What I don't understand is how there servers would crumble with only a peak number of 25,000?

PS3 definately has a good lineup this Holiday, so i wouldnt worry about it. But 360 and the Wii have as good list of games coming, so it does not really give them an edge in my opinion.

 According to this sight Socom sold more than 200,000 opening week. This does not include all the versions sold on the PSN. All this for an online only game I remind you. I doubt it took much resources to make the game. It's not like Sony is going to lose money on it. But your right, Sony FAILS at advertising there games. I think there plan is to advertise there biggest one or two games and hope people see and buy there others? Either way, they FAIL. But they still get respectable sales so I don't see the problem. And yes, people would add Socom Confrontation to there lists of games coming out this fall, but that was because it was coming out this fall. lol. I don't remember seeing anyone claim it was going to be triple A. Just another game that would grab some players interests and sell some copies which it did. True, I was expecting a score of 80 for this game but if you actually read the reviews it was unjustly ranked due to server problems. I'm sorry, but if they played the game how hard would it have been to rate the mechanics of the game etc. then just problems that are obviously being ironed out?

The reviewers pretty much complained about the server issues. The servers were pretty bad during the first few days of the game release. You couldn't get passed the title screen, you would disconnect from games, there were a lot of lag, and freezes. The reviewers praised the gameplay though. The game doesn't seem to have any problems any more, except for a few lags here and there. Some features are missing, but they'll be patched up. I have the game, and it's very fun and addicting. Great teamwork is the only way to win in most of game modes.

@solid_raiden, welcome to the VGChartz.

I have to disagree.  A reviewer has to review the product in front of him, and online functionality is a big part of it.  If you review a product assuming that lag issues will be fixed later on then you aren't reviewing the product in front of you, but instead what you think the product will be, and that's just too iffy.

The problems the reviewers had were the buggy servers not much else. I don't know why Sony doesn't seem to be able to get online play right considering all their MMORPG experience etc. but that's hardly a problem of the PS§ exclusives.

I am a Socom diehard and I have been waiting patiently to play this game. I was going to buy a PS3 because of this game. Now reading about the game at the boards at playstation.com and speaking with friends that play the game I will not be purchasing this game or the system (I really wanted to play Resistance 2 , damn it). I will be purchasing another 360. My 20 gig HD is almost full of my music so I am going to buy a 60 gig Xbox.

Now I will admit I am a little bias towards Xbox in loyalty but I have owned every PS that came out (about 3 PS2's) but when it comes to purchasing things in real life I could give a crap who makes it as long as it is something I want. I have absolutely no interest in LBP (I am 32 years old and generally into shooters WRPG and action games) and I am not purchasing a system for Resistance when I can play gears.

Dunno in my head it seems like buying the 360 makes more sense which is kind of sad for sony. And the 3 main reasons for buying the Xbox this year is price, new harddrive, and system link (me and a buddy love playing coop).

Just my 2 cents. Peace

Ok. I see your point and can respectfully agree with that. However, maybe they should have waited to review the game? Or release a newer review for the fixed version like 1up announced they would do? It has no effect on me personally but many gamers will see the score and not make the purchase which is really a great purchase exspecially with the headset. And that's just too bad.

Yet the main value of a review over time is to tell what it is like *when others might buy it*, and for a game that will be quickly patched, that means reviewing a post-bug-fix version *as well as* the initial buggy one.

They were idiots for releasing it unfinished, but my point about the value of reviews remains.

On that note though, I would instead argue that the developers should have waited if they were unable to have a good online right from the get go. These problems apparently were rampent in the beta, and therefore they knew they existed to an extent. I agree that it is unfortunate the game is getting railed for it, by all accounts it's a very good game when the online works, but an all-online shooter with online issues is not going to get a good review score.