Here's an old post I made on the subject,
A statement that might have been true up to and until the mid 90s, but not afterwards.
Gaming is not what drives hardware advancement.
Before that, "gaming" needed very specific stuff (e.g. 2D hardware scrolling capabilities, hardware bitblt, hardware sprites, etc.) which were seen as a particular/custom niche of hardware development, not really an "advancement" per se. To make a "next gen" console, you just stuffed it with enough custom proprietary ASICs, and that was it. No need for industry standards, open APIs, or even general purpose processing: you could have a shitty general-purpose CPU driving super-specialized hardware (practically all arcade machines of the 80s and early 90s were exactly that, and home computers like the Amiga thrived on that concept).
But with Pee-Cees lacking any sort of specialized hardware, it was all about raw CPU power, usually far in excess of what would be "enough" with other platforms for the same type of game genres.
A 68000-based Amiga 500 had smooth scrolling by default,on Pee-Cees you REALLY needed at least a 386 or even a 486 CPU to achieve that (CPU power difference: from 16:1 up to 50:1). This in turn gave PCs an advantage in 3D titles which DID NOT benefit from the Amiga's custom hardware and....well, that's why Doom appeared on PCs and not on Amigas ;-)
That "power inflation" drove features and consumer demand sky high. That's why 68000-based Amigas ended up being sold alongside 64-bit Pentium I, which quite literally were 100 times more powerful in raw MIPS. It was only a matter of time until their demise.
We all know the rest: the PC, with its general-purpose architecture with no specializations, thrived on raw CPU power (only exception: the introduction of GPUs and related APIs, which only became "general purpose" in the late 2000s!). If instead the industry had went the Amiga way, there would still be developments in graphics chips (3D accelerators would have appeared anyway) but there would be an over-reliance on ASICs and DSPs, rather than super-complex general-purpose CPUs.
Check out platforms that relied too much on that: Jaguar, Dreamcast, N64, PS3 (Cell processor)...yup, not really a winning strategy.