Uncharted 4: A Thief's End Discussion *Spoilers inside*

After the LP changes, here is the new loadout I have been rolling with:

-HS39 with Recoil Mod (9 LP)
-Aegis (0 LP)

-Indra's Eternity with Slowdown Mod (6 LP)
-Grenade (4 LP)

-Mark on Damage 3 (5 LP)
-Scavenger (1 LP)

Had to get rid of my healing booster. Ending up switching from the Para to the Aegis and adding Scavenger, so then I pretty much never run out of ammo with my HS39.

I'm still missing the LP for pistol downs. I guess you can unlock LPs through relics, so I think I will just spend my next relics on that for an extra LP. I have all the regular Vanity items unlocked, but I guess I will start grinding towards the DLC stuff next. If I get the other LP I will either add the Para back or perhaps add the healing booster back. I was only getting 1 heal a game with the booster. Didn't seem worth all the LPs (I was using the Level 3 one at one point).

For cash, I have just decided to not even bother upgrading grenades since it takes so much to get the second grenade slot. Just spend it on Indra instead.

I just beat this not too long ago. Haven't quite decided where I'd rank it yet. I do feel like it's the least consistent though. Nate and Elena's relationship is more charming than ever, I loved all of that stuff. But it can get really awkward when they reference the older games in the middle of those more grounded parts. Feels like two totally separate worlds.

Another big issue was Sam. Without him there's no conflict, and his motivation isn't any better than those of the villains. He's arguably the most evil character of the game.

Some of the setpieces were really good and they didn't go overboard with them this time. I had mixed feelings on some of the more open areas because they didn't always do a good job of disguising the linearity. I tried to sneak past enemies one time because it seemed like the logical solution, and I got stopped by an invisible wall. Fall damage seemed more inconsistent than ever, though maybe I don't remember the others correctly. Like I died during the heist mission for dropping onto the street from maybe 6 feet up, where other parts had me jumping across pits and grabbing ledges at least 10 feet below me. The platforming bits had a lot more going for them this time and I wouldn't mind if a new Naughty Dog IP focused heavily on that kind of stuff.

I wouldn't say it's my favorite Uncharted but it had a lot of highlights. Really loved the armored truck bit in Madagascar

I think my biggest problem with the Uncharted series as a whole is they aren't really...games. 70% of an uncharted game doesn't reward you for skill. Not matter how you press those buttons in that prison fight scene it won't end any sooner.

As I play more games like Bloodborne that really weighs on me more. It's a great narrative, and I still love it for that but the "game" aspect of it...mmmmm not the best.

Krubixcube wrote:70% of an uncharted game doesn't reward you for skill. Not matter how you press those buttons in that prison fight scene it won't end any sooner.

I disagree, play the games on crushing and there's definite skill to them. Watch Matt kick some ass in multiplayer, he's a god damn warrior. I get where you're coming from on Normal mode, but having gotten the platinum trophies on every game, crushing mode is no joke. It's a bitch, and there's skill to it. Unless you mean something else.

The thing is that's tied to the shooting portions and how much of Uncharted 4 was gunplay? Maybe 30%, maybe more. Though some of the puzzles got kind of tricky, not all but a good chunk, so maybe like 40-50%. I'm not sure on statistics, but what he means is the setpieces, melee combat, and story segments aren't really skill based. On crushing that melee fight in the prison, driving around, etc play out exactly the same as they do on easy.

Keep the Bloodborne comparison in mind where everything you do is skill based, down to where you guide your character to. You're scoping out every corner for potential traps or enemies, picking the route which gives you the best opportunities to fight enemies, and this is every encounter. Uncharted just doesn't do that until it's shooting time and even then there's not as many variables as Bloodborne.

Twolf just said the Uncharted series aren't really games. I don't really like the connotation that a game has to be skill-based for XX% to be a game. I find that really limiting. Games are so much more than that. Mass Effect wouldn't be a game either by his definition because of how much of the game involves skill. Hell as much as I joke about something like Journey, I really do believe its a game. The 70% estimate also seems way off for the Uncharted series as well. It is okay to say you prefer stuff like Bloodborne without stooping to the "it's not a game" rhetoric in my opinion.

One can also criticize something like Uncharted 4's first prison fight without going in that direction either. I personally would have preferred if it and the first Nadine fight were handled differently (the second Nadine one is pretty much just a tiny interactive piece of a larger setpiece, so I think it works fine). Give you a bit more freedom in them. They are too tightly scripted when they don't really have to be. Lumping in all of the melee combat as the same as these few fights also seems silly.

I don't think he ever called it not a game. Personally, I'm fine with Uncharted and Mass Effect blending story and gameplay, ME2 is in my top 3 games ever. And I'm in the firm camp all of those mentioned, even Journey, are games. Just that there's two kinds of games, one where you finish it and one where you beat it.

So Uncharted you're expected to finish, Bloodborne you have to earn that ending. And I like both kinds, but I get why some wouldn't prefer one and was just kind of elaborating that's more of what he was getting at. There's a good chunk of Uncharted that involves skill, but there's also a huge chunk that's pushing the story forward and about the experience over the gameplay. And like I said, I'm fine with that as long as it keeps me engaged. But I'm not going to pretend that most of Uncharted is rewarding your skill. A good chunk does, but not most.

To be honest though, I don't really remember how UC4's melee differed from the other games. 1 and 2 both felt they fit that model T-Wolf was talking about and 3 was going somewhere, but didn't quite make it. I mostly just remembered melee not being that engaging, but I could be wrong in how I remember it and there could be more skill necessary than I remember.

Krubixcube wrote:I think my biggest problem with the Uncharted series as a whole is they aren't really...games.

He says it plain as day.

All I said was that not all melee combat is the same as those few fights. Melee combat comes in the form of stealth kills, jump kills, pull downs, etc. You use proper positioning to execute them. Not everything has to be a complex set of button presses. Steel fist is also a simple combo that is not available in those two fights (though not entirely melee obviously). Even the group prison fight doesn't play out the same as those or the same on different difficulties as was inferrred here. The same with the Rafe fight.

Also we can't just ignore multiplayer as part of the discussion when making these statements about how much of the series requires skill or rewards skill. It is a part of the game whether one plays it or not.

I'm not pretending the games are the same as Bloodborne or Mirror's Edge or Ninja Gaiden. Just don't agree with some of the statements made in here.

Whoops my bad. Do disagree with that, guess was just too focused on the skill part. I'm gonna concede on the melee also since yeah, I just don't remember it. But on the MP, yeah, it's in there and that is all skill, but Uncharted still lives and dies by it's campaign. I won't deny the MP has its fans but the people buying an Uncharted for the MP is a very small number compared to the single player.

And his criticism was only focused on the solo as what he wants from out of it since that's all he's here for, which is where I think that 70% comment is, maybe not 100% accurate, but brings up a good point. We can say it doesn't apply to the MP, but if it does to the SP, theres still a discussion here. There were some moments with 4 where I really felt like it wasnt doing much to engage me as well. They were similar to TLOU, but that had resource gathering and world building so it worked. The areas you just roamed around in until you reached cutscene spot meandered since UC's about current story over world and there was no gameplay incentive. I mean, an experience game can make stuff like this work, but I felt 4 had more than a few moments where it really didn't work.

That said I probably should give this a replay to see if my points do hold up. It has been a year.

TripOpt55 wrote:Twolf just said the Uncharted series aren't really games. I don't really like the connotation that a game has to be skill-based for XX% to be a game. I find that really limiting. Games are so much more than that. Mass Effect wouldn't be a game either by his definition because of how much of the game involves skill. Hell as much as I joke about something like Journey, I really do believe its a game. The 70% estimate also seems way off for the Uncharted series as well. It is okay to say you prefer stuff like Bloodborne without stooping to the "it's not a game" rhetoric in my opinion.

One can also criticize something like Uncharted 4's first prison fight without going in that direction either. I personally would have preferred if it and the first Nadine fight were handled differently (the second Nadine one is pretty much just a tiny interactive piece of a larger setpiece, so I think it works fine). Give you a bit more freedom in them. They are too tightly scripted when they don't really have to be. Lumping in all of the melee combat as the same as these few fights also seems silly.

I wasn't really trying to be too controversial here. And sorry, I was too busy and clearly missed this response so I wasn't trying to ignore it. I obviously still really like this series, and Uncharted 2 is still one of my favorite games. And saying it's not a game isn't really conveying myself very well. It's like when people say golf isn't a sport. Doesn't mean that golf doesn't require skill or that golf isn't a worthy investment of time, just depends on how you define a sport. Similarly, I'm talking in that oldschool definition of "game" - where player agency is key, Uncharted takes liberties in its design.

My argument is more along what Casey was saying, the shooting requires skill, the setpieces are cool but they are cutscenes. Very well made, exciting cutscenes. Even the platforming, to an extent, is a cutscene. You don't have to build momentum to make your jumps, you home in on platforms because for better or for worse, the developers don't want you missing the set path they've defined. And like Casey said, what contributes to your game depends on the goal of its design.

For Mass Effect, a big bulk of that design is about story choices and character interaction. No, there's no skill involved, but the design choice lets you talk to people and explore the world in order to go towards that design goal. One could argue that Uncharted's goal is to bring on big set pieces, and yes - in that respect it works. But like Casey said, in other games like The Last of Us, those roaming sections are world building, resource collecting and work better than the quieter bits in Uncharted 4 which feel out of place. There are some beautiful looking skyboxes, but it doesn't have the same wonder when I can't GO to that distant mountain, or when there's not much to DO in the big beautiful place.

Replaying Uncharted games, I mainly do for the story, for the set pieces. And yes, I can up the difficulty which makes the shooting bits harder, makes you take less hits to die, but I'd also argue that a lot of that is un-organic difficulty spike. It just makes the enemies take more bullets, maybe makes them more aggressive.

Also, multiplayer is its own beast. I'm purely talking the singleplayer games.

Ugh. You guys have moved the goalposts. It is one of my pet peeves, but whatever. The major thing I was taking issue with is they aren't games comment. And that only 30% rewards you for your skill comment. Now you guys are both talking about something different. I still disagree with some of it, but not as vehemently. And heck, I agree with some of it. But you guys have discussed the games with me before, so you probably know that.

So, I don't know. Are we narrowing the discussion to just Uncharted 4's campaign? We are throwing the trilogy's more action-oriented campaigns out? We have obviously decided multiplayer doesn't count. All that completely skews the percentage comment and I still think its wrong. Having said that, I've been saying since I first played it that Uncharted 4 didn't have enough combat. You can look in this thread. You can look on my blog about it. It has been my number one complaint. I think ultimately it is what holds the game back from being as good as Uncharted 2. The combat that is there is better than ever. It feels better mechanically. Improved shooting, improved stealth, improved movement, improved level layouts that take better advantage of the tools you have, improved enemy AI, etc. But there isn't enough of it. I think they did the sort of "big" encounters right. I think they needed more of those small encounters that I think of as sort of the glue. The connective tissue. They aren't super memorable, but they keep you more engaged between the big ones. I think if this game did a better job with that it would help fix the main issues with the game: a bit too much down time and the slight pacing issues.

I do think Uncharted 4 has better content than the other games in the non-shooting sections. I enjoyed the jeep stuff. The platforming and puzzles are both improved (actually 3 might have the best puzzles, but 4's are much better than 1/2's). I think they have more interesting stuff to explore for. I think the lore pertaining to the Avery stuff and Drake's background that you can find is really cool and I love the optional conversations. Some of this stuff actually has optional light puzzles tied to it or optional encounters. Going off the beaten path also rewards you with better weapons like it always has in Uncharted. So basically I feel like the first trilogy would be improved if its non-shooting segments had this high quality, but I think Uncharted 4 would be improved if it had the combat-skewing balance of the other games. Because while this stuff is better, the combat is Uncharted's most compelling component. It is the most rewarding. It is the most replayable. Having said that, the multiplayer helps mitigate the issue for me. Like you guys can say it doesn't count, but you must understand for someone like me who wants to test his skills with some of his favorite combat in gaming, like that helps me think more of this game overall. It helps fill a hole left by the campaign.

There are other little things I disagree with too. Saying setpieces are glorified cutscenes when so many of them include combat and multiple ways to play them (3 and 4's convoys being chief examples). Worth noting that Uncharted 4's difficulties change enemy layouts too. And I am probably completely alone on this, but I find just doing crazy movie-style action moments on normal as rewarding my skill. Like just coming up with awesome little sequences pushing the mechanics to the limit. Like death doesn't need to be at the door for my skill to be rewarded. It is kind of like getting a stylish combo going in Devil May Cry/Bayonetta or something (though to be fair depending on the entry, some of those games are hard). Anyway, I do that quite a bit on encounter replay in Uncharted.

So yeah, you guys shifted the argument. First it was how much rewards you for your skill. Now it is how engaging are the sections that don't which is a different and worthwhile discussion I think.

I'm not trying to be a jerk here, but can we just agree to disagree? I haven't moved any goal posts I'm just trying to clarify what I was saying. I've clarified that I meant the singleplayer campaign, I've gone back on the biggest part of the comment you have an issue with, because I'm not so hardheaded that I won't change my phrasing when I'm clearly wrong. The "game" comment was dumb, and didn't describe a valid point whatsoever. I'm giving you that one hands down. And YES, it was most of the comment.

But honestly, if any of you had just said "Hey, don't you think you're reaching there?" I'd have come back with "...Yeah, I'm honestly thinking more Uncharted 3 and 4 in terms of these extended story scenes" but now I feel like I'm being antagonized a bit.

I'm certainly not implying that playing Uncharted 4 requires no skill. This is not some humdrum game it's a VERY well made game. But I don't think it's fair not to criticize it just because of that. The platforming could have been improved throughout the series but they chose not to. I thought the stealth felt kind of out of place, considering the series's influences and characters, but I'll admit that's personal opinion. Most of these things I'm saying aren't even BAD things - it's just a creative choice. One which will resonate more with some than others.

Personally, I get a bit annoyed when control is wrested from me in a third person action game. Many others, including you guys, might not mind that. It's not really up to me to tell you not to.

It's all personal opinion. I'm not going to say objectively that my opinions on this game should be yours. I made a comment to the ether here (admittedly a stupid one), and I can back it up with my opinion. But all of these are just based on my own preferences in gaming in general. Not arguments to try and sway you.

Overall, I'm sorry if I offended you, I was honestly surprised an argument had broken out about this.

Again, I'm someone who tends to take something I like (including this series) and pick it apart. Doesn't mean I don't like the games.



Anyway, can we all be friends again? Please?

You know what I apologize for the goalpost moving comment. That is really what I felt like what was happening. That the argument was being shifted to something more favorable for you guys especially since you moved it towards a point I think that everyone here would know I actually agreed with to some extent. The initial comments never specified a single game, but the whole series. And I feel like the Mass Effect/TLOU comparisons are discussing a completely different topic than the skill-based thing. I guess I just never really understood what you were saying in the first place then. So yeah, my bad there. Reading it back, I just sound like a total dick. The initial comment seemed inflammatory and had clearly gotten under my skin, but that is no excuse.

I'm surprised you didn't think saying Uncharted wasn't a game would get a certain reaction though!

If you remove the bitterness in my words regarding the goalpost moving (seriously, sorry I sound like a real dick there), I was basically trying to explain what I think there is in Uncharted 4's downtime that I liked. I feel like that is in bounds. And I think it is fair to add that the multiplayer helps fill a void for me left by the lack of combat in the main campaign. I wasn't trying to sway anyone either, but can I not bring up why I disagree?

Also I am critical of games I like/love too. I think it is important to be. I just mentioned a major issue I had with 4. And I've talked about any number things throughout the series: building the plot around the setpieces and the lack of proper enemy reactions in 3, the final boss in 2, the lack of content in MP at 4's launch just to name a few. That doesn't mean I can't disagree with other people's criticisms of the games.

I think that's a valid point if you feel MP fills a void the SP can't. But remember that T-Wolf never bothered with it and I don't care for Uncharteds MP. I mean I like Uncharteds shooting but it's something that works in an Uncharted campaign and I have trouble enjoying it in MP where there's more variables. It's the same reason I'd probably get bored if Overwatch had a campaign, its many characters don't even work for that. And I'm not trying to take away from your enjoyment, just saying that's why MP can't fill that void for me.

As for the downtime, I can still understand why other people could enjoy it. But personally I just wanted to move the plot forward. Uncharted works best when it's always pushing me forward in my opinion and once it let's me take a breath I start thinking about how that aspect isn't working for me.

Either way, still have high hopes for the Chloe game. Feel it could be my second favorite in the series.

But you were only involved in the discussion surrounding "70% of an Uncharted game doesn't reward your skill." It is no surprise me and Bret both sited multiplayer in our rebuttal. You just decided to wave multiplayer away as part of an Uncharted game that rewards skill. That doesn't work in that context right?

No, I'm acknowledging that it involves skill but also acknowledging that most people who played Uncharted aren't playing Uncharted MP beyond a couple matches. Because if you have my stance on the multiplayer that part of the equation is null. Playing the MP won't entertain me and therefore won't address that 70% part. If you like it, then it does, but bringing up that point to someone who doesn't have any interest in the MP just doesn't work.

I haven't played enough of it to really judge it, but the co-op survival might quench the combat thirst that the campaign was somewhat lacking. At first I thought it was super easy, but when I got to those last couple levels, that shit is frustratingly hard. Matt's probably the only one other than me that has played it though, but it is a nice addition that was given to us for free you guys should check out.

I was taken aback by the "no skill" comment for sure having gotten the platinum on all of the games (1-3 on PS3 and PS4, and the Vita game too), because it felt like you were saying that isn't much of an accomplishment because the games are easy. I know that you weren't saying that, but I think because Matt and I like the games so much we see that and we just naturally get defensive.

Matt, about co-op survival, is it best to replay levels you beat so you can level up to get better weapons? Not sure if it is the Clifton effect, but that level 8 was hard and as it is now, I cannot beat it. Got to the very end phase, and just died almost instantly like 15 times in a row. It was just the two of us because no third person joined, so that might be a bit of the trouble too.

Yeah, no, I made that comment with no thought. I stand by my thoughts on the series, and I DO enjoy those down moments but there are little things (more in the later games) like the desert sequence in 3 and the conversation choices that weren't choices in 4 that make me wonder what exactly those "cinematic" moments were going for.

Uncharted 2 still stands tall because its setpieces felt just like that...set pieces. The train was a set for a bunch of really great action and places to house enemies but the core experience was a third person shooter. The later games feel pulled in a few different directions.

And no matter how much you try and convince me otherwise, I still have beef with the platforming sections. The only thing that saves them for me honestly are the views. If you took that platforming and put it in a gray box, it would suck. Hard.

Me and Casey agree on MP in that it didn't even occur to me to think of those games as being MP (as is often the case with me).

I think my personal problem with Uncharted 4 is I feel like the next time I feel like going through it, I wouldn't mind simply watching it being played. I feel I'd get much of the same experience out of it. Again, purely talking SP here. But that's the aspect of the series that bothers me, because there are those "cinematic" elements that are in the whole series that take me out of it. It breaks immersion for me.

volvocrusher wrote:No, I'm acknowledging that it involves skill but also acknowledging that most people who played Uncharted aren't playing Uncharted MP beyond a couple matches. Because if you have my stance on the multiplayer that part of the equation is null. Playing the MP won't entertain me and therefore won't address that 70% part. If you like it, then it does, but bringing up that point to someone who doesn't have any interest in the MP just doesn't work.

That is why the point you were defending needed a qualifier like "70% of an Uncharted campaign doesn't reward your skill." You can't just say most people don't think it counts, so it doesn't. That is like an appeal to popularity. It's fallacious. That is why the initial statement needed to be amended (which Twolf did eventually). The popularity of the mode or the entertainment value gained is not a part of whether it rewards your skill. That was the debated point.

Krubixcube wrote:And no matter how much you try and convince me otherwise, I still have beef with the platforming sections. The only thing that saves them for me honestly are the views. If you took that platforming and put it in a gray box, it would suck. Hard.

No one in here tried to convince anyone that the platforming was good. No one. I said it was improved mechanically from the trilogy. I do enjoy it in context of the battles. As then the quick pace of movement adds verticality and agility to them and the ease of traversal makes sense. The only time the platforming on its own with storytelling and combat removed was good in my opinion was Heart of Ice in Uncharted 2. I wish in general the series utilized traps and such like that more often.

BretBaber wrote:Matt, about co-op survival, is it best to replay levels you beat so you can level up to get better weapons?  Not sure if it is the Clifton effect, but that level 8 was hard and as it is now, I cannot beat it.  Got to the very end phase, and just died almost instantly like 15 times in a row.  It was just the two of us because no third person joined, so that might be a bit of the trouble too.

I have only played through it once on Normal solo and a little bit of a Hard run after. Didn't have anyone still playing it when I tried it, so didn't keep on with it (don't like doing co-op with randoms). I suppose replaying levels to level up health, get better boosters and better weapons would be the way to go though if you are stuck.

Okay, but that's what I was getting at. I'm not explaining why that 70% comment applies to everyone, but why it can apply to many people. And I do think the popularity of a MP does apply to the scenario since it means the average person who doesn't touch the MP will agree more with that statement. If you don't care for the MP, it existing doesn't address this point. If you do, great, it does, but that doesn't change that it doesn't apply to everyone, which is more of what I'm getting at.

It's kind of like me and Pokemon. A lot of people say it never changes and is too easy, but in the MP that couldn't be any farther from the truth. In main game (until Sun/Moon at least), it was always 8 gyms, evil team, rival, gym leader. Somewhere along there you get a bike and HM moves to access new areas. In the MP, Pokemon that once sucked are now good. Moves that no one used to use are now on every team. It's a vastly different game from the last version and really tough to master.

But if someone never tried the MP and has no interest in it, that's still a very valid point. I know T-Wolf had it on Pokemon and while I could tell him it's different in MP, if he isn't interested in the MP, it existing doesn't address his issue.

I've had it with Pokemon but the bitch keeps suckering me back in...dammit.

Not really sure how else to explain this. Like I'm trying to use logic and reasoning terms to make this more clear, but I guess that isn't helping. In the Pokemon argument, the people who say Pokemon hasn't changed are making a false statement. It doesn't matter if they haven't played the multiplayer. They are simply wrong. They would need to adjust the statement to Pokemon singleplayer hasn't changed to be correct. They could not say, most people don't play/care about the multiplayer, so its changes don't count, therefore Pokemon hasn't changed. Well I mean they could say that, but it isn't logical.

Okay, I see what you're getting at now. I'm just more in the mindset of how MP and SO cater to different tastes so yeah they're technically wrong, but I still say there's a valid point in there.

So something that really surprised me in Lost Legacy was

Spoiler: