I'm not sure we're looking at this the right way. Yes, it's entirely possible that if consoles were better then you would have a few games with better graphics to play. But how many would be able to play them? Is forcing development teams to do more with the same budget a bad thing? I don't think so. It seems we're finally bucking the trend that is Wirth's law.
Besides, better graphics take a lot of development time and effort. I remember a developer commentary where somebody said "i don't think you'll find a graphic designer that's glad that it's an HD world". You ever wonder why games are shorter than they used to be? Ten years ago you could spend days on the campaign, now it's over in six hours. That's because all the time went into the graphics.
And i mean even then, it's not like consoles are holding back graphic development. There's no reason you couldn't make a game with the best graphics you've ever seen and run it at lower settings on consoles. You're not upset that you don't have games with better graphics. You're upset that you don't have games that console gamers can't play.