Top
250°
5.0

Joystiq: SOCOM 4 Review

Joystiq: If this game didn't carry the SOCOM name it would be just another functional third-person military shooter that you might recognize when you saw it in the markdown bin after a few months.

The story is too old to be commented.
Aussiegamer2435d ago (Edited 2435d ago )

Wait what?!

I didn't know reviews where out for this already?

Ducky2435d ago (Edited 2435d ago )

They were. Some of them.
Might be a two~three pages deep on the front page.

Kinda mixed. I guess its better to judge from your own experience from the beta... if you had it.

kaveti66162434d ago

That list proves my point.

None of the games you listed are worth the 65 dollar launch price.

Games like Assassin's Creed, which I love, are not worth 65 bucks. I paid 30 for it and felt that it was a good value. Had I paid a full 65 bucks for it I would have been disappointed.

I'm surprised you would pay full price for any of those titles.

It's better to buy the game for cheap and be pleasantly surprised.

And with the case of Socom 4, the current game is probably not worth a 65 dollar purchase but will be a great title within a few months after updates.

It just goes back to my original discussion of hard-earned money. People who work hard for every penny they earn are usually careful about how they spend it.

You should be more responsible with your dough.

Ducky2434d ago (Edited 2434d ago )

^ God dammit man. Lrn 2 rply pl0x.

=p

Most games these days aren't worth $65.
Luckily, all my pre-orders cost around $40. Yipee.

TBM2435d ago

well its a good thing i dont listen media/other people make up my mind on what games to purchase with my hard earned money.

well be picking this up next week along with PS3 version on mortal kombat.

kaveti66162434d ago (Edited 2434d ago )

People who work hard for their money don't throw it away on blind loyalty, either.

Edit: Although, I think this game is an 8/10.

TBM2434d ago

well Kaveti its not blind loyalty as i've never been a fan of the Socom series, but i am interested in this game so i will pick it up because i want too.

i dont purchase my games on blind loyality, i purchase my games on my level of interest or my like of the previous game in a particular series.

to all the haters out there your disagrees wont stop me from purchasing this game; or is it the fact that im buying the PS3 version of Mortal Kombat. which is it?

kaveti66162434d ago

So you're interested in a sequel to a series that you've never been interested in, and you're going to buy the game based on pure interest alone?

Did you play the beta at least?

I just can't reconcile any of this with your statement that your money is hard-earned.

People who earn their money the hard way don't purchase things on superficial interest.

ksoto2434d ago

Same combo for me socom and mk ps3!!!

ComboBreaker2434d ago (Edited 2434d ago )

So if you don't buy a game base on how much the game interest you, then how do you decide to buy a game? You're going to base on how cool the commercial is? Base on the sales? Base on what your friends are playing? LOL.

TBM will be buying Socom because Socom is interesting to him. It's his hard earned money, so if he want, he can spend it on something that interest him, instead of spending it on something that only intestest you.

"People who earn their money the hard way don't purchase things on superficial interest."

Wow. So a game that is interesting is superficial? LOL.

kaveti66162434d ago (Edited 2434d ago )

Well Combobreaker, TBM wasn't clear about why the game interested him.

For all you or I know, he may be interested in it simply because of the commercials or based on what his friends are playing.

I asked him if he he played the beta and was awaiting his response.

I really didn't want to know your opinion on the matter at all.

If he hasn't played the beta, and he doesn't listen to reviews or the opinions of others, and only decides to purchase a game based on his own interest, then I'd like to know what the criteria was for him developing that interest.

Did he hear about it from friends?
Did he read about it in a magazine?
Did he see something about it on PSN?
Did he play the beta?

He says he doesn't listen to reviews at all.

He says very clearly that he bases his purchase of a game on his level of interest and whether or not he liked the previous entries in the series.

But he did also say that he didn't like or was not interested in the previous Socom games.

So, how can he be interested? He must have played the beta, no?

If you played the beta, then it makes sense that someone else's review of the game isn't necessary since you know from personal experience.

But if you didn't play the beta, and you don't trust reviews, and you didn't get an opinion from someone else, and you didn't like the previous entries in the series, then how can you be interested?

Is it the graphics, is it the gameplay which you saw in the trailers (that you didn't experience first hand in the beta)?

It just strikes me as odd that someone would talk about having hard-earned money and then say that they don't listen to reviews.

I don't know about you guys, but my hard-earned money is SO hard-earned that I never buy a game the day it comes out, and I never buy a game on the promise that "Oh, well, at least the multiplayer might be good" and I never buy a game based on my interest in previous versions, or even based on the reputation of the developer.

I always read reviews and try out the demos and try to borrow the games I'm interested in from friends before I even consider purchasing them.

TBM should have clarified how he became interested in the game.

Even if I was anticipating a game or movie for months and months, and it finally came out and it got Cs or Ds across the board, I wouldn't pay to play it or to watch it because other people may be biased but a whole hell of a lot of them who are saying the same thing about a game or movie probably are not making stuff up.

Then again, wouldn't a person who earns money the hard way wait to see if the game improves through patches or does he go out and buy a game as soon as it launches despite the lukewarm scores?

TBM2434d ago (Edited 2434d ago )

@ kaveti

I work for the NYC Dept of Sanitation for the last 16 yrs as a civil servant so yea I think I can do anything I want with my money.

As for Socom I tried to get into it back on PS2, but couldn't so when I saw the trailer at last yrs E3 I became interested. yes I did play the beta, and even though I got my a$$ handed to me I liked what I played.

Its different then the other shooters and I want to try out this tactical shooter. I hope this clears up everything for you Kaveti.

@combo
thank you bro for seeing it from my side of it, you sir are a gentlemen and scholar.

Edit
@ kaveti I've been gaming for over 30+ yrs I don't need everyone to tell me what games to buy, or what to play. And like I said just because I didn't like the series back on PS2 doesn't mean I can't be interested in this game which I am.

Also you mentioned about the lukewarm responses of this game well imma list some games for you that also got lukewarm responses that I went on to love this gen

Mirror's Edge
Folklore
Dante's Inferno
Final Fantasy 13
Lost Odyssey
Alan Wake
Blue Dragon
Gran Turismo 5
Medal of Honor
3D Dot Game Heroes
Mafia 2
Enslaved
White Knight Chronicles
Prince of Persia (cel-shaded)
Splinter Cell Conviction
Killzone 3
Assassin's Creed
Resistance (series)
Crackdown
Saints Row (series)
Castlevania LoS
Tales of Vesperia
Valkyria Chronicles (favorite game this gen)

As you can see from this list its not blind loyality or as you put it superficial interest; I just buy and play games that either happen to catch my interest or its a previous game in the series I happen to like.

nycredude2434d ago

Kaveti6616

People who work hard for their money spend it however way they see fit, and teh last thing they do is listen to strangers on the internet. If I want to wipe my ass with my money it's my decision. Why do you care how people spend their money?

As a matter of fact you would be surprise how foolish some people are with their money, but it's theirs so who cares?

Marquis_de_Sade2430d ago

TBM, I question your definition of the word "lukewarm", as many of the games you list scored well over 80 on metacritic, hardly "lukewarm" in my book.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 2430d ago
just_looken2434d ago

compared to old socoms on the ps2 this is just mag reskinned i would not recommend this game.

a_bro2435d ago (Edited 2435d ago )

WTF? this isnt a 2.5

Edit: no. i did not mean it like that.

i mean this game does not play like a 2.5 out of 5, more like a 3.5 to a 4.

FailOverHero2435d ago (Edited 2435d ago )

It's not? Looks like a 2.5 to me...they have 5 stars and 2 are fully shaded and the 3rd one is halfway shaded. Yup, I've just confirmed with external sources that that indeed is a 2.5. You're welcome
Edit: it is? SONY also sent you the final build before retail version too?

a_bro2434d ago (Edited 2434d ago )

yes i have played it and no i wont tell you how i got it before release. have a nice day sir.

-Alpha2435d ago (Edited 2435d ago )

It's disappointing to hear how unlike the rest of the SOCOM games SOCOM 4 is. While I can understand that fans are PO'd with the more action-oriented story and the totally different feel of the MP a 5/10 seems way too low

And I can understand low scores from hardcore fans, but I don't ever see that sort of mentality by the general media who seem to take a game at more face value.

I see the trend here is that SOCOM 4 is failing to live up to past SOCOM's, with the lack of old modes, style, etc. playing an effect. It's clear that SOCOM had a distinct community and they are really raging at the change (not that I blame them)

I enjoyed the beta as a newbie, just disappointed that they took out everything from previous games that seemed like it would have made the game better. But I'd think for the general public the review would fall at a 7/10

And if reviews are basing games on the series as a whole then I'm sure lower scores like this will continue. IMO Zipper should have stuck to their roots. I don't understand why so many devs remove legitimate features like lobbies, it just pisses everyone off

UP2435d ago (Edited 2435d ago )

If SOCOM 4 was exactly like SOCOM 2 it still would have gotten mixed reviews. No matter what SOCOM vets say SOCOM is a niche experience that you either love or hate.

One more things as I said before SOCOM is love it or hate it game so dont predict your enjoyment based on reviews until you play it yourself.

Alpha I think Zipper is bringing the lobbys back. I can see some of the SOCOM vets problems but when you complain about crosshairs you have a problem. Thats just me though.

Alpha- But that was last generation I think if SOCOM II came out today the reviews would be different. Things change.

Anyways Zipper is amazing at supporting their games so expect huge improvements. But when you ask for changes please be good ideas not stupid crosshair changes.

-Alpha2435d ago (Edited 2435d ago )

Reviews for SOCOM II were pretty high. I'm sure it'd have gotten great reviews today, it was unique, and the #1 complaint I'm reading is that S4 is nothing like previous SOCOM's.

I played the beta, and I enjoyed it, but couldn't help but feel that everything they removed should have stayed. I am not surprised to hear complaints about appealing to COD crowds. It's something a lot of devs try to do.

They are not bringing the lobbies back, they confirmed it. Their excuse is that they want people to play games ASAP and not be stuck in a lobby chatting. Seems sort of odd that they'd dictate that to us, and I feel that it's just an excuse to push quickplay and to appeal to casuals who just want to jump in.

Even if it was last gen, it played uniquely. That's the complaint I'm reading. SOCOM 4 plays too much like the rest, people like and want SOCOM to be SOCOM.

Also, hey, I want a crosshair change :P I like the dot crosshair, seems much more accurate and can account for recoil unlike the circle in S4 where headshots seem to happen by chance.

despair2435d ago

If it was like old SOCOM games the reviewers would bash it for being too much out of date and doing nothing new. Its different from the old SOCOM games and now they are saying its no longer SOCOM that they are trying to copy big name games with big set pieces and more action.

Its impossible to please some people and while I did not expect 10/10 reviews for the game, many of the reviews I read are unnecessarily harsh(from what I played in the beta and read online of course).

Best review I saw/read so far is GameTrailers, the 7.9 seems justifies from the actual review and they clearly said its a good game if you are interested in the MP aspect of it. Worst is Eurogamer(I don't count Destructiod), just read the first 2 paragraphs and the bias and dislike is easy to spot.

UP2434d ago (Edited 2434d ago )

Exactly. Zipper was going to be bashed anyway. Zipper is amazing at supporting their games so expect huge improvements in the coming months. So instead of bashing them to high hell for stupid shit help make the game better.

That Destructoid review was hilarious. He said it has the same problems confrontation had at launch. Has any other reviews experienced the same?

LOL at FatOldMan's disagrees.

-Alpha2434d ago (Edited 2434d ago )

I don't think that's true at all. All games have a fundamental core that is expected by everyone to stay the same-- it's the essence that makes the game what it is. SOCOM was associated with lobbies, custom games, fast gameplay, a certain way of turning/shooting, and certain gamemodes. To change all that or to remove some of those things is what is wrong with "Change"

Change that removes and strips identity is different from change that adds and builds

People want new features, modes, etc. in a new game-- but to remove older modes and features is like turning your back on the people that made your game.

despair2434d ago

@Alpha

Splinter Cell Conviction was stripped to hell of many of its defining features to make a more action oriented game and got very high reviews. Same with Dragon Age 2, GTA 4, Mass Effect 2(many for the better but some for the worse).

Then there's COD.They removed things like lean left/right and LAN, which are basic features, in MW2 and yet it was rated one of the best games of all times.

Just because features people like are removed from a game, or even things people associate with the game, does not mean it should be rated down automatically.

So far other than Gametrailers, who reviewed the game as its own game(just look at the past SOCOM games references in this review), I haven't read/seen a review(haven't read all either) that gave the game a fair chance.

Eurogamer review had the reviewer talking about token non-white characters in the first couple paragraphs how is that a review, its the reviewers personal opinion that actually does not relate to the review itself, save it for a blog or something.

Removal of features and changing others is reality in the gaming industry, whether its to appeal to a certain market or budget/hardware limits, its what happens and many games get away with just a single sentence in a review saying that feature is gone, yet with SOCOM its different?

Trroy2434d ago (Edited 2434d ago )

Actually, the scores that this game is getting is right in line with what the mainstream media gave previous SOCOMs.

The first couple only scored higher because they had an, at the time, unique feature -- online play.

I think that Zipper would have made a huge, huge mistake to try and make SOCOM 4 exactly like previous SOCOMs. The only way to get scores higher with the media is to turn the game into an interactive movie, like CoD. They obviously didn't manage this (I don't see how they could, and still retain the tactical nature of SOCOM), and now they're paying for it with a couple low reviews, and a large number of "fairly good" reviews.

In a sense, these kinds of scores are exactly what old SOCOM fans wanted -- they are indicators that the series has stayed too close to its roots, not vice-versa. Probably not a good thing for Zipper, but I think the SOCOM vets might be getting more of what they wanted than the "vocal" ones let on.

2435d ago Replies(1)
sickbird2435d ago

this guy made the most sense out of all the reviews, its not socom.

rezzah2435d ago

Probably right, I look at it as a MAG in 3rd person. Which isn't something bad at all.

Unless you were expecting a HD version of Socom 2. Great game except for when one of my team members would always run into my line of fire....