http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/5251069024/m/9731093738?r=2281092838#2281092838
Is this guy for real?

I think he's referring to the console games, not the PC gamers

I think you misunderstood what this guy was saying. He said that console games are not as intelligent as PC games, so ports from console to PC tend to be dumbed down compared wo what a typical PC gamer is looking for.
I completely agree that PC gamers look for more complexity in their games than console users ON AVERAGE.

Sorry, seems like the grammar was driving me to the wrong direction.

Well their grammar was pretty much absent. So misinterpretations are inevitable. It's not your fault. It's just a reminder of why grammar shouldn't be abandoned on the internet just because 'it's the internet, not an exam'.

Well... at least the author used a period. That is more punctuation/grammar than I have come to expect in many places on the internet, sadly. I am sure everyone has seen the wall of text with nary a capital letter, comma, or period.; that mental image is already starting to give me a headache.
edit: Oh, he used a comma too! And in a good place, to boot!

The amazing thing is, they actually think that people are going to take the time to read it. Especially when they've spent the absolute minimum amount of time possible in writing it and haven't even shown the most basic form of respect for the reader - paragraphing.
It should be followed by a space, of course. But it's a start.

I'd tend to disagree, console gamers and PC gamers are just gamers. The difference between console and PC is control systems and the games that are made for the stereotype. For example with some good design there's no reason that Civilization Revolutions couldn't have been identical to the PC version of Civ IV with the addition of a quick play option but the developers chose to steamline it to the point where its an object example of the dumbed down console game.
People who bought it expected a good Civilization game and for the most part they got it although PC gamers (or perhaps I should say elitists) who saw it saw the streamlining as making the game dumb, applied the same label to those who played the game and then to owners of the system which is especially bad when there's no real alternative.
I think the fact that Dragon Age was such a success goes some way towards countering the console moron stereotype but its not helped when people ascribe intellectual or preferential values to a platform rather than to the person using it. You might as well declare that all fans of Metal are violent psychotics, all fans of country are inbred hicks or all fans of top 40 pop are vapid morons.

While I agree that gamers are just gamers, Aliasalpha, there are fundamental differences in consoles and the PC as gaming platforms. Each has its own area where it shines. Console gamers are better at action type games, like shooters and platformers, while anything requiring micromanagement, such as real-time party RPGs (like Baldur's Gate and Dragon Age***) and RTS, are better on the PC.
This leads many PC gamers to claim that console games are 'dumbed down' because they require less micromanagement. That opinion is then projected and applied towards the users of consoles. Console gamers obviously are offended by this, and they make some equally silly blanket statement.
Oh yeah, thanks for mentioning Civilizatins Revolutions. I have been wondering whether to pick that up for the PS3, just to see how it plays. I don't think i have played a Civ game since Civ 2, so it probably wouldn't disappoint me. Still curious to see how it will play though; I think I can pick up a $20 copy at Gamesto or something.
***I mentioned Dragon Age, because i have heard many many complaints from console owners that bought the game. They say that the console is not conducive to the combat structure. I can imagine their troubles, since I tend to micro manage all 4 party members non-stop during big combats (move the rogue to flank, run the mage around to Cone of Cold or mass heal, make sure the DPS off-tank doesn't get too much aggro, and etc). Without a mouse, I think it would take me three times as long.
Edit: Oh, yeah, forgot to mentioned that, yes, BG and DA can both be pause in combat, and, therefore, are not technically "real time". However, I do think the way they are set up is better for PC play. As opposed to a more shooter oriented RPG such as Mass Effect, which seems to play more towards the strengths of the console.

I don't think level of complexity has anything to do with console gamers or PC gamers having any sort of varying intelligence or the like...it all comes down to what works well on what platform with what controls.

Agreed.

Agreed - and I think controls plays a large part in it. If I could use my keyboard and mouse I would play more console games.

It doesn't matter whether the stereotype is true or not; developers believe it, and they are the ones making the games. There are some exceptions such as Dragon Age, but for the most part developers are trying to make "approachable" experiences that will suit a "wider audience".

Not trying to get into a fanboy discussion here, but can I assume you're not talking about first person shooters?

Console to PC games mostly suck because of the controls. A lot of shooters designed for the console and then ported to the PC feel weird because the mouse is emulating the right analog stick.
Not to mention that console gaming is pretty popular now a days, and most developers want to make their game so everyone can enjoy them. Hence the "dumbing down" of play mechanics. Auto-Aim, Guided Gameplay, Etc.