But there's a big difference between talking about hardware -- which can potentially mean better (or at least prettier and smoother) experiences of games -- and the games themselves.
I'm not coming at this as a console warrior, btw. I felt that way last year, when the talk was about Pro. I felt that way during the early years of Xbox One vs. PS4, when we had a ton of graphic comparison threads. It was tedious dick-waving over (imo) relatively minor technical issues -- all that energy spent talking about that junk, and meanwhile very little talk about, you know, the actual games themselves.
This E3, I'll listen to the hardware pitch -- I'm interested -- but my focus is the games. Tell me about the games. Get me excited about the new gaming experiences you are offering. And I don't mean better framerates!
I think power has been a secondary issue this gen. I think the main factor in Sony's dominance was the 2013 debacle: Sony's on-target messaging, in contrast to MS's multiple strategic errors (bundled Kinect, always-on, focus on TV/TV, used game fiasco, etc.), combined with their multiple PR blunders -- all of which resulted in the perception that Sony was focused on gamers, whereas MS had lost its focus. That in turn led to tons of good will being extended toward Sony, and lots of skepticism and critical scrutiny focused on MS.
The second main factor was the $100 price difference. Power added to this factor -- "Why pay $100 more for a less powerful console?" was the thing you'd hear all the time. But mostly it was about the price itself. So #1 and #2 were messaging/strategy and price, with power secondary. A fourth factor was the game catalog (more variety and thus more global appeal in the Sony catalog, whereas MS was seen as a more US/UK-centric console).
That's my view, anyhow.
