I'm an old man and I'm not happy!

Why, back in my day, we had 2D sprites for heroes and none of these 'fancy lighting effects'. You couldn't get the computer too excited or you'd blow up the monitor and the only thing it'd be good for then is your Doctor Roboto Halloween costume!

And we liked it! We loved it!

Nowadays people going around feeling good about themselves because when you smack someone with your level 3 barbarian you get blood that doesn't look like it's already clotted in their veins!

And I don't like it!

twisted03

Sweden137 Posts

September 30 2011 20:42 GMT

#62

I think the graphics seem cool but I kinda' want the game to be scary, I can't wait to see what it's like to actually play the game.

Nilrem

United States3684 Posts

September 30 2011 21:58 GMT

#63

I like the graphics; althouygh wish there was less of the soft hue added to it. Alas, I think without seeing the rest of the game, it is difficult to give an opinion since there is an entire game left to be seen and experienced.

Dusty

United States3359 Posts

September 30 2011 22:17 GMT

#64

From what I've seen it looks like you are walking around in mud all the time :\

edahl

Norway483 Posts

September 30 2011 22:28 GMT

#65

I am yet to play the game, but from what I have seen I am very torn on this one. There are certain innovations in the game that I feel I'll learn to love (in time). There are however aspects of the visuals I fear I may only learn to tolerate. Blizzard has certainly taken a liking to over-the-top and (probably) intentionally tacky WoW aesthetic. For instance, take a look at the different crossbows they have unveiled at the official Diablo III homepage. Not sure how I feel about that.

In summary, I didn't vote :-P

Al Bundy

7257 Posts

September 30 2011 23:13 GMT

#66

I'm kind of a gaming veteran so I don't really care about graphics, but if you ask me, I love diablo 3's graphics. This is true blizzard style here, and let's not forget that this game is not a tech demo or a benchmark program; it is supposed to run on older computers.

Anyway it's all about gameplay! I can't wait, the hype is consuming me.

Phayze

Canada2029 Posts

September 30 2011 23:35 GMT

#67

I dont care about the aesthetic. But the graphical quality (as in graphically intensive) is lacking. Sure, Diablo 2 was not ahead of it's time by any means, but Diablo 3 has been in development for a very long time, I do not see why care was not taken to make it a very graphically impressive game. Art direction, dont care, aesthetic, dont care --- Shinies, great textures, DX11 integration (Tesselation looks amazing in medieval type structures, cobblestone walls, why isnt it there?) should all be mandatory for a game that has been in development for many many years and being released in 2012. Has anyone here run the Heaven benchmark? Imagine diablo was in place of that Dragon statue and his horns/spikes had some real sick tesselation. Or if you're gliding across a stone bridge and zoom in to your character and see this cobblestone floor just popping out. I do not want to buy any game that comes out in 2012 and run it at 200fps. I just feel it needs some work.

For all those saying it's not dark enough, Diablo 2 was not dark. Act 1, 2, 5 were all in areas that had alot of lighting. (bar some dungeons, and the claw viper darkness in act 2). Diablo 3 starts off DARK. You enter new tristram in the middle of the night, you run around almost the entire beta in very grim light levels, foggy areas, and dark damp dungeons. I dont see how the "not dark enough" has any merit from what we've seen in the beta. I do hope there is still people chained to walls though.

mucker

United States1120 Posts

October 01 2011 00:08 GMT

#68

Blizzard has always aimed low for computer requirements and focused on gameplay. Every game they've put out has been behind the curve on graphics at the time. Looks fine to me, still better than Torchlight and Path of Exile.

And yes, Blizzard learns and burrows from their previous successes. Especially with the Blizzard North team long gone of course we are getting a Diablo title that has been influenced by WoW.

edit: "burrows" lol

Shauni

4077 Posts

October 01 2011 00:45 GMT

#69

I want it to be like the first Diablo in graphical atmosphere... I'll probably be disappointed though

MattBarry

United States4006 Posts

October 01 2011 00:52 GMT

#70

Who in the worlds has ever played Diablo for the graphics?

To anyone who has played the beta. Is there any way to change the perspective? I would prefer a more Diablo/Diablo 2 esque perspective. Seems like the screen is too "low" I'd rather it be higher overhead.

Warpath

Canada1242 Posts

October 01 2011 03:47 GMT

#71

I don't mind the graphics but like in the necromancers touch pic, I'm not a fan of the color palette used for the lighting.

Serpico

4285 Posts

October 01 2011 04:05 GMT

#72

On October 01 2011 09:52 MattBarry wrote:
Who in the worlds has ever played Diablo for the graphics?

To anyone who has played the beta. Is there any way to change the perspective? I would prefer a more Diablo/Diablo 2 esque perspective. Seems like the screen is too "low" I'd rather it be higher overhead.

Liking or disliking visuals doesnt mean you play games just for them.

Diablo3

46 Posts

October 01 2011 05:52 GMT

#73

I think they improved the graphics from when they first showed the game and reduced the wow'ishness on it. They reduced the wow graphic gayness as some call it, but increased the wow stuff in the gameplay.

Jerubaal

United States7684 Posts

October 01 2011 06:49 GMT

#74

On October 01 2011 14:52 Diablo3 wrote:
I think they improved the graphics from when they first showed the game and reduced the wow'ishness on it. They reduced the wow graphic gayness as some call it, but increased the wow stuff in the gameplay.

I'm not really sure how this is to be interpreted, but I don't see the point judging something based on some sort of similarity, real or imagined. to another game by the same company. If you didn't catch the satire in my earlier post, the lack of effects in D2 can be attributed to the hardware limitations of the day. As has been mentioned repeatedly, Blizzard likes their games to be played by the lower end.

Secondly, it's as likely that D2 influenced WoW as much as WoW influences D3.

I don't know what 'Wow-ness' you think they've inserted into the gameplay. The removal of skill trees, for one, is a step away from both WoW and D2.

Mastermind

Canada7096 Posts

October 01 2011 07:14 GMT

#75

The graphics look pretty good. So many people complain about it not being "dark" enough, but from what I saw of the beta it looks plenty dark to me.

Taryssa

United States1628 Posts

October 06 2011 20:21 GMT

#76

Not playing for the graphics, but for some reason the lack of AA really bothers my eyes.

And the character models don't have very much detail. Spell effects and everything look fantastic though.

ApocAlypsE007

Israel1007 Posts

October 07 2011 20:36 GMT

#77

I don't really like the green-blue hue of the graphics, but I guess it's the first level only. I don't really mind the low for today's standards polygon count as long as the art is good (and it's outstanding, especially compared to a game like Dragon Age Origins where the environments artistically are bland).
I actually didn't like Diablo 2's graphics very much as they were too bright for my taste except for specific areas where they were atmospherically amazing (Duress of Hate, Maggot Lair, Crypts, Duriel's Lair).

Sek-Kuar

Czech Republic593 Posts

October 07 2011 20:53 GMT

#78

I cant vote cuz in last years Ive played only D2, Wc3, SC2.

Bad poll.

pallad

Poland1958 Posts

October 07 2011 21:01 GMT

#79

On October 08 2011 05:53 Sek-Kuar wrote:
I cant vote cuz in last years Ive played only D2, Wc3, SC2.

Bad poll.

Poll is good , question to. You just dont play new games (beside sc2 )and you dont have a opinion.
And when you dont have a opinion then dont write

Praetorial

United States4241 Posts

October 07 2011 21:55 GMT

#80

Diablo 3's graphics are reasonable enough. They are not amazing, and don't have the feeling of the second game, but they are okay. I'd call them "decent", because they remain true to the essence of the Diablo series, yet presenting a different art direction as well.