Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by CardJoe, 20 Dec 2010.
If they can't make a good Lara Croft game, why don't they "HD" the old games? Like Serious Sam? I would buy them if they were less pixelated and have support to 1920x1200
Isn't Uncharted like Tomb Raider for Girls? I mean... it has no boobs nor bottom. Isn't that the whole point of Tomb Raider or am I missing something?
EDIT: Oh, and V3ctor, they did make a "HD" of an older game. Tomb Raider 1 is Tomb Raider Anniversary.
Uncharted 1 & 2 are in my top 10 of recent time & have good memories of the first few tomb raiders & can't wait for the 3rd uncharted & hope tomb raider devs can bring the once great franchise back to life making a must buy game, tomb raider went pear shaped as soon as they focused on movies although Jolie was absolutely steaming hot in the lara croft outfit (insert drooling emoticon here) & the only reason to watch it .
Naughty Dog haven't passed off Uncharted yet, so it's not in a Tomb Raider style nose dive just yet. 1 and 2 were my favo PS3 games.
What an odd article. Uncharted 1 and (especially) 2 are right up there with the top releases of this generation. Why are they in dire need of innovation? Both games have a great mix of adventure, platforming and combat with well written characters and excellent voice acting. Nathan Drake is a fully developed and compelling character were Lara Croft is a toff with big boobs, hot pants and not much else. The tomb raider series is the one in dire need of innovation, the early games are classics but the rest are just different flavours of fail cake where they have obsessed on re-defining the character and forgetting about the game play.
There's been 1 Tomb Raider reboot...
The others were sequels and prequels.
Well, they rebooted it with Legend, but they've retconned so many things in and out over the years (like all of Chronicles and The Last Revelation's stuff), then they've done games which are entirely unattached from other entries (Guardian of Light), plus the mobile and handheld games. Now they are rebooting it again with Tomb Raider.
I really liked Uncharted 1 & 2. Lara Croft always felt so vapid & one dimensional, not to mention an uneccesary thief; rich as sin & determined to just store all of her loot in her mansion.
Uncharted was much more like a spiritual successor to Indiana Jones, with Nathan Drake reminding me a lot of Nathan Fillion as the lead (beyond just the name). They were great & at least Nathan did it for a living & was quite honest about his intentions to sell artifacts to museums for a small fortune. Not to mention actually having some relatable & meaningful dialogue. Nobody ever gave a **** about anything Lara said.
Oops. My point being that a new Uncharted is significantly more appealing than a new Tomb Raider.
Yes, yes it is.
Have to agree Baboon. It's strange that you would think the Uncharted series needs innovation already. Baboon said it best. Naughty Dog has given the series so much attention and detail with each title that it shouldn't need innovation. I would say that it's innovation enough that for once, a developer pours it's heart an soul into each title the way Naughty Dog does. The presentation of both Uncharted 1 and 2 were beyond the level of work you see in other games that are simple rehashes with a tweaked story. As long as they continue to tweak the underlying controls and other technicial aspects of the series (multiplayer) all they need to do is give each Uncharted game the same TLC they have given the previous 2 in terms of gameplay and story and innovation won't be necessary.
Video games don't always need to reinvent the wheel to be refreshing and new. I start to wonder if the word has become over used in the industry. You can't get two lines out of any developer, manufacturer without the word innovate tossed in somewhere to spruce up the PR.
Uncharted is great, it could do with a bit of innovation, Uncharted does lots of things well but does nothing new more of a refinement of existing gameplay ideas, nothing innovative.
Things do need to change or you get bored of it, simple really, theres only so much time you can play the same thing new story or not, after a while you see it all coming if you stick to formula.
When I'm playing Uncharted I'm often thinking it could do with a bit more of the original Lara exploration/discovery, when I'm playing TR I'm often thinking the devs could learn a lot from the naughty dog boys, I really enjoy both but reckon if you could merge the best bits from both you would have a title full of awesome.
Uncharted really showcased to myself what a game should be about;
I picked up the first one earlier this year and despite it being many years old and myself having played many hit titles; I thought Uncharted drakes fortune was unbelievably good;
The reason why it was different from others was because of the whole experience it gave the player - You felt like you were in a movie and Drake really was just a regular guy (albeit very athletic yes) but he seemed human.
It felt like you were in a movie chasing this treasure of his, it felt like i was indiana jones searching for the lost Ark - Yes thats the best way I could describe it-It reminded me much of when I first saw Raiders of the lost ark and the mystery that surrounded it and the adventure Indy got himself into, facing one problem after another with some fun thrown in but all shown to us in this cinematic experience;
The different camara angles, the way the scenes were introduced to us.
Uncharted wasnt just a regular platformer though was it? It had elements of 3rd person shooter, free-running, exploration, mystery, puzzles to be solved...it had everything...almost..
Then Uncharted 2 came out and blew the first one out the water..I couldnt believe how much they improved upon it...
Uncharted 2 deserved game of the year, it was a rollercoaster ride and you felt like you were part of it, the star of the show in fact...is that not what games are meant to do? Delve you into another world, give you this experience and make you beleive your there?
Well for me anyways...uncharted did it and cant wait for the 3rd one.
I would go as far to say that even for the most anti console /die hard PC gaming fan, it's worth buying a PS3 to play these two games and wait for the third, even if you sell the PS3 right after. They even look to a standard most of us would be more then happy with (although you will kinda wish you could bump up the AA )
I long for a return to the brief period of history, 13 years ago when Sony brought there flagship games to the PC (I will always be grateful they ported Twisted Metal 2 which network play)
So true, if a game is innovative thats good but trying to force innovation can really wreck a game.
Agreed & I doubt they would trash the 3rd game, uncharted was the reason I bought a ps3 & was one of the best games I have played & I've played a ton of games .
What these games need is writers, filmdirectors and storytellers. Immersion and enjoyment of a game are not inherent to any technology, graphics, setting or the amount of quicktime events present. They rest for 90% on the ability of the game to make you give a damn, and the remaining 10% in setting the difficulty curve. I've love some hideous, unplayable, bugridden POS games, but the one thing they all had in common was that somehow, i CARED what was going to happen.
Having said that, i don't really see where this article lands the criticle hit... after 5 minutes of being confused and wondering if the line i'm reading is about Lara, Nathan or both, all i can take away from it is: two adventures coming, let's hope they are any good. Innovation.
I started Uncharted 2 again after reading this article and I forgot how amazing the game actually looks. It is a technical master piece. The opening level in the train crash with the snow building up on your clothes is breath taking. Looking forward to the helicopter chase and the train ride again!
This from the same site that thinks Mass effect is innovative, LMAO. Uncharted is about as good as an action game gets, it melds all its gameplay elements, together perfectly, with amazing pacing, set pieces, story, characters, platforming, melee combat, etc.. Not everything needs to innovate, innovation doesnt come along very often. you can argue Uncharted innovated by simply by merging action, stroy , characters, puzzles, all together better then anyone has.
Its because of stuff like this I never come here to find out if a game is any good or not.
There has only been two Uncharted games; The first in 2007 and the latest "Among Thieves" in 2009.
Suddenly its become dated according to this article? What on earth are you talking about? Lack of innovation? Have you even played these games? Or do you go in thinking "Right..how can i right some generic review" and spew this nonsense out?
Uncharted 1 was good, uncharted 2 pushed it even further - where exactly is it lacking in innovation? I am so so SO very eager to understand this? Please enlighten me?
Separate names with a comma.