Socom 4 (SOCOM Special Forces)
- Thread starter AngelvsMadman
- Start date
, 
, 
, 
, 
, 
, 
, 
, 
, 
, 
, 
-
PSN-Name: AngelVsMadman
, , , , , , , , , 
, 
-
Spielt gerade: GT7 | 60fps FTW
Ein ehemaliger Mitarbeiter ("Our staff has confirmed that this in fact a former Zipper Interactive employee") spricht:
http://therealsocom.com/2012/06/27/ex-zipper-employee-sends-anonymous-letter-to-therealsocom-com/
Dann hat er noch auf verschiedene Fragen geantwortet:
http://therealsocom.com/forums/showthread.php?tid=3115
Hi everyone,
So I am a former Zipper employee who worked on MAG and SOCOM 4. I will not tell anyone who I am as per the separation agreement with Zipper/SCEA, I cannot legally make disparaging remarks against either company. Well of course Zipper is no more, the website is no more, as if it never existed. I will only reply to private messages from Lukenbacher, as he is an admin of this forum.
So why do you care? Why place so much energy into a game which has not been the same for quite some time? Do you really think SONY will actually listen to the SOCOM fans and create an HD version of any of the games? Who do you blame for S4? What if anything did you like about S4? Single-player aspects, multiplayer aspects?
So I have been in the industry for a long time, I have seen as well as been with companies which have come and gone. I have been in situations where the folks who make the important decisions do not have a concept of the effects of those decisions. I have seen really great and talented people leave before all hell broke loose, as well as seen the same equally talented folks be loyal to a company and pay the price. I have seen companies embrace the folks who can just eek on by and be promoted to manage a portion of the project, but are ultimately over their head!
The industry is a volatile one. You can either keep your head down, do your work no matter how much you hate the work, or complain and try and get changes made to better the project. Well the biggest problem with either of those scenarios is that there will always be that manager/director who will slap you down, or rely on you too just shut-up and get the work done.
The biggest issue with SOCOM 4 was there were too many chiefs and not enough indians. Too many folks from within Zipper and SONY were making decisions. Now having a collaborative studio has its ups and downs, but ultimately someone needs to make the final call and be willing to take the ultimate risk.
I will also not name names, to protect the innocent, but you guys are pretty smart and can figure it out.
SOCOM went through multiple Creative and Art Directors during the development. The first CD (Creative Director hence forth) had tons of ideas, which were good ideas, but were ultimately shot down by SONY. So of course, said CD eventually became uninterested in working on the project and walked away. The next CD to fill the roll, should have never been in that roll. It is my experience that in order to say, be a Lead Animator, one must have actual animation ability. So if for instance you threw a gun to Bob the elderly mailman, with no Military training whatsoever and asked him to lead a squad of SEALS on a raid of an enemy compound, and said SEALS were ordered follow orders NO QUESTIONS ASKED! You can imagine how messed up that situation would be. The project also went through several AD’s (Art Directors hence forth). The first AD had tons of ideas, tons of experience with the franchise, and a passion for making the game look good, but was discouraged due to ultimately having to answer to a higher power who again did not have the experience or ability to critique the art of the game. Now many folks have blamed the Lead Designer for S4. The LD (you know the drill) was thrust into a bad situation and tried to make the best out of it. The LD fought for features until it finally wore the LD down and lost all hope. With no support from the first CD (as the first CD lost interest) the LD was stuck to listen to those who should not of been in the positions they were in.
Ultimately S4 was a failing on two fronts, a developer which was not brave enough to fight for what they thought was right, and a publisher which felt that the best thing for S4 was to copy elements from Uncharted, Killzone, CoD and Infamous.
If you think SONY is going to listen to the SOCOM community who has already given SONY quite a bit of money, you are mistaken. SONY has moved on (Notice Zipper is gone). They no longer wish to compete with CoD, since CoD already helps sell PS3 units. Look at Hockey, 989 Sports used to make Hockey games, but they stopped, why? They could not touch the competition, so no longer wished to try.
Anonymous Ex-Zipper Employee
So I am a former Zipper employee who worked on MAG and SOCOM 4. I will not tell anyone who I am as per the separation agreement with Zipper/SCEA, I cannot legally make disparaging remarks against either company. Well of course Zipper is no more, the website is no more, as if it never existed. I will only reply to private messages from Lukenbacher, as he is an admin of this forum.
So why do you care? Why place so much energy into a game which has not been the same for quite some time? Do you really think SONY will actually listen to the SOCOM fans and create an HD version of any of the games? Who do you blame for S4? What if anything did you like about S4? Single-player aspects, multiplayer aspects?
So I have been in the industry for a long time, I have seen as well as been with companies which have come and gone. I have been in situations where the folks who make the important decisions do not have a concept of the effects of those decisions. I have seen really great and talented people leave before all hell broke loose, as well as seen the same equally talented folks be loyal to a company and pay the price. I have seen companies embrace the folks who can just eek on by and be promoted to manage a portion of the project, but are ultimately over their head!
The industry is a volatile one. You can either keep your head down, do your work no matter how much you hate the work, or complain and try and get changes made to better the project. Well the biggest problem with either of those scenarios is that there will always be that manager/director who will slap you down, or rely on you too just shut-up and get the work done.
The biggest issue with SOCOM 4 was there were too many chiefs and not enough indians. Too many folks from within Zipper and SONY were making decisions. Now having a collaborative studio has its ups and downs, but ultimately someone needs to make the final call and be willing to take the ultimate risk.
I will also not name names, to protect the innocent, but you guys are pretty smart and can figure it out.
SOCOM went through multiple Creative and Art Directors during the development. The first CD (Creative Director hence forth) had tons of ideas, which were good ideas, but were ultimately shot down by SONY. So of course, said CD eventually became uninterested in working on the project and walked away. The next CD to fill the roll, should have never been in that roll. It is my experience that in order to say, be a Lead Animator, one must have actual animation ability. So if for instance you threw a gun to Bob the elderly mailman, with no Military training whatsoever and asked him to lead a squad of SEALS on a raid of an enemy compound, and said SEALS were ordered follow orders NO QUESTIONS ASKED! You can imagine how messed up that situation would be. The project also went through several AD’s (Art Directors hence forth). The first AD had tons of ideas, tons of experience with the franchise, and a passion for making the game look good, but was discouraged due to ultimately having to answer to a higher power who again did not have the experience or ability to critique the art of the game. Now many folks have blamed the Lead Designer for S4. The LD (you know the drill) was thrust into a bad situation and tried to make the best out of it. The LD fought for features until it finally wore the LD down and lost all hope. With no support from the first CD (as the first CD lost interest) the LD was stuck to listen to those who should not of been in the positions they were in.
Ultimately S4 was a failing on two fronts, a developer which was not brave enough to fight for what they thought was right, and a publisher which felt that the best thing for S4 was to copy elements from Uncharted, Killzone, CoD and Infamous.
If you think SONY is going to listen to the SOCOM community who has already given SONY quite a bit of money, you are mistaken. SONY has moved on (Notice Zipper is gone). They no longer wish to compete with CoD, since CoD already helps sell PS3 units. Look at Hockey, 989 Sports used to make Hockey games, but they stopped, why? They could not touch the competition, so no longer wished to try.
Anonymous Ex-Zipper Employee
Dann hat er noch auf verschiedene Fragen geantwortet:
Zipper was shut down due to the fact that it had not been profitable for SONY since it was purchased in 2006 (or there after). So if you have a company which has the rights to a franchise like SOCOM and the company does not commit (Zipper or SONY) to the franchise the way it should and instead tries to compete with CoD, it is a failing combination. I do not consider Unit 13 to be part of SOCOM. The PSVida has not done very well in the first place, which I am sure made the decision for SONY that much easier. You will recall that Kaz Hirai stated that he was going to reshuffle SCEA due to monetary loss. Compound that with what I wrote above, Zipper became the obvious choice.
Yes you are correct, the original SOCOM is not CoD, but SONY/Zipper did not look at it in that way, "if you can't beat them join them" seemed to be the way of the world. I clearly remember statements like "CoD is just a shooter in rails, and we are not going to do that" (this is not per-badum of course), but look at SOCOM 4, the player is directed where to go and what to do. So yes, CoD was the franchise to aspire to and it failed.
---
Honestly I have been thinking of posting here for quite sometime. I had been hesitant due to the fact that the industry no matter how large, is in effect very small. So, I am risking quite a bit. As for bad spelling and grammar, that is on purpose, writing in a style which is not my own further protects my identity.
---
You are welcome. Again the main reason I wrote this was an exercise in understanding the SOCOM community. I do not know how to prove to the community that I am legitimate. Perhaps I could chat directly with LUKENBACHER. We will just have to see.
----------------------------------------------------------------
LUKENBACHER,
I know of a way to prove who I am, but not sure if it would be enough, but here goes:
Prior to SOCOM 4 reaching Pre-Alpha the team was divided up into groups, strike teams to be exact. There were strike teams for Character Art, Environmental Art, Multiplayer Levels, Single Players Levels, Animation, Tools, Networking etc. At first these strike groups did not consist of the VFX or Cinematics teams, as they were added after the fact. Every Friday the leads of each strike group would sit around and update the CD, VP and AD of their respective teams progress. The strike teams remained in place until the game was final. Several of the strike teams were re-organized to work on what became Unit 13, as well as post production on S4.
When the first layoffs on May of 2011 occurred, a meeting invite went out to a "Team 1" and "Team 2". Team 1 met in the sports court to be told their services were no longer required, Team 2 was told that there was a reduction in staff, but did not say who was part of said reduction. Team 2 had to find out on their own. There were 2 security guards hired to make sure Team 1 left without incident. Zipper also contracted the services of DBM which was a career transition company to help members of Team 1.
Here is a link to SONY staff restructure: http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/News/Press/...index.html
---
I think the purpose of the original letter for me is closure. Maybe I want to apologize to the SOCOM community on behave of the folks who actually cared. I think about the former employees I worked with almost everyday. On May of 2011 Zipper laid off some really talented people who had been with the company 10+ years. I hope they are doing well. Some of these folks moved across the country to work for Zipper, disrupted their families, to ultimately lose their job. Writing in this way is very therapeutic.
---
1: I do not know what the post launch plans were, at least not all of them, and to respect Jeremy's integrity I will not talk about such matters. Jeremy is a great guy and I am glad he was able to get settled.
2: Again I am not going to reveal such inside information, but I can say that OpsCom was not the first choice for the main character, those changes were SONY driven.
3: Ideas of an HD version of S1 and/or S2, I do not know for sure, but I know the old assets and code were being "looked" at.
---
Did you guys know you were releasing a flop in Socom 4 or did you expect it to do well?
Yes and no. Let me explain, prior to say Alpha maybe even Beta, I personally felt we were going to release a flop, and then SONY did their "mock reviews", the data gained from these "mock reviews" showed us that we had an above average hit on our hands, many of us drank the koolaid, we thought we were going to be alright and then the real reviews came out, couple that with the PSN being hacked, we all knew for certain, it was a flop.
---
You are wrong, I do get it to a degree. Yes you are right, Zipper should have NEVER tried to compete with CoD. Yes SOCOM should have been a stand alone game, in the same vain it had always been. A third person tactical shooter! Yes I get that. What you do not understand is that Zipper and SONY are in the business of making money. If you look at the history of SONY titles which are no longer in production, the bottom line is that they could not compete with what they assumed was the way the future of games were headed. When the Wii was released, I thought it was never going to last, but it did and SONY and Microsoft took notice. Hence, the PSMove and the Kinect.
You see unfortunately the staple for shooters right now is CoD or MoH. CoD has the market cornered, their fans buy it up like a drug. It is all about stats now, all about achievements, all about "jumping in, killing some fools, and getting out before mom comes home and tells you to finish your homework". I loved playing the Rainbow Six games, the SWAT games, I even enjoyed Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising on the PS3. You have to admit, that game was far more tactical then S4. I am really looking forward to Takedown.
---
Sorry you think this reeks of bullshit. How many game studios have you worked for? You see like so many companies in the industry, communication is not always forth coming. So to say that I did not know what went on in area 51, is a true statement, Zipper did not communicate everything to everyone. Only a select few were privileged enough for that. This is also true for the post-release plans for S4, some of us were already working on Unit 13, or by it's code name ZP3, furthermore some folks were also working on Z7 the other project. From about March until May of 2011, the team would receive emails from the President stating "Info about future projects and staffing coming soon." So the updates we got were cryptic at best.
Sorry I do not have all the answers, sorry I am not spilling the beans, sorry I am not talking shit about other Zipper folks, sorry it is not juicy enough for you. I could have just stayed away.
---
To answer your first question: So yes there were strike teams in place and the leads would meet and talk about what their teams were working on, sometimes feedback was given, or a request was made to have a meeting and discuss feedback and changes to be made for that work. In regards to a need-to-know basis, not everything was done in this way, but there were a lot of times where the CD would ask for a change, example:
CD: "How long would it take to code X,Y and Z?"
Programmer: "Oh easy, about a week."
The CD would then walk off.
-One Week Later-
While reviewing the latest build:
CD: "So where are those changes I asked for last week? You know X,Y and Z?"
Programmer: "I was never told I needed to do that work, I was just asked for a time estimate."
This went on all the time, no proper protocol, no requests to Producers or Managers to make changes, or even to figure out what the impact of a change was. Furthermore, and I am going off on a tangent here, but there was a grenade arc in the game, and it was removed. No doubt it was removed because CoD did not have it, but I heard (using the grenade arc as an example) that if the CD wanted a change, it got done, despite any protest. Then a few weeks later, SONY would ask about the, let's say "grenade arc" and why it was gone, the CD would stall and finally get back to SONY claiming that no matter how hard the CD tries, the CD cannot convince Zipper to put it back, even though the CD wanted it removed in the first place.
So when it was company-wide information, that affected the staff, "bits and pieces", when it was sweeping project changes which affected the game, meeting were held, directions given, but Producers or Managers were left out of the loop, and they had to scramble to pick up the pieces.
Now part of the culture at Zipper was that everyone (unless you were non-manager/lead QA, and some contract staff) got an office. Friggin worse idea ever. People would use hold up in their office and wait for a manager or producer to come find them and tell them what to do. I hated it, it did change when the strike teams were formed, people were forced to sit together and collaborate, but by that time in the scheme of things, it was too late. The teams were now just reacting to changes, fixing bugs, or just trying to stay above water. None of the directors sat in an open space, no they still had their offices.
---
So while you have valid points, I am doubtful that the old SOCOM formula would work in this day and age, because after all "gamers are stupid".
Please understand I had to listen to this crap all the time. The amount of changes that went into the game to help the players better understand the game was ridiculous. Here are a few examples; the player was able at one time to order his team to set charges on an enemy vehicle. It worked, the AI were smart enough to run for cover and not get blown up, after all you did play as the Ops COMMANDER! That little feature was removed. The exact reason why, I do not know, but what I do know is that it had something to do with "The player would not get the thrill of blowing a vehicle up if he ordered the team to do it".
Another example I saw was in the first and almost last cinemas in the game. So in the first cinema (and I have to look them up on youtube, to refresh the memory, thank you Lukenbacher). So in the first scene when OpsCom meets 45, she hands him a pen and says "Here is Gorman's pen, why don't you stab him with it". So we fast forward to the scene when Gorman is shooting OpsCom, and he stabs Gorman with the pen, keep this in mind, PEN = STABBING = BLOOD! So now we are in the last level, 45 and the team is looking for Gorman, she touches the ground and says "Gorman's alive". So it was at one point changed, instead of touching the blood and using her bionic hands with special DNA senors in it to ID Gorman, she would reach down and pick up a bloody pen! It worked, everyone liked it, the cinema guys took some initiative to be creative. "But Mr. A, why was it changed back?" - "Well kids because the CD thought that the audience would not get the connection because they are stupid!"
So if the overall plan was to run Zipper into the ground, waste a shit ton of money, displace a bunch of employees and forever kill off the SOCOM franchise - SUCCESS!
You guys should be happy that they did not make any announcements about S1 or S2 in HD, because if Zipper was still around and they decided to start work on HD versions, you can bet the CD would stick his nose in and make changes to "fix" the game!
Sorry if this was not the reply you were expecting ;-)
---
Yes and no. Yes they planned on doing ""Classic Mode"" (I used quotes twice, because it was not a true "Classic Mode"). No it was not ready and was crammed in at the end, because that was how things worked there.
---
"So I guess my question is why is it Sony can afford to take risks with these other things, but when it comes to multiplayer shooters everything has to be like CoD?"
That is a great question, I think part of it is that the other studios in question have maybe a stronger position then Zipper, they were not afraid to say no to SONY, they were not afraid to prove to SONY that their ideas were good. Zipper was like the abused step-child looking for approval from it's parents. "Look SONY is this a good idea?" - "No Zipper it is not, it would be better if you did it this way." Then the new CD comes on board, which just strengthens SONYS position.
Yes you are correct, the original SOCOM is not CoD, but SONY/Zipper did not look at it in that way, "if you can't beat them join them" seemed to be the way of the world. I clearly remember statements like "CoD is just a shooter in rails, and we are not going to do that" (this is not per-badum of course), but look at SOCOM 4, the player is directed where to go and what to do. So yes, CoD was the franchise to aspire to and it failed.
---
Honestly I have been thinking of posting here for quite sometime. I had been hesitant due to the fact that the industry no matter how large, is in effect very small. So, I am risking quite a bit. As for bad spelling and grammar, that is on purpose, writing in a style which is not my own further protects my identity.
---
You are welcome. Again the main reason I wrote this was an exercise in understanding the SOCOM community. I do not know how to prove to the community that I am legitimate. Perhaps I could chat directly with LUKENBACHER. We will just have to see.
----------------------------------------------------------------
LUKENBACHER,
I know of a way to prove who I am, but not sure if it would be enough, but here goes:
Prior to SOCOM 4 reaching Pre-Alpha the team was divided up into groups, strike teams to be exact. There were strike teams for Character Art, Environmental Art, Multiplayer Levels, Single Players Levels, Animation, Tools, Networking etc. At first these strike groups did not consist of the VFX or Cinematics teams, as they were added after the fact. Every Friday the leads of each strike group would sit around and update the CD, VP and AD of their respective teams progress. The strike teams remained in place until the game was final. Several of the strike teams were re-organized to work on what became Unit 13, as well as post production on S4.
When the first layoffs on May of 2011 occurred, a meeting invite went out to a "Team 1" and "Team 2". Team 1 met in the sports court to be told their services were no longer required, Team 2 was told that there was a reduction in staff, but did not say who was part of said reduction. Team 2 had to find out on their own. There were 2 security guards hired to make sure Team 1 left without incident. Zipper also contracted the services of DBM which was a career transition company to help members of Team 1.
Here is a link to SONY staff restructure: http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/News/Press/...index.html
---
I think the purpose of the original letter for me is closure. Maybe I want to apologize to the SOCOM community on behave of the folks who actually cared. I think about the former employees I worked with almost everyday. On May of 2011 Zipper laid off some really talented people who had been with the company 10+ years. I hope they are doing well. Some of these folks moved across the country to work for Zipper, disrupted their families, to ultimately lose their job. Writing in this way is very therapeutic.
---
1: I do not know what the post launch plans were, at least not all of them, and to respect Jeremy's integrity I will not talk about such matters. Jeremy is a great guy and I am glad he was able to get settled.
2: Again I am not going to reveal such inside information, but I can say that OpsCom was not the first choice for the main character, those changes were SONY driven.
3: Ideas of an HD version of S1 and/or S2, I do not know for sure, but I know the old assets and code were being "looked" at.
---
Did you guys know you were releasing a flop in Socom 4 or did you expect it to do well?
Yes and no. Let me explain, prior to say Alpha maybe even Beta, I personally felt we were going to release a flop, and then SONY did their "mock reviews", the data gained from these "mock reviews" showed us that we had an above average hit on our hands, many of us drank the koolaid, we thought we were going to be alright and then the real reviews came out, couple that with the PSN being hacked, we all knew for certain, it was a flop.
---
You are wrong, I do get it to a degree. Yes you are right, Zipper should have NEVER tried to compete with CoD. Yes SOCOM should have been a stand alone game, in the same vain it had always been. A third person tactical shooter! Yes I get that. What you do not understand is that Zipper and SONY are in the business of making money. If you look at the history of SONY titles which are no longer in production, the bottom line is that they could not compete with what they assumed was the way the future of games were headed. When the Wii was released, I thought it was never going to last, but it did and SONY and Microsoft took notice. Hence, the PSMove and the Kinect.
You see unfortunately the staple for shooters right now is CoD or MoH. CoD has the market cornered, their fans buy it up like a drug. It is all about stats now, all about achievements, all about "jumping in, killing some fools, and getting out before mom comes home and tells you to finish your homework". I loved playing the Rainbow Six games, the SWAT games, I even enjoyed Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising on the PS3. You have to admit, that game was far more tactical then S4. I am really looking forward to Takedown.
---
Sorry you think this reeks of bullshit. How many game studios have you worked for? You see like so many companies in the industry, communication is not always forth coming. So to say that I did not know what went on in area 51, is a true statement, Zipper did not communicate everything to everyone. Only a select few were privileged enough for that. This is also true for the post-release plans for S4, some of us were already working on Unit 13, or by it's code name ZP3, furthermore some folks were also working on Z7 the other project. From about March until May of 2011, the team would receive emails from the President stating "Info about future projects and staffing coming soon." So the updates we got were cryptic at best.
Sorry I do not have all the answers, sorry I am not spilling the beans, sorry I am not talking shit about other Zipper folks, sorry it is not juicy enough for you. I could have just stayed away.
---
To answer your first question: So yes there were strike teams in place and the leads would meet and talk about what their teams were working on, sometimes feedback was given, or a request was made to have a meeting and discuss feedback and changes to be made for that work. In regards to a need-to-know basis, not everything was done in this way, but there were a lot of times where the CD would ask for a change, example:
CD: "How long would it take to code X,Y and Z?"
Programmer: "Oh easy, about a week."
The CD would then walk off.
-One Week Later-
While reviewing the latest build:
CD: "So where are those changes I asked for last week? You know X,Y and Z?"
Programmer: "I was never told I needed to do that work, I was just asked for a time estimate."
This went on all the time, no proper protocol, no requests to Producers or Managers to make changes, or even to figure out what the impact of a change was. Furthermore, and I am going off on a tangent here, but there was a grenade arc in the game, and it was removed. No doubt it was removed because CoD did not have it, but I heard (using the grenade arc as an example) that if the CD wanted a change, it got done, despite any protest. Then a few weeks later, SONY would ask about the, let's say "grenade arc" and why it was gone, the CD would stall and finally get back to SONY claiming that no matter how hard the CD tries, the CD cannot convince Zipper to put it back, even though the CD wanted it removed in the first place.
So when it was company-wide information, that affected the staff, "bits and pieces", when it was sweeping project changes which affected the game, meeting were held, directions given, but Producers or Managers were left out of the loop, and they had to scramble to pick up the pieces.
Now part of the culture at Zipper was that everyone (unless you were non-manager/lead QA, and some contract staff) got an office. Friggin worse idea ever. People would use hold up in their office and wait for a manager or producer to come find them and tell them what to do. I hated it, it did change when the strike teams were formed, people were forced to sit together and collaborate, but by that time in the scheme of things, it was too late. The teams were now just reacting to changes, fixing bugs, or just trying to stay above water. None of the directors sat in an open space, no they still had their offices.
---
So while you have valid points, I am doubtful that the old SOCOM formula would work in this day and age, because after all "gamers are stupid".
Please understand I had to listen to this crap all the time. The amount of changes that went into the game to help the players better understand the game was ridiculous. Here are a few examples; the player was able at one time to order his team to set charges on an enemy vehicle. It worked, the AI were smart enough to run for cover and not get blown up, after all you did play as the Ops COMMANDER! That little feature was removed. The exact reason why, I do not know, but what I do know is that it had something to do with "The player would not get the thrill of blowing a vehicle up if he ordered the team to do it".
Another example I saw was in the first and almost last cinemas in the game. So in the first cinema (and I have to look them up on youtube, to refresh the memory, thank you Lukenbacher). So in the first scene when OpsCom meets 45, she hands him a pen and says "Here is Gorman's pen, why don't you stab him with it". So we fast forward to the scene when Gorman is shooting OpsCom, and he stabs Gorman with the pen, keep this in mind, PEN = STABBING = BLOOD! So now we are in the last level, 45 and the team is looking for Gorman, she touches the ground and says "Gorman's alive". So it was at one point changed, instead of touching the blood and using her bionic hands with special DNA senors in it to ID Gorman, she would reach down and pick up a bloody pen! It worked, everyone liked it, the cinema guys took some initiative to be creative. "But Mr. A, why was it changed back?" - "Well kids because the CD thought that the audience would not get the connection because they are stupid!"
So if the overall plan was to run Zipper into the ground, waste a shit ton of money, displace a bunch of employees and forever kill off the SOCOM franchise - SUCCESS!
You guys should be happy that they did not make any announcements about S1 or S2 in HD, because if Zipper was still around and they decided to start work on HD versions, you can bet the CD would stick his nose in and make changes to "fix" the game!
Sorry if this was not the reply you were expecting ;-)
---
Yes and no. Yes they planned on doing ""Classic Mode"" (I used quotes twice, because it was not a true "Classic Mode"). No it was not ready and was crammed in at the end, because that was how things worked there.
---
"So I guess my question is why is it Sony can afford to take risks with these other things, but when it comes to multiplayer shooters everything has to be like CoD?"
That is a great question, I think part of it is that the other studios in question have maybe a stronger position then Zipper, they were not afraid to say no to SONY, they were not afraid to prove to SONY that their ideas were good. Zipper was like the abused step-child looking for approval from it's parents. "Look SONY is this a good idea?" - "No Zipper it is not, it would be better if you did it this way." Then the new CD comes on board, which just strengthens SONYS position.
, , , , , , , , , , ,
-
PSN-Name: AngelVsMadman
Danke, danke. Ich finde für all die Probleme ist das Spiel trotzdem (im Singleplayer) recht gelungen. Klar online hat es das Spielprinzip viel zu sehr aufgeweicht, ist halt die Frage ob es für old-school noch genug Gamer gibt, die einen komplexen MP zocken.
Ich fand viel schlimmer dass man SOCOM-eigene Modis (bzw. halt sonst nur aus CS bekannt) den Spielern vorenthalten hat.
Was mich noch interessieren würde wäre MAG. Es war ein FPS aber ein sehr guter ohne CoD-Einflüsse. Ist das auf Zippers Ideen gewachsen, oder hat Sony den Stein ins Rollen gebracht.
Ich fand viel schlimmer dass man SOCOM-eigene Modis (bzw. halt sonst nur aus CS bekannt) den Spielern vorenthalten hat.
Was mich noch interessieren würde wäre MAG. Es war ein FPS aber ein sehr guter ohne CoD-Einflüsse. Ist das auf Zippers Ideen gewachsen, oder hat Sony den Stein ins Rollen gebracht.
SOCOM 4 war wirklich ein erstklassiger Third-Person-Shooter, den ich sehr gern gespielt habe. Kampagne und MP waren beide sehr gelungen. Eigentlich der beste Third-Person-Shooter, den ich kenne. Leider bin ich bei 88 % Trophy-Status hängengeblieben, weil dann irgendein anderes neues Spiel kam. Die Zeit ist heute auch im Bereich Games so schnelllebig geworden.
, , , , , , , , , , ,
-
PSN-Name: AngelVsMadman
Ich habs online eine Zeit lang gespielt, das war viel nur kein SOCOM. Vor allem auf den kleineren Maps ist das im 32er Modus zum Rudelf*** geworden. Außerdem drehte es sich zu stark um genau 2 Modis: TDM und Bomben.
Keine Geiselbefreiung, der Classic-Modus spielte sich nicht wirklich wie frühere Teile und durch das Deckungsfeature wurde es zum Sitzkrieg.
Das alleine sind schon mal 3 Punkte, welche die Fans anpisste.
Ist ein Paradebeispiel wie man ein Franchise an den Fans vorbeientwickeln kann.
Keine Geiselbefreiung, der Classic-Modus spielte sich nicht wirklich wie frühere Teile und durch das Deckungsfeature wurde es zum Sitzkrieg.
Das alleine sind schon mal 3 Punkte, welche die Fans anpisste.
Ist ein Paradebeispiel wie man ein Franchise an den Fans vorbeientwickeln kann.
Ein Socom hat einfach nur eine Chance zu überleben wenn es sich an die harten Fans wendet.
Der Großteil aller Socom 4 Käufer hat auch die alten Teile gespielt ( PS2 ).
Viele Neueinsteiger, die auf der PS3 anfingen online zu zocken, kennen die Socom Reihe kaum bis gar nicht.
Als 3rd Person Shooter Fan ohne Socom-Vergangenheit wird das Spiel sicherlich ein Lichtblick gewesen sein, für alle alten Socomhasen war es das schlechteste Socom bisher.
Der Großteil aller Socom 4 Käufer hat auch die alten Teile gespielt ( PS2 ).
Viele Neueinsteiger, die auf der PS3 anfingen online zu zocken, kennen die Socom Reihe kaum bis gar nicht.
Als 3rd Person Shooter Fan ohne Socom-Vergangenheit wird das Spiel sicherlich ein Lichtblick gewesen sein, für alle alten Socomhasen war es das schlechteste Socom bisher.
An all diejenigen, die sich nach einem guten alten Third-Person-Taktikshooter ala Socom 1 & 2 sehnen : http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1687497632/h-hour-worlds-elite-0
Das ist ein interessantes Projekt bei dem u.a. Suckmyturban und der Entwickler von Socom 1 & 2 mitwirken !
Das ist ein interessantes Projekt bei dem u.a. Suckmyturban und der Entwickler von Socom 1 & 2 mitwirken !
Das Kickstarter Projekt war übrigens ein Erfolg und man schaffte sogar das erste erweiterte Ziel mit 250.000$ zu erreichen.
Im Übrigen werden in den kommenden Monaten die Server zu MAG, Socom Confrontation und Socom 4 abgestellt.
Das war es dann komplett mit Socom...
Bleibt zu hoffen, dass David Sears mit H-Hour wirklich das hält was er verspricht und zwar ein Spiel zu entwickeln, das sich sehr stark an Socom 2 orientiert !
Im Übrigen werden in den kommenden Monaten die Server zu MAG, Socom Confrontation und Socom 4 abgestellt.
Das war es dann komplett mit Socom...
Bleibt zu hoffen, dass David Sears mit H-Hour wirklich das hält was er verspricht und zwar ein Spiel zu entwickeln, das sich sehr stark an Socom 2 orientiert !
, , , , , , , 
, , 
, , , 
,
-
PSN-Name: Waggl81
-
Spielt gerade: Mit Dir!
Das Kickstarter Projekt war übrigens ein Erfolg und man schaffte sogar das erste erweiterte Ziel mit 250.000$ zu erreichen.
Im Übrigen werden in den kommenden Monaten die Server zu MAG, Socom Confrontation und Socom 4 abgestellt.
Das war es dann komplett mit Socom...
Bleibt zu hoffen, dass David Sears mit H-Hour wirklich das hält was er verspricht und zwar ein Spiel zu entwickeln, das sich sehr stark an Socom 2 orientiert !
Im Übrigen werden in den kommenden Monaten die Server zu MAG, Socom Confrontation und Socom 4 abgestellt.
Das war es dann komplett mit Socom...
Bleibt zu hoffen, dass David Sears mit H-Hour wirklich das hält was er verspricht und zwar ein Spiel zu entwickeln, das sich sehr stark an Socom 2 orientiert !
Zuletzt editiert: