Forum Index Off Topic Blizzard North's Diablo III

History

"
Septile wrote:
"
Bartuc wrote:
I can't bring myself to like the new art style and there is nothing I can say that hasn't already been said to describe it. Everything just seems blocky, unrealistic, and there is no denying WoW's artistic influence. May not be a bad thing in some games, just not in Diablo.

Diablo is known its dark atmosphere, it was the first game I ever played with this dark scheme to it, and I loved the earlier games for this atmosphere (and ofc the loot, etc). I too think they really want that Teen rating to draw more people to the game ofc. To really expand the audience, they need the teen rating, giving them reason to use brighter/more colors, and I understand that from the business point of view.

But then I say look at Sacred, teen rating and they didn't have that horrendous blue green color scheme in dungeons.

Blizzard isn't going to change its ways however. I for one am very glad POE is coming with the mature feel. The leaked pictures look good, and can u imagine what that Angel statue with the spear would look like in the new Diablo 3?

Lol Diablo 3 has been aiming for an M-rating since the beginning.

Don't let your rage cloud the truth.


If they are going for the M rating, then what is the reason for the art change? I understand that Blizzard can like this art scheme better than the old ones, but again, from a business point of view, why does pissing off the main audience seem like a good idea?

If they are not going for a T rating, that means they will keep that exact same 17 and up audience. So, keeping this exact same audience, again why does it make sense to piss those same people off?

Basically:

Original dark color scheme for M rating= Happy Audience

Colorful, bright, WoW inspired art direction for T rating= Relatively unhappy original audience, but also greatly expanded total audience due to rating drop

Colorful, bright, WoW inspired art direction for M rating= Relatively unhappy audience

Like the first one, understand the second, third makes no sense.

Bartuc
Feb 17, 2011 06:05:26 AM

A game that is "bright" isn't necessarily "cartoony". No Country for Old Men is a mature film, but well lit, didn't detract from the grittiness.

The "core" gamers you speak of are the relatively few people who still remember (and even play D2). I love D2 and still play it. My original band of friends who played it with me for years? Yeah, they've moved on, most don't even play games any more or have the time to do so. The "core" gamers that people keep talking about make up a minute fraction of the overall market place for D3. Straight to the point, Blizzard is making a product to sell, they don't care if we don't like it.

I'm sure back in the past, someone was really upset when Ford replaced the model T. But, time moves on, innovation happens. In my sarcastic rant a few posts back I complained about Mario moving into 3d and SimCity adopting color. Personally, I find complaining about a new art style to be equally as absurd. Of course you can voice your opinion, not buy the game, throw mud at the Blizzard HQ, but of all the things to get in a twist about in this world. A video game that looks different then you'd like it to, isn't anywhere near on the top of my list.

Wittgenstein
Feb 17, 2011 06:14:20 AM

"
Wittgenstein wrote:
but of all the things to get in a twist about in this world, a video game that looks different then you'd like it to isn't anywhere near on the top of my list.

Clearly someone needs to get their life's priorities straight . . .

tpapp157
Feb 17, 2011 06:24:36 AM

Lol people have a terrible sense of sarcasm. I picked it up on Wittgenstein's rant pretty much instantly.

Septile
Feb 17, 2011 06:36:21 AM

"
tpapp157 wrote:
Clearly someone needs to get their life's priorities straight . . .


I agree..... no, Im just kidding.

I understand what ur saying Wittgenstein. I know the gaming industry is moving towards a casual market. I honestly don't fully understand why this new scheme bothers me and others like me. This may be a bad example, but just bare with me.

Its like u have a kid who may dress a little darker, listen to darker music, not only those things but just a kid who did things on their own accord. They didn't just go with whats popular. U have respect for this kid. Then he starts to dress preppy, talk preppy and listen to popular music, just because its what everyone else does, he thinks u can't be cool unless u do like everyone else. U lose a little respect for him.

Ingenious, I know. Idk, I can't describe in words what I feel when I see This. I'll use a simple :(

The thing is, everyone, everywhere knows about D3. The new Diablo has and will make people unsettled. The older Diablo brings forth the uniqueness of the franchise, and separates itself from the pack.

Bartuc
Feb 17, 2011 06:57:26 AM

"
Bartuc wrote:
"
tpapp157 wrote:
Clearly someone needs to get their life's priorities straight . . .

Its like u have a kid who may dress a little darker, listen to darker music, not only those things but just a kid who did things on their own accord. They didn't just go with whats popular. U have respect for this kid. Then he starts to dress preppy, talk preppy and listen to popular music, just because its what everyone else does, he thinks u can't be cool unless u do like everyone else. U lose a little respect for him.

What the fuck? I don't respect kids like that. I think they're fucking morons who think they're clever because they "don't conform to society's standards."
They're idiots who are conforming to non-conforming, with the result of looking like trash, looking like they have no self-respect for themselves and looking like fucking try-hards.

Septile
Feb 17, 2011 08:08:54 AM

Holy crap septile, calm down abit. That was out of line.

I think what bartuc was trying to say is Diablo3 sold its soul to WoW. It looks like playable concept art. Not the realistic kind of concept art either. The 'Blizzard', cartoony style.

p0rt
Feb 17, 2011 09:34:27 AM

There’s a pretty big difference between “stylized and painterly” and cartoony.

Silver
Feb 17, 2011 22:30:13 PM

D2 is darker then D3 seems to be but in terms of "soul" or "feeling" it's not dark or mature at all.
Especially when compared to D1.
It has its good moments but large areas are just bad and boring to look and play (act 1 and 3).

About screens.
They look like some black isle stuff.

ness
Feb 17, 2011 23:17:33 PM

I've been hearing the very same arguement from the beginning of D3, too cartoony, not dark enough etc... I'm sorry to say guys but I just don't see it, in fact everything I've seen come out of the Blizzard camp is screaming Diablo. Furthermore, in reference to D2 being dark need I remind you of act 2 "desert" act 3 "jungle" and LOD which was basiclly a ripoff of Icewind Dale. Don't get me wrong it was still a great game, one I even still have to fire up and play every now and then. Back on topic I don't see the cartoony arguement, all the video looks vivid and fluid, the concept art is certainly in the idea of Diablo. I dismiss the fact they are going for a teen rating on this, most anything even made on the idea of a war between demons and angels almost immediately merits a Mature rating by the ESRB. I don't agree with it but history dictates. I'll even concede to the idea that WoW is influencing the project, that's definitive in my mind. However with some crafting you don't have to farm down, and the advantages you get with a crafting system I think it will add and enchance the overall flavor this is D3. Ultimately I looking very forward to the release and can't wait the play the latest vision in the franchise.

Vilneus
Feb 17, 2011 23:48:23 PM
  • Prev
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • Next