SOCOM: Confrontation Review

By Dan Whitehead Published 16 March, 2009

Biting the bullet.

Version tested: PlayStation 3

Usually when the European release of a game is delayed, it causes gnashing of teeth and curses spat at whichever fiendish publisher has so callously disregarded our proud continent. In the case of SOCOM's PS3 debut, we should probably be grateful. When it launched in the US last October, the internet was set aflame by furious players who found themselves stuck with something that was pretty much broken. Game-breaking freezes, constant network disconnections, and a multitude of other annoyances all conspired to leave faithful fans brimming with vocal and very legitimate grievances.

There are no such technical problems for SOCOM's arrival on European shores; the fatal bugs having been ironed out in the withering heat of American fandom's baleful glare over the last five months or so. This doesn't mean that the game is cause for celebration however. SOCOM Confrontation is hopelessly out of time, an entry in a series that last made an appearance in the dying days of the previous console generation, and which arrived last Friday with most of its unique selling points long since co-opted by dozens of alternatives. Many things have changed since SOCOM 3 in 2005. Unfortunately, SOCOM isn't one of them.

Curiously, the game has gone multiplayer-only and it's from this decision that most of the problems stem. Back in the day, the SOCOM brand pioneered online console gaming, bringing a taste of what the PC boys had been sampling to the PlayStation crowd. When a title with that sort of heritage announces that it's ditching the single-player aspect to concentrate on multiplayer, you'd be forgiven for expecting something ambitious, something that really takes advantage of today's always-connected HD consoles to kick the console online experience up to the next level.

What we actually get is a game that feels depressingly like the multiplayer component of any third-person shooter, with it's solo half crudely lopped off and nothing to replace it. In fact, it's hard to find a single aspect of Confrontation that PS3 owners can't already enjoy in other, often better alternatives.

'SOCOM: Confrontation' Screenshot 1

Sasquatch Offers Controversial Owl Massage.

Matches take place between a variety of elite military units and the crude but effective mercenary forces ranged against them. You have one of each character type to play with, and the customisation options are broad and generous. Not only can you edit your weapons and equipment, from a wide selection that is thankfully available to all from the start, but you can also customise your character's appearance and uniform from a selection of presets. It's not the most flexible tool - certainly nothing to compare to the sort of face-making features found in EA Sports titles - but in a genre where such personalisation is rarely offered, it's deserving of praise.

The effect your choice of beard has on gameplay is minimal, but you do need to pay attention to your combinations of weapons and armour. Strap your guy into the strongest body armour, give him a kickass M60, and he'll be one hell of an opponent. He'll also move like a snail. Strip back the armour, swap to a submachine gun, and you're able to nip about much more nimbly, but will die much quicker under fire.

In fact, there's a good chance you'll die quickly anyway. SOCOM's hardcore user-base ensures that headshots are standard practice, and since three of the game's seven maps are drawn from previous games (Crossroads, Frostfire and Desert Glory, since you ask) the odds are already stacked against the newbies.

Not that the software itself seems terribly bothered about attracting new players. Confrontation is often a fussily obtuse game, with a stark 1990s PC-style lobby system, key features hidden behind unintuitive menu options and a penchant for tangling your fingers in a needlessly complex default control layout. The on-screen info offers precious little guidance as to what game modes actually entail or where mission objectives can be found, meaning that matches with veterans are a closed shop of ruthless efficiency while new players run around asking for directions over the headset. There's hardcore and there's just plain impenetrable, and Confrontation too often opts for the latter.

Unfortunately, it's not as if the modes are anything out of the ordinary to compensate. You simply get the usual spread of deathmatch and objective-led missions, all of which can be mixed and matched with the various maps on your own saved playlists. Most of the maps come with two sizes - a cut-down version for 4-on-4 or 8-on-8 play, and a larger version for the full 32-player 16-on-16 extravaganza. Things have been scaled down from the sprawling maps that sometimes made the later SOCOM entries on the PS2 more of a hiking simulator than a shooter, but there's still not a lot of flexibility for those wanting to create more intimate matches for small groups.

The in-game action is far from awful, but it's nothing particularly special either. The detail of the maps is rather let down by the slightly boxy character models and the rudimentary animations don't do much to sell the immersion. Invisible walls crop up in unlikely places, and your elite military specialist can be stymied by something as simple as an ankle-high barrier. Even when you allow for the fact that the game is far from a run-and-gun shooter, simple movements such as jumping feel stiff and awkward. Technical rough edges aren't confined to the gameplay either. Loading and initialising the matches is slow, while clan and tournament options are still being rolled out.

Weapon equipment selection is carried out via a clumsy selection wheel, called up with the circle button. There's a quick-swap option mapped to L1, which automatically switches to the last item selected, but for moments when you need to do more than just hop from primary weapon to grenades and back again, it's a needless fumble in a game where any delay can mean death. Given that most matches follow a strict "no respawn" policy, it's incredibly annoying to be sniped by a spawn-camper (there seem to be plenty of them about) while still trying to find your feet, and then have to wait ten minutes to rejoin the action.

'SOCOM: Confrontation' Screenshot 2

Severe Oscillation Causes Overflowing Mammaries.

Despite a five-month wait, and a 153MB patch to download, SOCOM Confrontation still feels like a half a game, released half-finished. It's unclear if the change from original developer Zipper Interactive to a new team at Slant Six (creator of the most recent and equally limp PSP entry in the series) is at fault. Certainly, asking the Canadian developer to carry the SOCOM torch into the PS3 era hasn't paid off. Even with the more egregious bugs fixed, this sparse offering does little to justify its existence. Just seven maps, only four of which are new? Absolutely no offline options, not even a practice mode against AI bots? The same old capture-or-destroy objectives we've hammered through in dozens of games over the last few years?

If this were simply the online portion of a complete shooter package it would be disappointing. As a standalone multiplayer product, and a next-gen evolution of a pioneering multiplayer series, it's unforgivably light. Where is the map-editing option to rival Halo 3's Forge? Or something to rival the perks and rewards of Call of Duty's ranking system? These are games drawn from the supposedly dumber end of the shooter market, yet they still effortlessly outclass SOCOM's PS3 debut in both fresh ideas and intuitive implementation. In 2009, ticking the basic multiplayer boxes just isn't good enough any more.

Remove brand loyalty from the equation and between the existing online pleasures of Warhawk, Killzone 2, Metal Gear Online, GRAW2 and Rainbow Six, with the promise of even more realistic and tactical games such as Operation Flashpoint and ArmA 2 in the near future, it's hard to imagine why any PS3 armchair soldier would want to invest too much time in a game this small, ordinary and generic. When a bundled Bluetooth headset is the most compelling reason to pick up a new SOCOM game, you know something has gone horribly wrong.

5 / 10

Read the Eurogamer.net scoring policy
Picture of Dan.

About Dan Whitehead

Dan has been writing for Eurogamer since 2006 and specialises in RPGs, shooters and games for children. His bestest game ever is Julian Gollop's Chaos.

Read more articles from Dan by visiting the Dan Whitehead archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (83) Latest comment 3 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Tyranix #1 3 years ago

    I remember this game coming out (sometime in the future) was the main trigger to me getting my PS3.

    A year on and I've sold my PS3, got a 360 and couldn't be happier. I was a huge fan of Socom 2 on the PS2 but this...such a shame, and a waste.

  • des #2 3 years ago

    As good as FEAR 2,heh

  • bad09 #3 3 years ago

    I must look into that ArmA 2, sounds and looks really cool I fancy something realistic and a bit more thoughtful cheers Dan, does anyone know was the first any good?

    Anyway, I'll never understand the love for this series, horrid games right from the first one IMO. Still I was curious about the PS3 outing so grabbed an EG key to try the beta, from that the review doesn't surprise me at all, may be even a little generous IMO. Awful game.

    / goes back to the rather good KZ2 online, waits for MAG and this ArmA game he keeps hearing of.

  • Rodchenko #4 3 years ago

    kind of expected, still ouch.

  • wonton #5 3 years ago

    Remember this game kicking an online fuss back in the PS2's dying days, never got into it though, probably never will.

  • andywilkie35 #6 3 years ago

    not surprised considering the first two were absolute dogshit

  • seasidebaz #7 3 years ago

    Oh SOCOM, I knew this moment would come eventually.

    Ever since playing the beta and realising it was shit, and that it was more fun to tell everyone it had been cancelled.

  • lambtron #8 3 years ago

    MGO a compelling online experience???

    0_0

  • Doctor_What #9 3 years ago

    My flatmate's been playing this all weekend and loves it. I can't say it's my cup of tea, but it shows that there's a market for everything!

  • anotherrobharvey #10 3 years ago

    Have you actually played the game I wonder?

    As for reviewing it on it's content over price - for £28 (including the headset which is around £20 RRP separately) where's the issue?

    I've had it since release (also beta tested it) and even though there are a few bugs and general design faults - it's still FUN!

    Get a grip with reality EG and review games as games - maybe ask a few peoples' opinions before slaughtering it on whim or on a biased case of comparison against another full price game on a different platform?

  • DFawkes #11 3 years ago

    I can't say I disagree, I didn't feel it was a strong game in the beta and I an't see it being incredibly different (when it works). 7 maps is a bit shocking given it's a full game.

  • JayKwon #12 3 years ago

    Good and critical review:). Thought this game was mediocre after playing it.

  • miiiguel #13 3 years ago

    anotherrobharvey: chill dude, the guy said "remove brand loyalty" - which you clearly didn't.

  • Benno #14 3 years ago

    Unfair score for the state its in now, its a 7/10 for fan of online shooters and a 9 for fans of the series

  • Arwin #15 3 years ago

    I think this review takes a few wrong assumptions.

    "you'd be forgiven for expecting something ambitious, something that really takes advantage of today's always-connected HD consoles to kick the console online experience up to the next level."

    Yes, clearly, and that would be Zipper's 256 player squad based project called MAG.

    Confrontation on the other hand is more intended as lip-service to old-school So-Com fans. That said, it does seem like the developer responsible really isn't up to the task and the game could have been much better. But I guess that's why some developers stand out - there are others that don't, and still others that stand out negatively. ;)

    In the meantime, Warhawk, Resistance, CoD and Killzone make Socom a bit superfluous anyway.

  • Aretak #16 3 years ago

    "maybe ask a few peoples' opinions before slaughtering it on whim"

    Do you understand what a review is I wonder?

  • bad09 #17 3 years ago

    "anotherrobharvey: chill dude, the guy said "remove brand loyalty" - which you clearly didn't. "

    Aye, fight and you may die. Run and you'll live -- at least a while. And dying in your beds many years from now, would you be willing to trade all the days from this day to that for one chance, just one chance to come back here and tell our enemies that they may mock our mediocre exclusives, but they'll never take our brand loyalty!!!

    Sorry, I had to..... ;)

    / feels ashamed

    Seriously though I'm sure many will be upset with this review, SOCOM has a few fans. Some reviews do grate if you like a game, like..you know, Dead Space Dan (man, I can get that in ANYWHERE!).

  • DanWhitehead #18 3 years ago

    Hey, I liked Dead Space. I just don't think it's the awesome classic some seem to think it is. Too much tramping up and down the ship fixing things, not enough time spent developing an actually scary story. Also, the weapon set is ludicrously over-powered. It's a solid gory action game, but it could have been so much more.

  • Vanmunt #19 3 years ago

    Dead Space Dan

    ha ha, I thought it was only me.. that did make me laugh.

  • Benno #20 3 years ago

    It sounds like the reviewer got pounded online and took it out on the game by scoring it low. Just because its not run-and-gun noob friendly like Halo and Killzone, doesn't mean it should be penalised. Its a niche, one that hasn't been filled since Socom 2. There is absolutely nothing out there like it.

    And whats with this?

    "Given that most matches follow a strict "no respawn" policy, it's incredibly annoying to be sniped by a spawn-camper (there seem to be plenty of them about) while still trying to find your feet, and then have to wait ten minutes to rejoin the action."

    Spawn camper? How can he spawn camp when theres no respawns? You mean he was playing it tactically and you just ran in guns blazing and got shot? There are no rounds that last 10 minutes? You sound like an exagerting fan boi, using language I would expect to see on the forums by someone looking to be controversial. Yeah, 5/10

  • Benno #21 3 years ago

    Its not like me to defend game/attack reviews, but I feel this is way off the mark

    5/10 for its US release, sure, it was way unfinished and had plenty of bugs. I have been playing it the last few days and with the party system and lag free gaming its the closest I can get to the socom 2 experience without going back to my ps2.

  • Arwin #22 3 years ago

    I think Dead Space was so well received because it was a surprise, a new IP published by EA from a lesser known developer that had good production values and playability. Completely agreed with Dan there.

  • bad09 #23 3 years ago

    "Hey, I liked Dead Space. I just don't think it's the awesome classic some seem to think it is. Too much tramping up and down the ship fixing things, not enough time spent developing an actually scary story. Also, the weapon set is ludicrously over-powered. It's a solid gory action game, but it could have been so much more."

    Bah, Story was fine. The scares came from the actual terrifying gameplay more than the story anyway. An absolute classic horror shooter with a smidgen of survival horror in the RE reboot style - but better (also one of the few games these days I actually completed to the end and kept). YOU ARE WRONG!! (but fair play you did like it at least).

    But anyway back on track, you're right on SOCOM though. Very mediocre....

  • tonynibbles #24 3 years ago

    @Benno "Its a niche, one that hasn't been filled since Socom 2. There is absolutely nothing out there like it. "

    Um, Counter Strike?

    As an original SOCOM fan, I won't be picking this up.

    Such a shame they did this. All they needed to do was make SOCOM: HD, Wipeout stylee. That would keep that fans happy, the price down and also make their lives a lot easier.

  • Benno #25 3 years ago

    Counter strike? When was that released 3rd person on a current gen console?

  • tonynibbles #26 3 years ago

    Dude FFS come on, they're both *extremely* similar and I was/still am a big fan of both - if you can't see that then you've got some kind of problem.
    CS came out on XBox btw.

  • Rodchenko #27 3 years ago

    chill dude, the guy said "remove brand loyalty" - which you clearly didn't.

    Not a suprise at all that the biggest brand-camper on EG feels the need to lecture others on brand-loyalism
    My irony-meter still went through the roof.

  • nbnz #28 3 years ago

    I've been playing Confrontation this since Thursday and having a blast. Yes the lobby system is annoying, the controls fiddly (especially the "quick select" wheel), and characters have to "climb" up curbs - but the core gameplay is fun as hell, the weapons feel great, the maps are highly detailed (lots of nooks & crannies and practically every building open), the voice comms are perfect, the hit detection/accuracy/damage are perfect, and it has a good variation of game modes.

    I was very pleasantly surprised after my beta experience and the complaning I've seen in the US forums. It's all opinion so I'm not bothered but overall I think 5/10 is particularly harsh.

  • HermitArcader #29 3 years ago

    Post deleted at 09:17:39 22-12-2011

  • miiiguel #30 3 years ago

    Rodchenko : while english is not my 1st language (it's 3rd actually, I'm an USL - Unix as a Second Language - how cool is that?, shit I had to use this one... forget it!), that was quoting not lecturing. Then again chill, it's only a 5. Love you too, unknown buddy.
    Edited by 3 at 16/03/09 @ 09:47

  • seasidebaz #31 3 years ago

    I disagree Dan, if you're talking about SOCOM Tactical Strike for the PSP I think it was a very good game, rough around the edges but still the best PSP game with the SOCOM brand

    SOCOM:TS wasn't very well received critically though, was it?

    Not an especially bad game, but rather solidly average...

  • El_Pinko #32 3 years ago

    Shockingly biased review. Sorry, has to be said. But please, before you flame, allow me to justify this.

    If I were a gamer never having played a Socom game and I trusted Eurogamer for its reviews, I might miss out on what is an excellent gaming experience.

    The points you make in this article seem to search for fault, not review. And the comparisons to other games are unwanted. Wheres the map editor like in Halo 3? Well its in Halo 3 idiot. You dont see me playing socom and saying "yes but wheres the shiney blue sword" - same with the ranking in COD4, think about what you're saying. Where are the cars? Oh they're in Gran Turismo, where are the dinners? Oh, they're in cooking mama. Catch my drift?

    SOCOM is a gritty simulator, plain and simple. If you want a run and gun leveling up experience then no, this isnt the game for you, but if you want a game where strategy and teamwork are key and getting killed means you are out of the round, adding consiquence and suspense that is otherwise gone in 10 seconds when you spawn and run and shoot again. Yawn. You critisise this game for not being original but to me it is, its not the same run and gun death matches of Gears, Halo, Cod & Killzone.

    To be fair, this game isnt perfect, it has its flaws, some more obvious than others, but I think its hit the mark, and I get a rewarding experience from it, not better that COD or Halo, just different - to be honest I'm tired of run shoot die run shoot die.

    I just found this review to be a little too narrow minded, even for my taste.

  • miiiguel #33 3 years ago

    See ya later, I have a date with some Korn shell.

    Socom, to all of ya.

  • betahoven #34 3 years ago

    Post deleted at 09:36:16 17-12-2011

  • Cappy #35 3 years ago

    Dead Space is a shallow, unimaginative mediocrity. If anything Dan was far too generous.

    If that's EA doing their best on original IP, they should consider going back to the licensed titles.

  • phatb0y #36 3 years ago

    Spent a lot of quality time with the originals on my PS2. I thought that Confrontation was mediocre at best when I played the beta, but hey 'its a beta'.

    There was no way I was going to buy this without playing the superhappynew 100% patched version first. My friend rushed out and bought it like the mug that he is and kindly gave me the opportunity. We played it for about 4 hours or so on Friday night and both came to the conclusion that its complete dogshit. Its laughably behind the times and somehow even worse than games of the same genre made years previously (CS I'm looking in your direction).

    To quote him;

    'The only Confrontation here will be when I take it back to GAME.'

  • HermitArcader #37 3 years ago

    Post deleted at 09:17:39 22-12-2011

  • seasidebaz #38 3 years ago

    @VS Yeah I agree it was a good effort and definitely a better fit for the PSP than a TPS. I think the problem with it was that it was basically an unrefined version of FSW, and a couple of extra months ironing out the kinks would have made it much better.

  • Eighthours #39 3 years ago

    What we actually get is a game that feels depressingly like the multiplayer component of any third-person shooter, with it's solo half crudely lopped off and nothing to replace it.

    Ouch.

  • beckyh #40 3 years ago

    I bought this game last week as it was cheap. Haven't had a chance to play it yet. I didn't realise America got it 6 months ago. If that is the case forget it. I am taking it back. There is no way I am playing on an uneven playing field. I am crap at games as it is, I don't need to make it worse for myself.

  • Spekingur #41 3 years ago

    @Cappy: But then you would complain about EA never trying anything new :p

    I think it is quite funny and even weird when a game reviewer is accused of not having played a game properly. Normally, a game reviewer has more gaming experience than almost any other gamer. Since that is his job. Playing games, you see. To review.

  • Dizzy #42 3 years ago

    SOCOM was always pretty bad.. it just was the only online game that people played on PS2 and hence it got a "good" status when viewed by many rose tinted glasses.
    Edited by 2 at 16/03/09 @ 10:38

  • Benno #43 3 years ago

    Nah, socom 2 was one of the best shooters available at the time. I was a PC gamer as well so I had access to a lot of decent online shooters like CS, unreal etc at the time.

  • Cappy #44 3 years ago

    I've never complained or had an issue with a licensed EA game. They are what they are.

    I just dispute the assumption that since titles like Dead Space and Army of Two are 'original' they are automatically better than Harry Potter game 'X' etc.

    Dead Space is to survival horror what Jive Bunny was to golden era Rock N' Roll.

  • muscleblade #45 3 years ago

    Dead Space was awesome. AoT was great. The Harry Potter games wasnt any good at all.

  • tonynibbles #46 3 years ago

    @Raajaa

    PS3 can use pretty much any USB headset and most Bluetooth ones. So whilst you don't have to pay out for an exclusive Microsoft-only one, some people might use shitty quality ones.
    Incidentally, paying for the official HS is worth it as it is streets ahead in quality over most of the standard bluetooth ones people are using.

  • El_Pinko #47 3 years ago

    Its not about 'fanboys' its about accepting peoples taste. I will buy this game because I'm enjoying it, and I look forward to map packs and sequels, its my style of shooter. If its not your taste then dont buy it, but to biastly give it negative reviews seems a little over the top to me.

  • phycus #48 3 years ago

    5/10 not surprising really, played the beta and based on that experience decided the final game wouldn't be worth it.

  • El_Pinko #49 3 years ago

    Pyhcus, the beta was a beta, regardless of the game, if you base your final decision on a beta then you've got the wrong idea.

  • seasidebaz #50 3 years ago

    the beta was a beta

    It wasn't though. It was a multiplayer demo intended to test server load capabilities.

  • Sid-Nice #51 3 years ago

    This score makes me so happy that I sold my PS3 and bought a Jaguar.

  • Bilbo_bobbins #52 3 years ago

    ouch ! 5 out of 10? ha ha

  • robg #53 3 years ago

    SOCOM Confrontation still feels like a half a game, released half-finished

    I...can't even calculate what that makes it!

  • seasidebaz #54 3 years ago

    @robg:

    A quarter of a game

  • El_Pinko #55 3 years ago

    @British Blue

    I almost agree with you. I think you're spot on in what SOCOM is as a game, you summed it up perfectly by pointing out "your soldier doesnt just miraculously drop a grenade when he dies", thats perfect. Socom gives something that COD and others cant, tension. Its tense, fear and very tactical.

    I don't think however its "behind its time" - its refined its genre. Sure more maps would help, but the setup of the current maps is outstanding. And sure animations aren't perfect, graphics arent up there with Killzone, but if that warranrts knocking 5 off the score, ignoring the 32 player lag free matches im enjoying, the outstanding sound production and the website combined with the game to control your clan, something which no other game is rivaling then eurogamer seems a bit...trollish.

    I'd say its a hight 7 to 8. (AS A MULTIPLAYER WAR SIMULATOR)

  • MaDeFaDe #56 3 years ago

    I got this game months ago just after US release got sick of waiting.. I got no headset with it nout but still I'm so happy I bought it. Funny thing is I got Kz2 on release iv played it once and what a load of shit that was.. MGO what a joke, r6 lag fest, cod waw, lag fest, socom is by far the best online game on ps3

  • tonynibbles #57 3 years ago

    "WAR SIMULATOR"

    Er... well it's a pretty shoddy WAR simulator then. It certainly doesn't pitch itself as a war simulator, especially with the distinct absence of tanks, jeeps, choppers, planes, boats etc.

    It's a tactical shooter, not a WAR SIMULATOR.
    And it's most definitely not a 7 or 8. Unless that's a map count.
    MGS4 got an 8 on this site, don't you know.

  • El_Pinko #58 3 years ago

    Ok, so tactical shooter. Emphasis on the tactics part. Each to thier own I suppose, I just think 5 our of 10 seems a little rediculous, since the experience to me is one of the best on a console online.

  • El_Pinko #59 3 years ago

    I just read Eurogamers review of Resi 5 and it show the exact bias I'm talking about, in the first 2 paragraphs they talk about dates mechanics of running and shooting etc, then go on to say its what makes 'resi what it is'. They talk about its nostalgic style, then they go on to excuse it again saying that 'tradition has its place' a huge contrast to Socom that needs to get with the times!

    In the closing paragraph they summarise that its stubborn loyalty leads to a distinct experience and drop it a 7 out of 10. Shocking. Everything that SOCOM was Resi was, but the outcome was different because the reviewer has a hard on for zombies.

    I'm not saying that they're right or wrong, just that double standards and making your mind up before writing a review lead to a rather sour read. I invite you to read the Resi5 review and see if you can see what I'm talking about!

  • Miths #60 3 years ago

    "... Given that most matches follow a strict "no respawn" policy, it's incredibly annoying to be sniped by a spawn-camper (there seem to be plenty of them about) while still trying to find your feet, and then have to wait ten minutes to rejoin the action."

    I just can't wrap my head around what kind of masochist it must take to enjoy games with no respawn? Sure, if you're consistently one of the top players you obviously won't see much "downtime", but obviously someone always has to die first. And second, and third...

    It must take an admirable level of patience to play a game where you (if you're an average player at best, compared to the opposition and not in a more general sense) spend 50% or more of the time - and often for minutes at a time - just lying dead on your back or float around like spectator.

  • El_Pinko #61 3 years ago

    @Miths

    Its not like that, you must just be running in classic style. Buddy up, 2 or 3 of you sneak around the map and you cant die first everytime. Its a rewarding experience to refine strategy and work together instead of dropping your hundreth clip to the floor and respawning in 10...9...8...

  • DanWhitehead #62 3 years ago

    El_Pinko,

    Genuine question. Should you really be throwing accusations of bias around when your profile shows that the last time you commented on the site, before this review, it was for the SOCOM beta? In fact, it seems this is the only game you've ever commented on.

  • Eighthours #63 3 years ago

    Yeah Dan, you're really biased! Imagine saying you don't like a game you... don't... like. Disgraceful, I think you'll agree.

  • El_Pinko #64 3 years ago

    @Dan

    The only game I've ever commented on was the beta, true, but I attribute that to the fact that I never let myself get bogged down in these flame wars and am usually happy to go with the flow. I just think in this instance this seems a tad to far and people who trust eurogamer could miss out.

    And its not about reviews a game you dont like negatively, so much as I point out that in the Resi 5 review its the same points made, keeping with the times, traditional experience and nostaglia to loyal fans, yet for Resi5 these are defence points and for Socom they're attack points.

    Please don't read this as me throwing my bottle out of the pram, I'm meerly trying to point out the reviewing system seems heavily based on the reviewers taste and not the quality of the style of game. This game should be comapred to COD4 & Halo as much as Fifa should be compared to NHL.

  • zuljin #65 3 years ago

    @DanWhitehead
    In all fairness though, I'd rather have people that only play a single game complain about a review, than the sheer number of idiots on here complaining about Gears/Halo/Killzone/etc that obviously have never actually played a minute of the game they complain about...

  • DanWhitehead #66 3 years ago

    And its not about reviews a game you dont like negatively, so much as I point out that in the Resi 5 review its the same points made, keeping with the times, traditional experience and nostaglia to loyal fans, yet for Resi5 these are defence points and for Socom they're attack points.

    Different games in different genres reviewed by different people get different scores.

    Please don't read this as me throwing my bottle out of the pram, I'm meerly trying to point out the reviewing system seems heavily based on the reviewers taste and not the quality of the style of game. This game should be comapred to COD4 & Halo as much as Fifa should be compared to NHL.

    I didn't compare the game to Call of Duty and Halo, I said that it's disappointing that it's these games - the supposedly dumb run-and-gun shooters - that are now innovating in online multiplayer while a pioneering multiplayer series like SOCOM is stuck with this vanilla effort.

  • El_Pinko #67 3 years ago

    Different games in different genres reviewed by different people get different scores

    Exactly, and I'm saying this review seems better suited to someone who understands the genre they're reviewing.

    Also, I'm not accusing you of comparing the game to Halo etc, I didn't intend for it to read like that, I mean that the original review draws comparisons to those games.

  • DanWhitehead #68 3 years ago

    Also, I'm not accusing you of comparing the game to Halo etc, I didn't intend for it to read like that, I mean that the original review draws comparisons to those games.

    Well, I wrote the review, and I still didn't compare the game to Halo or Call of Duty.

    Look, it's fine to disagree with a score. I'd be amazed if people didn't - they're meant as a broad guideline, not some Holy Writ handed down from on high. But throwing out kneejerk accusations of bias and saying that I don't know what I'm talking about are kind of insulting, you know?

    Here's the thing. I'm happy you like the game. I wish we could all like every game that gets released, but that isn't going to happen. But enjoying something doesn't neccesarily mean that the something is good, or as good as it could be. I found SOCOM Confrontation to be a merely servicable multiplayer game, hampered by some technical clunkiness and a depressing lack of ambition. It's meat and potatoes, served up with precious little style or flavour. Hence the review. No bias. No agenda. Just a mediocre game. In my opinion, naturally.

  • El_Pinko #69 3 years ago

    Haha, you wrote the review? Boy is my face red!

    Excellent, its actually great to be able to talk to the reviewer and get the real take on things. I'm sorry if I offended you in the off. I just found the mention of Halo to be a little out of place - it struck me to be similar to when someone compares the likes of Fallout something liek farcry. The review to me did come accross as someone who had jumped in and experience a serious beating - likely by americans as they seem to be flooding the servers right now for the easy kill. Its a shame really, as I think the multiplayer experience is stellar, but will agree its an aquirted taste. The suspense and enviroment created when playing is something that I think can only be achieved without respawns, putting alot more pressure on the gamer.

    Again, apologies if I offend you but I do feel this seemed a game that was not your cup of tea, like if I was asked to review Halo wars - it just wouldnt work. Again, I sday this because of your take on games style, I dont know who wrote the Resi5 review, but it seems similar points of nostalgia and classic gaming were drawn upon, but viewed in a very different light.

  • woodnotes #70 3 years ago

    ps3lol

  • coolbritannia #71 3 years ago

    PS3lol.

  • El_Pinko #72 3 years ago

    C-C-C-Combo Breaker!!!

  • seasidebaz #73 3 years ago

    Tactical shooter?

    As read elsewhere on the site, "tactical shooter" is a codeword for "this game's controls are awful".

  • Benno #74 3 years ago

    Its a terrible review though. Full of "facts" that are just plain wrong. Too much opinion and not enough objective analysis. This guy should be removed.

  • trubadman #75 3 years ago

    Dan Whitehead
    TBH, I think that this review is quite harsh and there have been few times I can remember saying that to myself when reading Eurogamer reviews. I have no brand loyalty towards Socom. I never had a Socom game on the PS2 (and never played one) and back in November, my intention was to get a headset and a game with it for an extra ?10 max. Anyway, what a game I would have missed if I had not decided to do so. I?ve had this game since Wednesday and can understand Dan?s gripes. But I don?t think that the gameplay is anywhere as bad as you make it out to be and I hope that the 5/10 is more due to bugs still being present in the game than the actuak gameplay experience.

    Previously, Fifa 09 was taking up most of my gaming time and preventing me play the rest of my PS3 collection, but since Wednesday, Socom is the only disc which has resided in my PS3.

    Oh yeah, btw you said there are no technical problems now, but there still are. My game has crashed to XMB 8 times, totally crashed 3 times (so that I have to restart my PS3) and gone dim in the XMB once.

    I am not a fan of FPS? and as an advocate for games; I do not believe that games should have features just because they are present in other games. Game critics are constantly moaning about many games merging into the same kind of thing, so why complain when a game with a different concept and way of going about things is released.

    You said ?it?s hard to find a single aspect of Confrontation that PS3 owners can?t already enjoy in other, often better alternatives.? If this is true, does this make Socom bad, you could argue the same point for the games which give you a similar experience. I have to say that most people I?ve played with online in the last few days would disagree with you on this point.

    ?In fact, there's a good chance you'll die quickly anyway. SOCOM's hardcore user-base ensures that headshots are standard practice.? You can?t complain because others are really good at the game. I can understand your frustration at other players being much better than you, maybe slant 6 can address this by creating channels which you can only enter based on your rank (I don't know if they do this already?) and therefore you will be with players of a similar ability, because at the moment there are great differences between players. I found that playing in unranked games (which generally contain people with a similar ability to you) to increase your ability and then moving to ranked games helps.

    ?Given that most matches follow a strict "no respawn" policy, it's incredibly annoying to be sniped by a spawn-camper (there seem to be plenty of them about) while still trying to find your feet, and then have to wait ten minutes to rejoin the action.?

    Also understand your gripe at having to wait ?10 minutes? to respawn, as I have often endured a similar experience when playing ranked games. Although, I have never waited 10 minutes, normally more like 4-5 minutes or less. Obviously, this is annoying, because it means that you can be on the game 5 hours, but actually be active for 1 hour. I have gathered, that no respawning has been implemented to prevent cheating (but it doesn?t really stop cheating, it just slows it down, as you have to wait for the whole round to kill your mate who?s helping you out.)

    The game was release unfinished in terms of bugs etc. There aren?t many maps, but you can?t make a big deal out of the maps considering the game is ?15. Overall, a great game methinks, but different games appeal to different people and everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

  • rotmm #76 3 years ago

    Where can you buy it for ?15?

  • trubadman #77 3 years ago

    Amazon, here is the link:
    http://ww w.amazon.co.uk/Socom-Confrontat...

  • coolbritannia #78 3 years ago

    woodnotes, high five son

  • local_celebrity #79 3 years ago

    Ok, so he called it wrong on Dead Space. I still think Dan Whitehead is one of the best reviewers on this site, and a damn fine writer too. That he's bothered enough to respond to the comments in this thread only warrants him extra props, in my book.

    And no, I'm not bumming him.

  • HermitArcader #80 3 years ago

    Post deleted at 09:17:39 22-12-2011

  • El_Pinko #81 3 years ago

    @ Vertical Stand

    The game offers a variety of ways to customise a room, including private to just your clan, password, restrictions on weapons and explosives (to remove that gun everyone inevitably complains about) - you have pretty much free reign to make what you want, ok its not perfect, but its alot more options than your standard game. The best thing I've found so far is hang out of the ranked rooms, because americans are soaking them up like no tomorow, but you can get an awesoem game out of an unranked room.

  • HermitArcader #82 3 years ago

    Post deleted at 09:17:39 22-12-2011

  • El_Pinko #83 3 years ago

    Eurogamer portugal just gave this release a 7/10 which I think seems more reasonable.