DiabloFans

Quote from "3CXOD" »

I'll wait on this until I get a chance to buy a new Diablo Battlechest.
I lost my LOD cd and all I have is the Case w/ the key but I don't think that really matters. *shrug*

Umm, once you register the cd key on battlenet you can just download the game.

Quote from "Ranim" »

Well it wasn't just the community though, the Blizz north guys agreed that D2 wasn't dark (gore wise and story wise)

It's hard to pin it, there was a general consensus that something was wrong, but it wasn't serious.



Yes it can. All 3D is, is a bunch of straight lines making a wire frame, with 2D mapping covering.

It's especially possible considering all cameras will be facing one direction.

There are several ways of doing it, you can draw the pixels or you can use real-life objects to map a structure. Look @ Killzone 2 for example, they took high definition pictures of peoples faces and then wrapped it around the wire frame, and then look at custom faces on Arma. Here i'll give you an example of a custom face mesh that is wrapped around your character on Arma



Do you see what I mean?

I get what you're saying at thats is easy to make good looking character models but comparing Killzone 2 (a fps which at most has around 20 guys on screen) to Diablo 3 (which will most likely be hitting 100 guys on screen) is pretty much pointless. On top of all the enemies on screen you have to take into acount all the different abilities/special effects happening. Add in shadows and physics, etc. you are bound to run into framerate issues on way or the other. Even the game you mentioned (killzone 2) has been proven to dip below 30 fps on heavy firefights.

You can indeed use many tricks to make a game look good but it comes at a big cost. Hell look at Crysis, most comps still can't run that game at max settings at a constant, stable framerate.

They really just need to show off some later areas of the game with blood and gore, etc. just so people will shut the hell up about the art direction.

Also people need to realise that Diablo 3 is 3D as opposed to Diablo 1 and 2. If they seriously tried to imitate the detail in the environments in Diablo 2 and move it over to a 3D engine...the system requirements would be rediculous.

Do people actually think that this

and

could transfer over to 3D without any problems and keep this level of detail/gritiness? Seriously...

I admit it's damn different but my god people. At least wait until we get some media that isn't the grassland or basic dungeon area.

Quote from "blood-doll" »

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.

Quote from "blood-doll" »

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.

New quests that get you ready for Diablo 3
Fix the lag
Higher resolutions...800x600 was behind when Lod came out
Bigger stash and inventory
Extra boss or 2 with a few new special enemies
New set and unique items

Could be a few other things they could do but these are the key things that I really want to see happen that could really spark my interest with Diablo 2 again.

Heres hoping^_^

Blizz confirmed a while ago that the new mmo is a new franchise. It's not up for debate.

A Starcraft MMORPG would be damn awesome. Main reason being it would finally be a good MMO that is not a typical fantasy style game, aka WoW, Lotr online, Warhammer online, etc.

IMO, the MMO genre needs a damn good futuristic style game and Blizz is just the company that could deliver it.

As ridiculous as a suggestion this is, the cow level would be quite interesting LOL!!!!

If Blizzard is reading these forums at all.....this thread alone must make them have second thoughts on the community they are making this game for.....

Seriously....what......the.......fuck........

no thx.....
..
.
....
.
wow....

Quote from "Kiserai" »

Great interview, seems like a guy who knows what he's talking about.

I would like point out that his discussion about the Witch Doctor puts a huge damper on the few people holding out hope for the Necromancer's return. It really seems obvious he's the replacement in that summoner / poison / walls / etc. role with a new spin and some new skills / tactics.

He reiterates the devs saying that the Barbarian is an exception in being carried over from the previous game, and IMHO the pure caster Sorceress / Mage / whatever will probably be the only other of the 5 classes that is carried over. The other 3 (WD included) will be new or at least 'spun' classes (e.g., the WD as a 'spin' on the Necro).

If the Paly and Necro are gone ppl are going to fucking shit a chicken

Quote from "Superduperjew" »

Now isn'tthis what all really want from Blizzard? :mad:

lol someone should photoshop a chipmunk or gopher coming out of the hole in his head

Quote from "Sedako" »

Here is my take on it. I increased the shadows a bit, toned down the greens, and replaced the silly statues with something more appropriate. I warn you though, i'm not the best photoshopper around

http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f18/Sedako/D3edit.jpg

the gargolyes are a very nice touch. It does fit a hell of a lot better.

Quote from name="Sol Invictus" »

Way to spin history with your lies and fabrications.

Starcraft is built upon the Warcraft 2 engine, and it was whiteboxed (go look up the term if you don't understand it) using placeholder graphics in Warcraft 2. Not many fans spoke up because there weren't any message boards or Battle.net at the time for that to even happen. They were never intended to be in the final game.

Starcraft was without any fans because it was a brand new game and a brand new franchise and Command & Conquer was already the biggest thing at the time so there were no rabid fans for them to piss off.

Quit making stuff up.

E3 had begun which is where Starcraft was originally shown. The game was indeed based on the Warcraft II engine but when they showed the game looking like this....

fans spoke the hell up and said it was Warcraft in space rather then a new franchise.

Blizzard listened and while using the same engine(revamped), they re-did the syle completely. What did the game look like when they showed it again?

There ya have it, nothing like warcraft. The difference in visuals between Warcraft and Starcraft was now 100%.

Then after that, they gutted the whole damn game and revamped the engine for a second time to get visuals fully complete as well as allowing more things to happen within the game(which we know is a hell of a lot more then anything with the original Warcraft II engine).


I know damn well what i'm talking about dumbass. If Blizzard did not get the negative feedback on the games look, they would not have changed it, and from the way Starcraft has aged so well....i'd say it was a pretty good decision.

And just in case you think i'm pulling all this out of my ass http://www.sclegacy.com/content/starcraft-encyclopedia-4/starcraft-evolution-12/

Just beacause there were hardly any forums to discuss stuff and Starcraft being a new franchise doesn't mean a damn thing. Blizzard was able to get their answer on the first form of the game publically. The fans loved the new look of the game and Blizzard worked their ass off to make the game what it is today. If the fans did not speak up asap, all hope could have been lost for Starcraft.

The same thing now applies to Diablo 3 as many(including myself) think the game is Warcraft in the world of Sanctuary. Just as Starcraft was orcs in space.

Blizzard will listen, just don't be afraid to speak up. Oh and by the way, the complete redone vision of Starcraft did not take that long...what most of us want to happen with Diablo 3 would most like take a few months of hard work to change.

Quote from "Vimp" »

I've been watching this thread since it began. The way I see things, there are obviously two sides: the ones who like and dislike the current looks. The difference is we, the ones who don't like the current graphics, we demonstrate by arguments, while the other group yells at us that we're blind, crybabies et cetera. For a franchise like Diablo. I tought the fans would be just a little bit more mature. I've spent thousands of hours in the first two games so I'm totally into what happens with the third. If this would be the case, I would wait even 4-5 years more for a complete artistic redrawing. The ones of you who really waited nearly 8 years for the sequel surely can wait some more. But some of you are so desperate to get their hands on the game that they just don't care about the details and just want another PERFECT Blizzard game asap. Why should we settle for anything less? If there's any possibility we can make a difference lets yell it out loud and make ourselfs heard. And the pro-current-diablo-art should act more mature and not attack us in such a personal way, rather give arguments. I think D3 is too WoW-like. Not only from the 20 min of gameplay but from Blizzard's actions. They just reveiled a whole new game they're working on, with a full press release, screenshots and videos. They could have waited one or more years until announcing the game, but they were happy with its current state and they tried to explain to us why it looks like this (mood trough colours). Basically they were prepared for these negative feedbacks and while sitting in their conference room preparing for the announcement they tought of how they should justify this. All I'm saying is everyone should chill out, we're not enemies here. Go kill a orc if you're mad on someone.

Exactly my thoughts, most ppl saying it's fine are most like scared and think that switching art styles would delay the game 5 years. I would gladly give them all the time they need if it meant bringing the old style back.