The Wii U is supposed to only handle one touchscreen controller, which is a pack-in. Additional players will use standard Wii controls.

If the pack-in tablet breaks, however ...

Actually, they have since said they might support two tablets. =S
I think it's dependant on bandwidth... streaming that nice 480p picture has got to be quite heavy.

There was a rumor early on that the single tablet was having serious bandwidth issues while connected wirelessly and all the early dev shops had to use them wired to get actual work done. If they really can support two tablets wirelessly then they must have fixed that snafu (if it existed).

My curiosity is if you can't have multiple tablets connected how integral can the damned thing be as a controller? And if you can have more than one, how much will they cost? Wii-mote and nun-chuck was 70 bucks or so even a year after the Wii launched, this thing could seriously make the console expensive as hell.

My understanding is that it's intended for single player games and that multiplayer games are either intended to be 1 tablet and 3 wiimotes (with gameplay being vastly different for one player) or just 4 wiimotes.

I dunno if that necessarily makes it gimmicky. There might be some single player games that make amazing use of it so I'm going to reserve judgement until it actually comes out.

On the 3DS though, while it had a terrible launch it's really starting to come into its own now. As for the 3D screen, I am genuinely finding depth perception a useful thing to have in games like Kid Icarus and Starfox 64. When playing games on other systems now, I actually notice how useful it would be to have depth perception in them.

I can sort of understand the bitching about the power of the Wii U, but then what were they really expecting? Nintendo has established that they're fine with being most of a generation behind. If you want something more powerful than your PS3, wait for the PS4. The Wii U is certainly a considerable amount more powerful than the Wii and that's all that matters really.

Someone's buying one? Hmm... interesting. To be honest this generation has been so stale that I have no interest in the next generation now, I think I'll be catching up on games I've missed out on or PC if they're not too bad.

Last generation I bought an Xbox originally then when the 360 came out I picked up a PS2 and then eventually a Gamecube. All 3 had a huge share of absolute stunning games. This generation just doesn't seem to have it. I mean there's some games I've loved but most of them are pretty much the same thing, sequels, carbon copies etc. There's only a couple I could see myself wanting to go back to and I own a PS3 & 360.

If you pick up a console at the end of its generation of course you'll be guaranteed a wide assortment of amazing games on the cheap... As far as bang for your buck goes that's the ideal time to invest, in fact, though somewhat less so if you primarily like online multiplayer.

Yeah that's what I tend to do. I usually buy 1 primary games console and then as the generation fades I get the others. I've not got enough interest in the Wii to get one though. However I have always kept up with the latest games out etc. Fact is this generation is getting old now and it has been pretty stale, dlc has ruined a lot and insistence on online features, also the few innovative or great games haven't really done all that well financially because of the big budget sequels.

Ok I could probably list 20 hits but beyond that I'd start struggling.

If you include Arcade titles I think you have a whole lot of awesome in this latest generation, though some is also available on PC. Even so, I don't know what your definition of "must play" is but there's plenty in this gen that was really, really good, imo.