Honestly if I was Microsoft I would go big, aim abit higher than 6 teraflops (if your already going that high) give it abit more, and launch it as the Xbox Two.

Sure you can still say there are no more gens, and allow Xbox One to play games from Xbox Two (just at 720p instead of 4k).

Done, enjoy the early lead for kickstarting a new gen.

You need to understand how AMD builds it's GPU's.

AMD will design a GPU in "Blocks" and will modify part or all of a block, then they assemble various amounts of those blocks to form various parts of the GPU.

It is why AMD can take any old Graphics Core Next part and update say... Just the video blocks and add support for stuff like HEVC whilst leaving everything else the same.
Or why Graphics Core Next 4.0 wasn't a complete top-to-bottom update over Graphics Core Next 3.0, only parts that needed modifying/updated were updated.

Vega is likely going to be using the same architectural "Blocks" as Polaris, they aren't going to be radically different from a low-level architectural point of view, there is going to be differences for sure, Vega will use more blocks and have HBM2 memory, but it will still be the same architecture as Polaris.

The question remains... For both Scorpio and Playstation 4 Pro... Is how those blocks are configured, what their clock speeds are and how many there are, and we will not know that untill more official information is released about the GPU configurations.

For example for the Playstation 4 Neo/Pro/4k/Cats to hit it's claimed 4.2 Teraflop Target it could have 2304 shaders @ 900mhz or 2048 shaders @ 1033mhz.
Whilst the Scorpio would likely use 3584 Shaders @ 850mhz or 4096 @ 733mhz. - Or heck hows about 2304 shaders @ 1300mhz? Or 2048 shaders @ 1466mhz?
Although wider hardware with more conservative clocks at 16nm is likely the go.
Can't forget that a few extra CU's would be thrown in for die-harvesting practices to bolster yield too.

If people dont mind switching brands its evident exclusives arent the primary concern.

I know people who switched brands this gen and didnt bother with many if any exclusives.

I've heard $450, $500and even $600. Before this thing comes out it'll be $1000 😂.

If it's $500 or whatever you have at least 12 months to save. What's the problem?

So, they will release a console more expensive, with less games, with a smaller existing userbase, and a year late at least, and they're not worried because it will be more powerful?

Like when the OG XBox One came out, they weren't worried about the price difference thanks to Kinect?

That extra power is going to allow alot of extra polish and/or performance.

For example 4K games on PS4 seem to be aiming for 30 fps. That extra power of Scorpio could bring that to 60 fps. That alone would be pretty significant. Even 1080p titles pushing PS4 Pro's specs could be 30 fps. Thats another scenario where Scorpio could push 60 fps.

So in my opinion, MS should push the performance edge on 60 when they can. Thats worth more than beating PS4 on pixel count.

We havent heard a price. I'm predicting it ill be $400 and OG X1 will drop to $250-279.

MS isnt aiming to beat PS4 in sales, that war is lost. But if they can keep their sales steady then they are in a good place. Its still a relevant console that moves a lot of software albeit less popular.

I haven't seen anything about MS forcing devs into parity between versions on MP games with Scorpio. Would be equally disappointed if that's the case. Link? However you wanna excuse it, Scorpio is a much larger upgrade :)

Power does dictate who gets the best multiplats though. 

Sales in a way is irrelevant to MS because they already have major every third party supporting them, so it's not as if they would get more games if they sold more, so as consumer what does that even matter to you?

And I would say Super NES won over the Genesis in part because it was more powerful, the rest of those consoles released that gen (Atari Jaguar, 3DO, Neo Geo) were never seriously intending to compete for the mass market. 

IMO, I think MS has rightly recoginized that the XBox brand must have the best 3rd party multiplats. That has been a hall mark of the brand since the first XBox, and XBox One is really the first time they've done the less powerful thing and it hasn't worked for them. 

Unlike Nintendo, MS is trying to directly ape the Playstation model, and that only works if they're offering something better than the Playstation. If they're offering something that's not any better, then what's the point of even having such a console? The XBox by default needs to be better than the Playstation where ever it can be, and hardware is one area MS can control.