bit-tech.net's Andy Fair reviews Uncharted: Drake's Fortune on 15th December 2007. In his conclusion, he explains why Uncharted is getting shut out of 'Game of the Year' awards and nominations:
"Uncharted: Drake's Fortune has been proclaimed by some as the best game so far for the PS3. While this is true to some extent, it has to be judged against the relative paucity of the console's current games catalogue. It's a bit like films that come out in January with posters proclaiming themselves the best film of the year.
So, while Uncharted: Drake's Fortune is possibly the best PlayStation 3 game to date, that doesn't have to be taken as seal of perfection.
Thankfully the game is still pretty damn good. There's enough to keep you coming back for more and the replay value is enhanced by the bonus features. On the first run the game is short enough that it's not a grind to replay on higher levels, but long enough to be enjoyable and entertaining.
The frenetic pace sustained throughout Uncharted helps to hide its flaws, but it's impossible to get round the fact that this game is flawed. The pace of the game is maintained by the fact that there are no loading pauses to speak of. Each chapter flows seamlessly into the next, and you're never left looking at a stats screen or standing in an elevator.
Naughty Dog set out with the intention of creating something new and different, and instead what it has ended up with is a game that feels somewhat schizophrenic in nature, but which still remains charming. Uncharted is really two separate games, the jumpy adventure part and the shooty combat part, and there isn't really anything that links these two together. The on-the-rails nature of the game only serves to emphasise the separateness of the component parts.
What we have here is a great looking, great sounding game that is let down by two different types of gameplay that jar together. It's a great platform to show what the PS3 is capable of, but it'll never be a GOTY candidate."