On May 14 2011 23:23 Kipsate wrote: Is the reasoning not very simply?
It sells, cartoony games sell, part of Blizzards Marketing infrastructure is to make them interested in other games, Starcraft and WoW both had advertisements closely related to each other.
Both Starcraft 2 and WoW are cartoony compared to their predecessors(Alright, WoW has no true predeccsor, but Warcraft is cartoony overall).
They both sell.
Cartoony is what sells for Blizzard, especially if they cater to the WoW/Starcraft II community(Which will undoubtly be a part of their audience).
On top of this they have to adhere to certain standards, they can not release Diablo III so easily if it contains so much gore to certain countries(and reach the full demographic, which can be determined by the Rating they get on it), including South-Korea, Germany, Australia and the like.
And I have no doubt that the costs to make a gore-less version are not to be underestimated.
Im pretty sure sex and violence sells just as well, if not better
On May 14 2011 21:13 DwD wrote: There is a top video on youtube called Diablo Follower System but Blizzard blocked it. Anyone saw it in time and can say what it's about?
Okay It says this video is blocked, but just looking at the screencap.......that's not really what D3 is going to look like right?
"Im pretty sure sex and violence sells just as well, if not better"
It doesn't, Blizzard will always want mass-appeal with all it's future games. I'm pretty sure this will go down to a T rating.
Why should he grow up? Because he's passionate about something he cares for? I fully agree with him that Diablo should show the world for what it is. A terrible place full of evil and chaos. The artwork and landscapes set the mood for the whole game. Remember the first time you stepped foot in Tristram Cathedral? Yeah... you knew bad shit was about to happen. How about in the caves when a horde of the unseen popped out on you? Tell me you didn't jump at least once. Diablo is supposed to be all sorts of fucked up. This is HELL on earth.. well, sanctuary, essentially. I'll still play the game for sure, no question about that, but I believe it will lose some of it's former glory if the tone doesn't get set early on.
They are still aiming for the mature rating, as far as I remember, it's just their design choice to make the world less brown and dark, unlike most games these days. I am sick of all these dark caves, dark castles, etc, that force you to increase the brightness in order to see what's going on. Color doesn't necessarily mean the game will be childish, even WoW has areas that have an eerie feel to them. Stop freaking out for a game that is still in development and it could still be for another year. SC2 had some design issues, with zerg mostly, and they fixed the majority of them, so I don't see a problem to tone down some textures, if necessary. The game is going to be awesome, no doubt about. The only thing I want to know is a release date ;D.
Well as I said before, I'm not complaining too much about the environment as a whole, I know that it's not going to be the same feeling and mood as d1-d2 for a number of tech reasons (3d engine etc), and I can cope with that, as long as the gameplay is good and refined, and it's most certaintly going to be the case.
I'm dead furious though about the templar, it's just, it crosses the line really.
I've already stated my deepest feelings about this, so I'm not going to reiterate myself.
Am I only one who is happy with current state of graphics? I agree, it could be more gothic, but I like this too. Templar really looks like WoW character though.
On May 14 2011 22:17 PlosionCornu wrote: I'm pissed to NO FUCKING END at blizzard.
Even if the whole community warned em, and they even joked about it, they still fucking cling to this retarded full saturated color cartoonesque art style.
I dare you, look at that templar guy, I DARE YOU, it's a fucking wow character 100%.
Then look back at the official artwork, it's nothing like the finished model, it's dark and gloomy, exactly as a diablo char should look like.
And WHY THE HELL the finished model looks like a doll for retards? I don't get it.
Someone at blizzard has some big problem, he's against violence in a very retarded way or something, I don't really get it.
Never seen something quite like this, artwork = good color palette => finished model = ASS. A complete trifected fuckup with icecream on top of it, just to anger me even more.
I'm raging pretty fucking hard, I guess that the art director is some guy like the priest's wife in the simpsons and her "noone thinks about the children ?" kind of thing. But that's what the rating's for, else esrb and pegi would be unemployed for life, don't you think?
D1 and D2 had naked WOMEN impaled with the spear's tip sticking out of their mouth, people cut in half with their innards still attached to their lower half, piles of naked, mangled, dead bodies, streams, lakes, rivers of blood everywhere.
And then, what is this? EXPLAIN IT.
And don't bring the usual argument "well,the original devs quit the company", since the original devs founded runic, and guess what they made? TORCHLIGHT, a fucking cartoon, not a game, holy shit what is going on with the industry nowadays. What about arena.net? Another retarded mmo for children who are afraid of darkness, spiders and blood. Ofc Hellgate had some of the old vibe, too bad the whole game overall sucked so bad.
I am just, at a loss of words, I cannot pull myself together to actually accept this, I'm raging so hard I'm not even myself anymore...
I mean they have set up good mechanics, good game systems, everything seems good.* But whomever did that art style should play d1 and d2. A little more. And actually pay attention to the environment, doodads etc. And by the way , what's going on, are people suddently scared of blood or what? In a video game?
Take for example sc1 vs sc2. Why the hell the game was censored in korea, I don't get it. Sc1 tvz had blood literarly dripping from the monitor, sc2's version of the mu is much more tame, and childland friendly. Why they suddently felt the need to "censore it" after 12 years of sc1's zerglings bits exploding around?
*Except the very core concept behind the whole followers system. They put em in because they will serve as a help to players in the normal difficulty and single player only. Now, noone with a fucking straight face can say that to me, and expect anything other than a big, big laugh. Who in the world is that bad, seriously, who cannot finish a hack and slash on normal? It's soo easy, easier than bronze level macro actually, the problem it's the attention span. H&S games get boring FAST for the average (=not fan of the genre) player. Not the difficulty come on.
This is perhaps the saddest post I have ever read on TL. Really dude.......you should grow up. :-(
Sm3agol, you are pathetically wrong.
While PlosionCornu is correct. It takes someone from Italy that is at least somewhat cultural in gothic and medieval art to criticize degenerate blizzard designers that work on the game. It's been long since I gave up on D3. As I saw the original theme I realized that the team is full of cartoonists and they will never EVER come up with anything even close to being as realistic as D2 was. I just wrote D3 off as something slightly better than Starcraft Ghost. It will be Starcraft Ghost with gargantuan shiny spaulders, 10 times bigger than character's head that weight about a ton. I'm happy that at least SC2 turned out fine.
So many complaints. I guess the good side of that is that whiners wont apply to the beta right? Since its such a bad game...
Have you seen the whole game? No. Some areas may well prove "raw" enough for some of you apparently bloodthirsty gamers.
For all we know a maturity filter is set to on by default for the demos and screens/videos (altough I doubt it).
I can enjoy an hack and slash without depravity, will reserve judgement when I see more footages with music to get the overall feel of the game's atmosphere. The graphics are pretty darn good for its genre, cartoony look is popular because it saves a lot of time on textures and makes for much smoother animations (correct me if I'm wrong).
As for the followers, I like how they pan out development wise. However it seems they are restricted to a single weapon type (staff for mage, xbow for scoundrel, some sort of 1 handed spear for the templar). Not sure why they chose to make it so limited. If they get too annoying to look at or play with you can just choose to disable them.
People are missing the point of the art style. It puts a clear emphasis on good vs evil. That guy's a templar, of course his armor is shiny and glowing radiantly. Templar are the military epitome of all that is good. For comparison, compare the Templar to the Demon Hunter. The Templar is fighting for his holy religious organization. The Demon Hunter is fighting for absolute vengeance, thus explaining her darker and greyer look.
Blizzard plans to make the graphics accessible to everyone, and they already turned it away from the true Goth Diablo to a more happy unicorn fantasy land.
If you want good graphics, or dark scary ambience.... this is DEFINITELY not the game you are expecting.
On May 15 2011 01:30 AeroGear wrote: So many complaints. I guess the good side of that is that whiners wont apply to the beta right? Since its such a bad game...
Have you seen the whole game? No. Some areas may well prove "raw" enough for some of you apparently bloodthirsty gamers.
For all we know a maturity filter is set to on by default for the demos and screens/videos (altough I doubt it).
This is a thread for a game that hasn't been released yet...What do you want people to talk about?
What's funny is you somehow think this has to do with a maturity filter? Did anyone say anything about blood? Diablo is all about tone and mood, It was dark and creepy. This is not.
The graphics actually do seem kinda poor in the game, aside from the aesthetic decisions you could argue about. Shadows are nonexistent or poor, units float on the ground, and there's no normal or bump mapping as far as i can tell. I suppose things like that could be added soon. I remember zerg units from what we saw of pre-beta sc2 were in a similar state.
Aesthetically i think the game looks fine. They traded in a darker grimy look for a more painterly artistic one, which is a good idea if they want to keep a nice coherent look while also having the game scale well on all machines.
Well I'm still hoping to get a shot at the Beta either way. Best case scenario it draws me in as the previous D2 game did and the original before that. Even if the graphics aren't what I am hoping for(dark, gory, and evil) I'll still give it a shot in hopes that the game play and story line are amazing and make it worth playing. If not that frees up many many hours to hone my SC2 skills.
I'm generally not one to complain about graphics or artwork. If the gameplay is there, that's more than enough for me. But the thing where Blizzard is turning all of their games into cartoons is getting really old. Warcraft in space, warcraft in hell. How about we just have warcraft in WoW and let the other games have their own look.
Is there an actual reason everybody is so outraged about the Templar looking like a WoW Paladin besides seeing somebody else write that and copy it to jump on the WoW hate band wagon? I'm really curious because every time somebody writes that they never have a substantial reason to back it up.
I don't think blizzard could get away with the Gothic levels they put into the first and second games. I never noticed such things a decade ago when I was playing through the first time, but then I saw some graphics specifically pointing such things out. There's some crazy stuff in these games that goes unnoticed to the average eye. I don't mind such things, but I can see how it'd keep people away from the game. I've never played games for the graphics so I could care less really. I'd rather them make something completely retarded, hideous, and it actually have good game play than have good graphics, but suck.
On May 15 2011 02:59 Blitzkrieg0 wrote: Is there an actual reason everybody is so outraged about the Templar looking like a WoW Paladin besides seeing somebody else write that and copy it to jump on the WoW hate band wagon? I'm really curious because every time somebody writes that they never have a substantial reason to back it up.
I don't think blizzard could get away with the Gothic levels they put into the first and second games. I never noticed such things a decade ago when I was playing through the first time, but then I saw some graphics specifically pointing such things out. There's some crazy stuff in these games that goes unnoticed to the average eye. I don't mind such things, but I can see how it'd keep people away from the game. I've never played games for the graphics so I could care less really. I'd rather them make something completely retarded, hideous, and it actually have good game play than have good graphics, but suck.
Than do not try to talk down people who DO notice and enjoy graphics in their games. Guess what, different people look for different things in video games. I played a lot of WoW still do occasionally but I still don't like the WoW-style graphics being implemented to Diablo 3 because they're different games I play diablo to play diablo with its dark and gloomy atmosphere, not to play WoW as a hack and slash.
The templar looks fine in the isometric view of the game, I actually like his animations, like that little jump attack he does with his spear. I'm so sick of the graphics complaints for Diablo 3. Ever since it was announced it seems like half the comments are just people complaining about the graphics.
On May 15 2011 03:05 Pangolin wrote: The templar looks fine in the isometric view of the game, I actually like his animations, like that little jump attack he does with his spear. I'm so sick of the graphics complaints for Diablo 3. Ever since it was announced it seems like half the comments are just people complaining about the graphics.
EPT
