MS said the games on Series S would work as on Series X but with 1/3 of the framerate. On the first wave that have been far from true. But you will deviate from calling that misleading and pretend it is just optimization. Not that you haven't blamed optimization and tools for the Series X not outperforming PS5 by a lot as you were expecting before right?

So you did know that the CPU, RAM, SSD etc were weaker than Series X but occasionally forgot to mention them? But Sony would be misleading with only putting the specs of PS4Pro even if they don't say it is gen 9?

You know that there are games that Series S doesn't even have the RTX enabled? That the BC games on Series S doesn't run the X1X version even if it is stronger in all aspects as you claim? Also I have no idea where you saw myself claiming Series S isn't gen 9.

Someone needs to look at Series S specs. It's inferior to the Xbox One X in some regards. The One X has 12GB of RAM and 326GB/s memory bandwidth. The Series S has 10GB of RAM and 224GB/s memory bandwith. It's not across the board superior in everyway like the Series X.

It all depends on optimization, i have mentioned this many times when a game doesn't run well. No idea what you are on about. And what does MS have to do with this conversation? This is about trying to place a last gen system to a new next gen system.

Yes the CPU, RAM are less than the Series X, does it need to be on par with the Series X to be next gen? And what does the size of the SSD have to do with the topic? Did you know the CPU and RAM are ahead of last gen systems? As well as having a SSD NVMe where as the last gen systems don't.

Comparing stats between the Series S/X and PS5 is different than comparing stats from a last gen system to a next gen system because they are very different systems. It would be rather stupid to compare PRO to Series S because all it does is trick consumers in thinking one is more powerful, no matter how clever you word it. Like i said with my car comparison.

Halo Infinite didn't have Ray Tracing either which was suppose to be on a PC comparable to the Series X. Means nothing. The Series S also has games that use RTX.

Did you ignore the part where i said that software is just as important as the hardware inside the machine, or did you choose to ignore that part?

You also still choose to ignore the question which i have asked many times now, do you not think the Series S is a next gen system? 

It doesn't matter because future next gen games don't run on XB1X, they wont be compatible unlike the with the Series S which is the entire point of the discussion.

Also Series S uses GDDR6, XB1X uses GDDR5.

I bought a ps4 a long time ago, so I don't care how much they costs today, given I am not in the market. I also suspect Sony is fine if the ps4 dies hard, they have moved on to the ps5.

Since you don't care the least about Playstation, then if there is nothing to talk on the Xbox here, why are you on this thread that is specifically on price cut for PS4. MS have to do on being misleading, that you claim Sony would by listing specs while MS isn't when they say it will run the same (when it doesn't). Quite harsh on a hypothetic scenario that a claim haven't even be made and apologetic when a claim was made.

Nope they don't need to be gen 9. Still you initially claimed only GPU was weaker than Series X, so looks like you were the misleading one.

Nope your can comparison have a company claiming their car is faster because it have a bigger engine, while the console would have one comparing specs of two systems. But again you want to be harsher to one case and even distort it to fit your claim while ignoring the other.

Of course it means something. If a company claim their console will do something and it doesn't that is what? Yes, misleading.

I ignored your question because you were doing a strawman. Were you able to find anywhere myself claiming Series S isn't gen 9? I guess not.

OMG you're right.. MS has been lying to consumers and cheating them this entire time! They even had the nerve to discontinue the next gen XB1X and insert a last gen XBSS.

Wasn't and isn't the XBSX marketed as the most powerful next gen console by far? Then how is it that PS5 outperforms it so often, even in third party?

How shameful.

The fact that Sony won't cut the price of the Slim and Pro makes me think the PS4 is going to be discontinued quicker than previous PlayStation home consoles. The Pro will probably be discontinued this year, if it hasn't already. The Slim will probably survive into 2022. Maybe it will get a price cut, maybe it won't.

Erm, why does it matter what thread i am in? Weren't you in a Aaron Greenburgs article the other day? and you call me a hypocrite.

To add to your hypocritical standards is you seem to think MS is misleading consumers with the Series S while defending the idea of placing numbers to help sell a PRO over a XSS.. which is vastly superior in all ways except teraflops. (Which Teraflops mean little)

You honestly think its the same thing running a game with less fidelity than not running a game at all?

If all you care about is unit sales and not the customers buying them is quite shameful in my opinion, but that's you. Those customers you try to convince with the PRO will be mighty disappointed once they realize in a couple years the PRO becomes a brick to future games while the console that you are comparing it to will be running playable next gen games.

Oh and for the record, to remove the bias mentality from this topic you think i have, if Xbox did the exact same thing with the XB1X i would be saying the exact same thing. Its not a next gen compatible system. Last gen systems need to be discontinued to avoid confusion. That's why the Series S was made for those to move to next gen with a easier price tag, otherwise, why wouldn't Xbox do the same with the XB1X, an all round superior console to the PRO? Because again its not a next gen compatible system.

There have been many Aaron Greenburg articles, but most possibly I was, and discussing the subject. But you have plenty times said you don't care about Playstation, metrics, exclusives, etc but have been giving your "to balance the narrative" remarks.

Have I defended making the add? Nope, I was pointing that your comparison was very bad and that you was ok with a direct mislead on MS claims while against Sony only giving specs. And let's be real Sony doesn't need to do much to have Playstation selling over Xboox. TF means so little and MS also was very focused on promoting it on X1X and Series X right? Besides confusing names to confuse customers.

Have I said it is the same thing to run with less fidelity and not running? Guess not. But you have a very hard time admiting MS said one thing and isn't delivering and making a lot of excuses for it.

You don't even are about unit sales at all since MS started to lose on that field, to the point you had tried to convince us that isn't important and that MS had more gold subs than Sony had PS+ because you wrongly believed in misleading PR from MS that talked about all subs and compared to Sony, but soon after was of course prove wrong when Sony put out their MAU and was a lot higher than MS even though MS was braging about highest ever.

Way to close your argument saying you don't have a Xbox bias, everyone will certainly believe it.