
03-03-2011 07:45 AM
So seriously for those of you saying BF3 will be a CoD remake obviously have never played the BF series...BF predates the MW series and have alway done well on the PC and not once have they copied MW when they went Bad Company route. The promise of Jets, tanks, copters and huge maps sounds exactly what BF has always been about and looking at BF2 and how it was and the Bad Company series, BF3 is looking to promise an improvement. I can't wait to play Socom 4 but I think this post is right. BF3 is going to what it knows best and I honestly think Zipper is trying to market this game out and make money WHILE trying to keep the core happy but not doing what BF is doing and going with what it used to be. Whether that's going to end up being good or bad only the Beta will tell. I honestly have been waiting for Zipper to drop a jaw dropping realistic 3rd person shooter but from screens and gameplay footage alone it seems like it won't happen and that's fine. I'm excited regardless for the beta and I'll make my decision then if Zipper was right in making the changes they did.
03-03-2011 07:46 AM
How can you compare the two went you havent played either of them..??
03-03-2011 07:49 AM
I agree with the OP. Just saw those two trailers last night. I was blown away. I was thinking "this is a game?" Too bad I don't like first person shooters,lol.
The reason why COD sells so much is because its geared for kids and most people who don't want to do anything but run and shoot with out reason. It seems its a lot of folks like that and that's cool for them.
I don't like the fact that Socom is taking some of those elements and putting them in socom. I was addicted to socom because it was so much different than the rest of those wack as games. I can't play more than 2-3 rounds of COD without thinking of how weak it is.
Where did socom stand out:
1. true team strategy needed to complete objectives
2. weapons-each had a different sound and feel and made you adjust your game according to the weapon
3.bigger maps-to me this is the biggest (best) part of socom. You can think your way out of situations on big maps. Not just everyone tossing grenades into choke points.
What may backfire IMO:
1. the attempt to speed up play
2. just overall not attending to the wants of the core fans
3. If the weapons are too easy to use (scoped full auto, no spray full auto, no feedback)
4. dual primary weapons-this is a slippery slope
I hope they understand if a game is built around a core group once that core group turns on you its over.
Its like a singer, their style usually has a core audience and as much as they would like to reinvent themselves you have to make sure to NEVER turn on your core group, that's called career suicide.
03-03-2011 07:54 AM
Because you have played the predecessors... and you know what to expect so you compare what you see... if you see a game that looks like something you expected you're happy if you don't you're skeptical. I for one know BF won't mess their series up by just one clip of gameplay. My jaw dropped. I looked at Socom and couldn't say the same because of the changes but again the beta will tell.
03-03-2011 08:08 AM
03-03-2011 08:09 AM
BlackScud wrote:No I'm not talking about turning SOCOM into another FPS. Which is the route Zipper would like to go obviously.
I'm talking about realism and authenticity. Socom used to be known for a level of authenticity that was unmatched by other games. You felt as though you were playing a game designed by a special forces team that had seen real combat.
All the areas of operation were real locations. The gear the SEAL team used was real, the commands were real....the hit detection unforgiving.
Now I haven't played SOCOM 4, it looks like a "fun" game...but other devs stole the modern warfare rug out from under Zipper. Socom 4 should look more like Battlefield 3, gritty and raw, tight allet ways filled with junk and barking dogs, terrorists shooting RPGs from rooftops. The SEAL team should look like a real SEAL team.
I know this has been brought up before on here a bunch of times. OpsCom should look cooler, Schweitzter and Wells should look like real SEALs. Where are the ballistic helmets? Where are the boonie hats? Where are the painted faces and jungle camo? It's obvious this time around Zipper didn't use real Navy SEALs to make this game.
Battlefield 3 just reiterates the fact that S4 doesn't look that authentic, it doesn't ring true to it's older counterparts.
But again, I have to emphasize that S4 doesn't look bad. Just not what it could have been.
What are your thoughts?
i agree with this post mostly .. i wish OpCom looked like a real Navy Seal and not wearing blue jeans and no helment or facepaint ..they look more like Delta Force ,, a Ghilley suit would have been amazing .. it's no secret that the Frostbite 2.0 engine is better than MAG's engine lol
The character movements and uniform detail in BF3 is insane .. if BF3 goes third person view socom 4's in trouble
03-03-2011 08:11 AM
Gotchyagood wrote:Who cares? Two totally different games. Have fun with BF3, another CoD ripoff, just like the rest.
Battlefield a CoD ripoff? That's the funniest thing I've read all morning. I could have sworn battlefield came out ages before CoD...
03-03-2011 08:13 AM
MisterJimDavis wrote:
Gotchyagood wrote:Who cares? Two totally different games. Have fun with BF3, another CoD ripoff, just like the rest.
Battlefield a CoD ripoff? That's the funniest thing I've read all morning. I could have sworn battlefield came out ages before CoD...
So did SOCOM but you see whats happening? Like I said, BF3 is going to be a better MoH which is a CoD ripoff. You'll see but I'm sure you'll still love it.
03-03-2011 08:17 AM
The authenticity is what made socom socom. I agree that they should have kept it that way. But I guess these watered down characters go along with this watered down game. And for everyone who keeps saying oh this game isn't out how can you compare it. Well look at the game footage they have released if you can't tell from that than have fun wasting your money.
03-03-2011 08:19 AM