huh. fascinating.Ahh didn't know they put it back in 2017 but it was removed for 3 years
Honestly. She's basically a succubus.Why are people complaining about the horns, the wings and that she's sexualized/good looking? It's Lilith we're talking about, the seductress. She's been portrayed that way for centuries
In RoS Lillith is supposed to have been more or less neutral and had a romantic relationship with one of the high angels. It's all told through various books found in the last part if Act VWe only need her turning into the good side (or revealing she was from the good side) now.
Why are people complaining about the horns, the wings and that she's sexualized/good looking? It's Lilith we're talking about, the seductress. She's been portrayed that way for centuries
First off, it's fucking Diablo. Before Diablo 3 the series was basically defined by a gothic horror aesthetic developed by Blizzard North that was a far cry from everything Cali Blizzard was producing at the time (with the contrast only becoming larger as time goes by). This design is not gothic horror. It's generic fantasy schlock.
Skeletons aren't banned in China. Neither is blood, gore, etc.I mean, there's still time for China to cancel the whole development. Haven't they forced blizz to remove skeletons from WoW? They aren't gonna like Diablo at all then.
It's far far far closer to the Alexstraza/Yssera designs than Kerrigan'sJesus they should be embarrassed by that design. Not only is it fucking awful in this day and age, but it's also an incredibly obvious redesign of Kerrigan. Utterly without imagination or creativity.
To be honest, they should just scrap the entirety of D3a storyline and the Nephalim concept. I'm not entirely sure how many illegal drugs you have to be on to base the entire lore of your game on an incredibly shitty Richard Knaack novel, but whoever made that decision should never be allowed near a creative team again.
Secondly, basically everyone missed the train on Succubi being predators of men, creatures who horrifically consume men in a one-sided predator-and-prey relationship. Making them physically attractive is actually besides the point; Succubi don't need to be attractive because they have powers that allow them to ensnare men regardless of what they're attracted to. Yet Another Sexy Succubus is thus just another boring rehash of the trope that frames Succubi as somehow being both predators of men while also being the subject of male gaze (something that is completely unnecessary given the nature of their existence).
So no, I'm not gonna give them a pass on this one. Sorry.
To be honest, they should just scrap the entirety of D3a storyline and the Nephalim concept. I'm not entirely sure how many illegal drugs you have to be on to base the entire lore of your game on an incredibly shitty Richard Knaack novel, but whoever made that decision should never be allowed near a creative team again.
People aren't complaining that she's a dark fantasy design, they're complaining about Horns, wings and sexualization.First off, it's fucking Diablo. Before Diablo 3 the series was basically defined by a gothic horror aesthetic developed by Blizzard North that was a far cry from everything Cali Blizzard was producing at the time (with the contrast only becoming larger as time goes by). This design is not gothic horror. It's generic fantasy schlock.
Secondly, basically everyone missed the train on Succubi being predators of men, creatures who horrifically consume men in a one-sided predator-and-prey relationship. Making them physically attractive is actually besides the point; Succubi don't need to be attractive because they have powers that allow them to ensnare men regardless of what they're attracted to. Yet Another Sexy Succubus is thus just another boring rehash of the trope that frames Succubi as somehow being both predators of men while also being the subject of male gaze (something that is completely unnecessary given the nature of their existence).
So no, I'm not gonna give them a pass on this one. Sorry.
Diablo 1 had succubi too, and they were just voluptuous topless women with thigh high boots and wings so I'm not sure what your point is.First off, it's fucking Diablo. Before Diablo 3 the series was basically defined by a gothic horror aesthetic developed by Blizzard North that was a far cry from everything Cali Blizzard was producing at the time (with the contrast only becoming larger as time goes by). This design is not gothic horror. It's generic fantasy schlock.
You shouldnt even be able to play as a male character in Diablo 4 because you'd be too susceptible to Lilith.First off, it's fucking Diablo. Before Diablo 3 the series was basically defined by a gothic horror aesthetic developed by Blizzard North that was a far cry from everything Cali Blizzard was producing at the time (with the contrast only becoming larger as time goes by). This design is not gothic horror. It's generic fantasy schlock.
Secondly, basically everyone missed the train on Succubi being predators of men, creatures who horrifically consume men in a one-sided predator-and-prey relationship. Making them physically attractive is actually besides the point; Succubi don't need to be attractive because they have powers that allow them to ensnare men regardless of what they're attracted to. Yet Another Sexy Succubus is thus just another boring rehash of the trope that frames Succubi as somehow being both predators of men while also being the subject of male gaze (something that is completely unnecessary given the nature of their existence).
So no, I'm not gonna give them a pass on this one. Sorry.
Maghda!I don't know what people are expecting a succubus to look like.
I don't know what people are expecting a succubus to look like.
Looks better than the d1 design :PI don't know what people are expecting a succubus to look like.
First off, it's fucking Diablo. Before Diablo 3 the series was basically defined by a gothic horror aesthetic developed by Blizzard North that was a far cry from everything Cali Blizzard was producing at the time (with the contrast only becoming larger as time goes by). This design is not gothic horror. It's generic fantasy schlock.
Secondly, basically everyone missed the train on Succubi being predators of men, creatures who horrifically consume men in a one-sided predator-and-prey relationship. Making them physically attractive is actually besides the point; Succubi don't need to be attractive because they have powers that allow them to ensnare men regardless of what they're attracted to. Yet Another Sexy Succubus is thus just another boring rehash of the trope that frames Succubi as somehow being both predators of men while also being the subject of male gaze (something that is completely unnecessary given the nature of their existence).
So no, I'm not gonna give them a pass on this one. Sorry.
Reminds me a bit of Alexstraza too.Also, more than anything else, the design is a rehash of what they were already doing with Kerrigan.
It is boring for that alone.
That's a pretty silly hill to die on given that like virtually every modern interpretation of succubus is "demon who takes the form of an attractive woman to seduce/lure men". Like, sorry if that's not accurate I guess, but /shrug?
The point is that we can do better than rehashing the same shit over and over again just because it's 'tradition'. It's sexist horse shit is what it is.Diablo 1 had succubi too, and they were just voluptuous topless women with thigh high boots and wings so I'm not sure what your point is.
Not really. Read those posts again. It's more about how samey modern Blizzard designs tend to be (especially with the rather inescapable comparison between this Lilith design and ye ol' Queen of Blades). And yes, the sexualization because Blizzard just can't seem to let that one go for whatever reason.People aren't complaining that she's a dark fantasy design, they're complaining about Horns, wings and sexualization.
Diablo 2 improved on that front, at least. Is it too much to ask for better?
That's her HOTS design. The WoW one is better
And now shove this generic ass kerigan lookin bad guy through the WoW bubble graphics filter and see what we get!
Yes, the other one is somehow evil looking (the face mostly)
Diablo 4 will not look like Diablo 3, no doubt.
I thought with the 2nd D3 expansion the villain would be a nephalem, maybe the Amazon from D2 since it was probably going to take place on Skovos.
Speaking of Skovos, i really hope D4 doesn't recycle any old locations, pls no more Tristram.
Originally they were going to go with Xiansai, Westmarch, Skovos & Ureh, instead it was MEMBER DIABLO 1 & 2!Yes, a thousand times this! I hated that Diablo III reused locations, bosses and geography for it's four acts. Heck, they even went with a similar location progression of base DII's Tristram/Lut Gholein/Kurast Docks/Hell with DIII's Tristram/Caldeum/Bastion's Keep/High Heavens.
If they wanted to mention previous locations as lore bits you pick up, then that's fine. I just don't want to start off in Tristram again, as that town should stay in the past. It's old hat at this point.
Originally they were going to go with Xiansai, Westmarch, Skovos & Ureh, instead it was MEMBER DIABLO 1 & 2!
Im so sick of nostalgia pandering honestly, even though i can't see how Lilith could work as the big bad without some retcon, at least it's not Diablo again, hopefully.
Originally they were going to go with Xiansai, Westmarch, Skovos & Ureh, instead it was MEMBER DIABLO 1 & 2!
Im so sick of nostalgia pandering honestly.
Yeah that wasn't needed, same as the Butcher & Skeleton King coming back.Skovos could've been such a cool location to visit, as someone who played the Amazon class religiously in DII. (All the more reason HOTS's interpretation of DII's Amazon was such a cool update to her old design.)
Speaking of pandering, remember Izual? In Diablo II, you (as the player) were asked by Tyrael to put the soul of his old comrade to rest, believing that Izual had suffered enough and his spirit was vanquished. In Diablo III, he was....resurrected by the "Prime Evil" to serve and help conquor the high heavens? And history repeated itself and Izual was once again struck down?
I really didn't understand the 'why' for bringing back most of the bosses from past games, especially when half of them weren't actually that memorable to begin with.
Preach. Succubi in folklore were not originally bombshells with demon wings and horns taped on.First off, it's fucking Diablo. Before Diablo 3 the series was basically defined by a gothic horror aesthetic developed by Blizzard North that was a far cry from everything Cali Blizzard was producing at the time (with the contrast only becoming larger as time goes by). This design is not gothic horror. It's generic fantasy schlock.
Secondly, basically everyone missed the train on Succubi being predators of men, creatures who horrifically consume men in a one-sided predator-and-prey relationship. Making them physically attractive is actually besides the point; Succubi don't need to be attractive because they have powers that allow them to ensnare men regardless of what they're attracted to. Yet Another Sexy Succubus is thus just another boring rehash of the trope that frames Succubi as somehow being both predators of men while also being the subject of male gaze (something that is completely unnecessary given the nature of their existence).
So no, I'm not gonna give them a pass on this one. Sorry.