the borders on each object make a distinct seperation between them.
as of right now the art direction just looks like a soft colored painting, collage of pure colors.
*again im happy with either way, im not an extremist here. i actually love the new art direction, just make it darker in areas where it should be dark ----> dungeons/caves/etc
if you douches are suggesting Blizzard forgets its model of making this game as readily available as possible to current d2 players with comp specs, then get the fuck off these forums.
I am a student working and living on my own and i cant afford a EDITED *$800 rig.
All blizzard needs to do is give the game a less painted look and make it a lot bleaker in the caves/dungeons etc areas. thats it, you are all getting out of hand with your suggestions on both sides of the arguement. Blizzard is smart they will meet somewhere in the middle like ive suggested, keeping this new artisticly driven look but making it a little more eerie and dark in atmosphere.
and who cares if the graphics are outdated, last i checked that didnt infringe on people playing diablo 2 still. shit im planning on repurchaseing the game within this upcoming week because i cant find it anymore.
you people are morons. The specific rig im getting is not important. the POINT is there are many people out there that cannot/do not plan on buying $1000 or even a entry level $400 computer just for this game.
its ridiculous for you to even suggest that. so stop focusing on that and focus on the arguement.
First off,you need to lay off with the insults unless you want to be banned from the forums.
Again, why the hell should I care about your position. I'm a student too, so?
Blizzard needs to make a scalable Diablo3 with low-medium-high settings, but from what we've heard and seen it won't be so.
Now look at it from my position: Blizzard will leave the game with the current graphics --> You =happy ; Me = not happy.
Theyl probably won't even bother to at least place a 3d scalable system like this. That's why I'm bitching.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from "KonataX" »
lol it can still easily be a ranger since who said you cant shoot arrows at melee distance xD
Quote from "Archie" »
The Barbarian is from Arreat, a very cold snowy mountain top, but they are much tougher than normal humans, so they don't need warmth.
Quote from "Archie" »
Where are Barbarians originally from? Sumeria, or more specifically Mesopotamia, AKA Europe. Think the Alps and the Pyrenees
But the textures and everything else in the game could be desaturated from the beggining.
I insist that its not the textures themselves, but ambient lights that lead the the cartoonish look. The floor texture (inside the crypt) is most likely grey, and made blue/green/purple with a mess of poor lighting.
First off,you need to lay off with the insults unless you want to be banned from the forums.
Again, why the hell should I care about your position. I'm a student too, so?
Blizzard needs to make a scalable Diablo3 with low-medium-high settings, but from what we've heard and seen it won't be so.
Now look at it from my position: Blizzard will leave the game with the current graphics --> You =happy ; Me = not happy.
Theyl probably won't even bother to at least place a 3d scalable system like this. That's why I'm bitching.
laugh buddy if anything you are just a troll. and this is my last meal im giving you...
1) ive been here over a year longer than you, quiet now please
2) there are many people that would rather have the game keep the original look AND not be detrimental on PC specs. (stop being so obvious to the fact that everyone can afford to get a new PC if they dont have one)
3) gameplay > graphics in every which way. This is diablofans.com and if you dont go by that philosophy get out now, cause you are not a fan at all.
*Diablo was never about graphical testoserone, it was all above engaging, deep gameplay.* the graphics have updated a lot from diablo 2 and will still be looking better by the time of release.
These components were bought in 2005, but have been in production since end of 2004. i bought the entire system brand new including the monitor for 512 dollars (converted from denars)
Played WITHOT any lag whatsoever on both 1st person and 3rd person in massive battles.
The 3rd person I played from far far away (viewing a really really really big AREA)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from "KonataX" »
lol it can still easily be a ranger since who said you cant shoot arrows at melee distance xD
Quote from "Archie" »
The Barbarian is from Arreat, a very cold snowy mountain top, but they are much tougher than normal humans, so they don't need warmth.
Quote from "Archie" »
Where are Barbarians originally from? Sumeria, or more specifically Mesopotamia, AKA Europe. Think the Alps and the Pyrenees
These components were bought in 2005, but have been in production since end of 2004.
You're using a 2004 system:).
Just like most people you bought your system about 2-3 years ago. (2005)
Diablo 3 doesn't come out till at least 2010.
People have had 5 years to save up about 800$.
ANYONE could have saved 160$ per year. 160x5=800$
Even if you start saving today, that's only 400$/ year to buy a new comp in 2010 for 800$.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
~
"[Diablo1+2] obviously had the gothic look to it, but, you they weren't, they weren't very uh, very colorful games."
"We want to take dark as an emotion, rather than an actual color art choice." -Rob Pardo
"Why the hell shouldn't it be for 'kiddies', it's a goddamn game afterall." -lethlan
This looks a lot like dungeon siege, which is not good. It is too cartoonistic, if that is a word.
I like the changes you made very much. I like what they have done, but it is too bright, I liked getting scared in DI and DII when I played by myself. I want DIII to look dark and gothic.
Do you seriously think if Blizzard wanted the graphics to be more advanced they wouldn't do so? You seem to claim you know much more than they do. It's not like it's an issue for artists to implement all those technologies.
What I think is that the current staff Blizzard has is incapable of making a product of higher visual quality so they beat around the bush and make false claims about what their goal is.
It's called marketing. They're slapping grease around your eyes. They have got probably the largest fan base compared to other companies. Unless they hire some more talented people this is where their success ends. I don't know whether they have done this (hire new good artists designers etc. and have them work on something else) and left the D3 project to the fools that actually made this crap. What I do know is that since I saw the footage from Blizzcon my fears came alive.
I didn't want to make this claim and hoped that Blizzard would escape this, but I can't see bigger proof than this.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from "KonataX" »
lol it can still easily be a ranger since who said you cant shoot arrows at melee distance xD
Quote from "Archie" »
The Barbarian is from Arreat, a very cold snowy mountain top, but they are much tougher than normal humans, so they don't need warmth.
Quote from "Archie" »
Where are Barbarians originally from? Sumeria, or more specifically Mesopotamia, AKA Europe. Think the Alps and the Pyrenees
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.
What I think is that the current staff Blizzard has is incapable of making a product of higher visual quality so they beat around the bush and make false claims about what their goal is.
It's called marketing. They're slapping grease around your eyes. They have got probably the largest fan base compared to other companies. Unless they hire some more talented people this is where their success ends. I don't know whether they have done this and left the D3 project to the fools that actually made this crap. What I do know is that since I saw the footage from Blizzcon my fears came alive.
I didn't want to make this claim and hoped that Blizzard would escape this, but I can't see bigger proof than this.
It might be why they seem to always be hiring new artists.
*Diablo was never about graphical testoserone, it was all above engaging, deep gameplay.* the graphics have updated a lot from diablo 2 and will still be looking better by the time of release.
Ok, you lost me right here...engaging and deep? I can in no way say this game engaged me like, say, the BG series, IDale, NWN etc.
Hack-n-slash, grab loot, beat the bad guy, rinse and repeat...but it was different every time, even doing the same thing. This is what was so cool to me.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
People that liked what Diablo 3 looked like are not going to sit here and bitch about how its good. People that want it to change are much more vocal. The poll is flawed because of that FACT.
good job on totally ignoring and evading the main concern, or any concern in my arguement.
the point isnt whether its a 400, 800, or 2000 dollar computer....the point is there are people like myself, that cannot shell out that kind of money when diablo in the first place was never meant as a GRAPHICALLY TECHNICAL ACHIEVING GAME.
btw your reply makes no sense anyway. you got a pc for 800 without Os, screen and mouse and keyboard.....you are doing nothing but supporting the fact that this is a heap of money to get a new up to date computer.
and again, i shouldnt have to update or get a new computer (whether thats $300 or $900, ive got real world expenses in a inflated economy) to play a game that was never meant as a GRAPHICALLY TECHNICAL ACHIEVING GAME. hell thats half of the appeal to me and many fans, that graphics take a backseat to gameplay in Diablo
So what you're saying is that technology has to stagnate because that way it better suits your needs? Pfft
If you really wanted to know: IT IS THE GRAPHICS that make half the game. Let's not kid ourselves that it's JUST about the story or gameplay.
Stop posting these conspiracy theories- if you think the hardware companies are shaving you with their constant hardware updates, then you shoud think about your government that charges you for the water you drink. Think of all the money they've taken from you. Is the water there to be exploited? Maybe you'd like to discuss about this as well, aye? THINGS CHANGE, AND IF YOU STAGNATE ITS YOUR LOSS AND YOUR LOSS ALONE. Somethings shouldn't change but it's often beyond our power to do something about it.
While this is an interesting point- don't waste our time with it, because it only barely concerns this topic.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from "KonataX" »
lol it can still easily be a ranger since who said you cant shoot arrows at melee distance xD
Quote from "Archie" »
The Barbarian is from Arreat, a very cold snowy mountain top, but they are much tougher than normal humans, so they don't need warmth.
Quote from "Archie" »
Where are Barbarians originally from? Sumeria, or more specifically Mesopotamia, AKA Europe. Think the Alps and the Pyrenees
No, that actually proves that people have no idea how graphics are made at all. You keep using sharp edges on those screens and that would take a lot more polygons in 3D. It's easy to operate with 2D. It's easy to put a tint on a static picture. But when it comes to models and lighting and performance it gets much more complicated.
The most notable complaint can be addressed to the 2D background on which the game is played. It may be modified. Everything else is not really that simple. You say the armor is too bulky - try to make a model that has curves, is not bulky, and doesn't have too many polygons. You'll end up with a bulky model or a high-polygon model, or a compromise, which is what most 3D game kinda strive for.
Now, maybe you don't care about buying a super computer for Diablo III, some people do, and that's to whom Blizzard will sell.Yeah, with TPS perspective, great example...
Im not sure what you know about 3D but if they did manipulate those pictures in photoshop, it means that the poligons on the models where untouched. How a set texture looks sharp is dependant on the texture size and the games resolution. Yes, blizzard likes to use low polly, it give fast and accurate gameplay that works well in battlenet. The changes are nothing tragic, blizzard has just to change textures to allow the color and tonality to look like those photoshoped pictures.
I know that DII was played on a 2D BG but if you notice carefully, the ground is only so different in 3D. It stays very low on poligon and keeps most basic shapes while still limiting your ground movement on a pre designed path.
You have to understand that just Like WoW and SCII, DIII uses low polly and lets you keep a smooth path on the edges, its called a smoothing group. though you have a low polly model it makes it look fairly round and accurate.
I do however dislike the current look, you dont need to be an artist or creative director to know that rainbows dont fit in DIII (yes they have rainbows in DIII).
The second part looks like a gimmick, but I can't comment on your playing experience. I strive for maximum smoothness while playing. But MAX? Ultra settings? AA and AF?
If that's true, then I'll buy myself 2 more monitors with the money I've been saving. Pitty I've waisting time these past 2 weeks on Diablofans arguing with morons instead of looking up the web about these new GPUs...
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from "KonataX" »
lol it can still easily be a ranger since who said you cant shoot arrows at melee distance xD
Quote from "Archie" »
The Barbarian is from Arreat, a very cold snowy mountain top, but they are much tougher than normal humans, so they don't need warmth.
Quote from "Archie" »
Where are Barbarians originally from? Sumeria, or more specifically Mesopotamia, AKA Europe. Think the Alps and the Pyrenees
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.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
But the textures and everything else in the game could be desaturated from the beggining.
specific examples again?
the borders on each object make a distinct seperation between them.
as of right now the art direction just looks like a soft colored painting, collage of pure colors.
*again im happy with either way, im not an extremist here. i actually love the new art direction, just make it darker in areas where it should be dark ----> dungeons/caves/etc
Sign for a Darker Art Direction in the dungeons/caves/etc.
www.myspace.com/mariocamillo
www.youtube.com/mariospeedwagon
First off,you need to lay off with the insults unless you want to be banned from the forums.
Again, why the hell should I care about your position. I'm a student too, so?
Blizzard needs to make a scalable Diablo3 with low-medium-high settings, but from what we've heard and seen it won't be so.
Now look at it from my position: Blizzard will leave the game with the current graphics --> You =happy ; Me = not happy.
Theyl probably won't even bother to at least place a 3d scalable system like this. That's why I'm bitching.
I insist that its not the textures themselves, but ambient lights that lead the the cartoonish look. The floor texture (inside the crypt) is most likely grey, and made blue/green/purple with a mess of poor lighting.
laugh buddy if anything you are just a troll. and this is my last meal im giving you...
1) ive been here over a year longer than you, quiet now please
2) there are many people that would rather have the game keep the original look AND not be detrimental on PC specs. (stop being so obvious to the fact that everyone can afford to get a new PC if they dont have one)
3) gameplay > graphics in every which way. This is diablofans.com and if you dont go by that philosophy get out now, cause you are not a fan at all.
*Diablo was never about graphical testoserone, it was all above engaging, deep gameplay.* the graphics have updated a lot from diablo 2 and will still be looking better by the time of release.
Sign for a Darker Art Direction in the dungeons/caves/etc.
www.myspace.com/mariocamillo
www.youtube.com/mariospeedwagon
Hellgate: London
Played at 1280x1024 with AFx16, AAx2 with this system:
2gb 667 ram
gforce 7300gs 256mb ddr2
amd athlon64 3800+ X2 (2ghz)
These components were bought in 2005, but have been in production since end of 2004. i bought the entire system brand new including the monitor for 512 dollars (converted from denars)
Played WITHOT any lag whatsoever on both 1st person and 3rd person in massive battles.
The 3rd person I played from far far away (viewing a really really really big AREA)
Sorry man, but let's not exaggerate OK?
You're using a 2004 system:).
Just like most people you bought your system about 2-3 years ago. (2005)
Diablo 3 doesn't come out till at least 2010.
People have had 5 years to save up about 800$.
ANYONE could have saved 160$ per year. 160x5=800$
Even if you start saving today, that's only 400$/ year to buy a new comp in 2010 for 800$.
"[Diablo1+2] obviously had the gothic look to it, but, you they weren't, they weren't very uh, very colorful games."
"We want to take dark as an emotion, rather than an actual color art choice." -Rob Pardo
"Why the hell shouldn't it be for 'kiddies', it's a goddamn game afterall." -lethlan
I like the changes you made very much. I like what they have done, but it is too bright, I liked getting scared in DI and DII when I played by myself. I want DIII to look dark and gothic.
What I think is that the current staff Blizzard has is incapable of making a product of higher visual quality so they beat around the bush and make false claims about what their goal is.
It's called marketing. They're slapping grease around your eyes. They have got probably the largest fan base compared to other companies. Unless they hire some more talented people this is where their success ends. I don't know whether they have done this (hire new good artists designers etc. and have them work on something else) and left the D3 project to the fools that actually made this crap. What I do know is that since I saw the footage from Blizzcon my fears came alive.
I didn't want to make this claim and hoped that Blizzard would escape this, but I can't see bigger proof than this.
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.
It might be why they seem to always be hiring new artists.
Ok, you lost me right here...engaging and deep? I can in no way say this game engaged me like, say, the BG series, IDale, NWN etc.
Hack-n-slash, grab loot, beat the bad guy, rinse and repeat...but it was different every time, even doing the same thing. This is what was so cool to me.
So what you're saying is that technology has to stagnate because that way it better suits your needs? Pfft
If you really wanted to know: IT IS THE GRAPHICS that make half the game. Let's not kid ourselves that it's JUST about the story or gameplay.
Stop posting these conspiracy theories- if you think the hardware companies are shaving you with their constant hardware updates, then you shoud think about your government that charges you for the water you drink. Think of all the money they've taken from you. Is the water there to be exploited? Maybe you'd like to discuss about this as well, aye? THINGS CHANGE, AND IF YOU STAGNATE ITS YOUR LOSS AND YOUR LOSS ALONE. Somethings shouldn't change but it's often beyond our power to do something about it.
While this is an interesting point- don't waste our time with it, because it only barely concerns this topic.
So, you are going to dictate what time of year the game should take place?
Im not sure what you know about 3D but if they did manipulate those pictures in photoshop, it means that the poligons on the models where untouched. How a set texture looks sharp is dependant on the texture size and the games resolution. Yes, blizzard likes to use low polly, it give fast and accurate gameplay that works well in battlenet. The changes are nothing tragic, blizzard has just to change textures to allow the color and tonality to look like those photoshoped pictures.
I know that DII was played on a 2D BG but if you notice carefully, the ground is only so different in 3D. It stays very low on poligon and keeps most basic shapes while still limiting your ground movement on a pre designed path.
You have to understand that just Like WoW and SCII, DIII uses low polly and lets you keep a smooth path on the edges, its called a smoothing group. though you have a low polly model it makes it look fairly round and accurate.
I do however dislike the current look, you dont need to be an artist or creative director to know that rainbows dont fit in DIII (yes they have rainbows in DIII).
The second part looks like a gimmick, but I can't comment on your playing experience. I strive for maximum smoothness while playing. But MAX? Ultra settings? AA and AF?
If that's true, then I'll buy myself 2 more monitors with the money I've been saving. Pitty I've waisting time these past 2 weeks on Diablofans arguing with morons instead of looking up the web about these new GPUs...
What the hell are you even arguing about?
sorry . I edited it; replying and fighting with everyone.
Without the avatars it's just a mess.
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.