The problem I have with all the
cinematic experience claims and defenses I see of Uncharted is precisely the kind of cinematic experience it provides. I honestly agree with what Simon Parkin said in Eurogamer's GOTY2009 article:
There's nothing wrong with a big, dumb feel-good matinee, and Uncharted 2 certainly deserved every accolade laid at its feet, but is that really what we're going to point to as our very medium's best in the last 12 months? Dead Nazis, yetis, stubble and one-liners? It's like picking The Temple of Doom over the Seventh Seal.
While I won't go so far to claim that there was any Seventh Seal-level game released in 2009, I do find it very telling that the sorts of cinema that developers most often emulate is the standard style-over-substance action blockbuster. The scripting and corridors might be more forgivable if Naughty Dog was achieving more - or even just attempting to achieve more - than letting me play a polygonal Indiana Jones. The games are fun (don't get me wrong), but they're stupid fun, that makes me feel like I should finish it with buttered popcorn grease dripping from my fingers and someone else's spilled soda sticking my shoes to the ground.
An absurd degree of cognitive dissonance exists in the Uncharted series. It's an adventure game, but you're never really permitted by the developers to go off and adventure. You stick to their banal movie script, with one and only one task: be Nolan North's stunt double.