Sacred - It really is that good

[Sal Paradise]

Of all the stuff that claimed to be the "Diablo Killer" on the market, nothing has come close. Divine Divinity was weak. Neverwinter Nights was a completely different kind of game. Harbinger was fun and Diablo-like, but a little too short, and set in the future. Nothing has seemed to be able to capture the hack & slash fun of Diablo - until now.

Sacred is immediately fun. The interface takes a bit of getting used to, but after a few hours feels intuitive. The character classes are different and fun. The level up system is fantastic - more like Diablo 1 where you have to find runes that upgrade your skills. The new twist being that you can trade with a "combo master" 2 useless runes for a new random one, 3 useless runes for a new class-specific random one, or 4 useless runes for the rune of your choice.

There are plenty of items including uniques, sets, and socketable items. Not all character classes have the same number of slots. Battle mages can wear 4 rings and 2 amulets. Gladiators can wear 2 rings and 1 amulet, but get extra shoulder pads. Seraphims (angels) get upgradable wings.

I was initially worried about the description of the world being "huge". Morrowind was huge - too huge - and I didn't ever really get into it. Way too open ended. I would have a quest to do, but didn't really know how to get going on it. Here is one of the really BRILLIANT parts of Sacred: There is a main story-related quest and hundreds of mini-quests. I think they total 290 in all. Unobtrusively in the lower middle portion of the window is a small compass. The large arrow points to the direction of your main quest. The small arrow points to the direction of your subquest. When you open the mini-map, there is a tiny yellow arrow, and a tiny blue arrow showing where to go for each. It is subtle, and winderful. You can roam around freely if you choose and never really lose your way when you feel like getting back to the quests.

The quests are generally pretty standard stuff. Go kill this - go bring me that. But they are funny, too. Some of the dialog has me cracking up, but not in a way that makes the game silly. They probably put far too many "easter eggs" in the game. There are quotes from dozens of other games and movies littered through the game. There is even a "Pac-Man" cave where you are trying to gather up pellets in a maze while being chased by four slow moving ghosts that can kill you with a single touch.

Horses also change the dynamics of the game. You can still swing your axe from your mount, but it is slower. However, you can run away faster, too. More points in riding leads to the ability to use better and faster horses. I am anxious to play a mounted archer to see how it works out.

The graphics are great. They aren't the most ground breaking graphics I've ever seen, but I would give them a solid 8 out of 10. Much better than Divine Divinity, and far better than Diablo 2.

To me, Divine Divinity felt like a cheaply made and poorly translated Diablo clone. However, Sacred looks and feels like what I would expect out of Diablo 3. It plays and feels like the "next step". If you are a fan of Diablo 2, I urge you to go out and get this game. I could only afford one - Spellforce or Sacred. I am glad I went with Sacred.

[DravenII]

You're the second person who I've heard mention this title and both of you with high regard. I "must" check this one out. Thanks for the review.

[TaiDaishar]

I'll need to give this game a shot, we shall see, thank you for pointing it out for me.

By the way, the name is only "Sacred"?

[Sal Paradise]

Just "Sacred". I found it rather difficult to get hold of. My local EB didn't have it, and neither did MicroCenter. However, CompUSA had a half dozen of them.

[LochnarITB]

You're the second person who I've heard mention this title and both of you with high regard. I "must" check this one out. Thanks for the review.

Just in case you haven't already looked for it, there is a demo for Sacred. Just google "sacred demo" to find it. Be warned that you'll want a fast connection to download it though - 231 MB!

[Nicodemus Phaulkon]

Well, a twenty minute search online for feedback and reviews of Sacred yielded two basic complaints:

1.) Buggy as hell
(which is already resolved by a major patch... sound familiar to everyone here? Thought so.)

2.) You have to play a GIRL to be certain classes
(Horrors!! I guess I'd forgotten how tragic it is to be unsure about your own sexuality to the degree that playing a female type of character on a freakin' computer screen threatens your sense of well being).

Beyond all this hormonally-induced sniveling and rampant digital-homophobia, the game itself looks very interesting. One must sift through the usual inordinate amount of drivel on the reviews to get to actual qualified opinions... but what I see is promising. Thanks for the heads-up, Sal... methinks I'll give it a try.

*tips helm*

*edit -- forgot to hit the ol' iespell before the "submit" button... shame shame shame*

[Nantuko_Primus]

I picked it up a week ago, and I haven't been able to make it work yet. Every time I try and run it, it alwas gives me a strange error("Blah blah blah please update your windows instalation(#6000-1)). I've contacted tech support, but I haven't gotten a response except someone asking for my system schematics as told by msinfo32.exe. I have played the demo, but I may return the product if I don't get an answer.

-Nantuko

[Samka]

I heard a third criticism - character development was weak. Any comments on that?

[Jim]

Hi

Have Fun !!! :D

Description: Sacred English Demo. Filesize: 230.7 MB

The demo lets try out 13 quests in the World Of Ancaria, playable with either Seraphim character or the Gladiator .

SACRED is a huge world full of incredible magic and ancient myth.

Expect a unique fantasy RPG adventure! An in-depth storyline and plenty of opportunities which will not only inspire the role-player but also the action orientated fan. Sacred delivers battles, a vast range of quests, and a story filled game.

The player can choose from 6 playable characters, each with their own individual characteristics and style. The more reserved role-players might prefer the Battlemage or the Wood Elf, while admirers of traditional fantasy characters can take on the role of the Gladiator or the Dark Elf. If the player fancies a different approach then the Seraphim, a follower of the mystical Angels, or perhaps the bloodthirsty Vampiress might clench their thirst.

In order to give the player a fast introduction into SACRED the starting position of the game also acts as a Tutorial area. Upon leaving this zone, SACRED opens up to almost limitless exploration.

SACRED's interface concentrates on user friendliness and allows the player to give their complete attention to the game events. The interface allows for the quick exchange of weapons and armor, as well as special combat moves and spells, allowing all to be implemented tactically.

SACRED does not have a barren and empty landscape but is filled with life. In the forests, marshes, deserts, catacombs, villages and towns you'll find helpful settlers, faithful "hirelings", and animals. Adventurers should also be aware of cruel, vicious and devious monsters, the Undead, thieves and raiders, amongst others.

http://www.gamershell.com/download_demo.shtml

[Kevin]

I've had it for about 2 weeks now. I enjoy it quite a bit as well.

Co-op multiplayer only allows four people, but how often in any other coop type game could you get more than 4 people to actually play together (the BG games excluded)? So I don't mind that. Haven't tried the other multiplayer aspects yet.

Have a stand alone server helps a lot (and you can run more than one stand alone server on a machine if you like and have the power to do so) for my LAN play since I have some merely average systems for my wife and I, but it does give a good use for my old Duron 650 with 384MB of RAM. Being bechind two routers I haven't quite got the server to be accessible from the outside world. It is visible, but no one can connect. Of course there are problems with the multiplayer code and Ascaron says they are working on making things more friendly for those who NAT. Of course if the dang DSL modem/router (though it only hands out one IP) would actually function as a bridge like they say it should it might be easier. I might also be able to hand of the PPPoE functions to my other routher but I haven't had time to do all that config changes and testing yet (my wife gets mad if internet access goes away for too long :) ).

There are still bugs but nothing game breaking that I have seen. I see a lot of equipment bugs, it morphs at times, I have a Wood Elf who can ignore class restrictions on belts and wear any of them as long as level and attribute requirements are met, if I trade them to my wife's Seraphim she sees the class restrictions. I have seen a Seraphim that couldn't wear a searphim only item because it said that it was wrong class. There are some other things like that as well.

There are skills in the game that are just fun even if they aren't all that powerful. Making your own combos is really cool too (multishot -> spider arrow -> exploding arrow -> spider arrow) is a lot of fun, and then since combo timers don't affect your skill and magic timers I can spider or exploding arrow again right away while still under multi-shot. :) Of course I love spider arrow, nothing like shooting someone and then seeing 4 little spiders pop out and start dealing out really rapid but only mildly damaging attacks. They generally stun lock the poor bugger they are on though, or at the least make them start attacking the spiders. Watching all those yellow numbers fly by is just fun though.

I haven't really messed with horses too much. Some weapons slow down on them some speed up. Opponents with long hafted weapons deal more damage to foes on horseback, and there are some other fun weapon considerations.

The way you get to pick your skills (like armor, weapon lore, dual wield, riding) is pretty neat and allows for good customization of a character of the same class. You can easily do a spell slinging or a meleer with some of the classes based on these choices (seraphim for sure can be made melee or spell slinger this way). And of course as mentioned I like the rune system for improving spells and combat arts (which would be like the skills in Diablo/Diablo2).

I got a lot of fun out of starting a Battle Mage and then clicking on the stone and getting attacked by crazy bunnies and you could do that as often as you liked for a whooping 2 exp each... But there are a lot of easter eggs like that in the game.

The world is huge and fluid and despite not being random there are enough little side quests and areas that you can easily replay the game without the BG syndrome of, oh, yeah lets do that fight over again so that I can get this uber weapon (though I still replayed the BG games for other reasons). Storyline seems to be alright. Character depth is good enough for me.

I hope they keep patching it, I can put up with patches (I play all the Blizzard games and they all get at least 5 to 10 patches with 3 to 7 of those bringing major changes). This game does have the potential to have good longevity, and it has made me finally stop playing D2 because it fills any of the needs D2 used to fill and then some and I used to play D2 at least once a week since the day it was released.

[Roland]

Of all the stuff that claimed to be the "Diablo Killer" on the market, nothing has come close.  Divine Divinity was weak.  Neverwinter Nights was a completely different kind of game.  Harbinger was fun and Diablo-like, but a little too short, and set in the future.  Nothing has seemed to be able to capture the hack & slash fun of Diablo - until now.

This game does not even compare to Diablo, nor even Diablo II.

Sacred is immediately fun.  The interface takes a bit of getting used to, but after a few hours feels intuitive.  The character classes are different and fun.  The level up system is fantastic - more like Diablo 1 where you have to find runes that upgrade your skills.  The new twist being that you can trade with a "combo master" 2 useless runes for a new random one, 3 useless runes for a new class-specific random one, or 4 useless runes for the rune of your choice.

I found it immediately frustrating. With poor pathfinding AI, jerky animations, and pixelated graphics galore, the "fun" factor is almost nill. Although the interface is nice once you get the hang of it, there is absolutely NO explanation as to how to use it (in the game, nor in the readme for the demo), which is very irritating. And, I don't see how finding Runes compares in any way to Diablo, except the book-hunting from the original Diablo. But even that's not a great comparison,

There are plenty of items including uniques, sets, and socketable items.  Not all character classes have the same number of slots.  Battle mages can wear 4 rings and 2 amulets.  Gladiators can wear 2 rings and 1 amulet, but get extra shoulder pads.  Seraphims (angels) get upgradable wings.

Horrible inventory graphics, pathetic naming conventions (20 different "Shields" and they all have completely different modifiers, and requirements), horrendous loot-levels (a level 1 character finding loot that can only be used by a level 20 or above?!), and poor differentiation between normal, unique, etc. items? No thanks.

I was initially worried about the description of the world being "huge".  Morrowind was huge - too huge - and I didn't ever really get into it.  Way too open ended.  I would have a quest to do, but didn't really know how to get going on it.  Here is one of the really BRILLIANT parts of Sacred:  There is a main story-related quest and hundreds of mini-quests.  I think they total 290 in all.  Unobtrusively in the lower middle portion of the window is a small compass.  The large arrow points to the direction of your main quest.  The small arrow points to the direction of your subquest.  When you open the mini-map, there is a tiny yellow arrow, and a tiny blue arrow showing where to go for each.  It is subtle, and winderful.  You can roam around freely if you choose and never really lose your way when you feel like getting back to the quests.

Morrowind was a Godsend to the world of PC gaming. If more games strived to be of that high-caliber, incredible quality, we wouldn't be sucking down drivel like this Sacred. Sorry, but Morrowind is light-years beyond anything Sacred has to offer. And I'd MUCH rather have a huge world than a tiny one. Besides, Morrowind has customizability galore (equal to or greater than NWN), which only adds to the replayability. With no randomness, and no ability to add / change the world, replay value on this game is minimal, at best. A once-through with each character, and you're pretty much done. If you can stomach it that long, that is.

The quests are generally pretty standard stuff.  Go kill this - go bring me that.  But they are funny, too.  Some of the dialog has me cracking up, but not in a way that makes the game silly.  They probably put far too many "easter eggs" in the game.  There are quotes from dozens of other games and movies littered through the game.  There is even a "Pac-Man" cave where you are trying to gather up pellets in a maze while being chased by four slow moving ghosts that can kill you with a single touch.

Drab, childish humor that is entirely out of place in the fantasy setting? I'll pass, thanks. If I wanted that, I could go install Redneck Rampage or Duke Nukem 3D for a few chuckles. (Example: A SKILL for the Seraphim entitled "BeeEffGee". For those who don't know what that stands for, it's BFG, as in BFG2000, or "BigF-ingGun 2000", from Doom / Doom 2. Crude inclusion that just looks tacky and out-of-place in this game.)

Horses also change the dynamics of the game.  You can still swing your axe from your mount, but it is slower.  However, you can run away faster, too.  More points in riding leads to the ability to use better and faster horses.  I am anxious to play a mounted archer to see how it works out.

If not for the terribly jerky animations and the horrendous pathfinding AI, I'd say this would be a really neat feature. Because of them, however, it remains only a sub-par "bonus" that's sort of neat,.

The graphics are great.  They aren't the most ground breaking graphics I've ever seen, but I would give them a solid 8 out of 10.  Much better than Divine Divinity, and far better than Diablo 2.

The graphics are the equivalent of Divine Divinity, BG2, or any number of other, similar games. They're a touch better than D2 in the environment and character portions in some areas, equal to D2 in others, but entirely BELOW Diablo II (and even Diablo) in terms of inventory graphics! Overall, unpolished and ininspired.

To me, Divine Divinity felt like a cheaply made and poorly translated Diablo clone.  However, Sacred looks and feels like what I would expect out of Diablo 3.  It plays and feels like the "next step".  If you are a fan of Diablo 2, I urge you to go out and get this game.  I could only afford one - Spellforce or Sacred.  I am glad I went with Sacred.

Actually, Sacred feels like a Divine Divinity clone. I see absolutely no difference at all between the two. In fact, they both suffer the same problems (with Sacred adding in a few new ones to the mix).

The game suffers from poor gameplay mechanics, mediocre graphics, poor sound, unpolished and just outright jerky animations, and little immersion (at least in the demo). I don't feel like I'm making a difference in the game. I feel like I'm getting a migraine from trying to watch my character swat at a couple goblins, seeing my sword high over her head one moment, and low down around her knees the next, with virtually NO animation inbetween. Keeping track of your health mid-fight is a pain because I keep having to pull my eyes away from the MAIN screen and point them into the upper-right - a massive step back from Diablo II. The leveling system is about average, with a few neat features, but nothing that overall jumps out at me (via the Demo). And it, like everything else in the game, feels unpolished and a bit rushed. There doesn't seem to be any clear distinction between the different things (I can't even think of a better word for them - how bad is that?) They're so jumbled together, with no clear correlation, that it gives me a headache just trying to think about character planning.

All in all, I am sorely disappointed. After reading your positive review, I decided to check out the demo for myself. What I found left me with a poor aftertaste in my mouth, feeling disgusted with how poor the quality of games has been lately, and feeling greatful that I didn't waste my money on another cheap piece of trash.

My advice: Don't even bother. Nothing spectacular jumps out from this game, and many features that make Diablo and Diablo II shine so brightly above the rest are just plain lacking. The entire game (from what I've seen in the demo) is very unpolished, and some components just feel jumbled and out of sync. Combine this with pathetic game mechanics problems that should never have existed in the first place, and you have a piss-poor slop of a game. I won't be buying it, except MAYBE if I see it as a bargain-buy from my local EBX for ~$4. And even then, I might just keep my money. After all, I've bought games from a decade ago at that price that gave me more enjoyment than this piece of drivel could offer.

[Walkiry]

Being bechind two routers I haven't quite got the server to be accessible from the outside world.  It is visible, but no one can connect.  Of course there are problems with the multiplayer code and Ascaron says they are working on making things more friendly for those who NAT.  Of course if the dang DSL modem/router (though it only hands out one IP) would actually function as a bridge like they say it should it might be easier.  I might also be able to hand of the PPPoE functions to my other routher but I haven't had time to do all that config changes and testing yet (my wife gets mad if internet access goes away for too long :) ).

You might want to check this:

http://www.analogx.com/contents/download/n...ork/pmapper.htm

This is a very neat little app that will let you do port-redirect from the computer with the Internet access to whatever box is running the service bound to that port. This is, of course, assuming the box connected to the internet is windows :)

Very simple, clean and neat, works well and takes minimum resources.

[gronbek]

Hi,

I was the one who first "advertised" sacred on this forum.
My initial impression was very good.
BUT now it is NOT.(I was wrong)
The game is really "bugged beyond comprehension" as someone pointed out in a reply of my post.
There are far too may skill, items, character related bugs. It's very unbalanced. Skills don't do what they say in the description. The random item generator is very bugged. Skills don't work. The game is too easy. Enemy AI is severely bugged. Dragons. the toughest opponent just sit still in a spot and let them selves be attacked without attacking back. Everything is so hopelessly bugged. The designers can never keep up with patches. They don't even post any more in the forums.

So leave this game alone.
Regards, Anders

[TPJ]

Some of the Amazon Basin folks have started to play and discuss this game as well. If interested, wander on over.

[Kevin]

It has nothing to do with windows connection sharing. It is two physical router boxes and the problem isn't lack of knowledge, it the weakness of the configuration utilities the boxes have. :)

The ports are open and that is working, the problem is with the way Sacred handles the publishing of the game server IP in the lobby so I am having to pull tricks to get around the poor coding they do. (The lobby ends up using the internal IP's not the routable IP provided by the ISP, and of course you aren't going to be about to connected to a 192.168.x.x which is what the lobby ends up saying the game is on).

I did some IP spoofing to get it visible, but I think I might have to do some MAC address cloning as well....

[Walkiry]

Ah, I see.

Well, good luck with that then, and I'm sorry I can't be of any more help :)

[Kevin]

Not a problem. I do appreciate the effort. :)

I'll get it, I just need some more time. :)

[Iolair]

I keep hearing the game is so bugged, but I have only run into one so far (a little side quest, that disappeared).
I have enjoyed the game pretty much while I have played it.

There are some balance issues, but since I play SP I don't care so much. If there is an combat art that is broken, I do have enough selfcontrol as not to use it :) *cough* Battlefog *cough*.

There are 6 characters, that differ from each other and they can each be built differently. Don't expect Diablo2, but see another game that is pretty and with nice options in character building.

I can only say I have enjoyed it so far and is still happy for the game. Get the demo and try it out :)

[Sal Paradise]

OK, an update. Sacred is still rocking. I have played a little bit of all six character classes, and it is still very fun. I will agree with Roland on one point: The naming convention of the various items is a little tough to get used to, and doesn't make much sense.

As to his other points, they must have fixed a lot of the demo bugs in the final release, because I don't see them. Graphics are great, not pixelated and grainy. The explanations in the manual are great and easily gets into the game. The pathfinding for horses, etc, is good. I haven't found a problem with getting loot that my low level character can't use. (Once in a while I will be a level 14 battle mage that finds a level 16 helmet, but that isn't bad at all.)

Also, the humurous parts of the game don't seem sophomoric. I agree that the BeeEffGee is TERRIBLE, but everything else really kind of fits into place. The DEMO probably does feel like a Divine Divinity clone, but the full release just doesn't. It feels and plays well, even though I have been playing for a week straight. I am still sold on it.

I also have to say this about Morrowind players. The people who like Morrowind REALLY REALLY like Morrowind. Everyone else (like me) hates it. It's just a difference of what people like to do in a game. In Morrowind, you find yourself Jumping up and down everywhere you go for no reason whatsoever except to increase your acrobatics skill. That kind of mindless crap is really boring to me. I think that Morrowind was ambitious, just boring. I don't hate the people who play it, and I DO understand why some people like it. It's just a matter of personal preference.

But all Morrowind people seem to be torn of the same cloth. They like Morrowind, and pretty much nothing else. The entire reason I mentioned Morrowind is to placate the fears of people who don't like "Huge Worlds". There are a great many of us that HATE the Morrowind "Huge World" system. I wanted to let others know that if you DON'T like Morrowind because of the size and scope, you won't have to worry about Sacred being that cumbersome. If you DO like Morrowind, then keep on playing it because Sacred is a totally different type of game. Other than the fantasy setting and the role playing elements, Morrowind and Sacred are at opposite ends of the spectrum. Neverwinter Nights is somewhere in between. It isn't a "good/bad" spectrum, just a difference in hack n' slash and roleplay.

That said (whew!), Sacred really is still very fun. There are some obvious bugs. But, the bugs don't interfere with the enjoyment of the game. Diablo 2 had some bugs as well, but they also didn't get in the way. If Diablo 2 is one of your favorite games of all time, then go out and buy Sacred. If Morrowind is one of your favorite games of all time, then take the $50, put it in the bank, and wait for Morrowind 4, which will be much better for you.

I am looking at Spellforce now. Has anyone played that? Any feedback? I am a HUGE fan of Warlords: Battlecry 2, and I am hoping that Spellforce will have similar gameplay with a much improved graphics engine and story. Any news?

[kandrathe]

I also have to say this about Morrowind players. The people who like Morrowind REALLY REALLY like Morrowind. Everyone else (like me) hates it. It's just a difference of what people like to do in a game. In Morrowind, you find yourself Jumping up and down everywhere you go for no reason whatsoever except to increase your acrobatics skill. That kind of mindless crap is really boring to me. I think that Morrowind was ambitious, just boring. I don't hate the people who play it, and I DO understand why some people like it. It's just a matter of personal preference.

But all Morrowind people seem to be torn of the same cloth. They like Morrowind, and pretty much nothing else. The entire reason I mentioned Morrowind is to placate the fears of people who don't like "Huge Worlds". There are a great many of us that HATE the Morrowind "Huge World" system. I wanted to let others know that if you DON'T like Morrowind because of the size and scope, you won't have to worry about Sacred being that cumbersome. If you DO like Morrowind, then keep on playing it because Sacred is a totally different type of game. Other than the fantasy setting and the role playing elements, Morrowind and Sacred are at opposite ends of the spectrum. Neverwinter Nights is somewhere in between. It isn't a "good/bad" spectrum, just a difference in hack n' slash and roleplay.

All cut from the same cloth then, eh? I'm trying not to be insulted, but from the way you describe us MW players it seems like we just must be idiots to like jumping up and down and aimlessly slashing at fishes with a dagger. But, I know of many others here who also try on many different games. I tend to use my "game night" as a social thing now, so I have been gravitating toward games that allow and reward cooperative play, and so MW is a rare solo pleasure.

I enjoy MW for its strengths, it is simply an amazing world to wander around in. But, then I enjoy D2:LOD -- more so prior to 1.10. I enjoyed NWN, but it seems to be a game you can finish. I'm playing Dungeon Siege, which is another game where maps are done, and they seem to be done. Once in awhile I like to play a little Warcraft, Starcraft, Kohan, and even Civilization when I can spare half a day for one game. I belong to a CS clan and play with those folks once a week at least, and sometimes a little Halflife or TFC. Then there is this PS2 over by my TV... You get the picture. Not everyone is as one dimensional as you might think. Sacred might be as fun as you claim, but if the demo sux compared to the game as you say, then the company needs to release a new demo. There are just too many games in that space to not have the demo reflect the game you are contemplating buying.

Spellforce? Well Four Fat Chicks liked it.