Beautiful vistas?, 90% of the game was set in tunnels, caves, gardens, that huge bland room with the big cubes, it was dull. Now God of War 2 had great vistas, GOW3 was terrible for it, the setting was terrible in the game.

And except for the first 30 mins and the Chronos boss there was nothing ground breaking scale at all.

You really should try reading the OP, you completely missed the point of his thread.

OT - I agree it's stupid to compare games of different genres on different consoles as the only definitive measure in such instances is largely subjective to art style.  When you compare a multiplatform title then you're comparing like for like and can make definitive judgements on hard facts not opinions.

I guess the comparisons are made because both Uncharted 2 and God of war have gorgeous graphics, just like Alan wake, the only difference is that uncharted and God of war run at 720p native, while alan wake runs only at 540p, and this for an exclusive game which should be built around the strength of the 360.

Putting things into a little perspective

Uncharted 2: 720p rendering rez, x2 AA
God of war 3: 720 rendering rez, MLAA (equivalent to x4 AA if not higher)
Killzone 2: 720p rendering rez, x2QAA

Alan wake: 540p rendering rez, x4AA

Now I'm not taking anything away from Alan wake cuz from what I've seen it does look nice from the vids I've seen, but I'm puzzled why remedy couldn't do 720p native rendering rez on the 360.

I mean for the longest time people kept saying that the 360 had the better GPU, so if PS3 can render 720p games with at least x2AA, then the 360 should have no issues, an yet the game is only rendered at 540p, so what gives?

I reckon It could be 3 things:-
1- EDram is the limiting factor as it can't store the frame buffer with all the effects they want to do, and they don't want to tile because of the performance hit they'll incur

2- The engine along with the game was designed around being open world, but the developers had issues cramming it into the 360, so they made conscious decisions to make the game work on 360, such as decreasing resolution and making it more linear, but on the upside the made the frame rate solid and removed almost all jaggies

3- The game is actually multiplatform along with the engine, Microsoft just paid for 1 year exclusivity to keep it going to the PS3.

I more incline to say it could be the 3rd option, I say this because it's happened in the past with other games, and with things the way they are this gen, it honestly wouldn't surprise me.

my 2 cents.

I very much doubt it's number 3 in the sense you're saying.  If it's multiplatform then it's heading to PC, there is no way they'll rewrite the entire engine to suit the PS3 which they would have to, it's not a simple porting job.  It's not like they could just drop the reolution to quickly port it to PS3 either.

The most likely option was they made a choice on resolution and more AA because they honestly thought that would give the best quality and performance trade off.  There is no point producing a stunningly beatufil gave that runs at 15fps (unless your Crytek ).  What is becoming blatantly obvious now is in an ideal world Microsoft should have provided enough EDRAM to hold a 720p frame buffer.  That might make a good topic actually if someone can be bothered.  Looking back now what changes would you have made to the 360, PS3 and Wii designs at launch (Put a disclaimer in for RROD though or thats all you'll get for 360 which wouldn't inspire much interesting debate).

I would say Uncharted 2 is the top of the three just for the variety of the environments and its beauty art style.... but for me over UC2 is still MGS4, a game with a beauty art style and environmental design, for me is still the best looking  game on console and of course on the PS3