Actually I gotta say this is very untrue. You coulda kept making games for the PS4, but not only does it have 7GB of memory to share, but its CPU cores are Jaguar architecture, made for netbooks in 2013. They are literally worse than AMD's own poor-performance FX CPUs from 2011, which is why stuff like System Shock remake runs 30fps on PS4/XBO but can hit 60 on a fourteen year old PC.
So while I agree largely about diminishing returns and that the new consoles are hopped up BS, (and their hardware is now even inadequate for many badly optimised games) the PS4 and XBO were not very good hardware c: The PS3 and 360 were similarly poor.
There is I think no reason to ever replace the PS5 or Series X; they have RDNA2 graphics, eight-core Ryzen 2 CPUs, 16GB of memory and extremely fast NVME storage. Unlike previous generations they are balanced and well-rounded.
Actually I gotta say this is very untrue. You coulda kept making games for the PS4, but not only does it have 7GB of memory to share, but its CPU cores are Jaguar architecture, made for netbooks in 2013. They are literally worse than AMD's own poor-performance FX CPUs from 2011, which is why stuff like System Shock remake runs 30fps on PS4/XBO but can hit 60 on a fourteen year old PC.
So while I agree largely about diminishing returns and that the new consoles are hopped up BS, (and their hardware is now even inadequate for many badly optimised games) the PS4 and XBO were not very good hardware c: The PS3 and 360 were similarly poor.
There is I think no reason to ever replace the PS5 or Series X; they have RDNA2 graphics, eight-core Ryzen 2 CPUs, 16GB of memory and extremely fast NVME storage. Unlike previous generations they are balanced and well-rounded.