I think you are looking at this from your own perspective and not in a broader sense.

For the first bolded point, I'd argue that should be phrased the opposite way.The only people who would buy a GAMING PC over a PS4 are those that are enthusiast enough to want graphics and power and are willing to put in the extra effort to build a PC. Even though there are more PCs out there, there are still more current gen consoles out in the wild than there are PCs that play games better than PS4. It's definitely growing, but it's not as big an audience as you think. The biggest games most popular games on PC can be played rigs that are last gen. Same with all the indies.

For your second bolded point, Sony has had the longest support for their consoles and has kept brand recognition and stayed competitive since PS1 (taking first place in 3 out of 4 home consoles, and coming back from third after losing a lot of consumer trust with the high PRICED PS3). Just about every console has had nearly 10 year lifecycles and most didn't see a new system release before 5 or 6 years of its predecesor's release. If anything, the Pro will allow that gap to be larger. The Vita and the PSP (to a lesser extent, since it was by far the most successful NON-Nintendo handheld) couldn't compete with Nintendo, sure. But this in no way backs your point that they should have shorter generations. You're saying that because Sony can't compete with Nintendo, it has to adopt a model that competes with Microsoft. But Sony is in the lead. Aside from the the 360 (which eventually it closed the gap), Sony has dominated Microsoft. Sony doesn't have to adapt to an incremental generational leap...Microsoft has to take that model in order to not completely lose relevance since it has no real competitive edge with the current base hardware. And even then, Microsoft is competing more with itself in order to boost its PC gaming given it's pretty much given up on it's console exclusivity, has added both console and PC versions for one purchase, and is obviously out to create an ecosystem more competitive with Steam.

Finally, I don't think developers intently try to build Sony's install base or care to. I think that when a new generation comes that is firmly separated from those before, it allows the developers to be much more creative and do new things that generate buzz for their IP. This is as important to them as it is to Sony and other console developers. People like Mark Cerney or Digital Foundry have discussed the model that Sony is sticking with in contrast to Microsoft's iterative process. Getting that definitive generation gap is what they are aiming for, because it allows the consumers to better observe the tangible differences and offer a firm reset so that developers aren't tethered back to offering support for the old consoles. And I have read from several developers (maybe not the big guys that like easy CoD money), that they prefer this approach as well.

I think the PS5 will release in late 2020 and Final Fantasy VII Remake will be a launch title for it :p

Holiday 2019 is perfect. That gives PS4 a long and healthy 6 years on the market. By then, KH3, shenmue 3, god of war, ff7 Remake episode 1 should all be out for PS4.

Ps3 as crazy expensive for Sony as it was, had 7 years on the market before PS4 launched. PS4 was conceived much cheaper and has had a much more profitable lifecycle compared to ps3 which means PS4 is probably much closer to being replaced and moving onto next gen.

PS3 was only on the market so long cause it cost Sony millions of dollars and needed the extra time to recoup. PS4 has actually made Sony lots of money and doesn’t need to wait as long as they did last gen to introduce a successor. 5-6 years has always been the norm anyway. Last gen was just an outlier. 

E3 2019 at the earliest.

I can see PS4 Premium being a possiblity. The question I have is, even though the publishers will love a 100M+ PS4 audience, if XB launches a year later with a Ryzen/newest GPU, APU, will third party devs simply write the games for the next XB, then make a crappy port for the older PS4 tech? However, if XB does stick with the no more gens plan going forward, then those same third party games would have to be ported for XB1X, which is still Jaguar anyway, so it shouldn't hurt PS4 game quality at all in that case.

The other way to do it, so you don't anger too many PS4 fans by launching next gen "too early", is create two PS5's for launch (iPhone 8 and iPhone X), especially if XB sticks with the no more gens plan. If you could buy a $349 PS5, or $499 PS5 Pro, that should cover most bases. Those who can't or don't want to jump into next gen yet, still can buy a $149 PS4 or $249 PS4 Pro. PS5 needs to be BC though, that is key to this, which I don't see being a problem.

By having two PS5's available at launch, PS can not only cover more bases, but can bring even more customers into next gen even quicker, which should make both systems sales end up more equal than they are now, leading to better support for everyone. It also makes it easier for devs to start to focus more on PS5 only titles, which would work in PS's favor, since those devs would now have to port the games down to just XB1X (and not any PS4's), making those XB1X ports poorer quality most likely, taking away any price advantage it may have then.

The longer PS4 goes on, and the larger the userbase grows, the harder it becomes to get publishers to focus on making games for a next gen system. The last thing PS wants in this scenario, is to have a slow start and a slow sales pace for the first couple years PS5 is out, due to cross gen support. At the same time, PS doesn't want to throw away potential PS4 sales. The way I see it, by late 2019, if your looking to buy a PS4, it's most likely because your waiting for a lower price point, so PS5 if off the table anyway (other than brand new customers looking to buy a PS console). If you didn't jump into the PS4 ecosystem yet but you have the money, then no problem, buy a PS5, because it's BC.

I personally think trying to drag out PS4 until 2021 or 2022 is a little bit short sighted. It would still work, but could mean a much tougher descent from the lofty PS4 peak, to the bottom base that would be the PS5. With a really affordable and professional PS5 model available at launch, the transition would be more like taking a helicopter from the peak, to the lower hill nearby.

Starting fresh will work, as long as the base PS5 is cheap enough at launch, and it's BC. Casual console gamers, the majority of the user base, doesn't care all that much about the specs. As long as PS makes sure the games keep flowing through to PS5, casuals will buy it. PS5 Pro needs to be a big enough leap to make a purchase worthwhile for that audience, hence the $499 price point. With AMD harnessing their Infinity Fabric tech for its GPU's in the future, more TF performance for less money is the plan, just like their Ryzen Threadripper CPU's. (Imagine a 8TF PS5 and 14TF PS5 Pro).

SSD tech can still wait while SSHD or M.2/NVMe tech bridge the gap for now. My guess is that PS5 launches later than E3 2019 but before Jan 2021. 

I do see what you are saying as a possability. PS5 could run from 2019 to 2025, and then PS6 would make the switch to full SSD tech, and significantly more RAM. There are a few things that could advance just based on moving to Ryzen in 2019. Doing so would mean that we would be limited to SSHD or HDD, and most likely 24GB of RAM at the most. On the positive side this would limit the improvements possible over this gen, meaning more CPU should be geared towards higher frame rates and VR. Looking at the negative side of things, the leap may be to small for consumers to deem worthy of upgrading, thus resulting in a slow uptake for PS5. 

As you mentioned though, they do have to be cautious about what Microsoft may do. If they make PS4 Premium in 2019, and MS goes to Ryzen based Xbox in 2020, that would kind of force them to release a PS5 by 2021 with Ryzen in 2021. Depending on the reseption of a possible Ryzen based Xbox in 2020, MS could gain a significant head start. PS5 would have to come in noticably more capable, and at the same price in 2021. 

You also have to consider the games though. Will MS return to making games and buying major 2nd party exclusives, or will they continue to stick to Forza, Halo, and Gears? If MS does not grow their library, Sony may not have a whole lot to worry about. Sony has built a decent stable of 5 - 10+ million sellers over the last decade, that span many different segments of the market, and that may just be enough to keep people locked to PlayStation.

At any rate, this is an extreamly exciting time in games from both a hardware and software perspective. Scalable ecosystems and VR have made everything very exciting. After kind of getting bored with games towards the end of last gen/start of this gen, I have to say, I feel even more excited now than when I was a kid. I am extreamly excited about upcoming games, and can't wait to see what comes of the hardware going forward.

Full SSD storage in a PS6 around 2025 sounds easily doable. The leap to next gen would be less again, and some may say screw it, but if the base PS5 is cheap enough, and has more performance than XB1X, plus the variety of the PS exclusives, with BC, I don't see gamers having too much of a problem with that. Just imagine if PS3 had a different architectural layout (not cell), yet performed similar to the XB360, for $400, instead of $600. PS3 would have sold much faster and probably would have hit 100M again. Having an affordable console is necessary. Having a Pro version at the same time? Now that should allow for another PS4 like launch explosion, while fixing the issues PS4 Pro has now.

With a PS4 Premium, a Ryzen based new XB, almost seems guaranteed. If XB has any plans to get back into the console race, that would be the perfect time to execute. A few other posts mentioned PS5 trying to get a lead. If the next XB launches a year after PS4 Premium, with a Ryzen based APU, then XB is now the one with the lead, and PS is in the hot seat about what to do with PS5. I'd rather be the one with the lead going into next gen, regardless of the potential PS4 losses, because the PS5 losses could be even larger. With a cheaper and higher end system available to my customers, I wouldn't hesitate to start next gen if I were PS late 2019/2020.

I think XB is going to add a few more first party titles. The fact they announced that they were looking for devs to create a "HZD" like game, says to me that XB see's that PS decided to try and make a somewhat Zelda like game, which is doing quite well, and we all know how well Zelda does, so why not one for XB?  Whether these new titles end up being any good or helping the XB brand who knows, but I don't see them sticking with just their FGH big 3. XB won't go crazy and flood the market with their own first party titles, but they will make an effort to go from 3, to say maybe 6.

There are many possiblities as to whether this gen gets extended again or jumps to next gen. I just think based on how PS4 has played out, PS seems to have learned from their mistakes. One of those mistakes was focusing too much on PS2 and it's record sales, and ending up a year behind with the PS3. I think PS could get away with launching PS5, 6 months to 1 year behind the next XB, but they can't allow that XB to have a lower price next gen. This is another reason why having a cheaper base PS5 and a Pro version ready for launch, should solve yet another potential later launch problem.

So many possibilities. I am excited as well to see how this plays out. Since both XB and PS should have gotten their huge launch screw up's out of the way now, next gen should be really exciting. Not to mention Switch looks to become a big player as well. 2020 is supposed to be the year of the future right?

The reason I say early (I did actually mean to include 'mid') is because MS wouldn't dare risk releasing any sooner than late 2019, and even that would be a huge risk. Sony could easily take a good 6 - 8 months lead, or even longer, depending on whether MS takes that risk. Sony couldn't possibly know whether they would so to make certain of a lead they could release sooner than people (and MS) think. Just my opinion though. 

I would say you are not looking at the broader picture. Sony themselves have said the reason the PS4 Pro exist is because of PCs. From SEI Cheif Andrew House (in 2016)

“I saw some data that really influenced me,” House said. “It suggested that there’s a dip mid-console life cycle where the players who want the very best graphical experience will start to migrate to PC, because that’s obviously where it’s to be had. We wanted to keep those people within our ecosystem by giving them the very best and very highest [performance quality]. So the net result of those thoughts was PlayStation 4 Pro—and, by and large, a graphical approach to game improvement.”   

http://www.pcgamer.com/sony-says-the-pc-and-not-the-xbox-pushed-it-to-create-the-ps4-pro/

The bold is exactly what I was saying. If consumers want graphics and performance, they go to PC. Sony admits that what is happening, thus the mid-generation refresh. It's to keep consumers playing on Sony rather than migrating to the PC (which they wont return as Sony doesn't have the first party line up to keep them). People "convert" (for the lack of a better word) from consoles to PCs. 

Sony's systems last for 5-6 years (you even admit this). The PSX was about 5 years (95 - 00), the PS2 was 6 1/2 years (00 - 06), PS3 was the longest at 7 years (06 - 13). Based on what Sony has done in the past, 2019 is when the PS5 will come out. This also coincides with the PS4 Pro. Pro was released 3 years into the system's life and was a half-step. PS5 will be released in 3 years later and be another half-step. Again, Sony's biggest competitor is NOT the XBox One. It's the PC. The reason for the Pro was the PC, not XBox. Because PCs can always be upgraded, Sony has to adjust their console releases to mirror it.

On third parties building the install base, that is what happens on every Sony system. Sony doesn't have a strong enough 1st party line-up to sell their system. Why did the Vita fail? Beyond smart phones taking away its market (as a multimedia device), 3DS got all the third party support. The Vita got a few Japanese games and Sony's first party line-up and it fell flat. Sony needs developers to stay on their ecosystem too. Third parties are not reliant on the PS/XBox realm to sell units. They can go to PC as well. (By the by, this is the biggest risk to Sony from the Switch, esspecially in Japan where the system is flying off shelves)

To close, I find it funny you think I'm not looking in a broader sense when you (and others) can't think outside of XBox. You even bring up XBox in your second paragraph even though I only mentioned them once. Microsoft doesn't matter as XBox will likely be absorbed into Windows (this is already happening with Windows 10). Consumers have more choices than just PS4 and XBox One. They have Switch and PC, yet no one has brought up either of these systems in this thread. On the generations, I think the idea that this generation will be longer is wishful thinking. Besides the fact that its normally 6 years, consoles are not the only game in town. Sure, in generation 6 and 7, the video game market was only consoles. Now, PCs are becoming easier to build, cheaper and have more games on them. There are more reasons to switch over now. The Switch, too, gives consumers an alternative as its getting a lot of third party support. Unless Sony goes a different route with the PS5 and changes the PS brand, they will have to compete with PC. It will be sooner, not later. 

By announcing a year early and launching a year later, with stronger hardware, XB brand is letting itself know how that type of "next gen" launch should go if they tried it. Depending on what happens with XB1X, I would assume XB uses that to plan how to launch the next console. If XB1X does good or great, then XB knows they can announce a year early and spoil the PS4 Premium/PS5 by saying we have a stronger box coming next year. If XB1X goes poorly, then XB will most likely have no problem launching another console late 2019/2020.

They can't use the 360 launch early plan this time around, because a new XB launch before holiday 2019 would be console suicide. Their only options at this time are to try and compete head to head like the 2013 launch, which didn't go well for XB, or launch later with better hardware but make sure everyone knows ahead of time, or they have to try the NiN thing and launch years apart from PS to make sure there is as little comparison as possible, to try and do their own thing and keep PS at bay. 

As long as PS doesn't get greedy, going head to head with them is not the best idea unless XB is willing to give away the farm. Launching later with better hardware, or giving XB1X another full 4 years, are the only two options that make any sense to me. The problem with a full 4 year wait, is that if PS launched PS5 late 2019, that could mean PS5 Pro late 2022, 1 year after the new XB. PS could always turn around and use the early announcement of PS5 Pro to try and get customers to wait a year, just like XB did with the XB1X (most people would know a Pro was probably coming anyway).

That all being said, I think if PS5 launches mid to late 2019, then the next XB needs to launch no later than late 2020. The best XB can hope for, is that PS gets greedy and tries to extend the PS4 as long as possible, allowing the next XB to launch first. A new XB with a reasonable price launching well before PS5 late 2019/2020, could cost PS5 some sales. Regardless, XB needs more worthwhile exclusives. They can try and play the hardware game all they like, but lacking what PS has, is going to always mean that XB simply compete's toe to toe with PS at best, but never ends up ahead.

I agree, I'm a PC (and now Android tablet too) gamer, but I definitely can see the different priorities that most console gamers have. For the minority of tech enthusiast, power console gamers, consoles just launched will always be the top, then console makers can make mid-gen upgrades like Pro and X, but that's the maximum they'll do for them, shortening the generation lifecycle is totally out of question unless a console is a total flop. Actually mid-gen uprades are made less for power-whores and more to extend the generation. Adopting a PC-like architecture shouldn't deceive the observer, it wasn't a decision taken to make a console a PC, but only to ease game ports and lower HW production and SW development costs, and a longer generation, not a shorter one, is a strategy that goes in the same direction of these purposes.