Diablo 3 is happy to admit it has problems and copy POE & other ARPGs to improve.

"

TheAnuhart wrote:

GGG would do well to emulate some of Blizzard's latest thoughts and actions on how to steer the aRPG train back on track to loot-find after D3 completely bastardised the genre. Something GGG watched happen and failed to act on, in fact, they took it a step further and gated content behind trade. Something that Blizzard, in all their greed* didn't even comprehend.

*note, there is a clear difference in the greed of Blizzard and the green of GGG.

I agree with you Anuhart regarding locking content behind sinks. Of course I do Ive played endgame, how couldn't I.

So far though Blizzard only has thoughts in these areas, we don't know what GGG are going to do to this game on release but we know Chris has said long ago that he is not happy with content essential to levelling being gated behind sinks etc, so the thoughts came from GGG before Blizzard. Blizzard have announced what they are going to do about it first, but whatever the course of action they both take GGG will implement theirs first. This, given they are pretty busy trying to finish the game and continue to balance the game at the same time.

I think weve made enough noise that some serious thinking about these issues is going on in the GGG camp, I would like to hear those thoughts as I am sure you would but ultimately its about seeing the thoughts in action in the live game, and if I were to put money on whos going to get there first it wouldn't be Blizzard.

"

Sneakypaw wrote:

No one has played loot 2.0 yet and can say if they got the balance right or not, but according to some people it's a rose scented pile of gold and rubys.

Blizzard lost something that GGG earned. My trust. And I won't give blizzard the benefit of the doubt that the pile of gold won't turn into shit and that the smell won't be that pleasing.

exactly, Blizzard talk a good one, D3 sold 12 million copies before anyone had a chance to properly play it, the game was the success it is purely based on D2 which was made by different developers and hot air talk about stuff they didnt even have in the game on launch in a lot of cases.

People saying 'diablo 3 is quickly becoming the better game' what are you talking about? quickly? Its been out for about 16 months and these changes wont even be here till next year, and when they come they will, at best, make it the game it should have been 2 years before when people first bought it, the sort of game PoE will be next month when its released. you've seen the flagship items they are showing off loot 2.0 with, spawns a hydra? come on you know thats lame. another example is the puzzle ring, rather than spawning a goblin every 15 minutes like it currently does... itll spawn a goblin every 15 minutes who has a chance to drop a legendary.


wut?


goblins already have a chance to drop a legendary, presumably they mean an increased chance to drop one. This is really the best they could do? 16 months since release and thats the most fun, build defining items they have to show off?

Yeah some of the new bits of diablo look fun, itll be cute as a little toy run around to go play for a few hours here and there, but you cant seriously tell me you are excited by the loot 2.0 changes they have previewed. The only exciting thing I have seen from loot 2.0 is the 'account bound' text in the bottom corner, the items themselves are poster boys for what is deeply wrong with their game and cannot be fixed.

"

Yes, it hasn't 3D mambo-jumbo, tessellation and all, but it still holds an artistic dignity. Something that I definitely can't say about D3 visuals

That looks absolutely awful. It looked awful back in 2000. The sprites used in D2 were dreadful. The only difference between that screenshot and something in D3 outside of the poorer basic graphics is the darkness. What you want is D3 with the Dark D3 mod which does nothing but changes the lighting.



The graphics in D3 are miles ahead of D2, you just don't like the tone they put behind it which can easily be changed if you choose to.

why is this thread still here?

"

That looks absolutely awful. It looked awful back in 2000. The sprites used in D2 were dreadful.

U know what, I think that you either do not know which game are you talking about, or you think that Diablo 2 was made in 1996 and D1 in 2000 (based on your posts and screens) and that doesn't make much sense.

But I agree that D2 was some kind of a laze flip at artistic department. I mean, 640x480 in 2000 - what da hell?

And D3 was and still is nothing but a rainbow vomiting whore compare to D1 classy looks (imo).
But hey - its just me! Maybe I'm wrong and you are the one wise and reasonable person who right.

"

why is this thread still here?

Cause it's fun and brings memories!

"

Bozon wrote:

D1 graphics never get old, I am a huge D1 fan, not that huge a D2 fan.

To be honest, sometimes D2 fanboys were annoying while discussing things, they compared everything in D3 with D2, and leave rooms for D3 fanbois to say "It is not a D2 clone" to
nullify our points.

Be smart please. this is war :D

"

EnderCN wrote:

"

Yes, it hasn't 3D mambo-jumbo, tessellation and all, but it still holds an artistic dignity. Something that I definitely can't say about D3 visuals

That looks absolutely awful. It looked awful back in 2000. The sprites used in D2 were dreadful. The only difference between that screenshot and something in D3 outside of the poorer basic graphics is the darkness. What you want is D3 with the Dark D3 mod which does nothing but changes the lighting.


The graphics in D3 are miles ahead of D2, you just don't like the tone they put behind it which can easily be changed if you choose to.

that was a d1 screenshot dude.

"

EnderCN wrote:

"

Yes, it hasn't 3D mambo-jumbo, tessellation and all, but it still holds an artistic dignity. Something that I definitely can't say about D3 visuals

That looks absolutely awful. It looked awful back in 2000. The sprites used in D2 were dreadful. The only difference between that screenshot and something in D3 outside of the poorer basic graphics is the darkness. What you want is D3 with the Dark D3 mod which does nothing but changes the lighting.



The graphics in D3 are miles ahead of D2, you just don't like the tone they put behind it which can easily be changed if you choose to.

I think his screenshot is from Diablo 1.

"

CharanJaydemyr wrote:

"

EnderCN wrote:

"

Yes, it hasn't 3D mambo-jumbo, tessellation and all, but it still holds an artistic dignity. Something that I definitely can't say about D3 visuals

That looks absolutely awful. It looked awful back in 2000. The sprites used in D2 were dreadful. The only difference between that screenshot and something in D3 outside of the poorer basic graphics is the darkness. What you want is D3 with the Dark D3 mod which does nothing but changes the lighting.

Spoiler

The graphics in D3 are miles ahead of D2, you just don't like the tone they put behind it which can easily be changed if you choose to.

It's funny but I MISS the graininess of D1 and D2. Everything was just too smooth and slick in D3. Too WoW. I think that was the single biggest aesthetic misstep that Blizzard took with D3 when trying to appeal to the vets.

Again, not sure why I'm responding to a cheerleader like this but Diablo 3 looks absolutely nothing like World of Warcraft. Hope that helps.

"

WAWAMELONS wrote:

"

CharanJaydemyr wrote:

"

EnderCN wrote:

That looks absolutely awful. It looked awful back in 2000. The sprites used in D2 were dreadful. The only difference between that screenshot and something in D3 outside of the poorer basic graphics is the darkness. What you want is D3 with the Dark D3 mod which does nothing but changes the lighting.

Spoiler

The graphics in D3 are miles ahead of D2, you just don't like the tone they put behind it which can easily be changed if you choose to.

It's funny but I MISS the graininess of D1 and D2. Everything was just too smooth and slick in D3. Too WoW. I think that was the single biggest aesthetic misstep that Blizzard took with D3 when trying to appeal to the vets.

Again, not sure why I'm responding to a cheerleader like this but Diablo 3 looks absolutely nothing like World of Warcraft. Hope that helps.

It looks more like WoW than it looks like D2. So yeah, it's too WoW.

"

WAWAMELONS wrote:

Diablo 3 looks absolutely nothing like World of Warcraft. Hope that helps.

Problem is - it doesn't look like Diablo either.

And being like WoW is not a problem. I mean, I never played WoW, I just don't like how the game feels. I like when its dark, not Gothic-like dark, more like Frank Booth dark. But even if WoW seemed too colorful for me, it felt right for the game itself when I saw it back in a time. So this is not an issue of dark and bright, its about setting being and feeling correct.
And D3 feels wrong.

And as a conclusion: in 1996, when D1 was made, Blizz squeezed all the juice out of artistic department to make D1 visuals. But while making D3 they had so many tools, so many ways to make it great - but Blizz took a path of laziness and made some kind of a cartoonish mockery of the game itself.