[PS3] Uncharted 2

[Shifty Geezer]

Dunno about chat. People don't have headsets as standard unlike Live! I have a headset but tend not to use it unless I'm playing with someone I know. Though I did turn it playing Elliminator because when dead, you can choose cameras and give advice to your remaining teammates. Managed to direct one guy to the enemy to win the round. It doesn't help that in Europe, lots of the chat is multilingual, so even with headsets you can't understand each other. Hence it's not worth bothering with. And another point, perhaps like me lots tried chat in the early days but the imlementation was so rubbish it rendered it useless and we stopped trying? Warhawk was a garbled mess, so the game we bought chat for discredited it. U2's is perfect, making it worth trying, but if people are already conditioned against it, it'll be a hard sell.

Better to launch late with a working system than early with a broken one...

 

[Laa-Yosh]

Originally Posted by Laa-Yosh
Turning UC into an open world game, however, would require a complete overhaul of many of the game design principles. More intelligent enemies, more freedom in the equipment and ammo management, less cinematic events...

I don't think any of these are necessary. GTA games are heavy with cinematic events, they just push them to the point of parody (particular GTA:SA). Crackdown had about the same degree of freedom equipment-wise and it was more than enough. As for intelligent enemies... well, it'd be nice but most of the games in the genre overwhelm you with numbers anyway (though until recently they'd also overwhelm you with terrible controls).

What I've meant is like this:

Cinematic events: stuff like getting out of a collapsing building, fighting on a train, sequences where you need to have more control over the player's position and actions, so things that are not a storytelling cinematic. In a completely open world it's harder to direct someone and make sure he gets into situations as you've imagined it. Can be done though, by placing linear subsections into the environment, but takes extra effort to hide the smoke and mirrors.

Freedom with equipment: ability to purchase your own preferred weaponry and stuff, at almost any time in the game. Right now the designers can control the type of weapon you can use for certain encounters, you have to scavenge enemies for ammo and the type and amount of such supplies is controlled as well, and so on. Here we give you plenty of sniper ammo, but now we close up the section you've just left so you can't go back for more etc. etc. This allows the designers more control over the various encounters as they can rule out certain tactics and approaches.
But what if you can take an RPG into any part of the game and get through a semi-boss fight with no effort? Just as in AC2, where once they grant you throwing knives, the gun, poison etc. they have to keep in mind that these can be used in any mission from then on.

Intelligent enemies: once you can freely move around in a 3D environment, you'll expect enemies to be able to do the same. Follow you, navigate any type of terrain or obstacle, and remain to be able to find cover and flank you and so on. Not to mention being able to detect you wherever you're coming from. It's more complicated then encounters with a limited scope.

So all of these changes are obviously possible; but some will take new engine features, some will take more conceptual design work, more level building and playtesting, and so on. And it's important to seriously consider if these additions do really enhance the gameplay experience, are they worth the extra effort...

 

[Billy Idol]

Why would you guys trurn UC into an open world game?? I think you guys did not get what ND tries to achieve with the UC franchise!

If we consider an eventuel Jack&Daxter game, that is a compelte different story...

 

[Laa-Yosh]

I didn't say they should do it, I've just listed some thoughts about what it would mean should ND decide to go in this direction

But if we're at it, what do people want UC3 to be? More of the same in 2011 - a bigger, prettier, more intense ride on the roller coaster? Or something completely new on the PS4 as a launch game?
The core values of the franchise are clearly those that are derived from the 'action-adventure movie' theme. An open world approach is probably not in line with that, but what else can be done to improve the game?
And another interesting issue is that somehow the game is just not selling as well as it should... It deserves about 4-5 million IMHO; but then again God of War is highly regarded as well and did not move that many units either. But both are making enough money so maybe they shouldn't try to change them just to appeal to a wider audience.

 

[Cornsnake]

Has there been an official, or at least somewhat reliable, sales figure? It thought it was doing very well. But that's more based on the attention it's been getting on forums and gamesites.

Edit: I did some searching. The first month sales of october were very good, but there was a huge drop in sales in november. So far it has sold over a million copies, but that's a figure from early november.

I wouldn't mind UC3 being a bit more open and less scripted, more like the second half of UC2. And something new gameplay wise for the SP that hasn't been done in UC, but fits well with the rest of the game. A few clever puzzles would also be nice.

 

[obonicus]

Cinematic events: stuff like getting out of a collapsing building, fighting on a train, sequences where you need to have more control over the player's position and actions, so things that are not a storytelling cinematic. In a completely open world it's harder to direct someone and make sure he gets into situations as you've imagined it. Can be done though, by placing linear subsections into the environment, but takes extra effort to hide the smoke and mirrors.

But that's something almost all open world games do, with their missions. Crackdown is possibly the only counter-example I can think of. Even Prototype, which gave you significantly more freedom than say, GTA4 had you fighting inside closed arenas, with a linear progression to things.

Freedom with equipment: ability to purchase your own preferred weaponry and stuff, at almost any time in the game. Right now the designers can control the type of weapon you can use for certain encounters, you have to scavenge enemies for ammo and the type and amount of such supplies is controlled as well, and so on. Here we give you plenty of sniper ammo, but now we close up the section you've just left so you can't go back for more etc. etc. This allows the designers more control over the various encounters as they can rule out certain tactics and approaches.

Via 'tweaks' you can already adjust the loadout you have. I just played through the

Spoiler

village tank section with the infinite ammo tweak on -- you can destroy the tank (and end the level) from the very first RPG you get

. And again, even GTA games will make sure you have a suitable weapon when they present you with an encounter, even though you can buy whatever weapon you want between missions. They can either work with ammo 'types' (AK and M4 share the same ammo) or just make you switch weapons if the weapon you prefer doesn't pop up.

But what if you can take an RPG into any part of the game and get through a semi-boss fight with no effort? Just as in AC2, where once they grant you throwing knives, the gun, poison etc. they have to keep in mind that these can be used in any mission from then on.

AC2's an example of what you generally have to do -- throwing knives don't always work, your toys generally work according to designer's fiat.

Intelligent enemies: once you can freely move around in a 3D environment, you'll expect enemies to be able to do the same. Follow you, navigate any type of terrain or obstacle, and remain to be able to find cover and flank you and so on. Not to mention being able to detect you wherever you're coming from. It's more complicated then encounters with a limited scope.

This is more complicated, but again, the genre has never really had smart enemies. You can find videos in GTA4 of police-men getting lost on fire-escapes. It seems more a question of designing good path-finding and having your designers be more thorough with their meshes. Enemies in UC2 do already seem to know how to climb obstacles to get to you (there are a couple of encounters that you can start at dramatically different points, depending on how much stealth you work in).

So all of these changes are obviously possible; but some will take new engine features, some will take more conceptual design work, more level building and playtesting, and so on. And it's important to seriously consider if these additions do really enhance the gameplay experience, are they worth the extra effort...

Oh, sure. I don't think UC2 would gain anything by going open-world. But, excluding the fairly huge effort of actually going 'open-world', which I already conceded, I'm not sure anything else would be a major problem. We are lacking some information -- for instance, in UC2 your partners will often navigate the same obstacles you do. Is this all scripted, or is it actual pathfinding?

 

[wco81]

Terrible idea, it would be a crime to break up such a great team, they're doing work that Lucas Arts will never ever come close, if anything Naughty Dog should poach more and better talent from other top teams to make their team even better and make even better games for the Uncharted franchise.

Lucas Arts should just sell the Indy license to Sony and never make another Indy game ever.

OTOH, the Uncharted series aren't huge blockbusters, so a more recognized brand might help the genre sell better against the epidemic of shooters.

It would be great to see several games like this, instead of just one, and see them all selling well.

 

[patsu]

Finally worked, I guess it was taking time finding the best pings.

Played one DM and one Co-Op. It was okay but it was battle heavy. Didn't really see the platforming aspect, which is what I like best about the game.

Depending on the map, there can be LOADS of vertical routes to traverse. It's still a shooter in MP gameplay (how could you have multiplayer jumping? ) but the movement makes it a very different beast to all the other shooters where the routes are fixed and more predictable.

Yap, I think 2 of the maps have platforming (just like the SP game).

However, wco81, if you're thinking of co-op platforming and joint-puzzle solving, I think you may want to switch to LittleBigPlanet. ^_^

In U2, the focus is on gunplay. You can replay the games to learn your opponents' secrets too (How did he/she platform up there ?)

 

[patsu]

Assistant Professor poke (small) holes in Uncharted 2 story:
http://eis-blog.ucsc.edu/2009/12/uncharted-2s-sloppy-fiction/comment-page-1/#comment-2804

This is somewhat related to Evan Well's statement about Uncanny Valley for gameplay (and story).

In a nutshell:

A) Drake killing people and making jokes out of them, which is out of character (e.g., pulling enemy off the cliff with funny remarks)

B) Enemies don't radio in extra help


The first I can agree with, because I find it weird myself too. Killing is fine because the enemies are dangerous. Joking is a little too much unless it's a non-lethal action.

The second point, I'll pass. We do get waves of enemies. And I don't think help is always available to the enemies 24/7. They are in a very inaccessible location. At some point, helicopters and tank did arrive on the scene.

 

[Billy Idol]

An open world approach is probably not in line with that, but what else can be done to improve the game?
And another interesting issue is that somehow the game is just not selling as well as it should... It deserves about 4-5 million IMHO;

Hm, interesting question...the first thing that came to my mind was: improve the tech! re-increase the shadow resolution, re-increase the texture resolution and enhance the texture filtering and work on the animations and their transitions.

But maybe this is not what you asked for , so I for myself think that they should stay by the same formula...keep it as an 'action-movie'!

Some of the action scenes are really phantastic: fighting in a collapsing building was unbelievable for me and really one of the most memorable video game scenes
The action scenes and the fighting itself is for me flawless: every confrontation can be solved in many different ways - great!

But I definitely think that they should do something with the puzzle parts: for me it seems that they absolutely don't contribute to the game at all...in a hollywood block buster, many of those scenes would have been cut out!
Either make them more challenging, or skip them all together. As skipping is basically not an option...they should at least make them solveable by logic and not by looking into the diary! So as they improved the action combat part from UC1 to UC2, I hope that the improve the puzzle parts in UC3. But as Evan Wells often iterates in interviews: the most important thing for ND when designing UC is that they want people to finish the game...so with this goal in mind, they don't have to much freedom either?!?!

A bit difficult to judge are the platforming parts: this is very problematic, as difficult platforming often gets frustrating...so imo, the should keep the platforming as it is but use it to show of the graphics, i.e. to make some nice site seeing tours and incorporate some 'wow, did you see this' vistas!

And they really really really should include a full online coop modus for the whole SP campaign - this is an absolute must and should also naturally increase the sales of the game!!!

Regarding the sales figures, I don't know the numbers, but I know if the numbers were great I would know them!
Basically it is a shame and I really blame the PS3 crowd for being chronical non-buyers...but it is also obvious that the style of the game doesn't fit to everyone.

Increasing the sales would be very easy in concept if you asked me but would need a drastic change in game design: make the game realistic !!

Change the look from stylist to realistic...just imaging how this game would look like if ND opt for realism.

Change the combat from stylist to realistc: real sounds for weapons, no bullet sponges, brutal combat with screams and deaths!

Make platforming as realistic as possible: no 10 meter jumps while hanging in an ice wall.

Don't include 'fantasy' parts into the story.

Maybe even change the theme of Drake from 'funny lucky idiot' to 'sarcastic'?

 

[DuckThor Evil]

The first I can agree with, because I find it weird myself too. Killing is fine because the enemies are dangerous. Joking is a little too much unless it's a non-lethal action.

I don't have any problems with killing and joking, but yeah it was little bit out of character, especially when in the beginning Drake was taking really high ground when Harry Flynn shows his weapon and then he himself proceeds to kill death murder hundreds of people . Also both Uncharted games have tried to make Nathan appear as a regular guy, who get's afraid etc. I think it worked fairly well in the first game, but the second game has constantly such grazy sections, that no man would ever try to pull off, but Drake goes on forward, basically I don't have any problems with this, but sometimes I noticed weird contrast in some elements in the game. All the things he did in the first game should have boosted his confidence to such epic levels, that he isn't afraid of anything

edit: Happy new year to all!

 

[wco81]

However, wco81, if you're thinking of co-op platforming and joint-puzzle solving, I think you may want to switch to LittleBigPlanet. ^_^

In U2, the focus is on gunplay. You can replay the games to learn your opponents' secrets too (How did he/she platform up there ?)

I liked the part where he had to work with the Tibetan guide to trip switches. Was it Heavenly Sword which had puzzles requiring one of the minor character to hit switches with the arrow? Well there's an opportunity there for co-op puzzle-solving if you have characters with different specialities. Like say only one character is capable of doing the acrobatic feats but the other one is a good archer who can hit things or fire an arrow with a rope to tether it to some spot.

But this kind of co-op gameplay has really limited appeal to the gaming market now.

Reason why they focused on gameplay is that shooters are so popular, so there's kind of a gun porno aspect to games, where they use real high-tech weapons with different specs. that only gun nuts care about.

Charm of a character like Indiana Jones is that he uses the bullwhip most of the time and occasionally uses an old revolver. Having Drake use all these guns in an effort to compete with the popularity of the shooter makes the Uncharted series more pedestrian. It would be more interesting to see unusual weapons like the crossbow.

 

[patsu]

Hmm... I see where you're coming from. May want to hit the Uncharted 2 official forum and yell. They are working on co-op DLC it seems.

Yeah, Dr Evil, I also wonder at the disconnect between Nathan's personality and capability. It's like he's Jason Bourne. But I like him enough to overlook it.

 

[obonicus]

I think Drake killing off hundreds of clearly evil mercenary Slavik types with a joke is necessarily out of character. The one thing he does that bugged me is in the heist, when he grabs a guard and pulls him off a building, for several stories. This after they make it clear that Drake doesn't want to kill these guys.

 

[wco81]

Some of the action scenes are really phantastic: fighting in a collapsing building was unbelievable for me and really one of the most memorable video game scenes
The action scenes and the fighting itself is for me flawless: every confrontation can be solved in many different ways - great!

I don't mind the limited gameplay aspects of these set-pieces, which contribute to the cinematic feel of the game. Yes they're certainly memorable, you could call them signature scenes.

But I definitely think that they should do something with the puzzle parts: for me it seems that they absolutely don't contribute to the game at all...in a hollywood block buster, many of those scenes would have been cut out!
Either make them more challenging, or skip them all together. As skipping is basically not an option...they should at least make them solveable by logic and not by looking into the diary! So as they improved the action combat part from UC1 to UC2, I hope that the improve the puzzle parts in UC3. But as Evan Wells often iterates in interviews: the most important thing for ND when designing UC is that they want people to finish the game...so with this goal in mind, they don't have to much freedom either?!?!

Yeah the puzzles would not be organic in a movie. But in a video game, you have these things. You don't want to turn the game completely into an interactive movie. Then you might as well make it a Dragon's Lair where all you're doing is activating different scenes which you don't control.

A bit difficult to judge are the platforming parts: this is very problematic, as difficult platforming often gets frustrating...so imo, the should keep the platforming as it is but use it to show of the graphics, i.e. to make some nice site seeing tours and incorporate some 'wow, did you see this' vistas!

Isn't that the point? The unusual paths you have to find in the environment leads to these fantastic landscapes, almost more mythical than real. This is something games can do that movies can't do as easily, other than to spend a lot of money on CGI.

And they really really really should include a full online coop modus for the whole SP campaign - this is an absolute must and should also naturally increase the sales of the game!!!

Not sure if it would increase the sales but would certainly give the game legs and maybe give people reason to buy and keep the game rather than rent or buy and then sell the game once completed.

Regarding the sales figures, I don't know the numbers, but I know if the numbers were great I would know them!
Basically it is a shame and I really blame the PS3 crowd for being chronical non-buyers...but it is also obvious that the style of the game doesn't fit to everyone.

Increasing the sales would be very easy in concept if you asked me but would need a drastic change in game design: make the game realistic !!

Change the look from stylist to realistic...just imaging how this game would look like if ND opt for realism.

Change the combat from stylist to realistc: real sounds for weapons, no bullet sponges, brutal combat with screams and deaths!

Make platforming as realistic as possible: no 10 meter jumps while hanging in an ice wall.

Don't include 'fantasy' parts into the story.

Maybe even change the theme of Drake from 'funny lucky idiot' to 'sarcastic'?

I don't know that realism necessarily leads to better sales. Is Modern Combat realistic? (don't know, I haven't played it or have any interest in playing it). If a game is too realistic, you have some dry, boring thing like Flight Simulator.

All video games have characters performing unrealistic feats. Many of the issues like bullet sponges seem to come from wanting to tune and balance out the game. That is, they can't make it too easy for you to just rip through the levels because it makes the game too short or easy.

So AK-47 is one of the weakest weapons in the game but in real life, you would be able to cause a lot of carnage with it. They give you a lot of AK-47s because you have to shoot with it a lot to cause damage. Like the mutants (or whatever you call them), an AK-47 should be able to rip through any flesh. It would be more realistic if you can mow down these things (after all they're just flesh and bones) but a crossbow is more effective for killing them? They just wanted to make it harder to get through levels with these beasts but they sacrificed realism.

As for platforming, I wouldn't mind if they forced them to use other tactics, like repeling or moutain-climbing, instead of jumping from cliff to cliff in that ice cave. Of course it would make it slow-going though. That is one thing movies do better, like Indiana Jones tripping some booby trap and having to run out of that temple with the rolling boulder after him. To get away, he doesn't have to perform superhuman feats necessarily.

Spoiler

Agree on the supernatural elements, like some mythical elixir turning someone into a superman. But again, it may be a game balance thing. You don't want to be able to dispense with the game's villain as easily as just shooting him, because it might be anticlimatic to kill him that easily. Would be more realistic but it is what it is.

 

[wco81]

I think Drake killing off hundreds of clearly evil mercenary Slavik types with a joke is necessarily out of character. The one thing he does that bugged me is in the heist, when he grabs a guard and pulls him off a building, for several stories. This after they make it clear that Drake doesn't want to kill these guys.

Seems the game designers are conflicted. The villain accuses Drake of being just like him, killing dozens or hundreds in the course of the game.

But it's the nature of a game genre like this that you have to have bad guys and you have to overcome their resistance to progress in the game. Otherwise, it would be too easy to get through the game. And you're not going to dispense with bad guys by means other than killing them. What are you going to do, convince them that they should let you reach your objectives because you're a swell guy?

And movies also have to have villains that the heros have to kill too. The hero's quest is more meaningful because there are bad guys out to stop them (or the hero has to stop the villains, whose objectives would cause the deaths of innocents).

So once again, in the Indiana Jones example, Indy is a sympathetic character but he'll kill some people along the way (he does use guns occasionally) and what's more, he'll crack wise while doing it because it's a kind of cartoon violence and it's very crowd-pleasing.

It seems ND was trying to capture a similar feel. Yeah he's mowing down people but Drake's plot is noble (save the world from an evil villain) and his kills are not grave because he can joke about it?

Or maybe, it's not a good idea to look at video games as sources of moral rectitude.

 

[obonicus]

Actually, I skipped a word there. I meant to say that I DON'T think it's necessarily out of character. Pulling a hapless security guard down to his apparent death when the whole idea of that mission to that point was not to kill anyone did bug me.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

It was out of character. I just laugh at these mistakes though! The whole thing is so preposterous I couldn't get immersed into the story or characters, but the execution of the characters, the banter, the whole quality, made the emotion of events very strong. I felt excited or nervous at times, but never involved in the story. The way Drake leaps further with his arms than mere mortals can jump meant I was always laughing or shaking my head through these grand climbs. That said, I'm an absolute pig when it comes to story, and precious few artistic creations manage to drag me into a alternate world where I care about the protagonists! Perhaps for other people Drake's wickedness at times is jarring?

 

[wco81]

It'll never happen, because Uncharted is not big enough seller and the story is derivative of adventure films, but some elements of the Uncharted story could make a decent movie.

Or maybe the cut scene acting was strong enough to give it a good cinematic feel at some points.

Maybe they will make a movie out of Modern Warfare since it's such a big seller.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

It'll never happen, because Uncharted is not big enough seller and the story is derivative of adventure films, but some elements of the Uncharted story could make a decent movie.

They'd better, because they are making a movie from it!