If you're gonna look this hard, I'm quite certain you'll find plenty of little presentation points to nitpick at any Blizz title.
Nah im not looking hard, just pointing out what annoyed me, the font thing is very small but it seemed a bit amateurish on how the stats were displayed, any other UI designer would have find something with more presentation than arial but still its a small thing, the goofy characters are what annoyed me the most on the game and that certainly wont change, and since its tone that they have chosen for the game... well... fine but I dont think its proper for a Diablo game, I remember a lot of people being quite annoyed by Hellgate:London's "tongue-in-cheek" characters but now since its Diablo and Blizzard its all fine.
I think the whole tongue-in-cheek would have worked much better with diablo. Especially considering all of the characters are loner-outcast-badasses.
I dont quite remember the characters in HGL all that much, but I do remember that there were lots of monty python references on the NPC's dialogues.
And Diablo does have some quirky characters, there are the drunk guy from D1 and also Gharbad, D2 had the drunk guy in Act2 (no one talked to him tho), that kind of thing does work but it has to be done wisely, the overall done in D3 seems very cartoonish, when the developers started discussing that a "darker tone" isnt just about colors I agreed completely about that but the way most of the characters behave also contribute immensely to this and there is a very "halloween cartoon" vibe from the beta.
It just doesn't seem that dark, I agree. Hopefully it gets darker down the road? but I really don't see why it can't be that way now.
To be honest, I think the only real reason that these complaints hold any water at all is that they gave fans almost 6 years to build their container around 30 minutes of content.
I think all opinions at this point are considered moot. While I think all opinions are to be respected, I do not feel that this beta, which has been around for 9 months or so, gives people an unbiased impression of the game. While there is no substitute for actually experiencing the game with your own fingers, most people have watched it played, read the articles, and followed each snippet of news since its announcement.
This fact is inherently correlated to people's reflections upon their experiences - and I would hazard a guess that the effect is negative in most cases. I don't feel that the first segment of Act 1 reflects well on how you'll be spending the majority of time in game based on its linear progression and guided hand-holding, and should therefore be held as a constant if you're currently using it as your judge's gavel.
The game faces the test of time. It is bound to have people that don't like it - and the nitpicking that I see most people speaking up about rests on personal preference, and that's fine. I just think the complaints are too much, too soon. But as I said before, 6 years or so of development have given people a cast-iron tub to hold their complaints - even if that bucket only holds 25% of Act 1.
To me, the vitals of the game are intact and flourishing. Gameplay has not suffered based on some of their controversial decisions (even though I am against a fair handful of them). If fonts, colors, UI, and the like are game breaking for you at this point, then it is your prerogative to pass Diablo 3 by.
Diablo 3 is bound to fail at living up to the subjective nature and diversity of millions of fans. The voice of the passionate is the hardest to change, and the hardest to achieve acceptance.
Regardless of your disposition, you are faced with two choices: 1) accept the changes and enjoy the product or 2) reject the changes and move on.
[EDIT] The one thing that I DO find comical is the nonchalant nature of the horrors that are happening in New Tristram, and that one Blacksmith has had a REALLY bad day. You kill his wife, you find his apprentice dead, and you have to resurrect his father only to kill his spirit for a second time. Poor guy. At least he's a trooper.
Last edited by Nizaris; 23-04-2012 at 18:48.
I already bought it, I am quite sure it will be fun and I would never pass this game up, its my favourite genre and yet the one with the least titles in it, but I no longer think that Diablo 3 might be the end-all-rule-all ARPGs for a long time, granted the direction that blizzard chosed is understandable from a business POV, some other company might go the other way around and craft a very good ARPG as well, unless once again, every developer in the world forgets about the ARPG genre for another decade.Regardless of your disposition, you are faced with two choices: 1) accept the changes and enjoy the product or 2) reject the changes and move on.
Wow... I literally could not believe my eyes when I read this thread.
"itching to go back to play Dota 2 (my regular game of choice atm, and its artstyle is what Diablo 3 should have been"
I almost threw up when I read that line (right in my mouth!) You think that Dota 2, the game that is arguably the single biggest gaming disappointment of the last 20 years, is what Diablo 3 should look like?
Did I read that right?
For those of you who are not aware, as Dota 2 is in beta still, let me fill you in a little. Dota 2 is a remake of the mod from warcraft 3, which as you can see from the name, implies it to be a sequel to the game, which it in fact is not. It is just a version of the game that doesnt need to be run thru Battle.net. There is in fact, not a single new in game feature in the "sequel" to dota, the interface is terrible and I think the most disappointing fact of all is that the games graphics are seriously outdated. The game to me, looks like Heroes of Might and Magic 5 did, which came out in the early 2000s I believe and it looked cheesy to the core. Fact is I havent seen a new game come out with more disappointing graphics than Dota 2, it looks like Heroes of Newerth and that game stunk. The utter lack of graphical details in Dota 2 is something I cannot and will not ever be able to look past, to me the graphics of Warcraft 3 were and are still superior to what Dota 2 looks like with the settings cranked.
So for you to say you think D3 (which was visually stunning,) should look like Dota 2 which is destined to flop in a big way with the way the beta is looking? I just dont get it.