I still don't buy it. I'd like to see it first-hand for myself, taking "average" PC gamers and pitting them against the "best" console gamers.
I never denied that Kb/M is MORE precise. I even admitted that it can make individual players better than they are with a controller. I just don't think it magically makes crappy players suddenly great. I don't think that switching from a controller to a Kb/M is going to make someone an instant FPS god or that they're going to suddenly, magically be able to destroy people that used to thrash them all the time when it was controller vs controller. Some people just really aren't any good at FPS. They have slow reaction times, for instance, that aren't going to be overcome by a superior control scheme.
My buddy is one such person. He's a great guy, and fun to game with, but it's like he has to actually go through a thought process before he reacts to an attack in a shooter rather than just reacting with reflex/instinct/skill. There is no control scheme in the world that is going to make him be able to beat a lot of the hardcore shooter players even if he's on a native Kb/M system against someone on a native controller system. Maybe he's the exception to the rule, as a sample size of "1" from each category isn't exactly statistically significant.
Another consideration I don't think they're even thinking about is frame rate and screen lag. I bought a 19" gaming monitor that has much lower response time than my flat-screen TV, and I IMMEDIATELY saw a drastic improvement in my performance on average. Games where I used to go anywhere from 7 and 3 up to 10 and 1, I started going 15 and 3 up to 20 and 0 rather consistently. Basically it nearly doubled how well I was doing because I could react faster than a lot of players on laggy flat screens. Since I was playing on the same game, same console, same controller, but on a monitor specifically designed for low latency for gaming, I attributed the improved performance to the monitor's response time since there's no way I gained that much skill overnight.
Factor that in and I believe that PC gamers on a superior, low-latency monitor have a distinct advantage in reaction time in any given encounter against a console gamer. A few frames or so may not sound like much, but it can be a HUGE difference in twitch shooters.
At any rate, I have zero desire to be a PC gamer mainly because I'd rather pay one low price and game on something for 5-8 years than to have to upgrade parts to stay with the curve every 3 years. PC gaming to me is just too expensive, and the only real advantage (for me) would be graphics, which isn't enough incentive, because I've always been just fine with my "inferior" controller rather than a Kb/M.
As for the "shitthatdidn'thappen.txt" comment by another poster, I've got nothing to prove to you so I won't say anything further on the matter. Besides the fact that we're way off topic now anyway.
