Well, obviously the two platforms are extremely different, so in the case where something develop is affected by those differences, like in the Pirates of the Caribbean case, yeah, that should be pointed out.
Except it shouldn’t be called “console-itis” or even thought of in that frame, because that assumes there’s something nasty or disease-like about consoles themselves and supports retarded PC elitism. Any magazine worth its salt should only give its readers intelligent criticism from its writers, and any kind of PC elitism is unintelligent as it is, of course, completely laughable to think that either platform has ever been, ever will be or is superior to the other. Digging into that kind of thinking is like moving yourself closer to the tacky console war attitude among fanboys or the sludge-like vocabulary of online-insult-spewing brats.
On the flipside, in console reviews, they should definitely mention when the PC developer’s past affects their game. For instance, in Knights of the Old Republic, the main menu system was made clearly thinking of a mouse and ignored several decades of easy and fast console menu design, was clunky and much harder to use, despite not having as many mechanics to give menu access as other console RPGs. Despite the game’s very high quality that should have been noted, but only as a failing on the part of the developer, not as a nebulous idea of some sort of PC-itis, garnered from things the high increase in buggines this generation or the unprecedented amount of games that allow you to get stuck in unwinnable states. Those types of things may be connected to PC issues, but assuming they are carried over from them is illogical, nasty thinking and no writer worth his or her salt should indulge in them.
I mean, you usually see developers change their ideas when they develop portable titles, and if they do, it usually results in a better game, because its more specific to the demands of a portable game. In the same way, people who make games for PC and the consoles had better get used to offering one kind of menu screens and options and another, or a different control scheme to facilitate the same result. To not do so and recognize the difference of the platforms is just lazy. To develop the game for the console and then claim it was limited because of console technology is also lazy: any of the legendary of the console developers probably could have smacked that argument out of the air and developed much more impressive. PC-legacy developers need to realize that developing for many of the consoles is different, and adapt to that style, just as much as when console ports from say Capcoms and Squares need to be more than just putting a mouse control scheme, making it run without too many bugs and calling it a day, but not even giving you a way to quit out of the game due to the turn-off/reset scheme of consoles. These problems really are just laziness, inexperience and excuses all around.