Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Diablo III Video Interview

Diablo III Video Interview on Ten Ton Hammer speaks with Jay Wilson, Lead Designer on Blizzard's highly anticipated action/RPG sequel. The video offers gameplay footage from preciously released trailers and the conversation covers gameplay changes, Battle.net improvements, and more. The audio is pretty bad, but by no means the worst case of intrusive ambient noise from a show floor we've heard this convention season.

View
21 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >

21. Re: Graphics FTW! Sep 2, 2008, 19:45 Bhruic
 
Diablo 2...no it didn't, far from it. Max res of 800x600 and 2d sprites for graphics

It was worse than that, D2 shipped with 640x480. It wasn't until the LoD add-on that they added 800x600 support.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
20. Re: Graphics FTW! Sep 2, 2008, 18:16 Krovven
 
Thanks for the correction. Must have read the wrong date when I was checking it on the wiki.

I will add though, that C&C Generals about the same time, and it looked much better that WC3.

----------------------------------------------------
Trackmania United Forever, Bionic Commando Rearmed, GRID

PSN= Puscifer73 Trackmania= puscifer604
"Blues News" Steam Community... http://steamcommunity.com/groups/bluesnews/
This comment was edited on Sep 2, 18:35.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
19. Re: Graphics FTW! Sep 2, 2008, 18:11 Animals for Crackers
 
People bitched about Warcraft 3's graphics (2005) not being up to par with other RTS's and the cartoon style art direction

Believe it or not, just double-checked as it's hard for me to believe it's already been nearly seven years, WCIII was released in 2002 and Frozen Throne in 2003! Compared to other RTS at the time it had no rivals, graphically. Your point still stands though when comparing it to games in other genres at the time. Just don't want people thinking WCIII was an eyesore for it's time; the animation and amount of detail was really top-notch for a RTS, aside from the near-perfect gameplay balance.

This comment was edited on Sep 2, 18:12.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
18. No subject Sep 2, 2008, 17:51 Cram
 
You've got the graphics companies like Crytek and ID, and you end up with people complaining about their games. Whether it be support (the lack of), high system requirements, overhyped poor gameplay etc. It's non-stop.

Then you got the gameplay companies like Blizzard, and people complain about graphics. At least the gameplay companies don't themselves bitch about things like piracy (at least in public), because their customer base actually wants to pay $$ for good games. As well, you can except quality from Blizzard. Didn't John Carmack recently say something along the lines of "don't release a flawless product, just release a product that works "ok", that's functional." Jesus Christ monkey balls.

For reasons stated by numerous more-informed people then I on these and other forums, combining both graphics and gameplay seems to be going the way of dinosaurs. I think Resident Evil 4 (console...I know) was the last time graphics/gameplay both excelled and melded well together for me.

This comment was edited on Sep 2, 17:53.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
17. Re: No subject Sep 2, 2008, 17:46 The Half Elf
 
lizzard has always, always been more focused on the art direction on their graphics over the technical aspect. They want to make a game which everyone can enjoy without having to make them go out and buy a brand new system. Sure it may not be up to snuff but if you can capture that much more market space than how can it be a bad thing for them or you?
I guess that when everyone bitched about how Starcraft originally looked, had nothing to do with totally revamping the graphics right?

As it stands now D3 looks great and even if it comes out in 3 years from now I'll still play it.

Has there EVER been a OMGFTWBBQ game that had both awesome graphics and gameplay? Besides Bioshock?

 
Avatar 12670
 
"I've never seen a feature like this before. It warms your ass. It's wonderful" -Walter Bishop
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
16. Re: No subject Sep 2, 2008, 16:53 Krovven
 
While I agree...

...wouldn't it be nice to see a Blizzard game that has high end graphics tech AND has the gameplay to back it up?

Fear the day they do that.

----------------------------------------------------
Trackmania United Forever, Bionic Commando Rearmed, GRID

PSN= Puscifer73 Trackmania= puscifer604
"Blues News" Steam Community... http://steamcommunity.com/groups/bluesnews/
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
15. No subject Sep 2, 2008, 16:24 Wallshadows
 
Blizzard has always, always been more focused on the art direction on their graphics over the technical aspect. They want to make a game which everyone can enjoy without having to make them go out and buy a brand new system. Sure it may not be up to snuff but if you can capture that much more market space than how can it be a bad thing for them or you?

I've never been one to be weary about their choices in graphics as we know from past and present experience that Blizzard is incredibly capable of crafting fine pieces of entertainment which stand the test of time.

For people who are graphics > gameplay: You only contribute to the lack of innovation in this industry and while titles such as Crysis get widespread attention, others like Psychonauts go unnoticed.
 
Avatar 50040
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
14. Re: Graphics FTW! Sep 2, 2008, 16:23 The Raven
 
Very true. Luckily, Blizzard has a long history of ignoring idiots, and so gameplay still reigns supreme and they have not yet released a stinker.  
Avatar 15062
 
Dreaming Demon, formerly Tikatt, formerly The Raven
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
13. Re: Graphics FTW! Sep 2, 2008, 15:05 Krovven
 
Diablo 1 and 2 had very nice graphics for their time.

Diablo 2...no it didn't, far from it. Max res of 800x600 and 2d sprites for graphics, in an age where Darkstone had already been released with a 3D engine. Since day one I've personally thought the Diablo 2's graphics sucked and the choice for a 2D engine when 3D most games had already gone 3D was a poor one. I still played it, and enjoyed it.

People bitched about Starcrafts graphics and the 800x600 fixed res. People bitched about Diablo 2 graphics for the use of a 2D engine and fixed 800x600 res. People bitched about Warcraft 3's graphics (2005) not being up to par with other RTS's and the cartoon style art direction, and stating it looked like a minor update to War2. Starcraft 2, people are saying the same thing, minor graphic update. World of Warcraft, they kept the cartoon style design and people complained. And now Diablo 3, as we all know already know people are complaining about the graphics for that too.


----------------------------------------------------
Trackmania United Forever, Bionic Commando Rearmed, GRID

PSN= Puscifer73 Trackmania= puscifer604
"Blues News" Steam Community... http://steamcommunity.com/groups/bluesnews/
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
12. Re: Graphics FTW! Sep 2, 2008, 14:51 Paranoid Jack
 
I remember the graphics for both Diablo games as being slightly behind the times. At most barely on par with the norm at the time of release. Many complained that D2 should have been fully 3D... hence the update that came out to add a more 3D look to the game-world.

I actually hate to see how graphics have become the water-mark by which all games are judged before the game-play is even taken into account. Graphics are important but not that important.

Seems so many of today's gamers will avoid the best game created due to it's graphics being slightly less than the norm or old-school.

To me the game-play is king. Graphics are great when they add to the game-play but if they don't it doesn't ruin a game as long as it has well rounded game-play.

Take WoW for instance. I didn't care for the graphics at release but the game was fun so I stuck with it. I would have preferred it if they had stuck to the original darker gritty look from the preview videos release back in 2000 and 2001, before they went for that Saturday morning cartoon look.

Either way their graphics were good (some say great) but it was the game-play that keeps people playing and paying even today.

 
Avatar 11537
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
11. Re: Graphics FTW! Sep 2, 2008, 14:26 Muscular Beaver
 
Actually they add a great deal to the atmosphere.
This game looks like its from 2003 or so. Diablo 1 and 2 had very nice graphics for their time. Hell, even if you play the BG or IWD series today (thanks to tutu) in higher resolutions the graphics is still nice. They used similar graphics, though their characters werent as pretty as the Diablo ones.

I could care less for the Star and Warcraft crap But I know that WC2 and 3 had pretty up to date graphics. Even WoW had nice graphics, only the style was pretty... childish?


This comment was edited on Sep 2, 14:33.
 
Avatar 12928
 
Oh that is so lame... You will PAY for your use of inappropriate dialogue!
- Mojo Jojo
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
10. Re: No subject Sep 2, 2008, 14:18 Krovven
 
Uh... those graphics for a 2010 game? It already looks bad for a 2008 game...

Every Blizzard game over the last 10 years, people have complained about the graphics not being up to modern (for the time) standards. This has never stopped them from selling the games and people loving them.

----------------------------------------------------
Trackmania United Forever, Bionic Commando Rearmed, GRID

PSN= Puscifer73 Trackmania= puscifer604
"Blues News" Steam Community... http://steamcommunity.com/groups/bluesnews/
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
9. Graphics FTW! Sep 2, 2008, 14:17 Paranoid Jack
 
Yeah, because we all know that graphics are the most important aspect when it comes to a game's success by far over-shadowing the actual game-play.

 
Avatar 11537
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
8. Re: No subject Sep 2, 2008, 13:48 Muscular Beaver
 
Yeah, Dec. 2010 at best I'd say....

Uh... those graphics for a 2010 game? It already looks bad for a 2008 game...
 
Avatar 12928
 
Oh that is so lame... You will PAY for your use of inappropriate dialogue!
- Mojo Jojo
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
7. No subject Sep 2, 2008, 11:12 Wallshadows
 
Ah yes, the George Brussard Strategy.  
Avatar 50040
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
6. Re: No subject Sep 2, 2008, 10:47 InBlack
 
Who knows if you or I or anyone will LIVE to see D3 eh?

Maybe the Human race wipes itself out in a wild scrap for the last remaining natural resources on Earth.

Or maybe some asteroid will do the job for us.

Or maybe Ill get hit by a car. Meh....Ill have to watch out a bit more in traffic....

Live to see another day...meh...more like....Live to see D3...:P

 
Avatar 46994
 
I have a nifty blue line!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
5. No subject Sep 2, 2008, 10:27 Mr. Tact
 
Yeah, Dec. 2010 at best I'd say....  
Truth is brutal. Prepare for pain.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
4. No subject Sep 2, 2008, 10:22 nin
 

Remember kids, this isn't shipping next month. And probably not a year from next month, either.

------------------------------------------------
http://theslip.nin.com/
"The Bellic boys! Taking over your town, assholes!"
 
http://www.nin.com/pub/tension/
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
3. No subject Sep 2, 2008, 10:19 Mr. Tact
 
The worst thing is, I wouldn't be surprised if he actually said that...  
Truth is brutal. Prepare for pain.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
2. No subject Sep 2, 2008, 10:16 Wallshadows
 
Basically he said Diablo 3 is going to rock the faces off anything when it comes out. Even the Jesus himself will come from the Heavens and wait in line to get his chance to play the new Witch Doctor because his dad is away on vacation and Mary is being a total bitch.  
Avatar 50040
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
21 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo