PC exclusive games exist and look vastly worse than consoles games. Consoles and their large userbase is what allows so much money to be poured into AAA games and the visuals they deliver. The addressable market with a system more powerful than these new consoles will be miniscule for several years. Witcher 3 would never have looked like the early footage even if it was a PC exclusive, it likely would have looked far worse than what it ended up as. No developer is going to design a game around 700$+ GPUs. That ended with Crysis.
You avioded answer the link I gave you, let me quote:
A quick scan through also highlights there wouldn't even be a game without a console version.
They also talk about other things that needed to be changed and not just because of consoles.
It's easy to forget that PC is the ultra high end but it's also the ultra low end and everything in between.
So PC's are just as capable of holding itself back, especially if studio needs to have a large enough market to sell to.
We don't even know the performance of intels RT implementation is yet.
I'm just so happy that the consoles are a lot more balanced this time around, and it's the graphics that we are talking about having to make compromises and scale on.
As that's where engines need to be made to scale anyway. From low PC performing RT hardware to high.
That is why you have SETTINGS in a PC game....to span the hardware.
What you are advocating is not pushing further than consoles can play along (which reads as stagnate to me)...if the consoels are to weak, let them suffer...don't hold back games because consoles cry "unfair"...
Console gamers accept low FPS, variable resolution and other hacks due to the lack of performance...but saying that is a reason to stagnate is mindboggling....