Socom Confrontation GS Review RIP (10/21/08 - 10/29/08) (UPDATED)

[QUOTE="wado-karate"]They should reconsidered reviews and scores when important patches are released.jeezers

how so , they gave them socom to reveiw, its kinda silly to change a reveiw because of patches, it should be reveiwed how it is at launch, its not gamespots fault socoms online was released in a buggy state.

Reviews are there to help people decide if they want to buy the game... Why in gods name would they not change it if it no longer applies to the game... The Reviews are not just for all the people on System Wars to claim ownage...

Flops in the book cow's quit the damage control :lol:

Its good slant 6 fixed its broken game now only if sony would fix its broken online system.

[QUOTE="jeezers"]

[QUOTE="wado-karate"]They should reconsidered reviews and scores when important patches are released.W1ckedGo0se

how so , they gave them socom to reveiw, its kinda silly to change a reveiw because of patches, it should be reveiwed how it is at launch, its not gamespots fault socoms online was released in a buggy state.

Reviews are there to help people decide if they want to buy the game... Why in gods name would they not change it if it no longer applies to the game... The Reviews are not just for all the people on System Wars to claim ownage...

So you expect GS to go re-review every game that gets an update, added DLC, ect?

[QUOTE="jeezers"]

[QUOTE="wado-karate"]They should reconsidered reviews and scores when important patches are released.W1ckedGo0se

how so , they gave them socom to reveiw, its kinda silly to change a reveiw because of patches, it should be reveiwed how it is at launch, its not gamespots fault socoms online was released in a buggy state.

Reviews are there to help people decide if they want to buy the game... Why in gods name would they not change it if it no longer applies to the game... The Reviews are not just for all the people on System Wars to claim ownage...

hahah I think people tend to forget that, oh well the game is still selling great and is easily one of my most favorite games this gen.

Flops in the book cow's quit the damage control :lol:

Its good slant 6 fixed its broken game now only if sony would fix its broken online system.

Gh0st_Of_0nyx

Reviews are not just for this like game all of you like to play on this forum... Reviews are there to help people deside if they want the game... why would they not change the review if all the problems with the game are fixed...

[QUOTE="Nedemis"][QUOTE="Lionheart08"]

Unless GS re-reviews expect for people to still count it as a flop. :P

W1NGMAN-

Ones a single player game, the other Online only....keep that in mind.

Doesn't make a difference.

Games are reviewed as they are when the reviewer plays them. If SOCOM had issues that the developer didn't (or couldn't) fix before the title shipped to reviewing and retail outlets, reviewers should take note of that. It doesn't matter whether the game is single or multiplayer. A glitch is a glitch, even if it can be patched.

This is just another in a long string of games that developers have shoved out there, knowing that it can just be patched later. It's a disturbing trend and one that needs to stop.

This is typical cow double standards here they get a flop and now they cry and moan abour re-reviewing a broken game because it gets a patch.

Now if a 360 game flopped like Mass effect for example they wouldnt say "wait for the review" they would run wild with ownage claims :roll:

[QUOTE="W1ckedGo0se"][QUOTE="jeezers"]

[QUOTE="wado-karate"]They should reconsidered reviews and scores when important patches are released.Blackbond

how so , they gave them socom to reveiw, its kinda silly to change a reveiw because of patches, it should be reveiwed how it is at launch, its not gamespots fault socoms online was released in a buggy state.

Reviews are there to help people decide if they want to buy the game... Why in gods name would they not change it if it no longer applies to the game... The Reviews are not just for all the people on System Wars to claim ownage...

So you expect GS to go re-review every game that gets an update, added DLC, ect?

If it changes almost everything that the review marked the game down for Yes... Reviews are there to show you wants good about a game and whats bad... If an update changes all of that then I think it should be rereviewed...

:lol: Does anyone know who this is? it's cracking me up

[QUOTE="Gh0st_Of_0nyx"]

Flops in the book cow's quit the damage control :lol:

Its good slant 6 fixed its broken game now only if sony would fix its broken online system.

W1ckedGo0se

Reviews are not just for this like game all of you like to play on this forum... Reviews are there to help people deside if they want the game... why would they not change the review if all the problems with the game are fixed...

Its not GS fault they shipped a broken pile of crap it's slant 6's

This is typical cow double standards here they get a flop and now they cry and moan abour re-reviewing a broken game because it gets a patch.

Now if a 360 game flopped like Mass effect for example they wouldnt say "wait for the review" they would run wild with ownage claims :roll:

Gh0st_Of_0nyx

If an update came out for mass effect that signifacently changed the problems with the game then I would hope the rereviewed it....

[QUOTE="Gh0st_Of_0nyx"]

This is typical cow double standards here they get a flop and now they cry and moan abour re-reviewing a broken game because it gets a patch.

Now if a 360 game flopped like Mass effect for example they wouldnt say "wait for the review" they would run wild with ownage claims :roll:

W1ckedGo0se

If an update came out for mass effect that signifacently changed the problems with the game then I would hope the rereviewed it....

If Bioware came out with a patch that fixed Mass effect no site should rereview it because that would set a presedent thats its ok to release crap games as long as we patch it no one would care.

This is typical cow double standards here they get a flop and now they cry and moan abour re-reviewing a broken game because it gets a patch.

Now if a 360 game flopped like Mass effect for example they wouldnt say "wait for the review" they would run wild with ownage claims :roll:

Gh0st_Of_0nyx

Nope, it flopped but with this update the review is inaccurate. Also Mass Effect doesn't need online capabilities to play so how will the players that don't have interent connection get that patch?

[QUOTE="W1ckedGo0se"][QUOTE="Gh0st_Of_0nyx"]

Flops in the book cow's quit the damage control :lol:

Its good slant 6 fixed its broken game now only if sony would fix its broken online system.

Gh0st_Of_0nyx

Reviews are not just for this like game all of you like to play on this forum... Reviews are there to help people deside if they want the game... why would they not change the review if all the problems with the game are fixed...

Its not GS fault they shipped a broken pile of crap it's slant 6's

Yay and now thw final retail copy is not like that... people can no longer go out and Buy that copy so I see no reason why they should not change the review to show what you will be buying if you go out and buy the game... Mabye I'm just a newbie, but last time I checked Reviews were there to help people decide if they wanted to buy a game or not so it makes no sense to keep a review that no longer applies to a game...

I personnaly don't care if you call it a flop or not and I don't care if they rereview it or not, but I'm thinking about people in the future that want to buy this game going and reading the review and deciding not to buy the game because of all things they did not look in the review (although in reality those problems no longer exist)

[QUOTE="Gh0st_Of_0nyx"]

This is typical cow double standards here they get a flop and now they cry and moan abour re-reviewing a broken game because it gets a patch.

Now if a 360 game flopped like Mass effect for example they wouldnt say "wait for the review" they would run wild with ownage claims :roll:

W1NGMAN-

Nope, it flopped but with this update the review is inaccurate. Also Mass Effect doesn't need online capabilities to play so how will the players that don't have interent connection get that patch?

its accurate for when the game launched, Thats all that really matters, They should have made sure the game worked before releasing it, even if they were planning on comming out with a patch 2 weeks later....

:lol: Does anyone know who this is? it's cracking me up

MarloStanfield

That's booker t from harlem heat, hardcore g from 100 and 10th street....I think.

[QUOTE="W1NGMAN-"][QUOTE="Gh0st_Of_0nyx"]

This is typical cow double standards here they get a flop and now they cry and moan abour re-reviewing a broken game because it gets a patch.

Now if a 360 game flopped like Mass effect for example they wouldnt say "wait for the review" they would run wild with ownage claims :roll:

jeezers

Nope, it flopped but with this update the review is inaccurate. Also Mass Effect doesn't need online capabilities to play so how will the players that don't have interent connection get that patch?

its accurate for when the game launched, Thats all that really matters, They should have made sure the game worked before releasing it, even if they were planning on comming out with a patch 2 weeks later....

Yea exactly it was accurate from 10/21/08 - 10/29/08.

[QUOTE="W1NGMAN-"][QUOTE="Gh0st_Of_0nyx"]

This is typical cow double standards here they get a flop and now they cry and moan abour re-reviewing a broken game because it gets a patch.

Now if a 360 game flopped like Mass effect for example they wouldnt say "wait for the review" they would run wild with ownage claims :roll:

jeezers

Nope, it flopped but with this update the review is inaccurate. Also Mass Effect doesn't need online capabilities to play so how will the players that don't have interent connection get that patch?

its accurate for when the game launched, Thats all that really matters, They should have made sure the game worked before releasing it, even if they were planning on comming out with a patch 2 weeks later....

remember what reviews are for... I'm not saying it again... The only reason someone would care about holding onto an old review is because there such a fanboy there scared the game could be good...

[QUOTE="Gh0st_Of_0nyx"]

This is typical cow double standards here they get a flop and now they cry and moan abour re-reviewing a broken game because it gets a patch.

Now if a 360 game flopped like Mass effect for example they wouldnt say "wait for the review" they would run wild with ownage claims :roll:

W1NGMAN-

Nope, it flopped but with this update the review is inaccurate. Also Mass Effect doesn't need online capabilities to play so how will the players that don't have interent connection get that patch?

Not GS SLANT 6 man not IGN not metacritic. Your arguing a ridiculous point that its ok to sell a crap game as long as its patched.

[QUOTE="W1NGMAN-"][QUOTE="Gh0st_Of_0nyx"]

This is typical cow double standards here they get a flop and now they cry and moan abour re-reviewing a broken game because it gets a patch.

Now if a 360 game flopped like Mass effect for example they wouldnt say "wait for the review" they would run wild with ownage claims :roll:

Gh0st_Of_0nyx

Nope, it flopped but with this update the review is inaccurate. Also Mass Effect doesn't need online capabilities to play so how will the players that don't have interent connection get that patch?

Not GS SLANT 6 man not IGN not metacritic. Your arguing a ridiculous point that its ok to sell a crap game as long as its patched.

Slant Six is to blame, and they got what they deserved but now that they fixed the problem....shouldn't potential buyers be aware that the review isn't accurate anymore since EVERY Socom Confrontation purchaser is required to patch the game if they want to play? They don't need to change the score but people that visit this site and are looking to purchase Socom should at least know that the majority of the the games problems have been fixed.

Yea IGN actually waiting till the game is playabel. They couldint get into games or they would constally get disconnected from the servers.Thats why the review hasent gone up. If a game is unplayable whats the point of reviewing it.finalfantasy94

Oh, I don't know, maybe to tell people that it's unplayable. :|

They are supposed to be CRITICS, not lap dogs who happily slurp down whatever vomit is thrown their way.

They should have reviewed it, given it a low score, and said something like "bull **** like this is absolutely inexcusable, and the people behind this game need to get their **** together."

So should they re review Fable II when it gets patched? Can we say that the 8.5 the Fable II received doesn't count after the patch comes in? Or is this a SOCOM only thing? /sarcasmspinecaton

This is the second time Fable 2 has been brought up, what exactly is wrong with that game that will boost it's score up anymore from an 8.5 with a patch?

[QUOTE="spinecaton"]So should they re review Fable II when it gets patched? Can we say that the 8.5 the Fable II received doesn't count after the patch comes in? Or is this a SOCOM only thing? /sarcasmW1NGMAN-

This is the second time Fable 2 has been brought up, what exactly is wrong with that game that will boost it's score up anymore from an 8.5 with a patch?

Glitches that can break the game and you have to make a new character.

[QUOTE="finalfantasy94"]Yea IGN actually waiting till the game is playabel. They couldint get into games or they would constally get disconnected from the servers.Thats why the review hasent gone up. If a game is unplayable whats the point of reviewing it.jethrovegas

Oh, I don't know, maybe to tell people that it's unplayable. :|

They are supposed to be CRITICS, not lap dogs who happily slurp down whatever vomit is thrown their way.

They should have reviewed it, given it a low score, and said something like "bull **** like this is absolutely inexcusable, and the people behind this game need to get their **** together."

^ agreed

By the TC ridiculous logic its alright if GS rereviews old N64 games and faults them for poor graphics and sound.Gh0st_Of_0nyx

That's not using my logic at all.

[QUOTE="Gh0st_Of_0nyx"][QUOTE="W1NGMAN-"][QUOTE="Gh0st_Of_0nyx"]

This is typical cow double standards here they get a flop and now they cry and moan abour re-reviewing a broken game because it gets a patch.

Now if a 360 game flopped like Mass effect for example they wouldnt say "wait for the review" they would run wild with ownage claims :roll:

W1NGMAN-

Nope, it flopped but with this update the review is inaccurate. Also Mass Effect doesn't need online capabilities to play so how will the players that don't have interent connection get that patch?

Not GS SLANT 6 man not IGN not metacritic. Your arguing a ridiculous point that its ok to sell a crap game as long as its patched.

Slant Six is to blame, and they got what they deserved but now that they fixed the problem....shouldn't potential buyers be aware that the review isn't accurate anymore since EVERY Socom Confrontation purchaser is required to patch the game if they want to play? They don't need to change the score but people that visit this site and are looking to purchase Socom should at least know that the majority of the the games problems have been fixed.

[QUOTE="Gh0st_Of_0nyx"]By the TC ridiculous logic its alright if GS rereviews old N64 games and faults them for poor graphics and sound.W1NGMAN-

That's not using my logic at all.

[QUOTE="W1NGMAN-"]

[QUOTE="spinecaton"]So should they re review Fable II when it gets patched? Can we say that the 8.5 the Fable II received doesn't count after the patch comes in? Or is this a SOCOM only thing? /sarcasmspinecaton

This is the second time Fable 2 has been brought up, what exactly is wrong with that game that will boost it's score up anymore from an 8.5 with a patch?

Glitches that can break the game and you have to make a new character.

Hmmm after skimming through the review, it doesn't seem like Fable 2 was docked points for that.

[QUOTE="W1NGMAN-"]

[QUOTE="Gh0st_Of_0nyx"]By the TC ridiculous logic its alright if GS rereviews old N64 games and faults them for poor graphics and sound.Gh0st_Of_0nyx

That's not using my logic at all.

I'll let you figure that one out on your own :lol:

[QUOTE="W1NGMAN-"]

[QUOTE="Gh0st_Of_0nyx"]By the TC ridiculous logic its alright if GS rereviews old N64 games and faults them for poor graphics and sound.Gh0st_Of_0nyx

That's not using my logic at all.

Then halo 3 would have 5 new updated scores by now.... it just doesnt work, and any game that has ever gotten a patch, or a map pack, or new game mode from online, it makes no sense to keep updating reveiws just because they improved something.

Yea IGN actually waiting till the game is playabel. They couldint get into games or they would constally get disconnected from the servers.Thats why the review hasent gone up. If a game is unplayable whats the point of reviewing it.finalfantasy94

To warn people not to buy the game...? :?

[QUOTE="Gh0st_Of_0nyx"][QUOTE="W1NGMAN-"]

[QUOTE="Gh0st_Of_0nyx"]By the TC ridiculous logic its alright if GS rereviews old N64 games and faults them for poor graphics and sound.W1NGMAN-

That's not using my logic at all.

I'll let you figure that one out on your own :lol:

No, tell us. We'd all love to hear.

Guess what, Cows? SOCOM: Confrontation is still a 6.5 FLOP!

[QUOTE="Gh0st_Of_0nyx"][QUOTE="W1NGMAN-"]

[QUOTE="Gh0st_Of_0nyx"]By the TC ridiculous logic its alright if GS rereviews old N64 games and faults them for poor graphics and sound.jeezers

That's not using my logic at all.

Then halo 3 would have 5 new updated scores by now.... it just doesnt work, and any game that has ever gotten a patch, or a map pack, or new game mode from online, it makes no sense to keep updating reveiws just because they improved something.

This is some great damage control :lol:

Buh buh teh consoles have teh perfect games on release!!! Its teh PC tahts gettin teh bugzorz!!!!!!!!!!True_Gamer_

Unfortunately consoles are getting more like PCs these days :(

:lol: Does anyone know who this is? it's cracking me up

MarloStanfield

I don't know wrestling too well but I think his name is King Booka or something.

If a game is unplayable whats the point of reviewing it.finalfantasy94

I think a better question is whats the point of releasing it? If the game is that broken I think the developer should tell the bosses, "hey we have to miss the ship date by a few weeks, the game just isn't there yet" rather than ship a broken title to market.

since when did they re-review a game because of a patch? oh yeah... never :?ogvampire

[QUOTE="MarloStanfield"]

:lol: Does anyone know who this is? it's cracking me up

ONLYDOD

I don't know wrestling too well but I think his name is King Booka or something.

is he from WWF?

[QUOTE="ogvampire"]since when did they re-review a game because of a patch? oh yeah... never :?-Sniper99-

They shouldn't have waited to review it to supposedly give it a "fair" review. It shipped nearly unplayable, and they should've informed their readers about that.

[QUOTE="ONLYDOD"][QUOTE="MarloStanfield"]

:lol: Does anyone know who this is? it's cracking me up

MarloStanfield

I don't know wrestling too well but I think his name is King Booka or something.

is he from WWF?

That would be the man currently formerly known as Booker T, currently known as Royal T (Royalty) and previously known as KING....BOUKAH!

I'm glad only the TC is the only one who really thinks this. No one else believe this, no one else is damage controlling as hard as the TC, no one else thinks that it's good for gaming devs to release broken games with hopes for patches, no one else but the TC believes that Socom: Confloptation GS review is resting in peace. Socom: Confloptation GS review of 6.5 will live on forever.

[QUOTE="ONLYDOD"][QUOTE="MarloStanfield"]

:lol: Does anyone know who this is? it's cracking me up

MarloStanfield

I don't know wrestling too well but I think his name is King Booka or something.

is he from WWF?

It's been called WWE for a while now, he was either in that or RAW, I think he's in something completely different though. I only ever used to watch wrestling with my friend who was really into it, but it was great, especially with charecters like King Booka!

EDIT: Nevermind, look above for an answer.

[QUOTE="W1NGMAN-"][QUOTE="Gh0st_Of_0nyx"][QUOTE="W1NGMAN-"][QUOTE="Gh0st_Of_0nyx"]

This is typical cow double standards here they get a flop and now they cry and moan abour re-reviewing a broken game because it gets a patch.

Now if a 360 game flopped like Mass effect for example they wouldnt say "wait for the review" they would run wild with ownage claims :roll:

Gh0st_Of_0nyx

Nope, it flopped but with this update the review is inaccurate. Also Mass Effect doesn't need online capabilities to play so how will the players that don't have interent connection get that patch?

Not GS SLANT 6 man not IGN not metacritic. Your arguing a ridiculous point that its ok to sell a crap game as long as its patched.

Slant Six is to blame, and they got what they deserved but now that they fixed the problem....shouldn't potential buyers be aware that the review isn't accurate anymore since EVERY Socom Confrontation purchaser is required to patch the game if they want to play? They don't need to change the score but people that visit this site and are looking to purchase Socom should at least know that the majority of the the games problems have been fixed.

So admitting the game is a flop, and not caring whether or not they change the review is now considered whinning? All I'm saying is that it would be nice of them to inform people that the review isn't accurate anymore that's all.