Talk:Multiplayer online battle arena/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Smite

Smite is also played in a third person perspective. I didn't play MNC but I would think, that it would be very similar to HiRezs Smite --139.18.188.181 (talk) 09:44, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

May be true. Needs a WP:RS at the least. Beyond that, it should probably also have an article to be in the genre level article, which it does not. --Izno (talk) 18:07, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

It does now. Salvidrim! 03:04, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. Jenks24 (talk) 13:54, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

---

Action real-time strategy → Multiplayer online battle arena – My rationale is provided above. DarthBotto _talk•cont 02:12, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

• Support Under DarthBotto's reasoning above. -- ferret (talk) 02:24, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
• Support under the same popularity-based reasoning. I think Action RTS was a good "neutral" option that just described the thing, and helped ameliorate the Dota vs. LoL feuds simmering beneath the surface of the prior debate, but if MOBA is what the industry really uses then go with that. --GenkiNeko (talk) 00:44, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
• Support MOBA seems to be widely accepted by now, and the term ActionRTS just doesn't fit for games like Super Monday Night Combat, Awesomenauts or SMITE --Roman3 (talk) 10:46, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
• Neutral (because I cannot make up my mind) - On one hand, MOBA was a "buzzword" term coined by a single company to describe their product, and their product only; using a company's marketing strategy to describe a whole genre of other games seems kind of "fanboyish". ARTS doesn't seem to accurately reflect the subject either -- a lot of "classical" RTS games include plenty of action. I guess "Single character RTS", or "RPRTS" would be a better description. However, Wikipedia is usually unconcerned with accuracy itself, favoring verifiability, thus usually reports whatever the sources dictate... but even then, I am not seeing overwhelming evidence that either MOBA or ARTS is the most commonly used term to describe the genre throughout the media. Salvidrim! 16:03, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

• Note. The old histories are now located at Talk:Multiplayer online battle arena/old article and Talk:Multiplayer online battle arena/old talk. Jenks24 (talk) 14:05, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

This action should be reverted. MOBA is a vague term with no inherant meaning that could easily also include every multiplayer genre. 92.18.9.111 (talk) 17:26, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Moba doesn't fit

"Multiplayer online battle arena" could also just mean Quake. Its a marketing-word intoduced by S2 and shouldn't be used in a neutral encyclopedia. The genre name used by the gamers before the scene was flooded with casual naps was "AoS" (for "Aeon of Strife", the first Starcraft map of that type). + DotA is a map, not a mod- going to change this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.49.177.73 (talk) 10:05, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, and people said "Dota genre" didn't fit, people said "Action real-time strategy" didn't fit, people said "Aeon of Strife genre" didn't fit and people said "Multiplayer online battle arena" didn't fit. There isn't a genre title that will appease everybody. It was previously Action RTS, but now it is apparent that MOBA is incorporated to a greater extent and is therefore, the more appropriate title. It's senseless to change it now, simply because a couple of voices are raised. DarthBotto _talk•cont 20:42, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

The frustrating point from my PoV, 91, is that we agree with you. But we can't change it: the gaming industry seems to have adopted the terminology MOBA, for better or for worst, and we are required to reflect that naming per WP:COMMONNAME. --Izno (talk) 22:24, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Command & Conquer: Sole Survivor?

This game was released in 1997, before Starcraft. It featured units from the RTS Command & Conquer, which could upgrade themselves by picking up crates on the map. One of the game modes required players to work together to destroy the other team's base defenses. Since they then had to capture the flag rather than destroy a central structure, I'm not sure whether it counts within this specific genre, but it definitely qualifies as a single-player RTS, as some of the commentators have described such games. BattleLaf (talk) 13:33, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Not without some WP:RS. --Izno (talk) 23:04, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Confusing overlap of MOBA and ARTS. Also, what about FPS?

It seems like MOBA could be used for any type of game that fits the enemy base parameters, not just RTS or specifically ARTS. Even the Unreal Tournament series has an Assault mode, which is more or less the same deal but without the upgrades (at least older versions; not sure about newer ones). Also, as mentioned in the article, Awesomenauts is a MOBA, but is a side-scrolling action platformer.

I think more sources would help clear up the terminology.--Kaleb.G (talk) 02:09, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Some references from companies using terms, that aren't Riot or Valve (Which this seems to boil down to.

MOBA:

• SMITE http://www.hirezstudios.com/hirezwp/?cat=17
• HON http://www.s2games.com/core_pool.php
• ROI http://riseofimmortals.com/

ARTS:

Currently I can find no other than Valve 87.194.204.30 (talk) 04:07, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Demigod is called "real-time action/strategy" by its developer. That one falls under action RTS. Unflavoured (talk) 02:49, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that is true. However, the far greater majority of the public designates this genre as "multiplayer online battle arena". Most of us more frequent editors disagree with this public outlook, but we acknowledge it as today's dominant name. I do hope that it eventually changes to "action real-time strategy", but unfortunately, it simply doesn't seem to look that way at the moment. DarthBotto _talk•cont 04:56, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

This is acceptable, if it can be proven that MOBA is more popular in the mainstream than ARTS. I take issue with your revert on the DotA 2 page, since that term has no source for DotA 2. Other games call themselves MOBAs, but DotA 2 calls itself an ARTS. Why did you revert when a verifiable source was provided ?! Unflavoured (talk) 07:20, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

You don't need to take offense, since none was intended. Developers can call it whatever they wish, but we have to set a standard for categorization here. MOBA sticks far more than any other term, with action real-time strategy being the second, but as of now, a far second. It doesn't matter if Valve says it is one term, when most others would call it another. Them being a larger company than others does not make them necessarily more reliable on a subject of genre, in encyclopedic terms, at least. DarthBotto _talk•cont 00:43, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

No offense taken. Unflavoured (talk) 01:22, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

This page is incorrect and misleading

Sorry if I contradict your beliefs, admin-bots, but this page is incorrect. It calls RTS games like DotA, HoN, and others MOBA(?). The title is very misleading. I have never heard the term MOBA myself and I have never EVER seen someone reffer to DotA, HoN, or similar games as MOBA. I don't know where this term came from, but it doesn't describe these games at all. If we refer to games such as Quake, Unreal Tournament and Bloodline Champions, then yes, they are MOBAs. DotA like games are obvious Action Real Time Strategy games and should be referred as such. Why?

This genre revolves around commanding a single unit in a team of people. You gain a small army sometimes but the main goal of this game is not macro. This genre focuses on assaulting the enemy base, specifically planing attacks and correctly exploiting weaknesses while also requiring team-play, while also establishing map control. Most games are have multiple phases, such as the lane phase (where players focus on farming and ganking), mid phase (when players have acquired key items for their heroes and start planning team fights) and late game (when most towers are down and players focus on planning a final assault). Whereas Battle Arena focuses mainly on battle and planing/strategy is established by a team before the battle. This genre puts players head to head in a short match. Do you guys even play this games? Or just put these terms because you heard someone calling them so?

The only time I've heard someone calling such games MOBA is when Riot Games refers to their game, League of Legends. Only League of Legends is referred as "MOBA" and it is inaccurate to call other games as such. Please fix the wrong information displayed on this site. I don't care if your opinion is that these games should be called MOBA. They are called ARTS all over the world and they should be called by the proper term. After all, we are on Wikipedia, not on Wikiopinion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Faestus (talk • contribs) 18:54, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Read the rest of the talk page. We call it that because the RSs call it that. That's not our fault. --Izno (talk) 19:02, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

The what in a what now? Everyone I know calls the genre ARTS. It's even a suiting name. I don't care if magazines call it MOBA, MMORTS or whatever. This is Wiki-Enciclopedia not Wiki-Mediafacts or Wiki-Opinions. Please refrain from using common/personal opinions and use real, valid facts. Please refrain from breaking the most important Wikipedia rule "Encyclopedic content must be verifiable". Wikipedia is supposed to be a reliable site that provides valid information, not a admin commanded site that provides their own opinions. Also why is DotA locked? "Work submitted to Wikipedia can be edited, used and redistributed by other people at will." Please don't break the Wikipedia Rules. --Faestus (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.195.178.196 (talk) 21:13, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

You clearly don't understand anything about how Wikipedia works. Verifiable data is based on having reliable sources. Players and random editors who drive by at this page are not reliable sources, they are people expressing opinions. The reliable sources, which are critics, developers, maganizes, news papers, etc, etc, etc, have a tendency to use the term MOBA. We don't really like it any more than you do, but because we ARE following Wikipedia rules, we're forced to name the article MOBA in line with the reliable sources, i.e. the verifiable facts. -- ferret (talk) 22:07, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Verifiability is a core policy, and it requires the use of reliable sourcing. The media (magazines, editorial columns and websites, etc.) qualify as reliable sourcing. You, and the people you claim call it ARTS, do not so qualify. Sorry, but that's just the way it is. Unless you can find websites calling it ARTS, your opinion, though it may be true, just doesn't work. (I find it really funny that you have so misconstrued Wikipedia's core policies to think that the name of the page should reflect what you think and not otherwise.)

As I have stated, we don't like it anymore than you do.

DotA is locked due to continuing vandalism. --Izno (talk) 22:10, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Simply stating that all your friends call it "action real-time strategy" and that you are not familiar with "multiplayer online battle arena" does not warrant renaming the page. You yourself stated that Wikipedia is not based around opinion, yet all our reliable sources on this page refer to it as "multiplayer online battle arena". Magazines are reliable sources. As you said, please refrain from breaking Wikipedia's rules. DarthBotto _talk•cont 06:22, 30 November 2012 (UTC)