I never understood why the most intense moments in many of these action/adventures games take control away from the player. It's cool to watch but that's not what I bought the gaming console for.
At least the gameplay is great and polished. ND has reached perfection with Uncharted. The gameplay is excellent and well executed. Everything works perfectly. People need to understand the difference between shallow depth and poor gameplay. See: Dark Souls is my favorite franchise, but by 2019 I'm so tired I'm waiting for my vacation to start Sekiro! So many items with different effects and enemies and unique and connected scenarios. Just thinking about it makes me tired. Uncharted offers challenge on the ultimate difficulty and best of all: you dont have to study the game!
These set pieces are a big part of the reason why I haven't touched a lot of the current AAA games. As you said, I usually find them almost insulting and they perfectly represent the bad design trends so many big budget games having been following for years now - this mistaken believe that orchestrating every single detail of your game can be a substitute for good, deep mechanics. Here's hoping devs and publishers take some of your suggestions to heart.
At least the gameplay is great and polished. ND has reached perfection with Uncharted. The gameplay is excellent and well executed. Everything works perfectly. People need to understand the difference between shallow depth and poor gameplay. See: Dark Souls is my favorite franchise, but by 2019 I'm so tired I'm waiting for my vacation to start Sekiro! So many items with different effects and enemies and unique and connected scenarios. Just thinking about it makes me tired. Uncharted offers challenge on the ultimate difficulty and best of all: you dont have to study the game!
Jay Omega its the way dunkey puts it. Its shallow but flashy enough to keep you engaged with it. I hated how simple uncharted action could be but when you piece everything together it becomes pretty flowing and tangible. Like swinging off a vine and landing on an enemy only to catch his AK47 and spray another enemy nearby as i dive-roll into cover and yank the enemy from the other side to mine and punch his face in. Its trash and shallow when you take it at face value but when you amalgamate all the different mechanics and controls it becomes something special. Not to say you can’t do that with just straight up gameplay but taking the environment into account can change the flow of everything.
I like the interesting scenarios that the Uncharted set pieces present. Fighting a bunch of dudes while the cruise ship is tipping over felt great and very intense despite it obviously being very scripted. The build up is also Dying kills momentum so making them simple is intentional which leads to the feeling of smoke and mirrors. On the other hand I feel like all Tomb Raider set pieces consists of Lara running and jumping while shit crumbles around her which is super disappointing considering the slightly more depth those games have. I think gameplay is king but other things matter just as much for me.
I think the Nepalese village section and train sequence in Uncharted 2 were great set pieces because they do actually incorporate the key mechanics of the game.
I think Resident Evil 4 did it best. Nearly every room feels like a set pieces that changes the dynamic while still giving the player plenty of options.
90% of the time in Resi 4, you're playing as Leon from a third person perspective and you have full control over his aim and movement. It rarely takes control from you to throw you into an "epic" exciting set piece and instead creates amazing set pieces through enemy placement, boss encounters and level design. And I absolutely love Resi 4's use of QTEs, like the glory kills in the new DOOM, you're encouraged to play risky and move towards enemies when they stagger instead of running away. And don't even get me started on the way the game essentially gives Leon an un-spammable dodge move through QTEs. That game is just fucking genius.
As much as I love RE4, the QTE's are an issue. They are used so infrequently that it's easy to forget their existence and die because of that. Like it or not Cutscenes fundamentally have one important function in normal gameplay and that is a little break from the frantic action. QTE's fuck that concept in the ass. If the game had some more of QTE's and then some other quiet moments then the game would be alot better for it.
Couldn't agree more. That's why I hate most of these sequences. Worst is these sequences are the most boring to develop and are the ones that drains the most resources out of a development team. They take forever to make right and cost a fortune. Way too much for moments that no one will want to replay.
At least the gameplay is great and polished. ND has reached perfection with Uncharted. The gameplay is excellent and well executed. Everything works perfectly. People need to understand the difference between shallow depth and poor gameplay. See: Dark Souls is my favorite franchise, but by 2019 I'm so tired I'm waiting for my vacation to start Sekiro! So many items with different effects and enemies and unique and connected scenarios. Just thinking about it makes me tired. Uncharted offers challenge on the ultimate difficulty and best of all: you dont have to study the game!
The Madagascar chase as mentioned in the video is one if the most impressive if not THE most impressive set piece I've played in a game, its what every action set piece wishes it was, it plays great, looks great, lasts the perfect amount of time, gives the player plenty of control of the character, and I don't expect to see many sequences like that in other games because my lord that sequence sounds like it was a bitch to make. Worth it, but not practical for everyone to be making set pieces like that
I just got to this part of the video. I rewind back a little to see if I heard what I thank heard. Paused the video. Gave it a like. Gave me a chuckle lol
@@DarshanBhambhani in the new games, raiding tombs was largely a side activity divorced from the main game. Tomb Raider stopped being about Lara Croft raiding tombs and more about drama when the reboot was made
I came here from that Shammy video and slapped that subscribe button. Nice video! Personally, I love the big set-piece moments such as those in Tomb Raider reboot games. I think it's impressive how they manage to feel intense despite being simple to play through, but I'm definitely all for developers trying to spice these moments up a bit more in the gameplay department. It could also come down to personal taste as well. I prefer allowing myself to be swept up into whatever game I'm playing, and since this comes naturally it is easier to feel the intensity of the set-piece so I can play in the moment. I would probably hate most video games if I came across one of these moments only seeing them from a strictly gameplay perspective! I think it's great hearing perspectives like in this video because it's one I may not even consider otherwise!
One thing about the set pieces in many post-PS3/X360 action games is the *often taking away of controls*. Uncharted, Tomb Raider Rising, Enslaved, all do it with result from "meh" to "boring". Even, Metal Gear Rising slows down when Raiden gets "injured". The kind of beauty of Half Life 2 is that you are still under full control, so when you actually survive a set-piece, it's all the more satisfying. Call of Duty has it's own share of setpieces, though they got pretty stale after Black Ops. Also, I think you should also talk about "emergent gameplay" (or when setpiece gets generated through game systems and player's actions, like Far Cry and STALKER games), and compare it with this approach. Anyways, another great video. Your videos have enlightened me a lot regarding games and ideas in them, and hope others too would understand and appreciate games better.
SPOILERS FOR METAL GEAR SOLID 4. I think the best use of it comes from MGS4, most precisely, the microwave scene. You need to crawl through a giant microwave to get to GW. The only thing you need to do is QTE but it feels so tense since you snake slowly dying and, on the lower half of the screen, you see what Liquid is causing and you just want it to sped up but it just can't
5:55 - Stuff like this is why I feel I got as much out of watching a playthrough of Uncharted 4 as actually playing it myself. Essentially just watching the game play itself until the movie continues. Even the more successful set pieces you mention later on in the video, to me, felt about as engaging as any of the more static pop-and-shoot sections (although the kinetic, constantly changing nature of the setting does help). Pop out, shoot until no more boys, move on. At that stage you are basically just making an Indiana Jones film. It was infuriating seeing all the discussion surrounding the game devolve into the same kind of "GAMES ARE NOW EQUAL TO MOVIES HOORAY" legitimacy conversation that hasn't been relevant since, well, Uncharted 2 came out. Like you say, it's not about linearity-to me, it would have been more exciting to watch without the minimal mechanical requirements reminding me that the tension is all fake. In that sense, making the player actually play those sections felt like a crucially BAD action movie. Great vid as always, my dude.
Writing on Games Question for the two of you related to this: have either of you seen Novacanoo's video on Uncharted 4? His breakdown of the shooting system is one of my favorite analysis segments I saw last year. What's weird to me though is how advanced the shooting mechanics are despite the game's heavier focus on adventure and big bombastic set pieces. Based on just how much movement is happening on the screen all the time, it seems like a much simpler shooting system could have been built and we'd be none the wiser. Just wondering if you guys think that the advanced shooting in some way takes away from the game in that case, since it's unnecessary and doesn't really belong with the game's true core mechanics. Like, does the added complexity actually have a negative effect one them game? Any of that make sense or nah? Anyways, cheers guys!
Writing on Games I disagree. You're missing out on a lot not playing the game for yourself. And watching a play through is going to cut out most of the gameplay anyway so I'm not sure if your argument about the cutscene-to-gameplay ratio is even valid if you didn't actually play the game. If you do play the game, you'd know that the balance between story and gameplay is extremely well-done.
...most people feel the satisfaction of pretending to be part of the game. even though you are just "playing" a Interactive Movie. there are lazy designers in the same way that there are lazy players... or just people without enough free time.
Bhiner1029 that may be true, but some games are just an absolute chore to play but have an amazing story. I don't think Uncharted is an example of this, though, as it was mad fun.
And yet, I love these moments in gaming. It started with the game "Split Second" and the Time Attack Races. At the end of the airfield, a plane crashes down... and that moment is just phenomal and I played that level over and over again, just to witness this moment.
A fantastic example of this done well is the Ginso Tree in Ori and the Blind Forest. The entire tree is a good example of level design which also introduces and expands upon two new mechanics (blue things which teleport the player as well as a new ability called "bash"). Once the player has gotten through sections which require understanding of these new mechanics, the game throws a wrench at the player in the form of an exciting set piece... the tree floods with water. This requires the player to rapidly link together all the mechanics they have learned up to that point in quick succession (jump, double jump, wall jump, using the teleports, bash, etc.) It is both a flashy set piece that creates a very tense moment as well as a "final test" of the player's understanding and mastery of mechanics. It is hands down the best moment in the game... and that is what you want to do as a game developer; create memorable moments. Start of Ginso Tree: ruclips.net/video/Wh6gBjfXKxw/видео.htmlm21s Start of set piece: ruclips.net/video/Wh6gBjfXKxw/видео.htmlm23s
I haven't played all the games mentioned here, but I think the set pieces in the Uncharted series especially (and some in the recent Tomb Raiders) were done very well. It seems that the purpose of the set pieces is to give an adrenaline rush with an enjoyable interactive sequence, which is what the Uncharted series does very well. I'm talking specifically about the relatively short sequences that involve escaping / climbing out of somewhere that's falling apart around you. The thing about these sequences is, if the player dies it ruins the pacing even if they succeed the 2nd time, so the devs need to strike a good balance of difficulty so that the vast majority of players will succeed on the first try and still get an adrenaline rush. I think a lot of the issues with set pieces are only noticeable on the 2nd playthrough, so for most people they aren't really issues at all.
I don't complete disagree or agree but I'd argue that sometimes they take away some challenge in some set pieces because they don't want you to die and completely kill the momentum.
Kevboard Arts because they want you to play the game, and not watch it. For example, the last boss from FF XV was not design to be hard, but cool looking instead. They did not want players interrupting the story moment because players were dying by the final boss multiple times. Even so, the game gives you tons os extra bosses as real challenge.
Because watching cutscenes where the player character does some awesome looking shit isn't fun? Even if the skill ceiling is set fairly low a game with good game feel will always be more enjoyable than a non-interactive scene which is in all other respects equal.
Imperium Americanum FF XV has good mechanic feels but even so it has scenematic gameplay at a few bosses. I dont see any problem at that. The final boss use all the fundamentals of the combat system, but at the same time it has scenematic parts because the game is trying to show cool things too. The boss before the final boss also has lots of scenematic parts while also using the fundamentals of the combat system. So it really depends on the game.
God Of War 1-3 were a lot of the time scripted set pieces, and a lot of the most iconic moments were set pieces or QTEs. For some reason, we all, I included, fucking love God of War.
Because God of War's scripted set pieces were too crazy (especially because this is a franchise that uses monsters, gods and titans and stuff 99x bigger than the MC)
I really like scripted set pieces, (when done right, like in Uncharted), so here are my thoughts. Like you said, they are there partially to emulate movies. They give you the thrill of watching a crazy action scene. Problem is, if you are presented with a bunch of difficult challenges, then that conflicts with the flow of a crazy action scene. Because a lot of players will die. A lot. That ruins the momentum you want in a scripted set piece. Remember the intro to Inside? If you die in that intro chase sequence, it feels awful. Not in a "I feel sorry for this kid" way, but in a "clearly the designers didn't want me to die here" way. I think that's why the challenge has been sanded off the edges of scripted set pieces. If there's any real challenge to those segments, players will die frequently, causing the scene to lose momentum. Obviously these types of scenes are not perfect, but if you're looking for skill challenges, I don't think Uncharted or the Tomb Raider reboot are the games to play. They're about spectacle, which I think they deliver on pretty well.
this topic reminds me what stories people share in games like battlefield... is it from campaigns, no. Battlefield online gameplay stories about some crazy rush or kill streak or whatever else exciting because it was not scripted bombastic barely interactive movie cut scene... "Daigo's parry" would not be legendary or even remembered 10 min after if it was a cut scene or scripted event. Games are gameplay first and they are remembered for it.
The entire reason these scripted action scenes exist, and why they're not skill based, is because ten years ago they would have been cutscenes. But game developers listened to people's complaints that cutscenes were boring/unfun, so they make them playable. That's why you got QTEs, and then later on these kinds of set pieces. They're not meant to be tests of skill, they're meant to be cutscenes that are interactable.
One game which did set pieces gracefully is The Last Guardian. They exist to grow the bond between the boy and Trico, and because your character can't fight, it makes you feel vulnerable. One particular set piece which I found effective is designed to make the player feel helpless, something that I felt none of the Uncharted games have ever done.
The problem is they are all supposed to be cinematic moments, with great pacing and build up of an adrenaline rush to a thrilling climax, and to experience them fully... you have to not die. That's the very point of them. You have to just make it through by the skin of your teeth while feeling that death was close, but not actually dying, otherwise all the tension and build up of excitement is lost as you do the most "gamey" thing ever... play the same bit again. And players vary hugely in skill level, so they have to make it survivable for people with slow reactions. I agree, the more agency a player has, the better, but only if an average player is able to still make it through first try. So they are always going to skew to the easy side, except in cases where the get the balance just right of teaching you the mechanic to survive them without being too intrusive. As you say, the ones where they depend on core skills are the best.
I remember a game on the original xbox where the whole entire point of the game was to drive through crazy awesome set pieces. Wish i remembered the name of it. Damn.
I didn't watch the whole video just the first minute and I agree. But I believe that many people actually misunderstand games like Uncharted. They are not really games. They are intereactive movies. Like Heavy Rain. It's all there is to it. But if you want to play a game, then you play something like Zelda, like Devil May Cry... hell... the best of all, Super Mario Bros. It's just gaming from start to end.
Uncharted and Heavy Rain are not the same. Uncharted is a platformer/third person cover shooter. Heavy Rain is a multi choice story based game where decisions can get playable characters killed and result in different endings, none of which is present in Uncharted. Like, how are they the same? They're just not.
@@ashleythomas4112 You misunderstod my point. The game design are completely different, but they both have a common denominator that doesn't diferentiate the at all. And this is an interactive movie. Half of Uncharted always get's interrupted by cinematic sequences during the gameplay with the exact same graphic and they are both very story heavy during both periods (gaming and cinematics) Uncharted is a movie that you are playing. Hence interactivity. Heavy Rain is exactly the same thing, the only differences is that way you play it. Look it this way. Chess and Draught are two completely different games, but the both belong to the same genre. They are bord games and thinking games. I hope you do get what I mean. Mario is not an interactive movie, but is third person like uncharted. Devil May Cry at least before the PS3 times and Darksiders are Third Person as well, but they are not considered as interactive movies. But in the end you can see it how you like. I say it is like this and it is also considered like it by many. If someone just can't make the difference between playabiltiy and or how you play a game then I would recommend you to check out what game design measn. I didn't understand game design since a year now. I though it was how games looked and all but actually the game designer is like the director in a movie. It is the one guy who has the vision of the game, how it looks, what story it has and how you play it. that means also knowing what your avatar will do when you push these buttons. It's a hell of a job and responsibility. So yes. Both games are very different and yet they are the same. I hope you understand what I mean. Cheers my friend.
"If the steaks are fake, then there's no thrill on the grill." 10/10 A lot of Sonic games have this problem, though not to as much of an extent. Sonic Lost World has way too many segments where control is taken away while you run around at a cool camera angle. I really wish it wouldn't do that.
Absolutely... But while Sonic Adventure and on have been criticized harshly for it (and rightly so), Uncharted mostly gets a free pass because... it's new and shiny unlike old Sonic Adventure, I guess.
The scripting in sonic adventure is something k can easily excuse tho. In the classic games all his movement depended on how the physics worked (or whatever they did to make it look like the game had physics) and that's way harder to do in 3D especially in a 20 year old game. A non scripted 3D sonic game that uses the Genesis style of movement would be very interesting.
1 thing I found funny was the volcano Firewalker mission escape scene. While inside the building, I ran to the exit, realized I missed a safe, went back, hacked it and ran out.
This is some sharp analysis. Also helps that Rise of the Tomb Raider and Uncharted feature heavily. You even caught my favorite set piece moment in Rise in the final area of the game.
You are wanting these games to be something they aren't. You are judging a fish on its ability to fly. Gameplay is more varied than we give it cred it for. Gameplay can be a lot more than just the things I want them to be.
Was expecting a mention of Ori and the Blind Forest. It has by far the best scripted set pieces of any game I've played, including (and indeed especially) Uncharted and Tomb Raider. They are a genuine, challenging test of the player's mastery of the mechanics which you'll probably fail several times. However because there's no load time or gap in the gameplay, you will want to keep trying until you succeed, and you will come out the other side a better player and able to face the later challenges. Great video though. Hits the nail on the head of my problem with these kind of games.
I have been an Uncharted fan since Uncharted 1 and i have to agree with you. lately i've started noticing patterns, after Uncharted 2, where it began. I don't feel any tension playing this game anymore, i just move from one place to the next listening to dialouge, watching stuff happen on the screen. But the story is still so engaging for me that i don't mind that in the moment, but after i finished i was just done with the game all together. After beating games like bloodborne and dark souls 3 for the first time i now KNOW how pure gameplay feels like, and set pieces are basically the bosses in those games.
I think it's worth talking about Call of Duty if we're going to talk about setpieces. CoD has consistently made setpieces an opportunity to test your skills in new or more difficult scenarios. My personal favorite in the recent games is the asteroid setpiece in Infinite Warfare - by putting you on a rapidly rotating object close to the sun you are forced to use movement tech and combat skill to move and eliminate enemies without getting burnt alive.
Uncharted 4 was the one where I got really tired of these boring setpieces and fake tension. The game can be barely called a platformer, since falling and jump accuracy is a nonissue and 90% of platforming challenges are just one way pathways where you hold the stick in the direction you want to climb. The Madagascar chase was the only standout, everything else was just about running in a straight line and occasionally reacting to a predictable QTE, with several moments straight up copied from previous games. The Last of Us pulled it off better, with less predictable and much more lethal situations sprinkled throughout the game.
Abraham 302 Then why the fuck are you climbing 80 percent of the damn game. This is coming from someone who played the SHIT out of 2 and 3. (For the multiplayer) But you’re straight up lying if you say the story mode in uncharted 4 wasn’t half climbing... And you’re right it’s NOT a platformer, so wtf was naughty dog doing? Idk... got sick of cliffs breaking and the usual fake tension crap. The effect wears off with age.. Like the OP said TLOU was way more successful, mainly because I thought something fucked up happening in this world is all too easy and fits so anything can happen. But Nathan falling? Nathan Drake? Falling to his death or anything really consequential at all happening to him? No nothings going to happen. They’re not even going to kill his brother again... TBH the ending was so disappointing.. Not the fact his brother lied I thought that was interesting. But idk Uncharted just had too good and clean of an ending...
Benjamin Slater You ranting is unfocused. First you talk about platforming, then plot. At what point would you think the character would ever canonically die in the game because of something as insignificant as a cliff drop? Also, do you WANT a sad ending? Because that's a cliche within itself - especially considering the tone of the rest of the franchise.
I feel like another way of getting around these is just adding a little bit of extra effort in the interactivity, for example in the part in which Drake slides down the slope and is blocked by some wooden fences they could have added a little animation of him getting hit by them without actually being hurt should the player fails to shoot at them, that way skilled players can still feel accomplished for overcoming the obstacles without ramping up the difficulty
This genre of RUclips (game design analysis) is turning into the new let’s play of RUclips where it’s becoming the new thing that everybody is trying but I believe you are doing it the best
Best cinematic set piece is the jeep chase from Uncharted 4. It's adrenaline pumping, a technical marvel, has amazing looking scripted sections, but you're IN CONTROL almost the ENTIRE time.
The best set piece is really the end of Lost Legacy. It has all that from Unch 4 and a big ass train you can jump onto and off again several times as well.
This made me think about the final setpiece in Max Payne 3. Its a wide corridor filled with enemies and limited cover. The music is pumping you up as you do what you have done throughout the game, but this time the odds seem impossible, yet they aren't. Pretty much the whole game has prepared you for this and so you feel like the biggest badass there is.
I played the new Tomb Raider and quit after one hour because of all that hand holding. There was this once scene where Lara was trapped in a bear trap and there were wolves coming at you. And you had to shoot them with your bow. The fact that there were bushes right in front of you and you could only hear the wolves, but not see them until they jumped at you has done a great job at building some awesome tension. But after the 4th or 5th wolf I was tool slow to shoot the next one and the game suddenly slowed down, destroying all that tension in the process. Also, I was eaten by a bush once, for some reason.
Some games are more like semi-interactive movies than games. In a real game *you* should be the only one who determines what happens. It's all a bit too obvious that now a days there's more money in the game industry than in the movie business. Game levels today are "directed" rather than designed...
It is weird that some of these scenes are the most memorable and fun even when you aren't doing anything. I remember really enjoying the water slide in binary domain that lasted half a minute with minimal control lol. Guess maybe triggers same part of fun sense in brain you get from a roller coaster or an actual waterslide, then the gameplay between are like climbing back up the stairs.
My issue with "Press X to not die" Quick-Time-Events is that it seems like they're trying to raise the stakes by putting the player character in dangerous situations and scenarios without also putting the player in any danger. If you die, you just try again until you get it right, which usually isn't even that hard.
Something that might have pulled this off well is of all games, Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare. It only happens once and very quickly, but at some point the player is required to take out a helicopter all alone. They do this with a grappling hook and an SMG, without any special quicktime prompts, and it all happens in real time. By the time the player is jumping free of the helicopter after murdering its entire crew in the blink of an eye, they think to themselves "holy shit, I just did that."
I didn't think it was even possible to do scripted sequences right. If it was possible, I didn't think it could be explained in a simple expandable manner. How did you do both!?
Yeah I didn't think of that, Halo 1's final "racing across the exploding spaceship" is an amazing set-piece. I think with that they managed to keep up the excitement level comparable to the crazy Uncharted sequences but for much longer, and requiring more skill (but I do love most of those in Uncharted).
Adam Mackie Uncharted4 is real all the time, cutscenes and gameplay are the same And i forgot to say that uncharted4 got the highest award that a game can get, while all halos till now,. Sorry...
Theres one problem here. Although the lack of any real failure states does cheapen the excitement of these scripted sequences, if more of these reaction-heavy interactions that you want existed in these setpieces, then it's only natural for the game designers to expect a portion of the playerbase to fail these on the first try, since their inclusion is to be something that the player can potentially mess up. The problem with that is the only real thrill/excitement that these setpieces offer is their initial shock. replaying any of the segments in one of these scripted sequences cause of a failure would ultimately be more boring than what we have now, cause their is no room for any more shock since the player knows whats happening ahead. The problem that this causes for the game designers is, then when do they place their checkpoints? If they place them too far apart, it won't be fun because the player will just be pressing thebuttons in the exact same order the did earlier with nothing else to gain from it, but if they place them too close together, there's no stakes in failing them as you'll be put right where you were before, which means failing doesn't actually mean anything the way you want it to. That's why games like uncharted place so much emphasis on visual flair and story, because the setpieces manage to stay interesting cause of the composition, but still feel important because of the narrative driving. For example, the prison escape sequence at the start of uncharted 4 is more than just a parkour sequence because of the way it uses story and character. The sequence starts because of Rafe shooting Vargas, motivated by his reluctance to let him in on the money, midway through you're seperated from Rafe and need to catch up out of a fear of him leaving you behind (which you suspect because of his earlier murder of vargas), and this ends with you having to leave Sam behind when he gets shot because of this same fear of Rafe leaving you behind. Although a lot of scripted sequences are lacking, i dont think adding extra reflex-based challenges is a way to make them more interesting, instead designers should be opting towards using the setpiece to develop the games narrative as a way to make players care.
Yes, those are legit problems and pitfalls but it only concerns how a setpiece is as they are not what they could be. A bandage. Designers should create games to *play*. Games are about two things; Understanding Rules and Execution of Rules. Engagement happens when a player understands what to do (the initial "aha" moment) then skills are tested to recreate what they have in mind. Failure is a teaching moment. A core part of the game. Developers make sure that if the player fails, these players would have the tools to know why and would be able to try again with a different approach thus another "aha" moment and the cycle continues until the problem is solved. And yes, some games place emphasis on visual flair and story, because the setpieces manage to stay interesting cause of the composition, but still feel important because of the narrative driving. But if the *main focus* is *storytelling* and pacing is a concern, then why *diminish* the experience with a possibility of *player failure* ? Movies have been doing fine for years, what does pressing a button add to the experience? One could argue "player engagement" but again players are disengaged once failure happens, and as stated before failure is a core experience to games. As suggested in the video, these set pieces could work if the focus was different. For players to understand and know how to solve a problem.
One I think about is metro exodus where when monsters attack you in interactive cutscenes during the first few hours you're terrified and you can easily miss that you have to tap down the x button. But later in the game you realize anytime you lose control during a monster attack you have the x button ready and all tension is lost. Still a great game but that was one thing that took me out of the game the more I played
Some of the simpler set pieces are there for story purpose, the one you mentioned at the start of Rise where the guy warns about falling ice tells us he's an experienced adventurer and cares about Lara.
I've been playing the uncharted collection recently. I've found I don't find the gameplay all that fun, what keeps me playing it is my liking for the characters and the story so what I do is set it to the easiest difficulty and let it feel more like an interactive movie than a game
Consider Mark of the Ninja - in that, there are several 'set pieces', but they're all testing you on the actual skills you learn and use in the game. You don't suddenly have to fight a dozen guards - you have to remain undetected for a certain amount of time while those guards search for you.
interesting. i expected you to bring up Ori and the blind forest because unless you are only counting big 3D game set pieces. That is exactly what it did. Took the mechanics and ramped it up to eleven testing your skill and reactive speed along the way.
four years later unwanted opinion: Perhaps they're so restrictive because of the developers fear that the player will die too often? Nothing is more infuriating than having to play that one cutscene again and again and again and again and again and again, and that's what those set pieces essentially are.
It's only infuriating to replay a section of the game if that section of the game has no replay value like an Uncharted set piece. As in, if it was a big "set piece" that had interesting, dynamic, and fitting mechanics and interactivity instead of scripted sequence, it wouldn't be just "watching the same cutscene again and again", because it wouldn't be glorified cutscene anymore. It'd just be the game. I do think it's probably that they don't want the player dying too often, but it's probably not out of frustration with losing. Overcoming challenges are what games are all about. I think it's more that the player dying halts the story's flow and they're setting out to make a cinematic story experience first, not a game.
I feel like set pieces kind of run along the same lines as time pressure in games. Ya know, when the characters say “oh my god we have to escape before it blows up!” And then you can stand there for 3 hours with no consequence. It just adds an artificial pressure to the game that once you know about it, is completely lost. Like the set pieces where it adds an artificial pressure while making you feel badass, but once you know about it and realize there’s not much actual danger, the veil is lost
That’s how I remember the Prince of Persia series. Running from that Big Bad Thingy lining up your jumps, wall runs and time manipulation. Though if too complicated it might frustrate players hence the dumped down style to most of them so that more people can enjoy the game without having to really dig into. As for myself I’d often play game half way through, get bored with it and finish it 1-2 years later. Forgetting all the move sets and loosing all the skill acquired beforehand, therefore it’s much easier to get back into when it is held as simple as possible. But if the game would be more interesting in first place I might have no reason to stop playing it in the first place...
nice vid. I personally disagree with your criticism of Half Life 2's boat mission feeling "out of place". In my opinion, Half Life 2 offers unrivaled variety in gameplay consistently throughout the whole experience; variety that the 2 vehicle sections enhance, not take away from. I do agree with your main point of the vid. Those 'scripted' moments when you're still 'technically' in control serve to do nothing more than be interactive cutscenes... not unlike telltale games or the entirety of David Cage's games.
Simple fix. Have the same controls as the normal game but different animation. She runs and then the plane break in half and a small scene plays and she now hangs. But immediately it goes back to the same hanging mechanics you have used all the time with the same function and grab mechanics. When he's chased by the truck it's the same running controls and speed but instead of him staring straight and running he's now panicking and looking back but you can still roll and jump as usual meaning the player will still feel vulnerable to obstacles that their skill might fail at and that adds tension
Interesting video, but I think you're still downplaying the uncharted games a bit in order to have them fit your analysis of where gaming stands, when in reality these games already do what you wanted from them. Sure the games are full of scripted moments in between but when they want to go really into the action, they do it flawlessly, like in u4 every major setpiece does this, it takes gameplay concepts and tests your reflexes as well as presenting an exciting situation. Personally I'm ok with having moments like the jeep hanging from the cliff as long as it helps the pacing of the story and is followed by a combat encounter with great level design and as long as the game still gives me great setpieces when it's really trying. The example you gave of the tower collapse isn't even aplicable here, it does exactly what you said, the environment is presented in an interesting way and if you dont attach the rope, you will die, if you don't keep running and jumping, you will die, if you don't react quickly to that grenade, you will die, if you don't jump to that ledge after sliding in that mud hill, you will die, the wood barrier is to distract your eyes before you have to react by jumping, making it even more interesting
Knurdyob He was saying that you need to make the set pieces bring out more interesting mechanics, although it looks nice, for the most of the clock tower your doing the same shit that you do In the normal fights. He’s not downplaying anything.
@@brendanspaulding7930 3 years late to this, sometimes yt doesn't notify you of replies. don't even remember writing that but I don't think I was wrong, he's downplaying the uncharted games a bit as there's always been this narrative against them that portrays them as too "noninteractive", in my opinion they were really great at avoiding that, the setpieces (especially in the last one) are built around gameplay elements rather than on conceptual spectacle at the expense of player input. In the tower scene we're doing the same thing we've done before sure, but I don't see how that's a negative. It's the "gameplay" of the game. games should have a certain consistency, the game introduced elements in the first half, and then stuck with them throughout the second. I get the appeal of fantacizing about "something more", but we can always ask for more, no matter how much they give us. The game being consistent in it's gameplay elements is a positive, instead of introducing new elements the whole way through. (U4 for example did something different with each setpiece in the 1st half, already doing what the video wanted from it, don't think it's a fair criticism to say it should've kept introducing more things through the 2nd half). my main point though was that while it's true most action games followed this trend of "visual spectacle over gameplay", and that does warrant videos discussing the matter, I thought it was important to recognize the exceptions, I think the uncharted games were part of the few that avoided this for the most part
How to make a game into a legitimate, challenging experience -- that tests the player -- WITHOUT breaking the immersion of its narrative? This is what the modern philosophers talk about. Are video games just a lost art?
"When the stakes are fakes, there's no thrill on the grill"
Gold.
You've got the power to know
When is turbo button debuting his rap album
I never understood why the most intense moments in many of these action/adventures games take control away from the player. It's cool to watch but that's not what I bought the gaming console for.
so that way they work
At least the gameplay is great and polished. ND has reached perfection with Uncharted. The gameplay is excellent and well executed. Everything works perfectly.
People need to understand the difference between shallow depth and poor gameplay.
See: Dark Souls is my favorite franchise, but by 2019 I'm so tired I'm waiting for my vacation to start Sekiro! So many items with different effects and enemies and unique and connected scenarios. Just thinking about it makes me tired.
Uncharted offers challenge on the ultimate difficulty and best of all: you dont have to study the game!
These set pieces are a big part of the reason why I haven't touched a lot of the current AAA games. As you said, I usually find them almost insulting and they perfectly represent the bad design trends so many big budget games having been following for years now - this mistaken believe that orchestrating every single detail of your game can be a substitute for good, deep mechanics. Here's hoping devs and publishers take some of your suggestions to heart.
Same
At least the gameplay is great and polished. ND has reached perfection with Uncharted. The gameplay is excellent and well executed. Everything works perfectly.
People need to understand the difference between shallow depth and poor gameplay.
See: Dark Souls is my favorite franchise, but by 2019 I'm so tired I'm waiting for my vacation to start Sekiro! So many items with different effects and enemies and unique and connected scenarios. Just thinking about it makes me tired.
Uncharted offers challenge on the ultimate difficulty and best of all: you dont have to study the game!
@@afs3200 gameplay in uncharted is passable is nowhere near god tier action gameplay like resident evil 4
Lucas FS it’s trash and shallow
Jay Omega its the way dunkey puts it.
Its shallow but flashy enough to keep you engaged with it. I hated how simple uncharted action could be but when you piece everything together it becomes pretty flowing and tangible. Like swinging off a vine and landing on an enemy only to catch his AK47 and spray another enemy nearby as i dive-roll into cover and yank the enemy from the other side to mine and punch his face in. Its trash and shallow when you take it at face value but when you amalgamate all the different mechanics and controls it becomes something special. Not to say you can’t do that with just straight up gameplay but taking the environment into account can change the flow of everything.
I like the interesting scenarios that the Uncharted set pieces present. Fighting a bunch of dudes while the cruise ship is tipping over felt great and very intense despite it obviously being very scripted. The build up is also Dying kills momentum so making them simple is intentional which leads to the feeling of smoke and mirrors.
On the other hand I feel like all Tomb Raider set pieces consists of Lara running and jumping while shit crumbles around her which is super disappointing considering the slightly more depth those games have.
I think gameplay is king but other things matter just as much for me.
I think the Nepalese village section and train sequence in Uncharted 2 were great set pieces because they do actually incorporate the key mechanics of the game.
fragr33f Yeah I still replay that. Nice balance between cinematic handholding and freedom
Exactly. You still have full control of Drake and have all the platforming, climbing and shooting just like sections of normal gameplay.
I think Resident Evil 4 did it best. Nearly every room feels like a set pieces that changes the dynamic while still giving the player plenty of options.
SpeckObst except when RE4 loses itself with QTEs
Those make up less than 1% of the entire game and the Krauser fight actually is enhanced by the tension since the timing is pretty narrow.
SpeckObst No the QTE's are awful. I'd have rather walked/ran down an empty road than have ro QTE away from a boulder.
90% of the time in Resi 4, you're playing as Leon from a third person perspective and you have full control over his aim and movement. It rarely takes control from you to throw you into an "epic" exciting set piece and instead creates amazing set pieces through enemy placement, boss encounters and level design.
And I absolutely love Resi 4's use of QTEs, like the glory kills in the new DOOM, you're encouraged to play risky and move towards enemies when they stagger instead of running away. And don't even get me started on the way the game essentially gives Leon an un-spammable dodge move through QTEs. That game is just fucking genius.
As much as I love RE4, the QTE's are an issue. They are used so infrequently that it's easy to forget their existence and die because of that. Like it or not Cutscenes fundamentally have one important function in normal gameplay and that is a little break from the frantic action. QTE's fuck that concept in the ass. If the game had some more of QTE's and then some other quiet moments then the game would be alot better for it.
Just found this channel. So glad I've got a great RUclips channel to binge.
Couldn't agree more. That's why I hate most of these sequences.
Worst is these sequences are the most boring to develop and are the ones that drains the most resources out of a development team. They take forever to make right and cost a fortune. Way too much for moments that no one will want to replay.
At least the gameplay is great and polished. ND has reached perfection with Uncharted. The gameplay is excellent and well executed. Everything works perfectly.
People need to understand the difference between shallow depth and poor gameplay.
See: Dark Souls is my favorite franchise, but by 2019 I'm so tired I'm waiting for my vacation to start Sekiro! So many items with different effects and enemies and unique and connected scenarios. Just thinking about it makes me tired.
Uncharted offers challenge on the ultimate difficulty and best of all: you dont have to study the game!
The Madagascar chase as mentioned in the video is one if the most impressive if not THE most impressive set piece I've played in a game, its what every action set piece wishes it was, it plays great, looks great, lasts the perfect amount of time, gives the player plenty of control of the character, and I don't expect to see many sequences like that in other games because my lord that sequence sounds like it was a bitch to make.
Worth it, but not practical for everyone to be making set pieces like that
Can we officially rename the game to Rise of the Planet of the Tomb Raiders? Can that be done? Thanks.
Rise of the War for the Return of the Planet of the Revenge of the Tomb Raiders
With no ACTUAL fuckin Tomb Raiding
I just got to this part of the video. I rewind back a little to see if I heard what I thank heard. Paused the video. Gave it a like. Gave me a chuckle lol
விஷ்ணு கார்த்திக் eh lara did raid tombs
@@DarshanBhambhani in the new games, raiding tombs was largely a side activity divorced from the main game. Tomb Raider stopped being about Lara Croft raiding tombs and more about drama when the reboot was made
It's only been like 4 years since the last upload, you need to slow down mate.
I've always hated this trend. It's all smoke and mirrros as you said
I came here from that Shammy video and slapped that subscribe button. Nice video!
Personally, I love the big set-piece moments such as those in Tomb Raider reboot games. I think it's impressive how they manage to feel intense despite being simple to play through, but I'm definitely all for developers trying to spice these moments up a bit more in the gameplay department. It could also come down to personal taste as well. I prefer allowing myself to be swept up into whatever game I'm playing, and since this comes naturally it is easier to feel the intensity of the set-piece so I can play in the moment. I would probably hate most video games if I came across one of these moments only seeing them from a strictly gameplay perspective! I think it's great hearing perspectives like in this video because it's one I may not even consider otherwise!
Fr, I love the set-pieces in gaming, mostly because I’m an action fan, Uncharted is one of my favorite games ever
One thing about the set pieces in many post-PS3/X360 action games is the *often taking away of controls*. Uncharted, Tomb Raider Rising, Enslaved, all do it with result from "meh" to "boring". Even, Metal Gear Rising slows down when Raiden gets "injured".
The kind of beauty of Half Life 2 is that you are still under full control, so when you actually survive a set-piece, it's all the more satisfying.
Call of Duty has it's own share of setpieces, though they got pretty stale after Black Ops.
Also, I think you should also talk about "emergent gameplay" (or when setpiece gets generated through game systems and player's actions, like Far Cry and STALKER games), and compare it with this approach.
Anyways, another great video. Your videos have enlightened me a lot regarding games and ideas in them, and hope others too would understand and appreciate games better.
this is why i love MGS V (at least for the gameplay, the story is a bit.. disappointing)
it's a really dynamic experience
This is my exact problem with so many games today and the reason why the Spider-Man E3 trailer made me go "Oh no... :( "
Sahasrahla Well, Spider Man 2 on ps2 have that same kind of QTE
You put the thrill on all our grills.
SPOILERS FOR METAL GEAR SOLID 4. I think the best use of it comes from MGS4, most precisely, the microwave scene. You need to crawl through a giant microwave to get to GW. The only thing you need to do is QTE but it feels so tense since you snake slowly dying and, on the lower half of the screen, you see what Liquid is causing and you just want it to sped up but it just can't
The sad Love Theme really made me feel awful..
Carl Filion I was like "Don't die on me damn it, you can do it Snake!"
5:55 - Stuff like this is why I feel I got as much out of watching a playthrough of Uncharted 4 as actually playing it myself. Essentially just watching the game play itself until the movie continues. Even the more successful set pieces you mention later on in the video, to me, felt about as engaging as any of the more static pop-and-shoot sections (although the kinetic, constantly changing nature of the setting does help). Pop out, shoot until no more boys, move on. At that stage you are basically just making an Indiana Jones film.
It was infuriating seeing all the discussion surrounding the game devolve into the same kind of "GAMES ARE NOW EQUAL TO MOVIES HOORAY" legitimacy conversation that hasn't been relevant since, well, Uncharted 2 came out. Like you say, it's not about linearity-to me, it would have been more exciting to watch without the minimal mechanical requirements reminding me that the tension is all fake. In that sense, making the player actually play those sections felt like a crucially BAD action movie.
Great vid as always, my dude.
Writing on Games Question for the two of you related to this: have either of you seen Novacanoo's video on Uncharted 4? His breakdown of the shooting system is one of my favorite analysis segments I saw last year. What's weird to me though is how advanced the shooting mechanics are despite the game's heavier focus on adventure and big bombastic set pieces. Based on just how much movement is happening on the screen all the time, it seems like a much simpler shooting system could have been built and we'd be none the wiser. Just wondering if you guys think that the advanced shooting in some way takes away from the game in that case, since it's unnecessary and doesn't really belong with the game's true core mechanics. Like, does the added complexity actually have a negative effect one them game? Any of that make sense or nah? Anyways, cheers guys!
Writing on Games I disagree. You're missing out on a lot not playing the game for yourself. And watching a play through is going to cut out most of the gameplay anyway so I'm not sure if your argument about the cutscene-to-gameplay ratio is even valid if you didn't actually play the game. If you do play the game, you'd know that the balance between story and gameplay is extremely well-done.
...most people feel the satisfaction of pretending to be part of the game.
even though you are just "playing" a Interactive Movie.
there are lazy designers in the same way that there are lazy players... or just people without enough free time.
Watching a play through will NEVER be as good as playing the game yourself
Bhiner1029 that may be true, but some games are just an absolute chore to play but have an amazing story. I don't think Uncharted is an example of this, though, as it was mad fun.
And yet, I love these moments in gaming.
It started with the game "Split Second" and the Time Attack Races.
At the end of the airfield, a plane crashes down... and that moment is just phenomal and I played that level over and over again, just to witness this moment.
A fantastic example of this done well is the Ginso Tree in Ori and the Blind Forest. The entire tree is a good example of level design which also introduces and expands upon two new mechanics (blue things which teleport the player as well as a new ability called "bash"). Once the player has gotten through sections which require understanding of these new mechanics, the game throws a wrench at the player in the form of an exciting set piece... the tree floods with water. This requires the player to rapidly link together all the mechanics they have learned up to that point in quick succession (jump, double jump, wall jump, using the teleports, bash, etc.) It is both a flashy set piece that creates a very tense moment as well as a "final test" of the player's understanding and mastery of mechanics. It is hands down the best moment in the game... and that is what you want to do as a game developer; create memorable moments.
Start of Ginso Tree: ruclips.net/video/Wh6gBjfXKxw/видео.htmlm21s
Start of set piece: ruclips.net/video/Wh6gBjfXKxw/видео.htmlm23s
I haven't played all the games mentioned here, but I think the set pieces in the Uncharted series especially (and some in the recent Tomb Raiders) were done very well. It seems that the purpose of the set pieces is to give an adrenaline rush with an enjoyable interactive sequence, which is what the Uncharted series does very well. I'm talking specifically about the relatively short sequences that involve escaping / climbing out of somewhere that's falling apart around you. The thing about these sequences is, if the player dies it ruins the pacing even if they succeed the 2nd time, so the devs need to strike a good balance of difficulty so that the vast majority of players will succeed on the first try and still get an adrenaline rush. I think a lot of the issues with set pieces are only noticeable on the 2nd playthrough, so for most people they aren't really issues at all.
I don't complete disagree or agree but I'd argue that sometimes they take away some challenge in some set pieces because they don't want you to die and completely kill the momentum.
then why aren't they cutscenes I can skip? that is especially infuriating during multiple playthroughs
Kevboard Arts because they want you to play the game, and not watch it.
For example, the last boss from FF XV was not design to be hard, but cool looking instead. They did not want players interrupting the story moment because players were dying by the final boss multiple times.
Even so, the game gives you tons os extra bosses as real challenge.
+MemoriesLP
Gameplay should never be made less enjoyable just for the story.
Because watching cutscenes where the player character does some awesome looking shit isn't fun? Even if the skill ceiling is set fairly low a game with good game feel will always be more enjoyable than a non-interactive scene which is in all other respects equal.
Imperium Americanum FF XV has good mechanic feels but even so it has scenematic gameplay at a few bosses.
I dont see any problem at that.
The final boss use all the fundamentals of the combat system, but at the same time it has scenematic parts because the game is trying to show cool things too.
The boss before the final boss also has lots of scenematic parts while also using the fundamentals of the combat system.
So it really depends on the game.
Your videos blow me away. Great writing, interesting ideas, engaging visuals, and loads of other awesome things you do. Keep up the great work.
God Of War 1-3 were a lot of the time scripted set pieces, and a lot of the most iconic moments were set pieces or QTEs. For some reason, we all, I included, fucking love God of War.
Because God of War's scripted set pieces were too crazy (especially because this is a franchise that uses monsters, gods and titans and stuff 99x bigger than the MC)
I really like scripted set pieces, (when done right, like in Uncharted), so here are my thoughts.
Like you said, they are there partially to emulate movies. They give you the thrill of watching a crazy action scene. Problem is, if you are presented with a bunch of difficult challenges, then that conflicts with the flow of a crazy action scene. Because a lot of players will die. A lot. That ruins the momentum you want in a scripted set piece.
Remember the intro to Inside? If you die in that intro chase sequence, it feels awful. Not in a "I feel sorry for this kid" way, but in a "clearly the designers didn't want me to die here" way.
I think that's why the challenge has been sanded off the edges of scripted set pieces. If there's any real challenge to those segments, players will die frequently, causing the scene to lose momentum.
Obviously these types of scenes are not perfect, but if you're looking for skill challenges, I don't think Uncharted or the Tomb Raider reboot are the games to play. They're about spectacle, which I think they deliver on pretty well.
this topic reminds me what stories people share in games like battlefield... is it from campaigns, no. Battlefield online gameplay stories about some crazy rush or kill streak or whatever else exciting because it was not scripted bombastic barely interactive movie cut scene...
"Daigo's parry" would not be legendary or even remembered 10 min after if it was a cut scene or scripted event. Games are gameplay first and they are remembered for it.
You're first mistake was using Battlefield's campaign as an example.
The entire reason these scripted action scenes exist, and why they're not skill based, is because ten years ago they would have been cutscenes. But game developers listened to people's complaints that cutscenes were boring/unfun, so they make them playable. That's why you got QTEs, and then later on these kinds of set pieces. They're not meant to be tests of skill, they're meant to be cutscenes that are interactable.
One game which did set pieces gracefully is The Last Guardian. They exist to grow the bond between the boy and Trico, and because your character can't fight, it makes you feel vulnerable. One particular set piece which I found effective is designed to make the player feel helpless, something that I felt none of the Uncharted games have ever done.
so are we just gonna avoid the fact that he said "rise of the planet of the tomb raiders" at 6:04 ??
Ignore it? He got my like because of it!
Aladelicous same here! Haha. I went back to see if I heard correctly. Paused the video to give it a like.
The problem is they are all supposed to be cinematic moments, with great pacing and build up of an adrenaline rush to a thrilling climax, and to experience them fully... you have to not die. That's the very point of them. You have to just make it through by the skin of your teeth while feeling that death was close, but not actually dying, otherwise all the tension and build up of excitement is lost as you do the most "gamey" thing ever... play the same bit again.
And players vary hugely in skill level, so they have to make it survivable for people with slow reactions. I agree, the more agency a player has, the better, but only if an average player is able to still make it through first try. So they are always going to skew to the easy side, except in cases where the get the balance just right of teaching you the mechanic to survive them without being too intrusive. As you say, the ones where they depend on core skills are the best.
"When the steaks/stakes are fakes there's no thrill on the grill"
Ah, amazing idiom there
You deserve a like for that
I remember a game on the original xbox where the whole entire point of the game was to drive through crazy awesome set pieces. Wish i remembered the name of it. Damn.
As soon as I heard ratatat playing I knew I had to like
I love tropical freeze's gameplay set pieces because it you don't lose control and they actually elevate the gameplay
I didn't watch the whole video just the first minute and I agree. But I believe that many people actually misunderstand games like Uncharted. They are not really games. They are intereactive movies. Like Heavy Rain. It's all there is to it. But if you want to play a game, then you play something like Zelda, like Devil May Cry... hell... the best of all, Super Mario Bros. It's just gaming from start to end.
Uncharted and Heavy Rain are not the same. Uncharted is a platformer/third person cover shooter. Heavy Rain is a multi choice story based game where decisions can get playable characters killed and result in different endings, none of which is present in Uncharted. Like, how are they the same? They're just not.
@@ashleythomas4112 You misunderstod my point. The game design are completely different, but they both have a common denominator that doesn't diferentiate the at all. And this is an interactive movie. Half of Uncharted always get's interrupted by cinematic sequences during the gameplay with the exact same graphic and they are both very story heavy during both periods (gaming and cinematics) Uncharted is a movie that you are playing. Hence interactivity. Heavy Rain is exactly the same thing, the only differences is that way you play it. Look it this way. Chess and Draught are two completely different games, but the both belong to the same genre. They are bord games and thinking games. I hope you do get what I mean.
Mario is not an interactive movie, but is third person like uncharted. Devil May Cry at least before the PS3 times and Darksiders are Third Person as well, but they are not considered as interactive movies. But in the end you can see it how you like. I say it is like this and it is also considered like it by many. If someone just can't make the difference between playabiltiy and or how you play a game then I would recommend you to check out what game design measn. I didn't understand game design since a year now. I though it was how games looked and all but actually the game designer is like the director in a movie. It is the one guy who has the vision of the game, how it looks, what story it has and how you play it. that means also knowing what your avatar will do when you push these buttons. It's a hell of a job and responsibility. So yes. Both games are very different and yet they are the same. I hope you understand what I mean.
Cheers my friend.
The song at 7:17 is A Familiar Taste, it is from the sound track of the movie "The Social Network"... :)
Well done man, these recommendations would greatly improve damn near every game with scripted sequences like these.
"If the steaks are fake, then there's no thrill on the grill."
10/10
A lot of Sonic games have this problem, though not to as much of an extent. Sonic Lost World has way too many segments where control is taken away while you run around at a cool camera angle. I really wish it wouldn't do that.
Absolutely... But while Sonic Adventure and on have been criticized harshly for it (and rightly so), Uncharted mostly gets a free pass because... it's new and shiny unlike old Sonic Adventure, I guess.
The scripting in sonic adventure is something k can easily excuse tho. In the classic games all his movement depended on how the physics worked (or whatever they did to make it look like the game had physics) and that's way harder to do in 3D especially in a 20 year old game. A non scripted 3D sonic game that uses the Genesis style of movement would be very interesting.
1 thing I found funny was the volcano Firewalker mission escape scene.
While inside the building, I ran to the exit, realized I missed a safe, went back, hacked it and ran out.
This is some sharp analysis. Also helps that Rise of the Tomb Raider and Uncharted feature heavily. You even caught my favorite set piece moment in Rise in the final area of the game.
You are wanting these games to be something they aren't. You are judging a fish on its ability to fly.
Gameplay is more varied than we give it cred it for. Gameplay can be a lot more than just the things I want them to be.
The train of Splinter Cell: Pandora's Tomorrow is way better than the later one
I still prefer Uncharted over the other tries the industry has made any day in the last few years to emulate this differently.
that Loud Pipes timing.
Nice.
God bless the Tekken tag 2 music at the end
One thing that Tekken always nail
Was expecting a mention of Ori and the Blind Forest. It has by far the best scripted set pieces of any game I've played, including (and indeed especially) Uncharted and Tomb Raider. They are a genuine, challenging test of the player's mastery of the mechanics which you'll probably fail several times. However because there's no load time or gap in the gameplay, you will want to keep trying until you succeed, and you will come out the other side a better player and able to face the later challenges.
Great video though. Hits the nail on the head of my problem with these kind of games.
man that was a meaty video. I will now always refer to that game as Rise Of The Planet Of The Tomb Raiders
I have been an Uncharted fan since Uncharted 1 and i have to agree with you. lately i've started noticing patterns, after Uncharted 2, where it began.
I don't feel any tension playing this game anymore, i just move from one place to the next listening to dialouge, watching stuff happen on the screen.
But the story is still so engaging for me that i don't mind that in the moment, but after i finished i was just done with the game all together.
After beating games like bloodborne and dark souls 3 for the first time i now KNOW how pure gameplay feels like, and set pieces are basically the bosses in those games.
Great insights, never thought there are so many aspects to the game lol
It seems nobody noticed you saying "Rise of the Planet of the Tomb Raider". Damn Clever man! Nice videos
Uncharted does it great period.
The editing for the intro was smooth as butter. Good stuff.
Just noticed you used Ratchet and Clank 2 music in the background
GMMReviews ironically it has good example of setpieces. The train and that final grinding sequence.
I think it's worth talking about Call of Duty if we're going to talk about setpieces. CoD has consistently made setpieces an opportunity to test your skills in new or more difficult scenarios. My personal favorite in the recent games is the asteroid setpiece in Infinite Warfare - by putting you on a rapidly rotating object close to the sun you are forced to use movement tech and combat skill to move and eliminate enemies without getting burnt alive.
Uncharted 4 was the one where I got really tired of these boring setpieces and fake tension. The game can be barely called a platformer, since falling and jump accuracy is a nonissue and 90% of platforming challenges are just one way pathways where you hold the stick in the direction you want to climb. The Madagascar chase was the only standout, everything else was just about running in a straight line and occasionally reacting to a predictable QTE, with several moments straight up copied from previous games. The Last of Us pulled it off better, with less predictable and much more lethal situations sprinkled throughout the game.
Mattchester That's because Uncharted isn't a platformer. It was not designed to be a platformer
Abraham 302 Then why the fuck are you climbing 80 percent of the damn game.
This is coming from someone who played the SHIT out of 2 and 3. (For the multiplayer)
But you’re straight up lying if you say the story mode in uncharted 4 wasn’t half climbing... And you’re right it’s NOT a platformer, so wtf was naughty dog doing? Idk... got sick of cliffs breaking and the usual fake tension crap. The effect wears off with age.. Like the OP said TLOU was way more successful, mainly because I thought something fucked up happening in this world is all too easy and fits so anything can happen. But Nathan falling? Nathan Drake? Falling to his death or anything really consequential at all happening to him? No nothings going to happen. They’re not even going to kill his brother again... TBH the ending was so disappointing.. Not the fact his brother lied I thought that was interesting. But idk Uncharted just had too good and clean of an ending...
Abraham 302 it is a platformer...
Benjamin Slater You ranting is unfocused. First you talk about platforming, then plot. At what point would you think the character would ever canonically die in the game because of something as insignificant as a cliff drop? Also, do you WANT a sad ending? Because that's a cliche within itself - especially considering the tone of the rest of the franchise.
I feel like another way of getting around these is just adding a little bit of extra effort in the interactivity, for example in the part in which Drake slides down the slope and is blocked by some wooden fences they could have added a little animation of him getting hit by them without actually being hurt should the player fails to shoot at them, that way skilled players can still feel accomplished for overcoming the obstacles without ramping up the difficulty
I feel like the exploding trucks in the uncharted 4 convoy sequence is to hide a sneaky level transition of sorts
This genre of RUclips (game design analysis) is turning into the new let’s play of RUclips where it’s becoming the new thing that everybody is trying but I believe you are doing it the best
I've seen a lot more people doing this and I love this. I like intellectual talk about game design and various interpretations from different people.
Best cinematic set piece is the jeep chase from Uncharted 4. It's adrenaline pumping, a technical marvel, has amazing looking scripted sections, but you're IN CONTROL almost the ENTIRE time.
The best set piece is really the end of Lost Legacy. It has all that from Unch 4 and a big ass train you can jump onto and off again several times as well.
This made me think about the final setpiece in Max Payne 3. Its a wide corridor filled with enemies and limited cover. The music is pumping you up as you do what you have done throughout the game, but this time the odds seem impossible, yet they aren't. Pretty much the whole game has prepared you for this and so you feel like the biggest badass there is.
This video makes me feel like... You should do a video on noman's sky.
I played the new Tomb Raider and quit after one hour because of all that hand holding.
There was this once scene where Lara was trapped in a bear trap and there were wolves coming at you. And you had to shoot them with your bow. The fact that there were bushes right in front of you and you could only hear the wolves, but not see them until they jumped at you has done a great job at building some awesome tension. But after the 4th or 5th wolf I was tool slow to shoot the next one and the game suddenly slowed down, destroying all that tension in the process.
Also, I was eaten by a bush once, for some reason.
This is what I was trying to get at all the time with these games and thankfully you put my thoughts into words
Amazing intro with the musik kicking in when the thing hit the other thingy
Some games are more like semi-interactive movies than games. In a real game *you* should be the only one who determines what happens. It's all a bit too obvious that now a days there's more money in the game industry than in the movie business. Game levels today are "directed" rather than designed...
Nice song choice in the beginning lol. Love Ratatat.
Keep up the good work dude really enjoying the content!
Aw, I like when some of these appear as long as they aren't too frequent. Sometimes they help you get more attached to characters.
There's a ton of examples of how to do this right among old 2D games, e.g. Contra: Hard Corps
It is weird that some of these scenes are the most memorable and fun even when you aren't doing anything. I remember really enjoying the water slide in binary domain that lasted half a minute with minimal control lol. Guess maybe triggers same part of fun sense in brain you get from a roller coaster or an actual waterslide, then the gameplay between are like climbing back up the stairs.
My issue with "Press X to not die" Quick-Time-Events is that it seems like they're trying to raise the stakes by putting the player character in dangerous situations and scenarios without also putting the player in any danger. If you die, you just try again until you get it right, which usually isn't even that hard.
The uncharted series has the best set pieces in video game history.
Random Tekken Tag Tournament 2 track at the end. Well done.
Something that might have pulled this off well is of all games, Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare. It only happens once and very quickly, but at some point the player is required to take out a helicopter all alone. They do this with a grappling hook and an SMG, without any special quicktime prompts, and it all happens in real time. By the time the player is jumping free of the helicopter after murdering its entire crew in the blink of an eye, they think to themselves "holy shit, I just did that."
I didn't think it was even possible to do scripted sequences right.
If it was possible, I didn't think it could be explained in a simple expandable manner.
How did you do both!?
Yet uncharted is still my favourite franchise of all time.
nop
It's called having an opinion. You are not supposed to let others make your opinion
Halo 1's escape at the end = best set piece of all time.
agreed
nah uncharted 2 train set piece for me
Brozen Roxies not even close tbh
Yeah I didn't think of that, Halo 1's final "racing across the exploding spaceship" is an amazing set-piece. I think with that they managed to keep up the excitement level comparable to the crazy Uncharted sequences but for much longer, and requiring more skill (but I do love most of those in Uncharted).
Adam Mackie
Uncharted4 is real all the time, cutscenes and gameplay are the same
And i forgot to say that uncharted4 got the highest award that a game can get, while all halos till now,. Sorry...
Theres one problem here. Although the lack of any real failure states does cheapen the excitement of these scripted sequences, if more of these reaction-heavy interactions that you want existed in these setpieces, then it's only natural for the game designers to expect a portion of the playerbase to fail these on the first try, since their inclusion is to be something that the player can potentially mess up. The problem with that is the only real thrill/excitement that these setpieces offer is their initial shock. replaying any of the segments in one of these scripted sequences cause of a failure would ultimately be more boring than what we have now, cause their is no room for any more shock since the player knows whats happening ahead. The problem that this causes for the game designers is, then when do they place their checkpoints? If they place them too far apart, it won't be fun because the player will just be pressing thebuttons in the exact same order the did earlier with nothing else to gain from it, but if they place them too close together, there's no stakes in failing them as you'll be put right where you were before, which means failing doesn't actually mean anything the way you want it to. That's why games like uncharted place so much emphasis on visual flair and story, because the setpieces manage to stay interesting cause of the composition, but still feel important because of the narrative driving. For example, the prison escape sequence at the start of uncharted 4 is more than just a parkour sequence because of the way it uses story and character. The sequence starts because of Rafe shooting Vargas, motivated by his reluctance to let him in on the money, midway through you're seperated from Rafe and need to catch up out of a fear of him leaving you behind (which you suspect because of his earlier murder of vargas), and this ends with you having to leave Sam behind when he gets shot because of this same fear of Rafe leaving you behind. Although a lot of scripted sequences are lacking, i dont think adding extra reflex-based challenges is a way to make them more interesting, instead designers should be opting towards using the setpiece to develop the games narrative as a way to make players care.
Yes, those are legit problems and pitfalls but it only concerns how a setpiece is as they are not what they could be. A bandage. Designers should create games to *play*.
Games are about two things; Understanding Rules and Execution of Rules. Engagement happens when a player understands what to do (the initial "aha" moment) then skills are tested to recreate what they have in mind. Failure is a teaching moment. A core part of the game. Developers make sure that if the player fails, these players would have the tools to know why and would be able to try again with a different approach thus another "aha" moment and the cycle continues until the problem is solved.
And yes, some games place emphasis on visual flair and story, because the setpieces manage to stay interesting cause of the composition, but still feel important because of the narrative driving. But if the *main focus* is *storytelling* and pacing is a concern, then why *diminish* the experience with a possibility of *player failure* ? Movies have been doing fine for years, what does pressing a button add to the experience? One could argue "player engagement" but again players are disengaged once failure happens, and as stated before failure is a core experience to games.
As suggested in the video, these set pieces could work if the focus was different. For players to understand and know how to solve a problem.
One I think about is metro exodus where when monsters attack you in interactive cutscenes during the first few hours you're terrified and you can easily miss that you have to tap down the x button. But later in the game you realize anytime you lose control during a monster attack you have the x button ready and all tension is lost. Still a great game but that was one thing that took me out of the game the more I played
Some of the simpler set pieces are there for story purpose, the one you mentioned at the start of Rise where the guy warns about falling ice tells us he's an experienced adventurer and cares about Lara.
i like prince of persia ones where you need to run between different traps while either getting chased by dahaka or taking damage as dark prince.
oh my god i hear loud pipes
and ratchet and clank music
your a fucking legend
I've been playing the uncharted collection recently. I've found I don't find the gameplay all that fun, what keeps me playing it is my liking for the characters and the story so what I do is set it to the easiest difficulty and let it feel more like an interactive movie than a game
Ok... I always hated these things... but I think you've convinced me that there's something worthwhile here.
Consider Mark of the Ninja - in that, there are several 'set pieces', but they're all testing you on the actual skills you learn and use in the game. You don't suddenly have to fight a dozen guards - you have to remain undetected for a certain amount of time while those guards search for you.
interesting. i expected you to bring up Ori and the blind forest because unless you are only counting big 3D game set pieces. That is exactly what it did. Took the mechanics and ramped it up to eleven testing your skill and reactive speed along the way.
The reason I like set pieces is because unlike multiplayer, you always survive (usaly) and it makes me fell like I’m good at the game
four years later unwanted opinion:
Perhaps they're so restrictive because of the developers fear that the player will die too often? Nothing is more infuriating than having to play that one cutscene again and again and again and again and again and again, and that's what those set pieces essentially are.
It's only infuriating to replay a section of the game if that section of the game has no replay value like an Uncharted set piece. As in, if it was a big "set piece" that had interesting, dynamic, and fitting mechanics and interactivity instead of scripted sequence, it wouldn't be just "watching the same cutscene again and again", because it wouldn't be glorified cutscene anymore. It'd just be the game.
I do think it's probably that they don't want the player dying too often, but it's probably not out of frustration with losing. Overcoming challenges are what games are all about. I think it's more that the player dying halts the story's flow and they're setting out to make a cinematic story experience first, not a game.
Really good writing. Subscribed
I feel like set pieces kind of run along the same lines as time pressure in games. Ya know, when the characters say “oh my god we have to escape before it blows up!” And then you can stand there for 3 hours with no consequence. It just adds an artificial pressure to the game that once you know about it, is completely lost. Like the set pieces where it adds an artificial pressure while making you feel badass, but once you know about it and realize there’s not much actual danger, the veil is lost
That’s how I remember the Prince of Persia series. Running from that Big Bad Thingy lining up your jumps, wall runs and time manipulation.
Though if too complicated it might frustrate players hence the dumped down style to most of them so that more people can enjoy the game without having to really dig into.
As for myself I’d often play game half way through, get bored with it and finish it 1-2 years later. Forgetting all the move sets and loosing all the skill acquired beforehand, therefore it’s much easier to get back into when it is held as simple as possible.
But if the game would be more interesting in first place I might have no reason to stop playing it in the first place...
nice vid. I personally disagree with your criticism of Half Life 2's boat mission feeling "out of place". In my opinion, Half Life 2 offers unrivaled variety in gameplay consistently throughout the whole experience; variety that the 2 vehicle sections enhance, not take away from. I do agree with your main point of the vid. Those 'scripted' moments when you're still 'technically' in control serve to do nothing more than be interactive cutscenes... not unlike telltale games or the entirety of David Cage's games.
Thank you for using ratatat
Damn nice rhymes at 4 minutes
Simple fix. Have the same controls as the normal game but different animation. She runs and then the plane break in half and a small scene plays and she now hangs. But immediately it goes back to the same hanging mechanics you have used all the time with the same function and grab mechanics. When he's chased by the truck it's the same running controls and speed but instead of him staring straight and running he's now panicking and looking back but you can still roll and jump as usual meaning the player will still feel vulnerable to obstacles that their skill might fail at and that adds tension
That literally changes nothing.
6:04- "RISE OF THE PLANET OF THE TOMB RAIDERS" did anyone else hear that?
Interesting video, but I think you're still downplaying the uncharted games a bit in order to have them fit your analysis of where gaming stands, when in reality these games already do what you wanted from them. Sure the games are full of scripted moments in between but when they want to go really into the action, they do it flawlessly, like in u4 every major setpiece does this, it takes gameplay concepts and tests your reflexes as well as presenting an exciting situation. Personally I'm ok with having moments like the jeep hanging from the cliff as long as it helps the pacing of the story and is followed by a combat encounter with great level design and as long as the game still gives me great setpieces when it's really trying. The example you gave of the tower collapse isn't even aplicable here, it does exactly what you said, the environment is presented in an interesting way and if you dont attach the rope, you will die, if you don't keep running and jumping, you will die, if you don't react quickly to that grenade, you will die, if you don't jump to that ledge after sliding in that mud hill, you will die, the wood barrier is to distract your eyes before you have to react by jumping, making it even more interesting
Knurdyob He was saying that you need to make the set pieces bring out more interesting mechanics, although it looks nice, for the most of the clock tower your doing the same shit that you do In the normal fights. He’s not downplaying anything.
@@brendanspaulding7930 3 years late to this, sometimes yt doesn't notify you of replies. don't even remember writing that but I don't think I was wrong, he's downplaying the uncharted games a bit as there's always been this narrative against them that portrays them as too "noninteractive", in my opinion they were really great at avoiding that, the setpieces (especially in the last one) are built around gameplay elements rather than on conceptual spectacle at the expense of player input.
In the tower scene we're doing the same thing we've done before sure, but I don't see how that's a negative. It's the "gameplay" of the game. games should have a certain consistency, the game introduced elements in the first half, and then stuck with them throughout the second. I get the appeal of fantacizing about "something more", but we can always ask for more, no matter how much they give us. The game being consistent in it's gameplay elements is a positive, instead of introducing new elements the whole way through. (U4 for example did something different with each setpiece in the 1st half, already doing what the video wanted from it, don't think it's a fair criticism to say it should've kept introducing more things through the 2nd half).
my main point though was that while it's true most action games followed this trend of "visual spectacle over gameplay", and that does warrant videos discussing the matter, I thought it was important to recognize the exceptions, I think the uncharted games were part of the few that avoided this for the most part
How to make a game into a legitimate, challenging experience -- that tests the player -- WITHOUT breaking the immersion of its narrative? This is what the modern philosophers talk about.
Are video games just a lost art?
From the first beat at 0:10 I noticed Ratatat Loud Pipes. Not really relevant but it's cool how recognizable it is.
Loving that Ratatat in the background muh man.