Well let me jsut start off my saying that diablo 2 graphics were not amazing, we all know that. That is not something that bothers me, and it should not bother the fans of diablo 2.
Let me clarify. If you enjoyed diablo 2, which had poor dark graphics, then you musn't really care about graphics. So i say why are so many people complaning about the new approach to making a new game. Have they not read the storyline? This is decades after all the evil has been destroyed. Obviously its going to look more bright and more "cartoony."
There is no doubt that diablo 3 will succed, juse look at the team fortress series. TF1 was all dark and wierd, everything was difficult to see. Valve then made TF2 and all the characters became like cartoons, and they put much more light into the game. People complained about it, yet it was a succeses wasn't
I don't care what people say about diablo 3 looking like wow. If you don't like the graphics I say you don't buy the game and keep on playing diablo 2. Blizzard does'nt care about you, they won't change there engines and art direction just because some people disagreee with it. which bring me to my next point.
What did you expect? Diablo 1 and 2 were made when not many other games were competing with them, and when the engines to make these games were not amazing. Technology has advanced, did you really expect blizzard to keep the old art style, with cheap graphics and jut countine the story line? Why would blizzard do such a thing, it would not look like a new game whatsoever, especially in comparision with the diablo clones today.
If you're a real diablo fan graphics should not bother you too much.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Working with adobe and/or java is like pushing a paper clip against a building and expecting it to move...
Well let me jsut start off my saying that diablo 2 graphics were not amazing, we all know that. That is not something that bothers me, and it should not bother the fans of diablo 2.
Let me clarify. If you enjoyed diablo 2, which had poor dark graphics, then you musn't really care about graphics. So i say why are so many people complaning about the new approach to making a new game. Have they not read the storyline? This is decades after all the evil has been destroyed. Obviously its going to look more bright and more "cartoony."
There is no doubt that diablo 3 will succed, juse look at the team fortress series. TF1 was all dark and wierd, everything was difficult to see. Valve then made TF2 and all the characters became like cartoons, and they put much more light into the game. People complained about it, yet it was a succeses wasn't
I don't care what people say about diablo 3 looking like wow. If you don't like the graphics I say you don't buy the game and keep on playing diablo 2. Blizzard does'nt care about you, they won't change there engines and art direction just because some people disagreee with it. which bring me to my next point.
What did you expect? Diablo 1 and 2 were made when not many other games were competing with them, and when the engines to make these games were not amazing. Technology has advanced, did you really expect blizzard to keep the old art style, with cheap graphics and jut countine the story line? Why would blizzard do such a thing, it would not look like a new game whatsoever, especially in comparision with the diablo clones today.
If you're a real diablo fan graphics should not bother you too much.
Yes, I could have sworn this was finished months ago. You're just really really.. really late. That being said, I think people do expect excellent graphics due to the time we're in. Look at all the other games around us now. Most of us expect Blizzard to put out fresh 2008-2009 graphics.
Right, and they will. Fresh doesn't mean 'cutting edge', it doesn't mean people (most people) should be having to buy all new machines to play, etc. etc.
Very fast, fluid gameplay is vital, as well as acknowleding an obligation, to an extent, to try and keep the game playable to as many customers as they possibly can without dating / toning down the graphics ridiculously.
I've said it a dozen times but once more for good measure: personally from what we've seen so far I think the graphics are gorgeous and fluid and will look quite 'fresh'. This is bearing in mind nothing is finalized / fully polished / tweaked / etc. yet, so they can only really get better, not worse.
But, yes, really, this has really been done to death...
A: You say blizzard doesnt care about people that dont like the graphics.... Isn't that the point? Make a game people enjoy, therefor, buy?
For me, I think going from a "realistic" viewpoint to a "overexagerated" unrealistic viewpoint is what got me. Instead of trying to make bodys, weopons etc look proportional and realistic, they went with a (I think more of a) Warcraft 3 approach. Just not my cup of tea.
If you look at the difference between warcraft 2 and 3, 2 had a "realistic" look as well. Once 3 came, along came the comical enlarging of weopons, jaws etc. Maybe it is rooted from the 2D to 3D change?
When I played the original Diablo when I was young, I would literally get scared as hell just a few levels down. Sometimes I would quit before the butcher because the room he was in looked intimidating enough. That is the kind of thing I wished Diablo 3 would continue.
Many people say "youve only seen 3% of the game". What I, and presumably, the rest of the people that dont like it, is not what those specific level hold, but how they approach presenting the items within
In 50 years, Blizzard will still make games with the same graphical style. Because they are already as "good" as it gets. That sytlized look won't get old.... ever. It's when you attempt to use a realistic style with the best current technology available that the game actually gets outdated when the technology becomes obsolete. This stylized approach looks as good now as it would look five years ago and as it will look five years from now.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Let me clarify. If you enjoyed diablo 2, which had poor dark graphics, then you musn't really care about graphics. So i say why are so many people complaning about the new approach to making a new game. Have they not read the storyline? This is decades after all the evil has been destroyed. Obviously its going to look more bright and more "cartoony."
There is no doubt that diablo 3 will succed, juse look at the team fortress series. TF1 was all dark and wierd, everything was difficult to see. Valve then made TF2 and all the characters became like cartoons, and they put much more light into the game. People complained about it, yet it was a succeses wasn't
I don't care what people say about diablo 3 looking like wow. If you don't like the graphics I say you don't buy the game and keep on playing diablo 2. Blizzard does'nt care about you, they won't change there engines and art direction just because some people disagreee with it. which bring me to my next point.
What did you expect? Diablo 1 and 2 were made when not many other games were competing with them, and when the engines to make these games were not amazing. Technology has advanced, did you really expect blizzard to keep the old art style, with cheap graphics and jut countine the story line? Why would blizzard do such a thing, it would not look like a new game whatsoever, especially in comparision with the diablo clones today.
If you're a real diablo fan graphics should not bother you too much.
Which Final Fantasy Character Are You?
Final Fantasy 7
:necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro::necro:
gamma11 > east
Which Final Fantasy Character Are You?
Final Fantasy 7
not really spam... this thread could be considered lawl...
gamma11 > east
Very fast, fluid gameplay is vital, as well as acknowleding an obligation, to an extent, to try and keep the game playable to as many customers as they possibly can without dating / toning down the graphics ridiculously.
I've said it a dozen times but once more for good measure: personally from what we've seen so far I think the graphics are gorgeous and fluid and will look quite 'fresh'. This is bearing in mind nothing is finalized / fully polished / tweaked / etc. yet, so they can only really get better, not worse.
But, yes, really, this has really been done to death...
A: You say blizzard doesnt care about people that dont like the graphics.... Isn't that the point? Make a game people enjoy, therefor, buy?
For me, I think going from a "realistic" viewpoint to a "overexagerated" unrealistic viewpoint is what got me. Instead of trying to make bodys, weopons etc look proportional and realistic, they went with a (I think more of a) Warcraft 3 approach. Just not my cup of tea.
If you look at the difference between warcraft 2 and 3, 2 had a "realistic" look as well. Once 3 came, along came the comical enlarging of weopons, jaws etc. Maybe it is rooted from the 2D to 3D change?
When I played the original Diablo when I was young, I would literally get scared as hell just a few levels down. Sometimes I would quit before the butcher because the room he was in looked intimidating enough. That is the kind of thing I wished Diablo 3 would continue.
Many people say "youve only seen 3% of the game". What I, and presumably, the rest of the people that dont like it, is not what those specific level hold, but how they approach presenting the items within
As long as the game is good i dgaf about graphics.