Some of the devout on twitter believe it's the opposite, and that it's merely to court PC users into buying a console only to get the sequels, but that really doesn't make any sense both for the end user and the company (as that process would take years and not be done within 1-4 years).

I too believe they will go that route, as it makes the most sense and the two do not overlap each other. Sony only stands to make more money that was previously sitting on the sidelines for years. 

The problem of Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo( on the future) will have because of "free games" in online subscription, aggressive online discounts early on games( the famous "race to the bottom") make complications now. AAA games are very expensive. We see this on Days Gone, now Sony sees PC port one form can bank the AAA production but will lose exclusivity, and lost potential sales because of this. 

I'm against a platform holder going multiplatform. The platform holder needs to maintain their games exclusivity for their platforms. 

Times have changed, business plans have changed and so have their budgets. It has become increasingly more obvious that game dev isn't cheap anymore and is only climbing higher, so two of the 3 companies have already noticed this and seek to offset that by releasing on PC. 

It's virtually free money on the table and the only ones getting ultimately pissed by this, are the fanboys who only care for exclusivity, who have never ever ran a company that large by themselves, and who have not noticed the march of time and it's change on development throughout the years. 

Nintendo didn't have to charge for online, but they did, because they saw that MS was doing it, which Sony then followed and Nintendo as a result, followed them as well. Time changes everything.