PS3 News: No Offline Multiplayer For Uncharted 2 - PS3 News

Members Login: Register | Why sign up? | Forgot Password?

No Offline Multiplayer For Uncharted 2

It blew the audience away at Sony's E3 press conference, and it blew us away when we got a glimpse of it earlier this year. The multiplayer beta has been an immense success and everyone is saying that Uncharted 2: Among Thieves is definite Game of the Year material.

But it's not the Superman of video games. It can't do everything. As most of you know, the title will support online multiplayer, both competitive and cooperative, but you probably didn't know this: there will be no offline multiplayer of any kind. Thing is, the game looks so unbelievably gorgeous, Naughty Dog didn't want to sacrifice those wonderful visuals for the sake of a split-screen offline multiplayer option. As the studio's Evan Wells said in a recent PlayStation Blog interview:

"We are only supporting online multiplayer. We didn't want to compromise the visuals going from single player to multiplayer and to include a split screen option at this time would have meant making that sacrifice."

While this would've been a great game for offline co-op - we'll admit that - Wells does have a point. And it's hardly the first time that a developer has shied away from offline multiplayer this generation; what with the huge advancements in online multiplayer, it almost seems silly to have offline. Well, for those of us who grew up with only split-screen multiplayer, it'll never seem "silly;" some of us believe the only true "multiplayer" is when the other person (or people) are sitting there right next to you, playing the same game. But I digress. The point is, Uncharted 2 will boast online multiplayer only.

Related Game(s): Uncharted 2: Among Thieves

6/30/2009 John Shepard

Put this on your webpage or blog:
Email this to a friend
Follow PSX Extreme on Twitter

Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Share on Google Share on MySpace Share on Delicious Share on Digg Share on Google Buzz Share via E-Mail Share via Tumblr Share via Posterous

Comments (34 posts)

Danny007
Tuesday, June 30, 2009 @ 9:47:57 PM
Reply

I get what Evan is saying. I respect that.

Last edited by Danny007 on 6/30/2009 9:50:11 PM

Agree with this comment 2 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Gregory Freeman
Tuesday, June 30, 2009 @ 11:58:47 PM

they took the route of Guerrilla games killzone2... and i guess that's ok... but iunno what stops em from patching this in like capcom did for versus mode in re5... that doesn't sacrifice em anything, and i'll gladly pay 5-10$ for that...

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Scarecrow
Tuesday, June 30, 2009 @ 9:58:28 PM
Reply

Boooooh!

Still gonna get this game day 1, but still boooooooooooooooooh!

Offline multiplayer (co-op) is VERY important.
At least it'll have co-op online.

Still, there's nothing like 2 people playing on the same console, teaming up to kick ass (and enjoy the story together).

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

TheRiceman
Tuesday, June 30, 2009 @ 9:58:53 PM
Reply

Split screen would be nice but if it downgrades the game in anyway I don't want it. Anyway I can't wait for this game.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Scarecrow
Tuesday, June 30, 2009 @ 10:20:54 PM

It doesn't need to split the screen

Both characters can exist in the same camera.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

aaronisbla
Tuesday, June 30, 2009 @ 11:44:31 PM

No, that wouldnt work too well at all

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Siege
Tuesday, June 30, 2009 @ 10:01:51 PM
Reply

I understand what he is saying but it isn't a good enough reason for me. There are gamers out there (such as myself) who want offline co-op more than anything else. I will play a subpar game if I can play it co-op with a buddy of mine and have a blast.

It doesn't matter if the visuals would be compromised, that is a sacrifice that I, as the gamer buying the game, am completely willing to overlook.

If he had said that they didn't want to put the extra time in developing it or something, I could deal with it. If the only reason is that they didn't want to give gamers compromised visuals, well, I find that the gamers who really want co-op care more about getting it than what it looks like.

I'll still buy it and, if it is as good as it looks, it will probably be my favorite game this year. This news does, however, bum me out.

Agree with this comment 6 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Tuesday, June 30, 2009 @ 10:38:20 PM

Could have hurt their score in the end, I can see it in Edge magazine now: "The massive downgrade in graphics for offline multiplayer make us take a point off here"

Agree with this comment 2 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Tuesday, June 30, 2009 @ 10:50:31 PM

Edge would take more than a point for that Worlds, they'd knock the game down by 10 just because the don't like the way it says 'PS3' on the box.

Agree with this comment 4 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Ricochet
Wednesday, July 01, 2009 @ 12:17:52 AM

@Siege:

I could not agree with you more. However, PS3 has already been in tremendous scrutiny for not "delivering" the goods. Even the latest Killzone 2 was left questionable (due to the palette). As for the many poor ports, a lot of developers are already questioning the Blu-ray and Cell providing that it ONLY does provide a "slight" advantage to the 360, in other words, they're basically saying it's an "unnecessary" change for the console.

With Uncharted 2, a game that wowed us with it's unbelievable visuals and game mechanics, it would be pitiful to let that be sacrificed which will mean it can't really showcase what the PS3 is truly capable of. As of yet, it's one of the reasons why I keep my PS3, I don't mind the poor ports, but deliver the games that MAKES it ONLY POSSIBLE for the PS3 and not just a "slight" improvement over the 360. We can have "other" 3rd party games giving us better multiplayer (such as Biohazard 5), exclusives on the other hand should be delivered in the best quality possible only on the PS3. As a consumer, I want to get what I PAID for.

@WorldEndsWithMe

I actually lost faith in EDGE when they previewed the POP a few months before it was released saying a lot of stuff that basically didn't end up in game. Nevermind the reviews, too biased against the PS3.






Last edited by Ricochet on 7/1/2009 12:19:44 AM

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

armedkiller
Tuesday, June 30, 2009 @ 10:30:14 PM
Reply

My decision whether to buy or not to buy a game often hinges on whether or not it has offline multiplayer. I'm not loaded for cash and i don't want something where me and my friends are going to switch back and forth. I'm still intent on purchasing this game because i loved the first one, but still a slight disappointment that it won't be included.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Ricochet
Wednesday, July 01, 2009 @ 12:22:38 AM

No doubt "offline" multiplayer may enhance the experience. But the PS3 must come up with games as a "testament" the CELL and Blu-ray as "next gen" and not overhyped technology. We've got Resistance 1 & 2 and the upcoming Ratchet & Clank for offline multiplayer so let's stick with those until the PS3 can get back it's name.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

armedkiller
Thursday, July 02, 2009 @ 12:44:07 AM

Valid Point, but i must say i was disappointed with Resistance 2's "co-op". In R2 there was no true "campaign coop". I preferred the Resistance 1 style much more. Mainly becasue you actually played through the campaign, just with an extra character(who wasn't even included in any of the cut scenes, so it had no effect on the story).

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Tuesday, June 30, 2009 @ 10:39:12 PM
Reply

Offline multiplayer can bite my shiny metal butt.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 5 down Disagree with this comment

BikerSaint
Wednesday, July 01, 2009 @ 2:19:51 AM

OK, Bender!
(Loved Futurama)!!!!

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Arvis
Wednesday, July 01, 2009 @ 11:20:08 AM

"Oh yeah... I forgot you can tempt me with things I WANT..." Classic!

-Arvis

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Tuesday, June 30, 2009 @ 10:51:51 PM
Reply

Just like Burnout Paradise, split screen would have the game working twice as hard, and would require a big hit on the visuals just to work. No thanks. I want this game to be as stunning as it can be. If I want co-op play, I'll find a friend online, maybe in the Uncharted lounge in Home....

Last edited by Highlander on 6/30/2009 10:52:09 PM

Agree with this comment 1 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Juanalf
Tuesday, June 30, 2009 @ 11:07:03 PM
Reply

It shouldn't have any kind of multiplayer period,So I don't see what's to get upset about.However I was happy to hear that the single player is much longer then Uncharted so I have a great single player experience to look forward to later this year.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Victor321
Tuesday, June 30, 2009 @ 11:17:18 PM
Reply

Aww....I misinterpreted myself the whole time.....I thought the multiplayer modes would be both online and offline =(

It's only made a small dent in my wanting for the game, but it will be never be 100%..

More like 98.5 ^.^

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

aaronisbla
Tuesday, June 30, 2009 @ 11:45:12 PM
Reply

I understand some people's need for offline multiplayer modes but, i think its time we realize that its not gonna happen all the time

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Kangasfwa
Wednesday, July 01, 2009 @ 1:04:54 AM
Reply

[sigh]

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

OriginalSin
Wednesday, July 01, 2009 @ 1:45:41 AM
Reply

For me the main solo mission of the game is most important. I don't really care much about multiplayer all that much. I think that they are doing the right thing by only giving it online multiplayer.

I just hate it when they change a game's foundation just to include multiplayer. The main quest was and still is the most important part of the game. Unless they make games like Warhawk and MAG which are made specifically for multiplayer/online only.

I mean like RE5 was a great game but the whole multiplayer/partner thing just kinda dulled it down a bit in my opinion... the other RE in the series where you were alone had way more tension and horror in it.

Don't get me wrong I'm not against multiplayer all together I'm just saying there is a time and place for everything. COD/Army Of Two/Motorstorm/Bad Company etc etc... I say hell for for co-op and multiplayer but not every game needs it.

And just like there are a huge amount of people who would have liked Uncharted 2 to have offline multiplayer there are the same amount of people who'd rather play the game by themselves and then go online to play multiplayer games...

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

armedkiller
Thursday, July 02, 2009 @ 12:48:21 AM

I only have an issue with your last paragraph.

"there are the same amount of people who'd rather play the game by themselves and then go online to play multiplayer games... "

- I don't see why this is justification to NOT have an offline multiplayer.

Last edited by armedkiller on 7/2/2009 12:48:32 AM

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

chucknasty
Wednesday, July 01, 2009 @ 4:01:10 AM
Reply

thank you Naughty Dog! now if only more PSN games would follow this model.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

slayerkillemall
Wednesday, July 01, 2009 @ 4:05:51 AM
Reply

geez,veteran gamers are becoming an extinct race it seems,first killzone,now uncharted,the future looks dark for co-op....

slayer....

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

www
Wednesday, July 01, 2009 @ 5:15:51 AM
Reply

Since Uncharted Drake's Fortune, Resident Evil 5 to me is the best action/adventure game, those who skipped cause of some reviews,you've missed big time.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Andysw
Wednesday, July 01, 2009 @ 5:44:22 AM
Reply

Sorry to go off topic, but this just sprung into mind.

The first uncharted game lasted for like 6 or so hours. Does anyone know if gameplay will be longer in this game?

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

TheRiceman
Wednesday, July 01, 2009 @ 8:22:03 AM

@Andysw: on the official playstation blog the creators said it would be longer than the first game but didn't say exactly how long it would be.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Turbey
Wednesday, July 01, 2009 @ 2:36:35 PM

6 hours? When I played Uncharted first I played about 15 or so hours...

Second time around, 10 hours....

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Tim
Wednesday, July 01, 2009 @ 6:36:08 AM
Reply

This is a major disappointment to go with a lousy excuse. Compromising visuals? Everyone playing split-screen realizes it won't look quite as nice as when they play online or single player. Anyone bothered by that just doesn't play it split-screen.

I have friends and brothers over and we like to play games while sitting on the same couch. When it's a fun game, they get really into it and want to buy it themselves. It's exactly how games gain popularity without a big advertizing budget. And it's the only reason games like Timesplitters, GoldenEye, and Halo gained such popularity.

Uncharted 2 had a big opportunity to set itself apart from current gen games, and it is choosing to ignore that. I may still buy the game and enjoy single player modes, but I won't be able to get all my friends into it, buy their own copies, and play it with me (online and off) all the time.

Agree with this comment 4 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Ricochet
Wednesday, July 01, 2009 @ 10:09:16 AM

True, but unfortunately the 360 has been kicking PS3's ass consecutively for a very long time. We need a game that we can use to SLAP these fanboys silly. Fact is, if we keep putting exclusives that gives the 360 leverage or excuses to even TOP that, then the PS3 has lost it's name. We don't want to give hope for other developers to push 360 to even be on PAR and god-forbid SURPASS the PS3. Uncharted 2 may be the true beginning of what the PS3 is ONLY capable of.

Think of it as our battering ram to break the proverbial gate known as "THE-360-CAN-DO-WHAT-THE-PS3-DON'T"

If this comes to pass, future THIRD party developers may truly consider working on the PS3 first providing said features in games that you wanted to have in the first place.

For now stick with Resistance 1 & 2 for offline multiplayer for the meantime. Let PS3 get back it's name THEN we can start complaining about gameplay. Come on, support your console!

Last edited by Ricochet on 7/1/2009 10:13:44 AM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Andysw
Wednesday, July 01, 2009 @ 11:51:00 AM

Ricochet,

Yeah, and games like final fantasy VII remake and kingdom hearts 3 would be playstation 3 exclusives.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

armedkiller
Thursday, July 02, 2009 @ 1:01:08 AM


I, personally, believe that as long as the 360 has the capability to have a guest online (i.e. Halo 3) they will have a slight advantage. I take crap from my friends all the time because i'm the only PS3 owner within a hundred miles(Alabamians have no sense)... they all own Xbox's and swear by them.

I feel no obligation to prove my console better, because I KNOW IT'S BETTER. I'm the one playing it, and i'll be the judge.

Don't get me wrong, i support my console, but i think its slightly ignorant to ignore gameplay faults... I know this game will be awesome, and i'm going to buy it either way, but still why not take the experience all the way? Why stop short? If you're trying for an awesome game then why not fulfill all the gamers wishes(within reason). I understand time, and money constraints. But a visual sacrifice? He clearly doesn't play split-screen. When playing split-screen, i generally don't care what it looks like, because i'm having fun.

In the end it all comes down to preference... The only reason i think it's ignorant to ignore the gameplay is i'm worried that this might become an industry trend.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

___________
Friday, July 03, 2009 @ 10:05:44 AM
Reply

i think the "we dident want to comprimise the graphics"excuse is 1 a load of crap and 2 getting old.
your allways with another player no?
well why not have one player controll drake and the other controll the other.
if shes not in every single lvl than cut out the lvls she isent for the co-op.
simple not hard.
if almost every single ps1 game can do it i think with the advance in hardware they can handle it.
games are supose to gain features as time goes on not loose them.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Leave a Comment

Please login or register to leave a comment.

Our Poll

If you don't have a PS4 yet, why?
Not enough games I want.
I don't have the money right now.
I'm happy with other platforms.
I just plain don't want it.

Previous Poll Results