I'm not going to argue back and forth over details. I always like your discussions, Bug.
A few observations, from where I'm sitting:
(hope they're helpful.)
10-12 hours just isn't short for this type of game. That's factually incorrect, I believe. (Then again, what type of game is this? Shooter, Platformer, uneven stealth game with awesome graphics?) Genre aside, any non-rpg game this linear with this level of production values is doing well if it can hit ten hours (most don't).
I think there are plenty of flaws to Uncharted 2, but the vast majority of them are conceptual. I'd really like to design a movie-like game with characters as real as Uncharted 2's that doesn't involve shooting an unrealistic number of people, too -- but maybe this game had to be made first to get there. Or, maybe there never will be a game like that. But Uncharted has moved things in that direction, by making an incredibly well-executed game that isn't about a military man carrying out a mission. Killing stops seeming like a job and starts seeming like a choice you make. (Personally, I played through every part of the game I could, which was most of it, by stealthing around, so I didn't have to feel like I was killing people.) The fact that you even think about the number of people you're shooting puts the game in a different space from R6Vegas, Gears, Killzone, Halo, and even COD. (And so many more.) The fact that our imaginations immediately jump another step beyond what they were able to do differently in the game is arguably a trait of an inspiringly new game world, rather than a design flaw or lack of back-story.
And to anyone mystified by the game's number of perfect scores (not saying it's wrong to give the game a 92, either): If something as well executed as Uncharted 2 should never get the highest score, what kind of game should?
