Would Sacred 3 be an awesome Mmorpg?

[gogoblender 3,304]

You know...I used to think it would...until I saw this topic over at the SIf today with a person saying that this game could be an excellent mmorpg.

 

Sacred's closed servers come very close to the experience of a mmorpg, but still allow us to cut away to real life without getting too involved with toons to feel like we actually lead double lives...I think

 

Plus Sacred is free online, and for the many thousands of hours I think most of addicted players get out of it, Sacred 2 is cheap.

 

Twas spunky's response (yes you spunky!) on that other thread that really had me think... that no, sacred could NEVER be an mmorpg because it would have to be dumbed down.

 

True?

 

True!

 

Isn't this though?

 

Sacred 2's about leet math, leet bugs, and leet builds.

 

Are there any mmorpgs out there that come even close to the kind of builds that this game offers? And as Spunky said, mmorpg's are for the masses.. so yeah a lot of the functionality of this game WOULD have to be dummed down so that peeps could pick it up faster, build faster and get results quickly.

 

That was great insight Spunky, gave ma laugh this morning too. I'm agreeing with your take on this.

 

 

gogo

[Woody 24]

*Short Answer*

 

Sacred 3 MMORPG ? No thanks. (I can't say better)

 

*/Short answer*

[gogoblender 3,304]

Why?

 

Long answer please!

 

 

gogo

[Woody 24]

Why?

 

Long answer please!

 

 

gogo

 

Hehe gogo. ^^

First, I agree with what Spunky said.

Then, I don't like MMORPG's gameplay at all, and I would be really sad if DS will do of sacred 3 a MMORPG...

 

The only good point for MMORPGs... their big beautiful world (at least for guild wars/wow), but, Ancaria is also a great and beautiful world.

[Spunky 16]

Haha, great to hear that my post gave you a laugh gogo

[Flooxim 50]

I will say about this that I'd like to see more focus on cooperative play for Sacred 3, and yes, devs would have to "dumb down" the game mechanics to reach more users. I like Sacred 2 mechanics as they are, so I don't think they should be heavily modified to fit the "requirements" to make it an MMO.

 

 

Max

[Dobri 55]

here's my answer too:

 

MMOPRG?

 

I've played Lineage 2 for quite a while. I've seen all kinds of people. Leechers, Kill Stealers, Gankers, whatnot. When you, Gogo, showed me sacred 2 and assisted me to buy it, I was coninced I'm making the right choice, because this was a game that allows a user to play it properly avoiding all kinds of scum players. I've been a PK, I've been a leecher, and I wouldn't want to go back to that point. That would be like going back to may 2004 when I made my first ever Lineage 2 character and realized what it is to havepeople hunt you for your equip, your drops, your kills, etc.

 

No, thanks. If Sacred 3 becomes an MMORPG, I will have serious doubts I will play it. I've had enough of MMORPG's. I know how to beat other people, but I find little pleasure in it. I'd rather defeat people in the real life... not an MMORPG.

 

SO, gogo... I will hardly play S3 if it becomes an MMORPG. I would love to give it a go if it has a good clan and a lot of friends, but... If it's your regular MMORPG of the Lineage/World of Warcraft sort - you'll have to go without me.

Edited May 6, 2010 by Dobri

[r00ster 2]

I will say about this that I'd like to see more focus on cooperative play for Sacred 3, and yes, devs would have to "dumb down" the game mechanics to reach more users.

 

This is exactly why I don't do mmo's, and hope to high hell s3 isn't one.

 

I like that I can play solo.

I like the mp for teh chat.

 

The majority of sacred players you will find, don't want to group.

We want to hunt solo, and talk FECAL MATTER!e while we play.

 

IF it forced, or placed any kind of bs rules to make me have to party with player 'xx' I would be out.

 

Is is that hard to understand that not everyone wants a game where they are 'forced' to cooperate with people they don't want to?

Sorry if that breaks some hearts, but you have to understand, I don't (and probably many many others) want to play with you.

 

It's not I don't like you, I just don't want that.

 

In every game that forced co op, or tries to, the majority of posts I read, are players trying to find a way around that.

More emphasis, forced, whatever you want to call it is not what players of this genre want.

[Flooxim 50]

I will say about this that I'd like to see more focus on cooperative play for Sacred 3, and yes, devs would have to "dumb down" the game mechanics to reach more users.

 

This is exactly why I don't do mmo's, and hope to high hell s3 isn't one.

 

I like that I can play solo.

I like the mp for teh chat.

 

The majority of sacred players you will find, don't want to group.

We want to hunt solo, and talk FECAL MATTER!e while we play.

 

IF it forced, or placed any kind of bs rules to make me have to party with player 'xx' I would be out.

 

Is is that hard to understand that not everyone wants a game where they are 'forced' to cooperate with people they don't want to?

Sorry if that breaks some hearts, but you have to understand, I don't (and probably many many others) want to play with you.

 

It's not I don't like you, I just don't want that.

 

In every game that forced co op, or tries to, the majority of posts I read, are players trying to find a way around that.

More emphasis, forced, whatever you want to call it is not what players of this genre want.

 

I also like doing as you say with Sacred 2 : play solo and use multiplayer to chat/trade/help.

I understand your point r00ster, and I was talking about this idea because I think this is the direction they are going with Diablo 3. I know it won't make everyone happy, but if Diablo 3 will become the standard in action-RPGs, maybe the Sacred 3 devs will consider this idea even if they know there might be consequences.

 

However, I'm not talking about "forced" co-op, I'm talking about game experience enhancement via cooperative play. Game devs are and will be trying to make a game more enjoyable if we play in a small group instead of playing solo.

 

 

Max

[colif 39]

Isn't the focus of most MMORPG's to get to end and do the end game... What end game is there in Sacred 2? This game is focused more on making characters unique, not making them to fit a role in an end game dungeon fest. It would make respec necessary as most people wouldn't want to play through 200 lvls with a build that works at end game, but not before. Everyone would have cookie cutter builds to fit in.

 

The level cap would surely be lower, as people would complain they can't get to 200 and do the last dungeons. It was like that with Sacred 2 already. I kind of hate the wave of people you get with every new game that want this and that feature to make it the same as the previous game they altered to be the same... etc. No one wants to learn new things or take time to get things right. Good thing is the wave can ebb if they realize their demands won't be met and the sane can remain and learn from their mistakes. I may make suggestions but I try to restrict them to small improvements, not game changers

[Flooxim 50]

I'll explain my point :

 

I think I got carried away when I read this article about combat in Guild Wars 2.

 

It says the whole game will be doable in solo, but there will be benefits when playing in a group.

For example, if a ranged character throws an arrow through an Elementalist's Static Field, the arrow will be enchanted with lightning.

Another example, if a melee character does some kind of tornado attack into an Elementalist's Fire Wall, the fire will spread all over the place.

 

I thought this was so awesome when I read it that I thought every RPGs (MMO or not) could use things like this, and this is what I meant by "more focus on cooperative play".

 

Hope things are more clear now

 

 

Max

[locolagarto 15]

I'll explain my point :

 

I think I got carried away when I read this article about combat in Guild Wars 2.

 

It says the whole game will be doable in solo, but there will be benefits when playing in a group.

For example, if a ranged character throws an arrow through an Elementalist's Static Field, the arrow will be enchanted with lightning.

Another example, if a melee character does some kind of tornado attack into an Elementalist's Fire Wall, the fire will spread all over the place.

 

I thought this was so awesome when I read it that I thought every RPGs (MMO or not) could use things like this, and this is what I meant by "more focus on cooperative play".

 

Hope things are more clear now

 

 

Max

 

I am with you on this one. I love to play solo, not because playing in party isn't fun, but the builds we make are solo play builds. When we party its just more if the same. I would love to see a scenario where co-op play not only increased difficulty but added a new dynamic such as the Guild Wars example you gave. that would make Sunday Kami's a really great experience wouldn't it? And then I could still level and play that char solo if I wanted to.

 

Great idea!

[candesco 0]

Rather no MMORPG please. Not that I hate MMO's, I played rappelz epic 5 a bit, but there are so many already and it's pretty much the same.

I like to play solo, where you can try out things yourself and have the control over it and also been able to play when you want. Another thing is also the spamming with those MMO's.

With the free ones you soon run into players who spam all the time of selling items. I think also that Sacred is more suited for singleplayer then MMO.

This is the second singleplayer franchise where there are rumors about a MMO game. There are also rumors of a TES MMO. I hope Bethesda don't hop on the bandwagon and make one.

TES is definitely not suited for MMO.

[Rusto 0]

WoW is the most popular mmo, and it is far more complicated playing high ranking arena in WoW than this, hell even raiding is more complicated.

 

But, I would prefer if Sacred 3 was not an mmo. Simply because I like Sacred the way it is.

[Nervusbreakdown 2]

If anything I rather see Sacred 3 to be like the guild wars lobby room then a full MMO, but that's just me

Edited May 13, 2010 by Nervusbreakdown

[Rotluchs 83]

Would Sacred 3 be an awesome Mmorpg?

 

 

WHAT kind of mmorpg.

[gogoblender 3,304]

An AWESOME one

 

 

gogo

[Timotheus 430]

Those words don't belong toghether.

 

Sacred & awesome, that might just fit.

Awesome MMORPG: I guess there are.

Sacred the awesome MMORPG: impossible

[Rndm 1]

Also, they'd probably fix some of the game's most enjoyable bugs (speech bugs, water splashing above your character's head when running in certain places).

[Exathius 0]

Also, they'd probably fix some of the game's most enjoyable bugs (speech bugs, water splashing above your character's head when running in certain places).

 

 

My opinion on MMO's: Its a good and fun platform to run through but when you have to grind alot through quests it got really annoying waiting so long for respawns. But with normal sacred 2 or other games you can duck in a dungeon and pop up again and they are back. Aside from that you get the raiding experience with loot hogs or unfair raid loot systems, but that all comes down to attendance more than anything. But the major fact if sacred 3 is turned into an MMO is that your gaming speed and style gets the handbrake put on you and you spend hours standing around playing with yourself waiting for everyone to be ready, while you could have alt tab out and played a good game of sacred 2 or something while waiting for the others to be ready.

 

So MMO wouldn't be a good thing for S3. If you want MMO style play just stay on the battlenet style of it, but don't stuff around with the single player content.

 

Exathius out!

[Rndm 1]

Also, they'd probably fix some of the game's most enjoyable bugs (speech bugs, water splashing above your character's head when running in certain places).

 

 

My opinion on MMO's: Its a good and fun platform to run through but when you have to grind alot through quests it got really annoying waiting so long for respawns. But with normal sacred 2 or other games you can duck in a dungeon and pop up again and they are back. Aside from that you get the raiding experience with loot hogs or unfair raid loot systems, but that all comes down to attendance more than anything. But the major fact if sacred 3 is turned into an MMO is that your gaming speed and style gets the handbrake put on you and you spend hours standing around playing with yourself waiting for everyone to be ready, while you could have alt tab out and played a good game of sacred 2 or something while waiting for the others to be ready.

 

So MMO wouldn't be a good thing for S3. If you want MMO style play just stay on the battlenet style of it, but don't stuff around with the single player content.

 

Exathius out!

Agreed

[Cthulhu 0]

More MMO glut... no thanks. I appreciated Sacred 2 for its simple approach, since it came out in a time when too many MMORPGs began to choke the market. It seems now, many of those said MMORPGs are either kicking the bucket or flailing to keep up with more established games. Still, even now, there's more room for a Sacred 3 that'd cater to the same audience as 1 and 2, without having to try and be a huge "enterprise" of some sort.

[Exathius 0]

More MMO glut... no thanks. I appreciated Sacred 2 for its simple approach, since it came out in a time when too many MMORPGs began to choke the market. It seems now, many of those said MMORPGs are either kicking the bucket or flailing to keep up with more established games. Still, even now, there's more room for a Sacred 3 that'd cater to the same audience as 1 and 2, without having to try and be a huge "enterprise" of some sort.

 

For sure Cthulhu. Just look at how great Sacred 3 would be if they kept the same concepts but continued or new storyline in the world of ancaria and updated the graphics to match or excel past diablo 3 for whenever its going to be eventually released. Both games would FECAL MATTER! all over the current mmo's that will be struggling.

[Rotluchs 83]

WoW is the most popular mmo

 

indeed. unfortunately also many people only think of WoW when you read about 'MMORPG'...

up to date it's the most successful and best known example - for a very specific TYPE of MMORPG !

 

back then, there weren't so many other MMO based RPG's around - not YET, at least such ones 'everyone' would have heard about already..

 

so maybe no additional classification/nomenclature for further differentiation was necessary

 

the abbreviation/acronym MMORPG is older than WoW, in fact you could describe and classify games as MMORPG than are even older than 2 decades!

 

just the use of 'mmorpg' becomes more and more popular, synchronous to the rapidly increasing popularity of WoW since it has been released.

ever since back then, MMORPG is always somehow linked to WoW, which I can't say I like..

 

(both WoW, and the fact MMORPG is linked to WoW, and used for soo many different types of MMO ARPG's as well.. it's not suitable for comparison+differentiation of games, not the term alone..)

 

while there are so many sub-genres for 'racing games' or 'role playing games' , or 'strategy games' , for some reason we lack in using the acronyms&abbreviations for these subgenres when it comes to those games, that happen to be MMO: then everything is called MMO, tho maybe you shouldn't do so,

 

not if you're looking for a very quick, short significant description of a specific game-title..

 

Would Sacred 3 be an awesome Mmorpg?

 

WHAT kind of mmorpg.

An AWESOME one

 

 

gogo

 

yeah, fine. what's an MMORPG? almost everyone would name WoW first, when you're asked to list a few examples for games out of that genre..

 

and almost everyone would not like the idea of Sacred 3 becoming that type of game,

because there are many main-aspects people like about Sacred that are very different to the gameplay in WoW, or this type of MMORPG's

 

you see, imho there's the lack of abbreviations&acronyms that are generally known and in usage, that would allow for a quick and accurate differentiation amongst all (MMO) ARPG's:

 

look at the scientific (biological) classification, the various systems and taxonomic ranks, etc..

 

see: if Sacred happened to be a specific dog breed, like the Airedale Terrier,

 

then about the Airedale Terrier you could say:

it's a breed of the terrier type, originating in Airedale..

The terrier then is a specific 'domestic dog' ,

and therfore belongs to the Subspecies of Canis lupus familiaris, it's the domesticated forms of the wolf,

both species of Canis lupus

further, Species: Canis lupus

Genus: Canis

Family : Canidae

Order : Carnivora

Class : Mammalia

Phylum : Chordata

Kingdom : Animals

life forms on earth

 

if you were about to do the same as above for Sacred, a potential Sacred-MMORPG, the term MMORPG as such or WoW,

 

then, first you'd first have to determine where in the above list MMO or RPG would fit in, as well as their subgenres and gameplay-types like action, hack&slash, round based, real-time, first-person, third-person, 3D free angle, 2D ISO-bird-view, pseudo 3D-2D view, etc etc...

 

so if you ask me "would sacred 3 would be an awesome MMORPG" then imho it's a bit like asking me:

 

"do you prefer animals as pets?"

I do, but in general ANY pet IS an animal and all animals would fit in there then,

no matter if it was a snake, a dog, a cat or any other animal.. although I would NOT like a spider or a fish, only a dog or maybe a cat..

 

Sacred as an animal (RPG) wouldn't fit in as a pet (MMO) tho, as you can see from almost every response so far,

not under the current general use and understanding of these categories and acronyms..

 

Those words don't belong toghether.

 

Sacred & awesome, that might just fit.

Awesome MMORPG: I guess there are.

Sacred the awesome MMORPG: impossible

 

if you think of an MMORPG mostly beeing like WoW (like most people do, unfortunately) or similar, then I agree... no chance for me buying Sacred 3 then, would hate the idea..

 

My opinion on MMO's: Its a good and fun platform to run through but when you have to grind alot through quests it got really annoying waiting so long for respawns. But with normal sacred 2 or other games you can duck in a dungeon and pop up again and they are back. Aside from that you get the raiding experience with loot hogs or unfair raid loot systems, but that all comes down to attendance more than anything. But the major fact if sacred 3 is turned into an MMO is that your gaming speed and style gets the handbrake put on you and you spend hours standing around playing with yourself waiting for everyone to be ready, while you could have alt tab out and played a good game of sacred 2 or something while waiting for the others to be ready.

 

So MMO wouldn't be a good thing for S3. If you want MMO style play just stay on the battlenet style of it, but don't stuff around with the single player content.

 

same question here, what kind of MMO , RPG or better MMORPG are you thinking of beeing the game you compare Sacred 3 with ?

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

to sum up:

 

would Sacred 3 be an awesome MMORPG? both no and yes,

 

NO, if you think of a game like WoW or any other current game on the market,

 

YES, if you just think of a typical Sacred1 or 2 game, just with some specific MMO typical features added..

but more infrastructure related rather than these specific WoW gameplay-style elements.

 

MMORPG is a term/abbreviation/acronym/wording that does not allow for sufficient differentiation anyway..

it's just the combination of 2 specific genres,

RPG (as in RPG vs Racing game vs. 1st person shooter vs. strategy games vs. ...)

and

MMO (massively multiplayer online vs singleplayer offline)

 

MMORPG unfortunately has become some sort of "faux-pas word" to me, that is because since the commercial success and popularity of games like WoW,

it seems always linked to this very specifc type of game, with the look&feel of WoW..

 

people start to forget the 'term' MMORPG is older than WoW,

and that there are even games older than 2 decades! you could call 'MMORPG' (some of them in retrospective tho, maybe they weren't called MMORPG back then)

 

we already have some certain sub-genres you can often hear when you try to compare the type of RPG Sacred could be classified as:

 

H&S (or Hack & Slay, sometimes Hack & Slash) as well as in combination with 'action' either as prefix or suffix, trying to describe the most characteristic gameplay-elements to differ them from other RPG's..

 

Sacred = some sort of H&S ARPG = a lot like Diablo.. you kill tons of monsters fast, you concentrate more on fighting and equipment,

rather than questing, no long dialogs with loads of answers&questions to choose from, less story-orientated..

 

(I'd call games like Baldur's Gate, Morrowind or the Gothic series examples for the 'opposite' of sacred, but both are RPG's in a greater sense, just like dogs+cats are both mammals, but not closely related to each other... felidae vs. canidae.. see example above )

 

following the "biolocial cat&dog&fish as pet?" example,

 

the Sacred MMORPG (or, dog) I would love as a PC-MMO (our pet), would be called an MMOHSARPG

vs.

any kind of WoW styled MMORPG (or spider,fish,snake) I would not like as a pet (PC-MMO)

 

 

 

I would like a potential Sacred 3 that highly concentrates on 'MMO', to remain it's original style of gameplay,

 

furthermore it's original overall-look&feel...

 

there is currently no such game on the market, and there never has been.. Mythos was the closest thing next to it,

 

a classic hack&slash Action RPG just with the gameplay-characteristics of a Diablo2 or Sacred1/2..

 

combined with many interesting MMO aspects you may know from games like WoW, but not only...

 

the main-aspect was still concentrating on the way you run around and kill things , develop your skills and equip your character... very similar as in D2&Sacred..

 

I'd like Sacred 3 to follow that idea as well, so for both Mythos and Sacred 3 as well as Diablo 3 some sort of MMOHSARPG would be highly anticipated,

 

it would combine the best things of many worlds, but still with a main focus on what is so typical about Blizzard's and Ascaron's example for that specific type of RPG many of us like

Edited June 4, 2010 by Rotluchs

[Exathius 0]

My opinion on MMO's: Its a good and fun platform to run through but when you have to grind alot through quests it got really annoying waiting so long for respawns. But with normal sacred 2 or other games you can duck in a dungeon and pop up again and they are back. Aside from that you get the raiding experience with loot hogs or unfair raid loot systems, but that all comes down to attendance more than anything. But the major fact if sacred 3 is turned into an MMO is that your gaming speed and style gets the handbrake put on you and you spend hours standing around playing with yourself waiting for everyone to be ready, while you could have alt tab out and played a good game of sacred 2 or something while waiting for the others to be ready.

 

So MMO wouldn't be a good thing for S3. If you want MMO style play just stay on the battlenet style of it, but don't stuff around with the single player content.

 

same question here, what kind of MMO , RPG or better MMORPG are you thinking of beeing the game you compare Sacred 3 with ?

 

 

 

 

 

As to your question about my bleak answer from before.

With what I was meaning, I don't want sacred 3 to be the one style of game that is purely an online game connected with everyone else who play together and do the quests and have weekly maintenance. But housekeeping of a game is a good thing, thats why there are patches.

I don't want sacred 3 to lose the solo play style that make the game so much fun for yourself, and have options to play online if you so wish, making that your connection to MMO style play.

 

So I just want to enjoy the solo life as I'm sick of the multiplayer side of it atm. Thats why we all liked diablo 2 so much I think.