Diablo 3 Doesn’t Look Right, Dev Says Yes Sir!

August 6, 2008August 6, 2008| schommerschommer| 0 Comment| 7:20 pm
Categories:

There has been many debates on the graphic level of Diablo 3 and how it should be different. Finally a developer comes out and says “um, no.” Their reasoning is fairly simple, it’s one thing to photoshop up a screenshot with some filters but it’s another to get the texture and lighting to run at that detail on a standard computer.

How do you argue with that? Personally, I think the graphics look wonderful, brilliant, vibrant and professional. Diablo 3 game designer Jay Willson said:

“The key thing to remember here is that this has been Photoshopped. This isn’t created by the engine. Though it looks really cool, it’s almost impossible to do in a 3D engine because you can’t have lighting that smart and run on systems that are reasonable. If we could do that, we probably would in a few of the dungeons.” (slashdot)

Non-developers seem to forget that the colors, cameras and lighting don’t come free on a video game. Everything has limitations and, although the limitations change over time, today’s graphics for a standard machine are capable of running Diablo 3. Blizzard isn’t making a game that only hardcore PC gamers can play, this game is for everyone.

Building a video game is a lot of smoke and mirrors to make a virtual object look “real” to normal gamers. Immersion and definition is important, grainy dark graphics do set a mood, but they also frustrate many players. Remember DOOM 3? Some people could barely see the “epic graphics” of the last DOOM sequel, it’s time to mature and show off true colors.

Darkness usually is used to hide imperfections, Diablo 3 has nothing to hide.

(For a high resolution photo, checkout MTV Multiplayer Blog)

0 thoughts on “Diablo 3 Doesn’t Look Right, Dev Says Yes Sir!”

  1. Pingback: Diablo 3 Doesn’t Look Right, Dev Says Yes Sir! | Game Stooge

  3. It’s funny to see how much to world has changed because of the internet. There was a time when fans couldn’t wait for a new game to be released, and now-a-days fans critique to work of developers before even having played the games themselves. People have always slammed me for being really into graphics and are always quick to tell me how “the game play makes a game, not the graphics”. I can’t wait to play Diablo III but I think I will wait to actually play it before judging the game. Interesting article.

    Reply

  4. I remember calling Dynamix to talk amiably about a gameplay problem (field goals too difficult because the kickers have no power – keep in mind, this was before the age of sliders), and spoke to the lead designer. He sent me a disk that patched the game, and later sent me a free Pro upgrade.)

    I miss those halcyon days.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Post

Evolution of RPG’s – Gamers Don’t Want an End?Evolution of RPG’s – Gamers Don’t Want an End?

I remember a day when old RPG games had either a level cap or a definite ending. From Pool of Radiance to Secrets of the Silver Blades to Final Fantasy the game had a final boss or stage and often had some type of level cap. Today, gamers don’t want it to end, they’d rather have the option to wonder around aimlessly or completing minor quests in order to soak up every ounce of money they spent on the title.

linkNow even Bethesda is saying “we’ve learned our lesson” from the whiplash of ending their game title and capping levels. Gamers want to go back and re-try content they missed, they want to run side quests and talk to everyone in the world they want to grind themselves to über powerful levels and become a god in their fantasy world. Can you blame them?

You can’t really blame them for wanting to maximize the content, although it’s slightly more evolved than RPG’s of old. Perhaps it was World of Warcraft and other MMORPG’s that brought us to the stage in life where we all want to squeeze every last RPG dime out of the title. As a kid I wondered the world of Hyrule and covered every tile of graphical color, burned every bush, bombed every stone looking for all the content. However, even Zelda had an end with scrolling credits – you didn’t just land on a platform with your master sword and a dream.

Other titles have used level caps to limit you and draw you into the next release of the game. This was popular in the D&D world because the game is designed to target specific levels of difficulty. They may only allow you to gain level 10 because the enemies are no tougher than level 13, allowing the challenge to be good but not overwhelming. If they allow you to get to level 50 they’d have to design the game so all the enemies grow powerful along with you — that’s not always a desired result.

Final Fantasy is a popular franchise that typically allows you to grow infinitely powerful depending on how much time you want to spend repeat killing the same enemies. Gamers aren’t always into the grind, they just want to grind “enough” to make the challenges a little more do-able.

Today, however, with larger storage capacity, larger development teams and the desire to build more value into your gameplay experience titles have dozens of side quests and sub-plots that are totally optional. The result of so many sub-quests results in a player who is much more powerful at the end of those quests compared to a player who sticks to the narrow path of the main plot. So, games much grow dynamically challenging to keep the fun per dollar high.

Do you like your RPG’s to have a definite end and a high but capped level?

Read MoreRead More

Starcraft 2: A 2009 Release ScheduleStarcraft 2: A 2009 Release Schedule

If you thought you’d be getting a release of Starcraft 2 for the holiday of 2008 you’ll be upset at the news. The heavily awaited RTS title Starcraft 2 will be arriving sometime in 2009. The original title arrived in 1998 but we’re not going to see the first sequel until sometime next year, amazing people even remember the game after eleven years, right?

Activision Blizzard hardly makes a game we’d forget. The reason we all have fond memories of Starcraft, Warcraft and Diablo is due to the craftsmanship that goes into the game titles (and a bit of the marketing). The developers take their time to hand craft and test a solid product, which is reason alone to see a release next year rather than in this one.

“Next year’s offerings from Activision Blizzard should include highly anticipated PC strategy title StarCraft II, the sequel to one of the world’s most enduringly popular games.” (starcraftwire.com)

It won’t make the 2008 holiday schedule, making us wonder if it’s a 2009 holiday schedule. Although Activision Blizzard doesn’t need to time their games for the biggest sales seasons it doesn’t hurt to push the title out when gamers are actively looking for new blockbusters.

Personally, we’d love to see a Spring/Summer release time frame to give us something to fill the void, but we’re sure Activision’s marketing team has plans revolving around money than a few gamers personal preferences. Regardless to the launch time we’re at least privvy to the knowledge that it’s coming next year.

Read MoreRead More