-Is the Sacred game series finished or did they end the series on a cliffhanger? I ask cause Ascaron went bankrupt and stopped the franchise
I am not talking about Sacred 3 though, I only mean the RPG Sacred games
-Also I was recommended Dungeon Siege a while ago, is it similar to Diablo in terms of plot and all?
I know DS is party based but it often turned up in Diablo II clone suggestions
I think DS2 is more diablo like, than DS1.
It has big bosses, lot of side quests and secrets, unique loot, set items, pets, and even a bestiary function.
I’ve finished Dungeon Siege 1 without other party members once, and it was so much fun 
Thanks and Sacred?
Sacred 3 was a mess. Sacred 2 was good on PS3 when it came out…for a console ARPG and honestly it doesn’t feel like it aged well
Played Sacred 1, it was good at the time. Sacred 2 was okay, but it made me never played Sacred 3.
Played DS1, 2 and 3. At the time DS was good, 2 and 3 was okay, but never wanted to replay it a 2nd time. It’s not really like Diablo at all. Especially 3 for me didn’t really have a good story.
The Divinity series for me was much better than either Sacred or DS. But is more RPG than ARPG.
DS2 and sacred 2 are great, but their sequels killed the franchises. Sacred 3 is closer to gauntlet than to Diablo. Never played the originals but the story line seems to not really carry on from those.
First Dungeon Siege is okay, but i honestly really like the second game. It has many differences with the Diablo series, so don’t expect a similar experience.
The Sacred series is my favorite. NOT 3 though. Never played it, never will. I never understood the hatred for s2. Has it’s flaws, yes. What game doesn’t? S1 also has it’s flaws. Names on loot mean absolutely nothing. You will find for example, Flaming sword of alacrity. Has no fire damage and no attack speed bonuses. Also shields which add to dual wielding (!). Stuff like that. Also has respawn which a lot of people hate. But you CAN limit how bad it is by doing side quests in an area. “This area is at peace” is the verbal cue you will get when you’ve done enough to reduce the respawn. But the characters in s1 are great. Battle mage, dark elf, dwarf, seraphim, vampire, demon. Great stuff. Neat skill system with the “runes” and cooldown times. Not mana. Nice change. s2 has an absolutely INSANE amount of character customization. After putting so many points into a skill “group”, like pyromancy for instance, you select one of 2 “bonuses”. There a 3 altogether, each with 2 choices. This is on TOP of a number of skills and spells. Literally millions of combinations. Giant open game world. Both 1 and 2 feature this. I prefer the characters in 1 though. i always said s1 characters, with s2 skill system, would be a GREAT game. i was hoping that would have been s3. But they went a much different way for s3. Which pissed off the Sacred fans, this one included. Make any game you want, but don’t call it a sequel to a game which is entirely different genre. That’s just idiotic. Anyways games are cheap enough now that it warrants a try. 1 and 2 only though. Both are great, but flawed. Like most games are nowadays.
Can’t agree more with that one this is the Baldur Gate thing were the first two were clearly “Dungeon and Dragon” made into a Video Game while Dark Alliance is more like an Hack and Slash (Quite like Champion of Norrath).
Sacred 1-2 are real Diablo experience. Sacred 3 could have been Castle Crashers with enhanced graphics.
-The team moved to the project called Unbended at first, but the project is already dead now.
-It’s been more than 12 years since I played DS1 or 2, don’t even remember them well. At the time I liked them, but didn’t really got hooked. They are also not a goldmine for people like yourself who enjoy trying dozens of different builds.
Dungeon Siege games are … well each is different.
The first fits the older titles where you’re a party going through the world. Experience a mild story with combat that is similar to the first Divine Divinity, but you control an entire group. It is quite good even to this day. Replayed it a few months ago and didn’t feel clunky or such. It aged fairly well.
Dungeon Siege 2 has a lot of depth. You could call it a party based Diablo 2, but that wouldn’t do it enough justice. DS2 has a lot of mechanics that let you speak with ghosts and do other things to find secrets. It has lots of interesting areas. You can have summons and pets in your party. The buffs you can put on your characters are more acking to a Baldur’s Gate universe. Story/lore is deepened and told reasonably well.
Only thing that got a little under my skin is that on consecutive playtrhoughts you got to meet the same characters, but in totally different classes. I mean the game lets you visit/unlock areas that you couldn’t enter the previous difficulty… why not make some minor adjustments in party characters. Plenty of art assets of other NPC’s they could’ve used. It is a minor gripe though. Still worth replaying it many times over.
Dungeon Siege 3 is just…weird after you played the first two. It goes in a totally different direction gameplay wise. The world and story is pretty much the same as the first two. Lots of interesting areas and characters. The gameplay however might put people off. It was during the time developers were looking into having a console ARPG making Dungeon Siege 3 one of the first to attempt it. If you want to play with mouse and keyboard its clunky and frustrating so make sure to have a controller at hand to use. Also you’ll be controlling a single character that has limited build possibilities. However the character can shift in an alternate form and thus has access to plenty of skills to use though. Still worth too play at least once.
Sacred franchise I’m not really a fan of. The first one is pretty much a Diablo 2 clone. It has a world and different classes for you too play and level. It works and feels similar to D2. Rather blend in the end imo.
Sacred 2 tried to be different. You still had classes and a lot of build diversity. It attempts a more open world quest environment. Never completed Sacred 2 so can’t say much more.
Sacred Citadel doesn’t really fit in with the other 2. It is a side scrolling brawler. Enjoyed playing it through several times in co-op with friends. You can play through in 5-6 hours or so. Simple game, simple mechanics, simple combo’s, colorful.
Sacred 3…it had so many bad reviews that I didn’t even get it. Looked like a very bad game overall. No idea if this one finished the lore/story or whatever.
Well i really thank the people for the info they provided. I guess Sacred’s reviews are a little underwhelming so I’ll try it first and save Dungeon Siege for later on since the first two seem to have a good rep
And also Sacred 3 makes you think “I should be playing Castle Crashers instead”.
I’ve never played any Sacred game other than 3, so the genre shift isn’t much of an issue to me (although I agree the anger of the fans is justified). But I’ve played a little bit of it and it fell soulless in gameplay, and it gets repetitive real quick. But even if this game was called “Fantasy Heroes” or some other crap it wouldn’t do any favors because of the story, oh Gods, the story…
Sacred 3 “story” is a living proof that John Carmack views on video game plots are bullshit. It’s not that complicated, just “evil guy with his evil army steal big magic macguffin, go get it back”, not something that I would call bad. The big problem lies on HOW they executed the premise: It’s a non-stop festival of annoying characters and bad jokes came straight from pre-teen high-scoolers, and it just doesn’t seem to stooooop… It’s like they tried too hard to be like the Borderlands series, but forgot about the “actually being funny” part.
The dialogue was so cringeworthy that it made me ragequit. I’m not joking about that last bit.
And Sacred 2 had the best quest reward EVER in an RPG, IMO. I’m sure most, if not all know what I mean by now, But I won’t spoil it for those who don’t know by putting the spoiler tags around the answer.
A concert from Blind Guardian!
Sacred 1 & 2 were awesome. Fun times and the frustation with early bugged bosses 1-shotting your HC toon for lolz, especially in S2.
Sacred 3 was a betrayal to the franchise that effectively killed it altogether. It was underhanded scheme that attempted to reel in more casuals for a quick buck that failed miserably and altogether killing its original fan-base.
Dungeon Siege 3 was the first game I played in that series so I can’t hate it at all. It was a decent story game which you played for the story and possibly the achievements if you are a grinder, but definitely not something I play endlessly. It’s predecessors, on the other hand, is more like an ARPG which offers it some replayability despite being aesthetically inferior.
Like Diablo 2 ,Sacred 1&2 was very good , Dungeon siege i loved too.
I’ll never understand why they did shit with sacred 3, do they think people like change that much?? Or the veteran Dev died and Young one think they can do better ? Well…i’ll never know Oo
Old days are in my heart:)
Sacred 2 had some cool things such as your ‘combat arts’ (aka spells) can have modifications on them. Usually you get a choice of 2 mods at each ‘node’ and there are three nodes for a combat art. An example of a choice is to split your fireball in two or would you like burn damage. Some other cool things I liked about the game.
Lol. I had typed up this response that you were crazy. Until my eyes saw you said DS 1 or 2 not S1 or 2.
Sacred 1 was fun but terribly managed and updated. Sacred 2 was more of the same. It was trash balance from start to finish.
They were fun to play, though.
What exactly do you mean by “terribly managed & updated & trash balanced”? 1 was updated quite often. They even had a mini expansion called “plus” that they gave to everyone. Can you give me some examples of what you mean? Both games had their flaws. No question about it. I just want to know some examples so I can see if i agree or not.