You realize that if there are only 10k votes, that means that 10k people think the same way about this. This alone makes it a popular opinion and why do you think that only those people who signed the petition think this way? Sociological studies and statistics are made by interviewing a lot less people than 10-20k most of the times. It's a popular opinion and there are a lot of people who don't take part in online communities such as this so there is no way to know about this petition. Hell, some of the most hard core players I played with didn't know about D3 until I told them (2-3 days after the official release).
It's a popular opinion that was formed based on early footage of an early area and fueled by misguided hatred toward what people are claiming to be 'cartoony' or 'plushy', adjectives that are incredibly over-generalized and lack any real SUBSTANCE. Once again, I will say it. While there may be 10,000 of you who want change, the other 90,000 are wisely waiting to see Blizzard release more footage, and go farther down the development line.
Just because x number of people think it should be a certain way, doesn't mean it's in the best interest of the IP. I think you should leave it to the people who are actually making the damn thing.
The idiocy in this thread comes only from one direction: people who like the current art style (mostly because they also like WoW and don't mind D3 losing it's uniqueness) that bash and insult us for expressing our opinions and our wishes to keep Diablo 3 a Diablo game with its unique art style and feel. And I can't think of anything wrong with making a game as original and true to it's roots as possible. People like that try to bring us down and mock us by looking at the petition and choosing something way out of context and then go "lol they dont want color, fuck u", which just prooves how bad their reading comprehension is (there was even one petition supporting the current art style that used FAKED "should be" images, just to make us look bad, look it up on the official d3 forum)
First off, I hate (HAAAAATE) the graphics of WoW. Giant chairs, giant candles and muddy textures. But I love Diablo III.
To be quite honest, the only reason why I'm here being a jerk and all is because I'm sick and tired of reading this drivel coming from people who THINK they know what's best for the IP. They THINK they know how to make a popular game. They THINK that all you need for Diablo III to look "good" is play around with settings in Photoshop. They're so selfish, they're angered, ANGERED, by the fact that Blizzard wants to make the game a bit more accessible, a bit more easier for a larger audience to digest. They have this retarded superiority complex that, quite frankly, pisses me off. "HOW DARE BLIZZARD TRY TO MAKE THIS GAME PROFITABLE!! THEY SHOULD MAKE THE GAME EXACTLY HOW I WANT IT! HOW I, A TRUE FAN, SHOULD DEEM THE GAME TO LOOK!"
Sorry, but Blizzard won't listen to obnoxiousness or poorly typed out petitions. They'll look at fan-feedback, sure. But something like the art direction is formulated EARLY in the development cycle. (CONSISTENCY, PEOPLE!!) They won't change it for you, and they definately won't care. Screaming that you're the TRUE FANS and anyone who doesn't agree with you isn't one is assfaced retarded. And it'll do nothing but draw people like me to call you out on it.
3. This is for all the people that say that the graphics are perfect the way they are:
(i got this from one of the posts but it hits the problem right in the core) http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/ff249/JetpackNinjaDinosaur/diablo3cutestatue.jpg
How can that be in any way scary/mighty/ Looking proud/good looking ????
It looks like a plushy lion from WoW.
...what the hell is wrong with you?!
It's a statue of a lion on a staircase. It's tiny in the overall scope of things. IT'S JUST A FUCKING STAIR ORNAMENT. IT'S NOT WHAT DIABLO IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE.
I SWEAR TO GOD I WISH I COULD REACH THROUGH THE INTERNET AND SLAP YOU IN THE FACE.
No one is complaining about the game itself. It sure seems to be a well done and fun game, so I understand that warcraft fans and maybe others like what they see.
But this game isnt Diablo. This could instead had been made under another name. We want a Diablo follow up that is true to the Diablo universe and cartoon looks doesnt fit there at all, so of course you become disappoited when you see that presentated. It also isnt just about colors, you can make the colors how dark you want, but in cartoonish graphics you will never get a real Diablo feel. Its just that simple.
deigaman said: "While there may be 10,000 of you who want change, the other 90,000 are wisely waiting to see Blizzard release more footage, and go farther down the development line."
Dont you think alot of those 90000 are warcraft fans? And the list has only been up for 3 days and have already around 30000 signatures now and will proberly keep raising. I comment what I see and will things be better at the future footage all is fine. But the graphics are basicly finished if we do not give them feedback.
Warcraft and Diablo is two entirely diffrent universes. Some like warcraft more and some like Diablo more. It is often also diffrent people who plays WoW hardcore and Diablo hardcore, maybe thats what this poll shows? Why make their other games more cartoon like WoW are (starcraft2 also is cartoon/muddish) and just target the group of players that like that kind of graphics?
If the story is Diablo, the gameplay is Diablo, and the name is Diablo, trust me, it's Diablo.
I still fail to see how this isn't a follow up to Diablo. Warcraft 3 looks VASTLY different from Warcraft 1, and people still consider them in the same series.
Another thing you have to consider is the fact that Diablo II was made up of pre-rendered models that were converted to 2-d sprites. Because of this, models were made up of an incredible amount of polygons, much higher than the models used in today's next-gen games, without fear of bogging down computers with lower than high-end capabilities. However, it usually results in choppy frames and wonky depth perception, but, hey, it was the late 90s, who really cared, right?
Well that sort of thing wouldn't do for a game today. And that's why, in order to accommodate those with lower-end computers but still look good, Blizzard has to go with a more distinct style. Because the character isn't presented very large on the screen, they decided to go with bulkier looking armor in order to differentiate classes and armor types. In order to make features stand out in the environment, they utilized relatively clean textures. It's all a part of creating a product that isn't taxing on many computers, but can still keep utility and eye-candy at a higher level.
Trust me, I'm pretty sure making the game dark and gritty was the FIRST thing Blizzard experimented with (they started working on this game about 4 or 5 years ago), but they decided to go in this direction for a reason.
And to TheBlackDragon:
This is what the skeleton looks like in Diablo III
Wow, I see we have another poll where its quite heavily leaning towards people wanting the graphics changed. I am hoping Blizzard listens. Does anyone even want to imagine what diablo 4 might look like? its makes me cringe looking at the direction they are taking this, they gradually changed the Warcraft franchise from dungeons and dark themed orcs and goblins to fairytale gnomes and pets with everything cutesy. I fear if a stand isn't made who knows what Diablo may become.
Really? And where have they said that? What makes you think that only those who signed the petition don't like it? What if the people who don't know about the petition and don't take part in communities like that or those who don't even know the game is announced yet?
Do you think that those 10, 14 or 20 thousand people are the ONLY ones who think like that? Come on, you gotta be kidding me!
P.S. The petition approving the current artistic style have been on the same places the other petition is and has been signed barely 670 times (at this point) WITH the double votes!
Yeah, I didn't sign the 'approval petition' because frankly, online petitions are fucking useless, and I'd imagine that there are thousands upon thousands of people who didn't either.
In fact, this is the only website where I find the majority of people not liking how the game looks at the moment. Look at Gametrailers, Kotaku, Destructoid, etc. The comments sections are mainly filled with approval.
Most websites are filled with approval but I really do think that you should sign the petition if only to show the disapprovers that hey, we're here, and we like how the game looks.
Your hate for petitions is unreasonable. Think of this one as in term of polls. But this way you don't have to register in a separate forum to vote. It just shows a relative number of the people supporting an idea, critique, suggestion, etc.
I've looked at the comments and they are 90% pathetic and moronic. People calling us fanboys, emo, gothkids, idiots, whatnot (while kissing blizzards ass and not even daring to express a constructive critique, which is the only thing we're doing). If those low intelligent and pathetic excuses of a thinking human beings (more like human waste)are really the majority of the people supporting the idea... well, it's kind of sad that such great and smart people (blizzard) have these folks for support. And just so make myself clear - I don't think that everyone who likes this style is a moron, human waste etc., just those who insult us because they can't accept our opinion and are too insecure and think we might delay the game (and this way showing their distrust in Blizzard, which so comfortably blame on us.).
Ooo, finally someone who's willing to be a total asshat along with me.
Maybe in your eyes it's constructive criticism, but what I see from most of the forum posters is a total lack of understanding in both artistic concepts such as contrast and color, and game design. Anyone with half a brain can see the reasons behind the graphical choices are for accessibility to new users who aren't familiar with the franchise, and users who have lower end PCs. They want to make a game that looks great on the majority of computers. Crysis didn't do that, and look at the abysmal sales.
And to be quite honest, the fact that Blizzard might delay the game to make changes never really occurred to me, nor does it really motivate my reason for opposing this stupidity. I've waited 8 years just fine, a few more won't be a big deal.
Ooo, finally someone who's willing to be a total asshat along with me.
Maybe in your eyes it's constructive criticism, but what I see from most of the forum posters is a total lack of understanding in both artistic concepts such as contrast and color, and game design. Anyone with half a brain can see the reasons behind the graphical choices are for accessibility to new users who aren't familiar with the franchise, and users who have lower end PCs. They want to make a game that looks great on the majority of computers. Crysis didn't do that, and look at the abysmal sales.
And to be quite honest, the fact that Blizzard might delay the game to make changes never really occurred to me, nor does it really motivate my reason for opposing this stupidity. I've waited 8 years just fine, a few more won't be a big deal.
I have spent 3 years at college doing graphic design, I have worked with people on retail games doing 3d and 2d graphics, I know 3d studio max and photoshop back to front and I undestand "contrast and color" and I STILL think they have gone about it totally wrong. using the full spectrum of colors does NOT make a good image, and color is definitely NOT always your friend. Using it wisely in a complimenting manner works, blasting multi colored imagery over other strongly colored imagery does not.
pss .. i preffer even delay the game but keep the old-style from Diablo , i think the actuals colors and shapes ( some not all )are to plastic or have a lot of influence from wow and wc3 ... for a game like Diablo .. dont like it seem to be for 2 years old kid whit the rainbowns while you are killing skeletons and in mid of a "demons invasion " ... crap dont match at all ... losses all the style . well thats what i think.
also i dont know why the people says blizzard dont care about the critics made to the "demo" from game ... i think that if you are going to buy the game at lkeast you could do some sugestion to get a better job and in some way what you are specting from the game itself
also a few games have a option get the dark more gothic and more blood a few games made it and its a quite good idea to add in this game that way you could select your game style , keeping all the both sides that aporove the job that they are doing.
I have spent 3 years at college doing graphic design, I have worked with people on retail games doing 3d and 2d graphics, I know 3d studio max and photoshop back to front and I undestand "contrast and color" and I STILL think they have gone about it totally wrong. using the full spectrum of colors does NOT make a good image, and color is definitely NOT always your friend. Using it wisely in a complimenting manner works, blasting multi colored imagery over other strongly colored imagery does not.
I, too, am a graphic design major, although I'm not as far along as you.
I can't agree more with what you said about the full spectrum of colors, but I fail to see the 'blasting multi colored imagery over other strongly colored imagery' that you mention. I see highlights and splashes of color, but it's definately not something that feels overbearing. Perhaps it's because of the softer palette?
Anyway, as it was countlessly stated before, gamma and contrast are all features that are easily manipulated to fit the individual user. Color-wise, I feel like it's a good balance. The hues of blue in the dungeon that everyone seems to love picking at gives the environment more depth than a simple black gradient would. It's also a feature that, if WoW is any indication, can be turned off.
You may not see it as constructive criticism, but that's what it is. It's a bunch of suggestions with arguments supporting them and a proposals on how it might look better (obviously no one with some PS skills thinks he's better than blizz dev. team, but they just show what the end result MIGHT look like better, just to illustrate his opinion). It's not in any way disrespectful, bitchy or insulting.
Some people get all worked up because of rainbows, blur, green, blue (coming from nowhere, which is just odd), bunnies, WoW influenced modeling, etc. To each his own, the point is that the petition is not just about one color, one model, one area, it's about overall game/art style/feel. No one is against progress and evolution of the franchise to expand to new gamers (wow, imagine the loss they've suffered not playing D1 and D2 when they were new! i feel lucky!) but most people are against the game losing most of the artistic direction, the roots as some say, of the original games.
The roots of a brand are a very important thing. Every company has it, certain manufacturers make some elements of their cars similar, their new models are new but you can tell that they have the certain feel/look that resembles and reminds of the classic etc.
The low requirements argument is somewhat flawed, imo. Take a look at Half Life 2 engine. What a fantastic piece or art this is? Runs on GF 6150 with 128 ram (onboard v-card that is!) on high detail on 1024x768 resolution, and runs on high details on resolution of 1920x on 24" Widescreen DELL with GF 7300 SILENT with 512 ram and has FANTASTIC graphics.
You may not care if you wait a year more, but some people here are absolutely hysteric about this. I for one would love to see screenshots of earlier versions of the game, the darker ones they mentioned, the ones that resembled more the old art style, just for the sake of it(especially if there are such from when Blizzard North was doing the job).
So are you implying that the current state of the graphics engine DOESN'T look good? Because frankly, art direction concerns or no, I don't think anyone should be saying that.
And it's funny that you should mention 'one color, one model, one area' because it's basically all Blizzard showed us. I'm over-exaggerating, of course, but the point I've been trying to make this whole damn time is that considering how LITTLE we've seen of the game, and how FAR it is from its' eventual release, a lot of these comments are stupid and plain ridiculous.
I, too, am a graphic design major, although I'm not as far along as you.
I can't agree more with what you said about the full spectrum of colors, but I fail to see the 'blasting multi colored imagery over other strongly colored imagery' that you mention. I see highlights and splashes of color, but it's definately not something that feels overbearing. Perhaps it's because of the softer palette?
Anyway, as it was countlessly stated before, gamma and contrast are all features that are easily manipulated to fit the individual user. Color-wise, I feel like it's a good balance. The hues of blue in the dungeon that everyone seems to love picking at gives the environment more depth than a simple black gradient would. It's also a feature that, if WoW is any indication, can be turned off.
The thing is its going to end up "full spectrum" by the looks of how its coming along, the background IS basked in teal/green, with areas of yellow/orange for the torches. Add in some bright blue eels exploding out of corpses and some red demons running around and get say 4 players together, all with decent weapons which apparently now have giant sparks/flames flying off them and what do you have, a garish (to me) technicolor scene. This is fine in say WoW where graphics that came straight out of the teletubbies seem to be the chosen thing, but for Diablo? please no.
I am sure if you are doing design work your well aware of using color to draw the attention of the eye to areas and to use it wisely and not everywhere, magazines like "black + white" are deemed stylish, "Dolly" is not. I am just of the opinion that the game would look a lot more cohesive and like its predecessors if it used darkness and a few more carefully used colors instead of what it seems to be doing.
I know a fair bit about game engines, and you are right liquid, these is absolutely no way a game with low system requirements has to look like WoW. In fact I am thinking about going into 3dsmax and building a super low poly lion statue that doesn't resemble a WoW plushie and actually looks sinister.
I don't understand why he pro colourful and cheery crowd are so hostile to the idea that a large section of the community (I would argue the larger section) want the game to more resemble it's prequels and not mix the franchises together.
Of course we can judge how the game looks at this stage, why do you think they showed us those clips? To confuse us or to give us an idea of what D3 is all about? I really do think a lot of it is superb but at the same time a lot of the art decisions do confuse me, along with the fans who are so hostile to creative criticism.
Seriosly how can you say diablo 3 looks bright and cartoony?
If anything it looks 100x times better than D2.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Diablo 3 is graphically and artistically great, there needs to be variety in the game, instead of only plain and dark areas!
+Wouldn't it be better and more interesting if from a sunny beautiful day, mist starts covering the screen, rain starts falling, thunders and lightning striking and it starts to darken, instead of constant dark!?
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Too lazy to read about the latest technology? Then visit TigerDirectBlog for Tech Update Videos.
It's a popular opinion that was formed based on early footage of an early area and fueled by misguided hatred toward what people are claiming to be 'cartoony' or 'plushy', adjectives that are incredibly over-generalized and lack any real SUBSTANCE. Once again, I will say it. While there may be 10,000 of you who want change, the other 90,000 are wisely waiting to see Blizzard release more footage, and go farther down the development line.
Just because x number of people think it should be a certain way, doesn't mean it's in the best interest of the IP. I think you should leave it to the people who are actually making the damn thing.
First off, I hate (HAAAAATE) the graphics of WoW. Giant chairs, giant candles and muddy textures. But I love Diablo III.
To be quite honest, the only reason why I'm here being a jerk and all is because I'm sick and tired of reading this drivel coming from people who THINK they know what's best for the IP. They THINK they know how to make a popular game. They THINK that all you need for Diablo III to look "good" is play around with settings in Photoshop. They're so selfish, they're angered, ANGERED, by the fact that Blizzard wants to make the game a bit more accessible, a bit more easier for a larger audience to digest. They have this retarded superiority complex that, quite frankly, pisses me off. "HOW DARE BLIZZARD TRY TO MAKE THIS GAME PROFITABLE!! THEY SHOULD MAKE THE GAME EXACTLY HOW I WANT IT! HOW I, A TRUE FAN, SHOULD DEEM THE GAME TO LOOK!"
Sorry, but Blizzard won't listen to obnoxiousness or poorly typed out petitions. They'll look at fan-feedback, sure. But something like the art direction is formulated EARLY in the development cycle. (CONSISTENCY, PEOPLE!!) They won't change it for you, and they definately won't care. Screaming that you're the TRUE FANS and anyone who doesn't agree with you isn't one is assfaced retarded. And it'll do nothing but draw people like me to call you out on it.
...what the hell is wrong with you?!
It's a statue of a lion on a staircase. It's tiny in the overall scope of things. IT'S JUST A FUCKING STAIR ORNAMENT. IT'S NOT WHAT DIABLO IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE.
I SWEAR TO GOD I WISH I COULD REACH THROUGH THE INTERNET AND SLAP YOU IN THE FACE.
If the story is Diablo, the gameplay is Diablo, and the name is Diablo, trust me, it's Diablo.
I still fail to see how this isn't a follow up to Diablo. Warcraft 3 looks VASTLY different from Warcraft 1, and people still consider them in the same series.
Another thing you have to consider is the fact that Diablo II was made up of pre-rendered models that were converted to 2-d sprites. Because of this, models were made up of an incredible amount of polygons, much higher than the models used in today's next-gen games, without fear of bogging down computers with lower than high-end capabilities. However, it usually results in choppy frames and wonky depth perception, but, hey, it was the late 90s, who really cared, right?
Well that sort of thing wouldn't do for a game today. And that's why, in order to accommodate those with lower-end computers but still look good, Blizzard has to go with a more distinct style. Because the character isn't presented very large on the screen, they decided to go with bulkier looking armor in order to differentiate classes and armor types. In order to make features stand out in the environment, they utilized relatively clean textures. It's all a part of creating a product that isn't taxing on many computers, but can still keep utility and eye-candy at a higher level.
Trust me, I'm pretty sure making the game dark and gritty was the FIRST thing Blizzard experimented with (they started working on this game about 4 or 5 years ago), but they decided to go in this direction for a reason.
And to TheBlackDragon:
This is what the skeleton looks like in Diablo III
Fluffy mushroom fungus thing? Hardly.
‘I'M NOT LEAVING UNTIL WE ALL HAVE AIDS!’—The importance of calling them ‘mercenaries.’
It's probably more like 14 thousand if you don't count all the multiple signings.
Anyway the 80 or so thousand other D2 players stand for letting Blizzard do what it wants with its' IP and creating a quality product.
It'll be an awesome game despite all the nerdrage.
Yeah, I didn't sign the 'approval petition' because frankly, online petitions are fucking useless, and I'd imagine that there are thousands upon thousands of people who didn't either.
In fact, this is the only website where I find the majority of people not liking how the game looks at the moment. Look at Gametrailers, Kotaku, Destructoid, etc. The comments sections are mainly filled with approval.
Hellforge: Forging a passion for video games.
Ooo, finally someone who's willing to be a total asshat along with me.
Maybe in your eyes it's constructive criticism, but what I see from most of the forum posters is a total lack of understanding in both artistic concepts such as contrast and color, and game design. Anyone with half a brain can see the reasons behind the graphical choices are for accessibility to new users who aren't familiar with the franchise, and users who have lower end PCs. They want to make a game that looks great on the majority of computers. Crysis didn't do that, and look at the abysmal sales.
And to be quite honest, the fact that Blizzard might delay the game to make changes never really occurred to me, nor does it really motivate my reason for opposing this stupidity. I've waited 8 years just fine, a few more won't be a big deal.
I have spent 3 years at college doing graphic design, I have worked with people on retail games doing 3d and 2d graphics, I know 3d studio max and photoshop back to front and I undestand "contrast and color" and I STILL think they have gone about it totally wrong. using the full spectrum of colors does NOT make a good image, and color is definitely NOT always your friend. Using it wisely in a complimenting manner works, blasting multi colored imagery over other strongly colored imagery does not.
also i dont know why the people says blizzard dont care about the critics made to the "demo" from game ... i think that if you are going to buy the game at lkeast you could do some sugestion to get a better job and in some way what you are specting from the game itself
also a few games have a option get the dark more gothic and more blood a few games made it and its a quite good idea to add in this game that way you could select your game style , keeping all the both sides that aporove the job that they are doing.
I, too, am a graphic design major, although I'm not as far along as you.
I can't agree more with what you said about the full spectrum of colors, but I fail to see the 'blasting multi colored imagery over other strongly colored imagery' that you mention. I see highlights and splashes of color, but it's definately not something that feels overbearing. Perhaps it's because of the softer palette?
Anyway, as it was countlessly stated before, gamma and contrast are all features that are easily manipulated to fit the individual user. Color-wise, I feel like it's a good balance. The hues of blue in the dungeon that everyone seems to love picking at gives the environment more depth than a simple black gradient would. It's also a feature that, if WoW is any indication, can be turned off.
So are you implying that the current state of the graphics engine DOESN'T look good? Because frankly, art direction concerns or no, I don't think anyone should be saying that.
And it's funny that you should mention 'one color, one model, one area' because it's basically all Blizzard showed us. I'm over-exaggerating, of course, but the point I've been trying to make this whole damn time is that considering how LITTLE we've seen of the game, and how FAR it is from its' eventual release, a lot of these comments are stupid and plain ridiculous.
It's the definition of 'jumping the gun'.
The thing is its going to end up "full spectrum" by the looks of how its coming along, the background IS basked in teal/green, with areas of yellow/orange for the torches. Add in some bright blue eels exploding out of corpses and some red demons running around and get say 4 players together, all with decent weapons which apparently now have giant sparks/flames flying off them and what do you have, a garish (to me) technicolor scene. This is fine in say WoW where graphics that came straight out of the teletubbies seem to be the chosen thing, but for Diablo? please no.
I am sure if you are doing design work your well aware of using color to draw the attention of the eye to areas and to use it wisely and not everywhere, magazines like "black + white" are deemed stylish, "Dolly" is not. I am just of the opinion that the game would look a lot more cohesive and like its predecessors if it used darkness and a few more carefully used colors instead of what it seems to be doing.
Of course we can judge how the game looks at this stage, why do you think they showed us those clips? To confuse us or to give us an idea of what D3 is all about? I really do think a lot of it is superb but at the same time a lot of the art decisions do confuse me, along with the fans who are so hostile to creative criticism.
How D3 looks:
Seriosly how can you say diablo 3 looks bright and cartoony?
If anything it looks 100x times better than D2.
Diablo 3 is graphically and artistically great, there needs to be variety in the game, instead of only plain and dark areas!
+Wouldn't it be better and more interesting if from a sunny beautiful day, mist starts covering the screen, rain starts falling, thunders and lightning striking and it starts to darken, instead of constant dark!?