I still fail to see where this hype for Alan Wakes graphics are coming from, it looks great yeah, but not groundbreaking or even raising any bars! The character models are stiff and don't interact much with the environment, the physics and particle effects are average at best especially in scenes like when the bridge is ripping up. The day scenes look like most games already out there and theres tons of flat textures and boxy looking objects about.

For example in the video:

2:50 Alan stares into space a LOT, doesn't turn properly to look at the guy chasing him just looks like he's got a stiff neck. Many games have much more realism than this. Objects breaking are very rigid and very little reaction from the rest of the scene especially since the thing he breaks are meant to be screwed on to other objects (same as at 6:50).

3:40 Alan doesn't even seem to notice the gate as he opens it, no interaction with the environment, similar things repeat throughout in the daylight video too.

5.40+ in the cabin, most objects are squares, though they look nice the low res is just cleverly hidden. 

6.50 the rebuilding steps is just boxes fitting together looks fake and no all the pieces remain static as they move. This happens a number of times, like when the shadow first chases Alan hitting things on the bridge.

7:14 An example of how blocky the rocks are and covered in flat textures the same as the floor.

10:00 running accross the bridge things fall down and holes appear, but not much else, just smoke. Wheres the splintering wood, bits flying about, in fact ANY interaction from the rest of the bridge at all?

Video 1

http://www.gamepro.de/index.cfm?pid=386&pk=2300 (can't get it linked)

Theres no denying the game does look good, but not THAT good, any games designer knows darkness hides a lot of things, and what cost has the lighting system and rendering extra foliage come at? The animation and interaction is a step back compared to a few games, even old titles such as gears of war! Alan walks into gates and doors and opens them but he doesn't react, not much interaction with the environment. His animations are clearly severely limited, his hands hardly move, he can't bend round to look at things, stiff interactions with other objects and he barely notices when a shadow cyclone is breaking a bridge in front of him.

Whether this is all due to hardware limitations or just on the part of the developer I don't know, but theres plenty of other games out there that look better than Alan Wake so I just don't get where all this hype is from, even MW2 is better in my book. Are people being paid by Microsoft or are expectations so high for this game people are forgetting what's already on the market?

Here Here!

Oh my god! It definately raises the bar for console graphics, it looks miles better than anything I have seen on THE OTHER console! Selnor you were so right! I am obliged to you from here on out

Good looking game for sure. Great shadows. But I mean. It isn't any better than Killzone 2 as far as overall presentation. Who cares what games look better? But I am going to say. I am doing it this way from what I have seen thus far. Consoles only

Gow3>Uncharted2 > Alan Wake/Killzone2 > MGS4/Gears 2.

Of course I think Crysis 2 will be shoved in there also once I see more.

how would we know, we haven't played ALAN WAKE. Nor have we played CRYSIS 2. All I know is that according to previews and SELNOR, those two games are going to be the best looking games this generation period. So that's my expectation. Just how I expect HALO REACH to surpass KZ2 in visuals, as many posters here constantly tell me and other PS3 owners that it will.

Lol. I just watched the video in the OP. The game really doesn't even look as good as KZ2 based off that video. I am gonna move it down to MGS4/gears2 level.

Oh my, another thread like this.

Anyway, I was about to praise the fact that Selnor was actually right about this game, then I browse the other articles he wrote. Come on , CGI, I really want to believe this game is amazing looking, the lighting is impressive, but coming from a dude who writes " Halo Reach will outselll GOW3", I was ok now.

I read page one then skipped to page 6 so I don't know if this has been answered or not.

I've read a number of times about "the real-time projected shadows" and "the vegetation which interacts with characters and wind" as particularly noteworthy. But haven't we seen both of these things already in other games? What is it about this game that makes those specific features really stand out?

There's another game currently on the market where the protagonist makes extensive use of a flashlight and from what I can tell the real-time projected shadows look completely natural.

RE the main purpose of the thread which is to bemoan the efect multiplat engines have had on the gaming this gen: Multiplat engines are very important for multiplat games. If they are well designed then they ensure consistency of quality across platforms. This is a good thing, in fact it's an excellent thing. Cry Engine 3 is an important next step in multiplat engines because (if Crytek are true to their claims) this engine is optimised for all 3 platforms.

I utterly reject the notion that the 360 has been hard done by because of multiplat engines. That lays the blame for keeping the 360 from realising its full visual potential at the wrong door. Exactly who forced game developers who were making 360 exclusives to use UE3? No guns were being held to heads here. Developers chose to use the multiplat engine for exclusive games. They had excellent reasons for doing so (after all UE3 has produced good results, just not the best in gen). But it was the developers themselves who decided to go that route rather than build a 360 optimised engine. By and large 360 exclusive games haven't needed a 360 optimised engine to make the games look great. Whereas the PS3 has needed optimised engines to make games look great because the multiplat engines we've seen to date have had disappointing results on the PS3 compared to 360. Ironically having multiplat engines produce sub-par results on PS3 has helped the PS3 in achieving best graphics of the gen accolades basically ever since MGS4 came out

If 360 optimised engines are going to show that the 360 can take the graphics crown from the PS3 then this is the year for 360 exclusive developers to show it. If Alan Wake or Reach take the crown from PS3 then for the time being there doesn't seem to be much on the PS3 exclusive horizon that is likely to take it back.

CREEPY...but the visuals are truly stunning...the OP isn't kidding. The movement of Wake is so lifelike, which is normally a sore point in alot of games for me...ME2 comes to mind, since I was jsut completing the DLC earlier today.

Even IF AW does take the crown, there is a question of GT5 coming soon, that is bound to retake any graphical achievements for PS3.