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

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. 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.

  2. 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.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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

Related Post

Activision: Cleaning House, Losing StudiosActivision: Cleaning House, Losing Studios

Now that Activision has merged up with Blizzard all under Vivendi it’s time to consider what to do with all the additional overhead, management, internal studios and sheer amount of people working on projects within their organization. In other words, it’s time to trim the fat and get leaned out for the long haul.

This isn’t unexpected news, the only way to grow more effective as a large company is to remove some of the access baggage that can slow you down and let your competitors take control. This is a sad job which nobody takes pride in (most normal people anyway) but it could mean the difference between rising to the top and sinking like a brick.

“We are focused on improving efficiency across the combined organization and are concentrating on businesses where we have leadership positions that are aligned with Activision Publishing’s long-term corporate objectives,” Activision Publishing CEO Mike Griffith said in a statement. (gamespot)

It’s important to be aggressive as a large company, just like you would be as a startup company. There is a reason startup companies grow into powerful competitors that win, grow and eventually become (or be purcahsed by) larger companies.

As part of this move some staff will be migrated to new projects, persumably reporposed into other divisions or allowed to find new jobs somewhere else. This is called “realignment” by those in the management organization, and currently those up for realignment are:

  • Radical Entertainment (Prototype, Crash of the Titans)
  • High Moon Studios (The Bourne Conspiracy, Darkwatch).
  • Massive Entertainment (World in Conflict, Ground Control)
  • Swordfish Studios (50 Cent: Blood on the Sand, Cold Winter)

These realignments along with other organizational changes will effect a few working game titles:

  • Brutal Legend
  • Ghostbusters
  • Wet
  • Chronicles of Riddick: Assault on Dark Athena
  • World at Conflict: Soviet Assault
  • 50 Cent Blood on the Sand
  • Zombie Wranglers
  • Leisure Suit Larry: Box Office Bust
  • Several Xbox Live Arcade titles

At this point we’re not sure which, if any, will continue to be developed under Activision and which will be sold off to other companies or retired. Surely, those money making titles will be sold off if Activision has no plans to finish them.

Again, it’s hard to consider this a bad decision. This is a decision of growth over having too many “Cooks in the kitchen” making soup. It’s better to have rock solid titles of epic proportions than a large pool of mediocre titles with minimal sales and bad reputations, and that’s why they spend a lot of time in the office working on this and having a type of  office chair for long hours on a computer is really helpful in this area.

It’s not that the titles they’re questioning are necessarily bad, but are not the leading titles in their space and are should be either given a stronger team to work on them or retire them entirely. To build a stronger team with passion and direction it might be best to sell the franchise(s) to other organizations so they can do it right with time and attention to detail.

(Thanks, gamespot)

Imagine a Free World of WarcraftImagine a Free World of Warcraft

Once upon a time the folks at Blizzard Entertainment thought they could support the entire world of World of Wacraft by ad revenue. This would have created an MMO experience which would cost you nothing but a bit of annoyance by ad providers; what would the total audience be if the game was free?

Had WoW launched free of charge they would probably have significantly more users playing the game, but the ad revenue from the sheer amount of people would be nothing compared to a monthly charge for eight million subscribers.

Although only a small number of those subscribers are US based, they’re still raking in the cash compared to an ad-based model, even if they were to have triple the subscribers.

However, the Blizzard exec noted: “We didn’t want to charge a subscription, but as we researched market conditions, we realized that wouldn’t support us.”

It’s possible, perhaps, that Blizzard would have fallen under its own weight had they created a world where anyone could play for no charge. Imagine the server utilization, the volume of traffic and the support calls they would get for triple or quadrupal the player base with only ads paying the checks.

Granted, a free system would be excellent in theory, but in practice, making us pay is the only way to throttle our addictions. Sad, but true.

(Thanks, gamasutra)

Sony, What Doesn’t Kill Them Makes Them StrongerSony, What Doesn’t Kill Them Makes Them Stronger

David Reeves, Sony Europe’s President said, “we simply have to suffer a little” when talking about the PS3, Europe and the competition. He was talking specifically about Sony’s loss of market share, mind-share and overall performance in the latest competitive console arena. While Sony’s president dismisses Nintendo as in a separate market, David Reeves said, “we’ve learned from Nintendo how to grow the market and move from hand-held device to device – they’ve done it brilliantly.”

Buster Douglas Takes Down Mike TysonWhat Sony may be dealing with is the fact that they’re not top dog in the latest battle for consoles. Europe has taken to the PlayStation 3 better than the United States and they’ve got plenty of fans in the region. There has been a recent upside to it all, some light at the end of the tunnel:

“PS3 games sales are up 53% and there’s a healthy 1.1m pre-order book for Killzone 2, the first of a new batch of IPs that Sony will be counting on.” (guardian.co.uk)

Although it’s reported the PSP says are down 15% and PS2 software sales are down 51%, at least the PlayStation 3 is filling in the gap for some of those losses. At some point you’d expect the PlayStation 2 to decline, gamers are probably migrating over to the new hardware.

They’ve got some things to be proud of:

  • PlayStation Network increases revenues by 200% in 2008
  • 55% of all PlayStation owners are on PSN
  • 17.5 million PSN subscribers
  • 53% rise in software sales on PS3
  • Won HD format war

Unfortunately PS3 sales were down last quarter by about 9%, perhaps a response to the harsh economic times. And, of course, the fact that Sony’s VP’s are constantly defending their position in the market is a bit disconcerting. As David Reeves said:

“It’s like Ali v Foreman – go eight or nine rounds and let him punch himself out. We’re still standing, we’re still profitable and there’s a lot of fight in us. I don’t say we will land a knockout blow, but we’re there and we’re fighting.” (guardian.co.uk)

Sony is playing the defensive, guarding themselves against the punches of the competition. Nintendo making headlines for sales, Microsoft coming out of nowhere to try to build market share, while Sony holds out for the tenth round to win it in the end? We’re not yet sure if it’s Ali vs. Foreman or if Microsoft is the next Buster Douglas.

(Thanks, Guardian)