The Uncharted series is revolutionary, and here's why

OP, have you played Heavenly Sword or Enslaved? Now those games I give props to for the acting aspect of the games. Truly remarkable.
 
Mortrialus said:
I truthfully don't see the appeal of shooters, this one in particular. I don't see what exactly is so fun about dragging a cursor over an enemy.

How can you type something so ridiculous without being embarrassed? Really?
 
Normally a revolutionary title makes changes in the industry. Uncharted is just a stand out from an on-going trend.
 
TheOddOne said:
I've complained about this before, but the shooting feels off in Uncharted, its not very satisfying. I rather skip those sections and go directly to the story focused sections.

Once you've played something like Gears of War or Vanquish, it's tough playing something like Uncharted. The shooting mechanics are poor to average.
 
erragal said:
None of the things that actually make it a video game and all qualities that are surpassed by high quality animation or CG productions.

My question would be: What does Uncharted do that is progressive or spectacular to make it stand out as a game as opposed to a low budget CG movie?

Ummm, player interactivity?
 
erragal said:
None of the things that actually make it a video game and all qualities that are surpassed by high quality animation or CG productions.

My question would be: What does Uncharted do that is progressive or spectacular to make it stand out as a game as opposed to a low budget CG movie?

You can play it?
 
Onion_Relish said:
You didn't answer my question.
I like playing the gameplay sections of Gears, the shooting feels natural. The same with Vanquish, hated the non-story in it, but loved the gameplay sections.
 
Mortrialus said:
I truthfully don't see the appeal of shooters, this one in particular. I don't see what exactly is so fun about dragging a cursor over an enemy.


This just blew my mind.

You can't be real.
 
Tallshortman said:
The thing is there are aspects of movies that are great and considerably better than what games can do in it's currently incarnation of player controls. I think the Uncharted series hits a very, very fine line where both game controls and cinematic presentation meet in a nice equilibrium.

I will say it's not revolutionary in concept however it is what WoW did for the MMO genre. It refined the hell out of an already used concept in a way that surpassed the originals.

Very well put.
 
Derrick01 said:
If something is revolutionary then it must spark change and followers. I don't see anyone following Uncharted, other than Gameloft. GTA 3 was revolutionary, as was COD 4 for better or worse.

It's been almost 2 years since Uncharted 2 and I would think the ridiculous hyperbole over the game would have died out by now. I guess not.
I think the reason why we don't see many Uncharted-copies is that Uncharted doesn't have this "one little" innovation that everyone can copy in five minutes and put in their game.

You'd have to put a lot of work into every aspect of the game. It should be way easier to implement the RPG-leveling system from CoD 4 into any other shooter than it is to copy great (voice)acting, a good soundtrack, a well written story and great graphics.
 
I agree the performances are fantastic and the dialogue is generally pretty good, but the actual plot completely falls apart in the last act once the "supernatural" stuff kicks in, and becomes even sillier than Indiana Jones annd the Crystal Skull by the end. It also desperately wishes there were Indy style Nazis around to include as bad guys, and the actual villains never resonate as a result.

As a game it's pretty good but personally the combination of decent third person shooting and largely limp scripted platforming never added up to anything close to deserving the hyperventilating response the series always gets on here.
 
The first game was decent but the second one was simply amazing. I just showed it to my cousin a few days earlier, he was completely stunned by the graphics and the way Drake moves. I guess it's the attention to detail that makes UC2 so good.
 
StuBurns said:
To me it's only notable for being a good game series, and pretty. I don't think the writing is very good, or the acting.
Pretty much this. In fact I dislike most of the acting and writing. Fun game that really focuses on building the characters during intense game play. I don't think it is very revolutionary at all.
 
Uncharted 2's cutscenes were well-produced relative to other games, but their integration in the game was horrific. Time after time, the game would take control away from me during an action scene in order to show a short movie, then return it a moment later and that was jarring every single time. It was an awkward and pathetic imitation of when a film uses a humor in a tense moment. Technically proficient bad storytelling is still bad storytelling.
 
I wouldn't really call what the OP is describing as revolutionary - evolutionary sure, as it improves on the efforts of past games in several different areas in many people's opinions, but there's nothing really new/groundbreaking here for it to really be revolutionary.
 
I have always maintained that the Uncharted franchise is the classiest series in gaming. It's the one franchise that I could show anyone I know; my boss at work, my kid's teacher, anyone and I know they would understand the appeal.

The performances probably have a lot to do with that.
 
Derrick01 said:
If something is revolutionary then it must spark change and followers. I don't see anyone following Uncharted, other than Gameloft. GTA 3 was revolutionary, as was COD 4 for better or worse.

It's been almost 2 years since Uncharted 2 and I would think the ridiculous hyperbole over the game would have died out by now. I guess not.

Are you kidding me? You haven't seen the slew of new games try to mimic Uncharted's approach in delivering cinematics? Hell, Infamous' Cole was completely redesigned to make him more like Nathan Drake. Killzone 3's cinematics... Hell, take a look at the new Tomb Raider. Uncharted-lite much?
 
The acting does shine, and it's a big part of Uncharted's appeal, but I wouldn't call it revolutionary. Uncharted doesn't do anything new or different, it just does what it does better than anyone else.
 
Uncharted 2's digital actors are a step up from the average cutscene-heavy game.

Heavy Rain is technically more impressive, but less convincing than Uncharted.

LA Noire- now that game has jaw dropping, convincing digital actors. It truly is revolutionary, far beyond anything else. If you're going to do this thread, forget about Uncharted.
 
TheOddOne said:
I like playing the gameplay sections of Gears, the shooting feels natural. The same with Vanquish, hated the non-story in it, but loved the gameplay sections.

That's fine. Both of those are games with good shooting mechanics. Having played both of them, I really don't think its fair to make such a drastic distinction between one being good and the other being poor, but thats my opinion. That being said, I'm sure youre smart enough to see the appeal of a game like uncharted after having done the exact same thing in 2 other games; You point, it dies. That's the appeal.
 
Once you've played something like Gears of War or Vanquish, it's tough playing something like Uncharted. The shooting mechanics are poor to average.

Not Really. Just because they are better that doesnt mean uncharted shooting mechanics is bad

See thing is Uncharted doesn't have deep shooting mechanics nor has deep platforming elements.

Its the overall package and the presentation with great cinematic feel make the game great.
 
MrOogieBoogie said:
Are you kidding me? You haven't seen the slew of new games try to mimic Uncharted's approach in delivering cinematics? Hell, Infamous' Cole was completely redesigned to make him more like Nathan Drake. Killzone 3's cinematics... Hell, take a look at the new Tomb Raider. Uncharted-lite much?

It isn't that surprising to see PS3 exclusives trying to mimick the success of a fellow exclusive...not to me at least.
 
snap0212 said:
I think the reason why we don't see many Uncharted-copies is that Uncharted doesn't have this "one little" innovation that everyone can copy in five minutes and put in their game.

You'd have to put a lot of work into every aspect of the game. It should be way easier to implement the RPG-leveling system from CoD 4 into any other shooter than it is to copy great (voice)acting, a good soundtrack, a well written story and great graphics.

Right, and all that makes it a good game. A really good game even, but not revolutionary. It'll stand out as one of the top games of this generation but it won't breed any copycats. Its legacy will likely die after 3 until a decade later when someone who thinks it was the greatest thing ever like the OP wants to make a spiritual successor to it.

MrOogieBoogie said:
Are you kidding me? You haven't seen the slew of new games try to mimic Uncharted's approach in delivering cinematics? Hell, Infamous' Cole was completely redesigned to make him more like Nathan Drake. Killzone 3's cinematics... Hell, take a look at the new Tomb Raider. Uncharted-lite much?

Tomb Raider looks like a more serious Tomb Raider to me, with an obscene amount of QTEs. You forget that Uncharted was the one who followed TR's path, not the other way around.

As for Cole, I assume you're talking about the new design they eventually scrapped to go back to the old one?
 
The cutscenes, acting, dialogs and character interaction in the Uncharted games are incredible, one of the best I've seen/heard in a game. But I wouldn't call it "revolutionary" for that; they just really put a lot of care into bringing the characters to life.
 
shintoki said:
Normally a revolutionary title makes changes in the industry.

Changes in the Industry? The only one which did that this gen is COD. Is it revolutionary? Well, that is certainly open for discussion.
 
Marleyman said:
It isn't that surprising to see PS3 exclusives trying to mimick the success of a fellow exclusive...not to me at least.

Right. And now why was Uncharted successful? Think hard, my man. That's right, because it turned the cinematic action genre and flipped it on its head, presenting that fine line between movie-and-game experience that most developers could only dream to accomplish better than anything before it.
 
MrOogieBoogie said:
Are you kidding me? You haven't seen the slew of new games try to mimic Uncharted's approach in delivering cinematics? Hell, Infamous' Cole was completely redesigned to make him more like Nathan Drake. Killzone 3's cinematics... Hell, take a look at the new Tomb Raider. Uncharted-lite much?
Getting engrossed into a game's cinematics because of the effectiveness of the delivery isn't really new though and completely subjective. The feelings you describe in the OP might apply to someone else in a game from a generation ago for the same reasons, and to someone else in a game a generation before that for still the same reasons.

You might disagree, but there definitely have been people who started paying attention to voice actors due to the strengths of their in-game performances and a game's writing before Uncharted.
 
Meisadragon said:
Changes in the Industry? The only one which did that this gen is COD. Is it revolutionary? Well, that is certainly open for discussion.

Actually, I don't think anyone would deny that CoD has been revolutionary this gen.
 
Uncharted - decent shooting mechanics. Entertaining story with fun characters. A crazy and insurmountable disconnect between the cool dude you see in the cinemas and the homicidal maniac you control. Hunting for old-ass statues is all fun and chuckles until you have to murder the 5000 coolies standing in the way.

I really enjoyed the sequel's multiplayer mode though.
 
Vagrant Story had better cinematics. And the only thing Uncharted has influenced is publishers making their main character like Nathan Drake (Who is the worst part of the series, so that's weird)
 
ShockingAlberto said:
I think it's good, great, even.

I become uncomfortable with calling it more than that.


This basically. It's a neatly presented package, but nothing more. Revolutionary games should be the ones pushing gameplay to new horizons, not cinematics or overall presenation.
 
Onion_Relish said:
That's fine. Both of those are games with good shooting mechanics. Having played both of them, I really don't think its fair to make such a drastic distinction between one being good and the other being poor, but thats my opinion. That being said, I'm sure youre smart enough to see the appeal of a game like uncharted after having done the exact same thing in 2 other games; You point, it dies. That's the appeal.
I think the appeal lies in the gorgeous graphics, great story and characters. I really don't buy games just to shoot people. My point is though the overall package of Uncharted is fantastic, but as far as actual gameplay -- for me that is -- its not the strongest.
 
Wait, people actually complaining about the acting in Uncharted? You can dislike the story, but the acting? lol


I can't think of any game that does it better.
 
To me, especially Uncharted 2, can be like a nine course tasting menu full of robust ingredients that are simple yet elegantly arranged in complex sauces and foams then paired with a sommelier's choice OR a slider. It's all subjective to the player and it's a great IP in this generation.

Mortrialus said:
I truthfully don't see the appeal of shooters, this one in particular. I don't see what exactly is so fun about dragging a cursor over an enemy.

Why did post this if you aren't contributing to the topic of the thread? You are making a statement that infers a flippant attitude toward the shooter genre as a whole, which makes me wonder if you've got any evidence to back up your dismissal of Uncharted.
 
Cutscenes being revolutionary? No matter how well they are acted cutscenes will always only be conventional. Conveying meaning, significance and motivation through interactivity, that would be revolutionary.
 
Tallshortman said:
The thing is there are aspects of movies that are great and considerably better than what games can do in it's currently incarnation of player controls. I think the Uncharted series hits a very, very fine line where both game controls and cinematic presentation meet in a nice equilibrium.

I will say it's not revolutionary in concept however it is what WoW did for the MMO genre. It refined the hell out of an already used concept in a way that surpassed the originals.
The problem is the cinematics themselves. When you're robbed of control, you cease playing a game. It doesn't matter how good they are. This is one of the reasons I can't stand most Metal Gear titles, for instance. Others feel differently, but I have a very firm opinion on this matter. Cutscenes should be used as sparingly as possible.

I like Uncharted. I don't mean to say it's poor or that it suffers for its cinematics. But I think it could be presented better, in a way that doesn't fracture gameplay.
 
Salacious Crumb said:
Cutscenes being revolutionary? No matter how well they are acted cutscenes will always only be conventional. Conveying meaning, significance and motivation through interactivity, that would be revolutionary.

Have you played an Uncharted game?
 
TheOddOne said:
I think the appeal lies in the gorgeous graphics, great story and characters. I really don't buy games just to shoot people. My point is though the overall package of Uncharted is fantastic, but as far as actual gameplay -- for me that is -- its not the strongest.


Agree with you here.

Im a huge uncharted fan and imo its gameplay is good but not great as compared to other games.

Its the overall package which is fantastic.
 
Top Bottom