Uncharted 3: Drake's Deception Review

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

I simply just do not understand what so many other people see in the Uncharted series. Even reading this thread I feel like that guy in church surrounded by "believers" wondering what everyone's so worked up about.

I watched a walk-through of this entire game and in all honesty it looks so boring. The game isn't just linear. Halo is linear, Gears of War is linear, Battlefield 3 is linear. With Uncharted you simply follow a completely set path doing everything exactly how devs have scripted it to happen. In those other games you have a choice of how you accomplish a goal. So even though you are following a linear path what you do along that path is your choice, but all of Uncharted plays like the very last level of BF3 in that everything is scripted no matter what you it will happen in the way it is set to happen.

I fully realize that has a game that's also telling a story that sometimes is necessary but here it all that ever happens every moment is like that. There's only one path up any given wall you have to climb, one door into any given room you have to enter etc.

The game is like of those QTEs where hit every button perfectly but the bad guy still gets away because that's how it's supposed to happen. I don't know I just hate it when games feel over scripted and Uncharted has always felt that way for me and this game follow the same form both gameplay and story wise.

Nathan Drake, sociopath, mass murderer, and worst treasure hunter in the world bar none, but this will still end up being game of the year. I just don't get it.

I have no problem with you not liking the game, but I don't get the "sociopath/murderer" bit at all. He kills the people shooting at him - just like pretty much every other protagonist in gaming. If he doesn't defend himself, he'll die. That makes him a sociopath?

agreed on this. there are multiple times throughout the game where drake purposely throws away his guns in civilian populated areas or he doesn't want to shoot/use them, he even mentions it quite clearly sometimes before the next "mission" started.

honestly he is quite logical, i still don't get how he is a bad treasure hunter/sociopath, but i digress... explaining things like these to people who don't get it just never works.

 

[Lex Darko]

agreed on this. there are multiple times throughout the game where drake purposely throws away his guns in civilian populated areas or he doesn't want to shoot/use them, he even mentions it quite clearly sometimes before the next "mission" started.

honestly he is quite logical, i still don't get how he is a bad treasure hunter/sociopath, but i digress... explaining things like these to people who don't get it just never works.

1. Sociopaths are chronic lairs.
2. Sociopaths learn to fake emotions early.
3. Sociopaths lack a clear sense of right and wrong ie. stealing, breaking and entering etc.
4. If the world of Nathan Drake had police he would be jail.

Also what I "don't get" is how a game series who even Ms. Ardent says has meh gameplay keeps coming up as a game of the year candidate.

 

[jthwilliams]

Uncharted 3: Drake's Deception Review

If you don't have a PS3, go get one.

Read Full Article

I would say 9 times out of 10 I agree with Susan. She has a skewed view of the gaming entertainment world and I generally align with her. However, in this case I am not sure she and I played the same game. I completed Uncharted 3 and while I would say it was both fun and entertaining in a lot of ways it was a crap game. The story is good, but not excellent. The humor is weak. The controls are truly awful. It feels at times like a huge series of quick time events. The combat is also awful. Moving from weapon to unarmed is painful. There of middle boss characters who are Heavily armored that are just anoying.

While I do not regret playing the game, I fully expect to be far more entertained by Skyrim. However, all that being said, buy it. It is a definately going to be one of the better games of the year even if I found it disappointing.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

agreed on this. there are multiple times throughout the game where drake purposely throws away his guns in civilian populated areas or he doesn't want to shoot/use them, he even mentions it quite clearly sometimes before the next "mission" started.

honestly he is quite logical, i still don't get how he is a bad treasure hunter/sociopath, but i digress... explaining things like these to people who don't get it just never works.

1. Sociopaths are chronic lairs.
2. Sociopaths learn to fake emotions early.
3. Sociopaths lack a clear sense of right and wrong ie. stealing, breaking and entering etc.
4. If the world of Nathan Drake had police he would be jail.

Also what I "don't get" is how a game series who even Ms. Ardent says has meh gameplay keeps coming up as a game of the year candidate.

i could argue many of those points throughout all the games, especially the 3rd uncharted, hell just watch all the damn cutscenes in uncharted 3 alone and they would be more than enough proof against what you just listed.

and on point number 4, you could put that exact rule in nearly every game with an open world/adventure, and it would apply just the same.

gameplay =/= game of the year candidate

fun =/= the best

would you say fallout 3 had good gameplay, even though it had numerous game of the year awards?

 

[Susan Arendt]

Uncharted 3: Drake's Deception Review

If you don't have a PS3, go get one.

Read Full Article

I would say 9 times out of 10 I agree with Susan. She has a skewed view of the gaming entertainment world and I generally align with her. However, in this case I am not sure she and I played the same game. I completed Uncharted 3 and while I would say it was both fun and entertaining in a lot of ways it was a crap game. The story is good, but not excellent. The humor is weak. The controls are truly awful. It feels at times like a huge series of quick time events. The combat is also awful. Moving from weapon to unarmed is painful. There of middle boss characters who are Heavily armored that are just anoying.

While I do not regret playing the game, I fully expect to be far more entertained by Skyrim. However, all that being said, buy it. It is a definately going to be one of the better games of the year even if I found it disappointing.

My view is skewed? Huh.

You and I played the same game, but its charms worked on me and not you. If you don't enjoy the characters and banterr, then I can totally seeing not ally adoring the game. I didn't have any trouble going from armed to unarmed, personally, but the overall controls are definitely problematic.

A lot of enjoying Uncharted relies on the player wanting to spend time with these characters. If you actively dislike them, your chances of really getting into the game are greatly diminished. I get that, absolutely.

 

[Lex Darko]

agreed on this. there are multiple times throughout the game where drake purposely throws away his guns in civilian populated areas or he doesn't want to shoot/use them, he even mentions it quite clearly sometimes before the next "mission" started.

honestly he is quite logical, i still don't get how he is a bad treasure hunter/sociopath, but i digress... explaining things like these to people who don't get it just never works.

1. Sociopaths are chronic lairs.
2. Sociopaths learn to fake emotions early.
3. Sociopaths lack a clear sense of right and wrong ie. stealing, breaking and entering etc.
4. If the world of Nathan Drake had police he would be jail.

Also what I "don't get" is how a game series who even Ms. Ardent says has meh gameplay keeps coming up as a game of the year candidate.

i could argue many of those points throughout all the games, especially the 3rd uncharted, hell just watch all the damn cutscenes in uncharted 3 alone and they would be more than enough proof against what you just listed.

and on point number 4, you could put that exact rule in nearly every game with an open world/adventure, and it would apply just the same.

gameplay =/= game of the year candidate

fun =/= the best

would you say fallout 3 had good gameplay, even though it had numerous game of the year awards?

Yeah FO3 did have good gameplay and was fun to play, so I don't see your point there. Also gameplay isn't just combat; it's exploration, character progression (rpgs), it's what the player can do in a game.

I don't care to keep being so negative, but in Uncharted 3 there's only following of a path, puzzles, and combat. So if the combat in campaign is average at best, all that's left are puzzles along with what essentially amounts to walking in a straight line that was made to look dynamic and player dependent.

Finally, if Batman and Nathan Drake met, one of them would end up in a locked room at Arkham. And the next day Bruce Wayne would go play a round golf.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

agreed on this. there are multiple times throughout the game where drake purposely throws away his guns in civilian populated areas or he doesn't want to shoot/use them, he even mentions it quite clearly sometimes before the next "mission" started.

honestly he is quite logical, i still don't get how he is a bad treasure hunter/sociopath, but i digress... explaining things like these to people who don't get it just never works.

1. Sociopaths are chronic lairs.
2. Sociopaths learn to fake emotions early.
3. Sociopaths lack a clear sense of right and wrong ie. stealing, breaking and entering etc.
4. If the world of Nathan Drake had police he would be jail.

Also what I "don't get" is how a game series who even Ms. Ardent says has meh gameplay keeps coming up as a game of the year candidate.

i could argue many of those points throughout all the games, especially the 3rd uncharted, hell just watch all the damn cutscenes in uncharted 3 alone and they would be more than enough proof against what you just listed.

and on point number 4, you could put that exact rule in nearly every game with an open world/adventure, and it would apply just the same.

gameplay =/= game of the year candidate

fun =/= the best

would you say fallout 3 had good gameplay, even though it had numerous game of the year awards?

Yeah FO3 did have good gameplay and was fun to play, so I don't see your point there. Also gameplay isn't just combat; it's exploration, character progression (rpgs), it's what the player can do in a game.

I don't care to keep being so negative, but in Uncharted 3 there's only following of a path, puzzles, and combat. So if the combat in campaign is average at best, all that's left are puzzles along with what essentially amounts to walking in a straight line that was made to look dynamic and player dependent.

Finally, if Batman and Nathan Drake met, one of them would end up in a locked room at Arkham. And the next day Bruce Wayne would go play a round golf.

okay well we have different definitions there, by gameplay i meant the combat, i put exploration and character progression under their own sub categories as they are not directly related or dependent on each other. and if you don't enjoy that kind of game, then that's perfectly fine, like i originally stated, trying to show you why people enjoy it is next to impossible as it just simply won't get through to you.

batman? i really don't see why he is brought up in this discussion at all, but he has way more fucked up things going on in his mind that drake does in a few ways, so i really don't see how he's any better mentally than drake is. (why the hell are we even arguing over something so trivial as is? it's a fucking video game character, who is meant to be an adventurer, who gives two shits?)

 

[jthwilliams]

Uncharted 3: Drake's Deception Review

If you don't have a PS3, go get one.

Read Full Article

I would say 9 times out of 10 I agree with Susan. She has a skewed view of the gaming entertainment world and I generally align with her. However, in this case I am not sure she and I played the same game. I completed Uncharted 3 and while I would say it was both fun and entertaining in a lot of ways it was a crap game. The story is good, but not excellent. The humor is weak. The controls are truly awful. It feels at times like a huge series of quick time events. The combat is also awful. Moving from weapon to unarmed is painful. There of middle boss characters who are Heavily armored that are just anoying.

While I do not regret playing the game, I fully expect to be far more entertained by Skyrim. However, all that being said, buy it. It is a definately going to be one of the better games of the year even if I found it disappointing.

My view is skewed? Huh.

You and I played the same game, but its charms worked on me and not you. If you don't enjoy the characters and banterr, then I can totally seeing not ally adoring the game. I didn't have any trouble going from armed to unarmed, personally, but the overall controls are definitely problematic.

A lot of enjoying Uncharted relies on the player wanting to spend time with these characters. If you actively dislike them, your chances of really getting into the game are greatly diminished. I get that, absolutely.

To be clear, I mean skewed in a good way. I find your reviews insightful and more aligned to story and the overall experience than many others.

I will agree that I never realy felt connected to the characters perhaps because I started with the Uncharted 2. I just felt that this game could have been better if it was a series of tv shows rather than a game. There were so many places where it had to prompt you to press a button because there is no way you would ever have known to do so because you never did this action before and you will never do it again in the game.

Also, as you said in the podcast, there was no feeling that I was influencing the story at all.

Oh and the desert scene, I got it after the second time that I had to make him walk for 30 seconds and we faded to black. I can't remember how many times it repeated almost the exact same scene, but it was a lot.

To Summarize:
* Susan you are great and don't take 'skewed' the wrong way
* I can see your point. Perhaps if I was more connected to the characters before playing the game, I would have enjoyed the game more.
* This game could have been a better entertainment experience in a different medium. The playing part was more of a distraction from the parts that were good from the story.
* I have a hard time imagining anyone would want to play the multiplayer parts as they seem to circle around the parts that were worst.


Finally, Thanks for replying. I don't think I've ever elicited a response from a managing editor before.

 

[notimeforlulz]

Never explained how talbot did his disappearing tricks or survived getting shot.... Or what happened to cutter... And then talbot dies so there's no chance he'll continue in the next game to provide some information as to how the fuck certain stuff happened in this one....

And I didn't like Marlowe's dialog, seemed to be a pretty stupid broad for someone who's head of some agency thing.