Yes exactly, and I think that's the root of the problem, which is really disappointing. The first two games had multiple years to get right and perfect, but Jak 3 only got a year

first of all the one is fps and the other tps... secondly jak 3 is a great game ..many call it jak 2.5 but its far from the truth..the fact that they added 8 awesome guns along with light jak and more dark powers was pretty impressive..not to mention the desert with the cars..you were driving through heaven city and a freaking war was going on when you were looking down..for just a year in development it was super impressive ..uncharted for example is the same game but the fans aint complaining ..in what other game u can fool around stoping time using the mass inverter etc ..it was such an awesome game with amazing music too super underrated ..the rush of jak 3 imo comes from the level design or the over complicated story not the gameplay !! also for casual gamers that play the game for the first time .. the technique with the blaster or the beam reflector shouldn't be known to them unless they see gameplay from youtube..the veterans on the other hand like myself that knows the game and dont struggle during missions ..prefer to use ALL the guns and have fun with them ..atleast thats what i do..

@@bloody_outlaw8000 I love Jak 3, it is a great game, but I'm not blind to its flaws. Adding more guns and powers doesn't make a game better by default, they need to make use of these new abilities in meaningful ways and they didn't. Each new ability doesn't feel like they were added because of feeling like they were necessary to add, they were added because it sounded cool. For example, the Dark Jak invisibility power was a cool power, but it was used in 1 mission in the entire game. Same with the Light Jak time slow ability, it was used in 1 mission. I don't think I need to explain how much of a missed opportunity both these powers were, but I will. Think of how we could have approached combat if we could use the invisibility power whenever we liked. It would have given the player the option to use a bit of stealth in some of the combat encounters. Or we could have used the slow time ability in some really elaborate platforming puzzles. These abilities have a lot of potential to be used in amazing ways, but the game doesn't really allow for it, or care about them after they've been introduced. Yes, the spectacle of some of these missions and scenarios is awesome, but again, if what I'm playing is shallow and doesn't ask me to put any thought or skill into it, then the spectacle is lost. Your point about Uncharted isn't very well thought out. I hate the Uncharted games for this reason. All of them are pretty much identical, and don't provide much mechanical depth. Just because the Uncharted fanbase is contempt with a series of bland games that never evolve doesn't mean people like myself are complacent with the same. As a kid, I always used the Beam Reflexor as my one weapon all the time. I had no KZfaq to see other people play like that, it's just how most people end up playing because it's pretty much a guaranteed win for most combat encounters. Nowadays, I try to use all the guns in appropriate scenarios, but it's hard when the game doesn't account for it and just throws a bunch of enemies at you. Again, I love Jak 3, but come on, let's not be blind to the obvious flaws it has. That's what I'm trying to say in this video. And I'm using Doom Eternal as an example of how to approach combat correctly, not comparing the games genres.

@@PowercellZeke please read my comment again and don't call me blind for no reason..i just said the story isn't as good and the level design is bad..but again aren't you been a little hard on a game that is over 15 years old ? imagine judging san andreas by todays standards .. could it be fair for expecting the game to have all the stuff gta v has for example ? or what about shadow of the Colossus ? even then the game had terrible controls and camera but still many consider it a masterpiece..i used uncharted as an example because who doesn't like uncharted ? except u apparently..its objectively great series and you clearly see it as the reason why the jak series is overlooked..if thats the case i feel you ,i felt the same way but i can't lie to myself.. uncharted and last of us are great games.. uncharted to its core it might be the same game but if you played the games and didn't notice the difference between 1 and 4 to its visuals, level design, setpieces then I'm sorry but you are the blind..it suppose to be a realistic shooting cover base game ..what did u expect ,super powers laseers and shit ? you can say its not your type of game but don't call it bland just because you didn't like it.. you know what I mean ?

@@bloody_outlaw8000 I didn't mean to insult you, and if I did I apologize. I meant "let's not be blind" in the sense of we shouldn't overlook the flaws the game has just because we love it. Lot's of people do that because they don't want to accept what they love isn't perfect. As I said in the video, I'm hard on Jak 3 because I love it so much, and I know it had the potential to be something truly incredible, but it didn't happen that way. I think it would be totally fair to judge San Andreas to today's standards, same with any other game. Older games can still be critiqued just as newer ones can. I do agree that we shouldn't compare San Andreas to GTA V, and say that SA is bad because it doesn't have features that V has, that would be unfair. Most people consider Shadow of the Colossus to be a masterpiece because of how unique it was a the time, which is fair, but they updated the terrible controls in the remake because no one wants bad controls in a game. I'm sure that would have been a criticism the game had back then. In any case, every game is up for criticism, given the right context. The context of comparing Jak 3 to what Jak 3 SHOULD have been I think is fair. Comparing the features of San Andreas to V is a bit unfair, unless V has less features which would be odd and a good topic of discussion. I'm not the only one who doesn't like the uncharted games. A lot of people like myself find them to be incredibly repetitive and monotonous. I've only played 1-3, so I can't say anything about 4 as I haven't played it, but there is very little change between UC 1 to UC3. Mechanically the games are very shallow, which I guess is fine when you want to turn your brain off, but that's not what I play games for. You said "it's objectively great series". No it is not. As soon as anyone says something is "objectively great" or "objectively bad" they've lost the argument automatically. Nothing can be objectively good or bad, because everything is incredibly subjective. Uncharted and The Last of Us are not "objectively great" games. You may love them, and that's great. But that doesn't mean that many other people don't like them. I find Uncharted's gameplay to be very lackluster and unfulfilling, with a story that's very cheap and predictable. The Last of Us is a lot better, but I don't find it to be anything special as a video game. Uncharted over shadowing the Jak series isn't the reason I don't like the games, I just find them shallow and stale. I think the Jak series is overlooked because tonally the games were all over the place so they didn't resonate as well with people as games like Crash Bandicoot or Ratchet and Clank did, which is unfortunate, but I don't blame Uncharted for that. I know the Uncharted games are realistic cover games, I didn't expect lasers or anything like that. I noticed the small differences in game feel and level design, but that doesn't stop them from all feeling like the same games. I will say though that Uncharted and TLoU are nowhere near as creative as the Jak or Crash series. Sure, UC and TLoU may have better written character interactions and more realistic world design, but it's just stories of people from our world in our world, whereas the Jak series attempted to tell a story with its own universe with its own unique characters with its own rules. Honestly, what is unique about Nathan Drake? He's such a cooky cutter character. I'm not saying the characters in Jak are masterfully crafted, but they have a lot more character than anyone in Uncharted, bar maybe Sully. No, Uncharted is not my kind of game, but I find it bland, on a mechanical level, and a storytelling level. Nothing it does is unique, aside from the set-pieces, which lose all effect on a second playthrough, and most of the time, have no real consequence because it's all scripted, so really, what's the point of them? To make the player FEEL like they've accomplished something great, or made it out of a tight spot by the skin of their teeth, when in reality, they didn't really do anything. It's all scripted, and the game is designed to make the player feel like that. I could go on about why I really dislike the Uncharted series, but I'll leave it there. Thanks for taking the time out of your day to discuss this with me though!

I'm glad you're able to accept the flaws of the games as well, I think a lot of people just don't wanna see them. While I think Jak 2 is a difficult game and checkpoints can be frustrating, I don't think it's unfair. If you take the time to really get to know how to use your arsenal effectively, the game becomes a lot more fun and easier. Which means not using the jump spin shoot combo the whole time most people use. That being said, some of the missions that are more intense I think warrant a lack of checkpoints, makes the stakes a bit higher. I think you're exactly right with the over correction. They wanted to make the game easier by adding more checkpoints, healing on the spot, more health, and more guns. Just made the game piss easy

I never even thought about that with the Mass Inverter, pretty interesting. As you say, the game adds all these different weapons but don't adjust the game to account for it. I just wanted more unique situations to force me to use specific weapons. Also yeah, I never really used the rocket launcher in Doom 2016, but it's incredible in Eternal

I'm focusing a bit more on analysis type videos on a lot of games, not just Jak. A new video is already done and will be up later this week, I'm glad you enjoy!

@@PowercellZeke I LOVE that. My whole subscription que is mostly analysis-type videos. I would love to know if you're interested in the God of War lore, I've only played the new one and there's a lot apparently. I love everything you make bro, glad your channel is doing so well. Best of luck to you :)

@@anthonydarrigo7291 the only GoW game I've played was the first one, and am not really interested in playing the new one. But I've got a lot of other analysis type videos in progress that aren't just Jak related, which I'm super excited for. And cheers mate, I'm glad you're liking the content

I mostly agree, though I never had a problem with the platforming or Archviles. I actually really enjoyed the platforming, and yeah the Archviles are a bitch to fight, bit that's kinda the point

@@PowercellZeke The platforming was actually pretty good overall, though several jumps definitely made me want to rip my hair out. I understand some enemies were designed to be annoying to teach the player things, which it generally does well. Though an Archvile spawning in the middle of a fight when I'm on the other side of the room, and summoning heavies when I finally found it was not cool lmao. The Marauder's a good boi though.

When I first played 2016, I had to stop after every level cuz of how tense it was, so it took me a while to beat it. But yeah, I get how you can feel that, cuz after a certain point, the gameplay does get repetitive. You could almost compare Doom Eternal to DMC, they both have incredible combat depth, and encourage you to play stylishly and skillfully. Except one is an FPS. The biggest draw for me in Eternal, is when I'm playing at such a high skill level that I go into a sort of zen state. I'm so in the zone, weapon switching every two seconds and just slaughtering my way through wave after wave of tough enemies. It takes a while to get to that point, but the game is built so that you can experience that sort of feeling at any difficulty and at any skill level. That's my pitch, if that sounds cool, give it a shot. I think it's leagues better than 2016 purely for the combat. I think that's a fair way to look at things, but I don't think it's how they should have approached Jak 3. It's not a series like Just Cause where it gives you all these tools for you to just play around with. Jak 3 still has a lot of Jak 2s methodical DNA in its level design, but it doesn't fit well with the amount of abilities it throws at you. I think it's a case of over correction. They got a lot of criticism for how hard Jak 2 was, so they made the game easier by adding checkpoints every 3 steps, letting you heal when you want, giving you more health, and giving you all these overpowered guns, so your brain just turns off when playing, which was far from the case in Jak 2.

@@PowercellZeke I might pick it up on sale one day and give it a go. Yeah, when you put it like that it makes sense, In the process of trying to make a better game they lost track of what made Jak II so special.

@@keithealy yeah totally get it when it's cheaper A big aspect as well is they had fuck all time to work on it. If they didn't have such a strict deadline they probably could have reflected on it a lot more and approached it smarter

I'm comparing the games combat designs and their approach to combat, not comparing genres

Powercell Freak ohhh gotcha

That's what happens when you have a crap-ton of weapons each wildly different, poor gun-play, because you can never really balance for the whole arsenal. Though I always though the depth came from the exploration and the Metroidvania esk gated collectable + progression not the gun-play?

I think it's because, if some of these comments are anything to go by, is people aren't realising I'm comparing how both games approach combat, I'm not saying Jak 3 sucks and Doom Eternal is better. Just showing an example of a good way to integrate more strategy into the Jak series combat. And cheers mate

@@MartianBlobfish I feel the exploration was the best part of the first game because it really felt fleshed out. Every subsequent game just doubled up on the gunplay and didn't really evolve past Ratchet 2. But I'm working on a whole video about that so I'll shutup for now

Tbh borderlands 2 is the most better title than bod1 and 3

Nothing is perfect, does that mean I can't call anything extremely awesome? I can't acknowledge something has faults but still call it awesome? I honestly don't get where you're coming from

@@PowercellZeke I am coming from the graveyard, have left some flowers on the tombstone of "Awesome".

@@NotOrdinaryInGames Go outside mate. Get some fresh air

@@ss2gora0 Epic post, updooted.