Support NeoGAF

[elcapitan]

Is there anyone who enjoys the combat but encounters this so-called "ludonarrative dissonance?" That is to say, the fact that Drake kills so many enemies actually lessens your enjoyment of killing enemies?

It seems like this criticism is more a function of not liking the game's shooting mechanics more than anything else. They don't like the combat, so they come up with reasons to reduce shooting in the game.

Most of the proposed solutions (cutting down on enemy waves, skipping combat entirely, etc.) wouldn't fundamentally alter Drake's actions. Just because you reduce the kill count wouldn't make him any less of a mass murderer.

Where do you draw the line? When does one kill too many qualify as unrepentant sociopathic murder? It's arbitrary. You can ask for better context at the beginning of each scenario, but do you really need any more context than "they are trying to kill you"? Do you want a cutscene of the enemies discussing all the horrible acts they've done just so that you feel better about killing them?

At this point, it just becomes a pseudo-narrative justification for cutting down on an aspect of the game you don't like.

Other, more radical, suggestions involve changing the things that make Uncharted Uncharted, which is surviving against impossible odds in spectacular fashion, and I can't think of odds more impossible than facing an entire army of fearless mercenaries and pirates.

Third-person shooting has always been Uncharted's core. The first thing you do in the entire series is shoot pirates. There's some platforming, traversal, and some puzzle solving, but that's merely to add variety between combat.

Most of the suggestions from people trying re-contextualize the combat in Uncharted would cut down on what I enjoy most about the game. It's fine if you don't like the game's combat, but trying to ascribe your personal preference as an objective weakness of the work is a disingenuous attempt to change the game into something you'd enjoy more.

If you enjoyed the combat, you wouldn't give a fuck how many people he was killing. That's because it's a game, and honestly, that's reason enough to justify the kill count.

 

[DOWN]

The "it's a game" excuse doesn't really work when your game tries so desperately to emulate movies.

?

He specifically notes that it IS like movies. He says movies do the same thing, such as Indiana Jones killing a number of his enemies.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

If we apply logic of a sane, normal person into every story we would have extremely boring stories.

And our hero saw the treasure ahead, but noticed many foes in his way. Calculating the odds he deemed it would be reckless to go after his dream and he went home and found a nice 9 to 5 job that supplied good benefits for his family the end.

I consume a ton of media with normal people in them that are super interesting, what a weird strawman.

Uncharted has plenty of more writing problems than this, but Drake just comes off as weird sometimes to have quips after spending 10 minutes (maybe more if you die and restart) killing people. ND could do a better job with the tone and pacing of their jokes and drama.

 

[SeventhSon]

?

He specifically notes that it IS like movies. He says movies do the same thing, such as Indiana Jones killing a number of his enemies.

The parts where Indy kills lots of enemies are more like the scripted set pieces, like the crashing building, tank, or train sequences in Uncharted 2. What Indy doesn't do is fight dozens of enemies in one area as they pour in from spawn points. It isn't so much the killing lots of enemies, it's how it's presented in addition to the numbers involved.

 

[AniHawk]

If we apply logic of a sane, normal person into every story we would have extremely boring stories.

And our hero saw the treasure ahead, but noticed many foes in his way. Calculating the odds he deemed it would be reckless to go after his dream and he went home and found a nice 9 to 5 job that supplied good benefits for his family the end.

right, which makes him either stupid or an unrepentant killer.

You can't be serious. Nathan Drake is literally the Indiana Jones of the gaming world. Much like no one gives a shit when Indiana Jones kills some Nazis (while being oh-so-charming), no one should give a shit when similarly bad men are killed in Uncharted. Just because Drake kills more people in absolute numbers means jack shit when 1) these are games that are ~4-6x longer than your usual 1,5-2h movies & 2) it's a video game, you usually need to keep things engaging (for a lot of people) and one way to do that is to throw enemies at the gamer. And because it's a game, they either have to make singular enemies that are deadly (but then those have to be bullet sponges because if they are too easy to kill, the game loses all of its tension) or throw a number of less deadly singular enemies who can still offer you some challenge when they group against you. Or make Drake really vulnerable (i.e. dies from one or two hits), but those kinds of trial & error games can get extremely frustrating for a majority of gamers.

It's one aspect in games where gameplay can go and SHOULD go above any kind of narrative reasoning. Maybe it doesn't paint Drake in the bestestest of lights and makes him seem like a psycopath if you think about it too much, but I think in these kinds of things I can suspend my disbelief and accept that it's a game and not let it hamper my enjoyment of the storyline & characters otherwise.

i don't think you can make a reasonable comparison of anyone nathan drake fights to nazis. nathan drake also doesn't believe in anything. he seems to do what he wants just because hey it's a shiny thing. indiana jones is a boy scout and thinks artifacts should be protected. he teaches archaeology, which is how we as an audience are supposed to know he knows what he's doing. we're supposed to know what nathan drake knows what he's doing because he just does.

furthermore, there are other ways to keep the player engaged in a video game without murdering people. maybe the dudes at naughty dog should have played a lot of zack and wiki first to get a feel for what treasure hunting could also be like (unless one of the puzzles was 'fill the chalice with the blood of thirty men in the prime of their life.')

my contention with the uncharted games (really uncharted 2) is that, one, it didn't have to be a shooter. it could have been a little more thoughtfully crafted. two, if it had to be a shooter, the main character should have better fit the universe. naughty dog did this, and we got the last of us. i don't have any complaints with the last of us from a storytelling perspective because everything fits and the characters act as you would expect they should given their environment.

 

[Femmeworth]

Not a very nuanced argument on his part, even if I don't totally disagree with him. Then again, it was a short and unprepared response.

 

[Chmpocalypse]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TI8Yy8uwQNY&feature=youtu.be&t=55m15s

Full circle.

Oooh, does he call out the "intellectuals" who throw around terms like ludonarrative dissonance as if they actually understand the concept?

 

[Branduil]

right, which makes him either stupid or an unrepentant killer.

i don't think you can make a reasonable comparison of anyone nathan drake fights to nazis. nathan drake also doesn't believe in anything. he seems to do what he wants just because hey it's a shiny thing. indiana jones is a boy scout and thinks artifacts should be protected. he teaches archaeology, which is how we as an audience are supposed to know he knows what he's doing. we're supposed to know what nathan drake knows what he's doing because he just does.

furthermore, there are other ways to keep the player engaged in a video game without murdering people. maybe the dudes at naughty dog should have played a lot of zack and wiki first to get a feel for what treasure hunting could also be like (unless one of the puzzles was 'fill the chalice with the blood of thirty men in the prime of their life.')

my contention with the uncharted games (really uncharted 2) is that, one, it didn't have to be a shooter. it could have been a little more thoughtfully crafted. two, if it had to be a shooter, the main character should have better fit the universe. naughty dog did this, and we got the last of us. i don't have any complaints with the last of us from a storytelling perspective because everything fits and the characters act as you would expect they should given their environment.

That's what I find funny about this whole argument. Some people want to shut down criticism because it's "censoring" and it will destroy their artistic vision somehow. Man addressing the context of violence sure did ruin The Last of Us. It's a shame they were censored into making such a widely lauded game. We can only imagine what their true artistic vision would have been.

 

[Chmpocalypse]

Can someone bring me up to speed on this? Is there really a significant number of people on GAF who are upset that you kill a lot of people in a shooting game?

They're usually the same people who look down their noses at AAA games as creatively bankrupt walking simulators while hugging their Etsy-made 'quirky' mascot-platformer plushie.

In other words, people whose opinion you can safely ignore.

 

[TheLostBigBoss]

That's what I find funny about this whole argument. Some people want to shut down criticism because it's "censoring" and it will destroy their artistic vision somehow. Man addressing the context of violence sure did ruin The Last of Us. It's a shame they were censored into making such a widely lauded game. We can only imagine what their true artistic vision would have been.

Because The Last of Us has a universe and tone where addressing the violence grows the story. We can easily put ourselves in Joel's shoes as an everyman doing what it takes to survive, it's grounded in a very "real" reality.

Once again, I don't see Indiana Jones addressing the violence and killing, I don't see Jones slumped over at a bar having nightmares of the poor dude he shot point blank. Why? Because it's a completely separate tone and accepted universe, it's not a story that deals with the consequences of the death of nazi's or anyone who isn't a protagonist.

Trying to force Naughty Dog to justify Drake killing pirates and PMC's is fucking lunacy, and completely disregards the universe and genre setting Uncharted is set in.

 

[Chuck]

Ignoring well constructed criticism. Smart way to go.

 

[Wiktor]

I think Drake being a mass murderer is one of his most charming qualities

 

[Strike]

I still can't believe that after all these years that this is actually a thing. It pops up in almost every UC thread. I thought this had just become a long-running joke on this forum.

 

[SkeptiMism]

I think it's fine for a creator to say it's just a game and ignore various matters of consistency, but it's also fine to criticize that and call it lazy writing. This doesn't mean that the lazy writing makes it a bad game or that it has to be some outrage.

It's also fine for a creator to ignore all criticism but it's also fine to criticize that. Listening to criticism doesn't mean that you have to do what the critics say.

Oooh, does he call out the "intellectuals" who throw around terms like ludonarrative dissonance as if they actually understand the concept?

They're usually the same people who look down their noses at AAA games as creatively bankrupt walking simulators while hugging their Etsy-made 'quirky' mascot-platformer plushie.

In other words, people whose opinion you can safely ignore.

Show us some of those people then, please. Because it sounds like you're making things up.

 

[unround]

If we apply logic of a sane, normal person into every story we would have extremely boring stories.

And our hero saw the treasure ahead, but noticed many foes in his way. Calculating the odds he deemed it would be reckless to go after his dream and he went home and found a nice 9 to 5 job that supplied good benefits for his family the end.

Why not throw your seemingly sane, normal person into an unavoidably horrible situation then? That basic scenario is part of why Die Hard is amazing, after all. It really does seem like this is easily solvable with better writing and scenario building.

 

[-tetsuo-]

They're usually the same people who look down their noses at AAA games as creatively bankrupt walking simulators while hugging their Etsy-made 'quirky' mascot-platformer plushie.

In other words, people whose opinion you can safely ignore.

Damn breh

 

[Cyrano]

Is there anyone who enjoys the combat but encounters this so-called "ludonarrative dissonance?" That is to say, the fact that Drake kills so many enemies actually lessens your enjoyment of killing enemies?

It's been this way for me for years. Unless the point of your game is killing dudes, having lots of scenarios where you're killing dudes is probably going to detract from whatever it is you're trying to set up. Even more so if they are just mooks.

 

[The Artisan]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TI8Yy8uwQNY&feature=youtu.be&t=55m15s

Full circle.

I'll have to watch this at some point.

But just because it is uber appropriate...

 

[Branduil]

Because The Last of Us has a universe and tone where addressing the violence grows the story. We can easily put ourselves in Joel's shoes as an everyman doing what it takes to survive, it's grounded in a very "real" reality.

Once again, I don't see Indiana Jones addressing the violence and killing, I don't see Jones slumped over at a bar having nightmares of the poor dude he shot point blank. Why? Because it's a completely separate tone and accepted universe, it's not a story that deals with the consequences of the death of nazi's or anyone who isn't a protagonist.

Trying to force Naughty Dog to justify Drake killing pirates and PMC's is fucking lunacy, and completely disregards the universe and genre setting Uncharted is set in.

And it works for Indiana Jones because he actually does relatively sparce killing and it's not an identical story to Uncharted. I mean, you can't really rely on the effective immersion of someone else's story to justify your own. It explains the series' existence but that doesn't mean that everything in Indiana Jones will also work in a video game series of the same genre.

 

[TheLostBigBoss]

Why not throw your seemingly sane, normal person into an unavoidably horrible situation then? That basic scenario is part of why Die Hard is amazing, after all. It really does seem like this is easily solvable with better writing.

John McClain could have easily hid in a storage locker for the whole movie, like any normal person would.

No "sane" person would attempt to go head to head against 12 well armed terrorists and actively try to stop them.

No amount of writing is gonna justify a 500+ kill count in a game, unless you specifically go out of your way to criticize such violence (Spec Ops), it's best to ignore it if it's within the genre tropes.

 

[LeleSocho]

Drake mass murderer? Have people ever played Uncharted? You can knock out all the enemies (aside bosses i guess) with your fists if you want.
Jesus some people are just out of this world.

 

[Imm0rt4l]

I always thought it was just a joke. I don't think there's many people that seriously have a problem with it.

people really do feel strongly about this. Uncharted is on the more prominent examples on gaf on 'udonarrative dissonance'.

 

[FinalStageBoss]

Lol@ this thread. Druckmann was right after all, stay the hell away from gaf if you're a developer. You will get picked apart for the dumbest thing.

 

[Game4life]

Pack it up folks. Spielberg and Lucas goofed up according to narrative dissonance. Hell in Raiders Jones leaves Karen Allen all tied up inspite of finding her because it will disturb his treasure hunt. He kills people and does not bat an eyelid. All that is fine because he kills only 20 with humor while Drake kills 200 with humor so it is not okay. So 20 per game is the acceptable murder count according to GAF, Neil. Keep that in mind!

 

[Chuck Norris]

If watching Indiana Jones kill hundreds of Nazis over 12 hours was enjoyable than the movies would have been made that way. As it is, that is not enjoyable - so Indiana's kill count is comparatively lower. In Uncharted it is the central game mechanic and shooting is fun

All of those pulpy movies had brutal deaths laughed off with a clever quip

 

[CecilRousso]

"There is a problem, but we haven't been able to solve, and nor are we going to, because what we do sell millions, and win all of the GOTY's."

 

[CosmicGroinPull]

Yeah just ignore that part of Neogaf. Same goes for the RAD guys.

"Mass murderer..." Pfft.

"No innovation..." Pffft.

 

[Kintaro]

Why is Neil calling out NeoGaf? Wasn't it some othergame journalists that started this and really got the ball rolling?

 

[TheLostBigBoss]

And it works for Indiana Jones because he actually does relatively sparce killing and it's not an identical story to Uncharted. I mean, you can't really rely on the effective immersion of someone else's story to justify your own. It explains the series' existence but that doesn't mean that everything in Indiana Jones will also work in a video game series of the same genre.

In what world is killing 12 people sparse?

"Jones, why did you go and kill a dozen people?!?"

"Cause it belongs in a museum!"

"You fucking maniac, how do you sleep at night? You shot that one bloke point blank! All he did was wave his swords around at you!"

What I did is silly, and what people are trying to do with Uncharted in complaining about it's body count is equally silly. But no, Drake is the maniac because games last longer and demand more action.

Why is Neil calling out NeoGaf? Wasn't it some othergame journalists that started this and really got the ball rolling?

Cause it was a joke, and people here can't take jokes.

 

[POWERSPHERE]

The link goes straight to the timestamp in the video where this is brought up.

Not on my iPhone

 

[Game4life]

It is not a criticism worth even pondering for a few seconds. Glad Neil dismissed this nonsense early on.

 

[Earthpainting]

His "please ignore that" response is expected, but still a little disappointing. None of this would be such an issue if they tried to contextualise the violence more. Nate's motivation is usually "I want the thing" or "I want to go there", which is the usually the same motivation the antagonists have. That may be a sufficient reason for them to go on the journey, but for all the constant mortal danger they all face it doesn't really make sense. You can at least pretend that the antagonists putting themselves at risk are getting compensated well.

 

[Doctor_Thomas]

I honestly don't know how you're supposed to justify the killing in Uncharted or why you would want to.

It is a game, so unless you want them to take an approach closer to Indiana Jones (11 people killed by Indy in the 115 minute "Raiders of the Lost Ark") and have very little shooting action, then you're probably looking at the wrong genre and game entirely.

No other game is asked to justify its kill count, so why is Uncharted expected to?

 

[SkeptiMism]

Lol@ this thread. Druckmann was right after all, stay the hell away from gaf if you're a developer. You will get picked apart for the dumbest thing.

There are plenty of developers here who are very happy for being part of the community.

Anyway, I don't see many people tearing the game apart because of this. As I said, it's fine for a creator to say it's just a game and ignore various matters of consistency, but it's also fine to criticize that and call it lazy writing if the person feels like that. That doesn't mean it has to be some outrage or trying to tear the game apart.

 

[Branduil]

In what world is killing 12 people sparse?

"Jones, why did you go and kill a dozen people?!?"

"Cause it belongs in a museum!"

"You fucking maniac, how do you sleep at night? You shot that one bloke point blank! All he did was wave his swords around at you!"

But no, Drake is the maniac because games last longer and demand more action.

Indy kills twelve people over several months. Nathan Drake kills twelve people in a single encounter. It's a pretty significant difference. Heck, the whole reason Indy shooting the swordsman is so funny is because Indy virtually never actually uses his gun(because his goal isn't to kill people- not even Nazis). It's very different from Drake using his gun every time something happens. The enemies are different too, in that they are inhumanly obsessed with killing Drake, disregarding everything else including their own lives.

 

[Cyrano]

Indy kills twelve people over several months. Nathan Drake kills twelve people in a single encounter. It's a pretty significant difference. Heck, the whole reason Indy shooting the swordsman is so funny is because Indy virtually never actually uses his gun(because his goal isn't to kill people- not even Nazis). It's very different from Drake using his gun every time something happens. The enemies are different too, in that they are inhumanly obsessed with killing Drake, disregarding everything else including their own lives.

Particularly that they are still willing to fight Drake after Drake clearly not being a creature they, as mooks, can handle.

I want a videogame where all the bullet wounds you've sustained over time persist through death. You'd look like a Dark Souls monster by the end of an Uncharted game.

 

[Kintaro]

Cause it was a joke, and people here can't take jokes.

A, carry on then!

 

[Pappasman]

Man, its shocking to me that people get so defensive over Uncharted. I'll never get why people treat ND like gods. "It's a video game" is a such a profoundly stupid and lazy defense.

Why is Neil calling out NeoGaf? Wasn't it some othergame journalists that started this and really got the ball rolling?

To me, it sounded like he just used GAF as an example on internet fans. Could be subbed for reddit, etc.

 

[kaching]

"There is a problem, but we haven't been able to solve, and nor are we going to, because what we do sell millions, and win all of the GOTY's."

The problem is completely subjective and never going to be solved to everyone's particular taste. I think if you manage to solve the "problem" of catering to every last person's individual tastes, you'll probably be a wizard who figured out mind control.

 

[ibyea]

Indy kills twelve people over several months. Nathan Drake kills twelve people in a single encounter. It's a pretty significant difference. Heck, the whole reason Indy shooting the swordsman is so funny is because Indy virtually never actually uses his gun(because his goal isn't to kill people- not even Nazis). It's very different from Drake using his gun every time something happens. The enemies are different too, in that they are inhumanly obsessed with killing Drake, disregarding everything else including their own lives.

The part in the third game where

Spoiler

all the goons stayed inside the burning ancient mansion just to shoot Drake, man that was weird.

 

[Cyborg]

Ive killed more people in BF4 I dont get the discussion

 

[Chinner]

why does nobody challenge that pokemon promotes slavery and violence?

 

[Doctor_Thomas]

Man, its shocking to me that people get so defensive over Uncharted. I'll never get why people treat ND like gods. "It's a video game" is a such a profoundly stupid and lazy defense.

It is a video game. Not every video game needs to exist for some higher purpose other than to entertain.

 

[Relaxed Muscle]

Ive killed more people in BF4 I dont get the discussion

You're a soldier on a war, trying to save the world/country or whatever, you aren't killing hundreds of people because this treasure belongs to you while crakcing jokes....

 

[AniHawk]

why does nobody challenge that pokemon promotes slavery and violence?

this is like the joke people make about pokemon. actually the plot of pokemon black/white was about this, i think.

 

[Cyborg]

You're a soldier on a war, trying to save the world/country or whatever, you aren't killing hundreds of people because this treasure belongs to you while crakcing jokes....

Its a game dude! Get over it.

 

[Dezben]

It is a video game. Not every video game needs to exist for some higher purpose other than to entertain.

No video game should exist for some higher purpose other than to entertain.

 

[ibyea]

why does nobody challenge that pokemon promotes slavery and violence?

Are you kidding me? Do you have any idea how many fan fiction of pokemon there are that touches upon that? It is like the joke in pokemon fandom.

 

[jimi_dini]

Drake mass murderer? Have people ever played Uncharted? You can knock out all the enemies (aside bosses i guess) with your fists if you want.

Last time I played Uncharted 2, mass murderer Drake snapped necks left and right with his bare hands. And that's not even enough, he even did "funny" one liners like "whahaha that's your neck". That's all sorts of fucked up. And they even kept that shit in Uncharted 3.

 

[Relaxed Muscle]

Its a game dude! Get over it.

"It's a game dude" is the same argument Gamergate made over the whole sexism problem.

Think about it.