Uncharted 2: Among Thieves (PS3)

Nathan Drake and the Temple of the Sophomore Effort
10/13/2009 4:45 PM | 30 Comments | Page 1 of 2

What's Hot: Excellent gunplay

What's Not: Disappointing storytelling; Tomb Raidering
Try It!
Tom Chick
Tom Chick
Status: Battle dancing
Late in Uncharted 2: Among Thieves, all the gunplay and Tomb Raidering and calculated snappy banter about Chloe's ass suddenly stop. The hero strolls through a serene village. Along the way, he can pet the livestock, play with children, and watch the women go about their work. They don't speak English and he doesn't speak their language. There is no direct communication, and the game knows better than to provide subtitles. It's pure character. A village, its people and this newcomer, all bemused at each other. It's an example of how expressive Uncharted can be when it trusts its characters.

The village will shortly turn into a scripted Hollywood SpectacleTM in which you have to run from a tank until you get to the magically spawning RPG. You'll have done this a few times already in Uncharted 2 with helicopters -- not to mention all those Call of Duty games you've played -- so it'll be familiar territory. It's an example of how derivative Uncharted can be when it veers off into gameplay.

I don't want to be that guy holding forth about how the original was better, but the original was better. There's a certain loss of innocence in Uncharted 2. It's a good game, to be sure. In fact, when it comes to pure gunplay, it's the PlayStation 3's best exclusive shooter. But as a follow-up to Uncharted: Drake's Fortune, as a story about Nathan Drake, as a romantic adventure, as a series of set pieces, as a story, it's merely fair. The original game was a revelation. Uncharted 2 is a sophomore effort.

The geometry of romance

The game attempts a new dynamic among the characters, referenced in the "Among Thieves" subtitle. The first Uncharted was a straight-up and effective "Raiders of the Lost Ark"/"Romancing the Stone" trio of a charming rogue, his plucky love interest and his loyal sidekick. But now we have a couple of clumsily drawn love triangles (a love quadrilateral?) with a side of betrayal and intrigue that never quite makes sense. Your villain today will be a bald space-marine genocider with a scarred face who surprises no one when he shoots his own henchman. Bet you didn't see that one coming! Oh, you did? Really? You can imagine how that boss fight is going to go.

Nate and Elena were memorable characters brought to life by the alchemy of Naughty Dog's uncanny animation, Amy Hennig's script and an unmistakable chemistry between voice actors Nolan North and Emily Rose. The animation is still top-notch. But Hennig's script casts too wide a net, stirring into the mix a generic hawt chick and skeezy dude. Elena doesn't arrive until about a third of the way through the game, at which point the story gets a much-needed boost. Emily Rose's voice work is unparalleled. She manages to convey an amazing amount of emotion in her voice.

Uncharted 2: Among ThievesUncharted 2 is at its loveliest when it goes to town
The original Uncharted didn't globetrot, like many adventures do. But for all the distance this sequel attempts, it doesn't get very far. It basically goes from a jungle to a jungle by way of a snowy train ride. It is a great train ride, as far as videogame train rides go. But the final setting, which should have been spectacular, is as familiar as the tank and helicopter battles you fought to get there. And while I don't miss the first game's jet-ski sequences, I'm surprised the only replacement is a carefully staged "Raiders of the Lost Ark" convoy chase.

Ledge Raider

Like the original game, Uncharted 2 is a collection of discrete types of gameplay. You have a gunfight; then you do some Tomb Raidering. Then you have a gunfight. Then you do more Tomb Raidering. The Tomb Raidering is really getting long in the tooth. Nathan Drake climbs around on unstable edifices with crumbling ledges and loosely bolted pipes. On a few occasions, he pulls a lever. Late in the game, he has to solve a few puzzles. Well, "puzzles." Like the climbing, these are mostly busywork. In fact, all the Tomb Raidering in Uncharted feels like busywork. You know Nate isn't going to fall. You know he's going to make that jump. You know his path is fixed. It's built to be a fait accompli that Nate will reach that far ledge and walk through that doorway to his next gunfight. This is not gameplay anymore, no matter how good the animation, no matter how elaborate the textures, now matter how epic the level geometry, and no matter how faux perilous the handholds along the way. It's filler.

« Prev  1  2  Next »  

Share This

  • Stumbleupon Share Button
  • Delicious Share Button
  • Reddit Share Button
  • Slashdot Share Button
  • Fark Share Button
  • Yahoo Buzz Share Button

Comments

  • TomChick
    TomChick

    10/28/2009 10:38:55 PM

    @Austin: The drive to being cinematic is a big issue for games these days. Games have to struggle with the fact that they aren't movies, yet they often appeal to us on the same level that movies appeal to us. It's a fine line, isn't it? For what it's worth, I think the Uncharted games do a great job of walking that fine line. Better than most games, actually.

    @obonicus: I'm more than happy to discuss the review and it's disingenuous of you to suggest otherwise. What I'm not interested in discussing is the rating. Whether it's a 7 out of 10, three stars, or a Buy It is just a distraction when there are 1500 words of text besides that.

    As for Call of Duty 4, you have some weird issue with scripting that I don't understand. You might as well rail against Call of Duty 4 for having guns. And I'm not sure how you think it applies to me. I don't have any issue with scripting when it's done well.

    @Sam Huge: If you'd like examples of how Uncharted 2 does or doesn't hold up next to Uncharted 1, I offer some in the review. Again, it's those 1500 words of text underneath the rating. And you don't even have to read all of them! If you'd like examples, they're early on. Here are a few ways I think Uncharted was better: "as a story about Nathan Drake, as a romantic adventure, as a series of set pieces". Those are pretty specific.

    Reply »
  • SamHuge
    SamHuge

    10/28/2009 3:33:12 PM

    What bothers me, Tom, is that you made some statements you didn't exactly back up. If Uncharted 1 was better, give us some direct examples. What level in Uncharted: Drake's Fortune is better than the train? Or the Monastery? Or the collapsing hotel in Nepal? You also commented that "we know Drake is going to make the jump." Of course, but we knew that from Drake's Fortune as well. In fact, you should know that's what to expect after playing DF, it's a linear game that simulates a hollywood popcorn flick, with some republic serial moments thrown in for good measure. How is this a surprise, or, in the context of the franchise, a bad thing?

    Reply »
  • obonicus
    obonicus

    10/26/2009 9:54:55 AM

    @TomChick:
    Tom, it's hypocritical to write for a site that uses reviews and then claim you don't want to discuss them. Your text should support your score, and, given your text I don't think it supports a rating of 'try it'. Part of the appeal of Crispy Gamer's system is that it doesn't fit into 10-scale continuum, but the downside is that you have a set of ratings that, by name, aren't exactly orthogonal. If we assume that 'Try it' and 'Buy it' are mutually exclusive, any 'Try it' is at best a rental. If we don't, then you might as well assume there are only two ratings. But your review, the text, doesn't support the latter.

    To the second topic, CoD4, what I'm objecting to is your revisionist view of things. You have repeatedly, over the year brought up CoD4's campaign as an example of excellence. By then specifically excluding 'scripting' from your praise, you're somehow divorcing the experience from the actual gameplay, which seems to be an intellectually dishonest position to take.

    Which brings me back to my problem with many of your reviews; it seems like a common pattern on your part to want to divorce how a game actually plays from the way it's presented -- usually in terms of story. I don't know if it's part of the 'New Games Journalism' (thanks for that one, KG) to try and make games be more than what they are (see Flower and Bioshock), but it does seem to result in you reviewing games as what you wished they could be (sound familiar?). Which is even less useful than it sounds: your expectations aren't necessarily mine (in fact, they usually aren't) and whatever your expectations are, they may not involve realistic design decisions, as that isn't your area of expertise (and this isn't a snipe, AFAIK you have no practical experience in the area). What would be far more useful is a more direct analysis of the product at hand. Especially for a consumer-oriented website (or one assumes, from the ratings system, again) such as crispygamer.

    Reply »
  • Austin Walker
    Austin Walker

    10/24/2009 2:37:11 PM

    Hey Tom,

    Something I'm curious about, and which you touched on but weren't explicit about, is how you feel about the games attempts at being cinematic. Not just references to a particular kind or brand of film, but ANY attempt to replicate a cinematic flair or style. I haven't had a chance to play Uncharted 2 yet, but this is one objection I've heard from a few other gamers that hasn't gotten too much attention from reviews.

    I'm not sure where I stand on the issue overall. I'm for utilizing the strength of the medium - interactivity - instead of mindlessly pantomiming all of our favorite movies in cutscenes. But I'm not certain that creating cinematic PLAY is an affront to medium-wide progression. I'm still trying to work my head around it, and would like to hear your take.

    Reply »
  • TomChick
    TomChick

    10/22/2009 2:42:31 PM

    Someone is railing against a Try It rating? How odd. I'm all for simpler rating systems, and I'm perfectly capable of a working with a binary thumbs up/thumbs down (in which case I absolutely think Uncharted 2 is a thumbs up!). But the whole point of Crispy Gamer's system is that most review sites waste the range of their ratings by opting for the safe confines of a 7, 8, or 9. My feeling is that if you have a range of ratings, you should use it. As a writer and a reader, I love the three-tiered Buy/Try/Fry system.

    But mostly, I refuse to discuss ratings. It's just so pedantic when there's actually a whole mess of text to discuss. It's too bad that so many gamers are so juvenile and inarticulate that they're only capable of whinging about a rating.

    Anyway, I'm not sure what you're point is about Call of Duty 4, obonicus. But I'm glad you're acknowledging that you were wrong about me "gushing embarrassingly about the ham-fisted scripting", whatever that was supposed to mean. It's much easier to disagree with someone when you simply invent his perspective rather than considering what he actually wrote.

    Reply »
  • CG-Prophet

    10/21/2009 7:47:40 PM

    @Andy Bates:

    Finally, someone that doesn't want to just rant. I think you described a Try It perfectly.


    Reply »
  • Andy Bates
    Andy Bates

    10/21/2009 6:28:04 PM

    Can we just agree that “You didn’t like the game, but everyone else did” isn’t a valid criticism of a game review? If that were the case, then every game would be a 100% consensus either way. If Tom makes his points and supports them, I have no problem if he disagrees with everybody else.

    @RyanKuo:

    I like the ratings system too. Far from being “weasely,” the “Try It” rating says to people, “There is enough wrong with this game that I can’t recommend it unconditionally. You may want to read the review to see if the things that bothered me would also bother you.” Remember, reviews are opinions.

    Reply »
  • RyanKuo

    10/21/2009 2:36:16 PM

    @obonicus:

    "Try it is such an ambiguous, weaselly rating that could then be applied to any game. Any game that isn't absolutely terrible is worth 'trying', and even terrible ones might be worth a shot."

    That might be true if you absolutely couldn't think of anything else to do with your time. Games take a lot of time and energy. And the dominant view that your only choices are to either BUY BUY BUY a game or toss it in the reject pile is an unhealthy (not to mention uncritical) one.

    Reply »
  • CG-Prophet

    10/21/2009 2:33:02 PM

    @obonicus:

    I love our ratings system.

    Reply »
  • obonicus
    obonicus

    10/21/2009 2:27:03 PM

    @TomChick:

    Mr. Chick, are you serious about CoD4? You have constantly referred to its terrific single-player experience. Are you saying that it's good in spite of the scripting? Because that's like losing 3/4 of the game.

    And I respectfully disagree; you don't buy good games? What do you buy? Only 'great' games? Remember, these ratings try to avoid being reduced to a scale out of 10, that means that 'try it' isn't just 3.3-6.6, or whatever. Try it is such an ambiguous, weaselly rating that could then be applied to any game. Any game that isn't absolutely terrible is worth 'trying', and even terrible ones might be worth a shot.

    Reply »
  • TomChick
    TomChick

    10/19/2009 9:22:47 PM

    @frostyc: Exactly. I'm not sure why you'd expect it to be an insult. Because it has the same root as sophomoric?

    Reply »
  • frostyc
    frostyc

    10/19/2009 3:37:40 PM

    "Uncharted 2 is a sophomore effort."

    Not sure what you mean. That isnt an insult. You are simply saying that its a sequel, literally.

    Reply »
  • TomChick
    TomChick

    10/16/2009 5:51:42 AM

    @Mr_Adam:

    Thanks so much for your replies. I think you and I feel very similarly about the original Uncharted, so I'll be curious whether you share my disappointment. Like you, I carefully avoided any spoilers before playing, although I'd gotten a few press demos beforehand. But for the most part, I came to it with a fresh slate and a deep fondness for the original.

    However, there's really not much point us discussing the game until you've gotten through it. :) I sincerely hope you enjoy it. It's a good game in most ways and I think you'll have fun.

    @iCubPro

    Thanks for the clarification. It has been a while since I played the original, but I seem to recall having to go through all sorts of shenanigans -- whether it was finding some clue to unlock a door, making dramatic ledge climbs and leaps, or doing some sort of puzzle -- only to find myself fighting guys with AK-47s who got there before me.

    Whether I'm mistaken or not, it's not a problem in Uncharted 2, although the henchmen work in some places that OSHA wouldn't approve of.

    Reply »
  • GusMastrapa
    GusMastrapa

    10/15/2009 1:55:30 PM

    @Mr_Adam:

    In the first, best, Tomb raider game the enemies were all animals (later ghosts and mummies) except for the rare armed boss. Tomb Raider, initially at least, really was exploration with some critters there to hassle you.

    Reply »
  • No Cease Fires
    No Cease Fires

    10/15/2009 1:51:54 PM

    While I don't think Uncharted 2 has as much wit or soul as the original, I find the gameplay mechanics and pacing (especially the pacing!) to be drastically improved. I do miss Elena, however; Chloe is as bland a video game chick as you're likely to find.

    Digging it overall, though.

    Reply »
  • Mr_Adam
    Mr_Adam

    10/15/2009 1:10:57 PM

    @TomChick:

    I committed to reading the Tomb Raidering discussion (nothing else though). I feel that the monotony of Tomb Raidering will vary and is highly dependent upon the individual's connection to the storytelling. Personally, I enjoy the Tomb Raidering as a way to break-up the gun fights as well as enrich my experience of my first play-through. Granted, the false risks associated with jumping from ledge to ledge may be cheap thrills, but I feel they enrich the total experience. Again, I haven't finished the game so I don't know the extent of Tomb Raidering to come - perhaps I will come over to your side (the dark side?) upon completing the single player campaign.

    Thanks for your article and keeping me honest.

    Reply »
  • Mr_Adam
    Mr_Adam

    10/15/2009 1:00:28 PM

    @TomChick:

    I'll admit I didn't complete the review - stated more correctly, I barely started the review. I began reading the review but stopped after the second paragraph; I really don't want any of the experience to be spoiled and (I know it's petty) I was a bit disappointed that I read a simple description of a village that the player encounters. From that point on I really just skimmed and tried to gloss over what I thought may perceive as a "spoiler".

    To be completely honest, Drakes Fortune is probably the most engrossing game I have ever played. For some reason the game grabbed my attention and I couldn't/wouldn't stop playing it. For that reason I am very careful when reading reviews of Uncharted 2 - I am very eager to recapture the experience of the first Uncharted. When I compare the story of Drakes Fortune to other shooting/adventure games (Marines vs Aliens, Assassins vs. Assassinees, Men vs. Zombies, etc) I find little to no comparison in terms of quality of story (complete disclosure: I have yet to play Bioshock). I have high expectations for the story of Uncharted 2 - hopefully I'm not let down.

    My response was based on (a) my time (be it short) with the single player portion of the game and (b) other reviews giving glowing remarks of the story telling. Assuming I actually have time to play the game this weekend, my opinion of the storytelling may change, but as it stands right now I feel the caliber of storytelling is headed in the right direction.

    @ Gus:
    Is there any other type of tomb raiding? If there are no guys with guns behind doors that have been "locked" for an undetermined amount of time then it's just exploring.

    Reply »
  • iCubPro
    iCubPro

    10/15/2009 12:21:42 PM

    @TomChick:

    Hey, regardless of whether I agree with you or not (what withm you know, not having played the game. Damn UK games releasing on Fridays...) great review, and we're all entitled to our own opinion. Most people just don't like it when you disagree with the crowd...

    That said, I need to point out an error in your last comment.

    "they're actually more careful this time about having Drake open some ancient doorway with a byzantine locking mechanism only to discover a bunch of guys with AK-47s." Been a while since you played the original? That, or anything like it, never actually happens. The very resilient bad guys are only ever following you into a room, or in a room that you've already broken into... Or in some cases, they've commandeered an old fort/castle-esque thing long before you even got there and propagated their staff throughout. It does seem like the opposite, on my second play through the game I paid attention to this as I remembered it being how you said...

    ...jus' saying...

    Oh, and Tomb raidering is a negative in a treasure hunting game?

    Reply »
  • TomChick
    TomChick

    10/14/2009 10:35:56 PM

    Gus, they're actually more careful this time about having Drake open some ancient doorway with a byzantine locking mechanism only to discover a bunch of guys with AK-47s. Although what does discover is worse. And by "worse", I mean "more annoying".

    Obonicus, you seem to have some trouble parsing Crispy Gamer's ratings system. "Try It" is in no way mutually exclusive with "this is a good game". Also, can you please show me where I "gushed", embarrassingly or otherwise, over the scripting in Call of Duty 4? I don't remember writing any such thing.

    Mr. Adam, as I noted in the review, the storytelling is disappointing in that it doesn't live up to the promise of the first game. I could go into more detail, but I'd end up just reiterating what I wrote in the review. As for the Tomb Raidering, as I explained in the...wait a minute! You didn't read the review, did you? You're just commenting on the "What's Hot/Not" entries!

    Reply »
  • GusMastrapa
    GusMastrapa

    10/14/2009 7:34:48 PM

    @Mr_Adam:

    Just curious. Is this like the last game where he hunts treasures, but really finds tombs full of guys with guns who beat him to the punch?

    Reply »
  • Mr_Adam
    Mr_Adam

    10/14/2009 1:45:32 PM

    Relative to the genre (video games), I'd argue that the storytelling is top notch. I'm surprised that Tom noted storytelling as a negative.

    Additionally, stating "Tomb Raidering" as a negative - not really sure what's going on with that. You play as a treasure hunter in the game - should we not be searching for treasure? Tom, are you suggesting that the game play out more like Call of Duty or Mario rather than as a treasure hunting game?

    Reply »
  • RyanKuo

    10/14/2009 11:47:34 AM

    @truncheon:

    O-kay ... my analysis is that the writing sounds very similar to that of a late-'90s television show (I haven't really watched TV in the '00s so I'll give it the benefit of the doubt).

    Reply »
  • truncheon
    truncheon

    10/14/2009 10:41:40 AM

    the understanding of a story is subjective, just look at souljaboy's take on braid,

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xSXofLK5hFQ

    get back to analysis not opinion

    Reply »
  • truncheon
    truncheon

    10/14/2009 10:41:39 AM

    the understanding of a story is subjective, just look at souljaboy's take on braid,

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xSXofLK5hFQ

    get back to analysis not opinion

    Reply »
  • RyanKuo

    10/14/2009 9:30:55 AM

    It's true about the storytelling. It comes off like a television show, trying very hard to be much more. I guess you could call it overwritten.

    Reply »
  • obonicus
    obonicus

    10/14/2009 8:59:47 AM

    More seriously, on another unnamed website you said the game was 'good', not 'great'. Is it really a 'try', then? Also, for someone who gushes so embarassingly over CoD4's ham-fisted scripting, should you really complain that UC2 does too?

    Reply »
  • obonicus
    obonicus

    10/14/2009 8:57:48 AM

    I guess it's a good thing that no one reads Crispy Gamer, so you can avoid all the fanboy rage. Should I go link this on GAF?

    Reply »
  • Shurs
    Shurs

    10/14/2009 8:47:32 AM

    @Cubit:

    He hates it for the clicks.

    Reply »
  • robert preece
    robert preece

    10/14/2009 12:54:13 AM

    wow! i have seen nothing but glowing praise for this game so far. this is going to piss off a lot of people lol. I just picked up the game today haven't had a chance to play it yet, but i can't wait to get home tonight.

    Reply »
  • Cubit
    Cubit

    10/13/2009 5:26:25 PM

    Tom, why do you hate the PS3 so much?

    Reply »

Want a new look on the discussion?
» Take It to the Forums

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post.
0 / 2000 used

Log In and Post

Log In and Post

The Chatter Box

  • Recent
  • Active
  • Status
ChknKitty

ChknKitty Says

Wow, people win every day in the Chicken Out contest! Sign up and win.

Xbox 360 | PS3 | Wii | PSP | DS | PC
The Games That Time Forgot

The Games That Time Forgot


The games we're pulling together in this feature won't appear on any of those best-of lists and get confused looks when you mention them in conversation. Just because time has forgotten these titles, though, doesn't mean you should forget them, too.

» Read On

Expand Box

© Crispy Gamer, Inc. All rights reserved.

By continuing past this page, and by your continued use of this site,
you agree to be bound by and abide by the User Agreement.

Log In or Register with Crispy Gamer

  • Register
  • Log In
  • Facebook
Register
Log In

Use your Facebook account to log in to Crispy Gamer

You'll also be able to add your Facebook friends to Crispy Gamer and post your Crispy Gamer activity in your Facebook feed.

Reasons to Join Crispy Gamer

  • It's Free
  • Leave Comments on Crispy Articles and Blogs
  • Enter Contests and Win Great Prizes
  • Converse With Other Gamers in Our Forums
  • Share What’s Up With Custom Status Text
  • Track Your Activity on Your Personal User Page
  • Chat with Friends in Real-Time