I thought they pretty much stated they were *not* talking about fiscal quarters
Thats what I though to but we're 2 to 3 months from a supposed June release if we went by the calander quarters and there's No official release date, no official information on collector's edition, and even Gamestop has moved the Date to the Fiscal 2nd Quarter of September.
Its just some common sense and logic. If I'm wrong I'm wrong and I'll gladly be wrong if it means getting my hands on the game. But I honestly think if it was going to be a Calander Release of June we'd have a date and collector's edition information.
Its highly illogical for a game to release in June at this point without atleast the collector's edition information for release & pre order.
Please Refer to Doom Cat with all conspiracies & evil corporation complaints. He'll give you the simple explination of..WE"RE ALL DOOMED!
I'll easily admit it doesn't seem like and of what we know it would probably even be foolish to release within Q2 but that doesn't make me change their own words to something that would seem more fitting.
Yes they'll probably delay it.. yet again, either that or they'll release too early (from what I can tell). They still said it wasn't a fiscal quarter they were talking about as far as I can remember. Them not hitting it doesn't change that
One thing WoW did right was the low machine requirements and yet the art was great. I don't like WoW for a lot of reaons but they did that right. If Warhammer is doing the same thing then that is the right thing to do. I prefer less than optimum graphics if that means the game play is as smooth as WoWs. Pretty is nice untill you are so lagged that you have trouble playing.
The links I have bookmarked for this topic have been taken down, but Mark Jacob's himself said the game was set for a Calendar Q2 2008 release. I believe several others have also stated the same.
EA/Mythic has pushed back the launch date for Warhammer Online: Age of Reckoning (WAR) from Q1 2008 to Q2 2008.
EA CEO John Riccitiello:
"...[Mythic’s] Mark [Jacobs] came forward and said that it would affect quality if he held the March date. We made the decision with the big investment we’ve got behind it and frankly the talent and inspiration of the team to invest behind quality. We gave them a little bit more time, a little bit more money and we think we’re going to have a little bit more of a hit on our hands. So… simple. So, you’re safe Mark."
March would be a Q1 release date, and June is the Q2. This goes on, so on and so forth.
The links I have bookmarked for this topic have been taken down, but Mark Jacob's himself said the game was set for a Calendar Q2 2008 release. I believe several others have also stated the same.
EA/Mythic has pushed back the launch date for Warhammer Online: Age of Reckoning (WAR) from Q1 2008 to Q2 2008. EA CEO John Riccitiello: "...[Mythic’s] Mark [Jacobs] came forward and said that it would affect quality if he held the March date. We made the decision with the big investment we’ve got behind it and frankly the talent and inspiration of the team to invest behind quality. We gave them a little bit more time, a little bit more money and we think we’re going to have a little bit more of a hit on our hands. So… simple. So, you’re safe Mark."
March would be a Q1 release date, and June is the Q2. This goes on, so on and so forth.
I dont care what that old article says. Its March. Q2's Calender blah blah whatever ends in June. So we have all of March, April, May, then Part of June. So unless in the next week or two they put an official release date down and finally start Selling the Collector's Edition for Pre Order its not going to happen.
BTW I don't see them saying Fiscal or Calender so it really doesn't disprove and I'm not saying its FAQ I'm just going on common sense having been playing games for nearly 20+ years now.
Please Refer to Doom Cat with all conspiracies & evil corporation complaints. He'll give you the simple explination of..WE"RE ALL DOOMED!
1) Our release date is currently unchanged and is still part of EA's planning for 2008.
2) Our release date hasn't been Q1 for quite a long time. As our CEO said in a previous earnings call, our date was moved to Q1 Fiscal Year 2008, not Q1 Calendar Year. EA, like most companies, operates on a fiscal year not a calendar year. So, in our case, FY Q1 = CY Q2. This is not the first time someone has confused CY and FY. As long-time members of this forum know, we've been looking at CY Q2 2008 for quite a while.
3) Whoever the spokesperson was (we have no idea who they talked to), didn't have a clue. Heck, even if we changed the release date, it would still have to be on EA's SKU planning schedule even if it was one year from now. The only way the WAR would be removed from the schedule is if we thought the game was in such trouble we would have to put it into turnaround or that the release date was so far away so it didn't make sense for it to be in there. Neither which is true and frankly, not even close to being true. So, I'm rather dubious about the source as well as the article.
So, that's the scoop. Much ado about nothing as usual. We're still working on WAR and things move along nicely. As I've said before, we'll change the release date if/when we feel it's necessary to make a great game but as of now, it hasn't been changed.
Mark
The link is working again now, while it wasn't 10 minutes ago.
I'll easily admit it doesn't seem like and of what we know it would probably even be foolish to release within Q2 but that doesn't make me change their own words to something that would seem more fitting.
I'm not changing their words I specifically said im going on common sense & logic considering everything thats out there. Don't stick words in my mouth.
Please Refer to Doom Cat with all conspiracies & evil corporation complaints. He'll give you the simple explination of..WE"RE ALL DOOMED!
Having played DAOC at launch, I still remember the massive lag that happened whenever you got a couple of hundred players together in one spot. Playing at 1 frame every 3 seconds is just not fun And it's not just DAOC... take any game not designed to have 200 players on screen at once and try it, you'll see what I mean. I'll take lesser eye candy over the performance hit from too much detail any day of the week.
A high gfx requirement wouldnt affect lag in any way. The graphics of any mmorpg are compiled by the users computer. Players with a low performance computer would lag, but it shouldnt affect anyone else but themselves, and the fact that other people see that user lag-jumping. When everyone has a lag issue, then its because of server overload.... nothing to do with graphics.
That being said, I think the graphics are awesome, and mythic updated the daoc graphics in some expansion, so why not war too. It would be stupid to make a game that only 10% can actually play...
The graphics may not look great right now but neither did wow in beta. I think it will be very surprising when the game launches of how good it will look.
In DAOC they managed to update graphics and still keep the game playable for most computers. I am more concerned with content and immersion at this point. Nice graphics sure but how many sit for hours and watch how nice the water ripples. My idea of nice graphics is monsters/npcs that are smooth and have more then one move so on. same with game play more then bang one key get some styles going use the graphics wisely.
In the February Newsletter that they sent out, there were some screens from beta testers. Boy, did they look nice! Compared to past videos/screenshots, they almost looked like an entirely new game. They implemented lighting and shadowing, and improved character graphics, so it looks softer and smoother. And it's still in beta! They're doing a good job.
-------------------------------------- A human and an Elf get captured by Skaven. The rat-men are getting ready to shoot the first hostage with Dwarf-made guns when he yells, "Earthquake!" The naturally nervous Skaven run and hide from the imaginary threat. He escapes. The Skaven regroup and bring out the Elf. Being very smart, the Elf has figured out what to do. When the Skaven get ready to shoot, the Elf, in order to scare them, yells, "Fire!"
In the February Newsletter that they sent out, there were some screens from beta testers. Boy, did they look nice! Compared to past videos/screenshots, they almost looked like an entirely new game. They implemented lighting and shadowing, and improved character graphics, so it looks softer and smoother. And it's still in beta! They're doing a good job.
I dunno still looked like a 10 year old game to me.
where is the rivers of BLOOD in this game !!! i mean come on its WaRHAMMEr !!!! there should be heads, arms, legs going flying all over the place not this crap i been seeing so far i will never play this kid friendly crap ever !!! i mean come on this is warhammer universe here not a kid cartoon show !!! so what if they lose on some sub couse there is to much gore make that a option !! give me the option to see blood and guts not just nice flashing lights !!! this makes me so mad!!!
In DAOC they managed to update graphics and still keep the game playable for most computers. I am more concerned with content and immersion at this point. Nice graphics sure but how many sit for hours and watch how nice the water ripples. My idea of nice graphics is monsters/npcs that are smooth and have more then one move so on. same with game play more then bang one key get some styles going use the graphics wisely.
This is something I highly agree with. Of course, I enjoy superb graphics, but the best graphics don't help me, if the animations get repeated every other second.
Anyway, I'll be keeping an eye on WAR mainly because some of my friends will be playing it when it comes out and I'll be checking out the graphics at release to give a final opinion in the matter.
In the February Newsletter that they sent out, there were some screens from beta testers. Boy, did they look nice! Compared to past videos/screenshots, they almost looked like an entirely new game. They implemented lighting and shadowing, and improved character graphics, so it looks softer and smoother. And it's still in beta! They're doing a good job.
I dunno still looked like a 10 year old game to me.
I consider that statement pretty hilarious ... as I remember 1998 pretty clearly. So I took a look at PC RPG games that came out around 1998 to 1999 and find your statement...down right crazy...which just further makes me believe people who post these threads about Up coming 3D games have never beta tested in their life or been into PC games for longer than 4 or 5 years.
You can't compare MMORPG's up against FPS games I know thats what alot of 'graphics complainers" keep doing. Its ludacris if you know anything about computer's from a programmer's stand point FPS game mechanics require half the work since everything goes into Physics & Graphics instead. RPG's always involve multiple game mechanic systems for everything from just fighting to crafting & economy. Something has to give somewhere in order to be able to process more than 10 character's on screen at once.
Please Refer to Doom Cat with all conspiracies & evil corporation complaints. He'll give you the simple explination of..WE"RE ALL DOOMED!
In the February Newsletter that they sent out, there were some screens from beta testers. Boy, did they look nice! Compared to past videos/screenshots, they almost looked like an entirely new game. They implemented lighting and shadowing, and improved character graphics, so it looks softer and smoother. And it's still in beta! They're doing a good job.
I dunno still looked like a 10 year old game to me.
I consider that statement pretty hilarious ... as I remember 1998 pretty clearly. So I took a look at PC RPG games that came out around 1998 to 1999 and find your statement...down right crazy...which just further makes me believe people who post these threads about Up coming 3D games have never beta tested in their life or been into PC games for longer than 4 or 5 years.
You can't compare MMORPG's up against FPS games I know thats what alot of 'graphics complainers" keep doing. Its ludacris if you know anything about computer's from a programmer's stand point FPS game mechanics require half the work since everything goes into Physics & Graphics instead. RPG's always involve multiple game mechanic systems for everything from just fighting to crafting & economy. Something has to give somewhere in order to be able to process more than 10 character's on screen at once.
Great post. LOL......and a nice stroll down memory lane. Those were some great games. Let's hope another "great one" is in this batch of games being developed.
I have no opinions about WAR graphics right now because of a few reasons:
1. We don't know what kind of settings each screenshot/video was using. WoW uses a VERY simple graphics engine that doesn't scale well with better GPU. In other words, if you run a 8600gts or a 8800gts, the game would look about the same in WoW. Perhaps the performance and max res won't be the same, but the game will look the same. There are many effects that certain GPUs allow that must be detected and used by the GX engine. most engines don't do that cause it'd be writing several engines (work wise).
however, certain graphics' engines may scale up better with better GPU. So, if GPU is pixel shader capable, or T&L in hardware, the game could look and feel entirely different. Even animation would be affected if some of the rendering is offloaded to the GPU... Do we know which kind of GFX engine WAR uses? Does it scale up well and uses specific GPU capabilities?
2. When the code is in beta, the code is running in debug mode, with ASSERTs enabled. This means, that the focus is to catch corner cases, crashes, and/or invalid data in certain points in the code and provide good information about them when thay happen. This doesn't come for free, which means the code in debug mode will run a lot slower which in turn does affect performance, and specifically animation.
3. Due to #2, textures used in beta may not be final. Besides, a lot of optimizations and final touches will be done before launch.
1. We don't know what kind of settings each screenshot/video was using. WoW uses a VERY simple graphics engine that doesn't scale well with better GPU. In other words, if you run a 8600gts or a 8800gts, the game would look about the same in WoW. Perhaps the performance and max res won't be the same, but the game will look the same. There are many effects that certain GPUs allow that must be detected and used by the GX engine. most engines don't do that cause it'd be writing several engines (work wise).
If a engine not scale, is a bug. If your engine spawn more particles at 60 FPS than at 30FPS, is a bug. No? And theres the OpenGL stuff to autodetect extensions. Most engines don't autodetect extensiones?
Hello Acaeus 1. We don't know what kind of settings each screenshot/video was using. WoW uses a VERY simple graphics engine that doesn't scale well with better GPU. In other words, if you run a 8600gts or a 8800gts, the game would look about the same in WoW. Perhaps the performance and max res won't be the same, but the game will look the same. There are many effects that certain GPUs allow that must be detected and used by the GX engine. most engines don't do that cause it'd be writing several engines (work wise). If a engine not scale, is a bug. If your engine spawn more particles at 60 FPS than at 30FPS, is a bug. No? And theres the OpenGL stuff to autodetect extensions. Most engines don't autodetect extensiones?
It's not so much about detecting them, it's about properly using them. To use them, the software, the game engine, must be written in a way to do the same things in many different ways, depending on the extensions (as you call them) detected. That's a lot more work to developers, which means increased costs. My point being, some may be OK with those costs others may not. Don't know how Mythic/EA stands on this.
Sweeney (below) mentions, simplistically, GPU power only, but it isn't just the FPSes that the card can put out (as some may believe).
Part of an interview of Unreal creator Tim Sweeney:
TG Daily: You have to admit, the margin is obviously there.
Sweeney: Agreed. But it is very important not to leave the masses behind. This is unfortunate, because PCs are more popular than ever. Everyone has a PC. Even those who did not have a PC in the past are now able to afford one and they use it for Facebook, MySpace, pirating music or whatever. Yesterday’s PCs were for people that were working and later playing games. Even if those games were lower-end ones, there will always be a market for casual games and online games like World of Warcraft. World of Warcraft has DirectX 7-class graphics and can run on any computer. But at the end of the day, consoles have definitely left PC games behind.
TG Daily: In other words: Too big?
Sweeney: Yes, that is huge difference. If we go back 10 years ago, the difference between the high end and the lowest end may have been a factor of 10. We could have scaled games between those two. For example, with the first version of Unreal, a resolution of 320x200 was good for software rendering and we were able to scale that up to 1024x768, if you had the GPU power. There is no way we can scale down a game down by a factor of 100, we would just have to design two completely different games. One for low-end and one for high-end.
That is actually happening on PCs: You have really low-end games with little hardware requirements, like Maple Story. That is a $100 million-a-year business. Kids are addicted to those games, they pay real money to buy [virtual] items within the game and the game.
TG Daily: Broken down, that means today’s mainstream PCs aren’t suitable for gaming?
Sweeney: Exactly. PCs are good for anything, just not games.
Comments
I thought they pretty much stated they were *not* talking about fiscal quarters
Its just some common sense and logic. If I'm wrong I'm wrong and I'll gladly be wrong if it means getting my hands on the game. But I honestly think if it was going to be a Calander Release of June we'd have a date and collector's edition information.
Its highly illogical for a game to release in June at this point without atleast the collector's edition information for release & pre order.
Please Refer to Doom Cat with all conspiracies & evil corporation complaints. He'll give you the simple explination of..WE"RE ALL DOOMED!
I'll easily admit it doesn't seem like and of what we know it would probably even be foolish to release within Q2 but that doesn't make me change their own words to something that would seem more fitting.
Yes they'll probably delay it.. yet again, either that or they'll release too early (from what I can tell). They still said it wasn't a fiscal quarter they were talking about as far as I can remember. Them not hitting it doesn't change that
One thing WoW did right was the low machine requirements and yet the art was great. I don't like WoW for a lot of reaons but they did that right. If Warhammer is doing the same thing then that is the right thing to do. I prefer less than optimum graphics if that means the game play is as smooth as WoWs. Pretty is nice untill you are so lagged that you have trouble playing.
Talk to Vanguard.
The links I have bookmarked for this topic have been taken down, but Mark Jacob's himself said the game was set for a Calendar Q2 2008 release. I believe several others have also stated the same.
EA/Mythic has pushed back the launch date for Warhammer Online: Age of Reckoning (WAR) from Q1 2008 to Q2 2008.
EA CEO John Riccitiello:
"...[Mythic’s] Mark [Jacobs] came forward and said that it would affect quality if he held the March date. We made the decision with the big investment we’ve got behind it and frankly the talent and inspiration of the team to invest behind quality. We gave them a little bit more time, a little bit more money and we think we’re going to have a little bit more of a hit on our hands. So… simple. So, you’re safe Mark."
March would be a Q1 release date, and June is the Q2. This goes on, so on and so forth.
I dont care what that old article says. Its March. Q2's Calender blah blah whatever ends in June. So we have all of March, April, May, then Part of June. So unless in the next week or two they put an official release date down and finally start Selling the Collector's Edition for Pre Order its not going to happen.
BTW I don't see them saying Fiscal or Calender so it really doesn't disprove and I'm not saying its FAQ I'm just going on common sense having been playing games for nearly 20+ years now.
Please Refer to Doom Cat with all conspiracies & evil corporation complaints. He'll give you the simple explination of..WE"RE ALL DOOMED!
2 1/2 weeks old is too old of an article for you? Feb 21, 2008:
www.warhammeralliance.com/forums/showthread.php
Folks,
Yeah, that site has it all wrong:
1) Our release date is currently unchanged and is still part of EA's planning for 2008.
2) Our release date hasn't been Q1 for quite a long time. As our CEO said in a previous earnings call, our date was moved to Q1 Fiscal Year 2008, not Q1 Calendar Year. EA, like most companies, operates on a fiscal year not a calendar year. So, in our case, FY Q1 = CY Q2. This is not the first time someone has confused CY and FY. As long-time members of this forum know, we've been looking at CY Q2 2008 for quite a while.
3) Whoever the spokesperson was (we have no idea who they talked to), didn't have a clue. Heck, even if we changed the release date, it would still have to be on EA's SKU planning schedule even if it was one year from now. The only way the WAR would be removed from the schedule is if we thought the game was in such trouble we would have to put it into turnaround or that the release date was so far away so it didn't make sense for it to be in there. Neither which is true and frankly, not even close to being true. So, I'm rather dubious about the source as well as the article.
So, that's the scoop. Much ado about nothing as usual. We're still working on WAR and things move along nicely. As I've said before, we'll change the release date if/when we feel it's necessary to make a great game but as of now, it hasn't been changed.
Mark
The link is working again now, while it wasn't 10 minutes ago.
I'm not changing their words I specifically said im going on common sense & logic considering everything thats out there. Don't stick words in my mouth.
Please Refer to Doom Cat with all conspiracies & evil corporation complaints. He'll give you the simple explination of..WE"RE ALL DOOMED!
That being said, I think the graphics are awesome, and mythic updated the daoc graphics in some expansion, so why not war too. It would be stupid to make a game that only 10% can actually play...
The graphics may not look great right now but neither did wow in beta. I think it will be very surprising when the game launches of how good it will look.
In DAOC they managed to update graphics and still keep the game playable for most computers. I am more concerned with content and immersion at this point. Nice graphics sure but how many sit for hours and watch how nice the water ripples. My idea of nice graphics is monsters/npcs that are smooth and have more then one move so on. same with game play more then bang one key get some styles going use the graphics wisely.
In the February Newsletter that they sent out, there were some screens from beta testers. Boy, did they look nice! Compared to past videos/screenshots, they almost looked like an entirely new game. They implemented lighting and shadowing, and improved character graphics, so it looks softer and smoother. And it's still in beta! They're doing a good job.
--------------------------------------
A human and an Elf get captured by Skaven. The rat-men are getting ready to shoot the first hostage with Dwarf-made guns when he yells, "Earthquake!" The naturally nervous Skaven run and hide from the imaginary threat. He escapes. The Skaven regroup and bring out the Elf. Being very smart, the Elf has figured out what to do. When the Skaven get ready to shoot, the Elf, in order to scare them, yells, "Fire!"
Order of the White Border.
Speaking of the February newsletter, can anyone count all the ways this thing could hurt you?
mythicmktg.fileburst.com/war/us/media/newsletter/2008_02/spawn03.jpg
I dunno still looked like a 10 year old game to me.
Reminds me of LotRO in places from the videos, then in other places Runescape.
Will be interesting to see the final version and final rating.
where is the rivers of BLOOD in this game !!! i mean come on its WaRHAMMEr !!!! there should be heads, arms, legs going flying all over the place not this crap i been seeing so far i will never play this kid friendly crap ever !!! i mean come on this is warhammer universe here not a kid cartoon show !!! so what if they lose on some sub couse there is to much gore make that a option !! give me the option to see blood and guts not just nice flashing lights !!! this makes me so mad!!!
Anyway, I'll be keeping an eye on WAR mainly because some of my friends will be playing it when it comes out and I'll be checking out the graphics at release to give a final opinion in the matter.
Which Final Fantasy Character Are You?
Final Fantasy 7
I dunno still looked like a 10 year old game to me.
I consider that statement pretty hilarious ... as I remember 1998 pretty clearly. So I took a look at PC RPG games that came out around 1998 to 1999 and find your statement...down right crazy...which just further makes me believe people who post these threads about Up coming 3D games have never beta tested in their life or been into PC games for longer than 4 or 5 years.
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/rpg/baldursgate/images.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=gsimage&tag=images;img;2
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/rpg/revenant/images.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=gsimage&tag=images;all
Now lets see MMO's 10 years ago ...
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/rpg/ultimaonlinethesecondage/images.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=gsimage&tag=images;all
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/rpg/everquest/images.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=gsimage&tag=images;all
DAOC 2001
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/rpg/darkageofcamelot/images.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=gsimage&tag=images%3Ball&page=10
You can't compare MMORPG's up against FPS games I know thats what alot of 'graphics complainers" keep doing. Its ludacris if you know anything about computer's from a programmer's stand point FPS game mechanics require half the work since everything goes into Physics & Graphics instead. RPG's always involve multiple game mechanic systems for everything from just fighting to crafting & economy. Something has to give somewhere in order to be able to process more than 10 character's on screen at once.
Please Refer to Doom Cat with all conspiracies & evil corporation complaints. He'll give you the simple explination of..WE"RE ALL DOOMED!
I dunno still looked like a 10 year old game to me.
I consider that statement pretty hilarious ... as I remember 1998 pretty clearly. So I took a look at PC RPG games that came out around 1998 to 1999 and find your statement...down right crazy...which just further makes me believe people who post these threads about Up coming 3D games have never beta tested in their life or been into PC games for longer than 4 or 5 years.
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/rpg/baldursgate/images.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=gsimage&tag=images;img;2
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/rpg/revenant/images.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=gsimage&tag=images;all
Now lets see MMO's 10 years ago ...
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/rpg/ultimaonlinethesecondage/images.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=gsimage&tag=images;all
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/rpg/everquest/images.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=gsimage&tag=images;all
DAOC 2001
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/rpg/darkageofcamelot/images.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=gsimage&tag=images%3Ball&page=10
You can't compare MMORPG's up against FPS games I know thats what alot of 'graphics complainers" keep doing. Its ludacris if you know anything about computer's from a programmer's stand point FPS game mechanics require half the work since everything goes into Physics & Graphics instead. RPG's always involve multiple game mechanic systems for everything from just fighting to crafting & economy. Something has to give somewhere in order to be able to process more than 10 character's on screen at once.
Great post. LOL......and a nice stroll down memory lane. Those were some great games. Let's hope another "great one" is in this batch of games being developed.
I cannot stand to play WOW even as a pre AOC filler..because I just wont play cartoon graphic games.
Lemme just point you guys to this little vid:
http://www.warhammeronline.com/english/behindTheScenes/vidPhoneDiaries/windowopen/august_2007_w4444gh/view21_2007_august.html
Pay attention to the equipment shadows on the character.
Let me just emphasize that the date on the vid is august 2007...
point taken, they are holding back
I have no opinions about WAR graphics right now because of a few reasons:
1. We don't know what kind of settings each screenshot/video was using. WoW uses a VERY simple graphics engine that doesn't scale well with better GPU. In other words, if you run a 8600gts or a 8800gts, the game would look about the same in WoW. Perhaps the performance and max res won't be the same, but the game will look the same. There are many effects that certain GPUs allow that must be detected and used by the GX engine. most engines don't do that cause it'd be writing several engines (work wise).
however, certain graphics' engines may scale up better with better GPU. So, if GPU is pixel shader capable, or T&L in hardware, the game could look and feel entirely different. Even animation would be affected if some of the rendering is offloaded to the GPU... Do we know which kind of GFX engine WAR uses? Does it scale up well and uses specific GPU capabilities?
2. When the code is in beta, the code is running in debug mode, with ASSERTs enabled. This means, that the focus is to catch corner cases, crashes, and/or invalid data in certain points in the code and provide good information about them when thay happen. This doesn't come for free, which means the code in debug mode will run a lot slower which in turn does affect performance, and specifically animation.
3. Due to #2, textures used in beta may not be final. Besides, a lot of optimizations and final touches will be done before launch.
Hello Acaeus
1. We don't know what kind of settings each screenshot/video was using. WoW uses a VERY simple graphics engine that doesn't scale well with better GPU. In other words, if you run a 8600gts or a 8800gts, the game would look about the same in WoW. Perhaps the performance and max res won't be the same, but the game will look the same. There are many effects that certain GPUs allow that must be detected and used by the GX engine. most engines don't do that cause it'd be writing several engines (work wise).
If a engine not scale, is a bug. If your engine spawn more particles at 60 FPS than at 30FPS, is a bug. No? And theres the OpenGL stuff to autodetect extensions. Most engines don't autodetect extensiones?
It's not so much about detecting them, it's about properly using them. To use them, the software, the game engine, must be written in a way to do the same things in many different ways, depending on the extensions (as you call them) detected. That's a lot more work to developers, which means increased costs. My point being, some may be OK with those costs others may not. Don't know how Mythic/EA stands on this.
Sweeney (below) mentions, simplistically, GPU power only, but it isn't just the FPSes that the card can put out (as some may believe).
Part of an interview of Unreal creator Tim Sweeney:
TG Daily: You have to admit, the margin is obviously there.
Sweeney: Agreed. But it is very important not to leave the masses behind. This is unfortunate, because PCs are more popular than ever. Everyone has a PC. Even those who did not have a PC in the past are now able to afford one and they use it for Facebook, MySpace, pirating music or whatever. Yesterday’s PCs were for people that were working and later playing games. Even if those games were lower-end ones, there will always be a market for casual games and online games like World of Warcraft. World of Warcraft has DirectX 7-class graphics and can run on any computer. But at the end of the day, consoles have definitely left PC games behind.
TG Daily: In other words: Too big?
Sweeney: Yes, that is huge difference. If we go back 10 years ago, the difference between the high end and the lowest end may have been a factor of 10. We could have scaled games between those two. For example, with the first version of Unreal, a resolution of 320x200 was good for software rendering and we were able to scale that up to 1024x768, if you had the GPU power. There is no way we can scale down a game down by a factor of 100, we would just have to design two completely different games. One for low-end and one for high-end.
That is actually happening on PCs: You have really low-end games with little hardware requirements, like Maple Story. That is a $100 million-a-year business. Kids are addicted to those games, they pay real money to buy [virtual] items within the game and the game.
TG Daily: Broken down, that means today’s mainstream PCs aren’t suitable for gaming?
Sweeney: Exactly. PCs are good for anything, just not games.
More here: http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/36390/118/