the second pic looks close enough, remember the game had the best image quality/AA technique last gen, and kratos models was easily the best as well.

this was a pic posted at neogaf a long time ago.

Not even close:

It's clearly much muddier.

And no, MLAA was not the best image quality solution last gen.

DF's shots show what the game actually looks like when you play it, airbrushed bullshots and cutscene caps don't.

So does code and scaling them like that is way too simplistic, especially between GC and PS2 ... 

Most of the ports from PS2 to GC ran slower ... 

Sure the GC may have had prettier textures but ports to it often ended up worse in terms of performance or graphical affects like reduced/missing post-processing and lower resolution meshes/alpha effects or god forbid absent mechanical features such as inverse kinematics like we see in SotC ... (TEV is also fixed function but it has an awful lot of states) 

GC is waaay overrated in terms of hardware capabilities ... (I would dare argue that each have their own advantages and disadvantages that even them out despite the fact that most ports ran worse on GC)

It differs. There are some games that are slightly above the PS3 but there are still too many that are indistinguishable from 7th gen graphics.

Switch's handheld mode is marginally better than the Wii U, and the Wii U had its trade-offs with PS360 depending on what was being done.

Nothing on the PS360 comes close to the performance of a docked switch. Anybody saying otherwise is deluded. The few native 1080p games on PS360 were mostly sports titles, or limited scripted experiences. Many games ran at sub-720p, with low (sub-30) unlocked frame-rates and tons of screen-tearing. This is without discussing the differences in assets and feature-sets (overall) between then and now.

I'd say things roughly go as so XBX > PS4 PRO >> PS4 > XB1 >>>> Switch Docked >> Switch Handheld >> Wii U >= PS360.

Note that the arrows don't represent some linear relationship. It's more a subjective consideration of how many relative bottlenecks there are which would have to be overcome when running modern games at certain performance and image quality standards.

Anybody still have a Wii u?

They look a bit better, but for someone who could not care less about portabity still unimpressive. The PS3 exclusives did impress me, simply because they where the best looking consolegames at the time. So if anyone thinks it is great that the Switch games look a bit better than a crack in time more power to them. But they don't even come close to Horizon or Uncharted 4 lost legacy.

These are all from DF, those GOW3 look way too muddy.

http://images.eurogamer.net/2013/articles//a/1/5/6/4/1/6/4/Final_033_Copy.png/EG11/quality/90/format/jpg

Those are from Ascension, not GOW3, and as impressive as they are for 2006 hardware, they still have lower quality shaders, textures, and effects than Switch is capable of. Ascension  has its fair share of rough edges too:

you can find a bad screen shot of any game, and of course SWITCH is more capable then ps3, thats obvious, but imo nobody has tapped into the hardware yet. also these are agameplay pics of GOW3, posting another one