Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 02, 2014, 10:43:34 am

Login with username, password and session length

Search:     Advanced search
Donate! | Subscribe! | Shop: Amazon

***IF YOU DONATED $50+ AND WANT A TITLE, READ THIS POST.***
*
Home Help Search Login Register
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  PC/Console Gaming  |  But is it Fun?  |  Topic: Uncharted - Naughty Dog - PS3 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: [1] 2 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Uncharted - Naughty Dog - PS3  (Read 10671 times)
Velorath
Contributor
Posts: 6813


on: August 13, 2009, 03:27:39 pm

So I finally found a place that wasn't selling Uncharted for near full price, although I actually hear that it's going to the Greatest Hits line in a few days anyway.  I'd been looking forward to playing this game for quite a while now, but having gotten to Chapter 13 so far my feelings are a bit mixed.

Naughty Dog put a lot of effort into creating a really detailed setting.  The graphics and level design are amazing.  I don't generally care too much for story outside of Western RPG's, but what's here is well done for what it is.  The problem is that Naughty Dog took all this and then used it to make a below average third person shooter, with the occasional climbing around bit.  Even for a console shooter, the controls are very imprecise here.  I'm not sure if it's more the fault of the game or if it's just the PS3's thumbsticks (haven't played much else on the PS3 yet that requires precise controlling), but between the aiming and the fact that some of the guns you find are absolute peashooters that require you to put a full clip in someone before they drop, a lot of the shooting sections are more tedious than fun.

The emphasis on the shooting gameplay also hurts immersion at times because they feel they have to keep throwing enemies at you constantly rather than giving you long stretches to enjoy the scenery.  Maybe it's nitpicking, but when I climb to the top of a small tower doing all kinds of crazy shit, I don't expect to see enemies at the top.  When I solve a clue to find a set of keys on an old skeleton to open a door, I don't expect to go through to find a dozen people shooting at me when I round the next corner.  The bad guys seem to have airlifted enemies to just about every hard to reach place, they're positioned along every river, along with a supply of exploding barrels, and they're in just about every nook and cranny of the jungle and the ruins.  I feel less like I'm exploring lost ruins and deep jungle for an ancient treasure, and more like I'm single-handedly bringing down some Colombian drug cartel or something.

At the end of the day, Uncharted isn't a bad game, it's just disappointing that they wasted so much potential.  Maybe they thought they needed to make it heavy on the shooting to make it marketable.  That they added multiplayer elements for part 2 would support that theory.  The game could have been a lot more than just another 3rd person shooter though if they had put more emphasis on the exploration.  It could be argued that it's my fault for going into the game with the misconception about how much shooting there is, but I probably would have been more forgiving if the shooting mechanics were really good.

Rent it.

« Last Edit: May 22, 2010, 05:37:21 am by Velorath »
schild
Administrator
Posts: 48720

The face of cool.


WWW
Reply #1 on: August 13, 2009, 03:39:16 pm

Mob
Velorath
Contributor
Posts: 6813


Reply #2 on: August 13, 2009, 04:18:39 pm

Just started chapter 14.  I think to myself "ok, just solved a puzzle to get into a hidden room, and then found another hidden passage in there leading to some tombs.  They have to give me a break from enemies for a little while at least, there's no way anybody can be down here yet."

So I hang down on to a ledge, make a few jumps, and just after I pull myself up and start heading up a small set of stairs, I see the laser sighting, and a couple of enemies run at me.  Die. Save. Quit for the time being.
schild
Administrator
Posts: 48720

The face of cool.


WWW
Reply #3 on: August 13, 2009, 04:20:24 pm

Naughty Dog is a lot like Demon's Souls in that you get better as you play more. For sure, "dungeon"-wise it's not as well crafted (but then, nothing is). But on my second run through of Uncharted, dying didn't really happen unless it was my mistake. By the end of the first runthrough (short of the absolute end part, which is f'ing trial and error - which drives me nuts), I wasn't dying nearly as much.
Velorath
Contributor
Posts: 6813


Reply #4 on: August 13, 2009, 04:28:57 pm

It's not the dying that bothers me.  It's that the gunplay just isn't fun and feels shoehorned in most of the time, and there isn't enough balance between the shooting and the exploration/puzzles/platforming.
Tige
Terracotta Army
Posts: 273


Reply #5 on: August 13, 2009, 07:07:40 pm

It's not the dying that bothers me.  It's that the gunplay just isn't fun and feels shoehorned in most of the time, and there isn't enough balance between the shooting and the exploration/puzzles/platforming.

The only knock I had against the gun play was the waves of bad guys mechanic.  Weapon controls, cover and concealment really shined when the fire fight was in a more confined space. 

I think to myself "ok, just solved a puzzle to get into a hidden room, and then found another hidden passage in there leading to some tombs.  They have to give me a break from enemies for a little while at least, there's no way anybody can be down here yet."

Exactly, don't tell me I just solved a centuries old mystery only to find a bunch of dudes with guns that have already wired the whole placed with electricity and outfitted it with flood lights.

I hope in Uncharted 2 we don't climb through the Himalayas and find a group of enemies with ak47s sitting in a hot tub drinking mojitos. 
Morfiend
Terracotta Army
Posts: 5987

wants a greif tittle


Reply #6 on: August 14, 2009, 02:00:20 pm

It's not the dying that bothers me.  It's that the gunplay just isn't fun and feels shoehorned in most of the time, and there isn't enough balance between the shooting and the exploration/puzzles/platforming.

I completely and 100% agree with you. Also, I hate enemy "waves". Where you basically just have to keep killing the same guys spawning from the same 3 spots until you have killed an unknown set number to continue on. The shooty party of this game was where it lacked IMO, and to much of the game was that.
stray
Terracotta Army
Posts: 16724

has an iMac.


Reply #7 on: August 15, 2009, 10:22:25 am

I remember the shooting being just right for me.. Didn't have too many problems. And believe me, I'm a piss poor action gamer. Maybe it was the overall game that compelled me to keep moving on though.. Either way, it was fun. And I agree that there should have been more puzzles. Hopefully the next time around.
Hawkbit
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4039

Like a Klansman in the ghetto.


Reply #8 on: August 16, 2009, 07:30:25 am

I noticed that Best Buy's Sunday ad has a "new low price" marker on Uncharted for $29.99.  Time to pick it up for us cheapskates.
Fabricated
Moderator
Posts: 7722

~Living the Dream~


WWW
Reply #9 on: August 16, 2009, 11:16:30 pm

Basically Uncharted is the best attempt ever at making a playable action/adventure movie. If they changed the protagonist to Indiana Jones and somehow fit a proper whip mechanic into it, people would say it was the best film license game ever made.

"The world is populated in the main by people who should not exist." - George Bernard Shaw
schild
Administrator
Posts: 48720

The face of cool.


WWW
Reply #10 on: August 16, 2009, 11:51:49 pm

Too bad Nathan Drake is more appealing than Indiana Jones now that we've seen the 4th Indy movie.
Phildo
Contributor
Posts: 4500


Reply #11 on: August 17, 2009, 12:29:21 am

Wait to pass judgment until Uncharted 4.  Look what happened to Tomb Raider.
stray
Terracotta Army
Posts: 16724

has an iMac.


Reply #12 on: August 17, 2009, 01:11:24 am

I doubt that Naughty Dog would even be involved if it made to a 4th sequel. I can't think of many "franchise" games that kept the original creators involved. Not with western games at least.
schild
Administrator
Posts: 48720

The face of cool.


WWW
Reply #13 on: August 17, 2009, 03:12:46 am

I doubt that Naughty Dog would even be involved if it made to a 4th sequel. I can't think of many "franchise" games that kept the original creators involved. Not with western games at least.
Naughty Dog has remained pretty involved with Jak & Daxter games, as well as their Crash Bandicoot stuff. Just saying.

Halo core games have been Bungie.
Short of KoToR, Bioware stays pretty involved with their shit (if you include Black Isle in Bioware, which is pretty fair all things given).
Epic Games & Unreal/GoW is another example.
Id and Doom have always remained involved with their own stuff.
Valve has only brought people in and not outsourced.
Hell, EA has had the same studio make Madden since forever.

You know, now that I think about it, I'm at a loss for wherever the hell you just came up with that.
Velorath
Contributor
Posts: 6813


Reply #14 on: August 17, 2009, 04:02:49 am

I remember the shooting being just right for me.. Didn't have too many problems. And believe me, I'm a piss poor action gamer.

Like I said, I think part of the problem I had with it just might be the PS3's controller.  I like the analog sticks on the 360 better for shooters.  The PS3's sticks have a looseness to them that makes it harder for me to make precise movements with them.
stray
Terracotta Army
Posts: 16724

has an iMac.


Reply #15 on: August 17, 2009, 07:45:48 am

I doubt that Naughty Dog would even be involved if it made to a 4th sequel. I can't think of many "franchise" games that kept the original creators involved. Not with western games at least.
Naughty Dog has remained pretty involved with Jak & Daxter games, as well as their Crash Bandicoot stuff. Just saying.

Halo core games have been Bungie.
Short of KoToR, Bioware stays pretty involved with their shit (if you include Black Isle in Bioware, which is pretty fair all things given).
Epic Games & Unreal/GoW is another example.
Id and Doom have always remained involved with their own stuff.
Valve has only brought people in and not outsourced.
Hell, EA has had the same studio make Madden since forever.

You know, now that I think about it, I'm at a loss for wherever the hell you just came up with that.

Touché

I was thinking of typical franchises that get milked and spun off by the publisher over time. Or just as bad, might have the original team, but after great success, put under a contract that forces them to crank out titles. Like the Tomb Raider series mentioned above (I believe the creator there finally just walked away.. although I think he was asked back again for one of the recent games). But anyways, I wasn't thinking it all the way through. Your examples above are clear cases of the opposite.

edit: Either way, I'm not actually worried this will become Tomb Raider. For one, it doesn't have the sex appeal that let TR get milked. And not even just sex appeal. Nathan is just a regular (albeit, snarky) dude. He doesn't really even have iconic appeal. And that's OK. Nothing wrong with that. The good thing about it is that he'll never become bigger and marketed more than the game itself.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2009, 08:23:45 am by stray »
Yegolev
Moderator
Posts: 20503

I make poor decisions


WWW
Reply #16 on: August 17, 2009, 08:29:00 am

For one, it doesn't have the sex appeal that let TR get milked.

awesome, for real

Why am I homeless?  Why do all you motherfuckers need homes is the real question.
"The majority of my posts, though at times somewhat sarcastic, have remained confined to rational on-topic discourse" -- GUESS WHO
"Wasn't trying to be incentive." -- Mrbloodworth
"My interpretation as a LAY PERSON was correct." -- Broughden
stray
Terracotta Army
Posts: 16724

has an iMac.


Reply #17 on: August 17, 2009, 08:33:26 am

Mind you, I was immune to Tomb Raider as well.  Oh ho ho ho. Reallllly?
Jobu
Terracotta Army
Posts: 566

Lord Buttrot


Reply #18 on: August 17, 2009, 11:51:40 pm

It's not the dying that bothers me.  It's that the gunplay just isn't fun and feels shoehorned in most of the time, and there isn't enough balance between the shooting and the exploration/puzzles/platforming.

I completely and 100% agree with you. Also, I hate enemy "waves". Where you basically just have to keep killing the same guys spawning from the same 3 spots until you have killed an unknown set number to continue on. The shooty party of this game was where it lacked IMO, and to much of the game was that.

It felt like the game was having this conversation with me that was really captivating. Then suddenly, after building up this great rapport with me, it changed the subject abruptly mid-sentence and start talking at me (about something stupid and unrelated), instead of with me.

I'd still say it's a must-buy for the PS3 though.
Yegolev
Moderator
Posts: 20503

I make poor decisions


WWW
Reply #19 on: August 18, 2009, 02:10:54 pm

Was it yelling at you to run faster?  That's what it did to me.

Why am I homeless?  Why do all you motherfuckers need homes is the real question.
"The majority of my posts, though at times somewhat sarcastic, have remained confined to rational on-topic discourse" -- GUESS WHO
"Wasn't trying to be incentive." -- Mrbloodworth
"My interpretation as a LAY PERSON was correct." -- Broughden
Trippy
Administrator
Posts: 17826


Reply #20 on: August 31, 2009, 10:23:17 pm

This is definitely a "LOL console shooter" game. It's essentially a cross between Tomb Raider with a wise-cracking male lead and the combat system of Gears of War. If you hate console shooters it's doubtful you are going to like this game since combat is such a large part of it.

When I first tried the game in the very first scene which also has the first bit of combat I ended up punching everybody -- I literally could not hit the broadside of a barn using the standard console shooter controls. I put the game away shortly thereafter and played inFAMOUS for a while. That's also a "LOL console shooter" game but the design is much kinder to those like myself that hate aiming with a thumbstick since you can shoot from relatively safety from above and at long ranges most of the time so you can take your time and you don't have to worry about "wasting shots" since your basic attack has essentially unlimited ammo.

I went back and started playing Uncharted again today and now, though it's still frustrating at least I can make it through the combat sequences without too much difficulty and I can even land a head shot now and again.

I think to myself "ok, just solved a puzzle to get into a hidden room, and then found another hidden passage in there leading to some tombs.  They have to give me a break from enemies for a little while at least, there's no way anybody can be down here yet."
Exactly, don't tell me I just solved a centuries old mystery only to find a bunch of dudes with guns that have already wired the whole placed with electricity and outfitted it with flood lights.
Yeah that stuff is really annoying. What's the point of following all the clues when the bad guys have figured out a shortcut and are just waiting for your slow ass to catch up with them? I just did "find the key in the tower that only you can get to to unlock the door" sequence only to find that the bad guys got in without even bothering with any key.
Yegolev
Moderator
Posts: 20503

I make poor decisions


WWW
Reply #21 on: September 01, 2009, 07:33:53 am

I find it's a lot better if you put your brain in "action movie" mode.  If you let plot holes ruin Raiders of the Lost Ark for you, it will also happen here.

Why am I homeless?  Why do all you motherfuckers need homes is the real question.
"The majority of my posts, though at times somewhat sarcastic, have remained confined to rational on-topic discourse" -- GUESS WHO
"Wasn't trying to be incentive." -- Mrbloodworth
"My interpretation as a LAY PERSON was correct." -- Broughden
Velorath
Contributor
Posts: 6813


Reply #22 on: September 01, 2009, 03:12:10 pm

I find it's a lot better if you put your brain in "action movie" mode.  If you let plot holes ruin Raiders of the Lost Ark for you, it will also happen here.

I must have missed the part in Raiders of the Lost Ark where Indy drops down into the Well of the Souls and stumbles on wave after wave of Nazis who managed to light the place up like a Stadium while they were waiting for him to show up.
schild
Administrator
Posts: 48720

The face of cool.


WWW
Reply #23 on: September 01, 2009, 03:17:06 pm

I find it's a lot better if you put your brain in "action movie" mode.  If you let plot holes ruin Raiders of the Lost Ark for you, it will also happen here.
I must have missed the part in Raiders of the Lost Ark where Indy drops down into the Well of the Souls and stumbles on wave after wave of Nazis who managed to light the place up like a Stadium while they were waiting for him to show up.
Yea, because Indy was never unreasonably ridiculous. Between the holy grail and invisible platforms and a tiny asian sidekick (Uncharted managed to do sidekick better on the first try - and twice in one game) and this stuff:

Velorath
Contributor
Posts: 6813


Reply #24 on: September 01, 2009, 03:22:17 pm

I don't think you'll find too many people who think that Temple of Doom was a good movie, so I'm not sure what point you're trying to make with that picture.
schild
Administrator
Posts: 48720

The face of cool.


WWW
Reply #25 on: September 01, 2009, 03:28:24 pm

I don't think you'll find too many people who think that Temple of Doom was a good movie, so I'm not sure what point you're trying to make with that picture.
I wasn't trying to say it was a good movie, I was just pointing out that your argument was clownshoes (even if you did specify WHICH Indy).
Velorath
Contributor
Posts: 6813


Reply #26 on: September 01, 2009, 03:31:42 pm

I don't think you'll find too many people who think that Temple of Doom was a good movie, so I'm not sure what point you're trying to make with that picture.
I wasn't trying to say it was a good movie, I was just pointing out that your argument was clownshoes (even if you did specify WHICH Indy).

You're trying to point out that my argument that Uncharted takes away from it's mystery and puzzle solving when they show that the enemies got to even the most hidden locations long before you did without bothering to solve any puzzles, by reminding me that Temple of Doom was a bad movie?  Huh?
schild
Administrator
Posts: 48720

The face of cool.


WWW
Reply #27 on: September 01, 2009, 03:36:18 pm

Quote
You're trying to point out that my argument that Uncharted takes away from it's mystery and puzzle solving when they show that the enemies got to even the most hidden locations long before you did without bothering to solve any puzzles, by reminding me that Temple of Doom was a bad movie?  Huh?
Every adventure/quest movie in the history of quest movies has this in some form or another. It'd be pretty damned boring if the hero could, you know, just walk in. The whole thing is just a ridiculous argument.
Velorath
Contributor
Posts: 6813


Reply #28 on: September 01, 2009, 03:57:43 pm

Quote
You're trying to point out that my argument that Uncharted takes away from it's mystery and puzzle solving when they show that the enemies got to even the most hidden locations long before you did without bothering to solve any puzzles, by reminding me that Temple of Doom was a bad movie?  Huh?
Every adventure/quest movie in the history of quest movies has this in some form or another. It'd be pretty damned boring if the hero could, you know, just walk in. The whole thing is just a ridiculous argument.

I guess it's ridiculous if you're intentionally being retarded.  Again let's go back to Raiders here.  Start of the movie, Indy is going after the Idol.  He doesn't just walk in.  He's careful.  He avoids traps (although he fucks up on the last one causing the boulder to roll after him).  He get's through all that, gets the idol, and then (after some problems with his henchman) makes it out at which point he runs into the bad guy outside who was secretly waiting for him to do all the hard work.

That's much better than if Indy were to go through all that trouble and get to the Idol only to find Belloq sitting there drinking tea and playing cards with a bunch of Nazi's wondering what the hell took Indy so long as guys pour in from the ceiling.

In Raiders, Indy both with the Idol and with the Ark, gets used to do the hard part so the bad guys can swoop in to take shit from him.  In Uncharted, you're just sorta there.  You're a thorn in the bad guys' sides.  From the point they find out the location of the Island, they're ahead of every step of the way by several hours at least.  You're solving puzzles, and they're just saying, "fuck that, I'm taking the elevator".

Edit: I'm not sure why it's such a hard concept to grasp.  Even fucking Goonies did it right.  They had the puzzles and traps ahead of them and the bad guys behind them.  There's a sense of urgency in that if they take too long to solve a puzzle the bad guys will catch up (which they do at points throughout the movie).  If they try to rush through the puzzles they risk doing it wrong and getting themselves killed.  In the end, I guess it's harder for developers to come up with a lot of good puzzles though so they just decided to do Gears of War in the Jungle Ruins instead.
« Last Edit: September 01, 2009, 04:56:16 pm by Velorath »
schild
Administrator
Posts: 48720

The face of cool.


WWW
Reply #29 on: September 01, 2009, 09:04:46 pm

I haven't played Uncharted in a while, but aren't the enemies, short of the last area (and one other part, after you've been "betrayed"), always one step behind you? The first time you go through the first temple, you're the one opening all the doors, etc. You have to fight your way out. The enemies aren't at the nazi sub first. Etc.

It couldn't all be Indy, I'm not sure what you wanted.
Trippy
Administrator
Posts: 17826


Reply #30 on: September 01, 2009, 09:16:27 pm

I haven't played Uncharted in a while, but aren't the enemies, short of the last area (and one other part, after you've been "betrayed"), always one step behind you? The first time you go through the first temple, you're the one opening all the doors, etc. You have to fight your way out. The enemies aren't at the nazi sub first. Etc.

It couldn't all be Indy, I'm not sure what you wanted.
Not on the island you fly to after the sub. There they are always ahead of you which mostly makes sense since they were there before you but that's even true in all the "secret" places which apparently aren't quite so secret. The "locked" doors that open are usually from the enemies opening them so they can gun you down and then you can move on to the next spot, assuming you survive.
Velorath
Contributor
Posts: 6813


Reply #31 on: September 02, 2009, 04:18:48 am

It couldn't all be Indy, I'm not sure what you wanted.

I wanted an adventure game, not just another third person shooter.  It's seems pretty clear that was Naughty Dog's intention at first also since they start out the game by giving you the fucking grail diary, which at the time I felt I'd be using for most of the game in order to get clues which would help me figure out puzzles scattered along the way.  Then it felt like they just said "fuck it", took the diary away from you and just started making a shooter instead.  When you finally get the diary back you use it to solve, maybe two or three fairly uninspired puzzles (and it pretty much just gives you the answers rather than vague clues) and the rest is more shooting with the occasional bit of platforming.
Yegolev
Moderator
Posts: 20503

I make poor decisions


WWW
Reply #32 on: September 02, 2009, 08:10:31 am

Expectations not matching reality is the big issue here.  Having played a number of modern AAA games, I thought it was pretty well-done but my expectations were lower than what the game delivered.  Besides that, the quality of the story and cinematic elements smoothed over any concerns I had about the oddly-placed enemies.  There were indeed way too many gunfights for an adventure game, but I personally don't think it took away a large portion of the experience.

I find that there is a hell of a lot of fighting in Lego Indiana Jones, also.

Why am I homeless?  Why do all you motherfuckers need homes is the real question.
"The majority of my posts, though at times somewhat sarcastic, have remained confined to rational on-topic discourse" -- GUESS WHO
"Wasn't trying to be incentive." -- Mrbloodworth
"My interpretation as a LAY PERSON was correct." -- Broughden
Tige
Terracotta Army
Posts: 273


Reply #33 on: September 04, 2009, 03:46:06 pm

It couldn't all be Indy, I'm not sure what you wanted.

I wanted an adventure game, not just another third person shooter.  It's seems pretty clear that was Naughty Dog's intention at first also since they start out the game by giving you the fucking grail diary, which at the time I felt I'd be using for most of the game in order to get clues which would help me figure out puzzles scattered along the way.  Then it felt like they just said "fuck it", took the diary away from you and just started making a shooter instead.  When you finally get the diary back you use it to solve, maybe two or three fairly uninspired puzzles (and it pretty much just gives you the answers rather than vague clues) and the rest is more shooting with the occasional bit of platforming.


The fact that Uncharted was, for the most part, the only decent game the PS3 had at the time a lot of what Velorath pointed out never got traction.  It was the only game PS3 fanbois had to cling to so they weren't going to go all psycho about the gameplay flow, tearing etc etc. I hope ND realized the timing of Uncharted couldn't have been better but that doesn't mean there weren't serious flaws that should be fixed this time around.  They are entering a market with some competition this time.

I'd wager that if Uncharted came out today it would get a decent reception but a lot of what has been pointed out in this thread would keep it from gaining the recognition it has now.   
Azazel
Contributor
Posts: 7381


Reply #34 on: May 21, 2010, 05:39:08 pm

Playing through it now, on the recommendation of the "what should I play next?" thread, and I'm seeing merit in the stuff posted above. Even with my brain in "adventure movie mode", I'm often wondering "how the fuck did they get in/up there?" I'm not finding the combat difficult (yet?), I'm actually finding the combat a little boring. I'm not a massive fan of the platforming either, but it's okay.

Graphically, it's a beautiful looking game, the characters are pretty decently done so far and the dialogue is good for a videogame (sure, they're archetypes, but I don't hate them or want to stab my ears with a spoon when they talk). Some of the set pieces are indeed very cool - like the waterfall crossing sequence - though I still find myself thinking "how the fuck did they get there and there?"

So far at least, the game is disappointing. In that it's good, but not great. Which is what I was expecting for some reason.

http://azazelx.wordpress.com/ - My Miniatures and Hobby Blog.
Pages: [1] 2 Go Up Print 
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  PC/Console Gaming  |  But is it Fun?  |  Topic: Uncharted - Naughty Dog - PS3  
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.10 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC