SOCOM: Special Forces Review

By Steve Hill Published 12 April, 2011

Welcome to the jungle.

Version tested: PlayStation 3

Despite selling about 12 million copies over its decade-long history, nobody in the real world has ever heard of SOCOM. In fact, we'd hazard a guess that great swathes of those who've played the series don't even know what it stands for.

Neither do we. It doesn't matter. All you need to know is that it's a third-person tactical shooter with a chequered past, and Special Forces arguably represents its stab at the big time. It's immediately clear that the developers are going for the full Hollywood effect, as you've barely learnt the controls when the game's first exploding helicopter lands at your feet.

For reasons explained by earnest cut-scenes and interminable briefings from what appears to be Lorraine Kelly, you're somewhere in South East Asia, and there's a war going on, ostensibly against "farmers with shotguns". You (primarily) play Cullen Gray, a middle-class buffoon with more than a whiff of rugger and a yard-of-ale about him. As such, he's the leader of a pair of two-person units, and you can tell he's in charge as the rest of the squad are either Northern, non-white or female.

The token woman is the so-called "45", a perennially frowning firebrand with whom you somehow engender a frisson of sexual tension despite fundamentally divergent principles. As for the rest of them, for all their input they might as well be the dancers who stood at the back in East 17. Largely mute, the Geordie one does occasionally manage to muster the line "I might be crazy but I'm not stupid" when you point him in the way of danger.

Telling Gold Team and Blue Team where to stand and who to shoot is largely the extent of the tactical mastery involved, and it occasionally works, enabling you to flank the enemy while your drones draw fire. More often than not, however, the s**t hits the fan in spectacular fashion, forcing everyone to run for cover and simply try to survive.

Coming under heavy fire exposes the vagaries of the rudimentary cover system, with you inadvertently popping in and out of cover in the heat of the battle, and frequently shooting chunks of the scenery instead of the enemy. At least you're not alone, as your team-mates are often to be found filling the walls with lead. Perhaps to level the playing field, the enemy AI is equally moronic, and soldiers will simply run at you in a straight line with little regard for self-preservation.

Missions mainly involve following waypoints through the jungle until you come across the enemy, and you can also call in the odd air strike to get rid of tanks and frigates. Choppers make sporadic appearances, and there's the obligatory mission where you find a handily discarded rocket launcher and attempt to take one out of the sky while it continues to shoot at you despite having been on fire for 10 minutes. It's in situations like this that the third-person view and flaky controls stymie the experience, and you simply find yourself spinning round around in circles while your team-mates casually look on.

As a change of pace, four of the 14 single-player missions are stealth affairs featuring only the enigmatic "45". They certainly add some variety, and not a little tension, but if you hate stealth games you might be perturbed to find them holding up your progress through the game.

There's one in particular that will have you grinding your teeth in despair and hurling invective at the screen as you restart for the umpteenth time. Incidentally, don't hold back on the cursing; there's plenty of foul and abusive language in the game, with even the reserved Gray at one point moved to woodenly utter, "Son of a bitch!"

In general, the missions are a mixture of the forgettable and those that you'll remember for up to five minutes. And if you want to attempt them using the power of Move, be our guest. SOCOM: Special Forces is fully compatible with the Move controllers, if not necessarily their natural home. There's a reason why every bespoke Wii/Kinect/Move title is a chimp-friendly non-game, as Special Forces ably proves, offering an experience akin to plaiting snot while wearing gardening gloves.

Perhaps wary of this, developer Zipper Interactive was heavily involved in the design of the Sharp Shooter accessory, a plastic gun that you tuck your Move controllers into and point at the screen, firing off rounds like Alan Partridge in an arcade. Apart from the embarrassment of being caught wielding a throbbing pink weapon, it definitely works, although it's certainly an acquired skill, albeit one that may not be fully acquired before your weak, atrophied arms start aching. By the way, for the full interactive experience, the game can also be played in stereoscopic 3D.

As is the burgeoning trend in shooters, the single-player is a brusque affair that can be torn through over the course of a weekend. The SOCOM series was something of a pioneer in terms of online PlayStation shooting, and this obviously hasn't been neglected here, with five-player custom co-op missions alongside competitive multiplayer. There are a variety of new modes, notably Bomb Squad, whereby you have to protect a heavily armoured, lumbering bomb disposal expert. (And according to Zipper, they came up with the idea before they'd seen The Hurt Locker.)

Initially at least, the multiplayer and co-op can be chaotic, with lack of refinement in the control system proving costly. For instance, in order to heal an acquaintance you have to hover over him in pixel-perfect fashion, by which time you've been shot. Then someone comes to your rescue and gets shot, leaving you with the absurd situation of three soldiers lying on top of each other groaning. Presumably things will improve once everyone's mic-ed up and familiar with the maps.

SOCOM: Special Forces is not quite the unqualified success Sony may have been hoping for, proving a largely generic, intermittently glitchy experience. Despite being tortured souls, the leads are difficult to sympathise with, and each mission is approached with little more than resigned acceptance.

On the plus side, the visuals are reasonably impressive: the foliage is redolent of Far Cry 2, and film buffs will recognise the Kubrickian lighting in the missions set in the so-called 'magic hour' before dusk. The animations are decent, the scenery is pleasant, and there's a mildly bombastic score from the Skywalker Symphony Orchestra.

Special Forces is not without its moments of drama and excitement, but ultimately there is an overriding sense that you are simply going through the motions – Move or no Move.

6 / 10

Read the Eurogamer.net scoring policy
Picture of Steve.

About Steve Hill

Read more articles from Steve by visiting the Steve Hill archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (105) Latest comment 1 year ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • JonnyPx #1 1 year ago

    I was hoping for a better score. :(

  • D_arkTrooper #2 1 year ago

    To answer your question, SOCOM stands for Special Operations COMmand.

  • DonnieDarko333 #3 1 year ago

    Ouch..i'll wait for a price drop then...was expecting at least a 7!

  • captain_Carl #4 1 year ago

    It seems like i didn't read a single positive thing in that review

  • riceNpea #5 1 year ago

    once again the implementation of Move is a footnote. considering, as you say, Zipper were involved in the design of the sharpshooter a little more then a thinly veiled knob joke would've been appreciated.

    grow up and actually review it properly. considering it's a PS3 exclusive i would say it's an important feature. i own a sharpshooter and on KZ3 it works wonders.

    EDIT:

    seriously? who negs me for this comment. do you think EG did a good job of reviewing the game when they treat the implementation of move like a giggling teenager? so you'd prefer not to know how move is integrated. considering Sony are pushing it hard i'd have thought i was important to give it more then 2 infantile lines
    Edited by riceNpea at 12/04/11 @ 17:38

  • richarddavies #6 1 year ago

    I tried playing the demo for this. Waited while it downloaded. Loaded it up then had to wait while it downloaded an update. Loaded it up again and then it started downloading another update that said it was 1 and half gig...turned it off again.

  • DAN.E.B #7 1 year ago

    welcome to the jungle! weve got ........er......mmm....

  • customfirmware #8 1 year ago

    Poorly done review.

  • captain_Carl #9 1 year ago

    Agree about Move. You should do more than mention it twice in a review. it'd be nice to know how well the game controls with it, rather than just "lol it has move it makes your arms ache lol lol"

  • disappointed #10 1 year ago

    I was a bit worried after the cliche ridden story trailer but I rather enjoyed the multiplayer beta and thought the move control was excellent.

    It's a shame as this looked marginally less mental than the blockbusting FPSs we've been subjected to in recent times. Throw in split screen and I might have given it a go anyway. Oh well. Come back Tom Clancey, all is forgiven.

  • Hindle #11 1 year ago

    Post deleted at 23:04:43 04-04-2012

  • Architect_z #12 1 year ago

    The single player campaign was talked about alot in this review.
    I'd mainly play this for the multiplayer side, i've been impressed with the multiplayer beta so far. It's hella addictive.

  • SneakyGun #13 1 year ago

    I said it before and I will say it again. Make Socom 2 HD with new maps and coop and I'll buy the sh*t out of that game. Seriously, they don't even need to add a singleplayer.

  • technicianTed #14 1 year ago

    Ouch.

    Maybe Uncharted 3 or Infamous 2 will get that big score the ps3 exclusives are crying out for.
    It has so many more exclusives than the 360 this year but little big planet 2 remains the top scorer so far.

  • Miths #15 1 year ago

    For all I know the score may very well be appropriate, but large parts of this review sounded unnecessarily sarcastic to me.

    And I agree with those who commented on the few, equally sarcastic, lines about Move implementation - more information would have been appreciated here. But then if it's anything like Killzone 3, playing the game with Move + Nav Controller (even just resting one in each hand without the use of any attachments) should be great once you're past the the initial adaption period. In KZ3 - particularly multiplayer - I'm much better with Move than I've ever been in a shooter with a gamepad (which is to say distinctly mediocre instead of plain terrible :)).

  • dbranchevans #16 1 year ago

    To be honest most of the comments about the campaign apply to CoD and bad company 2. Its the multiplayer where the meat is and it deserves more than a cursory paragraph... if only to mention how bad it is. Killzone 2 proved you should never mount aiming on the stick as a click down, the pixel perfect healing is definitely an issue. However, far more so is that for a 'serious' shooter, you're actually far better off not aiming at all but running round hosing people with an smg or shotgun. The map design is pretty dodgy as well, far too many choke points. However, I disagree on the cover system, thought it was done pretty well although throwing nades from cover is a nightmare. Overall save your money and wait for Brink or Battlefield 3, and they'll be first person which is what these kind of games should be. And 6 is too generous, should be a 5 or 4, real disappointment, was expecting something much more clever.

  • karooo #17 1 year ago

    incredibly negative review, i loved the beta and will buy it

  • GreyBeard #18 1 year ago

    7.9 on Gametrailers.com suggests its a somewhat better than this review makes out.

  • Dave #19 1 year ago

    Couldn't you just have used bullet points to list all the bad things, instead of trying to write a review around it? Someone could get depressed after reading so much negativity... And what are the good things about the game that made it still get a 6?
    Edited by Dave at 12/04/11 @ 17:33

  • coldfoot #20 1 year ago

    If you're not going to review move implementation in depth, you could have at least linked to our Russian friends at iwaggle3d, who have the best in-depth move implementation reviews.
    Edited by coldfoot at 12/04/11 @ 17:33

  • Syrette #21 1 year ago

    To be fair the Move is owned by a minority of PS3 owners.

  • kangarootoo #22 1 year ago

    Not usually territory I stray into, but I have to say I thought that review was a bit rubbish. I'm not saying the game is good or that the score isn't justified - it just read more like a rant than an objective list of issues.

    What on EARTH was all that stuff about chimp-friendly non-games about? I read every word, and I really don't know very much about the game, despite knowing quite a bit about how it makes the reviewer feel.

  • NewbieZilla #23 1 year ago

    Worse than Halo.

  • Beano #24 1 year ago

    Never a SOCOM fan so I had no expections to this - I just hope they now have the time to focus on MAG2 :D

  • LeChuckie #25 1 year ago

    As a fan of Eurogamer reviews I was disappointed. Not that bothered about the game though.

  • Zephro #26 1 year ago

    I quite like the sarcasm in the review, far less bland to read.

  • higganos #27 1 year ago

    "7.9 on Gametrailers.com suggests its a somewhat better than this review makes out. "

    Well you better rush out and buy the shit out of this game according to gametrailers then eh?

    One site has tacked on an higher arbitrary number than another website, who has tacked on a slightly lower arbitrary number? May as well pick the high one, it'll validate my purchase!





  • RedSparrows #28 1 year ago

    Forgive me, but why does this exist? Are there not enough shooters like this about already?

  • Progguitarist #29 1 year ago

    The beta was great, going to buy it on the strength of the multiplayer.

  • bwiancohen #30 1 year ago

    After playing the Beta I dont think that I will pay much notice to this review.....

  • Tyranix #31 1 year ago

    Surely SOCOM is all about the multiplayer? So why then does the review contain two vague paragraphs about the multiplayer and about ten full of bad puns?

    And no I'm not interested in the game. Just a disappointing review from eurogamer.

  • Farzlepot #32 1 year ago

    I didn't see a single positive in that entire review, and it scores a 6? I might be alone in thinking this, but if your're going to use a 1 - 10 system, 5 should be average, and this reads like a 2 at best!

    Fortunately, I had no intention of buying this anyway. SOCOM has never been a buy-worthy series, and this doesn't appear to have changed.

  • chris_ace #33 1 year ago

    Post deleted at 11:55:13 13-12-2011

  • man.the.king #34 1 year ago

    The review read as if it was written by a 360 fanboy. The tone of the review seemed more like a taunting one than a reporting one.

    And if the game really was that bad, why not score it 2, 3 or 4? 6 indicates better than average (afaik).

  • Psychotext #35 1 year ago

    "7.9 on Gametrailers.com suggests its a somewhat better than this review makes out. "

    3 out of 10 on Destructoid and 2.5 out of 5.0 on Joystiq suggests it's somewhat worse than this review makes out.

  • HisDudness #36 1 year ago

    Oh dear, one paragraph dedicated to the MP component and it's wasted on complaining about healing (in co-op I assume)?

    I've got 30 hours in the beta, and I'm still itching to play more. But then again I adore the less-than-stellar-reviewed MAG.

  • GreyBeard #37 1 year ago

    @Higganos

    I'm not going to argue with you. Just add you to my ignore list.
    Thanks for playing.

    @Psychotext

    If you take Jim Stirling's witterings seriously... think what you like chap.
    Edited by GreyBeard at 12/04/11 @ 18:56

  • riceNpea #38 1 year ago

    it reads like the kind of review and score you would put out if you wanted to bring down the metacritic score.

    conspiracy theory anyone?

  • sfp_noodle #39 1 year ago

    Without sounding like a broken record, that review was shocking. SOCOM has always been about the MP and whilst the last effort was a bit too hardcore for my tastes the MP beta for this was actually very good. I much prefer 3rd person shooters to FPS.

    Why the hell was there no substancial info regarding Move controls and the MP - the main portion of the game? If EG are going to score MP heavy games this low based on the SP campaigns then I expect the next COD game to receive a 5/10 and no higher. Also, what the hell is with the lazy "2 page maximum" review space for not so well known games and the 3+ page reviews for the more established franchises? This review could have easilly been at least a page longer if the mentioned criteria was addressed.

    I'll wait for this to drop in price, mainly because I have too much to play right now but this review was poor and failed to offer any significant insight into the qualities of the game. In fact, it reminds me quite a lot of the long winded rant another writer had at the Final Fantasy series not so long ago. Poorly written and presented.

  • digoutyoursoul #40 1 year ago

    i've never read such a bunch of whilted,ignorant,obnoxious little cunts as you lot

    "OMG HE MUST HE BE A XBOT, ITS WRITTEN LIKE ONE"

    do one you gobshites, if you liked the beta then buy it.
    Edited by digoutyoursoul at 12/04/11 @ 19:23

  • Psychotext #41 1 year ago

    "If you take Jim Stirling's witterings seriously... "

    I haven't read any of the reviews. My point is more that you can pick whatever scores fit your preconceptions. I'm sure I could dig up a few 8 out of 10 scores for some really awful games, and I'd wager most people could find a few 6s for otherwise highly acclaimed titles. Pointing to different scores an saying "they must be right, this must be wrong" is utterly pointless.

  • dllord #42 1 year ago

    As good as homefront!

  • betrayerofhope #43 1 year ago

    the last great socom game was socom 2. Its sad. sony just give us socom 2 HD

  • GreyBeard #44 1 year ago

    @Psychotext

    You're quite right, but in all fairness all I wrote was that Gametrailers score -and far more detailed and balanced review- suggested that it was better, so I'm not quite sure why it provoked such umbrage.

    As to Stirling's "review". If you read it, you'll notice that he saves his most extreme contempt for the multiplayer mode, which he describes as being so broken that he was unable/unwilling to play for any length of time.

    Now, speaking personally, if something is that badly broken for me, the first thing I'm going to do is find out if the issues I'm having are widespread and/or how persistent they are. It could be a temporary server issue, or something relating to my system's connection to the internet, this stuff happens and checking out forums to see if other people are having the same grief seems logical. Especially if there's a live Beta ongoing.

    Reading around, you'll see that the issues he describes experiencing are far more extreme than what's being reported. Plenty of folks seem to be enjoying it...

    The point I'm getting at is Stirling seems unreasonably zealous in throwing the game under the bus, based upon limited exposure. Now its all very well saying that his review represents "his" experience, but, if its extremely atypical, where's the value to consumers in using it in such a clubbing manner?

    My (admittedly cynical) answer is sheer laziness in writing/reporting and a cheap ploy to drum up page hits.

    As for Joystiq, Justin McElroy's hideous failed Nier review (not to mention the hissy fit he pulled after inadvisedly trying to justify himself on NeoGAF), I honestly wouldn't waste a millisecond on any of their reviews.
    Edited by GreyBeard at 12/04/11 @ 19:55

  • RedSparrows #45 1 year ago

    Classic 'I care not for reviews, see how little I care SEE HOW LITTLE I CARREEEEE BASTAARRDDDSSS'

  • EmiliasHorse #46 1 year ago

    All bespoke Kinect, Move and Wii games are Chimp-friendly non games? Ok...... bit childish but everyone has an opinion I guess.

    Steve Hill has written far better reviews than this.

  • jefranklin18 #47 1 year ago

    I try not to be critical of reviews on EG or question the numbers awarded, because at the end of the day they are just one person's opinion and mine is invariably different (GTA4 is not a 10 damnit!). However, what I do want to see in a review is useful information about the game, enabling me to decide whether or not to download the demo or whatever. However, this review does not allow me to do this - if you contrast it with Keza's review of Patapon 3, where she was very clear about the positives and the negatives, this review falls for short.

    The fanboy-baiting comments really don't help the credibility of the review or to be frank Eurogamer as a whole

  • DrDamn #48 1 year ago

    @RedSparrows
    "Are there not enough shooters like this about already?"

    No not really - it's a squad based tactical shooter - it has more in common with GRAW or Rainbow Six and there hasn't been one of those for 3 or 4 years.

    @digoutyoursoul
    No one has mentioned bias at all before your post - it's been discussion about how utterly poor the review is as a review.

  • ForozM #49 1 year ago

    I find it quite amusing that all major reviewers has yet to discover that the Move is the 'de facto' shooter accessory on PS3, and no Sharpshooter is required.

  • man.the.king #50 1 year ago

    @DrDamn

    Actually, in my estimate, RedSparrows aka Mr. Gamerscore 43905 and digoutyoursoul aka Mr. Gamerscore 36339's profiles should give you a pretty good idea of where they are coming from.

    I'm guessing they share Steve Hill's sneering outlook, esp as this is a PS3 exclusive.
    Edited by man.the.king at 12/04/11 @ 21:14

  • byakuya83 #51 1 year ago

    Post deleted at 10:03:41 30-03-2012

  • davisorle #52 1 year ago

    Post deleted at 15:13:14 09-05-2012

  • MeBrains #53 1 year ago

    yeah... well... that was an awkward first page I read and, unlike a lot of other EG articles, I did not want to read more.

    it did not really mention the gameplay... it read more like a movie review that page there.

    and then I wondered... who's steve hill?

  • man.the.king #54 1 year ago

    @davisorle

    "PS. Stop caring so much about the scores on EG. I never paid attention cause about 75% of them are really against my own opinion."

    Not about the score dude - did you actually read the review?

  • FeralYouth #55 1 year ago

    Deserve an 8, for the extremely welcoming and friendly on-line community.

  • ronuds #56 1 year ago

    We need a separate review for Move now? You point and shoot - it doesn't take a genuis. If the game is a 6 then it's a 6 with Move as well.

    I'm sure if the game got a 9, nobody would have said anything.

  • captain_Carl #57 1 year ago

    @ronuds

    No but it'd be nice to know if it works well with move controls or not rather than just saying "it makes your arm ache and looks a bit like something rude hehe"

  • Widge #58 1 year ago

    Well no, you would want to hear a bit more wouldn't you. By the way there is 3D and you can use Move. Would you not be a bit pissed off with a Child Of Eden review that just said "the game also can be controlled with Kinect".

  • BritishBlue1 #59 1 year ago

    That was a terrible, fair enough so the game was a 6/10 but you could also give the review itself the same score. As a customer I gained no real insight from this review whatsoever.

  • ronuds #60 1 year ago

    @Widge

    I would think you should assume that Move works how it's supposed to, no? You point it, press a button and it shoots. It isn't going to change the game. Did he mention how it controls with the DS3? No, because you'd assume it works as a controller is supposed to work. You press buttons and move sticks and it does stuff.

    I'm not understanding the rage over this.

  • sfp_noodle #61 1 year ago

    To all the people saying that others are stupid for criticising the score - we're not. Almost no-one has an issue with the score. We are criticising what is a poorly worded and deeply flawed review. After what appears to be a barrage of negativity and badly executed puns we end up with a 6/10. Just after reading the first page I expected something along the lines of a 3 or 4/10, that's how poor the reviewer made it sound. So if anything, the 6/10 appears to be generous after such a scathing review.

    As readers, we are left with no impression of how the Move controls are implemented. The MP side of the game, which has been the staple of SOCOM games since their birth was given an ignorantly short and dismissive paragraph. We literally know fuck all as to how well or how poorly it works.

    In fact, this review was so poor it could well have been written by a food critic who just happened to run out of restaurants to critique. I study Journalism at university and am approaching my third year and pretty much everything we are told to avoid when writing was present here. Things like personal opinion, key information missing i.e substancial information regarding MP, and utterly poor wording and grammer. If this was submitted as an essay it would have scored below 40% and failed, that's how poor it was.

    So yes, no-one, bar a minority are disputing the score. We have every right to take issue with lazy write ups that have an influence on our gaming purchases.

  • miiiguel #62 1 year ago

    Back at insulting reviewers , huh? It's 2006 all over again, th3 system warrzzz!

  • FogHeart #63 1 year ago

    When I got to the words "There's a reason why every bespoke Wii/Kinect/Move title is a chimp-friendly non-game" I simply stopped reading and decided I would rely on other reviews to judge whether this game is worth purchasing, which is surely what EG don't want. An astonishing generalisation from a review on a website that I have come to expect better from, and as shocking and unwelcome as finding a wasp crawling through a bowl of strawberries.

  • ElNino9 #64 1 year ago

    Socomlol

  • timewarp87 #65 1 year ago

    Socom is basically about buying a multiplayer game then being repeatedly voted out the game for no reason

  • WJF #66 1 year ago

    'pretty much everything we are told to avoid when writing was present here. Things like personal opinion'

    Er, it's a review. What do you want, a list of features?

  • MeBrains #67 1 year ago

    hmm... read page 2 as well. here's a snapshot:
    "There's a reason why every bespoke Wii/Kinect/Move title is a chimp-friendly non-game, as Special Forces ably proves, offering an experience akin to plaiting snot while wearing gardening gloves."

    uh-kay

    "Apart from the embarrassment of being caught wielding a throbbing pink weapon, it definitely works," (about Move / Sharp Shooter)

    so... not uh-kay then?! O_o

    or is it the other way around....

  • nemesisND1derboy #68 1 year ago

    Again, not to sound like a broken record, but that review was terrible to be honest. A severe lack of multiplayer info and 2 pages of bad puns. I usually enjoy reading EG's reviews, but that was bad. Hardly any info, no flow to the writing. You just crapped all over it for 2 pages. Really, really bad review. I have to say I enjoyed the multiplayer beta, might even pick it up just because of that.

  • mr2ange #69 1 year ago

    Wow, EG some seriously negative responses to the review...

    many sound quite genuine too...

    maybe listening to your readers might tell you that you need to pick the right people to review the right games?

  • smithdown #70 1 year ago

    Wake up on the wrong side of the bed this morning did you, Steve?
    Probably the most curmugeonly review I have ever read. Perhaps shooter fatigue setting in?

    Game sounds like a rental to me, a bit of fun for a weekend session.

  • jumpdeveraux #71 1 year ago

    I'll join the rest and add my feedback that, irrespective of the end score, this was a particularly poorly written Eurogamer review.

    A couple of double entendres is to be expected but some of the text lately is just descending into chav pub talk. It's as if the reviewers are spending more time trying to outwit each other in their reviews writing than focussing on the game.

    Scant info about MP... is there a day one patch? Anything from Zipper on future DLC? Number of multiplayer maps... where are they set? Game modes? Which did you enjoy? If you didn't really play the MP (as live servers weren't available for reviewers) then just say so and add a short MP review in a few weeks.

    Please avoid going anymore "News of the World" with your reviews - will await the article of the bus found on the moon...

  • The-Bodybuilder #72 1 year ago

    "Apart from the embarrassment of being caught wielding a throbbing pink weapon"

    Mine's black, and I'm not ashamed to whip it out. *cough*

    "leaving you with the absurd situation of three soldiers lying on top of each other groaning."

    Odd. American soldiers usually get the prisoners to do that. Ahem.

  • SystemOvercast #73 1 year ago

    "and you can tell he's in charge as the rest of the squad are either Northern, non-white or female." One of the best lines ever in a video game review. Bravo my friend and thank you.

  • SIKFING #74 1 year ago


    Wow, I was kinda hoping this game would suck as most of my friends are wanting to marry this game. They talked me into getting confrontation which I simply didn't enjoy so I didn't like the idea of being ousted again for this new one.

    I must admit though, if the reviewer hasn't taken a big fat paycheck for half heartedly reviewing this game the way he has, then maybe he's simply not a fan of shooters?!?!?!

    For the fans of this game, I wouldn't get so worked up about this "review", it really isn't the only one in the world!!.

    Pinch'o'salt and all that.

  • higganos #75 1 year ago

    @Higganos

    "I'm not going to argue with you. Just add you to my ignore list.
    Thanks for playing."

    Oh noes! Not the ignore list?!! Can't I still play? I may literally cry myself to sleep tonight Graybeard........not that you're reading this because you're better than me and have just tossed me aside like an old wank-rag. Sob. Why me?

    Ahem.

  • des #76 1 year ago

    This is not the worst Socom 4 review,not sure why some people are melting and insulting reviewer.Reviews are just personal opinions.In Socom 4 case they range from total disaster to mediocre game.

  • sinisteral #77 1 year ago

    Loved the beta, will definitely buy the game, who gives a fuck about score

  • figgis #78 1 year ago

    That was a poor review.

  • muttler #79 1 year ago

    Shite review.

  • stealth_himself #80 1 year ago

    First socom I won't be buying. It's finally over :'(

  • DrDamn #81 1 year ago

    @des
    Most are not taking exception to it being a poor score, it's about how good it is as an actual review which is being discussed. No real information, new features and key features of the franchise glossed over in a couple of lines for example. Obviously a big part of any review is opinion, what is important in expressing that opinion is making it clear to the reader why you came to that opinion - as others may not share the same preferences.

  • SlackMaster #82 1 year ago

    Loved GRAW and GRAW2 so am keen on this game. Also not all games need to be first person. I find 3rd person worked well for GRAW with it being more tactical so hoping this plays similar.

  • FullSPecWarrior #83 1 year ago

    First review I've read on Eurogamer for some time and I'm immediately reminded why I stopped reading them. Shockingly bad.

    " the game can also be played in stereoscopic 3D"

    And? Is it any good? Oh. You didn't actually try it did you?

    Who did you get to try out the Move controls? Was it one of the aforementioned chimps? Plaiting snot though, that really was hilarious. You're wasted reviewing games, you ought to do stand up.

  • TheBusterMan #84 1 year ago

    IGN will prob give it 9/10,saying it's awesome dude!etc.Time to sell my sharpshooter? Well,Eurogamer tells it like it is.

  • man.the.king #85 1 year ago

    @des

    "In Socom 4 case they range from total disaster to mediocre game. "

    Socom - yes possibly a mediocre game (depending upon how reviewers older than Steve Hill's 15 review it and whether they actually provide any background for their inferences)

    Total disaster? That would be this review by Steve Hill you are talking about then.

  • UkHardcore23 #86 1 year ago

    The series is finished, such a shame as Socom 2 was awesome....the Socom 4 beta was bloody awful :(

  • sir_smooch #87 1 year ago

    I played the beta for the first socom game on ps3 and it was nigh-on unplayable, a broken mess which totally put me off buying it on release but i heard from a few people that the devs did a pretty gd job patching it up and with some decent dlc maps added made it quite playable altho the socom community was a very hardcore and serious one. I think the score is best kept as a guidline as a few of the reviews from here this year and last have been more than a little mis-leading!
    Edited by sir_smooch at 13/04/11 @ 17:59

  • jablonski #88 1 year ago

    "film buffs will recognise the Kubrickian lighting in the missions set in the so-called 'magic hour' before dusk."

    What? Since when is he famous for that?
    You'd have done better to pick out Terence Malick

  • BraveArse #89 1 year ago

    @91 my thoughts exactly - spouting gobshite about films you obviously know fuck all about, because you like the word "Kubrickian" in front of an audience as large and varied as EGs is bound to end in failure.

    This whole review echoes the absolutely terrible Resi 4 Wii review or " The McCarthy Incident" as I refer to it now. It's always been EGs achilles heel, I'll say it again, get people who at least like that type of game or control system to review the fucking thing. As soon as I saw the chimp comment the entire diatribe became utterly worthless to me.

    Word to the wise Mr Hill, unless you're Stuart Lee, you're not going to get away with insulting your readership. And you very obviously are not anything close to Stuart Lee.

  • local_celebrity #90 1 year ago

    ...or even Stewart Lee.

    Keep up the good work, Steve. I doubt it's much consolation, but I really enjoyed your review.

  • byron_hinson #91 1 year ago

    Been playing the full game since yesterday and the single player seems ok, not fantastic by any means. It's pretty repeative and the UI for your yellow and blue teams are not that hot, sometimes shooting when you didn't them to etc. Graphically I thought it was very good, 3D especially. It doesn't throw 3D effects into your face, its just subtly done with very little crosstalk and a host of 3D options to fiddle with too.

    Speech I didn't mind so much compared to the reviews, its a little stilted at times but there is far worse out there. I can't comment on multiplayer as it isn't up and running yet on my promo copy, though I assume Eurogamer has played it despite this? Game got updated to 1.01 today and still no online aspect working as yet. so can't comment.

  • stepleftstepright #92 1 year ago

    If it wasn't for Microsoft, this would have received 9 out of 10. Reality is that Sony exclusive has a lot to convince this year. Is this really the year of PS3? If you haven't noticed or lived in a cave, Sony has been claiming every year as the year of PS3.....

  • man.the.king #93 1 year ago

    In two short paragraphs, byron_hinson has provided much more information about SOCOM than Steve Hill's two page rant.

    +1 to you, byron_hinson.

  • DrDamn #94 1 year ago

    @pinkyrocks
    I've dismissed IGN for a long time but their reviews do at least do the basics you expect of a review these days - i.e. inform. The website design doesn't make my eyes bleed anymore too - which is nice.

  • EMULOUS #95 1 year ago

    Played the beta. Open comms are shocking (prefer push to talk), no lobbies to meet with clanmates/friends, game modes are same old same old - no demolition or VIP modes, can see it getting very stale, very quickly. I still play confrontation but for its faults and the odd no-life cheaters its still good fun when your with a clan. Think this is where Ill be until socom 2 HD is made.

  • DrDamn #96 1 year ago

    @EMULOUS
    "Open comms are shocking (prefer push to talk)"

    It is push to talk (up on the d-pad) - there is open proximity chat though.

    "no lobbies to meet with clanmates/friends"

    Nothing in the Beta but full game is suppose to have a party system - not that you'd know this from the review as that's far to close to actually passing on information.

  • RedSparrows #97 1 year ago

    '@DrDamn

    Actually, in my estimate, RedSparrows aka Mr. Gamerscore 43905 and digoutyoursoul aka Mr. Gamerscore 36339's profiles should give you a pretty good idea of where they are coming from.

    I'm guessing they share Steve Hill's sneering outlook, esp as this is a PS3 exclusive. '

    Hahahaha. Or, y'know, I think why would a PS3 owner need this, given the quality shooters around those parts already? But yeah, of course, I'm a fanboy. Jesus wept.

  • Madder-Max #98 1 year ago

    "There's a reason why every bespoke Wii/Kinect/Move title is a chimp-friendly non-game"

    Not wrong though is he?

    the review however read like he had cut and pasted phrases from other reviews and overreached himself in terms of trying to sound clever.

  • DrDamn #99 1 year ago

    @Madder Max
    Yes, yes he is. I could try and list out some fantastic games but you've clearly made your mind up already like Steve "I won't have motion control in the house" Hill. It's fine for you to be happy with this but ignorance is not all that high on the list of attributes you look for in a professional reviewer.

  • man.the.king #100 1 year ago

    @RedSparrows

    "Hahahaha. Or, y'know, I think why would a PS3 owner need this, given the quality shooters around those parts already?"

    Or, if you actually READ the comments, maybe you would realize that mostly no one seems to be upset over the score. It is the useless rant of a review that people, including myself are taking issue with.

  • Madder-Max #101 1 year ago

    Okay Dr (patrinising twat) dam.

    I have used the kinect and have a wii and the only games at the moment are chimp friendly family ones. The software is just awful. i know that there are games on Wii for exaple where you use the waggle sticks as controllers....but whats the point? thats what joypads are for.

  • DrDamn #102 1 year ago

    What's wrong with family friendly? If there is still depth in the gameplay then that's fine with me. Super Mario Galaxy, Boom Blox, Sports Champions. All family friendly enough and great depth for the more discerning player. They are nothing close to non-games.

  • KilledFirst #103 1 year ago

    Armed with an English degree a distaste for the series and a lust for some other shooter Mr. Hill writes a superb review that is as short as his attention span for the SOCOM series. If you wish for European sales of this game to not exist, then petition for an embargo and tell the little readers what shooter they should be buying. If it's not your cup of tea then have someone else take the honors of reviewing the game.

  • TTP #104 1 year ago

    @cooldfoot
    iWaggle3D guy is Italian, not Russian ;)

  • bwiancohen #105 1 year ago

    Damn....the Elite mode in this is so hard its impossible...... Gonna kiss the platinum goodbye. No way I can do it lol