Well some have said they like the current. Some have said they like the modified, I'd prefer in the middle somewhere.
I agree with you completely.At first i thought the modified one was the right choice for me but then i started to think that there has to be more colours.Lightning in modified version is good but it needs more colour.
Maybe if the video doesn't had the sight limitation 'vaused by the light radius system and they choose a red, yellow or orange light to iluminate the dungeon i would lake it.
But I'm 100% against what the video shows - the old D2's light radius system.
So the second sentence was your own thoughts, not? OK, got it. (Correct me if im still wrong. :P)
I don't think I was the only one wanting balance.
Quote from "Father_kai" »
I kinda wished he had left a bit more of the other colors but its still better that the way blizz did it
From the front page of the thread, seems like he wants something more in between also.
I don't want a dungeon devoid of ANY color besides red/orange/yellow lighting. I'd like some green to still be there maybe some mold, or something. Diversity of colors isn't necessarily bad, but I CAN see why people think the original way is unsettling.
Do you mean everyone agrees that it should be a balance between the original and the modded or did i understood?
My ideal would be exactly how it is in this guys modification. The specialization and restriction of color and the heightened contrast is quite beautiful in my opinion. Think the light radius system works beautiful with it as well in helping it stay in the more diablo feel of the series. This looks fun, and makes me want to play a game like THIS, makes me miss the original diablo, and certain areas of the sequel.
I just want to point out that the author specifically says that the video was his interpretation of the Diablo dungeons.
However, even if this grainy and discolored effect was only for dungeons, I can see myself getting sick of it and it not being enjoyable. When I first saw the colors in Diablo III, I felt like I was blinded, but it's just like sunlight. Squint for a bit and begin to open your eyes to see the beauty that is Diablo III.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
It's the decisions you make when you have no time to make them that define who you are.
Hellgate: London. The all advertised inofficial sequel to Diablo 2. The level design and coloring was too bad to keep you interested for long. I never thought i wasted my money more than buying this game, really... (on its release cost, now its extra cheap so its not that bad to pay for - at least you wont feel like you were robbed)
Quote from "avanent" »
Um... what? You can see them just fine in the desaturated video. The increased contrast makes it very easy to determine whats what. And for me, its easier to see them and determine whats what in the greater contrast than in the color washes. As for always seeing them, I dont want to always see them. Takes all the mystery and creepiness out of the game.
you missed the point.
you can see them (as in notice there are enemies there) but when we're going to have completely different enemies that require a different kind of strategy to beat, you wont be able to tell the difference with all the suggested changes (i followed the talk in the battle.net forums too about the glowing shields and stuff). If everythings so dark you cant tell the difference and in the end you dont bother playing again.
Thats exactly what happened with Hellgate: London too. Its as dark as people ask for Diablo 3 to be, yet very few even bother to play it. Some dark crap with the name Diablo 3 wont be the game to keep us interested for years as Diablo 2 did.
you missed the point.
you can see them (as in notice there are enemies there) but when we're going to have completely different enemies that require a different kind of strategy to beat, you wont be able to tell the difference with all the suggested changes (i followed the talk in the battle.net forums too about the glowing shields and stuff). If everythings so dark you cant tell the difference and in the end you dont bother playing again.
Thats exactly what happened with Hellgate: London too. Its as dark as people ask for Diablo 3 to be, yet very few even bother to play it. Some dark crap with the name Diablo 3 wont be the game to keep us interested for years as Diablo 2 did.
Quote from "avanent" »
The increased contrast makes it very easy to determine whats what. And for me, its easier to see them and determine whats what in the greater contrast than in the color washes.
Hellgate london isn't a very accurate comparison for a multitude of reasons.
i dont get why you guys are upset of green stones omfg green stones ive seen green stones stones come in more than just one colour you know, i mean it is weird but is it really that much of a noosence that you have to complain about it. on the other hand the video is so boring i want to shoot my self fifty times over after watching it... i'm sorry but its just so boring dull and grainy oh look its diablo 2 oh no its not its the new gay diablo 3 with fucked up graphics from the 1990's
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Not even Death will save you from Diablo Bunny's Cuteness!
i dont get why you guys are upset of green stones omfg green stones ive seen green stones stones come in more than just one colour you know, i mean it is weird but is it really that much of a noosence that you have to complain about it. on the other hand the video is so boring i want to shoot my self fifty times over after watching it... i'm sorry but its just so boring dull and grainy oh look its diablo 2 oh no its not its the new gay diablo 3 with fucked up graphics from the 1990's
you already posted that, and its already been replied to. In case you forgot... here you go.
Quote from "Ent1ty" »
ok not to be repetitive about my constant workings about how noone seems to understand.....i have in fact seen green stones ...not to mention tat is not a dungeon it is a church for some odd reason with bridges and ladders and other randomly out of place things thats the new tristram cathedral anyway if im not mistake the place has been well kept because after 5 years i hope they wouldve rebuilt aa bithiful chirch with GLass COLORED windows which could be the reason for green lighting...in other word the window was green= the stone turned a greener color and even if im wrong which i know im not in caves they are actually rather bright being ive been in one on a trip upstate to the rockies.... please understand the lore before you say that its not diablo 20 years is a long time and if they didnt rebuild then their civilization is retarded
Quote from "Doppelganger" »
We already covered this, the stones are not green, the green comes from a sourceless light. It also doesn't come from colored glass, which still wouldn't light up everything with a certain color like that anyways. There's no point in denying it.
Also, if i can read you correctly then you think green light actually turns the color of stones green over time? If that is what you are saying, well thats utterly ridiculous and just plainly wrong.
As for caves being bright, not even close, i've been in actual caves, the darkness was absolute and complete pitch blackness, you don't even realize how dark dark can be until you experience it by crawling deep in a cave. Note that this was in the middle of the day, the contrast of outside and inside was overwhelming. Everything you said is nonsense if you ask me.
The video SUCKED. Way to dull and uninteresting. It was like playing Diablo on a 1920's TV. I mean, I liked Diablo 1, I've played and beaten it on single player, but I say the first game was a little too dark. Come on, they had to have little outlines on the monsters to see them. You couldn't really appreciate the monsters, and some of the landscapes, artwork when it was too dark to even see them.
oh, and blizz's excuse would be they don't want to do that cuz that looks like the most boring thing to sit in front of of all time. Not to mention with that kind of bland, gray overtone, you wouldn't be able to tell when you were in an environment that was supposed to be light, like oh I don't know, a desert like act 2 or that has been seen in the gameplay vid, or a dungeon. It would simply be trekking across the same places again and again.
The environment displayed in the video doesn't seem all that exciting, a solution I would like is a middle ground. Blues and greens get toned down, and everything becomes a little darker and grittier(only a little), oranges and reds should get more concentration, but the blues and greens should still be included.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Don't try to be a great man, just be a man... and let history make its own judgment. -Zefram Cochrane, Star Trek
I still support the original art, that video looks like you are playing a colored character in a black and white world..... I do support removing rainbows from the game tho.
Well its the magical light radius of the hero. (Joking.)
I'll disregard the joke.
Quote from "Kenzai" »
I dont know how candles or torches would look in D1 with the fire animation of those days.
'Those days' are 1996. The game was actually released 1997. That was after Quake was developed and released, and later that year Quake 2 was released. You're making it sound like it's some ancient history. Also, the fire animation in the main menu looked pretty fluent to me.
Quote from "Kenzai" »
Also flaws are meant to be fixed.
I don't see a flaw. You're the first person who says the lack of light sources in D1 is a flaw. However it has to be a problem with D3 don't it. The problem with a 3D game is the fact that they either put a candle next to each 3D model or you can't see it. That is why they resorted to 'sourceless lights' because 3D objects are only rendered as artificial light sources illuminate them. Pre-rendering something and adjusting it's brightness is one thing, and rendering things with dynamic lighting system is another.
i think if they mixed the way it is now, with the way people want it, it would be more interesting because there is both color and a dark feel to it so both parties get what they want. Also when you enter a dark area just after coming from a very colorful area, it will make it feel even darker.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I agree with you completely.At first i thought the modified one was the right choice for me but then i started to think that there has to be more colours.Lightning in modified version is good but it needs more colour.
But I'm 100% against what the video shows - the old D2's light radius system.
I don't think I was the only one wanting balance.
From the front page of the thread, seems like he wants something more in between also.
I don't want a dungeon devoid of ANY color besides red/orange/yellow lighting. I'd like some green to still be there maybe some mold, or something. Diversity of colors isn't necessarily bad, but I CAN see why people think the original way is unsettling.
My ideal would be exactly how it is in this guys modification. The specialization and restriction of color and the heightened contrast is quite beautiful in my opinion. Think the light radius system works beautiful with it as well in helping it stay in the more diablo feel of the series. This looks fun, and makes me want to play a game like THIS, makes me miss the original diablo, and certain areas of the sequel.
~not going to buy a wow-ish diablo 3~
~this is the petition you're looking for~
However, even if this grainy and discolored effect was only for dungeons, I can see myself getting sick of it and it not being enjoyable. When I first saw the colors in Diablo III, I felt like I was blinded, but it's just like sunlight. Squint for a bit and begin to open your eyes to see the beauty that is Diablo III.
It's the decisions you make when you have no time to make them that define who you are.
Hellgate: London. The all advertised inofficial sequel to Diablo 2. The level design and coloring was too bad to keep you interested for long. I never thought i wasted my money more than buying this game, really... (on its release cost, now its extra cheap so its not that bad to pay for - at least you wont feel like you were robbed)
you missed the point.
you can see them (as in notice there are enemies there) but when we're going to have completely different enemies that require a different kind of strategy to beat, you wont be able to tell the difference with all the suggested changes (i followed the talk in the battle.net forums too about the glowing shields and stuff). If everythings so dark you cant tell the difference and in the end you dont bother playing again.
Thats exactly what happened with Hellgate: London too. Its as dark as people ask for Diablo 3 to be, yet very few even bother to play it. Some dark crap with the name Diablo 3 wont be the game to keep us interested for years as Diablo 2 did.
Hellgate london isn't a very accurate comparison for a multitude of reasons.
~not going to buy a wow-ish diablo 3~
~this is the petition you're looking for~
you already posted that, and its already been replied to. In case you forgot... here you go.
~not going to buy a wow-ish diablo 3~
~this is the petition you're looking for~
4th Screenshot. I think it looks perfect.
The video SUCKED. Way to dull and uninteresting. It was like playing Diablo on a 1920's TV. I mean, I liked Diablo 1, I've played and beaten it on single player, but I say the first game was a little too dark. Come on, they had to have little outlines on the monsters to see them. You couldn't really appreciate the monsters, and some of the landscapes, artwork when it was too dark to even see them.
oh, and blizz's excuse would be they don't want to do that cuz that looks like the most boring thing to sit in front of of all time. Not to mention with that kind of bland, gray overtone, you wouldn't be able to tell when you were in an environment that was supposed to be light, like oh I don't know, a desert like act 2 or that has been seen in the gameplay vid, or a dungeon. It would simply be trekking across the same places again and again.
Find any Diablo news? Contact me or anyone else on the news team.
DiabloFans: Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Live Chat
Rise and rise again, until lambs become lions
'Those days' are 1996. The game was actually released 1997. That was after Quake was developed and released, and later that year Quake 2 was released. You're making it sound like it's some ancient history. Also, the fire animation in the main menu looked pretty fluent to me.
I don't see a flaw. You're the first person who says the lack of light sources in D1 is a flaw. However it has to be a problem with D3 don't it. The problem with a 3D game is the fact that they either put a candle next to each 3D model or you can't see it. That is why they resorted to 'sourceless lights' because 3D objects are only rendered as artificial light sources illuminate them. Pre-rendering something and adjusting it's brightness is one thing, and rendering things with dynamic lighting system is another.