A PC in comparison is a more modular and versatile machine which to me says they're "similar, but different" so maybe we shouldn't be having the console VS PC debate in price/performance terms. A non-proprietary gaming HTPC even if it fills the same roles of a console should never be priced similarly in the first place and that they require their own price point, but the paradox I've run into is that even if you shouldn't try to compare the price/performance of the two you still can't make a unique price point because a modular PC doesn't have a set-in-stone price point.
That's pretty much what I meant when I said
The more you raise the budget, obviously, the more wiggle room you're going to have to edge out on the more customize-able front, PC.
Now, I don't know much of anything about consoles these days--I just bought a PS4 second hand only so I could play Persona 5--but I'm of the understanding they retail around $400 US with a controller and their operating system and often a game, too.
This is what I came up with on
PCPartpicker. The biggest note is that I splurged about $20 going for the cheapest ITX motherboard that had wifi rather than going with a MicroATX motherboard that didn't have wifi, everything else is about as cheap as it gets. My PS4 came with a 500GB (2.5") HDD so I tried to at least match that, and the Silverstone Sugo is ~$15-$20 more expensive than the very cheapest case you could get. There was a RAIDMAX case that was also ITX (but IMO a little less 'living room friendly' or attractive), and it was $10 less. Feasibly, the price could have gone down about $40 if you didn't mind a larger computer. That would leave you just over $400 if you wanted to get pretty much any 'mainline' wireless controller and its adapter. Still no free copy of Windows and no free copy of a modern 'AAA' title.
So this kind of leads into a point I was trying to make which you countered with your humbleness argument. I'm not offended by it, for the record, but I do think it was pretty misguided. Here's the best analogy I could think of:
I've known several people who, when their current vehicle dies, they purchase the cheapest running vehicle they can on Craigslist and ride it until it dies. Most people I know can afford either a 'nice' used car from a reputable dealer or spring for a new vehicle. Even if we can agree that these 'nicer' cars are in fact nicer, the cheap Craigslist cars work and they get people where they need to go. (Until they don't.)
...I don't like to spend too many resources or dollars on something like a PC because I don't want to feel like I'm trying to be better than everyone else. Maybe I go too far to this end, IDK, but I love using budget or entry level equipment for a lot of things. It also helps remove stress of things breaking because it can be a huge setback to replace/upgrade from high end hardware.
So, clearly these people who are spending literally ~$200-$500 on a vehicle aren't "trying to be better than anyone else." Maybe they go too far to this end, being willing to sacrifice having air coditioning, putting up with terrifying noise from the engine at 40MPH, redlining at 55MPH? But given their financial situation, it makes more sense to throw just a few hundered dollars at a vehicle that objectively works--until it doesn't, then they do it again, and it's still cheaper than going through a dealer until like the sixth vehicle kicks the bucket. Sure, it's a lot less heartbreaking when your $300 Craigslist vehicle kicks the bucket, but you've still got to make the decision whether or not you can (or whether or not you want to) afford something nicer the next time. And that's your own decision.
However, I like my vehicle that has air conditioning, that doesn't have any issues reaching highway speeds, has bluetooth, and so on. Maybe I lack "humbleness" or maybe I enjoy a reasonable amount of comfort.
Bringing this back to talking about computers, that PCPartPicker list I posted would yield someone a functional computer. They could play Overwatch or League of Legends (or of course Hearthstone) or pretty much any mainstream game. Going outside of the immediate, well-optimized, mainstream bread box would immediately hit this system with hurdles that would take it below Very High/Ultra settings on most games. Would it still run the games? Yes. Would they still be enjoyable? Probably. I enjoyed Breath of the Wild even though my Wii U cried bloody murder every time I climbed a tree. It objectively would have been a nicer experience if I didn't have to put up with that, though.
Arguably, that computer is
adequate. But that doesn't mean it wouldn't be nicer with a SSD in there, that it wouldn't benefit from more RAM, that it wouldn't benefit from a processor with more physical and logical cores, that it wouldn't benefit from a better video card. This is what I was getting at when I said "I have a hard time recommending that experience to someone."
I appreciate minimalism and I am impressed by people who choose to do without, but it's up to each individual to decide what's an acceptable level of comfort for them and it's kind of pretentious to tell someone that their idea of comfort is or isn't good enough. I mean it when I say I didn't take offense to you suggesting I wasn't humble, but I'm just trying to explain why I think others might have seen it as out of line.
