So I'm playing through the so called game of the year Uncharted 2. First off the hype on the graphics is correct, this is the best looking game that has been released on any gaming console so far. This being the first PS3 game to have graphics that cannot be replicated on a 360, its nice to finally see the ps3's power used correctly. Its a gorgeous tech demo for the system. The gameplay, however, is extremely average. The game is divided between very simplistic climbing (where you have to press up and X most of the time with very little skill involved). and mediocre Gears of War type shooting levels. There's really nothing here that hasn't been seen in other games and most importantly done better. The story is extremely dull also and the main character, though likable, isn't that engaging. I rented the game and was very pleased not to have paid the full price. I can't see playing through this game again at a higher difficulty since the climbing levels will always be the same without extra difficulty added (60% of the game is climbing somewhere). Its a very fun game as you play it, don't get me wrong, but its strictly a rental. And a great show off of the ps3s power.
The graphics are ok but you're kidding yourself if you think they are so amazing and beyond what can be done on the 360. Neither system is significantly "more powerful" to any point where the same general gameplay can't be achieved on both and that's what matters anyway.
Related question: for a person who's played neither, would it be a good idea to get the first one or the second one? It seems like the second one has better graphics, but then you might be missing out on stuff from the first one.
You can start fresh with uncharted 2, the only carry over from the first game are some supporting characters from the previous game, but the main story is self contained.
