Quote from Shelledfade_4967505
1. My link This is a link to the dark cultist. Copy and paste undead WoW. They could have been a bit more original on this. Yes doing things like this saves time but... it just cuts the originality of Diablo and its sequel #3 like a hot knife through butter. And let's be honest with each other, if they are going to do something as obvious as this WHO KNOWS how many more of these there could be in the game that were just copy and pasted?
I am not seeing how the cultist from D3 is a copy/paste of the undead from WoW. The undead from WoW were treated more as anrachist type characters with their mohawk hair-dos and bondage straps across their faces. Their bones often showed and their faces rarely complete. The cultist is a semi-living creature with his mouth sewn shut. His flesh is still intact and their eyes glow green. If you want to narrow it down precisely to and undead mage/priest wearing a robe, then the comparison is easy because it is two people standing in full robes. Is it their clothing choice you have a problem with. I really like the specific look of the robes of the cultist with the pointy hat and cool arm thingy. Either way, yes, no both you have a human type character but someone who shows signs of death. However, each one is stylized for their intended purposes.
Quote from Shelledfade_4967505
2. Diablo 3 items when they first released information about them were originally going to be in a unique- then -epic order with epic items being purple colored and the best you could get until the community outraged and it was changed (at least I think it was changed?). Even if it wasn't changed the point stands on an originality basis.
Ok, when item colors are chosen, their are a limit of colors to choose from. Basically your regular colors red-purple, white, grey. Black and red however will not be used because black would not show up and there is too much red normally on the screen. White is for normal, blue for magic, green for set, yellow for rare. This leaves orange and purple. Gold was originally used and it was too similar to yellow. Orange would probably be the same. Therefore, the only choice left is purple. It really remains to be the only color that is different enough but has not been used. Do you have a different suggestion? Each item color has to be distinguishable and there are just no other colors to use. Do you just want them change the colors around. Most of them were already iconic of D2.
Quote from Shelledfade_4967505
3. The original U.I that can be seen in the original gameplay trailer found on the D3 website. Basically copy and pasted from world of warcraft. Again, it isn't WoW being the problem, its the unoriginal eye being scoured into D3 like some hot twisted piece of metal. Yes it was changed for the better, but what kind of product would we have got if we never said anything about their work??
How is the diablo ui anything like the wow ui. Other than both use a hotkeys, Diablo 1-5 and wow uses 1-+ plus a possible three more rows. as far as health and energy, diablo's bookend the hotbar and wows is at top. I am just not seeing the similarity. Please point out some specifics to me. Oh, other than the map being in the top right corner which 95% of all games do.
Quote from Shelledfade_4967505
4. The stylized art style. I know its a hot topic and we all know it isn't going to change because it would basically be resetting everything they have done. That isn't the point though and I'm not asking them to change it I'm just dropping it into the melting pot of my overall concerns.
When I first envisioned diablo 3 I envisioned something like this.
My link
I really have to admit that I did not envision anything like this..
My link
With the art style. First off, everyone is only comparing it to the one area from the first gameplay vid.I have yet to hear any complaints from the Act 2. The area is stylized in a particular way to express a particular environment. Nobody has seen the vast amounts of areas and dungeons that they have created. With that said, there is a lot that goes into art style in a videogame then most people know. Making an awesome area for a screenshot is easy. Having that same area be playable both hardware wise and gameplay wise is completely different. With hardward, Blizzard tries to lower their graphic needs so more people can play their games. If you have a problem with this, then bring it up with the hundreds of thousands of diablo fans who cannot afford a new computer but still want to play the game. Secondly, in the screen shot you presented, it looks nice for a screen shot but actually playing in an area where everything is the same color does not work too well. But what it mostly comes down to is hardware restrictions. you might want to look at some of the blood-soaked desert screen shots from the last demo and see if that seems more like what you pictured.
I like this one with the "realistic" cliffs and the monsters in the foreground coming at you.
Quote from Shelledfade_4967505
5. Health orbs. Yes they feel very arcade like and everyone knows they could do a better job on it rather than putting floating red globes everywhere for health. We all know there can't be any more potion spamming because that just doesn't work but floating red balls that pop out of enemies? Come on, we all know they can do better than this.
The debate about the look of the health orbs have gone on for awhile now. While I think that they could do more, again, keep in mind that there are hardware limitations that they are trying to work with. Some awesome graphic of the persons soul leaving their body and misting their way towards you and then you absorbing it with every enemy would be way too taxing on the system. Also again, remember, what works in a screen shot does not work for gameplay and vice versa. While in a single still shot they look out of place, remember that they have to create something that will stick out amongst dozens of enemies that are big and bright enough for you to recognize at a moments glance. If you have a better way of creating a drop that is clearly always visible yet doesnt require too much graphics, please let me know.
Quote from Shelledfade_4967505
6. 60 level limit now. I think this speaks for itself. Nothing really wrong with it but it isn't original for diablo 3, it isn't a good idea in my opinion and it kind of ruins skill tree's based on the fact that you wont have the amount of points to play around with that you did in D2. Once you finish hell you should be level 60. I'm just wondering if there's going to be mounts at 40 now based on this unoriginality thumb print that I can't seem to watch out of my eyes for diablo 3. Just because something works in another game doesn't mean its the best solution and the best idea.
I think Bashiok did a pretty good job of explaining how it is not wow in his post. Wow is not the only game to use sixty. As for lowering the level. I personally like it because it seems more rewarding hitting that level. Getting a level every ten minutes does not feel rewarding. I think leveling through 30 on normal, 20 on nightmare, and 10 on hell is very similar to D2. maybe shy about ten levels but who knows how this game plays out. There is also a lot they have planned for end-game content so you wont be grinding baal for no reason other than to hit 99. AS for reasoning the idea with skills, nobody has any idea how the new skill system works. Lowering the level may have no affect on the system at all. It might not even be a point per level system.
Quote from Shelledfade_4967505
7. The glowing aspects of the game that just look ugly and dumbs the game down. Take the original gameplay trailer as example. The skeletons have glowing shields, the entire area under the dungeon is glowing. There's virtually no realistic firelight radius at all. The glowing weapons on the barbarian that deal extra lightning/ice damage is way to excessive. It's just all too pretty for diablo 3. Just refer to this picture again.
My link This is what it's all about. Not ridiculous amounts of glowing objects/areas however that seems to be the theme on what diablo 3 is based around.
Again, you are not taking into account pciture vs gameplay. With all of the glowing, this is to help signify and help particular components stand out at a quick glance. Also again, you are not taking into account the toll perfect/realistic lighting requires from your computer. If lowering the lighting quality means a couple thousand more people can play, I'm ok with that. As far as the barbs weapons, those were said to be the high end of each of those elements looks. The first will be something like a slight shading, the next mayeb a glow, and finally the full blown graphics we saw. Again, this is also to help them standout against everything else.
Quote from Shelledfade_4967505
8. Only 4 characters per game based on how intense the visuals are. Here's an idea... tone the visuals down? The combat doesn't have to be a giant glowing rainbow bomb unless they want it to be.
The four player limit is not only due to graphical strain. It has a lot to do with gameplay. Blizzard tests their games daily and I am sure they decided what was best based upon actual playing experience. There is also the point that many people did not play with more than four in a room, at least not all within close proximity. this is just proof that this number will work. Of course, some people will be upset because they wanted to play with their seven friends but the same argument could be used for a 20 player cap.
Quote from Shelledfade_4967505
9. None-changing area's. Only dungeons are randomly changed. The outside world is static. I find this completely boring if the level cap will be 60 and if we will finish hell by level 60 I see a very boring game that will be a lot less repetitive than D2.
This is not correct. Borders and major cities are static, but a lot of the map is randomized. In fact, they have a whole new system that will randomly put in events and quests so that everytime you play the game, it will be different. Oddly, the reason for the static map is the very argument you have been making. With a static map, graphics can improve because they dont have to worry about creating all sorts of pieces that will fit together. They can create better looks based upon this which is exactly what you want. Again, this comes to gameplay and hardware demand. To lower the hardware demand but keep graphics looking good, they decided to make it static. If they didnt and the graphics were worse, many people would complain about this.
Overall, I think you and all of us know way to little to pass such judgment on the game. However, it is also important to remember that they are making a game and not pictures. What works well in a fast paced action packed scene does not always look best in a still.
1
you fail miserably understanding my logic because you're blindly supporting yours.
What i'm saying is that:
1) whoever is whining about it has no reason to, because he has internet. The people that want to play LAN because they cant afford/get access to a connection cant say a thing.
After making that clear, we should start questioning the reason they keep asking for LAN.
It was the only way to pirate the game yet still be able to play multiplayer. If you care about Singleplayer only you dont need LAN anyway.
2) When you play LAN one of the computers connected acts as a server. That alone gives enough information to experienced hackers about the data flow of the game to the official servers, making the way easier to hacking them.
Weird how no private server in WoW works right, eh? And its 4 years old already.
That last comment about my logic and how Blizzard shouldnt make games like Diablo is completely crap and without sense at all. From my comment you understood that? You're either stupid or too drunk to understand what i'm saying.
I was always for a free multiplayer part, but i dont want the exact same thing as i had in Diablo 2. I want more. That doesnt mean i want to pay monthly for it, I just want at least the security i had (and still have) in WoW. And the possibility to save myself from spammers or any kind of idiots who spoil the game (through bots, hacks and anything else that isnt supposed to be in the game behavior wise).
that you understood from talking to a few kids in a forum and from your limitless marketing experience, no doubt.
Its very obvious there isnt anything that points in that direction.
You know how battle.net was kept alive that long? Because it had people on it. And mostly because of Starcraft and Warcraft 3 (regular too but mostly DotA). The more people on the servers the more income they can have from advertising (the little banner on top, yeah), thus keeping the service free without having problems with the server maintenance.
Now, if LAN helps people abuse any security holes on the system and hack/cheat on closed realms, that would definitely shoo people from playing. Remember how during the time of serious duping the game was unplayable?
Probably not, as i remember you didnt play or like Diablo 2.
anyway, the thing is that the ones that would pirate the game, will do it again anyway. Keeping LAN off will make it impossible for them to play the game with others but it will also help keep the secutiry of the closed realms intact.
1
i have never seen New York either, so unless i see it with my own eyes i dont need to believe that city exists.
kinda silly thing to say i know, but you get my point.
theres reason enough to make us believe of the "aliens" existance. Dont immediately think of little green men that travel through space and abduct us just to perform tests on us. Think of life in another planet, just like there is on our planet. Are there evidence for anyone to believe there's life on Earth? Not really, unless you live here
1
that statement has no point at all.
none of us (that apparently agree with the current looks) have said that we dont care or that it doesnt look like Diablo.
It looks like Diablo, it feels like Diablo. Hell, it's even called Diablo!
isnt it Diablo? IT IS! ITS CALLED EVOLUTION! Things change. Like it or not, it doesnt matter. What matters is that from what we get to see we're getting a great sequel to Diablo II.
If you dont like it make a mod of Diablo 2 and play there. Really, i'm tired of all the whining and complaining for nothing.
and yes, we would care if it changed to what those completely crap "how it is and how it should be" pictures. Having a boring game that makes it hard on your eyes isnt the thing i wish to have for Diablo 3.
1
1
thats the same everywhere i'm afraid. u have to search to find people that are willing to listen or "lead" the conversation in a way where they have to listen too. What i usually do is letting them talk first. It doesnt really matter who talks first in a debate. Its more important who talks last