That's about as one-sided as it gets. The game doesn't look like that at all. You ARE trying to start something, because if you weren't, you would have posted more screens. But then, you generally stir the pot and then call for leniency, so I'm not surprised at all.
OT: That explains a lot. The game looks fantastic, and coupled with the best AA I've ever seen in a home console game, its visual praise (by both gamers and reviews) is well deserved!
Amen to this, my friend. Sense abound!
Shouldn't even waste your time. The claims of "not a big difference" and "I'm not getting it anyway" are generally from people not known for their positivity regarding Sony.
OT: The res jump alone is pretty big, but the individual details are what will be most fun to look for.
There was no reason for you to be like that about it at all. It could simply be a matter of a misunderstanding (which is what it should be treated as).
Being that you can't make much of a contribution as is, you should at least attempt to be reasonable about it when you do.
OT: Depends on the gamer. For me, it's totally worth re-buying/beating for the story alone, but with the DLC added in, along with better visuals, the rest is icing.
I expect the PS4 version to look a bit better than "slight" over the X1 (the version that has been conspicuously absent from ANY of these show-casings).
Forza 5 is an anomaly, as evidenced by the disparity between how many games run in 1080p on the PS4 (both exclusive and 3rd party) and the ones that do on the X1. Besides, without a shred of proof, your claims of "laziness" sound more like a deterrent and a "please understand" attitude more than anything else.
Make no mistake, I have no doubt that the X1 can output games (in specific situations, given what we know about the hardware) in 1080p, but it'...
You'd think this would be a simple concept to grasp, but for some, it's just an easy feeding frenzy to jump aboard. Don't want to pay $60 for a "port", don't buy the game.
Outside of that clear reasoning, from my vantage point, it is people complaining just to pass air. If these kinds of re-releases are a detriment to the industry, if you don't buy them, they will die off, paving the way for a new way to sell games and keep gamer interest(s). Sim...
@ Opie: I'm not sure how how Sony is taking it easy on "AAA" exclusives. Big budget games are in development, and, if memory serves me correctly, 2007/'08 didn't see an abundance of Triple A titles either.
The first years of a console's life are never what you should go on, or you will look misinformed.
@ georgenoob: Then explain what happened the week inFAMOUS released? I believe the X1 was stopped then.
OT: Probably not, but then, even if it does, April, May and so on will probably continue to sway Sony's way. This isn't the 360 vs PS3, times have changed (again, back in Sony's favor).
I'm not sure we saw the same trailer. That looked fantastic and (arguably) as good as what they showed in 2012.
It says Naughty Dog on it (again). Double dip? Yup!
If the gap can be "easily" closed, why couldn't the 360 continue to outsell the PS3 when the latter was MORE EXPENSIVE? Without EU/JP backing, the Xbox can't stay/pull ahead of PlayStation. Period. It's a far weaker brand, globally.
Make no mistake, I expect some weeks to favor Xbox this gen, but the PS4 is the market leader and will remain there.
I'm actually curious as to how the X1 is better for social and online gaming. With the PS3 vs 360, I understood the argument (Live was more efficient), but on PS4, the online component is just as solid. In fact, I'd argue that some of the social aspects (party chat, for example), are currently better on PS4.
OT: With every gen, there are those who won't face reality. In that same breath, and as with most things, they'll just have to get over it. If you own bot...
@AutoCad: Um, both systems have games. It's irrelevant who has more out, however.
Surely you felt the same way about the PS3 then, right? RIGHT?
OT: Things will surely improve, but I think this particular spec is one that will always be a thorn (much like the RSX/Cell of the PS3 last gen). Difference this time is the weaker console is ALSO the one harder to develop for.
A story can be both good and basic (if this even makes sense) all in the same. Fortunately for Uncharted, with Amy (and the others on board), the stories are both memorable and well told.
If it was the PC in 2012 and the PS4 at E3 2013, then that isn't a downgrade (how could it be with no PS4 kit in 2012?). It would suggest that Ubi showed two different versions and, may have, claimed the next gen versions would look like the PC build of 2012.
I'm not saying there WASN'T a downgrade somewhere, I have no idea, but what you posted needed some clarification.
Completely disagree. If one machine is capable of offering a better experience visually and technically, then that machine's strengths should be exploited. Did you feel the same about the Xbox vs PS2? GameCube vs PS2? Genesis vs SNES? It's a nonsense viewpoint. Never before did this "parity" idea exist (at least not pre-gen 7). Stronger machines generally had better multiplatform games and I see no reason why that should change now.
In regards to the PS3 vs ...
So, based on this thinking, there must be, at least, 93 missing features from the PS4 that the PS3 offered. Out of curiosity, would you name them?