Sacred 2 Remaster

The Story of Sacred 2 Remaster receives mixed praise for its narrative foundation, with some critics highlighting its nostalgic appeal and world-building elements. COGconnected and GAMES.CH commend the game’s high fantasy setting in Ancaria, emphasizing its intricate political conflicts and T-energy manipulation mechanics, which provide a framework for players to choose between Light or Shadow campaigns. Gamesurf appreciates the well-developed lore, noting irony, humor, and Italian voice acting that add depth to dialogue, while Tech-Gaming acknowledges the sprawling storyline as intriguing, even if it doesn’t delve deeply into character development. IGN France also points to the game’s nostalgic charm and simplicity, suggesting that its open-world exploration compensates for a lack of narrative complexity. These positives underscore the remaster’s ability to evoke fond memories of the original while maintaining a sense of adventure. However, the majority of critics criticize the story for being formulaic, repetitive, and lacking engagement. CD-Action and Checkpoint Gaming describe the narrative as unoriginal, with generic side quests and minimal differences between Light and Shadow campaigns that fail to justify player choice. GameWatcher and Hooked Gamers highlight the unintentionally comedic tone and poorly written dialogue, which clash with the game’s attempts at a fantasy epic. Try Hard Guides compares the story to a “B horror movie,” criticizing its cheesy dialogue and dated humor, while Digitally Downloaded and GameGrin dismiss the plot as functional but irrelevant, focusing instead on repetitive tasks like item collection and enemy slaying. KonsoliFIN adds that the narrative’s steep learning curve is overshadowed by technical issues, further diminishing its impact. These critiques collectively paint a picture of a story that struggles to resonate with modern expectations. Overall, the consensus among critics leans toward the narrative being a mixed bag, with nostalgia and world-building offering some redeeming qualities but failing to elevate the experience beyond its flaws. While COGconnected, GAMES.CH, and IGN France acknowledge the game’s foundational elements, the overwhelming sentiment is that the story lacks depth, originality, and emotional engagement. The remaster’s focus on gameplay mechanics and exploration overshadows its narrative, leaving many critics disappointed by its inability to deliver a compelling or memorable tale. Despite some praise for its lore and charm, the Story of Sacred 2 Remaster ultimately falls short as a narrative-driven experience, with its strengths in world-building unable to compensate for its repetitive structure and unpolished storytelling.

The gameplay of Sacred 2 Remaster receives mixed praise, with several critics highlighting its enduring core mechanics and some refinements. IGN France notes that the remaster preserves the game’s open-world exploration, six distinct classes with unique abilities, and progression systems, while improving combat fluidity, interface clarity, and accessibility. GameGrin praises the fast-paced action RPG elements, including class selection, skill trees, and a refined UI for controllers, which enhance the experience on PS5. GAMES.CH acknowledges smoother controls and simplified multiplayer, though it also points to persistent camera issues in tight spaces. These positives suggest that while the game’s foundation remains intact, certain updates have made it more approachable for modern players. However, the gameplay is widely criticized for its outdated mechanics, clunky controls, and repetitive design. CD-Action and Games.cz both describe the combat as wooden, unresponsive, and frustrating, with issues like poor hit detection, inconsistent enemy AI, and tedious side quests. COGconnected and Checkpoint Gaming highlight the slow-paced early game, awkward weapon switching, and a lack of tutorials that make the deep systems feel inaccessible. Try Hard Guides and Tech-Gaming note persistent balancing issues, such as unreliable RNG for attacks and the need for micro-management in combat. Even with improvements like auto-targeting for ranged fighters (PC Games), many critics argue that the core gameplay feels archaic compared to modern Diablo clones, with a lack of polish undermining its potential. The overall consensus among reviewers is that Sacred 2 Remaster retains its nostalgic charm but struggles to reconcile its dated mechanics with contemporary expectations. While some improvements—such as smoother controls (GAMES.CH), better UI (GameGrin), and refined combat fluidity (IGN France)—are appreciated, the majority of critics agree that the game’s flaws remain largely unaddressed. The remaster offers a functional experience for fans of the original but fails to fully modernize its systems, leaving many frustrated by repetitive combat, poor optimization, and a steep learning curve without adequate guidance. As KonsoliFIN and The Jimquisition note, the core loop of fighting enemies and completing quests is present but hindered by design choices that feel outdated, resulting in a mixed reception that balances nostalgia with significant shortcomings.

The remaster of Sacred 2 received mixed but generally positive feedback regarding its graphical improvements, with several critics highlighting notable enhancements. Checkpoint Gaming noted sharper textures and a revised UI, while Gamesurf praised better lighting, textures, and field-of-view adjustments that modernize the experience for contemporary displays. GAMES.CH and IGN France acknowledged texture upgrades and a cleaner presentation, emphasizing that the remaster retains the original’s vibrant art style while offering marginal technical refinements. Additionally, SpazioGames pointed to improved draw distance and world map adjustments, which enhance exploration. These improvements, though modest, suggest an effort to update the game’s visuals without drastically altering its core aesthetic. However, the negatives were more pronounced, with many critics criticizing the remaster for failing to modernize the game effectively. CD-Action and Games.cz lambasted the graphics as outdated, citing poor animations, unimpressive textures, and an ugly UI that even worsened some elements compared to the original. COGconnected noted antiquated character movement and camera issues in complex areas, while SpazioGames criticized stiff animations and flat lighting that made the visuals feel dated despite higher resolutions. The Jimquisition highlighted glitches like screen-covering white rectangles and unstable physics, calling the remaster’s visual quality "in disrepair." Even KonsoliFIN criticized repetitive environments and a lack of dynamic elements, arguing that the remaster did little to address the original’s visual shortcomings. Overall, the consensus among critics is that Sacred 2 Remaster offers incremental graphical upgrades but falls short of delivering a truly modernized experience. While some improvements—like texture sharpening, UI refinements, and better optimization—are appreciated, most reviewers agree that these changes are minimal and fail to elevate the game’s visuals beyond its 2008 roots. Checkpoint Gaming and GAMES.CH noted the lack of substantial overhauls, while Games.cz and The Jimquisition were particularly harsh, calling the remaster a missed opportunity. Despite these criticisms, the faithful recreation of the original art style and some technical polish (as highlighted by IGN France and GameGrin) suggest that the remaster appeals more to nostalgia than innovation, leaving its visual design as a mixed bag of modest upgrades and persistent flaws.

The sound design and music of Sacred 2 Remaster received mixed but generally favorable remarks from several critics, particularly highlighting the inclusion of Blind Guardian’s contributions. IGN France praised the remastered audio for its improved balance and spatialization, noting that it enhanced the game’s unique atmosphere, while Tech-Gaming acknowledged clearer ambient effects and better presentation of the Blind Guardian questline. SpazioGames specifically highlighted the song “Sacred Worlds” as a standout moment, and Gamesurf noted that Italian voice acting added humor and immersion, even if the soundtrack lacked memorable peaks. These positives suggest that the remaster successfully preserved or improved certain audio elements, particularly in leveraging the band’s iconic music to evoke nostalgia and thematic depth. However, several critics pointed out significant flaws in the sound design and musical execution. KonsoliFIN criticized the repetitive nature of the audio, citing a single song and flute tune repeated across villages, along with monotonous ambient sounds that diminished auditory variety. The Jimquisition described the sound design as plagued by “audio tics,” random volume issues, and glitches that muted the game, while Tech-Gaming noted voice lines with volume fluctuations and soundtrack desynchronization during battles. Gamesurf also observed that the soundtrack lacked standout moments, and GameGrin remarked on the cheesy rock music and hammy voice acting, which, while nostalgic, failed to meet AAA standards. These critiques highlight technical shortcomings and a lack of innovation in the audio department, undermining the overall experience for some players. Overall, the consensus among critics is cautiously optimistic but acknowledges significant room for improvement. While the remaster’s audio enhancements, particularly the Blind Guardian collaborations and improved spatialization, were praised by IGN France and Tech-Gaming, the repetitive sound design, technical glitches, and lack of musical variety drew criticism from KonsoliFIN, The Jimquisition, and others. The mixed reception suggests that while Sacred 2 Remaster retains some nostalgic charm through its audio elements, its execution falls short of delivering a cohesive or immersive auditory experience. Critics like Gamesurf and GameGrin emphasized the gap between the game’s retro appeal and modern expectations, indicating that the sound design and music, though not entirely lacking in merit, are among the more polarizing aspects of the remaster.

The voice acting in Sacred 2 Remaster receives a mix of praise, particularly for its charm and alignment with the game’s retro aesthetic. Gamesurf highlights the Italian voice acting as a standout feature, noting that humorous dialogue and notable lines enhance the game’s personality and contribute to strong localization quality. Similarly, GameGrin acknowledges that the "hammy" and overly dramatic delivery aligns with the retro European RPG vibe, suggesting it complements the game’s cheesy, nostalgic feel. The Jimquisition also notes that while the voice acting is bad, it doesn’t feel intentionally so, instead fitting the game’s silly and humorous tone as a minor flaw rather than a major issue. These positive takes emphasize how the voice work, despite its flaws, contributes to the game’s identity and charm. However, the majority of critics criticize the voice acting for its uneven quality and lack of polish. COGconnected condemns it as "amateurish or bad," with humor that fails to age well, while Tech-Gaming points out fluctuating volume and "accidentally hilarious" delivery, highlighting inconsistent performance. Try Hard Guides explicitly calls it "notably bad," reinforcing the perception of a cheesy and unpolished experience. GameWatcher and Hooked Gamers also express explicit criticism, though their full remarks are truncated. These critiques suggest that the voice acting struggles to meet modern standards, with technical issues and uneven performances undermining immersion and overall quality. The overall consensus among critics is mixed but leans toward acknowledging the voice acting as a flawed yet stylistic choice. While some appreciate its retro charm and contribution to the game’s personality (Gamesurf, GameGrin), many criticize its amateurish execution, inconsistency, and failure to meet contemporary expectations (COGconnected, Tech-Gaming, Try Hard Guides). The Jimquisition’s observation that it’s a "minor flaw" in an otherwise humorous game reflects a broader sentiment: the voice acting is often seen as a reflection of the game’s outdated or intentionally cheesy design rather than a technical oversight. Ultimately, while some find it endearing, the majority view it as a significant drawback that detracts from the experience.

The technical performance of Sacred 2 Remaster shows mixed results across platforms, with some improvements noted despite persistent issues. On PC, critics like Checkpoint Gaming and IGN France highlight that the remaster addresses major original problems such as crashes and frame drops, offering smoother gameplay and faster load times. Tech-Gaming also notes reduced crashes compared to the original, while PC Games acknowledges technical upgrades like 64-bit optimization. For PS5, Digitally Downloaded praises the game’s improved stability over its 2008 counterpart, calling it “more stable” despite bugs, and GameGrin mentions minimal issues like volume muting, emphasizing overall smoothness without crashes or frame drops. These positives suggest that the remaster has made strides in optimizing performance for both platforms, though not universally. However, significant technical flaws persist across both PC and PS5. On PC, CD-Action, Games.cz, and Try Hard Guides criticize frequent crashes, unstable mechanics, and bugs like NPC pathfinding issues, camera problems, and character clipping, calling the experience “unplayable” at times. COGconnected and Gamesurf also note texture pop-in, stutters, and movement glitches despite graphical enhancements. For PS5, KonsoliFIN and The Jimquisition condemn the game as a “technical anarchy,” citing persistent bugs like missing quest markers, inventory glitches, and trophy inconsistencies, while GameSpew highlights clunky controller support and lack of co-op. These issues suggest that while the remaster improved some aspects, it failed to resolve many core technical problems, leaving players frustrated. The overall consensus among critics is divided but leans toward disappointment. While some praise the remaster’s stability improvements—such as IGN France’s “stable performance” and Checkpoint Gaming’s acknowledgment of fixes—the majority emphasize that critical issues remain unresolved. On PC, Games.cz and Try Hard Guides describe the game as an “unfinished product,” while on PS5, The Jimquisition calls it a “defecating shambles.” Despite efforts to modernize the engine, many critics argue that the remaster lacks meaningful technical upgrades, with SpazioGames noting minimal effort in updating outdated mechanics. The mixed reception reflects a game that, while improved, still struggles with its legacy, leaving players to navigate a patchwork of fixes and lingering flaws across platforms.

The Replay Value of Sacred 2 Remaster is viewed through a lens of mixed potential, with several critics highlighting its substantial content and nostalgic appeal. Reviewers like IGN France praise the game’s open-world design, extensive progression system, and inclusion of all expansions, which create a dense, exploratory structure that encourages repeated playthroughs. GAMES.CH emphasizes the 25–150 hours of gameplay, particularly for nostalgia-driven players, while Gamesurf notes the high replayability through multiple characters, campaigns, and over 300 hours of content. GameGrin also points to moderate replay value via hundreds of side quests and grinding opportunities, suggesting that the game’s scale and Diablo-like mechanics could engage fans of repetitive but addictive loops. These perspectives underscore the remaster’s ability to offer lengthy experiences for those already familiar with the original. However, the negatives surrounding Replay Value are more uniformly critical, with many reviewers citing repetitive design, technical flaws, and a lack of meaningful improvements. CD-Action and Checkpoint Gaming argue that the remaster fails to enhance the original, offering no new content or features to justify revisiting. GameWatcher and Hooked Gamers specifically highlight repetitive side quests as a major drawback, while COGconnected notes combat flaws and technical issues that diminish long-term appeal. Games.cz and SpazioGames advise against the remaster entirely, recommending the original with community patches instead, citing outdated gameplay and limited modernization. Even KonsoliFIN acknowledges the game’s addictive core loop but criticizes its lack of multiplayer and persistent bugs, further reducing replayability for broader audiences. The overall consensus among critics is divided, reflecting a tension between nostalgia-driven appeal and modern expectations. While some (like IGN France and GAMES.CH) see the remaster as a worthwhile experience for fans of the original, many others (such as CD-Action, Games.cz, and Try Hard Guides) view it as a shallow update with little incentive to revisit. The game’s Replay Value largely hinges on whether players prioritize nostalgia over innovation, with its technical shortcomings and repetitive elements acting as significant barriers for new or casual players. Ultimately, the remaster seems to cater best to long-time fans who value its extensive content, but its lack of substantial improvements and modernization limits its broader appeal.