Tell me the names of 5 shooters which explain the characterer's uncanny ability to kill.

You seriously expect 100% realisam from a video game? Wow, you probably like the games a lot. But hey, if your blind fanboy-ism hatered suspend your disbelief THAT much, all the power to you.

I'd agree in principle but disagree specific to Uncharted 2 - the game does a better job than pretty much any game I've played of using subtle, effective film approaches to convey character traits and history.

Early on, when Flynn hands Nathan the dart pistol, Nathan puts him down by pointing out he knows how to use a gun, that plus the clear pointers to his past activities makes it clear than Drake can handle himself and a gun.  The high number of enemies he mows down in the game is irrelevant.  That's the difference between a game and a film.  In a film, for example, if you take the level where you leap from truck to truck, there would be maybe 2 to 3 vehilces, Drake would take out maybe 4 to 8 people in total.  In a game, that would take seconds, so there's lots of vehicles and he takes out lots of people in them, but that's irrelevant, a necessary mechanic.

From a narrative perspective we quickly and clearly learn Drake can handle himself, isn't above a bit of theft or shooting someone, but shy's from unecessary violence and is worried about harming anyone 'undeserving'.  Again, that whole element of his character is well conveyed in his early dialogue with Flynn and the amusing 'Ghandi' dialogue from Flynn (which nicely makes clear Flynn doesn't see himself as Ghandi and may be a lot more criminal of a character than Drake).

Really, Drake is shown surviving no more amazing stunts than Indiana Jones or any similar character.  His abilities are perfectly in line with the serial mantinee roots of his character.  Now, if I was playing, say, Modern Warfare, and my solider suddenly showed amazing abilities to climb, jump and survive amazing drops and explosions I'd feel they were straying from an acceptable set of capabilities.  But Uncharted is (including Tomb Raider) by far and away the best realization of an Indy type character in videogames IMHO.

Haha good response, I probably shouldn't have said so much so soon, I'm still working through U1 (I don't own a PS3), so I should have mentioned it's definitely possible for exceptions to exist (as it sounds like here somewhat). Also, little things can help make up for lack of overt backstory. This scene you mention, about Nathan 'putting him down by points out he knows how to use a gun' is a nice little thing, and helps solidify a story in terms of plausible fiction. Maybe those things make it a 'good balance of mystery and backstory'. When I finally get to the game, I'll be able to see for myself.

@BladeOfGod There's a BIG difference between having the main character be a soldier killing hundreds in a game versus say a math teacher. I'm not saying it would be impossible, but without some explanation, most people wouldn't believe the story, or get caught up in it. Suspension of belief is a powerful tool in entertainment and literature, and shouldn't be disregarded. When you watch an action movie, and you start thinking "there's not way this guy could do this" instead of "whoa, that was awesome", there's a problem. Having a proper backstory/explanation for a main characters aptitude at anything in a game is important for this.

Most shooters feature trained soldiers. That is enough of an explanation. Or take a game like L4D or other zombie hunting games. You know that if your character has been alive this long, he/she must have some aptitude at staying alive.

In this regard, RPGs have it easy, since your character/party starts from essentially nothing. But action games need to be more wary. I guess it's important to note that not everyone really cares. As long as there are explosions, gun fights, good chase scenes, et; that might be all they care about.

Ah, okay.  I'll say Uncharted 2 does a far better job than 1 for explaining that.  In truth, I found myself seeing him and the characters afresh in Uncharted 2.  The first had nice dialogue here and there, but presented Drake, Sully, Elena, etc. as they were without explanation really, and trusted you'd just go with the stereotype.

U2 really does a good job of actually building some character - I think you'll find it does so much better than Uncharted 1, which was fun, but nothing like as polished as the sequel.

I'll give it an 9.5 Drake was never a stealth game anyway.. Also, you do get to know something about him. I believe Drake is afraid of 'Clowns' :) Really excellent game. Love the Action cinematic sequences which are part of the gameplay. Well done Naughty Dog.

Your final score is WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYYYY tooo low. It would fit right in with a VGC review.

A lot of the complaints you have with the game aren't even real complaints. How does Drake's shooting skills have anything to do with the rest of your review??? Isn't it us, the player, who shoots for Drake? Would it be better if he simply died ten minutes into the game? There are many games in which the main character overcomes tremendous odds. This is one of them.

Also, I completely disagree with you on the game length and ending. The game was longer than the first one, and did something new in almost every chapter. It also had a great deal of things you could do after the game is finished. Something like 30 skins, 7 crazy tweaks like unlimited ammo and mirror world, videos, treasures, etc.,

The ending has to be one of the funniest endings I've seen in a while. Short, sweet and straight to the point. I've seen it three times now and I laugh at their conversation every time.

This game deserves a minimum 9.5 IMO.

You know what? My fucking bad for commenting on your review.

Buddy, when you make a fucking thread, expect to get answers from people. What did you expect? I would come in here and say "beautiful, you're wack reasons which have nothing to do with the game justify your score."

No, a 9.2 does not satisfy me at all. And I've been extremely vocal about it in the VGC review which also gave it a 9.2. The game is a fucking masterpiece bud. It absolutley obliterates every other game in the TPS/Action Adventure genre. It sets the bar so fucking high it's not even funny. Point me to another sequel this generation which has improved this much over the first game. From gameplay to graphics, this game is flawless. Like I said, 9.5 is the lowest I'd give it, and not with a single reason you have listed. I don't get what's with people on VGC thinking they are obligated to give lower scores to amazing games.

You know, you can't really go by someone else's numbers and compare them to your own, different people have different ways of rating things. You might rate a game as a 80 or 8.0, and I might rate it as a 7.3, and we might both have the same likes and dislikes with it. My own rating system is a bit off from the rest of the world since i=I see a scale of 1-100 with 100 being the most entertaining a game could POSSIBLY be. I may be 95% entertained now, but future games could entertain me double as much.

Don't get me wrong, I have some games I enjoy VERY much, but if someone were to ask me the highest I'd rate any game I've ever played, I don't think I would reach 60/100 let alone 95. I see far too much potential in video games to see the small picture (the here and now).

Little rant there but his 9.2 might be your 9.5, or maybe my 60 is your 9.5, so why get so worked up over it? People view things differently, giving opinions is cool and all, but you seem borderline angry about it.

@Perpride you may want to edit what you wrote. I know you're angry but you can still be angry without all the bad words. You don't want to get banned do you. Don't let your anger get the best of you. Besides his score won't affect anything.

Actually, tbh, I'm not sure if I broke any of the forums rules in that post :)

I did use a few "bad" words, but none of them were towards to the creator of this thread. I wasn't insulting anybody. It's just the way I write, and I've never even had a warning on the forums.

But do you want to know what IS a bannable offense on these forums? Calling people a fanboy based on the score they believe a game should recieve. I made a comment in the thread, not knowing that I'd already been called a fanboy before even posting. Funny thing, the person who created the thread clearly agreed with him, pointing out that 9.2 does not satisfy people.

So yeah....don't make a thread called Uncharted 2 Final Thoughts and not expect people to comment.