I really enjoyed the demo - especially 'get out of cover and shoot' moments. Never felt like there were too many mobs. I'd give demo +/-7
Wow guess he didn't like the game ha! I just bought the PS3 Sports Cham. move bundle and I'm now trying the demo for this game. From the get go the demo is asking you to flick you wond to the right and left so the spell goes around to the back of this short plole or something, the right side works great but no matter what I do I can't get it to curve around with the left, and damp it you can't go any futher in the demo untill you get that part right! So anyway that said I'm reallllly not sure if I'm going to buy this game or not! I have to say tho it does really look fun, save for as he mentioned sometimes waaaaay too many mobs at once, I hate games that do that too often!
The game is now $20.00 new so I will give it a try. I got my move on sale last year during a black Friday sale for 1/2 off so I got 2. not a bad investment. Spend more going out to dinner with friends.
Yeah, just so everyone knows.. the comments about the reviewer playing the game incorrectly are spot-on. He doesn't take advantage of the spells/combos at his disposal, instead choosing to struggle through the game the hardest way possible. It's like trying to play any other shooter using only a starting pistol. It's fine if you wanna do that, if you're a good player, but you must understand that it'll make the game more challenging.
In truth, by the time you start facing large mobs of varied attackers, you will have the Wind magic which is what you should be defaulting to when you begin an encounter if you want to simplify things. The Twister/Whirlwind handles pretty much all basic mobs with ease, taking them out of action if not killing them. Combining it into a Firestorm or Lighting Storm is even better.
Also, the controls seem to respond rather brilliantly almost all the time, although sometimes switching between magic can be a bit finicky. However, the game compensates for this by slowing time while in the magic menu.
The only really VALID complaint is about the camera, it can be a bit obnoxious if you miss and enemy, especially the ones that charge up to you, because then it can be a bit difficult to get back to hit them.
Even the hit detection wasn't as bad as mentioned. The only two times I've had an issues so far were against the first Troll (those boulder fragments are really accurate, they can be dodged but you must be very careful and smart) and the giant spider in the forest area (that one's just cheap, can't always get away by dodging to the side.)
Aww, come on GameSpot. The game, from what I've seen in the review, didn't look TOO unplayable. And with all of the positives the reviewer said about the game toward the end of the review, I don't think the score of a 4.5 is warranted her. Granted, bad camera is annoying, but the rest of the game looks enjoyable. Also, I think what's important here is that the Move definitely is capable of some fun gameplay for older gamers and Sorcery shows it. I think I would've gave this game a 5 or at least a 6.5, but not a 4.5.!
This is an exclusive game that got a bad score. Therefore, people are going to get pissy at McShea. It's sad that the HD consoles have so few exclusives that any old second-rate or third-rate game is worth mewling over on the Internet.
I wouldn't be surprised to find that half the people complaining here have no intention to buy Sorcery. They just want a high score attached to a Sony exclusive so they can justify their console loyalty to Xbox fans.
And, I know the Xbox fans gloating here have no intention of getting Sorcery. So, why are you here?
One of the best MOVE game on ps3 and it is 4.5 people. This generation of gaming should stop relying on tech gimmick and focus more on core gameplay.
The review of the game is a bit harsh. This is probably the best Move game released to date. The main point I disagree with is he complains about the number of enemies. Thats not a problem with the game hes just bad at it lol.The real problem with the game is they have the facing control detached from the camera control. If they just centered the facing with where your camera faces it would play a lot smoother and it would also alleviate a lot of the targetting issues as well.All in all I found the game enjoyable. The graphics look good, the potion crafting is fun and there was actual challenge to it unlike most Move games that are seemingly designed for 8 year olds. I'd say the game deserves a 7 like most of the other metacritics said, if for nothing more than actually having something decent to use the Move for finally.
@Gelugon_baat Clearly you have issues with people who have opinions, information, and facts, but lack their own website to put it on. It's exhausting trying to argue with someone who behaves like they're paid to be Tom Mc Shea's internet bodyguard. Tom Mc Shea's review is a sham... a cheap publicity stunt to make it stick out like a sore thumb on metacritic in a sad attempt to call attention to itself and feel relevant and revolutionary. That is all.
Sad because I thought that game would give me a reason to buy a Move. Though I'm sure it's not as bad as it sounds, just from the footage it's easy to see that fighting 10+ enemies by waggling the move and each waggle takes a sixth of health from enemies. I do not have that dedication to motion.
Also, his version of the game appears different than mine, as the shortcut for Quake/Earth magic is different.
Oh, and one more thing, about the "poor controls" for any who claims trouble aiming in the proper direction. There is a setting to display a Mouse Pointer...
Thanks for that!
@Jyakotu I've read a bunch of other reviews that said this game would have been a solid 7 or 8 but the move controls completely ruined the experience. I believe it. I got Starfox for the DS and they FORCED the stupid stylus into a game that not only didn't need it, but in fact broke the experience, making it often unplayable without severe hand cramping. That's what I think happened here, they took a fun game and ruined it by forcing it to work with the move controls.
@IceJester45 looking at metacritic, and Gamerankings the average score is 7.0 so its not bad. This may not have been McShea cup of tea. Thus the low score. Like ALL games I do not think that everyone will enjoy this game.
So like every game people need to look at the game and how the reviewer scored it and what they have to say and decide for themselves if they want to give a game a try or not.
@IceJester45 "The HD Consoles have so few exclusives"? You are referring to the X360 I hope!Anyway, I played the demo, and this game is far from being so bad. It's actually fun. Sure it has some flaws (the camera is bad indeed) but in no way it deserves a 4.5. 4.5 is for broken games, this game is playable and enjoyable. If the jerk wanted to trash it a 6.0 was bad enough. 4.5 is way out of proportions.
@IceJester45 TO read your boring post about fanboys.
I'll buy this game and play it like it's a 10/10 game !!!
Don't care who wrote the review and read the s**tty messages from Gelugon_baat. I'm here to play Sorcery !!!
This... IS... SPARTA !88 I mean SORCERY !!! AND IT'S NOT on WII U !!!!!
@agentghost now tell that to the sony waaaambulance police pls
@Gelugon_baat I didn't say you were defending his review, I said that you were defending him. He doesn't need you defending him, he is a big boy. If he was afraid of what a couple of goof balls said about him on the internet, he wouldn't be posting these reviews.
@Gelugon_baat Sorcery got a 10/10 on my personal notebook review. This is SParta. I guess you didn't care about gamespot policy. To not defend the reviewer if you didn't personally play the game !
@Gelugon_baat And oddly enough, they all still rated the game higher than GameSpot.
I have to wonder if they have a proper setup for the move controller. It works best when you don't have a bunch of lights behind it so the PS Eye can see the pink light. If they're not set up right then you get glitchy movement.
PSU still has screenshots of the old E3 demo from a couple years ago, which is laughable. To say they "lambasted" it is equally laughable.
Then by all means, let me explain why I'm here...
I got Sorcery the day after it came out and I saw the first reviews on metacritic. It was receiving 7s and 8s and I thought "it must actually be better than Sports Champions", so I got it. I agreed with the reviews completely - it's not a perfect game - but it's certainly better than what Mc Shea is giving it. Anyway, I recommended it to a friend a few days later and he said "Really? I heard GameSpot gave it a 4.5" So I came here to find out why, and after reading both the review and watching the video, I know that the review is total crap.
I call BS on this review because it's a cheap move to pull when you're late to the review game and you want people to come read your biased opinion to make those sweet advertising bucks. It misinforms people and unfairly discourages them from trying what I and many other people would call a great game with fun and unique experiences.
So this is going to be my final post about the matter and you can be as contrary as you like after the fact... the review is a sham. Take it from someone who has played the game and the rest of the reviewers out there who actually put some journalistic effort into their scores. It's definitely worth playing, and there isn't a game out there like it.
@Gelugon_baatI brought up invulnerable enemies because in the video (2:22 - 2:30) he cries about wanting to hit the troll instead of the minions in the foreground, but you can't hit the troll because it's invulnerable. He even says "It might be obvious that you want to hit the troll", but it's not obvious because there isn't a reason to, it's futile.
As for Ice guys weak against fire - In the video (1:59 - 2:06) Tom clearly doesn't get the obviously placed firepit while fighting the ice bogey. He instead avoids it at all costs - even though there is a tutorial at the beginning of the level where Erline tells Finn that his spells will turn into firebolts and be much more powerful if he casts through them. By ignoring the tactics his attacks are almost worthless and he spends a ton of time and energy purposely doing things the hardest way possible.
Take it from someone who's played through it and doesn't really care about MC games... the video as a whole is full of this type of blatant ignorance - as if he went out of his way to make it look frustrating. He never uses his shield, he just sits there and takes hits in the face and then says it's the game's fault that he sucks. The game is much better than that and I'm inclined to think that he knows it. The low score is just a cry for attention to make GameSpot seem relevant where other critics have for the most part agreed the game is a solid 7.
Also, Halo is a fine comparison because Sorcery is in fact a lot like a shooter. The battles feel a lot like shooting galleries, and you have to know how to use the weapons in your arsenal to be effective. It's actually better than most shooters because you actually have to think about what you're doing. When you get a spartan laser for the first time you don't really have a clue what it does or how to be effective with it until you fire it. It's not a normal weapon and it doesn't magically recharge it's ammo when you fire it like your magic does in Sorcery, so I'd say that Sorcery is even more forgiving.
@Wetty01 shoulda bought the move last summer when it was on sale for 50% off at gamestop :P. Thats what I did. The only game I've actually really used it for heavily has been Killl Zone 3.
@Wetty01Before you decide to blow off the game based on this review, you should check metacritic. The game is obviously underappreciated here.
@slainta I was referring to both the PS3 and the Xbox 360. The PS3 has few exclusives, too. Just because the PS3 has more than 360 does (well, non-downloadable, standard controller-based exclusives, at least) doesn't mean that this gen hasn't seen fewer exclusives than previous generations did. The number of PS3 exclusives this year is pathetic compared to what the PS2, PS One and, heck, even the original Xbox would get in a year.
Few people -- fanboys included -- would have cared about a review for a game like this during the PS2 and PS One days.
"Dude", I would like it if you didn't feel obligated to jump through so many hoops to defend an obvious sham of a review just to get so much attention. When this game earns 6s, 7s, and 8s from EVERY OTHER REVIEW and GameSpot is the ONLY site to rate it less than 50%, it calls the integrity of the review into question, and if you don't understand why that is then you are either a hopeless GameSpot fanboy or you're intentionally trolling.
@slainta The Wii has much more than just Mario and Zelda. 2010 was a big year for Wii exclusives (going by this gen's standards) with games such as Tatsunoko Vs. Capcom, No More Heroes 2, Sonic Colors, Donkey Kong Country Returns, Sin & Punishment 2, Red Steel 2, Sky Crawlers, Kirby's Epic Yarn and more. The only Mario game I can think of from that year was Super Mario Galaxy 2. The year before, 2009, was similar, with games such as Boom Blox Bash Party, Muramasa, Madworld and Deadly Creatures. To say that Nintendo's platform is only Mario and Zelda is unfair -- as is saying the Xbox 360 is only Halo and Gears. Things are dire on those platforms exclusive-wise, but they aren't that dire.
That's not an impressive list. And, it goes all the way back to the PS3's launch in 2006. If you want to do that, the Xbox 360 would have at least an equally impressive list that consists of games such as Alan Wake, Viva Pinata, Project Gotham Racing, Crackdown and Lost Odyssey. You could get way more than 40 titles from that, especially considering the Xbox 360 had more exclusives than PS3 from 2006 until a few years ago.
The Xbox 360 only has Halo and Gears? That's ridiculous. There's more than that -- Crackdown, Forza Motorsport, Fable and Ascend. The Xbox is hurting for exclusives more than PS3 is, but only slightly so. Both of them have terrible exclusive lineups compared to what consoles in previous generations did -- and that's a point you failed to address in your post. I mean, the PS2 has, what, a dozen exclusive titles this year (including the minor ones)? Pathetic. Utterly pathetic. There is barely any difference between the PS3 and Xbox 360 in terms of game selection aside from, "Do you prefer Halo or Killzone? Forza or Gears?"
A review is always a subjective opinion, regardless of whether an editor or a user does makes it. McShea did not rage at Sorcery in this review. He backed up his score with valid arguments. I could definitely see why broken controls and a bad camera could cause a game to get a 4.5, or "bad," score. Likewise, you're entitled to your opinion of Halo 3. I just hope you can back it up. I get the feeling Halo 3 got a 1.0 from you simply because "Microsoft" is printed on the box, though.
@IceJester45 I really don't know what are you talking about. The PS3 is known for its many exclusive IPs. To make the list every time is simply getting boring since just the popular ones are many. But here is the Amazon list of the Top 40 PS3 exclusives:http://www.amazon.com/40-Best-PS3-Exclusives-Playstation/lm/R2JTCY2BKNCFD8
The X360 has just what? Halo and Gears of War? Then there is the Wii. Yes, it has plenty of exclusives, they sell quite a lot, but most of them are Mario here, Mario there and Zelda. The PS3 showed another two big new IPs at E3 this year: The Last of Us and Beyond. That among other things just look fantastic, showing that there is still juice that can be squeezed out of the Sony console. Then if you didn't notice the industry is moving multiplatform. AAA games are too expensive to produce, so more platforms, the better.Regarding Sorcery, 4.5 for a game means that it is a disaster. Which is not the case. The Move controls are quite smooth, the graphics is steady and beautiful. I give that the camera can get annoying. There is no way this game is a 4.5 and the 7.0 average in Metacritic shows it. That is why it is out of proportion. It shows that a professional reviewer judges games with the same rage I had against FPS when I gave 3.0 to Halo. If it can be fine for a user, it isn't for an editor.
@slainta And, you gave Halo 3 a 1.0. Talk about "way out of proportions."
@Gelugon_baat looks more like you're just hating on anyone that doesnt like the review. Dont really see what you have against the game do you even own it?
@Gelugon_baat becuz thats what it looks like your doing replying to every comment that disagrees with what he said, lol.
@Gelugon_baat That would actually mean something if the points they raise about a game are really true, and not contorted into propaganda or to falsely justifying a point of view. You can't say anything to defend him - not for this review. To do that you'd actually have to play the game yourself and validate that his claims are in fact true. And even then, you probably don't have the courage to admit when you're wrong. Since that isn't likely to happen and I have actually played the game, I know for a fact that the review is a sham and the problems he talks about do not exist - I certainly haven't come across them in the time I've played and if they do exist then they're certainly not to the degree at which he claims. The fact that he's the only reviewer out of so many who have had issues with the gameplay to mark the game with an adversely negative score calls the integrity of the review into question... or hell, you know what? Chalk it up to "broken controller" syndrome.
@Gelugon_baat Nope, you're just trying to be contrary because you like the attention I'm giving you.
@Gelugon_baat I watched 4 minutes of gameplay where he let himself get hit in the face and he never lifts a finger to save himself. And by your logic, just because it's not in the video does it ean he actually used it.
@Gelugon_baat It's one of the first tutorials in the game. It even shows you how to swing the wand sideways with a video.
You can curve your shots around objects to hit targets behind them. It's one of the first tutorials in the game. Not an excuse.
@Gelugon_baat You can't actually tell from the video if he is trying to hit the troll. Just because he says he is doesn't mean that is the clip in which he's attempting it. Looks like he's trying to hit the little guys instead.
@Gelugon_baatIf he's trying to hit the troll at that stage in the fight, he is truly an idiot - and if you've played the game you would know what I'm saying is correct.
And what reviews would those be? You can't acknowledge what doesn't exist.
@Gelugon_baat You're not a very good troll if you can't play along.
@Gelugon_baat Name one website from metacritic that scored Sorcery as low as Gamespot did, and you win the internet.