Well that makes sense to me.
Like I said, I don't ride the waves, but I follow them and buy behind them. By the time I have to start checking system requirements and wondering if I can run the game, I am getting close to starting from scratch again anyway. And when I see people talking about Win 7 RAM limitations, it's just hard to know if these are the serious builders who game, or gamers who just like to post their specs and benchmarks in signatures to brag about them (sometimes people willing to shell out well over 4k at Alienware, FalconNorthwest and other . I know the boards you are talking about, the ones with 24 and 32GB limitations, are around what $450-500+ which would put them out of reach for most or just not be practical in my case.
I guess there are two things that I find a real PITA to upgrade in the middle of a build, the motherboard and the OS, so I try to future "proof" them a bit more than other components. I've yet to upgrade a motherboard, when it starts lagging behind it's usually time for a new build, and I always pray not to have it crap out on me. Usually the OS is a given but because of the original and in some cases, lingering issues with Vista, I wasn't wiling to pay full price for it at the time, and I might not have actually looked at Windows 7 for this build until they came out with their rather inexpensive upgrade sale (although I kept hoping the full version would get similar treatment). So anyways, I appreciate the opinion. It goes with what I was thinking. And maybe it's just me, but it seems like requirements for games in general aren't moving as quick as they used to. There have been a few that really surprised me, Ghostbusters has a pretty steep recommended requirement setup but it's little more than a poor port from consoles that arent' even close to that fast.