-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Diablo 3 Gameplay Video [Art Debate Thread #547]
- Thread starter jim-jam bongs
- Start date
Raide said:Its one of those games that does not look great in static screenshots.Everyone that played D2 to death knows they will be investing massive amounts of time into D3. After that video, I think I will try the Monk first.
Boom!
I'd be lying if I said the Monk didn't pique my interest after seeing that video, but I can't fight the urge to play Wizard and spam magics everywhere.
FrontalMonk
Banned
CaLe said:
This.
I'm surprised nobody remembers the fact that D2 only ran in 640x480 on release, and that one of the big features of the expansion was that you could bump the res to 800x600. Meanwhile everyone and their sister was running their res. at 1024x768.
Edit: Quote fail.
Diablo 2 looked great for its time... smh
Diablo 3 doesn't even look like its a game from this generation. If you even ignore the graphics, you'll notice that it doesnt have that gothic/satanic dark atmosphere which was in D1/D2. If this game wasn't named Diablo 3, I woudln't even know if it was a part of the franchise.
Diablo 3 doesn't even look like its a game from this generation. If you even ignore the graphics, you'll notice that it doesnt have that gothic/satanic dark atmosphere which was in D1/D2. If this game wasn't named Diablo 3, I woudln't even know if it was a part of the franchise.
MrKnives said:
It's weird, because I still think the video that looks the best is the first one they ever showed. Everything else I've seen (especially char playthroughs) just look very bland. That said, I'm not an old Diablo fan and I'm not married to the old look, I just wished that it looked better "in general". /last comment on graphics coming from me.
inky said:
One thing to note is that they are from different levels. If you disregard the new video and compare the Monk blizzcon 09 trailer and the Barb mob fight from 08 they don't look all that different. Just different setting and different enemies.
I can understand blizz changing art styles in the middle of the production but I just don't see why they would downgrade the graphics of the game so I really do believe it's still how it looks in those older videos.
At least I hope so 
MrKnives said:
I'll bring it up if people bring D2's graphics up every page.
Teknoman said:
Act 2 and 3 looked bad? Don't agree.
Why would they show gameplay videos of a game without its graphics maxed? Have you ever heard something like that happening before? Everytime gameplay footage of a game is shown, its on max settings, otherwise it would be ridiculously stupid way of selling your product. The only cases where we've seen footage of lower settings being portrayed in trailers/gameplay videos, is when a patch/update with a superiour setting has come out after the game release (Crysis 2, Witcher etc.).
jim-jam bongs
Member
MrKnives said:
Kayo-kun said:
StarCraft 2 is looking better in motion than any other gameplay trailer it had before.
WoW is also looking better when you are running it as opposed to ANY kind of trailer/screenshot.
Why WOULD NOT Diablo 3 look clean and shard when you are playing it? After people confirmed that when playing it on several events?
Kayo-kun said:
No I think they looked great, just that they didnt share the dark/gothic atmosphere from the first Diablo or Diablo II act 1.
As far as the quality, i'm just wondering since even the recent Battlefield 3 alpha had most of the graphic options locked away, with just presets available.
FrontalMonk
Banned
yeah, I believe the quote that he was replying to was noting the gothic/demonic atmosphere and imagery, which you didn't have at all in the desert or the jungle areas.
V_Arnold said:StarCraft 2 is looking better in motion than any other gameplay trailer it had before.
WoW is also looking better when you are running it as opposed to ANY kind of trailer/screenshot.
Why WOULD NOT Diablo 3 look clean and shard when you are playing it? After people confirmed that when playing it on several events?
I'd rather see it with my own eyes than take other people's words for it. I mean why wouldn't an officially released HD quality video do the game justice?
Come on, please stop with these "it looks better in motion" because it looks like it does until its proven otherwise. People have already stated the issues they have with the graphics and art several times in this thread, it isn't like these things will change, or have enormous differences from what we've seen in the videos.
FrontalMonk said:
Yeah my comment mostly was a reply to that.
For example, look at these pictures from Act 2 and 3:
None of the D3 screenshots I've seen have this kind of an atmosphere, call it dark, creepy, whatever (shitty pictures, I know, couldn't find better ones)
Psychotext
Member
I think I'm a bad person... because I definitely prefer the after of those two shots above. (I'd be happy enough with something in between 
Edit - Oops, not the screenshots directly above.
Edit - Oops, not the screenshots directly above.
FieryBalrog
Member
Diablo 2 got pretty roundly panned for its graphics on release.
It actually ran in 640x480. Try playing it today on that resolution.
LoD added 800x600 and it looks a LOT crisper, but the graphics were still dated, like any Blizzard game since Warcraft 2. Some things worked better (character art, Act 2 in general, Act 4 & 5). And some things looked bad (Act 1 & 3). Act 1 in particular, looks really old, and thats because it was put together first, in like 1998.
It actually ran in 640x480. Try playing it today on that resolution.
LoD added 800x600 and it looks a LOT crisper, but the graphics were still dated, like any Blizzard game since Warcraft 2. Some things worked better (character art, Act 2 in general, Act 4 & 5). And some things looked bad (Act 1 & 3). Act 1 in particular, looks really old, and thats because it was put together first, in like 1998.
Diablo II was dark because of light radius. Your character had a light radius of like 5 squares that were well lit, then everything beyond that was pretty dark and hard to see. Some items modified your light radius.
I think light radius existed to help old CPUs with draw distance.
I think light radius existed to help old CPUs with draw distance.
FieryBalrog
Member
If you removed the light radius from D2, you'd see things like the arrows vanishing in mid-air and monsters who stand around without seeing you. The game would need a substantial reworking.
Freakinchair
Member
SamuraiX- said:
Really? I probably would guess Diablo 3 from any of the screen shots/videos. I think you're way wrong with that statement.
jim-jam bongs
Member
Way to cherry-pick your screens, I can do that too:
GOTHIC
GOTHIC
jim-jam bongs said:
Really?
It has nothing to do with cherrypicking, I was talking about the dark look that was missing from D3.
Yeah goot job finding the D2 on low settings. The second screen is from early beta (look at the potions). Not to mention they seem to use MH or some other cheat program since there is no light radius and the whole area is lit.
Kayo-kun said:
So you've seen everything in the game? Impressive.
Kayo-kun said:
Having just played the through a few days ago, that's really what it looks like. Not everything in Diablo 2 is so dark that the light radius kicks in.
Edit: Actually. The Lut Gholein screenshot is kinda bright.
jim-jam bongs
Member
Kayo-kun said:
No those are called outdoor daytime shots, as opposed to the shots you posted from inside dungeons. The point is that anyone claiming that D2 always looked dark and gritty is objectively wrong.
MurkyZebra2417
Member
The only creepy thing on these screens is fangskins lightning enchant.Kayo-kun said:
jim-jam bongs
Member
Kayo-kun said:
Nice, I guess I won that argument then.
TricksterLoki
Member
I saw lazors. That makes me happy
2:19
2:19
Interfectum
Gold Member
DennisK4 said:
Have they shown what D3 looks like with all the bells and whistles turned on?
Right. And as you'll notice, D2 is also god-awful ugly because the art style didn't age very well. There is a reason they chose this art style. In 10 years, it's still going to be playable to the next generation of gamers. It is going to age well, just as WoW has.Kayo-kun said:
jim-jam bongs
Member
Hmm, they don't seem to have made act 2 any more gothic in the 1.0 release either:
KrawlMan said:
I'm talking about what we've seen so far from D3. The screenshost and gameplay videos indicates that the D2 style of atmosphere isn't there. Atleast thats how I feel, sorry for having an opinion, seems like it offended you.
jim-jam bongs said:
I wouldn't say that. I just don't know what to add to what I've already said about your screenshots. Not only is your screenshots on low settings/some beta/alpha stage, but they seem to have maphack, since the game still does not look like that during the daylight.
Video of a character first arriving in Lut Gholein (before the darkness)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRTpKTL7kRk&t=3m22s
EDIT: Screw it, the screenshot didn't work for some reason.
