Multi-media-wise PCs were behind for a relatively long time compared to other home computers.
I don't think it would be overstatement to say only reason PC won was coz of competition's mismanagement
"affordable" - PC was the superior gaming platform from around 90 if you're generous, but it was never, ever, the more affordable option. IBM compatibles were horribly expensive. Yeah sure, the AdLib card wasn't terribly expensive in itself (about $130), but it gave sound capabilities of the same type, but much weaker than a Sega Megadrive (about $190 for the whole thing)
Sad to say, I don't think many people got converted to the FM sound by the AdLib card. Most games just used the general midi driver, and it wasn't great. A few games with a custom driver (KGB, Dune) showed that the hardware could do better, but it didn't catch on. It also didn't help that soundblaster's AdLib emulation, which probably far more people ever heard than an actual AdLib, was terrible.
Piracy I think is a wash. Sure, it let us play more of the games that existed for the platform, but probably limited investment, in ports in particular.
Yes, in the beginning Sound Blaster cards had the same chip, but eventually they switched to a clone/emulation. But quite possibly it didn't matter much, since most general midi soundtracks made so poor use of the chipset.
Didn't know about the OPL3 clones, agree it didn't matter much since by that time CD-ROM became common and most games got digital soundtracks instead of MIDI/synth stuff.
So yeah, the article has a bit of revisionism there.
Cause and effect are the wrong way round here.
Pretty much every other gaming platform had had multi-channel stereo sound since the mid-80s, so it’s unlikely this is a reason PCs came to dominate the market.
PCs eventually gained affordable sound cards because they were already dominant by that time. There was a market ready and waiting for Sound Blaster, et al.