DiabloFans

Any time you can get the word "juxtaposition" in a sentence, its going to be epic. :thumbsup:

"Caves are still awesome, but you probably don't want magical purple and green lighting in a cave, it's probably going to have a much different feel."

You're right.

I also don't want to see 'magical purple and green lighting' anywhere. I'd rather see a pale yellow light with shadows and then add those colors from a stained glass window in small amounts.

I mean, magical purple and green lighting has a place. That place isn't the Tristram Cathedral. Maybe, like... The Magic Forest or something. You can fight some unicorns and happy smiley clouds and rainbows there.

They absolutely have to make a rainbow unicorn dungeon; that should be the new "cow level." Here's to hoping we will maybe get some new areas though for Blizzcon.

THAT IS AWESOME!!i!!!! I cant wait to also see the diffrent obsticales you have to get around.

The idea of Blizz revealing some new zones/dungeons is very nice. Gives us a chance to speculate some more about what kind of monsters and also story line we will see.

Quote from "emilemil1" »

Yes! But first we have to find the way to open it Perhaps by hitting a horse xD Like that myth about the cow in D1. It makes perfect sense really!

But to make it like cowlevel you have to hit it with the special Horn weapon. And once the portal opens, the horn breaks.

Perfect^^

After you beat diablo after every difficulty you get a horn of the unicorns and a special portrate pops up with rianbows and unicorns lol

lame sourceless light. sick of it.

To those who say they like seeing purple lights, purple carpets, purple robes, purple pointy wizard hats etc; what exactly do you mean? Sure, I'd love a purple robe. But when you see Diablos disciples summoning some ugly monstrosity, do you really want them to do that in the purplest enviroment ever created? Please explain. Are you happy happy to meet diablo? Do you just want to see pretty colours and a turqouise mana orb? Pegasus ornaments and stainless purple curtains in the former hell of Tristram? Are you claiming to like the purple lighting separately from the thought of facing diablo, or do you wish to face diablo on a fluffy purple cloud of a dungeon? Please explain, I do not understand where you are coming from.

Quote from "Tapsi" »

Are you claiming to like the purple lighting separately from the thought of facing diablo, or do you wish to face diablo on a fluffy purple cloud of a dungeon? Please explain, I do not understand where you are coming from.

Well, I'm saying that I am smart enough not to fall for the stereotype that any place where there is evil the world magically turns gray and loses all color. It's very possible to commit vile, evil acts in a room with bright walls. To learn about this for yourself, visit your local prison and speak to a child molester. Ask him if his victim's bed was covered with a gray comforter or maybe something with ponies and bright colors.

As much as it sucks for fans of a gray scale game, evil is NOT confined to a world of black and white. Just because the color purple is present in a room, that does not mean that it has to be in the form of a purple cloud. Medieval kings paid top coin for silk tapestries died bright red and purple. The bright colors stood out on the gloomy stone walls of the castle and showed off the owner's wealth.

That said, YES, it will suck if every epic dungeon is bathed in a green or purple glow with no discernible source. The caves in Diablo I had an appropriate orange glow because of the lava everywhere. The icy areas of Act 5 of Diablo II had an appropriate blue tint caused by the shadows on ice.

So, I don't mind color, I just want it to match the environment in some way. And if Diablo shows up in a room with a purple tapestry on the wall, I won't be any less anxious about the coming encounter.

I'm pretty happy with that post, looking forwards to how they handle the different dungeons.

Quote from "emilemil1" »

blood (death), darkness (the unknown) and colorless (no sunshine) places triggers fear in humans.

Awesome point, man. I guess I think of it this way:

When I am watching a horror movie, I expect the slasher to be hiding in the drab rundown shack. The fact that he'll slit your throat in the room you just painted canary yellow for your newborn baby--the fact that NO place is safe--actually adds a greater element of fear than dividing the world into colorless=dangerous and colorful=safe.

I'm going to try to not contribute too much to leading this thread into another flame war art direction debate, but I think that the topic does still merit some comment if it can be kept civil.

The primary difference in what I sense in the art direction of Diablo 3 compared to the art directions of the previous games (especially Diablo 1) is that from what we've seen (which of course can't be considered the definitive, final version of the game), Diablo 3 seems right now more like a bright (in terms of atmosphere) game with dark elements to it whereas Diablo and Diablo 2 were darker games with bright elements to them. Thus the dominant impressions of each art direction seem different from each other.

Of course there were some brightly coloured monsters, spells and lava pools in Diablo 1 and likewise in Diablo 2 (although the amount of "bright" things were even more present in this game) but they still managed to retain the impression of a predominantly dark, macabre, and more menacing atmosphere because of the grittier textures used, lack of out-of-place sourceless lighting, stylization etc.

As for Bashiok's reply to the original poster's question, I tend to disagree that a "grey-scale world" (which is a misnomer in itself for what art direction critics have really felt they wanted from the art direction of Diablo 3) can be boring and dull because Diablo and to a lesser degree Diablo 2 are proofs that such a world can be interesting and fun, not to mention highly atmospheric. Anyways, I digress, maybe Blizzard's next update will prove more promising than what they've showed us from the Tristram cathedral. I don't mind some epic elements such as perhaps one act that has a few epic areas (similar to Act V from Diablo 2), I can live with that. But if this kind of penchant for epic areas keeps constantly returning throught the game to become an integral part of what Diablo 3 is and not just a nice little add-on, I don't think I'll be looking very forward to Diablo 4 if that ever comes out.

So there you have it. My two cents on the direction that Diablo 3 seems to be taking in its art. If you have a differing opinion as most people do, feel free to express it. I won't flame you.

lol whenever I hear the word epic warcraft & stupid colours and music immediately jumps into my mind. I hate the word epic lol and bashiok said it several times just then. :| mmm idk what to think haha. In my opinion being subtle has a far greater impact in creating a scary mood than being epic e.g. for me a dungeon that is dark coloured with dark ambient music playing and the sounds of water dripping and wind blowing is far better than some dungeon with purple lights and a full blown orchestra playing.

You actually get all kinds of sourceless lighting if you run Diablo II in 3D mode. Monsters of all kinds give off anything from neon green to blue light. You also emit green light when you get poisoned and blue when you get frozen (I'm not just talking about your character changing color- because that so adds to the scare factor that everyone seems to think is the focus of Diablo- but actual light). Furthermore, in Diablo I the Cathedral gave off tons of sourceless orange light from outside, when inside it was pitch black. I don't think it's fair to say that the other games did not have a share of it.

Furthermore, with how much graphical progress SCII has seen since its announcement, I can safely say that we will most likely be seeing better and better maps. My favorites so far are the Leoric Highlands and the woods they showed in the demo, since we all know Diablo is not a horror game, but rather an adventure game, and should be open to diverse and vivid scenery where appropriate.

Just look at the Shaman monster model and think of how much that has changed since it was first shown in Bashiok's avatar. Yeah

Quote from "Ralsu" »

Well, I'm saying that I am smart enough not to fall for the stereotype that any place where there is evil the world magically turns gray and loses all color. It's very possible to commit vile, evil acts in a room with bright walls. To learn about this for yourself, visit your local prison and speak to a child molester. Ask him if his victim's bed was covered with a gray comforter or maybe something with ponies and bright colors.

As much as it sucks for fans of a gray scale game, evil is NOT confined to a world of black and white. Just because the color purple is present in a room, that does not mean that it has to be in the form of a purple cloud. Medieval kings paid top coin for silk tapestries died bright red and purple. The bright colors stood out on the gloomy stone walls of the castle and showed off the owner's wealth.

That said, YES, it will suck if every epic dungeon is bathed in a green or purple glow with no discernible source. The caves in Diablo I had an appropriate orange glow because of the lava everywhere. The icy areas of Act 5 of Diablo II had an appropriate blue tint caused by the shadows on ice.

So, I don't mind color, I just want it to match the environment in some way. And if Diablo shows up in a room with a purple tapestry on the wall, I won't be any less anxious about the coming encounter.

I think the lighting removes any chances for 'bright colours', it all turns monotone, no real contrast, no real strong colors that will stand out (i.e it would get toned like everything else). I feel most of the time it just looks like light pollution, hiding the real colours.

I think maybe I liked the outdoor area. The sun is still shining, and the outdoor might still flourish alot of places. But also this is lost on us if the dungeons aren't being a proper contrast, showing us what could become of the world.

How old is that Tristram Cathedrals supposed to be anyway? Why do the carpets appear to be framed with spun gold and untouched, the curtains are newly dusted and unstained, someone is sure making an effort at keeping the place clean and inviting. Maybe it's what the zombies do during the day, to keep themselves occupied. Maybe the zombies didn't actually come from gooey dead people, but from a sterile lab? ..It sure looks more inviting than my apartment half the time.

You actually get all kinds of sourceless lighting if you run Diablo II in 3D mode. Monsters of all kinds give off anything from neon green to blue light. You also emit green light when you get poisoned and blue when you get frozen (I'm not just talking about your character changing color- because that so adds to the scare factor that everyone seems to think is the focus of Diablo- but actual light). Furthermore, in Diablo I the Cathedral gave off tons of sourceless orange light from outside, when inside it was pitch black. I don't think it's fair to say that the other games did not have a share of it.

The lighting up of your vision in Diablo 2 when you had a status effect was extremely subtle and rather difficult to notice in my opinion. It also doesn't really count as sourceless lighting I think because you know what's causing it even though in real life being frozen or poisoned would definitely not affect your perception. It was really just a temporary visual effect though to make the change of status more visceral and obvious for the player as opposed to lighting that doesn't seem to have much of a point to it but to contribute to the artist's vision of the game (which is the artist's prerogative, but this vision just doesn't seem to ring true with the rest of the diablo world's atmosphere).

Furthermore, with how much graphical progress SCII has seen since its announcement, I can safely say that we will most likely be seeing better and better maps. My favorites so far are the Leoric Highlands and the woods they showed in the demo, since we all know Diablo is not a horror game, but rather an adventure game, and should be open to diverse and vivid scenery where appropriate.

Well, what exactly does better mean? I'm a bit confused on this one, it would be helpful if you could please define better within the context of Diablo 3 maps. I do agree though, that Diablo 3 should be able to have "diverse and vivid scenery," I hope no one feels that the player should be restricted to the same tilesets in every act. But I do want the diversity of the scenery to be consistent with the general aesthetic of the game. If there are to be forests, I want them to be forests that have a feeling of dreariness about them, as if they had never fully recovered from the Prime Evils' invasion. Remember that Sanctuary is after all a place with a very unsavoury past. Surely even after twenty years, its wildlands haven't been able to shake off the taint of demons it had endured for so long before? And now with demons again inhabiting the woodlands again, I would expect the fauna to respond immediatly to their presence since they had been made so vulnerable from the constant corruption of evil of the past.

I'm not sure I fully agree with your assertion that Diablo is not a horror game. Clearly it is not solely a horror game as it has fantasy, adventure, and RPG elements to it and Diablo 2 certainly played down the horror elements that had been much more present in Diablo but wouldn't it be a good idea to bring back some of the horror elements that Diablo has been so noted and loved for? It's mostly the frightening atmosphere (as well as the addictive gameplay) that had made Diablo so memorable for gamers and saved it from being another mediocrity. The gothic horror side of Diablo has to me been the thing that makes the game worth returning to because if I liked it only for the gameplay than I would simply go play Diablo 2 and when it comes out, Diablo 3.

So basically, I feel that the horror elemets of the Diablo series shouldn't be lost because they have a lot of artistic potential and add a much needed tone of distinction to the Diablo series. I should also add that the gothic elements of Diablo help as well to make the series unique and visually inspiring. My biggest concern concerning a loss of horrific and gothic atmosphere within Diablo 3 is that the game will be too cookie cutter and will simply be just another fun but typical game among many others.

Quote from "JNM-illiquid" »

lol whenever I hear the word epic warcraft & stupid colours and music immediately jumps into my mind. I hate the word epic lol and bashiok said it several times just then. :| mmm idk what to think haha. In my opinion being subtle has a far greater impact in creating a scary mood than being epic e.g. for me a dungeon that is dark coloured with dark ambient music playing and the sounds of water dripping and wind blowing is far better than some dungeon with purple lights and a full blown orchestra playing.

Exactly!

Diablo had a horror element to it. When you first get into the cathedral there is this eerie sounds and everything is sort of quite, and its scary! (and i don't mean scary like some FPS games can be, that you'll never achieve with isometric game. but the atmosphere was spooky nonetheless).

In Diablo 3 (i don't know if they used that Russel Brower theme only for demo purposes), but the atmosphere is much less scary.

no matter, as long as its EPIC!@@#!1111

To learn about this for yourself, visit your local prison and speak to a child molester. Ask him if his victim's bed was covered with a gray comforter or maybe something with ponies and bright colors.

When i'll want to play a Child Molster game i would definitly want ponies and candies scattered all over the place!

Quote from "Musica" »

[FONT=Courier New]The lighting up of your vision in Diablo 2 when you had a status effect was extremely subtle and rather difficult to notice in my opinion. It also doesn't really count as sourceless lighting I think because you know what's causing it even though in real life being frozen or poisoned would definitely not affect your perception. It was really just a temporary visual effect though to make the change of status more visceral and obvious for the player as opposed to lighting that doesn't seem to have much of a point to it but to contribute to the artist's vision of the game (which is the artist's prerogative, but this vision just doesn't seem to ring true with the rest of the diablo world's atmosphere).[/FONT]

Yeah, you are right on there being a source for the player instance, but I believe you're wrong when you said it was subtle:



We've gotten tons of color in the game, here are some examples:





And when you summon Diablo, the whole Sanctuary turns red:

[FONT=Courier New]Well, what exactly does better mean? I'm a bit confused on this one, it would be helpful if you could please define better within the context of Diablo 3 maps. I do agree though, that Diablo 3 should be able to have "diverse and vivid scenery," I hope no one feels that the player should be restricted to the same tilesets in every act. But I do want the diversity of the scenery to be consistent with the general aesthetic of the game. If there are to be forests, I want them to be forests that have a feeling of dreariness about them, as if they had never fully recovered from the Prime Evils' invasion.

It's been two decades, I'm pretty sure they'd have recovered a good amount by now. That argument though is only opinion, both on my side and yours (in regards to twenty years). You will, however, recall

[FONT=Courier New]I'm not sure I fully agree with your assertion that Diablo is not a horror game. Clearly it is not solely a horror game as it has fantasy, adventure, and RPG elements to it and Diablo 2 certainly played down the horror elements that had been much more present in Diablo but wouldn't it be a good idea to bring back some of the horror elements that Diablo has been so noted and loved for? It's mostly the frightening atmosphere (as well as the addictive gameplay) that had made Diablo so memorable for gamers and saved it from being another mediocrity. The gothic horror side of Diablo has to me been the thing that makes the game worth returning to because if I liked it only for the gameplay than I would simply go play Diablo 2 and when it comes out, Diablo 3.[/FONT]

The frightening atmosphere, a nostalgic remnant from the claustrophobia generated from the dungeon-crawling nature of the first installment, is not something that I'm saying should go. It has its time and place. This game, however, is of a world recovering from battles and a great victory over the Prime Evils. The whole world. Not just the most frightening dungeons, not just the darkest, most monotone caves, it's about the whole world of Sanctuary. There is a place for the horror in the game. The game, you will have to note, isn't a horror genre game- it holds no predisposition to remain purely, or even mostly, horrific, although those elements need to be present to represent the evil at hand. The world of Sanctuary in Diablo III is supposed to be a world ignorant of the return of the legions of Hell (read over the lore on the website), so it's only natural that it would appear serene. We've seen about three areas so far. One excessively dark, gloomy forest, the Leoric Highlands as many have called it, one deep, elaborate dungeon, the underworld of the Cathedral, which has continued to come a long way from its previous radioactive green state (which I am thankful for), and one overworld area, a decaying forest. I don't see an issue with any of those settings. None of them are predominantly cheery, that would be overblowing the situation, but no, not all of them are redoes of Mephisto's Durance.

[FONT=Courier New]So basically, I feel that the horror elemets of the Diablo series shouldn't be lost because they have a lot of artistic potential and add a much needed tone of distinction to the Diablo series.

That is not what I was saying at all. Well, it probably is what it read like, but perhaps now that I've rewritten the same stuff I have countless times already on this forum you see what I mean. That has a time and place in the games- not everything needs it.

Furthermore, a great attribute to the grittiness of Diablo II was that it had very poor quality textures, thus leading to blocking, disgusting looking, grungy atmosphere. That was not intentional, it was a limit of the technology they used.

I should also add that the gothic elements of Diablo help as well to make the series unique and visually inspiring. My biggest concern concerning a loss of horrific and gothic atmosphere within Diablo 3 is that the game will be too cookie cutter and will simply be just another fun but typical game among many others.

I sympathize with your misgivings but do not share in your, in my opinion, overladen worries. They haven't even announced it being out of Alpha yet, so we have a ways to go.

In all honesty, I wish they would have just not released anything until like six months before release. Nearly everything they've shown is half done so it all, of course, doesn't look to par.

Uh... Doppel, those things are the real deal.
Play D2 on 3D mode and you'll see.
I played it briefly and wasn't too fond of it, due to that style of lighting.
But oh well.

And I hate to sound like a rent-a-mod, but seriously, calm the hell down, this is meant to be a discussion, not a place to personally attack other forum users.

Yup, I totally agree with you that the game is not nearly finished and so everything should be taken with a grain of salt. Still, I think it's helpful to comment on each little step along the way so as to aid Blizzard in the shaping of their game. I also think it was a really good idea on their part to show parts of the game before it was released. I know that you as a moderator must be very tired of seeing the same old criticisms and misgivings over and over again but I think criticism from the community can spur the game to be the best it can be.

As I look at those screenshots of the lighting, I see what you mean. It is not as subtle as I remember. But it's definitely of a different nature than the lighting shown so far in Diablo 3 which is really only present to create a sense of eeriness that I feel simply isn't created. Others do I suppose which baffles me, but I guess I have to accept that some people find bright, colourful lighting frightening.

Still, even with your well-supported arguments for Diablo 3's new art direction, I still feel there is a lack of Diablo ambience in many of the screenshots released. When I look at the Leoric Highlands for example, they look a lot like a water-colour painting. I really do believe that if Blizzard could provide more detailed and less smooth textures, all of the areas in the game would benefit from the change. This I hope would be something that would appear once the game has been finished but I don't think Blizzard has mentioned such a change in any of their interviews. If they could only eliminate that cleanly look, I would be much happier and I think other gamers would be quite pleased as well.

I'm also a bit concerned about Tristram Cathedral. Now, I know that Blizzard North was limited by graphics back in the day when they did Diablo but this cathedral seems nothing like the one I encountered in Diablo. I mean the Catacombs in the old Diablo were narrow and dark but the ones I see here are absolutely sprawling and deep! Maybe though since those catacombs were made only for the gameplay video those aren't the kind of catacombs that we'll see in Diablo 3. Still they would probably still use the basic design of these catacombs in the final game no? So wouldn't that still make whatever catacombs they come up in the final game a very vast and open design? I must admit I have many questions and am curious how all these things will shape up in the end product. It's certainly going to be fun comparing the initial designs with the final versions.

I wonder though, maybe all the technological limitations on the old Diablos actually ended up working in their favour instead of against them? I mean, the grittier textures and the smaller dungeons have I think endeared them to me more so than I think would have been the case if Blizzard North had been able to make them bigger and more epic. One thing that I am adament about however with the art direction is that the textures need to be made more realistic and worn down looking and the inappropriately colourful and sourceless lighting needs to go as well. I would very much like to see how the game would look after those changes and I bet you my bottom dollar it would be more "diabloish" than it looks now.

P.S. Is it true what Doppel's saying? Have those screenshots been tinkered with? I really can't remember exactly what the lighting was like during status effects and I really hope you didn't manipulate any pictures Seth. Oh, and I agree with Zhar, you shouldn't be so aggressive Doppel even if the pictures were tampered with. You could be wrong and you don't want to make yourself look like an overly agressive fool. It would make you seem more credible if you disputed in a gentler manner.