lol what is a “seamless underwater location”? I wasn’t aware HFW invented underwater gaming. And multiple people already discussed with you portal jumping or transitioning worlds that have existed in games for generations. We didn’t see any HFW gameplay but the gameplay we did see, Spider-Man, GT7, and Ratchet, didn’t look different than what you can already play from a mechanics standpoint. Just looks visually better for obvious reasons. Same with the Sackboy game and the AstroBoy demo game. Nothing wrong with that, of course. These are launch window or early games. But you’ve spent months arguing about how launch games should blow gamers away with new experiences, so I can understand why you’re reaching. But nah. 

Also who has been claiming anything about settings you can toggle to disable advanced physics or AI or weather, lol.  I don’t think you understand how graphics options work. 

Sure we've seen underwater gameplay in open world games before, but not with this kinda detail man.

That is what Sony's been hyping. Rendering massive amounts of geometry and assets and creating richer worlds. Call me nuts but to me that sounds helluva lot more exciting than Phil saying "the benefits will be felt most clearly in the mitigation of long load times and low or inconsistent frame rates that he believes hurt player immersion."

I see 4K/60fps is too demanding for many next gen games unless the genre or game type allows for it.

What I don’t understand is how 4K/30fps isn’t doable though for next gen all of a sudden. If Red Dead Redemption 2 is 4K/30 FPS and Series X is twice the power then surely 4K/30 is doable with the other bells and whistles like ray tracing. PS5 is similar in power so I really don’t see the obstacle here. Im more confused that you are ok with 4K TVs not having their potential used when they have been very affordable the last few years. And this isn’t about you per se but I’m very surprised Sony has received no blowback from targeting 1440p as the holy grail. 

“Also, I'm pretty sure most people will hardly be able to tell the difference between 1440p and 4k”

You just sounded like a defensive Xbox One fan in 2013 when their games were 720p to Ps4s 1080p. I really hope the irony isn’t lost on you. I have a 4k TV and I’d like to use it. That’s why I’m looking forward to MS delivering on games and benchmarks in July. 

I agree that 4k/30fps should be doable and I'm sure many games on ps5 will target it. It's just that some of their studios known for pushing visuals will probably go for the best balance and opt for 1440p. Sony isn't really talking about 1440p as the holy grail, they're just not saying much about framerates and resolution at all and let their games do the talking. 

MS is the one that's constantly mentioning their 4k/60fps or even 120fps. 

lol what is a “seamless underwater location”? I wasn’t aware HFW invented underwater gaming. And multiple people already discussed with you portal jumping or transitioning worlds that have existed in games for generations. We didn’t see any HFW gameplay but the gameplay we did see, Spider-Man, GT7, and Ratchet, didn’t look different than what you can already play from a mechanics standpoint. Just looks visually better for obvious reasons. Same with the Sackboy game and the AstroBoy demo game. Nothing wrong with that, of course. These are launch window or early games. But you’ve spent months arguing about how launch games should blow gamers away with new experiences, so I can understand why you’re reaching. But nah. 

Also who has been claiming anything about settings you can toggle to disable advanced physics or AI or weather, lol.  I don’t think you understand how graphics options work. 

True, alot of the games MS showed had the "Representative of expected Series X Gameplay" disclaimer on them, but assuming that those games do end up looking that good on actual Series X hardware, which I expect them to, they look properly next-gen to me, not half-step cross-gen or current gen running at a higher resolution and framerate.

I also had Bright Memory infinite on my cross-gen looking list, it looks good, especially for a 1 developer game, but it's not up to par with my expectations for a generational leap.

I'm kind of surprised you think Scorn looks cross-gen though. To my eyes at least, it seems like a pretty considerable leap in graphical fidelity compared to current gen horror games, even the AAA ones like Res 2 Remake, even though Ebb Software is less than 20 people I think. It definitely looked better graphically than the other horror game on Xbox's May show, Bloober Team's The Medium. It even looks a bit better than Res 8 imo, which according to leakers was originally cross-gen but had PS4/XB1 support dropped earlier this year. 

Considering that Res 8 probably has like 200 more devs working on it than Scorn, that's a pretty impressive feat of programming imo. 

Err... The developer seems to be promising something different:

"How much has the game changed in the time that it has been in development?
A basic structure is still there, but if you were to play builds of the game now compared to the builds from few years ago it sometimes feels like a completely different game."

And just as a reminder, the text in video trailer literally says:
"In-engine footage representative of expected Xbox Series X visual quality"

I don't know about you guys, but to me that sounds like: "this is the level of visual quality we are aiming for."

https://gamingbolt.com/scorn-interview-storytelling-inspirations-structure-and-more

Sure we've seen underwater gameplay in open world games before, but not with this kinda detail man.

That is what Sony's been hyping. Rendering massive amounts of geometry and assets and creating richer worlds. Call me nuts but to me that sounds helluva lot more exciting than Phil saying "the benefits will be felt most clearly in the mitigation of long load times and low or inconsistent frame rates that he believes hurt player immersion."