Bender Sama Mar 30, 2014 @ 7:41pm
Sad days in the gaming industry...
You know things are bad when people claim this glorious game is just "an offline Runescape" in their reviews, but have like, 10-15 minutes of play time....
Showing 1-15 of 20 comments
< >
{NERV} jacknozwad Mar 31, 2014 @ 9:44am 
I can honestly say ive played over 100 hours of Sacred 2 and steam still shows i have only 27 minutes of play time..... I wouldn't put to much trust in steams timer ability.
steeve Mar 31, 2014 @ 11:37am 
This game is great..still playing it
Bender Sama Mar 31, 2014 @ 4:03pm 
It is indeed greatness. Going back to the original now for a while :D
As for the timer, that's understandable, but the one's I am talking about are clearly kids who thought they were getting another Skyrim...
Xec May 21, 2014 @ 8:10am 
Game is as good offline as it is online.

I would even say this game is better solo.
Same for Torchlight 2, much better solo for me.
Buffalo Soldier May 21, 2014 @ 10:53pm 
its great fun with friends via tunngle imo better than diablo 3
bought it again on steam i got already 3 copies
Last edited by Buffalo Soldier; May 21, 2014 @ 10:54pm
DedZedNub May 25, 2014 @ 8:42am 
Note to those who always think the Steam time played is accurate:

If you play a modified file, especially a modified .exe or key file, often the Steam time played doesn't increment. Example: Vampire the Masquerade - Bloodlines requires an unofficial patch to work well. Steam no longer updates my time played, online or offline.

Likewise, many Steam games will not add to time played if you play the game in Offline mode, not sure why just know that OFTEN happens as I play almost all my games in OFFLINE mode most of the time.

Sometimes modded games will likewise not increment your time played.

Therefore, you cannot expect the Steam time played counter to be accurate all the time. In addition, some games come in multiple forms. For example, it is possible to play most of Arcen Games with either the non-steam DRM version or via Steam calling it up. Depending on the mode you choose to play the game in, and some games even have multiple game versions, you won't see an update to the Steam gametime played either. Another example is Mount & Blade, which offers both versions depending on how you purchased.

Perhaps a little knowledge will eventually destroy this arrogant assumption. If not, at least you know what to think of its ignorance. Think of it this way, a person does not purchase 100 plus games on Steam and play on average only 10 minutes in each of them. Otherwise that person would be too stupid to even type. Start putting yourself into the shoes of others and think about likelihoods, most humans act pretty similarly to you in similar situations. Ummkay?!
Bender Sama May 29, 2014 @ 5:31pm 
Originally posted by DedZedNub:
Note to those who always think the Steam time played is accurate:

If you play a modified file, especially a modified .exe or key file, often the Steam time played doesn't increment. Example: Vampire the Masquerade - Bloodlines requires an unofficial patch to work well. Steam no longer updates my time played, online or offline.

Likewise, many Steam games will not add to time played if you play the game in Offline mode, not sure why just know that OFTEN happens as I play almost all my games in OFFLINE mode most of the time.

Sometimes modded games will likewise not increment your time played.

Therefore, you cannot expect the Steam time played counter to be accurate all the time. In addition, some games come in multiple forms. For example, it is possible to play most of Arcen Games with either the non-steam DRM version or via Steam calling it up. Depending on the mode you choose to play the game in, and some games even have multiple game versions, you won't see an update to the Steam gametime played either. Another example is Mount & Blade, which offers both versions depending on how you purchased.

Perhaps a little knowledge will eventually destroy this arrogant assumption. If not, at least you know what to think of its ignorance. Think of it this way, a person does not purchase 100 plus games on Steam and play on average only 10 minutes in each of them. Otherwise that person would be too stupid to even type. Start putting yourself into the shoes of others and think about likelihoods, most humans act pretty similarly to you in similar situations. Ummkay?!

Thanks for clarifying that which has already been clarified. Glad you wasted your time, you certianly showed me! :p
Dunkelfalke Jun 11, 2014 @ 11:28am 
I find it a bit sad that it's "only" a hack&slash game but as that it is really good! So much detail and polish everywhere! But with all of that I see that it has more potential to it - if they had managed to put in more variety into the quests other than kill ..... and add a few more gameplay mechanics to it, it would have been an absolute masterpiece. Still very good as it is though - I totally don't understand the negative reviews. This game got hacked to pieces by some professional outlets after it was released. No idea why. It's certainly better than Diablo 3, I can tell you that for a fact!
Last edited by Dunkelfalke; Jun 11, 2014 @ 11:29am
Skcarkden Jun 15, 2014 @ 9:10am 
It's definitaly not like runescape at all. I've played both... although i have yet to install the steam version of sacred 2 on this computer.. was sorta dissapointed in it being a 'direct' sequel but not only had no import character form first game... but removed my vampire character =(

and what i mean by direct sequel is the first one ends with "to be continued" yet doens't really seem to continue with that.admittedly i only played for about an hour before giving up because i wanted to try multiplayer and had to contact the devs for a multiplayer key help and never got a response.. then learned they apparently shut down =(
fpanther43 Oct 18, 2014 @ 5:09am 
Is this game like sacred 3. I would buy if it is, i loved that game.
Skcarkden Oct 18, 2014 @ 10:23am 
Originally posted by fpanther43:
Is this game like sacred 3. I would buy if it is, i loved that game.

Prob not, from what i heard, Sacred 3 was a cash grab piece of crap that isn't even remotely the same as 1 and 2.

Bender Sama Oct 18, 2014 @ 10:31am 
Originally posted by Skcarkden:
Originally posted by fpanther43:
Is this game like sacred 3. I would buy if it is, i loved that game.

Prob not, from what i heard, Sacred 3 was a cash grab piece of crap that isn't even remotely the same as 1 and 2.

Agreed... In my opinion the original Sacred is my favorite, but Sacred 2 is also fantastic.
Skcarkden Oct 18, 2014 @ 10:36am 
Originally posted by Bender Sama:
Originally posted by Skcarkden:

Prob not, from what i heard, Sacred 3 was a cash grab piece of crap that isn't even remotely the same as 1 and 2.

Agreed... In my opinion the original Sacred is my favorite, but Sacred 2 is also fantastic.

I'd have to replay first one... i'm almost certain the story doesn't match up between 1 and 2, when 1 ended with a "to be continued" and 2 seems like a different age altogether. but i gotta admit, i only spent like... 20 mins before i quit.
bm3173 Oct 19, 2014 @ 10:05pm 
I believe 2 is supposed to be a prequel
xsys Oct 20, 2014 @ 4:49am 
Originally posted by Bender Sama:
In my opinion the original Sacred is my favorite, but Sacred 2 is also fantastic.
I can't seem to get into either one of these games. Can you compare them to any other rpg? Dungeon Siege? Divinity series? Gothic? What is it exactly that you find compelling?
Showing 1-15 of 20 comments
< >
Per page: 15 30 50