Naughty Dog lead designer discusses Uncharted 3 review

By Wesley Yin-Poole Published 28 October, 2011

"We've done even more to keep the player in control."

Naughty Dog lead game designer Richard Lemarchand has discussed Eurogamer's 8/10 Uncharted 3 review.

"The strict, linear design and tight camera management may contribute to a sense of being a semi-spectator on a fairground ride, but the benefit of this design approach is that it allows the team to focus every ohm of PlayStation processing power onto what is on screen at any one time," reviewer Simon Parkin wrote of Uncharted 3, out next week.

And in his concluding paragraph: "The execution exhibits a kind of workmanship and polish way beyond the ambition of most other developers, let alone their abilities or budgets. As an expression of all that a video game could be, however, Uncharted 3 is narrow, focused and ultimately shallow."

Lemarchand, who has read the review, told Eurogamer at the GameCity festival in Nottingham that he "agreed with some of [Simon's] points and not with others", but insisted Naughty Dog had done even more to keep players in control of central character Nathan Drake with Uncharted 3 than with previous games in the PlayStation 3 exclusive series.

"The way we design the Uncharted games is a very deliberate creative choice on our part," he said. "We've said many times in public we don't think it's the only way for video games to go. Indeed, when you look at Rockstar's games, whether it's Grand Theft Auto or Red Dead Redemption or L.A. Noire, those three games map out very distinct creative approaches to storytelling action games, which are quite distinct from what we do, but which we think are magnificent, and push forward the form in very important ways. Those games are so well crafted, and they take quite a different approach than we do.

"I don't think anyone at Naughty Dog thinks ours is the only approach. We love the diversity of approaches to storytelling in games. We're just trying to do what we've chosen to do as well as it can possibly be done. Hopefully, when people play it they'll agree we have made a leap forwards in Uncharted 3.

"I guess that's what I was a little disappointed about in Simon's review. We have done even more than we did before to keep the player in control from moment to moment, and to return control to the player really promptly whenever we possibly could. It's almost an obsession of ours. Players are going to notice it."

Lemarchand admitted that he cares about review scores "more than I should", but wished they didn't exist.

"I've said for a long time it's rather a shame we have to give video games scores in reviews," he said. "It's just part of the way things are done, isn't it?"

"On the upside, video games journalism has made great strides in the last few years towards a more mature kind of criticism that at the end of the day helps players figure out whether they as an individual are going to enjoy a game or not. That's what's most important.

"As games themselves have matured, we now see such incredible diversity in the kinds of play experiences you can have with any given game machine. Journalists are doing a good job of stepping up to bat, and rather than just running down the unique selling points of a game, really getting into the nature of the experience this game could let you as a player have. I am grateful for that. We're all doing better."

Picture of Wesley.

About Wesley Yin-Poole

Wesley is Eurogamer's news editor. He likes news, interviews, and more news. He also likes Street Fighter more than anyone can get him to shut up about it.

Read more articles from Wesley by visiting the Wesley Yin-Poole archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (181) Latest comment 7 months ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • kangarootoo #1 7 months ago

    "I guess that's what I was a little disappointed about in Simon's review"

    I'm not sure he was alone.

  • Shotofen #2 7 months ago

    Nice to see a measured and thoughtful response to Eurogamer's review. Unlike CliffyB's snit fit in response to the Gears 3 review.

  • Goodfella #3 7 months ago

    So can we conclude from this that Simon Parkin was in fact talking bollocks in his review?

  • djronz. #4 7 months ago

    I doubt hes too bothered, nearly all other reviews are absolutely glowing and im sure U3 will still sell at least as well as the second game.

    Just watched playr on sky, and they gave it 9/10 too, only real critisism was that it was "only" more of the same.

  • Alex_V #5 7 months ago

    A thoughtful response to Simon Parkin's thoughtful review. If only the rest of us could remain as dignified it might start to resemble a mature debate.

  • Vortextk #6 7 months ago

    All this backlash over a freaking 8/10? Extra articles all over the web, people going fucking crazy. If you can't handle outliers, don't make things that will get reviewed by EVERYONE and their mothers. Be happy your 8/10 isn't your upper outlier, game designer and fanboy alike. Looking forward to the game when I have money to buy it and probably playing through 2 again before then, but god give it a rest.

  • patchbox360 #7 7 months ago

    fact is with uncharted as a series, its been practically the same enemy type since the first game with little to no improvement in AI resulting in the battles panning out pretty much the same. building an amazing visual (also character/story) experience around a repetitive gameplay experience warrants a 8/10 tbh.

  • Hindle #8 7 months ago

    Post deleted at 23:04:43 04-04-2012

  • TheNonk #9 7 months ago

    On Hard, no Uncharted game is shallow, offering a series of tense showdowns that require multiple and varied approaches to succeed. As ever, EG fail to embrace what makes shooting and shooting games a real thrill, instead nit-picking superficial elements.

  • bionic #10 7 months ago

    I was disappointed with Simons review. He was obviously the wrong bloke for the job. Maybe in future EG should appoint Simon to review games that are more his type of game, as Uncharted obviously isn't his cup of tea as say it is mine.

  • peterfll #11 7 months ago

    I'm looking forward to playing this next week. If U3 turns out to be more restrictive than previous titles, then it will lend some credence to SP's review (although he should have stated this in the review as a basis for comparison). If not, his review remains flawed.

  • Pehmu #12 7 months ago

    I still don't see what the *real* problem is here. Since no normal person cares about silly scores and numbers anyway, it must be that Parkin was just being too honest. Uncharted is an amazing game but one might find it a bit shallow at times. Parkin said this out loud, and shit hit the (Uncharted) fan.

    You're gonna buy U3 anyway and as long as *you* like it, isn't that enough? Don't go apeshit everytime someone (slightly) disagrees with you.

  • zm26 #13 7 months ago

    Post deleted at 13:15:51 16-05-2012

  • bionic #14 7 months ago

    @djronz.

    Isn't more of the same what's its all about ?

  • mukki #15 7 months ago

    Well I thought the review was quite good, and can't tell how it compares to real game since the game is not out yet. Simon seems to make some good points and honestly an 8 is quite good, and even had the game had gotten less I would have still pre-ordered.

  • jtodroc #16 7 months ago

    @zm26 Developers having a hissy fit when their game doesn't get the review they expected is pathetic.

    I don't see any hint of a hissy fit in Richard Lemarchand's reply above. And by the looks of it, Eurogamer asked Richard what he thought of their review.

    So it looks more like Eurogamer are tryng to keep the "controversy" going over their review more than anything else.

  • Sunjammer #17 7 months ago

    @bionic Yeah, because the point of a review is to talk to a game's specific fan base from the point of view of that fanbase. Uncharted fans are going to buy U3 even if you stick a 1/10 on there. They are not the target demographic for an Eurogamer review.

    Simon's review talks about Uncharted from a neutral, reflected point of view, which lets those unfamiliar with the franchise come to the table with an understanding of what the Uncharted experience means.

    And for the love of god and all that is holy, Uncharted games ARE linear, tightly scripted experiences with no real reason to replay beyond collectibles and seeing the same spectacular set pieces again. Why do people seem so incapable of understanding that this rigid linearity detracts from the product's value if you aren't necessarily interested in watching amazing technology, but would rather like an unscripted, emergent experience?

  • loop7 #18 7 months ago

    Bring back Krudster to do the big game reviews!

  • Triggerhappytel #19 7 months ago

    From Simon Parkin's review I thought it had the tone of someone who wasn't willing to just enjoy the game for what it is - every positive feels begrudging, and the he doesn't do a very good job of explaining much about it apart from that it's pretty and it's linear. Plus, other reviews I've read suggest that while it is more of the same, ND at least make efforts to give it action-less sections, and humanise Drake a bit more, but I don't recall Parkin mentioning that at all.

    I don't take umbrage with the score itself, but I didn't think it was a very well-written piece.

  • djreplay #20 7 months ago

    @Sunjammer I get what your saying but that could be applied to anything.

    Like if I was to review RDR I wouldn't knock a point or 2 off for having to travel on horse back for 10 minutes to get to a mission, So I wouldn't mark down Uncharted for being linear.

    Focus on what the game is trying to do not what it isn't.

  • telboy007 #21 7 months ago

    I approve of this comment thread, excellent use of outlier and umbrage.

  • RedSparrows #22 7 months ago

    You should of course focus on what the game is trying to do, otherwise you can go around decrying pebbles for not being diamonds.

    However, if Simon Parkin felt the way he did about the game, then so he did. If he was left feeling that he wanted more control in this linear environment, and that the game stifled him, then he did. He didn't ask it to be open-world. He wanted it to be more than it was. And he still gave it 8/10.

    Games are maturing. Journalism might even be too. There's one factor which largely seems to refuse to, and that's the 'fans'.

  • spekkeh #23 7 months ago

    @djreplay why not? Should every game be scored a ten because for somebody out there it may be thr best thing ever? Or is your informed opinion about a game as valuable as that of another person?

  • RedSparrows #24 7 months ago

    @jtodroc Or, oh cynical one, they wanted to show they're not trolling, and asked ND their thoughts. But no, let's just assume it's all for hits and drag everything else down.

  • Badassbab #25 7 months ago

    Rockstar, Obsidian et al make the ultimate sanbox games. Naughty Dog and Infinity Ward make the ultimate linear games. Let's leave it at that.

  • Number1Laing #26 7 months ago

    If Simon Parkin thinks the Uncharted style of play is suboptimal, I think a Uncharted 3 review is the appropriate time to bring it up. If he thinks that style, even perfectly executed, is only a "8/10" game, then that's what it gets.

    I'm not sure why editorial sites are obligated to assign some slobbering fanboy of game XYZ to cover game XYZ.

  • Beano #27 7 months ago

    @Hindle I havent played U3, but U2 was quite open to different ways to tackle the levels.

  • berelain #28 7 months ago

    Now, I agree with Richard Lemarchand. But I also agree with Simon Parkin.

    But which is better? There's only one way to find out...

  • intpleeus #29 7 months ago

    I thought Simon's review was interesting and well-written. It's clear that he was a bit unimpressed and frustrated with Drake's Deception, but he also explained what the game did right and 8/10 is a respectable score. For me, it was the near perfect balance of critique and review. Simon expressed his own feelings about the game, which others may or may not share, while also conveying the facts about the game, which are the same for everyone.

  • HurbleBurble #30 7 months ago

    Let's be honest and grown up about this, shall we? I suspect even the most dyed-in-the-wool and cynical gamer would agree that the Uncharted series are 'good' and do an excellent job at what they set out to do: Provide an intense, cinematic action-thriller that is a cut above the usual pap as gamers we swallow without thinking about it.

    Peoples' lack of objectivity and gross-overreaction is a worrying sign. It should not matter what someone else thought of the game so long as, for yourself, it's an enjoyable experience. If anything, the proportion to which one person's perspective of a game has been blow up in to such a 'scandal' is personally quite sad and just highlights the immaturity and sense of entitlement prevalent in the gaming community.

  • martmart #31 7 months ago

    At least it drew lots of attention to the launch of the new website

  • Lemming81 #32 7 months ago

    I'm disappointed that Naughty Dog felt the need to say anything at all.

    Really, 8/10 is bad now? Jesus Christ on Ice Skates. Everyone needs to take a step back and chill the fuck out.

    7/10 isn't bad either btw. You should only start worrying people think your game is shit from 6 down.

  • theonlyix #33 7 months ago

    Well it seems like a welldeserved review, im just a little upset that other gamingsites just took the cash and gave it 10/10...... i mean, replayability above halo, cod, bf, gears?`seriously?

  • intpleeus #34 7 months ago

    The problem is the score at the bottom of the page. Should it reflect what the reviewer thought about the game, or should she try and guess how others will feel about the game? When writing the review, Simon was probably aware that most gamers would give Drake's Deception a 9/10 or higher. If his job is to guess, then he was wrong. If his job is to give it the score he thinks it deserves, then he was right.

    I don't know how games should be scored. I want to say the reviewer should just share their own feelings, but a lot of people use reviews to guide their purchasing decisions. They want the reviewer to guess what they, the reader, will think of the game.
    Edited by intpleeus at 28/10/11 @ 19:03

  • PearOfAnguish #35 7 months ago

    MAN WHO MADE GAME DISAGREES WITH OPINION OF MAN WHO DID NOT LIKE SAID GAME QUITE AS MUCH AS EVERYONE SAYS HE SHOULD.

    It's bad enough reading hundreds of comments from absolute fuckwits here moaning that the number below some words is not what they think it should be, but at least those cretins haven't got a vested interest in promoting the thing, aside from the apparent desperate need for their choice in games to be validated by a third party.

  • Smoped #36 7 months ago

    I hate that this thing is "news". It was a fucking 8/10 review, which means the game is pretty damn good. That people, both "fans" and pros, are up in arms about things like this means that there's something pretty sick about this hobby of ours.

  • Batfink #37 7 months ago

    @Smoped
    Damn right. I read that review and thought "sounds fair enough. I don't like this sort of tightly scripted game either, but this is obviously the peak of that particular genre"

    Turns out that expressing that opinion is write-crime. Sad state of affairs.

  • Goodfella #38 7 months ago

    @PearOfAnguish

    The problem (for most) isn't with the score, but then you'd know that if you'd read most of the comments under the review.

    Going round calling people fuckwits makes you an even bigger one if you can't even understand what (most) people were debating in a reasoned and mature fashion.
    Edited by Goodfella at 28/10/11 @ 19:17

  • the_dudefather #39 7 months ago

    all this hoo-hah over an 8/10 score?

    I love uncharted, but all this drama is embarrassing.

  • ronuds #40 7 months ago

    All of this complaining over an 8 has made me ashamed to call myself a gamer and be cast in the same mould as those complaining.

    What a boring world it would be if everyone thought exactly like everyone else, but that seems to be the only acceptable outcome for some people.

    Let's face it, if the score at the end of the review had been a 10, nobody would have said a thing and we would have quickly moved on with our lives - regardless of the negatives pointed out in the review.

  • PearOfAnguish #41 7 months ago

    @Goodfella

    I did read them, as many as I could take before the stupidity became infectious. Lots of idiots complaining about an opinion because it didn't match their expectations.

  • Devox #42 7 months ago

    @Sunjammer Spoken like a rational human being, amazed you haven't been banned....or called a witch at least

  • Pehmu #43 7 months ago

    "But IGN gave a 10! Everyone has to share the same opinion!" etc.

  • Goodfella #44 7 months ago

    @PearOfAnguish

    Still infected with the stupidity then?

  • PearOfAnguish #45 7 months ago

    @Goodfella

    Sadly, yes. It dissipated the moment I left the other comments thread but seems to have returned with a vengeance when you started posting. Must be a coincidence.

  • Osahi #46 7 months ago

    What was disappointing in the review was that, although it's critisism wasn't entirely unfair, it dismissed all the other parts of the game in favour of proving the point about one segment of the game, so that in the end the review didn't give an image of how the game is overall. There are moments where you lose control, and it is strictly directed, but most of the moments are truly interactive (the sinking ship for instance let's you run around freely while the water pours in) and the game is for a big part third person shooter, and one of the best of this day and age for that matter. That segment was just barely mentioned in the review, and that's just a failure...

  • Torkin #47 7 months ago

    I trust Eurogamer more than any other website when it comes to reviewing games. They gave Metal Gear Solid 4 an 8/10 when half the Internet was giving 10/10 before even writing the reviews. When I played it, I liked it less than the other games in the series, in fact I would give it a 7/10.

    But that's my opinion, even if people don't like it, and Simon Parker clearly has an opinion about Uncharted 3. Live with that.

  • Goodfella #48 7 months ago

    @PearOfAnguish

    Oh I am sorry, you must feel like Jobe in the Lawnmower Man, unable to handle a sudden rise in intelligence.

  • PearOfAnguish #49 7 months ago

    @Osahi

    Perhaps the writer felt that you didn't need to have all that reiterated when many of the readers will already be fully aware that the game includes shooting and running around, and that there will be a million other reviews which will just describe what you do in the game without ever giving any deeper criticism.

  • Tiberius_Gracchus #50 7 months ago

    Can't see any comments on PS3 browser !!!

  • PearOfAnguish #51 7 months ago

    @Goodfella

    Yes it is quite a shock, I now know what it is like to be you all the time and find myself incomprehensibly angry at the opinions of a man on the internet. Now if you'll excuse me I'm off to compare metacritic scores while touching myself.

  • Goodfella #52 7 months ago

    @PearOfAnguish

    Incomprehensibly angry?

    Ah, that old chestnut. Yeah, I'm sitting here absolutely fuming with rage and bile because of the review, have been for days.

    In fact don't be surprised to see me on the news for going on a killing spree at Eurogamer head office just because of it, yeah that's how angry I am.

    Nighty night.

  • nnepveu #53 7 months ago

    That was related to the slight problem I had with Eurogamer's review. I fully understand by their nature, a review is subjective and ultimately boils down to the personal perspective of the reviewer. However, lately, I have been noticing a trend amongst reviewers to consider it negative when games don't give you freedom of choice. It has always been my understanding games centered around freedom of choice belonged to a certain genre, sandbox. So, in other words, taking a non-sandbox game down a notch for not being a sandbox is like calling a hammer useless because it isn't a screwdriver.

    I don't believe people play Uncharted games thinking they will be sandbox games. They play them because they are swift, bombastic, visually stunning and just plain fun. Additionally, (1 and 2 anyway, haven't played 3 yet) they have strong stories and extremely interesting and relatable characters.

    Whenever I read reviews with those kind of nitpicks (ones noting the lack of freedom, or where the game forces you along a certain path etc) I cannot help but think of the recent South Park episode where Stan suffers from cynicism. Yeah, its true when you boil a game down to its basic mechanics they seem pretty stupid, and if you can't stop yourself from doing that, perhaps you shouldn't be playing them anymore.

  • evnewell #54 7 months ago

    Batman: AC is better. 8/10 is not a bad score, but it's the score the game likely deserves.

  • absurdkevin #55 7 months ago

    Well the Eurogamer review is very well-thought out and he lists the problems he had and praises the good parts of the game. It is a far better review than what Greg from IGN gave it. He gave a 10 for the same gameplay, 10 for story and 10 for re-playability. I am a massive fan of The Uncharted series but to give the replayability of this game a 10 is disturbing, Considering battlefield and gears of war, 2 highly replayable games only got 9/10. I think that this was reviewed fairly as I dont think that the game made enough leaps from the previous.

  • intpleeus #56 7 months ago

    Maybe a game that is trying, and succeeds, at being a 6/10 should actually get a 10/10. /sarcasm

    Half-Life 2 is a linear game. But the clever thing is that it does not feel linear. It was your choice to go left rather than right, and it seems just like you could have went right, but really Valve cleverly constructed the scene so that 99% of players "choose" to go left. It's a linear experience, but it isn't often criticised for that fact, because its linearity almost never noticeable or intrusive in the moment to moment gameplay. That is why it is a good linear game.

    I haven't played Drake's Deception, but it seems that people more often feel as though its linearity gets in the way of their enjoyment. It is more noticeable and intrusive, and some people, (maybe Simon Parkin) have less tolerance for that than others.
    Edited by intpleeus at 28/10/11 @ 20:04

  • andrewsqual #57 7 months ago

    @Hindle You really need to play the Tomb Raider games since Legend. THAT is what QTE's are.

  • silversun #58 7 months ago

    Review can be useful for when they make the next game.
    They can say well that was intresting i agree with this lets change this or they can say not, that is something we dont agree with in the review and actually we think people would prefer this.

    Getting a review like eurogamers review could be useful for them compared to every other site giving the game 10/10

    If i made games , which i dont i would try see it as a postive.

  • blarty #59 7 months ago

    I always think that reviewers in trying to be serious and ultra-professional about games lose sight of the very thing that is the antithesis of serious and professional - fun. I care more about whether a game is fun and entertaining rather than whether it strikes me as being too linear, or not groundbreaking enough. Maybe its the downside to all this 'games-as-art' nonsense.

  • Rajin #60 7 months ago

    @absurdkevin

    Replayabllity scores from IGN have been a joke from the moment they existed. Nevermind Greg, the typical american that annoys the hell out of everyone(looking at something objectively and then making a subjective opinion is the way a review normally goes. But Greg either doesn't even look at a game after ''something'' annoyed him or he builds a temple and starts worshipping the game.
    Edited by Rajin at 28/10/11 @ 20:18

  • RelaxedMikki #61 7 months ago

    Can I say that I thought the review was a bit short?

    Might be the new site layout, but the reviews for Uc3 and Battlefield 3 felt too brief. After all the main point of a site like Eurogamer is the reviews: sure we check out the forum and previews, but for a big AAA release a few pages of detailed review would be nice, especially as if you are reviewing a game pre-release then we are all aching to hear as much about it as possible...
    Edited by RelaxedMikki at 28/10/11 @ 20:22

  • blarty #62 7 months ago

    In all honesty, I love how everyone's defence and justification for Eurogamers review and score basically boils down to, 'well everyone else gave it a 10/10'

  • Scimarad #63 7 months ago

    I think I'm with Naughty Dog on this one unless UC3 is a massive departure from UC2.

  • nnepveu #64 7 months ago

    @blarty
    You might want to qualify that one a bit.

  • blarty #65 7 months ago

    @nnepveu Not in this thread, but in the main review comments, the number of '<Insert site here> gave it a ten, so it's good that EG didn't ' (abridged version) comments surprised me greatly

  • -cerberus- #66 7 months ago

    At least he's being calm about his disagreement with the review. Unlike some other shady developer that went berserk after reading negative reviews, only to update and re-release their crappy downloadable game three fucking times. N'est-ce pas, Dark Energy?
    Edited by -cerberus- at 28/10/11 @ 20:34

  • nnepveu #67 7 months ago

    @blarty
    I got you.
    I have always found it a little strange how people approach reviews. For some reason, it seems games are like sports. You root for a certain team (game) and talk smack when you don't like the outcome.

    Not sure why this happens, but seems like one of the many unfortunate symptoms of fanboyism that is so prevalent in this (and pretty much all hobbies)
    Edited by nnepveu at 28/10/11 @ 20:34

  • MRxVENGEANCE #68 7 months ago

    @Lemming81 Sorry, but you've got it wrong. Eurogamer asked Naughty Dog a question and Richard answered it.

  • blarty #69 7 months ago

    @nnepveu I think that whilst the review is a good read, and it is thought provoking, it is fairly narrowly focused, and maybeascribing a review score to reviews such as that UC3 one devalues the game, undermines the reviewer and, sometimes misleads the reader. Maybe it's Metacritic and all that kind of stuff, that is as incendiary as anything else is.

  • Syrette #70 7 months ago

    @djreplay

    "Like if I was to review RDR I wouldn't knock a point or 2 off for having to travel on horse back for 10 minutes to get to a mission."

    That's because you never have to travel on horse back for 10 minutes to get to a mission. I think Rockstar SD must have done an appalling job of making players aware of the fast travel feature of the campsite, because I see this incorrect criticism far too often.

  • nnepveu #71 7 months ago

    @blarty
    I agree with you, I had a problem with the review in a similar vain, if you read my comment a little below you will see it.

  • Savatage #72 7 months ago

    @goodfella - "The problem (for most) isn't with the score, but then you'd know that if you'd read most of the comments under the review. Going round calling people fuckwits makes you an even bigger one if you can't even understand what (most) people were debating in a reasoned and mature fashion."

    That would be the thread in which you called the reviewer a "tit", yes?

    A shining example of reasoning and maturity right there.

  • Silent-Hal #73 7 months ago

    Stay classy, Naughty Dog. Stay classy :).

  • Goodfella #74 7 months ago

    @Savatage

    That's the one. I didn't say I was a shining example did I. ;)

    But then of course I knew at least one person would go to the trouble of trying to 'dig up' something to prove a point. It was only a matter of time, and it was you, well done.
    Edited by Goodfella at 28/10/11 @ 20:53

  • Syrette #75 7 months ago

    Post deleted at 09:51:49 12-12-2011

  • Pehmu #76 7 months ago

    @Astro-Creature It makes perfect sense. U2 and U3 had different reviewers. Also, U2 is two year old. If U3 is pretty much the same stuff with slight improvements, it's no wonder if it doesn't feel as revolutionary as U2 did two years ago.

    See how it makes perfect sense now!

  • Goodfella #77 7 months ago

    @Astro-Creature

    Don't bother arguing, he'll just come up with 'a different reviewer' bullshit answer.

    I don't see how the fact a game that's absolutely brilliant, but doesn't improve much on it's predecessor deserves a lower score (or less complimentary text) because 2 years have passed and it's not as 'revolutionary'. Am I missing something here?

    Was The Empire Strikes Back more 'revolutionary' then A New Hope?

    Utter bollocks.
    Edited by Goodfella at 28/10/11 @ 21:10

  • Pehmu #78 7 months ago

    Goodfella: "Don't bother arguing, he'll just come up with 'a different reviewer' bullshit answer."

    Correctomundo:
    Forza 3 reviewed by Oli Welsh
    Forza 4 reviewed by Martin Robinson

    "I don't see how the fact a game, that's absolutely brilliant, but doesn't improve much on it's predecessor deserves a lower score. Am I missing something here?"

    Yes. It's that "different reviewer" bullshit thing.

  • Goodfella #79 7 months ago

    @Pehmu

    Afraid not, it was you who implied it should automatically be rated lower. Read your own post back.

  • Number1Laing #80 7 months ago

    @intpleeus No, Half-Life 2 feels every bit as linear as it actually is. Any exploration cuts you off after around 100 paces or so. I don't think Valve is even trying to do otherwise with that game (in other words, they are doing exactly the same thing as ND is with Uncharted).

    It actually is quite often criticized for not being linear, although you wouldn't see it on the review sites. Even a site like Eurogamer is probably afraid of the mob that would come from giving a Half-Life game a negative review (and honestly, Episode 1 was crap!).

  • des #81 7 months ago

    Uncharted 3 designer defends Uncharted,news at 11!!!
    Somebody should ask head of Sony what he thinks about PS3

    meh

  • JeroenZM #82 7 months ago

    An 8 is a great score by the way. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.

  • Ahskay #83 7 months ago

    It's getting ten's and full stars all over the world, who even cares about a review that's narrow, focused and ultimately shallow.
    Edited by Ahskay at 28/10/11 @ 21:57

  • DBLue #84 7 months ago

    Bleh. An 8 is not going to tarnish Uncharted 3's reputation and is certainly not going to stop most people in this thread from buying - and enjoying - the hell out of it.

    I absolutely loved Metal Gear Solid 4, but I'm not such a blind fanboy as not to realize Kojima's heavy-handed writing and cutscene direction would - as it did - annoy quite some people, reviewers included; just because I didn't mind - and admitedly enjoyed - watching a forty-minute cutscene showing the tribulations of a little girl who couldn't properly fry an egg, it doesn't mean nobody else out there would find it pointless and stupid.

    My favorite game of 2010, NieR, was a bland-looking, low budget, repetitive action-RPG, and was scored as such pretty much everywhere. It also had fantastic writing, a touchingly poignant story, absolutely stellar soundtrack and some really clever gameplay tricks. What if Gamespot gave it a godamn 5.0? It was awesome regardless.

    The same applies here. Do you enjoy Uncharted? If so, how is someone's honest (if controversial) opinion going to affect your enjoyment? Read the review and move on, people.

  • seasidebaz #85 7 months ago

    it allows the team to focus every ohm of PlayStation processing power

    Power is measured in WATTS, resistance is measured in OHMS. You can tell he's a designer.
    Edited by seasidebaz at 28/10/11 @ 22:03

  • Triggerhappytel #86 7 months ago

    This can only be settled with a Quake 3 deathmatch...

  • Killerbee #87 7 months ago

    Very sensible and measured response from Naughty Dog.

    I think the problem with Simon Parkin's review is that he chose to single out very specific design choices for his criticism - the linearity, the very direct focus on the narrative and the clearly structured gameplay that is intended to deliver the player between set pieces.

    Fair enough, he personally didn't like the direction Naughty Dog has chosen to take, and I'm not saying games should only be reviewed by fanbois of the relevant platform or franchise, but they should be looked at from the point of view of the interested consumer who comes to the review looking for some guidance on whether to spend £40 on the game or not.

    A review that largely read like Simon wanted to be reviewing Skyrim (or whatever) instead, is no help to anyone. Lemarchand's comment:
    On the upside, video games journalism has made great strides in the last few years towards a more mature kind of criticism that at the end of the day helps players figure out whether they as an individual are going to enjoy a game or not. That's what's most important.
    [/quote]

    I feel like I've decided I can't wait to play Uncharted 3 in spite of Simon Parkin's review, rather than because of it and is that really what Eurogamer intended?
    Edited by Killerbee at 28/10/11 @ 22:22

  • Killerbee #88 7 months ago

    @seasidebaz

    Er... that quote was from Simon Parkin's review, not Lemarchand.

    "You can tell he's a video games journalist"

    Fixed that for you.

  • SeanBeansGravyBoat #89 7 months ago

    Oh look, it's EUROGAMER publishing yet another story about the "controversial" review of Uncharted 3 on EUROGAMER.

    Seriously, this is getting old. The review is not, in any way, controversial. So why don't you stop going on and on and on about it yourselves to try and fuel this particular fire and move on to giving your next 8/10 review to try and get a few more hits.

  • Azazel #90 7 months ago

    Post deleted at 09:51:49 12-12-2011

  • penhalion #91 7 months ago

    While I enjoyed Uncharted 1 and 2. How the heck did 3 introduce death as a reward for deviate from a set path. So exploring is out now is it. Then it ramps up the on rails sections that require pretty much no input from the player.

    This seems to turn the game into a limited interaction farce. If I wanted that I'd rent a movie for a heck of a lot less that 40 quid. So what if it looks great. I ultimately buy a game to play it not stare at it in awe.

    A game that does this in todays age in no way should rate a 10/10. If people are so upset about the review then go buy the game and play and enjoy it. If however, you find as you play, that Simon's review was actually acurate. I wonder how many of you will have the integrity to come back here and admit it.

  • Pehmu #92 7 months ago

    Goodfella: "Afraid not, it was you who implied it should automatically be rated lower. Read your own post back."

    You mean this one:
    U2 and U3 had different reviewers. Also, U2 is two year old. If U3 is pretty much the same stuff with slight improvements, it's no wonder if it doesn't feel as revolutionary as U2 did two years ago.

    As you can see, I didn't say it _should_ automatically be rated lower. I was only trying to give an explanation for why U3 might have gotten its lower score.

    Tom Bramwell's opinion was back in 2009 that Uncharted 2 deserves 10/10. Two years later, a completely different person reviews its sequel, and people are confused by its lower score.
    First you'd have to ask Parkin, what sort of score he would've given to U2 when it was released. Maybe it would've been 9/10, I don't know. In that case 8/10 would sound completely reasonable if U3 really isn't that different from U2. You can't overlook the facts that we have two different reviewers here and that time has passed since U2 was released.

    It can't be so difficult to understand such an obvious thing.
    Edited by Pehmu at 29/10/11 @ 19:08

  • MisterCraig #93 7 months ago

    Why do game devs have to challenge a perfectly honest opinion? This gentleman has stated he wishes numerical values weren't slapped onto reviews, yet he is most likely basing his response on just that.

    Is every big budget game going to get the same treatment? Clify B coming at Eurogamer for Gears 3 is another example of a baby throwing its toys out the pram.

    Just kill the numerical values, and let people think for themselves instead of insisting every aspect of formulating an opinion is taken away from the reader.

  • peterfll #94 7 months ago

    @penhalion Well I will for one, if I find U3 a lesser experience than U2 or U1. Thing is, if that is true, Simon could have saved a lot of misunderstanding by actually stating as much in the review. You know, what a lot of reviews tend to do, compare against the predecessors, especially when reviewing the third in a franchise?

    Also, no sudden death in previous Uncharteds? You obviously made the right steps every time first time... I would often kill our boy Nathan from falling a couple of feet.. just as he goes on to fall another 10 without a scratch in the next cut scene.

  • ShiroBen #95 7 months ago

    Here's the question you have to ask yourself, as a game designer:

    What choices does the player have, at any given moment?

  • Mdpmdp #96 7 months ago

    I haven't played Uncharted 2, or 3, an eight may well be a fair score for all I know. However as a gamer something sits really uneasy with me from the review. It's the fact that the reviewer calls it 'the most exciting game in the world' and 'as a slice of one-view entertainment... peerless', but uses that as a basis for criticism.

    IMHO how exiting, entertaining or fun a game is is ultimately the only criteria you can judge it by, regardless of the content or mechanism by which it achieves that response or any faults along the way.

    If you manage to come to the conclusion that a game is literally the most exciting you have ever played (as is the meaning of peerless), but that still isn't good enough for you on the basis of it not being an 'expression of all that a video game could be' then either

    (i) You're looking for something that really doesn't need to be there and video games aren't for you. I recommend real life to meet your needs.

    (ii) It's a load of pretentious twaddle and you're filling your review with hyperbole for effect.

  • ThinkingGamR #97 7 months ago

    Wow, clearly Naughty Dog lead game designer Richard Lemarchand is a totally upset fanboy, because he's defying Simon Parkin's amaaazzzing review. lol talk about overreaction. Doesn't he know 8 is a good score? Last I checked 8=good, not bad haha. I wish these fanboys would shut up and stop being so emotional about game reviews.
    Edited by ThinkingGamR at 28/10/11 @ 23:25

  • ThinkingGamR #98 7 months ago

    @Goodfella Uh Have you PLAYED Uncharted 3? I didn't think so FAN BOY! Man, you are so childish. Stop trying to fit Simon Parkin into your little BOX of conformity! You need to respect freedom of speech!

  • ThinkingGamR #99 7 months ago

    @Sunjammer Why did you spend 2 paragraphs defending Simon's review only to launch into a staunch counter argument against it? Do you have multiple personality disorder?

  • ThinkingGamR #100 7 months ago

    @zm26 Hahaha you KNOW Amy Hennig is crying herself to sleep at night b'cuz of this review. "Why doesn't Simon Parkin love my WONDERFUL cut scenes and scripted sequences!??? WHHHYYY" hahahah we don't want ur dumb writing Amy! STICK TO MOVIES!!!!!!

  • HurbleBurble #101 7 months ago

    I think this XKCD sums this up the whole furor rather succinctly
    Edited by HurbleBurble at 28/10/11 @ 23:54

  • nnepveu #102 7 months ago

    @Mdpmdp
    I agree with you. There are definitely inconsistencies in his review. Generally, I never complain about reviews because I fully understand that they are subjective and pure opinion. However, the review itself just does not seem well done. It has nothing to do with the score, just the things he finds issue with. For example, his biggest complaint is the little ways the game keeps you on track, in other words he is lamenting the fact Uncharted 3 is not an open world game. But, it was not meant to be. How does it make sense to fault something for failing to be something it is not trying to be?

  • dsmx #103 7 months ago

    Reviews shouldn't have scores anyway but if you insist on giving them out they will never be right, someone will always find issue with it.

    But that's not the main problem here, the reviewer wants it to be something it's not and that is unfair. You don't go into BF3 and moan that there's not enough platforming segments, or go into a mario game and complain there's not enough tanks and artillery pieces.

    If you want to do a critique on the series as a whole then do a separate article on it, but you review a game based on it's own merits and if it's in a series of games how it compares to the previous titles. You don't start moaning about it being to linear when the series as a whole was never about being a sandbox game.

  • nnepveu #104 7 months ago

    @dsmx exactly

  • polaris70 #105 7 months ago

    I think in the end, what I take from this is how talented and fkin amazing Rockstar are at creating games, and I think the U3 developer was praising them in a roundabout way. Sure, every game doesn't need to be open-world but the ambition that Rockstar display I don't think can be acheived by other developers apart from maybe Bethesda. We're lucky to have these games.

  • Flyers021 #106 7 months ago

    I read in Parkin's review of Red Dead Redemption that the reason he gave it an 8 was because it was not linear enough and had trouble finding the trigger points for the cutscenes. Is that true? In his review of Child of Eden he was high the whole time he played, enjoyed the colors, giving it a deserving 9. He has to be the best reviewer of ALL TIME! I don't understand how that stupid Uncharted designer has any right to criticise the Sacred Writings of the Holy Parkin...I only wish that he could be promoted to take over Wesley Yin-Poole's position and just review all the games. I would only then bookmark Eurogamer as my home page.

  • marty_k #107 7 months ago

    Had it pre-ordered and can't wait to have more Uncharted, even if it's more Uncharted 2 with a different number in the title.

  • deez #108 7 months ago

    To be honest, the more games diverse, the more more we will get wildly different views. This is good, it suggests a vibrant entertainment form, not everyone likes Bambi for example, yet it's tough to deny it's a classic.

    Got a great score, but people will argue until the cows come home. Game fans platform and game type bickering is pathetic.

    Without playing it, it's probably a fair result, but if it had a 10, or a 6, you'd still be here arguing. it's all bent.

  • deez #109 7 months ago

    @Flyers021 RDR was definitely an 8, sorry.

  • KongRudi #110 7 months ago

    @polaris70
    The review here is basically the same as the reviewer of GTA5 start complaining about the pacing of that game, that it takes too long between the cool stuff happening because the developers allows the player to choose how they play.

    Or if you want to stretch it, if the reviewer started to complain that there were two tennis-players in Virtua Tennis' review, there should be 22 players, like in Fifa because it would be more fun to play a soccer-game.

    The single-player campaign in the previous Uncharted games, atleast has allways ensured that the player get a fantastic experience with perfect pacing.
    The only reason why alot of people think this is a acceptable review, were because he gave it a relatively high score.

    But in reality this review didn't focus on the game, or it's various modes - just what the reviewer tought what this game should have been.
    And you don't have to be a rocket-scientist to see that he wants Uncharted 3 tobe a sandbox game, instead of a linear action adventure with a popcorn-story, with movie-quality.

    And I think that might be were the developer disagree.

  • steoconnell #111 7 months ago

    Still can't help feel that EG gave the score it did to cause controversy and get people to visit the site so they get more hits and get charge more for advertising.

  • Flyers021 #112 7 months ago

    @deez

    Yea, out of 50 reviews on gamerankings.com, only three were 8s. That is a definite 8. Everything else was 9 or higher...but I will give you the benefit of the doubt.

  • Mr_Git #113 7 months ago

    People really should learn that whilst, "more of the same" may seem like a sure full marks winner of a game because it's your favourite will not necessarily apply to a games review. I love the Uncharted games for what they are and would more than happily pay money for another similar iteration. Not everyone will feel the same, though.

  • omniscient #114 7 months ago

    Ohh Eurogamer you Naughty Dog, there are better ways to get exclusives.

  • stryker1121 #115 7 months ago

    @TheNonk I missed the part where Simon was nit-picking the game. The points he brought up dealt w/ the overarching problems of what he felt was a fun and supremely polished but overly scripted, flashy and shallow experience. How is that "nitpicking" exactly?

  • Grayvern #116 7 months ago

    Sounds like a measured response but sighting RDR and Rockstar is a little weird as they tell their stories with bookend cutscenes and in game quips in much the same way uncharted does.

    As to Simon Parkin it's an honest critical response, if you take it as a given that no game can be critiqued in a true vacuum then as a critic Mr Parkin seems to simply be reacting to the predominant, and in some cases crushing, linearity prevalent in many of the most popular games du jour.

    This is however not necessarily an indication that the review is unfair just honest.

    When the quality of a game is basically not in question and everyone knows it's brilliant or is going to be then I'd rather a review like Eurogamers.

    I say this because reviews are literary as well as consumer advice. The best solely consumer advice review, for Uncharted 3, from a site frequented by people with a high probability of having played 2, or knowing of it, is to simply write:
    http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/uncharted-2-among-thieves-review

    Uncharted 3 is basically more of the same it is therefore brilliant, ask yourself if you want more of the same, and if you do you'll have a great time.

    If you are interested in 3 and you have no experience of 2 then read the review link and you'l probably conclude that you should bloody well buy 2 as it won't put a significant dent in you pocket at this point.

    For series fans the changes of note are a more fleshed out multiplayer, that is okay, and the ability in single player to throw attackers grenades back from cover.

    9

    Fin.


    This is deliberately simplistic however to review the game in a more traditional way is to dent the thrill of discovery story wise and become bad consumer advice and trite critique. Therefore the best consumer advice is to simply say as little as possible but then reviews cannot simply be consumer advice. And so the best course of action becomes to discuss discuss tangential matters minimiseing the traditional review intermix as much as possible.

    Reviews cannot exist purely to legitimate; purchasers, pre-purchasers or about to be purchasers, as they then become bad critique.

    Cor blimy that were long weren't it.
    Edited by Grayvern at 04/02/12 @ 00:35

  • Nazo #117 7 months ago

    The Uncharted review was one of the most pretentious, masturbatory pieces I've read on this site for a while. It seemed more about the reviewer showing how clever he could be than actually reviewing the game.
    It seems like EG is trying to get a reputation as hard reviewers often giving big releases (or just about any release, really) 8/10 where everyone else gives 9 or 10 but really EG's credibility is just getting worse and worse in my eyes.

    The new site that requires me to horizontally scroll to read the content on the portable version is the icing on the uselessness cake.

  • Kaminari #118 7 months ago

    EG would like you to believe that 8/10 is a great note. It's not.

    In the world of Metacritic (which EG are willingfully and proudly part of), 8/10 means 80%. It's a fact: it's a shitty score, especially for a triple A game of the caliber of U3.

    What bothers me is not the note itself. It's the ill intention behind the note. U3 didn't deserve 80%, and EG "critics" perfectly knew it.

  • drjitz #119 7 months ago

    Why is a reviewer not allowed to give a game an 8/10 if he thinks that all it warrants? I think a few years ago everybody agreed that too many games were getting near perfect scores when really no one has an answer on what a 10/10 videogame is. Personally I'm a fan of Uncharted and it's easy to play, cinematic flare. Make no mistake it's a game made for idiots, with any inkling of a difficulty curve ground away to a smooth finish. The reviewer says it's a great game, but he didn't appreciate the over-abundance hand holding, and lack of innovation for such a storied series. Uncharted is hand-holding as Gears is cover based shooting, that doesn't mean a game can't be criticised for relying on those qualities. Why so many are taking the review as a personally attack is mystifying, it's his opinion, yes it hurts the metacritic score, it might be 92 now instead of 94. Who cares, the point he's making is this well may be starting to dry up if Naughty Dog keep coming back to it.

  • Turfschipper #120 7 months ago

    Strange discussion this. 8 out of 10 is a great score. You should focus on all the other crap reviews giving a 10 for games that are not perfect at all.

    The whole game sites review business is just bullshit anyway, giving 7 and 8 for shit games and 9 and 10 for pretty good games.

  • blarty #121 7 months ago

    @Grayvern 'As to Simon Parkin it's an honest critical response, if you take it as a given that no game can be critiqued in a true vacuum then as a critic Mr Parkin seems to simply be reacting to the predominant, and in some cases crushing, linearity prevalent in many of the most popular games du jour.'

    Then surely that deserves a better and well thought out article regarding linearity in games in general citing Uncharted, amongst others, as an example, rather than using a review of a singular game as a platform for that, where the critique is squarely aimed at that game.

  • RedSparrows #122 7 months ago

    But Blarty, if Uncharted suffers from such an issue and IF Parkin is tired of that in ALL games, then he's perfectly entitled to say it. It's not like you'd expect a general dislike of bugs to lead to a situation where people can't mention them in reviews because 'it should go in an article about bugs in games'.

  • RedSparrows #123 7 months ago

    @Nazo Parkins review was good. It seems your 'analysis' if the only really pretentious part of this. If his review was too high-brow for you, then it only goes to show how far some gamers have to go before they're taken seriously

  • Biker_Bob_1971 #124 7 months ago

    Post deleted at 15:13:21 09-05-2012

  • Savatage #125 7 months ago

    "In the world of Metacritic (which EG are willingfully and proudly part of), 8/10 means 80%."

    Wow, thanks for letting us know.

  • Kili102 #126 7 months ago

    Wow, these Uncharted reviews really make me wonder about the value of sourcing information from videogames websites. Sometimes it seems that videogames are being used to stimulate tribal loyalties in the same way that sports teams are. Remember, this type of "debate" only helps the people that are selling you these games, and you buying them like the happy little consumers you are. Late year exclusive times are not like the FA Cup final!

    Social media is surely destroying any attempt at civilized discourse. Comments Karma systems portray an image that the "people are speaking" but of course represent only a tiny, self-selecting proportion of views. These pages are all about generating hype for certain games. For those of you satisfied that you are playing a 10/10 game, that feeling of stress that you get when you are playing it and your ridiculously high expectations have not been met, and your slipping into a polarized extreme viewpoint where only you are correct, that stress is called cognitive dissonance. The more you defend the expected experience, the more you will find you have to defend it post-play. The disparity between expectation and actual experience can be quite emotional.

    So just play your videogames, enjoy them! They are supposed to be fun! Compete in the actual games themselves, the actual experiences rather than this rather unproductive, industry-stimulated, totally unnecessary meta-discussion!

    Thanks for listening (or not:))
    Edited by Kili102 at 29/10/11 @ 07:30

  • djronz. #127 7 months ago

    SP does actually state that the game is PEERLESS, but maybe he shares a bit of a snobbish attitude regarding game styles, and considers that "proper" games should be open world rpgs? Personally i cant stand that type of game, just too much messing around for me, i sold oblivion after 2 days and gave away my gta4 (10/10? please!).
    These games were very highly praised but just not for me, what i dont like is those that seem to think uncharted or its ilk are any less of a game for being linear experiences

    It hardly matters anyway, its his opinion and its greatly overshadowed by the vast majority of reviews, and people should really look at that whole picture.

    I used to love the old "mean machines" magazine where they had a second opinion on every review, often by someone who like different styles of game, you knew if they both liked it, it was a gem.

    The proof will be in the pudding as they say and im sure this debeat will continue long after release day and we ve actually played it...cant wait!

  • bionic #128 7 months ago

    @Sunjammer Reviews of games that form part of a successful series should partly as you put it ‘talk to a game's specific fan base’. That fan base expects more of the same, preferably minus flaws that tainted previous releases. Uncharted 2 was an improvement over the successful Uncharted. Both games are great.

    Maybe scored reviews should be dropped. All the while sites like EG continue to use scores, then 1/10 would be cause for concern. It would mean Naught Dog screwed in a big way.

  • DonnieDarko333 #129 7 months ago

    I do find it slightly strange that the game has received 9's and above and Eurogamer gives it an 8...sometimes I think they do it for controversy and know it'll put the website in the spot-light.

    Overall though it doesn't matter..still will sell shed loads.

  • bionic #130 7 months ago

    @djronz. His open world comments were ridiculous. If it were open world it wouldn’t be Uncharted.

    As impressive as GTA 4’s open world was, the game ultimately became boring because of it. There’s always a main task, with side quests (pool, buy cloths, steal car, go to bar, make telephone call etc) should the player wish to do something else other than the main objective. At least the taxi allowed for long laborious car journeys to be avoided. The focused game play of Uncharted and Uncharted 2 kept me going until the end. GTA 4, after months of on off game play I knocked it on the head at about 60% due to total boredom exhaustion.

    I picked up Red Dead Revolver for £10 some weeks ago. I held off buying it at launch as in my heart of hearts, I just knew it would be GTA on horse back. And boy was right. The open world looks great, the horses look great, the graphics are not as polished as say Heavy Rain or Uncharted 2, because of ‘open world’ limitations. After about 2 hours game play I have not returned to Red Dead Revolver. I might do some day, but I wouldn’t count on it. The open world Rockstar formula that Simon loves so much isn’t for everyone. I personally find Rockstars game model not so interesting.

  • blarty #131 7 months ago

    @RedSparrows I understand your point of view, but by making that comment specifically in a review and then ascribing a score to that review taking into account that opinion and commentary about linearity, you make it specific to that game, you target that game alone, rather than inviting a bigger debate regarding linear vs sandbox.

  • masonica #132 7 months ago

    Haven't played Uncharted 3 yet but I was always going to buy the game regardless of the reviews but if the eurogamer review is the most damning then the game looks to be well worth the money. Had a brief chat with Mr Lemarchand a few weeks ago at an unveiling of the game and he was a classy guy and his enthusiasm for games is quite genuine.

  • Mindstorm #133 7 months ago

    I knew a farmer, I disliked apples because they aren't oranges. He wrote a review once for Eurofarmer.net in which he basically argued that the only fruits worth eating are oranges. Pretty much everyone else in the world disagreed and kept enjoying their apples.

  • Pehmu #134 7 months ago

    Kaminari: "In the world of Metacritic (which EG are willingfully and proudly part of), 8/10 means 80%. It's a fact: it's a shitty score, especially for a triple A game of the caliber of U3."

    The world would be a better place without Metacritic. Simple scores listed one after another, and this should tell everyone why game X is worth, say, 84 points. Nobody wants to read the reviews to understand where the points are coming from. Every now and then fanboys go bananas when one (1) site scores Gears of Killzone 8/10 or something similar.

    Kaminari: "What bothers me is not the note itself. It's the ill intention behind the note. U3 didn't deserve 80%, and EG "critics" perfectly knew it."

    Who are you to tell what U3 "deserves" and what people should think about the game? These are subjective opinions.
    I would give Gears of War 6/10 even though the masses seem to think it's easily worth 9/10. I'm not going to change my honest opinion just because GoW2 "deserves" better than that.

    Uncharted 3 is a triple-A title, but it shouldn't be treated like one - nor should any AAA game. It shouldn't automatically get certain scores just because it's a big, expensive game and because it "deserves" it.

  • stegabba #135 7 months ago

    the review is his opinion i guess, i mean if it is not his type of game or favorite game then he will critize it in some aspects, where as a big uncharted fan like me would give it a 10 which im not saying it does deserve or doesn't, point being you have to be neutral and not bias either way when it comes to reviews, this simon fella sounded downbeat from the get go to be fair.

  • carlosdfn #136 7 months ago

    He shouldn't even bother commenting on that ridiculous review. If you want a good, fair and accurate review of the game check out gamespot.

  • bionic #137 7 months ago

    Bring back the Zzap!64 score system. 3 reviewers all with something interesting to say, reviews not bulked out for the sake of bulk.

    The new EG design where all comments are displayed borks my PC depending on how many comments have been posted. 400+ comments = total IE seizure.
    Edited by bionic at 29/10/11 @ 13:20

  • knightmt #138 7 months ago

    Good response. A review is an opinion as well.

  • Les #139 7 months ago

    Except for there not being a way to ignore spammers and trolls (at least not one I've been able to discover) the new site is great: single page reviews, no more over-reliance on that piece of crap called Flash and iOS finally gets the attention it deserves.

    EG might be a little slow sometimes, but eventually they get it right... ;)

  • cloudskipa #140 7 months ago

    Oh joy, more pissing and moaning over the review. Now ND has their say and naturally they would be disappointed but in no way can we conclude from this interview that Simon Parkin was talking "bollocks".

    "We've said many times in public we don't think it's the only way for video games to go"

    All I can personally conclude is that ND think a little too much of their game, which reflects the pedestal they have been put on for the Uncharted series, which while good, is not one of the great video game franchises of all time. Not even close.
    Edited by cloudskipa at 29/10/11 @ 16:16

  • bionic #141 7 months ago

    Magazine Reviews:

    IGN - 10/10
    "Uncharted 3: Drake's Deception is the reason I play video games."

    "So exceptional that it is hard to imagine a game being better"

    Official PlayStation Magasine – 10/10

    “A game that can claim to not only be the best on PS3, but also one of the best in gaming history...Uncharted 3 is incredible and God only knows how this can ever be improved on"

    10/10 - Official PlayStation Magazine

    Shortlist

    “A masterpiece of modern gaming”

    Empire - 5/5

    "The definitive PlayStation 3 title worth stuffing in your stocking this Christmas."

    Zoo - 10/10

    "This year's greatest adventure"

    "Drake is back and he's kicking ass like never before"

    Metro - 9/10

    "An interactive roller-coaster of outstanding ambition, technical ability, and genuine heart."

    The Telegraph - 4.5/5

    "Drakes Deception further entrenches Nathan Drake as this generations Indiana Jones, in this gorgeous thrilling adventure"

    PSM3 - 96%

    "Uncharted 3 does action on a scale PS3 – gaming – has not seen before."

    CVG - 9.5/10

    "An absolute must-have."

    Gametrailers - 9.5/10

    "Shouldn't be missed"

    TheSixthAxis – 10/10

    “There hasn’t been a better Single Player game for years”

    IncGamers - 10/10

    "A landmark achievement for this generation"

    NextGenGamingBlog -10/10

    "A masterclass in video games design and storytelling"

    "Not only one of the best games that you’ll play this year, it’s one of the best games of its generation full stop."

    Nowgamer - 9.7/10

    "It’s a gigantic success; moment after moment of breathtaking action, epic adventuring, grand vistas and superlative set pieces.

    Eurogamer - 8/10

    That's Simon's a right douch bag.
    Edited by bionic at 29/10/11 @ 17:41

  • DBLue #142 7 months ago

    Post deleted at 09:51:49 12-12-2011

  • cloudskipa #143 7 months ago

    I'm watching a walkthrough of this on Youtube right now and I have to say it plays exactly the same as Uncharted/uncharted 2 save for some additional melee sequences.It's just the same shit over and over with some impressive set-pieces thrown in.

    I like the series myself very much, don't get me wrong. I played through Uncharted 2 a couple of times and enjoyed it but just what is so great about this game that earns it a place among the greatest video games of all time? I'm sorry but I find that laughable. If people want to bury their heads in the sand when a reviewer like Simon Parkin has the balls and experience to rightfully call out the games deficiencies then that's your call. After all, that is the mentality I'm seeing here.

    Zelda Skyward Sword will show you all how a sequel should be done. There's no way Uncharted can be spoke of as being one of the best videogame series of all time when franchises like Zelda exist.

  • cloudskipa #144 7 months ago

    @carlosdfn The Gamespot Uncharted 3 review was very good I agree.

  • Goodfella #145 7 months ago

    @cloudskipa

    Because different people have different tastes you fucking moron.

    Gears is widely rated very highly but I think it's average at best. What I don't do is go onto websites trying to convince others it's boring and calling people out in utter amazement as to why they love it.

    Now fuck off.
    Edited by Goodfella at 29/10/11 @ 18:29

  • digitalash #146 7 months ago

    That article read like an 8.

  • Grayvern #147 7 months ago

    The problem with that is that Eurogamer offers a generally better standard than most of the other sites and publications on that list.

  • cloudskipa #148 7 months ago

    @Goodfella I think what you wrote there says more about you than it does me.

    I'm not trying to "convince" other people of anything. I'm just offering my opinions and asking people for theirs, you may not agree with mine but there's no need for your outburst or personal insults.

  • Laserbrain #149 7 months ago

    I have no idea what the game is like, since i haven't played it. The review might be spot on. What annoys me is that they have printed an article on their review, its tantamount to Eurogamer throwing their hands in the air saying "look at me, look at me". Eurogamers bloated sense of self importance is painfully embarrassing, Is Eurogamer run by idiots with a child like mentality. Maybe a dignified silence even if the game developers do respond to your review would have, should have been the correct response.

  • SpaceMidget75 Verified Senior Software Developer, Minerva Computer Services #150 7 months ago

    I think people are bundling linearity into one bag and missing the point of Simon's review.

    Yes Half Life is linear (as are most other '10/10' games.) The difference between those games and things like MW2 and UC3 is that they don't put you in a highly cinematic experience with either infinite spawn or a scripted boss, then intersperse it with cut scenes, and carefully adjust jumps and grabs so that it can handle the intricate animations. That last one is the real differentiator. All movement in a game like Half Life is completely down to you and thus you feel like you're fully in control - because you are.

    Take UC3 out of the equation for a minute (as it seems people are having a hard time being objective with it) and use MW as an example. There's no way you can compare that to HL2. UC3 really isn't that much different and hence I think the score was perfectly good and yet still a great score.

    Just because everyone else is giving it 10 doesn't mean his score is wrong either. Everyone gave GTA4 10's until us mere mortals played it and realised that as great as it was the save points and friends mechanic should have stopped it being a 10.

    It was still one of may favorite games this generation though!

  • Goodfella #151 7 months ago

    @cloudskipa

    Except you're not really offering an opinion are you.

    Your post suggests you have first hand knowledge not only of UC3 but also of Skyward Sword, played and completed both of them have you?

    Oh I forgot, you watched a walkthrough of UC3 on Youtube. Fantastic, well that showed all of us didn't it. You're such a big fan of Uncharted though, you played UC2 twice and yet UC3, a game you haven't played is "just the same shit over and over".

    Yeah, sounds like you're a real big fan of the franchise.

    Fuck off.
    Edited by Goodfella at 29/10/11 @ 19:52

  • cloudskipa #152 7 months ago

    @Goodfella Well of course I'm offering an opinion, what else could it be?

    I don't for a minute suggest I've had first hand knowledge, no more so than all the people hurling abuse at Simon Parkin for giving this an 8/10. I was just saying how I felt watching this walkthrough having had fair experience with the earlier games in the series. It's just my opinion.

    I'm not a real big fan of the series though you are right, but is that a problem? Do I have to be a big fan to take part in this conversation? Is no-one allowed to disagree or offer a different opinion to yourself before you start telling them to "fuck off!" Strange world you live in my friend.

    Really you aren't worth this reply tbh. Go on, swear at me again if it makes you feel good.

  • Goodfella #153 7 months ago

    @cloudskipa

    See, it's the contradictions I don't like. "I like the series myself very much", and then..."I'm not a real big fan of the series though"

    Anything you say just doesn't have any credibility I'm afraid.

  • cloudskipa #154 7 months ago

    @Goodfella But I do like the series, yet at the same time I'm not a big fan (you do know what fan means?). Not a contradiction. My original point was they are good games but not GREAT ones. I hope you understand.

  • GaryHoward #155 7 months ago

    I'm surprised no developer has had a go at Jim Sterling from Destructoid, he pretty much gives the lowest review score to any game that comes out really.

  • Goodfella #156 7 months ago

    @cloudskipa

    You said you liked it VERY much, now call me crazy but I interpret that as someone who really likes the Uncharted series, a 'fan' if you will.

    Too late to try and backtrack now.

  • Grayvern #157 7 months ago

    I think another part of this is that people seem to believe that Eurogamer deliberately courts controversy in terms of review scores to attract traffic which is an odd view.

    Enough people read Eurogamer to bring in good search results on reviews.

    However if you want to have a conversation about the news bar and it's cynical quest for hits that's somewhat valid, but then Eurogamer is still better than Gmmespot and Ign, I mean look at IGN's flagrant use of top 10 lists.

  • king26 #158 7 months ago

    If it's anything like Uncharted 1 and 2 (it looks even better) then 3 will be one of the best games ever imo. I think it would be interesting to see what other Eurogamer reviewers made of it, surely they can't be as negative as Simon!

  • cloudskipa #159 7 months ago

    @Goodfella The only person that needs to backtrack is you; to read my original post:

    I like the series myself very much, don't get me wrong. I played through Uncharted 2 a couple of times and enjoyed it but just what is so great about this game that earns it a place among the greatest video games of all time?

    That should explain where I'm coming from, there's no contradiction and I never said I was a fan. There's a lot of people that regard UC2 as one of the best games ever etc (post underneath mine says it too) and I've never understood it. It's not that I think they're wrong, I just don't see anything in the game that warrants that level of praise.

    I'm perfectly entitled to say that in here as it's relevant to the article. I dunno what's made you so angry but you need to chill out and stop being so defensive.

  • noelveiga #160 7 months ago

    @Vortextk Actually, I don't mind the score, but I disagree with Simon's approach on the review, where he outright states that a linear experience is less deep than a nonlinear one and that great writing and set-pieces make for a less worthy game than a lesser open world setting.

    That's not a great take on game design, and it colours not just the score, but Simon's whole critical outlook on games. If we disagree on such a basic level, then why acknowledge his opinion (regardless of his scores) on any other game?

  • ThinkingGamR #161 7 months ago

    @Goodfella It would be nice to see Simon respond to this response. Based on my experiences in the multiplayer, which I've been playing for a couple weeks now, I'd say there's a lot of player agency in Uncharted 3. The environments are very open, and there are a lot of gameplay options. I don't see how Parkin could ignore this in his review.

  • VeyronMick #162 7 months ago

    Seemed like a fair review to me but its not going to stop me buying the game either.
    I do struggle a bit with all the sequels at this point, they rarely bring something entirely new to the table.

    I'm still on the last bit of GOW3 which I haven't been bothered to finish in the last month.
    I've seen the Uncharted series as like watching an Indiana Jones film, I do expect this kind of story telling game to be linear.

    Other sites like Arstechnica dropped ratings a while back and went with Buy or Avoid and a summary of the good and bad points which does seem a better way of reviewing games.

  • Ptarmigandalf #163 7 months ago

    I definitely agree with him we should lose the meaningless numeric scores...

  • Ptarmigandalf #164 7 months ago

    @Sunjammer Yes, and no. The review should absolutely explain this, so that people looking for emergent gameplay should look elsewhere, but it's unfair to punish the game with a low score for being what it is, if it's a shining example of being what it tries to be; if you get my meaning.

    I'm a fan of emergent gameplay and not into pseudo-interactive movies, so not the target demographic for Uncharted 3, but if it's the best example in the market of this kind of game, then it deserves a 10.

  • drumbaby #165 7 months ago

    "Half-Life 2 is a linear game. But the clever thing is that it does not feel linear. "

    It really did though. First time I wandered away from the car because I was bored of driving down long roads into yet another level-load tunnel, I went into the sea, and was devoured by little aquatic worms. That told me, I guess? The spooky zombie level....tried exploring/ backtracking only to be discouraged time after time with respawning enemies in cul-de-sacs. HL2 was/ is a VERY linear game. None of the hub-based goodness of HL1.

  • Marshall2008 #166 7 months ago

    I don't understand why each and every game should attempt to or even want to reinvent the wheel. If it works go with it. It doesn't do anything majorly different to the other games in the series apart from providing a gripping story and enjoyable game is no reason to downgrade a score. If that were the case then the fifa games would all get 1/10 etc.

  • jaguarwong #167 7 months ago

    All these responses in this, and the review comments, from people who haven't played a single second of the game...

    Comedy gold.

  • Machiavellian #168 7 months ago

    Isn't more of the same what's its all about ?

    But isn't more of the same is what makes people say Rage is crap. Isn't more of the same with COD have haters storm the forums to show their displeasure. More of the same for some people is boring, repetitive and as such might find a reviewer who also feels the same way. Why people want reviewer to actually be someone who is blinded by a AAA game instead of giving their honest opinion kills me.

    How many times have we seen the statement "he was the wrong reviewer because he criticizes Uncharted for doing the same things as the first two titles."

    I enjoyed Uncharted 2 but there was definitely points in the game where I became bored. If Uncharted 3 is like 2 then I will enjoy it as well but I am sure I will also be bored with bits just like the 2nd.

  • siegarettes #169 7 months ago

    @Alex_V
    The people who criticized Simon I feel, had already made up their minds about what they think.

    Honest criticism should be awarded, since it gives feedback for the devs and helps them make better games (if they care to take it to heart).

    Are we honestly going to put down someone whose observations might actually help make a better game in the future?

  • Mdpmdp #170 7 months ago

    @jaguarwong The majority of criticism is because of Uncharted getting an 8, which is a shame because it detracts from perfectly valid criticism of the review and a grown up discussion on what defines a good video game.

    Games are about excitement, fun and entertainment. Whether you play GTA, CIV5, Uncharted or FIFA the single common denominator is the fact you do so because you have a good time despite the hugely different mechanics and content. In the end I don't know how you can score a game based on anything but how much fun it is (longevity perhaps but that's another argument).

    If the review actually read 'Uncharted is fun, but the lack of control means that it isn't everything a video game can be' then that is a sound argument.

    But what is actually said is 'Uncharted is the most exciting game ever, a peerless piece of one-shot entertainment with a great multi-player but it isn't all a video game can be'.

    That argument doesn't wash for me and smacks of a critic being unable to enjoy something for what it is and looking for something that doesn't need to be there.

    I'd love for Simon Parkin to let us all know what he thinks 'all a video game can be' is, just so I know what magical yardstick he is comparing everything against.

    Also, you can tell he's written for Edge.

    Also, I've only played Uncharted 1, I'd give it a 7.
    Edited by Mdpmdp at 31/10/11 @ 20:27

  • nevarran #171 7 months ago

    @bionic So the reviewer should be someone who'll surely love the game? What's the point of the review then? Isn't seeing all point of views important? We have IGN's 10s, the reviewer there obviously adore the game, they even forgot to mention the short campaign. Thanks for that kind of review, it surely "deserves multiple readthroughs, just like my favorite film"...

    I say 8/10, from someone who don't like that type of games, is still a good score. And more importantly, it's a good review, because there ARE people who'll agree with the author's opinion.
    Edited by nevarran at 31/10/11 @ 20:39

  • dom9876 #172 7 months ago

    I'm beginning to find Eurogamer's reviews linear and more of the same. :p

  • Toothball #173 7 months ago

    Is this still a contentious issue? Eurogamer's 8/10 should be a well known score to readers of this site. I've always seen it as a mark of a solid game that is worthy of your time and money, while also leaving room for two more levels of outstanding-ness.

    The problem with review scores is that everyone now assumes that all publications measure games on exactly the same scale. The scoring scale is always calibrated to the expectations of the readership. You just can't write a review that surmises what every single person might think of a product, which is why multiple publications exist.

    I find myself enjoying EG reviews more these days because they're full of the authors opinions rather than a list of facts gleaned from the press release (I was going to say from the manual, but those generally aren't more than a few pages long these days, most of which is a picture of a controller). Parkin may have disagreed with Lemarchand's intentions, but I would imagine that others may eventually conclude the same. If you don't want people to disagree with you then you can't release your vision to the public in this way. There's just no way around that.

  • slivir #174 7 months ago

    Why not just let reviewers review those games they are actually interested in? I dislike sandbox, sport and racing games and if I had to review one I'd be very likely to rate it much lower than it probably deserves.

    Maybe the Uncharted experience isn't everyone's kettle of fish but for someone like me, who enjoys story-driven, linear, and tightly focused games, well, I can't sing its praises loudly enough.

  • Scandinavian #175 7 months ago

    Regardless of what I might think of the game, I think it's pathetic that the developer feels it has to respond to what is a thoughtful, well-written review as though it's an insult hurled in the schoolyard. Grow up and learn to take some constructive criticism. Your work isn't perfect, and it never will be. Be happy that your fans love the game, and move on. Writing an article to defend your product is pathetic, desperate, and childish, especially considering that an 8/10 is a pretty good score. I thought better of you, Naughty Dog.

  • JeremyRPS #176 7 months ago

    @TheNonk I'm not sure the question of control over a character you're playing in a video game is "superficial". He brought up good points about the importance of control, and the lengths a "game" will go to supersede your actions. All of that and still an 8/10.

  • EndrzGame #177 7 months ago

    In the future, perhaps they should simply have the lead designer review the game as well; that should head off any unsightly deviations.

  • mehh #178 7 months ago

    Sooooo...what he's actually saying is, "We wanted it to be pretty above all else, and the easiest way to do that was to prevent players from playing, looking around at other things, etc. We put all our attention on focusing on this one little spot, so it looks great!"

    Yeah, but what about story/gameplay/etc? Does it really only matter if it's pretty or not?

  • Android8675 #179 7 months ago

    Made an account just to say how bizarre it is to let a game developer criticize a critic. I tend to avoid sites that publish excellent, well thought out reviews, then let the lead game designer come in and say, "OMG what a tool!"

    Don't care how eloquent the developer it, it's insulting to the reviewer, or if the reviewer isn't insulted maybe he cherishes his job and will give Halo 4 a 10 out of 10 without question.

  • iamthemonkeyhead #180 7 months ago

    I find it amusing that the review of 8/10 was so abhorrent that it warranted a response from the developer. Tycho (from Penny Arcade) set me onto the article with a similar opinion. As a writer and journalist I can't think of a more insulting critique of my review than simply having a developer weigh in, not refute any of my points and then say "We did our best, honest!"

    The score was fair and people were crying about it not being a 10 like on other sites such as IGN (which is way too generous with scores, making me believe they have a special relationship with the distributors of review copies if you know what I mean). You only have to look at the mechanic of being killed off as soon as you stray from your predetermined path to get what the reviewer was talking about. Puzzles with answers handed to you is another point. I don't see why there is so much bitching. 8 is a great score. Fin.

  • mliparota #181 7 months ago

    The fact that people are so up-in-arms over an 8/10 - a very strong score in its own right - is ridiculous.

    Not as ridiculous, however, as a news outlet feeling the need to give a game developer a full-length response as if it were news. That is high quality journalism, right there.