1up Socom confrontation review (UPDATED )

1up has re-reviewed Socom after the glitches in the original game were fixed

The editor writes:-

"But the game's improved enough from its launch state that I'm comfortable recommending it, especially considering it will only get better. It may not suit the taste of every shooter fan; if Halo free-for-alls are your thing, for example, you're likely to find Confrontation annoying in its realism and challenge. But if you want a game in which brains are as important as marksmanship, you've found it. "

1up initially gave Socom Confrontation a C+. The new review stated that there is even more room for improvement and hence a chance of a further updated review

Oculus Quest Giveaway! Click Here to Enter
The story is too old to be commented.
aaron234029d ago

but what is happening to 1up???

Wii music = A+
PGR4 = A+

Socom B+

Resistance 2 B+???? R2 got 9.5 from IGN

The site is going to dogs

GiantEnemyLobster4029d ago

Any game that has to be reviewed again after patches is an automatic flop in my book. Oh well, thats what the PatchStation 3 is best at I guess.

she00win994029d ago

even though i haven't seen your face, it's automatically a flop in my book..

theKiller4029d ago

they r still bias and sh*t in reviewing on ps3 games but all websites should do what they did and always update the reviews when the gane get patches or servers got fixed

4029d ago
ruibing4029d ago

I'll return your words right back at ya. Any system that has to be released again after hardware patches is an automatic flop in my book.

GiantEnemyLobster4029d ago

Quite funny. My 360 has been with me for over a year with absolutely no patches or firmwares or updates to fix any of its problems.. because it has no problems! But I wouldn't expect a PS3 owner to understand what its like to have a console with no problems.

4028d ago
+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 4028d ago
DeforMAKulizer4029d ago

Good to see them update it... Lets hope IGN and GS do the same!

Tarasque4029d ago

You should not be able to update your score at all, then they need to go back and update all the other titles that released patched and fixes to make the game better.

pansenbaer4029d ago

Stop whining. Which games on the 360 were online only for 39.99 and also available on the marketplace?

Violater4029d ago

"The revised review was commissioned after much discussion with the writer, who strongly felt that the recent patch warranted a reevaluation of the game. This re-review should be considered a unique case (in other words: no, we don't plan on making a habit of re-reviewing games). --Ryan Scott, Executive Editor, Reviews"

There you have it and I totally agree, I stuck with the game through its glitches and I am loving it.
Then again it caters to people who are tired of the little kids screaming in your ear, so kids don't buy this game.

Why o why4029d ago


hes just pissed they done something good. Servers got fixed so why should people know? I tell you why because T man does not like the ps3 its games or its supporters, that's why.

From now on i feel online games or multiplayer sections of games should be reviewed separately and at least 2 weeks after release. I think there are minor squabbles with many online sections of games on release but that doesn't tell the whole picture. Im sure if gears2 multiplayer is problematic on launch it will be fixed and thats when i feel that section should be reviewed. If the nature of the problems are more deep seeded then take marks off, simple. I dislike 1up because of SOME of their antics over the past 2 years but they have though about GAMING with this act so ill give them a thumbs up for it.

Sitdown4029d ago

If you want to ask that question...then the question can be asked, Which games on the 360 were online only that were released as broken as SOCOM? And if the game is going to be the same price for the disc as it is for a download...I would prefer getting the disc. At least I can trade it in if I desire. I say you give an initial review for the launched product, then follow up a month later with a "second-look" review.

shazam4029d ago

so how can they give this and R2 the same score. the two games arent even in the same league.

pansenbaer4029d ago

@ Sitdown.

Uhhh the point is that there is nothing in the same league as SOCOM available on the Marketplace. The 360 doesn't have any games like that.

Doppy4029d ago

Let's hope everyone does the same. Especially that evil Metacritic.

Sitdown4029d ago

I am not sure I am understanding your are knocking xbox because you can not download a game like SOCOM? Does it really matter? can easily pick up COD4...which in my opinion has a similar feel. I just hope your core argument is the inability to download an online shooter from marketplace.....which for some could be a good thing.

Dark General4029d ago

Really you think CoD4 and Socom are similar? In what aspects? I never got that impression while playing the beta.

Sitdown4028d ago

style and feel felt the same for me. I posted a while back...that if I did not renew my live subscription for COD4, that I would ultimately end up getting SOCOM so I could continue playing a similar style game. For me you have your sci-fi style shooters and then your more realistic style shooters......and COD2 and SOCOM fall into the latter for me.

Grooski4028d ago

@1.12 Sitdown

You, sir, have most definitely not played SOCOM if you think that it plays like COD4. They are like chalk and cheese - totally different. You'd know that if you'd played.

Sitdown4028d ago (Edited 4028d ago )

the code said for SOCOM beta, and then it said I was downloading the SOCOM beta....and even the title screen said SOCOM beta. And when I customized the two different characters, I thought it was still SOCOM........was their a glitch or something that switched games just as I was getting into the multiplayer? Chalk and cheese ehh? So you mean I could not classify both games as a fps that are realistic in nature? You mean chalk does not allow you to use strategy and kill other players like cheese does? Chalk does not allow you to change your style of weapon like cheese does? Do you think I can take Gamestop to court for giving me a fake code when I pre-ordered the game? I mean it was misleading for it to be SOCOM branded and all..

Pain4028d ago

good, its a great game, just need the bugs smashed.

FrankenLife4028d ago

You cannot classify SOCOM as a fps. It is in the third person. Traditional SOCOM also has no respawn. Yes, I know there is the option for it in confrontation, but that isn't how SOCOM is set up to be played. In CoD4 you can be very successful by running and gunning, not so much in SOCOM. In every game mode of SOCOM you need to think out your moves, and work as a team. That isn't so in CoD4. Yes CoD4 has s&d, but that is it. Also s&d doesn't have the same teamwork and planning as SOCOM unless you are playing with a good clan. The two games aren't as different as chalk and cheese, but are very different shooters. I use CoD4 to relax from playing SOCOM.

+ Show (13) more repliesLast reply 4028d ago
omodis4204029d ago

I remember all the 360 fan boys talking all kinds of trash about this game. What a bomb. Again PS3=Older audience.

littletad4029d ago

More than 3 dozen ps3 ng4 fans claiming to either save your money and buy lbp or debating how harsh the review was. Others said the review needed a second chance. I only saw one instance of trolling. So to sum up "all" 360 fans and I assume the implied "opposite" of a mature audience is kind of silly.

Are you just throwing 360 fan hate in the mix for the heck of it?

MiloGarret4029d ago

Achievement/Trophy: Massive ownage.

Danja4028d ago

and im sure that most of those supposedly PS3 owners who were bashing the game didn't even play the game but were only saying what they said because of what they read in the reviews...the game is great and I expect it to improve dramatically it will be the Warhawk of Tactical shooters.

Raptura4028d ago

MMORPGs also have expansion packs, which are reviewed and by then many problems are fixed through patches.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 4028d ago
Forbidden_Darkness4029d ago

Now that is how reviews should be done, if a dev takes the time to fix the problems, the reviewers should fix their reviews to show that the dev has indeed fixed the problems in which lowered the score.

Odion4029d ago

I disagree, a review score should only be upon the box title, not whats updated past launch. If we allow companies to release games that have serious problems, and then reward them with better critical aclaim later, then we're allowing them to push out unfinished content.

littletad4029d ago

Call of Duty 4, Halo 3, and many other games all had some initial problems with their online components. Now their's plenty of downloadable content for many of those games. Should reviewers go back and make changes because of the improvements? No, I don't think so. The game should be reviewed by how it's delivered, not on how it's improving. Why?

Well because your shelling out your hard earned cash on these games. It's the developers responsibility to deliver a quality game to the best of their abilities. It's also the reviewer's job to be fair in the review because after all, your the one paying for it. Therefore a game should be reviewed on it's package out of the box, not on "future improvement".

SRuN44029d ago

There's a difference between re-reviewing an ONLINE ONLY game that had server issues at the start because of heavy traffic and FULL games and DLC for those games.

littletad4029d ago

What difference does that make. You'll pay just the same for a regular game regardless. Are you saying that because it's an online game that it deserves a second chance?

What we should really be arguing about is that this game should have been delayed, rather than cause trouble to the reviewing system and to gamers. I understand there's grade curves in our school systems, but there shouldn't be such a thing in video game currency.

Bigrhyno4029d ago

Assuming you aren't score whores, this is definitely what should be done. Many people may look at reviews as a way to tell if they should buy a game, and if 1up feels it is a much better game right now, then they have every right to say so. Whether or not they should change the score is irrelevant because who gives a **** what the score is. Read the stupid reviews for once.

RussDeBuss4029d ago

considering its an online only game so everyone that plays will get the improvements and its only about a month after release i think a re-review is warrented.
if it was improvements made 6 months or so after release then its tuff luck forthe devs if they get a bad score cos they shouldnt have released a bad game.
if its a normal game where people buying it may not have online, although i'm sure most people with a ps3 have online, but anyway, then a re-review is not warrented because not everyone will have the improvements

plain rice4029d ago (Edited 4029d ago )

FYI....There's a difference between patches and DLC. Re-reviewing games that have been "patched" to work properly are totally acceptable. Remember, DLC is optional and patches are mandatory especially when comes to online-only games. You guys disagreeing should realize that these are only temporary technical problems. The devs are promptly addressing the issue. It's only fair to re-review the game if the problems have been fixed don't you think?

Same thing with the 360.

Isn't it fair to reevalutate my Xbox 360? Because my initial review/impressions of the 360 at launch was more negative than all the PS3 fanboys in the open zone here combined. Should I flat out tell everyone that my launch 360 sucks when it does not? Yes it did back in 2k5,2k6 but not anymore. I like how some of you guys act like re-reviewing is wrong. It happens all the time people. This applies to everything out there.

"a review score should only be upon the box title, not whats updated past launch."

LOL. Do you know the purpose of reviews? It's for future potential buyers. If you already have the game or whatever it is, why even bother?

Tarasque4029d ago (Edited 4029d ago )

COD4 and Halo 3 for me did not have major issues launch day, sure there was lag at times and occasional disconnects (very few for me). But the game was not unplayable by any means. Then if that is the case then people need to go back and start re-review all these games. Sony fanboys never cease to amaze me seriously. And actually they are going to get and e-mail from me and a few other people stating that if they re-review this game they have to go back and re-review the rest.

LazyDevs4029d ago

I am with Tarasque on this one, i am going to have me and my friends send them e-mails telling them they need to re-review every other title if they are going to do this one.

plain rice4029d ago (Edited 4029d ago )

Tarasque. Are you trying to say Socom Confrontation was unplayable at launch? Maybe your confused with the beta because the retail version was just as playable as CoD4 at launch. I won't argue with your own personal experience though, I'll just leave at that.

pansenbaer4029d ago

Wow you guys sound mature...Do you really think that if they re-reviewed Halo 3 it would get a better score? That is highly doubtful.

Tarasque4029d ago

Yes Socom was unplayable for me on launch day and well the next day and the next day.

And too the blan blank above me /\, who gives 2 craps about re-reviewing halo3. Doesn't matter you need to re-review all games

Why o why4029d ago

Tarasque and all the others with pitch forks would accept this re-review if the score had been lower??????;)

This was a special case and your saying playstation guys never cease to amaze ya when it was 1up that commissioned the re-review, silly billy. You know this game isn't out in Europe yet don't you??

Raptura4029d ago (Edited 4029d ago )

Why don't you go cry me a river, you big baby..
You're going to email 1UP to re-review every other game?
Halo 3 and COD4 were not reviewed unfairly. From my understanding they got very high reviews even with their online problems at launch. May I also add that those games had a storyline and were not online-only.

Socom, being an online-only title, deserves a re-review because there's many problems that can be fixed and people want the most up-to-date review they can get. Let's say 3 months from now someone is thinking about purchasing the game and reads the IGN review, but the review states that the game is unplayable and glitchy. That will be very misleading when the majority of the launch problems will probably fixed by then.

Odion4029d ago

MMORPG are not re-reviewed if they have server or bug problems at the start, and those are online only games, where patches are a regular thing.

Your score should be based upon what I get when I take the game out of the box and put it into my system for the first time.

+ Show (13) more repliesLast reply 4029d ago
morganfell4029d ago

This site has been with the dogs. It started when that moron Dan Hsu took over as Editor. He is gone now but every bad decision and every bad hire he made is still around. Talk about someone that hated Sony. He epitomized the Sony hater. He was Idiot in Chief for EGM and some of the biased crap he pulled there is legendary in it's ignorance.

ultimolu4029d ago

I really do not like Dan Hsu. There is something about him I cannot stand. -__-

unjust4029d ago

A b+ isn't bad. It sucks when you hear people say this game is going to be an amazing title and then reviews come out and it doesn't place where you feel it should. Its almost like your favorite football team making it all the way to the playoffs and losing. What amazes me is that every time a GTA title comes out it never gets anything less than a 9.5 these games are good however they are a certain genre much like Socom and Silent Hill have their own, but somehow they always seem to find something wrong that doesn't match to giving it a good score. If we are willing to look past glitches in some games to give them score that average out to be a 9 or better why shouldn't it be done with every genre. I mean come on GTA isn't that great not enough to get the reviews it gets all the time.