What you are saying is the same as if Sony puts out an 8-track player and cons 75% of the market into buying it, promising it plays CD's. There's no difference.
Your analogy is specious. Intel does not claim that its various integrated graphics solutions have features which they do not have. The problem is that game developers are requiring features in their games which Intel's solutions do not provide. However, that doesn't mean that game developers couldn't make games with graphics that are adequate for a lot of players which would run on Intel's graphics. For example, some of Intel's current and older integrated graphics solutions support Dot3 bumpmapping. However, most game developers which use bumpmapping use pixel shaders to implement it because it looks a little better or they have moved on to normal mapping and other more advanced rendering effects. The point though is that Intel's graphics and other older graphics cards have many features which never really got fully exploited by a lot of games and could be fully used to provide some decent visuals without requiring a new video card. Sure these games won't look like Unreal Engine 3 or even Doom 3, but they don't have to, to still look alright, have a lot of features, and to be fun. If console game players don't mind games which run on five year old hardware, why must PC game players?This comment was edited on Jul 14, 20:23.