Okay yes I’m speaking about a singular PC running basic hardware. Idk why you are talking about enterprise deployments
Because we aren't talking about one PC for a pair of IT-educated adults to maintain and play games with. That's ONE PC.
We're talking about millions of consoles sold to the masses as gaming appliances, at a scale that dwarfs even my enterprise experience. If you're having a hard time understanding why I'm comparing your singular anecode to a hundred thousand professionally-managed and enterprise-grade X86 devices which still required between dozens and hundreds of people in my org to maintain, then how are you going to convince anyone you understand the support requirements of the literally millions of PCs it would take to replace consoles?
My staff were all professionally trained in their varied disciplines, nearly all of them with costly professional certifications, with years (or even decades) of experience in their field and likely related fields. Even with highly qualified people, it was a LOT of full time positions worth of effort to maintain those in reliable, stable, patched, correctly configured, and life-cycled in an orderly fashion. Even with all the standards you mentioned, plus addititional corporate architecture standards in terms of hardware selection, operating system hardening, application deployment, and configuration management / enforcement, PCs absolutely still come apart for seemingly random reasons. There's a reason IT infrastructure and EUC departments are big, and it isn't because they're bored and need that many people for multiplayer locally hosted CounterStrike events.
The point is: consoles are a singular, comprehensive, purpose-built, and tightly controlled walled garden ecosystem for games and nothing else. They're radically less complex than a PC in so many ways, all of which are important for delivering a quality user experience
to people who know literally nothing about a PC or its inner workings. And despite what you might think, that bolded section is the very most important part, because the overwhelming super-majority of the populace sits squarely in that bolded statement.
For those people who enjoy mucking with a PC almost as much as they enjoy gaming (myself included, you too) then PC gaming is still a great thing and IMO has the ability to provide a better experience than a console. I say "has the ability to" because it still ultimately depends on the game dev spending the time to create such an experience, versus just aiming for the common denominator of the console(s) where they expect the most money to be made.
EDIT about twenty minutes after posting this response: Want to see how a simple CPU upgrade can result in Windows gaming performance decrease without you ever knowing?
Watch Steve from GamersNexus describe the error they found in their 7950X3D performance scores reported in their 9800X3D review. Cliff's notes: even after following AMD's own published 47 page configuration guide, along with a completely new 24H2 install of Win11, and then manually checking for core parking (which reported 100% successful), they still found out the AGESA config dorked up
which CCD was parked after an upgrade from a non-X3D part to an X3D part, even though every AGESA and every OS configuration setting was exactly as AMD documented.
Again, this came from upgrading the CPU from a non-X3D to an X3D part, something a PC-literate person would absolutely do for all the gaming goodness reasons. Unfortunately, finding the error took quite a lot of digging, and is pretty likely to be missed by many of the "casual" computing enthusiasts even here in our forums. Someone who was very sure all the settings were correct (and, per all available documentation, absolutely ARE correct) would probably be left to assume the gaming performance uplift from the CPU upgrade just wasn't as good as reported.