Gears of War is a pretty hardcore shooter, whereas I see Uncharted as more of an an adventure franchise, so I don't really get why they're being compared except that they're both in the 3rd person?

Well first of all, GTAIV did add more to the GTA series.  Many things that were changes fans didn't even like, yet the game got high (note: perfect) scores anyway.

My personal opinion on this is its just another good example of how GT is one of the few sites who's scores aren't simply being driven by hype, fear of what their fans will think of their site if they don't give it a high score or money.  Having said that, they often give harsh scores to good games (especially Wii and DS games, which hardly ever get above 8.5).

Onyx, I think you're getting aggravated over this discussion because it means nothing to you, personally, and you don't understand it.  While I think I agree with your point-of-view, as I stated, scores really are for people, to whom, a difference of 0.1 is "important".

In that sense, by saying this thread is (some bad words I won't repeat), you're just judging these folks, based on your own personal values and opinions.  I can understand why people are upset -- the gametrailers reviewer spent a long time fabricating an explanation -- apparently it was important enough to him to defend his score.  He made a lot of logical missteps, and frankly, that's going to upset the people he was trying to address.

Thus, the thread.  

It is justified, from that point of view.  It's something people want to talk about.

even if we/they called uncharted: dude raider, or something, the fact that uncharted series is based on a treasure hunter just like tomb raider doesn't make it generic or not innovative...tomb raider took the idea from indiana jones, so what? the game had it's own personality, just like uncharted.

when we're talking about innovation in uncharted we can see just a little part of the game ("treasure hunting mini-game"), but even if it's not innovative the game did a great job in every other aspect.

now that we see uncharted 2 being better in every way possible to the 1st one, adding MP, co-op, cinema mode, new characters, new gameplay (stealth missions),etc.etc. and still is not considered innovative looking at the series history just like we did with halo series, or GTA series, or GT series, or any other series...

Wrong.

The problem with the review system is lack of consistancy. Uncharted 2 has proven to be a better game than many games that they scored higher than it.

Case in point, a 9.5 is better than a 9.3

The problem is that uncharted 2, being the greatest game of this generation, will not the the credit it deserves (99 on metacritic) because of sites like game trailers and game daily who have clearly been either A) Paid to review lower, or B) Simply jealous.

Did you even read the game daily review Onyxmeth? I'd like to point out some wonderful parts from it.

It opens up with..

Uncharted 2: Among Thieves was supposed to get the GameDaily review treatment last week, shortly after review copies of the game were shipped to media outlets. Unfortunately, a funny thing happened on the way to GameDaily HQ - it got lost in the mail.

Hmm, this is a good way to start off a review, isn't a critical review supposed to be free of bias? It isn't an opinion. You are a professional who is critiquing a work of art. Clearly, right off the bat, this guy is looking for hits to his site.

For a moment, we thought wow, this is perfect, until our fickle, hardcore gamer minds took over. It would be ludicrous to think Nathan walking on the snow without realistic footprints or water cascading into a puddle that doesn't ripple are anything that distracts you from the game. We bring up these moments, however, to compliment the developers: you must have unfair standards for Uncharted 2 to even hint at disappointment. At least, in the beginning.

And now they start their lies. I have the game, Right in front of me, none of this is true.

I wont go on to finish this off, but here's a clip i took of the start of the game, just me running around in the snow.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2U0y0CB23c

see a problem with this? yeah, the reviewer made comments on this exact thing NOT existing in the game when I can show you it right now.

Also, the entire review just bitches about whats wrong.

Of course, he gives it a 9, i mean, anything less than that is an outright laughable case, Uncharted 2 deserves no less than 98 from any outlet, it's just that good. There isn't a single piece of videogame software ever made that is as good as this is. It is the top of EVERY SINGLE element. There is not a single thing wrong with this game.

it is the best technical, best visual, best story, best gameplay, and arguably the best multiplayer experience available on any console and any platform.

Gametrailers is no different. They give other games a "pass" in originality, but they do not give this game a pass. Simply because that is the only thing it lacks.

When you buy a car, you say, well, company X already did this. But company Y did it far far better, we should say that company Y is less good because company X did the same thing first.

Also, the cover system in Uncharted 2 better make cliffy b and the boys hit the drawing table, because they've been way outclassed.

And what's gears of war? Nothing more than a Duke Nukem in third person.

Oh, and they also stole Killswitches cover system, and Used the same art from Unreal Tournament 3.

gears of war is nothing mroe than a "Oh, Unreal doesn't applease to the underage kids, lets make a bad asser game, make it third person, reuse the same art system, and steal duke nukem."

Of course, this is only true if you call it dude raider.

Uncharted is nothing like Tomb Raider. It just involves the same setting. Just like..

Duke Nukem
Halo
Gears of War
Resistance
Crysis
Half-Life

Doom

Quake

..

the list goes on forever, of games that are exactly the same "Setting"

Alien comes, shoot shit, space marine. There is nothing original about halo or gears, or GTA IV.

Infact, Uncharted is infinitely more original than all of those titles.

Modern Warfare two. Its war, in the future. GAME OF THE YEAR 10/10 ITS THE BEST THING EVER OH GOD THEY MADE IT IN THE FUTURE.

No. Call of Duty 4 is good because it does everything everyone already did but significantly BETTER.

Which is why uncharted 2 should of got the same treatment from gametrailers, but it did not.

That is the issue. It's simply unfair to the developers.

This thread makes me ill.... 9.3, yet some of you bitch and moan about it? Please remove the sand out of your vaginas.

The game is AAA.If the game got a 9.8 it would still be AAA.Get Over yourselves people.

I wasn't there when the whole shitstorm kicked off but how did the 9.3 issue even arise in the first place?  What prompted GT to explain their score?

Well first of all 9.3 is a great score for a game. Let's not forget that.

Secondly, I think GT has just openly stated what all reviewers do but don't openly talk about... reviewing games based on things other than the game itself. Now let's get it straight... when thinking up a score there needs to be a conscience of how original and innovative it is compared to others in the same genre and the series. BUT if this is the whole of the review then you are simply comparing it rather than actually reviewing it. Now from the comment we can't tell if that is the entirety of the case but the way he presents his argument is not a good one.

The problem with the argument is you are making a contradiction. If you state that a game can't be better than the original if it is the same thing, then doesn't that relate the same way to where Uncharted got its ideas from. Without making that clear you are stating that it is the case there and not the case then. That is a logical contradiction.

I think bringing up the whole GTA IV thing is simply a hasty generalization fallacy. What if he did think it was better than the first and innovative? Wouldn't that still constitute his original argument and not make it a contradiction. You are reaching out of your own opinions to unjustify his which is illogical.

The point is the problem with his argument is that it makes a contradiction between how far you go when you relate a game to another to determine score and the depth of how much the rating should changed compared to others. Personally this is one of the issues I have with a lot of reviews is they don't base the majority of the review on the merits of the game itself. Sure if it is an exact copy of the original, take points off. In a way he kinda states this but not well. Point being, the whole of your review shouldn't be based on how it relates to other games becuase that is not reviewing the game but reviewing it's position in the industry as a whole.