No, but lack of power compared to other consoles means less third party games.

not really, that game, with less hardware limitations, would have a huge chance to be better, more beautiful, more stable, more fluid, etc, you and everyone knows that, so you're comment is not de facto...

Yet the game is probably gonna be better than an entire generation of games on hardware 5 times superior, that's the point.

@bold highly dependable on opinion and taste so... you're not right, there is no point. i just comment because he used the "/thread" like that was a universal truth and he and you are using arguments based on taste and opinions and the OP asked about hardware power that is a measurable quantification and we should stay on that ground don't you think?

also, do you disagree that LoZ BotW developers could make a better game given a chance to develop it to a more powerful machine? don't you think they have the talent for it?

I don't entirely disagree only because with better hardware it could run at 60fps, but the reason why they made a great game was talent, not power, when a console with 1/5 of the power can have the best game that shows you how little determinant the power is.

tired... again... better game according to who? you? some critics? that is not a universal truth and has no place in this argument. i'm discussing hardware and game development and you are pushing a brand loyalty agenda... i'm not gonna post beyond this... but lets say someone can accomplish that and build the best game ever, every soul on this planet agrees and it is the best... and it runs on a not very powerful machine and also runs in a big powerful machine... you have fun on both but if the machines are both available to you and the game is more stable and fluid and prettier loads faster etc on the powerful machine... which machine would you, turn on, to play it?

It should, but it doesn't. Unfortunately these days more power means a higher resolution...period.

Very few devs actually use the extra power to improve on the game itself.

You young whipper-snappers. :P

Back in my day, Pentium hadn't been invented yet, it was all 386 and 486...

The reason for sequels is because that is a lower financial risk than developing a new franchise.

Remakes/remasters take the old game and try and make it new again, it is a good return on your investment... Usually you don't require all new voice acting and motion capture... And more often than not such a title will still shift millions of units.

It's not really about power... So much as it is about money.

I remember when Unreal Tournament 2003 was first released on PC... That game was such a big step up visually of what came before... Yet it didn't technically play any different from the game it was succeeding... Which was Unreal Tournament 99'.

However, Unreal Tournament 2003's visuals was such a big leap from the orginal title with tons of geometry, particle effects, lighting and shadowing... It wasn't unusual to see people jump and shoot at their own shadow. (It's a twitch shooter remember.)

The improved graphics actually made you play differently and be more cautious... It also helped significantly with immersion, you got more invested in the game as it was more believable.

I am always under the belief that graphics doesn't replace gameplay, they both lend credence to each other, you can also have both.

Nah.
Let's take Crysis for example... You remove the graphics in that game, you are not going to be as invested in that world and it's stealth components, suddenly traversing through the jungle (Which wouldn't be a dense and lush place anymore with shadows to help you hide in) is going to be a less attractive prospect to sneak up and assassinate your enemy's or flank the enemy installation.

Plus. Not all games use power for increased fidelity, some games use the power to bolster and retain a degree of performance, keeping framerates high, frame pacing even and input latency low. - Overwatch is a good example of this, it could probably run on the Wii U, but the experience would be absolutely garbage... And not because of the graphics either. (Which are not anything to write home about anyway.)

Full 60fps would probably result in literally better, more responsive and fluid gameplay. :P

More power could mean better LoD, it's already a sticking point in Breath of the Wilds visuals, longer draw distances on grass and tree foliage would look good as well.

Ironically... It's thanks to power that Minecraft could be what it is. We reached a point where building and keeping track of an entire world consisting of blocks became feasible from a processing and memory standpoint.

More power enabled Physics to become feasible which brought us games like Portal and Half Life 2, some of the best games of all time... And that lended itself massively to gameplay.

Food for thought: Would the physics based gameplay of Breath of the Wild be possible if not for the power [although quite modest by today's standards] of the Wii U? Would the game have been possible on the Wii? Most likely not. Now, imagine how much they could have pushed that aspect further if they had even more power. 

Hardware power may not be the be-all end-all of gaming, but the less limited creators are by the hardware, the more they can let loose their imagination and bring exactly what they have in mind.

Power is good. It let's the devs see their vision through with less technical restraints. If the game still ends up bad? Then there should be far less excuses from the technical front at least. Game designs and objectives should always come first though.