Uncharted - High quality whilst it lasts

Jul 2, 2009
125
1
0
43
England
#1
I got my hands on a copy of the first game for a tenner and completed it in 9 hours. In those 9 hours I experienced an amazing game that even got my Wife interested in the PS3 and what was going on.

Undoubtedly a fantastic game. However I kept coming back to thinking when it was released it would of been around £40, and thats a lot of cash for just 9 hours of game.

Is Uncharted 2 just as short? I know it has online, so that helps.

Whats people thoughts on short games, value for money or not?
 
Feb 11, 2008
40,321
431
83
South Carolina
#3
short or not, as long as I've had fun with the game, then I'm happy.
I beat the U2 on the hardest difficulty in 11hrs. on the first play through. (not crushing)
 
Nov 19, 2007
3,761
0
36
#4
Quality > quantity. I prefer a short game if it's really enjoyable opposed to something that might be padded out. That said Uncharted 2 is brimming with content, longer SP campaign, co-op missions plus MP. Amazing value.
 

Acid Snake

Super Elite
Sep 7, 2008
2,030
16
38
#5
I'm not a big fan of short games. There have been plenty of times when I bought a new game and completed it the day bought it and it feels like I just wasted my money. However, when something like Uncharted 2 comes along, I'm willing to make an exception. Other than that, I usually stick with RPG games because a quite a few of them can last anywhere from 25-80 hours and in rare occasions 100+ hours.
 

Lefein

Ultimate Veteran
Jun 9, 2005
22,966
158
63
39
#6
I think if a game like Uncharted were 100 hours long it would be very tiring to the player. For instance, games like RPGs make up for obnoxious repetition with leveling systems or skilling up so that there is a reward for that. On the flip side, if you made an Uncharted game twice as long, would it feel like an action packed adventure without anything short of ten times the amount of treasure and a plot that ends up pitting you against Frieza in outer space?

The same thing works for games like Gears of War or a Ninja Gaiden game. The pop and drop mechanics or over the top action is supposed to draw you in. If you did that for more than twenty hours you would be mentally fatigued from it and the gameplay wouldn't feel action packed or novel, anymore.

That being said, U2 is definitely longer than the first and is worth every single penny to own.
 

Fenix

Elite Sage
Aug 19, 2007
11,840
83
48
30
Ontario, Canada
#7
[QUOTE="Graham_UK, post: 0]I got my hands on a copy of the first game for a tenner and completed it in 9 hours. In those 9 hours I experienced an amazing game that even got my Wife interested in the PS3 and what was going on.

Undoubtedly a fantastic game. However I kept coming back to thinking when it was released it would of been around £40, and thats a lot of cash for just 9 hours of game.

Is Uncharted 2 just as short? I know it has online, so that helps.

Whats people thoughts on short games, value for money or not?[/quote]

In the case of Uncharted, it had an excellent story and pretty good gameplay. I got my copy a few months after release and I thought it was quite worth it.
 

mcav

Elite Guru
Jan 12, 2007
5,757
23
0
44
#8
Play MW, MW2 and then come back to talk about short campaigns.

I cannot imagine you collected much treasure or got many trophies when you completed Drakes fortune in 9 hours either. Either way, it is more than double the time it takes to complete MW2 single player.
 

Old Mate

Apprentice
Jan 14, 2008
304
2
0
29
#9
It took me about 12 hours to play through on hard. Then I went through it again on very easy getting all the trophies and treasure. Then once more on crushing to get the platinum trophy. That's before I started on the multiplayer, on which I've spent quite a lot of time.