Alright, so you just described auto aim very accurately and articulately, now here's my question: What's wrong with auto aim? Auto aim might make it easier to aim, but it does not play the game for you. Auto aim is necessary on consoles (and perhaps on PC too) to compensate for the lack of coordination that you have in a game that plays on a flat screen. Even if you were to get full out aimbot, the game does not play for you and it requires some skill. As for your argument that controllers suck, I think that keyboard is better than ABYZ and D pad, mouse is better than right joystick and triggers/bumpers, but joystick is better than wasd. Overall keyboard and mouse is better than controller because you can utilize 8 different fingers at once with keyboard and mouse while you can only use 4 with a controller. I could expand more on my thoughts of keyboard vs mouse, but I won't.
As for framerate, my PC plays BF3 at 15+ fps, but the gameplay still feels pretty smooth. I play it on high graphics just because it looks so much better, even if the frame rate isn't as high. Oh and as for console BF3. Yes, it sucks. I've played it. The pixelly textures, the low detail models, and the overly occluded shadows, yuck. As for Halo 4, the graphics will not be limited by the console. Since BF3 is one of very few games that really is limited by the graphical capabilities of a console, Halo 4 will be perfectly fine on console. Still though, there are other reasons why PC is better other than graphics, and controls. For this, I agree that Halo 4 would be a more suitable PC game. I wish it were