“Bethesda Softworks Can Suck It”

[FeelTheRads]

Sure, from our perspective they look like a bunch of spoiled brats who should treasure what they have before Bethesda buys it, but how are they to know that?

Fair enough, although from an outsider's point of view it looks like Blizzard cares. And so far they've only "fucked up" WarCraft. I'm sure there are people who don't like changes from Diablo 1 to Diablo 2 (hell, I liked Diablo 1 better myself) and people who won't like changed in StarCraft 2 and so on, but I certainly wouldn't go as far as calling them "misunderstanding" and what not. I still have to see Blizzard alienate their fan-base.

Why would they do that? They haven't played it yet.

Neither did we, and we express our disappointment on how it looks. Why wouldn't they do the same?

So D3 winning over F3 is hardly a victory of the thinking man.

Didn't mean that. Even though I'm sure the complexity of Fallout 3 will just be a facade and in the end it will be just as complex as Diablo, when I said "people who think" I meant people who don't consider a game bad just because it uses an "old" perspective and doesn't jump in the bandwagon.

 

[Phil the Nuka-Cola Dude]

Claiming Diablo 3 will "win" anything based on people "thinking" is pretty far out there, dude. I'm going out on a limb and guessing that while there is probably not as much thought and polish put into the design of Fallout 3 as is in the design of Diablo 3, I'd still wager Fallout 3 is more complex to play than Diablo 3.

So D3 winning over F3 is hardly a victory of the thinking man.

I dunno...


With fast travel, a compass (which will probably include quest arrows), and dumbed down dialog; it seems like thought required will be kept at a minimum, and your hand will be held the entire way through. I'd guess that they'll probably be about even in complexity.

 

[Brother None]

Neither did we, and we express our disappointment on how it looks. Why wouldn't they do the same?

Because they're professionals?

You'll find NMA's Fallout 3 preview is a lot more toned down than the average posting here, and I toned down even further for GameBanshee. That has nothing to do with appeasing anyone, it's just being professional: I don't know what Fallout 3 plays like. I have plenty of ideas how it probably will, and what I might or might not dislike, but until I play it, it is not fine to say such things while acting as a professional.

Just posting on a forum? Fine. I'm not that tied down to my job that I can't just go around stating my opinion.

But any developer is. Hell, this very thread proves it. Cheng makes a fairly innocent remarks and gets dragged around by his nose-hairs for it. Do you really, REALLY think any of the bosses of any Fallout developer (and most of them are still in the gaming industry, or might return to it someday) would appreciate them slagging another company without any grounds? It's not really considered professional behaviour. Hell, even saying "the game's pretty shit" after having played it is frowned upon; a developer can do it, but he'll normally opt not to (believe you me, I know developers who think pretty clearly that Oblivion is shit).

Boyarsky's comment on Bethesda's purchase of the license is probably as far as you can get, as well as Chris Taylor and Tim Cain both avowing to be looking forward to trying out Fallout 3.

Didn't mean that. Even though I'm sure the complexity of Fallout 3 will just be a facade and in the end it will be just as complex as Diablo, when I said "people who think" I meant people who don't consider a game bad just because it uses an "old" perspective and doesn't jump in the bandwagon.

I think you'll find Joe Average is actually not really that aware of there being any bandwagon on which to jump.

EDIT: and Kotaku joins the fray. Nice picture.

 

[FeelTheRads]

Because they're professionals?

Not slagging, not saying it's shit. Simply saying something along the lines of "This is not what I would've have done. Fallout shouldn't be like this." doesn't sounds unprofessional to me.
But it may just be me wishing, hoping, dreaming that someday, someone will just slap Bethesda over its smug face.

I think you'll find Joe Average is actually not really that aware of there being any bandwagon on which to jump.

Heh, you don't think too highly of the average Diablo fan, do you? If that's what you wanted to say...
Truth be told, neither do I... I have encountered many who couldn't be really told apart from the average Oblivion fan.. or the average Fallout fan - after all we have these too. And they are probably those who would dis Diablo 3 for not being first-person. But there are those who understand what Diablo is about, those who realize that its frenetic gameplay could never ever, under no circumstance be reproduced in first-person.
All that said it seems that there more people who understand the importance of the perspective in Diablo than people who understand its importance in Fallout. It might be of course because Diablo's fan-base is much larger, but it doesn't matter... what matter is it will hopefully make a difference and hopefully Diablo will save the iso-metric perspective. Kinda ironic after it was accused of destroying the RPG genre, I know... but hey... take what you can.

Note though that I never accused Diablo of that. I accuse Bioware and Bethesda.

 

[Brother None]

Not slagging, not saying it's shit. Simply saying something along the lines of "This is not what I would've have done. Fallout shouldn't be like this." doesn't sounds unprofessional to me.

But it is.

To stay with cars here, imagine Toyota announces they have a new car in the works, and then someone working for Daihatsu - who worked on the Toyota models of the same type - takes one look at the plans and media coverage and announces that it is shit - he wouldn't do it like that. Hell - imagine if it was the founder of Toyota (I assume he's dead, but whatever) having moved over to Daihatsu and then proceeding to say he doesn't think Toyota cars are very good.

Very, very unprofessional.

Heh, you don't think too highly of the average Diablo fan, do you?

I'm not sure what you think I'm saying.

What I'm saying is: the spread of the propaganda of first-person has not nearly spread as much as we who actively read gaming media would believe. Most people really, honestly don't care about it, they just want it to look good, but it can look good in any perspective, really.

 

[FeelTheRads]

I'm not sure what you think I'm saying.

What I'm saying is: the spread of the propaganda of first-person has not nearly spread as much as we who actively read gaming media would believe. Most people really, honestly don't care about it, they just want it to look good, but it can look good in any perspective, really.

I see... didn't got it quite right. Heh.

I don't know, though... certainly I have no numbers to base this upon, but simply looking around and not only at people posting around the internet, but at people I meet who don't have much exposure to the gaming media, I can see it's spread pretty much as I expected.
And of course it's the fault of the media, because since we're talking about the Average Joe here, it's enough just to have a brief touch with a magazine or gaming site to become the next first-person fan. What do you see in these magazines and sites? "Whatever game achieves unprecedented levels of immersion by using the first-person perspective". Then you'll have this Average Joe going around shouting out how first-person is the awesome because it was just invented 2 months ago by Bethesda. Exactly because they don't know anything about what was before can they be fooled so easily.

 

[Seymour the spore plant]

Not slagging, not saying it's shit. Simply saying something along the lines of "This is not what I would've have done. Fallout shouldn't be like this." doesn't sounds unprofessional to me.

Well, to be perfectly honest, that was kinda what mr Cheng did there.

That said, I still agree 100% with the response he got from blizzardguru, both in content and on the "STFU" tone. I don't work in the industry, but seeing such a comment from a developer is rare enough to assume that it's frowned upon. Plus, judging from both the update on his post and his last comment, I'd say he realized that he messed up.

 

[FeelTheRads]

Well, to be perfectly honest, that was kinda what mr Cheng did there.

Except he, thankfully, didn't have anything do to with any StarCraft or Diablo game.

 

[Lexx]

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/images/july08/d3wow.jpg
This comparison in particular made me think... It's true, the first one is so much better. I hope blizzard changes it. They probably will...

It does?

It looks to me like they're clamboring for Diablo III to adapt the same "brown is real" grey shit that is supposed to transfer "atmospheric" to the player.

Indeed, but Diablo 1 was also more depressing AND varied. It was more darker but also with more colors.

See this or this or this as example.

 

[Morbus]

It's not about real, it's about style... I remember Fallout being one of the brownest games in its time.

 

[Brother None]

It's not about real, it's about style... I remember Fallout being one of the brownest games in its time.

Yes. When it was in the desert - which was pretty much all of the time. I'd be pretty miffed if I hit the Nursery in Van Buren and it was still brown.

This is what I get about the criticism of Diablo III:
- There really shouldn't be any bloom (though its usage is fairly subtle and correct as it is)
- Spooky lighting fine - spooky green lighting might not be ideal for dungeons

This is what I don't get:
- The outside should be cloaked in eternal darkness
- Vibrant colours are the antithesis of Diablo (even though they're present in both Diablo I and II)

 

[Makagulfazel]

This is what I get about the criticism of Diablo III:
- There really shouldn't be any bloom (though its usage is fairly subtle and correct as it is)
- Spooky lighting fine - spooky green lighting might not be ideal for dungeons

I have to say, the blue smoke? What are those goblins smoking down there? The gray smoke is much more logical. As for the green lighting, I'm on the same bandwagon as you.

If you take those two things away, you basically have "Necromancers Choice." I'm with Morbus, I hope they change their direction as far as the art goes.

 

[whirlingdervish]

As a person who played both diablo 1&2 extensively and really enjoyed them, I don't see where some of this criticism is coming from.

I don't see anything wrong with the more colorful of the two images. They both look quite nice.

I agree that the first one looks more like the original Diablo's early dungeon levels, and that it sets a darker tone for the game, which given the franchise's gothic fantasy background, seems more fitting at first glance.

But, I didn't mind the bright jungles of Diablo 2 at all, or the blinding white/blue of the snow/ice in act 5. Those colors helped display the massive differences between the geographical areas your character had "travelled to". They were an effective means of taking you out of the green fields around Tristram and into a vibrant and dangerous fantasy world.

If Diablo 3 were meant to be nothing more than a dungeon crawl all the way back down to hell (which in diablo 2 was quite colorful) and it didn't include areas located continents away from Tristram, then I'd feel that the color palette of the first screenshot there is dead on.

After Diablo 2 tho, I'd be very dissapointed in Diablo 3 for taking a step backward to a more limitted section of the fantasy world. (in terms of size and variety)

From Diablo 3, I want an even more sprawling and epic hack and slash game instead of another straightforward climb down the tubes to heck because I've seen what that fantasy world can offer outside of the dark passageways full of demons.

 

[Forhekset]

I don't really get the big deal with the specific lighting issues (either of those comparison images looks good to me), but I guess that the world of Diablo 3 seems to be a slightly cheerier-looking place than the world of Diablo 1/2. In any case, I'm pretty stoked for D3 and I'm sure it's going to be awesome, despite all the whining.

One thing that always bothered me about Diablo 2 was the change to the music style - instead of the minimalistic, ambient music from Diablo, we got an overblown, forgettable orchestral score. Not that the music wasn't nice, but it wasn't memorable, either. Sadly, it seems that D3 is going to feature more of the same in the music department. Diablo had a great sense of atmosphere and style and the music was a big part of that.

Similar to what we're going through with FO3's music, incidentally.... I'm keeping my fingers crossed that the music for "New Tristram" will at least be based on the music for the original Tristram. That's one of my favorite pieces from the first game.

 

[Continuum]

Hahaha, the best way to defend yourself is to attack. Let's start the war! I'm waiting for Boyarsky's response!

Leonard is unlikely to lower himself to respond to such filth, tbfh...

I know that and I wasn't talking seriously about response to "statement" made by Mr. Cheng from any of former Fallout developers.

 

[Makagulfazel]

I don't really get the big deal with the specific lighting issues... In any case, I'm pretty stoked for D3 and I'm sure it's going to be awesome, despite all the whining.

One thing that always bothered me about Diablo 2 was the change to the music style... Sadly, it seems that D3 is going to feature more of the same in the music department

lol

 

[Forhekset]

I don't really get the big deal with the specific lighting issues... In any case, I'm pretty stoked for D3 and I'm sure it's going to be awesome, despite all the whining.

One thing that always bothered me about Diablo 2 was the change to the music style... Sadly, it seems that D3 is going to feature more of the same in the music department

lol

Har har, but I think my gripes are more legitimate than complaining about the color of the haze in a dungeon ("Gayness"? Really?).

Also, I maintain that Diablo 3 will be the shit, despite my reservations about the music. I can get over it.

 

[Makagulfazel]

Har har, but I think my gripes are more legitimate than complaining about the color of the haze in a dungeon ("Gayness"? Really?).

Also, I maintain that Diablo 3 will be the shit, despite my reservations about the music. I can get over it.

To each his own. Opinions are fine to have for everyone. I thought the word "gayness" was a little distasteful, also.

EDIT:
Did any of us say we couldn't "get over it"?
Don't assume.

 

[sanyok21]

after reading ashley cheng's "disappointment" of diablo 3, one must think that should have bethsoft developed games of need for speed or even chess, you would get "oblivion with wheels" and first person REAL TIME chess! now that's what you call innovation!

it's like they're the zombies of video gaming, trying to bite and infect all the world's games with first person and real time.

 

[shihonage]

(though they could tone it down a bit, but hell, you have graphic settings for that, and can make the game as dark and hard to see as you like)

This argument always strikes me as lacking. I wouldn't want my menues and character and inventory look out of whack. There's no way to truly fix this with global driver settings.

Also, I'm amazed at your inability to recognize the clear stylistic superiority of the upper screenshot, sorry The upper screen looks "Diablo". The lower screen looks like it was infected by the Fisher-Price plague of Warcraft 3 art direction.

The same plague that initially affected SC2 screens, until outcries of fans actually made Blizzard gritty up the visuals and stop trying to use the WC3 art style for every single 3D game they release.

Sometimes I wish Warcraft 3 was never made, if just for the notion that it got into Blizzard's head that it's ok to lose the earlier distinctiveness of their franchises' visual styles, and replace them with cartoonish bullshit.