It doesn't and that's why I stated about what the current gen consoles can do over the previous ones.
I think you've overstated the difference though. Plenty of people used a PS3 as a media centre (myself included), so you can't really argue that the main purpose of the PS4 was to improve graphics. I'd admit that the jump from 360 to Xbox One was more useful, but that was mainly to make up the failings of the 360 (such as not supporting an HD format without an addon, and even then they picked the wrong horse to back).
Well, with such a device, it's all about speed of the calculations.
That speed will always translate to visual improvement of course, and we are still a million miles from where we could be.
However, just as important that speed can be used to all other aspects such as you mention the game-play calculations, and the AI that's going on also.
At the moment there are so many clever tricks and fakery used due to not having anywhere near the power needed.
Current consoles are absolutely amazing.
It's just a shame hitting a low? ish price could be limiting how far we could move.
There are clever tricks and fakery used because so much of the computing power is being used on the graphics engine. If they scaled back on having make everything shiny and better looking, they could focus on making amazing gameplay. Look at what indies devs are doing with 16-bit looking games. You telling me they're not as fun and ingenious because they're not pushing the graphical boundaries?
Except there is a marketfor fancy graphics in games and Nintendo is also doing well.
I'm not saying there isn't a market for it, my argument is that in my opinion, games should stop being driven by making the next biggest, faster console, and focus on what makes the best, most playable games. If there is no alternative, for now people will keep buying what they're given thanks to marketing, but that's not a positive 
I could very well be wrong here, but we of course need massive amounts of hardware to power the graphical side of things for spectacular visual effects, especially when it comes to lighting, reflections and shadows which we simply don't have the power to do well yet, even with the very latest 2080Ti cards.
In addition, we don't yet have the power, well not apart from a super computer? to attempt much in the way of AI, of course a fair amount of that is understanding how to create an AI in the 1st place.
So both of those things we can keep throwing more and more power at for the next, who knows how many more decades?
Game Play wise, i presume you are sort of meaning the story of the game, and the puzzles in a game.
I'm, not really sure that power is what's needed to improve the story.
I mean, you could have an amazing story/puzzles on an 8-bit machine, it would just have poor graphics and poor AI, if AI was part of the game.
In the same way, take a storybook.
You can have better quality paper, better ink, amazing illustrations, superb book binding, with embossed leather, gold leaf etc etc etc. But the story requires none of that.
I'm in agreement, great, Visuals, AI, Frame-rates, Sounds are all wonderful things, but you need a great story in the 1st place to make it a complete package.
Or something so open that you can, if you will, create your own story as you go, but of course it has to be built to allow that to happen, perhaps that's where the AI may come in, in the future?
Gameplay is not the same as story, no. It's about an enjoyable playing experience, how does the character handle, what mechanics does the developer employ etc. Look at Super Mario World from 20years ago - pretty close to perfect, and a model still used to create 2D platformers today. Same for Mario 64 - all modern iterations still have the same core gameplay - technology has not improved that, good developers have. Yes, Galaxy and Odyssey look nicer, but they certainly didn't need cutting edge systems to run them.
If things like the latest COD and Assassins Creed NEED to have the latest tech in order to make them enjoyable, something is wrong.
I'm no gamer but when you say high end what you really mean is low volume.
No games house is going to develop / port a game to a platform that is low volume when the big boys bring in more cash
As much as I agree with you and would love to see this, this wouldn't work.
1. Major console companies are increasingly trying to appeal to the wider public, and not just the traditional gaming community.
2. The benefits diminish to a point where buying a gaming PC rig would be a more flexible and feasible option for many customers.
Consoles are fine where they're at. Gaming PCs cover the void where high-end consoles don't exist.