Support NeoGAF

[Brakke]

"But it was self defense!" is the whackest response to this discussion. Murder isn't a question of "is it justified" it's a question of "did you kill someone". Psychologically, once you've murdered your two thousandth dude you should be carrying that weight. PTSD doesn't ask you if the murder you committed was prosecutable.

And of course it's a pulpy thing and murder's gunna be happening. That's fine. I can both accept the game on its own terms while I'm playing it and also say "that was dumb" afterwards.

There's no doubt there's some dissonance there though. When James Bond murders a bunch of people it's understandable because James Bond's whole thing is being good at murdering people. It's cool to watch people be excellent at their jobs. The weird thing is Drake's job isn't murder, it's tomb raiding. At least, his cutscene job is tomb raider; his gameplay job is frequently maniacal sociopath murderer. The other thing with Bond is he's a shit dude in his cutscene life, too. So his action-murder life and his misogyny life make sense together.

 

[Tricky I Shadow]

I'm gonna be completely honest. This might sound like I'm a dick - but if you legitimately view this as a serious issue you're an idiot.

 

[Gbraga]

I don't mind that people think that about him. You can think whatever you want about anything. What bothers me is when it's considered a major flaw that needs fixing. Uncharted is great the way it is, and the only things it needed to be improved on, in my opinion, is exactly the kind of stuff they're doing with Uncharted 4, more open areas for combat encounters, allowing you to approach them in different ways, creating kind of a sandbox combat gameplay.

I want to shoot a thousand people in the face and laugh about it. If I want killing to be brutal, I'll play The Last of Us. Uncharted should be Uncharted.

What I think Uncharted could take from The Last of Us (aside from the better encounter design that it's already doing from what we've seen) is the more interesting monster encounters. Instead of making the supernatural element just blue dudes you have to shoot more, make them completely different. Fewer in number, but much more menacing. Either make your regular weapons useless against them, or just straight up put you in a situation where you don't have them, and make the encounters more strategic, maybe even mix stealth and platforming to avoid/run away from a creature you just can't defeat. It'll mix up the pacing and make those encounters more interesting.

 

[Synth]

I think I only saw it bought up when they were talking about a disconnect in character actions and in game actions.

I have not played it but I'm under the impression she has issues with killing people at points in the game but you're still killing tons of people in gameplay even around those points.

Pre reboot Lara seems like a far comparison although she didn't seem to face people anyehere near as often as Drake.

Synth, the problem with TR2013 isn't the situation, it's that the way Lara is being characterized in cutscenes is completely at odds with the actual gameplay. Nathan Drake is never depicted as being traumatized by what he does so it isn't as incongruous when he kills so cavalierly.

I recall two examples of Lara showing issues with killing. When she kills the deer, and when she shoots the guy that was about to rape her. Both situations represent a first (first innocent animal kill, and first human life taken). After the first human kill she actually proclaims that it disturbs her how easy it was (and I doubt this refers to the actual act of killing, rather than how easy dealing with the aftereffect seems to be). She never seems to dwell on killing out of necessity from this point forward, and over the course of the game seemingly becomes rather confident in her ability to. She's also shown no regression from this so far in RoTR either, where there's so far been no retreading of the "omg I just killed someone / an animal" stuff from the beginning of the first game.

I'm honestly not seeing as big a disconnect here as people are suggesting. It's like people are taking those initial scenes, and expanding their memory of them across the entire game.

EDIT: And yea, pre-reboot Lara would be a much better comparison imo.

 

[TheRedSnifit]

You guys are reaching too, that was kind of the point I was making by removing context and painting his actions in the worst light possible.

Drake is a treasure hunter and almost all of his killing is done in self defense. Yes he puts himself in those situations but he's not going around murdering people, and unless I'm mistaken they never even imply his motivation is to kill people so the serial killer accusation really doesn't fit.

The fact that Drake kills more in all honesty is kind of irrelevant, if John McClane had to kill 700 terrorists in Nakatomi plaza I don't think he'd have much of an issue with that.

Nobody is removing the context from anything. There is no accusation that he kills for the sake of killing - that's a strawman trying to deflect the argument that Uncharted's gameplay and Drake's characterization clash in such a way that it undermines the writers' intent and makes him come off as a glib sociopath who takes what he wants no matter the cost.

Such arguments never occur against John McClain in Diehard because McClain's characterization and actions never clash in such a way. Still, it's fun watching Uncharted fans bend over backwards to argue that a Naughty Dog game is on the same level narratively as Ninja Gaiden 2.

 

[Brad Grenz]

I still don't see how the wires cross. These opinions seem to be under the assumption that somehow fictional characters must be weighed down by the realities we live under. And when examples are brought up, the goalposts then shift to a numbers game, as if humanity dwindles the MORE people you kill, regardless of actual context, let alone the tone of the fantastical universe portrayed.

Exactly, judging a character based solely on numbers is just about the most shallow form of analysis possible. Like, sub-grade school bookbook report level. It's not that people aren't treating games as serious works of art, it's that these critics are actually failing treat them seriously at all as exemplified by such infantile readings.

 

[Moon_frogger]

It's because the series is otherwise grounded. Nathan drake is a believable wise cracking heart of gold type. Then he murders thousands of dudes In an absolute bloodbath that puts call of duty to Shame. Except Nathan drake isn't some hardened black ops dude. He shouldn't be grinning while covered in the blood of his enemies.

 

[Freeman]

The fact people seems shocked a the amount of people Drake kills is probably a testament of how well written the games are, but let's not lose perspective, it's a third person shooter videogame, and it needs enemies to shoot at during several hours to keep it interesting.

I say that every single time, there is a reason people don't care about this sort of thing in most other games.

If anything its a failure of gameplay design and not writing specifically.

 

[Superflat]

I'm gonna be completely honest. This might sound like I'm a dick - but if you legitimately view this as a serious issue you're an idiot.

can't disagree. I don't think a lot of people are though (at least i hope not), it's just a difficult topic to discuss clearly (perhaps because the topic itself is ridiculous), hence the ridiculous number of posts trying to put it to words.

 

[SolidSnakex]

It's because the series is otherwise grounded. Nathan drake is a believable wise cracking heart of gold type. Then he murders thousands of dudes In an absolute bloodbath that puts call of duty to Shame. Except Nathan drake isn't some hardened black ops dude. He shouldn't be grinning while covered in the blood of his enemies.

Why shouldn't he? Because you decided that he shouldn't act like that?

 

[OfTheOverflow]

Funny this is brought up now, I watched my girlfriend start the first Uncharted last night and she commented on this saying something like "Uhh, wouldn't he be feeling guilty about killing all these people?" Guess I just never really thought about it when I played them, you're not expected to put so much thought into analyzing these things in pulpy shooting games. The Last of Us however, well that's another story. If you want to play something and feel guilty about your actions, go right ahead and boot it up instead. Uncharted is light-hearted fun!

 

[plasmawave]

Nobody is removing the context from anything. There is no accusation that he kills for the sake of killing - that's a strawman trying to deflect the argument that Uncharted's gameplay and Drake's characterization clash in such a way that it undermines the writers' intent and makes him come off as a glib sociopath who takes what he wants no matter the cost.

Such arguments never occur against John McClain in Diehard because McClain's characterization and actions never clash in such a way. Still, it's fun watching Uncharted fans bend over backwards to argue that a Naughty Dog game is on the same level narratively as Ninja Gaiden 2.

What about Indiana Jones? He's a school professor going around killing people!

 

[Superflat]

It's because the series is otherwise grounded. Nathan drake is a believable wise cracking heart of gold type. Then he murders thousands of dudes In an absolute bloodbath that puts call of duty to Shame. Except Nathan drake isn't some hardened black ops dude. He shouldn't be grinning while covered in the blood of his enemies.

I know it's probably you just using flowery language to get your point across but the only blood drake gets covered in is his own

Drake is a guy who knows how to use guns, improvise, and incredibly lucky. The gameplay reflects that quite a bit. There's nothing coldly tactical or super efficient about how he runs around a battle arena.

 

[Android18a]

Alright, so I'm okay with Drake shooting up a load of goons. That's fine with me.

The thing that REALLY annoyed me is I go to all the trouble of puzzle solving and navigating previously secret passages in ancient tombs, only to find you get to an open area and the enemy has actually been there for bloody ages. Great. There's no sense of achievement in discovering anything because everywhere is full of enemy goons once you get to the mid part of an area.

Like in Uncharted 1 where you find the hidden passage into the crypts, and it's got floodlights and stuff down there. Why did I even use a secret passage then?

Sorry, slightly off topic, but damn. No wonder Drake ends up shooting everyone, it's so nobody can argue he was the first to find the stuff.

 

[family_guy]

"But it was self defense!" is the whackest response to this discussion. Murder isn't a question of "is it justified" it's a question of "did you kill someone". Psychologically, once you've murdered your two thousandth dude you should be carrying that weight. PTSD doesn't ask you if the murder you committed was prosecutable.

Well it's called murder because it's illegal. Killing someone in self-defense isn't the same as murder.

 

[Bear Force One]

Why shouldn't he? Because you decided that he shouldn't act like that?

Exactly.

 

[AniHawk]

I'm gonna be completely honest. This might sound like I'm a dick - but if you legitimately view this as a serious issue you're an idiot.

i think there are a few legitimate viewpoints to have on why this bothers people.

1. comparisons to other mediums are often superficial and lack critical analysis.
2. the gameplay in uncharted largely centers around getting to a part where you can kill more people, or some setpiece that has little-to-nothing to do with being a treasure hunter. essentially, the concept of a treasure hunter going treasure hunting seems wasted when it's just the one thing.
3. these games are supposed to be the current high points in action in video games because how the story weaves in and out of it, but the story itself has kind of a big problem with the main character. i mean this is supposed to be where we're getting inspiration from huh.

the biggest counterpoint to really all three of the above is 'it's a video game!' which is kind of a weird rebuttal. like cool it's a video game. then why isn't it more like vanquish where that's a third-person shooter but i'm rocket-sliding around on my knees and shooting giant robots in slow-motion. that shit is a spectacle and i'm actually in control of the spectacle. are we supposed to try and enjoy the story or are we supposed to just try and enjoy the gameplay.

 

[Superflat]

What about Indiana Jones? He's a school professor going around killing people!

Don't you worry, he's gonna feel the weight of that later.

 

[InsaneTiger]

If you've got a wife and kids, don't work as a mercenary. Simple as that.

This isn't an Uncharted problem, it's a problem with videogames in general. GTA IV had the character not want to kill but once you gained control you could easily kill some guy on the street. The situation is indicative of the game being design and the story/characters being shoehorned into the game.

"Our game is this type, what story should we tell."

Instead of...

"This is our story, what type of game should it be"

It's a videogame, so the player has to do something. Pretty sure everyone would be bored if all you did was walk from cutscene to cutscene.

 

[perineumlick]

Drake is an everyday guy's fantasy. Who doesn't want to take their current personality, and drop a layer of badass on top of it? I understand that some might enjoy debating things like this, but when you get right down to it, this debate is ridiculous.

 

[Kssio_Aug]

Before reading people debating it I never really noticed. Uncharted is a very cartoonish game and all the action doesn't really feel immoral or anything like that, just fun!

I can however see why some people do debate it. Most games give the character some story elements that makes killing hordes of enemies "justifiable". They usually are in a war, or fighting for surviving, or killing gangs to reach someone they want to save. In Uncharted though Drake kill enemies for sport, he just want to discover the damn treasures doesn't matter the consequences! LoL

 

[Brad Grenz]

Nobody is removing the context from anything. There is no accusation that he kills for the sake of killing - that's a strawman trying to deflect the argument that Uncharted's gameplay and Drake's characterization clash in such a way that it undermines the writers' intent and makes him come off as a glib sociopath who takes what he wants no matter the cost.

You have yet to present an argument for why they clash. You claim rests entirely on your own moral assumptions that they should clash.

 

[Ghost Slayer]

Before reading people debating it, I never really noticed. Uncharted is a very cartoonish game, and all the action doesn't really feel immoral or anything like that, just fun!

I can however see why some people do debate it. Most games give the character some story elements that makes killing hordes of enemies "justifiable". They usually are in a war, fighting for surviving, or killing gangs to reach someone they want to save. In Uncharted though, Drake kill enemies for sport, he just want to discover the damn treasures! LoL

Funny enough, all things you said happen in Uncharted

 

[Dremark]

Nobody is removing the context from anything. There is no accusation that he kills for the sake of killing - that's a strawman trying to deflect the argument that Uncharted's gameplay and Drake's characterization clash in such a way that it undermines the writers' intent and makes him come off as a glib sociopath who takes what he wants no matter the cost.

Such arguments never occur against John McClain in Diehard because McClain's characterization and actions never clash in such a way. Still, it's fun watching Uncharted fans bend over backwards to argue that a Naughty Dog game is on the same level narratively as Ninja Gaiden 2.

People are literally calling him a serial killer and ignoring the context behind it. He is killing in self defense in just about every circumstance I can think of and the people he is killing are not good people.

If you want to argue that the gameplay and storyline clash go ahead, but the specific "strawman" I'm talking about is an accusation which is being made.

What exactly is so different about Drake's character and John Clane's that makes this so different? Character personality wise they seem pretty interchangeable however they both seem to have zero issue killing people, make one liners about it and are supposed to be everyday guys so I don't really see why there is such a huge difference.

Narratively I think the storytelling in Uncharted is about on the same level as an action movie, note what I've been comparing it to.

 

[Dremark]

What about Indiana Jones? He's a school professor going around killing people!!

He's a disgrace abandoning his students like that.

 

[martino]

Uncharted is like transformer for video games.
It's dumb at everything expect being highly effective visual entertainment.
Entertainment can be dumb. And they must be dumb to please to the most.
This is not a real problem. And if you like it (like me) you must also accept that and not pretend it is something smart (story and or gameplay).

 

[PaulloDEC]

To answer the OPs question as simply as possible, they say it because they think it's a funny and clever thing to say.

 

[Superflat]

i think there are a few legitimate viewpoints to have on why this bothers people.

1. comparisons to other mediums are often superficial and lack critical analysis.
2. the gameplay in uncharted largely centers around getting to a part where you can kill more people, or some setpiece that has little-to-nothing to do with being a treasure hunter. essentially, the concept of a treasure hunter going treasure hunting seems wasted when it's just the one thing.
3. these games are supposed to be the current high points in action in video games because how the story weaves in and out of it, but the story itself has kind of a big problem with the main character. i mean this is supposed to be where we're getting inspiration from huh.

the biggest counterpoint to really all three of the above is 'it's a video game!' which is kind of a weird rebuttal. like cool it's a video game. then why isn't it more like vanquish where that's a third-person shooter but i'm rocket-sliding around on my knees and shooting giant robots in slow-motion. that shit is a spectacle and i'm actually in control of the spectacle. are we supposed to try and enjoy the story or are we supposed to just try and enjoy the gameplay.

1. Yeah

2. It's a difference of conception. They wanted to make a TPS first, not a a treasure hunting game. They fit treasure hunting around it because they deemed it more interesting than war/spies/space war/whatever other plotting framework many TPS have.

3. I just don't see the disconnect. In or out of cutscenes, Drake is the same guy to me.

 

[zsynqx]

Before reading people debating it I never really noticed. Uncharted is a very cartoonish game and all the action doesn't really feel immoral or anything like that, just fun!

I can however see why some people do debate it. Most games give the character some story elements that makes killing hordes of enemies "justifiable". They usually are in a war, or fighting for surviving, or killing gangs to reach someone they want to save. In Uncharted though Drake kill enemies for sport, he just want to discover the damn treasures doesn't matter the consequences! LoL

I think another way they might address it in Uncharted 4 is by going the Taken route where a family member is in danger and he does whatever possible to save her. In the description of UC4 it says his brother's life depends on finding this treasure and stakes are far more personal, so there should be motivations other than I need that shiny treasure.

 

[Kssio_Aug]

Funny enough, all things you said happen in Uncharted

?

All Uncharted games, irc, have the story totally related to Drake and his friends greed on hunting treasures. Things happens on the way of their jorney, but the start point is always the treasure they want to hunt.

 

[Dremark]

Don't you worry, he's gonna feel the weight of that later.

I hope in the 4th Indiana Jones movie he pays for his sins and is executed as a war criminal.

Or that the movie is just really bad and ruins the series legacy.

Oh wait they already made it?

 

[TheRedSnifit]

What about Indiana Jones? He's a school professor going around killing people!

Indie gets involved specifically to stop a genocidal force from getting hold of a superweapon that could potentially turn them into an unstoppable force.

Nathan Drake gets involved for $$$.

 

[braves01]

The best way this series could end would be Drake getting some cursed treasure that he thinks will grant immortal life, but instead makes him relive the deaths of all the people he's killed for an eternity and/or turns him into treasure.

 

[Jigolo]

America

 

[thecouncil]

I don't need to enter a single room and shoot wave after wave of men that take multiple bullets to the chest. It's not why I'm playing the game.

You kill almost 1000 people per game.

Just cut that number down by about 50%.

It's not necessarily a complaint, it's just a fact: I'd prefer not doing that.

 

[Kssio_Aug]

I think another way they might address it in Uncharted 4 is by going the Taken route where a family member is in danger and he does whatever possible to save her. In the description of UC4 it says his brother's life depends on finding this treasure and stakes are far more personal, so there should be motivations other than I need that shiny treasure.

Yeah, tbh I'm still not aware of Uncharted back story. But I've heard they're aiming to something more "serious" this time indeed!

 

[Silent Chief]

Han doesn't shoot "first", because that would imply there is a "second". He fires the only shot and then Greedo dies without firing any shots at all.

It's like you don't understand Star Wars at all, mom!

Shoots first, asks questions later. Who's Greedo?

 

[Superflat]

Indie gets involved specifically to stop a genocidal force from getting hold of a superweapon that could potentially turn them into an unstoppable force.

Nathan Drake gets involved for $$$.

If he was really in it for the money, he would have quit a while ago lol

UC4 seems like it'll actually tap into that. He's drawn to the adventure more than anything else, just like indie.

 

[Ghost Slayer]

?

All Uncharted games, irc, have the story totally related to Drake and his friends greed on hunting treasures. Things happens on the way of their jorney, but the start point is always the treasure they want to hunt.

?

They usually are in a war:

Spoiler

Drake stuck in Nepal

in U2
Fighting for surviving:

Spoiler

Drake escape ship graveyard

in U3
Killing gangs to reach someone they want to save:

Spoiler

Drake saved Sully

in U3

 

[SolidSnakex]

Yeah, tbh I'm still not aware of Uncharted back story. But I've heard they're aiming to something more "serious" this time indeed!

Nah, if anything they've been trying to tell people that this is still Uncharted. It's meant to be lighthearted. People seem to forget that two of the main forces behind Uncharted 2 are working on this simply because they previously worked on TLoU. They've said that they have a completely different mindset for this compared to Uncharted. Noting that it's kinda freeing to be back on the franchise because it's so over the top compared to TLoU, which is much more grounded.

 

[zsynqx]

Yeah, tbh I'm still not aware of Uncharted back story. But I've heard they're aiming to something more "serious" this time indeed!

Well TLOU directors are directing it this time so most people are expecting a little more gravitas. It should still have very pulpy elements though, as shown in the E3 demo.

Nah, if anything they've been trying to tell people that this is still Uncharted. It's meant to be lighthearted. People seem to forget that two of the main forces behind Uncharted 2 are working on this simply because they previously worked on TLoU. They've said that they have a completely different mindset for this compared to Uncharted. Noting that it's kinda freeing to be back on the franchise because it's so over the top compared to TLoU, which is much more grounded.

https://youtu.be/1a2chkYgBGQ?t=1959 @32:39 They talk about this.

 

[MoonsaultSlayer]

Imagine ISIS taking over a historic site.

Imagine within is a fabled treasure.

Imagine learning that that treasure has supernatural capabilities.

Imagine being capable enough to infiltrate and snatch it up before they get to it and unleash it.

You holding back from killing to be captured tortured and killed?

What if it was your college professor, that's OK?

 

[Langdon Alger]

Keep in mind, Drake was just a kid and an orphan when he was brought into this fucked up world of people killing each other for antiques. He doesn't know any better.

 

[KORNdoggy]

i think it's ultimately his humour. that's what's key here. while the last tomb raider tried to emphasis her first kill as some character defining, character shaping moment...it also made it ridiculous because you suddenly started close range executing guys immediately afterwards.

uncharted never bothered trying to capture that moment so we don't really know drakes story in regards to killing, hell, he might have bathed in the blood of his fist victim? or maybe he just laughed while doing it?...but what we do see is a guy snapping neck and making jokes about it WHILE HE'S DOING IT!

this isn't "self defense" or even just the risks of being a treasure hunter. this is someone who is so detached from the situation they are fine laughing and joking while taking lives. does that make him an asshole? no, not really. no more-so then Indiana Jones/Han Solo (who does the same thing) it just makes them all sociopaths. lol but i'm ok with that!

 

[Ghost Slayer]

Keep in mind, Drake was just a kid and an orphan when he was brought into this fucked up world of people killing each other for antiques. He doesn't know any better.

I blamed Sully

 

[plasmawave]

Indie gets involved specifically to stop a genocidal force from getting hold of a superweapon that could potentially turn them into an unstoppable force.

Nathan Drake gets involved for $$$.

So??????????????

 

[Synth]

Imagine ISIS taking over a historic site.

Imagine within is a fabled treasure.

Imagine learning that that treasure has supernatural capabilities.

Imagine being capable enough to infiltrate and snatch it up before they get to it and unleash it.

You holding back from killing to be captured tortured and killed?

What if it was your college professor, that's OK?

Yea, but imagine your college profession didn't know any of that, beyond "there's some serious loot here", prior to killing his first 250, and he was simply gonna take the treasure to make himself rich.

 

[Dremark]

Indie gets involved specifically to stop a genocidal force from getting hold of a superweapon that could potentially turn them into an unstoppable force.

That's where the disconnect is. How am I supposed to believe a college professor would do that when none of mine just took off to save the world for the rest of the semester and gave me free credits.

 

[Bishop89]

Indie gets involved specifically to stop a genocidal force from getting hold of a superweapon that could potentially turn them into an unstoppable force.

Nathan Drake gets involved for $$$.

at first, but then once he realises whats happening, he does exactly what indie sets out to do.

 

[prag16]

Well, I don't know if "yearns" is the right word. But his body count speaks for itself..