When Alan Wake comes out, you will know what I mean, assuming you know enough about what Uncharted 2 does, on a technical level. =P Feel free to compare the amount of physics going on screen at once during the most intensive physics part of both games would be one example of it, lets just see how many objects that game can handle at once, not to mention the character details and the environment details are already not as high from these preview videos.

You simply can not say game A is more technical than game B, unless they are the same genre and have the same type of goal and level design. I'm not a big fan of comparing games that differ in almost every aspect. If you want to believe your technical mumbo jumbo so that you can brag about it, be my guest, but try and keep it to yourself. The last thing we need is another thread turned into a flamewar between X360 and PS3 exclusives. There are enough of those around already.

Really has nothing to do with exclusives, I'm strictly talking about the tech in the engine itself, which has nothing to do with game play, game design, or game assets. I'm not trying to say that UC2 is a better game than AW because you are absolutely right in that they are different games with different design in mind. I'm never surprised about the outcome of certain games, think about it, AW dev team never exceeded 50 people, whereas ND has had way more resources since the start, so the results shouldn't be surprising to say the least. I personally think the atmosphere in AW is pretty damn cool, but of course it won't match up to the tech level of UC2, and that shouldn't be a big deal.

It's basically like this, it's blunt obvious that a game with PhysX enabled will have some cool effects over the disabled version, not surprising:

Besides the lighting, I don't see what makes Alan Wake look miles better than Uncharted 2. At least, I can't see it from the provided screenshots. When the game releases in May, I'll certainly know by then.

@Dahuman: *Sigh* I'll say it again. You can not say UC is more technically advanced than Alan Wake because their focus lies elsewhere. UC is linear corridor shooter with scripted events, extremely linear paths, and very bright artistic design for visual appeal. AW is a bit more open world, is much darker, focuses on atmosphere and mood, and uses LOTS of lights and shadows everywhere in dark environments for visual appeal. The lighting in AW is more advanced than any console game out there (don't gimme that KZ2 lighting crap with their pre-calculated light mapping), KZ2 probably has the best particle effects (smoke and the like) and UC2 probably has the best animations etc. There's no such thing as a game that's technically better than any other game on every front.

As for your video, it compares two things in exactly the same game.. You can not do that for games that have different goals and aspects. Don't throw "technical" words on me to appear smart. Won't work.

Now can we drop this?

According to the lead character modeller, Drake only renders between 2500 and 37,000

I should have posted my links. Here...

http://www.psxextreme.com/ps3-news/5942.html
http://xx3bxx.blogspot.com/2009/09/uncharted-2-characters-have-30000.html
http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-12218-Providence-Video-Game-Examiner~y2009m10d10-Uncharted-2-graphics-detailed-Two-million-a-second-eighty-thousand-in-main-characters

Shut up you!

That's it, im renting Heavy Rain!

Take THAT!

read that thread again that was for uncharted 1, and you even got the first number wrong, just to show how owned you got a full mesh model of drake here from uncharted 1

He tried proving me wrong with Uncharted... Drakes Fortune information?

Next time, i need to remember to fully read stuff people send me