Separator
Looking Back: the Original Uncharted Is Stupid
Photo_203
Wednesday, September 08, 2010
ARTICLE TOOLS

 

Speaking purely of things I enjoy, Uncharted 2 is a great game. I’ve never been much for the first person shooters, but Uncharted 2 took all the obscure little unpleasantries out of the shoot-em-up equation and put what remained in a perspective that really clicked for me. I liked being able to take cover and blindly fire in a panic, and I liked the simplicity of the arsenal, as opposed to Call of Duty’s litany of guns barely distinguishable to the lay man. In these simple terms of entertainment, Uncharted 2 is a big success.

So I went back to play the first Uncharted, and I can’t stand it.

I know this because I spent a weekend going after Uncharted: Drake’s Fortune’s platinum trophy (I’m becoming a bit of a trophy whore), and it was the most excruciatingly painful thing I’ve willfully done in gaming in a while. Lately, the only thing that really grinds my gears when I’m playing games is multiplayer games where I feel like I’m constantly being pummeled by god-like players, but playing the original Uncharted really reminds me of the worst thing that can plague an experience: bad game design.

What’s amazing is that Uncharted 2 exudes the polish of well thought-out game design. Environments are built to provide a tactical challenge while never putting me in a position where I feel like I’m at a fundamental disadvantage because of the way I’m being funneled through a level. Not only this, but the mechanics in Uncharted 2 are deliciously refined. The experience of moving through the environment and shooting is streamlined to the point where I feel less vulnerable and more like I’m capable of accomplishing the realistically insane murderous rampages Uncharted 2 puts me through, which is a lot of fun.

There’s something to be said for a loss of vulnerability, though. I don’t necessarily want my games to build me a little empowerment playground. Problem is that the object in Drake’s Fortune was clearly to make me feel awesome, and it’s frustrating as hell to even try to feel like I’m doing anything but euthanizing a race of autistic pirates.

How comforting it is to me, the gamer who needs the coddling of developers, to temper the act of murder with ridiculous “wounded” and dodging animations that make the battlefield look like a Thriller music video. Bullets are more like a minor inconvenience than a death sentence, and more often than not, an enemy’s subsequent reaction is to stumble as if a bee just stung his elbow and regrip his gun to ostensibly blindfire at me.

Something I noticed from the Uncharted 2 reviews was how much praise was lathered onto its predecessor, which dramatically undersells the mechanical improvements that took place between the two. It’s almost like no one noticed, and when you play the two in quick succession, the difference’s are glaring. I mean, Uncharted: Drake’s Fortune just isn’t that good. In fact, it’s pretty mediocre.

In retrospect, Uncharted 2 almost invalidates Drake’s Fortune  Everything we were getting was marred in some way by the perceived novelty of combining linear traversal, shooting, and gamey puzzle solving (push four buttons in this order..), and hardly anyone is calling it out.

Now I can’t stand Drake’s Fortune. I can’t stand the way enemies slowly flank you with stupid grins on their faces, and I can’t stand how they don’t aim their guns but manage to kill you in two hits in crushing mode. I can’t stand how much blood spurts from their fleshy pirate bodies, and how long it takes for them to die. And I definitely can’t stand how retarded every enemy looks after they’ve just been shot in the shoulder. It’s like,hey, I shot you. You’re going to die.

 
Pages: /1
1
0
BITMOB SPONSOR
Adsense-placeholder
Comments (4)
Robsavillo
September 09, 2010 06:21

Your experience with Uncharted is quite different from mine -- I also played both Drake's Fortune and Among Thieves back-to-back, but I didn't feel that enemies were bullet sponges. I also played through on hard mode.

 

I do prefer the first game, mostly because of the awesome late-game shake up that forces you to completely change the way you've been playing. That kept it fresh from start to finish for me, especially because it was the opposite of the late-game gravity gun in Half-Life 2. Rather than empowerment, Drake's Fortune makes you vulnerable, which increases the tense challenge.

Photo_203
September 09, 2010 09:50

I agree completely - Drake's Fortune does make you more vulnerable, but it does it in a way that makes me feel like I'm deliberately at a disadvantage and for no discernable reason. There is no meaning behind the frustration of the mechanics past poor game design.The odds of my victory seem the same to me in both games, but in Drake's Fortune, I feel like the mechanics get in the way of my success more than they should for a game whose focus is blockbuster-like entertainment.

 

There is a way for vulnerability to increase tensity, but in Drake's Fortune I felt like I was fighting against the game's unintentionally bad mechanics more than I was fighting against my own tensity. 

No-photo
September 09, 2010 12:25

It isn't so much that Drake's Fortune sucked it's just that Among Thieves was so much better. The same thing happened to Mass Effect. Before Mass Effect 2 came out and basically owned the western rpg scene, Mass Effect 1 was considered a great game. Now when held side by side with Mass Effect 2, Mass Effect 1 comes off as a sub par effort.  Both are great games but the sequels make the prequels look like Superman 64.

Photo_203
September 09, 2010 12:37

I think Uncharted 2 highlights its predecessors deficiencies, but those deficiencies are still present. I'm biased because I played UC2 before Drake's Fortune, but it still stands that, from my perspective, Drake's Fortune is indeed sub-par.  

You must log in to post a comment. Please register or Connect with Facebook if you do not have an account yet.