Gamesthirst Articles writes: Ladies and Gentlemen, it is here. A game that has taken the industry to new heights with stellar storytelling that leaves Hollywood struggling to match; graphics not seen on any other platform, gameplay more polished and refined than the best of them, and a cinematic experience so real, you would think you're not playing a game, but rather, battling it out among thieves in an action packed big budget feature film. Oh, don't take my word for it, let's take a read at what the IGN reviewer (Chris Roper) had to say:
Chris, Joseph, and Josh celebrate Active Quest’s 100th episode by discussing their favorite games of all time.
Nevada Dru from Bits & Pieces revisits Uncharted 2: Among Thieves to see if this legendary game has stood the test of time.
Currently playing Drakes Fortune on crushing, next will be to replay Among Thieves, but I'm sure it still holds up today.
Recently re-platinumed 1-3. Uncharted 2 aged better than I even expected. I enjoyed it more now than I did a decade ago. It’s more polished than 1, tighter than 3 and Yemen in 3 was gorgeous. Shambhala out-prettied Ubar though. 60fps w higher res’ made for a damn good rerun.
Question: When you say Uncharted2 aged better than expected, are you talking about the original PS3 game or the remastered collection on PS4. I ask because I think that a remastered version of the game would look and play better than the original.
I doubt that the original ran at 60 frames, how many years old is the remastered collection anyway.
I need to replay the original trilogy along with the collection, not a fan of the collection trophy of beating levels in a set time and don't think the originals required that for platinum.
@abnor_mal
It’s true that the remasters have upped the resolution and given it 60fps, but the base game is the same. The art design and base textures/physics/ animations are the same yet still look contemporary. More-so than UC1 which isn’t as tight, or UC3 in some cases which I found a bit clunky in close quarters.
UC2 level design was a great evolution in bringing the verticality from the jungle into rural/urban settings while maintaining smooth animation transitions. Drake still moves better than the ginger in Star Wars Jedi. Outdoor areas are better lit.
UC2 also has more action and better pacing imo, which helps when replaying a game 10 years later. Kept me engaged.
You don’t need to time trial for platinum. They stuck the speedrun trophies in a seperate extended dlc category so have no fear.
I thought the originals were good, but not great. I understand that puts me in the minority here. That said, Uncharted 4 was freaking fantastic.
Yeah I understand the hate for 4 prior to playing it I was firmly against it and felt like 3 wrapped things up already but now after playing it I think it was the best in the franchise.
Now I look back at two and I feel like I'm playing an on the rails shooter everything is so tightly scripted including the infamous train scene you simply can't make a mistake
I think Uncharted 2 is a lot like AC2. Both games took the idea and basically improved it in every single way.
Uc2, AC2,Halo2, Soul calibur 2, Killzone 2, Infamous 2 , Dishonored 2 and a few more. The only negative thing I have against uc2, and imo it annoyed me,are the blue apes, uncharted 1 handled the super natural far better.
Cultured Vultures: What's your favourite moment from the Uncharted franchise? Here are 15 that got our blood pumping.
The entire final chapter of The Lost Legacy is the best setpiece in the series and it wasn't even mentioned.
Well seeing as I haven't played it myself (only the multiplayer beta) I can't judge.
oh I get it, because a 9.5 is not good enough...
As I said in another thread, it isn't the 9.5. It is the fact they gave a 10 to GTA IV.
Now let's indict them with their own words:
"A "10" is not a score we give out very often. In fact, the last time we gave a 10 to a console game was Soul Calibur in 1999. A 10 doesn't mean a game is perfect -- it means a game is pushing boundaries, expanding a genre, and doing many things to a level so far above and beyond its competitors that they overshadows any flaws. Certainly, GTA IV has some issues, the most noticeable being the occasional flaw in the cover system, but there are many more pieces of GTA IV that are better than anything I've seen from a game in the past decade. We don't give 10s often -- just to games that merit the score."
You can easily pull the "GTA IV" out and drop in "Uncharted 2"...except where it says the cover system is flawed. The cover system in U2 is the best I have ever seen.
And face it, the cover system in GTA IV wasn't just flawed, it was an out right joke to call it a system in the first place.
Well I can't approve of a blog like this, and it is a bit ridiculous to complain over a 9.5, which is a great score... but I see where he's coming from. The review was absolutely glowing. I mean, is it really just 0.1 better than Killzone 2? Is it really no better than Resistance 2? Is it really 0.1 worse than Halo 3?
These numbers with the decimal places get so arbitrary and ridiculous. And then there's the time factor. Is today's 9.5 the same as 2 years ago's 9.6? Is it better? Are these things relative?
I think it's a much better idea to have smaller increments of scoring. 9 or 10, take your pick, but once you get into tenths of a point, the works get muddy. How do you quantify one game as a 9.5 and another as a 9.6?
rofl...