You guys are completely mis-interpreting what i said. I said that the LOOK of the monk didnt fit, i said i liked the idea and playstyle and everything i just thought the LOOK of him was weird. Go to the D3 official website character screen and tell me the monk doesnt just POP out at you. The other 3 blend together and look good together. The monk doesn't, and that may just be my opinion.
I believe I know the problem. The background image at the character screen is somewhat bluish, and all of the other 3 have a bit of that bluish tone (at least a bit), the monk doesn't really seem to be affected by that background. Is mostly a light color issue, not really a "look" thing.
But actually that's good imo, after he surely has to give some contrast to a dark world since he's a monk.|||Quote:
I don't know about you guys, but the monk just doesnt seem diablo-like. When you go to the character screen on the diablo website, he just seems out of place. I like the concept of him, but he just doesn't fit in. What do you think? Does he fit in with the other diablo characters?
I agree with this. It doesn't particularly look like a diablo 2 character. Anyone here who played eq2 would agree when I say a bruiser would fit better, as a monk is more of a naked paladin, wheras a bruiser is a little more sinister and would fit in perfectly to diablo.
When I originally heard of monk in diablo III i thought it was a little odd but kept my mouth shut ^-^...|||Quote:
I agree with this. It doesn't particularly look like a diablo 2 character. Anyone here who played eq2 would agree when I say a bruiser would fit better, as a monk is more of a naked paladin, wheras a bruiser is a little more sinister and would fit in perfectly to diablo.
When I originally heard of monk in diablo III i thought it was a little odd but kept my mouth shut ^-^...
Personally, I'm thank full the monk doesn't look like a D2 char. As a D3 char, he fits perfectly.
|||I think what pode means is that the Monk's clothing colors are too bright, happy-like, and the classic Diablo setting is gloomy, even in Act II. So the bright colors of the Monk don't fit into what has traditionally been used.|||Quote:I think what pode means is that the Monk's clothing colors are too bright, happy-like, and the classic Diablo setting is gloomy, even in Act II. So the bright colors of the Monk don't fit into what has traditionally been used.
Nothing about the Monk seems "happy-like" to me. The colors are brighter of course, but then again he is a holy man. I think we just don't know enough about the Monk's backstory yet. With the other classes, we can tell that they're rugged due to their personalities and lore. We don't know much about the Monk's characterization yet other than that he is a religious fighter.
We KNOW that the Barbarian and Witch Doctor are rugged because the Barbarian fought in Diablo 2, and the WD just looks the part. The Wizard is brash and arrogant, and the Monk is still mostly a mystery. I say give it time because I'm sure he'll fit in perfectly as we learn more.|||He seemed a natural part of the world playing him at Blizzcon. If he were dropped into D2 as is he would be a bit odd, but we're being picky about that in retrospect. If D2 were just 6 chars, and Bliz suddenly added the 7th (whichever you want to make the 7th) we fans could find a ton of reasons to object to the newcomer.
Paladin is too shiny and well-armored, Amazon is too Barbie doll, Druid is silly with all his animal friends, etc.
I think objections to the Monk or WD or others in D3 are mostly coming from a D2 mindset. D3's not D2. The feel of the game is different, the pacing is changed, and the vast majority of monsters and settings are new, so which characters "fit" requires a different sort of mindset on the evaluation.|||In Diablo 2, I found the 'culture fest' thing going on was hard to adapt to. Why would a Necromancer from some bog somewhere and an Amazon from a jungle and so on cross oceans to meet here and kill some quill rats together? D1 was tighter with all 3 classes looking right when next to each other, but d2 was a culture bomb with characters from every part of the world it seemed. It's like a native American elder showing up in a castle and standing next to the royal gaurd. But gameplay rules in the end, so it becomes forgivable.
Maybe the OP is experiencing this sort of cultural rainbow which is pretty strange when you think about it. What's a Witch Doctor doing next to a Barbarian next to a Monk? Would they all even speak the same tongue? It does seem rather forced, but I'm sure we'll get used to it.|||To be honest, I'm far too excited about the gameplay design of the monk (melee glass cannon) and how Blizzard will expand on that to even be able to notice if he's out of place.
He seemed to fit nicely in the desert environments though, but I'm sure that's subject to debate.
As far as his looks go, I'm merely happy that he doesn't come across as cheesy (despite his bright orange clothing). I also don't think he looks completely off in a medieval fantasy setting (considering that fantasy settings have all sorts of weird things in them anyway).
In short: I've seen far worse than the Monk in other settings.|||The Monk is holding a big blunt weapon and has a scraggly beard. He's fittin' in fine in my opinion. Plus, the orange seems kinda dark to me, so I would say somber and pious before I would say happy happy joy joy.|||I have to agree with OP, the monk doesn't totally fit in imo. He just doesn't seem... I don't know... I guess most of the chars seem so dark and battle-hardened (except for the wiz), and he's not that so much. Maybe I don't find his background so interesting or something. Not really sure why, but he doesn't seem to fit.
No comments:
Post a Comment