Horizon 2 could well be a cross gen title. 3-4 years of development time would be enough. Why miss out on 100-120 Million customers in 2020?

And no, I don‘t think TLOU2, DS and GoT will be PS5 exclusives, they’ll re-release on PS5. I was just responding to Miyamotoo who seems to think PS5 will release before those titles. 

I just said I think DS might release first, because Kojima has just stated that the game is finished and they have entered polishing phase. I don’t think TLOU2 will release in 2019, because of Layden’s comment concerning next year’s lineup.

I think I said after E3 2018 was over that it was looking like it was becoming more and more irrelevant and this would enforce that. However. it's surprising that Sony is gonna be the first one to be a complete no-show, I thought it would've been Nintendo to do this.

AMD are in a better position now than they were 3 years ago. They came close to failing. The consoles contracts and selling/licensing (to others) some of their IP saved them. They are stronger now than they have been for the last 12 years, but I digress.

I don't know if the next Microsoft Xbox will share the same Navi (Video Graphics) architecture as Sony's PS5, though It could happen. It could be beneficial to AMD for both of the machines to have the same video graphics technology, and Sony might not care as long as Microsoft/Nintendo is paying them some type of royalty, while Microsoft could get back into the competition if the Xbox would be on par in hardware. A cheap expense to Microsoft, if you ask me, to not be left behind in hardware. (I don't think Microsoft would work with Nvidia again, I think that bridge is burned.)

To sum it all up, I just feel that the announcement of the PS5 will detail a lot of the Navi Architecture; hence, E3 is probably not the right place to do it in. AMD may want to be part of it to explain to the gamers what they are going to get with next console generation. It could also be AMD surprising everyone with Mark Cerny on stage at CES 2019.

But it is a big deal.
It's not just about Sony. Nintendo and MS will be very active, aswell. And if the rumor about XB1's discless version is true, they will be even more present in people's minds.

They could talk, at least, as much as MS; they could still have a booth to play their games and that would still be enough to make headlines.
When E3 comes, either you won't hear about Sony or you'll hear bad press.

Leaks won't change things.
Don't forget that you'll also hear about MS, too.

When you are not present or don't make yourself noticed, someone will take your place.

I don't think you are giving MS enough credit.
It's true that they took advantage of Sony's mistakes, but they had a great product and strategy behind it.
PS4 also took advantage of MS's mistakes, btw. 
The big difference was that, this time, the company who made the mistakes didn't correct them as fast - and payed the price.

I'm not saying that MS can easily beat Sony, but if they play their cards right and come out with a better strategy, they will give Sony a run for their money.

@Errorist
ah ok fair enough, thanks for clarifying. I meant that expecting all those games as 2020 titles would be ridiculous but now that youve explained I get it.

Do you really believe that, after the backlash that Sony got in 2006 and MS in 2013, that they will go for 500$?
I can't say it's impossible, but the chances of that happening or slim to none.

The 400$ price tag worked perfectly for them.
You can bet that they will do their very best to do the same.

Sony sold more than 80 million consoles with a price point above 300$. How big of a market is that that can only afford a 199$ price tag?
Those days of the magical 199$ price point are gone. Consumers are used to higher prices, now.

That 100$ price difference between XB1X and Scarlett means choosing between a old console and a new console; a console with now dedicated games versus a console that will have a new library of next gen games (from a bare minimum perspective of what next gen will be).
I think the choice to move to Scarlett won't be that "hard".

$500 was way too much in 2006, and it was borderline in 2013. Lot's of people assumed with XB1 being $500, that the PS4 would also be, especially with it's specs. When people found out it was going to be $100 less, the Earth shook. PS4 likely could have gotten away with being $500. It probably would have taken longer before sales ramped up, but it also would have likely meant MS wouldn't have pushed the XB1 platform changes as quickly as they did either, which should mean PS ends up with similar sales as today, just less inertia and higher profits/no subsidizing earlier on.

Lot's of poor people on this planet, and some of them like to game. Just look at PS2 sales. Part of the reason it was able to continue to sell as well and as long as it did, was because of the constant reduction of the hardware entrance cost.

MS has made it pretty clear XB1 is an ecosystem and a family of hardware and software devices going forward. They have also made it clear they want FC and BC since they will no longer have gens. Now that might mean either 720p gaming on XB1/S, or it could mean they drop that console and make XB1X the base. Either way, Scarlet only games seem like they won't be happening at this point, or at least not until a Scarlet X is announced 3 or 4 years later when XB1X is possibly dropped.

Pro has only been $100 more than PS4, and look at it's sales. If spending another $100 to have the very best was so easy and such a no brainer, why is PS4 outselling Pro 5 to 1? If MS decides to drop the XB1 family altogether, and moves on to another gen, it's just another reason to question MS once again. They've made it pretty clear they wouldn't be doing that, so they say, and have convinced plenty of people to dish out $200-$500 for the XB1X for that reason. To drop that model completely and ask for another $400 or $500 for Scarlet seems like a really bad idea, unless they are going to give one heck of an upgrade deal to those owners, or wait until 2021 so the XB1X has been given a somewhat reasonable half gen life time.

PS4 at 500$ vs XB1 with Kinect at 500$, would have PS4 look bad (more expensive, in comparison).
The changes to the XB hardware wasn't just due to price difference. People's perception was already bad towards XB even before the reveals, adding to that, the borrowing games or lending games situation, or whatever it was, was also a big deal - specially because Sony were brilliant in taking advantage of that "little" problem.

You can't assume that changes on each side would balance each other out and end up with the same results.
If the starting point is different, the logical conclusion would be that the end result would be different. 
That extra 100$ could have dictated that the transition wouldn't have happened so fast. And with that, more support for PS3 and XB360, which would have probably resulted in slowing down the transition a bit more, etc., etc.

"Part of the reason it was able to continue to sell as well and as long as it did, was because of the constant reduction of the hardware entrance cost"
It's true. But PS2, in the US, started at a lower price and had a 149.99 price tag or less when it reached 100 million… in a time where lowering the prices by that much was the norm and necessary. That doesn't happen today.
When you can sell more than 80 million consoles and still be priced at 299$ it means that there are more people open to higher prices than 15-18 years ago.

A low price made a difference in 2006, specially when you had a 99/129 price tag versus XB360 that costed 300-400 and a PS3 that costed 500-600.

If i remember correctly, neither the XB360, nor PS3, were replaced while being sold at 99/129. And those higher prices (for PS3 and XB360) meant they couldn't reach that market even after replaced. They never had PS2's appeal to begin with, btw.
The same is going to happen this gen.

From what i have read, there's nothing pointing at Scarlett being just another XB1 variation.
Actually, it's being treated as a new wave of hardware.
If the no generation comment ends up becoming reality, it's not likely it will start with XB1.

It's not just that the Pro versions of both consoles don't have exclusives, the 4K tech didn't create a revolution in gaming, and the mass market hasn't fully adopted 4K TVs, yet.
Those 3 factors held back their sales. But they were done to prolong their lifecycle, anyway, just like Nintendo does with the handhelds… until it brings a new generation of handhelds.

They don't need to drop that Xbox family completely.
Despite the rapid transition from last gen to PS4 and XB1, cross-gen games still happened.
Pro and X owners will still have games to play, even if not all or the most important ones.

So, in a way, the people who payed for an X console, when it gets replace in 2019-2020, will have had it for some time now. I doubt they will be that angry if they still get games for a year or so.

PS4 wouldn't have looked bad, it just wouldn't have been as appealing as it was at $399. The one thing I remember reading the most, is why was the Kinect necessary? As angry as XB fans were that their console was seen as considerably weaker, which is debatable, I think they were the most pissed off that they couldn't just have their XB1 at $399 because of Kinect. If PS4 sales didn't take off quite as well as they did, MS very well would have seen a narrow gap that didn't necessarily need to be closed immediately, in which case changes wouldn't be as necessary, if needed at all. You still would have fans ticked off because they are paying $100 extra for a Kinect they don't want, for a lesser spec'd console, which may have kept some of the negative policies around for a longer period of time since the sales gap wasn't near as large. Assuming people would just give in and buy an XB1 instead of the PS4 still wouldn't make much sense in that case, and for the few that did, it wouldn't change the outcome all that much. I also said similar, not the exact same.

A year at $500 would likely have led to more PS3 sales for that year, along with 360's, but by the following year, a $399 PS4 would clearly be doable (and probably necessary to keep momentum), since they did it at launch, but a $399 XB1 obviously wasn't going to happen without dropping Kinect. The same type of backlash would have happened and MS would have been forced to drop Kinect sometime in the year after the PS4 holiday price drop, and would have seen a much larger sales gap created during that time period.

If you didn't have the 360, or if it was the first console from MS, like PS2 vs XBOX, it's quite likely PS3 would have sold 100 million+ units. While there may be more people that can afford $299 and above, it could mean simply more value has been added to the world economy, or it could mean the money just happens to be ending up in the hands of gamers, or that the money is shifting even more so from the poor to the rich. If the middle class is slowly disappearing, then your going to be able to sell at $300-$500 without much hassle, but your also going to have to drop that price well below $300 to get the lower class on board. You also have to take mobile, handheld, hybrid, and streaming into account. 15-18 years ago, those weren't something to worry about much in the console business, yet now they are, so much so the consoles have streaming and one console has partially gone mobile.

Xbox One was called that poor choice of a name, mainly because it stood for one continuing ecosystem to cover everything. XB has made it clear numerous times that there are no more gens for them due to FC and BC. If they pull another 180 with that, they are going to hurt their image even more so. There are plenty of people who don't trust them already, so the last thing they would want to do is start next gen with a fresh slate. The fact it's been mentioned that if XB does this digital only box, that there would also be an option to hand in physical games and get a download code for free, says to me leaving people behind and making them wish they hadn't purchased an item prior, is not what MS has in mind.

So what tech in next gen consoles is going to create a revolution in gaming if 4k hasn't? 60FPS? Most casuals won't really notice or care all that much. Pro was launched alongside PSVR, which hasn't exactly lit the world on fire, but is doing pretty decent for a brand new device that certainly wasn't overly affordable at launch, and is still expensive for an add on. Streaming? We already have that, which mostly requires external telecommunications upgrades outside of PS and MS control. MS in the future apparently wants a bare bones, cheap as possible console for that, so while sales could be strong in that case, I wouldn't exactly point to 'revolutionary' tech that is the reason for those cheap consoles potentially expanding the market.

Most people who bought Pro and XB1X, as you said, only were looking to extend the gen (at the highest spec available). When the new consoles come out, they will want the newest best thing again, especially if those consoles have exclusives, which you also say they might, but that those games will be available on the XB1X as well?

I'd feel pretty burned if I bought a $499 console at launch only to find out the developer's intention was to sell it for $399 just 6 months later.