It's difficult to believe Zipper allowed their name to be stamped on this. Socom has died.
Supposedly, the game is meant to be the spiritual successor to the last major entries in the venerable tactical series. When I think of Socom, I think of tactical depth, stealth, and teamwork. I still to this day remember sneaking into an Albanian castle under cover of night, low crawling my way through an Asian jungle dotted with ancient temples, and storming a Middle Eastern compound under heavy fire. I remember barking complex orders like "Jester breach, bang, and clear" or "Wardog move to overwatch" and planning my route into and out of enemy areas. I even remember the thrill of pulling off a perfect mission with no casualties or slip ups. I loved every second of my time with all three previous Socom titles, and I simply couldn't wait to get my hands on this one.
When the beta test for the multiplayer released, I can't say I was particularly impressed. While I was not really involved in the multiplayer aspect of gaming back during the days of the vintage Socoms, I had played it enough to get a feel for the game. The Socom 4 beta felt... different. The gameplay was faster, the number of bullets one had to fire to kill someone had been greatly increased, and it just generally felt and played more like an action title than a tactical shooter. When the change in feel was added to rampant lag and other issues such as the lack of a party join, I became a little skeptical about how the final product was going to turn out. Still, I decided I would give it a shot because if nothing else the single player and co-op experience would be worth some time. When the title released a few weeks later, I eagerly unwrapped it and fired up the single player, ready for some tactical action. The game looks and sounds good, the shooting feels pretty satisfying, and it at first appears that you're in for a really great ride. That feeling quickly dies, however. You can imagine my surprise when the game I found myself playing began to more closely resemble Uncharted or Gears of War than a tactical shooter.
Rather than continuing the wide open, free-to-choose environments of the previous titles, Zipper has chosen to make the game as linear and restrictive as possible. Most areas are now no more than maybe 50 yards across and are generally bounded by cliche borders like impossibly sheer rock walls and/or cliffs and rivers. This is especially frustrating because to look at the in-game map one would think the AOs are massive. The reality is that a system of invisible walls, "you are leaving the combat area" messages, and contrived barriers prohibit you from ever getting off the main path. As an added insult, Zipper has limited player choice even further by forcing a mandatory checkpoint system that places waypoints that must be hit about every 50 feet or so. They also added an abundance of chest-high walls that are so blatantly designed for use as cover positions that any sense of you actually being in a realistic scenario goes right out the window. To make matters worse, the cover system just plain doesn't work a lot of the time, with your character peaking around an edge instead of over the top or enemies destroying or shooting straight through whatever piece of cover you've taken refuge behind. I found myself frequently just doing the crouch/stand manual pop and shoot to avoid the issues with actually using the sticky cover. That isn't to say that cover actually matters much of the time, because Zipper has, in all their wisdom, also included rocket spamming enemies and impossibly convenient angles from which enemies can rain hell down upon you in an apparent attempt to force players to keep moving. This further destroys any tactical element Socom 4 had going for it, and all but the most patient of players will be screaming expletives as the 400th rocket impacts them in the face. Of course, multiple rocket launching enemies in any given area also doesn't do much for the Socom series' trademark realistic feel.
Speaking of a lack of tactics and realism, don't expect to be doing any flanking, suppression, or sneaking in the main levels either; enemies always know where you are and your friendly AI is so atrocious that expecting help from them will more often than not get you dead. Again, Socom 4 generally winds up feeling more like an on-rails outdoor corridor shooter than a tactical experience. There is really only one way to approach every situation, so attempting to avoid the ensuing carnage by playing smart is futile. You are going to have to play this as a fast paced pop-and-shoot title, not a tactical one. If you don't like that, you're in for a rough ride. The loss of its tactical identity is strike number one for the single player.
Also gone is the ability to issue complex orders to your team. While your unit is still made up of two 2 man fireteams (Blue team and Gold team), your orders have now been confined almost exclusively to a couple of buttons. You can order your teammate to a position by looking at it and pressing the order button and you can control whether they will move slowly (at a walk) or quickly (at a slow jog). Got that? Good, you're now basically completely caught up on the extent of Socom 4's squad mechanics. That's right, with the exception of a "heal teammate" command and the exceedingly rare contextual order, you are limited to movement orders. No hold fire order, no overwatch order, no suppressive fire order, no breach order (not that there are any buildings to actually be breached anyway), nothing. Zipper has completely and totally removed nearly every squad command feature from previous games. I suspect that this is because the cloistered level design doesn't require much tactical control and they were trying to keep things simple for the mainstream crowd, but it feels like a slap in the face for those of us who revelled in the franchise's tactical choice. The loss of squad control completely alters the feel and flow of the game, and in doing so pushes Socom 4 yet further into generic action game territory. Only the most naive of gamers could possibly call this a squad based tac shooter. Strike number 2.
As you may have guessed, there is a strike number 3. This one is the gameplay abortions that are the stealth missions. After every three or so regular shoot 'em up missions, you are "treated" to a stealth mission starring the horrifyingly irritating female Korean operative known as 45. These missions normally involve infiltrating an area that you will assault during the next level with the entire team. The basic idea is to stay hidden while accomplishing objectives such as planting a tracking device, listening to a conversation, or surveilling the enemy. Sounds interesting in concept, right? In actuality, however, the stealth missions are awful in nearly every possible way. To start, Zipper has inexplicably decided to include a visibility meter for these missions. The higher the meter gets, the more likely you are to be detected. It has been so long since I've seen a full blown stealth meter implemented that I'd thought--or perhaps hoped is more appropriate--that they had finally kicked the bucket. Unfortunately, I was wrong. Everything from light sources to speed of movement plays into the stealth level of 45, so you'll need to stay in the shadows and move slowly like you do in all B-grade stealth games. It's archaic, but it would be easy enough if not for my second major complaint about the stealth missions: the horrificly overpowered AI. The enemy detection AI is so unpredictable that hiding is basically a moot point. There are times when you will be discovered by a passing soldier even though you are completely hidden and immobile. It's hard to feel immersed when a soldier does a zombie-like left face while walking by you and begins screaming as the AI magically realizes you are there. And don't think you're going to be able to just silently kill that enemy and move on; if one enemy spots you, he will immediately use his genetically enhanced telepathy to reveal your location to all other enemies in the area, and because your health is drastically reduced during stealth missions (presumably to stop you from just shooting your way through them) this usually results in a nearly instantaneous death. You can silently kill enemies to get them out of your way before they see you, but if your aim is off even a little or if they are too close to a light source you will be immediately discovered.
The stealth missions do try to add a little bit of depth here and there. One early stealth mission teaches you how to hide bodies (a nod to the old Socoms), but in practice I never actually had to do it. In most circumstances, the people you kill from stealth are too far away to bother picking up their corpses, and more often than not they either fall where they are hidden or you are discovered straight away and killed, negating any need for body hiding. The end result of the stealth missions' flaws are that they wind up being more of an exercise in frustration than a fun change of pace. They could have been a pleasant gesture towards older Socom fans, but instead they just fall flat. Even worse, when they are combined with the general mediocrity of the shooting levels the entire game gets dragged down substantially. I can't believe that Zipper voluntarily stamped their name on a single player experience this bland. If you were hoping to pick up Socom 4 to relive the glory days of 1-3, you are going to be disappointed.
Of course, there's always the multiplayer. Now that PSN is back up, I've had the opportunity to give Socom 4's multiplayer suite a shot. Unfortunately, the beta turned out to be a pretty accurate representation of the game's final feel. The main game type is still suppression (essentially team deathmatch), though it is tempered by a few other somewhat interesting distractions like bomb squad or a classic mode which plays much like a last man standing game with teams (it also happens to be the most similar to previous Socom multiplayer games). None of the modes are inherently flawed and the game runs relatively nicely, but it is crippled by some downright baffling design decisions by Zipper before it can become too entertaining.
Socom 4 runs on dedicated servers for up to 32 players, and therein lies the first problem: the maps don't seem large enough to accomodate so many players. Most matches become a brutal mosh pit that conjures more images of games like MAG or Killzone than Socom. Gone is the slow, even tempo of the previous titles, replaced by a hectic symphony of violence that, to its credit, is sometimes pretty entertaining if a little shallow. You can choose your weapons from a rather large list and each weapon has unlockable mods that will improve its performance. All your standbys are here along with a healthy dose of weapons you have probably never heard of unless you're a gun collecter. The weapon choice is one of the high points for the game, and I would be remiss if I didn't tell you that the shooting mechanics actually feel very good and the weapon sound is pretty satisfying. If that's all you're looking for, this may be a pleasant stop on your gaming journey even if it's unlikely to blow your socks off.
It's not necessarily that the game isn't fun to play--I actually had a pretty reasonable time with it--it's that it just isn't what I signed up for. The mechanics feel good and it generally plays as well as any standard TPS out there, but it just doesn't do anything unique like the old Socom games did. There is nothing tactical about the way public matches are played. That may not be true in clan matches, but I detest the notion of clans so I won't be finding out any time soon. My one and probably only clan match was simply myself and a group of friends trying to play together (more on that later) and involved a whole lot of corner camping and grenade spamming, which is about as far from tactical as one can get. The lack of teamwork or tactics may be fine with many players, but it just isn't really my cup of tea given my expectations for this game.
The team experience is further hampered by one of the dumbest design choices I have ever seen: the failure to include a party system. That's right, there is no such thing as a party or even a pre-matchmaking lobby in Socom 4. You will not be able to join a match as a group with your friends because the feature simply isn't there. One person will have to join alone, and then the rest of you will spend up to an hour or longer attempting to nab any free spots that happen to pop open on the server. Even then, it's unlikely that you will all be placed on the same team. This is frustrating to say the least, and I am confounded by Zipper's apparent oversight of the issue. I have heard rumors that party support will be added later this summer, but its lack of inclusion (especially after the complaints about the same issue in the beta) has shaken my confidence in Zipper enough that I'm not sure what to expect in the future. For now, all I can say is that any multiplayer game that actively prohibits me from playing with my friends is not a game I'm willing to spend my time with. You can always create a clan and jump into clan matches, but the system for doing so is equally awkward and bumpy, so you may wind up in a room where your teammates' voices play only through your speakers or where you have to press a button to talk to them, not to mention the fact that you may very well be paired against a clan that is so well versed in Socom that no casual group will ever stand a chance against them. It is a pretty poor workaround for the issue and is likely to lead to even more frustration rather than a satisfying resolution of the problems caused by having no party system. Still, it the clan system does provide perhaps the most Socom-esque experience, so provided you have some interested friends it may be something that you are interested in.
The only aspect of Socom 4 that I struggled to find issue with is the 5 player co-op. Although you have to join friends in progress as you do in multiplayer, this is usually done easily since private games can be set up. The co-op games are actually quite entertaining if for no other reason than playing with your friends against hordes of enemies is always fun. Unfortunately, there are only 4 co-op maps and, although they are relatively large and allow you to set up a couple of different custom mission types, they are generally completed in less than 20 minutes each. Additionally, the co-op experience is hampered by the same frustratingly linear checkpoint system as the single player, so your tactical options will still be pretty limited (though it is worth mentioning that you have more freedom of movement in co-op than single player). Still, co-op is a fun diversion and perhaps worth a look for those looking to jam something simple with their buddies.
In conclusion, Socom 4 is an immense disappointment to me. I hate to say this, but I think that Socom as we all have known it for the last ten years or so is dead, swallowed whole by the mainstream/casual gaming trend. If you're new to the series or just looking for a decent game to pass the time between releases, this game is tremendously flawed but playable. For those of us who wanted a little bit more, though, it's hard to imagine feeling any more let down. It isn't necessarily that Socom 4 is a bad game on its face, its just that it isn't the game it should be or could have been. R.I.P Socom. I'll miss ya, old buddy.