When someone sees a photo they like and says something about what a nice camera I have, I understand where the comment comes from. A good camera is visible; judgment is quieter. It's easier to credit the object in your hand than the years spent learning what to point it at.
A good camera does make certain things easier: you miss fewer shots in low light, the autofocus locks faster, the file has more latitude in post. Those advantages are table stakes at this point, useful without explaining why a photograph has something worth looking at.
What separates shots that hold your attention from ones that don't comes down mostly to what was happening in the half-second before the shutter opened: where you were standing, whether the light was doing anything, whether there was something actually worth committing to or you were just filling the card. The camera records whatever you point it at, which means it records your judgment as much as the scene.
Most people who pick up a good camera for the first time get a lot of sharp, well-exposed photos of things that aren't interesting to look at. That happens before you develop the habit of noticing when something is worth stopping for. The a7III cannot give you that habit. You build it by shooting a lot and looking carefully at what came back, and over time the ratio of "why did I take this" to "oh, that's it" slowly shifts.