I agree with the above.
My only injection would be this:
The video of SoW on the 1946 DVD showed, what appeared to be, a working game, corroborated by the showing of this version at the exhibition which Mysticpuma attended.
Now is it the work on the engine which caused the host of problems in providing minimal tangible development between 2007-2011? Because it is certainly the lack of development between the first two builds which I think causes a lot of the so called 'negativity'.
See there is a gulf between the two engines, but this may not be as clear as we would like to imagine. It's only really noticeable visually in the self-shading, and landscape geometry.
But let's further this odd scenario with the map-editor, shown in 2008:
Which build is this? The geometry would suggest the engine CloD has now, however the cliffs and terrain textures aren't so different from the first build.
And I think the colours and textures look a lot better than what we have now (save for the repetition which could be tweaked).
So if this is the current build, why has the landscape taken so long to come together, and yet not provided a 3 year gulf in visual experience?
The answer is there are a lot of ways to look at it, from a positive perspective which takes the problems with the team and lack of initial resources into account, and then the other view which highlights the apparent lack of major development over the years.
I personally think it's 6 of one, half a dozen of the other. Oleg was a perfectionist, and I think they ran out of time in producing their dream game so had to come out with something quickly: CloD.