So it's settled then?

So it's settled then?

4 >= 2 >> 3 >>>>> 1

Honestly,
4=3=2>>>>

2 is the only good one.

2 >>>>> 4 > 1 >>>> 3

1 = 2 > 4 > 3

Anything else is wrong.

confirmed for having never played 4

The only arguably bad ones are 1 and 3

are you dumb? 1 is garbage compared to the other two

1s enviroments were so shitty and repetitve the rest of the games never stayed in the same place for more than a few chapters

2>1>4>3

correct order

How anyone can think 1 is better than any of the other ones is mind-boggling. Please explain your logic.

Best cast and best story.

Everything else was serviceable. I don't need a tour of all the world's biomes to be engaged.

>eddie raja better than chloe or cutter or sam

your opinion is wrong

2>4>3>1

no argument to be had here. if 4's story wasn't such garbage, it would be at the top. 3 had great set pieces but a loose story. they even admitted to designing the levels before writing the story. 1 is barebones. other games are better in every category.

2 had the balance of everything.

how was 4's story garbage?

Just started playing 4 and still up to Scotland. Does it really get better than 2? I played 2 and 3, still preferred 2 because 3 feels like a retread of 3 in some parts of the game. Holy shit I don't really remember Uncharted games having really long exposition. I feel 2 chapters already are wasted (Diving and the one at his house) on exposition that could have been reduced.

Weren't Uncharted games written in a way that they want to show off tech first and then it was put together as a cohesive story?

4>2>3>1

None are even memorable.

Chloe is only worth talking about because of her fat ass.

>charlie cutter not memorable

confirmed for never having played 3

1st act was shaky, character motivations and actions made no sense, the brother comes out of nowhere, everything gets wrapped up in a nice bow at the end and the story just solves itself with no explanation.

the graphics were the best I've ever seen on console though and the gameplay is the best of the series. 2 was just a better package overall.

sam dies

He's a weak attempt at a Guy Ritchie character.

>1st act was shaky, character motivations and actions made no sense

Can you be more specific? I felt the 1st act was quite strong, and set up everything quite well

> the brother comes out of nowhere
he died, and nate repressed the memory

> everything gets wrapped up in a nice bow at the end and the story just solves itself with no explanation.

What explanation do you want? Seemed like everything was answered quite well. Very satisfying conclusion IMO.

not even close

>cockney accent
>is automatically a guy ritche character

you're a fucking idiot

Yeah, it's just the accent.

Has nothing to do with being a hard ass criminal type with a penchant for banter.

and a master historian? every bit nates equal? or are you just cherry picking aspects of his personality to suit your narrative?

>every bit nates equal

Pump your brakes there.

>>=
only uncharted fans would think this is okay.

do you not understand? 4 is equal to or arguably greater than 2

do you not understand that there is an equality sign that represents that already?

Ive been marathoning the tetralogy over the past month and just reached New Devon in Uncharted 4 earlier today.

4 > 2 > 3 > 1

A Thief's End's got the first thing resembling a good story, well written villains and proper character development for Nate, and its mechanically the strongest too. The pick, sliding and grappling hook go a long ways towards making the climbing sections feel more interactive and less like holding a direction and mashing the jump button, they should have been added to the series ages ago. It backs off on the endless combat sequences from the PS3 trilogy too, having a lot more quiet moments and spending time building up to the action instead of feeling the need to have it always over the top. When it finally DOES get to the shootouts the gunplay feels smoother, you have a bigger variety of tools at your disposal, the enemies are less like damage sponges and the arenas allow for numerous approaches.

2's got the most memorable individual set pieces, but the gameplay doesn't come together the same way 4's does. It continues the trend of boxing off climbing, gun fights, dramatic set pieces and puzzles into their own little segments instead of blending them together, you rarely get times of having to multitask or use mechanics together. Sections where the series does that, like the train ride, horseback chase and using the footholds as cover in the shipyard are where Uncharted finally clicks and really starts to shine, so it's a shame that the first three games try to avoid that most of the time. When taken on their own the gunplay and climbing were both shallow as hell and not very interesting to play.

3 has an identity crisis between wanting to be a bigger, crazier Uncharted 2 or a more grounded character introspective, so the whole game suffers for it. 1 is fucking garbage all around and I'm amazed it even got a sequel.

what is this sign you speak of?

It's a fun, simple action romp through a lush jungle on an island. I loved it, and was disappointed with the more rigid focus 2 and onwards took. Before 2 came out and jettisoned ND into untouchable status, I was telling people to check out Uncharted. Now I hardly mention it. The series is a bastion of technical marvels, but each game has subsequently sacrifice player agency for highly scripted moments. 4 curbed back with this using open environments, but it was just so poorly paced and dull outside of a handful of firefights that I couldn't care.

Personal opinion:

2>3>1>4

4's just too boring.

you'll find out when you take middle school math.

but user 1 was every bit as linear and set-piece focused as 2. even more so.

4=2 >3 for sure.I never played one. 4 could have been better than 2 if they didn't have that black woman character who literally does nothing for the story. Every character in 2 was good from protagonists to antagonists and pacing was perfect. 4 has better technology for slightly improved gameplay but its pacing and story were up and down in parts.

3 did everything wrong.

>he's realized his mistake and is now resorting to name-calling

truly pathetic

Nailed it about 4. Story is great, the mechanics are more fleshed out with the grapple hook and pick, and they space out the repetitive encounters of past games so they feel enjoyable instead of a slog.

And the combat is actually enjoyable because of the verticality of the arenas, and working stealth mechanics this time.

do the proper sign then. if you want him to look up the alt code of whatever for it then you should too.

4>2>3>Golden Abyss>1

I feel like I'm the only one here who played Golden Abyss

>≥

>going to these lengths for a shitpost

he got his point across with >= just fine IMO

>to these lengths for a shitpost
>3 seconds to press several buttons
truly pathetic indeed.

You're right. I suppose it's all in the execution then. What I enjoy the most about 1 is how contained it feels. Drake ends up marooned on an island and struggles to get off it. With 2 and onwards the scope seemed to go for larger and wider, and ND's increasing control for spectacle just made the games feel less exciting the more they threw at you. I was uninterested for the entirety of the clocktower sequence in 4 and was going through the motions waiting for it to be over. In Drake's Fortune, I felt like I was on an adventure. In the sequels, I felt like I was being ushered across various sets on a stage with the occasional fade to blacks separating the locations.

Mind you I've liked all of the games. The only one that really threw me off was 4, owing to its gratuitous somber tone. There was nothing meriting the long, drawn out schlop between Drake and his poorly conceived brother. The very little we got in 3 in regards to a backstory--Drake being an orphan abandoned by a suicide mother barely surviving as a street kid who comforted himself with delusions of grandeur and a concocted lineage to a famous explorer he admired--was infinitely more interesting than the crap you were forced to wade through in 4.

Just my two pennies.

>having the alt code for greater/equal memorized

>pressing 3 buttons when pressing 2 gets the point across just fine

someones a shit programmer, huh?

>4's story is great

Does it still have exposition chapters after the heist in Italy? I felt the diving part and the one at Nathan's home were boring chapters.

IMO those chapters are either great/boring depending why you like Uncharted

I played it.

It was surprisingly good. Still think it's the worst.

used to use it a lot when taking comp classes in elementary school back in early 90's. I see that the education system is hard at work.
don't even know anything past the basics I needed for my comp sci class for my BA.

keep trying to save face though. a couple posts ago it was, "lol can't do it!"

So basically you're a "glass half full" kinda guy. I guess it's not surprising given where we are.

I do agree that the story was pretty shit, though. I liked that everything felt more polished(animations and blending in particular were a lot better) and the minute-to-minute banter was still as good as ever. I also liked the greater emphasis on stealth and deemphasis on constant encounters in favor of fewer, more open-ended ones, though that's more up to personal preference.

i never said I couldn't do it, just that looking it up for a Sup Forums post is unnecessary

I'm generally a storyfag but still wasn't a huge fan of the home chapter

Also FUCK that fucking second salvage crate fiovmwvklrwamgp