120°

Uncharted 3 Multiplayer Free-to-Play Sees 100,000 Downloads in North America After the First Week

Adding some validity to the decision of creating a Free-to-Play model for Uncharted 3′s multiplayer, Naughty Dog has announced that the Uncharted 3: Drake’s Deception Multiplayer Free-to-Play has seen over 100,000 downloads in North America during the first week of availability.
-PSLS

Read Full Story >>
playstationlifestyle.net
TrendyGamers4500d ago

Not bad, I wonder what the numbers were like elsewhere?

black9114500d ago

Whatever Happened to the option Recommend Games that are available on the PlayStation Store to Friends?

fourOeightshark4500d ago

It would have way more downloads if we still had that recommend feature.

-Alpha4500d ago

The new PlayStation store happened

shutUpAndTakeMyMoney4500d ago (Edited 4500d ago )

I think sony is smart doing this.. Bring out a franchise then make the older versions MP f2p! Even if the new killzone comes they could keep kz3 mp f2p!

It's better than old games just dying.

SPAM-FRITTER-1234500d ago (Edited 4500d ago )

Smart? This technique has been around for years on PC. Stealing other platforms marketing strategies is called Business.

MikeMyers4500d ago

Of course it is. MAG was a prime example of a gaming community dying that had a great rebirth by offering it free to a certain cap level as well. Even if only a small percentage upgrades to the full level or just buys a few items it's worth it. It also brings more interest to the ip and could help sell older titles.

clrlite4500d ago

Excellent point. I would love to see Counter Strike GO go free to play with continued support from Valve.

CalvinKlein4500d ago (Edited 4500d ago )

I dl it because I wanted to buy U3 just for the multiplayer already. I havent bought anything but it says it tracks your progress and Im level 35 from the beta instead of being at only 15. I wonder if it will unlock my progress if I buy the game on a disk too?

I will probably just buy the GOTY edition for less than 30(or even regular edition for 20$ or less) to get all the maps since just the level cap removal by itself is a 20$ ripoff and I think that still includes the adds. I will buy the real game just to get rid of the lame adds. Id like to have it digital but only if the full competitive multiplayer without adds was 20$(even without the extra maps).

below- I like SP games more but Id like the option to only buy the COD multiplayer (team deathmatch). I dont want the SP, or special ops or zombies, just team deathmatch. Id buy it if it was 20$ 20 for SP, 20 for multiplayer, and 20 for zombies would be great. then people could choose what they want. same with other games. Id like to buy just the SP of alot of games for just 40$.

ftwrthtx4500d ago

I'm not surprised by that. I'm curious to know if ND actually made any money.

LOGICWINS4500d ago

I'm assuming more than a few people bought some DLC.

HammadTheBeast4500d ago (Edited 4500d ago )

I bought the unlimited level cap and may buy DLC in the future.

LOGICWINS4500d ago

Unlimited level cap? How much is that?

GribbleGrunger4500d ago

Agreed. It's a great way of getting people online and a great way of boosting DLC sales.

Godchild10204500d ago (Edited 4500d ago )

I can't wait for the day where we (The gamers) can purchase something in the Marketplace or the PSN Store without leaving the game or losing our place in a game due to hardware limitations.

OT: Nice numbers for Uncharted. Nothing beats free! First Jetpack Joyride and now Uncharted 3. I can see Sony pushing the PS4/PSV as a great way (Alternative to PC, IOS and android) to utilize the free to play model.

ExPresident4500d ago

I can't wait till we can just buy the multiplayer portion of a game without the SP. This is a great start to that.

ExPresident4500d ago

Why because its an option? I would have loved the option to buy BF3 multiplayer without the single player portion because I don't care about the single player in Battlefield. It should be cheaper and it should be an option.

Not sure why people on this site hate options. Really baffles me.

BitbyDeath4500d ago (Edited 4500d ago )

Disagrees are cause this is FREE. Why would you want to pay for multiplayer when devs are giving it away for FREE?

That should be the future for multiplayer only games IMO.

Free game, money made through DLC, not that i'm a fan of microtransactions but as long as it's not Pay-to-win then i'm all for it.

ExPresident4500d ago

I would pay if it avoided microtransactions. I don't support micro-transactions if it means I'm paying for stuff I used to get with a one time fee. League of Legends on the other hand does it perfect from my experience.

So therefor, yes, free is good depending on how the micro-transactions are done. Otherwise I'll just pay the one time fee for a complete multiplayer experience.

Ares84HU4500d ago

If you don't like sp games than buy games that are just MP. There are plenty. Also, if you don't like the SP you don't need to play it. But don't you worry. Soon enough they will dissect games and you will have the option to buy each level of a game individually and each weapon as well. It already started happening...now they just call it DLC or add-ons. Soon you won't even be able to buy a whole game intact.

Microtransactions FTW!!/sarcasm

ExPresident4500d ago

So, in the case of Battlefield 3, which I think is amazing, I should just not play it since I can't get the MP only in your opinion? Rather then have the option of getting the MP only I should just avoid the entire game? How is that better then having the option to purchase the portion I want.

Also, I don't like the idea of purchasing levels individually, or each weapon, etc etc. I already stated that above. Micro-transactions are not a win in most cases, unless done like League of Legends. But more options are better then less.

Ares84HU4500d ago (Edited 4500d ago )

No, I never said that you should avoid the full game.

I said that don't play the SP part if you don't like it. Also there are plenty of MP only games if that is your thing.

But in my humble opinion, if I buy a game I want the FULL version of the game not 1/4 or half of it. I want it full. You think if companies would get on the habit of selling a games MP and SP mode separately they would charge you less??? No, they wouldn't. They would charge you almost the same...my guess is $39.99 for MP or the same for the SP. So if you want the full package you would end up paying more.

I just don't understand why having a SP campaign is a bad thing. It is the best in gaming a great SP is much much much better than ANY MP mode.

ExPresident4500d ago

@ Ares84HU

If I can save money by purchasing just the portion of the game I want, ie the MP or SP, then that would be a great option, and yes purchasing one should be cheaper then both, but both should be a savings deal as well.

I bought BF3 day 1 and I dont play the SP, but I should have the option of saving money and only getting the MP mode. I understand your concern that they would charge you more for one mode rather then a full game but that is something as a consumer I can support or choose not to with my wallet and I'm fine with that.

Your opinion on SP being the best of gaming is subjective as it is your opinion. It all depends on the game.

Rainstorm814500d ago

You can now.....within the F2P game

Ducky4500d ago

Starhawk and Killzone3 have this option.

In StarHawk's case, the SP and MP can be bought separately, while in KZ3's case, the MP version can be bought separately.

It's great too, because there are game for which I don't care about the SP, and if I'm buying them digitally, I might as well save some money and HDD space.

T24500d ago

Hell ya ive never played one missions of sp in cod or bf ... Not one ... Resistance was pretty cool tho

holdmyown834499d ago

I can't wait for that either. Especially for Call of duty games.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 4499d ago
Skate-AK4500d ago

I wish I could use my Online Pass for U3 disk version.

Show all comments (37)
50°

Uncharted Cast Doesn’t Take the Games’ Success For Granted at MCM Comic-Con

During MCM Comic Con London X EGX, CGM got the chance to be part of a press group interview with the stars of the Uncharted titles, namely the legendary Nolan North, who played protagonist Nathan Drake, Emily Rose, who portrayed Elena Fisher and Richard McGonagle, who took on the role of Victor ‘Sully’ Sullivan,

Read Full Story >>
cgmagonline.com
160°

Analyzing 'Uncharted: Drake’s Deception' – Wait, What is The Game About?

Uncharted 3: Drake’s Deception has a lot to live up to as Uncharted 2: Among Thieves is an incredible and near-perfect game.

Read Full Story >>
goombastomp.com
Profchaos1335d ago

It's about retirement...oh wait

UNCHARTED2FANATIC1335d ago (Edited 1335d ago )

I cant even say what the point was its easily the worst story in the series. The online was a whole lot of fun though but overall doesn't come even close to 2

porkChop1335d ago (Edited 1335d ago )

It was a step back for sure. Personally, I thought even the MP was way better in U2. Solid game, glad I played it. I just think they didn't push as hard as they did with U2.

UNCHARTED2FANATIC1330d ago

Yes both the online and story was better in 2 no doubt

Flewid6381335d ago

The "young Drake" portion was pretty top notch, story-wise. But yeah, everything outside of that I felt was inferior.

DanielEndurance1335d ago

Villains were all over the place in this… one second they wanted Drake dead, the next they needed him, then they want him dead again, then they coulda killed him, but poisoned his friend instead, then coulda shot him again, but had brunch with him, then needed him alive, then coulda mowed him down, but decided to kill him by fire and let him escape… Uncharted 2 was way better. 😅😅

slowgamer1335d ago

=D Sounds crazy. I don't remember any of that. Played it on ps3 and I remember thinking that why was this game so bashed compared to second one. I liked it.

Chocoburger1334d ago (Edited 1334d ago )

Another thing that annoyed me about UC3 events was the agent Talbot teleporting around Turkey. It just felt off to me, and made no sense.

Also, for about one third of the game, you go on a wild goose chase to rescue Sully, who wasn't even there to be rescued, and you end up back where you started again. There was simply no pay off for all the events you go through, so it fell flat in that regard as if they couldn't figure out how to make the game longer, so they decided to side-track you to do something with no pay off, hoping you wouldn't notice due to all the incredible action set pieces they made.

Overall though, even with its flaws, I still enjoy the game.

TheEnigma3131335d ago

This was actually my least favorite in the series. Didn't have that same impact that part 2 set.

Flewid6381335d ago

Uncharted 2 is the pinnacle of the series (to me).

Granted, 4 had the best story in my opinion, but 2 was the overall best game.

Show all comments (12)
210°

Uncharted 3 Anniversary Retrospective: Shackled By Its Precursor's Legacy

A decade after its release, how does Uncharted 3 fare today? Does its story still work? Was its precursor’s legacy a bedrock or quicksand for its own aspirations?

Read Full Story >>
techraptor.net
1336d ago Replies(2)
SullysCigar1336d ago

When arguably the weakest game in the series is still awesome and more fun than most games today, you know you're onto a winner!

coolbeans1336d ago

I'd extend "arguably" before awesome too. Many technically demanding scenes were jaw-dropping for the time, but it's tough to ignore the sub-par context propelling the action forward.

SullysCigar1336d ago

Tough for you, perhaps, and that's fine. I enjoyed it very much. Perhaps a little less than the others in the series, but then the bar is extremely high.

I remember being blown away by the water and sand tech in U3 for the time too. It certainly was a visual treat!

LucasRuinedChildhood1336d ago (Edited 1336d ago )

It is very good, but when I originally played Uncharted 3 it was the most disappointed I'd ever been in a video-game because Uncharted 2 was just that good. I enjoyed 3 much more when I replayed it in the Nathan Drake Collection though. I could just enjoy it for what it is and accept that it's not Uncharted 2 - it's not a roller coaster, and it doesn't balance and rotate between action, puzzles, platforming and set-pieces in the same way.

Uncharted 3's gameplay is a bit more compartmentalized and focused on one thing at a time. I'm not surprised the scrapped version of Uncharted 4 was going to have no gunplay for the first half. It's also paced much differently - it takes a long time to get to the notable set-pieces. Uncharted 2 is insane from Nepal onwards which is about an hour into the game. haha.

I did like the introduction of chase sequences, and I love first hour (bar fight, young Drake) and from the airplane sequence onwards but I just think the rest of it just sort of meanders along without as much purpose as 2.

When it comes to the script, you can feel the absence of Neil Druckmann and Josh Scherr (writer on every other console Uncharted game). Drake gets hit in the face, and the game goes on a random side plot for an hour to give you some boat set-pieces. He then washes up on a beach close to where Elena is staying to get you back to the real plot. Drake just says "How convenient" to try make you laugh off how sloppy the plot got.

In retrospect, I'm not sure if Naughty Dog were ready to work on 2 different games at once. 3 clearly had production issues that 1 and 2 didn't have, and Hennig's version of 4 didn't work out. They had to crunch so hard to get the rebooted version done on time that Bruce Straley gave up making video-games.

coolbeans1335d ago

I'll give you some props for the extra analysis. I remember Druckmann climbing his way to a writer spot in UC2, but wasn't aware of Josh Scherr. I didn't know that was the reason for Straley's departure either. That's pretty damn rough.

GhostofHorizon1336d ago

They had to make some weird choices as far as story went because the actor for Cutter had to bail which left a few holes in the story.

Uncharted is one of my favourite series and while the leap from 2 to 3 was not nearly as big as the leap from 1 to 2, I think it was an amazing experience none the less.

coolbeans1336d ago

Graham McTavish's departure wasn't easy, but I don't think that would fix many holes tbh. Because the main issue to consider is the precarious mindset Naughty Dog was operating on: an increased emphasis in set pieces that HAD to go in and worrying about the context later.

Petebloodyonion1336d ago

I really liked part 3 ( Among Thieves is still the best in my opinion) My only complaint was the interactions with the villains and how they were a missed opportunity, Linda MacMahon (Marlowe) was an interesting antagonist due to the history with Sully and Nate but it fails basically flat especially with her ending. And I couldn't care about Navaro 2.0.

What I did love and made me care was Cutter, in the short time he was in the game you could feel that the guy was a good treasure hunter for example when he pulled his own notebook with the clues he founds so the team can escape a room.
It was a small touch that add a lot to the character.

Good-Smurf1336d ago

Marlowe was played by Rosalind Ayres.

MadLad1336d ago (Edited 1336d ago )

I have mixed feelings on the series. I still own all of them on the PS3, and the collection for PS4, but I didn't truly "love" any of the games until 4.

They're good games, but they always stumble on some element.
The first is good, but the climbing mechanics weren't exactly fine tuned with the first showing. Not to mention the spongey enemies if you played on anything past normal; but you're then faced with a fairly unchallenging game experience.
The second mostly fixed the climbing, but added in a pretty clumsy stealth mechanic.
Three was just two with a new story.

Four got it right though.
I don't remember once getting annoyed by any mechanic had in the game.

I know that everyone has a soft spot for 2, and 3 is sort of the black sheep of the series; but they did, overall, get progressively better. Which doesn't always happen.

Show all comments (28)