We are talking about the Ouya compared to the Vita tv right?

Most people that proclaim gameplay over graphics will eventualy move on , but that doesn't mean they are chasing graphic fidelity just new content.

The trouble I have with the gameplay over graphics or everthing , is the very subjective way it is used to criticise games and game development, usually with out any concrete references to what game play mechanics they are talking about ,  and certainly no specific examples of how to do it better , instead you get quotes like "another graphics heavy (insert genre here ) game with no gameplay " .

You see this a lot especially in reference to fps even when the gameplay is de rigueur for tha tgenre  since gameplay covers such a wide spectrum it needs to be made clear what you actually mean by gameplay , rather than using it as a whitewash.

No one should sit in the past ,  even nintendo's supposedly graphics agnostic approach seems to stem from a  financial standpoint than a philosophical one .

LOL You think? I used to say the same thing you said until I played Killzone's storyline and then played the multiplayer. The drop from 1080p in the campaign to 900p destroyed my eyes, but eventually they got used to it.

I think it's more likely tmost devs will stay at 30fps and crank up the shaders/polygons/textures. People have been talking about a 60fps standard since the late 90s, it hasn't happened, I don't think it ever will.

I think consoles have lost their "ease of use" badge this generation, everything needs updating and fairly frequently.
Games also have to be installed.

It was a ton quickier, buying, downloading and playing Dragon Age: Inquisition PC (4 hours!) than the Master Chief Collection (20 hours) for me, MCC had the advantage of installing from last century optical disc, before chewing down on that big patch.
Before I installed MCC I had to do a console update (It only gets turned on once a month to get the free gamez.), then when the game was installed I needed to download a couple of App's to access some single player features (Xbox Live was having issues, couldn't do that for a week, apparantly multiplayer is fixed soon.)

You just don't get that kind of thing on PC anymore, you buy your game, download it, play.

Updates etc' are all automagic and happen in the background these days, you certainly don't go without multiplayer for weeks at a time.

I just think that most devs will always opt for 30fps with more detail over 60fps with less. (On consoles anyway)

Probably, but that's fine by me. There are some series/genres for which i hope 60fps remains the standard, but past that 30fps is alright in my books (providing the extra resources are utilized meaningfully, rather than a developer simply being too lazy to optimize for 60).

Not that i'd ever imply Ubisoft anyone would ever skimp out on optimizing time.

Yeah, devs would never half-ass their games, their harmonious Unity with consumers is unbreakable, so we have no need for consumer Watch Dogs. Unoptimization is a myth, like Ghosts. PC gamers just like to complain, every one of them is a Thief anyway.

My thoughts exactly ;P

You just won 10 internets.