i hope it flops.

I think you mean to not expect judging the game is dumb. But as someone pointed out, if they hadn't shown the video, there would be accusations of vaporware. It's expecting a perfect early build that is dumb.

But we have seen some early builds that look like crap and then we eat our words later. The early shots for The Conduit looked bland. Or take the damn Dogz videos. The first looked slightly better than that godawful Farcry port, but now it has full shading, mapping, and lighting. On a casual game.

And we've seen early builds of games that look beautiful (too many to mention) so what's your point?

There is a double standard, but it's easily beaten.  Announce a game when you have some good footage of the game to show.  You can announce a game a eight months or a year before it launches and have something to show from it, again, this applies to many games. There are so many games that get announced, and are accompanied by screenshots or videos that look tons better than this game, not in terms of graphics but in terms of effort.  This game looks like no effort is being put into it.  Why should we give this game a free pass?  What about every other game that releases screenshots?  Should we not judge them?  If other companies know how to announce a game and release good looking screenshots, why do we let Capcom off the hook?

Wow Hitman: Blood Money has more AI's on screen than Dead Rising on 360. So what was the point of all this. That Eidos can make a game with pathetic AI manipulated a hell of a lot of times badly over a 360 and Wii game and we are supposed to compliment that haha.

 because its capcom making a game for the wii.

Anyone who sees this dumbed down version and wants it is a moron. But anyone who sees this dumbed down version and still wants RE5 is a bigger moron.

If the beautiful builds were too early, so are the ugly ones. That is my point, and it should have been obvious.

And Capcom is trying to make sure people know about this game, as in people are talking about it instead of ignoring it.

Heck, it is possible they want to wow us with the final product. It could just end up being this bad. But the point is you all are still jumping the gun by assuming this is a certain indicator of the final game. Worse, you in particular are trying to justify that. Just because it's done doesn't make it right.

Now I'm having second thoughts about this game...

I'm saying we judge all games on early builds.

Why not this one?

LtNK has a fair point. 

A game that looks ugly today can look better tomorrow.  In development means exactly that, in development.

However, it is fairgame to judge them today based on what they have released up till today.  We can speculate about what the final product will look like all we want, but all we know today is what we see in the material as of today so that is what we will consider and comment upon until then.

I remember that game being pretty fun on the 360, but it seems to have none of its charm in translation. I ended up watching that and wondering what was wrong with a world when a good game could be made so, so bad. Maybe they'll fix it, but damn 3rd party games on the Wii (outside of Resident Evil 4) are awful. I mean Nintendo can make most of their games look at least passable in terms of being next gen, why do 99% of 3rd party games look like they were made in 2003?