Launch PS4 game diff to PS3.

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/xbox-vs-xbox-360-do-you-really-need-hd/1100-6140621/
Launch 360 diff to XBox. Same story every gen.

Go back and read my earlier comment. While the above image is true enough, it's only a part of the picture, since we're not talking about static, unlit, untextured models with no environment interaction.

We've not even started to hit any roof for deminishing returns.

Its not the same story every gen. Those were some half assed first year 360 games, so i understand where that guy was coming from. On the ps3 you would be hard pressed to find the same issue.

It seems its difficult to understand, but you are projecting yourself, and thats where your analysis goes wrong. You are a gamer ofc you can spot the differences. But, ask yourself this: Would your mum be able to spot the difference?

Your own consumer group, just like mine, is the early adopters. This issue will rear its ugly head when the time comes to appeal to the average consumer. Wether you recognise  it or not, it will be a difficult sell and its in no way on the same league of an article from last gen that evyone ignored. THe problem is quite real, and no ammount of ridiculous articles can disprove what is clear for everyone with eyes.

Its dificult to justify the price of the upgrade with just that much visible improvement.

I read your post and I agree that "the numerous fields where we are nowhere near hitting a wall, such as animation, lighting, physics, object count, object interaction, material simulation and so forth.". But that's what dimishing return is about: require a lot more power for improvements less and less noticeable.

For example tomb raider's hair modeling is nice, but is it worth the calculation and development cost ? How much to make it really realistic ? Does it really makes a difference with what we could already enjoy on 2007 Crysis ?

Well, art assets are clearly the most expensive part of developement, so implementing a physics system is clearly worth it, same with lighting. Animation, unless we see some amazing middleware out of nowhere, will be costly though. Worth it? Probably for AAA.

Personally, I'm glad that we seem to be departing the world we seemed to be heading into a few years back, when everything looked to be about AAA or F2P. What we now call "indies" is merely a return to the days of PS1/2 or even earlier PC developement.

Wrong person.

But yes, I also agree that it's dumb to keep on comparing 480p screenshots when framerate and resolution is one of the biggest differences this gen.

My father in law mistook GT4 for real 2 generations ago, ofcourse the tvs were much smaller back then. Same thing now, you might not see that much of a difference on a 40" tv in the living room on a cross gen title, I see a big difference on my setup. Yes YouTube videos and demo pods are currently pretty much maxed out for showing improvements clearly.

And since when does the average consumer buy based on graphics? They want the new thing, with the latest games.

Let's continue this discussion in 3 to 5 years while 4K tvs are making their way into the average consumer's homes and new graphics engines have been developed.

Yes, and don't forget improvements in animation, physics and simply the amount of moving and destructible objects on screen. Once the ball and chain of the cross gen ports has been cut devs can continue work on those areas.

Erm... you are thinking these average consumers just want to throw their money away. You are incorrect. They do care about their money (well, the ones that arent absolutely dumb anyways). If they already have an XB360 and they look at X1 and dont see a difference they will think: Eh? I already have that, i dont see a difference. /pass

But alright. Let us see how things happen once again. One year isnt enough for you to get the head from under the sand it seems. ^^