New Diablo 3 Images; Design Wins Over Darkness

KingofGnG writes "The new Diablo III screenshots highlight the strong chromatic variations existing between the dungeons and the various stages ... It appears obvious, however, that all those details enriching the scenes, the crumbling parapets of the paths within the dungeons, the plants and the ragged drapes lightened by candles, would lose the best part of their raison d'etre if put in monochrome palettes inclined to black."

Comments

Screw blackness

[runlevelfour]

I am all about games having dark and brooding atmospheres, and maybe even a bit scary. But I am more about a game being a damn fun and well designed one because the developers had a vision and weren't playing appease-the-fanboys during the development process. Plus the gritty, dark, angsty look has been done to death. I like color.

Re:Screw blackness

[narcberry]

If all the levels and scenery are dark, the game doesn't feel so dark after a while. You need the bright colorful levels to appreciate the dark depths of diabolical devils and demons.

Re:Screw blackness

[Jesus_666]

Depends on whether the color is used right, though. Some of the original screenshots did look a bit weird - one dungeon appears to have blue ambient light, even though there are no blue light sources. For some reason it really did look like World of Warcraft. In those cases it might be a good idea to tone down the ambient light's chroma a bit. Of course if they put blue torches everywhere things look a bit different.

What I don't get is the outcry over the magic effects being too cartoonish. Diablo always had magic effects in all the colors (and with the gravitas) of a well-stocked candy store and a poison attack wouldn't be a proper poison attack if it didn't have a bright green glow and preferably an inexplicable skull somewhere.


Of course, Blizzard could easily appease the color-hostile fans by adding a graphics option that reduces chroma by 90% and brightness by 50% everywhere but the HUD. And maybe changes all spoken text to goth poetry.

Re:Screw blackness

[nmb3000]

Plus the gritty, dark, angsty look has been done to death.

And the shiny, glowing, neon-stylized atmosphere hasn't? Besides, since when is trying to make a game feel realistic considered overrated?

I like color.

Then go play Warcraft III or World of Warcraft or Starcraft II or... Hm, anyone else notice a pattern here?

The Diablo series has always been about the stark contrast between good and evil, light and dark. The "gritty, dark" look was there for a reason: True evil and it's effects are not clean, nor are they pretty. You can have light and color in the natural and "good" sides of things, and with effects like magic and buffs, but the environments and equipment (unless possible enchanted) should reflect their likely rough and possibly sordid past. Diablo II felt very real; it was anything but stylized.

I'm not advocating such dark environments that you can't see anything, and I don't think that was really a problem with Diablo II (with the possible exception of a small light radius). I don't think they need to replicate the style of previous Diablo games directly, but I DO think they shouldn't just throw them away for the new "oooh, shiny colors!" motif of all Blizzard's newer games. My biggest concern over Diablo III isn't poor gameplay or a bad story, but rather that it's just going to become Warcraft IV and/or Starcraft With Demons.

Re:Screw blackness

[semiotec]

maybe these people who want "darker" designs should just play with blindfolds, or if that's too much, try using pantyhose, stocking or a pair of crappy sunglasses instead.

Re:Screw blackness

[jimmux]

Sometimes I wonder if all these people complaining ever played the original Diablo. It was much more colourful than the sequel. I mean, the palette seemed to be limited to grey and red for environments, but some of the enemies were practically fluorescent!

In a way this even made certain enemies scarier. It's one thing to have dark enemies appear out of the shadows (also annoying), it's another thing to have enemies that send a clear visual signal: Don't fuck with this!

Re:Screw blackness

[LearnToSpell]

Besides, since when is trying to make a game feel realistic considered overrated?

Yeah, I hate when a game feels unrealistic as I cast chain lightning on a bunch of frog demons.

Re:Screw blackness

[tdelaney]

Fall^H^H^H^HOblivion with Guns. Sometimes it's a good idea to appease the fanboys, because the previous games are already damn fun and well designed.

In the case of Diablo III though, I've looked at Blizzard's reasoning, and compared the images, and overall I think Blizzard has made the right choice. The basic gameplay doesn't appear to have greatly changed - this is nitpicking over a small change in look.

Plus I trust Leonard Boyarsky. He says the colour palette changes in later parts of the game. Kinda like going from pre-Searing Ascalon to post-Searing to Kryta in Guild Wars.

Re:Screw blackness

[WhatAmIDoingHere]

I remember running into bright blue and green enemies in Diablo 2, even.

Re:Screw blackness

[lysergic.acid]

one doesn't exclude the other. as narcberry already mentioned, you need lighter and more uplifting atmospheres in a game to contrast with the darker moments. variety is an important factor in creating an engaging game with long-lasting return value.

this is something that the game developers already mentioned when they ran the photoshop contest. since this is an RPG, players will be expected to put in a lot of hours playing the game--much of which spent level-grinding and doing generally the same repetitive actions. that's why it was important for them to put a lot of variation between different environments.

i don't think there's anything wrong with having a colorful game, but nor is it wrong to have a dark and ominous atmosphere. if all games were bright and cheerful it would become just as banal as all games being dark and brooding.

weaving an epic story is the same whether you're developing an RPG, writing a novel, or shooting a movie. whatever you can do to captivate the audience's attention and really immerse them in the fictional world of your epic is your prerogative. dark and malevolent environments naturally elicit a very visceral response from most people. it would be foolish to forgo such dramatic elements if it's appropriate to your story.

creating a dark in-game atmosphere just needs to be done tactfully. making the entire game dark and gloomy may not be the best choice. and there are many ways to convey an evil or foreboding atmosphere without rendering the game entirely in greys and blacks. a skilled game developer or cinematographer can create a bright and vibrant scene that still exudes an eerie feeling.

Re:Screw blackness

[machine321]

None less black.

Re:Screw blackness

[Anonymous Coward]

If all the levels and scenery are dark, the game doesn't feel so dark after a while. You need the bright colorful levels to appreciate the dark depths of diabolical devils and demons.

Agreed. If you're outdoors, during the day, it should be relatively bright. If you're in a cave underground with no lights, it should be dark. If the two look the same it blurs the distinction between them, and you don't have a good feeling for where you are.

Re:Screw blackness

[Anonymous Coward]

And the shiny, glowing, neon-stylized atmosphere hasn't? Besides, since when is trying to make a game feel realistic considered overrated?

When the game is freaking Diablo!

Then go play Warcraft III or World of Warcraft or Starcraft II or... Hm, anyone else notice a pattern here?

They're all awesome, great looking games from Blizzard.

Diablo II felt very real; it was anything but stylized.

What? Wait, I... what? I think you must... WHAT?!?!?

My biggest concern over Diablo III isn't poor gameplay or a bad story, but rather that it's just going to become Warcraft IV and/or Starcraft With Demons.

So the gameplay's good, the story's good, but the colour scheme might be too close to Warcraft or Starcraft. Yeah, sounds terrible.

Re:Screw blackness

[Anonymous Coward]

Sooo the Horadrum is going from Grizzled veterans of a thousand wizard wars, into Disney Wizards, straight out of Fantasia.

Re:Screw blackness

[RichardJenkins]

Looks good to me, the foreboding blackness of the text ('Error establishing a database connection') contrasting relentlessly with the bleak and brilliant white background.

Magic.

Re:Screw blackness

[tftp]

Plus the gritty, dark, angsty look has been done to death. I like color.

Try Scrapland then :-)

Re:Screw blackness

[e2d2]

I actually went and played Diablo II in the past month, picking it up after hearing great things and seeing the new screen shots. In most dungeons it's not dark at all, but darkness did play a part in some places, with specific gear created for adding "light radius" to your character. I have assumed this was to create a sense of surprise in some places, but not too many. That same surprise can be maintained in other ways in a new 3D environment. I think people concentrate too much on it when the first two were more about story line and fighting large groups of mobs in an RPG setting, gearing your character up, and truly unique environments, especially when you include the expansion.

Since Diablo II is fresh in my mind and an overall great game even today (I play it maxed out at 800x600!) I welcome the new one regardless.

Re:Screw blackness

[e2d2]

What game were you playing? I just played Diablo II and the level that you actually fight Diablo on is entirely bright red and Diablo looks like a cartoon. Same with the Mephisto level and the Baal expansion levels.

Re:Screw blackness

[ozbird]

The "gritty, dark" look was there for a reason: True evil and it's effects are not clean, nor are they pretty.

The more likely reason: CRT monitors and gamma settings. Try playing Diablo II on a modern, bright (sometimes too bright) LCD monitor and it might not seem so "gritty, dark" any more.

Re:Screw blackness

[srothroc]

On one hand, I agree that it would be simple enough to appease the fans by doing that, and of course it would probably get a few more people to buy the product in the end, but the other thing to consider is that it compromises artistic integrity.

Sure, it's what the people want, but in this case, the game designers are the artists trying to present their particular view of THEIR product to the world; it's not supposed to appeal to everyone, as much as it would be nice if that happened, from a commercial point of view. Of course, whether or not video games are art is still being debated, but I don't think it particularly matters in this case. As someone who produces a product, you do have to compromise a bit to reach an audience, but at the same time, you are in no way OBLIGATED to compromise in any way even though it may cost you customers.

Perhaps an author is writing a sequel to a popular series -- just because fans are clamoring for a scene they've always wanted to see or something they want to learn doesn't mean the author is obliated to put that stuff in to satisfy them. It's ultimately made by the author, not the fans.

Am I making sense to anyone here?

Re:Screw blackness

[MaxwellEdison]

Perhaps an author is writing a sequel to a popular series -- just because fans are clamoring for a scene they've always wanted to see or something they want to learn doesn't mean the author is obliated to put that stuff in to satisfy them. It's ultimately made by the author, not the fans.

One word. Misery

Re:Screw blackness

[Anonymous Coward]

It's more along the lines that if everything is dark, and brooding--the game starts to become oppressive and even annoying. A prime example is Doom 3. It's too dark too much of the time and becomes distracting, you want more because you want the environments to be more diverse.

If my character is outside during the day, I want there to be some sun and light. If it's dark all the time, how will I know that this particular part of the outside world is supposed to be more evil than the rest? We need visual cues to stimulate feelings associated with: A nice day, a creepy dungeon, and a night that is dark but not wicked.

With no contrasting or frame of reference, the environments begin to feel too contrived and the suspension of disbelief begins to fade.

Beyond even that, people have certain expectations for environments, and don't consciously expect the world to be dark all the time--evil or no.

Re:Screw blackness

[Jesus_666]

Actually, my last paragraph was firmly tongue in cheek; I thought the bit with the goth poetry made that clear. It's their game and they get to decide how it looks. Even if they decided to turn hell into a giant 70s disco and put Diablo into a leisure suit and platform shoes - it's their game. It'd also be kind of awesome, but that's beside the point.


Also, I think an "ugly mode" would actually serve to piss off the yammering fans rather than make them happy. I can really see it - the option would have the name "Ugly Mode" and the tooltip "How the game should have looked. Not WoW gay at all." And the game would have a TTS engine just for this mode so every goth poetry line (why, of course they'd implement that idea, too) could be randomly generated and they wouldn't actually have to record all that stuff.

Yup, that would be one of the most awesome insults in video game history.

Re:Screw blackness

[Anonymous Coward]

Know what happens to a frog demon when it gets hit by chain lightning?

Oh god, I'm so sorry!

Re:Screw blackness

[Purity Of Essence]

My biggest concern over Diablo III isn't poor gameplay

Well there's your problem.

Re:Screw blackness

[Anonymous Coward]

Know what happens to a frog demon when it gets hit by chain lightning?

The same thing that happens to anything else?

Re:Screw blackness

[greymond]

...What I don't get is the outcry over the magic effects being too cartoonish. Diablo always had magic effects in all the colors (and with the gravitas) of a well-stocked candy store and a poison attack wouldn't be a proper poison attack if it didn't have a bright green glow and preferably an inexplicable skull somewhere...

I couldn't agree more with this, in Diablo your character WTFPWNS massive amounts of mobs on a screen at a time, if they want something with a bit more realism (I use that term VERY loosely here) then they have a game for that, a little MMO I hear a few people know about...

Re:Screw blackness

[Eskarel]

The problem with things being "dark" is that you get Doom 3 where everything is really pretty and uses lots of video resources, but you can't see any of it because it's dark, or you get Quake which was the brownest game ever.

Making truly gritty environments is rather difficult and uses a lot of system resources to do properly. A truly gritty environment for a game like this wouldn't just be gray walls and shadows. A truly gritty environment would be whatever wonderful shiny, colorful environment the place was originally, covered in dust, ash, and general damage.

That's the ideal Diablo environment, the beautiful temple of light corrupted and destroyed, not some dingy dark cave.

Unfortunately doing that is somewhat technically difficult, and personally I'm sick to death of dark dingy dungeon crawlers.

Re:Screw blackness

[Anonymous Coward]

"Diablo II felt very real; it was anything but stylized."

if you thought it felt very real, i want to know what kind of drugs you're on, and where i can get some lol

Re:Screw blackness

[rahvin112]

The point is that if things are realistic it makes the game that much more fun and immersive. So as you cast chain lightening at the frogs you might actually feel like it's a real world and you are really the hero and provides the same type of escapism of a movie. That immersion makes the game that much funner and enjoyable.

Re:Screw blackness

[Roger Wilcox]

World of Warcraft pretty much is Diablo III.

Blizz did give WOW a Warcraft theme and story, but the gameplay is identical to that of Diablo, and it was released chronologically right where you would expect Diablo III to be.

Diablo III, therefore, is actually Diablo IV. It should come as no surprise that the game will look and feel a lot like WOW, which is not only its immediate logical predecessor, but has also been a hugely successful (and profitable) game for Blizzard.

Re:Screw blackness

[Ostracus]

"Of course, Blizzard could easily appease the color-hostile fans by adding a graphics option that reduces chroma by 90% and brightness by 50% everywhere but the HUD."

What do I have to roll to get that?

Re:Screw blackness

[BountyX]

For everyone complaining about d3 not being dark enough, just lower your gamma.

Re:Screw blackness

[Anonymous Coward]

i know what you have to roll

roll up 1 billion dollars and hand it to the ceo of blizzard.

Re:Screw blackness

[fiendie]

I played Gears of War some time ago where you could actually fiddle with the post processing. On "muted" it was nearly unplayable even if the game isn't as fast-pased as a first person shooter. The color makes the opponents stand out from the background.

Re:Screw blackness

[Fred_A]

I've always thought that those games were kind of lame but suggesting that they be played in pantyhose or stockings certainly is over the top as far as I'm concerned. You should probably take your strange fetishes elsewhere.

*Hmpf*

Re:Screw blackness

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, I'm sorry but after reading the gp's post I couldn't stop laughing. The image of someone donning a pair of pantyhose (on their head) to play a game borders on the absurd. The best part about it is how SERIOUS they would be...

Re:Screw blackness

[Legion_SB]

The Diablo series has always been about the stark contrast between good and evil, light and dark.

Is that a fancy way of saying "clicking the left mouse button incessantly until it wears out"? Because that's what they're really about. Good games, still.

Re:Screw blackness

[KDR_11k]

Then again maybe this particular compromise will actually increase the customer numbers.

Re:Screw blackness

[Anonymous Coward]

I remember running into bright blue and green enemies in Diablo 2, even.

Here you go: http://infoceptor.net/strategy/diablo2/walkthrough/mission30/shot3.jpg

Re:Screw blackness

[KDR_11k]

The French sell it in a restaurant?

Re:Screw blackness

[Dobeln]

For a long time, I didn't realize why people were ragging on Doom III for being "too dark". I thought it was just fine. Then I realized I had played it on a CRT...

Re:Screw blackness

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sorry, but you're talking out of your ass.

The gameplay, and "feel" in WoW are -not- identical to that of Diablo except on the most superficial of levels.

(you click buttons to activate skills oh my! IT'S DIABLO 3)

Seriously.

Re:Screw blackness

[houghi]

I like color.

Then go play Warcraft III or World of Warcraft or Starcraft II or... Hm, anyone else notice a pattern here?

Yes, that apparently looks is more important then gameplay.

Re:Screw blackness

[Anonymous Coward]

Besides, since when is trying to make a game feel realistic considered overrated?

Yeah, I hate when a game feels unrealistic as I cast chain lightning on a bunch of frog demons.

Sometimes you wish comments could be modded up over +5 Funny - this one deserves at least another couple of mod points :)

Re:Screw blackness

[Mike610544]

Well said. That's probably Blizzard's greatest skill: knowing how to ignore the loudest talking 1% of their fans in favor of everyone else. If you read the WoW forums you'd think the game was a total failure, but they still manage to retain all their millions of subscribers.

Re:Screw blackness

[nem75]

Besides, since when is trying to make a game feel realistic considered overrated?

Since forever? At least by me. More realism != more fun. Often quite the contrary, actually.

Re:Screw blackness

[Sj0]

You're attacked by nine skeletons with swords!

You fall to the ground in agony after the first skeleton slices your skin open, and don't get back up as the other eight rip hole after gaping hole into your flesh. There's no such thing as reincarnation. The fact that you've defeated 100 skeletons does NOT make your skin immune to swords.

Sounds like fun.

Re:Screw blackness

[mgv]

        Know what happens to a frog demon when it gets hit by chain lightning?

The same thing that happens to anything else?

LOL. Brilliant paraphrase - I didn't see it coming but loved it.

Points for knowing your lines from the X-men movie and paraphrasing them.

Extra bonus points if you knew this was a Joss Whedon part of the script too.

Michael

Re:Screw blackness

[revengebomber]

or you get Quake which was the brownest game ever.

At least Quake had a technical reason to be brown; it would have been difficult to get any kind of lighting at all without those big 16-step ramps in the color palette.

(And Doom 3 almost has a reason, in that the game was supposed to be scary and make you become disoriented, but that's flimsy at best.)

Re:Screw blackness

[Anonymous Coward]

Anyone who modded this post insightful has not played Diablo 2 in the past 5 years.

Re:Screw blackness

[brasscount]

My particular vision of Hell would definitely include a giant 70's disco, AND goth poetry. Being forced to wear a leisure suit and platform shoes for ten minutes would be dramatic punishment, much less for eternity...

Re:Screw blackness

[ZerdZerd]

And gameplay is more important than realism.

Re:Screw blackness

[74nova]

I must say, however, that the dark dungeons should be handled with care. Some of Halo 2 (yeah, sorry, no 360) is hard simply because it is way too dark. Straining my eyes to see where monsters are coming from may well be realistic when my character is indoors, but it annoys the hell out of me.

Re:Screw blackness

[Bobartig]

All the screenshots for DIII have been fucking gorgeous. The lush outdoor settings look almost like paintings. The dungeons are dark and brooding. I think the game's atmosphere will have something for everyone.

Re:Screw blackness

[Anonymous Coward]

Even if they decided to turn hell into a giant 70s disco and put Diablo into a leisure suit and platform shoes

Lucasarts already did that

Re:Screw blackness

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

And the spartan use of color to offset THIS ACCOUNT HAS BEEN SUSPENDED really scare you into thinking you're doing something wrong, and that somebody's gonna catch you!

Really gets the heart pumping. Well done, Blizzard!

Re:Screw blackness

[torchdragon]

Simple gameplay requirements wrapped around plot used as quests to further a "story"?
D2 Check, WoW Check

No actual change to world within persistence of software?
D2 Check, WoW Check

Carrot and Stick Item Collection with non-guaranteed psychology reward system?
D2 Check, WoW Check

"Lots of options" that enable you kill everything in the game in the same end result (0 hp)?
D2 Check, WoW Check

Repeating content for lack of anything better to do?
D2 Check, WoW Check

Increased difficulty of game in "epic" areas accomplished by giving the bad guys more hit points and making them do more damage (or letting them just kill players outright)?
D2 Check, WoW Check

Expansion packs claiming new awesome features that don't actually add new awesome features and really is just a rehashing of the same game with different graphics?
D2 Check, WoW Check

And the last, but you get the point...

No way for the players to ACTUALLY influence the progress and development of the world?
D2 Check, WoW Check

Re:Screw blackness

[nine-times]

True evil and it's effects are not clean, nor are they pretty.

If you really want to talk about reality, then evil things are often pretty, seductive, and seem harmless if you don't know any better. If evil always came after you with a pitchfork, horns, and glowing eyes, then it wouldn't be so dangerous. We would just identify it, kill it, and be done with it.

Making evil dark and gritty *is* stylized.

Re:Screw blackness

[jack2000]

The game is still a failure, all those playing it do not make the game better. It still is railroad-extraordinaire!

Re:Screw blackness

[Cornflake917]

I don't really agree with the negative tone of your post (I think both games are great), but you forgot one of main similarities between the two games: Skill trees.

Re:Screw blackness

[halltk1983]

Don't play Doom 3.

Re:Screw blackness

[Fozzyuw]

Also, I think an "ugly mode" would actually serve to piss off the yammering fans rather than make them happy. I can really see it - the option would have the name "Ugly Mode" and the tooltip "How the game should have looked. Not WoW gay at all."

LOL, Me thinks there might be a new "cow" level Easter egg in D3.

Re:Screw blackness

[Nebu]

I like color.

Then go play Warcraft III or World of Warcraft or Starcraft II or...

the environments and equipment (unless possible enchanted) should reflect their likely rough and possibly sordid past.

I don't understand the mindset of a person who, when they encounter someone stating a desire for a future product to be one way (e.g. "it should be colorful"), tells that person to stop complaining and use a different product, but themselves feel free to state their own desires for a product (e.g. "it should reflect their likely rough and sordid past.").

If you can say that you wish the game were less colorful, why can't others say they wish the game were more colorful?

Re:Screw blackness

[torchdragon]

They're good software. As far as a good "game", I don't know that I can go that far on it anymore.

And skill trees were already covered in the "lots of options" that all drip back down to managing hit points.

Its 2008, we can make better games. Can we make better money printing factories? Probably not, these two products are already harnessing the weaknesses of the human psyche.

Re:Screw blackness

[brkello]

Then go play Warcraft III or World of Warcraft or Starcraft II or... Hm, anyone else notice a pattern here?

Yeah, they are all Blizzard games just like Diablo is.

The Diablo series has always been about the stark contrast between good and evil, light and dark. The "gritty, dark" look was there for a reason: True evil and it's effects are not clean, nor are they pretty. You can have light and color in the natural and "good" sides of things, and with effects like magic and buffs, but the environments and equipment (unless possible enchanted) should reflect their likely rough and possibly sordid past. Diablo II felt very real; it was anything but stylized.

Actually, Diablo has always been about a lot of clicking and upgrading loot. The other stuff you talk about is story or made up in your head. Please go back and play Diablo and Diablo II. You are on a lot of crack if you think either of those games look realistic. The game looked gritty because it was played in 800x600 or worse. Guess what, in the 21st century we can have higher resolutions and we don't have to make the game look like crap. Seriously, I think your imagination has filled in the blanks of that game..go back and look...it isn't what you are remembering. You aren't worried about game play or story but whether it will look different than your screwed up memory of old games? Then don't get it! I'll be enjoying a great game with good story and game play. Sheesh, people whine about everything on here.

Re:Screw blackness

[Chyeld]

If you really want to talk about reality, then evil things are often pretty, seductive, and seem harmless if you don't know any better. If evil always came after you with a pitchfork, horns, and glowing eyes, then it wouldn't be so dangerous. We would just identify it, kill it, and be done with it.

Never been married have you?

Re:Screw blackness

[Anonymous Coward]

All those playing it actually do make the game better because it is an MMO and a huge part of it is social interaction which can't happen if nobody is on. That aside, what metric do you want to use for a successful game?

Fun: Can't argue it isn't fun for a ton of people. That is why they play it. Just because you don't think it's fun doesn't mean it isn't.

Commercial Success: It has made tons of money.

I guess they failed at the Entertaining to jack2000 metric, but I don't think Blizzard gives a shit.

Re:Screw blackness

[floodo1]

hahhaha the most unrealistic game felt "real"

Re:Screw blackness

[Anonymous Coward]

I am all about games having dark and brooding atmospheres, and maybe even a bit scary. But I am more about a game being a damn fun and well designed one because the developers had a vision and weren't playing appease-the-fanboys during the development process. Plus the gritty, dark, angsty look has been done to death. I like color.

So in other words you're not all about games having a dark and brooding atmosphere.

Re:Screw blackness

[Cornflake917]

Its 2008, we can make better games. Can we make better money printing factories? Probably not, these two products are already harnessing the weaknesses of the human psyche.

That's a little condescending towards the people who play these games, don't you think? You can even make the argument that deciding to play a video game at all is a weakness of the human psyche. Whatever. I think Blizzard's games were fun, and they stayed fun for a while, not forever, but for awhile. Just because millions of other people agree with me doesn't make them mentally weak or whatever opinion you have of them.

I actually kind of agree with you that we can make better games. But it's not Blizzard you want to be pointing your finger at. If more companies were like Blizzard, I honestly believe we would have a much easier time finding quality games. Blizzard games can be seen as "money printing factories" for a good reason. They made quality games that were very fun. They gained that reputation because of their track record.

Re:Screw blackness

[Luminair]

now try comparing diablo II to diablo III and it will seem gritty and dark again.

Re:Screw blackness

[Luminair]

you are dead wrong about quake and doom3 being ugly because they are dark.

diablo 1 and 2 have good art design, that is why they are attractive. quake and doom 3 do not have good art design, that is why they are not attractive.

there are attractive dark games, and you are dead wrong suggesting that dark makes something ugly.

Re:Screw blackness

[torchdragon]

Condescending? No. It is what it is. Why you're victimizing millions of people confuses me because I'm really not how I'm saying that people who play video games are weak. Ceramics have a kinetic shock weakness. Does that mean I'm trying to say that ceramics are crap and they suck? Less word games, more actual discussion please.

And yes, it is Blizzard who I should be pointing my finger at. Blizzard has a ton of money. A lot of it. More money than I can count on all the fingers of the people in some continents. What are they doing with this money? Setting up programs to incubate projects? Creating an arena where people can start up indie projects and get funding for their new and risky ideas? Is Blizzard working on a slew of new properties to harness the wealth they have in order to breath life into a Genre-King marketing landscape?

Nope. Quite the opposite actually. They're sitting on a total of 3 franchises that are now each 10 years or older and with the exception of game play differences between Franchises, have remained essentially stagnant for that amount of time. They're falling back on the "old formula" to pump out another iteration of what "worked before" but with a new shinier coating. If more companies were like Blizzard, the industry would be filled with giant companies trying to "out King" each other in the Genre wars and push innovation to the back end because its easier to put the "10,000 Items!" bullet point on the back of your box.

***Note: I do not mean any ill-will towards any Blizzard employees. I'm sure you're all very nice people. These statements are made towards the corporate, share-holder-value-enhancing Blizzard. And really, there's not much you can do about it sorry to say.

Re:Screw blackness

[Anonymous Coward]

Nod I'd have to agree. Some parts were so dark you just didnt see anything at all.

I paid for my pixels!

Re:Screw blackness

[Anonymous Coward]

You can have light and color in the natural and "good" sides of things, and with effects like magic and buffs, but the environments and equipment (unless possible enchanted) should reflect their likely rough and possibly sordid past. Diablo II felt very real; it was anything but stylized.

Dude, layoff the drugs. Diablo II felt real? Since when does clicking on something to kill feel real? If you want real, go do some real hand to hand combat. oh, I forgot, your weak, pale, spindly self likes to cast spells, not kick ass...

Speaking as someone that has seen the rockets red glare and bombs bursting in air, I can assure you, that real combat is **very** colorful.

Re:Screw blackness

[brkello]

Some people just don't like certain types of games...but you could at least be objective about it. From what you wrote I don't think you actually played WoW...or at least not enough to know what you are talking about.

WoW starts out simplistic but gets more difficult as you hit as you go along. Certainly, don't need a degree to play the game, but it is different than diablo to a certain degree.

You are never going to get a game that allows players to destroy the world in an MMO. The closest you will get is a game like Eve and that is probably one of the most boring games I have ever given money too. If the players can destroy everything, they will...then what you left with? Something that is only fun for the 1% of people who get to screw up everything before everyone else gets to see it. That is stupid game design.

Yes, lots of games have a hp system. What is your point? What a pointless thing to complain about.

Everything in life is repetitious. What game do you play that isn't repetitious in some aspect?

No, they do more than give things more hp. End game is actually fairly interesting since you have to figure out the bosses behavior and figure out a strategy to overcome it. They have more hp...but you can't just auto-fire it to death...you will lose every time if you do.

The WoW expansion was pretty amazing. It was so much more than a graphical update. The quests were more interesting, the ability to get good gear in other ways than raiding, the new abilities, the new areas. They really did an amazing job. Diablo added a whole extra area and new playable classes.

Quite frankly, you can find all the stuff you lament in most games. But this is Slashdot, where it is cool to put down things that everyone likes (unless it is Apple or Nintendo, of course).

Re:Screw blackness

[brkello]

Yet you aren't a game designer creating games with all your insight in to the industry. Very few game companies can do it better than Blizzard. There is no doubt in my mind that we are better off with Blizzard making games than whatever you could come up with.

Re:Screw blackness

[brkello]

Why do you think they make so much money? Can you not see the obvious flaw in your argument? Just because they don't make the games YOU want, doesn't mean they aren't making games that millions of other people enjoy. They are a company that actually wait to release things when they are done, rather than trying to cash in. That is what they do with their money...create quality.

None of Blizzard's games are innovative. They take old ideas and they polish the crap out of it. So who cares if they aren't making Spore? They are making good games that people want to play and probably do the best job of balancing of any game company ever.

Don't you think everyone would love to be innovative? But guess what, gaming has matured enough for it to be really hard to innovate. There is actually innovation going on all the time...but most innovation sucks. They aren't fun and so they quickly slip in to obscurity. I am perfectly happy with what Blizzard is doing. Just because they have a lot of money doesn't mean they owe it to you to innovate or take risks. They are a business. Businesses are to make money. If they have a successful model, who are you to tell them that they are wrong to do that? People like you drive me nuts. Don't tell people what they should be doing. You aren't as smart as you think you are.

Re:Screw blackness

[Taibhsear]

Even if they decided to turn hell into a giant 70s disco and put Diablo into a leisure suit and platform shoes - it's their game. It'd also be kind of awesome, but that's beside the point.

Actually that's the secret level. You get to it after you beat the secret cow level.

Re:Screw blackness

[Anonymous Coward]

"And the shiny, glowing, neon-stylized atmosphere hasn't?"

No, not by iD, Valve, Blizzard, or any of the big ones.

"My biggest concern over Diablo III isn't poor gameplay or a bad story, but rather that it's just going to become Warcraft IV and/or Starcraft With Demons."

Why would it when they already have WoW and Starcraft lines in process?

Re:Screw blackness

[torchdragon]

Why do they make so much money? They created a product that was about 15% better than the other MMOs at the time, slapped 15 years worth of respectable IPO on it and then rammed $120 million worth of budget into it. I never said other people couldn't enjoy it. I never said that they needed to make the games I want to play. But I'll be damned if I let this "Blizzard can do no wrong" attitude continue on unchecked.

Actually wait to release things? The release of WoW? Paladins didn't have talents at launch. Server disconnects were rampant. Server crashes were rampant.

Best job of balancing of any game company? Let me know when they make a balanced FPS. Let me know when they actually finish balancing out WoW instead of just kicking weight back and forth on the see-saw they've got going there. (Ignoring the whole grind/time in vs skill debate) What happened to Ghost? They're a mortal, fallible company just like every other one on the company.

Everyone wants to be innovative? Hardly. Who do you think sits at the head of the major publishers? Game designers? No, people who have been CEOs of other companies and who are sitting in their chairs because they know how to do one thing well, make money. That's why they're in that role and honestly, putting an idealist game designer in that role is a disaster. So no, not everyone wants to be innovative. Innovative is hard and innovative is a huge risk undertaking.

Gaming has NOT gotten too mature for innovation. One word, Portal. 8 students with help from Valve for polish. Check out the rest of the Independent Games entries next march when it rolls around again. Go back and look at the entries they had last year.

And so finally, who am I to tell them that they're wrong? I'm a person, just like you and the people that work at Blizzard.

Also, don't resort to character attacks to try and prove your points. They don't work as well as you think they do.

Re:Screw blackness

[Cornflake917]

Ugh, so much wrongness...where do I begin. Here is a little disclaimer: I'm an indie game developer myself and I know a little bit about indie games. This is one of the games I've made.

http://www.unm.edu/~jkellogg/

It's not portal, but I challenge you to come up with something better by yourself in 3 months.

Gaming has NOT gotten too mature for innovation. One word, Portal. 8 students with help from Valve for polish.

Techinacally, Portal is basically a rip off of Narbancular Drop which those 8 students developed first. Why didn't anyone hear of ND before Valve got of hold of it? I would imagine becaue it just isn't the quality of game we would see from a company like Valve or Blizzard. So you really can't even count Portal as an innovative game. And the innovators got lucky they got picked up by Valve, otherwise they're creation wouldn't have gone anywhere.

Also, for every Portal there are literally thousands of innovative/indie games that just plain suck ass. They might be original ideas but originality does move things off the shelf. Long past are the days we will see new game genres, just different ways of blending mutliples (like Spore etc).

What happened to Ghost? They're a mortal, fallible company just like every other one on the company.

They realized that the game sucked, and had the balls to yank it because they didn't want to ruin their reputation of making quality games. The fact they admitted to themselves that they are a "moral, infallible" company shows just how dedicated to making a good game Blizzard is.

Actually wait to release things? The release of WoW? Paladins didn't have talents at launch. Server disconnects were rampant. Server crashes were rampant.

Are you a programmer? You don't sound like one. However, if you have the ability to predict the future and anticipate how many people will use your servers, and then develop the most optimal server backbone for those numbers, you should seriously put your resume out for lead fucking db programmer of the universe. I don't think I've played an MMO that hasn't had some kinks during it launch or at some point. Maintaining servers for an MMO is a extremely complicated task and Blizzard resovled these issues in a timely manner. Could they have done it better/faster? Probably, but their response made MMO's like SWG seem like a joke.

Listen, if Blizzard games aren't your cup of tea, that's understandable. Hell, I could only stomach so much WoW and War3 before i got bored. But you have to admit, they are a very patient company that only release games that are acceptable to their high standards. Very few game companies do that anymore these days as they succomb to the will of their publishers. You have to give Blizzard credit for resisting that. If you can't see all of the many things that Blizzard does right, then I suggest you play some other games, and seriously take a step back and judge them.

Re:Screw blackness

[brkello]

I typed a long reply but decided to just delete it. You aren't worth talking to. Good luck in your battle against people who like the game company (stupidest thing I have ever read). Your points can all be countered in the sense that Blizzard is better than pretty much any other company in their game releases. Your counter-argument that Blizzard can't balance because it hasn't done an FPS has to be one of the worst arguments I have read in my life. I didn't say gaming was too mature for innovation. Learn to comprehend what you read. Yup, you are just a person...and your opinion is meaningless to Blizzard...and I can't tell you how glad I am about that.

Re:Screw blackness

[torchdragon]

I'd love to actually continue the discussion, but like someone else said, obviously we're of differing opinions.

I looked at the site for your game, I need to check it out at some point. Do I have anything else to show? Not really. I had a pair of games that I made in qBasic about 15 years ago. They were terrible. Truly horrid pieces of software. I'm working on a web game project now but all I have to show for it is some persistent socket serving code, some xml transforming object management code, and other back end widgets that need to be functional before I can even think about a UI.

I just want to make the point that not once did I say that the games weren't fun. I didn't ever say that Blizzard makes bad games. My actual point is centered around the reaction that people have whenever someone criticizes Blizzard with valid concerns. For some reason, they have a near cult like following that feels like they need to justify and defend anything that they do. That is what I don't like.

Blizzard has already turned into the Disney of the game industry. They have a ton of resources that they can sit on and their name is so big and they can throw so much money at something that so long as its at least mediocre with a lot of shiny, people will be supporting them forever. Its great that they're successful, but do something with that success instead of just making more money for the shareholders. Get back to making it about making games and not about business models.

The ironic thing

[TJ_Phazerhacki]

The only people complaining about the art style are the ones who would buy anything Blizzard boxes. The style is attractive enough to bring in new players.

It's absurd such a small outcry has gotten this much press already.

Re:The ironic thing

[calmofthestorm]

> The only people complaining about the art style
Me!

> are the ones who would buy anything Blizzard boxes.
Also me!

It's true. I'm concerned it won't be as neat as it could be but in the end I trust Blizzard to make a great game well worth the money and not crippled with computer-breaking DRM*. It's why I own [at least] one copy of every Blizzard game I've played.

Re:The ironic thing

[Annymouse Cowherd]

You acutally own a copy of Rock N' Roll Racing?!

Re:The ironic thing

[calmofthestorm]

Never played it. I forgot I deleted the part about the ones I play. I was quoting the parent for effect and being accurate later. Sorry;)

Re:The ironic thing

[morari]

You acutally own a copy of Rock N' Roll Racing?!

Yes! It was one of the best games on the Sega Genesis. Hell, I even have a copy for my GameBoy Advance!

Re:The ironic thing

[Anonymous Coward]

You have it backwards.
Those who are saying its great are the ones who would buy anything in blizzard boxes.

They an do whatever they want with their series, and Sheeple will buy it and proclaim it the best thing ever, irregardless of the fact that the people behind those games are long gone from the company. Or that they outsourced the creation of one of their games to Koreans.

Re:The ironic thing

[Khuffie]

I do. Is it supposed to be rare or something?

Re:The ironic thing

[Anonymous Coward]

Sheeple

This word applies universally to those who use it seriously.

Re:The ironic thing

[Sj0]

They an do whatever they want with their series, and Sheeple will buy it and proclaim it the best thing ever, irregardless of the fact that the people behind those games are long gone from the company.

and proclaim it the best thing ever, irregardless of the

best thing ever, irregardless of the

irregardless

You're not conformist like those sheeple, you do your own thing, even using words that aren't part of the English language to try to sound smart.

Sure, there's going to be sheeple who use dictionaries, but books are all fact, and no heart.

Re:The ironic thing

[jack2000]

You have it backwards. Those who are saying its great are the ones who would buy anything in blizzard boxes.

They an do whatever they want with their series, and Sheeple will buy it and proclaim it the best thing ever, irregardless of the fact that the people behind those games are long gone from the company. Or that they outsourced the creation of one of their games to Koreans.

"irregardless" is not a word, GET IT THROUGH YOUR THICK SKULLS!

Re:The ironic thing

[cbhacking]

Hell, the outcry is probably attracting new players. There are probably t least a few people who wouldn't really have looked at the game, certainly not at its pre-release screenshots, and now have - and it's a sure thing that at elast some of them (myself included) liked what they saw.

It's also worth noting that turning down the texture filtering, lowering the gamma on your monitor, and playing at 800x600 (bonus points if it's on a CRT that stratches and pixelates things) would go a long way toward re-creating that circa 2000 graphical feel...

I don't care!

[thermian]

Just release the damn game so I can play it!

Artsy discussions about screenshots aren't something I care about.

There are, as I see it, two possibilities, either the game sucks, or it doesn't.

Re:I don't care!

[Mhtsos]

I can see it now: Blizzard thinks the new feel is great, and will delay diablo III another 6 months in order to implement it. In other unrelated news the inspirer of said change has gone into hiding for reasons unrelated to the angry torch-and-pitchfork wielding mob outside his house.

Re:I don't care!

[harry666t]

> either the game sucks, or it doesn't.

Since it's Blizzard, it doesn't.

Re:I don't care!

[thermian]

> either the game sucks, or it doesn't.

Since it's Blizzard, it doesn't.

Well I thought Space Siege wasn't going to suck, because I really liked Dungeon Siege 2, and Space Siege was supposed to be its equal, but I was very wrong, very, very wrong.

Different company I know, but Diablo 3 now represents the only possibility of a decent game in this genre for some time to come. If they mess it up, what then? We wait for EA to make one? I has a doubt that would go well.

There are more important things to worry about, but I like my game time, I like to know I've got some quality entertainment coming when I click that icon.

We've all been bitten by hype for what has turned out to be pale shadow of the promised game in the past.

Re:I don't care!

[Anonymous Coward]

You can warm up with (coming in September; depending where you live it might be already available) Sacred 2 from Ascaron.

It should be "cheaper looking", compared to Blizzard's masterpiece, yet game-wise it is OK: kill all what moves; level up; repeat many many times. ^_^

Good for Blizzard

[MBCook]

I'm glad Blizzard is sticking to their guns.

I first found out about this when that video was released a week or two ago in which a fan tweaked the official video to show what the game "should" look like instead of the "colorful" look that Blizzard is going with.

I watched the video and thought only one thing: it was ugly. Look, I understand this game is supposed to take place in dungeons and such, but you are allowed to have SOME color. It really pointed out that argument I've seen a few times over the last few years about the recent consoles. They are so powerful and push so many polygons, but they only seem to work when you disable any non-yellow, brown, or grey color.

I've got to say, I really like the look of the Diablo III video and screens Blizzard has made. There are colors. You can tell what's going on. Enemies stand out, the art stands out. It all looks quite good. But at the same time, they didn't go overboard making it look too cartoony. I mean, it doesn't look happy.

I'm glad Blizzard is sticking to their guns despite what some group of hardcore fans says. I'm actually interested in Diablo III. I've never played the previous games, but I'd like to give it a try.

But if it had been that nearly black-and-white mockup a fan made, I'd avoid it. I don't have such a nice computer so I can only view dimly lit colorless environments with very little visible detail.

Re:Good for Blizzard

[esocid]

I'll admit I didn't like the idea of Diablo 3 looking how it does right now until I was informed of the time frame. It's supposed to be 20 years after the end of Diablo 2 when everything has been put to rest and all that evil has left Tristram. It only had that ambiance due to what had happened just prior to the first game. It had a gothic look and feel because that was how/when it was taking place.
My qualm was really that I felt WoW was bleeding over into Diablo's turf from the looks of the screenshots, but now that I have it in context of the story line I'm not much against the color scheme.

Re:Good for Blizzard

[ShakaUVM]

Eh, Diablo is supposed to be a pretty dark series, metaphorically. The D3 screenshots *were* too bright and colorful for my taste. The fan-goth-boi was a bit to grey (it's easy to go into Photoshop and choose 'greyscale'), but I think something in the middle would be ideal. It's not a battle through Strawberry Shortcake Land.

Re:Good for Blizzard

[Myrcutio]

To be fair, Diablo bled into WoW long before diablo 3 was even in development. The whole idea of soulbound items didn't exist prior to wow, and was a direct response to all the item trading that was going on in Diablo 2.

For that matter, WoW's item system is noticeably decedent from that in Diablo 2. The random drops, sockets, the uncommon, rare, unique classifications that has become ubiquitous now. Even the bag/bank space is am obvious evolution from diablo 2 days.

Re:Good for Blizzard

[phantomlord]

The whole idea of soulbound items didn't exist prior to wow, and was a direct response to all the item trading that was going on in Diablo 2.

No Drop items existed in EQ before WoW came out... to help prevent a combination of item trading, farming for twinks, to make items more rare, etc.

Re:Good for Blizzard

[marco.antonio.costa]

What are you doing postin on slashdot? Buy diablo 2 and the expansion now! Go!

Re:Good for Blizzard

[Anonymous Coward]

My qualm was really that I felt WoW was bleeding over into Diablo's turf from the looks of the screenshots,

If you play WoW, you'll notice that the two games are definitely starting to bleed together. One of the new talents for the Wrath of the Lich King expansion allows warriors to equip a two-handed weapon in just one hand - just like Barbarians in Diablo II.

I'm not going to say this is a bad thing... Or defend it as a good thing... Only time will really tell. But it's certainly obvious that ideas are flowing between the two games.

Re:Good for Blizzard

[morari]

My qualm was really that I felt WoW was bleeding over into Diablo's turf from the looks of the screenshots, but now that I have it in context of the story line I'm not much against the color scheme.

You were right in your original reservations. It's not just the oddly colored ambient lighting throughout the environments that make the game feel like WoW however. If you look, you can see that the characters have been stylized to such an extent that they exude the same cartoony feelings and comic book proportions that any WoW player would. This is a far cry from Diablo II's fairly realistic designs.

Re:Good for Blizzard

[e2d2]

This is a far cry from Diablo II's fairly realistic designs.

Okay everyone keeps saying this and I could not disagree more. Look at any of the boss characters in Diablo or Diablo II and tell me they look "realistic". They look like cartoons IMO. Then look at the other mobs. I mean just look at the jungle flayers in Diablo II with their cartoon like sounds, looking like little "ikari warriors" with spears, and tell me that is realistic!

Re:Good for Blizzard

[markov_chain]

Bah, we had all this stuff on MUDs forever. All Diablo did was put a GUI on the mudlib.

Not that I am complaining, they are beautiful and well done games.

Re:Good for Blizzard

[morari]

Look no farther than a comparison shot between Diablo II's barbarian and Diablo III's barbarian. If nothing else, the proportions seem content to stand in the same over stylized arena that World of Warcraft is in. That is most definitely not what Diablo should look like. With pretty much the entirety of the original team gone however, it's no wonder this new installment to the franchise seems iffy.

Re:Good for Blizzard

[Dachannien]

It's supposed to be 20 years after the end of Diablo 2 when everything has been put to rest and all that evil has left Tristram.

In other words, the Worldstone was a fluffy bunny prison made of candy. And that bastard Tyrael let them all out!

Re:Good for Blizzard

[Anonymous Coward]

I'll admit I didn't like the idea of Diablo 3 looking how it does right now until I was informed of the time frame. It's supposed to be 20 years after the end of Diablo 2 when everything has been put to rest and all that evil has left Tristram.

In other words, you are a dork, and after someone told you some pretentious crap about a made up story, you bought it hook, line, and sinker.

Re:Good for Blizzard

[BJH]

Maybe they can rehire Bill Roper, now that he's done playing around with HG:L...

Re:Good for Blizzard

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

In Dungeon of Doom, an ancient Mac game, if you had high enough strength, you could dual wield 2-handers, with full damage from both.

There were house rules in D&D where you could do this, too.

Yes, it makes a mockery of monks and people dual wielding daggers.

As it should.

Re:Good for Blizzard

[KDR_11k]

And now you need Holy Handgrenades to clean it all up!

Hasn't this already been covered in Slashdot

[milkasing]

Diablo III Designer Defends New Look and Feel http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/08/04/1858250 Personally, after spending way too much time on Diablo 2, I must say I now prefer darkness --accompanied with sleeping

Re:Hasn't this already been covered in Slashdot

[TempeTerra]

Darkness? Sleeping? That sounds like a great idea! I'll try it right after I hit the next waypoint...

Darkness

[Renraku]

The game shouldn't be so dark its hard to see. It should be slightly shadowy in some areas, but otherwise alright as far as seeing goes. Torches/lights should overbright the area a little, rather than making it normally lit. If it were real, you'd be pretty used to the dark, but torches would damn ear blind you.

Re:Darkness

[houghi]

Much depends on where you play the game. Do you play it during the day with a lot of sunlight coming in the room or during the night with only your screen as a light source?

I have seen games so dark that I needed to turn out all lights, otherwise did not see anything, or at least not enough to play a game.

So how hard would it be to include different colour schemes? e.g. you can select how dark you want it. Even make it easy for others to let you import colours. That way people can select whatever they like.

Re:Darkness

[drzhivago]

So how hard would it be to include different colour schemes? e.g. you can select how dark you want it. Even make it easy for others to let you import colours. That way people can select whatever they like.

That's called a gamma slider. Coincidentally, Diablo 2 had one.

Slashdotted

[im_thatoneguy]

Any mirrors? It seems to have gone down the second it went up. Or perhaps even prior to being posted.

Re:Slashdotted

[dnwq]

Coral cache. But it's insanely slow for me there, too.

Re:Slashdotted

[Anonymous Coward]

Funny thing is the person who submitted the story is the same person with the website. Self-owned!

UNACCEPTABLE!111

[Anonymous Coward]

It needs to be darker! i won't be happy until everything is either #800000 or #000000 or something in between!

Re:UNACCEPTABLE!111

[Tangent128]

Now that's gory.

Straight from the official site

[FornaxChemica]

Crafty little site... who went to take some pictures and artworks from the official site, added his watermark on it, submitted a news item and got slashdotted. Bravissimo! It's grand to see Arthur from Ghouls'N Ghosts announcing Diablo III.

Re:Straight from the official site

[Anonymous Coward]

Please mod parent informative. The link works, although it requires Javascript be enabled.

Anonymous Coward

[Anonymous Coward]

Site doesn't work, and this topic was already posted. Why is someone submitting an unoriginal article that links to their own website, which crashes because it isn't set up for slashdot front page traffic?

Sounds fishy and inappropriate.

Re:Anonymous Coward

[im_thatoneguy]

Here Here. How about a Mod redirect the link to a functioning server that's not just reposting official materials.

This is nothing more than an extremely thinly vailed attempt at getting some ad hits.

Re:Anonymous Coward

[Anpheus]

I tried but all I could do was make the GP insightful.

Oops.

Re:Anonymous Coward

[Anonymous Coward]

Where? WHERE?

Images are on Blizzard's Site

[im_thatoneguy]

http://www.blizzard.com/diablo3/media/screenshots.xml

Skip the middleman. The first four are the "new" screenshots... which look exactly like the old screenshots. Which is to say... nothing has changed

Really... a slashdot story on Blizzard releasing another 4 screenshots? Will we get a story for every new screenshot they release or only in intervals of 4 or greater?

Re:Images are on Blizzard's Site

[Vexorian]

This is a slashdot story on an article talking about another 4 new screenshots.

Re:Images are on Blizzard's Site

[tubs]

Those screenshots are far too dark. I can hardly see anything. Myabe I should adjust my monitor.

Re:Images are on Blizzard's Site

[alexandr19]

Also covered on gaming site http://www.planetdiablo.com/

Re:Images are on Blizzard's Site

[gid]

You probably should. They're a bit on the bright and cartoony side for me... for a dungeon anyways...

Re:Images are on Blizzard's Site

[KDR_11k]

I don't get what people are whining about. Looks pretty normal, I was almost expecting Wind Waker after all the complaints but those pics really don't look very cartoony. There's more color to the lighting but I guess that's more due to the better engine. The surface pics look weak, dull, blurry (and they are all green and brown so what do people complain about?) but the dungeon shots are pretty. So they have colored lights, what do you expect? That torches glow in a clean white? That you can't see shit because there's no light at all? I always hated low-light situations in Diablo 1 and 2, you're clobbering masses of demons, not scared of ghosts or anything so the darkness felt unnecessary and like little more than a control hurdle.

Best dept name ever

[incripshin]

'It's like, how much more black could this be? and the answer is none. None more black.' -This is Spinal Tap

Re:Best dept name ever

[Kamineko]

This is DooM 3, you mean.

Re:Best dept name ever

[speedingant]

There can be only none!

Re:Best dept name ever

[Anonymous Coward]

Blacker that the blackest black... times infinity.

I liked the shadows

[meist3r]

The current art style give it that weird World of Warcraft cartoonish look. Doesn't quite suit what I am used to from the other Diablo games and not really what I expected. But overall I don't care as long as it comes out soon.

Re:I liked the shadows

[Anonymous Coward]

What the hell are you talking about? Are you remembering the old versions through angst coloured glasses or something?

The old ones were colourful too, and neither this one, nor the previous ones look "cartoonish".

Re:I liked the shadows

[meist3r]

Dude, calm down. The old Diablo games (and I'm still playing D2 btw.) have a shadow system that gives you a "fog of war" type of effect. Remember? The minimap gets blocked out until you discover stuff and enemies that are further away are invisible because of the shadows. Sure thing, the game itself is beautifully colored but the one thing that wasn't in the videos of Diablo 3 so far is the shadows and sightline restrictions. And I believe that's where the whole debate comes from.

The first two had this eerie claustrophobia about them because you (at least with a low level character) couldn't see very far. That made perfect sense for the dungeon/cave gameplay and the athmosphere. So no, no angst colored glasses. Though I really wonder what color that would be.

nor the previous ones look "cartoonish".

Read the post, I never said the two earlier games looked cartoonish, that's what I liked about them. It's the art style in D3 that looks like WoW with the colorful textures and strangely proportioned characters and enemies. Please look at some screenshots of WoW and D3, compare and then tell me that doesn't look like a cartoon and/or really similar. I don't say that I hate it but I would have wished it looked more like Diablo and less like WoW but that's the new Blizzard I guess.

Hey!

[sw155kn1f3]

I don't need no more diablo images in my head, if you insist, I'll just wear tinfoil and the cross. Now go away, let me ponder that female elf. Thank you, thank you, don't let your horns damage my door. Thank you, bye.

alienating the fanbase

[Anonymous Coward]

They did not respond to calls to make the game darker. I will get back at them by continuing to support their competition by playing World of Warcraft! That'll show these guys!

Re:alienating the fanbase

[Anonymous Coward]

That's OK. I'm going to go out and buy it just to make up for the one you didn't buy.

Really, get a life. I wish things were as simple for me as to let something like this make me so upset.

Just do it

[billcopc]

I fail to see why they couldn't add a toggle to activate a desaturating filter. That would shut up the art-school dropouts, and frankly I think it would be interesting to switch between the bright/colorful and dark modes.

Is it that difficult to implement brightness/contrast/gamma ? I'm thinking of Far Cry, which offered different rendering modes, some of them cold and bluish, others hyper-saturated and cartoony. It was a unique feature at the time, so why can't Blizzard just copy that ?

Re:Just do it

[amdpox]

Far Cry's "rendering modes" were just hsv/gamma shifts, it was all a single postprocessing multiplier applied to every pixel. But, you make a good point - better to have the game in viewable colours with a slider for the deep, brooding, dark-wanting people than to make the game in brown-on-black and leave those who like to see with a washed-out palette.

Re:Just do it

[Kenoli]

Maybe the way the game looks isn't a matter of personal preference, and they don't want players making their own little adjustments to the carefully constructed visuals.

Re:Just do it

[billcopc]

Well there was a bit more to it in Far Cry, as there were differences beyond just color tweaks. For example, Cartoon mode had exaggerated outlines and a subtle cel feel to it, while Paradise had super-bright blooms, more translucent water/leaves and more progressive shadowing. These were pixel shader effects that did much more than simple gamma adjustment.

The same thing could be added to D3, as they almost certainly have some sort of shader-based postprocessing already in place. It would be nice to have different shader programs to choose from, or even offer some relatively simple way for a modders to replace the shader scripts - let them design it to their liking, if they're willing to learn HLSL

Re:Just do it

[drsquare]

Or, the petty whiners could just turn down the brightness on their monitors, and they could play with the lights off, whilst cutting themselves.

Re:Just do it

[Anonymous Coward]

Or, you know, just adjust your monitor's color balance.

Damn straight!

[sharkey]

...would lose the best part of their raison d'etre if put in monochrome palettes inclined to black.

And we all know what inclined-to-black gameplay looks like, don't we?

Re:Damn straight!

[Antique Geekmeister]

Agreed. That game was unplayable with a normal monitor, turning up the brightness and gamma on mine enough to see anything not already eating my liver made it very washed out and drab.

I like Isometric.

[Fantastic Lad]

I quit gaming a few years ago because I was tired of pour my life energy into the bottomless pit of interactive illusions, but it hasn't stopped me from appreciating a nice bit of design.

--I really like the isometric approach; it allows the design team to use artwork generated by actual painters and illustrators rather than 3D engine-workers. It'll be a neat day when you can create in 3D the same kind of evocative visual character in a tree stump or a bit of masonry as an artist can do with a pencil and few tubes of gauche, but that day hasn't arrived yet. And so, Diablo III is going to look oh-so-much prettier than any 3D game can at the moment.

-FL

Re:I like Isometric.

[GradiusCVK]

It'll be a neat day when you can create in 3D the same kind of evocative visual character in a tree stump or a bit of masonry as an artist can do with a pencil and few tubes of gauche, but that day hasn't arrived yet.

Perhaps the 3D artists just need to use more tubes of tactlessness to catch up with their pencil-and-paper peers?

Re:I like Isometric.

[Anonymous Coward]

Diablo III is 3D.

Re:I like Isometric.

[CronoCloud]

You've never played any of those fully 3D with a rotatable camera Diablo clones on the PS2 have you?

Re:I like Isometric.

[syousef]

I was tired of pour my life energy into the bottomless pit of interactive illusions

So why are you posting on slashdot? ;-)

Re:I like Isometric.

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you lookin at the same screenshots I am? That there is 3D.

Re:I like Isometric.

[WillAdams]

The Wii game _Okami_ seems to be 3D, yet has an appearance evocative of a sumi-e painting:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Okami-compare.jpg

There's even a site dedicated to the artwork:

http://www.artofokami.com/

William

Re:I like Isometric.

[wildstoo]

Just because it's from an isometric perspective (as most Diablo clones are) doesn't mean that it isn't true 3D.

Diablo and Diablo II used flat 2D art assets for most things, so what you're saying kind-of applies to them, but it definitely does not apply to Diablo III.

As far as I can see, the backgrounds, characters, particle effects and everything else in Diablo III is 3D geometry, textures and shaders, so I don't think it'll be any more detailed or have any more "visual character" than any other Blizzard game in the last few years.

(Actually, I think they did use some kind of 3D rendering for the entire viewport in Diablo II which allowed the dynamic shadowing you saw occasionally and the perspective view you could enable in the options if you had 3D acceleration. It was kinda 2.5D in that respect.)

Re:I like Isometric.

[Fantastic Lad]

That does look quite impressive. The broad stroke watercolor brush style lend themselves well to rendering in 3D, and they used some neat tricks, (keeping some objects 'flat' even through rotations), to help capture the style. It still has that '3D' look though, but the designers have certainly gone to some effort to temper it.

-FL

Re:I like Isometric.

[Fantastic Lad]

Perhaps the 3D artists just need to use more tubes of tactlessness to catch up with their pencil-and-paper peers?

It's possible, but they'd need to use the right kind of brusk. Also, I think those kinds of paints are less palatable.

-FL

Re:I like Isometric.

[Fantastic Lad]

They appear to be using a sort of hybrid approach. Isometric wasn't strictly the right word, but the 3D is limited to a locked point of perspective which doesn't show any vanishing points.

The clever thing about that is it allows for the use of very specific textures where you can paint into the texture itself lots of very deliberate light and shadow which is independent of the 3D engine, (the outcroppings of rock and birch tree branches in the outdoor setting are good examples). This kind of illustration looks fantastic, but the problem with it is if you rotate the object it is mapped to beyond a certain point, the illusion fails badly. With a locked perspective, however, you can get away with it and your game environment looks more lush than any fully 3D game could hope to be. Many of the trees don't rotate at all, being combinations of simple 2D branch structures with elaborate texture maps which just shrink and grow according to distance. The more complex trees are particularly amazing; they are static 3D objects in locked perspectives, and have really effective limited rotations; as they rotate away from one texture map making up a portion of a gnarly tree trunk, they bring a new texture into view which was painted using the correct lighting for that particular angle. The more I look at their work, the more impressed I am. There are only a couple of spots where the illusion fails. The roots on the flagstones at the cave entrance, for instance, don't work.

This is the kind of game I'd like to buy for a friend so I can watch them play and cheer them on without having to do all the mind-numbing work of actually having to fight all those annoying monsters myself!

-FL

Understandable

[Anonymous Coward]

having too brightly colored looks (in fact it looks a lot like world of warcraft in terms of colors) hurts the theme of the diablo series which is suppost to be dark and gritty not bright and happy happy joy joy.

Re:Understandable

[CronoCloud]

Oh please, only on Slashdot could you find someone who thinks those Diablo 3 screenshots look happy happy joy joy. Did you hate Doom 3 because it was too bright? Did you refuse to play Oblivion because the Sun was actually shining in the daytime? Do you only play games that use a million shades of black, brown and red and have names like Darkling Deathspire, or Avenging Bloodscrim?

The elephant in the room

[Pav]

The elephant in the room is that the Blizzard guys probably would have preferred staying true to the dark and brooding atmosphere, but it's no longer possible with todays technology. On panels black is really gray... often not even a dark gray, and then there's the trade-off most panels make in giving up a few bits per colour channel for speed. "Dark and brooding" looks pretty awful on your average modern rig.

Re:The elephant in the room

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe on *your* panel, but I'm posting this on a 20 inch LCD with a black terminal window in the background. The black terminal window is as black as night. I wouldn't call it gray by any stretch of the imagination.

(for the record, my monitor is a Scepter X20G-Naga)

Penny-Arcade...

[semiotec]

This came up weeks ago.

The article on the comparison between Diablo III design and fan "improved" colours:

http://multiplayerblog.mtv.com/2008/08/04/diablo-iii-designer-turns-tables

and Penny-Arcade's take on the "protest":

http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2008/8/6/

Re:Penny-Arcade...

[Purity Of Essence]

The article on the comparison between Diablo III design and fan "improved" colours:

http://multiplayerblog.mtv.com/2008/08/04/diablo-iii-designer-turns-tables

Thank you. Read it, people, if you don't like Diablo III "WoW Gayness". Lead designer Jay Wilson nails it.

Re:Penny-Arcade...

[Anonymous Coward]

Are people too lazy to change the contrast on their monitors?

Was diablo 2 actually dark?

[Vexorian]

You know, I've been playing doom lately, and that's quite a colorful game... Then I saw some people playing diablo 2 it is actually very colorful as well, I am glad blizz didn't waste their time pleasing a bunch of people that just remember diablo being darker than it really was...

Re:Was diablo 2 actually dark?

[Shadow of Eternity]

What I remember is not having the characters essentially defined by oversized shoulder pads or headdresses and armor designs straight out of WoW with the dungeons all either green or blue.

The current art style is no different from what the black-on-brown grunge addicts want, it's just been shifted from blacks, reds, and browns to blues and greens.

Re:Was diablo 2 actually dark?

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't forget the purples.

Re:Was diablo 2 actually dark?

[Shadow of Eternity]

And the purples. I don't mind the neon colors for special stuff, but when the entire dungeon is an inch away from being neon blue all over that just sorta ruins the diablo effect. And the tf2 style textures with less detail than quake2... nah.

Re:Was diablo 2 actually dark?

[joshuaobrien]

It was the original Diablo that was dark and it was the colour in Diablo II that irked some people. This appears to be the same issue: some people want the design of Diablo not Diablo II.

Re:Was diablo 2 actually dark?

[CronoCloud]

That blue is not neonish at all, in fact you've probably seen similar bluish tones in horror movies, because moonlight can have a bluish tone. The blue is coming from that large window to the left in that one screenshot.

It looks like Diablo to me, a Diablo that's been influenced by Baldur's Gate Dark Alliance or the Champions of Norrath games, but it's still Diablo.

Re:Was diablo 2 actually dark?

[Sj0]

I dunno, I remember the caverns as being pretty bright, and the hell levels were pretty much fullbright, not dark at all.

Re:Was diablo 2 actually dark?

[Sheafification]

I feel this way as well. I've always thought that Diablo2 had a different atmospheric feel to it - much brighter than the original Diablo. My friends and I have fired up Diablo 1 on several occasions to relive the dark and brooding atmosphere that D2 lacks.

I suspect a lot of people that are complaining about the brightness never played Diablo. Compared to the original these D3 screenshots look about on par with D2 as far as light is concerned.

Re:Was diablo 2 actually dark?

[Luminair]

you are dead wrong about brightness and color being mutually exclusive. It is absolutely ridiculous to suggest that.

Lightened?

[pushing-robot]

the plants and the ragged drapes lightened by candles

Lightened by candles? Lightened by candles? That's it, KingofGnG will never be my Dungeon Master.

Re:Lightened?

[Anpheus]

Hot air balloons are lightened by glorified candles.

Re:Lightened?

[Purity Of Essence]

Hot air balloons are lightened by glorified candles.

Or by matches, newspaper, and a receptacle. Just don't forget the clay brick and string.

its all about atmosphere for me

[Anonymous Coward]

I really don't care how bright/dark/whatever the game is, just as long as it gives me the same atmospheric "wow shit is really hitting the fan down here" feel Diablo 1 had.

Art over Atmosphere

[fullymodo]

Is it just me, or has there been too much argument over the brightness of Diablo III? I would think everyone's individual monitor setting preferences account for more difference to the levels in the game than the fine tuning done on the development end.

I browsed the screenshots and was happy to see, not the brightness -- or the contrast or the bleed or gamut or the bloody candle-power, but the artistic design of the creatures and the scenery. I'd much rather have attention to detail in the area of creativity and originality of visual style, than attention to the brightness of colours I can simply adjust on my screen. Take Heroes IV and Disciples II (click here if you're not familiar with Disciples), as examples; I found Heroes IV really uninspired and boring, whereas Disciples II, although very similar had such incredible artistic design that it was much more enjoyable to play.

Graciious Honor!

[CorporateSuit]

Actually, they said that players who have forced themselves through a difficult dungeon to reach a new area deserve the greatest sense of accomplishment a game designer can possibly bestow: A palette swap.

I wish I was dumb enough to make up something like this.

Re:Graciious Honor!

[Loopy1492]

Well, hold on there. Are you saying that you don't believe players respond to visual rewards?

Dark vs light/color...

[blahplusplus]

... is really about atmosphere. I admit that I never personally had any interest and didn't care either way for such things. But I know that lighting really does have an effect on atmosphere. Doom 3 had great atmosphere because of how the lighting was, even the original Diablo was dark and grey, it had some levels that were really bright, but it also compensated by levels that were really dark (as you go into the last dungeon to fight diablo in teh first one).

One of the cool things about the original diablo (for it's time) was lighting effects from spells/arrows, etc across floors and whatnot and going 'oh shit oh shit oh shit' when monsters were coming or were firing your way and you were trying to make an escape.

Screw Diablo 3, too

[Amazing Quantum Man]

I want my Duke Nukem Forever!

Do both

[OrangeTide]

Seems like a quick hack can be done to allow the alternate colorization just using extensions that are already there in opengl/directx. I'd just make it a check box, and then the big whiners can be satisfied.

Re:Do both

[Kent Recal]

Or you could just adjust your monitor settings. You know, these little knobs that are all set to 105/100 right now.

Re:Do both

[Dan667]

Or you could just turn off the monitors of the whiners and tell them it is REALLY REALLY dark and brooding atmosphere. Not sure if they would figure that out, but then everyone would be happy.

The future is now

[Waccoon]

Games are no longer dark, brown, and full of bloom?

Finally, next-gen has arrived!

Limited Sample Size

[Death_Aparatus]

I dislike people bemoaning the art style of the screen shots and gameplay footage that have been thus far released for Diablo3. We have only been shown with a small number of environments. They are presumably from the early game levels, since that's likely the most polished and there fore most worthy of presentation. It's very possible that there is a progression towards darker, more edgy environments later in the game.

The president is there from its predecessors. The tile sets in the original Diablo became progressively darker, the deeper under the cathedral you went. Even the varied environments in Diablo2 showed a movement, the further you got in the game, toward a darker, more suffocating atmosphere.

I think people will find most anything to complain about, and there's really not enough details available yet to come to any sort of reasonable, informed option. We'll all just have to wait for more bread crumbs.

Re:Limited Sample Size

[osu-neko]

The president is there from its predecessors...

Bush is gonna be in the game? That makes a kind of sense...

It's not about the palette

[neostorm]

It's about the art direction overall. Diablo was gritty and realistic. They could make the whole game black and white, but you've still got characters running around in cutscenes and combat that look like they came from Warcraft.

This http://www.diii.net/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=871&size=big&cat=563 and this http://www.diii.net/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=703&cat=565 are much more in the style of Warcraft, which aside from the bright and happy palette is the primary reason a lot of folks were surprised when D3 was unveiled.

I know I personally also wanted contrast to Blizzards other work, because that existed before now. Blizzard has amazing artists and they're going to make an amazing looking game, but when all your franchises start looking the same, they become kind of redundant from one another. I think most Diablo fans wanted something hellish, and dark, and corrupt. Gritty and realistic. While the game will look, and most likely play, just fine, the atmosphere is what will be different due to the changes in the look.
I dunno... Something like this http://www.worldart.com.au/images/kris-kuksi-sculpture-surreal-deadly-sins1.jpg

Right now the game looks like it was Disney's take on Diablo, rather than Geiger's.

Re:It's not about the palette

[Colonel Korn]

It's about the art direction overall. Diablo was gritty and realistic. They could make the whole game black and white, but you've still got characters running around in cutscenes and combat that look like they came from Warcraft.

This http://www.diii.net/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=871&size=big&cat=563 and this http://www.diii.net/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=703&cat=565 are much more in the style of Warcraft, which aside from the bright and happy palette is the primary reason a lot of folks were surprised when D3 was unveiled.

I know I personally also wanted contrast to Blizzards other work, because that existed before now. Blizzard has amazing artists and they're going to make an amazing looking game, but when all your franchises start looking the same, they become kind of redundant from one another. I think most Diablo fans wanted something hellish, and dark, and corrupt. Gritty and realistic. While the game will look, and most likely play, just fine, the atmosphere is what will be different due to the changes in the look.
I dunno... Something like this http://www.worldart.com.au/images/kris-kuksi-sculpture-surreal-deadly-sins1.jpg

Right now the game looks like it was Disney's take on Diablo, rather than Geiger's.

No one who played Diablo 2 was surprised by the D3 screenshots, since only part one of the series looked as you describe. I think that the flashy graphics in 2 and 3 make sense, since Diablo is essentially the marriage of Pacman or Super Mario and an RPG. What's gritty and realistic about point and click lolfests?

Re:It's not about the palette

[halivar]

You should go back and play Diablo and Diablo 2. I think you will find that the "new Disney" art direction is more consistent with the franchise than the fan-made mock-up's.

Re:It's not about the palette

[CronoCloud]

God save us from HR Geiger freaks.

You think that color scheme is bright and happy? What, do you wear sunglasses at night to make everything look darker so it's "more gloomy". That sculputure picture you link to is only black and white with perhaps a bit of grey and ivory! Do you really want to play hundreds upon hundreds of hours of a game that's just black and white? No sun? No grass? No rivers running through an autumn wood? No tropical island with sand and frog-things? No mist green-swathed swamp lit by moonlight?

Re:Screw sarcasm

[andy_t_roo]

the problem is you forgot to add your '~'.

It seems that absolutally noone would ever mistake sarcasm for genuine intent here at /. , even if you did leave off the '~' ~

inappropriate use of color

[Anonymous Coward]

I just watched the video on blizzards site and the graphics look amazing. Unfortunately, many of the colors are innappropriate. It's not about being dark, but what's appropriate for the environment. You start in a dungeon, that has blue/green stone walls. Blue/green hues are innappropriate, this isn't super mario bros. It appears they are trying to appease ADD people who need lots of eye candy, rather than staying true to the nature of the storyline which is a dark and dismal environment. There is still lots of room for color however, such as blood red and fire hues, blue water and electricity, but not arbitrarily placed colors just placed to try and brighten the environment in a game that is supposed to be gothic.

Re:inappropriate use of color

[CronoCloud]

Go outdoors, on a moonlight night. Look to see what color cast the moonlight gives everything. It's bluish, just like that dungeon shot. And if you look at that shot, you'll see there's a HUGE window. That's why it's blue.

These screenshots look nothing like a Mario style color scheme. They're quite in keeping with traditional fantasy artwork, probably moreso than the original Diablo was. Elmore, Easley, Caldwell, Wood. go take a look at them.

Why argue at all?

[soldoutactivist]

You will buy the game, and pray they make another. End of story. Whether or not Diablo 3 is "pretty" will not cross your mind as you hand over the cash unless you were simply not going to buy the game anyway. This has nothing to do with your opinions, you just want to bitch, bitch, bitch. This is aimed at the bitch in all of you.

Re:Why argue at all?

[jack2000]

Yes I WILL buy the game, and yes I WILL like it, but if they go wow-onit'sass i'll download a fanmade mod that will surely follow, and tune down the neoncolors, maybe add the shadow-of-war that d2 had, my machine can handle it...

Look at Halo

[HalAtWork]

A lot of the reason Halo looks so good is its vibrant palette, used to color enemies, vehicles, buildings, and surroundings uniquely. Maybe a bright orange pylon or a huge shimmering blue ship. Colored laser blasts everywhere. It looks very nice and nobody's complaining about that game, which shows that if done well, it can please gamers and stand out as well.

Re:Look at Halo

[dzfoo]

I agree. Diablo III could use some colored laser blasts everywhere too!

      -dZ.

Game Psychology

[tikal2k]

I think the game is resembling Warcraft simply because Blizzard designers are learning a lot from the game mechanics specifically behind World of Warcraft.

They're expanding the color palette most likely to assist with the pacing of the game, and that constantly shifting contrast ("first you're in a really bright desert, then you're inside a really dark pyramid") propel that sense of progress that players have as they move through the game.

It's one thing to have that gritty, dirty visual style in a dungeon instance that's supposed to last for an hour or two, it's another to have that exact same gritty visual style for the entire several hundred hours that you'll be playing the game.

One of the ways that playability is enhanced, and monotony is prevented is by having that really extreme sense of contrast, as well as the bright color palette.

Furthermore, I understand that most Diablo players don't want a color palette that looks like it was extracted from a Night Elf starting zone, but by the same token I feel like Blizzard wants to reach out to the millions of folks in the WoW contingency that might want to start playing Diablo for the first time if it looks and feels like something they are already very familiar with.

D3 wish-list and laughing at D2

[subnomine]

Yes, gameplay is far more important than appearance. I don't mind their new style.
Here's my short D3 wish-list:

1) A true marketplace. Make it Ebay like. Post magic items, get bids, buy/sell/swap efficiently and safely.

2) Less repetition, mouse clicking, maintenance. For example, gambling for circlets:
click, gamble, exit, click, gamble, exit, click, gamble, exit...(until circlet appears)
And rearranging potions after picking up a body should be automatic in town.

3) Blizzard wants simple mouse based controls, but I just want better control.
For example, having a clutter of items on the ground interferes with actions like teleporting, or trying to enter a town-portal. I want to setup my character to avoid these kinds of problems.

4) smarter monsters with a greater variety of behavior

5) better inter-player communication, network
----------------------
Some funny things about Diablo2 that don't make sense:
1) Rare items are actually the most unique and Unique items are the most rare!
2) Mercs hit with Iron Maiden keep swinging until they die
3) Mercs don't listen to the provided voice commands like "Run Away!"(in regards to #2)

Here's a magic ring that does me no good...or would you prefer to sell it back to me?

Slashdotted

[b1c1l1]

This Account Has Been Suspended

Another one bites the dust.

Color schmolor

[Anonymous Coward]

I am just sad that they excluded the necromancer. :(

Fingers crossed for the expansion...

Re:Color schmolor

[slodan]

Don't fool yourself. The witch doctor is the necromancer. The witch doctor casts curses and summons helpers. At most Blizzard has removed the bone and poison tree, which was worthless to begin with.

Diablo was dark

[Anonymous Coward]

beacause of light radius.It just obscured the map,which itself was pretty colorful and full of shiny and fully rendered demonic fauna. Thats mostly a game mechanic,not a true "dark/gloomy" feeling(its also present at some places).

Huh?

[WatcherXP]

"... It appears obvious, however, that all those details enriching the scenes, the crumbling parapets of the paths within the dungeons, the plants and the ragged drapes lightened by candles, would lose the best part of their raison d'etre if put in monochrome palettes inclined to black."

WTF does that mean?

Raison d'etre

[Snaller]

Now there is a pretentious ripoff ;)

lightened by candles

[gbjbaanb]

and the ragged drapes lightened by candles

oh come on! That's a fire hazard, this is going to be one hell of an easy game. How to defeat Diablo? Just wait outside with a pint and let his poor health and safety practices destroy his empire.

Shut up SHUT UP!

[Anonymous Coward]

You can have sepia tones or tie-dye just shut up!!!!

Give the users a fucking option and stop talking about it!

Christ!

Grittier is better, but

[omfglearntoplay]

Grittier and darker is better for Diablo, but hopefully they can have that and colorful dungeons/monsters. I don't want it to look cartoony, but color isn't necessarily cartoony. And why not have some places that are gloomier?

Aparantly Diablo Fainboi's don't......

[Giantfightingrobot]

.....have much of a fantasy background outside of their computer terminals. The new look of Diablo III smacks entirely of the gorgeous work of fantasy illustrators Frank Frazetta and Boris Vallejo. I for one welcome our new fantasy graphic overlords....

Color isn't the real problem

[nerdacus]

Though the color in the game does detract from it... However, the characters really look stupid compared to the old game. They've gotten cartoonish and silly looking. I really liked the way characters looked in the old Diablo II. Why have they done this? Between the stupid looking characters/weapons and the poor use of color, I'm not sure how interesting this game seems now. I'm sure some people will eat it up anyway, unfortunately.

Palette Town

[CorporateSuit]

Well, hold on there. Are you saying that you don't believe players respond to visual rewards?

If that were the case, H-games wouldn't exist.

However, running through an obsidian tower drenched in green light fighting green goblins for twenty minutes just so you can move on to an obsidian tower drenched in blue light fighting blue goblins is neither reward nor incentive to keep moving. We're not in the days when a palette-swapped imp saves precious space on a cartridge so you can include an entire town's dialog. Nowadays, it's merely an admittance to their lack of originality and their insufficient design.

Re:Palette Town

[Loopy1492]

I think you're taking "palette swap" far too literally. Fighting your way through one region to find yourself in another, with new, different vistas and environments is, indeed, a reward in itself.

Oh really?

[Moraelin]

The point is that if things are realistic it makes the game that much more fun and immersive. So as you cast chain lightening at the frogs you might actually feel like it's a real world and you are really the hero and provides the same type of escapism of a movie. That immersion makes the game that much funner and enjoyable.

Oh really? Please do enlighten me exactly what do frog demons look like IRL (since we're talking _realism_), or what is the real incantation for casting chain lightning IRL, or exactly how much mana does a level 5 wizard have IRL, how much of it is used by a chain lightning, and how fast it would regen for you. IRL.

Also, hey, let's make the game realistic. Let's see:

It's the middle ages. Chances are you're a peasant. (Some 80% of the population was, after all, so sheer probabilities point that way.) work dawn to dusk just to feed your family, but you're still badly malnourished since last year's war saw most of your crop looted. Half the village just died of plague, and the survivors are screaming in agony all night. Some of them are throwing themselves off houses and bridges just to end the excruciating pain already. You sneezed this morning. You're still scared shitless, because that's the first symptom of the plague. Please God let it be hayfever or a cold, is what goes through your head as you mindlessly walk behing the plough like a zombie. You'll likely always be a peasant. You'd have to buy yourself off serfdom before you can go do anything else, at all. Three of your five kids so far died before even reaching their first birthday. Which is just as well, since you wouldn't have enough food to feed all 5. And if demons attacked your church, you'd get drafted by your lord into hauling rocks to repair it.

Oh, sorry, that's not much fun... let's try again:

You're a grizzled mercenary. You've seen half your unit die of dysentery in the last war. In fact, in the last battle, you fought without pants so you can shit yourself on the move. The peasants in this village hate your fucking guts, because it was your unit that looted them in between employment as mercenaries. Your old commander got himself a promotion for volunteering your unit to Forlorn Hope. Actually meaning "lost troop", as that's the first wave to assault the walls. If he survives, the commander gets an automatic promotion, but you just got to burry your horribly mutilated mates and got kicked out of the army as soon as peace was signed. That old scar didn't make you tougher, it just got infected and that was a fun year of suffering. All the wounds and bad food and shitting your guts out on campaigns, have shortened your life expectancy a lot, and make you feel like you're 20 years older already.

In all probability, a single hit by any demon under the church will likely kill or disable you. It doesn't take much destroyed tissue to make anybody collapse in shock. You don't get -5 hp from the hit and to wait 10 seconds for it to regen. You'll probably just get killed, or disabled long enough for the rest of the demons to eat you alive. If you survived at half health, you'll just bleed to death. Or maybe the infection will kill you. Even if you're so elite as to dodge or parry 99% of the attacks (which is unrealistic already), in all probability, by the 20'th demon one will land that disabling blow right through your defenses.

And if you don't die there, chances are you'll end up crippled. And get to beg from those same villagers, who'll roll their eyes and pretend to not even see you.

Won't that realism be fun?

Re:Oh really?

[Anonymous Coward]

Congratulations. You just won this thread.

Re:Oh really?

[triffid_98]

So it plays just like Harvest Moon?

It's the middle ages. Chances are you're a peasant. (Some 80% of the population was, after all, so sheer probabilities point that way.) work dawn to dusk just to feed your family, but you're still badly malnourished since last year's war saw most of your crop looted. Half the village just died of plague, and the survivors are screaming in agony all night

D3 at least has destructible environments

[LionMage]

To address your second bullet point above ("No actual change to world within persistence of software?"), I've looked at some of the early demo videos of Diablo 3 in action, and they specifically showed off destructible environments. And that destruction appears to be persisted. So this has been addressed (at least partially) in Diablo 3.

Also, in WoW: Wrath of the Lich King, Blizzard introduced a hack to simulate the (temporary) change of the game world, referred to by some as "phase technology." I watched a series of videos of someone playing the beta of WotLK, and it's pretty clear that there are some major world-altering plot points that can be played out. The only drawback is, these environment changes are only "persistent" for the people participating in those game events, and the effects don't appear to be permanent.

There are also events in WoW that are server-wide and can only be performed once on any given world server. A friend of mine participated in one of those, and reported that for many hours afterward, the animals in most areas were replaced by some type of insectoid creature.

Re:D3 at least has destructible environments

[torchdragon]

Eventually, you'll run out of Chapters in D3 and you'll level a character and then you'll start a new character or you'll restart on a different difficulty, and the world will reset. It is not persistent beyond your play session.

The only event(singular) that I recall from WoW that changed the game world was the opening of the Gates of (Insert faux Middle East name here). And as far as events go, that was pretty weak. You get to run around and grind resources and whoever grinds the most resources first... gets nothing. The gates will open for everyone when they grind enough resources (and then eventually for everyone else who doesn't want the carrot).

But I really can't blame Blizzard for what they're doing. I would propose that writing an interesting world that actually has 10,000,000 people running around in it and making some kind of difference is pretty much impossible at this point.

self appointed authoritative leaders of opinion

[dilvish_the_damned]

Even having an option to play with no color pallet and gamma turned way down will not work.
Unless everyone is forced to play that game they have in their heads, they will not be happy. People who opt not to enable bland mode will almost be cheating the game as it "was meant to be played".
This argument over which style is best for the game cannot be won in any traditional sense of the word. At best it can be safely ignored.

Wow

[Chris Johnson]

I didn't know entrails HAD raison d'etre :)

Blizzard

[BingmanO]

Out of all the companies in the market, Blizzard is still my favorite. They are consistent in quality and design. Their vision for a game sets the industry bar higher than most games on the market these days. Granted Warhammer will give WoW a run for it's money, but that's the beauty of the USA! The Diablo series is still my favorite and i cannot wait till D3. I hope it's incredibly detailed and doesn't stray too far from the first 2 in terms of game play and quality. By the way, your link doesn't work for the screen shots as of 4:06pm EST

It's hard to see dark images on LCD in sunlight

[WillAffleckUW]

Why do you gamedevs hate those of us who live in places with strong sunshine so very very much?

I love Blizzard, but too much dark makes Jack a downer cow ...

Blizzard, right?

[stewbacca]

This is from Blizzard, right? Have you SEEN the cartoon world called World of Warcraft lately? We just bought Warhammer online, and my children think the graphics suck, because they aren't cartoony enough (as they've been conditioned to expect from 2 years of WoW). Sad, really.

lame.

[Anonymous Coward]

You are an idiot, because you obviously don't know the value because you never tried. Those were my Necromancer's two specialties in classic and LOD expansion. Blizzard is such a shitty company for RPG's. The continually contract and detract from core character profiles of their games. It's always the 3-class archtype, then they'll mix and match. In the case of Diablo 3, they just create another blunder thinking they can mix a new uber class no different than half measures of Catholic and Protestant with a little Baptist just to be a dick. Speaking of which, why don't you all stopping sucking Vivendi Blizzard dick and work on a replacement that uses one of the Quake engines in top-down mode or somthing. You people are just plain lame, paying for the same crap ten-times over. The only thing you are really playing and paying for is encryption and bondage on their servers.

Share with me your GPA score, and I'll tell you what you don't know.

Re:lame.

[slodan]

This is a difficult post to reply too, given your cogent and inspired arguments. I have done my best to address your concerns, and please accept my apologies in advance if I have failed in any way.

You are an idiot, because you obviously don't know the value because you never tried. Those were my Necromancer's two specialties in classic and LOD expansion.

I have tried a poison and bone necro. While you certainly can play that way, it is not a legitimate strategy when compared to the effectiveness of other necro builds (particularly the curses tree). It is also a selfish build for multiplayer as you provide no value whatsoever to the team, since you provide no synergies and every other class in the game can outdamage you.

Bone Spear has significantly more potential damage than Poison Nova, but Poison Nova allows a "fire and forget" playstyle with lower personal risk. Bone Spear leads to a severe mana-consumption problem, and even a barbarian can output more damage than poison nova.
Bone Spear - Magic Damage: 1972-2140, Mana Cost: 21.5
Poison Nova - Poison Damage: 1781-1953 over 2 seconds, Mana Cost: 20
(Numbers with maxed synergies from http://d2items.com/skills.php. My critique is assuming play on Hell difficulty, where a single Death Lord monster has 10,000-18,000 health (before defense, resistances, etc.) Combat characters must have damage output of approximately 10,000/second to be viable.)

Blizzard is such a shitty company for RPG's.

If you don't like Blizzard RPG games, then I don't understand why you are bothering with a post about an upcoming Blizzard RPG game.

You people are just plain lame, paying for the same crap ten-times over.

Thanks for the heads up. I'll be certain to emancipate myself at the earliest opportunity.

Share with me your GPA score, and I'll tell you what you don't know.

I do appreciate the low price that you charge for your knowledge.

Re:lame.

[Dreamlandlocal]

It's been a long time since I last ran down to the worldstone chamber, but IIRC the poison/bone necro tree is ARGUABLY the necro's strongest.

You cite some damage numbers, but the error you're making is that you assume are using skills data that relates to skill level 20. In advanced game, you SHOULD be looking at the numbers for skill level 35 or even 40 (depending on itemization...)

Which leads me to my next point, specifically, that FOR ALL D2 character builds, itemization is the only relevant consideration.

"Boner" necros are extremely powerful PvP characters. Since there is no *significant* resistance to "magic" damage there is little your opponents can do to mitigate the damage done by your bone spells. The dominant boner strategy is to stack FCR and +skills, wear an enigma, and if you're ranged elemental damage then some sort of resistance gear and they've got an EXTREMELY good chance of beating almost any other build (of any class) in PvP. They tele around, casting auto-targetting bone spirits and never let you get near enough to engage in melee.

Further, well geared poison necros are very viable for soloing the endgame. Sure, they are not the fastest killers, but they are extremely hardy. There are very few things that the game can throw at them that they won't be able to handle with relative ease.

In my opinion, the curse tree is one of the weakest, requiring AT MOST a single point in each skill.

Re:lame.

[slodan]

I have no idea what is good for PvP. If the original poster played PvP, then based on your response I am wrong. In regards to itemization, this is kind of a blind spot in my response--the people that I played D2 with and myself all preferred not to trade items, so if we had a certain piece of gear, it was something that we or someone in the group had personally found. I'm more used to talking in terms of 5-10 +skills to a particular skill. E.g. a Hammerdin is extremely unimpressive with level 28 hammers.

Although I used level 20 numbers, the numbers don't scale exponentially, so my basic point remains accurate--poison doesn't deal as much damage as other classes, and your comment about about solo endgame play confirms this (to my mind anyway). I'm a bit curious about ever describing a caster-class as "hardy", but I'm willing to be educated on the point.

I endorsed the curse tree because of its versatility and power in PvE scenarios with a team. You certainly only need a point in each skill, but abilities that hugely increase your teammates' strengths are more important than being individually powerful.

Finally, despite trying a couple necros, I definitely haven't given them the level of attention that I've given to paladins for instance.

Still looks bad

[spocksbrain]

Honestly both the new screenshots and the old Diablo games look equally shitty. Not everything has to look like either a Candyland board or a Marylin Manson album cover. Some original settings and more imaginative environments would probably be appreciated even more than the typical crap blizzard has already ran into the ground with all their existing IPs.

Let the folks at Blizzard do their jobs.

[mimimi]

After all, they did a hell of a job with every project so far and Im pretty confident they'll also nail this one.

What you see so far is only a tiny part from a far bigger game. There's more to come and Im sure there will be enough for everyone in there.

You have been served olives so far and some people are complaining that are not black olives. Wait until the whole table is set with candles, great music and loads of foods.

Satisfaction will be guaranteed. You will be rushing through hordes of minions with your heart pounding in your neck screaming for more blood.

But until then, u know, lets look at every square inch of the olive and find something wrong with it. Like a true warrior.