Blizzard defends decision to make Diablo III vibrant, colorful

50,000 retards.
I find it looks great the way it is now. I might actually play this one. (Yes, I skipped over Diablo 1 and 2; shall I destroy my gamer card right away?)

Unbelievable. Yes, let's have more shades of gray, light gray, and dark gray in our games.

It's time to get out of the dark (Pun intended) ages people!

Unbelievable. Yes, let's have more shades of gray, light gray, and dark gray in our games.

It's time to get out of the dark (Pun intended) ages people!

I'm tired of brown/gray games. Give me ******* color!

For the record, I don't care about the petition for Diablo 3 - at this point I'm confident that the Bliz people know what they're doing.

I'm just bored stiff by the vocal complainers who seem to think everything should be as colourful as Viva Pinata and Sly Cooper. There are games which are vibrant and colourful, tonnes of them. But not everything should, or even could be as colourful as some of these people think they ought to be.

I can't really say anything, I signed the petition to keep the old characters in L4D, but now I understand - they changed them so you can tell them apart from the grey and black darkness of the rest of the game, keeping TK to a minimum.

Down with poop colored games!

You need to understand Blizzard fans. When Warcraft took command of Blizzard (Warcraft 3, then Warcraft 3 expansion, then WoW, then WoW expansion, then second WoW expansion), the parts of the Blizz fanbase that never played the Warcraft games became very defensive and territorial. Anything that is perceived to have come from "Warcrap" (seriously, it gets called that a lot by HARDCORE BLIZZARD FANS) is instantly considered evil.

For example, on Starcraft sites, the fans regularly moan about how the style is too much like "Warcrap" and that the Zerg is basically a copy of the Undead now. Instead of calling the creep (the oozy stuff Zerg units build on) from SC2 creep they call it the bleep. The reason? It is allegedly more like the blight (which Undead from War3 built on) than the original creep.

Of course, they're morons. They don't seem to remember that the Undead were, themselves, all but a copy of the Zerg to begin with.

Sometimes, I wonder if these fans even want a sequel. Any significant changes made to the original get screamed about like the coming apocalypse, while the game, to even rational SC veteran's eyes, continues to look damn near identical to the original.

@ Jack
Haha, what exactly are you trying to say? That I'm the kind of person who would support the petition? I think it's funny that I posted almost at the exact same time and made fun of these idiots.

Regardless, here is the kind of article I was talking about:
http://www.sclegacy.com/content/editorials-8/the-zerg-are-from-zerus-the-swarm-is-from-azeroth-68/
It's basically one big wah-fest about how SC2 looks too much like Warcraft 3. With the exception of maybe one or two images, he's just crazy. Those few images that look similar to War3? Recently unveiled artwork that will probably be completely changed by release.

I also find this bit at the bottom funny: "I feel the developers owe it to the fans to flat-out tell us their intentions. Is it to make a devoted sequel to StarCraft while still adhering to the subtle dark (read: not demonic) nature of the lore, art (all of us miss you, Blizzard North), and style? Or, is to build a multi-million dollar "Rated-E For Everyone" franchise that will produce quantities of Happy Meal™ toys and a visual appealing to their 9+ million paying World of WarCraft users?"

See what I mean? These guys are crazy morons, and they're everywhere. Luckily, Blizzard has the good sense to take criticisms like this with a large amount of salt.

I have a solution that will make everyone happy: All the whiny retards who think everything is to bright should turn down the brightness and contrast on their monitors, whilst everyone who thinks that it's too dark should do the opposite.

"I'm a big SC junkie and I've yet to complain about the new look, but I do lurk to SC2 boards on gamefaqs and it's full of idiots that complain about every little changed detail."

Haha, yeah. I used to lurk on comments at sclegacy.com, and, finally, I just made an account and started making fun of them. There are some damn classic moments.

To the people whining about other people whining of brown/gray palettes:

Saturation is an important tool in an artist's arsenal. Keeping the saturation monotone (whether it's super-bright-colored or just plain gray) is going to look ugly, either way. The problem is that while it doesn't take a rocket scientist to look at something and say "this is way too colorful", a lot of less artistically inclined people easily fall in the lame pit of desaturation.

What I'm seeing with Diablo 3 is that Blizzard isn't afraid to sweep the saturation gamut; they're taking advantage of color to make gameplay elements more obvious... For example, sticking with a certain color range for a particular dungeon's floors and walls, and aim for the complete opposite color range for enemies. The brighter the colors, the easier the distinction. They also use saturation to further distance gameplay elements, making it easier to recognize something without having to stare directly at the thing to figure out what it is.

I'm tired of playing stuff like Gears of War where the only way to see your target is to wait for it move, turning essentially a static target into a game of Where's Waldo. There's nothing wrong with brown and gray, but color is a really important tool to easily make distinctions between two arbitrary targets. Desaturate the colors, and it gets ever harder to make that distinction.

It's a game ingredient. Whoever doesn't use it is losing out.

http://www.sclegacy.com/showpost.php?p=5546&postcount=5

There's a funny post that demonstrates how ridiculous Blizz fans can be.

My favorite moment: "I think the more ability-oriented micro of SCII (which it's starting to look like) is also just another way to cover up poor gamedesign. It's the same as with Browders other RTS (C&C3, which is a fun game might I add, I've been playing it rather a lot lately, even though it actually sucks)"

What I gather:
1. Abilities in strategy games are poor game design (what?)
2. SC2 will be just like C&C3 (notice that there isn't any actual evidence to hold this up.. just the fact that one of the game designers also worked on C&C3)
3. C&C3 is a fun game he plays a lot, but it actually sucks.

I still can't believe people are bitching about auto mine

"I'm still trying to get over the fact that people were/are actually fighting to get more blacks, greys, and browns into Diablo III."

Moar brown is not a good thing.

These people are fuckwads

You think THATs racist? Count the whites!

I'm looking forward to seeing their new scheme. Eff the darker pallette.

Because D2 was not colorful?

Seriously, anyone whining about how great the game looks and that it needs to be more like Doom "can't see shit captain" 3 needs to STFU

It really got THAT MANY signatures? That is ridiculous. I was actually thinking about checking out Diablo 3 now that it doesn't look like ass.

Has there ever been an online petition that actually affected whatever it was petitioning?

That's 50,000 people that should have their throats slit. I'm for colorful games. I didn't buy a $300 video card with 6 trillion colors (lawl) to look at 9mil shades of gray.

Good. I'm glad they ignored the whiny cunts. And I hope they're stupid enough to boycott the game, so that the millions of people who do buy it can play it in peace.

I thought i looked a little bit colourful and bright for a diablo game... and then i watched the trailer and i begun to feel differently. And then when the guy got his head bitten off but the others mananged to kill the giant thing at the end... fuck yeah. I may turn down the brightness a little and put up the contrast a bit, but only if i can really be bothered. This game is gonna rock regardless.