@soccerpzn Additional modes would make the game even better and doesn't take away from the genius of the sequential picking and banning feature. Some ppl like random picks or pick only from 1 side or even rush picks. That's perfectly fine. However, seeing how this mode is used on the first day of the first official tournament, I think the weight Valve places on this feature is clear. Who knows? Maybe as time passes, other modes would reveal even more impressive improvements.
I found the initial setup for the round fascinating. Valve has really done something original and terrific to improve (I mean improve, not just substitute higher resolution textures) on the original DOTA. DOTA is different from other popular arena-style competitive MP games because each of its heroes is unique and there is substantial chemistry depending on which heroes are on the same team and which ones meet up for a fight. DOTA 2 lets both teams see the other team's composition as each side gradually pick its heroes. Not only that, each side can deny up to 4 heroes that may significantly benefit the other team's existing (or anticipated) hero makeup. This rewards teams that have extensive knowledge of all the heroes in dota and how they relate to one another. The fact that each side picks or bans in sequence also solves the problem all players either try to grab their favorite hero ASAP (with the slower not getting what they want) or all wait for the other side's pick so a proper counter could be picked before timer expires, again resulting in possible (delayed) rush picking. The art of picking and banning heroes is practically a strategy game in itself. I don't know if there are enough similar heroes in DOTA 2 so that banning 4 makes no difference. Presumably Valve thought of this while designing DOTA 2. If the game setup works the way it should, however, this most certainly improves DOTA in a way far beyond ranked matches or tutorial or improved graphics.
I know it's been a while since this article was published (I just followed a link to it today), but I want to thank Brendan (way to let the facts and the interviewees do the talking. Bravo!) and Gamespot for a great article. It's rare for a piece of this length and depth to appear on a gaming site, especially on a topic that's pretty far removed from the usual daily affairs of us gamers. However, before we were gamers, we were first citizens of this country or at least of this Earth. We cannot forget that what we do as gamers have tangible effects on the greater society around us, and just as important, events in that society do substantially impact our gaming. The biggest stones in the pond might be thrown by people whom we dismiss as not knowing the first thing about games. With that in mind, I thank the writer and Gamespot once again for bringing this issue and others like it to our attention. And I hope all gamers remain conscious of social welfare and exercise the rights we are granted to make our voices heard.
Unfallen_Satan's comments