It's going to be awkward if the game released and the general consensus is that it's just an "okay" game.

It takes 5 years to make yet another light vs. dark game? Moving on, please.

..... and they could have made the pc version too, but nooooo, no pc version.

I think it will turn out to be an excellent game, but the expectations placed on any game after a 4+ year development cycle will be very hard to live up to. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any that has. They last to try was what, Too Human? I won't labor that point.

I'd rather the devs took their time, rather than rush it out the door just to meet a deadline.

Will it meet our expectations? Well that's a different matter.

Seriously Jim, what secret insider preview you've seen make you quite looking forward to it? Please tell us for the sake of JOURNALISM.
And Dragon Age. Despite a series of silly trailers, it seems people who can get their hand on actual code general praise it, this is driving me mad :(

mh...i looking for it...but only when the PC version will come out. Hope they turn their minds for it.

@Czech Monster

I'll hold my judgment of that game until I play it. As for people saying they are glad these people slaved over a game for 5 years? Well I damn well hope they make millions because I'm sure more then a few developer families have suffered. And for what?

if they can deliver something on the level as the first two Max Paynes in terms of dialogue and paced story I will be very happy I just seriously hope it doesn't turn out to be a alone in the dark game meets evil dead, it would be good but it would sort of suck. Also batteries for that torch best be limited in supply whats the point of enemies you can nuke with artificial light. I'm sadly being harsh but I just want it to be good. Remedy haven't released junk, the original max payne is still one of my fave games.

Max Payne meets Silent Hill in the year when the real Max Payne finally makes his return?

Win-win situation for me, honestly.

This is the only reason I bought a 360 in the first place, so even if ends up as a shadow of Max Payne, I don't really mind. Remedy have never let me down in the past anyway and I'm glad they didn't churn this one out. People seem to forget that the first Max Payne took forever in development and the early build was nothing like the finished product...and that game was a stone-cold classic.

I really hope this lives up to the whole small-town-Stephen-King-Silent Hill vibe. Sadly, ever since "Alone In The Dark" last year, the idea of ever playing another game in which I stumble around with a torch and a pistol fills me with soul-gnawing dread.

I'm glad they are doing this game right instead of releasing this game 'ages' ago as something mediocre. One of my most anticipated games, and I'd admit I've been frustrated that its been in development for so long since I want to play it.

Not many developers have the luxury and balls to develop games like this. Publisher have demands, consumers have demands (and sometimes very harsh things to say). Obviously there are two sides to thing, one spectrum being like Duke Nukem Forever, and the other being a game that may be long in the making but really shows it and is worth it. I hope Alan Wake is the latter.

They really shouldn't be developing this kind of hype. It's likely to backfire. If the game ends up being anything short of amazing, it will be a disappointment.

Yep it could have...

Fuck you Remedy for not bringing this to the PC when both your and Microsoft promised it back in the day.

Ooooor you tried to do something interesting and failed and ended up with Resident Evil 4 with flashlights. Good job guys, sorry your studio is about to fail. I'll always love Max Payne.

I really can't see any cause for concern over the development time. It's not like it's *your* time they're taking. There are plenty of other games to keep people occupied in the mean time. When it's ready, it'll be out. Why should a gamer's expectations be based on non-gaming ideas like development time? It should be based on the quality of the product itself. It's tiring all this talk all the time of "it better be good!". It's irrelevant. If it had been in production for 4 months and was average, people would treat it no differently - they wouldn't rate it higher because "ye know, what they've achieved in a short time". There's just no sense in levelling your expectations higher because it's taken longer. By all means *hope* for greatness, but please, unless you're a shareholder waiting for a profitable return on the game, you've no right to complain.
Or from another angle: many reviewers review games without taking price into account. Crazy notion to some I know, but it isn't a difficult task to separate quality and cost. Likewise, a similar separation should exist between quality and development time.