›

Uncharted 2

Lena_PLena_P
edited October 2009 in General Chat
I'd like to know if this game is ... not as annoying as it kind of looks. I realize it's been getting amazing reviews in things, but watching the quick look at giant bomb, the story just seems idiotic to me. Keep in mind I hate Indiana Jones. Yes, I am an evil, puppy killer. At the same time, the gameplay itself actually looks like fun, and I'm willing to give the game a chance if they keep the pseudo-history and cliched action-movie-dialog to a minimum. I'd also like to apologize to anyone who likes this sort of story. I realize Indiana Jones and Tomb Raider are fiction. They are fantasy; they aren't meant to be taken seriously. But I still get pissed off by "archaeologists" who just go around collecting shiny things. And wire fu. I don't go to see many action films. I'm more to be pitied than censured, really.

Comments

  • MegalomanMegaloman
    edited October 2009
    As an historian and amateur archaeologist, I have the same "problem" with those kinds of stories as you. With that said, you'll probably hate the story. Get it for the gameplay, which was stellar for me.
  • ShaggEShaggE
    edited October 2009
    I'm also an Indy hater, but Uncharted seems to me to just be an extremely solid shooty-platformer that happens to have a "movie-style" archaeologist.

    Note that I've only played the game vicariously through YouTube clips, so I may be wrong.
  • RibsRibs
    edited October 2009
    WHAT? I really think I have entered the twilight zone. Not one, but two Indy haters?
  • StarEyeStarEye
    edited October 2009
    Okay, let's get one thing straight. Nathan Drake is not an archeologist. He's an ex-mercenary and currently he's just an adventurer and a grave robber. He knows his stuff and he does his research. But he's not an actual archeologist. His main objective is probably to get rich. We don't really know much about him, other than that.

    Not even Indiana Jones is an archeologist most of the screen time. He too is an adventurer. It's not like he's using delicate brushes when digging up his stuff. Nathan Drake, however, is never an archeologist.
  • MegalomanMegaloman
    edited October 2009
    StarEye wrote: »
    Okay, let's get one thing straight. Nathan Drake is not an archeologist. He's an ex-mercenary and currently he's just an adventurer and a grave robber. He knows his stuff and he does his research. But he's not an actual archeologist. His main objective is probably to get rich. We don't really know much about him, other than that.

    Not even Indiana Jones is an archeologist most of the screen time. He too is an adventurer. It's not like he's using delicate brushes when digging up his stuff. Nathan Drake, however, is never an archeologist.

    Indy, at least, have given many people a completely wrong picture of what an archaeologist does. Nathan Drake continues the trend of treasure hunting through history like Indy and various Dan Brown (can't believe the books are so popular) characters. It doesn't matter what his profession is, it still bugs me.
  • StarEyeStarEye
    edited October 2009
    Uh, what? You really think a lot of people who like Indianan Jones thinks that's how archologists work? I'm pretty sure 99,99% of those who watched Indiana Jones knows that's not what archeology is - unless you're 10 years old (or younger).

    I don't think Indiana Jones fooled anyone but kids - and you know, that's okay, since they also believe in Santa. Are you gonna hate Santa? :D
  • MegalomanMegaloman
    edited October 2009
    StarEye wrote: »
    Uh, what? You really think a lot of people who like Indianan Jones thinks that's how archologists work? I'm pretty sure 99,99% of those who watched Indiana Jones knows that's not what archeology is - unless you're 10 years old (or younger).

    I don't think Indiana Jones fooled anyone but kids - and you know, that's okay, since they also believe in Santa. Are you gonna hate Santa? :D

    Haha, no. I was speaking in wider terms than running from boulders etc. ;)

    ...and you'd be surprised at how many people you would have to recategorise as kids with that definition.
  • LaserschwertLaserschwert
    edited October 2009
    On a side note: I have never been as excited about the release of any game, as I am with Uncharted 2.

    Sorry, Telltale... still love you :)

    It's just, I simply LOVED the first game, which was EXACTLY the way I want any action game to be like. It was the perfect combination of fantastic story-telling, extremely lovable (and hateable) characters, excitingly staged action-sequences and mind-blowing visuals. Excuse my inflationary use of superlatives here, but I just like the game so much. And if those reviews are right, the second game will easily advance to be my favorite game of all time.
  • BadwolfBadwolf
    edited October 2009
    I'm really desperate to get my hands on Uncharted 2, the original was great. It's a tossup between that, or the new Ratchet and Clank (Too many games at the minute already, so I don't want to get another two in such a short space of time).

    OP: Dunno if you've already got a PS3 or not, but if you have it's probably worth picking up the original to see if the series is your thing. It's relatively cheap now (got my copy for a fiver).
    I've no idea whether the trailers/reviews are doing the new one any justice, because I'm trying to go on a media blackout at the minute, but I thought the original was a fantastic game.
  • TookiGuyTookiGuy
    edited October 2009
    While I thought Indy was kind of dumb and corny as well, I'd say you shouldn't think too low of Uncharted. Last game, he was just looking for the corpse of Sir. Francis Drake, his ancestor, along with some gold, hopefully. You find "treasures" here and there, mostly Mayan sculptures or something. Can't really remember. The only thing I thought unrealistic about this game was the action(just like 99% of action games), and the [MEGA SPOILER]
    you really think I'm going to tell you?
    . Nathan(the main character) is not an archeologist, either - I'm not really sure what he is. Seems to me he's just a guy looking for gold who has some military knowledge, and played Prince Of Persia too much growing up.
  • GuybrushWilcoGuybrushWilco
    edited October 2009
    I don't see any reason to hate on Indy, it's just a movie :) No one is claiming it is a documentary about archeologists. If I had a PS3, I'd definitely play the Uncharted games.
  • Toothless GibbonToothless Gibbon
    edited October 2009
    StarEye wrote: »
    I don't think Indiana Jones fooled anyone but kids - and you know, that's okay, since they also believe in Santa. Are you gonna hate Santa? :D


    Or dare I say it, God?
  • StarEyeStarEye
    edited October 2009
    After playing a bit of Uncharted 2, I know a little more of what Nathan Drake is supposed to be. And I can honestly say, he's definately not an archeologist.
  • TookiGuyTookiGuy
    edited October 2009
    It's not that Indy Jones is claiming to be a documentary about archeologists, it's that it has elements which are kind of stupid, yet it takes itself very seriously.
    That, and I don't like action movies(fireworks + softcore pornography = awesome? Not for long).
  • StarEyeStarEye
    edited October 2009
    Indiana Jones movies take themselves seriously? Have we even been watching the same movies? What?
  • HomestarloverHomestarlover
    edited October 2009
    THIS LOOKS AWESOME!!!!!! Saw a review from IGN, says it's preety good!
  • Lena_PLena_P
    edited October 2009
    Well, seems someone bumped this thread anyway, I might as well make a belated reply. As far as the archaeologist thing goes, just for the record Indy was supposed to be an archaeologist. And "adventurers" don't usually go raiding tombs either. Mostly they make really bad travel documentaries *ba-boom shish!* Nathan Drake as a mercenary who doesn't actually work as a mercenary and is fluent in Latin (I'm guessing that's what Polo would have written in if he had kept a diary, but I could be wrong.) I'll accept. Why not? What I don't get is how someone that educated can't understand the expression, "desperate times". Maybe in context it makes sense, but I cannot see how. I also don't see how people call those characters "real" and the most well-developed yet when they speak hokey dialog like that. Yes, the voice actors gave great performances and the animators/choreographers/whoever makes video game characters move did a great job, but the characters still seem like stock action film characters to me. Keep in mind this is totally my opinion and I realize that. Other people love this kind of thing, and I respect that. Still, I'll take your advice Megaloman and maybe pick it up when it drops in price.
  • StarEyeStarEye
    edited October 2009
    You'll be waiting a long time. It's got a killer multi-player, which means a longer life for the game. Which again will lead to a late price reduction.

    Also, you have opinions, but you haven't played the game so do you base your opinions on the videos you've seen? This is a game that needs to be played by everyone, wether you enjoyed/played the first or not. So far, the game of the generation.

    Also, Nathan drake is an ex-mercenary, who now happens to be a fortune hunter. How he got his education and why he knows so much about ancient history and myths, is not explained. That said, Sir Francis Drake is supposed to be his ancestor, and he's probably spent a lot of years reading about him, hence the first game. Who knows, maybe history and myths just plain interest him.

    Either way, if he used to be an archeologist or a professor of some sorts, he's not anymore. Now he's using his skills differently.
Sign in to comment in this discussion.