This is a story driven game. Having an open world would have been cool. But then it would have slow down the flow of the story. And you may have a hard time remembering or keeping track of it. And you would be less captivated by the story.

Please...

@clarkjudo
All Alan wake is, is; run to objective, cutscene, TAKEN appears, flash shoot, shoot, rinse and repeat. Nothing spectacular...not even trying to burst bubbles or anything...you'll see when you get it. Not a very bad game, but if you're sick of shooters in general AW definitely isn't for you atm.

@FordGTGuy
I would play Alan Wake first, It's about a good 7-8 hours. It's a pretty linear game but the scale of the levels are amazing. It sort of makes it feel as if it's a sandbox a little, but nowhere near it.
So If i were you, have fun with AW for a day and a half, you'll beat it, then move on to RDR. I'm sure RDR has around 25-30 hours of gameplay. So save that chunk for last, or you'll probably never would get to AW without another new release interfering.

@clarkjudo: You're kidding right? First off, Red Dead Redemption is NOT a "run and gun" game, it's an open-world Western "sandbox" type game. If anything, Alan Wake IS a "run and gun", except now you have a flashlight. And second of all, I think we can all agree that Red Dead Redemption is going to be a bigger hit than Alan Wake. In fact I'll go so far as to say I think RDR will outsell AW on the 360.

OT: Alan Wake is going to be a good game, but people really shouldn't overhype it. And no, it won't be GOTY. Sorry.

Neither game is a run and gun but I might go with Alan for a good 3 hours and then switch to RDR for a good 3. Wake is said to be 8 to 16 hours plus you get episodic content upon release which make s it even longer.

People sometimes call Wal-Mart Wally World including myself