Talking about pirating. Game companies should just put all their games on Valve, or have a few more game-interfaces like that. Valve games are rarely pirated (and therefore, also are cheaper priced. I love Valve).

PC is the only platform for RTS, if it's a realistic RTS with detailed user interface. There just isn't enough buttons on XBOX/PS3/Nintendo console controllers. On the keyboard, there are alphanumeric keys (26 + 10) plus Function keys (12) plus Tab, Caps Lock, Shift, Ctrl, Alt, Enter, Backspace, Spacebar, Insert, Home, PageUp, Delete, End, Pagedown. And tilda ~
And the point-and-click of the mouse.

I really can't imagine playing an RTS with the XBOX/PS3/Nintendo interface, unless it's squad-based like Full Spectrum Warrior, which is not an RTS, but has only a few units to cycle through. Any epic RTS would not play well on console.

And as for FPS, PC is better for the realistic ones. The graphics is always more detailed on PC, and the point-and-click of the mouse matches the fast reaction time. In order to play FPS on a console, not only does the AI's aiming skill has to be toned down (playing Rainbow Six III and Medal of Honor on console was horrible, AI rifle fire from 10 yards away couldn't hit), the player is also given "HALO shield" to compensate for the console controller's much less accurate movement and crouching/aiming skill.

HALO is great for console because there wasn't that much aiming. Pointing the cursor near an enemy (including the Plasma Rifle) and it will hit. But for Rainbow Six, Medal of Honor, Call of Duty, and other realistic FPS, the slow aiming of the console control (and compensation by dumbing AI and superman-ing player) is just awkward. And having HALO shield in a WWII FPS is just strange. And while writing this, I realized, that the first non-HALO FPS with HALO shield was Call of Duty II, which, incidentally, was also the first Call of Duty to be released both on PC and console. So I realize, now, that the HALO-shield feature (abysmally, also added to Splinter Cell, that archetype of realism) was added to non-sci-fi FPS as part of console-control awkwardness compensation. Normally, a player with the awkwardness of console control would never survive in an FPS, which are made for the fine-point control of PC. So the survival gap is bridged by dumbing the AI, which breaks the realism. Then some console developer came up with the (ridiculous) idea, that the gap can be bridged by dumbing the AI some, and superman-ing the player some, with HALO shield, in 20th century.

Console is great for FPS like
HALO (not much aiming), and plausible rechargeable-shield
Prince of Persia series (not much aiming, except what direction to face),
Splinter Cell series (not much aiming, since most is about movement of sneaking around), simulators (car racing, airplane flying, spaceship flying)

But all FPS that require aiming and quick crouching, are made for PC.
Perhaps HALO shields are made to help console players survive an FPS environment that they wouldn't otherwise survive due to the awkwardness of the console control, but the PC version of the FPS shouldn't have the over-compensating HALO shields, except if the game is HALO or some sci-fi game.

Having HALO shield in Splinter Cell (and I can imagine, the latest Rainbow Six as well) and WWII FPS like Call of Duty totally ruined it. Not even arcade side-scrollers simulated bullets like that. Plus, computers have the quicksave function, which the console machines don't have. So computer FPS can be played with much better realism, and don't need the console-compensation of HALO shields.
The med pack system in MOHAA (easy level = many medpacks, hard level = fewer medpacks) was great.
So is the very-realistic system in Rainbow Six and Ghost Recon (before everyone got MJOLNIR armor from the 26th century) : one round = either death or injury and difficult aim/movement more than one round = death