The review itself contains some definite contradictions.
He talks about how the multiplayer is unwanted and he would never choose to play it over Gears of War or Halo ODST, but then he talks about how the multiplayer is just as beautiful as the single-player, greatly inspired by the single-player, how it works perfectly, how it's fun, and how it is well-balanced.
Yeah, OK.
So just because you personally didn't feel like Uncharted 1 needed multiplayer, you're going to treat Uncharted 2's multiplayer as though it were tacked on, and ignore the facts that you yourself pointed out, that it's an interesting, unique, well-balanced, well-implemented online component with a large variety of play-types not just deathmatches (all of this is said in the review).
You're going to dock the game points on replayability because you don't want to play its admittedly well-designed multiplayer over a game like Gears of War 2 or Halo ODST (which aren't even available on the PS3 so what's the use in making the comparison)?
He talks about how much better the story is, how much better the graphics are, how all of the new features are well-done, and yet he continuously turns right back around and tries to make it seem like all of these factors aren't important enough to make it worth a better score than he gave the first Uncharted. It's pretty ridiculous.
The second opinion reviewer gave it a 10 out of 10.
Although there was something in the review that was a definite red flag for me. He mentions that load times are a problem. What? This concerns me. Either he's out of his mind, or something's wrong. Because the first Uncharted didn't have any load times. Why would Uncharted 2 have load times? It's worrying if it's true, and its very telling of the reviewer's credibility if it's not true. I don't know if it's true because I haven't played Uncharted 2 yet. But in the multiplayer beta, I can confirm that the load times are just like any other online game. Menu transitions are quick, finding matches is smooth and as quick as you could expect, etc. So what is up with the load times criticism?
Edit: "Somewhat repetitive gunfights" is the main complaint with the single-player. This is an utterly ridiculous complain. I've read the other reviews that have come out for this game so far, and even this review itself prescribes to the notion that the game is constantly throwing exciting set-pieces and intense battles at you that could rival the excitement of any Hollywood blockbuster. With all that going for it, what does "somewhat repetitive gunfights" even mean? You could say that about any action game you want.
:kneel2:
