• Listen to a special audio message from Bill Roper to the Hive Workshop community (Bill is a former Vice President of Blizzard Entertainment, Producer, Designer, Musician, Voice Actor) 🔗Click here to hear his message!
  • Read Evilhog's interview with Gregory Alper, the original composer of the music for WarCraft: Orcs & Humans 🔗Click here to read the full interview.

Diablo III art style

What do you think about D3 artstyle and graphic?

  • It's great! Blizzard has done great job!

    Votes: 59 80.8%
  • Diablo 3 graphic looks like WoW and comic o.O They rlly dissapointed me!

    Votes: 14 19.2%

  • Total voters
    73
Status
Not open for further replies.
Level 9
Joined
Apr 2, 2005
Messages
491
I think the graphics pwn as they are. Besides, we got to see what? 2 areas? Lets complain after we see enough to even start making assumptions.
 
Level 4
Joined
Jul 4, 2007
Messages
123
If you look closely in the gameplay videos, you can easily spot out BUNNIES runnin' 'round. Now tell me one thing: HOW THE HECK THE BUNNIES STILL LURK IN TAINTED LAND INFESTED WITH DEMONIC CREATURES FROM HELL? Is that even LOGICAL? I want to see impaled heads, tortured people, demons sacrificing children, half-eaten naked maidens stripped to trees and walls, and obviously THE BUTCHER - things that Diablo had in through whole of series. None of them. Disappointing
Anyways. The next problem is actually the textures. Yeah, they look Warcraft-like. But why to borrow them from completely different game and stick it to new product that should retain the feel from the past games? Think about it: does it even match with the look that was held from D1 to LoD? NO. So that's a big minus, 'cause Blizzard's going off course with this continuation of the franchise, graphical atmosphere wise. Real fans want Diablo, not some Warcraft left-over.
Other part to flame: character/weapon design. Disproportions, Warcraft-like animations (particularly seen in gameplay video, when Barb talks to Cain), weapons with distinct 'additional' fire/flame/electricity effects (those can be seen in WC3, WoW, other RPGs), overlarged weapons/armor/shoulderpads, irregular assets - these are the things that COMPLETELY don't fit with Diablo universe of which we learned from D1 and D2. Shame.
And to all who'll say "It's only alpha, Blizzard's gonna change the looks of it without your ignorant and foolish sentences": Blizzard actually said to make commentary on shown videos, express thoughts on how the fans like it, what are their feelings towards it. I think that only still lasting Diablo fanbase can direct Blizzard out of its wanderings, so vital and helpful comments, that reflect what Diablo series is all about, are most appreciated.
P.S. The graphical atmosphere fits much better in presented concept art than in gameplay videos, that’s for sure.
 
Last edited:
Level 4
Joined
Jun 7, 2008
Messages
87
most every thing FreshMobster said

Diablo isn't an "alternate" universe, its more of a mirror universe. Cartoony disproportionate characters shouldn't be in diablo, unless they are flayers, or something smiler.
 
Level 4
Joined
Jun 7, 2008
Messages
87
most every thing FreshMobster said

Diablo isn't an "alternate" universe, its more of a mirror universe. Cartoony disproportionate characters shouldn't be in diablo, unless they are flayers, or something smiler.
 
Level 14
Joined
Oct 27, 2007
Messages
1,395
The graphics are fine. Stop bitching and moaning about them.
Oh no! How dare Blizzard update the graphics! It's like it's a new game or something!111111!

Of course it's not going to be like the other ones. God forbid Blizzard try to improve upon something. They can do more and better things with the new graphics, like all the new abilities that you saw.

Stop crying about it. If you don't like it, don't play or buy it. I'm pretty sure Blizzard doesn't care because they'll get new customers anyway.

@Freshmobster, what in the name of the high heavens are you prattling on about? Did you see the fight at the end of the gameplay video? The monster fucking ate the person. Not enough blood and guts for you?
 
Level 4
Joined
Jul 4, 2007
Messages
123
@Freshmobster, what in the name of the high heavens are you prattling on about? Did you see the fight at the end of the gameplay video? The monster fucking ate the person. Not enough blood and guts for you?

What's the point if all of the dripping blood and organs+bones will disappear after 7 seconds... Not to mention this was more of look-we-have-cool-effects show. I don't think that there will be monsters that are able to kill a character, except for mercenaries, in one final outrage of hunger. BAM! ONE HIT! DEAD! Talk about Hardcore.
And what I was actually talking about are the in-game level assets. Blizzard can make thousands of ways of how you'll be slaughtered to bite-size pieces, but they surely cannot throw out the vague feeling that demonic servants are still practicing their need to sacrifice virgins and children to their hell masters. Most of those were processed in dungeons and monasteries. Now when the gameplay video was showing dungeon level, there were none of those (except for dancing ones but only to summon a mightier demon). No signs that cultists were torturing people what so ever. Everything looks so clean an polished, even after 20 years and thousands of slaughterings. Like a mass of sexy-ladies from cleaning enterprise who had been sweeping the deck 24/7 everyday for the past 20 years or so.

OK. Now I see everyone is just pointing towards those screenshots in which we clearly see Act 2’s desert with the so called "Diablo II doesn't look as dark as you want D3 to be" theme. Now actually, the graphical atmosphere should be derived from Diablo1 not D2. As you know, you won't find any happy, cheery, fuzzy, cuddly, pinkish, violet colors there. I bet you won't even find any place there with soft and warming light, like in D3. Only Diablo1 possesses that clear graphical charm that separates it from a mass of other dull RPGs. Only it should be used as a clear reference for further Diablo series games, not some other game title.

I'm pretty sure Blizzard doesn't care because they'll get new customers anyway.
yeah those who'll put aside WoW for this lol

Now, Arvedui, I have a question for yah. I see that you're SO happy with the current artstyle. Now tell me one thing (YES OR NO): Do you think that those disproportions, irregular assets, crayon drawn textures, fit with what we are used to see in Diablo series? Do these things resemble previous Blizzard North work in any way?
 
Level 14
Joined
Oct 27, 2007
Messages
1,395
What's the point if all of the dripping blood and organs+bones will disappear after 7 seconds... Not to mention this was more of look-we-have-cool-effects show. I don't think that there will be monsters that are able to kill a character, except for mercenaries, in one final outrage of hunger. BAM! ONE HIT! DEAD! Talk about Hardcore.
And what I was actually talking about are the in-game level assets. Blizzard can make thousands of ways of how you'll be slaughtered to bite-size pieces, but they surely cannot throw out the vague feeling that demonic servants are still practicing their need to sacrifice virgins and children to their hell masters. Most of those were processed in dungeons and monasteries. Now when the gameplay video was showing dungeon level, there were none of those (except for dancing ones but only to summon a mightier demon). No signs that cultists were torturing people what so ever. Everything looks so clean an polished, even after 20 years and thousands of slaughterings. Like a mass of sexy-ladies from cleaning enterprise who had been sweeping the deck 24/7 everyday for the past 20 years or so.

OK. Now I see everyone is just pointing towards those screenshots in which we clearly see Act 2’s desert with the so called "Diablo II doesn't look as dark as you want D3 to be" theme. Now actually, the graphical atmosphere should be derived from Diablo1 not D2. As you know, you won't find any happy, cheery, fuzzy, cuddly, pinkish, violet colors there. I bet you won't even find any place there with soft and warming light, like in D3. Only Diablo1 possesses that clear graphical charm that separates it from a mass of other dull RPGs. Only it should be used as a clear reference for further Diablo series games, not some other game title.


yeah those who'll put aside WoW for this lol

Now, Arvedui, I have a question for yah. I see that you're SO happy with the current artstyle. Now tell me one thing (YES OR NO): Do you think that those disproportions, irregular assets, crayon drawn textures, fit with what we are used to see in Diablo series? Do these things resemble previous Blizzard North work in any way?

Damn you for making me read.

1.) Don't put words in my mouth. I never said that I was happy with the new graphics, I just said that they're different and that you cannot possible know what the entire game looks like based upon 20 minutes of gameplay.
2.) The dripping blood and bones and shit disappear in every Blizzard game. Even D2.
3.) You realize that everything was probably on God mode for the sake of showing off skills, right?
4.) I honestly don't give a rat's ass if it looks like WoW. A.) because it doesn't, B.) because if it does, It looks good.
5.) Blizzard doesn't care about what anyone says because they're always going to have a new and fresh batch of youngsters who have never played d2 or d1, and thus don't care about the change in graphics.
6.) I prefer Diablo to Diablo 2. It just sucked a lot more because it was older. Oh.. wait.. couldn't that happen here?
7.) Blizzard North people did work on Diablo 3. Maybe their style changed, think of that?
8.) Yes or No questions are fascist and don't allow for free thought therefore I will not answer you with a simple yes or no. I think it looks fine. We have only scene two places out of the entire world so far, and I think they look extraordinarily better than d2 did. If you've read my posts in other threads I said I never liked that it was so dark, I always put the brightness up. That's my personal preference, just like your ideas are yours.
 
Level 4
Joined
Jun 7, 2008
Messages
87
Calm down Arvedui, people just don't like to see the low poly but well thought out texture look any more. It was awesome in WC3, cool in WoW, okay in SC2, but i think they should try to push the graphics in Diablo 3, rather then trying to make their game work on every PC known to man. Diablo 2 was practically the zenith of 2d graphics, and it still holds up fairly well. And like you said, several times, blizzard will sell units no matter what they do with the IP, maybe Arthas and Diablo will ally to fight the zerg only to have the night elf ear rape baal with a psy emmiter.
 
Level 14
Joined
Oct 27, 2007
Messages
1,395
Calm down Arvedui, people just don't like to see the low poly but well thought out texture look any more. It was awesome in WC3, cool in WoW, okay in SC2, but i think they should try to push the graphics in Diablo 3, rather then trying to make their game work on every PC known to man. Diablo 2 was practically the zenith of 2d graphics, and it still holds up fairly well. And like you said, several times, blizzard will sell units no matter what they do with the IP, maybe Arthas and Diablo will ally to fight the zerg only to have the night elf ear rape baal with a psy emmiter.

Who isn't calm? Your post makes less sense than a smart narutard.

Try reading the post instead of making inane generalizations and retarded statements.

If you're going to post, at least add something to the conversation.
 
Level 23
Joined
Nov 29, 2006
Messages
2,482
Well guys settle down. This is what Keith Lee, one of the producers has to say about it

We all know by now that some people went as far as to make a petition for Blizzard to change the graphics, even only after 3 days of seeing the very first screenshots of Diablo 3. Why did Blizard choose a different art style for Diablo 3 than the previous games in the series? When asked, lead Diablo 3 producer Keith Lee, stated that in Diablo 2, and 1, they featured darker landscapes and dungeons which fit great with the whole theme of the games. Since the very first screenshots were released, people have blamed them to look a lot like World of Warcraft, and complained that they were too bright and colorful for a Diablo game.

Keith Lee stated the following about this: “One of the things that we considered when we were working on the visuals for ‘Diablo III’ is the fact that color is your friend. We feel that color actually helps to create a lot of highlights in the game so that there is contrast. A great analogy is like in ‘Lord of the Rings’ — not everything is dark. It allows you to see what a creepy dungeon can be like but if everything is dark it doesn’t allow you to have a lot of contrast. Diablo I and Diablo II are darker, and I think that the one of the main reasons why is the fact that in ‘Diablo I,’ you’re basically in a dungeon the whole time. And in contrast to ‘Diablo III,’ you’ll be exploring outdoors, you’ll be in dungeons, you’ll be experiencing so many different areas."


"We want to bring as much variety as we can when you’re playing the game so that you’re excited to check out new environments. We don’t want everything to look the same and that’s really what we’re trying to aim for. What we also tried to do is create very clean textures so that you can really focus on them. It’s a stylized feel and in that sense, it’s very sort of a Blizzard philosophy. It’s just really pushing the envelope in terms of the visuals so that everyone is excited about how everything looks. We think that ‘Diablo III’ is going to be better in so many different ways. We’re just building and improving upon the the first and second ‘Diablo’ games.”

Kieth also stated, "We’re very involved, because everyone’s very passionate about our games. Blizzard employees spend a lot of time actually iterating on [the game], and so in terms of the next phase, what we’ll try to do is a proof on concept on lot of different gameplay aspects. And we really want to get as much feedback as possible so that we can improve on the game and ensure that we meet Blizzard quality for our fans and for ourselves as players.”

So I want to apologize in advance for my "graphics" post. I was just outraged that people did not appreciate just the fact Diablo 3 was announced, and instead complained. It seems as Blizzard will be listening and making the graphics as the people want them to be. Which is good to hear, but at the same time, I would still love to see them done by a professional, and not only by what some people want them to do.

But really, this is great news, as it means that Diablo 3 will feature both great colors for some areas, that will include waterfalls, and other vibrant textures, but in other parts of the game, such as dungeons, caves, etc. the game will bring back the dark and shadowy Diablo 2 feel that the series is so used to.

I still dislike that petition... Keith Lee is so right
 
Level 34
Joined
Sep 6, 2006
Messages
8,873
About the pictures:

Who wants to play a game that's all gray? All color and life is gone from the game! Outside should be bright and cheery in areas. I get sick of death and dark, I like a mixture.
 
Level 9
Joined
Apr 2, 2005
Messages
491
I honestly don't see what the big deal is.. I like these graphics more than the dark gloomy atmosphere D1 and D2 had. I think they fit perfect for D1 and worked somewhat well for D2, but D3 is fine with what blizzard is doing right now.
 
Level 4
Joined
Jul 4, 2007
Messages
123
The color pallet/scheme both in different acts of Diablo II and Diablo were one-sided. That means that one color dominated over the whole Act/set. Now in Diablo III we have a mixture of different colors that totally don't add up to what we have seen from the past games. Obviously some awful color decisions have been as seen through those gameplay movies. Purple/pink in dungeons? Comme on. I don't think that those colors should at all represent the malicious feeling of the dungeons. There are people sacrificed there, not some cute fluffy bunnies. Some may start deflecting this option by saying that World of Sanctuary has been free of demonic beasts for 20 years or so. But that doesn't mean that cheery/happy atmosphere should be held were a horde of demonic servants just swiped throughout the land. It's completely illogical. The land is once again fouled and I would really like to see the land as it is portrayed in Diablo's (1996) opening scene, not some cute little sun-bunnies running across character's face, and bloom effect creating such awkward warming and friendly feeling that invites you to ‘go’ and 'play' outside. Complete nonsense.
Ok, you won't agree with me, I don't care. But what's with pastel/crayon-painted textures? I guess you support this strange feature. Nobody seems to complain. I mean you can create normal textures and make then still colorful. No need to actually strip some Warcraft feeling to them and stick unto Diablo III. Sinking deeper into abyss, I would say.
Also it seems that you try to not confront the asset topic. As I had previously mentioned, those things are disproportional, irregular and cheery. I just hope you do realize that those things only fit Warcraft universe, and totally fuck up what Diablo is. So you want a Diablo look or a great share of Warcraft unto it? I guess you won't answer this question...

So does Diablo III still have that distinct look from previous games of this franchise? I guess not - It lost its special touch (besides gorefest) on that matter. If you find any prove that it still remains there please post.

And to those dumbnuts that say that it's only at alpha stage: Do you at all realize that we are discussing ALREADY PRESENTED CONTENT? Predicting that the variety of gameplay environment will change as you pass through regions is pretty random.
 
Level 23
Joined
Nov 29, 2006
Messages
2,482
As I mentioned in another thread (should probably not just started a new one about it) the idea of Diablo 3 has nothing to do with wow. They got the colors and stuff from games like God of War. Besides, where did you find purple/pink? it was rather darkblue but maybe too lightened up by torches and stuff, or maybe just not right... But for d3, its still perfect.

I can quote it here instead (if an admin decides to remove the other thread):
1UP: Diablo II solidified the action-RPG genre further, but that was back in 2000. How do you keep Diablo III relevant to a modern audience?

RP: I think ultimately the gameplay is still very solid, and I think keeping it relevant is kind of building upon technology and really trying to learn not only from previous Diablo games, but also from all the other games in other genres. That's one of the things we really looked at a lot, the idea of, "this is an action-RPG, with (hopefully) a capital-A on the action." So we really wanted to make the game a lot more visceral. We kind took some cues from God of War and games like that. You know, really trying to ratchet up the visceral feel of the game to an 11 on a scale of 1-10.

[...]

1UP: On the subject of Diablo III being a more colorful game, there's already comments online about the color palette. Can you talk about how the team arrived at the decision for a wider color palette?

RP: Yeah, so we've probably been through, I don't know, maybe three major art direction changes on the game. And the previous two were probably a little more similar to the Diablo II look. But it just didn't feel right anymore. It didn't feel like an interesting enough environment to play in anymore. So when we finally came up with this look, what we're really trying to do is add more color to the game, and we were very careful to not want to go to WOW. We don't want the game to look like WOW. We want it to look like Diablo. But we felt that there was an opportunity to add more color to the game but still keep the game feeling dark. And I think that's something a little tougher to see in a demo. I think when you're playing the game, people will fall in love with it, and will realize, "you know what? You can have reds and blues and a more painted look and still have a very dark, gothic feel to it all."

Main source can be found here. It is acually a great interwiev so I'd recommend you folks to read it:
http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3168515

Also, those who state that d3 has too little blood effects and such I just want to say...
restmycaselc1.jpg

I rest my case...
 
Predicting that the variety of gameplay environment will change as you pass through regions is pretty random.

That is how it was in diablo 2, that is how it is going to be in diablo 3. Even in warcraft it is all darker as you go through. Oh wait, now you are going to say how this is not warcraft. And IT IS NOT. It is just some people bullshitting how it looks like warcraft, while it DOES NOT AT ALL. Only artists can discuss this it seems, and guess what, even THEY say it is NOT warcraft style. Your post with "OMG LETS CHANGE DIABLO 3 LETS SAVE TEH WORLDZ FO SHIZLE!!!11111" is completely irrelevant.
 
Level 14
Joined
Oct 27, 2007
Messages
1,395
And you could just ignore his post and respond to HappyTauren or Eccho..

hmm... oh well. Anyway, the point is that it looks fine. There's no use arguing about it because no matter how many people sign or don't sign the petition, they're not going to change it for a bunch of people who have no idea what they're talking about.
 
Level 4
Joined
Jul 4, 2007
Messages
123
Well Diablo III has that Warcraft-like animation feeling. If you watched the gameplay video, you probably have seen a scene where Barbarian talks to Cain. The animations are clearly WoW-esque. You could simply change the skin to some Orc and leave the rig animations and you'll have yourselves a WoW character.
 
Level 10
Joined
Nov 23, 2006
Messages
592
Well Diablo III has that Warcraft-like animation feeling. If you watched the gameplay video, you probably have seen a scene where Barbarian talks to Cain. The animations are clearly WoW-esque. You could simply change the skin to some Orc and leave the rig animations and you'll have yourselves a WoW character.

WoW animations are ok, so why don't use them?
 

frostwhisper

Media Manager
Level 52
Joined
May 25, 2007
Messages
4,258
Well Diablo III has that Warcraft-like animation feeling. If you watched the gameplay video, you probably have seen a scene where Barbarian talks to Cain. The animations are clearly WoW-esque. You could simply change the skin to some Orc and leave the rig animations and you'll have yourselves a WoW character.

No. They're not using animations from WoW. They're not using meshes form WoW, they're not using anything from WoW. Why? Because this is a different game, and Blizzard don't use their resources for more than one game (except for those sc2 ultralisk-pitlord thingies).
 
No. They're not using animations from WoW. They're not using meshes form WoW, they're not using anything from WoW. Why? Because this is a different game, and Blizzard don't use their resources for more than one game (except for those sc2 ultralisk-pitlord thingies).

How do you explain wow models in wc3? Those blizzard imported by default?


:p
 
Level 5
Joined
Jan 13, 2008
Messages
173
not sure if ppl posting here have actualy played the two d games, but the thing ppl are pissed about is the brightness, saturation and texture, NOT THE GRAPHICS! People love the 3d. Any ways just thought i would bring it up, since ppl seen to be confusing graphics and texture. Also, another thing that is missing is the light radious. Thats why its less creepy. Oh and this pole is extreamly biased since its no a wc site. No offence but wc is intended for children. Sorry for any sp in typeing this no my n95.
 

frostwhisper

Media Manager
Level 52
Joined
May 25, 2007
Messages
4,258
What would be even more badass, would be Tyrael looking normally, but doing evil stuff. It will be a good twist.

Anyway, Maedh the loss of the sight radius (I am pretty sure) was again buffed in that video so that we can see more of the environment. Besides, as a guy on w3c stated in a similar topic, "I prefer to tell zombies from furniture", so even if the radius is gone, it's for the better.

And if you've hanged around for longer you would have noticed that though a site inhabited primarily by kids, the Hive's most influenced by the heavy words of people around 17 or older.
 
Level 4
Joined
Jul 4, 2007
Messages
123
DukeCz said:
WoW animations are ok, so why don't use them?
I wasn't saying that Diablo III is using WoW animations. I was just mentioning that those animations look blatantly WoW-like. Anyways, you want Diablo III with its own unique setting, or game which has just too much in-common with World of Poop?
pooplw8.jpg

Think about it.

†-Revellion-† said:
Oh yes, I can totally see an Evil Tyreal. Spiked wings/floaty things, wings/floaty things turned black with red glow/aura, red & black robes, sword turned black with red glow/aura, flaming eyes. That would be absolutely badass!
frostwhisper said:
What would be even more badass, would be Tyrael looking normally, but doing evil stuff. It will be a good twist.

It's obvious that Tyreal will have a dominant role in Diablo 3. Heck, even Diablo 3 main page has Tyreal's bust all over it. So that should mean something.
Now some of you may think of Tyreal becoming The Fallen Angel, just like Izual (but in other circumstances). By most part humans and even divine entities consumed by the Evil change their looks and purpose. One of them is King Leoric. As Gillian said: "Leoric was the holliest of men, kind and just ruller." He went insane of his son Albrecht's lose and ultimately was killed by his knights. His spirit didn't travel to the high Heaven's. Instead it was possessed by the Three. The Hero from the original Diablo game killed Leoric's dark spirit to lessen his eternal pain. Obviously, Leoric's dark spirit didn't even look like it has something related to human kind. One of the more radical changes could be Izual's possession.

Before:
image030.gif


After:
19705ft9.jpg


There are more but I won't get into details (Archbishop Lazarus, Vizjerei, Blood Raven...). So as we see EVERYONE who has lost to the powers of Hell changes his looks no matter what. I don't think that, if Tyreal changes his sides but remains the same light-emitting entity, would be a good decision. It would really borken the understanding of what happens in the World of Sanctuary.
 
Level 5
Joined
Jan 13, 2008
Messages
173
What would be even more badass, would be Tyrael looking normally, but doing evil stuff. It will be a good twist.

Anyway, Maedh the loss of the sight radius (I am pretty sure) was again buffed in that video so that we can see more of the environment. Besides, as a guy on w3c stated in a similar topic, "I prefer to tell zombies from furniture", so even if the radius is gone, it's for the better.

And if you've hanged around for longer you would have noticed that though a site inhabited primarily by kids, the Hive's most influenced by the heavy words of people around 17 or older.

Lol With the Light Radius you can still tell the dif between monsters and furniture, since the monsters moved...

Also, the thing that set Ds apart from other games was that it was scary. If you dont like scary, Ds not the game for you, play Titans Quest.
 
Level 13
Joined
Mar 8, 2005
Messages
1,608
http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l318/frostwake/Diablo31.jpg

Which would you rather have, the upper or the lower? That being said, in my opinnion Diablo 3 right now is too bright and cartoonish. It should be darker and grittier, more gothic.

And I'm going to have to say a huge NO to Evil Tyrael just doesn't make sense. He is supposed to be that badass radical angel who is hellbent on destroying evil, NOT GOING EVIL!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top