So, uh, DIABLO III

Video Games

So, uh, DIABLO III

Postby Chronomaster » Sun Jun 29, 2008 12:53 pm

Is everyone psyched or what?

I know I'm setting aside a year of my life for it.
BEATMANIUH
User avatar
Chronomaster
 
Posts: 209
Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2008 3:13 pm

Re: So, uh, DIABLO III

Postby Exanthem » Sun Jun 29, 2008 12:58 pm

Looks pretty awesome. I'll probably need to get a better computer before it comes out though. The one I'm using now would probably just explode the moment I put the D3 disk in.
User avatar
Exanthem
 
Posts: 31
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 7:28 pm
Location: Texas

Re: So, uh, DIABLO III

Postby Random » Thu Jul 03, 2008 9:12 pm

I was so happy when I saw the videos, it actually looks like another diablo game! I was terrified they were going to butcher another classic.

Its a little too early to be psyched, the unofficial release date isn't for another year and a half, and its blizzard so you can automatically add an extra year or two onto that.
alpha446
User avatar
Random
 
Posts: 36
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2008 11:24 pm
Location: Toronto, Ontario

Re: So, uh, DIABLO III

Postby Chronomaster » Thu Jul 03, 2008 10:35 pm

Random wrote:I was so happy when I saw the videos, it actually looks like another diablo game! I was terrified they were going to butcher another classic.

The Witch Doctor looks exactly like some old, frail tribesman as we'd imagine it. It was kinda freaky seeing him shake around so much. I think he was even smiling too.

But yeah, unlike Warcraft (which no longer has a standard to uphold to :V), Diablo doesn't get to bow out so easily.
BEATMANIUH
User avatar
Chronomaster
 
Posts: 209
Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2008 3:13 pm

Re: So, uh, DIABLO III

Postby Allied » Thu Jul 03, 2008 11:37 pm

It looks amazing and i want it!
Image
User avatar
Allied
 
Posts: 107
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 1:41 am
Location: Texas

Re: So, uh, DIABLO III

Postby DanTheTimid » Fri Jul 04, 2008 4:31 am

I'm more pscyhed for starcraft 3 but thats just because theres so many great grind rpgs out there right now but so few great RTS. That said though, I am still looking forward to Diablo 3 as I invested quite a bit of time into the first 2, especially D2.

I'm still not especially fond of how blizzard has become obsessed with 3d graphics, it started with warcraft 3, I really prefered the classic 2d art to the 3d models of W3. It made sense in World of Warcraft, its the type of game where 3d should be used, but then they showed starcraft, a game which had AWESOME 2d graphics that I was looking forward to seeing even higher res awesome 2d only to find it too now was in ugly 3d -_- And now Diablo 3 also has recieved the 3d plague. As games that work perfectly fine with fixed camera angles there's really no need to use 3d models, I don't understand why they keep doing it.
The bunnies of Lavato have special abilities, like 'Action Skill: Make Carrot Disappear.'
User avatar
DanTheTimid
 
Posts: 1394
Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2008 2:10 pm
Location: Glendale, AZ

Re: So, uh, DIABLO III

Postby Allied » Fri Jul 04, 2008 10:12 am

You mean Star Craft 2? lol
Image
User avatar
Allied
 
Posts: 107
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 1:41 am
Location: Texas

Re: So, uh, DIABLO III

Postby reydien » Fri Jul 04, 2008 10:22 am

DanTheTimid wrote:I'm still not especially fond of how blizzard has become obsessed with 3d graphics, it started with warcraft 3, I really prefered the classic 2d art to the 3d models of W3. It made sense in World of Warcraft, its the type of game where 3d should be used, but then they showed starcraft, a game which had AWESOME 2d graphics that I was looking forward to seeing even higher res awesome 2d only to find it too now was in ugly 3d -_- And now Diablo 3 also has recieved the 3d plague. As games that work perfectly fine with fixed camera angles there's really no need to use 3d models, I don't understand why they keep doing it.


Who says it's a fixed camera angle? And besides, 2d models drawn to look 3d vs actual 3d models, don't you end up with basically the same appearance in the end? The 3d models just give the added benefit of being able to seamlessly move the camera when wanted/needed, as well as greater freedom of movement for the models.
"Select the pistol, and then, select your horse."
User avatar
reydien
 
Posts: 102
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 2:42 am
Location: Norman, OK

Re: So, uh, DIABLO III

Postby DanTheTimid » Fri Jul 04, 2008 10:44 am

Allied wrote:You mean Star Craft 2? lol


Yeah sorry my bad, I meant Starcraft 2

reydien wrote:Who says it's a fixed camera angle? And besides, 2d models drawn to look 3d vs actual 3d models, don't you end up with basically the same appearance in the end? The 3d models just give the added benefit of being able to seamlessly move the camera when wanted/needed, as well as greater freedom of movement for the models.


We still don't have SC2 or D3 in our hands to play so I can't comment too much on them, but I know with warcraft 3, even though they allowed you to move the camera a little bit, I found it quite unnecessary for game play purposes. The only real use they made of the movable camera was for cut scenes in the single player, which I didn't feel made up for creating (in my personal opinion anyway) inferior looking graphics during the actual game play. Starcraft is also an RTS and thus I expect will be similar to Warcraft 3, I can't really see a need for a movable camera, and the first 2 Diablo games also had fixed cameras so the 3d only becomes necessary if they made a significant change to game play that necessitated movable camera (which I haven't seen from the screen shots I've seen).

Now whether or not they look better or worse is purely opinion based, I'm willing to grant that others might even prefer the 3d graphics, but unless you do incredibly detailed 3d models (which really can't be done in these type of games right now because the average computers just couldn't handle it) they are going to be inherently less detailed them 2d images. Its just the nature of the beast. Things would be different if these games only required you to render 2 units on the screen at any given time, games like Soul Calibur, Tekken, etc have all created amazing 3d graphics that are comparable to any of their 2d counter parts. But RTS and Diablo games tend to have 20+ units on the screen at times, thats just a bit much for a non-totally suped up computer to handle, thus why their 3d units tend to be relatively low in detail (comparatively). 20+ 2d hi resolution units are a lot more manageable however and allow them to not skimp on the detail. Thus why I personally find 2d units tend to look better for these type of games.
The bunnies of Lavato have special abilities, like 'Action Skill: Make Carrot Disappear.'
User avatar
DanTheTimid
 
Posts: 1394
Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2008 2:10 pm
Location: Glendale, AZ

Re: So, uh, DIABLO III

Postby Chronomaster » Fri Jul 04, 2008 12:29 pm

We're still not seeing good High-Res 2d sprites in RPGs, is a problem. Even in games like Disgaea 3 which have the capability to store all the different sprites, it's still greviously marked down.

I'm all for High-Res 2d sprites. They look much more stylistic than 3d models.
BEATMANIUH
User avatar
Chronomaster
 
Posts: 209
Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2008 3:13 pm

Next

Return to Catherina's Play Room

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests