Bren

Diablo III

Recommended Posts

There could be soft shadows on the ground, which would be tougher to see in a still shot. Moving video would show them better. And really, if you watch some of the other gameplay trailers on YouTube, you can see shadows being cast by everything. So there's a good chance that the shadows just haven't bee programmed in yet, or they're tough to see in that still shot. Either way, I'm sure they'll be in place when the final build for D3 rolls out. Considering who's making the game (and they're attention to detail), I'd be shocked to find otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well the gameplay is obviously the most important but it still is weird that neither the skeletons nor the goatmen have any shadows...

Think of this as a "beta". There's not even a release date set, so many things can still be implemented/changed.

I remember early Diablo 2 vids sound effects were different than what they are now, and the Barb had a kick ability to knock monsters back.

I'm sure it's easy enough for them to add shadows to some monsters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing we gotta remember is that Warcraft was always a more colorful game.

However, Diablo has always been dark, with lots of blacks and grittiness... And shiny shiny golds and greys contrasted on MORE BLACK.

The comparison photo is right on the money with what Diablo has always looked like. Why change a good thing? Diablo is about LOTS OF BLOOD and blood looks really good when it's the only bright color in a dark palette.

I'm not talking about supporting that whole "where are the colorful video games/we are too into browns and etc. etc."

Diablo has always been like this, so why change a good thing to the "more popular" WoW-like palette?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, I don't mind the new color palette, but these edits here look pretty nice too. Perhaps perfection lies somewhere between the two. Or perhaps we've only seen two areas in a much larger game and should just drop all this silly speculation entirely.

diablo4.jpg

diablo5.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, if I can put in my two cents before this erupts into a full on barn burner of a flame war, I personally welcome the new dose of color. The world is still quite dark, but now there's life in that darkness. Instead of black for black's sake, it's dark browns, blues and greens. While the edited screenshots possess contrast, the washed out and over-contrasted greens, blues and such look more... lifeless.

Yes, Diablo is quite dark, and that created one type of mood. Like Doom 3, the darkness hid what was around you, and it was fun. The sequel is also quite dark, but not as much. It also brought in more vibrant colors, and the cycling of day and night. This allowed that newly injected color to stand out more as you explored deserts, dungeons and whatnot. This second sequel, seems to be following right in line with the changes that happened from 1, to 2. There's more color injected into the lighting, and that's reflected in the world being lit.... yet it still conveys that eerily lit and ominous mood which has been played with since the series began.

So while I can appreciate the dark world of Diablo and what it offered as you played through it, I also like the expanded look of the world in Diablo III. They both appeal to me for different reasons, and I personally don't prefer one over the other... or feel the series should be locked into only one visual style. I see the growth from 1, to 2, to 3, and it doesn't bother me. Maybe that makes me a heretic to some fans, but that's how I feel.

But for those who believe the game's not shiny enough, or too colorful, just wait a while after the game's released. As I suggested earlier, I would almost be willing to put money down on someone making a mod for Diablo III that adjusts the contrast and color levels to make it look like the first game. Then almost everyone'll be happy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I have to say those edits suck the life and dynamics out of each scene. In the first screenshot especially. Warm orange glow of the candles? Gone. Light cast over the statues? Gone. Faint blue light coming from (perhaps) the moon through some crack or window? Eradicated. The eerie green glow of the witchdoctor's spells? Nixed. Your edits (and I'm not trying to pick on you) make the game look like a late 90's pre-rendered background for an RPG rather than the dynamic environment Blizzard is working on. Looking closely at these shots made me reaize how much great lighting effects there were, and that's just looking at stills. Seeing the environments in action will really be impressive.

I'm not sure what you guys are whining about anyway. When I saw the gameplay video I sighed a huge sigh of relief. First they kept the same isometric viewpoint while upgrading the mostly static environments into destructable 3D spaces. This is exactly what I was hoping for. The graphics are impresssive enough and keep the atmosphere without needing top of the line gaming rigs to play. I could probably run D3 on my 4 year old lap top without much problems, though I'll probably upgrade by the time it comes out. I'm sure there'll add options for kids with $800 graphics cards, but one thing I like about Blizzard games is that you can play their games on just about any machine without missing out on too much.

Anyway, once you've played the game for a few weeks and seen all the new areas, the graphics will all take a backseat to the action in the end. With Diablo 2 sometimes when I was taking a break or something I'd sit and look at some area I've played through 1,000 times and go, "Wow, there's some great detail here!" Most of the time you are too busy blasting demons to notice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Think of it this way: If you grind all the way to the highest level and everything you touch DIES, how else are they going to keep battles challenging?

Note: This is based on abstract reasoning as the only game I've ever gotten my characters to the highest level was FFVIII, and that's a totally different game. So take my opinions with a grain of salt.

My best guess would probably be like a "fatality" type of script, like if your health is below a certain amount the monster is able to pick you up and decapitate you with its teeth.

But honestly, like a lot of you had already stated, the graphics issue is probably not the biggest issue. We all know that whether the colors are all bright or if the colors are monotonous and gloomy, we are all going to buy the game and play it while the gameplay takes over our senses and we pretty much don't care about the color differences....at least that's what I'm going to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well diablo II didn't have "The Butcher," but it still had its fair share of "dark" parts.

Good god, when I opened the door to fight the butcher for the first time I almost crapped my pants.

AHH. FRESH MEAT. But really, I thought just about all the other bosses were scarier in the end, because they were actually a big threat. The Butcher had the creep factor of being one of the first major bosses in the first game. Other than that, I don't think it was all that scary. It's just that it was one of the first of its kind and to make Sanctuary such a dark world. And really, I have no problems with the more colorful palette. The first game was a bit too dark in the sense that it was hard to really see. Diablo 2 fixed that for the most part, but even then it was a bit too dark (especially Hell). I think they can make a menacing world environment without literally being dark about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We've also only seen two areas. You don't know what Hell or Heaven (rumored, but long time ago) could look like. Or if those areas were just created to show the gameplay video.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although its in the spirit of diablo, most people are assuming that Blizzard intentionally wishes to make it all "dark and gloomy" like its predecessors, but is doing a horrendous job of it now. (This may be a bad comparison) but FF7 deviated from the spellbooks and dragons line and it was very popular. And although diablo was famous for its "dark and gloomy" setting, what is stopping them from taking a few risks?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Although its in the spirit of diablo, most people are assuming that Blizzard intentionally wishes to make it all "dark and gloomy" like its predecessors, but is doing a horrendous job of it now. (This may be a bad comparison) but FF7 deviated from the spellbooks and dragons line and it was very popular. And although diablo was famous for its "dark and gloomy" setting, what is stopping them from taking a few risks?

Yeah, like Azul said it would be cool to fight in heaven or some other areas. D2 had a pretty good variety of areas besides the usual gloomy places. Desert, ice caves, etc. I'm sure the guys at Blizzard will have some surprises for us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Although its in the spirit of diablo, most people are assuming that Blizzard intentionally wishes to make it all "dark and gloomy" like its predecessors, but is doing a horrendous job of it now. (This may be a bad comparison) but FF7 deviated from the spellbooks and dragons line and it was very popular. And although diablo was famous for its "dark and gloomy" setting, what is stopping them from taking a few risks?

Not that I side with the crazy people, but this argument is pretty crappy. FF7 was an entirely new game in a new world, wholly separate from its predecessors, while Diablo is a linear sequel to games with a preestablished world and atmosphere belonging to that world. If Blizzard wanted to "take a few risks" in the sense that you are suggesting with your comparison to FF7, they wouldn't be making another Diablo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, I do like the edits better. Darker. Grays and browns would be nice, more atmospheric. On the other hand the petition is stupid, don't tell Blizzard how to make their game ffs. I'll buy the game whatever the color scheme is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the edits, but I still think Blizzard's painterly look is really cool. I don't see it as an issue worth complaining about. Or petitioning over. :roll:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not that I side with the crazy people, but this argument is pretty crappy. FF7 was an entirely new game in a new world, wholly separate from its predecessors, while Diablo is a linear sequel to games with a preestablished world and atmosphere belonging to that world. If Blizzard wanted to "take a few risks" in the sense that you are suggesting with your comparison to FF7, they wouldn't be making another Diablo.

yea, didn't think that through completely.

But I do think that they're kinda taking another approach to this, I mean when LOD came out and I saw Horragath and the atmosphere of a war torn battle ground, i was taken aback that they would stray from the "brave warrior fighting against all odds" type of game to place you in (i think) an almost warcraft-like or LOTR-like setting. I don't think it detracted much from the game, and I thought it was kinda refreshing after being confined to hell for so long. To me, they went from "dark, scary, and gothic" to "epic and adventurous"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm really surprised at how many people are bringing up this rainbow. Haven't they considered the concept of setting a mood by gradually shifting from happier, more peaceful surroundings, to darker, more sinister ones? It makes for a more interesting scenario than simply jumping right into gloom and doom. Plus, it's been twenty years since the events of Diablo II came to an end. I don't think everything would stay exactly as it was right after all the destruction. Forests grow back, nature creeps in where things were abandoned, and cities are rebuilt.

Anyway, it's amazing how fast people are jumping on the "ALL ABORD TEH FALEBOAT!"-train over what little info is out there. People are damn near ready to cut Blizzard employee throats already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading that Blizzard reply, I'm even more confident in their artistic direction for this game. I can't wait to get completely sucked in when it comes out in like five years or something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shit, did any of them see the dungeon gameplay in the cinematic? It was dark and gothic and spooky and felt just like Diablo I and II. Guess why?? It was a DUNGEON. All of Diablo I was a DUNGEON. Most of Diablo II was scouring different types of DUNGEONS or HELL ITSELF.

Of course those are going to be dark. When you're above-ground, it's not always overcast and gloomy. Hell, do they remember Lut-Golein in Diablo II? That was a sunny desert when above-ground! Not every damn area will be dark and moody as hell. It would be unrealistic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People will complain about anything. Blizzard definitely looks to be on the right track with Diablo 3, in spite of the vocal minority who are afraid of colors other than brown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, dark palettes *are* appropriate sometimes, despite the blanket complaints by people on the "games are too brown" bandwagon. There are plenty of bright and colorful games out there that you can play instead.

But more than the colors, it's the animation that bothers me. Blizzard's been using that same slow, floaty running animation ever since WC3. It looked goofy then, it looks goofy now. Same thing with the gibs. Something just seems so...off...about the way they look and the way they just slowly sink into the ground. I've never played WoW, but there are definitely WC3-isms I'm seeing all over StarCraft II and Diablo III, and it saddens me. WC3 was a fine game for its time and everything, but your next-gen titles shouldn't look like glorified mods.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.