To any one who played to demo: were there any shaders at all on any of the metallic objects? Armor? Weapons? Chandeliers? I don't remember seeing them in the original video, but I don't see the logic behind not putting them in, and they already have the water super reflective, so it's not like they're cutting it out for performance reasons.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
D3 Pros: Outdoors environment, night time environment, female Barbarian, rune spell system, the Wizard class
D3 Cons: Fantasy architecture, fantasy armor, fanstasy weapons, no shaders.
I haven't played the demo, but I've closely watch the two gameplay videos, and there weren't any. Also, judging by the metal textures, it really seems like there aren't any shaders for metal. Actually, I haven't seen any shaders at all on any surface.
That's too bad this game doesn't look any better. I agree that most people should be able to play this game, but it shouldn't stop them pushing the graphics further. It looks like Blizzard wants everyone to be able to run this game at the highest detail, which is completely retarded.
Yeah, it's quite retarded seeing Blizzard making game that won't fail because of its over the top requirements. It's so retarded to see a game that needs a mediocre PC< that'd cost 500$ at best, rather than a 1600$ monster.
It's only fair, and pocket friendly. The details are fine. Since when did Diablo fans start giving a shit about graphics anyway?
Amen to the poster above me. Everyone tries to compare D3 to D2 and LOD...go upload that era of diablo and try to tell me it looks BETTER than D3. It can't be done! Diablo 2 HAS terrible graphics. If they want to make that game, they may as well make it Windows 98 compatable. The D3 graphics are going to look brilliant on my computer, screw the haters. Blizzard is smart in making this game CMPTR friendly for everyone, more money for this game means more money for future endeavors. Including more Diablo games if they see that anywhere in their companies future.
Ronkis, because Win98 is no longer supported and manufacturers don't produce drivers for it. You're going from one extreme to another, but guess what? You don't have a case. Blizzard has a policy and they are sticking to it. They want their games to run on any average PC and Mac and there's nothing wrong with it.
@OP: Its called reflection mapping, and WoW supports it, so no reason D3 doesn't unless it interferes with the current style. And I can see it interfering if done inadequately.
I couldn't care less. If it will impact requirements, I wouldn't care, since I have a heavy duty PC, but that would impact other people who do not own such a computer..then I wouldn't want that.
When you focus on graphics, you are making something that will last as long as the current best technology lasts. When you focus on other qualities and pull that off, you are making something that is timeless.
That is what separates Blizzard from other companies and makes their games special. Do you think ten million people play WoW and pay every month because of the crappy graphics? Why aren't they playing something else, instead of sticking to a 7-year old game that looked kind of crappy even when it was new?
You care about graphics in a game that you will play for a few months then turn your back to it. Blizzard fans look for substance and something that lasts.
When you focus on graphics, you are making something that will last as long as the current best technology lasts. When you focus on other qualities and pull that off, you are making something that is timeless.
That is what separates Blizzard from other companies and makes their games special. Do you think ten million people play WoW and pay every month because of the crappy graphics? Why aren't they playing something else, instead of sticking to a 7-year old game that looked kind of crappy even when it was new?
You care about graphics in a game that you will play for a few months then turn your back to it. Blizzard fans look for substance and something that lasts.
I totally agree with the guys that said the game should not be too dificult to run in a avarage PC.
And imo, for a game look really good the graphics are not so excential. Some games looks very nice just for the artistic part, like Odin's Sphere (PS2).
D3 is beatyfull in my opnion. However i think metal shaders are excential in a 3D, once without it the weapons and armor looks like toys, not real equipament. I hope they implement it later.
You're from Israel? I'm from Lebanon. That means I should hate you and commit Jihad on your ass. BUt I'm just kidding. On the more serious note..I didn't really like that game bar its graphics. It was rather dull and an annoyance at best.
If the game is great, I wouldn't care fending off zombies with a pan.
I care. . . In a game like diablo I must the fear of explore dark dungeons, the will of killing for survive, the wish of banish those demons for the protection of sanctuary Ç___Ç
I can't feel those things wielding a pan. =_=''
You're from Israel? I'm from Lebanon. That means I should hate you and commit Jihad on your ass. BUt I'm just kidding. On the more serious note..I didn't really like that game bar its graphics. It was rather dull and an annoyance at best.
That kind of things don't really matter on the internet, and even in the outside world, I love everybody, even you!!
Anyway, Crysis is the best example of how graphics are a minor issue. All of Blizzard's games are success, but none have good graphics. Crysis has the best/most realistic graphics yet in a video game, and also one of the worst FPS I've ever played... gameplay is unoriginal and storyline is boring. Crytek's funds -> 99% graphics, 1% everything else. I've played better text-based games...
Yeah, it's quite retarded seeing Blizzard making game that won't fail because of its over the top requirements. It's so retarded to see a game that needs a mediocre PC< that'd cost 500$ at best, rather than a 1600$ monster.
It's only fair, and pocket friendly. The details are fine. Since when did Diablo fans start giving a shit about graphics anyway?
Mephisto, I understand and completely agree that D3 should not have excessive requirements because the larger the audience is, the better the community will be.
However, this was spoken like a true ignoramus, because of a couple very simple facts:
1) Shaders are implemented with fallback strategies, so your computer will automatically revert to not using a complex shader if it is not capable of running it.
2) It is typical to have graphics settings options where you can choose less complex shaders or disable them, if you feel they are causing you to underperform.
3) Most shaders, such as metal shaders, or normal bump maps, etc, require such low performance specifications that your average laptop with integrated graphics card from 6 years ago can run them without any loss of framerate.
Taken the above 3 facts together, I respectfully ask you to stop repetively posting saying that you dont want graphics improvements because you think they will increase the game system reqs, which is 100% false.
making a game that looks like 4 years old because you want everyone to play is ridiculous. Ever heard of setting menu?
UE3 for example is tremendously beautiful yet, even more scalable. my friend play it using a 6600 card, and isnt that a 4 year old card?
Voodoo? That's horrible. I have a custom built PC. I'll be getting 8800 GTX in SLI, so I doubt I'll be needing anything anytime soon.
Even with a single 8800GTX you should be fine on almost every game. I have an HD4850 and so far Bioshock, Assassin's Creed, and CoD4 run 60+ fps on high settings on 1280x1024. Only Assassin's Creed falls to 40FPS during some crazy outdoor roof-jumping. Has lots of HDR it does. I haven't tried Crysis yet because I lost my disc. I didn't really play it on my old machine. Though I'm not expecting it to run well on an ATI card.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
It's the decisions you make when you have no time to make them that define who you are.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
D3 Pros: Outdoors environment, night time environment, female Barbarian, rune spell system, the Wizard class
D3 Cons: Fantasy architecture, fantasy armor, fanstasy weapons, no shaders.
Yeah, it's quite retarded seeing Blizzard making game that won't fail because of its over the top requirements. It's so retarded to see a game that needs a mediocre PC< that'd cost 500$ at best, rather than a 1600$ monster.
It's only fair, and pocket friendly. The details are fine. Since when did Diablo fans start giving a shit about graphics anyway?
Rise and rise again, until lambs become lions
@OP: Its called reflection mapping, and WoW supports it, so no reason D3 doesn't unless it interferes with the current style. And I can see it interfering if done inadequately.
Rise and rise again, until lambs become lions
That is what separates Blizzard from other companies and makes their games special. Do you think ten million people play WoW and pay every month because of the crappy graphics? Why aren't they playing something else, instead of sticking to a 7-year old game that looked kind of crappy even when it was new?
You care about graphics in a game that you will play for a few months then turn your back to it. Blizzard fans look for substance and something that lasts.
:thumbsup:
very well said.
I burned the game after 1 week.
Rise and rise again, until lambs become lions
I'm playing this game on my Alienware.. I doubt I'm going to buy myself a Voodoo, not right yet anyways.
Rise and rise again, until lambs become lions
And imo, for a game look really good the graphics are not so excential. Some games looks very nice just for the artistic part, like Odin's Sphere (PS2).
D3 is beatyfull in my opnion. However i think metal shaders are excential in a 3D, once without it the weapons and armor looks like toys, not real equipament. I hope they implement it later.
Rise and rise again, until lambs become lions
You made my day
Rise and rise again, until lambs become lions
I care. . . In a game like diablo I must the fear of explore dark dungeons, the will of killing for survive, the wish of banish those demons for the protection of sanctuary Ç___Ç
I can't feel those things wielding a pan. =_=''
That kind of things don't really matter on the internet, and even in the outside world, I love everybody, even you!!
Anyway, Crysis is the best example of how graphics are a minor issue. All of Blizzard's games are success, but none have good graphics. Crysis has the best/most realistic graphics yet in a video game, and also one of the worst FPS I've ever played... gameplay is unoriginal and storyline is boring. Crytek's funds -> 99% graphics, 1% everything else. I've played better text-based games...
Crysis is just ridiculous. My 8800 GTX barely handles it.
Rise and rise again, until lambs become lions
Mephisto, I understand and completely agree that D3 should not have excessive requirements because the larger the audience is, the better the community will be.
However, this was spoken like a true ignoramus, because of a couple very simple facts:
1) Shaders are implemented with fallback strategies, so your computer will automatically revert to not using a complex shader if it is not capable of running it.
2) It is typical to have graphics settings options where you can choose less complex shaders or disable them, if you feel they are causing you to underperform.
3) Most shaders, such as metal shaders, or normal bump maps, etc, require such low performance specifications that your average laptop with integrated graphics card from 6 years ago can run them without any loss of framerate.
Taken the above 3 facts together, I respectfully ask you to stop repetively posting saying that you dont want graphics improvements because you think they will increase the game system reqs, which is 100% false.
UE3 for example is tremendously beautiful yet, even more scalable. my friend play it using a 6600 card, and isnt that a 4 year old card?
Even with a single 8800GTX you should be fine on almost every game. I have an HD4850 and so far Bioshock, Assassin's Creed, and CoD4 run 60+ fps on high settings on 1280x1024. Only Assassin's Creed falls to 40FPS during some crazy outdoor roof-jumping. Has lots of HDR it does. I haven't tried Crysis yet because I lost my disc. I didn't really play it on my old machine. Though I'm not expecting it to run well on an ATI card.
It's the decisions you make when you have no time to make them that define who you are.