DiabloFans

Quote from "Credge" »

I think it was a huge mistake to show off a part of the game without showing us anything that resembles Diablo. For all I can tell, the respect they have from the franchise comes from their wallets and not from the game itself. This is why we see more of a Warcraft feel and look than a Diablo feel and look.

Instead of showing us, say, different areas. They showcased the beginning of Act 1. The release announcement wasn't doing anything but showing the direction they want to take the game and confirm that Hydra was, in fact, D3.

This was a huge mistake, at least for the fans. Cool. Diablo 3. This is what has taken 8 years? Eh...

To make it even worse they have said that this is the third, or that they have gone through three, art design(s). I'm pretty confident that it was much darker, grittier, and true to Diablo than what we see now.

To expand even further, Rob talked about using certain colors to enhance the horror aspect of it (specifically oranges and blues). The problem, though, is that the colors he specifically talked about were EVERYWHERE. There is a shade of blue or orange in every screenshot and in every second of that video. That isn't enhancing, that is saturating.

Those oranges need to be rarer and need to be darker, earthier. The water, if it is going to be bright, needs to react to the blood of your enemies. Things like that are possible without using much, or any, CPU power. Stuff like that makes it Diablo.

The violence was, simply put, O.K. There wasn't much to say about it besides "Oh, a gib." The physics stuff is expected and really isn't anything special. The highlight of the video, in regards to violence, was when the dragonspawn-look-alike ripped that player in half. When it happened, the blood was minimal. No spray. It simply looked 'meh'.

IF the art does get more gothic and dark as you play then GREAT! Amazing! The problem is that they didn't show us it. They showed us a place that, from past games, WAS VERY DARK AND GOTHIC. In D3, that place is NOT DARK AND GOTHIC!

That's the problem. That's the problem entirely.

If the dungeon was dark, cruel, and terrifying then I doubt as many people would be upset about it. I know I wouldn't.

Inside of the Cathedral, a place we know VERY WELL FROM DIABLO 1, we saw a blue-green mask on all of the shadows, a bunch of cartoony shaped furniture and scenery, and a general theme of... well... Warcraft. This is an issue. This is not respecting the franchise. In fact, it is throwing what is known about the franchise out of the window and replacing it.

To recap:

1. We know what the cathedral looks like. We know, to a lesser extent, what King Leorics woods looks like (the area outside of the cathedral).

2. They stated that they are respecting the franchise.

3. What we saw did not look like what the cathedral looks like.

4. This is respect how?

Quote from "Zoom" »

So a full screen glow effect, glowing weapon enchants, shoulder armor, and slight artistic similarities and a similar bag system means this game is just like WoW?

These are just small, superficial elements within the game. If you actually watched any of the videos, particularly the design panel, you will know this game is nothing like WoW and is a true successor to Diablo 2.

Quote from "Jackzor" »

I can't stand those before/after screenshots, I mean really, do you want them to make the beginning that dark? Where do you expect them to go when we get to a place thats actually supposed to be dark? Pitch black?

Furthermore, I don't think its really how it looks (obviously it should still feel evil and dark) but mainly, like Veltras said, what happens. Sure it might look a bit cartoony (I personally dont think it is, as 1. I wouldn't be able to run it if they made it too realistic and 2. Its damn hard to make it much more realistic than that...) but if that supposedly cartoony guy gets bit in half by a Living Siege Engine of Hell, thats pretty damn Diablo-like. Thats what impressed me the most about the gameplay video, sure it wasnt as dark as the other Diablos, but it looked well done and good, and the blood splatters and things like holes in the ground where the barbarian leaps or smashes really made it feel awesome.

Quote from "jaik" »

I just copied part of the petition made by (Ultramegazord as far as i remember):

- A more realistic artistic direction, more independent from the Warcraft universe art direction.

Quote from "bacon_army17" »

revolutionary idea, so not only can u own newbs, but take thier stuff, only flaw is hardcore players cant do this without a total loss on a epic scale lol

Quote from "ChaosCode" »

I like this idea. you risk no matter what. The problem are groups of people.

Quote from "nemesislives" »

I agree, I didn't like the way that the skill tree worked once you were on a higher level, but I don't think that they should add a WoW version of the skills either. And you have to consider that Blizzard is BIG on balancing classes with the diffictuly of the game. Just imagine if D2 skills were more like the WoW skill trees. It wouldn't even be a challenge when you got to the end of the game since you would be so powerful.

Quote from "Equinox" »

To mrdoom
Agreed with your take on skills. Some things in Diablo II are totally strange and unbalanced. There is so much stuff in the game that is never used...

Quote from "mrdoom" »

If there is one thing that I hope Blizzard learned from WoW, it's that replacing old spells with whole new ones that are simply stronger versions of them (or that only have small differences) ruins the skill progression system, as it encourages players to not spend skills at low levels, so that they may max out higher level skills of the same type later. In fact, this can be said of the skill tree system in general, if one does not make all of the abilities useful at any point in the game.

Blizzard's answer was the synergy system, which gave bonuses to other spells if you had skill points in the previous ones. But this seems like a rough fix. And you still have some abilities that you wonder why they exist. You get Leap at level 6, and Leap Attack at level 18. Why would you continue to use leap after you get leap attack? It's not just a matter of putting points into ablities, it's about making them useful at all. The same goes for many of the sorceress spells.

Basically, I would like the d3 devs to try the WoW spell method. Actually, for a better analogy, let's think of Diablo abilities like units in Starcraft 2. They always stress that they are trying to make each unit a niche unit, so that none of them are worthless, and they aren't tiered so that some will become useless in the endgame. Can we not do this in Diablo? Can every skill not be a niche skill, with the potential to be used throughout the game?

For an example, let's say I'm playing a sorceress. I have chosen to focus mostly on the ice tree, and as such have three (four, if you count frozen orb) projectile ice attacks. However, they are, for the most part, the same. You should an ice projectile, and units take damage and are either frozen or slowed. Frozen orb is a little different, but still tends to fill the same role as the other 3.

Why not just have ONE projectile spell, and simply tune it so that if one invests skills in it, it will stay useful throughout the game?

If each skill is unique, and will remain useful to the player for as long as they choose to invest points in it (not saying every point goes to this skill, but one every few levels maybe), then suddenly you don't have to save skill points while lower level. You still make choices about what to invest in, but there are no duplicate skills, and every one can be used at high levels if you put enough points into it.

Also, the progression part, with certain skills required for certain others, would either require careful crafting or removal. It's a waste of skill points and no fun to have to invest a point in one ability just to get another. You can maybe require X number of points on the tree, or a point in x,y, or z, to be able to get this ability, but if you make it too specific you are likely to end up with people investing the minimum and ignoring the skill. If you don't want to use an ability, you should not have to put points in it.

I probably typed way too much detailing this issue and how I hope they change it in D3 (I noticed that the barb used leap, but it dealt damage like a leap attack, so I think--hope--that they are onto this) But I know that the most important thing to me in this newest sequel will be the classes' progression system, and it seems like it ruins the fun of playing a new character if you have to gimp early on just to be good later.

Quote from "XxL2PxX" »

Yes, I would love more WoW in my Diablo 3, shutup and go with the the way it already is