@Bold Is that supposed to be a joke ? The vast majority of the AAA PS4 games are physically based and they tackle the aliasing problem quite nicely ... 

No one is saying the game is unplayable, in fact I myself can handle PS2 quality graphics but there's absolutely no dodging the painful alpha effects or the shimmering on thin meshes like wires ...

No is not a joke, until you try to find the ugly corners (and there are a lot of ugly corners) the game looks really impressive on a first look, and a lot of people is like "WUUT?" when I say is a WiiU game. Is like the last console they expect it to be.

My assumption, they must have not seen a lot of games or PS4 games specifically ... 

Oh no my friend. This is Spain. PS4 is everywhere here. The game just has a wow effect that those ugly corners don't kill. Unless you really want it of course.

Comparing  The phantom pain to twilight princess is ludicrous. The "areas" in phantom pain are three entire open world countries. The areas in twilight princess are dozens of small, segmented pieces of field and corridors. You can run from one side of the country to the other without a loading screen in the phantom pain, and that's a massive area to traverse, hence why it's considered an open world.

Size doesn't matter when it comes to categorization.

It's a fair comparison because it gets the point across whether you don't want to hear it or not, TP was a large game for it's day but nowhere near the largest much like MGSV, both these games aren't seamless open worlds, the areas in MGSV are a selection of large areas that are mission specific, you can't run from Afghanistan to Mother Base to Africa in MGSV and each area is far smaller then the areas in the games I mentioned earliar by a massive margin that is why MGS is borderline in this category.

Size matters because we're talking about open seamless worlds here which despite how simple it is you're either struggling to grasp or refusing to for the sake of your argument, the hardware is rendering the whole map in the other games while in MGSV it's rendering an a small select area that is not connected to other areas, want to go to Africa in MGSV you have to exit your current mission and select one base in the area then wait for it to load up. If MGS was rendering all maps at the same time believe me it would only run at 60fps on PC and would make many compromises.

By categorizating MGSV isn't in the same league as the other games as it's not seamless, the TP comparison gets the point across because it would be like standing in Hyrule field and say "Look TP runs fine with large areas" before comparing performing with other large games of that gen like San Andreas.

For a game world this massive, seamless, and breathtaking

and a solid framerate, I reckon they made the right tradeoffs.

The technology effectively portrays the developer's vision of a vast alien world, and does so without the performance problems common to open world games even on more powerful hardware.

Even Digital Foundry came away impressed with it overall.

The game is certainly big alright and it does OK for enemy draw distance ... 

And they certainly made the right tradeoffs when it came to performance and scale but there are things that they could've improved on ... 

They should cut alpha effects altogether if it meant less aliasing/artifacts and the WII U with it's low bandwidth is not suited for rendering transparency and the same applies to the X1 to a much lesser extent. Omit depth of field since it's rendered at a low resolution when it only serves to sap the already little amount of resources that the WII U has and accept the fact that it will never match the high quality implementations of the HD twins/PC. Leave out motion blur since it is most likely a screen space implementation which is limited in quality. Cube-maps are absolutely useless when it comes simulating the accuracy of reflections so there can be savings had from there. Throw out ambient occlusion since it's likely limited to screen space ...

All of this may not be enough to push it 900p but any appreciable increase in image quality is welcomed and even better if Monolith Soft played around with the GPUs customer resolve capability to give better anti-aliasing from temporal sampling ...

Honestly, in most games where Digital Foundry has pointed out low resolution alpha, motion blur, or depth of field, I haven't even noticed while actually playing. Similarly, I think the water looks fine with cubemaps.

As to the quality of it's AA solution, I can't speak to that until I get it on my own TV, but going by Digital Foundry's screens, it's far from the worst I've seen. I half expected them to jettison AA altogether, like Mario Kart 8 and a number of PS3/360 heavy hitters.

Crepuscular rays are a nice touch.

While i agree that MGS5 and XCX don't make for a perfect comparison, the bolded isn't entirely relevant. How difficult an open world game is to render has little to do with its actual size, but with the size of its various LOD fields and the quality of what's in them. In something like XCX, and even MGS5, everything past a certain distance is being rendered with very low-quality assets (and if it's far enough away often not rendered at all). If an open world game is properly optimized, the majority of its render budget should be focused on the player's local environment.

MGS5 isn't 60fps because it has a segmented world, in-fact i expect that was more of a design decision than a technical one. It's 60fps because of its general focus, and the quality of what's being rendered locally around the player. MGS5 is a pretty nice looking game, but ultimately on a technical level it's mostly just a PS3/360 game that's been polished up (far be it well polished).