The way traversal mechanics in this game is represented does make me think that maybe, just maybe parts of the game's various levels were designed before the piton/rope mechanics were properly established.
But if the traversal is simple so that it works well during combat, what does that mean for all the traversal without combat, or without any puzzle elements or elements of discovery?
It means that the game design needs to commit to a single traversal mechanism across both combat and non-combat scenarios so that players don't have to juggle between different mechanics or be confused.
I think the simplicity of the platforming sections are easier to forgive in previous titles because they were used as short cool down moments between firefights. You got a bit of witty banter, it served to cleanse your palate and propelled you forward.
However, in Uncharted 4 they make up a sizeable portion of the game and thus the mechanics (and/or scenarios) require a little more depth to keep people engrossed.
I'll just stress again, I had no issues with the platforming personally but if we are looking at this game critically, it has valid issues.
Edit: My iPad is not playing ball this morning, sorry for all the typos I keep having to correct.
It means that the game design needs to commit to a single traversal mechanism across both combat and non-combat scenarios so that players don't have to juggle between different mechanics or be confused.
And when it's featured purely by itself for extended periods of time like it is in this game, you have simple, easy gameplay that bores a lot of people.
I think the climbing sections are better here than they've ever been in the series as far as multiple paths, tools and mechanics go, but I still can't say the climbing itself is engaging enough to carry five chapters in a row, or all the other pure-climbing sequences.
The way traversal mechanics in this game is represented does make me think that maybe, just maybe parts of the game's various levels were designed before the piton/rope mechanics were properly established.
It means that the game design needs to commit to a single traversal mechanism across both combat and non-combat scenarios so that players don't have to juggle between different mechanics or be confused.
Precisely. And to be honest, I don't think everything needs to be difficult to be rewarding. I didn't struggle with the platforming but I still found it quite fun and rewarding.
I thought figuring out where to go in some of the more open spaces, combined with everything else that's going on (banter, exploration, puzzles) and platforming coming into play with how much less directed it felt was great experience. Maybe by itself, I would've been more critical of it. But I feel UC4 throws more at you in any given scenario then just pure platforming (though there's that too).
The climbing improvements are great. It feels much more analog than before. The IK is *amazing*. The rope is very polished and the piton introduces some risk. The overall climbing package is however not interesting enough by itself to keep a game loop entertaining for longer stretches.
A test for good gameplay should be: If I had a random level generator, will I still want to continue playing this mechanic?
If you presented me with a random horde mode to test with shooting I could play that 'forever' as it's super entertaining standalone.
If you had a randomized climbing walls mode I wouldn't play that for long.
I'm not saying Naughty Dog is at fault outside of having too many climbing sections. This is probably the best climbing implementation I've seen. But just like wood carving or waxing your sports car... maybe climbing can only be so interesting with a gamepad on a 2D monitor.
Personally I have never played an Uncharted game. Would be great if they'd release all games on PC though bc it looks like a fun and interesting story game that I would love to play.
I don't know how you can play through Chapter 11's
Clocktower
and Chapter 21's
platforming to Avery's ship
and not see the rest of the climbing in this game as anything but a huge missed opportunity. They were clearly willing to push beyond semi-realistic climbing or climbing purely for pacing in those 2 spots, so why didn't they do it throughout the game? If it's not going to be mechanically complex in order to preserve fluidity during combat, then the game should have slightly crazier environments and platforming challenges to compensate for how braindead traversal is.
I don't agree with that test in the context of UC. One because I don't think the game is trying to have platforming or any one mechanic carry the game and two because, personally, I feel it divorces too much of the thought process behind the design of the game (a multitude of things coming together as opposed to a singular gameplay system carrying it).
Would I play levels of UC platforming with banter, letters to read, interactions between NPCs, beautiful locations to explore and so on, as is present in UC4?
I absolutely would. Gave me some great cutscenes in there as well and I'd play an entire game like that.
I was really interested in that character, but she only appeared a few times to beat the shit out of you, just kinda left at the end and had no arc. I know some have defended it saying that she was actually smart enough to get away but for me this does not make up for the lack of character development or closure. I'm not saying she needed to die, but she felt entirely wasted. She's a character very much in the vein of Indiana Jones/James Bond villains and the leader of Shoreline, so yeah I'm pretty bummed that she was basically utterly pointless. If you totally removed her and just had Rafe the leader of Shoreline, it wouldn't change anything at all aside from a few fight scenes and bickering with Adler
I don't know how you can play through Chapter 11's
Clocktower
and Chapter 21's
platforming to Avery's ship
and not see the rest of the climbing in this game as anything but a huge missed opportunity. They were clearly willing to push beyond semi-realistic climbing or climbing purely for pacing in those 2 spots, so why didn't they do it throughout the game? If it's not going to be mechanically complex in order to preserve fluidity during combat, then the game should have slightly crazier environments and platforming challenges to compensate for how braindead traversal is.
I do think the game's traversal could be a lot better, but the examples you cited are quite standalone in the sense that the core of what they're doing in those moments is basically relatively lengthy traversal puzzles and are not down-time traversal.
Other parts of the game have a different mix-up of small encounters, puzzle beats, exploration beats, character beats, etc to mix things up.
I do think the game's traversal could be a lot better, but the examples you cited are quite standalone in the sense that the core of what they're doing in those moments is basically relatively lengthy traversal puzzles and are not down-time traversal.
Other parts of the game have a different mix-up of small encounters, puzzle beats, exploration beats, character beats, etc to mix things up.
Yeah, and I'm saying the game needed a lot more of those kind of timing based traversal puzzles where you're stringing moves together. Adds a bit of tension to a game that otherwise has far too much nonchalant traversal.
And there aren't enough small encounters to mix this up either, because if there were I wouldn't even care about traversal. I've barely ever commented on the climbing in this series until UC4 tbh.
My only problem with the traversal stuff is that it's 100% unbelievable. It's fine because it's a game, but they've humanized the characters a lot more than in the past games where they were still good and fun characters but the lighter, care-free tone didn't really clash with the shit you were doing. I feel like it totally does here though, and it was one reason I was a bit worried with the slightly more grounded direction.
I don't think it's a huge deal or something but it's definitely something that I felt while playing, and it is jarring. It wants you to take the characters and story seriously and there's all kinds of lifelike human drama and then the motherfucker will slide down a mountain and successfully fling a rope hook onto a conveniently placed point and perform insane acrobatics that make Spider-man look like a couch potato.
I give it a pass because again it's a game, but it's honestly pretty fucking dumb.
My only problem with the traversal stuff is that it's 100% unbelievable. It's fine because it's a game, but they've humanized the characters a lot more than in the past games where they were still good and fun characters but the lighter, care-free tone didn't really clash with the shit you were doing. I feel like it totally does here though, and it was one reason I was a bit worried with the slightly more grounded direction.
I don't think it's a huge deal or something but it's definitely something that I felt while playing, and it is jarring. It wants you to take the characters and story seriously and there's all kinds of lifelike human drama and then the motherfucker will slide down a mountain and successfully fling a rope hook onto a conveniently placed point and perform insane acrobatics that make Spider-man look like a couch potato.
Eh, I look at Uncharted characters the same way I do MCU or DCU characters, where apparently "peak human" can apparently shrug off jumping off several story buildings, get thrown to walls till it cracks like they're nothing.
If anything, I actually like that they're consistent where Elena and Sully are plenty as capable of doing them.
Eh, I look at Uncharted characters the same way I do MCU or DCU characters, where apparently "peak human" can apparently shrug off jumping off several story buildings, get thrown to walls till it cracks like they're nothing.
Like I said, I can give it a pass as it's a game and if I were to review the game I probably wouldn't even bring it up let alone engage it as a con, but it's something I did think about while playing the game. For what it's worth I felt this way about The Last of Us a few times, notably the final stretch. I was just like, yeah right.
Like I said, I can give it a pass as it's a game and if I were to review the game I probably wouldn't even bring it up let alone engage it as a con, but it's something I did think about while playing the game. For what it's worth I felt this way about The Last of Us a few times, notably the final stretch. I was just like, yeah right.
It's definitely something that "realistic" games don't do narratively, where within the game itself, they rarely ever try to imply that the world is fundamentally unrealistic to a certain extent of that setting.
I still roll my eyes a bit when I hear Neil Druckmann describe Uncharted as a "stylised/comic-book-like depiction of reality", where deaths don't hold much weight, as if to justify all the nonchalant killings that goes on in these games.
None of it is, and that's the problem with going more "realistic." When you opt to shift tone, everything needs to adapt, including the game design. If not, you're left with realistic things clashing with unrealistic elements, realistic people doing completely unrealistic things.
None of it is, and that's the problem with going more "realistic." When you opt to shift tone, everything needs to adapt, including the game design. If not, you're left with realistic things clashing with unrealistic elements, realistic people doing completely unrealistic things.
It's still a spectrum. Jesus and ghosts and other supernatural bullshit are less grounded in reality than people being able to climb and jump more than average humans.
Edit: But you're right. There can be thematic and game design clashes and I don't think Uncharted is free of that. But I don't think most games are free of that and they all fit on a spectrum.
Not being the worst offender by far and also not being the best representation either, but in my opinion closer towards that side.
Child Nate is more a timid orphan than the swashbuckling adventurer. Those scenes were more intimate and less about spectacal too.
Either way, it doesnt bother me. Just a little amusing.
I was really interested in that character, but she only appeared a few times to beat the shit out of you, just kinda left at the end and had no arc. I know some have defended it saying that she was actually smart enough to get away but for me this does not make up for the lack of character development or closure. I'm not saying she needed to die, but she felt entirely wasted. She's a character very much in the vein of Indiana Jones/James Bond villains and the leader of Shoreline, so yeah I'm pretty bummed that she was basically utterly pointless. If you totally removed her and just had Rafe the leader of Shoreline, it wouldn't change anything at all aside from a few fight scenes and bickering with Adler
Finished it last night. Took me a while, but I didn't want to rush. I've always taken my time with the Uncharted games. Uncharted 4 is a great game for sure. But for me it's not the best Naughty Dog's made or even the best Uncharted game.
+
* Amazing graphics
* By far the best story in the Uncharted series
* Jawdropping environments
* The characters all felt human and their motivations justified
* Great dialogue
* Elena's developed into such a great character
* The stealth added some variety to combat
* I love the grappling hook (made me think of Rise of the Tomb Raider)!
-
* Nothing really felt fresh here, I've seen it and played it before
* Sam was never a character I cared much for
* Although I liked the ending I actually think it
would have been more fitting if Sam had died there in the ship
* With these great environments, why not add a few side quests?
* The flashbacks added great value to the story, but were never any fun to play
* Seriously, having to find a box on wheels to get to higher ground EVERY TIME...?
I may seem negative here, but it's just because ND has me expecting so much from their games. After Uncharted 2, 3 and The Last of Us, I never expect anything less than excellence from them. Uncharted 4 is a really good game (I'd give it a weak 9/10). But I was just a little disappointed with the game not being a tiny bit surprising. Unlike Uncharted 2 and 3, I was not blown away by any of the action sequences this time. Maybe ND felt they'd already "done it all".
The story was what kept me playing this night after night. After finishing I can barely remember any gameplay that was amazingly fun, I just think of how exciting the story was and how well Elena and Nate interacted (I actually became pretty invested in their relationship). So... gameplay wise I guess this is below Rise of the Tomb Raider for me. But the story, the characters and the graphics all adds up and makes it a great experience nonetheless.
Great work, Naughty Dog. You're still the best developer out there.
It's still a spectrum. Jesus and ghosts and other supernatural bullshit are less grounded in reality than people being able to climb and jump more than average humans.
Sure, and for me that stuff is fine if it works within the same frame. I didn't have a problem with the previous games being super over the top and with supernatural elements because they felt more cartoony and I was okay with that. I'm not... not okay with it here, again more of an observation and again something I did think about consciously while playing it and I didn't feel that way before as it worked better due to that style.
Uncharted 4 is still a colorful game with a lot of over the top elements, but it also has much more natural dialogue, character interactions, visuals, scenes trying their hardest to depict incredibly normal real-life scenarios (Drake at his day job, married life, the drama between the characters) and for me it had a direct impact on how much I was willing to suspend belief when it came to what these people are actually able to do.
she had enough with most her men being dead or left. Rafe forced her to continue and she was level headed enough to walk away when she got the upper hand, she realised the lust for trreasure wasn't worth it after seing the parallels between them and the two pirates. I was fine with her "bye suckers" moment.
Could have done with a few more scenes with her but still great character. Like her a lot more than Chloe.
But if the traversal is simple so that it works well during combat, what does that mean for all the traversal without combat, or without any puzzle elements or elements of discovery?
Its arguably a flaw that the traversal seems (mechanically) intended to be functional and most fun done at speed to support inclusion in combat, but the campaign encourages you to play slowly and carefully enjoying the sights and looking for treasure.
On the other hand it generally seems indicative of ND's desire to be inclusive of and accessible to all sorts of players and play-styles, which is generally admirable.
she had enough with most her men being dead or left. Rafe forced her to continue and she was level headed enough to walk away when she got the upper hand, she realised the lust for trreasure wasn't worth it after seing the parallels between them and the two pirates. I was fine with her "bye suckers" moment.
Could have done with a few more scenes with her but still great character.
she had enough with most her men being dead or left. Rafe forced her to continue and she was level headed enough to walk away when she got the upper hand, she realised the lust for trreasure wasn't worth it after seing the parallels between them and the two pirates. I was fine with her "bye suckers" moment.
Could have done with a few more scenes with her but still great character.
I got that and have seen the argument before, but I was particularly excited about that character and there's just not much I can say about her. I simply don't think she had any impact on the story at all. For me a great character has an arc and an overall impact on a story. Nadine didn't have either.
she had enough with most her men being dead or left. Rafe forced her to continue and she was level headed enough to walk away when she got the upper hand, she realised the lust for trreasure wasn't worth it. I was fine with her "bye suckers" moment. Could have done with a few more scenes with her but still great character.
But as another poster pointed out, it really wasn't an arch, you could have removed her from entire plot and it would not have made a difference. The whole 'walk away' thing is basically what Sully and Elena have been therefore the whole time.
But as another poster pointed out, it really wasn't an arch, you could have removed her from entire plot and it would not have made a difference. The whole 'walk away' thing is basically what Sully and Elena have been therefore the whole time.
But now we have it from an antagonist point of view just to hammer how fucked up the persuit for dangerous adventure is. She joined Rafe sides for the money and by the end she walked away from him and even more wealth. Id say she grew as a character because if she wanted she could have shot everyone in the ship and taken off with everything.
I got that and have seen the argument before, but I was particularly excited about that character and there's just not much I can say about her. I simply don't think she had any impact on the story at all. For me a great character has an arc and an overall impact on a story. Nadine didn't have either.
she is the one who actually got away with the most loot and did better than her father who left her in debt. She knew when and how to quit. If you ask me she definitely is the smartest villain in the whole series. She got rid of Nate and Rafe , the 2 people who could ruin her plans, at the same time she gave Rafe the middle finger and got away with the loot. She is actually the only one who completed her mission.
she is the one who actually got away with the most loot and did better than her father who left her in debt. She knew when and how to quit. If you ask me she definitely is the smartest villain in the whole series. She got rid of Nate and Rafe , the 2 people who could ruin her plans, at the same time she gave Rafe the middle finger and got away with the loot. She is actually the only one who completed her mission.
I will say that this is the first Uncharted in which I actually felt the "Drake is a psycho killer" complaints. It struck me during the juxtaposition going from chapter 4
nice calm chapter with Drake the family man at home with Elena
to
chapter five when I'm suddenly snapping a security guard's neck for doing his job.
I was like whoa; I actually feel the disconnect here. I didn't dwell on it long though, and just continued to play the game without giving it much thought.
Really? Rafe would have achieved nothing without her and the ending would be completely different if not for her... If that holds no importance to the plot I dont know what does. I agree she was underdeveloped in the game but saying removing her from the plot wouldnt make a difference is just wrong.
she is the one who actually got away with the most loot and did better than her father who left her in debt. She knew when and how to quit. If you ask me she definitely is the smartest villain in the whole series. She got rid of Nate and Rafe , the 2 people who could ruin her plans, at the same time she gave Rafe the middle finger and got away with the loot. She is actually the only one who completed her mission.
Really? Rafe would have achieved nothing without her and the ending would be completely different if not for her... If that holds no importance to the plot I dont know what does. I agree she was underdeveloped in the game but saying removing her from the plot wouldnt make a difference is just wrong.
I'm saying if Rafe, who had shitloads of money/resources simply hired a group to help him achieve his means, the story would have/could have played out the exact same. Nadine instead is the leader of the Shoreline group and is treated as a secondary antagonist, but her role in the story is fleeting and she doesn't really do much
.
If you guys liked it, fine, I just thought it was incredibly limp.
I will say that this is the first Uncharted in which I actually felt the "Drake is a psycho killer" complaints. It struck me during the juxtaposition going from chapter 4
nice calm chapter with Drake the family man at home with Elena
to
chapter five when I'm suddenly snapping a security guard's neck for doing his job.
I was like whoa; I actually feel the disconnect here. I didn't dwell on it long though, and just continued to play the game without giving it much thought.
I strongly disagree, but to respond to your point, I think the discussion at Kinda Funny on this exact point covers most bases. Colin shared your sentiment, and Tim and Greg didn't. They explained why in the discussion. The discussion on her character goes on for 5 minutes.
Really? Rafe would have achieved nothing without her and the ending would be completely different if not for her... If that holds no importance to the plot I dont know what does. I agree she was underdeveloped in the game but saying removing her from the plot wouldnt make a difference is just wrong.
But now we have it from an antagonist point of view just to hammer how fucked up the persuit for dangerous adventure is. She joined Rafe sides for the money and by the end she walked away from him and even more wealth. Id say she grew as a character because if she wanted she could have shot everyone in the ship and taken off with everything.
it still didn't stop her inclusion in the whole thing from being unsatisfactory. A big deal was made of her inclusion in the marketing, I thought she would DO more...I don't think I am alone in this
