I guess my primary resistance to them is the half-baked nature of it all. I feel it will lengthen a gen and give us more years tied to weaknesses of 2013-era hardware. Problems like uneven MP competition is also a new wrinkle in consoles that people used to use as an attack on PC gaming (eg; the example earlier where PS4 Pro players will have greatly enhanced distance clarity on maps, steadier FPS, etc).

Console hardware itself has never been the real source of profits either. It comes from software, accessories, and services sales. So, expanding the market is the best way to go about it, and it seems to me the most likely buyers of PS4 Pros and Scorpios are owners of existing PS4s or X1s, which doesn't grow the audience in the same way.

Look at the examples of the PS1 and PS2, massively successful platforms that continued to grow their audiences by continually supporting the platform with a wealth of games, and with ever more affordable units. Bearing this in mind, I think PS could have found more success and profit by pushing for a $199 PS4 slim for Fall 2016 instead of splitting the models. Let's hypothesize that $199 would be absolutely scraping the edge of profitability, or even losing a small sum per unit. I believe that the growth in sales would more than make up for that element, as $199 is a magic price point that can really surge and reach people in ways that $299 can't do, and even $249 is tough. With MP requiring subs, extra controllers being $50+, etc, this seems like a more logical path to me.

The professed reasoning for the PS4 Pro also seems bizarrely counter intuitive to me as well : said to be a response to the threat of PC gaming I believe I heard. That's asinine. Console gamers tend to be, and stay, console gamers. The PS4 Pro is not competition to a well specced PC anyway, not in 2016, and especially not as a year or two passes. The target moves too quickly for that to be a reasonable explanation, because even if PCs were $500, and all ran 4K at 120FPS in all games, console gamers by and large wouldn't change to PC, because they prefer consoles.

If anything, adding a new model introduces more of the PC issues, the equal-playing-ground multiplayer concern listed above, the added developer work, the uneven support (eg; Bloodborne gets no PS4P patch, while Knack gets a PS4P patch .. ??), new bugs (yes, some people say this won't be an ongoing issue, but how often have we heard that before).

The worst of it all to me personally is the extension of the 8th generation, hamstrung by poor CPU performance even in 2013. Without the half-gen models, a true 9th gen would almost certainly arrived sooner. Making prettier games that struggle sometimes to hit 30fps or have sophisticated AI/depth is not my idea of a great thing compared to a big leap forward.

I do not think it will lengthen the console cycle. If anything it's a sign that they will become shorter. If they can't even justify to run the same console for more than 3 years I doubt they will hold out long for the next gen. Especially considering how successful the mid gen upgrade will be. As soon as the manufacturers realize that people are willing to buy multiple consoles within a single gen they will seize that opportunity. And even if the hardware itself does not generate them a lot of money it does generate a lot of new hype mid gen and hype will dirctly translate into money for both Sony and game publishers.

In the end it does not leave anyone with negative consequences.

Sony is happy because they can flood the market with more consoles.

Poor gamers are happy because they can now get OG PS4s for cheap as used.

Rich gamers are happy because they can finally spend more money.

4K TV owners are happy that they have finally a use for those bloody things.

Developers are happy that they can splurge a bit more on graphics.

Everyone else is happy that there are now more consoles on the market.

That is what I think, Xbox would of launched the Scorpio a year later than what it's currently going to release in response to the Pro which probably delays the release of a PS5 until 2020 at the earliest but my opinion is a PS5/new Xbox in 2021 rather than a new Xbox in 2018 followed by a PS5 in 2019 with reall good specs. Now we will end up with consoles that are powerful for a year or so but then end up falling well short of getting anywhere near the 4K what they have pitched the marketing on.

Why would the upgrades delay the next gen? They're working on next gen as we speak. The PS4 Pro and Scorpio are just measures that are necessary to keep it fresh. Why would they do a refresh after 3 years and then think that the Upgrades will last longer than that? I mean we already know now that the Pro is underpowered and Sony will want to keep the time that MS has a stronger console on the market as short as possible.

I remember a time when console owners wanted to keep the Gen as long as possible. I guess that's over now.

As I see it the next gen has already been delayed as I saw in my post of how MS would very likely of pushed a new Xbox in 2018 but we got confirmation not so long ago that MS won't release a console every 2 years so the earliest possible Xbox is 2020 if they go on a 3 year cycle and 2021 with a 4 year cycle which is the gap between the One and Scorpio.

As you said Sony will want to limit the time that MS have the power advantage and if they keep a 3 year cycle that will just end up 1 year Sony has an advantage then for 2 years MS will have an advatage in power so a PS5 releasing in 2019 would unlikely as it repeats the power advantage/disadvantage so PS5 will be 2020 at the earliest.

It's possible that both companies see no future of generations and just a refreshed hardware every 3 years is the future but I that that would lead to stagnation of sales eventually so a real next generation of consoles will be required to inject life back into the market.

Why would a 3 year cycle lead to stagnation in sales? People will still buy consoles if they need them. If Sony and MS lift the restrictions for game developers they have the power to decide on which consoles they would like their game to run. If they want more sales they will not neglect the older consoles. And just like that we have a very healthy console industry with choice for consumers and developers abound.

3 years is still a very long time.

I don't get this point? Where is MP being limited to 30fps?

But overall I emphasis with you a bit. I think mid-gen upgrades shouldn't of happened until next generation where they would actually be built into the operations of each respective system ,like the rumoured SCD which Nintendo patented. A thing where you could just spend $150 on a new add-on that would slot into/onto your console and boost performance. It makes better sense for consumers, developers and arguably sony and MS (as they'd be able to sell more of them and at higher profit margins compared to $399 replacement box). 

Where I disagree with you is that you're assuming the industry would otherwise move linearly without the Pro/Scorpio.

1. This generation was unlikely to end before 2020, half of sonys developers are yet to put out their first game and we're supposed to be expecting PS5 in a few years? Developers are struggling to put out games, when they do, they're falling short of initial techincal ambitions. It took Naughty Dog 3 years to put out their first title and likely another 3 to put out their next. The life of hardware is likely to reflect this, as the average developers will really want 3 generations of games to put out before moving onto the PS5. Instead of looking at PS4 Pro as some hindrance to the future gen, it could very well be compensation for the fact that this gen is infact going to be really long and full of games which aspire for more powerful hardware. 

Just look at how many titles can't sustain a constant 1080p/stable framerate. We can blame the developers all we want but that ain't changing the reality, both in regards to their output and our expectation of visuals. Final Fantasy XV, BF1, Titanfall are great examples of how the Pro should be used, actually most games are. Don't let a few (Launch) hiccups sour the potential of games on the system. Remember the gulf between console and PC multiplat games at the end of last generation? This generation they'll likely be worse. Pro will enable console gamers to aleviate that somewhat and settle upon a really stable performance that they otherwise wouldn't be given the choice of.

2. You're assuming next generation would retain the simplicity of past console generations. The existence of 4k kind of puts this into question. 1080p is such a respectable resolution that there is no actual need for higher resolution values on the average TV, especially not ones which take up 4x more GPU power. I think its inevitable that in the generation to come there was always going be the introduction of scalable games. Gamers deciding whether they want 4k resolution or better graphics/performance. Just as Bluray never quite replaced DVDs the way we expected, I think the road to native 4k becoming "the thing" is more than just a generation away. Imagine the PS5 came out in 2018/19. Realistically it wouldn't have graphics much better than what we're seeing on PS4 if it had to render all games at Native 4k, yet 4k would definitely be a demand from some gamers.

The bottom line is that PS4 Pro is an option that as of yet doesn't harm anyone and offers consumers choice. Choice is something that is going to rear its head in the console market sooner or later.I haven't spent too much time talking about Scoprio because there are many unknowns, but from the minute it was announced I always said Microsoft should skip it and go straight to their next system (2018). Forget about native 4k for X2 games but sell a Supplementary computing device which helps it get close to that goal.

People who actually think hardware is more important then good videogames.

Ps2 whas weak compared to the gamecube and xbox, yet ps2 had soo many incredible good games it destroyed, massacred, annihilated the competition.

Sony made huge mistakes with the ps3 but  after sony pumped out great game after another  it still whas able  to beat the x360.

 same with the ps4.

Yaay scorpio comes out 4x stronger then the ps4.
But what can i play on it besides upscaled x1 games that i can easily play on my pc?

Next year the ps4 could verry well get the most games a console has ever had in a year.
Jan-april has like whut? 15-20 exclusives (many on pc too)

Many gamers are not aware how many Japanese  and physical  indies are being  released  on ps4.

Especially  with limitrungames  the  biggest  publisher  in the  history  of gaming pumping  out games like crazy.

I have 324 ps3 games and 159(40% exlusives) ps4 with dozens of games i still need to buy

It's all about good games+ great price.

I'am  going  to buy the  ps4 pro so I can play certain  games @ 1080p @60fps.

Nioh

Ff15

Etc

Sony made a mistake pricing the slim@299.
Should have been 250

I personally don't mind revisions every 3-4 years and I will likely be buying a Switch, Scorpio and Neo next year but a big new generation hype train is needed to grow the industry or you will eventually just be left with a limited group of hardcore gamers. 

With a continuous cycle you will have scheduled hype every 3 years. Look at what kind of hype other companies are creating with only one year cycles.

How do you expect the console market to grow if not naturally? People will get a consoles when they need to. It's not like they can grow up without knowing about consoles just because there isn't a big announcement every 6 years. People you get only because of mega hype that seeps into the mainstream will not stay for long and will not grow the industry. Look at the Wii, those people are long gone by now.

I just don't see how people buying overall more consoles will be detrimental to the market. For the market to shrink people would have to actually stop caring about consoles. How is that connected to shorter lifecycles?