The thing is, why do I have to go out of my own way, to give you data from a specific point in time?.
You have a strong personal feeling, but that isn't being backed up itself. You're assuming something to being a fact, without actually backing up that side beforehand.
I just see it as you thinking PC is dog trash in NA, and that it'll never change, but general and revenue data from around the world, from various websites is saying things differently, but again, looking for specific data from a specific time-frame isn't going to automatically trump every data collection/reporting site out there, certainly not one random user on a site that's hardly mentioned as much on the internet.
"some people think PC is clobbering consoles", and you think it's doing worse, or somehow "50/50"?. According to global revenue, dev sales talks and general talks around the world, PC gaming seems to be doing amazingly better than it was 15 years ago.
Have you even considered taking on the even bigger giant?, the mobile market, which actually does make more money, is more popular, and has more users than consoles combined?. Will that be another "it can't be" situation you'll feel?.
I think you've lost site of my original point. My issue is that the success of the PC is overstated. It doesn't have a huge base in older gaming markets like North America. Growth of Steam comes largely from new territories where consoles do not have much of a presence. I don't think the PC is dog trash or anything like that.
Look here are my original two posts.
I've always felt Valve's numbers are misleading. I would like more hard stats from them. I don't think Valve is as nearly as popular as the big 3 in North America. Instead I think Steam gets a lot of users in places like Russia where consoles are not readily available.
Also, I personally don't use Steam. If I do get a PC game it has always been from gog.com. Given the rise of the Epic Games store, I might consider them as well. So you can count me as the type of person who might use the Epic Games store but not Steam.
A couple reasons.
1) Before Steam came along we had numbers for both PC and Console sales. PC games never sold like console games did. The big money was always in console gaming. This was also in an era when PC gaming had more exclusives (and better exclusives IMO) than it does now.
2) Valve never gives us all of their data. This in itself is telling. The XB1 is not selling well and Microsoft doesn't give us data about the XB1. I suspect Valve is the same way. If the data was actually good, then the company would give it to us regularly.
The thing is, it really isn't, that's what you think about the whole picture. You think it's overstated, not "it is", as if it were already a fact, for everyone to see. You're asking for proof to help aid your line of thought, to prove you being right, to assume what you think is fact. That isn't really a good thought process to take on, unless there's an added motive to it.
I just don't see it your way, where consoles hold some market, that is seemingly untouchable, or has been for years. It's a market that has been tapped and run through over the years.
Even with the previous points, they still do not ring true now, especially point 1, which has the latter half being entirely subjective. We've also had Steam spy, and even then, the very guy who made it works for Epic and he won't do the same for his own company, shouldn't that also be telling?.