How bout, "well um, the chip sizes can't shrink anymore but our sales sure are" I think all the consoles have basically hit most of the people they're going to hit at the current pricing. Maybe they're happy with 100K every month but we're hitting a point that the only thing thats going to push new hardware sales is going to be a price drop. I'm not sure a new game will do much.
So you're saying that console makers should (potentially) sell at a slight loss rather than a profit, so that they can sell more... consoles... at a slight loss? What kind of logic is this? lol
There is likely a reason why MS are toying with subscription models (I mean outside of their next gen unit) and it may have something to do with the fact that they had an extremely difficult time shrinking the chips (both companies did, iirc) and going further with it would require significant investment that, perhaps, their bean counters said wouldn't give an ROI. Getting to the node they are both currently at took a *LOT* of money and effort in R&D.
There was enough red at the beginning of this generation, so you may be proposing them to go right back to that place again. I don't think their bean counters would be a fan of that.
What people fail to realize is that node shrinks will be even more difficult and yield *less* cost-to-benefit result than even this gen. Pricing your next gen console for the mass market adoption to take place is going to be even trickier. That is... without a subscription model in place.