• 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.

(Digital Foundry) The making of Uncharted: the Nathan Drake Collection

jett

D-Member
48 people, 15 months. I imagine this was the most expensive "remastering project" yet. That was a nice interview with a lot of information.
 

thelastword

Banned
I want these folks to do an Infamous HD collection for the PS4.

Infamous 1/2/BF were some of the best games on the PS3 and my own personal favourites.
Infamous and Resistance would be swell from bluepoint. Great interview, seems to be some really hardworking guys.

I guess a good reputation as a developer is contingent on the work you put in. Everybody is holding these guys to acclaim for leaving no stone unturned. Hell, I'm pretty sure they would do more if they had more time, but the quality of their shipped product (the game on disc) without the patches is what they delivered in the time allotted them and that in itself was excellent work.....
 
People keep saying this but why? What's the point when there's a likelihood their own game will be mediocre? If they do their own game then we lose the best studio for remasters and have someone else produce inferior ports. Might as well let them stick to what they know, it's not like we're short of original games.

Yeah, I don't get why people assume that just because they are the best in the business at porting other people's games that they would be good at making their own games.

It's clearly not a studio built for that.

On the flipside, they get the technical know-hows on how individual codebases and engines work which can give them a perspective on scope based on the games they remastered.

Add to that, they are doing a part-by-part dissection on some of the best games in the business. I don't see how that cannot be incorporated into their own creative abilities considering the rest of the industry does this OUTSIDE this point of view.
 
I hope they do Golden Abyss. I know it's the weakest in the series by far, but I'd like to see how they can improve it both graphically and update the gameplay. It'd be nice to play it without the gimmicks.
 

SoulClap

Member
Bluepoint said:
We've done a significant amount of work, unifying the games and improving aspects of control and aiming. We worked on bringing U1 and U3 closer to U2, but we incorporated some global improvements such as reducing the dead zones, and making analogue aiming more responsive and precise across all three games. We also allow players to increase aiming sensitivity beyond the maximum values in the original PS3 versions. Uncharted: Drake's Fortune had the most drastic set of changes, such as including grenade control and functionality that more closely matches U2.

I really appreciate this change. I just jumped into UC1 and making small adjustments to aiming feels so much better. Amazing remaster by Bluepoint.
 

Inuhanyou

Believes Dragon Quest is a franchise managed by Sony
Infamous 1 and 2 remasters, Demon Souls Remaster, Motorstorm remaster plz
 
Not that surprising, given TLOU work started after U2 and before U3, so the code that got branched off was whatever we had around then. I'm trying to recall exactly, but it may have been the engine that already had work for U3 started on it before it got branched, but that's testing my memory quite a bit about basically one e-mail that went out.

I get why both teams split off in different directions with the Uncharted 2 engine but was TLOU really started before U3? Was that because the U3 team continued working on the U2 DLC or something?

Anyway, I've finished U1 and U2 and just started U3 a couple of days ago. All three remasters are pretty incredible but man, I really wish they'd fixed U3's 5 year old on sugar high enemy AI and awful hit reactions. I don't remember it being anywhere near this bad on PS3 but maybe that's because I didn't play it immediately after U1 or U2 back then. Either way, it really kills the fun of the combat.
 
Bluepoint said:
One question we've seen come up is: Why don't you just render the cinematics in real time? The reality is that all the geometry and texture data required to render the cut-scenes takes up way more room than the movies.

Good. I have been wondering this for awhile.
 
Top Bottom