Sony's SOCOM II Gets Cheat Patches

An anonymous reader writes "According to an email reprinted on the GameBattles.com forums, it seems that Sony has released the first mandatory downloadable patches for the Playstation 2 online game SOCOM II: U.S. Navy SEALs. This is nothing new in the PC gaming world, but is relatively novel for PlayStation 2 gamers - there's no official word on what changed, but there's a list of perceived changes on the official SOCOM II boards." 1UP also notes that the patch "occupies some space on your memory card in the blocks already used by the game", but doesn't need the forthcoming PS2 hard drive in any way.

Comments

Sounds Cool

[NedR]

Is this the first step towards downloadable extra maps, etc., like on XBox Live? Or, conversely, is this the next step towards developers releasing buggy games for the PS2 because they know they can add on patches later? I'm hoping for more of a trend towards the former than the latter.

Re:Sounds Cool

[lubricated]

The hard drive will allow you to download extra maps, but patches and updates will be released to the memory cards. The people with hard drives will be able to download new levels but they will still be able to play with people that dont' have hard drives if they don't play a new level.

Re:Sounds Cool

[obeythefist]

Here's the problem, as games become increasingly more complex on consoles (as the article said, nothing new for PC games), the bugs have become more apparent. It seems consoles must chase after the PCs again by including patchability in games.

Unfortunately the industry will just use this new technology as an excuse to make poor quality games for poor quality consoles and completely ignore the technology in the PC gaming platform.

Another Wolverine console game conversion from Activision perhaps?

Re:Sounds Cool

[StocDred]

Increasingly more complex? I don't think that's the problem. What's more complex, your average Final Fantasy game or your average PC FPS? I think that it's the usual rush-to-market syndrome, coupled with the relative inexperience of console developers when it comes to online games (and online cheaters.)

Patching in games is rarely a good thing, so I wouldn't make it sound like PC games are better because they can be patched. Console games (prior to this generation) required stricter quality control because they couldn't be patched. (Yes, yes, buggy console games ship, but the overwhelming majority of console games are far more stable and polished than PC games. That's not always an indictment on PC games, just points to the endless ways the user can alter/upgrade/fuck up their personal system.)

What's that saying... if you're so smart, why aren't you rich? Well, if PC games are so amazingly better, why aren't more people buying them? For most casual users, it's not worth the effort to get PC games to work. Consoles just work. It doesn't matter how much more techpower is behind your shiny new Windows machine, if it's beyond what most people can stomach in terms of money and time commitment and engineering, it's not going to win compared to a $100 Nintendo. Why do you think Microsoft started up the Xbox?

Re:Sounds Cool

[*weasel]

Which will outline the problems of add-on hardware for consoles all over again.

Most games don't leverage hardware add-ons because most people don't buy them. Offering content downloads to a small section of your community isn't going to be seen as a reasonable way to spend your development time and money. Since few people will have the HD, few people will have the new content, so few games will ever use it.

Games with fanatic followings like Phantasy Star Online and Final Fantasy XI can require adoption through a bundle - but what other developer is going to bank such a feature and development resources to support it, on their fanbase being made up of people who already bought FFXI?

It's the same problem XboxLive will run into when they start charging for content. Eg. Few people will pay for new maps, so no-one will be playing the new maps, which will be a disincentive for anyone else to buy the new maps.

Purchasable content and downloadable content will become adopted widely when everyone gets the content, but only the purchasers can use it.

Eg. a purchased avatar for The Sims that only paying customers can use, but anyone can see. Or a purchaseable mech for MechAssault that everyone can see and has to fight against, but only paying customers can select.

Naturally there'd be some design/balance issues to be considered, to ensure the game doesn't drive away users due unfair advantages from purchased content.

Though, the economic 'arms race' for new purchased content is essentially the driving force behind all Collectible Card Games.... so who knows?

Re:Sounds Cool

[Anonymous Coward]

It gets really annoying when the first thing I search for is a patch....

Re:Sounds Cool

[Anonymous Coward]

wtf was that modded as troll. StocDread is right the whole point of consoles is that they just work. As a avid pc user I prefer Consoles for gaming why becouse they just work!

Re:Sounds Cool

[obeythefist]

This is exactly my point! Console games don't "just work". Not anymore. Let me explain.

They need to make at least a shallow attempt at competing with the PC in terms of attractive graphics, because the eyecandy factor of a console will help sales. This is obvious because next generation consoles are more popular than previous generation consoles, despite being more expensive.

Early PC games, just like early console games, just like most early software, was generally more free of bugs than more complex modern software. The less you have to test, the less code you have to debug, the better the quality will be (in theory). As PC games got more complicated, they became more and more bug ridden. This is starting to happen with console games as well.

Patching with *any* software is always a good thing. Or are we suggesting that applying service packs to Windows, or kernel patches to Linux is unforgivable? I'll take my patches thanks. The same applies to games. If they can improve the quality of a game, even after I've already given them my money, then I'm all for that.

As for your question:

"Well, if PC games are so amazingly better, why aren't more people buying them?"

You've answered it for me:

"For most casual users, it's not worth the effort to get PC games to work."

So, lack of motivation to go through a few simple steps to install a PC game instead of plugging in a cartridge/DVD/whatever has robbed console players the opportunity to enjoy richer, higher quality games.

But you say console games "just work"? Given that the consoles are more and more commonly using the same code base, I'm not sure how you can qualify this anymore. There are some advantages because of the static platform for the game, testing is simplified, and quality will be higher, but this patch episode demonstrates that the times are changing.

Now, in Australia, I don't know about there, but when the PS/2 was first released it cost $899 AUD in stores. For that price you can get a low end PC capable of playing games of even higher quality than the commercials for the PS/2 games, and that *includes* a monitor. What's more, you can inexpensively continue to upgrade the PC. Of course, the console becomes much cheaper as it gets older. But then, a two year old PC will cost you much less than that $899. The cheap cost of a console is becoming more and more of a myth, as consoles try harder and harder to gain the same capabilities of a PC.

Console games don't just work. They're becoming more expensive and more complex. Now you have to jump on the internet and download the patches, it's not just a case of dropping in the disk.

One last suggestion: You'll find it much more enjoyable downloading the patches for your console games if you use a real PC for it. You even get a choice of browser!

Re:Sounds Cool

[StocDred]

Do you play console games? When I played Super Mario Sunshine, it never crashed out on me, never needed a patch to fix a level glitch, and never stopped working after I played some other game. When I played Vice City, the worst thing that happened was once my bike got stuck on a vertical ramp and I couldn't ride it anymore. I had to go find a new bike. By and large, console games do just work. 99.9999% of the time. It's only a handful of online-enabled games that are starting to go this patching route, hardly the deathknell for consoles that you're making it out to be.

Or are we suggesting that applying service packs to Windows, or kernel patches to Linux is unforgivable? I'll take my patches thanks.

The problem with patching is that it is out of control. PC games are rushed out the door to meet the holiday rush, and they're buggy and unbalanced because of it. Then there's a new Windows fix or other random download that f's up the settings and breaks something that used to work fine. Console games don't have this problem, because up until now the concept of a patch didn't exist, and because the given hardware of the console just isn't changeable by the end user. I'm not saying that PC patches shouldn't happen, because problems should definitely be fixed... just that on the console side, you have a much better chance of the bugs never appearing in the first place. That's a huge strength. They're far more trustworthy from the outset.

The notion that console games will be able to be patched scares me, because I don't want to have to babysit the playability of the new Zelda game on my console. I want it to work each and every time I play it, regardless of when I bought it and what I've bought since. If console games start making gaming as difficult as it is on the PC side, then they'll be in big trouble. That's just basic good business: you don't make things tougher for your consumers, you make it easier.

The cheap cost of a console is becoming more and more of a myth, as consoles try harder and harder to gain the same capabilities of a PC.

Are you crazy? Forgive my US pricing here, but the PS2 was $300 at launch. The Gamecube was $200. A useable PC is at least $1000, and most pros would shudder at even that low price. You note that consoles get cheaper into their run... yes, they do, but PCs do not. A two year old PS2 can still run current PS2 games. A two year old PC may not be able to run the latest PC games to their fullest without an upgrade. If I bought a $1000 PC in 2002, would it be able to run Doom 3 when it comes out later this year?

Re:Sounds Cool

[Deadguy2322]

If you had read the article, you would know that it is not a bugfix, but a patch to help eliminate cheating on the online play servers. How many PC games require 100s of MB in patches just to function properly, yet you still have assholes using trainers and other cheats to ruin your fun? Maybe before you post the next time, you'll try to learn enough about the topic at hand not to sound like an elitist wanker when you chime in with your contribution. Finally, if you are so opposed to consoles, don't annoy those of us who aren't chauvinistic trolls with your half-assed preaching. By the way, I am online with my PC, a P1-200 MHz, which I don't play games on, because even getting the games that my hardware can support to run properly is a load of bullshit I'd rather not go through when I can just pop a disc into my Playstation or Dreamcast and be playing in a few seconds.

Patches aren't new to PS2 games

[jvmatthe]

Everquest Online Adventures (my initial impressions) also has mandatory patches, and they are also stored on the memory card. You even get a changelog with them that tells you what's been updated and why. It was pretty neat, even if it does take forever to do sometimes. Also, just like a critical Windows patch, it requires a reboot of the machine to finish.

I presume that Everquest Online Adventures: Frontiers has a similar system.

Good

[mrshowtime]

Cheat codes ruined that game totally. But, the damage has already been done. Will anyone be playing anymore. Socom lost a lot of people because of cheating.

Re:Good

[Komarosu]

Yup, i'm one of them. I got SOCOM with my network adapter and after 3-4 weeks the game was ruined with aimbot and invisbility hacks. Since then i've binned it.

Fine Line to choose to walk

[Stubtify]

As stated this may lead down a dangerous path, as people enjoy consoles mostly because you put the game in, and it runs, everytime. This won't however be the first time games have shipped with flaws, See here for GT2's recall So the ability to download patches could save millions if a game was truly flawwed, but take it too far, and consoles lose their biggest edge.

what about the bathing bikini girls?

[Monofilament]

Now, sure they patch some security flaws or something like that.

BUT .. its still not going to prevent your buddy from getting distracted by gawking at the nice looking woman next door who are rubbing sun screen on each other next to the pool, and then ultimately accidentally killing your whole squad cause he's holding down the fire button and left at the same time.

Re:what about the bathing bikini girls?

[Sylver Dragon]

Well, if the game can be moddified, it might be possible to make it display naked women for all of the characters in the game, so your friend should then pay attention to the screen. Then again, he might still hose your squad, but in a whole different fashion.

Memory Card Space

[MadMoses]

Ah, now I understand why the block occupied by SOCOM2 on the memory card is 3MB big (I had to buy a new one, btw). That's an insane size just for game data, but understandable if it was intended to be used for patches.

FYI, Socom2 was released in Europe only two days ago. About 6000 players already registered, with about 1500 playing in the evening. I hope Sony will soon introduce an international server, so that we can have some inter-continental matches (currently, the american, asian and european servers are not connected).