Are you suggesting that peoples' opinions can not be influenced by what they are exposed to most?
I'm suggesting that the only way to form an educated opinion is by being exposed to both elements of differing opinions, and I think anyone who spends any time browsing fansites or forums has had ample opportunity to hear your side of the argument. So yes, peoples' opinions can be influenced by what they are "exposed to most," but if you have any fear that a fansite poster expressing his opinion on the frontpage is unduly influential, I think you underestimate how annoyingly opinionated and vocal those who agree with YOUR side of the argument have been. Basically, this is enough of a public controversy that you're really naive if you honestly believe this guy has any more power to "influence" than the vast number of gaming community sites and shows that have been latching onto the "art style" debate.
There is a difference from expressing ones opinion and using ones power to influence their opinion on others.
I am perfectly fine that sol agrees with the artistic direction of d3 completely.
I how ever think that if the demo is indeed a foreshadow of whats to come in the complete game, then there should be a few minor changes to the game.
The problem is that Sol is using his power (as staff member) to force his predigest (on a site that is officially linked by blizzard) to convey what he believes with out supply the other side of the argument.
"using power to influence others?" What's wrong with that? This is a completely subjective contention to begin with; you either like the art and think it should stay or don't. It's a matter of taste. How exactly does one "abuse his power and influence opinions" on the topic of whether one finds a certain artistic style tasteful or not? You're really defensive :/
Sol do you have to post every article or blog against the people who are giving constitutive criticism on D3?
Let it go! The majority feel D3 should have little changes made to it to make it more on par with the mood or look of the older games.
Way to be a non-bias staff member. (sarcasm)
Chill out, man. Even staff members have a right to express their opinions. If you don't agree, then you don't agree -- unless you're somehow insecure about your position on the subject, there's no reason to be up in arms about someone in a position of authority expressing dissent.
yeah the sad thing is they said a lot of crap ,and if anyone didnt hear what they were really saying
then they are too dumb to even talk to
the first dude got so nerve when he was saying NAKED it was really sad
and the another guy looked like he was about to cry (and i kinda was given me the same dumb cartony feeling that wow has)
about the thinks they told
first the Caldium city was just made up one
they said how they want it to be so dark ,gloomy, and I (at that moment) said to myself what is stoping you dumbasses
so they can make it like the good old diablo ,but they just want to play with colours because dont now why exactly something dumb
Mate you don't understand. We all want changing environments, and D3 will give us that light or dark. Its the ART STYLE that we have the problem with. Art style does not change throughout a game, it is consistant. Art style is the hand drawn, flat, watercolor textures you've been seeing. Art style is that low quality and silly looking lion statue. This stuff will all be consistant through the game. Sure, colors will change, the environment will change. But the art style won't.
Take a screenshot of D2, anywhere. And grab a D3 screenie, any one. And look at them. Yes there are 7 years of graphical enhancement there but you'll also see that D3 is a much different art style. It is, in my opinion, a bad art style.
Guess I just have to disagree with you, then. I liked what I saw, if you think the art style is just "bad," then there's nothing I can say to that. Agree to disagree.
What we have seen so far could simply be the act 1. This also means we might have a shot at affecting the future acts with less blurry cartoon style and more gothicness.
ACT 1?! It was a 5 minute intro dungeon and a little forested area. Not even act 1. Why would you conclude that the game adheres to any sort of style based on that? Also, think about this: the entire idea is that demons haven't been seen in 20 years. In previous Diablo games, you were wading through areas that had been overrun by demons where people had been LIVING and were massacred.
The gameplay trailer is, presumably, of an abandoned cathedral at the dawn of demons' first appearance in 20 years. Why WOULD there be mutilated corpses everywhere, a macabre theme, etc? Don't you think the lighter edge is the perfect way to more clearly denote a descent into darkness as the game progresses from a time of peace and calm to a demon invasion?
The art panel was even quite clear about the fact that each dungeon was designed SPECIFICALLY to help tell the story. Think about that, and it makes perfect sense based on the above paragraph. You can be dead sure that there will be macabre, gothic dungeons and themes in Diablo III -- but the entire game shouldn't be needlessly filtered through a crappy photoshop redo when it doesn't make sense based on certain parts of the story to do so. Get my drift?
This is really out of hand. Let me make a simple comparison: would you all have flipped out if you'd seen a gameplay trailer for Diablo II showing the Arcane Sanctuary? It's a very colorful, "mystical" environment that doesn't resemble Diablo I's setting/theme at all. Would you have taken this one example and drawn a conclusion about the entire game?
The art design panel specifically stated that each dungeon would be designed WITH THAT DUNGEON'S THEME in mind. Some dungeons won't be dark and gothic and dripping with macabre. Some will! That's what makes an interesting game. I don't understand why you think taking a photoshop filter and applying to everything will somehow make things fit the theme better. It's a bad idea.
0
I'm suggesting that the only way to form an educated opinion is by being exposed to both elements of differing opinions, and I think anyone who spends any time browsing fansites or forums has had ample opportunity to hear your side of the argument. So yes, peoples' opinions can be influenced by what they are "exposed to most," but if you have any fear that a fansite poster expressing his opinion on the frontpage is unduly influential, I think you underestimate how annoyingly opinionated and vocal those who agree with YOUR side of the argument have been. Basically, this is enough of a public controversy that you're really naive if you honestly believe this guy has any more power to "influence" than the vast number of gaming community sites and shows that have been latching onto the "art style" debate.
0
"using power to influence others?" What's wrong with that? This is a completely subjective contention to begin with; you either like the art and think it should stay or don't. It's a matter of taste. How exactly does one "abuse his power and influence opinions" on the topic of whether one finds a certain artistic style tasteful or not? You're really defensive :/
0
Chill out, man. Even staff members have a right to express their opinions. If you don't agree, then you don't agree -- unless you're somehow insecure about your position on the subject, there's no reason to be up in arms about someone in a position of authority expressing dissent.
0
....uh. OKAY.
0
Guess I just have to disagree with you, then. I liked what I saw, if you think the art style is just "bad," then there's nothing I can say to that. Agree to disagree.
0
ACT 1?! It was a 5 minute intro dungeon and a little forested area. Not even act 1. Why would you conclude that the game adheres to any sort of style based on that? Also, think about this: the entire idea is that demons haven't been seen in 20 years. In previous Diablo games, you were wading through areas that had been overrun by demons where people had been LIVING and were massacred.
The gameplay trailer is, presumably, of an abandoned cathedral at the dawn of demons' first appearance in 20 years. Why WOULD there be mutilated corpses everywhere, a macabre theme, etc? Don't you think the lighter edge is the perfect way to more clearly denote a descent into darkness as the game progresses from a time of peace and calm to a demon invasion?
The art panel was even quite clear about the fact that each dungeon was designed SPECIFICALLY to help tell the story. Think about that, and it makes perfect sense based on the above paragraph. You can be dead sure that there will be macabre, gothic dungeons and themes in Diablo III -- but the entire game shouldn't be needlessly filtered through a crappy photoshop redo when it doesn't make sense based on certain parts of the story to do so. Get my drift?
0
The art design panel specifically stated that each dungeon would be designed WITH THAT DUNGEON'S THEME in mind. Some dungeons won't be dark and gothic and dripping with macabre. Some will! That's what makes an interesting game. I don't understand why you think taking a photoshop filter and applying to everything will somehow make things fit the theme better. It's a bad idea.