then you aren't looking that hard. The difference iin the small details is huge, right down to the skin, rocks, and sharpness of the backgrounds.
The days of huge leaps in graphical fidelity are over, now it's about performance, fast loading, and small details. People expecting the IQ jump of PS2 to PS3 are being unreasonable. I'm far more enthused about Quality of Life improvements than I am about graphics. I have a PC with 4090 and laptop with a 4080, obviously the idea that " only next Gen can do this" is ridiculous, but you're using low res screenshots to make an argument that there are no improvements. Look at both of these scenes on a 4k screen from the original source (the games), instead of randomly grabbed screenshots, and the visual difference would be much bigger.
Just how much more blur is used in these FFXV shots should tell you everything you need to know. XVI isn't using extreme blur to smooth out transitions from one texture to the next. and like I said, look at the texture of the beast clive is fighting, which is just a regular monster, and then look at the textures on the last shot. Even in screen grabs, the texture improvements are massive.
I'm completely convinced a lot of people don't know what they are looking for when comparing graphical fidelity. Also, I think too many people don't see the optometrist enough (because that shit is expensive, and the decline of sight happens so slowly people don't notice, not because I think people are idiots or anything).