You know I keep hearing people in forums say this all the time but I do not here any developers saying this.  People in forums always debate about more this or that but people that actually have to code for it make different assertions.  I think no one truly knows if it will be 24% more or less because no one has trully invested into getting the most out of each system.

No you are still very off.

Last gen

Battery at 12V verse steam at 260 degrees

Electric motor vs piston

Recharge vs refill

Which car is better? Pretty hard to tell until both are on the track racing. Could have identical performance, or could be laps apart.

This gen

12 cylinder vs 18 cylinder

13100 horsepower vs 18400 horsepower

5 Liter gas tank vs 6 Liter gas tank

Unlike previous gens these things are directly comparable! Just looking at my hypothetical cars with hilarious specs the difference is much more apparent than you act.

If they had actually done a good job with the comparison, the difference between PS4 and Xbox One would have been greater but that's cool if you want to call me out.

It may be dangerous for MS to list features... when they talked about their revolutionary game sharing, angry gamers turned out in droves with torches and pitchforks to drive them back to the old model. People like the idea of new features, but on average lack the attention span to actually read a full description of anything. It's probably safer to mention all the cool features, but not actually go into detail about them, before angry consumers want them removed too.

Television(HDMI in). Cloud computing for in game (untested and PS4 can do it Cerny said).

we should only talk in metaphors from this point on.

The next gen games (2-3 years from now) will be very demanding. Heck Bioshock Infinite for PC for example recommends a system with 4 GB Memory and a HD Radeon 6950 already and in 3 years you will see games that will require much more than that. (I know PC specs vs console specs bla)

The technical gaps between the systems get bigger with every gen (Xbox One has 16 times the amount of ram of the Xbox 360 and the CPU is abot 6 times better, the GPU is 6 times better etc.) but the jump in visuals won't be as impressive as these number suggest, because we are getting to a point where a visual upgrade is very hard to achieve. And 24% difference are not enough to make games look significantly better.

Metaphor (inspired by your avatar):

It is like comparing Bill Gates wealth (PS4) to Warren Buffets wealth (Xbox One). Sure Bill Gates has 20 billion USD more than Buffet, but there is not much on earth that Warren Buffet could not afford, but Bill Gates can.

 It's really not infinite when you think about it. Even if it were, only 1% of internet users across the world actually have the connection to use it. At best, you'll get slightly better textures in MP maps, but it won't increase the system's power tenfold like people seem to believe. 

People seem to forget that PS4 has the same cloud capabilities through Gakai, a better cloud at that. Sony just doesn't throw this info around all the time, because 1) it's a really stupid concept overall, and 2) they're actually confident about their console's hardware. It will be a nice little feature down the road, but not a necessitiy at launch like it seems to be with XBone.

I don't count Kinect anymore than PS Move, though I much prefer movie because it's not mandatory to own, and it doesn't watch me in my personal. 

I know my Playstation fanboyism seems somewhat prevalent in these comments, but I honestly would like to see the potential of XBone that sets it higher than PS4. I'm a gamer who buys gaming consoles, and the XBone seems to have completely abandoned that concept, while still offering little to nothing above the competition. What am I missing?

Diminishing returns are a very real thing.

An xbox one game having 60k polygons per character and the PS4 version having 90K polygons per character would not be noticeable under standard playing conditions, that's true. However, that isn't how this extra power should be used in the real world. Devs could simply have the PS4 version run at a locked 30 in full HD while the Xbox One version stutters at 900p.

Also at the start of every gen people bring up diminishing returns when they are underwhelmed with next gen capabilities. For decades they have been proven wrong. I understand you are mostly focused on the diminishing returns of the power gap but it also should be proven wrong again this gen.

I don't think so.  The GC was much closers to the Xbox in performance - like 70 -85%. For reference the difference between the PS2 and the Xbox was that the Xbox was more than 100% more powerful.

So about 1/3 the difference between the PS2 and the GC.

That is a really good analogy.  Both are so much more than the current systems, and arguing over the minute differences is more ideas than practical.  Noteworthy - I was even saying this when I was hoping the Xbox  would have 2.5 Tflops GPU that some developers asked for vs the 1.8 Tflops the Ps4 has - even that difference wouldn't be that noticeable.

Look at how good and how many graphic awards Halo 4 one on the 'old less powerful Xbox 360.'  DirectX 11 is a mature platform  that Microsoft is really good at tweaking it for performance. 

It's more about which platform offers you want you want.

PS  My die hard Sony friend sheepishly admitted he was using his Xbox 360 more and more for app and multimedia than his PS3 or PC.  (He games on all of them.)