[Diablo III] Officially coming in early 2012. Beta now live.

Rakai

undeinPirat wrote:

Rakai wrote:

No, those armor designs don't look good in any context. The lowest level gear looks better by far. They should allow you to keep that look.

As for D3 on consoles, I wonder how they would get around MS's policies. With the PS3/Wii U they could get B.net running on them, but MS won't play nice in that regard.

how can you make a statement like that unless you've seen the armors in many different contexts

which, unless you are like mr. blizzard ceo, i doubt you have

You're right. Maybe a portal to hell breaks loose during Mardi Gras. Man, New Orleans just can't catch a break.

Echo

I like those armor sets, and as we all know I am the ultimate arbiter of excellent taste.

JAEF

Skab wrote:

Also, I haven't been around, so have you guys talked about the confirmed Inferno difficulty yet? Because thats a thing now.

Yes. We talked about it. You missed out. Discussion over. Sorry.

Noggin wrote:

I agree it makes sense to expect that an expansion will shift inferno up to 71 or whatever, but wonder how we'll actually get those levels. This is another area where more detail is needed! They say Inferno will have a "flat difficulty", but if monsters range from 61-70 then that's not flat at all.

I absolutely expect and welcome the addition of another Act for an expansion, but it'd be weird if that act scaled from 61-70ish.

That's an interesting point. Inferno would have to stay at max level+1 across the board to maintain its functionality as currently discussed. It would be a bit awkward to expect 60's to just go back to act 3-5 on hell difficulty to level though. That would be the obvious "we couldn't think of anything else so just grind up in the old/new acts." I imagine by the time we approach an expansion they'll have thought of something more elegant. Hopefully.

Scosglen

I don't know how anyone can design 18 tiers of armor that progressively get more "awesome" without eventually stepping over the line for at least some people.

DisruptorX2

Rakai wrote:

undeinPirat wrote:

Rakai wrote:

No, those armor designs don't look good in any context. The lowest level gear looks better by far. They should allow you to keep that look.

As for D3 on consoles, I wonder how they would get around MS's policies. With the PS3/Wii U they could get B.net running on them, but MS won't play nice in that regard.

how can you make a statement like that unless you've seen the armors in many different contexts

which, unless you are like mr. blizzard ceo, i doubt you have

You're right. Maybe a portal to hell breaks loose during Mardi Gras. Man, New Orleans just can't catch a break.

Or maybe a portal to somewhere even more tacky than Mardi Gras

Spoiler:

like Azeroth

JAEF

Scosglen wrote:

I don't know how anyone can design 18 tiers of armor that progressively get more "awesome" without eventually stepping over the line for at least some people.

BREAKING NEWS! All armor set graphics now have a pure black silhouette toggle if you're disappointed with their textures. Armor too garish? Time to get GRIMDARK.

Ceno

DisruptorX2

That's pretty much what Diablo is like. You have played it, right?

Henroid

Rakai wrote:

No, those armor designs don't look good in any context. The lowest level gear looks better by far. They should allow you to keep that look.

I sorta excuse the armor, for the moment, as representing a more heavenly side to the game. Which is like non-present in the series, save for Tyreal.

Noggin

JAEF wrote:

Noggin wrote:

I agree it makes sense to expect that an expansion will shift inferno up to 71 or whatever, but wonder how we'll actually get those levels. This is another area where more detail is needed! They say Inferno will have a "flat difficulty", but if monsters range from 61-70 then that's not flat at all.

I absolutely expect and welcome the addition of another Act for an expansion, but it'd be weird if that act scaled from 61-70ish.

That's an interesting point. Inferno would have to stay at max level+1 across the board to maintain its functionality as currently discussed. It would be a bit awkward to expect 60's to just go back to act 3-5 on hell difficulty to level though. That would be the obvious "we couldn't think of anything else so just grind up in the old/new acts." I imagine by the time we approach an expansion they'll have thought of something more elegant. Hopefully.

Exactly. After playing in Inferno for months, getting progressively better gear/runes/gems, throwing the leveling process back into Hell just sounds like it'd be so trivial. Oh well, we can worry about this in 2014

TheStig

I imagine if they added new acts in expansions, they would just have to rescale everything so that the next difficulty up wasn't too easy when you finished the added act.
I'm sure they will figure it out.

Anyway, I'm glad that what they're not doing is designing a system that will be shit now, and only make sense when the expansion(s) are released.

JAEF

DisruptorX2 wrote:

That's pretty much what Diablo is like. You have played it, right?

Yes. Did you?



Chainmail/plate is typically a light silver in Diablo. It's a little darker on the rogue, but nowhere near what some people must be thinking when they say "This ridiculous nonsense isn't Diablo!"

I mean has anyone who's complaining about these armor sets even seen the sorcerer in bright red robes?



You people seem to be remembering a different game than the one that exists. If you really want the game's brightness to be cranked down to -50 until you get some +light radius gear just adjust your damn monitor instead.

Lilnoobs

DisruptorX2 wrote:

Why is Diablo 3 for console "controversial"?

I have Diablo for playstation sitting over on my shelf right now.

Spoiler:

It sucks balls compared to the PC version though

At the time I took the PSX version over the PC version easily because of local 2 player co-op.

themightypuck

Scosglen wrote:

Rakai wrote:

No, those armor designs don't look good in any context. The lowest level gear looks better by far.

Yeah, well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.

Signalling is generally bad architecture.

TheStig

I always loved the D1 sorcerer gear.

Anyway, I think the most important part of gear design in D3 is making stuff that can be easily picked out amongst swarms of monsters.

Chen

I don't mind the colours, I do mind the excessive designs. It's getting a bit Bayformers.

What I'm saying is I want to put on a bitchin' robe and Wizard hat.

darklite_x

Chen has it dead on. I can get past the colors, especially with the option of dyes, but the ridiculous fucking designs seem more at home on a fashion show runway or in an anime than in a gothic, medieval setting. Yes, I'm aware of the irony of that statement. In any case, the one thing that Diablo 1 and 2 had in common is even if the colors were occasionally outrageous, all of the armor looked like something someone of that medieval setting would wear. This shit just looks like a cartoon.

BYToady

Shit has to be exaggerated so that you can see it when you're hovering 30 feet above it.

Halfhand

the armor sets are the first thing I've seen in the game I'm actually not stoked about

diablo 1 and 2 had a dark, gritty edge to everything. the armor in d3, especially in tier 3, looked bright, clean, and colorful

Chen

Less is more. I hope there'll be items that don't show up when equipped, like the circles, tiaras and diadems in D2. A tiara would probably look stylin' on a female Wizard, on a male Wizard, less so. Unless you're a flaming homosexual. In that case, good for you.

Xeddicus

Even if it DOES show up you'll like never see it. I hope every single armor slot shows up with options to toggle them off! I also want a very, very, very red outfit of badassness for the male wizard. It can be minimal, or look like I raided every hardware store and blacksmith in 3 worlds, long as I like it. Get busy Blizzard!

JAEF

Halfhand wrote:

diablo 1 and 2 had a dark, gritty edge to everything. the armor in d3, especially in tier 3, looked bright, clean, and colorful

Is this a joke? Did we even play the same games?

TheStig

Have they said anything about armor dyes in the game?

Scosglen

I will just have to enjoy wearing wooly mammoth skulls on my shoulders as pauldrons that much more, to balance out all the hating.

TheStig wrote:

Have they said anything about armor dyes in the game?

They exist. They affect single armor pieces. Some are rarer than others. They have not spoken in great detail about them otherwise. Here is a pretty picture

JAEF

Yeah. They're in the game.

lu tze

TheStig wrote:

Have they said anything about armor dyes in the game?

They're in AFAIK.

Edit: what he said, nice wiki link.

TheStig

Nice, thanks.

Kwoaru

JAEF wrote:

Halfhand wrote:

diablo 1 and 2 had a dark, gritty edge to everything. the armor in d3, especially in tier 3, looked bright, clean, and colorful

Is this a joke? Did we even play the same games?

it was gritty because the low resolution made everything look like it was covered in gravel and sand

harvest

Yeah I was gonna say, it only looked gritty because the pixels were so big (and so few of them) at the time.

DisruptorX2

Its honestly hard to tell if you guys are trolling or not. Sarcasm doesn't come across well over the interwebs.

JAEF wrote:

I mean has anyone who's complaining about these armor sets even seen the sorcerer in bright red robes?

You seem to be confusing color intensity with style. The screenshot you posted sums up people's complaints quite well. The characters in it are wearing armor that is toned down compared to what you'd see in other Blizzard games. You seem to believe that people want the game to look like Gears of War and thought that the original one did?

musanman

DisruptorX2 wrote:

Its honestly hard to tell if you guys are trolling or not. Sarcasm doesn't come across well over the interwebs.

JAEF wrote:

I mean has anyone who's complaining about these armor sets even seen the sorcerer in bright red robes?

You seem to be confusing color intensity with style. The screenshot you posted sums up people's complaints quite well. The characters in it are wearing armor that is toned down compared to what you'd see in other Blizzard games. You seem to believe that people want the game to look like Gears of War and thought that the original one did?

I seem to remember wearing full tal's set in D2 where I was bright purple and had a glowing aura around me.

darklite_x

Right, you had an aura, it wasn't the actual armor that stuck out three feet away from your character.

DisruptorX2

What the hell? Diablo saves files as .PCX? Man what? I'd never even heard of that type of file before.

Anyway, the Sorc's bright clothing stands out from everything else in the game. Always did. Well, he's a wizard from some crazy foreign land, you'd expect the extravagance, all is good. People seem to confuse complaints about a garish mess with hating color because I"m so emo bro.



Where's the goofy pauldrons, silly head-dresses, and the like?

Spoiler:

I don't think Diablo 3 looks that bad, just tired of hearing people say goosery about how Diablo 3 is totally what Diablo would look like in 3d and why'd do you hate color olol

These screenshots are a bit darker than what the game actually looks like, but not much I can do about that. The one Jaef posted has the gamma all the way up though, and would look like ass in full screen. If he actually played the game like that, then we probably did play different games. Messing with gamma beyond one or two adjustments makes all games look terrible, though, not just Diablo.



The caves are actually quite bright, in places, due to the lava. The point is, the game builds a Gothic mood.

Spoiler:

And no, Diablo 2 doesn't really and 3 definitely won't. I'd be perfectly glad to complain about all the things Diablo 2 did wrong, stylistically.

I'm perfectly excited about Diablo 3 though, and item dyes are always a good idea.

Stormwatcher

That armor looks nothing like WoW whatsoever... Regardless of how one likes them or not, they are completely different from the WoW designs, for better or worse.

Incindium

So what exactly is the reason for a new thread when hitting 100 pages of posts? If its a technical thing then it might not be an issue on the new forums?

Forar

Man, who would wear shit that color to battle. You'd think they'd be afraid the other soldiers would laugh at them and ask if their boyfriend picked it out for them.

Spoiler:

... I like the armour sets we've seen so far.

Incindium wrote:

So what exactly is the reason for a new thread when hitting 100 pages of posts? If its a technical thing then it might not be an issue on the new forums?

Tradition that's being carried on.

reVerse

Large threads might seem more intimidating for new posters, so the threads get started from scratch every now and then.

Xeddicus

Pretty sure it's that and just to keep them semi-readable/navigate-able.

Someone who's in Germany go look at that 3d art they did for hidden beta keys!

lionheart_m

You make me feel old Disruptor; I clearly remember PCX .

I liked the designs...up to Inferno. They just look cluttered, too much stuff going on there. Hopefully they'll dial it back a bit.

Jephery

You're both right, reVerse and Xed.