I think you may be misunderstanding some things about how improvements in computing capability happen and how Moore's Law works.
The other flip of the coin is that manufacturing costs for achieving this goal is also increasing over time at the same speed (which is exponential). We also talk about the increase in game production, which affects the publishers, but the increase in hardware production and plant building which affects the manufacturer is also here.
If it costs 1B$ to do build something one year, it will costs 2B$ to build something twice as powerful 2 years later, or you have to wait longer to get this speed increase for the same 1B$ price.
That is why the race for power is not sustainable in this industry where the revenue from consumers is more or less fixed and will not increase. To achieve the goal of being more and more powerful, it costs more and more each generation or you have to wait more to get this increase of power for a comparable amount of manufacturer money.
I do not think what I said is opposed to that law. in 2001, it was very much possible to get the same amount of power in the GC as for the ps2 after 18 months for a lower investment. in 2005, considering what MS invested, what Nintendo invested in manufacturing in 2006, one year later, AND - that was the part I missed in my previous post - THE INCREASING COST OF MANUFACTURING, being on par was not possible.