If Joachim Kempin wouldnt have opened his mouth, you might have a point, but he did. He noted before he left Microsoft that they were after Sony hence why they rushed the 360 (in a reactioary manner to  beat Sony by a year to market). Since then everything has seemed to coincide with what hes stated, including the scorpio. 

Nintendo turns profit on their consoles even if they dont gain marketshare. They dont take the risk. Sony needs the ten year profitability plan which they ushered into the industry (hence the longer gens) because they take risk with bringing in new formats and need time to profit. Last gen it took then literally four years to reach it. Good thing for the ten year profitability plan. Microsoft followed Sony and havent you noticed that much like how the PS3 is still getting support, havent you noticed that the 360 has continued to be supported after twelve years? Microsoft is following Sony  around the barn yard. Microsoft is smart not to attack Sony with games and attack them where they have the best chance and that is hardware. You should've seen them scramble to fix the clock speed of the xbox one after they heard Sony's launch specs in feburary of 2014. Its clear as day that they react to what Sony does. 

THe Xbox One is still a weird one tough, Initially the idiotic CEO at the time had very weird plans, we all know them and once Phil took over and made it a traditional console it was never ment to be, it could and can not compete with the PS4.

Sure Backwards compatability, value for consumers by giving them free PC versions when you buy a digital version and some great games like Forza, Quantum Break, Sunset Overdrive etc kept them in a "decent" spot but the Scorpio was inevitable, especially with the pro, because if they ever want to compete they need to change their opinion about their console and the Scorpio is aimed to do that.

I love both PS and XBox but I am no stranger to the internet, my colleges, friends, people love Playstation and most want the Xbox to go away in a dark hole and never come out. Personally I don't feel that way and I hope they can change their image around. But weather or not this becomes the norm every 4 years the Scorpio is a nessesary thing for Microsoft.

If Joachim Kempin wouldnt have opened his mouth, you might have a point, but he did. He noted before he left Microsoft that they were after Sony hence why they rushed the 360 (in a reactioary manner to  beat Sony by a year to market). Since then everything has seemed to coincide with what hes stated, including the scorpio. 

Nintendo turns profit on their consoles even if they dont gain marketshare. They dont take the risk. Sony needs the ten year profitability plan which they ushered into the industry (hence the longer gens) because they take risk with bringing in new formats and need time to profit. Last gen it took then literally four years to reach it. Good thing for the ten year profitability plan. Microsoft followed Sony and havent you noticed that much like how the PS3 is still getting support, havent you noticed that the 360 has continued to be supported after twelve years? Microsoft is following Sony  around the barn yard. Microsoft is smart not to attack Sony with games and attack them where they have the best chance and that is hardware. You should've seen them scramble to fix the clock speed of the xbox one after they heard Sony's launch specs in feburary of 2014. Its clear as day that they react to what Sony does. 

You must not understand what "ushered into the industry" means, because Nintendo supported consoles for over a decade well before Sony did. That's a lot of text you just typed that does nothing to sway these three simple facts:

1. Sony did not invent the 10 year plan.
2. Sony in fact will abandon a console long before 10 years if there's no money in it, aka Vita.
3. These are all businesses and the dollar is the bottom line. The plain and simple fact is as long as there's money to be made, any of these companies will support their older platforms.

Microsoft supported the 360 so long because it made them money. Had zero to do with Sony, hate to break it to you :(

1. It doesnt matter whether Sony invested the ten year profiitability plan

2l They  stated the plan will be in use for ALL of their home consoles. ( Is the vita a home console?) It has since became a primary factor in their longevity of support for their gamers which was unique traditionally to them until the Xbox 360 came.

3. Its obvious that the dollar is the bottom line, hence why Sony created the plan. Sony takes risks using new formats in the consoles and waits to turn profit. Whats Microsofts excluse for keeping the Xbox One going for 12 years?

4. Microsoft supported the 360 because it was not pulling away from Sony and as Sony gathered profit, they needed to keep pressure on them. While the money the 360 makes is great, its not really that impressive for Microsoft as a corporation.  Again, gaming is not their end all be all (hence why they dont act like it).

2.

1. It doesnt matter whether Sony invested the ten year profiitability plan

2l They  stated the plan will be in use for ALL of their home consoles. ( Is the vita a home console?) It has since became a primary factor in their longevity of support for their gamers which was unique traditionally to them until the Xbox 360 came.

3. Its obvious that the dollar is the bottom line, hence why Sony created the plan. Sony takes risks using new formats in the consoles and waits to turn profit. Whats Microsofts excluse for keeping the Xbox One going for 12 years?

4. Microsoft supported the 360 because it was not pulling away from Sony and as Sony gathered profit, they needed to keep pressure on them. While the money the 360 makes is great, its not really that impressive for Microsoft as a corporation.  Again, gaming is not their end all be all (hence why they dont act like it).

2.

1. You just said Sony "ushered it into the industry" so yeah, it does matter if they actually ushered it in or in this case, if another company did it. The difference is instead of saying Sony "ushered it into the industry" the correct way to say it would be Sony followed Nintendos lead :)

2. No they didn't. I remember them saying it applies to all three of their consoles when the PS2 and PSP were still going. The Vita didn't qualify because it didn't sell well enough. Long story short, they'll support consoles so long as there is money to be made. You can dress it up as some sort of grand plan of consumer support and longevity, the simple truth is it's just money. Also, the 360 already existed when they started touting this 10 year plan, so you're 0/2 here :(

3. Sony adopted what Nintendo had been doing when Sony entered the industry. They didn't create anything. I know this clashes with your narrative, but it's reality. You really could have shortened your entire reply to "the dollar is the bottom line". It also answers your Xbone question.

4. Oh ok so money doesn't matter to MS and they could have just ended the gen sooner and put out a new console but just wanted to "keep pressure on Sony" even though they were both getting beaten badly by the Wii. It's funny because in other threads you say MS is so desperate to get a leg up on Sony yet here instead of launching the 360 successor earlier which would have really put pressure on them they instead continued to support the 360 even though who cares about revenue it's Microsoft. Do you really believe some of these zany MS theories you post?