Korne

This user has not updated recently.

640 5 16 7
Forum Posts Wiki Points Following Followers

Korne's forum posts

Avatar image for korne
Korne

640

Forum Posts

5

Wiki Points

7

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 7

#1  Edited By Korne

@Dberg said:

All this noise over DOTA. It's like a dung beetle fight. The winner walks away with a lump of poo.

And the most popular new genre. It might be the new "plastic instrument music genre".

Avatar image for korne
Korne

640

Forum Posts

5

Wiki Points

7

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 7

#2  Edited By Korne

@avidwriter said:

It's funny how they only care about this now that Valve is going to be making money off it. Blizzard didn't give a shit about DOTA for years. I blame Activision.

That doesn't even make sense, since the merger of Activision and Blizzard has led to them creating a DOTA game in the upcoming Starcraft game. Blizzard didn't think it would be profitable. Now that games like LOL and HON have showed how incredibly popular and lucrative these games can be, everyone wants a piece.

Avatar image for korne
Korne

640

Forum Posts

5

Wiki Points

7

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 7

#3  Edited By Korne

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dota

In October 2009, IceFrog was hired by Valve Corporation, leading a team in a project that he described as "great news for DotA fans". Valve filed the trademark for "Dota" in August 2010, leading to Steve "Pendragon" Mescon to file a counter application of trademark for the phrase "Defense of the Ancients", on behalf of DotA-Allstars, LLC., in order to "protect the work that dozens of authors have done to create the game". Dota 2 was officially announced by Valve in October 2010.

Blizzard isn't the only one that has beef with the name. If Guinsoo stepped in a bit more, I'm pretty sure this argument could be over for Valve.

Avatar image for korne
Korne

640

Forum Posts

5

Wiki Points

7

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 7

#4  Edited By Korne

@Sooty said:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IceFrog

IceFrog is a game designer, known for being the longest-serving and current developer of the Warcraft III mod Defense of the Ancients. He is currently employed by Valve Corporation as the lead designer for Dota 2, the stand-alone sequel to the original scenario. IceFrog's involvement with DotA began in 2005, when he inherited the reins of the dominant variant entitled DotA Allstars from Steve "Guinsoo" Feak. Since the beginning of his involvement, IceFrog has added a myriad of features, including heroes and gameplay fixes. Every release is accompanied by a change log released on the official website. IceFrog is renowned for his continued anonymity, having never publicly disclosed his actual name.

But then Guinsoo and Pendragon, two of the lead designers of DotA Allstars, didn't like the idea of Valve creating DOTA 2 either. It just seems dirty to claim something like that for yourself.

Also, would it be ok for EA to copyright the name COD5, saying it has no relationship to Call of Duty 5? No. You can't do that.

Avatar image for korne
Korne

640

Forum Posts

5

Wiki Points

7

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 7

#5  Edited By Korne

@Hiddenpeanut said:

Blizzard doesn't care about community, they never have! The mod community is something Blizzard has never had while Valve has far superior in public relations and creating a superior products. Blizzard is a subsidiary of Activision and we all know how shitty they are. I am so glad Valve isn't publicly traded like those greedy whores.

I totally agree, but still see it as bad taste to copyright a name of a game that you had no part of making.

Avatar image for korne
Korne

640

Forum Posts

5

Wiki Points

7

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 7

#6  Edited By Korne

@cyraxible said:

@Korne: Except that EULAs are in no way legally binding. The most power they give a company is the ability to shut people out of their services and have the EULA to point to.

Obviously money is a driving factor behind their decision. They are a company after all. That no way excludes it from being a pet project.

Well of course money is the reason. Both companies are trying to own the Dota name in order to sell more copies as the sequel to the first MOBA game (even though it isnt). It would be awesome if a judge said no one can make "DOTA 2", but that will never happen.

And what is your definition of a pet project? I always think of it as a project you take even though it isn't likely to be successful.

Avatar image for korne
Korne

640

Forum Posts

5

Wiki Points

7

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 7

#7  Edited By Korne

@cyraxible said:

So Blizzard is throwing a tantrum because they didn't think of this first.

Since no single entity owned it in the first place, the community hardly counts people, those who lay claim to it first and have people who have history with DOTA working on it definitely have the right to own it.

This is more like a pet-project for Valve because they all loved Dota, hell I think I remember hearing it's what Gabe plays the most these days.

Acti-Blizzard can suck a fat one.

Doubt this is a pet project for Valve since MOBA games are becoming the most commercially successful and popular games on the market (watch out FPS). And all EULA terms of agreements state that anything created with mods for the game are technically owned by publisher, in this case Blizzard. Pendragon and Guinsoo at Riot games were pretty amazed that Valve was trying to snatch up the name DOTA since they had no involvement in the making of that game (Icefrog did, but he was such a small part of it). It would be like if THQ had copyrighted Team Fortress 2 before Valve, or EA copyrighted CounterStrike 2. I'm pretty sure Valve would be upset (and would bring it to court).

I expect either a pretty large settlement or Blizzard to just outright win this battle, especially now that they are coming out with their own DOTA 2.

Avatar image for korne
Korne

640

Forum Posts

5

Wiki Points

7

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 7

#8  Edited By Korne

@CptBedlam said:

@benson:Alright then. Misunderstanding. I thought you quoting the "why is it hypocritical"-post and answering it that way meant you think it's hypocritical, too. My bad. ;)

Well I think it may be a little hypocritical. Sure, SuperPACs are a way for coorperations to give money to candidates, which is inherently ridiculous and imo wrong. Then we see that Alex donated money to the Obama Campaign a few years prior. It's like telling people "Corporations should not have the ability to donate to a candidate, but as an individual (and CEO), it is ok to give as much as you want." Am I wrong in thinking like this (chances are I'm wrong :)

Avatar image for korne
Korne

640

Forum Posts

5

Wiki Points

7

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 7

#9  Edited By Korne

@BeachThunder said:

Ghost Trick is an amazing game; my favourite game from last year :D

It was my GOTY last year as well... fantastic story and pacing!

Avatar image for korne
Korne

640

Forum Posts

5

Wiki Points

7

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 7

#10  Edited By Korne

I guess I'm the only one who found it an interesting read. And the folks at Harmonix, they are friends of the site, and so it is nice to hear what a friend is up to, even if it sort of makes them sound like a bit of a hypocrite.