Yeah, nope. I could never, ever, ever, give up the vast benefits of PC gaming in favor of....(shiver)..consoles. God, just the
thought of it. Single display? Max of 60hz if, and only IF the game can hit even that? Limited control options? Paid online? 16x9 aspect ratio only? No GSYNC? Limited backwards compatibility (when available), to like, what, a gen or two? Have to buy a completely different cheap box to sit next to another cheap box because of exclusives? Those awful, limited operating systems?
What about games needing to be patched by the developer or platform holder to take advantage of those mid gen upgrades? Nah, I’d rather drop new hardware in and, boom, upgrade in play. I can burn physical, fully patched discs of my digital library. Game de-listed? No prob; there’s a solution for that too. Dev can’t or won’t fix a game (Skyrim PS3)? That’s cool, the community gets it done. Remasters of recent games that you have to buy again? No way. Turn those settings up or install a graphics improvement mod.
I can play, create, work, learn, experiment, and more. There are no limits and no way I would willingly accept any limitations.
“But the player base for latest AAA pew pew game is lower on PC!”
That’s because we have more games than console players do, more choices, and the library isn’t limited by “flavor of the week” affairs. The PC game market is too big for a single (or two, or three, or hell even four or five) release(s) to take all the attention as is the case normally seen on consoles.
“Constant upgrades!”
Nope. One of my machines has a CPU from 2011. It runs circles around all available consoles. If you want only console level performance on a PC, then congrats, your PC isn’t gonna cost much. Also the varied hardware spectrum isn’t a disadvantage to the static console. We have APIs like DirectX and Vulcan. A game doesn’t have to be specifically made to take advantage of powerful hardware: it just does. As a result, the high end doesn’t have to be targeted, a baseline minimum (requirements) is set.
“Bugs!”
It’s always like the same couple of games mentioned when it comes to this. This is not the norm. At all. The reality is that console ports release on the PC as the superior way to play the game. Looks better, runs better, free to play online if multiplayer is a feature. Arkham Knight (one of those often cited examples) was almost 5 years and God knows how many better games ago. It was an anomaly and shoddy product, especially since the first two games are -still- superior to both the original and remastered console releases.
That’s the norm, not the exception.
Red Dead 2 not on PC? Well we have so much to play that I’m not gonna lose sleep over it. If it does show up, great. I mean, the PC version of GTAV is still superior to, again, the original and remastered console releases.
For more information on why the analyst is a moron, and why the PC status as the superior platform will never be lost, here is a helpful and educational guide:
PC Master Race: Spearheading the Second Glorious Age of PC Gaming
pcmasterrace.org