Ghost Slayer
Member
God bless us we won't see this topic in Uncharted 4 review
I don't get why people say Nathan Drake is an asshole that yearns to kill people
- Thread starter The Lamp
- Start date
God bless us we won't see this topic in Uncharted 4 review
Manny Calavera
Member
I think Uncharted is the game equivalent of Indiana Jones, both are critically acclaimed and while maybe not exactly art, they are self aware enough to be taken seriously. I don't see a problem with either one that you must suspend your own disbelief at a times. Raiders of the Lost Ark even got 8 Oscar nominations which was unheard for such a light hearted fun adventure. I guess people forgot to nitpick why does a professor and archaeologist gets into situation where he has to kill Nazis. They didn't even have a scene where Indy showed remorse afterwards.
Isn't that the problem though? The gameplay loop makes killing dozens of guys a five-minute encounter with little justification or consequence. Why can't a gunfight with a smaller number of enemies be a more suspenseful, frightening thing? Why does it have to make the enemies so dumb that they run in front of a gatling gun?
Games don't have to be shooters with bodycounts in the hundreds, it's absolutely not essential for a computer game, but Uncharted is chained to it because of genre conventions. If anything, for me personally, it removes all feeling of threat from the enemy when you can kill off their entire army on your own.
Sure, players love it, but it isn't the only way to make a game, it's just the only way to make a high-bodycount shooter.
Bitch Pudding
Member
First of all, movies have a length of approx. 2 hours, hence you'd have to compare how many enemies Nathan kills during 2 hours of gameplay on average.
Besides, Die Hard is an old movie, even Schwarzenegger's classic Commando (1985) sums up to "only" 88 on-screen kills. Compared to the number of on-screen kills of more recent movies like 300 (600 kills) or The last Samurai (558 kills) this isn't actually that much.
But to answer the question of OP, I asume that most people saying Nate is an ashole don't have a PlayStation. Maybe it's as simple as that?
revolverjgw
Member
There's nothing about Drake that's ordinary, from the first scene in the first game it's established that he's packing heat and expecting to fight bad guys. Later on, all the supervillains bent on world domination know who he is, and they either try to kill him or force/trick him to use his skills to solve ancient mysteries. So clearly he's not an average Joe, he's the top thief in the thief underworld populated by insane people, good and evil.
And there's nothing about his wisecracking, charming personality that's at odds with the pulp adventure... go watch an old swashbuckler and you'll see Burt Lancaster slashing 30 bad guys to death with a smile on his face while a woman swoons. Uncharted is pure old fashioned pulp action.
Which movie did John give his reasons for becoming a police officer? It's been a while since I've seen them but I don't recall it.
I've already discussed a lot of the discrepancies between the two characters in another post which you can feel free to reply to if you choose, but my point is that they both kill without remorse and have similar lighthearted attitudes despite the fact the are offing people right and left.
Character personality wise the two are basically interchangeable but no one ever takes issue with McClane despite a previous poster claiming that films get criticized the same way.
That's true, but adding "ifs" to Drake's character would change him completely. It's not just the scenario, but his character dictates how he approaches them. Drake is simply looking to satisfy his own curiosity and get rich/famous in the process. He brings a trusted friend or two to have his back. Once you get into the hiring mercs business, you're not in it for the same reasons.
mocolostrocolos
Member
My bodycount after finishing Uncharted 1 was 673.
673.
I don't think I've killed that much in any Gears of War.
673.
I don't think I've killed that much in any Gears of War.
I'm a massive fan of text adventures. In The Craft Of Adventure Graham Nelson describes adventures as "A narrative at war with a crossword".
Uncharted is "A narrative at war with a shooting gallery".
I think, ultimately, the issue is the parallels with this. That's a deliberately absurd parody played for comic effect. Naughty Dog's aspirations suggest that they mean us to take Uncharted more seriously than that.
just in case you are serious lol, context.
SolidSnakex
Member
As far as the amount you kill goes, I think Neil did a good job of explaining it at last years PSX
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TI8Yy8uwQNY&feature=youtu.be&t=55m15s
His basic point is that with any medium you learn to accept things that aren't 100% in line with how things would work in reality. That absolutely goes for an action game. An action movie is usually around an hour and a half long while something like Uncharted lasts between 8-11 hours. And unlike an action movie, the game will primarily take place within the action field. Most action movies have lots of conversations leading up to an action setpiece before going back to the conversations. That wouldn't work with something like Uncharted. It'd get way too boring if there were more conversations than there were action. That gets into game logic. And at its heart the Uncharted franchise is an action game not an adventure game. So it wouldn't make sense to even have constant prolonged periods of just exploring, because that's not what the series is.
I guess what it comes down to is can you accept game logic instead of trying to make it into a reflection of reality or even to movies? If you can then there's really nothing out of line with what goes on in Uncharted. It's just game logic working at the end of the day. Just like movie logic requires you to accept that people will continually go back to a place where murders have taken place, or in a martial arts scene a group of people will attack the main character one at a time rather than just all of them jumping in and beating the shit out of the main character, which is obviously what would happen in real life.
Professor Beef
Banned
I don't get it. Are you agreeing with him?
You can remind me all you want those videos were hilariously stupid.
Now I am wondering if the writers for Archer used that as inspiration when they wrote the story arc with the main character diagnosed with breast cancer and him having to deal with it.
Yeah it's ridiculous....
He's a psycho, anyone would have been a psychological mess afterwards
What's not to get here..?
a dancing afro zebra.. press some buttons.. a gif.. a shot is fired..
the gif is just to illustrate how silly this whole discussion is..
Professor Beef
Banned
Is Ezio a psychopath? Squall? Or any other RPG character? Or are we just gonna single out Nate because of a Penny Arcade comic?
It's also much more of a "feel" than a numbers thing.
I trust that no one feels like they killed the number that they see in their game stats. Movies and games are different. When we're in control, killing is all we wanna do because killing feels cool, man (in games ofc).
You can feel like you played through an action movie, but your kill count will always be exponentially more than in any other fictional platform.
TheRedSnifit
Member
What reason would you expect him to become a police officer? I promise you, that's not a good job if you're looking for money.
I read it, and it's totally irrelevant because you're ignoring the fact that they have completely different reasons for killing people. Like, the fact that people are attempting to compare him to Sam Fisher, DOOMGuy, etc., despite their motivations being completely different highlight how absurd the ludonarrative dissonance in Uncharted is.
I refuse to believe that you're unable to see that Drake is portrayed as an everyman just figuring it out as he goes along.
How many of these have Burt Lancaster massacring people for personal gain, while at the same time being portrayed as a really nice guy?
JumpCancel
Banned
The reason people argue about this is down to the number of people Drake Kills. Don't get me wrong I understand that its a pillar of the gameplay in uncharted, they would kill him of he didn't kill the- you get the point.
When you look back on each game, its simply the volume of his kill count. Since it's a game with a story, likable characters with a lighthearted touch when you sit down to think "Christ, i killed about 90 people in that jeep chase" it only really hits you then. During gameplay it's going through the motions so you don't really have time to understand what you've done.
With Doom you were killing monsters so you've no reason to worry, that and you're killing something every 4 seconds.
For me personally, I find it harder to suspend disbelief that drake makes every jump, dodges death every time and generally has lady luck bent over a table. Honestly drake you should be dead by now. Some of the events I actually watch and think "bollocks you're dead dude".
Depends on each persons perspective I guess.
When you look back on each game, its simply the volume of his kill count. Since it's a game with a story, likable characters with a lighthearted touch when you sit down to think "Christ, i killed about 90 people in that jeep chase" it only really hits you then. During gameplay it's going through the motions so you don't really have time to understand what you've done.
With Doom you were killing monsters so you've no reason to worry, that and you're killing something every 4 seconds.
For me personally, I find it harder to suspend disbelief that drake makes every jump, dodges death every time and generally has lady luck bent over a table. Honestly drake you should be dead by now. Some of the events I actually watch and think "bollocks you're dead dude".
Depends on each persons perspective I guess.
I don't think you can really compare a 'vigilante' film to a 'war' film in terms of bodycount, no matter when they were made.
GravityInsanity
Member
Drake is following the footsteps of Indiana Jones. Drake is just a great movie actor winning best "character" at the Oscars. Harrison Ford was so proud of Drake he decided to play his game.
This is just the same as saying assault is actually a woman's fault for wearing revealing clothing.
Manny Calavera
Member
Well.. I'd like to hold off judgement on a thing like that, sir, until all the facts are in.
SolVanderlyn
Thanos acquires the fully powered Infinity Gauntlet in The Avengers: Infinity War, but loses when all the superheroes team up together to stop him.
Hahahaha, amazing
There is nothing weird about it. Charming, charismatic sociopaths are actually pretty common. You want him to walk around in a hooded cape rubbing his hands and cackling occasionally?
revolverjgw
Member
He's clearly not an everyman. He's more John Matrix than Joe Schmoe.
Most of them, he usually played a charming rogue in the Drake mold. He's the Crimson Pirate living an outlaw life, because that's exciting and dangerous. It's a common pulp archetype that Uncharted adheres to.
Scientist Supreme!
Banned
Why do you have a problem with people who talk about this?
TheSlySoul
Member
I think the biggest issue is that there is no knockout function. He throws people off cliffs plenty. So it makes him seem like a killer. More so than Indy.
We know Mario is psychotic, cannot even let his brother win tennis without getting upset.
Professor Beef
Banned
I'm just asking a question.
Manny Calavera
Member
I actually felt worse for all the people I killed while playing Assassins Creed Syndicate last night. Somehow something more personal about the stabbing. I'm just waiting for the scene where Jacob and Evie show remorse.
Ezio is a professional assassin at war with a conspiracy of powerful enemies, and Squall is a trainee soldier in a fantasy world of constant war. There's a difference between these fantastical characters for whom killing people is part of their day job, something they've accepted and come to terms with, and someone like Nate who is portrayed as an everyday guy in our world.
I think the same about the latest Tomb Raider game (and Far Cry 3) too, the push to make these characters feel like likable modern people in extreme circumstances is at odds with game design that requires them to instantly switch between human being in the cut scenes, and an automaton killing machine three seconds later.
I'll slay as many random animals as I need to get my experience points/drops and no one will stop me!!!!
As I said upthread, it's a narrative at war with a shooting gallery. My problem is that it's disproportionately currently in favour of the shooting gallery - and, for all Druckmann's protestations, I'm not sure it needs to be quite so jarring.
No-one's complaining about The Last Of Us. It works there.
Rambo is actually a good example of how someone can be totally fucked up by that amount of carnage.
One particular sequence in AC3 also rubbed me the wrong way for very similar reasons.
Langdon Alger
Banned
Who says Uncharted is trying to be frightening or suspenseful?
People have thier own reasons for picking thier professions. Perhaps McClane wanted to be able to kill people and get away with it, as he seems to have zero issue when he kills. Perhaps he wants to be able to harass minorities, this is the same John McClane who walked around in Die Hard 3 with a sign stated that he hated black people and had a particularly offensive racial slur on it.
We can't just make assumptions about people's reasonings when we aren't given them. That being said treasurer hunter isn't exactly the best paying line of work either, perhaps Drake is in it for something other than just money.
Big Baybee
Member
Should there be scenes of him visiting a psychiatrist after every set piece?
Professor Beef
Banned
Well there was that one dumb section near the final act of the 1st game.
I'm not. I'm saying it could try other things to make combat seem more engaging and meaningful for a character that doesn't always choose it and is woefully outnumbered than yet another game of whack-a-mole.
Being chained to TPS genre conventions isn't always a good thing.
revolverjgw
Member
I'd follow Chloe's ass into a volcano filled with mercenaries and zombies, I can tell you that much
indiana jones is a male wish fulfillment fantasy. he's kind of a perfect man. part of the allure is that he's like this guy with a double life, who goes out and finds treasure in these grand adventures and beats up actual bad guys. like history in the last 100 years keeps going back to nazis because they were the one thing everyone could agree on as being the biggest assholes since a whole world war was fought because of them and they tortured killed millions of people in their own country and across europe in the worst ways because they were racist evil shitheads. the motivation to root for indiana jones is built into the fact that who he's up against are some of the worst people in recent history. and not only is he a guy who's in a race against nazis and people who do shit like have child slave camps and pull hearts out of chests and possess people, but his goal is not for personal glory but to make sure that everyone has the benefit of the treasure. he goes through all of what he goes through because he has an appreciation for history and even humanity - eventually having the ark of the covenant stored away in a safe place where hopefully no one would find it. not only is indiana jones a smart, good-looking guy with the right quip, an awesome double-life, and always manages to come out on top despite overwhelming odds, but his heart is in the right place (but good try, mola ram).
and then nathan drake is this stupid asshole who is a treasure hunter because he has nothing going on in his life. his role as a male fantasy character is like jason rubin decided one day he wanted a real cool sarcastic guy who shot people because he can write a sentence and thinks that's all it takes to create interesting characters (for more on this, see jak or anyone who isn't krew in jak ii). the other games in the series have to have so much more work done to explain his backstory and try to get into his mind because he's so hard to relate to. i have no dog in the tomb raider vs uncharted fight, believe me - i really don't care much about either game, but tomb raider at least tries to tell us lara croft is a person in some other way before she's this
in addition to that, drake isn't doing anything really 'good' on his own. he's just kind of this selfish dude. this is something that was part of uncharted 2 that wasn't really explored much until uncharted 3 and it seems like uncharted 4 as well, but this is more of a response to complaints about what a poorly conceived character drake is in the earlier games than drake having been interesting to begin with.
what i'm trying to say isn't that drake had to be a good guy who is on the side of justice and whatever. he could have been a selfish jackass like they're trying to explain he really is now and has always been. that's fine. but what i think happened is that they really thought they were making indiana jones when they weren't getting it right in a whole lot of ways. the comparison falls flat.
Depends on the movie. First Blood and Rambo (4) definitely, Rambo 3 not so much. Like I said though, he's a better comparison for Snake as the Metal Gear games actually address these themes and even call out the player to an extent for enjoying killing at points
Captain Tuttle
Member
I think most people say it just to get that fanbase worked up, many tend to be passionate about the series