Nobody in this thread thinks this game is going to be terrible.
There is just a divided fan base in terms of preference to the new look or the old look of the Diablo franchise.
I'll still play it and probably enjoy it regardless, but when all you get to do is look at images and videos before release it shouldn't be surprising that a large percentage of long-time fans of the game are going to be critical of any new coat of paint thrown on.
Nice post though. I wasn't up-to-date with all that info until now.
Now this is more of a legitimate complaint than anything else, but we really dont know if this is a good or bad thing. In D2, regardless of class, you would basically end up pounding most of your points into Vitality, none in Energy, and just enough into Strength and Dexterity to use your gear. The only exception was if you wanted max block then you would put in a bit more Dexterity.
Theres no strategy there, because no matter what class you were using you basically built them the same. So while there is a loss customization and human input, there should be a lot more diversity between class stats. Ideally the new trait system will make up for the lac of customization in stats.
And Warcraft 2 had more going on than what was in Warcraft 1 (hell Blizzard even cut some stuff like a fourth resource out. because WC2 went a little too crazy) Same goes for Diablo 1 -> Diablo 2 and Warcraft 2 -> Warcraft 3.
Like I said in my edit I'm not sure if or when they take things too far (eg. people complain about SC2 map sizes which definitely feels legit) but they've always gone for accessibility. WC3 got flamed a lot by SC players at the time so it's anyway certainly not a new development.
That looks like a 3d Diablo done by Blizzard North, I wanna see some 3d Diablo Hellish levels from Blizzard North to really get a feel for it. This area shown reminds me of that "Monastery"? in act 2 architecture wise.
And current Diablo 3 looks like a "3D Diablo as interpreted by the Warcraft Team" which is, exactly what it is.
Im sure it will play great, be awesome, and still look cool, but anyone with vision can see the art "style" has changed. I liked it better the old way. But like the Fallout series, I can deal with change if I wanna still play the series I like.....however..... *glares at xcom thread*.
I want to know what other developer you guys would want to have worked on this third game if you guys don't like the WoW influenced look, obviously, Blizzard North is no more so they had to look for another team to work on D3. Maybe if they had outsourced D3 to Crate Entertainment(Ironlore) then maybe some of you guys would be satisfied?
I want to know what other developer you guys would want to have worked on this third game if you guys don't like the WoW influenced look, obviously, Blizzard North is no more so they had to look for another team to work on D3. Maybe if they had outsourced D3 to Crate Entertainment(Ironlore) then maybe some of you guys would be satisfied?
From the looks of things with the old Diablo 3 screenshots it seems as if Blizzard North was going towards either a contradiction in Diablo lore or a complete retcon of major portions of Diablo lore (Kingdom of Shadow, Demon's Bane and so on).
I prefer a darker Diablo 3, but despite that has still been my most anticipated game for years. I also think it's not really fair to compare it to Diablo 2 as all Blizzard games since Warcraft 3 appear to have this stylized cartoony look to them in order to keep pc requirements down.
From the looks of things with the old Diablo 3 screenshots it seems as if Blizzard North was going towards either a contradiction in Diablo lore or a complete retcon of major portions of Diablo lore (Kingdom of Shadow, Demon's Bane and so on).
One of the D3 designers responded to this by arguing that while it looks good, it's unfeasible from a lighting standpoint and also hurts the gameplay by not color-coding properly.
The old style reminds me of a Ys game for some reason. I like the old style better, the new one has that ugly World of Warcraft look to it. Keep in mind I have never played any Diablo game.
One of the D3 designers responded to this by arguing that while it looks good, it's unfeasible from a lighting standpoint and also hurts the gameplay by not color-coding properly.
He should play dead space. That game is dark as hell sometimes and rightly so. I think the real problem is in Blizz textures than the lighting. Shit he should check Demon's Souls.
One of the D3 designers responded to this by arguing that while it looks good, it's unfeasible from a lighting standpoint and also hurts the gameplay by not color-coding properly.
Why is it unfeasible? Demon's Souls also has only a tiny light radius around the character, with no other light except from spells and random torches in the environment, like Diablo had.
Now this is more of a legitimate complaint than anything else, but we really dont know if this is a good or bad thing. In D2, regardless of class, you would basically end up pounding most of your points into Vitality, none in Energy, and just enough into Strength and Dexterity to use your gear. The only exception was if you wanted max block then you would put in a bit more Dexterity.
This hasn't always been true. Vitality-oriented builds were once exclusively the realm of hardcore because there was once a time when the damage benefit alloted by strength/dex after 100 was worth it for melee classes (which for the most part aren't viable in 1.13, but that's unrelated). The reason that the stats became so automatic and fucked up after the expansion was released and moreso after 1.10 was released was because that the patches never balanced the stats for the increased significance of itemization after the expansion. A quick run through classic will give you an indication of the scale of the best gear dropped in classic versus that of the expansion, and if you can imagine it gear was SUBSTANTIALLY worse in older versions of classic than it is now. They're hard to find now, but if you can find a reference of 1.00 uniques you can see what I'm talking about. Energy has always had disputable uses but it was once an extremely important and rare stat (on items) for classes like the Barbarian -- which has such a low mana pool coupled with high mana costs on their most important skills -- and the Necromancer -- which consumes about as much mana as a sorceress without the copious bonuses to regeneration. Also, block used to be based entirely on the shield so dex was used for accuracy and in certain cases to boost defense (which, too, has become entirely disproportionate with the adjusted hit% values introduced in the expansion, resulting in Baal having like a 95% chance to hit on the impossible-to-reach-in-1.00-classic 2000 defense).
My point is that Diablo 2 has not always been devoid of stat customization and is only so now because Blizzard failed to put any effort into making any congruency between the stats and the rest of the game past 2001. There was once a time when stat customization added something meaningful to the game and I don't think that Blizzard Irvine is aware of this, so I'm standing by my position that its removal is short-sighted. You only need to look to games like Ragnarok Online to see how stat customization can be used to meaningfully add variety to otherwise identical characters.
FoxSpirit said:
"Needs 8 players".
I think 4 is plenty fine. Will be a bit more ordered instead of massive spam.
Why does 8 players necessarily indicate massive spam when 4 players doesn't? Diablo 2 looks like there's a lot of shit going on because there are practically no viable single-target abilities, not because there are eight players.
I will say that by far the most enjoyable times I've had playing Diablo 2 were times where I was playing with a large group (usually 8 players). I am really going to miss that, because I know that had the cap been four players I would have enjoyed the game substantially less.
It is also worth noting that it would have been much more effective to allow a cap of eight players and balance the game specifically for four (making it prohibitive to play with more unless you really want to) if Blizzard was so steadfast that four was the way to go because that would have left the eight-player fans no reason to be pissed off. This is essentially what they did with Diablo 2 (where the most efficient number is 5 without considering particular group efficiency) and it worked fine there.
charlequin said:
These shots do a great job of showing off what, to me, were the strengths and weaknesses of the previous Diablo titles visually. On the one hand, the level of detail in the environment, those tile floor patterns in the first shot, the grotesquerie, the subdued environmental tones -- I love all that stuff.
On the other hand, these shots remind me of how much I hated the lack of contrast or tone variance (especially in the first Diablo) and especially the darkness everywhere -- hated that then, hate it now, would still hate it in a new game.
(I think it's instructive that the Blizzard North shots have the detail style of the older games but very much don't have the crushing environmental darkness, actually.)
I'm personally a big fan of the darkness (Except in the original Diablo. Shit's so black) and I felt that it accented caves well, at least until players got gigantic light radii. I also don't particularly agree about the contrast variance (again, only in Diablo 2) if you're talking about the game as a whole because they get a lot covered, but the amount of variance within specific acts is somewhat lacking.
Why is it unfeasible? Demon's Souls also has only a tiny light radius around the character, with no other light except from spells and random torches in the environment, like Diablo had.
"Though it looks really cool, it's almost impossible to do in a 3D engine because you can't have lighting that smart and run on systems that are reasonable. If we could do that, we probably would in a few of the dungeons.
Now in terms of the actual texturing, this texturing, where they grayed out everything and it's very flat and the monsters are all kind of a similar tone -- that does not play well. It's very boring to run through more than a couple of times, and it's very difficult to tell creatures apart and pop them out of the environment. So those things don't really work for us. A lot of the lighting stuff I think is very cool, but it's also not very doable for us."
This hasn't always been true. Vitality-oriented builds were once exclusively the realm of hardcore because there was once a time when the damage benefit alloted by strength/dex after 100 was worth it for melee classes (which for the most part aren't viable in 1.13, but that's unrelated). The reason that the stats became so automatic and fucked up after the expansion was released and moreso after 1.10 was released was because that the patches never balanced the stats for the increased significance of itemization after the expansion. A quick run through classic will give you an indication of the scale of the best gear dropped in classic versus that of the expansion, and if you can imagine it gear was SUBSTANTIALLY worse in older versions of classic than it is now. They're hard to find now, but if you can find a reference of 1.00 uniques you can see what I'm talking about. Energy has always had disputable uses but it was once an extremely important and rare stat (on items) for classes like the Barbarian -- which has such a low mana pool coupled with high mana costs on their most important skills -- and the Necromancer -- which consumes about as much mana as a sorceress without the copious bonuses to regeneration. Also, block used to be based entirely on the shield so dex was used for accuracy and in certain cases to boost defense (which, too, has become entirely disproportionate with the adjusted hit% values introduced in the expansion, resulting in Baal having like a 95% chance to hit on the impossible-to-reach-in-1.00-classic 2000 defense).
My point is that Diablo 2 has not always been devoid of stat customization and is only so now because Blizzard failed to put any effort into making any congruency between the stats and the rest of the game past 2001. There was once a time when stat customization added something meaningful to the game and I don't think that Blizzard Irvine is aware of this, so I'm standing by my position that its removal is short-sighted. You only need to look to games like Ragnarok Online to see how stat customization can be used to meaningfully add variety to otherwise identical characters.
Good point I really wasnt thinking of previous builds of D2, and let me clear Im not against manual stat allocation, but if they were to keep the system similar to how D2 currently works and has worked for years, then I would prefer the automatic stat allocation.
Granted, stats have never really been hugely important in Diablo anyway, by comparison to other other wrpgs like your Fallouts where you have stats controlling stealth, luck, ability to talk to people etc. All the stats in Diablo are directly tied to either your kill speed or survivability, messing with the stats wont change that, and if we wanted a more complex stat system the game itself would probably have to be different was well.
Alright, in reference to The Kingdom of Shadow and Demonsbane, Demons cannot enter Sanctuary unless they have a lesser evil or Prime Evil posessing the body of a mortal to act as a tether, likewise it is insanely hard for Angels to manifest in Sanctuary, often they are only able to remain on the mortal realm for little more than one evening at a time (this is all covered in Demonsbane). Also while it is easy for mortals to descend to hell (for some unknown reason I can only attribute to a plot device), It is near impossible for them to ascend to Heaven with their mortal bodies intact, to do such would require vast amounts of magical energies and the guidance of an Angel, which they traditionally refuse to do (outside of Tyrael of course). The only group of people able to accomplish this feat of sorcery were the mages and king of Ureh, though
unfortunately they were deceived by Diablo and very nearly cast themselves into the pits of hell instead, twisting themselves into monstrous undead forms in the process
(This is covered in The Kingdom of Shadow). So logically, according to lore, it is near impossible for mortals to ascend to heaven with their mortal bodies intact.
Alright, in reference to The Kingdom of Shadow and Demonsbane, Demons cannot enter Sanctuary unless they have a lesser evil or Prime Evil posessing the body of a mortal to act as a tether, likewise it is insanely hard for Angels to manifest in Sanctuary, often they are only able to remain on the mortal realm for little more than one evening at a time (this is all covered in Demonsbane). Also while it is easy for mortals to descend to hell (for some unknown reason I can only attribute to a plot device), It is near impossible for them to ascend to Heaven with their mortal bodies intact, to do such would require vast amounts of magical energies and the guidance of an Angel, which they traditionally refuse to do (outside of Tyrael of course). The only group of people able to accomplish this feat of sorcery were the mages and king of Ureh, though
unfortunately they were deceived by Diablo and very nearly cast themselves into the pits of hell instead, twisting themselves into monstrous undead forms in the process
(This is covered in The Kingdom of Shadow). So logically, according to lore, it is near impossible for mortals to ascend to heaven with their mortal bodies intact.
Oh thats a shame, I was hoping that there would be a Diablo 3 expansion where you have to go to heaven and fight an army of fallen angels, the way you get to heaven is that an angel (a good one, not all are fallen angels) gives you access to heaven. Seeing those screenshots gave me hope this would happen. Of course I don't want this in Diablo 3 (should end in the depths of hell) but on a Diablo 3 expansion it would great.
I loved D2 for it's gameplay, not it's graphics and artstyle (which was horrid). The more recent shots of D3 look great and more hellish than the canned version.
Something about the original screens strikes me as a very ' stiff' looking game. The current D3 they have going seems to be in support of a lot more wild animations and atmosphere.
Of course i have no idea as i havent seen the original in motion.
I'm personally a big fan of the darkness (Except in the original Diablo. Shit's so black) and I felt that it accented caves well, at least until players got gigantic light radii. I also don't particularly agree about the contrast variance (again, only in Diablo 2) if you're talking about the game as a whole because they get a lot covered, but the amount of variance within specific acts is somewhat lacking.
I think the the one thing that is most responsible for the WOW comparisons is the texture work. It's not nearly detailed enough. I just started playing WOW a couple weeks ago and I can definitely see what people are referring to. The character models may be a little bulkier and exaggerated a la WOW, but I don't think it's much beyond D2.
I'm still looking forward to D3 of course, but I really do not like some of the textures in it. That's really the only complaint I have.
The reference I'll use is this
If you look at the skin of the things with flaming swords, there's just no detail there. It's completely flat with a small amount of 'flourish' painted on.
I understand that some people identify the series by the gothic visual style, and feel changing that takes something away from the franchise. But the crazy has gone overboard with attacking the developers for just about any small change or detail.
The game could not be in better hands, and the end result will have everyone eating crow, even if that crow is as drawn by a Disney employee.
Orbs/Potions We changed the health model, so that players don't rely on potions. Instead they can pick up health power-ups from enemies. It doesn't change the basic way the game plays, but it gives it a little bit more depth. You don't have one answer to healing in combat "I'm in trouble, I hit a potion." Instead, "I'm in trouble, there's a health globe over there, and there's a 20-foot demon standing between me and it." That's a really interesting situation for the player, but it works with the same complexity of interface and gameplay that we had.
...We did put health potions back in, but they play a very different role. You can't spam them like you used to, you can only use them about once a map. The purpose of those is to take the edge off the loss of health. "I don't have health, or I've got half health, do I want to use a health potion, or do I want to risk it? Ooh, I've got 10% health, it's not even a decision." That's a really interesting decision, and it makes potion use a fun part of the game. - Jay Wilson, Blizzcon 2009
Attributes We used to have a system in Diablo 2 where you could spend attribute points on all your core attributes and this system was much loved as a customisation tool but in actuality when we looked at it most of the builds took the exact same points in the exact same areas even across the classes and so we didn't feel like it was a good customisation system. Traits is really to specifically address the removal of attribute point spending. - Jay Wilson, Blizzcon 2010
that AFTER shot looks soooo freaking good. man if there are mods that come out making the game look like that at that scene i'll be very happy. plus more blood on the ground. and where are the bodies on spikes? where's the tits? the mature stuff?
that AFTER shot looks soooo freaking good. man if there are mods that come out making the game look like that at that scene i'll be very happy. plus more blood on the ground. and where are the bodies on spikes? where's the tits? the mature stuff? :P[/QUOTE]
Really?...
I don't think it looks bad, but it's a bit too gritty.
Then again I like how Diablo 3 looks right now. Oh well..
I understand that some people identify the series by the gothic visual style, and feel changing that takes something away from the franchise. But the crazy has gone overboard with attacking the developers for just about any small change or detail.
The game could not be in better hands, and the end result will have everyone eating crow, even if that crow is as drawn by a Disney employee. Attributes We used to have a system in Diablo 2 where you could spend attribute points on all your core attributes and this system was much loved as a customisation tool but in actuality when we looked at it most of the builds took the exact same points in the exact same areas even across the classes and so we didn't feel like it was a good customisation system. Traits is really to specifically address the removal of attribute point spending. - Jay Wilson, Blizzcon 2010
This hasn't always been true. Vitality-oriented builds were once exclusively the realm of hardcore because there was once a time when the damage benefit alloted by strength/dex after 100 was worth it for melee classes (which for the most part aren't viable in 1.13, but that's unrelated). The reason that the stats became so automatic and fucked up after the expansion was released and moreso after 1.10 was released was because that the patches never balanced the stats for the increased significance of itemization after the expansion. A quick run through classic will give you an indication of the scale of the best gear dropped in classic versus that of the expansion, and if you can imagine it gear was SUBSTANTIALLY worse in older versions of classic than it is now. They're hard to find now, but if you can find a reference of 1.00 uniques you can see what I'm talking about. Energy has always had disputable uses but it was once an extremely important and rare stat (on items) for classes like the Barbarian -- which has such a low mana pool coupled with high mana costs on their most important skills -- and the Necromancer -- which consumes about as much mana as a sorceress without the copious bonuses to regeneration. Also, block used to be based entirely on the shield so dex was used for accuracy and in certain cases to boost defense (which, too, has become entirely disproportionate with the adjusted hit% values introduced in the expansion, resulting in Baal having like a 95% chance to hit on the impossible-to-reach-in-1.00-classic 2000 defense).
My point is that Diablo 2 has not always been devoid of stat customization and is only so now because Blizzard failed to put any effort into making any congruency between the stats and the rest of the game past 2001. There was once a time when stat customization added something meaningful to the game and I don't think that Blizzard Irvine is aware of this, so I'm standing by my position that its removal is short-sighted. You only need to look to games like Ragnarok Online to see how stat customization can be used to meaningfully add variety to otherwise identical characters.
that AFTER shot looks soooo freaking good. man if there are mods that come out making the game look like that at that scene i'll be very happy. plus more blood on the ground. and where are the bodies on spikes? where's the tits? the mature stuff?
blizzard employees have already addressed these photoshops.
you have to realise that all those effects are done post render, and so it doesn't have to run at 24-60 fps. to achieve some of that stuff (particularly lighting) would be too taxing for most systems.
i think they talk about it in one of the blizzcasts or something.
