TheWhat13
This had no right to be this good, but the sandbox is really fun, you really feel like a kid playing with his toybox. Also, the main levels offer more than decent platforming fun.
2018
Celeste is excellent. It's really basic, there is no substantial change to the move-set once you've passed the first level, the only changes to the gameplay come from the level-gimmicks, which make it so that every level feels different and unique.
It has a good story too, but I do think I would've prefered less dialogue, and leave it be a bit more up to interpretation what the message is. The gameplay is so good I don't really want to sit and read dialogues basically. This is probably my main gripe with the game.
As for gameplay, it's pretty much flawless. every level outdoes the last in terms of gimmicks, "boss fights" and side-challenges. I couldn't pick a favourite honestly. I can definitely point out my least fabourite though: chapter 6, entitled "Reflection". it's a more story-focused chapter, which is probably why i didn't appreciate it as much. One gripe with the level design though: you don't always know if you're going down the main path or a road to a berry, and you can't always go back to the last screen after progressing on the main path. I was often frustrated by that. But that's all the complaining I'll do about the level-design.
Celeste deserves the praise it gets. It's amazing, short but sweet, satisfying... Absolutely pick it up.
It has a good story too, but I do think I would've prefered less dialogue, and leave it be a bit more up to interpretation what the message is. The gameplay is so good I don't really want to sit and read dialogues basically. This is probably my main gripe with the game.
As for gameplay, it's pretty much flawless. every level outdoes the last in terms of gimmicks, "boss fights" and side-challenges. I couldn't pick a favourite honestly. I can definitely point out my least fabourite though: chapter 6, entitled "Reflection". it's a more story-focused chapter, which is probably why i didn't appreciate it as much. One gripe with the level design though: you don't always know if you're going down the main path or a road to a berry, and you can't always go back to the last screen after progressing on the main path. I was often frustrated by that. But that's all the complaining I'll do about the level-design.
Celeste deserves the praise it gets. It's amazing, short but sweet, satisfying... Absolutely pick it up.
I'm gutted to be giving this grade to this game. I was so excited for it. But simply put, it feels uninspired, and honestly quite boring. It feels like Horizon Zero Dawn, with a few improvements, and not as intriguing as Zero Dawn, while not being as fun because the pacing of this game is not good. Simply put: they wanted to do too much. Too many side activities (most of which were already in Zero Dawn), too big a map (traversal is better than in the first game but still not very good). It makes getting to the main story a drag, a long drag.
Fighting humans has been made "better". I'm putting that in quotation marks because it feels like they've simply made it longer. Thay have armour now, so you need to shoot more arrows to knock the armour off and then you can kill them. Or you can try the new melee system, which isn't good. it's better than Zero Dawn, because there are more options, but it still isn't good. At least in Zero Dawn, fighting humans was quick.
In general, it feels like this game has made things longer. I played the game on very hard difficulty, and it wasn't hard per say, it was just a test of endurance to be honest. You're just shooting machines for what feels like age, all while they don't feel like a threat, just like a bag of HP. Maybe I should play on hard difficulty next time, because I will pick this back up, eventually, when I don't have such limited time to play. Right now, I don't want to play a 50 hour game that feels like it should be 30, because I don't have much time to play you know ?
Climbing hasn't changed, yeah sure they're more places you can climb, but you're still following a predetermined path.
The glitches were really annoying, but they've been mostly fixed, even though the AI is still dumb as hell.
I was dissapointed in this game as you can see. I'm just hoping that when I get back to it eventually, I appreciate it more.
Fighting humans has been made "better". I'm putting that in quotation marks because it feels like they've simply made it longer. Thay have armour now, so you need to shoot more arrows to knock the armour off and then you can kill them. Or you can try the new melee system, which isn't good. it's better than Zero Dawn, because there are more options, but it still isn't good. At least in Zero Dawn, fighting humans was quick.
In general, it feels like this game has made things longer. I played the game on very hard difficulty, and it wasn't hard per say, it was just a test of endurance to be honest. You're just shooting machines for what feels like age, all while they don't feel like a threat, just like a bag of HP. Maybe I should play on hard difficulty next time, because I will pick this back up, eventually, when I don't have such limited time to play. Right now, I don't want to play a 50 hour game that feels like it should be 30, because I don't have much time to play you know ?
Climbing hasn't changed, yeah sure they're more places you can climb, but you're still following a predetermined path.
The glitches were really annoying, but they've been mostly fixed, even though the AI is still dumb as hell.
I was dissapointed in this game as you can see. I'm just hoping that when I get back to it eventually, I appreciate it more.
2019
A fun, lay back, turn your brain off game. It isn't amazing, it isn't great, it isn't bad either. It's enjoyable, and has a very simple story but that gets the job done I guess. Shame this came out so late in the PS4's life, this would've been way better as a tech demo for the Dualshock 4 than a end-of-life release for the system
Uncharted 3 is the ultimate Uncharted game from the original trilogy. It doesn't do anything new, but it just polishes the previous two games. The game has no dead beat: the puzles are better, the action setpieces are at least as good if not better than the ones in Uncharted 2, and the pacing is way better than the previous two games.
The story is very interesting, diving into the responsibility Nathan has in regards to Sully, who loves him to death and would do anything for him. Nathan is questionned on the value of what he's doing, how much he's willing to sacrifice for nothing more than his pride. It's a humbling experience for him. The effort put into the story is noticable, it's a shame they didn't delve into it a bit more, as it only occasinaly shows its head.
The combat is different from the previous two games, in fact it's way more distinct than Uncharted 2 was to Uncharted 1. In Uncharted 3, combat is focused way more on movement than previous games. Covering is not the only way to approach combat anymore, and if you stay static you will be overrun by enemies often. The emphasis on hand-to-hand combat shows this, as the devs are clearly way prouder of this system than the one presented in the previous two games. They make you fist-fight multiple times, including in the final sequence, and it's not very deep, but it is leagues above Uncharted 2.
Now for the bad stuff. The characters aren't as good as Among Thieves, which doesn't mean they're bad. Chloe is a shell of her former self, sure, but Cutter is a delight, the villains, while not as comical as Lazarevic and Flynn, feel like very real threats. It's a shame they don't appear more. Elena is a cameo, and it sucks that they redid the whole "Nathan and Elena split up between games" thing from Uncharted 2. Sully and Nathan have a great relationship though, with it being the heart of the story.
There a a few too many sections where you do nothing but have the left stick forward. There's even one where there is no music or no dialogue, which makes it super awkward.
On teh technical side, this game has a few problems. I went out of bounds a few times, Nathan's scarf sometimes gets in front of the scope... In the final sequence, because the earth is trembling, your auto aim goes nuts and doesn't center properly at all.
Overall, this game is the definitive "classic" Uncharted game. It took everything Uncharted 2 did and did it better, except for characters. The pacing is pretty much perfect, the setpieces are crazy, the combat is fun... It ends ant the perfect moment as well, not outstaying its welcome like the previous two games. It is worth playing the previous two games just to get to this one.
The story is very interesting, diving into the responsibility Nathan has in regards to Sully, who loves him to death and would do anything for him. Nathan is questionned on the value of what he's doing, how much he's willing to sacrifice for nothing more than his pride. It's a humbling experience for him. The effort put into the story is noticable, it's a shame they didn't delve into it a bit more, as it only occasinaly shows its head.
The combat is different from the previous two games, in fact it's way more distinct than Uncharted 2 was to Uncharted 1. In Uncharted 3, combat is focused way more on movement than previous games. Covering is not the only way to approach combat anymore, and if you stay static you will be overrun by enemies often. The emphasis on hand-to-hand combat shows this, as the devs are clearly way prouder of this system than the one presented in the previous two games. They make you fist-fight multiple times, including in the final sequence, and it's not very deep, but it is leagues above Uncharted 2.
Now for the bad stuff. The characters aren't as good as Among Thieves, which doesn't mean they're bad. Chloe is a shell of her former self, sure, but Cutter is a delight, the villains, while not as comical as Lazarevic and Flynn, feel like very real threats. It's a shame they don't appear more. Elena is a cameo, and it sucks that they redid the whole "Nathan and Elena split up between games" thing from Uncharted 2. Sully and Nathan have a great relationship though, with it being the heart of the story.
There a a few too many sections where you do nothing but have the left stick forward. There's even one where there is no music or no dialogue, which makes it super awkward.
On teh technical side, this game has a few problems. I went out of bounds a few times, Nathan's scarf sometimes gets in front of the scope... In the final sequence, because the earth is trembling, your auto aim goes nuts and doesn't center properly at all.
Overall, this game is the definitive "classic" Uncharted game. It took everything Uncharted 2 did and did it better, except for characters. The pacing is pretty much perfect, the setpieces are crazy, the combat is fun... It ends ant the perfect moment as well, not outstaying its welcome like the previous two games. It is worth playing the previous two games just to get to this one.
Uncharted 2 is an evolution of a game that deserved to have a sequel. Uncharted 1 feels unfinished in may ways, but has tons of charm because of charismatic characters, its parody action movie style, over-the-top death animations and plot... Uncharted 1 is a fun time, at least for the first half.
Uncharted 2 changes a lot from the first game, but sadly, doesn't do away with the end-of-game dip in quality of the first game. Simply put, this game should've been an hour shorter at the least. It drags on just a bit too much.
It also changes the shooting quite a bit. The first game was focused on headshots, this game is focused on just gowing balls to the wall emptying ammo cartridges in enemies. Headshots are made harder in this game in order to introduce weapons that make them easier again, making this games' selection of weapons way more diverse, which really helps the game feel fresh, nearly at all times. It isn't as fun as the first game, which was just ridiculously over-the-top, which was delightful, but it's a better system.
The level design is impecable. Every shoot-out is unique, there are often times multiple ways to go about them, and a handful of them are inked in my brain forever, like the whole train section, the one where you're on a sign post and need to rotate around it to take cover. Sadly, by the end of the game, it does feel like the game wants to thro in articifial difficulty. There is often times, in the last quarter of the game, one enemy that you can pinpoint as being too much. There is often one enemy that seems places for nothing more than to F you over, he's in a spot chere you can barely hit him and he can hit you non-stop. The game can feel unfair because of this, and lead to some frustration. Also, I'm bad at shooters so that may be why.
Also, the addition to stealth is welcomed, it isn't amazing or anything, but it helps in certain situations.
On the technical side of things, there are a few technical issues. Letting go of a climbing situation doesn't work the best, and sometimes nathan hangs on to stuff you don't want him to because you're in the middle of a shoot-out. Also, sometimes bullets will hit you without you knowing how they got to you. I was hit by bullets coming from under the floor multiple times.
For the rest, it'll be nothing but praise. The game's pacing is really good. It buils up slowly, but changes up the setting often enough to keep it interesting (you explore three different locals before getting to Nepal, where the game really kicks in). The game then goes balls to the wall fmultiple hours straight and slows back down at the end, slowly, perhaps lasting a bit too long as I said. But that middle chunk, oh boy. Some of the best hours of video games ever. Just great shoot-out after great shoot-out, and great setpiece after great setpiece.
The setpieces are all really good, and in general, this game does cinematic presentation really well. You'll take down helicopters, ride trains while fighting to get in front, be confronted by tanks, have multiple pieces of land give out on you... Climbing is kinda fun in this because the camera shots add to it so much. Wether it be by showing a beautiful landscape or showing you just how far up Nathan is, it just works. Also, it helps that the climbing isn't as linear as in the first game.
As for plot and characters, they are better. Like the plot of the first game is so ridiculous it's funny because of it, but this game has an actual story arc for Nathan and his relationships with other characters. The side characters are also better, even though Sully is thrown out the game wayyyyy too early given how good a character he is. But Chloe is a fun mirror image of Elena, Harry is just a pretentious incompetent dickhead which makes him super funny, and Lazarevic is cery caricatural but he's at least a menacing presence.
Overall, if Uncharted 1 was a parody of an action movie, this game is an actual action movie. There is nothing worse about this game than the first one, apart from the base shooting which isn't as fun because of the lesser reliance on headshots, which is more than made up for by the variety of weapons and ways to tackle a shoot-out at your disposal. It feels a bit too stretched out, probably because the middle part of the game is so good that nothing could quite live up to it. This could've been a 4/5, but I have to dock off points for an underwhelming final 20% and a few shoot-outs that feel unfait, because of bugs or annoying enemy placements.
Uncharted 2 changes a lot from the first game, but sadly, doesn't do away with the end-of-game dip in quality of the first game. Simply put, this game should've been an hour shorter at the least. It drags on just a bit too much.
It also changes the shooting quite a bit. The first game was focused on headshots, this game is focused on just gowing balls to the wall emptying ammo cartridges in enemies. Headshots are made harder in this game in order to introduce weapons that make them easier again, making this games' selection of weapons way more diverse, which really helps the game feel fresh, nearly at all times. It isn't as fun as the first game, which was just ridiculously over-the-top, which was delightful, but it's a better system.
The level design is impecable. Every shoot-out is unique, there are often times multiple ways to go about them, and a handful of them are inked in my brain forever, like the whole train section, the one where you're on a sign post and need to rotate around it to take cover. Sadly, by the end of the game, it does feel like the game wants to thro in articifial difficulty. There is often times, in the last quarter of the game, one enemy that you can pinpoint as being too much. There is often one enemy that seems places for nothing more than to F you over, he's in a spot chere you can barely hit him and he can hit you non-stop. The game can feel unfair because of this, and lead to some frustration. Also, I'm bad at shooters so that may be why.
Also, the addition to stealth is welcomed, it isn't amazing or anything, but it helps in certain situations.
On the technical side of things, there are a few technical issues. Letting go of a climbing situation doesn't work the best, and sometimes nathan hangs on to stuff you don't want him to because you're in the middle of a shoot-out. Also, sometimes bullets will hit you without you knowing how they got to you. I was hit by bullets coming from under the floor multiple times.
For the rest, it'll be nothing but praise. The game's pacing is really good. It buils up slowly, but changes up the setting often enough to keep it interesting (you explore three different locals before getting to Nepal, where the game really kicks in). The game then goes balls to the wall fmultiple hours straight and slows back down at the end, slowly, perhaps lasting a bit too long as I said. But that middle chunk, oh boy. Some of the best hours of video games ever. Just great shoot-out after great shoot-out, and great setpiece after great setpiece.
The setpieces are all really good, and in general, this game does cinematic presentation really well. You'll take down helicopters, ride trains while fighting to get in front, be confronted by tanks, have multiple pieces of land give out on you... Climbing is kinda fun in this because the camera shots add to it so much. Wether it be by showing a beautiful landscape or showing you just how far up Nathan is, it just works. Also, it helps that the climbing isn't as linear as in the first game.
As for plot and characters, they are better. Like the plot of the first game is so ridiculous it's funny because of it, but this game has an actual story arc for Nathan and his relationships with other characters. The side characters are also better, even though Sully is thrown out the game wayyyyy too early given how good a character he is. But Chloe is a fun mirror image of Elena, Harry is just a pretentious incompetent dickhead which makes him super funny, and Lazarevic is cery caricatural but he's at least a menacing presence.
Overall, if Uncharted 1 was a parody of an action movie, this game is an actual action movie. There is nothing worse about this game than the first one, apart from the base shooting which isn't as fun because of the lesser reliance on headshots, which is more than made up for by the variety of weapons and ways to tackle a shoot-out at your disposal. It feels a bit too stretched out, probably because the middle part of the game is so good that nothing could quite live up to it. This could've been a 4/5, but I have to dock off points for an underwhelming final 20% and a few shoot-outs that feel unfait, because of bugs or annoying enemy placements.
This review contains spoilers
This game had a lot of potential, that thankfully was exploited in the sequels. This game is basically an action-movie morphed into a video-game. Also, it also doesn't take itself seriously, like at all. The plot is ridiculous, and very fun because of it, the animations on deaths are hilarious (shoot someone with a sniper and they'll do a flip 90% of the time). This game's first half really is a guilty pleasure of mine, because of how stupid and fun it is.
The gameplay is mainly shooting, with a few puzzles (that aren't good). The shooting isn't fully brainless, but it isn't the most advanced thing in the world either. It's main strength is the level design. Basically, the challenge if this game is to try and take an advantagious position over your enemies, and the game doesn't always give you a good cover spot out of the gate, so you'll have to take down a few enemies to get to that good cover spot, and even then, you may get a grenade thrown at you, forcing you to move. The use of coverage is what makes the game fun, so when the last hour of the game just shoves it out of the way to make way for bullet-sponges enemis that you just have to unload in, the gameplay takes a hit. Sometimes, the game can feel a bit unfair, by just having every one fire on you at once, giving you an insta-kill if you pop your head out for even a milisecond, but overall, the gameplay is good.
However, the gameplay's flaws are made apparent by the game's pacing. The first half of the game are just shootouts, and that's fine because the level-design is great until that point, though you will be feeling a bit tired of the formula by then. Afterwards, the game gives you avried gameplay for an hour, with vehicle sections (which are fine, not good, not terrible, fine) that are a welcome change of pace. then, backl to shooting, but not just any shooting: poor shooting. The level design takes a hit, it doesn't feel as well designed, the game feels unfair at times (it can be blatantly easy for enemis to flank you at this point because of large arenas), and then the final hour hits, and wow its not good. I was intending on giving this a 3.5 rating, but the ending just took me out of it. It's just emptying round of ammo after round of ammo into enemis. It isn't fun. Yeah, getting a headshot kills them, so you're supposed to be going for the head, but the enemies move too fast to actually be aiming at them, so you just empty bullets until A/ they die, B/ you somehow get a headshot. A shame to be sure. So basically: the base formula of the game isn't bad, but the vehicle sections being more spread out around the game and the last hour being either trimmed or reworked would have hid the flaws of the system way better. Also, it lacks variety. The weapons that the game introduces arrive quite late in the game, and are just upgrades of previous weapons.
But, Uncharted is supposed to be an action movie, and it has the story and characters to go with it. The great cinematic setpieces aren't exactly there yet, but the rest of the story and characters reek of 2000s action-movie. The story is so over-the-top it's ridiculous. It involves spanish conquistadores, nazis, Francis Drake and zombies. That pitch is insane. The game puts a U-boat in the middle of the jungle. It isn't high-art, sure, but it's hella fun, and perfectly fits the "doesn't take itslef seriously" vibe of the game. The characters are great, at least the good guys are. the villains are forgettable, the twist villain sucks (and the final boss battle against him sucks too). But Nathan Sully and Elena are one of the best trios in gaming. Nathan is charismatic, quick-wited, and funny. Elena is often the one doing the rescuing actually, a strong female character that perfectly complements Nathan's goofiness with her more serious tone, and Sully is Sully. He shines more in later entries, and doesn't appear much in this game, but he already shows signs of greatness here.
This game is no masterpiece, it's pretty unremarkable overall. However there was a lot of potential in the gameplay and story, as well as the characters. It feels rushed, as I said the first half of the game had me giving it a 3.5/5 score, that later dipped because of less-than-steller level design. It's interesting to go back to, I enjoyed it way more this time around (which was my second time playing the game) than I did my first, though the ending reminded me why I didn't really love it the first time around.
The gameplay is mainly shooting, with a few puzzles (that aren't good). The shooting isn't fully brainless, but it isn't the most advanced thing in the world either. It's main strength is the level design. Basically, the challenge if this game is to try and take an advantagious position over your enemies, and the game doesn't always give you a good cover spot out of the gate, so you'll have to take down a few enemies to get to that good cover spot, and even then, you may get a grenade thrown at you, forcing you to move. The use of coverage is what makes the game fun, so when the last hour of the game just shoves it out of the way to make way for bullet-sponges enemis that you just have to unload in, the gameplay takes a hit. Sometimes, the game can feel a bit unfair, by just having every one fire on you at once, giving you an insta-kill if you pop your head out for even a milisecond, but overall, the gameplay is good.
However, the gameplay's flaws are made apparent by the game's pacing. The first half of the game are just shootouts, and that's fine because the level-design is great until that point, though you will be feeling a bit tired of the formula by then. Afterwards, the game gives you avried gameplay for an hour, with vehicle sections (which are fine, not good, not terrible, fine) that are a welcome change of pace. then, backl to shooting, but not just any shooting: poor shooting. The level design takes a hit, it doesn't feel as well designed, the game feels unfair at times (it can be blatantly easy for enemis to flank you at this point because of large arenas), and then the final hour hits, and wow its not good. I was intending on giving this a 3.5 rating, but the ending just took me out of it. It's just emptying round of ammo after round of ammo into enemis. It isn't fun. Yeah, getting a headshot kills them, so you're supposed to be going for the head, but the enemies move too fast to actually be aiming at them, so you just empty bullets until A/ they die, B/ you somehow get a headshot. A shame to be sure. So basically: the base formula of the game isn't bad, but the vehicle sections being more spread out around the game and the last hour being either trimmed or reworked would have hid the flaws of the system way better. Also, it lacks variety. The weapons that the game introduces arrive quite late in the game, and are just upgrades of previous weapons.
But, Uncharted is supposed to be an action movie, and it has the story and characters to go with it. The great cinematic setpieces aren't exactly there yet, but the rest of the story and characters reek of 2000s action-movie. The story is so over-the-top it's ridiculous. It involves spanish conquistadores, nazis, Francis Drake and zombies. That pitch is insane. The game puts a U-boat in the middle of the jungle. It isn't high-art, sure, but it's hella fun, and perfectly fits the "doesn't take itslef seriously" vibe of the game. The characters are great, at least the good guys are. the villains are forgettable, the twist villain sucks (and the final boss battle against him sucks too). But Nathan Sully and Elena are one of the best trios in gaming. Nathan is charismatic, quick-wited, and funny. Elena is often the one doing the rescuing actually, a strong female character that perfectly complements Nathan's goofiness with her more serious tone, and Sully is Sully. He shines more in later entries, and doesn't appear much in this game, but he already shows signs of greatness here.
This game is no masterpiece, it's pretty unremarkable overall. However there was a lot of potential in the gameplay and story, as well as the characters. It feels rushed, as I said the first half of the game had me giving it a 3.5/5 score, that later dipped because of less-than-steller level design. It's interesting to go back to, I enjoyed it way more this time around (which was my second time playing the game) than I did my first, though the ending reminded me why I didn't really love it the first time around.
I really wanted to give this more than 3 stars, I really did. The firs half/ two thirds of this game are great. Just horror. I was scared, stresed throughout. I was debating giving it 4 stars. But then the game just changes. It goes from horror, to psychological horror, to action game, and ouch. Just ouch. The story is so good, the characters and design of said characters are good, but that last part, it's so bad. Add to that some technical issues that are visible even to me, who doesn't really look for those kinds of things, and some weird item balancing (one minute you'll only get a certain item, and next thing you know you'll never get that item) and this game is underachieving, dissapointing and left a really bitter aftertaste in my mouth. This should've been great. Istead it's ok.
2019
This game wants to be open-world Last of Us. Problem is, The Last of Us works as a game because of the scavenging mechanic, which this game takes from it (like every other game since TLOU to be fair). However, it faces a paradox because of this: either you give the player too little ressources, and they'll want to keep those precious ressources for the main story missions and be discouraged from exploring, or you give too much, and the scavenge system loses all interest. This game is fundamentally broken, not to mention the very bad start to the story (I got 7 hours through it and just wasn't hooked at all), the forgettable gameplay... Apparently this game gets better after a while, but I'm sorry, if 7 hours in, I still don't see a bit of light, I'm done.
I'll give out two stars because it's a good concept, I like the post-apocaliptic biker imagery, the side activites weren't too bad when I had enough ressources to do them... The storyline system makes the game feel a bit unfocused, but isn't a bad idea in of itself. This had potential.
I'll give out two stars because it's a good concept, I like the post-apocaliptic biker imagery, the side activites weren't too bad when I had enough ressources to do them... The storyline system makes the game feel a bit unfocused, but isn't a bad idea in of itself. This had potential.
An open-world stealth game is a bold idea, but Kojima nails it. The sheer diversity of ways you can approach a mission is insane, and keeps things consistently fresh, even 40 hours in. However, the confusing story of this game, the forced implementation of online and a game that is made artifically longer by forcing you to replay missions really knocks some points off.
2014
The level design oh my god. Every track is a banger. Every. Single. One. The Star Cup is the best cup ever. Also, the graphics. I don't think graphics are important to most video games, but for games like sports sims or racing games, they're important I think. And wow. Just wow. My only gripe with this game is the item balancing, which isn't crazy enough. Now don't get me wrong, MK Wii was excessive, but this is just a bit too little. It feels like I can always win a race basically. Compare this to Mario Party, where even the best player is guaranteed to get screwed, and you have the main gripe I have with the game.
3D World: a game that suffered from the lack of a traditional 3D Mario game on its original console. On Switch, a system that has Super Mario Odyssey, it's way easier to appreciate, because this is good, this is great even. Every level feels so fresh and exciting, you keep telling yourself that the level you just played is the best in the game. there isn't a single level I don't enjoy in this game. It's only problem is also one of its strentghs: bite-sized levels. This philosophy gives the game a sense of speed and energy, sure, but it also makes the levels less memorable sadly.
Bowser's Fury: My first time through it, I didn't get what the fuss was about. Sure, this was good, but it just felt like a watered-down version of SMO to me. Then, I 100% completed it. And wow. I loved it. Is it as good as SMO ? No, but that's because it's a demo more than anything, and there is a lot of potential here. My only real gripes with this is that to load a new catshine in a zone, you have to leave that zone and come back, which kinda defeats the purpose of the open world thing. Also, the levels don't have a lot of personality, they all kinda blend in together for me, but again, this is just a demo so it's normal. Other than that, this game is really fun, and really shows the potential that mario has.
Bowser's Fury: My first time through it, I didn't get what the fuss was about. Sure, this was good, but it just felt like a watered-down version of SMO to me. Then, I 100% completed it. And wow. I loved it. Is it as good as SMO ? No, but that's because it's a demo more than anything, and there is a lot of potential here. My only real gripes with this is that to load a new catshine in a zone, you have to leave that zone and come back, which kinda defeats the purpose of the open world thing. Also, the levels don't have a lot of personality, they all kinda blend in together for me, but again, this is just a demo so it's normal. Other than that, this game is really fun, and really shows the potential that mario has.
This review contains spoilers
Summary : Uncharted 4: A Thief's End is the send-off Nate and the gang deserved. It's gameplay is the final form of the Uncharted formula (the similarities between this and Uncharted 3 are clear) and the story may be a bit confusing at first in its message, but is very enjoyable once you realise what it's really about, the characters making it a very enjoyable experience.
Uncharted 4 is better than what I remembered it being, which is insane since it already is one of my favourite games of all time.
The game starts off slowly. At first, this is voluntary, it's to create a mirror image between gameplay and story. Then, I'll be honest, the game just isn't very interesting. Italy and Scotland just aren't the best locals you'll visit in Uncharted. Italy is mainly climbing, the first half of Scotland forces you to do stealth. But then you get to the second half of Scotland, and oh boy. the game starts showing potential in its gameplay: fast, energetic, forcing you to think on your feet to maximise your stealth opportunities before entering thrilling gun fights, that arent based on precision, but on using the terrain to your advantage and being mobile. This is enabled thanks to great level-design, the encounters take place in locals with multiple floors, really giving you a chance to take different approaches to the same situation. The only miss in terms of gameplay from that point on is, without a doubt, the heavy enemies with machine guns, who force you to get two headshots in a row to kill. As I said, this game's philosophy isn't precision, it's emptying your gun into an enemy and, if you're lucky, you'll get that headshot. So forcing you to get not just one, but two headshots in a row, against enemies that fire a lot of ammo, and have tiny heads, is a weird choice. But for the reste, the gameplay is impeccable. Perfect pacing between calm moments and encounters, adding a few setpieces in there to make it an amazing game (chapter 11 is a perfect example of this).
As for the story: I remember being dissapointed the first time through. videogamedunkey put it very well: it feels like everything just magically solves itself. But, on my second playthrough, I got what the story was really about (and yes dunkey pointed it out too in another video): being saved by those who love you. In this game, Nathan is self-destructing, but Elena doesn't give him up. So, when Sam starts self-destroying, Nate helps him in return. Meanwhile, Rafe has no one to save him, so he goes mad because of his obsession with the treasure, and litteraly dies crushed by it. it isn't revolutionnary, it can even be a bit confusing in the delivery of its message, but it is more than servicable, and hot potato every character in this game is great.
Uncharted 4 is better than what I remembered it being, which is insane since it already is one of my favourite games of all time.
The game starts off slowly. At first, this is voluntary, it's to create a mirror image between gameplay and story. Then, I'll be honest, the game just isn't very interesting. Italy and Scotland just aren't the best locals you'll visit in Uncharted. Italy is mainly climbing, the first half of Scotland forces you to do stealth. But then you get to the second half of Scotland, and oh boy. the game starts showing potential in its gameplay: fast, energetic, forcing you to think on your feet to maximise your stealth opportunities before entering thrilling gun fights, that arent based on precision, but on using the terrain to your advantage and being mobile. This is enabled thanks to great level-design, the encounters take place in locals with multiple floors, really giving you a chance to take different approaches to the same situation. The only miss in terms of gameplay from that point on is, without a doubt, the heavy enemies with machine guns, who force you to get two headshots in a row to kill. As I said, this game's philosophy isn't precision, it's emptying your gun into an enemy and, if you're lucky, you'll get that headshot. So forcing you to get not just one, but two headshots in a row, against enemies that fire a lot of ammo, and have tiny heads, is a weird choice. But for the reste, the gameplay is impeccable. Perfect pacing between calm moments and encounters, adding a few setpieces in there to make it an amazing game (chapter 11 is a perfect example of this).
As for the story: I remember being dissapointed the first time through. videogamedunkey put it very well: it feels like everything just magically solves itself. But, on my second playthrough, I got what the story was really about (and yes dunkey pointed it out too in another video): being saved by those who love you. In this game, Nathan is self-destructing, but Elena doesn't give him up. So, when Sam starts self-destroying, Nate helps him in return. Meanwhile, Rafe has no one to save him, so he goes mad because of his obsession with the treasure, and litteraly dies crushed by it. it isn't revolutionnary, it can even be a bit confusing in the delivery of its message, but it is more than servicable, and hot potato every character in this game is great.
The combat is neat, the music is even neater, the world is lovable.
AS for the bad parts of the game, go watch videogamedunkey's video on it. Basically, if you don't like dumb anime stuff, qwirky characters and grunts, you'll find this game unsufferable (which is 100% understandable btw). The game is also far too stretched out. Some chapters feel unnecesary to say the least (looking at you robot hands/phantom station)
AS for the bad parts of the game, go watch videogamedunkey's video on it. Basically, if you don't like dumb anime stuff, qwirky characters and grunts, you'll find this game unsufferable (which is 100% understandable btw). The game is also far too stretched out. Some chapters feel unnecesary to say the least (looking at you robot hands/phantom station)
Had Breath of the Wild never existed, RDR 2 would be praised as the best game of all time. However, Breath of the Wild exists, and it came out just a year and a half before this game, which greatly explains why this game doesn't get 5 stars.
Let's put it like this: Breath of the Wild didn't make an open-world game: they made something better. Breath of the Wild is to open-world games what Super Mario 64 and Ocarina of Time were to video games in general: a revolution, something new. Sure, those two games weren't the first 3D games, but hey might as well have been. They showed what games could be, and made every other game before them seem lacking by comaprison.
This is the same deal with Breath of the Wild, every Open World game feels lacking by comparison. Why ? Because Breath of The Wild doesn't hold your hand. RDR II on the other hand, does. It does a lot.
And that's not bad in of itself, after all, this is the most Rockstar game ever, and Rockstar are successful for a reason. But, when you put this game in perspective with Breath of the Wild, you just get why this game didn't get the same amount of praise as GTA V for example: it seems like it comes from a different time.
Rockstar games are a puppet show. Yes, unexpected things happen to the player, but those are all by design, Rockstar is pulling the strings of the puppets, and yeah sure, which puppets are going to come out is random, but if you go to the Rockstar theater enough, eventually, you'll see the same show twice. And for the longest time, we thought that this was the only way for an open world to be. But, in a post-Breath of the Wild world, the strings used by Rockstar became obvious. Nothing feels natural in this game, while everything in Breath of the Wild feels natural because it is, nothing is planned by the developpers, they just gave their world a set of rules, and let the players create with that, and since that set of rules is consistent, everything feels natural. If RDR2 is a Puppet Show, Breath of the Wild is an improv-theater group.
Mix this with Rockstar fatigue, a quest for realism that goes way too far (picking up an item takes way too long), and overall, just too much content (there is such a thing as too much content), and you get why RDR 2 is acclaimed, but not praised as the best game of all time. This still does get a 4 star rating because it is still great, it's a Rockstar game, it's technically impressive, the gameplay is a bit repetitive but it's still fun, and, most importantly, the story and characters are some of the best in gaming history, maybe the best since The Last of Us. So yes this does get such a high grade, but it doesn't get more than that simply because Breath of the Wild exists.
Let's put it like this: Breath of the Wild didn't make an open-world game: they made something better. Breath of the Wild is to open-world games what Super Mario 64 and Ocarina of Time were to video games in general: a revolution, something new. Sure, those two games weren't the first 3D games, but hey might as well have been. They showed what games could be, and made every other game before them seem lacking by comaprison.
This is the same deal with Breath of the Wild, every Open World game feels lacking by comparison. Why ? Because Breath of The Wild doesn't hold your hand. RDR II on the other hand, does. It does a lot.
And that's not bad in of itself, after all, this is the most Rockstar game ever, and Rockstar are successful for a reason. But, when you put this game in perspective with Breath of the Wild, you just get why this game didn't get the same amount of praise as GTA V for example: it seems like it comes from a different time.
Rockstar games are a puppet show. Yes, unexpected things happen to the player, but those are all by design, Rockstar is pulling the strings of the puppets, and yeah sure, which puppets are going to come out is random, but if you go to the Rockstar theater enough, eventually, you'll see the same show twice. And for the longest time, we thought that this was the only way for an open world to be. But, in a post-Breath of the Wild world, the strings used by Rockstar became obvious. Nothing feels natural in this game, while everything in Breath of the Wild feels natural because it is, nothing is planned by the developpers, they just gave their world a set of rules, and let the players create with that, and since that set of rules is consistent, everything feels natural. If RDR2 is a Puppet Show, Breath of the Wild is an improv-theater group.
Mix this with Rockstar fatigue, a quest for realism that goes way too far (picking up an item takes way too long), and overall, just too much content (there is such a thing as too much content), and you get why RDR 2 is acclaimed, but not praised as the best game of all time. This still does get a 4 star rating because it is still great, it's a Rockstar game, it's technically impressive, the gameplay is a bit repetitive but it's still fun, and, most importantly, the story and characters are some of the best in gaming history, maybe the best since The Last of Us. So yes this does get such a high grade, but it doesn't get more than that simply because Breath of the Wild exists.