I think this attitude of pre-emptive bashing should be seen in all aspects of our society.
If your professor sees your rough draft and doesn't like it, he should fail you, even if the final paper is to be due 3 months later. Cops should be able to ticket you because your car looks fast. Movie reviewers should write full movie reviews from the movie's preview. Because based off of a 20 minute gameclip we can discern every single solitary aspect of the game and thus have all the knowledge required to write a proper in depth review. The sad part is none of these "critics" seem to have much to say about actual game play other than, inventory icons.
Colorfull and vibrant is certainly not childish, but smiling lion statues with perky little wings? bunny rabbits that hop playfully away from you? rainbows? shoulder pads that appear to be stylized after children's caricatured toys? Your right about the weapons too, these are the sort of overly flashy graphics seen in kids shows and anime movies. I don't want the game to be muddy, but lets face it, stone isn't green and darkness isn't a shade of turquoise. I actually kind of like the outdoor colors, looks natural enough and the watercolor look on its own reminds me of some of the great artwork by the likes of Boris Vallejo.
Can I hit the rabbits with a mace? If I can they are acceptable.
And a dim rainbow that's forming in a place where rainbows ought to naturally form anyway is not unrealistic or childish. And they sure don't cover the land. You won't be looking at rainbows often.
I'm not sure which child's toy they model after. But they do model after those collectible WoW figures, and Warhammer armor. Both of which are bought by the 20+ demographic.
And here a real man wields a flaming sword. See not just for kids.
DIII's graphics are just stylistic. Still a good ways from kiddy.
Jetro your wrong, Cocbuffs meant that when he got older he started to have higher standarts and become more picky instead of blindly embracing any Blizzard game as God's Gift to Mankind...
Swing and a miss. It's almost like you don't know me at all. Oh wait.:thumbsup:
Increase of childishness is not progress, agreed. And surely one can not argue that theey have not increased it.
Or at least one can not deny the presence of childishness. The latter games had the excuse of graphical limitations, but here?
The childishness stretches beyond graphics as well as I see it, via the simpler (less involved) inventory system and who knows what else.
The art style is colorful, vibrant, but that doesn't equate to childishness any more than gritty dirt and depressing colors equates maturity. There's more then enough blood spatters in screens to place it outside of the kidz range graphics content wise. Childishness is a good buzz word to drive a point of view through without explanation, though. "A glow on a weapon is childishness" means "I just hate the weapon glow."
Whats the mature style? Muddy palletes, everyone in the game mean-mugs for no reason? Maybe says the f-word ever so often? No flashing stuff and an inventory that takes 3 seconds longer to organize? Are those really the standards games are judged by today? Not gameplay, depth, story/plot, and all that other stuff?
In a way I wish I was as young as when diablo2 came out, so that maybe just maybe I would not be noticing anything wrong with D3, or not think anything was wrong, or compare it to other games.
You struck the nail on the head. Nostalgia's not gonna trump progress. But the way some of you talk, yall sound like you want Diablo III to look like a really big expansion pack of Diablo II.
It almost seems like alot of series veterans want to just wallow in nostalgia and leave the rest of the player base playing an 8 year old game with high-def graphics.
Is a BoP/BoE style economy really the wisest choice for a none-mmo rpg? Sure wow has a more robust trade economy but it has significant downsides. The problem with a gold based economy system such as WoWs is that the gold system is designed as a quick medium of exchange for a huge variety of goods, from weapons to armor, to potions, to plans, to pets, to food, to worthless doohickies. In the MMO setting it's fine, in a regular rpg, it's a hassle. Any WoW player recognizes how much of a grind getting gold can be. Quite a few high level items are completely unattainable without several days of gold grinding. Constant, repetitive daily quest in Sunwell, hours of running around fields looking for ore to sell, ect are all the driving force of the player economy. That's ok for WoW, but for a regular rpg, lots of players would likely want a focus other than gold farming.
Also WoW has implemented an efficient auction house system that allows a few hundred players to quickly exchange goods quickly and efficiently. There's no such system in Diablo II and one would likely be needed to deal with currency exchanges in III. It's so much easier to simply trade items, than to advertise/hope for a buyer of an item you have, sell it for currency, then turn around and start asking for someone to sell what you want for a price you want.
Inflation might do more harm to players than good. There will always be business moguls in any game that features any sort of economy. The cost of high quality items will be high, in all likely hood high enough that the item won't be affordable without either grinding or saving for a while. This controls the item flow somewhat, but by only limiting high priced items to people willing to put in hard grinds for the cash. But the side effect always seems to be those less devoted to financial pursuits in many mmo's find themselves more and more strapped for cash as levels progress. In alot of ways this makes many mmo task simulated work designed to simply save up enough gold to buy an item so you can have slightly more fun. Sure finally getting the item is fun, but gold grinds are just tolerable in mmo's. Requiring such a system in a game like Diablo just doesn't sound right. And honestly seeing item values deflated in a non-mmo doesn't bother me in the least bit, accessibility to a wider audience is more important.
0
0
If your professor sees your rough draft and doesn't like it, he should fail you, even if the final paper is to be due 3 months later. Cops should be able to ticket you because your car looks fast. Movie reviewers should write full movie reviews from the movie's preview. Because based off of a 20 minute gameclip we can discern every single solitary aspect of the game and thus have all the knowledge required to write a proper in depth review. The sad part is none of these "critics" seem to have much to say about actual game play other than, inventory icons.
0
Can I hit the rabbits with a mace? If I can they are acceptable.
And a dim rainbow that's forming in a place where rainbows ought to naturally form anyway is not unrealistic or childish. And they sure don't cover the land. You won't be looking at rainbows often.
I'm not sure which child's toy they model after. But they do model after those collectible WoW figures, and Warhammer armor. Both of which are bought by the 20+ demographic.
And here a real man wields a flaming sword.
DIII's graphics are just stylistic. Still a good ways from kiddy.
0
Swing and a miss. It's almost like you don't know me at all. Oh wait.:thumbsup:
The art style is colorful, vibrant, but that doesn't equate to childishness any more than gritty dirt and depressing colors equates maturity. There's more then enough blood spatters in screens to place it outside of the kidz range graphics content wise. Childishness is a good buzz word to drive a point of view through without explanation, though. "A glow on a weapon is childishness" means "I just hate the weapon glow."
Whats the mature style? Muddy palletes, everyone in the game mean-mugs for no reason? Maybe says the f-word ever so often? No flashing stuff and an inventory that takes 3 seconds longer to organize? Are those really the standards games are judged by today? Not gameplay, depth, story/plot, and all that other stuff?
0
You struck the nail on the head. Nostalgia's not gonna trump progress. But the way some of you talk, yall sound like you want Diablo III to look like a really big expansion pack of Diablo II.
It almost seems like alot of series veterans want to just wallow in nostalgia and leave the rest of the player base playing an 8 year old game with high-def graphics.
0
Also WoW has implemented an efficient auction house system that allows a few hundred players to quickly exchange goods quickly and efficiently. There's no such system in Diablo II and one would likely be needed to deal with currency exchanges in III. It's so much easier to simply trade items, than to advertise/hope for a buyer of an item you have, sell it for currency, then turn around and start asking for someone to sell what you want for a price you want.
Inflation might do more harm to players than good. There will always be business moguls in any game that features any sort of economy. The cost of high quality items will be high, in all likely hood high enough that the item won't be affordable without either grinding or saving for a while. This controls the item flow somewhat, but by only limiting high priced items to people willing to put in hard grinds for the cash. But the side effect always seems to be those less devoted to financial pursuits in many mmo's find themselves more and more strapped for cash as levels progress. In alot of ways this makes many mmo task simulated work designed to simply save up enough gold to buy an item so you can have slightly more fun. Sure finally getting the item is fun, but gold grinds are just tolerable in mmo's. Requiring such a system in a game like Diablo just doesn't sound right. And honestly seeing item values deflated in a non-mmo doesn't bother me in the least bit, accessibility to a wider audience is more important.