Legend, since you didn't understand I will try to restate the WoW argument for you ...
You argued that it wouldn't make sense for a company to choose not to take full advantage of the hardware of a system because it would hurt sales; essentially that people judge a game entirely by early screenshots and are looking for games which take advantage of new graphical technologies. WoW vs. Everquest II demonstrates that this simply is not the case, artistic style and gameplay matter far more then taking advantage of the available hardware; had people been primarily interested in graphics Dungeons and Dragons online or Vanguard would have outsold the Burning Crusade expansion (which they didn't).
Now, if everything was entirely equal a developer would choose to take advantage of the hardware but that simply isn't the case; creating the content to produce a PS3 or XBox 360 game that takes advantage of the hardware is amazingly expensive, the PS4 and XBox 720 will likely be dramatically more expensive.
Anyways, I think I can demonstrate the level of polygonal and texture detail I was talking about in my initial post on this topic. Consider Super Smash Bros Brawl:



If you were creating this game on the XBox 360 or PS3 you could improve on these characters by increasing polygonal detail on the hair (and other features), adding normal maps to give small details to everything, introduce shader effects to give realistic material properties to the metal/leather/cloth/skin/hair; does that really add anything except for cost? If every object in the game is as detailed as these characters are would you be disapointed when you looked at screenshots?
Not every game could take this approach (a large portion of racing game fans want every game to look closer and closer to reality) but the majority of games could.