bolded would get you a standing ovation and mad tips at the GAF comedy club
It is obvious we have different experiences so I'll leave it at that. Suffice to say, I've been able to acquire at least half of the games I most played in my 360 for PC, and that hasn't happened with previous gens. The ports simply did not exist.
Getting a game late will mean a significantly smaller percentage of people were purchase the game on the platform.
Diminished sales and money on the platform overall will diminish publisher confidence and the platform will see less ports on the whole.
If you still cannot grasp this concept, then there is not much else I can do for you.
I can't put my ideas into words well, so I'll just say this and leave it at that: I do not believe developers do this in order to hurt the PC market, they do it because the console market is a more profitable field than the PC market, because developing for consoles makes everything easier for everyone, both the consumer and the developer (not in the long run but that's an entirely different point).
In order to maximize gains, they release first for consoles where the install base is higher in the present and then for all other platforms where the install base will get them more sales in the long run. That seems to me like a solid bussiness decision and I have no problem with that because videogames are not a necesity, they're a hobby. Rockstar spent a hell of a lot of money on a solid game that took years to create instead of going the EA way of releasing a yearly product with minimum changes, so whatever they do to keep it going with todays bloated development costs is fine by me as long as I get to play the game sometime.
I do believe however, that the real problem you have with this is:
It doesn't hurt the platform, but it's disrespectful and insulting to PC gamers. Would be the same for other platforms too.
And that's a respectful way to feel about the issue. I don't feel that way, but I am the minority here, so I'll leave it at that.