Source

First of all, if we denied that we have studied anything about 3G, we would be deemed lazy, so I do not deny that the company has been reviewing that possibility. In that regard, the company has been reviewing each and any possible function. However, having studied something does not mean that we will surely adopt that technology. If someone asks me, "Now that the company has spent some time to review a technology, isn't it true that the company will surely adopt it sometime in the future?", all I can say is "I have no idea."

As I have been constantly saying, the need to ask our consumers to shoulder monthly payments is not a great match for the entertainment that we are dealing with. Of course, there are people who are willing to pay monthly fees in order to enjoy certain functions. However, Nintendo is a company who wants as many consumers as possible to enjoy our proposals.

Accordingly, as long as we need to ask our consumers to pay additional costs every month, it is unlikely to become one of our viable options. Of course, the cost to carry such functions (such as the manufacturing costs for the hardware) is even expected to become less and less expensive from now. But we are not only concerned about the cost the consumers have to pay for the hardware. The bigger question (or the essence of the problem that has to be solved in order for a game machine to include 3G functions) is, "Will the added experience that our consumers can expect really be worth the additional burdens which have to be shouldered by the consumers (such as communication fees) when compared with the experiences that can be realized without having to ask our consumers to do so?"

--------------------------\\---------------------------------------\\-----------------------------------------\\-------------------------------\\-------------------

There you have it. Monthly fees turn down many costumers. Even more when a 3G connection isn't much suitable for lag-free online play.

Gasp!  This can only mean one thing: the Wii is doomed.

Does anyone use 3G for anything!

Nintendo just keep the Wi-fi, let Apple and Sony fleece (Phone Networks) customs with monthly payments for nothing that wi-fi can't do, do people really need to use the internet in the woods.

Question or expressing excitement???

I say 4G should've been the target, as I hear it's better than 3G. It's one more G, after all.

Phones haven't even reached true 4G yet. What they are calling 4G doesn't meet the actual definition of the term companies are just using it as a way to express that the service is better than 3G.

Realistically, Nintendo probably evaluates countless technologies to suit a vast array of needs when designing their hardware; and only a very small subset of these technologies would ever be adopted. The reason for this is that to be successful in the videogame hardware business you want to release a system that offers the biggest bang for the buck; and adding hardware which isn’t essential makes this nearly impossible to achieve.

can't have to much G now can you...

I will laugh when all the early NGP adopters rage when a 4G version is released a year after release 

Actually the international board that defines the term officially adopted all current, HSPA , WiMax and LTE tech as being 4G mid December. They only mainly did it because the cell companies like T-Mobile and Sprint put them over a barrel with the new tech. But whatever, it isn't available everywhere, nor is every network the same  quality so sticking to wifi is a good choice. 

That would really only be the case if 3G was a major feature of the system. SONY's already confirmed 2 sku's, the cheaper of which will be WiFi only. No 3G at all. 

3G is just an extra for those that want it.