Review SOCOM 4: U.S. Navy Seals
- Thread starter Greg Tito
- Start date
Opinions do not suck. You can feel free to disagree, but the opinion itself is just as vaild.DAVEoftheDEAD said:
As for the game, seems the worst of both worlds to me. I've never been particularly good at tactics, but that just means I would know to steer clear of SOCOM, as it's (or at least, the other ones) was clearly not for me. I would think most twitch-shooters like myself would reach the same conclusion. So who were they making this game for?
This game looks way more fun and has better graphics than Dragon Age 2 so why did you poop all over this one? Oh yeah, its because Bioware didn't make it. Did you guys not get enough free swag from the studio to make you change your mind on this one? At least try and sound reasonably critical about it. The game may have been bad but it couldn't have been that horrendous.
Or maybe it could have been that bad and the Dragon Age 2 thing could have been completely unrelated to anything in this review. He sounded "reasonably critical" to me.Panopticon01 said:
OT: None of these shooters really have anything going for them (When they start bragging about graphics, you know they've run out of ideas). It's really a shame that, with the idea of tactics in SOCOM 4, they ended up going for a more linear COD-esque game just to make some quick money.
Well, at least they tried to spice it up with the bad idea that was motion controls.
Uhm, it did get 3 stars, which says it's not terrible, but that it's not good either, and well it was his opinion of the game. It's a game that's supposed to be a tactical shooter, while it isn't. It also got nothing to do with the Navy, so even in the title it makes claims to be something that it isn't. Seriously, it's an opinion, either become a dictator or let it be.Panopticon01 said:
I don't like bad games, I sometimes like reviews of bad games, but I really love editorial web sites that are independent from game companies so they can publish any verdict a tester comes to.
Thank you, Escapist.
Thank you, Escapist.
Yeah, that "Minecraft is a beta" crap needs to stop.One Hit Noob said:
Tell me then, how often do betas cost 20 bucks?
If it's sold, it's a product. Minecraft, in this stage, is a product. A beta is a demo of a product.
Minecraft Beta even has a fucking demo.
Portal will get that realisation right off i've found. I've concluded that because of this game and homefront, my new destination if i had a time machine would be right back to when the unreal engine was built so i can destroy that idea before it rears its hideous, samey, uncreative headWanderingFool said:
Hold on, what's wrong with Unreal Engine games? I mean, Unreal Engine 3 looks the same, but it's powered gems like Bioshock, Arkham Asylum, hell, even Gears of War was pretty original and varied for its time. Unreal Engine is an overused engine, for sure, but it's cheap to license (or so I'm told) and outputs some damn fine results - and I've barely noticed that there are more gritty first-person war shooters on Unreal Engine than there are games of any other genre.JThai said:
Old Soccomer weighing in here. Socom 4 is worth four stars. It's pretty fun. If you've played the single player of the first three games, you'll see similarities instantly in how you have to be careful with your instructions to your squad. The AI isn't mega-retard like they used to be, but they sure aren't geniuses. I've run through single player on normal and veteran now; I can see why some of the old-timers are pissed. It's a new game. It's not the old Soccom. Zipper should really just make Soccom 2 HD so the old guys (like me) will quit whining for it. Soccom 4 follows in the tradtion of Soccom 3 in that it breaks from the style of the first two games and attempts to create a unique experience. I think it succeeds. It's not brilliant by any stretch, but it's not as mediocre as all of the two and three star reviews would have you believe. Now if only they could get the damn PSN back up...I want to play more bomb squad...