DiabloFans

I guess there is a "NEW" skill system involving diablo 3.

My link

The new skill system is pretty awesome. The first time I saw it I knew it fit. Of course I'll look like a fool if we change it again, but I think we found something that fits the game really well. It's actually not too far off from the tiered approach we had shown before, but a few important differences really make it something different and awesome.

From the one and only bash. Some "important differences" from previous skill tree's we have seen. Who knows what it could be. He also mentioned it wasn't far off from a "tiered approach".

It's nice to see there doing something interesting with the skill pages though. I'd be lying if I said I wasn't intrigued.

Quote from Azriel

Quote from Shelledfade_4967505

If you are trying to represent hell, you aren't going to do it with flowers and a pretty smile. Take mephies lair in D2 as reference.

Well, then again, we don't want Hell to look like red walls, red carpet, and a dead guy here and there.

There. Will. Be. Blood.

Just pointing out the fact that you say this picture is going overboard with blood/gore? Imo its one of the most lenient looking gore pictures I've ever seen and there really isn't that much blood. Just sort of stained on the ground a bit after a fight which would be expected from the aftermath of a fight or struggle.

and don't even get me started on a T for teen rating. They said countless times this game would be rated M//mature. If it isn't rated M in the end, diablo himself would come out of the ground under blizzard and start disemboweling Jay Wilson himself.

Quote from Azriel

Quote from slumlord

You say you don't get the whole comparison, yet you're the one bringing the comparison into this thread!

Hmm, maybe I'm just looking in the wrong place. Go onto any D3 Youtube video and you'll see a flock of idiots saying that shit. Sorry for getting you guys mixed up with that bag of degenerates (really, I truly am).

And I agree, there are some WoW qualities in D3's graphics, but I guess my argument was directed towards those who think it's a bad thing. I love the fact that they can incorporate rich color into the game.

Now, onto the actual topic (unless I'm misunderstood): the picture. Not too fond of it, looks too gritty, and, frankly, I can't look at it without thinking, "wow, a little overboard there, guys?" I mean, yeah, I love that dark, brooding style of Goth, but they executed that poorly. I would've liked it if things blended together a little bit and the lighting wasn't so prominent.

Not saying it's a bad pic, but I don't think that should be Diablo 3's end product. I'm all for Scream Bloody Gore, but that picture is going a little overboard with it.

Regarding that end bit, this is supposed to be a rated M game. M for mature. This isn't supposed to be torchlight bro. I want as much gore/disgusting//horrific stuff as possible. If you are trying to represent hell, you aren't going to do it with flowers and a pretty smile. Take mephies lair in D2 as reference.

Quote from Magistrate

Quote from Shelledfade_4967505

Only because you +1'd a ridiculous post...

The irony is palpable.

1. I'm basing all information and points that I'm making based on all information they have so far released

So is most of the opposition to your points. We're basing our arguments on what Blizzard's told us, what we've seen so far, and our own opinions, no different from you. The difference is we're actually citing a credible source. A game company. We're not just finding or making random photoshopped pictures.

2. I am not basing what I have seen on pictures only. There are several gameplay trailers that show the game in action and blizzcon demo footage as well.

I can't say that any of the recent videos show much of any of your complaints, but maybe I missed some of yours.

3. As for your cake reference I'm not even going there because I find it absolutely ridiculous and based on the fact that I find it absolutely ridiculous I cannot even acknowledge it to be honest.

I think you only find it ridiculous because, in simple and very approachable terms, it highlights the fundamental problem with fighting the style and graphics of a game with a photoshopped image of the game. The two are completely incomparable. It's like trying to disprove the artistry of a movie or a drama performance with a picture. They're different art forms, and photoshopping an image just takes about ten minutes of clipping, desaturating, and pasting.

4. There is nothing wrong with this photoshopped picture. It looks amazing.

The inherent problem here is that, as has been said countless times and is continually ignored, we've seen barely two acts of the game, and only the overworld for most of it: a world coming out of an era of peace and prosperity. An era where everything isn't burned to the ground, where every castle wasn't made into a labyrinth of ghosts and demons, and where the populace was not raped, skinned, and stuck on wooden stakes. Of the dungeons we have seen: 1) the demo from the WWI, which was the first dungeon they finished and was only done for the announcement (will not be in the game), 2) the old Tristram cathedral dungeons, which look awesome, are filled with eerie light, darkness, the Undead, and ruin, and 3) the desert tombs, which were a bit brighter, but still looked both awesome and unique. I think the argument could best combat the last dungeon there, but that's it.

I can understand your confusion and opinion, but it simply is not applicable yet. Once we get through the story, then yes, I'll take your argument more seriously, specifically regarding lighting and artistic style. So far, I see no concern for light radius. It's superfluous in the overworld and, I believe, was confirmed for dungeons.

5. Everyone knows Diablo 3 is the successor of diablo 1 and 2. It wouldn't be called diablo 3 if it wasn't.

No, it's the successor of Diablo II. Diablo II and Diablo I are completely different in geographic scope, style, and gameplay.

6. Your car reference, I see no point to it at all. And it really looks like a bad troll attempt.

It makes a very good point without wasting precious minutes of my time to read through six paragraphs of text.

7. As for the guy who quoted this post, why would you quote such a ridiculous post that doesn't even bring 1 real argument to the table and seems more like a vulgar angry women's outcry and/or troll attempt for very real concerns about what they have showed us this far and does not even give one good point. I do not know. It seemed completely illogical to me. I'm still in awe that you quoted and +1'd it. But too each his own.

Actually, based on your attitude, how you refer to his argument, and how that poster did not call your arguments ridiculous, vulgar, or trolling, I would say you're the troll here. And I am Magistrate. Please remember that.

I find your attempt to insult my intelligence lacking in effort and I find you hilarious to take the other poster seriously. You can't make good arguments and points so you quote cake and cars and will go down any road to try and make some kind of insane point but its hitting a brick wall and we both know that.

I don't care if you are bashiok, magistrate, the pope, news reporter or god himself. I have some dignity to know when I'm being trolled upon. I suggest closing the thread if you think I am trolling. I honestly thought YOU were the troll with a (+1) on one of the most ridiculous posts I've ever seen lol. Either way I suggest you stop quoting ridiculous points and outrageous references that make zero sense. It gets under my skin. Then again you are the magistrate so I guess you will do what you want, just don't expect me to sit there and take it.

Some comparisons can be made to Diablo 3's current stylized art style and WoW's graphics. The comparison is there and no one is saying it looks "exactly" the same, but it does have similarities, do not deny that fact. It doesn't stand out exactly the same as WoW, but it does blend in. And it DOES work for diablo 3. Again, you can't deny that and I wont try to deny that either because I think it looks good, just not amazing. I myself think this screenshot presented in this thread looks absolutely amazing and I can't say the same about diablo 3 when I look at screenshots and video footage.

Perhaps if they simply increased the intensity of detail and textures in diablo 3 it would look a lot better. There just doesn't seem to be that much detail or texture in diablo 3's graphics. That is disappointing and what makes this screenshot presented in this picture look so amazing in the first place. Not the style or the stylized art, but the level of detail.

Blizzard likes to cater to all types of computers that can handle their games, everyone knows that. What I do not understand is why they are not or can't cater to higher level standards. I'm not a graphics engineer or an artist so I really have no idea why they may or may not do that or can't do that. But based on what we have all seen the detail and textures look mediocre at best in diablo 3. I would love to see some higher settings in a gameplay video if they could release one but who's to say that the gameplay trailer wasn't already the highest settings they had to offer? I find it hard to believe they would release a trailer for the masses and present diablo 3 to everyone if it did not use the highest settings in it detail/texture wise. Based on that assumption what we have seen already is how good its probably going to get.

All in all, the picture presented in this thread looks amazing and it makes my jaw drop on how perfect it represented what I envisioned D3 to look like. Diablo 3's current detail and texture level looks mediocre at best compared to it.

Quote from Magistrate

Quote from liquorice

People just assume that because it's in D2 it'll be in D3. Just sayin'

It's on items as a stat in some videos and pictures, recent and old. Nothing's been said about it, though.

My conclusion to all of this is ; there are way too many factors that make a game great. If you haven't played the game and are basing your opinions on pictures only, you will be missing a lot of what makes the game great. A still picture shows the graphics of the game and nothing more, gameplay, story, sfx will be out of the picture. I can compare this to a cake :

What do you need to make a great cake?
-Flour
-Salt
-Baking powder
-Eggs
-Water
-Lots of love and attention

alright, if you take out the salt, baking powder and eggs.... you'll end up with just flour and water... and love. While it may satisfy you for a few minutes, plain dough has it's backdraws. It tends to get tasteless pretty fast and can't keep up with my insatiable hunger for more Cakezz.

So now, how does this succulent cake apply to diablo 3 will you say? Beside the fact that it tastes looks and smells great, it proves that you can't pass judgement on a still picture as it misses most of the games core features and so it seems... tasteless. Making pictures/movies using 3D with a nice setting is easy. They've made countless movies using such techniques (Final Fantasy, Pixar movies, Dreamworks...), they all look great but they are not games. Making a movie is not equal to making a game and the same thing applies to pictures. I know some of you guys pointed that out (scybedragon for instance), but I just wanna add my grain of salt.

Also, on the same optic, photoshopped pictures. WTH is the problem with you guys? I've been using photoshop for 6 years now and I've also made textures for my 3D projects. Changing a picture and making a texture is not the same thing and it also doesn't look the same. What you are all doing is change a picture's lightning setting and nothing more. I'd like to see you change the actual character, in game, and make him look like that... it's hard as hell and it will always depend on the environment. In a dark setting he won't stand out, in a light setting he'll look like a shadow. A balance must be made here and it really takes time to do it. Also I find it funny how people change the pictures... a couple of ovelays, drop lightning and some painting. I can do that also :


Normal bland picture______________________Super cool pimped out picture .My vision of what a civic SHOULD look like

Seriously though, stop doing it and leave it be.

As for the other points, I think that every point has been discussed extensively for the past 2-3 years, I therefore have nothing else to add.

Finally, graphics are fine the way they are. Too much details and there isn't enough room for your imagination to fill up the blanks, not enough details and there is nothing more to see. Diablo 3 is right in the middle of all this and exactly where it should be. Whine, cry, kick all you want, diablo 3 is gonna remain as it is now and this is how it will be. It's inspired after WOW, FINE what isn't nowadays? It takes stuff from other successful games? So what, if it works why change it? The nature does it...look at the evolution of species and you'll know what I mean. SO if mother earth does it...why shouldn't her 4th son, Jay Wilson the 4th, do it also?

As a closing argument, oncology recapitulates phylogeny. Diablo 3 is the proud successor of diablo 1 and 2, it's an evolution in gaming. It takes from his 2 brothers to make a new unique entity capable of living on his own as a standalone title.



And soon, IT shall be born.

+1

Only because you +1'd a ridiculous post...

1. I'm basing all information and points that I'm making based on all information they have so far released. I can't speculate any more than that on what I don't have and what I do have. I never said the game would be bad, merely what others have voiced and what I have voiced as concern from what we have seen so far. Again I'll say, if no one voiced any concerns on the information they have released some things wouldn't have been changed. Refer to my points that I already made.

2. I am not basing what I have seen on pictures only. There are several gameplay trailers that show the game in action and blizzcon demo footage as well.

3. As for your cake reference I'm not even going there because I find it absolutely ridiculous and based on the fact that I find it absolutely ridiculous I cannot even acknowledge it to be honest.

4. There is nothing wrong with this photoshopped picture. It looks amazing. As for your lighting references. It isn't just the "lightning" or "lighting" not sure if you are miss typing there. But what simply looks better. As for shadows and lighting itself, I see no relevance to that at all. It's a game, they can create an infinite light radius or a smaller one or base shadows off of certain static and//or moving light elements in the game or create specific dark areas. I really don't see what you are trying to say at all. The photoshopped picture was merely what I myself had imagined D3 to look like. Not the stylized style, not even a realistic style, just what looked overall better. I had no reference to lighting at all. "glowing effects" and "lighting" are two different things. They already said there was no light radius I believe. So "lighting" isn't even relevant, it's just what you think looks better in the end and what I had PERSONALLY envisioned Diablo 3 to look like. I did not even create this image. I found it and when I saw it my jaw dropped on how amazing it looked. I wish I could say the same about diablo 3's visuals that I have seen so far but I haven't seen anything that has made my jaw drop.

5. Everyone knows Diablo 3 is the successor of diablo 1 and 2. It wouldn't be called diablo 3 if it wasn't.

6. Your car reference, I see no point to it at all. And it really looks like a bad troll attempt.

7. As for the guy who quoted this post, why would you quote such a ridiculous post that doesn't even bring 1 real argument to the table and seems more like a vulgar angry women's outcry and/or troll attempt for very real concerns about what they have showed us this far and does not even give one good point. I do not know. It seemed completely illogical to me. I'm still in awe that you quoted and +1'd it. But too each his own.

Quote from saintchet

We all know that in games such as Everquest and WoW, the game content is rich, very extensive, and pretty much never ending. All that comes with a $15 a month service fee. I know the servers have to be paid for, but with all the people in the world that play these two game giants, I'm sure those servers are paid for and then some at $15 a head. I mean thousands apon thousands pay to play. So the rest of the money just goes to the other expenses like enriching the game content right?
Well I guess my question to Blizzard is... how far is Blizzard able/willing to take Diablo3 game content for us Diablofans while keeping the game free. Are we able to see game content as lengthy as wow and eq off strait up software sales?

It wont be pay to play they already said that.

1. There isn't enough content in it to be pay to play. I'm not talking about items, I'm talking about how long it takes to get from 1 to 60. They said the length of the game was about the same as diablo 2. Imho, I wouldn't pay 2 play for that amount of gameplay even if it IS diablo 3.

2. They already confirmed the only payment plans in store are other things such as changing your characters name or things related to that nature.

3. Since the level cap is 60 we can assume there will be a bunch of expansions that will stretch the content.

Quote from ScyberDragon

His point is that the way you worded it made it so that your state of worry was opinionated, up for debate, and not the actual cause of your worry. But, there I go again with my psuedo-intellectual asshat remark.

Just refer to the post I made when I quoted the guy right before this one.

I wouldn't mind fighting a dragon in D3. Although that would be kind of weird with the static viewpoint lol.

Quote from Frostbite5

Just wanted to say I love the logical impossibility in the title of this topic. "In my opinion, I am worried about diablo 3" - Well, that's just like, your opinion man, in my opinion you are not worried about diablo 3!

:turned:

It is better than saying, "I'm not getting what I wanted or what I expected" lol and then again I haven't even played the demo or the entire game, so all that's left is opinion. Just really does worry me a bit on the approach they are taking on this game. So I guess the title does fit after all.

I have edited my post for reasons such as grammar mistakes, added #10 and #11 concerns to the list.

Will add more to the list as time goes on.

Also another interesting point I want to make is... If I posted this in the battle.net diablo 3 official forums it would likely be either locked or deleted followed by my very near-future ban from posting by the one and only bash.

The interesting thing is that I don't think they want people seeing points being made like this or people voicing opinions about them. Especially when all these concerns are all bundled into one big package such as it is. I want to thank the mods here for allowing this to stay up as long as it has been and for allowing it to stay up without getting locked in the future if at all possible.

Quote from ScyberDragon

Quote from Shelledfade_4967505

Quote from ScyberDragon

Quote from mortor

I am sorry Scyberdragon but in your long post you make D3 sound like a graphic benemoth that strains systems. No more than 4 people because it will strain your PC and its hard to do? Come on !! This day and age games like Battlefield etc use ultra high textures in a complete 3D world with 64 players, explosions, tanks etc. So i am sure they can optimise Diablo 3 for more than 4 tiny 3d characters on screen.

I am tired with people saying that diablo 3 can't do this, that, and the other because its technically impossible or a lot of work. Blizzard have also used it themselves when talking about the light radius - "too hard to do". I am sorry but torchlight had something similiar and thats almost an indie game.

I have had really no problems with the games graphics (point 4). Yes it would look better, but iam still going to love every minute of D3 nonetheless.

With the party size, I said that main reasoning was actual gameplay. I said that Blizzard plays their games constantly to play test them and that is how they decided four was a good group size.

.

They only went with 4 players as of current information because the visual effects starting getting in the way. That was the only reason and why it "felt like the right number". Because any more players on screen and you wouldn't have been able to see anything. It was just a giant rainbow bomb.

there are at least three quotes stating the reason was for pure gameplay and testing.

There are at least three quotes stating the reason was for pure game play and testing reasons, because the visuals were too intense with anything over 4 characters playing in one area. - Fixed.

Quote from ScyberDragon

Quote from mortor

I am sorry Scyberdragon but in your long post you make D3 sound like a graphic benemoth that strains systems. No more than 4 people because it will strain your PC and its hard to do? Come on !! This day and age games like Battlefield etc use ultra high textures in a complete 3D world with 64 players, explosions, tanks etc. So i am sure they can optimise Diablo 3 for more than 4 tiny 3d characters on screen.

I am tired with people saying that diablo 3 can't do this, that, and the other because its technically impossible or a lot of work. Blizzard have also used it themselves when talking about the light radius - "too hard to do". I am sorry but torchlight had something similiar and thats almost an indie game.

I have had really no problems with the games graphics (point 4). Yes it would look better, but iam still going to love every minute of D3 nonetheless.

With the party size, I said that main reasoning was actual gameplay. I said that Blizzard plays their games constantly to play test them and that is how they decided four was a good group size.

.

They only went with 4 players as of current information because the visual effects starting getting in the way. That was the only reason and why it "felt like the right number". Because any more players on screen and you wouldn't have been able to see anything. It was just a giant rainbow bomb.

Imho Werehamster I'm just basically saying that when you put every piece of negative information together into one big melting pot it's something to take a good look at. Not even negative stuff, just unoriginal designs and things that I never expected to see in D3.

Again it comes down to a very high expectation of what diablo 3 could have been and how it doesn't seem like they coulda made it as good as it could have been and the directions they take on a lot of things in the game.

Imho it will be good, but it isn't going to be the amazing game that I been waiting 6-7 years for. Just take a look at that picture I posted. You can't deny that it looks freaking badass lol and that really shoulda been what D3 looked like.

Hell I even made that picture my desktop backround for how amazing it is.

Quote from Lt. Venom

Kgydkgyd, I refuse to read what you wrote unless you fix the massive jumble of words into something readable. That means work on the grammar, spelling, and sentence structure.

There is nothing wrong with the grammar, spelling, or sentence structure.

Oh sorry, I didn't realize that Kgydkgyd was an actual person. Sorry bro. I thought you were referring to me lol.