Uncharted 2

[ganpondorodf]

I don't invest all that much interest in the story of the game. I'm not out to analyse the characters or the plot, if I enjoy it enough that it makes me want to keep playing then as far as I'm concerned the storytellers have been successful. I enjoyed Uncharted 2 a lot, but if Yahtzee or anyone else didn't then that's fine too. At the end of the day he's out to entertain, and he still entertains me pretty consistently regardless of whether or not I agree with what he says.

 

[Carnagath]

I don't see gow Yahtzee can hate Nathan Drake but like Garrett of Thief fame, who kills just as easily but is also a sarcastic misanthropic psychopath with a God complex.

 

[AbnormalFetus]

Nathan Drake dosent have a backstory. He was grown in a lab by scientists trying to weaponize cliches. It's fitting that he is the protagonist in a game who has done the same. It brings nothing new, but it dosent need to. It's a popcorn game. As mindless and shallow as Drake himself.
I had tons of fun playing this game. I got what i payed for. Polished predictable action adventure with treasures and legends and puzzels so easy the actions never stops. It's long enough to be worth the money and short enough to not outstay its welcome. Its the same reason Zombieland is fun. Brings nothing new (exept maby

Spoiler

Bill Murray

) but it dosent need to. It's not there to bring something new, its mindless entertainment to give your brain a rest from thinking. If you dont want that, dont buy it. Its not the fucking god of "cinematic" gameing, whatever that meens. And it's no way GotY. Dragon Age Origins has 100 times more cliches and generic gameplay then UC 2, and still pulls off beeing 100 times more immersive and interesting. Batman AA well, just rocks. And CoD MW 2 may be like playing a Tom Clancy novel. But playing a Tom Clancy novel is a hell of a lot more fun and interesting then reading one. UC 2 is popcorn entertainment to the end, but GotY. No way!

 

[hermes]

Madworld: Deathmatch tv show. I think Manhunt did something like this.

There are differences between the two, but I get the point. Still, can you name any other games like those? Just because it's happened once doesn't make it unoriginal. It's stuff that has happened twenty times over or more that gets old (space marine fighting alien hordes, for instance).

You mean, futuristics game shows as "game premise" to justify mass killing? Ok... Here are some:
- Fatal Review
- F-Zero
- Madworld
- MegaRace
- MTV Celebrity Deadmatch
- Rage
- Ratchet Deadlocked
- Serious Sam
- Smash TV
- The Grid
- Unreal Tournament
- Whacked!
- Zhadnost: The People's Party

Not to menction the entire premise is lifted of The Running Man (that has its own game), which on itself must have come from somewhere...

 

[Commissar Jake]

Ah very true, Not only does it seem bland it is infact bland.
Glad I don't own a ps3.

 

[hermes]

So, I have to wonder if Yahtzee hates Han Solo as much as Drake. Same smug attitude. Same money-driven motivation. Same willingness to kill whomever he "needs" to kill.

Han Solo is but a humble space pilot trying to eke out an existence that allows him freedom and security. He may seem self-serving and egocentric, but he prefers to make deals over exploitation and thievery. Additionally the films prove that he cares for his friends and their struggles because he knows they are righteous. Classic case of the little guy standing up to the man by living on his own terms.
Nathan Drake on the other hand commits single-handed genocide and endangers public safety solely for some phat loot. They may seem similar, but one of them has honor and integrity while the other just dicks around for his own jollies.

I don't want to squash your little love story with Han Solo there, but I think you might be talking of a different character... or you only saw the Return of the Jedi. Han Solo IS self-serving and egocentric for the most part of the first movie, he shoots people without hardly any provocation, would work for anyone providing that they pay, and its a smuggler that wouldn't care less about anyone else but himself.
I actually think Han Solo is a better comparition to Drake than Indiana Jones. Sure, it got the whole adventuring thing, but other than that he is a witty bandit that doesn't care who only cames to do the right thing because he end up on the other side of far worst men and both he and the woman he likes are too much into shit to turn back.

Yes, that's true. But Han Solo is also very well characterized(I can't compare him to Nathan Drake because I haven't played Uncharted 1 or 2). Yes, Han is a selfish bastard who in general doesn't give a shit who he hurts, but we see as he goes through relationships and conflict with the other characters that he has the ability to feel for others which makes him likable, so his flaws then serve to make him human(I'm not knocking Drake, as I said I haven't played Uncharted so as far as I know Nathan Drake could be the same way, I'm just pointing out differences that I see between the Han Solo and who Yhatzee describes as Nathan Drake)

For what is worth, I believe its a very good comparition. Yatzhee's opinion on Drake as a character is a little over-the-top. Sure, he is a smug, but a likeable smug (kind of like Solo, specially on the first movie - before the character change). It is true that he can kill several hundreds of people with little remorse, but almost any action character can be blamed for that, and they were mercenaries that felt little remorse in killing inocents, women and children, to begin with. He even does some stuff without personal gain, like figthing to stop the bad guys when there was no treasure to collect or carry an inocent, wounded man through a war zone when it would have been more convenient to let him to his fate.
I am not saying he is the best, most likeable, new character of this generation but, as far as action characters go, we can certainly get far worst.

 

[oneshotfinchy]

Well shit. Don't I feel like a tosser?
He did get annoyed when Flynn proposed the use of guns in the museum by the way. I also thought the point of Flynn's character was to show what Drake isn't.

 

[oneshotfinchy]

Well shit. Don't I feel like a tosser. Drake objected to Flynn's suggestion of using guns in the museum by the way. Flynn to me seemed like he existed to show what Drake isn't. Even though both are very similar, Drake has a shred of morality.
I'm a total fanboy for defending this game and my opinion should be completly disregarded anyway.

 

[A Weary Exile]

Darkest of Days: You got me, this was pretty original.

An original premise? Yes. An incredibly stupid premise that makes no sense? Yes.

Originality does not excuse stupidity, an idea can be original but that doesn't mean that it's good.

 

[Fluffy0883]

Wow! I've just signed up, to say a few things.

I watch Zero Punctuation every week at work and love the reviews, they're fun, they usually make me laugh out loud and its a break through the day. I always find the reviews much better when you have played the game being reviewed as well.

I'm truley, truely gobsmacked to read this thread and the other Zero punctuation Uncharted 2 thread (Nothing specifically to do with Uncharted, I just don't normally read the comment pages for obviosu reasons), and find that there are people that are saying they will not play this game based on the Zero Punctuation review! Really?

I would like to ask these people how many games you have played this year?
Yahtzee obviously puts a negative spin on his reviews, thats why they are loved and watched by so many, but there are people actually taking them seriously.

Is this because they don't quite understand the very british humour and need to critize everything thats quite clearly present in them?

Is it (in the case of a game like this one) because they don't own a PS3 and use this as some strange reasoning for themselves to not want to play the game? Having not looked at many of the other comment threads I can't really say on this as I don't know if people make comments like this for other games that mult-plat etc.

Or are there genuinly people on here that will only play a game that #
A) Yahtzee loves according to his reviews (I think I can probably count these on one hand)
B) Yahtzee hasn't reviewed (If he reviews the game later, and you loved it, does that mean you have to sell it and then start hating it?)

Even this aritcle, it is quite clear that Yahtzee is (purposfully) being very one sided, he doesn't raise any points about the good sides of drakes character.
The whole article about a GAME is in fact entirely about the character you play as.
This is what makes it entertaining reading. Do people really not get that.

 

[Fluffy0883]

Wow, that was a long first post. Sorry all!
Just to add.
I, clearly, love the game, but can still agree with most of Yahtzee's criticisms having played it, thats why the reviews are more interesting when you've actually played the game being reviewed.

 

[Tears of Blood]

Interesting, but I wouldn't have worried about the spoilers as much.

I haven't palyed it, was diappointed there was going to be spoilers, and then my spirits were back up once I got to the end.

Anyway, I would have to say that I've never liked Drake much either, from what I've seen in the first Uncharted. I've palyed much more interesting protagonists in my day. (Ezio from AC2 is a personal favorite at the moment, but I'll always have a soft spot for Max Payne.)

I gotta' say, though, just 'cause I've hated the protagonist in some of the games I've played, I can't say that it completely ruins the game. For example, I hate most of the characters in Gears of War, however I think Gears of War is a petty good game. (Then again, I've always loved TPS games since I played the first Max Payne.)

I guess what I'm saying is, I think I'm going to take the Uncharted review with a grain of salt and eventually get it. I liked the first Uncharted, and I've heard good things about this one for the most part. Even though I'm not a fan of Mr. Drake, I don't mind if I get to pretend he is a more interesting character like Indiana Jones.

 

[AcacianLeaves]

You can't invalidate someone's opinions because they write humorously. Yes, he's doing it for comedic effect but it's not as if he's just making things up. He'll point out a games flaws using exaggerated language. It's the exaggerated language that is the humor, not the flaws. The flaws are real, the complaints are genuine, the humor is in understanding that even with games that you like and he hates - he's right on the money with his complaints.

Hell my favorite articles and reviews of his are for games that I like. I laugh because I know he's right.

 

[Stargoat]

"Maybe in the intro he could lovingly sprinkle some fish flakes into a goldfish bowl before he heads out to ransack a temple and murder a prostitute."

Reminds me of the canary in Agent 47 hideout in Blood Money.

 

[Fluffy0883]

You can't invalidate someone's opinions because they write humorously. Yes, he's doing it for comedic effect but it's not as if he's just making things up. He'll point out a games flaws using exaggerated language. It's the exaggerated language that is the humor, not the flaws. The flaws are real, the complaints are genuine, the humor is in understanding that even with games that you like and he hates - he's right on the money with his complaints.

Hell my favorite articles and reviews of his are for games that I like. I laugh because I know he's right.

I'm not, I'm saying the same thing as you, did I not say, I agree with him on the stuff he says, and the reviews are better if you've actually played the game.

I'm just saying I can't believe people base their buying decisions on his reviews alone...

 

[AcacianLeaves]

You can't invalidate someone's opinions because they write humorously. Yes, he's doing it for comedic effect but it's not as if he's just making things up. He'll point out a games flaws using exaggerated language. It's the exaggerated language that is the humor, not the flaws. The flaws are real, the complaints are genuine, the humor is in understanding that even with games that you like and he hates - he's right on the money with his complaints.

Hell my favorite articles and reviews of his are for games that I like. I laugh because I know he's right.

I'm not, I'm saying the same thing as you, did I not say, I agree with him on the stuff he says, and the reviews are better if you've actually played the game.

I'm just saying I can't believe people base their buying decisions on his reviews alone...

Hell personally I can't believe people base their buying decisions on ANYONE'S reviews.

Usually if I haven't bought a game Yahtzee's reviewed already, I'll keep his comments in mind. If the things he's complaining about don't sound like they'd hurt my gaming experience, I consider it an endorsement. He'll point out the bad things that most other reviewers will never mention.

 

[Jillybean]

Yeah, but Han Solo's good looking.

 

[The_ModeRazor]

So how does that stack up with Lara Croft? I mean, we do see some parts of her private life but you still consider her evil.

That's cause she IS evil.

OT: Videogames with guns are usually about killing people. I'm not exactly surpirsed that this game is no exception.

 

[Captain Pancake]

Nice top gear reference there, though I doubt you'll get in as much shit as Jeremy Clarkson did.

Speaking of which, did anybody watch it yesterday? Eric Bana was the star in a reasonably priced car!

 

[persona J]

i realy dont get you here, sure he's a cocky smart arse douche but thats what alot of people like about him, i think partialy the reason you dont like him is coz he can have just as much wit and be as cocky as u and u dont like people or a rival. personaly i find him at least a little funny ulike the prince form prince of persia who is the biggest dick in all of gaming along with all other characters in the franchise, this may be abit personal now but what the hell. weve all seen that you dont like any good characters anyway so ill just ignore any character comments from now on.