“while console comparisons are as sure to happen as those bile-filled tweets, they’re likely going to showcase two versions of games that are barely distinguishable from one another.”

“The PS4 may have a technical lead out the gate, but it's too early to hand it the decisive victory. The PS3 at launch faced a similar deficit against the Xbox 360, but the differences eroded with time.”

“Though each little caricature might reflect some truths, they’re essentially nonsense. But these notions carry weight out on forums and social media.”

“The reports certainly sound like a big deal, with Sony's system pushing 50 to 100+ percent more native pixels than Microsoft's on identical launch games. Try as I might, though, I can't get too worked up over what seems like an incredibly minor difference in practical graphical output.”

I can't even begin to fathom if there were benchmarks for a card that cost $100 more and performed – in some cases – at half the performance level of the competition, what the articles would look like. Heck, there was definitely a lot of hoopla over the 7990 vs the Titan , and most enthusiasts made it known that the price to performance difference was not negligible. I also know that you would never find Extreme Tech saying...I didn't know a difference of 518,400 pixels was considered “barely distinguishable” these days.Worse yet is that Toms Hardware , known for their meticulous take on hardware performance and benchmark tests, even went as far as to write that...I didn't knowandhad eroded away the lines of visual parity to the point where they looked on par to each other. Obviously the quality in the visuals are the same... no?Even worse than hardware enthusiast sites making light of the “resolution wars” are the hard hitters like Edge and respected tech site Ars Technica belittling the uproar over the pixel conundrum. Edge's Neil Long nonchalantly throws the discursive ratio debates away as forum fodder, stating...The Ars article commits the greater sin of creating a diminutive box for this issue, almost as if it's a non-issue, saying...That above quote is almost as bad as saying that the R9 290X isn't a better deal than the GTX 780 , which is almost tech-blasphemy considering that the 4k benchmarks are closer together between those two cards than the resolution difference is between the Xbox One and PS4.The sad reality is that it looks like – from the gaming media's end – that there's a push to keep people from simply recognizing and acknowledging that the Xbox One is weaker than the PS4. If there's nothing wrong with admitting this indisputable truth, then why not just say it?It's not like gaming's past has been marred by power discrepancies before. The PS2 was weaker than both the Gamecube and Xbox and it still won its generation. The Wii was far weaker than the Xbox 360 and PS3 and it still won its generation. The PSX was weaker than the N64 but it still won. Why then is it that gaming media feels obliged to pander to the pre-order ritual of keeping things as unfairly balanced as possible?Spending $500 is no small investment for the average household; with the media downplaying the $100 difference and lower resolution right out of the gate it instantly does a massive disservice for discerning consumers. Hopefully we'll get more honest coverage leading up to the release of both consoles.