Bumblebee wrote:
As a veteran of the SOCOM 1 beta who loved the game, and SOCOM 2, and bought SOCOM 3 but spent most of my time with S3 smacking my head in disbelief at the terrible decisions made for that game, I feel qualified to talk a little about why SOCOM 2 was so great.
SOCOM 2 was an 8 v 8 online shooter. 8 v 8 games were ideal. The amount of people in a room meant that you would get to know people by their voices, which made the whole "community feel" all the more fantastic. S3 had 16 v 16 which meant far more people, which meant the voices tended to get lost in the crowd. S3's maps were also far too big and whereas in SOCOM it felt like one player could make a difference - for example, protecting the hostages against the opposing team when your fellow team members had died (or were useless), or sometimes being able to take the whole opposing team down against the odds... this was far more unlikely in 16 v 16 matches. Furthermore, when each team was down to the last man in S2, it was often gripping watching from the "ghost room", chatting with your fellow team members, watching the last man hiding and/or hunting... in S3 it was boring, the maps were too big and way, WAY too often, in the "last man left" scenario you'd just be watching someone wandering around a FAR too big map with little hope of even running into the opponent by chance. And because the maps were bigger in S3, they were less detailed, much more "open" and far less exciting.
The match lengths were perfect in S2 too... not so long that you'd think "ooh I'd best not start another game" but perfect to make you think "well... I'll squeeze in ONE MORE MATCH before bed"...
Also consider the soundtrack and interface of S2, and even S1... SOCOM 3 just lacked the character, class and charm. From the moment I first fired up S3 all I thought was "uh-oh"... it was nothing, NOTHING compared to the moment S1 first loaded up, and that "watery" opening screen hit with an orchestral burst. I actually MP3'd the music to S1 & 2, so great they were. I wouldn't know S3's music if you bashed me over the head with a room-sized ghetto blaster playing it. Do that to me while playing S2's tunes and I'd die a happy man...
Also, odd as it may be, just the fact you could open and close doors - either softly, or kicking them in - added a fair amount to the gameplay. For example, in Blizzard you could hide in the toilet... that slight interactivity of the door made a huge difference, and it is sad that Confontation didn't bother with it, because there were some fantastic gameplay moments just from that one small feature. Laziness on the part of Slant Six, I'd say. It was quite a heart-racing moment when you'd be in a room, last man on your team, and the door would fly open...
But really, it was the increase to 32 players and the map size that wrecked S3 for me.
Sure, the game had problems but at the time you'd be lucky to get a 1MB connection, so it did lag a bit when players had awful connections, but if you knew what you were doing - e.g. don't download stuff on PC while playing and don't play with people far, far away (there was a test where we played with some of our friends in the Far East at one point and the lag was AWFUL) it could be AMAZING at times. I'd say I've not played a game since that has evoked the feelings that S2 did, and I made friends in that game I'm still in contact with today... and we're all STILL WAITING for the next SOCOM 2. Or, SOCOM 2 in HD.
SOCOM 3, Combined Assault and even Confrontation just didn't "get" what made SOCOM 2 so special.
And, sadly, neither does SOCOM 4.
You'd think Zipper would listen to their community but instead of listening they seem to be trying to kill it. I suspect that the devs at Zipper don't actually play their games. They can be proud of their "network code" which has been pretty decent since SOCOM 1, but the actual gameplay refinements that they have needed have taken massive strides BACKWARDS since S2.
For one, I wish they'd stuck to 8 v 8 on small, tight maps with no respawn and decent regionalised lobbies.
There's certainly a gap in the market for it if any devs are out there. Zipper don't want to make another SOCOM 2, they wan't to make "SOCOM Special Needs"... so please, talented devs, take a look at what the SOCOM 2 community are after and RIP OFF SOCOM 2!
It was flawed by lag but it is still my favourite game in thirty years of gaming. It even ran alright on my B/C PS3 and I tried to play it but sadly it was plagued by filthy cheating scum in the later years.
I lost a couple of summers to SOCOM 2 and it saddens me that I will never have that thrill of firing it up and entering a game with my friends again because Zipper just don't care enough to listen to what the gamers want. Such a shame.
So, in summary:
S2 had 8 v 8 players, which gave the game a more "friendly" vibe and made it easier to "get to know" your fellow gamers.
The maps were smaller and game length shorter which meant for tighter gameplay, making it VERY addictive.
The music and presentation had a certain class that has been lacking in all SOCOMs since.
Everything that has happened since SOCOM 2 has been a step backwards. I HATE 16 v 16 games, even in Confrontation, because you do feel "lost in a crowd" compared to the tight community feel of the 8 v 8 S1/S2 games.
Oh, how I pine for S2. And I'm not the only one. So there's a gap in the market, like I said. A gap that Zipper don't care about... all they seem to care about is the false equation that "bigger = better". It doesn't. That, and Call of Duty's sales figures.
Such a shame, because a refined, honed, tight, smooth, HD SOCOM 2 with less lag than back in the day, tighter controls and REGIONALISED LOBBIES would RULE ALL.
Ah well.
Pretty much hit the nail on the head. Me, also being a SOCOM player since the beginning, feel like SOCOM 3 completely changed the entire gameplay. The shhooting mechanics were simply a whole new game (I liked SOCOM 3/CA, but I/II were much better imo). Just felt the need to add thiss thought
