Yes, last gen Forza did sell well last gen, but that was pretty much it though. It sells ok now. That rabbid early adopter base that jumped ship from the PS2 and bought 360 ate that up. I thought of Forza, but I dont really count racers....but truth is truth and it did sell well. Then again, Microsoft has always excelled at simulations. Outside of that...I cannot really think of anything. Got anymore?

Hahaha, am I reading that right? Are you saying that Halo alone is more popular than Sony and Nintendo's IPs combined?

The last Halo couldn't even come close to PS3 remasters of Uncharted and TLOU let alone the latest Uncharted. How is that more popular than Sony and Nintendo combined?

You can't directly compare them. AMD GPU's suck with flops with Open GL where Nvida gets a lot more out of it and using Vulkan. Well Switch is fine.

I'm pretty sure holiday bundles may have to do with some of those.

Fact is that Halo is obviously not moving X1s, so there is no reason to believe that it would move XBOXs.

And Xbox Consoles ship with digital codes while many PS4 bundles ship with physical discs ****

Fair from what your thinking.

Didnt Halo 5 and UC4 sit on rougly the same amount of sales at 4m until Sony heavily bundled the crap out of the game on just about every bundle available for the Xmas period. While Halo 5 being one of the least favorite in the franchise still manage to sell 5m to date. That to me says enough.

* The Playstation 2 wasn't the weakest console that generation. The Dreamcast was.

* The Playstation 4 was also the strongest console of this generation out of the gate and is dominating.

* SNES was superior to Genesis.

Power or lack-there-of isn't a prerequisite to a consoles success, having the right hardware at the right price is.

The Xbox 360 for instance is a perfect example of that they had the right performing hardware at the right price, the Playstation 3 wasn't pushing graphics that were generationally superior, heck allot of multiplats were worst on it! And it was priced significantly higher.
Having the right games also helps, the Xbox was being pushed by Halo at the time. (That era has passed.)

The Switch does not reach a Teraflop of single precision floating point. Please do not spread false information.

I think there is a small subset of users who think the Xbox One X will be some insane seller, it won't be.
The Playstation 4 Pro set the precedent of what to expect.

To calculate the magical flops... It is...
Shader count * Instructions per clock * Clock Rate.
Ergo. 256 * 2 * 768 = 393 Gflop.
For fixed-math modes where two FP16 operations are done on the FP32 unit, then you just double it again. Or. 786 Gflop.

However, FP16 comes with caveats, it cannot be used for everything as it's precision is inadequate for allot of tasks... And with that, flops isn't an accurate representation for comparing the performance capabilities of different chips anyway.

You can have a chip with less flops outperform a chip with more flops.

The Genesis did have a superior CPU. However... It's GPU and Sound capabilities did come up short against the SNES. Both consoles used "add-ons" to bolster their respective power later such as the SuperFX chip on the SNES.

Regardless, the proof is in the pudding... Er games.

The Nintendo 64 was the most powerful console that generation. This isn't even up for dispute. So please do not spread mis-information.

The physical media is actually technically superior on the Nintendo 64 as it had higher transfer rates and lower access times, the PS1's physical media had the advantage of capacity. That's it.

As for Polygonal performance... When Nintendo allowed developers to make their own Microcode, it was a polygon pusher.

It also had texture filtering, anti-aliasing, 480P resolutions, full Texture and Lighting, it was an effects powerhouse.

Again, the evidence is in the games. Perfect Dark obliterates anything on the Playstation 1 or Saturn graphically... And that isn't even the best looking Nintendo 64 game.

The Playstation 4 has games that are sub 1080P. It just happens far far far less often than the Xbox One.

What is ultimately important is the right hardware for the right price, the Playstation 4 smashed that out of the park.
 

The Original Xbox had a myriad of new graphics effects that the Playstation 2 couldn't even dream about... Like fully compliant DX Pixel and Vertex shading.
The feature set of the Xbox One X isn't generationally different to that of the base Xbox One.

The Original Xbox was pushing graphics that was able to compete with early Playstation 3 and Xbox 360 games. In-fact a few early Xbox 360 games like Kameo and Perfect Dark: Zero was slated as original Xbox titles at one point.

*Chokes*

Most don't include them in comparisons as they were never really mainstream consoles. It really depends how far you wish to push the goal posts I guess.

Sadly, Halo is in decline. Sales have been in decline since reaching it's height with Halo 3... The Master Chief Collection was a massive failure, absolutely terrible game.

Halo 5 released bare-bones, graphically sub-par of what to expect this generation... And it's singleplayer left much to be desired.

Halo Wars 2 never reached the same heights as Halo Wars 1... And Halo Wars 2+Halo Wars Definitive Edition have a non-existent multiplayer base, making matchmaking useless. (In oceania at least.)

Plus, Spartan Strike never made it to Xbox either, which is sad, the only Halo never to do so.

Hoping for the best, expecting the worst with Halo 6 to be honest. Hopefully they give it the appropriate degree of development and budget to make it shine on the Xbox One X... Microsoft needs the success.

A flop is a flop. They are neither better or worst.

The reason for the performance discrepancy is simple. There is more to rendering a game than flops. Funny that, huh?

In compute-only tasks, AMD actually does well, it's just their GPU's in general right now are shit for gaming.

The XxX only has 6 FP16 TFLOPS.
The PS4 Pro has 8.4 FP16 TFLOPS. 
Microsoft don't have rapid packed math in their GPU.