Funny part is some games are defined not by their looks or graphics engine even. Some are defined by the quality and vision they bring to the table. I mean wtf Pokemon is how successful?!?! You could achieve it's graphics quality on the original console. Did newer technology make the Star War Epilogue better? It gave us Jar Jar Binks...JAR JAR BINKS!!!

As I stated in other posts, PC gaming isn't the achilles heel for CCP and Legion; if Legion is supposed to be what Dust should have been, then they are simply saying they are building a game using untested ideas and approaches that only in sound bites is it truly a great game. We could be wrong, a lot of us, about Legion and I won't argue that. I am arguing though that abandoning one project and then attempting the same project in spirit using the experience and knowledge from a supposed "broken game" is never a positive point or highlight you want to advertise.

CCP can have all of the advanced technology it needs and wants but if you can't have the core mechanics and basics down what use is it? I can really only think of one company that's saved itself from releasing something bad and making it better but they also took the right approach and started with the idea that if they want to make a game that they need new ideas and fresh perspectives; no one can create a game that caters to everyone but if a game can find the middle ground where we want to participate and can enjoy ourselves then it is a success.

If you want a PC analogy if you have all the hardware and tech in the world but the only OS you can install is windows 95 you'd just want to cry on the inside. I could forgive CCP if dust wasn't as "flashy" if they had better core fundamentals down and they don't. A game will ALWAYS be behind the hardware curve and that will never change but if you have the core basics down and build from there ppl will stay and support you. CCP doesn't have that and changing hardware and tech won't change it either.