DiabloFans

I for one hated the randomly generated outside levels. They actually frustrate me far more than "add to replayability." I find myself running through areas simply in search of the next goal instead of exploring or stopping to fight monsters. It felt like far more of a hindrance than an enhancement. The squareness of it all certainly didn't help.

I'm all for a static outside world, where they can focus on making it better looking and more unique. Plus actually add in other unique elements if they want (hidden areas that you have to explore to find, rather than everything hidden because the entire world just changed).

Quote from "UndeadDonut" »

Clean, un-detailed, brightly lit dungeons (with really awful looking statues) without a spec of darkness, death and decay & beautiful autum trees in a lush grassy field with rainbows do not scream "Diablo". The dungeon shown in the trailer is supposed to be underneath Tristram... it does not look like ANYTHING that was supposed to be that horrible, bloody, dreadful place we adventured through in D1 (or like any dungeon in D2 even). I also didn't like the non-inclusion of light radius, it shouldn't be lit all over like that. The outdoor enviroment area shown seemed like the Barbarian and Witch Doctor where taking a picnic only then to be assulted by some skeleton bullies who wanted their sandwiches. None of those places in the trailers filled me with "dispair, fear or dread" like they should supposed to. They did not convey a "Diablo" mood or reaction.

You have to consider what this video was for. It was created to be shown on a huge screen in front of hundreds of people to show off a new game. The lack of a light radius makes sense in this situation because they want people to SEE the whole game. I wouldn't automatically jump to the conclusion that the light radius has been eliminated--it seems more likely that they simply eliminated it for this presentation.

I do miss the scattered dead bodies and bloody stains of previous dungeons. This one does seem fairly spotless for being a dungeon. I'm not sure how easy that is to rectify later. Again, this could've been just a way to showcase the game play a little better, but it seems less likely.

Quote from "UndeadDonut" »

Santuary is supposed to be a dark and dreary world, a world filled with fear and depression - with death, blood, sorrow, horrible things everywhere (you get the idea...), this is HELL invading, after all (and even before then, Sanctuary never seemed dandy in the 1st place). It should be like the past 2 Diablo games before it, not like Azeroth. When I play D2, the environments in there look way more detailed and fitting then D3's. D2, an 8 year old game, looks a hellava lot better than D3 does ATM. D2 conveys the whole mood it should.

If you read through the website and some of the "journals" it does have the one character saying that Tristram was not nearly as frightening as he had been lead to believe. I got back to the idea that they're incorporating a broader storyline in DIII. It's 20 years after DII. Things in Tristram and Sanctuary have been cleaned up a bit by people trying to move on and forget the past. In my mind, it makes perfect sense for these areas to not YET be dreary. The demonic forces are just beginning to make their presence felt.

This is a very early stage in the game. Blizzard has given themselves the opportunity to crank up the darkness and despair as the game progresses. Which can act to heighten the player's involvement in the game - you see the world deteriorating in front of you getting even more caught up in the frightening scenarios.

Quote from "UndeadDonut" »

Also, I feel the armour could use some work. Please no huge shoulders, I hated that in WoW (and those shoulders on the Barbarian look exactly like a pair of shoulders from WoW...). It looks really dumb. I detest shoulder slot armour as well. And, the Witch Doctor does indeed look too much like a Troll WD from Warcraft. A very poor decision for a playable class in DIABLO. (I know there is a Witch Doctor unique mob in D2, but that is something entirely different.)

I agree that some of the armor appears to be a little over-the-top. There's definitely an over-exaggerated sense to some of the armor and character styling.

But to say a Witch Doctor is a poor decision for a diablo game doesn't make any sense. It fits the mythos of the game, since there were witch doctor and jungle characters in the jungles around Kurast. The Witch Doctor is no more random than a Druid or Necromancer. They're expanding the game and story in a way that makes sense and brings a fresh set of skills and gameplay to the universe.

Quote from "UndeadDonut" »

Imo, Blizzard is trying to cater to the WoW fanbase too much because they think it would make them all play it. ... Its like a kick in the face to all us old Diablo fans. But then again... no one from the original Diablo series team is still with Blizzard, right?... that could explain... and thats what im afraid of. I hope the lore/story doesn't turn out as bad as the "art direction".

Blizzard understands the power of this franchise. I guarantee that a considerable amount of thought (and probably research) has gone into all of the decisions they've made for the game. In the end, they have to make a game that appeals to the largest market.

Remember that Diablo was released in 1996 and Diablo II in 2000. So, you got into this game series anywhere from 8 to 12 years ago. So ultimately, this game originally appealed to someone 8 to 12 years younger than you are now. To some degree, a game does have to evolve with its fan base. However, if you cater only to your fan base without attracting newer, younger fans, you're dead in the water (example: know anybody under 55 years old who buys a Buick?).

In the end, these guys know how to make a game that's fun for the fans and profitable for them--they have lots and lots of examples to prove it. They're doing what they can to satisfy the "old Diablo faithful" as well as a generation of new gamers.

I'm not saying you should just blindly swallow everything they throw at us, but you really have to accept the idea that every single decision they make isn't going to please you.

Quote from "Eldius" »

That can't be a Fallen, it isn't ugly or menacing enough to be as such.

Menacing? At what point was a fallen or fallen shaman ever menacing? I always regarded that character as goofy - even in the beginning when my character wasn't very strong. I mean, they run at you waving their little weapons around screaming "Rakinishu!" and then they run away. The shaman are just wandering in circles reviving the dead ones, but never acting particularly menacing.

It's a fairly low level character, so I don't expect it to be a huge, terrifying ghoul. It looks like a fair 3D representation of the 2D characters in DII to me.

Quote from "XanderV" »

What difference would that make as whether it were valid or not? It is perfeclty possible to make perfectly great, good art using a restricted color palette. Using all the colors of the rainbow to portray something doesn't make automatically better than using muddy browns, reds, blacks, and so son.

Those colors determine a mood and if lighter, more happier colors take away from the story that the artist is trying to suggest, so be it! ART is about just as much about the constraints you place upon yourself to produce the art rather than the final image itself. LOTS and LOTS of games show what you can do with a restricted color palette. Stop trying to pretend that it's a lesser complaint.

I agree with this. The choice of color palette, whatever it may be, is very important. But just because they broadened the palette on DIII doesn't mean they're using all the colors of the rainbow. To me, there was still a muted feel to the colors in the game play video, hinting at a darker future around the corner.

As for art direction, I can see the point about the statues and over-the-top armor. Part of that, I imagine, is them designing items that actually match the over-the-top names of items we've had in the past.

Quote from "Corwyn" »

That may be the case for you, and many other but for me and many like me the mood and ambiance of a game matters hugely as to whether or not we like it or even play it. I do understand that you may be the type of gamer who can enjoy a game simply for the challenge of finishing or finding the best loot, and not for its visuals and feel, but please don't name me an "angry nerd" because I find D3 lacking in the atmosphere department.

Personally, I thought some of the depth in the video was excellent - like seeing enemies crawl up the walls in the background, or the huge beast walk by. In terms of sound and detail, I thought they did an excellent job in creating a mood.

Again, I do see how there could be a darker, more foreboding edge to the art direction overall. But I'm still willing to consider that, based on what we've seen, they're building a story here. Things are back to normal, people are happy, times are super scary. YET.

They've given themselves an excellent foundation on which to create on escalating sense of dread and fear.

Quote from "Arcanox" »

I'm not even sure how some of the speculation around the look of the game evolving around the plot line started. I haven't seen any evidence to indicate that Blizzard actually intends to do that.

Throughout the gameplay video the narrator makes comments about expanding the story, focusing on the story and developing a more robust story. That's where the speculation comes from - the fact that they talk about the importance of the story throughout the video.

Quote from "Arcanox" »

As for the drastic change, that's also something I have to question. Why should they feel the need to incorporate a large amount of color into the game when so many other titles have done the same thing? At first I actually thought the game looked more like Neverwinter Nights, or some other fantasy based RPG. Wouldn't adding liberal colors be a move that follows the basis for all other fantasy RPG titles? Personally, I feel the original look of Diablo was far more distinct than any of the other comperable titles on the market. If you're going to go out and make a successor to Diablo II, I think you should try and preserve the qualities that made it unique. Even some of the concept art seems to reflect that direction.

I vividly recall fighting many a bright blue or bright green "champion" in DII. There are plenty of bright colors throughout that game. The actually world and backgrounds are far more muted, which I think gets hard on the eyes. Giving the world some more color and depth are vast improvements in my mind.

Quote from "Arcanox" »

I'm willing to trust them to some extent, but unlike others... it's not going to be trust without limit. There are plenty of great aspects to the gameplay video, and I think that's exactly what has people excited about the game thus far and agreeing with the art direction. I'm really just putting some constructive critisim up to the community and trying to rationalize a change in the artwork. You'll note that I only have about 4 posts, but I did play both games despite not being an active member of the communtiy. I've really only registered to put some good arguments because all I've seen thus far is mostly ridiculous polarization on the issue and fits. Everyone should have a better understanding of the issue and actually submit a more coherent set of critisims for Blizzard, or it's really going to be ignored. I might actually take some time over the next couple days to write up some good stuff that hopefully will give the Art Director something to think about.

In the end, I'm wondering how much of the gameplay video was "doctored" to make it show off the game. Obviously, the characters are far stronger than they would be at an early level or dungeon, with a full range of abilities and great armor. They can't really have a character with a crappy light radius if they want to show off the game. And depending on what format they showed it, they may have had to simplify certain things to make sure they showed up smoothly on a huge screen.

As it stands, I thought the game looked great. I think Blizzard gave themselves an opportunity to use the visual style in the game to help tell the story (we've been given some background on the story - this is 20 years after DII, people have forgotten what happened and returned to normal). At this point in the story, from what we know, evil is just starting to grow again.

I expect later dungeons to have a grittier feel. I expect the feeling of doom factor to increase as we go through the game. (And to that end, for everyone who mentions the fear they had to play the game, or how they would get "scared" when they played it... that was 8 years ago, you were probably a little younger than you are now).

To me, it appears they've spent a lot of time updating the look and the game play of the game to provide an even more immersive and entertaining Diablo experience. I'm all for it. Most of the "darkened" screens I've seen people post are simply bland and boring to me, not engaging. Sure, I don't want Diablo to look like Mario Kart, nor do I want it to be a color palette of gray, black, grayish-red, blackish-red, brown and more grayish-gray.

I think it's important to think about everything that was going on in the gameplay video. It's specifically mentioned that they're focusing a lot more on the story and building the story throughout the game in D3.

So, (according to what we're being told) it's 20 years after D2 and people have forgotten or chosen to forget what happened in the past. The short scenes we were shown are in the very beginning of the game. If this is just as things are getting bad, it makes sense that things will look a little brighter--and get darker as the game progresses and evil becomes more prominent.

Colors can be as important to telling a convincing tale as the story itself in a visual medium, so I think they're giving themselves the opportunity to present an ongoing story in the most effective way possible.

As for the characters and realism - I don't know, I'm on the fence. Most animation I've seen that tries to be as realistic as possible usually ends up looking forced and fake. When animators choose to go in a more stylized direction, it's easier to effectively convey emotions and actions because we're not looking for perfect realism.

To me, what I've seen looks to be a perfectly acceptable continuation of the Diablo series. I'm eager to see more information and screenshots to make my final decision on how it looks.