I don't honestly know, but when I find out I'll let ya'll know.  Just a post to say I'm still here and I do plan to post some more at some point.  I've been on a self-imposed break for video games.  Aside from a little dabbling here and there I have not played much of anything lately on the PC.

I have gotten back into weekly board game night and may share some of that goodness at some point.  I have a burning desire to write a review about Small World, but I fear the backlash when I finally admit that it is actually not all that great.

Long time, no post.  But had to share because Wildstar is really starting to impress me.  Their latest entry is player housing.

Long time, no blog post.  More on that some other time.

2012 is gone, the world is still here (as predicted by yours truly) and 2013 is rolling on through the neighborhood.  It's about damn time I take a look at my oh so bold predictions for the year that was.

First, head on back in the way-back machine and read "2012, the first post".

First prediction: The world will not end.
Verdict: You are reading this right?

Second prediction: I will post more than I did in 2011.
Verdict: Horribly inaccurate.  I posted only 36 times in 2012, less than once per week.  I posted 100 times in 2011, about twice a week.

Third prediction: "the game that shall not be named" will have a tough year, but will survive.  The argument to take the game Free 2 Play will begin around July.
Verdict: 100% accurate, down to the month.  It was July when Star Wars: The Old Republic announced its Free 2 Play future.

Fourth prediction: Warhammer Online will be shut down this year
Verdict: I had to Google whether this game was still even running, so to me that is as good as being shutdown.  However, it pulled at my heart strings to look back on WAR again as I still see the glimmer of promise that is still housed in the game.

Fifth prediction: DOTA2 will launch, but fail to make much more than a drip into the MOBA scene.
Verdict: Horribly inaccurate.  DOTA2 didn't "launch" technically, but Valve is pulling a GMail beta with DOTA2 currently.  Secondly, DOTA2 is immensely popular, easily reaching the most played game on Steam in it's beta form.  I'm still not sold on DOTA2 long term as I feel the game still shows too many hold overs from a game restricted by a game engine that wasn't built to support the game.

Sixth prediction: League of Legends will hit 50 million players and still be flying under the radar in the online gaming market
Verdict: Close call.  League of Legends hit 32 million players in 2012.  LoL is the biggest game on the planet between all consoles and PC games, but you would be hard pressed to know that visiting any gaming website or reading through any gaming magazines.

Seventh prediction: A major game will "surprise launch" this year with little to no notice and possibly be Free 2 Play
Verdict: All in the eye of the beholder.  Some would consider DOTA2 as having surprised launched in 2012 with its beta-thats-not-really-a-beta-because-they-are-cashing-in-on-it.

Eight prediction: Indie games will continue to creep into the spotlight and we will see another Minecraft-level indie break out this year
Verdict: Day Z

Ninth and final prediction: At least 4 of these predictions will be right
Verdict: Winner, winner, chicken dinner.

Great art of a Steampunk Heartless!

Black Friday is here!  Gaming deals are as follows:

The autumn Steam sale has been in progress since Wednesday.
There are some hidden gems outside of the daily and flash sales, use the awesome Steam Game Sales website to find them.

Amazon has had pre-Black Friday deals all week long, but today they are really ramping it up:

Xbox 360 + Kinect bundle for $199
Playstation 3 bundle for $199
Bioware Pack (Mass Effect 1&2, Dragon Age 1&2) for $12.49 total
Borderlands 2 for $29.99 (activates on Steam)

View all of Amazon.com's gaming deals here.

Guild Wars 2 is not perfect (actually quite far from it), but it does enough things right to keep me entertained. I am level 26 on my Norn thief, Heartless Foe.  The average level of players according to most polls of MMO veterans is in the 50 to 60 range.  I'm behind; way behind.  And I don't care.  Guild Wars 2 leveling is fast and I've found that I have no reason to rush it because Guild Wars 2 is not going anywhere nor is its content.

As an MMO vet, I should be embarrassed at what happened last night and this morning.  I played for almost three hours between the two and only gained a couple levels.  The entire time I was out and about doing things and having fun.  Before I knew it I had moved onto a new zone, Plains of Ashford, and started in on the "hearts" and various points of interest.  I was cruising along having participated in a few events when it struck me.  This zone was a level 1-15 zone meant for new players.  I was level 25 at the time.

Guild Wars 2 doesn't punish players for being in lower level zones and it levels-down your avatar seamlessly to make the zone still a challenge.  Experience gains from killing monsters is not a large portion in any leveling and the experience gained from the events is generous.  The leveling curve is flat, so whether I level in a lower level zone or a higher one doesn't really matter.  In fact, as the newbie zones start to wind down in activity, there is a fat and happy bonus for killing some of the monsters that haven't been knocked off in a while (I was seeing 40 bonus experience in some cases, 2x what an equal level kill would net in a zone my level).

Even with the game design in mind, I am still a bit shocked how long it took me to even register the fact that the creatures I was slaying were in the single digits for levels.  The loot as well was working out; scaling to somewhat meet my level (albeit about 5 levels low, but still that was 15 levels higher than what I was killing).

Funnier yet is that I came into the zone through a gate from Diessa Plateau and immediately walked into a dynamic event that had spawned veteran (aka hard mode) units that quickly did me in.  A quick re-spawn and I was able to join the fray and see the event to conclusion.  In past MMOs entering a lower level zone meant enabling EZ mode.  Not so in Guild Wars 2.

Guild Wars 2 is refreshing and with no subscription to pay there is no impetus for me to put metal to the grind stone.  I can do what I want, when I want and most of the time feel rewarded for it.  There is more to it than the meager little bit I passed along here.  Tons of tiny little things is really what makes Guild Wars 2 and without these nuances, the game could easily fall flat.  Again, I highly recommend Guild Wars 2 to any MMO veteran.

And picture time:

Another day, another Guild Wars 2 update:

• Account Security

• Hacked Accounts

• Reset Password

• Email Authentication

• Parties, Guilds, etc.

• Trading Post

• PvP Tournaments

• World v. World

• Worlds

• Overflow

• Botting and exploits

• Forums

• Next software updates

Arena.net is certainly living up to their communication promise.  Here is the update for today, as copied from Reddit.

Arena Net has posted their progress on the Guild Wars 2 launch and planned updates and fixes they have in the pipeline over at Reddit.  Re-posted below:

Guild Wars 2 head started on Friday shortly before midnight.  I was able to log in immediately to the Maguuma server and get started on my Norn thief, Heartless Foe, and my Human ranger, Heartless Gamer.  (Heartless Foe is a throwback to my Warrior/Necro character name from Guild Wars 1).  Guild Wars 2 immediately lives up to many of it's expectations by improving and simplifying many MMO tropes, but at the same time there are some core issues that hold it back.

Upon logging in the first enhancement is immediately visible: overflow servers.  This is the first MMO launch in recent memory where the word "login queue" didn't apply.  Instead, extra players are thrown into an instanced server where they can play and progress waiting to join the main server.  The downside is that right now overflow servers make playing with friends difficult, but to me its a better solution than NOT playing the game while watching a login queue.  Playing will always win the war against NOT playing.

As far as the actual game goes; Guild Wars 2 is a brilliant package.  There is a lot to like, from the excellent world/zone maps, "quest" design, and graphics, to the little things such as the collections tab, waypoint system, and emotes.  Without spending too much time droning on about the nuances, suffice to say that Guild Wars 2 listened and executed well in regards to improving on many little annoyances of MMOs.  Anyone that has experienced MMOs for the past several years will be spoiled by Guild Wars 2's feature list.

However, I can't put Guild Wars 2 on too high of a pedestal as there are some problematic core items that have already started nagging on my brain.  First and foremost is the combat which works somewhat well in small scale, but is a complete clusterfuck once more than five people show up.  Worst of all, it clearly seems to have been designed to be a clusterfuck in certain situations.  In the open World vs World PvP map or large public quests (aka dynamic events), the combat is just unintelligible spam.  With spell effect scaling, players will often find themselves subject to invisible attacks and random death.

Guild Wars 2 relies a lot on reflex and action-based combat.  This works great and lets players showcase their skills in small-scale combat, but again it does not work, AT ALL, in large scale confrontation.  There is literally so many area of affect abilities (and one shot death in PvE) being tossed that the dodge mechanic is completely rendered moot.  And the game was designed to bring clusters of players together in small areas to spam the shit out of these abilities.  It is very troubling to me that so much effort was put into this action combat to have it result in a complete button mashing affair when it should shine the most.  Combat is very difficult to follow because of this.

I want to reiterate that outside of combat, Guild Wars 2 has completely won me over.  The features are really that freaking good.  Advancement paths are varied and traditional MMO quests are all but gone.  Players are always encouraged to play together and never are they penalized for helping each other out (seriously, how the fuck has it taken this long to get an MMO where playing together is NOT a penalty!).  The non-combat heavy players will also find they can successfully thrive and reach max level simply through crafting and exploration.  If you can do it in Guild Wars 2, it probably advances the level track (even resource gathering gives experience!).

Another core area of weakness, which Arena Net keeps holding up, is all the voice acting in personal story quests and dungeons.  Instead of traditional MMO quest text boxes, Guild Wars 2 opts for quasi-cut scenes with voice acting (think Mass Effect 1 dialogue).  The problem is the character models are nearly 100% emotionless while the voice actor puts passion into the lines.  It is terrible.. honestly terrible... and I end up clicking skip the end just to red the blurb that will appear on the map (which again, the map is awesome).

Even with the core weaknesses in combat and the story telling, Guild Wars 2 is certainly a refreshing take in the MMO market.  I would highly recommend anyone who is interested in MMOs to check it out.  If anything, it is certainly one of the few games worth the $60 box price and there is no subscription so it is a game that players can continue to come back to at their leisure.  It also features level-up mechanics to bring lower level characters up to level 80 for the World vs World combat (albeit as a lower level character your stats are lower and options limited).

I expect a good healthy run in Guild Wars 2.  Once I reach level 80 down the line I will certainly be spending a good amount of time learning the WvW map, but at this point I think I am going to have to let the "mists" dissipate a bit as it is not fun currently.  Hopefully the WvW areas will change to encourage smaller group skirmishes (Arena Net should start by removing the invisible walls at the bottleneck leading out of the portal keep).

In my previous post I detailed some of the items that I liked about DotA 2 and while the game has slowly changed my outlook on its potential, I still have some hesitations. Some of these are not limited to DotA 2 and are concerns I shared about my time with League of Legends.

Asymmetry

The asymmetrical nature of the hero design in DotA 2, as much as I love the idea of it, rarely works out in public match making. As explained in my previous post, there are heroes that have no business being on the field by themselves, but when combined properly they become a force multiplier which really unbalances a match when not countered. Then there are other heroes, such as Ursa or Lycan, that when played well singlehandedly destroy the other team (often referred to as “pubstomping” heroes).

This leads to one-sided games and the more I play DotA 2 the more I realize the public matchmaking games at my level are terribly lop sided. In fact, I went back over my history of recent games and found only a single game that was competitive. All of the other games were steam rolled by one of the teams and were decided within the first 15 minutes.

I must note that this is actually part of the game design for this genre. It is also what gives these games such high skill caps and great competitive scenes that are quickly taking over eSports. However, I can’t help but feel that it really damages the casual scene and in the case of DotA 2, so far, it seems to be a much bigger issue than other games I have played.

In comparison, in my time with League of Legends, I have certainly seen my fair share of lop sided victories and losses. Yet, I have also been involved in far more competitive matches via public match making than I have in DotA 2. Not nearly as often did I feel like a match was a complete wash and in games that were a wash there was the forfeit vote or the dominating team could easily and quickly push to finish the match which brings me to my next two gripes about DotA 2: the length of matches and the lack of a forfeit feature.

Length of Matches

DotA 2 matches last anywhere from 30 minutes to an hour, more often than not leaning towards the hour mark. Combined with load times and match making time, I would estimate a player averages one game per hour. This is just too long, especially when considering that many of the matches are pretty much determined by the 15-20 minute mark and the rest of the time is spent just waiting for the towers and base to fall. Unlike League of Legends, DotA 2 does not really have anything that speeds up the inevitable push so to avoid leaver penalties many players end up just AFK in the fountains for 30 minutes waiting for the match to be finished.

Forfeit

DotA 2, by its mere design, should have a way to concede a match. Currently the only safe way out of a match is if someone makes the first move and disconnects, allowing all others to drop out without penalty. After the 15 minute mark, a team should be able to call a vote to concede.

Customization Items

This is a minor complaint, but may in the long run be the biggest problem for DotA 2 with its Free 2 Play business model. The customization items for heroes are not distinguishable and I don’t see how they make someone feel unique. Other than looking good on a player’s profile page, I do not see as nearly as successful a market around customization items as there is in Team Fortress 2 (where the customization items affect game play as well as are clearly distinguishable when playing). This may change as more items are added to DotA 2, but to say that I was less than impressed by what was already out there is a massive understatement.

"The game that shall not be named" is going free 2 play.

To quote my predictions for the year:

3. "the game that shall not be named" will have a tough year, but will survive.  The argument to take the game Free 2 Play will begin around July.

Next time, I'm putting money down in Vegas.

I've felt lost lately in DOTA2 playing against heroes that I have never seen in a game before.  At the same time I was getting frustrated playing the same heroes over and over because I felt comfortable with them and ending up with completely different results.  One game I will dominate as Viper and the next one I can't even scratch my laning opponent.  To force myself to expand a bit and help learn about the numerous heroes in DOTA2 I have switched to playing Single Draft mode.  Each player is randomly given a choice of three heroes to choose from (one hero per main attribute type: intelligence, agility, or strength).

Since this change I have played games as Phantom Lancer, Nightstalker, Omniknight, and a few others I have almost never seen in pub games before.  I found myself doing well with some such as Phantom Lancer, but not feeling like I really knew why I was doing well.  That forced me to research the heroes a bit and actually learn something (like how to control illusion minions!). 

Out of all the things I've done in DOTA2, this is easily the change that has resulted in the most knowledge gained on my part.  It has also wisened me up to some intricacies of DOTA2 which I can explore more as I find heroes I enjoy playing.  My end goal is to have at least ten heroes I feel comfortable playing in a pub game, which is about where I was with League of Legends (though in LoL I felt like I could far more easily pick up new heroes).

For anyone playing DOTA2, I highly recommend some time in Single Draft mode to open your opportunities to try and learn other heroes.  Its a surprise each time you load up a game and if you care about team composition, single draft's randomness can land you some wonderful learning opportunities.

NOTE: Yes, I understand this makes some players angry as they don't want "scrubs" using Single Draft as a sort of testing bed.  However, the fact that the picks are random, there is always the chance of a team being shafted.  This makes the match all the more fun in my opinion.

My PC died two weeks ago, so its upgrade time:

PCPartPicker part list: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/bJFA
Price breakdown by merchant: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/bJFA/by_merchant/
Benchmarks: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/bJFA/benchmarks/

CPU: AMD FX-6100 3.3GHz 6-Core Processor
Motherboard: ASRock 970 Extreme3 ATX  AM3+ Motherboard  ($84.99 @ Amazon)
Memory: Corsair Vengeance 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory  ($48.99 @ Amazon)
Hard Drive: Samsung 830 Series 256GB 2.5" Solid State Disk
Case: Antec One ATX Mid Tower Case  ($49.99 @ Amazon)
Power Supply: OCZ 650W ATX12V Power Supply  ($92.65 @ Amazon)
Total: $276.62
(Prices include shipping and discounts when available.)

There is a stir in the online PC gaming community today over a EU court ruling that allows for the resale of digital licenses.  Read up here.  The important part of the ruling is: "Therefore, even if the licence agreement prohibits a further transfer, the rightholder can no longer oppose the resale of that copy."  This is big news.  HUGE news for software copyright.  The immediate Internet conclusion is that Steam or any other digital distribution platform for games will have to allow end users to resell their games for profit.  However, its all being taken too far in regards to digital distribution.  This will not and cannot change anything with digital distribution.

I won't claim to be an expert in copyright law, but I do consider myself a logical thinker.  Thinking this out a bit, I don't see anything in the ruling that forces a digital distribution platform to allow another user access to a game license bought by one of its other users.  The license to a game can be transferred to another user, but access via a digital distribution platform is under a completely different license.  The ruling may force the likes of Steam to allow user account sales, but it does not in any way look like it forces Steam to allow a different user access to a license you've resold.  Theoretically, as you no longer own the license, Steam could deactivate your access to the game while the new owner is forced to procure the game files and installation methods independent of Steam.

In fact, it would be like buying a new game from Walmart and then having a law forcing Walmart to resell that game for the purchaser, deliver it to the new owners house, set it up for them and ensure it is in brand new cloned working order, and then provide all the monies to the original purchaser.  It makes zero sense.  Walmart sold you the game and if you resell it, it is up to you to figure out how to get it to the new owner and its then up to the new owner to have a method to use it.

Oh and there is a little United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruling (basically then upheld by the Supreme Court) for Vernor v Autodesk in the good ole' US of A which pretty much puts the kibosh on the reselling of software licenses.

Even if we were in fairy-tale land and the resale of used digital games was allowed, I wouldn't want it.  The sale of used physical copies of games already forced developers into the models we currently have.  Downloadable content (DLC) and the piecemeal sale of games is a direct result of developers looking at ways to get around used game sales.  Every developer now is building or has built online service platforms around their game franchises to lock features behind pay walls.

I much prefer the path the PC gaming industry is actually on: free 2 play (F2P).  Players want to pay for games and are more than willing to happily spend away on games that keep them engaged.  The F2P model allows them to try before they buy and then show the developer in a tangible way what they like about the game.

There is so much doom-casting about the current gaming industry that we are all missing the fact that the PC gaming industry has completely transformed itself over the past two years.  Reselling of digital licenses for digital games would be a huge derailment.

Rift may be a completely different game than World of Warcraft, but I will never know.  I've played two hours of Rift and had I not seen the title screen, I would have thought I was playing World of Warcraft.  This is the same thought I had while playing Aion.  The same thought that made me shriek in horror when I finally got to play "the game that shall not be named".  It annoys me that so many games have copied World of Warcraft and not just copied ideas, but cloned wholesale everything about World of Warcraft.  It is so bad that the games are all using the same text color to identify different levels of loot.  The font used looks almost exactly the same.  The icon shapes.  On and on and on this goes.

There has been a long running discussion that World of Warcraft just copied Everquest which just copied DIKU MUD and therefore the current flood of WoW clones is expected.  I disagree with this line of thinking.  Everquest's biggest achievement is that it brought the DIKU MUD to 3D graphics.  Other than that, I would argue Everquest was a pretty terrible game.  World of Warcraft's biggest achievement was that it refined the DIKU model into something that made sense with a massively online game that is beyond a doubt one of the best games ever released.  Secondly, WoW brought MMO to the mainstream.

These other games: Rift, Aion, etc. They are all clones; none of them bringing anything significant to the genre.  They aren't even trying to bring something to the genre.  They are all fighting to carve out a piece of the table scraps of players that Blizzard ends up shoving off the table where they keep the money hats.

Does this make these games bad?  Not really, but after an hour of playing Aion I was done; having decided if I wanted this experience I would just go back to play World of Warcraft.  Rift?  Same story.

Yet, the worst part is each and every game tries to sell itself as though its the "next big thing".  That its ONE THING IT WILL DO DIFFERENTLY is the NEXT PILLAR OF WHAT IS GOOD IN GAMES.  It's annoying.  These developer's need to just shut up and tell gamers that they really liked World of Warcraft and wanted to make a game that emulates it.  I would be far less pissed off about the state of the MMO industry if the big players would just come out and admit they are riding WoW's coattails

Rift is World of Warcraft.  I don't care if the game gets better in the later levels or has some whiz-bang new idea that you get to enjoy at some point.  Give me something different that as soon as I start playing the LAST thing I think of is the other game I played before it.  When I played DOTA 2, I didn't think "oh man, this is League of Legends".  DOTA 2 is it's own game.  It defines itself as something unique.  AND DOTA 2 IS A LITERAL CLONE OF ANOTHER GAME!

Fuck it, Valve make me a god damned MMO already.

A week doesn't seem to go by without someone buzzing me and asking why I'm so silent on Guild Wars 2.  Some have gone as far as to scream in my general direction that "IT IS EVERYTHING WARHAMMER ONLINE WAS SUPPOSED TO BE!!!".  To be honest, and to admit this for the first time publicly, I'm still a little butt hurt over Warhammer Online and it's epic shortcomings.  I've sworn off caring about big-name MMOs until I get my hands on them and the NDAs have dropped.  With that said, I do agree that GW2 is shaping up to be what Warhammer Online should have been, but with so much more going for it.

While I don't believe I ever blindly bought into the hype of Warhammer Online, I am certainly a victim of foolishly believing the game was more finished than it turned out to be.  I still maintain to this day that Warhammer Online put all the pieces together for a great MMO, but forgot to add the glue and nails that would keep it all together.  Band aids could only hold that sinking ship together for so long (surprisingly it's still not Free 2 Play).

Warhammer's failures put GW2's features into perspective.  Simple things such as allowing instant access to end-game PvP zones, PvE content in the PvP zones, and having PvP objectives outside of just killing other players would not mean as much (to me) had it not been for Warhammer Online's complete opposites.  Warhammer Online allows me to smile a little bit inside every time I watch or read a new bit of information about GW2.

Another small area of pleasure is looking at GW2's World vs World (WvW), most directly comparable to Realm vs Realm from Warhammer Online. Unlike Warhammer Online; GW2 took an interesting path to get to its WvW system.  Instead of distinct races/areas dividing the "teams", GW2 simply pits server against server. Each server has the exact same world, characters, and classes that the other servers have.  This instantly strikes a balance and the conflict comes down to numbers and grand strategy to decide the victors.  Throw in a bit of match making to re-balance equally skilled servers together and the forumla looks solid.

Matter of fact, GW2 looks solid as a whole (even in it's beta stage).  And this is why I am silent.  This is why I've stopped clawing to watch every new video or story that is released. I have yet to even pre-order the game. I want as much of GW2 to be fresh to me as possible.  Hopefully that will limit the butt hurt this time around on another promising MMO.

I've gotten about an hour to click around in the Salem beta.  There is something to be said for games that offer no hand holding and require their users to look up a guide just to create a character.  I'm not talking about a guide for figuring out what the best stats are; I'm talking about a guide that explains on what and where to click so the player can even get to the point where they get to make a decision.  Salem is more of an idea than a game currently, but hot damn, what a brilliant idea it is.

The first thought that hit me when starting off in Salem (aside from trying to figure out why someone would want to sell me crickets in Boston) was that Salem is Ultima Online (UO) set in Massachusetts. I was immediately brought back to my early days of UO: no idea what I'm doing, no idea where to go, random wandering in the countryside clicking on every object I can interact with, stumbling over other player's homes and settlements, and a constant fear the next person I see on screen is going to lead to my death at the hands of a murderer.  All of these elements are present in Salem.

The only problem is, unlike UO, there isn't really a clear "this does this and that does that".  UO was a fantasy game and it was easy to piece together that a sword slashed and a fireball was flung.  In Salem, the setting is colonial Boston (aka the New World) and the associated lore may as well be a foreign language.  Salem makes no attempt (that I could find) to explain anything.  A player that is unwilling to venture to the beta forums or a spoiler website is in for a rough experience.

To make matters worse the UI is terrible.  Nothing works as expected outside of the grid-based inventory and character portrait.  Skills aren't explained and accidental clicks result into investment into skills which may or may not be implemented yet.  The mini map does not seem to rotate with the player's positioning and direction making guided travel a lesson in frustration.  Fortunately, the UI is open to modders and there are already some decent UI mods out there (which I've yet to try out).

Add into the mix some bugs such as maple leaves not re-spawning and the inexperienced player is quickly lost on what they are expected to do.  Then Joe Blow shows up and murders them, permanantly killing the player's character.

This all should add up to a giant pile of rage-quit, but for some reason the more I clicked around the more I became intrigued. The overall puzzle of "what the fuck am I supposed to do!" wasn't unraveling, but I found myself setting goals for myself.  For example, I found I could harvest branches which I could then use to build piles of logs which I could then use my tinder box on to start a fire (though the whole build process is a mystery to me).

I'm very curious about Salem now.  With a better UI and some effort invested in explaining the game to players, it has potential.  I'd also add in that Salem is clearly in an alpha stage, not a beta stage.  Its very difficult to test something that doesn't seem to be anywhere near finished.

So quit asking unless you are going to buy me a copy of Diablo 3.

And seriously, as I've tweeted, my garden is taking up a lot of time this year.  Outside of my family, my interests are Green Bay Packers > Gaming > Gardening.  Spring is a busy time for the latter and I've up-scaled my gardening this year (pretend I have like maxed my farming skill in the MMO known as RL).

For a bit of background, I have a few hundred League of Legends games under my level 27 summoner's belt on both the classic (DOTA-like) map and the new Dominion (capture the flag) map.  I have about 20 games under my belt in DOTA 2.  I do not play ranked matches in either game and mainly rely on public match-making via the solo queues.  As fair warning, I am not a DOTA 2 or LoL expert.  These are my observations from the view of a casual player. 

Graphics: 

LoL offers stylized (aka cartoony) graphics which hold up over time.  DOTA 2 features more "realistic" fantasy visuals.  If I had subcategories, I would give DOTA 2 the nod for excellent attack/spell animations.  LoL would get a bonus for it's cleaner graphical play which makes spectating games easier.
Game Client:

DOTA 2's client is a glorious thing to behold.  It is a one stop shop for the digital DOTA 2 consumer featuring games to jump into and spectate, player profiles, news, hero information, and more.  LoL's game client is serviceable, but is split from the actual game.  It is based on Adobe Air which I've found to be less than reliable.  However, Riot Games has continued to improve the LoL client.
User Interface:

The UI of each game is almost the same.  Both work equally well.  I'm a bit disapointed that neither game has opened their UIs up to modders, but I suspect that is in an attempt to keep UI mods from giving unfair advantages.

Customization:

While LoL's user interface is perfectly serviceable and almost identical to that of DOTA 2, there are far, far more customizations that can be made to DOTA 2.  DOTA 2 player's can save their configurations instead of having to set them by hand each game as is needed in LoL.
Map(s) and Game Types:

LoL offers three different maps with three game types to DOTA 2's single map and game type.  One of LoL's maps, The Crystal Scar, offers completely new game play mode with a capture point game type (the other two LoL maps are still Defense of the Ancient (DOTA) ).  Some may say DOTA-like games do not need any more maps, but I would strongly disagree with that after having played many games on The Crystal Scar in LoL.

Heroes:

While I like a lot of LoL's hero designs, I can't help but gawk at DOTA 2 for the sheer audacity with which some of the heroes are designed.  There is completely broken-in-normal-game heroes in DOTA 2 and it's all part of the design.  DOTA 2 features a lot more unique and definitive play mechanics and the attack animations are much better. 

At the same time, LoL has a much better grip on balance for the casual player.  It is much clearer why a player or team is dominating a match with a certain hero.  The hero designs are also much closer to one another making it easier to cross over and play something else.

Items:

I think LoL's items are a) simple to understand and b) in the same shop.  DOTA 2 may have great items, but its daunting for a casual player to keep track of some of the more intrinsic items.  DOTA 2 also has regular and secret shops, with recipes to make items and couriers to bring items from the shops to the players.  This all leads to making DOTA 2's items a very frustrating experience at times.
Overall Game Play:

LoL offers more variety than DOTA 2 in regards to game play experiences.  The multiple maps are the start, but Riot Games has also pushed to open up all aspects of the game for the majority of their heroes.  Jungling is a real possibility with almost any LoL hero these days.  LoL also stepped away from some things such as the secret shop and denying, both of which still don't make much sense to me in DOTA 2.

DOTA 2 is still a very, very solid game.  It's distinct enough to offer a separate play experience from that of LoL.  However, Valve is clearly leaning towards the hardcore players and sticking to the true DOTA experience for DOTA 2. 

From a casual perspective, LoL is the better option.  From a "complete package" perspective, DOTA 2 has the better shot and it's still in BETA!  Interestingly, LoL can fix its "not a complete package" problem where as Valve has all but stated that DOTA 2 isn't going to relent on the design aspects that make it less-than-ideal for casual players.

At the end of the day both games still offer a hell of an experience and both are Free 2 Play.  I recommend anyone interested check out both before making a decision on which one to commit to (well that is if you can get into the DOTA 2 beta).

Salem



Features: crafting/building focus, perma-death, open PvP, set in colonial New England (aka The New World), free 2 play, "generations"

The developers have been very clear that this game is about freedom.  They are removing the "grindy" parts of MMOs to get the players to the "end game".  Players logging in on day one are in the "end game" and participating in the community.

With freedom comes consequence.  A prime example is the idea that there will be forests in the game that players can clear.  Clear an entire forest and waste the wood on something, players are out of wood in that area.  This fits right in with the focus of the game's narrative: the New World.  Players will be focused on building and expanding in the new territory and that will open all kinds of avenues for teamwork and competitive play.

The discussion of freedom extends further when you start talking about open PvP and the fact the game will feature perma death.  A player's character can be murdered, never to be seen again, but only if the "murdering" player consciously makes that decision.  Incidental murder will not be possible and being flagged a murderer will  be a very troubling position to be in when you are caught.

This all sounds a bit out there, but the developers have experience in the perma-death, crafting/building MMO realm.  They already run Haven and Hearth, Salem's predecessor that has executed and learned from most of these ideas.

Lastly, Salem is going to be free 2 play (F2P) which should allow for anyone curious to get their feet wet.

Dominus



Features: three-faction "realm vs realm" (though legally they cannot call it that), SWG-style gathering

If Star Wars Galaxies and Dark Age of Camelot (DAoC) had a love child, it would be Dominus (formerly Prime Online: The Battle for Dominus).

Dominus, based in a SciFi setting, will feature three-faction warfare along with an in depth crafting and exploration system where resources will be unique to an area and be finite (in the fact they could be gathered into extinction).

The game is also being geared towards PvP combat with the three factions battling it out for control of zones and areas similar to DAoC frontiers.  There will also be a bounty system where players can hunt individual targets or live with one foot in the grave by carrying a large bounty on their head.

Dominus also marks the return of Sanya Thomas (now Sanya Weathers), of DAoC fame, back to the MMO community manager standpoint.  If you haven't followed MMOs for a long time, you may have missed the fact she pretty much invented how modern day community management is done for an MMO.

Otherlands




Features: based on Otherlands book series by Tad Williams, SciFi and Fantasy combined (or really any sort of world they want to add as Otherlands is really a metaverse capable of any idea that can be thought up), eDNA system, free 2 play

While Dominus and Salem have received a bit of press and a small mentioning in some notable blogs, Otherlands on the other hand has received almost no attention.  And that's a damn shame because the Otherlands books by Tad Williams are a superb read.  Not to mention the game is shaping up to be an excellent free 2 play MMO experience.

The Otherlands is a meta-verse in which users log in and have experiences in various worlds.  Everything from World War I to swords and sorcery fantasy is covered.  The areas in the game will be varied from the main meta-verse hub to a fantasy world that grew out of a chess board and features a giant floating game of chess happening in the sky (and that description doesn't even come close to doing the area in question justice.  Watch this video to learn more about the chess board zone.)

The important thing to understand is that the zones in the game are "simulations" and therefore are not meant to simulate a "real" world.  Things can be serious or exaggerated and it all fits into the game's lore. Rules in the simulations can be bent and broken, changed, or given context.  Its really a perfect fit for an MMO.

Another neat feature is non-static NPCs.  NPCs will be on life cycles where they actually travel and have things to do.  A fisherman will go to fish, a baker will go to buy flour, etc.

However, the coolest thing going for Otherlands is the idea of eDNA and the MyLand feature.  The basic premise is players will be able to find something in a simulation (aka zone) and take a  copy of it's eDNA which can then be brought back to their MyLand zone to transplant a copy.  Its MMO housing on steroids and this is one MMO where instanced housing zones make complete and logical sense.

If there is any MMO that I'm excited about these days it is Otherlands.