I'm sure they plan more than we think. As completely ludicrous as their ideas come off, they are a games-exclusive company, meaning they have less room for error than Sony and Microsoft. Which really, I believe, is WHY they took to a different direction with the Wii. If S&M were game-exclusive companies as well, I don't think they would have survived this console generation. They saw some tremendous hardware issues in their early days; Sony with cost (which later took its toll on compatibility) and Microsoft with build quality. And I think Nintendo was well aware of the fact that it was simply impossible for them to go along that same path. If they had released a $600 Blu-Ray Wii HD in 2006, they'd have been toast. Whether the third party devs want to admit it or not, it was the best thing Nintendo could do for their survival in the industry.
Wouldnt surprise me if some day in the future we begin to get consoles with the same price ranges as new computers.
Oh, it's already happened, it's just that we're provided with alternatives.
Really, though, game systems are NEVER as powerful as PCs besides maybe the day they come out. I think the fact that devs are using that as their benchmark for gauging the need for new gaming-specific hardware is going to get them into trouble. Yes, we're at the "typical length" of a console life cycle. Yes, the issues that make big-budget PC gaming such a hellhole for the devs haven't gone away. But you know, consoles hit some pretty big budget concerns when last-gen kicked off, both hardware and development, and that's not going to go away either.
Also on DeviantArt, Rumble, DLive.tv, and the Fediverse (@freespeechextremist.com and @bae.st)