Yes. It's not fair that the devs get to dictate what works for everyone on consoles. I hate motion blur for instance and will turn it down or off on everything on PC but have to put up with it on consoles.

No. Regardless of how my system handles the game I always disable motion blur when given the option.

While true, you can have quite a few advantages with certain settings such as choosing simpler lighting and fog effects, increasing draw distance etc.

I don't think anyone is saying tha developers should be required externally. I think what they're saying is that once players start to experience this feature in games they will demand it from developers, as they do now with a plethora of things. It's just one of many ways to compete. 

Sure, but on consoles everyone has all of these options at their disposal while on PC people have different hardware limitations. So if they want to play competitively they can also choose the settings that allow them to do so. I don't think I've really ever experienced this being a huge issue in the multiplayer PC games I've played more than casually. Keyboard + mouse type and input lag (which can be affected by framerate) are much greater concerns. On the console end people modify their controllers to have better gameplay performance. The games where this really mattered though were fast paced FPS games like Quake (most FPS games these days are much, much slower.) 

That sells me on the game. I have always wanted devs to be more open with console games. Obviously a game should ship and be optimized to the system, but allowing people to adjust the game to their liking is definitly pro consumer.

I also wish devs would give console players mouse and keyboard, and MOD abilities. These types of things would be a big selling point for any game that offers them, and would tap into a large group of gamers that may have never messed with this or even knew about it.

But that is an player's demand is an external requirment. Its a balancing act between the developers and their audience. When the developers dominate the balance, the base grows smaller, but the game is more unique, with the opposite you have a large fanbase with a game that is standardized (possibly leading to stagnation)

I understand both and I favor the gamers in the the gaming industry, but the developers in that balancing act because that is the ONLY way you get innovation and creativity. Gamers are going to ask for what they are used to, the same of the same, even if they think they want something new, they aren't going to know what that is, and you can be damned if you think they are going to agree on what they want. It's only rarely that consensus provides something novel and useful.

While input is useful, you don't go designing your games around it.

At the same time however, i think it will be a long time before a sizeable portion of the console audience even cares about graphical options cause trouble shooting to provide a preferable experience directly contradicts the ease of use tenent of Console Philosophy.

Sometimes you want 60 FPS and sometimes you want CGI quality.  Not to mention some things like depth of field (I HATE IT!), and motion blur are opinions.

Glad I'm not the only one who hates motion blur.

Well it might or might not become a standard that sells a game, just like 1080p is these days. Adding this feature doesn't limit the creativity of the developer. All it does is force them to do more work to optimize the game for multiple settings. 

@ Bolded It doesn't have to be the players who do the troubleshooting. Since these are closed platforms the developer can do the troubleshooting and then provide presets with descriptions like, "If you like a smoother experience, and want higher frames per second a the cost of higher image quality, choose this option." So on and so on. There is still the convenience factor over PC gaming because in PC gaming you have a specific hardware that the developer didn't keep in mind (they kept general hardware in mind) when creating the graphical options.