I'm really not following the "uncharted is a shooter" logic any more than I would say Metal Gear solid is a shooter. sure, they have plenty of shooting in them but they are NOT the primary focus.

In my playthroughs of both Uncharted 1 and 2, I did a lot more adventure/platforming/puzzling than shooting. In fact I'd say about 1/3 or less was shooting, the rest was all about climbing buildings, solving riddles, and working with your teammate to get places. Yeah, you shot a LOT, but I found it was only in a small portion of the game. I'm sorry dude, but I'm not agreeing with that assessment. if anything I'd say Uncharted is an Adventure game, through and through. the perfect blend of platforming and puzzle solving is what does it for me, I'm not going to lump it in with Gears just because you shoot a few brown people.

Well everyone is entitled to their own opinion right?

On my experience with Uncharted's, there is really only 1 or two puzzle sequences, and they are near the end. Climbing only took about an hour or two total in the game. Those sections were not challanging, and in Uncharted 1 pretty glitchy.

To me, most of the game involved shooting. This game felt a lot like Lost Planet to me. It's an extremly linear experience, with some climbing/puzzle aspects. Metroid Prime, which I consider a FP Adventure game, has free exploration, so does MGS. In Uncharted, backward paths become eliminated as you go.

I consider Uncharted 2 a shooter just like I do Lost Planet. MGS is a different category because you have free exploration, you never have to even fire your gun, Boss fights also don't always involve shooting, and well you can go and play the entire game just being sneaky(tranq guns, hiding in boxes, chock holding people, hiding in lockers, etc). Uncharted is not the same as Gears because Gears is focused on online play where Uncharted is focused on single player, but it's the same type of game as Lost Planet 1 (which I love).

This same logic applies to Mass Effect 2 as well. Yes you still play in an RPG like world, where decisions affect the story, and your interactions with people are a big part of the game. However there is no real exp or leveling system anymore, so although the atmosphere screams RPG, the game plays like a shooter. Mass Effect 2 and Uncharted are hybrid genres. Shooter first, RPG/AA second.

That's my opinion, and I respect yours too.

QFT

I started to reply about Uncharted a few hours ago but then I decided it wasn't worth it.  I was actually having a hard time trying to recall exactly when did Uncharted have puzzles (it's been a couple of years).  Even the few puzzles that were in U2 were ruined since the game gave you the solution before you even realized you were stuck.

To a degree, I guess I can agree with you about Mass Effect 2.  While there was heavy emphasis on a lot of other things, I think someone could probably beat the game just by running from gun fight to gun fight, totally ignoring the RPG elements.  It's not how I played it but I do see how it's possible. 

How does ME compare to the Fallout series, if you don't mind my asking?  Here's another WRPG that seems to have a heavy focus on shooting.  I was never interested in the Fallout games but I'm open to opinion.

I dunno, I don't think it's fair to call these games shooters just becuase they have shooting elements. Hell, ratchet and Clank has you shooting things constantly, but I still maintain it's a platformer.

what about Grand Theft Auto? what about Fable? Hell, Fable hasa lot of shooting elements, is it a shooter? Well, okay what if you use a sword, is it an action game? No, I'd say it's an RPG.

I just think you guys are lumping things in together with shooters because it's convenient, and I am not following that logic at all.

Oh, I'm not lumping.  I think of Uncharted as an action adventure like Tomb Raider except with a heavy focus on shooting.  I think of Mass Effect as an RPG with a heavy focus on shooting.  I think Fable is an RPG and GTA is a sandbox game.  I don't think MGS is a shooter, either.  It comes down to what the primary focus of the game is, if you ask me.

Gears primary focus, despite having a good story (imo) is the combat.  It does that very well.  Mass Effect seems to be primarily foccused on the story and absorbing you into its world.  Uncharted seems to be primarily focussed on maintaining an action/adventure movie atmosphere.  Of course, this is my interpretation.  I could be wrong.  I think the biggest problem developers face is that there's only so many buttons on a controller.  You have your jump, your interact, your melee,  your shoot, etc.  With just a few buttons, you have to make an experience that spans anywhere from 10 to 50 or more hours. 

Unless you totally want to take gameplay out of the hands of the gamer and make a game based entirely on context sensitive buttons (ie: Heavy Rain) or quick time events, you're going to end up shooting, chopping, or running an awful lot.  It can't be helped.  Those buttons have to be used over and over again.  But, if you use those buttons repeatedly, but at the same time, manage to work in some other elements (exploration, interaction, platforming, heavy story, level up systems) and the actual combat isn't the main focus of the game, it's okay.  It's okay for a game with good shooting mechanics to be labeled an adventure (Uncharted) or even a platformer (Ratchet and Clank).  It's okay for a game with lots of hacking and slashing to be labeled an RPG (Dragon Age).  It's okay for a game with a lot of first person shooting to be labeled a puzzle game or an adventure (Portal, Metroid Prime).  Again, I think it all comes down to the primary focus and vision of the game.

Hm, how about the Live Arcade and Kinect? How's the role of these in the demographic diversity? We know that Live Arcade is a beast in games sales, most of them aren't shooters, like Castle Crashers, Braid, Limbo, Super Meat Boy, Mr/Ms Splosion Man, The Maw, DR2: Case Zero, The Dishwasher: DS, The Dishwasher: VS, Plants vs Zombies, From Dust, Bastion, etc etc, and there are even the free games, which i think only one is a shooter (Aegis Wings? And that's a euroshmup).

And in the other and, Kinect has been grabbing a lot of the casual market. Which adds even more weight to this debate, since Kinect has now even more users playing games that aren't shooters. One that comes in bundle with the Kinect, others that sell a lot like Dance Central and Kinect Sports (both will receive sequels).

Most of these games don't even meet the point "it has shooting elements". So, i can't see how the PS3 demographic can be more diverse than the Xbox.

The problem is you think Uncharted is an Action/Adventure with Shooter elements, where I feel it's a shooter with Action/Adventure elements. There is no denying, the bulk of the game involves shooting people. There is cg, there are a couple of puzzle sequences, there are some platforming elements, and often times, the shooting is mixed with platforming, but the main thing is shooting comes first.

How can you consider Uncharted an Adventure game, if the game is linear? There is no fee world exploration, no deviation from the main game at all. Super Mario has free world exploring, you can tackle any level at any time, and you can pick any mission within a world to accomplish. Metroid Prime has side missions, branching gameplay paths, and you are always free to go back anywhere in the game and look around, or scan.

GTA is not all about shooting. There is free world exploring, car chases, car racing, stunts, cage fighting, etc, etc. It's sandbox because the game allows you to do anything you like. If GTA were a linear game, with a set path (like Uncharted), then I would begin to consider it a shooter. However being a free world adventure game, it allows you to explor.

As for Fable, I never really been a fan of the franchise, I wouldn't know what to classify it as. Even Peter Monyloex doesn't know. I recall reading him say something like "It's a mixture of a bunch of games, but if I had to classify it, I would say MMO style RPG" which is kind of true. Yes there is a gun, but that thing is useless, you spend most of the game punching people and using magic. Mainly magic. However that's not what makes it an RPG. To be honest though, I just don't like this game, I think it's a terrible RPG, so I can't really argue about it well.

I'm not classifying Uncharted as a shooter because it's convienient. I could say you are classifying it as Action Adventure because that's convienient. The thing is except for some platforming, there is very little in this game that would make it an action adventure. No free world exploration, no side quests, no ability to choose my own mission, all enemy encouters involve shoot offs (rarely do you use environments or melee to battles), and well the game is a shooter IMO.

If I had been trying to classify Uncharted as a shooter for convienience, I would have done the same for MGS. However I have stated that MGS is not an Action/Adventure game, but a stealth/shooter game.

Well in Mass Effect I still cared about character interactions, decisions I made in the game, and well the universe. In fact, it's because the world of Mass Effect is so meticulously crafted, that I love the game. So in that sense, it's still an RPG, but not with the battle system. There are no levels, and experience alters almost nothing in the game.

Fallout is an RPG, with shooter elements (opposite of Mass Effect). First of all there is a leveling system, and when you level up you can allot points to specific stats and choose perks to use. Your characters fighting style can become very customizable, you can be big on Melee, Nukes, Rifles, or even talking your way out of situations. Also as you progress through the game you can find or buy weapons with varying stats (even identical weapons have different stats based on how worn out they are). Mass Effect has this too, but there are only a handful of weapons in ME.

However you are probably wondering, what makes the gameplay of Fallout different from a shooter. Basically Fallout isn't a shooter. I mean you can run around and shoot people, but the second you come across a fast or strong enemy, that won't save you. You have to wait for your AP to regenerate and then select a target and location (head, leg, arm) to shoot. You can de-arm an enemy to stop him from attacking, cripple a leg to slow him down, or just blow off his head for a fast kill. When you are in the mode to select a target, time stops (just like choosing a Biotic power in ME). So basically Fallout is more similar to FFVII and chrono Trigger then a shooter, since you do your most damaging attacks when your AP is regenerated.

If Bioware brings back a system like in ME1, then I will consider ME3 an RPG before shooter. They also need to make Biotics more powerful, and emphasis that type of stop and go gameplay more. If ME3 plays (during battles) like ME2, where you just shoot, and tell team mates where to go, then I will still consider it a shooter.

E.G. When you found Harbinger in ME2, what did you do? I ran in circles hiding behind cover and shooting. What about the Matriarch Benezia and Ascari Commandos in ME1? I used Biotic powers (gravity, then slam). Most of ME2's bosses are immune to Biotic Powers until you destroy their sheild/armor, but at the point the boss is basically dead. That's why ME2 plays a lot like a shooter.