@SombrLiz
Naughty Dog showed signs of decay very early. A big focus of Crash Bandicoot’s development was an attempt to create good-looking 3D graphics on PS1 hardware. As the series went on, ND inserted many gimmicky gameplay styles because they felt that doing their 2.5D platforming was getting stale. Jak and Daxter was an attempt to create a bigger 3D platforming experience for new hardware. While none of these things are necessarily bad, they show that ND didn’t have as high of a priority on making good gameplay, instead having more of a concern about innovating with their hardware.
Naughty Dog’s death becomes apparent in the making of Jak 2. Jak and Daxter didn’t sell to expectations. And what was their reasoning as to why this was? Was it not making a good gameplay experience? No. They pointed to two things: one, that the character design of Jak wasn’t relatable enough, that it wasn’t a stereotype that any market could identify with. The second excuse was that 3D platformers were on the way out. Yes, it’s definitely the fault of the genre, and not that you put more of a focus on making a big world, rather than make exploring that world fun.
But the next part is the dev’s true death: that they decided that to make the next Jak game more appealing, that they would take inspiration from Grand Theft Auto. Yeah, what a good idea. All of their talk about wanting to innovate, but then they go ape one of the least creative ideas in the industry. It’s at this point that their ‘innovation’ they talk about actually means making their games more closely resemble reality.
This becomes most clear when Uncharted comes along. Take the typical concept of an action movie and make a game of it. Again, this kind of idea is not necessarily bad, but it puts a priority on making something resemble reality over making a good gameplay experience. But what kind of innovation is that? A third person shooter with hitscan weaponry, and watching your character slowly move along a ledge while you hold the control stick? It’s only an innovation in the minds of people who think that the thing holding gaming back is technical limitations not allowing us to simulate reality. What a joke.
None of this is a judgment on how good the games themselves are. I like more than half of them. But Naughty Dog have never had the right priorities when designing games, and as technology improves, these types are going to focus more on making a realistic experience than making a good gameplay experience. They’re not entirely mutually exclusive goals, but they do oppose one another. Worse technology meant that designers were more willing to compromise reality, since they weren’t very close to begin with. But the more games can simulate reality, the more designers will focus on reality, to the detriment to everything else.