Are you seriously using a smartphones screen size as an example of diminishing returns? Jesus Christ...
I'm bored at work here so allow me to write a bunch of shit
There is most certainly a difference between native 4K and, say, QHD or checkerboard/upscaled resolution. This is proven in every single F2F comparison. To keep screaming "diminishing returns" sounds like an attempt at downplaying the facts. You talk about Xbox console warriors because of a few numbskulls (that are prevalent in both sides, FYI, if you can remove your tinted shades for a minute to realize this) but the fact is that for years and years, 900p vs 1080p was a massive thing on internet forums everywhere and it even seeped into real life.
I can never forget back when I worked retail I had multiple customers who simply assumed PS4 was better than Xbox because Xbox had "Wii-like bad graphics," and it was true to them because their family/friends said it or they read how bad the graphics were on the internet. I remember in particular these parents that were straight flabbergasted when they viewed both our Xbox and PS4 demo kiosks; they had assumed the Xbox wasn't even HD or something. This is how bad the FUD and anti-Xbox propaganda went, and now you have a bigger difference, 4GB extra ram (actuslly 5GB more usable ram) downsampling, supersampling, mandatory 16x AF, and shit, even a faster HDD, and people are croaking about diminishing returns?
The fact is that
no matter what, fanboys from both sides will change their narrative upon the situation (these things happened almost universally):
Last gen Xbox fanboys croaked about Halo sales while PS fanboys bragged that ratings mattered more and Uncharted 2 was higher rated.
Forza 3 took the racing genre by storm, and unexpectedly so, and PS fanboys, feeling threatened, whined that ratings don't matter because GT sales so much more (despite being in the market like a decade without competition, but no, this fact is irrelevant somehow). Forza has continued to be the premier higher rated and more consistent franchise and is consistently declared so by many review outlets and racing outlets, but now ratings don't matter, because Sony as a corporate entity sales more copies to consumers.
Microsoft was committing sin by charging for online, despite having a better online service (now it is debatable but I'm talking 360 days here). For years this was a very pronounced argument in console wars everywhere. Sony takes advantage of the Xbox One launch blunder (Mattrick was terrible, but alas) and quietly slips in that PS4 has paid online (rewatch that E3 if you want to laugh at how subtle they did this) and after a few days not a peep is uttered. Its simply accepted and the few arguments that stem from it would be that Microsoft did it first.
This entire 4 year generation was about graphics and power. So much revisionist history trying to be rewritten here when I can completely ether some of you ignorant fanboys by simply posting links to many topics even from NeoGAF itself. Exclusives started to be in the conversation as well the past few years but the
main argument was always resolution and graphics. Now, even better and more noticeable graphical differences (compared to 900 upscaled vs 1080 for example) are irrelevant, and massive salt is consistently being thrown.
In case you dont know where I'm getting at, this is going to continue forever. Its kinda sad, too because PlayStation has been out almost a decade longer than Xbox but Xbox is still seen as a massive threat to these fanboys when in reality Microsoft shouldn't have been able to get to close to the competition. PS3 really fucked everything up for Sony, and the same thing happened with launch Xbox One.