Jump to content
passwords have all been force reset. please recover password to reset ×
MFGamers

Uncharted : The Nathan Drake Collection


Sambob
 Share

Recommended Posts

So over the last 2 weeks or so I've finished all 3 games..

 

Firstly, people that still think the first game is good or go as far as to call it the best in the series need to be put to sleep. :lol: Everything about the first 15'ish chapters are a boring, grindy mess. Shooting to climbing doesn't flow. The shooting is all ground level kill rooms.  I did like the castle/church area,but that's it. But it comes across (to me anyways) as proof of concept/launch title kinda game. So I don't think I can be too harsh on it. 

 

I had a much better time with 2 and 3. I fought 3 was actually pretty fun bar a overlong section near the end. 

 

But I found it odd that all 3 had the same problems with multiple enemies being unfairly able to one shot or corner you, even on normal. Most deaths I felt like I was being screwed over rather than being out played. 

 

I'll probably start 4 tomorrow. I'm really interested in how that game is paced and flows. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jimbo Xiii said:

What annoyed me more about the stuff on the ship was it doesn't serve the plot or move it forward in anyway. 

Sully was kidnapped and Drake thought he was on it...I think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Jimbo Xiii said:

But then he wasn't if I remember correctly. 

I have literally played that section less than 24 hours ago and I can't remember..

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Duck said:

So over the last 2 weeks or so I've finished all 3 games..

 

Firstly, people that still think the first game is good or go as far as to call it the best in the series need to be put to sleep. :lol:

 

That was me before U4 :ph34r: I think the original game has probably aged the worst out of all of them, at the time I remember loving it, but yeah if I went back now, probably wouldn't enjoy it so much :lol:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

C'mon man, it was 9 YEARS ago, 9 YEARS that's a long-ass time, we were both 9 years younger (I was 17!) and the world and gaming climate was completely different back then, nothing like Uncharted existed then, the iPhone had just been invented etc. 

 

And 2007 was an amazing year for games ;):

 

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/why-2007-was-the-best-year-in-gaming/1100-6424367/

 

Halo 3, CoD4, Portal, The Witcher, Crysis, Super Mario Galaxy, Bioshock, Rock Band, Assassin's Creed, Team Fortress 2, Half-Life 2: Episode Two

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But you didn't play it back in the day did you? So how would you know if it wasn't all that great back then? :rolleyes:

 

I'm not saying it was a masterpiece either, before U4 it was my favourite Uncharted that much is true, but I thought it was a solid 8/10 game back then, a bit overrated, sure, but decent enough, innovative in lots of ways and with plenty of room for improvement for the inevitable sequel.

 

Have no idea how good 2007 was for the PS3 specifically, thought you meant 2007 as a whole across all consoles/handhelds. As mentioned previously though, some bloody great games across multiple platforms came out in 2007 which I listed in my post and which are mentioned with huge logo-banners in that article (didn't even see RE4 Wii Edition).

 

At this point I don't know if you're just out to rustle my jimmies :lol:, but 2007 was a bloody great year for games overall: Halo 3, CoD4, Portal, The Witcher, Crysis, Super Mario Galaxy, Bioshock, Rock Band, Assassin's Creed, Team Fortress 2, Half-Life 2: Episode Two

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I played the first Uncharted on release (or there abouts), there's a thread on here for it still. It definitely wasn't a 100% game, not that anything is, but it was good. 

 

The shooting was better than it is now, the scope of it, the humour. I've no idea how it's aged but it was largely well regarded for a reason, it was good. And at that point I had all the consoles, it wasn't just good because the triple had nothing else, although that's probably why Play magazine gave it 100%

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you might not have enjoyed it, not everyone did, but it wasn't Rise of the Robots*

 

 

 

*by that I mean, it might not be up to much now but at the time it was a decent game, standards have just changed. Soul Reaver would be a comparison I guess, amazing at the time, but when I tried going back it's an empty trudge through giant rooms

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think folk get what Lakitu is trying to say. Halo CE, Doom etc are old games that were great and still are, but you have to be accepting in some way that tech has moved on.

 

Uncharted 1 you can't be as accepting as it's aged so badly it now feels like a broken mess. Hence the 'people actually liked this game' type responses.

 

18 hours ago, DANGERMAN said:

The shooting was better than it is now, the scope of it, the humour. I've no idea how it's aged but it was largely well regarded for a reason, it was good.

I don't agree. Bluepoint tried fixing the shooting to bring it more in line with 2 but again it's abit broken.

 

The pistol is so overpowered that there's no need to use the other weapons. It doesn't have any recoil and it's magazine is high so I just spent the whole game easily head shotting guys. There was no real skill to it. 2 and 3 did it ALOT better. 

 

I can't really remember the first game being considered a 'landmark' game when it came out too. Gears came out a year before it. So the cover stuff wasn't new or better. The character stuff was cool, but Tools of Destruction (which came out around the same time and reviewed higher) probably did it much better. 2 was an important game at the time but I don't think we were anywhere near that with the first. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Duckwhen I say "better" I mean in a relative sense. There weren't lots of these games, there was Gears, but you weren't falling over cover shooters. Compared to what was around it was 'better' than it will be today 

 

The first Uncharted wasn't a classic but we hadn't seen a lot like it. I'm not suggesting people have to like it now, nor even then, but it wasnt the game it is now 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...

Here goes (thanks to PS+)

 

I've never played any of the series (as I was 360 last gen) so I'm finally going to give these a go - just hoping they are more like pre 2013 Tomb Raider's than the later trilogy (but I'm prepared for disappointment).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure how they've aged @shinymcshine but there's plenty to like in U1 and U2. I probably wouldn't bother with U3 though as it's by far and away the worst of the three games. 

 

U1 is a more sedate adventure with less action set pieces and bombast, it is similar to Indiana Jones/old Tomb Raider in its vibe for sure but U2 and U3 are very similar to TR 2013 with lots of set pieces, action moments and combat.

 

I'm not sure how you'll get on with them to be honest, U2 is a little overrated but fun and U3 is pretty awful. Up until U4 I never really loved the series at all and only really liked the first game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Maf said:

I mean it goes Uncharted 2, Tomb Raider 2013 then Rise of the Tomb Raider is just about worth talking about and you can forget the rest for both series

 

U1, U4, TR 2013 and Shadow of the Tomb Raider for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...