Are PC Games Boring?

I read yesterday that the head of PC games at Electronic Arts declared PC games to be too boring.  I'm not so sure.  I think the number one hurdle for PC games these days is compatibility.  Playstation systems are out at least 5 years before the specs are too little, but at least ALL of the games are gauranteed to work.  PC games, on the other hand, take advantage of the latest PC memory, hard drive, CPU, and video cards.  I'm fairly sure the games have to be written with the assumption that they will run faster when the software is mature. People don't like buying a new computer every one or two years.  It's as expensive or more expensive than buying a new game system.  All you have to know when you buy a console game is which system it runs on.

I think it's economics that pulls the more interesting games to the consoles.  The rest of the interesting PC games are casual games, and many of those are browser-based.  PCs need independent configuration control.  This would be like the ESRB as an independent entity, except instead of content, they'd test it to certain benchmarks.  Finally, instead of counting on the latest configuration and technology, games should anticipate 2-year-old computers will need to run their software.  Compatible specifications need to be boiled down to a single label, like "PC 2007."