Exactly, people forget that this is what Diablo 2 looked like:
http://www.cheats.ru/uploaded/d/diablo2/diablo2-04521.jpg
http://www.gamershell.com/static/screenshots/12758/276866_full.jpg
Last edited by a moderator:
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Diablo III Open Beta Weekend
- Thread starter HardOCP News
- Start date
Exactly, people forget that this is what Diablo 2 looked like:
http://www.cheats.ru/uploaded/d/diablo2/diablo2-04521.jpg
http://www.gamershell.com/static/screenshots/12758/276866_full.jpg
Umm, I think you might be the one on a tanget because I don't recall Pelo ever being the focus of a discussion regarding Diablo 3. The rest of us are talking about Diablo 3 and general arguments from it's detractors, Pelo is not so important that anyone is focusing or should focus on his opinion.
Valshistixol
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2011
- Messages
- 1,809
It's not about colors, it's about art styles. The people who don't like the art are talking about art while everyone who loves the game talks about colors.
IT'S NOT ABOUT COLORS.
Yet plenty of them gripe about it. They either complain about the colors and that it isn't dark and dreary enough, or complain that it looks like this:
http://www.gamershell.com/static/screenshots/1764/202089_full.jpg
Of course anyone complaining that Diablo 3 looks like that apparently needs to pay a visit to the optometrist.
Last edited by a moderator:
misfitsfiend
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2003
- Messages
- 1,293
the UI definitely feels WoWish to me, but it doesn't really bother me that much tbh. hopefully they'll extend the open beta since it seems nobody's getting to play much anyway!
4saken
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2004
- Messages
- 13,171
i unno. I wish the gfx were better, BUT, it feels like Diablo, and thats whats important to me. Going to be a TON of fun regardless.
cant wait for the full version in a few weeks.
cant wait for the full version in a few weeks.
sfsuphysics
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2007
- Messages
- 15,993
So what's with the "tiers" of armor? Forgive me as I've never played WoW, but is there some innate level with your armor that translates to what your little character's picture looks like? So if you have some godly plate mail armor, your wizard who's wearing it is still going to look like they're wearing robes and shit?
PornoSatan
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2004
- Messages
- 3,493
Yes, and in both games it's called ilevel or ilvl for short. It's basically used to determine how much stats (how powerful) an item can be. So just to throw some random numbers out there, "tier 5" in Diablo 3 might be equal to "ilvl 25". If it's anything like Diablo 2 in this regard, ilvl will be tied to mlvl (monster level) and just be used as a basis to determine what drops from who. Obviously, the higher the ilvl, the more potential stats an item can have.
PornoSatan
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2004
- Messages
- 3,493
Also, in terms of really good items such as a unique, the ilvl and mlvl also function as a guide to what monsters can drop it. Any unique with an ilvl of 40 can only drop from monsters with an mlvl of 41 or whatever. Since bosses themselves are "special", this means bosses usually have a higher mlvl. So for example that cool 2 handed unique sword may have an ilvl of 15, but the max mlvl of monsters in act 1 may only be 12, so they won't be able to drop the sword, the boss on the other hand might have an mlvl of 20, and would be able to.
This forms the basis for the addiction in Diablo 2, finding those types of items and killing the bosses over and over.
This forms the basis for the addiction in Diablo 2, finding those types of items and killing the bosses over and over.
You'll be waiting around 3-4 years before it hits the bargain bin. SC2 only just hit 30 dollars for a short period of time last November on amazon. Its back up to 45ish dollars and thats almost 2 years after release. Blizzard games hold their value surprisingly well. All I can say is good luck getting it below 45 unless you're vigilant about sales, or want to wait several years. Not saying that you shouldn't wait, just letting you know the facts I guess.
Just "defeated the beta" today. Didn't live up to my expectations, and I'm with most of the complaints online, but it's overall a decent game.
I think I felt the same way about sc2 at release, having been a hardcore sc1 player back in the days. At first I thought the game was shit, but over time I realized it's a good game and worth playing. Hope d3 will make me feel the same way.
I think I felt the same way about sc2 at release, having been a hardcore sc1 player back in the days. At first I thought the game was shit, but over time I realized it's a good game and worth playing. Hope d3 will make me feel the same way.
I played a little earlier this morning but the server went down and has stayed down. Is this what I have to look forward to if I purchase the game? Not being able to play. It played like the old Diablo and I guess after all this time I was expecting something ground breaking. I might pass on this because of the DRM. I don't like being locked out of a single player game by an online all the time requirement.
You jerkface!
It's just a game that hasn't lived up to expectations because Blizz is rehashing models/artistic styles. How this surprises anybody who's played Warcraft, WoW or SC, I'm not sure. Rather than embracing a completely different doom and gloom style that was true to Diablo of old, they went with their bread and butter and assumed people would buy that shit up. No thanks. If Bethesda can make Skyrim look and feel that way on a console and PC then so can Blizzard, but they've become lazy and apathetic.
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Ac...blo-3-Steve-Parker-Senior-Producer,14539.html
http://www.gamefront.com/blizzard-on-diablo-3-lower-those-expectations/
More than 10 years after D2 came out and 7-and-a-half years since WoW launched, this is a completely different, unoriginal and lazy Blizzard. Having played through the decline of WoW's golden age and seeing the half-assed approach the developers had in releasing "new" content, this Diablo 3 game looks to be the same shit all over again.
I'm glad they had beta weekend a month before release to get their server issues fixed or at the very least understand the issue.
@pelo
There are many aspects to game design, one of them is artistic / story design. Diablo 3 is just a sequel to Diablo 2 and Diablo, I wouldn't expect them to stray too far from that. On top of that, their art department is responsible for all 3 of their games. If you prefer some other doom and gloom style game, you'll have to buy a game that isn't from Blizzard and probably not named "Diablo".
I don't think you realize how difficult it is to come up with new content that isn't a sequel. On that note, I really doubt that Blizzard is sitting there playing miniature golf and sipping tea while releasing sequels.
Sorry, I meant a completely different doom and gloom style than the WoW cartoony approach they have now. Like one that was in the first 2 Diablo games...?
It's not about content, whatever that means, but something that resembles Diablo more than it does WoW. They failed at that. They just didn't capture me like the first 2 games did. It's not an issue of me being pissy here, either. There are games that I absolutely loved, like Skyrim for instance. Bethesda did extremely well in creating a certain atmosphere and look in order to tell a story that also fits very well with that. Dragon Age 2 is another game that I loved but most despised. I thought the story line was fantastic and the world was great too, despite the fact that there were only 3 different dungeons in the whole game
The characters, the art, the style and the gameplay just fit together very well. Diablo 3 doesn't have that. The first 2 Diablo games had that doom and gloom. The game itself was dark. They had decent graphics for its time, but more importantly is that the looks fit the story. This game strays in a completely different direction and the plot, unless it's got Pandas and Tauren, won't fit the scenery.
There's also no excuse for making it look that crappy. Blizzard makes shitty looking titles. We all know this and it's not surprising. The fault here is that the look doesn't match what the game is: Diablo. Skyrim isn't amazing graphically. It's on DX9 and a console port at heart. But you know what? It's dark and gloomy and still manages to look great. D3 on the other hand looks like it was made 10 years ago and doesn't carry the same feel.
The worst part is that Blizzard games tend to have length. You can't play them for 5 minutes and put them down. They're usually something that take up months of your time and you never really feel like you finish them. Diablo 3, though, just feels like Starcraft 2. I'll play for the story and then maybe online a bit and never bother to log in again.
It's not about content, whatever that means, but something that resembles Diablo more than it does WoW. They failed at that. They just didn't capture me like the first 2 games did. It's not an issue of me being pissy here, either. There are games that I absolutely loved, like Skyrim for instance. Bethesda did extremely well in creating a certain atmosphere and look in order to tell a story that also fits very well with that. Dragon Age 2 is another game that I loved but most despised. I thought the story line was fantastic and the world was great too, despite the fact that there were only 3 different dungeons in the whole game
The characters, the art, the style and the gameplay just fit together very well. Diablo 3 doesn't have that. The first 2 Diablo games had that doom and gloom. The game itself was dark. They had decent graphics for its time, but more importantly is that the looks fit the story. This game strays in a completely different direction and the plot, unless it's got Pandas and Tauren, won't fit the scenery. There's also no excuse for making it look that crappy. Blizzard makes shitty looking titles. We all know this and it's not surprising. The fault here is that the look doesn't match what the game is: Diablo. Skyrim isn't amazing graphically. It's on DX9 and a console port at heart. But you know what? It's dark and gloomy and still manages to look great. D3 on the other hand looks like it was made 10 years ago and doesn't carry the same feel.
The worst part is that Blizzard games tend to have length. You can't play them for 5 minutes and put them down. They're usually something that take up months of your time and you never really feel like you finish them. Diablo 3, though, just feels like Starcraft 2. I'll play for the story and then maybe online a bit and never bother to log in again.
What this sounds like to me.
"McDonald's is so bad for your health, the worst part is the super-size option. I'm going to go out and buy a big mac and eat it. I'm going to dislike every second of me eating it."
Come one, man.. Quill Rats were NEVER in Act 2; Don't post D2 mods and claim that they were Vanilla D2.
But I agree, people have long forgotten D2's vast variety of color palettes.
Beat it twice. Once with Demon Hunter and once with Monk. Monk isso much more fun that it makes Wizard and Demon Hunter seem pretty boring in comparison. And I love ranged characters. It's a bit sad.
I'm slowly warming up to it, but it's still horrible in comparison to what it was before. (Skill system/UI) *Sigh*
I'm slowly warming up to it, but it's still horrible in comparison to what it was before. (Skill system/UI) *Sigh*
Manaknight
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2005
- Messages
- 5,446
haven't been interested in d3 this time around. Had a bunch of friends txting the shit out of me to play this weekend.. cozied up to the tera open beta instead.
I don't know... it's just not wowing me yet...and i was big into d1/d2
I don't know... it's just not wowing me yet...and i was big into d1/d2
wiseoracle
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2002
- Messages
- 2,305
You'll be waiting years. You should know better that Blizzard games keep their value for years.
kcmastrpc
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- May 26, 2011
- Messages
- 1,300
I only got to play for about 2 hours this weekend (thats about all I get to game through the week) - and I'll probably pick this up in the FS/FT boards.
MavericK
Zero Cool
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2004
- Messages
- 31,897
Not that it's "bargain bin" but SC2 was only released about a year and a half ago and it's down to under $40. It'll happen, and it depends entirely on how popular the game ends up being. From what I've seen there's a pretty decent split of those who think it's awesome and those who are waiting for price drops.
Intel_Hydralisk
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2005
- Messages
- 4,743
Good luck since it's tied to your bnet account.
It's not about content, whatever that means, but something that resembles Diablo more than it does WoW. They failed at that. They just didn't capture me like the first 2 games did. It's not an issue of me being pissy here, either. There are games that I absolutely loved, like Skyrim for instance. Bethesda did extremely well in creating a certain atmosphere and look in order to tell a story that also fits very well with that. Dragon Age 2 is another game that I loved but most despised. I thought the story line was fantastic and the world was great too, despite the fact that there were only 3 different dungeons in the whole game
There's also no excuse for making it look that crappy. Blizzard makes shitty looking titles. We all know this and it's not surprising. The fault here is that the look doesn't match what the game is: Diablo. Skyrim isn't amazing graphically. It's on DX9 and a console port at heart. But you know what? It's dark and gloomy and still manages to look great. D3 on the other hand looks like it was made 10 years ago and doesn't carry the same feel.
I just fucking love the rationale of people. You say Skyrim isn't amazing graphically, but that it has a great mood or scenery?
What about WoW? WoW most people think looks like shit but the environments look and feel of different zones is completely spot on.
And judging the story of Diablo 3? YOU GUYS PLAYED ONE QUEST LINE IN ACT 1.
Hell most Wiki sites don't even have Diablo 3 plot information.
Um no. Unless you buy from like that "videogamegeeks" vendor on Amazon, which who knows how many copies he has.
Amazon: 49.99
Walmart: 54.99
Target: 59.99
The only time I have seen SC2 drop under 40 was when Blizzard had a Black Friday sale last year.
Pretty good for a game that has been out 2 years.
Monk is fucking awesome and OP in my opinion. Characters like Barbarian, Monk and Demon Hunter are so much better to play than Wizard and Witch Doctor.
I haven't tried Witch Doctor, but Wizard seems terrible from what I've played, in comparison to Monk and Demon Hunter.
What's really odd is that my drops was horrible too. Wizard got roughly half as much and had to play like twice as long as both Monk and Demon Hunter. It might justbe my luck, but it's odd in a weird way. Doubly Disappointing because I was really planning to play Wizard as primary.
What's really odd is that my drops was horrible too. Wizard got roughly half as much and had to play like twice as long as both Monk and Demon Hunter. It might justbe my luck, but it's odd in a weird way. Doubly Disappointing because I was really planning to play Wizard as primary.
I played the beta all weekend and max leveled out the monk/demon hunter class, and beat the game with male monk/female demon hunter/female barbarian/male wizard.
I have to say that the monk is the most fun to play (AOE at close range and ability to apply conditions to foes by just holding down mouse button) , with Demon Hunter being second (when you get 1-hand crosbows equipped that regen hatred a lot faster). She has so much maneuverability. Wizard was boring and barbarian was just blah (maybe it was because she looked like a man to me but..:X )
Only thing I didn't like was the pace of the game itself (it seemed slow paced to me compared to D2), and the skill tree. I was a big fan of D2 and I liked creating different builds within the same class (i.e. the 6 shael runed crystal sword bear druid and the wind druid, the hammerdin/auradin/shield basher paladin builds, the different sorc builds, the necro minion or curses build, etc etc) which added some replayability to the game itself. I don't see myself creating more than one type of character, and to me that isn't a good thing. That's what made D2 fun to me. I'm not asking for a D2 clone, I'm just stating that taking that away from D3 would sort of kill the replayability for me :X
I have to say that the monk is the most fun to play (AOE at close range and ability to apply conditions to foes by just holding down mouse button) , with Demon Hunter being second (when you get 1-hand crosbows equipped that regen hatred a lot faster). She has so much maneuverability. Wizard was boring and barbarian was just blah (maybe it was because she looked like a man to me but..:X )
Only thing I didn't like was the pace of the game itself (it seemed slow paced to me compared to D2), and the skill tree. I was a big fan of D2 and I liked creating different builds within the same class (i.e. the 6 shael runed crystal sword bear druid and the wind druid, the hammerdin/auradin/shield basher paladin builds, the different sorc builds, the necro minion or curses build, etc etc) which added some replayability to the game itself. I don't see myself creating more than one type of character, and to me that isn't a good thing. That's what made D2 fun to me. I'm not asking for a D2 clone, I'm just stating that taking that away from D3 would sort of kill the replayability for me :X
I didn't feel the wizard was that bad. I definitely enjoyed it once I leveled and unlocked more spells, got better equipment.
I don't understand why people keep comparing this game to WoW. They're nothing alike. I even asked my GF who still plays WoW and she said they're nothing alike. I used to play WoW a lot as well. Didn't feel the same, didn't look the same. Nothing was the same actually.
I dig the art direction and atmosphere of D3 a lot. Looking forward to the rest. Not really wanting to shell out $60, but it might be worth it.
The haters never disappoint.
I don't understand why people keep comparing this game to WoW. They're nothing alike. I even asked my GF who still plays WoW and she said they're nothing alike. I used to play WoW a lot as well. Didn't feel the same, didn't look the same. Nothing was the same actually.
I dig the art direction and atmosphere of D3 a lot. Looking forward to the rest. Not really wanting to shell out $60, but it might be worth it.
The haters never disappoint.