Dude, that was like 5 years ago. I'm so touched you remembered.

Steam doesn't necessarily mean much though. I have a steam account and I'm not a PC player. Not only that, but the PS4 pro's specs will become more and more irrelevant as time goes by. So for people who are into PC because of graphics, it's just not the same.

Thank you. This is pretty much what I can see happening and fully agree with. (Well besides Scorpio with it's possible high PP).

How can you say that the enthusiast are the ones waiting for the $500 pc's to upgrade? Then you say they are willing to spend $800+. your not being consistant. If you already have or planing to get a $800+ pc, then yea, most likely you will not even think twice about a pro. Thouse people are out off reach. But the people wic you first mentioned, that are planing to wait a year at least to get a $500+ pc to beat(I would not say beat, more like match) a pro, thouse people will definetly think twice and have theese thoughts witch are the main.

1) wait a whole year for the pc parts to drop so I can have a competitive machine.

2) will still pay more for a competitive machine.

3) consoles have longer life than pc's without the need to upgrade.

4) consoles have higher quality exclusives.

Sony never said that 4k doesn't matter. They said that 4k blu-ray only matters to a minority of potential PS4 buyers. And the facts support that. MS using that against them is only valid of that helps MS gain marketshare. We'll see in the long run whether it goes. My guess? The gap will keep increasing. 

Sony only marketed the PS as a an entertainment device during the PS3 era. In fact it would make more sense for them to tout the ability to watch Netflix on it than playing movie discs. Remember that the PS4's biggest marketing angle is that it's a machine for gamers. Like with the 4 The Players ad campaign.

MS has started investing in PC because they know the console market is a no-win for them. They just cannot compete in this market.

In a year's time when the Scorpio releases, what will MS's marketing say? That the Scorpio can deliver 4k gaming? Something that Sony would have been saying in their ads for about a year already? There's just not enough of a difference for most people to care more about the Scorpio than the Pro or Slim PS4. 

You're talking about a small segment of pc gamers who would not jump platform no matter what. House is talking about those people who would have got a decent PC (nothing fancy) for better graphics. Just look at the steam stats - the majority play at lower than 1080p. I can even see some of those jumping from PC to PS4.

That should be read as "at the exclusion of playing on a PS4."  PC users (me being one of them obviously) sometimes make the descision to go full PC, thus they don't buy the exclusive however many or few there are on a console.  This is Sony saying, "Hey we have an updated console that can pump out the best graphics on a console this gen, for a good price, right _now_, that might change your mind from not buying one to play some of our exclusives."

Some PC snobs always like to play the PC master race card, to show that their's is the far superior choice, always.  When in fact that is simply not the case if you want to play specific games you can't get on the PC.

Tbh I go where the games that interest me are (and with mod support as well as other benefits). We get all sorts of snobs from any platform that claim theirs is the better choice. That video for example that RUler linked in his thread about Bethesda/Sony mod support has the gent's youtube channel chock full of jabs at PC and Xbox players, there really sin't a side that remains pure, innocent and clean in this industry, not even mobile players. 

I'm taking issue mostly with your statement of:
"PS4 Pro clearly is competitive as you can not build a PC comparable to PS4 for $399. "

You never elaborated or made any further distinctions on the pricing issues outside of that, hence you give the impression that the PC is inherently worst value for money when there is so much more to the cost of a platform than your outright hardware purchase.

In otherwords a full break down of costings is more representative than the simple plain figures you have used.

If you have a Steam account and don't use it or you have not purchased at-least a single game, then you are not counted in any of Steams statistics, Steam is more presentative of "active" players, where-as Sony and Microsoft will just use a collective number regardless if a player is active or not.

I wouldn't be surprised if Steam had something like half a billion user accounts all told, with that said only 180~ million are active on a monthly basis who have purchased at-least 1 game, thus the accounts with say only Team Fortress 2 don't count.

To be fair, DVD never really mattered at one point either.
Yet the PS2 included the technology and that storage medium then exploded into popularity.

Blu Ray only mattered to a minority of movie goers at one point, yet the PS3 still pushed that Medium, whilst Microsoft backed the defunct HD DVD standard.

The point is that these consoles are supposed to have a life-time spanning years, what will the market look like in 5 years time? What will 4k adoption be like then? I would likely be more content to retain the Scorpio as a Multimedia hub over the long term.

I don't doubt that Sony has this generation in the bag, but that doesn't mean they should be above criticism where criticism is due, same goes for Microsoft and Nintendo, the consumer can influence things when we demand it. (I.E. Kinect, Always online etc'.)

Doesn't really say much when you take a game like Assassins Creed on the PS4 where 100% of gamers play at a resolution lower than 1080P.

And for the record, 1080P is the most popular resolution on the PC, 42.39% play at a resolution that is 1080P or higher.
To put that into perspective you are looking at a good 70-80 million PC gamers, still think that's a small number to ignore?

Not to mention resolutions like "1536 x 864" that Steam reports isn't a standard resolution, it's likely a scaling bug that has been mis-reported, yet commands almost 4% of PC gamers? (I have *never* seen a panel like that in my entire Multi-decade PC gaming life.)

2560x1440, 2560x1600, 2560x1080, 4k and other Ultra Wide standards are all growing on the PC, whilst lower resolutions in general are seeing downward trends.

With that said, the point of the PC isn't the power to have the best, that's always an option regardless of the console that is on the market.
The power is that you can spend less and get less or spend more and get more, you actually have a choice on what you can have and what you want and when you wish to upgrade, rather than having someone dictate all that on their own terms.

Steam tracks 10s of millions of active users, and their collective data means far more than your anecdote of One.