Sorry if this has already been discussed, but I skimmed the last two pages and didn't see anything.
Alright, quite simply, I've never had a problem with the art style of the game. In fact, I've always been one to bitch at the people bitching about the art style.
But I recently bought Dragon Age, and at certain points in combat I'm forced to go to the isometric view to get a better view of the battlefield. As I was playing I began to notice something: This is how Diablo III needs to look.
This is a game (Dragon Age) that is not a dark depressing game color palette wise (which is what the D3 devs said they wanted D3 to be like; non-dark depressing). One of Blizzard's main things with the new art style is that they wanted to use color to make it express the mood and what-not of the levels and game. But honestly, I think the art style of DA does this just as well as Diablo and actually looks more like Diablo should than Diablo III does.
Thoughts?
(EDIT: I actually noticed that those two screens of D.A. are an early version of the game ... but I don't think it should matter since the art it pretty much the same.)
Right now, D3 looks like a blend of Torchlight, and DA.
It's got cartoony effects from Torchlight, but it has some realism and really nice effects from DA.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from "Sixen" »
"One in every 10 million people can potentially have a headache from this pill." God forbid she is the 0.000000001% of having a headache.
I like both, I mean yea DA suites the Diablo universe a lot more but it's not bad the way they are doing it, I'd prefer DA though. If they did it like torchlight then I'd be fucking pissed...that game was soooo boring
I s'pose I could take some in-game screens from Dragon Age to compare. But I really didn't want to use FRAPS screens since those are huge files.
You can't really find better images on google for DA that are isometric. I tried to keep the images smaller for respect for people with slower internet ... leme test out a fraps ...
Hm, seems my images automatically resize on here (I think I left the option checked), but I guess I'll take some isometric screens later and post it this size so it doesn't take forever to load (1850x1200 regularly)
Well the most recent screenshot you posted looks like a crappy hand drawing.
But the first two of DA look like the only thing they have over DIII is AA and a gritty filter. Honestly DIII actually looks like it has better polygons and IMO, the art style for DIII will be much more timeless. DA, on the other hand, looks like hyper-reality, and the art style will look extremely outdated in 3-5 years.
I don't see much difference. DA has more detailed textures and bump maps, but you gotta remember that one of these games is released and one is still in production.
Did D1 or D2 had cartoonish graphics ? NO !!! so why i will want cartoonish wow graphics on D3 i want same style as D2 that means REAL , DA graphics are REAL it suits D3 like a glove, don`t compare D3 graphics with DA because its a really HUGE difference. Why you like D3 graphics ? because you like wow that`s why. What did they think hmm.. lets import all the creatures from warcraft and wow and put them in D3 minor changes to make you think they are different but they aren't, graphics hmm.. lets use wow cartoonish graphics because people LIKE IT and here you are D3, well done blizz. Torchlight is D3 stop waiting cause is not going to be eny better.
You basically recapped every overstated bull headed argument that's been used since D3 was announced. Good job.
I think to say that Diablo is trying to stay away from dark and gritty is a bit of a jump. I don't think they are trying to stay away from realism. From an art perspective, the iconic "WOW" look comes from over sized features which is what makes it look "cartoony". Giant hands and torso are often used to exaggerate a personality in cartoons of heroism and strength. Diablo is not doing that. All of the characters are made in proportion to actual humans. The "cartoony" look that everyone is talking about is just a simplification of graphics. Blizzard has always stated that gameplay comes first and part of doing this is allowing a wide arrange of people to play it. I highyl doubt that it is beyond Blizzard's capability to make any of their games more "realistic" looking. They have purposely lowered the graphics to allow more people to play the game.
DAO is not worried about people not being able to play their game. They chose a higher pixel count to make things more "realistic" looking or more detailed.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find any Diablo news? Contact me or anyone else on the News team
I think the primary similarities to WoW graphics are:
1) Lack of normal bump map shaders which give everything a smooth fakey look
2) Low poly counts
If they just put on normal maps everything would look soooo much grittier and more realistic :/
I think normals are overused in a lot of games. Not everything is shiny and reflective. It's nice to see every once and a while, on marble, metal, and wet things, but for the most part It doesn't belong on half the things level designers use it on. Plus, given the amount of chaotic lighting in Diablo 3 it might just add to the visual pandemonium.
I'm actually quite certain they will have bump mapping, and better shadows, people with lower end computers can just tune them down. I'm pretty skeptical towards the graphic features being ready, the launch date after all is still about a year and a half away anyways.
The whole point of graphical options and scaling is to cater to the biggest possible masses.
The sad news is, that I'm very skeptical towards D3 being playable on as bad computers as WoW can be.
just saying, for a game were looking at being released in 2011 (earliest), we should have enough time to beef them up. if the ibm aptivas are still floating around and cant run d3, so be it... finding middle ground is something blizzard does well. i hope they dont sacrifice it all for everyone, just hit that medium.
I don't see much difference. DA has more detailed textures and bump maps, but you gotta remember that one of these games is released and one is still in production.
This.
DA has the same blue/green coloration when not affected by lighting yet no one is yelling about it.
The main difference as Murderface said is I don't see as much texture/bump mapping.
Alright, quite simply, I've never had a problem with the art style of the game. In fact, I've always been one to bitch at the people bitching about the art style.
But I recently bought Dragon Age, and at certain points in combat I'm forced to go to the isometric view to get a better view of the battlefield. As I was playing I began to notice something: This is how Diablo III needs to look.
This is a game (Dragon Age) that is not a dark depressing game color palette wise (which is what the D3 devs said they wanted D3 to be like; non-dark depressing). One of Blizzard's main things with the new art style is that they wanted to use color to make it express the mood and what-not of the levels and game. But honestly, I think the art style of DA does this just as well as Diablo and actually looks more like Diablo should than Diablo III does.
Thoughts?
(EDIT: I actually noticed that those two screens of D.A. are an early version of the game ... but I don't think it should matter since the art it pretty much the same.)
Diablo III:
Dragon Age: Origins:
CyberPunk RP Nexus
But yea the DA art style is nice.
I trust Blizz to make D3 look good.
Thats all i got to say.
It's got cartoony effects from Torchlight, but it has some realism and really nice effects from DA.
♣Strength and Honor♣
You can't really find better images on google for DA that are isometric. I tried to keep the images smaller for respect for people with slower internet ... leme test out a fraps ...
Hm, seems my images automatically resize on here (I think I left the option checked), but I guess I'll take some isometric screens later and post it this size so it doesn't take forever to load (1850x1200 regularly)
CyberPunk RP Nexus
But the first two of DA look like the only thing they have over DIII is AA and a gritty filter. Honestly DIII actually looks like it has better polygons and IMO, the art style for DIII will be much more timeless. DA, on the other hand, looks like hyper-reality, and the art style will look extremely outdated in 3-5 years.
Fuck you, I'm a dragon.
Signature and avatar courtesy of Indestructible.
Fuck you, I'm a dragon.
1) Lack of normal bump map shaders which give everything a smooth fakey look
2) Low poly counts
If they just put on normal maps everything would look soooo much grittier and more realistic :/
DAO is not worried about people not being able to play their game. They chose a higher pixel count to make things more "realistic" looking or more detailed.
Find any Diablo news? Contact me or anyone else on the News team
Fuck you, I'm a dragon.
just saying, for a game were looking at being released in 2011 (earliest), we should have enough time to beef them up. if the ibm aptivas are still floating around and cant run d3, so be it... finding middle ground is something blizzard does well. i hope they dont sacrifice it all for everyone, just hit that medium.
This.
DA has the same blue/green coloration when not affected by lighting yet no one is yelling about it.
The main difference as Murderface said is I don't see as much texture/bump mapping.
I grow very tired of art discussion threads.
Keep the discussion civil and constructive. There is no room for flaming or trolling one another. I will be watching this thread pretty closely.
Find any Diablo news? Contact me or anyone else on the News team
CyberPunk RP Nexus
Find any Diablo news? Contact me or anyone else on the News team