Diablo II's producer weighs in on sequel's art style

Oh great. Now the deranged fanboys have more fuel for their gothy fire. How long do you think it will take for them to blow that quote way out of proportion?

I don't really think it looks very Diablo either, but why does it have to? How rad would it be if Starcraft 2 looked exactly like Starcraft 1? Not rad at all, which is why they've tweaked and changed and updated a ton of units.

Diablo 2 looked great for what was available, but it wouldn't have been a great transition to 3D at the time. Everybody remember a few months back when someone made that D3 screen show "the way it should be", and some dev spoke up and explained how it wouldn't make any sense at all?

I don't think it looks specifically Diablo, I think it looks almost like NWN2 but with a ton of enemies on screen. And I'm ok with that, as long as it's fun and different from other games and D2. Look at the reinvention Resident Evil had and people loved it. Sure some people didn't like how it strayed from it's roots, but it was still fun enough and set itself apart from games in general and it's previous entries and the world was better for it.

Detail is lost in very dark environments. I think it'd be painful for quality modelers and texture artists to put a lot of effort into their work only for it to all be washed in black.

To me what defined Diablo II was the gameplay, not necessarily the look.

Well this game looks really great and I can't wait to play it. The brighter environment is so great and it really gives the player more control over where enemies are. And as Blizzard said themself:

The artstyle:
If they used a dark and grey environment then the game quickly became monotony. Distinguishing players from enemies and some enemies from other enemies was easier if they used a brighter and more colorful art style.

http://www.creiij.com/?page_id=90

I'm not that concerned. There were a thousand and one mods for Diablo II, and I'm sure there will be a thousand and one mods for Diablo III. If I don't like the look of the game, the solution is just a mod away.

I don't know how anyone could say that the look of Diablo wasn't important. It was pretty gritty from start to finish, and downright macabre at times. Without that atmosphere, I don't think it would have been the same game. I'm not going to trash D3's art style before I've actually seen more than a few screenshots of it, but I can see where people are coming from when they say that they don't like it.

Everyone here is saying that they like the new look and are more looking forward to returning to old Diablo Hack and Slash gameplay. I for one (from the screenshots I have seen) think D3 looks a bit too WoW-concept-art for me.

I absolutely loved the art direction in the first two games. Again, in line with everyone else, I'm not saying this is going to make D3 bad, but just dissimilar to its predecessors.

I mean, to be completely honest, I wouldn't mind a refreshed D2 quasi-3D art style at 1920x1200!

I have to agree--the color tone itself doesn't scream Diablo, but the game play footage that they showed earlier sure did.
To me though, it's not the character's art that puts up a different tone, but the general lighting quality altogether. Which is not a bad thing. The lighting looks much better in D3 in my opinion.

I never played any Diablo title. With that said this will be my first and I like the art style. If it were any darker I would avoid it because my eyes don't like dark reds, browns, and greens on video games. A game can still be "Dark" and fully show highlights and details at the same time.

I'm just curious. What has Bill done since his departure from Blizzard. Apart from the failed mmo shooter thing (Hell's Gate or something)?

Yeah, that's what I thought. As long as the guys at Blizzard continue to be so immensely successful, I'd let them do their thing their own way. These guys know their shit.

On a counter-point, Bill is also perfectly entitled to his own opinion, like everyone else.

Oh noes! My old Voodoo card can't utilize its powers of the dark!

Game looks good, i am sure as many on here have said it will play like Diablo should.

@ Ihavepants I'd really encourage you to go back and play TQ again. It isn't limited to GreccoRoman mythology, it goes through Ancient Egypt and Babylon and Ancient China. Maybe you weren't able to get deep enough into the game to really see where it shines, the dual class system doesn't fully flesh out until about level 20 or so when you have enough skills to really make a difference. TQ is easily one of the best PC games I've ever played..sad about IronLore closing its doors, no real chance for a follow up to that game.

Why go through all the trouble of imbuing intricate details and vibrant colors when you can just swab some dark hues on to the game's graphic.

It looks gorgeous. Is that the problem?

Everyone knows that bright colors are more appealing to casual gamers. Personally, I just don't feel like giving Activision my money.

What has been shown is probably the first few areas in the game. I'm sure it'll get darker and more sinister the further you progress. It's called contrast. It's a good thing.

Diablo 2 has a "Contrast" slider in the video options ... I don't know why Blizzard wouldn't include something similar in D3? Then those who really don't like the bright shiny colors can just turn them down.

Yeah, give it an f-ing chance first, d00ds...

The intentions of the first two Diablo (Diabli?) games for the darkness was that it limited your "viewpoint" to what you could "see". The dark circle around the screen gave an artificially created limited view for what your "character" could see and respond to. The thrill of it was that you had to react to what was about to come out of the "dark" areas at any given time on any given place of the screen.

I enjoyed it, but I say it's bullsh!t. Your monitor is a representative of what you can "see" at any given time, so why limit what a monitor can do artificially? If a game is done right, even when you make use of the full screen, you can still make something scary/exciting because of elements you can't see when they're not on your current viewpoint. Any good rts game has that element because you never know when an enemy/group is about to pop up, and what numbers you have to deal with. Same applies for first-person shooters (Left 4 Dead anyone?).

Blizzard is generally known for not putting crap on the market. I haven't touched WoW (or any other MMO for that matter), but I heavily enjoyed WC2 and 3, and the Diabli. Have faith brothers and sisters....

The issue isn't with the gameplay, because we all know more fun to play than anything, and the issue isn't even with the new art style, because we can all agree it looks good for an art style. The real issue is that the art style has been CHANGED. Mr. Roper said it makes total sense it would have changed because the developers changed, and Blizzard Irvine always does things that particular way. So this means that when they make a game, any game, that's the way it's going to look; regardless of any precedent, regardless of series continuity. They seem to have so much respect for the series in terms of how it plays that I'm surprised they had no respect for how it looks and switched it out for their own thing the very moment they were given the chance.

But if we had been able to play a Diablo game in the last decade since Diablo 2 and the wait hadn't been so unreasonably, almost incomprehensibly long, perhaps a change in art style wouldn't be such a slap in the face. Like with what happened with the Prince of Persia series: we got a full trilogy in a reasonable timeframe and then got a full-blown cartoon reboot not long after, and everyone was ok with that. That's the way to do it if you must. But why do they feel like they need to in the first place? Were they dissatisfied with Diablo 2's sales figures and felt the need to expand their audience? (Ha!) Is there really so much overlap between the demographic that would not buy the game with the old darker, gritty art style and the demographic that likes M-rated, ultra-violent stuff? If you want to make it more kid-friendly, you can't keep it an M. So what's their reasoning? Maybe they just didn't give it any thought at all and out of pure habit, did, as Mr. Roper said, what they just always do.

Forget about the style itself: If you like the CHANGE, that's ok; but that means you weren't a fan of everything the original games were. Fortunately, despite the fact that Blizzard Irvine wasn't either, we are in good hands when it comes to how Diablo 3 will play; I can already see that. So while they already made a big blunder, they have it where it really counts, so it can't get here soon enough.

I Played this at Blizzcon 2008, the art style is just fine don't panic.

About this brightness in graphics has to stop, have u even seen the wizard gameplay, its darker just like what everyone wants it to be.

Like I give a damn about what Mr. Hellgate London thinks. The game looks great. Color takes nothing away from the dark undertones of the game. Please stop whining.