Quick Diablo 3 Question...

[Dog--]

If they ever get around to making it, would you rather them keep it sweet-ass 2D, or gay WoW 3D?

I'd rather (obviously) have it just like the other two, I think that was one of the best selling points of the game for me.. I don't really like 3D MMO's like that, Diablo is such an awesome game, but if D3 is 3D, I probably won't get it..

 

[Pesmerga]

If it is 3D, the camera better be fixed. I want a proper hack n slash! HG:L made everything too busy with a third person camera. Birds eye view kthx.

 

[Lucid]

It'll be made 3D, it's inevitable.

I highly HIGHLY doubt it'd look anything like WoW though, it'll probably more or less have a gritty art style in the same vein as Dungeon Siege or Neverwinter Nights.

I'd prefer it 3D either way, 2D Diablo was nice and pretty... but seeing Diablo with next-gen 3D graphics would be pretty sweet.

 

[Shakermaker]

I'd prefer it 3D either way, 2D Diablo was nice and pretty... but seeing Diablo with next-gen 3D graphics would be pretty sweet.

Seconded.

 

[Dog--]

What about next gen 2D? That'd look sweet.. You can't say it wouldn't.. C'mon.. They could make it so you can zoom and rotate in 2D..

 

[Shakermaker]

What about next gen 2D? That'd look sweet.. You can't say it wouldn't.. C'mon.. They could make it so you can zoom and rotate in 2D..

Then what would be the pint of doing it in 2D? What you're describing is basically 3D.

 

[Dog--]

Rise of Nations kind of 2D is what I'm talking about. I knew there was a game that had what I meant..

 

[Lucid]

Rise of Nations kind of 2D is what I'm talking about. I knew there was a game that had what I meant..

I don't recall being able to rotate the view in RoN...
I could be mistaken.

What you're asking for though, is a bit awkward.
What's so bad about it going 3D?

Trying to work with 2D graphics and pushing it as far as possible seems pointless.

 

[TCfromBN]

It's critical that they keep the dirty, dark feel in the game.

If they go WoW on it, I'm going to be skipping it. Which really would make me sad.


If they stick with 2d, they could have one hell of a good looking game at almost no performance cost though.


I'm not voting. I could see myself liking it either way, so long as it keeps the style of Diablo series.

 

[Dog--]

I don't recall being able to rotate the view in RoN...
I could be mistaken.

What you're asking for though, is a bit awkward.
What's so bad about it going 3D?

Trying to work with 2D graphics and pushing it as far as possible seems pointless.

Actually, I don't think you could.. But if they could add it, it'd be cool.

 

[CyberPitz]

I'd like it any way the threw it on the table.

Though I voted 3D, because it's a direction I've always wanted to take the game. You feel more "IN" the game, in my opinion. I don't know, I think it would rock some socks.

 

[Cole]

I wouldn't see the point of making Diablo 3 in 2d. 3D can do everything 2d can and so much more.

And about Rise of Nations. It was both 3D and 2D. Units were in fact 3D objects(i think), along with the Terrain(for sure). However most buildings were 2D. Thats why when you build some buildings the terrain became *flattened* underneath it. While on stuff like farms the terrain did not change.

 

[Naurgul]

Can't it be 3D but with a fixed camera? 2D sprite-based games are pretty restrictive.

 

[TCfromBN]

They could do it in 3d, it would just be very hard to give it that gritty feel and detail that it truly deserves.

 

[Sedako]

When they do finally get around to making it, I hope they leave all the lovey dovey WoW-like macros and animations out. I got so fed up of the macro spams everywhere I went. I also hope they use a good engine to design it, and not one with ugly low-res textures.

 

[Ravioli]

they can still make it 3D as long as the point of view stays the same. Also the overall art style must be the same, no cartoony shit.

 

[Raziaar]

Super high resolution 2d.

Like... devilishly high.

 

[Pesmerga]

Devilishly high development times to draw that many sprites.

 

[Raziaar]

They can hire vegeta and have him working nonstop for 4 years.

 

[Tagaziel]

Of course three dimensional graphics. Sprites are inefficent, time-consuming and often don't look as good as proper 3D models, especially on today's resolutions (hell, Falout's sprites were first created as 3D models).

Also you are presenting a false dillema in your original post, dude.

 

[Bad^Hat]

3D with 2D aesthetics, if you get my drift. So long as it doesn't go with Blizz's more cartoony 3D approach as seen in WCIII and WoW. SCII is looking fine though, so no worries.

 

[Tagaziel]

Agreed, 3D following previously estabilished aesthetics, just like the late Van Buren did.

 

[Irksome]

Make it 3D and just offer a "retro-camera" so you get that same Diablo angled birds eye view. Making it 2D would be lame, becuase I want to see all the ambient gore (like the ripped apart harem maids) in full 3D, thank you very much.

 

[Pesmerga]

Not really. You have to do textures for 3D models, anyway, and all your backgrounds and whatnot can basically just be done in Photoshop. It might still wind up taking longer, but I don't think the difference would be that big, especially because Blizzard games take forever to come out anyway. The graphics would still be done long before the game is.

Texturing 30-40 different major 3D models takes much less time to draw sprites for several classes and weapons. 3D models are also much easier to work with, and much easier to manipulate and dynamically light.

(classes) * (8*(total class animations) * (total armor appearances)) + 8* weapon appearances

And that's only if you have 8 different angles.

 

[Cole]

To expand on what Permerga said, there are a lot of images. For a single starcraft unit it was around 300 (or was it 600?). Furthermore, Blizzard would have to hire a bunch of people to create all them, and probably be laying off a lot of current 3d modelists.
Plus lets say you have a Barbarian, then you want to add a scar to his face. 3d models you could just change the texuture or add a few veritices. With 2d you have to go back and modify each image. So 300 to 600 images? Plus all the variations in armor and the such?

 

[Pesmerga]

I suppose it would be possible to make the 3d model, and then write a batch script to rotate the model then capture that frame, and do this for all possible armor/weapon/animation sequences.

But still, impractical.

 

[SamuraiKenji]

Diablo kicks so much ass its unreal

 

[Pesmerga]

Makes sense.

 

[Stigmata]

Blizzard's not going to make it sprite-based. That would be stupid.

 

[Eejit]

Maybe like NWN2 with the expansion where you can play it in a 3rd-person 3d view or an overhead 'strategy' view which resembles 2d more.

 

[Cole]

I suppose it would be possible to make the 3d model, and then write a batch script to rotate the model then capture that frame, and do this for all possible armor/weapon/animation sequences.

But still, impractical.

Very true. However, what would be the point? Most computers have the capability and hardware to run 3d programs. Diablo 2, 7 years ago with 40 units on screen without looking like crap? In todays world why not just use the 3D models rather than converting them all to sprites, redoing that on any little graphic change you do? and yes D2 sprites were created from 3d models like that.

Furthermore you have any idea how hard it was to probably create the Arcane Sanctuary in D2? All that was 2D, but looked like it had depth. Furthermore there were some pathfinding issues in that part of the game and some other really weird things with the AI.

 

[Tagaziel]

It was actually pretty easy, as when you take a closer look, the archs are just cleverly positioned to create an illusion of an Escher creation.