Was there any console which had a short lifetime due to graphics?

Has there ever been a console that is so far behind it's competitors in this area?

Regardless of whether or not anyone cares about graphics, it can't be denied that Wii's weaker hardware has cost it just about every major multiplat game this gen.

Just the PS2.  That ugly slow blocky pixely laggy pile of shit only lasted 8 years... so far.

Nes,GB, and  DS are all that come to mind. All three had a much larger difference from their competitors though.

Always look at the bright side of life.
Actually you brought out one point, which actually turns this weakness as a strength. Since it's easy to market games with graphics, this is where the developement focuses, which eventually leads to disappointments, when the actual gameplay is secondary and people stop buying games since their movies look better anyway and they don't need to suffer shitty gameplay (equaling industry crash).
Basically Wii forces the developers to focus on the game itself, instead of focusing to finishing the graphics, when finalized gameplay gets gamers more happier.

The reason why some of developers don't like the Wii, is because in order to success, you need to be creative (or have model that "fits" the Wii). Upgraded graphics don't require much creativity and lets devs easy (although expensive) route.
In the next gen, i belive that the creative studios are going to be the "strong" ones in the industry (not that the wouldn't be already).

@Zucas: I don't think Nintendo plans to release new console early, since you are now forgotting the Nintendos strength, which lead Wii (and DS) into success. The headstart didn't lead Megadrive to beat SNES, or 360 to beat Wii, it was Nintendos ability to innovate and be different from the competition. Let's say that N6 would come out year early to PS4 and 720 and you would control the N6 with your brains electric activity, the year would mean that competition would have enough time to copy the controller and the software. So, i can assure you that Nintendo will start the 8th gen last.

I said consoles... handhelds have never been on the cutting edge of technology...
Dunno about the NES... did it even have a direct competitor when it was released? :/

Back then it was NES vs. the world. Even TV, books, and "real life" were competitors. The NES still owned everything.





I know the graphical gap between consoles is bigger than ever now, but I really don't care anymore. I think the big graphical hump we needed to get over was just past the PS2. I can go back and play XBox or GameCube games, but PS2 games look like shit now. (I'll still play the PS2 games I enjoyed. Looking like shit doesn't get in the way of my fun.)

Now that we're past the ugly 3-D hump, the next hump is the uncanny valley. We're gonna be stuck in there for a loooong time, so I really won't care about graphics until then. And even then, I think that last visual hump isn't necessary. I don't need to relate to human-looking characters. This isn't film. It's games. The graphics are good enough for all games except "realistic cinematic games." And I'd rather watch films than play those anyway. So I've opted out of all graphical battles from here on out. Forever.

How are graphics going to make Halo, Tetris, GTA, Boom Blox, or Zelda better? Those games ALL LOOK GREAT. They need to work on gameplay only until we're out of the uncanny valley, and then we can start the argument all over again about the ways we identify with characters and hoq it helps immersion but costs way too much and puts indie devs out of business or into EA's clutches.

@OkeyDokey: Well NES was put against the 16-bit gaming computers. Famicom actually was released in Japan with keyboard, but it got ditched on the "NES version". So yes, NES faced direct competition.
The thing why it looks like NES didn't have direct competition was because it got the world by storm and 20 years from now, people who got introduced to gaming post-Wii, are asking did Wii even have direct competition?