This thesis covers the history of the MOBA (Multiplayer Online Battle Arena) genre by creating a chronological historical timeline of some of the most catalytic titles. It also delves deeper into the dynamic between modders and companies and how that dynamic changed as the genre evolved. All of this is analyzed through a political economy lens, to see how the power structure and monetization plan for the games in the genre has changed over the years. The research was conducted by piecing together relevant academic papers, with popular sources to construct a credible thesis on the MOBA genre's evolution. One of the key points from this research is how monetization has changed from the beginning of the genre to how it is today. Roughly 20 years ago, when the genre first started, monetization was more straightforward, a one-time purchase for the game. Today, most games in the genre are free-to-play, while containing in-game purchases such as cosmetics and character unlocks.

A indicação de LAIDLER (1987b) de que Henry Thornton, apesar de ter mudado de posição política, não modificou substancialmente suas subjacentes percepções analíticas entre 1802 e 1810 não tem recebido suficiente atenção por parte da literatura especializada. Busca-se, aqui, estudar se e em que medida essa indicação é corroborada. O caminho investigativo escolhido, contudo, não se restringe, meramente, a uma comparação analítico-teórica das visões sustentadas pelo autor nos anos em questão. Para que se compreenda com maior acurácia suas idéias monetárias, é necessário que as mesmas sejam situadas no contexto histórico e analítico original, levando-se em consideração os paradigmas de economia monetária e bancária mais aceitos na Grã- Bretanha a essa época e as controvérsias do período. Também serão de destaque as análises das Comissões de que Thornton fez parte, o \'Irish Currency Committee\', em 1804, e o \'Bullion Committee\', em 1810. A base adotada para a comparação do pensamento do autor em ambos os períodos é a obra \'An Enquiry into the Nature and Effects of the Paper Credit of Great Britain\', de 1802, e seus discursos feitos em maio de 1811 a respeito do \'Bullion Report\', que foi publicado um ano antes. / LAIDLER (1987b)?s indication that though Henry Thornton?s policy stance had changed between 1802 and 1810, his underlying analytical views weren?t any different hadn?t received enough attention from the specialized literature. We aim to study here if and in which measure this perspective is corroborated. However the investigation path chosen is not merely restricted to an analytical theoretical comparison between the two views supported by the author in the corresponding years. In order to understand with greater accuracy his monetary ideas, it?s necessary to place them in their original historical and analytical context, considering the most regarded banking and monetary paradigms of Great Britain in that time. Attention will also be placed in the Committees of which Thornton was a member, like the \'Irish Currency Committee\', in 1804, and the \'Bullion Committee\', in 1810. The base in relation to we compare the ideas of the author in both periods is his work \'An Enquiry into the Nature and Effects of the Paper Credit of Great Britain\', of 1802, and his speeches made in may 1811 about the \'Bullion Report\', which was published a year earlier.

A indicação de LAIDLER (1987b) de que Henry Thornton, apesar de ter mudado de posição política, não modificou substancialmente suas subjacentes percepções analíticas entre 1802 e 1810 não tem recebido suficiente atenção por parte da literatura especializada. Busca-se, aqui, estudar se e em que medida essa indicação é corroborada. O caminho investigativo escolhido, contudo, não se restringe, meramente, a uma comparação analítico-teórica das visões sustentadas pelo autor nos anos em questão. Para que se compreenda com maior acurácia suas idéias monetárias, é necessário que as mesmas sejam situadas no contexto histórico e analítico original, levando-se em consideração os paradigmas de economia monetária e bancária mais aceitos na Grã- Bretanha a essa época e as controvérsias do período. Também serão de destaque as análises das Comissões de que Thornton fez parte, o \'Irish Currency Committee\', em 1804, e o \'Bullion Committee\', em 1810. A base adotada para a comparação do pensamento do autor em ambos os períodos é a obra \'An Enquiry into the Nature and Effects of the Paper Credit of Great Britain\', de 1802, e seus discursos feitos em maio de 1811 a respeito do \'Bullion Report\', que foi publicado um ano antes. / LAIDLER (1987b)?s indication that though Henry Thornton?s policy stance had changed between 1802 and 1810, his underlying analytical views weren?t any different hadn?t received enough attention from the specialized literature. We aim to study here if and in which measure this perspective is corroborated. However the investigation path chosen is not merely restricted to an analytical theoretical comparison between the two views supported by the author in the corresponding years. In order to understand with greater accuracy his monetary ideas, it?s necessary to place them in their original historical and analytical context, considering the most regarded banking and monetary paradigms of Great Britain in that time. Attention will also be placed in the Committees of which Thornton was a member, like the \'Irish Currency Committee\', in 1804, and the \'Bullion Committee\', in 1810. The base in relation to we compare the ideas of the author in both periods is his work \'An Enquiry into the Nature and Effects of the Paper Credit of Great Britain\', of 1802, and his speeches made in may 1811 about the \'Bullion Report\', which was published a year earlier.