NES - SNES = 8-bit to 16 bit

SNES - PS1/N64 = 2D (except the polygon ones like Star Fox) to 3D

PS1/N64/Saturn - Dreamcast/PS2/GC/Xbox = this one yes

PS2/GC/Xbox - 360/PS3 = SD to HD

This next gen will stay in HD, no big changes,. That doesn't mean there won't be a "massive" leap, but most of the other gens benefit from changes that were really big at the time, this time everything will remain in HD. 

You can argue about 4K TVs but those won't become mainstream in a long time.

nintendo's current leadership has made statements time and time and time again that raw power and graphics are not important to them. if you are expecting the wii U to be a significant leap over sony and MS then you fundamentally misunderstand nintendo,

What?

It's his job to speak positively about the product, I agree, but did you read his words? The man's words made it seem like he was bouncing around the room with excitement. That's what caught me off guard.

There's a difference between graphics not being their focal point, and using similar graphical powers to the *last generation* of consoles. I suppose this trend really started when Iwata took the reigns, because every time I hear this argument I always think back to the older generations and dismiss your argument, but if we split Nintendo off into old vs new Nintendo, then the new Nintendo has thrived on giving power that is more similar to the previous generation. You're right.

The only possible reasons the other two next gen consoles wouldn't be a massive jump over what we have now, is because of development costs or following the Wii's example, but I have no doubt the technology is there. People have said "there isn't any room for improvement over what we have now" 7 generations in a row... and been proven wrong every single time. I think we're going to see the same deal with the eighth generation, at least from the PS4 if nothing else.

I fully expect the PS4 to support 4K, though not as a standard. I view it more like how the PS2 and Xbox were capable of HD resolutions, but hardly ever utilized it. I really don't know what direction MS will go, but I have a feeling they're intrigued by Nintendo's direction and will follow them in the next generation.

All the PS4 will ever need is blast processing.

I can explain with images, at launch developers on a limited budget were able to port games to the XBox 360 that looked like this:

After developers got more comfortable with the hardware, updated their tools, and started making games from scratch for the platform games started to look like this:

Now, even if the Wii U is significantly more powerful than the XBox 360 or PS3, many developers would be worried that unexpected performance issues of unfamiliar hardware would result in needing to reduce graphical quality to get a decent frame-rate; especially in the wake of the PS3 where you regularly see the frame-rate drop on games like Mass Effect 3 which have (relatively) steady frame-rates on the XBox 360.

The fact that graphical quality is maintained on early generation games that are quick ports of highly optimized HD console games implies that the Wii U is a reasonably powerful system that is easy to work with.

That's why I said it doesn't necessarily mean next gen won't have a massive leap, it's just that other gens benefit from things that were truly ground breaking at the time. Those things were extremely noticeable, but like I said, everything will remain in HD so most of those changes will be better textures, AA, etc. And those changes will be noticeable (at least extremely noticeable) by a relative small group of people (the hardcore gamers), not the normal consumer which is the people that makes Nintendo, Sony and MS more money.

As for the PS4 being the one that gives the best graphical leap, I can see that but only because that was Sony's philosophy with the PS3, but their are other things that makes me believe it will be different next gen (not going in detail since it has been discussed numerous times on the forums), but we just have to wait and see.

Edit: just look at this 2 images

(Not putting the second image since it's too big)

http://s.pro-gmedia.com/videogamer/media/images/pub/large/agni.jpg

The second one being what next gen games will probably look like, the difference it's not really all that big (at least comparing it to previous gens), you can probably see those changes in more detail but keep in mind we are hardcore gamers, the normal consumer won't notice those extremely big changes.

Software development costs, hardware manufacturing costs, and heat issues of cutting edge hardware may limit Sony and Microsoft from pushing graphics like they did in the previous generation ...

While I haven't seen any formal studies of it, it seems like the rate of increase of processing power per watt of GPUs has been decreasing for some time; and graphics card manufacturers have (mostly) kept up their previous pace of advancement by allowing their cards to use more energy/produce more heat than earlier cards. Although there are laptop GPUs that can provide 6 to 8 times the performance of the HD consoles with reasonable energy consumption, pushing much beyond that is the domain of desktop GPUs that run very hot (and would likely cause significant problems for a console manufacturer).

I really don't know what to think about that article, mostly because it contradicts itself.

The key words are exactly and radically.

That "radically" seems to imply that it is a diminished version, but the differences aren't noticeable.

But that "exactly" says that it is the same game.

The pessimistic in me, reinforced by the past news about AC 3 on WiiU, thinks that it will be the same game content wise (except for the 4 exclusive missions on PS3), but graphically it won't be the same as the others. It won't look worse, but it will lack something.