My plan

[Pilot_51]

If you build a PC with the exact hardware specs (RAM, CPU, etc.) of a console, you could probably get it cheaper than the console. Nothing really "needs" to be replaced to enjoy the games made to run on it, it's just that PC hardware advances way faster than consoles because lots of companies build the PC parts while only one company works behind the scenes (with a little help from big names like ATI or Intel) for a console they'll release in some 2-5 years.
Both have their advantages and disadvantages for how often they're upgraded. PC's are good for those that want the most out of their gaming experience, with top-notch performance and graphics, and wouldn't mind spending a couple hundred or so a year to keep up with the latest high-end games. Consoles are for those that don't want to worry about upgrades and want to be able to play new games for the life of the console, but they don't get nearly as much improved graphics or performance on one console over the years. Another thing, once a new generation console is released, the previous generation quickly loses new game releases, while PC constantly has games being released, some that could even play on systems 5-10 years old (I'm especially talking about the free games you can download). I haven't upgraded my PC motherboard for about 4 years and I can still play Doom3 and many other recent demanding games at descent performance, but I'm feeling the impact and getting ready to upgrade it (FYI, the best AMD motherboard available is only ~$150).

[ShadowMarth]

Mother boards aren't the expensive part. Video cards and RAM are. Heck, the best alienware you could buy a couple months ago is already outdated from the latest games by a whole GB of ram, and it was nearly $6000.

[Pilot_51]

Motherboards aren't the expensive part, but they aren't much cheaper than anything else if you're going for budgeted performance. The mobo is also a very important part for compatibility and staying up to date, because they include lots of different standards and if a new one comes out (USB2, PCI-E, and SATA are good examples) the board becomes outdated, other hardware usually only gets outdated in one or two aspects and they last about as long as mobo's before getting really outdated.
I suggest always staying away from pre-built systems and learn to build them yourself if you want to save money, not only will it get rid of all the extra junk software, but you'll have 100% choice on what hardware and where you buy from, so you could choose increased or decreased performance for different parts as your budget and needs require, likely saving a couple thousand bucks on a high-end system. If you don't have money to throw away and aren't totally disparate for the latest and greatest, pick hardware somewhere between 6-18 months old, because the prices would've seriously dropped to make room for the latest hardware and you'll still have decent performance for the latest games.

[ShadowMarth]

A 2.4-3.4ghz P4 with at least 512mb of ram would cover you for some great stuff (plus a good graphics card, I suggest a PCI-E one) like UT 04, but don't expect to be running BF2 on it.

[Pilot_51]

I used to play UT2004 just fine on Athlon XP 2000+ (1.7GHz, 2GHz Intel equivalent), 512MB PC2100, and 64MB AGP 4x. Right now I play BF2 (barely) fine with same CPU, 1.5GB (PC3200 limited to 2100 by the mobo), and FX5700LE 256MB AGP 8x (limited to 4x by the mobo). My PC is essentially proof that technology 4 years old can still play the latest games, with just a 1 or 2 new parts.

[kyletazz]

etal gear solid 1 and 2 are ou on the pc and i have the 1st resident evil for pc!
and online gaming is better on pc's!