Because the differences between the Wii and the HD consoles is more or less the exact same difference between the HD consoles and the PC. So it is kind of extremely hypocritical for someone to include the 360 and the PS3 in the same sentence as the PC, yet not include the Wii in the ones with the PS3 and the 360. It is also kind of hilarious in a very pathetic sort of way.

There's nothing on PC that looks as good as Uncharted II or God of War 3. Crisis is the only PC game that comes close.

HD consoles still roughly are on level with PC.

God of War 3 is not even technically impressive at all. If I locked the camera a little more than what happened in GoWIII on a game I make I can make it look 10x better, if not more. UC2 also used cheapish tricks. Play Metro 2033 and you will see exactly why I say that the HD consoles are are just as bad as the Wii. In fact the difference between the power of the Wii and the HD consoles is much smaller than the difference between the PCs and the HD systems. Then play it in 3D at non-stop 60 FPS, at resolutions which the console games will struggle to push 2 generations from now. I mean hell, the consoles struggle to play any game at 1920x1080, that's absolutely pathetic.

.

Hell, just one of my GTX480's by itself is probably more powerful than the enitre console (either one) so imagine 2 of them (liquid cooled of course, the way a 480s were MEANT to be). Then pile on the 6 core i7 and 12 gigs of DDR3. As far as I am concerned the HD consoles are no more powerful than my toaster. If a Wii is 2 GCs ductaped together, then my PC is around 3 360s and 3 PS3s all duct taped together.

Before you start with all the typical excuses and bullshit, we're talking power. Pure, raw power. As far as that is concerned, the PC makes the HD consoles look like the PS2. If I could set Fur,ark and Prime95 to use up only 90Z% instead of having 100% load, I bet you I'd have absolutely no problem playing any console multiplatform, with better textures and particle effects, on a far higher resolution, and with infinitely less popups, all at silky smooth 60 FPS (which neither GOW3 nor UC2 managed to pull off even at 720). Oh yeah, also absolutely amazing post-processing too. Call me when the consoles don't go up in flames when someone tries to push more than the simplest 2x AA at 720p and 30 FPS.

You're hilarious. Metro 2033 doesn't even look as good as Uncharted II.

All that power means nothing when there are no games that take advantage of it.

Don't you get it yet? 12 GB RAM is meaningless when no PC game needs more than 2 GB of RAM.

And it's not only irrelevant but it's also dishonest to take the absolute strongest PC as an example when your typical gaming PC (which all the PC games are optimized for) is nowhere near that strong.

Maybe you haven't seen it on highest with at those resolutions in 3D. Again, UCII couldn't even handle a smooth 1920x1080 at 60 FPS, it could barely, BARELY, do it at 720p. I don't think a PC has run a game in 720p since 2002 (Diablo 2 LoD had the "high" resolution of 800x600). You know when you are in trouble when people have to say this about the perfomance of the console "Did Naughty Dog truly smooth performance and remove all screen-tear? The answer is "yes"."

Here we go with all the typical excuses that have zero to do with the point of the argument (pure power). "NO games, costs too much, not fair," etc. etc. Remember back in 2007? The PS3 had jack shit for games, and I mean jack shit. Did it deterr anyone from making fun of the duct taped GCs? I didn't think so.

Also, for the next 2 lines before I prove you wrong, let's assume that my rig is indeed the best there is. Why shouldn't it count? Are we moving the goal posts now? If the HD consoles want to play with the big boys and point and laugh at the Wii, they should definitely be ready to get some flack in return in that area. But let us assume that my PC didn't have all it had, it only had a lowly 6 gigs, an i7 930 instead of EE, and a single 480 gpu. I still think that the 480 by itself is more powerful than either console just by itself. That set up, which is far more common is still a few HD consoles duct taped together when it comes to power.

Lastly my rig isn't the best there is, check this out: GefForce GTX 480 4-way SLI review. So yeah, I wasn't even comparing the extremes of PC power when I was talking about this earlier.

It's not moving the goalposts when I say there are no games. All PC exclusive games apart from Crisis 1 are designed for medium PCs which are no more powerful than a PS3 or X360.

All those higher resolutions, AA, framerate increases etc give marginal effects. I'm a PC gamer so I know.

You have yet to explain to me what games have to do with power.

You orginally said:
"Because the differences between the Wii and the HD consoles is more or less the exact same difference between the HD consoles and the PC. So it is kind of extremely hypocritical for someone to include the 360 and the PS3 in the same sentence as the PC, yet not include the Wii in the ones with the PS3 and the 360. It is also kind of hilarious in a very pathetic sort of way"

But it's not hypcritical to include PS3 and X360 games with PC games because they play in the same league, while Wii games graphically are in last gen.