Middle-class vs working-class maybe? Or upper-middle-class vs middle-class. Or UK vs elsewhere.
Obviously most of the adults I knew who owned PCs in the 1980s and early 1990s were middle-class, usually upper-middle-class. PCs were expensive (even the cheaper ones were the equivalent of £1000 to £2000) and didn’t have any real utility unless you were self-employed in a way that required you to do accounts properly (so not most 1980s builders, say), or you liked to write, or do your taxes in a complicated way. As we knew lots of lawyers, doctors, professors, etc. we knew tons of people who had PCs - and virtually everyone who had a PC, had Flight Simulator of some edition, and they certainly knew how to load it and get it going and so on (because I would make them, very excitedly!).
One thing is more similar - most dads didn’t “play games”. It wasn’t really totally socially acceptable to play something like, say, Wasteland or Pool of Radiance. People would think you were a bit eccentric, at the very least.
But Flight Simulator wasn’t regarded the same way - at least in this section of society. It wasn’t a “game”, it was a “simulator”. There’d been loads of articles in newspapers and so on talking about how it was this remarkable simulator, in many ways as good as the big ones the professionals used (and in some, better), and whilst I think that was before you could get actual flight hours counted on it (as you later could in some countries), it wasn’t seen as “playing a game”, it was seen as “learning to fly” (even if you might never actually fly a plane), which was an entirely different and far more socially acceptable context.
As an aside, I know with my wife’s dad (she’s roughly the same age as me) in the rural US, very much working class and “cool” (he was in a band etc.), it was acceptable for him to play console games (and his buddies did too when they came over), so I think it varied quite a lot regionally.