![]() Oh, and I guess it had "puzzles", but I never saw the point of any of them. It was literally hold forward and listen to a bunch of exposition dumping, near auto platforming, dull as hell encounters into the next exposition dump. I don't play video games to watch a wannabe interactive movie. The struggle was real for me to even get halfway through Uncharted 4 due to how boring it was. For gameplay, it's not even close, despite the Tomb Raider reboots trying a bit too hard to be Uncharted. Regardless, Uncharted 4 obviously wins for presentation, but that's pretty much all Naughty Dog cares about anyway. It never actually felt good to me at all. Have guns, shoot enemies as they pop in and out of cover like you're at a shooting gallery as they soak up bullets unless you get the occasional headshot ad nauseum. Is it only good in comparison to the previous Uncharteds (which were terrible in that regard) or only in MP? For the main game it just felt barely above serviceable. I can't wrap my head around all of the praise the gunplay of Uncharted 4 gets. UC4 seems very intentionally slower paced and more methodical in its narrative or character development compared to RotTR, or even compared to other Uncharted titles. Though granted its pacing wouldn't have been to everyone's taste. I enjoyed both games, but to me it's obvious to see why Uncharted 4 was the better received title. More weapon options (poison bow and arrow is OP) What Rise of the Tomb Raider does better Overall, if I had to summarise, what Uncharted 4 does better RotTR has many of these elements too, but they're generally no where near as fluid or effortlessly interchangeable within combat arenas as they are in UC4s. This on top of contextual melee and the quality cover shooting mechanics too. There's more mechanical and animation complexity on offer in UC4 too, which is promoted not only by the super layered, complex and rich level design, but also the degree of gameplay options in many of the combat levels too, from general platforming and climbing, the ropeswing (usually placed in many spots all over combat arena maps), the mud sliding, underwater swimming, stealth options etc, which can all be transitioned to and from dynamically and fluidly mid combat. UC4s enemy AI is not only more competent, but combat arenas are generally so much more intuitively designed and complex, offering a bigger breadth of mobility and approach options. Then there's the quality of actual arena design and AI in UC4 vs RotTR. To clarify, these issues didn't exist in the Xbox 360 version of Tomb Raider.Īdd to that, there are so many things jumping between the two that made RotTR seem so much less fluid and instead more cumbersome, eg the animations, the cover system, for example the way you snap peak in and out of corner cover (you essentially can't in RotTR) etc. The gameplay was severely hampered for me due to wonky controls, huge amounts of input lag, a deadzone in the controls plus weird aiming acceleration. I'm surprised some claim RotTR had better gameplay than UC4, especially if they played the Xbox One version at launch like I did.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |