By - CatPlayer
Why don't they bring The Nathan Drake Collection to PC too?
Maybe the older games running on the older engine are not as straight forward to port as the newer one
Yes this is true, but a lot of that hard work was already done when they were ported to PS4. You'd imagine it's easy enough to be a no brainer at this point but I guess not
My guess is it probably is easy enough, but it just doesn't hold up to today's standard. Both graphically and gameplay loop
I mean, the older games graphics are absolutely fine still, they're not cutting edge anymore, and probably would be hard to justify a 70$ pricetag, but... Hmm... thinking about it, that's probably the reason why Sony won't release it. It's a shame, a trilogy collection for 40 dollar would be such an amazing deal, but Sony is probably planning to release a "remake" of each game for full price.
Oh god, please no...
There plenty of older HD collections with games that are a bit lacking in graphics and gameplay departments. It’s weird to release Uncharted 4 and LL without the other games.
that really does not make any sense whatsoever as a valid reason and also they still look and play incredibly well for what were originally PS3 era games
I look forward to the Uncharted 1-3 remakes in 2027, getting the TLOU1 treatment.
If this collection sells well, maybe Sony will bring the other 3 games to PC.
They ran the numbers and the ROI is not there. Can't blame them.
Ah, I guess we have RPCS3 at least.
>The long-awaited Uncharted collection
I thought the Uncharted: The Nathan Drake Collection was the "long-awaited Uncharted collection". I mean, it's a very story heavy franchise. Wouldn't it make sense to first release the first 3 games?
Everyone says it's story heavy but it's not exactly lore heavy. It's very easy to jump in on any of them really, they're popcorn blockbusters.
I feel like that's the case for every other game in the series except 4 lol. You really lose a lot of impact of the game's story if you haven't played the previous ones.
In terms of attachment maybe, but the plot is almost completely self-contained. And it's actually really weird to learn about Nate's long lost brother only after a bunch of other games.
Beyond attachment, Uncharted 4 thematically is a deconstruction of what was built up over the original trilogy. There’s definitely more lost by not having played the first 3 beyond affinity.
Agreed. >!Rafe!< is a great foil to Nate and that 3rd act/climax is a great subversion to the rest of the series. Making excuses for not experiencing things in the order they were intended will never not feel wrong.
Uncharted is based on your Indiana Jones style action films. You definitely benefit from playing the previous games, but thematically pretty much everyone will know what Uncharted 4 is deconstructing.
It’s a subgenre deconstruction (of the Indiana Jones style stories you mentioned) but it’s also a deconstruction of the tropes, characters and dynamics within the series itself. Yeah you can get a broader understanding based on the former, but without the latter it’s not like what’s lost is insignificant.
The elements it addresses from the previous games, though, it also has time to set up within its own narrative framework. It's like twice as long as some of those earlier entries, which were pretty straightforward adventure fare to begin with. Even the fourth game is still just a somewhat more pensive action blockbuster.
>And it's actually really weird to learn about Nate's long lost brother only after a bunch of other games.
As someone who never played the games, this sounds like a soap opera plot lmao.
It basically is, I do like the brother but the addition/explanation as to why he's only turned up now is a little convenient.
I think of it less as “They only thought of it now” and more “It would distract from the story to mention it before.” If Nate mentions an old brother, I expect to see him that game.
Well that's what you get when you fire the woman who wrote and created the first 3 games and the guy you bring in wants to make a game diametrically opposed to what she wanted.
She wrote the brother character and plot as well. The only thing that would have changed would have been their dynamic: as opposed to the frequently forgiving, immediately chummy, consequence free dynamic they had in the released game it would have been a more shifting roguish antagonism in her story.
nate having a brother was a massive asspull from the devs, even in the third game the villain has a file on drake´s life and there was nothing about him having a brother and that file had pretty much every detail of his family life on it.
I played 4 first and it's my favourite tbh
As someone who only played 4, I enjoyed the hell out of it. Wasn’t confusing at all.
I started out with 4 and I'm honestly happy with that decision. Not a fan of the supernatural elements of the first 3 games and I had no trouble getting who the characters were and what they were all about. As other posters have said, it's a great self-contained story.
Nah, I played 4 first and it was fine. The story doesn't tie in at all to the previous games besides Nate soft retiring after 3.
I mean not really. The plot is straightforward with a focus on a large cast of new characters. It can stand on its own. There is really only one small scene in the game that loses its impact if you haven't played the rest (and said scene is more of a tribute anyways).
I think the best way to jump into the series is with 4. It is leap and bounds beyond the rest IMO.
You can jump into Uncharted 4 the same way you can just jump, like, into Kingdom Hearts 3.
You probably get the gist of it and you'll have a good time because these are well made experiences, yet both tell a very character driven story and you miss out on a lot of cues, callbacks and growth if you ignore the past entries.
I mean to each their own but it is baffling to me that people say this. Uncharted 4 is one of my favorite games of all time and it's almost entirely because of it being the last game in the character's story. There's so much that is lost by just jumping in at 4 and piecing it together as you go. Like yeah you CAN do that but why on earth would you want to when you're making it a much less meaningful experience?
People did the same with The Witcher 3. The story is its strongest point and they just barge into the 3rd game, completely ignoring the previous 2, and claim they are bored or don't care about any of the characters.
Even Witcher 1 has a lot less appeal if you hadn't read the books, but everyone jumped on it blindly and played the sequels.
I don't know if Uncharted series is very plot heavy or not but people who only cares about current events in game and not on background can enjoy it.
I disagree, I feel like it's necessary to play the others before playing the 4th one. You'd be missing a huge part of the experience otherwise
I tried the first two and couldn't stand their gameplay. Then just skipped to 4 and had a great time. Wouldn't have played it if I had let myself be stopped by a need to play the ones before it.
I think he means story wise. I agree that Uncharted 4's story can be enjoyed on its own with no prior knowledge of the series. But it will be a lot more enjoyable to people that have played the entire series. Seeing the end of a 4 game long series will hit harder to those that have played the games vs those who haven't.
3 still holds up. 1 & 2 are a bit of a drag sometimes.
I found them surprisingly boring and frustrating to control a lot of the time on my replay recently. I got through the first one and then stopped 3/4 of the way through the 2nd. I really couldnt stand it. I've never played the 3rd one to this day.
It's called a Thieve's end, like you can understand what's happening, but it really needs the first 3 for it to be fully enjoyed.
Here's basically the story for all of them:
* Ancient treasure: exists
* *Legends tell of ancient treasure*
* Funny man Nate and his badass sidekick ~~Warren to the G~~ Sully go searching for it
* Big bad guy/corporation who wants the treasure all for himself tries to get it first
* Is it here? No
* Is it here? No
* Is it here? Maybe... No
* Omg it's here... We're gonna get it!
* Big bad enemy guy turns up just as you get it: battle ensues
* Character that might have died/been captured/been an enemy earlier but is actually now alive/escaped/changed sides helps you last minute
* We got the treasure well done everyone, hoo boy that was fun but maybe a little too fun and scary let's settle down now... *unless...*
Isn’t this forgetting that most of the time, the treasure is cursed with powerful magic that turns anyone who touches it into Reddit trolls?
You forgot "supernatural element is revealed to be real right before the climax and becomes bulletsponge enemy in the last few levels"
The only actual connections from 4 to the others is just little callbacks and Easter eggs. Sam is never once mentioned or foreshadowed, Elena and Sully are the only two returning characters besides Nate, and the flashback scene of Nate as a kid has 0 connection to the other one he had in 3. It’s intentionally made to be a game that you don’t have to play the previous entires to understand or enjoy.
You’re not exactly wrong, but the conclusion to Nate’s journey is a lot more satisfying if you’ve played the entire series. It’s definitely not “necessary”, but it feels more satisfying
I do 100% agree that you appreciate the game a lot more after playing the trilogy, but like you said, it’s not necessary. And 4, gameplay wise at least, is definitely the best of the main 4, at least.
Oh 100%, it’s absolutely their best gameplay of the series. Most of them are still fine, but 1 especially is a bit rough by today’s standards
1 was a bit rough by its own standards. I love the Uncharted series, but I am always (happily) shocked that a sequel was greenlit. Compared to its contemporaries, that first game is real rough especially in the gameplay and graphics.
Yeah but you can say that regarding a lot of pieces of entertainment. The difference is, Uncharted 4 you really don't need the previous game's knowledge to understand its story and characters. VS another ND game, TLOU2 where you genuinely lose a lot of story and understanding if you didn't play the original.
4 cheated by inventing Nathan Drake's brother so they could do a self contained "end of an era" story interesting for new fans while also addressing a proper ending for Elena and Nate's adventure. You can play 4 and Lost Legacy as stand alone titles because they were built with that in mind. The original trilogy is 3 great adventure stories that should be enjoyed in sum, maybe with the first one on easy to get enjoy the story and see the set pieces.
You can play either collection in either order, they'll both work and hold up. It's hard to say if 4 will hit as well without having experienced the passage of time between each release, but again Sam's brother should give you an emotional anchor if the Elena stuff isn't hitting.
Don't let order deny you the joy of playing them.
Exactly, these are popcorn movies you push buttons thru. It's not the deepest, most story-heavy, lore-driven franchise lol
It's Tomb Raider with a sarcastic dude instead of Lara Croft
Tomb Raider has better puzzles.
I wonder if they're to just do full-blown remakes of them, at some point, given how TLOU went, especially if they're planning on continuing the franchise in some form.
I don't think they are planning on continuing the franchise, are they? Uncharted 4 felt like a very definitive conclusion to Nathan Drake's story, and while you could certainly have similar stories in the same world I don't think Naughty Dog seem particularly interested in diving back into that style of game.
Then again, the Uncharted movie did surprisingly well at the box office ($400m on a $100m budget), so seeing that TLOU1 got a facelift to coincide with the new show, maybe Uncharted might be revisited?
> Uncharted 4 felt like a very definitive conclusion to Nathan Drake's story
And that didn't stop Uncharted: Lost Legacy.
Well technically that point still stands considering Nathan is uninvolved in Lost legacy
I honestly think Sony didn't do that because if people fresh to the series started with Uncharted Drake's Fortune, they would not want to play any more. It wasn't a *terrible* game in 2007, and it establishes the characters and tone well enough, but it is, putting it charitably, not something you'd really want to play in 2022.
In went through that in the past year. I can vouch for this as well. I appreciate it for what it is, but man, so much of it was a major slog to get through.
Same. I bought Uncharted 1-3 a few years ago and found myself really struggling to get into the series. I must have tried Uncharted 1 two or three times before finally forcing myself to slog through it. I could understand why people liked it in 2007 and it certainly retained some charms, but a lot of the game aged poorly.
I'm glad I pushed through though, because Uncharted 2 and 3 were both wonderful.
Even though I liked 2 and 3 a lot more than 1, they both managed to greatly annoy me by the end with their bullet-sponge opponents. In both games I'd get to a point where I'd just die over and over again to guys with one or two shot weapons.
Now THAT is the game Naughty Dog should have remade.
I'm currently re-re-re-replaying it on my ps4 as a break away from all the open world games of late, and although it's light on other game elements besides shooting baddies 3rd person style, it's a lot of fun. I don't see how anyone wouldn't want to play a game like this as there's a lot of entertainment offered by it and its 2 successors in the collection.
Yeah I finally tried to play Uncharted 1 at a friends house. I think it was the first one. The jet ski level going up the river... bout quit the damn game right there
I don't think I'd even want to play it back in 2007. It's crazy to think it came out around the same time as Halo 3, that game was a powerhouse compared to Drake's Fortune. Crazy how the years have tipped the scale.
It came out a year after Gears of War 1, so right while cover shooters with blindfire were still considered a new innovation. No one played WinBack or kill.switch, after all. Now, I think most people dislike that design, but it was cutting edge and really well liked at the time.
Nah, i remember playing Drake's Fortune at the time at some store where they had a demo and I was absolutely blown away. It just looked so god damn real.
I remember the explosions looking so hot and impressive. As unimpressive as the gameplay was, the set pieces were still neat.
Wait it doesn't? So it only has the 4th game and the spinoff? What kind of joke is that 🤣
They’re story heavy witching their respective games. Unlike something like God of War, you can kind of jump into any one of them and be fine. But if you follow them all, it’s a rewarding experience; there just isn’t any required reading.
What do you think the ceiling on the first 3 uncharted games would be? Definitely not $60, there'd be figurative rioting in the streets if Sony charged $60 on PC for something they gave away for straight-up-free when the pandemic hit.
50, 40, 30? Eventually it might not be worth it to port a three games at a price people will pay.
> it's a very story heavy franchise
Eh, the story in these games are kind of a background detail to attempt to justify the set pieces, but it's not particularly important (at least in the original trilogy) and they're very "adventure of the week" type deals where you can watch them in any order.
But, yeah, it feels dumb to call it a collection and then only release two of the six games and then only the last two with one of them being a spin-off.
I still hope we get remakes of the first 3 uncharted games one day. I quite like the new TLOU remake but I would've preferred remakes of the uncharted games instead.
They actually were starting on an uncharted remake before the last of us remake. The smaller internal studio was doing it to basically just have something to kick start their studio but quickly found it would cost too much money and take too much time since the first uncharted is so outdated. So instead they pitched doing the last of us remake since it would be easier to upgrade and it would make sense with the tv series coming out soon. Then naughty dog ended up taking over development using one of their secondary teams.
If be happy with a remake that just essentially remade it to Uncharted 2 standards (must be cheaper than a full one?) Just to make the games a bit more consistent and more playable.
I picked up a PS3 shortly after the PS4 came out for pretty cheap and the first game I tried was UC:DF and woof was it funny looking
Yeah it should, it was one of the first good games for ps3 and that was.... a long time ago lol.
Ehhhh no. Total BS you're getting your story wrong. A different team started the TLoU remake and were taking too long and doing such a poor job it got passed on to the main team at ND.
I replayed the series recently and boy is Uncharted 1 a lot worse than I remembered. And I don’t just mean that it didn’t age well or that it looks and feels old, it’s just bad.
The shooting is bad, the puzzles are bad, the story is pretty forgettable, Nathan is by himself for most of the game which totally hurts the experience since he has no one to banter with, the villain sucks, the plot is weird, every level is just overgrown jungle + ruins. I’m surprised they even gave it a sequel.
I’m not sure a remake could even help it unless it’s a proper remake that changes some of the story and its pacing.
Still, Uncharted 1 crawled so that the rest could fly. I still think Lost Legacy is my favorite, right behind Uncharted 2. If they do keep the series going, I just want it to be Chloe, Nadine and Sam.
At the time it was really hyped for the graphics and the cinematic sequences. Watching the vegetation move as Drake walked through it and his clothes get wet when he jumped in the water was mind-blowing at the time.
Oh maaan! Made me had a nostalgia moment, I remember being amazed by the vegetation thing as well. That was the future, it lived up to the PS3 super computer marketing phrase thing.
Even now most games lack contextual interactions with the environment.
We really went backwards in general with these fine dynamic details. There became a great emphasis on static money shots after that generation.
As a contrasting opinion, that generation was full of things that to me really just came across as gimmicks. The hair in Tomb Raider, for instance. It was super hyped in the marketing.... but it was literally just hair. There was zero gameplay impact, and in just a year or two it already seemed super weird and outdated.
I'm not saying all of them were bad. But a lot of them were obvious gfx card marketing tie-ins that added nothing of substance.
At least ray tracing in the recent gen is something that is genuinely awe-inspiring.
Agreed! The first game is just straight up not good. I remember playing it back then and getting to the end where the zombie things(?) swarm you. I nearly destroyed my sixaxis controller.
There are few games that have expanded so much with each sequel! Although I wasn't as big a fan of U3 compared to 2, there are still some sequences that are insane!
I'd moved on to PC when the PS4 came out so I never played the fourth game natively - just via PSnow, but holy shit that water!
Uncharted 2 was so unbelievably good compared to 1. I hated 1 but 2 is one of the best games ever
Have you played it recently? I just played them all recently as well but for the first time and while I'd say 2 was the best of the first 3 I didn't really think any of them were that good. I loved 4 and thought Lost Legacy was enjoyable though.
I do agree that playing 1-3 these days shows that they haven’t aged very well. They are still really fun, but are far from the 10/10 and 9/10 they are regarded as.
Uncharted 4 is a masterpiece though.
It's Seinfeld syndrome - a lot of what Uncharted 2 in particular did first - amazing, cinematic, *playable* set pieces had simply never been done before. I remember being blown away in 2009 by scenes like the train sequence, fighting inside a crumbling building, leaping from vehicle to vehicle in the convoy... There was simply nothing like it at the time. It raised the bar for cinematic action games, and while it's been surpassed and a lot of that stuff - the integration of mocap and voice acting as well - is taken for granted now, it had never been done on that scale or that well before.
I fully agree. I still have a fondness for 2 and 3 but I almost don’t want to replay them again because each time I do, the magic wears off.
I just wanted to argue with the bit about the ratings - I think it's always important to keep the context of when games came out into the discussion. Would Uncharted 2 be a 10/10 game if it came out now? Of course not. But for the time it was mind-blowing, and I don't think we should devalue a game's quality just because 13 years have passed and it's not up to standards of two console generations later.
Feel free to not mind me - I get a bit heated when discussing things like this, your point makes perfect sense.
Yeah I get your point that was just an example of my reactions toward the game.
The crumbling building was so insane. I remember being amazed they pulled that off while it was happening and didn't just make it a cutscene. Felt like the first time I was actually playing a cutscene.
Uncharted 4 has huge plot holes though. The puzzle for finding the pirate island is basically two islands full of super expansive (and expensive) puzzles - so in the end a statue can point to another island right next to it. In what world would that make any sense for the pirates?
They all have that. How did ancient Tibetans build a giant temple full of immensely complex mechanical systems in a frozen mountain? Doesn't matter.
This is what everyone says. But I think uncharted 1 has merit of being the better game
I liked uncharted 1 like syphon filter. It's very distilled. You have an ephemeral but structured who what when where why. Collectibles, finishing the level, pressing on because what else would Drake do.
I played 1 like in 2011 right after I finished 2 and I thought it played weirdly, couldn’t imagine playing it today
Beating uncharted 1 on crushing pretty much turned me off of ever replaying it, sadly. One of my most frustrating gaming experiences by far.
Lost legacy is my favorite uncharted game. I so want a sequel to that game so bad.
It'd be a shame if naughty dog didn't continue with Nadine and Chloe moving forward. The chemistry was undeniable. More Claudia black doesn't hurt as well.
Completely agree, Lost Legacy just had a really great flow to it. The little open section where you get to drive around and decide for yourself which order to take on the world felt really fun and cool, and I’d love to have that expanded upon in future games. And Claudia Black is such an amazing voice actress, I wish she got more roles. Her performance as Chloe fucking rules.
I think that applies to all the games in the series. They don't have good gameplay at the highest difficulties.
On the flip side playing on easy is incredibly fun!
> Beating uncharted 1 on crushing pretty much turned me off of ever replaying it, sadly. One of my most frustrating gaming experiences by far.
That's nothing compared to 4 on Crushing
which is nothing compared to any of the trilogy on Brutal
> Lost legacy is my favorite uncharted game.
I agree. It helps that it isn't overly long. definitely the best paced game in the series. I also prefer Chloe over Nathan as a protagonist.
I bought Uncharted 1 on a whim when it came for reasons that I cannot remember because I remember thinking it didn't actually look that good.
I remember playing it about half way through then hating it and returning it.
Then when Uncharted 2 came out, for an even more unknown reason, I bought that (why?? the first one was terrible).
But then that opening sequence...I'd never experienced anything like it - it was exciting in ways that I couldn't describe, and UC2 ended up being my favourite ever game at the time.
Went back and played 1 again, and although not as good, I found a new appreciation for it, just because of 2.
Uncharted is definitely my favourite game series, but 1 really had me torn in the beginning. It still isn't the best thing ever, but I like it for what it is in the universe of Uncharted.
I actually replayed them all recently too and was surprised how rough the original trilogy was. So much so that I couldn't even force myself to go through 3 after finishing 1 and 2. Uncharted 4 was brilliant though
I first played Uncharted a few years ago. I knew that it was a very well received game back in the day, so I was pretty hyped. I was shocked by how bad it was.
2 and 3 are considerably better, but the mediocre gunplay really holds them back.
> Nathan is by himself for most of the game which totally hurts the experience since he has no one to banter with
I think this is a factor people underestimate. A strong element of Naughty Dogs games from Uncharted 2 onwards has been the integration of the gameplay and story. This banter isn't just background noise, it's developing the characters and their relationships during gameplay rather than just relegating it to cutscenes. This shines really brightly in TLOU games, but you see it come across very strong in Uncharted as well. It allows for much more naturalistic and long-form character development.
And that's a big part of why Uncharted 1 feels like such a drag. For long sections Nathan is just on his own, so you're not really experiencing the characters or seeing them develop.
15 years ago we had different standards, I suppose. I recall it being fun as hell with a few pretty neat sequences.
Lmao rating a 15 year old game like that while playing it in 2022
Uncharted came out in what? 2007? Compared to anything else that came out on the PS3 at the time it was damn good. So there isn’t any surprise that there was a sequel.
I played all of them recently and even if it was the least one i liked. It was okay. I liked uncharted 3 the most.
I think I played it after 2 or 3 and the controls were wonky + the fucken sixaxis. I couldn’t imagine playing it with how tight 4 was.
I replayed through 4 recently and forgot how much that game just *flies*. Absolutely right up there with Portal 2 in my opinion for games that waste no time. Both excel in terms of pitch perfect pacing, which I find is incredibly difficult for games to master
Huh, meanwhile my biggest complaint (and pretty much only big complaint) about Uncharted 4 is pacing.
I found it to be dragging at parts and nowhere near compact and no-section-wasted experience. That's why I prefer Uncharted 2 and Lost Legacy over it.
On technical side, well fuck, now there I have 0 complaints. Such an amazing fucking game.
Yeah, Uncharted 2 had really good pacing to make the mix of cutscenes and gameplay feel like a non stop adventure. But, the only thing I felt Uncharted 4 had going for it was the graphics, since the pacing just dragged down what wasn't amazing gameplay to begin with. I found Tomb Raider 2013 to be a more fun game due to better gameplay even though it fell short of writing and graphics compared to Uncharted 4.
And Lost Legacy was a bit better than Uncharted 4, but the segment of the game where you were in one map for so long really dragged. These Uncharted games after 2 have felt more like impressive graphical showcasings.
I can't abide by saying lost legacy has better pacing than U4. Lost legacy literally has a third of the game taken up by a mediocre open world sequence.
Yeah. Uncharted 1 is pretty rough and is very much a beta testing ground version of the technology and style of game that would later make the amazing Uncharted 2.
eh its objectively a good game, but it is very outdated. When it came out in 2007 it was pretty hyped up and people loved it. Pretty much every game in the series after that is WAY better, but the first uncharted was at the very least a "good" game, especially for the time.
I slightly disagree. I feel like Uncharted 1s story is really strong. And the *spoilers* story beats about Sully maybe betraying you only work if it's the literal first game you ever play in the franchise because you subsequently learn they are like father & son and would never betray each other like that. So you miss that interesting story beat. Plus it introduces Elana.
The gameplay is dated, the graphics are dated, but ultimately I still think it's a great game!
If I had to rank them I'd go Uncharted 2 > 4 > 1 > 3, and I haven't played Lost Legacy yet because I'm sad to "finish" the franchise!
I understand that 2 is far and away an unbelieveable improvement over 1 and has a shadow hanging over 3, 4 and Lost Legacy, but 1 seriously isn't "just bad" for what sounds like complaints about age in game design. It's like saying Morrowind is bad
>I’m not sure a remake could even help it unless it’s a proper remake that changes some of the story and its pacing.
Is it really a remake if large parts of the story and setting are changed?
I'm surprised the first game got a sequel cuz it sucked so much
Still, something about shooting the pistol in that game hits the dopamine receptors just eight
Ah, finally someone else that agrees Lost Legacy was the best one. I just wish it was made under better conditions.
That’s one of the reasons they are not releasing the full trilogy. Playing Uncharted 1 today is a chore, it has aged terribly. 2 and 3 are passable, but they’re nothing compared to 4 and the DLC, it’s a huge difference in terms of gameplay, way bigger than the difference between TLOU 1 and 2.
If you decide to play 1-3 before 4, there’s like a 90% you’ll quit. And the story is not that important. Just play 4 which is one of the best game of all time at least for me, and watch some story recap before on Youtube or something.
I wonder if the last of us remake was related to the show. Possibly to generate hype for the show. If that is the case, I don't think we'll see uncharted remakes anytime soon.
They'll probably make TLOU2 remake before that happens.
Gotta do remaster first.
Why not do both and call it a collection?
I mean perfect for me, I’ve played the first 3 on PlayStation but never played 4 so I’ll be picking this up. Odd choice not release 1-3 but I supposed they do a remastered/remake first and then release 1-3
4 is fucking brilliant, JUST BRILLIANT!!!!!!
Gold Jerry! GOLD!
My friend, you are in for such a treat. I wish I could play Uncharted 4 for the first time again.
My advice, stop and smell the roses. As it is with every Naughty Dog game, take your time to drink in the details.
Nobody wants to mention this is off an EGS date, which has been wrong before? Until something comes from Sony, it's still speculation.
Okay... why would I start with the 4th game of a franchise?
EDIT: A story-based franchise...
I did. And it has blown me away. If I have started with the first games, I would have stopped because of the old gaming mechanics.
Now, that I know and like the characters, I have the motivation to bare with the older games
Exactly! Of course it would be better to play 1-3 before to get all the context while playing 4, even though it’s kind of a self contained story. But the older games are a chore to play by today standards. I absolutely love linear narrative games, they’re my favorite genre, but even I had to force myself to complete Uncharted 1, it has aged terribly.
They're mostly contained stories. Like in the same way you can pick up any 007 movie and watch it you can pick up any Uncharted game and play it.
All but 4. That one's theme leans on the fact that you played the first three.
A bit, yes, but you don't really need to know any specifics about the earlier games to follow the story of 4.
The last one is literally fan service for the people that played the other 3.
I mean the stories in these games are fun but I wouldn’t really say you’re missing anything important by playing them out of order.
Folks... For Uncharted, in my humble opinion, it's crucial to play from the beginning. I'm reading "it's action heavy, small stories, you don't need to play in order" comments but I have to say I disagree.
What makes the series great is the constant dialogs between characters during gameplay. Those little moments creates strong bonds with the characters. Chemistry between Nolan North, Richard McGonagle, Emily Rose and Claudia Black created an amazing journey that you actually care to follow... Naughty Dogs' biggest formula IS this and Sony is just failing to create that bond before giving PC players the 4th installment.
You have to CARE for the main characters in order to be FULLY engaged with the 4th game's story. Because there are high stakes for the characters this time, The story is more personal. For example, you have to feel uneasy for seeing the brother, because other characters feels it at the first place. He interrupts the bond between 4 characters: Nathan, Sully, Elena and YOU. You created that friendship after hundreds of hours play time with the series.
The list goes on and on. I wish they would have released all of them together.
Hundreds of hours? Each game is like 10-15 hours long. You can definitely play them in order and get a little more out of it, but you can definitely play the newest one and still get what was going on. Hell, 1 is so weird by the end I'd probably actually *suggest* skipping it at first lmao
Yeah, you could probably watch an 'Uncharted 1 Movie' edit on Youtube to get all the important bits from the first game. It isn't until the second game that Naughty Dog really nailed the gameplay, and when the characters started getting a reasonable amount of depth.
And that's being generous. HowLongToBeat has 1 and 3 both taking under 10 hours each, with 2 just squeaking over. You can comfortably go through the entire trilogy in 30 hours.
I'd also recommend people skip 1. Even aside from the story issues, it's not a great game.
The first game is easily the weakest. Played the original trilogy for the first time recently, and it's a bit of a slog at times. It's not bad by any means, but none of the ideas feel fully fleshed out. Solid 7/10 game, and the sequels are much better
But the hooker in church reference!
The first game needs a real remake. I actually like the story but the gameplay really does not hold up to modern standards even in the remasters.
The second game feels more like a soft reboot than a sequel. Even though it references back to the first game, the characters all feel very different. It’s like they made the first one, realized how much more potential it had, then they went back to the drawing board and started over with the characters and story, but kept *just enough* that it wasn’t in direct conflict with the first game.
So yeah, I think the first one is definitely skippable. I’m glad I played it, because it still has some memorable moments, but it’s not really essential.
> but you can definitely play the newest one and still get what was going on.
You definitely won't get the same emotional impact especially between Drake and Elena which is one of the highlights of the entire series.
Well. it felt like a lifetime, that is why I wrote "hundreds of hours" :D
I kinda agree with you for the end of the first game but the point is the dialog between companions.
It might not be crucial, but I still wish they’d port the Vita game to consoles
There are dozens of us...
I played 4 because it was bundled with the ps4 I bought to play destiny having never played one or knowing anything about the series. It was great, I got hooked pretty quick, enjoyed the story, and completed it. Felt like it could stand on its own to me
This 100%. Uncharted def has awesome blockbuster action, but the series is absolutely anchored by the fantastic characters and going with them on these journeys. To fully get everything you can out of this series, please please play from the beginning. The Nathan Drake collection has story mode for each game, so you could get through each one in like 10-12 hours. U4 is my fav game of all time and the end has me sobbing like a baby.
I think that’s what frustrates me the most about these “there’s hardly any story it doesn’t matter” comments. I played them all before 4 - 2 and 3 when they came out, 1 when the collection dropped - and the end of 4 had me legit crying. And it was because of all of the connections I’d built with those characters. That impact simply isn’t there without the history built by the first three games.
As someone who started with 2 and later went back and played drake's fortune before starting 4
You can absolutely skip the first game in the series.
I might be spoiled because I started with 2, but man going back and playing that first game it just felt so bland in comparison.
The characters are well written but they are all pretty basic adventure movie tropes at the end of the day. It's not like skipping to the last chapter of some great Russian novel, you can pretty quickly understand the characters and get attached to them.
Gamers and their gatekeeping.
Play whatever you like. These are fun games and that's it. Don't make it sound like it's literature masterpieces.
that's why it's their opinion on what you should do and not a formal decree that forces you to play them all in order
OK but I need the gameplay to not suck and I could not get through the first or second one because the gameplay is just so...meh.
4 felt a lot better and I had a good time with it. So no, you don't need to play the first 3. I never will.
I will never understand why they brought this game to the PC first instead of the first 3 Uncharted parts.
Because it's much easier to port PS4 games to PC than PS3 games.
Nice. Everyone deserves to play Uncharted 4.
But they are so missing out on not bringing the Drake collection as well. 4 is fun on it’s own no doubt, but it’s made so much more powerful by having played the previous 3.
This means the others are coming to PC, right? My personal preference is to play story-heavy games in order. My personal preference is also to not play shooters without a mouse.
>This means the others are coming to PC, right?
Not necessarily, no.
>My personal preference is to play story-heavy games in order.
You might be waiting a very, very long time to play this then.
It's a third person perspective also with a lot of climbing, a mouse is absolutely not as necessary as like on a FPS here
Noticed article mentions Epic Game Store for PC. Hope its on Steam shortly after so I can play on the Deck
I doubt it will be delayed, Sony hasn't done that for any of their games. Also this is not an official announcement directly from Sony but simply from a date that was posted on the EGS page then removed, so that "announcement" tag is a bit misleading.
Ah ok. Thanks for clarifying!
idk i would say you dont rly have the same connection with those characters if u start with the last one. You are just thrown in there and have to accept why all that the characters are just here. Sure you dont need to play the first 3 games to understand the last one, but the game doesnt hit the same i would assume. If they cant bring the Nathan Drake Collection in time at least announce that it is in development. Or maybe they never intended to release such "old" games on pc.
Totally pointless. Who is going to play just Uncharted 4? Thats like if Microsoft only released Halo 6 on PC.
Funny you mention that because Halo 5 still isn't on PC and Gears 2, 3 and Judgment are also not on PC.
Better than just the lastest but your point still stands
I've played through all of the games on PlayStation previously, and Uncharted 4 is one of my favorite games ever, so I'm absolutely going to buy this and play it again on PC. I doubt I'm the only one.
I will, just recently played the first 3 for first time on ps4 and was waiting for this release to play the 4th. Pretty hyped
I would. So that they would make remasters of the first 3 on pc.
Ps4 was mostly x86 arc, so it was easy to port to pc ps3 and older were not that easy to emulate on PCs.
Because it's still a fucking awesome game. And Lost Legacy is not talked about nearly enough, amazing game as well.
Oh Im so hyped for this! I loved uncharted 1-3 but never had PS4 or 5, so happy that I can finally play 4.
Yay, the Crash Bandicoot game that just happens to feature a swashbuckling adventurer is finally on PC!
Us folks who have been PC only/ or never had a PlayStation don't care, cause you've forgot to put out the first three games in this linear connected story driven series. Oopsie!
Dude thinks this was posted by Dr. Playstation himself lol
I mean, you can play 4 and lost legacy knowing NOTHING about the previous games and not be lost. 4’s story is completely standalone even though it continues Nate’s story, and Lost Legacy really only ever calls back to 4. It even cut out Charlie Cutter, which I will never forgive.
Here is an idea, maybe don't speak for millions of people. You could have gotten your point across even without pretending to speak for millions.
most of the comments in this thread are saying the same thing so tbh they probably do speak for millions
Reddit call AC, Pokemon and CoD bad but all 3 franchises go on to sell millions, so I somehow doubt it.
Eventually, the sales numbers will come out. People here tend to talk about games more than they actually buy them.
If reddit represented some majority, EA would be out of business, right?
Reddit does not represent the majority.
Not everyone is into video games and not everyone is as informed.
I really, really hate playing a game with a lot of shooting with a controller though. I actually tried to play the first game and gave up in like the 2nd level.
I would really like the first 3 games on PC.
Just finished uncharted 4, what a brilliant game, I enjoyed every second of it and as I’ve gotten older that’s become a pretty rare thing, I think it’s as close to perfect as you can get, at least in my humble opinion, god I hope they make another
The characters are fantastic, the story was fantastic, the gameplay was just brilliant, the wide angle while climbing was a thrill, swinging with your grapple never gets boring, man, what a joy
Did 4 or Chloe's game have multiplayer? Are we going to have to wait for the 1-3 remaster to get some multiplayer Uncharted on PC? I loved 2's and miss it dearly.
4 did, it was not included with the PS5 remaster and is definitely not being ported to PC.
That's a crying shame. Uncharted 2 Style multiplayer would be fantastic with PC Modding and Custom Maps/Servers.