Diablo 3 art direction

hpmons · Aug 1, 2008

I have to admit, when I first saw the before/after mock ups, I did feel a preference for the "after" images.
http://www.diii.net/gallery/showphoto.p ... ig&cat=553
http://www.diii.net/gallery/showphoto.p ... mit=recent
http://www.diii.net/gallery/showphoto.p ... mit=recent

There has been an uproar among many D2 fans about the art direction, but the team arent changing it

"Diablo is a game you play for, hopefully, hundreds of hours, and one of the rewards is a variety of different-looking environments." People looking back on old Diablo, he said, may have a selective memory. "People remember the Act I dungeons... but they kind of conveniently forget the green fields of Act I, and all of Act II... and it's palaces, its bright deserts."

Actually, Wilson said the team originally shot for a "very desaturated, very dark" gameworld. "We had all kinds of problems with identification of units... combat wasn't very good, and the worlds got homogeneous very quickly. As we played through it, we didn't like it, or think it was very much fun."

http://kotaku.com/5031732/art-apocalyps ... -decisions

The fact is, if D3 was darker and more girtty like some fans would like it, it would feel very samey. Part of the point of a new Diablo game is that it should be different, it should progress in some way, and if the Diablo team think that the more colourful direction will lead to better gameplay, then frankly I trust them. As Wilson states, D2 is more varied in colour once you consider it.

I do still feel a bit hesitant about the characters design though.

What do others think of the art direction in D3?

Darth Roxor · Aug 1, 2008

Old news is old, this was already posted three times I think.

hpmons · Aug 1, 2008

Sorry, I didnt see a thread specifically on the art direction, and as far as I know the interview link I posted was new.

DarkUnderlord · Aug 1, 2008

"Diablo is a game you play for, hopefully, hundreds of hours, and one of the rewards is a variety of different-looking environments." People looking back on old Diablo, he said, may have a selective memory. "People remember the Act I dungeons... but they kind of conveniently forget the green fields of Act I, and all of Act II... and it's palaces, its bright deserts."

I remember the bright deserts. They sucked. So far the problem with the Diablo 3 screens for me is they feel very washed out.

J1M · Aug 1, 2008

Glad to hear they are sticking to their guns.

I really like the "painted" look of the game right now.

Raapys · Aug 1, 2008

hpmons said:
As Wilson states, D2 is more varied in colour once you consider it.

Ah, so we had some sucky areas in D2 and that's enough reason to make all areas in D3 sucky? Besides, it's Diablo 1, with its completely dark and gritty world, that rules supreme when it comes to art direction, which, combined with its music, makes it one of the 'best atmosphere ever' games. It's just the gameplay that is better in D2.

Anyway, this is not just about the lighting, which I hate, but also about the crappy character and armor design, which is taken straight from Warcraft 3 and WoW.

But this has been discussed to death in several threads already.

J1M · Aug 1, 2008

Completely dark and gritty world!

I think you were playing with your gamma way too far down. Don't worry Diablo 3 will have a gamma setting too!

Occasionally Fatal · Aug 1, 2008

J1M said:
Completely dark and gritty world!

image
image

I think you were playing with your gamma way too far down. Don't worry Diablo 3 will have a gamma setting too!

The first screenshot has the light radius mechanic disabled, either through items or something else. has nothing to do with gamma. The second screen is that way because of the lava, iirc.

Observe:

Raapys · Aug 1, 2008

I can just feel the chills washing over me. No seriously, what the fuck? Some of you actually like this?

Horrible doesn't even begin to describe how I feel about this art direction. And when you get into the actual dungeons then it just looks exactly like World of Warcraft or W3; blocky and cartoony.

elander_ · Aug 1, 2008

Some people enjoy a realistic color palette, some people don't, some people don't care. It's plain simple.

Raapys · Aug 1, 2008

But half the point with the games was that they were 'scary'; now it looks anything but.

Jasede · Aug 1, 2008

Diablo was supposed to be scary...?
:mind is blown:
I thought it was supposed to be a fun "kill all dudes" action RPG.

Fez · Aug 1, 2008

I think the first one was considered a little more gory and scary than the second.

elander_ · Aug 1, 2008

Diablo 1/2 never looked excessively realistic to me. There's something odd about those screens. They lack contrast and detailed shadows and have weird color casts. The colors on those screens aren't very pleasant but i don't think this is because they have chosen a more cartoonish look. They have to fix whatever filters they are using.

MetalCraze · Aug 1, 2008

Diablo 3 looks like a colourful cartoon that is WC3/WoW. I can't take this seriously. It doesn't give that "oh you blew that bunch of monsters into bloody meatchunks" feeling. It gives the "omg cartoon violence" shit.

Mareus · Aug 1, 2008

I really don't care about Diablo 3, but it does look quite cartoonish. The backgrounds look hand drawn, and while I agree this is certainly good, it just doesn't feel like Diablo. The name carries certain expectations from people.

Naked Ninja · Aug 1, 2008

I like the art, I just don't like it for diablo.

J1M · Aug 1, 2008

Comparing indoor shots with outdoor ones... and outside is brighter? Omg!

You know the power of contrast right? That if an area starts out looking normal the contrast will be much higher when you enter the den of some boss and the whole place is dark and corrupted?

kingcomrade · Aug 1, 2008

I like color, and I don't think Diablo 3 should be grey, but those screenshots do not flatter the game.

Globbi · Aug 1, 2008

J1M said:
Completely dark and gritty world!

I think you were playing with your gamma way too far down. Don't worry Diablo 3 will have a gamma setting too!

It is and gritty no matter what your gamma setting is. It's not about creating darkness that makes the game unplayable before sunset - like in D2. Compare Diablo to Diablo 3 - in first part there are only bleak colors, no light greens and flowers.
Also notice how human corpses look like in Dialbo, especially in hell and butcher's room - realistic naked bodies in blood. In D2 instead we have some corpses that look like either sleeping people or like there were only clothes on ground and I suppose D3 also won't have bodies like in Diablo.
Look at zombies in Dialbo 1 - colored but it's a dark color, and still the zombie looks like it could be real leftover of human flesh. In Diablo 3 there is a big green ogre-like guy

There are lots of other such things that provide nice mood in the first Diablo, like the catacombs that really looked a bit like catacombs, or hell where walls were made of bones.

I don't get why most people think that the art direction proposed by fans mean darkness - they sharpened everything, improoved contrast that made everything look clearer. Yes, they also put lot's of black around but it's obvious they won't care for every pixel, in one picture for example black bacground was put instead of a rainbow (yeah, rainbow gives such a horrifying feeling it had to be in Diablo 3) and it's not up to fans to make new backgrounds. Suggestion has been made and it should be corrected by developers, it's not fans fault that some idiot thought a rainbow would suit there.

Jaime Lannister · Aug 1, 2008

I actually like how Diablo 3 isn't smothering everything in gray-greens and browns like every other next-gen game is. They've got a distinctive look that looks great in motion, and should ignore the internet waahmbulances.

J1M · Aug 2, 2008

Globbi said:
I don't get why most people think that the art direction proposed by fans mean darkness - they sharpened everything, improoved contrast that made everything look clearer.

Funny, I see fan-made shots that leeched brightness and contrast, slapped on a sharpness filter and ended up with shit so dark I wouldn't want to play it... especially not if every level looked like that.

Variety is good. This change would not be:

As for the rainbow, juxtaposition says hi.

gc051360 · Aug 2, 2008

I don't really care.

It looks fine to me. I prefer the detail in Diablo 3's shot.....than the crappy "EVERYTHING MUST BE DARK!!!" shots that fans are putting up as "this is what it should look like!"

Damned Registrations · Aug 2, 2008

It's not juxtaposition when the zombies you're fighting look like teletubbies and the weapon you're carrying is a sparkler.

shihonage · Aug 2, 2008

I am one of the "whiners" who signed that Diablo3 visual style petition.

Ever since Blizzard migrated to 3D engines with Warcraft 3, they "caught on" to the fact that they can compensate for low polygon counts by making everyone in the game shoot rainbows out of their ass, and make it a "stylistic choice".

Of course, they desire to keep the poly counts low so that their games can be played on anything from an octaprocessor 7ghz PC to your grandma's sewing machine.

Warcraft2 and Diablo1 were on the same level of technology. WC2 looked bright and cartoonish. Diablo 1 looked like, well, Diablo. It was clearly a stylistic, not a technological, choice.

Blizzard needs to stop trying to slap WC3 visual style on every 3D game they make. They caused fan outrage with first cartoony Starcraft 2 screens, and they yielded and adjusted the graphics to be more "Starcraft".

Now their focus shifted to Diablo3 as the next victim to WC3 visual style. Dungeons saturated with fabulously gay colored lights, much like first usermade levels for Quake2 and Unreal.

I'm not enthused.

Diablo 3 art direction

Novice

Royal Dongsmith

Novice

Professional Throne Sitter

Arcane

Arcane

Arcane

Prophet

Arcane

Arbiter

Arcane

Arcane

Erudite

Arbiter

Arcane

Magister

Arbiter

Arcane

Kingcomrade

Augur

Arbiter

Arcane

Scholar

Furry Weeaboo Nazi Nihilist

Subscribe to my OnlyFans