If you’re basing this simply on processor speed, then it’s not next generation. If you’re basing this on Wii U being a new idea that challenges existing platforms, then it definitely is next generation.

EXACTLY. I don't think anyone can deny this.

Processor speeds and power can do more than just improve graphics. They can improve gameplay via better animations, physics...etc. Graphics is just the most obvious so its  mentioned the most.

About the Wii's  motion controls changing gaming.......is that a good thing? Did it change gaming in a good way? Are we playing Call of Duty with Wiimotes? No. There's a reason for that. The majority of people don't like playing "real" games with motion controls. They prefer tradional controls and they always will. The Wiimote didn't change their minds, the Wii U Gamepad won't either.

So if I throw away the processor my Wii U will transform into a next-gen machine? Awsome!
*grabs screwdriver*

Anyone that says that is a fan boy. NG3 was trash, Razor's Edge at least improved its gameplay flaws and added content that fans expected it from the original release.

What I read is the Wii U version have the same 720p graphcs than the superior PS3 version (the 360 is the worst) and the same bullshit framerate drop... so the game is the same. So in graphics and performance the game is the same for all version PS3, Wii U and 360 (that is a little worst in graphics because the filters used).

The changed made in gameplay is not valid for a graphic/performance comparison.

The Rason's Edge is a better version because the fixed gameplay and added content but for everything else it's the same game.

DF: "Ninja Gaiden 3: Razor's Edge once again suggests a piece of hardware not far beyond the capabilities of the existing HD consoles, but that is not the real story here." - http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-ninja-gaiden-3-on-wii-u-face-off

So if you made an 360 or PS3 pad with a screen on it that could stream images from the console, that makes 360 and PS3 a entire new generation too? Gimme a break. Wii U is Nintendo catching up to where MS and Sony have been for a while (720p graphics, an actual online service, etc) just with Nintendo flavour to it.

What resolution was the xbox?
Did you ever use one on a 720p+ TV? It looks terrible. Plus mixing and matching ingame to promo shots is hardly a fair comparison. 

Compared side by side here there may not be an issue, but blow both up to 28" and the difference becomes a lot more apparent. 

The lower picture is Xbox1? The textures are far less detailed (compare the human to the monsters of pic 1) and seem to be a bit more muddy in case of the environment. 

Yes.

And yes, motion controls changed gaming in a good way. They pretty much singlehandedly saved this from being the brown FPS generation. There was as much brown FPS shovelware as there was motion controlled shovelware, and the two overlapped a bit as well. But games like Metroid Prime Trilogy, Skyward Sword, and the actually-not-completely-terrible Wii Sports Resort and Kinect Sports redeemed motion controls. Even games that used them sparingly like Super Mario Galaxy and Flower still implemented them well, taking advantage of the opportunity for greater interaction that a new method of input presented.

Motion controls expanded the audience, and that is inherently a good thing. They did not sully the gaming community with an influx of casual gamers. Getting a wider variety of people to play video games is a good thing no matter how you look at it.

Stop stalking my posts. 

No the textures are not less detailed. They are more detailed and the game is running at a much higher resolution. Stop stalking my posts trying to inanely argue everything - you mistake bump mapping and bloom for detail and ignored the 720p comment.