-
- ExGhoul
- Registered User
-
Member for 15 years and 9 months
Last active Sat, Aug, 9 2008 01:19:39
- 0 Followers
- 56 Total Posts
- 0 Thanks
-
Aug 7, 2008ExGhoul posted a message on Diablo 3 Art Director Resignsjay: lead designer =/= art directorPosted in: News
-
Aug 5, 2008ExGhoul posted a message on Jay Wilson on Art Direction @ KotakuImmersive? That's your argument?Posted in: News
LOL!
Coming from a guy who signed the "Diablo should be darker" internet joke petition #14234
I'll take Blizzards approach on how to get a player immersed in the game.
There is no way I believe you even play other games with such a close-minded nitpicky mind as yourself by the way you ridicule D3 and say you won't play it for anything other than the story because the shoulder pads are a wee too bigBecause this is how we remember what “Diablo II” was like as well. This is what we were thinking what “Diablo II” looks like. And then we played through, and we were like this isn’t very fun. And then we started going, “Why was ‘Diablo II’ so much more fun?” And some of the Blizzard North guys [the team that made 'Diablo I' and 'II'] knew why right away. They were like, “Well, because we didn’t make all the areas like this.” And if you think about even the areas they did, the creatures were really bright. Like in the gray and dark dungeons, those are the places that you run into the ghosts who were almost like glowing brightness, and that was so that they would stand out from the backgrounds.
I think one of the things that these lack is if you stuck every one of these re-done shots right next to each other you would not be able to tell that they’re in different areas. One of the things that’s key to “Diablo II” — and I’ve gone through and done timing on it — it changes environments every 15 minutes, and every 45 minutes they give you an environment that looks completely different than one you’ve ever seen before. And when they change environments, the contrast is huge. It’s like I’m in green lush fields, and now I’m in the darkest dungeon you’ve ever seen. I’m in a bright sandy desert, and now I’m in a completely dim mummy tomb. There are these vast shifts in look, and it’s one of the things that keeps people interested in playing the game.
It’s a very simple game, and [you need to ] constantly vary what you throw at the player — big look changes in the environment, creature changes with different behavior. And not just behavior; we spent a lot of time trying to make creatures show up and die more interestingly. Because those are all the things that keep you going. Each one of those things is a reward. When you pull all the color out of the environment and you make it too homogeneous across the game, essentially what you’re doing is you’re pulling away the player’s reward of feeling like they’ve progressed because the area they’re in now looks like the area they were in 30 to 45 minutes ago.
So that’s one of the reasons why we really felt we had to do this. We had to move to an art style that had a lot more variety in it and was capable of a lot more.
thanks. You just made my day! -
Aug 5, 2008ExGhoul posted a message on Jay Wilson on Art Direction @ KotakuPosted in: NewsQuote from "Kenzai" »Dont know what you call 'flaming' exactly, but your posts definitely include heavy insulting.
Yeah StarCraft and Warhammer 40000 have big pauldrons. :rolleyes:
Just plainly ridiculous...
I dont think i can productively discuss with you or anyone else who stands with you after this point.
Wait wait wait...
What makes it ok for those shoulder pads to be huge but the ones in D3 are "a little too big"?
Not realistic? ...neither is D3.
Not in the older games? ....this isn't the older games
Not Exactley your taste? ...ding ding we have a winner. However, TOUGH.
But why? ... because your not making the game. Get over it and quit trying to tell people how to do thier job. The game isn;t even out yet and you haven't seen much of it! I'm sure some shoulder pads will be smaller, some will be larger!
LOL. This is just getting silly. You got told by Jay Wilson
Guess what, this is not Diablo 2 with updated graphics. Again, you don;t know how to make Diablo 3 "more Diablo" than the creators themselves. Everyone will have small things they want changed about the game but to complain about things when you realize it's your Personal opinion and closing off the creativity of the creators is just silly. - To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
0
He explains - "Diablo is a game you play for, hopefully, hundreds of hours, and one of the rewards is a variety of different-looking environments." People looking back on old Diablo, he said, may have a selective memory. "People remember the Act I dungeons... but they kind of conveniently forget the green fields of Act I, and all of Act II... and it's palaces, its bright deserts."
It's actually a pretty good read and discusses nothing but the art direction of the game.
http://kotaku.com/5031732/art-apocalypse-blizzards-wilson-talks-diablo-iii-design-decisions
Let's face it, these people know games... more so than the fans who can even claim to be their biggest fans.
0
0
Oh? Is Blizzard allowed by you now to keep the colors they want but in order to they must do certain things thought up by that genius mind of yours? Listen to how you talk "They should do this! They should do that! They are allowed to this only if they do that!." Who are you again? What do you do? Wow, you would think with such talent as yours and such knowledge of "WUT IZ DIABLOZ" that would have already applied at Blizzard and be working on the game.... :rolleyes:
0
So first you're telling me how Diablo 'should be' then you're telling me how 'gothic' should be. No thanks, I'll take Blizzards viewpoint of Diablo, and historians' viewpoints on what the term 'gothic' refers to. :rolleyes: You've totally discredited yourself here....
0
Huh? It is gothic.
Either way the argument over "what is goth lololololol" doesn't really apply when you dealing with fantasy. There can be influences within the fantasy if the game developer decides to but Diablo in no way takes place in a realistic gothc era.
Look, the game will be awesome. You know this. The game will probably look better than you think. You know this as well. What you don't know is "What make's Diablo more Diablo" than the creators of the game themselves, since you know.. they make the game. The whole "It will look better if it's just Diablo 2 with updated graphics" yelling and petitioning is getting old. You crybabies really haven't put forth an argument past "IT SHULD B LIEK DIS CUZ... we played Diablo 2 more than anyone else and we know what better!" It's all opinion. Sucks for you, most people agree with Blizzard I guess.
0
Well, you see here
Note the word original -
o·rig·i·nal
1.belonging or pertaining to the origin or beginning of something, or to a thing at its beginning: The book still has its original binding.
2.new; fresh; inventive; novel: an original way of advertising.
3.arising or proceeding independently of anything else: an original view of history.
4.capable of or given to thinking or acting in an independent, creative, or individual manner: an original thinker.
5.created, undertaken, or presented for the first time: to give the original performance of a string quartet.
6.being something from which a copy, a translation, or the like is made: The original document is in Washington. –noun
7.a primary form or type from which varieties are derived.
8.an original work, writing, or the like, as opposed to any copy or imitation: The original of this is in the British Museum.
9.the person or thing represented by a picture, description, etc.: The original is said to have been the painter's own house.
10.a person whose ways of thinking or acting are original: In a field of brilliant technicians he is a true original.
11.Archaic. an eccentric person.
12.Archaic. a source of being; an author or originator.
0
Well, what happened was the kiddos who think they canmake better games than Blizzard decided to tell everyone what they 'think' Blizzard needs to do to make the game... more like Blizzard's game. :rolleyes:
0
Wow, after all this discussion and you still seem to be missing the point. I'm almost tempted to tell you to not buy Diablo 3 and stick with the old crap since that's the only thing you seem interested in doing. Sorry, Blizzard doesn't want to make Diablo 2 but 'with updated graphics.'
Go back and read the updated first post. There are people who have played the game that initially had the same concerns as you. After playing the game and seeing it in motion, first hand, they realized what a more extended color pallete can do for a game to immerse the player in the environment while sticking to a certain atmospheric feeling. I'm alost jsut tempted to say "you know, you don't have to play this game, go play the other hundred games that are engrossed with greay and brown that have hit the market the last 2 years." It's getting old IMO. THen again, I play on a huge monitor so picturing nothing but greys and blacks because you think it looks more "evil and Diablo" make my stomache churn.
0
0
So Diablo 3 just recently got announced and shown and people are already crying? Wow, simply don't play the game if you think "the shoulder pads are too big" or "itz gotz too many colorz"
Nobody is making you play the game... that's not even released yet. Personally I dont want to look at a game that is nothing but grey. It's about time we moved away from greys and browns in video games.
Simply put - QQ more noobs.
0
Welcome to the forums! Enjoy your stay! Please be sure to read the Rules of Conduct!
0
LOL! Nicely done sir. :thumbsup: You just made my lols for the day.
...and for all you haters who don't like all the colors, quit hating gheyz. Without them, teh internetz wouldn't have as many lulz.