I love the entitlement card argument along with consoles>PC.

Will be interesting to see it pop up with Neo and Scorpio when the games don't look any better on them apart from fps.

I know around the first 2 years of seeing people on other sites complainging that X1 was holding PS4 back along with Wii U and how they wanted better visuals because the specs in that system were better than the other two.

I think that was only an issue with MS backed games, that had forced parity. That is a completely diferent situation. One was paid to look worst wile the competitor could easyly do better, the other is devs choosing a base and that being slightly harmfull to the stronger competitor. Cant be mad a a dev for choosing the maintrame spec as a base model.

SC graphics are already gorgeous, and I don't complain about them, I'd need a new PC even for graphics half as good, the important thing is that devs find the right balance of features to make gamers happy without having to delay the launch by some billions years . Haters gonna hate anyway, and they wouldn't buy the game anyway, but SC is quite a complex and vast game, and its typical buyers will be surely happy with its excellent graphics, but they'll buy it mainly for other reasons, the challenge, the immersion (and here graphics surely help), the complexity, the variety of challenges and careers in the game universe, and surely the wide range of ships available and the collection factor, but about this, the ones alredy available should be enough for game launch, and postponing the introduction of new ones until after launch could be beneficial for more than one reason: surely the main one is being able to stop delaying launch, but also, successive extras added would help keeping the game hyped after launch, and a gradual release of them could also help avoiding the "Morrowind effect", overwhelming the gamers with too much stuff immediately available and making them feel lost or unable to choose a main thread amongst all the ones available.
About those video you posted after answering to me, I can just say wow, the game already looked very good last time I checked, but now it really looks excellent.

Just looking at the different control panels from some of the ships has me like:

But yeah I would hope they don't completely overflow the users with too much choice, sometimes when I'm presented with too much I end up choosing one or two options and end up forgetting the rest, really I'd love to try them all but the time to try them all can be an issue for some with time constraints or general interest.

This is also what I wish Ark devs would do since they are just adding in more and more content without giving much thought to optimization crunches, I know they are likely to focus on that enar launch but they don't have much time left till launch this summer.

Yeah the explosion physics vid really caught my eye when I was trying to check out some ship models a few months back and a friend showed me the ship damage physics vid some time back. They really look like something special for a game of that scope, especially for you and other players being able to not only share a ship during travel/hyperspace, but you can all move around it independently while doing whatever you want inside it, hardly any other multiplayer open world game does that since most of them have you sat down in a static postion where the only thing you can do is sit inside a vehicle and getting in or out of it.

The thing is we never saw payment proof let alone words from them to make a case that they forecefully and deliberately made it so the game would look worse on all the other plats and it only being MS who would ever do such a thing.

For an open world space sim of that scope and with a seperate SP experience that will allow for the same, yes, yes I can because no other game is doing what they do on their level, not for an MP and SP experience being of the exact same caliber, not by a very long shot.

We have more proof than with the witcher, the previous dev claimed they aimed for parity, wich led to belive MS was behind that, while the wicher devs claimed teh oposite, that why they would do everithing they can to optimize for pc since its where the core base is.

Now I cant remember if this started cuz of the witcher 3, or im confusing 2 diferent conversations... o well.

Parity was still a result if you had to scale back in the end regardless of the excuse. I don't think with CDPR's excuse means they think their core base is where they think it is, I mean there is being honest to your base and then there is lip service, tell them what they want to hear.