Uncharted 3

I have been thinking of writing about Uncharted 3 since it came out in November. I was never very impressed with Uncharted 1 and knew nothing about Uncharted 2 when it came out. I played Uncharted 2 with no expectation but it is now one of my favourite games of all time. When Uncharted 3 came out I was wary that my expectations were very high and I wanted to wait until I felt I could separate what I thought of the game from those expectations. It is an extremely rich game and while every aspect of it could be analysed in depth, there is one sequence which encapsulates most of my feelings about Uncharted 3.

-------- 14 --------

Cruisin’ for a Bruisin

Chapter 14 is perfectly executed. Its beautiful, atmospheric, has incredible action set pieces, and has the most dynamic and exciting game environment ever. Even with my very basic understanding of how video games are made it is an absolute marvel. The technical skill required is awesome. The cruise ship sails on a living ocean with massive swells and dark stormy weather. All the environments move with a perfect pitch and yaw down to the smallest detail. The water sloshes in the swimming pool and the chandeliers throw dancing shadows in the ballroom. Naughty Dog create this perfectly immersive environment and, as the action escalates, they destroy it perfectly also. From the moment the ship starts to sink the environment seamlessly changes around you. Water rushes in and the ship rolls onto its side but you fight on regardless. Your movement is never restricted and your interaction is never altered. Naughty Dog have left them selves no room to hide, no loading screens, no cut scenes. As a result you are never taken out of the game, the suspension of disbelief if complete and the action is as it should be, relentless. The cruise ship is a worthy successor to the train in Uncharted 2. It takes an environment and explores it in every way possible. It explores it to destruction.

-------- 12 --------

A Train to Catch

The difference in Uncharted 2 is how the sequence sits in the plot. The train journey is used as a narrative device extremely effectively and provides a backbone for the story, taking the characters a significant distance to their intended destination. The story sees the protagonists ascending from the foothills up into the mountains and as they get higher, the action, peril and emotions are also heightened. Boarding the train increases the pace of the narrative but also sets them on a course that, once decided, cannot be altered. As the train speeds towards its destination, Drake travels to its front, everything in constant forward motion. The plot is advancing towards its ultimate resolution in Shambhala and Drake is advancing to his immediate goal of regaining the key to Shambhala and rescuing Chloe. It’s a classic pulp adventure location and all this combined gives the plot considerable pace.

After fighting tooth and nail to the front of the train Drake retains the key but when he finds Chloe she is uncooperative if not disloyal. Flynn then adds to his initial betrayal by shooting Drake, who is forced to destroy the train to avoid being killed by advancing soldiers. When the train is derailed so is Drake’s journey, the pace which had been built up is dissipated and the sense of adventure is replaced with feelings of despair. This rest in the action proves a turning point, Drake decides to give up and only through his friendship with Elena, he is convinced he should carry on. This train journey and its derailment is a really important part in the plot both literally and figuratively.

--------    --------

It’s this synergy between game and story elements which make Uncharted 2 a seminal game. The cruise ship hits all the right buttons in terms of action and environment but doesn’t serve the story. The pirates who capture drake seem to exist solely as an excuse to get Drake on the ship. The cruise ship works as a sequence but you could take it out of the game, and it wouldn’t affect the story. The sense of desperation in searching for Sully is shown equally as well in the plane crash and desert sequence. In Uncharted 2 the train wreck provided a key high point in the story. Having two such events in Uncharted 3 diminishes their importance.

The episodic nature of the story also causes other problems. Characters appear only for sections of the game and don’t have time to expand their own plot strands. Interaction between characters is confined to a few key scenes. Amy Hennig squeezes so much into these moments that they have real gravity and emotion but I cant help think that the story hasn’t been given enough room to breathe. Uncharted 3 is still far and away the best game I have played this year. The individual sequences the game is made up of are breathtaking and the multiplayer is extremely accomplished.

Naughty Dog have said they produce the action set pieces first, and then Amy Hennig fits them into a story, I wonder if this method may need a little tweaking. If the balance isn’t right you lose the ability to make the player care about what is happening and no amount action can make up for that. Climbing the wreckage in Uncharted 2 will stay with me forever because it got that balance just right. The story and gameplay elements working in perfect unison. Uncharted 3 is a fantastic game but its flaws show why Uncharted 2 is one of the best games of all time.

The Imagination of the Player

There is a long held belief that film and televisual arts somehow inhibit the imagination of the viewer. It comes from that old cliche that books are better because the reader has to use their imagination to fill in the blanks. This is true of all art, it only becomes art when it is interpreted by the viewer and it will depend on their imagination, coloured by their own experience, memories and subconscious. Video games however are subject to this criticism more than most. Maybe this is because games, even more than films, seek to control every aspect of the world they create. The player must feel in control but is actually just walking a path predetermined by the developer. Or maybe it is just simple prejudice. Regardless of these concerns video games still require a lot of imagination and suspension of disbelief from the player. After all, unlike movies, the characters often don't look like humans even when they are meant to, let alone the environments and objects. All sorts of things can happen to break the illusion of the game world and regularly do. Players learn to be resilient to such intrusions. The preconception would be that this imagination damper is most damaging to kids but I think conversely it is precisely the reason children find it easier to get the most out of games. As children we were best equipped to use our imagination to enhance our experience of the game. As with art, adults seem much more likely to get bogged down in realistic representation and technical limitations.

This is a lot higher resolution than we were playing on, but it conveys the blocky graphics. A style I think has aged well, I looks somewhat like Minecraft.
(Tomb Raider II from www.bestofmultimedia.com)

One of the first games me and my friends played was Tomb Raider 2. I think we played it on a win95 pc so that would mean I was about eleven or twelve. At the time it seemed incredibly realistic and immersive. As players we imbued the crude landscapes with our imagination, we didn't see polygons in green and grey, I remember actually being on the Great Wall of China. Even though it was incredibly simplistic by current standards I simply remember being attacked by ferocious wild animals and looking out over endless wilderness.

Things have moved on but at the time it seemed incredibly realistic. I don't think you can simply put it down to us being easily pleased, we knew the limitations of the medium then, as we do now, but it was important what we bought to it. In short it required just as much imagination as any novel and we filled in the blacks with immersive effect. In the real world we played in fields and dens, had war games and treasure hunts but we bought all of this to the game world as well.

Panzer Dragoon Saga borrows a lot from the films of Hayao Miyazaki but creates a unique world, even with its own language, comparable only to middle earth.

Televisual arts don't stint kids imagination, they just develop them in a different way. Some games of the early 3D era required a lot of blocking in by the player but gave such a well crafted outline it was like filling in a colour by numbers and ending up with the Sistine Chapel. The developers responsible could use almost abstract forms and give them real personality and depth. Metal Gear Solid and Panzer Dragoon Saga used their graphical limitations to give just enough pointers to perfectly convey rich and atmospheric worlds. As a fantasy game Panzer Dragoon may have benefited from the lack of detail. One of the things I hate about a lot of fantasy games is they so obviously borrow from the real world. Detailed textures and objects from our reality cheapen the reality of the game. Panzer Dragoon forced weapons to be lumpy, but they were still elegantly crafted, textures were abstract and hinted at other worldy things, conveying colour and feel. It forced the developer to be extremely creative with their tools and this benifiter the player immensely. It enabled the player to imagine a world far more detached from our own, and as a result richer and more immersive. It was a time I remember with great fondness, the advent of 3d gaming produced works of gaming art which I think will last the test of time. As photo realistic graphics become more common I hope developers will start to turn back to a more abstract visual style.

Herges Adventures of Tintin and Motion Capture

I went to see Tintin: Secret of the Unicorn yesterday and I have mixed feelings about it.

THE GOOD

There were some fantastic action sequences, high end motion capture, a couple of great characters and some really nice references to the source material.

Captain Haddock is great

The heart of the story was Captain Haddock, of all the characters in the film, he makes the transition into digimation the best. His clothes, facial features, animation, expression and voice were all brilliant. The film combines the first time Tintin and Haddock meet in The Crab with the Golden Claws with the story of The Secret Of the Unicorn. It seems a logical move, the story of The Secret of the Unicorn (and its second part Red Rackham's Treasure) is rich and varied. It combines many of the classic Tintin elements: exotic locations, history, treasure hunting, a big cast of well formed characters and big action sequences. The book comes in the middle of the Tintin canon so some of the characters have already been established with readers. It makes sense to add to this the first meeting of Tintin and the Captain from The Crab with the Golden Claws to introduce the Captain properly. As a result the Captain is really the main character of the film and it is his journey we are following.

Captain Haddock and Andy Serkis at the premiere in my head

Andy Serkis is great

The most important thing about the Captain is he is full of life and character which I can only imagine is thanks to Andy Serkis and Weta Digital (the team behind the motion capture for Gollum in the Lord of The Rings trilogy and countless other big effects movies). Serkis is a great motion capture artist. Many actors come to motion capture thinking it a lesser art, and don't understand the kind of performance required (Nolan North is probably the other master of this art). Serkis has a physicality which is not lost in the process of animation. He hits all the right beats in his movement and expression and does it with subtlety. Nothing is over played, it comes through just the right amount. He articulates a lot about his character through his movement, in a similar way to what he did as Ian Drury in Sex Drugs and Rock and Roll. It is his flexibility to deliver performances in so many guises which makes him special, a motion capture specialist, he has convincingly portrayed everything from game characters (Enslaved: Oddysey to the West) to apes (The Rise of the Planet of the Apes). To complete the character Serkis also delivers the best voice acting in the film and a solid Scottish accent to boot. Weta digital do a fantastic job with the Captain and it must the thanks to Serkis giving them so much to work with and their ongoing collaboration.

Its fun

The action sequences range from light hearted and fun to suspenseful and thrilling, the best of which (and in turn the best sequence in the film) is a drunken hallucination dreamt up by the Captain. It contains great action, big bangs and fantastically detailed animation.

There are things for fans

Throughout the film there were little visual references to the Tintin universe. Tintin starts the film having his portrait painted by a 'market artist' in a sequence which will send shivers down the spine of any fan. Tintins house contains newspaper cuttings and items from previous adventures, as does a moroccan palace midway through. Some of the scenery is constructed from disguised items from other books, there are lots of moments like this which are reminiscent of the attention to detail in the fantastic Pixar fins, in particular the environmental modelling of Radiator Springs in Cars. The film is at times incredibly beautiful and occasionally a frame will come up which perfectly builds upon a frame from the books.

THE BAD

For all the good work of Andy Serkis it can't make up for some of the other cast members.

With the exception of Serkis it seems the casting was focussed on big names (Daniel Craig) or a more traditional likeness on celluloid (Jamie Bell). It would have been better to build a cast based on their motion capture and voice talent.

Red Rackham isn't scary

Craig is disappointing, his voice is a bit quiet and generally his performance isn't as creepy as it needs to be. Red Rackham is a classic pantomime villain in the books but here he lacks the edge to invite a boo hiss at his presence. Some of the cragginess of Craig's expression is carried over nicely but it doesn't do enough to make up for his other problems. 

Simon Pegg and Nick frost are a complete miss

I think Pegg and Frost are really funny and full of character in other films but they hide it, it could be anyone. Their voices lack any character or credibility and they nullify any funny lines they are given with a distinct lack of timing. There also seems to be a problem with their facial animation. The twins have round faces in the books with large moustaches and this seems to be a barrier. Often they the voices look completely detached from the faces. In the books a lot of expression comes from their cheeks, eyebrows and eyes. In the film their faces are usually motionless, and characterless. I think this might be, in part, to do with a lack of familiarity with the characters. By the time Herge got round to The Secret of the Unicorn he had been carefully adding and refining his characters over some time. He evolves their facial expressions and can sum expressions up in a single frame with a few clean lines. It would be hard for anyone to reach such a level of animation in one film.

Tintin is a bit of a passenger

Jamie bell has some physicality about his acting (possibly from Billy Elliot), but his movements and voice are too child like and naive. He portrays Tintin as floating through the adventure with little conviction or knowledge. In the books however Tintin is wise beyond his years, and although he makes mistakes and embarrasses himself, like a TV detective, he usually knows more than he is letting on.

Snowy is just not cute enough

Snowy is probably the biggest disappointment. Like the Thompsons he loses a lot in digitalisation. He looks neither like a dog, or the Snowy from the books. His eyes often look very blank and his face is strangely motionless. Its such a shame because Snowy gets plenty to do in the action sequences and a loveable cartoon dog would have been a real selling point for a family movie like this.

Alls (not) well that ends (not) well

The end of the story is a bit dry. After some great action the film finishes on a wimper, and with a crane sequence which doesn't fit in the world of the movie. To give the Secret of the Unicorn its own ending (as it really just continues into Red Rackhams Treasure) the key twist over the two books is removed, I kind of see why but It finishes on a wimper, when it should end on a big climax. Tintin stories don't rely on structure but momentum. Things need to keep getting better and this one leaves you a bit bored.

I'm a big Tintin fan and I know this can get in the way but I think the objections I have listed are valid. There was a lot to like about the film and I especially enjoyed the middle section. I don't know if it had enough in it for me or not, I will have to see it again.

Driver: San Francisco, The worst out of body experience I have ever had...

I have just played the Driver: San Francisco demo on PSN.

You play as a traffic cop who can 'shift'. This means he can have an out of body experience where you control other people. In practice this means switching to other cars in the area. The first thing you have to do is jump into the car of a dangerous driver. If you could control a dangerous driver, you would just have him/her stop their vehicle, get out and assume the position so you could come over and arrest them. The game, however, asks you to drive the car over a series of ramps with no explanation.

Letting you control your adversary is the worst idea ever. They are no longer your adversary if you can control their actions. Its like playing Street Fighter against yourself. Also when you are driving one car and then 'shift' into another, who is now controlling the car you were in? Somehow your original vehicle follows you around. I don't have a problem with the game mechanics, I just wonder why the developer had to wrap them up in such a contrived and nonsensical plot.

Driver San Francisco is quite a confusing game, partly because i couldn't force myself to pay attention to the awful dialogue. Back to Need For Speed: Hot Pursuit for me.

Language options in Videogames should be on par with blue ray

It used to be the case that when an obscure Japanese game was released abroad it would come with english sub-titles. Now it seems that left of field japanese games from the likes of Suda51 come with english voice acting. In film there is no excuse for not wanting to read sub-titles but this is partly because of lip syncing issues games don't share but really it should be the case for games as well. Sure, an english voice over can be well done, i think the best example of this is the films of Hayo Miazaki. Its good for children who cant keep up with sub-title. Miazaki's work is so highly regarded it attracts the best voice talent.

Video game dubs are done much more cheaply and with lesser talent behind the microphone. As a result you get a very cheesy and US-centric dub. I don't have anything against US voice actors but when done cheaply, as a UK resident, they are a constant reminder that the game is not in its native language. Metal Gear Solid has high quality US English voice acting but is different because it is a much more international game. Its makers are drawing on western culture in a direct way and as such the games already fit well with  english voice acting.

However, I don't think quality is really the Issue, the most important thing about voice acting is the atmosphere. Even if a japanese original voice over is not that well done it still brings the intended atmosphere of the original game, with an american voice over this is severely lost. As in Miazaki's films this can me remedied but it takes a lot of effort and care. As a rule its best to have the option of the original voice work because then at least it will work as intended.

Games stand on an interesting line, like film, games can be subtitled but also they can be seamlessly translated like literature. My hope is that games can eventually follow in the foot steps of Blue Ray and have language options come as standard on foreign language games. The localisation of Japanese games is often to their detriment. A Japanese game translated into english looses so much of itself. It makes the player categorise it with western games with similarly cheap voice acting. Games like Bayonetta derive from a distinctly Japanese type of pop culture. Without its original language it becomes diluted and loses its exotic, niche appeal. If Japanese games are going to sell abroad it should be as Japanese games, as they were made and intended to be played.

Let me feel like I'm special

Watching Rage and Bethesda's latest trailer got me thinking about special abilities in games.
At various points the player releases a spider type bot to which shoots at enemies. It looks great for getting enemies who wont budge from cover but then I thought, I bet at some point they get released on you.

It annoys me when in a game you come up against an enemy who has the same powers as your own. A cogent paradigm would be Superman 2. Superman has to fight other cryptoian's who possess the same powers as his own. How annoying, invincible people fighting each other is like the long big punch up but not funny. Also it demystifies Superman's character and makes him less special. You want to feel like he is unique.

There are two games which approach this problem in very original and different ways. The first thing which popped into my mind as was the companion cube in Portal. Its just a box like in tomb raider but it feels like so much more than that. Partly this is because your ability to use it is unique and your enemy, Glados could not be less like yourself.

The second game is Metal Gear Solid, the original that is. That seems like a strange choice as your enemy is your clone but even Liquid is a marked difference from snake. Your encounters with him are many and varied and when you finally face him mano-a-mano, it is just that, and a war of attrition. The most significant 'enemy' or boss fight is however with the Ninja. His weapons and skills are so different to snake's but this makes it such a compelling battle. It makes you think Snake is unique, but also the the Ninja is unique aswell.

Thats what I want in a game, I want to feel my character is special.

Lets put Nathan Fillion to bed.

The Idea of petitioning to cast an actor in a Hollywood film is ridiculous. Regardless of the film, the director must be responsible for primary casting, free from influence by the fans or the studio.

David O Russell is a respectable Director, especially since his Oscar nod for The Fighter (one which should have been given to Christopher Nolan for Inception). It remains to be seen if he can direct a straight action film. He will to have to change Uncharted a lot, it may be a revolutionary game but it is not very original in terms of cinematography or narrative.

Mark Wahlberg would be great with Emily Rose, am I out on a limb with this one?

The announcement that Mark Wahlberg would be cast as Nathan Drake was met with disbelief. After petitioning for Nathan Fillion to get the role it was seen like a slap in the face. This is probably because many gamers associate Wahlberg with Max Payne. All actors get involved in bad films at some time in their career. Wahlberg was unlucky enough to be in a bad film with a big fan-base. (I would liken this to Hayden Christiensen in Star Wars, but he is just a bad actor). Boogie Nights, The Departed and now The Fighter all demonstrate that Wahlberg can turn in a solid, subtle and intense performance. More importantly David O Russell has a better track record than John Moore and I think they will be conscious of the critical and box office failure of Max Payne (Moore has not directed since.)

The success of The Fighter in the Oscar nominations should be a good thing for Uncharted. Columbia pictures will now be keen to cash in on the profile of Wahlberg and O Russel. Hopefully this should translate into O Russel getting greater artistic freedom. This is important because big changes have to be made. A great game doest necessarily translate into a great film and the same can be said of books and films.

Nathan Fillion could never have been Drake, the creative process is not democratic and that’s a good thing. I personally would have like to see Emily Rose get a chance to reprise her role as Elena Fisher but its unrealistic. There’s a bigger picture to be considered. Tron: Legacy was made on positive reaction to the teaser trailer and for all its good will to the fan-base it was boring. The Uncharted film carries a weight of expectation. In its current hands, its probably got the best chance of success you could hope for.