^^^ i think your being too pessimistic. it hasnt come down to that yet. If that were true then we'd only have Wii's and simpler smart phone games to play. as long as their is a market for deeper games we will always get them.  I would like to know how consoles are simplyfing games??? because IMHO the libray for PCs and consoles are not that different. RTSs and MMOs are the only genres i see that thrive on PC but not on consoles. I guess those two could count as "deep" games, but they never thrived on consoles to begin with

The way you worded it sounded like you saw them as a negative as you mixed it in with late ports and poor support. Thanks for clarifying.

As for the support I think a lot of developers are expanding due to high development costs and yes, focusing on consoles more which is actually what has lead to this article; the expansion to consoles has compromised elements of the PC versions (and in some cases all versions). However, this gen has also seen a huge rise in small-medium sized indie developers to thrive on the PC and hopefully some of these will become the big developers of the future (expanding to consoles in the same way Bioware and Crytek have done).

This is a joke post right?

Impossible to tell. Poe's law on PC haters.

I think you just didn't understand what I am saying. I like Angry Birds too. That's fine. What's not fine is if games stopped being made, and only games like Angry Birds came out.

As for elitism, that's true. However any media which is produced to cater to the least common denominator is by definition bad (this goes for books, music, movies, etc.). That is the opposite of elitism, and where the industry is headed.  Some elitism isn't in the least bit bad, otherwise we'd be swamped with material catering to the idiots of society, even moreso than we already are.

^^^ maybe im blind but i see absolutely no evidence at all to suggest that the games you and i like to play are going to stop being made in lieu of stuff like Angry Birds.  As for elitism, you might be right, but who decides what is the lowest common denominator or not??? You??? me?? some college grad??? Im not trying to be a wise ass, but who decides? If you look at stuff like angry birds, twilight, and Transformers as on the low end i would agree with you. But heres the thing, IMHO the people who like that crap and dont want to try to go further, far outweigh people who do. You dont know how many times ive asked different people why they play those games and not something like, i dont know, SF. the common answer is. its too complicated. plus people are cheap 

There isn't just a cutoff but you stated point right there at the end. Lowest common denominator spawns simple entertainment. It's called the least common denominator because it appeals to the broadest amount of people which includes the huge percentage which are just plain idiots. It's perfect from a business perspective, and terrible from a cultural perspective.

^^^we can agree on that, but whatcha gonna do??

bitch, moan and buy as much high end content as you can afford. There sure is hell isn't anything else to do...

Is there a necessitiy to so much hostility towards consoles? Console gamers get pissed too when something is watered down. I hated it when I played DA 2 Demo/SC Conviction. I didn't go around blaming consoles/PC/bioware/casuals/COD for that.

Things happen. There are a few developers that don't cater to the CoD crowd, and some will learn later on.