In this case, do you think it's great that we keep working on SOCOM titles??- I think it is your responsibility to work on Socom and I hope you do some justice to the series and the fans.
Were you glad to see us work on something new like MAG? I think it was totally bizarre that Zipper was working on another game at the time the PS3 was released and starting to gain some momentum. An awesome Socom could have captured some of the old magic back from the S1/2 days but instead it made an already tough crowd even more bitter and jaded. I could see how the employees at Zipper may have wanted to try something new, but the bed was already made and Zipper needed to lay in it and focus on Socom (not just the next one but supporting the existing ones as well).
What do you think about the industry's reliance on sequels year after year? We all know they do it to make money, but it's a tired formula now. I never really viewed Socom as having "sequels" in a classic sense, but where sequels fail is in not improving gameplay, but instead focusing on adding a bunch of bells and whistles (see Confrontation).
I think it's cool to see developers take on new franchises, and seeing MAG, especially upon its announcement was very interesting. I personally did not care for MAG after playing in the Closed and Open Betas, however, the ability to put 256 players on one level and yet still maintain flowing, organized gameplay was impressive and I would certainly look into MAG's sequel, if there is one.
However, having said that, I don't really like seeing original franchises being changed so drastically amidst developers creating new ones. I'm all for evolution of a series, especially one like SOCOM, but I feel the changes, at least what from the little footage we have seen and the developers acknowledging that S4 is a major overhaul of the series, it's apparent that SOCOM 4 and the older titles are almost completely different franchises all together.
As a SOCOM fan, obviously I would like to see the series continue with future titles, but only if the series retains and builds upon many attributes that made the original games popular.
How much do higher powers (i.e. SCEA) influence the approach you take with a project and the decisions you make along the developing process?
Zipper Interactive has only made military/combat-oriented games thus far. Would you guys ever consider starting a franchise in a totally different genre, a game concerning completely different subject matter, or both?
As we mentioned at the end of last year, some changes are coming to Zipline beginning with this week's episode. The most significant change is that we're moving away from the strict Q&A formula and moving more towards a topic-driven roundtable discussion.
This week's topic will be: Existing franchises vs. new franchises. Our special guest will be Zipper President Brian Soderberg.
What we're looking for from you guys is your thoughts on the topic. In this case, do you think it's great that we keep working on SOCOM titles? Were you glad to see us work on something new like MAG? What do you think about the industry's reliance on sequels year after year?
You're free to ask questions, but try to keep them related to the topic.
Q1. I think you guys could do more with socom franchise titles.. You can make a turn based game, you can doa mmo . sky's the limit with socom. every game is doing a spin off of some sort Dont be afraid to do a spin off let the hardcore fans know its not a true socom, its just something to keep you bizzy till the real one drops. This way you can get fresh ideas and things out you guys like and gamers like.
Q2.I think mag was a ok game(although i never played it) . I think the unbalancing of the factions is what hurt the game and dlc was managed wrong.. But i think mag 2 will be huge hit and its already a great franchise . so sky's the limit. I do think zipper should do other styles of games besides shooter..
Q3. well its not a bad thing a sequel every year.. This goes back to my 1st point doing a spin off of sorts. Ok.. if you guys made socm con 2. with better updated clan gameplay fixed a few flaws same exact style of gameplay and added 20 plus maps.. None would fault you for that . Game of the year if you ask me.. Everyone Knows you dont need a real socom every year to be successful. You guys could do spins offs and gather more fans to the franchise till the real socom comes out. The point of sequel with same name is to give fresh gameplay a new way . spin offs is your safest bet .. but you have let the fans know its not a true socom its a spinoff its something to keep them bizzy.
Im looking forward to see what mr soderberg has to say..
vp-psn legioniaree group.
Seek wisdom, not knowledge. Knowledge is of the past, Wisdom is of the future
I liked that you did MAG, I am not a huge fan of MAG, but I respect that you did not do the traditional FPS gameplay. You created unique gameplay that actually involves some teamwork (unlike every other FPS respawn). I am a fan of zipper because you guys constantly push the bounds of gaming and I respect that. I simply ask that you do the same with SOCOM 4. If you take these "cookie cutter" ideas from many shooters out today, I ask that you create your own, unique cookie shape, so to say.
Could you give us an example of something in SOCOM 4 that you took from another game, or is similar to another game, and show us how you did it differently.
Any MP info would be awesome.
You have stated before that you would not remake the previous Zipper installments of Socom in HD because of the online aspect. Any chance of getting just the SP in HD? MP is what made it famous but I still enjoyed trying to get all A's.
As for any new IPs, stick with what your good at.
#1- MAKE SOCOM AND NOTHING ELSE.
#2- Make improvements to THIS franchise as it "used to" offer something that no offer fanchise ever did. Keep Socom true to its roots while only tweaking bonus features (new guns, attachments, suits, etc..)
DONT TWEAK GAME PLAY FROM PREVIOUS SOCOM TITLES. YOU ARE KILLING SOCOM WHEN YOU TWEAK OLD GAME PLAY.
I was extremely excited when S4 was officially announced to be in production by Zipper. Please continue to make socom titles or at least titles in the spirit of socom.
I was also very excited when Mag was initially announced, but as more info came to light, I realized that it was definitely not the game for me. I played in the Mag beta to confirm and was not impressed.
I know that creative minds need to take a gamble sometimes and try something completely new, but I would rather see you guys focused on what you are very very good at. Socom.,
Anyways, it's hard for me, or anyone for that matter *cough* dirty_walter, to comment on whether or not we want you to keep making SOCOM games when we no nothing about the most important aspects (multiplayer gameplay) of the SOCOM 4 yet........ : |
Existing franchises vs. new franchises is a great topic. I'll try to keep this short and sweet.
First I would like to quickly rant about Sony putting an established franchise in someone else's hands (/6). Socom: Confrontation or any Socom titled game should have never been done by another developer which I am not sure why this was the case at the time but I think having a different developer work on your existing franchise game has actually done more damage then good to the franchise. So my point is I don't think existing franchises should be put into other developers hands unless the primary developing company is the overseer.
Socom an existing franchise has manic fans that don't settle for anything so now more then ever the pressure is on to produce a perfect sequel to the series. It is nice to see the success of all these sequels but to me I want something unique that breaks through the clutter of the norm. I hope zipper continues to work on Socom(s) but also would like to see the company try to grow into a larger business model and become more versatile with different genres. (RPG or Action game would be cool)
Which has carried more pressure for your company?
Existing franchise(Socom) or New franchise(MAG)
Also, How much can you actually change a franchise, while still keeping it under the same name? We understand Socom 4 will still be a squad based military third person shooter, but is that enough to retain the SOCOM name?
What I'd like to know is, what limitations do you have when making a sequel? As was asked very early in the Zipline Q & A's, what absolutely has to be in SOCOM to make it feel like SOCOM? Everything else could be new to the franchise. Zipper has always said it's a team oriented game, but most online games are team oriented since you play them with others. I don't think we ever got an honest answer to that. To me, the features I mentioned earlier are what makes the games what they are. You could change the scenery, the amount of players, have different objectives but maintain their importance in relation to the other objectives, etc. but it'd still maintain the core features that made it a great game in the first place.