I think the primary difference is a matter of complexity. PC games have much wider control schemes, they're generally deeper (esp. with various "deep" genres that don't really translate well to consoles), there's a much wider back catalogue, and it is (let's face it) a good bit harder to get started with PC gaming than with console gaming.
Thus, the PC player believes himself to be more hardcore (and quite possibly rightly so, if the wargaming population is included in the reckoning) than the console player in much the same way that the console player believes himself to be above the casual player. (including, ironically, the new generation of Facebook "gamers" on the PC) It is in every sense a matter of aristocracy, of setting oneself apart from the "common folk" by nature of one's temperament - in this case, the ability to wring enjoyment from inherently tougher activities. It mirrors the Rennaissance era of "high culture" complexity and "lowbrow" entertainment - the former intricate and detailed to the point of stiltedness; the latter simple and immediately mindless, but nonetheless great fun.
Neither side is superior, je pense, only different - but when the interests of one side are overlooked by the market in favor of the other, then strife quickly follows. It is undeniable that the "aristocracy" has been largely passed over in favor of the "commoner" in today's videogame market, which is bound to make the "aristocracy" a bit miffed...