Faster or better isn't as important as being there first.
Tell that to the Dreamcast. Or Xbox 360 while looking at Revolution (I'm not calling it Wii) sales. Or the Jaguar. Or Atari. Or the CD32.
The Amiga was faster, had more colours, better sound etc...
Yet had nothing to match F-Zero's graphical punch, nothing to match Gunstar Heroes' glorious mayhem, routinely received lazy-ass ports of high profile arcade games that widened the perceived gap (see UN Squadron, Strider, Final Fight, Street Fighter II et al) and would offer up inferior imitations of console exclusives with a straight face (Speris Legacy anyone?) And don't forget, I was talking about the A1200 there -- supposedly 32-bit. It should have
run rings around the 16-bit consoles, not struggled to keep up.
But I'm talking game design and execution also, not just technicalities (because you could shove a copper list backdrop behind anything to up the number of colours onscreen with the Amiga, but doing so means jack shit for the
quality of the game): Show me the Amiga title that beats Kenseiden or Wonderboy III at what they do... those are
Master System games, man. Very often the craftmanship just wasn't there on the Miggy, and when it was (Chaos Engine, Lotus Esprit, Lemmings etc) the other platforms either got decent ports or comparable titles.
Sony did nothing, they didn't need to. Playstation was not available in quantity for worlwide consumption until late 1995, at which time Amiga CD32 had been out of production for a year and a half.
Keep up fella. The original assertion was that the CD32 was on its way to becoming a success before CBM imploded, taking the console with it. I'm saying that's cobblers and it would have failed anyway, largely due to the PlayStation being light years ahead. I was commenting on a hypothetical situation.