Poll: Why is Uncharted so polarizing?

[remnant_phoenix]

As I traded in my faulty 360 for a shiny new PS3 just a few months back, I only just recently started playing the Uncharted games. What strikes me as strange is the extremity of the opinions of the series.

On the one hand, the games are lauded for their graphics, writing, and cinematic storytelling, have won numerous awards, and showered with praise from fans and critics alike. The Escapist publishes articles like these (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/features/9854-Father-Figure) that give unabashed praise for Nathan Drake's character.

But then Yahtzee calls Nathan Drake an unlikeable tosser and a racist, and says that the games, specifically in the story department, are as impressive as a direct-to-DVD bargain-bin spin-off. In one of his Big Picture vids, Moviebob says that the story of the Uncharted games boils down to, direct quote, "What if Indiana Jones were contemporary, and he was also a giant douche?" while flashing up a picture of Indiana Jones with Dane Cook's head.

I can't acutely recall hearing a person say something along the lines of, "It's alright" when offering their opinion on the series.

Rather than dwell on questions of, "Is Uncharted overrated?" (there are other threads for that) I propose this:

First, based on the poll response, we can see if (and if so, how much) the opinions gravitate toward the extremes (on The Escapist, anyway).

And for discussion:

Why do you think that the Uncharted series seems to elicit such extreme opinions? Basically, what about the series makes it a "love it or hate it" scenario?

EDIT: Poll doesn't seem to be working and isn't responding to edits. Sorry about that.

2ND EDIT: Poll is working now. Cheers!

 

[Iyon]

I go back and forth when it comes to Uncharted. On one hand I enjoyed the series and thought it had some incredible set pieces, and even though I think Nathan Drake is a bit of a douche, I still think he's a good character. On the other hand I absolutely hated the shooting mechanics and wasn't a huge fan of the "puzzles".

As to why it's so polarizing, I'd say it being extremely popular has at least something to do with it. Not to say that that's the only reason someone would hate the game, but there often tends to be a pattern of popular games getting lots of hate whether it deserves it or not.

 

[Kordie]

I'm in the good but overrated catagory. It was certainly a pretty game, and it was entertaining to play. But yea, nothing stood out about the game as great. The combat wasn't that good, though that may be my bias against third party shooting. I think the fact that I can't actually remember a lot of the games right now comes into play as well...

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

for what it does, i think it does it quite well, naughty dog has a specific skill set and i think they polish their games well with it.

I've never had a beef with nolan north or nathan drake, but there are definitely quite a few vocal people who do, so i suppose there is that.

if I had to sum it up, I'd say: "Great series, but nothing that is a must have in everyone's collection"

 

[Wullie]

I suppose the obvious answer is that it's utterly brilliant at certain things and absolutely dreadful at other things.

FWIW I really love it but it's certainly as linear as anything on a modern system and far too short, and this in a gaming world which continues to look increasingly towards epic and open for single player games.

 

[ScrabbitRabbit]

I don't think it's terrible, but it doesn't really have anything going for it except it's aesthetics for me. I dislike "cinematic experiences" in games, the story didn't hook me at all and I didn't like any of the characters. The actual gameplay was very... run of the mill? The gunplay was nothing I haven't played before and I didn't feel in control of the "platforming" at all.

Like I said, it's not terrible and I don't think many people, if they were truly being honest with themselves, could call it terrible either. I guess it's just kind of frustrating for a lot of people to see something they perceive as mediocre, and even generic, to be lauded as a modern classic.

I think the people who love it have fallen in love more with the experience than what could strictly be termed the gameplay. Don't get me wrong, the gameplay is perfectly functional and the level design is professional, but the game's main appeal is it's spectacle. The huge set-pieces, the movie-like writing and direction; it feels like a Hollywood blockbuster and I can understand why people would love that... but that's the issue I, and many others, have with the games. I'm not a fan of the Hollywood blockbuster and I like my games to feel like games and not films.

Like all divisive works, the very things the fans love about are what the detractors hate.

 

[CityofTreez]

I enjoyed it. I like the game play, story telling aspect, dialogue, graphics.

Best game this gen? No. Fun game? Oh yes.

I don't think it's terrible, but it doesn't really have anything going for it except it's aesthetics for me. I dislike "cinematic experiences" in games, the story didn't hook me at all and I didn't like any of the characters. The actual gameplay was very... run of the mill? The gunplay was nothing I haven't played before and I didn't feel in control of the "platforming" at all.

Like I said, it's not terrible and I don't think many people, if they were truly being honest with themselves, could call it terrible either. I guess it's just kind of frustrating for a lot of people to see something they perceive as mediocre, and even generic, to be lauded as a modern classic.

I think the people who love it have fallen in love more with the experience than what could strictly be termed the gameplay. Don't get me wrong, the gameplay is perfectly functional and the level design is professional, but the game's main appeal is it's spectacle. The huge set-pieces, the movie-like writing and direction; it feels like a Hollywood blockbuster and I can understand why people would love that... but that's the issue I, and many others, have with the games. I'm not a fan of the Hollywood blockbuster and I like my games to feel like games and not films.

Like all divisive works, the very things the fans love about are what the detractors hate.

What's wrong with that though? If the "cinematic" part is done well, which it does, then what's the problem? It's a fun story that's packaged together nicely with a great MP/co-op.

People need to just enjoy games instead of nitpicking them because they didn't have the impact that DOOM did to the gaming industry. (not a shot at you)

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

Like all divisive works, the very things the fans love about are what the detractors hate.

Definitely a good post and agree with the last statement (i'm on the other side of the spectrum as you, I like some cinematic experiences and i liked the hollywood style story/characters, but as you've stated in a nice way, it's what is divisive)

 

[ScrabbitRabbit]

What's wrong with that though? If the "cinematic" part is done well, which it does, then what's the problem? It's a fun story that's packaged together nicely with a great MP/co-op.

People need to just enjoy games instead of nitpicking them because they didn't have the impact that DOOM did to the gaming industry. (not a shot at you)

It does it well, yes, but I simply dislike that kind of presentation regardless of how well executed it is; it's simply not for me. It felt like I was controlling a character in a film and, to many people, that's exactly what they want in games... but it's not what I want, not least because I've never been a big fan of film.

When I was playing the game, though, I wasn't necessarily thinking about how "Hollywood" it was, I was just thinking "I'm not really having much fun." The presentation, story and characters simply failed to grab me and the gameplay was relatively typical of genres I'm fairly apathetic towards. I don't think they're terrible games by any stretch of the imagination, they're just not for me.

 

[AJax_21]

From an artistic, design and gameplay point of view I think Uncharted is really good at what it set out to do. It's one of the few triple-A games that does the whole "Linear-cinematic gameplay" right and pulls it off with some grace. You can definitely see the amount of love from Naughty Dog that have gone to their craft.

From a writing and story perspective, it's absolute trash in my opinion. While there are some occasional banter that is actually funny and witty between Drake and his friends, the story is your typical "Hollywood-Blockbuster!" that we've seen a dozen times before. I don't really mind derivative stories in games because most of the time I'm enjoying myself with the gameplay but Naughty Dog is so busy hitting us over the head with their attempts at humanizing Drake it's almost comical. What's really galling is the dissonance between Drake in cutscense and Drake in gameplay. One is a likeable adventurer with a heart of gold, the other is a murdering sociopath who doesn't bat an eye even if he killed an innocent museum security guard.

Just my 2 cents. I think it's a pretty good franchise overall.

 

[teqrevisited]

I played through it when my mate brought his console over. It was alright but I kept wishing that it had a different main character. Also it felt like he was the slowest runner in the world.

I didn't go out of my way to look closely at the environments but the textures still seemed to pop in from green blobs to fully rendered leaves & trees. I'm not a big graphics whore but what graphics are there I prefer to be consistent.

As with anything: Opinion is opinion. I just couldn't get into it.

 

[CityofTreez]

What's wrong with that though? If the "cinematic" part is done well, which it does, then what's the problem? It's a fun story that's packaged together nicely with a great MP/co-op.

People need to just enjoy games instead of nitpicking them because they didn't have the impact that DOOM did to the gaming industry. (not a shot at you)

It does it well, yes, but I simply dislike that kind of presentation regardless of how well executed it is; it's simply not for me. It felt like I was controlling a character in a film and, to many people, that's exactly what they want in games... but it's not what I want, not least because I've never been a big fan of film.

When I was playing the game, though, I wasn't necessarily thinking about how "Hollywood" it was, I was just thinking "I'm not really having much fun." The presentation, story and characters simply failed to grab me and the gameplay was relatively typical of genres I'm fairly apathetic towards. I don't think they're terrible games by any stretch of the imagination, they're just not for me.

Okay, fair enough.

 

[Goofguy]

I'd rank it somewhere between the "One of the best game series of this generation." and "Good, but perhaps overrated." options. I like the series and thought the graphics and cinematography were fantastic. Sure, it's a huge rip-off of Indiana Jones but I love Indy and its premise.

Sure, the combat and main character leave something to be desired but I thoroughly enjoyed all three games (the first, a little less).

 

[MBurdock]

I think it comes down to how much you value gameplay mechanics and story and setting. (note: I have only played 1 and 2)

If you highly value gameplay mechanics, Uncharted is definitely over-rated. The platforming and shooting is competent, but not outstanding.

If you place a high value on story, then the game is really good. Yes, it's a McGuffin chase, but the characters are interesting, well-voiced, and the story was well-paced and engaging.

If you place a high value on setting, the game is exceptional and probably the best of this generation. It goes from jungles, to villages, to mountains, to ruins, to ice caves, to trains. The set-pieces on the train or when you're facing waves of enemies are well-designed and don't feel too "gamey". The environments are varied enough that you could make the story garbage or non-existent and the setting would be enough to keep me engaged.

Personally, I value gameplay, then setting, then story. What actually made this game better than good for me was that they kept some last-gen features. Hidden treasures! Unlockable skins! Ability to purchase weapons and extra modes! All that stuff is typically DLC these days, so the games felt more complete than many recent ones.

 

[Casual Shinji]

The first game was okay-ish.
The second game was fucking great.
The third game was a weak copy of the second game.

Overall I like the series, but it's shtick got old real fast. I never had a problem with Drake murdering tons of generic army/pirate dudes though, and I don't quite understand what people find so shocking about the whole issue. Is it that he makes quips while doing it, or what? I don't think Lara Croft ever got this much shit for killing dudes while graverobbing.

I can see why people might find the smugness of the characters coupled with the Joss Whedon-y writting style a bit overbearing though.

 

[hoof ardet]

I find Drake profoundly unlikeable and just couldn't see myself spending 20+ hours with the douche while trying to beat the game. That was my main gripe.

 

[Launcelot111]

I've only played the second one, and it's completely fine. It's got style, it takes us to bright and visually interesting places, its characters have an actual sense of humor (not a great one, but better than most big time titles), and the emphasis on exploring and climbing and being archeological is great, especially when they mix that with the shooting. On the other hand, the shooting by itself is painfully dull. Hanging off of trains and billboards while shooting is great, but that's only like 7% of the time. The story is also absurd, and the twists are essentially meaningless (how many times did Chloe pull a gun on Drake to make Harry think she'd captured him?). The cinematic nature of the game often pays off, but at times, it also leads to a feeling of immense disconnection from the game when you realize that you don't have to do much to escape the big fiery life or death situation.

 

[AJax_21]

the other is a murdering sociopath who doesn't bat an eye even if he killed an innocent museum security guard.

You do remember he used tranquilizers, right? Even the one he pulled off a ledge landed in water and swam away. He never once killed an innocent in any of the games.

I'm pretty sure he threw him off a goddamn cliff. Don't know how you can swim away from that.