If they were novice artists then... there are two directions they could have taken.
They could have become great artists or their artistic career could have taken a nosedive.
I'd like to think I've improved 100% since I started drawing at 13.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Watching 240 guys talk trash about cavaliers is like two retards having a slapfight over a sippy cup.
Actually i would like to hear your thoughts on D1 if you played it. (Really no problem if you didnt.)
I have. If you count the first time I actually played the demo of it when I was a kid. Then I actually got D2 and still play that. After D3 was announced I picked up D1 just to actually get the full experience. Don't get me wrong; I like D1 as well as D2...I think they are totally different from eachother, but I can appreciate that.
Now back to D1, I guess when I first played it (when I was a kid) it was something new and out at a time when there were no other games like it really. I could see the people relating the scariness or horror if they played it as a kid. I play it now and it's not scary at all.
I liked a lot of the ideas they put forth though. Lots of items, good lore, random level layouts and the progression from going to the cathedral into the depths of hell. Honestly I think that last aspect is what the D3 team is going to achieve, just on a world scale rather than one area. It's still a classic in my opinion.
There are things I didn't like or thought were corny (mind you I played it AFTER D2). I hated not being able to run. I hated not being able to store my stuff. I couldn't stand the fact that if I didn't get any really good items before getting too far I'd get creamed and monsters did not respawn so i could try and get better items. Some of the characters were corny like the fallen that you talk to about the sign or that goat guy gharbad. Some of the quests did not seem that well fleshed out or purposeful either.
Anyways, keep in mind that I played it after D2, so my opinion is going to be skewed a bit. There are things I like and dislike about it. Is it still a great game, yes by all means especially for its time. Is it perfect and should be duplicated exactly (this goes for D2 as well). No. If you look across the two of them there are a lot of differences. So will be the same with D3.
You didn't play Diablo 1 and have no idea what you're talking about.
I beat Diablo I at least 10 times. You don't know what are you talking about. I bet all my money that you don't face that shiny place in DI. Probably you just beat it one time and that's all. In fact i'm playing D1 even now and try to get all of missed randomised quests to complete them. Just a few left. The last time i beat it i had a great axe that reduces light radius and i could just see my character in Diablo's lair. I'm really serious about that.
@Dimebog
That screenshot was just for showing the game. If they had choosen to show that shot without removing light radius, people wouldn't understand the game wasn't exist in that time.
I played Diablo I first in 1997 when i was 10 and i still can't forget the experience i had when i saw the butcher. I was just like, Oh shit, run run run run to level 1 Then i couldn't open his door for a day If i tell the truth i was scared. I was just 10 and in that time Diablo 1's graphics were one of the best and most realistic in pc games. Also it was not that pixelly because there were only 14" monitors
None of those are cartoony. They use bright colors, yes, but most people who played those games know they have quite an atmosphere and the style fits it. They weren't afraid to use colors, that is all, and they adapted to whatever graphics they could afford. These days, though, it seems the murkier you make the game, the better, as long as you apply the latest shaders and best bumping techniques *ahem* FEAR *ahem*. No imagination whatsoever. Besides, murky colors are easier to draw. Ugh.
It's not about the colors, people. Or darkness. It's about the STYLE. Style, style, style, style, style... You can desaturate those pictures all day long and improve the poly count or change texture size it's not going to make a difference.
I think the vast majority of people would prefer a change in STYLE. But that has nothing to do with the colors, really. Most wouldn't really be able to describe, distinctly, what made Diablo II, or I feel the way it did. You can point out the differences but are they really the actual problem here, or is it something else?
Quote from "Kenzai" »
The drawings in Cain' s journal? Oh god, look at what they made to our good old D1 warrior.
Unless you have any concrete proof that a guy with a closed face and dual wield has anything to do with DI's warrior, take that back, please. For all we know, it could even be an angel.
Quote from "Kenzai;407127 »
Ok its just my opinion that its a bit too epic, but whats obvious is that its a crapload different than D1.
You're comparing an artwork to a game...?
Quote from "Kenzai"" »
Well the only point is really that in general D1 feels so much different than D3. Its much more "calm" with the "depressed" feeling everywhere.
Advice #1: replace the stupid DIII music with something else.
For me, the music can define 75% of the game's atmosphere.
Well, I think I'm done with this...there is really no point in talking about any of this. We know almost nothing about the areas they are going to do. Just cause the area's we've seen are not as dark as people want does not mean that is as dark as the game is going to get.
As for the "feel" of the game, uh wouldn't you have to play the game in order to get the "feel" of it? I mean, I don't know about anyone else, but I don't get a whole lot from a screenshot or even a video.
I dunno why any of this is up for debate anyhow since people are comparing final products to a product that is in progress. I mean, they have already changed the look of the mana and life orbs that drop. Don't you think that they might change other things as well? Well, I'm done, I'll read what people say, but no more.
Well of course it wont appear very good when playing it now.
But we had impaled corpses, for gods sake. Did you listen to Farnham the Drunk and what he said about the Butcher?
Then the feel of everything in general, its really somehow depressing in there dont you think?
It is just so much different than D3, when it comes to the "feeling" the game leaves on you. This would have been a lot stronger if youd have played it before i guess but actually its really the same with me. I dont even remember the last few areas in the game. The last i remember are the lava levels... (BTW im 15 now so i was 3 or so when D1 came out. :P)
Well the only point is really that in general D1 feels so much different than D3. Its much more "calm" with the "depressed" feeling everywhere.
QFT
It is all about how things have been feeling with the games. Neither D2 nor D3 looked bad in any way. It just seems that there was something that made D1 incredibly scary. It was truly a masterpiece imo. Going down in that church had such a creepy depressing feeling. It was great XD
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I want to say something but I'll keep it to myself I guess and leave this useless post behind to make you aware that there WAS something... "
-Equinox
"We're like the downtown of the Diablo related internet lol"
-Winged
So for all of you who said "OMG IT'S NOT CHANGED, IT'S STILL GRITTY n00BeMoS"
you got served.
First of all I'm pretty sure no one has said "it's not changed"(making it pretty impossible for anyone to get "served"). Secondly, Bill Roper said D2 was leaning more towards photo realistic, grit has nothing to do with realism. Something completely abstract can still be gritty. Thirdly, served? Really?
First of all I'm pretty sure no one has said "it's not changed"(making it pretty impossible for anyone to get "served"). Secondly, Bill Roper said D2 was leaning more towards photo realistic, grit has nothing to do with realism. Something completely abstract can still be gritty. Thirdly, served? Really?
Why are you taking this so at heart? Oh, I know. It's beacause you got ser...
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
well one thing you got to remember is that there has been a 20 year time spam between d2 and d3 of course its not going to look as gothic. Evil things are just starting to come back to sanctuary with the return of ...well i assume its diablo but how the heck did he come back from the dead. I like the way that the sky outside is actually colorfull and then when u go down into the dungeons it looks more like the diablo 2 dungeons
i suppose i should have been more specific. The dungeons dont really look like the d2 dungeons in graphic work but the main concept is that they are darker than other areas of the game
I Absolutely HATE the Rainbows and bunnies, bright colors, etc in Diablo 3 Art style.
I mean, I don't understand how you all Diablo fans could love Diablo 1 then also Embrace these childish stuff in Diablo 3 now?
The man IS RIGHT! These things doesn't ring with Diablo world, at all!
I don't get how D3 looks childish to you. Ok, so there is some sun outside and it brightens things up a bit, but you are still smashing through hordes of evil and enter dungeons where it's dark like you want. It looks just fine.
The art style in Diablo 3 screams exactly like this T-shirt
Which BTW, I am refusing to get even if it's offered to me for FREE!
Again, as I said, I don't see HOW anyone who thought Diablo 1 was one of the BEST games ever for all the Gothic, darkness, Demon reasons could love this kiddie style so much!
It's like you watching a freaking Nightmare on Elm Street movie, Freddie Kruger goes for a kill. then all the sudden, a cute bunny hops out on the screen ..WTF? Is that Acceptable?
And Don't get me wrong, I have Nothing against Bunnies, Rainbows, Unicorns, BUT they just DON'T belong in the Diablo world!
Just leave Diablo world to Gothic, Dark, Evil, Demon, CAN'T-SLEEP-LIKE-Scaryness PLEASE!!!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Blizzard, please put back the single player offline mode!
The art style in Diablo 3 screams exactly like this T-shirt
Which BTW, I am refusing to get even if it's offered to me for FREE!
Again, as I said, I don't see HOW anyone who thought Diablo 1 was one of the BEST games ever for all the Gothic, darkness, Demon reasons could love this kiddie style so much!
It's like you watching a freaking Nightmare on Elm Street movie, then a cute bunny hops out on the screen ..WTF? Is that Acceptable?
And Don't get me wrong, I have Nothing against Bunnies, Rainbows, Unicorns, BUT they DON'T belong in the Diablo world!
None of that is in D3.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
They could have become great artists or their artistic career could have taken a nosedive.
I'd like to think I've improved 100% since I started drawing at 13.
I have. If you count the first time I actually played the demo of it when I was a kid. Then I actually got D2 and still play that. After D3 was announced I picked up D1 just to actually get the full experience. Don't get me wrong; I like D1 as well as D2...I think they are totally different from eachother, but I can appreciate that.
Now back to D1, I guess when I first played it (when I was a kid) it was something new and out at a time when there were no other games like it really. I could see the people relating the scariness or horror if they played it as a kid. I play it now and it's not scary at all.
I liked a lot of the ideas they put forth though. Lots of items, good lore, random level layouts and the progression from going to the cathedral into the depths of hell. Honestly I think that last aspect is what the D3 team is going to achieve, just on a world scale rather than one area. It's still a classic in my opinion.
There are things I didn't like or thought were corny (mind you I played it AFTER D2). I hated not being able to run. I hated not being able to store my stuff. I couldn't stand the fact that if I didn't get any really good items before getting too far I'd get creamed and monsters did not respawn so i could try and get better items. Some of the characters were corny like the fallen that you talk to about the sign or that goat guy gharbad. Some of the quests did not seem that well fleshed out or purposeful either.
Anyways, keep in mind that I played it after D2, so my opinion is going to be skewed a bit. There are things I like and dislike about it. Is it still a great game, yes by all means especially for its time. Is it perfect and should be duplicated exactly (this goes for D2 as well). No. If you look across the two of them there are a lot of differences. So will be the same with D3.
I beat Diablo I at least 10 times. You don't know what are you talking about. I bet all my money that you don't face that shiny place in DI. Probably you just beat it one time and that's all. In fact i'm playing D1 even now and try to get all of missed randomised quests to complete them. Just a few left. The last time i beat it i had a great axe that reduces light radius and i could just see my character in Diablo's lair. I'm really serious about that.
@Dimebog
That screenshot was just for showing the game. If they had choosen to show that shot without removing light radius, people wouldn't understand the game wasn't exist in that time.
I played Diablo I first in 1997 when i was 10 and i still can't forget the experience i had when i saw the butcher. I was just like, Oh shit, run run run run to level 1 Then i couldn't open his door for a day If i tell the truth i was scared. I was just 10 and in that time Diablo 1's graphics were one of the best and most realistic in pc games. Also it was not that pixelly because there were only 14" monitors
Good old memories.
http://www.gameogre.com/reviewdirectory/upload/Age%20of%20Empires.jpg
http://www.penguinpetes.com/images/Heretic_ss_2.jpg
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/l-making-linux-fun/descent2.gif
http://www.bluesnews.com/guide/images/H203.jpg
http://image.com.com/gamespot/images/screenshots/0/198380/quake2gz_screen005.jpg
None of those are cartoony. They use bright colors, yes, but most people who played those games know they have quite an atmosphere and the style fits it. They weren't afraid to use colors, that is all, and they adapted to whatever graphics they could afford. These days, though, it seems the murkier you make the game, the better, as long as you apply the latest shaders and best bumping techniques *ahem* FEAR *ahem*. No imagination whatsoever. Besides, murky colors are easier to draw. Ugh.
It's not about the colors, people. Or darkness. It's about the STYLE. Style, style, style, style, style... You can desaturate those pictures all day long and improve the poly count or change texture size it's not going to make a difference.
I think the vast majority of people would prefer a change in STYLE. But that has nothing to do with the colors, really. Most wouldn't really be able to describe, distinctly, what made Diablo II, or I feel the way it did. You can point out the differences but are they really the actual problem here, or is it something else? Unless you have any concrete proof that a guy with a closed face and dual wield has anything to do with DI's warrior, take that back, please. For all we know, it could even be an angel.
You're comparing an artwork to a game...? Advice #1: replace the stupid DIII music with something else.
For me, the music can define 75% of the game's atmosphere.
It's too late for changing the style. At least we want to see improvements.
It's just about pleasing the majority.
As for the "feel" of the game, uh wouldn't you have to play the game in order to get the "feel" of it? I mean, I don't know about anyone else, but I don't get a whole lot from a screenshot or even a video.
I dunno why any of this is up for debate anyhow since people are comparing final products to a product that is in progress. I mean, they have already changed the look of the mana and life orbs that drop. Don't you think that they might change other things as well? Well, I'm done, I'll read what people say, but no more.
QFT
It is all about how things have been feeling with the games. Neither D2 nor D3 looked bad in any way. It just seems that there was something that made D1 incredibly scary. It was truly a masterpiece imo. Going down in that church had such a creepy depressing feeling. It was great XD
-Equinox
"We're like the downtown of the Diablo related internet lol"
-Winged
Fuck you, I'm a dragon.
*jz_owns_all
Willing to help xfers/mods.
Yea.
The dungeons don't look anything like Diablo II.
You can't even see over into the other rooms, can you?
I hope they take it a notch farther tho.
I Absolutely HATE the Rainbows and bunnies, bright colors, etc in Diablo 3 Art style.
I mean, I don't understand how you all Diablo fans could love Diablo 1 then also Embrace these childish stuff in Diablo 3 now?
The man IS RIGHT! These things doesn't ring with Diablo world, at all!
I don't get how D3 looks childish to you. Ok, so there is some sun outside and it brightens things up a bit, but you are still smashing through hordes of evil and enter dungeons where it's dark like you want. It looks just fine.
Which BTW, I am refusing to get even if it's offered to me for FREE!
Again, as I said, I don't see HOW anyone who thought Diablo 1 was one of the BEST games ever for all the Gothic, darkness, Demon reasons could love this kiddie style so much!
It's like you watching a freaking Nightmare on Elm Street movie, Freddie Kruger goes for a kill. then all the sudden, a cute bunny hops out on the screen ..WTF? Is that Acceptable?
And Don't get me wrong, I have Nothing against Bunnies, Rainbows, Unicorns, BUT they just DON'T belong in the Diablo world!
Just leave Diablo world to Gothic, Dark, Evil, Demon, CAN'T-SLEEP-LIKE-Scaryness PLEASE!!!