Shpeshal Nick
aka Collingwood
Agree with first part of first sentence. Disagree completely with second part of first sentence. The gunplay in this series has been less than serviceable up until 4.
It's fantastic in 4.
-
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.
Eurogamer: Is Uncharted more 'walking simulator' than action game?
- Thread starter Raylan
- Start date
Agree with first part of first sentence. Disagree completely with second part of first sentence. The gunplay in this series has been less than serviceable up until 4.
It's fantastic in 4.
SoraanTribal
Member
I think I wouldn't mind Uncharted 4's approach to lots more exploration and quiet moments if they were satisfying or entertaining. I mean, in comparison to TLOU where exploring netted you items you could use to craft or other neat collectibles that told their own side stories sometimes, you rarely find that here. There's no useful items to find, only treasures like in the past games which are used for almost nothing (bonus stuff only). The addition of journal entries and letters are definitely welcomed, but I would have liked more of that. I'm not through with the game (over halfway), but the exploration and climbing segments just aren't all that satisfying anymore, and they can go on for quite some time in this game. None of the set pieces so far have really been all that memorable either - at least compared to Uncharted 2 and 3 which will probably stick with me for a longggg time. I will reserve my judgment until I beat it (on Ch14 iirc), but I'm really not sure how I feel about it. Still a wonderful game, and I'm enjoying it, but I think I prefer Uncharted 2 and 3 so far.
NinjamicWZ
Banned
They may be saying it for silly reasons and expressing a half baked idea but there's some substance to be had in the conversation. First time through Uncharted 4, it's mindblowing, 90% "greatest ever" material. It can be just jaw dropping and show you so much subtle stuff that makes you ruminate about game design. Replaying it afterwards I find myself trudging through a lot of restrictive, obstructive, non-interactive filler that just doesn't do anything for me anymore after having seen/heard it once already, to get to the parts that I barely got to enjoy the first time.
The run and/or gun segments are often too brief to gleam any lasting joy from, despite them having been expertly timed in terms of significance and pacing (as it relates to the flow of an adventure) the first time through.
So many breathtaking set pieces ripe for gameplay scenarios that you can only linger in or briskly jaunt through. If each of these areas had been an encounter the first time through, it may have felt like a slog and a narrative obstruction, but on second viewing it's like negative space and a kind of tragic waste. There's a certain level of courage and audacity required to make something purely for spectacle, experience and narrative sake rather than maximum profitability. It's the type of freedom the medium needs to be afforded at this level... and it also takes willingness from the audience to be entertained in this way, and pay for it.
There's an encounter select, but that's such an unnatural, inorganic way to re-experience a game... it's something I don't feel like I need or want to do when playing say, Resident Evil 4, for whatever a game like that may lack in comparison.
I loved the game. It's not even as much a criticism as it is a perplexing conundrum that I'd like to see the medium eventually riddle out. This might be the current oil and water point of equilibrium for awhile and Naughty Dog keeps the mixture in a centrifuge to keep it solvent. I guess the way to think about it is that the way it feels the first time is worth the loss of a game that never was. It's a drug that only gets you that high once, but it takes you to a very specific region of outer space. Better to have loved and lost.
The run and/or gun segments are often too brief to gleam any lasting joy from, despite them having been expertly timed in terms of significance and pacing (as it relates to the flow of an adventure) the first time through.
So many breathtaking set pieces ripe for gameplay scenarios that you can only linger in or briskly jaunt through. If each of these areas had been an encounter the first time through, it may have felt like a slog and a narrative obstruction, but on second viewing it's like negative space and a kind of tragic waste. There's a certain level of courage and audacity required to make something purely for spectacle, experience and narrative sake rather than maximum profitability. It's the type of freedom the medium needs to be afforded at this level... and it also takes willingness from the audience to be entertained in this way, and pay for it.
There's an encounter select, but that's such an unnatural, inorganic way to re-experience a game... it's something I don't feel like I need or want to do when playing say, Resident Evil 4, for whatever a game like that may lack in comparison.
I loved the game. It's not even as much a criticism as it is a perplexing conundrum that I'd like to see the medium eventually riddle out. This might be the current oil and water point of equilibrium for awhile and Naughty Dog keeps the mixture in a centrifuge to keep it solvent. I guess the way to think about it is that the way it feels the first time is worth the loss of a game that never was. It's a drug that only gets you that high once, but it takes you to a very specific region of outer space. Better to have loved and lost.
NullPointer
Member
How does that work by the way?
Does that jump you straight into the combat encounters? Or is that just another chapter select?
perfectsil
Member
Too much climbing ledges for me, they are not challenging or fun, can't imagine people replaying the game would like to do that all over again
NinjamicWZ
Banned
It jumps you straight into the encounter and is a different entry in the menu from chapter select. It's great that it's there, all said and done.
Outrun
Member
Isn't this the truth?
I think that it is exciting how technical advances are going to lead to new immersive experiences that get closer to mimicking life (albeit, in an exaggerated and stylized fashion)
R3TRODYCE
Member
I'm at chapter 8 and it hasn't been enjoyable in the least bit for me. I think the shooting is good but it feels like I've been slowly walking around and pressing X to climb and jump. I might go spoil it for myself and look ahead to see if it gets any better because so far it's been a bore compared to the previous entries.
NullPointer
Member
Is Encounter Select a good option for those who just want to jump into the game's various combat encounters? Like, once you clear an encounter can you move to the next one or do you just continue the story as normal? If you can move between combat encounters directly, I could see load times being a big issue.
It matters when it comes to expectations. So much does.
Can you see how some players could be disappointed given the history of the series and how the new game has been demo'd? UC4 is quality, but its a marked change of pace from all of the previous games, and the big gameplay demos focused for the most part on the big bombastic combat encounters.
I know some posters here have a problem with calling it a walking simulator and that's definitely a tongue in cheek exaggeration, but I found myself jokingly describing it that way to a buddy of mine before this. I'm enjoying the hell out of the game but I've been really surprised by the downtime and how little combat there seems to be in comparison to previous games, which are fresh in my mind from replays on the remastered collection.
brandonh83
Banned
As long as they still provide terrific gameplay experiences, like Uncharted 4 does. It isn't just pretty with astounding production value, the game design is legitimately good. I had more fun with the stealth elements than I did the last Metal Gear, the environments and enemy patrols were so much more interesting for me, even if you don't have all the gadgets or whatever that you did in MGSV. The slightly more sandbox design was fantastic without being too big or boring.
I don't really care about graphics if I'm not having fun in some capacity. So while I expected it, it was nice that Uncharted 4 was more than just a pretty face.
I found Encounter Select really helpful to get good at the gunplay. It had been a while since I played an Uncharted game, and the shooting felt really awkward at first (I'm spoiled by the superior shooting in Splatoon). So I replayed the (early game spoilers)
Hector encounters
It does have to go through the whole pre-load each time you choose an encounter, though, even if you're picking the one right after the one you just played.
While the term 'walking simulator' is baiting, it's definitely more of a traversal game than pure action. The complexity of the continuous-narrative-experience is mindblowing. Uncharted 4 is a couple of generations beyond your typical episodic games with clear triggers and "look at object" as only possible interaction.
But the amusing thing is that the combat and the sandboxes is so crazy good. It feels under-used.
Though the pacing and overall game is more realistic and grounded this time.
It's easier to accept ever-ongoing conflict in a game like the Last of Us where the worldwide population has turned to monsters but it's a harder balance in a game where you are basically treasure hunting and facing off bandits.
But the amusing thing is that the combat and the sandboxes is so crazy good. It feels under-used.
Though the pacing and overall game is more realistic and grounded this time.
It's easier to accept ever-ongoing conflict in a game like the Last of Us where the worldwide population has turned to monsters but it's a harder balance in a game where you are basically treasure hunting and facing off bandits.
NullPointer
Member
Thanks for the detail Neiteio. Will definitely check out Encounter Select once I finish the story.
Encounter Select reminds me of the challenge modes in Wolfenstein: The Old Blood, and seems to be there for similar reasons, though the Old Blood added scoring and leaderboards.
Encounter Select reminds me of the challenge modes in Wolfenstein: The Old Blood, and seems to be there for similar reasons, though the Old Blood added scoring and leaderboards.
_Spr_Drnk
Banned
I'll be somewhat brave here (not least because I'm quoting Evilore), but because neoGAF is an amazing place that is almost completely free of shitposting and the vast majority of posts are thoughtful and positive thanks to the mods and the core philosophies outlined above. It's the main reason why I engaged two years ago and spent quite some time working my way up to member instead of just typing the first thing that comes to mind where the only intention is to earn (nebulous) internet points. I don't bother anywhere else, at all.
There are so many toxic communities here on the internet, neoGAF is certainly not one of them. I'll be accused of sucking up (don't care) but wanted to support what Evilore said from a user POV.
OT: Buy UC4, or do not. There is no try.
Stealth_Cobra
Member
I think the walking simulator comment is clickbait indeed. It's defintively more of a climbing game than a walking game, anyways, punctuated by story development, some puzzles and occasional fire fights.
And honestly, I'm fine with this. It's more of a game about exploration and less of an action game. Granted, it's on rails, heavily scripted exploration, which is a paradox in itself, but I feel like Naughty Dog does an admirable job giving the player the illusion of freedom while being funneled into the right direction... It's less about having a world to explore and more about feeling like the whole world can be explored when only one true path exist.
And honestly, I'm fine with this. It's more of a game about exploration and less of an action game. Granted, it's on rails, heavily scripted exploration, which is a paradox in itself, but I feel like Naughty Dog does an admirable job giving the player the illusion of freedom while being funneled into the right direction... It's less about having a world to explore and more about feeling like the whole world can be explored when only one true path exist.
Yes, this. My comment about serviceable was more about the previous entries. Combat in general in 4 is really good, a lot of it to do with the addition of stealth and the more open areas. Which are exactly the two things that put the gameplay of TLOU miles ahead of Uncharted.
Shai-Tan
Banned
I think this is a scenario where you can't satisfy everyone. A common complaint with Uncharted 2 and 3 is that it has poor flow to its storytelling because it's skipping between set pieces without sufficient unfolding of story or feeling of exploration. So you try to satisfy those people and the people who want it to be more of an action scenario over an adventure story will be less satisfied. I'm not suggesting that they got the optimal balance (and people who are into adventure story telling might not even like some of the new characters) but there just isn't a way to satisfy everyone; consider the other dimension of cutscene vs gameplay. There are a lot of complaints about cutscenes so then developers make a lot of walking/chase kind of talking sequences with short cut scenes interspersed but then the people who mainly want action complain that they can't just skip these sequences like they could with cut scenes.
Silent Chief
Member
Admiral Ackbar would be proud.
gamerMan
Member
I completely agree with you. The first time through you ignore all the faults of the limited gameplay because of the story. It's the most amazing thing ever. The second time through you want to fast forward through all the story elements. Trekking through the beginning more than once is a slog.
Ya, the article is a little hyperbolic, but I've got no problem with "walking simulators" (as much as I hate that name.)
Action sequences are a nice punctuation, but exploration has always been more important for me. The issue of it being "on rails" is less of an intention problem as it is a technical problem. Unless you're creating environments procedurally, you need a team of people to create everything. There's only so large of an open world you can make when you get so detailed.
well you have said it. Is a new form of game an ]"interactive movie." And like a movie every single detail is for the sake of the plot. Every narrative have highs and lows and those "boring" moments are there to build something up. What I like and dislike of your post is that you are validating and invalidating the game at the same time. "its okey because the game is different cause ND make plot then gameplay but then is not okey because the gameplay is repetitive and boring(every gameplay is; every game is repetitive by definition).
You are right about a lot of stuff almost everything you said is true. But that doesn't mean that the gameplay of Uncharted is weak per se. Imagine an India Jones movie with an impossible puzzle like the Witness with little "wow" factor.
And transformers 1 was legit. The other 3 not so much.
If uncharted had a bland story it might be in trouble. Imo the shooting isnt the best and when exploring im usually just waiting for that next crazy setpeice. With that said it is near the best story telling you can find in any video game series. That goes a long way and ill forgive almost anything for a great story.
Emerson's Essentia
Banned
Not really, OPs aren't required to factor in the lack of other user's ability to read the source or at least the quote in the OP before reacting.
The bans here are just as deserved as they would have been had such a rule been enforced say in the thread where someone from Massive said the PC version of The Division had to be kept in check with consoles during development (where in the source they then noted how glad they are about still being able to push the PC platform) and everyone went to cry about downgrades while in reality such thing is just a core philosphy to multiplatform development rather than an intentional attempt to make one platform look worse in favor of another one looking better. The OP contained core questions they wanted to discuss in the topic but instead it became an ages long thread about people just reacting to the thread title rather than discussing the questions asked in the OP or at least listening to the source to hear the full interview rather than basing their reaction on a single sentence in the OP.
I think the core question asked in the thread title is fine, if anything the use of walking simulator and the ensueing drive-by shitposting about Uncharted 4 being that made it rather easy to rightfully ban users who contributed absolutely nothing by just reacting to the thread title because it contained "Uncharted 4" and "walking simulator" in the same sentence.
iNvid02
Member
damn, this thread is uc3 8/10 levels of meltdown
the problem i had with uc4 was that it took one too many pages out of tlou playbook, the 'downtime' in tlou was exciting because you were navigating a collapsed world with superb atmosphere, had ellie as your companion (who had no idea of life before) there was the possibility of danger lurking around every corner, and you found things to craft to aid you in combat - all of these elements elevated the simple act of exploring a linear world.
its not the same with uncharted, there is no sense of danger but actual anticipation as to when you'll come across 10 shoreline mercs for your next combat encounter, there is nothing to find aside from mostly useless treasures and none of nate's companions bring that unique perspective ellie did - and as lush, dense and detailed as the environments they crafted are, they still cant capture the atmosphere from tlou that made exploring that world feel so rewarding.
the problem i had with uc4 was that it took one too many pages out of tlou playbook, the 'downtime' in tlou was exciting because you were navigating a collapsed world with superb atmosphere, had ellie as your companion (who had no idea of life before) there was the possibility of danger lurking around every corner, and you found things to craft to aid you in combat - all of these elements elevated the simple act of exploring a linear world.
its not the same with uncharted, there is no sense of danger but actual anticipation as to when you'll come across 10 shoreline mercs for your next combat encounter, there is nothing to find aside from mostly useless treasures and none of nate's companions bring that unique perspective ellie did - and as lush, dense and detailed as the environments they crafted are, they still cant capture the atmosphere from tlou that made exploring that world feel so rewarding.
jhmtehgamr20xx
Banned
You know something? It just occurred to me just how much this Eurogamer piece doesn't make a lot of sense. In my eyes Uncharted actually feels a lot like a more cinematic, modernized, grounded, mature-themed Zelda.
Yes, it doesn't have "dungeons", but what are dungeons in Zelda games other than self-contained levels wrapped up in an enclave and separated by masses of land? The only big difference btwn Zelda and Uncharted in that way is that there's less traveling to get to and from levels.
And yes, one game uses guns as its main form of combat versus swords in another, but the similarities are still very strong. The combat in both is solid, still completely real-time, still routinely involves multiple enemies and still gives you "loot" to collect for defeating them (rupees, bombs, arrows in Zelda, ammo and such in Uncharted). The only difference is Uncharted doesn't have a focus on sub-bosses or boss fights, which is mostly due to its cinematic nature.
The reason I mention this is to show how banal the entire article is. If they wanted to reach any further, they could claim Zelda is just moreso a "walking simulator" itself, but we know that isn't very true. I do however find it hilarious to see so many people here going into ways to justify the article's merit, without those same types perhaps recognizing how their criticism could be levied against other works.
And again, I'm not even too big a fan of Uncharted (4 is, however, mightily impressive and fair to say seems to be one of the best games of the gen, easily), but it takes the removal of a LOT of things to boil it down to a walking simulator. Things that are pretty integral to the games working the way they do.
Yes, it doesn't have "dungeons", but what are dungeons in Zelda games other than self-contained levels wrapped up in an enclave and separated by masses of land? The only big difference btwn Zelda and Uncharted in that way is that there's less traveling to get to and from levels.
And yes, one game uses guns as its main form of combat versus swords in another, but the similarities are still very strong. The combat in both is solid, still completely real-time, still routinely involves multiple enemies and still gives you "loot" to collect for defeating them (rupees, bombs, arrows in Zelda, ammo and such in Uncharted). The only difference is Uncharted doesn't have a focus on sub-bosses or boss fights, which is mostly due to its cinematic nature.
The reason I mention this is to show how banal the entire article is. If they wanted to reach any further, they could claim Zelda is just moreso a "walking simulator" itself, but we know that isn't very true. I do however find it hilarious to see so many people here going into ways to justify the article's merit, without those same types perhaps recognizing how their criticism could be levied against other works.
And again, I'm not even too big a fan of Uncharted (4 is, however, mightily impressive and fair to say seems to be one of the best games of the gen, easily), but it takes the removal of a LOT of things to boil it down to a walking simulator. Things that are pretty integral to the games working the way they do.
Comparing Uncharted to Zelda is a terrible idea. It's a comparison that doesn't do Uncharted any favors since it reveals how light on mechanics Uncharted tends to be.
The difference in mechanics alone is staggering. Nate has his gun and rope, while Link has his sword, shield, boomerang, bow, bombs, etc, etc, etc — usually like a dozen or more core items, each of which have multiple mechanics and are used in many more ways than Nate ever uses his one or two items. And the dungeons in Zelda are complex macro- and micro-level affairs that layer together and wind in on themselves — they're not simple one-off riddle rooms like UC4. And the "exploration" in UC4 is hyper-linear, or linear with the illusion of being semi-open (i.e.
Madagascar
I'm really enjoying UC4, and I agree it's unfair to simply call it a walking simulator, but... let's not get carried away here!
NullPointer
Member
You nailed it.
This was especially the case for me during the
driving around the volcano towers
Killing a dozen dudes in order to blow open a long frogotten basement with nothing in it but a random token treasure just felt like such a waste of the game's potential,
Prime crotch
Banned
All they needed to fix was the weird offset aiming has when you're aiming in cover and then pop out and your aiming reticle is way above where you thought it would be.
I agree with most part of the article.
I am huge fan for Uncharted series ( I even platinumed 1, 2 and 3) but I can't deny that I hate the long walking, talking and climbing segments in UC4. They've could made it much shorter or at least if they added more enemies encounters.
When I finished the game I didn't feel satisfied yet and I want more shooting because it was really really fun in this one.
I love UC4 and its excellent ending but it would've been maybe the best ND game if they just added more enemies to fight.
I am huge fan for Uncharted series ( I even platinumed 1, 2 and 3) but I can't deny that I hate the long walking, talking and climbing segments in UC4. They've could made it much shorter or at least if they added more enemies encounters.
When I finished the game I didn't feel satisfied yet and I want more shooting because it was really really fun in this one.
I love UC4 and its excellent ending but it would've been maybe the best ND game if they just added more enemies to fight.
jhmtehgamr20xx
Banned
Bruh, games have been going in this direction for a long time already. UC4 isn't the sudden surprise to bring this about. And arguably speaking games have been moving from being mostly skill-based since the late '90s since every successive gen's games have been, on average, easier than the average game from the gen before them.
In any case Uncharted is certainly not in the same category as, say, Heavy Rain. Y'know, a game that truly would be a walking simulator if you stripped away the story elements. Or at the very least, a big-budget FMV game.
Also, I'd like to think ND didn't create the "interactive movie". You can arguably say that was created with games like Phantasmagoria and MYST way back in the early '90s, or even a lot of those FMV games like Sewer Shark, Crypt Killer etc. You can even arguably say that the advent of games like FFVII and MGS started this as well, but in a way where the gameplay was much more substantial. Either way you cut it, ND didn't invent this style of game. It came well before Uncharted but began to cement itself with the PS1's later years. The thing of "cinematic gaming", if you will.
Uncharted just amped the production values up to 11 is all.
Oh I agree. There are nuances to the game design of the Zelda entries that lend them a lot of active engagement with the player, something the Uncharted games don't have. Then again, a lot of games also lack that. I made the comparison to show how easy it is to distill a game down to its barest elements for the sake of making an argument, even if you ignore many little details along the way.
That's why I was able to easily compare Zelda to Uncharted, and it's how Eurogamer was able to compare Uncharted to a walking simulator.
I know. Was actually testing a hypothesis of sorts, to see what steps Eurogamer (the editor who wrote the piece) took to jump through similar hoops to write this article.
Lmao you have never even tried a zelda game have you. These two series are as far apart from each other as mario and silent hill.
I was trying to figure out what is bothering me so much about Uncharted's gameplay and I finally figured it out. It's that my favorite part of these games are the fantastic characters, story, and action set pieces. But what bothers me is that the climbing part (which is the majority of the game) of the gameplay is not really gameplay. There's no meaningful fail state, as the article points out, and there's always only one path. So the gameplay really boils down to just trying to figure out where the developers were intending I go.
I love story only games, I love gameplay only games, and when they're married together really well, even better! But I feel like Uncharted leans so far on the story side that the overly long gameplay sequences are just preventing me from getting to the good parts (the character interactions and the great set pieces). The gameplay actually becomes a hindrance to the game.
The other day I was playing Final Fantasy 1 for the first time and after about 3 hours I realized that literally the only button I had pressed for the entire time was the A button to press the same ability; attack. I kind of realized that I wasn't even playing the game. I was kind of just turning pages on a non-existent story.
There's a great Jonathan Blow talk that is kind of related: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SqFu5O-oPmU
Or maybe I'm being overly reductive, I don't know.
I love story only games, I love gameplay only games, and when they're married together really well, even better! But I feel like Uncharted leans so far on the story side that the overly long gameplay sequences are just preventing me from getting to the good parts (the character interactions and the great set pieces). The gameplay actually becomes a hindrance to the game.
The other day I was playing Final Fantasy 1 for the first time and after about 3 hours I realized that literally the only button I had pressed for the entire time was the A button to press the same ability; attack. I kind of realized that I wasn't even playing the game. I was kind of just turning pages on a non-existent story.
There's a great Jonathan Blow talk that is kind of related: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SqFu5O-oPmU
Or maybe I'm being overly reductive, I don't know.
NullPointer
Member
I think so. Why else put it there?
If ND recognizes it as a valid criticism maybe we'll see more combat focus in any single player DLC down the line.
gamerMan
Member
You really can't compare Zelda to Uncharted because Zelda is a game that is designed around the game whereas Uncharted is designed around the story. Zelda continuously builds on gameplay ideas testing the players mastery of them.
The gameplay in Uncharted is repetitive because there is no progression in the gameplay ideas. In Uncharted you are introduced to an idea and repeat that idea over and over with no progression in the mechanics. You never feel threatened or challenged. You will push the same crate over and over. You will swing across huge chasms over and over. You will traverse by spamming the jump button. Everything is at a superficial level and Naughty Dog never asks you to show mastery of any of the gameplay concepts.
It's really getting down to game design and the progression of ideas. Mario is not a jumping simulator. It introduces you to an idea early in the level in a non threatening way and you have to demonstrate mastery of that idea by the end of the level. If you don't, you will die.
See basic Mario level design: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZH2wGpEZVgE
Uncharted never does that. Instead, progression is done by flipping pages through the next story element.
For example in Uncharted 4, you are introduced to the rope and will spend the entire game doing the same mechanic over and over. Sliding down a ramp and jumping across a chasm. It never progresses beyond that and you never feel threatened or challenged with the game mechanics.
Going with the Indy Jones theme, you can easily use the rope mechanic to build on gameplay ideas by designing a trap that Nathan has to get through using both the rope and the traversal mechanics. Here you can really test if the player has mastered the rope mechanics.
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
........No. No. Not even a little bit.
The only game that fits the description of a cinematic, mature-themed Zelda is already decades old (Legacy of Kain).
Uncharted has literally nothing in common with Zelda. Even when you squint real hard.
jim-jam bongs
Member
I don't really think walking simulator is the right term for what the author is describing, it's really just the same kind of gameplay which you'd see in a P&C adventure game. You walk around an area, click stuff to read/hear the protagonist comment on it, talk to people etc. Action adventure is a perfectly adequate name for that kind of game, IMO.
poodaddy
Member
I haven't been on gaf lately and just randomly decided to check out this thread as I thought the question was an interesting one......but man that first page is a graveyard! Why are people so defensive of this game? I mean being a walking simulator is not inherently a bad thing anyway. I'll be honest; my favorite thing about Naughty Dog's Uncharted games is the exploration and admiring the environments and incredible details and nuances of the maps as Naughty Dog is top of the line in this aspect, so I totally see what Eurogamer was getting at with this article. No reason for people to be so angry and spew vitriol about it, or really any game to be honest. It's all just opinions.
Jack The Nipper
Banned
I believe for some smaller devs or indies they make actual walking like games because they don't have the talent to create animation or any high end movement and gameplay. So, it does seem strange for anyone to make uncharted out in this way even if it has walking story parts.
When i think of life and how things work out, it's walking for the most part and for some parts or things to happen in a game it makes sense to walk and have something unfold or develope.
How would shenmue be considered? I feel they tried to portray that idea and I liked it
First pages of threads like this are usually best ignited.. Cause they often have little to say so I can understand the want for more enforcement there but I still feel bad. I'd be a bad mod I guess
When i think of life and how things work out, it's walking for the most part and for some parts or things to happen in a game it makes sense to walk and have something unfold or develope.
How would shenmue be considered? I feel they tried to portray that idea and I liked it
First pages of threads like this are usually best ignited.. Cause they often have little to say so I can understand the want for more enforcement there but I still feel bad. I'd be a bad mod I guess
wapplew
Member
Plus you get reward with actual useful scrap for your efforts.
It make a lot more sense for the slow moment in TLOU than Uncharted, but I still love them both, I just love non combat moment overall.
I actually enjoy the travesal in UC4 maybe because they give me the illusion of adventure better than past Uncharted.
Jack The Nipper
Banned
Most games have that activation point though. You could name the mario game jump simulation perhaps but eh..
I can understand people for not liking some games when they want pure coordination skills though.
I use to hate turned based for that reason actually.. So I'm happy with rpgs atleast going more of a action route and I leave the turned based games alone.
I can deal with walking in games but it's other parts of uc that get me and I think the writer had my same basic feeling on it and it's a very fair complaint for me
Only difference is I think they are more acceptable to my most unfavorable parts of the series which aren't the cut scenes just the short interactive ones.
IAmAnAgnostic
Member
I fully agree. I'm playing the game right now and I am in chapter 18, which I think is near the end. (So I believe I get to have an opinion on this by now) Just seems bizarre to me that there is nothing at all beyond collectibles to discover. Its like they created these big open zones and gave you ways to navigate and explore them but forgot to put anything in them to find! Not to mention that there didn't seem to be a lot of optional dialogue to discover either. I think I found one scene (and it was a good scene) between Nathan and his brother while exploring. But that's it.
I am enjoying the game way less than it feels like I should be, and I think this is a major part of it. I just can't see myself replaying the game and going trough what are essentially get from A to B "exploration" scenes.And I loved and replayed the Last of Us many times. I know there is a mode to only replay the gunfights, but that aspect of the game is the one they least improved upon. In fact outside of a couple of battles they are just as good or bad as in any other Uncharted.
Jean Grey Will Rise
Banned
Even if you disregard the identity politics mentioned in the article, playing something like ROTR right before U4 truly did make the latter feel like a walking simulator. That's not a terrible thing, though...given that some of the best moments in Uncharted were the slower paced, indoor story segments. It almost pulled off a Gone Home-caliber simulation at times.
Bl@de
Member
Same here. The visuals are great, the dialogue is funny and the characters are charming as always but so far the game is rather mediocre up to chapter 10 (except some short sequences). The "start" of the game is paced very poorly in my opinion. I also don't like the movement very much. Definetly a case of animation over control/gameplay. I've played MGSV before that and that game was a lot better when it comes to this point.
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
oops wrong thread