Media coverage and publicity aren't nessecarily very good things. In this case I don't think that it really matters.
I just don't like WoW. Its a mediocre game that, I think, tarnishes Blizzard's reputation. Really, most of my hesitations for future Blizzard games comes from the fact that WoW was boring.
Of course, I've also been finding most MMOs really don't please me too well (combat is so boring. Click once and watch the show!) so I don't think its just WoW.
I still don't like it.
Agreed here...
Quote from "Ocarina" »
And about the 2D-3D debate, Doom is three dimensional. There are X, Y, and Z axises. There is front-back, left-right, and up-down.
However, due to limits in the engine it isn't rendered in a way where looking up and down will still give you a real-life image. Essentially what it does (as seen in Heretic, and Hexen I believe, but also Doom-engine Ports like zDoom) is skew the picutre, like was said before.
However, if the game was really only in 2d, then how can you have stairs and upper and lower levels? These all have data on the Z-axis, telling them how high to be. But, because of another limit in the engine, you (essentially) can't have two planes "on top" of each other. So basically, you can make a bridge that goes acorss the river, but nothing can be under that bridge.
Front-back, left-right, and up-down are also available, in a crude form, in any zoomable game, like ANNO. Also, the game Mageslayer, which is top-down, creates a very realistically looking tilted, 3D view, without any 3D used... Not to mention that any viewing scheme created in a game is virtual, and even if we see 3D, it doesn't have to be programmed as 3D.
If it is rendered in a different way, it already means that either it's not 3D at all, or some strange 3D, e.g., 2.5D. The camera is wrong, why would it be wrong unless it is not a 3D camera? Even if there was a camera.
Stairs and Lower-upper levels are edited with the floor, the beginning point, and the roof, the ending point, without anything allowed in between. Does any 3D game today restrict you to do a 4-story building? No. But the DooM engine does. The data does represent something that could be refered to as the Z-axis, but all it is is just data, refering to the floor, but not to a Z-axis. It is an expansion on a 2D plane, creating a bit of incomplete 3D by deforming the 2D plane, and mind you, it's very dependent on the 2D plane, thus the name 2.5D. It is as though you take a piece of paper, and if you push out a cylindrical covering from it, it will become a pillar, if you push a little - a stair, and if you push down - a chasm. But the paper is still a piece of paper that was originaly 2D, except it was deformed, but still not 3D. [/quote]
Ah, Equinox, you are right. It really is "distorted 2D". But then again you are wrong.
Let me illustrate...
You see on this piece of paper, there is an obvious X and Y axis.
On this one, is the new axis still Y?
Nope! Z axis.
However, this doesn't mean I'm not willing to consent to your explinations. You described the phenomena very well, although in certain cases it really does produce a 3D environment. It might not seem that way when you look at the raw map data, but when you play in Doom, you play in 3D. Perhaps it would be better described as pseudo-3D....?
But we are SO off topic that we're getting ridiculous!
Lets tie this in, shall we?
I think that Diablo 3 should be similar to D2 in perspective, although perhaps rendered in a true 3D, or even psuedo-3D environment. I may be a bit old-fashioned in thinking this, but I like the Diablo series the way it is. Not that some innovation will turn me off, but lets keep core-gameplay pretty much the same. It has been so far, and (ignoring WoW) I trust Blizzard enough to make the game awesome, 2D, Isometric, or 3D.
----------------------- "What man, anywhere under Heaven's high arch, has fought in such darkness, endured more misery or been harder pressed?" -Beowulf
Well, now that everyone knows the difference between 2D and 3D.... im quite
sure that blizz will go with 3D since i mean cmon its 10 years later and 2D
kinda REALLY blows now.. and if anyone has played Guild Wars... even though
its not that great of a game the 3D physics are really nice (WoW too I guess) and im sure Blizzard will let no one out-do them in any aspect of a computer game. If you still actually want D3 to be 2D than you shouldnt buy the game
keep playing D2 i mean since D2 = 2D and D3 = 3D its quite simple.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Dream as if you'll live forever, and live as if you'll die today. "James Dean"
old skool diablo/LOD graphics just sharper and clearer. or even Baldur's Gate style graphics. i might miss isometric view to much if it was in some other view. a place like the arcane sanctuary which plays with the contraints of isometric view might not look the same if it was in a graphical styling like WOW.
but i guess we will have to wait and see what it will be like.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
-Humankind cannot gain anything without first giving something in return. To obtain, something of equal value must be lost. That is alchemy's First Law of Equivalent Exchange. In those days, we really believed that to be the world's one, and only, truth.
i also like the Baldur's Gate style graphics since its still a side scroller it can be very similar to D2 but it can also have good enough 3D graphics to satisfy the people who want graphics like WoW. I just like jumping though =( o ya also that new heroes game HOMM Dark Messiah, that game has some pretty cool graphics since it's First Person but maybe that would be to difficult to tele and stuff lol and getting surrounded by monsters would also suck but just a thought....
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Dream as if you'll live forever, and live as if you'll die today. "James Dean"
well duh lol but you know what i mean D3 has to be a 3D game and most likely (hopefully) still a side scroller like Buldar's Gate and if its not ill prob cry then go buy the game and play it for 9900090 hours or until i pass out
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Dream as if you'll live forever, and live as if you'll die today. "James Dean"
im not sure d3 will have to ability to scroll like in BG, but i think it could have a similar view point.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
-Humankind cannot gain anything without first giving something in return. To obtain, something of equal value must be lost. That is alchemy's First Law of Equivalent Exchange. In those days, we really believed that to be the world's one, and only, truth.
I hope it is made in like Kult: Heretic Kingdoms or Sacred - Isometric landscape and 3D models. I don't want 3D landscape, I prefer sharp textures, not when they are all mushy to save performance... and 3D models would be better.
gotta be isometric i think, but prehaps 3rd person view like in Fable might not be so bad, but the graphics would have to be sharp and clear, lots of detail. WOWs graphics seems weird, its almost like the chars are superimposed onto the land scape, i dont want that.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
-Humankind cannot gain anything without first giving something in return. To obtain, something of equal value must be lost. That is alchemy's First Law of Equivalent Exchange. In those days, we really believed that to be the world's one, and only, truth.
Diablo has always had the more defined graphics out of all the three main franchises. I think it will be true for the third time around. I'm sure thats why it is taking so long. Don't forget Havok 4.0.
if anything i think it should more towards neverwinter nights type graphics...otherwise i dont want to see realistic or hardcore 3d modeled graphics because its too much...i would be happy if they just clean up the d2 graphics a bit,i still play d2:lod and i rather play that than wow,lineage 2,everquest,stormreach or any others ive failed to mention.
i dunno if 3d is the way to go with diablo...it doesnt sound good to me...im almost wishing d3 would be an expansion aswell as a seperate game.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Front-back, left-right, and up-down are also available, in a crude form, in any zoomable game, like ANNO. Also, the game Mageslayer, which is top-down, creates a very realistically looking tilted, 3D view, without any 3D used... Not to mention that any viewing scheme created in a game is virtual, and even if we see 3D, it doesn't have to be programmed as 3D.
If it is rendered in a different way, it already means that either it's not 3D at all, or some strange 3D, e.g., 2.5D. The camera is wrong, why would it be wrong unless it is not a 3D camera? Even if there was a camera.
Stairs and Lower-upper levels are edited with the floor, the beginning point, and the roof, the ending point, without anything allowed in between. Does any 3D game today restrict you to do a 4-story building? No. But the DooM engine does. The data does represent something that could be refered to as the Z-axis, but all it is is just data, refering to the floor, but not to a Z-axis. It is an expansion on a 2D plane, creating a bit of incomplete 3D by deforming the 2D plane, and mind you, it's very dependent on the 2D plane, thus the name 2.5D. It is as though you take a piece of paper, and if you push out a cylindrical covering from it, it will become a pillar, if you push a little - a stair, and if you push down - a chasm. But the paper is still a piece of paper that was originaly 2D, except it was deformed, but still not 3D. [/quote]
Let me illustrate...
You see on this piece of paper, there is an obvious X and Y axis.
On this one, is the new axis still Y?
Nope! Z axis.
However, this doesn't mean I'm not willing to consent to your explinations. You described the phenomena very well, although in certain cases it really does produce a 3D environment. It might not seem that way when you look at the raw map data, but when you play in Doom, you play in 3D. Perhaps it would be better described as pseudo-3D....?
But we are SO off topic that we're getting ridiculous!
Lets tie this in, shall we?
I think that Diablo 3 should be similar to D2 in perspective, although perhaps rendered in a true 3D, or even psuedo-3D environment. I may be a bit old-fashioned in thinking this, but I like the Diablo series the way it is. Not that some innovation will turn me off, but lets keep core-gameplay pretty much the same. It has been so far, and (ignoring WoW) I trust Blizzard enough to make the game awesome, 2D, Isometric, or 3D.
"What man, anywhere under Heaven's high arch, has fought in such darkness, endured more misery or been harder pressed?"
-Beowulf
Thats not to say everything Equinox said was wrong though.
I've pretty much said all I've got to say, both here and in PMs, so I'm done, lol.
sure that blizz will go with 3D since i mean cmon its 10 years later and 2D
kinda REALLY blows now.. and if anyone has played Guild Wars... even though
its not that great of a game the 3D physics are really nice (WoW too I guess) and im sure Blizzard will let no one out-do them in any aspect of a computer game. If you still actually want D3 to be 2D than you shouldnt buy the game
keep playing D2 i mean since D2 = 2D and D3 = 3D its quite simple.
but i guess we will have to wait and see what it will be like.
And when they make D4 it'll be in 4D?
:cool:
i dunno if 3d is the way to go with diablo...it doesnt sound good to me...im almost wishing d3 would be an expansion aswell as a seperate game.