I am not to happy with the game industry at the moment with the way sequels to existing franchises are handled. Take Madden for example, year after we pay for updated rosters with little to no new features. I dont believe it is fair to the consumer when developers just put on a fresh coat of paint on a game and release it every year. Some developers even hurry up a sequel to put out the door so fast that quality when compared to the original is worse. At the end of the day if your game sells good by all means make a sequel to it but do it with more effort and creativity than the original project.
Do I want Zipper to keep working on SOCOM titles? Hell yes! You guys practically sold the network adaptor and got PS2 online multiplayer on the map. When I first heard of SOCOM 4 I was estatic to say the least. Now when I seen the first gameplay video of S4 that was another story. I dont understand how you can change this series so drastically to the point where it does not look like SOCOM anymore. Maybe its just the lack of multiplayer videos that are clouding my view point right now but we want the SOCOM series back and honestly your not giving it to us in SOCOM 4.
Do you think it's great that we keep working on SOCOM titles?
I think we will all be happy that you came back to work on Socom - It's been said that this Socom (Socom 4) is what was really invisioned for Socom to be like, why did it take so many Socoms to get it the way Zipper wanted it.
Or were there certain "influences" to make Socom 4 the way it is? <--You can leave this question out to avoid pointing fingers
Were you glad to see us work on something new like MAG?
I was glad to see you work on MAG, but I couldn't help to feel that Socom was just handed over after it had treated you and us so well. Did you guys have a hard time working on MAG? For example, were there people that couldn't stop thinking about Socom while working on MAG? Furthermore, did you feel a little out of place working on something NOT Socom after so many sequels OR was it a nice break?
What do you think about the industry's reliance on sequels year after year?
I think sequels for games are great. Sequels are great especially if you have a solid base for a starter such as Socom 1. For a multi player sequel to be relied on, it should really have the same flow as its predecessor. You can't really just build maps and slap some SEALS vs Terrorist. Keeping in mind that the game engine and PS3 technology (coding and all that other fansy stuff) may be hindering you from recreating the original Socom feel, do you really consider Socom 4 a sequel with completely new characters and completely different feel for SP, for example air strikes, cover system, no voice commands?
And Mr. Soderberg, is there anything you'd like to or can say about Socom 4, in regards to how much we will enjoy it
I like the fact you kept the SOCOM series going but i'll try the game before i decide whether i think the changes and story sux.
I was not at all happy with you working on MAG at the time wasn't sure how long it would take for SOCOM4. didn't even know you were that close to release. but overall it was pretty good i don't play it anymore though because it has it's flaws and with the PMC themed style. Look who's still on top SVER big surprise.
I don't mind year by year sequels really but i don't apperciate a whole new game altogether just so you can add the money in your pocket and start on the next one like call of duty does. If you guys ever did SOCOM yearly i would expect for every 2 games the 2nd be an expansion of the first. Just like SOCOM 3 and Combined Assault.
With that said I do hope Zipper does something outside of another Military game if possible. Like umm a zombie third person shooter? There is no real good ones on the market. It should somewhat revolve around the desicions you make having consquences and or benefits. Example during the start of the outbreak you're a let's say Police chief you're faced with decisions should i block the city off, fire into the open crowd, help em, or fall back? that decision could cost the player the outbreak to spread quicker or even loss of personel. just something different would be nice.
heck get the rights to the Walking Dead
I think it's important that Developers spread their wings and try new things. MAG came out of nowhere for me, and though the Socom games were my favorite games to play online, MAG is now up there with them. I've crossed 600 or so hours of play in MAG, thats the most I have put in a game in a very very long time.
I'm ready to support the MAG Franchise, just as much as the socom one.
Has zipper ever thought of creating a new headset for socom?/ and is the DLC going to be already in the works on release or do we have to wait like previous socom titles? (S:C)
New Project Ideas? Here's my list.
#1. SOCOM 2 HD
#2. SOCOM COLLECTION - S1, S2, & S3/CA on ONE disc for the PS3. Each game could be hosted on ONE huge server. You could play Abandoned on S1 for a map, then jump on the Ruins on S2, then the next map play Crucible Convoy. Zipper would only have to make ONE version of each map, and it could be played within each title if it was relevant to the originals.
The first Multiplayer title screen would the option to pick your SOCOM. Then the next title screen shows the lobbies & servers for that title.
#3. MAG 2 REVAMPED. 3rd person perspective. Matches available as small as 32 vs 32.
#4. A merger of ALL OF THE ABOVE. A totally new 3rd Person, SOCOM like game offering 4v4, all the way up to 128v128. INCLUDING round based, and respawn play.
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.
Since this seems to me I have been given the green light to ask this question. What is the future outlook of re creating SOCOM 2 for the PS3 on-line. New Franchises are great but you can't forget what put the 2002 Benz in the driveway.
PS2 SOCOM's could be played starting with 1 thru CA with out having to re learn the game. Each new installment always carried over the feel, controller config, Core gameplay and we could pop in the newest one with out being confused. I played SOCOM because over the years you appeared to understand the Core of SOCOM was more important than pleasing a 12 year old who wants to use The Move. I expected SOCOM 4 to follow your SOCOM Core, not someone elses, but as of today I have not seen any proof of SOCOM in your videos.
SOCOM 1 out of the box could be played today using the same controller config as SOCOM Combined Assault 8 years later. We expected SOCOM 4 to be the same, no sprint button, no snap to cover system, jump to climb, grenade arc, classic view, doors opening and closing, a real Navy Seal Team, you get the picture and so on, or maybe you don't ?
User Created Ranked Rooms is what made SOCOM Clan Friendly for those who wanted to play a game in peace with like minded people. Rank ups and Cheaters will always be there, so those True SOCOM Fans who follow the SOCOM honor code should not be punished for the few who think it's cool to have something they didn't earn. Remember it's just a video game and we all know who cheats, we are not stupid, STATS DON'T LIE. So for those who supported you thru it all, I feel you should give us UCRR's back since you have takened so much out of SOCOM already. Call it a peace offering, LOL.