I haven't had to upgrade my rig in ages thanks to the console-first release trend. 4 years sounds about right. That said, I also own a ps3 and the games I have for that can pretty much be counted on one hand.
In my opinion, some games make more sense on consoles than the PC. It's true that there is very little difference in hardware between them, especially these days, and the idea that one can somehow squeeze more performance out of consoles simply because they are specifically geared towards gaming and are mass-produced according to one unifying design is now obsolete: the modern console is especially vulnerable to bugs and performance issues. But this is beside the point.
I would suggest that consoles are more appropriate platforms for games, particularly action oriented games, that feature local multiplayer. Such as fighting games, platformers, re-envisioned digitalized board games and the like. Games that offer up competitive (or cooperative) gameplay that does not require hours of active involvement, the way a strategy game on the pc might, but rather engage players for as long as they themselves are willing to be engaged. It's an "entertainment station", something you switch on during parties or if you have a few minutes to kill before you head out on the town with your friends.
To do the same with the PC is far from impossible, but inherently more cumbersome, especially if one expects the engaging gameplay-experiences of 10 or more years ago to resurface. Different hardware setups and preferences do require the presence of a serious configuration tool to be present with games, and we all complain when it isn't there in a PC game. Not so on consoles, where having more than one screen of options popping up can get annoying when all you want is to kick someone's ass in Tekken. Byte-sized gameplay also doesn't make sense on the PC, which is a multi-tool that always engages your attention beyond just some one game that you might feel like playing for 15 minutes, and so check-points and save-points really feel out of place and can't compare to a proper save-at-will system; but they make sense on a console where you might drop off for an hour doing something else and then pick it back up where you left off.
The multiplayer on PC's has generally been over a distance, either in a LAN or over the Internet, and this makes sense; the control-schemes for pc games normally don't transfer well to gamepads, being able to see what your opponent is up to takes away some of the fun from rts/fps type games, a desktop computer usually ended up sitting on a desk which isn't the most comfortable way to fit several people in next to each other etc. Consoles were great for that though but, at least in my experience, they have been less than wonderful in multiplayer over a distance; from Red Alert on psx with serial cables and 2 tv's, to the various matchmaking services on the current generation consoles, Internet multiplayer has been unreliable and cumbersome. I myself fondly remember playing 2p Liero with my friends, using the same keyboard for both control-schemes and on occasion triggering key-conflicts with space/arrow-k combinations and, in terms of comfort, it couldn't compare to kicking each-other's asses in Tekken 3 or Xtreme games for the psx; and these are the sort of games we would play for 15-20 minutes tops before going out, where booting up a WC2 skirmish was hardly any more of an option than an engaging crpg would be.
Maybe people are forgetting that there used to be a distinction between consoles and pc, simply because the games have become so similar, utilizing the same mechanics and dropping for every available platform. Actually, that may well be a perquisite to even have this discussion. For my own part, apart from a few select gems, I'm not interested in neither "PC" nor "console" games as they are presented today and couldn't care less what platform they utilize, especially if the devs aren't willing to play on the different strengths of these platforms.
