Support NeoGAF

[Cow Mengde]

Yeah, Stub's is nowhere near comparable to the transcendent majesty found in the regal balconies of the Hall of Fame.

Someone should make a movie based on this thread.

 

[ColtraineGF]

Not really. If you want to convert 5-point scale into 10-point scale you have to take into account that 1/5 = [0,2], 2/5 = (2, 4], ..., 5/5 = (8, 10].

EDIT: ugh, too late :/

You wouldn't take that into account, because of no information. If you're using a 5/5 scale, you are arbitrarily limiting yourself to 0, 20, 40, 60, 80, and 100%. There's no getting 91% out of a 5 point scale.

If the person reviewing wanted that sort of granularity, s/he'd use a scale out of 10, or out of 100.

So yeah, 5/5 has the same distinction as 10/10. The only difference behind them is reviewer intention.

 

[state-of-the-art]

I'm having flashbacks of posting on Gamefaqs. It's horrible.

 

[Loudninja]

Topic going in circles we have the samething posted again from a different site.

 

[Pranay]

Someone please close this thread now.

If anyone wishes to discuss the game, its better we do it in OT, where people are playing the game.

and yes as loud ninja said thread is going in circles

 

[Lovegooder]

I'd always thought NeoGAF was supposed to be asylum from this kind of "discourse"?

 

[Ra1den]

If the person reviewing wanted that sort of granularity, s/he'd use a scale out of 10, or out of 100.

So yeah, 5/5 has the same distinction as 10/10. The only difference behind them is reviewer intention.

Reviewers use whatever they are told to use, in most cases. There is no question that 5/5 is more common than 10.0, and reasons for this have already been given.

 

[JudgeN]

God forbid you criticize a review or the review process of a mainstream game these days then.

I would love for the score to disappear for reviews period, give us your review text and let us decide based on how well written if the game is worth buying or not.

 

[Deleted member 81567]

The show must go on.

 

[Segnit]

Linearity and reduced interactivity is a shortcoming in videogames.

High average reviews represent mass appeal.

Lower Uncharted 3 reviews represent reduced mass appeal.

 

[Ra1den]

Linearity and reduced interactivity is a shortcoming in videogames.

High average reviews represent mass appeal.

Lower Uncharted 3 reviews represent reduced mass appeal.

Those three sentences are all incorrect.

 

[Segnit]

Prove me wrong.

 

[Andvary]

So the mods are promoting every site that gives UC3 an 8? weird.

 

[Daschysta]

,

 

[Kalnos]

5/5 = 80%?

Is this the new .999.... != 1?

 

[flyinpiranha]

As has been stated SEVERAL times before (and pretty much right above and below my post), a 5/5 is not going to be the same as a 10/10, even if they are mathematically the same. Just compare the number of "perfect" scores for reviewers that use the 5 point scale versus those that use 10s.

I don't get this argument. So it's not math anymore? 4/5 =9.9/10? Math isn't subjective the last time I checked.

 

[Daschysta]

Prove me wrong.

Dark souls? No more heroes?

 

[iamshadowlark]

Dark souls? No more heroes?

Yea I dont think i've played a game less mass appealing this gen.

 

[gray_fox224]

Has it be discovered what game Geoff from GT was playing when he said that one of major titles this year is "slightly" disappointing?

 

[SolidSnakex]

Has it be discovered what game Geoff from GT was playing when he said that one of major titles this year is "slightly" disappointing?

Nope, but it definitely isn't U3

Uncharted 3 is the best PS3 game to date. By far the best story of the series - real depth there. I love the world and the characters.

http://twitter.com/geoffkeighley/status/128513510777958401

 

[arne]

There's an interesting thing concerning the criticism to U3 (and the Uncharted franchise) that's been interesting to notice during the past week-plus

it's almost like one of our core gameplay philosophies - that of that we want to take full control away from the player as little as possible, is working against us (as far as reviews).

it's like we give you a little bit of control where traditionally we may not (escaping from a wall of water, walking through the desert) and then you, as a game player, want more. it opens the door to the question: why am i being "pushed" through this sequence when i should be given more freedom?

there's something about what we do in the game, through gameplay, that seems to make people want uncharted to be an open world game or a much more open world game. and it makes it hard to ignore our linear, scripted moments, compared to other titles that do very similar things.

i personally don't know how to take it sometimes. we can do what we do because it's such a tightly paced, controlled, linear experience.

 

[Dr. Malik]

Checkpoint (videogame web news satire from LoadingReadyRun) make fun of this entire thread:

http://penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/uncharted-charted

See if you're one of the one's they quoted!

I wasn't mentioned

There's an interesting thing concerning the criticism to U3 (and the Uncharted franchise) that's been interesting to notice during the past week-plus

it's almost like one of our core gameplay philosophies - that of that we want to take full control away from the player as little as possible, is working against us (as far as reviews).

it's like we give you a little bit of control where traditionally we may not (escaping from a wall of water, walking through the desert) and then you, as a game player, want more. it opens the door to the question: why am i being "pushed" through this sequence when i should be given more freedom?

there's something about what we do in the game, through gameplay, that seems to make people want uncharted to be an open world game or a much more open world game. and it makes it hard to ignore our linear, scripted moments, compared to other titles that do very similar things.

i personally don't know how to take it sometimes. we can do what we do because it's such a tightly paced, controlled, linear experience.

Make the environments more opened? There is a lot of sections in UC3 that could have used more breathing room for exploration.

 

[iamshadowlark]

I don't get this argument. So it's not math anymore? 4/5 =9.9/10? Math isn't subjective the last time I checked.

Think of it like the weighted grading system teachers use.

 

[DoomGyver]

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=32101923&postcount=3231

 

[Nirolak]

There's an interesting thing concerning the criticism to U3 (and the Uncharted franchise) that's been interesting to notice during the past week-plus

it's almost like one of our core gameplay philosophies - that of that we want to take full control away from the player as little as possible, is working against us (as far as reviews).

it's like we give you a little bit of control where traditionally we may not (escaping from a wall of water, walking through the desert) and then you, as a game player, want more. it opens the door to the question: why am i being "pushed" through this sequence when i should be given more freedom?

there's something about what we do in the game, through gameplay, that seems to make people want uncharted to be an open world game or a much more open world game. and it makes it hard to ignore our linear, scripted moments, compared to other titles that do very similar things.

i personally don't know how to take it sometimes. we can do what we do because it's such a tightly paced, controlled, linear experience.

Out of curiosity, do you think a new console generation would change the bolded?

Obviously you're extremely memory constrained right now, but when you're not, does that open more doors, or does it lend itself more to just having more impressive controlled set pieces?

 

[Ra1den]

it's like we give you a little bit of control where traditionally we may not (escaping from a wall of water, walking through the desert) and then you, as a game player, want more. it opens the door to the question: why am i being "pushed" through this sequence when i should be given more freedom?


i personally don't know how to take it sometimes. we can do what we do because it's such a tightly paced, controlled, linear experience.

This is exactly what I said above. Had these same moments been cutscenes, the complaints would not be there. By giving the player a bit of control over the cutscene, which is a GOOD thing, all the sudden we have a problem. It is illogical and unfortunate, and is only harming the industry. Sadly, when the reviewers themselves aren't even aware of how illogical their position is, these complaints are going to happen.

 

[Corto]

Just another voice to defend stubs. In a scale of 5 points there is not as much room to incremental scores as in a 10/10 so a 5/5 could be if that reviewer choose to use a 10 points scale a 9.5/10.

 

[Zeliard]

There's an interesting thing concerning the criticism to U3 (and the Uncharted franchise) that's been interesting to notice during the past week-plus

it's almost like one of our core gameplay philosophies - that of that we want to take full control away from the player as little as possible, is working against us (as far as reviews).

it's like we give you a little bit of control where traditionally we may not (escaping from a wall of water, walking through the desert) and then you, as a game player, want more. it opens the door to the question: why am i being "pushed" through this sequence when i should be given more freedom?

there's something about what we do in the game, through gameplay, that seems to make people want uncharted to be an open world game or a much more open world game. and it makes it hard to ignore our linear, scripted moments, compared to other titles that do very similar things.

i personally don't know how to take it sometimes. we can do what we do because it's such a tightly paced, controlled, linear experience.

The best may be to try and find some middle ground. Not quite open world but have more open environments, kind of similar to what Valve did with Half-Life Episode 2 and making it a focal point to have more expansive environments.

More open levels and some branching paths and such would give much more of a feeling of player agency in Uncharted while still keeping options for scripted set pieces and dialogue exchanges open. Not only would that feel far more freeing to the player but it also opens up more tactical possibilities for gameplay. Uncharted has a stealth system of sorts and one of the things bigger environments would allow is more opportunity to use it.

Of course all of it comes at a cost. Larger environments and less of a linear, guided direction will tend to mean more assets, more testing, just more time and resources in general invested. You don't know exactly what the player may be doing or seeing at any given moment so it undoubtedly takes work. But it can have significant positive impact.

Uncharted's linearity is compounded by its fairly automatic platforming. It amounts to player traversal through the levels feeling like the game is pushing you along a pre-determined path instead of doing what it ideally should which is making the player feel like they're on an adventure, exploring the unknown.

 

[Raitosaito]

There's an interesting thing concerning the criticism to U3 (and the Uncharted franchise) that's been interesting to notice during the past week-plus

it's almost like one of our core gameplay philosophies - that of that we want to take full control away from the player as little as possible, is working against us (as far as reviews).

it's like we give you a little bit of control where traditionally we may not (escaping from a wall of water, walking through the desert) and then you, as a game player, want more. it opens the door to the question: why am i being "pushed" through this sequence when i should be given more freedom?

there's something about what we do in the game, through gameplay, that seems to make people want uncharted to be an open world game or a much more open world game. and it makes it hard to ignore our linear, scripted moments, compared to other titles that do very similar things.

i personally don't know how to take it sometimes. we can do what we do because it's such a tightly paced, controlled, linear experience.

Maybe from reviewers, but I think a few members of GAF are pretty vocal regardless of what game takes this linear approach. I personally don't mind it too much, and I'm actually in the camp where you guys should only be pushing those aspects and ditch shooting or at least make it super minimal.

 

[Tom Penny]

Reviews are so important that" much better " games get 1 point better SMH.

I feel like I’ve collected a big bag of coins and have nowhere to put them. Yes, I’ve got to dock them. But we already rated Gears of War 3 at 92 and this game is a lot better than that one, in my opinion. So we’ll let Naughty Dog skate by with 93 out of 100.

and what the fuck does this mean?

The No. 1 trade-off of all of the graphical beauty is speed and freedom of movement. When you have your gun drawn, it takes a full 11 seconds to spin around in a 360-degree circle. Eleven seconds! That means you can’t turn fast enough to shoot enemies who are coming at you from the side.

 

[Souldriver]

The Neogaf-Uncharted3 saga continues.

Jesus, not neogaf's finest hour. But amusing none the less.

 

[Segnit]

Had these same moments been cutscenes, the complaints would not be there.

And you're actually proud of wrongly speaking on other people's behalf?

High average scores represent plurality in game design. A linear game that can only do linear design excludes a segment of the reviewers and gamers. A sandbox game that only does sandbox well excludes a segment of reviewers and gamers.

Game design that is built on complementarity and plurality is a better game.

I love simulation racing games but I'm am not offended to see that GTR2 or iRacing rated below Uncharted on Gamerankings.

Why are the people advocating for linear and focused gameplay offended to find out that they are part of a niche?

 

[Nirolak]

Just another voice to defend stubs. In a scale of 5 points there is not as much room to incremental scores as in a 10/10 so a 5/5 could be if that reviewer choose to use a 10 points scale a 9.5/10.

But a lot of 5 point systems have half and quarter stars, while some 10 point systems have no half points at all.

 

[-Pyromaniac-]

The Neogaf-Uncharted3 saga continues.

Jesus, not neogaf's finest hour. But amusing none the less.

always the greatest works that spawn the most discussion.

 

[Corto]

But a lot of 5 point systems have half and quarter stars, while some 10 point systems have no half points at all.

I know, I just want to defend Stuburns as I'm sure that was what he meant by that statement. I give him more credit than what that decontextualized sentence makes of him. Potentially, the more points a score scale has the more incremental points you can assign.

 

[Ra1den]

Uncharted's linearity is compounded by its fairly automatic platforming. It amounts to player traversal through the levels feeling like the game is pushing you along a pre-determined path instead of doing what it ideally should which is making the player feel like they're on an adventure, exploring the unknown.

I don't think "automatic" is fair. You often have to stop and take a hard look around and die a few times before you find the correct route. Uncharted 1 especially, there were times when the correct path is not at all clear.

Do you want it to be like Mario with lining up precise platform jumps? That would not be appropriate for this type of game, and ends up being a nightmare in most non-2d games.

 

[arne]

Out of curiosity, do you think a new console generation would change the bolded?

Obviously you're extremely memory constrained right now, but when you're not, does that open more doors, or does it lend itself more to just having more impressive controlled set pieces?

i'm sure the next evolution in technology would open up a lot of doors, so it's hard to say exactly how that could change what we are doing right now, and what type of game we would create with some sort of leap forward in tech.

frankly, i don't think it's as much a limitation of technology rather than it starts to take away from the experience and emotion you're trying to evoke. we're trying to make you follow a very specific script as far as the narrative, and to deliver the story and the emotional highs and lows effectively with our format, you have to maintain the pacing so you don't get bored or apathetic. and for us, it's important that we want you to play without stopping, to get the experience of the game as a whole, cohesive experience - so that requires that the game continues to progress constantly. there's different ways to do this, and perhaps new/better tech will expand those options, but I also feel like those options are limited by what feels satisfactory from a gameplay or narrative point of view as well.

but i guess that's tangential to part of my question/point - how come this practice is ignored as a criticism elsewhere, or how come limited environments are okay, and for us, we've gotten to the point where it's not okay for us to proceed that way?

I'm not saying we'd be okay to settle with what everyone else is doing, but all i have is to compare with how other games are received.

The best may be to try and find some middle ground. Not quite open world but have more open environments, kind of similar to what Valve did with Half-Life Episode 2 and making it a focal point to have more expansive environments.

More open levels and some branching paths and such would give much more of a feeling of player agency in Uncharted while still keeping options for scripted set pieces and dialogue exchanges open. Not only would that feel far more freeing to the player but it also opens up more tactical possibilities for gameplay. Uncharted has a stealth system of sorts and one of the things bigger environments would allow is more opportunity to use it.

this was the criticism i levied towards Uncharted 1 when I was interviewing for my job here. that the environments were too constricted and it really felt like you were being pushed only towards one path. the thing is, compared to what we did then, the environments are way, way more expansive and "wide." what we do though, is go wide to narrow to wide, etc. to move you in the directions where the story moves forward.

the only thing we don't have to your point, and i don't really see how to do this within the scope of what we've got and are doing, is having branching paths within the story/environment.

 

[Segnit]

always the greatest works that spawn the most discussion.

Although I mostly agree with you, I believe the discussion here is based on Uncharted fans and Naughty Dog themselves being at least partly surprised that linearity and reduced interactivity is not going down well with everyone.

Why the surprise?

Is it wrong for reviewers to markdown a game for being too linear? Is that what you guys are saying? Are you guys saying that people who don't like linear games shouldn't review linear games? What is the complaint?

 

[JWong]

Nope, but it definitely isn't U3

http://twitter.com/geoffkeighley/status/128513510777958401

Then it's MW3.

Spoiler

or Skyrim?

 

[-Pyromaniac-]

Although I mostly agree with you, I believe the discussion here is based on Uncharted fans and Naughty Dog themselves being at least partly surprised that linearity and reduced interactivity is not going down well with everyone.

Why the surprise?

Is it wrong for reviewers to markdown a game for being too linear? Is that what you guys are saying? Are you guys saying that people who don't like linear games shouldn't review linear games? What is the complaint?

I see both sides. One side is all herppp but you're criticizing a game for being the type of game it is, it makes no sense. It's like criticizing a point and click game for being too point and clicky and not taking enough risks. But then there is the other side that is all derrrrppp but we just expected something more, it's just my opinion, it's all subjective, etc...

Is that it?

 

[Number45]

I wish some review site would come up with a random-assed scale like 1-7 or something.
The entertaining part would be the fanatics trying to equate that to a 1-100 scale score and arguing over percentages.

Isn't this essentially what happened with 1Up?

 

[Segnit]

but i guess that's tangential to part of my question/point - how come this practice is ignored as a criticism elsewhere, or how come limited environments are okay, and for us, we've gotten to the point where it's not okay for us to proceed that way?

If this is a conspiracy theory, and you're right that there is a conspiracy against Naughty Dog then I'm with you. Question is, is there a conspiracy against Naughty Dog? I'm inclined to think 'no'.

I mean, are we forgetting that Uncharted 2 is among the top 5 highest rates games on Gamerankings?

 

[Abylim]

Looking forward to playing this, Arne.
I still dont see whats worth getting so upset over, its 93 avg, and by now anyone whose played the first 2 are buying the third.

I cant waaaaait for christmas! (Wife is buying me U3 for xmas, I have to wait -=)

 

[Ra1den]

Game design that is built on complementarity and plurality is a better game.

This is far too simplistic to be even remotely true. Or perhaps you believe it is true because you also believe that these games will score higher (as you stated)? Even if that is correct, better reviews don't make better games. I would hope the ideal is for better games, and not better reviews.

 

[Segnit]

I see both sides. One side is all herppp but you're criticizing a game for being the type of game it is, it makes no sense. It's like criticizing a point and click game for being too point and clicky and not taking enough risks. But then there is the other side that is all derrrrppp but we just expected something more, it's just my opinion, it's all subjective, etc...

Is that it?

As the way Gamerankings and Metacrtic work, there is no way that Pong or Tetris can compete with Uncharted. Are you advocating that we change the system?

Because if only people who love puzzle games were to review Tetris then it would likely be the highest rated game ever.

What's the suggestion here?

Or perhaps you believe it is true because you also believe that these games will score higher (as you stated)? Even if that is correct, better reviews don't make better games. I would hope the ideal is for better games, and not better reviews.

Can we agree on the general principle that better games get higher average scores and worse games get lower average scores?

 

[arne]

Although I mostly agree with you, I believe the discussion here is based on Uncharted fans and Naughty Dog themselves being at least partly surprised that linearity and reduced interactivity is not going down well with everyone.

Why the surprise?

Is it wrong for reviewers to markdown a game for being too linear? Is that what you guys are saying? Are you guys saying that people who don't like linear games shouldn't review linear games? What is the complaint?

it's not wrong. and reviewers have the latitude and agency to mark down any game, including ours, for whatever reason i valid.

but this is the third game in a series that has established itself as being linear. wouldn't that have been discussed the first time around, and then when the second game continued that format, why hasn't the discussion/criticism moved on to discuss whether that's a successful format or if we achieve the goals within the linear format.

i mean that's just personal opinion. i just can't keep letting go that this exactly thing is rarely mentioned for other titles that do the same, but they do for us. and in my head, what are they doing right with being linear and scripted that we aren't so that it isn't as big an issue.

 

[Abylim]

I struggle to think of a better series this gen than Uncharted, actually. Batman, maybe, but I'm a massive Batfreak.

I platinum'd UC2, and had the most fun out of any of my plats. Didnt plat the first, but I played it after 2.
I wish you guys got a bonus based on how many fans, not reviewers loved it.
Someone said the trophies were messed in this one, does it include MP or something?

 

[Nirolak]

i'm sure the next evolution in technology would open up a lot of doors, so it's hard to say exactly how that could change what we are doing right now, and what type of game we would create with some sort of leap forward in tech.

frankly, i don't think it's as much a limitation of technology rather than it starts to take away from the experience and emotion you're trying to evoke. we're trying to make you follow a very specific script as far as the narrative, and to deliver the story and the emotional highs and lows effectively with our format, you have to maintain the pacing so you don't get bored or apathetic. and for us, it's important that we want you to play without stopping, to get the experience of the game as a whole, cohesive experience - so that requires that the game continues to progress constantly. there's different ways to do this, and perhaps new/better tech will expand those options, but I also feel like those options are limited by what feels satisfactory from a gameplay or narrative point of view as well.

Thanks for answering. I didn't actually expect one.

but i guess that's tangential to part of my question/point - how come this practice is ignored as a criticism elsewhere, or how come limited environments are okay, and for us, we've gotten to the point where it's not okay for us to proceed that way?

I'm not saying we'd be okay to settle with what everyone else is doing, but all i have is to compare with how other games are received.

For this, my general perception is that as game quality increases, people still try to find things they would like improved in a game.

Uncharted 3 doesn't have a lot of obvious issues that should be fixed and improved upon, so the focus of "What would I like done differently in the future?" moves to high level design concepts instead of issues like "I wish there was a larger variety of guns." or "This multiplayer mode is rather sparse."

 

[arne]

If this is a conspiracy theory, and you're right that there is a conspiracy against Naughty Dog then I'm with you. Question is, is there a conspiracy against Naughty Dog? I'm inclined to think 'no'.

I mean, are we forgetting that Uncharted 2 is among the top 5 highest rates games on Gamerankings?

oh i don't think its a conspiracy. maybe then the question is, why was that format, which continued from U1 to U2, not a big deal in U2, but now it's back with U3.

i'm not taking issue with what's been said, i'm just trying to get an understanding to it all.

Looking forward to playing this, Arne.
I still dont see whats worth getting so upset over, its 93 avg, and by now anyone whose played the first 2 are buying the third.

i'm not upset at all! as i just said, i'm just trying to get an understanding of it all, figure out the subtext to these feelings. maybe it's something that can be addressed in the way we make games, or maybe not. who knows. but it's fun to probe into it.

 

[-Pyromaniac-]

As the way Gamerankings and Metacrtic work, there is no way that Pong or Tetris can compete with Uncharted. Are you advocating that we change the system?

Because if only people who love puzzle games were to review Tetris then it would likely be the highest rated game ever.

What's the suggestion here?

review a game without referencing what you wish it would be, what other games are, and so on. Review a game purely for what it is. Uncharted has always been a linear experience with a focus on slick gameplay, awesome set pieces, and good storytelling. It has never even in the slightest attempted to be different.

An experience should be evaluated by the intentions of the maker. The only outside references that should be made are to past uncharted games, because I think that's fair at least.