Well Blizz thought the WCII look was a good decision for Starcraft, look how that played out.
Fans won that argument
And they should have. But there is a huge difference between saying "I don't like this, it should be like this" and "You've ruined my game," and "you can't have diablo take place in the fall, its not gothic."
You replied, so obviously it brought your attention too it. I wanted to point it out to put the rest of his post into context. Then context of someone who wants to completely dictate what someone else's creation is.
And I agree that graphics are all fucked up, but you have to be reasonable.
You can't tell blizzard that their product isn't "diablo", they get to decide what diablo is. They own it. ITS THEIRS TO DESIGN.
No, you wanted to bring attention to my statement, not to me. The thing is, it didn't bring attention to what I said as what I said is pretty factual.
A game like Diablo dictates a certain kind of art style. The art style shown is not the art style that a game like Diablo dictates (or deserves). Even further, it's established fact that bright oranges and medium greens don't excite fear, terror, horror, or any other emotion that a title like Diablo dictates.
I'm not dictating anything. The human brain is.
The devs that are working on Diablo 3 had little to nothing to do with Diablo 1 and 2 and it shows. Dramatically. Diablo is as much theirs as it is mine, especially since I own stock in Vivendi (VIV).
Quote from "nzkobc" »
And they should have. But there is a huge difference between saying "I don't like this, it should be like this" and "You've ruined my game," and "you can't have diablo take place in the fall, its not gothic."
It's because Fall is not gothic much like how spring and summer are not gothic. Two epic games have been released that have set the theme of the game. That theme is gothic. Fall is not gothic. The game dictates its own theme and art direction due to past games having that theme and art direction.
who Human Brain? Yours(seeing as how its the only one you are qualified to speak on). Who's Human brain said that you should type that first post you made? Yours. It seems to me, that you are irrespirable from your brain.
The devs that are working on Diablo 3 had little to nothing to do with Diablo 1 and 2 and it shows. Dramatically. Diablo is as much theirs as it is mine, especially since I own stock in Vivendi (VIV).
DIABLO IS AS MUCH YOUR'S AS IT IS THEIR'S? Awesome. You make the "real" Diablo III then. I certain you won't get sued because intellectual property right don't exists.
Its kinda different from music, trust me, im an artist / designer and we get huge, explicit briefings with sketches of how our work should look like, this is really evident in Blizzard because all of the elements of their games are really coherent, especially in 3D models and textures, a 3D modeler just models a sketch and an idea, the model will have some personal characteristics but wont ever get away from the artistic direction guides.
Yeah, I see what you mean. In my case, less informed the person I'm working with, the control I have. However, the more annoying they are to work with.
That doesnt matter because all of the hired artists will work accordingly to what the art director wants, he's the boss, he's the one that tells the artists what kind of feeling and style he wants the game to have, do you understand? The artists are simple workers, they just follow the art director orders and those orders are to copy World of Warcraft style
Maybe the workers can kill him and usurp control !
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from "KonataX" »
lol it can still easily be a ranger since who said you cant shoot arrows at melee distance xD
Quote from "Archie" »
The Barbarian is from Arreat, a very cold snowy mountain top, but they are much tougher than normal humans, so they don't need warmth.
Quote from "Archie" »
Where are Barbarians originally from? Sumeria, or more specifically Mesopotamia, AKA Europe. Think the Alps and the Pyrenees
It's because Fall is not gothic much like how spring and summer are not gothic. Two epic games have been released that have set the theme of the game. That theme is gothic. Fall is not gothic. The game dictates its own theme and art direction due to past games having that theme and art direction.
Judging by the weather in act one in D2, I would say it takes place in summer/spring.
I don't the content has as much to the tone as the execution. You can draw a bowl of fruit anyway you want, and have it induce any emotion you want, if you are talented artist(something blizzard seems to lack).
He's right, this team has nothing to do with Diablo 1 and 2, not even 1 person from Diablo 1 2 team is working on this one and that had consequences like we can see, that's what he's saying.
No, thats not what he saying. He saying he own's diablo as much as blizzard.
who Human Brain? Yours(seeing as how its the only one you are qualified to speak on). Who's Human brain said that you should type that first post you made? Yours. It seems to me, that you are irrespirable from your brain.
:confused: Really?
Do you know why Disney chose the colors they did for the Whinny the Pooh halloween episode? It's because the human brain (I.E. everybody's) responds to it in a similar manner.
I'll say it again.
Bright orange and medium greens in no way can ever go along with what gothic is.
I'll say this again.
Diablo 1 and Diablo 2 have set a mood, a theme, and an art design for the game. This is similar to how the art design from Warcraft 1 to 2 to 3 didn't change. This is similar to how the art design from Fallout 1 to 2 to 3 didn't change. This is similar to how the art design from Diablo 1 to 2 to... wait a minute...
DIABLO IS AS MUCH YOUR'S AS IT IS THEIR'S? Awesome. You make the "real" Diablo III then. I certain you won't get sued because intellectual property right don't exists.
It's plain to see that you're grasping straws here, but allow me to explain why you don't understand what is going on.
When you buy the stock of a company, you are buying a portion of that company. Because ActivisionBlizzard is a part of Vivendi, and I own Viviendi stock (VIV), I own a part of Blizzard. Because of that, I own a part of Diablo.
The current developers had nothing to do with Diablo 1 and 2. Most of the D1 and D2 devs made a terrible game called Hellgate: London. Because of this, I own just as much of Diablo as they do. I.E. None. What you are suggesting, to put it plainly, is that if I work at a Gibson guitar factory then I created the Les Paul design by proxy, despite the person who made the design originally didn't work for Gibson and me not being alive when the body type was created.
Seriously, you're failing hard as a troll.
Quote from "nzkobc" »
Judging by the weather in act one in D2, I would say it takes place in summer/spring.
I don't the content has as much to the tone as the execution. You can draw a bowl of fruit anyway you want, and have it induce any emotion you want, if you are talented artist(something blizzard seems to lack).
It doesn'tLOOK LIKE IT IS IN THE SUMMER/SPRING.
THAT IS THE POINT.
Quote from "nzkobc" »
No, thats not what he saying. He saying he own's diablo as much as blizzard.
No. I said that I own Diablo as much as the current developers do. I.E. None. I do own a part of the company, though, probably even more than what the current developers do as well.
i dont know...i just get this overwhelming feeling that if the art direction was exactly the same we'd be hearing outcries of OMG BLIZZARD JUST INNOVATE ALREADY IF WE WANTED THE SAME FEEL OF DIABLO 1 AND 2 WE'D GO PLAY THEM STILL.
the fact of the matter is this: the art direction aint changing dramatically. you know they are aware of the EXTREMIST fans this way or no way are being heard on these forums and bnet forums, but the fact is blizzard will meet somewhere in the middle.
i dont expect a major overhaul to the visuals of diablo 3 from what we saw and i dont want it. they will adjust the visuals to be more accomodating to the average diablo franchise fan wanting it more bleaker and gloomy.
so lets stop with the exaggerating claims and end of the world bitching because no one cares that much into it besides you.
and for the record, i hate world of warcraft. ive only played the 10 day trail and after 3 days i was done because i hate the art design, rpg elements, and community. so stop pulling excuses out of your asses to divert my CONCERNS into fanboyism.
So what your basicly saying is that, if George Lucas had gotten some feedback from perhaps the biggest fanbase in history, the outcome of the Star Wars prequels wouldn't have been better than the turd of the day he ended up showing us?
There are to many variables in the equation. Namely Star Wars Fans. It could have been better, seeing as how it already felt like fan fiction. But I don't know if Star Wars fans would have been the best guidance.
And I don't think there is anything wrong with feedback for a product like this. Fuck, its a huge part of how games are made (beta tests). AND FUCK : Valve makes all of their games bases around playtests. I'm say there is a line where you have to recognize its their product, and any criteria for what "can" and "can't" be in the game in over that line.
No. I said that I own Diablo as much as the current developers do. I.E. None. I do own a part of the company, though, probably even more than what the current developers do as well.
I think its fairly Obvious that the current developers own a fair deal more of Diablo that you do, seeing as how that have the rights to make a sequel, and you most definitely, do not. No matter how hard you slice it up, that fact remains ture.
As For the psychology of color : You're scope of the fuction of color is defined by how Disney uses them. McDonald's uses the same colors to make people uncomfortable for long periods of time.
However, to say that you can't do dark and or gothic interpretations of anything(spring, winter, fall, summer, a bee's hive), is give art, and artists who make art in such genres too little credit.
there is sooooo much time for them to adjust they will take this into consideration.... i 100 % agree with this veiw that it needs to be changed but they've got very little they need to do to change it... let it go guys... you've made your statement now let it simmer with blizzard they didnt let us down with the othere diablos have faith
i dont know...i just get this overwhelming feeling that if the art direction was exactly the same we'd be hearing outcries of OMG BLIZZARD JUST INNOVATE ALREADY IF WE WANTED THE SAME FEEL OF DIABLO 1 AND 2 WE'D GO PLAY THEM STILL.
the fact of the matter is this: the art direction aint changing dramatically. you know they are aware of the EXTREMIST fans this way or no way are being heard on these forums and bnet forums, but the fact is blizzard will meet somewhere in the middle.
i dont expect a major overhaul to the visuals of diablo 3 from what we saw and i dont want it. they will adjust the visuals to be more accomodating to the average diablo franchise fan wanting it more bleaker and gloomy.
so lets stop with the exaggerating claims and end of the world bitching because no one cares that much into it besides you.
and for the record, i hate world of warcraft. ive only played the 10 day trail and after 3 days i was done because i hate the art design, rpg elements, and community. so stop pulling excuses out of your asses to divert my CONCERNS into fanboyism.
Hahaha, sorry, but I couldn't help myself; just had to say you're an idiot.
Contradicting yourself all over the place fanboy.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from "KonataX" »
lol it can still easily be a ranger since who said you cant shoot arrows at melee distance xD
Quote from "Archie" »
The Barbarian is from Arreat, a very cold snowy mountain top, but they are much tougher than normal humans, so they don't need warmth.
Quote from "Archie" »
Where are Barbarians originally from? Sumeria, or more specifically Mesopotamia, AKA Europe. Think the Alps and the Pyrenees
Diablo 3: it completely lacks the gameplay of the original Fallout while masterfully keeps the art style of it.
I like the darker art design, but it won't fix the cartoony models.
The "darker" photoshop version can be easily implemented in the game by developers.
But the cartoony armor/ models/ architecture will still remain.
Lut Gholein was bright as hell, it was still realistic, due to the realistic character sizes, armor, ground texture, etc.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
~
"[Diablo1+2] obviously had the gothic look to it, but, you they weren't, they weren't very uh, very colorful games."
"We want to take dark as an emotion, rather than an actual color art choice." -Rob Pardo
"Why the hell shouldn't it be for 'kiddies', it's a goddamn game afterall." -lethlan
i dont know...i just get this overwhelming feeling that if the art direction was exactly the same we'd be hearing outcries of OMG BLIZZARD JUST INNOVATE ALREADY IF WE WANTED THE SAME FEEL OF DIABLO 1 AND 2 WE'D GO PLAY THEM STILL.
the fact of the matter is this: the art direction aint changing dramatically. you know they are aware of the EXTREMIST fans this way or no way are being heard on these forums and bnet forums, but the fact is blizzard will meet somewhere in the middle.
i dont expect a major overhaul to the visuals of diablo 3 from what we saw and i dont want it. they will adjust the visuals to be more accomodating to the average diablo franchise fan wanting it more bleaker and gloomy.
so lets stop with the exaggerating claims and end of the world bitching because no one cares that much into it besides you.
and for the record, i hate world of warcraft. ive only played the 10 day trail and after 3 days i was done because i hate the art design, rpg elements, and community. so stop pulling excuses out of your asses to divert my CONCERNS into fanboyism.
I think they will change the graphics. Not dramatically like some would like, but a small amount that is easy to implement. Which ultimately will probably get the game to us much faster than if they did a huge overhaul
and for the record, i hate world of warcraft. ive only played the 10 day trail and after 3 days i was done because i hate the art design, rpg elements, and community. so stop pulling excuses out of your asses to divert my CONCERNS into fanboyism.
That's the biggest issue for me currently. The game looks like WoW. From the colors they chose to the player models to the environments.
Don't get me wrong. I like the look of the outside area. I like it a lot. It just doesn't fit Diablo. We've all seen what the world of Sanctuary looks like on the outside. We spent 4 acts on the outside and one act on the inside. We know exactly what a desert, a jungle, a snowy mountain, and an open plain look like. We know what a forest looks like from Diablo 1.
The issue, for me, is what has been shown for D3 looks nothing like the rest of the game. It might as well be Warcraft: Swords and Sorcery since the game looks exactly like how the Warcraft series looks. Everything from the colors chosen (both for the player models and the environments) to the moody lighting colors (that blue-green hue that is plastered all over everything that should be black... seriously, what the hell is that?!). The player models, while looking better than WoWs, have the same feel.
The biggest thing about Blizzard is that they had three franchises that had vastly different art designs. It was great. I could instantly identify a game by its screenshot. If starcraft, warcraft, and diablo had chairs, you could easily identify all 3. With the current art direction, you can't tell the difference between the Warcraft chair and the Diablo chair (LITERALLY IN THIS CASE!).
To make it worse, the influences they cited for this game don't even make sense. Zelda and God of War? WHAT?! Why not... Diablo 1 and 2? It's stuff like this that makes me seriously question what it is that is going on inside of Blizzard.
It would be GREAT if we could see the TWO OTHER ART DESIGNS THAT THEY HAVE GONE THROUGH.
For me, all of this would be fixed if:
1. They got rid of the WoW shoulder pad crap (it looks bad and isn't intimidating or fierce at all).
2. They reintroduced the light radius stuff, something they said they were going to get rid of... I don't understand this at all. You'd figure they'd be able to do some AWESOME lighting stuff with todays PC's.
3. Got rid of that blue-green crap. Seriously. What the hell.
4. Toned down the bright orange (needs to be a dead orange instead) and made the green a dull green. You can still maintain brightness by doing this by adding in, say, some real-time lighting effects from combat abilities/spells and weaponry. They can easily keep the water brushed effect while making the rocks and terrain 3D JUST for the lighting.
These are the biggest issues. These are the biggest things that make it look like WoW and not like Diablo.
One more, still colorful and with bright flames / gore but maintains the Diablo mood:
It looks better, but it's still a cartoon.
Look at the tiles: they're hand-painted. I can get D2's ground texture if you want to compare them.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
~
"[Diablo1+2] obviously had the gothic look to it, but, you they weren't, they weren't very uh, very colorful games."
"We want to take dark as an emotion, rather than an actual color art choice." -Rob Pardo
"Why the hell shouldn't it be for 'kiddies', it's a goddamn game afterall." -lethlan
To make it worse, the influences they cited for this game don't even make sense. Zelda and God of War? WHAT?! Why not... Diablo 1 and 2? It's stuff like this that makes me seriously question what it is that is going on inside of Blizzard.
I get the influence. From everything they said, I think their main focus was overhauling the action elements of the game. And to be honest, as far action gameplay goes, zelda has some of the best bosses, and nothing is more burtal than god of war.
It would be GREAT if we could see the TWO OTHER ART DESIGNS THAT THEY HAVE GONE THROUGH.
For me, all of this would be fixed if:
1. They got rid of the WoW shoulder pad crap (it looks bad and isn't intimidating or fierce at all).
yes.
2. They reintroduced the light radius stuff, something they said they were going to get rid of... I don't understand this at all. You'd figure they'd be able to do some AWESOME lighting stuff with todays PC's.
Yes and no. They need to kill the blue/green ambient lighting. First. And I agree that they could do some amazing things with the lighting, but for the large scale that the action needs to take place on, performance wise it would be smarter to keep it simple.
3. Got rid of that blue-green crap. Seriously. What the hell.
Yes. I watched the gameplay video HD about 15 times trying to figure out what went wrong. I'm about 99% certain that they used blue and green ambient lights. Witch really doesn't make any sense at all for a place light by candles to be blue.
4. Toned down the bright orange (needs to be a dead orange instead) and made the green a dull green. You can still maintain brightness by doing this by adding in, say, some real-time lighting effects from combat abilities/spells and weaponry. They can easily keep the water brushed effect while making the rocks and terrain 3D JUST for the lighting.
I don't know about this. The contrast would be excellent for gameplay. I think its fine, until it starts raining. Then it should have gotten about 5 times dark than it did, just for that miniboss.
That big hell demon that came out from the wall? That looked an awful lot like a Dragonspawn from WC3.
I'm seeing absolutely NO originality here. I'm seeing nothing but WC3 and WoW. I'm NOT seeing Diablo.
OMG youre right! A 4 legged body with an upright torso! Obviously they are the same...yea so what is that? Centaurs, Assault Beasts, and WC3 Dragonkin are all the same.
I hear theres a lot of exploding undead dogs, locust swarms, and walls of zombies in WoW and WC3 btw, they're obviously not thinking of enough of their own content in the 2 classes and half of 2 zones we've seen.
And they should have. But there is a huge difference between saying "I don't like this, it should be like this" and "You've ruined my game," and "you can't have diablo take place in the fall, its not gothic."
No, you wanted to bring attention to my statement, not to me. The thing is, it didn't bring attention to what I said as what I said is pretty factual.
A game like Diablo dictates a certain kind of art style. The art style shown is not the art style that a game like Diablo dictates (or deserves). Even further, it's established fact that bright oranges and medium greens don't excite fear, terror, horror, or any other emotion that a title like Diablo dictates.
I'm not dictating anything. The human brain is.
The devs that are working on Diablo 3 had little to nothing to do with Diablo 1 and 2 and it shows. Dramatically. Diablo is as much theirs as it is mine, especially since I own stock in Vivendi (VIV).
It's because Fall is not gothic much like how spring and summer are not gothic. Two epic games have been released that have set the theme of the game. That theme is gothic. Fall is not gothic. The game dictates its own theme and art direction due to past games having that theme and art direction.
who Human Brain? Yours(seeing as how its the only one you are qualified to speak on). Who's Human brain said that you should type that first post you made? Yours. It seems to me, that you are irrespirable from your brain.
DIABLO IS AS MUCH YOUR'S AS IT IS THEIR'S? Awesome. You make the "real" Diablo III then. I certain you won't get sued because intellectual property right don't exists.
Yeah, I see what you mean. In my case, less informed the person I'm working with, the control I have. However, the more annoying they are to work with.
Maybe the workers can kill him and usurp control !
Judging by the weather in act one in D2, I would say it takes place in summer/spring.
I don't the content has as much to the tone as the execution. You can draw a bowl of fruit anyway you want, and have it induce any emotion you want, if you are talented artist(something blizzard seems to lack).
No, thats not what he saying. He saying he own's diablo as much as blizzard.
:confused: Really?
Do you know why Disney chose the colors they did for the Whinny the Pooh halloween episode? It's because the human brain (I.E. everybody's) responds to it in a similar manner.
I'll say it again.
Bright orange and medium greens in no way can ever go along with what gothic is.
I'll say this again.
Diablo 1 and Diablo 2 have set a mood, a theme, and an art design for the game. This is similar to how the art design from Warcraft 1 to 2 to 3 didn't change. This is similar to how the art design from Fallout 1 to 2 to 3 didn't change. This is similar to how the art design from Diablo 1 to 2 to... wait a minute...
It's plain to see that you're grasping straws here, but allow me to explain why you don't understand what is going on.
When you buy the stock of a company, you are buying a portion of that company. Because ActivisionBlizzard is a part of Vivendi, and I own Viviendi stock (VIV), I own a part of Blizzard. Because of that, I own a part of Diablo.
The current developers had nothing to do with Diablo 1 and 2. Most of the D1 and D2 devs made a terrible game called Hellgate: London. Because of this, I own just as much of Diablo as they do. I.E. None. What you are suggesting, to put it plainly, is that if I work at a Gibson guitar factory then I created the Les Paul design by proxy, despite the person who made the design originally didn't work for Gibson and me not being alive when the body type was created.
Seriously, you're failing hard as a troll.
It doesn't LOOK LIKE IT IS IN THE SUMMER/SPRING.
THAT IS THE POINT.
No. I said that I own Diablo as much as the current developers do. I.E. None. I do own a part of the company, though, probably even more than what the current developers do as well.
the fact of the matter is this: the art direction aint changing dramatically. you know they are aware of the EXTREMIST fans this way or no way are being heard on these forums and bnet forums, but the fact is blizzard will meet somewhere in the middle.
i dont expect a major overhaul to the visuals of diablo 3 from what we saw and i dont want it. they will adjust the visuals to be more accomodating to the average diablo franchise fan wanting it more bleaker and gloomy.
so lets stop with the exaggerating claims and end of the world bitching because no one cares that much into it besides you.
and for the record, i hate world of warcraft. ive only played the 10 day trail and after 3 days i was done because i hate the art design, rpg elements, and community. so stop pulling excuses out of your asses to divert my CONCERNS into fanboyism.
Sign for a Darker Art Direction in the dungeons/caves/etc.
www.myspace.com/mariocamillo
www.youtube.com/mariospeedwagon
There are to many variables in the equation. Namely Star Wars Fans. It could have been better, seeing as how it already felt like fan fiction. But I don't know if Star Wars fans would have been the best guidance.
And I don't think there is anything wrong with feedback for a product like this. Fuck, its a huge part of how games are made (beta tests). AND FUCK : Valve makes all of their games bases around playtests. I'm say there is a line where you have to recognize its their product, and any criteria for what "can" and "can't" be in the game in over that line.
I think its fairly Obvious that the current developers own a fair deal more of Diablo that you do, seeing as how that have the rights to make a sequel, and you most definitely, do not. No matter how hard you slice it up, that fact remains ture.
As For the psychology of color : You're scope of the fuction of color is defined by how Disney uses them. McDonald's uses the same colors to make people uncomfortable for long periods of time.
However, to say that you can't do dark and or gothic interpretations of anything(spring, winter, fall, summer, a bee's hive), is give art, and artists who make art in such genres too little credit.
Hahaha, sorry, but I couldn't help myself; just had to say you're an idiot.
Contradicting yourself all over the place fanboy.
I like the darker art design, but it won't fix the cartoony models.
The "darker" photoshop version can be easily implemented in the game by developers.
But the cartoony armor/ models/ architecture will still remain.
Lut Gholein was bright as hell, it was still realistic, due to the realistic character sizes, armor, ground texture, etc.
"[Diablo1+2] obviously had the gothic look to it, but, you they weren't, they weren't very uh, very colorful games."
"We want to take dark as an emotion, rather than an actual color art choice." -Rob Pardo
"Why the hell shouldn't it be for 'kiddies', it's a goddamn game afterall." -lethlan
I think they will change the graphics. Not dramatically like some would like, but a small amount that is easy to implement. Which ultimately will probably get the game to us much faster than if they did a huge overhaul
That's the biggest issue for me currently. The game looks like WoW. From the colors they chose to the player models to the environments.
Don't get me wrong. I like the look of the outside area. I like it a lot. It just doesn't fit Diablo. We've all seen what the world of Sanctuary looks like on the outside. We spent 4 acts on the outside and one act on the inside. We know exactly what a desert, a jungle, a snowy mountain, and an open plain look like. We know what a forest looks like from Diablo 1.
The issue, for me, is what has been shown for D3 looks nothing like the rest of the game. It might as well be Warcraft: Swords and Sorcery since the game looks exactly like how the Warcraft series looks. Everything from the colors chosen (both for the player models and the environments) to the moody lighting colors (that blue-green hue that is plastered all over everything that should be black... seriously, what the hell is that?!). The player models, while looking better than WoWs, have the same feel.
The biggest thing about Blizzard is that they had three franchises that had vastly different art designs. It was great. I could instantly identify a game by its screenshot. If starcraft, warcraft, and diablo had chairs, you could easily identify all 3. With the current art direction, you can't tell the difference between the Warcraft chair and the Diablo chair (LITERALLY IN THIS CASE!).
To make it worse, the influences they cited for this game don't even make sense. Zelda and God of War? WHAT?! Why not... Diablo 1 and 2? It's stuff like this that makes me seriously question what it is that is going on inside of Blizzard.
It would be GREAT if we could see the TWO OTHER ART DESIGNS THAT THEY HAVE GONE THROUGH.
For me, all of this would be fixed if:
1. They got rid of the WoW shoulder pad crap (it looks bad and isn't intimidating or fierce at all).
2. They reintroduced the light radius stuff, something they said they were going to get rid of... I don't understand this at all. You'd figure they'd be able to do some AWESOME lighting stuff with todays PC's.
3. Got rid of that blue-green crap. Seriously. What the hell.
4. Toned down the bright orange (needs to be a dead orange instead) and made the green a dull green. You can still maintain brightness by doing this by adding in, say, some real-time lighting effects from combat abilities/spells and weaponry. They can easily keep the water brushed effect while making the rocks and terrain 3D JUST for the lighting.
These are the biggest issues. These are the biggest things that make it look like WoW and not like Diablo.
It looks better, but it's still a cartoon.
Look at the tiles: they're hand-painted. I can get D2's ground texture if you want to compare them.
"[Diablo1+2] obviously had the gothic look to it, but, you they weren't, they weren't very uh, very colorful games."
"We want to take dark as an emotion, rather than an actual color art choice." -Rob Pardo
"Why the hell shouldn't it be for 'kiddies', it's a goddamn game afterall." -lethlan
yes.
Yes and no. They need to kill the blue/green ambient lighting. First. And I agree that they could do some amazing things with the lighting, but for the large scale that the action needs to take place on, performance wise it would be smarter to keep it simple.
Yes. I watched the gameplay video HD about 15 times trying to figure out what went wrong. I'm about 99% certain that they used blue and green ambient lights. Witch really doesn't make any sense at all for a place light by candles to be blue.
I don't know about this. The contrast would be excellent for gameplay. I think its fine, until it starts raining. Then it should have gotten about 5 times dark than it did, just for that miniboss.
First, I agree with the fact of your statement.
But at that point(on the screen shot)its raining, so I don't feel though the rework was too dark.
I don't like the way that tree looks at all though. Thats not anyone here's fault though.
OMG youre right! A 4 legged body with an upright torso! Obviously they are the same...yea so what is that? Centaurs, Assault Beasts, and WC3 Dragonkin are all the same.
I hear theres a lot of exploding undead dogs, locust swarms, and walls of zombies in WoW and WC3 btw, they're obviously not thinking of enough of their own content in the 2 classes and half of 2 zones we've seen.
Find any Diablo news? Contact me or anyone else on the news team.
DiabloFans: Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Live Chat