Jump to content

munk

Members
  • Content count

    37
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

munk last won the day on June 1 2014

munk had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

26 Fine

About munk

  • Rank
    Master of Antimony

Previous Fields

  • Favorite pizza topping
    pepperoni
  • Why do you want to join DarkMatters?
    still play Sacred
  • All time best video game ever played
    Oblivion
  • Real Name
    Brad
  • Platform
    PC
  • Gamertag
    kuks kri
  • Country
    United States

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Montana, US
  • Interests
    Great games. Used to be books. Games are the future of novels and movies, but we're not there yet. Like hiking, mt biking, family, friends, all the usual suspects like sunlight and rain, animals and open spaces. 4X4 exploring, rock collecting. Writing.
  1. The majority of the purchasers gave Sacred 3 one star, (11 people out of 25) But enough took pity and selected 3 stars, about 5 posters, that Sacred 3 was raised from the bottom to appear even half way respectable. There was concensus it bore nearly no relationship to the Sacred franchise, one reviewer even suggesting one would have to leave their expectations at the door before they could enjoy the game. I trust the actual buyers at Amazon more than the professional reviewers anyway. I think it was GN that thought Red Dead Redemption about the greatest game of all time, and most rated it very highly, and the Add-on, Undead Nightmare , got more points than had Shivering Isles not many years before; 10 out of 10 I think. (Yes, I enjoyed RDR; no, I do not think it in the running for greatest rpg of all time) Sacred 3 is selling for around 28 bucks American or so, pretty rapid fall for a fairly new release. I don't think the company will get their money out of their effort, whatever that effort was. One purchaser who was positive about the game said he thought there would be little replay for most people. Play it once and put it in a box somewhere.....and indeed there were already used copies for sale. Now, that's how capitalism is supposed to work! If it's an inferior product that fails to meet needs you pay at the marketplace for your bad work. I am very heartened to see "unbended' still unbent and moving forward. I
  2. Sacred 3 moved forward

    My impression of shards and now weapon spirits, and I'm not a tech guy, is they sound like after-thoughts to inflate the balloon enough so it looks like a real ball. But it's still a balloon. Linear game is a no for me. A serious breach by itself to quit right there, with a mere one percent chance the game is still Sacred; but it's not even that close. There is no in- depth character build- and no involved combat art development, and no variety of combat arts. What the actor's voices sound like, or how silly, much like any issues with the artwork, could be overlooked if the fundamentals were intact. None of the fundamentals are intact. And remember- Deep Silver asked for input several places on-line. They should not have asked; makes it worse, if it could be worse. Whoever made the decisions to gut Sacred did not understand the fan base. It was not just a swashbuckling pre-teen children's game- though it could be that too, such was the charm and ingenious design,- very wide appeal. Sacred franchise was a product for intelligent players, attracting sophisticated, often technically minded young people as well as families and children from the broader population. And Sacred was a top level game, not a low-level knock-off. But the market people must have sneered and discarded the, 'intelligent' player as a non-issue, because superficial offerings from everyone in the industry have done just fine. They think. If this were true though, the newest Elder Scrolls franchise of Skyrim would not have sold millions and millions from a public hungry for challenge, any challenge, or at the least fewer insults and less boredom. Sacred 3 could've had it all. We're going to get a McDonald's Burger, probably a Big Mac instead of a sirloin steak or even a decent burger with homemade fries. After you discard the three pieces of white bread and the shredded lettuce, and remove the fillers from the meat product, there isn't much 'meal' left. The oils, fats and calories drive your hunger away, but a couple hours later, often with heart burn, it comes back. Only by now you know better, and won't go there again anytime soon. That's what will happen to Sacred players with Sacred 3. Maybe I'm wrong. After all, they sold enough Big Macs to climb to the Moon on them, right? Trouble is, McDonald's arrived on the cheap, and never claimed to be anything other than fast food. Sacred began at the top. It's been said many times here in this forum the best hope would be a good game- not a Sacred game- but a good game ironically with the title we think the world of. I'm not confident of that, because linear games with shallow development and gameplay are not what I spend time with. The gamble for the company with the copyright is that their Sacred cartoon series introduced over the last few years will become the new fan base for their launch. There is a line of thought in the gaming industry which believes multiplayer on-line gaming neatly sidesteps any issues; lack of AI, detailed world, character development, plot or game depth, and that costly game development. They're counting on you and your peers to interact and provide the missing elements in their product. Their game is a platform for you to interact with each other, very little else, and of course any fees or online registrations are economic icing on the cake. That is the future they want. They said as much when they told you that, 'most players were online multiplayer' anyway for Sacred ll so that's what we did in Sacred 3.' Paraphrase, quotes mine.
  3. I was wondering when Minecraft would hit the Elder Scrolls RPG form. Now, where's that missing AI?
  4. So, this will not actually be Sacred right?

    Of course not; aren't programers and designers following the guidelines set by those with the money to pay their salaries? I don't blame a programer for a linear Sacred 3 without deep character builds, anymore than I'd blame a Vietnam vet for that war in Asia. But don't sell me a comic-book and tell me it's a famous Russian novel....
  5. So, this will not actually be Sacred right?

    Or someone (s) on top insisted release sooner rather than later, perhaps seeing further investment of resources would not be productive. When Gothic for Xbox was released the cut-scenes were beyond bad- mere sketches of cut scenes never developed. Someone decided no further development.... make what money could be made and get it over with. And that's what happened, too. On a more positive outlook, perhaps Sacred 3 is tidy and complete, not needing the few weeks more, because there really wasn't that much to tidy and complete.
  6. both my use of Xbox and PC have this problem; many times the spell will gather foes, and then fail to launch and or knock them around. We just stand there, eyeing one another, until they decide to hit me and I decide the spell has failed. thought it might be my technique, and have tried everything. I just don't get it. Love the spell, bread and butter for this guy, but when it fails, so does my enjoyment. I've quit toons rather than put up with this. It seems to fail in waves, might stop working for 8x straight then work fine for 3 more, then back to putz. What am I doing wrong? as always, thank you very much. munk
  7. Programing for Sacred (or any other game)

    I learned a lot- compared to the little I knew before. Very interesting stuff.
  8. An Interview with Sacred 3 devs

    There is this stance, being repeated and expressed in many different ways, (for over a year-since S3 facts became understood) which says we can't judge until we actually have Sacred 3 on the screen in front of us. This appears very reasonable, fair, and not being knee jerk . The idea, to wait and see, is valid in so many ways, it's hard to disagree. If Betty Boop gained 400 pounds would we still want to see her in a brief slinky outfit singing her song-'I want to be loved by you, by you, and nobody else but you'? (in the cartoons..of course) It might be good for a laugh, and then she could put some clothes on, but most would no longer turn to her for entertainment if they'd paid to see Betty Boop. We could laugh at her for being an entirely different cartoon, but she would not be Betty Boop. (We could add a horrible disfigurement from a car accident with Roger Rabbit driving that left half of her face removed. She can't walk because a leg is missing; so you won't be hiking and exploring the local park trails with her beside you. -Assuming you were a cartoon also, or were in a movie with cartoons... She can't dance, can't sing. They'll add the graphite blade soon, Warner Bros promises.... Oh, and she's now an idiot with an IQ of 62 because of brain damage from the accident- so there's no character to appreciate any longer, or chances to grow and experience variation in experience.. er uh...talk about a strained illustration.) OK, crazy example- you don't know who Betty Boop is- try Mae West, or anyone. Jennifer Anniston? Tasteless examples, too crude; how about the comic book version of, As I Lay Dying done in 12 pages? Fear and Loathing without Las Vegas? One could still say, we'll have to wait and see Betty Boop, or Mae West, Jennifer Anniston, or brouse all 12 pages of a Marvel adaptation of Faulkner- but there are some things you do not have to see first hand to know they've failed. If S3 is a good game I'll believe those of you here who try it. But it won't be a good game in the Sacred series, it will be a good game with an ironic name, Sacred 3. No open world, no in-depth character development-that's not Sacred. It has about as much relationship to Sacred as John Lennon's tooth (now in private hands) does to musical genius. That is to say, not much, if any. You can't remove fundemental features of a product, call it by the same name, and expect the same response from those who enjoyed the product before change. You shouldn't label it as the previous product. What isn't fair is a company removing intrinsic features and then expecting you to be, 'fair'. I want something Sacred to come along.
  9. If it's the sword I think it is, I've recieved it several times while fighting. Sometimes it doesn't show up for a long time, it's possible some of my toons have never had it. Often the level of the sword is too low when my character finds it.
  10. these posts are what I came for, why I wanted to ask. thanks all. Oh, just an aside about Morrowind- it did not have the AI of Oblivion. I forget what Beth called that AI in Oblivion, but it's gone. They returned to the Morrowind model in Skyrim, but without Morrowind's layers of factions and that societal context they had going. They never returned to Morrowind's level of 'book' literacy. There's a surface layer of 'grit' and 'harder hitting' realism in Skyrim's writing that is at first glance superior to Oblivion's simpler approach, but it is only skin deep. There isn't really anything there, and it lacks the suggestive beauty of Morrowind, where you really felt you were picking paths between factions in a strange land. Its all just soup in Skyrim, nearly word salad. They faked it. But that was enough for most players.. As an ecomomic target, 'kiddies' will always be a powerful one. But it is not the only one, and the market just keeps growing and widening. There are more adults on the planet than kids. Those adults want games that are playable. This is not 1965 or even 1985, adults spend bucks on entertainment, and movies are on the decline. It's the lego bloks model. Adults who grew up on Legos do not build legos at age 30, usually, but the toys they do use are much more expensive. That could and does include video games. If I've learned anything from this thead, it's that as soon as these engines are cheaper to get, there may be better games. Lego can't get much of the adult market, but someone is going to, because it is there and largely untapped. I could have said the whole thing by using 'toy's; the cheap games are toys, and adults want better. ...I love the idea of a free engine. to my mind, that is .....a gift, spiritual, God inspired, freeing...its, well, a person who participated in that project would be like....Gutenberg, mechancial printing press. I looked it up. If there are people who think like that in this world right now, we aren't licked at all. SX255, thanks for posting that.
  11. Silver_Fox, you put a lot of ideas foreward for me to think about. Thank God! Wish I could get a transfusion of information and analogue from all you knowledgable people. There are many games I don't know-and the tech side my son understands while I do not. AI may never be 'good as a human' at this stage of our tech, but it won't be that way forever. More importantly, AI remains the most desired achievement. Gaming is supposed to feel real? They can't get away with better graphics each year as a replacement for interaction, er, can they? I don't think so. The wild card has to be the small children playing now, having grown up with toys I only dreamed of while watching Startrek, (the one with Capt Kirk) Human beings are smarter than the business is giving them credit for, and those children are maturing and will want more than better, 'splat' effects when their hero kills a bad guy. You could look at the sideshows the industry has given us as a diversion- the unspoken thing in the room, the beast everyone is afraid to mention, is still AI, and the diversions won't change that. Isn't it intrinsic to the art form? I think it is. If they do not push that, then games will never be much more than improved Asteroids. Hollow. Todd Howard said another thing I remembered, for reasons other than he would hope. He's said that the spell making in Skyrim, for instance, had to go because of the graphics- he said reluctantly. He has his priorities wrong. The features he chopped off should never be sacrafised for better visuals. It's the other way around. Apparently, high definition is a over-valued goal, and they are not thinking of the game as a whole. I get that they developed while the industry had lower tech and clumsy graphics, and have always wanted the visuals to be superb. Didn't we all want that? But that's not the end goal. Someone could take what the tech could bear today and with equal or better than Oblivion level graphics push AI beyond what it has ever been- and have character building and attributes and all else. I'm subscribed to Grim Dawn, if that's the right word, and while I like it, glad it's here, support the direction, it is not really a Sacred game. It's a step in the right direction. You said Sacred used Character development because it didn't have as much choice in action and plot advancement. And that's exactly why Sacred is re-playable. But repeatable games don't take a bite out of sales-that's apples and oranges, a different market. I don't believe for a second that Sacred or Oblivion took sales from the hordes of buyers who would purchase another 8 hours of Halo, with their always new release coming next year. That 'event' in the marketplace will always exist- it's like the pop music market for young teens. I don't know what Pve and PvP are. You know, I watched Television in the 60's and much of that programing is contrived and lighweight by today's standards. We wanted more, but the networks were afraid. All the issues they were afraid of then have been hammered out over and over today, with more realistic, filled-out relationships. These things do change. I see the programing today has it's own set of pitfalls and stereotypes too. I just hope this doesn't mean I'll have to wait for my children's generation to mature to see great games. I hope it's not that long. It was disturbing to see so many elder scrolls fans not notice or not care about the huge cuts in character building and choice. But that just leaves a big window open for another company to put out a product that does. I guess ranting is one of the things I do best. Too bad I never made any money at it. Oh-the opposing maps of the two fps says it all. I didn't actually know that. They have shortened everything, haven't they? I wonder how much of that is the devalued US dollar?
  12. I go back to the Atari 5200. I was old then- 30- most people that age would not get themselves an game system. But I was a reader, SF, classics, loved movies, comics, pop art forms, and always music. What was wrong with fun? Nothing. Doom came and went, Hexen, Heretic, Diablo, others...then Sacred. Sacred really did it; I thought Diablo was great, but Sacred was a place you could go back to, live in. And we did- my son grew up with Sacred. (He started on Doom when the media was filled with dire warnings about children and gore and what would happen to them. My son is one of the most moral and honest persons you will meet. The secret was parenting, not gaming. Leave a kid alone with Doom and no parent around at all and maybe the child will take instruction from the screen....) When Elder Scrolls reached Morrowind, it was a milestone for everybody, but when they reached Oblivion, it was a high water mark. Why? AI, Open World, Character build variations, and great stories and adventures. The Holy Grail, to me, in gaming was AI. Did the game react to the player? Did NPC's react to the player's actions, have memory of those actions, and how independently could they respond? There were games at the top of the heap that had a wide variation in character building, and choices to make with tools and spells and abilities. Attributes and Skills choice, and how that affected game play. Sacred 1 and 2 both have a level of character building not seen in games today. RPG's were coming into their own. Remember Two Worlds? Gothic? Now look at where we are just a few years later. AI is gone. For real time reaction to player we have multi-player games; you react to your peers. In single player RPG we have ruins and caves to explore. When the last dark hole has been found, there isn't much reason to go back and do it again. Character building is deciding which sword you'll swing, to bow or not to bow, heavy or light armor and how cute your girl or guy looks in that outfit. Skyrim dropped attributes to three, and spellmaking is now cookie cutter with far fewer choices, and you cannot make your own. You cannot make your own enchantments/spells on equipment either; you choose from a very simple menu of pre-assigned values depending upon your skill level. It's not about 'what kind?" of affect so much as it is, 'how much?" The AI in Oblivion, once proudly held as a pinnacle, was quietly dropped and initially few even realized was gone. Skyrim looked the same- no- much better- those potato heads were gone, so it must be better, right? At this stage in our technology, you can pretty much say every new game in a series has the opportunity to look better than the one before. That's graphics, pixels, definition; not gameplay. First person shooters seem to dominate what young people want. Those haven't changed much, they look better, feel more responsive with superb graphics, and the online multi experience has swelled with participation. But what has happened to my beloved RPG? In Oblivion an NPC could be made to love or hate you, and would remember, has shared history. In Oblivion when you saved the world shopkeepers and passer-bys thank you. In Skyrim NPC's dont realize their 'wife' has expired, her body lying twenty feet away, let alone you saving the world. Mages dont know you're head of the college. You are alone in a vast world. When you finish with that empy world, you are done. The Big Empty. Stranger in a Strange land. This isn't a debatable point. Bethesda dropped AI and thought minispeeches by NPC's would mimic enough to pass inspection. Having Guards in Skyrim know you're the Listener for the Dark Brotherhood is an appalling breach, a sloppy replacement for AI, for the lack of true feedback or response. A shopkeeper that follows you into your home, repeating for the 20th time the same speech he always blathers is not AI or communication. It's a bore. It's tedious. And you can't make him stop! You don't have conversations in Skyrim; you listen to their inane scripts over and over. The only choices in interaction are the few scripted conversations with NPC's in major quests where you sometimes have option 'A" or "B", and these are few in the body of play. This is Fallout format. This is Red Dead Redemption format. This is surrender. Bethesda doesn't even bother to write much script for major companions. AI is hard, writing possible script choice is hard. Graphics are easy by comparison, and if there are enough places to go, who will miss these things? Character building is still there, but much simplified, and with pre-canned outcomes. Choice is losing the battle in modern RPG's. Why? I've tried the Draconis stuff, Risen, Witcher; if anyone knows of a great RPG please tell me. Reckoning was pretty good- not much choice- but good- having promise of future improvement, the add-on was fantastic, but that franchise died. Oblivion was far from perfect. Good minds can debate how to handle the leveling problem of opponents in the game and assets like legendary blades, and NPC conversations were often trite, but it had AI, wide character and attribute combination build possibilities and interaction with game world. The game had constant variation. NPC's thought for themselves. The game unfolded differently each time it was played because of this. Sure, AI was simple, but they tried, and it worked. Now no one does. It's in the ashcan of history. Modern games have dropped Good and Evil; it's all moral relativism now. In previous Elder Scrolls you could redeme yourself if black- evil- in Skyrim no one knows or cares you murdered Lydia. There are no consequences for your actions because there is no scripting for NPC's other than basic. They don't know if you are of good karma or bad. Saving the world or telling your companion to touch that daedric pillar for their sacrafise to a dark god are equally ignored. You can't even get the Xbox achievement unless you complete all the evil acts in the Daedric questline. I'm not a Priest, don't attend church or have an axe to grind, but making all possible actions in an RPG equal mirrors the same moral relativism the Western World currently flirts with. I believe a game can provide an opportunity to role play- you are not going to become a thief because you play one on Skyrim. But I also believe having no in- game, and now little industry- wide division between morality and immorality is dangerous. They are not the same- that is why they are role played. Yes, games are political. They do intentionally attempt to shape public opinion. I guess that's human, but acceptance of differing choices in personal and family life is one thing, accepting no difference between murder and self sacrifice is clumsily done and destructive. I don't really need video games to shape my political decisions, but it seems politics have crept into everything. That too, can be seen as a restriction of choice formerlly left to the owner player. The folks here who researched the math behind the spells and actions inside Sacred could have hammered this topic out of the ballpark in far fewer words. I'm not a research guy. Hope some of what I've said rings a bell, and hasn't done to you what that liitle girl in Whiterun Skyrim does to me, "I'm not afraid of you, I'll fight anyone, elders, kids, ...." Whatever RPG makers decide we can still do in the future, I hope they return the ability to close the door on that little girl. Character build variations, attributes, action and spell making, interaction with NPC's and AI are all diminshed, but at the least bring back the 'A' button and halt that conversation! I'm hoping the new wave of community- start games, like Grim Dawn and hopfully Unbended, will push aside the complacency of the big boys. That's how capitalism works, you know, when there's a need, someone finds a way and if it's wanted enough it's successful. I'm hoping gifted persons on computers will still build games that'll break through. The movie, Night Of The Living Dead, started as a small project by a teacher with amatuers; now it's the forefather of an entire genre. It can happen. It must happen if I'm going to be playing any new game in the next ten years, or if I'll simply be using antiquated equipment with inferior graphics to play games that are superior in every other way to what is being done. Why are they killing choice?
  13. Probably at least an incorporated face in Nevada or Del.
  14. New Sacred 3 will be like what current game?

    Grim Dawn; (for those who mentioned it- Ryanrocker etc) I bought into Grim Dawn because my son told me it was Sacred -like. It isn't- It's Diablo like. Pretty much Titan Quest -esque. Some of same people making it, same format. Both Titan Quest and Grim Dawn are fun, by all means have some, but don't expect Sacred. While not exactly linear it's not even close to the kind of open world Sacred one and two have. The fighting is densely packed. Thats what you'll be doing. Neither franchises have the attention to the world of a Sacred. Nor that great balance between conflict and being able to look around and enjoy. Eldest son agreed, being surprised himself at how close to Diablo in feel and arrangement Titan and Dawn are. Grim Dawn recently released the next chunk of game region, probably the 2nd out of 3. You have zombies, magic, guns, and a post apoc world. It's on Steam. Both Titan Quest and Grim Dawn are enjoyable- but there is nothing Sacred like out there that I've found. If anyone knows a game like Sacred, let us know. You know what I mean; a game that has more in common with Sacred than just the name Sacred.
  15. Sounds to me like they raised a Dream, had it splatted down by lawyers and copyrights, yet are rising again. Sounds like...Sacred to me. Henceforth called unbended or whatever they want. The world is filled with fantasy characters. While you can't make another Seraphim in high heels, you can make a Angel. The world is also filled with knock-offs you can't challenge. Almost every game or book out there has ties to other books, movies and games. The original Sacred was advertised by critics as Diablo without the mistakes, or improved Diablo. Remember that? Diablo couldn't stop Sacred, and Deep Silver can't stop you or me from making a game similar to Sacred 1, or Morrowind, or even Hexen. I suspect this forum will have to do its part and call the new game a name without anything Sacred in it. I remain very hopeful and will still donate when the dust settles. The new characters show they are on new ground. The world will have trees, water and birds in it. You can't copyright those things. Right now there's a huge hole screaming to be filled in gaming, this could be the start.
×