Support NeoGAF

[SerTapTap]

I agree. I'd prefer to use something like "exploration" or something that tries to look beyond the base mechanic of walking.

Regardless, Uncharted 4 doesn't fit the label, not even remotely.

Well "Uncharted 4 is an exploration game" sounds reasonable enough on the surface.

Personally I can't really consider a game where I died dozens of times (mostly because of my refusal to shoot my way through stealthable sections honestly) and killed 1000 people to be in the same vein as Everybody's Gone to the Rapture though. There's room to discuss the merits of the non-violent sections but Uncharted isn't nearly the "no-interaction" game some people like to paint it as. (and IMO, interaction is still critical to "walking sims", there's a reason they're not movies. But Uncharted isn't a great example to make this argument in regards to since it has so much obvious gameplay)

 

[Scientist Supreme!]

Sad how many gamers reject articles like this. I found the article explained why I never really clicked with it.

 

[KratosEnergyDrink]

Uncharted 4 is a blockbuster game and does not pretend to be challenging or clever. It's an event like a Transformer movie.

Nothing wrong with relaxing and looking at beautiful explosions.

 

[wiibomb]

This is a very strange criticism to levy IMO. Most NES games, platformers, shoot 'em ups etc, very much "gamey" games, follow all of these points. Linear, no level up systems or craftable gear. That really has nothing to do with "not being good at being a game".

Has Open World ruined us so much that we don't see things as games without pseudo-open endedness and progress bars?

we are not in the NES era, we are in an era where we have a kind of progression and most games make that very clear. If I play a New Super Mario Bros, I have multiple option in those games, I mean, I can go ahead and take an alternate path, I can go ahead and collect coins that will also let me go to new levels or even new world, hell! I could go make shortcuts to certain areas in a world, hidden levels or gameplay mechanics that can give me a gameplay progression, something that makes the gameplay meaningful for more that a single segment, something that I can see different the more I play the game.

one good way I could say all this is: in Uncharted, playing a end-game level plays exactly the same as playing a starting-game level. The only thing that changes are the enemies, but you will be doing the same thing than what you did in the beginning, not much would be changing except enemies. Add to that the fact that you have gone the same exact path as every other player and that doesn't look nice to me progression-wise.

Open World has nothing to do with this, one good example of a linear game that makes a nice gameplay progression for me would be Quantum Break, because you need to manage you powers while going on and advancing with you adventure, making more options for everything one does.

Can you give some examples of games which don't follow what you say here? Specifically re puzzles.

Also, try playing on Hard or Crushing. Ups the combat ante a lot and makes it infinitely more compelling in Uncharted 2 and 4 (if you're into challenging/strategic gameplay).

Dark Souls

Spoiler

it might be a very unfair comparison, though.

may be another one, Quantum Break, a much more linear game that can be well compared to Uncharted.

----

I could play on hard yeah, but that isn't really my main concern, I would really like a gameplay progression to the whole game, not playing the same thing all the time

 

[ViewtifulJC]

You are 100% correct.

In that sense Half-Life 1 is truly what started this.

I've been saying this for years. Half life 1 is the origin for the cinematic action game, ever since it opened up with a tram ride with opening credits. You can draw a direct line from its style of game desig right through to uncharted 4

 

[orthodoxy1095]

Well "Uncharted 4 is an exploration game" sounds reasonable enough on the surface.

Personally I can't really consider a game where I died dozens of times (mostly because of my refusal to shoot my way through stealthable sections honestly) and killed 1000 people to be in the same vein as Everybody's Gone to the Rapture though. There's room to discuss the merits of the non-violent sections but Uncharted isn't nearly the "no-interaction" game some people like to paint it as. (and IMO, interaction is still critical to "walking sims", there's a reason they're not movies. But Uncharted isn't a great example to make this argument in regards to since it has so much obvious gameplay)

Agreed all around.

 

[Ricky Ricardo]

Your post was a mini outburst about something that isn't really true though. Uncharted 4 is privy to criticism, as the OT, numerous impressions threads and even this thread prove. The only alternative conclusion is that you're randomly having a go at a very small group of people who exist with every medium or major product or game, but don't necessarily even pertain to this actual thread or the OP. I just don't get the context or relevance of the post.

You continue to act as if hardcore Uncharted fans have not behaved unseemly in the past. There have now been waves of bans based on the meta-game of "no melt-downs here, just persecution from haters" mentality, the review thread was closed by folks losing their minds over the WP's 4/10 review, and now this thread has become a graveyard, especially in the first half.

Can you point to a recent game where the fanbase on this forum has behaved this way in recent times? Where were the mass bans for Quantum Break? Halo 5? Fallout 4? Black Ops 3? Street Fighter V? The Division? There continues to be this willful ignorance with the "well, fanboys will be fanboys" argument, that pretends as if Uncharted fans do not have a storied history here on NeoGAF.

 

[Rathorial]

While the article isn't that well informed, it does have a point. I distinctly remember Lemerchand noting the influence of The Graveyard, and that game would easily be called a walking simulator or art installation.

Really though, the environmental storytelling of walking simulators is taken largely from Looking Glass/Irrational Games design in early titles like Thief or System Shock 2...just gutted of combat, steath and other systems...except Uncharted still has combat.

"Can you imagine if Halo or Doom spent approximately 40 per cent of their running time trying to tell a story or mixing up their core mechanics with lightweight platforming or puzzle elements? Chances are it wouldn't be good.

Yet Naughty Dog went for it. And what a risk that was!"

That quote is my favorite, because it seems to forget the differences between shooters and action/adventure titles. Games like Sony's own God of War intentionally built the same rhythm where a combat encounter would end, and you'd cool off with limited platforming, puzzles, and down-time story delivery. Only difference is you played always mad Kratos, and it didn't tell much story through environment interaction. It still wasn't uncommon for action/adventure games to have that mix of puzzle and platform to balance out combat.

Naughty Dog didn't take a risk, they just injected more environmental storytelling into their downtime. Bioshock did the same thing, except it (and walking simulators) primarily told a narrative through that, while Naughty Dog still relies on cutscenes, and I'd say that's less risky if anything. Bioshock honestly paved the way for big popular games to tell stories through environment exploration.

 

[Jebusman]

Your post was a mini outburst about something that isn't really true though. Uncharted 4 is privy to criticism, as the OT, numerous impressions threads and even this thread prove. The only alternative conclusion is that you're randomly having a go at a very small group of people who exist with every medium or major product or game, but don't necessarily even pertain to this actual thread or the OP. I just don't get the context or the relevance of that post of yours.

Because I don't believe that the group is as small as you seem to want to believe, and you're willfully ignoring this. If you don't want to believe that a surprisingly large amount of GAF UC4 fans apparently aren't too keen to criticism compared to other fandoms, that's on you.

PS, quoting the OT as a place of genuine criticism is laughable. The OT is literally the place for people to go for people who love the game to continue to discuss about how much they love the game. As almost all OTs are.

PSS the actual thread being a graveyard is not exactly good proof that criticism is welcomed.

 

[potatohead]

the puzzles are always linear making them a one way solution that always leads them to only 1 possible outcome, there are no alternate paths, not alternate solutions, not alternate nothing, they are pretty much what I would expect from a first game experience of an starting gamer, nothing deep, yet entertaining for the cutscenes.

I get where you're coming from, in this space that we should have choice in videogames.

But is that the choice that Uncharted 4 is trying to go for? Does it make Uncharted 4 better if the puzzle solutions have two or three solutions rather than one?

I personally don't understand what that means to a directly narrative driven game.

Is deep the synonym of choice? I personally feel Uncharted 4 was very deep, because the characters are interesting to me, but I didn't feel like I needed more choice as far as how the game progressed or advanced.

I just find the whole thing very strange. When I play GTA, I don't have "choice" either that really determines the outcome of anything besides some reductive parts like choose the Red or Blue pill in the ending to determine who lives and dies. But does that choice really even matter for the game? Like at all? It changes nothing about the game proper really.

Yet that game is open world and supposedly lets me freely play the game as much as possible, which really just comes down to I can drive around all over the place.

But does GTA provide "choice" more than Uncharted? Is GTA a walking and driving arcade simulator between its own combat scenarios? I think it's possible to argue that.

While the article isn't that well informed, it does have a point. I distinctly remember Lemerchand noting the influence of The Graveyard, and that game would easily be called a walking simulator or art installation.

Really though, the environmental storytelling of walking simulators is taken largely from Looking Glass/Irrational Games design in early titles like Thief or System Shock 2...just gutted of combat, steath and other systems...except Uncharted still has combat.

"Can you imagine if Halo or Doom spent approximately 40 per cent of their running time trying to tell a story or mixing up their core mechanics with lightweight platforming or puzzle elements? Chances are it wouldn't be good.

Yet Naughty Dog went for it. And what a risk that was!"

That quote is my favorite, because it seems to forget the differences between shooters and action/adventure titles. Games like Sony's own God of War intentionally built the same rhythm where a combat encounter would end, and you'd cool off with limited platforming, puzzles, and down-time story delivery. Only difference is you played always mad Kratos, and the storyt wasn't told through the environment much. It still wasn't uncommon for action/adventure games to have that mix of puzzle and platform to balance out combat.

Naughty Dog didn't take a risk, they just injected more environmental storytelling into their downtime. Bioshock did the same thing, except it (and walking simulators) primarily told a narrative through that, while Naughty Dog still relies on cutscenes, and I'd say that's less risky if anything.

I agree, I think this is the purpose for many of the puzzles and "block puzzles" in Uncharted as a series, and Uncharted 4 as well. It's not really the puzzles, especially when it's a block puzzle. It's mainly to just drop the pace a few notches for a bit and let the characters deliver some dialogue or character building aspect.

The main reason, especially in 4, is not really for loading screens, or really anything else. It's mainly to highlight some conversations or character interactions while leaving the player on the stick to choose to enter or not enter conversations and stuff like that, and simply let the characters act and speak so the player can see the relationship building first-hand outside of just the cutscenes.

I personally like that design decision, but to each his own.

 

[MK_768]

People should just read the article instead of letting the OP's seemingly butthurt bias form their opinion for them.

 

[Nheco]

Why so many people banned in this thread?

 

[nib95]

You continue to act as if hardcore Uncharted fans have not behaved unseemly in the past. There have now been waves of bans based on the meta-game of "no melt-downs here, just persecution from haters" mentality, the review thread was closed by folks losing their minds over the WP's 4/10 review, and now this thread has become a graveyard, especially in the first half.

Can you point to a recent game where the fanbase on this forum has behaved this way in recent times? Where were the mass bans for Quantum Break? Halo 5? Fallout 4? Black Ops 3? Street Fighter V? The Division? There continues to be this willful ignorance with the "well, fanboys will be fanboys" argument, that pretends as if Uncharted fans do not have a storied history here on NeoGAF.

There weren't mass bannings for QB, but were the same sort of response that QB garnered elicited with UC4 instead, I think there likely would have been. I think it's just a case of mods being more vigilant with UC4 because it's a bigger franchise with a larger fan base, but what I witnessed in the QB review threads was in some ways worse, with dozens of people personally insulting Jeff and Angry Joe for their reviews, or making similar click and character based assumptions and so on.

Also, as I've said before, I think the more acclaimed or revered a game or franchise is, naturally the more of a fan base it's likely to have. Exclusives of course more so because you have people aligned to the platform itself, and others opposed to it, which only heightens discourse.

 

[Ploid 3.0]

Wow the banns on the first page. /panics

I really like what ND did with their story telling however. As you're exploring and moving around, the characters talking and such keeps the game going even during what could be a cutscene, like Half Life 2 without being locked in a room stacking books and chairs.

 

[Ninja Scooter]

This is a very strange criticism to levy IMO. Most NES games, platformers, shoot 'em ups etc, very much "gamey" games, follow all of these points. Linear, no level up systems or craftable gear. That really has nothing to do with "not being good at being a game".

Has Open World ruined us so much that we don't see things as games without pseudo-open endedness and progress bars?



I wouldn't mind losing the walking sim label TBH, though I enjoy most games in the 'genre". "exploration game" seems to be the less-pejorative (but less popular) label FWIW.

The challenge in those older games (the good ones at least) though came from the twitchy action that tested your reflexes. It's not about leveling up or open world. Uncharted doesn't have much of this kind of challenge, and for me, that's perfectly okay, as I said earlier I feel like it had its place, but there isn't a ton of different ways to play UC from person to person. Like, would anyone ever say "man I'm so good at playing Uncharted!"?

 

[DistortionOfReality]

Oh my it's a grey graveyard in this thread.

I appreciate what point the article is trying to get across, but to be honest there is plenty of player involved action throughout all the games (mostly relegated to 3rd person shooting, per the article, but it still accounts for a large amount of playtime)

 

[martino]

This kind of article was expected because they try to sell hype on open areas and large sand box promoting the game(or it was easy to be mislead into it)....in the end they didn't bring it .The formula is exactly the same (except madagascar and it's arguable).
The biggest add in this opus is ac3 hide and seek gameplay with the same flaws : Enemy right behind you not seing you.(i really fell like playing connor in thoses situation) .
But it stays a great game (like other uncharted)
Gameplay is not bad but imo it's not and was never something strong in uncharted (or most ND games)

And the biggest add is nathan is nearly never alone ...he seems less schizophrenic that way

 

[LiK]

Why so many people banned in this thread?

not having a meaningful discussion of the actual article is my guess.

 

[wiibomb]

I get where you're coming from, in this space that we should have choice in videogames.

But is that the choice that Uncharted 4 is trying to go for? Does it make Uncharted 4 better if the puzzle solutions have two or three solutions rather than one?

I personally don't understand what that means to a directly narrative driven game.

Is deep the synonym of choice? I personally feel Uncharted 4 was very deep, because the characters are interesting to me, but I didn't feel like I needed more choice as far as how the game progressed or advanced.

I just find the whole thing very strange. When I play GTA, I don't have "choice" either that really determines the outcome of anything besides some reductive parts like choose the Red or Blue pill in the ending to determine who lives and dies. But does that choice really even matter for the game? Like at all? It changes nothing about the game proper really.

Yet that game is open world and supposedly lets me freely play the game as much as possible, which really just comes down to I can drive around all over the place.

But does GTA provide "choice" more than Uncharted? Is GTA a walking and driving arcade simulator between its own combat scenarios? I think it's possible to argue that.

yeah, I get you, this is why I tried to mention just the gameplay, I find the narrating fascinating, but in that case in my very personal opinion, I would rather just see the cutscenes than dealing with the puzzles.

I would find them a lot more interesting if you could find different paths, alternate ways to solve a single pluzzle, some kind of choice or reward for progressing in the game, for making the player better at something while playing the game. it might be difficult to point, it could be similar to a leveling system, but that isn't what I mean at all.

also, I wouldn't like to compare Uncharted to GTA, they are wildly different and make things their own different ways.

 

[Hugstable]

Why so many people banned in this thread?

Probably because of the huge wave of people that were reacting terribly without obviously reading the article

 

[Chabbles]

Oof.

Thread is becoming a graveyard.

The Walking Dead.

 

[Jack The Nipper]

I'm going to have to disagree with you here. In-fact I think what made Uncharted 2, and the franchise so revolutionary or ground breaking at the time, was the interactivity within those set piece moments, which most games would generally relegate to being cutscenes prior to it. Things like having a gunfight inside a collapsing building, or within a capsizing cruise ship during a violent storm, or an aeroplane that blows up mid flight and crashes in a desert, a train that passes through an entire region seamlessly, and ends up in the Himalaya's following a helicopter fight and then a massive vehicular chase and combat sequence, where you can actually hop to and from different jeeps, trucks etc, mid chase and mid combat etc.

Whilst these set pieces are of course still linear in nature, which I think they have to be mechanically in order to have the same impact, the whole selling point of them is that they offer interactivity to moments that would otherwise be too bombastic or outrageous to typically involve gameplay.

I don't mind the set pieces, train wrecks etc what I hate is crash, then start my climb on the crashed train then.... they go and do things that they don't need to create a cut scene or prime example

https://youtu.be/5ZIUznmch9M?t=379

im not upset at the train crash cut scene or the whole convo just before but

1. Move left- ok pause and little scene
2. climb up a little, shake and oh another forced little scene (ok nd, you got me... just let me play ok )
3. ok, rocks and stuff ha's fine... just don't take me out of the gameplay oh, pipe breaks another scene, swings me over (well, cliche almost death sequences how many can we have nd)

At this point I'm just annoyed with the game design and this was my first play through

4. climb up, boom another cut scene flipping out of the train sigh.... at this point probably picking up pizza or something

5. oh ffs, another pipe breaking and cut scene... wtf is with this so tired of it

6. get up to the train, oh boy another cut scene to let me fall and squat

7. run jump off the train into a cut scene, atleast its damn over which im just thrilled about

That was my first play through experience and why I dont care to replay it.

Not to mention you have to do this twice in the game.

These parts and little cut scenes are all over the game in certain parts and all I am saying, LET me play it and you can still have a lot of that stuff happen in real time with more control, that's all.

Now, I'm not even saying UC4 does it that badly, but I do worry they have those little moments. I can't say why it annoys me in this game so much and while others I can handle it a lot more, maybe because they just over do it needlessly. They really over do it as if someone has a job just to do this little stuff everywhere in the game.

It's tedious and I'd rather have it more like Prince of Persia or the old raiers where you just get through your climbs, jumps. I think they are talented enough to have physics based breaks and give you control the whole time. That would be really cool and fun/skillful actually


These complaints and issues are a lot easier to talk about when we are in person and are able to conduct an actual conversation on the actual events though, I admit. And I do realize they are taking about UC4 and I havent played it... I just have hope they toned this stuff down. The phsyics stuff in the gameplay I have seen is fantastic and I wont mind walking around and talking, won't mind that much at all actually.

 

[Lord of Ostia]

Oh my it's a grey graveyard in this thread.

I appreciate what point the article is trying to get across, but to be honest there is plenty of player involved action throughout all the games (mostly relegated to 3rd person shooting, per the article, but it still accounts for a large amount of playtime)

Seriously, look at the first page is like looking at a battlefield
That said, I do think the article is an interesting critique, especially since Uncharted 4 seems more open and less scripted in many areas than the previous games. Of course, that's not true of the entire game, and some parts are definitely more linear than others.

 

[Htown]

This seems like one of those cases where if we're going to just be careless with slapping the term "walking sim" on games, the term will lose any meaning. You can critique Uncharted for being too linear, too easy, too cinematic, too lacking in player input, but that's not what makes a walking sim.

Spoiler

Death to genre labels tho.

did... did you read the article?

 

[Tizoc]

I am so confused about this article.

My head hurts.

Makes sense to me; said sections are so straight forward that even when in control you're not really doing much.

 

[Always-honest]

You can approach any game ever made this way. Not about it being a walking simulator ofcourse but just focusing on what could make it seem boring. Any game ever made.

And in most cases i can understand what they mean. But it never really reflects my enjoyment of the game.

 

[SerTapTap]

It's really sad that a writer is not allowed to have an opinion these days without it being lambasted as "clickbait" or "bad journalism." I don't understand how people can be so insecure about their likes and dislikes.

The thing with the "clickbait" thing is clickbait has a very specific meaning and it has fairly little to do with "bad article". Clickbait is all about meaningless headlines like "You won't BELIEVE what this man has to say about Uncharted! Number 5 will SHOCK you!" There's no way this headline would survive on Upworthy, it's too descriptive and accurate to the article.

 

[EGM1966]

well, it also talks about the lack of agency and lack of interactivity that is covered up by how well designed its downtown is. they compare it to some walking simulators by saying one scene of autoplatforming isn't much more interactive than selecting dialogue in firewatch and i kind of agree.

The article specifically asks a question. The answer is pretty much "no". That's a poor framing device. I'm mean sure if I deliberately just wander around for ten hours it would be.

All the Uncharted games have primarily featured player agency balanced with subset of slower paced sections. That is a "no" to the articles question.

It's a shame as I actually like much of the article and its points I just wish it had been properly framed, they'd avoided the click bate question title (which is what it is) and focused on what the article is actually about which is how well ND leverage periods of low interactivity to achieve better pacing, character development and balance tat with periods of high activity.

They just took an unnecessary piece of context to "grab" attention with the title which I dislike (not just gaming articles to be fair but any article that does this).

 

[nib95]

I don't mind the set pieces, train wrecks etc what I hate is crash, then start my climb on the crashed train then.... they go and do things that they don't need to create a cut scene or prime example

https://youtu.be/5ZIUznmch9M?t=379

im not upset at the train crash cut scene or the whole convo just before but

1. Move left- ok pause and little scene
2. climb up a little, shake and oh another forced little scene (ok nd, you got me... just let me play ok )
3. ok, rocks and stuff ha's fine... just don't take me out of the gameplay oh, pipe breaks another scene, swings me over (well, cliche almost death sequences how many can we have nd)

At this point I'm just annoyed with the game design and this was my first play through

4. climb up, boom another cut scene flipping out of the train sigh.... at this point probably picking up pizza or something

5. oh ffs, another pipe breaking and cut scene... wtf is with this so tired of it

6. get up to the train, oh boy another cut scene to let me fall and squat

7. run jump off the train into a cut scene, atleast its damn over which im just thrilled about

That was my first play through experience and why I dont care to replay it.

Not to mention you have to do this twice in the game.

These parts and little cut scenes are all over the game in certain parts and all I am saying, LET me play it and you can still have a lot of that stuff happen in real time with more control, that's all.

Now, I'm not even saying UC4 does it that badly, but I do worry they have those little moments. I can't say why it annoys me in this game so much and while others I can handle it a lot more, maybe because they just over do it needlessly. They really over do it as if someone has a job just to do this little stuff everywhere in the game.

It's tedious and I'd rather have it more like Prince of Persia or the old raiers where you just get through your climbs, jumps. I think they are talented enough to have physics based breaks and give you control the whole time. That would be really cool and fun/skillful actually

These complaints and issues are a lot easier to talk about when we are in person and are able to conduct an actual conversation on the actual events though, I admit.

But it's still a lot more fun, adrenaline inducing, and cinematically rewarding to actually play the character climbing up the derailed train hanging off the edge of an icy mountain, than it is simply watching it in a cutscene. Not to mention you can actually still fail at doing so if you wait long enough climbing certain parts (however unlikely), or miss time the jump at the end. That interactive insight just allows you to better immerse yourself in to the event in question, at least imo. I'm scared of heights, and that scene actually gave me a sense of vertigo. Watching it instead of playing it I doubt would have had even close to the same impact.

 

[Jack The Nipper]

But it's still a lot more fun, adrenaline inducing, and cinematically rewarding to actually play the character climbing up the derailed train hanging off the edge of an icy mountain, than it is simply watching it in a cutscene. Not to mention you can actually still fail at doing so if you wait long enough clubbing certain parts, or miss time the jump at the end. That interactive insight just allows you to better immerse yourself in to the event in question, at least imo.

But it's filled with cut scenes, that is my main point. i would probably rather just watch a cut scene of it than to be forced through that sequence as is honestly... So I would disagree a little. Atleast I can fully enojoy my drink or pizza for the inevitable next cut scene at the top of the train. Thats just my opinion though, it's just not fun to me to play that way.

 

[Stallion Dan]

I certainly thought there was too much 'down time' and not enough combat.

 

[Ansatz]

What style is that?

They're called mechanics-driven games, or alternatively arcade-y games.

Doom
Portal
Super Monkey Ball
Bayonetta
Resident Evil
Contra
Castlevania
Mega Man
Super Meat Boy
Shovel Knight

etc.

Games with tightly balanced gameplay, hand-crafted content and clever design. Like in Vanquish you have to juggle between long and short term planning because you can only upgrade weapons that are equipped and thus take up a slot, but not used, which creates interesting gameplay. For example you could use the sniper to get through a level easier, but if you avoid using it and instead go for the upgrade, that would benefit you more in the long run. It's not an obvious choice to make either, you have to think and this while 50 other thoughts are racing through your mind as you play. Good games constantly put you in positions where you have to make interesting decisions, for me games are not about experiencing the content (story, set pieces, environments), it's about the thought process that goes on in my head.

In Mega Man you decide which stage you start with, and as you play you learn more about the game and thus the next time you play the game you can make a more informed decision, because now you know which boss is doable with the default weapon. Then you learn about the different boss weaknesses and start optimizing the order of the levels you play; this is what games are about.

 

[Gurish]

I haven't played Uncharted 4 (can't stand them), but a lot of the random streams I've dipped into haven't shown combat once, which I thought was pretty unusual considering my experience with 1-3.

Then again, I wouldn't be surprised if I'd get an equally quiet result with TLoU streams, and that manages to be a fine game.

He is talking about the whole series though, and there is enough combat, platforming and puzzles in U4 alongside exploration and atmospheric moments, calling any of the games in the series a walking simulation is pretty much a joke.

 

[potatohead]

yeah, I get you, this is why I tried to mention just the gameplay, I find the narrating fascinating, but in that case in my very personal opinion, I would rather just see the cutscenes than dealing with the puzzles.

I would find them a lot more interesting if you could find different paths, alternate ways to solve a single pluzzle, some kind of choice or reward for progressing in the game, for making the player better at something while playing the game. it might be difficult to point, it could be similar to a leveling system, but that isn't what I mean at all.

also, I wouldn't like to compare Uncharted to GTA, they are wildly different and make things their own different ways.

That's fair enough.

But I do find it strange that with so many linear action games, some others that I also absolutely loved e.g. Binary Domain, don't really get flak for being linear or walking simulators.

And I love Binary Domain, even in that game (which does have a XP gain system and upgrades unlike Uncharted 4, and a nice variety of weapons similar to Uncharted).

If I recommend Binary Domain to others I wouldn't really call it a "walking simulator" even though you similarly have cutscenes and walking segments between combat scenarios (like pretty much every other action game ever made in similar vein).

I feel that would be very silly and underselling what the game does have to offer, which is a very interesting story, lovable characters, and amazing shooting gameplay.

The game is trying to be an action game with an interesting story, and I don't see what's wrong with that. Sure it can be criticized for not offering something else, but I guess Binary Domain is not uber-popular enough to have those discussions around. Hence we are talking Uncharted 4.

I feel that Uncharted 4 basically takes an action game formula, runs with it, and adds great cutscenes and character-building scenes too. And I think that's good for what they are trying to do, because I think that's exactly what they are trying to do.

I do find it only strange that a game with a set of goals that achieves those goals in an exceptional way is mostly focused on for what it doesn't do than what it does try to do and does exceptionally well.

That's kind of why I compared it to GTA. I'm not really judging GTA on whether or not those choices or open-world or whatever lend itself to being like Uncharted, because they are two different games. And I think their objective is to offer different experiences, both of which games I think achieve those objectives extremely well.

I dunno I would love to start focusing down on the merit of what games do have to offer. I find that when it comes to Uncharted generally there is much more focus on what it doesn't offer, and probably isn't trying to offer in the first place, which is not unfair, but maybe that is just a reflection of the broader demands of the gaming public which I am not always in line with....

Maybe I am just responding to the title of the article unfairly though. I'm sure it has a point, but the point is lost on me if only that I prefer to judge a game on its own merits rather than on a universal check-list of what I feel all games should aspire to.

I want games to be different and offer their own style and unique things, and I think that will become too hard in a gaming culture that celebrates homogenizing of game design decisions too much (e.g. Uncharted 4 needs to be even more open-world or needs to have multiple pathways or needs to have multiple puzzle solutions or needs to have a XP driven progression system). In spite of what failures it may provide Uncharted 4 with, I think I am happier it is the way it is.

Much like I preferred MGS2 or MGS3 exactly the way they are despite all the failings of too many cutscenes or isometric gameplay or silly shooting mechanics... (how many buttons do I have to press to aim?!!?! I love that gameplay, personally).

I want them to offer something unique that can hit those notes you don't think are possible in games, otherwise how can we fall in love with games if they fail to be eccentric? Surely we are not all the average gamer. Love for games needs eccentricity and uniqueness, not homogeny, just IMO.

 

[Jebusman]

But it's still a lot more fun, adrenaline inducing, and cinematically rewarding to actually play the character climbing up the derailed train hanging off the edge of an icy mountain, than it is simply watching it in a cutscene. Not to mention you can actually still fail at doing so if you wait long enough clubbing certain parts, or miss time the jump at the end. That interactive insight just allows you to better immerse yourself in to the event in question, at least imo. I'm scared of heights, and that scene actually gave me a sense of vertigo. Watching it instead of playing it I doubt would have had even close to the same impact.

But that's not actually his point. Saying that the game operates at a functional level slightly above "interactive cutscene" is a weak defense for "I'm tired of the game being interactive cutscenes".

He doesn't want to remove the "interactive" part. He wants to remove the "cutscene" part. No one is arguing that these should, or HAVE to be entirely cutscenes.

This is the problem. You are actually saying that Naughty Dog should be praised that they took a cutscene and added some interactivity to it. You're looking at it from a "Game is entirely cutscenes and then we added gameplay" perspective. We're looking at it from a "Game was entire gameplay then they replaced it with cutscenes". We "lost" player agency in the Uncharted franchise.

 

[Jack The Nipper]

I certainly thought there was too much 'down time' and not enough combat.

I'll be fine with that as long as the things I said above are more out.

 

[nib95]

But it's filled with cut scenes, that is my main point. i would probably rather just watch a cut scene of it than to be forced through that sequence as is honestly... So I would disagree a little. Atleast I can fully enojoy my drink or pizza for the inevitable next cut scene at the top of the train. Thats just my opinion though, it's just not fun to me to play that way.

Why do you think it's interrupted with cutscenes? It's by design, so the player can actually digest Drake's reactions, comments, close up actions etc. As much as the set piece is interactive, it still serves a side narrative and character purpose, which is why the cutscenes exist. If if didn't interject with them, players might be facing a completely different direction with their camera, or miss the character or narrative exposition altogether. This is why these interactive set piece moments are still very much linear and directed. They have to be really, otherwise they simply wouldn't work.

But that's not actually his point. Saying that the game operates at a functional level slightly above "interactive cutscene" is a weak defense for "I'm tired of the game being interactive cutscenes".

He doesn't want to remove the "interactive" part. He wants to remove the "cutscene" part. No one is arguing that these should, or HAVE to be entirely cutscenes.

This is the problem. You are actually saying that Naughty Dog should be praised that they took a cutscene and added some interactivity to it. You're looking at it from a "Game is entirely cutscenes and then we added gameplay" perspective. We're looking at it from a "Game was entire gameplay then they replaced it with cutscenes". We "lost" player agency in the Uncharted franchise.

See my post above.

 

[potatohead]

But that's not actually his point. Saying that the game operates at a functional level slightly above "interactive cutscene" is a weak defense for "I'm tired of the game being interactive cutscenes".

He doesn't want to remove the "interactive" part. He wants to remove the "cutscene" part. No one is arguing that these should, or HAVE to be entirely cutscenes.

This is the problem. You are actually saying that Naughty Dog should be praised that they took a cutscene and added some interactivity to it. You're looking at it from a "Game is entirely cutscenes and then we added gameplay" perspective. We're looking at it from a "Game was entire gameplay then they replaced it with cutscenes". We "lost" player agency in the Uncharted franchise.

I don't understand this perspective. I don't think there was ever a time when Uncharted did provide player agency?

You play the game, but you never have "agency" at least in the way I understand it. I don't see what's really wrong with that either though.

I think I don't understand truly when people use the word "player agency" because I think it means something completely different to what most people use the term as. Most games IMO do not provide any real form of player agency outside the raw gameplay mechanics of "choosing" exactly how to approach a gameplay scenario.

But agency outside of that is beyond rare in videogames, and I personally think overrated, but that's just me.

 

[Jack The Nipper]

Why do you think it's interrupted with cutscenes? It's by design, so the player can actually digest Drake's reactions, comments, close up actions etc. As much as the set piece is interactive, it still serves a side narrative and character purpose, which is why the cutscenes exist. If if didn't interject with them, players might be facing a completely different direction with their camera, or miss the character or narrative exposition altogether.

drake actually sounds annoyed too that's sort of the funny part about it, I agreed with him and wanted to drop him off the train

I think you miss the key point, you can have most of those things while always being in control of it, many games have falling rocks with similar situations and actions that don't stop your movement. I can climb to the pipe and it breaks and have a choice to jump to another section or go up and down the current piece, just don't want it the way they had been doing it through out the whole game.

is there no reason to make it better? can you imagine the physics out of motorstorm and specific wrecks and cut scenes while racing? I know that's a far fetched example but that's what makes the racing so fun are the physics and skill require from the player. I want more of that in my bodies, not too much to ask for is it

 

[potatohead]

drake actually sounds annoyed too that's sort of the funny part about it, I agreed with him and wanted to drop him off the train

I think you miss the key point, you can have most of those things while always being in control of it, many games have falling rocks with similar situations and actions that don't stop your movement. I can climb to the pipe and it breaks and have a choice to jump to another section or go up and down the current piece, just don't want it the way they had been doing it through out the whole game.

is there no reason to make it better? can you imagine the physics out of motorstorm and specific wrecks and cut scenes while racing? I know that's a far fetched example but that's what makes the racing so fun are the physics and skill require from the player. I want more of that in my bodies, not too much to ask for is it

Is it better or just different?

It's still going from point A to point B.

Does this really change fundamentally what the game offers? I don't really know about that.

 

[ANDS]

nope or else they wouldn't be so offended for no reason.

also OP's title for this thread is basically made up and is setting a negative tone even though the article is praising Uncharted.

I did and it's still a click bait premise even if they are (in their own way) complimenting the game.

 

[OléGunner]

Sad how many gamers reject articles like this. I found the article explained why I never really clicked with it.

Funnily enough this article generally praises the more calm, walk around exploration bits.

Title is just misleading at a glance.

 

[Jebusman]

Why do you think it's interrupted with cutscenes? It's by design, so the player can actually digest Drake's reactions, comments, close up actions etc. As much as the set piece is interactive, it still serves a side narrative and character purpose, which is why the cutscenes exist. If if didn't interject with them, players might be facing a completely different direction with their camera, or miss the character or narrative exposition altogether. This is why these interactive set piece moments are still very much linear and directed. They have to be really, otherwise they simply wouldn't work.

See my post above.

So maybe walking simulator was a bad title, and they should've gone with "Is Uncharted more of an interactive movie than an action game?" I still wouldn't even consider it a slight, more just a statement about what Uncharted's design goal is. Present the player with a very carefully scripted and linear experience in which they are interrupted by moments or sections of having to play a video game.

I guess I'll hear some semantic arguments about how all video games are just interactive movies and we'll go around the circle again.

I think Uncharted is a well designed game. I think they've done amazing character building, personalities, writing, it's good. But Naughty Dog being praised for the previously unthinkable idea of "make this video game not a video game at times" seems misplaced. The sequence Jack the Nipper described would fit perfectly in a game of nothing but QTEs. Uncharted just decided to pretty them up a bit more.

 

[XxRampage07xX]

Reading the article at the moment and it seems like they enjoyed the "walking simulator" more than many people in here are assuming. Well it couldn't help since the title is clickbaity af.

 

[ironcreed]

I certainly thought there was too much 'down time' and not enough combat.

I kind of like the pacing with all of the banter and platforming to get from place to place. It fits the storytelling and gives the game more balance vs just going from shootout to shootout. That is kind of how Naughty Dog makes their games and I appreciate that beings they are so story heavy and gorgeous, with lots I am sure they want you to stop and look at.

 

[wiibomb]

That's fair enough.

But I do find it strange that with so many linear action games, some others that I also absolutely loved e.g. Binary Domain, don't really get flak for being linear or walking simulators.

And I love Binary Domain, even in that game (which does have a XP gain system and upgrades unlike Uncharted 4, and a nice variety of weapons similar to Uncharted).

If I recommend Binary Domain to others I wouldn't really call it a "walking simulator" even though you similarly have cutscenes and walking segments between combat scenarios (like pretty much every other action game ever made in similar vein).

I feel that would be very silly and underselling what the game does have to offer, which is a very interesting story, lovable characters, and amazing shooting gameplay.

The game is trying to be an action game with an interesting story, and I don't see what's wrong with that. Sure it can be criticized for not offering something else, but I guess Binary Domain is not uber-popular enough to have those discussions around. Hence we are talking Uncharted 4.

I feel that Uncharted 4 basically takes an action game formula, runs with it, and adds great cutscenes and character-building scenes too. And I think that's good for what they are trying to do, because I think that's exactly what they are trying to do.

I do find it only strange that a game with a set of goals that achieves those goals in an exceptional way is mostly focused on for what it doesn't do than what it does try to do and does exceptionally well.

That's kind of why I compared it to GTA. I'm not really judging GTA on whether or not those choices or open-world or whatever lend itself to being like Uncharted, because they are two different games. And I think their objective is to offer different experiences, both of which games I think achieve those objectives extremely well.

I dunno I would love to start focusing down on the merit of what games do have to offer. I find that when it comes to Uncharted generally there is much more focus on what it doesn't offer, and probably isn't trying to offer in the first place, which is not unfair, but maybe that is just a reflection of the broader demands of the gaming public which I am not always in line with....

Maybe I am just responding to the title of the article unfairly though. I'm sure it has a point, but the point is lost on me if only that I prefer to judge a game on its own merits rather than on a universal check-list of what I feel all games should aspire to.

I want games to be different and offer their own style and unique things, and I think that will become too hard in a gaming culture that celebrates homogenizing of game design decisions too much (e.g. Uncharted 4 needs to be even more open-world or needs to have multiple pathways or needs to have multiple puzzle solutions or needs to have a XP driven progression system). In spite of what failures it may provide Uncharted 4 with, I think I am happier it is the way it is.

Much like I preferred MGS2 or MGS3 exactly the way they are despite all the failings of too many cutscenes or isometric gameplay or silly shooting mechanics... (how many buttons do I have to press to aim?!!?! I love that gameplay, personally).

I want them to offer something unique that can hit those notes you don't think are possible in games, otherwise how can we fall in love with games if they fail to be eccentric? Surely we are not all the average gamer. Love for games needs eccentricity and uniqueness, not homogeny, just IMO.

sure, I agree with that, Uncharted has its own merits as a narrating piece and that is still fascinating to me, the cutscenes make meaningful story progression and the character progression is amazing.

I was just trying to address the point made in the article, which while was very well written, it still had a kind of ill-mannered purpose and a very click-baity title.

so, all in all, I appreciate uncharted more as a cutscene story narration that I do as a game, and that's good, I just think that is not as good for me in this case, nothing wrong with others liking it, I see their appeal

 

[nib95]

drake actually sounds annoyed too that's sort of the funny part about it, I agreed with him and wanted to drop him off the train

I think you miss the key point, you can have most of those things while always being in control of it, many games have falling rocks with similar situations and actions that don't stop your movement. I can climb to the pipe and it breaks and have a choice to jump to another section or go up and down the current piece, just don't want it the way they had been doing it through out the whole game.

is there no reason to make it better? can you imagine the physics out of motorstorm and specific wrecks and cut scenes while racing? I know that's a far fetched example but that's what makes the racing so fun are the physics and skill require from the player. I want more of that in my bodies, not too much to ask for is it

I think what you're asking for would actually diminish the quality of the characters, narrative and funnily enough, reduce player agency. If I don't ever see that close up, the pain, suffering, commentary, jokes, quips, emotion etc. I'm not really going to engage with the character or empathise with him or her in the same way. And unlike the game developer, I don't really know when Drake is about to say or do something integral to the scene, his character or to the story, and I don't want to be rushing to spin my camera madly just to see his expression and hear what he had to say or do in that random moment and time. That's why cutscenes are still integral to games such as these, games that are very story and character driven, and the Uncharted franchise in particular, very successful in that area.

 

[tinfoilhatman]

I wish The Last of us and Uncharted came without combat. They'd be the greatest exploration games ever

I have no issue with this what so ever........why does everything have to be "hard core" to be good?

 

[eerik9000]

I thought it was a mass murder simulator?

 

[entremet]

This seems like one of those cases where if we're going to just be careless with slapping the term "walking sim" on games, the term will lose any meaning. You can critique Uncharted for being too linear, too easy, too cinematic, too lacking in player input, but that's not what makes a walking sim.

Spoiler

Death to genre labels tho.

It's not a critique at all. The article that is. The author is just making observations of game design from a positive point of view--he likes the game.

From the article:

And, quite frankly, that's usually the case for downtime in action games. I shudder to think of how many times I've encountered a banal narrative-heavy sequence in a game where no one actually gives a toss about that side of the equation. Can you imagine if Halo or Doom spent approximately 40 per cent of their running time trying to tell a story or mixing up their core mechanics with lightweight platforming or puzzle elements? Chances are it wouldn't be good.

Yet Naughty Dog went for it. And what a risk that was! This was before Journey and The Stanley Parable had proved to the world that these sort of mechanics-lite deviations had market value, mind you. If people had found Uncharted 2's non-shooty bits boring it would have destroyed their enthusiasm for the game. Critics and players alike could have hated it. It could have killed the franchise. Maybe even ruined Naughty Dog.

....

And yet it's never boring. The jokes land. The story beats are appropriately moving. The dialogue sings. And it all looks glorious thanks to some of the best art direction and tech wizardry in the business.

In a world that's already seen the likes of Everybody's Gone to the Rapture, 30 Flights of Loving and Dear Esther, such bold pacing practices aren't quite as shocking as they were back in 2009. Yet Uncharted 4, for all its bombast, often feels more akin to those games than any of its big budget contemporaries