If there weren't any consoles you might have a drop in the total number of games put out, but quality would rise a ton.
Not even close to the truth. Without the bankroll consoles provide, you'd less big budget games (GTA wouldn't exist in its current state, it took consoles to launch the series into what it is now), but likely more smaller, creative titles. Whether that would be a good or bad thing is up to your subjective view.
I don't even see how you argue quality rising unlness you're speaking about only having to develop for one platform? There are plenty of counterpoints to this as there plenty of PC exclusive games that fall short of multiplatform titles. It rarely holds any bearing on the quality of the game. Sure, bad ports exist, but they exist for all platforms.
With the gaming market trending more and more into a blockbuster market, consoles have been relied upon by big publishers to push the company profitable. I don't particularly love CoD anymore, but I appreciate what it does as it finances far more than just a new Call of Duty. I'd figure the master race would be wise enough to understand this.
Which doesn't even take into account games like CoD which basically bankroll Activision to being able to do whatever the hell it wants to on other fronts, because they are ALWAYS in the black financially, because of the CoD franchise.
Many of these large franchises (Elder Scrolls, Mass Effect, etc.) rely on consoles to move more copies. Modern Warefare 3 sold something like 3-4 million on PC, where as the console version pushed over 25 million combined. Don't really wish to single out this series though, it's just very easy to do so since there is some much open data on it.
This post was edited on 1/5 at 1:41 am