Support NeoGAF

[potatohead]

I think they did it to give the idea that there is at least a reasonable threat to Drake's and Sam's life. If there's no reasonable way to think they are actually in danger, then anything that happens during the game loses half of the drama. No threat to their lives as they go on the last adventure makes the adventure that much less impactful, or the impact at the relief they don't die.

That's the reason for the marketing as it was IMO. It's part of the setup to the game proper to give a reasonable sense of danger to the characters. Not unlike how Elena becomes nearly mortally wounded in UC2 but ends up "perfectly fine" or how Nathan Drake escapes a train bleeding from an abdominal wound (which is in every literal sense essentially impossible, but dramatic).

 

[SolidChamp]

Perhaps because you don't disagree with every post? It's fine to disagree with some.

It's not because I disagree...it's the hyperbole. The completely baseless hyperbole.

 

[R_thanatos]

Finished the game on crushing , aside from chapter 13 , it was good fun.

Chapter 20 was not nearly as annoying as some posters made it out to be.

I loved it a second time.

Not to play this game a third time.(speedrun ?)

 

[gundamkyoukai]

In this case technically you can. It's very hard to call an ending objectively bad, which is why safe is being used. It's all open to interpretation. Imo the epilogue just made it worse. They did say it would be divisive and it seems to be. I just think it's another case of misleading marketing ala Halo 5, coupled with questionable pacing.

The ending is hardly divisive .
Most seem to think like it or think it's okay .

By the way i like the ending , happy endings are okay once there is good flow behind it and not some nonsense to make it happen .
Also after so many stories everything is generic in some way .

 

[Alienous]

It's not because I disagree...it's the hyperbole. The completely baseless hyperbole.

hyperbole
hʌɪˈpəːbəli
noun
exaggerated statements or claims not meant to be taken literally.

I'm not sure what the issue is

 

[reKon]

Despite the pacing issue (and no it wasn't due to open level nature nature of the gameplay alone), this game is at the top of the genre when it comes to gunplay and TPS action. More shooters should be this dynamic. Mixing all the game mechanics together works brilliantly and looks stylish/fun. Is there any place I can see recorded flips of other people's cool gameplay recordings?

 

[Carn82]

I feel Uncharted 4 has the strongest thematic consistency in its storytelling.
..

Of course a fanfiction writer can come up with that ending. Coming up with endings, good, bad, super happy, super grimdark, plot tweest or no plot tweest is like the easiest thing to make.

..

However, it is a very well crafted ending that employs the rule of three very well in its limited gameplay moments and environmental storytelling. The choice of the direction for the story to lead to that ending may not be up your alley, but I think qualitatively, it's hard to deny it's well written.

I totally agree. I would also want to add that these types of computer games are big, big projects, with many stakeholders. The medium itself is relatively new (compared to literature, or film for that matter); you can't just build a 'fun game' around a story and make that work. I think Naughty Dog did a great job with the material. Coming up with an idea is simple, realising that idea in a fun product is hard (as with many projects).

Sure, could Druckmann and co could have come up with an introspective, depressing story where Nathan continuously psycho-analyzes his actions, becomes a fulltime alcoholic, beats up Elena, becomes homeless; detoxes and has one final adventure and shoots himself through the head? Sure, but that wouldnt make much sense as an Uncharted game. This series created its own narrative 'box', and Uncharted 4 fits that box greatly (imho, etc).

 

[Lys Skygge]

When it comes to people saying "Uncharted 4 doesn't have vertical gameplay" you know something is up. It's happened already. People will rely on objectively false statements to degrade a game when there are plenty of genuinely more legitimate concerns.

There's plenty to criticize about Uncharted, some people just choose to rely on pettier or false statements to "raise" their case.

Also stuff like "the gunplay is bad" is just cheap drive-by stuff. I could say Binary Domain sucks at shooting too, but I'd hope no one would believe that.

And this isn't exclusive to Uncharted defending either from me. I'd defend games like MGS which have "different" or eccentric gameplay all the same. People can call those games' gameplay "shit" or whatever but I'd prefer to see receipts and some good reasoning as to "why" its so shit.

There was a person in another thread who was saying that "Uncharted is catered to casuals because auto-aim is on by default". Now unless he/she played on Explorer mode we know that that's 100% false. Its crazy the shit people will say about games to fit their fanboy agenda.

Its fine to criticize a game, but don't make shit up to fit your narrative. As for those that have been criticizing the ending for the last couple pages, they haven't been making anything up. They gave their opinion. Simply disagree and move on.

 

[Spring-Loaded]

When it comes to people saying "Uncharted 4 doesn't have vertical gameplay" you know something is up. It's happened already. People will rely on objectively false statements to degrade a game when there are plenty of genuinely more legitimate concerns.

There's plenty to criticize about Uncharted, some people just choose to rely on pettier or false statements to "raise" their case.

Also stuff like "the gunplay is bad" is just cheap drive-by stuff. I could say Binary Domain sucks at shooting too, but I'd hope no one would believe that.

And this isn't exclusive to Uncharted defending either from me. I'd defend games like MGS which have "different" or eccentric gameplay all the same. People can call those games' gameplay "shit" or whatever but I'd prefer to see receipts and some good reasoning as to "why" its so shit.

Which is why I said to ask "what could be done better about ____?"

If there's no answer, or no non-vague answer, then just move on.

There was a person in another thread who was saying that "Uncharted is catered to casuals because auto-aim is on by default". Now unless he/she played on Explorer mode we know that that's 100% false. Its crazy the shit people will say about games to fit their fanboy agenda.

Its fine to criticize a game, but don't make shit up to fit your narrative. As for those that have been criticizing the ending for the last couple pages, they haven't been making anything up. They gave their opinion. Simply disagree and move on.

Aim-assist is at 10 (maximum) by default in single and multiplayer. Maybe that's what they're talking about?

And what's so wrong about the series being catered toward casuals? It's a big-budget AAA game. It's not trying to push casuals away, that's for sure.

 

[Nightengale]

I don't share the perspective on the psychoanalysis of the ludo-narrative dissonance in this article so much, but it analyses many things I agree with on why I think Uncharted 4's story is great and why the ending is great.

Obviously spoilers all the way :

http://kotaku.com/uncharted-4-solves-the-series-identity-crisis-1780108429

 

[Alienous]

I don't share the perspective on the psychoanalysis of the ludo-narrative dissonance in this article so much, but it analyses many things I agree with on why I think Uncharted 4's story is great and why the ending is great.

Obviously spoilers all the way :

http://kotaku.com/uncharted-4-solves-the-series-identity-crisis-1780108429

None of that addresses why he snaps people's necks. The game

Spoiler

doesn't address that. It address' Nathan Drake coming to terms with the fact that he can't have it all in life, and his choice of family over adventure

. The game doesn't really address the ludonarrative dissonance in any meaningful way.

 

[Spring-Loaded]

None of that addresses why he snaps people's necks.

He really should just knock people out for stealth kills. Something about snapping necks seems too far, like if he was slitting throats.

You can of course sniper a dude who isn't an immediate threat, but at least dudes are actively trying to kill tou after that.

 

[Nightengale]

None of that addresses why he snaps people's necks. The game

Spoiler

doesn't address that. It address' Nathan Drake coming to terms with the fact that he can't have it all in life, and chooses family over adventure

. The game doesn't really address the ludonarrative dissonance in any meaningful way.

Like I said, I don't agree with the ludonarrative angle of the article. I'm talking strictly why I think it's a great story and why the ending works with the story they went with.

From a design perspective, the game addresses nothing ludonarratively. From a character perspective, why Nathan Drake is the person he is does.

 

[gundamkyoukai]

He really should just knock people out for stealth kills. Something about snapping necks seems too far, like if he was slitting throats.

You can of course sniper a dude who isn't an immediate threat, but at least dudes are actively trying to kill tou after that.

If he knocks people out there going come back as waves of new enemies lol
Being serious we always going to have that sort of thing in gaming .

 

[Dangansona]

ND already entered the upper echelon of excellent TPS mechanics and design with TLOU but I feel like UC4 is the first time they have achieved combat that is on the same level as everything else with Uncharted. Fights are frantic and dynamic, staying constantly on the move and varying your attack method is more necessary now than ever.

It's just so enjoyable.

If only everyone knew that's how you're supposed to play the game like you do. I think there are a lot of Jeff Gerstmans out there who sit behind cover and try to get headshots until every last enemy is down and then complain about the combat.

Worst offenders are the ones using the word "garbage". Stop using that word ffs, it's garbage.

This is my biggest problem with GAF and whenever I call people out for it there's someone to defend them saying "obviously it's their opinion." No it isn't, because to me it sounds exactly like the angry nerds I've talked with going through school who will fight you about how the movie you like is objectively shit.

 

[potatohead]

This is the same kind of discussion about how distance in war somehow changes the killing involved. Is killing someone with a headshot with a high caliber sniper rifle and having them fall 100 to 1000 feet to their further death better than snapping their neck?

The only dissonance is that there is a major difference, but that is a discussion not exclusive to Uncharted, it applies to interpretations of real-life conflicts, in how the distant between combatants desensitizes the concept of violence even to those partaking in it.

You might be accustomed to shooting people in videogames, but it is no less violent than snapping necks that Drake does.

The game is campy, and yes I agree that snapping necks is quite violent. But I also would contend it's not so much more violent than anything else in the game either.

Btw he also throws people down huge chasms onto rough water and spiky rocks.

Uncharted 4 is not so deeply philosophical about violence. It's an action movie/game. It's like analyzing whether or not James Bond is too violent or not violent enough when he kills people. He's supposed to be a secret agent, and his entire life makes no sense.

 

[Alienous]

Like I said, I don't agree with the ludonarrative angle of the article. I'm talking strictly why I think it's a great story and why the ending works with the story they went with.

From a design perspective, the game addresses nothing ludonarratively. From a character perspective, why Nathan Drake is the person he is does.

Oh shit, sorry about that. I read "ludonarrative dissonance" and saw red. But yeah, from a character perspective I think they did a good job of understanding Nathan Drake's adventure seeking. I thought that was all done really well, from beginning to 'end' (well, before the

Spoiler

Epilogue. The sugary sweetness of it just didn't jive with me given the themes of the rest of the game

).

 

[J 0 E]

Neil Druckmann once hinted that

Spoiler

Uncharted 4's ending will be something controversial, while I love the ending but can't say it's "controversial"

what did he mean?

 

[potatohead]

Neil Druckmann once hinted that

Spoiler

Uncharted 4's ending will be something controversial, while I love the ending but can't say it's "controversial"

what did he mean?

Yea I didn't think it was very controversial. But he could've simply meant not everyone will like it. That is technically controversial, disagreeable.

 

[valkyre]

This is my biggest problem with GAF and whenever I call people out for it there's someone to defend them saying "obviously it's their opinion." No it isn't, because to me it sounds exactly like the angry nerds I've talked with going through school who will fight you about how the movie you like is objectively shit.

Τhe thing with opinions -at least the way I see it- is that they are determined by the manner and the way their are presented and expressed.

If some guy wants to sound like a smartass, presenting his opinion as a fact and using words like "garbage" , then -in a similar fashion- his opinion is classified as garbage to me as well.

World is filled with know it all guys who think that they are much better. Funny thing is that most of the times they are just fooling themselves.

 

[Nightengale]

Neil Druckmann once hinted that

Spoiler

Uncharted 4's ending will be something controversial, while I love the ending but can't say it's "controversial"

what did he mean?

In the recent interview with Rolling Stones, he said the marketing of the game very consciously

Spoiler

tried to hint at a character death/something bad/etc happening, even though they were never going to kill off anyone

So there's a very strong chance there could've been a backlash.

 

[Alienous]

This is the same kind of discussion about how distance in war somehow changes the killing involved.

Is killing someone with a headshot with a high caliber sniper rifle better than snapping their neck?

The only dissonance is that there is a major difference, but that is a discussion not exclusive to Uncharted, it applies to interpretations of real-life conflicts.

Uncharted 4 slowly becomes a deeply philosophical game when these aren't even issues it is trying to address.

The game is campy, and yes I agree that snapping necks is quite violent. But I also would contend it's not so much more violent than anything else in the game either.

Btw he also throws people down huge chasms onto rough water and spiky rocks.

I think it's just that it'd take a particular kind of person to snap another person's neck, and Nathan Drake (at least as the character we're presented) doesn't seem like that kind of person. There's no way to look at it as cartoon violence, like throwing someone off of a cliff to almost comical screams. It's brutally violent, even without blood and gore.

And when you look at a relationship in Uncharted and think "that's so true to life" it's hard, at least for me, to just dismiss neck-snapping with 'well, in the universe of Uncharted, violence doesn't have the same weight it would in ours'. That's such a cop-out.

 

[potatohead]

I think it's just that it'd take a particular kind of person to snap another person's neck, and Nathan Drake (at least as the character we're presented) doesn't seem like that kind of person. There's no way to look at it as cartoon violence, like throwing someone off of a cliff to almost comical screams. It's brutally violent, even without blood and gore.

Again, this is not a new discussion or exclusive to Uncharted 4. If you google you can find massive debates on whether or not killing up close and personal and killing from afar is any different. There are whole novels dedicated to this topic. Read Forever War or Forever Peace by Joe Haldemann, it is literally this topic in a nutshell. And there is a lot to be said. But U4 definitely is not trying to say it.

Sure, it's brutal. But it's also really not *that* much more brutal than throwing a grenade next to a person and seeing him go flying.

It's like, again, talking about how if James Bond shoots someone from afar, or snaps their neck, is one worse, and does one degrade the game more than the other?

I don't agree. Most people probably don't care. But note I see where you're coming from, and maybe it is slightly inconsistent in "tone" and we could talk about that for weeks and get nowhere. I just disagree with you that this even matters to UC4 specifically. It's not that big of a deal, to most, including me.

 

[gundamkyoukai]

In the recent interview with Rolling Stones, he said the marketing of the game very consciously

Spoiler

tried to hint at a character death/something bad/etc happening, even though they were never going to kill off anyone

So there's a very strong chance there could've been a backlash.

I remember when people were worrying that UC4 was going to be dark cause the duo now came off TLOU .
So kind a of play off a little of that in the marketing .

 

[J 0 E]

Yea I didn't think it was very controversial. But he could've simply meant not everyone will like it. That is technically controversial, disagreeable.

The ending is

Spoiler

generally happy and expected like the pervious uncharted games though, you can worry about disappointing fans if you tried something bold like TLOU.

 

[Alienous]

Again, this is not a new discussion or exclusive to Uncharted 4.

If you google you can find massive debates on whether or not killing up close and personal and killing from afar is any different.

And there is a lot to be said. But U4 definitely is not trying to say it.

Sure, it's brutal. But it's also really not *that* much more brutal than throwing a grenade next to a person and seeing him go flying.

It's like, again, talking about how if James Bond shoots someone from afar, or snaps their neck, is one worse, and does one degrade the game more than the other?

I don't agree. Most people probably don't care. But note I see where you're coming from, I just disagree with you.

The thing is, James Bond would snap a person's neck. He would shoot them from afar. He's that kind of person. Whereas Nathan Drake, by all accounts, isn't.

 

[potatohead]

The thing is, James Bond would snap a person's neck. He would shoot them from afar. He's that kind of person. Whereas Nathan Drake, by all accounts, isn't.

OK, so which other fairy tale character should we compare to? If not James Bond, there are hundreds of others to pick from.

Maybe to you he isn't. Except, since he is going on these treasure troving adventures and putting himself in danger, why shouldn't he fight back in any way he can?

He's an "everyman" supposedly, not a jujitsu ninja man that can knock everyone out. He isn't super Tenchu ninja man. That's even less consistent with his character than snapping people's necks.

You're stretching from your interpretation of what Drake is and what he should or shouldn't do, when there is no agreement on this.

This also doesn't appreciate whether or not the gameplay can be creative with abstracting the reality that is more present in the cutscenes.

If you go this far, why doesn't Drake die every time he is shot, if Sam only needs to be shot once in a cutscene to be lost for 15 years? Then we have to talk about narrative dissonance, and why the entire gameplay itself is inconsistent with the tone of the narrative.

Why is a cutscene gunshot holding more gravitas than a gameplay gunshot? Why doesn't Cloud use a Phoenix Down on Aeris?

If Drake breaks someone's neck in a cutscene, would that hold more or less meaning than breaking a NPC character enemy in gameplay? Yea, it would.

It's an opinion, and I disagree with it, and also that it even matters for an action game in the first place.

It's simply a clear cut case of taking gameplay concepts literally to a point of "missing the point." It doesn't really matter that much.

Why do characters even die if you pull them off a ledge into shallow water where they would really just start swimming? But they do. If you take any of the gameplay inconsistencies with the narrative so literally, the entire game doesn't even make sense anymore (not that it does even in many ways without doing this).

 

[gundamkyoukai]

The thing is, James Bond would snap a person's neck. He would shoot them from afar. He's that kind of person. Whereas Nathan Drake, by all accounts, isn't.

James Bond would shoot them from a far because he walk with his silencer in advance .
Then he don't have to worry about other people noticing him .
If they do he can always use one of his sc fi gadgets or car .
What i mean is it makes no sense to try to talking about this stuff in games even more so in UC .

 

[Spring-Loaded]

James Bond would shoot them from a far because he walk with his silencer in advance .
Then he don't have to worry about other people noticing him .
If they do he can always use one of his sc fi gadgets or car .
What i mean is it makes no sense to try to talking about this stuff in games even more so in UC .

How would you react to Nate slitting a dude's throat

 

[potatohead]

How would you react to Nate slitting a dude's throat

Why doesn't Drake ever shoot anyone in a cutscene in UC4?

That's pretty inconsistent with his gameplay character who racks up 500 kills over a single play through.

 

[RespectThySole]

The ending is

Spoiler

generally happy and expected like the pervious uncharted games though, you can worry about disappointing fans if you tried something bold like TLOU.

It's a shame that this is probably exactly why they delivered this ending.

Spoiler

They just didn't want to 'upset' anyone despite the obvious differences between UC4 and previous games.

---
I think some of you are taking the criticism a little too harshly though. The fact that we're discussing the story this much shows that ND employs some talented writers. Most games' stories aren't even worth discussing so while I do think that the ending and

Spoiler

chapter 16

were missteps, I'm not discounting the good work ND did elsewhere.(

Spoiler

like the jeep sequence with Elena or the banquet.

I don't think anyone's claiming it's the game's death knell or anything a la ME3, it just wasn't nearly as satisfying as it should've been for us.

 

[BruceLeeRoy]

If only everyone knew that's how you're supposed to play the game like you do. I think there are a lot of Jeff Gerstmans out there who sit behind cover and try to get headshots until every last enemy is down and then complain about the combat.

Yeah its frustrating to see that stuff. I don't think people realize then when your running it throws off enemy accuracy as well so its always worth taking damage to get to a more strategic advantage point.

I don't know how people can game for such a long time and be so terrible. You should have been in the Quantum Break thread. The way people were attempting to play that game was so embarrassing.

 

[gundamkyoukai]

How would you react to Nate slitting a dude's throat

That would never happen because the game won't be rated teen anymore .
All the violence and how it is done it build around that and story .
Which is another reason why trying bring up that topic in a UC games makes no sense.

It's a shame that this is probably exactly why they delivered this ending.

Spoiler

They just didn't want to 'upset' anyone despite the obvious differences between UC4 and previous games.

---
I think some of you are taking the criticism a little too harshly though. The fact that we're discussing the story this much shows that ND employs some talented writers. Most games' stories aren't even worth discussing so while I do think that the ending and

Spoiler

chapter 16

were missteps, I'm not discounting the good work ND did elsewhere.(

Spoiler

like the jeep sequence with Elena or the banquet.

I don't think anyone's claiming it's the game's death knell or anything a la ME3, it just wasn't nearly as satisfying as it should've been for us.

Story wise the game really not that different comapre to past games.
Yes it has a more emotional tone but they try that with 3 but it did not work out so great there.

 

[The Chef]

There are moments in this game where I find myself staring at the screen with my mouth open. I've never seen anything like it before ,and I'm only on chapter 4. The character animations and facial features are unreal but the environment and atmosphere are some of the best i've ever seen.

 

[tcrunch]

Wrote a LTTP for this entire series (well, not the VITA game, sorry VITA) here. It's GIF-heavy so don't go on your toasterphone.

For some reason I thought U4 released in March, so maybe it's not as LTTP as I thought!

Catching up on the past few pages of conversation re: Nate the homicidal maniac. That was something I wondered about occasionally when playing, but my conclusion was that the games operate under Hollywood rules where if a bad guy is remotely threatening and it's a good guy doing the shooting, everything is okay and you can ignore all the violence as a character trait.

 

[Alienous]

There are moments in this game where I find myself staring at the screen with my mouth open. I've never seen anything like it before ,and I'm only on chapter 4. The character animations and facial features are unreal but the environment and atmosphere are some of the best i've ever seen.

I smiled through the first four chapters of the game. A big dumb smile.

It's a shame that this is probably exactly why they delivered this ending.

Spoiler

They just didn't want to 'upset' anyone despite the obvious differences between UC4 and previous games.

---
I think some of you are taking the criticism a little too harshly though. The fact that we're discussing the story this much shows that ND employs some talented writers. Most games' stories aren't even worth discussing so while I do think that the ending and

Spoiler

chapter 16

were missteps, I'm not discounting the good work ND did elsewhere.(

Spoiler

like the jeep sequence with Elena or the banquet.

I don't think anyone's claiming it's the game's death knell or anything a la ME3, it just wasn't nearly as satisfying as it should've been for us.

.

We're on the exact same page, I think.

 

[Hojaho]

Yeah its frustrating to see that stuff. I don't think people realize then when your running it throws off enemy accuracy as well so its always worth taking damage to get to a more strategic advantage point.

I don't know how people can game for such a long time and be so terrible. You should have been in the Quantum Break thread. The way people were attempting to play that game was so embarrassing.

Didn't see the Jeff Gerstmans thing, but I have no clue how it is possible.
I did only one playthrough so far (Crushing difficulty) and camping behind one cover was just not possible. You either get flanked very fast and/or they throw grenades at you to get you out.

 

[Alienous]

Didn't see the Jeff Gerstmans thing, but I have no clue how it is possible.
I did only one playthrough so far (Crushing difficulty) and camping behind one cover was just not possible. You either get flanked very fast and/or they throw grenades at you to get you out.

The game is designed not the let that happen. It makes it pretty clear in multiple combat scenarios that hiding behind cover for too long will just get your cover blown up.

 

[joms5]

I seem to recall your suggestion of

Spoiler

letting Sam die and Nate saying "The man who saved my life"

as being superior to what we got. Is that not thinking you can write the story better than ND themselves? Personally, I found your idea terrible and I'm sure a few others did too. Also, I've been spending much less time on GAF for the past half a year and somehow the constant ranting still annoys me. Trust me, if it weren't for the news and hype, I would have quit GAF long ago.

My suggestion was written in about 5 seconds and was simply a thought not a screenplay.

Spoiler

Consequences would have at least meshed better with the story.

I'm sticking to that.

Maybe a good idea. You seem to be taking this stuff WAY too seriously. There's better stuff to get all bent out of shape about.

ON TOPIC: Did anyone notice that Drake still touches walls as he's walking past them sometimes, but properly this time. I remember in Uncharted 3 he would be touching air almost constantly. They seemed to leave that system in this game and improved it considerably.

 

[MAX PAYMENT]

I'm a huge critic of uncharted. But 4 finally clicked with me, and now they're done.

I don't want any more last of us.
I want more uncharted.

 

[Spring-Loaded]

Why doesn't Drake ever shoot anyone in a cutscene in UC4?

That's pretty inconsistent with his gameplay character who racks up 500 kills over a single play through.

He's shot people in cutscenes before tho

He hasn't snapped anyone's neck in a cutscene

I'm a huge critic of uncharted. But 4 finally clicked with me, and now they're done.

I don't want any more last of us.
I want more uncharted.

The DLC needs to be about

Spoiler

young Sully and Alcazar's job

Then he can be added into multiplayer.

 

[Javin98]

So made it to Chapter 11. I don't know why, but I definitely love my second playthrough more. Hell, for some reason, I even think the game looks better this time around. I already thought it was the greatest and best looking game I've ever played, but somehow the positives just stick out even more now. Perhaps because on my first playthrough, real life was conflicting my feelings about everything, but now three weeks on, I've settled down.

This.... so much THIS.

Like you said, criticism is fine, but you see a shit ton of "opinions" being thrown around here, presented as "facts" coming from seemingly "amazingly talented folk", who can obviously do a better job.

I hate this arrogance, not just in terms of Uncharted 4, but generally. So many people act as if they are super awesome and make you feel that perfection is just so easy for them to achieve... those "know-it-all" guys, who rarely live up to their credentials in RL.

Indeed, it seems to be getting worse on GAF recently. Like, I don't even know if a lot of people here actually play any games and enjoy them or they just love the hyperbolic statements. In any case, it's why I tend to spend much less time on GAF since I got my PS4.

 

[Alienous]

So made it to Chapter 11. I don't know why, but I definitely love my second playthrough more. Hell, for some reason, I even think the game looks better this time around. I already thought it was the greatest and best looking game I've ever played, but somehow the positives just stick out even more now. Perhaps because on my first playthrough, real life was conflicting my feelings about everything, but now three weeks on, I've settled down.

I have heard people say that without the expectations it's a better experience. Easier to soak in, you aren't so concerned about the story and can focus on the gameplay, etc.

 

[potatohead]

He's shot people in cutscenes before tho

He hasn't snapped anyone's neck in a cutscene

Let's just get to the meat of the issue. Can you describe why there is such a disparity between gameplay Drake and cutscene Drake? Or why any actions in cutscenes are far more permanent than in gameplay? Or why there is any distinction between them at all in terms of narrative delivery?

 

[Ricky_R]

So made it to Chapter 11. I don't know why, but I definitely love my second playthrough more. Hell, for some reason, I even think the game looks better this time around. I already thought it was the greatest and best looking game I've ever played, but somehow the positives just stick out even more now. Perhaps because on my first playthrough, real life was conflicting my feelings about everything, but now three weeks on, I've settled down.


Indeed, it seems to be getting worse on GAF recently. Like, I don't even know if a lot of people here actually play any games and enjoy them or they just love the hyperbolic statements. In any case, it's why I tend to spend much less time on GAF since I got my PS4.

Second playthroughs are usually enjoyed more because you're far more concentrated in the task at hand and playing the game better. The first time around you're just trying to pay attention to every single thing and that can become a distraction, specially with ND games.

My first playthrough I was trying to catch every single animation, admire the environments, catch all banter, observe how awesome Drake looked while shooting, get a feel of the feedback from each gun, learn the way to go to accelerate future playthroughs, pick my jaw from the floor every time a new area was revealed... All that while trying to play smoothly by taking advantage of the level design and the tools ND gave us, and while trying to hold back the feels from playing the last Drake adventure for the first time.

It can be difficult, you know.

 

[Spring-Loaded]

Let's just get to the meat of the issue. Can you describe why there is such a disparity though between gameplay Drake and cutscene Drake? Or why any actions in cutscenes are far more permanent than in gameplay? Or why there is any distinction between them at all in terms of narrative delivery?

When was I talking about there disparity between cutscene Drake and in-game Drake before you mentioned it in response?

I just said Drake snapping necks seems too brutal compared to shooting, blowing up and dropping dudes to their deaths. It doesn't appear nearly as proportionately cartoony to the real thing as other means of killing enemies in the game. It's not a hard-and-fast rule or anything, but it seems incongruous with the rest of the gameplay, not even taking into consideration the cutscenes.

 

[BruceLeeRoy]

I'm a huge critic of uncharted. But 4 finally clicked with me, and now they're done.

I don't want any more last of us.
I want more uncharted.

Bro I know your a huge critic of mechanics so you liking UC4 really shows what a step up the gameplay is.

 

[potatohead]

When was I talking about there disparity between cutscene Drake and in-game Drake before you mentioned it in response?

Because it's also something that is rather inconsistent, so it seems strange to me why focus on the neck snap/choke hold thing, but not the inconsistency in behaviour or violence of cutscene Drake versus gameplay Drake? So I'm asking you to take a devil's advocate position and try to explain why there is a disparity here, if you also feel there is a disparity between killing with a sniper rifle headshot or snapping their neck. It can also help explain to you why there is some creative license given with the violence in gameplay.

There's more inconsistency between the behaviour of cutscene Drake and gameplay Drake as far as violence is performed, to a much greater degree than anything between different gameplay to gameplay parts, that's why. Cutscene Drake almost looks like he is afraid to hurt a fly, reluctant to even use his weapons at all, whereas in gameplay we're regularly dispatching several tens of enemies per hour, including with choke hold/neck snapping that you are arguing is much more brutal than the rest of the game violence.

It would raise your argument if you could describe why from the developer's perspective they may be able to justify these discrepancies as you are calling them for the choke hold neck snap, and I am pointing out some others' criticism for the cutscene disparity in violence.

I just said Drake snapping necks seems too brutal compared to shooting, blowing up and dropping dudes to their deaths. It doesn't appear nearly as proportionately cartoony to the real thing as other means of killing enemies in the game. It's not a hard-and-fast rule or anything, but it seems incongruous with the rest of the gameplay, not even taking into consideration the cutscenes.

That's fine. I agree that the neck snapping is brutal in gameplay. But then really just have to disagree about the other parts. If you take a step back from the other violence, it's really not as disproportionate anymore e.g. shooting someone with a sniper rifle and seeing their head snap back. Tossing people off cliffs to their doom, animations that respond to shooting location, etc.

We just headshot people in games more. So it doesn't seem like it is as brutal. I'd even say the neck snap thing is cartoonish equally in the same way as the rest of the game. It's quick and doesn't really distinguish itself that much over a choke hold. There's not much focus on that particular aspect than any other death in the game either. Which is why I'd say they are all pretty "cartoonish" and none of the gameplay deaths in the game really set apart from one another.

There's just a major disconnection and dissociation that we have by habit to the action of shooting someone in the face with a high-powered sniper rifle. Because we do it so much in videogames already. We see necks recoil back in games after headshots, because there's so many games where you shoot people in the face lol.

Like really think about it: the act of sending a piece of hot metal at a high velocity into someone's face is, quite literally, a lot more brutal than choking them and breaking their neck, if you start digging into the details of what is, in a literal sense, going on when Drake does that in gameplay. Truthfully, they are both quite brutal. We're just dismissing the violence of one of them because of habit.

 

[Spring-Loaded]

I enjoyed my first playthrough more than my second so far because all the story beats, scenery and dialogue were fresh. Replaying puzzles and long climbing segments once I know where to go and what to do is pretty dull. As good as the game looks, the visual design of the puzzles isn't enough to be fun to watch over and over, and the puzzles aren't any different each time, so ...

The exploratory chapters were actually great the first time through, but I didn't come remotely close to exhaustively poring over them. Upon replay, but how void hey we're of any reward (either tangible or just a satisfaction)became more evident. Even chapter 10's traversal/exploration — which was actually consistently great — just seemed to feel incomplete or incongruously shallow at certain points. Like, it's genuinely cool finding a well and then

Spoiler

figuring out you have to use the winch to make a path down below was great,

but all you get is a random treasure with no description, no real lore, and no affect on your current game. And the only hidden weapons are two-shot flintlocks. All the little side areas end that way, and don't feel like they loop back into the game in a substantial way, or contribute to something greater. Like it's merely proof of concept for a future game.

Had all the exploration been like chapter 10 and had some nicer incentive, it would've been much better overall, certainly better upon replay. The shallowness isn't inherently bad, but the promise and tease of something more is what hurts for me.

 

[Earthanoid]

I'm doing my second playthrough and I'm actually enjoying it more this time, precisely because I know where to go. It makes the climbing segments go by really quickly and it's moving me to the action sequences faster. I think the first playthrough I spent too much time checking every nook and cranny during the climbing sequences so it felt like there was more climbing than there actually was. Scotland really felt perfect in terms of the mix of climbing vs. action the second time around.

As for the ending, there seems to be a subset of GAF that always wants someone to die and thinks that's the best or only way to put emotional weight behind a game or movie. This seems to be a common argument in a lot of OTs for movies (especially Marvel movies) and games.