Doesn't the graphics seem...strange?

[Asehujiko]

C&C 3 without distortion is butt ugly. Worse then generals and that wasn't great to begin with.

 

[Prometheus]

But CNC3 still has fun gameplay.

 

[punwisp]

has some fun gameplay, but after all EA isnt the best at RTS games, they are just wanting big graphics and money, they dont care about really pleasing RTS fans, only milking us with hype, causing us to buy it, play ti for 3 days straight and then go "THis game sucks"(half of this was a joke)

 

[giragesh]

remember that blizzard will be trying to get a "new generation" of gamers to support it so the graphics will have to be suitable for a 13+ rating.

if its too realistic they wont get the kiddies playing it as much

 

[TheDamien]

Maybe the new art direction is a bit too vivid, but to say it's that much less realistic than the old style is ridiculous. You don't need to walk too far from your front door to realise that the world comes in multicolour.

 

[UndeadDragon]

I think the graphics look fine. A good mixture of "cartoony" with more realistic style graphics.

 

[Doomhammer]

the recent screenshots make a fairly better impression. Though I wish the Zerg were designed a lot more slimy, creepy and threatening. On my personal wish list Zerg buildings are interconnected with slime tubes and tentacles, which speed up the healing of damaged buildings; the creeper should appear to have a life of its own, bulging and moving around randomly, excreting from time to time little organisms that fall over wreckages and body parts from fallen enemies. All in all, that gluey, slimy feeling of Zerg civilisation is still missing, despite the vast amount of possibilities with nowadays hard- and software.

 

[Blackveiled]

Lol, I hate how you guys think that Blizzard is going in a new direction with their graphics. Their graphics have always been cartoonish. Excluding some parts of Diablo, all of Blizzard's games have been cartoonish. Thats the way it should be.

 

[rover2341]

I think blizzard commeted on this some where...i forget where...

but it talks about how the old one was cartoonish, this one is alot less but they still wanted to leave it that way...something about retaining the old game with in the new, so they dont change it too much...

I think it looks great.

 

[Seannny]

It seems blizzard is using the WoW graphics engine wherever they can, even Star craft has a hint of WoW look to it.

However diablo 3...that really looks like WoW

 

[Black Hawk]

If you actually pay attention, its just a modified Warcraft III engine. They would have to modify it alot more if it was the WoW engine.

 

[sqrage]

It seems blizzard is using the WoW graphics engine wherever they can, even Star craft has a hint of WoW look to it.

Yea, using a MMORPG's graphics engine in an RTS where there are huge numbers of units on the screen at any time. Sounds about right.

 

[Jedimindtrixxx]

when i looked at the gameplay i was like "did some1 draw that or is it an actual ss.... no wai, thats not an actuall ss, it cant be.... can it? omg it is wow wtf is with the gfx is it only me.....?"

 

[Caedin88]

Blizzard is right, you are wrong.

The old games were gloomier BUT, and heres the big point, BOTH DIABLO 2 AND STARCRAFT WERE 2D.

Blizzard has made three unique graphics engines for Diablo III already, the first 2 being very dark and Diablo like, but they found the game just wasn't that fun. I mean in Diablo 1 the game was so dark you couldn't see the enemies so they outlined them in red lines... this isn't acceptable any more. A more vivid world is required, one that is brighter and more fun to play.

On your view of the Creep... the Creep from Starcraft 1 was nothing like what you describe, everything you said was concept in YOUR head, the problem is YOU don't make multi million dollar video games. Blizzard is the only one who has the right to say how the Creep should look like / act. And by retaining its simplicity they are retaining the way it was in Starcraft 1.

I think your description of the Creep would be acceptable in maybe idk Starcraft: Ghost, or a similar FPS but these things are not needed by RTS games and the more you over do thinks like that the more it distracts the player from the game and taxes the players computer for stupid shit like wiggling creep that spawns little worms that eat dead bodies?

 

[sqrage]

Based on a few newer screenshots they look even less cartoony than before.

Spoiler

 

[Sirroelivan]

I'm mainly waiting for the campaign, but I find the graphics to be very satisfying.

 

[Jedimindtrixxx]

i like!
looks like wc4 from the first ss!

EDIT: holy crap ultralisks still look as tuff as always

 

[MurderMode]

To be honest... it looks awesome.

When you go to the store to buy it on release day, the case will look awesome. The store will look awesome. Even the guy selling it to you will look awesome.

Then you'll get home and put the awesome looking installation disc into your piece of shit computer (which looks unusually awesome for a change). The installation slideshow will make you utter something along the lines of 'can't wait' or 'awesome' .... and finally you'll load up the game and get caught up in the awesomeness of it all.

It's about this very second you'll forget you ever doubted blizzard or dissed the artwork direction.

Case dismissed.

 

[666n00b]

Yeah it looks strange. IMO Warcraft 3 has the same problem

WC2 and SC had more/better style

 

[Oninuva]

I think Command and Conquer has better graphics imo. EA is crap game maker but they do well on the graphics department at least. Blizzard, are you under paying your design studio? I mean SC2 is alright but now look at Diablo! We want photo-realistic!