After thinking about it 8 inches is the right size. Because when you are playing close to your space you don't want a tv in front of you.

Tbh Switch being PS4 level will be more than fine for me.

We are reaching a point in gaming where spec upgrades are leading to less and less major improvement to the graphics, and I think it is the most noticable this generation between PS4 to PS5. I honestly feel like I haven't seen any major upgrade in graphics with the PS5 compared to PS4, their the type of differences where you need to zoom in on textures to notice them. PS4 games still hold up well til this day. The advancements from the 5th to 6th gen felt huge, same goes for the advancement from 6th to 7th gen, even 7th to 8th gen felt like a big advancement, this gen didn't nearly feel as significant when it came to graphics advancing.

Even if Nintendo continues the Switch hybrid concept for the the next few generations, with less major advancements in graphics with each generation the hybrid Switch consoles will feel like they eventually catch up close enough to the graphics seen on home consoles even if the specs aren't neccessarily the same.
This is what Satoru Iwata envisioned back over 20 years ago, he realized that graphics advancements will eventually slow down and that they would need to offer something new with their consoles to make them standout outside of specs, and realized that the race to create the most powerful console making the most detailed games imaginable wasn't sustainable for success in the long run, eventually advancements will slow down while development costs will skyrocket with diminishing returns in graphics, which is why Nintendo's been on the same path of not caring about specs for 20+ years and focus on making innovative consoles that truly change the way games are played. This is why the Switch concept will continue to age like wine more and more if Nintendo sticks to it.

I don't agree with the diminishing returns argument. There is massive improvement still to be had, the problem is it requires complementary hardware and is expensive. The one aspect the ps5 crushes the ps4 with is lighting, but without OLED the difference is somewhat negated. 120 hz is superb, but requires a TV that supports 120 hz. The list goes on and on.

The days of noticing the benefits of a new system regardless of other hardware are gone. But with the right hardware the differences are stark.

I just upgraded to a rtx 4090, is slaughters the ps5.  But again requires a good TV/Monitor and of course isn't cheap.  

So diminishing returns exists, depending on how it is define, but graphics can get way better than seen on consoles.  

I think for the vast majority of gamers, it's diminishing returns.

If you own a 4090, by definition you're an enthusiast and way more knowledgeable, and more importantly interested in visual fidelity than the average game-playing Joe. I watch a lot of Digital Foundry videos as I find them oddly relaxing (I don't own a PC), but they rely heavily on side-by-side analysis in addition to varying degrees of zoom and slow-mo.

I question myself whether I'd be able to tell which version of HZD : FW I was playing, without the benefit of side-by-side... Maybe I'd notice the lower res of the base PS4, though not 100% convinced.

Likewise if you were to show an average gamer Spiderman 1/MM/2 I reckon most wouldn't perceive any real difference in fidelity. Most gamers won't have a clue about raytracing or how it looks different from other reflection techniques.

Whereas I do think if I showed my partner a PS1 & PS2, or N64 & GC game she'd quite easily be able to identify a clear difference.

We're in enthusiast territory here. For everyone else it's getting to the point where it'll take multiple generations for them to notice the jump.

We went from one generation where experiences were mostly 60fps (PS2) to one where they were barely hitting 30fps (PS3/360), and the general gaming public didn't really bat an eyelid around the new 30fps base because they were wowed by overall graphical presentation. There was no digital foundry to unite people around the numbered comparisons. Things like 120hz are simply not going to be a meaningful thing for most gamers.

The difference you reference are really tech enthusiast ones, the average person doesn't even know whether their TV has the aweful motion+ (force high frame rate modes on). What makes a difference to people are worlds, storys, characters, gameplay that wouldn't have been possible on prior hardware and we're really getting a point where that is rarely applying to new games. 

This kind of comparison would never of been able to be made comparing one of the best looking games over a year into a new generation, to another version of the game on prior hardware. 

4k for sure makes a difference but the essence of the visuals and what its able to achieve are the same. 

Cross gen comparisons is probably not a great example, given old hardware is holding back games. A better comparisons is Rachet remake vs Rift. There is a very significant difference. The difference is there, but just is expensive.  Alan Wake and Cyberpunk are additional good examples.  This gen was held back with cross gen ports which is giving (imho) a false view of diminishing returns.  

If people care is an entirely different discussion.  I would guess most don't because ps4 games still look great, unlike ps1 games.  And performance isn't cheap.  

I think what most people are interested in is: "Will this console be able to play the games I like at decent settings?" That's basically the question things revolve around. And I think for the vast majority of people playing a game at 1080p @ 30fps is perfectly fine. We already saw that many people are willing to sacrifice graphical fidelity with a lot of major Switch ports.

Horizon Forbidden West is one of the best looking PS5 games still to this date though and Ratchet (2016) looks great but lots of PS4 titles look much better. The point is that this conversation wouldn't of been possible to have in prior gens, 3+ years into a new generation comparing it to a game from the last. That is diminishing returns in effect, gaps are getting smaller and less significant from an average user perspective.

I disagree.  True ps5 exclusives look way better than Forbidden West.  Rift in Time is far more impressive as is spider man 2. 

The gap isn't getting smaller.  It is becoming less of a necessity and more of a luxury.  Playing a game at ultra settings, full RT locked at 120 fps.....  the gap is alive and well.  It just isn't necessary like previous generations.  

To me the only difference between this gen and previous is how well modern games age.  Ps1 games, after playing ps2, were unbearable in many regards.  Meanwhile ps4 games still hold up well.  Meaning modern weak hardware still produce good looking titles as seen in pikmin 4 and Tears.  

We are in agreement.