WhiteTigerShiro said:
Well, whether you'll acknowledge it, Diablo 2 existed outside of the personal bubble of you and your friends. But in any case, those unique builds still exist, and if anything I would argue that D3 encourages them. What happens when it turns out that the throwing build just doesn't work for the Barbarian? You basically lost all the time you spent leveling him when you have to delete him. Or, as in D3, you just take a few seconds to swap-out some abilities for another build. You no longer have to build a character specifically for solo play, only to feel gimped when you hop into a game with other people, because you can just swap-out to another build. I guess that if you hate being able to just play the game, then yeah, D3's system is bad. Personally though? I like playing the game, so I like not having to constantly re-roll or run into town to pay for a respec. A build isn't working? *Click click click* Alright, let's see how this works.
We can call this one a matter of taste. I like the choices I make to be binding, but that's just my preference. It isn't really a choice if I can flip out of it at anytime. The strength of Diablo 2's gameplay was building a "skeleton" of skills, and then having equipment be the "skin" that you can swap out at will. By having everything be swappable, it's less like you're crafting a character, and more like you're just test driving cars. I certainly won't say it empirically makes the game worse, but it does legitimately strike me as a step backwards. I'm sure many many people prefer being able to change on the fly, but I'm psychotically odd/oldschool. I like decisions that matter. It makes you think about them more.
Says the guy who insists on using the term "cartoonish" to describe anything that isn't gray/brown with heavy bloom. I don't know if you've looked outside the window, recently, but there are more colors in this world than gray and brown.
I'm not going to call you a liar here, but allow me to be succinct.
Do not put words in my mouth. I'm not opposed to COLOR. I never said that & I never inferred it. I am opposed to a game series that is historically based on realistic aesthetics (lighting, shadow, color) and a dark atmosphere suddenly jumping into WoW Land with glowing green rocks. There is a time and a place for cartoonish stylings (Torchlight, Castle Crashers, Rayman Origins) and a time and a place for realism. I would kindly ask that you fully read what I say before attempting to speak for me.
Color for color's sake is NOT smart design. Diablo could have used green grass, blue skies, and maybe a few purple sunsets in a manner that would have been 100% in keeping with the Diablo series. But they implemented color in a cartoonish way, which absolutely does not fit into the history of the series. Libraries have random blue or pink glowing walls, rocks exude blue light. You can like it; I'm not out to destroy that. But don't try to patronize me by attempting to boil down my argument into a disdain for color.
See, and that's all the more reason why I find it hard to believe that you take graphics seriously. You want to know why every single cookie-cutter Modern Warfare wannabe uses washed-out gray/brown colors for all their games (aside from the fact that it's the scheme used by the game they're copying)? Because THAT is what's "easy to make". The more color you put into your game, the more you have to make sure that the colors all work together. If everything is a dull gray and brown, you don't have to do much coordinating because everything is the same color.
Just stop. Please see the statement above about not putting words in my mouth. Have we ever had a chat about my favorite games? Did I tell you who my favorite game designers are? I'm pretty sure I never have. And if I haven't, how can you
possibly judge how committed I am to the art of taking graphics seriously?
I didn't mention gray or brown
once. I have never stated here, not even
remotely, that I want a washed out gray brown game. Also - and this is a separate discussion - the extensive use of gray/brown in games has nothing to do with how easy it is. Companies want the GoW/MW $$$.
When I say this was "easy" for Blizzard to make, I mean that they can pull their assets directly from WoW and more or less port them into D3. Textures, color palettes... the works. It takes far less effort to modify or reuse existing artstyles than it does to reinvent a new style from scratch and ask your artists to work outside their comfort zone (WoW).
And I have to call your bluff here. Balancing colors is
NOTHING compared to making something look realistic. Much higher polygon count, the lighting has to be PERFECT (green glows won't cut it), your shadows have to be TIGHT. You're looking at longer render times, larger file sizes, a need for better optimization across the board. Basically, it takes a CRAP TON more work to do things realistically than it does to stylize.
So if you want to have a real discussion that doesn't involve you making wild accusations and assumptions of what I've said and feel, I'm up for it. From your patronizing attitude and extensive stuffing-of-words-into-my-mouthiness, I am guessing you're not, so this will probably be the last I have to say on the matter.
