I managed to finish the game over the weekend (Normal). Very enjoyable indeed. For me the game does have issues though, well lets be honest all games do. The Story which is entertaining enough and told expertly, loses it magic in the final 3rd for me, I can't put my finger on it! The other problem I have is the game as EDGE put it so well, is well a bit too mechanical. Although your hanging from a cliff or what not, there really isn't any danger unless you just let go. You can't make bad jumps as such and the set peices are just a bit too much on rails for my liking (although I have no better idea for expanding them). To be honest though these pretty petty complaints the game is very satisfying and looks wonderful throughout and baring ODST its easily the best game I've played in 2009.
[PS3] Uncharted 2
- Thread starter DieH@rd
- Start date
inefficient
Veteran
Was having fun playing co-op arena until after level 10...only 10 levels wtf I was expecting something along the lines like horde, 50 lvls. It was just starting to get good
When you first start playing coop it is set to "Easy". You have to unlock harder difficulties.
I think he's talking about Survival, which doesn't have difficulty settings.
I think the last 3rd is
Nate and Elena chasing after Lazarevic
As RobertR1 mentioned, you can indeed make bad jumps if you miss the grip cues. I died a few times there, sometimes 3-4 deathes consecutively. Compared to regular platforming, I think the U2 developers tried to use cinematic angle to exaggerate the sense of danger. Sometimes the platforming are just excuses to chereograph a scene or spice up the journey.
Also, I think people were amazed by the set pieces because the experiences are very focused. The gameplay is "embedded" in the story telling. IMHO, an open-world game would have diluted the overall experience substantially, and provides nothing new (See GTA4).
If you want to appreciate the platforming in any real way, you have to go treasure hunting. There are some set-piece rope-swings for instance, but if you go treasure hunting, you'll use the rope swinging in a less straightforward manner. Some stuff is still faiirly simple, but other stuff can be rather involved. I only have about 31 treasures so far or so, but I found a few by accident that involve a fair bit of platforming. That said, this is not a game designed to require pixel perfect jumps by any stretch of the imagination, but the fluidity of the traversal in general is really good and comes into its own in multi-player as much as anything else, imho.
I didn't think the 3rd part was out of character, or weak in any shape or form, by the way. I quite enjoyed it, thought the boss-fight was actually not annoying for once, and there were some neat surprises.
.
I didn't think the 3rd part was out of character, or weak in any shape or form, by the way. I quite enjoyed it, thought the boss-fight was actually not annoying for once, and there were some neat surprises.
Not a huge fan of the zombie replacements though to be honest, especially after they shed their skin
By adding scale to battles. However this would not allow the same level of graphics fidelity thus they went with the bullet sponge model to maintain the high level of presentation. This way you're engaged for a longer period of time with the same small group of enemies thus increasing the tension.
Many other do the same thing btw. Very focused battles with enemies coming in waves to create the illusion of a large battlefield.
You can certainly have cover shooters that don't have a sponge model. Rainbow Six is a great example. Also, I'm not a fan of having crosshair in blind fire. Defeats the purpose.
Might want to re-read what I posted. I jumped because for what ever reason, I could not trigger certain cut scenes and I'd jump in frustration. The platforming is VERY basic. At best, you have to fight the camera sometimes as the game tries to focus you in one direction while the next platforming element is not in view. I will agree that most of the platforming is really designed to show off the levels. However, with so much of it, it'd be good if there was any really urgency or sense of accomplishment to it.
You don't need a GTA Open world to add scale. Now you're using extremes to negate a viable option/request.
I am wary of the "scale" word here. It may make the fighting more tedious. Notice that the game breaks up combat into small morsels to keep people going quickly. Some of the U2 battlefields are not small (e.g. the Shambhala one) especially when you consider the verticality.
Likewise, in an Indiana Jones movie, it's always small scale fighting between Dr. Jones and the enemies even if WWII was going on. What made things interesting was he always exploit any situation, terrain or equipment advantage.
I prefer smart AI to increase the difficulty for this game. However, there is a problem. When Nate is on a different plane, the smarter AI would go under his platform to hide from him. I think the next game should make it possible for the enemies to platform to Nate's location (e.g., fetch a ladder, repel down a cliff, etc).
You jumped to the wrong place though (Your comment about jumping an inch away compared to jumping a "mile" away)... even if you're forced to jump to trigger a cutscene, you should be able to focus on the intended grips.
Even if GTA map is smaller, the story telling style wouldn't make a big difference to its experience. I was refering to GTA4's approach because it is representative of the genre. e.g., For inFamous, I don't like the frequent traversal between different locations. They have a speedy train there, still it's lull compared to U2's platforming.
Likewise, in an Indiana Jones movie, it's always small scale fighting between Dr. Jones and the enemies even if WWII was going on. What made things interesting was he always exploit any situation, terrain or equipment advantage.
I prefer smart AI to increase the difficulty for this game. However, there is a problem. When Nate is on a different plane, the smarter AI would go under his platform to hide from him. I think the next game should make it possible for the enemies to platform to Nate's location (e.g., fetch a ladder, repel down a cliff, etc).
You jumped to the wrong place though (Your comment about jumping an inch away compared to jumping a "mile" away)... even if you're forced to jump to trigger a cutscene, you should be able to focus on the intended grips.
Even if GTA map is smaller, the story telling style wouldn't make a big difference to its experience. I was refering to GTA4's approach because it is representative of the genre. e.g., For inFamous, I don't like the frequent traversal between different locations. They have a speedy train there, still it's lull compared to U2's platforming.
The enemies already have largely the same traversal moveset as the player, they make jumps, they climb up using ladders and handholds. And I'm not sure why anyone would accuse them of the whole "bullet sponge" thing other than the guardians, most of the soldiers go down easily and are hardly bullet sponges, the armored ones are armored, but they're still highly susceptible to headshots, once the helmet comes off after a few shots, headshots are one-hit-kills, even the mercs with chain guns, the guardians are highly susceptible to the chain gun and the crossbow.
I've had it for a week or so, and have only played into Chapter 7.
It's gorgeous, but I feel a little unsatisfied with the continual 'on rails' feel of the game. So far, there's really only been a couple of fire fights where I felt like there was some uncertainty / variability in terms of how I went about dealing with the situation.
The game is also so visually busy that I get a bit tired of playing it.. I'm playing it for the story, and I'm enjoying that lots, but if I have no choice as to what to do in a given situation and there's only one path forward, and the game will keep pushing me until I take the right path, then I feel like the illusion is a bit shattered for me.
So far, I think Half-Life 2 was better about providing the illusion of free movement, even if one still had to do a specific thing to advance forward in the story.
I actually backed off of UC2 and played a bit of Demon's Souls last night. That game is very channelized as well, but at least it doesn't *look* as though I have a choice. I don't mind going down a dark hall when that's all the world shows to me. If it looks like there should be dozens of ways to go when there's really only one, that's annoying.
But I'm going to keep playing, of course. Hopefully my feelings about it will improve.
It's gorgeous, but I feel a little unsatisfied with the continual 'on rails' feel of the game. So far, there's really only been a couple of fire fights where I felt like there was some uncertainty / variability in terms of how I went about dealing with the situation.
The game is also so visually busy that I get a bit tired of playing it.. I'm playing it for the story, and I'm enjoying that lots, but if I have no choice as to what to do in a given situation and there's only one path forward, and the game will keep pushing me until I take the right path, then I feel like the illusion is a bit shattered for me.
So far, I think Half-Life 2 was better about providing the illusion of free movement, even if one still had to do a specific thing to advance forward in the story.
I actually backed off of UC2 and played a bit of Demon's Souls last night. That game is very channelized as well, but at least it doesn't *look* as though I have a choice. I don't mind going down a dark hall when that's all the world shows to me. If it looks like there should be dozens of ways to go when there's really only one, that's annoying.
But I'm going to keep playing, of course. Hopefully my feelings about it will improve.
I don't mind linear games as long as I'm given enough choice in gameplay along the way. Rfom did this well. There was always just one path to follow, but you had a huge arsenal of very different guns always available, letting you play it the way you wanted to.
God of War does a good job of it by having very short segments of different gameplay follow each other in rapid succession. Your constantly gaining new abilities or weapons, fighting different enemies, doing puzzles, platforming, huge bosses.
IMO Uncharted 2 could improve by giving players more choice between it's huge setpieces. I liked the larger gun/stealth fights in the second half the most for that reason. Or like in the first Uncharted which had more frequent larger open areas with more choice in cover.
God of War does a good job of it by having very short segments of different gameplay follow each other in rapid succession. Your constantly gaining new abilities or weapons, fighting different enemies, doing puzzles, platforming, huge bosses.
IMO Uncharted 2 could improve by giving players more choice between it's huge setpieces. I liked the larger gun/stealth fights in the second half the most for that reason. Or like in the first Uncharted which had more frequent larger open areas with more choice in cover.
Maybe they could do something gameplay changing with some of the supernatural elements the game usually has.
Play more. The story telling is linear after the initial flash back. Later on, the developers will use different ways to mix the gameplay up a little. Towards the end, it becomes more traditional.
Demon's Souls is not linear. ^_^
Sometimes, there are more than one routes to the same destination. However at all times, you are free to choose where to go next. Or whether to run away. You can also level up your character differently, or use different equipments, or fighting styles. You may also choose to play alone or co-op in the same level.
I think you may feel "trapped" in Demon's Souls because the game only opens up after you kill the 1-1 boss. The real Demon's Souls begins then.
Yes, they do, but sometimes (later), they don't always have a connected path to Nate. I am just commenting that in the next refresh, whether the AI can change the terrain/level by bringing their own ladders and other tools. Heck, they may even remove ladders/bridges to force me to take some fall damage. In that sense, the platforming may also become more interesting together with the gunfight. Perhaps then, demanding players can identify with U2 style platforming more. Obviously, we'll need playtesting to tell for sure.
I like the pacing in U2. It reminds me of RFOM and Heavenly Sword. So I hope they can somehow fit new changes into the same rhythm.
djskribbles
Legend
I know I'm in the minority here, but I actually prefer somewhat linear games. I hate exploring and getting lost to the point where I find myself constantly backtracking... I just find it frustrating. I think UC2 is perfect.
And yeah, I agree... the game really picks up after chapter 9 or so (don't remember exactly which chapter, just guessing).
And yeah, I agree... the game really picks up after chapter 9 or so (don't remember exactly which chapter, just guessing).
This game is hard to find at retail stores around here, seems to sell well. Only 1 store I checked had the "collectors edition" (the 2 others had neither), but paying 20€ more for a couple postcards ain't acceptable.
Ordered per Amazon now even tough I hate getting stuff sent to me.
Ordered per Amazon now even tough I hate getting stuff sent to me.
You can actually approach most of the fights in Uncharted 2 from any angle, you can use as much stealth as you want, combat-wise there's a ton of variety.
Tease
UC2 is a fun game, but it's also a frustrating tease of what it could have been. Such an awesome engine begs for open-ended exploration (I would have killed for a pair of binoculars in the game!), but instead you're dragged through the entire game by the hand. I have nothing against linear, heavy narrative games, but I need to feel that I am part of a world rather than an amusement park ride.
The MGS series is an example of linear games done right. Even though you need to achieve very specific, prescribed objectives to advance, the game, through its inventory system, its attention to detail, its rich anticipation of alternate outcomes, gives you the feeling of of much more open-ended experience. A Hideo Kojima game built on the ND engine would be heaven.
UC2 is a fun game, but it's also a frustrating tease of what it could have been. Such an awesome engine begs for open-ended exploration (I would have killed for a pair of binoculars in the game!), but instead you're dragged through the entire game by the hand. I have nothing against linear, heavy narrative games, but I need to feel that I am part of a world rather than an amusement park ride.
The MGS series is an example of linear games done right. Even though you need to achieve very specific, prescribed objectives to advance, the game, through its inventory system, its attention to detail, its rich anticipation of alternate outcomes, gives you the feeling of of much more open-ended experience. A Hideo Kojima game built on the ND engine would be heaven.
Naughty Dog's ICE team makes the tools available to first-party developers, if Kojima wants to use the engine he can leave Konami and join Sony, meanwhile Kojima can try to learn how to make great MP and co-op without all the Konami online bullcrap, maybe he can buy Uncharted 2, play it and pick up a few pointers.
Last edited by a moderator:
Billy Idol
Legend
I completely agree! It is much better compared to UC1 (which I already liked
). Even in 'rail' type chapters, eh...like the train section, you get sometimes the chance to take different routes.I'm really not sure if I'd consider the "jumping" and getting from A to B in Uncharted to be platforming. If you compare the platforming to older ND games like Jak & Daxter (the first one especially), there's a huge difference which I really kind of miss. The sort of platforming that requires skill, jumping from one platform to the other while possibly battling enemies, evading traps or dangerous obstacles etc. This is somewhat in Tomb Raider, though not nearly as well executed as it could be and it's totally absent in Uncharted 2. I guess the setting and characters don't really allow it. Would be kind of funny seeing Drake jump from one platform to the other and it would lose the illusion pretty quickly.
As for the open-world. I think it's a trade-off. Jak & Daxter had the open world and IMO they only did a good job in the first part with it where you really had the feeling that you were traveling a far adventure and came to different parts of the game. Part 2 and 3 were ultimately just a huge city with some adventuring outside the city which was very disappointing. In Uncharted 2 though, you don't have the open exploration, but on the other hand, you get to visit so many very different places and get a great diversity in the visuals. From snowy locations, cities, temples etc. I don't think you could combine all of this in an open world if you wanted it tied to a realistic setting.
As for the open-world. I think it's a trade-off. Jak & Daxter had the open world and IMO they only did a good job in the first part with it where you really had the feeling that you were traveling a far adventure and came to different parts of the game. Part 2 and 3 were ultimately just a huge city with some adventuring outside the city which was very disappointing. In Uncharted 2 though, you don't have the open exploration, but on the other hand, you get to visit so many very different places and get a great diversity in the visuals. From snowy locations, cities, temples etc. I don't think you could combine all of this in an open world if you wanted it tied to a realistic setting.
Yap ! It also prevents overuse of some art elements. If you keep seeing the entire city of Tibetan colors and motifs along the way, they will become dull very quickly.
It's easier/"better" to craft set pieces for people to gawk and play in. It heightens the experience.
Most games are like this, except a handful of open world ones like GTA4, Assassin's Creed and inFamous.
It's easier/"better" to craft set pieces for people to gawk and play in. It heightens the experience.
Most games are like this, except a handful of open world ones like GTA4, Assassin's Creed and inFamous.
