This gen is closer to the end than it is to the beginning. MS is doing good work with the XBox One X, their strategy should be from now on to never allow Sony to ever out power them again. They have the money/engineering to do so, they never ever should've released an XBox One that handed over the technical superiority to the PS4 AND was more expensive on top of that. 

I think they have learned that though. XBox needs to be the no.1 go to brand for multiplats and XBox One X is the correct step in that direction. They need to have the best hardware. 

The Xbox One X created yet another hurdle for Microsoft. You see, on a strategic level, the Xbox One X created a hurdle that will slim over the performance gap between this generation and the next. If Microsoft wants success, they will have to accept that unless their next console (which should be announced next year in 2019) will not be that much of a leap over the X. Sony will have to accept this as well...and they both will just have to focus on making games. If Microsoft is thinking clearly, this is where they will need an A game. 

The main issue is that the Playstation 4 and Xbox One were so similar from an architectural standpoint that it made direct comparisons comically easy for even the most non-tech headed person to understand.

I mean, the Xbox 360 was technically inferior to the Playstation 3, but they were different enough that you couldn't really make direct comparisons to gauge performance.
Plus half the games looked/ran better on 360 anyway due to various reasons.

The Xbox One X is the right hardware for now, but they do need to back it up with exclusives that can showcase it's capabilities outside of just a resolution bump, because Multi-plats aren't going to push the X to it's limits.

Yep, being good compared to their worst year ever isn't an achievement.

And billions on the bank.

When they go and release the HW close together or before Sony how do you plan MS to launch a better HW than Sony? With spies? And they could release stronger HW for the rest of the gens and not make a difference since this is the first gen the stronger HW have been the highest selling.

The Xbox One X will only get a short amount of time to showcase its value. Owners will only get about a year and a half with it before they hear rumblings about the new consoles. Chances are it will enhance some games and then showcase its power with the next Halo, Forza and Gears and bow out.

Value is very subjective and will thus vary from person to person.

Some people may not see value in the Xbox One X over the base console as they genuinely don't give a crap about graphics.
Heck. The Xbox One X can't even exceed 1080P on my display anyway, so visuals look very soft next to my PC's crisp native 1440P output.

Personally, I believe that if you have a decent PC, Playstation 4, Playstation 4 Pro, I don't see any value in the Xbox One X, especially with the lack of exclusives that can showcase it's hardware potential anyway... As outside of resolution/framerate differences the experience for multiplats can be found elsewhere and often at a lower price.

Well. Microsoft was very conservative with the hardware, having such a mid-range GPU (At the time, now it's budget/low-end) wasn't ever going to ensure it was going to be competitive in any performance metric.
They did try and turn that around once they got a heap of backlash by boosting the clockrate, but it was to little, to late.

I completely agree with your point that from the Xbox standpoint, the only way they can compete is to somehow vastly outpower whatever PS is doing hardware wise.

It would help them if, again, they managed to release their new console more than a year before Sony does, pretty much like they did with the 360.

But honestly, having the consoles going to a more pc type of architecture, that means they will always be in some sort of parity for the targeted price. So there's very little hope, aside some unforced errors from Sony, for them to take the performance crown.

My hope is that for the next gen, both MS and Sony will have a base SKU that is made for the penny pinchers, but open up the possibility to buy a premium model that is not bound by the 400-500 figure.

In a way this is what MS already did by having their games on PC and that's a big advantage for their gaming division, just coincidentally a possible disadvantage to their hardware sales.

On the main topic, it seems some people keep throwing the word niche when comparing to the PS4 list of games not realizing that since the PS1 era, the whole PS fanbase is composed of tons of different "niches". This is why they stay dominant as a worldwide gaming brand. If you cater to all niches, it turns out you sell much more than the competitor.

PS1 and PS2 dominated because they got all the big third party exclusives games or timed exclusive games for a while that are now what we consider multiplatform games. Such as MGS, Resident Evil, GTA, DMC, FF, KH, SH, Guitar Hero, ect as well as being cheap with multimedia functions. Not to mention playstation brand is a world wide brand. Sony is the only game company able to pull a ps3 and still be okay. If Microsoft or Nintendo did what Sony did with the ps3 they would be finished. There was only a few ps2 first party games that I would consider big like the GT and god of war series.

It's never getting fixed, they don't have the horse's.  They would be better suited to focus on developing some good stuff for the next gen.

Personally, it feels like MS gave up since 2017 and doesn't seem like that's going to change.