and things continue to be the same, no idea why you think now is different.
I believe the crux of his argument was that the industry is in essentially this cycle:
...and that he dislikes that cycle as it reduces the total amount of available creativity in high-level game production. (I recommend the below article & accompanying book for anyone who is interested)
I personally don't believe in the myth that the PC Market of the games industry is 'dying' but I can see how people might perceive it as such (in that what they 'know of' as the PC Market of the games industry is becoming less and less significant). Sales are as strong as ever and I don't think we're looking at a potential future crash in the market of PC Games for a long time to come; especially when SSDs, paralleled graphics cards, and quad-core processors become the norm.
I have yet to see credible evidence that anything is 'killing' PC gaming. I do not accept any statistic related to piracy as evidence and perhaps that's my problem but I fail to see how Piracy could 'kill' PC games unless the PC Market was trending downwards, which I fail to see from the resources available to me. My supposition is that people are simply nervous because now they're able to see all the wide-spread sharing of their content between folks. Even without 'mainstream piracy' as some wish to call it: friends trade their games with other friends. That's one of the very original cornerstones of the PC market. Games got popular because people made it popular through word-of-mouth, not marketing, and they made it popular by sharing. That's my conjectural analysis, anyway, and I would rather nobody take it as an expert opinion; I have no data to back those claims up, that's merely my viewpoint.
Anyway, we're getting less a piece of the pie than before, but that's because consoles have a few advantages PC gaming hasn't or doesn't wish to catch up to ("It just Plays", etc.) due to DRM, the above cycle, and other industry staples. Even so, that's not the same as 'PC gaming is dying', but I can see over-dramatization of the industry losing its appeal to some being represented as 'death'.
As far as my 'we only live as long as you allow us' was concerned, if that is what you were responding to earlier, VincentC: If Blind Mind Studios were to become an actual studio then we need money to pay our bills and rent a space to work in close proximity. The money that we get is income off our products. Should we not make enough money on our products that we're likely to be unable to pay our bills should we attempt to make another game, we'll take the safe path, shut down the studio, and try to start it up in the future if we feel like we're in a position where we can dedicate more than 50+ hrs a week on top of other responsibilities to make a game. If we are unable to find well-paying, low hourage work, then we simply will not have the time to make a game and pay for our responsibilities; thus the death knell of the studio.
So it's a perfectly valid statement to make, I feel. Independent studios like ours, where a bunch of start-ups get together, spend a huge amount of time and make a game on nearly 0 budget, rarely get more than one shot to launch their studio with a title of their own. Should this game fail, it is very likely that our studio fails with it, and I will be out of the market for a long time as I am unable to make rent right now, much less more than the lowest-tier of foodstuffs, without leaning on other people's support and calling favors. I am confident if you polled other independent studios you'd get a mixed bag of circumstances similar to what I just described. 
Source: http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/2839/Analysis_What_the_Video_Game_Industry_Can_Learn_From_the_Death_of_Glam_Metal.php
