Why the hell does everything need to be compared to WoW? We get that everyone hates WoW. Nobody gives a shit about WoW, this is about Diablo 3.
Also, "Even a lot of the touch-up screenies just don't get it. Only one of them have, and it's the one that added in the light-radius. THAT IS EXACTLY IT. He gets it."
The CG team was phenomenal, but if you remember back to Diablo II, the CGI was amazing there also. But seriously I am amzed by how far they have come with the cut scenes.
This seems to be the strongest point for D3 currently. I'm absolutely confused as to why the CG looks so different than the actual game. I'm constantly asking myself what went wrong.
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.
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.
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.
Just because the beginning is not all messed up and evil doesn't mean the entire game will be like that. It has been 20 years since something majorly evil happened after all. The good part is the graphics look good so when they do make everything evil, it will look good.
Simply making the game gray and dark will not solve our problems, sure you'll like it at first but 1. Its a lot harder to change that kind of stuff in game as opposed to photoshop and 2. It'll get plain old boring after a while. Just because there is color doesn't mean that color can't be used to make a dark, diablo feeling enviornment. If you want the starting place to be as dark as many people are saying, your entire screen will be black when they get to the real evil stuff. Honestly, wait till we see some of the real evil enviornments before you start worrying.
The problem, though, is that in Diablo 1, the demons remained underground and the landscape was still dark, brooding, and gothic. It was as if the presence of evil corrupted and tainted the land. The video we were shown did not show a change as the characters progressed. The dungeon didn't get darker and more brooding as he traveled along, the character models didn't get more serious as he took steps... it remained the same.
It's not as if the characters were RIGHT THERE as the meteor hit. Hell already had a sizable force outside of the cathedral. It simply doesn't make any sense that trees came up out of the ground to attack us that looked just as cartoony as a WoW treant.
Obviously these trees had been corrupted enough to come to life and attack the players, but they hadn't been corrupted enough to look as if they were evil?
Thats one of the problems. Nothing looks evil. The summoning sequence when the big fatty comes to life, first having his bones appear? Looks like a goofy big ol' dummy skeleton right there. When his skin came, he looked like a goofy big ol' Abomination from WC3.
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.
So, you are going to dictate what time of year the game should take place?
Yeah, lets have the game take place in a sunny forest. That'll fit a game like Diablo where every single piece of scenery thus far has been dark and gothic. That will make a ton of sense.
Fall is a terrible choice for a season for the first act to take place. If they were to do Fall, they would need to darken it up a bit. Make it seem like there are tons of dark, brooding clouds. Have it rain randomly. Lots of thunder. Etc.
Bright and sunny doesn't strike me as a time for me to be afraid.
My absolute biggest issue with the dungeon we were shown is the blue-green color that the ENTIRE dungeon has. It isn't creepy, it isn't dark, it isn't scary... it's the kind of thing you'd see from a childs cartoon to depict creepy, dark, and scary. Even a lot of the touch-up screenies just don't get it. Only one of them have, and it's the one that added in the light-radius. THAT IS EXACTLY IT. He gets it.
Another thing that REALLY has me not anticipating this game like I was yesterday is the character model. I hate WoW. I hate every aspect about it. The thing I hate the most about it, though, is the art. The character models look terrible. The thing that makes the character models look terrible are the god-awful shoulder pads. They're huge. They're ridiculous. They scream
"HEY LOOK AT ME I'M A BIG OL' DUMMY HYUKHYUK."
The final thing that has me fairly peeved is that the art design has been changed 3 times and this is the one they are the most satisfied with. Really? This one? It doesn't feel like Diablo.
Yeah, ok. It's been 20 years. I get that. We're in King Leorics forest. This is near Tristram. Does anyone remember what Tristram looked like before the demons came up?
The forest surrounding Tristram looks NOTHING like that. Again, this is BEFORE the demons came out of the church. In Diablo 2, the entire area was destroyed. In Diablo 3, the demons are already out of the church and are all about the landscape. Sorry, what? They didn't do anything to the landscape?!
To make this all worse, the dev in the interview stated that they tried to make dark a mood and not a color. Sorry, it's not working. The mood that you have set in the video is clearly the opposite of what you are trying to convey. If this was another game, any other game, it would be fine. Warcraft? Sure thing. Morrowind? It'd fit. Diablo? No. Sorry. Two epic games have dictated the art style. This is what the fans expect.
They really need to dump this WoW art guy. The reason WoW is popular isn't because of the art design, it's because it's an easy game that doesn't require any sort of major time sink to feel like you did something. A game like Diablo dictates an art design that reflects the theme of the game. Currently, the art design dictates a game that is set in the fall months and is very reminiscent of Winnie the Pooh halloween episodes.
Fall does not bode well with setting a 'dark' mood. Winter, though, does.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
No? Serious? No to the light-radius?
Lets have absolutely no lighting in the game.
This seems to be the strongest point for D3 currently. I'm absolutely confused as to why the CG looks so different than the actual game. I'm constantly asking myself what went wrong.
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.
: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.
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.
You didn't bring attention to anything though. Quit trying to troll.
The problem, though, is that in Diablo 1, the demons remained underground and the landscape was still dark, brooding, and gothic. It was as if the presence of evil corrupted and tainted the land. The video we were shown did not show a change as the characters progressed. The dungeon didn't get darker and more brooding as he traveled along, the character models didn't get more serious as he took steps... it remained the same.
It's not as if the characters were RIGHT THERE as the meteor hit. Hell already had a sizable force outside of the cathedral. It simply doesn't make any sense that trees came up out of the ground to attack us that looked just as cartoony as a WoW treant.
http://www.wowwiki.com/Treant
Obviously these trees had been corrupted enough to come to life and attack the players, but they hadn't been corrupted enough to look as if they were evil?
Thats one of the problems. Nothing looks evil. The summoning sequence when the big fatty comes to life, first having his bones appear? Looks like a goofy big ol' dummy skeleton right there. When his skin came, he looked like a goofy big ol' Abomination from WC3.
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.
Yeah, lets have the game take place in a sunny forest. That'll fit a game like Diablo where every single piece of scenery thus far has been dark and gothic. That will make a ton of sense.
Fall is a terrible choice for a season for the first act to take place. If they were to do Fall, they would need to darken it up a bit. Make it seem like there are tons of dark, brooding clouds. Have it rain randomly. Lots of thunder. Etc.
Bright and sunny doesn't strike me as a time for me to be afraid.
Another thing that REALLY has me not anticipating this game like I was yesterday is the character model. I hate WoW. I hate every aspect about it. The thing I hate the most about it, though, is the art. The character models look terrible. The thing that makes the character models look terrible are the god-awful shoulder pads. They're huge. They're ridiculous. They scream
"HEY LOOK AT ME I'M A BIG OL' DUMMY HYUKHYUK."
The final thing that has me fairly peeved is that the art design has been changed 3 times and this is the one they are the most satisfied with. Really? This one? It doesn't feel like Diablo.
Yeah, ok. It's been 20 years. I get that. We're in King Leorics forest. This is near Tristram. Does anyone remember what Tristram looked like before the demons came up?
The forest surrounding Tristram looks NOTHING like that. Again, this is BEFORE the demons came out of the church. In Diablo 2, the entire area was destroyed. In Diablo 3, the demons are already out of the church and are all about the landscape. Sorry, what? They didn't do anything to the landscape?!
To make this all worse, the dev in the interview stated that they tried to make dark a mood and not a color. Sorry, it's not working. The mood that you have set in the video is clearly the opposite of what you are trying to convey. If this was another game, any other game, it would be fine. Warcraft? Sure thing. Morrowind? It'd fit. Diablo? No. Sorry. Two epic games have dictated the art style. This is what the fans expect.
They really need to dump this WoW art guy. The reason WoW is popular isn't because of the art design, it's because it's an easy game that doesn't require any sort of major time sink to feel like you did something. A game like Diablo dictates an art design that reflects the theme of the game. Currently, the art design dictates a game that is set in the fall months and is very reminiscent of Winnie the Pooh halloween episodes.
Fall does not bode well with setting a 'dark' mood. Winter, though, does.