Then you have no idea what a console gen is or what the purpose of the Pro and X1X.

Pro was made just to get the 4K TVs some use (mind you that Sony manufacture these TVs as well) and PSVR platform of choice. With the clear idea of not fracturing the userbase and having all games work on both consoles. So the easiest way to have games working on both consoles is just res and in some case some small gain on fps. Plus PS4Pro is quite a small jump in power from the base console.

X1X was made both to cover the "strongest console" MS wanted after losing in all fronts for 4 years plus the great gap between consoles and PCs. But also MS doesn't want to break the userbase mid-gen.

So your comparison is really pointless, you arbritated the no gen jump to talk about "recently all extra power go to res and fps". We haven't changed gen so there were nowhere else to go, even more when CPU was basically kept the same and GPU itself only got a double or triple count on CUs. No new architeture, no other big improvements in the HW parts as well. Plus no intention of making games that couldn't be made on base consoles.

When gen change for PS5 and Xbox next, you can be sure the jump will be much more noticeable than mid gen refreshes, and the AAA games made after the crossgen will be generally not possible on the older consoles (sure you can make several compromisses and make ports, but you could even do that today to launch a PS1 or PS2 game, just wouldn't look anywhere close).

You seem to have a good amount of information, but little knowledge or understanding on the subject.

About your other post above... so you think 1/5 to 1/4 of PS4 userbase is double dipping on the consoles? Because ever since PS4Pro launched more than 20% of the sales have been of the Pro, on Xbox even more than this (probably over 1/3) even though the pricegap have been over double (like 199 to 499).

You are trying to portray to many factual things the wrong way to make an analysis that would make even Patcher blush.

Microsoft has stated there will be no New Console generations going forward. They are trying not the split the base at all, which also means very few exclusives.

https://www.gamespot.com/articles/microsoft-talks-xbox-scorpio-and-the-end-of-consol/1100-6442774/

"For us, we think the future is without console generations," Microsoft's Aaron Greenberg said.

It is you that doesn't seem to understand where the market is going, but one day you will figure it out. I perfectly understand what the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X do. The Xbox One X is complete failure and waste which hasn't sold anything. 

Xbox One X sold approximately 4 million in it's first year counting 2 Holiday seasons. If you think that is good then I don't know what to tell you. That is pretty abysmal to me considering how much more power it has then the Xbox One. In my opinion they would have been better off splitting the base. Especially considering Xbox One X had a price cut in its first year and a major sale on Black Friday ($399 with a free game).

Microsoft have said many thing they changed later. This for example is over couple years ago. Now if you think MS will launch Xbox next costing 499 and playing same games of base X1 you are for a very strong wake to reality.

Sony have said they will still have next generation. And you can be sure their 1st party won't be hold down to a machine over 10 times weaker than their offering in PS5.

And exclusives on Xbox at the time was basically a no conversation.

Xbox total on that year was less than 10M, so X1X that is the premium offering sold quite good. It doesn't play a single game over X1. So over 40% (perhaps 50%) opting to pay 2,5x more for the same game is quite unexpected.

I definitely don't expect the next Generation to only play the same games as the current gen. If it did I don't think it would find much success. I mean I don't think the regular Xbox One numbers are that great, but they aren't bad considering they have near zero Japanese Market. I don't expect Switch to offer Next Gen gaming, as I said I only expect them to with the Switch Pro (assuming there will be one) be able to play current Gen games at 1080P (docked). I don't think Switch needs to play  PS5/X4 games to be successful because the trade off is portability, but if it can play current gen games (Xbox One/PS4 quality) the trade off will be enough for a second system. I assume most people would want a next gen console and a handheld they can play some games on the go. So that is where my assumption that someone will be the loser in the next Gen and I don't think it will be Sony due to their quality First Party games. A large quantity of gamers will purchase two platforms. PS5/X4 will offer similar experiences, while Switch offers handheld gaming.

So do you expect when PS5/X4 arises that devs and pubs will port other PS4/X1 games to Switch2? Not sure it makes much sense. Sure some games may see that, they may even see a remaster to PS5/X4 with upgraded visuals and together a Switch 2 version with the base quality. But don't expect a great number of games.

I mostly expect next gen to be similar to this. PS5 100+M, X4 40+M (about 33-50% of PS4) and Switch 2 or whatever solution if hybrid to be 60+M.

I think if the demand is there to play some Xbox One/PS4 games on the go (which I think there is) they will. Since porting cost is way less than developing a brand new title. I don't think it will be every game. I also think Switch will get some games built from the ground up since I expect the base will be large enough for Developers to see value. I can definitely see for instance Blizzard/Activision making a ground up Call of Duty for Switch especially since Fortnite is a huge success on Switch so there is a Shooter base there already. For sure you will see Switch to be the ultimate Indy system as many games are even outselling the PC Versions. The key for Nintendo is the Japanese Market. They can easily reach 20 million there alone. The other key is that Switch is a system that can sell multi within a single household. Whereas I agree with the general consensus that Switch isn't a direct competitor to X4/PS5, it still competes for time since you are most likely not playing Switch and a Home Console at the same time. Nintendo's weakest market right now is Europe. In order to expand in Europe they need some AAA third party titles as Nintendo titles alone don't seem to be strongly penetrating that market. I think someone mentioned that they cant see RDR2 being ported to Switch, and I agree I don't see it being ported to the current Switch. I do think with the Switch Pro if it does use the Tegra X2 (which is my guess) that it will be able to play RDR2 maybe at 720P 30FPS (docked). Now whether that is something acceptable for Rockstar and whether the porting cost of RDR2 is worth it to them that is up to them as a developer. 

@bolded: That doesn't make much sense, and especially no business sense. Why would you port games for replaced hardware but not go a bit lower to garner clients of a console that's still selling, and most probably selling pretty well even by then? As long as games will be ported to the XBO, you can be damn sure they'll take the extra step to port to Switch too, as there's just more to gain there by then.

Because even now when X1 is relevant HW the Switch port is hard to do and cut a lot of corners. So when X1 is the one that needs a lot of cuts made to get made the Switch will need much more cuts and it may become ludicrous. There were Fifas being ported to PS2 while not being ported for Wii just to remind you.

They will make ports to consoles where they will profit enough.

Doesn't make an ounce of logic to instead of making a game that already is on the 10+M sell on PS/Xbox design a new IP or change the base to Switch to try on a base that those type of games make 1M sales.