The problem is that any next ms's console is an undefined target. We don't know if it's just a refresh with no performance increases, a slight transparent increase lake for the one s, a pro model, a portable model, or just a new generation.
It's just a rehash of the industry discussions. If there's not enough info to talk about hardware ideas, this thread shouldn't exist. Or people with an idea can post their hardware ideas here and those who only have business theories can leave these others to talk about their hardware ideas. 
I dont know how we're supposed to talk about hardware without talking about the market and strategy and all that.Which is what in the past people did with hardware discussions. Pick a target and describe your solution or expectations for that target. A thread discussing MS's strategy before deciding on what hardware to discuss is not a hardware and tech discussion, is it?
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
That eerily sounds like they want to launch Xbox portable hardware and also provide the same OS (or launcher?) to 3rd party hardware
Are they too late to the party? They wouldn't need to sell that many units to be deemed a success if we actually deem the Steam Deck a success. What will they need to sell like 7 million units total to match Steam Deck sales?
the thing is that the traditional console model is having a hard time. Even the most successful console nowadays isn't traditional by any means, but some king of hybrid handheld with desktop capabilities. Rampant numbers of mobile games, people are now more tech savvy will likely get a PC following the most popular streamers and instagramers and whatever, The console industry is doing ok but it is stagnated, there is a ceiling and the increased budgets are making exclusives difficult to pull off.
Yea, maybe. I just think if there's more 'fervor' for this sort of market, I'm not seeing what Microsoft can bring as an advantage over a Steam Deck alternative. Remember Valve will iterate on this too, and the next one will be a fair bit more powerful as well. Microsoft will not really have access to any special technology Valve wont. So being able to play Series S versions of games is something that a Steam Deck 2 could essentially offer as well without having to be locked into the Xbox ecosystem to do it.
There is a chance, with XBOX becoming like the OG XBOX, or even a dead console, that the PS brand may shift back to it's PS2 glory.
True that helped. My PS1 was also modded. But still it sold a lot of official software in the grand scheme of things, which kept third party devs happy and people associated the platform with all of these franchises you could not play anywhere else.
Here we go again, repeating the same mistakes over and over. Power is nothing without mastery. This is the mistake they did with XSX: 12 tflops, ML exclusive hardware, RDNA2 exclusive hardware, static clocks evenBack to hardware then.
The reason I think MS should bring out the handheld and new console in 2026 is because that's when they'll be able to deliver S level performance in a handheld and a clear edge over the PS5 Pro with the X2.
I don't see why they can't deliver at least 2x raster and nice RT and ML upscalling in 2026 with the X2.
.
I am not even talking about games only. I am talking about GDK: tools. They famously did release X1X basically without tools ready back then (I wonder why...). Similar thing with XSS/XSX while Developers constantly praised PS5 and its tools: SDK.
It may be having a hard time but not every console manufacturer is having a hard time. Only certain ones are. Nintendo for example is not having a hard time at all. In fact, they're doing quite well by focusing on profitability and staying off the cutting edge. They use experiences to drive sales by delivering games driven by gameplay rather than graphics and looking to innovate where possible. The companies that are struggling are the ones that trying to push the cutting edge technologies with bloated games. Look at games like Avatar, AW2, etc. Great technology, boring games with tired gameplay. Games now have extremely long development cycles not due to demand from fans but due to lack of direction, scope creep, trend chasing, and a variety of other factors. Cyberpunk was in development for like 8 years? 6 of it was wasted doing absolutely nothing of value. Then they had to clobber the game together in 2 years and released the broken bug-ridden mess that they did. That's 6 years of paying staff for absolutely nothing. Most people don't finish the games they buy yet, developers insist on releasing super long games that a vast majority will not finish.
I'd argue that this is a result of exclusives innovating on the wrong thing. They've fallen into the technology trap. Gran Turismo at it's core with the exception of sport mode hasn't innovated at all since the ps2 days. The same can be send of Resident Evil. We're at 8 now? Final Fantasy, we're at 16 now? These IPs are tired and need to rest. Instead they're given a new lick of paint and presented as if they're something new. Obviously there's going to be competition when you keep release the same fundamental thing? The truth of the matter is that what made those games unique was the blend of technology and gameplay innovation to introduce something that was new and unique. The last time we saw that was in the ps360 days. It's been 2 generations now with very little innovation from Sony/Microsoft and in some ways(physics/interactivity) drastic regression.
