To Snarf
First of all. I already said in the deleted post that UE is not a mass engine. You can try using SS engine, but not UE, it's going to be pointless. You don't see Witcher using UE, do you? They are using Aurora, and for a reason.
Second of all. It's merely your opinion that Diablo I and II have bad graphics. My opinion is their graphics are much better than Diablo III ever will be because Diablo III will be 3D, and 3D at this point has pretty low quality, especially in games with a lot of monsters. I don't like 3D, so keep that "bad graphics" to yourself, please. Or I'll just say you are chasing after technology without knowing anything about it.
Making the game "beautiful" will make it unplayable for me and a ton of other people. So I won't support you here. I am annoyed at having to buy a new computer each year. I'd rather play Diablo II and StarCraft instead, they'd always be the best.
You don't have to buy a new computer every year - games have texture, filter, physics, etc. control menus for a reason. But, you are most definitely correct that 2D engines can be highly detailed, and that they have been better suited to mass-character games so far, however I would suggest that they perhaps reduce the numbers of monsters in Diablo III.
Yes, Diablo has always involved fighting of wave apon unrelenting wave of demons, and the sheer mass of enemies is a key part of the game, but don't you think that reducing this number might actually be benificial to gameplay? Do you really think the 'click-click-click' gameplay of the last two Diablo games is the most exiting form of combat possible? It gets rather repetitive, fighting all tose identical mosters, you have to agree? Sure, keep the numbers sufficient to give a sense of mass, but dont have them so high they get boring. Less overall characters on screen would prove benificial to gameplay and allow the use of a detailed 3D engine.
And Diablo III won't use Unreal Engine and Havok physics... why do people keep trying to cram FPS technology into a mass game of a company that always tried to make games accessible?
What do you mean by always trying to make games 'accessible'?
If your saying that using an advanced engine will make the game useless to people who do not own powerful PC's, think again. UE3 is probably the most balanced (performance vs quality), stable and compatible engine there is at the moment. Even when set to medium detail, it still looks great. Sure, the Crysis engine looks better - but at a huge performance cost. Sure, the engine used in WoW performs well on just about anyones PC - but it looks unrealistic and cartoon-like.
I believe Blizzard did not use the simplified pre rendered engines in D1/D2 because they wanted to make the game accessible. They were simply limited by the technology they had, and that has always been the biggest flaw in the Diablo series: the graphical engine.
They have a series with an outstanding history of detailed storylines, flawless soundtracks, decent gameplay (which I am sure they will improve this time around), so why not go one step further and make the game beautiful with the use of a quality engine.
Unreal engine is not the only option out there, but it is one of the best - if not the best - available.
Hi,I'm new here, how's it going?"Buddhism has the characteristics of what would be expected in a cosmic religion for the future: it transcends a personal God, avoids dogmas and theology; it covers both the natural & spiritual, and it is based on a religious sense aspiring from the experience of all things as a meaningful unity" - Albert Einstein---Jessiehttp://jessie.infinitehosting.net
Yeah, thats just spam. I got the exact same message when I joined Blizzard Sector. Pay no heed to that stuff.
See, now thats based on personal preference, not just the fact that every game should be made in 3D. A lot of people don't like the look of WoW or Starcraft II at all and would hate a Diablo game in the same 3D style. Blizzard's 3D graphics so far aren't good enough for serious games like Diablo, so they either have to put a hell of a lot of effort into improving their graphics or go back to the traditional pre-rendered style.
They could purchase the rights to use someone elses engine...
God, even I can't find that thread where we already had this discussion. The thread title might've been not too specific sounding. I think it was like, "Help Needed" or something.
I have been looking for it, and I did a search before I started this thread. I also did a massive search on Google, to no avail.
Quote from name="Elfen Lied" »
I bought my "classic" DIablo II in 2000, it has the non-exposed forehead version. Pretty sure the exposed forehead version is the new version.
Sometimes when things are reintroduced or re-released the covers are changed or updated. Esp. movies, you can find one version of the movie from say the 70's with one cover, then find another copy of the movie re-released in say the 90's (or the '00's) and it will have a different cover. And I don't mean the obviously different anniversary/director's cut version.
And on a slightly different but still kinda the same note, Director's Cuts and Double Disc Editions have different covers from the Single or non special edition.
The exposed forehead version is no doubt a more patch version so in essence it is like a "Bonus Features" version in a way as depending on the versions in question, the new version will contain synergies, where as my version from 2000 originally does not. Or a likewise change due to patching.
The last standard copy of Diablo II I purchased two years ago isn't the exposed head version, nor is the version depicted on my Diablo battlechest... Perhaps it is a regional variation?
The Barbarian is the one character I have not played up to Tal Rasha's tomb, but perhaps you could use dual axe's or sword's to get plenty of hit in there each time you engage. If I remember correctly, Duriel is good at blocking.
Diablo 1 set the bar at an hole new level for blizzard. Even if it's not that great anymore it still deserves our respect.
Hehe that goes without saying, my friend.
I still play the original Diablo regularly, and I read librarius ex horadrim every so often to refresh my memory of Diablo's history. I love the storyline behind the series.
Quote from "Num3n" »
i like the game but i dislike the fact that you can only bloody walk hahaha
Yes, that is the only real downside, but you soon get used to it.
Actually Mephisto freed himself, he was just waiting for Diablo and Baal and controlling the Zakarumites from the temple, he seems to be less hands on then the other 2. He also sent Leoric for Diablo to use.
And I believe that Baal was always physically the strongest, his soul did crack the Soulstone.
"Mephisto finally managed to overcome the powers of the Soulstone that imprisoned him enough to influence and corrupt the local priesthood, known as the Zakarum. The Demon then had the priests work spells to shatter the Soulstone into seven shards, breaking the mystic seal and freeing the Lord of Hatred. Mephisto drove the six smaller shards into the left palms of six Zakarum archbishops who were then charged with bringing him nourishment in the form of human sacrifices while running their temple. The largest stone pierced the hand of the Que-Hegan, the highest divine authority of the Zakarum faith. It was this body that the Demon used as his manifestation on the mortal plane, warping the mortal’s form into an approximation of his true visage. For years the corrupted religious leaders of the Zakarum have kept Mephisto supplied with information and misguided followers to carry out his plans of conquest. He eventually met up with Diablo, and the two began to work to enslaving the human race. However, Mephisto was later killed by the same adventurers (or adventurer) that would go on to kill Diablo. Mephisto's Soulstone was destroyed in the Hellforge after his defeat, ensuring that he demon stayed dead.
Mephisto is considered the most intensely evil brother of the three Prime Evils (and is also the oldest). So overwhelming is his evil that his malevolent influence can bring the dead back to life; these zombified beasts are filled with such anger for the living that not even death can quench their desire for pain and suffering. Mephisto may also be viewed as the most intelligent and calculating. Over the years, after having ensorcelled the Zakarum, he used his newfound power to bring the lands of Sanctuary under his heel through the martial power of warped Paladins, and sent the Zakarum deep into Westmarch, where his inwitting servant, King Leoric, would take over Tristram."
- from http://diablo.wikia.com/
I originally voted for Diablo, but I have to agree with kebzilla. Mephisto seems the most evil of the prime evils.
0
Ha, walking and running, no matter how slow or fast, always looks funny in Diablo/Diablo II
Nor does Diablo II have as mcuh story/background included in the manual (although Librarius Ex Horadrim contains enough for both of them)
0
You don't have to buy a new computer every year - games have texture, filter, physics, etc. control menus for a reason. But, you are most definitely correct that 2D engines can be highly detailed, and that they have been better suited to mass-character games so far, however I would suggest that they perhaps reduce the numbers of monsters in Diablo III.
Yes, Diablo has always involved fighting of wave apon unrelenting wave of demons, and the sheer mass of enemies is a key part of the game, but don't you think that reducing this number might actually be benificial to gameplay? Do you really think the 'click-click-click' gameplay of the last two Diablo games is the most exiting form of combat possible? It gets rather repetitive, fighting all tose identical mosters, you have to agree? Sure, keep the numbers sufficient to give a sense of mass, but dont have them so high they get boring. Less overall characters on screen would prove benificial to gameplay and allow the use of a detailed 3D engine.
0
Well it still doesn't give a definite answer, but thanks anyway.
Hehe that one helps me make sense of the way the official 'exposed-forehead' version's hood curves outwards at the top.
0
What do you mean by always trying to make games 'accessible'?
If your saying that using an advanced engine will make the game useless to people who do not own powerful PC's, think again. UE3 is probably the most balanced (performance vs quality), stable and compatible engine there is at the moment. Even when set to medium detail, it still looks great. Sure, the Crysis engine looks better - but at a huge performance cost. Sure, the engine used in WoW performs well on just about anyones PC - but it looks unrealistic and cartoon-like.
I believe Blizzard did not use the simplified pre rendered engines in D1/D2 because they wanted to make the game accessible. They were simply limited by the technology they had, and that has always been the biggest flaw in the Diablo series: the graphical engine.
They have a series with an outstanding history of detailed storylines, flawless soundtracks, decent gameplay (which I am sure they will improve this time around), so why not go one step further and make the game beautiful with the use of a quality engine.
Unreal engine is not the only option out there, but it is one of the best - if not the best - available.
0
Yeah, thats just spam. I got the exact same message when I joined Blizzard Sector. Pay no heed to that stuff.
Anyway, Hi!
0
They could purchase the rights to use someone elses engine...
0
I have been looking for it, and I did a search before I started this thread. I also did a massive search on Google, to no avail.
The last standard copy of Diablo II I purchased two years ago isn't the exposed head version, nor is the version depicted on my Diablo battlechest... Perhaps it is a regional variation?
0
0
0
0
0
0
Yes, I always have more trouble killing him than Diablo.
0
Hehe that goes without saying, my friend.
I still play the original Diablo regularly, and I read librarius ex horadrim every so often to refresh my memory of Diablo's history. I love the storyline behind the series.
Yes, that is the only real downside, but you soon get used to it.
0
I originally voted for Diablo, but I have to agree with kebzilla. Mephisto seems the most evil of the prime evils.