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.
Wait what?! I didn't know reviews where out for this already?
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.
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.
^ 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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
Same combo for me socom and mk ps3!!!
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.
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?
@ 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.
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?
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.
compared to old socoms on the ps2 this is just mag reskinned i would not recommend this game.
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.
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?
yes i have played it and no i wont tell you how i got it before release. have a nice day sir.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
@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?
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.
this guy made the most sense out of all the reviews, its not socom.
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....
This game is NOT 2.5 rating. I've played it several times and I think it's awesome and fun. Sure, you have your occasional campers but every MP has that. The detail and sound are awesome. I can't get enhough of this game and can't wait for it's release next week!
The majority of the reviewer's complaints are opinionated. He really didn't give much that would classify it as a bad game. "There are some attempts at characterization, humor and even some drama, but they failed too badly to warrant attention." "The actual game content -- the missions, the enemies, the levels -- just isn't acceptable by franchise standards, and is only about average for the genre as a whole." Those aren't necessarily cons of the game. They are just reasons *HE* didn't like it.
Zipper is getting battered by reviewers. Too bad it doesn't live up to expectations though. I was really looking forward to this game now my anticipation has been crushed :(
@ Remember.....Thats how I feel. Crushed!
Well, they seem to support their games. Not sure what the major beef people have with it (I personally never got into the Socom series) but I'd expect them to patch/update the game in the long-run similar to MAG. Or is it not something patchable? =x
I actually avoided MAG because of how harsh the reviews were but when I finally rented it I loved it. Although this bothers me, I'm still going to try the game out. And your right they'll probably be patching the hell out of this game as the year goes on.
So far there is the ridiculous 3/10 from destructoid which is full of ridiculous crap. 6/10 from Eurogamer and 2.5/5 from Joystiq. The rest of the reviews of which there are about 10 so far are in the 7.5/8.5 out of 10 range. I wouldnt say its getting battered. Anyone who has been a SOCOM fan since SOCOM1 knows that the game always polarises reviewers and I never expect any SOCOM game to get over a 7. If its all classic mode and classic socom, it will get marked down for being too hardcore. If its like SOCOM4 it loses points for trying to join the mainstream. Either way they will end up selling about the same as every other socom with the same size of commuinty.
The community is pretty watered down these days. Many people who jumped ship long ago, and now play CoD might come back though, who knows.
Maybe you guys should use your own judgement and not listen to obviously a bunch of old socom fans who are bashing the game cause they wanted Socom 2. Last I check this game is Socom 4. Can we get a fucking review of the game without comparing to Socom 2? Sheesh. Reviewers suck major ass this gen. NO one is professional any and you guys antagonize them by listening to their bullshit. Buy the game and try it yourself. Hell wait until it drops in price or rent it but please don't give these wanabe journalists too much credit. Most don't even have any decent writing skills or spelling skills for that matter.
Double post, sorry
Wow! Joystiq is getting tuff. I have heard nothing but great things about this franchise. 5/10 is not what I was expecting. Joystiq will surely get a tounge lashing from rabid PS3 fans for being so brutal to one of their revered Exclusives. You guys do have the last say if you just buy the game any way. If the game sells really well, this review would be meaningless.
Never really followed the Socom franchise, but first MAG and now this. Sony should just go ahead and drop Zipper from its roster. I thought the beta was rather lame myself.
I would actually say that Zipper has made more technological progression for Sony than most of its other studios combined. The other studios excel at presentation, but none of them have pulled off technical marvels like MAG, with its insane player count and fantastic networking. If they get the high-end presentation going at Zipper, they'd be a serious contender for top dog in the shooter genre.
and i had a blast with the clan and all so i expect Socom 4 to be as good as Mag was to me, and i like the beta so reviews dont tell me much
And they were right. MAG is garbage.
You want to spread some negativity around, congrats, keep contributing your part
Looks like SOCOMs best days are behind it.
Being a ps3 enthusiast, I would be the first person to argue against this rating. However, it is very much deserved. Lack of team work, no attention to game modes, the fake feel of grenades amd weapons, it screams "dumbed down" for the masses. If you want to see what a good game in teamwork is, play MAG with some of those higher ranked people. I think that the beta to this was great for 2 reasons: 1. It allowed me to cut this game out of my "must own" april 19th release dates. And 2. Showed people that it changed so much so the fans (like myself who initiated socom online from day 1) would try the game and judge for themselves. I really believe minus a few tweaks that the online beta showcased the real game, and it just cant compete with its older, bigger cousin MAG, let alone the absolute MOSH PIT of shooters. Ill wait with Killzone 3 till Brink comes out. Thats a game that needs more mention and support. At least people sometimes play with teamwork on kz3. MK and portal 2, buy those instead.
If you want to see what a good game in teamwork is, play MAG with some of those higher ranked people. I bet you play Socom with those higher ranked ppl you will see some good team work
Socom 4 beta was just painful really. I spent more time trying to wrestle with the tank controls and wonky camera than anything. It was all so average that I just didn't care after 30 minutes. I got 3 kills and was awarded some lame air strike like COD, and I just felt sorry for the game and turned it off. I can see why people might want to try really hard to get enjoyment out of this game, but just face facts people. It's shit.
5 kills for an airstrike, or kill the bomb technician. These also only exist in the respawn games and not the classic modes. People that don't enjoy classic mode don't get SOCOM, its as simple as that, 1 life, no respawn.
You caught him in a lie. How shocking that he didn't reply. I've played Socom since game one day one, and I can't wait for the 19th. The options available with this game make it as casual or hardcore as people want to make it. I think it's awesome. No respawn, no regenerating health sure feels like Socom to me, especially with the cover system turned on. Socom should have had a cover system a long time ago. I'm laughing at those who say Socom was a fast paced game. It sure as hell was not a fast paced game, and anyone who tried to play it that way would have been destroyed by a good team. I'm so glad I played the beta, because all the whining almost made me avoid it. I'm shaking my head and laughing at all the haters.
thanks Zipper. Thanks a whole bunch, turned a fast paced game into some generic cover system camp fest COD clone.
yea COD has a cover system and is a 3rd person shooter without campers all SHOOTERS have camping... Since when was socom fast paced? Go play Socom 2 and tell me its fast paced
You must have been playing in a respawn then, go play demo on S2 and see how long a round lasts... Go back to playing MAG, you never know you might get into a full room with atleast 2 people using a mic.
Have any of you haters played the full release instead of reading only the bad reviews?
The beta was enjoyable, but nothing amazing. I can fully understand the low scores, and with the slew of games on the horizon, I just can`t be bothered to pick up Socom 4, sorry Zipper. Perhaps you should have just stuck with the classic formula instead of all the funky and unnecessary changes to a once addicting game.
Zipper was not creative enough to handle the series. I'm still going to buy the game regardless and judge it for myself though. In the meantime, this might be the last Socom for everybody.
Nice try zipper. i seen this coming a year ago, there was nothing socom about it bunch of fire fights and people yelling. what happened to crawling through the mud sneaking past enemies and all the great tactical options of socom 2? I mean come on there are killstreaks. Im tired of people trying to make there games like COD when, to begin with the people who bought socom arent even interested in COD.
"the people who bought socom arent even interested in COD" Lol. Get real. The only reason the people who bought SOCOM 1 and 2 weren't interested in a console CoD was *it didn't exist at the time*. CoD and Halo are the major reasons SOCOM has lost so many players over the years, not the game changing blah blah blah. You're seriously delusional if you think people just loved SOCOM so much they've been playing S2 since 2003 and haven't looked elsewhere. This iteration actually looks like a good game, and plays very well, even in beta.
what i ment was, socom set the bar for being an uber hard/realistic shooter that the truly hardcore realism fans loved and worshipped, and zipper pissed it all away trying to bring in the Redneck COD Crowd by throwing in a bunch of high octane missions, firefights and lots of swearing. its a 3rd person COD.
I really hope UBISOFT gets the feedback from this mess and gets Ghost recon future soldier the way it should be!Old stuff its not always bad,and after this crap i really need the old Ghost recon tactical approach on future soldier.Since the Wii version of GR its still in the same old fashion i really hope UBISOFT deliver a great game for future soldier.Its best for Zipper to make a remake of Socom 2 than give the fans this run and gun CALL OF SOCOM 4 .
...but I couldn't. The game is addictive and think a 2.5 is total bullsh*t. I really enjoyed it and I think Zipper needs to tweak a few things which I am sure they will in patches. The game is a solid buy. No fighting game is worth $60...sorry. I loved the new MK and even MvsC3, but $60 w/ no story...ock my doink
at least i can say this game is alot more competitive then cod....gosh i hated gamebattles in cod.This game requires alot more teamwork then the other games recently released.Ive already put 60 hours in the beta.Its something i rather play then anything else released recently.Move isnt too bad with this game either i got 13 and 1 in a bomb squad no respawn.Its different and i need different right now.
A 2.5 is actually 2.5 points higher than what this game really deserves haha
Hey guys, look on the bottom of the related posts. G4- 4/5 stars. Game Informer. 8/10 Gametrailers (8/10) (I just round out the points. Its pointless with the .25 thing.) Clearly this game is good, very good! But let us ask a question: Why is it for SONY exclusive games that they have the reviews out well in advance and for every other game, it comes out the day after? I've been a playstation gamer since the PSone. I don't get it though.
this game would be a 9.5 if zipper didnt strip the game of features from past socom titles.. its still an 8 in my book from the beta.. I like it better than black ops for sure..
played a good 5 hours and i love this game.. Yes it has issues like easy headshots and bullet spread seems a bit strange but over time, like in MAG, they will improve this game. The cover system is a bit of a cop out but they made the 1st real light gun game along with a sneaky fun console game. From my time in the beta i say 8 with work it can be a 9 all day... online only i still need to play coop and sp b4 i really give it a score
What a surprise N4PS3G submitting this article get ready to see every bad review get approved by all the no life Muppet's your butthurt no game playing must be streaming down your eyes waiting for your first non Kinect exclusive November is just 7 months away.
Can someone explain in factual detail why this game is crap? I get that it's not like previous socoms. But I never played socom...so explain from a newb pov why I should hate? I like the beta. It's very team driven if you want to win. It's a bit sluggish, but it could be that we are used to playing cod/halo/insert fps that are waaay to fast? Killstreaks...how is this bad? I like being rewarded in game for kills. If I want to play without killstreaks I can play classic mode. My only question: lol.....are their pistols in the retail version? Ha ha.
I BLAME COD! Cod turned many casuals in. Cod ruined the feeling of a real war game. cod made things so easy, what once was a challenge was now deemed as bad. cod ruined the tacticalness and strategy. ill never play black ops