I'm an illustrator and I love a detailed picture (not those cartoon or anime stuff... in general).  For me, camera control is a commodity.  But it doesn't make me think what's on screen looks more detailed.  That's the point I'm trying to make all along.  If a game can look like a Renaissance painting come to life (I think you can get the idea), then I'm in heaven, eye-candy wise.  God of War III does that, Uncharted does that and Castlevania achieves it too on most occasions. 

Now as I said, depending on the game type, camera control may be greatly welcome, and I would lie if I said I never reached the right analog stick to change my field of vision in Castlevania.  But even without that element, I still ended up saying out loud "holy crap, that looks awesome", even though I'm all alone in my apartment at 3am. XD

And, seriously, Shank, and Sonic 4 ARE graphics powerhouse in their own genre.  Even thought they may not put as much stress on the hardware as their 3D counterparts, they are still the most beautifully rendered 2D games out there, especially Sonic 4.  Now, to better illustrate what I mean  imagine if Symphony of the Night (using this example since that's your avatar) was made today with that kind of 2D graphics and animation! 

Am I the only person thinking Red Dead Redemption is beter looking than LOS?

Well of course it's just my opinion on this.

But from what I've seen, Bulletstorm, Crysis 2 and RAGE already look better than LOS and RAGE looks to take Multiplat Graphics King next year.

Then where do you put Halo:Reach?

Red Dead Redemption is one of the best looking games out there IMO, except when you get close to some of the textures especially the mountains they are really weak. 

Bulletstorm, Crysis 2, and Rage are not out yet so I'm not putting them in the discussion but when they are released I agree they will be among the best looking games out there period. I'm including exclusives in that statement.

Well since I've only played the Demo of LOS, I just based it on that as well as the gameplay footage I've seen as well. Like the rain effects, I think RDR does a better job of the rain than LOS, but that's just from what I've seen.

And by no means am I trying to say that LOS looks bad or anything. It looked really good. Like really Solid Graphics.  Just I think RDR looks better overall.

Yeah I know they're not released but I wanted mention them because LOS won't be the Best Looking Multiplat next year ;D.

And I know we're not talking Exlcusives here so that's why I didn't mention games like Killzone 3, THe Last Guardain, etc. Just sharing my view on Multiplat Graphics.

I agree those games look fabulous in 2D. Playing SOTN with smooth graphics like that would be the cherry on top...only if the gameplay is as smooth and brilliant as it was. Original SOTN is pretty amazing looking game though, id love to see anyone dare to try to improve on it. :) I think that even the new castlevania on XBL doesn't look as good.

As far as lords of shadow, visuals are not what turns me off in that game. Far from it as they are great. The artists and designers did their work and then some...I just don't however think its a mindblowing visual game but it is in the top 10% for consoles for sure

Gameplay wise I think the game lacks a good director and vision. It seems like they were contempt in making a game that looks good and taking tried and proven gameplay elements and then slapping castlevania name on it. Not good enough for a castlevania game in my mind...

I love static camera, I feel it is "classic" gameplay like turn based games, and I also don't feel that it is necessarily an antiquated form of camera management.

That said, this game does look great, but imo, the difference in most of these great looking games is negligable, might as well be comparing apples and oranges, so you might as well say "LoS is the best looking game this gen" because I can barely tell a difference between it and the supposedly "best" graphics on 360 and PS3 exclusives. Compared to a true generational leap, there is no significant statistical difference in graphical quality.

I'd rate halo as..."as good as it can be"...with hardware, design choices and everythign involved lol. 

The difference to me is that one has mindblowing amount of control, challenege and level of user involvement...while the other is very limiting to me.

MW2 vs castlevania would be a better comparison gameplay vs visuals wise. Both have a very limiting "on rails" like gameplay and both are about very focused visuals in some areas while others are very lacking...

oh,some people would strongly disagree with differences in these games being negligable. lol

Once 2011 is over with the best looking games on either console will have such small differences it will be negligible. Rage was voted to have best graphics at E3 and its multiplat. We know Crysis 2 will be amazing for a console. We also know Gears of War 3 looks to be amazing as well from the small snippets of vids and screens we have seen. For the PS3 side Killzone 3 and Infamous 2 will look amazing as well. The one thing all these games will have in common is its going to be hard to pick a winner for best graphics and I think after 2011 we will have maxed out this gen graphically.