The problem was that people were comparing the best-looking late-gen PS3 games to early-gen PS4 games, so it's no wonder the difference wasn't huge. If you did the same with PS2 and PS3, the difference wouldn't suddenly look that huge anymore. Obviously the difference between PS2 and PS3 is bigger than that between PS3 and PS4, but it does put things into perspective a bit.

Anyway, I haven't seen the issue too much lately, as common as it used to be.

I Agree the graphical leap between PS3 and PS4 is quite nice.

That was the consensus up until Uncharted 4 released. Seeing UC3 and 4 side by side is a legit generation leap. Got to be 10 times the information on screen at least.

The problem is when people compare the tail end of the old generation (when they've mastered the hardware) to the start of the new (that they're only just getting to know). Cross gen and launch games won't make the most of the new hardware. Comparing early to early or late to late software provides a better measure, and in that regard it certainly does feel like a generational leap.

There is a leap, but it's smaller than it used to be. MUCH smaller..

The graphics leap was good but not that big like from the ps1 to ps2 and from ps2 to ps3

Those "many" were clueless to begin with - IIRC, Sony themselves said when PS4 was revelad (in post conference show with Geoff Keighley) that it's around 10x PS3.

I'm perfectly happy with ps3 graphics, yes ps4 looks better especially when you are trying to do realistic graphics but I think the ps3 gets the job done quite well. The PS4 always had a big jump in graphic power it was the cpu power that was quite a low jump from ps3 infact with all the cell processor's working efficiently it actually has more computing power than ps4 if you don't factor in the gpu.

I would of thought the main difference is memory though, 16x more memory is a huge generational gap.

I personally haven't been as impressed as the transition from ps1 to ps2 or ps2 to ps3 definitely seems like diminishing returns to me. Still enjoying the fantastic range of ps4 software of course.

I think the popularity of the Switch shows that convenience and portability might actually be more important than performance to many people. Personally I love capable hardware but you see many popular Switch games and their hardware requirements are quite low nothing the ps3 or 360 couldn't do most of the time. I enjoy quite a few android games on my phone, tablet, set top box etc. I guess my point is people aren't quite as impressed with hardware capabilities as they used to be and keeping hardware affordable is more important nowadays. The PS1 and Sega Saturn were about £400 back in 1995 approx which is about £750 in todays money, almost double. I think £750 would produce a pretty amazing console today but no one seems to want to go there probably commercial suicide.

Just making the point that its clear we aren't willing to invest so much money into a console nowadays and therefore shouldn't expect such huge generational differences.

what would be ingesting is seeing those game PS4 vs PS4 Pro side by side.

Still haven't decided if i want to upgrade to a Pro lol

Yes, it was.