This is an emotional argument coming up against reality. There are fewer PC releases from the major studios. When games are released on multiple platforms, the consoles do better sales pretty much across the board. It is easier and cheaper to make a modern game for a hardware spec where you know exactly what is in the machine than it is to make one that will run on hundreds of different combinations of operating system (both 32- and 64-bit), motherboard, graphics card, and amounts of RAM, with millions of different potential combinations of programs running in the background. It remains harder to pirate games for the consoles, in most cases, than for the PC. And the various forms of DRM just make PC gamers that much more likely to express their outrage either by refusing to buy or buying the console versions of games instead. Look around the forums here and you will see as much.
Independent game studios have some breakaway hits. That's wonderful; I cheer each and every one of them on. But take a look at the dusty basement of Steam some time, and you will see dozens of games that are selling for $10, $5, $1, and rarely get a hundred sales in any given month. And they're the lucky ones; they've made it as far as Steam. Many game creators are lucky to make back the costs of the software they used to make their games. Look at some of the independent developers' blogs and forum posts. Look at how many people, given a choice, wouldn't even pay $2 for a game as good as World of Goo. PC games are a great place to release labors of love, but even Cave Story had to go to the Wii before it saw a cent.
That is the reality, and no amount of individual passion will change that reality. I know this better than many.
I'll admit it; I rarely pay full release price for games. I wait until they come down, usually to the $20-$30 mark. But how quickly they do so is also not a good sign. I was able to get Stories From Liberty City for PC for $7.50 not a month after its much-delayed PC release. And it's not because it's a bad game.
The last game I paid release price for was Mass Effect 2. And I would have paid $60 for it, because its production values are worth it. Good games deserve our support at $50, and and $60, and yes, possibly more.
Take a look at the credits listing on a major release some time. Notice how long it goes on. Think how much of a budget it takes just to employ those beta testers. Do a little multiplication. Now ask yourself, seriously: are those companies really trying to cheat you by asking $60 for a game- the same as the console customer is paying- for, frequently, a superior version- and given that that will likely only be the price for, say, a month?
Or is that a completely uninformed knee-jerk reaction?