EPTDiablo III General Discussion - Page 179
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
socommaster123
United States578 Posts
| ||
|
Gcubed
United States131 Posts
Don't get me wrong though, i like the painted style, and I think it will definitely work but it just needs way more refinement; especially on the characters. It almost seems like the graphics aren't complete. Lets hope they refine the details before releasing the game. So for now I'm just worried about the graphical look, because the game play can always be adjusted and made better, but once the game is released the graphics aren't changing, at least not for a while. | ||
|
Seditary
Australia7033 Posts
On August 05 2011 00:56 Gcubed wrote: I agree with the atmosphere problem. I did expect the D3 art to be stylized but not completely cartooney. I was expecting a much more dark, and realistic style with extreme detail. You expected a non-blizzard game then? | ||
|
TheGlassface
United States612 Posts
Diablo I certainly didn't have this issue. Diablo II sort of did. Diablo III clearly does. They *can* do it, they've chosen not to. | ||
|
Gcubed
United States131 Posts
Was Diablo 1/2 cartooney in your opinion? It wasn't in mine. | ||
|
Krowser
Canada788 Posts
On August 05 2011 00:56 Gcubed wrote: I agree with the atmosphere problem. I did expect the D3 art to be stylized but not completely cartooney. I was expecting a much more dark, and realistic style with extreme detail. As of now the D3 graphics remind me of SC2 on low because of the lack of fine details. Don't get me wrong though, i like the painted style, and I think it will definitely work but it just needs way more refinement; especially on the characters. It almost seems like the graphics aren't complete. Lets hope they refine the details before releasing the game. So for now I'm just worried about the graphical look, because the game play can always be adjusted and made better, but once the game is released the graphics aren't changing, at least not for a while. Did youuuuuu play the beta? See all the content, play the release version? I doubt it. I know public internet forums are the ultimate repository for complaining about everything (I admit, sometimes I do it too) but everyone here is freaking out about a game that hasnt even gone into beta yet. (Remember MBS for starcraft 2? This forum was spreading news about the apocalypse and in the end SC2 is just fine) Wait till it's released, then bitch. My point is, one way or another, you're going to play it, and you're going to have fun. Don't worry, be happy. | ||
|
TheGlassface
United States612 Posts
On August 05 2011 01:01 Krowser wrote: Did youuuuuu play the beta? See all the content, play the release version? I doubt it. I know public internet forums are the ultimate repository for complaining about everything (I admit, sometimes I do it too) but everyone here is freaking out about a game that hasnt even gone into beta yet. (Remember MBS for starcraft 2? This forum was spreading news about the apocalypse and in the end SC2 is just fine) Wait till it's released, then bitch. My point is, one way or another, you're going to play it, and you're going to have fun. Don't worry, be happy. Wtf? So, what about those of us who complained during SCII beta and still don't like the game? What about people who want to stop seeing lazy game design and expect more? | ||
|
TOCHMY
Sweden1692 Posts
On August 05 2011 01:05 TheGlassface wrote: Wtf? So, what about those of us who complained during SCII beta and still don't like the game? What about people who want to stop seeing lazy game design and expect more? Seems like you wanna argue for the sake of arguing._. IMO, I agree with " My point is, one way or another, you're going to play it, and you're going to have fun." If you dont wanna play it then dont. | ||
|
TheGlassface
United States612 Posts
Yet, this idea that we're going to play a game just because it's going to be good because Blizzard can never possibly make a mistake is absurd. The alternative you presented is something that is completely opposite of the bolded statement. That's the whole reason I even posted anything. Of course the option if we don't want to, then don't is there. | ||
|
TOCHMY
Sweden1692 Posts
On August 05 2011 01:11 TheGlassface wrote: Of course the option if we don't want to, then don't is there. problem solved ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ | ||
|
Gcubed
United States131 Posts
On August 05 2011 01:01 Krowser wrote: Did youuuuuu play the beta? See all the content, play the release version? I doubt it. I know public internet forums are the ultimate repository for complaining about everything (I admit, sometimes I do it too) but everyone here is freaking out about a game that hasnt even gone into beta yet. (Remember MBS for starcraft 2? This forum was spreading news about the apocalypse and in the end SC2 is just fine) Wait till it's released, then bitch. My point is, one way or another, you're going to play it, and you're going to have fun. Don't worry, be happy. Look here, I know I'm being skeptical about a game that isn't even in beta yet but the beta event is a close referendum to the release of the game. Throughout the entire SC2 i didn't see any change in SC2 ingame graphics, and I'm simply concerned with the graphical state that Diablo 3 appears to be in, because yes, your right i haven't played the game yet, and all i can do is speculate. So let me say I'm just voicing my concern about the speculated graphics, and i can be completely wrong so don't take my opinion as fact. Let me also say I was one of the people that never really liked the look of SC2, and wished it could of been improved. As you can probably tell i was waiting for SC2 to be graphical improved during the beta but it never happened. That was the first time Blizzard failed to meet my graphical expectations for a game, they simply failed to meet my expectations of a modern BW, and now im hoping they don't do the same for Diablo 3. | ||
|
Krowser
Canada788 Posts
On August 05 2011 01:15 Gcubed wrote: Blizzard failed to meet my graphical expectations for a game, they simply failed to meet my expectations of a modern BW, and now im hoping they don't do the same for Diablo 3. lol? I wasnt aware blizzard reported to you. What's wrong with the graphics anyway? They look pretty fucking cool imo. | ||
|
SKC
Brazil18828 Posts
On August 05 2011 01:00 TheGlassface wrote: Diablo I certainly didn't have this issue. Diablo II sort of did. Diablo III clearly does. They *can* do it, they've chosen not to. You answered it yourself. As Blizzard evolved, all of their games started looking more like this. Warcraft 1 was diferent than Wacraft 2, that was diferent than Warcraft 3. It was much easier to design realistic graphics on a 2D engine, specially if you want the graphics to endure the passage of time well. "Realistic" graphics get old very fast compared to the style Blizzard uses. It was expect from them to follow the style they have been doing since Warcraft 3. You can say you don't like it, but not expected? Seriously? | ||
|
TheGlassface
United States612 Posts
On August 05 2011 01:19 SKC wrote: You answered it yourself. As Blizzard evolved, all of their games started looking more like this. Warcraft 1 was diferent than Wacraft 2, that was diferent than Warcraft 3. It was much easier to design realistic graphics on a 2D engine, specially if you want the graphics to endure the passage of time well. "Realistic" graphics get old very fast compared to the style Blizzard uses. It was expect from them to follow the style they have been doing since Warcraft 3. You can say you don't like it, but not expected? Seriously? Opioninssss Actually, and sure...I can expect more out of game developers. I can expect an art team to try something new. I never said I wanted old D1 style but I also don't like this glossy, nicely lit romp through the killing fields either. Then, on top of porting abilities straight from WoW, a lot of these monsters are starting to look ported re skins. I honestly don't think it looks *that* bad, I'm just saying it's fine to expect something a little more immersing and "real." | ||
|
Gcubed
United States131 Posts
On August 05 2011 01:11 TheGlassface wrote: I have no intention of just arguing. Yet, this idea that we're going to play a game just because it's going to be good because Blizzard can never possibly make a mistake is absurd. The alternative you presented is something that is completely opposite of the bolded statement. That's the whole reason I even posted anything. Of course the option if we don't want to, then don't is there. Exactly there's nothing wrong for wanting the game to be the best it can be. We will all play the game, but for some of us there exist a very high expectation for Diablo 3 and Blizzard games overall considering how good the past games were. Perhaps are expectations are a bit too high, but i for one don't believe the graphics look finished, with extreme expectations or not. | ||
|
NotJack
United States737 Posts
On August 05 2011 01:25 TheGlassface wrote: Opioninssss Actually, and sure...I can expect more out of game developers. I can expect an art team to try something new. I never said I wanted old D1 style but I also don't like this glossy, nicely lit romp through the killing fields either. Then, on top of porting abilities straight from WoW, a lot of these monsters are starting to look ported re skins. I honestly don't think it looks *that* bad, I'm just saying it's fine to expect something a little more immersing and "real." You're just looking for scraps to complain about, even though a second ago you were implying that you weren't going to play the game. We get it, for some reason there always has to be a person like you no matter how obviously good a game will be. | ||
|
Gcubed
United States131 Posts
On August 05 2011 01:18 Krowser wrote: lol? I wasnt aware blizzard reported to you. What's wrong with the graphics anyway? They look pretty fucking cool imo. The open areas look bland, and the character models even more so. They are missing fine details, and look outdated. They are stylized but look too fake, and leave me desiring a different look hence creating doubt about the ultimate potential of the game. | ||
|
TheGlassface
United States612 Posts
On August 05 2011 01:30 NotJack wrote: You're just looking for scraps to complain about, even though a second ago you were implying that you weren't going to play the game. We get it, for some reason there always has to be a person like you no matter how obviously good a game will be. Negative ghostrider. Just trying to be an interested person in a game. I didn't imply shit. I reiterated what someone said as he was trying to quote me and then misinterpreted my statement. And what the hell is this, "obviously good," shit? I get so tired of this. Just because Blizzard made it doesn't mean it can't be bad. WotLK was bad. Cata is bad. SCII is bad. <----these are all *my* opinions. As a player, a consumer and a forum member, that's what I'm saying. There doesn't have to always be someone like me (which, by the way, what is this...someone who is disappointed in the current state of design? Because that's all I am. I'm clearly still interested to see where it goes, or I wouldn't be typing into this thread. Though, hey, please keep labeling me that's pretty cool of you) there just always is one because...holy shit...hold the phone...not every single person thinks Blizzard is infallible. | ||
|
NotJack
United States737 Posts
On August 05 2011 01:36 TheGlassface wrote: Negative ghostrider. Just trying to be an interested person in a game. I didn't imply shit. I reiterated what someone said as he was trying to quote me and then misinterpreted my statement. And what the hell is this, "obviously good," shit? I get so tired of this. Just because Blizzard made it doesn't mean it can't be bad. WotLK was bad. Cata is bad. SCII is bad. <----these are all *my* opinions. As a player, a consumer and a forum member, that's what I'm saying. There doesn't have to always be someone like me (which, by the way, what is this...someone who is disappointed in the current state of design? Because that's all I am. I'm clearly still interested to see where it goes, or I wouldn't be typing into this thread. Though, hey, please keep labeling me that's pretty cool of you) there just always is one because...holy shit...hold the phone...not every single person thinks Blizzard is infallible. I really never talk to hipsters, but if you had reading comprehension you'd see I didn't say Blizzard was infallible. I said a sequel to Diablo 2 will obviously be good. I like how you can dance around the topic and make empty claims about how it won't be good, but you never actually say you think it won't be good. You're simply just mad people think it will be good, while you don't think otherwise. Definitely a waste of my time. | ||
|
Pufftrees
2449 Posts
On August 05 2011 01:36 TheGlassface wrote: And what the hell is this, "obviously good," shit? I get so tired of this. Just because Blizzard made it doesn't mean it can't be bad. WotLK was bad. Cata is bad. SCII is bad. <----these are all *my* opinions. I agree with ya all the way here, Blizzard isn't the old passionate blizzard that had a stellar track record. Their recent games have been lack luster pretty much, the WoW expacs and Sc2 for example. I have faith that d3 will still take up a load of my time even if its not perfect, but I don't have as much faith as I did pre-sc2. | ||
| ||
