By John Walker on March 31st, 2009 at 10:17 am.
Asking around the RPS Castle chambers if anyone had anything to add to the news that there were some new Diablo III screenshots (click on the pics), Jim Rossignol immediately ran to the projection whiteboard and thoughtwrote, “there are two Diablo games, but now there is three of it.” This is the reason you visit RPS, and not other sites that apparently persist with existing. But look again, gentles, the inventory system has had a bit of an overhaul.
The latest Blizzcast contains a bundle of new details regarding the third dungeon crawling epic, including more on how the new Rune system will allow you to create far more unique character, with far more unique loot, as well as letting us know about the thinking behind the redesign of the inventory. Bashiok, Blizzard’s community manager, is joined by lead technical artist, Julian Love, and senior artist on UI design, Mike Nicholson.
Last year the inventory had been simplified down to a WoW-type system where all items were one block big. Arms went up, of course, because let’s face it, if they changed the length of the tail on the ‘A’ in the title, there’d be a dedicated forum and furious protests outside Blizzard’s HQ. But I liked the old Tetris inventory, and sure, maybe that makes me some kind of bridge-dwelling freakface who’s feared by the locals, but it was an added element of game. Juggling what I was carrying, weighing up whether I should port back to a shop to ditch a load, or carry on and leave stuff behind. Any how, never mind all that as the new version is a compromise between the two. The inventory is now tabbed, with larger items having their own section of your bulging sacks, another for smaller items, and a third for quest items.
This doesn’t mean bags are going anywhere. Mike Nicholson explains,
“Current design right now is to have bags. You’ll get bags and they will expand, you know kind of like in WoW, except you’re not going to open up separate windows. You’ll start off your inventory with say… you know, eight slots, right, and then you’ll get a new bag and that has ten, so two more slots will open up within that tab, but you’ll never have multiple tabs. Like you won’t have two or three ‘large’ tabs.”
There’s a ton more details about the UI to be found, or read, during the podcast. And don’t forget to click on the pics for full size versions. Spotted via Eurogamer.
31/03/2009 at 11:29 James G says:
Hmm, I quite like inventory tetris, but then again I am a bit odd. However I can’t help thinking that in attempting to simplify things, while still appealing to the old-guard, they may just have ended up making things more complicated and confusing.
31/03/2009 at 11:32 phuzz says:
Ah, but for those of us that never played either of the first two, what’s so interesting about this one?
Actually, I’ve just realised that I don’t think I’ve ever played a Blizzard game.
Apart from 3 minutes of WoW on a friends machine where I ran off a cliff and killed him. Oops.
31/03/2009 at 11:34 Nill says:
I liked the old system as well. They’ve yet quite some time to work on it though, and the fewer “kind of like in WoW” there are, the better.
31/03/2009 at 11:38 Ian says:
Wait a minute, have they changed the length of the tail on the ‘A’???
31/03/2009 at 11:45 axed says:
Meh… still looks like WOW zoomed out.
I’m so dissapointed in Blizzard. D3 was supposed to be the game to take me back to the days when playing a game was an obsessively engulfing experienc. One that was very much so worth your time and didnt leave you feeling like a cheap used whore after a session of play (WoW anyone?).
[Oh good grief, we can do without /fiction about Blizzard fans, thanks - Ed]
Those models look so chunky and low poly… i feel like this is 2001 all over again.
31/03/2009 at 11:49 ChaosSmurf says:
@phuzz – I can’t understand how anyone could have never played a Blizzard game.
31/03/2009 at 11:49 Xercies says:
Still looks to bright for my liking, i think I will just continue to play Diablo 1.
31/03/2009 at 11:50 Garg says:
Oh God, I bet this is going to turn into a huge number of comments on “the scourge of WoW” and how it’s actually “the worst game, like, EVER”.
31/03/2009 at 11:52 Dolphan says:
Axed – that was satire, right? Please?
31/03/2009 at 11:53 ChaosSmurf says:
@axed – other than the part where the models are massively better than their 2001 counterparts, where your opinions expressed as facts are simply opinions and where it doesn’t really look anything like WoW I’d say you’ve hit the nail pretty much on the head.
More seriously, if you’re worried about the models, I wouldn’t be. Almost everything in the game is likely to get another once-over before release (since this is exactly what they’re currently doing with SC2).
Less seriously, you’re an idiot.
31/03/2009 at 11:56 Klapperman says:
@Garg
Too late, “axed” already crapped all over the thread…
31/03/2009 at 12:01 Tek says:
I don’t know if there were pictures of the skill system before, but it looks almost provocatively like the talent system in WoW. I personally think it’s an “ok” way of doing things, but people will disagree. Strongly. Besides, I quite like the interface. I think the creative department has done a great job on that, from an artistic point of view.
31/03/2009 at 12:04 Thelps says:
Well, errrrm, WoW/D3 homophobic metaphors aside (poster above, wow…) I think this’ll at the very least provide another dose of Diablo gameplay, which is why I certainly played the series in the first place. I never particularly found Diablo 2 to be all that dark anyway. Remember the desert section? Broad, sun-drenched daylight. Regardless, I’m sure we haven’t seen the darkest the game gets, and even so, I’m sure Blizzard’s priority is a game that looks good on a wide range of machines not simply the high end. This is Diablo’s first foray into 3D, and Blizzard’s art department have developed a very distinctive style that is consistent throughout WoW, Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3.
As for complexity of gameplay: If you got sick of WoW quickly, I somehow doubt Diablo 3 will make a large difference. It’s not an MMO, but the gameplay mechanics are incredibly similar to WoW. In fact, I remember in my early WoW days how much that game reminded me of Diablo. Granted there were far fewer loot drops, and combat took slightly longer per mob, but the pacing and range of abilities was very similar, and the talent trees a complete graft from D2. Wailing Caverns gave me a serious case of Deja Vu to 4 player Diablo 2 sessions.
I always found Diablo’s atmosphere to be primarily in the music and sound-effects anyway. I mean, nuking your way through a mass of 20 skeletons is hardly conducive to a feeling of creeping horror, regardless.
31/03/2009 at 12:06 Saul says:
@axed: I’d say WoW and Diablo 1/2 are pretty similar in the obsessive/engulfing stakes, though they of course only work for certain people. I found them round about equally dull, and I doubt D3 will do any more for me. Glad they brightened it up a bit, though– at least the screenshots are prettier as I scroll on past.
31/03/2009 at 12:09 axed says:
@Dolphan:
Nope… this game looks childish and cartoony.
@ChaosSmurf:
Yep, opinions made of steel! If you think it doesnt look like WoW then you probably havnt played much WoW… its the same damn color scheme for starters! Also, WE CANNOT ASSUME BLIZZARD WILL REDO THE VISUALS BEFORE RELEASE. That is an amazing waste of resources and time. Also, why would you release half ass material? Why not show fully polished stuff to prevent people like me from valiantly defying this “God” of a developer.
If Blizzard = Jesus
My ambition = to be the spear in his side.
have you all forgotten this thread?
http://diablofans.com/forums/showthread.php?t=10112
2001 was a reference to RTS games making the switch over to 3D and how that itself was like 3d games FPS games 10 years prior*.
*actual dates may vary but hopefully you get the point.
again…
have you all forgotten this thread?
http://diablofans.com/forums/showthread.php?t=10112
31/03/2009 at 12:15 futage says:
“Jim Rossignol immediately ran to the projection whiteboard and thoughtwrote, “there are two Diablo games, but now there is three of it.””
Made me piss myself.
31/03/2009 at 12:16 Ian says:
Now you’ve linked to a thread full of rabid fanboys your point becomes so much more compelling.
“Diablo 3 has humanoids? SO DOES WOW THIS R PHAIL OMGF IM CHOKING ON MY OWN IRRATIONAL HATRED ARRGGGhhhzbxbx….”
31/03/2009 at 12:18 Rob says:
Ooh, pauldron slots.
31/03/2009 at 12:28 Taillefer says:
So. How often did you ditch a load from your bulging sacks, RPS?
31/03/2009 at 12:33 Dexton says:
@Axed, we will never forget that thread. That was the day that the collective internet gaming community had a giant laugh at the expense of the contradiction that is the Diablo fanboy/wow hater.
31/03/2009 at 12:34 FuKuy says:
I like the new style a lot. Keep the good work Blizzard!!
31/03/2009 at 12:34 Ben Abraham says:
I don’t want to seem willfully contrary, but those dudes summoning the demon seriously look like Undead characters from WoW. That’s kinda funny.
And for what it’s worth, I quite liked WoW, I just got busy.
31/03/2009 at 12:39 Heliocentric says:
Bleh, need a demo, not sure blizzard know how to make games anymore, as opposed to tredmills.
If you equate visual darkness with darkness within the emotion of the work, or its theme you =”13 year old goth who is crying at his/her mother for not letting him/her paint his/her bedroom black”.
Dark themes and even moods have nothing to do with pallette, pallettes priority in an interactive medium should be aiding interativity, still I hope they put a “disable wow [fun]ness” option in the graphics setting which reduces the contrast to 10% and gives everything a purple hue.
31/03/2009 at 12:41 axed says:
I’ll admit, this game brings me rage but ill be a “chap” and try to stay on topic of this particular post. I’m not liking the inventory revamp… weapons not visually taking up varying sizes and spaces makes it look a bit dumbed down and intended for a younger audience with a short attention span.
@Ian: i posted that link to help display the visual style that has become as opposed to what it could have been (the fan-made renders)
Yes… ultimately they will make their best efforts to apeal to a younger audience (simpler inventory layout) with a more colorful color palette, usage of widely accepted modern in game tools and concepts (bags for inventory and its size upgrades). I still definitely prefer the 2d look, thought it was pixelated in itself (mainly due to its 800x600res or less), there’s something about chunky 3d models that just throws me out of any mood the game is trying to create and puts me in a child’s play pen with fluffy teddy bears and smiling plastic horses.
@2nd image from top: that looks like something a warlock would conjure in WoW.
Also, yes D2 had some “not so dark” atmospheres… but they still had an eerie feel to them. Looking at these colorful images It feels more like a comedic tribute or a generic emulation of someones vague take on the Diablo universe.
There already is a WoW. There’s no reason to make “WoW with more demons and skeletons but less dwarfs and gnomes. Diablo 3 should have been an MMO with a more mature theme. More like Conan, if you will. And no “Why would Blizzard have 2 MMO’s!?” as they wouldnt be the first, and they would probably be able to pull it off if both MMOs were different in execution.
31/03/2009 at 12:48 danielcardigan says:
I just hope it has auto-click when you hold the mouse button in, like Sacred et al. My carpal tunnel syndrome will never cope with a D1/D2 clickfest. Hmm. I suppose I can alway remap the key away from mouse 1. Maybe some kind of foot pedal would work…
31/03/2009 at 12:51 Clockwork Harlequin says:
Maybe I’m just not in tune with my inner Angry Internet Man, but it amazes me that so much hatred is thrown at WoW. It was the highest earning MMO last year, right? That means it’s extremely popular (among consumers; 97% of “rabid fanboys”) can hate it and it’s still popular). Should we attack Blizzard for making a game they think will sell?
31/03/2009 at 12:59 oceanclub says:
“Hmm, I quite like inventory tetris”
God, I hate it. In any game. It makes no sense, unless you actually do want to play a bag-packing simulator.
P.
31/03/2009 at 13:00 Gladman says:
I also like inventory tetris. You have a whiteboard? Sounds like a propper company.
31/03/2009 at 13:02 Nick says:
Too much Meridian 59 heterosexuality tbh.
31/03/2009 at 13:07 Heliocentric says:
Younger audience? Heh.. You realise that D2′s “darkness” would be very popular with todays tweens? The lightened style is more likely to appeal to adults who, as nature deals have reduced contrast sensitivity. Not seeing something is bad game design… except when its not!
But, i’m not saying your complaints arnt legitimate, but rather i disagree. But i challenge you, make your next post on this topic after you read this a conversation on the things you like about D3, if nothing just state that.
Personally, this game feels like it lives in titans quests shadow, titan quest not having a strict class definition and allowing you to mix styles together, just like guild wars did indeed. and just like no blizzard game ever has. Their balance always structured around a fairly small range of builds.
Often in magical fantasy games i’ll be able to stretch the limitations of the balance to tune my experience, less clicking or more raw power but with lots of micro for example. But i found the click on the little dudes and carefully manage my health was an unavoidable chore in D2. Unavoidable, some times i dont mind dealing with it, others i do. I know a vampiric build can offset the need to potion spam, but the need to spam on enemies is ever present. Indeed, ther are probably mods which fix this but i’ve not played D2 for yonks.
31/03/2009 at 13:11 Tei says:
I am one of these diablo fanbois/wow haters. And I am also a rabid Internet Hate Littel Men. Whatever.
I think part of the problem is that WoW is so well designed (and this is from a WoW hater) that most people misunderstand good design for WoW. Diablo is getting better design, and this naturally make it more like WoW. Good fonts, easy to understand icons, .. etc.. is what define WoW.
I have see a glimpse of the future.. and things looks ugly. I think the Diable that will be release will be a game that willl feel like a off-line Age of Conan, with isometric view.
Theres still few diable things left to be removed.. like the classical Diablo font.
So to me, Blizzard has two options, one is undo some of the solutions to make a game better on this build, and search for new solutions, not the ones that are proven and trued on WoW. And this may or not work. And the other is to continue, and release a game that will be good and cool in all corners, but that will spawn lots of controversy, because I will look somewhat like a “WoW mod”. I suppose Blizzard will continue as we seen on this screenshot. Hence.. my prediction for fun, interesting, internet flame, times.
31/03/2009 at 13:29 The Hammer says:
Still really looking forward to this, though my appeal lies not in the inventories and skill sets, but in the randomized loot and largely non-committal dungeon crawling.
31/03/2009 at 13:34 Martin K says:
That linked Diablo 3 forum thread is…terrifying. Ninety thread-pages of…bullshit. Complete and utter bullshit, containing within its impressive bulk not even the smallest, most minute concentration of actual merit. The number of man-hours wasted on the thing boggles the mind. I suggest all serious contestants in the aforementioned sado-masochistic circle-jerk be neutered, so that the future might be salvaged, even if only in part.
31/03/2009 at 13:34 Markoff Chaney says:
I am a Diablo lover and, while I played WoW for years, I’m off that treadmill now. I was also enamored with Hellgate (yeah, I know) and I’m really looking forward to this iteration of Blizzard clickfest. I, personally, always liked inventory management. It helped slow down the pace and make you make sometimes hard decisions. This looks like I’d only have to lose one big item to get another big item instead of possibly losing 6 1 slot items for a big item.
As long as scarcity is balanced with drops though, this can work out and be a little kinder to those who don’t like playing Tetris lite in the middle of time they have set aside for killing baddies. I’m still a little concerned about Blizzardnet 2.0 but we’ll see how that pans out too. I anticipate another well balanced, finely polished game.
31/03/2009 at 13:45 coco says:
wow! look! its world of warcraft!
31/03/2009 at 14:07 -Spooky- says:
“when it´s done..”
31/03/2009 at 14:10 Nimic says:
I don’t see what this has got to do with WoW. Even if it did, I don’t see what WoW has done to deserve this immense hatred.
31/03/2009 at 14:11 danielcardigan says:
No, this is World of Warcraft.
31/03/2009 at 14:13 SwiftRanger says:
This still looks brilliant, nice to see another new person (Mike Nicholson) from a reputed developer (Dreamforge) doing some great stuff (UI) at Blizzard. This doesn’t look like WoW that much to me and I seriously doubt it’ll play like WoW, playing it is the most important bit here you see, have patience.
Interesting tidbit is that while they were discussing item colours (they’re going back to Diablo 2 colours because it was too much like WoW at first) they discussed magic, unique and set items (if the latter will make it in) but they also said there is a new item type in DIII. Read everything, it’s nice to see Blizzard iterating pretty much every single aspect of the game.
31/03/2009 at 14:14 yutt says:
Oh no! The inventory management is vaguely similar WoW’s (and most other games, and is a natural progression of Diablo’s design)! I am going to make hyperbolic comments about Diablo 3 being the same as WoW (Have you seen? They both have more than 256 colors too!).
If you want to play Diablo 2 – you still can! If you want to play Diablo 3, don’t expect it to be Diablo 2 anymore than Warcraft 3 was the same as Warcraft 2.
31/03/2009 at 14:20 unclelou says:
No other game comes close to how much I look forward to this. Not even remotely.
I do hope the picture with the inventory is a mock-up of sorts though, as the armour he actually wears looks nothing like the inventory item. Oh, how awesome Titan Quest was in that regard!
31/03/2009 at 14:30 Kalain says:
I’m impressed with Diablo3, it looks good and different enough from WoW. I’m wondering if people wondered where WoW’s inventory system came from, or have they forgotten Diablo2 already?
The forum thread is truly a piece of stupid selfish fanboyism gone wild. Their mock ups of Diablo3 look, to me anyway, rubbish. Why have a darkened, washed out game, when you can have darkened, colourful game? Last time I saw, grass was green not grey. No, the new diablo is looking great and I think Blizzard have done a great job on it’s visual style. If people think they can do better, then why don’t they attempt to do it then instead of rant about how they would do it.
31/03/2009 at 14:39 Xocrates says:
I’ve actually been playing some D2 recently, so this actually showed up at the right time.
I admit, I always associated the tetris inventory to Diablo, so I’m kind of sad of seeing it go. However I have no problem with the current one and the arguments for the change make perfect sense.
Curiously enough, one of the things I wanted the most for D2 to be able to do, is perhaps one of the most wow-like things D3 currently has: The skill row near the bottom. Mostly because it allows to chain skills efficiently making for more varied combat (as opposed to D2′s equip skill, cast skill, equip different skill, cast…). Seriously, I know skills better for what F# key I have it bind to than their actual icon or name.
31/03/2009 at 14:43 Zyrusticae says:
Sigh.
I miss the photorealistic inventory icons.
The full-color skill icons also scream “Warcraft!” to me. What was wrong with the stone reliefs used in I and II? Or are they just incapable of replicating that style? That’s the impression I get from the screenshots thus far.
That said, I still look forward to the game. It’s just that, being an eye-candy whore, some part of me is wholly unsatisfied by what I see.
31/03/2009 at 14:58 psyk says:
How long ago did you play d1 cause thats looking seriously better than it did, D2 though the graphics were updated still dosent look as good as this. “Good fonts, easy to understand icons, .. etc.. is what define WoW.” you are kidding right thats how people define WoW wtf.
31/03/2009 at 15:03 psyk says:
sry double post but.
“If Blizzard = Jesus
My ambition = to be the spear in his side.”
HAHAHA Blizzard have already shown that they give not two shits what fanboys have to say.
31/03/2009 at 15:07 teo says:
I agree with Zyrusticae
I loved the realistic style of Diablo II.
Also, the items are still too small. Diablo is ALL ABOUT the items, make them big and awesome. You drool over them because they look cool and have awesome stats
31/03/2009 at 15:12 MaxFrost says:
I agree with a previous poster that when I first played WoW, I thought to myself, “This is how diablo should have been made.” The combat system in World of Warcraft is extremely robust, though if you’re not level cap, you wouldn’t know it. If they were to use the WoW engine in a single player game, it would translate near perfectly, because it’s fluid, continuous, gives lots of feedback, and lets you do cool stuff.
As for the bags, inventory management is a pita. I always felt like I just couldn’t carry enough in D2, and it’s happening to me again in WoW, where _every_ single item mearly fills one bag slot. It’s not so much tetris there as it is bejeweled, but it’s still a small meta-game to keep your bags organized.
31/03/2009 at 15:35 Okami says:
I really have to laugh out loud at the fears of Diablo fanboys, that Diablo III will be a dumbed down game with too many colours, since I remember the time the original Diablo came out. Back then, I regarded it as a stupid and mindlessly dumbed down travesty of an RPG, whose only appeal lay in it’s flashy graphics.
In other words: People are idiots.
31/03/2009 at 15:37 Xocrates says:
@Zyrusticae and teo: Diablo II looks were realistic? When did that happen?
31/03/2009 at 15:51 unclelou says:
Back then, I regarded it as a stupid and mindlessly dumbed down travesty of an RPG, whose only appeal lay in it’s flashy graphics.
In other words: People are idiots.
Hmmmm.
/says nothing
:)
31/03/2009 at 16:01 Zyrusticae says:
@Xocrates
Are you being deliberately obtuse?
We’re talking about the inventory icons, which, if your memory’s lacking, happened to strongly resemble the real-world in terms of material properties, as well as the pre-rendered backgrounds, where stone actually looked like, well, stone, rather than flat, washed-out paper cut-outs. (Which would easily be solved by adding some gawdamn texture noise. Sigh.)
There’s always Google Image Search, y’know: http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&q=diablo+2&gbv=2
31/03/2009 at 16:01 Stenl says:
@Xocrates
Don’t you have little red guys running around your backgarden, casting fire spells and with a big barbarian jumping on them and hitting them with an axe ?
31/03/2009 at 16:06 unclelou says:
Yeah, it’s a fair point. I don’t mind the general cartoony and colourful look at all, but I it’s nice if metal glints like metal.
31/03/2009 at 16:31 Jeremy says:
I can’t say I’m disappointed to see the tetris style inventory go away. For me, it was kinda frustrating and pointless since I always had 8000 town portals to use, it just forced me to make 8 trips to town every time I killed 12 enemies. I don’t want my inventory to be a meta-game, ever. Nostalgia can rose-color even the most nagging and annoying design choices. I think the changes to inventory are a welcome thing and, honestly, the new inventory is for a younger audience and for people with short attention spans? Too much drama for your mama. We need a troll killer.
Now for the discussion on design. Diablo 1 had, what… 4 design tiles? Dungeon, deeper dungeon, lava and even deeper dungeon? If you want the game to have no visual direction and be a drab, uncolored borefest, then just reinstall the original Diablo. Colors do not make something a cartoon, the ability to discern the characters nose from their pixelated eyeball doesn’t make it dumbed down, icons being different than 1 or 2 doesn’t mean this game is betraying the good sensibilities of gothic action. We all see things objectively from the viewpoint of a fan (we like X game for Y reason, so any game similar to X should have Y), but when you begin to see something from the viewpoint of creator, you don’t simply want to recreate something you’ve already done. How boring would that be? Not only that, but it would be unfair to fans to simply make Diablo 1 Redux, that would be a lazy effort.
31/03/2009 at 16:37 phuzz says:
@ChaosSmurf That’s a good question, I’m not sure how I’ve managed to avoid all Blizzard games so far, my only excuse is that up until the last few years I’ve been pretty skint and Blizzard have only really released WoW recently i think? (I don’t do WoW for the same reason I don’t do crack)
Anyway, How exactly are those screenshots ‘too bright’? The bottom two are about 40% black, and both of them would make me want to turn up my contrast. The 2nd one is quite light certainly, but there seems to be a nice balance, it certainly doesn’t look cheerful. I do see what people mean about the slightly chunky polygon style, personally I like it, but yeah, it is noticeable.
From the fanboi reaction and the screenshots above I’d have to assume that the typical Diablo 2 screen was completely black with some grey.
Always fun to get stuck into a flame war when you’re not really bothered much about the game in question, but lets face it, nothing Blizzard do will please the fanbois will it?
31/03/2009 at 16:38 Bhazor says:
I don’t think it’s colourful enough.
I mean Eternal Sonata, Valkyria Chronicles, Okami, Wind Waker, Dragon Quest V-IIX, The Paper Mario games, The World Ends With You, Earth Bound and so on.
Each and everyone a beautiful game that I found myself staring at like a boy seeing a real womans nipple for the first time since breast feeding. RPGs set in worlds I actually want to explore, worlds that left a bulge in my screen from the sheer wieght of style and shazzam that they effortlessly poured over me.
Now imagine those games without the soap opera storylines, dialogue diahorea and irritating characters that plague every rpg I just mentioned. If this is just one step towards getting a mainstream western made rpg with the bravery to make a RPG with more than three colours then it’s already a decade late.
I still won’t buy Diablo 3 though. Because it just has soo much WOW gayness.
31/03/2009 at 16:44 Bhazor says:
On topic I think the key factor with the inventory is whether management’s in real time or not. Because tetrising (tetrissing? teterising? tetorerising?) your stuff will be dang irritating if your in a hurry to go, say before some respawning buggers respawn like buggers. Though if it does pause then yeah I’d kinda miss the tetris minigame.
31/03/2009 at 16:48 fulis says:
@Stenl stop trolling
Maybe you don’t know what art style is
@MaxFrost you’ve played too much WoW
Diablo is an action game
31/03/2009 at 16:49 Dave says:
axed is perversely amusing.
Quake and Diablo I are identical because they have the same color scheme!
Civ 4 and Sid Meier’s Pirates are identical because they have the same color scheme!
Sims 3 and GTA are identical because they have the same color scheme!
Crysis and Battlefield Heroes are identical because they have the same color scheme!
31/03/2009 at 16:58 Jeremy says:
Oh man, I forgot how awesome phat lewtz were in Quake.
31/03/2009 at 17:00 Gorgeras says:
The hostility towards people let down by the cartoon colour scheme of Diablo 3 makes hostility towards Blizzard’s approach seem like a complaint about bird poo on park benches.
My feelings about WoW are mixed; there are bits I adore and bits I see as cynical lowest common denominator gimmicks. WoW’s art direction is by far the thing I am most impressed by. It’s a beautiful virtual world enjoyable to just wander around sometimes. It’s badly let down by a weak core design team that under-use it whilst at the same time over-saturating it and then putting the most viable gameplay not even in the actual world at all. WoW literally could run purely on a lobby system like Battle.net and you team up with a small number of people to fight through a dungeon. No massive server capacity for a persistent world is actually necessary in WoW.
Rather than keep Diablo and Warcraft more distinct than they have done Warcraft and Starcraft, Diablo has had awfully poor art direction. It’s like someone saw how great WoW’s aesthetics were and decided to copy it by the cart-load without regard to the thought that the style was appropriate *for the setting* that Warcraft is.
Star Trek has been around long enough that the nerd-rage that would follow if a ST sitcom series was made would be understandable. Hell, the nerd-rage over Enterprise’s theme song was VERY understandable to anyone that ever heard it.
Warcraft can not dumb down art-wise because it is basically a cartoon on appearance with subtle themes, like South Park: it can only dumb down if the little things that make it great are neglected.
But Diablo is the anti-Warcraft. It’s a bleak setting, an esoteric nightmare on appearance with a cartoon being it’s subtext, like Evil Dead 2. When people see this realism-based cartoon(like a Manga) change so drastically they realise this is no longer going to be a cartoon inside a nightmare but a cartoon inside a cartoon. It shows that the point of Diablo has been missed and makes me pine for the game that Hellgate should have been. When Warhammer Online looked like it was going to be a very strong MMO, Blizzard reacted and some of the strongest ideas were put in the pipeline. Had Hellgate not been a wet toilet roll with an ill-advised premium subscription, it might have provoked similar reflection of Diablo 3.
The entire world of imaginary worlds has been turned upside down, imaginably.
31/03/2009 at 17:02 Bhazor says:
Reply to Dave
Actually I think Pirates! and Civ 4 had the same engine.
31/03/2009 at 17:12 Heliocentric says:
Yo momma has the same colour scheme as a 2c whore.
31/03/2009 at 17:23 Kirkburn says:
And the conversation above is why I love my unicorn Diablo tshirt from NerdyShirts. I love the current design, and I love my tshirt :)
31/03/2009 at 17:33 357SIG says:
Looks like a lot of you need to give sacred 2 a whirl, the game is nowhere near as buggy as it was on launch and it’s quite good. The world is huge AND fun to explore not only due to how pretty it is but also how much crap there is to do. honestly i think it’s the game that ruined diablo for me. It doesn’t take itself too seriously and the character classes are…. different… but the same. Good fun to play with a friend, we’ve played for hours with different characters and still only explored a minute amount of the content.
http://screenshot.xfire.com/screenshot/natural/a0b51e7209e8e697a8646e89ed19277772146fef.png
http://screenshot.xfire.com/screenshot/natural/cdfaf6bed09ac15fb73cb91475a30a92bd7fcb82.png
http://screenshot.xfire.com/screenshot/natural/fbad181f2d8697dafe8661fee8c1671f4ce1f60a.png
31/03/2009 at 18:11 dhex says:
i found the first sacred pretty crap next to titan quest.
actually i don’t think i’ve enjoyed a roguelike timewaster that hates you more than titan quest.
31/03/2009 at 18:26 BigJonno says:
I never “got” Diablo. I blame the control scheme and my incredibly short attention span when it comes to games revolving around repetitive and allegedly compulsive gameplay.
Anyway, when I look at or play any of the Diablo-style games, it strikes me how similar they all are. Same perspective, same gameplay mechanics, same loot systems, same levelling systems. Kinda like how most FPS games, or beat ‘em ups, or MMORPGs are, on many levels, virtually identical. However, some of them are great and some of them are complete bollocks.
What this says to me is that you can’t judge the quality of a game from screenshots and videos, especially Diablo-style ones. Blizzard haven’t made a bad game yet, the fanboys should chill out, wait for the game to be released and have a little faith.
31/03/2009 at 18:26 Subject 706 says:
I kind if look forward to Diablo 3, but a nagging voice in the back of my head keeps telling me I don’t like the ‘click click click splat’ gameplay anymore. I shall try and suppress it.
31/03/2009 at 18:27 Nick says:
Titan Quest coop was amazingly good fun with teamspeak. Hopefully I will be reliving that with Diablo 3 coop and the same people.
31/03/2009 at 18:31 Johnny Go-Time says:
The Jim quote is the funniest thing I’ve read all week!!!
Well worth the price of clicking on the RPS entry in my bookmarks menu.
31/03/2009 at 18:56 Dave says:
I really don’t like the art direction or style of Warcraft III or WoW, but I am totally not seeing that in Diablo III screenshots. ::shrug::
31/03/2009 at 19:24 axed says:
@ Gorgeras
Well said. Very well said. If I could only release my mind from the twisted and agonizingly perverse thoughts that bind it to my head perhaps I could have come up with a sensible, calm, and respectable angle of attack such as yours.
But I would like to make it clear that I am not a Blizzard fan boy nor am I a Diablo fan boy. However, the series nearly defined my gaming youth and I believe I deserve the right to yearn for something better than what is currently cooking in the pot. At this point I don’t want the recipe changed… I want the cook to be fired and I want the restaurant to be shut down… many rats hide within these walls and the air is filled with the stench of feces, and decaying roaches.
31/03/2009 at 19:48 Azradesh says:
@ axed
Fun fact 1: WoW is heavily based on Diablo 2 if you can’t see that then you’ve not played much D2 :P
Fun fact 2: D2 is actually quite bright, sometimes even bright neon green.
31/03/2009 at 20:30 bhlaab says:
I’ve never cared for Diablo, and Diablo clones even less. It’s just all so pointless… get equipment in order to get better equipment in order to get better equipment.
Actually, thinking about it, the only Blizzard game that I can remember enjoying is Lost Vikings. When are they going to do another one of those?
31/03/2009 at 20:33 Xocrates says:
@axed: You manage to conclude all that from a picture of a dish being cooked?
…
Do you live under a bridge and give away business cards?
31/03/2009 at 20:51 teo says:
I paid for Sacred 1
I’m not making that same mistake again
31/03/2009 at 21:02 DD says:
Anything revolving around Diablo 3 just sends chills down my spine at the awesomeness. But not as much as StarCraft 2……
Blizzard has a flawless track record for game making and i doubt they can screw that up with the mountains of cash they now have.
31/03/2009 at 21:15 Funky Badger says:
Can something be “more unique”?
31/03/2009 at 21:17 Fumarole says:
I say no, but it is just one of those words most people seem to use incorrectly.
“The primary meaning of unique is ‘one of a kind’; it’s an absolute, so something can’t be more unique than something else.” (Fogarty, Grammar Girl’s Quick and Dirty Tips 66).
31/03/2009 at 21:20 Frankie The Patrician[PF] says:
I still consider Diablo 1 better than Diablo II…. I still can’t get the Hell music from my head, the pureness of the gameplay…ahhhh..alright, alright, I’m out :)
31/03/2009 at 21:51 Archonsod says:
I’ve always preferred the Sacred series. I think where Diablo went wrong was it was a tad too linear. At least in Sacred you get a choice of background upon which to violently assault innocent kobolds for their loot.
So how long before Jack declares it a mugging simulator then?
31/03/2009 at 21:59 Gorgeras says:
Some facts about Azradesh’s fun facts.
1. Fact number one is not a fact, it’s an opinion.
2. Fact number two isn’t quite clear. Diablo 2 has bright points, undeniably. It can not be argued however that they make up the bulk of the art direction at all. The one obviously bright Act in the desert has you frequently popping underground out of the light and Blizz even knew they wouldn’t get away with it without a good old fashioned supernatural eclipse.
If we are going by a 32-bit colour pallette, then it’s firmly verifiable which range among the shades Diablo 2 favours if we go annoy the artists. But I think it’s sufficient to say that most people simply agree that Diablo 2 was dark.
31/03/2009 at 22:22 Zyrusticae says:
Complaining about the “brightness” or “colorfulness” misses the point – the game is just too “washed-out”, and too primitive-looking in terms of graphics technology. There’s a lack of texture noise, which is particularly noticeable in a comparison between Diablo 2 and Diablo 3 (you rarely ever find two pixels of the same shade sitting right next to each other in Diablo 2), and the graphics no longer have that realistic “sheen” that’s seen in Diablo 2, particularly with the item graphics.
That’s my primary complaint. It has nothing to do with how “dark” it is, or how many “colors” are on the screen at any one point in time – Diablo 2 had bright points, and it had plenty of colors. It’s the lack of visual noise and, frankly, how utterly craptacular (seriously, Starcraft 2 vs. Diablo 3 – wtf?) the graphics are that has me miffed.
31/03/2009 at 22:23 Arathain says:
You know, if the phrase “dumbed down” utterly disappeared from the vocabulary of everyone in the world (but most particularly that segment of it that posts on the Internet) I think the world would actually be a noticeably better place.
I find myself feeling strangely nostalgic about the Tetris inventory system, but then I remind myself that when I play Titan Quest I make extensive use of the organise-my-darned-inventory-for-me button. So clearly I won’t miss it at all.
I’m very excited about D3. I love that they’ve removed player stat upgrades on levelling (pointlessly numerical increases with effects hard to detect or anticipate) in favour of greater skill customisation. Fiddling with numbers: a bit boring. Fiddling with new ways to deliver pyrotechnic thunder-blam-kerpow-death? Eeenteresting
“Can something be “more unique”?”
Nope.
31/03/2009 at 22:28 Azradesh says:
You think it’s an opinion? Wow, just wow.
WoW even shares some of the some spells and abilites as D2 (for example a fury speced warrior is like a crap barbarian). The talent system is based on D2, the item system is based on D2 and I think the whole idea of set items is a diablo thing (I don’t know if some other game did it first)
As for D2′s darkness, yes it was dark, but that doesn’t mean it lacked colour, that just means it lacked light. The game has quite bright colours.
31/03/2009 at 22:42 Panther says:
Has anyone who has viewed more of the screenshots and videos tell me how the dungeons and backgrounds are in comparison to D2?
The first time you go into the Harem in Lut Gholein for example, bodies everywhere in various states. It gets you on edge, a little reminder of the demons you are up against.
31/03/2009 at 22:58 ack says:
Can’t help myself. Did someone actually express fear that D3 would be aimed at a younger audience? As in dumbed down? As in not much of depth in any but the clicking department?
Sounds like it’s going to be its elders peer then.
/me dons fireproof suit
31/03/2009 at 23:57 Logo says:
Am I missing something or is the UI? Where’s the mana? Is D3 using an alternative energy system for different classes (ala WoW)?
01/04/2009 at 00:12 Xocrates says:
@Logo: Yes, they are. I believe they expand the particular one being shown in the podcast.
01/04/2009 at 02:15 357SIG says:
@Sacredhaters
Sacred 2 is a completely different animal
01/04/2009 at 02:40 Derek K. says:
This game looks like a reskinned Doom: Fall of Mars. What’s so interesting about that?
01/04/2009 at 05:11 Logo says:
@Xocrates thanks, read through the transcript and saw the info.
How originial, barbarian is using the rage system from WoW’s warriors. Sure they call it ‘fury’ but it’s the same freaking mechanic… They could have at least been original and mixed the archetypes that go with the mechanics. I can’t wait for the amazon/assassin hybrid character that has a very limited bar that starts full and regenerates very quickly.
01/04/2009 at 05:14 Logo says:
Wish I had an edit, reading over it again I wanna clarify that I know it’s a tiered rage system rather than the traditional WoW one but it’s still the same system just tweaked to work for the pace of diablo.
01/04/2009 at 06:41 unclelou says:
“@Sacredhaters
Sacred 2 is a completely different animal”
Sacred 2 didn’t work for me at all. Can’t really put the finger on it, as the basics are all there, but I didn’ even finish it. As similar as all these games are, if the “flow” doesn’t work for someone, it’s entirely ruined. Sacred and Saced 2 made me understand why some people think Diablo is a boring clickfest. But then I know people felt the same about Titan Quest, which I put more hours in than I would publically post. :-)
It’s a genre without average games. It either works, then it’s brilliant, or it does’t, and then it’s a total failure. And as this seems to be entirely subjective, only buying all of them and finding out for myself seems to help.
01/04/2009 at 08:52 axed says:
Nope. I live under a business card and pass out bridges.
There are a lot of comments linking similarities between D3 and WoW and WoW and D2… i see very little discussion linking D2 and D3. HAH! This leads us to believe that WoW built upon many existence mechanics from D2 and, from what we have seen, D3 is doing the same but with WoW as its base and D2 as a distant 2nd cousin it once met at a family gathering.
Not much has been mentioned, either, regarding the lack of light radius. This may be added in later… it will definitely help. D1 and D2′s light radius really pushed the “alone and hopeless” atmosphere, along with both games’ spectacular soundtracks.
Isnt the D3 dev team almost void of any D1/D2 devs? I still say D3 should have been an MMO that pushed an absense of cute/cuddly crap and simple environments/textures. Blizzards games always debut with poor performance except to the elite few with $$$ machines. I doubt their main motive for the simple environments/low poly models/lack of texture masks is due to performance efficiency. Its more welcoming to the eye of the casual gamer (most people initially hate the light radius element from the older games) and more importantly for $$$ its very welcoming to a WoW player. Very familiar looking environment… people hate change and this looks lke something every WoW player will want to play, regardless of their interest in the previous ones. [Stop it with the homophobic adjuncts.]
01/04/2009 at 09:45 Xocrates says:
“Blizzards games always debut with poor performance except to the elite few with $$$ machines.”
@axed: You’re talking about the Blizzard that launched a 2D game locked at 640×480 in 2000?
01/04/2009 at 10:13 Kommissar Nicko says:
This is why we can’t have nice things, RPS. This.
01/04/2009 at 11:10 unclelou says:
“I still say D3 should have been an MMO”
Burn, heathen.
“Blizzards games always debut with poor performance except to the elite few with $$$ machines. ”
Are you quite serious? If there’s one dev that caters for the lowest end possible for an AAA (in lack of a better term) game, with games that are never ever technically anywhere near the top, it’s Blizzard.
01/04/2009 at 11:44 Butler` says:
Blizzards games always debut with poor performance except to the elite few with $$$ machines.
ye……….
no.
And blizzard are KNOWN for average-at-best graphical detail compensated with brilliant art direction. Diablo 2 was a prime example of this at the time.
01/04/2009 at 14:54 MrFake says:
Poor choice of character silhouette in the equipment window. Is that slot for pants, or customisable penis attachments? Can I drop the club in there and swing my hips around to use it as a weapon?
01/04/2009 at 14:58 wrshamilton says:
I can’t decide whether these comments make me want to quit gaming or the internet. I thought this blog was supposed to be like sophisticated.
01/04/2009 at 15:09 Meat Circus says:
I wish I were a witch doctor.
01/04/2009 at 15:22 Malagate says:
Meat, I’m pretty sure there’s a correspondance course through the Open U that can help you with that, just be sure to get your Witch Bsc first. You could also get it as a minor as part of a Law degree.
01/04/2009 at 15:31 Meat Circus says:
Can I get an official ‘smiting with locusts’ license before Summer?
01/04/2009 at 15:36 Malagate says:
Maybe, if you can get on the fast track course, and pay the fee of two sacrificial virgin goats up front.
01/04/2009 at 15:48 Hmm-hmm. says:
Let’s just say that while I still think that, at that point (considering the (lack of) information available), I really liked the darker areas in Diablo 2. And as such wouldn’t mind seeing such in Diablo 3, as I found those darker places more.. foreboding. Also, plenty of folks here (me included probably) show a tendency to judge larger groups / games without any thought for.. uh.. reason beyond the obviously stereotypical. Or there’s really such a thing as the RPS-hivemind..
That or I suck at the internet. :P
Now that’s over with, I had somewhat of a love/hate relationship with Diablo’s inventory system. And really, bashing it because it’s different and inspired by WoW seems pointless to me. I mean, it’s an inventory system. For me, at any rate, inventory systems are not what make or break a game purchase. The functionality of the entirety of the UI is another thing.
..as long as I can stash at least as much stuff in it as I could in D2.
01/04/2009 at 15:58 Jeremy says:
The pants are where the pants should be. Blizzard has always allowed people with mid range computers to play their games. I’m one of those mid-rangers and have never had a problem with them.
@axed, you seem to find it cataclysmic that D2 carried elements over to WoW and in turn, WoW will carry elements over to D3. However, I will say this, Blizzard is a game company that has not missed yet with a computer title, it has years and years of experience with creating games and creating an awesome UI to allow the user to play it well. So, a company is going to use the assets it has at it’s disposal and one of those assets is the ability to create a slick and usable interface. Someone has said it before, but you’re confusing an intelligent user interface for “dumbing down” and “copycat design”. The reality is that there is no point in changing a user interface just for the sake of changing it. If certain mechanics work across multiple platforms and genres, then why would the company change it for no reason? How many companies have used the very same mechanics in their games, borrowed from Blizzard? Nobody complains about that, because the controls, UI and mechanics all make sense. Should we place the health bubble in the upper center, key commands along the left wall and a mini map in the lower right? These similarities are not damning to this game, it just means that Blizzard is going to use its expertise to make the game that much better, and we’re already going to know how to play it right out of the box.
01/04/2009 at 16:22 axed says:
My argument is based on the sake of tradition. Tradition is a difficult thing to break and D3 is looking like it will feel too much unlike its predecessor. Its why we still see wooden ladders at hardware supply stores… theres no reason to buy one as aluminum ladder is superior in every way but wooden ladders still exist. D1 to D2 was a great transformation… this one? not so much it seems (with regard to tradition and maintaining that Diablo charm).
01/04/2009 at 16:57 psyk says:
axed basically when it comes down to it D1 and D2 looked like crap and nowadays they look even worse than they once did if you don’t like what there doing don’t buy it go and play D2 with mods.
01/04/2009 at 17:27 Gorgeras says:
Azradesh,
Because no game could possibly have a *few* of the abilities from an earlier game without possibly not being based on it in some way?
Considering how many abilities there are in Warcraft 3 that match up with those from Diablo 2, is there any reason to not make the same claim regarding them? It would seem ridiculous to do so.
*No one* is saying Diablo 2 doesn’t have bright bits, but you will be hard pressed to get a majority of people to agree that the game was not dark overall.
01/04/2009 at 18:35 Jeremy says:
Tradition-breaking is always a gamble for any development team, but I think what we have seen so far is great. Taking away potions at first seems crazy, but then I remember how much I hated the concept of potions, basically having one hand on a potion button at all times. I spent more time watching my health orb than anything else during battles. Auto-picking up gold is a great thing, it was so annoying to have to individually pick up each pile. The destructible environments are also pretty amazing, it provides a huge level of immersion in the game and makes it seem like you’re actually impacting things. It seems like the major concern is just the color scheme, but I think until we actually can see it on our own screens, it’ll be hard to judge it.
01/04/2009 at 21:25 underdweller says:
This will be an awesome game.
01/04/2009 at 22:18 Azradesh says:
Gorgeras,
Sigh
01/04/2009 at 22:19 Erlam says:
Yeah, Diablo 2 looked so realistic, check those graphics.
01/04/2009 at 22:58 axed says:
lets prove a point by highlighting a piece of the game that was meant as an easter egg/ridiculous fun. i would take 2d photorealististic textures over these bland 3d screenshots any day. same reason why mortal kombat 1-3 are superior to anything made with their chunky 3d models.
02/04/2009 at 02:40 Zyrusticae says:
@Erlam
That screenshot is overbright (does anyone actually play the game with the brightness set that high?) and obviously focuses on the joke level, so I fail to see your point. (And even regarding all that, the game *still* looks better than Diablo 3…)
02/04/2009 at 07:43 perilisk says:
“Yeah, Diablo 2 looked so realistic, check those graphics.”
Stylistically, as compared to the cartoonish graphics of WC3 or (to a lesser extent) WOW, yes, your picture still supports it. Both of the earlier Diablos, while portraying fantastic material (realistic isn’t referring to the actual plausibility of fighting hordes of bipedal cow-demons), used a style that leaned toward faux-photorealistic versus obviously stylized. Now Blizzard apparently wants to have a signature style — which is their prerogative, but may disappoint fans, who are more likely to expect stylistic cohesion from a series rather from a company.
It’s not necessarily that a less realistic style can’t convey the unease and ‘wrongness’ that psychologically evokes horror (or Tim Burton would be a sad, sad man). It’s just that we haven’t seen Blizzard do it, that their efforts thus far aren’t especially convincing, and that the evolution from Diablo 1 through LOD (not even considering D3) has been from gothic horror to heroic fantasy.
Obviously, none of this has any bearing on gameplay, and I for one won’t miss inventory tetris and think they found a workable compromise. Honestly, if it was up to me I would just drop selling items to shops altogether, let monsters drop gold, and use gold for minor services (scrolls, potions, repairs, basic level weapons and armor, etc). If you need an item or want to trade with other players, pick it up. Otherwise, ignore it and get back to killing monsters. Inventory management is compulsive, but not fun, not unlike any number of basic biological needs.
02/04/2009 at 10:00 antonymous says:
This is shaping up into the most boring game ever. Just looking at the screenshots I can smell a whiff of cheese. But I know it’s just the socks gathering progress under my table.
02/04/2009 at 17:41 Erlam says:
I meant it as a joke (hense, you know the joke level) but when Diablo 2 came out, it was ugly as HELL! Come on, guys, don’t try to pretend it was anything less than that – and I liked the game, I did – but it took an expansion before the game got 640 x 480 resolution.
is this somehow more realistic, and ‘better looking’ than this? Come on.
This is like reading a forum where people complain that a PS3 game looks ‘worse’ than a PS2 game. Are we even looking at the same stuff, here?
02/04/2009 at 22:00 Zyrusticae says:
First of all:
Get your facts straight. The game launched with 640×480 resolution, and the expansion added 800×600 resolution.
Secondly: That screenshot was obviously taken with the lowest visual settings (seriously, no shadows for the skeletons? Really?). I can easily find a better example, and I’ve done exactly that for you: http://www.cheats.ru/uploaded/d/diablo2-02325.jpg
Lastly: Diablo 3 is barely more technically advanced than Diablo 2. In fact, in some ways it’s inferior. The only major advances Diablo 3 brings are 3D models and better animations. That, and higher resolutions. The shading is actually inferior to the pre-rendered 2d sprites Diablo 2 uses – for that matter, there’s not much in the way of shading in the game at all. No normal mapping? Really? In a game set to be released in 2010/2011? For that matter, texture resolutions that would have been appropriate well over five years ago? Really? I just can’t understand why anyone would defend that. At the very least, have options for those of us whose computers were actually updated within the last 18 months! It’s very easy to argue that the polygon counts of the pre-rendered models in Diablo 2 are much, much higher than that of Diablo 3′s models. And that’s bad. At least Starcraft 2 makes an effort, at that!
16/09/2009 at 02:57 Anonymous says:
Diablo 3 is definitely a game i am going to look at, but i think axed has a pretty good point in saying that this game looks like it is going to break valuable tradition.
Along with the title of a game comes tradition, so if the developers are going to set forth on some project to develop DIABLO 3, then they should follow tradition. If this game ends up being completely different, then they should have just announced some other new series, not a new Diablo.
19/04/2011 at 07:26 Marthinho says:
I don’t want to whine before Diablo 3 will actually become public, but I’m a little bit scared that too many people will stick to Diablo 2 because they don’t like the new game. It’s so much different regarding graphic, camera view and gameplay that there is a good chance of that.
There’s not really many similarities with the old editions of Diablo, they even renamed the runes!
I still like that game alot and will most certainly play it, but will probably still continue to play Diablo 2