As much as I think Microsoft will have an advanced controller scheme bundled with their system at launch, I think it would be a huge mistake to use Kinect as a central part of their next generation strategy ... I think the technology can be re-used, or they could release it as an add-on, but I haven't seen much evidence of long term positive reactions to Kinect; and I don't think most people would be willing to pay more to have an advanced Kinect as part of their system.

World of Warcraft? Starcraft? Diablo? Planetside 2?
All games at a true 1080p resolution?
The bigger, better version of BF3?
DX11?

Almost all MMO's are PC only, something you have forgotten....
Oh wait nah u just jelly ^-^

LOL.

you have some kind of proof for the claim that i am bias? he made a claim based on just clock speed knowing that other things have they rightful place in this things and i am the bias one? he was in damage control mode and i am bias? i don't know why is in that mode... there are no proof wii U is underpowered but the same is true for the opposite, no proof wii U has enough power to battle the next gen consoles the competition will release. so take a chill pill everyone, we are discussing rumors and with no final specs Nem is doing the same "trolls" (his defenition, not mine) did with wii U back at the time CPU clock speed was leaked.

Been playing WoW about 4 years.....

I can tell you its not that graphics intensive, more just memory and internet speed.

True but consoles still don't have it and couldn't run it...
If you want to play WoW on anything other then low, you do need a relatively good GPU for it. You have to remember that the consoles aren't even running an 8800GT...

so... low number of cores with low speed produces the same as more core count at higher speed??????

so nintendo is using alien tech? it would be necessary to wii U using (intel analogy) i7 architecture against next box using Pentium IV architecture for 3 cores at 1.25 to be producing more FLOPS than a 8 core @1.6

@bold -> you have a link?

I never mentioned you specifically and it seems like my statement somehow fell in your garden. Whatever.......

I played World of Warcraft for several years after its launch on a system far below the capabilities of the HD consoles; and many of my friends upgraded to the Radeon X800 or Geforce 6800 when they were first available and it played the game beautifully.

The reason WoW isn't on consoles isn't because of processing power or memory, it is because the game would not map well to a controller and there are barriers to setting up Pay to Play services on the XBox 360.

Beautfiul =/= low resolution and lowest settings. Those cards are the minimum specs. 

If you want to play it beautifully, you need to be playing on the HD5770, or better, at 1080p or greater. 

If the Playstation didn't exist you may have a point, but it does and it's not owned by Sony. Fable was mapped fine to a controller - WoW could take that approach. The issue is with the larger raids and pvp arenas, bad GPU's and setups just don't cut it and will suffer massive FPS dips. 

Still, this is getting off topic. Point is that the consoles need to be released with good specs otherwise a basic PC for a few bucks more will hammer them next christmas.