Who else is very dissapointed in next gen console power?

not really both MS & Sony already came out & say jump from 360/PS3 -> Xbone/PS4 won't be a huge one. Tho we will see better stuff later on with Xbone/PS4 like 360/PS3 later in life. :P

I think we got way more than what people were expecting, back in 2011/2012. Back then people thought the consoles would have no more than 3GB, and have graphics worse than the GTX 580. But in terms of efficiency the X1 and PS4 are both very capable machines. The PS4 for me hits the sweet spot for price and functionality.

I am. It's a shame that 1080p 60fps isn't a standard on either console. I was ready to shell out $700-$800, so when the ps4 announced their price I was happy that day because of the money I would save.

I've been very impressed by the next gen games, just need to get rid of this cross gen garbage and we will be good.

1080p and 60fps is going to yield substandard visuals on these consoles. Developers are saying this, but no one is interested in hearing it.

I want my games to look good, I figure the developers are more experienced with that than I am.

Going by numbers alone will not always show you the full picture.

I really did expect the hardware to be better than it was out of the gate, but then again, the last time we had consoles come out the financial situation of the world was in a much better place. I think Sony and Microsoft reached the best balance they could with their visions of the platforms.

Unfortunately, the loss-leading strategy is dead. The result: Less technologically impressive consoles.

When the Xbox 360 debuted in 2005, it had an estimated BOM of $525 and sold for $399, a loss of $126 (http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/multimedia/display/20051123214405.html). When the PS3 debuted in 2006, it had an estimated BOM of $840 and sold for $599, a loss of $241 (http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2006/11/8239/). Of course, the PS3 included a state of the art Blu-ray player and at the time was the cheapest Blu-ray player on the market.

The Playstation 4 has an estimated BOM of $381, and sells for $399 (https://technology.ihs.com/467389/microsoft-xbox-one-hardware-cost-comes-in-below-retail-price-ihs-teardown-reveals). The Xbox One has an estimated BOM of $471, and sells for $499.

The market has changed. Emboldened by the profitability of the Wii, and confident that technological and graphical advancements have become less important to the average consumer, Microsoft and Sony no longer felt a need to race to the top. They only tried to fit the best technology they could directly under the target MSRP. Since both systems require a subscription to play multiplayer games online, they should become profitable much faster than last generation's.

PC gamers like to gloat about how their gaming rigs destroyed consoles last gen... but this time the gap will be truly huge like never before as the generation progresses.

The generational leap is fine, it's the pricing that was a put-off. X1 way overpriced, pay to play online. PS4 priced good, but once again pay for mp. WiiU just overpriced.

I don't understand how anyone could expect a huge jump at a console gaming price. Yes technology has come a long way since PS3 and 360. But if you want to keep up with PC specs of today it will cost you a nice chunk of change. And I'm not picking on PC gaming since I am a PC gamer myself. But if you don't think the spec jump is huge, just look up the last gen specs. You will feel better.

this is just one reason among many not to buy a console in the launch window

This. People talk about the xbone's price but good lord the wii u is even more overpriced. All because it comes with a craplet. smh. $299 for that? Nintendo dropped the ball even more than Microsoft. The xbone does what the wii u should have done. You can market to casuals sure great but gamers still want to be able to play multiplats and AAA games. At least microsoft's casualbox offers that.

Both X1 and PS4 didn't keep up with PC's GeForce 8800 GTX TDP standard i.e. about 185 watts for just the GPU. 185 watts AMD GCN would be about Radeon HD 7870 XT level GPU (24 CU, 925 Mhz base, 975 MHz Turbo at 2.99 TFLOPS peak).

Unlikely since NVIDIA K1 just rivals last gen consoles. AMD Bemma SoC (~2.5 watts) rivals NVIDIA K1..

AMD Bemma (second gen Jaguar+GCN mobile SoC)~= AMD Kabini (first gen Jaguar+GCN mobile SoC).

Tablet ARM based SoCs still has to beat Intel HD 4000 (ULV, laptop and desktop grades) and Intel Haswell IGPs(ULV, laptop and desktop) before it rivals Radeon HD 8570M (6 CU based laptop GCN with 64bit DDR3 bus).

Whats to be disappointing about? Remember how bad graphics was when the 360 launched? Remember when the PS3 launched, and Resistance Fall Of Man had every reviewer saying it looks and plays like a PS2 game? Remember when Cliff Bleszenski said the first Gears Of War was pushing the 360 to its limits? Remember when Ken Levine said the first Bioshock was maxing the 360? Just look how far the 360/PS3 has come. We have Crysis 3 running on 8 year old machines.

My point is, its the first year for the PS4/Xbox One, graphics will get better. Some of the better looking games still haven't even been released yet. The Witcher 3 is said to be maxing the PS4/Xbox One, but we know this isn't true from the 360/PS3 era. Destiny looks fantastic. Its pushing with the dynamic lighting, and the fact that the game looks as good as a PC title, and has a huge open world, that is an MMO like game is impressive. The Order 1886 is stunning, and has clothing simulation that puts Batman's cape to shame. Tom Clancy's The Division's tech demo they showed at the VGA's has some of the best lighting and overall graphics I've seen. Youtuber's like JackFrags, and LevelCapGaming have both said that Battlefield 4 on the PS4 is only a hair behind looking like the PC version. Unreal Engine 4 hasn't been released yet, nor has CryEngine 4, which with the rep CryEngine has, will arguably be the best looking game engine out there. I can just keep going on.

I am not.

I'm not impressed by the graphical 'leap' at all, that is why I don't plan on buying a PS4 for at least two years (I would have gotten one when my old PS3. broke if it was backwards compatible) as games are releasing on both PS3 and PS4 and I'm not a graphics whore. I feel that 8th gen consoles are a little bit of a cash in, and the fact that both systems have pay-to-play online supports that assumption.

The only game that truly looks next gen is MGSV, but the price paid for that will probably be a lack of content and cash grabbing.

Only had my PS4 less than a week and can honestly say that yes I'm slightly disappointed with the difference between gen 7 and 8. Don't get me wrong I was never expecting the massive leap we had from gen 6-7 but aside from sharper/higher resolution I'd bet that the PS3 is capable of running most next gen games adequately.

Obviously I know that developers take time to get used to the new hardware and that in 12 months or so some absolutely spectacular games will be released but honestly, right now I'd say the gap between gen 7 and 8 is more a crack.

Despite this I'm still 100% happy to have a PS4 and just know it's gonna be a fantastic generation for both heavy hitters.

No. Considering how long was the 7th gen, they could be a bit more powerful, but the jump is still as big as in previous generations (10/12 times better).

Most games run at 1080p30 or 1080p60, the performance i expected to be standard in 8th gen.

Consoles are falling behind further and further. Now that it's clear that the PS4 and Xbox One are nothing to brag about the ongoing hate for the Wii U's specs are like a soft weiner slapping whipped cream.

Its funny how some people equate 1080p 60fps to good visuals

I'm really happy with it. KZSF looks great, runs at native 1080 over 30fps in sp. The Other looks much better than SF and has 4x AA, the first game to have real gameplay near CGI level. Future PS4 games will look even better.

And the Quality in gameplay is actually going backwards now.

I'm disappointed by the hardware ... well ... in Xbox One's case shocked by the hardware. X1 is only half the power it should have been. And now they'll go spend hundreds of millions or even billions on exclusivity deals and/or advertising, money that could have gone towards appropriate hardware.

Lucky for me, the first Next Gen game I played was Ryse. I was blown away for 8.5 hours until its completion. My expectations were met and thensome.

Sharper than that and you're kidding yourself, or you've got your forehead glued to the television screen ... probably both. A lot of people in studies fail to tell the difference between 720p and 1080p but PC guys are always swearing they can spot the difference between 2,235,788 and 2,235,787 pixels from 40 yards away.

This thread has herm bait written all over it... lol

Honestly... what is there to be disappointed in? We all knew that at some point the HUGE jumps were going to come to an end... next gen will be eve smaller. However, most impressive changes are not graphically but with memory. Allowing greater draw distances and less pop in/out...things like that.

Upscaled 720p is hard to tell the difference unless images are side by side.

I agree that resolution ain't everything. Imo going beyond 1080p/60 is a waste of resources. But it would be nice if these consoles could do 1080p/60 consistently ... especially when you're talking about ports of last-gen games. If they were the 2.5 tflops Epic Games recommended they probably could.

these 2 games look real sweet.

That is not a problem for console gamers, they are used to low end staff.

This.

I kind of agree with you, but with the new consoles we are seeing more AI, better character models and effects that just couldn't be done last gen. I'm happy with what we got, but the jump isn't as big as it was from gen 6 to 7.

The jump is bigger to me. I was very disappointed playing perfect dark zero last gen. The AI in Forza 5 made me look at racers in a new light. Its a needed breath of fresh air.

Yup, give 'em a year and they will be outputting 10 terflops. Give em another year and you will get 20 teraflops. I bet in 5 years the 900pStation and 720pBox will be outputting 100 teraflops That's how consololites think consoles work, right?

@bfmv2007: LOL...

JackFrags said the PS4 version looks better than Xbox One version and then said that they both are a hair away from PC version.....

BUT YOU OBVIOUSLY KNOW THAT BF4 IS ONE OF EA’S BIGGEST MISTAKES!!!

Bf4 is one of the worse optimised games right behind COD:Ghosts.

No freaking wonder the PS4/XBO version looks so close to PC version.

Some flaws in your argument, The 360 and PS3 had to wait for the software to catch up and be developed to make use of the hardware, Back in 2005/2006 games on average only one core was being used and on the 360 no shader intensive games were being made and the then the PS3's Cell didnt start augmenting the RSX in general until around 2008. Many have claimed that they were maxing the systems and every time a new game out by the same developer continue to use that card. But a prime example of them hitting a plateau in graphics is Gears of War where only small improvements were made as each sequel released.

But here is the thing many ignore these new consoles are essentially Pc's using the same type of hardware and processing architecture, have large OS and features eating into resources. Most if not all the hard work has been done understanding what are the limits of the hardware. Of course they will learn new ways of saving resources and applying them else where but you should not do a comparison of early 360/PS3 games to today's matured games to gauge what the X1 or PS4 can do now and later. These new consoles are based off of Pc hardware and they know what they can do and there is no major learning curve this time around.

All of Destiny's material is not from the 360 or PS3 natively so you cant go by what their promoting as what it will look like since chances are that its all from their dev kits aka pc's. Also with CDproject when they say it will max out hardware it will, Look at how they were able to get the Witcher 2 to run and look on the 360 which was impressive feat even though there was some major downgrades in quality compared to Pc to make it work. Also The Division's tech demo is just that a tech demo its not a real way to gauge what a system can do in the real world of gaming. You can look at tech demos made from 2002 Nvidia's "Dawn" some aspects still look better then many 2013 based games. Both the X1 and PS4 with BF4 are comparable to Pc because they are all using the same standard in hardware however some aspects of BF4 had to be toned down on console versions and with the weak cpu introduces framerate issues in MP on both consoles.

Needless to say it is disappointing to see this gen of consoles from the get go hardware wise almost two years behind Pc. If you havent seen or played Pc games in the last three years you wont be disappointed with differences from last gen to this gen.

You would have to get a $900+ PC or if yours supports it, a $700 upgrading to get the same results easily with smooth running so the power seems fine to me. You would also need a $1500-2000 laptop as well.

really a $900+ PC with a HD7850(or equivalent) ? with that money you can get a PC(that it is almost 3 times more powerful) with I5-3570K, r9 290, etc

Yeah, they haven't impressed me at all really compared to graphics on the PC. I've already got a Wii U for exclusives though and at the very least will add one of the others to my collection at the end of the year. I don't like missing out on great exclusives and the consoles certainly get some (even if nothing has got my attention yet on PS4/XB1).

I agree, there is a lot more coming into the picture here than just pretty graphics. The Forza A.I. is stellar now and like Heil said with other touches like particles and effects, getting a nice boost.

And to think that was Day 1. This gen is going to be sensational for so many different reasons, on BOTH consoles.

If I didn't have a PC that mopped the floor with them and was stuck with just console (shudders just thinking of the depression), then yes I would be disappointed, but seeing console is nothing more than my secondary system for exclusives only, I have no issue with them being underpowered.

subHD and 30 fps average

yeah pretty shitty.

very fair perspective ATB.

i might try to change my perspective a bit, maybe i'm too harsh.

Nope. Playing AC4 on XOne at the minute and think it looks pretty awesome.

The jump to 1080 requires quite a bit more power so I always had my expectations tempered. In fact I'm pretty glad that WiiU and Xbone are so weak, it enables the PS4 to run multiplats in 1080P.

I'm disappointed with how obsessed people have become of this and how the internet allows this obsession to become a big deal

I have nothing against consoles, If I buy one I'd want it to last... I just don't see it happening. Devs are already hitting walls, and don't tell me there's "hidden power to unlock", these consoles have the same development architecture as a PC.