Wow! I am really amazed at the onslaught of negative responses.
It is freaking Bill Roper. The guy is largely responsible for many hours of fun that most of us here have had over the years. The guy has an opinion on the matter. Of course he would much rather plug projects that would bring him money.
Sure he may be a bit mad at Blizzard for canning him after several best sellers (who wouldn't), but I didn't take his responce to those questions as catty or back handed. He respectfully said that he liked the artwork style from before more than what we see now.
Honestly though; what did he do to deserve the kind of responces some of you have given here? I am seriously curious. Did I miss something? Did he make a statement somewhere that said "People who play my games from Blizzard are douch bags" or something like that?
To touch on that art "style" now. I use to feel the same way as Roper. I thought "oh boy look at that WoWish game." Looking at the screen shots I still get that feeling from time to time.
I was lucky enough to get to play Diablo III at Blizzcon though. Playing the game really changed my point of view on the art style. I didn't think it looked cartoony playing it. I was a bit spooked out even (all while playing next to 500 other people).
The art style is different, but I really do think that with the sound and play style the game really maintains that "Diablo feel" we all talk about.
Honeslty the only thing that really took away from the Diablo feel was combos, crit numbers, and the leveling animation. In my honest opinion they really added an arcade game feel to the game. Never the less it was still bad ass (esp the leveling animation).
Its a new game in a series that hasnt had a entry in almost 10 years.....and lots of different people working on it....its obviously going to be fairly different in terms of the art style and all that jazz
lol listen to this... this is exactly what everyone needs to realize
Yeah, let's keep it in perspective. I know flame wars are basically counterproductive insult sessions, but Roper's comments may have inadvertantly re-opened a good issue.
You know the Blizzard guys read these forums from time to time. It's good to get the opinions of your best market targets, and you can't always get a straight answer out of people. Sometimes it's good to get real ideas via opposition and contrasting opinions. That way they can get an unbiased look at what kind of progress they've made since the last Art debate. I remember there was an emphasis on dark screenshots shortly after some of the original art wars.
I'm not saying Roper did that on purpose or was influenced to do so, but it is a good opportunity to let Blizzard know how we feel.
One of the gems on this particular discussion has been defining that it's not the "Darkness" (as in gamma or level of light), but the "Darkness" (as in grittyness, western-european gothic feel, obscured lines, affects of time\disrepair\general neglect on dungeon areas, pro photo-realsim vs. exaggerated visuals) hardcore fans are lacking from the perceived experience so far.
So funny that everyone, Bill included, is talking about the art direction in this game like it is some static thing.
Did a single one of the hundred geniuses who posted above mention the fact that the lead producer and art director both are off the title as of just a few months ago? Does a single one of the posters above even know the names of these two guys - or their replacements?
Maybe a higher-up or two had similar feelings as Bill and already took action last summer... ya think??
also trying to keep an open mind, but from what i see so far..i agree with roper .
mockery you say "starting in a somewhat lighter area and descending into darkness rather than just having the game begin in the depths of hell"
but when i log into either d1 or d2 im immediately immersed in this sense that it's a tragic world.. the melancholy and mournful music with just a touch of hope urging you forward.. and the omninouse undercurrents.
the "dark and gritty" scenery .. often through a sheet of rain in d2.
you enter diablo and it's bad and it's gonna get worse.. that's how it's always been.
you enter d1 or d2 and you enter a town that's been ravaged by tragedy and they know something worse is out there.
for the sake of contrast or not, the world of diablo was never meant to look like a nice place to be.
so far i'm disappointed in both the look and music of d3.. but again i'm trying to keep an open mind
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
they'll never see me coming.. life is a sequence of tragedies, inconsistent only by fleeting, elusive moments of pleasure,
serving only to ensure absolute vulnerability to the pain of their inevitable absence.
So funny that everyone, Bill included, is talking about the art direction in this game like it is some static thing.
Did a single one of the hundred geniuses who posted above mention the fact that the lead producer and art director both are off the title as of just a few months ago? Does a single one of the posters above even know the names of these two guys - or their replacements?
Maybe a higher-up or two had similar feelings as Bill and already took action last summer... ya think??
Brian Morrisroe left Blizzard to peruse another job outside of the gaming industry.
Here is Blizzard's Response to the new (at the time) job posting for art director:
"Regarding Brian, he recently resigned to form a startup technology company (outside the game industry), which is why we've posted about the open position,"
They followed up with: "This change won't impact the game... we're really pleased with the look and feel that Brian helped create for Diablo III, and the new person we bring on board will work with the other artists on the team to maintain the art style moving forward."
So yes some of us did know that, and we do know that a new art director does not always (in this case especially) mean that the art style will change. It helps to actually look up what you are talking about before you call out several people above you.
we do know that a new art director does not always (in this case especially) mean that the art style will change.
You make more sense when you're just regurgitating the party line. Doing something besides repeating the official announcements of a multi-billion dollar company is a little more challenging.
In Soviet Russia, game plays you, I guess. The Ministry of Information has spoken, and none shall question.
Music, i dont really know. But what i know is that its rather less important than graphical issues.
bit off topic but just wanted to point out that the music/sounds are definately important to me.. maybe more so than graphics.
i can play d1 or d2 with the sound off now.. but the music is a key part of what made me have interest and reverence for both games.. it set the mood and i don't think i could have had such immersion without it.
i could play d1 style graphics on d3 if the music is good enough. (which it so far doesn't seem to be..)
also ..most guys are very visually oriented.. males are just wired that way.
so it may be the opinion of a lot of people on this male centric forum (or the polls would suggest that kind of gender demographic)
but anyway just pointing out that different people have different opinions on what matters most.
also to be a little more on topic.. after reading the other responses on this thread i also agree that the photorealism is what's missing.
the edges too curvey the details diminished.. a little too much of that fuzzy afterglow effect.
and one last point in d1 you couldn't see things sometimes.. walls got in the way and it was too dark. but you know what.. it enhanced my gameplay experience rather than diminishing it.
over and over i've read people say that they get to the butcher in d1 and they are just freaked.. yes maybe we were a lot younger, but it was also because of the ambience that was in great deal due to the poor lighting.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
they'll never see me coming.. life is a sequence of tragedies, inconsistent only by fleeting, elusive moments of pleasure,
serving only to ensure absolute vulnerability to the pain of their inevitable absence.
It's funny that you're all substituting the fact that a Senior Producer on Diablo 1 and 2 said they were aiming for photo realistic. That's kinda the important part in this thread; He's acknowledging what many had been concerned about before through not just straight up statement but inference.
If people had stuck to their guns and supported the Petition to the bitter end, Blizzard would have probably discontinued their deceptions. Because the stats say otherwise.
So funny that everyone, Bill included, is talking about the art direction in this game like it is some static thing.
Did a single one of the hundred geniuses who posted above mention the fact that the lead producer and art director both are off the title as of just a few months ago? Does a single one of the posters above even know the names of these two guys - or their replacements?
Maybe a higher-up or two had similar feelings as Bill and already took action last summer... ya think??
I'm also curious about this subject. Blizzard hired a new art director but they didn't give his name. Why is blizzard try to hide his name? It looks interesting. Like you mentioned they also look for lead producer.
If they have been devoloping DIII since 3-4 years they should have kept their art director and lead producer. Then i suspect that new replacements have made for changing the game style. I call Blizzard liar if they haven't been devolping DIII since 3 years.
So blizzard is a liar company or blizzard wants to change DIII's style. Make your choice.
I haven't played the game yet but I'm agree with Bill Roper. He, with his team, father of our gothic world and surely would have made it again to please my dark side much more than this upcoming diablo. I'm very sure I gonna like the game, because it's diablo universe and I'm such addicted but I will miss the dark gothic sensation.
also trying to keep an open mind, but from what i see so far..i agree with roper .
mockery you say "starting in a somewhat lighter area and descending into darkness rather than just having the game begin in the depths of hell"
but when i log into either d1 or d2 im immediately immersed in this sense that it's a tragic world.. the melancholy and mournful music with just a touch of hope urging you forward.. and the omninouse undercurrents.
the "dark and gritty" scenery .. often through a sheet of rain in d2.
you enter diablo and it's bad and it's gonna get worse.. that's how it's always been.
you enter d1 or d2 and you enter a town that's been ravaged by tragedy and they know something worse is out there.
for the sake of contrast or not, the world of diablo was never meant to look like a nice place to be.
so far i'm disappointed in both the look and music of d3.. but again i'm trying to keep an open mind
One major thing you're overlooking with Diablo 3 compared to Diablo 1 and 2 is that Diablo 3 is years after the events of LoD and it takes place in, more or less, a period of peace(at least from demonic invasions every 5 hours).
In Diablo, you're a hero that appears in Tristram after all hell has already broke loose, and in Diablo 2 you start in the Rogue Encampment from where Diablo has already traveled through and caused all kinds of hell and havoc and vice versa for the next 3 acts and then Baal starts his invasion.
With Diablo 3, we have no clue where you start the game nor do we have a real explanation as to why all of these crazy events with demons and such is happening again(obviously something with the Worldstone's destruction finally showing major side effects but no in dept background).
While this doesn't mean anything for art direction but it does explain why we aren't seeing complete tragedy in every screenshot and why it doesn't seem hellish because, well, all hell really hasn't broken loose yet.
These events seem to be happening slowly but when they do, they show their effect on the world(death and chaos, etc). However, it should be clear as day at this point as to why Diablo 1 and 2 start off much darker then Diablo 3.
i understand your point and i've considered it before.. but maybe they went the wrong way with the story itself.
i just really like the atmosphere of diablo 1 and 2 and i don't want it lost in d3.
i don't want sesame street areas in the timeline.. (and i'd like it if it looked more realistic rather than stylized..read cartoony)
a lot of games or movies show you this happy time then dash it and you want to see it restored.
diablo always hit you with a world that had never known a happy time. no relief.. it was a world where the people hudled together in misery and compassion for one another.
the happy time was only ever a dim hope.
despite all my complaints in this and other threads..i passionately want it to succeed and for my expectations to be met.
i will honestly try to like it
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
they'll never see me coming.. life is a sequence of tragedies, inconsistent only by fleeting, elusive moments of pleasure,
serving only to ensure absolute vulnerability to the pain of their inevitable absence.
i understand your point and i've considered it before.. but maybe they went the wrong way with the story itself.
i just really like the atmosphere of diablo 1 and 2 and i don't want it lost in d3.
i don't want sesame street areas in the timeline..
a lot of games or movies show you this happy time then dash it and you want to restore it.
diablo always hit you with a world that had never known a happy time. no relief.. it was a world where the people hudled together in misery and compassion for one another.
the happy time was only ever a dim hope.
despite all my complaints in this and other threads.. my fear is based on my expectations that i don't want to be dashed.. and i passionately want it to succeed.
i will honestly try to like it
I get what you're saying and I agree, however I don't really think they will have sesame street like areas in the game. Like I said before, it's technically a peacefull time in terms of a break from the forces of hell slaughtering villages every night. If I had to take a guess as to what's happening, is that many people/places are slowly being corrupted and will eventually be revealed to be being controlled by demons.
I'm also expecting many if not all of the old enemies from the first 2 games in Diablo 3, if Leoric has already been shown. If Zhar the Mad is in this game I will freaking lol.
No, he's not "eating sour grapes" some things are just facts, Diablo 3 from a graphics standpoint isn't the same as the two games previous. He doesn't think it looks bad, it just doesn't look like the other two games, I mean, that's just a fact. I wasn't lucky enough to make it to Blizzcon. It may feel exactly like Diablo in all other aspects, the graphics may not bother me in the least once I start playing, the fact of the matter still is that they've changed what the game looks like visually, which is an aspect, along with many others, that contribute to the games overall atmosphere. I think Bill Roper hit the nail on the head. If you liked the darker graphics style the game is no longer as asthetically pleasing as it once was. Not a big problem like say...the total rip off of automatic stat point allocation, but that's for another post, and you can count on me making it provided I don't get banned...again. I LOVE YOU BLIZZARD EVEN IF CREATIVITY DOESNT SEEM TO BE HAPPENING RIGHT NOW!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
It is freaking Bill Roper. The guy is largely responsible for many hours of fun that most of us here have had over the years. The guy has an opinion on the matter. Of course he would much rather plug projects that would bring him money.
Sure he may be a bit mad at Blizzard for canning him after several best sellers (who wouldn't), but I didn't take his responce to those questions as catty or back handed. He respectfully said that he liked the artwork style from before more than what we see now.
Honestly though; what did he do to deserve the kind of responces some of you have given here? I am seriously curious. Did I miss something? Did he make a statement somewhere that said "People who play my games from Blizzard are douch bags" or something like that?
I was lucky enough to get to play Diablo III at Blizzcon though. Playing the game really changed my point of view on the art style. I didn't think it looked cartoony playing it. I was a bit spooked out even (all while playing next to 500 other people).
The art style is different, but I really do think that with the sound and play style the game really maintains that "Diablo feel" we all talk about.
Honeslty the only thing that really took away from the Diablo feel was combos, crit numbers, and the leveling animation. In my honest opinion they really added an arcade game feel to the game. Never the less it was still bad ass (esp the leveling animation).
lol listen to this... this is exactly what everyone needs to realize
gamma11 > east
You know the Blizzard guys read these forums from time to time. It's good to get the opinions of your best market targets, and you can't always get a straight answer out of people. Sometimes it's good to get real ideas via opposition and contrasting opinions. That way they can get an unbiased look at what kind of progress they've made since the last Art debate. I remember there was an emphasis on dark screenshots shortly after some of the original art wars.
I'm not saying Roper did that on purpose or was influenced to do so, but it is a good opportunity to let Blizzard know how we feel.
One of the gems on this particular discussion has been defining that it's not the "Darkness" (as in gamma or level of light), but the "Darkness" (as in grittyness, western-european gothic feel, obscured lines, affects of time\disrepair\general neglect on dungeon areas, pro photo-realsim vs. exaggerated visuals) hardcore fans are lacking from the perceived experience so far.
Did a single one of the hundred geniuses who posted above mention the fact that the lead producer and art director both are off the title as of just a few months ago? Does a single one of the posters above even know the names of these two guys - or their replacements?
Maybe a higher-up or two had similar feelings as Bill and already took action last summer... ya think??
A good portion (not all, granted) of the issues mentioned can be texture-manipulated.
mockery you say "starting in a somewhat lighter area and descending into darkness rather than just having the game begin in the depths of hell"
but when i log into either d1 or d2 im immediately immersed in this sense that it's a tragic world.. the melancholy and mournful music with just a touch of hope urging you forward.. and the omninouse undercurrents.
the "dark and gritty" scenery .. often through a sheet of rain in d2.
you enter diablo and it's bad and it's gonna get worse.. that's how it's always been.
you enter d1 or d2 and you enter a town that's been ravaged by tragedy and they know something worse is out there.
for the sake of contrast or not, the world of diablo was never meant to look like a nice place to be.
so far i'm disappointed in both the look and music of d3.. but again i'm trying to keep an open mind
they'll never see me coming..
life is a sequence of tragedies, inconsistent only by fleeting, elusive moments of pleasure,
serving only to ensure absolute vulnerability to the pain of their inevitable absence.
Brian Morrisroe left Blizzard to peruse another job outside of the gaming industry.
Here is Blizzard's Response to the new (at the time) job posting for art director:
"Regarding Brian, he recently resigned to form a startup technology company (outside the game industry), which is why we've posted about the open position,"
They followed up with: "This change won't impact the game... we're really pleased with the look and feel that Brian helped create for Diablo III, and the new person we bring on board will work with the other artists on the team to maintain the art style moving forward."
So yes some of us did know that, and we do know that a new art director does not always (in this case especially) mean that the art style will change. It helps to actually look up what you are talking about before you call out several people above you.
Source: http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/54087
You make more sense when you're just regurgitating the party line. Doing something besides repeating the official announcements of a multi-billion dollar company is a little more challenging.
In Soviet Russia, game plays you, I guess. The Ministry of Information has spoken, and none shall question.
bit off topic but just wanted to point out that the music/sounds are definately important to me.. maybe more so than graphics.
i can play d1 or d2 with the sound off now.. but the music is a key part of what made me have interest and reverence for both games.. it set the mood and i don't think i could have had such immersion without it.
i could play d1 style graphics on d3 if the music is good enough. (which it so far doesn't seem to be..)
also ..most guys are very visually oriented.. males are just wired that way.
so it may be the opinion of a lot of people on this male centric forum (or the polls would suggest that kind of gender demographic)
but anyway just pointing out that different people have different opinions on what matters most.
also to be a little more on topic.. after reading the other responses on this thread i also agree that the photorealism is what's missing.
the edges too curvey the details diminished.. a little too much of that fuzzy afterglow effect.
and one last point in d1 you couldn't see things sometimes.. walls got in the way and it was too dark. but you know what.. it enhanced my gameplay experience rather than diminishing it.
over and over i've read people say that they get to the butcher in d1 and they are just freaked.. yes maybe we were a lot younger, but it was also because of the ambience that was in great deal due to the poor lighting.
they'll never see me coming..
life is a sequence of tragedies, inconsistent only by fleeting, elusive moments of pleasure,
serving only to ensure absolute vulnerability to the pain of their inevitable absence.
Obviously, the folks there disagree and felt they needed to make a change. Anyone want to dig up the Official Party Announcement on that one?
If people had stuck to their guns and supported the Petition to the bitter end, Blizzard would have probably discontinued their deceptions. Because the stats say otherwise.
I'm also curious about this subject. Blizzard hired a new art director but they didn't give his name. Why is blizzard try to hide his name? It looks interesting. Like you mentioned they also look for lead producer.
If they have been devoloping DIII since 3-4 years they should have kept their art director and lead producer. Then i suspect that new replacements have made for changing the game style. I call Blizzard liar if they haven't been devolping DIII since 3 years.
So blizzard is a liar company or blizzard wants to change DIII's style. Make your choice.
In Diablo, you're a hero that appears in Tristram after all hell has already broke loose, and in Diablo 2 you start in the Rogue Encampment from where Diablo has already traveled through and caused all kinds of hell and havoc and vice versa for the next 3 acts and then Baal starts his invasion.
With Diablo 3, we have no clue where you start the game nor do we have a real explanation as to why all of these crazy events with demons and such is happening again(obviously something with the Worldstone's destruction finally showing major side effects but no in dept background).
While this doesn't mean anything for art direction but it does explain why we aren't seeing complete tragedy in every screenshot and why it doesn't seem hellish because, well, all hell really hasn't broken loose yet.
These events seem to be happening slowly but when they do, they show their effect on the world(death and chaos, etc). However, it should be clear as day at this point as to why Diablo 1 and 2 start off much darker then Diablo 3.
i just really like the atmosphere of diablo 1 and 2 and i don't want it lost in d3.
i don't want sesame street areas in the timeline.. (and i'd like it if it looked more realistic rather than stylized..read cartoony)
a lot of games or movies show you this happy time then dash it and you want to see it restored.
diablo always hit you with a world that had never known a happy time. no relief.. it was a world where the people hudled together in misery and compassion for one another.
the happy time was only ever a dim hope.
despite all my complaints in this and other threads..i passionately want it to succeed and for my expectations to be met.
i will honestly try to like it
they'll never see me coming..
life is a sequence of tragedies, inconsistent only by fleeting, elusive moments of pleasure,
serving only to ensure absolute vulnerability to the pain of their inevitable absence.
I'm also expecting many if not all of the old enemies from the first 2 games in Diablo 3, if Leoric has already been shown. If Zhar the Mad is in this game I will freaking lol.