silver III, Silver III. The "starting rank" the game generates is one of those. The "tier" is Silver, though. What do you reckon?
I think for summary style it's fine, you're right. I'd hope that prospective LoL players aren't using this article as a starting point!
neutral "monsters" I think we should be clear what "neutral" means. From Minecraft, I'm guessing it means peaceful unless provoked?
That's right! I totally agree with you, and I've spent the past 10 minutes searching, but it doesn't say that in any of the sources. This is a problem: I want to tell people what these things mean, but I can't include it or my article will be failed for not being sourced! What do you recommend?
Hm... I think the problem with "neutral" is that it might mean that the monster doesn't differentiate between players of both teams, or that the jungles are neutral grounds where the teams can't/don't fight, I dunno. Also it's kind of already OR because the article states The Dragon pit is another spawning point for crucial neutral monsters, rather than that the jungle solely spawns neutral monsters. Because of these two things I'd suggest the "neutral" part just be removed (along with the neutral in neutral jungle).
These monsters require multiple players to defeat and grant special abilities to the team that slays them. I'm no grammarian but I think it needs to be to the teams that slay them. How about Each of these monsters requires multiple players to defeat and grants special abilities to its slayers' team.
Great suggestion. Thanks!
Players in a lane "farm" This is a bit of a garden-path sentence for me when I interpret farm as a noun. How about Players in a lane kill minions to accumulate gold and XP ("farming") and try to prevent their opponent from doing the same.
Nice one! Fixed. I knew this was problematic, and it is kinda funny in hindsight to realise it did sound like a noun.
conventions have arisen over the game's lifetime As far as I can tell this isn't supported by the given source?
Here ya go: The positions you can play are Top, Middle, Bot Lane and Jungle. Of course, you could go anywhere you like, but your teammates might become upset with you. It’s a bit less formal than the language we use :p
Sounds good.
vigilant in order to avoid enemy abilities how about vigilant in avoiding enemy abilities (in general I don't really like "in order to")
I also really don't like in order. Feel free to paraphrase absolute anything to remove that clunky ol' clause.
the mode is more popular among "casual" players of the game can remove "of the game", unless we're talking about hockey players :P
Any updates on this change?
Yup! It’s implemented, sorta (the source failed the source review, so it’s gone) — ImaginesTigers (talk)
parent game clarify? Do you mean Summoner's Rift?
I mean "League of Legends". You are picking up on what PMC did, I think. TFT is not really a game mode; it’s kind of its own game, but within the League client, and using League's character models. Pretty weird. Open to ideas.
I think it's fine to just remove the phrase set off by dashes; the fact the units are the same doesn't really matter.
with cross-platform play with the Windows and macOS clients How about we replace the second "with" with "using"?
The mobile versions don't use the Windows or macOS clients at all (they can just play with players on their computers), so how about: and has cross-platform play with the Windows and macOS clients?
Ultra Rapid Fire Italicize?
I totally see why you think this. It’s the Teamfight Tactics thing again. TFT is its own game, and does need to be capitalised, but URF is just a game mode. This might be something worth me talking to WP:VG about, tbh. The MoS isn't set up to talk about games like League, with constant, ongoing development, similar to Overwatch, etc. etc. Does this make sense? :]
Since it became permanent, why not just remove and became a permanent game mode the following month and the mode in auto battler mode?
I think I know what you mean here. Have a look and let me know if I got it! — ImaginesTigers (talk)
Looks good!
was intended as a temporary game mode It was intended? Or it was? Do mean a "perennial"/"annual" game mode or something?
It was intended to be completely temporary. Riot usually bring them back if they get a good reception, but they only brought back URF once the following year, and then not again for several.
Got it. How about we merge URF was available for two weeks into the second sentence, like Ultra Rapid Fire (URF) mode was available for two weeks as a temporary game mode as part of a 2014 April Fools' Day prank.
I like the concept but the "as a" and then "a part" is throwing me off. Tinkering... how about Ultra Rapid Fire (URF) mode was intended as a temporary game mode, available for 2 weeks as a 2014 April Fools' Day prank. It’s live by the time you read this, so let me know :]
Love it.
with many quitting League of Legends I'd recommend tacking on "entirely" to clarify
Good catch! Done.
The developer said I think "also said" would be better because the idea is mostly unrelated to the previous, unless they're talking about the cost of people leaving
Also a good one!
That's it for now. It's excellent writing so far! For the first time I have a mild clue what a few of my peers are spending their whole lives on.... Ovinus (talk) 18:40, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a bunch, Ovinus. I thought this process would be really tough but everyone has been really kind (perhaps even, dare I say it, gentle??). I have left a bunch of follow-up questions for ya! Looking forward to seeing the answers. — ImaginesTigers (talk) 21:52, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Riot Games founders Maybe this should be Riot Games's founders? It also makes a stronger implication that Beck and Merill are the only founders. (I think it should be 's per MOS:POSS)
Done!
the parent game I'd like just Warcraft here?
Definitely clearer. Done!
and then install Can remove "then" here, it's quite clear that the latter action comes after
Done :] (I'm speed-running this, and apologise you for having to do all this)
significantly lowering the barrier to entry What do you mean? Barrier to entry of making a mod?
Have a look now!
Great!
ulterior goal of recruitment Recruitment of employees? (recruiting employees) LoL testers/players?
Can't change this one, I think. We talked about this in the source review a bit -- I originally had "interns" there, because they hired an intern, but the source is kinda vague on what they actually wanted: “They hosted a DOTA tournament at USC. I think the goal was to actually meet students who were interested in games, that were interested in doing game design or [quality assurance] work — mostly QA work to be honest — for their new company,” Jew said. “They were looking for passionate kids that knew this game back to back.”
Sounds good
Following a conversation about the game Conversation with whom? Also I don't see and what would become its main competitors supported by the given source.
Fixed it up a bit to be more precise! I was worried about the paraphrasing be too close.
Steve "Guinsoo" Feak, Steve "Pendragon" Mescon I think his nickname could be omitted since Beck and Merill's nicknames aren't included.
True! The sources used it, so I was trying to avoid confusion. Changed!
Is there reliable information on LoL's etymology? I think that would be relevant
The name, League of Legends? No; unfortunately not. It wasn't the original title, though.
Got it.
There, Beck and Merill approached publishers as potential investors, with poor results It's not the worst of the bunch, but approached is one of those words that I find intrinsically promotional, lest we're talking about an asteroid or theorem. How about Beck and Merill had little success with potential publishers at the conference.
Done!
untested outside of Asian markets This surprised me. Aren't Beck and Merill Americans?
Yeah; I don't know what you mean. The free-to-play model had been tried, with other games, in eastern markets, but had never really been tested in the west (and these were western publishers they were approaching). From the article: While the freemium model was starting to gain traction in Asia, it really hadn’t yet been proven in North America.
Ohhhhh, got it
finding that they understood the game's business model I think this could be removed.
Agreed. This does seem promotional. This is just a difficulty with development sections in general, I think; you're relying mostly on their word for it. Outsiders can't really comment.
October 7, 2008, latter comma could be removed, in which case I think the citations could be moved to the end for readability.
Done!
but doubled the number, comma could be removed
Done :D
The development team includes hundreds of game designers and artists across several departments. For example, in 2016, the music team had four full-time composers operating within a broader team of producers to make audio for both the game and its promotional materials. Same here. I'd remove across several departments and shorten the last sentence
Done!
A general comment: I hope you don't feel I'm just trying to delete everything. The article is an amazing overview and I'm just striving for clarity and more stringent NPOV.
Nah, I get where you're coming from. This is just an issue with sourcing. I'm using pretty much everything I have to work with, and none of it is entirely neutral. The last section - about how big Riot is - comes from them winning Inc.'s company of the year. It’s tough to write, and I acknowledge I haven't done a terrific job with this.
It is terrific, though. I can imagine the paucity of sources you're facing....
is free-to-play remove hyphens
oops! Done.
Riot Points, or RP can be Riot Points (RP)
Another oops.
Several forms of customization—for example ... These items are cosmetic, and do not impact gameplay How about we merge to Several forms of purely cosmetic customization...
Done!
US$7 to US$25 remove the second "US"
Didn't know this, sorry. Done!
loot boxes are purchasable How about just they are purchasable
Done!
Riot Games' Use 's per MOS:POSS
Done.
Both the gaming press and players criticized the system How about just The system was widely criticized
True. I just want to avoid a [by whom?]. changed!
As of August 2018, ... an annual revenue How can their FY2018 revenue be determined in August?
This one, I can't answer. SDR's report was published in January 2019, but it looks like their data was compiled in ~November 2018: Annual title-level revenue esImates in this report include preliminary December data.
Makes sense, I think the current wording is sufficient.
uninteresting, and presented Remove comma for clarity. Also, can we say Reviewer/sociologist Max Watson described? (From a cursory Google search I couldn't figure out who he is.) Finally, I can't find "uninteresting" in the given PDF source.
This was paraphrasing. Watson writes: LoL's content [...] lack the emotive force and strong ties to real-world issues found in the insight games discussed in the previous section. Nor is there any overt social or political message. Reworked. Let me know what you think.
Ah I didn't see that, thank you! I think it should be Max Watson rather than Matt Watson
collectively played three billion hours every month In what time period?
In 2016; it isn't any clearer than that (source limitation) (but added). I'm so hesitant to add loads of dates, because it is generally advised against.
Sounds good.
creating a biography How about creating character biographies
Done!
rebooted the setting Maybe rebooted the game's universe or rebooted the game's fictional setting?
Gone with the second one, and added a wiki-link to match.
Luke Plunkett wrote for video games news site Kotaku that, although How about Luke Plunkett wrote in Kotaku that although
Now that I think of it, I think this is important info. The other companies mentioned contain "Game" in them which makes their purpose clear.
it became necessary as the game grew in size For tense consistency I think it should be it was necessary for the game's increasing size. Also by size do you mean lore complexity, or player base?
Player base, yeah. Fixed both!
The new fictional setting is a planet called Runeterra, made up of recognizable characteristics from popular culture, ranging from Lovecraftian horror to traditional sword and sorcery fantasy Sounds like the planet is made out of not rocks or gas, but pop culture! XD How about "The new fictional setting is a planet called Runeterra, and the lore includes recognizable popular culture phenomena/elements".
Fixed!
The two also observed that publishers like Blizzard Entertainment released games, offered paid downloadable content, and then shifted their focus, even though there was still an active community of players. I think this could just be They also observed that game publishers like Blizzard Entertainment often shifted their focus away from games that still had active player communities. I just don't understand why "paid downloadable content" is relevant—most games are paid.
Downloadable content is separate from buying a game; it’s sort of like an expansion, an update. League, similarly, has updates all the time (but for free). Removed, though!
Oh I see, do put it back at your discretion then.
Yeah; shoved this one back in. I think it’s good for context. It might not mean much to people familiar (but I don't think it detracts), but it will to people familiar with game dev ^_^
At the time, most of Riot's development team had no experience working as a team. This sentence doesn't feel neutral; it's feels like "They had no experience in teamwork, but they learned and look what they created." Ideally this would be removed.
I don't think I agree here. "At the time" might be what feels unbalanced, but the fact that none of them had no experience working as game developers (Beck was an investment banker) is absolutely true. They recruited a bunch of kids. I feel it’s really strange to omit that. Do you think it’s better if I remove "At the time"? If you push on this one, I shall relent and cut it :]
Ah, I think you've changed my mind! Maybe we could be At the time, most of Riot's development team had little experience in game development. I think it was the "working as a team" part that made me a bit uncomfortable.
Not gonna lie: I think I removed it but can't find where I removed it from, and I am too lazy to hunt. All good!
created a design document Same with this... I'm guessing any sufficiently competent team would use a design document. Look where largely decentralized discussion has taken us! (Kidding!)
Okay. I've back-peddled after seeing this, and just cut that whole bit.
I think you can include parts of it, see above comment
See above!
Merill described the following years as "building the plane while flying". I don't know how I feel about this. It's a pretty quote but it feels like a portrait of a company arisen against all odds. Personally I think it's crucial in these types of articles—concerning active companies and products—to be neutral and sparing with flowery language, except in some "Reception" section. It's also a shame that words like "approach", "solution" etc. have become used so promotionally as to restrict our diction. Not sure if that sentiment is shared by other editors, though. Also the rest of this section discusses the post-release in a backwards-facing fashion, while this quote is from 2016, so if included it should probably be "In 2016, Merill..."
I do see where you're coming from here. I do think it’s genuinely pretty important that the game was not at all finished when they launched it. This recurs in the reception section; the game (in 2016) was starting to be re-assessed because of the changes. But the launch stat was a bit of a mess, and really not ready for release. Open to feedback! I've added the 2016 part.
You've convinced me; feel free to include it assuming no one else objects
No; I removed it. I also reworked it a little, so the quote no longer exists, but the concept is explained in more precise details. It was a good suggestion that prompted an edit to make it stronger
The developer also How about just "he"
This was meant to be "Riot" although Riot Games the corporation is likely a legal person, I am uncomfortable with gendered pronouns
Hahahaha, okay. It should be "Riot has", though, due to the tense differences between BrE and AmE.
Fixed! You're right
they announced an I'd like to use "Riot Games" here for clarity. (Ya know, I love singular they but I recently realized it brings greater need for specificity)
Same as above! These were both about the company, not any individual developer. I think, now that the prior instance begins with Riot, "they" can remain.
Yes it's good now, but unfortunately we have to use "it" here. Thanks for deigning to use our stupid Americanisms.
When I move to writing about 19th and 20th century books, I will very thankfully be writing when my own spellings and such.
player base grew in size can just be player base grew
Done. Didn't know once was enough, but makes sense!
said none of the bonuses Maybe use "noted" and remove the comma in this sentence
Gotcha!
Now we have a section Reassessment. Should the first section be called Initial reception or Initial
not sure. had some inconclusive discussions about this with some members of WP:VG. some people wanted reassessment to be called "contemporary reassessment", others wanted "contemporary reception" for the first part. I've never seen a video game article talk about anything other than the initial reception at the beginning of Reception, so it feels to me like an unnecessary addition. open to it, though
I think you're right, sounds good
items", and did I'd remove the comma here. I'm starting to wonder if I just don't like commas.
RIP commas. This has been a slaughter for them.
champion kits What's that?
Fixed! Had to change the preceding sentence, but got it
"horny Clash of Clans clones" LOL I love it
had to get it in there, as the best line in the review
female champions being limited to one body type Apostrophe after champions since "being" is a gerund
Fixed; comma just looks really weird to me there, so jiggled the sentence
Awesome, thanks
League of Legends' Use {{'s}} here, same with the other times
done
Almost one year after the game's release I think this could be removed
goodbye, AOYATGR
Link first appearance of "esports"
done
the removal of random effects I'm guessing, again from Minecraft (admittedly the only VG I've ever played), that effects refer to status effects on players. Could this be clarified?
I can explain what he is talking about, but he doesn't, so I don't think I'm allowed to. I've looked around for some other sources which talk about the removal of random effects but can't find any. He only says that "crit" is the only one remaining in the game, which is random (you can buy crit-chance, which gives your attacks the ability to hit for extra damage, based on a %). Not sure how to tackle this one
Does "randomness-based skills" or "luck-based skills" work? I don't think it's OR to paraphrase like this, though I'm not sure either. I think the problem is that "effects" can have many meanings to many people; even as someone with a bit of video games knowledge I got it wrong.
One anti-toxicity measure is basic report functionality, enabling players to indicate to Riot that their teammates or opponents had violated the game's code of ethics. How about Players can report teammates or opponents who violate the game's code of ethics. Presumably they're not reporting to the government.
Done :] thank you
In-game chat -> The in-game chat
good catch
ranging -> including or such as, since it's a list rather than a range
another good catch!
to jargon specific Maybe to offensive jargon ?
Good point!
Social Systems Idk what this means
It’s the name of the team they operate to deal with toxicity. Removing the earlier instance of it was recommended to me, I think at the peer review. Back in now
That makes a big difference! thanks
should instead be Remove "instead"
done :]
ascending through honor levels Sounds like the ascent is a continuous process, while I'm guessing it's a discrete moment. Maybe "who ascend honor levels" or (as a second choice) "ascending honor levels"?
Went with choice one :]
* Kotaku's, GameRevolution, GameSpy's, DotA's, GameSpot's, etc. Could we use {{'s}} here? (Sorry... I feel like an annoying MOS golem holding you ransom, demanding an additional 0.03em space.) Also, is Crecente the only reviewer for Kotaku?
this one crushed my soul a bit... think I got them all. and yeah, for this game, if that's what you mean
Sorry!! Also re Crecente, it says Kotaku's reviewer, Brian Crecente, which to me implies that he is the only reviewer for Kotaku in general. It could just be Kotaku reviewer Brian Crecente admired
Fixed! I suspect you are sneakily scheming to kill 2 commas kidding I do agree!
and—as of 2018—had dashes can be removed
Done, but it looks really bad to me without some parenthesis; "and as of" just doesn't run together well.
Hm... I don't find it jarring, but we could use commas! In any case, it should be operates instead of had operated, didn't see that one
Bear with me on this. A significant amount of changes are needed for this article
"honor level" of 2, and gains remove comma
boy-oh-boy you really do hate commas
I honestly think I was being a bit aggressive yesterday. What constitutes elegant prose is subjective beyond a certain point and like I said, I'm not a professional writer by any means. Apologies for that over-confidence... I humbly offer you a plate of commas: ,,,,,,,,,, Ovinus (talk) 09:31, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe rename this section to "In esports" ? Not a big deal though
sure
its' -> its
done
traditional sports By this, do you mean soccer? Maybe physical sports is better? I'm guessing the classification of esports as non-traditional sports remains contentious, so I'd prefer "physical" here
good point!
Riot -> Riot Games, twice
done
totalling -> totaling American English
I'm a Brit; it sneaks through :p
over... the players of hero shooter Overwatch Why are we comparing to Overwatch specifically?
It’s the comparison the source makes; it’s likely the second biggest esport (maybe Dota 2?)
* In a celebration of the 10th anniversary -> For the 10th anniversary
this is blatantly promotional oh no... I don't even like the game!!! changed!
Overarching comment: Is "League" or "LoL" formal enough to be used in some places throughout this article for brevity? If not, League-related -> League of Legends-related
Originally the article did use League in some places, but they were all culled at PR. This one snuck through. I do still think League is fine and RSes do use it, but not a hill on which I seek to die
Ah. I think it's fine too, but I'm sure they have their reasons.
the virtual group released I'd hope they haven't achieved consciousness yet! Maybe a second single "created" by the group, though that sounds contemptuous. Or a second single virtually created by the group
Honestly, really glad you gave me suggestions for this one, because it was puzzling me. This, and spin-offs, were the first sections I wrote, back when I first started editing, and I remember struggling a bit with this! What about: Riot Games released a second single from the virtual group?
I think that sounds great
Is there any data on League's player base by country? If so that would definitely be relevant.
This one was tough, because I truly scoured looking. A few people on the WP:VG discord pitched in, too. We were able to find very broad player numbers released by Riot, but they stopped releasing numbers years back (I suspect, straightforwardly, because they've gone down; officially, they've said something to the effect of, we don't measure player value by player counts!). We were able to find PC Bang numbers from the mid-2010s, but from no FA-ready sources. A lot of stuff about the game's early server history also had to be removed because it couldn't be confirmed, or the sources were sketchy. It’s a shame. It is absolutely something I'm on the look-out for, though.
Got it!
The vocalists performed a live version of their debut song same business here, maybe use "human vocalists"
Thanks again :] This one I actually felt was okay, because the vocalists were real performers, performing on stage, but I think you're right. Weird to try and write this. I can truly say I have not listened to much of this music (there are people who have never played the game who like it way more than I do). Done!
Good point, I think you can remove "human" actually.
Done!
(Moved to main page.)
Hi Ovinus, I know that it can get tricky, but if you could keep ongoing discussion on the FAC page and reserve here for parking fully resolved issues it would help the coordinators. Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 11:32, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Gog the Mild: Oh, I guess I didn't understand our conversation on SandyGeorgie's talk then.... Should I move the entire thing back? Or just the unresolved things? I am a bit lost. Cheers, Ovinus (talk) 11:35, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ovinus, "Our conversation"? Anyway, parking fully resolved issues here to clear space on the FAC page makes sense. I have just done the same. But if there is ongoing discussion on the article, especially anything relating to its suitability to promotion, that is better on the main page. I took your two paragraphs above to be in this category, hence my comment.
Oh, by conversation I meant the long discussion about FAC reviews I, uh, roused on SandyGeorgia's talk. But I realize what you mean now. I'll move the two paragraphs to the main page, along with the comments that I found to be unresolved. And thank you, I certainly will! Cheers, Ovinus (talk) 11:52, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"developed and published by Riot Games for Microsoft Windows and macOS". I follow "developed and published by Riot Games for Microsoft Windows", but shouldn't the last bit be something like 'using the macOS operating system'?
I'm not sure. The game is now developed, in tandem, for both Windows and macOS, but it wasn't at release. A simple fix might be to remove the platforms? They're in the info-box. Open to ideas!
Above comment from Tigers. Random observer comment: This sentence is correct, if perhaps unwieldy? The game was developed for "Microsoft Windows and macOS". Both are operating systems. The Microsoft Windows version does not use macOS in any way, and to my knowledge the game was principally developed on Windows, then ported to macOS. -- ferret (talk) 14:05, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ah. I think that the "for" is ambiguous. How about something like 'developed and published by Riot Games and running on Microsoft Windows and macOS operating systems'?
"and monetized through" → 'and is monetized through'?
Fixed!
"their own separate". One of "their own" or "separate" seems to me to be redundant.
I cut "separate"; I agree completely.
"with unique abilities and differing styles of play". A discussion point rather than an actionable comment, but isn't a "style of play" something a player has, rather than a character?
So this is coming from the initial reception to the game, and "style of play" is me re-wording play style. The reviewers mention the wide variety play styles champions offer. There are some similarities: some champions want to 'catch' players from range with crowd control and burst them down, while others have an advantage in prolonged fights in closer-quarters. With very few exceptions, play styles are very much dictated by the champion that you play, not by how the player chooses to play them. There are some champions who can specialise at different things via items, but they're usually not very good (and unviable at higher levels of play). Let me know what ya think!
"to level up". This has a normal meaning which is not what you mean. Perhaps something like 'to gain levels"?
Fixed!
"champions collect experience points to level up and purchase items in order to defeat the opposing team". This reads as if experience points are collected in order to "level up", while items are purchased in order to defeat the opposing team. I assume that is not how it works?
Yeah, I'm with you; I believe this was a PR suggestion. Originally it was something to the effect of: During a match, champions become more powerful by levelling up and purchasing items in order to defeat the opposing team. Should I change it back? I agree it reads weird!
Yes, change it back.
"The player base's ..." You use "base" twice in the previous sentence to mean something different. I was honestly confused when I first read this, assuming that the abuse by the "base" was a game feature.
This was silly! I've made some changes; have a look now. If it isn't clear, let me know :)
"Players also buying progressively". "buying" → buy.
Fixed!
"or destroying their structures". That is the structures of "non-player enemies". yes?
Fixed. So the reason that this section is here is as an over-view to indicate that levels and items don't transfer over from one matches to the next. I can't explain that without items and levels being touched on here. At the same time, I think this section seems really puzzling because it is meant to be read with the next section, not independently. If you think this would be better merged, I can do that.
"items are available in the "shop", available only when". "... available ... available ..."; can the repetition be avoided?
"levels and items do not transfer from one to another". Optional: for clarity maybe 'levels and items do not transfer from one match to another'?
"Nexus", "Inhibitors". Why the upper case initials?
Good point. I've dropped all of the capitals, but the sources do use the capitalisation (presumably because they're capitalised in-game). Doesn't make much sense for us, though! — ImaginesTigers (talk)
"located at behind". Delete "at". (Or "behind".)
"when the enemy team's Inhibitor is destroyed". When one is destroyed? Or when all three are?
"as a way to close out games." As a non-aficionado this does not make sense to me. I suggest either expanding it a little or deleting.
Yeah; the important thing is that they're big and scary and give powerful bonuses. The strategy is very game guide-y. Removed the last clause! — ImaginesTigers (talk)
Caption: "The fountains are the dark areas within each bases, and are beside the Nexus". "bases" → 'base'.
"The top and middle lane have one champion each per side". "lane" → 'lanes'.
"assists their teammates in lanes". 'in the lanes'.
"Although the game does not enforce where players go" 'not enforce where players may go'.
"Given the small size of the map, the map's design teaches". "the map, the map's" - could the repetition be avoided?
"After a long period of retirement, Riot disclosed that the mode's wildly unbalanced design" You what? We still talking about "Ultra Rapid Fire mode"? Do you mean something like 'Some time after the mode was retired, Riot disclosed'? If so, is there a reason why the period of time cannot be specified?
"Short-term game modes enabled Riot to be more creative with their designs, and described the associated costs of maintaining and balancing URF as too high." What is an URF? In a paragraph referring specifically to Ultra Rapid Fire mode why start a sentence with a general comment on short-term game modes and end it with a specific point about Ultra Rapid Fire mode? If there is a general point to be made about short-term game modes put it at the end of the paragraph in a separate sentence.
Give this one another look for me, if you can. I think I've fixed it, though! — ImaginesTigers (talk)
Yep, that works.
"players vote on a champion". Optional: → ' players vote to select a champion'.
I am going to pause here. There seems to be a high incidence of basic grammar issues. The article would have benefited from a copy edit prior to being nominated. (I note that it has not gone through GoCE.) I am unsure whether the incidence of grammar errors rises to the level of the article not being ready for nomination - while many FACs are going to contain grammar errors, it is not the role of reviewers to be pointing them out every couple of sentences. It may be helpful to this nomination's smooth progression if someone were to copy edit from "Development" down before I recommence reviewing.
For the avoidance of doubt, grammar aside, I have so far found this an interesting, informative, reasonably well written and FAC-ready article. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:52, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This is my bad. I think nominating directly after the PR has meant that little errors get in. I'll ping you when I've copy-edited; I'm quite thorough, so you really shouldn't run into any other issues! — ImaginesTigers (talk) 15:55, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Gog. I've done some jiggling a bit, but (kinda as expected), gameplay was the focus of most of the changes so far. It’s a complicated game, so that section has been highly iterative, and mistakes just crept in. I've read through everything else, and if there are anything there (you're right, there will be—I'm too close to it!), I do think they'll be super minor. I'm sorry for you having to read the above. I've only left comments on a few of them, but they are all fixed (although I did leave "timers"; that's what they're called in-game). :) — ImaginesTigers (talk) 17:20, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Not a problem - all FAC comments are subject to come back from the nominator. Or, in my case when I mark something as "optional", simply being ignored.
I didn't ignore all of your optional suggestions! :p I changed the one re: "Matches are discrete" (though I did purposefully not do that to avoid a double 'matches', it’s not a hill I'll die on), for example, and the other one, too. Flagging them up as optional draws people to them, but I think if you didn't flag them as optional, some people might still discuss instead of just implementing ^_^ I've only done a few FARs so far, but pretty much every comment I've made has felt optional, if it isn't outright wrong/a bad MoS violation. I wouldn't have failed a nomination for any one in particular. Plus, I do think—broadly—people like getting feedback :] — ImaginesTigers (talk) 22:42, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Development
"significantly lowering the barrier to entry. The two believed that the gameplay originating in DotA could become a new genre; a stand-alone would have the advantage of a significantly lower barrier to entry". "significantly lowering the barrier to entry ... a significantly lower barrier to entry".
"Shouldn't be any problems from here on" YIKES! That's what I get for not making big changes in sandbox.
"They hired Jeff Jew, who later would serve as one of the game's producers, because of his familiarity with the genre, and what would become League of Legends' rivals." Is there a typo in there? I can't work out what the last clause means.
You read this one in-between edits, yeah. I'm sorry again :( Growing pains. Fixed.
"They were confused by" It is unclear who "They" are. Could you specify?
Publishers/investors. Fixed!
"Although the game's full name was revealed as League of Legends: Clash of Fates, the subtitle was prior to launch." You have lost me here. Does "revealed" mean 'announced' or 'uncovered'? The subtitle was what prior to launch?
Fixed!
"Large, systemic changes occur at the end of each competitive season to sustain player excitement."What is a "competitive season" and how long does it last?
From January-December each year, but (and I have tried) I can't source it without dipping into the "gaming enthusiast press". Thoughts?
"the music team had four full-time composers operated within". Ah ha! Either "had" → 'of' or "operated" → 'operating'.
I've never before had someone absolutely destroy me in such good humour; I gotta say, I'm a fan.
Hey, I'm going easy because this is your first nom. Wait until we get to know each other!
In that case, I may dip after this one!
"Dot Esports reported in 2018 that their relationship had been strained over Riot's refusal to make a mobile version of the game, citing a decline in players and profits" Who did the citing - Dot or Riot? And what has the declines to do with the mobile version, or lack thereof?
Fixed this one! I was trying to be waaaay too brief, when I should have paced it out.
"Riot responded that they were happy with the game's player numbers, but admitted that it had fallen from its peak." Are Riot responding here to Dot's 2018 account of what happened in 2015?
They were responding to the article, yeah. Riot and Tencent's relationship became more difficult in 2016/2017, because mobile gaming was really taking off.
"According to magazine Inc for their profile". "for" → 'in'.
Fixed!
"players collectively accrued three billion hours played every month". This is possibly permissible in US English, but in other varieties players didn't "accrue" 3 bn hours, they played them, or spent that many hours playing the game. 'players collectively played three billion hours every month'?
I only did this because I was trying to escape the double "play" :( Fixed, it though! I agree that it’s a weird subject-formation
"controlling champions and make them fight". 'ing'.
What is a "disconnected setting"?
The source writes that the champions, before they had writers, just felt like they came out of nowhere—just disparate things thrown together, without any thought to what makes sense for the world. Realistically, is it even needed? I've removed it :-)
"but very little is seen as a part of normal gameplay". Suggestion: 'but very little of this is seen as a part of normal gameplay'.
You were right, Gog. There are still problems :) I'm sorry again. Appreciate you doing this. My future FACs will sway away from games and towards books and literary theory—my comfort zone. — ImaginesTigers (talk) 20:12, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"League of Legends received generally favorable reviews". Is this when it was first released?
Yup! Everything before Reassessment is the game's contemporary reception—contemporary, that is, to the game's release (what a weird word 'contemporary' is).
"praising the amount "experimentation" offered by champions". Has an 'of' gone walkabout?
"Of" took a very brief vacation but has returned, feeling recharged.
"The inventive character design and lively colours was cited". "was" → 'were'.
I notice there's a "cited" in the prior sentence, so changed this sentence a bit.
"by noting that was not" → 'by noting that there was not'.
"the physical version was an inadvisable purchase". You state earlier that it is free-to-play.
There was a physical version available for US$30, but I was completely unable to source it outside of these reviews (and fans talking about it). I had a chat about it with some VG editors, and they concurred that it wasn't a bad movie just to mention it in reception. That said, I see your confusion, and I will ensure that no one suffers from it here again!
"Matchmaking suffered from" "Matchmaking" being?
I have linked to Matchmaking (video games). It’s the process of matching players of a similar skill level to play online.
"mentioned problematic bugs". Erm, as opposed to the non-problematic ones?
Some bugs are just little visual glitches, and ignorable!
"Some addressed toxicity". Some of what or who?
Fixed!
"was described as "fascinating", with "memorable" characters and abilities". The MoS says of quotations "[t]he source must be named in article text if the quotation is an opinion" (emphasis in original).
Fixed! I actually did not know this, so thanks for flagging it up.
"events organised by At the 36th Sports Emmy Awards in 2018". Say what?
swings medallion in front of your head, speaks melodically: This did not happen. Forget, forget, forget...
"Riot held a show that included a computer-generated dragon", A real dragon? Or a mechanical one? Or a hologram? Or ...
"and—as of 2018—had operated a team to tackle it for several years". Puzzling this out it seems to mean that as of 2018 a team had been tackling this for several years. Yes?
Unfortunately, I wish they'd been clearer. I did look around for more precise info, but couldn't find anything. I get that it reads strangely :(
"Stayed Cool, Great Shotcalling, or Good Game". Why the upper case initials?
Similar to nexus, inhibitor, I was replicating source capitalisation. Fixed! :]
"Honour level" Now one upper and one lower case?
same!
"Honour", "honor". I don't care which but be consistent. Preferably use the spelling prevalent in the game.
This is my bad. I'm a Brit, but I've used American English for this article. The web browser I use -- Safari -- automatically corrects my spelling constantly, and sometimes they slip through. I need to find an add-on which blocks auto-correct for Wikipedia...
has been described as "underwhelming" - attribution, see above.
Fixed!
"The game's highest paid athletes". Are you sure that "athletes" is the appropriate word here?
Surprisingly, yeah! Professional League of Legends players get the VISAs they give to athletes. Open to an alternative, for sure. I was trying to avoid using players, hehe
I don't think that getting the same class of visa makes them "athletes". You will need better sourcing. (What is wrong with "players"? You use it in the same sentence to mean the same thing.)
Changed this yesterday!
"such as Mark Cuban". A brief introduction, as for Rick Fox.
Done!
"to provide "a more polished experience" for its new platforms". in line attribution needed.
Fixed!
"After a two-year hiatus, the virtual group released a second single"; "In the year between K/DA's first and second singles". So how long was it between the two?
I see what I meant, but I also see why it’s written very badly. K/DA releases a single in 2018. They don't in 2019 (True Damage does). K/DA returns in 2020. So "in the year between", it was kinda right, but also very misleading. I think I fixed it; I just didn't mention K/DA in the second one anymore.
"than they otherwise could because of League of Legends' genre". Has the end of this gone missing?
Fixed! I've been quite sheepish in the rest of the article about quoting, I think, but I've made an exception for this. From the article: The collaboration is a rare opportunity for Riot to showcase its years of lore that has often appeared as an afterthought in the game. I think this is absolutely worth including (from "showcase" to "game").
References: Watson needs an identifier. (Which is ISSN 2068-0317.)
I am content with most, but not all, of the changes. However, the article is currently something of a moving target, so I am going to let it settle for a few days before coming back for another pass. If you become impatient, feel free to ping me. Gog the Mild (talk) 12:49, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Gog the Mild: Sorry about the delay... I drove over 300 miles today. The sooner you're able to give feedback, the more time I have to consider & implement, so I wouldn't worry about the moving post thing! I work quite quickly when there's things to be fixed. I've really enjoyed your feedback so far, and looking forward to the rest :] — ImaginesTigers (talk) 01:37, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I meant that there are lots of changes happening because of your responses to others' comments, so I would rather wait until those are largely settled before coming back on the couple of issues I would like to discuss further and, especially, before giving it a final read through. Gog the Mild (talk) 10:33, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Gog the Mild (talk) 11:42, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
