@nickle the distance between the tv and my bed is about 3ft at most 4ft. i sit quite close lol. if i sit any closer i will go blind lol.

I say this with no offence but maybe you should get your eyes checked then? Or perhaps there is something wrong with the Tv's. Either way the difference in quality is absolutely detectable if you have them side by side.

+27% is a pretty considerable boost, especially with a price-drop on the horizon.

@ nickle none taken. i have checked my eyes and was told i have 20/20 vision and can perfectly see the 3D on 3ds. My older brother who has the other version has teh same size tv and a 100 inch projector. even to him theres no difference. Guess you special eyes if you can detect them lol.

I wish that were the case. Sadly I'm not the only one to notice the differences in quality. http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2014-watch-dogs-face-off Lots of of other articles of people doing comparisons  and all pretty much say the same thing. The difference is there and it is noticeable.

Dat resolution difference.

@nickle you have awesome eyes ! thats the DF article i was talking about lol., According to DF they said :

"Shadows are reworked on console - rougher around the edges on PS4 compared to PC, and with a lower resolution on Xbox One - but the differences are only really noticeable at short range, most especially during cut-scenes. In-game, shadow quality on both versions is clearly different, but neither feels particularly out of place. " that occurring hardly game breaking or advantage since its small.

the other advantage is Ps4 having a slightly stronger HBAO +. I barely notice it.

They also said " Elsewhere, we seem to be looking at parity between Xbox One and PS4 - which is curious bearing in mind the discovery of an internal engine XML document that suggests Xbox One-specific settings for environment, vegetation and geometry quality.

Try as we might, we couldn't find any substantial differences on Xbox One in the areas highlighted. It may simply be the case that bespoke code was required in those areas for the custom Xbox hardware, or perhaps the settings are remnants of code that no longer exists in the final game. Whatever the explanation, we find nothing in any of those areas likely to impact your enjoyment of the game. Certainly in other taxing areas - such as water simulation - we see parity between the two consoles. Only by moving onto PC with its ultra settings do we see any major improvement.
" The key word that is parity .

The frame rate advantage : "the exception being packed scenes with lots of cars and explosions. Xbox One operates on much the same level - the difference being occasionally more noticeable screen-tear that occurs a little more frequently." key word there is little more frequently.

In conclusion they said " However, for the vast majority of the run of play, the two versions play in exactly the same way despite PS4 having the resolution and framerate. The things its better at,, doesn't affect gameplay and for me hardly noticed liek the slightly stronger HBAO +. The one where it counts according to DF is parity.

The key words are "environment, vegetation and geometry quality" which are the only areas the article claims they found pairity between the two games.
Also that's not what they said in conclusion this is what they said in conclusion.

"On the console front, it's all too easy to recommend Watch Dogs on PS4 over its Xbox One equivalent: performance is more consistent and there's obviously the resolution boost to factor in as well. However, for the vast majority of the run of play, the two versions play in exactly the same way, and in motion the worrying notion of a significantly sub-native 792p rendering resolution looks nowhere near as bad as the raw numbers suggest.

The filmic approach to effects work in combination with an aesthetic that eschews jagged edges and intricate texture detail produces a game that presents itself in a mostly similar manner whether you're gaming at 792p, 900p or indeed 1080p. Console-wise, we feel confident in recommending both Xbox One and PS4 versions, but go for the latter if you have your choice of consoles: it's effectively an additional sheen of polish at no extra cost"

So you may want to give the article another read. They made it clear the differences were real and noticible.

@nickle you forgot to add water in there. "Elsewhere, we seem to be looking at parity between Xbox One and PS4 - which is curious bearing in mind the discovery of an internal engine XML document that suggests Xbox One-specific settings for environment, vegetation and geometry quality.

Try as we might, we couldn't find any substantial differences on Xbox One in the areas highlighted. It may simply be the case that bespoke code was required in those areas for the custom Xbox hardware, or perhaps the settings are remnants of code that no longer exists in the final game. Whatever the explanation, we find nothing in any of those areas likely to impact your enjoyment of the game. Certainly in other taxing areas - such as water simulation - we see parity between the two consoles. Only by moving onto PC with its ultra settings do we see any major improvement.
"
The conclusion only specifically said resolution boost and conssitent and if you prefer that then ps4 is the right choice . If thats not a problem then xbox one is also a good choice. The difference illustrated are small and hardly noticeable. i am not goign to go aroudn watch dogs admiring shadows to detect lower resolution and i don't even notice the difference HBAO+ . The never mentioned the difference in texture asset quality or any other visuals stuff apart form what has been mentioned.

Dane! Dane! Dane! I've been following your comments and with each comment I think "WTF are you talking about".

OK we get it, you love your X1. But come on man. You try to list exclusive games as fact but when somebody challenges you, you revert back to opinion by saying things like "But I don't like KZ as much as TF", "But I don't like Indies".

What is it to be? Are you going to state opinions or facts? Stop stating you like every game released on X1 but don't want to recognise PS4 games because "you don't like them"

Talking about facts, Dead Rising 3 isn't a 1st party exclusive, Titanfall isn't a 1st party exclusive, Ryse isn't a 1st party exclusive. They are all made by 3rd party developers. And out of all those MS only own the Ryse IP which btw isn't a AAA game. Maybe a AAA budget but not a AAA game, Metacritic proves that.

Then you go on about E3, like MS is going to have the Mega Awesome E3 and Sony is just going to stand there and do nothing with their chins hitting the floor in awe of MS. Their Not!

And what is it about Indies you do not like? Some of the best games are Indie. Why should you not include all the indies coming to the PS4 just because you don't like them???

Talking about future, MS will have to sell alot more console to aquire and support studios because at this rate they are heading for a smaller console base than last gen which will mean downsizing. MS, despite what a lot of people think, aren't prepared to throw money at something unless they get profit back for the future. Right now they will have to seriously think what their next steps are.

Sony will produce a steady steam of exclusives. KZ and I:SS already out. Driveclub and The Order in the near future and Naughty Dog have Uncharted 4 and a second project to announce. Plus GG are working on an open world game. Santa Monica also have to make their move, maybe GOW4. And lets not forget that Media Molecule are working on something.

So you see this is what people are trying to tell you, the facts. Sony have games OUT NOW, they HAVE the better multiplats, they HAVE a diverse range of indies, F2P, multiplats and Exclusives. EVEN IF you don't like them, that's your OPINION. Sony have a lot of AAA "budget" games coming. 

These isn't to say MS don't have games coming because they do. Quantum Break looks good and even though I'm not keen on GoW or Halo I can recognise those as huge games. Massive infact.