or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Gaming & Content Streaming › Home Theater Gaming › PlayStation Area › Uncharted: Drake's Fortune reviews
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Uncharted: Drake's Fortune reviews - Page 21

post #601 of 664
Does anyone have tips for beating the pillar room on crushing? I did not have major problems on normal and hard, but it seems absurdly difficult on crushing. I made it to the last guy once, but was killed with a shotgun blast. Aside from my one close call, I have not been particularly close to beating it.
post #602 of 664
Thread Starter 
I posted some tips earlier...

- Use MANUAL cover at times for best results instead of always using auto-cover. This is where you manually get behind a pillar but don't press the 'o' button to hide. You still won't be shot, but it is easier to shoot one foe while protected from the bullets of three other bad guys that way.

- Blind fire will save your butt sometimes. While using auto cover, if you use the right stick to center a foe rushing to you (horizontal AND vertical centering), you can shoot and kill without using L1 to lean out and aim, which makes you vulnerable.

For the pillar room, I take out goons right in front, and then the ones up high at a distance. I use the methods above to kill those closing in on me, then I make my way to the back right of the room and turn around (manual cover instead of auto cover where possible) to kill the next wave.

You can kill them as they drop down BTW, and explosive weapons (grenades, the explosive pistol) can be used to kill enemies who are behind cover.
post #603 of 664
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeblow View Post

- Blind fire will save your butt sometimes. While using auto cover, if you use the right stick to center a foe rushing to you (horizontal AND vertical centering), you can shoot and kill without using L1 to lean out and aim, which makes you vulnerable.

This technique is vital to beating the game on crushing and will come in handy for a few other tricky spots later on. Enemies will often retreat and/or run for cover where you guide them with your blind firing. It's sort of a "corraling" technique.
post #604 of 664
Thanks for the tips guys. After about 10 more attempts, I finally beat the pillar room. The key to beating it was to have perfect aim and a lot of luck. If you don't kill the first few guys very quickly, they flank you, and then it's all over.
post #605 of 664
All of Naughty Dog's GDC stuff is on their site now in PDF form, including all the slides. There's the full Uncharted Post-mortem and other more technical presentations.

http://www.naughtydog.com/corporate/press-events.html



Naughty Dog's take on auto-aiming
Quote:


For a long time, in fact through the late winter of 2006 (through our first year of full production), we'd planned to use an automatic lock-on aiming scheme.

We were skeptical that manual aiming could create the fast-paced kind of gameplay we wanted to go for, and we were worried that the transition between the Mario 64-style follow camera we were using for traversal and the over-the-shoulder camera that manual aiming implies would be jarring.

We tried every possible lock-on auto-target selection mechanic and target-selection control scheme perturbation that we could think of, and lock-on aiming didn't give us the visceral fun of taking a bead and loosing a round that we wanted to capture. Also, it wasn't challenging and interesting enough from a gameplay point of view.

Quote:


A number of people on the team felt that manual aiming could work, and we were already big fans of Resident Evil 4.

So in Naughty Dog's spirit of experimentation and iteration, we tried it - and liked it! We managed to solve the camera transition issues, making it nice and snappy so that the game didn't feel like it had two gameplay modes, and was one seamless experience instead.

It seems like we were telling ourselves even back in the days of our first E3 teaser trailer, then that manual aiming would be possible. Though we then had a lot of new issues to puzzle over

Quote:


Manual aiming in a Third-Person Character-Action Game proved to be a lot harder than we thought it would be.

We knew that we would have to have an assisted-aiming, or Enemy Adhesion, system that was as superb as that in Halo - so that when the player aimed near a target, the game would have to subtly, almost imperctibly, move the reticle onto the target, and travel with the target, to help the game be optimally fun.

Quote:


We also knew that we'd have to overcome the issues associated with manual aiming in a third-person game as well as Gears of War had done (which is a game that we really love, BTW) - issues like those arising from the differences between the line of sight from gun-to-target and camera-to-target, among many other things.

So we studied those games a lot, and we eventually managed to get it right.
post #606 of 664
Thread Starter 
...and all of this could've been easily fixed (for FPS titles as well) if the PS3 came with a thumb-trackball in the place of the right analog stick as standard. Many that would've been an awesome marriage of control pad character control with the precision of mouse-look aiming.

With that said, Uncharted felt as smooth as can be expected with the control scheme available.
post #607 of 664
When playing on crushing, blind shooting with the shotgun prolly killed about 100 foes or so, and I blind threw grenades too, which killed a hell of a lot more guys than i expected... I'd recommend it!
post #608 of 664
Thread Starter 
Yeah, as long as the enemies are kind of in the middle of the screen, blind shooting works rather well. It gives you an extra strategic option to use in some sections that reward aggressive tactics.
post #609 of 664
Finally rented this game from Blockbuster. All I can say is that it brought back memories of how I felt playing Tomb Raider I. The sense of awe and mystery that has long left the Tomb Raider franchise returns in Uncharted.

The fact that the combat is top-notch is actually just a bonus for me. I thought I was going to dread the combat, feeling it would ruin the sense of exploration, but surprisingly enough, it is quite fun.

The lighting and shadows are the best I've ever seen. The sound effects and music add to the suspense.

I've been waiting a long time for a game to remind me of the original Tomb Raider, and I think it's finally here. I say think, because I am only on level 4, although I have no reason to believe that I will be disappointed.
post #610 of 664
It gets better as you go on
post #611 of 664
Thread Starter 
Just don't be too discouraged if the difficulty seems to ramp up; it;ll be manageable overall by the time you finish it and the overall experience is worth it.
post #612 of 664
This game really grew on me. I enjoyed it a bunch when I first played through it, but by the end of the game I was really into it. A second playthrough on Crushing brought it all together. Keeps getting better.
post #613 of 664
I started playing on normal, but realized that I wasn't even trying to fight with any strategy, which was not challenging at all. I didn't want to rush through the game, so I think I'll restart on hard. I already put it on hard for a couple of gun fights, and found it more satisfying.

I don't know if it was a glitch, but when playing on normal, I died during a gunfight, and when I came back to life, everyone was gone. I think I died a couple of times in the same area, so I was thinking it might be some auto-difficulty adjust thing. If that's the case, I felt like the game must of thought I really sucked!

Seems like games today often lack challenge on the default difficulty. I guess it's for the non-hardcore gamers to not give up so fast. Personally, I like a challenge, otherwise I get bored. Halo on legendary was intense. Ninja Gaiden Sigma was tough, but satisfying. As long as the difficulty is based on skill, and not cheap deaths.

Sounds like this would be a good game to play on Crushing. So is it true that I need to play the entire game on one difficulty setting to open up Crushing?
post #614 of 664
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnsmith808 View Post

Sounds like this would be a good game to play on Crushing. So is it true that I need to play the entire game on one difficulty setting to open up Crushing?

To unlock Crushing you have to beat it once on Hard (never changing the difficulty).
post #615 of 664
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnsmith808 View Post

Seems like games today often lack challenge on the default difficulty. I guess it's for the non-hardcore gamers to not give up so fast. Personally, I like a challenge, otherwise I get bored. Halo on legendary was intense. Ninja Gaiden Sigma was tough, but satisfying. As long as the difficulty is based on skill, and not cheap deaths.

Sounds like this would be a good game to play on Crushing.?

I agree 100%

I'm not to sure who these game magazines are hiring, but it is apparent that they think the best games are those where you blow through 100K enemies easily with cool weapons, story and difficulty be damned.

Seems they never got over the "Uberness" of the BFG to appreciate the story and gameplay in Doom (for it's time).
post #616 of 664
I just completed the game for a third time, this time on Crushing. It was tedious at parts, but still a good experience. Although I've put more hours into CoD4, I still think Uncharted is the PS3 game of the year for 2007. The gameplay, graphics and story are all so well done and everything fits together perfectly. The game may not have had the most ambitious design like Assassins' Creed, but the execution was nearly flawless.
post #617 of 664
One thing that I would have liked has to do with the camera. Now that most of us are used to using dual analog controls to move a character and the camera at the same time, why do game designers insist on having the game still control the camera?

The camera has an auto-centering feature so that if you want to walk/run and look up, it will automatically go back to centering. Irritating. At least give you the option to disable auto-centering.

Also, when moving forward and you turn left or right, the whole screen moves, causing the game to stuffer more than necessary. I play on a projector, so these things are more noticeable than for most I would imagine.

A good way to compare the difference in screen stability is to press the first person mode and move around. Notice how the environment is a lot clearer and stable. Now when you move in normal third person mode, move around, and notice how the environment gets blurry. Just because your character moves, doesn't mean the camera has to be adjusted as well. If framerates were locked in at 60, that would be one thing, bust most games are struggling to get 30.

Like I said, you may not get bothered as much by such things, but on a large screen, it can make your eyes get tired.

I think Splinter Cell has a great camera, so that it never moves on it's own. Hitman has a constant over the shoulder camera that works as well.

Maybe I just like the camera control on first person games. It's always the third person games that run into problems.
post #618 of 664
I'm still looking for a deal on this game... So far I've gotten/beaten Resistance, Call of Duty 4, and Ratchet & Clank. This is next on my list... but I gotta get it first... why doesn't anyone have it on sale?! I can't even find it used for cheap... It must be that good?...
post #619 of 664
Quote:
Originally Posted by moshock View Post

It must be that good?...

Yup.

Though I did manage to find a copy (new) from one of the Amazon "sub-retailers" for about $50 delivered. That's probably the best deal you're going to find for a while.

Trust me though. It's well worth it.
post #620 of 664
When is Uncharted II supposed to come out?
post #621 of 664
Quote:
Originally Posted by ohdanny View Post

When is Uncharted II supposed to come out?

Not soon enough! Next time, I'll need to set a gameplay time-limit for myself so I don't get through it too quickly the first time. Still the best experience on PS3 thus far, IMO.
post #622 of 664
Thread Starter 
They are rumored to be working on Uncharted 2, but no details are confirmed.

What would be cool IMHO is if they did something like the movie Godfather II where it switches back and forth between the past and the present. The "past" can be game sequences where you are controlling Drake on one of his earlier adventures before he died after some lost treasure, and the "present" sequences would have you control Nathan as he follows clues that you (as Drake) leave behind for him to solve. That way you can have some interesting puzzle sequences that involve two characters, but the characters would be separated by a few hundred years instead of the normal way games have you work out co-operative puzzles.
post #623 of 664
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeblow View Post

They are rumored to be working on Uncharted 2, but no details are confirmed.

What would be cool IMHO is if they did something like the movie Godfather II where it switches back and forth between the past and the present. The "past" can be game sequences where you are controlling Drake on one of his earlier adventures before he died after some lost treasure, and the "present" sequences would have you control Nathan as he follows clues that you (as Drake) leave behind for him to solve. That way you can have some interesting puzzle sequences that involve two characters, but the characters would be separated by a few hundred years instead of the normal way games have you work out co-operative puzzles.

That would be cool!! Great ideas!
post #624 of 664
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeblow View Post

They are rumored to be working on Uncharted 2, but no details are confirmed.

What would be cool IMHO is if they did something like the movie Godfather II where it switches back and forth between the past and the present. The "past" can be game sequences where you are controlling Drake on one of his earlier adventures before he died after some lost treasure, and the "present" sequences would have you control Nathan as he follows clues that you (as Drake) leave behind for him to solve. That way you can have some interesting puzzle sequences that involve two characters, but the characters would be separated by a few hundred years instead of the normal way games have you work out co-operative puzzles.

That is a neat idea. I wouldn't mind playing as Sully in his younger days either.
post #625 of 664
The only thing I hated about this game is the damn zombies. It took out the realism away.
post #626 of 664
Quote:
Originally Posted by like.no.other. View Post

The only thing I hated about this game is the **** *******. It took out the realism away.

Why should it be realistic though? Does that stuff bother you in the Indiana Jones movies too?

You should probably spoiler that too. I know it's been a while but not everyone here's got around to playing it yet.
post #627 of 664
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slacker George View Post

Why should it be realistic though? Does that stuff bother you in the Indiana Jones movies too?

You should probably spoiler that too. I know it's been a while but not everyone here's got around to playing it yet.

Agreed, on both points.
post #628 of 664
Well, I finished this game. I must say that I totally agree with the Official Playstation Magazine's review on it. The best part of the game was the first third of it. After that it turns into a shootout.

Now if that's your kind of game, then great, but I was really looking forward to playing a true adventure that focused more on the environments than on countless enemies.

It got to the point that every couple of feet you walked, you could expect another ambush.

The graphics were incredible the whole way through, but I kind of got tired of the destroyed look of everything. By the way, I didn't like gears of war either, just so you know where I'm coming from.

I kind of had the feeling like they ran out of time towards the end of development. It started off so promising, then degraded rather quickly.

I guess my hopes of a game that brought Tomb Raider back from the dead are dashed again. Why can't anyone make a game that focuses on exploration and adventure, and let combat take a back seat for once? Is there something wrong with idea that the environment is the main enemy, and not a million clones shooting at you around every turn?

The story and cut scenes were very enjoyable. Great acting and animations. These characters really grow on you.

For the sequel, I would love to see a game that focuses more on exploration and REAL puzzle solving. Another suggestion would to have more options on the camera. Instead of the Super Mario 64 follow camera, why not also have the option for a passive camera that will not change at all unless you change it (splintercell). The level where you jet skied up the river was ridiculous. The camera was going crazy!

All in all, what is in the game is of a very high quality. It's just not what I was hoping for.
post #629 of 664
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnsmith808 View Post

Well, I finished this game. I must say that I totally agree with the Official Playstation Magazine's review on it. The best part of the game was the first third of it. After that it turns into a shootout.

Now if that's your kind of game, then great, but I was really looking forward to playing a true adventure that focused more on the environments than on countless enemies.

It got to the point that every couple of feet you walked, you could expect another ambush.

The graphics were incredible the whole way through, but I kind of got tired of the destroyed look of everything. By the way, I didn't like gears of war either, just so you know where I'm coming from.

I kind of had the feeling like they ran out of time towards the end of development. It started off so promising, then degraded rather quickly.

I guess my hopes of a game that brought Tomb Raider back from the dead are dashed again. Why can't anyone make a game that focuses on exploration and adventure, and let combat take a back seat for once? Is there something wrong with idea that the environment is the main enemy, and not a million clones shooting at you around every turn?

The story and cut scenes were very enjoyable. Great acting and animations. These characters really grow on you.

For the sequel, I would love to see a game that focuses more on exploration and REAL puzzle solving. Another suggestion would to have more options on the camera. Instead of the Super Mario 64 follow camera, why not also have the option for a passive camera that will not change at all unless you change it (splintercell). The level where you jet skied up the river was ridiculous. The camera was going crazy!

All in all, what is in the game is of a very high quality. It's just not what I was hoping for.

Good summary. My feelings exactly. (Although I now know what I suspected (i.e. frequent pirate attacks) as I proceed through the game. I am probably not half-way through yet).

I enjoy the puzzle apects of the game, and can't help feel disappointed when the pirates appear (again). Once in while is okay. But I feel it is too often. I come from gaming like the 'Myst' series on the PC. So the puzzle challenges within Uncharted are my main likings in this game.

Overall though, it is a great game so far for me, and hope improvements will be made in future adventures.
post #630 of 664
Thread Starter 
I guess it's all about how the emphasis is decided by the developers. If they make it too "adventurey", then the action fans will complain there is too much mindless wandering.

The developers clearly wanted to make a linear, straight forward action-adventure with a heavy emphasis on action. They succeeded in achieving that goal, and due to the VERY strong positive response of Uncharted they will likely deliver a similar experience in the sequel(s). Adventure fans who want less shooting may have to hope another franchise has what they want.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PlayStation Area
AVS › AVS Forum › Gaming & Content Streaming › Home Theater Gaming › PlayStation Area › Uncharted: Drake's Fortune reviews