1) Console gaming also benefits from PC gaming, as you stated the bleeding edge graphics of PC get taken up by console developers years later, but those bleeding edge graphics wouldn't be commercially sustainable for the majority of devs if it werent for the revenue from console games. Gaing for everyone,

2) So you agree that all of the changes that were presented as being the fault of console gamers in the OP are actually a result of the fact that cost of development is growing more rapidly than userbases can? Cool

Last paragraph. It makes perfect sense, I'll go into it in a bit more detail.

Lets say you have a rich friend. For argument's sake we shall call this friend Console Gaming. Console Gaming gives you $10 every day to buy cool stuff, such as bleeding edge graphics, with. Then, one day he gets robbed and loses his ability to continue to provide financial aid. He then tells you he can't give you money anymore. The polite person (Me) would say "That's ok, infact, I'll try to give a little back if I can" You, however, fly off the handle and blame him (Such as by creating threads with titles such as  '12 ways console games are hurting PC gaming') because you can't afford the shit you were going to buy with the money he was to give you.

Still not making sense to you? Console gaming has been keeping PC gaming alive for quite some time, and now it is losing its ability to do so. That is not the same as console gaming hurting PC gaming.

some of them are due to the cost of development but not all. 

and your last paragraph still does not really represent the state of game development as consoles are not pushing better graphics for PC gamers, if they were multiplatform games wouldn't look pretty much the same or wose as PC exclusives from 2007 and Crysis 2 wouldn't be a side grade in graphics. If your anology was really representative of the situation then developers would be making cutting edge PC games and dumbing everything down for cheap cash in console ports, but what is actually happening is that developers are creating console games and then just putting out a cashin on PC without taking advantage of the PC platform or bothering to remove the features that don't work on PC.

a more acurate anology would be 

Someone is used to getting the best of everything and getting something better every other year but as the cost of products incresses he is foced to buy the same old level of product he was used to getting several years ago because that is the only product that everyone else can afford and the companies that used to be pushing boundries are now rereleasing the same products with a new coat of paint every other year.

In other words the lure of easy money on consoles and multiplatform development is driving development in technology backwords, which is bad for everyone.

In the past each new generation of consoles would bring over technology that was developed over the years on PC, next generation will be a cold start for 99% of developers and will make next gen games far more expensive in the early years, compaired to how it would be if developers were still pushing technology as far as possible on PC. We are in the point of the console cycle where PC games would usally be showing gamers what the next generation will look like but instead 99% of PC games still look like the current generation of console games.

But anyway this is getting off topic because most of the problems listed in the article have nothing to do with graphics and more to do with the fact that developers are not making PC freindly design decisions when making PC games the cost would be insignificant but as they know that PC gamers will probably buy the game regardless or they just don't care they don't bother. Simple things like adding mod support, creating mouse and keyboard freindly UI, releasing day and date, adding support for DX11 effects, providing options to tweak the games graphics and controlls and not adding stupid things like mouse accelleration without an easy way of turing it off would go a long way in apeasing PC gamers.

You're saying that PC developers cut costs by cutting the cheapest alternative (PC)? Makes no sense. Besides; if console gaming was so healthy and good for PC gaming and gaming in general, why is it that this gen (the biggest console generation by far) has seen more bankrupcy and shutdowns than any other? PC game development is still cheap compared to the PS360 (not the Wii though but developers don't seem to want anything to do with it).

Your argument of "console gaming is required for PC gaming to exist": Where does all the tech and work on console games come from? My grandmother? PC gaming is equally important for console gaming, so it doesn't become completely irrelevant and watered down into unplayable smudge. You're making it sound like consoles are the sole reason PC gaming exists when the fact of the matter is this; console gaming is threatening the existance of PC gaming and has no doubt harmed it greatly. PC gamers don't owe console owners any thanks, they're part of the very market that is taking more and more depth and funds away from the PC as a platform.

The market as a whole is turning casual and stylistic and the PC was never made for that as it's general purpose while console gamers seem to be perfectly content with it.

PS: Please, don't start blaming piracy, if piracy kills gaming then the Wii and 360 should be dead or dying or at least move little to no software.

^^^ i see where your coming from but what do you want console gamers to do??? i try my best to buy games that i dont feel are casual, but im not plucking down hundreds of dollars just to play some generic FPS that i could already play on my console. For what??? better graphics??? some modded content that ill probably never use anyway. it sucks that that some PC games seems to be getting the shaft but hey, id be lying if i said it affected me that much. sorry

You are already seeing the effects. I have been laughing my ass off this entire gen at how the "hardcore" HD console people are making fun of the Wii and its games. Apparently now the mobile crowd is laughing even at those.

Basically, what I find dumbed down, doesn't even reach as many people. What the console people find dumbed down also apparently doesn't reach enough people. The new Angry Birds was sold 10 million times, in a very short amount of time. I'm sure you find it dumbed down compared to other games on consoles, but it sells more.

Basically, this effect of dumbing down, affects you.

Gaming has always dominated on consoles, it isn't like they just barged in and "ruined teh grafix!".

Nobody had a computer in the NES / SNES era, the PS1 and PS2 sold into the hundreds of millions and it seems like the PS3, Wii and XBOX 360 are doing just aswell.

The matter of the fact is, without consoles, PC gaming wouldn't exist or be as big as it is now. Your "12 points" were pretty poor IMO.

^^^that doesnt answer my question about what console owners should do. dont know what Wii or mobile games have to do with this either. I see the effects on PC, however as ive stated they dont effect me because im not a PC gamer... yeah you guys are getting a raw deal and that sucks but thats just the way it goes sometimes

@vlad  thats where your wrong and that whole elitism comes to play. you dont know me you dont know what i like. I have and play and enjoy angry birds. I dont see it as dumbed down, i see it as a simple game that doesnt cost as much. I like all games(except MMOs) your acting like because angry birds sold that all of a sudden they'll just up and stop making games you want to play, its never been true before and i doubt it will change in the future

I don't want console gamers to do anything but what they're doing; play games and enjoy them. The problem stems from marketing and development and causes more "casual" consumers to gain almost all market-dictating consumer power and the cycle goes on.

What I don't want console gamers to do is harbour and spread the idea that console gaming is paramount to PC development and longevity as a gaming platform because its just not true.

There is room for two markets but the tide and times are such that developers refuse to see it and act on it, while others are branching out and finding alternate ways of making money (Valve is a prime example, they have yet to "sell out" as a PC developer and they have found a good source of income through engine development and royalties from that and, of course, the Steam portal). The gaming market is as big as ever but it takes more to be a developer nowadays, too many shitty concepts are greenlighted and some of the truly great minds of our time are being peddled onto menial tasks (imagine former Westwood studios employees making mobile games for EA and weep) or are being made to produce drivel for the masses. The masses tire and new drivel is thought out and released.

As it stands now, the gaming industry is setting itself up for a big fall like the music and film industry not wanting to embrace new times and methods. Adapt and survive and realize that there can be two viable markets; the same is still true for movies and music as well, underground bands and indie films are still available alongside commercially big franchises and artists.

By the way, my post should not be taken as a nod to the Wii and it's current business model, the Wii takes the same problem into the more extreme imo but I do find it laughable that the HD consoles are being lauded as "hardcore" globally when all they're actually contributing to is the simplification of games and gaming in general in the long run. Bigger budgets that yield less depth, creativity and raw value = lose/lose situation both on a technical and artistic scale and for both consumers and developers.

How is it possible to get so much wrong in such a short post?