It's fine if PC has the best gaming available. Congratulations, you win! That's not the point. The point is, PC is in it's own category. Consoles are in theirs. Handhelds are in theirs. Mobile phones and iPods are in theirs. The PC runs better sure, but you pay an arm and a leg to have it. Back in the day, the pinnacle of console gaming was the NeoGeo. It produced arcade quality graphics, which was unprecedented at the time, and cost about $600. The games cost about $100-$200. Yes it was better, but you get what you pay for.
Here's a challenge. Put a name on the PC. Every console comes with parts manufactured by the same guys that make PC parts. So esentially each console is using similiar parts. Now each console has a name attached, Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft. Each console has it's first, second and third party games. Now attach those rules to the PC. You really can't. If you could you'd obviously say Microsoft. What makes a console unique is the look, the insides and the operating system. A PC can change insides, has many looks, and has multiple operating systems. The most popular of those is Windows.
Here's another challenge. Find me a PC made of parts available in November 2005 that can last me through approximately 2011, playing any game available for PC between those times. Find me a PC made in late 1996 that can play games through 2001.
You cannot compare PC and console gaming. They are different beasts. You can say PC has more exclusives and I can say that my $400 investment will last me through 5 or 6 years. You can say that this $400 PC can play Crysis on medium settings or whatever, but will it be able to play Far Cry 2 next year on medium settings? How about Spore? How about Starcraft 2? How about the 2009 year of PC gaming? Will it even be able to play the same ports it's getting from Microsoft? Will it play Gears of War 2 or Halo 3? Probably not.
Tag: Became a freaking mod and a complete douche, coincidentally, at the same time.
