Maybe the frame rate and such has been improved but the graphics really look no different. Maybe expecting a lot from the ME3 Engine was too much? This shouldn't be a deal breaker by any means or a dig against the PS3 version. It is just pointing out that the claim by the dev of the retail version looking noticably better is wrong, at least from my current stand point.

Take a look yourself and let me know what you think.

http://www.gameblurb.net/?p=6958&preview=true

Laughing at the people calling bullshit and the site being biased. Still, I'm going to wait for DigitalFoundry or LensofTruth.

but but but to me it does look noticably than demo!

I'm not seeing these noticeably  better changes.

Not that I care (I own neither a PS3 nor a 360 and don't care much about graphics) but I see quite a difference.

You probably don't even have a PS3,let alone ME2 on PS3.

most people dont, it doesnt release till the 20th does it?

Maybe it doesn't look noticeably on the faces. Maybe it looks noticeably somewhere else. That being said, on the faces the hair looks a hair crispier. If only they would have implemented some good AA.

The differences that we wanted was in screen tearing and frame-rate, remember? Or is it now graphics?

Graphics were pretty cool from the demo itself.

Yeah, it doesn't look very noticeably than demo to me, either.