*i still hate the laser beam in the 4th video i think it was
I wish they changed the visual representation of the spell, but I hope they keep the spell as it is innovative in many ways. It does damage that increases over time (almost no damage at first, massive damage after a while), for one, and for two because it is a channeled spell which is very interesting in an arcade game where you need to move a lot. We didn't have either of those things in D2 and that is why I find the concept very refreshing and welcome.
Hey, they've been dead for who knows how long! It's good they're still moving!
I think we already saw Scrolls of Identify in the first Gameplay Trailer, although I think Deckard Cain will provide that service like in the first two games!
Yeah we surely saw it. The barbarian identified one of his magic weapons with the scroll (i think it was the maul enchanted with fire).
All the models and animations need lots of polishing imo..
Well, dont know how many people agree on my opinion though.
I don't, sorry. I think some things need improving but not the visual aspect of the game. I think it looks perfect. People want more detailed everything but they don't realize that it would look grotesque with the current style, which is not striving for realism. It's easy to put more detail, to make everything sharper and contrasted with stencil shadows, but it would ruin the overall composition as it is now. Try and imagine it. There is no 'middle ground' for two diametrically different artistic styles.
As for the animation needing polishing - I really don't see that. I see how every blade of grass and every tree sways on the wind, waterfalls look absolutely amazing as they disperse and make every drop trickle trough the air, how the fog realistically swirls around your ankles when you move, and how the flags wave on the wind. Everything is so lively and animated. Can't find any objections. I believe it was all done quite masterfully.
I don't see any major graphical or animatory (is that a word?) issues except for in the weapon swings. Some of them just don't work. The character just moves the weapon in a direction instead of attacking with it. It looks like the last two Matrix movies where the blows just look glancing and retarded, never connecting solidly but somehow doing devastating damage. That's just in normal weapon swings, though, not the skills. The skills are great.
The one complaint I still have is that the metal in Diablo 3 has absolutely no reflective quality, At all. I mean, even Myth 3 (eight years ago), which can run on my ancient, 10 year old computer, has reflective metal, and it goes so far in making the game look better. It wouldn't have to be, like, actually reflecting models & stuff like a mirror, but I'd love to see some sort of shaders put on metal surfaces.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
D3 Pros: Outdoors environment, night time environment, female Barbarian, rune spell system, the Wizard class
D3 Cons: Fantasy architecture, fantasy armor, fanstasy weapons, no shaders.
They said it themselves that they ARE striving for realism in models.
Compared to WoW models, yes. Compared to D2, no. They could easily make CGI quality models with photorealistic skins and downscale the poly count without any effort at all. They are striving to stylize the models to fit the overall style. High-detail textures, bump mapping, stencil shadows and reflective maps (things I've heard many are suggesting) on the stylized models as they are now, would fit like breasts would fit George Michael.
That is the point I am trying to make. The game is not striving for realism. If it were, it would be like that. They were very specific about not wanting to make the game look like another Gears of War, like another.... like ANY other game of today with all the fancy effects hardware and software engineers are forcing as an industry standard. Instead, much like the original Diablo, D3 looks like a painting come to life and it also looks like a Blizzard game, unmistakably. You want to take a masterpiece painting and slap on DirectX10 effects on it. The thought of it makes me shiver.
EDIT: P.S. Yeah, here's this guy above me who had to mention reflective quality. Let's compare it with Myth 3. Well, WoW has reflective surfaces everywhere and it's 4 years old. So what's your point? If reflective surfaces would look good on something in D3, they will implement it. To force it everywhere just for the sake putting it there would be kinda stupid like hell. Especially since the technology is more than a decade old now, and nobody is going to be impressed by it.
Whatever design they are striving for, they could use more polygons.
Why? Polygon count seems fine to me. I am pretty sure it's going to be a murder on the req's when you screen becomes crowded, and you know what Blizzard's policy is.
Take WoW. The polygon count on models is criminally low, yet when it gets crowdy, the game becomes more demanding than FEAR 2. Everyone can testify to that.
Why? Polygon count seems fine to me. I am pretty sure it's going to be a murder on the req's when you screen becomes crowded, and you know what Blizzard's policy is.
Take WoW. The polygon count on models is criminally low, yet when it gets crowdy, the game becomes more demanding than FEAR 2. Everyone can testify to that.
Nail on the head, Blizzard always makes their games accessible to a large user base, that's why their games sell so well, people don't have to mull over the fact that maybe or maybe not their PC will handle it. And he's right with WoW, the polygon count is perfect for what they're trying to achieve. You want a higher one, go play Crysis.
You had me all the way to 'WoW shoulder pads'. Then you lost me.
And no I didn't necessarily mean Crysis realism. However there was a misunderstanding because I remembered from your earlier posts that you would prefer textures to be sharper and models to have more detail, and you referred to these things as necessary 'improvements' if I recollect well enough, so I assumed that is what you meant this time around when you said that models need polishing and you didn't specify in what sense.
I am pretty sure it's going to be a murder on the req's when you screen becomes crowded, and you know what Blizzard's policy is.
A game that looks worse than S2 will be a murder on the req's, when my 2-year old req runs S2 fine? Maybe Blizzard needs to hire better programmers, then. Seriously, their graphics department has always been a bit crappy.
Quote from "Dimebog" »
Take WoW. The polygon count on models is criminally low, yet when it gets crowdy, the game becomes more demanding than FEAR 2. Everyone can testify to that.
Wow is not a good example because it's a MMO and deals with excessive amounts of enemies with online. DIII, on the other hand, has a pretty low amount of enemies, most of whom are going to be instanced anyway. So I am not sure what you're trying to compare.
Look at TQ, and look at Sacred 2. Those are games in the same genre and graphics wise they're doing fine.
To me D3 looks better than S2, so I can't relate to what you're saying there.
WoW is a good example. I am talking about rendering 20-30 other models on the screen at the same time with a bunch of spells. You well know that D3 will be dealing with those numbers as well. And D3 models are way more detailed than WoW models, and animations are way more demanding, effects and spells are of much higher quality, etc.
P.S. Wtf do you mean by D3 monsters being 'instanced'?? You're way off, man. I'm not talking about server lag, I'm talking about strain on the CPU and GFX card. Each game of D3 is entirely instanced, so you can't say that 'most of the monsters' will be 'instanced'. Seriously, when you talk like that you just make me think that you don't have the first clue about what you are saying.
If your computer can't handle the the textures it'll run slow nonetheless. latency =/= hardware
and you're connected to bnet for d3 so if their servers lag you'll lag either way. Where are you going with this discussion?
and you're connected to bnet for d3 so if their servers lag you'll lag either way.
DIII is 4 players per game at most. WoW is tons upon tons of players per world that may appear in your generation space... what are you comparing?
Quote from "Dimebog" »
WoW is a good example.
The fact that WoW is a MMO makes it a bad example automatically. Too much online stuff to take into account.
Quote from "Dimebog" »
I am talking about rendering 20-30 other models on the screen at the same time with a bunch of spells.
You need to specify if it's 20 instances of the same monster (Diablo) or 20 totally different human-controlled players, each with their unique behavior... There is a humonogous difference there, one between a MMO and a normal game.
Quote from "Dimebog" »
You well know that D3 will be dealing with those numbers as well.
I really don't know what max numbers D3 is aiming at, honestly, and only they matter.
Quote from "Dimebog" »
And D3 models are way more detailed than WoW models, and animations are way more demanding, effects and spells are of much higher quality, etc.
Not by a large margin. S2 and TQ get away with more detail (you may not like them, but poly count, texture size, and particle effects are much higher). And they tun fine on my comp. I just want the same form Diablo III, that's all...
Quote from "Dimebog" »
I'm talking about strain on the CPU and GFX card.
Then you need to stop talking about WoW. Any issues I had with it were directly related to my crappy internet connection.
Quote from "Dimebog" »
Each game of D3 is entirely instanced, so you can't say that 'most of the monsters' will be 'instanced'.
You need to specify if it's 20 instances of the same monster (Diablo) or 20 totally different human-controlled players, each with their unique behavior...
So what if it is 20 of the same monster? Your card still has to render them.
Quote from "Equinox" »
Then you need to stop talking about WoW. Any issues I had with it were directly related to my crappy internet connection.
It has NOTHING to do with my connection. I don't know about you, but latency doesn't cause FPS drops. And I have perfect latency. The number of players and monsters ON SCREEN does NOT affect the latency either way.
25-man raid + their spells + one boss = complete havoc even if your computer can run Crysis on maximum settings. It has NOTHING to do with anyone's connection. It has nothing to do with me either. Every single raider will confirm my words. I have to lower all my graphical settings in WoW to absolute minimum to get over 20 FPS in some cases, and I can run pretty much any new game that gets out without a problem.
Quote from "Equinox" »
You have no idea what I'm talking about, do you?
Oh yes I do. Each gameroom is instanced for those 5 people who play it for example. Unlike you, I choose my terminology carefully.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Yeah we surely saw it. The barbarian identified one of his magic weapons with the scroll (i think it was the maul enchanted with fire).
As for the animation needing polishing - I really don't see that. I see how every blade of grass and every tree sways on the wind, waterfalls look absolutely amazing as they disperse and make every drop trickle trough the air, how the fog realistically swirls around your ankles when you move, and how the flags wave on the wind. Everything is so lively and animated. Can't find any objections. I believe it was all done quite masterfully.
D3 Pros: Outdoors environment, night time environment, female Barbarian, rune spell system, the Wizard class
D3 Cons: Fantasy architecture, fantasy armor, fanstasy weapons, no shaders.
That is the point I am trying to make. The game is not striving for realism. If it were, it would be like that. They were very specific about not wanting to make the game look like another Gears of War, like another.... like ANY other game of today with all the fancy effects hardware and software engineers are forcing as an industry standard. Instead, much like the original Diablo, D3 looks like a painting come to life and it also looks like a Blizzard game, unmistakably. You want to take a masterpiece painting and slap on DirectX10 effects on it. The thought of it makes me shiver.
EDIT: P.S. Yeah, here's this guy above me who had to mention reflective quality. Let's compare it with Myth 3. Well, WoW has reflective surfaces everywhere and it's 4 years old. So what's your point? If reflective surfaces would look good on something in D3, they will implement it. To force it everywhere just for the sake putting it there would be kinda stupid like hell. Especially since the technology is more than a decade old now, and nobody is going to be impressed by it.
Take WoW. The polygon count on models is criminally low, yet when it gets crowdy, the game becomes more demanding than FEAR 2. Everyone can testify to that.
Nail on the head, Blizzard always makes their games accessible to a large user base, that's why their games sell so well, people don't have to mull over the fact that maybe or maybe not their PC will handle it. And he's right with WoW, the polygon count is perfect for what they're trying to achieve. You want a higher one, go play Crysis.
And no I didn't necessarily mean Crysis realism. However there was a misunderstanding because I remembered from your earlier posts that you would prefer textures to be sharper and models to have more detail, and you referred to these things as necessary 'improvements' if I recollect well enough, so I assumed that is what you meant this time around when you said that models need polishing and you didn't specify in what sense.
A game that looks worse than S2 will be a murder on the req's, when my 2-year old req runs S2 fine? Maybe Blizzard needs to hire better programmers, then. Seriously, their graphics department has always been a bit crappy.
Wow is not a good example because it's a MMO and deals with excessive amounts of enemies with online. DIII, on the other hand, has a pretty low amount of enemies, most of whom are going to be instanced anyway. So I am not sure what you're trying to compare.
Look at TQ, and look at Sacred 2. Those are games in the same genre and graphics wise they're doing fine.
WoW is a good example. I am talking about rendering 20-30 other models on the screen at the same time with a bunch of spells. You well know that D3 will be dealing with those numbers as well. And D3 models are way more detailed than WoW models, and animations are way more demanding, effects and spells are of much higher quality, etc.
P.S. Wtf do you mean by D3 monsters being 'instanced'?? You're way off, man. I'm not talking about server lag, I'm talking about strain on the CPU and GFX card. Each game of D3 is entirely instanced, so you can't say that 'most of the monsters' will be 'instanced'. Seriously, when you talk like that you just make me think that you don't have the first clue about what you are saying.
and you're connected to bnet for d3 so if their servers lag you'll lag either way. Where are you going with this discussion?
The fact that WoW is a MMO makes it a bad example automatically. Too much online stuff to take into account.
You need to specify if it's 20 instances of the same monster (Diablo) or 20 totally different human-controlled players, each with their unique behavior... There is a humonogous difference there, one between a MMO and a normal game.
I really don't know what max numbers D3 is aiming at, honestly, and only they matter.
Not by a large margin. S2 and TQ get away with more detail (you may not like them, but poly count, texture size, and particle effects are much higher). And they tun fine on my comp. I just want the same form Diablo III, that's all...
Then you need to stop talking about WoW. Any issues I had with it were directly related to my crappy internet connection.
You have no idea what I'm talking about, do you?
It has NOTHING to do with my connection. I don't know about you, but latency doesn't cause FPS drops. And I have perfect latency. The number of players and monsters ON SCREEN does NOT affect the latency either way.
25-man raid + their spells + one boss = complete havoc even if your computer can run Crysis on maximum settings. It has NOTHING to do with anyone's connection. It has nothing to do with me either. Every single raider will confirm my words. I have to lower all my graphical settings in WoW to absolute minimum to get over 20 FPS in some cases, and I can run pretty much any new game that gets out without a problem.
Oh yes I do. Each gameroom is instanced for those 5 people who play it for example. Unlike you, I choose my terminology carefully.