I'll end buying because I do like 1st party Nintendo titles. I'll have to see what it offers to see if I buy it at or near launch before any price drops.

The Wii U has a lot of problems being passed around as unofficial rumors. Stuff like the tablets don't work right wirelessly so everyone has to develop with wires, and other random hardware issues like that that don't give me a lot of confidence.

The Wii was quickly put aside by people who had other consoles (in general, I know there's a few hardcore Nintendo fans and that's fine, they just seem to be in the minority); most of the people who accounted for the massive, early Wii sales were people who had never really owned a console before. Now Nintendo has to sell that crowd and a fairly pricey upgrade? I don't think that's going to happen.

Even so the Wii had a really low attach rate early on, which is bad for putting money in the bank (I realize the Wii was not sold at a loss). It's cheap price turned out to be kind of tricky because the Wii had more doo-dads and add-ons than the average console and I think the casual crowd has figured out the price of the console is just one tiny issue.

At any rate, late for my party, ciao.

Will probably get eventually. Hopefully it will have interersting titles right off the bat, unlike the 3DS.

...I am still getting a 3ds soon, though. MGS3. Yeah.

To be honest, at release (well, near release that is) I saw the Wii as being really the only good option. The 360 was plagued by the now infamous RROD and other issues, and the Ps3 was incredibly expensive and lacked many interesting games (which is odd considering that at this point I'd say that the Ps3 has more interesting exclusives than the 360).

The Wii's issues are, in hindsight, multifaceted. First, let's face it... the motion controls did not work properly until Wii Motion Plus. Although a handful of FPSs like The Conduit and Metroid Prime 3 made convincing arguments for IR aiming, I don't think there was a single game before Red Steel 2 that provided gesture-based controls with any amount of accuracy. At this point, the Wii's motion controls have just barely hit their stride, and it's far too late. Then there's the ubiquitous issue of less-than-impressive visuals. As I understand it, the Wii technically has the power of the original Xbox, but lacks important features such as pixel shading, which means that even last-gen engines like IdTech 4 and Source can't render at their max potential. That being said, games like Twilight Princess, Resident Evil 4, the REmake, Super Mario Galaxy, and Metroid Prime 3 all show that it is completely possible to have highly attractive visuals on the Wii. Heck, Twilight Princess and the two Resident Evil games ran on the GC, and they still look better than the majority of Wii games. Nintendo can certainly take some blame for the Wii's lack of power, but developers deserve an equal amount of blame. And, of course, there's the biggest issue...lack of good 3rd party support. In this case, it's known that Nintendo is not always the easiest to work with as far as 3rd parties go. However, I think there's also a certain element of developers not taking the Wii seriously. Underpowered visuals and a limited number of buttons are not good excuses for putting out shallow, crappy games.

erm... I kinda lost track of where I was going with this. It's late...

Anyway, I guess those are just some random thoughts.

This is really true. People who have another console did really put the Wii aside due to its lack of good games and features compared to its competitors. It happened to me too. I have a Wii, bought it a few months after release, but i barely ever play it. I only play Nintendos great first party titles.

The only good games Wii has are first party titles and a few rare decent third party titles (i can only recall The Conduit, Trauma Center, Red Steel and Mad World right now), everythiubg else are just some stupid casual games and terrible ports. It just isnt enough compared to the huge amount of great games both the Xbox 360 and the PS3 have.

My sister got her boyfriend a Wii for Christmas and I finally got to try it. I was underwhelmed, but I recently moved from a PS2 to a PS3 and I'm already a bit spoiled. I'm also not a fan of the kiddy titles (die-hard LOZ/Metroid fanboy, and that's about it) so there isn't much to attract me to the console. Unfortunately. (I remember when I used to rag Sony and worship Nintendo, but the 64 is a bygone Titan, a fallen god of the elder age, and its successor and avatar the Gamecube could never capture my attention like the 64 did...)

Oh, and I just have to say - we were playing a Mario Brothers game, not sure what it was called precisely, and the limited amount of motion control we had to do SUCKED. I hated it. I had to flail my arms like an idiot to get Mario to spin-jump or pick something up when there were at least four unused button combos that would have worked every bit as well.

WiiU failed several years ago when it was first released as Gba/Gamecube connectivity. Nimtendo wants mandatory handheld use with their consoles, and like sony, they will. Ake sure you have to buy their product this time...but like bluray, I thonk the tech will.be DOA.

OT: I wish more games brought the voice controlled gameplay niche back into focus. AFAIK PS2 only had lifeline(which I loved even with the semi-terribad voice recognition) and a few other systems had a title or two. Such promise for a new gameplay style and not many utilized it. :(

GBA didn't have touchscreen or gyroscope, and it had a lot less buttons. And with cable, it costed a lot more. And it was optional, and not standard part of the Gamecube package. Seriously.

I completely disagree with most of what you said, but I at least see where your coming from with it. The Sony thing has me confused though.

It was optional precisely because it was a failure. If you wander into houses in every Pokemon game made for the DS and click on things it'll say "It's a Nintendo Gamecube with a Gameboy hooked up as a controller" or similar. They seriously wanted this to be big and despite the wild success of the actual DS it was a complete failure (perhaps if every DS came with the cable it might have had a chance).

I know Nintendo wants you to live in their own little walled garden (just like Apple in fact) but they haven't presented a very compelling case for investing in all things Nintendo. Frankly all the reviewers I actually trust said Skyward Sword was pretty lackluster for a Zelda title; and I'll be honest I'm pretty tired of playing the same damned Zelda game over and over again; and the only inventive Mario game in years was Super Mario Galaxy (no, Paper Mario doesn't count). Metroid was fun on the Gamecube but they somehow managed to screw up the Wii titles. Super Smash Bros isn't my thing. Literally what else is there?

AND THEY CHARGE A LOT, seriously, the pricing is insane. No, I'm not giving a pass to the similarly asinine Vita pricing, but we're not talking about Sony here.

Frankly, there still isn't a game that would make me buy a 3DS, but at least Nintendo kind of gets the handheld thing right (and they seem to support 3rd party devs properly for it). As others have pointed out, the living room consoles are going to be first party titles only.

So as someone who's waiting for next gen do I want Nintendo's Wii U? No, seriously not unless they get some really amazing games on it, in which case I'll pick one up well after launch. Will I upgrade to a 3DS eventually? Yeah whenever the 3DS "Lite/Has Battery Life" comes out and there's some games I want to play on it. I think Pokemon Grey actually will be a DS title, there's just not enough 3DS handhelds out there right now.

Wasn't part of Nintendo's success formula ast generation that their offerings in hardware were CONSIDERABLY cheaper than the competition? It was underpowered, yes, but cheaper

Software, though, damn Mario Galaxy was fullprice for YEARS.

+1

The whole GBA->GC setup was a great idea on a fundamental level, the flaws lay in the fact that it required two consoles and a special cable to connect them. This (providing the whole Wii U package isn't too expensive) seems to solve those problems.

Reviewers you trust are only the ones that bashed Zelda? Seriously? Even then, criticizing something youve never played just doesnt make any sense at all. Especially when the game youre criticizing has an above 90 rating on metacritic. And actually most reviewers said its the best Zelda since Ocarina. Seems to be quite an achievement for Nintendo in my opinion. I would play it first before bashing it, especially when 99% people in the world agree that its a good game. Tell me one inventive game this generation that isnt an indie title. This is true for every game series out there. Every single one. Final Fantasy is the same thing for years, Metal Gear hasnt changed anything (except for Rising which hasnt come out yet), Halo is the same thing every year, Gears of War, Uncharted, GOW, GT5, and the list just goes on and on.

And to be sincere, Mario Galaxy was quite innovating and refreshing. For me Nintendo titles are the only ones that actually innovate and feel new on every iteration. Theyre always changing artwork and design, and sometimes they get bashed for that. Look at Windwaker. They tried something new with the cel shaded style and a lot of people hated it, even though it was an amazing game. Truth is, Nintendo os still the most "inventive" big developer out there. Prove me wrong.

When has a Sony game changed? When has a Microsoft game changed? They keep tossing the same thing all over again and yet you only complain about Nintendo, which is the most inventive. I dont get it.

The only complaint i can agree with is that Nintendo hasnt made a new IP for a long time. Actually, their last new IP i recall is Pikmin. How? Nintendo consoles are the cheapest in the market since the GC. Thats actually the main reason, in my opinion, that they sold so many Wiis at first. The Xbox 360 and PS3 were way more expensive.