14 minutes of the new Uncharted cash grab.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/see-14-minutes-adventuring-next-172000786.html

God, it looks so boring... The banter between characters is dreadful and the nothing gameplay is at a fever pitch. Please stop making these games... Please.

Every couple years we get a breath of the wild that reminds us how powerful the medium can be as an interactive experience, and then here comes another Uncharted game asking you to do next to nothing for 10 hours while watching a Brandon Frazier movie. Please make it stop, before we have a generation of kids who grow up not knowing how to make video games.

Looks just like Uncharted 4 to me... so I guess what fans expect?

@ArchoNils2: after 4, I was off this train. Talented Dev making something this tired? How about making something fans DONT expect?

Watched a few minutes of it and man that was boring as hell!

I'm not seeing this as a cash grab. Naughty Dogs has previously stated they will do an expansion for the final Uncharted game series when the game launch. from what I saw, The Lost Legacy seems to be somewhat similar to Witcher 3's Expansion Packs in terms of bangs for the bucks which is good, cause Witcher 3 both expansions were well worth price I paid for. Sure, the Lost Legacy maybe price at $40 but you'll get what you paid for right? Granted, I get it for free since I was able to buy the season pass when it was on sale before Sony/Naughty Dogs remove it from store and so with that, I get to play this expansion for free! So I ain't got no worries.

Still don't get the hating on Uncharted 4 at all, Uncharted 4 is my fav out of the series. (besides UC2) I love the story just because it has this whole Pirate theme going for and I enjoy exploring Captain Avery. But hey, to each of there own I guess.

@TheEroica: Okay, 2 things:

1. Why the **** is your link from "finance.yahoo.com"!? lol
2. Yes, we get it, you don't like the games. We got it before UC4, we got it during UC4 and we still get it now. You don't need to make the same complaint over and over every single time you choose to write about the game/series :P

The "nothing" gameplay also happens to be the best TPS this side of Vanquish (we need a sequel, damnit!) so stay jelly I guess.

Zzz.

Looks like boring movie.

I have only played Uncharted 2. It was enjoyable but not really my cup of tea, largely due to levels with little situational depth and platforming sections being dull moments of gameplay.

From what I understand about Uncharted 4, the combat arenas were really fun but the play time was heavily in favor of those platforming sections. I heard that they were improved but still not really all that engaging. Perhaps if Lost Legacy has more gunplay and less platforming and puzzle solving, some might find it more fun to play?

Don't you think 40$ is too much for this?

TW3 expansions are like 40 hours, based on what I've heard, they definitely worth the price

lmfao thats the funniest thing I've read all week. Thank you

Getting this for sure.

It's true though. Stay mad bruh.

@mjorh: 60$ for Destiny 2 is way too much for me, for example. Not worth it at all. Lenght =/= value either. Otherwise no non-rpg game could be 60$, ever.

@Desmonic: I agree that Length =/= value, but I don't think expansion packs should be higher than 20$

Shaping up well liked the impressions. If they refined some aspects of UC4 I'm game. All I ask is for the exploration to be meaningful with neat puzzles and a lot more encounters. I quite like the characters Chloe in particular. Let the kids grow up knowing that all types of games can exist TC.

@mjorh: It's a standalone though. It's about as long as the very first UC game, even. Soo, 40$ seems okay. Unless you don't like the games, of course. Then no price makes it worth it, ever.

Hmmmm? gotta make a thread on this :D

@mjorh: Depends what medium we're talking about. ;)

Board game expansion packs regularly cost anywhere between 20 and 50 euro. As far as video games go, I think it depends on what that content is. I would first like to see what I am getting for that price. I don't know if the current model makes sense though.

@mjorh: Go for it :)

Definitely the content matters here, it's just that I can't bring myself to pay 40$ for an expansion pack, it feels so much for me ....goddamnit that's almost the price of another game lol

And the tricky thing is, you can't be sure about the content unless you play it for yourself

@mjorh: The difference between board game expansions and video game expansions is that in most cases, the former builds upon the base game whereas video game expansions (such as Lost Legacy) can exist without the base game. It makes you wonder whether it really is an expansion pack.

In the case of many board game expansions (similar to classic PC game expansions), they add new content, rules and pieces that change the formula of the existing game while still retaining the foundations of that existing game. In the case of Lost Legacy, it looks less like an expansion, and more like a continuation of the same rules and challenges under a different context (in terms of narrative). So it has more in common with, I dunno an additional episode than an actual expansion pack.

Granted, I know nothing about Lost Legacy so I'm not really commenting on what it actually is. Just wild assumptions.

That's just defining terms though. What we label Lost Legacy isn't really as important as what it is and whether you feel that is valuable enough to purchase.

This one is an open map and you do what quests you want, when you want to do them so it's nothing like U4 at all.

Its not though. Stay delusional bruh. freaking splatoon has more depth than uncharted

Player Unknown's Battlegrounds says otherwise.

Let's not forget Ghost Recon: Wildlands, which is way more in-depth, and it's not even that great of a game.

Mass Effect: A also had better gameplay, albeit a crap story and characters, but we're not counting those.

Even Watch Dogs 2 has better gameplay.

:P

I think gamers have forgotten that Metal Gear Solid: Ground Zero was supposed to be $40 dollars before launch and later on, cut down to $30 because of the backlash it got. And destiny 2 $60 lol. Nope, try $90 which includes 2 DLC that you will be getting the real game cause Bungie/Activision are locking players if you don't have the other two DLC.

I advice to anyone just wait for the reviews on Lost Legacy but I'll say this, it's nice to play Chloe for a change just because.

Giving the fact that this is a standalone Uncharted game and tends to be just an expansion pack, it is said to be over 10 hours long and $40, it's indeed too much for what there asking for and I can tell you know, I played both Witcher 3 expansion packs and they are way longer to complete but Blood & Wine is even longer then Hearts of Stone.

If you play any Uncharted games, you'll know what to expect from this one and it's better to wait for a price drop in my opinion. I got the season pass on sale and will be getting this for free and waiting for that season pass to be on sale was a smart move on my end.

Truth be told, I did paid for No Man's Sky at full price and even I can tell you I really had fun playing the game and still play it from time to time and I heard were getting something big on the next update so I got my money's worth on it.

That sounds promising

Yeah we enter to the semantics territory, one might define "expansion" as "more of the same" and another as "overhauling the formula", I'd prefer the latter but what we get is usually the former.

Yeah waiting for a price drop is better.

Nice! goddamnit I should delve into them, I miss the world

At the end of the day, it's what YOU enjoy that matters the most, I haven't played NMS but I'm glad you've enjoyed it.

Don't forget Gears 4, boring as hell but the gameplay is rock solid and still miles ahead of Uncharted

Rise of the Tomb Raider also had more variety when it came to weapons and encounter design.

MGSV is also better because of the wide variety of options the game gives you

Mafia 3 was a janky game but the shooting was incredibly satisfying

There have actually been quite a few TPS games this gen with either better gameplay or more interesting gameplay than Uncharted 4.

@mjorh: much of the cost of board game expansions probably comes down to covering production.

But yeah, it's an interesting medium.

I an going to have a look at the footage of Lost Legacy here and give my thoughts.

Uncharted 4's shit pacing aside, **** no.

PUBG mechanically is pretty piss poor, it's a cool vehicle for emergent scenarios, and Wild Lands is a pretty diluted version of a proper sandbox. Mechanically Ubisofts games n UC4 might as well be interchangeable in a vacuum, with UC4 winning out on a game feel front personally, where UC4 legitimately holds strong (and I'd argue Des has a point) is in its level design and encounter spaces. Somethings Ubisoft's games usually let me down going by Watchdogs 1 as an example or even fucking Far Cry.

A lot of the spaces make good on what UC3 hinted at with the ship graveyard (a sequence hated by people who hate games, because "mah narrative"). The spaces are free form enough for the player to make actual meaning decisions as they have choice (IE the depth, not a bunch of redundant skill trees that add fucking nothing)

The island jungle encounter in Chapter 13, which they used as a vertical slice for the game to show off the game initially for instance starts you below in tall grass (in a stealth state), with enemies placed above on a cliff, with a few adjacent cliffs tied to the general area. You have 3 points of attack to work your way up the cliff alone, and if I remember this route a path under that cliff side to work a perimeter if need be. While taking out goons, you can do part of this area sneaky, but lets say you get spotted, you now initiate a direct combat state. With all the cover n shooting that comes with it, dealing with enemies directly in front n flanking enemies, moving to a grappling point of which you can shoot while grappling, n launch off to knock out another enemy below, with enough wiggle room for you to actually break line of sight, and reinitiate a stealth state.

With enemies still on high alert looking for you, without just doing a silly "well back to patrol" pattern. You're probably not going to ghost the area at this point, so yeah you'll initiate combat again, but still working vertically dealing with enemies from multiple directions. There is environmental quirks like slopes that you can slide down for quick evasion while shooting at another enemy on the fly. And you can probably still do a chunk of that area and actually not have to kill or knock out everyone.

All of which is tied to a more conservative bullet economy that actively forces you to switch up weapons.

And none of this is rail roaded (like a typical Uncharted games encounters usually are) on the player like most cover shooters. The game has issues with difficulty balance, and Drake's low health pool kills any idea of any proper running n gunning. And it certainly lacks the moment to moment depth of Japanese third person shooters that are willing to work with more abstractions ala Vanquish, Resi 4, or Splatoon. Either way UC4's poor pacing aside, it's encounter designs are legitimately ace. So the whole "bu bu it's a movie" really doesn't fly, albeit yeah 90% of the complaints about pacing can be centered around how sparingly it uses its combat in favor of mechanics that are fucking shallow, or nothing more than walking segments for a fucking video game story.

That wouldn't exactly be surprising, for starters it's Nintendo. A dramatically superior studio to Naughty Dog, and second, Splatoon has more depth than it's usually given credit for since most people don't actually know how to discuss depth as it pertains to games.

lolnope

Wildlands is poverty GTA, including shit controls and gunplay.

Mass Effect: Andromeda is never the best anything. It's crap through and through and to make matters worse, it's still a buggy mess.

Watch Dogs 2? Another GTA clone with piss poor combat? lolkay

PUBG is okay I guess. Even then, it plays more like a FPS if you wanna actually play it properly and not just mess around.

@Desmonic: lol... I saw the link on Yahoo news and thought I'd watch. Ugh... Des....ugh.... Have i mentioned , uggggh.

Gears 4? Nope. If I wanted Dinasty Warriors AI but with guns I'd play that I guess.

Just finished RoTR this past month actually. Overrated as hell. Anything that isn't the shotgun (pretty damn fun, one of the best I've used) or the bow just sucks, period. Even then the enemy encounters are awful.

MGSV is a mixed bag. For every great thing it does it seems to counter with with some BS mechanism or feature. Even then, once you have to actually shoot anything with an actual gun, whatever greatness it had goes away. Turns into the most generic shooter possible. Also, you're doing it wrong if that even happens.

Mafia? lolokay.

Stay mad mems :D

All this to say: ****, I really want more Vanquish in my life.

lol such a random place for news on games hehe

ME Andromeda in combat and gunplay departments is dope af and rivals TPS games, only if the encounter design wasn't so inconsistent

Metal Gear Solid V is a much deeper game than UC4, don't be ridic. Though sure, not strictly because of it's shooting aspects. But the ballistics are plenty enjoyable in MGSV, quick, snappy, n just enough of a recoil/bloom or whatevs to force the player to feather shots n stuff, with open spaces n compounds with far more room for experimentation n expression than the spaces of UC4. MGSV's action for instance, isn't nearly as fucking shallow as UC4's brand of stealth.

And MGSV, when you can crank up the difficulty on its Subsistence n Extreme missions is like FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF territory.

UC4 on Crushing is like, well okay the stealth becomes even more rigid, grapple points become effectively useless, you're too low of health to tolerate all the hit scan enemies shooting at you for any run n gun, and oh yeah the bullet economy is now a detriment in certain spaces. Both of em even have a shit tier bullet sponge enemy to boot.

And this fucking means nothing.

@Desmonic: you never know with me what article will bring our a new layer of Uncharted hate. Haha.

Uncharted pushes the needle in the opposite direction to what I consider great gaming experiences and that's where the venom comes from. It's not an action game and it's not a game that tells a last of us type of story despite the Dev. What it does is offer a flaccid approach at gameplay mixed with a flaccid approach at story telling to combine into a game that doesn't really ask you to be master and commander of your interactive experience but rather keeps you in 2nd gear while you watch the story theyve spent a few years creating and insisting is worthy of your time...

It feels like being stuck in the mud throughout. Games are better than that, no matter how many set pieces you can muster.

@Desmonic: Even Splatoon is a better TPS than Uncharted and that game uses motion controls.

Are you speaking from using a controller?

I played Wildlands on a keyboard and mouse, and it seemed pretty good there. The vehicle controls were awful, but that was about it.

Besides that, Wildlands actually lets you set up drone targets and actually lets you snipe. Good luck trying to actually choose how you want to approach a battle in Uncharted 4. ;)

Watch Dogs 2 has a plethora of combat utilities that you can use, such as knocking out enemies with your RC car, controlling cars and utility vehicles remotely, and hacking electric boxes to blow up enemies. It's not a great game, but it gives you plenty more options than Uncharted does.

Now, I hope you're not moving the goal posts and only talking about the gunplay now, when you said "gameplay" earlier. If you said gunplay, you would be right about Watch Dogs 2. But that's not what you said, is it.

@jg4xchamp: In what sense?

Once the actual combat starts it definitely turns more into an FPS than a TPS. There is exactly 0 wrong with that btw, in fact it's part of it's charm I'd argue (as that also has disandvantages reflected in the gameplay in terms on environment awareness which can easily **** you over) but UC, Gears, GTA (well, the PC/PS4/XB1 allows you to turn it into an FPS if you want to), Vanquish, etc, don't change that dramatically in terms of the player point of view when the combat starts. It's not just when you get snipers either, even combat rifles are better to use from a FPS perspective in the game, I feel.

Again, nothing wrong with it at all, just that it's also not the most traditional of TPS's.

Because what the **** is the difference? You point you shoot, the perspectives has barely changed that basic element. FPS games are more fluid, full stop, but there is no massive shift in principle n goals there. It's more efficient to play it as a TPS when you are roaming (giving up information that other players aren't giving up isn't exactly wise), you might feel more comfortable playing it first person when combat engages, but that has more to do with the nature of how scopes work in that game.

Either way as fun as PUBG is, the central comparison of how each games use their mechanics doesn't necessarily need to be separated. And nothing about how it plays is any more FPS centric than it would be TPS centric.

You cuck. ;p

I still find it hard to fathom how UC4 got a ten. I couldn't finish it because I got so bored of the endless cutscenes. MGS V - another game that didn't deserve top marks - has infinitely superior gameplay, despite its flaws.

@SecretPolice said:

:P

Your gifs are the best.

@kuu2 said:

@SecretPolice said:

:P

Your gifs are the best.

:)

What do motion controls have to do with anyhting though? Unless you mean they're "waggle waggle" type of motion controls? Which as far as I'm aware they're not. Could be wrong of course.

Never played Wildlands on PC, so no idea if the control scheme there is better. Though I mean the actual combat.

Also, did we play the same Uncharted 4? Plenty of combat scenarios allowed you to not even fight anyone if need be (there is even a trophy for this btw). Hell, you can mark enemy AI as well too. And yes, snipers are present in every UC game (though, given it's not the nature of the game, you can't have one all the time unless you find it and keep it). Again, did we play the same game? Feels like we didn't.

More options =/= better. Vanquish gives you about 1 option in how to do combat (which in this instance is all the gameplay there is to it): either kill everyone or die. Still miles better than most TPS's. Also, I'd argue WD2 options are cool (as they were in WD1, even if not as cool as what we were promised at it's E3 debut) but since the gunplay is actually poor, very poor even, it's all for nothing. For me it's a bit like MGSV: as long as you manage to use it's side-options without entering open combat (or in MGSV, stealth around without alerting enemies) the game feels fun. Once you enter open combat I feel the fun gets sucked away very quickly.

@jg4xchamp: Could be me of course, but I feel shots are much easier to nail from a FPS perspective in the game. I feel like I sway way too much when I'm on a TPS view. Alas, it could be that I just suck :v

In terms of mechanical depth, it's not most, probably all of them really. Ubisoft's games just have more redundant shit.