So you're saying that ND are untalented morons that they couldn't bring Uncharted to stable 60 fps?
Yeah, the hardware is just fine, it's just all of the developers that suck.

On a more serious note. So you think it's good for a console manufacturer to demand talent and only the best developers to develop games for their console? Then why not make it half as powerful and let the developers figure it out for themselves? You could produce it so much cheaper.
No. The key is to make developers happy and to get as many of them to develop for your platform as possible. Part of that is making the platform as powerful as possible and easy to develop for. Otherwise you will end up like the Wii U. Every developer on this planet wishes for more hardware power. Part because they do not need to optimize so much and part because they can come as close to their artistic vision as possible. There are lots of ways to make your game prettier but require lots more hardware power.

You have no idea how much ND had to compromise their vision just to let their game run on a potato. no 60 fps is only the beginning. Who knows how good UC4 could've looked. They were most definitely some of the developers that approached Sony to release a revision with more power.

PS4 and XB1 hardware wise is stone age compared to 2016 technology. That's a fact.
When you have a Dev with an unlimited budget and all the time in the world to create a game. Of cousre its going to look great. Look at Crysis 3 on PC, a last gen game that looks better then most current FPS games. Thats the difference between having limits.

Like Uncharted 1... Uncharted 4 set the "baseline" for fidelity on the PS4.
Of course successive games will look better, but it's not going to be a generational difference.

From here on out, the developer will remove various effects to use different ones or bolster some others to improve the overall image displayed.

For example... When the Playstation 3 and Xbox 360 launched, all the games were using Dynamic lighting, shadowing, nothing was really static. Towards the end of the generation though... All the details ended up being baked in the texturing or pre-calculated.

Take the jump between Halo 3 and Reach for example, they ditched the triple buffering, HDR, Water Tessellation and other effects, threw in impostering and texture streaming and used the freed up resources to improve texture quality, particles etc'. End result is an overall better image.
Halo 4 took it a step farther and baked in the lighting and shadowing and used simpler geometry, freeing up even more resources.
The developers weren't pushing the system "harder" per say, just allocating their minimal amount of resources better.

Powerful developer does not equal - 1st party huge funds and time to optimise the game for the hardware.

In the world we live in most 3rd party devs work across multiple systems with a strict budget that is far less than Naughty Dog would have. They need more powerful hardware so that they do not need to optimise games to look as good.

Nd already said this is not full ps4 power 

It's not only the resolution and framerate that makes graphics. It's also Naughty Dogs insane dedication to details that you are hard pressed to find from any other developer or on any other platform on that scale.

Thanks for posting that vid. Informative.

I am still on the fence though. I can appreciate shiny stuff but i am afraid it's just another Tps to me.

The level of graphics a PS4 can do is enough for me.

For the Developers while it cannot time-travel or make a 100% Virtual Reality , like in the movies, so is not powerful enought.

I actually agree with you here. Comparing Uncharted 4 to any of the previous 3 mainline Uncharted games shows a massive leap of graphics, and that is comparing Uncharted 4 to the some of the best looking games(Uncharted 2 and 3) last generation. Even compared to The Last of Us(PS3) which pushed to PS3 to it's limit is leaps and bounds better.