Of course the games matter more than anything else. That SHOULD be the case for any gamer, for any console. That is not, however, the case for many "hardcore" fanboys who love to believe that their system, spec-wise, is just amazing. I remember back before Wii U was really revealed, how so many people online were falling for the rumors that "Nintendo's next console was going to be more powerful than the PS4", a LOT of people believed it or wanted to believe, and were practically giving each other high fives and shit, celebrating Nintendo "finally getting it", even though that's not "getting it", and it was never realistic to believe that Nintendo could even afford to make that kind of overpowered hardware.

The games ARE what matter most, and that's always been the case. However, the notion that Wii U hardware is somehow "weak", and that it's "not truly Next Gen", falls even flatter than the same shit said about the Wii last gen. There was, at least a mildly valid argument to be made with Wii, if nothing else on the basis of the fact that it wasn't an HD console. Yet it still put out some of the best looking games of that gen, because of good game design, art style, and because while it wasn't HD, it was the best SD hardware the market had seen. With Wii U, it's not even a question. It's next gen. It's more powerful than PS3, and that's what matters, and that will bear out, in graphics and game design, given due time.

That is literally only true for the Wii. The NES, for it's day, was plenty powerful. The SNES was considerably more powerful, graphics-wise, with the only advantage Genesis could claim being slightly faster CPU speed. The N64 was hands down the most graphically (and otherwise) powerful hardware of it's gen. There were games on it, such as Turok 2, such as Goldeneye, such as Ocarina of time, Banjo-Kazooie, Star Fox 64, Perfect Dark, and Conker's Bad Fur Day, that you simply were not seeing on the Saturn or Playstation, because they couldn't do it. The Gamecube was the not most powerful of it's gen, the Xbox was overpowered for that gen for sure, but graphically the Gamecube was superior to the PS2 and especially Dreamcast. Games like Metroid Prime, Pikmin and Twilight Princess easily looked as good as the best looking Xbox games that gen.

It was only with Wii, where Nintendo decided to take a "more powerful hardware isn't the answer" type of approach, even though Wii was still more powerful than the original Xbox, there was a significant gap between it and 360 or PS3. With Wii U, while they did take a similar approach with the CPU, the GPU, as has been talked about ad nauseum by now, is actually quite powerful for this new gen. Not "PS4 powerful", no, and no one in their right mind honestly should have expected Nintendo to have more powerful hardware than Sony or even Microsoft could afford to provide. But when you talk about graphic power alone, the Wii U actually packs quite a lot of muscle, and you're going to see that more and more as the gen goes on.

Any gamer who want to play the best possible games should worry about specs. I want more complex AI, larger levels and games that don't look like they did 20 years ago.

The question is when the specs are sufficient and anything above is a bonus. The wii was a 88MB system that lack the power to compete with the HD consoles on many features and these lack of features were very evident. Some things were just not possible with the wii.

If the wii u can do pretty much whatever the PS4 can do but not just as well most fans will consider it sufficient. It can run the equivalent of DX11 according to developers so this in itself says a lot.

Developers like Ubisoft already stated the console is not up to the next gen level of the other two but capable enough for them develop future multi-plat games on (like watchdogs) which was not possible in the wii generation.

What I am saying is that I do care about specs, but not to the extreme. If the console is efficient enough then that's fine with me. The wii was a big disappointment because it wasn't efficient and in many ways it's legacy is hurting the wii u.

That's bull IMO. As a Nintendo first fan, I want the ultimate console : exclusives and top notch 3rd party multiplats. I want flexibility in my buying options. I do not want to be FORCED into buying other consoles, because of their superior multiplats. If I want to buy in for MSony's exclusives, I may or may not do so. Nintendo not competing spec wise, forces consumers to put down big money for a competing console, and the multiplat games. That money could be going into Ninty's pocket. But they are not confident enough in competing with the big boys, apparently.

IMO, the only way Ninty competes in specs again, is if one of MS/Sony bows out the console business. Honestly, even if Wii U fails, ninty is too stubborn to realize their flaw, and will just try a different approach (possibly a gaming tablet)

Nintendo gamers don't care for graphics since November 19, 2006.

The Wii U sold that much in Japan because they stopped production of the Wii. Simple.

correct. if we look at raw power alone, ps360 were 20+ times stronger than wii AND had modern resources (wii didn't even have programable shaders). for the same difference to occur, the wii u would have to be as powerfull as an overcloked 360 and ps4/xone would have to be 20+ times better.

the reality many refuse to accept: ps4 and xone are 7x and 5x more powerfull than their predecessors. that alone already reduces the difference by A LOT. a good guess puts wii u between 2.5x and 3x more powerfull than ps360 while having all modern resources that ps4 and xone have. the difference from wii vs ps360 was ONLY reduced by about 10x.

And to the user who said diminishing returns only apply to polygons, don't say such nonsense. we can only have so much with graphics in general. there's a point (that was already reached) where it takes much more power and resources to make something look slightly better. just look at the specs difference for PCs to run THE SAME GAME at low, medium, high, ultra.

It's not that nintendo can't afford. it's simply not a bright idea to release a console for 400+ dollars.

I don't remember of any video's comparision of ps2/gamecube versions on internet

QFT! Nintendo really forced their gamers to go elsewhere because they refuse to work with third parties. Do you know how many people would buy Nintendo alone if they didnt have to run elsewhere just for third party?