I get the whole "I need to change how I look" but how often are you going to stare all teenage girl like at your character in the face? What happens if you put a helmet on then what? I'm not sure if a don't show helmet option is available. I don't know much about the "witch doctor culture" but I've never heard of a white one.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Playing Diablo since 97. I know nothing and having nothing good to say, I be a troll.
@Karsen, Would you prefer a version of Diablo 3 where all the characters are white? Personally, I wish each of the characters carried a briefcase, since I can't relate to carrying a sword to work.
I would prefer a version of diablo 3 where I can customize the skin color, hair color & length, body type, and gender to that of my personal preference, rather than having race/gender locked to a specific class (thankfully we at least have gotten a choice of gender).
I belive all people should be able to make their hero look as similar (or different) to themselves as they would like. It is, after all, an action ROLE playing game.
Ever heard of sims?
The characters are locked I believe due to the general background. White witch doctor? No... Things are locked for a reason and as far as I understand there's more than enough specification in there.
You also forgot D&D... things are locked for a reason its called lore, you know something that's in role playing games! Such a concept indeed! A hillbilly witch docotor just wouldn't make sense "Joe Bob the voodoo trailer pimp will throw explosive moonshine at you instead of toads..."
Playing D&D years ago we got to pick our race/class/gender/ etc. Is that not the norm? When a player starts D&D are they told they will play a 57 year-old middle eastern female cleric named "Verellia"?
Playing D&D years ago we got to pick our race/class/gender/ etc. Is that not the norm? When a player starts D&D are they told they will play a 57 year-old middle eastern female cleric named "Verellia"?
This is news to me.
Say you wanted to be an bard and you pick an Orc... well you get the picture it just doesn't quite work.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Playing Diablo since 97. I know nothing and having nothing good to say, I be a troll.
Jay Wilson mentioned that at first they did have character customization, but took it out because:
#1. The customization wasn't very visible when wearing armor, so it was a waste of time.
#2. It became a time barrier to hitting "Start" and start playing.
I get the whole "I need to change how I look" but how often are you going to stare all teenage girl like at your character in the face? What happens if you put a helmet on then what? I'm not sure if a don't show helmet option is available. I don't know much about the "witch doctor culture" but I've never heard of a white one.
1. As much as I like, I don't see how it concerns you as to what I look at and how often.
2. The "dont show helm" option is invisble dye - usable on all types of armor to make them transparent.
3. It's a fantasy world. Theres nothing that holds them to saying a certain race is tied to a certain culture - espcially regarding what exists in real world culture. Have you ever heard of any Western European sects of Shaolin Monks? Clearly the culture they are taking from is eastern in orgin and visual appeal (see yin-yangs, orange sash robes, etc.) but has been made to portray anglo-saxxon men and women. There is even a direct blue comment on this talking about how they wanted to give each class and its lore alittle bit of twist. For barbarian they made him old with white hair instead of younger man more in his prime. For monk it was to make the appearance western rather than eastern. Saying it doesn't make sense that a different race be a WD is a bit trite in this instance.
EDIT: the comment from blizzard came from the GDC lecture on art in D3. It was linked to in a news story here if you want to find it. About an hour long but it was very interesting and informative if you get the opportunity.
Jay Wilson mentioned that at first they did have character customization, but took it out because:
#1. The customization wasn't very visible when wearing armor, so it was a waste of time.
#2. It became a time barrier to hitting "Start" and start playing.
1. As much as I like, I don't see how it concerns you as to what I look at and how often.
2. The "dont show helm" option is invisble dye - usable on all types of armor to make them transparent.
3. It's a fantasy world. Theres nothing that holds them to saying a certain race is tied to a certain culture - espcially regarding what exists in real world culture. Have you ever heard of any Western European sects of Shaolin Monks? Clearly the culture they are taking from is eastern in orgin and visual appeal (see yin-yangs, orange sash robes, etc.) but has been made to portray anglo-saxxon men and women. There is even a direct blue comment on this talking about how they wanted to give each class and its lore alittle bit of twist. For barbarian they made him old with white hair instead of younger man more in his prime. For monk it was to make the appearance western rather than eastern. Saying it doesn't make sense that a different race be a WD is a bit trite in this instance.
1. Could care less what you think, but to me its a waste of time.
2. Thank you for that, now I know.
3. Blizzard could have easily picked any of the options you have listed but I'm sure their appearance will have
some background and story and it if doesn't "I'd be disappointed". In which make whatever you want option would make more sense. BTW this is still an ARPG which has more emphasis on the action part; at least we can pick a gender now. Overall it’s just more nitpicking because there isn't anything left to bitch about anymore about this game.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Playing Diablo since 97. I know nothing and having nothing good to say, I be a troll.
Jay Wilson mentioned that at first they did have character customization, but took it out because:
#1. The customization wasn't very visible when wearing armor, so it was a waste of time.
#2. It became a time barrier to hitting "Start" and start playing.
I believe both of those explanations, and they seem quite reasonable. I have a friend who is a game designer at a different company, and I can imagine that #2 is, in fact, actually a huge deal to them.
I don't know much about the "witch doctor culture" but I've never heard of a white one.
You've also never heard of someone summoning Meteors or firing beams of energy from their hands, launching anything that can be called a "rain of arrows" (or of vengeance) with a single bow twang, or escaping their enemies by summoning a wall of zombies or swarm of locusts. As I said before, this is about appealing to deeply-ingrained cultural stereotypes, a common practice among movie directors and every other branch of the entertainment industry.
Playing D&D years ago we got to pick our race/class/gender/ etc. Is that not the norm? When a player starts D&D are they told they will play a 57 year-old middle eastern female cleric named "Verellia"?
Say you wanted to be an bard and you pick an Orc... well you get the picture it just doesn't quite work.
I've never played D&D being given a pre-constructed character, but, esp with a limited degree of background, that might be a fun way to play. Nor have a made an orcish bard, but I tend to be a min/maxer. Some of my friends would definitely appreciate playing in this way.
Well, we will be playing with these characters for ungodly numbers of hours, so, on average... a lot...?
Unless you have the invisbile dye (thanks karsen!) you really won't. On top of that you don't really see you character from the face while killing monsters.
You've also never heard of someone summoning Meteors or firing beams of energy from their hands, launching anything that can be called a "rain of arrows" (or of vengeance) with a single bow twang, or escaping their enemies by summoning a wall of zombies or swarm of locusts. As I said before, this is about appealing to deeply-ingrained cultural stereotypes, a common practice among movie directors and every other branch of the entertainment industry.
Actually I have it's called anime. Stereotypes exist for a reason, because more often than not they are true. I get what your saying and if they wanted a hill billy which doctor and could explain it to me I'd be fine with that.
I've never played D&D being given a pre-constructed character, but, esp with a limited degree of background, that might be a fun way to play. Nor have a made an orcish bard, but I tend to be a min/maxer. Some of my friends would definitely appreciate playing in this way.
Pre-constructed D&D chars were kinda fun they brought something a little different to the table. You could pick and choose a lot in D&D but there were still limitations, some classes couldn't be certain races, all I'm doing is using these "restrictions" and applying them to the aesthetics and background of a Diablo character.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Playing Diablo since 97. I know nothing and having nothing good to say, I be a troll.
Playing D&D years ago we got to pick our race/class/gender/ etc. Is that not the norm? When a player starts D&D are they told they will play a 57 year-old middle eastern female cleric named "Verellia"?
This is news to me.
Say you wanted to be an bard and you pick an Orc... well you get the picture it just doesn't quite work.
Well these are the two extremes- clealry it doesnt have to be one of these. I shouldnt have to play as Verellia, nor should I be able to be a giant pink elephant that flies. Character Customization is a balance that gives a player limited control over thier appearance, while still conforming to the game in question. An example of the extremes would be say Zelda, where you play as a named character with a set identity and appearance (link) for the lack of customization, and say Saints Row 3- where you can play as an astronaut in clownshoes or whatever esle you can think of. A good example of a balance is world of warcraft: you can't be an Orc Paladin, but you can alter your character's appearance, name them slightly alter their skin color and facial features, as well as hair styles, colors, and of course gender. They still allow skinny female warriors wielding weapons and armor thousands of times outside of what should be possible, even considering in game lore, simply for the sake of player preference (and political reasons). Some suspension of disbelief is ok to allow for customization, while other cases aren't worth it ("do people really need to have afro's on their orcs?")
The case of diablo 3 is that it is closer to the "lack of customization" extreme. With only your hero's name and gender being selectable (and to a lesser extent, armor dyes). I would have prefered Diablo 3 been more away from this extreme and allowed a bit more freedom in character creation.
The butthurt in here is amazing. No you are not the only one who (Insert anything here), ever. The WD is a black, stereotypical tribal shaman/witch doctor archetype. Don't like it, don't play it, don't complain that you wish he could be white. Just don't play as him and stop trying to make everyone buy into your belief that x class is silly.
Well these are the two extremes- clealry it doesnt have to be one of these. I shouldnt have to play as Verellia, nor should I be able to be a giant pink elephant that flies. Character Customization is a balance that gives a player limited control over thier appearance, while still conforming to the game in question. An example of the extremes would be say Zelda, where you play as a named character with a set identity and appearance (link) for the lack of customization, and say Saints Row 3- where you can play as an astronaut in clownshoes or whatever esle you can think of. A good example of a balance is world of warcraft: you can't be an Orc Paladin, but you can alter your character's appearance, name them slightly alter their skin color and facial features, as well as hair styles, colors, and of course gender. They still allow skinny female warriors wielding weapons and armor thousands of times outside of what should be possible, even considering in game lore, simply for the sake of player preference (and political reasons). Some suspension of disbelief is ok to allow for customization, while other cases aren't worth it ("do people really need to have afro's on their orcs?")
Me I just pick the random generator and start playing. I don't want to spend 2 hours creating a character and I think many people would follow this mind set as well. In any case, this has gotten way off topic and I'll leave it at this, if people don't want to be a witch doctor because he's a stereotypical weirdo that you can't relate, well sucks to be you, I'm going to enjoy this class because it has amazing mechanics.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Playing Diablo since 97. I know nothing and having nothing good to say, I be a troll.
Actually I have it's called anime. Stereotypes exist for a reason, because more often than not they are true. I get what your saying and if they wanted a hill billy which doctor and could explain it to me I'd be fine with that.
This means only you've seen a cartoon. Stereotypes are not true any more than any other commonly-held ideas tend to be true, which makes them wrong a significant fraction of the time. They could have made the witch doctor absolutely anything, and owe no one any more explanation than they do now.
Stereotypes could just have easily been invoked to make the DH black, as DHs will clearly make the best basketball players.
This means only you've seen a cartoon. Stereotypes are not true any more than any other commonly-held ideas tend to be true, which makes them wrong a significant fraction of the time. They could have made the witch doctor absolutely anything, and owe no one any more explanation than they do now.
Stereotypes could just have easily been invoked to make the DH black, as DHs will clearly make the best basketball players.
Not sure how basketball = DH (is it because they jump? Guess we should have made barbarians blacks too then). What is the majority of the NBA consist of? Dark coloured people, who is the best basketball person in the world... hmm a dark coloured individual. Yes in recent years there have been a "couple" of great pale skinned players but "more often than not" you will find a black player in basketball.
Hockey.. lets go to hockey. Hmm best players in the world, white yes. Are there good black players... yes. More often than not good hockey players will be white. This is obviously attributed to geographical locations but black people do live in cold areas so I guess thats not really a factor. Not sure if I get where your coming from?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Playing Diablo since 97. I know nothing and having nothing good to say, I be a troll.
Stereotypes typically have some original factual basis, but are poor predictors of behavior, worse generalizations, and terrible teachers for those trying to understand or learn about a culture, group of people, region, or the world. Yes, there is a reason they get applied in media when the director (director in a general sense) has an impression they want to send to the viewer/player/reader/listener and a limited amount of time and resources with which to do it. That doesn't make it a desirable practice.
I can definitely understand Blizzard's reasons for denying us most possible aspects of character customization; in fact, in that context, I wonder if they might not have been better off keeping the issue of customization and the concept of demographics furthest from our minds by continuing to dictate gender as well, but I'm not one for understanding or predicting the effects of something like that on a game's market penetration, so I'll assume their decisions were well-informed. Even so, perhaps a wider range of customization might have worked in their favor overall, even if it would cost a few days of development effort.
As I don't want to be unfair to karsen, I will point out, Slayer, that my not coming from anywhere, but I hope my previous statements explain where I am coming from.
Playing D&D years ago we got to pick our race/class/gender/ etc. Is that not the norm? When a player starts D&D are they told they will play a 57 year-old middle eastern female cleric named "Verellia"?
This is news to me.
Say you wanted to be an bard and you pick an Orc... well you get the picture it just doesn't quite work.
#1. The customization wasn't very visible when wearing armor, so it was a waste of time.
#2. It became a time barrier to hitting "Start" and start playing.
1. As much as I like, I don't see how it concerns you as to what I look at and how often.
2. The "dont show helm" option is invisble dye - usable on all types of armor to make them transparent.
3. It's a fantasy world. Theres nothing that holds them to saying a certain race is tied to a certain culture - espcially regarding what exists in real world culture. Have you ever heard of any Western European sects of Shaolin Monks? Clearly the culture they are taking from is eastern in orgin and visual appeal (see yin-yangs, orange sash robes, etc.) but has been made to portray anglo-saxxon men and women. There is even a direct blue comment on this talking about how they wanted to give each class and its lore alittle bit of twist. For barbarian they made him old with white hair instead of younger man more in his prime. For monk it was to make the appearance western rather than eastern. Saying it doesn't make sense that a different race be a WD is a bit trite in this instance.
EDIT: the comment from blizzard came from the GDC lecture on art in D3. It was linked to in a news story here if you want to find it. About an hour long but it was very interesting and informative if you get the opportunity.
I know this.
I said it in post #47 in this topic.
1. Could care less what you think, but to me its a waste of time.
2. Thank you for that, now I know.
3. Blizzard could have easily picked any of the options you have listed but I'm sure their appearance will have
some background and story and it if doesn't "I'd be disappointed". In which make whatever you want option would make more sense. BTW this is still an ARPG which has more emphasis on the action part; at least we can pick a gender now. Overall it’s just more nitpicking because there isn't anything left to bitch about anymore about this game.
I believe both of those explanations, and they seem quite reasonable. I have a friend who is a game designer at a different company, and I can imagine that #2 is, in fact, actually a huge deal to them.
Well, we will be playing with these characters for ungodly numbers of hours, so, on average... a lot...?
You've also never heard of someone summoning Meteors or firing beams of energy from their hands, launching anything that can be called a "rain of arrows" (or of vengeance) with a single bow twang, or escaping their enemies by summoning a wall of zombies or swarm of locusts. As I said before, this is about appealing to deeply-ingrained cultural stereotypes, a common practice among movie directors and every other branch of the entertainment industry.
I've never played D&D being given a pre-constructed character, but, esp with a limited degree of background, that might be a fun way to play. Nor have a made an orcish bard, but I tend to be a min/maxer. Some of my friends would definitely appreciate playing in this way.
Unless you have the invisbile dye (thanks karsen!) you really won't. On top of that you don't really see you character from the face while killing monsters.
Actually I have it's called anime. Stereotypes exist for a reason, because more often than not they are true. I get what your saying and if they wanted a hill billy which doctor and could explain it to me I'd be fine with that.
Pre-constructed D&D chars were kinda fun they brought something a little different to the table. You could pick and choose a lot in D&D but there were still limitations, some classes couldn't be certain races, all I'm doing is using these "restrictions" and applying them to the aesthetics and background of a Diablo character.
The case of diablo 3 is that it is closer to the "lack of customization" extreme. With only your hero's name and gender being selectable (and to a lesser extent, armor dyes). I would have prefered Diablo 3 been more away from this extreme and allowed a bit more freedom in character creation.
Me I just pick the random generator and start playing. I don't want to spend 2 hours creating a character and I think many people would follow this mind set as well. In any case, this has gotten way off topic and I'll leave it at this, if people don't want to be a witch doctor because he's a stereotypical weirdo that you can't relate, well sucks to be you, I'm going to enjoy this class because it has amazing mechanics.
This means only you've seen a cartoon. Stereotypes are not true any more than any other commonly-held ideas tend to be true, which makes them wrong a significant fraction of the time. They could have made the witch doctor absolutely anything, and owe no one any more explanation than they do now.
Stereotypes could just have easily been invoked to make the DH black, as DHs will clearly make the best basketball players.
Not sure how basketball = DH (is it because they jump? Guess we should have made barbarians blacks too then). What is the majority of the NBA consist of? Dark coloured people, who is the best basketball person in the world... hmm a dark coloured individual. Yes in recent years there have been a "couple" of great pale skinned players but "more often than not" you will find a black player in basketball.
Hockey.. lets go to hockey. Hmm best players in the world, white yes. Are there good black players... yes. More often than not good hockey players will be white. This is obviously attributed to geographical locations but black people do live in cold areas so I guess thats not really a factor. Not sure if I get where your coming from?
I can definitely understand Blizzard's reasons for denying us most possible aspects of character customization; in fact, in that context, I wonder if they might not have been better off keeping the issue of customization and the concept of demographics furthest from our minds by continuing to dictate gender as well, but I'm not one for understanding or predicting the effects of something like that on a game's market penetration, so I'll assume their decisions were well-informed. Even so, perhaps a wider range of customization might have worked in their favor overall, even if it would cost a few days of development effort.
As I don't want to be unfair to karsen, I will point out, Slayer, that my not coming from anywhere, but I hope my previous statements explain where I am coming from.
both classes are bad ass
but i, however, plan to roll a wizzard and monk first