No.

The original Assassins Creed was really great, although repetitive, but it had a cool original-ish story and gameplay. Then they just CoD the series which is the same to say took it in the back and shot it. Ezio is just a forgettable character, as is all the AC's since the original.

@lostrib said:

As for games themselves...

Ground Zeros on a 399 console:

Crysis 3 on a 2~4 times more expensive machine:

As you can see it's a "WORLD" of difference... Right?
Value for your money you can't beat a console, no matter what the forum warriors here say.

Rock* used to do with their GTA games, and there's a BIG difference.

Hands off means you have an in house trained guy with a controller in his hand, he knows exactly what he's doing in order to show the game without making it look bad, he's careful with the camera and where he goes and where he doesn't.
So the journalists there get to see it being played in real time, which is nice, but it's not much different than a video.

On GTAIV they actually for the first time gave hands-on demos to the journalists during a developing time phase they'd never allowed with previews GTA's.

@miiiiv:

I know a 7800 gtx can pull GTAIV along, but only with a much better CPU than what the PS3 had, and a lot more RAM, we're talking at least 4 times more.

I always love coming to SW presenting my ideas because they diverge from the norm here and that makes some people spill their coffee and jump from their chairs since apparently they're under the impression the hardware they choose to buy is the holly grail of computer science and everyone that doesn't do what they do or think the way they think is automatically wrong by default.

Then you get the usual zero counter argument, nothing but slanderous comments and at the end those people have a feeling of accomplishment as if they won the argument when they actually lack the skill set to even begin one.

Now I'll tell you something even more funny, I game on PC every day, my PS4 I haven't touched in about almost 3 months and probably won't touch it until MGS5. Why? Mostly because it's a sleek transition from work to gaming on the same machine when I'm on my PC, but also because on PC I play MMOs that are just much more time consuming and drag you in everyday with a promise of great reward.

Now go ahead and label me what you (or anyone else) wants.

A PC will always need higher specs to produce something similar, and much higher specs to produce something better, luckily they're ALWAYS coming out with new stuff and when most people drop 200~300 USD on a GPU alone, seems like good value compared to an entire gaming console.

Another thing people seem to forget, the hardware you buy a few years down the line after a console release, just wasn't available before, yet they are surprised when they can put together a much more powerful PC for the same out of money a console cost on release.

Today 600USD gets you a machine that was unthinkable in 2007, but when I look at some of the users here that have been users here for almost a decade I think to myself how is it possible they haven't learned anything yet? The amount of people on SW that loves to pitch a PC with Quad-Titan X vs the original Game Boy and run some comparison bench marks just boggles the mind.

I think I'm gonna start pitching 1990's GPUs vs an 8th Gen consoles to see what kinda response I get, #DoubleStandards?

Honestly I'd much rather hear it's coming out for PS4, PC and Xbox One, meaning there was some real money behind it, how are you gonna pitch a game just for 1 console?
It's most likely just a time exclusive, sure, but still, you get your budged according to projected sales, and those depend on units sold. If you present it for 3 platforms...

Which still today (never mind on release date) you'll have trouble putting together with a 399 budget, even on "shady order off the internet websites". And remember, as always I'm talking about a full tower (yes, the tower itself must be included in the price) with an OS and peripherals, so it's a direct and FAIR comparison to what you get for 399 on a console purchase, NOT just a CPU and GPU like the system warriors love to toss around as if all the other parts just fall out from the heavens.
And even on a 7800 gtx you can't run GTAIV/V surely not with 512MB of RAM, so my point stands. On a direct an fair comparison, the victor is not the PC.

Cue the steam sales that compare old PC games vs fresh console releases argument about saving money at the end.

This one always makes me laugh, you have people throwing in hundreds if not thousands of dollars at PCs and then they pull out this argument.
The 9,99USD games you can buy on steam are just old games, not the new releases.
Batman Arkham Knight, on amazon.com right now:
PS4: 59.99USD
X1: 59.99USD
PC: 56.18USD

And there are as many sales for console games as there are for PC ones, you can pick up physical copies (new, unused) of a console game with a few years new for as little as any steam sale. By the way, the ones you get on steam if something comes up and they tell you to delete them, you have to as per ToS, you know, that wall of text you just click accept?

At the end of the day if you happen to have a high end PC for work, you'd be a fool not to play games in it.
If you just don't care about your money and you have the disposable income to toss it around on one just to play games, knock yourself out.
But saying a gaming PC represents more value than a console is shortsighted to say the least.

The "master race" is nothing but an infantile pile, they aren't real gamers and by trying to bring down every other platform at every chance they can they only show how insecure they are. I mean like @kinectthedotssaid, if this was some pre-rendered PS4 footage of some tiny little spaces with ultra slow camera movement the hermits would be trashing it like rabies carrying dogs. But it's PC footage so "lets all concentrate on the fact that consoles are bringing my gaming down and forget that if today there are huge companies making dedicated PC graphic cards we can thank the console market for showing the money-men that people were willing to shell out good money for video games dedicated 3D hardware".

That's not the proper way to wrap the controller cords.

As for the rest of your post, let me just hover over most of it without touching to get to FFVII.

I loved the original when it came out, still have the discs and the PS to run it, I've actually played some 5 years ago, only there is a problem with disc 2, on a certain part I need to get disc 3 in to load the city and then change back to disc 2, don't ask me how it works, it just does. After that I've even bought the digital version for the PSP.

Now my problem is, it's gonna be a REMAKE, and those never live up to the originals. They'd have to pull out all the stops and make something absolutely incredible, but what have we got so far? Pre rendered cutscene, how much time and money did that cost?
If I had my way this game would have NONE of that, and some FF fans might be getting their novelty sword out already to stab me, but my idea was to put all the time and money and resources into the actual game and have all the cutscenes rendered in real time.

Conclusion, and not only regarding your post but also your signature, FFVII remake has been something that was asked decades ago, but it's still a REMAKE, so like me there are gonna be a lot of skeptics, in other words, it alone will not tip the balance of the PlayStation 4 vs Xbox One as much as you might think, even because JRPGs were never a big think on any Xbox so it's not something the people that have one will be super interested in.

These are my thought exactly, I had a lot more fun with the 5th.
6th wasn't as good but the 7th generation is gotta be one of the worst ever.

I think the 5th was just at that sweet spot where there was enough money being invested to make great things, but at the same time not too much that it would have the investors (that don't know anything about nothing) calling the shots and making dead line demands and asking for freaking spread sheets, like it's the only language they freaking understand and they can only comprehend something if it's on a God damn freaking spread sheet.

But the 4th is probably my all time favorite, I also love some of the games I had on the Commodore 64, those were true art made by half a dozen guys on top of their knees.

By the way, a little on-off topic, the Original PlayStation had indie games, two or three would come every month with the disc of the Official PlayStation magazine, that wasn't a thing anymore on the PS2 or 3, but indie gaming on consoles definitely came before the 360 on the 7th gen.

@RyviusARC: I thought my point was within the comprehension grasp of the average person, but something is missing here...

Are you gonna present a counter argument or just pretend you're on top of an imaginary high horse and call yourself a winner?
Because I'd frankly love to see you produce some screen shots of a PC game rendered on PS3-Spec-PC that can top or even come close to some of the screens I can easily put in here.

Because THAT'S a true comparison.

My screen shots prove what Console vs Console-Spec-PC can do, unlike what you do when you post renders made on MUCH more powerful PC specs, I mean it makes for a cheap laugh but it's hardly a comparison, is it? But I guess that's what simple minds like best, fart jokes and cheap laughs.