The trouble with PC's is (sadly) the lack of anything proprietary. The old IBM PC-compatible thing seemed great to everyone at the time, and gave developers (hardware and software) and home computer users a type of freedom they couldn't have imagined before.
But the drawback is there is no "PC company" out there pushing to give PC's an equal share of the gaming market. Any company can build PC's, which means the payout is considerably less for any company to push PC gaming when compared to the Playstation. If Sony gets an exclusive game, they get to reap all of the rewards. If a PC company does that, they would be sharing the rewards with 100's of others. So the way I see it, console makers have reasons to pull people away from the PC, but there's little incentive for any PC company to do the opposite.
Microsoft could have become a company that could push PC-exclusives, but they took the easy way out and made their own console.
All true, but my understanding has always been that it's not the companies pushing for PC games to be made, but PC Gamers who have been making companies willing to go that route because we give them money without extra proprietary costs up front for producing the game on our "system". Making a game for the PS3, 360, or Wii/WiiU costs a lot of money to get the rights/tools to do it, but PC development is largely on the cheaper/freer side.
Mostly, developers go where the money is, but the problem with PC games getting the attention they deserve is that too many people are convinced that the only good options for video games are in consoles, and by extension, cookie cutter clone games of the same rehashed ideas over and over with different skins/retooled weapons, such as Call of Duty or Call of Duty
in Space(AKA Halo). Never mind that in large part, such FPS games are in fact
easier to play on a PC with a mouse/keyboard than with a clumsy set of joysticks on a console. But most gamers are addicted to their controllers from years of being told by Atari, Nintendo, Sega, Sony, and more recently, Microsoft, that that's how games are
suppose to be played.
This gets compounded even worse by the fact that a lot of gamers, while claiming to be computer literate, actually don't know what makes a good gaming computer to begin with, so they settle for buying a console so they don't have to think about it because they think it's "cheaper". A relative term, considering a Console's average lifespan usually is about 3-5 years(this latest generation being a few years longer than the average, mostly because of "mini-improvements" and "slim versions!" of the same consoles), but a PC can sometimes last longer than that simply because of the ability to be upgraded with more RAM and new video cards, a feature most consoles lack(save maybe Memory Expansion Slots in a few select consoles).
Simply put, PCs keep up with gaming technology pretty efficiently(sometimes even staying ahead of the curve before games actually get there), but consoles are almost always constantly playing catch-up.
Edit: Sorry for the lengthy post... My response was much smaller in my head when I first thought it...
