Diablo III coming to 360

To all the true PC gamers in this thread, I think we can all agree that this post, and TC, are a complete embarrassment. Diablo 3 on consoles is like big mac at burger king. VideoGameRosado

i agree, even if the console version were somehow better i would still buy the PC version simply because i cant see myself playing diablo on any other console.

although, people need to understand that dungeon crawlers are possible for the consoles, the gameplay just needs to be changed a little (and no i dont mean dumbing down), baldurs gate dark alliance and champions of norrath were highly addicting last gen

For all you Hermits who bashed my threads about how dumb it would be if Blizzard didn't port D3 to its true platforms of choice, the 360 & PS3, I now laugh at you.

While not confirmed...

WillieBeamish

Stopped reading there.

If it is not confirmed by Blizzard themselves, I don't want to hear it. Blizzard is in the unique position of having the final say on all of their games. WoW earned them that right. Activision and Vivendi can argue till they are blue to the face to get Diablo III on consoles. However, they simply cannot do a single thing to sway Blizzard's influence. Since Blizzard is dedicated to keeping this game on the PC, that's where you'll have to play it.

The box art is a photoshop. I don't understand why you think it is real...

aside from the fact that Blizzard hasn't announced anything aside from a PC version (over a year off) an official placeholder for box art wouldn't have a rating yet (aside from Rating Pending) and secondly, if it DID have a rating, it wouldn't be a T rating. Blizzard said when they announced the game that it would be earning its M-rating more than the previous titles in the series.

[QUOTE="Velocitas8"]

[QUOTE="WillieBeamish"]But there are millions of people who will pass this game up because they don't see it as being anything special when sticking it on the annoying PC platform.WillieBeamish

So on PC, Diablo is "annoying" and "nothing special?"

Yet here you are desperately trying to convince us of the need for a console version of that game that's "nothing special?"

You must like Diablo very much, given your enthusiasm and many threads about the game..which contradicts your claims about Diablo on PC being "nothing special" (since, up until now, you can only play Diablo/Diablo II on PC..unless you count the PS1 version of Diablo, which can be safely disregarded)

Sorry, but the fail-level in such logic is is off the charts. Are you sure you aren't just a blind console fanboy? Because then some of what you're saying might begin to make sense.

Edit: Given the part I quoted, I realize this seems like I could be misinterpreting what you said -- however this post was written with some of the previous posts you've made in mind (in your other Diablo III threads.)

Edit2: For those who don't see the contradiction with just this, and to give a bit more context to this post: WillieBeamish has previously made threads calling Diablo III on PC "lackluster" not long after the very first glimpse of the game was given ..and yet here he is making thread after thread about the game. Why does he want such a "lackluster" title to come to consoles? The only reasonable explanation is that he's a console fanboy -- he trash talks the PC version ..but out the other side of his mouth, he turns around and says how awesome the game would be on consoles.

Diablo on PC:

Diablo on Console:

/thread

YOU WIN

The box art is a photoshop. I don't understand why you think it is real...

aside from the fact that Blizzard hasn't announced anything aside from a PC version (over a year off) an official placeholder for box art wouldn't have a rating yet (aside from Rating Pending) and secondly, if it DID have a rating, it wouldn't be a T rating. Blizzard said when they announced the game that it would be earning its M-rating more than the previous titles in the series.

gamer620

Then why the heck are they going for the "cartoony" look?

[QUOTE="gamer620"]

The box art is a photoshop. I don't understand why you think it is real...

aside from the fact that Blizzard hasn't announced anything aside from a PC version (over a year off) an official placeholder for box art wouldn't have a rating yet (aside from Rating Pending) and secondly, if it DID have a rating, it wouldn't be a T rating. Blizzard said when they announced the game that it would be earning its M-rating more than the previous titles in the series.

3XRatedlocc

Then why the heck are they going for the "cartoony" look?

cartoony?

Have you WATCHED the gameplay? When you kill someone they explode into a burst of blood. Some monsters spill their guts everywhere when they die.

Just because it has COLOR doesn't mean it is cartoony. This game will be M-Rated.

As if 360 has Diablo fanbase...Blue-Sky

exactly...its a PC title. i don't think it would do very well on 360.

[QUOTE="gamer620"]

The box art is a photoshop. I don't understand why you think it is real...

aside from the fact that Blizzard hasn't announced anything aside from a PC version (over a year off) an official placeholder for box art wouldn't have a rating yet (aside from Rating Pending) and secondly, if it DID have a rating, it wouldn't be a T rating. Blizzard said when they announced the game that it would be earning its M-rating more than the previous titles in the series.

3XRatedlocc

Then why the heck are they going for the "cartoony" look?

Cartoony compared to what?

[QUOTE="3XRatedlocc"][QUOTE="gamer620"]

The box art is a photoshop. I don't understand why you think it is real...

aside from the fact that Blizzard hasn't announced anything aside from a PC version (over a year off) an official placeholder for box art wouldn't have a rating yet (aside from Rating Pending) and secondly, if it DID have a rating, it wouldn't be a T rating. Blizzard said when they announced the game that it would be earning its M-rating more than the previous titles in the series.

horrowhip

Then why the heck are they going for the "cartoony" look?

cartoony?

Have you WATCHED the gameplay? When you kill someone they explode into a burst of blood. Some monsters spill their guts everywhere when they die.

Just because it has COLOR doesn't mean it is cartoony. This game will be M-Rated.

Oh yeah, I forgot cartoons couldn't have blood... so by your logic, Itchy and Scratchy is not a cartoon?

[QUOTE="WillieBeamish"][QUOTE="Velocitas8"]

[QUOTE="WillieBeamish"]But there are millions of people who will pass this game up because they don't see it as being anything special when sticking it on the annoying PC platform.3XRatedlocc

So on PC, Diablo is "annoying" and "nothing special?"

Yet here you are desperately trying to convince us of the need for a console version of that game that's "nothing special?"

You must like Diablo very much, given your enthusiasm and many threads about the game..which contradicts your claims about Diablo on PC being "nothing special" (since, up until now, you can only play Diablo/Diablo II on PC..unless you count the PS1 version of Diablo, which can be safely disregarded)

Sorry, but the fail-level in such logic is is off the charts. Are you sure you aren't just a blind console fanboy? Because then some of what you're saying might begin to make sense.

Edit: Given the part I quoted, I realize this seems like I could be misinterpreting what you said -- however this post was written with some of the previous posts you've made in mind (in your other Diablo III threads.)

Edit2: For those who don't see the contradiction with just this, and to give a bit more context to this post: WillieBeamish has previously made threads calling Diablo III on PC "lackluster" not long after the very first glimpse of the game was given ..and yet here he is making thread after thread about the game. Why does he want such a "lackluster" title to come to consoles? The only reasonable explanation is that he's a console fanboy -- he trash talks the PC version ..but out the other side of his mouth, he turns around and says how awesome the game would be on consoles.

Diablo on PC:

Diablo on Console:

/thread

YOU WIN

Inserts PC HDMI into TV, done.

[QUOTE="Velocitas8"]

[QUOTE="WillieBeamish"]But there are millions of people who will pass this game up because they don't see it as being anything special when sticking it on the annoying PC platform.WillieBeamish

So on PC, Diablo is "annoying" and "nothing special?"

Yet here you are desperately trying to convince us of the need for a console version of that game that's "nothing special?"

You must like Diablo very much, given your enthusiasm and many threads about the game..which contradicts your claims about Diablo on PC being "nothing special" (since, up until now, you can only play Diablo/Diablo II on PC..unless you count the PS1 version of Diablo, which can be safely disregarded)

Sorry, but the fail-level in such logic is is off the charts. Are you sure you aren't just a blind console fanboy? Because then some of what you're saying might begin to make sense.

Edit: Given the part I quoted, I realize this seems like I could be misinterpreting what you said -- however this post was written with some of the previous posts you've made in mind (in your other Diablo III threads.)

Edit2: For those who don't see the contradiction with just this, and to give a bit more context to this post: WillieBeamish has previously made threads calling Diablo III on PC "lackluster" not long after the very first glimpse of the game was given ..and yet here he is making thread after thread about the game. Why does he want such a "lackluster" title to come to consoles? The only reasonable explanation is that he's a console fanboy -- he trash talks the PC version ..but out the other side of his mouth, he turns around and says how awesome the game would be on consoles.

Diablo on PC:

Diablo on Console:

/thread

I'd rather play games like Diablo on a computer desk than a couch.

Even if a monitor screen is smaller, it's sorta irrelivent unless you plan on playing a foot away from your tv, thanks to the invention of perspective, things that are closer (wait for it) are bigger, things that are further away, are smaller.

A prime example.

[QUOTE="3XRatedlocc"][QUOTE="WillieBeamish"][QUOTE="Velocitas8"]

[QUOTE="WillieBeamish"]But there are millions of people who will pass this game up because they don't see it as being anything special when sticking it on the annoying PC platform.Bebi_vegeta

So on PC, Diablo is "annoying" and "nothing special?"

Yet here you are desperately trying to convince us of the need for a console version of that game that's "nothing special?"

You must like Diablo very much, given your enthusiasm and many threads about the game..which contradicts your claims about Diablo on PC being "nothing special" (since, up until now, you can only play Diablo/Diablo II on PC..unless you count the PS1 version of Diablo, which can be safely disregarded)

Sorry, but the fail-level in such logic is is off the charts. Are you sure you aren't just a blind console fanboy? Because then some of what you're saying might begin to make sense.

Edit: Given the part I quoted, I realize this seems like I could be misinterpreting what you said -- however this post was written with some of the previous posts you've made in mind (in your other Diablo III threads.)

Edit2: For those who don't see the contradiction with just this, and to give a bit more context to this post: WillieBeamish has previously made threads calling Diablo III on PC "lackluster" not long after the very first glimpse of the game was given ..and yet here he is making thread after thread about the game. Why does he want such a "lackluster" title to come to consoles? The only reasonable explanation is that he's a console fanboy -- he trash talks the PC version ..but out the other side of his mouth, he turns around and says how awesome the game would be on consoles.

Diablo on PC:

Diablo on Console:

/thread

YOU WIN

Inserts PC HDMI into TV, done.

I meant the picture of the Blizzard fanboy was win, I don't give a crap if you can hook up your computer to a TV, I know that, I'm mainly a hermit.

Don't see why they couldn't do Diablo 3 for the consoles, Starcraft 2 I think not, Diablo 3, possible..

I don't think there is anything stopping it, yeah sure it might play better on PC, but so does every FPS in my opinion.
So if gamers for some reason will "put up" with console FPSs, then what's the problem with a hack and slash? They'll all be playing with the same "limits" on PSN/XBL.

And I'm CERTAIN they could pull off the graphics.

[QUOTE="horrowhip"][QUOTE="3XRatedlocc"][QUOTE="gamer620"]

The box art is a photoshop. I don't understand why you think it is real...

aside from the fact that Blizzard hasn't announced anything aside from a PC version (over a year off) an official placeholder for box art wouldn't have a rating yet (aside from Rating Pending) and secondly, if it DID have a rating, it wouldn't be a T rating. Blizzard said when they announced the game that it would be earning its M-rating more than the previous titles in the series.

3XRatedlocc

Then why the heck are they going for the "cartoony" look?

cartoony?

Have you WATCHED the gameplay? When you kill someone they explode into a burst of blood. Some monsters spill their guts everywhere when they die.

Just because it has COLOR doesn't mean it is cartoony. This game will be M-Rated.

Oh yeah, I forgot cartoons couldn't have blood... so by your logic, Itchy and Scratchy is not a cartoon?

You haven't tackled his main point.

The fact is that art direction, not color, dictates whether or not the game is "cartoony". Color is just a fraction of the overall picture. The fact is that the game displays a very Dark Fantasy/Gothic art style with (for the most part) realistic proportions on their character designs. "Cartoons" tend to exaggerate their proportions on their character designs since they are meant to be caricatures of the subjects they portray.

Learn to know the different because you sure as hell don't know a single thing about art.

[QUOTE="Bebi_vegeta"][QUOTE="3XRatedlocc"][QUOTE="WillieBeamish"]

Diablo on PC:

Diablo on Console:

/thread

3XRatedlocc

YOU WIN

Inserts PC HDMI into TV, done.

I meant the picture of the Blizzard fanboy was win, I don't give a crap if you can hook up your computer to a TV, I know that, I'm mainly a hermit.

Don't see why they couldn't do Diablo 3 for the consoles, Starcraft 2 I think not, Diablo 3, possible..

I don't think there is anything stopping it, yeah sure it might play better on PC, but so does every FPS in my opinion.
So if gamers for some reason will "put up" with console FPSs, then what's the problem with a hack and slash? They'll all be playing with the same "limits" on PSN/XBL.

And I'm CERTAIN they could pull off the graphics.

Hell I could careless if this games goes to console, all I want is a good diablo game for the PC. Sure you can make a game for new clients that don't know the Diablo series, but what's really important is the fanbase. Hopefully this game will be made for PC gamers and it's fanbase in mind.

[QUOTE="3XRatedlocc"][QUOTE="horrowhip"][QUOTE="3XRatedlocc"][QUOTE="gamer620"]

The box art is a photoshop. I don't understand why you think it is real...

aside from the fact that Blizzard hasn't announced anything aside from a PC version (over a year off) an official placeholder for box art wouldn't have a rating yet (aside from Rating Pending) and secondly, if it DID have a rating, it wouldn't be a T rating. Blizzard said when they announced the game that it would be earning its M-rating more than the previous titles in the series.

Redmoonxl2

Then why the heck are they going for the "cartoony" look?

cartoony?

Have you WATCHED the gameplay? When you kill someone they explode into a burst of blood. Some monsters spill their guts everywhere when they die.

Just because it has COLOR doesn't mean it is cartoony. This game will be M-Rated.

Oh yeah, I forgot cartoons couldn't have blood... so by your logic, Itchy and Scratchy is not a cartoon?

You haven't tackled his main point.

The fact is that art direction, not color, dictates whether or not the game is "cartoony". Color is just a fraction of the overall picture. The fact is that the game displays a very Dark Fantasy/Gothic art style with (for the most part) realistic proportions on their character designs. "Cartoons" tend to exaggerate their proportions on their character designs since they are meant to be caricatures of the subjects they portray.

Learn to know the different because you sure as hell don't know a single thing about art.

Great job pulling words out my mouth, when did I ever even mention color?
I would put Diablos art styyle(worthless gamespot, can't type styyle wtf is that?) betweeen that of WoW(extremely cartoonish) and original Diablo.

And if you don't think the art styyle(seriously, F gamespot) for Diablo 3 is cartoony compared to it's predecessors why don't you go and tell that to the thousands of Diablo fanboys who signed a petition that wanted the old art styyle(now I'm losing it gamespot) back.

Hell I could careless if this games goes to console, all I want is a good diablo game for the PC. Sure you can make a game for new clients that don't know the Diablo series, but what's really important is the fanbase. Hopefully this game will be made for PC gamers and it's fanbase in mind.Bebi_vegeta

And that's why they shouldn't screw with the fans by changing the IP into some twisted offspring of WoW.

As if 360 has Diablo fanbase...Blue-Sky

Console fanboys wanting this game is funny as hell. Have you already forgotten the fact that wouldn't be set up to battle.net? Guess so. After all we've already gotten a first hand view of big hit pc games being ported to consoles and having s**t for an online component. LOL TF2 on consoles LOL.

Get real, the game will never appear on consoles. With Diablo 3, Starcraft 2, and Wotlk, Blizzard will make more money then most developers have made in their whole damn career.

You want the game's Blizzard creates, get a pc.

I dont want a watered down console Port, Diablo has huge a Fanbase on PC, more than enough to make Profit with.

Either a 360 or Ps3 port'd be a joke.

For all you Hermits who bashed my threads about how dumb it would be if Blizzard didn't port D3 to its true platforms of choice, the 360 & PS3, I now laugh at you.

While not confirmed, the fact that Vivendi stands to pocket an additional HALF A BILLION DOLLARS on a console port, do you honestly think Blizzard has ANY SAY in whether or not it gets the port?

WillieBeamish

Im still getting the PC version.

we have jobs & familiesWillieBeamish

I don't believe you

[QUOTE="Redmoonxl2"]

You haven't tackled his main point.

The fact is that art direction, not color, dictates whether or not the game is "cartoony". Color is just a fraction of the overall picture. The fact is that the game displays a very Dark Fantasy/Gothic art style with (for the most part) realistic proportions on their character designs. "Cartoons" tend to exaggerate their proportions on their character designs since they are meant to be caricatures of the subjects they portray.

Learn to know the different because you sure as hell don't know a single thing about art.

3XRatedlocc

Great job pulling words out my mouth, when did I ever even mention color?
I would put Diablos art styyle(worthless gamespot, can't type styyle wtf is that?) betweeen that of WoW(extremely cartoonish) and original Diablo.

And if you don't think the art styyle(seriously, F gamespot) for Diablo 3 is cartoony compared to it's predecessors why don't you go and tell that to the thousands of Diablo fanboys who signed a petition that wanted the old art styyle(now I'm losing it gamespot) back.

The thousands of supposed Diablo 2 fanboys don't know a single thing about art as well.

Also, I already explained the difference between "cartoony" and "realistic" in terms of art direction. I love how you completely ignored the points I brought up. The fact is that color is the major factor behind the complaints (Which is silly since Diablo 2 was a colorful game outside of the Light Radius system), yet the character designs has minimum exaggerations via proportions in their armor and their anatomy. You should try looking at WoW before even comparing the two art designs.

My advice: Don't say anything about art direction if you don't know how to compare art.

[QUOTE="Redmoonxl2"][QUOTE="3XRatedlocc"][QUOTE="horrowhip"][QUOTE="3XRatedlocc"][QUOTE="gamer620"]

The box art is a photoshop. I don't understand why you think it is real...

aside from the fact that Blizzard hasn't announced anything aside from a PC version (over a year off) an official placeholder for box art wouldn't have a rating yet (aside from Rating Pending) and secondly, if it DID have a rating, it wouldn't be a T rating. Blizzard said when they announced the game that it would be earning its M-rating more than the previous titles in the series.

3XRatedlocc

Then why the heck are they going for the "cartoony" look?

cartoony?

Have you WATCHED the gameplay? When you kill someone they explode into a burst of blood. Some monsters spill their guts everywhere when they die.

Just because it has COLOR doesn't mean it is cartoony. This game will be M-Rated.

Oh yeah, I forgot cartoons couldn't have blood... so by your logic, Itchy and Scratchy is not a cartoon?

You haven't tackled his main point.

The fact is that art direction, not color, dictates whether or not the game is "cartoony". Color is just a fraction of the overall picture. The fact is that the game displays a very Dark Fantasy/Gothic art style with (for the most part) realistic proportions on their character designs. "Cartoons" tend to exaggerate their proportions on their character designs since they are meant to be caricatures of the subjects they portray.

Learn to know the different because you sure as hell don't know a single thing about art.

Great job pulling words out my mouth, when did I ever even mention color?
I would put Diablos art styyle(worthless gamespot, can't type styyle wtf is that?) betweeen that of WoW(extremely cartoonish) and original Diablo.

And if you don't think the art styyle(seriously, F gamespot) for Diablo 3 is cartoony compared to it's predecessors why don't you go and tell that to the thousands of Diablo fanboys who signed a petition that wanted the old art styyle(now I'm losing it gamespot) back.

Diablo's art sty1e is FAR from WoW's, and looks more like a natural evolution of Diablo II's. Those "thousands of Diablo fanboys who signed a petition" are just looking at the past with rose colored glasses. The only difference really IS the use color.

You know, I kinda do want Blizzard to make a successful diablo III console port, just prove a point. Consolization is not synonomous with casualization, like most hermits seem to think. I believe a full capable port is possible, and it would not water down the PC version in any way. Casualization is a result of broader fanbase appeal, and has nothing to do with more games being designed with consoles in mind.DrinkDuff

PC gamers have every right to complain about casualization. What's ironic is that you have all these 360/PS3 fans complaining about Wii casualizing things when there are clear examples for Hermits to use in their arguements but not one example can be used from the 360/PS3 camp.

You know, I kinda do want Blizzard to make a successful diablo III console port, just prove a point. Consolization is not synonomous with casualization, like most hermits seem to think. I believe a full capable port is possible, and it would not water down the PC version in any way. Casualization is a result of broader fanbase appeal, and has nothing to do with more games being designed with consoles in mind.DrinkDuff

Games ported from the PC are limited by an unfamiliar interface and features of a console that it wasn't designed for to begin with. It would be the same thing if a console game was ported to the PC console. People seem to ignore this fact, yet developers take it into account. This has happened with Supcom, CNC3, Starcarft 64, Diablo for the PSX, and so many others. Every console port of a PC game are constantly missing a feature from the PC game, slowed down by a forced control scheme, or lacks the refinement the PC version enjoys.

You cannot get the same experience on consoles ports as you would the PC originals. To think otherwise is contrary to reality. It'd be like me saying that Super Mario Bros. is best on the PC.

[QUOTE="DrinkDuff"]You know, I kinda do want Blizzard to make a successful diablo III console port, just prove a point. Consolization is not synonomous with casualization, like most hermits seem to think. I believe a full capable port is possible, and it would not water down the PC version in any way. Casualization is a result of broader fanbase appeal, and has nothing to do with more games being designed with consoles in mind.Blackbond

PC gamers have every right to complain about casualization. What's ironic is that you have all these 360/PS3 fans complaining about Wii casualizing things when there are clear examples for Hermits to use in their arguements but not one example can be used from the 360/PS3 camp.

Yea, absolutely, it's not mindless hate, it is happening

You know, I kinda do want Blizzard to make a successful diablo III console port, just prove a point. Consolization is not synonomous with casualization, like most hermits seem to think. I believe a full capable port is possible, and it would not water down the PC version in any way. Casualization is a result of broader fanbase appeal, and has nothing to do with more games being designed with consoles in mind.DrinkDuff

Shall I list some more?

As if 360 has Diablo fanbase...Blue-Sky

I'd buy it

As if this is going to be on 360. You see WoW on the 360? Or Starcraft?

Casualization is a result of broader fanbase appeal, and has nothing to do with more games being designed with consoles in mind.DrinkDuff

[QUOTE="3XRatedlocc"]

[QUOTE="Redmoonxl2"]

You haven't tackled his main point.

The fact is that art direction, not color, dictates whether or not the game is "cartoony". Color is just a fraction of the overall picture. The fact is that the game displays a very Dark Fantasy/Gothic art style with (for the most part) realistic proportions on their character designs. "Cartoons" tend to exaggerate their proportions on their character designs since they are meant to be caricatures of the subjects they portray.

Learn to know the different because you sure as hell don't know a single thing about art.

Redmoonxl2

Great job pulling words out my mouth, when did I ever even mention color?
I would put Diablos art styyle(worthless gamespot, can't type styyle wtf is that?) betweeen that of WoW(extremely cartoonish) and original Diablo.

And if you don't think the art styyle(seriously, F gamespot) for Diablo 3 is cartoony compared to it's predecessors why don't you go and tell that to the thousands of Diablo fanboys who signed a petition that wanted the old art styyle(now I'm losing it gamespot) back.

The thousands of supposed Diablo 2 fanboys don't know a single thing about art as well.

Also, I already explained the difference between "cartoony" and "realistic" in terms of art direction. I love how you completely ignored the points I brought up. The fact is that color is the major factor behind the complaints (Which is silly since Diablo 2 was a colorful game outside of the Light Radius system), yet the character designs has minimum exaggerations via proportions in their armor and their anatomy. You should try looking at WoW before even comparing the two art designs.

My advice: Don't say anything about art direction if you don't know how to compare art.

Come off your high horse pal, you're not the only one who "understands" art.

You started off by talking about color which is strange cause I never even mentioned it.
Fact off the matter is colors matter though, to a slight degree, it won't matter that much if the colors are bright when the art of the game is gothic, only when combined with caricature proportions(like Diablo 3) pastel looking colors and the similar art ****to WoW.

Say whatever you want, that is NOT dark fantasy/gothic, don't make me laugh.
It's like I said, a mixture between the popular cartoony WoW graphics and dark, gothic graphics.

It's neither, but the graphics are slightly cartoonish.

When I read through that thread the majority of people complaining about the petition was the ones who didn't understand that a darker monitor wouldn't make the athmosphere of the game darker.
On the other hand the people that signed the petition could explain in detail what they felt was wrong with the art.
What that tells me is that the ones complaining actually know what art is while the people that were satisfied(not surprisingly) with the looks of the game didn't understand squat... "Bu-h-but.. just turn the brightness down on the monitor." seriously.....

What that tells me is that the ones complaining actually know what art is

3XRatedlocc

stop the presses, there's now an official definition of art.

[QUOTE="3XRatedlocc"]

What that tells me is that the ones complaining actually know what art is

Hewkii

stop the presses, there's now an official definition of art.

Technicalities aside, are you saying some people don't have a better understanding of art than others?
If I had two friends, one who could barely paint, one who could paint really good showing off his creativity,
and I had to ask one of them for advice on art, I would go for the latter even if there is no definition of art.

For all you Hermits who bashed my threads about how dumb it would be if Blizzard didn't port D3 to its true platforms of choice, the 360 & PS3, I now laugh at you.

While not confirmed, the fact that Vivendi stands to pocket an additional HALF A BILLION DOLLARS on a console port, do you honestly think Blizzard has ANY SAY in whether or not it gets the port?

WillieBeamish

Diablo 3 would be M for Mature. : / I'd like to see Vivendi try to force Blizzard to make a console port, it won't happen unless Blizzard wants to.

[QUOTE="Redmoonxl2"]

The thousands of supposed Diablo 2 fanboys don't know a single thing about art as well.

Also, I already explained the difference between "cartoony" and "realistic" in terms of art direction. I love how you completely ignored the points I brought up. The fact is that color is the major factor behind the complaints (Which is silly since Diablo 2 was a colorful game outside of the Light Radius system), yet the character designs has minimum exaggerations via proportions in their armor and their anatomy. You should try looking at WoW before even comparing the two art designs.

My advice: Don't say anything about art direction if you don't know how to compare art.

3XRatedlocc

Come off your high horse pal, you're not the only one who "understands" art.

Never said I was. I simply stated that if you don't know how to compare, you shouldn't comment.

You started off by talking about color which is strange cause I never even mentioned it.
Fact off the matter is colors matter though, to a slight degree, it won't matter that much if the colors are bright when the art of the game is gothic, only when combined with caricature proportions(like Diablo 3) pastel looking colors and the similar art ****to WoW.3XRatedlocc

Let me take you to a comment I stated in my last post.

"The fact is that color is the major factor behind the complaints"

Noticed the "s" in the word "complaints"?

Also, lets compare WoW to Diablo 3, shall we?

Hmmm...

Say whatever you want, that is NOT dark fantasy/gothic, don't make me laugh.
It's like I said, a mixture between the popular cartoony WoW graphics and dark, gothic graphics.

It's neither, but the graphics are slightly cartoonish.3XRatedlocc

Just proved you wrong since there is a clear difference between the WoW picks I've posted and the Diablo 3 pics. Also, anything that contains extreme violence and/or sexuality in fantasy setting is considered "Dark Fantasy". Diablo 3's art direction is clearly gothic. Guess you were wrong in that respect, eh?

By the way, I love that last quote. Trying to have your cake and eat it, eh?

When I read through that thread the majority of people complaining about the petition was the ones who didn't understand that a darker monitor wouldn't make the athmosphere of the game darker.
On the other hand the people that signed the petition could explain in detail what they felt was wrong with the art.
What that tells me is that the ones complaining actually know what art is while the people that were satisfied(not surprisingly) with the looks of the game didn't understand squat... "Bu-h-but.. just turn the brightness down on the monitor." seriously.....3XRatedlocc

People complaining are the same people that complain that the game is too colorful, too bright, and too WoW-esqe. However, I just proved those complaints to be false. The two are simply not comparable. This is why I said "If you can't tell the difference between art design, don't comment on it". You simply cannot point out close similarities. What's on screen in both games are clearly different than one another. Diablo III simply takes anatomy, color selection, and background design more seriously than WoW by a large margin. WoW is meant to be a goofy exaggeration of the fantasy genre, hence all the color, huge shoulder pads, insanely big weapons, yata yata.

Again, if you cannot tell the difference, you shouldn't really speak.

I am curious.... What is a successful Isometric hack and slash game on consoles? I can't understand how people would prefer this type of action experience on a console... Even Too Human is a behind the back camera. Loki, which was a hack and slash title, was behind the back. Fallout 3, a franchise that is typically played via an Isometric view has been turned into an FPS. The only game i can think of was Record of Lodoss war for the Dreamcast nearly 10 years ago...and aside from some decent acclaim, the game wasn't very successful... point being... the camera system in Diablo, aka, the Isometric 2.5 D view does not lend itself to sitting farther away from the screen as everything on screen is smaller. It is much the same reason why RTS games really haven't been successful on consoles as well (excluding the controls).

I just realized Xmen: Legends was psuedo isometric... even still though, the camera was pulled in far closer.

[QUOTE="3XRatedlocc"][QUOTE="Redmoonxl2"]

The thousands of supposed Diablo 2 fanboys don't know a single thing about art as well.

Also, I already explained the difference between "cartoony" and "realistic" in terms of art direction. I love how you completely ignored the points I brought up. The fact is that color is the major factor behind the complaints (Which is silly since Diablo 2 was a colorful game outside of the Light Radius system), yet the character designs has minimum exaggerations via proportions in their armor and their anatomy. You should try looking at WoW before even comparing the two art designs.

My advice: Don't say anything about art direction if you don't know how to compare art.

Redmoonxl2

Come off your high horse pal, you're not the only one who "understands" art.

Never said I was. I simply stated that if you don't know how to compare, you shouldn't comment.

You started off by talking about color which is strange cause I never even mentioned it.
Fact off the matter is colors matter though, to a slight degree, it won't matter that much if the colors are bright when the art of the game is gothic, only when combined with caricature proportions(like Diablo 3) pastel looking colors and the similar art ****to WoW.3XRatedlocc

Let me take you to a comment I stated in my last post.

"The fact is that color is the major factor behind the complaints"

Noticed the "s" in the word "complaints"?

Also, lets compare WoW to Diablo 3, shall we?

Hmmm...

Say whatever you want, that is NOT dark fantasy/gothic, don't make me laugh.
It's like I said, a mixture between the popular cartoony WoW graphics and dark, gothic graphics.

It's neither, but the graphics are slightly cartoonish.3XRatedlocc

Just proved you wrong since there is a clear difference between the WoW picks I've posted and the Diablo 3 pics. Also, anything that contains extreme violence and/or sexuality in fantasy setting is considered "Dark Fantasy". Diablo 3's art direction is clearly gothic. Guess you were wrong in that respect, eh?

By the way, I love that last quote. Trying to have your cake and eat it, eh?

When I read through that thread the majority of people complaining about the petition was the ones who didn't understand that a darker monitor wouldn't make the athmosphere of the game darker.
On the other hand the people that signed the petition could explain in detail what they felt was wrong with the art.
What that tells me is that the ones complaining actually know what art is while the people that were satisfied(not surprisingly) with the looks of the game didn't understand squat... "Bu-h-but.. just turn the brightness down on the monitor." seriously.....3XRatedlocc

People complaining are the same people that complain that the game is too color, too bright, and too WoW-esqe. However, I just proved that to be false. The two **** are simply not comparable. This is why I said "If you can't tell the difference between art design, don't comment on it". You simply cannot point out close similarities. However, what's on screen in both games are clearly different than one another.

Again, if you cannot tell the difference, you shouldn't really speak.

The only thing you proved was that if I post pics of Duck Tails I can claim WoW to look gothic and dark, as always everything is not just black and white.

Yes and the fact is that the majority of the complainers was not talking about colors, I repeat NOT talking about colors, check the original thread if you want to, I think WillieBleamish or whatever his name is made it.

For the third time, it's gothic, but it's also cartoonish.

Lets bring in another game to get some perspective and perhaps prove my point, Warhammer AOR with a setting that would make Diablo himself cry.. a far darker and far more gothic universe than Diablo, yet the games graphics are slightly cartoonish,
although not quite as cartoonish as Diablo 3 it still is a little bit cartoonish.
Hooooow_ Please explain art master, I must know!

No you proved nothing, you posted pictures of a extremely cartoonish game with pictures from Diablo 3, of course it will make Diablo 3 look darker and more realistic, Ive already pointed that out, still doesnt make Diablo 3 quite as gothic as youd hoped though.

From Mike Morhaime himself,

"You also asked about console. There a lot of people at Blizzard that love playing consoles games, a lot of us have consoles at home, a lot of people love Guitar Hero, the Wii is becoming very popular. When Blizzard goes to make a game we look at what is the appropriate platform for each of our games. Our primary focus is on the PC, but I wouldn't rule out us continuing to look at console in the future if it was appropriate for the game."

The only thing you proved was that if I post pics of Duck Tails I can claim WoW to look gothic and dark, as always everything is not just black and white.

Yes and the fact is that the majority of the complainers was not talking about colors, I repeat NOT talking about colors, check the original thread if you want to, I think WillieBleamish or whatever his name is made it.

For the third time, it's gothic, but it's also cartoonish.

3XRatedlocc

Are you that dense? If you were to post pictures of Duck Tails to compare it to WoW, you can argue that, yes, WoW is a much "darker" setting than Duck Tails. The point ofme posting pictures of WoW to compare it to Diablo III is to point out the differences. Notice that WoW's colors are more solid than Diablo III's distribution on the character and on the environmen. Notice as well that WoW's character design is complete exaggerated while Diablo III's character design is much more realistic and evenly proportioned. I already state what makes soemthing "cartoony", yet you liberally use the word without knowing the meaning?

3X, you are only making yourself look like a fool.

Lets bring in another game to get some perspective and perhaps prove my point, Warhammer AOR with a setting that would make Diablo himself cry.. a far darker and far more gothic universe than Diablo, yet the games graphics are slightly cartoonish,
although not quite as cartoonish as Diablo 3 it still is a little bit cartoonish.
Hooooow_ Please explain art master, I must know!3XRatedlocc

Again, the definition of cartooning is the exaggeration of a setting and character design. You can have a dark and gothic setting in cartooning. However, you cannot claim that by taking the cartooning route in the design that the art is "realistic" by any measure in terms of design. Warhammer AoR is, in fact, quite "cartoony" with it's art direction since there are several elements with the art design that are simply exaggerated.

While there are elements of WAR that borderlines something that is "realistic", there are just as much examples in the game that are clearly exaggerated to look silly and humorous, not meant to take itself too seriously. Diablo III has yet to show something as "cartoony" (I hate this word) as an Ork or a Goblin from Warhammer AoR. Every design in DIII shown thus far has been details, meant to be taken seriously, exaggeration is kept to a minimum, and are not in there to lighten up the mood. To claim that Warhammer Online is less cartoony than Diablo III demostrations your lack of understanding when it comes to comparing art.

No you proved nothing, you posted pictures of a extremely cartoonish game with pictures from Diablo 3, of course it will make Diablo 3 look darker and more realistic, Ive already pointed that out, still doesnt make Diablo 3 quite as gothic as youd hoped though.

3XRatedlocc

God, you are dense. Again, the game I compared it to was WoW. You claimed that Diablo's art direction was very close to WoW, yet I've proved you wrong. Also, gothic does not equal realism. Gothic is a design choice. Now you can't even remember what you are arguing about. Come back when you have a clear idea what you are talking about.