Sacred 2: Fallen Angel.

[northlander]

Is anyone playing this game? If you're unfamiliar with it, it's basically somewhat of a Diablo 2 clone, which lets you start a character from six available classes: Seraphim (Paladin-like), Dryad (ranger/amazon), Shadow Warrior (Warrior/necromancer crossover of sorts), High Elf (sorceress), Inquisitor (A curse-style necromancer warrior -- not sure, since I haven't tried that character yet) and the Temple Guardian (A robot dog of sorts. Not sure how to classify it, other than a "gunner" of sorts.) You can also choose to throw in your allegiance with the light or the dark (with the exception of the Seraphim and the Inquisitor, whom can only do light and dark respectively.)

The game basically lets you roam almost freely in a GIGANTIC open world. (Kind of like Diablo 2, except much, MUCH larger-scale.) All your characters are levellable (all the way up to, not making this up, level 200) with a series of 15 different skills that can be levelled to 75. There are also five difficulty levels to go through, and each game has one main quest, one character related quest and a truckload of optional quests for you to undertake. (One of them is -- again, not kidding -- helping Hanzi from Blind Guardian regain his instruments so that they can hold their last live concert in Ancaria (the name of the world in Sacred), with a song that's basically written solely for the game itself.

You can also play together (or against) other people over whatever network your version has. (Sacred 2 is available on PC, Xbox 360 and the PS3.) As of this moment, the network play can be a bit finicky with lags and such, but I'm hoping that will be improved upon later. You can play with a friend on the same machine (at least on the 360 and most likely also the PS3), so that's an option if you don't want to deal with network issues. The total number of players are limited to two instead of four if you do that, though.

Being a Diablo 2 style hack-n-slash with RPG elements, it does suffer from the same kind of shortcomings; gameplay that might become repetitive depending on how you play. There are also a few bugs that has rendered some of the quests I've played uncompletable, although I've solved all those by basically existing and restarting the game, so that's not as much a big problem as a potentially annoying one. If you're like me and basically just like exploring any game you play at your own leisure, you might very well like this game as much as I do. And if you already know about this game, or, even better, have played it, I'd like to hear what you think.

[Anon Mous]

You forgot to mention that if you don't have a good TV and good cables, seeing the on screen text, especially for the different weapons and items can be a challange.

I got this game when it first came out, having high hopes for it. I have probably played it all of two hours total. I was hoping for a little more out of the story, weapons, moves, and all around environment.

I got it on 360, Temple Guardian was the class I chose, and I feel that like the Guardian it is time for me to scrap the game.

[Roas]

Jul 1, 2009 11:18:36 GMT -5 Anon Mous said:

You forgot to mention that if you don't have a good TV and good cables, seeing the on screen text, especially for the different weapons and items can be a challange.

I got this game when it first came out, having high hopes for it. I have probably played it all of two hours total. I was hoping for a little more out of the story, weapons, moves, and all around environment.

I got it on 360, Temple Guardian was the class I chose, and I feel that like the Guardian it is time for me to scrap the game.

Now granted I have yet to purchase any of the current gen consoles, yet the feeling you have expressed about this game is in general a feeling I believe represents this entire generation of consoles.

A feeling of failure.

With a small exception of a very few games, I am willing to conclude that this gen of consoles us a complete and utter disastor in terms of quality. It's like we've gone back to the early 90's where all companies catered to were two or three genres, forgetting the other four that are out there...including RPGs. This is a discussion I have had at length with my other videogaming friends, and they agree with me (some having two out of three or all three of the systems). As far as I can see it, nothing has gone really right with this gen of consoles.

A) things are too expensive

B) the libraries suck monkey butt

C) the companies don't seem to be even listening to the consumuers, making crap after crap nobody really wants (gee...I wonder where they got that idea...not listening to the will of the people...)

Now, I'm still going to get my hands on a PS3 because I want it for a Blueray player, gotta play FF XIII, it's my system of choice that I want to play FF XIV on, and I am sure a few more gems will be out for it before everything is said and done. Still, that does not change the fact that I think this gen is a failure, and I only hope in a few years when this cycle reaches its end, the next one ends up being more like the previous gen than the 90's feeling we have right now.

The era of the PS2 at its height was incredible. Tons of games to choose from, the majority of them very good for at least one play through, and it was not that expensive.

[Anon Mous]

I wouldn't say that the current gen systems are failures, but this is something that we have also had a lot of conversations on at work.

Are things too expensive? Too expensive? If you are talking about hardware, no. More expensive yes, but with the technology where it is, not too expensive. If you are talking about the software, yes. There are many more games now that have less content and replay value. There are a ton that people will play through once and never pick up again. Paying $60 for one of these sucks. But we are also in an age where trade ins are easy and well known.

Do the libraries "suck monkey butt?" Yes and no. For gamers like most of us who were never really main stream gamers (at least from what I can tell) yes, but for those who like multiplayer games and such . . . This is their bread and butter.

Are they making crap nobody wants? No. They are making crap based on games that sold well, turning it into crap nobody wants.

I never really said that there was anything particularly bad about Sacred 2. Just said that you need a good cord (which is not something that uncommon for a society that is going higher and higher def) and it had areas where it was lacking.

This is the problem with the current gens that we have been able to derive.

1. Across the three systems, for any one genre, there are 1.3 good game libraries. The problem is in order to get a full 1 good game library for any one genre you have to have at least 2 systems.

2. By the end of the PS2's life (some still argue that it isn't truly over) the system was widely accepted into a huge number of households. Up until that point games have been more of a niche market, made up of mainly kids and hardcore gamers. Non niche game player realized in the PS2 life that games are fun. The game developers are now shifting their games to what they think these types of gamers want.

3. Genres are no longer much of a focus. Therefore their meanings are skewed as well. We had a huge discussion on just what defines a genre. Here is what we came up with.

1st person shooter- A game where the primary focus of the game is shooting some type of projectile, and doing so while seeing through the eyes of the character. Usually between 2-9 hours long.

3rd person shooter-A game where the primary focus of the game is shooting some type of projectile, and doing so while seeing from a behind the head point of view. Usually between 2-9 hours long.

Action/Adventure-A game where while a focus may be put on the story to drive the game, the focus is also put on exploration and fighting. Usually between 4-15 hours long.

Puzzle Game-A game where solving the puzzles set before you are main reason for the game. Time to beat depends on your intelligence or time set forth by the game.

Music/Beat Game-A game where timing, and hitting the right button at the right time. Usually between 2-5 hours long.

Arcade Game-A game where if the game were to only have 1 mode and take 30 minutes to complete, that would be enough for the player. Usually between 20-45 minutes long.

Platformer-A game where the focus is on getting from point A to point B often while collecting stuff along the way. Often jumping is a key part of the game. Usually between 1-9 hours long.

Fighter-A game where the whole game is a fighting match. Usually between 30min-1 hour long.

Racing-A game where you are racing. Usually between 1-5 hours long.

Sim-A game that simulates something in life up to life itself. Often have no time limit or time cap.

RTS-A game that focuses on managing resources and building up ones army and society. Usually between 30 minutes-12 hours long.

Sports-A game where you are playing a sport. Usually between 1-5 hours long.

RPG-A game where the focus is on the story and characters, more than any other aspect. Usually between 15-100 hours long.

And then we have the 3 most incorrectly classed games ever. Legend of Zelda is an action game, not an RPG. Elder Scrolls is not an RPG. People could care less about the characters and story. It's a 1st person action/adventure game with RPG elements. Similarly Fallout 3 is an Acton/Shooter with RPG elements.

There are a ton of other sub genres but these are the main ones we can seen at the core of games. How did we get on this track?

[Roas]

I concede to your resolution that there has been a break down in the genres as we used to know them. Things are blended to a point where in some cases there is no telling where it falls. I also concede to your cost statments since I know little how much hardware should cost, so I amend my statements to foucs on games and accessories...still wishing though that there are some price drops still coming

And then, as you have said in that list, there is the emergence of that horrible beast known as the Music/Beat game....no one will ever convince me this sect of gaming is anything but retarded. I'm sorry if anyone likes these...but in the time most people spend playing these games, they could learn a real instrument.

South Park said it best in their episode all about Guitar Hero...watch it and enjoy.

Do the libraries "suck monkey butt?" Yes and no. For gamers like most of us who were never really main stream gamers (at least from what I can tell) yes, but for those who like multiplayer games and such . . . This is their bread and butter.Are they making crap nobody wants? No. They are making crap based on games that sold well, turning it into crap nobody wants.

I'm going to continue to slightly disagree with you on this in the sense that this goes back to what I was saying about a repeat of the 90's. This is the exact mentality they had back then, making games for meatheads who only played what was hip and cool while leaving those of us who wanted more from a game out in the cold. They are only focusing on what makes the most money, which is pretty simple to understand yet such a tactic leads to prevailing waves of crap.

So yay...there are a hundred and one FPS that everyone can play online and shoot each other over and over again, with the best players having memorized where the best sniper positions are turning into a tool fest rather than any game that requires skill or true strategy.

Uncountable numbers push buttons in time to songs on a screen...yeah...that's videogaming....

Depending on the time of year millions play a Maddon game til their eyes bleed and their fingers are sore....EA is a marketing genius....

Random Sandbox Game of the Month comes out....yay they are all the same in the end. Really no challenge or originality there.

A Fighting Game...by the end of the week we're done with it. Yay. We're bored again and sorry we paid money for it.

RPGs....we need a super spyglass to even spot one....let alone a good one...

I'll stop here, cuz I'm just starting to piss myself off.

So I'm agreeing with a lot of what you laid out...but I'm still not convinced this gen is not sailing down the river on the SS Failboat.....I hate that phrase...yet I used it showing how disappointed I am.

The remaining lifeboats are few...with time running out to get off the SS Failboat.

[northlander]

Wow, I didn't expect this thread to turn into a huge anti-current-generation console rant. As for the text in Sacred 2, I don't really have a problem reading it, even though I've only got a standard video cable running from my 360 and into my not-exactly-HD plasma screen.

As for games being worse; I'm going to disagree with that, but mostly on strength of the LiveArcade download market, which has a lot of interesting stuff that isn't necessarily old arcade/Megadrive/whatever games. But in all honesty, what they're doing now isn't really all that different from what they released on the PS2/Gamecube/Xbox.

[Solana]

Northlander, this sounds like a pretty interesting and far-ranging game between the leveling and freedom. Maybe they'll be able to smooth out the bugs in time.

No offense taken on music/beat genre. (Shrugs.) To each their own.

I love Guitar Hero for a few reasons. My cousin is a huge fan, and it's a ton of fun playing with him when we're at our or his place. (Granted, I have to build my endurance back up since my diagnosis, but that'll come back.) I also find it kind of nostalgic because I was in orchestra for eight years. The fingerings are similar, though shifting to second position throws me off because I'm used to first or third from my viola. The drums are also fun on Rock Band for something different.

DDR is also a passion of mine. I love the variety of music, and it's a great way to get a smaller workout. Again, I guess my background might influence it- it's great fun to add a hip drop onto a quick step and nice to work on precision footwork for dance class.

I don't really know much about the business dealings beyond trade in values, and often come into games much later, so mostly rely on my own experiences colored with nostalgia for my opinions. But, as Ambrienne said on our pun war, it'd be boring if everyone liked the same thing.

[Anon Mous]

Jul 1, 2009 23:17:18 GMT -5 Solana said:

But, as Ambrienne said on our pun war, it'd be boring if everyone liked the same thing.

It's a quote that holds quite true. Even though I don't like the music genre personally (as mentioned in the frustration thread), I recognize it's place in games. I said the same thing about DDR back in the day.

Roas I am just going to have to do this with 2 of your points. Keep in mind that this is just because I see it .

1. Actually there are not so many FPS's being produced, because nobody currently thinks they can overthrow Call of Duty for online, and Bioshock for offline.

2. MaddEn. While I don't like it, there will always be people who buy games based on their favorite sport. Football just happens to be a popular sport. Even I watch the Superbowl. Just as I wouldn't put it past you or Zero to pick up a basketball game, JWL to pick up a hockey game, and I have also picked up baseball games. If you are in the game business it is just something you have to come to terms with.

[Anon Mous]

Jul 1, 2009 22:46:56 GMT -5 northlander said:

As for games being worse; I'm going to disagree with that, but mostly on strength of the LiveArcade download market, which has a lot of interesting stuff that isn't necessarily old arcade/Megadrive/whatever games. But in all honesty, what they're doing now isn't really all that different from what they released on the PS2/Gamecube/Xbox.

Almost forgot to comment on this. While yes the games made for the LiveArcade are interesting, many of them are done in an old school style. I think the main argument that Roas was making was for the physical games rather than the digital downloads.

Though that does bring about the other point of the systems being created at the cusp of the begining of the DD era. Kinda scary to think about, but it may happen sooner than we think.

[northlander]

I actually like the newest generation consoles, because it's brought social gaming back to me; something that has been mostly lost since the early period of the PS1. Ok, so the "social" aspect is basically over a net connection, but it's still a step up from what I had with the PS2. I can game with my friends while talking with them as we game, and it's been a blast. As much as I like JRPGs, they're a lonely sort of games.

And why shouldn't LiveArcade games (or the PS3 and Wii equivalents) be counted among the reason why the newest generation consoles rock? They're games on the 360 (or the PS3/Wii), aren't they? Many of them which you can't get on other consoles, even. After a little over a year, I now have 16 original games and 60 LiveArcade games. If not for the fact that many of my PS2 discs are classic collections, my 360 collection would have been bigger than my PS2 collection, despite me having owned a PS2 since around a year after its launch. (And just to put things into perspective; I have far more games for the Commodore 64 than all my other gaming machines put together.)

Now, I can see Roas' point to a degree: disc-based games seems to be hung up on FPS games nowadays, so much so that even racing games or RPG games seems to take a back seat to it. In some cases, there's even a mix-n-match, like Fallout 3. But I don't think it's fair to just dismiss an entire library of games just because it doesn't fit into the argument. The 360 has a lot of fun games. You just can't buy them in the store. And I'm sure this is the case with the Wii and the PS3 as well.

[Roas]

Jul 2, 2009 2:20:53 GMT -5 Anon Mous said:

Almost forgot to comment on this. While yes the games made for the LiveArcade are interesting, many of them are done in an old school style. I think the main argument that Roas was making was for the physical games rather than the digital downloads.

Actually, I won't go near basketball games anymore. I broke that horrible addiction years ago. I was tired of spending the cash every year for the new game. I realized the dupe I was being, and I'll probably never go back to it. Besides...it was never challenging against humans or AIs. Too easy.

I gotta go out, so I'll have some more comments later on other lines when I can sit down and give some solid thought. I think in some cases I'm using a shotgun method of description when referring to things cuz in my mind I'm lumping things together. Might need to be a little clearer.