Last gen we had one weak console now we have two, I blame Nintendo and microsoft

In what way ? 

plain and simple, all the 3 consoles are WEAK. want power get a PC.

Exactly. That is really why I find it funny when I hear people talking about how good a game looks and how powerful Pcs are and stuff. The simple truth is that we are now at a point where everything that sets out to look good looks good. Thats why the most obvious way to diferentiate games now from platform to platform is to strat throwing specs and numbers around. 

Like think about it. a GTX Titan Z is a $3000 GPU. $3000. On paper it runs circles around the GPUs in a PS4 + XB1 combined multiplied by 4. And thats just the GPU. By the time you put in a CPU and everything else you will have a $4000 gaming rig. But if we were to be honest with ourselves, like really sincerely honest. Does BF4, Wtcher 3, Watchdogs...etc look $3600 better on that Rig than the do on the PS4? Does that rig run a game that will be impossible to run on the PS4/XB1? Yes, it will look sharper, run smoother.....etc. But its not $3600 better. 

That is why I am not disappointed wth the PS4/XB1. I am just being realistic. Nvidia and AMD wants gamers to keeping chasing numbers and specs and making them feel like they "need" to always be on the bleeding edge. Thats just not true. I believe that gams will still keep looking better and better every passing year. But I also believe we will never see a game that will blow our minds away gain cause it looks so damn good. We will never have a KZ2 trailer (even if it was faked) moment again. Never.

to everyday folk it may seem that way, to developers who know wtf theyre talking about the difference is huge.

Go look at images of Resistance Fall of Man to get an idea of what PS3 games looked like when the PS3 first came out. Compare that to what we have on PS4 now.

In other words you don't know how or why the Cell processor is more powerful than the custom jaguars and even if it's more powerful than the custom jaguars ...

@Bold You tell me since it appears that you must know more than what the engineers at Sony or AMD are doing ... 

Pretty sure that all bar the absolute best Devs like Naughty Dog weren't able to utilize the Cell properly so they made the right call in changing to something a bit more mainstream.  Had Sony of gone with some kind of updated Cell whilst the Xbox One went the way it did, we wouldn't see the gains we are seeing now on multi plat games.  They would ALL be developed for Xbox first, then a rush job ported over because it would have been too much hassle otherwise to spend too much time on it.  I don't think Sony had too much of a choice to be honest.

Ideally I would have liked to have had consoles with 3 -4tflps of computational performance. That would have put it inline with a 7950-7970. That would have at least made it top of the range, at release. A decent CPU would have also been nice.

All of those additions would have taken the price to about $500 - $600, which would have most likely have resulted in less sales.

Would those additions for the price even be worth it though? I mean yeah we would probably be able to get 1080p @60FPS but then devs would simply push the graphics even more.

The leap from PS3/360 to PS4/Xbone is rather underwhelming in my humble opinion.
Sure, games look a little sharper and more detailed, but there's no quantum leap like Gears of War last gen, Rogue Squadron II in the 6th gen, or Mario 64 in the 5th.
And they both use controller designs dating back to 1997.