http://diablofans.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=55&pictureid=915&thumb=1
Blizzard recently updated Diablo3.com with a few new screenshots. It appears to be a few new ones featuring Act II locations and the characters dealing out their skills on their enemies, as well as an updated blood texture that departs from the vibrant monochrome of old (see left).http://diablofans.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=55&pictureid=916&thumb=1
Could these serpentine poker-wielders be the revamps of the Claw Vipers of Diablo II and Diablo I (see right)? The Witch Doctor's pyrotechnics even seem more appealing for some reason, as does his body animation, or maybe we're just reading too much in to these images. A quick view of a cached version of the gallery reveals as many as twelve of the images are new, so go and see for yourself by checking out the rest in the screenshot gallery on the official website.Thanks to snillum101 for the heads-up!
This doesn't look like it's from a comic book or WoW.^_^
Are we to interpret this as you don't like the art style of the game?
Maybe instead of giving advice you should try to follow it yourself.
Since it is apparent that neither of you understood my original post. Hence my frustration.
Strangely enough, I never even said the word amout, nor did I ever imply that it was crucial to the art style.
I was only mentioning that the details were amazing... I guess people like to argue on dumb shit eh?
Go read it again, ok buddy.
What you have is the following: Bitching Wife Syndrome;
"Honey you look beautiful today!" says the considerate man.
"WHAT! Are you implying that I was ugly yesterday?" replies the bitching wife.
1) Even if he was refering to the amount, he's still wrong. Because the amount of details does have something to do with the art style. Unlike what he said:
2)
Since both of you are blatently wrong, let me emphasize. Art and beauty is sometimes known to be in the details. However not in all cases. But in a game, it is. It's details like hanging corpses, spiky walls, bloody floors that made people fall in love with the feel of D1 and D2, plus the musical score.
But again, so you don't misunderstand, IT"S NOT THE ONLY FACTOR OK, are we clear?
Alright, let's move on.
You guys are basically arguing over somthing I didn't say and didn't imply. Only your flawed and biased understanding of what I wrote.
Wow.
So let me get this right.
Since I used the word "Even" ,it automatically means that I think details are the one and only CRUCIAL defining factor of D3 art? That's just beautiful.. lol
Let me teach you what the Adverb "Even" means. Quoted from the online dictionnary, so you don't think I'm trying to fool you with complex definitions.
PS: I loved their example.
So, crucial, that's your word, don't put it in my mouth.
My original post meant the following:
It's defining that Blizzard has put details and gothic like art even into the most basic of things such as a staircase. To try recreate the feeling of what D3 should be.
And in no way did I say that only details created this feeling. I simply mentioned them, nothing else.
So buddy, please, get over it ok.
First off, it's called slight sarcasm, not aggressiveness. If I told you to f*ck Off, that would be aggressive. But I was respectful enough not to. There are no rules stating that we cannot use a light sarcasm, or dark humour.
Second, I was also OBVIOUSLY posting about games, since I am in a game website, and also about art in general since games are a form of art.
If you would of intelligently said that in your first post, that you didn't disagree completely, I wouldn't of had to reply to you as I did.
But you said " HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT" Basically implying that I don't know what the hell I'm talking about. Let me educate you, in English, saying that someone's idea has nothing to do with the subject is akin to saying he's bullshitting.
And like I told maka, never did I say that the details were crucial, nor are they the only defining factor of art. Either you guys made that up, or misunderstood based on lack of English understanding. I strongly suggest you re-read.
I agree as well, never did I imply that it wasn't. Only you said that my opinion had NOTHING to do with it.
I respect your opinion, but not when you come and say that my comments have NOTHING to do with the subject. That's disrespectful.
I think that the palette, and the details, and the lighting, etc. Are all part of the art style or D3 and are wonderfully depicted in these recent pictures. That's it. Nothing more, nothing less.
I know what I said was correct. And I know it's a game, it kind goes without saying.
You don't need to write a paragraph to explain that what your opinion is, I respect your opinion. It's not even about that. It's about you being wrong about my post and me rectifying the facts that I never said anything of what you or Maka implied I did.
No, I didn't say details were crucial, nor were they they only defining factor. Nor did I imply the palette wasn't important, or anything else for that matters.
Thank You
Are you so arrogant as to imply that you undertand what I meant more than me? It doesn't matter what you think I said, nobody cares what you think I said. In my last post I explained it enough. If you still got a problem then take it with the Mods of the forums.
I'm not going to waste anymore time arguing with you about what you think the deeper meaning of my post is.
So apart from changing and rearanging people's words to your advantage, do you post anything of interest? imbacraft didn't say wasn't important, he said "HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH IT" That's a big difference. Stop twisting quotes. It only reduces your already low credibility.
I could argue that the low polycount has little to do with art style since D2 sprites didn't have polygons than alot of 3d rendered ARPG did, but still had a better overall style. Plus the fact that Blizz saaid they want D3 to run on mid systems with lower end graph cards that can't crunch so much polys. However that would be completely different from saying that the poly count has nothing to do with the look of the game, which everyone knows to be false.
The art style is fine, not just fine it is exceptional. And yes the effect that the details are giving is staggering. The colours are stunning, and the fact that monsters don't just appear standing in the middle of nowhere but also can come off cliff and map edges is creative and refreshing.
DIABLO III HAS TOO MUCH COLOR AND RAINBOWS AND LOOKS ALL CARTOONY! TEH ART DIRECTION IS BAD!
Great update, can't wait for more!
You find ?
I find it little bit strange... pixelized !! I strongly guess it's not blood who come from a particul generator. Maybe a way to minimize the requirment because particul generators take more resources system. But anyway it looks nice though.
My thoughts exactly, the blood looks......strange. I can't put a finger on it, it's just blobby.?. Doesn't really make the battle gory as much as it makes it brightly colored... Is that normal?
I hope !! I think you're right !
Just hope they don't try to exaggerate too much on the blood.
Yes, bloody explosions are cool, but they get old quick.
And seeing red showers everytime I kill a monsters really defeats
the purpose of replayability. I would much prefer the original
and quite delightful "unique" death animations.
And of course some blood on the side