PS3 Uncharted 2: Among Thieves

[EdelZocker]

75%, weil sie eigentlich auch einen coop wie in resi 5 oder gears einbauen wollten, es aber technisch nicht drauf hatten.

Aha und woher willst du das wissen?

 

[Moggy]

Aha und woher willst du das wissen?

Wieso behauptest Du, dass ich das wüsste?

Es ist eine Vermutung, die daraus resultiert, dass 75% (!) des Leveldesigns für zwei Personen ausgelegt ist. Eine - meiner Meinung nach - ernstzunehmende Vermutung, wenn man die Fanboy-Scheuklappen absetzt.

 

[Cohen]

Interview mit Amy Hennig und Evan Wells

1UP: OK, first off: Should we consider Nathan Drake to be a sociopath? I ask this because I realized that while I was playing Uncharted, it felt odd that he would be this charming everyman kind of guy, but he also killed about 400 guys by the time the game was done, and it's just something that's been in the back of my mind that I can finally ask...

Amy Hennig: Yeah, it's funny -- it's actually a dilemma that we're going to face more in this medium now that characters are getting more well-rendered -- I mean in all forms, not just visual rendering -- in characterization, in acting, the performances, and all that stuff. I've heard some people refer to this as a sort of "uncanny valley of characterization." I'm not sure how we deal with it in the industry. Because you don't want to constrain yourself to saying, "well, we can only tell certain kinds of stories and games, and it's all got to be soldiers; they've all got to be hard-bitten, and it's all going to be post-apocalyptic and grim; there can't be any humor or any romance or anything like that because it's still a game, and you want to be shooting things and having combat."

Now, if you made a game that matched a movie... Let's use a literal example -- let's say you made a game out of Raiders of the Lost Ark. It wouldn't be any fun. Because [gaming's] an active experience; you have to have that interaction of shooting and having combat. On one hand, I almost take it as a compliment, that we've done our characterization so well that people have that potential cognitive dissonance of, "I'm this character, yet I'm doing these things." On the other hand, [sigh] you almost have to take the gameplay as a metaphor. Maybe that's going to sound like a cop-out, but, we want the game to be fun at the end of the day. It's not to be taken seriously. Yes, it's maybe a little bit over-the-top in the sense that when you compare it to a film -- or in our case five or six films because of the length -- you wouldn't have that body count. But it's a different medium, and you almost have to take all of that and say, "we want to keep the tone of that genre that we're trying to match." But if we only had you fight three guys over the course of two hours, you'd say, "this sucks." So I think we need a little bit of slack in regards to that cognitive dissonance. Otherwise, the only kinds of games anybody's going to get are...

Evan Wells: Military.

AH: It's a tricky question, and I'm not sure what the best answer is, because you don't want fewer types of games out there -- you want the variety. And you want the gameplay to be fun between all the story elements.

EW: Without giving away too much, I can safely say that we do call it out -- we do make reference to it.

AH: [Laughs] Sometimes you just have to hang a lantern on these things too, when you're like, "OK, we know this is an issue, so let's let everybody know that we know this is an issue."

1UP: OK, here's an easier question: can you talk about the sources and inspiration for this "modern take on treasure hunting?" A lot of other games tend to cite the same movies -- Aliens, Goodfellas, Scarface and so forth, and I'm curious what atypical influences Uncharted 2 has.

AH: Obviously, we looked at a lot of stuff. When we started Uncharted, we did a ton of research and de-constructed a lot of movies, books, and comics in our genre. You're talking about everything from old adventure serials like Doc Savage to comics like Tintin, or old '30s adventure movies like Gunga Din and serials from the '50s, to adventure movies from the '80s and modern stuff like National Treasure and The Da Vinci Code. There's a lot of stuff -- we watched and read as much as we could, and plucked out the themes that we saw over and over again. Some of them were things that weren't really being taken advantage of in the medium, and a lot of it had to do with the humanization of the character and all that kind of stuff.

One of the main differences, I think, is that some of the movies and things we use for inspiration came out of the fallible hero idea. Which isn't at all new in movies, but is pretty new in games. It's the idea of the sort of "sloppy" combat -- the "sloppy" gunplay, and the "sloppy" hand-to-hand combat. It's not martial arts or tactical SWAT guys or Navy SEAL stuff. It's this guy who probably learned how to fight on the street, and can handle his guns but doesn't really know how to shoot them "right." He's not trained; when he throws a punch he'll throw himself off-balance and he can easily get clocked on the head. There's much more of that scrappy style. Everything has been sort of precise and tactical up to that point. And actually, that created a lot of technical challenges; the only way you have organic sloppiness is by not playing the same animation over and over again. For example, all of Drake's cover animations -- he probably had literally about 150 to 200 cover-taking animations -- whether he was low or high, or how he had his foot angled, and that was all done via a proprietary layered-animation system that we developed.

EW: Think of the effort we put into his run cycle, where he can be running for 60 seconds straight and you won't see the same loop twice. There will always be differences to his gait.

AH: It's one of those things that when done right, nobody notices, but when done wrong, everybody will really notice.

EW: I don't know if this is going to be completely obvious to people as they play though the game, but something that is different this time for Drake is that we beat him up like crazy. You probably can't count on your fingers and toes the number of times he gets completely knocked on his ass or on his head. You play through other video games, and you basically only fall down when you die. Drake is always getting knocked around.

Spoiler

1UP: Can you talk about where the story takes Nathan, location-wise?

EW: You start in Turkey, and then go through Borneo, Nepalese cities, and then mountains in Tibet and the Himalayas, and more.

AH: Actually, Nepal and onward are pretty much "in realtime." While early on, and in the last game, there were transition cut-scenes to mark the passage of time between locations. Once you reach Nepal, when it comes time to go to Tibet, you actually play through the journey to Tibet. So we have levels that model the transition between locations.

EW: Let me touch on one of those transition levels: we have you go on a train. In fact, the train fight is the first thing we started with after completing Uncharted. In most games, a train level is simply a stationary area with the background moving all around you. We didn't want that, and we started early on and created enough real estate to have an actual moving train. Once we had the moving train, then we could do the things we wanted in a train level; it could go up hills or twist around bends. A lot of Uncharted 2's systems, like collapsing buildings, came from the train level.

1UP: Away from the nuts-and-bolts stuff: in some of the story elements we've seen so far, there are moments of clearly conflicting ideologies. Does Nathan go through a defined character arc, or will there be some sort of "player choice moment" on occasion?

AH: In the overarching narrative, there's a defined arc. This isn't the kind of game where the narrative would take a different direction based on player choice; that's just a different kind of game. This is the kind of game that definitely has a clear and linear narrative. But within that space, the player chooses how they behave. Now, once we hit the points where we're trying to tell a certain aspect of the story, yes, things are going to play out the same way for everyone, but how they get to that moment might be slightly different.

So their interpretation of that moment may be different based on how they played, if that makes any sense. But, I don't know, we'll see how people respond. I'm always in favor of leaving a lot to inference. I don't like to bang players on the head with a lot of exposition -- especially emotional exposition. I think you just let things play out a bit, and then let people then imply what they like to imply. Obviously, there's a lot of interesting characters in the story that you react to in different ways, and they're all meant to reflect or challenge different aspects of his personality. Part of the story is about making choices: self-sacrificing or altruistic choices versus ones that are purely self-preservational. Obviously, this isn't coming out of a choice-based game system.

1UP: So there's no "Hit Square to go with Elena; hit circle to go with Chloe" moment?

AH: I wouldn't even want to try to make that game. "Here's the end: which girl?" No, it's a little deeper than that. I've said before, this isn't just "angel on one shoulder and devil on the other" -- everyone's written a little bit deeper than that. They all have their own conflicts and character flaws as well, and they're all coming from different places, so it's interesting to see when Drake is pulled in different directions by his allies. I think it'll be more interesting to the player as well, because as Evan showed you [when he demoed the single-player campaign], it's not a question of watching a movie and thinking, "OK, I saw how that played out." Now you're going to play something that then makes you feel, I hope, the emotion that's being carried out in the scene. Like, "OK, I have a dilemma: there's this wounded guy, and how do I deal with this?" And no, the player doesn't have the option to drop him, because we want him to play through this event, but they may be wondering, "Maybe Drake shouldn't have done this; I wonder what the right choice is."

1UP: I really like Eddie Raja from the previous game; hearing him yell at you in Indonesian was a great little surprise. Will there be another foreign language foil for Nathan in Uncharted 2?

AH: Everyone's going to be really surprised by the languages in this game. We have Turks, we have Tibetans, we have Nepalese -- we have hundreds and hundreds of lines all in other languages. One of the main characters in the game is Tenzen -- this guy you meet in Tibet who becomes your partner for a while. The interesting interplay there is that Tenzen doesn't speak English, while Drake doesn't speak Tibetan, and their dialogue plays out that way. We don't subtitle the Tibetan either, so the player is in the same boat as Drake is -- in the "Uh, I have no idea what you're saying." I don't want to say too much about all the characters and the roles they play, but there's a lot of interesting foils in the game.

Spoiler

1UP: Actually, with Tenzen being an ally, along with Chloe and Elena, can you say how many different allies Nathan will have over the course of the game?

EW: Hmm, at least four...

AH: [Mumbling incomprehensible names while counting off with her fingers] At least six.

EW: Six? Who am I forgetting?

AH: I don't want to say; how about "five and a half?"

EW: Oooh, OK. I got it.

AH: Five and a half, because there's a dwarf. [Laughs] But seriously, there're also things like situations where you have multiple allies like Chloe and Elena together, or when you're in a defensive position and there're lots of people around, and the fight is more than just you against an army -- you got a bunch of allies with you. But yeah, six.

And here's the thing: when we set off to make this game, we knew our number one thing was to capture that feeling of being in a great action-adventure genre movie that we all love when they come along, contemporize it, make you feel the same feelings you get when you watch them, and then put the controller in the player's hands. The number one thing is humanizing the hero. Not making a cardboard cutout that serves as your avatar in the video game space, but instead making him a living, breathing character with flaws and fears -- someone who can get hurt and all that kind of stuff. Not something you expect to see in a video game.

There's a deliberate reason he was in a t-shirt and jeans in Uncharted. In video games, that was unusual; that was weird. And he had hair. Even though people say, "That's such a generic characterization," I'd say, "Not in this medium. Generic would be space armor and a shaved head." The other thing is: watching a movie, you don't put the protagonist out there with no one to bounce off of. You have to tell a character-driven story to bring your audience in. Video games haven't traditionally done that; it's usually just the sole protagonist charging along. For one, it's hard to have allies on-screen be A.I. controlled and just have that work.

And also, it's a writing challenge; I think we've been a little bit immature in the creative writing of this industry to be honest. How you're supposed to tell a story that's not character-driven, that doesn't reflect off of other characters? I don't know. That's also where I think our wide demographic appeal comes from. Over and over again, we hear that it isn't just popular among the expected demographic -- girlfriends and wives and parents want to see the game. They want to play; they want play it in one sitting just to see what happens next. That's hugely gratifying for us to hear, because that tells us that we've done the character-driven story right. You're not just being propelled along by the visceral need to see what's next, but by the emotional need to see what happens next.

1UP: So have there been features or scenarios that were cut due to not "feeling in character?"

AH: There might be some weaponry that didn't feel "right."

EW: We definitely shied away from doing anything too gadgety or James Bond-like. Stuff that you'd expect to see in a spy thriller; we tried to make sure it stays in the action-adventure genre. Usually, everybody kind of "gets it" here -- not much gets brought up that needs to be shot down.

1UP: Except for that one guy quietly sobbing in the corner.

EW: Sure, like the guy who suggested anti-gravity boots.

AH: Every once in a while, something would come up and we'd go like, "that would be out-of-character or not appropriate for the franchise." Even with the possible cognitive dissonance of saying, "here's a guy who shoots at everything in front of him," there're still certain [lines]. We don't want him to be bloodthirsty -- we could easily go a lot further in terms of making everything gory. We try to keep everything to that "stunt" level of violence; a bit of a cartoony romantic veneer -- and when I say "romantic", I don't mean Cupid-and-hearts, I mean a little bit larger-than-life like when you're watching a stunt show and everyone goes flying in the air like in old Westerns. We try to keep that veneer on it. We don't want it to be like, "wow, that was graphic." It's a fine line that constantly moves and keeps us on our toes.

1UP: So, speaking of him being in t-shirt and jeans, who can claim credit for the whole "half-tuck" phenomenon?

AH: Tim Schafer coined that phrase, right? Because we all love it, and now everybody says "the half-tuck." Of course, credit goes to the character modeler, but I remember a conversation about how you never want your character to be symmetrical. So when you see that he's a guy in t-shirt and jeans, you go, "hmm, we'll have to have something on him to throw the symmetry off." So we have things like the fact that his sleeves aren't pulled up the same way on each arm, his holster was on one side, and his shirt half-tucked-in, to give him some asymmetry. We didn't know how awesome it would look. For this game, now Elena is rocking the half-tuck.

Spoiler

1UP: Is there a conscious effort to tuck his shirt in more often now?

AH: I don't know how conscious of it we were; we definitely knew that even though he does a lot of climbing and jumping, and a shirt wouldn't be tucked-in at all, that we at least want some sort of semi-tuck this time. At least it's more tucked-in for the front than last time, since we have to attach his pouch. It's still half-out in the back.

1UP: So it's official: Nathan Drake's shirt is more tucked-in.

EW: It's a little more than last time. You can notice if you put [the two games] side-by-side.

AH: It's the three-quarter-tuck this time.

1UP: Moving on, we recently saw Gears of War 2 put out a deleted scene as DLC. Would you be interested in doing something similar?

AH: We don't really have deleted scenes; we have altered versions of some scenes that we'll probably include on the disc... [looking at Wells] if you allow us to.

EW: Are you thinking of Lazarevic [the main villain in Uncharted 2] in the...?

AH: Yes. But I mean we have lots of bonus material to include, as long as we can fit them onto the disc.

EW: We're bursting at the seams already.

AH: I didn't think we'd fill a Blu-ray disc, but we do and we did, and we're constantly fighting it now. But DLC is always a possibility.

EW: Yea, but with multiplayer now. We'll probably make DLC multiplayer-focused, but we haven't made a final decision yet.

AH: But we do have lots of outtakes and fun bloopers to include, if we have the room.

1UP: Wait, how long do you have to decide on those outtakes and extras? Shouldn't that be decided soon?

EW: We're actually pretty good at deciding things at the last minute. The bonuses and stuff you unlock is always something you put in the tail end, since the artists get freed up and can start to wrangle the assets. We have already planned more than we had in the last game. It really does just come down to disc space. And of course, you have to wait until the end to make that call, as game content comes first, and if space is tight, the extras are the first to go.

1UP: And you guys are doing a demo, correct?

EW: We have the multiplayer demo starting on September 15 as a two-week exclusive with GameStop initially. So that takes us to the end of September, and then the next two weeks leading up to our launch date -- October 13 -- it will be open to everybody.

1UP: So multiplayer demo, but no single-player one?

EW: Yeah, it's probably not looking like we're going to do one.

AH: It's always tough to do a single-player demo. You can always argue whether it benefits you or not in the long run, because so much of it depends on you understanding where you are in the narrative, and then appreciating what's going on in the single-player demo.

EW: Not to mention that it's a 12-15 hour experience and you have to somehow collapse that into 15 minutes. I mean, we have something like hundreds of moves to train you over several hours, and if you just drop somebody into the fire...

AH: It's hard to take a slice. But what's nice is that multiplayer actually gives you that, "if you're enjoying this gameplay, you're going to enjoy single-player gameplay," which is certainly a benefit that we didn't have last time.

EW: You certainly get to see the quality of the graphics and animation. So yea, the multiplayer demo is the only one we've got.

1UP: Hmm, it seems like it might be more intimidating to just drop a player into multiplayer though.

EW: Well, I think it's about different levels of expectation. Because in single-player, you want the story and the adventure, and you want to experience the narrative. If you're only taking a slice of that, you haven't developed the attachment to the characters; you haven't developed the motivations these characters have; all the stuff Amy was talking about. These are all critical parts of the experience; people just sit down [and finish the game] in one or two sittings because they get engrossed in the environment. If you just plunk any 15 minutes out of the game, it's not going to be the same.

AH: We sort of got that anecdotally from the first demo. Some people loved it; some people thought, "eh." I read over and over people saying, "Oh yeah, I played the demo and I didn't think much about it, but I bought the game and it's the best game ever and I love it to pieces." And, well, how do you solve that? A 15 minute slice just doesn't give you all that. I'd rather have people play the multiplayer, get the feel for the mechanics, and then look at the game, and think, "Yeah, I want to see the single-player experience." Yeah, I think we're giving people a lot of value for their money.

EW: The game is enormous; the first one just looks like child's play.

AH: It's a longer single-player experience.

EW: Significantly longer single-player. We've got competitive and cooperative multiplayer. We've got 90 minutes of cinematics compared to 50.

AH: It's literally a feature-length film, with fully-fleshed out multiplayer and co-op experiences. That's why we all look so tired.

 

[Cohen]

Wieso behauptest Du, dass ich das wüsste?

Es ist eine Vermutung, die daraus resultiert, dass 75% (!) des Leveldesigns für zwei Personen ausgelegt ist. Eine - meiner Meinung nach - ernstzunehmende Vermutung, wenn man die Fanboy-Scheuklappen absetzt.

Oder man liest das neue Interview und erfährt, das laut Amy Hennig und Evan Wells durch begleitende Charaktere eine dichtere Atmosphäre aufgebaut bzw. Drakes Sprüche sich besser einfügen.^^

And here's the thing: when we set off to make this game, we knew our number one thing was to capture that feeling of being in a great action-adventure genre movie that we all love when they come along, contemporize it, make you feel the same feelings you get when you watch them, and then put the controller in the player's hands. The number one thing is humanizing the hero. Not making a cardboard cutout that serves as your avatar in the video game space, but instead making him a living, breathing character with flaws and fears -- someone who can get hurt and all that kind of stuff. Not something you expect to see in a video game.

There's a deliberate reason he was in a t-shirt and jeans in Uncharted. In video games, that was unusual; that was weird. And he had hair. Even though people say, "That's such a generic characterization," I'd say, "Not in this medium. Generic would be space armor and a shaved head." The other thing is: watching a movie, you don't put the protagonist out there with no one to bounce off of. You have to tell a character-driven story to bring your audience in. Video games haven't traditionally done that; it's usually just the sole protagonist charging along. For one, it's hard to have allies on-screen be A.I. controlled and just have that work.

 

[Moggy]

wie mans dreht und wendet - fakt ist, man hätte exzellent nen coop-game draus machen können. man hätte sogar aus der "not" der 25% eine tugend machen können:

- spielt man alleine, dann erlebt man nicht die perspektive von person 2
- spielt man zu zweit, dann erlebt spieler 2, die perspektive von person 2, sprich hier wird beleuchtet was sie erlebt, während drake die 25% absolviert

sie kann ja nicht zwischendurch tot sein. *g*

 

[Cohen]

wie mans dreht und wendet - fakt ist, man hätte exzellent nen coop-game draus machen können. man hätte sogar aus der "not" der 25% eine tugend machen können:

- spielt man alleine, dann erlebt man nicht die perspektive von person 2
- spielt man zu zweit, dann erlebt spieler 2, die perspektive von person 2, sprich hier wird beleuchtet was sie erlebt, während drake die 25% absolviert

sie kann ja nicht zwischendurch tot sein. *g*

Also hätte ND nur 25% Extrainhalt erschaffen müssen für einen 2. Spieler, welcher in den meisten Fällen nicht vorhanden ist, denn Uncharted soll ein Action Adventure Filmgefühl vermitteln und wird wohl folglich auf den Einzelspieler so oder so abgestimmt sein.

Da wäre also ein Mehraufwand für ND gewesen, den man alleine nicht erleben kann. Welches wohl auch nicht wirklich interessantes zur Story beitragen würde(Achtung meine bescheidene Annahme^^).

Für mich wäre dies Zeit- und Arbeitsverschwendung.

 

[Moggy]

Für mich wäre dies Zeit- und Arbeitsverschwendung.

Mal sehen was es für dich dann bei Uncharted 3 ist, wenn der Coop dann vorhanden ist. Wohl auch dann genau das, was ND dir erzählt.

 

[frames60]

In Uncharted war man doch auch meistens mit einer Person unterwegs, was ist daran jetzt überraschend?

Und das Naughty Dog (!) es technisch nicht drauf haben einen Coop-Modus zu integrieren wenn sie es wollten, dass glaubst du ja wohl selber nicht :wink2:

 

[Cohen]

Mal sehen was es für dich dann bei Uncharted 3 ist, wenn der Coop dann vorhanden ist. Wohl auch dann genau das, was ND dir erzählt.

Nun in Uncharted 3 wirds dann wohl gleich von Anfang an drauf ausgelegt und wäre nur logisch:

Uncharted 1 Einzelspieler
Uncharted 2 Einzelspieler + Multiplayer
Uncharted 3 Einzelspieler + Multipläyer + Coop

 

[verplant80]

Hmm zu 75% des Spiels hat man eine Begleitperson dabei. Weiß nicht ob das im SP so gut kommt. Im onpsx Forum schrieb einer schon wieso die dann nicht gleich nen Koop Modus a la RE5 einbauen.

Hoffe bloß das die KI clever genug agiert aber mich überrascht es jetzt schon etwas! Ich muss aber auch gestehen das ich mir zu Uncharted 2 gar keine Infos mehr angeschaut habe außer den E3 Trailer. Lasse mich also voll und ganz überraschen und glaube fest daran das es unter Umständen das GOTY 2009 werden könnte!

Bin da jetzt auch nicht so begeistert drüber. Bei Resi5 hatte ich den "Vorteil", dass ich es mit einem Freund zusammen durchgezockt habe, daher hatte ich das KI-Problem nicht.

Naja. Hört sich vielleicht schlimmer an, als es ist. Das mit den 75%.

 

[Brod]

wie mans dreht und wendet - fakt ist, man hätte exzellent nen coop-game draus machen können. man hätte sogar aus der "not" der 25% eine tugend machen können:

- spielt man alleine, dann erlebt man nicht die perspektive von person 2
- spielt man zu zweit, dann erlebt spieler 2, die perspektive von person 2, sprich hier wird beleuchtet was sie erlebt, während drake die 25% absolviert

sie kann ja nicht zwischendurch tot sein. *g*

in teil 17 der serie dann....nd hats doch technisch nicht drauf einen koop zu machen. omg...warum hat eigentlich TR keinen koop? also ich würde gerade bei TR einen koop ganz toll finden. so könnte man die rätsel viel interessanter gestalten. außerdem machts zu zweit doch sowieso IMMER mehr spaß - egal ob online oder zuhause auf der couch mit dem besten freund, einer pizza und einem kräftigen schluck kakao. *hust*

so..damit auch ich mal einen unnötigen TR vergleich im thread gebracht hab.

und zu deinem vorschlag. stell ich mir sehr schwer vor. zeig mir einen ähnlichen koop, bei dem 25% des spiels getrennt gezockt werden und die story vernünftig voran getrieben werden kann. 25% ist dafür imo doch ein bisschen hochgegriffen. sowas funktioniertfür paar min. bei gow für 2 verschieden pfade, wo du sinnlos um dich rumschießt und dann gleich wieder mit deinem mitspieler zusammentriffst....aber für stunden? offline dann sowieso schwer...spielt man dann gleichzeitig im splitscreen unterschiedliche zwischensequenzen ein, von denen man dann ncihts mitbekommt? und sowieso...sehr schwer vorzustellen, dass beide spieler gleichzeitig mit ihren handlungssträngen fertig werden. online geht dann der eine erstmal eine halbe stunde duschen oder wie?
wie gesagt...stell ich mir etwas schwierig vor. kann natürlich sehr gut funktionieren, wenn diese 25 getrennten % nur sehr seichte kost sind...se ich zu mind. so.

abgesehen davon: bei teil 1 hatte man auch mal sully und elena auch mal begleiter bei sich, die tatsächlich fast ausschließlich zur unterhaltung da waren. könnte doch sein, dass ähnliches bei teil2 gemacht wird. ich hatte zu mind. nie das gefühl bei teil 1 "omg, wär das jetzt geil, wenn mein kumpel sully zocken könnte. wir würden so abgehn"...hatte ich wirklich nie. möglich, dass die neue frau hier und da ein bisschen mitschießen darf und uns über eine mauer hilft...aber einfach mal abwarten.

 

[Moggy]

was hat denn tomb raider damit zu tun? das macht nun überhaupt keinen sinn. vom gameplay her und auch vom charakter der figur her nicht. :-?

ihr glaubt ja eh, was nd euch erzählt. ich glaub 1.) nen coop wäre absolut genial und fördernd für das spiel und 2.) nd weiß das, hats aber nicht in der zeit umsetzen können.

meine meinung.

 

[Brod]

was hat denn tomb raider damit zu tun? das macht nun überhaupt keinen sinn. vom gameplay her und auch vom charakter der figur her nicht. :-?

ihr glaubt ja eh, was nd euch erzählt. ich glaub 1.) nen coop wäre absolut genial und fördernd für das spiel und 2.) nd weiß das, hats aber nicht in der zeit umsetzen können.

meine meinung.

was tr damit zu tun hat? ich weiß es wirklich nicht, aber hier wird doch gerne darüber gesprochen und um die vorzüge von tr gegenüber von uncharted aufzuzeigen, ists doch immer wieder recht das ganze zu vergleichen. umgekehrt also nicht? interessant. aja bei tr passt ein koop nicht? was hat der char der figur damit zu tun? irgend einen sidekick einbauen, mit dem sie sich gar nicht versteht, aber notgedrungen zusammen arbeiten muss - wäre doch total witzig und innovativ und im gegensatz zu uncharted ist doch tr so verdammt innovativ oder nicht? gut ich sehs nicht so.

für mich passt auch zu uncharted - so wie ich es kenne - kein koop. mir hat vor allem die spaßige, wenn auch leicht 0815 anmutende, story und die sympathische charakterentwicklung bei uncharted gefallen...für beides wäre imo ein koop nicht gerade förderlich.

versteh ich wie gesagt ganz und gar nicht, wieso bei tr ein koop gar keinen sinn machen sollte und bei uncharted das ganze absolut wünschenswert wäre. ist doch wieder nur gerede um das spiel kritisieren zu können. nicht jedes spiel, bei dem mal ein schuss fällt, braucht auch einen koop - ganz einfach.


und zu der sache mit der zeit: interessant - man weiß doch seit monaten, dass es keinen koop geben wird. in der selben zeit macht dir insomniac ein neues game, aber nd schafft es unter keinen umständen einen schon fertig geplanten und anscheinend auch ins spiel integrierten coop modus (man ist ja nur deswegen nicht 75% des spiels allein unterwegs) zu liefern. die haben wirklich nichts drauf...

vielleicht oder wahrscheinlich hat man sich sogar wirklich über einen coop und dessen sinnhaftigkeit unterhalten...aber obs wirklich an der nicht vorhandenen zeit liegt, dass er nicht kommt? dagegen spricht imo wie gesagt das frühe bekanntgeben, dass es eben keinen geben wird...

 

[Cohen]

1. Coop könnte genial sein, aber da muss ND dann auch vieles wieder abstimmen. Ingame Dialoge könnten keinen Sinn machen, da z. B. Spieler 2 anders handelt. Die Geschichte von Uncharted ist auch immer eine Geschichte von Nathan Drake. Folglich ist er der Hauptcharakter und kommt schon ungünstig, wenn Spieler 2 entweder auf Spieler 1 warten muss oder Spieler 2 Dinge tut, die für Spieler 1 gedacht sind um die Geschichte fortzusetzen.

Unterhaltsam ist Coop 100%. Nur die Frage ist, passt es ins Spielkonzept zur Weiterführung der Erzählung oder wird das Erlebnis eines Spielers dadurch gemindert.

z. B.: Chloe wird von Soldaten an Wand gepresst.
Szenario 1: Spieler Chloe schießt Gegner so oder so ab und macht Spieler Drake eingreifen überflüssig.
Szenario 2: Spieler Chloe schießt auf Gegner aber wunderbarerweise wird dieser nicht getroffen/stirbt nicht, Spieler Drake kann helfen. Spieler Chloe fühlt sich vom Spiel übergangen.
Szenario 3: Cleveres Leveldesign und Gegneraufkommen lässt Spieler Chloe einen Gegner erledigen, aber Gegner 2 hievt Chloe gegen Wand. Spieler Drake rettet Spieler Chloe.

Okay vlt. wäre Coop doch nicht so schlecht, aber mich kümmerts nicht.

 

[geloescht11593]

Ich fand den ersten Teil genial so wie er war. Und wenn sie einen Co-Op irgendwann machen dann nur nicht so wie bei RE5, denn diese Sheva hat mich mit ihrer Dummheit und ständigen Anwesenheit einfach nur genervt.. (SP).

 

[665N8borOTBeast]

Mir ist nicht klar wie man davon ausgehen kann, dass nur weil anscheinend zu 75% NPC´s einen begleiten es sofort einen Story coop geben muss. Bsp. der Führer in Nepal, wie willst du da einen Coop vernünftig einbauen? Soll einer schon den weg kennen und den anderen führen? Dann kannste aber nicht so gut plötzlich auftauchende Fallen einbauen und generell musst du beim Storytelling und der Präsentation abstriche machen.

Ausserdem hat U2 einen Coop! Zwar getrennt vom SP, aber vorhanden. Damit ist diese komische Theorie, dass ND unfähig wäre einen Coop zu integrieren widerlegt.

Achso btw: Hört doch bitte mit dieser Cortana / Crazy Krankheit auf, eigene Vermutungen und Meinungen mit dem Satz "und das ist Fakt!!11elf" zu verkaufen (i'm looking at you MoggyB). Zumindest im Herstellerforum sollte man doch halbwegs anständig diskutieren können.

 

[DannyWilde]

Ich fand den ersten Teil genial so wie er war. Und wenn sie einen Co-Op irgendwann machen dann nur nicht so wie bei RE5, denn diese Sheva hat mich mit ihrer Dummheit und ständigen Anwesenheit einfach nur genervt.. (SP).

Der erste war gut ... aber genial ist IMO etwas anderes!
Die Entwickler haben noch genug Luft nach oben ;-)

Oder meinst Du nur die Grafik?

 

[Moggy]

was tr damit zu tun hat? ich weiß es wirklich nicht, aber hier wird doch gerne darüber gesprochen und um die vorzüge von tr gegenüber von uncharted aufzuzeigen, ists doch immer wieder recht das ganze zu vergleichen. umgekehrt also nicht? interessant. aja bei tr passt ein koop nicht? was hat der char der figur damit zu tun? irgend einen sidekick einbauen, mit dem sie sich gar nicht versteht, aber notgedrungen zusammen arbeiten muss - wäre doch total witzig und innovativ und im gegensatz zu uncharted ist doch tr so verdammt innovativ oder nicht? gut ich sehs nicht so.

äh, willst du mich jetzt aufs glatteis führen? :-D

du meinst doch nun kurtis trend oder? ja die idee war innovativ, aber nicht gut meines erachtens. wie gesagt, zu tomb raider bzw. zum charakter von lara croft passt kein partner. ist einfach so - um das hier mal als "fakt" hinzustellen. ^^

zu zweit machts einfach doppelt so viel spaß - die lehre hab ich aus gears und resi gezogen. heißt unterm strich - aus dieser sicht - schonmal im vorab: uncharted macht nur halb so viel spaß. aber dafür hat es ja auch noch andere vorzüge.

p.s.: hier nochmal meine kritikpunkte an uncharted:

- keine elena (hat sich erledigt ^^)
- elena nicht alleine da -P)
- zu wenig rätsel und jump n run (abwarten diesesmal)
- sehr verbrauchte szenarien (zug, dschungel, eislevel)
- kein coop (zu verschmerzen, aber es hätte "doppelt" so viel spaß machen können)

das sind aber marginale dinge. ich liebe 08/15 games! (achtung kein schimpfwort beim moggy: tomb raider ist auch 08/15). das heißt, ich liebe es, wenn ein game sich selbst treu bleibt im szenario und gameplay. aber der ein oder andere tick kann schon ruhig verbessert werden, und das wären hier der coop oder bei tomb raider die schießeinlagen. es gibt immer was zu verbessern.

 

[Zelos]

- zu wenig rätsel und jump n run (abwarten diesesmal)

Ist das einzige was mich jetzt stören könnte.
Bin sehr gespannt ob sie sich selbst treu geblieben sind oder das Spiel dieses mal um einiges abwechslungsreicher gestalten

 

[DannyWilde]

Ist das einzige was mich jetzt stören könnte.
Bin sehr gespannt ob sie sich selbst treu geblieben sind oder das Spiel dieses mal um einiges abwechslungsreicher gestalten

Abwechslungsreicher wäre schön
Die Sprungpassagen fand ich ok .... aber ich hatte immer das Gefühl, dass sie einfach nur eingebaut wurden um eine Pause vom Ballern zu haben .... es ging immer nach Schema F.
Also ich hätte auch ohne diese Passagen leben können

... wobei das Ballern auch immer nach dem gleichen Schema ab lief.
Man kam an einem Ort wo schon zig Gegner warten und man hat genug Deckungsmöglichkeiten ....