Except for the physics. It's not used that much in current games, is it? Care to guess why?
And sure, graphics aren't that amazing...yet. It's still early days. Most of that should have been realtime, rather than CG like past generations. PC will always have early hardware compared to consoles...it just may not be able to properly use it. And this time, really, what the consoles have isn't out yet. 128-bit CPUs? Where? Jaguar is 128-bit.
I guess we will have to wait and see. Normally first generation games don't look as good as future generations games. That's a given. However first generation games of a NEW console have historically blown away the last generation console games. Nothing I saw in that demo wowed me. Sony and MS both said they were not going to have as massive a jump this time in graphics as they did last time. They didn't think the market needed it.
Now I took that as strategic positioning at first but, then I was reading how some developers were parroting those positions and were saying expect texture bump and true 1080p but not much else as the market doesn't need it. Now you can take this a few ways.....
1. Its still strategic positioning and the PS4 demo we saw last night it part of it. EVEN if that's a PR strategy that could be suicidal. Showing lack luster games out of the gate isn't the smoothest of moves.
2. Developers are being paid to take part in the strategic positioning (very possible) but guys like Carmack and "B" haven't historically done that unless they have a game in the debut pool which at this point there is no sign of. Could they have been paid to down play the consoles? Or course. But, again that seems like a PR nightmare for MS and Sony.
3. MS and Sony both know top shelf hardware will in fact cost a LOT of money to mfg a console in a CRAPPY economy. They see people buying CoD over and over again with lack luster graphics and know that the market doesn't really need a HUGE jump in graphics. Just a small bump. They see that this time they can turn a profit per console a lot more early in the cycle than last time. SO why not make a mediocre console, turn profit early and keep the masses going with an affordable console?
4. MS and Sony have seen game development cost skyrocket this past decade and using x86 hardware was super smart IMO. However will that cost saving measure be enough to allow game developers less time coding and more time being creative....OR will publishers push for shorter deadlines to a better bottom line? I think we know who signs the checks.
I don't see any other way of looking at this scenario. Everything IMO points to another 10 years of lack luster gaming and honestly I think we are heading to another 1984 crash. Do you feel there is an option 5?