GameDaily: SOCOM: Confrontation Review

Sony's PlayStation 3 military shooter, SOCOM Confrontation, takes the series in a drastic new direction. Instead of including a single-player campaign with multiplayer options, it's strictly an online only affair. That'd be fine if it wasn't ruined by numerous glitches.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
Pennywise3435d ago

LoL - ridiculous review. This site is out of their damn mind. I played all weekend with minimum problems. I enjoy this game and it should be no lower than 8/10 with its online situation, which will only improve.

socomnick3435d ago

They review the retail build and it sucks. You cant expect them to bump up the score for what the game might be someday in the future. At its current state socom sucks and the review reflects that.

bigshynepo3435d ago (Edited 3435d ago )

After reading their exaggerated tale of woe regarding SOCOM, i had to read what they wrote about one of my favorite Ps3 games yet, Warhawk.

After reading the article, one thing is painfully clear. The gamesdaily team shouldn't be reviewing games in the first place but if they have to, they should stay away from Online-Only games.

The only negatives they mention on the warhawk review is that is doesn't have training (which is does now), it doesn't have a single player (which is why it's priced lower but GD doesn't believe any game should be missing a single player component), and it doesn't have a manual for those who download off the PSN.

I think these reasons for only giving the game an 8 is garbage. They quote problems with joining games that turned out to be full by the time they joined them. Gimme a break, welcome to online play. Refresh the list and join a less full game! They quote lag as being a reason behind their crappy game playing experience but in the 200+ hours of warhawk I have played online, I've maybe experienced Lag 5 times? I find it to be one of the most lagfree online games I have ever played and routinely servers ping under 95.

These guys have no credibility. They give games a score based on their inept ability to play the game and not on what it's deserving of.

F |_|CK GAMES DAILY. (PS. I agree SOCOM launched badly, but why do you think we have seen so few reviews for it. Real sites are waiting till they figure out the issues before properly reviewing.)

Drekken3435d ago (Edited 3435d ago )

Their complaints are retarded.

Socomnick, I understand that - but most of his complaints were false. This discredits anything he says. No quickswitch? L1... No time limit? Every game has a timelimit. No quit option? PUSH START NOOB.

If this review isnt fishy... this review should be banned from writing reviews.

socom is solid and I will be playing it for months to come.

@ sonarus - This game is far from perfect, but it is an 8 easy. This site has no credibility with me after reading that review. There were problems wit Warhawk @ release and now it is smooth with no lag at all - expect the same with Socom.

sonarus3435d ago (Edited 3435d ago )

Socomnick (despite not playing the game) is right. Slant six didn't really put a decent effort into this game. Its understandable that they are a small team but sony should have held the game back a little bit. All things said and done behind the mess that the game is, the gameplay is superb. Its addictive and fun.

Some people won't like it because it requires team work and won't let you get away with run and gun techniques. It incorporates elements of stealth into the gameplay. If i was to review it i would give it a 7. Yes its a mess but behind it there is still an excellent game.

Regardless though gamedaily has proven themselves to me to be a trash website so this score isn't surprising in the least.

And if anyone criticizes me and spits out its just their opinion then i am calling them out and saying all their opinions on all games are trash. I won't even bother reading it because i know it will be full of false criticism just like MGS4 review

Edit: looks like drekken already found them

jaysquared3435d ago (Edited 3435d ago )

Its funny how many first party PS3 titles are either missing single player campaign or online Multiplayer. Games like Lair, Uncharted, Heavenly Sword don't have online MP. Then games like Socom and Warhawk don't have SP campaigns. Whatever happened to games that would take advantage of the extra storage in Blu Ray? Where are the 50+ hours GAMEPLAY(MGS4 only has 5 hours of gameplay)that was suppose to be on the PS3? Don't count games like GTA IV or Oblivion because those games were able to fit in one single DVD9 disc for the 360..

@Sonarus- Actually I was just going off this statement from the review..

"Sony's PlayStation 3 military shooter, SOCOM Confrontation, takes the series in a drastic new direction. Instead of including a single-player campaign with multiplayer options, it's strictly an online only affair"

I was just agreeing of what the reviewer said about not including SP campaign and notice how many of the PS3 first party games are lacking either SP or MP. So its on topic.

MGSIV is not my cup of tea but I can understand how a lot of Xbox fans would love to have another PS3 exclusive going to their console.. People have different preferences in game and one part might not be important to others. So i'm not bashing MGS IV its just not my type of game!

@Dark- I have a different preference in games. I dont really get into stories of games and would perfer a great online MP than a great SP. I can never get into the stories in games and thats probably the reason MGS IV just doesn't appeal to me. Everybody says that MGS4 has the most amazing story ever and certainly don't doubt them. But it also sounds like MGO isn't that great..

I think next gen games should include SP and MP. Online MP just brings a whole new aspect on the game. It keeps you replaying them. Yes you can replay the SP campaign but after playing it the first time you already know what to expect and know the story already.

Again my real question is and Sony fans should have the same complaints about first party games feeling rushed and missing features. Sony hyped up Blu Ray as a gaming revolution and right now all they are good for are movies. I just haven't seen the benefit of having blu ray in games other than just having one disc but in turn many of the PS3 games are requiring 30 minute installs which is a lot more time compared to 30 seconds of exchanging discs. Yes that is a hassle as well but its a lot less time compared to the installs in some games on the PS3 all because of the slow drive speed in BD drives.

sonarus3435d ago Show
Bnet3433435d ago

What do you expect? It's Slant Six who made this horrid piece of poo, not Zipper. I am glad I saved my money and I knew this game would turn out bad. Slant Six really sucks.

Delive3435d ago (Edited 3435d ago )

And I believe it deserves this score, period. No need to wait for them to fix the game or review it on potential once fixed. The fact is that Slant 6 released a broken game to retail and are asking us to pay for it. No need to sugar coat it, it's broken now. I do realize that their hand was forced to not delay it any more, so they released it as playable as possible. With that said and the state it is in and being a Socom fan, I have to say that score is on point. Sony needs this criticism so they understand that (At this point) this is a failed project, and maybe rethink Slant 6 doing this again, putting it back in the hands of Zipper. Socom stood proud on the PS2. There is no way it should be represented in this manner. Yes, it's playable, kind of like saying you can ride a 4 wheeler with only 3 wheels. With the right balance and patience, it can be done, but it's more fun to do it the right way. My suggestion, wait for R2 and get it instead.

@ morganfell

Your right, I should have said I loved Socom until this. I was in the open Beta and I see the same issues that plagued the Beta making the cut on the retail release. I bought the game and Played it for 2 days, because that's all I could take and the R2 beta is better IMO. I was agreeing more with the score. I would not have given this poor effort for a released retail game more than a 5. That is just a loyal fan recognizing the truth. I'm not going to lie to myself about it, it's broken and deserves a broken score.

By the way, what am I? Just curious about the last sentense of your comment. I still play Socom Combined assault online (Out_on_Bail). I waited patiently and got Qore specifically for the Socom beta, so do tell, What am I? I would like to know.

Dark General3435d ago

I'm a single player first type of gamer. I prefer games that are single player only because that means a better chance of having a great single player game. Imagining Uncharted with online is a atrocity. I wish MGS4 was single player only with no online. It's just a feeling that if a dev is dedicating all their resources to a single player experience that experience can be better than spreading themselves on both single player and online.

As for MGS4 having 5 hours of gameplay that's false. I beat the game in 5 hours myself but it's called a speed run. Trying to be perfect without dying once, killing no one, using no health amplifiers etc. It's like when you see a speed run for one of those old Mario games. Just because someone can compete SMB3 in a few short minutes doesn't mean that's ALL the gameplay that's in the game.

morganfell3435d ago (Edited 3435d ago )

No you do not love SOCOM. If you did you would have played it and seen the blatant lies in the article. The one that sticks out the most has been mentioned.

They said there was no option to quit the game. There are two. You press the start button on the controller - you know, what you press to get a menu for every game made on the PS3 OR the 360 for that matter - and you can quit back to the Briefing Room menu. Or you can press the PS button and quit to the Console Desktop.

If you were the least bit of a fan you would have looked at the numerous holes in the article and considered such matters. You would also have considered the source of the review. You did neither. But then again, you aren't a fan either. Next time just be honest about what you are and then go on the attack.


solidt123435d ago

SOCOM the game does not suck, but the first few days did suck because of the network problems which seems to be a non issue now. I think this game is the most tactical and competitive shooter out of all of them. I have played alot of shooters but this one is king to me online. I am new to SOCOM so my opinion is unbiased.

4me23435d ago

"Its funny how many first party PS3 titles are either missing single player campaign or online Multiplayer"

Shadowrun doesn't have single player,cost $60 (at least when it came out) and it was 360 exclusive.

morganfell3435d ago (Edited 3435d ago )

Now Bluray is the SOCOM villain? How long have you been lugging that bit of psychological revenge baggage around.

Here, let me help you.


Just enjoy your pixelated low res DVDs and be happy...or get a PS3.

Also remember that along with Hideo Kojima, Bluray is one of the reasons you aren't getting MGS4 on the 360. And don't pretend that every 360 superfan in the world doesn't want it. Lack of DVD9 space led to GTA4 cuts, it was the cause of PGR4 cuts, and countless other limitations.

For someone complaining about missing portions (SP) of a game everyone knew was online only, you sure don't mind it when DVD9 causes pieces of a 360 or multiplatform title to fall into oblivion.

EDIT: @Delive above. What are you? You don't know? Well you are not a SOCOM fan. Buying a game doesn't make you a fan. And here is a little something from the Japanese, from Zen in particular. You are as you act and your act demonstrates clearly you are not a SOCOM fan. As a person that says one thing and does another, I have no place for such moral deception. Have a nice Ignored life.

Aclay3435d ago (Edited 3435d ago )

"Its funny how many first party PS3 titles are either missing single player campaign or online Multiplayer. Games like Lair, Uncharted, Heavenly Sword don't have online MP."

First party titles like Lair, Uncharted and Heavenly Sword didn't have multiplayer because they weren't intended to be Multiplayer games. You do realize that other 3rd party games like Dead Space (awesome game) and Fallout 3 are Single Player Only games too right?, don't just point the finger at PS3 exclusives.

Games like Uncharted aren't "missing" Multiplayer and a game like SOCOM isn't "missing" Single Player because each of those games are focused on delivering 2 different elements of gameplay.

Yes, there have been a lot of PS3 exclusive games that have been Single Player Only, but Single Player only fit those games well. I'm trying to picture Uncharted Drakes Fortune with Multiplayer and I just can't see it.... Uncharted Drakes Fortune DOESN'T NEED multiplayer and neither did Heavenly Sword. God of War 3 is another game that doesn't need multiplayer either and I think that MGS4 didn't even need the multiplayer because it still would have sold millions without it. Not every game needs multiplayer and different games focuses on delivering different experiences. I'm mostly a Single Player gamer myself and I enjoy Single Player games.

Honestly I don't think that SOCOM really needed a Single Player campaign because the majority of people that buy SOCOM buy it for the Multiplayer anyways.

I don't think that negative review scores will keep people away from SOCOM because there are already millions of people that enjoyed it on the PS2, and more than likely they'll enjoy it on the PS3.

morganfell3435d ago (Edited 3435d ago )

The official site has this posted up. Let the reviewer suck on this. This beats the hell out of fire and forget titles like Too Human:

SOCOM: Confrontation Update October 20th, 2008
Posted by Seth Luisi


I wanted to keep everyone up to date on where we are and what we are doing.

The consumer response to SOCOM: Confrontation has been huge. We are consistently seeing almost 100,000 people log in everyday with peaks of 25,000 simultaneous users. On average, you are playing about 3.1 hours per person with a total of 300,000 player hours everyday. I would like to thank all of you for helping to make SOCOM: Confrontation such a great success.

As I'm sure many of you are aware, the launch has not gone without its share of problems. Unfortunately, the server environment is not holding up during peak loads. We've made many changes and improvements to the server to improve the issues (the first few days were really rocky) but we are still seeing server issues when we get up to around 25,000 simultaneous players during peak hours. Our primary focus at this time is to resolve these server issues. We have all available resources looking into the issues and we are trying to resolve them as quickly as possible. It is not as easy as adding more servers, we have to identify and fix the bottlenecks in the system which are preventing the servers from scaling properly. The servers should continue to get progressively better as we roll out server side updates.

As a reminder, our scheduled daily server maintenance is between 5am and 8am PDT (8am to 11am EDT). We bring the servers down during this time to roll out updates. The servers will usually only be down for about 20-30 minutes but some updates may take longer.

In parallel to the server updates, we are also working on a new client patch which resolves some client side stability issues. These issues include getting booted to the XMB, large number of players getting disconnected from a specific game and other issues. We've been working on and testing this since the game launched and we should have a final version ready for release in the next week or so. It is hard to provide an exact date or timeframe as we need to make sure the patch is thoroughly tested and does not introduce any new issues.

We are also working on a patch to enable trophies and address various user feedback but this will be after the stability patch. Our top priority is getting both the servers and client as stable as possible before making any changes which could possibly cause other issues. Please continue to provide feedback in the SOCOM: Confrontation forum. We do read it and use the feedback to make further changes and tweaks in future updates.


Seth Luisi
Director of Development
Sony Computer Entertainment America

Tarasque3435d ago (Edited 3435d ago )

I have to say i think a 5 is a little low, but i think it should be at 7 top's. There is alot of issues with this game, it is better than the beta but man it still needs some work.

And to the guy above me /\
Umm, doesn't matter what they are going to do. The game is broke and has some major issues. Sure they are going to fix it, but just cause they are going to fix doesn't mean the score should go up. It is based off a finished product, If thats the case then we should go back and re-review alot of games.

Delive3435d ago

You danced around the question pretty well. Let me ask you this. Are you satisfied with this Socom "AS IS"?. If you would be willing to say "This is great, no need to change anything at all" then that's fine. I'll accept that as your choice and taste. I on the other hand know what Socom should be like, I have been there, Each game, countless hours and stats. That was the only game my brother and I played, but I'm not trying to convince you. So when one of your favorite franchises is released and it's less than stellar, are you supposed to give them a free pass? Well it has lag all over the place, my stats are not kept, features are missing, the menu system is a mess compared to Socom: Combined assault in relation to ease of use and speed, trouble with friend invites....... But it is Socom and I am a SOny Fanboy, so I'll give it a 10. Seriously, don't take it personal, I'm not grading you, it's a game that should have been better on release for the loyal fanbase. I have no problem saying "They fixed all the issues and Socom is the game it was meant to be, it's now a 10 out of 10", but at the same time, I can say "It was released before it was ready and this is NOT the Socom experience that the fans were looking for. The bugs and flaws that made it over from the beta have hurt the image of the game. I hope Slant 6 can get it together, but I wonder if Zipper could have done it better". No hate, no zen, no karma, that's just the real truth. The standards set by previous games are higher than what this has brought to the table.

If I was ignored, that would be sad. Check the previous comments and see how I was bashed by stating my opinion based off of the observations I made. I'm offering a mature discussion on games. If it's not going your way, you ignore someone, My sons do that. They are 10 and 12. That says a lot about some people.

BattleAxe3435d ago

There are certainly some touch ups that need to be done on the game, but it still plays like Socom. The maps are beautiful and pay alot of attention to detail.

It did freeze up on me lastnight once, but other then that it was solid. Sony should have pushed this game back to December in order to make sure that all the bugs were worked out. From playing the beta it did't take a genius to know that the game was going to be released with some bugs.

This was GameDaily's chance at getting a cheapshot in on a Sony game. Like I've said in the past, GameDaily are a bunch of losers.

+ Show (15) more repliesLast reply 3435d ago
Sez 3435d ago

that score can't be good.

Hagaf223435d ago

"there's no time limit on your matches and no ability to simply drop out if you're frustrated or tired of losing."

there is the option for time limits on set up games, and you press start and quit if you dont want to play anymore, a review loses alot of credibility when the dont get their facts straight, dont get me wrong there are issues but this game deserves better than a 5.

Aquanox3435d ago (Edited 3435d ago )

That's the problem with fanboy listings. I remember every single fanboy listing SOCOM as one of the heavy hitters for this year when it was pretty obvious that the game wasn't going anywhere. Yes it served to make the list longer, just like 2007's, but in the end, only a couple end up delivering.

Sadly, the same has happened to the Xbox 360 this year. Too Human wasn't a good game and Ninja Gaiden II was good but not the Triple A everyone was expecting. However, I think SOCOM didn't even deserve to be included in the "hope" list, it look plain terrible from the first unveiling to the latest gameplay videos.

So far, only 3 exclusives have truly delivered. MGS4, LBP and Fable II (Motorstorm 2 seems to be in the neighborhood of NG2). Lets see what happens in the rest of the year with Gears 2, Resistance 2 and Banjo Kazooie.

pansenbaer3435d ago (Edited 3435d ago )

Hey Aquanox, how are those 39.99 online only games treating you on the 360? If the 360 had any games like that, you better believe they aren't going to be perfect from day 1. Slant Six has taken care of a lot of problems and the game runs very smooth now. This review is bullshit. This is a title that A LOT of people have been waiting to get a PS3 for. The problems will be fixed and the game will be expanded upon. This game will deliver by the end of the month.

And what are you talking about with 'only 3 exclusives that delivered'?
What about Ratchet and Clank? What about Warhawk? What about Uncharted? And what about the 360 exclusives that have also delivered? Are you talking only of 2008?

chaosatom3435d ago (Edited 3435d ago )

before handing out score!

Samething happen with warhawk.

Kyur4ThePain3435d ago

While I don't agree with the score, I also don't agree with you on the online-only issue.
The question is simple...does the game offer sufficient fun and entertainment for the price.
A score is a score...there are no ifs or buts involved. changed your post.

Tarasque3435d ago

That is absurd "Wait for a patch before scoring it". That is saying just half @ss your game and when you patch it we will score it. Well then we should go back and re-reviews all the game's and redo the score's. Honestly i think that is dumbest thing i have heard on here in a while and i have heard some stuff boy let me tell ya.

Pennywise3435d ago

"Despite these modes, glitches ruin the fun. Constant freeze-ups force you to reset your PlayStation 3, there's no time limit on your matches and no ability to simply drop out if you're frustrated or tired of losing."

ITS CALLED START - QUIT GAME YOU NOOB REVIEWER. There is time limits in every game and my PS3 has NEVER frozen.

"However, manual weapon switching often leads to an early death in the heat of combat. For instance, if you have a rifle and need to throw a grenade, you'll need to take the time to actually pull out the grenade, rather than just tossing it. This small delay takes just enough time to turn the tide in a battle, leaving you vulnerable to enemy attack"

Ok, again noob - HOld circle pull out grenade at the beginning of the round/spawn and hit L1 to go back and forth.

Did Mart do this review?

solidjun53435d ago

However, I think Omega was salivating when he posted this.

siyrobbo3435d ago

ITS CALLED START - QUIT GAME YOU NOOB REVIEWER. There is time limits in every game and my PS3 has NEVER frozen.

that statement is flawed. just because yours hasnt frozen, doesnt mean it doesnt happen.

my 360 hasnt died from rrod, but that doesnt mean that nobody elses has (and we all know they have)

nycredude3435d ago

I have played the beta for a month and against my judgement purchase the game day one anyway (freaking only $40 bucks!). At first the servers sucked and getting on is a pain, but damn once you get going this game is like crack. Hopefully they will have the issues fixed soon.

Let's be honest here the game has numerous issues that has no place in a retail version, but reading this review it is very clear that the reviewer is a complete socom noob that got owned hard and can't handle it. Instead of having a little patience and learning the game he just resorted to bashing.

That being said this game is not easy. There is a learning curve and if you don't take the time you will get owned, but there is nothing like going to battle with some experienced comrads against other experienced players who play the game the way it is meant to be played, not running around shooting like idiots!

Three words to the reviewer: Go f&!k yourself!

juuken3435d ago

Lol, wtf?


On what grounds?

Captain Tuttle3435d ago (Edited 3435d ago )

Try reading the review.

Seems pretty harsh though.

juuken3435d ago

...I read the review.
That's what I meant. On what grounds exactly? Their review was too damn harsh.

Pennywise3435d ago

grounds that his PS3 froze and he didnt know how to see time limits before the game (which there are).

He didnt know how to quick switch weapons.

then he goes to say how good the graphics are and how realistic the game play is and how superb the sound is... how could it be a 5/10 because of his noob mistakes and misunderstanding. This review site just lost all respect from me.

BattleAxe3435d ago

Its funny how a buggy, incomplete game with 1 online game mode upon release(BattleField: Bad Company) can get good review scores but when its a Sony game it gets dumped on.

The online for this game is 10 times better then BF:BC.

Cliff Bull-Shit-ski3433d ago (Edited 3433d ago )

They gave MGS4 an 8/10 and there was an uproar! The reviewer spoke about his reasoning after the uproar and tries to justify it. This was in an interview and not in the actual review. It went something like this-

"MGS4 is a DECENT title but my no means is it a triple a title. People just give it a high score because it's made by Kojima and he can do no wrong. Sites are just giving it a high score so they don't stand out."

"Sites are just giving it a high score so they don't stand out." - WTF?! He completely wrong! It would make more sense to give it a differing score to stand out which get their sites more hits! What an idiot!

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3433d ago