How about I put it this way. I have to buy a PC regardless of whether or not I am going to play games on it because there are no other devices with the capabilities of my PC. The only additional cost to make a decent gaming rig is the video card which added about $300 for my system, less than the cost of either game console. As far as performance goes, my PC is clearly superior to the XBOne and comperable / slightly superior to the PS4. The initial investment is the only major cost for PC gaming and no matter how much you try to downplay it you can not change the fact that I save money with PC gaming. Finally, not to offend but if you can't figure out how to pick out a handful of components and have a website like NCIX, Tigerdirect or Newegg build, test and ship a tower to your house there is something wrong with you, it really isn't very complicated. If it was complicated, you can always get somebody like myself to do it for you because frankly, I can put together a PC in mere minutes so it's really not an inconvinience. Finally, now that consoles have firmware updates, installations and pathces the "convinience" of console gaming isn't significant as far as I can tell. I had zero difficulty setting up my PC and haven't had any issues whatsoever.

As a 30+ years of gaming on computers for me it was always about variety of genres, specially being fan of P&C adventures and war strategies. Additionally, when KB+mouse combo kicked in that pretty much cemented my choice of preferred platform...so, at least for me, it was never about gfx.

Just speaking from personal experiences... :)

Firstly, I have not once, tried to downplay that pc gaming is cheaper than console gaming. When considering the true costs og gaming. So to sayI am downplaying it is lander at best or misinformation.

And secondly, its even worse if you can't make your point without personalizing it or directly attacking me. Thats completely uncalled for. Even if you nicely start by saying no offence.

Everything you are saying though, still has absolutely nothing to do with the point of this thread. Or what people should or could do so they could also be playing on PCs or what not. Or how cheap games can be or can't be or how expensive console gaming is. I feel like this is the 100th time i am saying this. Even though I made this clear in my OP.

What this is about, is how games are compared. 

Can you tell me how everything you have said is relevant to comparing a game that is running on more powerful more expensive hardware (regardless of whatever reasons you have for buying the more powerful hardware, thats no ones business) to cheaper less powerful hardware? Thats what this thread is about.

That it makes no sense comparing a game running on a GPU that costs 4 times as much as the GPU in a PS4/XB1. And that if you were gonna comapre the game on PC to consoles then it should be a PC bought or built with the exact/similar cost of what it cost to buy the console hardware. So that way you are in the exact same price/performance class.

I think these are all just very simple things and couldn't be more straight forward. And shows how defencive PC gaers get wheneveer the price of their hardware is brought up even if the reasons for bringing them up are to help categorize the differences in hardware and not teh benefits of any suggested cost savings.

Whats funny is that I could even  make this whole argument by taking consoles completely outta the discussion. Let me try it. If you want to compare the performance of GPUs under the $200 price point. Will you include a Titan Z in that comaprison????

Yet you perpetuate this with your moronic comment at the end... Do you even think before you type?

No. I think you really should re-read my OP. You saw what I said, but you are talking about stuff not related to it.

1. What other costs consoles have compared to PCs are irrelevant if all you are doing is comparing the performance of a game running on both. I even went as far as saying that you wouldn't expect a $200 GPU even on the PC side of things to outperform a $1000 GPU for PCs. This point works both ways. If you won't compare a $1000GPU released in 2014 to a $200 GPU released in 2014. Then how does it even begin to make sense comparing how a game running on a $1000GPU to how it runs on a console with what is at best a $200 GPU? So I don't understand what these added costs of consoels have to do with how a game runs on a console to your screen.
   
   
2. Funny you said that, cause that is exactly the point I was trying to make in this thread. So thanks for agreeing with me.
   
   
3. Again, this is not what I was saying in the third point. I am not talking about the fucntion or vast usage options of a PC. I am talking about the fact that theer are people that want to buy something primarily to play games. And how those ppl are not willing to go throug the hassle of building systems or being extremly creative wtth what they buy to get the best possible PC system for the lowest possible cost and would just want to buy something already packaged for them. 

1. Because of the price? *facepalm* I said this, so I'll be more clear - the cost is of the overall system and games. To just cherry pick parts is only done so to biased someones point. If you look at the entire setup cost and games over 3 years, PC's are cheaper (monitor, games, OS carried over/upgrade etc).  Kids just like to ignore the fact that mummy and daddy paid for the TV separately.

2. The comparison is flawed because consoles are so weak and you can get very powerful gpus for dirt cheap. So many console owners cry about this $1000 PC needed when in fact a $100 gpu is good enough to beat the consoles.

3. You could just go and buy a PC off the shelf ? My argument is much better - consoles loan themselves to social gaming far more than PCs.

1. OMG!!!!! NO ONE IS DISPUTING THIS FACT.
   
   And you are stil hammering a point that is completely off base. What has anything you just pointed out got to do with the performcance of a GPU? Does this mean that if I only buy used PS4 games when I can get them for $10 and never pay for PS+ then every game I play on my PS4 is running better than a game played on another persons PS4???????? 
   
   The only kid here is you, firstly for even resorting to such a tone and secondly for seeming to unable to get a very simple point. This thread is about performance and making comparisons of such. Even if I were not talking about consoles and PCs. Would you compare a $200 PC GPU to a $1000 PC GPU both released in the same year? 
   
   You like some thers here (funny enough all PC ppl) Keep going on and on about this whole biased point nonsense. How is the point biased if all the point is about is a games performance on any specific hardware? How is the point biased if I am basically asking why someone would compare a game running on a more expensive GPU to a cheaper GPU. Why isn't that comparison being made between similarly priced GPUs???? You guys keep doging this question. Ok... indulge me. Please. Take Metro redux, now tell me how you would arrive at what sub $200 PC  GPU runs the game best. 
   
   
2. Lol... ok, if you so. But hey lets assume you are right. Are you telling me that we can walk into a store and buy a PC with everything we get in a console for $400 and it will outperform the weak consoles? If so, please.. point me in the right direction. And if you can get you head in the game, you would see that no one is crying here. But I think its telling how you keep avoiding actually answering the questions asked but rather trying to dismiss them.
   
   
3. Don't even know what you are talking about anymore. 

If you have the moniez, PC is the way to go.

Consoles are cheaper and more consumer-friendly, so I definitely see their value.

This is why I do Nintendo for console exclusives I want and PC for everything else.

Alright, seeing that you dismiss anything I say that's not directly related to your original post I'll simply respond to each point and discuss nothing else.

1. $350-400 is not the cost of a new console where I live. I can purchase The Last of Us PS4 bundle for $508.49 taxes included (no S&H), not $350 or $400. Again, a comperable PC cost me about $700 including taxes, shipping and handling. Your point is valid but exaggerated. Additionally, the hardware that I bought last year now costs less than $600.

2. Using a mid-ranged PC for all of your comparison videos would pose logistical problems (how would you determine which components to use, who would determine the price of the system?). Also, you would want to show the PC versions' full capabilities because many of the people who watch these videos have high-end rigs and they want to see what is available to them. I will admit that it would make sense to include a mid-ranged PC in the comparison but not one in the $500 price range though. Direct price comparisons are pointless because I need to own a PC anyway, why not invest a little to make it play games too?

3. As a PC gamer I don't scrounge for refurbished parts (where did you get this notion?) and I don't actually build my own rig. I go to NCIX and use a series of simple list boxes to select from popular components and it's all done in minutes. I have friends who don't know / want to bother so i do it for them, it's a snap. Once the system arrives we hook it up to the TV and we're gaming in minutes.

Additionally, your statement that the price / performance difference gets worse every year is absurd. The price of game consoles does not drop nearly as rapidly as PC components. The PS4 that was sold at a loss in 2013 will not drop in price as much as the PC components that I bought last year. Just for kicks I went to Tigerdirect and tossed together a slightly better system for about $575, nearly a 20% decrease in cost. I could have spent more time looking for better prices but I don't feel like putting much work into this. There is no way for a console, intially sold at a loss, to keep up with the decrease in price for ANY PC hardware. That assertion simply has no basis in reality.