|
On August 06 2011 03:01 Skwid1g wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2011 02:40 iCanada wrote:
I don't understand what the big deal with the inventory screen is, are you seriously not going to enjoy a game because your paper doll isn't pretty?
Gimme a break...
"I don't like the inventory screen, I won't be buying this game."
Reminds me of that ruining esports shenanigans... It's not the inventory screen (although that does look like a 12 year old designed it) it's every single piece of media content they've released that makes us feel like that. Diablo 3 is taking basically everything that made Diablo II great and shitting all over it. No skill trees because we didn't want people to fret over what build to use! Well shit, guess we couldn't add an NPC that allows you to reset skills. Graphics are mediocre on a lot of levels. I'm not saying graphics really matter, but they DO add to the environment and Blizzard has put a lot of time and money into them anyway, yet they still look really poor. Gameplay seems really "meh" in my opinion. Action seems pretty slow and I'm having trouble imagining PvP being very good (I hate the Arena too, but I'll let that slide) PvE seems "okay" at this point, but if I wanted to PvE I'd go play WoW or DFO. The equipment, runes, skills, and attributes parts of the game seem just really poorly done, and don't even get me started on the "use real money to buy items" AH... I still play d2, have never played GW, and yet I'm more excited for GW2 than D3. I hope I'm wrong though.
Wait, you call D3 graphics mediocre yet still love D2 which had graphics that was like 2 years behind? IMO a lot of the stuff you call bad, is stuff which has been released to not be focus points of D3. So of course you will be disappointed. You are not the market they are aiming at.
|
On August 06 2011 03:08 trainRiderJ wrote:I did a google image search for "diablo 2 inventory" and took a look at a bunch of the items there. Not counting unique items, I don't see where this huge amount of nostalgia is coming from. All of the boots, belts, and gloves are very generic. Hell the sash is literally a strip of cloth tied in a knot. For example: ![[image loading]](http://dl-web.dropbox.com/u/39720/games/diablo%202/Screenshot035.jpg) The armor looks like a t-shirt with a bit of texture. I'm going to give Blizzard the benefit of the doubt and assume that these year-old screenshots of low level characters don't express the full breadth of item art in Diablo 3.
I wonder how many recall that there were only a handful of graphics for each slot, they reused them between difficulty levels (e.g. Quilted Armour = Ghost Armour = Dusk Shroud) and they usually just tinted the colour of the graphic to represent an item's uniqueness.
For your perusal:
http://www.d2tomb.com/items.shtml
|
On August 06 2011 02:37 DrBoo wrote:
I was sooo happy about Diablo 3 I was jacked, I was hype, I was going to spend a week locked in my room playing it... I don't feel that way anymore, I feel sad... and depressed. I want to lock my self in my room just so I don't have to play it.
All this new information about Diablo 3 and all this new screen and etc just makes me think, where did Blizzard go wrong... how could they possibly think this is in anyway an improvement over Diablo 2 except in graphics (not inventory screen graphics)
Blizzard games used to be something that was coveted and looked forward to for years, the hype slowly building up until finally that magical day came for the midnight release. Then you'd go home and play it all night without even realizing how much time has gone by.
Where is the magic now blizzard?! WHERE IS THAT MAGIC NOW?!
They went wrong the moment they decided to make a new diablo game without having anyone of the lead people behind Diablo 2 still in the team. They went wrong the moment they decided to use happy-go-lucky cartoony graphics for the game instead of the gritty, depressing, oppressive, gothic style Diablo 2 used. They went wrong the moment they decided that forcing players to always be connected to the internet in order to play was a good idea. They went wrong the moment they decided to add Warcraft characters and spells to the game while removing the arguably most iconic character of the series: the paladin. They went wrong the moment they decided to add an auction house to a game that's about killing monsters and hunting for gear. Why they thought that Diablo 3 should be a business simulation game as well is beyond me.
I never believed they'd pull it off but they have actually managed to completely alienate a huge part of the original Diablo fanbase.
This game is aimed at the younger generation of MMORPG fans who've never played a Diablo game before. This is not a game for the fans. This doesn't even look like a game they've been working on for four or five years. Most companies would be able to throw this up in a year or two. With way better graphics, too. This looks like stuff from 2007.
|
On August 06 2011 02:45 trainRiderJ wrote:This picture is from August 2010. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/PVJoz.jpg)
what is wrong with this? the items look pretty gritty too me
|
FYI, all those Diablo 2 people went on to make Hellgate London (a failed game) and Torchlight (cartoony graphics by the ton).
|
People need to realize the main problem with Diablo 3's graphics is the fact that they went for this stylized looking game. It would be like if Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3 used the Team Fortress 2 art style.
Diablo 1/2/3(blizzard north alpha) were all dark, gritty and they presented a certain amount of realism that isn't present in the current Diablo 3.
Whether or not the new art style looks better to the average person, the hardcore fans of Diablo 1/2 were always used to a game that didn't use stylized graphics.
Do not say "Because it is 3D!". There are plenty of 3D top down RPGs that have a realism approach such as Path of Exile and even the old Diablo 3 alpha.
What has happened is that the most appealing and accepted graphics for this genre is sadly now the graphics of games such as Fate, Torchlight and Sacred 2.
Evolution of Graphics in The Diablo Series:
+ Show Spoiler +
|
+ Show Spoiler +On August 06 2011 03:08 trainRiderJ wrote:I did a google image search for "diablo 2 inventory" and took a look at a bunch of the items there. Not counting unique items, I don't see where this huge amount of nostalgia is coming from. All of the boots, belts, and gloves are very generic. Hell the sash is literally a strip of cloth tied in a knot. For example: The armor looks like a t-shirt with a bit of texture. I'm going to give Blizzard the benefit of the doubt and assume that these year-old screenshots of low level characters don't express the full breadth of item art in Diablo 3.
That screenshot must come from some mod or something.
Here is a somewhat cool inventory pic: http://img404.imageshack.us/img404/7038/screenshot100ef9.jpg
|
On August 06 2011 03:14 maartendq wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2011 02:37 DrBoo wrote:
I was sooo happy about Diablo 3 I was jacked, I was hype, I was going to spend a week locked in my room playing it... I don't feel that way anymore, I feel sad... and depressed. I want to lock my self in my room just so I don't have to play it.
All this new information about Diablo 3 and all this new screen and etc just makes me think, where did Blizzard go wrong... how could they possibly think this is in anyway an improvement over Diablo 2 except in graphics (not inventory screen graphics)
Blizzard games used to be something that was coveted and looked forward to for years, the hype slowly building up until finally that magical day came for the midnight release. Then you'd go home and play it all night without even realizing how much time has gone by.
Where is the magic now blizzard?! WHERE IS THAT MAGIC NOW?! They went wrong the moment they decided to make a new diablo game without having anyone of the lead people behind Diablo 2 still in the team. They went wrong the moment they decided to use happy-go-lucky cartoony graphics for the game instead of the gritty, depressing, oppressive, gothic style Diablo 2 used. They went wrong the moment they decided that forcing players to always be connected to the internet in order to play was a good idea. They went wrong the moment they decided to add Warcraft characters and spells to the game while removing the arguably most iconic character of the series: the paladin.They went wrong the moment they decided to add an auction house to a game that's about killing monsters and hunting for gear. Why they thought that Diablo 3 should be a business simulation game as well is beyond me. I never believed they'd pull it off but they have actually managed to completely alienate a huge part of the original Diablo fanbase. This game is aimed at the younger generation of MMORPG fans who've never played a Diablo game before. This is not a game for the fans. This doesn't even look like a game they've been working on for four or five years. Most companies would be able to throw this up in a year or two.
Whatever iconic vision you had of the Paladin in how it relates only to Diablo 2, is a complete fabrication in your own head. Blizzard introduced Paladins in Warcraft 2. They became a hero unit in Warcraft 3 and eventually became an entire class in WoW. Meanwhile the Paladin just showed up in Diablo 2 as another melee guy; an offshoot from the original Warrior, much like the Barbarian. You had the Amazon as an offshoot of the Rogue, the Sorceress as an offshoot of the Wizard and the Necromancer who was pretty much unique to Diablo 2 (since there were no pets, and thus no equivalent/similar class in Diablo 1).
|
Anyone complaining about the inventory aesthetics needs to reevaluate their lives.
|
On August 06 2011 03:18 Kairos~ wrote:People need to realize the main problem with Diablo 3's graphics is the fact that they went for this stylized looking game. It would be like if Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3 used the Team Fortress 2 art style. Diablo 1/2/3(blizzard north alpha) were all dark, gritty and they presented a certain amount of realism that isn't present in the current Diablo 3. Whether if not the new art style looks better to the average person, the hardcore fans of Diablo 1/2 were always used to a game that didn't use stylized graphics. Do not say "Because it is 3D!". There are plenty of 3D top down RPGs that have a realism approach such as Path of Exile and even the old Diablo 3 alpha. What has happened is that the most appealing and accepted graphics for this genre is sadly now the graphics of games such as Fate, Torchlight and Sacred 2. Evolution of Graphics in The Diablo Series: + Show Spoiler +
I honestly don't see how you can't tell the difference between Torchlight, Diablo 3, and Sacred 2. Each has a completely different style.
|
On August 06 2011 03:22 trainRiderJ wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2011 03:18 Kairos~ wrote:People need to realize the main problem with Diablo 3's graphics is the fact that they went for this stylized looking game. It would be like if Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3 used the Team Fortress 2 art style. Diablo 1/2/3(blizzard north alpha) were all dark, gritty and they presented a certain amount of realism that isn't present in the current Diablo 3. Whether if not the new art style looks better to the average person, the hardcore fans of Diablo 1/2 were always used to a game that didn't use stylized graphics. Do not say "Because it is 3D!". There are plenty of 3D top down RPGs that have a realism approach such as Path of Exile and even the old Diablo 3 alpha. What has happened is that the most appealing and accepted graphics for this genre is sadly now the graphics of games such as Fate, Torchlight and Sacred 2. Evolution of Graphics in The Diablo Series: + Show Spoiler + I honestly don't see how you can't tell the difference between Torchlight, Diablo 3, and Sacred 2. Each has a completely different style.
You need to understand what I am saying. lmao. The accepted graphics for this genre are unrealistic? there you go. Easier for you to understand.
|
How do you make realistic demons in a fantasy world filled with magic?
What does a "realistic" magic missile look like?
Maybe you should call up Blizzard and let them know the witch doctor needs to look more like this guy:
![[image loading]](http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/images/38264000/jpg/_38264985_witch300.jpg)
|
This new "inferno" mode will make attempting Hardcore mode that much ballsier.
|
On August 06 2011 03:27 trainRiderJ wrote:
How do you make realistic demons in a fantasy world filled with magic?
What does a "realistic" magic missile look like?
I am talking about art style(textures, proportions, lighting.) and not setting... You clearly do not understand what im trying to convey. You obviously don't understand a lot now that it has been said. Not coming back to reply to you.
|
They went wrong the moment they decided to use happy-go-lucky cartoony graphics for the game instead of the gritty, depressing, oppressive, gothic style Diablo 2 used.
Circa 2008:
![[image loading]](http://gucomics.com/comics/2008/gu_20080702.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://art.penny-arcade.com/photos/345954033_mmTwJ-L-2.jpg)
From: www.pennyarcade.com
www.gucomics.com
|
On August 06 2011 03:19 MagisterMan wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On August 06 2011 03:08 trainRiderJ wrote:I did a google image search for "diablo 2 inventory" and took a look at a bunch of the items there. Not counting unique items, I don't see where this huge amount of nostalgia is coming from. All of the boots, belts, and gloves are very generic. Hell the sash is literally a strip of cloth tied in a knot. For example: The armor looks like a t-shirt with a bit of texture. I'm going to give Blizzard the benefit of the doubt and assume that these year-old screenshots of low level characters don't express the full breadth of item art in Diablo 3. That screenshot must come from some mod or something. Here is a somewhat cool inventory pic: http://img404.imageshack.us/img404/7038/screenshot100ef9.jpg
It does, but the item art is normal D2.
|
|
|
Meh, i can definitely see people being unhappy with the D3 style. It's not like the morons who were complaining about SC2 being too cartoony, which was truly asinine considering the look of BW.
D2 was a very dark and gritty game. Even though i don't really mind D3s look, it DOES lose alot of the dark Gothic feeling. It's a sacrifice i guess to make the game more playable on various PCs (and consoles!?  )
|
On August 06 2011 03:19 MagisterMan wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On August 06 2011 03:08 trainRiderJ wrote:I did a google image search for "diablo 2 inventory" and took a look at a bunch of the items there. Not counting unique items, I don't see where this huge amount of nostalgia is coming from. All of the boots, belts, and gloves are very generic. Hell the sash is literally a strip of cloth tied in a knot. For example: The armor looks like a t-shirt with a bit of texture. I'm going to give Blizzard the benefit of the doubt and assume that these year-old screenshots of low level characters don't express the full breadth of item art in Diablo 3. That screenshot must come from some mod or something. Here is a somewhat cool inventory pic: http://img404.imageshack.us/img404/7038/screenshot100ef9.jpg
No? Those were very common low level items, how do you not remember those? It's very unfair to compare shitty lvl 5 items to high level items, like you are doing. Making higher levels items better looking is actually a good thing. The Invincible Armor of DOOM should be more impressive than a level 1 leather glove. Diablo 2 failed in this point, some of the best items are just recolors of a shitty item and didn't look impressive at all.
|
This argument has been rehashed for years (look at the date of your links). Not even talking about the horrible viewing angle on most of the alpha screenshots, the art doesn't look that interesting to me. I'm not of the generation of "two colors is all we need".
It's obvious that restricting the light radius to 40% of your screen is not a good gameplay mechanic.
Also D2 Act 2.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/1ho76.jpg)
