if dota players play demigod, that does not necessarily mean demigod will become a dota clone. and i'm sure stardock/gpg will be glad just as glad to take dota players money just as much as they want yours. if they didn't want dota players playing this they wouldn't openly advertise to be inspired by it. 

It's never a good idea to compare two unreleased games.

I remember when Sword of the Stars was being compared to Sins of a Solar Empire.  The development teams on both games even once worked together and on the surface both games seemed similar.

But it's in execution that games end up being very different from one another.

have you seen WoW graphics? i like how blizzard graphics doesn't try to be more than a game. this also allows for running on lower specs, and lets the developers focus that much more on gameplay. it seems like riot games is following in their footsteps. i'm all for it.

we'll see i suppose. i do hope both games are greatly successful though. this genre really deserves the publicity.

WoW is over 4 years old. When it first came out it had the best graphics for any mmo. Warcraft 3 was the same- amazing graphics for its time. It is not that Blizzard makes games with low graphics, but instead their games are such good quality that they last a long time (People still play Starcraft 1 today!  ). 

Anyway graphics are an important component of games now, especially considering the steep competition. 

Agreed, Blizzard purposefully doesn't make games with great graphics because they want people with older machines to be able to play them.  Mass appeal, that's what Blizzard is all about.

Blizzard games have distinctive and cohesive art styles (as DK put it), but they do not have remarkable graphics.

MMO - Everquest 2. Released within days of WoW, and sporting technically far better graphics.

RTS - tba.

well said

Fine.  Empire Earth.  Just search Gamespot RTS games, and you'll find other examples.

I disagree.  WC3 graphics look pretty good, I'll admit, but this is mainly achieved by using bright colors and large unit silhouettes.  The style of the game allows it to look good without being particularly taxing graphics-wise.  There are rarely a lot of units on screen at once and none of the units have a great deal of detail.  Other games that came out around this time had more units on screen at once with a larger amount of detail.  In other words, Warcraft 3 was one of the better looking games of its time, but it was not as graphically impressive as you make it out to be.

I'm not knocking WC3, I like it, but saying that Blizzard games tend to have great graphics is simply not true.  Blizzard uses distinctive art style to make their games look great despite having lower graphics requirements, which means they can be played by a larger user base and still be very appealing.  That's part of the secret to their massive success.

Graphics are overrated, play games for their gameplay. Graphics should be secondary and used as all only an accompaniment.

...and you, Xan, are the poster child of the "see-and-hear-only-what-they-want-to-see-and-hear" Stardock fans.  I have been around here for well over "a few weeks."  You love to put words in my mouth, and you love to exaggerate.  Why don't you put some effort into being open minded and some time into reading comprehension and leave ME (and posters like me who aren't flower-tossing starry-eyed lovers of the game and its developers) alone.

By posting the way you do about me you have only succeeded in creating for yourself an image that is congruent with the words you use to slander me.  Chill out.

Even I (the hopeless "poster-child" of mindless DotA-loving Demigod-bashing drones) appreciate this quality of the game.  My only worry is that the statement "there's a place for casual players on a team alongside hard core [players]" may be just a bit too true.  All of the things you mentioned casual players can do are indeed important, but they also require no skill and little knowledge of the game - as I am sure you realize. In fact, that's your point.  My worry is that such aspects of the game may be too large a fraction of the important aspects of gameplay.  Nevertheless, I think there's potential for the game to be shaped and developed further through simple number tweaking, skill balancing, and item additions.  I think there is reason to be optimistic assuming the developers are open to feedback and willing to make significant changes if necessary.

I believe a game can be very approachable, fun, and playable for less experienced players while still having a lot to learn and grasp and practice and sharpen and hone for experienced players, and I'm optimistic that Demigod may develop into a game that is accessible yet still requires a good deal of skill at the highest level.  I've invested my time (and money) into the game, so I am being honest when I say that I wish it only the best in developing a "highest level" that is indeed high.

By the way, Frogboy, I also agree that graphics are not very important, though extreme artistic styles can still bother me (LoL might fall into that category for me, I'm not sure).  Demigod has graphics that I happen to like a lot, though the levels are a bit too simplistic (despite the really cool background scenery) in my opinion.  Luckily I don't need to run the game on high graphics to enjoy it, because my computer isn't quite good enough to run it at high settings.

Uh Pako......LoL isn't free. Dota May be (though you still have to buy warcraft first), but LoL will be a "real" game, designed to turn a profit and all that.