Support NeoGAF

[Kittonwy]

Game doesn't get 10/10 score by a game CRITIC. Fanboys go nuts.

I don't get this fucking "outrage over the outrage" bullshit. Where was the outrage to begin with? Who were attacking this guy over the review? If he doesn't like someone sending him an email to call him an idiot, just block the sender, was there serious emotional damage inflicted? Did he cry for hours?

Like it or not, every AAA game is going to get one or two 8/10 scores, either out of this whole "higher standard" rationale or just to get some hits, and there are going to be some people who don't agree, and then certain individuals see this as a perfect opportunity to take shots at fans of game X, like "oh I don't know why people like this game so much, played it and it was alright, so overrated blahblahblah". The point is you might not like the game as much but most people overwhelmingly like it, for obviously reasons, that's why it's critically acclaimed.

Most people enjoy a great game why you don't? It sucks for whom? You make the call.

If Uncharted 2 is just "alright", I seriously can't imagine how those people can play stuff like Dark Void and Dante's Inferno without vomiting out their insides.

 

[shintoki]

If Uncharted 2 is just "alright", I seriously can't imagine how those people can play stuff like Dark Void and Dante's Inferno without vomiting out their insides.

When it doubt. Turn opinion into fact and insult other games, opinions, and preference.

 

[Pistolero]

Dante's Inferno is outside the realm of preferences, sorry !

 

[H_Prestige]

Oh no, somebody didn't like Uncharted 2 that much.

 

[OldJadedGamer]

If you truly, honestly believe that then you might want to have a reality check because Uncharted 2 is no better and no worse than its predecessor. It is a good adventure yes, but it is also derivative, uninspired, and generic.

Heh... even the trophies were basically a copy and paste from the first one.

 

[Pistolero]

Uncharted 2 won tons of awards, received critical acclaim, made an indelebile impression on the vast majority of players and sold extremenly well...
If you're in the minority of those who disiked it, good for you, but don't try to insinuate everybody else is wrong !

 

[Pistolero]

Heh... even the trophies were basically a copy and paste from the first one.

Sarcasm ?

 

[DCharlie]

Most people enjoy a great game why you don't? It sucks for whom? You make the call.

No one, actually. It's not like every other game out there is crap. Again, it's the "WHY DON'T YOU LIKE IT AS MUCH AS ALL THE OTHER REVIWERS?!" crowd who look dumb.

 

[Tony Rocky Horror]

Review Scores.

 

[Takuan]

More power to him... review scores are retardedly inflated and have been for the past ten years or so. Publishers have the media in their pocket, plain and simple.

 

[Scootydowopp]

Uncharted 2 won tons of awards, received critical acclaim, made an indelebile impression on the vast majority of players and sold extremenly well...
If you're in the minority of those who disiked it, good for you, but don't try to insinuate everybody else is wrong !

It's that reliance on everyone else that has this thread on page 10. Once fans realize that games are subjective (like most things of entertainment), the differing opinions wouldn't draw so much vitriol and bile.

And as the guy who once described the game from what i'd seen as thematically bland, i agree with Rusty Monowhatever on how the game looked to me, and why it hadn't spurred a ps3 purchase.

 

[Twig]

I usually think viciously disagreeing with review scores is silly, but seriously:

One of the best regarded N64 games ever made with:

60 FPS
high-res textures
Upped poly count for characters and weapons
8 player online
2 player co-op
Expanded multiplayer weapons
Several control options

...for 800 points

is worth a 6?

They honestly could have done a slap-dash port like Banjo Kazooie, but no, 4J studios worked their ass off on stuff they didn't even NEED to do and are charging us less money then straight N64 points with absolutely no enhancements on the Virtual Console.

This means absolutely jack shit when the game in question has been surpassed many times over since it was released.

Fuck nostalgia.

 

[DCharlie]

+1 to Twig

and requoting the destruction of a ton of people from previous page.

Some people are so cute around here... I've seen the "It's well reviewed so it has to has only perfect scores!"-argument flung around this thread when it comes to Uncharted 2 and God of war 3.. But when GTAIV shows up then acting all surprised? So what's the metacritic score for GTAIV again..?

"nuked from orbit" total.

 

[Baki]

If you truly, honestly believe that then you might want to have a reality check because Uncharted 2 is no better and no worse than its predecessor. It is a good adventure yes, but it is also derivative, uninspired, and generic.

Blah, Blah, Blah...So are 99% of games out there. Not to mention, there are very few games that have levels as exhilarating and mind numbingly awesome as the train level.

Now name an actual flaw instead of randomly spouting criticisms without substance and evidence.

 

[selig]

Uncharted 2 won tons of awards, received critical acclaim, made an indelebile impression on the vast majority of players and sold extremenly well...
If you're in the minority of those who disiked it, good for you, but don't try to insinuate everybody else is wrong !

Oscar-worthy

 

[jman2050]

Sorry but Uncharted 2 is practically flawless from all perspectives. Story, gameplay and presentation.

No it's not.

I don't even have to qualify this statement because it's self-evident. No it's not.

Uncharted 2 won tons of awards, received critical acclaim, made an indelebile impression on the vast majority of players and sold extremenly well...
If you're in the minority of those who disiked it, good for you, but don't try to insinuate everybody else is wrong !

I'm pretty sure even considering my personal feelings UC2 is good enough that you don't have to resort to appeal to majority to justify its worth.

 

[Cipherr]

This means absolutely jack shit when the game in question has been surpassed many times over since it was released.

Fuck nostalgia.

Jesus, thank you. I was trying to figure out how to respond to that but this sums it up perfectly. The game is being graded as it stands here in 2010 with the understanding that it is an intentional port up from two gens prior. If you accept that its easier to see the score and realize its not that bad.

 

[DCharlie]

Now name an actual flaw instead of randomly spouting criticisms without substance and evidence.

-exploration is too linear
-final boss is awful
-lots of straight line set pieces that may NOT appeal to all players
-story sometimes inconsistent

that's just off the top of my head, but bear in mind i LOVE U2 and thought it was the best game of last year.

There's STILL stuff that can be done better.

 

[Baki]

No it's not.

I don't even have to qualify this statement because it's self-evident. No it's not.



I'm pretty sure even considering my personal feelings UC2 is good enough that you don't have to resort to appeal to majority to justify its worth.

...Or you don't have anything to actually substantiate your claim.

I'm not saying everyone who does not like the game is wrong. But taking into account the type of game it is, I can not think of any substantial criticism of the game. Be it story, presentation or gameplay.

-exploration is too linear
-final boss is awful
-lots of straight line set pieces that may NOT appeal to all players
-story sometimes inconsistent

that's just off the top of my head, but bear in mind i LOVE U2 and thought it was the best game of last year.

There's STILL stuff that can be done better.

- Sorry, but linearity can not be levied as a criticism. Simply because it is supposed to a self-contained linear adventure. That is the type of game it is.

- He was ok. But I can give you that one.

- Loved the set pieces and they nailed what they were aiming for.

- Inconsistent? I Can't think of any inconsistencies?

PS: Not saying they can't make it better. I'm saying that I can't think of any major flaws with the game. The formula they have is pretty air tight. All they need to do is add more awesome.

 

[DCharlie]

- Sorry, but linearity can not be levied as a criticism. Simply because it is supposed to a self-contained linear adventure. That is the type of game it is.

lol why can't linearity be levied as a criticism if that the reviewers "thang"? I agree that that's the type of game it is, but given he gave GTAIV a 10, i'm going to go out and say he's looking for more open world experiences. Again, i am not in agreement with the reviewer, but i can certainly see why someone might not care for some of the linearity.

- He was ok. But I can give you that one.

it was the only fly in the ointment for me. Maybe it was actually ok in reality but after going through the whole game being wow'ed, it felt a bit of a let down.

- Loved the set pieces and they nailed what they were aiming for.

yes, me too - but i can still appreciate why someone wouldn't care for them.

- Inconsistent? I Can't think of any inconsistencies?

same with the first one, without getting too spoilery: peoples motivations and flip flopping.

PS: Not saying they can't make it better. I'm saying that I can't think of any major flaws with the game. The formula they have is pretty air tight. All they need to do is add more awesome.

To reiterate again, i personally agree. But again i can see why others might know it down a little.

 

[Pistolero]

I'm pretty sure even considering my personal feelings UC2 is good enough that you don't have to resort to appeal to majority to justify its worth.

I'm talking about the majority of pretty much everything. Not only players and outlets, but also peers (GDC). Again, we need something a little bit more objective to appreciate something.
Lol ! at the GTAIV references. What is that supposed to mean ? That GTA IV is a bad game ?
The trolls that were hiding behind a rock have got a party going I see... :lol
Only thing that would justify a person not liking U2 is not being drawn to the genre, the type of games it represents. because it's by fare the best at what it does.

 

[benjipwns]

Again, we need something a little bit more objective to appreciate something.

Can you elaborate on this?

 

[Baki]

lol why can't linearity be levied as a criticism if that the reviewers "thang"? I agree that that's the type of game it is, but given he gave GTAIV a 10, i'm going to go out and say he's looking for more open world experiences. Again, i am not in agreement with the reviewer, but i can certainly see why someone might not care for some of the linearity.



it was the only fly in the ointment for me. Maybe it was actually ok in reality but after going through the whole game being wow'ed, it felt a bit of a let down.



yes, me too - but i can still appreciate why someone wouldn't care for them.



same with the first one, without getting too spoilery: peoples motivations and flip flopping.




To reiterate again, i personally agree. But again i can see why others might know it down a little.

Oh...I have no problems with the reviewer. Just certain people in this thread using this as an opportunity to shit on UC2. They are trying to make it seem as if UC2 had some sort of glaring problems and not worthy of the praise it receives.

 

[benjipwns]

They are trying to make it seem as if UC2 had some sort of glaring problems and not worthy of the praise it receives.

What if from their perspective it isn't?

 

[Pistolero]

Can you elaborate on this?

Nothing to elaborate on, really : pretty straightforward. When you judge a soccer team, appreciation is good, but stats are equally (if not more) as important. If a movie gets great reviews, wins awards all over the world, and is praised by critics and public alike, you may end up hating it, but it won't disqualify it from being great...(especially of it stands the test of time)...

 

[Baki]

What if from their perspective it isn't?

Well in terms of what it does and its genre. Its the best of its kind.

One thing is not liking a game because its not your thing, but it does not mean you cannot appreciate what the game does.

 

[benjipwns]

Nothing to elaborate on, really : pretty straightforward. When you judge a soccer team, appreciation is good, but stats are equally (if not more) as important. If a movie gets great reviews, wins awards all over the world, and is praised by critics and public alike, you may end up hating it, but it won't disqualify it from being great...(especially of it stands the test of time)...

But neither does that make it great.

What you think may be "objectively" fun I may think is "objectively" boring. I'm not sure how we would ever determine which one of us, if anyone, is "correct."

Well in terms of what it does and its genre. Its the best of its kind.

One thing is not liking a game because its not your thing, but it does not mean you cannot appreciate what the game does.

What if you disagree and think it's "average" for its genre? Or merely "above average"?

Is it simply not possible for anyone to honestly come to this conclusion?

 

[Foxtastical]

If Uncharted 2 is just "alright", I seriously can't imagine how those people can play stuff like Dark Void and Dante's Inferno without vomiting out their insides.

Jesus, this is why we can't have nice things. Holy shit.

 

[Baki]

But neither does that make it great.

What you think may be "objectively" fun I may think is "objectively" boring. I'm not sure how we would ever determine which one of us, if anyone, is "correct."

What if you disagree and think it's "average" for its genre? Or merely "above average"?

Is it simply not possible for anyone to honestly come to this conclusion?

Then something else is clearly your genre. Because if you like that particular genre, there is no way you could not like UC2.

You see a genre = a type of game. Type of game indicates certain common play mechanics/themes etc..

If a game does all of those to a extremely high standard (i.e. UC2) then for someone who likes games with those themes/play mechanics. They will love UC2.

Obviously not everyone likes certain genres and thats where "objectivity" comes in to play.

 

[DCharlie]

When you judge a soccer team, appreciation is good, but stats are equally (if not more) as important

you just misspelled RESULTS as STATS and as a result this analogy backfires horrifically.

A team can have the most amazing statistics ever, but if it doesn't have the results to go with them then it's meaningless.

359 shots on goal! 60% possession each game! 80% player pass completion!
but
Played 38 Won 16 Drawn 10 Lost 12

Results man, RESULTS!

(no one cares that Arsenal were "boring boring Arsenal" under Graham because they were WINNING SHIT! Great results, crap stats)

but it won't disqualify it from being great..

agreed, and on a scale of 1 to 10, 8 is still VERY very good by any definition (hmmm, maybe not IGN). As i said previous, if the worst that this game gets is an 8 putting it in line with other great games that the same guy gave 8 to? Pretty sure that's a good sign.

 

[Foxtastical]

Then something else is clearly your genre. Because if you like that particular genre, there is no way you could not like UC2.

You see a genre = a type of game. Type of game indicates certain common play mechanics/themes etc..

If a game does all of those to a extremely high standard (i.e. UC2) then for someone who likes games with those themse/play mechanics. They will love UC2.

No, you're wrong. This shit doesn't have some objective angle like you fools claim. Someone can like a game that's similar to Uncharted 2, and then not like Uncharted 2. Someone can like early Beatles music and not like The Zombies or The Animals. Someone can like Star Trek and not Star Wars.

Fuck, what is so hard to grasp about subjectivity.

 

[benjipwns]

Because if you like that particular genre, there is no way you could not like UC2.

I'm not sure I understand why this must absolutely be so. What is the genre? Action-adventure? Is Batman: Arkham Asylum an action-adventure? Can someone not like Uncharted 2 but love Batman: AA?

Or is the genre so specific that it essentially only defines Uncharted 2? A tautology then?

 

[Baki]

No, you're wrong. This shit doesn't have some objective angle like you fools claim. Someone can like a game that's similar to Uncharted 2, and then not like Uncharted 2. Someone can like early Beatles music and not like The Zombies or The Animals. Someone can like Star Trek and not Star Wars.

Fuck, what is so hard to grasp about subjectivity.

Beatles music and Zombies music is quite different. So is Star Wars and Star Trek.

 

[Twig]

Fuck, what is so hard to grasp about subjectivity.

My opinion is objectively the only opinion that is right.

 

[DCharlie]

Because if you like that particular genre, there is no way you could not like UC2.

yet i've seen a ton of Sony fans say that they hate Gears of War but love Uncharted (see also: I hated Halo, but love Resistance!, I hate Forza but love GT5) and of course the reverse is true.
Okay, Gears and Unch aren't exactly the same but they are definitely cousins! (Unch 2>>>GOW2 by the way IMO)

Hmmm why is that? Could be art style, characters, anything really... hell the box art.

 

[Pistolero]

you just misspelled RESULTS as STATS and as a result this analogy backfires horrifically.

A team can have the most amazing statistics ever, but if it doesn't have the results to go with them then it's meaningless.

359 shots on goal! 60% possession each game! 80% player pass completion!
but
Played 38 Won 16 Drawn 10 Lost 12

Results man, RESULTS!

(no one cares that Arsenal were "boring boring Arsenal" under Graham because they were WINNING SHIT! Great results, crap stats)

Yeah, I meant results ! Sorry !

 

[Baki]

yet i've seen a ton of Sony fans say that they hate Gears of War but love Uncharted (see also: I hated Halo, but love Resistance!, I hate Forza but love GT5) and of course the reverse is true.
Okay, Gears and Unch aren't exactly the same but they are definitely cousins! (Unch 2>>>GOW2 by the way IMO)

Hmmm why is that? Could be art style, characters, anything really... hell the box art.

I liked Gears. Wish they fleshed out the story more. The backstory is actually pretty decent.

EDIT: you hate Halo.

EDIT 2: Biggest difference between Gears and UC2 is that UC2 is story driven narrative that utilises both action adventure elements and 3rd person shooting.

 

[DCharlie]

Yeah, I meant results ! Sorry

ha ha, i assumed so - just had my soccer pedant hat on!

EDIT: you hate Halo.

no, i was speaking as a hypothetical fan. I liked both Resistance 1 and Halo but in much different ways. Had fun with both, ultimately prefer Halo, but doesn't make Resistance a bad game.

 

[Pistolero]

What you think may be "objectively" fun I may think is "objectively" boring. I'm not sure how we would ever determine which one of us, if anyone, is "correct."

Well, that creates a problem. There has to be a common set of tools, objective ones, to evaluate an artistic creation or an entertainement product. Otherwise, why bother having reviews and awards ?

 

[Baki]

ha ha, i assumed so - just had my soccer pedant hat on!



no, i was speaking as a hypothetical fan. I liked both Resistance 1 and Halo but in much different ways. Had fun with both, ultimately prefer Halo, but doesn't make Resistance a bad game.

See. I doubt you can find anyone that likes Resistance 1 and not appreciate Halo.

Just like somone who likes MW2 will probably like one of the 101 MW clones coming out. :lol

 

[benjipwns]

Well, that creates a problem. There has to be a common set of tools, objective ones, to evaluate an artistic creation or an entertainement product.

Why does there have to be? Why is this a problem? How can you even objectively evaluate an artistic creation?

 

[DCharlie]

Well, that creates a problem. There has to be a common set of tools, objective ones, to evaluate an artistic creation or an entertainement product. Otherwise, why bother having reviews and awards ?

awards are almost always pandering to popular opinion and may not actually represent what the "best" is ... just the most popular (okay, that's one measure of "best" but still). Preemptive note : As far as i'm concerned U2 deserved it's awards.

reviews are never ever going to be objective because you can't fully objectify things like the effects of atmosphere, immersion, "fun", addictiveness etc. because the perception of each of these vary from person to person.

The Zzap!64/Crash review scheme did it best for me. You had 3 or 4 reviewers who would each give their individual take on what they though of the game, with no score attributed to each, but a small picture cartoon showing the review giving a thumbs up , and okay face, a back turned in disgust etc. This gave you a quick indicator of what their opinion was and you read the text. The main body of the review was an objective as possible over view of what the game was. Then you had a final review score, and a Sizzler! (for very good games) and Gold Medals (for TOP TIER games).

This fostered a few things - game fans would start to realize whose opinion they were in line with. A game might score 88%, but Gary Penn might have had a "back turned" and a "this really didn't click with me" style outlook, where as Jaz Rignall would perhaps enthuse and give it the two thumbs up.

Of course we can STILL do this by visiting multiple sites , but when this system was in one location it helped to bring focus to the differing reviewer tastes.

 

[I'm an expert]

Well in terms of what it does and its genre. Its the best of its kind.

One thing is not liking a game because its not your thing, but it does not mean you cannot appreciate what the game does.

It's the best of its kind, but it's been done before. By Uncharted. Uncharted 2 was very fun to look at, but was a snoozefest when playing because it was exactly Uncharted all over again. I had only played the first Uncharted 6 months or so before 2 and I immediately realized this was the exact same gameplay, with even LESS puzzles or anything else other than platform, shoot some guys, cutscene. The story is a story we've seen 100x in a multitude of different media. Is it still interesting? Yes. Are the characters and locations fun? Yes. Is it a wonderful ride? Yes. Is it actually fun to play? Ehhhhh...yes but it's just not different enough from the first one in terms of gameplay to really make me go WOW. Now the multiplayer is a wonderful addition and I wish that got more praise than the 'set pieces' or the 'cinematic scenes' or whatever other non-important gameplay feature you want to talk about.

In the end I'm in the majority that loved the game, but I think people love the character of Nathan Drake way more than the gameplay of Uncharted 2. The game was certainly not the best GAME last year, that would be Demon's Souls. All I'm trying to do is tell you that this game has just as many flaws as any other game out there.

 

[selig]

Well in terms of what it does and its genre. Its the best of its kind.

One thing is not liking a game because its not your thing, but it does not mean you cannot appreciate what the game does.

What genre do you believe UC2 belongs to? Action? Action-Adventure?

No matter which, both those genres have sooo many variations that all belong to the same genre. It´s easy for someone to love action-games, but not UC2. Because there´s a fuckton of different kinds of action-games.

But maybe you think UC2 created a whole new gerne.... :/

 

[Ploid 3.0]

Oscar-worthy

The thing with the GTA4 reviews is that the reviewers were in a rush to get their reviews out, they were limited in how much they could play of the game, and rockstar had them all by the balls (content released to the media, giving pr co-pilots to walk them through parts of the game showing them how awesome it is). Because of the GTA4 situation I became very careful in how I researched games up until release. I did a lot of research on UC2 and I'm sure the reviewers finished the game, and most of them even played a lot of the multiplayer. UC2 review situation isn't like GTA4's, GTA4 was in a very unique situation. The first part of the game is indeed interesting. GTA4 falls flat when you unlock more of the world, and then attempt to experience the meat of the 3d GTA games. You then realize that it's quite boring with nothing to do. The story turns into a joke, you realize how strict and controlled the missions are (can't kill bikers until X point). GTA4 was the FFXIII of it's franchise. It got rid of the fun stuff, and it brought in a annoying phone. Annoying not only because of the calls which you can disable, but because codes were entered by the phone each time. You can get interrupted easily while trying to use a code. The codes were very limited too, not half as fun as San Andreas'.

After playing UC2 I didn't feel tricked. People are trying to downplay the game for some reason, and I'm not talking about some reviewer giving it a 8 (that's not even a bad score).

 

[Sullen]

The best of this is that he is right, taking games in the directions of movies is a mistake. They are their own medium and should be taken in creative ways, not down a path that mimics other mediums. It is bad for the growth of gaming.

edit: and that mimicry is a major part of the reason why gaming is so stagnant lately, unless you really look hard for the good stuff.

 

[MrPing1000]

 

[Ploid 3.0]

The best of this is that he is right, taking games in the directions of movies is a mistake. They are their own medium and should be taken in creative ways, not down a path that mimics other mediums. It is bad for the growth of gaming.

Games can be done in any way the creators see fit. Why restrict it, if it's fun and exciting to play Uncharted 2 for me why take that away? The gaming industry isn't so small that you need to tell the developers that they need to focus on being a certain way. If you want a particular type of game buy it, or something close to what you want and support it. Then maybe that type of game will be less risky to companies.

 

[Foxtastical]

Well, that creates a problem. There has to be a common set of tools, objective ones, to evaluate an artistic creation or an entertainement product. Otherwise, why bother having reviews and awards ?

Fuck, why why why why.

 

[Kittonwy]

When it doubt. Turn opinion into fact and insult other games, opinions, and preference.

FACT: Uncharted 2 is overwhelmingly the most critically acclaimed game of 2009 among both the media and developer community and the recipient of most of the GOTY awards out there, the other two games I mentioned simply are not critically acclaimed games. It's sad that we can no longer make statements pertaining to a game's quality relative to other games without the bullshit response of "oh but that's just an opinion".

It's not an insult to those games, not every game is going to be critically acclaimed like Uncharted 2, my point is if one is so particular that even the most critically acclaimed game of 2009 can't make that individual happy, how can such an individual tolerate other games that have a myriad of problems?

I also think it's a fact that steaks taste better than dirt, would you like to challenge me on that too?