OK, serious response.
Personally I wouldn't freeze hardware development at 16-bit level. The commercial life of any given platform or technology is one thing, but the room for innovation on that platform is surely only finite.
When the 16-bit machines first came in, the 8-bit market was still healthy. Users were still happy with the things that could be done with their machines, still bought games. Game developers were still squeezing more out of the machines; sometimes technically, sometimes in the realm of originality.
But inevitably, the extra scope 16-bit provided was realised more and more, leaving 8-bit looking limited by comparison. Things appeared on 16-bit that were just plain impossible to achieve, no matter what, on 8-bit. Bigger worlds, better AI, smoother scrolling, whatever.
I surmise that the same argument applies to 16-bit versus 32, 64, 128...
Extra capabilities equate to extra possibilities. In the right hands.
Not all the great games that could have been written for Amiga (or ST even) have been written, but the same could be said for the C64. Nothing to stop someone using that machine well tomorrow.
The gaming world (as a whole) seems to push for new frontiers all the time, good or bad. While the majority seem content with 'new' equating to another RTS quite similar to the last RTS, or a racer with a few more polygons thrown in, true advancement comes along less frequently, when someone with vision truly innovates.
One thing never seems to change, no matter how many bits - the majority of game output is unimaginative crap!