[Official] SOCOM: U.S. Navy SEALs Confrontation


Recommended Posts

Ermm, no! That is nothing at all to do with NAT. Keep studying (Y)

Now I'm sure you don't mean to, but to me your coming off as rude now.

We get its a beta, at least I do, but it doesn't mean I am going to say nothing about my experiences so far it with, I have no doubt it will improve it is the first day it has been available of course it is going to have problems with so many people trying to use it for the first public time.

I should be on soon to find a game, I haven't found my mic yet, but I can still try it out.

Im assuming the Neowin server is still going?

How are you supposed to connect to other players when there is conflicts with NATs. Only when they leave and there isn't a conflict can you connect. I don't need to study the issue anymore (Y) It doesn't lag during game so it's not servers issues plain and simple as you make it out. Maybe you need to go back to studying? :rofl:

Even Halo 3 beta had this issue, don't see why you need to defend it to the grave that it can't possibly be the problem :no:

I'll tell you what, you carry on thinking it's NAT issues.

The real problem is down to servers not being 'sized' correctly for the sheer amount of load (users in this case). The developers will be sat watching the real time captured metrics of the servers as we log in and play. They will be making small adjustments to the load balancing to see if it has a huge impact on the server loads. The main problem here is the configuration of the servers.

It has nothing whatsoever to do with NAT. I promise you. They will be using this period as there 'peak' baseline and everything will be changed around these results.

I'll tell you what, you carry on thinking it's NAT issues.

The real problem is down to servers not being 'sized' correctly for the sheer amount of load (users in this case). The developers will be sat watching the real time captured metrics of the servers as we log in and play. They will be making small adjustments to the load balancing to see if it has a huge impact on the server loads. The main problem here is the configuration of the servers.

It has nothing whatsoever to do with NAT. I promise you. They will be using this period as there 'peak' baseline and everything will be changed around these results.

I'll tell ya, these NAT issues are annoying.
Tell me about it.

:rofl:

You can keep the promise, I can reel off a list of games already out in the market which mimic this exact behaviour and it comes down to NAT problems.

Anyways, back to the beta itself.

I thought SOCOM was meant to be big on customizing weapons? The list is tiny :/

Maps are huge which is a good thing, although a bit of a pain until we get some more people playing (Y)

Okay I am in. :shiftyninja: :punk: Downloading now.

And Beta, Demo, that is all just semantics. If people are having issues, they are having issues, so lets just leave it at that. No need to beat a dead horse now is there?

Can someone give me a break down of what buttons do what? I have not played a SOCOM game in years.

And also, just let it go everyone and act civil, please.

Can someone give me a break down of what buttons do what? I have not played a SOCOM game in years.

And also, just let it go everyone and act civil, please.

There's a detailed listing in the menus, also which motion sensing actions there are.

At this early stage there is probably a whole list of issues, including server, as I wasn't able to connect to the network when I booted up either. From there on though its far more likely NAT issues imo. Games like Halo and RSV are just some which have had these problems even when they reach retail.

Server issues aren't much better in the end, it shows PSN and it's game servers still need a hell of a lot more work.

Anyways I'll be on again tomorrow to play some more Neowin matches (Y)

Edit: that's a good point actually, how the hell do you sprint :rofl:

Sprint was the first thing I figured out.

And I was wondering why no one could hear me!! LOL I figured out the controls were in the menu, so thanks for the tips. See you guys tomorrow.

@ Dirk, I would say just from an hour playing with it, it is worth buying it. I already do feel that. I am also working on trying to get you a code, but cannot promise anything so do not hold me to it, but I will try for you.

So it did take me a long time to get into a game from the game lobby, enough to make me think the game froze, but I did get in, and once I was in, there was noticeable lag, but it was not all that often. Overall, the matches ran pretty smoothly. Lag was there though once in a while, no doubt.

But overall, I loved it.

Graphics looked better than I thought they would, they truly do. While not the prettiest out there, the screenshots I have seen do the game no justice. The overall visuals I have seen are really actually impressive. There are hardly any jaggies, actually barely any, which I thought jaggies were going to be dominant from the screens I had seen. And even the textures, which overall are definitely not the highest I have seen and do look noticeably low in certain areas and on certain objects, somehow the low and high textures mesh to make a really nice combination. Just to give you an idea, my brother in law came by while I was playing (also owns a PS3 and 360) as we were going out to dinner with him and his gf, and his exact words were "bro, this looks really ****ing good." So I have to say I was really critical of the visuals, and they look really damn good, they do. So that is out of the way for me now.

Onto the gameplay...

Loved it, not much else to say. I have not played a SOCOM game since whichever one I last had on the PS2, and I was never hardcore into it to begin with which you can maybe tell since I do not even remember which one it was (somewhere around 6-7 years ago??), but I do remember enjoying it. Honestly, SOCOM it is pretty much exactly like the GRAW series, it just feels better overall to me, and not even sure why. I loved the GRAW series, I truly enjoyed it, and I feel this is just the same, but better, and I am not even fully comfortable with the controls yet, like it took me several rounds to know how to zoom (missed it when I checked the controls the first time), but it just felt really good, and the thing is it is not even hyper realistic, it was just incredibly fun to play, and distinctively SOCOM.

What truly blew me away is how seriously people took playing, and yes, for me that is a good thing. People were communicating about the enemies position, staying together, etc. etc., and for this type of game, that is essential, but I could truly tell most people playing the Beta were already part of a very dedicated community, and that was incredibly cool to experience right away. I am sure I will run into some knuckle-heads for sure, but that was just a very great first online experience.

So overall really impressed.

With that said...

If the menu system stays this unresponsive, that is truly a travesty. I have never been in a more unresponsive menu system.

It was not easy to connect to a game, definitely not, and I hope that gets better, but I am assuming it will.

Finally, I had a CRAZY issue with my Bluetooth headset, and I hope it is because of the game and not my setup at home, I have to do some research I guess. I have not tried my bluetooth headset since I set up my true surround sound (I have my rear speakers actually behind me finally), but basically I was getting a really weird feedback in my speakers that was an echo on about a 3 second delay picking up any sound through my headset and playing it through all of my speakers incredibly loud and then it would feedback on itself. Was really, really, really strange, since I was hearing the voices playing through the headset, not my speakers, and my team could hear me. It happened after about 35 minutes of playing and not initially, but it was almost as if my headset was a microphone coming through the speakers and not through itself like it should be, if that makes any sense. I am going to try my USB headset tomorrow (maybe tonight if I do not fall asleep LOL), and see if they work better.

So yeah, I wrote a whole lot, as I usually tend to do, but my first impression was an EXTREMELY positive one, something that does not happen all of the time with me and games. No doubt I will be buying this game.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
    • A $300 price hike is insane! No one is going to want to pay that much!
    • Since the 1st one flopped, there is really no reason to make another one. It's just losing money left and right.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      580
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      75
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      71
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!