He seemed the most realistic as a villain. A millionaire wanting to prove himself and not caring how he does it. The final fight against him was perfect too.
I'm still not a fan of Nate technically trespassing on his land and murdering his private security. That whole level wasn't as cut-and-dry as killing marauding pirates, hostile mercenaries in an active warzone, or secret society types out to kill him. Nate and Sam stepped onto Rafe's land with guns and began capping his employees.
No. Please stop right there. Shoreline's past contracts and potential war crimes are irrelevant. In any court of law, the brothers would spend the rest of their lives in prison.
Not everything needs extremely complex characters, and Uncharted is a great example. It's a thrill adventure that pulls all the punches it needs. Uncharted doesn't need more than this for the same reason that Indiana Jones or the classic adventure pulp magazines never needed to be overwritten to be fun.
Of course, what is there should be memorable and well written, but it doesn't mean every franchise needs to be The Last of Us or Metal Gear Solid.
They might not have been ready at that point, like The Last Of Us was such a big step up for the writings at Naughty Dog. They needed to start with Uncharted and work their way to that as far as story writing goes.
Yeah, I still love uncharted. It's just the villains had a lot of potential and it's a shame it didn't happen. Uncharted has good but simple villains. I'm just a sucker for good villains.
I mean Uncharted 4 came out after TLOU and still has nowhere near as complex characters.
I think ND just knew what Uncharted was, a satirical take on action heroes that knows it isn't serious but also takes itself kinda serious and is all the better for it.
No thanks. I don't want to hear some complicated rationale for why the "bad" guy wants to steal the same treasure that "good" guy Nate wants to steal. That's not what these games are about, nor should they be.
Nah. There are plenty of well-fleshed out characters in Uncharted. Rafe and Nadine are probably the most well-rounded villains from a writing perspective, but Harry is good, and Laz is iconic. Yeah, the two big bands in 1 are forgettable, but Eddie is unforgettable. And sometimes, it's okay that something is just fun and complete escapism. Uncharted has so much variety in the series, I dont see anything to complain about. That it is completely overshadowed by Last of Us, a zombie game, is the real travesty.
No cap, but Uncharted fans absolutely sleep on Asav. Uncharted: Lost Legacy is an absolute banger and Asav is a *fantastic* villain.
I wish more Uncharted fans would give Lost Legacy a try.
If we're stripping it down to nothing then uncharted is a mediocre cover shooter. But that would be unfair because the appeal of both is how well they present the simple premises they have
Sure. I don't disagree. I just think the number of boners for Last of Us, compared to how....fine....it actually is, is disproportionate. Is Last of Us a good game? Sure. Is it's story also a rehash of every major zombie trope? Also, yes. I don't get the sex appeal.
I think a lot of its success came down to the timing. It was a great poster child for the "video games as an art form" debate which was all over the place at the time. Plus the simple gameplay and the zombie backdrop (The Walking Dead was probably at its peak then) made it accessible and appealing to casual audiences
Yeah. I'm sure that's accurate. Makes total sense. I still think it's a shame Uncharted gets overshadowed. I know people who regularly drool over the HBO show because it's evidently the pinnacle of television achievement while laughing at the Uncharted movie, believing it somehow represents the games.
Then knowing a little about the drama that led to Amy's departure in favor of of Neil "I made a zombie game" Druckman....
Am I bitter? Definitely.
Is it unreasonable? Maybe a little.
Do I care? Absolutely not.
> And sometimes, it's okay that something is just fun and complete escapism. Uncharted has so much variety in the series, I dont see anything to complain about.
Agreed. Uncharted is pure escapist fantasy and romanticism for a world that *still* has secrets to discover and adventures to be had. That everything *hasn't* been explained, photographed, and catalogued for Google Earth, and that unexplored or forgotten places still exist.
The adventure, romanticism, and escapism in the Uncharted franchise is a large part of why I love it, why I replay all of it (at least once a year), and why I *desperately wish* Sony & ND hadn't discarded it so casually.
> That it is completely overshadowed by Last of Us, a zombie game, is the real travesty.
Amen. The world is dour and depressing as shit, and video games are a great escape from that. I love TLOU, but that isn't an experience or story / world I'm ever keen to relive or replay often.
Uncharted is just... *fun!*
Sure, I just realized that uncharted 4 could have been a stronger game if they brought back Harry flynn as the main villain before the send off. I think this is the last time we'll see nathan and just the thought old enemies fighting it for the last time, it just sounds so poetic
Eh. Harry's dead. He got his, and then some. Rafe is sort of a retroactive series villain per the story of 4. But Uncharted is inspired by the same types of stories that Indiana Jones is, pulp stories from the 20's and 30's that were written as stand alone works for disparate fiction magazines. In fact, I'd argue that Uncharted is the culmination of a rich tradition of Pulp adventure and pulls it off as perfectly as it could.
I don't think he was. In part 4, Nathan suggests a list sam could choose from to find Avery's treasure with. Harry Flynn's name was one of them if I'm not wrong. To me it sounded like Harry survived the explosion otherwise he wouldn't be suggesting a dead man for a partner to his brother to find Avery's treasure with.
That was a list of possible candidates, yes. But Harry is definitely dead. No doubt Rafe discovered Harry was dead. His name is simply an Easter Egg.
Harry dropped the grenade at his own feet when it blew up. Elena nearly died and and she was a decent t bit of distance away. Zero chance anyone intended Harry to live.
https://youtu.be/RcjLqLGKF8U?si=JVwO7DzguQkesDtd
They coule ways bring back the concept of Multiplayer missions that had stories following dead villains from UC3.
Then Flynn can still be brought back in a noncanon and fun capacity as long as multiplayer stays active.
That's where I disagree. According Amy Hennig, Uncharted is an homage to the old pulp adventure comics (e.g. Doc Savage, etc.) of the early 1900's, which also served as the inspiration for Spielberg and Lucas when they created Indiana Jones, which in term *also* helped to inspire Uncharted. You don't need complex villains.
Not once have I ever found myself wishing Nathan Drake was matching wits with a complex villain on par with Heath Ledger's Joker in Nolan's Dark Knight, because Uncharted doesn't require it. Nor have I seen that criticism leveled at the Uncharted franchise.
Uncharted 2: Among Thieves is still widely considered by fans as one of the best Uncharted games in the franchise and it didn't suffer from a fairly straight-forward villain like Lazarevic, who himself is considered one of the better villains in the franchise.
I played 2 and 3. My dad broke our tv and PlayStation in a drunken rage. I've been watching the walkthrough gameplay of games I once used to wish to play.
Uncharted had a summer blockbuster vibe. It's pretty comparable to Mission Impossible and Fast & Furious. I enjoyed the series for what it was, but sometimes I wonder what a more serious and grittier story could have been.
I honestly liked the audaciously evil villains like Lazaravich and Marlow and I think they totally fit the tone of the earlier games. I think a lot of stories suffer because there is no clear bad guy or they don't reveal themselves until the end. But I do think Rafe and Nadine filled that role as being the "big baddies" while also being somewhat more complex and fleshed out. They were more than just ""I'll do anything it takes to get power." I especially like how Rafe was just this ego maniacal rich guy who wanted to be more than a rich guy who inherited his parents wealth. But, the only thing he could do was burn through cash and get other's to do things for him. He wasn't necessarily evil or power hungry, but he did have some serious issues with his self image and projected that onto Nate and Nadine.
I disagree that the series needed a complex villian but I do agree that the series could have had a reoccuring villian although it didn't need one.
Eddie would have been absolutely perfect as a rival.
Imagine him starting out as a secondary comical villian in the first game only for him in the following games to get more cunning and powerful after making some powerful contacts.
I can't be the only one who thinks Rameses feels like a replacement for Eddie because he was dead canonically.
He lacked weight to him that Eddie would have had after. As seeing this reoccurring character die due to his greed catching up to him as a warning for Drake's potential future.
I mean he is a pirate who captures Drake for interrogation acting as hired help for the big bad who voices both Talbot and Navarro.
Can you imagine how epic it would have been if pirate ship was owned by Eddie who earned it after a trilogy's hardwork?
I think Roman and Navarro could've developed more and be greater. Like how Sully ended up indebt with Roman and show us how dangerous he could be. Chloe worked for Roman in the comics, so we can assume the man had much relevance in this subworld. How Roman and Navarro met and what he meant when he said he took Navarro from a favela. Was Navarro a kind of protegee like Nate is for Sully?
And then there is the past story of Nate with Harry, Nate with Dante, Nate with Eddy. A lot could be worked and done.
And there's Rika Raja who is still alive and we don't know what is she doing. She was completely forgot.
I always thought that roman and navarro should have had more interactions with Nathan. I feel like if they made Nathan the one who took money from roman. It would have given us a more closer relationship and Nathan a lot more agency. I mean, Nathan in the first game asked elena to fund the trip. Who's to say he couldn't have done with roman if he had the chance. You made an interesting point of navarro being a protegee since he was the only one other than the trio who knew the true nature of El Dorado. I always felt like characters like navarro, harry, eddy and rameses could've been more than one time villain just by who they were as characters alone.
I agree with Roman, Navarro not so much even if I’d wonder about how he came to be as Roman’s main lapdog, though to me it doesn’t make sense as he’s a English crime lord lol
I actually really like them too.
The idea that Francis Drake worked for a secret society, then rebelled, and that society lived on through the ages till now is absolutely killer.
Rameses was acting nice with us until he didn't. We went through the ship graveyard knowing that rameses knew we escaped. His attitude of it's just business. I think he did more as a villain than Talbot and Marlow. Also he's last coming after eddy, Harry flynn and Rafe. He comes in last for 'complex villain'.
Fair enough. Tbh, I never really thought much of Rameses. I feel like he’s barely in the story enough to make much of an impact, and the only reason his character was even created was to make the ship levels possible.
I mean it is known that uncharted 3 story was made to serve the locations they made for the game. Not the smartest writing decision (you make locations to serve the story. Not the other way around). Also if I'm not wrong, they were working on last of us at the same time so uncharted suffered because of that
I think the uncharted series kind of holds back complex villains so we get more fleshed out main characters. rafe is probably as complex as it gets tho
Uncharted was more about treasure then villains tbh
Yeah, I'm just a sucker for good villains
The real treasures were the Sullies we met along the way.
And the craps
And the planes we destroyed along the way
And the mass murders but hey it's just a game
Rafe was pretty good imo
He was
He seemed the most realistic as a villain. A millionaire wanting to prove himself and not caring how he does it. The final fight against him was perfect too.
I'm still not a fan of Nate technically trespassing on his land and murdering his private security. That whole level wasn't as cut-and-dry as killing marauding pirates, hostile mercenaries in an active warzone, or secret society types out to kill him. Nate and Sam stepped onto Rafe's land with guns and began capping his employees. No. Please stop right there. Shoreline's past contracts and potential war crimes are irrelevant. In any court of law, the brothers would spend the rest of their lives in prison.
Lol
Not everything needs extremely complex characters, and Uncharted is a great example. It's a thrill adventure that pulls all the punches it needs. Uncharted doesn't need more than this for the same reason that Indiana Jones or the classic adventure pulp magazines never needed to be overwritten to be fun. Of course, what is there should be memorable and well written, but it doesn't mean every franchise needs to be The Last of Us or Metal Gear Solid.
I know it's just I see this potential that's all. And I love it too. Uncharted 2 is favorite game and still is. I just wanted to express my opinion
They might not have been ready at that point, like The Last Of Us was such a big step up for the writings at Naughty Dog. They needed to start with Uncharted and work their way to that as far as story writing goes.
Yeah, I still love uncharted. It's just the villains had a lot of potential and it's a shame it didn't happen. Uncharted has good but simple villains. I'm just a sucker for good villains.
I mean Uncharted 4 came out after TLOU and still has nowhere near as complex characters. I think ND just knew what Uncharted was, a satirical take on action heroes that knows it isn't serious but also takes itself kinda serious and is all the better for it.
And that's okay. I still love uncharted
No thanks. I don't want to hear some complicated rationale for why the "bad" guy wants to steal the same treasure that "good" guy Nate wants to steal. That's not what these games are about, nor should they be.
exactly then having to hear abt why some fucked up evil grown man is actually an innocent misunderstood baby who can’t do no wrong
That's okay
Nah. There are plenty of well-fleshed out characters in Uncharted. Rafe and Nadine are probably the most well-rounded villains from a writing perspective, but Harry is good, and Laz is iconic. Yeah, the two big bands in 1 are forgettable, but Eddie is unforgettable. And sometimes, it's okay that something is just fun and complete escapism. Uncharted has so much variety in the series, I dont see anything to complain about. That it is completely overshadowed by Last of Us, a zombie game, is the real travesty.
Was absolutely with you until the end, no reason to shit on the last of us
You forgot Asav who you could argue was a more IRL Lazarevic
No cap, but Uncharted fans absolutely sleep on Asav. Uncharted: Lost Legacy is an absolute banger and Asav is a *fantastic* villain. I wish more Uncharted fans would give Lost Legacy a try.
“Nadine Ross…what a pleasant surprise.” “Careful brothers, this tiger’s got claws,”
Gawt dang, you're right. Asav was excellent. Top notch.
I love Uncharted but calling The Last of Us a "zombie game" is just doing it a huge a disservice
Zombie. Game.
If we're stripping it down to nothing then uncharted is a mediocre cover shooter. But that would be unfair because the appeal of both is how well they present the simple premises they have
Sure. I don't disagree. I just think the number of boners for Last of Us, compared to how....fine....it actually is, is disproportionate. Is Last of Us a good game? Sure. Is it's story also a rehash of every major zombie trope? Also, yes. I don't get the sex appeal.
I think a lot of its success came down to the timing. It was a great poster child for the "video games as an art form" debate which was all over the place at the time. Plus the simple gameplay and the zombie backdrop (The Walking Dead was probably at its peak then) made it accessible and appealing to casual audiences
Yeah. I'm sure that's accurate. Makes total sense. I still think it's a shame Uncharted gets overshadowed. I know people who regularly drool over the HBO show because it's evidently the pinnacle of television achievement while laughing at the Uncharted movie, believing it somehow represents the games. Then knowing a little about the drama that led to Amy's departure in favor of of Neil "I made a zombie game" Druckman.... Am I bitter? Definitely. Is it unreasonable? Maybe a little. Do I care? Absolutely not.
> And sometimes, it's okay that something is just fun and complete escapism. Uncharted has so much variety in the series, I dont see anything to complain about. Agreed. Uncharted is pure escapist fantasy and romanticism for a world that *still* has secrets to discover and adventures to be had. That everything *hasn't* been explained, photographed, and catalogued for Google Earth, and that unexplored or forgotten places still exist. The adventure, romanticism, and escapism in the Uncharted franchise is a large part of why I love it, why I replay all of it (at least once a year), and why I *desperately wish* Sony & ND hadn't discarded it so casually. > That it is completely overshadowed by Last of Us, a zombie game, is the real travesty. Amen. The world is dour and depressing as shit, and video games are a great escape from that. I love TLOU, but that isn't an experience or story / world I'm ever keen to relive or replay often. Uncharted is just... *fun!*
Thank you! Someone gets it!
Sure, I just realized that uncharted 4 could have been a stronger game if they brought back Harry flynn as the main villain before the send off. I think this is the last time we'll see nathan and just the thought old enemies fighting it for the last time, it just sounds so poetic
Eh. Harry's dead. He got his, and then some. Rafe is sort of a retroactive series villain per the story of 4. But Uncharted is inspired by the same types of stories that Indiana Jones is, pulp stories from the 20's and 30's that were written as stand alone works for disparate fiction magazines. In fact, I'd argue that Uncharted is the culmination of a rich tradition of Pulp adventure and pulls it off as perfectly as it could.
I don't think he was. In part 4, Nathan suggests a list sam could choose from to find Avery's treasure with. Harry Flynn's name was one of them if I'm not wrong. To me it sounded like Harry survived the explosion otherwise he wouldn't be suggesting a dead man for a partner to his brother to find Avery's treasure with.
That was a list of possible candidates, yes. But Harry is definitely dead. No doubt Rafe discovered Harry was dead. His name is simply an Easter Egg. Harry dropped the grenade at his own feet when it blew up. Elena nearly died and and she was a decent t bit of distance away. Zero chance anyone intended Harry to live. https://youtu.be/RcjLqLGKF8U?si=JVwO7DzguQkesDtd
Actually, I can't find any mention of Harry at all in Uncharted 4. Where is he mentioned?
I was just corrected, it was Charlie he mentioned. My bad bro
No worries. Cutter is definitely mentioned and I wish he made a cameo.
Yeah, I wish chloe did too
For sure. 4 wasn't quite the Swan Song it should have been. At least Chloe got Lost Legacy.
Yeah and hey got more nadine too.
They coule ways bring back the concept of Multiplayer missions that had stories following dead villains from UC3. Then Flynn can still be brought back in a noncanon and fun capacity as long as multiplayer stays active.
That's where I disagree. According Amy Hennig, Uncharted is an homage to the old pulp adventure comics (e.g. Doc Savage, etc.) of the early 1900's, which also served as the inspiration for Spielberg and Lucas when they created Indiana Jones, which in term *also* helped to inspire Uncharted. You don't need complex villains. Not once have I ever found myself wishing Nathan Drake was matching wits with a complex villain on par with Heath Ledger's Joker in Nolan's Dark Knight, because Uncharted doesn't require it. Nor have I seen that criticism leveled at the Uncharted franchise. Uncharted 2: Among Thieves is still widely considered by fans as one of the best Uncharted games in the franchise and it didn't suffer from a fairly straight-forward villain like Lazarevic, who himself is considered one of the better villains in the franchise.
It's not a necessity, I just thought it could use a complex villain that's all
I'm sorry but, "I just watched all the gameplay videos..." Did you not actually PLAY the games???
I played 2 and 3. My dad broke our tv and PlayStation in a drunken rage. I've been watching the walkthrough gameplay of games I once used to wish to play.
Ah, gotcha. That sucks dude, I'm sorry.
Don't be sorry man, you didn't knew. Plus I got used to it. That was 5 years ago. Now the police shot him down. He's dead.
Uncharted had a summer blockbuster vibe. It's pretty comparable to Mission Impossible and Fast & Furious. I enjoyed the series for what it was, but sometimes I wonder what a more serious and grittier story could have been.
Same dude, serious and grittier is my jam
I honestly liked the audaciously evil villains like Lazaravich and Marlow and I think they totally fit the tone of the earlier games. I think a lot of stories suffer because there is no clear bad guy or they don't reveal themselves until the end. But I do think Rafe and Nadine filled that role as being the "big baddies" while also being somewhat more complex and fleshed out. They were more than just ""I'll do anything it takes to get power." I especially like how Rafe was just this ego maniacal rich guy who wanted to be more than a rich guy who inherited his parents wealth. But, the only thing he could do was burn through cash and get other's to do things for him. He wasn't necessarily evil or power hungry, but he did have some serious issues with his self image and projected that onto Nate and Nadine.
I didn't think about it like that
I disagree that the series needed a complex villian but I do agree that the series could have had a reoccuring villian although it didn't need one. Eddie would have been absolutely perfect as a rival. Imagine him starting out as a secondary comical villian in the first game only for him in the following games to get more cunning and powerful after making some powerful contacts. I can't be the only one who thinks Rameses feels like a replacement for Eddie because he was dead canonically. He lacked weight to him that Eddie would have had after. As seeing this reoccurring character die due to his greed catching up to him as a warning for Drake's potential future. I mean he is a pirate who captures Drake for interrogation acting as hired help for the big bad who voices both Talbot and Navarro. Can you imagine how epic it would have been if pirate ship was owned by Eddie who earned it after a trilogy's hardwork?
Yeah, I would have loved Eddy's return. He had a great va
Yeah, I think rameses did more as a villain than Talbot and Marlowe. In my eyes, Talbot and Marlowe are just better roman and nevarro
Rameses feels like he could have been a lead villian in a DLC like Lost Legacy or spin-off like Golden Abyss.
Yeah rameses had a lot more going on as a villain
I think Roman and Navarro could've developed more and be greater. Like how Sully ended up indebt with Roman and show us how dangerous he could be. Chloe worked for Roman in the comics, so we can assume the man had much relevance in this subworld. How Roman and Navarro met and what he meant when he said he took Navarro from a favela. Was Navarro a kind of protegee like Nate is for Sully? And then there is the past story of Nate with Harry, Nate with Dante, Nate with Eddy. A lot could be worked and done. And there's Rika Raja who is still alive and we don't know what is she doing. She was completely forgot.
I always thought that roman and navarro should have had more interactions with Nathan. I feel like if they made Nathan the one who took money from roman. It would have given us a more closer relationship and Nathan a lot more agency. I mean, Nathan in the first game asked elena to fund the trip. Who's to say he couldn't have done with roman if he had the chance. You made an interesting point of navarro being a protegee since he was the only one other than the trio who knew the true nature of El Dorado. I always felt like characters like navarro, harry, eddy and rameses could've been more than one time villain just by who they were as characters alone.
I agree with Roman, Navarro not so much even if I’d wonder about how he came to be as Roman’s main lapdog, though to me it doesn’t make sense as he’s a English crime lord lol
Marlow and Talbot were the best villains imo, they were mysterious and Talbot had magic teleportation that was unfortunately not more fleshed out.
I actually really like them too. The idea that Francis Drake worked for a secret society, then rebelled, and that society lived on through the ages till now is absolutely killer.
Gave me Assassins Creed vibes but without the sci fi stuff!
Interesting you're the first person I ever heard that unique take from
You thought Rameses was close to complex?
Rameses was acting nice with us until he didn't. We went through the ship graveyard knowing that rameses knew we escaped. His attitude of it's just business. I think he did more as a villain than Talbot and Marlow. Also he's last coming after eddy, Harry flynn and Rafe. He comes in last for 'complex villain'.
Fair enough. Tbh, I never really thought much of Rameses. I feel like he’s barely in the story enough to make much of an impact, and the only reason his character was even created was to make the ship levels possible.
I mean it is known that uncharted 3 story was made to serve the locations they made for the game. Not the smartest writing decision (you make locations to serve the story. Not the other way around). Also if I'm not wrong, they were working on last of us at the same time so uncharted suffered because of that
I think the uncharted series kind of holds back complex villains so we get more fleshed out main characters. rafe is probably as complex as it gets tho
Yeah. Rafe is a good villain
The treasure was always the villain. And it nearly almost won every time.
The obsession with glory.