Because they're still holding some pretty good games hostage. What monster would I be if I didn't give in to their demands and at least play with the hostages a bit?

It sounds like your making it into a bigger deal than it really is ... 

Why not just forgo those several games instead ? 

Don't equate games as humans beings BTW and you won't have to think yourself so much as a monster because afterall they're just 1's or 0's ...

There aren't enough games on PC to keep me entertained and I do appreciate the console experience more. Well everything that isn't horribly misfigured or slowed down due to hardware restraints. It's my hobby after all. And why wouldn't I try to improve it by making my complaints heard? Isn't that what everyone should do?

So you think console > PC ? 

Yes, input is important but what's more important is speaking up with your wallet!

If your not satisfied with something you hit corporations where it hurts the most, their banks ... 

Ideally what I'd want from the next and last generation are some upgradeable SKUs like the N64 expansion paks to cover the crowd that can never be technically satiated ...

My wallet won't help in that matter. They won't let me pay more for better hardware and buying games on an old system only supports their decision to keep it running. And not buying anything is not good as well. First, my wallet would burst and second I'm the only one buying niche titles so they get a sequel some day.

Imagine a PS5 selling next year with double the hardware, same architecture. Price point maybe 500-600? It will have perfect backwards compatibility and will be able to play all next and old gen games in 1080p60.

And yet you have people object to this great future.

Shorter life cycles are good.
- Excitement of new hardware with new possibilities.
- Room for innovation and new IPs.
- Level playing field for developers.

Longer life cycles leads to
- Stagnation and sequelitis.
- Established game engines that push the machines to the max leaving little room for experimental game play.
- Harder for small teams to break into the market.

If it's being marketed as a new platform where all devs immediately make the majority of their games exclusive from now on then I don't want to be a part of it and you can count the vast majority of the customers out ...

If it's just an enhanced version of a platform like DSi or N3DS then I have no qualms about it ... 

No one wants to keep shelling out $600 at every 3 years and backwards compatibility is no guarantee ... 

This "great future" that you propose will leave consoles with very few games including the ones you would've liked because of the fact that the install base didn't warrant such a game so your idea is most likely fundamentally at odds with the games you want to play ...

The games I really want won't get made regardless of what I do.

People are already shilling 600 bucks every year for the new iphone. The resistance of not wanting the pay the price is not because the money isn't there but because console players were lulled into thinking that it wasn't necessary. If phones and PCs can do it I don't see a reason why consoles can't adopt the system of quick progression of hardware.

This naturally entails BC because the generations are closer to each other and the leaps in technology will be smaller.

New consoles should release every 5 years and be announced after 4.

People upgrade there phone annually or bi-annually, after about 5 years consoles really start showing there age.