The Rant: The Uncharted Hypetrain [Episode 2]

I've been waiting to make this one for a while! Alright as you may know my last rant was about Microsoft. Some of you will go "Alan I think you messed up on the title." OKay, before you guys get at me for doing this rant. I just want to say that Uncharted 2 was a good game. I enjoyed it but not nearly as much as I thought I would. I don't even see why Sony fanboys choose THIS game out of all the other fantastic Sony titles to hype up the ass.

Uncharted 2: Among Thieves, developed by Naughty Dog and published by Sony Computer Entertainment, won 100+ GOTY awards in 2009 and has gotten over 50 PERFECT scores. This game is hailed by many as not only the greatest Playstation game, but also one of the greatest games of all time. My question is...WHY? Sure the game has great cinematics and well-developed characters, but beyond that there really is nothing about the game that could warrant this many awards. The core gameplay itself is shallow. It has really generic weapons and none of them really pack a punch. Now a days shooters have to stand out some how, but Uncharted doesn't. The enemy AI is also very shallow and there is hardly any variety of them in the game. Don't get me started on the platforming. Alot of the walls you climb feel very on-rails. In Assasin's Creed you can climb practically any vertical object. On the other hand, most of the platforming you do in Uncharted are very selective. There isn't really any blood or gore either, making kills feel less satisfying than most shooters. The multiplayer is fun, but again nothing that really stands out. In fact the only thing that wowed me about Uncharted 2 were the co-op objective modes. But there are hardly any co-op maps. Instead of leaving me blown away about it, it leaves me thinking "hey I liked this, why the hell isn't there more of this?" Even in the story aspects of the game I have something to say. They basically use the well-developed characters and cinematics to hide the fact that story never really drives forward and that the plot itself is pretty lacking, kind of similar to Mass Effect 2.

Then there's the graphics. The oh so amazing graphics. Besides the stunning lighting and and animations, there really isn't anything over the top about the graphics. Basically everyone that praises the game's graphics bases it off of the cutscene cinematics. The cutscenes aren't even ingame, hence the digital artifacting you can clearly see. Hell, the developers even said they use the time that there engine isn't in use to load the next level, meaning that the cutscenes MUST have been pre-rendered (while maybe being inengine) like most games. UC2 is still a good looking game. Hell, it's better looking than most. Though I gotta say, to everyone that has been saying that UC2 cannot be done on the 360 or that this game is leaps and bounds better than other games and that it "pushes the bar"....ya no. Basically the polygon models and texture details are tenfold in the cutscenes compared to the actual ingame detail. Even with the linear nature of the game, the draw distances and finer details aren't as over the top compared to GOW3 or Alan Wake. The colors are bit oversaturated in some scenes, but that could just come down to personal preference. I personally thought UC2 stole the best graphics award from Killzone 2 in 2009.

Do you know what Uncharted is? It's a nicer, G-rated, slower paced version of Gears of War + Tomb Raider. That's it. It's not the greatest fucking Playstation game ever nor is this GOTY worthy. I give up on the gaming industry if UC3 somehow beats ME3, Skyrim, and a bunch of other titles that probably deserves the GOTY award much more than UC3. UC2 is by no means a bad game, but it's definantely the least deserving GOTY of this generation if not of the last decade. (EDIT: Well, I forgot about GTA4)

But ofcourse, many of you will read this as if it says "Uncharted 2 suxors lolololol" and start defending it. Get at me bitches.

I wouldn't make the assumption that UC3 doesn't deserve to win GOTY. What if the game is improved immensely?

Teckno wrote:

I wouldn't make the assumption that UC3 doesn't deserve to win GOTY. What if the game is improved immensely?

Then I take back my statement. Though I really doubt it will destroy the competition.

You ask why...

Because it reinvented (really the only way I can think of to describe it) the way videogame stories are told. It's one of the games that make one think and question why videogames are not hailed as an art form. The game was essentially one big blockbuster action-adventure movie that you played. It was amazing, it was different, and it was fun.

Heavy Rain was hailed as many as a step forward in videogame story-telling. The gameplay is horrendous and admittedly, you and I could develop a game with better gameplay than Heavy Rain. The game is still amazing. Not because of the gameplay or because of the graphics, but because of the way it is so to speak.

Hypnotoad wrote:

You ask why...

Because it reinvented (really the only way I can think of to describe it) the way videogame stories are told. It's one of the games that make one think and question why videogames are not hailed as an art form. The game was essentially one big blockbuster action-adventure movie that you played. It was amazing, it was different, and it was fun.

Heavy Rain was hailed as many as a step forward in videogame story-telling. The gameplay is horrendous and admittedly, you and I could develop a game with better gameplay than Heavy Rain. The game is still amazing. Not because of the gameplay or because of the graphics, but because of the way it is so to speak.

So the cinematics alone warrant this game a nearly perfect score on Metacritic!? 100+ awards for making a game feel like a movie?

Dude, don't pull me this BS. I hear people saying different things. "The story matters the most." "The Gameplay is KING!."

Fact is, for a game to be outstanding in most cases, it would need to have both great gameplay and a great storyline. UC2 has a great story...sorta...maybe the first half. But it doesn't GO anywhere. People just get distracted by the awesome characters (like in ME2) and forget about the barebones plot.

Uncharted 2's cinematics aren't reinventing the wheel. What DOES it do that any other fucking shooter with a decent story has not? "Great Voice acting" isn't innovative. "Nice lighting" isn't innovative either. It just does that one aspect really well, but fails to deliver on all other aspects to live up to the whole "best PS3 game" bullshit it's been piling up over the years.

igame wrote:

This is exactly what I think every time someone says a game is overrated ._. That's exactly how I picture most of them.

Alan, you took the exact words right out of my mouth.

And see, even you are admitting that UC2's graphics aren't what they are hyped up to be.

And yes it is so damn on rails. That's my problem with it. I don't need open ended gameplay for a game to be fun but the problem with Uncharted is in that it's too planned out. I found that in one of the levels, the only thing you could actually climb up was something that you needed to progress anyway! It is just a film which you can either choose to progress in or not. You cannot choose how.

Imo, Heavy Rain is better.

In-game graphics where stunning in most places, especially the part where the train crashes and you have to climb it up the side of the mountain, just mind blowing.

Graphics aren't subjective, the game is gorgeous, not just the cut-scenes, but IN-GAME.

Did it deserve all those perfect scores? Well, I'd give it a ten.

So you're upset because you have an opinion and there are hundreds of other people with a different opinion?

It was an excellent game.

you know what's funny? there actually is a part of the game where Uncharted 2 Literaly IS on rails.

i don't think uc3 will win this year..it has tought competition..2009 didn't really had big competition like this year will have..i would want me3 to win but if it doesn't win,i hope skyrim does..i don't want uc3 to win because the way the game is made is like the last games..you do a puzzle,shoot people,run and set piece moments,cutscene and repeat and repeat.not to mention that it will have a 6 hours campaign and online that really isn't that awesome and there you go..game of the year..
skyrim will have over 100 hours of gameplay and me3 will probably have 20 to 25 hours of gameplay..i rather have those than a game that i can beat in 1 and a half day with online that i will barely play..which i don't play online much

Uncharted 2 us an AMAZING GAME. Hands down one of the best games ever made. The 6th highest rated game ever made. You don't need innovative gameplay to be great. It perfects what it is. The only game I can say are better than this are the Super Mario Galaxy games and Ocarina of Time. Some reviewers even gave this game an 11/10. It deserves a ten from me.

Pein wrote:

i don't think uc3 will win this year..it has tought competition..2009 didn't really had big competition like this year will have..i would want me3 to win but if it doesn't win,i hope skyrim does..i don't want uc3 to win because the way the game is made is like the last games..you do a puzzle,shoot people,run and set piece moments,cutscene and repeat and repeat.not to mention that it will have a 6 hours campaign and online that really isn't that awesome and there you go..game of the year..
skyrim will have over 100 hours of gameplay and me3 will probably have 20 to 25 hours of gameplay..i rather have those than a game that i can beat in 1 and a half day with online that i will barely play..which i don't play online much

Yeah, I get what your saying. But, Mass Effect isn't an RPG.

Don't double post.

Teckno wrote:

Don't double post.

Why not? At XBR and PS3N we could double post.

DukemNukem43 wrote:

Teckno wrote:

Don't double post.

Why not? At XBR and PS3N we could double post.

We're not XBR or PS3N. Double posting is unnecessary. Just stick with the rules and we can all be happy campers.

All valid points, Alan, but Uncharted nails what it aims to do. What's great about the gameplay is the variety in the set pieces. One minute you're on a snowy mountain, climbing to the front of a speeding train. The next, you're fighting Na'vi-like creatures in a ruined jungle.

You could argue the bare-bones gameplay about any game, including Gears of War and Mass Effect. Why does Uncharted not have a chainsaw gun or biotics, however? Because it takes place in modern times. This isn't science fiction. These are all real guns and the "blandness" of these weapons isn't really something that I think you should criticize given the setting.

I love Uncharted because of its fantastic writing and awesome set pieces. THAT'S why it got great scores. Does it deserve a perfect ten in my book? No, but anything below an 8.5 and you're just kidding yourself.

Teckno wrote:

DukemNukem43 wrote:

Teckno wrote:

Don't double post.

Why not? At XBR and PS3N we could double post.

We're not XBR or PS3N. Double posting is unnecessary. Just stick with the rules and we can all be happy campers.

Sometimes double posting is necessary. For example, if you need to respond to 3 different people, you cant just copy and paste what they said (to quote and reply) because computers only allow you to copy single things.
Therefore to respond to all you have to either copy , edit your post and paste it in or just save time and just double post. I mean I haven't double posted yet on this forum (if I have its only once) but sometimes it just makes sense.

Unless there's a way to select several things to quote?

TRF wrote:

All valid points, Alan, but Uncharted nails what it aims to do. What's great about the gameplay is the variety in the set pieces. One minute you're on a snowy mountain, climbing to the front of a speeding train. The next, you're fighting Na'vi-like creatures in a ruined jungle.

You could argue the bare-bones gameplay about any game, including Gears of War and Mass Effect. Why does Uncharted not have a chainsaw gun or biotics, however? Because it takes place in modern times. This isn't science fiction. These are all real guns and the "blandness" of these weapons isn't really something that I think you should criticize given the setting.

I love Uncharted because of its fantastic writing and awesome set pieces. THAT'S why it got great scores. Does it deserve a perfect ten in my book? No, but anything below an 8.5 and you're just kidding yourself.

You are implying I should give the game a break because it is in a realistic setting instead of a sci-fi one. Alright, let's switch up the arguement. Are weapons in real life bland and boring? NO! They are loud, fun to use, and all pack a punch. Just because the weapons are straight from real life, that doesn't mean they have to be boring. Hell, the Battlefield series has argueably one of the most interesting gunplay in any shooter and that series is somewhat of a war simulation. The platforming in UC2 is also anything but realistic. There are some walls and jumps that are just impossible for humans to do that you see Drake doing in UC2. There are also some walls and jumps that even I could make in real life yet Drake apparently can't in the game.

That's the thing, both story and gameplay are important. I'd give the story and set pieces a high 9 while giving the gameplay a low 7. Which in the end would average out to about an 8.5. I'm not ranting about how I think the game itself is bad. I was ranting about how the game is OVERRATED. 96 is an incredibly unrealistic score for this game considering everything I've just said.

Ihsahn wrote:

So you're upset because you have an opinion and there are hundreds of other people with a different opinion?

It was an excellent game.

Not exactly.

I don't have to have the same opinion to understand what people are coming from when they say "this is my favorite game ever."

For example last year's GOTY was Red Dead Redemption. I personally didn't agree that it was the best game of 2010, but many other people felt that way. I understand why it was picked though.

While playing UC2, I wouldn't have guessed this game would have gotten this many awards. Nor do I understand why it deserves that many.

Stoney wrote:

In-game graphics where stunning in most places, especially the part where the train crashes and you have to climb it up the side of the mountain, just mind blowing.

I thought the draw distance was impressive about uncharted. Even if you are stuck in a linear path, it does look nice. lol

Sovereign Alan wrote:

You are implying I should give the game a break because it is in a realistic setting instead of a sci-fi one. Alright, let's switch up the arguement. Are weapons in real life bland and boring? NO! They are loud, fun to use, and all pack a punch. Just because the weapons are straight from real life, that doesn't mean they have to be boring. Hell, the Battlefield series has argueably one of the most interesting gunplay in any shooter and that series is somewhat of a war simulation. The platforming in UC2 is also anything but realistic. There are some walls and jumps that are just impossible for humans to do that you see Drake doing in UC2. There are also some walls and jumps that even I could make in real life yet Drake apparently can't in the game.

That's the thing, both story and gameplay are important. I'd give the story and set pieces a high 9 while giving the gameplay a low 7. Which in the end would average out to about an 8.5. I'm not ranting about how I think the game itself is bad. I was ranting about how the game is OVERRATED. 96 is an incredibly unrealistic score for this game considering everything I've just said.

I for one thought the guns were all fun to use, and I tried to play around with all of them. Sure, the platforming isn't realistic, but is platforming in any game realistic? Double-jumps aren't possible, and I highly doubt most people can leap across a gap and catch the ledge with just their hands.

Ultimately, I think Uncharted is a fantastic series due to its blockbuster film qualities. Everyone wants to feel like they're in a movie, and the Uncharted series does a fantastic job of making me feel like I'm in Raiders of the Lost Ark.

May not agree with all of the things you said, but nice rant anyway Alan. What do you think the next rant is going to be?

chobo500 wrote:

May not agree with all of the things you said, but nice rant anyway Alan. What do you think the next rant is going to be?

Gaming journalism and how it provokes fanboyism.

Sovereign Alan wrote:

Gaming journalism and how it provokes fanboyism.

I'd like to read that, although I hope you realize that many journalism sites throw in a dash of fanboyism here and there to gain readers.