Support NeoGAF

[Corto]

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?

No conspiracy theory. Taste evolves, trends evolve. Uncharted as a series can fall to the same problems that Indiana Jones as a movies series suffered. Become formulaic with some changes to the conceptual formula perceived by its creators as game changing but to the exterior were perceived as just cosmetic changes. I'm far away from that point of saturation still, but others seem to have reached it already. There's now a balance to be made by ND to decide if the audience for future Uncharted games has the potential to grow with the same formula or if it needs to change it to another fresh one to expand. This off course can mean that the faithful fans of the "old" formula can feel somewhat "betrayed" by that step. But I'm sure this is a discussion that ND is having internally.

 

[Abylim]

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.

I have to agree here.
The av guy (Scott) gave 2 an A. Then with 3, he gives it a 50. I can understand marking the third down for not being as original, or impacted, but wouldnt that be like an 80? How does one say the gameplay was dated in 2, give it a high score, then say the same gameplay is "archaic" in 3, and dock it 40 points? within what, 2 years? /baffled

I had a good discussion with a friend over this lastnight, and it ended with us throwing our hands up and just agreeing that some folks just dont make sense.

 

[Shurs]

Question:

If you're going to update the thread title with new news, why don't you also update the OP with a link to the Penny Arcade video?

 

[JABEE]

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.

It's like when scouts are analyzing a player so much that they fall down the draft list. There isn't much left to criticize so they have to look for things to say about the game. I find the "it's subjective" appeal to be a bit of a cop out, especially when they are putting a number at the end of the review. It seems so contradictory.

 

[Nirolak]

Question:

If you're going to update the thread title with new news, why don't you also update the OP with a link to the Penny Arcade video?

Sometimes I'm updating a lot of things at once and forget that I didn't put an update in an OP.

 

[Abylim]

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.





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.

Oh, I meant us, the fans, with the upset comment. You should check out some of the comments people have been making about these reviews man, hehe.

I think its pretty cool that one of you can respond to us here.

I cant seem to make sense of the reviews that dock the game points for following the formula of the first 2 games either, though =\

 

[arne]

I have to agree here.
The av guy (Scott) gave 2 an A. Then with 3, he gives it a 50. I can understand marking the third down for not being as original, or impacted, but wouldnt that be like an 80? How does one say the gameplay was dated in 2, give it a high score, then say the same gameplay is "archaic" in 3, and dock it 40 points? within what, 2 years? /baffled

I had a good discussion with a friend over this lastnight, and it ended with us throwing our hands up and just agreeing that some folks just dont make sense.

the thing is, I don't even look at this regarding the scores, but with the qualitative parts to the reviews.

 

[Raitosaito]

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

.....

Games are now defined by their score? A lot of people must have miss some good games if this were true.

 

[Shurs]

Sometimes I'm updating a lot of things at once and forget that I didn't put an update in an OP.

Cool. I hope that didn't come off as me being snarky.

I appreciate the updated thread titles.

 

[Dr. Malik]

People expect games to evolve, if you give them more of the same with a few changes here and there of course they will mark it down. UC1 to UC2 was a huge step and if UC3 replaced UC2 it would have released the same amount of praise, but the reality is that UC2 to UC3 isn't a progressive step and so it should be mark like that when rating the franchise. Best luck on UC4, that PS4 should give you more tools for Uncharted to evolve

 

[Zane]

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.

Well, the way I felt during the game was this (I wrote the Wired review): Uncharted 1 was a fresh and new experience. Uncharted 2 improved on that by a gigantic amount. It blew minds because we had never seen those sort of really amazing setpieces before. Or at least, nothing on the scale of what U2 had to offer. What I felt with U3 is that it didn't really offer anything new and fresh. U1 and U2 did.

Because, here's the thing: Okay, bombastic setpieces, above-average storyline, charming characters. But this is your third game to follow this formula. At this point -- especially after the huge leap from U1 to U2 -- I'm expecting a bit more than the status quo. For me, just more Uncharted isn't really enough. And to me, that's just what U3 felt like.

U3 is still a fantastic game. I mean, I gave it an 8. A Wired 8 is like a 9 anywhere else. But for U1, I had no expectations. U2 defied all expectations. It made U1 look like a joke. U3 only really met my expectations.

 

[NullPointer]

I'm not seeing linearity as the issue in those Uncharted reviews, as much as its the illusion of choice getting shattered. Its the feeling that you're doing it wrong when you aren't following the script exactly to the tee. The problem is a game that gives you a false sense of freedom just before pulling the rug out from under you and possible even penalizing you or killing you for doing the wrong thing.

That's a more nuanced complaint than "linearity = bad" and some games exhibit these problems more than others.

* I haven't played Uncharted 3 and loved UC2, but this is the impression I got from reading the reviews.

 

[Segnit]

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.

Yes absolutely. Let me admit that I care about scores and I care about rankings of games. Vindication is a powerful drug and so is winning and so is having a vision that proves popular.

I am equally frustrated by how silent the media was about the evident issues of Uncharted 2, when it launched years ago. The game had sizeable drawbacks but somehow managed to claw it's way into the all time greats.

I share your frustration by the lack of warning. Reading the reviews of Uncharted 2 today, one would get the impression that everyone wanted more of the same. There is a problem there no doubt.

But ultimately Tetris does not compete with with Uncharted and I think the same principle applies to uncharted in relation to other games.

Sandbox games take more time and effort to make because they have to pull of both uncharted types of elements well as well as the sense of freedom.

Linear games that are too limited in scope should not be directly competing with games the emphasis grander visions.

.....

Games are now defined by their score? A lot of people must have miss some good games if this were true.

For better or for worse, your words not mine.

 

[Zane]

I'm not seeing linearity as the issue in those Uncharted reviews, as much as its the illusion of choice getting shattered. Its the feeling that you're doing it wrong when you aren't following the script exactly to the tee. The problem is the game gives you a false sense of freedom just before pulling the rug out from under you and possible even penalizing you or killing you for doing the wrong thing.

That's a more nuanced complaint than "linearity = bad" and some games exhibit these problems more than others.

This too.

 

[Corto]

Oh, I meant us, the fans, with the upset comment. You should check out some of the comments people have been making about these reviews man, hehe.

I think its pretty cool that one of you can respond to us here.

I cant seem to make sense of the reviews that dock the game points for following the formula of the first 2 games either, though =\

At this point in the cycle there seems to be some sort of sequel fatigue. Maybe Uncharted 3 was in the wrong place at the wrong time and UC2 acclaim worked in UC3 disfavor creating impossible expectations to this title. When you have such high quality expectations from game to game there will be a point where it's impossible to meet those same expectations.

 

[JABEE]

Another thing I like about reviewers is how they laugh at the people comparing their scores yet they continue to put them on the end of their reviews. If they are so laughable, why use them? It seems ridiculous to put out content and just say "Oh, you nerds and your scores." Reviewers created this joke of an evaluation tool. They also are important in deciding what games get green lit. If you don't want people to think these numbers mean something, don't put them on your damn review. Don't make money off of the hits a review score brings and then wash your hands of the "fanboy" uproar.

 

[Fine Ham Abounds]

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

I think you mean sanctuary. But asylum works better for this thread.

 

[hauton]

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

neogaf is definitely the asylum

 

[Massa]

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.

One common complaint I noticed from people who didn't fall in love with Uncharted 3 is that they die a lot. Like 100+ times in a playthrough.

In that case the "I don't like that this game is scripted" doesn't come from having parts that give you too much control, but from dieing over and over again and feeling it's not because you suck at the game but simply because you haven't found the "correct" path through a level.

 

[Zeliard]

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.

I'm guessing one of the reasons people look at Uncharted's linearity more than some other games is that it can hurt the exploration element that the game seems to otherwise promise the player with. Nathan Drake the character is an adventurer but with the game guiding the player along the way it does, it makes it tougher to feel like you're maneuvering out on your own. Uncharted feels like a series that would lend itself nicely to further refinement in that area.

It's a similar reason some people have been wanting more complex puzzles and more downtime, and fewer combat scenarios and scripted set pieces. They want it to feel like more of an adventure game, basically. Any time the player feels like they aren't really in control and are being too guided, it can undermine that aspect.

 

[XxSlasherMcGirkxX]

I think more than anything with a game like uncharted that is universally praised with little faults, people/reviewers tend to start to create a vision of what they think the game should be or evolve into because they don't have anything else left to ask for. The game is already what they want, but nobody is ever completely satisfied. So we add things here or there or give input to what we would like to see. Therefor the minor docking of reviews and such.

 

[Abylim]

People expect games to evolve, if you give them more of the same with a few changes here and there of course they will mark it down. UC1 to UC2 was a huge step and if UC3 replaced UC2 it would have released the same amount of praise, but the reality is that UC2 to UC3 isn't a progressive step and so it should be mark like that when rating the franchise. Best luck on UC4, that PS4 should give you more tools for Uncharted to evolve

Eh, I'd be pissed if UC3 wasnt very similar to the second, In fact, I'd be wary if this game was more open world, or something. I think the combat is refined as hell in the second, and I enjoyed the "platforming". I guess I understand why the devs wouldnt change a hell of a lot with one of the highest rated games of the gen.

I mean, the basic thing that changed from 1 to 2 was refinement, AFAIK. My biggest complaint with the first would be the awful sixaxis grenade aiming, and some of the platforming/climbing was abit unresponsive. Those were fixed with the second, and unless they brought back sixaxis grenade aiming, I dont see why it would get docked.

 

[jett]

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.

I think one of the reasons Uncharted 3 is getting more criticism regarding freedom and linearity because quite simply there are more moments in UC3 where control is taken away from the player than in UC2. There are several times in the game where the game forbids you from running, climbing, shooting or do anything other than walking. There was only one such time in Uncharted 2, and the game smartly gives you stuff to do to break up the monotony, such as talking to the villagers, playing with the kids, or petting the animals. In UC3 you just walk forward in all of these scenarios, there's nothing else to do. There's a time in the beginning where the game doesn't let you exchange weapons. If you don't want us to exchange weapons, why even have the enemies at that point drop pickups? These are only two examples I can think off the top of my head.

The game is just as linear as UC2, but it feels more directed. Frankly the people answering you in this thread clearly haven't played the game yet.

 

[Ra1den]

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.

Many professional reviewers and gamers view games as little more than diversions. They have little respect for the format, hence the obsession with "innovation." You ever hear a complaint about a great gangster movie because it was not "innovative," or because "gangster movies have been done before" ? Of course not. But with games, there is this persistent belief among reviewers that games need to reinvent the wheel every incarnation. Why isn't it enough to release a high quality product, even if it does nothing innovative?

The reason is because these types of reviewers see games as nothing more than diversions, so as long as it is "fresh" it keeps their attention, but if not, regardless of quality, it is dull to them. So the problem here is lack of respect for the format of videogames, and I doubt the reviewers themselves are aware of their bias.

So, in U2, because of how unique and fresh the action was, not many found fault with the linearity...but even though U3 does everything U2 did but better, the novelty (which is a large part of their enjoyment) for them has worn off. One day, hopefully, games will be held to the same standards as movies and books, and not be forced to constantly re-invent successful formulas to get proper respect.

 

[Combichristoffersen]

Hey, Arne, quick question that's completely unrelated to Uncharted: Do you have any European ancestry? Just asking, 'cause Arne is a name usually found in Scandinavia.

 

[Chinner]

arne has brought up a really interesting debate that i want to participate in but i can't really say anything until i've played uncharted 3

 

[arne]

Well, the way I felt during the game was this (I wrote the Wired review): Uncharted 1 was a fresh and new experience. Uncharted 2 improved on that by a gigantic amount. It blew minds because we had never seen those sort of really amazing setpieces before. Or at least, nothing on the scale of what U2 had to offer. What I felt with U3 is that it didn't really offer anything new and fresh. U1 and U2 did.

Because, here's the thing: Okay, bombastic setpieces, above-average storyline, charming characters. But this is your third game to follow this formula. At this point -- especially after the huge leap from U1 to U2 -- I'm expecting a bit more than the status quo. For me, just more Uncharted isn't really enough. And to me, that's just what U3 felt like.

U3 is still a fantastic game. I mean, I gave it an 8. A Wired 8 is like a 9 anywhere else. But for U1, I had no expectations. U2 defied all expectations. It made U1 look like a joke. U3 only really met my expectations.

dude we share a last name, how can you do this to me?! (kidding)

so, we're a victim of our own ambition/success? or perhaps mismanagement of expectations in a way.

you're not going to get a U1 -> U2 leap more than once per engine/console generation. U1 we were developing an engine concurrently with a game. U2 we could use the full power of the fully armed and operational game engine, and take it to the point we could, without worrying about engine development.

it's almost like we would have done better for the franchise as a whole to have dialed back U2 (which we would never have done)

 

[Lyonaz]

Arne what's up with the EU version not having online yet while the majority of Europe is already selling the game?
It completely sucks that the Online Pass can't be redeemed yet. I don't mind Online Passes but when it isn't even available on PSN when the games are already shipped and in stock at retailers it just pisses me off.

 

[Ra1den]

Sandbox games take more time and effort to make because they have to pull of both uncharted types of elements well as well as the sense of freedom.

This is utter nonsense. Name some sandbox games that pull off what Naughty Dog has pulled off with the UC series. Now I'm thinking your just trolling.

 

[patsu]

arne has brought up a really interesting debate that i want to participate in but i can't really say anything until i've played uncharted 3

Same here. >8^/

EDIT: I think part of the reasons is because ND showed too much earlier on. The boat scene and airplane scenes were amazing, it raised the expectation even higher since people think you have even more amazing stuff underwrapped.

Tell Sony to buckle up and not rely on ND to impress the crowd during their presentation.

I also wonder if the beta has any "magic removal" effect psychologically.

 

[Amir0x]

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 see what you're saying, but my biggest problems outside of the 'forcing' through action set pieces is why there is this seeming desire to make it nigh impossible to die during platforming segments. This is real gameplay, in control of the player. If a ledge is breaking and I don't make it over in time, i should die. If I go for a jump and time it wrong, I should die. This neither ruins the cinematic experience nor kills pacing: it enhances the tension to these otherwise amazing moments which, for me, feel kind of limp and weak because I know I can close my eyes through them and basically get to the end in 9/10 spots.

Now, I'm speaking purely from an "Uncharted 2" standpoint because I haven't played Uncharted 3, but it doesn't sound like this has changed. So i'm curious why your cinematic, guided linear philosophy has gone so far that it has corrupted platforming in this way. I can't really see the logic behind how letting players die and thus heightening the tension would make it impossible for you to do what you do.

 

[Fine Ham Abounds]

arne has brought up a really interesting debate that i want to participate in but i can't really say anything until i've played uncharted 3

^

Can we call you Wednesday?

 

[MikeE21286]

Aww man Stu


This thread has claimed some good ones :|

 

[Ra1den]

If a ledge is breaking and I don't make it over in time, i should die. If I go for a jump and time it wrong, I should die. .

This is how it is. You are claiming it is not possible to fall to your death? I don't know what to say to this other than that it is false.

 

[Raonak]

dude we share a last name, how can you do this to me?! (kidding)

so, we're a victim of our own ambition/success? or perhaps mismanagement of expectations in a way.

Heh, you act like U3 is getting reviewed badly, most people like U3 better. I think a similar example to this situation is LBP2.

It is far better than LBP1 in nearly every single way, but LBP1 has a 95, while LBP2 has a 92.

 

[Raitosaito]

For better or for worse, your words not mine.

You are not being consistent. Supposedly as you've stated better review games are better games, now what you just said is implying that is not true.

I stated that what you originally said about general review scores has no basis, and I feel like you are just spouting anything to reach a conclusion that variety creates a high enough gamut to create a better review score which in turns make a better game. That is really just non-sense, but if that is your opinion stick to it.

 

[Jarmel]

@ arne
The way I felt this could be best handled is multiple pathways throughout the game such as pure stealth or combat and having individual scenes for each path. For example if you go the stealth route that might involve a backdoor, floodlights stream across the place with a helicopter flooding the room with lights from outside while if you run in then maybe a cannister or something blows up lighting the room on fire. That way you can still provide cinematic moments while giving the player control. This can also be done in regards to platforming. For example one route is going up a rope and another is jumping ledge to ledge.

I think providing two or more ways to get through a level would allow for that player freedom yet you can still sprinkle certain scenes throughout the ride.

 

[RurouniZel]

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.

I think it's because of three primary reasons

1) Uncharted lends itself to Hollywood comparisons far more easily than other games do. It's more a testament to your skill in directing action sequences with the best of them.

2) Uncharted places more emphasis on the single player, story driven campaign, unlike the equally scripted and linear MW games or BF3 which put more emphasis on the multiplayer.

3) It's easier to notice a character gliding slightly in directions you're not telling them to in 3rd person than in 1st. And please don't take this as a "switch to first person" plea, I NEED my 3rd person fix.

These aspects combine to put Uncharted's scripted sequences a bit more in the forefront, and thereby easier to critique, as it were. It's a shame, because there are videos on YouTube of Modern Warfare effectively playing itself, so to speak, which is worse than Uncharted's scripting.

 

[Zane]

dude we share a last name, how can you do this to me?! (kidding)

so, we're a victim of our own ambition/success? or perhaps mismanagement of expectations in a way.

you're not going to get a U1 -> U2 leap more than once per engine/console generation. U1 we were developing an engine concurrently with a game. U2 we could use the full power of the fully armed and operational game engine, and take it to the point we could, without worrying about engine development.

it's almost like we would have done better for the franchise as a whole to have dialed back U2 (which we would never have done)

I understand that it is hard or impossible to get the same leap. But, and I mean this with no disrespect, it doesn't really matter to my review. At the end of the day, I am evaluating the product you have on display. The behind-the-scenes stuff doesn't change how I feel about the game. From what you say, it doesn't seem like you could really do anything about it.

But I can't let that influence my personal opinion. Because I am reviewing the product that my readers are buying. Not the product that could have been.

 

[Amir0x]

This is how it is. You are claiming it is not possible to fall to your death? I don't know what to say to this other than that it is false.

Sure, if you really REALLY are so bad you like close your eyes and just randomly press buttons, but the window of failure is so massively large I assume you have to have broken fingers to ever fail. I did not die even once from any platforming challenge in Uncharted 2. I actually assumed it was impossible to die because more than once a ledge broke and it just waited until I decided to push myself off before breaking conveniently behind me.

Maybe I have that wrong, but I definitely remember that being the way it is. I'll see tomorrow with Uncharted 3 if it changes.

 

[arne]

I think one of the reasons Uncharted 3 is getting more criticism regarding freedom and linearity because quite simply there are more moments in UC3 where control is taken away from the player than in UC2. There are several times in the game where the game forbids you from running, climbing, shooting or do anything other than walking. There was only one such time in Uncharted 2, and the game smartly gives you stuff to do to break up the monotony, such as talking to the villagers, playing with the kids, or petting the animals. In UC3 you just walk forward in all of these scenarios, there's nothing else to do. There's a time in the beginning where the game doesn't let you exchange weapons. If you don't want us to exchange weapons, why even have the enemies at that point drop pickups? These are only two examples I can think off the top of my head.

The game is just as linear as UC2, but it feels more directed. Frankly the people answering you in this thread clearly haven't played the game yet.

spoilers ahoy.

we wouldn't take that control away from you except for a few, in my opinion extremely valid reasons. one is pacing or say emotional manipulation (

Spoiler

desert sequence

) the other is that it sucks from a gameplay perspective.

Spoiler

that part where drake is walking on top of the sand dune. that was originally open so that you weren't just pushing drake down a very limited path. what happened is that in focus testing people kept getting frustrated that they would go off the path and die, over and over again, leading to a point where people wanted to quit. so we had to make that a very small path that you couldn't move away from

 

[X26]

The one thing I've always found odd about uncharted criticism is the whole drake killing bad guys thing. It's pretty much standard that the main character you play in pretty much every action game kills far more people than the villain ever could, but somehow it's 'worse' in uncharted?

 

[Dr. Malik]

nvm.

 

[arne]

I see what you're saying, but my biggest problems outside of the 'forcing' through action set pieces is why there is this seeming desire to make it nigh impossible to die during platforming segments. This is real gameplay, in control of the player. If a ledge is breaking and I don't make it over in time, i should die. If I go for a jump and time it wrong, I should die. This neither ruins the cinematic experience nor kills pacing: it enhances the tension to these otherwise amazing moments which, for me, feel kind of limp and weak because I know I can close my eyes through them and basically get to the end in 9/10 spots.

Now, I'm speaking purely from an "Uncharted 2" standpoint because I haven't played Uncharted 3, but it doesn't sound like this has changed. So i'm curious why your cinematic, guided linear philosophy has gone so far that it has corrupted platforming in this way. I can't really see the logic behind how letting players die and thus heightening the tension would make it impossible for you to do what you do.

because dying sucks. and totally cheap mechanics that lead to dying multiple times because you didn't get the timing right suck more. but we also want to create tension.

i'm being extremely reductive, but that's kind of the gist.

Hey, Arne, quick question that's completely unrelated to Uncharted: Do you have any European ancestry? Just asking, 'cause Arne is a name usually found in Scandinavia.

yep, frequently asked question. i do, my dad is german. from the little i know, seems that names from that side of the family are taken from scandinavian names.

 

[Ra1den]

Sure, if you really REALLY are so bad you like close your eyes and just randomly press buttons, but the window of failure is so massively large I assume you have to have broken fingers to ever fail. I did not die even once from any platforming challenge in Uncharted 2. I actually assumed it was impossible to die because more than once a ledge broke and it just waited until I decided to push myself off before breaking conveniently behind me.

Maybe I have that wrong, but I definitely remember that being the way it is. I'll see tomorrow with Uncharted 3 if it changes.

I wont call the platforming challenging from a timing point of view, but the challenge comes from figuring out how to proceed. There are places, like the courtyard in U1 and the ice ruins in U2 that take a fair amount of looking around to figure out where to go. Not extremely challenging, but certainly not automatic. The main challenge of the game comes from the combat.

 

[-Pyromaniac-]

In the end it's important for arne and others working on the game to realize that the reviewers offering harsher criticisms are in the minority. Should the minority be ignored? No. You should parse through them and see what's worth taking into account, and trying to implement those changes in a future title, while making sure you continue to appease the majority who offered rave reviews about the specific type of experience that you've been offering.

 

[Snipes424]

Well, the way I felt during the game was this (I wrote the Wired review): Uncharted 1 was a fresh and new experience. Uncharted 2 improved on that by a gigantic amount. It blew minds because we had never seen those sort of really amazing setpieces before. Or at least, nothing on the scale of what U2 had to offer. What I felt with U3 is that it didn't really offer anything new and fresh. U1 and U2 did.

Because, here's the thing: Okay, bombastic setpieces, above-average storyline, charming characters. But this is your third game to follow this formula. At this point -- especially after the huge leap from U1 to U2 -- I'm expecting a bit more than the status quo. For me, just more Uncharted isn't really enough. And to me, that's just what U3 felt like.

U3 is still a fantastic game. I mean, I gave it an 8. A Wired 8 is like a 9 anywhere else. But for U1, I had no expectations. U2 defied all expectations. It made U1 look like a joke. U3 only really met my expectations.

I cringed reading this. This type of mentality is not sustainable, you cannot expect leaps and bounds of improvements on a near perfect game. Also, the fact the game met your expectations after Uncharted 2 is a feat in its self, which I'm sure were extremely high. I'm not telling you how to review games, but I think you do game companies a disservice with this type of mentality.

 

[Amir0x]

because dying sucks. and totally cheap mechanics that lead to dying multiple times because you didn't get the timing right suck more. but we also want to create tension.

i'm being extremely reductive, but that's kind of the gist.

I guess extreme philosophical differences here then. I feel like you've created these amazing LOOKING moments that just have all the excitement sucked out of them because, well, there's no actual danger, no risk for not actually overcoming the challenge. The shooting works well on Crushing because there is risk involving, it feels good, enemies can be challenging and flank you or whatever. And let me say I understand the idea of a breather - that village segment in Uncharted 2 was a brilliant way to let the player take a breath (side note: loved how you turned it on its head later) - but I just think we need more village moments for that sort of thing, I don't think I should be feeling that way during crazy platforming segments when buildings are falling over my head and ledges are collapsing over a 5000ft ledge. Maybe it's just me, but I would LOVE to die and be like "oh fuck that was tense as hell."

 

[squidyj]

The one thing I've always found odd about uncharted criticism is the whole drake killing bad guys thing. It's pretty much standard that the main character you play in pretty much every action game kills far more people than the villain ever could, but somehow it's 'worse' in uncharted?

It's worse because they believe the character of Drake more IMO, characters in Uncharted are more fully realized than characters in other games so it creates cognitive dissonance.


seems like difficulty settings could be applied to platforming sequences as well as combat sequences to satisfy the hardcore of course then you probably wind up with people who like tough shooting but get frustrated at tough jumps and timings and that leads to separated difficulty settings for a total of something like 9 different actual difficulties which really just seems like a headache.

 

[Jarmel]

because dying sucks. and totally cheap mechanics that lead to dying multiple times because you didn't get the timing right suck more. but we also want to create tension.

i'm being extremely reductive, but that's kind of the gist.


yep, frequently asked question. i do, my dad is german. from the little i know, seems that names from that side of the family are taken from scandinavian names.

Well you could make the platforming controls more natural or interesting instead of just pressing X. For example, using more buttons for control as well as some sort of grip meter so that somebody can't hang somewhere for an indefinite amount of time.