Uncharted 3's story was an incoherent mess *SPOILERS*

[roosterjcogburn]

You'd think the spiders came from Ubar except you never see them there?

Oh except in an hallucination.

I thought for a while that the spiders actually were just hallucinations every time you saw them, but then remembered that they ate that guy under the chateau. So apparently they were real, extremely random killer arachnids.

 

[legacyAccount]

All I can say is it was one of the worst endings I have ever seen for a PS3 action-adventure.

 

[Spirit_Gun]

My problems started when Drake, Sully & Cutter escaped the London underground hideout. How in the world did Talbot make it to the Chateau? Drake said it himself: "Drake had half the clues, Lawrence had half, we have both & Marlowe has nothing" after getting the decoder and map. So at that point, I expect there to be no enemies at the Chateau but lo and behold, they're there because apparently they "followed" them. How the hell did they follow them? They escaped them & hid in Cutter's apartment.

Oh and the best part? You need the stars to find Iram, yet they find it in the day, and Salim is some guy who knows how to get there yet asks Drake why the English are here.....

And why was Talbot disappearing after stealing Cutter's journal never explained? I think it took Amy Hennig to explain that he was some black ops agent, but even then he walked into a wall for ****'s sake....

Also, cue random and unexplained spiders and a sandstorm that conceals a city which for some reason is not obvious to the human eye in the Uncharted universe. Oh, lets also not forget Elena opening a door which you had to do 2 puzzles to open

 

[Daishudo]

8 It does matter. Its the reason why Marlowe is doing what she is doing. it does matter what is in the jar. its simple story telling

 

[Violet_raine]

My problems started when Drake, Sully & Cutter escaped the London underground hideout. How in the world did Talbot make it to the Chateau? Drake said it himself: "Drake had half the clues, Lawrence had half, we have both & Marlowe has nothing" after getting the decoder and map. So at that point, I expect there to be no enemies at the Chateau but lo and behold, they're there because apparently they "followed" them. How the hell did they follow them? They escaped them & hid in Cutter's apartment.

The books detailing the importance of the chateau in france and the citadel in Syria were in the hidden Library on the table for gods sake.

They already knew about the Chateau and Citadel and that something was hidden in them, they just needed Drakes ring to decipher the clues and tell them what to look for.

 

[Spirit_Gun]

But that's exactly the problem: without the ring, how in the world would they make the connection between Francis Drake and Atlantis of the Sands? They would have no clue as to look in the Golden Hind figurehead to find a map, which is the only thing that proves or even implies that Drake went to Arabia in the first place. And to really understand the importance of the citadel and the chateau, they would need to see the Sabean script around the map and correlate with the two buildings. How they made some link between Drake and Ubar without the ring to help decode 'Long Hidden', and why they killed Lawrence for his journals when they had no proof to go on is just ****ing stupid. Its like saying George Bush's ancestor was a spy, and I'm going to assassinate him to find out even though its just a guess & I have no proof. I can understand if it was their goal after they drugged and captured Nate, but it wasn't, just accounting for sloppy writing

 

[Violet_raine]

T.E. Lawrence isn't really important, they only included him in the game to add another historical figure who was affiliated with the lost city and tie it in with the conspiracy around his death.

Sir Francis Drake however was sent to find the lost city of Ubar by Queen Elizabeth and the order of "whatever they are" that Marlowe is in charge of now, Francis was working with John Dee who was Marlowes 15th century counterpart.

Thats how they knew he was involved.

Drake made it as far as Yemen which would indicate he already found the clues hidden in France and Syria but since he covered all traces of his journey the only way to pick up the trail is to use his ring to decode his secret messages(Why he left secret messages when he seemingly didn't want anyone to follow him is the real question?)

Honestly while I can't deny there are problems with this story alot of it is pretty standard for this kind of treasure hunting adventure, there are always leaps of logic.

Also personally I get the feeling there were parts cut from the story before this game was released, more likely that than just bad writing.

 

[Spirit_Gun]

You are correct, T.E. Lawrence isn't as important as ND made him out to be. And I guess your Marlowe-knowing-since-she-is-leader-now theory also works to a degree, though we didn't see an in-game record by the Queen or something of that nature explaining Drake's "failure", thus not giving Marlowe the knowledge that Drake went to Yemen. Also lets remember that he and John Dee hid almost all traces of the journey.

You are wrong about Drake visiting France and Syria though, he went through the East Indies and reached Arabia. He traveled only in one direction as he went towards the Pacific side of America and sailed through to Asia and the Indies.

 

[Violet_raine]

Nate and Sully found John Dees laboratory in the chateau signifying that he was looking for the crusader knights tomb.

They imply that he never found it thereby never finding the talisman.

So another more pressing question you could ask is how could Drake have ended up in Yemen without the two halves of the talisman to lead him there?

Maybe there were other crusader tombs perhaps...

 

[Spirit_Gun]

True, though he might have sketched it just like Nate did before Talbot stole it

 

[Lucas_Lover]

It sounds to me like nobody here likes ANY of the Uncharted games...

 

[Sportsfan_03]

Why does everyone think that the spiders are random? Look at where they were at. They were guarding the "keys" or "guides" that they needed. Think about it. They were guarding the tablet in the chateau, and then guarding the tablet in Syria, and finally, in Arabia, they were guarding the final clue on how to find the city.

While I'll admit it wasn't the best attempt at a good story (U1 as that imo), the story has hardly any plotholes, you just have to find the ones you think are there.

 

[buda.1]

I really have a hard time believing this post. Although Uncharted 3 never really explained how Talbot was able to survive after being shot by Charlie, and some might say that it had plot holes (though I disagree besides the one mentioned), it's still a better story than Uncharted 2, not because it had less faults but because it had more emotion and more strengths to the story.

 

[buda.1]

Plus you can't ignore some of the plotholes in Uncharted 2, mostly the ending. How did Nate all of a sudden come to the conclusion that the actual Tree of Life was down those steps, besides the fact that he knew the amber tree wasn't the real one, how did he know it was just down from there, it never explained that. Plus (again), how was Lazarevic able to heal himself after eating the resin, after Nate blew up the resin, while the other beastly sasquatches weren't able to heal themselves.

 

[buda.1]

asking what's in the Djinn bottle is like asking what was inside the sap of the tree of life that made those demon sasquatches. It doesn't matter!

 

[Sammy4Heisman]

I agree with the OP. This game was a mess and obviously rushed by another stupid zombie game called The Last of Us...oooo how original Naughty Dog.

It's a shame this series was ruined by the last installment. Uncharted 2 was the best 3rd person game I've ever played, and second best online overall(Resistance FoM). I couldn't believe how stupid this game was after I finished it. I kept waiting and waiting on something to happen with some explanations and it never did.

Bad move on ND's part to basically rush this game for a stupid zombie shooter.

PS: And what makes this worse is all the BS maps we are getting online. Nothing new, just remakes of all the UC2 maps.

 

[Violet_raine]

Okay so it seems alot of people think Uncharted 2 is better than this one... fine.

But seriously saying Drakes Deception is rushed and stupid and RUINED the whole series?

What is up with your standards, you must dispointed alot in life.

Get over yourslef and try and have a little fun you could be playing a whole lot worse than this.

 

[roosterjcogburn]

Okay so it seems alot of people think Uncharted 2 is better than this one... fine.

But seriously saying Drakes Deception is rushed and stupid and RUINED the whole series?

What is up with your standards, you must dispointed alot in life.

Get over yourslef and try and have a little fun you could be playing a whole lot worse than this.

It's not stupid, it didn't ruin the whole series, but I can't help thinking that it IS rushed. They announced the release date a year in advance, and there were several wonky issues with it that U2 simply didn't have. It's still a really good game, hell, maybe even a great game, but it just doesn't feel as special as U2 did.

 

[Lucas_Lover]

I agree with the OP. This game was a mess and obviously rushed by another stupid zombie game called The Last of Us...oooo how original Naughty Dog.

It's a shame this series was ruined by the last installment. Uncharted 2 was the best 3rd person game I've ever played, and second best online overall(Resistance FoM). I couldn't believe how stupid this game was after I finished it. I kept waiting and waiting on something to happen with some explanations and it never did.

Bad move on ND's part to basically rush this game for a stupid zombie shooter.

PS: And what makes this worse is all the BS maps we are getting online. Nothing new, just remakes of all the UC2 maps.

It's not a zombie game, it's an infection game. A lot of people get in a tiff over that distinction. And how do you know it's a shooter? There's been one teaser, and that's all the info we get. Besides, each game was made by a separate team at Naughty Dog, so they didn't interfere with each other's development.

As for it being rushed, it was released 2 years after the previous entry. That's pretty much the standard for all video games. Most of last year's 3's were sequels to 2009's 2's. Uncharted 2 came out in 2009, and the original came out in 2007. And I'm pretty sure Uncharted 2 was announced about a year before it was released, too.

I really don't see how anyone could think Uncharted 3 was rushed. It's one of the most polished games I've played with a fantastic presentation.

I'll admit that the story gets kind of hard to follow, but that's how all of these adventure stories go. I can't follow the back stories of the first two much, but I still love them.

 

[Spirit_Gun]

Why does everyone think that the spiders are random? Look at where they were at. They were guarding the "keys" or "guides" that they needed. Think about it. They were guarding the tablet in the chateau, and then guarding the tablet in Syria, and finally, in Arabia, they were guarding the final clue on how to find the city.

While I'll admit it wasn't the best attempt at a good story (U1 as that imo), the story has hardly any plotholes, you just have to find the ones you think are there.

Because they are never explained. The Descendants had an explanation in the 1st one, the Guardians had an explanation in the 2nd one.....the connection to Iram needs to be explained. Where are they from? Why do they guard the amulet pieces? Are they cryptids? Did someone create them? Questions like that need to be answered

 

[Violet_raine]

Actually things like that don't need to be answered because it's just a staple of the genre.

Why were there flesh eating scarabs in the Mummy?

Why was the Ark of the Covenant in a room filled with millions of snakes?

They're just there so Nathan Drake and co have something to run away from and swing their flaming torches at.

 

[Spirit_Gun]

Actually things like that don't need to be answered because it's just a staple of the genre.

Why were there flesh eating scarabs in the Mummy?

Why was the Ark of the Covenant in a room filled with millions of snakes?

They're just there so Nathan Drake and co have something to run away from and swing their flaming torches at.

But the problem with that is that there is more than one thing giving shock value/adventurous value there. Its hard to explain, but looking at the crypt or amulet alone did not give me that same feeling that your examples did. It needed some back story.

 

[Sportsfan_03]

the guardians had an explanation? I don't think so, if anything I believe that was the worst part of Uncharted 2. All they said was they were the guarding the entrance to shambala. It did not explain why they had to dress up as yeti creatures, or why they were only killable when out of costume.

Tresspassers would have been just as scared if they saw an 8 foot blue man with weapons, than a yeti. Heck, I would've been satisfied if they were real yetis instead of dressed up guardians.

point being, the spiders were there to protect the two pieces of the artifact, and then again when found how to find the atlantis of the sands.

 

[Masta160]

If your going to start taking issue with matters of logic and plot holes when talking about Uncharted you really can't single out any one game over the others.

Just sit back and enjoy the ride its all in good fun.

OK, I'll grant you the logic part. But if I'm going to pay $60 for a game, I want a story that doesn't leave major plot elements unresolved in the closing scenes. Having gaping plot holes in any medium is a huge no-no.

I refuse to acknowledge these plot holes every one refers to. I will agree naughty dog intentionally had you use your own brain to connect the dots (which many are apparently not capable of). A great story doesn't give you all the answers, get over it.

 

[aidack1579]

why is everybody picking apart these games? cant we just agree that U2 and U3 are both great, but do have some minor flaws. Every game has SOME things wrong with them, none of them can be perfect. I think that they are both excellent games

 

[jcashel]

Y U bitch about greatest game series ever!!!!?????? Every game has their flaws, personally, I think the stories in all 4 Uncharted games are brilliant and turned out exactly as Naughty Dog had planned. The reason I think U3 lacked in some areas is because NG is currently split in half, one team worked on U3, the other currently working on The Last of Us

 

[kily1]

My problem with 3 wasnt the story but the set pieces. The burning house was good, but I felt underwhelmed by the boat and airplane scene. They could have been alot better. They felt rushed and short, especially the plane scene.

 

[Spirit_Gun]

the guardians had an explanation? I don't think so, if anything I believe that was the worst part of Uncharted 2. All they said was they were the guarding the entrance to shambala. It did not explain why they had to dress up as yeti creatures, or why they were only killable when out of costume.

Tresspassers would have been just as scared if they saw an 8 foot blue man with weapons, than a yeti. Heck, I would've been satisfied if they were real yetis instead of dressed up guardians.

point being, the spiders were there to protect the two pieces of the artifact, and then again when found how to find the atlantis of the sands.

Yes, they do. Explorers ate the resin and transformed. The yeti costume and all, I agree with. But at least we know their purpose. The spiders we don't. Granted, they are their near the amulet halves.

I guess its not important but still, I would've liked backstory on a supernatural creature like this. Uncharted has done it with the Descendants and Guardians; the Djinn are just hallucinations so they don't count. But at least say where they came from or they're an undiscovered species, something...

 

[SargentSnowball68]

The game was a massive letdown from Uncharted 2. Period.

1. Ridiculous plot holes
2. No medals
3. No tweaks
4. Drake devolved from 'every-man' to 'demigod'
5. The graphics in some sequences were far inferior to U2
6. Unnecessary, random firefights around every corner
7. Unoriginal puzzles
8. Cartoon-y brawling system
9. Lazy level design (i.e. that spindly iron mast you were supposed to magically know was the way out of the shipyard)

And you know, at first, I was decently satisfied with it. I was just happy to get my hands on a new Nathan Drake adventure. Then I played it again, and it just felt... bad. I dunno what the hell Greg Miller was thinking, but this is clearly an inferior product to its predecessor. And it's a shame, too, because the story had the potential to be incredible. With a villain tied directly to Drake's past, they could have made it really memorable had they only spent some time fleshing out Talbot and Marlowe. As it is, it's a mess.

You shouldn't let that douse your enjoyment in the least bit. Learn to enjoy what you've got.

 

[RangaBanga]

It was probably shit because Naughty Dog was working on The last of us.

 

[Greed1914]

OK, I'll grant you the logic part. But if I'm going to pay $60 for a game, I want a story that doesn't leave major plot elements unresolved in the closing scenes. Having gaping plot holes in any medium is a huge no-no.

The problem seems to be more that the story feels incomplete, like you've missed something along the way. Drake Fortune and Among Thieves didn't draw attention to its lapses in story in the way this game did.

For example why make such a big deal about Talbot seemingly disappearing into thin air and shrugging off a bullet when you're not going to tell us why.

It dosen't create a sense of mystery so much as the feeling that they cut out the scene which would have explained it.

If you're not going to supply an answer then don't raise the question.

As I've said before I can overlook these kinds of things when faced with the epic action and setpieces which are the best of any game out there, but I do get your complaint.

This is really my biggest issue with it. The other games might not have been super original with the explanations and motivations for the villains, but at least they were there. They bring up that Marlowe is running some sort of centuries old secret group, yet they don't go into what it is. They make a big deal that Talbot seems to have mystical powers, then just let us assume that it must be a trick. Sure, the guy probably had body armor under his clothes, but why not show it? And it still doesn't explain the disappearing act. They also show that this group has a weaponized serum very similar to the 'genie' of Iram, but they don't go into why they're so desperate to get the genie. I can assume that this old version is superior since it can go into the water and the victim has no idea what happened, but why not take a minute to explain? This game would have benefited greatly from just taking a second to explain things instead of funneling you into the next action segment.

 

[Drakesonaplane]

Ok, Drake's Deception wasn't as coherent as Among Theives all give you that, but alot of your questions are to sau the least stupid if had paid any attention to the story, which clearly you hadn't Marlowe is a leader of a mysterious shadowy hermetic secret society it wouldn't be very secret if they told you about it now would it? As for Talbot he was just her enforcer we don't reall need to to know his life story he's a jerk and you kill him. as for Ubar people aren't all treasure hunters so not everything is going to be found Drake isn't a college kid, he's a professional treasure hunter, um hello did'nt you play the other two? Also if you listened to Salim in the game at all he said King Solomon or someone imprisoned the Djinn in the brass urn as punishment for rebelling, he he then cast it into the center of city, and the Djinn cursed the water so the city went mad. (if you knew anything a Djinn is an Arabic demon/Genie type spirit). Maybe next time you'll actually pay attention to a game, also Uncharted has always had square as melee and triangle as block, it not a new thing they added and I thought the brawling was more like Drake it fit his personality he always had a smartass attitude, when he throws the gun and says catch then punches the dude in the face that's just typical Drake.

 

[Drakesonaplane]

Oh, yeah they also specifically said the spiders were brought from Ubar to the Chateu and other locations to serva as a Medieval version of ADT home security.

 

[zaniack]

I've just completed the game and was shocked.

I'm a professional scriptwriter and had to check my save game to see if something got skipped or if I missed something important.

Because, frankly, they rushed it out like a pregnant woman on the way to the hospital.

Look at the plot of the first act, how much attention to detail each and every character gets. How much they chat and make fun and interact. Then, act two comes along and it's epic and great and all, plus they raise a lot of intriguing questions about fatherhood and life and death and a certain genie in a bottle (!!!).

But then, as this masterpiece (and I mean it) wraps up into act three, everything just collapsed for me.

Where did everybody go? Why aren't my characters talking anymore? Has this game just deteriorated into a shooter? And why does Uncharted remind me more and more of Indy suddenly? Up to now, I never looked at Nate as a copy of indy, but that third act (starting after that amazing plane crash and Nate's spiritual walk through the desert) had the Holy Grail written all-over it.

Some producer clearly said: guys, we need to get this game out, so let's skip a bunch of storylines.

But that doesn't work with a complex plot like this.

1. If you mention a pandora's box, and you don't actually OPEN it, then better don't mention it at all! What would Raiders be, if the Nazi's never opened that Ark? What would the finale of that film be without the ghosts and the melting faces? I was SOOOO looking forward to a conclusion of what the teased genie buried under the sea looks like or if Marlowe or Talbot would be enchanted by it... but what does drake do? He makes a whole ancient city collapse with two (or was it three?) shots. Nothing to see here, moving on. I thought, okay, that genie container is going to hit the ground and crack and something horribly evil will emerge and attack, but nah, let's have some more mindless shoot-outs and then close the game...

2. also let's FIGHT the main antagonist, how is that? It's nice that Marlowe drowned, but hey, she went WAY to quickly. Couldn't she have mutated into one of those Helghasts or the genie or something worth fighting for? What would Jedi be without Luke fighting Vader? Those plot decisions just didn't make any sense!

3. What do the creepy agent corpses hint at in that burning chateau? What's that all about? Why tease us into a direction that doesn't pay off?

4. I don't care about that drugged water (but I also hated it), but what the hell were those Helghast firedemons and why didn't they reappear? I soooOO wanted more of that. Uncharted always had that otherworldly side toward the endings, so why not this time?

5. Those spiders.... what's the connection to the main storyline? Why did they constantly re-appear?

6. Where did Chloe go? (I might have forgotten about that one...)

7. And why not sacrifice Sully or have him truly retire at the end if you keep letting us know how old and fragile he has become...

Etc.

During the endless credits roll, I was left speechless. How could they start off so perfectly and turn it into such a rush job towards the end? I felt like the game needed one more chapter or so. 23. Also, I -as the gamer- didn't feel like I did something very heroic that brought about the game's finale! All they wanted me to do at the very end was to RUN AWAY. That's not very heroic, if the hero also didn't kill the antagonist, and also didn't rescue any damsel in distress (Sully was rescued much earlier).

But after I watched the unlocked "STORYTELLING" featurette (which I did immediately after finishing, because I was so baffled) it all became clear: they didn't even start the project with a story at it's core, but rather asked themselves, where they haven't gone before and what they haven't tried yet, so later they constructed the story around those (thrilling) set-pieces.

Yet, to fully envelop us, they should have taken all those loose strings and bring them together in a strong, emotinally fullfilling and satisfying third act. They didn't and that's a shame.

I just hope, that Uncharted 4 (or whatever comes next from that amazing studio) has better pacing and a tighter, smarter and more integrated plot.

Peace.

For a 'professional script right' you sure are oblivious.

 

[zaniack]

I've just completed the game and was shocked.

I'm a professional scriptwriter and had to check my save game to see if something got skipped or if I missed something important.

Because, frankly, they rushed it out like a pregnant woman on the way to the hospital.

Look at the plot of the first act, how much attention to detail each and every character gets. How much they chat and make fun and interact. Then, act two comes along and it's epic and great and all, plus they raise a lot of intriguing questions about fatherhood and life and death and a certain genie in a bottle (!!!).

But then, as this masterpiece (and I mean it) wraps up into act three, everything just collapsed for me.

Where did everybody go? Why aren't my characters talking anymore? Has this game just deteriorated into a shooter? And why does Uncharted remind me more and more of Indy suddenly? Up to now, I never looked at Nate as a copy of indy, but that third act (starting after that amazing plane crash and Nate's spiritual walk through the desert) had the Holy Grail written all-over it.

Some producer clearly said: guys, we need to get this game out, so let's skip a bunch of storylines.

But that doesn't work with a complex plot like this.

1. If you mention a pandora's box, and you don't actually OPEN it, then better don't mention it at all! What would Raiders be, if the Nazi's never opened that Ark? What would the finale of that film be without the ghosts and the melting faces? I was SOOOO looking forward to a conclusion of what the teased genie buried under the sea looks like or if Marlowe or Talbot would be enchanted by it... but what does drake do? He makes a whole ancient city collapse with two (or was it three?) shots. Nothing to see here, moving on. I thought, okay, that genie container is going to hit the ground and crack and something horribly evil will emerge and attack, but nah, let's have some more mindless shoot-outs and then close the game...

2. also let's FIGHT the main antagonist, how is that? It's nice that Marlowe drowned, but hey, she went WAY to quickly. Couldn't she have mutated into one of those Helghasts or the genie or something worth fighting for? What would Jedi be without Luke fighting Vader? Those plot decisions just didn't make any sense!

3. What do the creepy agent corpses hint at in that burning chateau? What's that all about? Why tease us into a direction that doesn't pay off?

4. I don't care about that drugged water (but I also hated it), but what the hell were those Helghast firedemons and why didn't they reappear? I soooOO wanted more of that. Uncharted always had that otherworldly side toward the endings, so why not this time?

5. Those spiders.... what's the connection to the main storyline? Why did they constantly re-appear?

6. Where did Chloe go? (I might have forgotten about that one...)

7. And why not sacrifice Sully or have him truly retire at the end if you keep letting us know how old and fragile he has become...

Etc.

During the endless credits roll, I was left speechless. How could they start off so perfectly and turn it into such a rush job towards the end? I felt like the game needed one more chapter or so. 23. Also, I -as the gamer- didn't feel like I did something very heroic that brought about the game's finale! All they wanted me to do at the very end was to RUN AWAY. That's not very heroic, if the hero also didn't kill the antagonist, and also didn't rescue any damsel in distress (Sully was rescued much earlier).

But after I watched the unlocked "STORYTELLING" featurette (which I did immediately after finishing, because I was so baffled) it all became clear: they didn't even start the project with a story at it's core, but rather asked themselves, where they haven't gone before and what they haven't tried yet, so later they constructed the story around those (thrilling) set-pieces.

Yet, to fully envelop us, they should have taken all those loose strings and bring them together in a strong, emotinally fullfilling and satisfying third act. They didn't and that's a shame.

I just hope, that Uncharted 4 (or whatever comes next from that amazing studio) has better pacing and a tighter, smarter and more integrated plot.

Peace.

For a 'professional script writer' you sure are oblivious.

 

[dece23]

I still liked UDF the best, but I liked this one better than the second. "Tree sap on steriods" didn't do much for me.

But you were OK with "genies in a magical cookie jar?"

If you play the game to completion you will see that the genies you spoke of were the result of a hallucinations Drake was having because of the water he had drank since the games antagonists were polluting the water supply with a hallucinogen.

 

[dece23]

WOW, I just realized that Nate and Elena were supposed to be married, but separated in UC3. I was wondering what the hell was going on when they were talking about "you still have it"....I just thought it was something Nate gave to her in one of the other games that I forgot about. Then, at the end with the ring I just thought maybe he was going to propose and then didn't or something, again something I forgot about. They definitely didn't get married at the end of UC2 (I mean, they did after the fact I now realize, but it wasn't shown) and suddenly in this one they're separated with no mention of their marriage, just a mention of still having "something" that I couldn't even tell what it was since it's a video game and was skimmed over real quick.

Alright, I have to vent about this somewhere. Uncharted 3's story was an inexcusable incoherent mess (not to mention its shooting mechanics or hand-to-hand combat systems as well). I am fully aware that the game is supposed to be action based, but there has to be a story to drive the action. Why am I engaged in a shootout with 10 people? Who do they work for? Who is the villain in this game? What is the villain's aim? If I wanted to test my shooting skills, I would go play a first person shooter or skip Uncharted 3's single campaign and go straight to multiplayer. I am basing this upcoming rant on the proposition that most people will buy Uncharted 3 for its single player campaign.

Obviously, there will be spoilers.


1. When did Drake become Batman, able to take on 12 dudes at once in hand-to-hand combat. The controls are even the same as in Arkham Asylum, square to punch, triangle to counter.

2. Where did these demon spiders come from? Clearly "inspired" by the scarabs from "The Mummy" and its sequels. I like how their territory ranges from eastern france, to syria, to yemen. Im pretty sure giant flesh eating spiders that roam in packs of 5,000 dont just spawn out of walls across 2 continents.

3. Who were the crusader knights the amulet pieces were buried with? Just an excuse to progress the story (and i use that term loosely).

4. Since when did Chloe become a barely used and irrelevant character? She was a main character in Uncharted 2. In Uncharted 3, she drives a van. That's it.

5. So did Elena and Drake get married? Engaged? Way to completely poop the bed on that explanation Naughty Dog.

6. The combat mechanics took a real turn for the worst. The game is not fun when enemy snipers can deliver pinpoint 3 round bursts to my face through a sandstorm from 100 yards away when my visibility extends about 15 yards. Also, unloading 30 m9 bullets into anyone, body armor on or not, will kill them. Unloading 30 rounds into a guy and having him keep on coming is absurd and stretches the suspension of my disbelief to breaking.

7. Why did I spend 2 hours fighting my way out of a pirate camp? The pirate leader was almost a wholly irrelevant character. Basically a hit-man hired by Marlowe to dispose of your body. I had no interest in spending two hours fighting my way out of his pathetic cruise ship. Stupid. Stupid. Stupid.

8. What was in the Djinn bottle? A genie? Some ancient artifact? Something dropped by aliens? I just fought through an entire game and Drake spends a grand total of 5 seconds looking at the thing before sending it back to the bottom of the subterranean aquifer. Thanks Naughty Dog, why the hell did I just play your game? Supposedly its the entire reason the city of Ubar died, the reason Queen Elizabeth sent Sir Francis Drake to look for the city, and the one object the organization Marlowe runs has been searching for for 400 years. TOTAL SCREEN TIME: 5 SECONDS. AND YOU NEVER FIND OUT WHATS IN IT.

9. So in two games, Drake has completely obliterated two priceless archeological mythical cities....What a hero.

10. Drake manages to completely destroy Ubar by firing three Estes hobby model rockets from underwater. Lets make that two, actually. One of these 2 inch mini-missiles, FIRED FROM A HANDGUN, hits the crane reeling up the Djinn container, taking it out. The next two hit a support column about the width of a refrigerator, that falls down. This one support column (there are two identical ones visible during the escape) takes two missiles the size of candy corn and collapses. Stupid. It takes one of three support columns going down to destroy the entire city. Stupid. A mythical city that has lasted for millennia was supposedly supported by three completely unsubstantial columns. Stupid.

11. Who is Marlowe. What is her organization. Please, dont anyone say "an organization that controls it enemies through fear". WTF does that even mean? Is it a london sleeper cell propagated by Rhaz-al-Ghul from Batman Begins? I mean that would make sense, since they are looking for "weaponized hallucinogens". But seriously, what is this organization's deal. Who do they work for, what do they want, why do they want the Djinn container (again, we have no idea whats in this thing), what will they do with it once they have it? In other words, why am i playing this game. There is certainly a placeholder for the villain role, but without a motive or backstory, it is just incoherent and artificial.

12. Back to "The Mummy", who the hell is Salim. Apparently Ardeth Bay (the arab guy guarding Hamunaptra in "The Mummy") has a TWIN brother, who dresses and talks exactly the same way, along with a pension for guarding lost cities in deserts. By the way, Salim has 0 backstory.

13. So Ubar is surrounded by a sandstorm. When? All the time? Maybe the Djinn is doing it but since the Djinn just seems to be a hallucinogenic drug, I doubt it is magically conjuring a sandstorm. So if the sandstorm is not permanent, and there is no reason to suspect it would be, why is the city's location such a mystery. It kind of ruins the point of the game when you realize that some geography student with too much time on his hands could have discovered the "lost city" on google earth. People have found mass graves in North Korea, possible roadways at the bottom of the sea off the coast of spain (debunked btw), and a shape in lake Loch Ness that looks pretty similar to Nessie. I am pretty sure they would notice a massive gleaming city of gold in the middle of the desert. Stupid.

14. So this desert is 600 miles across. Drake manages to crash a plane somewhere in this desert and magically find himself right in the middle of Marlowe's convoy after a few days of aimlessly wandering? Sigh.


Uncharted 2 was a masterpiece and its story was would have done well as a movie blockbuster on the big screen. The characters were fully fleshed out, the story progressed in a way that made sense, the enemy was believable and had a real motive for his actions, and we finally got to see what Drake and the villain were after the entire time (ancient exploding steroid tree sap). Uncharted 3 was a stupid incoherent mess.

Both Uncharted 2 and Uncharted 3 were great games and both won game of the year awards. Ign scored uncharted 3 a perfect 10/10 and there usually quite critical. Each game has improved on the last, each game having the best graphics of the time. Uncharted as a series is influencing games like Assasin's creed revelations and the new tomb raider game. Naughty dog were able to keep things fresh by using new effects in each game like the sand storm effects in the 3rd game and the set pieces. The boat sequence and the plane sequence to name but a few, were epic and the fire effects in the chateau for that matter. I know every one can't like the same things since we all have different tastes but no one can deny that the graphics and special effects have improved in each game.

 

[dece23]

1. Uncharted employed the square to attack, triangle to counter control scheme before Batman.

No it didn't. Arkham Asylum came out months before Uncharted 2.

Batman Arkham Asylum was awarded for being the best super hero game the year it was released, Uncharted 2 was awarded for being the best game that year period. Even if Batman had the fighting system first it didn't make it a better game than uncharted 2. Further more many games use that fighting mechanic, the fact that it was used first in the Batman game doesn't take anything away from the quality of the other games. The same can be said of quick time events, Shenmue on the dreamcast was one of the first games to use that technique but who remembers or cares? The fighting system in uncharted may not be innovative and not everyone will like it but adds to the games immersion and fluidity, making the game quite hard to put down. Uncharted 3 was very advanced and is one the best examples of 3D gaming. Come to think of it didn't Uncharted 3 win game of the year awards?

 

[zaniack]

1. Uncharted employed the square to attack, triangle to counter control scheme before Batman.

No it didn't. Arkham Asylum came out months before Uncharted 2.

Batman Arkham Asylum was awarded for being the best super hero game the year it was released, Uncharted 2 was awarded for being the best game that year period. Even if Batman had the fighting system first it didn't make it a better game than uncharted 2. Further more many games use that fighting mechanic, the fact that it was used first in the Batman game doesn't take anything away from the quality of the other games. The same can be said of quick time events, Shenmue on the dreamcast was one of the first games to use that technique but who remembers or cares? The fighting system in uncharted may not be innovative and not everyone will like it but adds to the games immersion and fluidity, making the game quite hard to put down. Uncharted 3 was very advanced and is one the best examples of 3D gaming. Come to think of it didn't Uncharted 3 win game of the year awards?

Loved Arkham Asylum and Uncharted 2. And yes, Uncharted 3 won many GOTY and industry awards.

 

[Shadeslayer4]

1. Uncharted employed the square to attack, triangle to counter control scheme before Batman.

No it didn't. Arkham Asylum came out months before Uncharted 2.

Okay, I'm sorry but this is the dumbest thing I've read on here yet. Yes, Arkham Asylum came out a couple months before Uncharted 2, but they were both in development around the same time. There's no way someone from Naughty Dog magically went over to Rocksteady's office, saw the control scheme for Batman's fighting and decided to use it. Nor is it possible that within a few months they decided to add in a completely new control scheme for fighting because they saw it in Batman. That's ridiculous. The last few months are used to polish and debugged the FINISHED GAME. Both studios just happened to come up with this control scheme. IT HAPPENS. And you know why? Because it feels natural. It's a good control scheme, and both teams obviously figured it out. That's the only way I can think of this happening with two teams that had no communication with one another.

 

[roosterjcogburn]

1. Uncharted employed the square to attack, triangle to counter control scheme before Batman.

No it didn't. Arkham Asylum came out months before Uncharted 2.

Okay, I'm sorry but this is the dumbest thing I've read on here yet. Yes, Arkham Asylum came out a couple months before Uncharted 2, but they were both in development around the same time. There's no way someone from Naughty Dog magically went over to Rocksteady's office, saw the control scheme for Batman's fighting and decided to use it. Nor is it possible that within a few months they decided to add in a completely new control scheme for fighting because they saw it in Batman. That's ridiculous. The last few months are used to polish and debugged the FINISHED GAME. Both studios just happened to come up with this control scheme. IT HAPPENS. And you know why? Because it feels natural. It's a good control scheme, and both teams obviously figured it out. That's the only way I can think of this happening with two teams that had no communication with one another.

Did I say one of them ripped off the other, or even suggest that one was based off the other? No. I said (truthfully) that Batman used the control scheme before Uncharted did. Yes, Drake's Fortune came out first, but it didn't use the same melee control setup as its sequels. And everyone suddenly starts ranting on my ass like I'm accusing ND of plagiarism or something... Seriously, read what you're quoting before the angry fanboy in you starts lashing out at nothing.

 

[zaniack]

No it didn't. Arkham Asylum came out months before Uncharted 2.

Okay, I'm sorry but this is the dumbest thing I've read on here yet. Yes, Arkham Asylum came out a couple months before Uncharted 2, but they were both in development around the same time. There's no way someone from Naughty Dog magically went over to Rocksteady's office, saw the control scheme for Batman's fighting and decided to use it. Nor is it possible that within a few months they decided to add in a completely new control scheme for fighting because they saw it in Batman. That's ridiculous. The last few months are used to polish and debugged the FINISHED GAME. Both studios just happened to come up with this control scheme. IT HAPPENS. And you know why? Because it feels natural. It's a good control scheme, and both teams obviously figured it out. That's the only way I can think of this happening with two teams that had no communication with one another.

Did I say one of them ripped off the other, or even suggest that one was based off the other? No. I said (truthfully) that Batman used the control scheme before Uncharted did.Yes, Drake's Fortune came out first, but it didn't use the same melee control setup as its sequels. And everyone suddenly starts ranting on my ass like I'm accusing ND of plagiarism or something... Seriously, read what you're quoting before the angry fanboy in you starts lashing out at nothing.

You have nothing even remotely credible to say about anything Uncharted franchise related. STFU

 

[roosterjcogburn]

Okay, I'm sorry but this is the dumbest thing I've read on here yet. Yes, Arkham Asylum came out a couple months before Uncharted 2, but they were both in development around the same time. There's no way someone from Naughty Dog magically went over to Rocksteady's office, saw the control scheme for Batman's fighting and decided to use it. Nor is it possible that within a few months they decided to add in a completely new control scheme for fighting because they saw it in Batman. That's ridiculous. The last few months are used to polish and debugged the FINISHED GAME. Both studios just happened to come up with this control scheme. IT HAPPENS. And you know why? Because it feels natural. It's a good control scheme, and both teams obviously figured it out. That's the only way I can think of this happening with two teams that had no communication with one another.

Did I say one of them ripped off the other, or even suggest that one was based off the other? No. I said (truthfully) that Batman used the control scheme before Uncharted did.Yes, Drake's Fortune came out first, but it didn't use the same melee control setup as its sequels. And everyone suddenly starts ranting on my ass like I'm accusing ND of plagiarism or something... Seriously, read what you're quoting before the angry fanboy in you starts lashing out at nothing.

You have nothing even remotely credible to say about anything Uncharted franchise related. STFU

Yeah... Read the last sentence of the post you just quoted. I'm not even criticizing Uncharted, I just stated a fact. But apparently on this forum, anything besides "OMFG UNCHARTED IZ DA BEST THING EVA!!!" is blasphemy, so... bye.

 

[zaniack]

Did I say one of them ripped off the other, or even suggest that one was based off the other? No. I said (truthfully) that Batman used the control scheme before Uncharted did.Yes, Drake's Fortune came out first, but it didn't use the same melee control setup as its sequels. And everyone suddenly starts ranting on my ass like I'm accusing ND of plagiarism or something... Seriously, read what you're quoting before the angry fanboy in you starts lashing out at nothing.

You have nothing even remotely credible to say about anything Uncharted franchise related. STFU

Yeah... Read the last sentence of the post you just quoted. I'm not even criticizing Uncharted, I just stated a fact. But apparently on this forum, anything besides "OMFG UNCHARTED IZ DA BEST THING EVA!!!" is blasphemy, so... bye.

Bash Uncharted all you want, I don't mind. Just don't be an illogical dumbfuck, if you bash one you have to bash them all.