It's going to be hard to post a talent build when the whole rune system was recently converted into something else.
But I'm a gonna do it anyway. You will bow before my Demon Hunter.
-
- Creepsville
- Registered User
-
Member for 15 years and 9 months
Last active Mon, Mar, 19 2012 21:22:25
- 0 Followers
- 554 Total Posts
- 13 Thanks
-
Feb 21, 2012Creepsville posted a message on Diablofans Diablo 3 Beta Key Contests! 450 Keys to win!Posted in: News
-
Feb 16, 2012Creepsville posted a message on Diablofans Diablo 3 Beta Key Contests! 450 Keys to win!Thanks Diablo Fans. Totally following you guys.Posted in: News
I kinda wish we had some more creative contests going, but these will do! -
Jan 12, 2012Creepsville posted a message on Development Article Soon, What's NOT Delaying the Game, Zarhym on "The Big Meeting"Why are Blizz employees having quote by quote throw downs with these disgruntled gamers? Weird. Borderline unprofessional if you ask me, but then again it might get people to stop assuming so much when it comes to a fucking tweet.Posted in: News
-
Aug 28, 2008Creepsville posted a message on G4TV's Adam Sessler Attacks Diablo 3's Art HatersPosted in: NewsQuote from "Kenzai" »
LOL you sure took them down.
It feels good.
You sure your english is good? Is your mind clear right now? Re-read please. Thanks.
Your question makes no sense. Rewrite it so that it makes sense.
Depending on your wiev they may be "good" or "awarage". But some people care much about those models seen through the whole game.
Most people care and most people like them. Moving on.
Other than that, D3 has those issues with the models and animations etc. which are much different than the environment issues.
If by "issues" you mean "not to Kenzai's personal tastes" then yes, D3 has "issues"...
The situation is the same. People cried when they saw that D2 has outdoor areas and intense, saturated colors. They said things were too bright. Now D3 is the same situation. If a forrest isn't shrouded in black charred bones and covered in a rain of blood somehow it is considered "happy" and "bright". The forest I saw was pretty, but in no way did it seem "happy". It seemed like a solid fantasy game area that was refreshing after being in a dungeon. -
Aug 28, 2008Creepsville posted a message on G4TV's Adam Sessler Attacks Diablo 3's Art HatersPosted in: NewsQuote from "Kenzai" »And you were talking about repeting. :rolleyes:
I'm enjoying taking down the same points you keep bringing up in multiple threads.
1) So what if the game progresses into more darkness? Even the monsters in the first places will be happy and cheerful? Also the style of the models of some objects and lighting style etc. are things that most likely stay during the whole game. (I think its actually a part of the art style. Though it would be enaugh to just improve them in some way without changing them all that much.)
I don't really see what you are asking here. Yes, the game's story leads into darker areas. Moving on.
2) How in the hells do those things not matter for the gaming experience? Ill see those things the whole game.
Ah ha! See? You didn't read. I said that they don't "take you out" of the game experience. Of course, they matter, but they aren't BAD DESIGNS. They don't distract you from the game. They don't make normal people say "oh shit! those shoulders are too big and bulky! They don't allow free form of motion!!!!" If it doesn't take you out of the fantasy they've created then it is not worth asking to change it based on personal tastes or your interpretation of reality.
3) Not every kind of change is the same. You can change by improving from the previous aspects (example is below) or you can change it totally. D3 is i think kinda in between, they tried to just improve but changed some things kinda wrong or something, i dont really know either how they brought it to the current state.
You don't like change. Your arguments constantly refer to D2 as some kind of Diablo standard. You do realize that there was a minority of people who complained when they saw how D2 had changed from D1, right? Well, this situation is no different. -
Aug 27, 2008Creepsville posted a message on G4TV's Adam Sessler Attacks Diablo 3's Art HatersPosted in: NewsQuote from "Kenzai" »
If you look at the petition and all the debates again, youll see that what i said are a part of the most common "problems". Not problem for everyone of course, but things that could be changed in a way that it please more old fans.
The petition doesn't cite actual game problems. It instead explains that Diablo needs to meet a standard of personal taste.
The game has no real problems as it is. It just isn't dark enough for some people. However - if you tell a good story you know that it can't be on the same wavelength and have the same mood the entire time. If D3 was dark and ugly the entire time we would get bored quickly. D3 isn't post apocalyptic. It's post the world is healing up. Putting in nice areas and then having the storty take us to new corrupted areas and darker dungeons gives the feeling of a progression. A journey into the unknown. A quest that leads us from comfy villages and into the jaws of doom.
Secondly, none of the things complained about in the petition take people out of the experience. Hence, there isn't a real problem. It's a matter of taste. Your taste isn't necessarily what's "true" to Diablo. It's arrogant to assume it is.
You guys simply don't like change. That's what it really comes down to. -
Aug 27, 2008Creepsville posted a message on G4TV's Adam Sessler Attacks Diablo 3's Art HatersPosted in: NewsQuote from "Kenzai" »Whats your problem? It really doesnt matter. I dont want to watch a video of some guy yelling at me. Answering to you is probably the same, so i dont think i have to watch it.
A. You cant underestimate the number of people who want some changes just in this forum. It is clear that there are a lot of people.
B. If those minor changes arent going to affect YOU, and also not the release date etc., then why do you care? The people who like the current look are NOT going to be affected.
If some people want the whole graphics to be totally revamped and arent going to be happy after some changes in models, lighting etc., no one can do anything for them.
So forget about that part of people.
But it is clear that many people will be a lot more happy than now, only if you improve the parts i pointed out (and some that i probably leaved out). Im totally sure about that.
And it WONT affect YOU.
Why dont you just stop thinking about that if you wont understand it?
It was meant to be more funny than credible. And if you want to see what i mean without looking to the serious part, remove Mickey and put something like "bulky shoulder pads" or the like. (JUST an example.)
Tell me if you had any problems with D2's OR D1's equipment models, environment, animations etc..
The lighting was kinda bad in dungeons in D2. It was pretty good in D1.
The graphics in D2 are kinda "pixelated" or however you call that, it was better in D1.
So never forget about the first game.
AND I DONT SAY MAKE IT THE SAME.
What has to remain same is the credibility of the game and how "imersive" it is.
Also, you dont need green (sourceless) lighting in a dungeon to make the player see the monsters better. (Gameplay)
Im summing it up, as these quotes get messy:
Even though some people are going to remain unhappy in some way, some minor changes in the models, environment, lighting, animations etc. will make the biggest part of people clearly more happy than now.
Those are things that, 1. wont affect the people who currently like the graphics and 2. wont affect the release date (much). So that means it doesnt have much of a downside.
As more people will be at least less disappointed and hopefully a lot more happy with those little changes, Blizzard's reputation will get better in their eyes, and theres a possibility that more sales will be reached. But thats not the important part.
Even if the increase in sales is tiny when compared to the sales in total, pleasing the older fans of the franchise is morally a plus for the company. And as i said before, it most probably wont have much of a downside.
Keep telling yourself all of this,...if you really think it will help. There is no point arguing with someone with no points and only make-believe and self-assurance used in repetition as their tools. You don't know what will make everyone happy. You'd like to think you do so that your vision of what D3 should be would be the "best" thing out there. And that's what you're always talking about in every thread: The "perfect" game - in YOUR eyes.
If you still can't understand that then it's no wonder you keep droning on like a broken record. -
Aug 27, 2008Creepsville posted a message on G4TV's Adam Sessler Attacks Diablo 3's Art HatersPosted in: NewsQuote from "Kenzai" »HAHA. Be honest Creepsville, did you ever really use the ignore list?
Yes.
Does he explain any better? I dont think so.
You didn't watch half of it. You admitted this.
"You want it changed into this and that!!!"...
I dont want "the game" (the full art direction) to be changed into something. I want some easy-to-implement improvements thatll please lots of people.
Don't rationalize why what you are asking for is reasonable. It still is you wanting to change the game. You like to appeal to numbers (citing the petition) when:
A. We all know that the petition isn't a reliable source.
B. There is a majority of people who don't share your sentiment on what counts as "better".
The things i listed are all things that can be reached without major changes. And theyll please the most part.
It wont affect the release date (much), and it wont make it worse for the currently happy people. Theyll get possibly more sales and a better reputation.
Your idea still falls within the boundaries of what YOU think is better for the game, whether you mention other people or not. You don't know that it will please everyone. You also know nothing about what it will do for Blizzard's reputation. You're guessing and hoping. That's ok, but you need to understand that "better' is subjective. And Blizzard hasn't shown us their entire vision of the game yet.
/facepalm
Thats why i added the serious part.
Someone who uses his mind will get the main point. Mickey is just to make it funny.
It doesn't matter. Like I said, it relied on jumping to the far end of the spectrum to prove a point, which is self defeating because your point only has presence if Mickey Mouse is really being put into D3.
Again, i (and probably everyone else) just want changes that are going to improve it even more and leave more people happy.
You're definitely on an appeal to the masses kick. What you don't know is: That you are the minority. You are fans and your voice counts, but your ideas, I feel, won't make Diablo 3 a better game for "everyone". -
Aug 26, 2008Creepsville posted a message on G4TV's Adam Sessler Attacks Diablo 3's Art HatersPosted in: NewsQuote from "Kenzai" »Watched half of the thing.
That's not good...
Is the only thing he says through the interwiev "People cant say Blizz what D3 looks like!"?
No, he says more than that.
Warning, hyperbole:
So if Blizz decides to put MickyMouse in D3 as a boss, we cant complain?
You still don't get it do you? No one said that you can't complain, but they are saying that it is arrogant to assume that Diablo needs to be changed into what you personally envision it as.
Even though im fully serious with what i said there, i know people will ignore it just because... "hyperbole".
Exactly. Your points rely on exaggerations that make them moot. Mickey Mouse is not the level of bad that you people are complaining about. You're complaining about a game in which you've seen barely anything, and you're complaining about lighting and armor design in a microscopic way that seems inflated and premature at this point from what we've seen of the game.
So serious now: If they want to f' around with how Diablo looks, fine. But complaints about it are unavoidable. Them saying something like that would be just like accepting that they dont plan to stay true to Diablo.
In your eyes. In mine they've taken the series to the next level.
Some random things i would like to see:
- More "realistic" equipment models. And i dont say equipment of the barb (an example) should be like real-life armor. But it should be "immersive". The current ones will clearly bang on his head if he moves his head. Or like VegasRage said: The female barb better doesnt shrug her shoulders.
- Better models for environmental objects. Those chairs and tables could be a lot more kickass. They somehow look like toys imo, and there are more people who dislike them.
- Better animations for spells and item glow. Its a bit too big. A slight glow or buzz could be kickass, but seeing the full power of the element when it first hits the monster (kinda like in the previous games) is really kickass and doesnt have a chance of affecting the credibility.
- Contrast between monster and environment could be better. This will hopefully be better thatnks to blood and corpses staying longer. But even before we start slaughtering, the place should be a bit dirty.
- The green dungeon is kinda weird and doesnt really create a good atmosphere.
They are changing the dungeons to add even more grit. They won't be changing the armor or lighting. They won't be making most of those changes. But I bet once you see the final game you'll see a darker game than you thought previously. I bet you'll be surprised. -
Aug 26, 2008Creepsville posted a message on G4TV's Adam Sessler Attacks Diablo 3's Art HatersPosted in: NewsQuote from "VegasRage" »I don't recall seeing half the complaint's about D2 that I have on D3
That was a different era. An era of less whiny internet folly. Blizzard wasn't as popular. Gamers weren't as jaded.
And guess what?
Wilson has said himself that he recalls people complaining that D2 was way too bright and colorful as well upon release. -
Aug 24, 2008Creepsville posted a message on G4TV's Adam Sessler Attacks Diablo 3's Art HatersStrange. Wilson said that the levels shown were made only for the demo video and not from the actual game. He also said in the latest video interview that they were the most "cheerful" (if you could even use such a word) looking things in the game.Posted in: News
So once again, the people that have been complaining have been wasting their energy and are premature in their claims. -
Aug 24, 2008Creepsville posted a message on G4TV's Adam Sessler Attacks Diablo 3's Art HatersI tire of people saying that Wilson is making excuses and being dishonest. As if there is even one shred of evidence that he is doing either of those things.Posted in: News
He explains why they made the decisions they did with the game and tells it like it is. Then people suddenly can't attack the game anymore, and they have to attack him. It's pathetic. It's low. And it's frighteningly boring. You can't discredit his decisions just because you don't agree with them.
The video was funny and made some good points. For the most part people are happy with the game and the people complaining don't even understand that - even after Jay has said it - that the game will give them the dark world of Diablo. They are too busy screaming about rainbows and winne the pooh to bring a real complaint to light these days. -
Aug 19, 2008Creepsville posted a message on Bill Roper Shares Diablo III ThoughtsPosted in: NewsQuote from "Anheuser" »One second while I dig up the Jay Wilson interview.
One minute while I put the quotes back into CONTEXT.
WoW did NOT influence the art style of Diablo 3. WoW did influence the way in which they approached making the game as they learned a lot from WoW - as Jay Wilson has said. You took my quote out of context.
But to say that WoW's art style influenced Diablo 3's art style is ridiculous. It's the artists that conjure the art style - not the previous art they've worked on. People are getting the horse before the cart on this one.
Sorry, Kenzai. I still have you on ignore. I just responded to your rant because someone else quoted it. -
Aug 19, 2008Creepsville posted a message on Bill Roper Shares Diablo III ThoughtsPosted in: NewsIt doesnt matter how 'old' those arguments are because people still dont seem to understand. Thus reposting them is good sometimes.
Wrong. They are the same tired, and defeated arguments and misinformed phrases over and over again. No one wants to hear about how Diablo 3 is a "Copy Paste WoW" anymore. It isn't.
There very well IS WoW (or WC) influence in the greaphics of D3. You cant deny the fact that the models in the previous games were better in some way.
Actually they even kind of admitted some WoW influence, but unfortunately not in which aspect so it cant be used as proof for anything.
Wrong. The models for D3 are way more detailed - not to mention - 3D! Also, WoW is NOT an influence. Blizzard's art teams are the influence and they created WoW so you might see some similarities there, but it is not COPY PASTE WoW. That much is obvious.
Also i think some people here have problems with understanding 'examples' or 'comparisons' properly. While the first person just said "Would you be happy if D3 had good gameplay and Pokemon graphics?", the second person is saying that D3 graphics arent like Pokemon.
Wrong. You and many others of your ilk are having problems making decent arguments so you resort to exaggerations and bring pokemon into the mix. You can't form a single decent point so you have to resort to false analogies and ridiculous comparison scenarios that box the argument into your narrow point of view.
BTW you kind of admit that D3 is cartoony when sayin "D3 isnt as cartoony as Pokemon."
Wrong. That's out of context. D3 is stylized. Pokemon is cartoony. There is a difference.
(Im starting starting to think that your English is not very good because of your writing but maybe you wrote in a hurry. "... same level of cartoony that Pokemon uses." What in the Hells?)
Wrong. Your english just sucks. It has always sucked. And it has always led to you misunderstanding most of the reasonable things people have typed to you. You can't even comprehend a joke most of the time - let alone a point about art direction. -
Aug 18, 2008Creepsville posted a message on Bill Roper Shares Diablo III ThoughtsThese arguments from people complaining about the art direction are old, especially when they show up in every other thread.Posted in: News
Your Pokemon comparison holds no weight because the new Diablo is nowhere near the same level of cartoony that Pokemon uses. Also, the game does not look like WoW. It does look like a Blizzard game though and it appears as if Diablo has evolved into a much more engaging and rich game environment.
Change is good. Evolution of a game is inevitable if the people working on it have any talent. WoW has not been copy and pasted. That's lazy arguing from jaded kids who like to use the net as a soap box for railing against everything. - To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
0
0
0
0
But yeah, when I pick up the game at launch we'll see if I get exited again. This same thing happened with SC2 and I still haven't beaten the game because Blizz upped my expectations too much by making me wait and wait and wait.
0
And let's remember Baal from the D2 expansion. Baal led an army and seemed to have very human traits. He had more going on than Diablo at least. And remember, that Diablo is a known as a PRIME EVIL for a reason. He's evil.
**Edit: Did some more Diablo research. He's apparently the strongest brother and drives those that work for him through sheer terror, which are some damn good villain traits.
0
To be honest it seems like there's a lot of rationalization for why he's so evil when to me that should be obvious from the start. The best version of him creeping me out as a villain which someone pointed out is that he invades your character at the end of Diablo 1. I remember when I first saw that cutscene and it did send a shiver down my spine. So that is a good villainous trait. And in 2 watching him slowly envelop our warrior from the first game was eerie, but still these things are still passive threats. Diablo is always trying to mettle with things, as demons do. His threat seems to be more about "What COULD happen..." vs. "Diablo just burnt down half the planet." (Except I get the feeling in D3 we may come to see him pull off something like that.)
0
As in Darth Vader (Pre-Lucas Prequels) would wet his big black pants over him?
For me, he's loot. Background. I'm hoping 3 will change that.
0
Nay. You are not allowed to join our band of snarky misanthropes.
0
0
Usually the best villains in movies don't think they're evil. Could this be the case for Diablo? Is his perspective that he is merely doing what is right and good by his culture?
It's interesting isn't it that Diablo is the game title and he's not the great super demon in the mythos of Sanctuary. I guess that's a good thing if you want to make sequels. If he were the head super beast beating him each game would feel like anti-climactic repetition.
But don't you think in the world of story villains that Diablo is kind of...lackluster? He never springs to mind as any kind of great villain to me when I do a line up of them. He's more of a guy we kill in order to beat a game and get phat loots kinda monster (which could very well change in D3). You know what I mean? He doesn't ever make me go: "Oh damn that Diablo! Look at what he did to this village!" Instead he's just kind of,...there. In the background somewhere, waiting to be killed by me. He's not plucking off baby heads or deflowering virgins or eating angel stew or spreading a plague or anything really. He's just...there.
And ever notice how no one ever talks about Diablo as a villain? He's just a trophy at the end of a game. He's not a constant impediment for the hero like villains in classic tales are. And there in lies my answer: He isn't a consistent obstacle for the main character - passively he is, but actively - not so much. That's why he feels so background to me and not as badass as he should to me. D2 still worked as a cool story because we hunted a still developing Diablo who gave us obstacles to overcome. But still...somehow...he feels so far away and background.
Other games use this principle and it works. It's not a big deal, but it does make a difference when your game is named after that villainous character for me. It makes me expect way more out of the villain.
0
But his character. His motivations. His thoughts. His power. It isn't explored all that much. Perhaps with 3 they will have the chance to show us more and surprise us. As far as demons go though he's just a fairly large big red demon. Almost the same thing you've been killing the entire game. Seems like they will have to toss in some more characterization for him in 3 and maybe some plot twists to raise the stakes and the threat Diablo poses. I mean, they were able to make an expansion around his brother so he's actually just one of a group of evils in the end - what makes him an especially potent evil over the others? Or is it debatable?
With so much room in the story to make him grow as a character I just can't wait for 3 any longer.
0
Nope. Didn't help. Even if I am Club Treasurer.
0
0
I call Club Treasurer.
0
I mean, comparatively speaking when it comes to great villains in stories and media through history.
The game is named after him, and we are on the 3rd game now, and really, what do we know about Diablo and his aspirations? He wants to help the baddies defeat the goodies and take over the world. Done. That's it.
Or is there a lot more to this mystical demon and I'm missing it?
In D2 Diablo is kinda dormant while his brothers are spinning the gears. And in one he is...manipulating the mind of a king and plotting to do something naughty in a dungeon.
So many people talk about this game in terms of action, classes, loot, but never are they ever talking about the character its based around. Never are they saying " Damn, Diablo is one evil bitch and hard as hell to kill and could you believe that evil shit he did in Act 2? Damnnnnn!"
What is so special about Diablo - the character? Tell me what I'm missing as I'm not that much of a lore buff.