Design includes level design, game length (under 10 hours for novice players according to them), and originality.

thx Dolla Dolla

the game is already out in NA ?

or not ?

Damn, they hammer the game in the "Design" part (no branching paths, getting stuck or lost is impossible, 10 hours for novice players, not much reason to play it again), and then take a related shot at the end ("...may not have 60 dollar legs, it's the perfect friend for a lost weekend").
Which is odd considering everything else about the review (including the overall score) seems to be positive enough for this to be a definite buy. I'll certainly be picking it up when I get a PS3.

 8.0 isn't hammering actually.

According to them easily the best looking console game to date.

> the game is already out in NA ?

Yes:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=204857

"With no online leaderboards" -Odd they should mention this, they didn't mention it in the AC review, which scored higher, and considering the game type, I find it hard to imagine how this game could implement a leaderboard.

"Kirk Douglas" -GT makes a blatant mistake here, it was Micheal Douglas that played the role. (Perhaps an indication of the level of thought that goes into their reviews? :D)

Odd to hear them say the melee system is difficult to use, when no other review mentions it, and people in the GT forums are going beserk, saying it's 'very smooth and easy to use'. I'll have to check out if that complaint is justified when I get the game.

Also the average of those scores is 8.975, I laughed when I saw that, it reminded me of an exam I failed when I got 39.5% and all I needed was 40% to pass. You'd think GT could just round the score at 9.0, which looks a lot better.

WHAT THEY ACTUALLY SAY in the "Design" part of the review, not the freaking score. Jesus. I don't know how you could not understand that when I list some of their complaints in the parenthesis immediately following the part of my comment that you quoted.

Eurogamer (who are both tougher reviewers and more trustworthy) essentially said the same thing.

Chill out dude. Score only proves that all elements are pretty well shaped even with limitation they've listed. Don't separate quotes and the score. Game is linear but well made. That's important.

Some people seem upset about some inaccuraties in the review:

Someone's take at NeoGAF:

"As far as Gametrailers' criticism about the "one combo" well, that's just plain factually incorrect bullshit. I count at least five different combos I learned, and even when Drake hits the "one combo" that the idot Gametrailers reviewer managed to figure out, (square triangle square) he hits it in probably a dozen different ways.

Satterfield tried to defend this crock of a review by mentioning that Bioshock was almost twice as long as Uncharted. I played Bioshock. How much of that time in Bioshock is spent backtracking? You never have to backtrack in Uncharted. Everything is full steam ahead...bang, bang, bang. It's a rushing rollercoaster ride.

Gametrailers' "Design" score is also complete rubbish, IMO. The design is amazing. Every environment flows right into the next environment. One you are in the game...No loading. Gorgeous atmosphere and architecture. The combat, while taking cues from other games, takes from some of the best game ideas, and in some cases, improves on what those games do. That's what Gears did via Killswitch, and it deserved praise. What more could you want?

What a bunch of clowns. Can't even get their facts correct. Terrible review. "

But if you combine statements like:

GT: "'easily the best looking console game so far"
IGN: "Uncharted: Drake's Fortune is the most fun I've had in a videogame this year."
IGN: "Uncharted isn't just a standout for Sony -- it's a standout for gaming as a whole."

It's clear this game is well designed and quite a gem.