| killer7 said: https://youtu.be/br32luTomOU?si=6YDSGacf1azZFXyW |
Maybe I am wrong but ... I think you may be missing the point. I have not gamed on PC since the days of WarCraft 3. I am not a fan of PC gaming because time more so than money is my gaming bottleneck. So please do not assume I am a PC fanboy I just recognize the benefits / drawbacks of PC. These days the PC I use is an old Windows 7 machine with integrated graphics. I doubt it would run anything modern. That does not stop me from having a 4 port Keyboard, Video, Mouse and Peripheral (KVMP) switch and a 5 port HDMI switch in front of my monitor and old ass surround sound receiver (a Kenwood from the mid 90's). This allows for 4 PC towers to be hooked to 1 monitor and audio receiver at the same time that I have a WiiU, Switch, my work laptop (so I can dual screen) and PS5 hooked to the same setup. You COULD do the same with inputs on a good receiver with the exception of the PCs that use VGA for video output. There may be a receiver out there that has 4 VGA ports but I highly doubt it since modern PCs have embraced HDMI as an output method.
I think you should think of the PC as just an output device not completely unlike a Blu-ray player. Just another component that could be added to nearly any home theater, be it high end or low end. What differentiates PC from other output devices is just how customizable it can be. Perm has been trying to point out that a PC with high end graphics, sound cards, and the right optical drive could actually get more out of the home theater setup you have. Unlike a Blu-ray player a good PC (tower) is customizable, as time passes you could upgrade components in the PC to get better graphics and sound.
To PC or not to PC be it gaming or home theater. PERSONALLY my bottleneck is time, I do not want to piss time away with checking requirements, messing with settings, ect. So that is mostly why I choose to game on a simple plug and play console. The only thing I have to waste time on is updates and downloads most of which, in this day and age, is handled while the console is idle. I just want to put in a disc / cart or launch a digital game and play.
What I give up by not playing on PC ... Mods, the best graphics and sound possible, a whole host of games and community contributions (most of my time with Warcraft 3 was spent in custom games made by other players using the assets and engine Warcraft was running on - playing DoTA, tower defense games and games I would have a hard time categorizing ... you know stuff made by enthusiast for enthusiasts), ect.
I 100% understand a no PC stance but it is baffling that you shun PC while embracing high end sound and video. If you had the time / money you would get more out of what you paid for your A/V equipment if you added a PC to your set up and think of it as simply another component in front of your receiver and TV (monitor). I don't care either way but I bet you could geek out on it if you gave it a chance. Media servers / Network Attached Storage (NAS) are also nice additions to a home theater if you have the cash and little bit of time to set-up / maintain them. End of the day though to each their own. You do you.
As to the actual topic of the thread, my 2 cents: I think they are competing for mind-share and consumers money. They offer dissimilar software to differentiate themselves from the competition. I think that is why some consider Microsoft and Sony to be competing more head to head since their software offering is more similar than dissimilar.
Nintendo and Sony would both love to get every video game dollar you spend. In that sense they are competing, one just goes red ocean while the other tries for blue. Different strategy does not mean no competition.
Essay Pro