Blizzard's New Cataclysm Video Is Shameless Scenery Porn

[Jimbo1212]

No, I said graphics help immersion, you're the one who's adding "good" to that, which is entirely subjective to boot. WoW is immersive to me thanks to it's art style, and it's outdated engine does a more than good enough job for me to portray it. I don't care about the technicalities being outdated, I can live without them.

And I loved Storm Peaks thank you very much. I just left them behind on my Warrior because I found the quests being dull, but I still love the scenery and overal epic atmosphere of that place.

It's art style is childish and makes the graphics worse as it hides any texture. It is the same as arguing that colour makes TV immersive, yet you prefer black and white..
Again, go play a game with DX 11 and then come back otherwise your opinion is based on ignorance.

The mountains look like silly bumps in Strom Peaks and rather then colossal walls of stone. Again, go play MoH and then come back with an informed opinion on what good mountains look like.

Visuals help make a game more immersive. HELP being the operative word, there. Whether you're talking good design or good technical specifications - either one can do the job. But immersion can also be accomplished through good audio design, good world design, good game design - plenty of things that have nothing to do with graphics.

Yes, good graphics are nice. But in the grand scheme of things, they're... just one minor facet of how immersive a game is, especially when good art direction can compensate for technical weakness.

And, once again, you and Mazty have the exact same opinion.

Sight is the main sense followed by sound for humans. I would argue that visuals are not minor, but a major factor in immersion. Only very few games have managed to be immersive with poor visual due to exceeding every other aspect eg. Shadow of the Colossus. However this game had stunning design (which was not childish and everything was clear on what material it would be fulfilling the touch sense as well as not being easily forgettable), and an epic sound track (as in epic classical music genre fulfilling sound). WoW lacks many of these strong points to simply let graphics slip by the wayside. Its artistic design is also partially lost by how poor the graphics are as is shown by the FMV intros of WoW. An example is of the ice dragon from the intro of the lich King. In the into the scale is daunting and the design grasp the ferociousnesses of the beats. In game it looks like a stuffed cuddly toy for kids - not to mention very disappointing.
On a technical view of having a large player base for people with poor PC's etc, it makes sense to have worse graphics, but lets not beat around the bush and make excuses up such as graphics count for very little with immersion. Would Avatar have been the same with stop motion ?

 

[John Funk]

Sight is the main sense followed by sound for humans. I would argue that visuals are not minor, but a major factor in immersion. Only very few games have managed to be immersive with poor visual due to exceeding every other aspect eg. Shadow of the Colossus. However this game had stunning design (which was not childish and everything was clear on what material it would be fulfilling the touch sense as well as not being easily forgettable), and an epic sound track (as in epic classical music genre fulfilling sound). WoW lacks many of these strong points to simply let graphics slip by the wayside. Its artistic design is also partially lost by how poor the graphics are as is shown by the FMV intros of WoW. An example is of the ice dragon from the intro of the lich King. In the into the scale is daunting and the design grasp the ferociousnesses of the beats. In game it looks like a stuffed cuddly toy for kids - not to mention very disappointing.
On a technical view of having a large player base for people with poor PC's etc, it makes sense to have worse graphics, but lets not beat around the bush and make excuses up such as graphics count for very little with immersion. Would Avatar have been the same with stop motion ?

I've played DX11 games. I've played Medal of Honor. I would prefer a game with great art design and dated technical graphics over something bland and soulless like MOH. At least Metro 2033 managed to have character (despite being another dark/gritty/brown FPS) in its visuals.

WoW is a game meant to be played on a wide variety of computers from beastly modern gaming rigs to five-year-old Macbooks. Honestly, I think Blizzard's decision to go with a cartoony, non-realistic art style was one of the best choices they could have possibly made, because it means a game can be visually appealing - and make no mistake, WoW is still visually appealing - without requiring a high-end machine.

Blizzard HAS improved the graphics bit by bit over the years (in Cataclysm: new water effects / sunlight ray-tracing), but never requiring a full graphics overhaul which would be a gross waste of time.

Mazty (and you) seem to be under the impression that any given problem can be fixed simply by hiring people to deal with it, which makes absolutely no sense if you know the slightest bit about games development. Okay, so you hire 50 more people to retool the graphics. Someone still needs to oversee those 50 new people, someone needs to plan it out, someone needs to integrate it so that the new art team and the old art team are communicating as far as all the NEW graphics being made in the old style (that need to be converted to the new style) are concerned. In the end, you've just made communication more difficult and everything less efficient. Plus, what do you do once you've finished the graphics overhaul - do you just fire those guys you hired? It's horrible business/development sense.

You *don't* need good graphics to be immersed. People were immersed in Half-Life 2. People were immersed in Fallout 2. People were immersed in Final Fantasy 7 and Myst. People were immersed in *ZORK*. Great design can compensate for everything else.

I'm going to warn everyone - and you know who you are - if you can't discuss politely without resorting to ad hominem attacks, you won't be discussing anything at all. Consider this a warning, and if I see any more blatant rudeness going on after this post, bans will be handed out.

 

[Jimbo1212]

I've played DX11 games. I've played Medal of Honor. I would prefer a game with great art design and dated technical graphics over something bland and soulless like MOH. At least Metro 2033 managed to have character (despite being another dark/gritty/brown FPS) in its visuals.

WoW is a game meant to be played on a wide variety of computers from beastly modern gaming rigs to five-year-old Macbooks. Honestly, I think Blizzard's decision to go with a cartoony, non-realistic art style was one of the best choices they could have possibly made, because it means a game can be visually appealing - and make no mistake, WoW is still visually appealing - without requiring a high-end machine.

Blizzard HAS improved the graphics bit by bit over the years (in Cataclysm: new water effects / sunlight ray-tracing), but never requiring a full graphics overhaul which would be a gross waste of time.

Mazty (and you) seem to be under the impression that any given problem can be fixed simply by hiring people to deal with it, which makes absolutely no sense if you know the slightest bit about games development. Okay, so you hire 50 more people to retool the graphics. Someone still needs to oversee those 50 new people, someone needs to plan it out, someone needs to integrate it so that the new art team and the old art team are communicating as far as all the NEW graphics being made in the old style (that need to be converted to the new style) are concerned. In the end, you've just made communication more difficult and everything less efficient. Plus, what do you do once you've finished the graphics overhaul - do you just fire those guys you hired? It's horrible business/development sense.

You *don't* need good graphics to be immersed. People were immersed in Half-Life 2. People were immersed in Fallout 2. People were immersed in Final Fantasy 7 and Myst. People were immersed in *ZORK*. Great design can compensate for everything else.

I'm going to warn everyone - and you know who you are - if you can't discuss politely without resorting to ad hominem attacks, you won't be discussing anything at all. Consider this a warning, and if I see any more blatant rudeness going on after this post, bans will be handed out.

MoH soulless? How is depicting real life in one of the most dramatic locations in the world soulless? I find this a very strange statement to make seeing that real life has inspired so much art etc. I will post a screen shot when I have free time tomorrow to show what I mean.

As for WoW running on a wide range of machines, for lower spec yes, for mid range PC's or higher, they will just be running them at silly fps rates regardless of the overhaul simply because it is still a DX9 engine. If Blizzard where serious, they could easily release DX10+ options, but seeing as they do not, they clearly do not want the game to be slightly demanding, which is fair enough, but not without its flaws which many people seem to brush under the carpet.
Also, I doubt cataclysm brings actual ray-tracing as this would stop even the best rigs playing the game at more then 1 fps as ray-tracing is so demanding as I have seen in doing my own renders.

 

[Wicky_42]

I love Blizzard's art style for this and all their other games, but even with the graphics update that Cataclysm brings, it's still looking very dated. There are more rough edges and 2D textures here than any non-MMO game released even three years ago. I guess this wouldn't be a bad thing if the gameplay was something fantastic like with Warcraft 3, but that's just not the case here.

That's my sentiments. The stretched textures on the ground stood out for me, and I know it's kinda part of the art style, but the untextured walls and polygonal special effects kinda stand out. I mean, I'm not normally a graphics snob, but here it's being held up as THE point of the trailer, and I'm not getting it.

It's probably one of those things that makes more sense when you've played in the world and have a frame of reference and experience with the graphics, lowering your expectations somewhat (as with Minecraft's aesthetics), but dude, I was playing Metro 2033 the other week - this doesn't compare. Heck, even Starcraft 2 looks like it might very well have more detailed models!

 

[Jimbo1212]

As promised, a comparison of screenshots showing how graphics are key to immersion.

Compared to:

As it is clearly shown that the bottom mountains are far more immersive as they the capture scale so very well where as the WoW ones look like they are fresh from a toy set.
As for extreme escapism (which is what I think most of you WoW players are aiming for), the WoW mountains are better as they are far from real and nothing in real life looks like that. However immersion and trying to replace reality with something extremely different are quite different.

And on the point of MoH being soulless...........really? I know when I ran around the corner I was amazed at seeing that amazing mountain which is the perfect back drop for that mission.

 

[Vhite]

Only reason why Im happy that I dont have enough free time. If I had enough time then I would start playing it again and then I would have none.

 

[Amardor]

Extremely rich in detail!? Compared to what? Games that are 4 years old, maybe, but not modern games, that's for sure...
Something which makes graphics and scenes look impressive is lighting. This is known through the industry and sadly, working on a basic DX9 platform, WoW is never going to look pretty compared to many scenes in Metro 2033 which are actually stunning - when you see the doors to the Metro open for the first time and so on. The contrast & lighting make it an awe-inspiring moment. Sadly, WoW's graphics are never going to take anyone's breath away if they have kept up-to-date because they are simply nothing special- low polygons, limited detail, bland lighting and so on. They are certainly doing the best with what they have, but WoW is certainly looking very dated.

When I mean detail I don't mean that in a technical sense, I meant in art design; grizzlies fishing in the streams in Grizzly Hills, the flowers on the ground covered by barbed plants in Duskwood, NPC's going about their routine, those little things that make the world feel vibrant and alive.

Yes that doors-opening scene in Metro 2033 was impressive, but WoW manages to blow me away just as much, not through technical prowess but through art design. Hence why I said that there's more to eye candy than just technicalities. I don't give a single damn about the low polygons, plain lighting and all that.

Eventually the subscriber list will go in reverse even further, more content means a much larger end game to reach, i.e patience new players won't have.

Because all content before the end-game is completely worthless and no-one pays attention to it, right?

70% of Trial Players quit before level 10. You really think increasing the level cap even further and adding more content will gain new people? Even though most of them quit before level 10? The point I was raising was that as gorgeous as WOW is turning into, its sad that its not snowballing as fast as it was. We need more than just sexy images to keep us engaged, new gameplay, new classes, new dynamics to play is what people really want.
http://wow.joystiq.com/2010/02/11/70-of-trial-players-quit-wow-before-level-10/

 

[Nostalgia]

Threads like these and what they turn into is why I choose to not only avoid posting but avoiding the site altogether.

Matzy keeps on asking why and why the game can't look better and there is one simple reason why: 12 million subscriber base.
Blizzard does NOT care that their engine is old because it helps them make money. They have a lot of money to make a new engine, but it's like they would be paying money to lose money. I'll let that sink in. I know you can't accept that, a business of all things, would not be more concerned about people who would most likely be playing entirely different games than their own subscriber base.

I don't know about you, but graphics would be one of the last reasons I would ever drop an MMO. The gameplay, balance, and content far exceed the graphics in priority, especially in an always stylized series like Warcraft. (which never pushed having a realistic vantage to make WoW's vibrancy and cartoony look jarring)
This is not about what you want or want the player wants. Constantly needing to ***** about why it can't fulfill your expectations (either because you find it ugly or think it should be better on principle of its dated engine) makes you come off petulant and whiny when it's apparent from the "arguments" in this thread that people really don't care or accept the game's engine limitations.

If they were to update the engine and release it with the expansion, I would definitely be able to play it, but do you think that others would? Do you think that Blizzard would want to pour resources into something that alienates their playerbase rather than bring more in? No one should be playing a game for how pretty it looks, ESPECIALLY WoW.
It's not like they do not give graphical updates to the game. You could even tell the difference from the jump to Outland when it came out and they have been doing such ever since.

Stormwind only loaded one district at a time, but now the whole city is its own thing since the world needed to accommodate flying mounts. That alone would take more processing power because there is much more around you that's on the screen at one time. Many inaccessible areas in WoW that were just a flat texture expanding the area needed to be given mountains for that same reason. Ahn'Qiraj needed an entire uninstanced remake, again, for the same reason.


Blizzard updates their own tools and adds newer things each expansion. Polycount is upped and there are much more hi-res textures in the game. If you still think the game looks the same from vanilla to now, your head is up your ass.
If graphics, of all things that are more wrong with the game, are the thing holding you back from either enjoying it or playing it altogether, there are more things wrong with you than things wrong with the game.



Also, I can't find where to quote it because I'm too damn lazy; that whole video card thing you keep going on and on about?
Ever think that maybe people are buying new cards, not for graphics, but PERFORMANCE. This is one of the very frequent arguments you see ingrained into the PC vs console debate. Computer hardware updates are more frequent and people pushing the hyper-realistic graphics will chose a PC over a console due to hardware every time.
I would hear shit about Crysis and its engine all the damn time, but never about how spectacular its gameplay was. Games are placing way too much emphasis on what they can push out of their engines and what new sparkly bit can capture the eyes of ADD riddled children who orgasm over bloom.

Ever think that maybe, JUST MAYBE, people that want to continue gaming just want to be able to PLAY the game rather than feed their graphical fetish? People were afraid of buying the game for it to just not work the moment they start it up, even with adequate system requirements. I guess the developers can be proud of pushing boundaries, but all they did was make a glorified benchmark. At least when you buy for a console, you KNOW that the games you'll buy for it will work and it'll last you til the next console generation.

I think it's about time WoW started emphasizing new features in it's trailers rather than saying "Look how pretty our engine is!"

Because you know.... it's not anymore.

Because this is the only trailer. /sarcasm
This was something players unlocked via Facebook and Twitter and is just extra eye-candy for the expansion. It was the final 100% unlock piece. Previously were things like music samples, TGC and concept art, interviews and a behind-the-scenes for the opening cinematic.

This was the original trailer that lists those features.

 

[Bobzer77]

extra eye-candy

You see theres where the problem lies, you need your game to look good for you to have a successful eye candy trailer. I've already admitted that WoW has excellent level design and the areas are built well but all I was saying is that whenever they release a trailer like this all I think about is how badly it's showing it's age.

 

[Nostalgia]

extra eye-candy

You see theres where the problem lies, you need your game to look good for you to have a successful eye candy trailer. I've already admitted that WoW has excellent level design and the areas are built well but all I was saying is that whenever they release a trailer like this all I think about is how badly it's showing it's age.

Wow. Really. Out of everything.. just..

It is the WORLD of Warcraft and the fact that Blizzard had replicated it to be as expansive and varied makes it to be a pivotal aspect. The areas associated in the lore and questing environments can be just as important to one person as what raids are to another. Seeing how the world looks and wondering what is going on in what they see, is yes, eye-candy for them, and might not necessarily 'wow' anyone who just finds it to be Blizzard showing off their engine, because it's not.

An MMO takes times/emotional investment depending on the person or how long they have played. Seeing the Barrens with fissures and faction skirmishes is an extremely different tone and change to what they leveled up with when they first started playing, seeing how the world they used to know all so well being changed forever, reflecting on their memories from yesteryear.

 

[Nostalgia]

12 million subscribers? How is that a reason as to why the graphics can't be improved? There is no logical link between the two...

Alright. You could have stopped right there because I'm not reading any further. (I ended up doing so anyway, but it was all just the same.)

Honestly. If you cannot put two and two together as to why a new engine could put a dent in a 12 million subscriber base, then I can't help you see past your nose more than I have already tried to dumb it down.

You seem to not understand that immersion by graphics is not the way an MMO operates. Blizzard knows that. They make their world vast and seamless and work without the need of instance gates between towns (Guild Wars, for example) to make it feel like a world, but that's all they need to do.
The social aspect and game itself trumps all this and keeps the money incoming. Having to dedicate time and having it show keep people playing. There is no one story-mode and once you beat the final boss, you're done with needing to be immersed into your environment.
Graphics aren't what makes a game form addictive habits. It's the progression and friends made through it all that make people continue playing.


Obviously we both have different perceptions on what makes a game good. If graphics are important to you, you can find your fix elsewhere, but an MMO is a whole 'nother beast.
For every whiny kid and his glorified full-tower of heat complaining that there isn't enough BLOOM or there is a stretch texture here and there, there are another dozen computers that can run the game.

Edit: Also, F.E.A.R. 2 can run so well despite having better graphics because most of their environments are inside. A warehouse, school, offices, whatever. Even if it wasn't the case, a lot of games that do have outside environments are instanced off and are much smaller than they appear. GTA4 would have been a better example here, or any sandbox game really.

 

[Nostalgia]

But as I've said, an improvement to the graphics doesn't mean you have to alienate existing players due to hardware demands...As I said, look at FEAR and Crysis =S
In short, if Blizzard improved their graphics, they would have a better looking game which would bring in more players while improving the game that existing players are enjoying. It would be a win-win for Blizzard & the customers which is why it baffles me as to the anger towards criticism of the graphics from the existing players. Plus taking into account the other flaws with WoW I mentioned, I feel we probably have similar ideas on what makes a game good.

They would lose more than they would gain, trust me. You seem to not understand this part and make it feel like graphics is what keep people playing or from playing. In almost all cases, it's either the game itself, the sub fee, or the community. I really don't know anyone who has ever been shallow enough to dismiss a game due to its graphics, especially when WoW, honestly, isn't as terrible as you make it out to be.

Looking and being dated doesn't make a game terrible, and its style and lower requirements gives it its charm and ability to be played to and for a vast audience.
If you're still baffled, you're not seeing the spectrum.

I would like it if Blizzard would at least visit their older models and give it them same treatment as the stuff they put out with Cata by rounding out the edges and making better looking textures, but this isn't my primary concern and never will be. It would not change my game experience because it's not the graphics that get me immersed in the game. I said this already, so it does not bear repeating.

There are more MMO's out there if you feel that graphics should be much more up to par with today's standard, but I'll still find that decision making shallow.

 

[Nostalgia]

Unfortunately you are not a market analyst nor are you backing your points with any sort of evidence so I don't think it be right of me to simply trust your word.

And you are?
If you're going to be marketing a more casual-friendly game like WoW, you're going to need to be sure that someone who has either never gamed before or games here and there would be able to run it on their computer. WoW is an extremely accessible game that doesn't require consistent grouping to be able to do anything and allows the person to play the game at their own pace. If you're gonna make your game play like this, you're going to make it so that people like this can actually play it. I don't know how many times I must reword this argument, but this audience far exceeds the people who could run GTA4, Crysis, or MW2 on their machine that would ever even be slightly interested in WoW but dismiss it due to its dated graphics. I can guarantee that people who do not play WoW either:
1) haven't/haven't heard of it,
2) did and did not like it,
3) tried other MMO's and did not like those,
4) do not want to pay the subscription fee, or
5) find the community repulsive, their server imbalanced, or lack of progression/end-game.

You may say bad graphics gives a game charm but I've yet to find a review which shares that opinion - it seems similar wording to the real estate agent who describes an abandoned house as rustic.

No, no, no it doesn't.
Must I add respectively to the end of the sentence? I suppose I should have.
I said its style gives it charm and its lower requirements gives it its ability to be played on more machines. I admit that it's a dated engine. I admit that some things aren't up to par with what they put out now. However, do I think that makes it bad? No. Is it of any concern to me? Not really. Would I care if they did touch-up more things? Probably not, but it's welcomed. Overall, does it break my immersion or does all this make it unplayable? Absolutely not.
Constantly having to hit loading screens between every zone like I had to in Guild Wars broke more immersion than having to "endure" WoW's "terrible" graphics. Once you enter the questing/travel areas of GW, you do not see other people around you. It's only the NPC's you dragged along or your own friends. Going to Hyjal, I saw a numerous amount of fellow players and people I recognize. It makes the world feel much more alive than a series of loading screen gates.

I have never said graphics should be the first think changed in WoW & have mentioned many other flaws with the game, so I can't see why you are of the opinion that I think graphics are the no 1 problem...=S I believe they are part of a long list of flaws with the game...

Oh? So are you saying that they're not? Because it definitely sounds like that is what you are saying. If anything, the fact that I think the graphics are your primary concern and you are giving me an attitude like it's not only further proves my point.
Also, you're making it out to be a big deal and it's what you have been arguing about. Can you blame me for thinking that?

Graphics do help you become immersed in a game but it certainly is not the only element. I've yet to find a game where immersion is decreased through improved graphics...If you have an example, I'd be happy to look at it.

Was waiting for you to say this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncanny_valley
And before you argue, yes, it does reply.

If graphics didn't help with immersion why would Blizzard spend so much money on expensive cut scenes?

With what? One cinematic per expansion that isn't even IN the game? All their other cut-scenes are done like machinima. Are you telling me that people who do it for fun are throwing countless dollars of their money away for fun? Expensive isn't the word I would use here, especially when they already have access to the programs to make it happen.

 

[Valiance]

Unfortunately you are not a market analyst nor are you backing your points with any sort of evidence so I don't think it be right of me to simply trust your word. I have never said graphics keep people playing, but that the lack of graphical improvements do prevent some people from joining WoW as they do not see a game that is so graphically dated as being worth the asking price.
You may say bad graphics gives a game charm but I've yet to find a review which shares that opinion - it seems similar wording to the real estate agent who describes an abandoned house as rustic. As I have mentioned previously, an improvement in graphics does not mean the game can no longer be played by a vast audience; Crysis is a classic example of this. I have never said graphics should be the first think changed in WoW & have mentioned many other flaws with the game, so I can't see why you are of the opinion that I think graphics are the no 1 problem...=S I believe they are part of a long list of flaws with the game...
Graphics do help you become immersed in a game but it certainly is not the only element. I've yet to find a game where immersion is decreased through improved graphics...If you have an example, I'd be happy to look at it.
If graphics didn't help with immersion why would Blizzard spend so much money on expensive cut scenes?
But at the end of the day I've had to repeat numerous points to the same objections & it doesn't seem we are getting anywhere I think we are just going to have to agree to disagree.

What exactly makes you think that someone needs to be a market analyst to prove you wrong? If anything, I think you should be the market analyst considering you keep harping on the "better graphics --> more subscribers" statement and the "new engine --> better graphics" train.

If you're going to cite EVE Online as an example please understand a few things. First off, it aims for a DIFFERENT demographic - understand that the kind of person who wants to play EVE would not want to play WoW and (most likely) the other way around. There are people who went to EVE from WoW because they found WoW too easy/dry/restrictive or whatever, but there are not many people who played EVE first and then went to play WoW instead.

Secondly, EVEs graphics have already been talked about in here. But what about the rest of the game? It's much much different than WoW. And I don't just mean art style. I mean a lot of things - setting, sandbox, punishment for death, freedom, theme, factions, PvP, PvE, exploration - Nearly everything is radically different, save combat and guild(corp) structure. While graphics might be a factor, I'm certain that they are banking on many other things to draw a new player in.

Third, let's talk about player-base. The last figure I can find is EVE having 320,000+ accounts, and Blizzard having 12,000,000+ WoW accounts. EVE doesn't have the critical-mass player-base that WoW does, and it appeals to different kinds of individual - a discerning individual. CCCP built their game around that individual, and will continue to cater to that kind of individual. They will further the game around it and continue with it.

Now for the unfortunate reality: Blizzard is not creating WoW to cater to you, or me, or anyone posting on this forum, or anyone who even posts on forums at all. Of their subscribers, I'd be amazed if even 2% of them ever posted on their forums or if 10% of them did a raid in Vanilla/BC other than MC/Kara. The people buying Cataclysm are NOT the people who are going to be worried about PvP balance, level 85 raid content, dynamic combat, compelling gameplay, interesting crafting, or whatever.

I'd tell you what they want, but I honestly don't know. I don't know how WoW got to where it was or is where it is. I guess it became popular being the best Everquest, and stayed popular due to the habit. I know a lot of people buying the expansion just because there's an expansion. You have to "keep up with the jones'" or "All my friends are buying it" or "I'll be left behind the rest of the server" or whatever. People have invested years of their life into it and aren't about to just give it up now. If the graphics were good enough for them to start playing, they aren't going to ignore an expansion because they haven't improved "enough." This expansion could be wonderful, it could suck, people will buy it anyway because they bought the last two and have paid 15 bucks a month for a few years and aren't going to just let their character ("investment") not pay off. In order to continue on in any reasonable sense, you NEED this expansion.

But the point I'm trying to make is this: It's the social aspect of the game that gets it sales. It's why Myst was #1 on the sales charts for a long time, it was why The Sims was #1 on sales charts for a long time, it was why Solitaire is the most played game of all time (mostly in the 30-40 year old female demographic). It's why guilds exist, friends lists exist, why Facebook exists, why people send Christmas cards, why Steam is successful, why any online game is successful.

Blizzard already broke the mold that they need to in order to make money. And they are going to continue with what they have in place to make money. If the people who care about graphics boycott the game, they wouldn't even notice. If you won't play it because it looks bad or because the game sucks, they don't care. They make money anyway. If you point to Cryengine 3 and say "it should look like this," it just isn't feasible from a business standpoint. They currently make 69.4 dollars a second from WoW alone. Why change it? Even if technology has advanced, they make money now. Maybe if you showed up at their headquarters with a feasibility study proving that better graphics would get them more subscribers, they would do it. However, they must have considered that for each expansion and realized that it's completely unnecessary from a business standpoint.

In one of your posts you said people in "other industries" don't put up with this. I find this to be incredibly untrue. Cars have been developed that are powered by Hydrogen fuel cells. Meanwhile the average person here in the US has been using roughly the same kind of engine for 100 years. We don't have mag-lev trains, bullet-trains or supersonic passenger planes, but they do exist. Most of our power plants are coal or oil amidst a few natural gas and nuclear reactors. The advanced technology exists, but they make money using the older stuff. Land-based telephone lines still use the same copper wire that's been coming into our houses for over 150 years. WoW makes money with what it has? It will continue to use what it has.

If you really think about it, what could better graphics do for them? Let's think for a minute: Assume they make a new engine. Assume they make it scalable so all of their player-base that can currently run the game can continue to run the game with no problems stemming from it. That's not unreasonable. It'd take time, money, but whatever, they can do it. Then what?

What market do they get? The top 1% of gamers, top 5% of PC gamers, that would only play WoW if it looked fantastic? Does that help them make money? If anything, that's the most finicky market there is, and they'd probably just hop off the bandwagon when Crysis 2 comes out. What other market can they get? The market of non-gamers who says the game looks too ugly? They'll try it and before level 10, probably quit because it's not their cup of tea. If you truly believe that better graphics would make WoW easier to market to new players, then you'll have to bring some proof about it next time.

 

[Cid Silverwing]

Somehow I didn't yawn from the flashy edits.

Oops, wait, I did just now.