Larian Studios Forums General Chat RPG Chat Sacred got a 7.6 from Gamespot... pretty ok..

but not good enough...

summary from desslock

In comparison to some of its hack-and-slash RPG peers, Sacred is in some ways definitely a deeper RPG than Dungeon Siege or Diablo, since it's less linear and quests are more frequent and varied, but its gameplay isn't as polished as in those games. Sacred is a welcome addition to the genre that distinguishes itself by incorporating a few novel gameplay tweaks. However, the game's success is ultimately limited by an unrewarding character development system and by combat that is too frequently tedious rather than engaging.


now for Beyond Divinity.. will u score higher? are u feeling lucky punk!? (just kidding!!) <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/silly.gif" alt="" />

I don't know. Okay, I do. I would have given it a 7.0. That respawn really killed the game for me and they really didn't mention it. I just don't understand why its even there. I was level 37 gladiator when I finished the game and I ran from most conflicts just because it was EXTREMELY annoying!

Well, I haven't played the full version of Sacred, just the demo, and I didn't really like that because of the hack and slash aspects and the low interactivity with the world and NPC's.

All I can say is this: I hope that the person who reviews BD tries to finish the entire game before writing his/her review. I don't care whether BD gets a higher or lower score, as long as both scores are fair and well deserved.

Futile hope - reviewers seldom have or take the time, and in addition are expected to publish reviews prior to full game release. The best you can hope is that after release another full and fair review is made. But rarely have I seen reviews that weren't influenced from previous results (good or bad).

Not very fair for a reviewer, is it. Finishing a whole game -- especially games like BD or DD -- is quite time-consuming. Not to mention that games like, say, Sacred or Dungeon Siege hardly need finishing to be evaluated properly. You play it for an hour, you play it for a day, and the gameplay is still repetitive.

Besides which, 7.6 is being pretty damn generous. Bug-ridden and monotonous as Sacred is, I'm surprised it doesn't get a lower score.

Does this imply that testers who test D2 or DS assume that with any C-RPG that method of testing can be used because all C-RPGs are repetitive ?

Remember that DD was bug ridden. I have been playing Sacred daily and I am not bored with it yet.

No, but the sub-category of action games with RPG elements -- not counting them CRPGs here, so sorry -- rarely diverts from the click-click-click-kill-loot routine. Plot is generally not worthwhile, so there's no point in advancing it to the end. (Dungeon Siege, D2.) There's also the fact that some games are bug-ridden enough that finishing them will be extremely infuriating or nearly impossible. (ToEE, Sacred.)



DD didn't have a mass of random quests that often are impossible to finish; DD didn't have a bugged main quest that, without applying a cheat, is impossible to complete. I could finish the game without a patch or game-editing. All things considered, that earns a game a lot of points. There's something to be said for D2 and DS -- they're, at least, polished and don't play like a beta version.

By the way, German Patch 1.6 for Sacred is out now.

What did the German patch fix?

Several things ...

English version :
http://eng.sacred-game.com/news.php?s=&action=show&news_id=169

Additionally :
http://eng.sacred-game.com/news.php?s=&action=show&news_id=173
(Including announcement for 1.7 . )