InterMoniker
Member
Have you seen the new Socom Confrontation in motion?cjelly said::lol at the people saying this looks better than GRAW. It's night and day.
Didn't think so. lol Gfx wars.
Have you seen the new Socom Confrontation in motion?cjelly said::lol at the people saying this looks better than GRAW. It's night and day.
n1n9tean said:I, for one, will happily buy both games. Because, at the very least, ONE of them is bound to be perfect. But, most likely, they will each tailor to our different desires for a Socom game. Maybe Zipper will keep going in the direction of S3 for people who may have enjoyed it but felt they could have done a better job of tightening/focusing the combat. Slant 6 is obviously creating Confrontation for us hardcore S2 players. It's a WIN/WIN, man!
GRAW has way more eye candy, but CONFRONTATION is definitely looking sharper and with a more appealing colour.cjelly said::lol at the people saying this looks better than GRAW. It's night and day.
J-Rzez said:Oh definitely. I'll be there day one for both. I'd do the same like for the release of S2 and S3 (meh), and burn up a pday or two.
I think Zipper is going to take the game in the direction that the hardcore may not like it. But, if it's a persistent battlefield, with S1/2 mechanics, they may come over to it. Actually, I do hope it is set up like that. Chromehounds was simple but effective with that, and I think Zipper can push that set up way beyond to a new level. Or maybe it'd be a MMO-type open-world experience? Who knows. That's another reason I want SOCOM:Conf to hit, so they'll finally leak the info's on the real SOCOM series. :lol
J-Rzez said:No, GRAW tries to play like SOCOM. And SOCOM plays light-years better than GRAW.
Sorry, this series just isn't "another military shooter", this series is "Thee Military Shooter". GRAW was Ubisofts "wow, let's cash in on that" counter to this, and it no where near played as good.
SOCOM is one the most intense and competitive shooters I've ever played. It's no Respawn-o-rama, but it's not much of a campfest either (unless of course the mode calls for it). And it's as close to realistic behaving as any console shooter ever has been. It also has some of the most fun "game modes" out there like extraction, VIP's, demolition, and they feel done right, not just extras thrown in on top of deathmatch. And the SOCOM community feel-feature sets are absolutely 2nd to none.
Even though this isn't the full-fledged Zipper title, and just a PSN hold over, S6 seems to have taken great care to listen to the fans of the series, trying to bring it back to it's S1/S2 glory, along with maybe taking some of the weapon mods and clan match features of S3 (the main good things about that one).
I can't wait to have a SOCOM that runs and plays as solid and sure like R:FoM and Warhawk with it's dedicated servers... oh man, I just wet myself. And if ANY title screams HOME functionality, like say Warhawks proposed set up, this game is it.
recklessmind said:Man... how do I answer this.
GRAW is more like Socom than the classic Ghost Recon games. What Red Storm Entertainment did with GRAW was try to make Socom. Unfortunately, they never really figured out what was so good about Socom and in the process they ruined everything that was great about Ghost Recon.
GRAW is a fucking abortion.
Geeze... I don't think I answered your question. Oh yeah... comparing GRAW's horribly crippled "I-love-to-wait-15mins-for-a-match-just-to-be-booted-at-the-round-start" online interface to Socom's nearly-perfect lobby system is another example of epic Ubisoft failure.
Hey, but that's just one guy's opinion.
shintoki said:Depends...I would say Graw is between Socom 2-3. In terms of how good. They thing about Socom is also...They have become progressing worse each installment. 1 I will still say is my favorite online game todate. 2 was good. 3 was absolute ****. CA...Well...That doesn't exist >_>.
Every installment they go with more is better, bigger is better. Yet all that does is fuck up Socom even more.
So I would say take caution on anything with Socom anymore. Unless that is your type of thing
Greg said:SOCOM has never been a powerhouse graphically.
Confrontation could be a cleaned up version of S2 and it would still play better than 99% of the shit on the market today.
ThisGreg said:SOCOM has never been a powerhouse graphically.
Confrontation could be a cleaned up version of S2 and it would still play better than 99% of the shit on the market today.
Summer and Fall. One claim is Summer, the other is Q4. In order for both to be true, Confrontation has to come in the Summer, and the full Socom in Fall. But the truth could just be either Summer or Fall for Confrontation.Elbrain said:Damn that is just making me quiver! Has it been said what is now the expected time frame for this game's release? Summer? Fall?
lol I was looking for him too.chubigans said:Almost on the second page and no signs of Doel. *throws down flares*
Vyer said:I haven't really kept up with this. You guys are saying 'PSN'. This game is getting a big disc release, right?
I'm pretty sure it will get a BD release.Vyer said:I haven't really kept up with this. You guys are saying 'PSN'. This game is getting a big disc release, right?
BeeDog said:Surprisingly enough, I haven't tested any of the previous SOCOM games, so dunno where to place my hype; do they play something along the lines of America's Army or such? Or is it a bit more arcade-y?
I completely agree.Greg said:SOCOM has never been a powerhouse graphically.
Confrontation could be a cleaned up version of S2 and it would still play better than 99% of the shit on the market today.
That's actually pretty damn tough to answer - I'll try though.BeeDog said:Surprisingly enough, I haven't tested any of the previous SOCOM games, so dunno where to place my hype; do they play something along the lines of America's Army or such? Or is it a bit more arcade-y?
WinFonda said:I don't know, I'd have to see it in motion, but I think it looks pretty fucking good. Whats with all the fuss?
People like you bring a smile to my face because you have NO idea what you're in for.Kyoufu said:It looks really good, gonna have to see what the fuss is about SOCOM, since I never played the PS2 games.
I know that the first two Socoms had tons of acclaim, huge sales, and logged a shitload (no better word for it) of hours online by it's players, but it really never got that media attention that other series get. Since you seem to be pretty into the series (I have only tried a short demo and that was a long time ago), why do you think that is? Do you think the death of the Dreamcast (and the anger that ensued) could have something to do with it?Doel said:People like you bring a smile to my face because you have NO idea what you're in for.
If Confrontation does indeed retain the feel of the first two SOCOM titles with a smooth frame rate and great visuals to boot, it will blow your mind. I've always been a huge advocate of this franchise and hated the fact that it seemed so ignored in the media.
In August 2002, before XBLive even hit, SOCOM 1 shipped with voice chat support, clan support, dedicated servers, perfectly set up lobbies, and a unique feel unlike any other shooter before it. This all shipped alongside the PS2 network adapter, a peripheral that no one in the media at the time thought had a chance at succeeding. SOCOM sold that thing for Sony and turned it into a success and an opportunity for other developers to create a game on the PS2 with online support.
Where games like Battlefield 1942, Rainbow Six, Quake, Unreal Tournament, Team Fortress, etc, we always heard about people in the media talking about everyone playing these games around the office, but you never heard that about SOCOM. I think the simple fact that it was on the PS2 and not on Xbox Live or a PC (though the PC market isn't really suited for it) is a large part of reason for this. The media just never considered the PS2 to be much of an online machine, so a game like SOCOM went largely unnoticed despite it's amazing sales and huge community following.
I will give a shout out to a few people in the media who have given this game credit. Joe Rybicki formally of OPM and freelancer for 1up, N'Gai Croal of Newsweek, John Davison formally of 1up, and Garnett Lee of 1up.
akachan ningen said:the palm shadows are way too dark.
I think its because it was on PS2 and required the network adapter.Madman said:I know that the first two Socoms had tons of acclaim, huge sales, and logged a shitload (no better word for it) of hours online by it's players, but it really never got that media attention that other series get. Since you seem to be pretty into the series (I have only tried a short demo and that was a long time ago), why do you think that is? Do you think the death of the Dreamcast (and the anger that ensued) could have something to do with it?
That was definitely a huge part of itrecklessmind said:Here's what happened with Socom: It wasn't Battlefield.
The media at the time was completely fixated on Battlefield (PC) and if you go back and read all the coverage from the Socom launch (it was very well received) you'll notice all the media outlets soon started to shift their focus from very positive impressions of what Socom was doing so well, to everything it wasn't doing - even though it was never meant to do those things.
- When are you going to do vehicals?
- Are we going to get more players?
- Why aren't there any grenade launchers and huge explosions?
- Are you guys ever going to do bigger maps?
And blah, blah, blah... they wanted Socom:Battlefield. I personally blame that pressure from retarded gaming media for the franchise's shift away from Socom I style gameplay and features. I believe Zipper was eventually convinced that those shitty changes were necessary. They listened to the clamoring casuals instead of the hardcore Socom base and the games have never been the same. After spoiling the greatest online console game of all time, the media coverage dried up (unless a new one was be released, and then the coverage was just weaksauce talking about the new bulletpoints like vehicles and more players, or how well the games sell) and they moved onto other games like they always do.
I think that was a part of it too. But that didn't seem to stop games like Rainbow Six 3 Black Arrow from getting major media attention. I don't know if the pressure is on them to do the same or if for some reason there is a double standard and the media understands that RS is about tactical squad play in small locations and thats ok, but for SOCOM it isn't ok.recklessmind said:Here's what happened with Socom: It wasn't Battlefield.
The media at the time was completely fixated on Battlefield (PC) and if you go back and read all the coverage from the Socom launch (it was very well received) you'll notice all the media outlets soon started to shift their focus from very positive impressions of what Socom was doing so well, to everything it wasn't doing - even though it was never meant to do those things.
- When are you going to do vehicals?
- Are we going to get more players?
- Why aren't there any grenade launchers and huge explosions?
- Are you guys ever going to do bigger maps?
And blah, blah, blah... they wanted Socom:Battlefield. I personally blame that pressure from retarded gaming media for the franchise's shift away from Socom I style gameplay and features. I believe Zipper was eventually convinced that those shitty changes were necessary. They listened to the clamoring casuals instead of the hardcore Socom base and the games have never been the same. After spoiling the greatest online console game of all time, the media coverage dried up (unless a new one was be released, and then the coverage was just weaksauce talking about the new bulletpoints like vehicles and more players, or how well the games sell) and they moved onto other games like they always do.
I can see what you mean. I never really viewed my PS2 as an online machine myself, so I can definitely agree with that sentiment.Doel said:I think its because it was on PS2 and required the network adapter.
It came out just before XBLive, and once that hit it got all the attention and the PS2 was never really viewed as an online machine.
This I agree with as well. I can't tell you how many times I saw the words "CoD 4" and "perks" in the Resistance 2 thread. It seems like as soon as gamers experience one thing, they want it applied to every game possible.recklessmind said:Here's what happened with Socom: It wasn't Battlefield.
The media at the time was completely fixated on Battlefield (PC) and if you go back and read all the coverage from the Socom launch (it was very well received) you'll notice all the media outlets soon started to shift their focus from very positive impressions of what Socom was doing so well, to everything it wasn't doing - even though it was never meant to do those things.
- When are you going to do vehicals?
- Are we going to get more players?
- Why aren't there any grenade launchers and huge explosions?
- Are you guys ever going to do bigger maps?
And blah, blah, blah... they wanted Socom:Battlefield. I personally blame that pressure from retarded gaming media for the franchise's shift away from Socom I style gameplay and features. I believe Zipper was eventually convinced that those shitty changes were necessary. They listened to the clamoring casuals instead of the hardcore Socom base and the games have never been the same. After spoiling the greatest online console game of all time, the media coverage dried up (unless a new one was be released, and then the coverage was just weaksauce talking about the new bulletpoints like vehicles and more players, or how well the games sell) and they moved onto other games like they always do.
Y2Kev said:Just hope it holds 12 fps.
f3niks said:I feel the same way but the framerate and graphics in the original socoms looked like ass and I still continured to play. I'm hoping that be the case with Confrontation.
Madman said:This I agree with as well. I can't tell you how many times I saw the words "CoD 4" and "perks" in the Resistance 2 thread. It seems like as soon as gamers experience one thing, they want it applied to every game possible.
Resistance doesn't need perks. Socom did not need vehicles and all the extras that came along in the series. But people and the media will denounce games that are "missing" what they think it needs instead of trying to understand the appeal of the game itself without those extras. It's really an annoyance to fans of the series who thought the game needed little change, and instead have to deal with the developer giving in to outside pressure. It's not really the fault of the developer. If they want favorable reviews and press coverage, they have to give in to what the media wants. It should be the other way around, where the media tries to understand what the developer is trying to achieve instead of making developers pander to the media. Perhaps as the industry matures, we will see less of this.
recklessmind said:I think over the past couple years I've gotten to where I let framey games ruin my enjoyment of them... dude, I don't even like occasional hiccups.
I really hope Socom is locked in... it really needs to be.
Well said.