• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Replaying Jak 2, it's apparent Naughty Dog simply got lucky with Uncharted

teiresias

Member
By lucky I mean they obviously stumbled into a style of gameplay that they're actually competent at making (excuse me . . . copying). Jak 2 is such a bumbling, poorly designed game that if it weren't for the good will engendered by the first game in the series the company deserved to crash and burn after the offensiveness of Jak 2. It's an incompetently executed knock off of the GTA formula that failed as a game after the the studio was capable of making a competent knock-off of the Mario formula with the first game.

Obviously, with Uncharted, ND discovered that they apparently had the skill set to actually pull off a competent knock off of the third person cover shooter and probably held a party at the office celebrating that they'd found a gameplay mechanic they could execute with some finesse.

Now, following this logic it's quite obvious why "The Last of Us" - judging by all released media to date - seems to play in a highly similar fashion to Uncharted. They're not quite ready to move on to something different for fear of giving up the one game mechanic they've found themselves capable of actually delivering with. Of course, this begs the question . . . how long can Naughty Dog milk this style of gameplay before gamers realize they're a one-trick pony? Will the management actually risk trying something completely different on PS4, and thus exposing the company as incapable of making anything beyond this one style of game in a competent manner?
 

Reiko

Banned
I would have believed you if you put Way of the Warrior in the topic title. But Jak 2 is pretty good OP.

But it is your opinion, so I see where you stand.
 

Jarmel

Banned
Yea I wrote a really long post detailing why a good chunk of the game is shit.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=505264&highlight=jak

I agree with most of what is said. The title is obviously flamebait but there is a lot wrong with the game.

Edit:I'll just copy my earlier analysis

The writing in the sequel is definitely more ambitious and tries to tell a more interesting story from the first. It doesn't really make too many flaws, except for crap like the Errol wanting to race you instead of just flat out killing you, but again the problem comes from the tone shift in that the tone shift just turns the writing into a big revenge story. For so much of the focus to be on Jak, as a character he not only drops the ball but runs in the opposite direction. Another problem is that you spend half the game as other people's errand boys doing sidejobs such as picking up bags of money for Krew. There doesn't really feel to be any initiative on the part of the characters or story.

Some of the VAs were just horrible fits such as Thorn. The entire time he's talking in both Jak 2 and 3, I can't help but imagine Bale's Batman voice. 'I sound gruff because the writers dictated that my character is gruff'. The Baron also couldn't help but sound one-note even during his dying speech. There just isn't any variety in this area.

Now for the villains in particular. Yes, Jak 1 wasn't much better but it also didn't go that overboard either. The Baron is just one step away from kicking that Crocodog and revealing that he's responsible for every major problem in your life(although the story does go down that road anyway). ND took a more serious tone but somebody forgot to tell them that if you go a more realistic route then stuff like the villains start to matter more. Also Krew could be stand-in for Jabba the Hutt. There's also the ridiculous plot-line about Krew selling out the city which is so nonsensical and is more used to advance the plot. All the villains except for Kor, act in the most stupid manner possible.

Now for this godforsaken overworld. I don't mind crappy overworlds, hell I liked the one in No More Heroes and I like the Mako in ME1. I fucking hated this one. There are way too many pedestrians and hovercars for this to be enjoyable. It feels like I'm having to constantly dodge everytime I go some place and it just makes me wish there was a fast travel button. What makes this worse is that the amount of time you have to spent in the damn overworld. There are also some bullshit mission segments in the city such as the race with Errol where you want to strangle the developer. What makes all of this more frustrating is the floating hovercar controls. It's not fun to navigate and overall sucked all the life and enjoyment I was trying to salvage out of this game.

The missions and their environments are for the most part, forgettable and boring. There are really only a couple of acceptable ones such as the Precursor Temple and the underwater mech level but that's really it. ND throws in a bunch of setpieces but unlike Uncharted, I got nothing out of them. The forced shit camera angle also kills some of those bits as well. A lot of the design is industrial in nature and so it becomes pretty repetitive.

Then there is the lack of checkpoints. I'm sure some people liked the increased difficulty spikes, the problem is how big some of these spikes are and how long some of these missions are. The Seal in the Slums mission is absolutely ridiculous with how many enemies there are and how the controls are in general, in that you can't really dodge or move around much. There are also some missions which last close to 10-15 minutes where you have to perform them perfectly or you start from the very beginning. It gets old very fast and very annoying. It's a bullshit arbitrary way of increasing the difficulty and padding out the game time. What makes it all the more frustrating is that due to how the controls are, it sometimes feels like deaths are undeserved and you then have to redo another 10-15 minutes. Atleast with Dark Souls, it feels somewhat fair.

As I stated earlier, part of the problem is the camera. The camera in the game doesn't show all the enemies onscreen or even do a proper job of relaying the action half the time. I would be shooting my gun at some random enemy off the screen, a good portion of the time. There also would be times where the camera would be fixed such as Daxter's chase sequence where I would love to know where the hell I was heading towards. It feels like you're fighting with the camera for hours and the camera is winning.

Now for the auto-aiming gunplay. I wouldn't mind it so much if it wasn't so integral to the game and the camera wasn't so bad. The lack of some sort of dodge or guard mechanism also makes this pretty frustrating as you just have to pray that you stagger or kill the enemy before he hits you. The auto-aim also can really just screw you over such as in the final boss fight where you want to focus fire on the boss but the jetpack crew get the attention because of the auto-aim. More control would have made this much less annoying.

For the vehicles, there's a whole laundry list of issues I had with them. The first is that the controls are just too floaty. Yes they're hovercars but it still feels like I'm fighting the controls. This is a major problem due to the number of races and general moving around you have to do with them. This extends to that damn hoverboard where it feels like the grind isn't really connecting other than a few visual sparks. They feel sluggish and are a nightmare to use. There is also the amount of damage that half these vehicles can take. It feels like with the hoverbike that a solid two hits will do it in. What makes matter worse is the bumpercar physics.

Yea I really didn't like this game.
 

injurai

Banned
Ehh, I find this a slightly unfair interpretation of the series. Jak 3 was great fun, and while Jak 2 strayed from the charm and mechanics of the first game it was still pretty solid.

I think they tried to emulate more of what Insomniac was achieving with R&C, and this is why they started introducing the morph gun.

I thought it was a pretty neat contrast for Jak to go from exploring the country side to being tossed into the decay of a anything but civil civilization.
 
Loved Jak 1 but I still enjoyed the hell out of Jak 2. The GTA stuff was a nice addition. It's evident that changed the formula to get more sales.
 

Wynnebeck

Banned
By lucky I mean they obviously stumbled into a style of gameplay that they're actually competent at making (excuse me . . . copying). Jak 2 is such a bumbling, poorly designed game that if it weren't for the good will engendered by the first game in the series the company deserved to crash and burn after the offensiveness of Jak 2. It's an incompetently executed knock off of the GTA formula that failed as a game after the the studio was capable of making a competent knock-off of the Mario formula with the first game.

Obviously, with Uncharted, ND discovered that they apparently had the skill set to actually pull off a competent knock off of the third person cover shooter and probably held a party at the office celebrating that they'd found a gameplay mechanic they could execute with some finesse.

Now, following this logic it's quite obvious why "The Last of Us" - judging by all released media to date - seems to play in a highly similar fashion to Uncharted. They're not quite ready to move on to something different for fear of giving up the one game mechanic they've found themselves capable of actually delivering with. Of course, this begs the question . . . how long can Naughty Dog milk this style of gameplay before gamers realize they're a one-trick pony? Will the management actually risk trying something completely different on PS4, and thus exposing the company as incapable of making anything beyond this one style of game in a competent manner?


raUm2.gif


Seriously thought this entire post is ridiculous. Jak 2 a knock-off of GTA? Uncharted a knock-off of 3rd Person Shooters? Naughty Dog incapable? I don't even.
 

Brazil

Living in the shadow of Amaz
Jak 2 is terrible.

But all three Uncharted games, all three Crash games and CTR are great.

So you're wrong in that they're a one-trick pony.
 

Lijik

Member
Trying to find something in the OP thats substantial and isnt just vague empty statements and can't find anything. Expected something like Jarmel's linked post

OP, you could have saved yourself a lot of time by just making your post say"Its janky". It would be just as meaningful with none of the effort.
 

Card Boy

Banned
I actually felt the opposite. The Uncharted series is corridor linear handholding piece of shit and Jak 2, along with 3 (and Crash) is their best games.
 
Never played it(although I recently bought the HD collection) but isnt Jak 2 regarded as the "good one".

More people [citation needed] tend to like Jak 3 better, if only because it's not as ball-bustingly difficult and has better controls. It also tones down the grimdark.
 

mclem

Member
Jak 2 put a MASSIVE SPOILER in content that could be unlocked before the event occurred in the main game. That's a cardinal sin in my book.

Spoiler details, spoilered (spoils the endgame. Vaguely):
You could unlock concept art which had footnotes which spoiled one significant twist about a major character

...but other than that kvetching, and a few points about balance and focus (the city *really* didn't feel necessary), I rather liked it.


Edit:
Jak 2 was heavily inspired by GTA, it's pretty obvious too.

Actually, no. It didn't ever feel like it was inspired by GTA. It felt like it was cynically trying to *look* like it was inspired by GTA in order to try to catch some GTA fans' interests. I think that might be what I mean by the city not feeling necessary.
 
Now, following this logic it's quite obvious why "The Last of Us" - judging by all released media to date - seems to play in a highly similar fashion to Uncharted.

What media? Because the E3 demo and extended demo makes it quite clear that it really doesn't have a lot in common with Uncharted aside from being a third person game.
 
Retarded post is retarded.

Nice job.
I wouldn't mind if you were just bashing a game, but it's a little much to slag off such a talented and passionate studio like that, for no particular reason. Should be banned.
 

teiresias

Member
could you actually go into detail as to why you think Jak 2 is terrible? for me: 2>3>1

1>3>>>>>2

The city design and congestion in the city is unbearable. Suicidal crimson guards ramming into you in the too many missions based in the city streets and just too many horrible design decisions that I refuse to believe they actually play-tested a great deal of it.

I actually like Uncharted 1 better than Uncharted 2, but I have yet to play Uncharted 3 because by the end of the second one it was pretty obvious there wasn't much new there that didn't involve set pieces that didn't change the core mechanic very much. I just couldn't muster the interest to play through more of the same for a third time.

However, my musing is more in the hypothetical. Since ND has changed up their generational IP's gameplay every console generation will they do the same this go around, or are they comfortable with the formula they've found? Finally, given the history of their past endeavors, my optimism for them delivering actual solid gameplay in a different vein (if they do change up their formula next-gen) is not exactly high.
 
While I don't really enjoy Jak 2 cuz of the change in tone/gameplay style, anybody who's played one of the Jak games should know this thread is just flamebait. I'd just treat it as that.
 
Jak 2 is pretty great I thought, its actually my favourite of the three. There are a couple of lame missions like the turret rail shooting one or the Errol races, but the rest of the game was cool.
 
Wait, why is it bad? You didn't explain in detail. I've never played that game, so I'd like to know.

Also, why is Uncharted a one trick pony? It's an amalgamation of many revisions to popular things done well, not one single thing. Especially Uncharted 2.

Which game mechanic are you talking about?
 

Card Boy

Banned
Retarded post is retarded.

Nice job.
I wouldn't mind if you were just bashing a game but it's a little much to just slag off such a talented and passionate studio like that for no particular reason. Should be banned to be fair.

Oh noes someone has a different opinion that differs from mine and insulted my favorite company, they should be banned!
 

Neiteio

Member
Retarded post is retarded.

Nice job.
I wouldn't mind if you were just bashing a game but it's a little much to just slag off such a talented and passionate studio like that for no particular reason. Should be banned to be fair.
Some people think Naughty Dog sucks. People don't get banned for opinions.

Me personally, I like UC2 and UC3, but I hardly think they're masterpieces.
 

TTG

Member
how long can Naughty Dog milk this style of gameplay before gamers realize they're a one-trick pony?

Having played the Uncharted games, it feels like Naughty Dog do just enough(not saying they have an obvious potential for more) with the mechanics to serve as a vehicle for stuff they actually want to focus on. Things like graphics, the look and feel of a movie and the pacing that goes along with that. Accessibility and God forbid the player feels inadequate for a moment.

My point is, I don't get the impression that their fans care much about the gameplay, so they're probably not worried.
 

pantsmith

Member
Jak & Daxter was great because of its zen-like platforming and cartoony charm, and so obviously Jak II might not be the best transition for fans of the original. Buts its still a really well made game!

My only major complaint is that I hated travelling through Haven City, so so so much, but loved everything else about the game. If they were to re-release Jak II without needing to travel between missions, it'd be one of my favorite games ever. The non-Haven City environments and gameplay are wonderful and a joy to mess around with, too.

So I disagree.
 

Jarmel

Banned
Actually, no. It didn't ever feel like it was inspired by GTA. It felt like it was cynically trying to *look* like it was inspired by GTA in order to try to catch some GTA fans' interests. I think that might be what I mean by the city not feeling necessary.

Yes it does, through and through. The weapons, vehicles, overworld, mission design, and tone are very much in line with GTA.
 
I hated Jak2 as well. It was such a letdown after the first game.

Adding guns and shit was bad IMO.

It wasn't a bad game per say but it just wasn't the sequel I wanted at all. I didn't mind the grim dark too much but the guns were a bummer.

Not every game needs guns man.
 

bridegur

Member
I think the last really great game ND made was J&D. It was derivative, but the quality of gameplay and visuals put it up there with Mario 64 and Banjo-Kazooie for me.

Everything after it has either been frustrating (the Jak sequels) or too safe and increasingly focused on a "cinematic" experience rather than gameplay (Uncharted, and it appears, The Last of Us).
 

Shahed

Member
Without going into the ability if Naughty Dog, I'll just say that I really didn't like Jak 2. Loved the first, but the 2nd has so many things wrong with it I don't know where to start
 

Neiteio

Member
Having played the Uncharted games, it feels like Naughty Dog do just enough(not saying they have an obvious potential for more) with the mechanics to serve as a vehicle for stuff they actually want to focus on. Things like graphics, the look and feel of a movie and the pacing that goes along with that. Accessibility and God forbid the player feels inadequate for a moment.

My point is, I don't get the impression that their fans care much about the gameplay, so they're probably not worried.
Pretty much the reason I'm not excited about The Last of Us. I've been playing enough pretty games on PC to no longer be smitten with how a game looks. I don't see anything in TLoU that actually looks fun -- just another game where it looks cool if you play it just so.
 
Top Bottom