Contests Official Rules
No Purchase Required to Enter or Win
1. Eligibility: Destructoid.com contests are usually provided by sponsors who, due to customs and shipping costs (yay budgets), often limit participation to individuals who are legal residents of the fifty (50) United States (unless otherwise stated) and are 12 years of age. We encourage our overseas friends to be super sneaky and make a friend in the United States who can receive your prize, and then you two figure out the customs/logistics. Be cautious about who you trust, obviously. Employees of destructoid.com, their advertising or promotion agencies, those involved in the production, development, implementation or handling of Contests, any agents acting for, or on behalf of the above entities, their respective parent companies, officers, directors, subsidiaries, affiliates, licensees, service providers, prize suppliers any other person or entity associated with the Contests (collectively “Contest Entities”) and/or the immediate family (spouse, parents, siblings and children) and household members (whether related or not) of each such employee, are *not* eligible and will be fired and publicly beaten if are caught participating. All U.S., federal, state and local and regulations apply.
2. Agreement to Official Rules: Participation in the Contest constitutes entrant’s full and unconditional agreement to and acceptance of these Official Rules and the decisions of the Sponsor, which are final and binding. Winning a prize is contingent upon fulfilling all requirements set forth herein.
3. Entry Period: The start and end dates/times of each Contest (the “Entry Period”) will be posted on the applicable Contest site.
4. Entry: To enter a Contest, follow the instructions on the Contest site. Submission will result in one (1) entry. The number of times you can enter the Contest will be posted on the applicable Contest site. The use of any agencies or automated software to submit entries will void all entries submitted by that person.
5. Drawing: At the conclusion of the Entry Period, we will select the names of the potential winners in a random drawing of all eligible entries received during each Entry Period. The number of winners to be selected in a specific Contest will be posted on the applicable Contest site. The odds of being selected as a potential winner depend on the number of eligible entries received during the Entry Period. Potential winners will be contacted via email and will be asked to provide their full name, age and mailing address within a specified time period. If a potential winner does not respond within the timeframe stated in the notification email, we may select an alternate potential winner in his/her place at random from all entries received during the Entry Period. Limit one (1) prize per household per Contest.
6. Requirements of the Potential Winners: Winners will be notified by the e-mail address associated with their account on destructoid.com.com and/or receive a Private Message on destructoid.com.com or through a Twitter Direct Message/Facebook message. Winners have five (5) days from the original message alerting them of their winnings to respond and claim their prize. If no winner comes forward within five business days, the prize will be forfeited and raffled again where Destructoid's hardcore fans are most active (forums/community blogs/facebook group).
7. Prize(s): The prize(s) (including each prize’s approximate retail value) available to be won in a specific Contest will be posted on the Contest site. No cash or other substitution may be made, except by the Sponsor, who reserves the right to substitute a prize with another prize of equal or greater value if the prize is not available for any reason as determined by the Sponsor in its sole discretion. The winners are responsible for any taxes and fees associated with receipt or use of a prize. Prizes will be mailed between 1 to 45 business days after winners have replied with their required info.
8. General Conditions: In the event that the operation, security, or administration of the Contest is impaired in any way for any reason, including, but not limited to fraud, virus, or other technical problem, the Sponsor may, in its sole discretion, either: (a) suspend the Contest to address the impairment and then resume the Contest in a manner that best conforms to the spirit of these Official Rules; or (b) award the prizes at random from among the eligible entries received up to the time of the impairment. The Sponsor reserves the right in its sole discretion to disqualify any individual it finds to be tampering with the entry process or the operation of the Contest or to be acting in violation of these Official Rules or in an unsportsmanlike or disruptive manner. Any attempt by any person to undermine the legitimate operation of the Contest may be a violation of criminal and civil law, and, should such an attempt be made, the Sponsor reserves the right to seek damages from any such person to the fullest extent permitted by law. The Sponsor’s failure to enforce any term of these Official Rules shall not constitute a waiver of that provision. In case of a dispute as to the owner of an entry, entry will be deemed to have been submitted by the authorized account holder of the screen name from which the entry is made. The authorized account holder is defined as the natural person who is assigned to an e-mail address by an Internet access provider, online service provider, or other organization responsible for assigning e-mail addresses for the domain associated with the submitted e-mail address.
9.Release and Limitations of Liability: By participating in the Contest, entrants agree to release and hold harmless the Contest Entities from and against any claim or cause of action arising out of participation in the Contest or receipt or use of any prize, including, but not limited to: (a) unauthorized human intervention in the Contest; (b) technical errors related to computers, servers, providers, or telephone or network lines; (c) printing errors; (d) lost, late, postage-due, misdirected, or undeliverable mail; (e) errors in the administration of the Contest or the processing of entries; or (f) injury or damage to persons or property which may be caused, directly or indirectly, in whole or in part, from entrant’s participation in the Contest or receipt of any prize. Entrant further agrees that in any cause of action, the Contest Entities’ liability will be limited to the cost of entering and participating in the Contest, and in no event shall the Contest Entities be liable for attorney’s fees. Entrant waives the right to claim any damages whatsoever, including, but not limited to, punitive, consequential, direct, or indirect damages.
10. Disputes: Except where prohibited, entrant agrees that any and all disputes, claims and causes of action arising out of, or connected with, the Contest or any prize awarded shall be resolved individually, without resort to any form of class action. All issues and questions concerning the construction, validity, interpretation and enforceability of these Official Rules, entrant’s rights and obligations, or the rights and obligations of the Sponsors in connection with the Contest, shall be governed by, and construed in accordance with, the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia, without giving effect to any choice of law or conflict of law rules (whether of the Commonwealth of Virginia or any other jurisdiction), which would cause the application of the laws of any jurisdiction other than the Commonwealth of Virginia.
11. Contest Results: To enter the contest without needing to buy/sell anything or request a written copy of the name of the winners, send a self-addressed stamped envelope (stating the specific Contest you are requesting the winners for) to destructoid.com Contest Winners 260 King Street Suite 883, San Francisco California 94107. We run many contests, so please be specific in what you are requesting. Winner requests must be received within thirty (30) days from the end date of the applicable contest (they're always posted on our site though). Winners are usually posted the day following the contest on our contest section.
Lastly, Destructoid has the right to kick your ass and take away your prize if you are a total dickhead, so be cool and don't kick any puppies on your way to victory. Have fun with our contests and be a good sport when you win or lose. Remember: First you get the power, then you get the money, then get the baby.
Contest:
3:00 PM on 06.13.2010
| 
I totally agree with your arguments Mr.Sagat. I wrote a c-blog a while ago about how Uncharted 2 , although fun , was a complete technical mess. Especially towards the end of the game when, you come across nearly invincible enemies that resist way too much damage from guns. But have this special weakness to melee combat, which in most of the case would grant you a 1-hit kill every time.
I'm not going to go in all the details because I'll be hear all night. But I think the story was as boring as you mentioned it. The events I remember were those little things like the Tibetan village or the Pool on top of the hotel. There's nothing relevant to remember about anything, aside from that it's a blockbuster game.
I also agree with the "wish they were in movie journalism" criticism you brought up. I see a lot of reviewers think to highly of video games and how they can "change the world" with their message. That they're actually pretentious about the criticism and so call "JOURNALISTIC" integrity they are trying to evoke.
Luckily for me , Destructoid gives me a safe-haven from this and is down right honest about how they feel about video games.
We are never going to agree on every score given to every video games ever made. But at least we could hear the other side of the medal for certain "popular" games.
And it's exactly what you are doing mister!
Keep them coming!
But I have no idea.
I dunno Jon. I can see where you come from and for people who are similar to you your points are probably valid. I'm not very similar to you though, and I personally loved the game. The ending was lame as fuck, but I can live with that. The graphics were beautiful, the majority of the characters were at least interesting, and most importantly the interactions between Drake and everyone else continually brought a smile to my face. Hell, my wife even watched me play and enjoyed it.
It's doing nothing to truly push gaming forward as it's OWN medium, merely borrowing the language of cinema, but that doesn't mean it sucks.
Besides, it's not every week you buy a game that lets you jump out of a collapsing building while having a firefight. Hell, not every year.
Sagat's sony bias confirmed.
Die hard, nes 1991 or commodore 64 1990, but you can't confirm due to the lack of gameplay where the perspective is shown, as in the nes it is top down, whereas the commodore is 1st/3rd person
Though I agree with the game journalists wishing they were movie journalists.
I thought it got GOTY because it was really fun...
Personally, a scripted event (no matter how epic) is really only cool the first time. After that, the effect is lost on me.
The train and collapsing building segments were excellent though. Its a shame parts like that were few and far between.
There are plenty of games that follow the action genre video games, though maybe not as much as say the fortune explorer like the Tomb Raiders and Indiana Jones' but it definitely oversaturates the market. Hell the game that alot consider GOTY (I know Game Trailers did) Modern Warfare 2 is your basic popcorn action army fare but yet to the players it appeals to it's "EPIC". If you think about it the winner for Best Picture at the Oscars this year was a Modern Warfare 2 type setting in "The Hurt Locker". Not exactly an action picture or as abrasive in it's army archetypes it still represented that lifestyle and was apparently good enough to win the Oscar. Again, I don't like Modern Warfare 2, nor did I really like The Hurt Locker but I guess there was enough interest there on both fronts to see something special when I think realistically and personally there wasn't anything that special to either. Hey, differing opinions.
I think Uncharted 2 atleast in terms of standing out however did have one of the most interesting, funny and just likable main protagonists to come out in the last few years. That to me was big ups for that game. Also the fact that it was a great combination of platforming, third person shooting and simplistic puzzles helps round out the experience. Easy controls and what not helps too. Plus while I understand the element of danger not being there, for me a person who can and will find many ways to die it was way less stressful. And trust me, I definitely found ways to die on those "easy" platforming areas. Is the plot simple and even forgettable? Sure, I mean I don't remember every detail but then again it's not trying to be anything different. It knows what it's strengths are and it plays to those instead of going for a deeper experience and as stated a thin plot in a video game hardly tanks Uncharted 2 considering many games of lesser quality not delivering on the fun factor which Uncharted 2 has in spades.
Then again there's always Crushing, which does ramp up the difficulty if you like dying alot.
There are plenty of games that follow the action genre video games, though maybe not as much as say the fortune explorer like the Tomb Raiders and Indiana Jones' but it definitely oversaturates the market. Hell the game that alot consider GOTY (I know Game Trailers did) Modern Warfare 2 is your basic popcorn action army fare but yet to the players it appeals to it's "EPIC". If you think about it the winner for Best Picture at the Oscars this year was a Modern Warfare 2 type setting in "The Hurt Locker". Not exactly an action picture or as abrasive in it's army archetypes it still represented that lifestyle and was apparently good enough to win the Oscar. Again, I don't like Modern Warfare 2, nor did I really like The Hurt Locker but I guess there was enough interest there on both fronts to see something special when I think realistically and personally there wasn't anything that special to either. Hey, differing opinions.
I think Uncharted 2 atleast in terms of standing out however did have one of the most interesting, funny and just likable main protagonists to come out in the last few years. That to me was big ups for that game. Also the fact that it was a great combination of platforming, third person shooting and simplistic puzzles helps round out the experience. Easy controls and what not helps too. Plus while I understand the element of danger not being there, for me a person who can and will find many ways to die it was way less stressful. And trust me, I definitely found ways to die on those "easy" platforming areas. Is the plot simple and even forgettable? Sure, I mean I don't remember every detail but then again it's not trying to be anything different. It knows what it's strengths are and it plays to those instead of going for a deeper experience and as stated a thin plot in a video game hardly tanks Uncharted 2 considering many games of lesser quality not delivering on the fun factor which Uncharted 2 has in spades.
Then again there's always Crushing, which does ramp up the difficulty if you like dying alot.
The game is designed like an action movie, that's certain. But even though it's characters are cliched, they've still got more personality than the vast majority of video game characters we see nowadays. Sure, Nathan Drake might not be a Travis Touchdown, but he's probably the most interesting third-person shooter protagonist that we've seen in gaming. I'm also amazed that you don't find any humor in his ironic ability to be glib while killing hundreds of enemies.
In terms of the story and set pieces (and even the lack of death), how is Uncharted 2 any different than 2008 and presumably 2010 GOTY Mario Galaxy? Neither story is very original, but what's there is functional. There's a ton of creativity that went into both games, and both use ludicrously epic setpieces as an excuse for interesting gameplay. While Mario is more creative in it's level design, it took a lot of clever design to get sequences in both games to work. You can't look at scenes like the helicopter scene in U2 and say that it's badly designed. Sure, Uncharted uses movie tropes but that's BECAUSE THE GAME IS DESIGNED TO BE LIKE AN INDIANA JONES FILM. And yes, Uncharted has checkpoints, but they don't seem too much different from Galaxy's punishment-free Game Overs. Death has become almost a nonissue in modern gaming. Just look at Prince of Persia or Final Fantasy XIII!
I think the inherent problem with this SWS is that you're essentially dissing Uncharted 2 because it succeeds in what it was trying to do: be the videogame equivalent of an Action-Adventure film. Don't knock it for being what it is, it's like complaining about the inability to jump in Bionic Commando.
Just pointing that out since you made reference to Academy Awards several times as a sort of indication of highest quality. That aside, the message was clear enough, and for the most part I agree. While I was never really bored while playing the game, it didn't come off to me as my favorite game of 2009, or really anything close.
The gameplay really wasn't that great for a cover shooter. It was leaps and bounds above the first game, sure, but this wasn't Gears of War (oh no! I compared it to an Xbox game! Clearly biased!). It was still super clunky.
Same goes for the platforming. I was never challenged, and when I was it usually was because the game did things unfair, like give no prompts where to jump and have me rely on luck. It wanted to be Prince of Persia in this regard, but it didn't polish that either.
Story was predictable too, sure, but it was fluff as mentioned so I didn't care.
The killer was just the gameplay felt unpolished. I'm guessing in the inevitable Uncharted 3 they'll probably have it down, but I think most people just saw the amazing graphics and funny quips from Nolan North and just threw GOTY awards at the thing. I never beat the game either; I got about 3/4 of the way through, got stuck on an unfair jump, and never had the motivation to pick it back up and rough through it.
I think some people just need to get over their HDTVs, because all I saw was a poor man's Indiana Jones meshed with a mediocre third person shooter. The platforming had potential, but often felt too linear.
I don't think anyone is saying it did. Pretty much everyone who played it realized that it was derivative, but that really doesn't matter. People enjoyed it because it was well-paced, beautiful, had a very likable cast, and, most importantly, was just a fun game. It was never trying to be anything else.
I too saw Harry Flynn's double crossing coming from a mile away, but I didn't really have the same issues with the cookie cutter characters. For what they set out to do, Elena is absolutely perfect. You, as the player, are meant to fall in love with her, and there's no way not to do just that.
That's a fault of the genre's pathos and not with a video game. As a game it is still is very fun to play, has multiple difficultly levels, larger and varied environments, and pretty much oozes quality. What you're confusing for lack of quality, or rather unworthiness, is simply a genre issue. And while you think that there is no danger and the player simply is unable to die, well, chief, let me tell you from experience that you can die. It happens, and if you're not very good at video games, like me, then it happens a lot. You may have died once or twice two if you actually played through the game, then who knows, you might have died once or twice too. Not only that, but the game does support harder difficulties, although you didn't mention trying them, so either I have to assume you played it on hard in good faith to your argument, or assume that you played on normal and blew past a difficulty that is at the entry level, when we both know that you're not a casual gamer.
I'm not here to argue whether this is Game of the Year with you, and while it seems like I am, I'm not. You're just biased, and I can very clearly see you saying that no game in that genre deserves Game of the Years status, and not just Uncharted. That you brought counterpoints as example in your previous videos, and not in this one, I am taking your opinion with a grain of salt because you're talking a lot of shit about a game that has a lot of very fun gameplay and honest to goodness polish without bringing up a single thing from that year applied in a game that works to make it Game of the Year caliber.
You can't make a three minute video bashing a single game on its genre's failings without addressing qualifiers whatsoever for what makes a game good, or mention good games even, and not turn off a few people who can see that you're arguing from bias. You hate summer blockbusters. I hate RTS's, but I would never make an argument that Starcraft is in a crummy genre and that should prevent it from receiving accolades. Take off your blinders.
Also, you know why so many Game-journalists considered this the best game of last year, and you don't? Your opinion sucks almost as much as your attempt at comedy, and/or they might be right.
Sorry if that was douchey, but this video is no better than my comments above. It doesn't matter if you have your own opinion on a game, just don't shit on a perfectly decent game and force it down our throats. If you didn't enjoy the game, just say so don't force your opinion on us. And don't call every game-journalist that gave this game of the year pathetic, it may not be your game of the year, but it might be theirs solely because they may have genuinely enjoyed it.
I don't really disagree with the points, because yes, most of Uncharted 2 in terms of how the characters interacted and how the story unfolded was very predictable. I still had a lot of fun with it though, aside from that awful final boss.
Sagat is starting to sound a lot like some bitchy art house film critic(I miss you Rev Ant), shouting bile upon the masses because Transformers 2 made a ton of money despite being one of worst movies made in a while, but no one went to some French silent film about a boy playing with string in a landfill(aka didn't give New Super Mario Bros Wii the GOTY last year).
Well, boo hoo. People like big dumb action movies/games. Its fun to just sit there and stare in awe at something that, while contrived, is still infinitely more exciting than your own boring ass life.
It was still fun shooting dudes though.
Oh and good arguments. I don't necessarily agree with most of them myself, but good nonetheless.
Because having a good narrative TOTALLY MEANS making your game boring and cliche and trashy and ripping off blockbuster action films.
For some reason most of these big popular titles are completely uninteresting to me. I was probably off playing something like No More Heroes while my roommate was gushing about Uncharted. While I haven't played it between this video and what you have talked about on Bit Transmission I think you nailed my feelings exactly. I'm never going to identify with these big budget titles but what I enjoy is still getting made...even if it barely makes enough money to continue on like that.
Wait, was my comment supposed to be funny?
*I've never played Uncharted but I heard the same thing about MGS4. I've never played a game that was more movie then game but I can't see that being a good thing. Games are suppose to be games not movies. The only game that I can think of that mixed movie and game exceptionally well was Resident Evil 4 on the Gamecube. Well, at least in my opinion. Also, keep up the good work Holmes.
As I said, he's entitled to his opinion, but he doesn't have to form his opinion in a way to sell or in this case not sell the game. I'm sure his primary concern wasn't to tell people to not buy this game, yet that's the vibe I'm getting. Here's a similar example:
Not forced: I hated Uncharted 2
Forced: Uncharted 2 Sucks
What's with all this "Games aren't supposed to be like movies" crap? Since when do you lot define the rules of a creative medium?
Games can and SHOULD be like movies. They can and SHOULD be like a great novel. They can and SHOULD be like boardgames, or sports, or a million other cultural expressions. How does imposing artificial limits on creative expression help a creative medium in ANY way?
If you don't like a particular example, don't consume it. Rocket science, it is not.
You're the same people who say shortsighted things like "Story is not important" or "Graphics are not gameplay" or "Games aren't art" as though you personally have the authority to define what is and is not art. You have the hubris to tell me as a consumer that I am wrong to enjoy story or the immersion that good art direction can inspire?
Since this all seems to be about the term "gameplay", let's take a second to point out that you use it like it means something specific, something quantifiable, and something which you can use to dump on games which don't fit your uncertain standards. "Gameplay" is NOT a specific thing, it is a term used to describe the combination of mechanics, rules and presentation that goes into a video game. It does not impose limits on the ratio of those elements, or how they are combined, and for the love of this creative industry, I hope it never does.
Destructoid's "journalists" are just adding to the problem.
They have, for the most part, forsaken relevant editorialising and friendly debate for the sake of 4chan-esque scathing petulence. I've enjoyed the occasional comedic editorial, but lately this place has become less informative, and more like a bunch of spoilt brats with toxic attitudes and painfully uneducated vitriol.
If you're going to copy someone else's presentation, make it someone other than Yahtzee. He's funny, but he's not at all relevant.
U mad?