Are people actually saying there is no point in getting a game unless it has re playability? It is not just about how long you play the game, but how much you enjoy it. And anyway, I have played the game 5 times, I'll play it a 5th in a few weeks to get myself ready for 2

So to answer their questions:

1. I lost any respect I had for this site when they assumed it would shorted despite the dev saying the contrary, and anyone who actually likes games would realise Uncharted 1 did have replay value, and besides the game was so good does it matter how long you play it for once you have had your 8 hours.

2. Eddie was a rival, and Nate is not an evil man, he just kills whoever shoots at him. If they had been paying attention, they would realise that Eddie and Nate had had a history together, but never this violent before

3. They are at the bottom of the ocean, is that not good enough, how the hell are you meant to kill a curse?

Stupid article, and Uncharted 2 will be amazing

Oh, and cliffhanger endings are the best... It allows the user to use his imagination... Like at the end of sapranos people thought he lived people thought he died. people talked about it. I assume he died since... being underwater you'll drown.. unless he opened the thing somehow and became a mutant... but isnt that basically dying too? Not like we'll meet him in the same form... I also assumed el darado was still around for the next set of treasure hunters to find... but lets face it the chances of that are slim to none. Nate already found all the clues and even destroyed some the best the next set of guys will do is find the mutants and the room... why would the think "hm... maybe a heli took it and flew it to a boat and while the boat was sailing away some guy pushed it in the water" even if the did think that the ocean is a very big place... good luck getting the equipment and man hours to find it.

the writer must be an idiot and have no logic

The Creative Director of the game said on Qore that the game will be at least 1/3 longer
than the original game...

Nope, it's pretty much in the same league as Indiana Jones.  Lot's of action, witty dialogue, and likeable characters.

Nazi U-boat is from a book actually.... Clive Custler I believe.

Actually it's quite often used part in adventure movies/books. I'm pretty sure I have seen them several times used in similar way.

Read my signature please.

yes it is similiar to indy, before the last release which i'd much rather forget because it was so unbelieveable, drake is the new indy now.
i personally foundd nothing wrong with the storyline mayne the writer of this post does not have the intelligence to understand it lol

Needs Graphics that put Crysis to shame.

I sort of agree with Number 1, but at the same time, I felt towards the end of Uncharted 1 Naughty Dog was running out of ideas (the terrible twist, imo, is a sign of this). If Uncharted 2 is much longer (say 2 more hours) then I'd hope it carries the same level of consistent quality throughout.

Also, though I sort of ignored it, the writer makes an interesting point with Uncharted 1 playing as if it's the middle game in the franchise. Whilst Drake and Eddie's back and forth were quite fun, there was no meaning to it and no significance to when eddie died (because we don't care about the character uptil that point, we didn't love him, we didn't hate him). That's an issue with Uncharted, we can forgive Nathan because he's a loveable character, but we shouldn't forgive Naughty dog for neglecting to fill in the stories of the less memorable ones (who's personality can't compensate for a lack of history).

But I guess that's probably intentional in case they want to make prequels in the future