Support NeoGAF

[Lothars]

The first act of Titan Quest isn't amazing, but the game gets better as it goes on. The expansion is downright fantastic. Based on pure mechanics, it's also a superior game to D2. The loot is also the closest any game has gotten to D2. The only downside to the loot is that there's a little too much of it, and the good stuff isn't quite distinctive enough. Still a very good effort, though.

I agree that Titan Quest and expansion is a good game but I think your totally wrong, the mechanics and gameplay doesn't even touch Diablo 2, honestly it's not even in the same league.

I would have liked to see a sequel to Titan Quest.

 

[Keikaku]

i'm pretty sure we've all seen enough the be able to pass judgment on the artsyle and graphics of the game. i'm sure gameplay will be fun as hell..but from what i've seen, the mood and atmosphere of previous diablo games is just not there, especially diablo 1. if you haven't played diablo 1 you wouldn't understand.

I've played Diablo 1. I have Diablo II and LOD installed on my computer to this very day and I am, in fact doing a run with a barbarian through the game right now.

What I don't understand is that people seem to be forgetting that Diablo 1 and 2 weren't as dark as they seem to believe. Diablo 1 had monsters that were lime green and bright blue all over. Diablo 2 has the ridiculous Fallen and Pygmy monsters that are almost completely comic relief. Hell, I'd argue that Blizzard was trolling people with the monsters in Act 1 of Diablo 2-I mean, hedgehogs, zombies and yeti's? Really? REALLY?

The only reasons those games were even remotely scary, in my opinion, were because you were so vulnerable in the beginning. Once you hit around lvl 15 or so, a lot of the fear went away. The game became less about "Can I survive?" and more about "How much health will I survive this with?"

Do you remember what it was like when you had a Conc Barb or a Meteorb Sorceress? There was no fear because "Look minions - DEAD" was all that happened.

 

[Goon Boon]

The four player multiplayer limit, more WoWesque graphics, and anti-gimmick itemization/stats is making this alot easier to resume not buying anything from Activision. Also pretty interesting how the current story seems nothing like what they're doing in Diablo 3, usually when blizzard cancels a game the lore ends up somewhere (that warcraft adventure game, starcraft ghost)

 

[BlueCrest]

I would say that the shift from its horror aspect can even been seen in its cinematic trailers.
Diablo 3 Cinematic Teaser
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EgbUSsblCSQ&feature=related
It's a decent trailer, but the writing is horrible it seems to be an offshot of the World of Warcraft monologues.

Diablo 2 Cinematic Teaser
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFWZpRtt6_M
Probably one of the best cinematic teasers ever released the horror aspect is fantastic even though it's technically inferior to the Diablo 3 teaser, it's much more powerful in the message of terror it coveys.

 

[X26]

I think the fact that the brightest, most colorful act in D2 (act 2) looks significantly more grim than the underground dungeons/caverns of D3 we've seen sofar says a lot a well

 

[John_B]

Diablo 2 looks like those old stop motion movies (see picture below). Those Blizzard North screens carries a completely different style and looks nothing like Diablo 2.

The Diablo 2 style is very cool, but not really fitting for a video game that is very busy visually. Almost all monters have bright hues because otherwise they would blend into the background (try finding Cain in Act 5).

To render that style in 3D you would need some Doom 3 type of light setting, which again would not be very fitting, and probably much more demanding to render than what they are doing now.

So the visual style of Diablo 2 would probably not have been a good option, but I can agree that they probably should have tried to make Diablo 3 more visually distinctive compared to their other franchises.

 

[bigboss370]

I've played Diablo 1. I have Diablo II and LOD installed on my computer to this very day and I am, in fact doing a run with a barbarian through the game right now.

What I don't understand is that people seem to be forgetting that Diablo 1 and 2 weren't as dark as they seem to believe. Diablo 1 had monsters that were lime green and bright blue all over. Diablo 2 has the ridiculous Fallen and Pygmy monsters that are almost completely comic relief. Hell, I'd argue that Blizzard was trolling people with the monsters in Act 1 of Diablo 2-I mean, hedgehogs, zombies and yeti's? Really? REALLY?

The only reasons those games were even remotely scary, in my opinion, were because you were so vulnerable in the beginning. Once you hit around lvl 15 or so, a lot of the fear went away. The game became less about "Can I survive?" and more about "How much health will I survive this with?"

Do you remember what it was like when you had a Conc Barb or a Meteorb Sorceress? There was no fear because "Look minions - DEAD" was all that happened.

dude i'm not saying diablo 3 can't have bright and/or daytime areas. i'm saying i wanna see more of this:

compared to this:

 

[V_Arnold]

Okay, this is beyond ridiculous now.

You want D1 in D3? Wrong! Go play D1.
THIS is D3, deal with it, or skip it.

I think that a lot of people here are confusing technique with style. Although it's undeniable that Diablo 3 uses similar graphics techniques and an evolution of the WoW engine the actual style of the character and environment design is distinctly Diablo. People are putting way too much emphasis on things like the fact that the game uses hand-painted textures and low-poly models. Those things aren't the exclusive domain of Warcraft, and they're mostly just a side-effect of moving to 3D but still trying to keep system-requirements low.

The test would be to take the characters and put them in a WoW environment. Most if not all of the characters and mobs would stick out like dog's balls.



I'm pretty sure that shot has been floating around for a few years now and isn't really representative of the current state of the game. And even then, if you transferred that barb as is to a major city in WoW, they would not look like they belonged there. The armour is definitely similar but the face and significantly toned down exaggerations of body-mass are pretty distinct from the current Warcraft look.

You make too much sense to be posting in this thread, really. These are the hard cold facts, not the WoW-phobic screams when someone sees a shoulderpad and colors. Those are not WoW-exclusive features.

 

[JaseC]

Okay, this is beyond ridiculous now.

You want D1 in D3? Wrong! Go play D1.
THIS is D3, deal with it, or skip it.

Wanting a Diablo game to have the visual aesthetic one expects of a Diablo game is not "ridiculous". Some wish it had the aesthetic of Diablo/Diablo II and others are fine with the approach to Diablo III. Personally, I don't really give a shit what it looks like. I just want to run around slaying shit with a couple mates, collecting bits and pieces along the way.

 

[Fugu]

I've played Diablo 1. I have Diablo II and LOD installed on my computer to this very day and I am, in fact doing a run with a barbarian through the game right now.

What I don't understand is that people seem to be forgetting that Diablo 1 and 2 weren't as dark as they seem to believe. Diablo 1 had monsters that were lime green and bright blue all over. Diablo 2 has the ridiculous Fallen and Pygmy monsters that are almost completely comic relief. Hell, I'd argue that Blizzard was trolling people with the monsters in Act 1 of Diablo 2-I mean, hedgehogs, zombies and yeti's? Really? REALLY?

The only reasons those games were even remotely scary, in my opinion, were because you were so vulnerable in the beginning. Once you hit around lvl 15 or so, a lot of the fear went away. The game became less about "Can I survive?" and more about "How much health will I survive this with?"

Do you remember what it was like when you had a Conc Barb or a Meteorb Sorceress? There was no fear because "Look minions - DEAD" was all that happened.

The games contained bright colours but they were undeniably darker than Diablo 3. I only need to point to the removal of light radius to demonstrate this; there are dozens of screenshots in this thread as well.

 

[Cipherr]

I think Im starting realize that the OT for D3 when it launches is likely to be packed to the gills with bullshit, with those of us actually playing it having to sift through pages of nonsense to get info. I hate the Blizzard official forums, but I might weather them considering how bad this game sets GAF off. This thread went from decent discussion to batshit insane.

 

[Lothars]

The games contained bright colours but they were undeniably darker than Diablo 3. I only need to point to the removal of light radius to demonstrate this; there are dozens of screenshots in this thread as well.

Diablo is also a game that's been out for 15 years, it's not like we've seen even a majority of the enviroments for Diablo 3 and we don't know how dark it will or will not be in some areas but so far the screenshots only prove the game is looking great but there's still alot we dont' know.

 

[JaseC]

I think Im starting realize that the OT for D3 when it launches is likely to be packed to the gills with bullshit, with those of us actually playing it having to sift through pages of nonsense to get info. I hate the Blizzard official forums, but I might weather them considering how bad this game sets GAF off. This thread went from decent discussion to batshit insane.

All you need is a mod warning stating that such discussion is to stay out of the thread.

 

[peakish]

Are these shots from Eurogamer new? They show off the male deamon hunter.

Concept art is here and on the topic of design I'm no fan of those huuuge spiky things. I like the concept of the character otherwise, but it's a huuuge leap from the more simple characters in D2 (I think the most extravagant design if the necromancer?)

 

[Lothars]

I think Im starting realize that the OT for D3 when it launches is likely to be packed to the gills with bullshit, with those of us actually playing it having to sift through pages of nonsense to get info. I hate the Blizzard official forums, but I might weather them considering how bad this game sets GAF off. This thread went from decent discussion to batshit insane.

Well I won't visit the battle.net forums because they are always bad and there's lot's of insanity here from both sides but I will still visit the Diablo 3 OT when it's made as I will the dedicated Diablo sites I've frequented for years.

 

[Fallout-NL]

Blizzard has already stated that these acts will get progressively more fucked up as you move through them. And most of the shots are from earlier parts of the game, hence not as fucked up maybe.

 

[Lothars]

Blizzard has already stated that these acts will get progressively more fucked up as you move through them. And most of the shots are from earlier parts of the game, hence not as fucked up maybe.

I'm thinking that the case because there's not really any screenshots from the later parts of the game and really almost no info as well at the moment.

 

[peakish]

I'm thinking that the case because there's not really any screenshots from the later parts of the game and really almost no info as well at the moment.

Makes sense, no reason to spoil the surprise. I trust Blizzard and love just about everything I've read in interviews with the designers of D3 - they seem really intelligent and intent on making a great game.

 

[antonz]

Okay, this is beyond ridiculous now.

You want D1 in D3? Wrong! Go play D1.
THIS is D3, deal with it, or skip it.



You make too much sense to be posting in this thread, really. These are the hard cold facts, not the WoW-phobic screams when someone sees a shoulderpad and colors. Those are not WoW-exclusive features.

You come across as a total asshole. People are allowed to have differing opinions. No one says the game is going to be bad. They say the art direction is too Warcraft team which is not surprising considering the team tasked with the art direction

 

[maniac-kun]

When you enter hell in the final act of Diablo 3 your complaints will be invalid.

Oh and the throne of Baal had color:

Some new screens:

 

[Stahsky]

I dunno, man. While I'm totally digging the old concept, I also really like the current one. Sure it's a touch colored, but it still has its own charm that differs from WoW. I'm totally okay with the look of it, so long as the environments keep fresh.

In the end, I don't think anyone of us will be complaining come time to gore up a room full of Diablo-esque dudes.

 

[antonz]

I dunno, man. While I'm totally digging the old concept, I also really like the current one. Sure it's a touch colored, but it still has its own charm that differs from WoW. I'm totally okay with the look of it, so long as the environments keep fresh.

In the end, I don't think anyone of us will be complaining come time to gore up a room full of Diablo-esque dudes.

I am sure that will be the case. Everyone who isn't happy will play the shit out of the game. Its just foolish to not expect people to compare and contrast and even express disappointment with the direction a game takes when you see the prior.

 

[V_Arnold]

You come across as a total asshole. People are allowed to have differing opinions. No one says the game is going to be bad. They say the art direction is too Warcraft team which is not surprising considering the team tasked with the art direction

Am I allowed to have my own opinion in this, btw? Or is that a no-go? Just because in this thread I was already advised to wear glasses, open my eyes, stop suggesting nonsense (that it is NOT WOW-looking). Alright, moving on.

 

[charlequin]

Am I allowed to have my own opinion in this, btw?

You are, but it would behoove you to tone it down and discuss things politely and respectfully.

We're back to the terri-bad fan shopped screenshots?

We're not back on it, Joe; we're still on it.

 

[Philthy]

Looks amazing. I would buy that today without hesitation. I'm still not sold on the rainbow colored lighting that the current one is going for. I just get that bad vibe when every game did colored lighting to death back in the Quake 2 days.

 

[Loto]

Day 1 etc... That male demon hunter is new info. Should have a new thread on that.

 

[Fugu]

When you enter hell in the final act of Diablo 3 your complaints will be invalid.

Oh and the throne of Baal had color:

I actually like these screenshots, but why are they such a small percentage of the large variety of screenshots that we've seen?

 

[Raide]

I actually like these screenshots, but why are they such a small percentage of the large variety of screenshots that we've seen?

Blizzard PR only showing the stuff they want to show. In a few years, as we get closer to launch, they might show off more of the variety.

There are some ugly ass parts of Diablo 2 and some stunning places, I expect Diablo 3 to be the same once people have played it several times.

 

[Loto]

Also, if you already haven't check out some of the media from Blizzcon 2010. There were a lot of environments shown. I can link you when I get home

 

[Fallout-NL]

Don't think I'm ever going to play the Demon Hunter by the way. Maybe I'll start with a Barb, or the Wizard maybe.

 

[Loto]

Don't think I'm ever going to play the Demon Hunter by the way. Maybe I'll start with a Barb, or the Wizard maybe.

Ya Wizard fo sho. I'm really liking what I am seeing from Demon Hunter though. I hope we get this in 2011

 

[SnakeswithLasers]

When you enter hell in the final act of Diablo 3 your complaints will be invalid.

Oh and the throne of Baal had color:

Are you saying that ironically? As in, "Ya, RED and BLACK."
Or are you being serious and counting spell effects as "color" included in the room?

Again, I don't care too much, as I just want to shred packs of monsters, but those are bad examples if you're trying to show D2 as being light and colorful.

Overall, the game was dark and gothic in architecture, whereas the new stuff that we've seen is very wow-esque with the chunky BRM style. Not a value judgment, just an observation.

 

[KAL2006]

dude i'm not saying diablo 3 can't have bright and/or daytime areas. i'm saying i wanna see more of this:

compared to this:

I know exactly what you mean, the new graphics is lacking those hard lines and detail. However. Also the there is too much color in the new graphics.

However it is too late now and have gotten over it, the graphics are still good in it's own way (even if it's different), also it looks much better in motion. Even though I would have preferred the old style of graphics I am still excited for this games, in fact it's my most anticipated game of all time.

 

[Instro]

Are you saying that ironically? As in, "Ya, RED and BLACK."
Or are you being serious and counting spell effects as "color" included in the room?

Again, I don't care too much, as I just want to shred packs of monsters, but those are bad examples if you're trying to show D2 as being light and colorful.

Overall, the game was dark and gothic in architecture, whereas the new stuff that we've seen is very wow-esque with the chunky BRM style. Not a value judgment, just an observation.

Most of the monsters in Baals throneroom have some really weird colors to them, solid purple, green, blue etc. The really ugly palette swaps show up a lot late in the game and in NM and Hell difficulties. To be honest most of the enemies in D2 are heavily colored, in that regard the 2 games are actually pretty similar.

 

[Fugu]

Blizzard PR only showing the stuff they want to show. In a few years, as we get closer to launch, they might show off more of the variety.

There are some ugly ass parts of Diablo 2 and some stunning places, I expect Diablo 3 to be the same once people have played it several times.

Diablo 2's launch didn't look anything like this. Also, we've seen three acts of Diablo 3; there's not too much left to see.

 

[depths20XX]

D3 looks like a watercolor painting.

I'm not sure if it's harder to get that gritty look with the 3d as opposed to the older 2d sprites, but it definetly looks more disney than dark.

Still will buy

 

[iamblades]

D3 looks like a watercolor painting.

I'm not sure if it's harder to get that gritty look with the 3d as opposed to the older 2d sprites, but it definetly looks more disney than dark.

Still will buy

Well there is the issue that more detail costs performance in 3d, whereas with sprites, if you can fit the detail into the size of the sprite, you are good. Then there is the inherent grittiness of sprites where the sprite resolution doesn't quite match the display resolution along with all the artifacts from compression and color palette limitations.

Then there are other things people aren't considering like the resolution difference. Comparing a 640x480 resolution screen to a 1080 screen doesn't really work.

All these things are the causes behind the diablo aesthetic and the reason for the backlash(I much prefer the crisp, smooth high res look, though I could do with some added spec maps or something on the environments in places, it does look a bit flat in static screens), but people saying 'they just used wow's art style' are annoying and wrong.