I have all 3 and all 3 around about this guy with a heart of gold that looking for some ancient lost treasure and along the way he meets some rivals that just so happen to have a lot more resources at their disposal and coincidentally they're on the trail of the exact same artifact, only the thing ends up being some ancient dooms day device they're trying to weaponse. Along the way there is a stock pile of dead bodies, considerable destruction of buildings and other property and many impossible escapes from situations that would have killed a human being. Oh an by the way, no one is even called on the countless murders, even being in self defense.

Uncharted 4 seems like it's gonna be just another one, so what exactly do you mean by "stray too far from it's original concept"?

@RyviusARC: You hear yourself talking? I think you just like to hear yourself talking, never mind what you're saying, right?

I started my post by stating a console is a full ready to use machine for 399USD.

A GPU to run the demos OP showed would take most of that budget, never mind everything else hardware and software wise, excluding the monitor, to have it working, because that's what a console is, an equivalent to a full PC tower (inclusind OS) plus the keyboard and mouse for 399.

Then I processed to make a point about how on-paper-specs vs real-screen-performance are two very different things, I mentioned PS3 vs equivalent PC hardware but I could have picked any other console.

I went ahead and referred to past gamespot reviews as an example of gameplay thumping undeniable better graphics when it comes to a video game worth.

And I've finalized my line of thought by mentioning if you're buying a high end computer for games alone, you'll never get your moneys worth out of it.

I'm not quite sure what's tripping you in all that or what exactly are you failing to comprehend, but that's a problem I can't help you with and you'll have to find someone who can somewhere else.

By the way, since I did mention PS3 vs PC-Equivalent specs, which GTA game could you play on a PC with 512MB of RAM? San Andreas, you wanna get some side by sides on that one?

Yeah.

Collision map is normally a different thing, for example, on trees you'll only have collision only on the tree trunk, now the top half with all the leafs because that would just be nuts.

Like it was said the idea here is to optimize, just think GTAIV PC, most people needed to turn off the Euphoria physics engine because it was just too heavy and it would cause severe frame rate drop.
Maybe this will shed some light: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGh-Vh_NYO0

That was actually pretty fun to read OP, I remember spending entire afternoons playing Sonic the Hedgehog 2 on my Mega Drive with my brother, that was the last Sonic game I bought, looking at it now kinda wish it died. It's a perfect example of "know when to quit".

It's a game by game matter, I could live with some at 30FPS, others I wouldn't get near them at that. I've played several games around that that I've truly enjoyed because other aspects of it were worth it.

Now if you put something like a Hokey game in front of me with at 200 FPS or Half-Life 3 at 25 FPS guess which one I'll be playing?

Consoles aren't outdated, they are a complete machine with interface peripherals throw in for 399USD.

I'm not sure why people get tripped on that, still today if you wanna buy a full new PC tower with an OS plus keyboard and mouse you aren't really gonna be able to get much for 399USD.

Show me a Pentium 4, 512MB of RAM and a geforce 7600 (PS3 to PC specs-ish) running something like The Last of Us for example.

Year after year you people don't seem to get you need a considerably more powerful PC (and a lot more money thrown into it) to do what a console does with a fraction, as demonstrated with the example above, you simply couldn't run a game like The Last of Us on a PC with PS3 paper specs.

Cue the forum warriors posting a 99USD PC that can "triple outperform a PS4".

As for the meat of the bone, gameplay, let me make a little point.

Last gen we got gamespot giving +0.5 to every multiplatform on Xbox 360 because the brightness and color contrast was better, good job on loosing a great chunk of your user base with crap like that by the way, anyway, what concerns me to my point is Final Fantasy XIII.

That game was purposely downgraded for the Xbox 360, it was said to be so by Square Enix themselves, and anyone with at least 1 eyeball could see.

After all the track record of pretty much every game getting the +0.5 over brightness and contrast, you'd think a game that was, without a shadow of a doubt or any possible counter argument, downgraded, would get at least -0.5 or even -1. But no. They both got the same because 8.5 "it looks worst, but it doesn't affect gameplay".

So by the logic established by gamespot, GTAV on PC is no better than on consoles, specially because you get analog buttons to drive on consoles. Try pulling that off with a keyboard.

It's like buying a sports car then complaining the speed limit is 60 and your neighbor Volkswagen is always on your tail, that's on you I'm afraid.

Buying a high end PC just for games, and don't lie, that's what most of you do with them you DON'T need them for your work, is just idiotic, you'll never get your moneys worth out of it.

My new computer could ultra GTAV, am I gonna bother with it? No, I played it originally on the PS3, it's the same game with some spit and polish it's not gonna make the experience feel fresh and new. As for mods (because I know someone is gonna crack open this can) I'm not a fan of going around downloading and installing a million things then trying to get it all to work without conflicts and then just play 15 minutes because that's how long they last before they get old, last game I've ever modded was New Vegas and that's how long I played it, 15 minutes. Real weapons, better animations, a pile of companions, yay, fun...

Just to give you an idea the only game I have installed on my PC right now is Guild Wars 2, because there's nothing else catching my eye even the slightest, if I bought this thing just to play games I'd be really annoyed right now.

The pictures and videos OP posted are very pretty, we're at the point where not only you can fool your granny, you can also fool your parents and little children as well convincing them it's actual real world footage.

But lets not forget these are tiny little constructs with a draw distance of a few feet and a super slow camera movement shall we?

Toss in some AI, moving enemies and vehicles, particle effects, some destructibility and some real draw distance and the gap between the quality of the game you would get from high end PC hardware and these demos would be far larger than many would have you believe.

Easily Halo and Call of Duty, every came in those series that came out in the last 10 years.

And you have the silver laced pockets PR guys to thank for those games reviews.

Just the fact that it was filmed off a PC screen to make it look like it's a stage screen kills it right off the bat.

They came out with a pre-rendered cinematic and people are already writing facts on stone. I must be on System Wars. Oh wait, yes I am.

A remake of FFVII was something fans have been asking ever since the PS2, is it over-hyped? Over-rated? Over-credited? That's all a matter of opinion, but I think there's no denying it's likely the most loved FF game of them all, and at the end of the day that's all that matters.
As for the quality of the actual game that will (hopefully) come out, my money is on "not as good as the original", they'd have to pull out something truly amazing and frankly looking at their latest games, I don't think they can.
If I could give them one advise it would be QUIT THE GOD DAMN PRE RENDERED CUT SCENES, it's like 40% of their games budget go on these cut scenes and that could be MUCH better spent on lets say, the actual game you play? You know being a game and all that.

And when you thought gamespot sank as much as it possible could after the rework and the massive user drop, here's a new low coming from a moderator, mind you still not as bad as posting a picture of his PS4 telling a user to "shut the **** up". http://static4.gamespot.com/uploads/original/709/7099775/2439098-7997537749-FNMuu.jpg

Care to elaborate? Because if you pick up a PC with the same on-paper specs as the PS3 (that will be a P4, gforce 7600 and 512MB RAM) and get the best possible looking game running on that and then compare it with the Last of Us you'll see a HUGE difference.
And you can go back on every generation of consoles and do the same.

But every time a new generation turns up the bones heads will come with these idiotic comments, just because you can put together a PC with the same on-paper performance as a PS4 it DOESN'T mean it will be neck and neck with it, a PC by its open nature needs to be massivly overpowered to compete with a console stardardized hardware, always has, always will be.

You see I didn't even had to go technical on you, so with all that history to look at what exactly makes you think this won't be possible on a PS4?