This thread seems to be split into two halves: those who say having a mid/high range pc allows you to enjoy a good standard of gaming with moderate graphics capabilities, and those who sing the praises of having a "super rig" that can out-graphic a console or normal pc by miles. Most of both groups seem quite adamant that "teh keyboards and teh mouses" are superior to a dedicated gaming controller.
To that first group- isn't what you're describing basically the console experience?
"I can play a variety of good games without too much expenditure"- Sounds familiar.
For some reason these days there's a real stereotype concerning the "console-tard". But I've gamed for years on that basic everymans platform, the Xbox 360, and don't think I'm missing out on much. If I'd invested the same money in a pc three or so years ago I'd have an OK computer which I could have used to play a couple of exclusives. Same goes for the PS3 I guess. Or I could have sunk an English grand into a high powered rig and played the same exclusives with better graphics, but been too poor to by food or clothes for the next decade.
As a final point; if mouses and keyboards are so superior for the playing of games, why do machines designed exclusively for gaming use controllers? I get that they can be a bit difficult to use in an RTS if the interface is bad, but done properly (in say, C+C Red Alert 3) they handle OK. And lets face it, it's a damn sight easier to connect four controllers to your Xbox for local multiplayer than it is to squeeze even two people onto a keyboard
I could just be an uneducated console-tard misunderstanding the whole issue, and I agree that PCs make up the ground with game customisability, but... I don't know. At best that puts them level with consoles as a platform.
Except the Wii. That thing can burn in hell.
