Do you realize how completely ignorant it is of you guys to bring up the graphics argument? I'm guessing... no.
For one thing, the good gameplay portion is pure opinion. When was the last time you saw a game that was really violent with having no good gameplay at all? God of War? Incorrect. God of War was actually considered, by many, one of the best games of the year for its gameplay, besides the violence involved. GTA? Even more incorrect. Like GoW, it was considered one of the best Action games because of its gameplay and unmatched open-endedness, besides the violence. Besides, it has some of the worst graphics out of any of the last generation games. Is that saying anything to you?
I can't think of any other violent games like these right now, but my point remains. If you're going to accuse the game companies of making crappy games with lots of violence... actually, just don't, because it's false.
Also, the violence isn't just there for "BLOOD WHOO" responses. The violence is there to make an emphasis. The violence is there for you to remember the game well. You'll think back and say "Woah, I remember that scene where...*cue gore*". It's simply to make you reminisce about it. The other reason for a high violence is because of the fantasy factor. You know how Mario and Zelda are very fantasy-like and are virtually completely fictional? Well, the violence is exaggerated or emphasized because we cannot do the same things in real life. It's the same concept, only done in a more mature way.
The majority of the Gamecube/Wii's games are first-party. (Made by them) People accuse Nintendo of making childish games. This is partly true. The majority of the Gamecube's best-selling games were anything involving Mario and friends, Starfox, and Link/Zelda, (except Metroid, that's awesome). All of these games, (Besides TP) are rated E. These games are made by Nintendo themselves, so if people accuse Nintendo of making childish games, they are partly correct, due to the game company behind them as well as the console itself being in conjunction...
Furthermore, please do not get the impression that I hate Nintendo. Their reputation for releasing games geared more for somewhat younger kids (Pokemon, Mario and friends, Link/Zelda) is what turns me off to them, but I do not think they're a bad company at all. Their games are great in content, but what skins are put onto that content is the deciding factor for me.
They haven't changed much over the last 20 years. They're still using Mario and Zelda in their games, through all of the generations, and they're still utilizing fantasy stories much like fairytales you would tell children.
I don't understand the "Sony fanboy/girl" or "Microsoft fanboy/girl" accusations against people who only have those systems. You're attacking someone for having a console that hardly has any of the respective company's games on there... which is silly.
The graphics are being heavily upgraded, but it's up to the game company, not Sony or Microsoft, to come out with some good gameplay, which can already be done. Remember, do not think that just because a game has an excellent level of detail means it automatically has bad gameplay. The level of detail in a game is objective, whereas the enjoyability of those games are not. Do not tell me otherwise.
Graphics are important these days. You can disagree with me all you want, but they do make a difference. I'm not saying they're the only thing that's important, but a game with good renders and a smooth framerate is more enjoyable than a game that is lacking aforementioned things.