This may not have much to do about Diablo 3, thus far, except Warcry tossed a catchy question at Travis Baldree, asking his opinion on the Art Direction of Diablo 3. This was his response.
Warcry: Just for fun, what do you think about the discussion swirling around the "tone and color" of Diablo 3?
Travis: Personally, I think what they've done with Diablo 3 is fantastic. It seems pretty obvious that the mandate was to make the game look like a concept painting brought to life, and I think they've succeeded pretty wildly. The contrast and use of color really works well for an Action-RPG, where there are hordes of monsters and spells, and separation of individual entities is required for satisfying play. I can't wait to play it!
Blizzard is really second-to-none, and I have nothing but admiration for their work. I know a lot of people are lamenting what they see as a move away from the grim vibe of Diablo, but I think a lot of that gothic feel is really sold by a combination of sound, content and story, and the visceral nature of the game - and Blizzard certainly isn't skimping on the visceral if the videos are any indication. I also feel strongly that there's some pretty grim content they haven't bothered to show everyone just yet.
No offense, but I don't think you're in a position to say that the Mythos beta sucked. It was changing all the time. I played every patch from alpha up until the project was shelved, and I can say that I believe they were on the right track in their development. It got more fun after every content patch, and it was still very much in development.
It was definitely not one of the suckiest isometric action games I have tried.
And claiming Mythos and Diablo 3 look the same is even more ridiculous than saying Diablo 3 and World of Warcraft looks the same. You're really only discrediting yourself by saying that.
The difference is that Diablo II and Diablo I were both done with limited and out dated technology and methods (hence 2D) and the new one is done with 3D. Because of 3D's nature, lighting, ambient lighting, particle effects (which are new for the most part to the series), and many other characteristics not present in 2D (Diablo II had some basic ambient lighting, which was for the most part unnoticable unless you put it on "3D mode", which was still 2D, just with perspective), the colors that were always present (yes, I say always, because it's completely true) in the old games become suddenly more vivid.
3D mode is the way Diablo II was meant to be played, you know. Most people just play it at normal 2D. 3D mode offers tons more color ( DUN DUN DUN.) Another fact that you people are just ignorant of its colors.
With 2D, the textures aren't illuminated or lit very well because of a limited engine/programming. Now, when you get the proper lighting and such that 3D offers, suddenly it's like you're looking at a rainbow.
Because having faith in a game developer equates to starving children in Africa.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_scotsman
I have to say, the more and more Blizzard talks about this the more humorous it all gets.
Blizz: "We give you, Diablo 3!"
Fans: "WTF IS THIS SHIT?! This is not Diablo! Look at those colors!"
Blizz: "Um...Diablo II had colors too?"
Fans: "Well...the rainbows! There's no rainbows in Diablo!"
Blizz: "Yeah, we uh...we put them there on purpose. To piss you off"
Fans: "But the grittyness is gone!"
Blizz: "Here's a technical reason why..."
Fans: "If only the guys at Blizz North could see this! They'd hate it!"
Blizz North: "We think it looks great!"
Fans: "DAMNIT! NONE OF YOU ARE TRUE FANS! NOT EVEN BLIZZARD, THE CREATORS!"
Not to a child.
I don't remember shit eating being a requirement for respect.
What qualifies your ratings?
Its a living, breathing, piece of artwork just like its predecessors. Show me something that proves otherwise.
Thoughtful edit: why post something saying ''I'm going to watch the Olympics instead of posting'' when you're already posting something.
you are all dumb, end of argument
They're not going to show you a battle with like a Prime Evil in a demo.
WOW. That was sooo inapplicable, disrespectful, irrelevant and stupid of you to say. You should be ashamed for even mentioning that in regards to a game.
First, how do you suppose that in terms of art direction in a game the discussion of taste become an invalid point to argue? I simply want your full logic when making this assessment.
When you say it is a contradiction of terms to like Diablo, Diablo 2, & Diablo 3 you seem to be implying the following argument:
If a person is a true fan of one game 1, then he cannot be the true fan of another game 2.
You are the fan of game 1.
Therefore you cannot be a fan of game 2
While this is a logical argument it invalidates the argument by any fan of a game that is not Diablo 1 or Diablo 2. Unfortunately this line of argument also creates a problem in your own argument. If there is any significant difference in art or style between the original Diablo and Diablo 2 then you cannot be a true fan of both. However you most commonly reference Diablo 2, so we will use this as the reference point for the continuation of this.
Please describe in which ways Diablo 3 "... looks like every other game." If you have time I would like ot see specific examples from other games so that I can clearly understand your point here.
Also you seem to say that you care only about the opinions of people who A) Are true fans of Diablo 2, and are not fans of the art of Diablo 3. Thus any argument presented by someone who declares that they like the look of both would automatically be presenting an argument unacceptable to you regardless of soundness of the argument presented.
By this do you mean that no one over the age of 12 or who has not played any game with a release date after 2005 cannot like Diablo 3 art?
If you remind yourself of previous graphics as beautiful it seems that you are both using your sentimentality and taste in beauty to make an argument about how, regardless of tase (and, in fact, outside the realm of taste) a person cannot like the art style presented in Diablo 3 if they liked the art style of Diablo 2.
And for the last statements.
If the Diablo series up until this point has been characterized exclusively by atrocity, blood, and darkness everywhere a person can look, it then seems that the ability to present any part of the game which does not contain all three said elements would invalidate the argument you have previously put forth as a criticism of the new art style of Diablo 3.
Also, your final statement. You believe that no one can be a true fan of a game if they do not always complain about a later game in the same series?
Thank you, I look forward to your responses.
Then why bring it up at all?
And I'm supposed to take your opinions seriously, why?
I see no lack of detail (just look at the bridge). Pastels are used in artwork. Ambient lighting is used to create mood in a piece of artwork. The place does not look clean, its actually crumbleing in places, and the floor is grimey and worn. What you dont like is your preference, and seeing as everyone has there own preferences that makes your argument rather trivial, and pointless.
The textures are detailed, they're just not detailed to your liking.
http://www.blizzard.com/diablo3/_images/screenshots/ss25-hires.jpg
The detail is in the cracks in the ground, the cement look of the floor, the statues and bricks, etc. (Also, there's no green glow *gasp!*)
It retains the feel of a painting, which would make it seem 2D, but in a 3D world.
Simply put: Art - Brought to life.
Some of us didn't like the light radius, myself included. Call me crazy but I'd actually like to see the world, the environments, and the art in the game. Not let it be shrouded and covered up in blackness.
Exactly, a painting. Many employees, current and ex, have stated that the painting look was to retain a 2D feel. From the color palette to presentation. The very fact you acknowledge this means they artist did their job.
Diablo was more than a "look", as the looks changed throughout each game and each act. It's about lore, character, mood setting, and more.
Nobody exaggerated anything. You made the horrible analogy, not us. We're talking about faith in a developer that has never let it's fans down. Who demands quality from every title they publish. Whose games are loads of fun to play for years to come. Certainly something to have "faith" in.
Gameplay
If gameplay qualifies your ratings then why are you worried about look? You realize they're two different things, right?
See above.
I agree completely!
Doesn't matter, in general as you say, it WAS about the game in all respects.....It was inappropriate for the thread even. Even that you generalized them in AFRICA...Africa is big, not everyone is stricken with starvation....In general you should have given a more fitting example.
You are mistaken.
What makes your opinion better than the game developers opinions? Do you have a degree in game development? How much have you actually played the diablo games?
You babble like a fool. Learn proper english, or shut up.
This is what a cartoony D3 would look like:
I think you are just complaining because its D3 is 3D
...people aren't allowed to like, or love, many things? Since when?
Most gamers play different games because they love different aspects of each game.
I love what UEIII games do in terms of graphics, and especially love the sound and music mod friendly aspect.
I loved the graphics behind Okami and thought they were beautiful.
I loved the graphics in Gears of War, as they were gritty and really set the atmosphere.
I don't even know how to counter argue that...because...it's common sense.
Yes, I would like screenshots as well showing that Diablo 3 looks like "every other game". The last time I looked at a game and went, "Ya know, this looks just like an oil painting only brutal and brought to life" was...never.
Diablo I and II didn't really "look" all that different from other games. Mainly because of technology. They all looked pixelated and "grungy".
Again, people can like a lot of things.
However, people really liked Diablo because of it's gameplay and it's mechanics. Because the gameplay is still there in part III people will "love" it as well.
No need, I gave you one.
Diablo wasn't scary.
Not to be rude but..did you pass english? i am thoroughly confused every time i see you post. I dont understand what you mean half the time when you type. Your tenses and spelling are off a lot. It's very confusing. Not taking a shot at you, i just dont understand half of what you say,and what is sth?