I've been waiting to make this one for a while! Alright as you may know my last rant was about Microsoft. Some of you will go "Alan I think you messed up on the title." OKay, before you guys get at me for doing this rant. I just want to say that Uncharted 2 was a good game. I enjoyed it but not nearly as much as I thought I would. I don't even see why Sony fanboys choose THIS game out of all the other fantastic Sony titles to hype up the ass.

Uncharted 2: Among Thieves, developed by Naughty Dog and published by Sony Computer Entertainment, won 100+ GOTY awards in 2009 and has gotten over 50 PERFECT scores. This game is hailed by many as not only the greatest Playstation game, but also one of the greatest games of all time. My question is...WHY? Sure the game has great cinematics and well-developed characters, but beyond that there really is nothing about the game that could warrant this many awards. The core gameplay itself is shallow. It has really generic weapons and none of them really pack a punch. Now a days shooters have to stand out some how, but Uncharted doesn't. The enemy AI is also very shallow and there is hardly any variety of them in the game. Don't get me started on the platforming. Alot of the walls you climb feel very on-rails. In Assasin's Creed you can climb practically any vertical object. On the other hand, most of the platforming you do in Uncharted are very selective. There isn't really any blood or gore either, making kills feel less satisfying than most shooters. The multiplayer is fun, but again nothing that really stands out. In fact the only thing that wowed me about Uncharted 2 were the co-op objective modes. But there are hardly any co-op maps. Instead of leaving me blown away about it, it leaves me thinking "hey I liked this, why the hell isn't there more of this?" Even in the story aspects of the game I have something to say. They basically use the well-developed characters and cinematics to hide the fact that story never really drives forward and that the plot itself is pretty lacking, kind of similar to Mass Effect 2.

Then there's the graphics. The oh so amazing graphics. Besides the stunning lighting and and animations, there really isn't anything over the top about the graphics. Basically everyone that praises the game's graphics bases it off of the cutscene cinematics. The cutscenes aren't even ingame, hence the digital artifacting you can clearly see. Hell, the developers even said they use the time that there engine isn't in use to load the next level, meaning that the cutscenes MUST have been pre-rendered (while maybe being inengine) like most games. UC2 is still a good looking game. Hell, it's better looking than most. Though I gotta say, to everyone that has been saying that UC2 cannot be done on the 360 or that this game is leaps and bounds better than other games and that it "pushes the bar"....ya no. Basically the polygon models and texture details are tenfold in the cutscenes compared to the actual ingame detail. Even with the linear nature of the game, the draw distances and finer details aren't as over the top compared to GOW3 or Alan Wake. The colors are bit oversaturated in some scenes, but that could just come down to personal preference. I personally thought UC2 stole the best graphics award from Killzone 2 in 2009.

Do you know what Uncharted is? It's a nicer, G-rated, slower paced version of Gears of War + Tomb Raider. That's it. It's not the greatest fucking Playstation game ever nor is this GOTY worthy. I give up on the gaming industry if UC3 somehow beats ME3, Skyrim, and a bunch of other titles that probably deserves the GOTY award much more than UC3. UC2 is by no means a bad game, but it's definantely the least deserving GOTY of this generation if not of the last decade. (EDIT: Well, I forgot about GTA4)

But ofcourse, many of you will read this as if it says "Uncharted 2 suxors lolololol" and start defending it. Get at me bitches.

I wouldn't make the assumption that UC3 doesn't deserve to win GOTY. What if the game is improved immensely?

You ask why...

Because it reinvented (really the only way I can think of to describe it) the way videogame stories are told. It's one of the games that make one think and question why videogames are not hailed as an art form. The game was essentially one big blockbuster action-adventure movie that you played. It was amazing, it was different, and it was fun.

Heavy Rain was hailed as many as a step forward in videogame story-telling. The gameplay is horrendous and admittedly, you and I could develop a game with better gameplay than Heavy Rain. The game is still amazing. Not because of the gameplay or because of the graphics, but because of the way it is so to speak.

Alan, you took the exact words right out of my mouth.

And see, even you are admitting that UC2's graphics aren't what they are hyped up to be.

And yes it is so damn on rails. That's my problem with it. I don't need open ended gameplay for a game to be fun but the problem with Uncharted is in that it's too planned out. I found that in one of the levels, the only thing you could actually climb up was something that you needed to progress anyway! It is just a film which you can either choose to progress in or not. You cannot choose how.

Imo, Heavy Rain is better.

In-game graphics where stunning in most places, especially the part where the train crashes and you have to climb it up the side of the mountain, just mind blowing.

Graphics aren't subjective, the game is gorgeous, not just the cut-scenes, but IN-GAME.

Did it deserve all those perfect scores? Well, I'd give it a ten.

So you're upset because you have an opinion and there are hundreds of other people with a different opinion?

It was an excellent game.

you know what's funny? there actually is a part of the game where Uncharted 2 Literaly IS on rails.

i don't think uc3 will win this year..it has tought competition..2009 didn't really had big competition like this year will have..i would want me3 to win but if it doesn't win,i hope skyrim does..i don't want uc3 to win because the way the game is made is like the last games..you do a puzzle,shoot people,run and set piece moments,cutscene and repeat and repeat.not to mention that it will have a 6 hours campaign and online that really isn't that awesome and there you go..game of the year..
skyrim will have over 100 hours of gameplay and me3 will probably have 20 to 25 hours of gameplay..i rather have those than a game that i can beat in 1 and a half day with online that i will barely play..which i don't play online much

Uncharted 2 us an AMAZING GAME. Hands down one of the best games ever made. The 6th highest rated game ever made. You don't need innovative gameplay to be great. It perfects what it is. The only game I can say are better than this are the Super Mario Galaxy games and Ocarina of Time. Some reviewers even gave this game an 11/10. It deserves a ten from me.

Pein wrote:

i don't think uc3 will win this year..it has tought competition..2009 didn't really had big competition like this year will have..i would want me3 to win but if it doesn't win,i hope skyrim does..i don't want uc3 to win because the way the game is made is like the last games..you do a puzzle,shoot people,run and set piece moments,cutscene and repeat and repeat.not to mention that it will have a 6 hours campaign and online that really isn't that awesome and there you go..game of the year.. skyrim will have over 100 hours of gameplay and me3 will probably have 20 to 25 hours of gameplay..i rather have those than a game that i can beat in 1 and a half day with online that i will barely play..which i don't play online much

Yeah, I get what your saying. But, Mass Effect isn't an RPG.

Don't double post.