Boards›Story, Art, & Sound

| I think Riot is largely to blame for the unpopularity of monster designs |

Arakadia·5/9/2019, 1:49:09 AM·71 votes·19,294 views

Does anyone ever get the implication that monster designs aren’t unpopular simply just because they aren’t relatable humans? I mean there are so many other faults from Riot that create a vicious cycle of champion is played less so they don't get content and then people play them less because they don't get content. I’m going to define monster characters as inhuman in shape, so not like Nami but like Anivia or Rammus.

#####Riot really discourages you from getting attached to a monster character when:

  • Most monster characters are old designs with outdated lore, gameplay, and art.
  • Most monster characters don’t get skins.
  • Most monster characters don’t get attention in cinematics, art, promotional stuff, etc.
  • Lots of monster characters aren’t stable/reliable gameplay wise (Skarner, Cho’Gath, Fiddlesticks Urgot) and often disregarded when it comes to improving their design or viability.
  • Many monster characters are just flat out worse than other options (Bard, Skarner, Rammus)
  • Most monster characters have lore that is limited to run or fight to the death (Rek’Sai) or are simply plot devices (Anivia) or if they ever actually do anything significant in the lore an equally powerful foe would be necessary to nullify it and put them back at point 0 (Cho'Gath).
  • Monster characters in general do not receive attention in general such as in the comics like Academy, Olaf vs the World or w/e its called, and the new canon lore comics.

Overall I think its more Riot’s fault that monster champions aren’t popular. When humanoid champions already have an advantage in popularity due to being relatable, Riot fails to give players much reason to play anything but the humanoids. Why would I play Skarner when he will never get skins, got multiple failed gameplay reworks, has been largely forgotten balance wise with nothing in the foreseeable future, is unlikely to show up in any promotional material or lore, and overall will get no new content around my champion?

Meanwhile I can play Kayn whose new, already got a legendary, showed up in a cinematic, has significant and modern lore, is a likely candidate for future promotional material, and will certainly remain a viable and consistent character because I know Riot will keep him playable.

Sure, I might play Skarner just because I like his gameplay more. Thats what I personally do, I like Bard so I play Bard even though there are stronger and more reliable options. But Riot really shouldn’t be surprised when they actively do everything in their power to encourage you to play Miss Fortune, read her comic, read her multiple short stories and updated bio, buy her numerous skins one of which is techinically an ultimate, and assures you that you will get consistent content.

If Miss Fortune was nerfed and bad for a patch too, you know she isn’t going to stay out of playability for very long at all meanwhile there are a plethora of trash champions who will stay there. And Riot has explicitly said they won’t even update a champions VO, much less their gameplay, if they are popular and people like the character the way they are regardless of need for change (MF VO, Le Blanc kit).

Its worse when you realize that it becomes Skarner is played less --> No skins, content, or gameplay fixes ---> Skarner is played less because who wants to play an old broken champion who will only collect dust ---> Skarner is played less ---> No skins, content, or gameplay fixes.

https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/322045075700056064/530495969293369355/unknown.png

######edit: I'm not saying its all Riots fault. It probably doesn't help that Rammus isn't as relatable compared to Riven. But it is incorrect for Riot to simply dismiss it as monsters aren't relatable or interesting. Monsters have been included in stories and media since basically all of recorded human history. At the very least monster characters wouldn't be as unpopular with the playerbase if Riot hadn't starved them of quality gameplay, art, story, and promotional material.

99 Comments

ModAcademy Kayn5/9/2019, 4:59:46 AM25 votes

This feels like an issue of what came first, the chicken or the egg? Are monsters unpopular and therefore don't get a lot of frequent spotlight or content, or are they not popular because they don't get a lot of spotlight or content?

For me, it's really simple. It's the first. Why? Well, I want you to list me the number of stories, TV shows, Anime, literally any piece of Media you want, where the main leading character is a Monster. I know there's a few, but the few that exist are hugely outnumbered by the amount of Media where we have a human, or humanoid (Dwarf, Elf, human-relatable-looking character). And that's really it, you said it yourself, we empathize and relate most to humanoid characters.

Keep down the same train of thought, you see where Monsters are typically left in the spectrum. They're the villains, the mysteries of the world, the surprising ally to the main group whose remarkable for 'overcoming their nature'. Why do you think when Authors want to make monsters more empathizable, we give them more Human-like Traits? When we start to characterize them as people, instead of Monsters, they tend to gain traits akin to a human, concepts like Family, Loyalty, Honor, things that aren't...well, Monstrous.

If it makes you feel better, you can believe all you want that the only reason monsters aren't popular is because Riot doesn't give them any spotlight, but you're gonna be hard pressed to find the evidence to back it up. It's really easy to find an appeal in a human character, but it's a lot harder to find the appeal in a monster whose completely benign.

Olath Quortek5/9/2019, 3:50:49 AM10 votes

I think this is very good point...

PaffWasTaken5/9/2019, 4:44:23 PM10 votes

The new Volibear lore kinda made me want a Volibear full rework to go along with it, but since Riot publicaly stated that they are now too lazy they won't put major emphasis on reworks anymore, it just confirmed to me that they only half care about non-humanoid characters and only see them as the bastard cousins of e-girl, edgelords and weab champions

XxDRAGONsAK47xX5/9/2019, 2:48:22 PM7 votes

I would rather play monster champs because they're more cool and why would I play a human... I AM a human. Playing a human in a video game is stupid.

Jeddy0175/9/2019, 3:38:38 PM5 votes

Lots of monster characters aren’t stable gameplay wise (Skarner, Cho’Gath, Fiddlesticks Urgot) and forgotten about gameplay wise.

You know, someone made a thread here before saying the reason "monster" champs are unpopular is because they tend to have either niche gameplay styles or outdated gameplay styles. Meanwhile Human/humanoid champs are more likely to have more appealing gameplay styles. Make sense, a champ's playstyle should have an effect on the resulting playbase.

Sir Saltarin5/9/2019, 10:59:49 AM5 votes

Most monster characters are old designs with outdated lore, gameplay, and art.

Because they realized that when they created monster and human champs in the past, the old humans were more popular than the old moster champs, that's why they stopped to make monster champs.

Most monster characters don’t get skins.

Which is a correlation of the start, if they would get money of monster skins in the first place they would have done more monster skins since the begining, they didn't do it because since the start they realized that they were not popular, and that's why later they dont get skins

Most monster characters don’t get attention in cinematics, art, promotional stuff, etc.

Which is again caused for the same

Lots of monster characters aren’t stable gameplay wise (Skarner, Cho’Gath, Fiddlesticks Urgot) and forgotten about gameplay wise.

What does "stable gameplay wise" even mean? I cant rebate this if I dont understand what you are saying

Many monster characters are just flat out worse than other options (Bard, Skarner, Rammus)

Put examples of the other options or this point means nothing since your argument is half blank

Most monster characters have lore that is limited to run or fight to the death (Rek’Sai) or are simply plot devices (Anivia) or if they ever actually do anything significant in the lore an equally powerful foe would be necessary to nullify it and put them back at point 0 (Cho'Gath).

Monster characters in general do not receive attention in general such as in the comics like Academy, Olaf vs the World or w/e its called, and the new canon lore comics.

Check out when are the comics being created, Riot relized that monster champs were not popular years ago and that's why they dont put them on comics and stuff now, it's not the other way: monster champs were unpopular since the begining because the playerbase generally doesn't like them, sorry if it's that hard to understand

If Miss Fortune was nerfed and bad for a patch too, you know she isn’t going to stay out of playability for very long at all meanwhile there are a plethora of trash champions who will stay there.

Maybe because MF is a soloQ champ that almost never causes balance problems? Why would she even be nerfed in the first place, nerfs are not random things you know, champs are nerfed for a reason.

The only time in which MF actually caused problems was when Lethality was actually good and she could be played on pro play with her E max build as a Supp on a counterpick, and just for that reason she got several nerfs to her E to the point that playing around that skill isn't viable.

You are just saying non sense, you create an illogical situation in which MF gets gutted and say "booh they would buff her back soon" but you fail to understand that for her design she will never be needed to be gutted, and the champs thar are gutted are gutted 99% of the times for being so strong on pro play, not for lore or skins reasons.

The scenario you present is just a fallacy itself

The playerbase dislikes playing monster champions, Riot realized that years ago and for that reason they give monster champs less stuff: because they know that they would get less money.

If giving attention to monster champions gave them money they would do it lmao.

XJ999999999999995/9/2019, 3:20:01 PM2 votes

the popularity of a champion is based on if they are op or not, and how easy they are to abuse if they are op.

Jerry SeinfeId5/9/2019, 3:48:25 PM1 votes

Yumi was just released though.

If anivia counts as a monster then so does yumi.

But that's not what most of you want. Monster is honestly a vague term, and riot could release a monster champ that is popular. But it wouldn't be what you want most likely.

IronyAndSublime5/9/2019, 4:01:51 PM1 votes

Skarner Crystalline Scorpion Rammus Armadillo Urgot Literally a human. Stop loosely using "monster" to describe non-human/humanoid creatures in league. Void Champions are the only ones you can properly label as a "monster".