| |
Site Navigation
Main
News
Forums
Games
Games Database
Top 100
Release List
Support Files
Features
Reviews
Previews
Interviews
Editorials
Diaries
Misc
Download
Gallery
Music
Screenshots
Videos
Miscellaneous
Staff Members
Privacy Statement
|
|
|
|
Dhruin
Stranger In A Strange Land
Joined: 20 May 2002
Posts: 1825
Location: Sydney, Australia |
| Sacred: Review @ Frictionless Insight |
|
A <a href="http://www.frictionlessinsight.com/archives/2004/06/sacred_review.html" target="_blank">review</a> of Ascaron's 'Sacred' can be found at Frictionless Insight, with a score of 3/5. Here's a snip:<blockquote><em>After a certain number of references, oughtn't a game title just be used as the genre title? Oh sure, the industry prefers to refer to games like Diablo as action/RPGs. But this reviewer believes the industry forfeited its right to name stuff when it decided that games like EverQuest are to be called MMORPGSUVASAPs. So when your friends ask, "What kind of game is Sacred? Is it a shooter?" You can cock a sneer at the industry and tell your buddy, "No, it's a Diabloer." And it seems fitting when discussing Sacred to think of Diablo as a genre because "Diablo clone" doesn't quite do Sacred justice. Ascaron has taken certain guiding principles that define Diabloers and attempted to inject some fresh ones of its own. Unlike most Diablo clones you've played, whose chief innovation rests on external trappings ("It's Diablo, but it's sci-fi/Chinese/Mary Kate and Ashley."), Ascaron seems to have given some thought to contributing to the development of the genre.</em></blockquote> |
Wed Jun 30, 2004 3:51 am |
|
|
Fleisch
Village Dweller
Joined: 03 Feb 2003
Posts: 10
Location: USA |
Is it really sick that now I have a sudden desire to play a Mary Kate & Ashley version of Diablo? Yes, I think it is very sick, but I blame you.  |
|
Wed Jun 30, 2004 3:52 am |
|
|
Sir Markus
Counselor of the King
Joined: 11 Jan 2002
Posts: 369
Location: Columbus, Ohio USA |
Diablo was SO much more polished, IMO. With Sacred, I gave up on it because of the tiered landscape. I just got tired of trying run around trying to get where I wanted to go on the map. Otherwise Sacred is excellent. |
|
Thu Jul 01, 2004 6:49 am |
|
|
Danicek
The Old One
Joined: 15 Dec 2001
Posts: 5922
Location: Czech Republic |
quote:
Originally posted by Sir Markus
Diablo was SO much more polished, IMO. With Sacred, I gave up on it because of the tiered landscape. I just got tired of trying run around trying to get where I wanted to go on the map. Otherwise Sacred is excellent.
So you stoped playing excellent game just because it was sometimes too far to run somwhere? This game was not so excellent? |
|
Fri Jul 02, 2004 12:53 pm |
|
|
Sir Markus
Counselor of the King
Joined: 11 Jan 2002
Posts: 369
Location: Columbus, Ohio USA |
Danicek:
I don't have a problem with overland travel in a game, but I thought it was drudgery trying to get around in Sacred due to the tiered landscape. I think this was a BAD design flaw. Just my opinion. I might go back to Sacred, it's a pretty good game I agree but trying to navigate that tiered geography got old quick IMO. |
|
Sun Jul 04, 2004 5:13 am |
|
|
sealight4
City Guard
Joined: 02 Sep 2002
Posts: 130
Location: Massachussets, USA |
Sacred had faults but overall was well worth the time. I'm waiting for the 1.7 patch to play it again. The distance travel was a chance to level up anyway. RPG's are all the same formula mostly, Sacred is trying to be better but it's been along time since I "diabloed" V.1.05 I think. Diablo was one of the firsts but not a standard to be held up against every RPG<RTS< or whatever that comes along IMO. Enough Diablo already. Although 1.10 is on my list. Simply put, Sacred is a fun game , the import version of course. Pixel blood is low on my to fix the world list. Censorship is high, I can choose, really! |
|
Tue Jul 06, 2004 12:45 pm |
|
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is Thu Apr 11, 2019 7:10 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
