UE4 is certainly nice. The differences are undeniable. When I saw that mamga alone, I was sold. Watch dogs is nice but not a  humongous leap. The square enix demo failed to impress me at all though. It looked like more of the same old thing with a few touch up spread around.

The big thing I'm looking towards is "tesselletion". This gen should make it a standard feature in games. Its obvious that no Wii U games used it at e3, but we know it is there. How much of a visual impact do you believe it will make?

Graphics leaps aren't really necessary for the next get. What I want out of next gen (from Sony of course because PS4 is the most likely console I'll buy) is mostly PC-like loading times. I've played Dragon Age 2 on PC and PS3 and really there's nothing between the two versions IMO other than super short load times on PC and super long load times on PS3. Fewer screen freezes would be good while the game is doing some background loading (though I experience that on PC too).

Eliminate frame rate drops. I don't care about 60fps, but make sure the games have a solid framerate at whatever fps is being used.

Not all that fussed about screen tearing, I barely notice it, except in slower paced games.

I would like to see little things like, solid objects not going through each other, improved biomechanics. I think graphics in terms of textures, draw distance, fine details is good enough for the player to remain immersed. But these other things, they way they are at the moment can tend to draw you out of the immersion.

Why do you keep bringing up this PS2 comparison? The PS2 was garbage. It couldn't even run Gamecube games without massive downgrades. Quit creating arguments as if I had said them. The PS2 was hardly better than the Dreamcast.

The GIF is certainly nice looking but I'm but why exactly would that be impossible on the current gen consoles? His face is detailed, but there isn't much more going on. It would not be hard to pool the resources of the 360 or PS3 GPU to produce something like that in a real game. There certainly wouldn't be much else going on but it could be achieved without much difficulty.

I'd say about 200k polygons and some parallax mapping would do the trick, exept for the hair. The hair would pose some problems.

woah! easy there....i think you missed the point of my post :( Perhaps i didnt word it well enough. I absolutely undoubtedly acknowledge the step up shown in the UE4 demo...hell even watch dogs which doesnt look insanely next gen had me freaking out with over exposure to pure awesomeness.

My point is that current console games like U2, U3 and other cinematic games that have amazing visuals, vistas, facial detail, animations, etc. already look pretty darn good for a game. Now other technologies that are significantly better technically, dont appear to be as advanced to the average guy. Lets get this straight by virtue of us being on this site...i wont consider anyone here the average guy. But i can get where Spurgeonryan is coming from with his point of view and others who share his opinion.

Tessellation is a good example of this....as a PC owner (somewhat of an enthusiast), I have been exposed to tessellation already...and to be honest it doesnt create much of a difference while playing a game. Yet...the processing needed to do proper tesselation is quite high. This is a good example of a technology that is much more advanced than what we currently have yet to the average person wont really pick up a major difference...this is all imo ofcourse. But i do mess around quite a lot with benchmarking tools and playing games on ultimate settings, playingwith all the different graphic setting trying to see the difference etc. You know the usual nerdy stuff :) 

Easy there? Why do you say that?

I honesty think that tesselation has been widely underused because of the 360 and PS3. Most big name PC games are just ports from those 2 consoles and the exlsuves are usally indie games that are at the graphical level of last gen games.

The few things that do use it just tack it on with no major optimizations. I'm still waiting for games that look like the Froblins demo. That demo just shows how sad PC gaming has become, because it was a DirectX 10.1  demo and it uses tessellation better than any Directx11 game to date.

unreal 4 is capable of millions of dynamic particles, real time dynamic lighting, destructible environments,real time reflections,perfect animations and not sure why you compared linear last of us to it either

Lol. Okay APM, there's no convinsing you. I have now learned that. 

But, Do you seriously think I'm that stupid to think that a Pikmin looks As detailed as Nathan Drake? No! Of course not. Seriously, we think differently, that's obvious. No need to act like something I said means nothing, though. It's an opinion. 

Well because you had made an incorrect assumption about my opinion on the next gen stuff shown at E3...i think they all pretty amazing. But i can also understand how someone wont be impressed by it.

Ive yet to be wowed by tesselation tbh.

The Wii U Pikmin was obviously just ported over from the Wii without much added. It hardly looks better than the GC pikmin which I demonstrated in another thread.

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4623173

The difference between them look like the difference between Mario Sunshine

and Mario Galaxy.

Consoles have caught up to screen tech. TV's and monitors have pitifully low pixel density. Most high end phones ship with 720p screens now, and thats 5" max. The Galaxy Note 2 is rumored to have a 5.5" 1080p screen. 4K TV is not far off, and next gen consoles better have some horsepower. Current high-end desktop GPU's even struggle. VRAM bandwidth is a little too low, and we need more texture units. But the Wii U will fall vastly behind if 4K comes out on schedule.