Right - Blizzard themselves show you actual concept from the time before those leaked kotaku screenshots (which, incidentally, bear a strong resemblance to a little of the redacted stuff from yesterday's video in at least one case), and you come back with the compilation of those leaked backgrounds. They also specifically mention that at least some developers made the move down when the doors closed, as well (and show art specifically signed by Vic Lee, which has been seen before, and dated back to at least 2003).
Which part of the word '2000' is giving you trouble? Or is it the source? Blizzard themselves, in an official video? Or is it just losing an argument with such finality that is hard?
Huh.. re-read my post.Not sure you got the right meaning out of it.
AKA we already knew it was in dev back then, but its not the same diablo as we are getting today, it was fully scrapped and redone (aka like the video says).
im not sure what your point in posting this was..trying to show poeple that it was in dev baack then...when we alreayd knew this before that video... im confused I guess.
Damn I'm glad that isn't our D3. The camera alone is way off, the colors suck, i mean half of them the hero is camouflaged. Potion belt... yay more pot spamming. Two spots for skills... yay only 2 skills at a time again. That's defiantly the definition of diablo 2.5 rather than D3.
me, 2009: guys, there's evidence (like linked interviews with Micheal Huang and Ben Boos) that development goes back way before '05.
many others: no way, it's a total redo from 2006
blizzard now: development began in 2000 - here's a bunch of concept art from the time
many others now: no way! look, here's unsourced leaks from a kotaku story a few months ago! that's what the game looked like, even though I have no idea what context the shots are from.
I understand that, but that's also what molster has been saying; A lot of us on here knew of the old D3 started ~2000.
Actually its kind of funny, i played with a dude in like 2002 in D2 that was hired by the original team, and he was telling me they were thinking of making diablo an MMO for D3 =) I should look him up..
Uhh did you even watch the video and understand, they even said it started in 2000, which people knew before the video (point I was making) and they even say it was scrapped. AKA its not the same diablo they were working on. it was "drastically changed".
How is that hard to understand? thats All I was saying... your not reading what anyone is saying and trying to make it a 180 from what it is.
This is where you put your apologies and retractions, especially if you were especially rude on the other side of that one.
I think Molster needs to make a thread for the sole purpose of presenting a place for you to apologize to him. Sounds like a better thread then what this is.
This is where you put your apologies and retractions, especially if you were especially rude on the other side of that one.
I think Molster needs to make a thread for the sole purpose of presenting a place for you to apologize to him. Sounds like a better thread then what this is.
lol . +1
breakin it down homie: *scratch record*
step 1. project A (2000) is being worked on for a few years right? we all knew this. 5-6 years later....
step 2. project A gets tossed in the trash can *virtual trash bin**delete sound effect* oh nos project A is almost virtually erased! (besides pics, there so bootilicious we couldnt part with them)
step 3. start over on programming on project B (real Diablo 3 you see today started being worked on. 2005- 2006)
step 4. calculate years of actual development by minusing currect year from year of starting project B. wtf? 5-6 years? math pwns! step 5. form hate mob and take over blizzard and force release D3 (february 2012)
step 6. eat cheetos (fire variety)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"once the pretty hardcore gamers we had testing inferno found it fairly difficult, we then we doubled it" -trolololol jay wilson
Source? None. Did they cycle through a bunch of art directors and other leads? Of course, and that's documented. But are there design and possibly programming elements that date from earliest iterations? Quite probably, and that's what Blizzard's incredibly clear statement, which is the title of this thread, implies. There's definitely monster art source which informed the design of at least a few monsters currently in the game, which is a key part of the game. We know that because they show the concept art from that period, featuring work from an artist that is probably still on the team (Victor Lee).
I can relink the Huang piece and Boos interview where they both specifically mention that some aspects of the game revealed in '08 - many years after they worked on it were familiar. You have no sources, just speculation, which plainly contradicts that Blizzard statement. Do some people in Irvine, especially hired after the move, want to believe that everything that came before them generally sucked, and needed their direction? Of course, that's human nature. And you buy it.
Source? None. Did they cycle through a bunch of art directors and other leads? Of course, and that's documented. But are their design and possibly programming elements that date from earliest iterations? Quite probably, and that's what Blizzard's incredibly clear statement, which is the title of this thread, implies.
I can relink the Huang piece and Boos interview where they both specifically mention that some aspects of the game revealed in '08 - many years after they worked on it were familiar. You have no sources, just speculation, which plainly contradicts that Blizzard statement. Do some people in Irvine, especially hired after the move, want to believe that everything that came before them generally sucked, and needed their direction? Of course, that's human nature. And you buy it.
gheed2011's guide to replying to people's posts:
step 1. read until you find something specific out of context that you can argue about
step 2. only reply to that specific part and make yourself look smart
step 3. eat more cheetos
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"once the pretty hardcore gamers we had testing inferno found it fairly difficult, we then we doubled it" -trolololol jay wilson
Gheed is speaking the truth though in a really douche way. Even in the retrospective video and aniversary page they state that there was much speculation about a D3 but nothing was official at all. Not until after the 2005.
You honestly think that a company like blizzard would produce a game all the way to an early, yet very defined stage then just trash every bit of it?? This is one of the more stupid things ive heard all day. Work smart, not hard. You see the amount of work that was in that vid that Molster put up? Shoot that is a better game than Torchlight and was no where near completion. Please be at least a little open minded and realize that there is no way that an entire 2000-2005 worth of work (even if it was testing different aspects) is going to be "fully scraped" Blizz is way too smart for that. D2 was great success, D3 is built by a different team but retains some of Blizzard north employees. Blizz would not waste 5 years of time to completely start over. Be real...
Thanks for the substance-free ad hominem. Let us know when you find a source for even a single one of your speculative statements.
Or don't - as we see here, even when Blizzard itself contradicts you (and many other posters) in a clear, concise statement, it will make no difference to your opinion.
Gheed is speaking the truth though in a really douche way.
Thanks, DD, I'm just harsh because I had this discussion many times, and, as you can see, people stick with their narrative and weak, speculative sources even when Blizz themselves contradicts them. And despite the above comments, no one on this site stated that they thought development originally started in 2000.
Also, to be clear the '2005' clip isn't a game, it is probably just a still-shot portfolio from one background artist that worked on it. That would explain why it has almost no characters, monsters, is totally overlit, has zoomed-out perspective, and generally exists in the same style. Anyone that can't see this immediately and thinks it is a fair representation of what early builds looked like is beyond stupid.
skip to 8:52 (embedding isn't supporting time coding for some reason)
I've had a couple of discussions on this one over the past couple of years here. Now, there you have it, a dozen years later.
This is where you put your apologies and retractions, especially if you were especially rude on the other side of that one.
2000 was blizz north, which is fully scraped in 2005-2006... its not the same diablo in dev for 12+ years
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nmE5t1EvM8
Which part of the word '2000' is giving you trouble? Or is it the source? Blizzard themselves, in an official video? Or is it just losing an argument with such finality that is hard?
AKA we already knew it was in dev back then, but its not the same diablo as we are getting today, it was fully scrapped and redone (aka like the video says).
im not sure what your point in posting this was..trying to show poeple that it was in dev baack then...when we alreayd knew this before that video... im confused I guess.
Unsurprising, despite the most clear and direct quote imaginable from the ultimate source on the subject.
Im confused on why your posting old information..as if this was just found out with this video..
kiiiiinda douchey
me, 2009: guys, there's evidence (like linked interviews with Micheal Huang and Ben Boos) that development goes back way before '05.
many others: no way, it's a total redo from 2006
blizzard now: development began in 2000 - here's a bunch of concept art from the time
many others now: no way! look, here's unsourced leaks from a kotaku story a few months ago! that's what the game looked like, even though I have no idea what context the shots are from.
Actually its kind of funny, i played with a dude in like 2002 in D2 that was hired by the original team, and he was telling me they were thinking of making diablo an MMO for D3 =) I should look him up..
How is that hard to understand? thats All I was saying... your not reading what anyone is saying and trying to make it a 180 from what it is.
exactly.
I think Molster needs to make a thread for the sole purpose of presenting a place for you to apologize to him. Sounds like a better thread then what this is.
lol . +1
breakin it down homie: *scratch record*
step 1. project A (2000) is being worked on for a few years right? we all knew this. 5-6 years later....
step 2. project A gets tossed in the trash can *virtual trash bin**delete sound effect* oh nos project A is almost virtually erased! (besides pics, there so bootilicious we couldnt part with them)
step 3. start over on programming on project B (real Diablo 3 you see today started being worked on. 2005- 2006)
step 4. calculate years of actual development by minusing currect year from year of starting project B. wtf? 5-6 years? math pwns!
step 5. form hate mob and take over blizzard and force release D3 (february 2012)
step 6. eat cheetos (fire variety)
Source? None. Did they cycle through a bunch of art directors and other leads? Of course, and that's documented. But are there design and possibly programming elements that date from earliest iterations? Quite probably, and that's what Blizzard's incredibly clear statement, which is the title of this thread, implies. There's definitely monster art source which informed the design of at least a few monsters currently in the game, which is a key part of the game. We know that because they show the concept art from that period, featuring work from an artist that is probably still on the team (Victor Lee).
I can relink the Huang piece and Boos interview where they both specifically mention that some aspects of the game revealed in '08 - many years after they worked on it were familiar. You have no sources, just speculation, which plainly contradicts that Blizzard statement. Do some people in Irvine, especially hired after the move, want to believe that everything that came before them generally sucked, and needed their direction? Of course, that's human nature. And you buy it.
gheed2011's guide to replying to people's posts:
step 1. read until you find something specific out of context that you can argue about
step 2. only reply to that specific part and make yourself look smart
step 3. eat more cheetos
You honestly think that a company like blizzard would produce a game all the way to an early, yet very defined stage then just trash every bit of it?? This is one of the more stupid things ive heard all day. Work smart, not hard. You see the amount of work that was in that vid that Molster put up? Shoot that is a better game than Torchlight and was no where near completion. Please be at least a little open minded and realize that there is no way that an entire 2000-2005 worth of work (even if it was testing different aspects) is going to be "fully scraped" Blizz is way too smart for that. D2 was great success, D3 is built by a different team but retains some of Blizzard north employees. Blizz would not waste 5 years of time to completely start over. Be real...
Or don't - as we see here, even when Blizzard itself contradicts you (and many other posters) in a clear, concise statement, it will make no difference to your opinion.
Thanks, DD, I'm just harsh because I had this discussion many times, and, as you can see, people stick with their narrative and weak, speculative sources even when Blizz themselves contradicts them. And despite the above comments, no one on this site stated that they thought development originally started in 2000.
Also, to be clear the '2005' clip isn't a game, it is probably just a still-shot portfolio from one background artist that worked on it. That would explain why it has almost no characters, monsters, is totally overlit, has zoomed-out perspective, and generally exists in the same style. Anyone that can't see this immediately and thinks it is a fair representation of what early builds looked like is beyond stupid.