Digital Foundry vs. Uncharted 3

By Richard Leadbetter Published 5 November, 2011

"We're only limited by our imaginations."

Page 1 of 3

"We felt really good about that game as it came together. We felt that we had something really special on our hands but I don't think we were prepared for the scale of the rapturous reception we got. So how do you top something like that?"

Digital Foundry recently had the opportunity to sit down and chat with Naughty Dog co-lead designer Richard Lemarchand, the writer/presenter of the brilliant Among Friends talk we adapted into what remains our favourite article on the site. Discussing the immense popularity of the game, we couldn't fathom how the developer team could begin the process of following it up.

Uncharted 2 was the game that changed everything, redefining the third-person genre, setting new standards in technology, production values, characterisation and gameplay. Its legend is so powerful that any faults it may have had are perhaps forgotten in a haze of happy nostalgia. Its deserved success at the time was unparalleled, and for us it remains one of the principal reasons for owning a PlayStation 3 - the ultimate first-party console exclusive. The pressure on Naughty Dog to follow up on that must have been tremendous.

"I think really each one of us has reacted to it differently," reflects an earnest Lemarchand. "We all felt the pressure to rise to the challenge of making something as good as or better than Uncharted 2, but my philosophy has been that if you have spent your time doing whatever kind of work you do, really focused on the work with the goal of not working towards any kind of secondary goals like praise or awards or anything but just trying to do the best that you can in your craft, that is the real key to success.

"That was certainly the way that we made Uncharted 2. We'd made a good first run on it with Uncharted: Drake's Fortune and we'd learned a huge amount in making it, and we just set to it and applied ourselves with gusto. We came to it with what Zen Buddhists call the 'Beginner's Mind', not resting on any laurels, not making any assumptions."

lighting-1
lighting-2

Naughty Dog's high dynamic range deferred shading system debuted in Uncharted 2 but in concert with the new effects in the sequel, the lighting has never looked better.

Bare-Fisted Brawling

Readers of Among Friends may recall that Naughty Dog retains focus on its projects by sticking to a series of core design goals. For the new game, hand-to-hand combat gets a renewed focus.

"We had expanded the role of melee combat over the three games but we really wanted to foreground it at a number of points throughout Uncharted 3 so we put a lot of time and effort into developing the system," Lemarchand tells us.

"It's a system that isn't too convoluted but I think has enough depth and richness in it to support the sequences that we use it in and really bring the flavour of bare-fisted action to the game - bare-fisted combat is a very important trope in the genre of pulp action movies."

Melee combat gets a significant overhaul in Uncharted 3, with a range of context-sensitive moves added in the key brawls and combat adapting in places to environmental detail.

It's also an element that serves to kick off the story, as Drake and Sully brawl in a London pub - the sequence serving to introduce the player to the basic punch, dodge and escape buttons. On the surface it's a fairly basic button-masher, and throughout the game there's a lot of repetition, but the fun comes from relocating the brawling to different areas of the environment and fishing out the area and object-specific moves. Hand-to-hand combat has also evolved to be far more integrated with gunplay, adding to the variety in general gameplay.

Technological Evolution

From a technological perspective, Naughty Dog hasn't rewritten the book in quite the same way that it did with Among Thieves - there's no leap quite as pronounced as there was with the introduction of the Dynamic Objects Traversal System (DOTS) that allowed gameplay to take place on moving objects. Instead there has been a radical evolution of those same systems, allowing for the even more ambitious set-pieces and physics-based puzzling and action.

"One of the first things that we did in the development of Uncharted 3 was to extend this [DOTS] system beyond objects that are simply animated towards objects that are now physics-driven. This created a whole bunch of new possibilities," Lemarchand shares.

dots-1
dots-2

Uncharted 2 revolutionised third-person action games by being able to stage action on moving objects. In the sequel, these objects now obey the game's laws of physics, allowing for moving platforms on the ocean and containers rattling around the interior of the cargo plane.

"You may have seen the cruise ship level. What people may not realise is that it's not just a big object that we are animating, it's one enormous physics object whose movement is driven by another dynamic system we have in the game: our new dynamic sea system. So each time that Drake rocks around on the deck of that ship the movement he is subject to is unique."

Perhaps the most impressive element of the new technology in Uncharted 3 is the way in which its most impressive effects are based around natural elements and materials: the various water systems in the cruise ship, the way that fire acts as a dynamic light source when Drake holds a torch, the atmospheric rendering of smoke - recreating natural elements like this and making them look so realistic is no mean feat, but it's the area in which Naughty Dog excels. For a game where the desert is so important, Naughty Dog's implementation of sand in terms of pixel shaders and surrounding effects work is nothing short of remarkable.

One of the greatest successes from a visual perspective is how well Naughty Dog has rendered natural elements like fire, water, sand and smoke. The attention to detail is truly remarkable.

It's not just the look of the effects, it's their application in terms of gameplay. The cruise ship is the highlight of the water technology: the animation of the ship itself within the ocean, plus the rushing water of the breached hull, even the water in the swimming pool is sublimely animated. However, preceding this stage are areas of gameplay where Drake is in direct contact with the ocean, where the height of the water-line itself can be of crucial importance in deciding where to go next, what to do, and whether a stealthy approach is viable or not.

Fire is the most destructive of the elements and it is here that Naughty Dog does some of its best work, marrying the uncanny effect with some excellent use of the destruction system that sees scenery collapse, breaking into component pieces and literally razing the impressive Chateau level to the ground.

Page 1 of 3

Comments (107) Latest comment 7 months ago

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

  • Widge #1 7 months ago

    One small bit there is why we don't need another gen yet. Reaching the technological limit means that you have to start focussing on ideas and not the shiny. This in turn drives more fulfilling gameplay experiences and glorious twilight years of consoles.

  • vizzini #2 7 months ago

    DF: “It's fair to say that there are no new over-arching, groundbreaking technological ideas that enable amazing, never-seen-before gameplay opportunities in this sequel.”

    Try again DF; the rest of the article is reasonable, but that line is complete rubbish, like you are stage managing the justification of the review score you gave it. UC3 is game of the generation material, and an easy shoe in for game of the year so far. I beat the single player on hard mode(to break in to Rage), last night went online for a little razz, and already started the game on Crushing mode that excludes many of the QTE prompts(& upto Level 6).

  • MrE26 #3 7 months ago

    It is a great game, no doubt, but it's not the leap forward Uncharted 2 was. Fucked up aiming controls aside, I'd still give it a solid 9/10 but game of the generation? Nah, it's predecessor is in with more of a shout for that.
    Edited by MrE26 at 05/11/11 @ 11:55

  • darkmorgado #4 7 months ago

    Excellent game, but definitely not game of the generation material. It doesn't move beyond what was already established by its predecessors in any way. It's too formulaic. And while that makes for great games sometimes, as in this case, it doesn't make for revolutionary games.

  • Arwin #5 7 months ago

    I think Naughty Dog's ability to be so much more amazing than others partly because they are such masters of tech actually does suggest a new generation is needed, because most developers simply can't manage to pull it off, and even then Naughty Dog has to do all sorts of clever tricks to make sure the streaming has enough time to catch up.

    And the difference is quite staggering at times. The only game so far that had a similar visual impact on me is God of War 3.

  • kirankara #6 7 months ago

    No.doubt the controls feel.stiff, and at first I was floundering in gun fights, but adjusted quickly, and now don't even think about it at all. Put this on.for a quick blast to see what controls were like last night, after all the fuss, 7 hrs later, at 4am , I went to bed lol
    Easily my favourite game this year. the story and characters, are possibly only ones in games that I care enough about to follow, and actually enjoy, instead of repeatedly trying to skip (batman games keep me kinda interested too). Acting is amazing, truly likeable and believable characters.

    Cant say I share most of eg's issues with game tbh. Occasionally, id be unsure where I was going, and jump to my death, as id jump blindly, more in hope , to.a place,hoping it was right. Apart from that, I always knew what distances I.could cover.


    Ai wise, I.didn't find it an issue. Yes stealth wasn't hugely effective, but the ai being able to know where you were , didn't feel overwhelming, even playing on hardest difficulty, unlike bf3 campaign, where they could shoot you from anywhere on map , and it was ridiculous at points, as once you engaged enemies, you were inundated with fire, and you had no idea where they even were , and die almost instantly.

    Sure it has its faults , but I don't notice any of them in this game, and love it more than prequels, and possibly more than any game ive ever played. Although, i cant imagine wanting to playthrough again in hurry, just cause I would feel like ive seen pretty much everything.
    Edited by kirankara at 05/11/11 @ 12:46

  • Ror1984 #7 7 months ago

    For me, what made Uncharted 2 impressive (graphically speaking) was the attention to detail - you had to go out of your way to find a blurry texture or an angular jar. They're the kind of incidental details a lot of devs ignore in order to focus on the stuff you'll see closest, but ND seemed to take pride in making sure everything looked as good as they could make it. After a few hours of Uncharted 3 I'd seen more blurry textures than in the entirety of Uncharted 2, and there have been a few angular objects too - hexagonal pots just don't seem very 'Naughty Dog'. The physics also seems a bit off at times - I remember walking up to a gas tank stood next to a crate, and when it got stuck between Drake and the crate, it vibrated before flying about 30 feet through the air. There also seem to be less physics objects and breakable items - pots no longer crumble into pieces when shot, for instance.

    However, these are all very minor things - it's certainly not riddled with blurry textures (quite the opposite), but there are a few noticeable ones throughout. They're just really small incidental details that made me quizzically raise an eyebrow, as ND always seems to have these tiny, incidental details that subtlety enrich the world taken care of.

    Having said all that, I think it's a more enjoyable game than Uncharted 2. I'm right near the end now (I'll finish it off later today), and I've found it so much better paced than its predecessor. The story, which I think is the series' best, moves along at a much better pace than 2, which I felt dragged in many places - especially when they took so many opportunities to basically lock you in an arena and send wave after wave of foes at you to take care of. You just never get bogged down in one place for long enough to get bored or frustrated, which was my biggest complaint about Uncharted 2. The characters are as good as ever (and Charlie Cutter is brilliant, his mobile contracts line was great), and throwing in some lines from The Waste Land in the Rub' al Khali was inspired.

  • customfirmware #8 7 months ago

    Well done naughty dog. When you finish a game wanting more you know that it was a job well done. Personally I would want to see naughty dog apply what they've learnt doing uncharted into a different game, I have no doubt in my mind that it would be good. Let's just wait and see if all the work team ico has been doing for all these years can eclipse what naughty have done. One thing I find surprising is that all the games that have set a bench Mark on me personally(console wise) this gen Is only available on the ps3. God of war and uncharted, those are the only two games that made my jaw drop to the floor when playing them for the first time.

  • kirankara #9 7 months ago

    @darkmorgado

    sometimes you dont need revolutionary games, to have great games. uc2 wasnt that clever either tbh, and bf3 mp is hardly changing gaming landscape forever, but if they do what they do well and make you want to play it, then thats a great game imo. I have literally never had desire to play through games from start to finish, apart from with the uncharted series (thought 1 got bit monotonous half way through tbh, and 2 started to drag by very end a tiny bit, but overall, that feeling of wanting more is so strong). They just are so more-ish. Maybe not super deep gameplay mechanics or complex enough to make you replay again and again, and get more from them, and maybe for some people that disqualifies them from being amongst the high brow , elite of games, in the same way that a blockbuster film like transformers(couldnt think of good example lol) or some other popcorn title , just cant be regarded as a great film,with likes of godfather even if you absolutely love every minute of it, but the difference for me, is that the experience is even more vivid, as you have experienced it on a more interactive level.

    i always feel like Ive been on an adventure of epic proportions, rather than just played a game with uncharted, and thats why I rate it amongst the elite of games. It is a very engaging experience, not just a game, by which I mean, in most games, I feel distanced from the characters and story, whereas in uncharted, i feeel it was me in the adventure.

  • richardiox #10 7 months ago

    Yes! Kirankara and Vizzini double act straight in. Their insane ramblings and constant EG conspiracy theories always make for good reading.
    In my head I perceive them as the same person

    Getting to finally play this tonight, can't wait to see it in motion.

  • kirankara #11 7 months ago

    @Ror1984

    what you say about some textures is true, but overall uc3 is more beautiful and jaw dropping imo. Theres been moments where Im waiting for cutscene to end, and havent realised that game is waiting for me to do something lol.
    Like Rage or BF3 too, theres definitely some compromises been made along the way, so they can achieve the whole stunning picture,and if you pick away at it, you find the little bits of loose thread etc, but when taken as a whole package, it's gob smacking.

    Technically its not as impressive as anything on pc, butI honestly cant think of a better looking game out there, on any format.

  • Ror1984 #12 7 months ago

    @kirankara - Generally speaking, I agree with you. At the very least, I find many of the areas in Uncharted 3 more visually striking than in 2, certainly from a design point of view - the ship graveyard level is very striking in its visual design, with all the broken and decaying superstructures around. I just find it a little less polished in the incidental details which, as I said in my post, I don't think is a big deal, or really any kind of deal at all. I just happened to notice.

    I think Uncharted 3 is generally a better looking game than 2, but I think 2 was a little more consistent in it's level of polish across the board. Either way, both are phenomenal-looking games.

    One thing I neglected to mention in my previous wall of text was the puzzles. They're still fairly simple, but I have enjoyed them a lot more in this installment. They may not be taxing, but they're well-designed, and still manage to be satisfying to complete.

  • kirankara #13 7 months ago

    @richardiox shut up you total nob cheese! What exactly was conspiracy theory about what I said??? When have I ever suggested eg bias etc? I disagree with things they've said, and sometimes felt their pieces aren't exactly balanced, but been long time since I said anything along those lines. I questioned the absence of mention of the effect missing in 360 bf3, but nothing more than that.
    I haven't had issues with judging what jumps I can and can't make, my experiences playing uncharted have put me in good stead in this regards. The shooting I adapted to quickly (but accepted it was clunkier), and if I'm honest, don't agree about puzzles, as I don't really like them, something eg praised game for .
    I'm capable of.forming my own opinion of things, and thus don't have to agree with everything eg says. For example, id have marked bf3 campaign much harsher than eg, I think its truly awful. Id also give RDR a worse score , but thats simply my opinion and experiences of game, which is what gamings about.
    If you cant comprehend my post, im.not totally shocked, (youre a moron), but it wasnt that complex, or at all a conspiracy theory post, just my own perspective on my experiences with game. I dont offer then as fact, and people free to.disagree. so go fuck yourself !

  • des #14 7 months ago

    sdf meltdown in progress

  • vizzini #15 7 months ago

    richardiox: “Getting to finally play this tonight, can't wait to see it in motion.”

    Are you a aware this is a platform exclusive? From the vibe I get from your other EG comments, you don't own a PS3.

    Kirankara: “Technically its not as impressive as anything on pc, but I honestly cant think of a better looking game out there, on any format.”

    Wait to you get to one or two of the later sections, visually at times it looks better than PC GPU tech demos, as though the sections are either being ray/photon-traced in real-time. Or were ray traced for ambient lighting offline, and captured, and then using normals with dynamic particle sand physic to provide dynamic diffuse and specular surface lighting, that looks more pixar than PC graphics.

    @ MeE26
    As for comparing to UC2 SP; putting the vast multiplayer enhancements to one side, the use of dynamic environment physics (as described by the ocean wave modelling in the article) for tricking the new unscripted AI to lead them to their death, or the new natural animation, tricking the AI to kill them with environment props, or the graphical uplift and grenade throw back. If someone completely new to gaming needed a generation defining game; so far it would be UC3. Maybe the days after tomorrow, it will be Journey or Last Guardian, or Revelations.

  • kirankara #16 7 months ago

    @richardiox

    Forgot to.add. Its interesting to note , that you think of me and.vizzini as one and same entity, as I think of you and the dogshit on the pavement outside, as one and same entity.
    I cant understand most things vizzini says, so have no idea about validity of his posts.most the time, but willing to give anyone who.isn't total cunt , the benefit of doubt. I leave the high end technical arguments to fan boys and those qualified to discuss them,.and only talk about what I understand, and my experiences of games.

    If you think I'm some fanboy, youre very wrong. Rage and bf3 both purchased on 360 recently, whilst arkham city was purchased on ps3. I'm beyond caring.about fanboy battles , and pick games on system I want to play it on, and thats influenced by various factors . Youre free to add me on live yournemesis78 is gamertag, or psn kiran_kara.

    I tend to judge people on these sites., by the manner in which people speak to people, and am not overly bothered by fanboys or idiots, as.long as they are polite and pleasant , but rude.twats like yourself, I have no time for , and care so little what you think, its untrue.

  • Brianstorm #17 7 months ago

    Not up to the usual DF quality and detail, really strange for such a terrific and technologically interesting game. Putting this alongside the plainly wrong EG review is my low point in EG coverage this year, 4/10 guys.

    Just finished it and would agree that it's the best third person shooter since UC2. Really hope over time it gets the plaudits it deserves, and people wishing to be contrary spend time on something constructive instead.

  • Gaol #18 7 months ago

    We shouldn't need to wait on neogafers to tell us the aiming in single player has been buggered up a bit. You would have though at least one of dozens of professional reviewers would have noticed.

  • RESIDENT_nEVILe #19 7 months ago

    Uncharted 2 was the sum of its parts, and a major one of those parts was graphical finesse/attention to detail; it had been given the attention that an artist might give a painting. The moment I saw the anti-aliasing solution in the U3 multi-player beta, I was worried - half the time it just doesn't work! And the plane section in the beta; grenades disappearing when thrown into moving trucks or on the ramp - the whole thing felt shonky and still does at retail.

    Compared to the smoothness and solid feel of U2 or even U1 the new game is a step down.

    Sadly, I think ND partly lost sight of what made U2 so breathtaking - it wasn't just extreeeeeeme set pieces that made U2 special. I think the graphical trade-offs have been to the detriment of the experience in a big way. Overall the game may be doing cleverer things but it looks worse and is missing a massive amount of polish.

    EDIT: Forgot the aiming. You don't completely revise the aiming in an established franchise. It's not what core shooter fans want--and lets be honest, Uncharted is primarily a shooter. Uncharted 3 controls like a tank with a wonky turret compared to the ballerina like Drake from U2. I was one of the folks on Neogaf calling for a patch, but I think the game's problems ultimately run deeper than the aiming. Simon Parkin was right saying the game wrenches the controls away from the player too much - one minute you can only walk, can only run, cannot draw your weapon, cannot walk over there, it can be distracting in U3 and is over done. Even the gun battles are less satisfying in their stop/start staggered nature and the AI seems dumber. 8/10 is exactly right.
    Edited by RESIDENT_nEVILe at 05/11/11 @ 16:34

  • Badassbab #20 7 months ago

    @Brianstorm

    Talking about 4/10

    http://www.honestgamers.com/reviews/9640.html

  • kimchibaka #21 7 months ago

    Apparently it's not just the deadzone of the aiming that's messed up/going to be patched, it's lock-on and the ability to aim at angles other than up,down,left,right and perfect diagonals.

    Bizarrely, the aiming works differently (and is fine) in co-op and competitive.

    A lot of people are wondering quite rightly why none of the reviews mention the change in the SP campaign from what was pretty much already the perfect system in U2.

  • Brianstorm #22 7 months ago

    @Badassbab I lol'd at the fact the reviewer is a Sales Assistant at Millie's cookies.

  • Miths #23 7 months ago

    "The 3D mode is by no means a "must""

    It absolutely is (well, maybe not quite to the point that anyone who doesn't own a 3DTV should run out and buy one just for this game of course :)) - the depth is phenomenal in this game and really adds to the experience and even the excitement of all the climbing and rooftop jumping.

    I'm actually surprised the resolution in 3D is supposed to be as low as 896x504. While there are some unsightly jagged eyes here and there, I had actually just been assuming it might be some lacking anti-aliasing or other edge smoothing, and certainly not such a large drop in resolution.
    Knowing that I'm now even more surprised how stunning the game looks in 3D on a 51" TV.

  • The-Jack-Burton #24 7 months ago

    I think the biggest thing I take away from U3 is the story of Drake. I loved how his motives began to be called into question, and the tone of the game mirrored that. U3 doesn't beat you over the head with anything, it is all presented with sophistication and smarts, and I really felt that I had a better sense of Drake, the arch of his story, after the end game. U3 is unparalleled in this.

    Gameplay wise, the aiming, and just a general sluggishness of the controls, make many parts of this game a frustrating experience. To make matters worse, the game is very combat heavy, you are constantly put in situations of being fired on from all sides, while being spammed by grenades. For me personally, I would have preferred a much stronger focus on platforming and puzzles. Let me traverse parts of the beautiful city, let me climb a mountain or get lost in a jungle; I want to actually hunt for treasure and search for clues.

    That being said, Uncharted 3 is an incredible game. It is one of my 3 GOTY candidates.
    Edited by The-Jack-Burton at 05/11/11 @ 20:12

  • Feanor #25 7 months ago

    When these articles talk about tech they are good, when they start re-reviewing the game they are awful.

  • todoso #26 7 months ago

    Okay, so there's no mandatory install, but is there a benefit to doing so?

    (Usually I never install my games, but if it enhances Uncharted 3 in any way I'm gonna do it!)

  • The-Jack-Burton #27 7 months ago

    @todoso That's what the article is trying to point out, the steaming technology that ND has created is incredibly advanced. There is no need for install, it runs beautifully.

  • carlosdfn #28 7 months ago

    After playing through this trilogy all I can really do is thank the brilliant minds at Naughty Dog for this amazing experience.
    As for the tech side, most AAA games are crippled with frame-rate issues and sub-HD resolutions and yet ND managed to deliver a game that puts them all to shame while making zero compromises.
    It's really easy to sit on your chair and write veredicts on the internet about other people's hard work, people should learn how to enjoy things instead of only looking for reasons to bitch on the internet.

  • carlosdfn #29 7 months ago

    The gripe this article seems to have with the way the story was told is pretty funny. On one side they say there is a clear division between 'goodies' and 'baddies' but at the same time it criticizes the fact that Drake is depicted in a way that makes you realize he's not the saint you'd think he is.
    If there's one aspect where U3 truly beats U2 it's the story and the way it is presented and written.
    Cutter is a fantastic addition to the cast and Marlowe is a far better antagonist than Lazarevic.
    Edited by carlosdfn at 05/11/11 @ 17:57

  • mousearmyone #30 7 months ago

    No insights into input lag? Seems to be a fairly hot topic where this game is concerned.

  • patchbox360 #31 7 months ago

    ND are special thats for sure, when they combine their visual artistry with tight AI, varied enemies and gameplay mechanics, they will be outright the closest thing to perfection in gaming.

  • funkateer #32 7 months ago

    "Similarly, once Drake has been located by CPU AI, it's almost impossible to shake them - they seem to zero in on you even if you have been hidden, out of sight and navigated away from the spot where you were located. Short of being granted x-ray vision, there's no way this should be happening within the confines of the game and the rules previously set by the core mechanics."

    I can say that this is definitely not true. I'm only halfway in the game, but I already had a few occasions where I managed to lose the enemies. I could even hear them say "where did he go?" at some point and they would actively patrol trying to find me.

  • carlosdfn #33 7 months ago

    @funkateer

    That is true, forgot to mention that.

  • Aphexman #34 7 months ago

    So, where's better? On 360 or ps3, is online any good? If yes I'm going for 360 version because of live and i got all my friends there and I prefer 360's pad.

  • Lemming81 #35 7 months ago

    I think it deserved an 8, tbh. It wasn't as refined or ground-breaking as 2 was to 1, and Naughty Dog played it safe instead of trying some new ideas. Perhaps they saw it as a trilogy to draw a line under and want to try new ideas with Uncharted 4? Hope so. I'd love to see where they can take the series next (game mechanics-wise).

    I'll probaby get negged for saying this, but Uncharted is Indiana Jones in all but name and save for the fact Drake is a mass-murderer. I've always loved this series for the spectacle, the story, and the platforming with occasional puzzle. I've always hated the gunplay and they always feel like a chore to get through to get to the next cool set piece and they aren't the best controls in the world.

    Yes, I realise some people like the gunplay, but I've always felt that it feels totally opposed to the kind of game and setting Uncharted is. You've got your hero wise-cracking and getting into scrapes through glorious action sequences, and it feels Indiana Jones - it feels Saturday Morning - it feels family friendly...right up until you start gleefully mowing down every living thing.

    I just can't help but imagine what it would have been like if it had gone Arkham Asylum brawling-style (but more 'drunken' than refined martial arts obviously). I would have looked forward to the fights and they wouldn't have felt so opposed to the rest of the game's universe.

    Does any else feel this? Even if you like Uncharted through and through, do you not feel the gunplay feels like it's dropping you into a different game entirely when those sections happen? Do you think if Arkham Asylum had come out before Uncharted, we would still see 'Rambo Drake'?
    Edited by Lemming81 at 05/11/11 @ 21:55

  • funkateer #36 7 months ago

    I bought it today and I'm loving every minute of it (I'm playing it in 3D).
    Although I do feel it's slightly less polished (yes, there are some slight control issues and I even had a complete lock-up once), I also think it's way more ambitious than UC2.

    The story is so much more involving and mature, the action and set pieces are simply breath taking and way beyond UC2, the AI is much better making the shoot-outs much more exciting, the puzzles are smarter. I even like the new brawling mechanics.
    And what about how they incorporated water, the sea and waves into the gameplay? The way the waves rock the boats, making everything move about and enemies harder to hit, diving underwater to dodge bullets. Quite amazing and fresh, really.

    I can't really understand why some people seem to be set on taking away from its accomplishments. To me the leap from UC2 to UC3 is at least as big as from UC1 to UC2.
    They should have taken a month more to polish it to perfection, but to me it's a sure contender for game of this gen.
    A 9.5 (half a point off for lack of polish, but I hear they're working on a patch)

    @Lemming81
    "do you not feel the gunplay feels like it's dropping you into a different game entirely when those sections happen?"
    Well, yes but in a good way, keeping things fresh.

  • TazerFan #37 7 months ago

    Having just beat the SP, I have to admit that the EG review was pretty much dead on. The game is gorgeous, the acting is unreal, but the gameplay seemed more on-rails than the first two installments ever did. The much ballyhooed plane crash scene was barely interactive. It seemed there were far fewer climbing puzzles as well, which is a shame. Gunplay is definitely off, and I could never shake the feeling that the game would control better with a 360 controller.

    I think a larger issue I have with the SP campaign is that it feels to me like it was designed entirely around set pieces with little regard to how they fit into the plot. You can picture Naughty Dog sitting in the conference room listing "Things That Happen In Action Adventure Movies" and checking them off the list: plane crash, sinking ship, horseback acrobatics, bar brawl, mansion burning to the ground, and so on.

    The Syria castle level felt completely out of place as well.

    Finally, the end level felt like an empty afterthought in the same way that the final level of Deus EX HR felt incomplete.

    I enjoyed it because it was gorgeous to look at and Nathan Drake is so fun to watch, but man did this game play like an 8/10.

  • peterfll #38 7 months ago

    I'm up to chapter 5 and starting to form some firmed up impressions. I do feel that there's a little less polish that U2. I can't quite put my finger on it, but I think it's the physics at times... Drake seems to moonwalk at times and doesn't feel as connected to the environment?

    Interesting comments too about the 3D. I've had my new TV for 2 months and was looking forward to giving this a go in 3D (having replayed and enjoyed a significant portion of Motorstorm recently just to experience the 3D, and still tucking into the 3D GoW PSP/PS3 collection). However, now at chapter 5 I've decided I'm going to switch it off. It simply makes the game too ugly to my eyes. The lower resolution and frame rate just kill the sheen, and for me one of the stunning things about the Uncharted games is the breathtaking graphical fidelity. I also get serious cross talk (aka ghosting) - more so than other 3D games that I have. So I have to say that the 3D IMO isn't anything great, and your not really missing much.

    I do have a bloody belter of a screen (55";) which makes you obviously less tolerant of lower resolutions, but this is Sony's own top of the range Bravia, and as I said, other 3D PS3 games impress much more.

  • weebl #39 7 months ago

    It is graphically stunning but some of the gun fights have turned in to a chaotic mess, the worst of which was the ship arena in which the best tactic I could use was to pick off snipers using a pistol whilst bobbing around in the water! In contrast with other people here, I really liked the section of being lost in the desert and rolled my eyes when I got another wave of enemies to tackle 10 minutes later.

    I seem to recall the actual gameplay being better in 1 and 2, but this one does have a certain epic quality that I haven't seen too much in games until now.

  • GamesConnoisseur #40 7 months ago

    Loving the game and replaying the SP with my son, and also co op.

    Biggest bugbear for me, is after using aiming on controllers of X360 and other PS3 games, the dead zone really bit too large and loss of the subtlies in fine aiming quickly is not great and enemies AIs such a stubborn drones with X-ray visions.

    Addressing these two for me would take the game into higher order of the most entertaining and complete classic, as it is, the two flaws pervades the whole game and affects how you play.

    Corners were cut due to time pressures and wish extra few months spent perfecting it further. Naysayers who say game is perfect as it is, please what wrong with addressing the weak points and thus making it even more perfect?!!

  • Miths #41 7 months ago

    @peterfll

    While it does take a minor visual hit in 3D (it still looks fantastic though, and until I read this article I fully believed there actually wasn't a resolution drop but just some missing anti-aliasing in 3D mode), I'm up to chapter 13 and the places where I've noticed very minor performance drops can be counted on one hand.

    There have been several 3D games I've found borderline unplayable because of performance issues (framerates I estimate ranged from the mid 20s all the way down to the teens), but if UC3 has occasional performance drops in 3D I'm hard pressed to believe we're talking about more than 1-2 frames.
    Once framerates are frequently down in the mid 20s I find most games borderline unplayable, and that hasn't happened once yet in UC3.

    Regarding crosstalk, I have some minor problems with it on occasion on my 2011 Samsung plasma, but in UC3 it has only been noticeable on objects in front of black or nearly black backgrounds.
    I've seen many people on tech forums report similar minor issues with UC3, but the worst reports seem to come from those with Sony 3DTVs. As a general rule active LED sets tend to suffer most from crosstalk problems, plasma (particularly the 2011 models) generally have fewer problems, passive LED sets fewer still and the lucky (rich) people with 3D projector setups apparently never have any crosstalk problems at all from what I can gather.
    Edited by Miths at 06/11/11 @ 04:01

  • jstar #42 7 months ago

    Vizzini I literally can not understand how you could say that UC3 is 'game of the generation material'. In fact I am flabbergasted.

    I have just turned it off after playing for about 2 hours and won't be turning it back on again. Only the most shallow of minds can be entertained by this surely?

    In terms of gfx, story, writing, character, drama etc it is right up there I'll give you that but the actual GAME is shoddy at best. The aiming is wonky, identikit enemies pop up every five seconds exactly like in Virtua Cop, and the pace of the game is set in stone right from the beginning. Yawn.

    Climb, shoot, cinematic, look in diary, climb, shoot etc etc. It is unbearably predictable and formulaic, with each individual component feeling much more like a chore than a pleasant experience. Not a crime intiself but I have already played UC 1 and 2.

    The only thing pulling you through is the story but I can't bear playing it so I guess I'll miss out on that. It's just a rehash of Indiana Jones anyway so no biggie.

    UC3 is a massive backward step in gaming for me. It is dressed in the prettiest clothes but the actual mechanics are as old as anything I can remember. I find it incredibly depressing you would wax lyrical about it so.

    I will stop playing games if they all become like this. It's a 6/7 out of 10 for me at best.

    I literally don't understand what is wrong with you all. Presumably you are the Harry Potter fans and the people who watch X-Factor.

  • cloudskipa #43 7 months ago

    It is a nice looking game but then in all honesty it should be, given how linear it is. Technically the game doesn't bowl me over, nor does the gameplay tbh. I'm not a hater, I like the series as a whole, in a lighthearted and fun "switch your brain off" kind of way. But there is no chance it deserves an accolade such as "Game of the generation" LOL c'mon, it doesn't even deserve GotY with the stunning line of games we've had in 2011 (and still yet to come.. Skyrim and Skyward Sword).

    Far be it from me to criticise anyone's opinion, after all this is only my own, but I sometimes wonder how much experience people have had with games when they say such things. As mentioned below, I also find it incredibly depressing that people could think this is the pinnacle of gaming in 2011.
    Edited by cloudskipa at 06/11/11 @ 10:29

  • djreplay #44 7 months ago

    @jstar Couldn't you say that about every game, like I've already played Batman, Deus Ex etc. Maybe you should stop playing sequel's when trying to find a new game to play.

  • kirankara #45 7 months ago

    @cloudskipa skyrim is the epitome of boring games imo, as I hate rpg's. Skyward sword will no doubt be fabulous, and have no.reason disagree it will be a game for hall of fame. Peoole need to understand that peoples tastes and experiences of games are different. Its snobby to take some elitist view that only certain types of games are games that "real " gamers would enjoy, and that people must have had little experience of games to enjoy them .

    I have been gaming since early 80's, but I know the games I enjoy. Zelda games get a free pass , as they not overly rpg-ish. If you are the kind of person that loves rpg's and developing your character as an individual, its clear uncharted , won't really tick all your boxes.

    Portal 2 is my choice for goty in terms of innovation, and offering something different to norm, and arkham city probably is best.game I'll play this year in many other ways, whilst bf3 will eat up more hrs than any other game, but somehow uc3 is the one that has brought most joy to my life, with me never wanting to put pad down.

    everyone to.their own I guess

  • kirankara #46 7 months ago

    @jstar

    Clearly, many critics.didn't feel the same, and many people who bought game, don't feel.same.
    If , the industry, stops producing games like this, it would be a loss based on the reactions of millions of people.enjoying game.
    Who are you , or anyone else to judge people based on the games they enjoy? I hate xfactor, I enjoy harry potter, I watch smaller arthouse films, and will watch some blockbuster films too. I like games like halo, gears 3, bf3, mario, arkham.city, portal 2, rage, infamous 2, god of war.3, but hated games that are highly rated such as rdr, gta4, la noire, mass effect 2, kinda bored.me after.while, and rpg's are my idea of hell on earth, but I wouldn't say that people who enjoy rpg's are kind of people who have no social life, who.have.never had sex in their lives, as its clearly not true in all cases.

    Grow up and accept that people.enjoy different games, and your opinion of what.constitutes.a great.game isn't necessarily what others would.require from a game. Furthermore, your opinion is no way more.valid, it's just.an opinion , and is only as valid as the next persons.

    If you dont like a game that's fine, but remember, some people are able to.enjoy different types of games

  • richardiox #47 7 months ago

    How's that SDF tattoo working out for you Kirankara? Your lengthy and defensive posts speak volumes.

    Also before you say, owning other consoles doesn't preclude someone from showing SDF sensibilities which you most clearly do.

  • hesido #48 7 months ago

    I'm quarter way through uncharted 3, and this game is a technical marvel, although with more instances blurry textures (rare but more) as mentioned and they removed the motion blur.

    However, I'm not getting the joy I got from UC1 or UC2 still. Don't know, something is missing, I can't pin point it. It's like I'm controlling the character between beautiful sets of animations and set pieces, feels less gamey, more heavy rainy?!

    It's evident ND has poured their hearts and souls into the detail, the animation, the techinality. Every inch of the game makes you feel the hard work that went into it. But as a game, so far it failed to ignite the kind of excitement and joy I had playing UC1 and UC2.

    edit: Oh, the aiming is way too laggy by the way.. :(
    Edited by hesido at 06/11/11 @ 12:22

  • kirankara #49 7 months ago

    @richardiox
    what cause im literate and am mature enough to appreciate that different people appreciate different games, that makes me a member of sdf/fanboy? so when I said same things to people on gears 3 review, and on other threads where people are bitching about reviews, does that make me a fanboy too?
    Whats defensive about my post? Im not speaking in particular about the game itself even any more, just the principle that different people appreciate different games, and that people who feel they have some sort of moral superiority, as they like certain types of games, are pretentious tossers.

    i would say the same about any game now, as Ive grown up. I simply state that I dont like a game, but if others enjoy it great. I dont make claims about what sort of person they are as a whole, or how their choice in games is totally wrong and it's a bad game etc etc. It's just not for me.

    If thats too mature and logical for you, and doesnt fit into your black and white view of world, where people either like sony or love ms, then I'm happy, as im clearly not as big a bell end as you.

  • vizzini #50 7 months ago

    Jstar: “have just turned it off after playing for about 2 hours and won't be turning it back on again. Only the most shallow of minds can be entertained by this surely?”

    Like Simon Parkin, I think your problem is you are looking for a fault before playing the game to completion, and making a false assertion from a basic misunderstanding of story based game design.

    If I tell you that it is an inevitably that every story based games(Mario 64, Ocarina, Snake Eater, Skyrim, RDR, GTA, Infamous, AC, Valkyria Chronicles, Rage, Dark Souls, etc) all need to be linear, will it be like finding out the truth about Santa Claus?

    Once you understand that simple concept, you and Simon might then judge the games based on their gameplay(above easy mode), and the ability to express your own gameplay style, and have your own non-linear gameplay experience.

    UC3 sets a new standard for this non-linear experience in a cover shooter, by its use of dynamic physics, props, unscripted AI and non-linear animations. Then add on the vast online multiplayer features(including youtube replay publishing), 3player co op, LAN play, offline 2player split coop and 3D mode and the game as a whole is a worthy candidate in any fair metric based assessment for best game this generation(so far).

  • weebl #51 7 months ago

    @jstar

    I find it difficult to disagree with you when you take the constituent parts on face value, but as a complete package it is still a good game at its heart. It is easy to become disillusioned with games that have the same mechanics especially when they don't nail the fundamentals.

  • captainrentboy #52 7 months ago

    I don't seem to be quite as thrilled with this as some of the folks on here. 'Game of the generation'?? After 4 hours or so it's barely cracking 'Game of the last 3 months'.
    It does look lovely, but after U2, GOW3, Crysis 2 and so on, there's nothing on show that's left me jaw dropped or anything :/
    I thoroughly enjoyed Uncharted 2, it's the game that made me go out and buy my PS3, but this one just isn't doing it for me.... Yet.

  • darkmorgado #53 7 months ago

    @vizzini

    I stopped reading your condescending post when you called Mario 64, Dark Souls and Rage story-based.

  • kirankara #54 7 months ago

    @captainrentboy

    Everyone entitled to their opinion, as ultimately, it's your subjective experience of a game that counts.

    I actually am preferring this game overall to uc2, although, as noted the shooting does feel a bit off, although I adapted that them fairly quickly and doesnt bother me any more.

    God of war 3 made me jaw drop no doubt, as did crysis 2, but I still find myself looking around at times taking it all in.

    maybe im more easily impressed by some people on here graphically , as i still find most games coming out this gen amply good looking, and only thing making me think of next gen, is 60fps, slightly better aa and not having objects pop in like they do in bf3, which is really noticeable during tank scenes in the sp.

    Game really doesnt offer anything new gameplay wise, and for that, I guess some people will feel disappointed with it, but I'm just happy to play some more of same, for now at least.

  • kirankara #55 7 months ago

    @darkmorgado

    he kinda has point tbf, in that story driven games are linear by default really. Only way to escape that, is to have an open world, with a main story running through game, and lots of side plts via side missions.

    On a side note. wtf is wrong with people in here, that they cant just disagree about what they think of games. That they have to get into petty arguments, that get personal and offensive???

    We all here because we like gaming, and no doubt, like any other aspect of life, we all have different tastes. I love indian food, and am not fond of italian, but I dont get into rows with people because they dont like indian food etc etc.

    No idea why people cant just state their own opinions on games, and respond to other peoples responses, with each accepting that, their opinion of a game, is equally as valid as their own, for that person anyway. When it comes to games, there's no absolute opinion, which everyone has to adhere to.

    Sometimes, a film will get critical adulation, like the king's speech, but I just didnt like it. My friend on other hand, who I share similar taste in films with generally, loved it. What was the thing that made it enjoyable to him, but not to me?

    Ultimately, i've no idea, I cant explain it. Great cast, great story, fantastic script, but I walked away kinda indifferent to it, it made no sense. It's just my own individual experience.

  • jstar #56 7 months ago

    @djreplay Yes you could say that about every game to some extent. Or at least every sequel. And it is certainly true that I enjoyed Batman Arkham City less than Asylum and Human Revolution less than Deus Ex 1.

    However, the experience of playing as Batman or the experience of playing as Jensen is still fundamentally enjoyable on a mechanical level. The controls, the movement, the way you interact in the world. Playing is enjoyable for me despite their familiarity.

    I'm sorry but you can not say the same about UC3. The mechnanics of the game are not enjoyable and if you argue that they are then I'm afraid I must call into question your ability to accurately critique things. Only the most ardent fan boy could assert that the actual gameplay in UC3 is anything other than average.

    The climbing is inferior in every way to the first tomb raider as is the shooting as are the puzzles. And that game was made 15 odd years ago. Please tell me how this is progress.

  • jstar #57 7 months ago

    @Kirankara

    No. All opinions are not valid. Everyone is entitled to an opinion but in no way are they all equal and to suggest that they are is beyond stupid.

  • layleeloo #58 7 months ago

    @jstar If this isnt the mose Elitist "I know more than anybody" comment I have seen in years on EG, then I don't know what is

    "I'm sorry but you can not say the same about UC3. The mechnanics of the game are not enjoyable and if you argue that they are then I'm afraid I must call into question your ability to accurately critique things. Only the most ardent fan boy could assert that the actual gameplay in UC3 is anything other than average."

    Utter bollocks. There is no more enjoyment to be had playing the characters you say than playing U3 - and there is nothing fanboyish about saying that. It is simply a fact of which mechanics you prefer?!?!

    I am normally a Battlefield man for example, yet yesterday and today playing Modern Warfare 3 the mechaics of that are so WAAAAAY above BF3 its unbelievable, so that is a relative comparison. But that paragraph above certainly isnt. Personally I found Batman certainly 'average' which is why it took me three times of owning it to actuall dedicate any time to it. It is simply what you prefer - not an elitist "if you think it is you know fuck all" kind of comment.

  • jstar #59 7 months ago

    @vizzini Now I must presume you are joking. Especially as I did not once mention linearity.

    And the fact that you have used Skyrim as an example of a linear game shows me you don't even know what the word means.

    I hope for your sake that you are about 15.

    'UC3 sets a new standard for this non-linear experience in a cover shooter, by its use of dynamic physics, props, unscripted AI and non-linear animations.'

    This is my new favourite comment post.

    kirankara - Here is a good example of how two opinions are not equally valid.

  • layleeloo #60 7 months ago

    @jstar I DO AGREE with the comment re Vizzini though hahaha.

    'UC3 sets a new standard for this non-linear experience in a cover shooter, by its use of dynamic physics, props, unscripted AI and non-linear animations.'

    That is hillarious. As much as I love the Uncharted series I do have to agree with the EG comment that at times it just seems like a game of trigger sequences one after another - so it is very linear. However, as a cinematic exprience its great. Sometimes I don't want open, non linear bollocks. Sometimes you just want something you dont have to think about that you can just sit and enjoy the ride - of which U3 is quite unparraleled for.

    But non-linear it certainly isn't

  • jstar #61 7 months ago

    @layleeloo

    First of all you have entirely missed the point. At no point am I claiming that being Batman is intrinsically more enjoyable than being Nathan Drake.

    I am talking about the mechanical controls of the game. The aiming, the movement, the connection from player, to controller to action on screen.

    If it is your contention that the controls in UC3 are anywhere near as refined or as precise as the controls in either batman game (which isn't to say these controls are particularly refined, just in comparison to UC3 they are) then I am afraid you are a fucking idiot.
    Edited by jstar at 06/11/11 @ 13:51

  • kirankara #62 7 months ago

    @jstar

    Clearly missed my point. When it comes to.enjoyment of a game, they are equally valid

  • layleeloo #63 7 months ago

    @jstar They are only refined to the degree of your preference. Certain games purposely have mechanics built in for feeling. A la Killzone 2, War of the Worlds etc.

    Therefore they way you go on about Batman being a pinnacle is as blind sided and ignorant as I am a fucking idiot.

    Mechaics are often built to a style of play and personally I couldnt give a flying toss about having Batman's mechanics in U3 - it would not suit the game. What is good for one game is not good for another - I can't believe you are dumb enough to even ignore that

  • kirankara #64 7 months ago

    @jstar

    " I'm sorry but you can not say the same about UC3. The mechnanics of the game are not enjoyable and if you argue that they are then I'm afraid I must call into question your ability to accurately critique things. Only the most ardent fan boy could assert that the actual gameplay in UC3 is anything other than average."

    Lot.of fanboys reviewed this game, judging by the scores it got then?

    The shooting.elements were awkward at first, but hasn't.ruined my enjoyment of game at all. Apart from that, I've absolutely no complaints about gameplay, as side from that issue, its just more of uncharted 2, which id take all day long. You clearly.don't like game, which is.fine, but your.compulsion to make everyone share this.view is sad.

  • wattsn26 #65 7 months ago

    I enjoyed the technical analysis from DigitalFoundry but when you guys tried to critique gameplay, story and characters you sounded like you have no idea what you're talking about...

  • UkHardcore23 #66 7 months ago

    Why are the aiming control's so shit in this game? They were fine in U2?

    Why did reviewers not pick up on this?

  • wattsn26 #67 7 months ago

    @kimchibaka Aiming in UC2 was far from perfect....

  • JediMasterMalik #68 7 months ago

    A large chunk of this article seems devoted to justifying and supporting the review. Not what I expect from a DF article at all. Talk about the tech, it's kinda the point, don't go wandering off about design decisions within the games that have little to no effect on the tech.

    That review does not need defending as it was the reviewers opinion, you dont need to bring it up here.

    Quite surprised you didn't mention the incredible faces in this game, particularly drakes. It's pretty mind blowing.

  • cloudskipa #69 7 months ago

    @vizzini

    Guy's stop pulling the "elitism" card just because people have the good sense to share what they feel about the game in a truthful manner without being blinded by the Sony hype machine.

    I understand that Uncharted isn't an RPG and wouldn't suit someone looking for that type of experience (no, really I understand that). Judging Uncharted on it's gameplay is what has people like me disappointed Vizzini, I agree with jstar that the first Tomb Raider was a much superior gameplay experience. It had a sense of REAL exploration that wasn't almost completely automated and sticky like Uncharted. Likewise with the puzzles and level design in Tomb Raider, some of it was so clever and didn't insult the intelligence of an 8 year old....unlike Uncharted.

    I don't personally think the shooting was better in Tomb Raider personally but when compared to the game whose mechanics it "borrowed" (ie Gears of War) then Uncharted 3 falls short in comparison, NO question. It just doesn't feel as accurate or satisfying to take out enemies. Then we can look at the melee fighting system. More than a little inspired from Batman AA/AC and not even close to as good. The animation awkwardly chops and changes in ways that were well disguised in the Batman games.

    So what are left with here? Not a great deal to make it game of the generation that's for sure! The set-pieces are visually stunning, but they are all so similar to Uncharted 1/2 (ie. Crumbling scenery, Nate having to run and jump before a bridge or building collapses, only for the animation system to once again, awkwardly chop and change at the last minute to assist the player and steer him away from an avoidable death. It is INCREDIBLY scripted, to call it "non-linear" and "non-scripted" is borderline insane.

    Uncharted games, good for what they are, but it is the most overhyped and overrated series in the history of gaming. Even Uncharted fans can't keep a lid on their disappointment with the third game. No wonder they are disappointed when you have hype merchants like IGN make people believe this is the greatest game this generation. Seriously watch that review then tell me how anyone can criticise Simon Parkin.
    Edited by cloudskipa at 06/11/11 @ 17:19

  • cloudskipa #70 7 months ago

    @wattsn26 Really? Richard Leadbetter has only been reviewing games professorially since the early Mega Drive days and given some of his outstanding contribution at Sega Saturn Magazine I think he's more than experienced enough to offer his opinion in his own article.

  • Azhrarn #71 7 months ago

    Watching the vids I was wondering why it was apparently so difficult to hit something with a gun. Then I realized this was a console game with console controls.

    But I would love this on PC. I know it won't happen.
    It seems like a fun game to play with Keyboard/Mouse controls.
    I would never attempt this on a console.

    I am not sure if I should envy the PS3 gamers though, after reading the frustrated reactions of those who tried to play it.

  • Rodchenko #72 7 months ago

    @weebl

    Exactly my thoughts. I loved the broken architecture and lighting of the desert town and if it was for me, ND could have build the entire level just around Drake finding some potable water, and, in doing so, further understrike his loneliness and desperation. Instead they decided to throw yet another stupid enemy wave at him understriking *my* desperation as a player who was already tired of shooting identikit NPCs in the ship level.
    Edited by Rodchenko at 06/11/11 @ 18:08

  • kirankara #73 7 months ago

    @cloudskippa, sure whats overated and not, is just again a matter of opinion. I think rdr is overated , but the general consensus, is its a great game. Just accept you and others disagree, instead of trying to assert your opinion as.absolute truth.

    Anyway, im bored if the ridiculously immature morons populating this thread, so nothing really else to say.

    In.news for people who.actually like game , it looks like patch for control on way

    http://myona.com/2011/11/06/naughty-dog-aim-fix-uncharted-3-aiming-problem/

  • IvorB #74 7 months ago

    Hmmm... I can see the knives are out for Naughty Dog. Okay the game is not perfect but people are searching hard for something to criticize. What's telling is the people that say it is worse than the previous but cannot articulate why. They "can't put their fingure on it". In truth I have felt a bit oy that playing it and it is just series fatigue. We've been spoiled with three of these amazing games in a short space of time. But this game is a marvel. Perhaps Naughty Dog should have waited but how can we blame them for spoiling us? You can wait up to ten years for your favourite series to come with a new game and it's lame. If you can't enjoy this game because you feel a bit burnt out on the series formula then I beg you please don't play it. Keep it for when you're ready for more Uncharted. It will be ready for you.

    I hope Naughty Dog can filter out the valid criticisms from the nebulous malaise being expressed. They've delivered another outstanding game that's streets ahead of almost anything you could play at the moment.

    Also I think controller lag is a screen latency issue. Played the game at a Sony event on shit TVs and control sucked. Playing on my TV which I know to have low latency is a different story. Perhaps Richard could investigate.

  • IvorB #75 7 months ago

    Also what's with professional reviewers saying you can't lose opponents? They even say: "I've lost him".

  • The-Jack-Burton #76 7 months ago

    @jstar 2 hours doesn't qualify you to make such sweeping judgments. Try putting the game on very easy and at least finish it before you render an opinion. The internet is such an inviting place for dumb logic to be voiced, at least pretend to have some integrity

  • greenthumb #77 7 months ago

    "shut up you total nob cheese!" - Kirankara

    "cause im literate and am mature" - Kirankara

  • kirankara #78 7 months ago

    @greenthumb

    What, so because im.literate anf mature , I cant get pissed off with moronic.people and use a bit of abusive language?
    at least I dont think my view is only correct view , and that.only games I like , are good games, and anyone who disagrees with me , is a fanboy.etc.

    If your definition of maturity includes never telling someone who is talking shit , that they are in facr talking shit or swearing ocasionally, when continuously provoked , as immature. Then yes , I'm immature. My definition of immature is more defined by not thinking im centre of universe., and only my opinion of something is valid.
    ps must take great maturity to post what you did. Eh??
    did it add anything to thread? Was there any point to it, other.than to antagonize me?nope! Such maturity .At least the quote you have taken of what I said, was followed by something constructive, and was only a reaction to provocation, not a deliberate attempt to rile someone.

    I don't actually care what people on these threads think anymore though tbh, as most people lack basic manners, and are nothing more than insecure individuals, who get some weird kick out of putting people down, and have some strange afilliation with a corporation, and get their sense of identity from it, as they are so insecure about their own sense of self worth.

    i may not agree with other peoples opinions, or tastes in games, but id never tell them that it's wrong, or that the games they like are crap, as if it's divine revelation from God himself. to me that's the first part of being mature, is to respect people enough to believe that other people's opinions are valid, especially when it relates to their own experiences. You cant tell people that their experiences are wrong. If they like something, then that opinion is equally as valid as another who dislikes it.
    Edited by kirankara at 06/11/11 @ 22:22

  • vizzini #79 7 months ago

    @Cloudskipa

    Your reference to Gears here and calling UC over hyped is quite interesting.

    From people I know who rightfully love the Gears games from the hours they play, they never even play through the campaign; never mind play again on crushing mode.

    The aim of game development(after making a profit), is for people to actually play the game and sample as much of the content that has been produced.

    On that metric alone, the UC series is exemplary, in that so many people do complete the games; many more than once. Look at the raft of people in all the recent UC threads that can discuss the campaigns in such detail because they actually play the games and can have informed opinions.

    Putting my earlier non-linear gameplay comment that has been repeatedly been taken out of context. I'll try explain it again.

    All games with a story ending are linear games at their core. Game designers aim was to take the player from start point to end point, and to experience all story side avenues also.

    How that is achieved in different genres is just semantics. So once you have concluded that all non-linear looking games, just appear non-linear and it is an illusion produced by fenced decisions(choice) by when objectives happen, or by different paths or routes through a gameplay area, like the open play area of the Syria chapter in UC3, you can then re-sheath your Naughty Dog knives and either decide to look at how amazing the SP game is by buying/beating it or maybe go to a discussion of a game you actually have some interest.

  • VeyronMick #80 7 months ago

    U3 is a good game even with the aiming issues, and the game crashing but its not as good a game as U2.
    I enjoyed the story and the interactions more in U2 while most of the other characters seem to spend their time nagging Drake which is getting tiring.

  • Ror1984 #81 7 months ago

    @Vizzini - So you use some anecdotal evidence that people you know allegedly don't play the Gears campaigns to insinuate that it's only worth playing the MP modes. In my own anecdotal evidence, I don't know a single person that owns the Gears games that doesn't play the Gears campaigns, and that accounts for pretty much everyone on my FL. As for replayability, I just today finished my fifth runthrough of Gears 2 (and still absolutely loved it, by the way), I've also played the original a number of times, and am going to play through 3 again, just as soon as I finish reading Coalition's End that is. And I barely even touch the MP - maybe I'll play a bit of Horde, but that's about it.

    I realize you didn't bring up Gears, but it's really not necessary to attempt to denigrate one game to make another look better. If people didn't finish the Gears campaigns or care about the stories, there'd be no demand for the four very good novels that currently exist, nor the fifth one currently being written by Karen Traviss. There'd also likely be no Gearspedia, with people scouring the games and additional material for every little detail they can find, and there wouldn't be forum threads upon forum threads full of theories about the beginnings of the Locust, Myrrah, the Sires etc.

    As for Uncharted, I've played (and own) all three once, enjoyed them a lot (especially 3, for it's pacing and lesser focus on combat), and will probably do a trilogy playthrough in the new year. It is possible to like two competing games or systems, and if you can't see anything to enjoy in one, then just spend the energy enjoying the one you like.

    Also, there is no 'Crushing' difficult in Gears. It's 'Insane' in Gears.

  • vizzini #82 7 months ago

    @Ror1984

    I'm not knocking Gears, and would have probably bought the games if they'd had silver demos(when I owned a 360) or if Epic were ever free to release them on PS3.

    I was just going by the people I know who are 360 gamers and play a lot of gears, and COD in big groups with their work colleagues, and seemingly have little interest in the campaign, or single player gaming at all.

    It is good to hear the SP is the highlight of the game from people like yourself.

  • smithdown #83 7 months ago

    Just finished it tonight, ace game. I think I prefer UC2's set pieces and art design on the whole, but the improvements in facial animation in 3 is incredibl. It honestly felt like watching a Pixar movie a lot of the time, just amazing! Everything zips and pops with such colour and clarity. Sure there are some weird moments with animation glitches, NPC buddies teleporting ahead if you etc, which break the immersion but no biggie really. I would have liked a bit more Elena, as well as Chloe and Cutter. And maybe more backstory on Marlow and Ramsay, the ending felt a bit rushed and could have used more closure, cos there were a lot of loose threads! So, great game but inferior to 2, in my book.

    PS - What is with all the bitchiness on this thread guys? It's like a fucking sewing circle, man up (if you're men).
    And one more thing, realised my post was a bit negative when I really think U3 was ace, only game for ages where I properly gasped at a cut scene (you know the one...). I will prob have another go through on Hard before sending it back to Livefilm - yes sorry guilty of renting it buying, just bought Dark Souls and Batman so decided something had to be sacrificed sadly. Will prob buy it when it's platinum in a few months and have an uncharted marathon!! Happy days!!
    Edited by smithdown at 06/11/11 @ 23:53

  • Ror1984 #84 7 months ago

    @Vizzini - fair play, I just thought it was worth pointing out, as a counterpoint to your own anecdote. Personally, in terms of enjoyment I'd say Gears and Uncharted are about equal for me - they are, after-all both 3rd-person cover-based action games with huge setpieces. I will say I'm more into Gears as a media series (apologies for using quasi-marketing spiel, I almost did a mini-sick myself), as I'm interested in all the additional stuff (such as the aforementioned novels), and my own personal tastes tend more toward sci-fi. This is not to take away from Uncharted though, it's a hugely enjoyable series, and I'm glad I get to be a fan of both.

    Incidentally, that sci-fi leaning I mentioned earlier (along with my love of horror) means that Dead Space 2 is likely to be the best game I play this year.

  • bluetoothion #85 7 months ago

    For the general forum....just as I am about to agree with someone...there they go saying something off or entirely stupid.

    What I have to say and I think it applies to Gears of War as well...

    When you have a successful formula that captivates gamers and plays well...and the time comes and a No. 3 is stuck next to it.... especially when its in the same console era with different development gens... it is rather irrational and unrealistic to expect things that are leaps and bounds different from previous iterations without ruining it... ( calling my lawyer Mr. Capcom to my defence ) and I m not only referring to the technical stuff.


    I see most people bitching against the obvious...the fact that UC had to change to a slightly different direction whether than is for better or for worse is down to personal taste...doesn't mean that its wrong and if it is...wonder of wonders we live in the despicable age of patches...where developers can experiment with boxes with full priced retail games just like PC gaming of the past hoo foocking ray... if something is to be fixed it now can.

    @ vizzini

    while I usually like your technical notes... its higly unlikely even NG went to anything remotely close to RayTracing basically because the closest to ever getting there with ps3 was a 3 ps3 bundle...one fully operational to process a still image...

  • cloudskipa #86 7 months ago

    @vizzini You accuse me of taking your earlier quotes out of context and yet you do the same thing to me within your very first sentence. I only eve mentioned Gears because it is an obvious inspiration to the Uncharted series, I only compared the aiming system between the two and that is where my comparison ended. I never said anything about the campaign, or, indeed that Gears wasn't overrated.

    I like Uncharted, all three of them and I like the Gears trilogy too. I probably prefer the Uncharted games in single player too. Though I prefer Alan Wake to both.

    I just think the Uncharted series is overrated, and yes more so than Gears as you don't hear fans of that franchise make such bold statements as "best game of the generation" or "the pinnacle of gaming" etc. You can say " well that's because they are different games and UC is better than Gears" but I don't think there's really enough distance between them, either in terms of quality or as a gameplay experience (single and multi) to warrant the differing levels of sung praise and hype.


    I honestly believe that If Uncharted was a multiplatform title it wouldn't be held in quite such high regard. I believe the reason behind this is Sony. If there's one thing Sony are good at it's marketing, they are masters of the trade.

  • vizzini #87 7 months ago

    @bluetoothion

    The information about needing 3 ps3s is wrong, the general purpose interactive ray-tracer by IBM works fine on just one PS3 linux kit, like the working one 10cm away from my keyboard.

    In the desert section of UC3 there is a non-combat section that looks absolute breath taking as you move were the sand changes under foot with dynamic light. It isn't completely unthinkable that with a less general purpose ray tracing setup for the scene and the availability of the RSX and its VRAM that 720p30 couldn't be achieved to improve on the PS3 linux kits 6SPUs only and 256MB RAM 720p15fps setup.

  • TazerFan #88 7 months ago

    Two other things that have struck me after finishing the game:

    1) The way they completely abandoned Chloe and the Jason Statham guy on the bus was very odd. What happened to them? Not even a mention in passing? Weird, and uncharacteristic of Naughty Dog. Thanks for the help, secondary characters! We appreciate the plot convenience!

    2) They did a very poor job of developing the "what drives you to these obsessive adventures Drake?" theme. It was mentioned in reviews, and every character had a melodramatic "it's not worth it Drake!" little speech when it was their turn, but nothing ever came of it. Drake realized the water was poisoned, or something, from a golden treasure chest in a lake, or something, and yes Francis Drake did a kind of selfless thing by hiding the city, but Nate still took his best friend and father figure along for the entire ride and nearly had him killed like a dozen times. And yet, no consequences. Drake lost a silver ring. Boo bloody hoo. Until we see some real consequences to Drake's misadventures, Naughty Dog is just jerking us around with the notion that anything is at risk or that Nate actually realizes how narrowmindedly obsessed he is.

  • Sodding_Gamer #89 7 months ago

    @Aphexman

    Your a clever little minstrel aren't you! ;)

  • bluetoothion #90 7 months ago

    @Vizzini

    Ray-tracing is still resource hungry process and even on high end machines it is not used for full gameplay scenes...so I might go as far as seeing the PS3 capable of Ray-tracing but not in a game.

    however my argument will not be on technical basis...it would be that... If PS3 had proven through UC3 having some sort the ability to do sufficiently Ray tracing...SONY would not keep quiet till the end of days...

  • funkateer #91 7 months ago

    "there are no new over-arching, groundbreaking technological ideas that enable amazing, never-seen-before gameplay opportunities in this sequel. Instead, the developers have iterated and improved on the systems they already have"

    They obviously missed the (visually breathtaking) real time water simulation that moves and tilts the entire level, making the level play out differently the next time you play it. There's a nice video on the disc about it.

    What struck me is that this article contains surprisingly little tech info, and missed some quite important improvements.
    It complained about controller lag, but didn't actually measure it. It didn't mention the stunning looking new 'god-ray' effects. It didn't mention how character animations are now more affected by it's surroundings. It didn't mention destruction. It didn't mention AA (were the AA problems they picked up on in the MP analysis fixed in the released version?).
    The texture streaming is so efficient that it seems not that far off Rage's "megatexture" (although probably a bit less flexible) as I've hardly ever seen any repeating texture, yet UC3's textures also look great close-up (unlike Rage).

    OTOH the article spent quite a lot of space trying to be game review.
    Edited by funkateer at 07/11/11 @ 21:32

  • miiiguel #92 7 months ago

    Mario 64, story based...
    This generation is officialy over, and I'm not talking about PS3 and 360.
    Edited by miiiguel at 07/11/11 @ 10:06

  • BuckEntropy #93 7 months ago

    It's a little funny to me that at the time hardly anyone seemed to have noticed the Uncharted 2 tech features were also atypically superficial and anecdotal. And no one here seems to remember. Naughty Dog appears to get slightly 'special' treatment from DF... at least the UC games don't get put through the usual grinder, and that's a double edged grinder.

    I'm just saying... ;)

  • vizzini #94 7 months ago

    @Bluetoothion

    It is a solid non-technical argument you make there, and the same reason I originally suggested it might actually be cheating slightly by offline photon-tracing for ambient lighting and then composited. But I can tell you it looks of ray-tracing quality, so they've done amazingly well if it isn't.

    The other question is why would Sony talk up some incidental interactivity piece of story, which would be a annoying spoiler for gamers. Everyone is well aware the PS3 Cell has a special designed architecture for the toughest computing problems; wouldn't it just be old news versus the wow factor of the graphics people will actually experience for that 5mins of interaction?

  • vizzini #95 7 months ago

    @funkateer

    The second comment in this thread, where I called DF out on the same thing, was met by 35 people(so far :) ) negging the comment.

    I guess they all didn't like it as game of the generation candidate; but 35 people haven't put forward suggestions of their choice in the thread. So I assumed all of them were just defending EG's analysis.

  • bigcrunch #96 7 months ago

    @Miths

    I also agree that UC3 in 3D is a must. I've played 29 (!) games in 3D across PS3 and 360 and UC3 would easily be in the top three.

    MP in U3 definitely takes a graphical hit, looks rather blocky, but in single player it looks as good as most other PS3 games do in 2D! Because of the two different viewpoints in 3D your eyes see more pixels, so two half resolution images combine into one higher resolution image, and the up-scaling on the TV does a great job too (like how DVD's look much better on a good HDTV). I definitely haven't seen anything anywhere near as bad as the single eye 3D images posted in this article.

    I can also concur with the frame rate - haven't noticed any issues, though it's clear from the footage above that it drops in some parts.

    Crosstalk is only distracting in some dark sections - for the most part it is quite good.

  • demons #97 7 months ago

    good games? but i have a question?

    this game have a different tech aa ? uncharted 2 : msaa 2x this game= ? mlaa?? no aa? fxaa? custom edge alg? bho and the quality of image ?

    for me uncharted 2 have best quality graphics for msaa..in uncharted 3 naughty remove then ...but...what change ?

  • Uncompetative #98 7 months ago

    Enemies have X-Ray vision & you can't aim at them?

    LOL WOT?

  • RESIDENT_nEVILe #99 7 months ago

    @demons
    I am with you, brother :p In my opinion, one of 3 things happened:

    1. Sony wanted to push their 3D TV technology like they did with blu-ray in the PS3, hence 3D in Uncharted. Even though you can turn 3D on and off, changing the Anti-aliasing from mode to mode is a problem. To get the performance ND wanted in 3D, the whole anti-aliasing solution had to be rethought to make a smaller footprint.

    It's obvious if you check a few online interviews that Naughty Dog was gently pushed to include 3D. Sure, they had to get excited about it, but it wasn't in their original plans.

    2. Maybe the line that ND said about the anti-aliasing being too costly and they had to change it to increase details elsewhere in the game (not just for 3D) is true. Whatever, I think the game looks worse overall, increased detail or not.

    3. Naughty Dog cannot see jaggies. It also seems like a lot of Uncharted fans can't see jaggies either because apart from a few posts, the horrible anti-aliasing hasn't been mentioned, even in the reviews. Maybe ND thought the anti-aliasing was amazing.

    Conclusion:
    Only a few people are cursed to notice jaggies or most people believe the increased detail/3D was worth the hit to overall image quality. I think the smooth image quality in Uncharted 2 was almost like a cartoon 95% of the time. The shimmering jagged edges on almost everything in Uncharted 3 completely removes that polished smooth look and reminds you that this is indeed a game.

    And before fanboys get their knickers in a twist, I think Uncharted 3 is awesome, but we should be allowed to discuss the games shortcomings. Enough people are already discussing its strengths.
    Edited by RESIDENT_nEVILe at 07/11/11 @ 14:46

  • vizzini #100 7 months ago

    @RESIDENT_nEVILe

    The jaggies issue is highly person dependent in some ways. But UC2, like good games that attempt real-time lighting(from that time) has far less robust shadowing mapping, not to mention shadow map aliasing issues occur more frequently.

    Overall aliasing is down in UC3 just by shadowing, and the HDR lighting quality is surprisingly even better than UC2. Not to mention that it seems to use some form of lighting contrast AI, for scene lighting and composition changes. It has the natural delay of the human eye, before optimum contrast and visibility is reached.

  • RESIDENT_nEVILe #101 7 months ago

    @vizzini

    Yes, I did notice the slightly better lighting and the slightly less jaggy shadows. But there are jaggies everywhere else:) I would rather have a uniform quality of AA rather than great here, awful there. But I suppose its entirely to personal taste. Personally, I don't think the increased lighting detail was worth the hit, but then again I also believe that it was 3D responsible for the downgrade to the AA not the lighting/shadow detail, so it's all arbitrary with that in mind.

    I mean who would trade off anti-aliasing for slightly less jaggy shadows and slightly better lighting? Well, ND, I guess. But it makes more sense that they would make such a drastic change for the sake of something bigger, like 3D.
    Edited by RESIDENT_nEVILe at 07/11/11 @ 15:08

  • vizzini #102 7 months ago

    @RESIDENT_nEVILe

    If you think about the way backwards compatibility works on PC and console, screen space AA techniques are a waste of resources in a console game's design.

    Next gen 16x screen space AA on a PS4 running UC3 will eliminate most of those issues by super-sampling. But what it can't do, is improve the lighting or shadow AA retrospectively without access to the game's source code and being reprogrammed.

    World or Model space AA is a much better plan for games to look better in the long run imo.

    TV signal post processing is getting faster all the time, so on amazing TVs games running at 30fps could easily benefit from something like digital reality creation, with almost no problem of lag affecting game play. I'll try at some point with the Bravia Pro DRC in my TV to see if it is playable and how well it eliminates the occasional aliasing artefacts.

    If you used a 2D or 3D projector you can adjust the focus to reduce aliasing, above and beyond the normal reduction by virtue of the image being bounced light and needing to sit further away.

  • funkateer #103 7 months ago

    @vizzini

    Actually I don't like MLAA or FXAA at all. I mean, it works quite well in some cases, but imho the cases that are most important to me (the edges that really require sub-pixel rendering, such as thin high contrast lines that cause really serious pixel shimmering) fall flat on their face. And this is only more emphasized because the other edges seem to be so nicely anti-aliased. This is especially obvious in KZ3, but also UC3 shows this.

    Sometimes I wonder if it would be doable to have some kind of non-linear screen buffer with some pixels rendered just once (no AA), and the edges running a high quality AA (like 8xMSAA) instead of 'fake' solutions like MLAA. The result might then still take less memory than doing 2xMSAA for each pixel.
    But detecting those edges where things are more important are surely a lot more difficult to detect since they're usually edges that are broken up in screen-space.

    I haven't done any serious opengl development for a long time though, so I'm not sure this is even possible or viable. I'm thinking something like this might be more easy to implement in a pure software renderer/rasterizer, but I could be wrong.

    "The second comment in this thread, where I called DF out on the same thing, was met by 35 people(so far ) negging the comment."
    You know, it could even be much more than 35 people if you consider the number of people +1-ing you ;)
    Personally I never really care about negs unless I realise that I actually made a moronic comment.

  • carlosdfn #104 7 months ago

    I'm really disappointed with this article, it barely scratched the surface, he could've analized so many other aspects but instead he wastes half of the article talking about the issues he had with the story and other things that are completely irrelevant for this feature. I thought eurogamer already had a review? I wonder if he would've brought up the story if he had positive things to say about it.

  • vizzini #105 7 months ago

    Funkateer:”Actually I don't like MLAA or FXAA at all.“

    @funkateer

    I wasn't meaning those techniques by mentioning world or object space AA, I was meaning geometry based motion blur or model jitter AA, using an accumulation buffer with jitter displacement for multipass rendering of geometry; like recent Gears 3 technique, it (coincidentally) added some months after I suggested it in a DF discussion with someone like Buck, as a potentially good use of wasted EDRAM bandwidth in the tiling delay.

    As for both MLAA & FXAA, I thought they are search based screen space AA techniques; just not super sampling screen space AA.

    So yes I agree, they tend to increase contrast for chequered board styled aliasing problems.

    However, I haven't seen these problems at all in Rage, so I assume they get completely eliminated by mega-texturing; presumably from being one huge data structure that is accessed at the appropriate mipmap(clipmap) level and anisotropically filter, allowing the creation of mip maps through bi-linear(bi cubic) downsampling, and then clarity recovered by the anisotropic filtering when rendering the scene.

    edit:typos
    Edited by vizzini at 08/11/11 @ 10:50

  • inferna_hermit #106 7 months ago

    @carlosdfn

    i'm with you buddy

  • Scaper #107 7 months ago

    >"The focus in the ambiguity in the characters of Among Friends"
    >"in the characters of Among Friends"
    >"Among Friends"
    >"Friends"